Phil Crane

Mr. CRANE

Mr. CRANE. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume to share another quote with my colleagues. It is in the vital interest of the United States that China continue to open and reform its economy and improve the quality of life of its citizens. We can advance that vital interest by continuing to extend normal trading relations to China. That was on June of this year by former Presidents Ford, Carter, Bush and 17 former U.S. Secretaries of State, Defense and National Security Advisers. Madam Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. English).

Mr. CRANE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I have another quote I want to share with my colleagues: If each person in China were to eat one more slice of bread every day, they would need 400 million bushels more. That is about what Kansas' entire output was last year. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to our distinguished colleague, the gentleman from Kansas (Mr. Ryun).

Mr. CRANE. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I know that we want to expedite this procedure, since I see some of my colleagues here, like the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Traficant), who has fought against MFN all these years; and now the gentleman from Nebraska (Mr. Christensen); and my good friend, the gentleman from California (Mr. Dana Rohrabacher) over here; because all of these people who have waged this battle want to make sure they are out here on the Capitol steps at 12:30 to catch the bus to go down to the White House, because at 1:30 the President will be signing the legislation that terminates MFN. We will never again be using that absurd language: Most Favored Nation. And so I know my friends here, who have fought this battle for years, are taking comfort in the realization that that label will be made a part of history and now we can get down to serious discussion about what we are really talking about, and that is normal trade relations. Big difference. Normal trade relations. So I would hope some of those who are so ecstatic over their victory today will pay some attention to some of the arguments. We heard some arguments earlier from my good friend, the gentleman from New York (Mr. Solomon), who was concerned about what was being exported to the United States from China versus what we were exporting over there. And we heard from the gentleman from California (Mr. Stark) to that effect, too. Some of the arguments advanced by the gentleman from New York (Mr. Solomon) were arguments that were advanced when the textile and apparel industry migrated from Burlington, Vermont, to south of the Mason-Dixon line. They did so for labor reasons and the cost of labor. And the textile and apparel industry has continued that flight, as my colleagues know, going down to the Caribbean and other countries because labor is cheaper in these areas where we are talking about a lack of skills. With regard to, for example, the majority of our imports from China, it is underwear, it is toys, it is also footwear. Those are products that are certainly not high-tech but, to be sure, they manufacture good underwear, they manufacture good shoes, and they manufacture good toys over there. Our exports to them, the majority of ours, are power generating equipment, air and spacecraft and electrical machinery. Now, my home State of Illinois exports over $1 billion a year of products to the mainland of China, and I would like to share some of these products with my good friend, the gentleman from California (Mr. Stark), over here, who I do not know how California is doing with regard to the breakdown of their list, but one of our big exports is scrap and waste. Scrap and waste. That is one of our big exports to mainland China. In addition to that, agricultural products, of course, is a biggie. We are an ag State. In addition to that, let me recite some of the big exports from the State of Illinois. Primary metals, stone, clay, and glass products, rubber and plastic products, chemical products, paper products, food products, electric and electronic equipment, industrial machines and computers. It is a wide range of goods that we in the State of Illinois are blessed in finding markets for. But that is not confined to my home State of Illinois, and I think that it is important for our colleagues involved in this debate to examine the breakdown in their own States of what their exports are; the component parts of their exports, but the magnitude of those exports. So I would urge my colleagues to go back now and review the possibility of expanding, not contracting, normal trade relations, and to do that we have to guarantee that we defeat H.J. Res. 121. Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. CRANE. Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. Dreier). (Mr. DREIER asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

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

Mr. CRANE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I would like to share one other quote with our colleagues here: I am optimistic about China, and the reason is because I believe China will meet the challenges it faces. I think it will add many new chapters to its modern success story. And in this, let me say, I hope the United States plays a positive role. This was former President George Bush in June of this year. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to our distinguished colleague, the gentlewoman from Washington (Ms. Dunn).

Mr. CRANE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I would remind colleagues on the floor and who are following this debate that if we are losing all these jobs, I do not know where we will find the labor force, since we have been at full employment for two years. But, in addition to that, on the religious persecution issue, to be sure there are restrictions that remain, but there are now an estimated 12 to 20 million Protestants in mainland China, 4 to 10 million Catholics, 100 million Buddhists, 18 million Muslims, and 2 to 3 million Taoists currently practicing their religion in China. There are more than 12,000 official Protestant churches and 25,000 homes or other unofficial meeting places where church services are held. Mr. Speaker, I yield two minutes to my distinguished colleague, the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Porter).

