Richard Burr

Mr. BURR of North Carolina

Mr. BURR of North Carolina. Mr. Chairman, it is my honor to yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. McCollum). (Mr. McCOLLUM asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. BURR of North Carolina. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 1 minute. Mr. Chairman, I want to tell a quick story about a town in North Carolina in my district, a town with a high concentration of textile workers and companies, companies that are forced to compete on margin, struggling to find cost-effective health care for their employees. They banded together and self-insured. They supplied a greater benefit package to their employees than they ever could have had they gone through an insurance company. Their creative, innovative approach to quality health care for their employees is in jeopardy with what we do here in the next 48 hours, because if we extend liability to those employers, they will no longer offer health care as a benefit. For us to talk about the human face hopefully is not to show that face of the future uninsured because of our actions. I would encourage my colleagues to vote against the Norwood-Dingell bill and to support the Coburn-Shadegg bill. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Shadegg). (Mr. SHADEGG asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. BURR of North Carolina. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 2 minutes. Mr. Chairman, let me say that I hold in high regard my colleagues on both sides of the aisle that are here on different sides of this debate. I hope the fact that we have seen the works of political satirists and comics is not an indication that health care policy in this institution will be driven by the jokes that we see in the newspapers but that it will be driven by the policies that we should adopt about those real people. Mr. Chairman, I think that the forgotten folks in this debate are the 200-plus million people that are insured, many of whom are happy with the system. You know, we do have the best health care delivery system in the world, and I hope that that is not something that would be challenged on this floor. It is not a system that we want to change the gold standard that we have set. Nor is ours a system where the American people want to wait for procedures, like they do in other countries. I am confident that it is, in fact, the wish of the American people that Congress do no harm to the system. Is there room for improvement? There always is. I remember when I became a Member of Congress, I took the same health care coverage that I had in North Carolina, only to find out that the cost of it was some $30 higher than the 50-person company I worked for. It was, needless to say, something that I had to inquire as to why. That health care company said to me, ``Richard, never let the Federal Government negotiate your health care.'' That stuck with me ever since then, because it gets at the heart of cost, and it also gets at the heart of the quality of the services provided. I am hopeful that through this debate we can separate the rhetoric and the policy and truly come up with the right direction.

Mr. BURR of North Carolina. Mr. Chairman, I am pleased to yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Greenwood).

Mr. BURR of North Carolina. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Oklahoma (Mr. Coburn), still a practicing doctor.

Mr. BURR of North Carolina

Mr. BURR of North Carolina. Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding. Madam Speaker, I also welcome Pastor Carter and his wife Betty. In fact, in every community, we find families that we represent. Pastor Carter represents a family in Burlington of several hundred of his parishioners that every week turn to him for their spiritual guidance and for the leadership that they need, both personally and professionally. Dr. Carter, we are glad to have you today and your lovely wife. I also pledge to my dear colleague, the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Coble) that I will carry on the good tradition that he has established, not only with the Baptist Temple, but with Alamance County.

Mr. BURR of North Carolina

Mr. BURR of North Carolina. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this time. Seldom, if ever, have I ever gotten up on the House floor and suggested a no vote against the rule. Seldom on the House floor have I ever seen so blatant an effort to eliminate U.S. jobs. In fact, let me read to my colleagues a press release from the Chinese Trade Ministry, March 23, and I quote: Setting up assembly plants in Africa with Chinese equipment, technology and personnel could not only greatly increase sales in African countries but also circumvent the quotas imposed on commodities of Chinese origin by European and American countries. This is not an African growth and opportunity bill. It is not a U.S. growth and opportunity bill. This is an Asian growth and opportunity bill. I am a member of the Committee on International Relations with my colleague, but we look at this differently. Mr. Speaker, it is our responsibility, all 435 of us as representatives of the American people, to put their interests first. The explanation we ought to have today is to the textile workers who we have disregarded their jobs. Clearly, there will be job loss. We are like ostriches with our head in the sand. This body has never allowed bad legislation to move with the intention that it would get fixed somewhere in the process until this bill. I urge my colleagues to vote against the rule. If that passes, to vote against the bill, to move this back to committee and to do the work that we need to make a good bill and save U.S. jobs.

