Jimmy Duncan

Mr. DUNCAN

Mr. DUNCAN. Mr. Speaker, I proudly represent the people of Imperial County, California, which is a small community located on the U.S.- Mexico border. As with many border communities, the Imperial County has a good working relationship with their neighbors in Mexico. Unfortunately, they also have to suffer the consequences of Mexico's more lax environmental requirements, especially with respect to air quality. As we all know, air does not respect the international boundaries we put in place and, as a result, border communities are often penalized for activities that are actually happening south of the border and beyond their control. Such a situation is developing for Imperial County. At least partially due to the heavy regulatory and environmental compliance burdens, electrical generation facilities are locating in Mexico. While some companies are building power plants that meet U.S. standards, for which they should be commended, other companies are choosing to operate dirty plants as opposed to incurring the additional cost of installing the best available emission control devices. As a result, I am introducing the Southern Border Air Quality Protection Act. This bill takes an immediate and important step in acknowledging that we must consider air pollution a regional issue that does not respect international boundaries. My legislation will prohibit the export of natural gas to any electricity generation facility located in Mexico and within 50 miles of the U.S. that does not meet the air pollution emission rate requirements in the nearest U.S. air quality control region. In addition, the legislation includes a grandfathering clause so that any plants put in service before December 31, 2001 are exempted from this law. This bill is necessary to protect our border communities from rapidly increasing emissions from unregulated, substandard power plants that leave U.S. communities vulnerable to federal regulatory sanctions. If a plant isn't good enough to be built five miles inside the border in California, then it shouldn't be good enough to operate five miles outside the border in Mexico. I realize this is a first step and that more work must be done to create cross border air quality zones. I look forward to working with the appropriate U.S. agencies and the Mexican government to implement such binational agreements. In the meantime, this legislation is immediately necessary for the protection of our border communities and I urge all my colleagues to join me in this effort to ensure the clean air throughout the region.

Mr. DUNCAN

Mr. DUNCAN. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that it may be in order at any time on Wednesday, June 12, 2002, for the Speaker to declare a recess subject to the call of the Chair for the purpose of receiving in joint meeting the Honorable John Howard, Prime Minister of Australia.

Mr. DUNCAN

Mr. DUNCAN. Mr. Speaker, ever since the Gulf War ended in 1991, the U.S. has been spending about $4 million a day enforcing a no-flight zone in Iraq, $4 million a day. This has been a tremendous waste of money and manpower. I believe almost all Americans would have preferred that this 12 or $13 billion that has been spent over these years would have been spent in almost any other good way. Most Americans have not even noticed that we have been dropping bombs and still shooting at missile sites all these years in Iraq. I remember reading a front page lengthy story about a group of Iraqi boys we accidentally killed there. Now there are some people here in Washington who seem to be clamoring for us to go to war against Iraq. I represent a very patriotic pro- military district in Tennessee. My people will strongly support our troops if we go to war. But I can assure you that as I go around my district I hear no clamor or even a weak desire to go to war against Iraq. Saudi Arabia had much more to do with the September 11 tragedies than Iraq did. I heard yesterday that one of the main financial backers of the terrorists is from Kuwait. Yet we are not talking about going to war against Saudi Arabia or Kuwait, nor should we. We have been too quick to get involved in ethnic or religious disputes around the world. We have been too quick to drop bombs on people who want to be our friends. We turned NATO from a defensive organization into an offensive one in Bosnia. Chris Matthews on ``Hard Ball'' the other night said, ``In the past we always had the world on our side because we did not go to war unless we were attacked.'' He strongly questioned this eagerness to go to war against Iraq. He said in a recent column that the American people are being ``herded into war.'' A war that he says will just lead to more hatred of the U.S. David Ignatius, the nationally syndicated columnist for the New York Herald Tribune and The Washington Post wrote on March 15: ``How can the United States sell a war against Iraq to skeptical Arabs and Europeans? A good start would be to level with them and admit there is no solid evidence linking Baghdad to Osama bin Laden's terrorists attacks against America.'' The Joint Chiefs of Staff have questioned this eagerness to go to war against Iraq. Yesterday, William Raspberry, the very highly respected columnist for The Washington Post, in a nationally syndicated column repeated words he had written a dozen years ago. He wrote: ``The prospect of a bloody war with no price worth the tens of thousands of American lives it would cost can make you a little nervous. I am getting a little nervous. It is not that I doubt the ability of America's fighting forces to take out a third-rate power like Saddam Hussein's Iraq. My doubts concern the purpose for doing so. Saddam is being described as a ruthless and power-mad tyrant bent on achieving political control of the Arab world. I do not question the description, but it does seem to me that most of the current saber rattling is coming from Washington, not Bagdad.'' And Mr. Raspberry continued: ``I wrote those words a dozen years back when the first President Bush was contemplating the invasion of Iraq. Why are we rattling sabers now? The reason I recall my earlier doubts is that they are so much a carbon copy of my present ones.'' Mr. Raspberry says: ``Maybe it was a mistake not to wipe out the last scrap of Iraq's military power back then, not to mow down the surrendering republican guard like shooting fish in a barrel. But surely the failure to do so then cannot justify a unilateral attack now.'' Mr. Raspberry said: ``We should not become the playground bully of the word.'' In 1990, Saddam Hussein, who I am not praising or defending in any way, had invaded Kuwait and was threatening to go further. We had to act and I voted for the original Gulf War. However, we later found out the Iraqi military strength had been greatly exaggerated. The so-called ``elite'' Praetorian Guards were surrendering to CNN camera crews or anybody who would take them. Hussein has been greatly weakened since then in almost every way. Let us not exaggerate his strength this time. If he starts to attack us, I will be the first to support a war effort, but please let us not provoke war. Let us not change the name of the Department of Defense into the War Department once again. We should not try to be the policemen of the world. We should try as hard as we can to reestablish our reputation as the most peace-loving Nation on the face of the Earth.

