Steve Buyer

Mr. BUYER

Mr. BUYER. Mr. Speaker, the Buyer-Towns amendment to the motion to recommit, is it a debatable or a nondebatable amendment?

Mr. BUYER. Mr. Speaker, parliamentary inquiry.

Mr. BUYER. I thank the Chair.

Mr. BUYER. The gentleman from New York (Mr. Towns) and I had an amendment to the Conyers-Cannon amendment. If these two gentlemen or their designee do not offer that amendment, then I have no opportunity to do that, other than we defeat the previous question, and then I have an opportunity to make an amendment on the motion to recommit. Would that be correct?

Mr. BUYER. Mr. Chairman, I have a parliamentary inquiry.

Mr. BUYER

Mr. BUYER. I yield to the gentleman from Louisiana.

Mr. BUYER. Mr. Speaker, reserving the right to object, since the Buyer-Towns amendment was an amendment to an amendment not made in order, and the committee has now risen, I would ask of the chairman of the Committee on Energy and Commerce to explain to the gentleman from New York (Mr. Towns) and me what he intends to do.

Mr. BUYER

Mr. BUYER. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the Public Health Security and Bioterrorism Response Act. This legislation will strengthen our ability to conduct a war against terrorism, whether with biological, chemical, or radiological agents. I am particularly pleased that this legislation contains a version of legislation I introduced to provide health professionals with access to the very best information we have for treatment of injuries or diseases from weapons of mass destruction or natural disasters. Our health care professionals are not resourced or trained with the proper tools to detect, diagnose, and treat casualties in the face of biological, chemical and radiological weapons. The very best information we have for medical treatment of injuries or diseases as a result of these weapons currently resides with the Department of Defense and the Department of Veterans Affairs. There is no need to reinvent the wheel with regard to medical knowledge on weapons of mass destruction. It currently resides with the federal government. We have an obligation to get this information into the hands of all medical professionals who need it. Section 105 of this bill directs the Secretary of Health and Human Services to develop and provide educational material to health professionals for the response to weapons of mass destruction. The Department of Defense and Department of Veterans Affairs have seats at the table with the Secretary in this program. It is my intent with this Section that the educational material and curriculum that already exist within DOD and VA be adapted and provided to health professionals in civilian settings. We cannot afford to assume that our country will never have to experience a massive biological, chemical, or radiological attack. The combination of DOD's expertise in the field of treating casualties resulting from an unconventional attack and the VA's infrastructure of 171 medical centers, 800 clinics, satellite broadcasting capabilities and a preexisting affiliation with 107 medical schools should enable current and future medical professions in this entire country to become knowledgeable and medically competent in the treatment of casualties of weapons of mass destruction. Health care providers all across the country are not looking for anthrax, botulism, smallpox, and other such diseases. You do not diagnose what you have not been training to see. Now medical professionals will be trained to see and treat injuries or diseases from unconventional sources. Let me also take a moment to explain what this provision does not do. It does not establish a federal curriculum for medical schools. It does not mandate that medical schools teach particular educational material. It does not set any new community standard with regard to health care and practice. What I am interested in doing is sharing the information that is readily available through DOD and the VA with the civilian health care community. Our civilian health care system must develop effective, practical responses to these deadly weapons. It must do this through planning, training, preparation for future terrorist attacks. Section 105 will help. Mr. Speaker, I would also like to briefly express my view regarding Title III of this bill, which addresses the security of our food, especially imported food. While I am pleased that this legislation pays special attention to the security of our food sources, let me be clear that I will encourage the Secretary of HHS to exempt small businesses, and farms from the registration or the recordkeeping requirements of Title III. While I understand the bill exempts farms from recordkeeping, I do think that it is not necessary for American farmers to register with the Secretary of HHS as suppliers of food. Furthermore, I do not think that small retail food establishments, those in smaller rural communities, or those that serve a particular niche in a larger community should be required to register. To me, this is common sense, and I will be urging this approach to the Secretary. This is a good measure that the Committee has worked very hard to produce and I urge the passage of the bill.

