Nathan Deal

Mr. DEAL of Georgia

Mr. DEAL of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as she may consume to the gentlewoman from Maryland (Mrs. Morella).

Mr. DEAL of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and agree to the concurrent resolution (H. Con. Res. 194) recognizing the contributions of 4-H Clubs and their members to voluntary community service.

Mr. DEAL of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, every day we hear more about the challenges currently facing our young people in society. However, today I am proud to bring good news about America's youth by specifically recognizing the 7 million young citizens who are involved in 4-H programs through this resolution. The roots of 4-H began at the turn of the 20th century when progressive educators started to emphasize the need of young people and to introduce nature study as a basis for a better agricultural education. The 4-H program was founded sometime between 1900 and 1910 to provide local educational clubs for rural youth from ages 9 through 19 years. The program was designed to teach better home economics and agricultural techniques and to foster character development and good citizenship. Boys and girls clubs and leagues were established in schools and churches to meet these needs. Farmers saw the practical benefits, and public support and enthusiasm for 4-H, therefore, grew throughout the Nation. The program is administered by the Cooperative Extension Service of the United States Department of Agriculture, state land grant universities, and county governments. For nearly a hundred years over 45 million Americans, myself and many other Members of this body included, in some 3,150 counties have subscribed to the 4-H philosophy of learning by doing. In all projects, 4-H members strive to develop and improve the four H's: head, heart, hands, and health that not only make themselves better citizens but, through volunteer service, 4-H members make America's cities, towns, and farms better places to live. To keep up with the wide range of interests of today's young people, the 4-H program has diversified tremendously. Its agricultural heritage is still alive and well, but today's 4-H members also design Web pages, participate in mock legislatures, organize community clean-ups, and deliver speeches. The 4-H Youth Development Program continues to make great contributions toward the development of well-rounded youth. By this resolution we congratulate them and recognize this ongoing contribution. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. DEAL of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Nebraska (Mr. Barrett).

Mr. DEAL of Georgia

Mr. DEAL of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that in the engrossment of the bill, H.R. 2, that the Clerk be authorized to make technical corrections and conforming changes to the bill.

Mr. DEAL of Georgia

Mr. DEAL of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this time. I rise in opposition to the motion to instruct and simply would compliment the conferees for hopefully keeping in section 110. We are all aware of the illegal immigration problem on our southern border, but we are also becoming increasingly aware of the problem on our northern border. We have read the stories of the boatloads of Chinese who are landing there with the hopes of crossing the Canadian border into the United States. For those who simply say it is an illegal immigration problem, the 2 million or more of the 5 million illegally in this country are estimated to be overstays of visas that were lawfully granted to them. So overstay is a problem because they recognize that once they get here, the INS has no effective way of being sure that they leave. To those who say that they do not like section 110, I would simply say provide us with a better alternative. The answer is not simply to abolish what is now in the law, waiting for its implementation, and that has been extended by the way, but to simply say, ``Okay, if you don't like our solution to it, give us a better one.'' Do not just simply throw up your hands and say we cannot do anything about it. The American public wants us to solve the problem.

