Michael Doyle

Mr. DOYLE

Mr. DOYLE. Mr. Speaker, I am rising here this morning to speak about this very important bill known as the Maintain United States Trade (MUST) Law. First, allow me to thank my colleagues and friends, the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Visclosky) and the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Ney) for their work on this issue and for organizing this morning hour today. I am just one of nearly 200 cosponsors of the MUST law resolution that has drawn its support from both sides of the aisle. There is a reason for that, of course. Quite simply, this issue does not fall along partisan lines. It is no surprise that there are many Democrats and many Republicans that together have recognized the necessity of maintaining our antidumping laws and countervailing duty laws. It is no surprise because these laws are a concern for all of us, affect all of us, and protect a wide range of products that come from all corners of our great country. According to the U.S. International Trade Association, as of March 1 of this year, over 290 products from 59 different countries were under antidumping and countervailing duty orders. Throughout our ongoing steel crisis, antidumping and countervailing duty laws have represented one of the only means of relief for American steelworkers and the American steel industry. My constituents in Pennsylvania and other American producers throughout the country recognize that these laws are important protections affecting countless products throughout the United States. It is imperative that the administration uphold these important trade laws at the upcoming WTO Seattle Round. It is this conference that will launch a new round of trade negotiations. It is said that these talks will focus on reshaping WTO rules regarding agriculture, services and intellectual property. However, the concern of those of us here this morning is that other issues may surface on the agenda. Mr. Speaker, it is becoming clear that a number of foreign countries are seeking to expand the agenda allowing for debate on WTO's antidumping and countervailing duty laws. This effort must be stopped. This is why the MUST law is so important, because its passage will allow the administration to attend the Seattle negotiations with a unified statement from the Congress declaring that the United States must not agree to reopen negotiations on any of these antidumping and countervailing duty laws. The MUST law resolution will call upon the President to not participate in any international negotiation in which antidumping rules are a part of the negotiation agenda. Further, it will insist that he refrain from submitting for congressional approval any agreements that require changes to the current antidumping and countervailing duty laws and enforcement policies of the United States, and that our government must vigorously enforce these laws in all pending and future cases. This is the type of direction that we must insist upon. Mr. Speaker, I represent a district from western Pennsylvania. It is the heart of steel country. In fact, I was born and raised there, so believe me I know that area pretty well. Because of that, I have been very involved in attempting to mitigate our ongoing steel crisis, and I am sure some people might see me speaking here this morning and think that this is just another steel issue again. Nothing could be further from the truth though. This is not just about steel. Instead, as I stated earlier in my remarks, it is about all American industry production and workers. It could be agricultural products ranging from raspberries to rice to chilled Atlantic salmon, or industrial products like dry-cleaning machinery, brake rotors, or roofing nails, manufacturing materials such as silicon metal or uranium, or even electronic products like color television receivers or cellular telephones. All of these products and hundreds more are protected by the antidumping and countervailing duty laws. This is why we need everyone to join with us and insist that our administration hold firm on this issue when those talks kick off in Seattle. We have an obligation to protect our American workers and producers from unfair foreign trade practices. It is an old line but it still rings true: We can have free trade, but only if it is fair trade. For these reasons, Mr. Speaker, I add my voice to urging the House leadership to bring the MUST law resolution to the floor as soon as possible.

Mr. DOYLE

Mr. DOYLE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize three wonderful teenagers from my Congressional District. Miss Ashley Cole, a junior at Woodland Hills High School; Mr. Aniruddha Chatterjee, a senior at Fox Chapel High School and Mr. Jonathan Hobaugh, a senior at Elizabeth Forward High School will be representing Pennsylvania's 18th Congressional District in ``Voices Against Violence: A Congressional Teen Conference'' which began here in Washington this morning. This conference, which has brought together some 350 students from across the country, will enable young people from all walks of life to discuss their experiences and ideas for the causes and prevention of youth violence. The young people involved in the conference will participate in workshops covering a variety of issues including: violence in the media, hate crime prevention strategies and peer mediation training. Ashley, Aniruddha and Jonathan will participate in drafting a House Resolution, which will be presented for immediate consideration, stating the actions this Congress can take to help prevent youth violence. Prevention of violence by and against our Nation's youth is a top priority. I am honored to have three such fine young people work with us helping to find the solutions to this problem.

