David Dreier

Mr. DREIER

Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks on this tribute to the gentleman from New York (Mr. Solomon) that surrounds House Resolution 574.

Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I call up House Resolution 574 and ask for its immediate consideration.

Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, this rule waives points of order against the conference report to accompany H.R. 4194, the VA, HUD and independent agencies appropriations bill for fiscal year 1999. A key element of this rule is that it permits the inclusion in the conference report of the public housing reform bill that the House passed last year with substantial bipartisan support. That legislation will provide more flexibility for local housing authorities and greater housing opportunities for the working poor. Mr. Speaker, I want to commend the chairman of the Subcommittee on Housing, the gentleman from New York (Mr. Lazio), for his successful efforts in moving this good government reform bill forward. I would also note that the conference report provides nearly three- quarters of a billion dollars more than the President requested for various veterans assistance programs such as medical care and research, and at this point, Mr. Speaker, having said that, I am going to move into a very, very important issue here, and I am going to take time and encourage my colleagues to join me as we pay tribute to the guy who has done more than almost anyone for veterans in those areas of medical care and research, and I am referring of course to my great pal from Glens Falls, New York, the distinguished chairman who will be retiring: Jerry Solomon. Nobody has worked as aggressively and as tirelessly on behalf of our nation's veterans and for all those programs that benefit them than Jerry Solomon. Mr. Speaker, as you know, the gentleman from New York (Mr. Solomon), as I said, will retire this year after two long decades of very distinguished service here in the House of Representatives. During the last 8 years he served as the top Republican on the House Committee on Rules, and during the last 4, as we all know, and especially the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Moakley) knows this, Jerry Solomon has served as chairman of the committee. I know I speak for many of his colleagues in Congress, his constituents in the Adirondacks and other parts of New York, our men and women in uniform and the millions of veterans who bravely serve their country when I say that we will all miss the gentleman from New York (Mr. Solomon). Jerry was first elected to Congress as part of the very distinguished class of 1978, which includes, of course the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Gingrich), my colleagues from California, Jerry Lewis and Bill Thomas and a number of others. But the legacy he will leave behind is as impressive as some who have served in this institution for generations. Inspired, as I was, by President Ronald Reagan, Jerry Solomon has worked to strengthen the morale and preparedness of our military and to make the government fiscally responsible by rooting out waste and inefficiency. He is a principal author of the line item veto legislation that was enacted in the Congress in 1996. He fought tirelessly for the defense build up of the 1980s that led to the end of the Cold War. At a time when the all volunteer Army is serving our Nation well, Jerry reminds us every year of the pending dangers that loom on the international horizon by his spirited advocacy of the Selective Service program. His unquestioned patriotism and love of country have been a source of leadership and inspiration to those who have been fortunate enough to spend their entire lives in a world free from global conflict. But if there is one legacy that Jerry Solomon can be most proud of Mr. Speaker, it can be found in the veterans programs and their funding levels contained in the appropriations bill that this rule makes in order. As a veteran of the United States Marine Corps, as my late father was, he served during the Korean war and was a former Member of the House Committee on Veterans' Affairs. There, as I said, there was no better advocate for our brave men and women who have made sacrifices for our country and for the freedoms that we enjoy, and there is no one more committed to the long-term success of our military. Serving with Jerry Solomon on the Committee on Rules and on the front lines to implement the policies of Ronald Reagan has been one of the most rewarding experiences of my years here. Mr. Speaker, I want to offer my very best wishes to Jerry and his wonderful wife, Frieda, and their great family as he pursues what I am sure will be another long and very distinguished career in the years ahead. With that, Mr. Speaker, I will urge adoption of this rule. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, for purposes of debate only, I yield the customary 30 minutes to my very dear friend from South Boston, Massachusetts (Mr. Moakley), pending which I yield myself such time as I may consume. During consideration of this resolution, all time yielded is for the purpose of debate only. (Mr. DREIER asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks and include extraneous material.)

Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Bakersfield, California (Mr. Thomas) with whom, as I mentioned in my opening remarks, the gentleman from New York (Mr. Solomon) came to the Congress. (Mr. THOMAS asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to my friend, the gentleman from Saint Joseph, Michigan (Mr. Upton).

Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time, and I move the previous question on the resolution. The previous question was ordered.

Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, having spent more time in the woodshed than probably any of my colleagues, thanks to the gentleman from New York (Mr. Solomon), I know the feeling that was just mentioned by the distinguished majority leader. Mr. Speaker, I yield a minute and a half to the gentleman from Lincoln, Nebraska (Mr. Bereuter), a classmate of the gentleman from New York (Mr. Solomon). (Mr. BEREUTER asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to my very good friend, the gentleman from Atlanta, Georgia (Mr. Linder), a valued member of the Committee on Rules.

Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, I am happy to yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Redlands, California (Mr. Lewis), my very good friend, and the man who will be managing the conference report when we finally get to that point.

Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Clarks Summit, Pennsylvania (Mr. McDade) the distinguished chairman of the Subcommittee on Energy and Water Development, who also is joining that very distinguished group with Mr. Solomon and will be, unfortunately, retiring at the end of this term. (Mr. McDade asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Corning, New York (Mr. Houghton). (Mr. HOUGHTON asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Pasco, Washington (Mr. Hastings), a very valued member of the Committee on Rules and my good friend.

Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Wood Dale, Illinois (Mr. Hyde), my very, very dear friend, the distinguished chairman of the Committee on the Judiciary, which has gotten a little attention in the last 24 hours or so.

Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Sanibel, Florida (Mr. Goss). We are all very gratified that our colleague from Sanibel has returned and that his wife is recovering well.

Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, I am happy to yield 1\1/2\ minutes to my friend from Metairie, Louisiana (Mr. Livingston), the very distinguished chairman of the Committee on Appropriations. (Mr. LIVINGSTON asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. DREIER

Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, balancing the budget, cutting taxes and reforming the welfare system, those are things of which both Democrats and Republicans are very proud. I remember that in speech after speech over the last several months people have said, ``Gosh, why do you all let Bill Clinton take credit for balancing the budget, cutting taxes and reforming welfare?'' And I am reminded of that great, great sign that appeared on President Ronald Reagan's desk in which said: ``There is no limit to what you can do as long as you don't care who gets the credit.'' Mr. Speaker, it is very clear that we as Republicans have, in fact, won the war of ideas. We, in fact, have been the ones who for years have been advocating balancing the federal budget, cutting taxes and reforming our welfare system. So while Democrats and Republicans alike can take credit for it, I am particularly proud that it was our party, the Republicans, who consistently argued that for years, and we are today enjoying the benefits of those very important policies.

Mr. DREIER

Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, it is a great privilege for me to join in this ``Farewell to Fawell.'' As we listen to some of the remarks that have been made, the discussions that centered from the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Hoekstra) about issues like ERISA, and I know there has been a great deal of discussion about higher education, I think I would like to move slightly beyond the higher education area to say that Harris Fawell played a key role in teaching me an awful lot, and one of the most important things had to do with an issue called electrometallurgical treatment of nuclear waste. This whole issue of nuclear waste disposal is something that came to my attention from some people that I was meeting with in California. And late one night we had the chance, with Mr. Fawell calling me a half dozen times to make sure that I came over to speak on behalf of a very important amendment that dealt with the issue of electrometallurgical treatment. I want to congratulate him for the tremendous persistence that he has shown in dealing with these very, very important and complex issues. One of those issues that, frankly, got a great deal of attention, something of which I am extraordinarily proud, is that Mr. Fawell and I had the privilege a couple of years ago of both being categorized as ``super heroes'' by an organization known as Citizens Against Government Waste. All it meant was that the two of us were working long and hard to make sure that we would deal with the horrendous problem of government waste. And it is one that continues to go on and on and on. And that is why, as I heard earlier mentioned, Harris has been really at the forefront of this issue, with an organization known as Pork Busters, in trying to get rid of all of the waste in government. That is why I am particularly saddened that Harris has decided to leave, not only because he has been a great friend to so many of us, but because he has really been in the vanguard of that issue of focusing on particular areas where we are able to try and reduce the size and scope of government and encourage individual initiative and responsibility. So I would like to say that even though Harris told us months and months and months ago that he was going to be retiring, and many of us were very saddened then, as we head towards the waning days of the 105th Congress, I think that we will recognize that the contributions that Harris Fawell has made for the years that he has served here are very, very great, and he will be sorely missed when the 106th Congress convenes in January.

