Sam Farr

Mr. FARR of California

Mr. FARR of California. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding me the time. Mr. Chairman, I just heard some students out in the hallway saying, oh, they are just talking about agriculture and that is boring. The difficulty with this debate is, it is everything but boring because it is really the engine that drives the American economy and it is wonderful history and it is great culture and to understand what agriculture is, is really to listen to this debate. I happen to represent just one State that is very diverse in agriculture in California, and California farmers in my district, I think, are the most productive farmers in the world when they grow specialty crops. These are big crops in our area, but in agriculture language here in Washington, they are known as minor crops. Specialty crops produce 2.5 billion dollars' worth of fresh fruits, vegetables, and horticulture crops without any Federal price supports, without any other direct Federal support, including water. We grow lettuce and artichokes and strawberries and flowers and over 100 different crops. That is just in two, three counties in California. They have succeeded by embracing the full benefits of potential risks and of great market. They are models for American agriculture, and I believe that American agriculture must move in that direction to remain viable into the next century. But even market-driven agriculture needs a national farm policy. It needs conservation, it needs research, it needs rural development, it needs market promotion. These are all really crucial to our future success and sustainability. I think the issue about agriculture in America is to sustain it so that our grandchildren and great-grandchildren can still move into the same lands, hopefully not covered by shopping centers, and allow those great-grandchildren to be able to farm in this great country. The Federal Government has a deep responsibility to make sure that these programs help all of rural America. H.R. 2854 has some problems because it ignores some of the crucial goals of the American farm policy. While I do not like the transition program that is in the bill, I think it is too expensive and makes payments regardless of the farmer's production or market prices, it still moves agriculture toward the market, and I can support that. But I cannot support the bill if it also does not address the conservation issues, the research, and the rural development and I am particularly concerned that it does not address the loss of farmland to urban sprawl. I have coauthorized legislation with my good friend, the gentleman from Maryland [Mr. Gilchrest], to help States address the troubling loss of farmland to urbanization, over a million acres last year at current rates. The States have taken the lead in helping farmers keep this land in agriculture and out of the grasp of urban sprawl, and the Federal Government should help these States with their efforts, and so far they are not. A version of our bill was added to the Senate farm bill by Senator Santorum. Unfortunately, neither this bill nor the conservation amendment allowed by the rule includes any farmland protection measures. Mr. Chairman, I cannot support the bill without adequate funding for conservation, research, and rural development.

Mr. FARR of California

Mr. FARR of California. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in tribute to one of California's great leaders and legislators, State Senator Henry J. Mello. The Senator retires this year after more than three decades of continuous service to the people of California's Central Coast, located in my district. As he closes this chapter of his public life, I want to take this time to salute a man who epitomizes the best in public service. A native of Watsonville, CA, Senator Mello has spent most of his adult life working tirelessly on behalf of his constituents. Rising through the ranks of local government, the Senator served first as a Santa Cruz County supervisor for 8 years, then was elected to serve as assemblyman for both Santa Cruz and Monterey Counties in 1976. In 1980, Senator Mello was elected to the State senate and, in a tribute to his talent, he was quickly named that body's majority whip. Senator Mello was subsequently elected majority leader in 1992 and successfully chaired the Subcommittee on Aging, the Subcommittee on Economic Problems Facing Agriculture, the Senate Select Committee on Bilingual Education, the Joint Committees on the Arts, the 1992 Quincentenial, and served as vice chair of the Senate Select Committee on California's Wine Industry and Water Resources. I have had the honor of working with Senator Mello on many occasions and I have always been touched by both his skill and his concern for the community. You just won't find a better citizen's advocate for education, the environment, or especially, the elderly. Senator Mello authored legislation to enact the first programs focusing on Alzheimers-Respite Care, Adult Day Health care and the Multipurpose Senior Services Programs. He founded the Senior Legislature and passed legislation to combat elder abuse. In the 20 years that Senator Mello has served in the legislature, he has authored more than 120 bills on aging and long-term care that have become law of the land in California. Senator Mello's commitment to our senior citizens, and indeed to all citizens, was particularly impressive when their need was greatest, after the Loma Prieta earthquake of 1989. Senator Mello's work was key in maintaining vital lines of communication and in ensuring that our area received millions of dollars to aid in the region's rebuilding. I am certain that had it not been for Senator Mello's initiative and hard work our area's recovery would have been far less easy. Helping the area recuperate from the earthquake was just one of many highlights in his distinguished legislative career. For many years to come, tangible evidence of Senator Mello's labors will be obvious to all California residents, especially his interest in education and the arts. During his tenure as chairman of the Fort Ord Task Force, Senator Mello helped establish the California State University at Monterey Bay, the University of California, Santa Cruz research center at Fort Ord and authored the legislation creating the Fort Ord Reuse Authority. Senator Mello also acquired essential funding for Santa Cruz County libraries preventing their closure and, in perhaps the greatest tribute to his work, was honored in 1994 with the naming of the Henry J. Mello Center for Performing Arts in Watsonville. One could literally fill books with Senator Mello's many other wonderful accomplishments. As he retires this year because of State term-limits, one thing is positively certain: Senator Mello will be sorely missed. For my part, I will miss working with a member of the Democratic team who has so successfully governed the Central Coast for more than a generation. As for the people of his district, they will no doubt miss something much more profound. In the Senator, they will miss a man who has lived his life to serve, who has led with levels of compassion and commitment not normally found in our public servants these days. But then again, Senator Mello has been no ordinary public servant.

