Mac Collins

Mr. COLLINS

Mr. COLLINS. I yield to the gentleman from Colorado.

Mr. COLLINS. Mr. Chairman, reclaiming my time, what we are asking for, and we have received cooperation from the trade representative, Ms. Barshefsky, is for full interagency review. That is taking place today, and we are very appreciative of their cooperation in doing this. It has come to our attention that some of the agencies that are involved in the review feel like it may be necessary for that agency involved in the review, not USTR, to do an investigation of their own for over a 30-day period, maybe even with involving a trip to Japan for some investigating procedures. That is what we are speaking of. There is nothing to mandate that they go along with that or that they do that.

Mr. COLLINS. I yield to the gentleman from Alabama.

Mr. COLLINS. Mr. Chairman, let me just point out, we understand fully the ownership of INA in Japan. That is not the question. The question is in the activities of the Yasuda Insurance Company in Japan and what they are doing to affect the market of the third sector insurance market in Japan. As far as the investigations, we are very pleased that the Trade Representative is conducting a full interagency review. However, we would hope that the Trade Representative would not prohibit or try to discourage any agency that is in the interagency review from doing a further investigation as far as their agency is concerned. That is what we are speaking of. Amendment No. 45 Offered by Mr. Sanders

Mr. COLLINS

Mr. COLLINS. Mr. Speaker, our republic recently celebrated 222 years of liberty and freedom. For the last 209 years, these freedoms have been guaranteed by our Constitution. In spite of this, the Clinton administration is now trying to undermine the Constitution through Executive orders, threatening the powers of Congress, the sovereignty of the States, and the rights of all Americans. Our Founding Fathers demonstrated timeless wisdom in the crafting of our Constitution and Bill of Rights. The Constitution carefully defines the authority granted to each of the three branches of the Federal Government to ensure a separation and balance of Federal powers. Additionally, the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution protects the rights of the States to self-determination, requiring that powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively or to the people. Both of these constitutional provisions guarantee the individual rights of American citizens throughout the democratic process. Our Bill of Rights and republic form of government ensure that the people maintain the ultimate authority to govern themselves. The success of our Constitution is clear. The United States is the world's strongest economic power, providing a standard of living to Americans that is the envy of the world. Our Nation is also the world's foremost military power, providing strong protection to American citizens from foreign threats to our liberties and to our democratic principles. Finally and most importantly, our government is the single greatest guarantor and protector of individual liberties in the world today. The freedom of speech, the freedom of religion, the freedom to own property, the freedom to vote are just a few of the liberties that American citizens enjoy, thanks to the wisdom and foresight of the framers of our Constitution. Sometimes we take these liberties for granted, but benefits such as public safety, education and the finest health care system in the world should remind us that the Constitution provides us with much more than abstract principles. In spite of the great successes of our Republic, President Clinton has disregarded our Constitution with the issuance of executive order 13083. First, the order requires Federal departments and agencies to review State regulations and to dictate State policy without regard to the decisions made by States' own legislatures and agencies. Second, the order's broad and vague definition of what should be a Federal issue reserves little if any jurisdiction for State and local governments. Third, by granting Federal jurisdiction over all matters related to international obligations, the executive order threatens to bypass the U.S. Congress, imposing on States and the American people provisions of international treaties or agreements that have not been ratified by the Senate. Clearly this executive order directly violates the separation and division of powers as provided by the Constitution. It violates the authority of the U.S. Congress, the sovereign rights of States, and threatens the liberties of every American citizen. In response to this disregard for the Constitution, I have introduced House Concurrent Resolution 299. This resolution sends a message to the American people that representatives in Congress will understand the Constitution and will uphold the principles of the Founding Fathers that have made this Nation so great. The Congress will protect the rights of States to self-determination and prevent undue Federal intervention into State and local affairs. The Congress will protect the rights of American citizens to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, without unwarranted and unconstitutional intrusions by the Federal departments and Federal agencies. This resolution also sends a message to the executive and judicial branches of the Federal Government: The Congress will defend the people it represents against Federal actions that undermine the Constitution and threaten the rights of all citizens. Congress is paying close attention to the actions of the chief executive. We will closely scrutinize any action by any member of the executive branch that threatens to usurp the legislative authority of the Congress, the sovereignty of the States and the freedom of the American people. Furthermore, Congress will seek to remedy any judicial interpretation of U.S. law that is inconsistent with the intent of Congress, that threatens State rights to self-determination or threatens the liberties guaranteed the people by the Constitution. Mr. Speaker, I urge each of my colleagues to join me in defense of the powers of the Constitution and sovereignty of the rights of States, the rights of the people, by cosponsoring House Concurrent Resolution 299, reiterating the separation of powers that are established and preserved by our Constitution.

