Mark Foley

Mr. FOLEY

Mr. FOLEY. Mr. Speaker, I rise today, Pulaski Day, to pay tribute not only to Kazimierz Pulaski but to all men and women of Polish descent who have helped to make this Nation the greatest in the world. Kazimierz Pulaski was an energetic and fiery soldier who, in July 1777, came to America to offer his services in the Revolutionary War. As a cavalry general he fought courageously and won distinction in several campaigns. Pulaski was to the American Revolution what Patton was to World War II. Though he was mortally wounded in the Battle of Savannah, he left behind a cavalry unit that earned him the title ``Father of the American Cavalry.'' Mr. Speaker, Kasimierz Pulaski knew, just as the following famous Polish-Americans, that freedom isn't free and that America is a great nation because it provides an opportunity for every person regardless of ethnicity: Famous Polish-Americans Mieczyslaw G. Bekker--scientist; built the first vehicle used on the moon (moon rover used by Apollo 15 in 1971). Zbigniew Brzezinski--professor of political science; National Security Advisor in President Carter Administration (1977-1981). Stanislaw Burzynski--physician, cancer specialist. Adam Didur--opera singer; at the beginning of the 20th century was for 25 years principal bass of the Metropolitan Opera. Mieczyslaw Haiman--historian; the first curator of the Polish Museum of America in Chicago. Bronislaw Kaper--composer; composed for nearly 150 Hollywood movies, won Oscar for ``Lili.'' Jan Karski--diplomat and professor of political science; author of the report concerning conditions in the Warsaw Ghetto and concentration camps in the early World War II, who tried to bring to the attention of unwilling-to-listen Allied governments and societies the atrocities committed by Germans in Europe. Jan Kiepura--opera singer; star of the Metropolitan Opera and Broadway. Tadeusz Kosciuszko--political leader and philosopher; brilliant military strategist, a Revolutionary War hero, built West Point. Jerzy Kosinski--writer; author of ``The Painted Bird.'' Jan Krol--the first Polish-American cardinal (from Philadelphia). Wladimir B. Krzyzanowski--soldier; organized Polish Legion that fought in the Civil War; the first Governor of Alaska. Bronislaw Malinowski--anthropologist; a founder of cultural anthropology; famous for his research in Trobriand Islands. Czeslaw Milosz--poet and writer; won Nobel prize for literature (1980). Helena Modrzejewska--actress; famous in the 19th century America for her appearances in Shakespeare's plays. Ralph Modjeski--engineer; specialized in building bridges (Themes Bridge over Mississippi, Delaware River Bridge, Trans-Bay Bridge in San Francisco, Blue Water Bridge in Michigan). Stan Musial--baseball player (St. Louis Cardinals); Sportsman of 1957, Baseball Player of the Decade, 1946-56. Edmund Muskie-Marciszewski--U.S. Senator from Maine; Democratic candidate in the presidential elections of 1968 and 1972. Pola Negri--actress; star of many films in the early era of Hollywood. Ignacy Jan Paderewski--pianist, composer and statesman; loved by the American audience, played an important role in establishing free Poland after the World War I, Prime Minister. Ed Paschke--contemporary painter; representative of the Chicago Abstract Imagists. Roman Polanski--film director; famous for ``Rosemary's Baby,'' ``Chinatown'' and other movies. Tadeusz Sendzimir--engineer; author of over 50 inventions in mining and metallurgy. Leopold Stokowski--conductor. Leopold Tyrmand--writer, editor of ``Chronicles of Culture.'' Stanislaw Ulam--mathematician, cocreator of the atomic and H-bombs. Korczak Ziolkowski--sculptor, creator of the statue of Crazy Horse in the Dakota Black Hills; member of the team of artists that carved head of presidents in Mt. Rushmore. Florian Znaniecki--sociologist; coauthor of ``The Polish Peasant in Europe and America, 1918-1920; considered the foundation of modern empirical sociology.

