Howard Coble

Mr. COBLE

Mr. COBLE. Mr. Speaker, this will now be the third Congress in which legislation protecting databases has failed to become law. Over the past years, the opponents of such legislation have done all they can to prevent legislation from moving forward and maintain the status quo so they may pirate the work of others due to the current gap in protection. They first claimed there was no need for legislation. Then subsequently, they admitted there was, in fact, a need as long as they could get a carve-out for themselves. How selfishly convenient. This issue will not go away. Now, more than ever, America's database producers need sufficient protection to ensure the continued investment in developing these information products. Their vulnerability remains as the pirates still sail without fear. Rest assured, Mr. Speaker, I will do everything I can next session to finally pass legislation which benefits database producers and, therefore, benefits American consumers. Finally, Mr. Speaker, I want to express thanks to the many people who worked tirelessly to promote this legislation.

Mr. COBLE

Mr. COBLE. Mr. Speaker, Walker F. Rucker of Greensboro, North Carolina, is a veteran of the Second World War, a lay historian, and a man unafraid to speak his mind. Along with 38 other veterans from the Greensboro area, Mr. Rucker wishes to have his thoughts on the conduct of the President recorded for posterity. Mr. Rucker has written and spoken eloquently of the sacrifices which his generation has made on behalf of our Republic. In light of their contributions, and those of preceding generations, these men are disturbed by the President's conduct during his two terms in office, which they believe manifests a basic disrespect for the values which they hold in such high regard. They are especially appalled by the events in the White House and elsewhere that led to the President's impeachment; and further object to his fund-raising tactics, his motivations for shaping certain foreign policy scenarios, his posture toward and treatment of our military, and a seeming disinterest in the imperative to adhere to the rule of law. Mr. Speaker, I have paraphrased Mr. Rucker's views at this point. Anyone who knows him can fully appreciate his passion for a cause, his command of the King's English, and his sense of history. Accordingly, I thought it also appropriate to quote from a petition which he has circulated on this subject. Mr. Rucker notes that historical precedents teach us that external forces do not fell great Republics such as ours; they implode from within. To invoke Mr. Rucker verbatim: ``The Tree of Liberty has never been toppled by an external whirlwind. Rather, in the past it has perished because a vine which grows in its shadow and under its protection eventually smothers it. In nature this is the work of the strangler fig; in Government, this is the work of Corrupt Political Adventurers. Republics are a tenuous form of Government. Their demise does not come about by a single seismic political event, but rather is initiated by an unchallenged violation of its Founding Precepts. Thus the first successful violation of a State's Tenants of Faith begins the inevitable Decline and Fall of that State. Thus: (1) ``Democratic Athens did not fail because of the annihilation of its fleet in 404 B.C. by Sparta. Rather a generation earlier Alcibides, when summoned to appear in Athens to explain the Syracuse Debacle, deserted first to Sparta and later to Persia. (2) ``Republican Rome fell, not because Julius Caesar crossed the Rubicon, but because a score of years earlier Sulla violated the Roman Constitution by leading seven renegade legions into the defenseless city. (3) ``The First Republic of France succumbed to Bonapartism because a decade earlier the ``Incorruptible'' Assembly was replaced by the Corrupt Directorate. ``Some 162 years ago, a 28-year-old frontiersman who became our 16th President foresaw such a challenge to our nation's foundation and told us how to respond: At what point shall we expect the approach of danger? By what means shall we fortify against it? Shall we expect some transatlantic military giant to step the ocean and crush us at a blow? Never! All the armies in Europe, Asia, and Africa combined, with all the treasures of the earth (our own excepted) in their military chest; with a Bonaparte for a commander could not by force take a drink from the Ohio, or make a track on the Blue Ridge, in a trial of a thousand years. At what point then is the approach of danger to be expected? I answer, if it ever reaches us, it must spring up amongst us. It cannot come from abroad. If destruction be our lot, we must ourselves be its author and finisher. As a nation of free men we must live through all time or die by suicide. The question recurs, ``How shall we fortify against it?'' The answer is simple. Let every American, every lover of liberty, every well wisher of this posterity, swear by the blood of the (American) Revolution never to violate the least particular, the laws of the country, and never tolerate their violation by others.--(Abraham Lincoln, The Perpetuation of Our Political Institution, Springfield Lyceum, January 27, 1838.)'' Mr. Speaker, Mr. Rucker and his colleagues believe that the President should resign prior to January 3, 2001, in deference to their beliefs and reading of American history. I believe that this is an old war that distracted the Congress from its business and the nation from its tranquility. Given the President's transgressions, however, it had to be fought, and as a result the President became the second man to be impeached by the House of Representatives. I do not wish to fight this war again, but I have enough respect for Walker Rucker and like-minded men to submit their views on this unfortunate subject in our nation's history for inclusion in the Congressional Record.