Mr. CRANE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I have another quotation I would like to share with my colleagues. ``No country has a larger interest than Taiwan in seeing prosperity take hold on the mainland, for prosperity will help push mainland China into becoming a responsible member of the international community. MFN is a useful tool in steering the PRC on the path to prosperity and eventually democracy.'' That is a quote from the Honorable Jeffrey Koo, Advisor to Taiwan Government, Chairman, Chinese National Association of Industry and Commerce, in May of this year. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to our distinguished colleague, the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Fox).

Mr. CRANE. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Madam Speaker, I have another quote I would like to share with my colleagues. It's critically important to have a broad range of contacts with China. The West should not try to isolate the communist regime . . . Economic change does influence political change. China's economic development will be good for the West, as well as for the Chinese people. China needs Most-Favored- Nation trade status with the United States and it should fully enter the world trading system. Madam Speaker, that quote is from Wang Dan, student leader, Tiananmen Square, July 6, 1998, and he spent all but 2 of the years since Tiananmen in prison in China. Madam Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Ramstad). (Mr. RAMSTAD asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. CRANE. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I have a quote I would like to share with my colleagues. A truly moral position would do two things. First, it would honor those who have fallen by pursuing their lost dreams and helping China reform from within. Second, it would open, not shut, the door to the message of freedom and God's love. Leaving 1 billion people in spiritual darkness punishes not the Chinese government, but the Chinese people. The only way to pursue morality is to engage China fully and openly as a friend. That quote was from the Reverend Pat Robertson on June 30 of this year. Madam Speaker, I yield 2\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Knollenberg).

Mr. CRANE. Madam Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Ewing), our good friend and colleague from my home State. (Mr. EWING asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. CRANE

Mr. CRANE. Mr. Speaker, this is an interesting experience. We had a debate on the floor yesterday and I was semi-joking about the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Yates) coming to Congress when I graduated from high school, but that was the same year that Lee Hamilton and I met each other in our freshman year in college. We were college chums together for a couple of years. Of course, we are going to be losing the gentleman from New York (Mr. Solomon) too, who retires after this year, and we have had our agreements and disagreements along the way on a lot of issues. But I am particularly proud of the eloquent presentation today by the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Hamilton) on behalf of maintaining our normal trade relations with China. It is probably the most important country that we can have relations with on the face of this Earth, and I say that because of what the future holds for China. In those years that I described, talking about the election of the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Yates), his first term here, and the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Hamilton) and I going off to college together, the fact of the matter is that was the beginning of the Great Leap Forward, that you remember cost 30 million Chinese lives from starvation. That is when they put the wall up, for all practical purposes, and locked out contact with civilized human beings. Then they did the Great Leap Forward after that for another decade, and hundreds of thousands of Chinese people were executed, put to death, for political reasons. Then Deng Xiaopeng finally took charge, and Deng Xiaopeng, to his credit, believed in what he referred to as Leninist capitalism, the ultimate oxymoron. What he passionately was embracing was free enterprise, he did it with a vengeance, and he turned China around. Today more Chinese people enjoy a higher standard of living than ever before in the 5,000 years of recorded history. It is providing hope and opportunity. A middle class has already developed in South China. Now, these are accomplishments that we can aid and abet with our presence and our influence. The Chinese have respect for us, and our leaders in this country, and this goes back to Gerry Ford, it goes back to Jimmy Carter, Ronald Reagan, George Bush, to the current occupant, Bill Clinton, they have all embraced going forward with this policy. It is not a partisan question. It is not Republican versus Democrat, it is what is in the best interest. We can have legitimate disagreements, as I have had with the gentleman from New York (Mr. Solomon) throughout the years, have disagreements on this. But I submit, if you look at the reforms taking place in China, and that is local democratic elections, one-third of the Chinese people have already participated in the democratic process, and they are not communists. In addition to that, as I say, the advancement of free enterprise, and the advancement also of religious freedom and what is going on there with a vengeance today, in contrast to not that long ago when this was impermissible, now an estimated 20 million Protestants, possibly as many as 10 million Catholics, 100 million Muslims, these are accomplishments that are far from perfect, but we know that it is movement in the right direction. I argue that trade relations provide that opportunity for personal contact, which ultimately has the most civilizing impact on mankind. I urge all Members to think long and hard and vote against this resolution.

