Sam Farr

Mr. FARR of California

Mr. FARR of California. Mr. Speaker, there is such unanimous support on this legislation that no one asked for time, and I yield back the remainder of my time.

Mr. FARR of California. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I rise also to enthusiastically support this legislation. This will provide much-needed funds, again, taxpayer money, for the protection of highly endangered rhinos and tigers throughout the world. Why do we spend American taxpayer money on this? There is probably no two animals more urgently in need of strong conservation programs. Throughout their range, these two magnificent species have been brought to their knees by habitat destruction and commercial trade in products made from their carcasses, essentially, greed. Today, our President is viewing wildlife on a safari in Botswana. Hopefully, he will be able to see a rhino, perhaps a black or even more endangered and rare, a white rhino. If we do not act and pass legislation like this, the next President to visit Africa may not be so fortunate to ever see a rhino. While CITES, which is the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Flora and Fauna, has made great strides in controlling the international trade of rhino horn daggers and tiger skins, these species continue to decline due to massive habitat destruction and the black market demand for traditional medicines using rhino and tiger products. Here in the United States, we sometimes find it hard to believe that a relatively small amount of money can produce such tremendous conservation benefits when applied to on-the-ground programs in other parts of the world, but, believe me, it works. The desperate situation of all species of rhinos and tigers worldwide makes every conservation dollar that much more critical in the battle to save them from extinction. Since its enactment in 1994, the rhino and tiger conservation fund has supported the investigation of poaching and illegal trade in wild tigers in India, a Tiger Community Education Program in Indonesia, aerial monitoring of white rhinos in Zaire, and other programs that are desperately needed if we are to have any hope of saving these species for future generations. This is simple and straightforward law, thanks to the excellent management and implementation by the Department of the Interior, which has provided great conservation bang for a very limited buck. Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support this much-needed legislation.

Mr. FARR of California

Mr. FARR of California. Madam Speaker, we are here tonight to discuss campaign finance reform. Where is everybody else? Half the Nation is watching basketball games. Half the Congress is attending a funeral. What kind of business are we in? This House, your side, the House Committee on Government Reform and Oversight spent $5 million, had 13 days of public hearings, 33 witnesses and you bring nothing to the floor that deals with that issue. You try to say you are having campaign finance reform that requires a two-third vote of this House? This is a mockery of democracy. It is a violation of the spirit of Hershey. There is no bipartisan effort here. There is no Democratic bill on the floor. There is no substance to our debate. We cannot have a debate in 20 minutes on an issue like this. There is no amendment allowed. It increases the limits one can give to campaigns. It triples and doubles the amount of money that can go to campaigns, not caps them out. The timing tonight, this is a mockery of democracy.

Mr. FARR of California

Mr. FARR of California. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this time. Mr. Speaker, I rise with great concern about this bill. I do not think this is about Colombian drugs; I think this is about Colombian pork, and I will tell my colleagues why. I lived in Colombia. I know the country well. What we are getting is the Colombian military coming up here and asking us to give them $36 million for three new Blackhawks. We give $120 million for all of Latin America to fight drugs, so this is about 25 percent of the entire Latin American drug budget going to Colombia for those three Blackhawk helicopters. Mr. Speaker, let me tell my colleagues how Colombia has taken advantage of us. Not only do they come here and get free helicopters, but they are importing every day 70 percent of the cut flower market into the United States. They come in free. We ought to get that money from the business that is making $300 million off of United States consumers buying Colombian flowers that do not have to pay any tariffs that all other flowers from all other countries in the world have to pay. And our flower growers in California and New York and other States are going out of business because of the free Colombian imports. So here we have a bill where the Colombians come up here, ask us for $36 million for Blackhawks, we give it to them because we are fighting drugs, and at the same time we will not close that open door that we have given them to grow other crops other than drugs. Mr. Speaker, they are getting it both ways. They get free military equipment, and that free military equipment sometimes is used to suppress human rights in Colombia. More than 3,500 human people were killed in Colombia last year at the hands of military, paramilitary, and guerrilla forces. Yes, there are some bad dudes in Colombia, and the Colombian military supported civilian paramilitary groups which have murdered, tortured and forced the migration of thousands of peasants and villagers. So here we have a country that does not have the personnel to fly the helicopters, does not have the mechanics to repair the helicopters, but because it is in the drug war, we support it. I think we need to get our priorities straight. We cannot have it both ways. If they get three helicopters eating up most of the drug money for all of Latin America, at the same time we allow them to import all of their flowers here and do not charge them anything, no tariff whatsoever, that is outrageous.

