Mark Foley

Mr. FOLEY

Mr. FOLEY. Mr. Speaker, pursuant to House Resolution 589, I hereby give notice that the following suspensions will be considered on Thursday, October 15, 1998: 1. S. 1733--To Require the Commissioner of Social Security and Food Stamp State Agencies to Take Certain Actions to Ensure that Food Stamp Coupons are not Issued for Deceased Individuals. 2. H.R. 4821--A bill to extend into fiscal year 1999 the visa processing period for diversity applicants whose visa processing was suspended during fiscal year 1998 due to embassy bombings. 3. S.J. Res. 35--granting the consent of Congress to the Pacific Northwest Emergency Management Arrangement. 4. S. 1134.--granting the consent and approval of Congress to an interstate forest fire protection compact. S. 610.--Chemical Weapons Convention Implementation.

Mr. FOLEY

Mr. FOLEY. Mr. Speaker, as the Representative from Palm Beach County joining the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Shaw) also representing Palm Beach, we are quite surprised that the President would assume that the negotiations to continue the good work of this Congress would be held in the island of Palm Beach. Clay Shaw and I stayed here to work on the people's problems. We are here throughout the weekend to solve the budget crisis. Regrettably the President and, I understand, the Vice President are traveling to Palm Beach, Florida to raise more money. In fact, the chairman of the Florida State Democratic Party suggested that they should probably not come because they were bleeding all of the dollars out of the State and bringing them here to Washington, D.C. So let us understand what this is all about, not about working, not about saving this Nation, not about helping our children, not about helping education. It is about going down to Palm Beach, Florida, a place that I love, to raise big dollars to come back and assault the integrity of the American public with more money on TV ads that do not tell the truth. So, if the President wants to solve the government's problems, stay in Washington tomorrow, work through the weekend, like we are. We can make some significant gains for the American taxpayers.

Mr. FOLEY

Mr. FOLEY. Mr. Speaker, on the front page of virtually every newspaper in America yesterday, I saw a story that sickened me when I read it and should shock every Member of this body. Matthew Shepard, the 21-year-old student at the University of Wyoming who was described by a family member as an incredibly caring person with a big heart, mind and soul, was lured Tuesday night from campus by two young men, driven a mile outside of town, bludgeoned with a blunt instrument and tied to a fence like a dead animal. Close to death, with his head battered and burn marks on his body, he was discovered 12 hours later by two passing cyclists who at first said they mistook his unconscious body for a scarecrow. Today, as we deliberate here, young Matthew Shepard is lying in a coma, clinging to life. Why was this young man singled out for such a barbaric act of violence? According to all accounts, he was attacked simply because he was gay. This is the latest in a series of brutally violent crimes committed against people for no other reason than the color of their skin, their sexual orientation or their religion. For example, in southern Virginia last year, a soft-spoken black man was soaked in gasoline, burned alive, and then beheaded in the yard of his slayer. The victim was the only son of his parents, who were incredibly proud of his service in the Marines. He was targeted for this act of violence, it was discovered, simply because he was black. Likewise in April 1994, two African American men murdered a white father of three in Lubbock, Texas. The killers later stated that they had set out to find a victim this time who was white. Earlier this year in Illinois, a Hispanic family mourned the loss of their son who was kicked and verbally abused as he lay on the ground bleeding to death, shortly after being in a car accident with the assailant. According to the authorities, the driver of the other car was upset that his car had been damaged and went over to the victim and repeatedly kicked him in the stomach while shouting, ``Mexican, go back to Mexico.'' And all of us by now have heard about the recent slaying in Texas of James Byrd, a disabled black man. The Nation was horrified to hear the account of Mr. Byrd who was offered a ride by three young men in a pickup truck. After luring him into their vehicle, buying him beer and driving him to a remote location, the men beat Byrd unconscious, chained him to their truck and dragged him around until he was beheaded. Incidents like these underscore the need for Congress to move forward and pass pending hate crime legislation sponsored by my colleague from Florida (Mr. McCollum). We have a responsibility as lawmakers and as human beings to do everything in our power to punish those who commit hate crimes of any kind to the fullest extent of the law. But it is equally important for us to speak out loudly against those individuals and organized groups like neo-Nazis, white supremacists, and skin-head sects which target people based on benign traits like skin color, sexual orientation or religion. Today we should all keep Matthew Shepard and his family and his friends in our prayers as we reflect on this brutal act of violence. If we are in fact to survive as a society, we have got to come to grips with these horrible, horrible crimes that are being committed around us, and we have got to teach our children different, we have got to set examples. The two young couples that disposed of the body of a baby in a trash can as they celebrated their evening prom continue to underscore how terribly weak we are becoming as a Nation and how careless we are becoming with facts and how we are not protecting each other from these types of acts of violence. So, again I urge my colleagues to speak forcibly on this floor about protecting every human being on this earth. And we may have our differences, we may disagree on a lot of things, but to witness these kind of crimes being repeated and repeated and repeated, and allow them to go unchallenged, and allow it to be, well, because he was different, or that just happened because he was hanging out around the wrong types of people. Even the characterization of a legislator several years ago when he said, homosexuals are like gay bulls; they are worthless and should be sent to the packing plant. When legislators and people of authority start talking about other people like that, you wonder what impact it may have on average Americans who are sitting, listening.

