Saxby Chambliss

Mr. CHAMBLISS

Mr. CHAMBLISS. Mr. Speaker, I want to congratulate the Lady Trojans Girls Softball Team of Telfair County High School in McRae, GA for recently capturing the Class A State Championship title in girls softball. This fine group of young women and their coaches from Georgia's 8th district deserve great recognition for their hard work and success. This is not only a victory for these fine young women, but for their school as well, as it is the first State Championship for Telfair County in over 30 years and the first ever in softball. The Lady Trojans have won four straight area titles and have advanced to the playoffs three times in the last 4 years. I want to congratulate Telfair County Head Coach Colby Taylor, Coach Becky Hamilton, and Coach Randy Pope for their leadership and dedication to the team. Coaches spend every day of their lives building character, integrity, and determination in our young people and I want to commend each of them for their commitment and service. I also want to take this time to recognize the Lady Trojans individually. The 1999 players are Falon Wooten, Kamika Collins, Haley Clarke, Cameo Cooper, Karla Hamilton, Jodi Burress, Heather McGowan, Davitta Jones, Kaycee Pope, Judy McRae, Sam Wilmouth, Danyelle Williams, Melonie Wilcox, Latoria Mathis, and Paige Froug. This is an outstanding group of athletes. Mr. Speaker, victory cannot be achieved without the hard work, talent, and perseverance of every single athlete and the strong leadership and direction of the coaches. The Lady Trojans truly are a team to be proud of, and it is an honor for me to represent Telfair County, GA in the People's House. The Lady Trojans made history this year, and I look forward to many more victories from this outstanding team in the years to come.

Mr. CHAMBLISS

Mr. CHAMBLISS. Mr. Speaker, it is my privilege to yield 3 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from Mobile, Alabama (Mr. Callahan), the home of Hank Aaron. (Mr. CALLAHAN asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. CHAMBLISS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor and recognize a man of great athletic ability, a man who has a great passion for life, a man who had a great vision for where he wanted to go, a man of great compassion, and a man who had unbelievable leadership skills. Hank Aaron was born the third child of a rivet bucker of a shipbuilding company in Mobile, Alabama. While in high school, Hank Aaron began playing with the Mobile Bay Bears, a semi-pro team. One day in Mobile he was playing against the Indianapolis Clowns, which was on a barnstorming tour throughout the South playing other semi-pro teams, when the manager of the Indianapolis Clowns said, I have to have that guy come play for me, and he signed Hank Aaron to come play for the Indianapolis Clowns. A couple of years later, he was scouted by the Milwaukee Braves, and at that point in time, at age 18, he was signed by the Milwaukee Braves and was sent to the Northern League in Wisconsin. At that time, when he went to Wisconsin, one of the first times he had ever been away from Mobile, Alabama, Hank Aaron began chasing his dream. In 1952, he was rookie of the year in the Wisconsin league. The next year he moved to Jacksonville in the Sally League. He became the most valuable player in the Sally League in 1953. In 1954, he went to the big leagues, but they did not give him a chance to make it in spring training. It was only because of an injury to Bobby Thompson, who the Braves had acquired from the Giants during the off season, that Hank Aaron got a chance to play. But once he took over in left field, and he ultimately moved to right field, the rest became history. On April the 23rd, 1954, Hank Aaron hit his first major league home run. Twenty years later, on April 4, 1974, Hank Aaron hit home run number 714, as was witnessed by our friend, the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Boehner). Four days later, on April 8, 1974, at 9:07 p.m., Hank Aaron hit home run number 715 at Atlanta Fulton County Stadium. And those of my colleagues who have an opportunity to go to Turner Field today, which sits right across the street from where Atlanta Fulton County Stadium used to sit, ought to take a minute to go over and take a look at what is now a parking lot. There my colleagues will see a brass plate in the shape of a home plate. That is where home plate sat in Atlanta Fulton County Stadium. In the outfield, where home field number 715 used to be marked, there is the original section of the fence still existing today with the number 715 painted on it. That is where Hank Aaron hit number 715. The next year, after he hit number 715, Hank Aaron was traded back to Milwaukee, which was his original home playing area. He spent two seasons there playing for then the Milwaukee Brewers, and wound up, as we have already heard, hitting 755 home runs. He retired after the 1976 season, but here are some of the records which Hank Aaron still holds: obviously, most home runs ever hit in a career; 2,297 runs batted in; 6,856 total bases touched during his career; and 1,477 extra base hits during his career. Hank Aaron obtained these records because he was a model of consistency. In his 24-year career, he played in 22 All Star games. He hit between 24 and 45 home runs for 19 straight seasons. For 11 years, he had 100-plus runs batted in. For 15 years, he scored 100-plus runs. He won two batting titles and four Gold Gloves. After he retired, Hank Aaron came back to Atlanta and has been employed with the Braves organization since. Today, he is a senior vice president with the Atlanta Braves organization. Several years ago, Hank and his lovely wife, Billy, started the Chasing the Dream Foundation. Today, Hank Aaron recognizes that there are any number of young people out there who do not have the opportunity that he had and Hank Aaron and his wife, Billy, established this foundation to provide an opportunity for kids between the ages of 9 and 12 to have the opportunity to improve themselves. They do not have to be athletes. They can be people who need rides to dance classes or people who need music lessons paid for. But if they exhibit an ability, if they exhibit good scholastic habits, they are available to apply for a scholarship from the Chasing the Dream Foundation, chasing the dream, just like Hank Aaron did many, many years ago in Mobile, Alabama. Today, this great American, Henry Louis Aaron, is still chasing his dream, his dream to make America a better place to live, and he is doing his part. Hank, we all salute you, my friend. God bless you, and thank you for everything that you do for America.