Mr. FARR of California

Mr. FARR of California. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I have not had the privilege of visiting this area, but I understand that President Theodore Roosevelt was among one of many Americans who appreciated the stark beauty of the North Dakota lands. In this bill we are really providing an opportunity for what he noticed generations ago to be saved for generations to come; and I applaud the work of our colleague, the gentleman from North Dakota (Mr. Pomeroy), on this. I do want to point out, Mr. Speaker, that the administration supports the objectives of this exchange; but they did raise some concerns in the hearing testimony about the procedural language in the bill. We, too, would have preferred it had the Forest Service prepared a legislative environmental impact statement for Congress to consider ratifying; and we urge the Forest Service to do so in the future. But in this case the Forest Service has engaged in a thorough process of extensive public outreach in negotiating this exchange. The major stakeholders in North Dakota, including environmental groups, support the exchange in the bill; and there appears to be nothing to be gained by undue delay in its implementation. Therefore, Mr. Speaker, I compliment the gentleman from North Dakota for his dedication and work on this important legislation. I urge my colleagues to support this bill. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of S. 750. This bill is identical to H.R. 2574, sponsored by our Democratic colleague Representative Earl Pomeroy. The gentleman from North Dakota is a strong advocate for the interests of his constituents and has worked very hard on this legislation. The purpose of this bill is to ratify an exchange of mineral assets between the U.S. Forest Service and Burlington Resources in order to consolidate federal land holdings in the National Grasslands of North Dakota. The exchange is deemed desirable because the land and mineral ownership pattern in this area is fragmented, with the Forest Service managing the surface estate of the lands while Burlington Resources owns subsurface mineral rights. The Forest Service supports the objectives of the exchange in order to protect significant resources values in the National Grasslands, including the Kinley Plateau roadless area which provides critical habitat for bighorn sheep. The exchange will also have the benefit of protecting view-shed lands along the scenic Little Missouri River. A Memorandum of Understanding between the Forest Service and Burlington Resources concerning exploration and development of Burlington's mineral rights is also intended to provide additional protection to sensitive lands. I have not had the privilege of visiting this area, but it is my understanding that President Theodore Roosevelt is among the many Americans who have appreciated the stark beauty of these North Dakota lands. In this bill, we are providing the opportunity for future generations to use and enjoy these lands as well. Mr. Speaker, the Administration supports the objectives of this exchange but did raise concerns in hearing testimony about procedural language in the bill. We, too, would have preferred it had the Forest Service prepared a legislative environmental impact statement for Congress to consider and ratify. And we urge the Forest Service to do so in the future. But in this case, the Forest Service has engaged in a thorough process with extensive public outreach in negotiating this exchange. Major stakeholders in North Dakota, including environmental groups, support the exchange and the bill. There appears nothing to be gained by undue delay in its implementation. Again, I compliment the gentleman from North Dakota for his dedication and work on this important legislation. I urge my colleagues to support the bill. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. FARR of California

Mr. FARR of California. I thank the gentleman very much for yielding. And my question pursuant to the campaign finance reform: Are any of those bills democratic bills?

Mr. FARR of California. So there are no Democratic authors. Is Mr. Shays', the Meehan bill, one of the bills?

Mr. FARR of California. And do I understand that on suspension it requires a two-thirds vote in order to pass any of those bills?

