Richard Burr

Mr. BURR of North Carolina

Mr. BURR of North Carolina. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in support of the Intelligence Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2003. As a member of the Subcommittee on Terrorism and Homeland Security, I am particularly eager for this bill to be voted into law. During the course of the 107th Congress, the subcommittee, which began as a Speaker's working group in January 2001, heard testimony from dozens of intelligence officials, both at home and abroad, from counterterrorism commissioners, foreign officials and hosts of other terrorism experts. In the end, we found an intelligence community that has suffered severely over the protracted period from budget shortfalls and poor internal management decisions about the allocation of available resources. Significant collection gaps, not just in the realm of counterterrorism, were identified, and many of these problems have proven to be systemic. H.R. 4628 provides a significant new resource for the most neglected areas of the community and guidance for how the most pressing gaps can be expeditiously closed. The community's most crucial counterterrorism shortcomings, as we judged in a classified report released in unclassified summary form last Wednesday, are as follows: a chronic linguistic shortfall across the community; a shortage of core human intelligence collectors out on the streets in bazaars hunting potential terrorist spies; a culture of risk aversion that has permeated collection operation and is manifest in the CIA's 1995 ``Internal Human Rights Guidelines'' promulgated by Director of Central Intelligence John Deutch. These management-generated guidelines have tied the hands of those brave men and women on the front lines for far too long. George Tenet finally repealed these guidelines just last Thursday, the day after the counterterrorism gaps report was released, and some 7 months after he was directed to do so in the fiscal year 2002 intelligence authorization. The community also lacks analysts in sufficient numbers and with sufficient skills at the CIA, FBI, and NSA to connect all the dots out there that are being unearthed and examined in isolation. The FBI needs to change its culture and traditional methods of operating from emphasis on after-the-fact. Does H.R. 4628 solve all the problems? No one authorization could possibly do that. But this bill takes us further in terms of targeting resources than we have seen in some time. I submit this bill is critical in getting the intelligence community on the right track and that there is no time to waste in this endeavor.

Mr. BURR of North Carolina. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the requisite number of words. Mr. Chairman, I truly believe tonight that none of the debate will change people's minds about how they vote on this amendment, but I think it is important that we read from the amendment itself. In fact, this amendment says that the responsibility of this commission is to review the implementation by the intelligence community of the findings, conclusions, and recommendations of, A, the Joint Inquiry of the Select Committee on Intelligence of the Senate and the Permanent Select Committees on Intelligence of the House of Representatives regarding the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001; B, other reports and investigations of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence of the House of Representatives and the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence of the Senate; C, other such executive branch, congressional, or independent commission investigations of such terrorist or the intelligence community; and make recommendations on additional actions for implementation of such findings, recommendations and conclusions. In fact, the mission of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence and the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence. It goes on in point (2) to say, review resource allocation and other prioritizations of the intelligence community for counterterrorism, which are current missions of the House and Senate intelligence committees; (3) to review and recommend changes to the organization of the intelligence community, in particular the division of agencies under the jurisdiction of the Secretary of Defense and the Director of Central Intelligence. In fact, now current responsibilities of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence and the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence. (4) determine what technologies, procedures and capabilities are needed for the intelligence community to effectively support and conduct future counterterrorism missions, and recommend how these capabilities should be developed, acquired, or both from entities outside the intelligence community, including from private entities. Again, a current mission of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence and the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence. Let me just say to my colleagues that I commend the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Roemer). The gentleman is impassioned on this. We have a joint inquiry currently in progress of the House and Senate committees. Our hope is that by the end of the year to come to this body, the Senate, and the American people with a report, and it will be the responsibility, then, of the House and Senate committees to make sure the recommendations, to make sure the findings, to make sure the changes, to make sure the resources, and to make sure the technologies that have been identified are incorporated. It is the core responsibility of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence and the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence today to take up practically every point of this amendment. I would urge my colleagues, let us do our work on the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence without the burden of people looking over our shoulders, questioning what we are doing. Let us get to the facts, let us keep the focus that we have, let us make progress at fixing those things that we find are broken, and we will air it to the American people in the correct way.