Mr. FOLEY

Mr. FOLEY. Mr. Speaker, I commend the chairman of the subcommittee for his hard work on H.R. 2202. Mr. Speaker, let us just say everybody is in bipartisan support of this bill. The House passed the bill 333 to 87. The Senate bill passed 97 to 3. This bill secures our borders, cuts crime, protects American jobs, and saves taxpayers from paying billions of dollars in benefits to noncitizens. The conference report doubles the number of Border Patrol agents, expedites the removal of illegal aliens, increases penalties for alien smuggling and document fraud, prohibits illegal aliens from receiving most public benefits, and encourages sponsors of legal immigrants to keep their commitment of financial support. My grandmother came from Poland with a sponsor, a job, and a clean bill of health. We should expect no less from any other person coming to this country. We must stop illegal immigration. We must stop the waste of Treasury dollars towards people who come here illegally. We need to clean up our communities. This bill goes a long way to doing it. Again, I commend the gentleman from Texas for his leadership on this issue.

Mr. FOLEY

Mr. FOLEY. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman very much for his leadership on this issue, and I am urging my colleagues to vote ``yes'' on a modified Gallegly. First, it ends the unfunded Federal mandate that forces States to provide free public education to illegal aliens not yet in our schools; it protects children already in schools as of July 1, 1997, and does not kick anyone out of school; and it guards against creating a new education entitlement for those not yet even in this country. Now, folks, today, we have 35 to 40 children in every public education classroom. We are, indeed, overcrowded. In the Palm Beach County School System there are 37 languages spoken. In Palm Beach County, FL, teachers are required to complete some 300 hours of training to be prepared for English As A Second Language, to be able to assist students with other languages, taking time away from their families to learn to adapt to others who do not speak the English language. A moment ago a colleague suggested that we do not talk about the benefits illegal aliens provide to this State and Nation, we do not talk about the taxes that they pay. Well, then, is it fair to say that we respect and appreciate drug dealers because they certainly pay taxes themselves, as well? The gentleman from California, Congressman Bono, and I were talking a moment ago, and this is the only topic in this Congress where the word ``illegal'' is actually protected. We talk about illegal drugs and we give 5-minute speeches on the terror of drugs in our Nation. We talk about rape and murder, illegal, crimes, and we talk about the toughest, most serious punishments we will level out in this Congress. Yet we talk about people illegally coming to this country, and we are supposed to be silent. We are supposed to be quiet. Now, some of our colleagues are defending Governors, like Governor Chiles in Florida, who is suing the tobacco companies to recover health care costs because of the tobacco deteriorating one's health and costing the States moneys. Well, I would suggest to Governor Chiles that he sue the Federal Government to recover moneys for education benefits paid to illegals. In Florida we are spending $800 million to $3 billion annually for illegal immigration. Now, clearly, this Congress stepped up to the challenge when Mexico needed to help in its currency to the tune of $20 billion. But how are States like Florida, Texas, and California going to meet their payroll obligations, their fiduciary obligations to their taxpayers, if we do not start discussing this in an honest and fair manner? People who come here illegally should not be rewarded. No, none of us suggests we want our children out on the street, but we have to send a message sooner or later that the United States of America is not going to accept everybody in illegally. There are hundreds of thousands of people who are seeking to come to this country legally, that have applied to their Embassy to gain the privilege of being an American and to come to this country and participate. So we should not let others who illegally come in to this country to jump in front of that line, jump in front of those honest citizens who want to find opportunity in American society. Do not deny those people that are waiting in line to come to this country by suggesting that people who are illegally here should have all rights and privileges. I have to think, ladies and gentlemen, of those 35 and 40 kids in those classrooms in Palm Beach County that are not getting a good education because of the overcrowded conditions. The gentleman from California, [Mr. Gallegly] has worked tremendously hard on the Task Force on Immigration Reform, and in particular on this issue, because he knows well enough that California, Florida, Texas, New York, and other States have long endured the cost to their taxpayers to provide benefits for illegals. It is time simply to stop. Not stop with the people who are here today, but stop July 1, 1997, for those who would arrive and expect something for free from this Nation.