Mr. CRANE

Mr. CRANE. Mr. Chairman, first I thank the gentleman from Oklahoma (Mr. Largent) for yielding me this time. Mr. Chairman, this is a little repetitious. We have been through this so many times. But I want to take advantage of an opportunity to pay tribute to a very distinguished colleague who was first elected to Congress when I graduated from high school. That is the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Yates). The gentleman is a dear friend. He has been a devoted and committed Member of this body. We sometimes have our disagreements on all kinds of issues, but I respect him profoundly and I wish him all the best. Let me add that I am totally opposed to this amendment. At the Constitutional Convention, the whole question came up of funding the arts and it was overwhelmingly rejected on the grounds that that is not an appropriate function of the national government. In 1965 we got into ``guns and butter.'' We got into funding everything. The national government swelled enormously, penetrating virtually every aspect of our lives. This is not a time to revive it; this is a time for downsizing, getting the national government out of our lives and getting folks back home more involved in participating in funding such things as the arts and humanities.

Mr. CRANE

Mr. CRANE. Mr. Speaker, on the evening of Wednesday, June 24th, I was away from the Capitol complex and was not notified of an impending vote. As a result, I was unable to record my vote on rollcall No. 266. Had I been present, I would have voted for H.R. 4103, The Department of Defense Appropriation bill. Indeed, I must compliment my colleague Bill Young, Chairman of the Appropriations Subcommittee on National Security, for his fine work on this legislation. There is no more important appropriations bill considered by Congress than the bill providing funding for the defense of our nation, and nobody takes his responsibility more seriously than Chairman Young. I look forward to Chairman Young bringing back a conference report mirroring the priorities in the House version of H.R. 4103, and, assuming that to be the case, I will proudly cast my vote in support of this legislation at that time.

Mr. CRANE

Mr. CRANE. Mr. Speaker, I rise to commend to the attention of my colleagues a bill I am introducing today which will correct an inequity in the tax code which punishes certain small businesses. The 1990 Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act taught Congress a number of tough lessons. At the time, I took on the leader of my party, then President Bush, and, along with every other House Republican, opposed the 1990 bill because of its huge tax increases. The bill enacted the infamous luxury taxes on boats, automobiles and other goods in order to ``tax the rich.'' What I predicted at the time was confirmed when the U.S. boat and aircraft industries were hit hard economically as a result of these so-called ``tax the rich'' policies. The rich were not harmed, rather U.S. workers were out of jobs when consumers stopped buying goods subject to luxury taxes. While Congress has since worked to repeal these harmful luxury taxes, there are a few remaining tax inequities from that 1990 bill. The federal gas guzzler tax attempted to force better gas mileage from automobiles in the U.S. by overtaxing cars that exceeded government mandated fuel economy standards. Congress in 1986 provided an exemption from the gas guzzler tax for small automobile manufacturers. Those benefitting from this tax relief were the small coach builders who modify existing automobiles into limousines. Unfortunately, the 1990 tax bill repealed this small business exemption, thus subjecting the small coach builders again to the gas guzzler tax. Like the other luxury taxes, the negative consequences of this new tax increase fell hardest on the workers of the coach building industry. In the late 1980s, there were 35 builders producing up to 9,000 autos. Today, only 12 builders remain and they produce less than 2,400 vehicles. The gas guzzler tax adds, on average, $1,800 to the cost of one of these vehicles. This cost must also be borne by the small businesses who operate limousine services and must replace a vehicle every 18 to 24 months. The bill I introduce today will restore that exemption for small coach builders from the gas guzzler tax. Specifically, my bill will exempt coach builders who annually manufacture fewer than 10,000 vehicles from this onerous tax. I urge my colleagues to join me in providing this tax relief for small businesses by cosponsoring this legislation.