Mr. FARR of California

Mr. FARR of California. Mr. Speaker, I rise to bring to the attention of my colleagues a recent event in California. On Wednesday, a caravan of 30 vehicles was stopped at the United States-Mexico border by United States Customs officers. The caravan was carrying approximately 300 used personal computers and modems for medical and educational purposes in Cuba. Why was the delivery stopped? Because the United States imposes a comprehensive trade and travel embargo against Cuba. Mr. Speaker, the equipment these people were trying to deliver to Cuba was not high technology. It was not a threat to our national security. The equipment--outdated 286 personal computers and used modems--was for schools and hospitals in Cuba. This recent event demonstrates the problems with our embargo against Cuba. How could the Cuban Government oppress the Cuban people with obsolete computers? How could these computers be used to threaten the security of the United States, a country where many individuals have personal computers that are many times more powerful? We need to face the fact that the best way to help the Cuban people is to work with Cuba, not against it. How better could we bring our values to Cuba than help improve the health and welfare of the Cuban people? How better could we help Cubans learn about American philanthropy and goodwill than support private donations by Americans? Mr Speaker, we need to reexamine our approach to Cuba. We are the only nation left that imposes such severe restrictions on trade with Cuba. Let us help the Cuban people by letting Americans help Cubans.

Mr. FARR

Mr. FARR. Mr. Speaker, I rise, first, to thank the President for challenging this Nation and those who are elected to govern it, and also for his reasonable stand on our budget crisis. Second, I want to thank the President for recognizing the importance of educational technology in our schools. While serving in the California State Legislature, I authored the California Educational Technology Act, which now drives public schools throughout California into modern technology. In his State of the Union Address, the President spoke of continuing and expanding on this project. The California Educational Technology Act highlights the importance of computer technology in the classroom. In my district, children at Manzanita Elementary School in Seaside, use computers to communicate with students from around the world to learn about geography, different cultures, and languages. They can also communicate with scientists doing research in the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary together with the National Weather Service to learn more about science. This project is an outstanding example of the benefits that come from local, State and Federal Government partnerships with private industry. Connecting our schools to the information super highway is exactly the type of program that will prepare America's youth to lead American economic growth and technological development into the next century. Thank you, Mr. President, for your leadership in education.

Mr. FARR

Mr. FARR. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor the memory and exceptional life of Mr. Fay Patterson, a dear friend, active member in the community, and veteran of three wars, who passed away January 8, 1996, at the age of 80. Mr. Patterson was born in South Carolina on June 15, 1915. He served this Nation in the Army during World War II in both France and Germany. He was also a veteran of the Korean war and the Vietnam war. He was awarded the Bronze Star. From 1944 to 1953, living in Savannah, GA, Mr. Patterson continued to serve the American people as a police officer. In 1959, he began 37 years of active residency in Seaside where he served as provost marshall at Forth Ord until he retired. He then worked as an airport police officer for the Monterey Peninsula Airport District until 1977. He was interested in not only providing for the welfare of the Nation through his service in the Army, but also as an active member of the community. During the Christmas season, Mr. Patterson was especially generous in giving his time to help the needy and promote activities for the young. Mr. Patterson was an active member of the NAACP, having served as chairman of the registration committee and as a board member of the local NAACP chapter. His participation in the American Legion, Kiwanis, Friendship Baptist Church, the Monterey County Sheriff's Department Advisory Committee and the Monterey County Board of Parol was strongly felt and will be sorely missed in his absence. While serving as an assemblyman in the California State Legislature, I was privileged to present a resolution honoring Mr. Patterson for his dedicated service to the community. In conjunction with the resolution, the Monterey County Board of Supervisors presented a resolution for faithful service and a certificate for outstanding volunteer service. The city of Seaside also honored him with a proclamation for outstanding service. In 1985, the board of supervisors recognized his efforts to register thousands of voters. As you can see, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Patterson spent his entire life serving this country and helping his community. He was known to many and was a dear and close personal friend of mine. He was like a second father to me. Please join me as I express my regret at the loss of Fay Patterson, and my profoundest condolences to his two sons, Ray and Fay, Jr., and his two grandsons, of whom he was extremely proud.