Mr. BURR of North Carolina

Mr. BURR of North Carolina. Mr. Speaker, I have listened to the debate tonight for over an hour. I have heard the word ``sham'' and I have heard other words used. Those words are in fact about a benefit that we are going to extend to Medicare, a benefit that had not been extended since 1965, when Medicare was created. Mr. Speaker, tonight we have a great opportunity. We have a great opportunity to pass a bill that is not perfect, but few things in this House are. We have the opportunity to extend for seniors for the first time coverage that the majority of Americans eligible for Medicare want and need. I do not think that is a sham; I think it is a tremendous opportunity for the Congress of the United States to pass for those individuals. Some will get up and say that ``GOP'' is ``get old people.'' Maybe they ought to change the words tonight to ``GOPD, Get Old People Drugs.'' That is what we are here to do. If we can put aside partisanship, we can pass a bill that for the first time brings drugs to the American people.

Mr. BURR of North Carolina

Mr. BURR of North Carolina. Mr. Speaker, my only regret is that we had not had this debate and this level of cooperation about the economic stimulus package, because had we started it sooner, it would have been bigger. The fact is the economy would go faster and we would not have the challenges that we do about programs that the American people want. I find it ironic that we have a debate about robbing money from Medicare in the same month that we hope to pass a $300-billion-plus Medicare prescription drug benefit for seniors who desperately need it across this country. We will in this House, once again as we did 2 years ago, pass it, but in all likelihood we will not do it with a unanimous vote. Mr. Speaker, H.R. 4 does a tremendous amount, and I think we are in agreement on the highlights of this bill. It is the SAFE Act. It is about securing America's future energy needs. It is about making energy policy and energy availability predictable and, most importantly, affordable. The House passed a comprehensive national energy bill which builds on the President's national energy policy and that was to promote economic development and domestic energy supplies and encourage increased efficiency and conservation. This motion to instruct will be accepted, and we should, because nobody wants to rob Social Security and Medicare. But the fact is that many of the areas that have been pointed out as tax breaks are, in fact, issues that were lobbied for by all Members, because they deal with conservation. Let me just point out a few. We give a tax credit for residential solar energy because we know that we need to diversify the sources that we get our energy from. We give tax credits for fuel cells, the possible best breakthrough in the future, for less of a reliance on the fuels that we currently import. We give modifications and extensions for provisions relating to electric vehicles, clean fuel vehicles, clean fuel vehicles' refueling property. We give tax credits for energy-efficient appliances. We give credits for energy-efficient improvements to existing homes. We give allowance and deductions for energy efficiency for commercial properties. We give investment and production tax credits for clean coal technology. As a member of the North Carolina delegation where we just passed smokestack legislation which cleans up our State, it is challenging, but we cannot do it without the Federal Government's investment in clean coal technology. By the way, Mr. Speaker, in addition, we in this bill increase the LIHEAP authorization levels. That is the needs of low-income Americans for heat in the winter, and I am sure that is probably calculated in these predictions of what we steal from Medicare and Medicaid. The fact is that, Mr. Speaker, we are challenged with many more things than just energy policy this year. This one bill makes predictable not only the supply but the cost. We as a Congress will be challenged with additional needs of supplemental appropriations to fight a war on terrorism. We will be challenged to find the money for the Medicare prescription needs of our seniors. But since we have taken care of some of it in budget resolutions, we may be challenged as money runs short. We can find the areas we get it from. We have before. We will again. We will live up to the fiduciary responsibility that the American people have entrusted in us. I hope that all of our colleagues will join us in supporting the motion to instruct conferees, protecting the bank that we are in charge of but, more importantly, in passing an energy policy that is so overneeded in this country, making sure that our future is, in fact, secure.

Mr. BURR of North Carolina

Mr. BURR of North Carolina. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of an exciting new technology. Local television broadcasters across the country are undertaking their biggest advancement in years: The transition to digital television. Digital TV opens the doors to new possibilities, like High Definition TV, interactive television, and expanded programming options. In my district, we are already served by several stations transmitting a digital signal. I am proud of my hometown broadcasters, like WXII, which is owned by Hearst-Argyle. These stations are leading the charge into the digital future. These TV stations are small businesses, like others. They have made substantial investments in new transmitting facilities, new production equipment, and, in some cases, new broadcast towers. Collectively, the industry has invested over $1 billion in this new technology. While local broadcasters are doing their part to propel the digital television transition forward, we have yet to see all the pieces of this come together in place. I believe the transition will accelerate once cable companies begin to carry digital signals. Seventy percent of U.S. households receive their TV through cable. We need that signal as digital. I hope that Congress can work with these differing groups, broadcasters and cable operators and other interested parties, on the remaining issues. Until then, however, I remain fully confident that the future of television is digital, and I believe the future is bright.

