Phil Crane

Mr. CRANE

Mr. CRANE. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Manzullo).

Mr. CRANE. Mr. Speaker, that is my understanding.

Mr. CRANE. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from California (Mr. Hunter).

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

Mr. CRANE. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the distinguished gentleman from Iowa (Mr. Latham).

Mr. CRANE. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the distinguished gentleman from California (Mr. Cunningham).

Mr. CRANE. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentlewoman from Maryland (Mrs. Morella). (Mrs. MORELLA asked and was given permission to revise and extend her remarks.)

Mr. CRANE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume, and I yield to the distinguished and talented service of Mary Jane Wignot. She has served on the professional staff of our Committee on Ways and Means during development of landmark trade legislation, such as the Omnibus Trade and Competitiveness Act of 1988 and the implementing bills for NAFTA and the Uruguay Round agreements. There are few individuals in this country who know more and have contributed more to the development of U.S. trade policy than Mary Jane Wignot. Her wise counsel and drafting skills have been absolutely essential to the success of these historic bipartisan initiatives. I want to salute her and wish her all the best as she returns to her home town of Boston to continue her career. I yield to the gentleman from New York (Mr. Rangel).

Mr. CRANE. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as she may consume to the gentlewoman from Connecticut (Mrs. Johnson) for a brief colloquy.

Mr. CRANE. Mr. Speaker, will the gentlewoman yield?

Mr. CRANE

Mr. CRANE. Mr. Speaker, as all of us know, family is the center of American life and I want to share with my colleagues an article which exemplifies the strong family ties found among our healthiest and happiest of families. The article was written by Courtney Toft about her sister, Nicole, who has Rett syndrome. The affection and devotion with which she writes permeates each word and demonstrates the unconditional love both girls have for one another. The close relationship between Courtney and Nicole is a direct reflection of the family life created by their mother, Carol Toft, who works in my District Office in Lake Villa, Illinois. Knowing of Carol's commitment and love for her family, my heart was touched by Courtney's comments about her sister and I simply wanted my colleagues to have an opportunity to read her article as it appeared in the September 1998 issue of the Rett Syndrome Association of Illinois Newsletter. Sisterhood (By Courtney Toft (age 16)) My sister, Nicole, turned nineteen on August 3. Her personality has changed throughout the years, but she has always kept the sparkling eyes and the smile that lights up the room. People always say, ``I think she understands!'' I know she understands! She knows so much more than we give her credit for. She is just like every single one of us except she can't express her feelings in words like the rest of us can. Having a sister with Rett syndrome has taught me so much. If Nicole had been ``normal'' our family would have had a different outlook on life. Nicole has always been there for me. She listens to my deepest secrets and doesn't tell a soul. She laughs at all my jokes even if they are not funny and basically puts up with all my annoying habits. Of course, Nicole has her bad habits that the rest of the household has to put up with. Not that I'm complaining, but nineteen years of the Muppets and Sesame Street can be a little extreme. I think Nicole has been a blessing to our entire family. I don't know what we would have done without her. There are so many stories to tell, but most of them are the ones that only a mother, or sister, could tolerate. Whenever you have a family with two girls close in age, there is competition. You would think that with us there wouldn't be any. Big mistake. Nicole has a boyfriend named Jason (cute couple!). I have a boyfriend named Jeff (cuter couple!) Nicole figures she should have both guys so she hits on mine. The sad part is, my boyfriend falls for her mischievous ways. Thinking from her point of view, I guess we really don't compete. She has everyone wrapped around her finger, and I think she knows it, too. I might have missed out on some things related to sisterhood, like the part where Nicole was supposed to break Mom in to parenting a teenager. You know, all the bad habits: boyfriends, curfews, driving, and all the other things that every parent looks forward to. Things I haven't missed include time together styling her hair, polishing her nails, and going shopping. We recently had our first adventure together where she and I picked out some really cool clothes for her. Her eyes and smile told me that she thought it was the coolest thing! We've grown up not only physically, but emotionally. We've developed an admiration for one another, and I'm very lucky to have a sister like her.