Mr. CRANE

Mr. CRANE. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of H.R. 2676, the Internal Revenue Service Restructuring and Reform Act Conference Report. Number hearings during this Congress have opened up the IRS to public scrutiny. These hearings provided further proof that the IRS is out of control--something too many Americans already knew. Several witnesses testified only under the condition of anonymity for fear of retribution by rogue IRS agents. Among other abuses, we found that IRS employee performance was measured by the amount of money squeezed out of American taxpayers. This is hardly what we expect of the government of the world's leading democracy. The Republican-led Congress had enough of the countless stories from our constituents who have been mistreated in their dealings with the IRS and we felt it was high time to rein-in the agency. H.R. 2676 most importantly shifts the burden of proof to the IRS in disputes with taxpayers over an alleged tax liability. After this bill is enacted into law, no longer will Americans be guilty until they prove themselves innocent before the IRS. To maintain close scrutiny of the IRS' work, the bill establishes an oversight board comprised mostly of private-sector citizens. The board will also have input into the President's selection of the IRS commissioner. Other benefits taxpayers will enjoy from the enactment of this legislation include: relief for innocent spouses; elimination of penalties and interest on outstanding taxes in certain circumstances; and the ability to collect damages caused by rogue IRS employees. In addition, I would like to commend the Chairman of our Ways and Means Committee, Bill Archer, for two provisions he added in conference. First, I appreciate the addition of the language of my bill, H.R. 2316, to the conference report. This will correct a misnomer in U.S. trade law. The term ``most-favored-nation'' has been quite misleading because it has implied that we were extending benefits greater than the normal benefits we extend to our trading partners. The language in the conference report will change the terminology from ``most-favored-nation'' to ``normal trade relations'' or ``NTR.'' Rather than misleading the American people, we should call this trade treatment what it really is--merely ``normal.'' My Ways and Means Trade Subcommittee recently marked up H.R. 2316, and the issue has been debated in Congress for years. Second, the sorely-needed correction to the Administration provision from last year's Taxpayer Relief Act concerning the holding period for capital gains. I agree with the Chairman that the correct holding period ought to be 12, not 18, months for taxpayer to enjoy the lower capital gains tax rates. Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support this conference report and hope that the President will sign it into law.

Mr. CRANE

Mr. CRANE. Mr. Speaker, I rise to commend to the attention of my colleagues legislation that I am introducing today with my fellow Ways and Means Committee member, Robert Matsui. Quite simply, this bill will clarify the length of time which petroleum storage facilities are depreciated for tax purposes. Since 1981 the petroleum terminal industry has depreciated this property over a 5 year time period. Recently, however, the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) has challenged this practice. Instead, the IRS has suggested that the correct depreciable life for petroleum storage facilities is 15 years. My bill will end this debate and state that petroleum storage tanks may be depreciated over five years. Congress has changed the depreciation rules for numerous properties since 1981, but we have not acted to specifically change the depreciation rules for petroleum storage tanks. The petroleum storage industry has complied with the tax code in good faith, now only to be told the IRS wants to change the rules. The IRS is even instituting this change in selective cases through examinations. While we in Congress do give the IRS the authority to enforce the tax laws, only Congress, and specifically the House Ways and Means Committee, has the Constitutional authority to originate new tax laws. Enactment of this legislation will resolve this issue, and both the taxpayers in the petroleum storage industry as well as the IRS will be saved the millions of dollars which would otherwise be spent disputing the correct depreciation time. I urge my colleagues to join us in cosponsoring this important bill.