Mr. BURR of North Carolina

Mr. BURR of North Carolina. Mr. Speaker, I thank the chairman of the Committee on Energy and Commerce for yielding me this time. At this time, Mr. Speaker, let me recognize the tremendous work of the chairman, of the ranking member, the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Dingell), Senator Kennedy, Senator Frist, who headed the Senate side, but more importantly the great work of committee and personal staffs of all the Members who served on that conference. This was not an easy thing to hammer out. It took many late nights on the part of staff. There was a lot of give and take; but it meant that something that was important to this country, something that was timely and urgent, actually got addressed in a sufficient way. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of the conference report. This legislation has been long in the making and is long overdue when we look at what we have gone through. But H.R. 3448 puts in motion the resources, $4.6 billion in 2 years, and authorities needed to close the gaps in our Nation's public health infrastructure. I would like to speak briefly about a few of the many important provisions included in this bill. I am grateful that the managers agreed to retain the provisions authorizing the National Medical Response System. These provisions are built around legislation introduced earlier and recognize the critical role played by personnel of the National Disaster Medical Response Teams in responding to all disasters, not just bioterrorism. The members of the National Disaster Medical Response Teams are nearly all volunteers who are called away from their real jobs on a moment's notice, and they deserve the liability and job protections we extend to them in this bill. I am also pleased the managers recognized the need to revitalize and modernize the lab facilities and other buildings at the Centers for Disease Control. This section, which builds on the hard work of the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Chambliss), the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Harman), and the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Linder) and their bill H.R. 3219, authorizes a dramatic ramp-up in our facility spending for the CDC. The legislation also takes into account the central role played by the centers in operating and maintaining a robust public health communications and surveillance system that we were shocked to find out was not electronically connected to every public health entity in this country. But after this bill, it will be connected. The centers are a national asset, and they need our support in order to carry out their very important mission. The grant program authorized in this legislation, Mr. Speaker, is the real heart of this bill. Building on the work being done on an emergency basis by the administration, these grants will enable our State and local governments as well as hospitals to train personnel, purchase needed equipment, and strengthen the communication and disease surveillance that they have done up to this point. It is our hope spending in these areas will not only help improve our ability to respond to bioterrorist attacks but also strengthen critical elements in our overall public health system. The bill also tightens control on access to dangerous biological agents and toxins by establishing a reporting and tracking system that was not in place. We do not mean to introduce these provisions to be burdensome on researchers, but as we have learned post-September 11, our ability to know where these agents and toxins are is vitally important. Title 3 strengthens the safety of the food and drug supply in the United States. I believe that with subsequent regulations from HHS, we found a balance between information requirements and information activities. None of us want to make it a burden to import food and bulk drugs. But after 9-11, we realized we have to have a better handle on the items that cross our borders and where they are. In this legislation, Mr. Speaker, we also reauthorize the Prescription Drug User Fee Act. The last time we reauthorized this act was when we passed the food, drug modernization act in 1997. This time, PDUFA is reauthorized with increased emphasis on post-market surveillance and generic drug review. The FDA and patients across the United States will benefit greatly from this legislation and that reauthorization. Finally, let me once again extend my thanks to the many personal and committee staffs on both sides of the Hill who put really invaluable time into working out the differences on this. Like many others, it is not perfect; but it is pretty darn good. It is this legislation will go a long way in restoring the viability of our Nation's public health infrastructure at a time when it is vitally needed. Mr. Speaker, today I urge my colleagues to support this conference report, support the good work of the House and the Senate, and let us move forward with rebuilding things that we know now we need to rebuild.