Mr. FARR

Mr. FARR. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to discuss an issue of great importance to our Nation's military retirees: COLA equity. The thousands of veterans and military retirees in my district have repeatedly asked that the inequity in COLA's for military and Federal civilians be ended--most recently during a veterans' town hall meeting I held last week. This House has been unprecedented in dedicating itself toward ending the problem of inequity in military cost of living adjustments for military retirees. Early last year, legislation was introduced by my colleague, Mr. Jim Moran, to end COLA inequity. The House also included a provision ending the disparity in COLA's in the budget reconciliation bill--a provision which, unfortunately, was removed by the Senate. In response, my Republican colleague, Mr. Bill Young, introduced a new, fast-track bill to accomplish the same task. I am proud to have cosponsored both Mr. Young's and Mr. Moran's bills, and I applaud the tenacity with which the House leadership has pursued this important matter. A provision to end the COLA inequity problem was included in the conference report of the Department of Defense authorization bill, which the House approved today. While I strongly supported the provision, I could not support the entire bill, a bill which mandated a $7 million increase in defense spending over the President's original budget. This spending increase comes at a time when other Federal programs-- especially programs serving veterans--are suffering from serious budget cuts. For example, last year's Veterans Affairs budget, which provides for medical care for millions of veterans and military retirees and the construction and improvement of VA medical facilities, was cut by nearly $1 billion from 1994. At the very least, we cannot speak about mutual sacrifice in ending the deficit at the same time that we actually increase spending in defense. I will continue to support the House's legislative efforts to remove the COLA inequity once and for all. Our Nation's military retirees deserve no less.

Mr. FARR

Mr. FARR. Mr. Speaker, I would like to take this opportunity to express my strong objection to two specific elements contained in the fiscal year 1996 Defense authorization conference agreement. First, I must take strong offense to the suggestion that the members of our armed services, who have served our country honorably through times of war and peace, should be discharged merely due to contracting HIV. Military personnel must be judged on their ability to perform their assigned duties. Retaining service members who test positive for HIV but demonstrate no further evidence of illness should not be revised due to a flagrantly political agenda. Discharging experienced soldiers, sailors, marines, and airmen merely for their testing positive for a virus is a patently inequitable action is clearly based on a prejudicial attitude towards HIV. Further, we owe it to the American people to not add fuel to the fire of hysteria concerning HIV. If otherwise capable of performing their duties, our servicemembers deserve the right to continue defending our Nation. Second, this conference report denies military personnel or dependents the right to obtain safe, legal abortions at overseas U.S. military facilities, except in cases of incest, rape, or danger to the life of the mother. I must ardently protest the denial of a basic constitutional right to the military women who so diligently protect our vital national security interests by serving overseas. Servicemembers deserve the very best we have to offer, in all regards. We simply cannot deny them the very same civil rights we grant every other American, the rights they are sworn to defend with their lives. Anything less would be to reduce military women to the rank of second- class citizens. The members of the armed services perform a necessary and vital function in defending our national interests and our liberty. Just as they struggle to protect our Nation, we must endeavor to protect their fundamental human rights.

Mr. FARR

Mr. FARR. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this time. I have four points I would like to make. First, I would like to associate myself with the remarks of the distinguished chairman of the Armed Services Appropriations Subcommittee, Defense Appropriations Committee, on the COLA equity issue. I agree it is totally essential that we bring that COLA equity to the military retirees. Second, I strongly support the effort in a bipartisan way to bring this bill to fruition so we can continue to support military education in this country. With the downsizing of the military, we, indeed, must support our military schools and open opportunities that these schools are experiencing, like naval postgraduate school and the seaman-to- admiral program and the Defense Language Institute, which is doing a lot to help our troops in Bosnia and in Serbia to understand the Croatian and Serbian languages and help our troops with the translation that is going on with the 29 other countries that are now serving along with the NATO forces in Bosnia. Third, I would like to point out that this is a bill that really assists with the base closure issues that was not all in Milcon, the authorizations for bases to do what they have to do with base closures, which is the largest base closure list we have ever had in this country, which is addressed in this legislation. Let us bring assurance to the veterans who had the gulf war syndrome. Last night a lot of news was indicating that perhaps there is not a specific individual syndrome, but in this authorization is the money available to continue to assist those veterans with that disease. And I appreciate the bipartisan effort to bring this to fruition in the bill. Lastly, let us support those troops in Bosnia. They are doing a good job with the NATO forces there. I think that this is a bill that can show that we support the troops 100 percent.