Mr. CHAMBLISS. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Oklahoma (Mr. Watts), the chairman of the Republican Conference.

Mr. CHAMBLISS. Mr. Speaker, we are indeed privileged to be here today to honor and recognize a true American hero, and as we start this debate I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Isakson).

Mr. CHAMBLISS. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Boehner), who has a very interesting experience to relate about Mr. Aaron.

Mr. CHAMBLISS. Mr. Speaker, it is my pleasure to yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from New York (Mr. Boehlert) who happens to represent Cooperstown, the home of the Hall of Fame.

Mr. CHAMBLISS. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2\1/4\ minutes to the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Kasich), the distinguished chairman of the House Committee on Budget and a great baseball fan.

Mr. CHAMBLISS. Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased to yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Oxley), who is the coach of the Republican baseball team.

Mr. CHAMBLISS

Mr. CHAMBLISS. I yield to the gentleman from Washington.

Mr. CHAMBLISS. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the conference report. I want to commend the gentleman from California, the chairman, along with the gentleman from Pennsylvania, the ranking member, for putting together what I think is a good quality bill. As the gentlemen know, I was not particularly pleased with the direction at which we started out with respect to the F-22, but I want to say to each of the gentlemen, they have been very straightforward in the debate, the dialogue we have had, they have been honest in their beliefs and honest with me. I appreciate them working hard to make sure that we came up with a fair resolution for the continued research and ultimate procurement of a very valued weapons system. It is going to be necessary for this system to be purchased if we are going to maintain air superiority in the future, and we have seen just most recently in the Balkans how critical that is. I also want to commend them on the direction in which we are continuing to go with respect to the C-17. The C-17 is a very valuable airlift mobility asset. I think that we ought to continue to look at what we are doing with the C-17 as a model for the purchase of future weapons systems. A multiyear buy not only provides our armed forces with the best weapons systems available but it also saves the taxpayers money, and that is what we are ultimately here and all about. We are operating in an entirely different era now from what we have operated in in past years because we simply do not have the money to buy anything we want in the quantities that we want to buy them. I am a little disappointed in where we are going, the direction, with the 130s. The Marine Corps asked for a total of four and we were not able to provide those. But I know that the gentlemen are going to work hard to see if we cannot improve that next year. We are going to put the burden back on the Air Force, that if they want these weapons systems, they are not going to be able to depend on add-ons in future years. They have got to come ask for them. That is the way it ought to be.

Mr. CHAMBLISS. I thank the gentleman for those comments. Lastly, just let me say that I appreciate the efforts that we have made on the quality of life issues. As I go around and talk to enlisted personnel all across the world, I am very impressed with the quality of those folks, and the provisions that the gentlemen have made with respect to quality of life are going to help those young men and women out there.