Mr. FOLEY

Mr. FOLEY. Madam Speaker, I rise to strongly support this legislation and to thank specifically our subcommittee chairman, the gentleman from Florida (Mr. McCollum), for his extremely hard work on this issue. This bill is vitally important to America's families and its children, and I will strongly suggest that this measure here will make America safer. This bill contains much-needed help to States across America to improve their anticrime technology. It also contains the Volunteers for Children Act, a bill of mine that this body approved unanimously many months ago, which the other body unanimously added to this important legislation. The Volunteers for Children provisions will give volunteer groups access, if they want that access, to fingerprint-based FBI background checks. Let me reiterate the gentleman from Florida's comments a moment ago. It does not require any group to seek these background checks, nor does it incur liability if they choose not to. This access is supported by every group concerned about using the best tools possible to protect their young charges. Organizations like the Boys and Girls Clubs have been asking for this access because fingerprint checks are virtually the only way they can know whether a person who shows up in a community to volunteer around children has, in fact, a criminal background in another State. As a report last year by the General Accounting Office put it, ``National fingerprint-based background checks may be the only effective way to readily identify the potentially worst abusers of children; that is, the pedophiles who change their names and move from State to State to continue their sexually perverse patterns of behavior.'' Two of the biggest problems with using fingerprint-based FBI checks has been that they have taken too long and cost too much to use them more than occasionally. But the FBI has been developing a computerized system that will all but eliminate both those concerns once States have comparable technology. That is the crux of this overall bill before us today: helping States acquire that technology. Madam Speaker, it is critical that we give States the help we can in upgrading their crime-fighting technology. And it is critical that we allow volunteer groups, schools and others who work with young children access to the most effective resources they need to ensure that they are not inadvertently hiring criminals to work around young children. As Robbie Callaway, the senior vice president for the Boys and Girls Clubs of America and a strong supporter of this legislation, put it, ``Our clubs and most youth-serving organizations want every possible legal tool to guarantee the safety of the children we serve.'' We are all dedicated to doing what we can to protect children from harm, and this bill will significantly advance those efforts. Again, I thank the gentleman from Florida (Mr. McCollum) for bringing this measure to the floor. I thank my local constituent, Jody Gorran, for bringing this to my attention. I want to specifically thank Erica Bryant from the staff of the gentleman from Florida (Mr. McCollum) for her very, very hard work and dedication to this issue, and of course to my staffer, Liz Nicolson, who has really worked with me to see this to success on the floor tonight, because it really does suggest that this is about protecting our children. Is it fool-proof? No. Will it do everything? No, of course it will not. But it gives those organizations one more tool in their arsenal to protect our children. I want to thank the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson-Lee) for her help on this bill and the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children for weighing in on this issue when it was most timely during committee hearings that the chairman agreed to hear on this bill, and again I thank my colleagues for not only supporting the portion that I am here today to speak on, but the entire bill, because it will be an effective tool for law enforcement in this country.