Mr. CRANE

Mr. CRANE. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of H.R. 3809, the Drug Free Borders Act of 1998. I am pleased that the House is taking up this important legislation which was reported by the Committee on Ways and Means on Thursday, May 14, by a bipartisan vote 29-0. I believe that H.R. 3809 will lead to a stronger and a more effective Customs Service better able to interdict illegal narcotics while still facilitating passengers and cargo through major land and sea ports. H.R. 3809 would increase the authorization for the U.S. Customs Service drug enforcement efforts by an additional $232 million over the President's request for fiscal year 1999. Within two years, H.R. 3809 would add 1,745 additional Customs inspectors, canine enforcement officers, special agents, intelligence analysts, and internal affairs agents to our Southern border with Mexico, our Northern border with Canada, southeast Florida seaports, and major metropolitan locations. It will target areas where significant drug smuggling, drug transportation and distribution networks, and money laundering operations exist. I am proud to help rebuild our nation's defense against drug smugglers that prey upon our children. In H.R. 3809, we have the ability to give Customs the tools it needs to meet this national goal. We must work to stop illicit drug use by strengthening the ability of the Customs Service to stop the flow of heroin, cocaine and other drugs into our country. Stopping drugs from entering the country and preventing drugs from getting into the hands our children must be a high priority of this Congress as well as the Customs Service. H.R. 3809 would also correct significant problems with the overtime and night time pay of Customs Officers and would devote any savings to additional drug enforcement. The Committee on Ways and Means Subcommittee on Trade, which I am privileged to Chair, held hearings on March 11, 1997, May 15, 1997, and again most recently on April 30, 1998. These hearings, at which the General Accounting Office, Department of the Treasury's Office of the Inspector General, as well as the National Treasury Employees Union testified, shed light upon some disturbing practices resulting from previous Congressional legislation and arbitral rulings. They found that in certain circumstances Customs pays its officers overtime, which is two times their regular rate of pay, when those officers are not even working. In some instances, Customs officers are also paid night pay for hours worked at noon or one in the afternoon. H.R. 3809 would not only resolve these problems but would use any overtime and night pay savings to pay for additional overtime for those officers already working to interdict cocaine, heroin and other drugs illegally entering the United States. This bill would also give Customs more flexibility in the operation of the fiscal year cap on overtime pay and at the same time allow Customs officers the opportunity to earn even more overtime. H.R. 3809 seeks to ensure that the Customs Service is not prevented from performing its legitimate drug interdiction efforts or that the integrity of the Customs Service is diminished. Customs must have every tool in its arsenal to ensure the integrity of its Customs officers. Specifically, granting the Secretary of the Treasury the authority to rotate up to 5 percent of Customs officers to new permanent duty locations each year starting in fiscal year 2000, will help guarantee the integrity of Customs officers and is similar to the authority Customs currently has for its special agents. This provision would become effective after the conclusion of the current contract between Customs and its union to ensure that it does not abrogate the terms of that contract, as some have argued it would. H.R. 3809 also addresses another serious weakness in the ability of Customs to interdict illegal narcotics. That weakness is Customs' current inability to implement certain measures while labor negotiations drag on, as they have for nearly four years in one case. The bill would allow the Commissioner of Customs to immediately implement any proposed changes without waiting 90 days for the parties to bargain. This would mean that Customs could respond in time to the dangerous changing tactics of drug smugglers. Contrary to statements made by the bill's opponents, this bill would not interfere with the union's bargaining rights or with other rights of the union, such as redress before the Federal Service Impasse panel. This bill gives Customs the flexibility to get to the battlefield on time and win the war on drugs. I urge my colleagues to support H.R. 3809 and stop drugs from destroying the lives of our children and grand children.

Mr. CRANE

Mr. CRANE. Mr. Chairman, I rise in reluctant opposition to H.R. 2431, the Freedom from Religious Persecution Act. As a Christian, I am always deeply concerned when reports surface about individuals and groups anywhere in the world being persecuted for their faith. However, like so many situations that face us in the international arena where we seek to change the behavior of other governments, legislation can often do more harm than good, both for the people we seek to help and for U.S. national interests. With respect to H.R. 2431, there is no evidence that the automatic sanctions triggered by the bill would do anything but incite further persecution in the divided and troubled countries that it is designed to condemn. Although the sanctions in the bill have been watered down during the many months this legislation was stalled in the International Relations Committee, the premise and structure of H.R. 2431 remain fundamentally flawed. The bill creates a mid-level bureaucracy within the State Department, the ``Office of Religious Persecution Monitoring,'' which would have extraordinary powers to publicly condemn and sanction a wide range of countries important to U.S. national security interests. The ``Office Director'' would be charged with identifying countries that engage in or tolerate religious persecution. Countries named as violators would be subject to an arbitrary, ``one size fits all'' list of trade sanctions including denial of U.S. foreign assistance, denial of visas, and prohibitions on U.S. exports and U.S. support for multilateral development bank assistance. The danger is that sanctions are automatic, can be waived by the President only in very narrow, extraordinary circumstances, and are limited to one year. Contrary to statements made by the bill's proponents, H.R. 2431 contains no authority for the President to waive sanctions if he determines that they would result in the loss of American jobs or otherwise have an adverse impact on U.S. economic interests. Under the bill, sanctions would be imposed on many governments that are important to U.S. trade, security and foreign policy interests. These countries include Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Indonesia and Morocco. The supporters of H.R. 2431 say that this bill will force foreign governments to improve their treatment of religious minorities and help alleviate egregious human rights abuses. Yet they fail to offer any evidence that this bill would be effective in achieving its intended result. In truth, the call for passing H.R. 2431 is not coming from persecuted religious minorities throughout the world. Indeed, many prominent religious leaders from countries this bill is designed to target recently traveled to Washington to warn us that the bill would only further divide them from the societies in which they live and struggle to worship freely. These leaders, such as the Rev. Canon Clement Janda, General Secretary of the All Africa Council of Churches and a native Sudanese Anglican priest, and The Rev. Dr. Joseph Pattiasina, General Secretary of the Communion of Churches in Indonesia, told me in the strongest possible terms that H.R. 2431 would exacerbate tensions between Christians and Muslims in their respective countries. Christians and clergy working in China, Saudi Arabia and Egypt say that the bill would make their plight worse, not better. For example, the United Church of Christ, which has supported missionary work for decades in many Middle Eastern countries, writes: ``By using U.S. power to accuse all Muslim countries of religious persecution, . . . radical Muslims will be strengthened in their efforts to associate Christianity with the West.'' Religious minorities and missionaries who have dedicated their lives to Christian education abroad fear that their work will be undermined because their host governments will blame them for the imposition of sanctions under this bill. Rev. Billy Graham's son, Nelson Graham, who heads a large, successful Christian missionary program in China, wrote to urge Congress to reconsider this legislation because of the potential harm it could do to both American missionaries and to indigenous religious organizations in China, as well as in other targeted countries. He believes these groups were given no opportunity to participate in the development of H.R. 2431. The National Council of Churches, which represents 34 Protestant denominations (including the Methodists, Lutherans and Presbyterians) with an aggregate membership of 53 million Americans, also strongly opposes this legislation because it does not take into account the concerns of a broad spectrum of religious leaders who are ``on the ground'' fighting religious persecution overseas. Mr. Chairman, unilateral trade sanctions are dangerous because they appeal to an emotional need in all of us to condemn reprehensible behavior in the strongest possible terms. Yet history has shown that unilateral trade sanctions rarely, if ever, succeed in changing rogue behavior. In my view, the United States has been the most successful in advancing our values of religious freedom and democracy by remaining active in countries where these principles are not well-established. A policy of engagement fosters expanded opportunities to spread the Christian message through direct contacts that would be denied to us if we pursue a policy of isolating countries through punative economic sanctions. Because there is strong evidence that the sanctions proposed in this bill would do more harm than good to religious minorities and American missionaries working abroad, I am opposed to H.R. 2431.

