Chris Cannon

Mr. CANNON

Mr. CANNON. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that when the House adjourns today pursuant to this order, it adjourn to meet at 11 a.m. on Wednesday, August 2, 2006, unless it sooner has received a message from the Senate transmitting its concurrence in House Concurrent Resolution 459, in which case the House shall stand adjourned pursuant to that concurrent resolution.

Mr. CANNON

Mr. CANNON. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that the business in order under the Calendar Wednesday rule be dispensed with on Wednesday next.

Mr. CANNON

Mr. CANNON. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to take from the Speaker's table the Senate concurrent resolution (S. Con. Res. 112) relating to correcting a clerical error in the enrollment of S. 3693, and ask for its immediate consideration in the House.

Mr. CANNON

Mr. CANNON. Mr. Speaker, pursuant to the order of the House of today, I move that the House do now adjourn.

Mr. CANNON

Mr. CANNON. Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank Chairman Sensenbrenner, Ranking Member Conyers and Representatives Watt for their work and leadership on this legislation. H.R. 4019 is a technical amendment to Public Law 104-95. This legislation clarifies that all retirees should be treated the same with regard to how States may tax retirement payments. In 1996, Congress passed Public Law 104-95 to prohibit States from taxing the retirement income of nonresident retirees. Essentially, if retirees, most of whom are on fixed incomes, are not living in the State, then no State except the State where the individual resides should tax the retirees' incomes. After passage of the 1996 law, most States interpreted the law, as it was intended, to apply to all retirees, including employees and partners. One State, however, has recently taken the position that it can treat retired employes of a company and retired partners from partnership differently. This State's interpretation is contrary to the original intent of the law and would allow for a State to tax the retirement payments of a person who retires from a partnership, no matter where that retiree is living. This was not the intent of Congress when the bill was passed, as was emphasized at our hearing by our former colleague Mr. Gekas, who was chair of the subcommittee when Public Law 104-95 was enacted. Congress intended for all retirees to be treated the same under the law, and H.R. 4019 simply clarifies that intent. States must treat all retirees similarly. I have worked with the State tax administrators and crafted a manager's amendment that passed the full committee by voice vote in order to alleviate their initial concerns, an appreciate their efforts in coming to the table to reach agreement. I urge all of my colleagues to support H.R. 4019.

Mr. CANNON

Mr. CANNON. Mr. Chairman, I want to thank the gentleman from Colorado for his comments, and I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Nevada (Mr. Gibbons).

Mr. CANNON. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.

Mr. CANNON. I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of this amendment that I offer on behalf of myself, Mr. Mark Udall, Mr. Rob Bishop, Mr. Rahall, Mr. Gibbons, and Mr. Salazar to redirect $16 million from Departmental salaries and expenses to the Payment in Lieu of Taxes program. I am pleased to be working with this bipartisan group and thank the gentlemen for their support. All of us have something in common: we represent some of the 1,900 counties that host public lands that rely on the Payment in Lieu of Taxes program to mitigate the impact of the lost tax revenues resulting from Federal land ownership. The Federal Government owns nearly 650 million acres of land, most of it in the West. The map I have here has all land owned or held in trust by the Federal Government in red. As you look at this map, you can see that we have a problem: the Federal Government owns the bulk of the West. That means that we do not tax those lands, and that means that in the western United States we pay less per child for education but we tax our people more per family because we are supporting the Federal Government. As the chairman of the Congressional Western Caucus, I know well that my fellow colleagues in the West struggle with these issues. It is only fair that we pay a reasonable amount in lieu of taxes to cover this shortfall. The Payment in Lieu of Taxes program was created in 1976 to provide payments to counties to make up for the property taxes they are prevented from collecting on Federal lands located within their boundaries. This year, the administration's budget proposed to cut PILT by $34 million, a paltry 56 percent of the authorized level. Under Chairman Taylor's leadership, and I might say also Ranking Member Dicks', we have been able to achieve historic levels of PILT funding. We thank them both for that and for their efforts this year that have nearly restored last year's PILT funding levels. While the number currently in the bill is significantly above the administration's recommendation, it is well under last year's level and far from what it should be, and our counties are bearing the brunt of it. While the Department's administrative budget has nearly doubled since 2001, PILT funding levels have not kept pace, and this is not acceptable. It is imperative that we keep fighting for funding so our rural counties will not have to continue to foot the bill for lands owned by the Federal Government. I urge my colleagues to support the amendment to bring PILT funding levels to the nearly 70 percent of authorization and support the counties that host our public lands. This amendment will add a modest sum to the PILT program, a sum that is important to the American people who live in and around these Federal lands and those who travel to them and enjoy them from around country. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Colorado (Mr. Udall). (Mr. UDALL of Colorado asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. CANNON. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Colorado (Mr. Salazar). (Mr. SALAZAR asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. CANNON. Mr. Chairman, I yield the remaining 1 minute to the gentleman from Utah (Mr. Bishop).

