Nathan Deal

Mr. DEAL of Georgia

Mr. DEAL of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me time. Mr. Speaker, we are going to hear debates that are emotional, that are based on personal points of view and perceptions that we do not all agree with. But there is one point of view we should all agree with, and that is we are a nation of law. It is our responsibility to make that law. It is our responsibility to forge support for the concept of law. This is a situation, as I view it, in which the prerequisite that is indisputable for eligibility under 245(i) is that you be in violation of the law. Mr. Speaker, can one think of any other statute that we have that says to qualify for the provisions of this statute, you must be a law violator? I can only think of one. That is where, in order to get a pardon, you must be in violation of the law and we forgive your sins and pardon you. Mr. Speaker, that is what we are doing here. We are saying you are in violation of the law; no matter how well intended, no matter how many family members you have here, no matter how many employers you have that say they are willing to give you a job, you are in violation of the law. If we are a nation of laws, we ought to abide by it, respect it, and enforce respect on behalf of those who are citizens and noncitizens.

Mr. DEAL of Georgia

Mr. DEAL of Georgia. I thank the chairman. Mr. Chairman, I would urge the adoption of the Goodling amendment.

Mr. DEAL of Georgia. I yield to the gentleman from Pennsylvania.

Mr. DEAL of Georgia. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the requisite number of words. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the Goodling amendment. It is not a complicated issue that we are talking about here tonight. The issue is simply one of control. The power to test is the power to control. The power to determine whether we have validated through a testing process is the power to determine how that process is arrived at. I would suggest that what we are engaged in here now is, first of all, an unauthorized effort by the Department of Education at the Federal level to foist on the American public and on this Congress a testing procedure that has not been authorized. First of all, we should not allow the bypass of this congressional body to determine where the money is to be spent in education. But, second, I would suggest to my colleagues that this is a very clever way, and a very disguised hook; it is the beginning of a curve that leads to a circle. The chairman has outlined it partially in his testimony. The power to test and thereby to evaluate the test, if it is not a satisfactory result, then would dictate that Washington would have the power to determine the curriculum, since obviously the States and local communities were not properly addressing the curriculum since their test results were not appropriate. Also, if then by addressing the curriculum the test results are still not adequate, then the next step would be for the Federal Government in Washington and the Department of Education to address the selection and the training of the teachers who are administering the curriculum. Then, if the test results are still not appropriate, the next step would be obviously that the administration that is supervising the teachers who are teaching the curriculum and who are giving the test, if not adequate, then obviously Washington should assume responsibility for that as well. One can take this circle in ever-ending cycles and go right down to the fact that the ultimate result is that this is an effort for Washington to control education. It has traditionally been the responsibility of States and local communities; it should remain that way. I would suggest to the preceding speaker that the results of the children in my State of Georgia are best left to the determination of their local elected school boards, that it is best left to their elected State school superintendent and the State school board that works in conjunction with her, and that these are issues that we in our State can adequately address; and unless Washington is willing to assume all of the responsibility, which none of us I think want to see happen, that we should leave it at the level where it is of local and State responsibility.

Mr. DEAL of Georgia

Mr. DEAL of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I commend the gentleman and commend the subcommittee chairman and the staff for their hard work and to the minority for their hard work in the development of this piece of legislation. I rise in support of H.R. 5. As someone who is involved with education through my wife's teaching in a middle school in my district, I think that I can share with my colleagues the same concern that most administrators and teachers would say when they consider the Disabilities Act in terms of its impact on education. That specific area that I wish to touch on is the area of discipline. It is indeed difficult to balance and achieve a reasonable balance between those who suffer from disabilities and those who are being educated along with them who are not under those disabilities. In the area of discipline, it is a difficult subject. This bill provides some necessary relief. Under this legislation, if a child is involved with drugs or with a weapon and is a disability child, it increases to 45 days the time in which they may be placed in an alternative teaching environment. It also increases to 45 days the time in which a child that is involved in a disciplinary problem in which danger to other children is involved. Mr. Speaker, I commend the committee and thank the gentleman for yielding the time to me.