Mr. DREIER

Mr. DREIER. I thank my friend for yielding. I would like to begin by thanking her for taking this time for a very important special order. Mr. Speaker, there are a few things that every Member hopes to hear upon retirement from this institution. We want others to say that we have been effective, that we worked hard to represent the interests of our districts, and that we will be missed by our colleagues. As one who represents a neighboring district, who worked with Esteban Torres on both the Banking and the Small Business committees and who because of redistricting has had the opportunity to represent many of the same communities and the same people, I can say all of those fine things about my colleague from West Covina. I am saying that he is from West Covina by letting a secret out that he actually is a constituent of mine and I am very proud of the fact that when I got West Covina back in that reapportionment process that he chose to stay in West Covina with me as his representative. His work was critical to the passage of the North American Free Trade Agreement which I truly believe is one of the greatest bipartisan achievements of this decade. When the House debated the NAFTA, he worked with the Clinton administration and those of us on both sides of the aisle to create the North American Development Bank which built support for the agreement and secured important votes for its passage. I have also had the opportunity to work with my neighbor on important local issues such as clean up of ground water in the San Gabriel Basin where Esteban led the effort to authorize the San Gabriel Basin demonstration project. This demonstration project along with the San Gabriel Basin Water Quality Authority has enabled residents and businesses in the San Gabriel Valley to pursue a locally led response to the problem of ground water pollution. The goal has been to give all stakeholders an interest in a successful clean up and to avoid the litigation nightmare that has characterized the Superfund program. And I should also add that I worked with him on dealing with the closure of a large, what was a toxic chemical dump in west West Covina, and he was key in that, and I found working with him on that to be very, very important because we were able to work on it in a bipartisan way. Besides the important environmental initiatives, he and I have worked together to support another issue that has been very key for the San Gabriel Valley, local transportation and getting funding for the Foothill Transit Authority. He was very, very key. He and I regularly testified before his appropriations committee in behalf of this. This is a local bus project which has repeatedly been cited by national officials as a great model of both the public and private partnership in dealing with the transit needs that exist. I should also say, Mr. Speaker, that not everyone knows that Esteban Torres is a very accomplished artist. He often has the chance to sit down and very quickly is able to do these great drawings of people and of places and things, and it is a talent that very few of us have, and I am glad that Esteban Torres has been able to regularly utilize that when he served here in the Congress. I have seen some of the great caricatures that he has done. Mr. Speaker, I often comment on what a pleasure it is to work on bipartisan initiatives that benefit both the American people and the constituents whom I am proud to represent in the San Gabriel Valley, and I am very pleased to say that I have such a relationship with Esteban Torres. He has created a very impressive legacy of service that is equal to that of many of our more senior colleagues. I have truly enjoyed working with Esteban, and I wish him, Arcy and their wonderful family all the best as they pursue together what I am sure will be many rewarding endeavors in the future. And I thank my friend for very generously yielding me this time, and I look forward to the other remarks, and I see my very good friend, Mr. Ortiz, who I am sure will offer some great brilliance about our colleague, Mr. Torres.