Mr. DUNCAN

Mr. DUNCAN. Mr. Speaker, the very people who have caused high gas prices in this country are now crying the loudest about the oil companies raising prices. Most experts say gas prices are going to go much higher. What is causing this is not collusion among the oil companies as much as laws and rules and regulations demanded by big government liberals and environmental extremists. Approximately 36 oil refineries have closed in this country since 1980 due to costly environmental rules. This keeps gas prices high and will drive them even higher. Environmental groups have demonstrated for years against drilling for oil anyplace in this country. ANWR is just the latest example. This has kept gas prices high, and they will go higher if we do not at some point get some common sense back into our rules and regulations in this regard, and if we keep not letting anybody produce any oil in this country. This keeps gas prices high and will help drive them even higher. When I was a boy, a poor man could start a gas station. Now, because of all the environmental rules and regulations and red tape, it costs a fortune to open a gas station. This causes gas prices to be higher, and will drive them higher if we do not, as I said a moment ago, get a little common sense and balance back into these rules. Oil companies have been forced to merge and get bigger to survive. Small companies have been forced out of business by excessive and overly costly and expensive regulations. This has caused gas prices to be higher, and probably are headed even higher. Sometimes those who shout the loudest about being for the little guy are actually the best friends that extremely big business has. In almost every area, in almost every industry, Mr. Speaker, big-government liberals and environmental extremists have driven small- and now even medium-sized companies out of business, thus removing much competition for the really big companies. I was told that in 1978 there were 157 small coal companies in east Tennessee. Now there are none. I think this is why so many extremely big businesses fund these environmental groups. In fact, it would not surprise me at all if Arab oil interests were funding most of the fight against drilling for oil in Alaska and other places in this country. But whatever it is, Mr. Speaker, whether it is small logging companies in communities in the Northwest or coal companies in Tennessee, it seems that groups are protesting anytime anybody wants to drill for any oil, dig for any coal, cut any trees, or produce any natural gas in this country. We cannot, Mr. Speaker, shut the whole country down. They always base everything on tourism. Tourism is a minimum wage industry. I can tell the Members this: I have a lot of parents and grandparents who come to me with their college graduate kids and they cannot find jobs because we have forced so many companies to move jobs to other countries, and we have shut so many things down in this country. Most of these environmentalists seem to come from wealthy or very upper-income families, and perhaps they do not realize how much they are hurting the poor and the lower-income and the working people in this country; but they are destroying jobs, they are driving up prices, and they will keep on doing this harm if we do not talk about this and discuss this a little further in this country today. We need to do something about this, so that we can bring prices down. If we keep on letting environmental extremists dictate the agenda in this Congress, we are going to destroy jobs and drive up prices; and as I say, we are going to really hurt the lower-income and working people in this Nation.

Mr. DUNCAN

Mr. DUNCAN. Mr. Speaker, yesterday in my hometown of Knoxville, Tennessee, the Levi Strauss Company announced that a plant was closing and 900 jobs would be moved out of this country. This follows on the heels over the past year of many other plants closing in east Tennessee and throughout this Nation. We have entered into some trade deals over the past several years that have not been good for American companies and American workers. They may have been good for big multinational companies, but they have resulted in millions of jobs going to other countries. I think that many, many people, in fact I think a great majority of the people in this Nation, are sick and tired of all of these jobs going to other nations. Our trade deficits have been running at almost unbelievable levels over the last couple of years, usually $25 billion to $30 billion a month, or even higher. Many economists say that we lose 20,000 jobs per billion, but even if the job loss is much smaller than that, it still means that we have been losing millions and millions of jobs over the last several years, and I just do not believe that we can sustain that kind of job loss indefinitely on into the future. In the short run, we do benefit from being able to buy cheaper goods from overseas. In the long run, however, we have lost and continue to lose millions of jobs to other countries. These jobs will not be easy to replace. Michael Kelly, a columnist for the Washington Post, wrote recently that ``Globalization ultimately depends on driving manufacturing jobs out of the U.S. and results in the loss of real jobs for real people in, say, Akron, Ohio. More than that,'' Mr. Kelly continues, ``it results in real costs to the Nation as a whole, and these costs are massive. When, as has happened all across the country, a factory shuts its doors and shatters a town, turning what had been a productive community into a ward of the State, what does that cost America? Over time, many, many millions, a price that globalists ignore. Finally, globalization results in the loss of a way of life,'' what was quaintly known as the American way of life. This columnist, Michael Kelly for The Washington Post, continues by saying, ``In the long run, global free trade may be, as its boosters say, to the greater good of all, but in the short and even medium run in any developed country, it is to the greater pain of many for the greater gain of a few. Those who do not understand this may be well- intentioned, but the people who live in globalism's growing number of ghost towns must consider them shockingly ill-informed.'' Then, Mr. Speaker, just yesterday Paul Craig Roberts, writing in the Washington Times, wrote this. He said, ``Today, free trade has come to mean opening U.S. markets to those who do not open their markets to us. To meet this competition, U.S. firms locate factories in low-wage countries in order to be able to compete in the American consumer market. Free-traders think this is fine so long as the American consumer is benefiting from a lower price. But, of course, if specialization and division of labor means shifting production to low- wage countries, the U.S. population will find itself specialized in selling and servicing imported goods.'' He continues on, and he says, ``Free-traders are out to lunch when they say things like `Oh, let the Chinese have the low-wage textile jobs,' implying that the United States retains the high-tech jobs. The reality is that the United States has had a trade deficit with China even in advanced technology goods since 1995.'' And then he ends his column by saying, ``The United States already has the export profile of a Third World country. The massive influx of poor immigrants from the Third World and the outflow of advanced technology will complete the transformation of the United States from a superpower into a colony.'' Mr. Speaker, this greatly concerns me. Already we have environmental extremists who protest any time anyone tries to cut any trees or dig for any coal or drill for any oil or produce any natural gas. They destroy jobs and drive up prices in the process and they hurt the poor and the lower income and the working people of this country. They always say, well, let us turn to tourism. But we cannot base the whole economy of this Nation on tourism. Mr. Speaker, we need a trade policy, we need economic policies that put America first, once again, and that put American companies and American workers first, once again. The obligation of this Congress is not to foreign companies and foreign countries; it should be to the American people. If we do not wake up, this country is going to be in bad, bad trouble, because I am not sure that this economy is bouncing back as some of the experts say. I hope it is. But after what happened yesterday in Knoxville and what has happened over the last year or so, I have my doubts. I think we need to take another look at some of these trade deals and put our own people first, once again, in this country.

Mr. DUNCAN

Mr. DUNCAN. Mr. Speaker, we are privileged to have as our guest chaplain today Rabbi Joseph Mendelsohn of the Heska Amuna Synagogue in Knoxville, Tennessee, to lead us in our opening prayer. Heska Amuna, loosely translated, means ``stronghold of faith,'' and ``strong faith'' are words that could certainly be used about the life of Rabbi Mendelsohn. This is the first time since I have been a Member of the House, and I am in my 14th year now, this is the first time I have had a member of the clergy from my district lead us in prayer, and I am very honored. Rabbi Mendelsohn was a longtime congregant and leader in conservative Jewish congregations throughout California. He became so dedicated to his faith that he decided to fulfill his dream of becoming a full-time member of the rabbinical clergy. Known in Knoxville as ``Rabbi Joe,'' he has been well received, not just by his congregation, but also by his fellow clergymen of all faiths in east Tennessee. Apparently he is doing a great job, because the congregation has seen a very significant increase in membership since his arrival. Pace and Karen Robinson, two well-respected and long-time members of the congregation, said, ``We are glad that Rabbi Joe came to Knoxville and became a part of our community by leading us into the 21st century.'' Rabbi Mendelsohn is one of the finest men I have ever met, and I am honored to have him as our guest chaplain for the United States House of Representatives on this occasion.