Mr. FARR

Mr. FARR. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentlewoman from California [Ms. Pelosi].

Mr. FARR of California

Mr. FARR of California. Mr. Speaker, I rise on a more somber note than the debate that has been going on here today. I rise under special orders on this day, January 4, which would have been the birthday of my younger sister Nancy, had it not been for the tragic death of Nancy when she was killed visiting me when I was a Peace Corps volunteer. But I rise not so much to remember her. I did that when I was sworn into office in this Chamber just a few years ago. But I rise to talk about death, because it has come to one of our colleague's family. Today I ask this country to share my empathy with our truly distinguished colleague, Vic Fazio. He lost his youngest daughter, Anne Noel. Everyone knows how hard Vic works in this institution. He is one of the hardest working Members that we have and certainly one of the most devoted Members to the institution of the House of Representatives. Vic is totally dedicated. But most important, or more important than his leadership, is his family. Today, in Sacramento, as we sit here in Washington, a memorial service is being conducted for his and Joey's daughter. She was a star. She fought off leukemia with a successful bone marrow transplant. She graduated from McClatchey High School. She earned a degree from the University of California at Davis, where she was president of her sorority. To Anne Noel's parents, Vic and Joey, there is nothing more painful than that of the pain of losing a child. But I know from my own sister's death that you need time to grieve, and in your grief this country shares what you have so effectively done in leading this Nation ahead, and that is that this country shares your sorrow. We send this sorrow to you as Representatives of this Nation's Government, who knows that Vic not only has led this Congress but he has been a great father who is now suffering from the most difficult pain of all, the pain of the loss of a child. Vic, we pray for you. But most of all, we send our love. I yield to my colleague, the gentlewoman from California [Ms. Eshoo].

Mr. FARR

Mr. FARR. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding time to me. I also thank the chair of the committee who does outstanding work and is an outstanding chair, but I must rise to urge that we not override the veto. The veto is there because the President found that there were things in this bill that were broken, that need fixing, and we in Congress can fix those things. The President rejected the clear-cutting of the Tongass National Forest. The President rejected the jeopardizing of the Columbia River Basin ecosystem management plan. The President recognized that this bill kills the California Desert Protection Act that Congress enacted last year. This bill prohibits the protection of the habitat for endangered species and further prohibits any further listing of endangered species. This bill walks away from the commitment of the Indian Health Service and Indian education. It walks away from the National Endowment for the Arts and the Humanities. In particular let us talk about that for a moment. I think the shutdown of the Federal Government has drawn national attention to the importance that the arts play particularly here in Washington, DC. Indeed our country has said that these things are important. This bill cuts funding for those important programs. This bill was vetoed because Congress failed to hear the recommendations of the White House conference on tourism which met here just a few months ago, the private sector, at the invitation of the President, to recommend to Congress and to the executive department of how we should best support tourism in the United States. This bill undermines those recommendations. So my colleagues, this committee has worked hard. It has an outstanding chair and outstanding members because it has recognized the interest of special interests in this and is certainly a bill that ought to be vetoed, as it was by the President. I ask my colleagues to sustain that veto.

Mr. FARR

Mr. FARR. Mr. Speaker, I rise as a Member from the delegation of the great State of California. This is the State that is proud to lead this Nation in environmental, educational, and economic policy. Unfortunately, it is also the State that showed that a legislative branch of government can bring Government to a halt by not adopting a budget on time. California's partisan politics delay the State budget year after year. However, never was it this bad. Congress is now in its fourth month. We have been here more days, taken more votes, and spent more hours on the floor and accomplished less than any other Congress in history. Congress was unable to make the October 1 fiscal deadline. It is internationally embarrassing. Mr. Speaker, give us back our Nation. Let your people go. Vote for a clean CR and get Government back to work.

Mr. FARR

Mr. FARR. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong opposition to this bill. Mr. Speaker, in Dr. Seuss' beloved story, the Grinch stole Christmas from the children in Whooville because he was mean-spirited. While the Grinch is a fairy tale and has a happy ending, it is tragic that the welfare reform conference report before us today is not. While every Member of this institution agrees with me that the welfare system is broken and must be fixed, it is unconscionable to me that the Republicans can demonstrate such mean-spiritedness by proposing a welfare reform bill that will plunge innocent children into poverty. Every President since FDR has preserved the minimum national guarantee of income assistance for poor children. What the Republican conference report does is steal the basic guarantees of help for poor, hungry, ill, abused, and neglected children much like the Ginch who stole Christmas from Whoolville. At the same time the Republicans can eliminate the safety net for children, they continue to insist on a $245 billion tax cut for the wealthy. Let me tell you what would happen by the year 2002 if the $245 billion were allotted to low-income children instead: enroll another 1.5 million children in Head Start, cost: $42.68 billion; expand child care for working parents, cost: $42.20 billion; provide health insurance to 10 million children who currently have no health insurance, cost: $90.80 billion; provide after-school programs, cost: $4.95 billion; and raise 3.65 million children out of poverty, cost: $70.67 billion. This is true welfare reform--if we allocate $70 billion to give jobless parents part-time jobs and provide families with child care, wage supplements, and direct cash assistance, we would truly fulfill the spirit of Christmas for millions and millions of needy children. This is a Grinchie conference report and I urge its defeat.