Mr. COLLINS

Mr. COLLINS. Mr. Speaker, I rise to honor an individual, no not a Georgian by birth but is the essence of a Georgia gentleman. Horace Ellis Jones is the grandfather of one of my legislative staff members. Today I pay tribute to Mr. Jones through the eyes of his grandson. Born on February 7, 1916, in Spring City, Pennsylvania, to Russell and Mary Ellis Jones, Horace Ellis Jones spent his childhood days growing up in the suburbs of Philadelphia. He was known for his wide grin smile and his charming demeanor. He was very active in the Boy Scouts, earning the distinction of an Eagle Scout. After attending Spring City High School and Stanton Military Academy in Virginia, Mr. Jones decided on Duke University and became a true Blue Devil. A couple of days before he was to leave for Durham, Mr. Ellis dropped by a local cafe just outside of Pottstown, Pennsylvania, with friends. As he entered, his eyes focused on Olive Hammer. One look at her put Ellis Jones in a spin. He immediately put money in the juke box and asked Olive to dance. The music has not stopped for 57 years. After they were married in 1941, Mr. Jones worked with his father in automobile sales in Reading, Pennsylvania. Very soon after their marriage, like so many of our distinguished citizens at the time, he answered America's call to duty and served in the United States Army during World War II. Lieutenant Jones was stationed at Newport News, Virginia, as a member of the Army Transportation Corps. From there, he returned home to Pennsylvania, began his work with his uncle in the family business, the Jones Motor Company. For almost 30 years, he played an instrumental role in the success of the business, one that grew to be among the largest trucking companies east of the Mississippi River. Jones Motor boasted 59 terminals, almost 4,000 employees and more than 3,500 pieces of equipment. This was an amazing feat considering it all started with a single horse and wagon back in the 1800s. Along the path of hard work, Ellis and Olive welcomed a new generation of Joneses, their children, Mary Ellis and Donald. In the mid-seventies, Jones and his brothers decided to sell the company and retire. Retirement lasted a brief 6 months, after which Mr. Jones entered the lucrative real estate business and became very active in many charitable organizations such as the American Hospital Association and the Pottstown Hospital Association. During his spare time, he could continue to pursue the major nonfamily passion of his life, the game of golf. After picking up the first set of clubs at the age of 7, Mr. Jones' devotion to the sport culminated with his presidency of the Philadelphia Golf Association in the 1960s. During that tenure, he worked to provide scholarships and opportunities for many hard working young people. He also served on countless boards of the United States Golf Association and as a member of many country clubs and golf societies throughout the world. When he finally decided to slow down from all of this activity, Ellis and Ollie relocated to the State of Georgia. They chose the quiet coastal beauty of Sea Island, a spot that they had first visited in their honeymoon. The environment there was proven to be the ultimate spot to pursue new opportunities. While preserving their already acquired interests, it also served as a meeting place for the entire Jones' family to congregate and forge new memories. With all of that said, to really know the tale of Ellis Jones is to realize that his greatest accomplishment continues to be his capacity as a person. Amidst all of the challenges and successes of life, Mr. Jones always conducts himself in the highest degree of courtesy, generosity and integrity. He is concerned with the happiness and the well-being of others at every turn, as a leader, as a businessman, a father, a grandfather, a husband or a friend. Recently, Mr. Jones has been battling the evils of cancer, a war he has been waging for some 7 years. It has been a difficult time for him and his loved ones, but through it all he has maintained his positive attitude built upon the love of his family. Ellis Jones' life is nothing short of remarkable, an American dream come true that seems to guide the brush strokes of my Norman Rockwell painting. One need only look to his family and friends to see the reflection of his charmed life. Mr. Speaker, I would like to extend my heartfelt best wishes to Mr. Jones as he watches today from Georgia, as well as members of the Jones family throughout the country. In closing, I would like to read a piece Mr. Jones wrote just a few weeks ago. I think it is an appropriate testament to the life of this great man and is something from which we all can learn, and I quote: I have always believed that the game of life, like the game of golf, was the last gentleman's game and I have tried to play both as such, a gentleman. If I have been successful, it is because of my love from and my love for my wonderful wife, our blessed children and grandchildren and my many loyal and supportive friends. Looking back over the entire course, I can say in all honesty, what a game, what a life, what a lucky guy I have been, end of quote. Mr. Speaker, our prayers are with Mr. Jones and his family and for the blessings all have received from the life of Horace Ellis Jones.

Mr. COLLINS

Mr. COLLINS. Mr. Speaker, I thank the chairman for yielding me time. Mr. Speaker, as one small representative, I rise in support of this conference report. This legislation will provide many new protections to ensure that IRS abuse ends. Mr. Speaker, no citizen should fear their government nor any agency of their government. Unfortunately, today, many citizens fear the IRS. Mr. Speaker, I rise today on behalf of the residents of the Third District of Georgia who are tired of being threatened and harassed by IRS agents. Throughout the hearing process on this legislation we heard example after example of how certain IRS employees believe they have the authority to threaten, harass and intimidate individuals involved in tax disputes. Mr. Chairman, this is wrong and it must be stopped. Not every IRS employee is unscrupulous. There are indeed many who work with constituents to fairly resolve tax disputes. However, even in Georgia there are agents who routinely abuse and intimidate citizens. Mr. Speaker, any member of this chamber could use all of the debate time just citing cases where citizens have been harassed by agents. In my District, there was a retired couple making monthly payments on a tax debt that had arisen because the government had failed to withhold the proper amount of taxes from the husband's government retirement check. After working out a pay plan with the IRS, the gentlemen actually overpayed each month in order to pay the debt quickly. Unfortunately, he died before doing so and the IRS wasted no time coming after his wife. To compound problems, the IRS had failed to properly credit the payments he had made against his tax debt. So, his wife was faced with an inflated tax bill, compounded by interest and penalties the IRS incorrectly added to the total. The IRS demanded full payment of three thousand dollars which she could not afford. This poor woman was hounded by an individual agent who literally told her she was spending too much money on groceries and other basic necessities and should instead send those monies to the IRS. Eventually, she was forced to move out of her home and leave the state to live with a relative. There she re-filed her taxes and found an IRS office willing to fairly resolve her case. She settled the case by paying four hundred and fifteen dollars, rather than the three thousand she was told she owed by the Georgia agent. While her case was eventually resolved, the unnecessarily long process, and the abusive approach by the IRS completely changed her life forever. Mr. Speaker, this legislation will provide many new protections to ensure that these abuses end. No citizen should fear their government-- or any agency of their government such as the IRS.

Mr. COLLINS

Mr. COLLINS. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the requisite number of words. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the Thomas amendment. I think when we look at what happened with the campaign finance reform after Watergate and the provisions that were struck down by the Supreme Court, we see a patchwork of legislation that is left that has led to a lot of the problems that we have here today. Mr. Chairman, I want to refer to a news article that was in the Clayton County, Georgia News Daily back on May 23 of this year. The longest reigning speaker of the house of any state legislators in Georgia, his name is Tom Murphy. And the quote in the headline was by Mr. Murphy. ``I worry about the future.'' It goes on to say that: If Tom Murphy could do it all over again today, he would steer clear of politics. Murphy, the longest tenured serving speaker in the country, told the Clayton College and State University Alumni Association that politics has deteriorated into an arena of viciousness and untruths. The candidates are getting so careless with the truth that I worry about the future of this state and the nation. What truly worries me in the next few years, unless something happens, is you will not get a decent person to run for office. Mr. Murphy never mentioned finances. He never mentioned money. He mentioned untruths and viciousness. That is what we need to focus on. The gentleman sent me an article the other day of a quote, and the quote reads as this. It is titled ``Honesty'': We can afford to differ on the currency, the tariff, and foreign policy; but we cannot afford to differ on the question of honesty if we expect our republic permanently to endure. Honesty is an absolute prerequisite to efficient service to the public. Unless a man is honest, we have no right to keep him in public life. It matters not how brilliant his capacity. Without honesty, the brave and able man is merely a civic wild beast who should be hunted down by every lover of righteousness. No man who is corrupt, no man who condones corruption in others, can possibly do his duty to the community. If a man lies under oath or procures the lie of another under oath, if he perjures himself or suborns perjury, he is guilty under the statute law. Under the higher law, under the great law of morality and righteousness, he is precisely as guilty if, instead of lying in a court, he lies in a newspaper or on a stump; and in all probability the evil effects of his conduct are infinitely more widespread and more pernicious. We need absolute honesty in public life; and we shall not get it until we remember that truth-telling must go hand-in-hand with it, and that it is quite as important not to tell an untruth about a decent man as it is to tell the truth about one who is not decent. That was by Theodore Roosevelt in 1900. Mr. Chairman, yes, we can change campaign laws. And there are probably some that need to be changed. We have not investigated thoroughly enough yet to determine just which ones. But that is not the problem. The main problem is compliance and untruths. The change in statutes will not change either compliance or untruths. It has been mentioned about unions and dues from union members and how in the 1996 campaigns some of them were erroneously used. I have with me a flyer that was published in Georgia. On the back of it it says the ``Georgia State AFL-CIO Not Profit Organization.'' On the inside the cover says their rules and it walks through several things, Medicare, pensions; and it goes on to say, and this is entirely against the law, the current law, this is where compliance has not been adhered to, it says, ``Vote no on Collins. Vote no on Milner and Collins.'' That is where your noncompliance comes in. The untruths are in the breeding of this. We can change the law. We can change every law in the campaign finance arena. But if we do not change the hearts and the souls of those who are involved in the government, we are not doing anything. That is the problem. It is not written words down. It is inside the individual. It is not how we get here as much as what we do to get here and what we do after we get here.