Mr. DOYLE

Mr. DOYLE. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in strong support of true and meaningful managed care reform that H.R. 2723 provides to all Americans. On behalf of my constituents back in Western Pennsylvania, I am proud to say I am a cosponsor of this vital bipartisan legislation which confronts the real problems many families face with HMO's My colleagues, supporting this bill is the only responsible choice for us to make certain that everyone in America has proper access to medical care, can see a medical specialist when necessary, and will ensure timely access to emergency room care. The Bipartisan Managed Care Improvement Act guarantees medical decisions are made by qualified health care professionals, and not by insurance company bureaucrats. It returns to the American people that which has been denied for too long; the right to hold managed care companies accountable if they choose to make decisions regarding medical treatment. Lately, there has been much concern expressed regarding employer liability provision in this bill. The overwhelming majority of employers rely on a third-party health plan to make medical decisions. Under our bill, only organizations that make negligent medical treatment decisions on individual claims are subject to liability. Independent legal analyses have confirmed that employer liability allegations are simply a non-issue. Managed care and insurance company bureaucrats have to stop shunning responsibility and realize that if they choose to make harmful discretionary treatment decisions, they will be held accountable by the public. Most importantly, our bill would help all American families, like my constituent Ellen Gasparovic, who was diagnosed with breast cancer, only to have her HMO refuse to pay to have the cancerous lumps removed from her chest. Fortunately, Mrs. Gasparovic is doing well today, but only after having to endure needless financial and emotional hardships, all because of the negligence of her HMO. It is on behalf of my constituents in Western Pennsylvania that I urge my colleagues to support H.R. 2723, and defeat any attempts to weaken this much needed legislation.

Mr. DOYLE

Mr. DOYLE. Mr. Speaker, on October 4, I was unavoidably detained and missed rollcall votes 470, 471, 472, and 473. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yes'' on all four votes.

Mr. DOYLE

Mr. DOYLE. Mr. Speaker, first let me say to my good friend the gentleman from West Virginia (Mr. Mollohan) that he is in our thoughts and prayers, he and his family. Mr. Speaker, I stand today to urge my colleagues to vote for H.R. 1664, the Byrd-Mollohan steel and oil loan guarantee bill. My colleagues, the crisis in steel is not over. Jobs are still being lost. Steel mills are still closing. And this problem will not go away without some real solutions. The Byrd-Mollohan loan guarantee proposal we are debating today will take real action to save American jobs and two vital American industries. I heard the distinguished minority whip here say that in the oil and gas industry they have gone through some hard times and they have rebounded and come back stronger and they do not need any help. Well, I do not know about the oil and gas industry, but I know about the steel industry; and I want to make something perfectly clear. We have not fallen on hard times. We have lost jobs because our foreign competitors are cheating, they are breaking the rules, and this country is doing nothing about it. That is why American steelworkers are on hard times. That is why we need some help. Let us vote for Byrd-Mollohan and save some American jobs.

Mr. DOYLE

Mr. DOYLE. Mr. Speaker, I got here in 1995 and I certainly was no expert in trade matters. So I was persuaded by the proponents of normal trade relations that engaging China would be the way that we could help lower this trade deficit we had, and engaging China was the only way to help China grow and lessen these human rights abuses, and I voted for Most Favored Nation status for China in 1995, and I waited a year, and it got worse. And in 1996 we heard the same arguments over again, engagement was the only way to lower the deficit and improve human rights. And I voted for it again, Mr. Speaker, and it got worse, and the same the following year, and the same last year. When I got here in 1995, the trade deficit with China was $33 billion. Today it is projected to be $67 billion. I have heard a speaker say that there is no argument about the facts here, only about what the end result is going to be. Well, Mr. Speaker, the facts are this: our engaging China and Most Favored Nation status has not worked. It is time to try a different approach. This year I intend to vote with the gentleman from California (Mr. Rohrabacher).

Mr. DOYLE

Mr. DOYLE. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the requisite number of words. (Mr. DOYLE asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. DOYLE. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the amendment offered by the gentleman from Massachusetts. This well-intentioned amendment would increase funding for the Land and Water Conservation Fund, a goal I share. However, the programs proposed to be cut to offset this amendment are equally important and deserve another look. By this amendment we propose to cut an additional $29 million from the fossil energy budget, and my friend tells me that is only an 8 percent cut. Well, let me tell my friend this program has seen steady decreases over the past 10 years, deceases of 7 percent, 10 percent, 13 percent depending on the year. Eighty-five percent of our U.S. energy supply currently comes from fossil fuels. This figure is going to go up, not down in the coming years. By the year 2015, 88 percent of the energy we consume will come from fossil fuels. The important research the Department of Energy performs on oil, gas, coal and other fuels is entirely directed at making these fuels burn more efficiently and with fewer emissions. I think these are goals we all support. The emerging renewables, solar, wind and geothermal, currently supply less than 1 percent of the energy needs in the United States. Research on this small share of our energy supply has increased greatly during the last 10 years, despite its relative unimportance to our energy supply. I am all too aware that the Green Scissors Report, among others, has severely criticized the U.S. fossil energy research program. For this reason, Mr. Chairman, every July the fossil fuel research program becomes a convenient whipping boy for legislators looking for budget offsets. Well, I am sorry to see that these criticisms take no consideration of the fact that renewable energy still supplies a very small percentage of our energy needs. As we work together towards a future energy-use environment of cleaner, more efficient fuels, we need to recognize that our energy supply, this country's energy habits, will not and cannot change overnight. Cleaner and more efficient means of accessing oil, gas and coal are sorely needed. Finally, Mr. Chairman, I would point out to my friends that the fossil energy program has been revamped and retooled in response to input from Congress over the past few years. The fossil energy program has shifted to focus on such exciting new technologies such as fuel cells which are clean burning, relocatable energy sources that fit perfectly into a deregulated power environment; the ``Vision-21'' clean power plant, which will combine existing technologies to greatly reduce emissions from our utilities; and gas hydrates, an exciting, hidden source of natural gas on the ocean floor that is estimated to offer hundreds or even thousands of times more reserves than all the existing fossil energy supplies combined. Mr. Chairman, as our energy researchers have pursued this fundamental shift in response to congressional criticism are we governing responsibly and effectively if we continue to take ill-considered cuts out of this program? Mr. Chairman, I strongly urge my colleagues to oppose this amendment offered by my colleague from Massachusetts.