Mr. DUNCAN

Mr. DUNCAN. Mr. Speaker, the Immigration and Naturalization Service has had a 250 percent increase in funding over the last 8 years, about 10 times the rate of inflation over that period. Now they are trying to blame the snafu over granting student visas to two dead hijackers over 6 months after the September 11 attacks to an antiquated paper system. What a flimsy excuse. In other words, even with a 250 percent increase in funding, they are basically saying, ``If we had had even more money, we would have done better.'' The problem is not money, Mr. Speaker, it is a civil service system that does nothing for good, dedicated employees, but protects lazy or incompetent ones. Also, in the private sector, the pressure is always on to do more and to do better and to do more with less. These pressures are just not there in the Federal bureaucracy, and it becomes more apparent with each passing year that big government cannot do anything in an economical or efficient way.

Mr. DUNCAN

Mr. DUNCAN. Mr. Speaker, it was reported last week that an invitation to author Doris Kearns Goodwin to speak at the University of Delaware's commencement exercises had been withdrawn. This invitation was pulled because Ms. Goodwin has admitted that her books contain many sentences, facts, even whole paragraphs plagiarized from other writers. But today, Mr. Speaker, I am not concerned as much about Ms. Goodwin's plagiarism or shoddy research as about what the invitation to her says about almost all of our colleges and universities. It is well-known that Ms. Goodwin colors her history with a very strong liberal bias. We will soon be in the season of college and university graduation ceremonies. If my colleagues have ever looked at a list of commencement speakers, they have seen almost immediately that almost all come from a very liberal or left-wing background. Two or three years ago, Evergreen State college in Washington State even invited as its speaker a man who had been convicted of killing a policeman. Conservative speakers are almost never invited to speak at commencement or graduation exercises. People who started businesses with nothing or very little, and thus tend to be very conservative, are almost never invited to speak. The only business leaders who are ever invited are those from extremely big business and who can safely be identified as liberal or at least very politically correct. I know there are always a few exceptions, but I would guess that liberals outnumber conservatives 50 or 100 to 1 as speakers at graduation ceremonies. This reflects the fact that there is less true academic freedom, at least for conservatives, on U.S. college campuses than anyplace else in U.S. society today. College faculties, at best, have only a few token conservatives in fields that deal with political questions. Even professors in nonpolitical fields, such as English, often work in comments or assign books that show their liberal bias. The very liberal bias of our national news media has been well documented and is not even questioned today. However, there is a much greater or stronger liberal or left-wing bias on most college and university faculties than even in the national news media. Conservative students, unless they are unusually courageous, learn very quickly to, many times, remain silent or not express their true opinions in statements they make or papers that they write. Most colleges and universities have gone to great lengths to make sure minorities are well represented in their faculties and that they have diversity, and that is fine. But the most discrimination today is against conservative professors and speakers, especially at very liberal schools like Antioch, Oberlin, the University of Colorado, and some of the Ivy League schools. Mr. Speaker, I hope that colleges and universities around this Nation will strive for full diversity and true academic freedom by allowing at least a few token conservatives onto their faculties, or at least as graduation speakers.

Mr. DUNCAN

Mr. DUNCAN. Mr. Speaker, I move that the House do now adjourn.

Mr. DUNCAN

Mr. DUNCAN. Mr. Speaker, I rose yesterday to discuss in a 5-minute Special Order about the horrendous miscarriage of justice that occurred in a case involving a man named Joseph Salvati in Massachusetts who was kept in prison for more than 30 years, despite the fact that the FBI and the Justice Department knew all along, from the beginning, that he was an innocent man. And even worse than keeping a totally innocent man in prison for more than 30 years, a man with a wife and four small children at the time he went into prison who had, through all of those years, to visit him in prison; even worse, the Justice Department was doing that to protect a man in the witness protection program named Joe ``The Animal'' Barboza, one of the leading figures in organized crime, who, listen to this, was responsible, according to the FBI and the Justice Department and law enforcement officials, who was responsible for 26 murders. Mr. Speaker, I mentioned yesterday that I spent 7\1/2\ years as a criminal court judge in Tennessee prior to coming to Congress; and I tried the felony criminal cases, the murders, the rapes, the armed robberies, the burglary cases, the most serious cases. I have been a strong supporter of law enforcement. But it seems to me that we have allowed a government to get so big that it just gets totally out of control and then the government can somehow rationalize or justify almost anything. Now, the Justice Department has convinced the President to stand behind a claim of executive privilege and refuse to release documents about this Salvati case, even though it has been on ``60 Minutes,'' even though it has been publicized all over the world, to keep these documents covered up, in spite of repeated requests or demands from the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Burton), the chairman of the Committee on Government Reform. I want to say how much I admire and respect the courage of the gentleman from Indiana (Chairman Burton) in continuing to hold a series of hearings in regard to this Salvati case and other abuses by the FBI and the Justice Department, especially in regard to this witness protection program. I mentioned here yesterday that Chairman Burton's statement that he has now made twice in hearings before the Committee on Government Reform was to me the most shocking statement I have heard in a congressional hearing since I have served in the Congress. I am in my 14th year. I serve on three different committees, five different subcommittees. I have participated in hundreds, possibly even several thousand committee and subcommittee hearings; and I think the statement that I am about to read was the most shocking statement I have ever heard a chairman or any Member, really, give in this Congress. Chairman Burton has said now at two of our hearings this statement: ``The United States Department of Justice allowed lying witnesses to send men to death row. It stood by idly while innocent men spent decades behind bars; it permitted informants to commit murder; it tipped off killers so that they could flee before they were caught; it interfered with local investigations of drug dealing and arms smuggling; and then when people went to the Justice Department with evidence about murders, some of them ended up dead.'' This Salvati case, while I hope it is the worst example, is just the tip of the iceberg. I can tell my colleagues this: there needs to be some reforms within the Justice Department and the FBI. I think the problem has come about because we have expanded those agencies so much and given them so much money that they do not know what to do with all of it. Forbes Magazine, in 1993, had a cover article in which they said that we had quadrupled the Justice Department between 1980 and 1993 and that there were Federal prosecutors falling all over themselves trying to come up with cases to prosecute because they had so little to do, and that they were prosecuting businessmen and women who had violated obscure rules and regulations that they did not even know were in existence. We need to be funneling our law enforcement assets to the local law enforcement people who are fighting the real crime, the street crime that people want fought. Some of these Justice Department and FBI officials here in Washington never see a real criminal unless they are mugged on their way to their cars after work. But this idea, or this case, of keeping a man in prison for more than 30 years, even though they knew from the start of his innocence, they did not find out he was innocent after he had been in jail 25 years or so, they knew from the start that he was innocent. To do that to protect a man that had committed 26 murders is just, to me, mind-boggling. It is unbelievable. They told in this hearing that Barboza's defense lawyer was given great assistance by the Federal Government while the prosecutors were snubbed when they asked for help. A murder weapon in one case was conveniently lost by the FBI. Barboza's own lawyer called him one of the worst men on the face of the Earth. When asked about the short prison term that Barbosa got in one case, one murder that he committed after he was in the witness protection program, his lawyer said that that was amazing, he figured out that must be how it worked when you had friends in the FBI. I can tell the Members, the people of this country need to know that we desperately need reforms at the Justice Department and the FBI. Joseph Califano, a former Cabinet member under President Carter and adviser to President Clinton, wrote in a Washington Post column a few days ago, ``In the war on terrorism, we need not to overlook the alarming rise in Federal police power that is going on, and not create some type of Federal police state that will abuse citizens in horrible ways.''