Mr. DEAL of Georgia

Mr. DEAL of Georgia. Madam Speaker, for the consideration on the floor today of an issue important to the State of Georgia and myself. H.R. 2140 is legislation I introduced earlier this year to improve the protection and management of the Chattahoochee River National Recreation Area. The Chattahoochee River National Recreation Area was established August 15, 1978, and boundary adjustments were made in October 1984. The recreation area is along a 48-mile stretch of the Chattahoochee River within four counties, north and northeast of Atlanta, Georgia. The area immediately adjacent to the park is being heavily developed, and Forsyth County (which I represent) is the fastest growing county in the United States. The park currently contains about 9,238 acres of which approximately 4,500 are Federally owned. Presently, the park includes thirteen separate land units. Popular recreational activities in the park include fishing, hiking, picnicking, canoeing, rafting, tubing, and boating. It also contains a number of natural habitats, 19th century historic sites and ruins, as well as Native American archaeological sites. Annual visitation is about 3.5 million visitors. My legislation would modify the boundaries of the Chattahoochee River National Recreation Area and authorize the creation of a greenway buffer between the river and private development to prevent further pollution, provide flood and erosion control, and maintain water quality for safe drinking water and for the fish and wildlife dependent on the river system. In addition, this legislation promotes private- public partnerships by authorizing $25 million in federal funds for land acquisition for the recreation area. The $25 million will be matched by private funds. The State of Georgia, private foundations, corporate entities, private individual, and others have already given or pledged tens of millions of dollars to protect and preserve the Chattahoochee river for future generations of Georgians to enjoy. At the same time, it includes an ``any willing seller'' provision to protect private property rights of landowners. Last year, in anticipation of passage of this legislation, Congress made available $25 million for land acquisition in the Chattahoochee River National Recreation Area. That funding is serving to leverage state, local government, and private funding to further augment land purchases in the recreation area. However, legislative authority expanding the boundaries is needed before the additional land can be purchased. We can help preserve one of Georgia's most vital natural resources by enacting H.R. 2140. Similar legislation was introduced in the House and Senate during the 105th Congress. As most of you know, the House passed the legislation in October 1998, however the Senate did not act on the measure. During this Congress, Senator Coverdell introduced the companion bill to H.R. 2140 (S. 109), and the bill was reported on June 7, 1999 by the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. I believe it is crucial for the House to act quickly on this legislation in order to protect the Chattahoochee River from further development and environmental damage. Again, thank you Madam Speaker, and thank you to the Resources Committee members and staff for all the help they provided with H.R. 2140. I would also like to thank Representative Isakson for his assistance in protecting one of Georgia's most vital, natural resources.

Mr. DEAL of Georgia

Mr. DEAL of Georgia. Madam Speaker, I rise today in honor of the National 4-H Club. October 3 through 9 is designated as National 4-H Week. Across the country this week, the youth are marking the 97th year of this organization and are asking the question with the theme: Are you into it? The theme is embraced by more than 6.5 million young Americans who take part in 4-H educational programs. It is time to celebrate the diversity of 4-H activities and people, and to recognize the achievements of youth who strive to develop the four Hs: head, heart, hands, and health. Founded in 1902 as an agricultural youth organization, 4-H is no longer just cows and plows. To keep up with the wide range of interests of today's youth, 4-H programs have diversified and include such things as designing web pages, participating in mock legislatures, community cleanups, and so forth. Since its beginning nearly 100 years ago in rural America, about 45 million Americans from all walks of life have been involved in 4-H. Madam Speaker, I have authored a resolution in honor of the 4-H clubs of America as we congratulate their members.