Mr. DOYLE

Mr. DOYLE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H.R. 2018, the Child Custody Protection Act. This important legislation reaffirms the vital role of parents in our families, and seeks to promote and encourage communication between teens and their parents or guardians. Today in many states, it is legal for a child under the age of 18 to make the monumental decision to end a life by getting an abortion without consulting with their parents. It is unfortunate that some minors who find themselves confronted with an overwhelming situation such as an unplanned pregnancy would not consult the very people they should turn to for guidance and support in a time of personal crisis . . . their parents. My home state of Pennsylvania already has legal statutes which require knowledge of at least one of the minor's parents before obtaining an abortion. The Child Custody Protection Act will re- establish the rights of parents nationwide, by requiring that a parent must accompany a minor child if they choose to undergo abortion procedure. The Child Custody Act would not interfere or take the place of existing state laws like those in Pennsylvania, but it would make it a Federal offense to transport a minor across a state line for an abortion, unless the child was transported by a parent. It is my hope that enactment of this bill will not only foster a greater level of communication between family members on this most serious subject, but will prove to be instrumental in reducing the number of abortions and encourage the consideration of viable options such as adoption. Mr. Speaker, I strongly encourage every Representative of this body to join with me in support of the Child Custody Act, as 130 of my cosponsors have, and vote for passage of this important child protection and parent's rights legislation.

Mr. DOYLE

Mr. DOYLE. Madam Speaker, I can think of no greater symbol of freedom, no higher embodiment of American ideals than the flag of the United States of America. Since the Revolutionary War, our flag has served as a sacred reminder of who we are, what we stand for, and the dreams we hope to achieve. Therefore, I am pleased to rise today in support of H.J. Res. 33, which reaffirms our national commitment to protect our great flag. As in the 104th and 105th Congress, I am proud to say that I am once again a cosponsor of H.J. Res. 33. Madam Speaker, support for prohibiting the desecration of our flag is apparent not just from my constituents in the 18th District of Pennsylvania, but from 279 of my colleagues that have cosponsored this resolution. Our flag represents the very essence of what it means to be an American. By honoring and respecting our flag, we, in turn, honor and respect those who gave their lives and lost loved ones in the fight to protect this important symbol of America. Under our great flag, many different cultures, beliefs, and ethnicities can find common ground and come together as one. It is this unit and freedom that is represented by our flag and forms the cornerstone of America. Throughout our history, the United States has called upon her husbands and wives, sons and daughters to travel to foreign lands and defend freedom and liberty at all costs. We owe it to them to ensure the American flag, the very symbol they fought and died to protect, is respected and cherished by all. Prohibiting the desecration of the flag does not deny any individuals any freedoms or beliefs, but it does serve to strengthen our commitment to these very ideals. We should join together in this effort to preserve the symbol of our national unit. Madam Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support the sacrifices of all of our Nation's citizens; support the very beliefs that our great country was founded upon, and support our great American flag.

Mr. DOYLE

Mr. DOYLE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in praise of an outstanding young adult from the 18th Congressional District of Pennsylvania, Ms. Amanda Iannuzzi, a Congressional Award medal recipient. Amanda's commitment to self-development and community involvement serves as an inspiration to people of all ages, and illustrates the accomplishments that come with hard work and determination. Without motivation, however, hard work and determination are destined to remain unfulfilled ideals. Amanda's motivation breathed life into innumerable commendable acts. Not only did Amanda involve herself in volunteer work, but invested time in broadening her artistic and physical skills. While much of what is directed towards young people is prescriptive in nature, it is important to note that these acts were of Amanda's own design and were completed with her own resolve. Upon review of Amanda's achievements, one is particularly struck by the considerable amount of time that was devoted to obtaining this award. Hundreds of hours over the course of months were invested. Clearly, Amanda recognizes the immense value of giving one's time to help others. It is my hope that your actions foreshadow a life distinguished by the pursuit of new challenges. Congratulations Amanda! Best wishes to you for continued success.