Mr. COLLINS

Mr. COLLINS. Mr. Speaker, I rise to express my most sincere congratulations to and appreciation for Muscogee County Juvenile Court Judge Aaron Cohn. Columbus, Georgia, which falls within the boundaries of Muscogee County, shares many of the juvenile crime problems faced by cities around the nation. Drugs, gangs, and violent crime are serious challenges that parents, teachers, and law enforcement officers are forced to address every day. When the efforts of these individuals fall short, however, we rely on the juvenile justice system to assist troubled youth and to protect our communities. Boot camps are one approach that has proved particularly effective in Muscogee County. While some federal bureaucrats have suggested that boot camps are too severe a punishment, Judge Cohn's use of the program has been a very effective ``last resort'' for some of the area's most difficult cases. I congratulate Judge Cohn for utilizing successful local approaches to juvenile crime such as the boot camp program. Boot camps are not, however, Judge Cohn's only approach to the juvenile crime problem. Judge Cohn understands that every child represents a unique set of circumstances and is in need of a personalized approach. I am sure I speak for many Muscogee County residents in expressing my appreciation for Judge Cohn's sensitivity to the needs of both children and the communities in which they live. The ``tough love'' that he provides the children of Muscogee County is saving taxpayers millions of dollars in future adult correctional costs, providing a safer environment for all children in their schools and neighborhoods, and insuring that even the most difficult children are given a fighting chance to succeed in life. Thank you, Judge Cohn, for your love of children and for your dedication to the communities of Georgia. A Few Words With . . . Aaron Cohn Muscogee County Juvenile Court Judge Monday's paper carried a story that said more than 16,000 juveniles have been sentenced to boot camps since the program began four years ago. As juvenile judge, what is your assessment of that program? I think it is a wonderful program for some children. Juvenile justice has to be individualized justice: One kid may react better to probation than to incarceration; another kid may require incarceration. It's not an exact science. You just never know sometimes. One thing we do know: I don't think you can mix 11-year- olds with 15- and 16-year-olds. If the kid is real young I try to steer away from boot camp. But with the boot camps, we're dealing with children who would never know what the word ``discipline'' is. And most of the kids going there, the ones we're sending there, are kids we've adjusted, we've talked to them, we've done everything we could to avoid it. I think the first year, we may have led the pack (in boot camp sentences) for all I know. But we used it only as a last resort, based on the type of offense the person has committed. What have the results been, in your experience? The program does work for lots of people. It's like a baseball game--some you win, some you lose, some get rained out. Not every program works with every child, but they'll get something from this program. I read the article saying the feds think it's a bad program . . . I don't know about any child who's been mistreated. I do know one thing--you couldn't just get some drill instructor at Parris Island. He'g got to have tough love, but not so he just scares kids to death. It's a good plan, but sometimes you may have the wrong person in there. You can't get away from the human equation. What kind of youthful offender most benefits from a military program of that kind? I like a child to be around 15 years old or older. We as a general rule do not send the 11- and 12-year-olds because they haven't even reached the age of criminal responsibility. The bad part is that in any of our work, we can take a kid from a home that has no discipline, that's so fragmented and dysfunctional the family can't handle him. So even after we send him (to boot camp), what does he come back to? The same home, because we don't have enough foster homes, group homes to take care of him. If we save one kid, if we turn him around, we save taxpayers about $250,000. You pay now or you pay later, and if we can get him early enough where he doesn't go into the adult system . . . it's the only place we're going to save them is in the juvenile justice system. The thing we have to do is make sure there's no favoritism, because not every child is treated alike. Some have a good support system, some have no support system. You walk a tightrope. I want what's in best interest of the children, but we have to protect our friends and neighbors in the community. There's nothing wrong with that program as long as it's handled right.

Mr. COLLINS

Mr. COLLINS. Mr. Chairman, in the Third District of Georgia, illegal immigration and drug trafficking are major concerns. I congratulate my colleague from Ohio (Mr. Traficant) for offering his amendment, which helps to address both of these difficult challenges. I strongly support the amendment, which will allow our military forces to participate in the most basic national defense function there is, that of the defense of our own borders. General Charles Wilhelm of the U.S. Southern Command recently referred to the international drug trade as the greatest chemical weapons threat to our national security. Congress should act today to allow the U.S. military to pursue its mission to protect our national security. It is high time for Congress to set its own priorities. The administration and some Members have shown great willingness to sacrifice American service members around the world to protect the borders of other nations. Today, we must act to protect our own borders, our own hometowns, and our own children and grandchildren from the hardships and suffering caused by illegal immigration and drug trafficking. Members have a clear choice to make today. We can support the amendment of the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Traficant) and represent the interests of our constituents by addressing the flow of illegal immigrants and drugs across our southern border, or we can choose to represent the interests of illegal aliens and drug smugglers by supporting and maintaining the current failed policies. If you believe there is not an illegal immigration problem, you should support the Reyes substitute. If you believe the drugs are not flowing from the nations of the Andean Ridge to the streets and schools of your hometown, you should support the Reyes substitute. If, however, you know, as I do, that illegal immigration and drug trade are destroying the fabric of our communities, you should oppose the Reyes substitute and stand in strong support of the Traficant amendment. I urge my colleagues to support the amendment of the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Traficant) and to provide the INS and the Custom's Service the assistance they need to defend our American borders.

Mr. COLLINS. Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the gentleman yielding 2 minutes. But it might take me a little longer. Will the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Traficant) yield me 1 minute?