Mr. FOLEY

Mr. FOLEY. Madam Speaker, I want to take a moment to thank the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Sensenbrenner), the gentleman from Florida (Mr. McCollum), the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Coble) and, of course, the House leadership for bringing this important measure to the floor tonight and spend a moment of special tribute to our good friend Sonny Bono who was basically the one that brought this bill to the attention of the floor. Sonny, as many of my colleagues know, was a song writer and cared deeply about the rights of performers like himself who had created music and wanted that protection under law as other nations have recognized. The gentleman from Florida (Mr. McCollum) eloquently laid out that European nations protect their copyrighted materials, and we should do no less for our artists. I also want, as Chairman of the House Entertainment Task Force, to thank all parties for recognizing the importance of this issue to America's creative community. Whether it is Sony, BMI, Disney or any of the multitude of companies that make up the fabric of our entertainment community, as the gentleman from Florida (Mr. McCollum) clearly stated, 6\1/2\ million workers make up the work force of the entertainment industry in America. It is a thriving business, it is an important business, but, more importantly, it is a business that needs protection so that the works of these creative artists, the works they have struggled to produce, the works that have now reached critical acclaim are not stolen and pirated. When we were in China with the Speaker last year we noticed that there were CDs for sale in the streets of China for a $1.25 and $2, American currency. That record cost $14 here in the United States, but it was being bootlegged by foreign sources, if my colleagues will, and sold under market, under value and no attribution to the recording label or the artist. So, again I want to take a moment because I know it has been difficult, and I know it has been stressful to reach a compromise. But thanks to the leadership of the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Sensenbrenner) bringing all parties together, we were able to really produce what this House is all about. Comity. And I would also like to thank the minority and certainly those that have worked so hard at this, the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson-Lee), the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Frank) in the Committee on the Judiciary for their hard work in this effort because they too recognize the importance of the artistic community. So really this is a spirit of bipartisanship, this is a good bill, and I urge all Members to support it as it reaches the floor tonight.

Mr. FOLEY

Mr. FOLEY. Madam Speaker, I thank the chairman and also all the Members who have participated in this very, very important debate, and particularly the leadership, the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Gingrich), the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Armey), and others who have helped bring this platter to the floor today for full and fair debate. Businesses and industries that depend on copyright protection, including publishing, music and recording, film and video and computer software companies, are among the fastest growing segment of our society. These creative industries contribute nearly $280 billion to the gross domestic product yearly and provide jobs for some 3.5 million Americans. Moreover, they are among our biggest export earners, accounting for some $60 billion in foreign sales. What has been plaguing this huge and important industry is piracy, the outright theft of copyrighted works. Not piracy on the high seas, it is today's version, piracy on the Internet. American companies are losing nearly $20 billion yearly because of the international piracy of these copyrighted on-line works, and that is what this bill helps to stop. It has been a long process which has been carefully and thoughtfully negotiated. What we now have is a balanced measure that protects both the interests of the users and the consumers, and the property rights of the creators. As chairman of the Entertainment Industry Task Force, I know how important the enactment of this bill is to one of America's most promising industries. I would like it thank the chairman of the Committee on the Judiciary, the chairman of the Committee on Commerce, the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Coble) and others who have worked tirelessly on this effort, as well as Members of the other side of the aisle, the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Frank) and others, who have taken into consideration all the concerns of both the users and end users of the product, as well as those who provide the intellectual content, if you will, to striking what is a fair balance for Americans, a fair balance for consumers, but, more importantly, will allow the very appropriate and important works to be put on the Internet for future generations to come.

Mr. FOLEY

Mr. FOLEY. I yield to the gentleman from California.

Mr. FOLEY. Mr. Chairman, let me just for a moment correct the record about the impression being left about the amendment of the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Sanford). It was just described as a 10 percent cut. It always amazes me in this city of Washington, freezing expenditures at the current year's level is described as a cut. It was just mentioned we would see a 10 percent reduction in the amount of money spent on research. Correct the report. If the amendment of the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Sanford) is adopted, the committee and the National Science Foundation will be able to spend exactly what they spend this year. Most families in America have not been able to allocate a 10 percent additional expenditure for next year's vacation or for the next year's food supply or for school uniforms, simply because they cannot project those types of dollars forward because they have to live in reality, they have to live with today's dollars. I agree with the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Ehlers) that there are a number of important research projects that are done by the National Science Foundation, and I agree with him. I think we have developed some wonderful technology in this government through their efforts, and I generally support most of them. What I am concerned about is its refusal to heed Congress' call to use better judgment in awarding grants even though we are proposing to increase its budget this year by $200 million. One of my constituents, Bill Donnelly, recently contacted my office to complain that the National Science Foundation awarded a $107,000 grant to study dirty jokes. Although skeptical, I contacted the National Science Foundation for an explanation. To my dismay, not only did the National Science Foundation spend more than $100,000 to fund such a study but it attempted to justify the grant by saying that there is no accurate study as to why people laugh at certain offensive jokes.