Mr. DEAL of Georgia

Mr. DEAL of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this time, and I commend the gentleman and the staff for their fine work in the bringing of this bill to the floor. I, too, like the speaker who preceded me, am not particularly fond of commissions, but this one is of short duration, 4 months, and will address some very serious issues that we need to be concerned about. We are spending $35 billion in Federal aid this year for student aid programs, but we also know that for many students who are graduating that the cost of loan repayments is a significant burden that they will face in the near future. This commission has some important questions to answer: What is the role of the Federal Government? Do we have a role? What can we do? Are there regulatory reforms that are called for that will slow down or reduce the cost of rising tuition? These are the kinds of questions that deserve our answers. These are the kinds of questions that must be answered before we reauthorize the Higher Education Act.

Mr. DEAL of Georgia

Mr. DEAL of Georgia. I am afraid so. Mr. Isakson is a businessman and he looks at it from that point of view. He said, if the dollars spent could be concentrated, there would be less disturbance and that more of the money would actually flow into education and out of administration. Let me give a classic example that we heard from, from a lady who was a director of an adult literacy services center in Dublin, GA. She said this, speaking of the grant process. In other words, when applying for a Federal grant for education, this is what she observed: ``The process is cumbersome and labor intensive. Writing the 1997 proposal consumed nearly two months of the literacy director's time. Measuring accountability in terms of performance rather than volume of paperwork is the best solution to the problem.'' We heard some very common sense, practical observations from people who have hands-on daily experience in delivering education to children in the classroom. Once again, I thank the gentleman for affording us this opportunity, and I thank the gentleman for allowing me to share these comments today.

Mr. DEAL of Georgia. First of all I want to join with my colleague from Georgia, Mr. Norwood, in his compliments to the gentleman from Michigan, Mr. Hoekstra, for holding the hearing in Georgia. We do regret the gentleman was unable to be there with us, but we appreciate his scheduling this Special Order. I want to share with my colleagues some of the comments, as my colleague from Georgia began doing a few minutes ago, as we listen to people at every level of the delivery system in our State. Even though we have a lot of progress to be made in Georgia, there are many things we are indeed proud of. One is we have a HOPE scholarship program. And unlike the fact that the President is borrowing and adopting the name of it for his proposal, the uniqueness of ours is that we have a funding source that is separate and distinct from the taxpayers' normal revenue stream. The lottery proceeds from our State fund it and it is a very successful program. Would it not be nice if there could be an alternative funding source to fund the President's proposal? I want to say to the gentleman that both my parents were public school teachers. They were classroom teachers. My wife is presently a 6th grade middle school teacher in our home county. So I have a genetic as well as a spousal bias toward where I think education dollars should flow, and that is to the classroom. There are three things that stood out in my mind as to what we heard last week. The first is that our schools are faced with greater social problems than they have ever been faced with before, and in order to overcome those social problems we need greater parental support as well as parental participation. The second thing was that discipline is a major problem in our school system, and all of us want to do what will help rather than what will hurt. As the gentleman knows, we are considering in the reauthorization of the IDEA program the issue of removing some of the Federal impediments to discipline that have put mandates and restraints that interfere with teachers and administrators in terms of discipline. Third is the flexibility in the use of Federal funds, the ability to design programs that meet local needs rather than having to meet a Federal mandate. Let me share just a few quotes with the gentleman of people who have made some observations about it. One was from Dr. Craig Dowling, a principal of an elementary school down in Valdosta, GA, when he said, ``Federal programs come with guidelines and strings that choke school improvement. Guidelines for a program such as Title I may help a school in Atlanta or Washington, DC, and totally disturb a school in south Georgia or the central plains.'' In terms of flexibility, I think the chairman of our State school board said it best, Mr. Johnny Isakson. He said this: ``There are far too many dollars scattered in far too many programs managed by far too many agencies.''