Mr. CRANE

Mr. CRANE. Mr. Speaker, one of the saddest chapters in America's history is that of her Indians. The U.S. government has, over the years, waged wars against various tribes, as they forced others to relocate great distances from their ancestral lands. In the 20th century, Washington made American Indians virtual slaves to the federal welfare system. As a student of history with some Cherokee blood in my veins, I have had a keen interest in the plight of the American Indian. For that reason, I have been very encouraged and impressed with the efforts of Chief Phillip Martin of the Mississippi Choctaws. I have had the privilege of meeting Chief Martin, who has presided over an economic renaissance in his tribe. Instead of looking to bureaucrats on the Potomac, the Choctaws looked to themselves and took advantage of opportunities in the free market to lift themselves out of destitution. Now the reservation is a economic dynamo of industrial and commercial enterprises. In fact, the reservation is among the top ten employers in the entire state of Mississippi. I commend to the attention of my colleagues an article from the Wednesday, September 16, 1998 edition of the Washington Times entitled ``Choctaws' climb from despair'' written by Grover Norquist. Mr. Norquist describes the achievements of Chief Martin and the Mississippi Choctaws which should be a good lesson for not only other Indian tribes across the country, but other communities as well. [From the Washington Times, Sept. 16, 1998] Choctaw's Climb From Despair (By Grover Norquist) Forty years ago, a long forgotten band of Indians, the Mississippi Choctaws, were mired in the deepest of poverty, after 150 years of decline from what was perhaps once the mightiest Indian nation in the South. Unemployment had long stood at about 75 percent, and those who did work were poorly compensated sharecroppers. Life expectancy was only 45 to 50 years, and infant mortality was the highest of any population in the United States. Eighty-five percent of Choctaw housing was classified as substandard. Local education stopped at the sixth grade. The only health care was from a nearby federally run hospital. Even in the 1960s, a local newspaper called the Choctaw tribe ``the worst poverty pocket in the poorest state of the union.'' Then Chief Phillip Martin took over the reigns of leadership for the tribe. Chief Martin's insight was that his people were never going to climb out of this swamp of despair by relying on federal handouts and bureaucrats. He realized instead that their only hope was to turn to the private market economy and earn their own way. Remarkably, he understood that what seemed to others like an economically hopeless enclave of despair had much to offer business and industry. The tribe's reservation was effectively an Enterprise Zone, with tribal business exempt from all federal and state taxes, as well as all state regulations and many federal regulations. Moreover, the tribe had a ready and available work force eager to be trained and perform well. Through long years of hard work, Chief Martin turned these assets into astounding success. Today, the Choctaws are an economic powerhouse, proprietors of a sprawling, multi- enterprise, industrial and commercial empire. They are the largest employer in Neshoba County, and among the 10 largest employers in the state. They now have industrial plants on their reservation under contract with Ford, Chrysler, AT&T, Xerox, Navistar, American Greetings, McDonald's and others. They also now run one of the most successful casinos in the state, the Silver Star, opened just four years ago. As a result, average family income has soared from about $2,000 per year 35 years ago to around $24,000 per year today. Unemployment has been all but eliminated, and only about 3 percent of Choctaw tribal members are on welfare. Life expectancy is now 65-70 years, an increase of almost 20 years from four decades ago. Infant mortality has now plummeted to below state and national averages. The average educational level of adult tribal members has climbed from sixth grade in 1975 to almost 12th grade today. Substandard housing is virtually gone from the reservation, replaced by modern homes. In short, on indicator after indicator, the Chocataws are now approaching middle class American status. In leading this long climb from the depths of poverty and despair, Chief Martin has achieved many accomplishments that show he well deserves the Hero of the Taxpayer Award we will happily present to him today: He has shown the way for American Indians and tribes across this nation to climb out of government dependency and join in the mainstream American economy. He has shown that the Enterprise Zone model of economic development, with greatly reduced tax and regulatory burdens and local control, can work incredibly well in the most difficult of circumstances. He has been the leader and innovator in contracting out services and programs from the Bureau of Indian Affairs and Indian Health Service, so that now virtually all Federal Indian programs and services for the Mississippi Choctaws are run by the tribe rather than the federal government. He has consequently shown how the federal role in Indian affairs can be greatly diminished and the role of tribes in running their own affairs greatly increased. Even though the tribe is effectively the state and local government for the Mississippi Choctaws and provides all state and local services, Chief Martin runs it and has accomplished all of the above to boot with virtually no tribal taxes.