Mr. DUNCAN

Mr. DUNCAN. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to talk about what I think is one of the greatest miscarriages of justice ever heard of or ever seen in this Nation. As some people know, I spent 7\1/2\ years before coming to Congress as a criminal court judge in Tennessee trying felony criminal cases, the murders, the rapes, the armed robberies, the burglary cases, the most serious cases. But I want to talk briefly today about the Joseph Salvati case, a case in which a man whom the FBI knew was innocent and yet they still kept him in prison for more than 30 years, a man with a wife and, I think, four children. It is just horrendous to think about what was done to this man by our own Federal Government, a man that they knew was innocent. They did not discover that he was innocent after he had been in prison for 25 years. They knew before he went to prison that he was innocent. First of all, I want to start by expressing my great admiration and respect for the courage and determination of the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Burton), chairman of the Committee on Government Reform, in conducting several hearings about this terrible miscarriage of justice that I am talking about here. This is my 14th year in the Congress. I have been shocked by this Joseph Salvati case and all that I have heard in the hearings that Chairman Burton has had so far, but I want to read to you the first paragraph of Chairman Burton's opening statement, because I am a member of three different committees, five separate subcommittees, I have participated in hundreds, maybe even several thousand of committee and subcommittee hearings since I have been in the Congress, and I have never heard a more shocking statement in a congressional hearing than I heard Chairman Burton give. In fact, I have heard him now give it on two occasions. His opening statement, the first paragraph said, ``The United States Department of Justice allowed lying witnesses to send men to death row. It stood by idly while innocent men spent decades behind bars. It permitted informants to commit murder. It tipped off killers so that they could flee before they were caught. It interfered with local investigations of drug dealing and arms smuggling. And then when people went to the Justice Department with evidence about murders, some of them ended up dead.'' Now, that is a statement by the gentleman from Indiana (Chairman Burton). As I said, I think it is the most shocking statement I have ever heard made in a congressional investigation. I do not really know what all is behind everything that is in that statement. I know it is far more than just the Salvati case from Massachusetts, which, as I say, was a case in which the Justice Department kept a man in prison for more than 30 years for something that they knew all along that he did not do. But I will say this: anyone who is not totally, completely shocked by what the gentleman from Indiana (Chairman Burton) said in that statement that I just read and who is not totally completely shocked by the Salvati case should reexamine his or her commitment to true justice and to our legal system. The primary purpose of the law and our legal system should be to protect the freedom and liberty of innocent citizens. That should be the primary purpose and goal of our legal system. Our term ``justice'' can be defined in many ways; but in the end, it should and does mean fairness, simple fairness from one human being to another. Justice should mean fairness to all. Apparently, you had and still have Justice Department and FBI bureaucrats who are so blinded by arrogance and power that they can no longer see what true justice means. To me, this is shocking. The FBI and the Justice Department are still refusing to turn over documents and papers on the Salvati case and on some of these other cases to the gentleman from Indiana (Chairman Burton), even though these cases are many years old. The Salvati case, as I say, occurred more than 30 years ago. Joseph Califano, who was a member of the Cabinet and a top adviser to Presidents Clinton and Carter, wrote in a column a few weeks ago in the Washington Post and said, ``In the war against terrorism, which all of us support, we are missing a very alarming problem that is growing by leaps and bounds,'' and that is what he described as the ``shocking, alarming rise in Federal police power.'' If we are going to have true justice in this country, we cannot end up with a Federal police state that allows the FBI and the Justice Department to do just anything they want, no matter if it means that an innocent man ends up behind bars for 30 years when they know he is innocent, and they covered it up and then attempt to continue to cover it up after the world knows all about it. This Salvati case has been on ``60 Minutes.'' Everybody knows about it; it has been all over the television and the news. So I hope the gentleman from Indiana (Chairman Burton) will continue the series of hearings that he has held trying to call attention to this horrendous abuse, this terrible miscarriage of justice that was done to Mr. Salvati, and I hope that people realize that we have a Federal Government that has gotten out of control here and they start opposing things like happened in this case.

Mr. DUNCAN

Mr. DUNCAN. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to thank Bert Robinson of my staff, who has done an outstanding job on this bill. He has been working on it for many, many months. I also want to thank those on the committee staff who have helped us with this legislation, Jim Wilson, Kevin Binger, David Kass, Randy Kaplan, and Russell George; and Michelle Ash and David McMillen from the minority staff. All have been very, very helpful on this legislation, and I thank them at this time.