Mr. BUYER

Mr. BUYER. Mr. Speaker, today we will consider several bills that were favorably reported by the Committee on Veterans Affairs, with my support, which will provide veterans with much needed assistance. The first bill, H.R. 2540, would provide veterans with a cost-of- living adjustment (COLA) for veterans with a service-connected disability and for survivors of certain service-connected disabled veterans. This year's COLA is 2.6 percent and is effective December 1, 2001. I can't think of any group that is more deserving of this increase in their benefits than those who have answered the call to defend our country's freedoms. I want to thank our Chairman Chris Smith, for his bold leadership in bringing the Homeless Veterans Comprehensive Assistance Act to this point. H.R. 2716, addresses many of the issues that homeless veterans are forced to confront on a daily basis such as how to obtain health care, housing, employment training and other benefits. This bill goes a long way to ensuring that our nation's homeless veterans will receive the assistance they need to turn their lives around by providing the necessary resources. It is shameful that one-third of our nation's homeless are Vietnam-era veterans. Veterans should not be forced to sleep on our streets or be warehoused in our nation's jails. That is why I am pleased to support passage of this important initiative. One of the most important benefits that we offer people who choose to serve their country is that in return we will provide them with education benefits. H.R. 1291, the Veterans Education and Benefits Expansion Act of 2001, makes several important improvements to our current programs. Passage of this legislation will increase the $650 monthly benefit to $800 per month effective January of 2002. In October 1 of 2002 that amount will increase to $900 per month, and effective October 1 of 2003, the monthly benefit will be $985. This should help those individuals who could not keep pace with the escalating cost of higher education. Again, I want to applaud our Chairman, Mr. Smith, for his outstanding work in making this one of the Committee's top priorities. H.R. 1291 also contains several other provisions including an expansion of the definition of illnesses for Gulf War veterans; offering additional assistance to disabled veterans by increasing specially adapted housing allowance for severally disabled veterans from $43,000 to $48,000 per year; increasing burial and funeral expenses for a service-connected veteran from $1,500 to $2,000; increasing the allowance for burial plots for eligible veterans to $300; and prohibits payments of veterans' benefits to fugitive felons. I urge my colleagues to support our veterans and vote for these three bills.

Mr. BUYER

Mr. BUYER. Madam Speaker, I would also like to thank the gentleman from New York (Mr. McNulty) because I do not have the words to follow the articulation. Each of us individually have our own memories of our dear friend, Jerry Solomon. And I compliment the gentleman for his statement. I rise and encourage all Members to support H.R. 3392. It is fitting that a national veterans' cemetery in Saratoga, New York be named after our colleague, Jerry Solomon. It honors not just the person but the contributions to our country. I know Marines are proud of their military service but it is much more. It is the cohesion of the brotherhood that only combat Marines understand and it survives beyond the distant battlefield. It becomes a way of life, led by the attributes of honor, integrity, courage, and commitment. Jerry Solomon emulated these virtues and values during his life and left a distinct impression upon our country, his constituents, friends and family. I am quite sure the comrades who he lies with are equally proud to have their remains rest in perpetuity in a national veterans' cemetery that bears the name of Jerry Solomon. We miss you, Jerry.

Mr. BUYER

Mr. BUYER. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the Medicare Regulatory and Contracting Reform Act. I would like to express my appreciation to the gentleman from Louisiana (Mr. Tauzin), the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Bilirakis), the gentlewoman from Connecticut (Mrs. Johnson), the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Dingell), and the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Brown) for their assistance in working on the concern of dentists who often file Medicare claims even though the dental services are not covered by Medicare. The provision in the bill seeks to help reduce the paperwork burden on dentists and expedite payment for services from appropriate sources of that payment. In addition, I am grateful that language can be worked out that will assist the medical device manufacturing community, enhancing the communications and cooperation between the Food and Drug Administration and the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services. This is an excellent bill, and I urge its passage.