Mr. CRANE

Mr. CRANE. Mr. Speaker, I am proud to add another line of defense in our Nation's war against drugs by introducing legislation today to strengthen drug interdiction efforts by the U.S. Customs Service. As my colleagues know, drug use, particularly among teenagers, is widespread and skyrocketing. A critical prong in Congress' attack on illicit drug use is stopping the flow of drugs across our nation's borders before they fall into the hands of our children. As the Federal agency responsible for protecting the nation's borders, the U.S. Customs Service is our front line in fighting the war on drugs. Customs seized nearly 1 million pounds of illegal drugs last year, more than all other Federal agencies combined. In 1997 alone, over 118 million automobiles, 9.3 million trucks, 321,000 railcars and 4.5 million sea containers entered the United States creating an enormous window of opportunity for drug smugglers and a massive drug enforcement dilemma for Customs. To provide Customs with the necessary resources to police our borders, my legislation authorizes a significant increase in the number of inspectors and narcotics detection equipment along the U.S. borders with Mexico and Canada, as well as providing additional personnel and equipment at Florida and Gulf Coast Seaports and major metropolitan drug distribution centers such as Chicago, New York, Miami and Los Angeles. The war on drugs is winnable, but it can't be fought with words alone. My anti-drug smuggling bill supplies Customs with the necessary arsenal to defeat the ugly scourge that is casting a dark shadow over our nation.