Mr. BURR of North Carolina

Mr. BURR of North Carolina. Mr. Chairman, I think that it is safe to say that everybody here wants to help Africa. Why is there a difference? It is because some do not want to do it on the backs of American workers, plain and simple. How could this be a good bill? Well, we could assure that there are no Asian transshipments. Can we accomplish that without U.S. Customs? Not with the track record currently. We could assure that the products were made in Africa. The agreement calls for 35 percent. Rule of origin. Can my colleagues imagine if we allowed Made in America, I say to the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Traficant), that say only 35 percent needs to be made here for them to have the label? Clearly, we should look to increase our export opportunities to the African countries, but under this agreement, not a single item is required to have their tariffs lowered. I would challenge the Members, this is a trade bill, we will all agree. I think the name is the transshipment trade bill, but we have a trade bill.

Mr. BURR of North Carolina

Mr. BURR of North Carolina. Madam Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Madam Chairman, let me say that this is a very narrow amendment for a unique situation. As a matter of fact, this amendment only applies to the Jefferson Pilot Insurance Corporation of Greensboro, North Carolina. Their principal business is life insurance. But in the past 40 years they have been in the broadcast business as well under Raycom Sports, that great ACC delivery system. According to the Federal Reserve, Jefferson Pilot is the only insurance company in the United States in the broadcast business. This amendment simply gives Jefferson Pilot the option of increasing their broadcast interest in order to maximize the value of their asset divestiture. They would still be required to stay under the 15-percent gross revenue limitation and to divest any non-bank and financial institution assets in the 10-year period if they were purchased by a bank. The Federal Reserve and the Treasury have no objection to this amendment. I urge my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to support this very common sense amendment. Madam Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. BURR of North Carolina. Madam Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Madam Chairman, in most cases we would criticize on this House floor for a very specific tailored amendment for a specific company. But, as has been pointed out, this is a unique company because they are the only ones that will get caught in the catch-22 of what we created, which was an atmosphere in the Telecommunications Act of 1996 where we go through a different calculation as to how we value assets in the communications business today. In fact, it has been official to have a pool of companies in a particular market to achieve the true asset value of a communications business. As this company agrees to divest themselves of the nonfinancial assets, I think that it is only fair to look at that 1996 Act, to look at what we are getting ready to do, and to say we will allow this company who is caught in the middle to, under their divestiture of this broadcast business, to at least achieve the asset value that it is worth. Unfortunately, that means that we have to create this one amendment that says, during this 10-year period, we will allow them possibly to add a radio station in a market because it raises the value of the sale in that market to where it should be. I do not think that it is out of line to allow companies, and specifically this one, who are affected by changes that we make to in fact be excluded from the specific language that we are here to do today. I appreciate the concerns expressed by my dear friends on the other side. I hope that in the end they will support this, because I believe it is the right thing to do.

Mr. BURR of North Carolina. Madam Chairman, I offer an amendment.

Mr. BURR of North Carolina. Madam Chairman, I yield to the gentlewoman from Charlotte, North Carolina (Mrs. Myrick) a member of the Committee on Rules.

Mr. BURR of North Carolina

Mr. BURR of North Carolina. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to tell a story, an entertaining story of spies and secrets. Some may even think it sounds like a James Bond movie, but unfortunately, it is not a fictional tale. I am, of course, referring to the Select Committee's report that was released yesterday, a report that details acts of espionage compromising our most precious military secrets. These findings frightened me months ago when I was briefed and they disgust me today. What is the difference between a Bond movie and the Select Committee's report? In the Bond movie, the Department of Justice would have allowed wiretaps. In a Bond movie, we would have gotten the bad guy. All the American people have gotten out of this process are questions. Why did the Department of Justice limit the investigation? Why did the Department of Justice drag their feet? Why was not the President told and, if he was, why did he not do anything? Why, why, why? The American people, Mr. Speaker, deserve answers, not questions.

Mr. BURR of North Carolina

Mr. BURR of North Carolina. Mr. Speaker, I would like to also thank my colleagues on the Committee on Commerce and the Committee on the Judiciary for bringing this legislation to the floor. My interest in DBS technology began really last August when I first introduced a local-to-local bill. It appeared to me then as it does now that once the new technologies designed to facilitate transmission of local TV signals to their local markets are up and running, satellite television will provide a swift and viable competition to cable television. This in turn will allow customers to take full advantage of the open multichannel video programming market that is being created with cable deregulation. The bill we have before us today will not only bring this much needed competition to the market but it will alleviate some of the problems satellite TV viewers are experiencing as a result of the court decisions. In closing, Mr. Speaker, I again want to thank the gentleman from Louisiana (Mr. Tauzin), the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Markey), the gentleman from California (Mr. Berman) and the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Coble). I am truly excited about the possibilities that can happen from this piece of legislation. This is truly a piece of legislation written with the American people in mind.

