Henry Brown

Mr. BROWN of South Carolina

Mr. BROWN of South Carolina. Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Boehner), the gentleman from Delaware (Mr. Castle), and the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Armey) for helping me bring this bill to the floor today. I think it is very important that we bring this up today because while more than a month has passed since September 11 there is still a great deal of anxiety in America. The events of September 11 have affected us all, whether we lost a loved one or not. The freedoms that America took for granted before this date have been shaken. Now, more than ever, many people are searching for strength and solace. Like the rest of my colleagues, I will never forget standing on the steps of the Capitol on the evening of the attack and singing ``God Bless America.'' I am a newcomer to Congress and I have not had a chance to know each and every Member of this body very well. However, that night I felt closer to each of my colleagues than at any other time. We were all together, not as Republicans and Democrats, but as Americans united in support of our Nation. Madam Speaker, since that time, Congress has worked very hard to take necessary action to combat terrorism on many different fronts. But on September 11, as the damage was still being assessed, I think it was important for us to come together as a symbol of unity and sing ``God Bless America.'' When I learned that some schools are being challenged for showing this same type of support for our Nation, I was deeply troubled. The case that was first brought to my attention is in Rocklin, California where the American Civil Liberties Union wrote a letter to Terry Thornton, the principal of Breen Elementary School, calling its display of ``God Bless America'' a ``hurtful, divisive message.'' I take exception to that statement and believe the message sent by the ACLU is extremely wrong-headed. I further commend Principal Thornton for standing up for the principles of this country by refusing to take down this sign. Pride in America is higher than I have seen at any time in my lifetime, and it seems like actions such as this are trying to dampen the spirit in our country. To threaten a public school for showing the same type of patriotism that we showed on the Capitol steps is the opposite of what this country is all about. I introduced this resolution because Congress needs to make it abundantly clear that the kind of message displayed on the marquee of Breen Elementary is part of what makes our country great. As former President John Adams said, ``It is religion and morality alone which can establish the principles upon which freedom can securely stand.'' Madam Speaker, I urge my colleagues to be mindful of these words and vote in favor of this resolution.

Mr. BROWN of South Carolina

Mr. BROWN of South Carolina. Mr. Speaker, today we have the opportunity to come together, with one voice, to stand up for what this great country means to all Americans. We owe it to the victims of Tuesday's attack; to those who continue to sacrifice in response to that attack; to those in our Armed Forces who we call on to defend us; to all Americans who dearly love their country; and to all future generations of Americans. I urge my colleagues to make the vote on this resolution a symbol of a unified voice of freedom. May this vote prove to the entire world that the United States of America--as one nation, under God--will continue to be a beacon of freedom, hope, and dreams. Above all, may all Americans take heart as their federal government moves forward, as a collective body, to protect their precious freedom. The use of force is justified to eliminate this menace of terrorism, and America will prevail.

Mr. BROWN of South Carolina

Mr. BROWN of South Carolina. Mr. Speaker, yesterday our great Nation was attacked by terrorists whose aim is to violate what we cherish so greatly across this land: our freedom, our democracy, our hopes and dreams, our quality of life. I would like to join my colleagues in expressing my sorrow for both the victims and families of those that were killed and injured during yesterday's cowardly attack. This is a time for us to remember and express our gratitude to the policemen, firefighters, and emergency service personnel who have unselfishly sacrificed their lives. Mr. Speaker, a tragedy happened in America, but America will rise and be stronger. God bless America. God bless this great people.

Mr. BROWN of South Carolina

Mr. BROWN of South Carolina. Mr. Speaker, we honor a great American and a great South Carolinian who will be sorely missed not only here in the halls of Congress but in the entire Nation. His leadership in the area of national security is without equal. Floyd Spence had been hailed by Democrats and Republicans for devotion to God and country. He spent his career fighting for our men and women in uniform. He was a strong advocate of improving the life of military personnel including pay raises and better living conditions. He understood that a well-trained and equipped military is the first priority by the Federal Government and the best way to preserve the peace. Floyd leaves behind a legacy of accomplishment that includes service in the United States Navy, 6 years in the South Carolina House, 4 years in the Senate and 3 decades in the United States House of Representatives. In 1971 he was the first House Member to sponsor a constitutional amendment calling for a balanced budget. He served for 13 years as the ranking Republican on the Committee on Ethics, and he also chaired with distinction the House Committee on Armed Services from 1995 to 2000. Floyd Spence was one of our most distinguished patriotic public servants as well as a southern gentleman in the best of the tradition. He was a great colleague and a wonderful friend. His guidance, optimism, statesmanship, and strong leadership will be missed by all that knew him. He was a mentor to me and a great friend. God bless Floyd Spence and his family.