Mr. CRANE

Mr. CRANE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize several special business leaders in my district who will be honored today by the Rolling Meadows Chamber of Commerce. Tom Rivera, President of Greater Woodfield Convention and Visitors' Bureau, will be honored as the 1997 Business Leader of the Year. Under Tom's guidance, the Bureau has grown to serve 13 northwest suburban communities, and produces more than $25 million in tourism business for the Greater Woodfield area. In addition, Tom is an active member of the boards of Northwest 2001 and the Northwest Cultural Council. He also serves as the Co-Chair of the Illinois International Convention Center Authority and ``The Friends of the Northwest Suburbs.'' For the past four years, he has been the President of ``Visit Illinois,'' the state's public and private sector tourism association which engaged in marketing, lobbying and educational efforts on behalf of Illinois' tourism industry. In 1995, I was pleased to appoint him to serve on the White House Conference on Travel and Tourism. Tom is certainly an expert in his field and contributes a great deal to the Rolling Meadows community. Mr. John Conyers, Superintendent of Community Consolidated School District 15 will be honored as the 1997 Community Leader of the Year. John is a dedicated educator, having been a classroom teacher and principal in inner-city and suburban schools. He is a member of the Advisory Committee to the State Superintendent of Schools, and also serves on the board of the Palatine Township Senior Citizen Council as well as the Roosevelt University-Robin Campus Community Advising Board. In addition, he serves on the Board of Representatives of the Northwest Suburban Education to Careers Partnership. John also has had articles published in several well-respected educational trade journals, and has served as a member of the State of Illinois Governor's Commission on Japanese Economy and Educational Interchange. Through John's participation, School District 15 has received a due amount of recognition of its excellence. Incredible Technologies, Inc. will be honored as the Small Business of the Year for 1997. The company is the coin-operated game manufacturer of the popular Golden Tee 3D Golf game. The success of its games has earned the company a reputation for being able to develop innovative games that consumers enjoy playing. The company, and its owners Elaine and Richard Ditton, have been in the Rolling Meadows business community since 1993. The City of Rolling Meadows has been selected to receive the 1997 Business Beautification Award. In the past four years, the City Council has transformed a virtually unidentifiable downtown area into a place that area residents are proud of. A key improvement was a new community events sign, located in the downtown area, which has an electronic message board to relay messages related to city events and activities. Also receiving the 1997 Business Beautification Award is the Harris Bank Arlington-Meadows, a long-time member of the Rolling Meadows community. The new building constructed in 1997 has given great appeal to the local downtown area. This state-of-the-art banking center adds convenience to residents' lives as well. Mr. Speaker, I would like to congratulate these leaders of Rolling Meadows for their hard work and dedication. Rolling Meadows and the Eighth Congressional District of Illinois is a better place to live because of them.

Mr. CRANE

Mr. CRANE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H.R. 3546, the National Dialogue on Social Security Act. This legislation could not be more timely with the announcement yesterday that in the year 2032, the Social Security Fund will be exhausted. We must take action to address the long-term needs of the Social Security system and it must be done so that Americans are confident they will have a reliable source of income during their retirement years. The intent of this bill is to create a bipartisan, eight-member panel which will report its recommendations on long-term changes to Congress by February 1, 1999. The other important component of H.R. 3546 is to initiate and coordinate a truly inclusive national dialogue which will also issue a report. The national dialogue will allow representatives of all Americans, from the children of the Great Depression to the children of the third millenium, to participate in a process affecting their future. It is my strong belief that proposals to incorporate the private sector and promoting options can be developed that will, at the same time, ensure that the current beneficiaries continue to receive the benefits they have been promised. In any event, I look forward to receiving the panel's recommendations at the appropriate time.

Mr. CRANE

Mr. CRANE. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of H.J. Res. 111, the Tax Limitation Constitutional Amendment. Since I was first elected to this body, I have fought against the growth of government in Washington. For most of my tenure, that fight was an uphill battle, and our rising debt and annual deficits were testaments to that fact. The last time our government enjoyed a budget surplus was the year I was first elected to Congress, 1969. Until recent years, Congress has been to blame for the lack of fiscal discipline, not the taxpayers. Even though we are enjoying a budget surplus, Americans have the highest tax burden since World War II. Quite simply, the Tax Limitation Amendment proposes a constitutional amendment requiring a two-thirds majority vote of both the House and Senate for passage of a bill that would raise taxes, except in the case of war. Even taxes that were increased as a result of the United States involvement in a war would be in effect for no more than 2 years. That provision alone would have forced Congress after World War II to revisit the high taxes, and the implementation of mandatory tax withholding, that helped to fund our victory over tyranny, but which were unnecessary after peace was achieved. Since 1980, four of the five tax increase bills passed with less than a two-thirds majority. The last tax increase, the 1993 Clinton tax increase, was the largest in America's history. That bill passed both Houses by a two-vote margin. Although it will do nothing to redress past tax increases, a supermajority requirement will protect the American taxpayers from future Congresses. To those who have reservations or objections to making this part of the Constitution, I assure you that the Tax Limitation Amendment is completely consistent with that document. The Constitution demands that Congress consider important matters such as overriding presidential vetoes and passing constitutional amendments by two-thirds majorities. Certainly, protecting the wallets of American taxpayers from profligate Washington spending is just as important. I urge my colleagues to join me in voting for the Tax Limitation Amendment.