Mr. COLLINS

Mr. COLLINS. Mr. Speaker, 4 years ago the Columbus, Georgia Water Works Board established the goal of having the best water system in the Nation by the year 2000. With the guidance and experience of its president, Billy G. Turner, that goal has been achieved. On June 8, the EPA Regional Administrator will present Mr. Turner with the award for having the best large water treatment plant in the Southeast. In all, he has received seven other prestigious national, State and regional awards in 1998, including top national honors for design. As recognized by the Columbus Ledger-Enquirer, they are doing more with less. Employees have been reduced without layoffs, and with a budget of $1 million less than last year. But most importantly, water rates have been kept at a lower rate than most comparable cities. Due to Mr. Turner's work, dedication and innovation, he was appointed President of the International Water Environment Federation. I would like to commend Mr. Turner for his efforts. The City of Columbus and the State of Georgia are fortunate to have him. Mr. Speaker, I also provide for the Congressional Record two recent articles from the Columbus Ledger-Enquirer about Mr. Turner and his outstanding work. Mr. Speaker, just four years ago, the Columbus Water Works Board in the Third District of Georgia set out to have the best water system in the country by the year 2000. With the guidance and experience of its President, William Turner, that goal is being achieved. It takes many people to achieve the successes which have been reached by Columbus Water Works. But I rise today to single out and commend Mr. Turner for his outstanding leadership, vision, and commitment to water quality. On June 8, Region IV Administrator for the Environmental Protection Agency John Hankinson will present Mr. Turner with the award for having the best large water treatment plant in the 10-state Southeast region. With seven prestigious national, state-wide, and regional awards in 1998, this is yet another honor for him in the water quality field. Already, the Columbus combined sewer treatment and Riverwalk project earned top national honors for design from the American Academy of Environmental Engineers. Mr. Turner spearheaded the development of this new technology demonstration project which EPA estimated will save over $42 billion for small cities across the country. In addition, Columbus has received the first ever award for wastewater collection and water distribution from the Georgia Water and Pollution Control Association. It was honored with a Gold award for being in 100 percent compliance with all regulations from the Association of Metropolitan Sewer Agencies. And, the Water Works was presented with a certificate of excellence by the Government Finance Officers Association. And if that weren't enough, they are doing more with less. Currently, water works employees have been reduced without layoffs and are operating with a budget $1 million less than last year. In addition, water rates have been kept at a lower rate than most comparable cities. Most importantly though, the quality of water in the Columbus area has been greatly enhanced, something which has immeasurable value and importance not only to Columbus but to cities nationwide. Mr. Turner's work has also garnered the respect of his peers and colleagues. His dedication and innovation also led to his appointment as President of the International Water Environment Federation, a term which he just completed. I would like to extend my deepest thanks and congratulations to Mr. Turner, his wife Judee, his sons Rodney, Chris, and Jeff, and his two new grand-daughters. The City of Columbus and the State of Georgia are fortunate to have him. Mr. Speaker, I am submitting for the Congressional Record two articles from The Columbus Ledger which were recently written about Mr. Turner and his outstanding work. [From the Columbus Ledger, May 13, 1998] Doing More for Less Much of our frustration with Atlanta's failure to get its water treatment act together comes from our own success. Fact is, the examples of innovativeness, effectiveness and efficiency set by the Columbus Water Works is a mixed blessing: On one hand, we can be proud of what has been recognized as one of the finest systems in the state and even the country; on the other, our familiarity with how it's done right makes us even less patient with seeing it done wrong. The Water Works has received no fewer than seven national and regional awards this year, including the American Academy of Environmental Engineers' top honor for the CSO/Riverwalk project, the first of its kind in the country, and an EPA award for the best large water treatment plant in the 10- state Southeast region. What makes the Water Works' success even more impressive is that a leaner operation is doing more. President Billy Turner notes that the budget is down by $1 million over the previous year, the staff is smaller and the rates still lower than those in comparable cities. Turner and all the employees of the Columbus Water Works have a right to feel proud of what they've accomplished in the past couple of years. Here's hoping they keep up the good work.

Mr. COLLINS

Mr. COLLINS. Mr. Speaker, increased regional tension and instability resulting from this week's nuclear test detonations in India have heightened concerns over the Administration's policy toward Communist China. China's targeting of thirteen CSS-4 missiles at the continental United States and its unwillingness to abide by existing non- proliferation agreements prove that China is a threat to peace, in general, and American interests, in particular. In light of these critical concerns, I urge the President not to agree to any future dual-use technology transfers to China at this time, including those in the Administration's proposed space agreement. Furthermore, I strongly urge the President and all Members of Congress to oppose maintaining China's Most-Favored Nation (MFN) trade status. Since President Clinton's election in 1992, China has violated non- proliferation agreements at least twenty times. On a number of occasions, China has transferred military technologies directly to nations hostile to American interests, including Pakistan, Iran and Libya. Additionally, China continues to refuse to join the Missile Technology Control Regime to prevent the future spread of these dangerous technologies. In spite of a clear record of Chinese unreliability and irresponsibility, the Clinton Administration has continued to support waivers allowing additional missile technologies to be transferred from American corporations to the Chinese government. Of particular concern to me is the recent waiver granted by the President to Loral Space and communications, a company currently under investigation by the Justice Department for making allegedly illegal transfers of sensitive missile technologies to Communist China. As the editors of the New York Times noted in April, this waiver ``could open the door to discussions about the same kind of guidance system expertise under investigation in the 1996 case, effectively undermining the Justice Department investigation'' of Loral. In the interest of justice and international security, I urge the President to withdraw his support for Most-Favored Nation status for China and to end American dual-use technology transfers to China. Only after it ceases to deploy missiles capable of attacking the United States mainland, ends its transfers of military technology to nations such as Pakistan, Iran and Libya, and agrees to the terms of the Missile Technology Control Regime should China become eligible to receive military technologies from the U.S. and be considered a candidate for Most-Favored Nation status. I further urge that the President refuse to accept so-called ``detargeting agreements'' as progress toward any national security goal. As most Members are aware, retargeting can occur with a single keystroke in today's computer age. As long as China maintains offensive missile capabilities against the United States, American policy should seek to render these weapons unreliable and ineffective. Denial of technology transfers could prove a valuable tool in achieving this objective.