Mr. FARR of California

Mr. FARR of California. Mr. Speaker, and it is my understanding that this is----

Mr. FARR of California. Mr. Speaker, is my understanding that the Suspension Calendar is done usually on a travel day when most of the Members are in the process of getting to Congress, and that is why the vote is not scheduled until 6 o'clock? Is that correct?

Mr. FARR of California. Mr. Speaker, parliamentary inquiry.

Mr. FARR of California. Mr. Speaker, is this how the House normally debates substantive legislation?

Mr. FARR of California. Yes, Mr. Speaker, the parliamentary inquiry is that the debate is limited to 20 minutes?

Mr. FARR of California. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. FARR of California. Mr. Speaker, parliamentary inquiry.

Mr. FARR of California. Mr. Speaker, I am inquiring regarding the Suspension Calendar. It is my understanding, Mr. Speaker, the Suspension Calendar requires a two-thirds vote; is that correct?

Mr. FARR of California. Mr. Speaker, is it my understanding that under suspension----

Mr. FARR of California

Mr. FARR of California. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to show my shock at this House's procedure in bringing up campaign finance reform. Let us recall a little bit of history. When the Democrats were in control of this House, we passed out campaign finance reform in every session. The bill was vetoed by President Bush, the bill that we passed out was filibustered by the Republican Senate, and now, when the President of the United States comes to this hall and asks the Republican leadership to give a campaign finance reform bill to him, last year and they failed, they have now scheduled it the same day that they are sending half the House to New Mexico for a funeral, they are limiting debate to 20 minutes, and they are requiring a two-thirds vote. Now, if we do not need some reform of the reform, then we are crazy. This is a sham, and the American public will know it is a sham and demand campaign finance reform in a true fashion, such as the Democratic bill or the Shays-Meehan bill, be voted on in this House with a good, solid debate.

Mr. FARR of California

Mr. FARR of California. Mr. Speaker, I rise to note the passing of a woman whose loving care for her family and community spanned half the world, for over half a century. Filipina S. Macahilig began life in Manila, graduating from the University of the Philippines before working as a nurse through World War II. The children at the schools on Panay Island were comforted by her tender and competent care. At war's end, Ms. Macahilig moved to the United States, first to San Francisco and then to the Monterey Peninsula, where she continued to care for the ill and infirm. She and her beloved husband Edel raised her large family: four sons, Rene, Felicisimo, Requiro and Edilberto, and four daughters, Alice, Bernadette, Suzanne and Teresita, all of whom graduated with highest honors and became outstanding members of their communities. Her warmth extended outwards into the community through her service as a longtime member and officer of the Filipino Community Organization of the Monterey Peninsula. She replenished her spirit at the Carmel Mission Basilica where she was a faithful parishioner. She cared for her fourteen grandchildren and five great- grandchildren with her own special kind of gentle compassion, providing a model of humanity that they will carry with them always. Her death at the age of 87 was a loss, but her generous spirit will continue to warm and nurture the community through the memories she has left with us.

Mr. FARR of California

Mr. FARR of California. Mr. Chairman, I thank the chairman for yielding time to me. Mr. Chairman, visa waiver has nothing to do with credit cards, but it has a lot to do with small business. I stand in support of this, because as cochair of the Travel and Tourism Caucus, along with the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Mark Foley), we stand in bipartisan fashion to support the White House Conference on Travel and Tourism's recommendation to this House that we ought to expand the visa waiver program. I hope it is expanded. Let me tell the Members why this is important to this country. Twenty-six countries now have the visa waiver program. This bill helps Main Street, U.S.A. Why? Because it brings people from other places, international visitors, to the United States. They spend $90 billion when they are here, money that is brought into this country to shop and visit places in America. They learn about our country. They learn about our culture. They visit this Capitol. They may be sitting upstairs right now. We have over 46 million international visitors each year in the United States. They spend more in this country than all of the Americans spend when we go abroad, so our balance of trade in the tourism issue is in the $26 billion surplus. We are winning with this program. It is good for Main Street, America. It is good for the United States Congress, because it helps, I think, visiting this country and understanding what makes it work at the local government, State government, Federal government level, it really helps people appreciate what democracy is all about. The visa waiver program is one small step for getting us on more user-friendly terms with countries that we as Americans just take for granted, because oftentimes they require no visa for us to visit them. We should not require a visa for them to visit us, particularly when the error rate is so low. I hope we will adopt the amendment that will allow other countries to come into the program.