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

Mr. FOLEY. I thank the gentleman for the clarification. Mr. Chairman, obviously, the National Science Foundation does not get it. The U.S. taxpayer should not be funding research that has dubious scientific merit, at best. This is why we should support the Sanford amendment. We need to send a strong message not only to the National Science Foundation, folks, this is not just about one agency. This is about every agency that determines how to use its Federal dollars. Now, I got a very nice letter back from the Office of the Assistant Director for Social, Behavioral and Economic Sciences trying to justify that this was a very important study. I still would ask my colleagues to ask every American taxpayer at home, do they think we should spend $107,000 to find out why people laugh at dirty jokes? I would say no.

Mr. FOLEY

Mr. FOLEY. Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the majority leader for according the Members this time to pay tribute to two fallen heroes. I join my colleagues in reiterating what most are no doubt feeling today, that sadly our Nation has lost two American heroes. When I first heard of the shooting last Friday and subsequently about the tragic deaths of Capitol Police Officers Chestnut and Gibson, I was reminded of a point I tried to make more than 5 months earlier during a speech in this very Chamber. When I took to the floor last February, I paid tribute to the Capitol Police force and another selfless officer, David Lyon, who rescued the passenger of a car which are plunged into the Potomac River. I did not realize how apropos my words would be these many months later. At that time I said, It is important to note that the Capitol Police force who man security around this building are of the finest caliber and quality. They do serve the public and the people of the United States of America in not only protecting our guests and visitors, which number in the millions on an annual basis, but also the property that we consider sacred, this Chamber and the monuments that surround this wonderful complex. I added at that time, It is a very dangerous job. Oftentimes their families do not know whether in fact they will return safely because of the dangers of just doing their job. Little did I know how prophetic these words would be. Let me join the rest of the Nation expressing my profound sadness at the loss of officers Chestnut and Gibson, who selflessly laid down their lives so that I and every other person who visits or works in this building could remain safe. I offer my deepest condolences to their families, and I ask God to bless their children. Their daddy is not coming home anymore, but their daddy cared deeply about them. He cared for every man and woman in this building. They did their job proudly, and God bless them for that.

Mr. FOLEY

Mr. FOLEY. Mr. Speaker, I wanted to take a moment to share with Americans all over that for the past month and a half, as many people are aware, Florida has been besieged by wildfires, which have consumed almost half a million acres. The fires have badly strained the resources of local and State fire officials, who have had to respond to more than 2,200 individual fires throughout the State. Given the widespread devastation, which includes the destruction or damage of more than 400 homes and businesses, firefighters from towns throughout Florida have had to travel to wherever they are needed. But even with this kind of statewide teamwork, the magnitude of the disaster has required help from beyond our borders, and the response across America has been overwhelming: 5,100 firefighters, from almost every State in the Union, as well as Puerto Rico, have uprooted themselves, leaving their families behind, to help Florida in its time of need. On behalf of all Florida residents and the congressional delegation, I want to give my heartfelt thanks to each and every firefighter, to their family throughout the Nation, who have risked their lives to put an end to the devastation which has so profoundly affected my State.

Mr. FOLEY

Mr. FOLEY. Mr. Chairman, let us just set the facts straight. Since the 1996 farm bill, wholesale refined sugar prices have dropped 12.1 percent, while retail refined sugar prices have increased to 1.2, ice cream, 2.4; cereal, 6.6; candy, 3.7; cookies and cakes, 3.9. Let us dispel the fact that this is an environmental vote. The Miami Herald: ``Dismantling the U.S. sugar program will not save the Everglades.'' Fact two, the working 200 richest in Forbes Magazine, none of them are sugar barons. In fact, the only people mentioned are candy maker Mars and Wrigley, the chewing gum. Finally, to get a lecture on campaign finance reform from the gentleman from New York (Mr. Schumer), the sponsor of the bill, who has $10 million in his campaign account, I think is a little bit sanctimonious. Please defeat this amendment. It will not solve the problems. In fact, to the contrary. If Members really want to help the consumer, I would ask of the sponsors of the amendment to start pursuing the very people who are charging the consumers more for products when their supplies are costing them less. Mr. Chairman, I include for the Record the following chart and the article entitled ``Congress Weighs Sugar.''

Mr. FOLEY

Mr. FOLEY. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Markey).