Mr. BURR of North Carolina

Mr. BURR of North Carolina. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor and congratulate Alamance County, North Carolina for its upcoming 150th Anniversary. Alamance County's charter was granted on April 24, 1849, but its rich history goes back much farther. The area was first an important crossroads on the well- known Indian Trading Path which connected villages in eastern Virginia, South Carolina, and eastern North Carolina. This path became an important avenue for trade and migration in the new colony, and it helped bring Alamance County's first European settlers--English and Irish Quakers, Scotch-Irish Presbyterians, and German Lutherans. Most of these settlers traveled many miles from Pennsylvania and northern Virginia to make Alamance County their home, and their legacy lives on today. The Cane Creek Meeting, established in 1751, is the oldest active Quaker meeting in North Carolina, and Hawfields Presbyterian Church, established in 1755, is the oldest Presbyterian Church in the county. A desire for freedom has always been deeply ingrained in the people of Alamance County. As a result of their frustration with land tenure problems, inequitable taxation, and inadequate representation in the colonial General Assembly, many of the county's residents joined the Regulator Movement--established to protest corrupt and inefficient county courts. The hostilities between the Regulators and the colonial government escalated into general insurrection and climaxed when Royal Governor William Tryon quelled the uprising by mustering a 1,000-man militia and defeating the Regulators on May 16, 1771 in the Battle of Alamance. While the county's loyalties were split early in the American Revolution, Alamance County played a key role in America's independence. General John Butler, a Swepsonville resident and one of our country's most distinguished Revolutionary War soldiers, led patriot troops in the battle of Moore's Creek Bridge and was later elected Brigadier General of the Hillsborough District. Moreover, Pyle's Massacre, a major American victory, occurred in Alamance County four miles west of the town of Graham. Before Alamance County's charter was granted in 1849, the area was part of Orange County. Residents of the section of Orange County west of the Eno River, however, felt removed from the county seat of Hillsborough, and in January, 1849, one of Orange County's Representatives in the General Assembly introduced legislation creating Alamance County. Separate legislation introduced at the same time established Graham (named after Governor William A. Graham) as the Alamance County Seat. On April 19, 1849, the residents of Orange County approved the creation of Alamance County by a narrow margin, and five days later, on April 24, 1849, Alamance County's Charter was granted-- the event we will celebrate next Saturday. Since its establishment, Alamance County has had a strong and growing economy. In 1856, the North Carolina Railroad was completed. Running from Goldsboro to Charlotte, the railroad spurred great economic growth in the county. Because of the efforts of Benjamin Trollinger and Edwin M. Holt (local mill owners and members of the railroad's board of directors), the North Carolina Railroad was run through the middle of Alamance County, and the railroad's repair and maintenance shops were located near Graham at Company Shops. In 1887, Company Shops' name was changed to Burlington which is now the county's largest municipality. The presence of the railroad was also a blessing to the county's emerging textile industry. Within a short period, many new mills opened, including Alamance County's most successful textile operation-- the Alamance Cotton Mill. Established by Edwin Michael Holt on the site of his father's grist mill on Alamance Creek, Alamance Cotton Mill contributed greatly to the prominence of the southern textile industry when it became the first mill south of the Potomac River to produce commercially dyed cotton plaids--known as Alamance plaids. The success of the mill enabled the Holt family's business to grow and include 22 mills in Alamance County alone. Some of these mill holdings would later be consolidated into the multinational corporation Burlington Industries. Today, the textile industry continues to be a major source of the county's economic growth and stability. Mr. Speaker, after 150 years, Alamance County exemplifies the best attributes of a rural county. Its people have worked hard to develop its economy and community--all while preserving its heritage and culture. It is a friendly place where people still stroll the sidewalks in the evening and greet friends and strangers with a smile. I am proud to have Alamance County in my district, and I wish them success and happiness for the next 150 years.