Mr. DUNCAN. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from California (Mr. Horn) for yielding me this time, and for the gentleman's very strong support of this legislation. As the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Burton) mentioned, the gentleman from California (Mr. Horn) has shepherded this through the legislative process in the Subcommittee on Government Efficiency, Financial Management and Intergovernmental Relations and in the Committee on Government Reform. The gentleman has been an outstanding Member of this body for many years. I thank the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Burton) for his support and the gentleman from California (Mr. Waxman), the ranking member, for his support of this legislation. I rise to urge support for the Presidential library contribution disclosure bill that I first introduced in the last Congress. I believe this is common-sense legislation. It simply requires disclosure, public disclosure, of donations and donors to Presidential libraries. I first introduced this bill in 1999, many months before anyone heard of Marc Rich or the Presidential pardons that the gentleman mentioned a few minutes ago. I introduced this bill because I felt the public should be made aware of possible conflicts of interest the sitting Presidents could have while raising funds for their libraries. In most cases we do not know who these donors are or what interests they may have on any pending policy decisions. This bill will shed light on an otherwise secretive process. With disclosure, the public is able to draw its own conclusions about whether conflicts of interest are present. Without it, the appearance of impropriety could often exist. This bill is not aimed at any one President in particular. This is a problem that can be faced by Democrat and Republican Presidents alike. This bill does not prohibit or limit contributions to these organizations. It simply requires disclosure of the name of the donor and the amount donated. Mr. Speaker, no one should be against this bill unless for some reason they want to keep this process secret. I also want to say that I understand the concerns of those who say it is impossible to influence a deceased President, and I agree. We may be able to address this concern and the concern that the gentleman from California (Mr. Waxman) mentioned later on. As others have mentioned, these Presidential libraries serve a good and noble purpose in our Nation. However, they should not serve as a way for Presidential foundations to peddle influence to the highest bidder. Mr. Speaker, the organization Vote.com ran a poll and received almost 26,000 votes over the Internet, and 94 percent of those 26,000 who voted on this issue voted for it in a poll that ended September 13, 2001. Ninety-four percent supported this bill. Larry Noble, executive director of the Center for Responsive Politics, at our hearing that we held on this bill in the subcommittee said, ``The potential for real and apparent corruption that this fund-raising brings is obvious. The public, however, is still in the dark with regard to several back-door ways of buying influence in Washington. One of them is the funding of Presidential libraries.'' Scott Harshbarger, president of Common Cause, said, ``Presidents should not be in the business of raising funds for their libraries while in office. Gifts to the library can be a powerful means to secure access and influence at the White House, especially with a President eager to burnish his legacy.'' Kenneth Gross, who is an attorney who is a specialist in this type of fund-raising, said, ``The bill will prevent donors from sidestepping disclosure by agreeing, pledging or promising, while the President remains in office, to make contributions to a Presidential library after the term has expired.'' Mr. Speaker, I think this is good legislation. I think it is legislation that almost all of our colleagues can and should support. As I said, it just sheds lights on an otherwise secretive process, and I urge support for H.R. 577.

Mr. DUNCAN

Mr. DUNCAN. Mr. Speaker, I have heard and read that some people in publications in Europe and some members of the European Union have been very critical of U.S. treatment of the Afghan prisoners in Cuba. I think they are scraping the bottom of the barrel in a vain attempt to make themselves feel superior to Americans. I wonder how they would feel or how they would respond if they had been attacked the way we were on September 11. No country on the face of the Earth, Mr. Speaker, has done as much. No nation has even come close to doing as much for other countries, as has the United States of America. These prisoners will live far better as prisoners of the U.S. military than they ever would have in the caves of Afghanistan. Even more importantly, Mr. Speaker, they will live far better as our prisoners than they deserve, after killing thousands of our citizens in one of the cruelest ways imaginable.

Mr. DUNCAN

Mr. DUNCAN. Mr. Speaker, since September 11th there have been many acts of kindness that have gone a long way to bridge the gaps between all faiths, not just here in the United States, but around the world. Many of these acts are done one at a time, noticed by few, but each having a significant impact on many individuals and communities. Mr. Louis Balloff, immigrating to this country from the Ukraine during the late 1800s, was one who touched many lives. He came to this country with nothing, fleeing religious persecution, seeking a new start to a better life and participating in the American dream. He eventually settled in LaFollette, Tennessee, and became a successful merchant. This community was good to him and he always felt a need to give back many of his financial successes to this town in rural Appalachia. The following article is a typical way in which Louis felt obligated to help less fortunate members of his community, not knowing the impact it would have on so many others. I have included an article from the Knoxville News Sentinel, which highlights one such act, that I would like to call to the attention of my fellow Members and other readers of the Record. [From the Knoxville News-Sentinel] Merchant Gives Love Boy took giant strides in gift of shoes (By Jacquelyn B. Dean) A single act of kindness can sometimes have a tremendous impact on a person's life, with repercussions felt halfway around the world. Such was the case of Louis Balloff and Roy Asbury of Campbell County. ``They were good friends,'' said Asbury's son, Campbell County Circuit Judge Lee Asbury, ``but it was a strange partnership. Mr. Balloff was an older, real conservative merchant, and dad was a country lawyer and rabblerouser who dabbled in politics. They were not alike, but they were still close friends.'' Both men are deceased. Balloff, a Russian Jewish immigrant who moved from New York City to Campbell County and began his retail business as a peddler selling goods in the mining camps, died of a heart attack in 1964. Roy Asbury was a well-known Campbell County lawyer who served one term as a state representative (in the 85th General Assembly in the mid-1960s). He died of a heart attack in 1970. The story of their friendship, and how it began, is told over and over again by members of their families. Asbury was a poor, teenaged boy who walked barefoot from Caryville to Jacksboro High School one September day in 1922. Balloff was a merchant who called him into his store that ``cold, frosty morning and encased his feet in a good pair of shoes with socks.'' Their families later became friends, but at that time Asbury was so resentful and prejudiced against Jews that he left the store without saying thank you. Forty years later, in a letter dated April 28, 1962, Asbury finally told Balloff ``thank you'' and recounted how that single incident caused him to reconsider and shed his prejudiced attitudes ``against all `furringers,' and especially Jews.'' Asbury wrote: ``The years began to slip by, you and that boy was always and at all times friendly, but the shoes were never mentioned. ``The boy learned as he grew older to love and respect the Jews, and he developed a strong feeling of sympathy for all minority groups, oppressed groups, or individuals, and he never forgot that pair of shoes being put on his cold feet, by a Jew, and continually promised himself that one day, he would do something for a Jew to repay for the shoes, and most of all for forever erasing from his mind prejudice against a race or member of a race by prejudgment without due examination.'' Asbury found his opportunity in Paris in 1944, when he served in the U.S. Army during World War II. He wrote that in September 1944 he found an orphanage housing about 300 children, mostly girls and virtually all of them Jewish. Their parents and relatives ``had been taken to Germany and killed by that despot, Hitler.'' Asbury wrote that the children were in the care of an old Catholic priest and four nuns, but they were suffering from extreme malnutrition. ``The old priest could not speak much English, but he convinced that boy (Asbury) they needed sugar and sugar products.'' That night, he couldn't sleep. He woke a fellow soldier who spoke French, and together they obtained a truck, went to a U.S. Army supply depot, and ``appropriated 1,500 pounds of sugar and 500 pounds of candy bars, and drove to the orphanage, arriving just before daylight.'' They unloaded the truck, awakened the priest and felt they could foresee better days for all the children, he wrote. Before long, ``the U.S. Army personnel was furnishing food, clothing, and medical supplies in abundance, and by the next spring, the children looked almost normal,'' Asbury wrote. He said the old priest and nuns followed the truck and tearfully tried to thank them. ``The boy heard their expressions of thanks.'' Asbury wrote of his experience, ``but he knew they were not talking to him but to a man who, on a cold frosty morning, put a pair of shoes on the cold feet of a boy who was barefoot; and that boy knew he was trying to do something for the Jewish race to repay him for that pair of shoes, worn out more than 20 years before. '' Asbury concluded the letter by saying, ``Lou, I don't know how to say it, but for erasing from my mind and heart all prejudice for any race, member of a race, or an individual because of his race, creed or color, MANY, MANY, MANY THANKS.'' He signed it, ``Yours truly, Roy Asbury.'' Judge Lee Asbury said, ``I've heard dad tell that story as long as I can remember. It's part of the family lore.'' He said he's also known about the letter a long time, and has a copy of it in his files. ``Dad was inspired at least in part by Mr. Balloff's helping him out,'' he said. Says Lee Asbury of the Balloffs, ``I can't ever remember not having a deep affection for the whole family.'' Ed Balloff, who, with his brother, Sam Balloff of Knoxville, operated a chain of Balloffs stores in LaFollette, Oak Ridge and Knoxville, said, ``The letter meant a great deal to me, and I've kept it in my files.'' When Ed Balloff sought Lee Asbury's advice about what to do following his retirement from the retail business, the judge suggested he volunteer with the public defender's office in Campbell County. He did. A mutual friend, Jim Agee, a distant cousin to famed writer James Agee, suggested the letter might be especially significant in this 50th anniversary year of D-Day. Asbury said there is a greater significance: ``People are not any different. We all have the same desires. The quicker everybody comes to that conclusion, the better off we will all be.''