Mr. COBLE

Mr. COBLE. Mr. Speaker, I would like to recognize a high school from the Sixth District of North Carolina that recently won the state lacrosse championship. Southeast Guilford High School claimed the North Carolina varsity lacrosse title. This is only the second team from the school to ever win a state championship in 33 years. The Falcons had an impressive season with 16 wins and only 3 losses. We congratulate Chris Godfrey, Josh Smith, Jon Murphy, Justin Patteson, Scott Van Hoever, Lucas McCraw, James Aldridge, Mike Wiggins, Ben Doffelmoyer, Chris McVey, John Clark, David Murphy, Chris Collins, Chris Smith, Chad Thompson, Paul Winn, John Batts, Daniel Davenport, David Dunnuck, Jimmy Mullen, and Russell Peele. The team was led by Head Coach Mark Goldsmith and Assistant Coaches Clark Byrnes and Paul Allen. They were ably assisted by head manager Nikki Berger and assistant manager Alicia Reed, along with athletic trainers Eric Stubblefield and Mark White. The team was supported strongly by the school administration including Athletic Director Roy Turner, Principal Dr. Pat Spicer and Assistant Principals Amanda Gane, Randy Shaver and Ron Coleman. Since winning the state championship in lacrosse, interest has escalated in the school, and they are expecting an influx of players this season. Many of the players are being recruited by colleges and receiving scholarships. Perhaps a dynasty is brewing at Southeast Guilford High School. The Sixth District of North Carolina is proud of this high school team from Guilford County for its hard work and dedication. Congratulations to the Falcons for a job well done.

Mr. COBLE

Mr. COBLE. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 4870, the Intellectual Property Technical Amendments Act of 2000. As my colleagues may well know, the benefits of the modern economy and promise for future prosperity are strongly related to our intellectual property laws. We are relying upon the proper functioning of our country's patent and trademark systems. These laws are not a casual accident, but a result of constant refinement by the Congress. Last year, the Congress passed landmark patent reform in the American Inventors Protection Act in the final days of the session. As we all know in the hurly-burly to pass such a large bill, it is usually the case that there are often many oversights and errors which require a follow-up technical corrections bill. I am pleased to report that the bulk of today's bill is clerical and technical in nature. It removes semicolons, aligns paragraphs, and makes other housekeeping changes. It changes some titles of key offices at the PTO. It also includes some noncontroversial changes to make certain that reexamination and the status of patent applications go as anticipated. It advances the Congress' goal of making the PTO a more responsible government department. Most importantly, it preserves the protections for the American inventor that we designed and implemented last year. In closing, I am pleased that the efforts of the progress on H.R. 4870 reunited me with my friend and colleague, the gentleman from California (Mr. Rohrabacher), who is a tireless advocate for the American innovator. Likewise, I want to extend my remarks and thanks to the ranking member, the gentleman from California (Mr. Berman), for his valuable assistance in preparing this bill for consideration. The Members will realize that a strong and well-functioning patent and trademark system plays an integral part in our economic prosperity, should feel confident that the legislation before us plays a small, however important, role in continuing our efforts. I urge all of my colleagues to support its passage. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. COBLE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. (Mr. COBLE asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. COBLE. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 4870) to make technical corrections in patent, copyright, and trademark laws.

Mr. COBLE. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks on H.R. 4870, the bill under consideration.