Mr. CRANE

Mr. CRANE. Mr. Speaker, as we move into the 21st century, we must address the issue of Social Security. When I support privatizing the system which would allow Americans to more fully control the financial aspects of their retirement years, I realize we must have a national debate on the issue. In an effort to contribute to the discussion, I would recommend that my colleagues read this following column written by Jose Pinera as it appeared in the European edition of the Wall Street Journal on June 25, 1998. [From the Wall Street Journal Europe, June 25, 1998] A Way Out of Europe's Pension Crisis (By Jose Pinera) On the wall of my office in Santiago, Chile, I have a map of the Americas with South America's sharp southern tip pointing toward the top and the United States and Canada at the bottom. Visitors often look puzzled, then exclaim, ``Oh, they've hung your map upside down.'' ``No,'' I say, ``It's just a different way of looking at the world.'' I often think of that map when I'm asked how Europe's crisis-riddled pension systems can fixed. Reform is possible, I reply, if people are willing to look at the world in a different way. Most importantly individuals will need more power to provide for their own retirement--and the government's role must be scaled back. We've accomplished this in Chile, and reform on the Chilean model is being seriously considered in the United States. In the meantime, the system has already spread to several other nations around the globe. Beneath its veneer of egalitarianism, Europe's present pension systems are hideously unfair to tens of millions. Most young workers can look only to paying more and more to support those on retirement today--and then to receiving less and less when they themselves retire. Many under-40 members of today's working population may end up on income support to make ends meet in the next few decades, even though they pay up to 20% or more of their income in social security taxes. Simple Yet Radical Part of the problem is demographics. Europe's state pension systems are based on the so-called pay-as-you-go (Paygo) principle, meaning that the pension payroll taxes of today's working populations are passed through immediately to today's retirees. This system worked half-a-century ago in a world where there were seven or more workers for each retiree, who typically lived only a few years after he left the work force. That world is gone. Thanks to a sharply declining birth rate and longer life expectancy, there is now an average of only four people of working age to support each pensioner in the 15 member states of the European Union. By 2040 there will be only two, and in some countries like Germany the ratio of workers to pensioners will be closer to one to one. As a result, the financial burdens will become enormous. Pension contributions in Germany, for example, are now 20.3% of earnings, and the government has just increased VAT to finance the cost of pensions. And that is just the beginning. In France, pension contributions may have to double to 40% of earnings. But higher payroll taxes lead to even high unemployment and thus fewer contributions to the pension system. At the same time, the payouts will be rimmed. European governments have already begun doing so, for example, by increasing the retirement age. Meanwhile, every pressure group grants to cut the best deal for its members. Thus we see that Italian civil servants retire in their early 50s and that French truck drivers can end their working lives at 55. Does anyone seriously believe that such a system can survive in the 21st century? Twenty years ago my country faced a similar crisis. Chile had created a state pension system in 1925 and by the 1970s it was on the brink of bankruptcy, life with special privileges and burdened by high payroll taxes. When I was appointed minister of labor and social security, my team and I hit upon a simple, yet radical way to keep the idea of a national retirement system, but change the way it is structured. Every worker's payroll taxes, we proposed, could go into a private, individual pension account that would be his own property. His money would be invested in professionally managed funds of stocks and bonds. If he changed his job, his retirement accounts would move with him. These would fuel--and keep up with--a growing economy, yielding a far better pension income than if the same sums went to the government. Here's how the Pension Savings Account (PSA) system works. To start with every working man and woman gets a PSA passbook to keep track of how much as accumulated and how well the investment fund has performed. To manage these growing assets, individuals choose freely among a number of private companies that invest in a diversified, low-risk portfolio of stocks and bonds. Since workers can change freely from one company to another, they compete to provide better customer service and lower commissions. Many have user-friendly computer terminals where individuals can calculate the value of their pensions or find out how much to deposit in order to retire at a given age. The companies are regulated by the government and there's also a safety net: the state guarantees a minimum pension if the worker's savings fall short. The PSA system changes the very notion of what a pension is. For example, Chile no longer has a right legal retirement age. People can retire whenever they want, as long as they have sufficient savings in their accounts for a ``reasonable pension'' (50% of average salary of the previous 10 years, as long as it is higher than the minimum pension). If they want to, they can continue working without contributing to the plan after their pension begins. No longer is anyone forced to leave the labor force--or work on the black market-- because he draws a pension. The result? Today Chile's private pension system has accumulated an investment fund of some $30 billion, in a country of only 14 million people and a gross domestic product of only $70 billion. As University of California economist Sebastian Edwards noted, the system ``has contributed to the phenomenal increase in the country's savings rate, from less than 10% in 1986 to almost 29% in 1996.'' Chilean people have reaped a rich harvest. The average worker has earned 12% annually after inflation, and pensions today are much higher than under the old system nearly 80% of annual income over the last 10 years of working life. Can this system work in Europe? Some economists assert that it can't. Let's examine their objections. ``The transition to an investment-based system is too costly.'' If today's worker's taxes get redirected into individual retirement funds, critics wonder, who will pay the pensions of today's retired workers? In Chile, we covered the guarantees to already retired workers in several ways. The government issued new bonds, which spread some of the cost over the generations. Privatization of state-owned business, and a reduction in government spending elsewhere, were also important. We levied a small temporary transition tax; and the economic growth unleashed by the PSA system brought in greater overall tax revenues. In the meantime, during the transition, everyone contributing to the old system could remain in it, but those who moved had their rights to partially accrued pension. Income guaranteed by the government. All new entrants by the work force were required to go into the PSA system. ``Operating costs of an investment-based system are higher.'' True, professional pension fund managers do have advertising and investment costs that tax-and-spend government programs run by civil servants do not incur. But the costs are low--and are dwarfed by the higher returns the PSA system generates. ``Private pensions are less reliable and safe.'' In fact, it's hard to consider the present setup reliable, with governments increasing taxes and decreasing payouts. The investment results of private funds cannot be guaranteed. But all studies of past performance show that the long-term gains of a well-chosen portfolio of bonds and equities have been far greater than that of paygo systems. The government supervises the investment companies, and of course the fund manages themselves keep a constant watchful eye on the accounts. Empowering Workers The PSA system has other benefits. For example, if this system were adopted Europe-wide, workers would not risk losing their pension rights if they left a job in one country for a job in another. Interestingly, the EU Commission is considering a change from Paygo to an investment-based retirement system for its own workers. Harvard University economist Martin Feldstein has estimated that the value of future benefits to the American economy of privatizing Social Security pensions could reach an astounding $20 trillion. ``It is difficult to think of any other policy,'' he recently wrote, ``that could produce such a substantial permanent rise in the standard of living of the vast majority of the population.'' Europe could also derive a similarly huge benefit. I cannot emphasize enough that the PSA is not a solution of the political right or left; it empowers all workers. It allows them ownership of financial capital that many have never had, giving them a greater stake in the economy than ever before. It may seem revolutionary to suggest that Europeans give up their dependence on the state for their old-age livelihood in favor of taking their pension provision into their own hands. Nevertheless, millions of people in countries such as Peru, Argentina, Colombia, Bolivia, El Salvador, and Mexico have already done so, with excellent results for themselves, their economies and their societies. To all who say it cannot be done, my reply is twofold: it has been done, and--considering the ruinous state of Europe's pensions financing--It must be done.