Mr. FOLEY

Mr. FOLEY. Mr. Chairman, today I rise in strong support of the amendment to strike economic development funding from the Tennessee Valley Authority. I want to thank the gentleman from Wisconsin [Mr. Klug], the chairman of the Privatization Task Force, for bringing this amendment to the attention of this body. This taxpayer-friendly amendment would save $16 million in an unnecessary appropriation from this legislation. The gentleman from Wisconsin [Mr. Klug] mentioned, and I read from page 130 of the bill, the economic development, ``In testimony before the Subcommittee on Energy and Water Development this year, TVA conceded that economic development is not an essential appropriated activity of the Authority.'' They agree. They admit it. But they still want $16 million. What my friend, the gentleman from Wisconsin, [Mr. Klug], is getting at today is not merely the unnecessary $16 million appropriation for economic development, but the larger problem of the TVA, an authority that the former TVA Executive, Mr. William Malec, said should be sold, and called a ``New Deal Dinosaur'' in the Wall Street Journal this time last year. I think the elimination of the economic development funding for the TVA is a prudent and fiscally responsible step, especially given the fact that the TVA itself admitted that the economic development is not an essential activity. Let us look at a newspaper article. First of all, ``Power Agency to Form Joint Venture in India. The Tennessee Valley Authority intends to lend its agency and expertise to a profit-producing joint venture in India.'' OK, ``Limo Expenses Among TVA Expenditures.'' Knoxville News Journal: ``$86,000 spent on trips,'' $86,000 of ratepayers' money. Then, thousands on alcoholic beverages; nearly $40,000 for limousine services; and $48,000 for air travel to and from China. Mr. Chairman, when it is their own money, they go by cab or Metro. When it is the Government's money, let us call up a limousine, a Lincoln Town Car. Now, they were asked: ``Please tell us why you use expensive chauffeur-driven Lincoln Town Cars rather than using rental cars, taxis, or the Washington's electric air-conditioned subway system?'' ``I am writing down your question and I will get back to you.'' Mr. Francis from the Authority says, ``I am writing the question down, I will have to get back to you.'' He could not answer it. Now we are going to China, we are going to India. And this is supposed to be promoting economic development in the Southeast. Southeast Asia? I must have missed where we are doing business. Mr. Chairman, this is taxpayers' dollars. Sixteen million dollars I know does not amount to a hill of beans around this place. Unless you talk billions and trillions, you do not get anybody's attention. Today Mr. Klug's amendment will save $16 million. Mr. and Mrs. Average America could thank you for that kind of sacrifice.

Mr. FOLEY. Mr. Chairman, let me sum it up. We have got $378 million invested. I just heard a minute ago we are going to get $3 million back on the sale of a reactor somewhere. With that kind of math we have almost 120 or 140 reactors yet to sell to break even. What a great investment. San Francisco Chronicle: If there's a lucrative export market, let them finance their own development programs. The Oregonian: Let's face it, nuclear power in the United States, no matter how you feel about it, is a dead issue. The Charleston Gazette: Why on earth is Congress giving taxpayers' money to billion-dollar companies? The Courier-Journal of Kentucky: Given the new competitive pressures in the utility industry, no manager with any concern for his company's financial stability would even think of going nuclear. Kennebec Journal in Maine: The project is a classic government boondoggle, all the more egregious since it squanders taxpayers' money. The Morning Sentinel in Maine: Funding continues despite the fact that no utility has built a nuclear plant in 23 years and that 89 percent of utility executives claim they will never order another nuclear plant. Mr. Chairman, clearly the editorial boards from around the Nation are against this. Clearly CATO and all the other groups that have weighed in are against this. The gentleman from Wisconsin [Mr. Obey] has led the fight for years. I give him credit. This year we are going to win it and win it for the taxpayers.