Mr. BROWN of South Carolina

Mr. BROWN of South Carolina. Mr. Chairman, this provision for a feasibility study of commercially owned and operated nuclear power plants is intended to be simple and straight-forward. We know that the nuclear plants operating today are quickly approaching the end of their serviceable years. If nuclear power is going to continue to provide a significant source of this nation's electricity, this study by DOE will help the Congress determine if there are any unique advantages to having commercial nuclear power plants on existing DOE sites. The fact is that nuclear power is our cleanest source of energy and provides about 20 percent of U.S. electricity generation. That compares to almost 76 percent in France, 56 percent in Belgium, and 30 percent in Germany. In my state of South Carolina, nuclear power provides 55 percent of our electricity. Demand for energy in the United States is rising and nuclear power can continue to help us meet this need. These DOE sites offer a potential solution to problems such as securing new land for the next generation of nuclear power plants, contentious licensing, absence of local community support, and investments in costly basic infrastructure.

Mr. BROWN of South Carolina

Mr. BROWN of South Carolina. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of President Bush's faith-based initiative, as reflected in H.R. 7. Both the Judiciary Committee and the Ways and Means Committee has worked hard to craft legislation we should all be able to support. I would like to take a minute, though, to concentrate on the charitable choice provision of this bill, because the tax provisions should not keep anyone from voting for H.R. 7. According to Chairman Nussle of the House Budget Committee, the $13.3 billion in estimated revenue reduction does not threaten the Medicare trust fund. No, if this bill fails, the failure will be due to the charitable choice provision. Many have expressed concerns about ``separation of church and state'' and about ``government funded discrimination'' in conjunction with President Bush's faith-based initiative. However, when the Welfare Reform Act was passed in 1996, the charitable choice provision allowed faith-based groups to apply for federal money the same way that secular groups do. The charitable choice provision is also included in the 1998 Community Services Block Grant Act and in the 2000 Public Health Service Act. The charitable choice provision has a history of success. Rather than promoting a radical restructuring of current law, H.R. 7 will simply ensure that faith-based organizations can compete on more equal footing than in the past. The government will not be encouraging any kind of discrimination but, instead, will be able to partner with faith-based organizations in a wider variety of social services, including juvenile justice, crime prevention, housing assistance, job training, elder care, hunger relief, domestic violence prevention, and others. In summary, we should all support H.R. 7 because it provides a proven method for the federal government to participate in the provision of social services to Americans who still need help. This bill allows the federal government to partner with faith-based and other community service organizations that already have a history of success in providing these social services. H.R. 7 puts faith-based organizations on a level playing field in the competition for federal funds, without jeopardizing their autonomy, and without undermining religious freedom for either the service providers or for the service beneficiaries. I urge all of my colleagues to vote for H.R. 7.