Mr. DEAL of Georgia

Mr. DEAL of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I submit the following for the Record: Democracy--Above and Beyond (By Adam Richardson) When Alexander Hamilton was a child, his family was traveling along the North Carolina coast by boat. He was so terrified of the surroundings he vowed that if he ever became capable, he would build a lighthouse so large and bright that all those that resided in its glow would have nothing to fear. In 1802 Hamilton as Secretary of the Treasury used his influence to get a lighthouse constructed on Cape Hatteras, and to this day it stands, the tallest on the East Coast. Our American democracy that we have built with our blood, sweat, and tears is much the same as this lighthouse. Democracy, like a lighthouse, starts with a dream and strong foundation. This foundation was made with the lives of the men and women who first dreamed the dream to allow democracy to soar above and beyond. As our democracy grows, we are indebted to be a caretaker of the lighthouse and keep it strong so that the ideal that we uphold, the beam of light, can be seen from farther away with the clarity it commands. This beam of light, seen first by our forefathers, led them out of oppressive darkness to thrive in unforeseen opportunity. But the obstacles were untold, and to aid others who would follow them, they built our lighthouse to carry their vision above and beyond. We were indeed fortunate to have received a raw country instead of being given one stifled in outdated institutions. Democracy still stands strong, yet it has its enemies. As a lighthouse is constructed, the salt, sand, wind and water attack it, intent on destruction. But when finished, a lighthouse is nearly indestructible and will stand up to the winds of change. When democracy stands tall and strong, it is the envy of its enemies and cannot be considered safe, because there is always a sea spray to diminish the radiance that gives democracy the ability to illuminate the darkness. The democratic vision stands above and reaches beyond all barriers--but not without a struggle. The waves of ignorance often inhibit the gains of democracy. In many countries a child goes without an education because religious differences hurl bullets through the schoolyard. In the former Yugoslavia 250,000 lives have been lost and millions displaced because of a campaign of ethnic cleansing. We in America are made strong by people with the same goals but not necessarily the same gods. Likewise, the winds of inequality topple the hopes of people in countries where one man's vote will not count as much as another's or possibly will not be counted at all. On the other side of the lighthouse, where all is calm, are the opportunities and the peace of mind that comes with a democratic nation. In America, like a harbor with its protected waters and secured ships, is a country with the betterment of the people the main issue. When democracy has fallen into rigidity, the government has always bent to refuse breaking--in the form of new laws, updating of old ones, and the acceptance of new schools of thought when the old way had proved itself ineffectual. Because this harbor is guarded by democracy and maintained by the power of the people, children can receive an education in the manner they should. Within this harbor a man goes to vote, and his ballot is cast without the worry, ``Will I be heard?'' or ``If so, will I be given a chance?'' Even though the wind and the waves can be kept out, certain elements cannot be held at bay. There is a fog that we cannot see through, even with attuned senses. If we leave this fog unattended, it will be our terrible demise. Many great civilizations have fallen to this killer that comes on cat feet. This killer that lurks in the fog is complacency. We must not become immune to what is going on around us because beyond the fog and beyond the safety of our democracy, the wind and waves are always surging. We must remain vigilant.

Mr. DEAL of Georgia

Mr. DEAL of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, the television set has become the primary delivery system for information and entertainment into the average home. Some of this information is objectionable when viewed by young children, but many families feel powerless to control this situation. Having participated in the critical viewing project sponsored by the cable television industry and the PTA, I want to commend these organizations for their efforts. The ``Taking Charge of Your TV'' video which was developed out of the critical viewing project, offers strategies and solutions to parents and families who want to make the TV a more positive instrument for the delivery of information and entertainment.

Mr. DEAL of Georgia

Mr. DEAL of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, too often we ignore the caldron of neglect, violence, and moral decay that pervades our society until its poison boils over into our own lives. On January 16, 1996, that occurred in my community of Gainesville, Hall County, GA, when a 19-month-old young boy, Austin Sparks, was brutally beaten to death by his baby-sitter. As we are now in this first anniversary period of Austin Sparks' death, the Hall County community has undertaken a campaign to fight child abuse by implementing the blue ribbon campaign in his memory. These small blue ribbons help remind us to be aware of child abuse every day of every year. Another positive that has come out of this tragedy is the purchase of a permanent home in Gainesville to assess the needs of abused children. The Children's Center will provide multiagency interviews for child abuse victims. We must all work together to end this cycle of child abuse in our country.