Mr. BUYER

Mr. BUYER. Mr. Speaker, today, I have introduced the Medical Education for National Defense Act in the 21st Century, H.R. 3254. I would like to thank the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Smith), the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Bilirakis), the gentleman from New York (Mr. McHugh), the gentleman from Arkansas (Mr. Snyder), and the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Stearns). These are Members of the House Committee on Veterans' Affairs, Committee on Armed Services and Committee on Energy and Commerce, with whom we have coordinated on this bill. This legislation would authorize funds to establish partnership between the Department of Veterans' Affairs, the VA, and the Department of Defense, we call DOD, to develop education and training programs on medical responses to the consequences of terrorist activities. We are fighting a war on terror on two fronts, domestically and overseas. Unfortunately, as a Nation, we are not prepared for the new face of terror that we have been exposed to in the aftermath of the September 11 attacks. What has become all too clear is that our health care providers are not armed with the proper tools to diagnose and treat casualties in the face of nuclear, biological, and chemical weapons. The events of September 11 have forced the American people to reexamine many facets as to how we live our lives. We have been forced as a Nation to become more aware of our surroundings and more vigilant in the defense of our freedoms. Most recently, we have come under attack through our own mail systems by terrorists who have used its efficiency to spread the deadly disease of anthrax. The difficulty experienced by government officials and our health care community, in responding to this attack, use infectious diseases rarely seen by medical personnel that should serve as wake-up call for us all. A Washington Post article on November 1, 2001 by Susan Okie is a perfect illustration of the urgency of our medical community's lack of preparedness to deal with biological, chemical, and nuclear attacks. Ms. Okie reports the accounts of two of the heroic physicians who treated victims of the anthrax attacks: Dr. Susan Matcha, a Washington, D.C. area physician, and Dr. Carlos Omenaca, of Miami, Florida. Dr. Matcha was quoted as saying, ``We're really in uncharted territory here. As much as we want to have literature to look at, we really have nothing to guide us.'' According to the article, Dr. Omenaca, who encountered a rare form of inhalation anthrax in the case of Ernesto Blanco, found the description of the symptom that Mr. Blaco displayed in a 1901 textbook. Just think, a doctor in the United States of America, home of the best medical system of the world, this doctor had to use a medical textbook from the first half of the last century to acquire information that he sought on the diagnosis and prognosis of the anthrax. I find that not only unbelievable but unacceptable. As disturbed as this makes me, we are not here to try to place blame on this predicament to any group or organization. The reason why so many of our medical personnel feel uncomfortable about their ability to respond to these situations is because very few of them were taught how to diagnose and give a prognosis for these types of rare diseases in medical school. In fact, out of all of the medical schools in our country, only one, the Department of Defense Uniform Services University of Health Science, USUHS, has in its core curriculum a program to teach its medical students how to diagnose and treat casualties that have been exposed to chemical, biological, or radiological agents. That, Mr. Speaker, is why I have introduced legislation to create a partnership between the Department of Defense and the Department of Veterans' Affairs that tasks these two agencies to develop and disseminate a program to both our current medical professionals and current medical students in the Nation's medical schools. We already have a nexus in place between our medical universities, where there is a VA hospital in close proximity. That nexus is already in place and that is what we plan to tap into. The combination of DOD's expertise in the field of treating casualties resulting from an unconventional attack and the VA's infrastructure of 171 medical centers, 800 clinics, satellite broadcast capabilities, and a preexisting affiliation with 80 medical schools will enable the current and future medical professionals in this country to become knowledgeable and medically competent in the treatment of casualties that we all hope will never materialize. However, Mr. Speaker, we cannot afford to assume that our country will never have to experience a massive biological, chemical, or radiological attack on the American people. We must, as elected Members, sent by our constituents to Washington to represent their interests, act to ensure that if the worst of fears are realized, our medical professionals will be ready and able to deal with these situations. Mr. Speaker, I will insert the rest of the statement in the Record. Mr. Speaker, I cannot impress upon you enough the urgency of making sure this proposal is adopted. Both the American Medical Association and the American Association of Medical Colleges have thrown the full weight of their support behind this plan. These two organizations, made up of the doctors who will be on the front lines of this new war, know how vital it is to receive this educational package that the Uniformed Services University of Health Sciences and the VA are currently developing to disseminate to the Nation's medical community. It is often said that knowledge is power, and in this instance nothing could be truer. The knowledge resulting from the implementation of this act is critical. Our medical professionals need to be exposed to training methods that would enable them to save lives, and I can think of no greater power than that. Please, join with me and support this important piece of legislation.