Mr. BROWN of South Carolina

Mr. BROWN of South Carolina. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of this important piece of legislation and I applaud the gentleman from California (Mr. Cunningham) for his tireless advocacy on this issue. Justice John Paul Stevens, speaking for the Supreme Court minority opinion in the United States v. Eichman in 1990 stated, ``Thus, the government may, indeed, it should, protect the symbolic value of the flag without regard to the specific content of the flag burner's speech. It is, moreover, equally clear that prohibition does not entail any interference with the speaker's freedom to express his or her ideals by other means. It may well be true that other means of expression may be less effective in drawing attention to those ideas, but that is not itself a sufficient reason for immunizing rising flag burning. Presumably, a gigantic fireworks display or a parade of nude models in a public park might draw even more attention to a controversial message, but such methods of expression are nonetheless subject to regulation.'' There is a lot of talk about free speech, but passage of this will not prevent anyone from saying anything more than our law already does. If one does not like what the country is doing, or if one is upset about anything at all, one can stand on the street corner and say whatever comes to one's mind, and that right is protected. It is part of what makes this country great that we have this freedom; that, despite differences of opinion, we still manage to move on and respect what other people have to say. But while we enjoy this freedom of speech today, there are still certain things we cannot do or say by law. We have laws against libel, slander, perjury, obscenity and indecent exposure in public. Just as it is within the realms of the Federal Government to limit this kind of conduct, it is also right for it to regulate a clear attack on its sovereignty and dignity by protecting our flag. To me, our flag represents not only the sacrifices of those who came before us, but also the hope for our future generations. It is both the past and the present which makes us a great people and what so many Americans have fought so hard to preserve. I am privileged to serve on the Veterans' Affairs Committee and to have such constructive interaction with so many current and retired members of our Armed Forces. We have more than 350,000 veterans in the State of South Carolina, many of whom are in my district. If I can go back home and tell them anything, I would say that I voted to make sure that their sacrifices were not forgotten. That the flag that serves as our national symbol of unity--and a symbol of what so many of their brethren gave their lives for--shall be revered, not desecrated. Again, I urge you all to vote for this legislation.

Mr. BROWN of South Carolina

Mr. BROWN of South Carolina. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. BROWN of South Carolina. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong opposition to this amendment to reduce the Federal Government's investment in beach renourishment. This proposal is not only shortsighted but it clearly violates today's agreements that local communities have arranged with the Army Corps of Engineers. To walk away from these commitments is simply wrong. How can we expect the coastal communities in South Carolina and other States to successfully budget for other major infrastructure investments if we arbitrarily increase their local cost share by over 80 percent? I support reigning in unnecessary government spending, but our shore protection program, Mr. Chairman, is absolutely necessary for us to maintain the Federal Government's responsibility for coastal hazard and erosion protection. If we do not honor the current Federal-local cost-sharing formula, we should know the communities in my district, including Myrtle Beach and Folly Beach and 150 miles of the shoreline of South Carolina will be facing an enormous financial hardship, so much so that it jeopardizes the progress we have made in improving our water and waste water infrastructure, roads, and bridges. Without the current cost-share partnership, we risk the preservation of the beautiful beaches that attract over 12 million visitors throughout our country. Our beaches belong to everybody. They provide a wonderful source of recreation for both young and old Americans. We hope our responsibility will be seen to help preserve these great natural resources. Contrary to the programs' critics, beach renourishment is a sound investment. I urge my colleagues to reject this ill-advised amendment.

Mr. BROWN of South Carolina

Mr. BROWN of South Carolina. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in honor of the Carolina Southern Railroad for its efforts and achievements in restoring the Blue Bastille drawbridge spanning the Intra Coastal Waterway in the First District of South Carolina. After one and a half decades standing idle, the giant drawbridge, built in 1935, will finally be lowered. Three vintage Pullman cars pulled by a super chief type locomotive at the Historic Carolina Southern Railroad Conway Depot will travel to Myrtle Beach where the bridge will be crossed by the first passenger train since 1953. The train will then continue to the Myrtle Beach Depot that is currently undergoing restoration by the All Aboard Committee. The Carolina Southern connects Myrtle Beach to Conway, Loris, Tabor City, Chadbourn, Whiteville, Mullins and the National railroad network beyond. I commend the Carolina Southern Railroad's Road Master, John Allison Gore, and his 20 man track crew who have been working feverishly to refurbish the abandoned two and a half miles of track into the city. I also recognize the Pippin family for its instrumental role in renovating the track and depot of the Carolina Southern Railroad. I again applaud the historic reopening by the Carolina Southern Railroad and acknowledge the benefits it will provide the citizens of South Carolina.