Mr. BURR of North Carolina

Mr. BURR of North Carolina. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding this time to me. I had remarks to make, and I cannot make them. As I have sat here, I found that this is an ever-changing process and some are not relevant. I would only say to many of my colleagues who suggest that this is ill- timed, to debate whether we send troops is not ill-timed. It is, in fact, a debate that I believe our process demands. That process also demands us to ask questions like my colleague from Texas just asked: Does a deployment to this region make us too thin for the mission of protecting our national interests? What is our exit strategy? Will a peace agreement that may be reached be agreed to by both sides? These are legitimate questions that we need answers to before we agree to anything. I found myself going through this process when I sat down with people that I have a great deal of confidence in: Senator Dole, Jeane Kirkpatrick, Henry Kissinger, those mountains of the past in foreign policy and, more important, in United States policy. As my colleagues know, Mr. Chairman, there are people around the world that will watch what we do. They will watch what we do, and they will watch how we act. They realize, as we do, that as we see more and more evidence of genocide on the TV, that we reach out not necessarily because of national interests, but because of injustice, injustice in a region where we have seen martial law take doctors and teachers and eliminate their profession. We have many questions to find answers to. I am hopeful that the resolution that we have got we can perfect and that we can have unanimous support, but until that point we have a tremendous amount of work to do, and this administration has a tremendous number of questions to answer.

Mr. BURR of North Carolina

Mr. BURR of North Carolina. Mr. Speaker, on the afternoon of March 20, 1998, a tornado ripped through the town of Stoneville, NC which is in my district. The people of this small town had no warning before the powerful winds of an F2 tornado ravaged the downtown area and touched the surrounding towns of Madison and Mayodan. The path of the tornado was 12 miles long and 100 to 400 yards wide. It claimed the lives of 2 individuals while damaging or destroying 500 to 600 homes and nearly all of the businesses in the downtown area. Yet, after facing this devastating force of nature, the people of Stoneville did not give up. They pulled together with the aid of their neighbors and have been rebuilding their homes, their businesses and their lives over the past 12 months. I was there the night of the tornado, and from that time until now I have witnessed the best in the human spirit as everyone has volunteered to help those in need. The buildings were destroyed, but not the determination to survive. This is a true example of American's working together for the good of their fellow man. I salute the people of Stoneville and all of their neighbors who have volunteered for their will to rebuild rather than to let their heritage be destroyed. I wish them the best and brightest future which they surely deserve.

Mr. BURR of North Carolina

Mr. BURR of North Carolina. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor the life and memory of a former Member of this body and one of my predecessors from the Fifth District of North Carolina, the Honorable Wilmer ``Vinegar Bend'' Mizelle. Born in 1930 in the town from which he received his famous nickname, Vinegar Bend, Alabama, Wilmer Mizelle lived a full and rich life before his sudden death this past Sunday, February 21, 1999. He grew up in rural America, but like most boys of his day, he had a greater dream. It was to be a professional baseball player. He had the talent to make his dream a reality and, as a young man, soon found himself assigned to the minor leagues and a team in my hometown of Winston Salem, North Carolina. Vinegar Bend was a pitcher, a southpaw, and you can still today find fans who remember the strength he possessed as he held the mound at Ernie Shore Field. It was during this time that he met Nancy McAlpine who would later become his wife. Vinegar Bend broke into the big leagues with the St. Louis Cardinals in 1952. Standing at over 6 feet tall, he was an imposing figure as a hard-throwing left-hander when he hurled that ball towards home plate. In 1960, Vinegar Bend was traded to the Pittsburgh Pirates and went 13 and 5 that year as part of a strong starting rotation. It was in 1960 that he pitched in the World Series winning a game as the Pittsburgh Pirates became the world champions. In 1962, he was traded to the Mets in their first game, which turned out to be his last year as a ball player. Vinegar Bend had 90 wins in his career, including 15 shutouts, and an E.R.A. of 3.85 lifetime. After retiring from baseball, Wilmer and Nancy returned to North Carolina and he took up a new career, that of public service, where he has served as a commissioner and then as a Member of Congress from North Carolina's Fifth District. Wilmer Mizelle worked as hard in Congress as he did on the baseball field. That is known by his colleagues and by his constituents. He always explained that he saw himself as an advocate for farmers and factory workers and consumers who populated his district. Vinegar Bend served three terms in this House from 1969 to 1975 and then was appointed Assistant Secretary of Commerce by President Gerald Ford. He returned to North Carolina in 1976 only to be called back by President Reagan to serve as Assistant Secretary of Agriculture and then as a member of President Bush's President's Council on Physical Fitness and Health. Wilmer then retired from government service, but he never slowed down. I can recall that Vinegar Bend returned to be with us in 1995 in this House in the majority to help give us some advice on our Republican baseball team. He never lost his love for sports. After the death of his wife Nancy, Wilmer married Ruth Cox, and together they divided their time between their homes in Alexandria, in North Carolina, and in Texas. They spent a great deal of time working in Texas with the Christian Missionary Alliance Church. Back home in my district, Wilmer Mizelle's reputation was as imposing as his physical stature. He was known as an honest, dedicated representative of the people. He filled his speeches with humor and home spun stories, and he only had to speak a few words before they knew he was from the south. Wilmer Mizelle's life calls to memory the words of Woodrow Wilson, who said, ``There's no cause half so sacred as the cause of people. There is no idea so uplifting as the idea of service of humanity.'' Clearly, Wilmer Mizelle proved Leo Durocher wrong when he said, ``Nice guys finish last.'' As a matter of fact, Wilmer Mizelle won before the game ever started. He is survived by his wife Ruth and sons Danny and David and by four grandchildren. On behalf of the United States Congress and the State of North Carolina, I extend our sympathy to them for this great loss, the life of Vinegar Bend Mizelle.