Mr. DEAL of Georgia

Mr. DEAL of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to introduce Seniors Mental Health Access Improvement Act of 1999. I urge support of this important legislation to address the mental health needs of our nation's elderly population. According to the National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH), nearly 2 million Americans over the age of 65 suffer from depression. Timely and appropriate access to mental health services is a critical component in depression treatment and suicide prevention. Unfortunately, many of those two million older Americans do not have access to appropriate mental health services or, if they do have access, the mental health provider available to them is not covered by the Medicare program. Failure to treat depression has devastating consequences. It is a national tragedy that one of the highest rates of suicide in the United States is found in white males over the age of 85. Depression is treatable and suicide preventable if we make mental health services more readily available to the Medicare population. The legislation Representative Strickland and I introduce today is an important step in the battle to improve mental health services access for older Americans. The Seniors Mental Health Access Improvement Act would authorize Medicare Part B coverage of marriage and family therapists (MFTs). For many years, the Federal Government has recognized a core group of mental health providers. The five groups of professionals are: psychiatrists, psychologists, social workers, psychiatric nurses, and marriage and family therapists. When assessing the availability of mental health services, the Federal Office of Shortage Designation (OSD) determines the availability of each one of these health professionals when determining whether a community should be considered a Mental Health Professional Shortage Area. According to OSD, nearly 50 million Americans currently reside in areas designated by the Federal Government as a Mental Health Professional Shortage Area. Unfortunately, while many older Americans may live in an area the Federal Government has determined to have an adequate supply of mental health professionals, the reality may be something quite different. You see, Mr. Speaker, of the five core mental professionals I mentioned earlier, all but one are covered by the Medicare program. Marriage and family therapists are the only mental health professional not recognized by Medicare. The Seniors Mental Health Access and Improvement Act seeks to correct this oversight Many may hold a common misconception that marriage and family therapists only deal with marital strife or family communication problems. In fact, like psychologists and social workers, marriage and family therapists provide a full range of mental health services. When you examine the state laws governing social workers and marriage and family therapists, my colleagues will find that the education and training criteria for licensure as a social worker is often identical to the requirements for licensure and certification as a marriage and family therapist. In other words, like social workers, marriage and family therapists are educated and trained to diagnose and treat those mental disorders and services currently covered by the Medical program. Currently, 42 states license or certify marriage and family therapists, and legislation is either pending or anticipated in the remaining 8 states. In each of these states, the standards of licensure or certification are virtually identical to the standards for licensure or certification as a social worker: possession of a Master's degree or Ph.D. from a recognized program for marriage and family therapy or a related field and at least two years of supervised clinical experience in marriage and family therapy. In the 8 states where licensure or certification has not been achieved. MFTs are able to practice if they are eligible for clinical membership in the American Association for Marriage and Family Therapy which is the national certifying body for marriage and family therapists. Although the name might suggest that the scope of services MFTs provide would be limited to problems arising due to marriage, their title merely refers to the context in which they treat common mental disorders. For example, research has shown that one of the greatest risk factors for depression is family stressors. In addition, the likelihood of relapse is more likely when family stressors are not addressed in treatment. MFTs treat the individual in the context of their spousal and family relationships. Such as approach not only affords the provider a better context in which to deal with the underlying problem, but increases the likelihood for a successful outcome. I want to make it clear to my colleagues that the proposal we are putting forward today does not expand the scope of mental health services currently available to Medicare beneficiaries. Our proposal would simply state that when a marriage and family therapist providers a mental health service to a Medicare beneficiary that is covered by Medicare when provided by a psychiatrist, psychologist, social worker or psychiatric nurse, then the same service is covered if provided by a marriage and family therapist. Equally important, when the marriage and family therapist provides a covered service to a Medicare beneficiary, the fee paid shall be 75% of what has been paid by Medicare had the service been provided by a psychiatrist or psychologist. Our proposal, Mr. Speaker, is modeled after earlier laws passed by Congress relating to Medicare coverage of mental health services provided by psychologists and social workers. Individuals must meet certain minimum educational standards, as well as compete clinical experience requirements and be licensed or certified by the state as a marriage and family therapist. In the event the individual provides services in a state that does not license MFTs, the therapist would be required to meet equal education and experience qualifications, adhere to standards determined by the Secretary of Health and Human Services, and be eligible for clinical membership in the American Association for Marriage and Family Therapy. Mr. Speaker, I suspect that many of my colleagues would be surprised to learn that much of their Congressional Districts may be considered Mental Health Professional Shortage Areas by the federal government. Indeed, in my own rural district, all 20 counties are considered Mental Health Professional Shortage Areas. The time has come to correct the oversight in the Medicare law and treat marriage and family therapists the same way we treat other mental health professionals. Millions of Medicare beneficiaries could benefit from being able to receive their covered mental health services from a marriage and family therapist. Equally important, I believe the Medicare program could benefit by covering these individuals. We have an opportunity to make an investment to improve access to mental health services for the Medicare population. Failure to make this investment now could result in far higher Medicare expenditures in the future, but more importantly, many mental disordered that could have been successfully handled by a marriage and family therapist will go untreated. If this is allowed to happen, the human toll, as well as the financial toll, will steadily increase. I welcome my colleagues' support for this important legislation, and I look forward to working with both the Commerce and Way and Means Committees to secure the bills' adoption.

Mr. DEAL of Georgia

Mr. DEAL of Georgia. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment made in order under the rule.

Mr. DEAL of Georgia. Mr. Chairman, how much time is remaining?

Mr. DEAL of Georgia. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Traficant).

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

Mr. DEAL of Georgia. Mr. Chairman, I wish to express my appreciation to the chairman of the subcommittee and to the ranking member of the subcommittee with regard to this amendment. The problem this amendment addresses is the fact that there are thousands of individuals who are criminal aliens that are being detained in U.S. detention facilities that are in a limbo status. Currently, we have over 3,300 individuals in those detention facilities that are deportable criminal aliens. The reason that they are in a deportable status and in limbo is the fact their native countries refuse to accept their return. It is estimated that the cost of these being detained indefinitely is in excess of $80 million a year. What this amendment does is simply put further teeth in the law that was recognized and passed by this Congress years ago. The current law states that if the Attorney General notifies the Secretary of State that a country refuses to accept a deportable alien back, that the suspension will take place as to the processing of visas for individuals of that country until the deportees are allowed to return. This amendment simply puts further teeth that the funding for that purpose will be withheld until the country accepts their citizens back.