Mr. FARR

Mr. FARR. Mr. Speaker, I voted for this bill because it addressed things that were broken and needed fixing. We had a bipartisan effort to fix those things, and we did. We need to keep America competitive. Technology development depends on risk-taking. This bill allows risks to be taken and rights to be protected. Mr. Speaker, I was shocked by this veto. It is the first time I have ever not agreed with the President on a veto, and I am going to vote to override it. I urge my colleagues who supported it in the first instance to do so in the latter.

Mr. FARR

Mr. FARR. Mr. Speaker, I rise on this cold, wintry day here at the end of the year to remind us how it all got started. Remember we were here last January with all our families when a new leadership took over, a leadership that promised that this Congress would be family friendly, that we would have an ambitious agenda, that they would deliver their Contract on America, and that first 100 days they really went to work. They did a lot and celebrated here with great big circuses and things like that. Mr. Speaker, look at it at the end of the year. We have been in Congress more days, cast more votes, and done less than any Congress in history. No budget bill was adopted on time, none of the appropriation bills were adopted on time. Why? All because of stubbornness of the Speaker to keep a tax break, keep a promise. Look at what the Speaker said. He said, ``I do not care what the price is. I do not care if we have no executive offices and no bonds for 30 days. Not at this time.'' This Speaker has shut down Washington just at Christmas time. Well, Mr. Speaker, join the spirit of Christmas, start giving. Give up the tax break.

Mr. FARR

Mr. FARR. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to salute a great military leader, U.S. Army Col. Vladimir Sobichevsky. The colonel retires from the U.S. Army this month after serving for the last 3 years as the commandant of the Defense Language Institute located in my district. A native of Russia, Sobichevsky fled the former Soviet Union with his mother in 1943. Settling in Germany, the two emigrated to the United States from a displaced persons camp in 1949. He enlisted in the U.S. Army just 7 years later, joining the first Special Forces group. At the time, Sobichevsky said he was motivated to become a soldier because you could earn U.S. citizenship by serving in the Armed Forces for 5 years. He recently told a reporter: I was going to join the Marines. I kind of fell into the Special Forces. I was the dumbest kid you could've met, with virtually no education, due probably to a poor start in life. I was standing in a drugstore in Geary Street in San Francisco, reading a magazine, and I saw an article titled ``The Apes of Rath,'' about Colonel Rath, who was putting together the first Special Forces group. I thought they had nice headgear, the green beret. I joined the Army without any idea of what I was getting into. I began to realize it at the Airborne School at Fort Benning (Georgia). And after nearly 40 years in uniform, there is little doubt that Sobichevsky made the right choice. Indeed, his career in the Army has been very distinguished. Completing three tours of duty in Germany, two tours in Korea, and one in Panama, Sobichevsky saw combat first in Laos as part of the White Star initiative and then in the Military Assistance Command Vietnam's Studies and Observation Group. After earning both bachelor's and master's degrees in government from the University of San Francisco, Sobichevsky also graduated from the Army Command and General Staff College and the National War College. After serving as operations director for the Special Operations Command, Pacific, Colonel Sobichevsky was transferred to the Defense Language Institute, which will mark its 50th anniversary next year as the premier military institution for foreign language instruction in support of national security requirements for all four military services. During his 3-year tenure at DLI, the largest language training institution in the world, Sobichevsky is credited with incorporating the school into the network of Monterey Bay educational and language facilities. DLI now works cooperatively with other Monterey Bay institutions of higher learning dedicated to foreign language training, including the Monterey Institute of International Studies and the Naval Postgraduate School. The consortium of institutions that provide graduate-level training in foreign language in the Monterey Bay area have a strong leader in Colonel Sobichevsky and DLI. More importantly, the commandant has improved the training at DLI. ``Our goal is to have students achieve a Level II proficiency in listening comprehension, reading and speaking,'' Sobichevsky said. ``That's not a native speaker, but that's pretty darned good.'' According to Sobichevsky, while just 12 percent of DLI graduates had level II proficiency in 1985, 64 percent have it this year. ``I don't want to take credit,'' Sobichevsky modestly added. ``We built on the building blocks of previous commandants. The credit goes to the 650 faculty, seven school deans, 80 military language instructors. They deserve the credit.'' As each student who has received language training at DLI will attest, Sobichevsky is to be commended for enhancing the language preparedness of its students. Colonel Sobichevsky is a soldier's soldier and deserves the Nation's heartfelt appreciation for his military service.