Mr. COBLE. Mr. Speaker, I have no further requests for time, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. COBLE

Mr. COBLE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the Work Made for Hire and Copyright Technical Corrections Act of 2000 and urge the House to adopt this measure. Mr. Speaker, H.R. 5107 is noncontroversial. It repealed an amendment in the Intellectual Property and Communication Omnibus Reform Act of 1999, IPCORA, which inserted sound recordings as a type of work that is eligible for work-made-for-hire status. Following passage of the amendment in 1999, some recording artists argued that the change was not a mere clarification of the law and that it had substantively affected their rights. After the gentleman from California (Mr. Berman) and I had several meetings and agreed that a hearing was in order, the Subcommittee on Courts and Intellectual Property subsequently conducted a hearing on the issue of sound recordings as works made for hire on May 25, 2000. A compromise solution was reached and H.R. 5107 implements that solution. It repeals the amendment in question without prejudice. In other words, it restores any person or entity to the same legal position they occupied prior to the enactment of the amendment in November 1999. H.R. 5107 states that in determining whether any work is eligible for work-made-for-hire-status, neither the amendment in IPCORA nor the deletion of the amendment through H.R. 5107 shall be considered or otherwise given any legal significance or shall be interpreted to indicate congressional approval or disapproval of any judicial determination by the courts or the Copyright Office. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the gentleman from California (Mr. Berman), the ranking member of the subcommittee; the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Conyers), the ranking member of the full committee; the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Hyde), chairman of the full committee; and the gentlewoman from California (Mrs. Bono) on our committee. There are others who will speak to this issue who also were helpful. H.R. 5107 also includes other noncontroversial corrections to the Copyright Act. These amendments remove expired sections and clarify miscellaneous provisions governing fees and recordkeeping procedures. They will improve the operation of the Copyright Office and clarify United States copyright law. The manager's amendment to H.R. 5107 that we are voting on today makes purely technical and noncontroversial changes to the text of H.R. 5107 as it was reported from the Committee on the Judiciary. The Subcommittee on Courts and Intellectual Property and the Committee on the Judiciary support H.R. 5107 in a bipartisan manner, and I urge its adoption today. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. COBLE. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. COBLE. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks on H.R. 5107, the bill under consideration, and to insert extraneous material in the Record.

Mr. COBLE. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from California (Mrs. Bono).

Mr. COBLE. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. COBLE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. In closing, the gentleman from California (Mr. Berman) was very generous in his remarks to me. I want to remind my colleagues, there were two mules pulling that wagon, and the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Lofgren) referred to the two Howards. I refer to us as the two mules because it became heavy lifting at times. As has already been mentioned, I mentioned the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Conyers) and the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Hyde). They were both helpful to us. The recording industry and the artist community were both helpful. Mr. Speaker, there was no ill intent involved with this. The Committee on the Judiciary submitted, or dispatched, six conferees, three Democrats and three Republicans. All six of us signed the conference report. It was my belief that we were merely codifying accepted practice, but that is subject to interpretation. With the passage of this bill today, I think that both parties, that is, the recording industry and the artist community, will both breathe easier, particularly the artist community. I too want to thank the staffers. Both Democrat and Republican staffers worked very diligently on this matter.

Mr. COBLE. Mr. Speaker, I have no further requests for time, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. COBLE. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 5107) to make certain corrections in copyright law, as amended.

Mr. COBLE

Mr. COBLE. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks on H.R. 5106, the bill under consideration, and to insert extraneous material in the Record.

Mr. COBLE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume; and I rise today in support of H.R. 5106, the Copyright Technical Corrections Act of 2000 and urge the House to adopt the measure. H.R. 5106 makes purely technical amendments to Title I of the Intellectual Property and Communications Omnibus Reform Act of 1999 and Title 17. H.R. 5106 corrects errors in references, spelling and punctuation, conforms the table of contents with section headings, restores the definitions in chapter 1 to alphabetical order, deletes an expired paragraph, and creates continuity in the grammatical style used. This legislation makes necessary improvements to the Copyright Act. The Subcommittee on Courts and Intellectual Property and the Committee on the Judiciary support H.R. 5106 in a bipartisan manner and I urge its adoption today. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. COBLE. Mr. Speaker, I have no further requests for time, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. COBLE. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 5106) to make technical corrections in copyright law, as amended.