Mr. DEAL of Georgia. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding time to me. Too often when issues like this that have moral or religious overtones are raised here, they are rejected on theories of constitutional purity. The constitutional prohibition, for example, against the establishment of religions, or the companion philosophy of separation of church and State, many times become excuses for avoiding debates that focus on morality and character of citizens. I believe that the erection of these phrases as roadblocks to such discussions is wrong and does a disservice to the intentions of our Founding Fathers, who never intended that governmental interaction with its people be sanitized of all religious flavors. In fact, I think they intended exactly the opposite. They understood that it was the multitude of religious beliefs that undergirded the character of the citizenry. This amendment simply makes one small statement of reaffirmation of that concept by prohibiting those who receive funds through the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention from using those funds to undermine or denigrate the religious beliefs of children or adults who participate in the programs. I urge support for the amendment.

Mr. DEAL of Georgia

Mr. DEAL of Georgia. Mr. Chairman, as the chairman indicated, we have a serious problem in this country with regard to individuals who are noncitizens who have been arrested for serious felonies and have been ordered deported. They are then in the custody of the Immigration and Naturalization Service pending the acceptance back by their country of their citizenship. Unfortunately, we have many countries, well over 100 countries now, who have either refused to accept their citizens back or are unduly delaying the process of accepting them back, over 3,300 people, and we are adding approximately 60 every month to this list. These are individuals who are having to be detained in our Federal detention facilities at a cost of about $67 a day, and the cost on an annual basis is somewhere in the neighborhood of about $80 million. My amendment would have addressed that by simply saying to those nations, many of whom do receive assistance under this particular bill, that they would not be able to receive that assistance unless they cooperated, which is the responsibility and the comity of nations to accept your citizens back once they have been ordered deported from another country, and that that would be a condition for their receiving assistance under this bill. As the chairman has indicated, unfortunately, we did not receive the waiver from the Committee on Rules, but it is a serious problem, not only in my district, but in many other parts of the country. We cannot criticize the INS for not issuing deportation orders when we run into the problems of these over 100 countries who refuse to cooperate with that deportation process. I want to thank the chairman for his cooperation in making the matter a matter before the House tonight. I appreciate his cooperation and look forward to working with the gentleman as we approach the Commerce, Justice and State appropriation, as hopefully we can find wording that will address the issue there. I also appreciate his willingness that if we are not successful there, to continue to work with us to find a solution. I think the American people expect when we order a person deported, that their country will accept them back, and, if they do not, that they should not expect to receive foreign aid at the same time they are costing the American taxpayers over $80 million a year.

Mr. DEAL of Georgia. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. DEAL of Georgia

Mr. DEAL of Georgia. Mr. Chairman, today's amendment focuses on the culture of violence that has saturated our society. While some would argue that television, the Internet, satellite transmissions, movies, and video games have not contributed to this culture of violence, I disagree. I believe their misuse has desensitized all of us by making murder, rape, assault, and mayhem appear commonplace and acceptable through the process of repetition and overexposure. To claim that the first amendment renders us powerless to deal with this issue is to claim that our Bill of Rights is static, such as never has been the case. Just as the Bill of Rights is flexible enough to prevent the innovative and technology-enhanced intrusions of government on the rights of individuals, it is, likewise, rationale enough to prevent it from being used as a cloak to conceal and protect conduct that is ultimately destructive to society as a whole. I urge the adoption of the amendment. Every generation wrestles with the reality that the internal universe of society is constantly expanding. Advances in technology continue to push back the darkness of the unknown and open up new territories that were hidden from the view of our ancestors. Our generation has experienced an explosion of technologies--television, the Internet, satellite transmissions, movies, video games, and cellular telephones, to name a few. These have expanded the scope of our childrens' world far beyond that which existed during our own childhood. Even though the world in this last decade of the 20th century, as magnified by the information age, is vastly different from the world of our founding fathers in the last decade of the 18th century, we are firmly committed to maintaining the structure of order embodied by our founding fathers in our Constitution and Bill of Rights. Today's debate focuses on a culture of violence that has saturated our society. While some will argue that the new technologies previously enumerated have not contributed to this culture of violence, I disagree. I believe their misuse has desensitized all of us by making murder, rape, assault and mayhem appear commonplace and acceptable through the process of repetition and overexposure. If, therefore, these advanced technologies, which should be the tools for advancing civilization, have in fact nurtured primitive instincts of violence that are not compatible with making us more civilized, the clear questions arises as to what can government do to reverse this process without infringing on the individual liberties of our citizens' To claim that the 1st Amendment renders us powerless to deal with this issue is to claim that our Bill of Rights is static. Such has never been the case. Just as the Bill of rights is flexible enough to prevent the innovative and technology enhanced intrusions of government on the rights of individuals, it is likewise rational enough to prevent it from being used as a cloak to conceal and protect conduct that is ultimately destructive of the society as a whole. I commend Chairman Hyde for his amendment which applies the constitutionally sanctioned constraints on obscenity to the matter of violence as directed at children. Since both have adverse effects on society it is altogether appropriate for this Congress to confront our culture of violence in this orderly approach, and I urge adoption of this amendment.