Mr. COLLINS

Mr. COLLINS. Mr. Speaker, as many of my colleagues have come to know, there is an ongoing movement led by the Maryknoll Order of the Catholic Church to attack American foreign policy and her right to defend her interests through closure of the U.S. Army School of the Americas. The School is our nation's preeminent training facility for Spanish speaking militaries and police forces and for U.S. military officers slated to be stationed in South America, Central America, or the Caribbean. The School of the Americas provides training in professional military and police operations (including a Spanish-language Command and General Staff Officer Course). Other coursework includes drug interdiction and eradication, peacekeeping, and resource management. Most importantly, each course focuses on supporting and maintaining democracy and protecting human rights. The School is widely recognized as having developed the foremost human rights training program available at any military training institution in the world, including other U.S. training centers. Unfortunately, you can lead a horse to water, but you can't make him drink. While the vast majority--well over 99 percent--of the School's graduates have returned to serve their nations honorably, those who oppose U.S. foreign policy in the region have seized upon the horrible actions of a very few School graduates as justification for U.S. disengagement throughout our own hemisphere. These former students have acted illegally and immorally in spite of what they learned at the School, not because of it. Suggestions that the Army's School of the Americas has somehow been responsible for, or complicit in atrocities committed by rogue Latin American soldiers are outrageous, inflammatory, and completely unsubstantiated. Implicating our own dedicated soldiers in the wrongdoings of criminals throughout Latin America represents an attack not only on the School, but also on the U.S. Army, on the U.S. Armed Forces as a whole, and on American foreign policy and the American government's right to protect her national interests abroad. Today, the United States pursues its foreign policy in Central America, South America, and the Caribbean with fewer military deployments than are required in any other region of the world. We are able to accomplish this because of the confidence that we have in the American-trained military leadership of the region's democracies. If there were no School of the Americas, pursuit of our foreign policy in Latin America would be very costly both in human and monetary terms. Large military deployments would probably be required to continue current international drug interdiction, peacekeeping, and humanitarian relief missions throughout the region. Such deployments would not only put thousands of American lives at risk, but would also vastly increase the region's burden on the taxpayer. Currently, the entire Southern Command Area of Responsibility (which encompasses \1/6\th of the Earth's surface, including all of Central America, South America, and the Caribbean) requires an investment of only about $550 million per year to protect our national security interests. Compare this to the costs associated with operations in the much smaller regions of Bosnia, costing over $2 billion last year, or Iraq, costing over $1.6 billion last year. An honest assessment of Latin American history over the last 50 years demonstrates clearly that the U.S. Army School of the Americas saves lives. Recently, Latin American military officers trained at the School were responsible for negotiating a peaceful settlement to the Ecuador/Peru border dispute. During the 90s, military coups threatened in Venezuela and Paraguay have been averted through U.S. contacts and cooperation with soldiers trained at USARSA. Jose Serrano, Colombia's new drug czar who was featured recently in the Wall Street Journal, has made great progress in eliminating police corruption and in attacking the operations of that nation's drug kingpins. He is a former guest instructor at the School. Jaime Guzman, the Minister of Defense of El Salvador, has nearly eliminated human rights abuses by the Salvadoran military. During the 1980s, such abuses numbered nearly 2000 incidents each month. Now they nearly never occur, thanks to the School of the Americas human rights training that General Guzman received at Fort Benning, and then implemented in El Salvador. While most of the turmoil of the 1980s has receded in the region, new threats have emerged and must be addressed. The Army School of the Americas continues to be an important support structure for many of the region's fledgling democracies, particularly in fighting on the front lines of the war on drugs. With all of the progress that has been made in the region, it would be irresponsible to turn our backs while drug traffickers and terrorists chip away at freedom and democracy in Central and South America and continue to kill our children on our own streets. Recently, the Commander-in-Chief of the U.S. Southern Command General Charles Wilhelm referred to the inter-American drug supply as the greatest chemical weapons threat currently faced by the United States. Every year, hundreds of billions of dollars worth of deadly, addictive chemicals flow across our borders from Mexico and South America and end up in the bodies of American citizens--many of them children. We must have the School so that we may continue to train Spanish-speaking soldiers and police to interdict drugs and eradicate them at their source. Hundreds of thousands of Americans have died of the effects of narcotics smuggled from without our hemisphere, yet the School's opponents still seek to close this institution which is having a more profound impact on inter-American drug trafficking than any other military training facility in the world. Opponents of the Army School suggest that it should be closed in the interest of human rights. But whose human rights are we talking about? Through its training programs, the School of the Americas protects the human rights of Latin American citizens from both wayward military officials and drug death squads (like the one that recently ambushed a Colombian National Police scout team, killing them all). Furthermore, the School protects U.S. human rights and interests by attacking the drug crisis at its source and by maintaining peace and constructive relations throughout the militaries of our region. The only humans whose rights would be protected by closing the School are those of the drug lords and criminals who are the enemies of democracy and the murderers of our children and those of Latin America. Ironically, the School's closing would eliminate the opportunity for Latin America soldiers to study democracy and human rights. Not only are such courses unavailable at other nations' military training facilities, they are not even offered at other U.S. Department of Defense schools. The School's critics seem to be suggesting that the best way to effect a better understanding of human rights and democracy in Latin American militaries is to close down the only facility providing Latin American soldiers and police with training in democracy and human rights. I respectfully disagree.

Mr. COLLINS

Mr. COLLINS. Mr. Speaker, I rise to recognize and celebrate the contributions of Reverend Charles Carter, senior pastor of the First Baptist Church of Jonesboro. For the past 25 years, Reverend Carter and his wife, Margaret, have led the church through explosive growth, all the while inspiring those they touch with the important lessons of the Bible. Raised in Toccoa, Georgia, Reverend Carter spent his time outside of school bagging groceries in his family's store and pumping gas at his parents' filling station. He went on to study at Mercer University, and then attended Southern Baptist Theological Seminary. After pastoring in Kentucky and North Carolina, Reverend Carter brought his passion for preaching the Bible to Clayton County. Under his leadership, First Baptist Church paralleled the country's population boom with incredible growth from a family of 1,600 members in 1973 to an extended family of 6,400 members this year. With the growth, the church has had the opportunity to expand programming, particularly for the community's youth. They also fund missions to build churches in countries like Guatemala and Venezuela. In 25 years, First Baptist has operated under balanced budgets, even with a budget that has swelled to more than $4 million. A balanced budget is not the only lesson we should follow from the example of Reverend Carter. His belief in the importance of work is motivation for us all. ``You do whatever it takes to get the job done. Forget your job description. Forget what can be done and can't be done. Do whatever it takes.'' Margaret Carter's involvement in the church is also inspirational. She is a partner in the truest sense, as she and her husband have shared in the joys and responsibilities that come with 25 years of heartfelt devotion to the church. Jonesboro is privileged to have Reverend and Mrs. Carter in it's community. Although Reverend Carter will soon retire, his legacy of guidance and inspiration will long survive his absence from the pulpit of First Baptist.

Mr. COLLINS

Mr. COLLINS. Mr. Chairman, I would like to offer comments in support of the gentleman from Louisiana. Last year members of the Transportation Task Force studied the waterway tax and trust fund structure with regard to equity. In light of the fact the current tax that applies to waterway uses has generated a surplus to the trust fund, and since the legislation before us today will eliminate the deficit reduction tax as it applies to the rail industry, I join in the request that we work toward an equitable elimination of the deficit reduction tax as it applies to the barge industry.