Mr. BURR of North Carolina

Mr. BURR of North Carolina. Mr. Speaker, I thank the chairman of the full committee for yielding me the time. I was struck earlier when the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Dingell) got up to speak because all of the sudden, after my lunch partner today who was our former colleague, ranking member on the Commerce Committee, Jim Broyhill, I began to realize that between the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Dingell) and Mr. Broyhill and our current chairman, they were here in 1985 when the energy policy act was, in fact, passed; and they shepherded it through, and it really did start the process rolling. For 20 years from then we are now here today trying to make sure that a process continues to move forward, and I found it striking that Senator Broyhill looked at me and said we envisioned that this would only take 10 years. Well, it has taken 20 now; and the question, as the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Dingell) so appropriately raised, are we going to allow it to go to the next step? This is not about shipping waste tomorrow. This is about allowing a process to go to the next step where in the licensing phase we may learn more. To stand up and suggest that science has not been applied to this project is only to say that under the definition in Webster's there is one area that we have not covered, whether it is applicable or not, but every study that people have suggested has been done on this site. The gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Dingell) strongly worded across this country today we store in our communities, in our backyards waste today, waste that eventually we are committed, as the Federal Government and as stewards of the trust fund with the rate payer money, to make sure that it has been used in a way that is effective long term. To my colleagues today I would urge them, this has been studied and we will continue to study it; but the way to continue to study it is not to stop the process. It is to let the process go forward. It is to make sure, in fact, that we are a little further down the road in the licensing process as well as our understanding of the transportation challenges that we will be faced with. I am confident that the 400 trillion Btus that North Carolina receives in low-cost energy from nuclear is something we have to have in the future. Do not cut this out by making sure nuclear is cut out because we have nowhere to store it. I urge passage.

Mr. BURR of North Carolina

Mr. BURR of North Carolina. Mr. Speaker, I want to take this opportunity to recognize a committed and longstanding financial institution in my hometown of Winston-Salem, North Carolina--Truliant Federal Credit Union. For the past fifty years, Truliant's family-like tradition of progressive thinking, reliability and accessibility has served more than 200,000 members in five states. On their 50th Anniversary, the founders and executives of Truliant are to be commended for maintaining a valued and trusted reputation and their tireless contribution to the community. In 1952, the Radio Shops Credit Union--what was to become Truliant-- was chartered in Winston-Salem to serve employees of Western Electric. Founder Tom Pullen built the Credit Union on four cornerstones--member ownership, democratic governance, volunteer directors and access for working families. Pullen's success as a trusted and loyal financial guide immediately brought in 2,000 members and more than $100,000 in assets. His commitment to providing the best technology and friendly, personal attention grew his reputation, diversified his membership and tripled his holdings. The recent change in name to Truliant certainly reflects Pullen's mission to maintain relationships of mutual respect and trust with all of the Credit Union's members. Winston-Salem is thankful for Truliant's philosophy of ``people helping people.'' Truliant members are leaders in the community, sponsoring the Special Olympics, American Red Cross blood drives, Habitat for Humanity builds, Junior Achievement events and the annual March of Dimes' walk. Truliant also sponsors a scholarship fund that has helped 52 high school graduates gain access to over $26,000. Today I applaud Tom Pullen and every member of the Truliant family for fifty successful years of endless community to their members and the Winston-Salem community.

Mr. BURR of North Carolina

Mr. BURR of North Carolina. Mr. Chairman, I yield 30 seconds to the gentleman from Louisiana (Mr. Tauzin), the chairman of the Committee on Energy and Commerce.

Mr. BURR of North Carolina. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Boehner), the chairman of the Committee on Education and the Workforce.

Mr. BURR of North Carolina. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself the balance of my time. Mr. Chairman, since 1971, an amazing thing has happened. This law has actually worked, with no complaint since 1995, and yet we are here talking about changing it. The result on average is that candidates have received a 30 percent discount. To my colleagues that are here, I ask that we not shift this to the businesses in communities. They do not need it now. To my colleagues who are here, I suggest we support this legislation because it is the right thing to do.

Mr. BURR of North Carolina. Mr. Chairman, it is a pleasure to yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Stearns), the chairman of the Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade, and Consumer Protection of the Committee on Energy and Commerce.

Mr. BURR of North Carolina. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Nebraska (Mr. Osborne), the greatest football coach in my lifetime.

Mr. BURR of North Carolina. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Graham), a good friend and a proven reformer.