Mr. FARR

Mr. FARR. Mr. Speaker, yesterday the House of Representatives voted for legislation to ensure continued assistance to our Nation's veterans. I voted for this bill, the Veterans Housing and Employment Rights Benefits Act, which would permanently extend programs which provide invaluable assistance to our Nation's veterans and military retirees. The bill would extend a number of important home-loan programs. One such program permits veterans to negotiate for favorable interest rates and terms for mortgages. Another service allows veterans to get mortgage loans with interest rates fixed by the Department of Veterans Affairs. A third program extended by the bill allows veterans to secure mortgages for energy-saving improvements to their homes. All of these services allow veterans, who often do not have the collateral or financial resources normally needed to purchase a home, a chance to pursue the American dream of owning and maintaining their own home. Other programs reauthorized by the bill include the Homeless Veterans Employment Program, and the VA program providing housing assistance to homeless veterans. It also makes changes to current law to help veterans further and prevent discrimination against veterans--such as a measure ensuring that employers cannot force employees to use their vacation time to participate in military training programs. I thank my colleagues, Chairman Bob Stump and Representative Sonny Montgomery, for bringing this important legislation to the House floor. It is my hope that we shall soon see this bill signed into law.

Mr. FARR

Mr. FARR. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to speak in opposition to the Interior appropriations conference report for fiscal year 1996. One of the main reasons for my opposition is the severe cuts to the National Endowment for the Arts and the National Endowment for the Humanities. For a modest investment of $162 million, the preservation of our cultural resources outweigh the small cost to the government each year. Recently, this Republican Congress proposed the elimination of Federal funding for these institutions. The purpose of these agencies is to provide support for arts organizations. In turn, these groups offer the community many activities such as plays, festivals, and seminars that cannot occur without Federal assistance. Furthermore, no arts organizations receive grants from the NEA or the NEH without providing matching funds. On July 17, the House voted to approve the fiscal year 1996 Interior appropriations bill which cut Federal funding to the National Endowment for the Arts by 40 percent, leaving only $99 million. There were three amendments to the bill which would have cut all funding to the endowment and thus, completely phase out the agency at the end of this year. Fortunately, bipartisan efforts defeated the amendments. However, in this era of Federal budget constraints, every Federal program, whether it is worthy or not, is subject to cuts. While we must work toward a balanced budget, we must not make indiscriminate and arbitrary cuts in the NEA budget. Recently, Chairman Jane Alexander has had to implement a 47 percent reduction of staff. Because of these reductions, the number of applications will have to be significantly cut and viable arts organizations will be hurt. During my tenure in the California legislature, I continually met with business leaders who supported the arts. I believe that support for the arts is essential and contributes to our economic edge. The same hands that mold clay or play the piano can also program computers and start new businesses. It is our creativity which must be nurtured from an early age. We cannot afford to abolish the NEA and the NEH. It is an investment in our future.

Mr. FARR

Mr. FARR. Mr. Speaker, the debate here today is not about sending troops to Bosnia. Our troops are in Bosnia, and tomorrow more will go, and Friday even more will go. In fact, yesterday afternoon I was with many of my colleagues having lunch with those troops in Frankfurt, Germany, and what they asked is for us to support what they are doing. Mr. Speaker, those troops are trained. They are prepared to go. They are eager to go. In fact, the ones I had lunch with said, ``I want to do the job that I am trained for.'' This debate here tonight is not about war in Bosnia. It is a debate about whether Americans will stand up to implement a peace plan--a peace plan that we led. The agreement was written in Dayton. This agreement is one of the most interesting contracts ever done in the modern world. It sets out a whole process for how the military aspects will be involved in the peace settlement; how to stabilize the region; how to enter into boundary disputes; how to prepare for elections; a new constitution is written. It sets up a system of arbitration of differences and sets up a commission for human rights and petitioning that commission. It is how to deal with refugees and displaced persons, including just compensation for taken property. It sets up a commission to preserve the national monuments and sets up public corporations for Bosnia and Herzegovina. It sets up a civilian implementation plan to transfer from war to civil governments; it sets up an international policy for police task forces. Mr. Speaker, this is an agreement that is signed by all the leaders. This is a contract on how we get from here to there. And when it is over, we stabilize the Balkans. Sure, there is some risk. But we are in a world where leadership is about getting something done, and the United States has gotten something done. We have ended the war; peace has broken out. Mr. Speaker, to walk away from this would be a travesty. All the generals that we talked to, and the admirals that are going to be involved in this, urged our delegation to support the troops. As Admiral Snuffy Smith, who is going to be in command, told us, ``I'll tell you why I want you to support us. Because we're big, we're good, and we deliver. We'll get in, we'll get the job done, and we'll get out.'' Twenty-eight nations are already involved in the IFOR process. It would be a travesty for our military to walk away from all of those other troops whose mothers and fathers are just as concerned as our mothers and fathers about their sons and daughters serving there. Mr. Speaker, it would be a travesty for diplomacy. Every ambassador that we talked to said this is the right thing. This peace accord is amazing. It is a great document. We ought to be supporting. Last, the Presidents whose countries are involved, whose citizens suffered the war, all stated, ``We signed this document. We are going to implement it. We want it to work. We are sick and tired of war. We do not want it to continue. We want to be back in the nation of economic prosperity. We have the talent to do that. Give us the chance.'' Let peace prevail. Support our troops. Reject the Dornan amendment.