Mr. DOYLE

Mr. DOYLE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to give tribute to U.S. Merchant Marines and extend my gratitude for their valiant service to our country during World War II. As my colleagues should be aware, May 22nd is National Maritime Day. In years past, I have come before the House to explain in detail how the thousands of courageous men and women who served in the Merchant Marines transported supplies to our soldiers during war and in the face of grave danger. Undeniably, the actions taken and responsibilities fulfilled by these men and women who served in the Merchant Marines contributed to the outcome of World War II. As the Pittsburgh areas was one of the most heavily recruited regions of the country by the Merchant Marines, I have come to have an enormous appreciation for and ever growing amount of respect for the contributions that merchant mariners have made to our nation. Indeed, their efforts should not be diminished in any way and should be equated with those of other armed service personnel. It is important to note that during World War II, Merchant Marines were subject to government control and their vessels were controlled by the government under the Authority of the War Shipping Administration. And just as with other branches of the military. Merchant Marines traveled under sealed orders and were subject to the Code of Military Justice. Like many Members of Congress, I felt it was completely unacceptable that Merchant Marines were discriminated against in terms of benefits and lent my strong support to H.R. 1126, the Merchant Marine Fairness Act. The bill, H.R. 1126, was ultimately enacted into law as part of H.R. 4110, the Veterans Programs Enhancement Act. While I am pleased that the Merchant Marine Fairness Act has been signed into law, I was not pleased that the language of an important provision has been altered. Specifically, the Merchant Marine Fairness Act included directive language according the recognition of Honorable Discharge to merchant mariners whose service included time between August 15, 1945 to the end of 1946. The language however, was changed to read ``Certificate of Honorable Discharge'' when the original bill was included in H.R. 4110, and was enacted as part of Public Law 105- 368. As it has been more than half a century since the end of World War II and almost 20 years since the struggle for equitable recognition of merchant mariners began, I am deeply concerned about the potential for the intent of the original language to be misconstrued and thus creating further delay in the delivery of earned benefits. I urge both Secretary of Defense Cohen and Secretary of Transportation Slater to expeditiously and consistently implement the new benefits provisions in accordance to the intent of the original bill's language. Approximately 2,500 mariners and their families are expecting and should receive no less. I also want to recognize the efforts of one of my constituents, Mark Gleeson, for this personal involvement in, and steadfast commitment to obtaining appropriate recognition for the efforts of Merchant Marines during World War II. Mark cares very deeply about this matter and played a major role in creating greater awareness about the inequitable treatment of Merchant Marines within the halls of Congress. In closing, I want to thank all of my colleagues who were supportive of the effort embodied in the Merchant Marines Fairness Act and encourage them to monitor its implementation. It is my hope that each and every Member of the House will take the time to recognize the efforts of our country's World War II Merchant Marines.

Mr. DOYLE

Mr. DOYLE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor Katherine Philp from Woodland Hills School District. Katherine is the top winner of the 1999 18th Congressional District High School Art Competition, An Artistic Discovery. Katherine's colored pencil still life entitled ``Tissue and Fruit'' was chosen from an outstanding collection of entries. Katherine is a young woman of considerable talent and is sure to have many successes in her future. I look forward to seeing Katherine's artwork displayed along with the artwork of the other competition winners from across the country. I am pleased to be associated with Katherine's artistic talents. Congratulations Katherine. I wish you all the best of luck in the future.

Mr. DOYLE

Mr. DOYLE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to condemn the senseless and brutal murder of Ms. Rosemary Nelson. As a human rights lawyer who represented the rights of peace-loving Catholics in Northern Ireland, Ms. Nelson and her family endured constant threats, violence, and intimidation at the hands of the state police force, the Royal Ulster Constabulary (RUC). Despite the massive daily threats and concerted campaign of nightly fire bombings against Catholics in the area, Rosemary Nelson continued to be an outspoken proponent of peace and the rights of the victims facing such violence. Late in 1998, she traveled to Washington to testify before the House Committee on International Relations regarding the campaign of terror perpetrated against the Catholic minority in her home land. Even though a United Nations special Rapporteur and given accounts of consistent and systematic physical intimidation against defense lawyers by RUC officers, Ms. Nelson would not be deterred from her course. Rosemary Nelson was a true champion of peace, and gallantly defended the freedoms of a repressed minority in County Armagh in Northern Ireland. Sadly, Ms. Nelson paid the ultimate sacrifice for striving to uphold those freedoms after a cowardly placed bomb exploded under her car this past March. True to her robust Irish spirit, Ms. Nelson tenaciously fought for life, but her injuries proved to be too extensive. She passed away on March 15th, 1999. Now, other courageous individuals must carry on with Rosemary Nelson's legacy of fighting for justice and equality. Her death has served to draw even more attention to this troubled area, and the many grave faults of the RUC. I am proud to have voted in support of House Resolution 128 and heartened that this legislation passed the House by an overwhelming margin. Very soon, I hope to see the government of the United Kingdom launch an independent inquiry into the practices of the Royal Ulster Constabulary and their role in the murder of Rosemary Nelson. Earlier this month, the United States, Northern Ireland, and the United Kingdom celebrated the year anniversary of the Good Friday Peace Accords. This action provides encouragement for the future of this troubled region that the youth of tomorrow will outgrow the prejudices and hatred of the past. There have been significant strides for peace made in Northern Ireland and much progress has been made, but we must be ever vigilant for those who still refuse to give up the old ways of violence. We must stand up for human rights, just like Rosemary Nelson, and continue to send a message that acts of violence will not be tolerated any longer.