Mr. COLLINS

Mr. COLLINS. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to introduce the Real Estate Investment Trust Tax Equity Act. This legislation is an important measure which levels the playing field among investors and businesses competing in similar real estate markets. It addresses an inequity first recognized by Congress in 1984. Unfortunately, the legislative change that occurred in the Deficit Reduction Act of 1984 made important modifications that were too open-ended. As a result, certain players in the REIT market have taken advantage of a loophole which potentially shifts the markets in their favor. Specifically, paired- share REITS were provided a shotgun tax benefit in the 1984 legislation which has created a meaningful imbalance in certain industries. My legislation seeks to install equity, true to the intent of the 1984 changes.***HD***II. BACKGROUND A. What is a Real Estate Investment Trust (REIT)? A REIT is organized as a corporation, business trust or similar association which allows many investors to pool capital in order to acquire or provide financing for real estate. REITs were first created in 1960 in order to give small investors access to the commercial real estate investment market. Previously this market had been monopolized by large capital investors, and this new structure afforded a wider group of investors to share in the profit opportunities. A REIT is not required to pay a corporate level of tax, but must pass 95% of its taxable income through to its investors. Additionally, 95% of a REIT's income must come from passive sources, such as lease payments or interest on mortgage debt, etc. Also, 75% of a REIT's income must come from real estate. A REIT may not receive a significant portion of income from operating its real estate. Over the years, there have been several legislative efforts to modify the REIT structure. While REITS have been generally prohibited from self-managing properties that they hold in trust, changes to the code were made in 1986 which allowed REITS that own specific types of real estate to provide customary services to their tenants. However, under current law, REITS are still restricted from operating real estate that requires a high level of operation management services (usually associated with such entities as hotels, casinos or similar properties). REITs that operate in these markets must lease the property to a third party, usually structured as a C corporation, which is tasked with providing the operation and direct management of the restricted real estate held by the REIT. The REIT market has seen considerable recent growth. According to the National Association of REITs, five years ago there were 142 REITS with a market value of $16 billion. Today there are 210 REITs with a value of $141 billion. Experts forecast that at current growth rates, within a decade REITs will reach a market value of $1.3 trillion. B. What are Paired-Share REITs? In the 1980s certain REITS began pairing their shares of the REIT with those of the management company. For each share of the REIT received by the investor, they also received one share of the management company. Pairing these shares creates significant benefits because the same shareholders derive all of the profits from operations related to the real estate owned by the REIT. C. Congressional Action Because of several concerns about the paired share structure, including the fact that it could cause an artificial reduction in tax liabilities attributable to the income associate to management of properties, Congress took action in 1984 to ensure that the two structures would be treated as one for purposes of applying the REIT gross income tests. However, in this legislation, Congress considered the impact on the companies that had already adopted the paired-share REIT structure. Consequently, these existing entities were grandfathered, with the acknowledgment that they would need additional time to ``unwind'' in the effort to meet the standard gross income tests. Historical discussion language indicates Congressional intent: ``Congress did not intend to eliminate the corporate tax on the portion of an active business' income that arises from the ownership of its real estate.'' ``Congress believed that to permit the use of such a transparent device would have weakened the integrity of the tax system.'' ``Congress believed that all stapled entities should have adequate time to remove the requirement that shares trade in tandem . . .'' D. The Competitive Benefits of Paired-share REITs Although supporters of paired-share REITs argue they have no benefit over competitors within their industries, indications are to the contrary. Specifically, this structure provides significant benefit because it eliminates the sometimes adversarial relationship between the REIT and the management company. If both entities have the same group of shareholders, there is no friction over who should realize the benefit of profits. Second, the shifting of income between the two entities can have a significant impact on the tax liability attributable to profits. There are a number of ways this can be accomplished whether through rent payments, or shifting other overhead expenses. Third, the structure of paired-share REITs enables these entities to avoid the double taxation of income from real estate, a benefit not realized by non-paired-share REIT competitors in certain markets. Again, tax liabilities are minimized and profits are significantly increased for shareholders. This unique business structure has made them particularly attractive to investors, thereby giving them more advantageous access to capital. Rather than making movements to ``unwind'' or adjust their structure in anticipation of having to comply with standard REIT gross income tests, since 1995, a majority of the grandfathered entities have expanded aggressively. Again, while today's paired-share REITs argue they have no real advantage over the traditionally structured corporations against whom they compete, their behavior indicates otherwise. Not only have some of the grandfathered REITS publicly discussed their advantage in an effort to attract investors, they have also stated in the past that they originally purchased the paired-share REIT, not for the line of business that it was participating in, but because they wanted the paired-share structure which provides unique, advantageous opportunities in certain markets.***HD***III. THE REAL ESTATE INVESTMENT TRUST EQUITY ACT Mr. Speaker, because the REIT market continues to expand aggressively, Congress must take action to ensure that the grandfathered REITS are not enjoying tax based advantages, to the detriment of other businesses competing within the same industries. The legislation I introduce today levels the playing field by further clarifying the intent of Congress expressed in the Deficit Reduction Act of 1984. My legislation simply states that paired-share REITs must comply with the standard gross income texts applicable to all REITs, contained in section 856 of the Internal Revenue Code. Federal tax policy must be consistent so that it does not favor one competitor over another within industries. This important legislation ensures equitable tax policy so that one group of investors does not have a significant benefit over their competitors.

Mr. COLLINS

Mr. COLLINS. Mr. Speaker, I am honored to congratulate Fort Benning, Georgia, for winning the Army Community of Excellence Chief of Staff Award. This is the sixth consecutive year that Fort Benning has been recognized as the best Army installation in the United States. The award is indicative of the ability of professionalism of the tens of thousands of soldiers that pass through Fort Benning's gate each year and of the successful partnership that exists among Fort Benning, Columbus, Georgia, and Phoenix City, Alabama, communities. The soldiers and civilians who work under the leadership of General Carl Ernst and his staff continue to reinforce Fort Benning's long- standing commitment to military quality, focusing on the watch words, ``First in training, first in readiness, and first in quality of life.'' Fort Benning constitutes a cornerstone of our national defense. To all of the personnel at Fort Benning, I offer my sincere thanks and congratulations for a job well done.

Mr. COLLINS

Mr. COLLINS. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this time. Mr. Speaker, a lot has been said by several Members of trips that they have made to Bosnia. I, too, have made several trips there. In fact, I made two just this last December, two trips within 8 days. I was totally surprised by the attitude of our soldiers upon my first arrival in Bosnia, about how positive they were about what they were doing and why they are there. I was totally set back, I was not expecting this, and I thought to myself, why do they feel this way? I thought back to 1995 when we were in there, in December of 1995, prior to any of the soldiers being deployed, and all of this destruction that was very visible. I knew by that destruction that there had to be some terrible war that had taken place there just in recent times, just recent months. But then, when I was there in December of 1997, there were people in the streets, guns were silent. I knew peace had arrived, and it was due to the United States soldiers and the other peacekeeping forces who were there. During lunch I asked several of the soldiers, if they had an opportunity to tell the President of the United States one thing about Bosnia, what would they say? They listed three things. They told me of three things. First, they recommended that the President look at the deployment, the length of the deployment, the time that the soldiers are being deployed there, the frequency of deployment. Some 52 percent of active duty component soldiers in Bosnia at that time were there on their second mission, and this was just 2 years into the mission. Then they said, define the mission, tell us what our goals are, what we are trying to accomplish. We cannot be policemen of the world forever. Mr. Speaker, now to the resolution that is before us. I am going to vote to support this resolution, not that I would require or vote to withdraw soldiers from Bosnia. Because they themselves told me the story of why they are there and how proud they are of what they are doing. But to reinforce their requests: Define the mission. I think it is well stated in the letter from the American Legion that this will encourage the administration to define the mission, establish goals of this mission, establish benchmarks for this mission, what we are attempting to accomplish, what time frame we should be there to help accomplish these benchmarks, and how are we going to help the Bosnian people establish a new republic, a true democracy that includes all three branches of government: the executive, the legislative and, most of all importance, the judicial that is lacking in Bosnia and other nations that we have peacekeeping forces in. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of this resolution.