Mr. BURR of North Carolina

Mr. BURR of North Carolina. Madam Speaker, I thank my good friend for the 3 minutes, and I give my 3 minutes that the subcommittee chairman was going to allow me back to him. Madam Speaker, it is tough to get up after the chairman of my committee so eloquently told the story of the children in Louisiana, but, you know, I believe every Member of this body can tell a story about some group that reaches out to folks in New York or folks at the Pentagon, whether it is King Elementary School, where the kids just donated $16,000 to charities in New York, or Pinnacle Elementary, that wrote a check to people that they did not see, had never seen and will never know. But the fact is that it tells us that we are doing something right in this country; that we are raising the next generation of leaders in the right way, where they are giving and not necessarily taking. We are here today to make sure that the American people understand that there is a system to give life to individuals who need it. We are here to make sure that there is a 4-year certification for those organizations that make sure that organs are provided to individuals whose difference in life is the receipt of that organ, that their ability to continue a normal life, and sometimes to continue life, is the difference between whether they receive the organ or whether they do not. As the chairman said, this is a technical change to make sure that these organizations have 4 years between certification. Four years makes a tremendous difference in their ability to function in the job that they carry out. My only hope today, Madam Speaker, is that all Members will take the opportunity as we begin to fix this bill, that they will start a massive campaign in their districts and across this country to get more and more people to donate organs, to make sure that the organs are available for the individuals that need them today. The only way that we will let the American people down is if we cannot promote organ donation in a bigger and more effective way than we do today. So I thank the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Bilirakis), the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Pallone) and the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Brown). This is truly a bipartisan effort to make a technical change to a piece of legislation, but it will touch many, many lives.

Mr. BURR of North Carolina

Mr. BURR of North Carolina. Mr. Speaker, I thank the chairman for yielding me this time, I also thank the ranking member; but more importantly, I thank all the members of the Committee on Energy and Commerce because traditionally we do not get things done as quickly in the body as we have on this bill. I want to take this opportunity to personally thank the staff on both sides of the aisle, many of whom are here tonight, and many who spent tens, if not hundreds, of hours on this bill, and much of it over the Thanksgiving break. Mr. Speaker, 3 months ago, we were attacked in a savage way. Over these 3 months, we have seen what is good about America; the response of the American people, in many cases to individuals they did not know. What we have seen good about this institution is its ability to throw down the partisanship that sometimes overtakes us and for Democrats and Republicans to work together on an initiative that America needs today. We have come a long way in restructuring our public health agencies in this country. This is only the first step, though. We have a long way to go to reach a point that communities deserve for us to have in place. Through this legislation we strengthen our Federal disaster response efforts by authorizing in law the National Disaster Medical System. This legislation provides for the much-needed resources to improve the Centers for Disease Control, not only the facilities upgrade that is needed in Atlanta, but also an additional $150 million in the first year to make sure that the overuse of laboratories, the space needs, everything that they need to respond to a threat that we clearly do not fully understand today are in fact in place. We send money directly to States and to local public health agencies in order for them to build out their core capacity to deal with bioterrorism and other public health threats. Mr. Speaker, in this, we update and strengthen the pharmaceutical stockpiles, and we establish a core educational curriculum to train health care professionals for public health emergencies. I urge all of my colleagues to support this legislation today, but we cannot quit until the public health network in the U.S. is trained, equipped, and prepared to handle all responses and all threats in the future.

Mr. BURR of North Carolina

Mr. BURR of North Carolina. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. BURR of North Carolina. Mr. Chairman, the bill we are debating today allows $8.25 million to help replace the public broadcasting facilities that were destroyed atop the World Trade Center during the devastation of September 11 of this year. No one disagrees that the stations in New York, both commercial and noncommercial, need to get back to the business of serving the people of the city as soon as possible. To date, however, no alternative site for the replacement broadcast towers has been located. Unfortunately, plans to build the new tower have been stalled, and it is unclear when a site will be located. Until then, it is obviously impossible for broadcasters to begin projects to rebuild the broadcast facilities and get back to reaching the full broadcast area that was served prior to September 11. For this reason, I think it is only appropriate that NTIA refrain from granting this money to the designated stations until a proper site is secured to construct a replacement tower. I urge the NTIA to use its expertise and planning resources to help New York broadcasters with any engineering and technical decisions about the placement of the new tower. However, any actual grant of these monies should occur only after such a tower is located.