Mr. FARR of California

Mr. FARR of California. Mr. Speaker, it was 50 years ago this year that World War Two came to an end. Fifty-four years ago today, our naval base in Pearl Harbor, Hawaii, was subject to a devastating surprise attack by the Japanese. And with that attack, our participation in that war began. On that day, we could not have foreseen the terrible consequences World War Two would have for our Nation. No one could have known that 400,000 Americans would die. No one predicted that 1 million Americans in all would be killed or wounded: more than in any other war where American blood was shed. But what our Nation did see on that terrible day was a great threat to freedom, peace, and security. The shadow of imperialism and war had crossed our borders, and we realized just how close we were to being consumed by the aggression that was claiming the freedoms--and lives-- of millions of people in Europe and Asia. Millions of young Americans volunteered to serve their country. They could not see the future, but they knew the risk they took and the horrors of war they would face. They knew they might never come home again. Yet they also saw the great threat to America, to democracy and freedom around the world. They saw that the very future depended upon their service. When the war was over, more than 16 million Americans had served-- more than in any other conflict, before or since. Without their sacrifice, our world would not be what it is today. Indeed, our entire world was shaped by the outcome of that war. And so many of the basic things which we take for granted--peace, freedom, respect for human rights, economic prosperity--we would not have without their sacrifice. So on this day, let us remember those who lost their lives at Pearl Harbor, and the hundreds of thousands who gave their lives in the 4 years of war that followed. We owe them all a very great debt.

Mr. FARR of California

Mr. FARR of California. Mr. Speaker, on Wednesday, November 29, the House of Representatives voted to return the VA-HUD appropriations bill to conference. By doing so, Congress recognized that the bill was unfair legislation which neglected the needs of our Nation's veterans and military retirees. The bill underfunded many important veterans programs. It eliminated educational help for those willing to work at VA facilities. It cut money for construction, modernization, and improvement of VA facilities. It reduced funding for VA programs by over $40 million from last year. But above all, the VA-HUD bill provided insufficient funding for veterans medical care--$400 million less than the President requested. In my district, tens of thousands of veterans and military retirees rely on VA medical programs. The cuts in the bill would have threatened the quality care they depend on. I joined the 217 other Members--Democrats and Republicans--to recommit the VA-HUD bill in order to fix this serious flaw. Our motion to recommit specifically requested that $213 million be restored to veterans' health care programs. Without this additional funding, the bill would have forced our veterans and military retirees to make an extra and unfair sacrifice in the name of deficit reduction. Veterans and military retirees are willing to take their fair share of spending cuts in order to eliminate the deficit. But they do not deserve burdensome cuts which unfairly target them. Our bipartisan vote yesterday will go a long way toward making the bill better, one that treats all our Nation's veterans and retirees fairly.

Mr. FARR

Mr. FARR. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me the time. Mr. President, you should veto this bill. It kills a program that evokes the spirit of a national service program, the AmeriCorps. There are many other bad aspects of this bill but eliminating AmericCorps is penny-foolish. It is a program that benefits the very heart of our communities. In my district in California, we have AmeriCorps workers involved in the Boys and Girls Clubs, in Big Brothers and Sisters, in the Food Bank of Monterey. We have 20 AmeriCorps volunteers involved in the Senior Companion Program. I happened to swear in as a former Peace Corps volunteer new AmeriCorps workers. The pledge of office is something this Congress ought to learn. The pledge of office to be AmeriCorps is to get the job done. The job that they are doing is essential to make our communities get back on their feet both socially and economically. I suggest that to eliminate that program is not a very wise thing to do. Mr. President, if this House cannot reject the bill, then veto it.