Mr. BUYER

Mr. BUYER. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of the PATRIOT Act. We are engaged in a great struggle to combat the forces of terrorism that threatened our Nation on September 11. For this struggle, we have called forth the strong arm of our military. But in addition, this struggle will also be fought by law enforcement here at home. Our law enforcement officers need the best tools available to combat terrorism. This is not the case today and it is this deficiency that this bill seeks to remedy. For far too long we have neglected to equip our law enforcement with the tools they need to do their jobs as technology has changed. This bill will permit wiretaps to be leveled against suspected terrorists the same as we do for drug lords and organized crime syndicates. With existing court protections in place, law enforcement will now be able to follow suspected terrorists when they use the Internet, a land line phone or numerous cell phones. Nor will law enforcement have to go back to various courts when suspects move from location to location to location. Quite frankly, these provisions are long overdue. I regret that this bill includes a sunset provision. We need these provisions to be permanent. Modification to Amendment Adopted Pursuant to House Resolution 264

Mr. BUYER

Mr. BUYER. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the Farm Security Act. This legislation is the product of over two years of preparation by the House Agriculture Committee in consultation with agriculture and environmental groups, and most importantly, American Farmers. I had an opportunity to testify at one of the many field hearings the Committee held. During my testimony, I told the Committee that the government's approach to agriculture should focus on the farmer. I spoke of the importance of maintaining a market approach, encouraging productivity, reducing regulatory costs, and managing risk. I also discussed the importance of emphasizing cooperation and incentives instead of punitive measures in dealing with conservation. And I addressed the need to expand markets through fair trade and the development of new uses through research and development initiatives. But it was the input of farmers that I believe was of most value to the Committee in formulating the farm bill. I believe the Agriculture Committee did a good job of incorporating the input of farmers into the bill. The Committee worked to preserve the market-base philosophy of Freedom to Farm, while strengthening the safety net for farmers by replacing the unpredictable ad hoc system of emergency payments with a system of counter cyclical payments that farmers can rely upon. The bill also provides a balanced approach between boosting commodity programs and supporting the important goal of conservation. With an increase of 80 percent over baseline spending for conservation programs, this truly is the most environmentally sensitive farm bill ever produced. Mr. Chairman, the horrible terrorist attacks of September 11th have focused the nation's attention on the need to shore up our national security. While doing so, it is important to remember that America's food supply is a vital national security issue. By passing this bill, this Congress shows that we realize this fact, and we demonstrate that we truly speak with one voice when it comes to acting in the best interests of the American people.

Mr. BUYER

Mr. BUYER. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of this Resolution, House Concurrent Resolution 204, legislation establishing a national ``Character Counts Week'' sponsored by my friend from Texas, Mr. Lamar Smith. Today, the vast majority of Americans share a respect for fundamental traits of character, honesty, compassion, justice, courage, and perseverance. Yet, in today's world, all children face great uncertainties in a complex and sometimes troubled society. Positive character traits are not always readily apparent and easy for them to grasp or learn. When children are young, it can be difficult to decipher between what is right and what is wrong. Therefore, our challenge is to provide youths with the self-esteem, stamina, and support they need to survive, be successful, and develop into strong, competent, caring, and responsible citizens. This resolution encourages the establishment of a ``Character Counts'' week, geared towards educators, students and communities to become more involved in the development of positive character traits. Life consists of a series of choices. Every choice you make helps to define the kind of person you choose to be. Good character requires doing the right thing even when it is costly, risky, or when no one is looking. With all the pressures youths face today, how can we, as lawmakers, encourage our children to do the right thing, while so many elements in our culture say the complete opposite? That is why it is so important for Congress to pass this resolution. Character education is about celebrating what is right with young people while encouraging and enabling them to develop knowledge and life skills for enhancing ethical and responsible behavior. I urge my colleagues to join with me in support of this measure.