Mr. DREIER

Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, Larry Elder is the top radio personality in Los Angeles. His drive-time radio show is heard by about 400,000 people per day, and an average of 72,000 people tune in at any given time. In overall audience, he trails only a few of the nation's best-known, nationally-syndicated hosts. Why is Larry Elder so popular? Because he thoughtfully espouses a message which stresses the importance of accountability, individual responsibility, and hard-work as keys to success. Larry grew up in South Central Los Angeles, and he is now the self- proclaimed ``Sage of South Central.'' He attended law school at the University of Michigan, and later worked as an executive headhunter in Cleveland before his radio talents were discovered. Cleveland's loss has become Los Angeles's gain. Larry has appeared on KABC radio for nearly 5 years, and his popularity has consistently grown. One of the reasons for Larry's devoted following is that his views are often contrary to those espoused by other nationally-recognized African-American leaders. He argues that big government and excessive regulation inhibit economic growth. He supports school choice as a way to ensure that the children of lower-income families have access to good schools. Larry argues that the biggest problem for minorities in America is not white racism, but illegitimacy, which is fostered by a welfare state that liberal leaders have fought to preserve and expand. Larry has survived and thrived in America's second-largest radio market despite a lengthy boycott aimed at depriving his show of important advertisers and forcing him off the air. This experience prompted Forbes magazine recently to note that ``Larry Elder is one of a group of black dissenters who are winning public attention. Nevertheless, the business community is nervous of them: They fear arousing the wrath of pressure groups that can muster street boycotts.'' Despite concerns among sponsors about the shopping habits of those who want Larry off the air, the boycott seems only to have increased his popularity, and he is now looking toward a syndicated radio show, and possibly a book and television contract. Soon, the rest of the United States will benefit from the insight and humor of my friend, Larry Elder. Mr. Speaker, Larry Elder is thoughtful and entertaining, and even his staunchest critics concede that his ideas merit serious debate. I believe that if more Americans took to heart his message of self- reliance, accountability and equal treatment, we would make great strides toward empowering the weakest in our society to improve their own lives through better education, safer neighborhoods, and enhanced economic opportunity. In turn, it would allow us to focus public resources on those who truly need assistance.

Mr. DREIER

Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time, and I move the previous question on the resolution. The previous question was ordered.

Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume to simply congratulate my very dear friend from Charlotte, North Carolina, for her spectacular presentation of the opening remarks on this rule, and to rise in strong support of this rule and urge my colleagues to vote in favor of it.

Mr. DREIER

Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, how big is $80 billion? We have this chart right here that shows, over a 5-year period, $9.6 trillion of expenditures. It is obviously a little tiny sliver. When we compare it to the size of the Federal Government, $1.7 trillion in spending last time I checked, we realize that the Republican tax cut package, alas, is quite modest indeed. A liberal could spend $80 billion by lunch, but $80 billion over 5 years is considered a threat to the Social Security Trust Fund. Why spending is not a threat to the Social Security Trust Fund but tax cuts are is anybody's guess, but that is what the liberals are trying to say. Just take a look at this chart and try to put things in perspective. Republicans are putting aside $1.4 trillion to save the Social Security Trust Fund, but the Democrats are strangely silent about that. But that is not surprising, given how much money they put aside during the four long decades they were in the majority. Right here. A great big zero. Zero versus $1.4 trillion. That is pretty embarrassing, and maybe that is why they are trying to change the subject and demagogue on this issue. First, it was Mediscare, now it is frightening nonsense about Social Security.

Mr. DREIER

Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, at a time when America needed a distraction from Washington scandals, hurricanes, and global economic crises, St. Louis Cardinals first baseman Mark McGwire lifted our spirits and made us forget our troubles. For his achievements on and off the baseball field, Mark McGwire deserves our praise and admiration. We all share in the pride felt by his parents, Dr. John and Ginger McGwire, who were long time residents of Claremont, California. The people of California feel a special bond with this son of the San Gabriel Valley. Born in Pomona and raised in Claremont, McGwire graduated from Damien High School where he was recruited by the University of Southern California as a pitcher. At USC, McGwire gave up pitching to become an everyday player. Like Babe Ruth, McGwire has become one of the most feared hitters in the major league. This year, his 70 home runs shattered the 37-year-old mark set by Roger Maris. McGwire also had a .752 slugging average, the highest average since 1927. He had 162 walks, which is the second most intentional walks in a season. To put that in perspective, in 1961 Roger Maris drew only 94 walks and never received an intentional walk. Besides his accomplishments on the baseball diamond, McGwire is an all-star off the field. He is a devoted father, and the images of him hugging his son, Matt, after home run #62 brought tears to many eyes. In 1987, McGwire had a chance to lead the American League in home runs as a rookie, but instead he sat out the end of the season to be there for his son's birth. His love for children is extraordinary. Last year, McGwire pledged $3 million to his foundation which helps sexually abused children. While in Oakland, he regularly wore wristbands with the pictures of missing children so viewers could see them on television. After awarding McGwire with their Sportsman of the Year award last year, The Sporting News President James Nuckols appropriately commented, ``the quantity and sheer power of Mark's home runs have put him in a class of his own, but his moving example of selflessness and loyalty have made him equally unique.'' Baseball historians may view Mark McGwire's legacy as the greatest home run hitter of all time. McGwire has hit a home run every 11.3 at bats, which is the lowest ratio by a major leaguer--lower than Hank Aaron, Babe Ruth, Willie Mays, and Harmon Killebrew. Or, his legacy may be this year's 70 home runs which may never be surpassed. However, Mr. Speaker, I believe McGwire's legacy should be the tremendous inspiration that he provides. As he described in a recent interview, ``for all the bad things that are going on in the world, for a short period of time, [I was] putting a lot of smiles on people's faces.'' To be sure, Mark McGwire has been an inspiration to all of us. He is the pride of the San Gabriel Valley.