Mr. BURR of North Carolina

Mr. BURR of North Carolina. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the resolution. Mr. Speaker, a new day has dawned in America. Yesterday morning, our Nation felt the full force of terrorism and saw the real face of evil in an attack designed to cripple this Nation by cowards who hold no regard for human life. In a carefully coordinated and well planned attack on symbols of our Nation's strength, they sought to destroy the very foundation of our democracy. In this new day, the entire world has learned they failed. Their cowardly attack has shaken our country and has taken from us some of our best and brightest, but they had not crippled our Nation. Their attempt to destroy our democracy has only served to make it stronger. Our Nation, united and with great resolve, will see its way through this ordeal. As Americans, we will comfort our grieving countrymen. As Americans, we will heal our wounded. As Americans, we will bury our dead. And then, as Americans, we will remember why they died and track down those who perpetrated this act. We shall not be deterred. and we shall not be defeated. Yesterday, an act of war was carried out against these United States. Today, a united American people are prepared to rebuild their lives and communities. Driven by the principles of democracy, this place that some call America and we call home has been strengthened because the American people have strengthened. America will remain a beacon for peace and freedom around the world. American history will document the devastation caused and the lives that were lost, but the new dawn highlights our greatest asset, the resolve of the American people.

Mr. BURR of North Carolina

Mr. BURR of North Carolina. Mr. Chairman, today will be a heated debate. We will hear people criticized today that just yesterday were praised. To the Members in this Chamber, do not lose focus on one thing. There is one Member who has had his eye on the American people for years on this issue. His name is Dr. Charlie Norwood. For those who criticize him today, but praised him yesterday, let no person believe that he is not doing what he thinks is in the best interest of every American. The fact is that we do have new legislation. This institution can perfect things that are flawed, and I believe today that we are doing that. We will start with a base bill that incorporates the thoughts of many good colleagues, but because of the need to extend patient protections today to the American people, the gentleman from Georgia was brave enough to negotiate with the President until they came to an agreement on a piece of legislation he could sign and that protection could be extended. This is not about who wrote it or whose amendment it is. Yes, it is about what it says, but it is about whether it can be signed into law. This bill, amended by the Norwood language and, hopefully, several other amendments, can be signed into law and extended to the American people today; and this body will make a mistake if it does not support the Norwood amendment and provide patient benefits for the American people.

Mr. BURR of North Carolina. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Traficant). (Mr. TRAFICANT asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. BURR of North Carolina

Mr. BURR of North Carolina. Mr. Speaker, today I rise to welcome the Reverend William Vanderbloemen to the House Chamber. I have known William's family since my football-playing days at Wake Forest, and it is a pleasure to have such a fine young man here to lead us in prayer as we begin this day's work. William is a native of Lenoir, North Carolina, and attended Wake Forest University and graduated in 1992 with a degree in history. He then attended seminary at Princeton where he received his Masters in Divinity in 1995, with the goal of becoming a professor or scholarly author; but as his studies intensified, it became clear to him that he would call the pulpit his home. Mr. Speaker, the Presbyterian faith is better because of his choice. Upon graduating Princeton, William took an associate pastorship at First Presbyterian Church in Hendersonville, North Carolina. After a successful campaign in the mountains of North Carolina, William received a call from Memorial Presbyterian Church in Montgomery, Alabama, to be its head minister. Memorial Presbyterian Church is a church with a place in the history of the civil rights movement of the last half of the 20th century. Opening shortly after World War II, in the middle of the 1950s, it was the first church in Montgomery to desegregate by offering open seating to members of both races. During the last 5 decades, Memorial has seen many changes, some causing divisions within the church family. In fact, when Reverend Vanderbloemen took over Memorial in 1998, they were meeting in a local YMCA, and 150 members in attendance was a good Sunday. Since 1998, membership has tripled and Memorial Presbyterian opened the first building on its new location on the east side of Montgomery. William founded the InStep Ministries, a series of syndicated radio spots aired daily and on secular stations; and one of the radio pieces prevented a suicide and that person is now a member of Memorial Presbyterian. William serves on the board of the Presbyterian Coalition, a national gathering of leaders within the Presbyterian Church U.S.A., as well as the Ministerial Board of Advisors to the Reformed Theological Seminary. He and his wife, Melissa, have three children, Matthew who is here with us today, as are Mary and Sarah Catherine. Mr. Speaker, I know all my colleagues join me in welcoming Reverend Vanderbloemen and thanking him for offering this morning's prayer.