Mr. FOLEY. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding time to me. Mr. Chairman, I want to rise in strong support of this amendment to strike the $17 million. The supporters of corporate welfare for the advanced light water reactor program are playing fast and loose with the facts. We hope Members will take the opportunity to separate real fact from the fiction they have been spreading. Our amendment to strike the advanced light water reactor funding is not part of some anti-nuclear agenda. Moving past its authorized limits, this program has become a subsidy to a wealthy industry capable of supporting its own projects. Congress should abandon wasteful funding for this giveaway. Again, clearly, first-of-a-kind engineering, the Energy Policy Act strictly states, item B, ``No entity shall receive assistance under this subsection for a period greater than 4 years.'' Mr. Chairman, we talk about this nuclear reactor and suggest that some day, somehow, somewhere, we will recapture some of the dollars our great taxpayers have invested in this project. Why has Westinghouse canceled construction of its own reactors? They are not using the technology. The only places we are able to find any utilization of this technology is in China, is in areas that we are critically concerned about nuclear proliferation, and these reactors could in some way benefit a program of expanding those nuclear reactors. Mr. Chairman, sure, $17 million is small if you are a corporation in an industry with annual revenues in excess of $100 billion. However, the last time we checked, it was an enormous amount to American taxpayers. The nuclear industry has dominated energy research and development over the last 50 years, receiving more than $47 million. Now they are clamoring for another 17 million for this reactor without a future. Just how many taxpayers does the Department of Energy want to work their entire lives to pay for this corporate giveaway? They will tell you the termination costs are going to cost the government millions of dollars. Folks, clearly in the contract: Item number C, reimbursement for costs specified in termination above shall be subject to the availability of appropriated funds. Much like every government contract that is written, the government protects itself and has a hold-harmless clause that, if you do not appropriate the moneys, it in fact will not be tendered as cancellation fees. I have heard it before when we cancelled gas turbine last year, we would have to pay all of these millions of dollars in termination fees. Clearly not the case. What are broad groups like Citizens Against Government Waste, CATO Institute, Competitive Enterprise Institute, Friends of the Earth, Heritage Foundation, Progressive Policy Institute, Public Citizen, Safe Energy Communication Council, Taxpayers for Common Sense and U.S. Public Interest Research Group in one group together advancing against this project. It does not make any sense to spend the hard-earned tax dollars of the American public to support projects that do not work. Mr. Chairman, I would like to read some editorials from newspapers around the country later in the debate.

Mr. FOLEY

Mr. FOLEY. Mr. Speaker, yesterday, I had the pleasure of speaking before the fourth SIDS international conference taking place in Bethesda, MD. This conference brought together researchers, health professionals, and parents from around the world to discuss recent and future efforts in the fight against sudden infant death syndrome. SIDS is the No. 1 cause of death among infants between the ages of 1 week and 1 year, striking infants of all countries and cultures. This tragic disease is responsible for the death of over 6,000 babies in the United States each year. The sudden death of a child is a painful experience for any parent, especially when the infant is otherwise healthy and there is no apparent explanation for the child's death. The good news is we have found ways to lower the risks of SIDS and we are now closer than ever to understanding the underlying causes of this condition. My personal interest in SIDS stems from my work as a Florida State Senator when I met Stephanie Quick, a mother who had lost her son, Michael, to SIDS. Michael was just 2 months old when he passed away. At the time of his death, there were few, if any, services in Florida available to families such as Stephanie's who had suffered such a tragic and unexplainable loss. Since that meeting when I first learned about SIDS, I have worked on State legislation and public education efforts promoting research, support services for grieving families, training for first responders, and guidelines for death scene protocol. Last year in Congress I, along with Senators Hollings and Stevens, sponsored the first congressional SIDS briefing to promote SIDS awareness by educating our colleagues and their staff about research and prevention efforts. This even focused attention on the national ``Back to Sleep'' campaign which encourages the placement of healthy babies on their back or side to sleep. Today, more and more parents are taking preventive steps such as this to lower the risks of SIDS. Preliminary studies of the Back to Sleep campaign indicate the number of SIDS deaths in the United States is declining. This is an important finding that reflects similar reports from other countries which have also seen a drop in SIDS deaths when babies are placed on their back to sleep. While this news is very encouraging, more work is necessary if we are to reach our goal of eliminating SIDS. The National Institute of Child Health and Human Development is the Federal agency responsible for health care research in the area of SIDS. A recent study revealed that a brain defect in some SIDS babies could interfere with normal respiratory activity in infants and play a part in SIDS deaths. This important finding underscores the critical need for congressional support of federally funded research and will provide us with valuable knowledge in the fight against SIDS. It is my hope that our continued commitment to SIDS research will shed new light on the mystery behind SIDS and bring us closer to finding a cure to this cruel and tragic condition. I would like to take a moment to especially thank my legislative aid, Cherie Lott, who has worked so tirelessly on bringing this issue to the forefront of the U.S. Congress. I think it can prove, without question, that this Congress is committed to caring for our children, caring for our parents and to maintain the best possible health care for all Americans.