Mr. BUYER

Mr. BUYER. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to lend my support to H.R. 1583, legislation to name the federal building and courthouse in New Albany, Indiana, after a very distinguished former member of this body, Lee Hamilton. While a Member of the House, Lee Hamilton earned a reputation as foreign policy expert. With the recent tragic events that have struck our country, Lee Hamilton's advise and counsel are again being sought. He served for 34 years in this body before retiring in 1999. While his primary committee focus was in foreign policy, Lee also had a tenure as the Chairman of the Joint Economic Committee and on temporary panels to address standards of conduct and Congressional operations and organization. Still although having a love of foreign policy, Lee Hamilton never forgot his constituents in Indiana. He worked hard for the well-being of his constituents and reached across the aisle on many items for the betterment of the Hoosier State. Finally, it must be noted here, that perhaps one of his greatest accomplishments, came not on the House floor or in committee, but on the basketball court. He was a star player on his high school and college teams and has been inducted into the Indiana Basketball Hall of Fame. I support H.R. 1583 and urge its adoption.

Mr. BUYER

Mr. BUYER. Mr. Speaker, on rollcall number 348, the vote we just had, I inserted my card, pushed ``yea'' and left the Chamber only to learn from a colleague that I had not voted. I believed that I had voted. I came back in, and the record was closed. I would like for the record to indicate that I would have voted ``yea'' on rollcall number 348. I was present.

Mr. BUYER

Mr. BUYER. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of the Fiscal Year 2002 Military Construction Appropriations bill. This bill is good for defense, and it is good for the nation. Equally important, it is good for the people of Indiana because it continues to recognize their important contributions to this nations national security, by providing funding for Grissom Air Reserve Base, the Newport Chemical depot, and the Crane Naval Service Warfare Center. I would like to thank Chairman Hobson for honoring my requests for funding. Specifically for the $66 million for Newport Chemical depot. This funding comes on the heels of well over $145 million for Newport over the last four years. In addition, this bill provides $13.2 million to finish Phase III of the Grissom Air Reserve Base Services Complex. Over the last two years, this body has authorized $22.1 million for phases I and II, as well as an additional $4.73 million for the construction of a new Marine Corps Reserve Center at Grissom, and a total of $4.8 million for three Army National Guard Maintenance Shops in Plymouth, Logansport, and Delphi. Lastly, this bill provides $9.11 million for a Microwave Engineering Device Facility and $5.82 million for a Special Warfare Engineering Facility at the Crane Naval Surface Warfare Center. Mr. Chairman, I want to thank this body on behalf of the hard working people of Indiana for recognizing their contributions to national security, as well as funding the military construction projects that I have requested.

Mr. BUYER

Mr. BUYER. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this time. Mr. Speaker, this is a bill that recently passed in the other body 96 to one. Ninety-six to one. I had to come to the floor because I could not believe the rhetoric that I am hearing, the passion. I understand the song that is being sung, but let us remember what is occurring here at the moment. An industry is hemorrhaging. Hemorrhaging. Folks, let us calm down for a moment here. When you look into a pond and it is nice and glassy on a calm, windless day and you take a rock and you throw it into a pond, sure you see the splash; but then you have the ripples that go far out infinitum. We are trying to deal with those ripples and bring calm to it before it hits the shores. Here is an industry that is approaching 100,000 layoffs. We cannot give in to the terrorists. We have to have this immediate infusion. I have great respect for the leaders of both parties that negotiated this. Let us bring calm here also to our words. This needs to pass. Yes, it is an economic stabilization. Yes, we have to address security assurances. Yes, we have to address liability. There is plenty of work still yet for us to do. I want to compliment the Governor of Indiana, Frank O'Bannon, a Democrat governor. He sent a letter to me and said, ``I would like to urge you to support the enactment of the economic assistance for our domestic airline industry as quickly as possible. As you well know, the tragic hijackings of the four commercial jets last week resulted in the first-ever complete shutdown of our air traffic system. This closure itself cost the airline industry hundreds of millions of dollars each day. The continued closure of Reagan Washington National Airport, heightened security measures, reduced passenger demand due to concerns about air safety pose significant obstacles to recovery. Without Federal assistance, including grants and loans, many airlines will go bankrupt.'' I want to compliment Democrat Governor Frank O'Bannon. Republicans and Democrats are unified. We are unified and there is unity to do this measure, so please let us be very cautious about the rhetoric and the tone that is being used here on this floor, and let us continue our work in a bipartisan fashion on behalf of the American people.