Mr. DUNCAN

Mr. DUNCAN. Mr. Speaker, on December 10th my good friend Mr. Mitchell Robinson passed away after a lengthy illness. He was someone who made a difference and dreamed the American Dream, and he truly represented what this country is all about. The following is a tribute to my friend. Mr. Robinson, a Knoxville native for 77 years, founded Modern Supply Company in 1949. He devoted his life to family, business and philanthropy. He was married to Natalie Levison Robinson for 50 years. Mr. Robinson was a lifelong member of Heska Amuna Synagogue and was a leader as chairman and longtime board member. He also chaired the Knoxville Jewish Federation. He established the Sylvia Robinson Memorial Fund and endowed the A.J. and Sylvia Robinson Chapel at the synagogue in memory of his parents. Mr. Robinson, who served as president of the Southern Wholesalers Association and a Director of the American Supply Association, pioneered the concept of bath and kitchen showrooms in East Tennessee. He was also active in the Knoxville business community, where he was a charter member of the Midtown Sertoma Club. He was a loyal supporter of the University of Tennessee, contributing to the Departments of Judaic Studies and Athletics. A World War II veteran, Mr. Robinson served as a flight controller in the U.S. Air Corps Radar Unit in the Pacific. His beloved family also includes children Rabbi Rayzel and Dr. Simcha Raphael of Philadelphia, A.J. Robinson and Dr. Nicole Ellerine of Atlanta, and Pace and Karen Robinson of Knoxville; grandchildren Yigdal and Hallet Raphael; Micaela, Ethan and Nathaniel Robinson, and Asher and Eli Robinson; sister and brother-in-law Fay and Bob Gluck of Boynton Beach, Fla.; brother-in-law Gilbert Levison of Knoxville; brother- and sister-in-law Jarvin and Deanne Levison of Atlanta; and many nieces, nephews, cousins and friends. Mitchell spent most of his 77 years in Knoxville, Tennessee. He was part of a generation that had a significant impact on Knoxville and the surrounding area. He came back from World War II with no money, no business, and a limited education. But he had enduring self-confidence, determination, and a desire for accomplishment that stayed with him his entire life right up to the end. He was part of that ``greatest generation'' that we read so much about today, and who Tom Brokaw has made so famous. Men and women who have impacted and enriched all of our lives over the last half of the 20th century. But as many of you know, and as Sinatra sings, Mitch did it his way . . . whether it was in his business, in his synagogue, or the various other circles he traveled. Everyone was a part of his empire, family, friends, customers, and employees alike. He shared the good and the bad with everyone. The child of immigrant parents, he created his own style, his own flair in everything he did and everybody he touched. He had style in his clothes, in his cars, in his hats, in his dancing, in the showrooms at Modern Supply, in the ``Pitch from Mitch'' stationary, in the incentive trips for his customers that he so tediously planned and enjoyed. He bought things in a big way whether it was a truckload of sinks, shirts for himself, or smoked turkeys for gifts. He was able to charm about anyone he met, particularly the females. He had an appetite for food and people that was enormous. Mr. Robinson was a leader, perhaps not always knowing where he was going, but knowing he was going somewhere. His devotion to his business was inspiring. His family's contributions to the religious community in time and money are in the record books. Members of the community called on him when something was needed for those who were less fortunate. He was always there. He was generous to a fault and has set a standard for all of us to follow. In a Yom Kippur Sermon several years ago, Rabbi Joseph Weinberg, said: ``Always we are commanded to seize the day, to create a life which will be remembered as a blessing. Not how long, but how well did I live? Not how many honors did I obtain, but how honorable was my life. Not how many things did I acquire, but how much was I able to give.'' This quote is very fitting for the life of Mitchell Robinson. I would like to offer my deepest sympathy to the Robinson family. Our Nation and our community have suffered a great loss.