Mr. DEAL of Georgia

Mr. DEAL of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, we have heard a lot of terms here the today. One is unfairness. Let me talk about the greatest unfairness there is. That is those citizens and those legal immigrants who are finding their jobs taken away from them, who are finding their taxes increased to pay for the jobs that are going to those who are illegally in this country and the benefits that are going to them. There are a lot of things that we as Americans hold dear. One is citizenship. Those of us who are lucky to achieve it by the virtue of birth or those who have achieved it by virtue of immigration and naturalization. Another thing we hold dear is that we are a country that has a system of law. I submit to you that the ever-increasing tide of illegal immigrants undermines both of these things. Citizenship should not be cheapened. Respect for the law, which includes immigration laws, should not be denigrated. This bill is the first major step this institution has taken in the direction of dealing with illegal immigration in more than a decade. Is it perfect? Certainly not. But does it begin to restore the sanctity of citizenship and respect for the law, yes, it does.

Mr. DEAL of Georgia

Mr. DEAL of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding time to me. Mr. Speaker, I think it should be abundantly clear as a result of the debate on the previous bill and on this bill here that the enforcement of our immigration laws has a very low priority in the minds of some, and perhaps not the same degree of urgency that it has in the minds of others who have appeared before this body today to speak. I would simply say that we are dealing with two very separate and different issues here. One is truly the issue of unfunded mandates. By definition, we have traditionally thought of that as this body passing laws that have costs that are associated with other levels of government paying for them; namely, States and local communities. Here we are not talking about passing laws, we are talking about the failure of the Federal Government to enforce its existing laws, that is, namely, our immigration laws; and by failing to do so passing on, by virtue of court decisions, the costs to States and to local communities in the cost of education. If we are not serious about doing anything about unfunded mandates, then simply let us defeat this proposal. But if we are serious about it, then we should restore to the level of government that is having to pay for these decisions the power to make the decisions: namely, States and local communities. My State, like most States, I am sure, divides that cost up, the cost of education. In our State of Georgia roughly half of the cost is paid by the State, the other half being paid by local property taxpayers. We have heard a lot of talk about compassion here, compassion for children. I would submit to the Members, there is another element of compassion, the senior citizen, the widow who is fighting to hold onto her home, and every year sees her ad valorem taxes go up, and part of that reason, a significant part, being the cost of education. I would say that this is a matter of compassion, to restore to those who are paying the cost for our failure to enforce our immigration laws the ability to make a decision: Should they or should they not allow those who are illegally in our country to participate in the education system? That is a decision that they are paying for. They should have the right to make that choice. I say that is compassion. That is putting meaning into doing away with unfunded mandates.

Mr. DEAL

Mr. DEAL. I appreciate, first of all, your bringing this to the attention of this Congress, and at this appropriate time, as these 14 children, who are really orphaned as a result of this very tragic event, have been able to come to these Olympic games that are being hosted in our State of Georgia and our capital city of Atlanta. It is certainly appropriate I think for us all to remember these tragic events of the 1972 Olympic games, and certainly appropriate, as you have just done, to read the names of those who were tragically murdered in that event and to remember these 14 orphans who are here in the United States for these Olympic games. As Mr. Linder referred to earlier, I am pleased, as I know all of us are, that there will be a ceremony on July 28 at 7:30 at the Selig Center in Atlanta in which a memorial will be dedicated in memory of those who were slain in the 1972 Olympic games, the 11. It is being hosted by the Atlanta Jewish Federation, and certainly is an appropriate way of all of us remembering this particular tragedy that still has a cloud that hangs over the Olympic games, in spite of the fact that we have come very far in the years that have followed. But we are pleased that these children are here in our country and in our home State of Georgia and in our city of Atlanta for the Olympic games, and we want them to know that those of us here, especially those of us from the Georgia delegation in Congress, have not forgotten this event, and we welcome them to these Olympic games and to our country, and we want to assure them that as this memorial is dedicated this weekend, that we will all be remembering the ones that they lost in Munich. I thank you again for yielding me time and for bringing this matter to the attention of this body.