Mr. DOYLE

Mr. DOYLE. Mr. Speaker, it is with great pride that I rise today to recognize one of Pennsylvania's outstanding young students; Mr. Richard Kreseviteh Gilbert. This February, Richard attained the coveted rank of Eagle Scout, a distinguished goal that only 2 percent of Boy Scouts reach. Rich's achievement is the culmination of years of hard work, dedication, and community service. Each Eagle Scout candidate is required to have earned a minimum of 23 Merit Badges, as well as contribute as least 100 man-hours toward a community oriented service project. Richard Gilbert, true to his selfless Scout nature, went above and beyond these minimum requirements, earning 33 Merit Badges and logging over 400 man-hours on his Eagle Scout Project. For his particular project, Rich chose to design and build a new retaining wall between American Legion Post 660 and St. Ireanaeus Church in his hometown of Oakmont. Under his direction, Richard and 33 others gave up their summer vacations to work on the old retaining wall which had deteriorated on the S. Ireanaeus school playground. He and his crew worked through the hottest months of this summer to shape 120 ties and 22 tons of gravel into a wall which measures 6 feet tall and 110 feet long. Because of Richard's exemplary commitment to his project, St. Ireanaeus Church and Post 660 both sponsored his efforts, and Conrail graciously donated the needed railroad ties. Not only did Rich's labor improve the aesthetic beauty of the community, but it greatly improved the safety of the nearby playground. Richard Kreseviteh Gilbert is currently a Junior at Riverview High School in Oakmont, and continues to shine as an outstanding leader among both his classmates and fellow Scouts in Troop 7854. His Scoutmaster, Mr. Dave Scatina has certainly provided the guidance and leadership that promote the growth of outstanding young Scouts like Rich. I am honored to stand here today in sincere praise of this outstanding example of the importance of community involvement. Congratulations Richard, your achievements make us all very proud.

Mr. DOYLE

Mr. DOYLE. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in support of the Democratic Budget Alternative. Given the great amount of time we have paid over the past several years to the critical issues of paying down the national debt, ensuring the solvency of Medicare and Social Security, and targeting tax cuts in a fiscally responsible manner, I am pleased that the Democratic Alternative embodies these important priorities. In my view, a comparison of the Democratic and Republican budget proposals clearly indicates who has been listening to the American people and who has not. The annual budget is meant to serve as a barometer of what our country needs to thrive and be successful now and in the future. While the Democratic Alternative provides thoughtful guidelines to keep our country on course, the Majority's proposal can be likened to an uncontrollable storm that threatens to decimate the significant amount of progress that has been made in getting our nation's financial house in order. Let's take a quick look at some of the differences. The Democratic Alternative provides $40 billion in targeted tax cuts for those in need of dependent-care credits, long-term care credit, and school bond credits. The Republican Proposal has $143 billion in tax cuts in the next four years--and $636 billion in tax cuts in the four years after that. In total, a whopping $1 trillion dollars in tax cuts in ten years. These figures are so staggering that by FY 2009, these ill-advised tax cuts would become so large that they would exceed the entire non-Social Security surplus projected for those years. The Democratic Alternative extends the solvency of Social Security to 2050 and the solvency of Medicare to 2020. The Republican Proposal does not add one day of extended solvency to either of these critical programs. And the Democratic Alternative pays down $146 billion more debt than the Republican Proposal. I also want to express my serious concerns about adequate funding for our nations veterans. I am troubled that those of us who sit on the Veterans Affairs Committee were prevented from even speaking about our alternative which included $3.2 billion more for critical veterans programs than the Administration's funding levels. Representative Clement's efforts on behalf of veterans were treated equally as poorly by Republicans on the Budget Committee and Rules Committee. It is absolutely disingenuous what Republicans today have said about their concern for veterans, and quite frankly is a slap in the face of all veterans and a blatant slam to their intelligence. Again, putting rhetoric aside and looking at the cold facts that the numbers illustrate--The Democratic Alternative provides an increase of $2 billion in FY 2000 discretionary spending for veterans and $106 billion in budget authority over 5 years. The Republican Proposal on the other hand offers our veterans the paltry crumbs of a $900 million increase in FY 2000--which doesn't even cover the costs of inflation and pay for hard working VA employees. And then they turn around and slash funding for veterans by $1.1 billion in FY 2001. Mr. Chairman, the numbers speak for themselves. The Democratic Alternative reflects the priorities and needs of the American people. I urge my colleagues to support its passage.