Mr. FOLEY

Mr. FOLEY. Mr. Speaker, today, I rise to salute an exceptional student from Palm Beach County, FL, Miss Wendy Guey. At 12 years old, Wendy attends the Palm Beach County School of the Arts and was the winner of the 1996 Scripps Howard National Spelling Bee. Not only a talented pianist and violinist, Miss Guey is also a bright, young lady who calmly spelled vivisepulture to become a national champion. To get through the early rounds, she spelled correctly--parquet, multifarious, and gesticulate. Aside from a small shopping trip, she donated $200 to her school while the rest of the prize money has been put away for college. This was Miss Guey's fourth National Spelling Bee. In 1993, she came in fourth place at the unbelievable age of 9. This year, she came back after missing two words in previous rounds to win the championship. Perhaps most importantly, Miss Guey has reached a level that all American students should strive to achieve. Education cannot be emphasized enough; our children need to be prepared to attain the skilled positions that will await them in the future. For the United States to compete on the international level, young individuals such as Miss Guey need to become the role models for all students. I am proud to recognize Miss Guey for her victory as well as her parents Mr. and Mrs. Ching and Susan Guey of Palm Beach Gardens. We should all be proud to salute Wendy for her achievements and wish her the best of luck in her future endeavors.

Mr. FOLEY

Mr. FOLEY. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word. Mr. Chairman, I want to thank the subcommittee chairman for his assurances to address the issue of funding for Everglades land acquisition in conference. This is an extremely vital issue for the State of Florida, and I look forward to working with the chairman through conference. As the author of the amendment to provide $200 million for land acquisition in the Everglades earlier this year in the farm bill--it was not my intention, nor the intention of the Florida delegation, to have these monies undercut any future land acquisition funding through the normal appropriations cycle. As I stated during the debate on the conference report of the farm bill in House--``It is not my intent that these funds supplant any funds committed to South Florida for the purpose of Everglades restoration.'' In fact, the Florida delegation has sent several letters to the Interior Subcommittee stating that the Farm Bill money was a furthering of the federal commitment to restore the fragile Everglades ecosystem-- not the end of this ongoing process. Mr. Chairman, as part of the Everglades Forever Act passed by the Florida legislature, the State of Florida has invested over $850 million in Everglades and the agriculture industry has also pledged a commitment of up to $320 million. The Federal Government was the third part of the funding scheme for overall Everglades restoration--so we must retain that commitment. I appreciate the committee's willingness to make Everglades restoration one of its highest priorities--however, I believe the lack of funding in this bill for land acquisition under the Land and Water Conservation Fund is inconsistent with this goal. The Everglades ecosystem is a unique national treasure and its long term viability is critical to the water supply, quality of life, and economy for South Florida. Therefore, today, it is important to remember that because South Florida is home to seven of the ten fastest-growing metropolitan areas in the country--Everglades restoration is clearly on a critical path. And success will depend upon the federal government, the State of Florida, and all local, regional, and tribal interest working in tandem. But to keep this process moving forward we must not neglect the federal role--so with the chairman's assurances that this issue will be addressed in conference it is my hope that the Everglades will continue to receive the land acquisition funds it needs in the upcoming fiscal year.

