Tom DeLay

Mr. DeLAY

Mr. DeLAY. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. DeLAY. Mr. Chairman, I am having a hard time understanding the gentleman's question. I guess what he is talking about is the specific case in Philadelphia. It was a Federal judge, and on her own set her own arbitrary limits to overcrowding in the Federal system and started releasing prisoners as a condition of overcrowding. Violent prisoners, if I might say.

Mr. DeLAY. Well, what is the gentleman's definition of violence?

Mr. DeLAY. It is the gentleman's question.

Mr. DeLAY. It is the gentleman's question. What is the gentleman's definition of violence?

Mr. DeLAY. Mr. Chairman, I yield the balance of my time to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Foley).

Mr. DeLAY. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself the balance of my time. It is easy to claim we know what is constitutional or not. I just referred to the Constitution and Article III. It is very specific. This Congress, when we create courts, can set their jurisdiction. And when the courts abuse that jurisdiction and overreach by releasing violent criminals, or any criminals, out on the streets because of overcrowding conditions, then we have every right to limit the jurisdiction of these Federal courts. I might also say to the gentleman from Michigan, in answer to his comments, this amendment in no way eliminates the ability for courts to enter into consent decrees, it does not have anything to do with prisoners filing claims that prison conditions are cruel and unusual. The gentleman, Mr. Chairman, mischaracterizes my amendment. My amendment is very simple. It just limits the jurisdiction of Federal courts and says that they cannot turn violent criminals out on the streets. I might also say, Mr. Chairman, that when Federal judges have no concern for the victims of crimes and turn violent criminals out, they should have their jurisdiction limited.

Mr. DeLAY. Reserving the right to object.

Mr. DeLAY. Mr. Chairman, I appreciate it, and under that reservation I apologize for claiming that the gentleman is misleading the House. What I meant to say was the gentleman is confusing the issue on my amendment by offering this information. My amendment has nothing, has nothing to do with cruel and unusual punishment or the rights of people to bring actions if they think that prison conditions are outrageous. It has nothing to do with other remedies to correct those kinds of conditions in prisons. All my amendment says is that the jurisdiction of the judges to release violent criminals on the streets of this country because of overcrowded conditions will be restricted. Mr. Chairman, I withdraw my reservation of objection.

Mr. DeLAY. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.

Mr. DeLAY

Mr. DeLAY. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong, strong support of the Young-Kasich amendment. Discipline must be maintained in the appropriations process. Now, it is fashionable today to say that Government should be more responsible, but hard choices have to be made to turn this cliche into a reality. Today we have an opportunity to work toward that ultimate goal. Taking the Aviation Trust Fund off budget in this way is irresponsible. My colleagues cannot have it both ways. They cannot say that they want to take the trust fund and spend it on aviation and, oh, by the way, we also want to keep all the general revenue, too. That is not fair. It is not fair to the appropriations process. It is not fair to the budgeting process. It is not fair to the American taxpayer. Now, I am all for raising revenues from aviation facilities and from passengers and other ways to pay for aviation infrastructure. I am all for that. But I am not for doing it both ways. Because if they are one of those that want to take it off a trust fund, they ought to live within the budgetary restraints of that trust fund and not dip into the general fund paid by general tax and general taxpayers and have it both ways. Now, I appreciate the importance of infrastructure. The gentleman from Pennsylvania and the gentleman from Minnesota have done an incredible job in building the infrastructure of this country over the years, and I appreciate what they are doing. I just disagree with them on this in this respect. I served on the Committee on Public Works and remain an avid supporter of infrastructure programs that keep the foundations of our Nation strong. But this bill and this issue goes too far and my colleagues have overstepped their bounds and they have stepped way too far out. It does bust the spending caps, it does jeopardize Social Security in the way that it is written; and, in the long-term, it imperils tax cuts. And I say to my friend on my side of the aisle, if he wants tax cuts, he cannot vote against the Young-Kasich amendment because this does dip in our ability to allow our families to hold on to more of their hard-earned money. And absolutely none of the spending in this bill is offset. We must shut this door today, and we must slam it shut for good.

Mr. DeLAY

Mr. DeLAY. Mr. Speaker, Evergreen State College is having a convicted cop killer, Mumia Abu-Jamal, as their commencement speaker this year. This outrage is as sad as it is maddening. America wonders why there are shootings in schools. Well, irresponsible institutions making celebrities out of killers are part of the problem. In our mixed-up times, heroes are often made for the wrong reasons. The real hero in this case is the police officer who was shot in the back while doing his duty. Yet the twisted radicals in the ivory tower give the spotlight to his murderer while refusing the officer's widow time to speak. At this time, Mr. Speaker, I would like to take a moment of silence to protest this outrage to honor Officer Faulkner and to give sympathy to the real hero's wife, Maureen.

Mr. DeLAY

Mr. DeLAY. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.