Mr. DOYLE

Mr. DOYLE. Mr. Speaker, today marks a great anniversary for every Greek citizen and those who cherish Democracy and freedom worldwide. 178 years ago on this date, courageous Greeks, determined to cast off the chains of oppression, rose up against the Ottoman Empire and firmly sounded the cry of freedom. It was fitting that the nation that gave the world the very concept of democracy was to be a free and sovereign land once again. Sadly, like all struggles for freedom, good people lose their lives striving to uphold what they believe. It is important that we as a democracy never forget the sacrifices of those brave individuals whose selfless sacrifices and dedication to democratic ideals gave us the freedoms and liberties we enjoy today. I salute those gallant Greeks who stood against oppression so many years ago today and with happiness and joy for Greek citizens worldwide.

Mr. DOYLE

Mr. DOYLE. Mr. Speaker, I express my appreciation to the members of the Committee on Rules, the Committee on Ways and Means, to the leadership and to the Speaker, the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Hastert), for their fair treatment on this issue. I know that the substance of the Visclosky steel bill may be of concern to some of these Members so I am gratified to see this bill brought to the floor for consideration. The subject of foreign steel dumping in the American market is simply too important, with an impact on too many areas of this country, for it not to receive consideration by the full membership of this House. This is the kind of bipartisan cooperation we need to see to solve the problems affecting American families, and I was especially gratified that the members of the Committee on Rules accepted our request for more debate time on this bill, as well as a closed rule. On the substance of the bill, let me just say at this point that the Commerce Department has already issued its determination that illegal dumping and foreign government subsidies have occurred in Japan, Brazil and Russia. This constitutes the best, most informed judgment so far by the U.S. Government that illegal dumping is, in fact, occurring. We are playing by the rules but we are losing jobs to those who are not. Support fair trade. Vote for the rule and vote for final passage of H.R. 975.

Mr. DOYLE

Mr. DOYLE. Mr. Speaker, we have heard a lot of facts today about the steel import crisis, but there is one fact that I would like to stress above all: 12,000 Americans have lost their jobs to foreign competitors who have cheated. This is not the first steel crisis. I remember the real suffering in the 1970s and the 1980s, in towns like McKeesport, Duquesne, Braddock, Clairton and many other communities in the Mon-Valley section of Pittsburgh. Those were desperate times. I know hard working men and women, who never took a dime from the government, that were forced to go on welfare. I saw good families break up from the stress of not being able to support themselves. Since that time, steel and our steel towns have recovered somewhat. We have done everything we have been asked. Labor productivity has improved tremendously, for one thing. Steel plants in my area have come back with probably one-fourth the number of workers they had, and the large percent of people that were let go many had to find work in the service sector or whatever other under employment jobs they could do, and no one shed a tear for them. Steelworkers did everything they were asked to do because we were told we had to make U.S. steel competitive again. They had to work harder for longer hours, for less pay, and no one came to their aid, but steel came back. They got lean and mean and American steelworkers are now the most efficient producers of steel in the world. We have played by the rules, only to have our jobs stolen by foreign companies who are breaking our laws and that is an incontrovertible fact proven by our Commerce Department's own findings. Today we draw a line in the sand. We will not tolerate a steel policy that let us 12,000 Americans lose their jobs to competitors that are cheating, and if this administration is not going to take decisive action then we will. As I stand in the well of this House on Saint Patrick's Day, I think about my grandfather, Mike Doyle, who came to this country from Ireland in the early 1900s and found work in Pittsburgh in the steel mills. He worked 43 years at the Carrie Furnace and along with his wife Beatrice raised three sons. His middle son, Mike Doyle, my father, followed him into the steel mills and worked almost 30 years at the Edgar Thompson Steel Works. Aside from two summers when I was in college, I am the first Mike Doyle in my family not to work in a steel mill, but I remember vividly the sacrifices made by thousands of families who worked in the mills to build this country and keep it strong. My father and grandfather are not here anymore. They are up there celebrating with Saint Patrick today, but I know they are watching and I know their Irish is up. In their memory, and on behalf of thousands of American steelworkers and their families, I dedicate every ounce of strength I have to the passage of H.R. 975. Mr. Speaker, it is up to us. We need to send a message. Stop this cheating. Stand up for steel. Support H.R. 975.