Mr. FOLEY

Mr. FOLEY. Mr. Speaker, I rise to honor and recognize the retirement of one of Palm Beach County's most prominent and respected law enforcement officers, Col. C. Frank Fogleman of the Palm Beach County sheriff's office. Col. Fogleman began his law enforcement career in 1962 as a patrolman with the Belle Glade police department. He earned the rank of detective in 1965 and joined the Palm Beach County sheriff's office as a detective in 1967. With hard work and a professional demeanor, Frank rose through the ranks of the sheriff's office and served as a lieutenant in charge of the Detective Bureau and Vice Intelligence Unit, as a captain responsible for the Belle Glade substation, and in 1986 became a major and director of the Criminal Investigations Division. And, since 1989, Frank has served the citizens of Palm Beach County as colonel, overseeing nearly 1,000 employees in the uniform division. This duty has required him to directly manage the road patrol division and smooth operation of three substations, along with the airport, marine, mounted, K-9, and aviation divisions. Frank's long service with the sheriff's office is a testament to his devotion to public service, inner drive for excellence and dedication to the basics tenets of honorable law enforcement. After 34 years of procedures, apprehensions, reviews, arrests, and budgets, Frank certainly deserves a chance to go fishing. Mr. Speaker, I wish to thank Col. C. Frank Fogleman for his 34 years of service to the people of Palm Beach County, and wish Frank and Dottie many enjoyable and healthy years to come.

Mr. FOLEY

Mr. FOLEY. Mr. Speaker, today I rise to commemorate this week as National Missing Children's Week. As Americans, we are all compelled by the heartbreaking stories of abductions and murders of children. Adam Walsh, and Jimmy Ryce, these are names and faces south Floridians will never forget. In 1995, nearly 5,000 missing persons cases reported that year remained unresolved. We all grieve for the families whose cases remain unresolved--and pray that they may be reunited with their loved ones soon so that their lives can return to normal. As a nation we should try to prevent child victimization through education. Families should begin early by opening the lines of communication in their family, teaching children protection information that can help keep them safe. Knowledge empowers children, and high self-esteem gives them the confidence to trust their own feelings when they feel uncomfortable and need help. Mr. Speaker, we need to join together as a community to help resolve missing children cases and Missing Children's Week is an important part of the awareness process.

Mr. FOLEY

Mr. FOLEY. Mr. Chairman, today I rise in support of the Klug amendment to phase out the Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences, the Defense Department's very own medical school. What this debate is about is setting priorities at the Pentagon, eliminating duplicative functions and finding more cost-effective measures to train our defense forces as we enter the 21st century and the limited Federal dollars which will be available as we prepare to balance the budget by the year 2002. Let us make is clear that DOD currently offers tracks for training of medical personnel, and clearly one is more taxpayer-friendly. In 1995 the General Accounting Office concluded that the DOD medical school is more costly to educate and retain graduates than the health professional scholarship program run by that same organization. Clearly, from the charts, $566,000 compared to $126,000 is a clear savings to the taxpayers. Yes, $250 million will be saved over 5 years. DOD graduates from their medical school make up only 11 percent of all military school graduates while the balance comes from the scholarship program. Clearly, out of the total 987 graduates, 155 were from DOD. I urge the passage of the Klug amendment.

Mr. FOLEY

Mr. FOLEY. Mr. Speaker, there they go again, distorting the record. This Republican Congress increases the spending on Medicare each and every year for the next 7 years. We increase it over $305 billion. This Congress is committed to the senior citizens of America, but we are also committed to the future generations. We are $5 trillion in debt, my colleagues, $5 trillion, costing us $300 billion, $300 billion in interest payments alone that could go to critically needed programs if we would get our fiscal house in order. It is easy for the other side to make accusations, but this Republican Congress has been steadfast in its determination to balance the budget. We have done it with real numbers, honest numbers, addressing the American public's desire for reform of government. We have been in the forefront of that debate, and to be criticized for cutting Medicare once again by the other side is a lie, is a sham, and is distasteful and disgraceful on behalf of the minority party.

Mr. FOLEY

Mr. FOLEY. I am delighted to yield to the gentleman from Pennsylvania.

Mr. FOLEY. I am delighted to yield to the gentleman from Minnesota.