Mr. DeLAY. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself the balance of my time. Mr. Chairman, there is no one I respect more in this House than the gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Skelton). His work on this committee is outstanding, his leadership in trying to stop the devastation and the hollowing out of our defense is next to none. The gentleman, we say from Texas, knows from where he comes, and I do respect the gentleman, but in this case I respectfully disagree with him. The gentleman says that my amendment is redundant because the committee has worked very hard at putting language in the bill that does basically the same thing I do. Where I disagree is the transparency and the reciprocity part of their portion of the bill, which, in my opinion, gives a huge loophole to this administration, this administration that has already exhibited incredible weakness when it comes to China. Foreign relations with China are very difficult in the best of circumstances. They were difficult during the Reagan administration, they were difficult under all the administrations before this administration. But when we have an administration that kowtows to the Chinese, that lets them bamboozle them, that out-negotiates them, it leads to these kinds of problems that we are talking about here today. The President of the United States went to China. He was received in Tiananmen Square, where hundreds were killed fighting for democracy. The President, while he was in China, was embarrassed when the Communist Chinese decided that that they would test an ICBM missile while the President of the U.S. was in-country. Just recently, after the huge mistake of bombing the Chinese embassy, this President apologized I do not know how many times. And I will tell my colleagues something, I will never forget the picture that I saw on CNN network of the ambassador to China and his aide standing over the President of the United States while he was sitting at his desk in the oval office signing a book of apology. Now, we should have apologized once, and that is enough. But this administration has kowtowed to the Communist Chinese over and over again. And now we find that they are using all types of ways for exchanges to show the Communist Chinese and the People's Liberation Army how we do things so they can copy it. It has got to stop. There is no reciprocity. The only thing that transparency will show is that we give them the key to the penthouse and they give us the key to the outhouse. We have got to stop it for the sake and security of the American people. And my amendment makes no mistake, leaves no door open, leaves no crack open. My amendment says we are going to stop it and we are not going to show the Chinese how the SEALS operate; we are not going to show exercises using two divisions of our army; we are not going to let them on our aircraft carriers so they can take notes of how to destroy them; we are not going to do these kinds of things. That is what my amendment does. The gentleman from Guam says that the program improves our knowledge of Chinese methods and tactics. We are going to learn 1950s and 1960s and 1970s military tactics from the Chinese. We gather intelligence from them. The U.S. Armed Forces are superior to the People's Liberation Army. There is nothing we can learn from them nor is there parity between these exchanges. We offer the Chinese our national laboratories while they offer us empty barracks. Let me just cite a couple of examples that were put in an article in The New Republic written by Jason Zengerle, I believe it is. A group of officers from the Chinese People's Liberation Army happened to drop in on an American naval base. Over steaks, beer, two kinds of wine and apple pie, the Chinese peppered their American counterparts with questions about the American aircraft carrier they were on and its vulnerabilities. Wanting to be a gracious host, like the admiral, an American lieutenant commander proceeded to tell the Chinese about the carrier's Achilles heel, its hull is too thin on the bottom, the commander explained. So a torpedo that exploded underneath the carrier could easily penetrate the carrier's skin. That is why they are buying torpedoes that explode under our ships because we gave them the information. In another incident, not surprisingly then, when then chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, General John Shalikashvili, visited a Chinese military installation in 1997, and this is incredible, he was shown a routine marksman demonstration, at a distance, through binoculars. Now, this is an exchange. And he was given a tour of empty barracks and mess halls. And similar things have happened to other visiting American officers. We see the same tired old factories, the same divisions we have seen before, gripes a Pentagon official. We do not get into their crack divisions and factories. We have to stop this. We have to stop it now. Enough is enough. The security of this country is at stake. I ask for a ``yea'' vote for the DeLay amendment.