Mr. CANNON

Mr. CANNON. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize the dedicated dentists and physicians who volunteer in my home state of Utah to provide much needed care to low-income, uninsured residents in my district. An estimated one-third of Utah County residents lack dental insurance. Hundreds of thousands of school hours and even more work hours are lost every year due to oral pain when families cannot afford to visit a dentist. In Utah, needy patients are linked with dental providers who are willing to see patients on a charity basis. For example, a constituent of mine was a patient suffering from severe oral pain due to three abscesses. She had been working full- time; however, she did not have dental insurance through her employment. Even with her full-time wages, she made less than $1,500 a month--which put her family of four more than 150 percent below the poverty level. Fortunately, through a system of volunteer dentists, this constituent was able to schedule an emergency appointment with one of the dentists in a local volunteer provider network. The dentist was able to see her in his office the next day. This is just one of many success stories among patients who are treated by volunteer dentists and physicians, none of which would be possible without the dedicated professionals who volunteer to give back to their community. I commend the dentists in Utah who willingly donate their time, their resources, and their skill as dentists to help the less-fortunate members of their own community. Their service and commitment in helping the underserved is a testament to the strength of the local community, and I applaud their efforts.

Mr. CANNON

Mr. CANNON. Mr. Chairman, I rise today to commend Chairmen Sensenbrenner and King for their work on the manager's amendment to H.R. 4437. The manager's amendment amends Title VII of H.R. 4437 by including language that I authored that prevents the mandatory construction of day labor facilities by private businesses in order for them to conduct business. An increasing number of local governmental entities are requiring businesses to undertake new, onerous obligations with regard to day laborers as a condition of getting a use permit necessary to conduct business. Examples include requirements that businesses build structures with toilets and water fountains at or near their private property to house day laborers, while they wait for employment opportunities with contractors or customers of the business. The local ordinances typically require that a business maintain the structures, including providing security and janitorial services. These obligations are costly and represent an unwarranted interference by governmental entities with the rights of businesses to use and operate their private property. Worse, these local ordinances are unreasonable because they go beyond safety issues. They force businesses to use their property to facilitate employment through the creation of a de facto hiring hall. These ordinances expose the businesses to potential liability on a number of fronts. I offered language that amends the existing preemption of the employer sanctions provisions of the INA (8 U.S.C. Sec. 1324a) as they relate to State and local governments. Enacted in 1986, this section preempts State and local governments from applying the employer sanctions provisions of the INA. The language of Section 708 included in the manager's amendment adds an additional preemption paragraph that preempts any State or local law that requires a private business to build and maintain what is essentially a hiring hall as the price of doing business in that city. I understand and empathize with the State and local governments as they grapple with illegal immigration, but immigration is a national problem that must be addressed by Congress. Piecemeal and patchwork local ordinances only add to the confusion surrounding this issue. I thank the Chairmen for working with me to resolve this issue.