Mr. COLLINS

Mr. COLLINS. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to congratulate the American Legion on the occasion of the 79th Anniversary of its founding and to pay homage to General Raymond G. Davis, Medal of Honor recipient and retired Assistant Commandant of the United States Marine Corps. I recently had the honor of introducing General Davis as the keynote speaker at the recent birthday celebration of the Clayton County American Post 258. I enter those remarks in the Congressional Record in honor of the American Legion and General Ray Davis. The Honorable Mac Collins 79th Anniversary of the American Legion Clayton County American Legion Post 258, March 13, 1998, Jonesboro, Georgia Good evening. It is a real pleasure to be with so many friends here tonight. Thank you Lamar Miller for your kind introductory remarks and for giving me the honor of introducing General Ray Davis, our distinguished speaker this evening. I also want to recognize Clayton County Sheriff Stanley Tuggle, State Representative Greg Hecht, and State Representative Frank Bailey and his wife, Frances. I have known and respected Frank for many years. He is a friend and does a fine job for the people of Clayton County in the Georgia House of Representatives. And, I want to recognize Mr. James Hugh Lindsey. I had the pleasure of first meeting Mr. Lindsey at a celebration arranged by Mr. Miller on the occasion of his 101st birthday. Mr. Lindsey recently celebrated his 102nd birthday, and I know everyone here this evening joins with me in wishing him many more to come. We are here tonight to celebrate and honor the 79th anniversary of the founding of the American Legion. When Mr. Miller told me tonight's dinner was being held to celebrate the founding of the American Legion, I wanted to learn more about the rich history of your organization. It all began in March 1919 when members of the American Expeditionary Force in Europe held the first caucus in Paris and created an organization for those who have served their country. The official name for the Legion was adopted in May 1919 at a caucus meeting in St. Louis. In September 1919, the organization was officially chartered by the United States Congress. And, in November 1919, the Legion held its first annual convention in Minneapolis where its members adopted the organization's constitution and set its future course. From that handful of soldiers in Paris and the founding members at the first convention in Minneapolis, the American Legion today has grown to over 2.9 million members. The programs you sponsor and support touch the lives of so many of your fellow citizens. You are helping to mold the harts and minds of our nation's youth with your work with the Boy Scouts of America, your sponsorship of Boys State and Boys Nation, American Legion Baseball, your educational scholarship programs, the Child Welfare Foundation, your Children and Youth Programs and many, many more. Through your Citizens Flag Alliance, the Legion is working to ``protect our history, our pride, our honor and our flag.'' And, the American Legion provides valuable input to Congress in writing and passing laws that protect our national security and enhance the lives of all who have served their country. As a Member of Congress, I thank you and your fellow Legionnaires for all that you have given, and continue to give, to your nation. While I could continue speaking on the wonderful history of the Legion, it is my honor to introduce your keynote speaker who, I believe, best represents the ideals on which the American Legion was founded and for which it stands today. Raymond G. Davis is a son of Georgia. He was born on January 13, 1915 in Fitzgerald, the son of Zelma and Raymond Roy Davis. Following his 1938 graduation from Georgia School of Technology with Honors, Ray Davis began a 33-year career with the United States Marine Corps as a second lieutenant. During that distinguished career, Ray Davis rose from the rank of second lieutenant to become a four-star general and Assistant Commandant of the Marine Corps. While General Davis may be best known as a recipient of the Medal of Honor while serving as a Battalion Commander during the Korean War, he first saw action in some of the most brutal fighting of World War II. He was part of the Marine forces that participated in the capture and defense of Guadalcanal and the Eastern New Guinea and Cape Gloucester campaigns. While commanding the 1st Marine Division of the 1st Battalion in September of 1944, then Major Davis was wounded during the first hour of the landing operations. He refused to leave his men and continued to direct the Battalion in establishing defense positions and gaining control of the island. For his actions, Major Davis was awarded the Purple Heart and the Navy Cross. As a Lieutenant Colonel in Korea from 1950 to 1951, General Davis earned the nation's highest decoration for heroism during the 1st Marine Division's historic fight to break out of the Chosin Reservoir Area. Against overwhelming odds, he led his Battalion in a four-day battle which saved a Marine rifle company and opened a mountain pass for the escape of two trapped Marine regiments. President Harry Truman presented Colonel Davis with the Medal of Honor in ceremonies at the White House on November 24, 1952. In 1968, then Major General Ray Davis was named Deputy Commanding General of forces in his third and final conflict--the Vietnam War. During that tour, General Davis was awarded the Distinguished Service Medal--the first of two such medals he received. In 1971, General Davis was nominated by the President and confirmed by the United States Senate as the Assistant Commandant of the United States Marine Corps. He served in this position until his retirement in 1972. In addition to the Medal of Honor, two Distinguished Service Medals, the Navy Cross and Purple Heart, General Davis was awarded two Silver Stars, two Legions of Merit, six Bronze Stars and many other awards from allied governments. Additionally, the forces in which he served received five Presidential Unit Citations, three Navy Unit Commendations and 15 Battle Stars. After 33 years of traveling the world, seeing action in three wars and serving as one of the nation's highest military officers, Ray Davis could have settled into a comfortable retirement on his farm here in Georgia. But this was not the way for Ray Davis--a man of life-long action and deep commitment to serving others. Let me quote General Davis on leaving the Marines: ``As for retirement being difficult, I had an ideal transition in that I was retired from the Corps at 10 o'clock in the morning in Washington, and I was in my Atlanta office at 2 o'clock that afternoon in charge of the whole state of the Georgia Chamber of Commerce.'' Ray Davis had returned home as Executive Vice President for one of the premier business organizations in Georgia. General Davis went on to lead the Georgia Chamber through an exciting time of growth in our state. He later left the Chamber to become President of RGMW, a family-owned land development corporation. General Davis also gave time to activities that are close to his heart. He has served as a trustee in the Valley Forge Military Academy, Chairman of the Trustees for the Marine Military Academy and on the Board of Visitors for Berry College. He was appointed by President Ronald Reagan to the Korean War Veterans Memorial Advisory Board and he is active in many Marine Corps organizations. Today, General Davis and his wife of over 50 years, Knox, live in Rockdale County. They enjoy traveling and staying active in the many organizations in which General Davis still serves. They also enjoy having more time for their three children, Raymond Jr., Gordon and Willa, and their grandchildren. Tonight I have touched on the highlights of the extraordinary life and career of General Davis. For more details on this incredible man, I would encourage you to read ``The Story of Ray Davis.'' In fact, we may be able to prevail on the General to autograph copies of his book this evening. In closing, I want to leave you with a quote from Army General Creighton W. Abrams Jr., commander of U.S. forces in Vietnam, to Marine Commandant General Leonard F. Chapman Jr. General Abrams said of Ray Davis, ``. . . of the 50 or so division commanders I have known in Vietnam, General Davis has no peer. He's the best.'' Ray Davis truly does represent the best of American society--soldier, scholar, a man of deeply held beliefs and commitments, and a devoted husband and father. Words cannot express how proud and honored I am to know General Ray Davis. Ladies and gentlemen, I give you a true American hero-- General Raymond G. Davis.