Mr. DUNCAN

Mr. DUNCAN. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to congratulate Ms. Melinda Day of Lenoir City, Tennessee, in my District. She was recently chosen as Tennessee Teacher of the Year 2002. Ms. Day teaches fifth grade at Lenoir City Elementary School. This honor is well deserved for Ms. Day, who has been teaching for six years. Even when she was a child, Ms. Day would practice being a teacher in the basement of her parents' home. Her students enjoy learning in her classroom. she teaches with enthusiasm and a real love for educating children. Ms. Day has traveled to Japan on two occasions to teach as a part of the Fulbright Memorial Fund Teacher Program and the Fulbright Master Fund Teacher Program. This Nation would be a much better place and our students would be better educated if there were more people and teachers like Melinda Day. Mr. Speaker, I would like to congratulate Ms. Day on a job well done. She serves as an inspiration for educators all over the Country. I have included an article from the Knoxville News-Sentinel that highlights the accomplishments of Ms. Day that I would like to call to the attention of my fellow Members and other readers of the Record. [From the Knoxville (TN) News-Sentinel, Nov. 19, 2001] Tennessee's Top Teacher Melinda K. Day is now vying for national honor (By Jennifer Lawson) Lenoir City Elementary School fifth-grader Alexis Lawson thinks she knows why her teacher, Miss Day, was chosen the Tennessee Teacher of the Year 2002. ``She's a good teacher because she listens to people,'' Alexis said as she led a visitor to Melinda K. Day's classroom. Day was recently chosen to represent Tennessee in the competition for National Teacher of the Year, which will culminate next April in a ceremony at the White House. At 28, Day's been teaching for six years officially, but she actually started teaching at age 6 when she set up a classroom complete with a row of antique desks in her parents' basement or in the back of the family horse trailer. ``Every day after school I would rush home to `teach' what I learned that day and model my teacher's actions in my play classroom,'' Day wrote in her state competition essay. ``This love of learning and teaching has always been an integral part of me. My mom and dad instilled the value of education in me at a very early age.'' It only takes a few minutes spent in Day's classroom to feel the enthusiasm and energy she spreads to her students. Her classroom is decorated with fish and palm trees, and a tank of goldfish sits on one counter. She loves things tropical and through her fiance, Chris Webster, she's become a fan of Jimmy Buffett and his ocean-inspired music. ``Your life is so precious you can't be replaced by anyone,'' is written across the top of the blackboard. Her age belies her experience, which includes summers teaching in Japan and Wales as well as bachelor's, master's and education specialist's degrees from the University of Tennessee. She also traveled to Japan to teach as part of the Fulbright Memorial Fund Teacher Program in 1998 and again last year as a recipient of the Fulbright Master Teacher Program. She said spending time in Japan and not speaking the language made her understand the frustration Spanish speaking children feel when they come to Lenoir City Elementary. Over the past few years, the school has taught a growing population of Mexican immigrants. ``She has served as an inspiration to more experienced teachers and helped to change the attitudes of some teachers with less enthusiasm,'' wrote Lenoir City Schools Superintendent Wayne Miller in a letter supporting Day's nomination. ``Another point which makes Ms. Day an exemplary teacher.'' The Alabama native, who grew up in Lenoir City, Iowa and South Carolina, said she's like her father who ``has to have change constantly.'' She channels that need for change into her teaching. ``Teaching to her is 24-7,'' said Lenoir Elementary Principal Patricia Jones. ``She's got a unique quality about her that creates an environment for the children where they feel safe to learn.'' Day credits three elementary teachers for cultivating her natural love of teaching: Melanie Amburn and Donna Langley (now Zukjowski) of Eaton Elementary School in Loudon County and Julia Pratt, who teaches in Marion, Iowa. More than the subject matter she learned, she remembers how the teachers made her feel about learning and her potential. ``Not only did these teachers set high expectations for students (to) learn the basic skills, but (they) also wanted each child to gain confidence and develop a sense of humor to enjoy life,'' she wrote in her essay. ``The small acts of kindness exhibited by these teachers still make me realize the importance of personally knowing all of my students and learning what encouragements they need to make them feel better about themselves each day.'' Her toughest decision after winning the $3,500 prize accompanied by a crystal award and a certificate signed by Gov. Don Sundquist, was deciding whom to take to Washington with her--her mother, her father or her fiance. ``I'm taking my mom with me.'' Day said. ``She's a big Republican. When I told her, she jumped up and down like a little girl.''

Mr. DUNCAN

Mr. DUNCAN. Mr. Speaker, I have no further requests for time, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. DUNCAN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I would simply close by saying I view the main intentions of this legislation to be, number one, to make sure that no small businesses are unfairly driven out of existence by unintended and unfair liability under Superfund. And, secondly, and very importantly, to see that more brownfields sites across this Nation are cleaned up and put back into productive use in this country. I simply want to say that I commend all of the Members and the staff that were involved in bringing this very important legislation to the floor of this House.

Mr. DUNCAN. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Shimkus). Mr. SHIMKUS asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. DUNCAN. Mr. Speaker, H.R. 2869 combines the text of H.R. 1831, the Small Business Liability Protection Act, with the text of S. 350, the Brownfields Revitalization and Environmental Restoration Act of 2001. I strongly support title I of H.R. 2869. As the gentleman from Ohio (Chairman Gillmor) mentioned, Title I earlier passed the House 419 to 0. Title I will protect small businesses from Superfund liability. It prevents lawsuits against people and businesses who should not be held liable for the costs of cleaning up a Superfund site, either because they send only a very small amount of waste to a site, or because their waste was ordinary trash. I am very proud of this legislation, and was pleased to have sponsored this, along with the gentleman from Ohio (Chairman Gillmor) and others. Title II of this legislation is intended to encourage brownfields redevelopment. Brownfields redevelopment is very important, as previous speakers have mentioned. Our economy is changing. We have lost manufacturing jobs. Communities across America have lost thousands of jobs. I held a subcommittee hearing on this issue of brownfields redevelopment earlier this year, and I agree that we should be doing everything we can to encourage the redevelopment of these brownfields sites. Unfortunately, the brownfields title of this bill is not drafted as clearly as I would like, but let me make clear the intent of title II is to encourage brownfields redevelopment, and it needs to be read with that goal in mind. Nothing in this bill should be read to narrow the scope of properties eligible for assistance under the bill. All brownfields sites are eligible, including properties contaminated by petroleum releases, asbestos, or lead paint. Nothing in this bill should be read to make it easier to bring lawsuits against innocent landowners. The gentleman from Ohio (Chairman Gillmor) mentioned earlier that some estimates have been as high as half of the amount of the Superfund money that has been spent on lawyers and consultants and so forth. I have seen estimates much higher even than that. The intent of this bill is to increase liability protections for people who own property that is next to a contaminated site, and people who buy property after all disposal activities have taken place. Nothing in this bill should be read to encourage Federal intervention when brownfields sites are being cleaned up under State programs. The intent of the bill is to prevent unnecessary Federal involvement. As with most legislation, its successes or failures will depend on how it is implemented. As chairman of the Subcommittee on Water Resources and Environment, I will be keeping a careful watch on the EPA. I expect the EPA to use the discretion given to it under this legislation to remove red tape from brownfields sites. To date, the EPA has never brought a lawsuit to second-guess a State clean-up decision. I do not expect this deference to States to change after passage of this legislation. Since 1995, the EPA has viewed the Superfund national priorities list as a last resort for managing contaminated property. In fact, since income taxes, the EPA has had a formal policy of seeking the concurrence of a State government before listing a site on the Superfund list. I do not expect these policies to change after passage of this legislation. Let me say to the EPA, it should not look at this bill as an excuse or an opportunity to build its bureaucracy or expand its mission. The funding in this bill is intended to go into communities around the country to encourage and achieve brownfields redevelopment, not simply to expand the Federal bureaucracy or add to Federal red tape. Finally, I would like to express concern over the applicable to Davis Bacon prevailing wage rates to brownfields projects under this bill. Davis Bacon wage rates can add unnecessarily to clean up costs. Our goal is to get as many sites as possible cleaned up and returned to productive use. The higher the cost, the fewer the number of sites that can be addressed and actually cleaned up. There are mixed feelings about this bill from a number of groups, the National Federation of Independent Businesses strongly supports the small business liability relief but does not support the expansion of Davis Bacon. The National Association of Home Builders and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce call the bill the first step for addressing the brownfields but the Chamber expresses serious concerns over David Bacon liability. Other groups, like the National Association of Realtors, the National Association of Industrial and Office Properties and at least 7 other real estate groups strongly support the election. After weighing the matter carefully, I believe that this litigation, if implemented properly, could go a long way towards protecting small businesses from Superfund liability and is a significant first step towards encouraging the redevelopment of brownfields. For these reasons, I support H.R. 2869 and encourage all of my colleagues to do likewise. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. DUNCAN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. (Mr. DUNCAN asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. DUNCAN