Mr. BURR of North Carolina

Mr. BURR of North Carolina. Mr. Chairman, this is not about ``them or us.'' This is not a fight between Americans about what our policy is going to be. This is a question of whether we are going to keep the promise to all Americans to protect the gold standard of the pharmaceutical inventory in this country. We currently through the FDA have compassionate use exceptions. We have the ability for individuals to cross the borders at Mexico, where there are 1,500 pharmacies in Tijuana, and we watch that very carefully. But we have also learned from that experience that we cannot determine the difference between real and fake. What this amendment does is it defunds the enforcement mechanism at the FDA. It says that by defunding section 801, we do not allow the FDA to do any of these things that we see on this chart. Let me go down a few of them. We prohibit drugs that contain filth. We defund the ability to stop drugs manufactured under unsanitary conditions. We defund our ability to stop drugs packaged in potentially unsafe containers. We defund our ability to enforce drugs made with unsafe filler additives. In a hearing of the Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigation, we had Customs and DEA testify that they found drugs manufactured in Colombia; and visibly, one could not tell the difference between that and the real thing except one: it had no active ingredient. Therefore, it did nothing. The yellow color came from leaded yellow highway paint. It also contained boric acid, floor wax; and this is what this amendment would allow people throughout this country to purchase and to take only with whatever health conditions it might cause. This would defund our ability to assure quality or purity that falls below our standards. It would not let us enforce drugs that are diluted; drugs that have false or misleading labels; drugs with labeling that does not identify the manufacturer, packer or distributor; labeling that does not include the name and quantity of active ingredients; labeling that does not require adequate warning. And, most important, this would defund any effort by our enforcement mechanism to stop drugs that do not comply with child- resistant packaging requirements under the Poison Packaging Act. Mr. Chairman, it could not have been said better than by the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Dingell), the ranking member of the Committee on Energy and Commerce: ``I wrote this provision because we had counterfeiting years ago. If we change this provision, we will have counterfeiting in the future.'' Defeat this amendment. Stand up for the safety of our pharmaceuticals in this country.

Mr. BURR of North Carolina. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding time to me. Mr. Chairman, this is not about bringing illegal drugs in. This is about whether we are going to withhold the gold standard of the Food and Drug Administration in the United States of America. In 1997, this House in a bipartisan way, and as a matter of fact, under suspended rules in a unanimous vote, voted to modernize the Food and Drug Administration. The one vigilant thing that every Member did was to assure that the gold standard, that stamp of approval that we say to the American people passes on from the FDA on manufactured pharmaceuticals, was maintained. As a matter of fact, when my good friend, the gentleman from California, talked about global trade, one of our objectives with global trade was to harmonize the standards of approval so that we could reach the efficiencies of a global manufacturing base. We have yet today to reach harmonization standards with the EU because we cannot accept the Italian standard for drug approval. But what this amendment does, it says we are going to defund any, any and all reviews at our borders of reimported or imported drugs. The gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Greenwood) just showed the awful conditions where drugs are manufactured, where they look identical, where they are packaged identically. Today the DEA, the FDA, the Customs Department, they are all against this amendment. They are all against reducing the gold standard that we currently find at the FDA. As a matter of fact, the executive director of the trade program at U.S. Customs had this quote: ``Counterfeit pharmaceuticals enter in both wholesale and retail quantities. Additional problems include expired material, products that have not been approved by the FDA, products made in facilities under no proper regulation, and products not having the proper instructions for consumers to use.'' Mr. Chairman, we should not do this to the American people. We should maintain the gold standard.

Mr. BURR of North Carolina

Mr. BURR of North Carolina. Mr. Chairman, I raise a point of order that the language beginning with the words ``provided further'' appearing on page 89, line 13, and following through the words ``qualified participants'' on line 18 violates clause 2 of rule XXI of the rules of the House of Representatives prohibiting legislation on an appropriations bill. The language in question directly contradicts current law by making weatherization assistance grants contingent on a 25 percent matching share from recipients. The Energy, Conservation and Production Act imposes no such requirement. Accordingly, the language changes current laws and constitutes a violation of clause 2 of rule XXI, and I must regrettably insist on my point of order.