Mr. CHAMBLISS

Mr. CHAMBLISS. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 1906. H.R. 1906 contains funding for many vitally important programs in agriculture. This bill provides appropriations for those programs that were authorized in the 1996 farm bill. Furthermore, this bill provides important funding for the foundation of agriculture research. Continued research will provide answers that enable farmers to continue to improve efficiency in providing food for our table. Specifically the bill includes funds for the National Center for Peanut Competitiveness, a program that establishes a broad-based research program directed toward assuring the competitiveness of U.S. peanuts in the world market. Also included is funding to allow the University of Georgia to research tomato spotted wilt virus, a plant virus that has become a major yield-limiting constraint on many important food crops in South Georgia. The bill also contains funds for peanut allergy collaborative research as well as onion research. In addition, our farmers have once again faced another disastrous year. Farmers who were fortunate to have a crop are faced with the lowest prices in decades. Adverse weather conditions have resulted in another disaster. This bill also contains disaster assistance for farmers who have suffered yet another crop failure. My farmers cannot afford to wait any longer on relief. Mr. Speaker, I am disappointed that dairy and sanction provisions were not included in the current appropriations bill. The funds appropriated in the bill will aid farmers in surviving another year of adverse weather conditions and low commodity. Peanut and tobacco farmers will all receive aid in the form of market assistance payments, market loss payments or direct payments. The bill also includes funds to replenish the step two cotton program. In addition fruit and vegetable growers along with dairy and livestock producers will receive assistance from this package and other essential measures that are critical to our producers. This bill is not a cure all. However, it is imperative that we don't delay this funding any longer. I urge all my colleagues to support passage of conference report.

Mr. CHAMBLISS

Mr. CHAMBLISS. Mr. Chairman, I just want to say, like my other colleagues, how much I appreciate the strong leadership, both to the chairman of the committee and also to the ranking member. The gentleman from Texas (Mr. Combest) and the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Stenholm) have come together in a strong bipartisan way to ensure that farmers in America have been treated fairly. Also to the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Ewing), my subcommittee chairman, and the gentleman from California (Mr. Condit), the ranking member. Again, we have shown how things in this body ought to work in a bipartisan way. Agriculture is the backbone of the economy of this country. It always has been and, frankly, always will be. But today agriculture all across the United States is in trouble. We are taking some short-term measures to shore up the current deficit in prices for commodities across the country, and that is very well needed. But even though we have heard a lot of fingerpointing in the last 4 years now, almost since we passed the 1996 farm bill, as to what the cause of the problems are in agriculture country today, when we passed the 1996 farm bill, there were several legs to the table that were going to be necessary to require agriculture country to stabilize for years to come. One of those legs was regulatory relief. Frankly, in this House, we passed any number of regulatory relief measures that would give our farmers more flexibility to operate their farms and improve their bottom line. Some of those measures have been enacted into law and are in the process now of being tweaked to benefit our farmers. Some of them never got beyond passage in this House. Another leg was providing tax relief to the American farmer. We passed a real tax relief package not too long ago that would have been a huge benefit to the American farmer and has recently been vetoed. Another leg to that table is crop insurance. The one thing that I think we agree on across agriculture country in the United States is that the current crop insurance program we have in place does not work and does not provide any sort of safety net to our farmers. We did have hearings down in my district and all across the country. The gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Ewing) was gracious enough to come down and visit with the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Bishop) and myself. The gentleman from Texas (Chairman Combest) came down and heard the interest of my farmers. There were a couple of things in particular that we heard. One was we need flexibility. We need flexibility and a crop insurance program that will provide for a cost to production policy that will ensure our financial benefactors to be able to know that we will get some sort of return in disastrous years. That flexibility is provided in this bill. A second thing that he heard, that both these gentleman heard from our farmers, was that, in our part of the country, we have a real distinction between irrigated and nonirrigated crops. We need crop insurance policies that will allow the insurance of irrigated crops versus nonirrigated crops so that our farmers who are making good, rational business decisions to invest in irrigation will be able to provide the risk management tool that they need to cover those irrigated versus nonirrigated crops. Those are some of the major issues that are covered here. It is a good bill. I, again, thank our leadership and urge the passage of this bill.

Mr. CHAMBLISS

Mr. CHAMBLISS. Mr. Speaker, during the August district work period, I conducted nearly 20 town hall meetings throughout middle and south Georgia. And at every stop, I had young people who came up to me and raised the concern that Social Security would not be there for them during their retirement years. This concern is legitimate, as American taxpayers have witnessed the raiding of Social Security surpluses time after time after time. In fact, since 1983, the Social Security Trust Fund has run a surplus. And since 1983, Washington has taken that surplus and spent it on programs that are totally unrelated to Social Security. This practice must end; and I agree with my colleague, the gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Gephardt), the distinguished minority leader, who said that exact same thing earlier. After years of hard work, the independence that comes from financial security ought to be the one thing that our senior citizens can count on. Now, earlier this year we made a commitment to this idea by overwhelmingly passing the Social Security Safe Deposit Box Act. Now, as we near the end of the appropriations process, it is important that we reiterate our resolve to reign in government spending and not spend one penny of the Social Security surplus. I commend my colleague on the House Committee on the Budget, my good friend, the gentleman from California (Mr. Herger), for bringing this legislation to the floor and for his tireless effort in promoting honest budgeting. This resolution reaffirms our commitment to the principles of honesty and accountability in the Federal budget process, and I urge my colleagues to support its passage.