Mr. BROWN of South Carolina

Mr. BROWN of South Carolina. Mr. Chairman, the foundation upon which every American child's future is based begins with a quality education. This amendment provides a vehicle to ensure this ideal becomes a reality. Every child deserves a good education, not just those whose parents can afford to send them to a different school. In the past, the solution to America's education problem has been to simply throw money at it. While the federal government has spent billions of dollars on education, there are still countless children trapped in failing school systems. This amendment acknowledges that money alone does not provide for a quality education, but instead requires strengthening the framework of America's schools; in other words, fundamental reform. To achieve this vision for reform, it is essential to close the achievement gap and provide disadvantaged students with the same opportunities as other children. In recent years, society has increasingly forgotten those children who have not been afforded the basic needs with which to fulfill their dreams. It is unacceptable that in the twenty-first century nearly 70 percent of inner city and rural fourth-graders cannot read at a basic level. Illiteracy has far- reaching consequences that affect social development and opportunities for successful employment. Many lawmakers, including myself, want to involve parents more on education. Why shouldn't parents have the right to send their children to the school of their choice? Students need opportunity and parents need options. This amendment is the first step in giving parents choice and students hope. Unfortunately, many of my colleagues are against this type of parental choice. Let me address three of their concerns. First, parental choice opponents say this option would take federal funds away from the public schools that most need the money. Let me be clear--the last thing we want to do is take money away from public schools that need to improve. This amendment does not take money away from public schools; instead, the amendment includes an additional authorization of $50 million to fund the demonstration projects and the related research. $50 million is a small price to pay for the opportunity to test the effectiveness of this type of parental choice. Second, parental choice opponents say we don't know if private school choice contributes to improved education, either for those who go to the private school or for those left in the public school. Let's change that; let's increase our level of knowledge. Let's do a demonstration that will provide the research data we need to make this determination. If there is any possibility that this type of parental choice will improve education, then can we afford not to try? Intuitively, of some disadvantaged students transfer from a failing public school to a private school, and the failing public school still receives the same funding, the result is increased per student funding and smaller class sizes in the public school. Therefore, school choice should contribute to improvements in education, not only for students who transfer to a private school, but also for the students remaining in the public school. Let's test this theory to make sure it really happens. This amendment provides the accountability, measuring, and research we can rely on to make future parental choice program decisions. Finally, parental choice opponents claim that the majority of the American people are against private school choice. Even if that is true, don't we have the obligation to provide a voluntary demonstration project for those who support private school choice; those who don't have any other choices? This amendment provides for up to five demonstration projects. The projects are completely voluntary. Therefore, we may have five demonstration projects going, on a first come, first served basis. On the other hand, if no one wants the private school choice option, we will have zero demonstration projects going. Let's not base our entire policy on what opponents say the majority believes, if we have another option. This amendment provides that option. The political reality is that H.R. 1 will not pass if complete private school choice is included in the bill. However, the other part of the political reality is that H.R. 1 may not pass if some type of private school choice is not included. This amendment is our last chance to include private school choice to make final passage of H.R. 1 more likely. We need education reform. We need to pass an elementary and secondary reauthorization bill. We need H.R. 1. I urge my colleagues to vote for this amendment; it might make the difference between education success and education failure.

Mr. BROWN of South Carolina

Mr. BROWN of South Carolina. Mr. Speaker, today we declare victory for every taxpayer in America. Finally, a tax refund is on the way. The government has overcharged the American people, and it is time to return their money. This budget will provide long-term tax relief of $1.35 trillion over the next 11 years. This includes an immediate, much-needed hundred billion dollars this year. When Americans have more money in their pockets, the Nation's economy will benefit. This agreement on the budget resolution between the House and the Senate will also repay a historic $2.4 trillion on the debt by 2011, which is the maximum that can be repaid without penalty. This, too, will benefit our economy by lowering interest rates. Do not be misled by political rhetoric. Let us look at the facts and support this budget resolution. This budget is good for America and a victory for the taxpayers of this great Nation.

Mr. BROWN of South Carolina

Mr. BROWN of South Carolina. Mr. Speaker, on roll call No. 59 I was unavoidably detained. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yea.''