Mr. DEAL of Georgia

Mr. DEAL of Georgia. Mr. Chairman, I think the ultimate mandate of this Congress has been to try to balance the budget. I commend the chairman of the Committee on Appropriations and all of those others who have made Herculean efforts in that regard. We have done so in this body by reducing our staffs by a third. We have made other efforts. I would support this amendment. I remind my colleagues that no one who is affected by this amendment is an indentured servant. There are choices that all of us have the right to make. I would urge the adoption of the amendment.

Mr. DEAL of Georgia. I yield to the gentleman from Iowa.

Mr. DEAL of Georgia. Mr. Chairman, as the gentleman just mentioned, I rise to engage the distinguished chairman of the subcommittee in a colloquy with regard to the postal facility in Dalton, GA. Mr. Chairman, I want to bring to the gentleman's attention again the consideration of the situation in the postal facility in Dalton, GA. Dalton has become recognized internationally as the home of the carpet industry. As a result, tremendous growth in recent years has placed an enormous burden on the local post office. Traffic along South Thorton Avenue is often congested due to the overwhelming number of consumers that are lacking adequate parking spaces there. Automobile accidents have become a weekly occurrence. Not only is parking limited but also are the post office boxes. Currently, there is an unacceptable number of citizens and businesses on waiting lists that are in need of postal boxes. Much has changed in Dalton, GA, since 1966 when this postal facility was established. I would appreciate the committee's support in urging the U.S. Postal Service to consider building a new postal facility that provides safe, accessible, postal services which meet the needs of the Dalton community.

Mr. DEAL

Mr. DEAL. Mr. Chairman, my amendment likewise deals with the area of title I basic education funding. It would simply transfer $1 million out of the management administration account and even though there have been transfers pursuant to the previous amendment, I would point out that in this one Office of the Secretary, half of the 100 employees there perform press-related activities. I believe that an additional million dollar transfer would certainly be appropriate into the classroom to deal with title I basic education, Mr. Chairman, that this is a minimal thing that we can do to help those in the classroom level of education.

Mr. DEAL of Georgia

Mr. DEAL of Georgia. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.

Mr. DEAL of Georgia

Mr. DEAL of Georgia. I yield to the gentleman from California.

Mr. DEAL of Georgia. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word. Mr. Chairman, I rise to engage the distinguished chairman of the Subcommittee on VA, HUD and Independent Agencies of the Committee on Appropriations in a colloquy regarding language to encourage the establishment of an outpatient VA clinic in Gainesville, GA. This is an area located in rural Hall County, and there are close to 10,000 veterans who must travel over 200 miles to receive services at the VA hospital in Atlanta. This language was included under an amendment No. 4 to the statement of the managers in the conference report on VA-HUD appropriations in fiscal year 1996, that being H.R. 2099. I would ask the distinguished chairman if the committee would continue to encourage the outpatient VA clinic be established in Gainesville, GA?