Mr. CRANE

Mr. CRANE. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the Kucinich amendment. (Mr. CRANE asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. CRANE. Mr. Chairman, this amendment would prohibit the use of any of the funds appropriated by this bill to challenge a State law on the grounds that it is inconsistent with NAFTA or the Uruguay Round Agreements. Let there be no mistake. This is an anti-trade, anti-export amendment that would have the effect of encouraging States to enact discriminatory statutes in violation of international trade agreements. By denying the Federal Government the constitutional authority to regulate foreign commerce, the amendment would invite trade retaliation against U.S. exports. In granting Congress the authority ``to regulate commerce with foreign nations,'' Article I, section 8 of the Constitution recognizes the need for uniformity among the States in the conduct of international trade. As Daniel Webster stated, ``The prevailing motive was to regulate commerce; to rescue it from the embarrassing and destructive consequences resulting from legislation of so many States, and to place it under the protection of a uniform law.'' In cases where there is a conflict between an act of Congress that regulates commerce and local or State legislation, Federal law enjoys supremacy. In order to encourage uniformity among the States, Congress wrote the laws implementing NAFTA and the Uruguay Round Agreements to state plainly that it is the exclusive right of the Federal Government to challenge State laws on the grounds that they violate international trade obligations. One thing should be made clear in this debate. The authority to bring legal action against the States has never been used during the 50 years that the GATT global trading system has been in effect. I want to remind my colleagues that Congress established elaborate consultation procedures to protect the interests of States in these matters, and to ensure that representatives of States play a formal role in any international dispute settlement proceeding that concerns their laws and practices. For those who raise concerns about U.S. sovereignty, I emphasize that the statutes implementing NAFTA and the Uruguay Round Agreements also state that panel reports under the World Trade Organization dispute settlement mechanism or under NAFTA are not binding as a matter of U.S. law and cannot form the basis for bringing suit in U.S. courts. In fact, the Uruguay Round Agreements Act specifically precludes Federal courts from giving WTO panel reports any deference. Thus, in the regulation of foreign commerce, Federal law is the ``law of the land,'' and neither WTO dispute settlement panels, nor the WTO itself, has any power to compel any change in U.S. law or regulation. It is up to the United States government to decide how it will respond, if at all, to WTO and NAFTA panel reports. Yesterday we considered a resolution calling on the European Union to bring measures that restrict the exports of U.S. beef and bananas into compliance with WTO obligations. The adoption of the Kucinich amendment would directly undermine these efforts to get the EU to come into compliance with its WTO obligations. This is a flawed amendment put forward by those who desire to build walls of protection around the United States, while sacrificing the benefits of a functioning international trading system for our workers and businesses. I urge a ``no'' vote on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Ohio.