Mr. BROWN of South Carolina

Mr. BROWN of South Carolina. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding time to me. Mr. Chairman, I would like to congratulate the chairman on putting together a mighty fine budget. Having chaired the Committee on Ways and Means in South Carolina, I recognize the difficulty of trying to match all the needs and all the requirements that are out there in this Nation with the limited resources we have. But I applaud the gentleman and the other members of the Committee for standing firm that we would address the major issues that are facing this country, one being paying down the debt, and the other being returning some of the excess money back to those people that worked hard to make this great Nation strong, and giving some of that money back to them. Our goal was to save Social Security, we have done that; to repay the debt, and we have a program to do that; improving education and returning tax overcharges back to our citizens, and those are being accomplished in this budget. I applaud the chairman and the other members of the committee for making that happen. We all know that paying down the debt will mean better interest rates for all Americans. The Progressive Caucus budget calls for $745 billion more debt reduction than the committee's budget during the years 2002 to 2011. To achieve this, however, the government will either pay a penalty premium to retire ``unredeemable'' debt, or will build up cash surpluses which would be invested in private equities, introducing government ownership of the private economy. We are making the strongest strides possible without unwise penalties. In 2002, we will eliminate some $213 billion in debt; in 5 years we will be up to $1.2 trillion; and in 10 years, $2.34 trillion. In defense, we have made a decision that policy would drive the budget for defense, not dollars. Another great concern of mine surrounds the Armed Forces budget. While the committee budget recognizes both immediate and long-term defense needs, the Progressive Caucus budget cuts deeply in defense. It provides $753 billion less in budget authority and $698 billion less in outlays during the years 2002 to 2011 than does the committee budget. The quality of life for our Armed Forces personnel and their families is a priority in the House Republican budget, including increased pay, better housing, and $3.9 billion for the first year of expanded health benefits for over-65 military retirees. The progressive budget slashes funds for national defense. We cannot afford to neglect our Armed Forces any longer. I applaud the chairman for supporting the committee budget.

Mr. BROWN of South Carolina

Mr. BROWN of South Carolina. Madam Chairman, I commend the chairman for a great budget. Having chaired the Committee on Ways and Means for South Carolina, I recognize the extreme pressures that the gentleman is under as we try to formulate a budget that would meet the needs of this great Nation and also return back to the taxpayers their due return that they so patiently waited for for so long. As we campaigned across the land, one of the items that concerned most of the constituents was the ever-increasing debt. I am grateful, Madam Chairman, that that was one of the first items we addressed, is paying down the debt. Congress has paid down some $625 million in public debt since the Republicans took majority control of the House and the Senate. For 40 years, debt was racked up as far as the eyes could see under deficit spending. Paying down $625 billion is only the beginning. The budget pays down $2.3 trillion more dollars in public debt over the next 10 years. Paying down the debt will mean better interest rates for all Americans, and the citizens of the First Congressional District. Just think how much more purchasing power we would have if college and university loans were at a lower interest rate. The same goes for a mortgage for a house or financing a family car. Lower interest rates will help all Americans. In 2002, we will eliminate some $213 billion in debt. In 5 years, we will be up to $1.2 trillion; and in 10 years, some $2.34 trillion. The work is far from over. As we heard tonight from both sides, there are additional items that could be funded if the will was to do so. This budget, thanks to President Bush, has made it clear that the Federal Government's growth rate should be no larger than 4 percent per year. This is larger than the rate of inflation; it is larger than the rate of most people's wages increase. I think we can continue to fund important priorities. The budget assumes a $1.7 billion increase in discretionary budget for our veterans over the fiscal year 2001 level, and a $3.9 billion increase in mandatory spending for veterans. This would accommodate a big increase in educational benefits under the Montgomery GI Bill. Madam Chairman, the average American family knows how to balance its budget. The Federal Government is catching up to the Joneses. Things are looking up for the great business that is conducted in Washington, and all of us will benefit from these prudent decisions to restore fiscal sanity and pay off our bills. Madam Chairman, I am grateful to be part of this committee.

Mr. BROWN of South Carolina

Mr. BROWN of South Carolina. Mr. Speaker, today Mrs. JoLynn Mellis, a teacher from College Park Elementary School in Ladson, South Carolina, was awarded the 2000 Presidential Award for Excellence in Mathematics and Science Teaching Award by the National Science Foundation. I rise today to congratulate Mrs. Mellis on this prestigious award. This award, the nation's highest commendation for K-12 math and science teachers, recognizes sustained and exemplary work, both inside the classroom and out. These outstanding teachers serve as role models for their colleagues. Mrs. Mellis exemplifies what is great about America's public schools. Mrs. Mellis recognizes that our children are our future; she has taken on the crucial responsibility to ensure her students master the math and science skills they require to make that future a bright one for South Carolina and for the United States of America. She has fulfilled this responsibility in outstanding fashion. I commend Mrs. Mellis for her hard work and dedication. Thank you, Mrs. Mellis.