Mr. DEAL of Georgia

Mr. DEAL of Georgia. Madam Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to the travel and tourism industry in my State of Georgia and in my Ninth District. It is an industry that contributes some 190,000 jobs in my State. My district is blessed to be the home of Lake Lanier which is the most visited Corps of Engineers lake in the United States and has some $2 billion of economic impact annually. We also have some 750,000 acres of the Chattahoochee National Forest. The Appalachian Trail begins at Springer Mountain in my district and ends some 2,100 plus miles later in Maine. We also have the Etowah Indian Mound and the Tallulah Gorge State Park. And in Dahlonega, Georgia, the first actual gold rush in our country was ignited there in 1828. The gold museum there is the second most visited museum in our State. We also have the Chickamauga-Chattanooga National Battle Park which is the first military park in our Nation that celebrates the fact that it was a bloody 2 days in which over 35,000 men were either killed, wounded or missing. We have visitors that come from all over the world to visit that park. A number of other attractions include our Prater's Mill, Chief Vann House and others. It is absolutely the reason why the tourism industry is referred to as America's largest services export.

Mr. DEAL of Georgia

Mr. DEAL of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, tonight I want to talk about an issue that I think has enormous impact on the future of our Nation. Unlike many issues that we deal with, such as crime or taxes, which are likewise dealt with by our colleagues at the State and local level, this issue is one which is exclusively the responsibility of the Federal Government. That issue is immigration. As a Nation of immigrants, many of us are reluctant to deal with this matter because we are concerned that we will be accused of being prejudiced or having an ethnic bias. However, the overriding issue is not that we are a Nation of immigrants, but that we are primarily a Nation of laws. We have immigration laws which define who will be allowed into our country. The increasingly evident truth is that our immigration laws are being flaunted, and the Federal agency charged with enforcing these laws, the Immigration and Naturalization Service, the INS, is failing to fulfill the obligations to our citizens. It is appropriate to ask why. Is it because this administration has made the enforcement of our immigration laws a very low priority, and if so, why is that so? The facts are very clear. There are an estimated 5.5 million illegal immigrants currently living in the United States. An additional 275,000 to 300,000 illegal aliens are coming to our country every year. Even though the INS removed a record 169,000 illegals last year, it was not as many as entered the country illegally during the same time period. What are the consequences of this invasion by illegals? While it is true that many of these individuals are hardworking people who keep certain industries and enterprises supplied with needed labor, the costs to local school systems, health care agencies, and law enforcement groups are tremendous. About 221,000 foreign-born criminals are in Federal, State, and local jails. About two-thirds of them are illegal immigrants. Another 142,000 are on parole or probation, and are subject to being deported under the provisions of the 1996 Immigration Reform Act. An additional 161,000 have disappeared after receiving deportation orders. That means that there are approximately a half a million aliens who have committed crimes for which they are either in our prisons or are being subject to being deported, and that, Mr. Speaker, is almost the amount of people who constitute an entire congressional district. In many parts of this country, my congressional district included, no criminal court can be held without the availability of an interpreter. Drive-by shootings by gangs made up of illegal immigrants has become commonplace. What is the Federal Government doing about this problem? Since 1995, the budget for the INS has been substantially increased so that it is almost $4 billion for the current fiscal year. Congress has mandated that the INS add at least 1,000 new border agents every year until the year 2001, but has this been done? Is the INS using its $4 billion to enforce the letter and spirit of the 1996 Immigration Reform Act? The answer is a resounding no. In his latest budget, President Clinton has decided to cut off funding to hire the new 1,000 agents. It seems that the Clinton administration has decided not only to undermine Congress' get-tough immigration laws, but to completely ignore them altogether. The Border Patrol is only the most obvious component of a system of law enforcement that should cover both the border and interior enforcement. Even though it