Mr. BUYER

Mr. BUYER. Madam Chairman, I thank the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Stump) and the gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Skelton) for a job well done on the bill. The President, as we all know, is coming here tonight to address not only a joint session, but the American people, to describe not only his mission in the war on terrorism, but also how he will help stabilize and stimulate our economy and how sacrifice must be of a higher priority than personal inconvenience. This is the first war of the 21st century, and it is nothing like anything we have ever faced. The enemy flies no flag, has no boundaries, and often goes unseen. We call it the asymmetrical threat; but this is one that is not subject to the traditional calculus of deterrence, which means that we also in this bill, and I am sure as we go to conference, will have to address the intelligence side of the House, not only by my colleagues' cooperation as an authorizing committee, but also with the appropriators to make sure that not only the intelligence community of our CIA but the military intelligence community is strengthened. I thank on behalf of the Guard and Reserve Caucus, the gentleman from Mississippi (Mr. Taylor) and myself, the gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Skelton), and the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Stump), for allowing us to play a part in the bill. I am pleased that the bill provides $807 million, $192 million more than the President's request for facilities enhancements to improve training and readiness for the Guard and Reserves. Congress has worked hard in the past to close the procurement gap between the active and reserve components to ensure seamless integration of equipment and compatibility. That modernization of those reserve components is highlighted by the call-up that is happening right now. We cannot go to remote places of the world without relying upon the Guard and Reserve. We need their air assets to build the air train, for the lift to get us to where we need to be. As this bill supports them, I want to thank the gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Skelton) and members of the committee on both sides of the aisle and the chairman for a job well done in this bill. Please support this defense bill.

Mr. BUYER

Mr. BUYER. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of this joint resolution between the Senate and the House. As I have sat here and have witnessed my colleagues, I have seen great resolve uttered in this Chamber and the swaggering display of courage. I can share with my colleagues, as a veteran of the Gulf War, that war may be glorious in verse or prose, but in reality it is not. We are about to send America's finest, and that means men and women will die. It will be a noble cause, but we must remember the resolve of this moment, because in war it is chaotic. Not everything is going to go right. We cannot be 400 and 500 generals between the House and the Senate. The solidarity and resolve we have at this moment we have to remember at times when it gets tough, when we have to stand with a constituent in a lonely place at a burial service. We must make sure that we take care of the loved ones afterwards. And taking care of them means we resource them and we are patient and we are in this for the long haul. We cannot have the bravado of today and then run at the first sound of the guns. We have to stay the course and see it through. Please, when it gets hard, remember this day.

Mr. BUYER

Mr. BUYER. Mr. Speaker, the dynamic of our Nation has been reshaped by the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001. This tragedy not only destroyed the lives of thousands of innocent American civilians but also violated each and every American's sense of safety and security. No longer can we deny the fact that there are people in this world who seek to violate our cherished ideals of liberty, wise tolerance and an enduring peace. But those that live under the security of this Republic are resilient. From the sorrow, confusion and fear will come resolve, focus and confidence. We are coming together in service, prayer and dedication to those in need and we will persevere. To those who committed this horrific and cowardly attack, your attack on America and freedom itself has failed. With the full force of the United States we will find those responsible. They will be punished severely. Nation-supported and subnational terrorism activities constitute an asymmetrical threat upon our Nation's security. These terrorists groups are not subject to the traditional calculus of deterrence. We are now at war with terrorism. We must strike these vipers before they strike again. We must also make a renewed commitment similar to our investments and policies which worked to defeat communism. We must work to strengthen our national security system by modernizing and sustaining the U.S. intelligence community so its capabilities and performance will be able to cope with the demands and challenges of international and domestic counter-terrorism. In our emptiness and in our grief and fear, we must turn to our faith in God and the faith of this great Nation. We will show the world that our ideals will not be compromised by those who believe they can scare us into submission. I truly believe that goodness will prevail. God bless America.