Mr. DOYLE

Mr. DOYLE. Mr. Speaker, I rise to address these articles of impeachment and the magnitude of what our actions today portend, not only for the office of the presidency and the institutional integrity of the House, but for the well-being of our country. In my estimation, while the President's misconduct in this matter is both reprehensible and indefensible, it does not rise to the threshold of impeachable offenses, as drafted by our Founding Fathers. Without question, the impeachment provisions of the Constitution were drafted in word and spirit to provide recourse for crimes committed against the State. Treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors cannot be indicated with the allegations outlined in the Starr referral. We must not allow the historical context and inherent meaning of the Constitution to be subsumed by political passion and rhetoric. This is not to say that the President's misconduct does not deserve condemnation. It does. Thus, I am profoundly disappointed that the Republican leadership has thwarted consideration of a formal censure of the President. Mr. Speaker, for all of the above reasons, I urge my colleagues to vote no on the articles of impeachment, and instead, support a strong and severe censure. Mr. Speaker, I rise to address these articles of impeachment, and the magnitude of what our actions today portend not only for the office of the Presidency and the institutional integrity of the House of Representatives, but for the well-being of our country. As with any serious matter, it is of the utmost importance to avail oneself of all available information before reaching a conclusion. Accordingly, I did not arrive at a final determination on the articles of impeachment until I had the opportunity to thoroughly review the Judiciary Committee's final report. In my estimation, while the President's misconduct in this matter involving an adulterous affair is both reprehensible and flat-out wrong, it does not rise to the threshold of impeachable offenses as drafted by our Founding Fathers. Without question, the impeachment provisions of the Constitution were drafted in word and spirit to provide recourse for crimes committed against the state. Treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors can not be equated with the allegations outlined in the Starr referral and presented in the Majority's views contained within the Judiciary Committee's final report. We must not allow the historical context and inherent meaning of the Constitution to be subsumed by political passion and rhetoric, or subordinate the office of the Presidency to the whims of Congress. This is not to say that the President's misconduct does not deserve condemnation. It does. Thus, I am profoundly disappointed that the Republican Leadership has thwarted consideration of a formal censure of the President. By doing so, the Leadership is effectively preventing members from having an opportunity to vote their conscience on what will likely be the most significant decision during their public service in the U.S. House of Representatives. To not be afforded the opportunity to consider a censure motion shifts the focus from appropriate punishment of the President to inflicting unwarranted distress on the entire country. In my view, our actions should not result in further upheaval for the American people, but should bring about prompt resolution of the matter. I hold an enormous amount of respect for the institutional integrity of the House of Representatives, but seriously have to question what precedent today's pending vote will set for the tenor of the 106th session of Congress. While the 104th Congress was often marked by deep philosophical divides and the 105th for missed opportunities for compromise on social security and HMO reform, one must consider the shadow that will be cast on the potential for progress in the 106th Congress if we proceed further with the process of impeachment. As members of Congress we should be working to build consensus and solve problems, not to encourage divisiveness and apathy. If the House does approve these articles of impeachment, it is my belief that we will be doing a disservice to the office of the Presidency, the House of Representatives, and the country--not only in the short-term, but for many years to come. For all of the above reasons, I urge my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to vote no on all articles of impeachment, and to instead support a strong and severe censure resolution.

Mr. DOYLE

Mr. DOYLE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to urge support for the resolution offered by my colleague from Ohio. Along with my friends from Indiana and Ohio, and many other Members of the House who have been working to get debate and a fair vote on this issue--I am deeply concerned about the current crisis in the U.S. steel industry. We are worried about this steel crisis and we want to send a strong message to the White House. The U.S. steel industry and its workers are suffering tremendously from reduced orders, as a result of dumping by Asian and Russian producers. But the Administration has not acted to stop this illegal practice. The Members of the European Union have been smart enough to protect their steel industry from dumping by erecting temporary barriers to steel imports during the financial crisis. Their steel industry will weather this storm. American steel workers--the most efficient in the world--cannot continue to be besieged by foreign steel products while waiting indefinitely for trade cases to be settled. Damage to the American steel industry is extensive, severe, and rapidly growing. I want to say that I do think there is a legitimate role for the United States, Japan, the European Union, and others to play, together, to help Russia and the newly industrialized Asian countries get through this economic crisis. But the American steel industry cannot and should not shoulder the burden alone. Just recently, just in the Pittsburgh area, Riverview Steel in Glassport, and a number of other steel producers have been forced out of business by unfair imports. Steel has already been through tough times in our lifetimes--but the industry has come back more competitive than ever. The current steel crisis is an external, macroeconomic problem that is unfairly impacting American workers. We already have the laws in place to address this problem. We need to act now to stop another hollowing out of American industry, by acting to stop illegal dumping. This House must act today to urge concrete measures on the Administration to stop the flow of dumped steel. The Traficant Resolution makes the strongly worded statement that needs to be made on this subject. Although it's non-binding, the Traficant Resolution would call on the Administration to investigate these low-priced steel imports for 10 days. If the Asians, former Soviet states, or anyone else is flouting international trade agreements, the President should impose a 1-year ban on steel imports from that country. By asking for these actions, the Traficant Resolution is making a real statement. This is not just some toothless piece of paper that would make this issue go away. Because this issue will not go away. I urge my colleagues to think over this serious problem, and vote in favor of the Traficant Resolution.