Mr. FARR of California

Mr. FARR of California. Mr. Speaker, I stand here before you recognizing that at last night's Oscars the Titanic swept away with 11 awards. It is a fitting occurrence because this is the year of the oceans. Right now, something more exciting is happening across this country and around the world than anything that was ever put on the big screen. That is what is going on in our classrooms around the United States called the Jason project. It was started by the man, Bob Ballard, who found the Titanic. He has dedicated his services to science and to education where children at this moment are speaking to scientists that are on the floor of the ocean live. Those scientists are in California and Bermuda, and they are talking back and forth, and students interact with it. So in this year, the International Year of the Oceans, we have to celebrate that. We also celebrate it, because it is our own money that Congress has put into NOAA and put into the Navy that has helped sponsor this project. This show goes on all week. And if you are here in the Nation's capital, visit the National Geographic, where the show is live right now. So the Year of the Oceans is get into it. Get into it.

Mr. FARR of California

Mr. FARR of California. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of providing fair equity to the Filipino veterans of World War II. I represent many Filipino veterans in Congress, and I have witnessed their fortitude and love of country and heard many accounts of their bravery and dedication in the face of battle. Sadly, these veterans--despite their service and sacrifice--are not considered to have been in ``active service'', and are thus not eligible for full veterans benefits. Many of these veterans served in the battle of Bataan, were subject to the horrors of the Bataan Death March, and fought against the Japanese occupation of the Philippines. No one can argue that they did not earn their right to be considered World War Two veterans--yet current law does just that. I am hopeful that we are moving closer to finally providing these brave and honorable people the benefits they have earned and deserve. In the 104th Congress, the House of Representatives overwhelmingly approved a resolution expressing strong support for Filipino veterans. This year, the President's budget request actually includes funding--$5 million--for benefits for these veterans. Now is the time to give equal treatment to Filipino veterans. Over 180 Members of Congress, including myself, have cosponsored H.R. 836, the Filipino Veterans Equity Act, which would provide all Filipino veterans full and equal benefits available to other veterans of the Second World War. This legislation is long overdue and, especially given how little the House of Representatives is scheduled to consider this year, there is no reason not to enact this bill in this session of Congress. I urge my colleagues to support the President's request for funding for Filipino veterans, and push for swift consideration of H.R. 836. It is the least we can do for those who fought so bravely in the defense of our country.

Mr. FARR of California

Mr. FARR of California. Mr. Speaker, today is National Arts Advocacy Day, a time to focus on the fact that American creativity is driven by the arts. The most creative aspect of American art springs from our diversity. The history of the United States is depicted by the arts-- paintings, photography, dancing, music, poetry, theater, literature, architecture. National Arts Advocacy Day is a day in which we can realize the importance of the arts to our culture and economy. It is a day to remember that the arts are an integral part of our lives in both rural and urban communities. San Francisco, Los Angeles, New York City all revolve around the arts. Where would those cities be without such enthusiasm for the world of art and the revenue derived from public support of the arts? We are working in the U.S. Capitol, a living museum of art and history that tells the story of democracy in the United States. Yet today, more than ever, what this building demonstrates is the creative talent of this country displayed in priceless paintings, photographs, works of sculpture in Statuary Hall, and in the very architecture of the building which is the symbol of the greatest democracy in the world. We must invest more money in the arts to perpetuate creativity in future generations. The return on every federal dollar invested in the arts is phenomenal. Every $1 of federal support for the arts--local ballets, music concerts, theater--generates an average of $12 in matching funds. For the past two years the National Endowment for the Arts has requested $136 million dollars from Congress to fund their organization. For fiscal year 1998, Congress budgeted only $98.5 million. The arts are not a frivolous, disposable commodity. They represent a significant part of our economy. On National Arts Advocacy Day, let us remember the importance of intellectual development that the arts foster. Let us remember how it not only enhances the beauty of our country, but the economy as well. I support all Americans involved in arts from children doing finger paintings, to the design of new monuments in Washington, D.C. that will remind all Americans of their history. Let us celebrate together the importance of arts by supporting a strong Federal role in their promotion.