Mr. DUNCAN. Mr. Speaker, the events of September 11th of this year had a great impact on our Country. While the devastating terrorist attacks have caused us great sorrow for the loss of lives, Americans have pulled together like never before. Those who carried out the attacks thought that they would destroy the American Spirit, but I can tell they did exactly the opposite. People have come together to show their support for those lost in New York, the Pentagon and Pennsylvania. Recently, art students at Cleveland High School showed their support by creating a mural that depicts the events of September 11th and our resolve to never let this happen again. This piece of work has been talked and written about in local newspapers and television. Cleveland High School Art Teacher, Martha Kidwell, created a collage of images from magazines and newspapers which were used as a base for this mural. The mural measures 13 by 6 feet. This piece of art shows the attacks on America, but it also portrays the heroic firefighters, a determined President Bush, the Statue of Liberty, the American Flag and the Bald Eagle. This work of art was created by 22 high school students who have shown their patriotism and care for their fellow Americans. Mr. Speaker, I believe that Martha Kidwell and her students should be commended for their hard work and determination to show their fellow citizens that we will overcome terrorism. This mural will serve as an inspiration to anyone who sees it. It is currently on display in Southeast Tennessee, and I encourage anyone traveling through this part of the Country to stop by and see this mural entitled, ``We Will Never Forget''.

Mr. DUNCAN

Mr. DUNCAN. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of H.R. 3178, ``the Water Infrastructure Security and Research Development Act.'' As Chairman of the Subcommittee on Water Resources and Environment, I am well aware of the need to improve our water infrastructure security. I held a subcommittee hearing on this subject a month after the horrific events of September 11th. The subcommittee received testimony from representatives of drinking water and wastewater operators, as well as EPA and a security expert from Sandia National Laboratories. All the witnesses agreed that more information about terrorist threats and how to protect against them was needed. I appreciate the interest of the Chairman of the Science Committee in promoting research in this area. I also appreciate his interest in developing additional security tools that can be used by drinking water and wastewater operators. My subcommittee has jurisdiction over the operation of wastewater treatment works, including security measures. But, I was pleased to work with the gentleman from New York on H.R. 3178 to avoid any delay in floor consideration and I look forward to continuing these efforts in a House-Senate conference.

Mr. DUNCAN

Mr. DUNCAN. Mr. Speaker, I spent 7\1/2\ years just prior to coming to Congress as a criminal court judge in Tennessee trying the felony criminal cases, the murders, the armed robberies, the rapes. I tried the attempted murder of James Earl Ray, many leading cases, but I can tell Members that I do not think that in my years of law practice or in my years as a judge that I have ever seen a worse miscarriage of justice than that done to Joseph Salvati in Massachusetts where he was made to stay in prison for over 30 years. Even the FBI knew he had not committed the crime for which he had been convicted. Sometimes we read about people who have been wrongly convicted, but almost always in those cases the prosecutors or the law enforcement people honestly thought the people were guilty, and only found out later that they were not. But in the Salvati case, the FBI knew apparently for 30 years that this man was not guilty of the crime he had been convicted of, and yet they made him stay in prison for more than 30 years. I can tell Members that the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Burton) of the Committee on Government Reform has tried to call attention to this miscarriage of justice and see that nothing like this ever happens again. He held one hearing and he attempted to hold another hearing today about it, but today the Department of Justice refused to release or submit the documents that the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Burton) had requested in a continuing cover-up of the original cover-up. I think it is shameful. In fact, I think it is fair to say that I have never seen the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Burton) as angry as he was today, and he said that he is going to told hearings until the Department of Justice has the decency to come forward and do what they can to correct this horrible miscarriage of justice. I remember reading a cover story in Forbes magazine, certainly a very conservative magazine, in 1993 in which they reported that the Department of Justice had more than quadrupled its budget since 1980, and that there were U.S. attorneys falling all over themselves trying to find cases to prosecute. The article discussed how Federal prosecutors were cherry-picking local cases, taking the best or easiest cases away from local prosecutors so they could have something to do. This quadrupling of the budget and size of the Department of Justice was being done, even though 94 percent of all crimes were being handled and prosecuted by local and State law enforcement personnel and prosecutors. Even though their work was not going up, their budget and number of employees was. This article in Forbes said too often in Federal law enforcement the name of the game is publicity, not a reduction in the amount of crime. The article in Forbes said that the Department of Justice was proving that Parkinson's law of bureaucracy was true, that work expands so as to fill the time available for its completion. As the real or imagined work expands, the bureaucrats ask for more bureaucrats to do it. Since then, we have expanded the Department of Justice even more. Now here we are giving them more power. Last week Joseph Califano, a former top assistant to President Johnson and a former Secretary of Health and Human Services under President Carter, wrote in The Washington Post last week that in all of our concerns about terrorism, we ``are missing an even more troubling danger, the extraordinary increase in Federal police personnel and power.'' Mr. Speaker, for the FBI to keep a man in prison for 30 years for a crime that they knew he did not commit, that should be criminal in and of itself. I described it at this hearing as saying that the arrogance of the Federal bureaucracy seems to grow with each passing year. The gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Delahunt) said I was mild in describing things in that way. It seems that we now have a government of, by and for the bureaucrats instead of one that is of, by and for the people. I salute the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Burton) and commend him for continuing to try to call attention to the miscarriage of justice in the Joseph Salvati case, and to say if we keep expanding the Department of Justice and the FBI, then the abuse of the American people is going to continue to grow, and we are going to have much of our freedom taken away from us, and the American people are going to have problems that they never dreamed of. We need to bring these people under some type of control because they are certainly out of control at this time.