Mr. CHAMBLISS

Mr. CHAMBLISS. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that my name be removed as a cosponsor of H.R. 1621.

Mr. CHAMBLISS

Mr. CHAMBLISS. Mr. Chairman, it is with very strong reservations that I support Mr. Ramstad's amendment to the Fiscal Year 2000 Commerce, Justice, State, and the Judiciary Appropriations Act that restores $109 million in funding to the Legal Services Corporation. As a practicing attorney in Georgia for over two decades, I had the opportunity to view firsthand the multitude of services provided by public legal services personnel throughout my state. While I have been critical at times of the Georgia Legal Services Program, they do provide indigent citizens of my state needed legal services. While I support the legal services provided to the indigent by the hard working men and women of programs like the Georgia Legal Services Program, I rise today to register my deep dissatisfaction on the actions of individuals within the Legal Services Corporation. Last year on October 21, Congress approved $300 million for the Legal Services Corporation, a $17 million increase that I supported. At the time of this vote, Congress was relying on the accuracy of legal services case statistics provided by the Corporation. As a result of subsequent audits and investigations, it is evident that for months prior to this vote Corporation officials knew that the case numbers given to Congress were both false and inflated, deliberately withholding that information from Congress. This is absolutely inexcusable and those providing false information to Congress should be fired immediately. With regard to the serious mismanagement at the Legal Services Corporation, I would like to associate myself with the report of the Appropriations Committee. In their report to accompany H.R. 2670, the Committee raised serious concerns about the case service reporting and associated data reports submitted annually by the Corporation to the Congress. Additionally, the Committee found that substantial inaccuracies in these submissions, as documented by the Corporation's Office of Inspector General and the General Accounting Office, and directed the Corporation to make improvement of the accuracy of these submissions a top priority. To continue receiving my support and provide assurances that the Corporation is proactively addressing its problems, I support the Committee's directive that the Corporation submit its 1999 annual case service reports and associated data reports to Congress no later than April 30, 2000 in order to provide my colleagues with the information necessary to consider the Corporation's budget for fiscal year 2001.

Mr. CHAMBLISS

Mr. CHAMBLISS. Mr. Chairman, today, I rise in support of the Twenty- First Amendment Enforcement Act, which will provide individual states the ability to enforce statutes regulating the distribution and sale of alcoholic beverages within their border, a right guaranteed by the Twenty-First Amendment. Most states, including my home state of Georgia, employ a three- tiered system of alcohol distribution to control the distribution and sale of alcoholic beverages within their borders. Under this system alcohol producers go through state-licensed wholesalers, who must go through retailers, who alone may sell to consumers. Furthermore, Georgia is one of nineteen ``express prohibition'' states that expressly outlaw direct shipments of alcohol from out-of-state. Georgia's system has proven quite effective in combating illegal alcohol sales to minors. While Georgia's alcohol statutes have proven successful throughout the years, the recent development of electronic commerce via the Internet has presented new challenges to preventing illegal shipments of alcohol into our state. Confronted with this new challenge, as well as the difficulty of enforcing its laws in court, Georgia in 1997 enacted statutes making the illegal shipment of alcoholic beverages within its borders a felony. This action was necessary to ensure the state would have jurisdiction over violators of its state liquor transportation laws. I believe if states are unable to effectively enforce their laws against illegal interstate shipment of alcoholic beverages, they may also lose some ability to police sales to underage purchasers. Illegal direct shipments also deprive the state of the excise and sales tax revenue that would otherwise be generated by a regulated state, placing regulated businesses at a distinct commercial disadvantage. Finally, if direct shippers violate state law, they exclude themselves from other state obligations such as submitting to quality control inspections, licensing requirements, and complying with other restrictions placed upon sellers of alcohol. As an advocate of smaller government and state's rights, I favor a resolution to this problem that does not mandate changes to any existing state laws or alter existing case law interpreting the Commerce clause of the Constitution. I believe the Twenty-First Amendment Enforcement Act is the common-sense solution to this problem as it allows Georgia the authority to seek enforcement, through a federal district court injunction, of its state laws regulating the importation or transportation of intoxicating liquors without infringing on states' rights or creating Constitutional confusion. For these reasons, I support the passage of H.R. 2031, the Twenty- First Amendment Enforcement Act, and urge its adoption.