Mr. DREIER

Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, we are 456 days from January 1, 2000. The dawn of the new millennium. A time of great hope and anticipation for many Americans; in fact, for people the world over. You can bet that there will be some very serious time and effort put into preparing festivities befitting a truly historic moment. Even so, as big a day as January 1, 2000 promises to be, most Americans probably think it's a little time early to prepare their New Year's resolutions and parties. I have to agree. However, the same does not hold true for the federal government. People are increasingly coming to grips with the fact that there is a potential Year 2000 computer problem. Some people call it a millennium bug, and if we don't focus on solving this problem, it may have a ripple effect that impacts virtually every aspect of daily life. When we talk about this issue, we must underscore the word ``potential'' problem. I am not an alarmist. We don't know what will happen to hundreds of millions of computer and electronic systems when their internal clocks turn from year ``99'' to year ``00.'' In many cases, the answer may be nothing. However, being prudent is completely different from being an alarmist. We need to be prudent because the more the federal government does to detect and solve this problem, the more local governments and public utilities do to detect and avoid this problem and the more private businesses do to detect and avoid this problem, the less impact it is likely to have on American families. Prudence and problem solving were the principles that led me to join my colleague from Atherton, California, Anna Eshoo in sponsoring H.R. 4455, the Year 2000 Readiness Disclosure Act on August 6th. This legislation, which served as a basis for the bipartisan product of the Senate Judiciary Committee that we are considering here today, encourages our nation's private sector, the most creative and energetic force for change that can be harnessed in this effort, to get down to business on this problem. The first important step that must be taken, and this is the view of a broad spectrum of experts including John Koskinen, the Executive Branch point-man on the Year 2000 transition, is to dramatically increase the sharing of information on this ``potential'' problem. The reality is that most companies are not sharing very much news on the status of their Year 2000 preparations. The reason they cite is litigation concerns. Now, the sad fact is that if real problems are caused by the transition to the Year 2000, and we all hope our efforts today will make that less likely, there are sure to be plenty of lawsuits trying to place blame and win damages. Some people estimate a trillion dollars in litigation. Those numbers can chill any corporate legal counsel into advising clients to say as little as possible. Mr. Speaker, this bill is not the whole Year 2000 litigation answer, but it is a start. It will give businesses more confidence that they can talk about the state of their Year 2000 readiness--problems and solutions--without the fear that they are simply arming lawyers planning to hit them with big Year 2000 lawsuits. There is more to be done to ensure that national energies and resources, both in the government and in the private sector, are directed at solving and avoiding problems rather than preparing for and fighting litigation. That is in the best interest of American families. In addition, we need to make sure that America's high technology industry, one of the fastest growing and most important sectors of our economy, creating millions of good jobs for working Americans, is not bankrupted as a scapegoat for a problem set in place decades ago. Mr. Speaker, there is much to do next year, but today, this is the right first step. I encourage all of my colleagues to support this truly bipartisan bill so that it can be sent to the President and we can begin to eliminate one of the hurdles to solving the potential Year 2000 problem.