Mr. COBLE

Mr. COBLE. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Virginia, my friend, for yielding me this time. Just last week, Mr. Speaker, back on the back rail, I said to Herb, you will be missed, in response to his announced intention to retire from this body. He said, oh, I will be back. This tells us, Mr. Speaker, how fragile, how indefinite, how uncertain life can be. As has been said by other speakers, Herb's congressional legacy will be formidable and impressive. One of his most salient contributions was his steadfast advocacy for a strong national defense. His district, after all, is home to one of the nerve centers of our defense community. I say to the gentleman from Richmond, Virginia (Mr. Bliley), my friend, I fondly recall an occasion when I delivered the OCS graduation address at the Coast Guard Reserve Training Center in Yorktown, which is in Herb's district. After the ceremony, Herb came to me and said, I so much enjoy coming to this place. It is beautifully located on the banks of the York River, and Herb expressed such pride in that Coast Guard installation; but he was equally proud of all of the military installations in his district; and as has been indicated by the other speakers, they are numerous. Herb was, indeed, proud of our defense family. He was proud of his district. He was proud of his State. I am not sure the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Bliley) mentioned this, but he was, in fact, born in North Carolina. He may have said that early on. He was proud of this House, the people's House. Herb often referred to it in those words, the people's House, the Chamber closest to the people. Finally, he was proud of his family. I know that my colleagues will join me in extending to Laura and Herb's children our expressions of sympathy during this time of their bereavement. I again thank the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Bliley) for having taken this time out in honor of Herb.

Mr. COBLE

Mr. COBLE. Madam Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman from Maryland and the gentleman from Maryland for having brought this bill to the floor. Madam Speaker, about 25 years ago I had the pleasure of visiting my uncle on his Watauga County farm in the shadow of the Tennessee border. It was late April, and there was a nip in the air, because summertime comes late in the Blue Ridge. He and I were walking across the cow pasture, and I said to him, ``Have you seen Jim Broyhill lately?'' He instinctively opened the pocket of his overalls and removed a rumpled, worn letter and proudly extended it to me. It was a letter from Jim Broyhill addressed the previous Christmas, 4 months earlier, to him and his wife, to my uncle and his wife, wishing them a happy Christmas. I bet he had shown that letter to 125 people, and he proudly put it back into his overall pocket when I returned it to him. That testimony, that rumpled letter, testified to me how Jim Broyhill's constituents felt about him. He was revered by all who knew him, because, Madam Speaker, he, unlike some elected officials, was not a stealth representative. He did not all of a sudden become accessible 5 weeks before the next election. He was consistently accessible, consistently providing outstanding constituency service. He is a good man, and was an exceptional Member of Congress. Madam Speaker, I say to the gentlewoman from Maryland and the gentleman from Maryland, when I next drive through Lenoir on my way to the crest of the Blue Ridge Mountains, I will feel just a little better as I drive through that little mountain town, knowing that its Post Office bears the name of Jim Broyhill, an outstanding American, an outstanding public servant. I know that my colleagues in the House, here in the people's House, join me in extending our best wishes to Jim and Louise Broyhill and their family.

Mr. COBLE

Mr. COBLE. Mr. Speaker, today I am introducing, along with the gentleman from California (Mr. Berman), the ranking member of the Subcommittee on Courts and Intellectual Property of the Committee on the Judiciary, H.R. 5107, the Work Made for Hire and Copyright Corrections Act of 2000. This bill addresses the controversy over the recent amendment to the Copyright Act that added sound recordings to the list of works eligible to be works made for hire. It resolves the controversy and is supported by all parties involved. It also includes other noncontroversial corrections to the Copyright Act. First, some background about sound recording as works made for hire is necessary. A work made for hire is, one, a work prepared by an employee within the scope of his or her employment; or, two, a work especially ordered or commissioned for use as a contribution to a collective work if the parties expressly agree in a written instrument signed by them that the work shall be considered a work made for hire. The Copyright Act provides authors a right to terminate a grant of right 35 years after the grant. The termination right, however, does not apply to works made for hire. Since 1972, sound recordings have been registered by the Copyright Office as works made for hire, even though they were not statutorily recognized as such prior to the enactment of the Intellectual Property and Communication Omnibus Reform Act of 1999. This statute, known as IPCORA, included a provision that added sound recordings to the list of works eligible for work made for hire status. Following the passage of the amendment last year, recording artists argued that the change was not a clarification of the law and that it had substantively affected their termination rights. When apprised of these arguments, I agreed to hold a hearing on the issue of sound recordings as works made for hire. The subcommittee subsequently held a hearing on May 25, 2000, after which the gentleman from California (Mr. Berman) and I encouraged both sides to seek a mutually satisfactory resolution through private negotiations. Representatives of the artists and the recording industry negotiated diligently and in good faith, and during the August work period they presented us with a compromise solution. H.R. 5107, Mr. Speaker, implements that solution. It is a repeal of the amendment without prejudice. In other words, it restores both parties to the same position they were in prior to the enactment of the amendment in November 1999. The bill states that in determining whether any work is eligible to consider a work made for hire, neither the amendment in IPCORA nor the deletion of the amendment through this bill shall be considered or otherwise given any legal significance or shall be interpreted to indicate congressional approval or disapproval of any judicial determination by the courts or the Copyright Office. Given the complex nature of copyright law, this compromise was not easily reached, but I believe it is a good solution and I want to thank everyone who worked so diligently to resolve this controversy. I want to give special thanks as well to the gentleman from California (Mr. Berman), ranking member on our subcommittee, and the ranking member of the full committee, the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Conyers), for their participation and cooperation. I also want to recognize Mr. Cary Sherman of the RIAA, the recording industry, and Mr. Jay Cooper, who represents the recording artists, for their efforts to find a solution. H.R. 5107 also includes other noncontroversial corrections to the Copyright Act. These amendments remove expired sections and clarify miscellaneous provisions governing fees and recordkeeping procedures. These are necessary amendments which will improve the operation of the Copyright Office and clarify U.S. copyright law. Mr. Speaker, it was my belief this amendment merely codified existing practice and that remains my belief, and there is ample authority that supports my contention. In fairness to the artist community, there is also ample and convincing authority that supports the artists' contention regarding this issue. I believe we have reached a fair compromise with which all parties can live. In conclusion, Mr. Speaker, I think H.R. 5107 is a good, noncontroversial bill. I urge my colleagues to support H.R. 5107 when it is considered on the floor, hopefully imminently, maybe even within the next couple weeks.