Mr. BURR of North Carolina

Mr. BURR of North Carolina. Mr. Speaker, I am indeed honored to be here and rise in support of H.R. 92. This bill was previously unanimously passed by this body in the 105th Congress but was not taken up by the United States Senate. We have heard about the human face behind Judge Ward by the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Coble). Clearly, nobody can tell it better than the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Coble). Let me tell my colleagues a little bit about Hiram Ward, though. After his plane was shot down in a World War II mission over Burma, Judge Ward was decorated with the Purple Heart and the Air Medal. Soon after returning to the United States, he dedicated himself to his education and to his career. Following that military service, he was quickly accepted and enrolled at Wake Forest College, now Wake Forest University that just had that large comeback against Florida State this past week in basketball. Judge Ward went on to serve 20 years as a private attorney, gaining the highest respect from his peers and colleagues for his devotion, for his honesty, and for his hard work. Judge Ward's passion and his dedication to his work is echoed still today by his peers and his colleagues in North Carolina's Federal District Courts and the Fourth Circuit Court. His reputation ultimately earned Judge Hiram Ward an appointment to the Federal bench by President Richard Nixon in 1972. By 1982, he had become chief judge where he would stay until 1988 when he elected senior status. Mr. Speaker, Judge Ward is a man of commitment, service, and honor. He has provided North Carolina with the kind of service and dedication that I can only hope for in our future. It is my sincere belief that the legislation currently before this House to designate the Federal building in Winston-Salem as the ``Hiram H. Ward Federal Building and United States Courthouse'' is both a fitting tribute for a man who gave so much selfless service to his country and to the people of North Carolina. I want to thank the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Coble) as the sponsor for introducing this legislation. I want to encourage all of my colleagues to support this bill.

Mr. BURR of North Carolina

Mr. BURR of North Carolina. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor and congratulate the town of Mayodan, NC for celebrating its centennial next Tuesday. The town's charter was granted on February 16, 1899 with a population of 225 residents. Mayodan received its name (unique from any town in the world) because of its location near the junction of the Mayo and Dan Rivers in North-central North Carolina in Rockingham County. The town's history is tied to the growth of the textile industry and the railroad. In order to provide more traffic for the new rail line between Roanoke, VA and my hometown of Winston-Salem, NC, several companies constructed textile mills at different points along the route. One of those mills (Mayo Mills) provided the impetus for the town of Mayodan and was responsible for much of its early growth. It built the houses, provided utilities and health care, and employed the majority of the people. Since these early times, Mayodan has outgrown its complete dependence on the textile industry and now provides its own services and government. Textiles, however, will always be closely linked to the town's history, people, and economic development. One hundred years later, Mayodan has grown into a town of 2,400 residents. Its recreational, residential, and commercial sectors are alive with activity. With the economic stability provided by the introduction of new textile companies and other industries and the close sense of community that has developed in the town over the past century through the many churches and civic organizations, Mayodan has thrived despite the Great Depression, wars, and, most recently, a disastrous tornado. Mr. Speaker, after one hundred years, Mayodan exemplifies the best attributes of a small town. It has worked hard to develop its economy and community--all while preserving its heritage and culture. It is a friendly place where people still stroll the sidewalks in the evening and greet friends and strangers with a smile. I am proud to have a town like Mayodan in my district, and I wish them success and happiness for the next hundred years.