Mr. FOLEY. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. FOLEY. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 2 minutes. Mr. Chairman, I want to thank the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. McDade) for his fine work and particularly for all he has done for the Everglades and so many Florida projects which our entire State and Nation have benefited from. And I hate to spoil the parade. I do have an amendment today on his bill that would strike $5 million in funding for the Department of Energy's newly proposed Nuclear Energy Research Initiative, also known as NERI, and I am not opposed, Mr. Chairman, to nuclear power or its research. In fact, I have a reactor in my district and I fully support its continued existence, but I will not allow taxpayers to pay for research that benefits an industry that had $141 billion in revenue last year alone. Mr. Chairman, everything but the kitchen sink seems to be fair game for this program. They want R&D funds to focus on their competitiveness including operations, maintenance and fuel costs. This program contains large elements of the Nuclear Energy Security program that Congress choose not to fund last year. NES and NERI both would fund efforts to examine reactor aging issues, fuel economics and advanced instrumentation and controls. Some of this same research is already performed by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. The proponents of this program claim it is independently peer reviewed, but the reviewers are from universities, national labs and industry, the very same people who will receive the funds. Where exactly is the independence in that? Our constituent tax dollars should not be spent on new and questionable Department of Energy programs for an already mature industry, yet this is exactly what the DOE is suggesting we do in the newly-proposed and unauthorized Nuclear Energy Research Initiative. This program is clear-cut corporate welfare. While it benefits a whole industry, it nevertheless benefits them with taxpayers' money, and that is wrong. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Kucinich).

Mr. FOLEY. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote, and pending that, I make the point of order that a quorum is not present.

Mr. FOLEY. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.

Mr. FOLEY. Mr. Chairman, in closing, let me suggest to Members that when we had debate in the committee on this very issue, we asked Mr. Magwood who would be responsible for the implementation of the language. Is there any possibility of major advanced reactor programs which had been terminated by Congress being funded by this program? He said, ``I guess from the legal perspective, it is not precluded, so clearly this could open up the door.'' Mr. Chairman, this is a $20 billion bill: $2.4 billion for research for high-energy nuclear physics, basic energy services; $232 for fusion energy R&D; $228 million for nuclear energy programs. We are not asking to cut a lot of money. We are asking for $5 million of savings on a $20 billion bill. The program is ill-defined. It does not provide any guidelines that I think we can successfully track. Congress last year cut the funding for these programs. So I would suggest to my colleagues, in the interests of fairness, to support our amendment and save the government $5 million.

Mr. FOLEY. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself the balance of my time.

Mr. FOLEY. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Vermont (Mr. Sanders).

Mr. FOLEY

Mr. FOLEY. Mr. Speaker, let us clarify what this debate is about. We are not changing the Tax Code overnight, but for those who come to the floor and defend this and defend this number of books, I urge the Members who defend this to go ahead and sit down and try and figure out their own taxes. If Members of Congress were required to do their own income taxes every year, they would realize the severity by which we have inflicted pain on the American public. I also heard today that this is about politics, today's vote is about politics. What do we think represents every page in this book? About politics, about adding amendments. Now, I did not hear the gentleman from Oklahoma (Mr. Largent) or anyone else defending the Republicans who added amendments. He did not say that, nor do I. I suggest both parties are responsible for the promulgation of these rules, regulations, amendments, addendums that require every average American citizen to hire expensive accountants in order to just comply with the law. Money Magazine challenged 50 tax preparers to prepare the return for an average family of 4, the same return. Forty-eight failed to get the same answer. Only 2 were successful in completing the equation. Now, that should speak volumes, as the books do, about the complexity of the code. Every law we pass in Florida now has a sunset provision. That is a normal, standard operating procedure, because laws do not exist forever. I remember as a young person when rust would appear on my car and I would try to sand the rust and put bonding on it, and I was so surprised months later that rust reappeared. If we merely tinker with this, it will continue to haunt us, and I urge Members to support this bill.

Mr. FOLEY

Mr. FOLEY. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Washington (Ms. Dunn), the vice chairman of the conference.

Mr. FOLEY. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.

Mr. FOLEY. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself the balance of my time. Let me again thank my colleague, the gentleman from Florida (Mr. McCollum), and the folks on the other side of the aisle for their extremely hard work on this, the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Lampson), chairman of the Congressional Missing and Exploited Children's caucus, the gentleman from Alabama (Mr. Cramer), cochairman, and all the organizations that stood with us to support this: Boys and Girls Clubs, National Center for Missing and Exploited Children; Girl Scouts Kids Safe; the Marc Klass Foundation; the John Walsh Foundation; the Florida Catholic Conference; Child Help; the National Foundation to Prevent Child Sexual Abuse, and its founder Jody Gorran, who first brought to my attention the need for this bill; Robbie Callaway from the Boys and Girls Clubs of America, and Liz Nicolson, my staff director, for her hard work on this initiative; and all those who joined together in the protection of our children. I appreciate their involvement; I appreciate their hard work. I thank the Members of this House for their support of my amendment.