Mr. DeLAY. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Chairman, I rise today to offer an amendment to bar the United States from training the Communist Chinese military. Now, at first this amendment may sound unnecessary, especially after all the revelations about the Red Chinese spying that was found in the Cox report. It seems almost crazy to even suggest that the American government might tutor its ambitious nemesis in military strategy, but that is exactly what the United States Department of Defense under Bill Clinton has planned. Unless this Congress acts to stop it, the Pentagon will go ahead with military to military exchanges and other sensitive information sharing with the People's Liberation Army. Such cooperation between American and Red Chinese Armed Forces has been both hot and cold for the better part of two decades. President Bush ended military exercises 10 years ago after the communist government violently suppressed the peaceful protest for democracy in Tiananmen Square. But consistent with his administration's habitual appeasement of Communist China, President Clinton jump-started American cooperation with the PLA soon after taking office in 1993. The imbalance in these so-called exchanges is extreme and predictably benefits the PRC. Just this year, more than 80 cooperative military contacts were planned between the U.S. and Red China. Proposals for these training exercises include American operation on advice from Special Forces units, from the Navy Seals, the Army Green Berets and the Air Force. Last December a ship from Communist China participated for the first time ever in complex exercises with America in Hong Kong. Plans were hatched this year for the PLA to engage in Code Thunder, the largest U.S. Air Force exercise in the Pacific, and, remarkably, the United States Army has already hosted communist troops for training exercises, and it just recently squelched a visit by PLA observers to view the entire American air and infantry divisions that were practicing at the Army's National Training Center. Such suicidal national behavior has to come to an end. The role of our military is to defend America from hostile foreign powers, not to train them. This amendment protects the American military from its own expertise. The United States has the most sophisticated military equipment in the world, bar none. Rogue nations and other aggressors are permanently discouraged from wreaking havoc around the globe because they fear the wrath of American retaliation. One key to this influence is our unmatched technological and strategic supremacy. Why on earth would we want to share our most valuable secrets with any nation, let alone a potential aggressor? The Cox report went into painful detail about the extent to which our arsenals have already been compromised to Communist China. The massive depth of the PRC's operation to infiltrate American security should teach us many lessons about our relationship with the growing power in Asia. Primarily our relationship is not a two-way street. The PRC steals our nuclear secrets and we do nothing. We give them industrial technology and ask for nothing in return. They financially tamper with the reelection of an American President, and we sweep it under the rug. We open our markets to their products, but they slam their markets closed to America. Now, almost like a parody, the United States is practically training the People's Liberation Army. It is past time that we say enough is enough. Opening our markets is different than opening our laboratories and military facilities, and the line should now be drawn. The Chinese Communists will not leave any stones unturned in their quest for military domination. There is absolutely no reason for the United States to enhance the PLA's war-making capabilities. It was not that long ago that a high ranking PLA official threatened to nuke Los Angeles if America interfered in the Taiwan Straits. There could be no clearer warning to their intentions, and we must defend ourselves from such a threat. Now, this amendment is very simple, Mr. Chairman. It prohibits the United States Secretary of Defense from authorizing military exchanges with Communist China that reveal American classified, nuclear, logistical, technological, intelligence and other war fighting secrets. Mr. Chairman, this Congress must vote against military-to-military exchanges with the Communist Chinese now. American security is definitely at stake. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. DeLAY. Mr. Chairman, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Spence), the chairman of the Committee on Armed Services.

Mr. DeLAY. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from North Carolina (Mrs. Myrick).

Mr. DeLAY. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. Rohrabacher).

Mr. DeLAY. Mr. Chairman, could I ask how much time is remaining on each side?

Mr. DeLAY. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Chairman, let me just say this side believes that we have a strong America, but we have a weak administration. Nothing in my amendment has anything to do with talking about proliferation or treaties or anything else. It has everything to do with exchange of operations, letting the communist Chinese observe what we do so they can take it back to China and copy it, if not steal it. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. Calvert).

Mr. DeLAY. Mr. Chairman, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from New York (Mr. Sweeney). (Mr. SWEENEY asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. DeLAY. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Jones).

Mr. DeLAY. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. Cunningham), a top gun.

Mr. DeLAY. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.

Mr. DeLAY

Mr. DeLAY. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of this amendment brought to us by the gentleman from California (Mr. Cox) and the gentleman from Washington (Mr. Dicks), and I congratulate the two of them for an outstanding job and a great service to the American people. Also I commend their committee. The American people owe them a great deal of praise for the work they have done. American national security has been squandered for too long. It is time for this Congress to correct that problem. The revelations in the Cox report could not be more startling. The People's Republic of China orchestrated a multifaceted cabal of spies to methodically steal all of America's nuclear secrets. This theft by the Communist Chinese was so complete that the bipartisan Committee on National Security has concluded that the PRC's nuclear weapons design is now on a par with our own.'' I know the press is trying to sweep this story under the rug. The fiasco exposed in the Cox report is being painted as simply another innocent and unavoidable blunder where no one is to blame. In other words, it is no big deal. But considering the military ambitiousness of Red China, there can be no doubt that this is only the tip of the iceberg. They are going full steam ahead with their nuclear weapons program, and using our technology to build it. Because of gross negligence at the White House, future PRC warheads aimed at the United States will largely be the product of American expertise. Predictably, the Clinton administration is trying to ride out this storm, like it always does. The difference is this tempest puts our whole Nation at risk. There can be no compromises when the security of America is at stake. We have to shore up security and counterintelligence failures, and begin a serious battle against espionage. This amendment does that by establishing new procedures to combat the vulnerability of classified technology. It also requires the President to submit detailed reports to Congress on security matters concerning our arsenals in Red China. This amendment is only the beginning. Much more must be done, because there are consequences to the President's careless disregard to protect classified information, and it is time we tackle that problem. Americans can be reassured, and China should know that this issue will not fade away. This is just the first step. China must not mistake the weakness of our President for the weakness of the American people. Congress must be strong where the administration has been weak. We need to flex our muscles and let the world know that America takes its national security seriously.