continues to receive most of the attention, about 40 percent of all illegal aliens in this country came here legally and simply overstayed their visas. Therefore, interior enforcement is an integral part of protecting the integrity of our borders. Yet the INS field offices were recently told that their interior enforcement budgets would be cut by as much as 90 percent from last year's level. The INS's eastern region, covering States east of the Mississippi River, was told that its enforcement budget for fiscal year 1999 has been cut from more than $10 million down to $1 million. The INS has begun a policy of releasing illegal aliens that they feel they cannot afford to detain. The INS plans to release at least 2,000 illegal immigrants, including people who have been convicted of arson, armed robbery, manslaughter, drug trafficking, alien smuggling and firearms violations. A spokesman for the INS acknowledges that detainees who get released probably will not ever be deported, since 9 out of 10 are never found again. Agents in field offices are being told, ``If you need money to do a case,'' then simply ``do not send it up.'' A senior investigating official said that without more detention space, there is little point in arresting people because ``they get home before you do.'' The administration's refusal to allocate the appropriate funding for interior enforcement is not even the biggest hindrance to the enforcement of our laws. In what is called a major shift in strategy, the INS has decided to discontinue such practices as traditional workplace raids and instead emphasize only operations against foreign criminals, alien smugglers, and document fraud. What should be done about this situation? Mr. Speaker, I call on you and my other colleagues to let officials at the INS and in the administration know that ignoring or undermining our Nation's laws will not be tolerated. I call on each of us to throw a spotlight on the INS's operations, to call them to task on laws that are being flouted and policies that have seemingly been forgotten. I would ask us all, if we wish to maintain our Nation of immigrants, of letting those who wait in line and bide their time and abide by the laws that we have in place so that they can come legally in this country, then we must not ignore the fact that our immigration lawyers are being ignored and the policies are not being enforced.

Mr. DEAL of Georgia

Mr. DEAL of Georgia. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the requisite number of words. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the Fowler amendment. There are many uncertainties regarding the consequences of our action on this resolution, but there is no uncertainty, however, about the historical reaction of the American people when our citizens, either civilian or military, are killed by foreign powers. Whether it is the slaughter of Americans at the Alamo which led to war with Mexico, the sinking of the Lucitania in 1915 and the loss of 123 American lives that led to our involvement in World War I, or the bombing of Pearl Harbor and the loss of hundreds of American personnel that resulted in our entrance into World War II, one thing is constant. Our Nation will go to war when we believe our citizens have been killed by others without reason. So therefore, what are we prepared to do if our soldiers are killed in Kosovo? To say that such has not occurred in Bosnia is no guarantee that it will not happen here. It is altogether appropriate to ask other questions, such as the scope of the mission, the duration of the engagement, and the exit strategy, none of which can be answered with any degree of certainty. I am more concerned about our escalation strategy. Do we really believe that the killing of American soldiers will not result in more than 4,000 soldiers being sent to Kosovo? Will we abandon our historical reaction to such events? National pride would say we dare not do so. Therefore, even though there are many unanswered questions, there is one question to which we do know the answer, the question, what will the United States do if Slobodan Milosevic and his forces kill our troops? The answer, we will respond with greater force to avenge their deaths, and the mission will escalate. Therefore, I oppose sending troops to Kosovo. Let us not forget the lessons of Vietnam, which many Members of this body have said include that of nonintervention in the internal affairs of another Nation. We should never use our military forces as bait to arouse national indignation when a bloody dictator takes the bait. If our purpose is to take out Milosevic, then we should have the political courage to do so with overwhelming force. We should not deceive ourselves about the dangers to our troops by calling it a peacekeeping mission, in an effort to simply make ourselves feel good. We should not go to Kosovo.