Mr. CRANE

Mr. CRANE. Madam Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to our distinguished colleague, the gentleman from my home State of Illinois (Mr. Ewing), who was author of the original resolution that we have under consideration today. (Mr. EWING asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

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

Mr. CRANE. Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from New York (Mr. Gilman.) (Mr. GILMAN asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. CRANE. Madam Speaker, I would remind my colleague from Youngstown that we are trying to move in that direction, and I know it is not as fast as he would like, but we are. I would again remind him that we have been, to our dismay, at full employment for almost 3 years in a row now. Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Iowa (Mr. Latham).

Mr. CRANE. Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Nebraska (Mr. Bereuter), chairman of the Subcommittee on Asia and the Pacific of the Committee on International Relations. (Mr. BEREUTER asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. CRANE. Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Portman).

Mr. CRANE

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

Mr. CRANE. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I would simply remind my distinguished colleague the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Traficant) that I have seven daughters, and so these are issues of concern I think to any father. But let me remind my distinguished colleague also of the consideration of the H-1(b) visa vote forthcoming that would permit entry into this country with special visas of 65,000 skilled, skilled, workers because we cannot find them in our own labor force here in the United States. And I would urge that he look at Congress Daily, where it says, ``Business groups, especially high-tech companies, want to increase the current annual allotment of 65,000 H-1(b) visas per year to address what they say is a shortage of computer workers.'' And so we can have our honest disagreements on this. But I am so appreciative that the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Traficant) is, nonetheless, supporting this bill we have under consideration today.

Mr. CRANE. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I rise in strong support of H.R. 4342, a bill to make technical corrections and miscellaneous amendments to trade laws. H.R. 4342 is a package of miscellaneous trade provisions and other technical and clerical corrections that were introduced originally as separate bills. Collecting these highly technical miscellaneous bills into a single legislative package is an enormous task undertaken in each Congress. Given these difficulties, we have worked on developing and applying a set of consistent, transparent guidelines for handling miscellaneous trade proposals. The provisions in H.R. 4342 fall into two titles. The first title makes clerical corrections to trade laws. The second title of H.R. 4342 contains two subtitles. The first subtitle contains 112 various duty suspensions and tariff reductions. A large portion of the provisions in this section would temporarily suspend the duty on a variety of anti- HIV/AIDS and anti-cancer drugs. Other provisions temporarily suspend the duties on a wide array of chemicals, including many which are environmentally friendly substitutes for those containing toxic heavy metals. Another notable provision would provide for duty-free treatment to all participants and individuals associated with the 1999 International Special Olympics, the 1999 Women's World Cup Soccer, which, incidentally, will be held in my home State of Illinois, the 2001 International Special Olympics, the 2002 Salt Lake City Winter Olympics, and the 2002 Winter Para-Olympic Games. The package of trade bills has been thoroughly evaluated and commented on by all concerned parties, including the U.S. Customs Service, the Department of Commerce, the International Trade Commission, the United States Trade Representative, and the general public, including firms which may have an interest in a tariff suspension on a product they produce domestically, including those from Youngstown, Ohio. The provisions that remain in the bill are completely noncontroversial and revenue neutral, and many will enable U.S. firms to produce goods more competitively and cost efficiently. Accordingly, I urge my colleagues to support this package. Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. CRANE. Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous matter on H.R. 4342.