Mr. COBLE

Mr. COBLE. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Gilchrest) for yielding me this time. Mr. Speaker, as was said, this resolution honors the United States Coast Guard on its 210th birthday which will occur on August 4. Many people, Mr. Speaker, say to me, well, what does the Coast Guard do? Never heard of the Coast Guard. Well, the Coast Guard does not do too much. All they did since 1994 was rescue and save over 90,000 lives. All they did last year was establish a new record for cocaine seizures; the same Service that performed with dignity and courage under pressure in response to the numerous aviation accidents and natural disasters. An Independent Government Performance Project recently completed its second report card rating the performance of Federal agencies. The good news, Mr. Speaker, is that out of 20 Federal agencies rated only the Coast Guard and the Social Security Administration received an overall grade of A for their performance. That is the good news for those two agencies. How was the Coast Guard able to achieve a grade that eluded 18 other Federal entities? The answer, at least according to the Independent Government Performance Project, is innovation resulting from constant budgetary and operational pressure. The Coast Guard, Mr. Speaker, receives an appropriation of about $4 billion a year, about the same amount that the Social Security Administration spends every 4 days, to do everything from rescuing endangered boaters, protecting fisheries, stopping illegal immigrants, and interdicting drugs. In fact, the street value of the drugs seized by the Coast Guard exceeds the value of its entire budget. As indicated in a recent GAO report during the 1990s, the Coast Guard has been assigned vastly increased responsibilities while shrinking its workforce by 10 percent and operating within a budget that has risen by only 1 percent in actual dollars. The time has come for us, it seems, Mr. Speaker, to reward the hard-working men and women of the United States Coast Guard by providing them with the necessary equipment and resources that will allow them to continue their excellent service to this country well into the 21st century. At many Veterans' Day and Memorial Day services across this country, it is not uncommon for speakers to refer to our four Armed Services, the Army, Navy, Air Force and Marine Corps. Time and again I have heard that. The Coast Guard is significantly omitted. Mr. Speaker, I do not think there is any ill intent involved in that. I think it is omitted because the Coast Guard is the only armed service, as we perhaps know, that is not a Member of the Department of Defense. I attended a Veterans' Day service in a school, Mr. Speaker, in my district. It has been 5 or 6 years ago. The local band honored the military services by playing their respective hymns. And guess what? The Coast Guard's marching hymn, Semper Paratus, was omitted. I almost knocked the table down to get to the music director. I asked her why it was omitted. She said, we did not have the music. I said to her, it is the most beautiful and most stirring marching hymn of the armed services. She said next year if I get her the music she will play it. Next year the band did, in fact, play that hymn. Mr. Speaker, there is a current movie that is just doing tremendously on box office receipts that portrays the Coast Guard in its proper role, and I think that many Americans take very casually what the Coast Guard members do day in and day out. It is indeed an unsung service. I call it oft times the blue collar service. I call them the buoy tenders. They are clearly the blue collar, the Coast Guard, but I think the Coast Guard is the blue collar armed service of this country and they serve us well. Mr. Speaker, in closing I would just like to wish all of our Coasties and our men and women throughout the Coast Guard from sea to sea, ocean to ocean, and express our thanks to them on behalf of the country for giving us the opportunity to be here and to wish them a very happy 210th birthday. I want to acknowledge the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Gilchrest). He has done a tremendous job chairing the Subcommittee on Coast Guard and Maritime Transportation of the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure. The Coast Guardsmen tell me that from the commandant on down. I commend him for that. Happy birth, Coasties. Semper Paratus. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of this resolution honoring the United States Coast Guard on its 210th birthday which will occur on August 4. As many in this body already know, the U.S. Coast Guard is our nation's oldest maritime service. What many of you may not realize, however, is that the U.S. Coast Guard is also the seventh largest naval service in the world and operates with the second oldest fleet. Yes, that's right, our Coast Guard--the one that's saved over 90,000 lives since 1994, the one that set a record for cocaine seizures last year, and the same service that performed with dignity and courage under the pressure of numerous aviation accidents and natural disasters--operates with the second oldest fleet in the world. While operating with the second oldest fleet in the world, the U.S. Coast Guard was one of only two federal agencies to earn an ``A'' from the independent government performance project for operating with unusual efficiency and effectiveness. How was the Coast Guard able to achieve a grade of ``A'' that eluded 18 other federal agencies? The answer, at least according to the independent government performance project, is innovation resulting from constant budgetary and operational pressure. If the Coast Guard can get an ``A'' operating under these dire conditions, imagine what they could do with better equipment and well- compensated people. Along these same lines, the Interagency Task Force on Coast Guard Roles and Missions recently reported that a healthy Coast Guard is vital to protect and promote many of our nation's important safety, economic and national security interests. The men and women of the Coast Guard--with a force smaller than the New York City Police Department--carry out these vital missions in this country's ports and waterways, along its 47,000 miles of coastline, lakes and rivers, on international waters or in any maritime region as required to support national security. As exhibited by this laundry list of assignments, the Coast Guard has been spread far too thin in recent years. A recent GAO report found that the Coast Guard has been assigned vastly increased responsibilities while shrinking its workforce by 10 percent and operating within a budget that has risen by only one percent in actual dollars. Mr. Speaker, the time has come for this Congress to stop expanding the scope of the Coast Guard's operations without providing them with the necessary resources. Despite the Coast Guard's outstanding performance record, asking them to continue to do more with less jeopardizes the Coast Guard's core duties--which are matters of life and death. The time has come for us to reward the hardworking men and women of the Coast Guard by providing them with the necessary equipment and resources that will allow them to continue their excellent service to this country well into the 21st Century. To the men and women of the U.S. Coast Guard--thank you for your service to our country and for giving us the opportunity to wish the Coast Guard a Happy 210th Birthday. We would not be here today without your dedication and sacrifice. Happy Birthday Coasties and Semper Paratus!

Mr. COBLE

Mr. COBLE. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Bateman) for yielding to me. I came to the floor for another purpose. Not only did I not know that Ron Lasch was retiring, I did not know we were having this Special Order, and my friend from Michigan asked if I would like to insert my oars into these waters lauding Ron Lasch. Mr. Speaker, some call him the floor manager, some call him the Great Poobah or the Great Mogul. Oftentimes, Mr. Speaker, I would go to Ron, I would come in here perhaps from a committee hearing and I would be running late and I would go to him and I would say Ron, what is this vote, my dear friend? And he would instinctively grab his wallet. When you are calling me ``dear friend'' you are up to no good. But I never saw him in any way become impatient with us, and that is the same, Mr. Speaker, for the staff generally. Last month I was at an event in the intellectual property community in this town with Orrin Hatch, Senator Hatch, the gentleman from the other body, from Utah. At that hearing I said to those people, oftentimes we take staff for granted. Mr. Speaker, we have talked about it before. Staff is very essential to the well being and to the efficient functioning of this body. Sometimes we think it does not function efficiently; but I think, on balance, it does, and Ron Lasch is the epitome of that role. I know he will be missed, as the gentleman from Virginia just said. He will be sorely missed here. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Upton) for inviting me to share these few thoughts.