Mr. DEAL of Georgia

Mr. DEAL of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, assistive technology--products designed to maintain or enhance functional capabilities--enables people with disabilities to assume greater control over their lives and contribute more fully to society. Rapid advancements in technology continue to provide important new tools to help individuals with disabilities become more independent and participate in activities related to home, school, work, and community. While substantial progress has been made in both the development of new assistive technology devices and in the transfer and adaptation of existing technologies, information on these devices is difficult to find and inconsistent. This lack of information creates barriers to individuals with disabilities trying to increase their independence and productivity. The Assistive Technology Act (S. 2432) includes a national, on-line resource and distance learning center for people with disabilities. This bill offers an on-line website for people with disabilities to become aware of assistive technology. Information provided on the website might include: available devices and services, comparisons of products, distribution points, training support options, as well as maintenance and funding options. Assistive technology is the key that provides access to employment, education, transportation, and other activities of daily living for many people with disabilities. Please join me in providing the opportunity to help individuals with disabilities become more self-sufficient. I urge you to support the Assistive Technology Act.

Mr. DEAL of Georgia

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 the Interior in a colloquy regarding the language to encourage the U.S. Forrest Service to continue the Pinhoti Trail into the Cohutta region of the Chattahoochee National Forest in the State of Georgia. In the Interior Appropriations bill for fiscal year 1995, I was successful in allocating funds for construction of the Pinhoti Trail in the Armuchee Division of the forest. As the population of Atlanta continues to grow, the Pinhoti Trail has become a high-use recreational area. This trail is now overused, so we really need to see that it is extended. Does the committee encourage that the Pinhoti Trail be continued in the Cohutta region of the Chattahoochee National Forest? Mr. Chairman, I yield to the gentleman from Ohio.

Mr. DEAL of Georgia. It either ends or begins, whichever way you look at it.

Mr. DEAL of Georgia

Mr. DEAL of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, as a member of both the Commerce Subcommittee on Health and Environment well as the House Education and the Workforce Committee, I am particularly interested in programs and achievements in education and the environment. Preserving our environment and educating our work force are challenges our Government cannot meet alone. It is important for those of us concerned about these issues to develop partnerships to help meet our responsibilities to society. This past summer, I had the opportunity to tour Collins and Aikman Floorcoverings in my ninth district of Georgia. Located in Dalton, the company manufactures commercial carpets and tiles. Collins and Aikman is an example of a company that has discovered solutions to preserve the environment by being the first to recycle carpeting. Using 100 percent of the used carpet that it reclaims, Collins and Aikman produces the only high-performance carpet that contains a significant amount of recycled content. The product has the same performance characteristics and warranties as new carpet and sells for the same price. Further, the recycled content carpet is itself 100 percent recyclable, creating the opportunity for an infinite cycle of use. These achievements signify that manufacturers can produce successful recycled products without compromising design, quality, or price as well as preserve the environment. Companies that go beyond compliance to achieve new benchmarks in resource and energy conservation should be commended, This holistic approach to environmental responsibility and accountability protect our resources for future generations. This technological breakthrough involved the ingenuity and dedication of all Collins and Aikman employees. Through trial and error testing and development, this product became a reality. Special training and education programs are the key. The innovative Collins and Aikman Pacesetters program is designed to orient new employees--from hourly wage earners to top level management--in the company. The outdoor adventure program builds team work, respect, and problemsolving skills. During my tour, I learned that this program broke down barriers for employees, making them feel part of a team and company right away. A second educational effort within Collins and Aikman is its continuous, internal GED program. The company decided that instead of sending employees out to classes, it would bring the classes to the employees. Like Pacesetters, this program has helped develop an empowered, creative work force. Teachers conduct classes in a room set on the factory floor. Classes are held 2 days a week in 2-hour shifts, and participants go to class on the clock during work hours. Since the company started this program 5 years ago, 115 employees--25 percent of the Collins and Aikman hourly work force--have earned high school equivalences. They have become part of the central core of trained employees who manage high-technology equipment and make daily, critical decisions that companies depend upon to stay competitive. Going back to school has been made easier for employees, and the resulting self-esteem and pride are immeasurable. Productivity and quality of work have improved yearly, and the trained work force has been instrumental in breakthrough discoveries such as the closed loop carpet recycling program. As testament to these successes, Collins and Aikman Floorcoverings has recently been awarded the Success Track Outstanding Employer Award from the Georgia Department of Labor. I am pleased to bring these innovative examples in corporate leadership to your attention. Such environmental and educational practices help prepare our country for the challenges of the 21st century.