Mr. DEAL of Georgia

Mr. DEAL of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, both gentlemen have adequately addressed this issue as to its purposes. I would simply like to elaborate that this is one of the oldest military parks in our country. It is on a major route that has been there for years. Unfortunately, U.S. Highway 27 goes through the middle of Chickamauga-Chattanooga National Battlefield, and when the State was in the process of widening this very important transportation corridor, which it has designs to do all way from the Tennessee border on the top of the State of Georgia all the way to the Florida border on the south, it required that, in order to expand this route, to either do so in the middle of the national military park or to attempt to bypass it. The decision was made in 1987 to build a bypass around the outskirts of the national military park, and it is for that purpose that this authorization is here today. Mr. Speaker, the cost of the project has increased from its original estimate, and this bill is for the purpose of reaching the authorization level that is currently projected as the cost of the project. The State of Georgia has been more than willing to pay its portion, and had done so and will continue to do so. I thank both gentlemen for their support of this legislation, and I would urge this Congress to pass this bill so this important project, around one of the most important national military battlefields, can be completed expeditiously. Mr. Speaker, I would like to begin by thanking the Resources Committee for bringing this bill up for consideration. H.R. 848 is a bill to increase the authorization of appropriations for the National Park Service to assist the State of Georgia in relocating a highway affecting the Chickamauga and Chattanooga National Military Park. I introduced this same bill during the 103d Congress as H.R. 3516. It passed the House by unanimous consent; however, the other body did not bring up the bill for a vote. The Chickamauga and Chattanooga National Military Park was established in 1890 to commemorate the Civil War military engagements which took place there and to allow opportunities for future study of these historic battles. The park was administered by the War Department until 1933 when jurisdiction was transferred to the National Park Service. In addition to its inspirational and commemorative values, the park is also used for military instruction, although this military activity was substantially curtailed following its transfer to the National Park Service. Today, the Army Command General Staff continues to bring field classes here to study the military strategies used during the battles. Specifically, this project reroutes a 3.7-mile section of U.S. Highway 27, which passes through the park by way of a 7-mile-long bypass around the western boundary. This rerouting is necessary to protect the natural and historic resources within the park from damages caused by heavy traffic. Highway 27 is a major north-south highway through the center of the Chickamauga National Military Park connecting Chattanooga, TN to Florida. It is a well traveled commuter route between northwest Georgia and Chattanooga. On average, 16,200 vehicles pass through the park each day by way of Highway 27. U.S. Highway 27 serves as a vital north-south link amoung the three States and its renewal is a top priority of the Georgia DOT. Highway 27 presently is undergoing construction from end to end in order to upgrade the highway for substantial commercial usage. When complete, Highway 27 will be a four-lane highway through rural areas of Georgia and will include five-lane bypass sections around urban areas with limited access. This is an ongoing construction project. Land acquisition is mostly completed and construction contracts have already been awarded. This includes current construction on two bridge structures. A halt in funding would increase future planning and construction costs and affect the overall completion date of this project. The original authorization was for $30 million. This bill increases the authorization by $21.9 million. The 1987 cost estimate provided by the Georgia Department of Transportation was based on aerial mapping and broad planning values. The 1993 cost estimate provided by the Federal Highway Administration is based on detailed surveys, computer designs, and geotechnical data from on-site investigation. More cut and fill work is required than was initially expected and a large quantity of rock will need to be hauled from the site. Bridge structure designs had to be changed based on geotechnical data and problems with subsurface base materials. Let me now explain to you how this is another example of the Federal bureaucracy getting in the States way and costing more money. The Georgia Department of Transportation originally wanted to widen the portion of U.S. 27 which went through the park. The Georgia DOT maintained that this plan was the most viable and environmentally attainable choice and also provided the best transportation service. This plan was estimated to cost approximately $3.9 million. In addition, the Georgia DOT was willing to pay for this project with State funds. However, the National Park Service would not agree to the State's plan. Instead, the Park Service advocated an alternative which would require that a bypass be built around the park. In 1987, Public Law 100-211 authorized this alternative at a cost of $30 million. This law authorized the National Park Service to assist the Georgia Department of Transportation in building the bypass around the park. The agreement between the Park Service and the Georgia DOT set up matching funds of 75 percent Federal to 25 percent State. To date, a total of $28.046 million in Federal funds has been appropriated through fiscal year 1996. The State of Georgia has contributed around $7 million to meet their end of the agreement. Let me remind you that the original cost estimate for this project was $3 million. I have news articles with me which show pictures of unfinished bridges. Other articles have been entitled ``Road To Nowhere.'' This is not the kind of thing which restores the public's faith and trust in their Government. In fact, it creates the very opposite opinion. The State of Georgia was more than willing to take on this project itself; however, the Federal Government would not allow this to occur. Therefore, the Federal Government has an obligation to Georgia to fulfill its part of the agreement.