Mr. BUYER

Mr. BUYER. Mr. Speaker, earlier the gentleman from California (Mr. Hunter) and I spoke on the issues of national security. I want to touch on an issue we do not really talk about much on the House floor, and it is the issue of foreign policy and how it relates to our national security objectives, i.e., our military strategy to fight and win our Nation's wars, as the gentleman from California (Mr. Hunter) likes to refer to, with overwhelming force. We went through the 8 years of the Clinton administration and we had a foreign policy of engagement. The President has the responsibility of outlining what are the vital interests of a Nation. Then he turns to the Pentagon and says what is your military strategy now to protect the interests of a Nation that I have outlined? President Clinton, what he had done in his foreign policy of engagement, took 275,000 of America's finest and spread them over 135 nations all around the world. What that did was create an expectancy by our allies and our friends that the United States will always be there. So when you looked at Germany, or the United Kingdom, other allies began to decrease their defense budgets relative to their GNP. Time out. You are going the wrong way. So now we have had a change in administrations and a change in direction, so I give some counsel now unto the administration: when the United States has provided for the peace and the stability of two major regions of the world, the Pacific Rim and Europe, I believe the United States as a superpower, we can act. Whether it is unilaterally or in concert with another nation, if there is instability upon a region of the world, then we can act. Take, for example, the continent of Europe. If there is an intercontinental conflict that poses no threat to destabilize the region, then our allies need to step up to the plate. We can provide assistance through our architecture of intelligence or through our airlift and our sealift, but we need to ask of our allies that they begin to accept greater burdens of peace and responsibility. Now to the issue of our military force structure and how that relates to that foreign policy. There is a debate in the town about do we move away from the military strategy of being able to fight and win two nearly simultaneous major regional conflicts. I have never endorsed that two-major-regional-conflict scenario, but I think what is important and what I have heard the gentleman from California (Mr. Hunter) say is it is in our interests, this Nation of ours, to not only protect our interests and that of our allies; when they need our assistance, we need to be highly mobile and volatile. I mean, it has to be lethal. It has to be a force that can respond rapidly. So we can have debates, and the gentleman from California (Mr. Hunter), I want to yield to him, to speak about the discussions he is presently having on the Committee on Armed Services about what should be the proper force structure as we move to the 21st century.

Mr. BUYER

Mr. BUYER. Mr. Speaker, I wanted to come to the floor tonight and also join in the eulogy of a friend of the House and a friend of the country. Floyd Spence, I think, was an individual whom many of us here in this body could call a friend, because Floyd in his aw-shucks kind of Southern gentleman demeanor would come up and ask you how is your health, how are you doing, how is your family, and he always put the needs of others ahead of himself. Even though Floyd may have been failing in his health, he always wanted to know how you were doing and how you were feeling. That was a lot about who Floyd was and the impact he had on a lot of us and the impact he left upon a country, because he dedicated his life to public service. It was truly honorable in the manner in which he conducted not only his everyday life but also his profession. He had so many positive attributes that he could not help but have an impact upon each of us and a nation. I think as an individual that dedicated his efforts to national security and making sure that the men and women who wear the uniform, when they take that uniform off, in his dedicated service to the Committee on Veterans' Affairs, he made sure that that solemn oath that that veteran took, that the government in fact fulfilled their commitments to the veterans of this Nation. He taught each of us every day that freedom is not free and that we must be vigilant as a Nation, leaning forward so that we could respond. Floyd may not be with us in body but the lives of whom Floyd Spence touched will be forever with us in spirit. There is a song and the lyrics of that song may have been heard but not listened to by many and it is that life is about more than who we are, it is about what we do with the span of time in which we have. Floyd embodied that. He made sure that the imprint that he left upon each of us and the Nation was one that was very positive. Floyd, to your family, you spoke often of your sons and of your grandchildren, we wish you and your family well. One day we will join you, my friend.

Mr. BUYER

Mr. BUYER. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding. When the gentleman comes up with his $50 billion number, what he did not mention, and I ask him to elaborate a little built, is on the question of deferred maintenance. When one looks at this past decade of the 1990s, in the post-Reagan buildup, we began to use a lot of the equipment, use those maintenance facilities, and now the bill is coming due, is it not?