Mr. BURR of North Carolina

Mr. BURR of North Carolina. Mr. Speaker, we stand on the floor of the House in the shadows of 23 men who in the course of human civilization have written the basic principles that anchor American law, the concept of a Nation of laws, not men. Today, we have been charged with choosing between reaffirming these basic principles, or sacrificing fundamental truths, so that one man can be placed above the law. I have studied the thoughts of the North Carolinians who helped shape the debate of the ratification of the U.S. Constitution. James Iredell, who later served in the Supreme Court, while debating the impeachment clause before the North Carolina Convention noted that an impeachment clause is necessary because, and I quote, ``If this power were not provided, the consequences might be fatal. It will be not only the means of punishing misconduct, but it will prevent misconduct. A man in public office who knows that there is no tribunal to punish him, may be ready to deviate from his duty; but if he knows that there is a tribunal for that purpose, although he may be a man of no principle, the very terror of punishment will perhaps deter him.'' After reviewing evidence, I support Article I accusing the President of lying before the grand jury, and I support Article III, charging the President with obstruction of justice. I believe the charges outlined in I and III go to the very heart of our system of justice. John Jay, the first Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, believed that, and I quote, ``No crime is more extensively pernicious to society'' than perjury. If we knowingly allow our President to break laws while some Americans sit in jail for having violated the same statute, we weaken the very rule of law protecting us. One of North Carolina's most favorite sons, the late Senator Sam Ervin, stated in his last newsletter, and I quote, ``If we seek truth, keep faith and have courage, I have no fear that this Nation can overcome all challenges from within or without.'' Our country is strong. Our Constitution was written with wisdom and grace. Regardless of the outcome of this sad chapter in our Nation's history, I am hopeful that we will live in peace with our conclusion.

Mr. BURR of North Carolina

Mr. BURR of North Carolina. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of the resolution. The men and women of the United States Armed Forces have once again been called on to defend our country's interests abroad. We can no longer stand idly by while Saddam Hussein flaunts the will of the world and thumbs his nose at the inspectors. This action was not only necessary, Mr. Speaker, it was long overdue. Our military personnel currently serving their Nation in the Persian Gulf should know that this Congress and this country is fully behind their new mission. One of those sailors is a former intern from my staff, and today I would like to tell her that we are thinking about her. The relatives and friends of our officers and our enlisted men and women should know that their mission is a just one and is clearly in our national security interests. While the prospects of their absence over the holiday season is discouraging, they should take heart from the knowledge that their service today preserves the future for tomorrow's generation.

Mr. BURR of North Carolina

Mr. BURR of North Carolina. Mr. Speaker, I knew the administration was throwing its weight around on the budget agreement, but I simply could not believe it when I read in yesterday's USA Today that the President of the United States was willing to shut the Federal Government down over a road bypass in the State of Ohio. So I tried to find out what all the fuss was about. I learned that there was a provision in the Omnibus budget bill that would have helped southern Ohio leverage existing State and Federal dollars, and I stress, existing, to fund six high-priority Appalachian Ohio projects. Even better, the so-called highway redesignation did not cost one dime more. We are talking about no money involved in this provision. Then I find out that this particular highway provision has the full support of the Ohio Governor, George Voinovich; the Ohio Department of Transportation; local elected officials in 30 community and business groups across southern Ohio. So I asked myself, why was the White House willing to shut the Federal Government down on a highway designation that helped southern Ohio? Apparently, Mr. Speaker, the White House has a political reason for opposing this small highway provision and threatening a government shutdown. I have a copy here of the actual letter from Erskine Bowles, the Chief of Staff of the President, to our Speaker stating pointblank that the President would shut down the government over this one small Ohio highway provision. Mr. Speaker, I just cannot understand why this White House is willing to play such high-stakes political hardball over a simple Ohio bypass.

Mr. BURR of North Carolina

Mr. BURR of North Carolina. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and agree to the resolution (H. Res. 212) recognizing suicide as a national problem, and for other purposes.

Mr. BURR of North Carolina. Mr. Speaker, I also commend the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Lewis) for his foresight with this issue. Many times teen suicide and child suicide goes with many unanswered questions. I urge my colleagues to support this resolution.