Mr. BROWN of South Carolina

Mr. BROWN of South Carolina. Mr. Speaker, today I would like to recognize the dedication and hard work of the Myrtle Beach Area Chamber of Commerce Employee of the Year. Shonda Riggins, a guest service representative at the Hampton Inn located at 48th Avenue North in Myrtle Beach, South Carolina, has displayed over a ten year period how deserving she is of this award. Ms. Riggins is ail astute employee who is known for her dependability, generosity, and great southern hospitality. The type of service that Ms. Riggins provides to the guest of the Hampton Inn goes beyond the call of duty. She has proven herself to be an asset to the tourist industry and indispensable to the Hampton Inn. Examples of Ms. Riggins exemplified service include her handwritten personal postcards to every guest, top-scoring in professional and friendly phone-skills, and a perfect attendance that is also at the top of the charts. Her appearance is always impeccable and she wears, with pride, all of her service pins and buttons. Ms. Riggins is a team player who has shown that she is willing to help in all aspects at any time. This includes such tasks as assisting during hurricane seasons, covering shifts of co-workers, and always being able to keep her cool so that she can help out in whatever way possible. Over the years Ms. Riggins has received numerous awards and recognition for her continuing great service to the Hampton Inn. This award, though, is an esteemed honored that Ms. Riggins is extremely deserving of. I would like to thank her for her continuing hospitality and support to the tourism industry that is so important to Myrtle Beach. As a thriving part of South Carolina, Ms. Riggins has proven herself to be indispensable to the true meaning of southern hospitality. As the Representative of the First District of South Carolina, I must say that this type of dedication and hard work is refreshing and appreciated to the upmost degree.

Mr. BROWN of South Carolina

Mr. BROWN of South Carolina. Mr. Speaker, Ronald Reagan exemplified honor and dignity while serving his country and restored stability to an unstable nation. The United States will be forever indebted to this exceptional man. I am proud and humbled to honor our 40th President, Mr. Ronald Reagan, on his 90th birthday. President Reagan focused on rebuilding our country's military forces and developing a defense system to protect our shores. On May 15, 1993, Mr. Reagan delivered the Commencement Speech at The Citadel. This remarkable address highlighted his continued support of our military and the need for military readiness, an issue clearly facing us today. It is with honor and humility that I read to you a part of his address: ``It is said that the price of freedom is eternal vigilance. And I'd like to offer several reasons why we must stay strong militarily: ``First, despite the spread of democracy and capitalism, human nature has not changed. It is still an unpredictable mixture of good and evil. Our enemies may be irrational, even outright insane--driven by nationalism, religion, ethnicity or ideology. They do not fear the United States for its diplomatic skills or the number of automobiles and software programs it produces. They respect only the firepower of our tanks, planes and helicopter gun ships. ``Second, the Soviet Union may be gone, but even small powers can destroy global peace and security. The modern world is filled with vulnerable ``choke-points''--military, geographic, political and economic . . . ``Third, technology--for all its blessings--can enable new enemies to rise up overnight. Scientific information flows to ambitious dictators faster than ever . . . who can predict what will be the `blitzkriegs' of tomorrow?'' President Ronald Reagan advised against weakening the military in peacetime, and, in turn, honored the young men willfully seeking the opportunity to serve our nation. He further commented, ``In my eighty- two years, I've seen America drop her guard time and time again--and each time with tragic consequences . . . Today, the United States dominates the world arena. Once again, our noble first instinct is to seek peace. And that's why America needs the brave and skilled soldiers of The Citadel more than ever.'' I share many of President Reagan's views on military readiness. I am happy and proud to add that we share one more thing--we both received Honorary Doctorates from The Citadel. Happy Birthday, Mr. President.