Mr. FARR of California

Mr. FARR of California. Mr. Speaker, this is a bad bill camouflaged by the military uniforms of our former service men and women. Not only will this bill hurt veterans, the environment, and tenants in low- income housing, but it eliminates funding for AmeriCorps, the national service program. In my district, there are tens of thousands of veterans and military retirees who rely on medical assistance and quality medical facilities. Unfortunately, the cuts in this bill will threaten the quality care they depend on. For example, it cuts nearly $400 million in medical care from the administration's request and eliminates educational help for those who agree to work at VA facilities. Many veterans and military retirees are willing to make a sacrifice in the effort to end the deficit, but we should not target them unfairly--and, unfortunately, this bill does just that. This bill will also hurt the environment by cutting the EPA's funding by over $1.5 billion from this year's budget. In my coastal district, less money will be given to help local communities keep the Monterey Bay clean and healthy. This bill will also hurt the public by preventing EPA from expanding its list of the toxic chemical releases that companies must make public. Finally, this bill hurts our young people. As we approach a new millennium, we need to renew the spirit of our Founding Fathers. A program that evokes that spirit is the national service program, AmeriCorps. It is a volunteer program that works--it should not be arbitrarily cut. It is an investment in our future-- according to IBM for every dollar AmeriCorps invests, the community will realize a return of $1.60 to $2.60 or more in direct benefits. AmeriCorps workers are involved in every aspect of our communities, teaching in schools, feeding the homeless, and counseling troubled youth. In my district in California, we have AmeriCorps workers involved with the Boys and Girls Club, Big Brothers and Sisters, and the Food Bank of Monterey. We have 20 AmeriCorps members involved in the Senior Companion Program which has low-income seniors assisting other seniors, allowing them to lead independent lives. Several weeks ago I had the privilege of swearing in two AmeriCorps volunteers in Hollister. They will be working on developing a new youth center and administering the city's housing rehabilitation program. Unfortunately, this bill terminates funding for AmeriCorps. As a former Peace Corps volunteer, I know the benefits of volunteer service. No one can quantify the benefits an AmeriCorps worker gives to his or her community. Unfortunately, the communities of Hollister and Monterey will notice the loss of this valuable volunteer service benefit. This is yet again another example of Republican budget-cutting that is penny-wise and pound-foolish.

Mr. FARR

Mr. FARR. Mr. Speaker, this is the first Saturday that the 104th Congress has been in session. Last year at this time Congress was home with their families preparing for the Thanksgiving holidays, praying for peace in Bosnia and the Middle East. We had adopted all 13 appropriations bills, we had passed the budget, and we created a $500 billion deficit reduction package. Look at this year. We have more days in session, more votes cast, and less done, than any time in recent history. The delay, the fight, is not necessary. Just in the beginning of October, this House passed a continuing resolution by a voice vote, so uncontroversial nobody even wanted to have to debate it. You have the power, Mr. Speaker, you have the votes, Mr. Speaker, you have celebrated the expedience in which you could pass the Contract With America. You have made promises and less progress. You can bring the Federal workers back to their jobs and send Congress home to their families without any debate. Pass a clean resolution. You have shown it could be done in October. It certainly should be done this late in November.

Mr. FARR

Mr. FARR. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding to me this time. Mr. Speaker, this bill probably speaks more to the values that we in Congress have toward the esthetics of America, its land, its people, and certainly its arts. The gentleman from Ohio [Mr. Regula] is probably one of the finest Members of this House, and it is a tough thing to bring this thing to the floor in the shape it is in. Mr. Speaker, I stand today in opposition to the rule, and hopefully it will be defeated. If it is not, I hope that the bill is defeated and recommitted as it was once before, for several reasons. First of all, the taxpayers are still ripped off under this bill, particularly as the mining process goes. It defers to the authorizing bill, which makes it worse, so by adopting this bill and then leading us to the authorizing bill, we are not getting a fair shake for the American taxpayer. Second, the public gets cheated on the issue of the Endangered Species Act. It prohibits adding species not in the jurisdiction of the appropriations committee. It is in the jurisdiction committee, and this bill prohibits any endangered species from being added. Third, the bill cripples the Columbia River Basin from the ability to create a sustainable timber harvest, at the same time protecting the salmon runs, which are so vital to the local economy. Fourth, it puts a moratorium on the development of Federal energy efficiency standards. Fifth, and worst of all, it cuts the subvention to State and local governments for acquisition of lands to enhance the quality of life issues, that enhance the local economies. It locks up over $11.1 billion in the bank. This money is made from the sale of public resources, and does not give it back, does not reinvest, does not do what most things do when you try to run Government like a business, reinvest in its resources. This bill locks that money up. These moneys should be reinvested, allowing us to create the esthetics that are essential for local communities to be a nice place to live. It fails to reinvest in America. That is why the rule should be defeated. If the rule passes, the bill should be defeated.