Mr. FARR of California

Mr. FARR of California. Mr. Chairman, I was sitting in my office listening to this debate, and really the question is what does the 105th Congress have to fear? It really sounds like two things. First of all, we are fearful of Puerto Rico having an election, which is essentially a public opinion election. Since when did Congress fear elections? The other thing we have is we are fearing people that speak other languages. Why? One hundred four sessions that went before us did not fear that. In fact, our forefathers who admitted Louisiana, New Mexico, Oklahoma and Hawaii, allowed those states to come in and protected the rights of those people to speak French, Spanish, Native American and Hawaiian, Aloha, a language that everybody uses in business. What about our forefathers who rebuilt this room we are all sitting in, in 1949 and 1950. If you look around, there are 23 lawgivers that we respect. These are the people who historically gave us the under-law for American law. These were the lawmakers, lawgivers, as we call them. There are 23 of them. Only three of them spoke English, and one of those, Thomas Jefferson, also spoke French. Mr. Chairman, what are we afraid of? Defeat this amendment and pass the bill.

Mr. FARR of California

Mr. FARR of California. Mr. Speaker, it has been 35 years since I joined the American Peace Corps, and I rise today to celebrate this month and this very day, the 37th anniversary of the Peace Corps. It was started on March 1, 1961, when President Kennedy signed legislation passed by this Congress creating the Peace Corps. Today there are more than 150,000 returned volunteers in the United States, five of whom serve in the House of Representatives and two in the United States Senate. Today, because of the anniversary of the Peace Corps, there are more than 6,000 returned volunteers that are presently, as I speak, working in schools throughout the United States to bring a program called World Wise Schools. They bring the cross-cultural awareness of these countries that they served in to the school children of America. I just participated in a program like that downtown at the Peace Corps headquarters, where we had life interaction with students from South Africa, that was being taught by an American Peace Corps volunteer from Washington, D.C. Today there are 84 countries in the world that have invited the Peace Corps to be in them. There are 6,500 volunteers that are now serving overseas. They are addressing the critical development needs on a person-to-person basis, helping spread and gain access to clean water; to grow more food; to help prevent the spread of AIDS; to teach English, math and science; to help entrepreneurs start new businesses; and to work with nongovernmental organizations to protect our environment. In fact, the demand for Peace Corps far exceeds the supply. For my conservative friends on the other side of the aisle, I wanted you to recall that the President has asked for expansion of the Peace Corps in his address to the Congress here just last month. In his 1999 budget request, he wants to put 10,000 volunteers, up about 35,000 more volunteers, serving overseas by the year 2000. The demand for their service is there, the supply is not, and the only thing that stands between that is the United States Congress and its ability to appropriate the funds. I encourage my colleagues to do so. The proposed expansion of the Peace Corps comes at a time when the interest in serving as a volunteer is particularly high. Last year, more than 150,000 Americans contacted the Peace Corps to request information on serving as volunteers, an increase of more than 40 percent since 1994. The value of the volunteers and their experience is not restricted to overseas service. I can testify that the best service that is given to the Peace Corps is the domestic dividend that we all bring when we come home. I urge all of those Members of Congress that they ought to think someday even when they retire, that Peace Corps has no limit to the age that one can enter. Remember President Carter's mother who entered the Peace Corps in her elderly years. I encourage on this 37th anniversary of the Peace Corps that we all be proud of what was created here in the House of Representatives and what has served its country well, the United States Peace Corps.