Mr. DOYLE

Mr. DOYLE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to urge support of the Traficant resolution. The U.S. steel industry and its workers are suffering tremendously from reduced orders as a result of dumping by Asian and Russian producers, but the administration has not acted to stop this illegal practice. The members of the European Union have been smart enough to protect their steel industry from dumping by erecting temporary barriers to steel imports during the financial crisis. Their steel industry will weather this storm. American steel workers, the most efficient in the world, cannot continue to be besieged by foreign steel products, while waiting indefinitely for trade cases to be settled. Damage to the American steel industry is extensive, severe and rapidly growing. The House must act today.

Mr. DOYLE

Mr. DOYLE. Mr. Speaker, I rise to be heard on the question of privilege offered by the gentleman from Indiana. The resolution under consideration constitutes a question of privilege of the House because trade laws enacted by the House over 60 years ago are being ignored. These laws were specifically designed to ensure that American workers are not hurt by unfair and illegal dumping of manufactured products including steel. I am sorry to say that the congressional intent, as represented by the Trade and Tariff Act of 1930, is specifically ignored. This is an external crisis caused by steel dumping in the U.S. by foreign producers for whom any price for steel is higher than the price they would get at home. Because of a result of the Asian and Russian financial crisis, there is no market for steel in their home countries. This is a crisis addressable by laws currently in effect which are not being enforced. U.S. steel remains very competitive. But steel was being dumped in the U.S. at below the cost of production, which is illegal and a violation of the laws that the Legislative Branch has enacted. U.S. trade laws are supposed to be enforced by the Executive Branch. The administration has failed to stop these illegal activities, and the dignity of this House is being impugned. I urge the support of the resolution.

Mr. DOYLE

Mr. DOYLE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H.R. 4194, the FY1999 VA/HUD/Independent Agencies Conference Report. While there are many parts of this bill that I am proud to support, I am especially pleased that the Housing Opportunity and Responsibility Act, H.R. 2, was included in this Conference Report. Mr. Speaker, it was not too long ago that the House considered and passed H.R. 2, which represents the first significant reform of public housing in several years. Among other substantial improvements, the bill eliminates many current obstacles that local housing authorities face in receiving funding. During the consideration of H.R. 2, I worked diligently with my fellow colleague from Pennsylvania Representative Ron Klink to successfully include the text of a bill we crafted, the Community Right To Know Act, as part of H.R. 2. The Community Right to Know Act, H.R. 212, requires local public housing authorities to notify, and consult with, potentially impacted local governments when negotiating any settlement of, or consent decree for, significant litigation regarding public housing assistance from the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). Thanks to our hard work and persistence, the House passed our bill in the form of an amendment unanimously, by voice vote last year. When the House considers this Conference Report today, we will be requiring HUD to consult with local communities before they attempt to implement any housing program. This is especially important to my constituents in Allegheny County, Pennsylvania, where they have been working hard to implement the Sanders Consent Decree, a housing desegregation class-action lawsuit which involves HUD and the Allegheny County Housing Authority (ACHA). The Consent Decree states that HUD, ACHA, and the plaintiff's attorney's will work to end alleged discriminatory housing policies in the County and distribute 100 public housing units throughout the County rather than concentrating them in blighted areas. Disputes stemming from the consent decree began early in the implementation process when HUD, ACHA, and the plaintiff's attorney's, as members of the Sanders Task Force, decided to schedule closed door meetings in which the general public was not invited. To make matters worse, the Task Force does not include community leaders, private citizens, local officials or any Congressional Representatives and has made little or no effort to consult with citizens in developing their plans. As a result, the Task Force's initiatives are often ill-advised and poorly managed. The Klink-Doyle ``Community Right To Know'' initiative would prohibit closed-door meetings and allow the public at-large to voice their concerns, comments and make suggestions as to how to implement consent decrees, and other HUD programs in the best possible manner. I am especially pleased that the House and Senate Conferees included this bill in this Conference Report. This Conference Report is the product of a compromise between the Administration, the House and the Senate. I am proud to support this Conference Report and urge my colleagues to vote yes on H.R. 4194.

Mr. DOYLE

Mr. DOYLE. Mr. Speaker, I rise to urge my colleagues to support this important effort to deal with the Year 2000 computer problem. This bill is the Senate counterpart to a House bill, H.R. 4355, that I was pleased to cosponsor on behalf of the Administration. This bill has now been amended to represent a bipartisan agreement on how we can encourage companies to pool their information as they deal with the Y2K problem. At the same time, this bill would not shield companies from liability for products that fail. I'd like to commend the fine men and women from the House and Senate authorizing Committees who have put so much hard work into this issue over the past few years, as well as the many people in the Administration who have been working this for a long time as well. When taken together, I'm pleased to be able to say that this bill shows that the important work of governing in Washington is still going on. There's still a lot of work to be done to make the Year 2000 computer fix happen, and it's going to take more of this kind of cooperation to get it done. Again, I'd like to thank my colleagues who've put in so much hard work on this bill, and I urge all the rest of us to support it. The Senate bill was ordered to be read a third time, was read the third time, and passed, and a motion to reconsider was laid on the table.