Mr. CHAMBLISS

Mr. CHAMBLISS. Mr. Chairman, I first of all want to thank my friends, the gentleman from Florida (Chairman Young), the gentleman from California (Chairman Lewis), and the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Murtha), the ranking member, for the great job that they have done in a very tough environment. We have all had very difficult budget issues to resolve, and this is yet another one. But I also rise to talk about securing America's future. Part of the cornerstone of securing America's future is to provide for a strong national defense. In order for our continued strong national defense in this country, we have got to maintain air superiority. Now, what we are doing by reducing the funding of $1.8 billion for the F-22 program is to move the F-15 into an upgrade status. The F-15, make no mistake about it, has been a great airplane for the United States Air Force. But the threat out there today, as my friend from California has already alluded to, is the SU-27, which is on parity with the F-15. If you upgrade the F-15, we are looking at the SU-35 that is a Russian-made airplane coming down the line that will be superior to the upgraded F-15. Yet they have another airplane on the drawing board already. We simply will not be in parity if we do not have the F-22. Sure, cost is a problem. But can cost measure saving lives of our young men and women? The F-22 is an absolute necessity to maintain air superiority. There are three things that the F-22 has as an asset that no other airplane has. It has integrated avionics. It has supercruise capability. And it has stealth. The F-15 has none of these. The upgrade will have none of these. The F-22 has the capability of first-day, first-shot, first-kill. Against the other airplanes that are out there today, the F-15, even with its upgrades and modifications, will not have that capability. If we are going to maintain air superiority that has been so valuable and such an absolute necessity in the Persian Gulf and in Kosovo and other areas of the Balkans, we have got to have the F-22. I urge the chairman to really negotiate hard in conference on this issue.

Mr. CHAMBLISS

Mr. CHAMBLISS. Mr. Chairman, I would just say to the gentleman that we look forward to working with him to reconcile any concern he has.

Mr. CHAMBLISS. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the right to raise a point of order on the amendment of the gentleman from Nebraska (Mr. Bereuter).

Mr. CHAMBLISS. I do, Mr. Chairman. I object to the amendment under section 306 of the Congressional Budget Act. Mr. Chairman, the amendment violates section 306 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974. Section 306 prohibits the consideration of any amendment that is within the jurisdiction of the Committee on the Budget and which is offered to a bill that was neither reported or discharged from the Committee on the Budget. The amendment of the gentleman from Nebraska modifies the budgetary treatment of certain leases entered into by the State Department. The budgetary treatment of such leases prescribed in the Balanced Budget Act and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985, which is, pursuant to clause 1 of House Rule X, within the jurisdiction of the Committee on the Budget. Under current law and existing scoring procedures, the Federal Government is required to appropriate the full cost of any multi-year lease of office space in the fiscal year in which it enters into the lease agreement. This amendment permits the State Department to commit the Federal Government to a long-term lease agreement with an appropriation for only the first year of the cost of the lease. However, once the lease is agreed to, the Federal Government is saddled with a long-term financial commitment. So I do object to the gentleman's amendment.

Mr. CHAMBLISS

Mr. CHAMBLISS. Mr. Chairman, reclaiming my time, I just want to say that I associate myself with all of the remarks of both my friend from Maryland and my friend from Michigan. This was a very egregious and intentional and, frankly, malicious act, I think, on the part of this particular employee of the Customs Service. And I want to also say very publicly that were it not for the intervention of our friend, the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Hoyer), in this, I am not sure we would even be at the point we are today, where they have recognized the issue and recognized the problem. And I thank him for his diligent efforts on behalf of our folks back home in this regard. We will continue to pursue this with the gentleman at this meeting next week. I hope we are able to come to some satisfactory resolution of it. Because if we are not, then I think we will be back here in this same venue the next time we are able to, to ensure that our folks are well compensated and well taken care of for a malicious intentional act on the part of this employee.

Mr. CHAMBLISS. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.

Mr. CHAMBLISS. I yield to the gentleman from Maryland.