Mr. COLLINS of Georgia

Mr. COLLINS of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I will talk slowly, because I want him to understand what I have to say. Mr. Speaker, I have been asked: What has been the most difficult vote for you to cast in Congress? The most difficult votes for me are those on trade issues. I fully understand the importance of expanding trade legislation, and the American worker understands its importance, also. There is not an American worker who does not take pride in manufacturing a product and having it sold worldwide. But that same worker knows that while the U.S. has aggressively lowered or eliminated many of its barriers to foreign products, most countries are still closed to U.S. products. These workers believe that trade bills export jobs and not products. Time after time they have seen the trade agreements we have enacted result in a few hundred jobs lost here, a few hundred jobs lost there, and Mr. Speaker, those numbers add up. More importantly, those numbers represent families in communities losing income and economic strength. Those are the same workers that used to walk in a store and see the ``Made in the U.S.A.'' label sewn in the garment. Today, that same worker sees the same label ``Made Anywhere But the U.S.A.'' That is salt in the wound to those who have seen their jobs exported and the products they used to make imported. Yesterday, a Member of this body, as well as a member of the Committee on Ways and Means, made a powerful statement before the Committee on Rules. He said, it is time that we give up on textile jobs. He added, we need to recognize, too, that it is too late to save these industries. Mr. Speaker, that kind of a statement is exactly what the people of this country are angry about. They know that there are Members of Congress who have forgotten that the U.S. textile industry employs some 2 million people in this country, and most of those workers do not have the security of a higher education or the security of a trade or profession, as does a lawyer or a college professor. Mr. Speaker, just this past week the Bibb Company textile mill located in Columbus, Georgia, announced that it would close its door March 20. That means that of thousands of textile jobs in Georgia, we lose some 250 more. Mr. Speaker, textile workers in this country deserve to know that legislators have not given up on their jobs. The amendment I would have offered today, if the Committee on Rules had made it in order, would have provided that American workers receive some benefits from this trade bill. It would have guaranteed that the demand for U.S. products is as important to this body as creating jobs in Africa. Mr. Speaker, if the rules of origin and the GSP product exemptions were good enough to put in NAFTA, then they are good enough to put in this sub-Saharan Africa trade bill. Mr. Speaker, I have tremendous respect for my colleagues in this Chamber, particularly the chairman of the Committee on Ways and Means, but Mr. Speaker, I must represent the people of the Third District of Georgia. I strongly urge defeat of this rule, defeat of this bill. I will not give up on American textile jobs, which represent the livelihoods of families in Georgia and the economic strength of communities all across this country.

Mr. COLLINS

Mr. COLLINS. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding. He has graciously advised the House on the importance of this committee and the importance of his motion to recommit, which contains substitute language. Mr. Speaker, on behalf of the textile workers, agriculture workers, their families and the communities which depend on those jobs as their economic base, I rise in support of the motion to recommit with instructions to insert into this bill the same provisions we have in other trade agreements pertaining to textiles, and also language that will address the transshipment problem.

Mr. COLLINS

Mr. COLLINS. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this time. Mr. Chairman, the foundation of our American republic is built upon the idea that citizens have the inherent right to life, liberty, and property. In fact, throughout the writings of our Founding Fathers, the right to property is viewed as fundamental to economic and political liberty. In the Declaration of Independence, Jefferson cited as a central reason for seeking independence was the King imposing taxes without our consent, the illegal taking of citizens' personal property. Then, arguing in support of the proposed Constitution, James Madison suggested that government is instituted no less for the protection of the property than of the persons or individuals. Fortunately for all of us, these views prevailed in the Constitution, and the Fifth Amendment ensures that, in the United States, no one will be deprived of personal property without due process of law and just compensation. Unfortunately, however, there is currently no single court in which a property owner can seek full relief for a Federal taking. The Tucker Act, which splits jurisdiction on property rights issues between Federal district courts and the Court of Federal Claims, allows the government to argue that property owners are suing in the wrong court. This results in bouncing citizens between two courts, often preventing or significantly delaying a final decision on the underlying issue of an illegal taking. Today, each of us have the opportunity and the responsibility to protect the constitutional rights of our constituents. The legislation before us today will ensure that Federal agencies and courts cannot sidestep the Constitution through procedural games and delay tactics. I urge my colleagues to support the Tucker Act Shuffle Relief Act.

Mr. COLLINS

Mr. COLLINS. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that my name be removed as a cosponsor of the bill, H.R. 2495.

Mr. COLLINS

Mr. COLLINS. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor the life and accomplishments of Mr. Jack Allan Bell of Columbus, who passed away on December 22nd. His life should serve as an example to all of us who seek to serve our families, communities, states, and nation. A son of the South, Mr. Bell was born in Birmingham, Alabama, educated at Birmingham Southern College and the University of Alabama, and spent most of his life in Columbus, Georgia, where his widow still resides. Mr. Bell demonstrated his patriotism at a young age, serving in combat during both World War II and the Korean Conflict. Even in times of peace, Mr. Bell served in extremely dangerous positions, including piloting RB-45 reconnaissance aircraft for the Strategic Air Command (SAC). These reconnaissance missions produced invaluable intelligence information regarding Soviet defenses but also resulted in the loss of two-thirds of Mr. Bell's squadron. And as an Air Force test pilot, Mr. Bell again proved his skill, gaining certification in over 40 different U.S. military aircraft. Following his military service, Mr. Bell made countless contributions to the Columbus community as both a businessman and a benefactor. He served as president of the Gas Light Company of Columbus, the Southern Gas Association, the Muscogee Lions Club, and the Greater Columbus Chamber of Commerce, as well as Director Emeritus for Sun Trust Bank. As a member of the Board of Trustees, Mr. Bell was instrumental in the growth and development of the Columbus Museum and the Springer Opera House. He also was a leading force in the Chattahoochee Council Boy Scouts. Jack Bell is and will be greatly missed in Columbus. As a father, husband, patriot, and community leader, Mr. Bell will continue to serve as a shining example of the great impact that one individual can have on his community and on his country. I am honored to have had the opportunity to represent him.