Mr. CANNON. Mr. Chairman, as we conclude the debate on H.R. 4437, the Border Protection, Antiterrorism and Illegal Immigration Control Act, I wanted to share with my colleagues a thoughtful letter I received outlining Republican philosophy and the need for comprehensive immigration reform. December 16, 2005. Dear Member of Congress: Watching the action in the House of Representatives this week, we feel compelled to write and express our disappointment with the direction of the debate about immigration. There can be no question: we as a nation need to retake control of our borders and restore the rule of law in our communities. But enforcement alone--without more realistic, more enforceable laws in line with our need for foreign workers to do jobs Americans no longer want to do--will not solve the problem of illegal immigration. The restrictionist wing of the Republican Party--those who would revoke birthright citizenship for immigrants and build a fence from the Pacific to the Gulf of Mexico--has been getting most of the air time this week. These members have seized on an emotional issue, and party leaders have humored them--at the expense of more reasonable Republicans advocating broader, more realistic reform. But make no mistake: the reform-minded wing of the party is alive and well--and standing ready for the next phase of the battle, in the Senate and beyond. Who makes up the reform wing? There are political operatives like Ken Mehlman concerned about how immigration plays with Latino voters. There are business-friendly Republicans at the Wall Street Journal, the Cato Institute and elsewhere who know that immigration is good for the economy: not just good for individual employers--in agriculture, food-processing, hospitality, health care, construction and other sectors--who depend on these workers to keep their businesses open and growing, but also for native-born workers employed by these companies and others that trade with them. There are security-minded Republicans like Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff and his predecessor Tom Ridge who know that creating a system for immigrant laborers to enter the country legally is the best way to free up border agents whose real job is protecting us from terrorists. And then there are Republicans like Ronald Reagan and now George W. Bush who understand in a more general way that immigrants are good for the country: that they bring entrepreneurial energy and family values and fresh patriotism--and that, as Reagan emphasized, the nation must remain a beacon to the world. None of these Republicans think enforcement or legality are unimportant. But they are convinced that the best way to restore the rule of law is to start with more honest, more enforceable immigration quotas--a temporary worker program more in line with the reality of our labor needs--and then make those realistic limits stick with all the means at our disposal. This is the approach that the Senate will almost certainly pursue when it turns to immigration in January or February, and it is the approach the President hopes to sign into law, perhaps as soon as next spring. House Republican leaders face a difficult challenge-- precisely because of the way the issue divides us from one other. But we remain convinced that reason--and the party's traditional values--will prevail in the end. Instead of trying punitively to enforce unrealistic law, the majority of the GOP will eventually come together around an immigration policy worthy of the label Republican--one that encourages the American Dream and rewards work, even as it restores the rule of law and enhances national security.

Mr. CANNON

Mr. CANNON. Mr. Chairman, I rise today to support HR 4437, the Border Protection, Antiterrorism and Illegal Immigration Control Act. The debate over our nation's immigration policy has steadily moved from the back of the newspaper to the front page. I should know. I've been working on this issue since I first came to the House of Representatives in 1996. Americans are rightly concerned about the security and the integrity of our nation's borders because the very system designed to stem the flow of illegal immigrants into our country is broken. Current statistics estimate that we now have at least 10 million illegal aliens in this country. Mr. Chairman, if we are going to fix this system, it is important that we fix it in the right way, comprehensively, so that we are not back debating this issue within a year. We need a system that will encourage well-intentioned, contributing aliens out of the shadows so they can be identified. Standing on the soap box, spouting fire and brimstone is not going to do that, but laws implementing a guest worker program will. From 1990 to 2000, the number of U.S. Border Patrol agents nearly tripled, but illegal immigration increased by as much as 5.5 million. Increasing enforcement resources to keep out willing immigrant workers, as we did throughout the 1990s, has obviously failed. Mr. Chairman, as most are well aware, I have long stated that enforcement, border security and a guest worker program are the pieces of the puzzle that need to be linked together to allow us to effectively control our border. A broader strategy that includes both enforcement and the creation of adequate legal channels for immigration serves our nation's interests. Our immigration laws and policies must reflect the realities we face today. Our economy demands workers, but our national security demands that we identify those lurking in the shadows. An editorial that ran on KSL-TV of Utah last week stated: ``Steps must be taken to stop the torrential northward flow of illegal workers. As that is accomplished, attention can focus on rationally dealing with the millions of illegal immigrants already here. A realistic temporary worker program, in some form, must be part of the effort.'' Mr. Chairman, KSL has it right. Enhanced enforcement must be a priority for immigration policy, but as part of today's debate, we must realize that we owe it to our constituents to resolve all the issues that contribute to true immigration reform and that includes a guest worker program. I would like to note that the Mexican government and their President Vincente Fox have taken steps to work cooperatively with the United States to protect our southern border. What often goes unnoticed in the immigration debate is Mexico's efforts to reign in organized crime, stymie drug trafficking and the ongoing cooperation between our Attorney Generals to combat narcotics, illegal immigration and related violence on the border. The OASISS, a prosecution program launched by our countries this year to stop human smuggling by criminal rackets, has helped stem the illegal flow of persons, but there is more to do. President Fox has shown himself to be an ally of America's national and economic security by standing up to the dictators of Latin America, like Hugo Chavez, and this should not go unnoticed. I encourage my colleagues to support this bill. Broader immigration reform has been outlined by President Bush, and there are ideas in both Houses of Congress that will restore public confidence in a safe and secure immigration system. I stand committed to seeing comprehensive immigration reform passed out of Congress and sent to the President for his signature. That is what America wants and needs. I would like to thank Chairman Sensenbrenner for his tireless work on this issue. I support this bill as the first step in the process towards true immigration reform.