Mr. CRANE

Mr. CRANE. Mr. Chairman, three years ago, when the Contract with America was being debated, had somebody told me that this Congress would seriously consider, much less adopt, legislation calling for a 40% increase in highway spending, I would have said ``only on April Fools Day.'' Well, here it is, April 1, 1998, and what do we have on the Floor but a bill fitting that description that stands a good chance of being approved. Is it a joke? No indeed. Whatever people may think of it, the Building Efficient Surface Transportation and Equity Act (BESTEA) we are considering today is a very real and a very attractive proposal for a number of reasons. First of all, BESTEA meets a clear need, the need for better roads, safer bridges and relief from the incessant traffic congestion that plagues Chicago and many other urban areas of this country. Second, the legislation deals with several rather obvious inequities, one being the expenditure of federal gas taxes for purposes other than those intended and another being that not all states receive a fair return on their gas tax contributions. Third, the bill addresses these inequities in a way that is not only generous but is designed to prevent their recurrence. And fourth, almost every state and four congressional districts out of every five stand to benefit from that generosity and from the inclusion of nearly 1,800 demonstration projects in the legislation. So what is the problem? Put simply, the problem is the way BESTEA, or H.R. 2400 as it is otherwise known, goes about those tasks. Yes, BESTEA meets a need, but that need can be met without shattering the balanced budget agreement by a $26 billion margin. Yes, BESTEA corrects several inequities, but there are other ways those can be addressed besides setting a spending increase precedent so monumental that many other special interest groups will be tempted to seek similar treatment. Yes, BESTEA is generous, but is being so generous to ourselves fair to future generations who will have to pay the bill for any deficits that may result? Yes, BESTEA calls for budget cuts to offset those spending increases, but it does not specify what they are or guarantee that they will be in the bill when it is enacted into law. Yes, BESTEA has state and local appeal but, at the same time, it is so expensive and so replete with demonstration projects that it threatens the nation's fiscal interests. And yes, it may be easier to pass a bill like BESTEA that increases spending enough to make everybody happy in the short term than it is to adopt a measure that develops priorities, makes choices and promotes fiscal year responsibility over the long run. But expediency should not be the determining factor when it comes to surface transportation legislation. Instead, our decisions should be primarily based on the very same need for fiscal restraint and responsibility that caused many of us to seek, and be elected to, public office in the first place. Otherwise put, that means taking into account the fact that Uncle Sam has been running in the red for 30 years, may continue to run in the red if we are not careful, and has accumulated a $5.5 trillion national debt that should be reduced if its forbidding consequences are not to hang like the Sword of Damocles over the heads of our children and grandchildren. Like many other Members, I cannot help but be impressed by what H.R. 2400 could do in the short term for my state and locality. Not only that but I like the idea of taking the Highway Trust Fund off budget, which BESTEA would accomplish. However, last year's balanced budget agreement, which BESTEA would shred, provides for a 20% increase in surface transportation spending which should be sufficient to fund the most pressing infrastructure needs and the most deserving of the demonstration projects. Moreover, the sanctity of the Highway Trust Fund can be restored by reducing gas taxes to the level of annual appropriations rather than by increasing spending so as to consume all of those revenues. Furthermore, enactment of H.R. 2400 would appear to be entirely inconsistent with the tenets of fiscal responsibility and restraint to which the majority in this Congress has heretofore adhered. To many, it might smack of hypocrisy. For all those reasons, I find myself obliged to oppose this edition of BESTEA. While it is possible that some of its excesses might be addressed in conference, there is no assurance that they will be corrected or that others will not be added. Worse yet, approval of this bill by the House of Representatives would send absolutely the wrong message about our future fiscal intentions. Accordingly, we should return this bill to committee so that it can be scaled back to a level that allows necessary infrastructure improvements to be made but is in keeping with the balanced budget agreement. Granted, that will not be easy and could take some time, but far better that than the alternative. Believe me, our children and grandchildren will thank us for looking beyond our immediate interests to their prospects as well.

Mr. CRANE

Mr. CRANE. Mr. Speaker, on March 17, 1998 I was granted a leave of absence to be in Illinois for the state primary elections. If I were able to be present on that day, I would have voted ``yea'' on rollcall number 54 regarding the passage of H. Res. 364, a resolution urging the President to seek a United Nations resolution criticizing the human rights situation in the People's Republic of China.