Mr. DEAL of Georgia

Mr. DEAL of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I would briefly like to say that we should test this legislation by the light of reasonableness. When we do, I would ask the question, is it reasonable for punitive damages to be limited to a quarter of a million dollars or twice the compensatory damages? Most people think so. Is it reasonable to give injuries that have multiple defendants the right to decide how much each of those defendants should have to pay rather than having the one who may be the last culpable have to pay it all? Most people think that is reasonable. Is it reasonable to say a 2-year statute of limitations in which an action must be brought after the injury? Most people think so. Is it reasonable to have a 15-year statute of repose? The President had to go no further than a member of his own Cabinet, our former colleague in the previous Congress, Mr. Glickman, who led the efforts in the last Congress to try to save an industry in his district, a small aircraft industry, that was faced with a similar prospect of extinction to find that this is certainly reasonable. Based on the test of reasonableness, I would urge this Congress to override the President's veto. I thank the gentleman for yielding time to me.

Mr. DEAL of Georgia

Mr. DEAL of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding time to me. Mr. Speaker, there is one abiding fear that all parents share. That is the fear that something tragic will happen to their child. We pass laws to make sure that their childhood toys are safe and that they will not be swallowed and choked on. We pass laws to be sure that there are child restraints properly installed in the vehicles on which they ride. All of us hold our breath when they finally get to the age where they can begin to drive vehicles themselves. Mr. Speaker, this law today addresses an area of concern that haunts society. That is the possibility that their child will be victimized by someone who has previously done the same. If one of the purposes of government is to collectively protect ourselves better than we can do individually, then this law and its merits are very clear. I am pleased to rise in support of it. I commend the author, and I urge all of the Members of this body to vote for this very commonsense piece of legislation.

Mr. DEAL of Georgia

Mr. DEAL of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me time. I walked in and thought this was a debate about horticulture. I would suggest to the gentleman from California his analogy to the realm of the horticultural area would be more in the nature of sour grapes rather than fig leafs, however. Let us talk about the issue here, however. The issue is one that is important to our Nation and my State. I recently had an opportunity to visit one of the manufacturing plants in my State that utilizes the batteries that will be used in this recycling process. I think that H.R. 2024, which is the Mercury Containing and Rechargeable Battery Management Act, is the kind of bill all of us certainly will support. It would maximize the environmental protection and resource recovery through a vigorous voluntary recycling program. I think it is the kind of legislation that all of us should support in that it encourages people to do voluntarily both at the consumer level, at the retail level and at the manufacturer's level what all of us would like to do, and that is to reduce the toxins in our environment. H.R. 2024, the Mercury Containing and Rechargeable Battery Management Act, is a bill which maximizes environmental protection and resource recovery through a vigorous, voluntary recycling program. H.R. 2024 will make it more efficient, and less costly to handle batteries in an environmentally sound manner. It will phase out the use of mercury in batteries nationally and is consistent with many State laws. Last, H.R. 2024 is an important step in reducing toxics in the waste stream without imposing expensive mandates on local governments. The bill has enjoyed bipartisan support in both the House and Senate and is supported by the Clinton administration. I would like to make two additional comments in regard to this legislation that I hope the public will take note of. First, I would like to recognize and commend both the Republican and Democratic staff for their hard work in crafting a bill that all parties could agree on. While there may have been differences along the way, you established a common ground from which you could work together to develop a solution. It is unfortunate that bipartisan environmental efforts such as these are too often overlooked. Second, let me emphasize that Republicans are respectful of American's desire to protect the environment. We embrace opportunities to work with our colleagues across the aisle in any effort to strengthen and improve our Nation's environmental laws. H.R. 2024 is an important example of our commitment. It is my hope that the public will look beyond the political rhetoric and media bias that is typically associated with environmental legislation. The fact is that Republicans have the same environmental concerns as our constituents. H.R. 2024 is but one example of how we are addressing the issue of solid waste disposal. This is a bill that we can all be proud of. I believe that many more opportunities exist for me to return to this well and tell the public what Republicans are doing to protect the environment.