Mr. CANNON

Mr. CANNON. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on H. Res. 487.

Mr. CANNON. Mr. Speaker, I yield as much time as he may consume to the gentleman from California (Mr. Royce), my friend and colleague.

Mr. CANNON. Mr. Speaker, I would like to again thank both the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Tom Davis) and the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Davis) for their work on this bill and bringing it forward, and I want to urge all Members to support the adoption of H. Res. 487.

Mr. CANNON. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and agree to the resolution (H. Res. 487) supporting the goals and ideals of Korean American Day.

Mr. CANNON. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H.R. 487, which supports the goals and ideals of a Korean American Day and recognizes the 103rd anniversary of the arrival of the first Korean immigrants to the United States. Korean Americans have played an important part in American society since January 13, 1903, when over 100 pioneer Korean immigrants arrived in America. I am proud to say this last century is chock-full of significant, creative Korean-American accomplishments from Jam Kim, the first Korean-American to serve in the United States House of Representatives, to Eugene Chung, first Korean-American to be selected in the first round of the NFL draft. To commemorate this remarkable period, the Centennial Committees of Korean Immigration and Korean- Americans designated January 13 of each year as Korean-American Day. The Korean-American community has created a successful community at large and has established a deep sense of culture and heritage for the upcoming generations. It has become a centralizing force that promotes progress and unity of Korean-Americans, as well as preserves their close historical ties with Korean-American ancestors. Korean-Americans have played an integral part in helping the United States grow our principles of strong family ties, support for our community as well as aspiring for success. With their contributions to the economic vitality of the U.S. global marketplace, they have also rejuvenated businesses, churches and academic communities in the United States. The Korean-American population has made enormous contributions to all facets of American life, including to the United States military. At least 4,000 Korean-Americans serve in the U.S. Armed Forces with approximately 25 percent serving in Iraq currently. In addition, Korean-Americans score among the top tier in academic tests and scholastic accomplishments. In closing, Mr. Speaker, I am hopeful that H. Res. 487 will serve to bring the well-deserved recognition to a community that has given so much in leadership and heritage to our Nation. I would like to thank Chairman Tom Davis for introducing this important resolution and urge my colleagues to join me in its adoption. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. CANNON. Mr. Speaker, I yield as much time as he may consume to my distinguished colleague and friend from the Commonwealth of Virginia (Mr. Tom Davis).

Mr. CANNON. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield so much time as he may consume, given the constraint that we may have, to the gentleman from the Commonwealth of Virginia (Mr. Moran).

Mr. CANNON. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. CANNON

Mr. CANNON. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 4107) to designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 1826 Pennsylvania Avenue in Baltimore, Maryland, as the ``Maryland State Delegate Lena K. Lee Post Office Building''.

Mr. CANNON. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on the bill under consideration.

Mr. CANNON

Mr. CANNON. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on the resolution under consideration.