Mr. FOLEY. So the gentleman thinks the conversation has changed completely?

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

Mr. FOLEY. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the requisite number of words. Mr. Chairman, I want to take a moment to read a quote from a former colleague of ours in California now: ``For 20 years I have advocated the orderly economic deregulation of American transportation systems. Air and ground transportation deregulation have largely been completed, with consumers and businesses benefiting from less government and more competition. This new proposal extends deregulation to ocean transportation. It is a commonsense, balanced proposal, providing a clear road map and a schedule for ocean freight deregulation.'' Norm Mineta, June 28, 1995. Something has happened since then. Something has happened in Washington since that statement was uttered. And there is more. And my colleagues will share some of the other statements. When we look at the partisanship displayed on the floor on this issue, it is no wonder things are not happening here in Washington. I heard the last speaker say we should not grant economic opportunities to select people. Some of us in this Congress feel NAFTA and GATT granted select opportunities to certain individuals. In Florida, my agricultural industry is under great pressure from NAFTA. Tomatoes are almost being run out of business. Citrus is next. Why do we not pass a bill with bipartisan support on ocean shipping reform, allowing elimination of tariffs and tariff enforcements, giving an opportunity to American vessels, American shippers, to be able to compete in the international marketplace? NAFTA and GATT were talked about as great incentives for the economic opportunities of all Americans. All Americans are going to benefit from NAFTA and GATT. Well, let us extend that great system we have passed on the floor to ocean shipping. Why leave shippers out of the equation? But somehow the politics of this House turns on the dime, that thin dime Mr. Gore spoke of when he talked about minimum wage. When we talk about minimum wage, they had on the other side 2 years to do it while they had control. No discussion of minimum wage. Gas tax. All of a sudden, my God, gases are high. Call Janet Reno, have her investigate. Gas companies must be in collusion. Nobody stands here on the floor and says, by God, I passed a 4.3 cent increase in the gas tax, I wonder if that had something to do with it. Consumers in American need to know that the taxes passed by this Congress and State legislatures throughout the Nation add probably 40, 50 cents per gallon of gasoline. So when you pull up to the pump, do not immediately shout it must be Exxon's fault. Think of the people in this body that on partisan rhetoric destroy legislation or attempt to destroy legislation that at one time, just a short period ago, was fine with Mr. Mineta, apparently fine with the gentleman from Minnesota [Mr. Oberstar] and others. Clearly, I would say to my colleagues that we have a bill on this floor that reforms a system that desperately needs reforming. We have not had all perfect experiences with deregulation, as people will testify on transportation, like airlines. But I think, by and large, the prices consumers pay today to fly from West Palm Beach, FL to Washington, DC, $137 on a round-trip basis, are largely as a result of deregulation. Lower prices for consumers, benefiting America, benefiting the airliners, benefiting everyone involved in the process.

Mr. FOLEY

Mr. FOLEY. Mr. Speaker, let me thank the gentlewoman from Texas for her acknowledgment. That was very gracious and very kind, and I hope I hear more of that tonight from the other side because this truly is a bipartisan effort in helping people that have been stricken by a very deadly and tragic disease. With the passage of the conference report on the Ryan White CARE amendment today we have a valuable opportunity to continue our commitment in the fight against AIDS. This legislation secures vital medical care and treatment for Americans suffering with this tragic disease and gives States more flexibility to provide them with a wider range of support services. Since 1981, over 250,000 Americans have died from AIDS and more than a million others are expected to be infected. Sadly, the number of women, children, and teenagers infected with HIV continues to grow dramatically. In my home district in Florida, the city of West Palm Beach has the single second highest rate of HIV infections in females. The legislation recognizes these concerns and sets up special grants to provide health services to women, infants, and children. As more and more of our Nation's communities are affected by the AIDS epidemic, preserving the partnerships we have developed between the Federal, State and local governments to meet these health care needs is critical. I want to single out the gentleman from Florida [Mr. Bilirakis] for his leadership on this important legislative initiative, but I also want to take a moment to thank some people that are often derided by both the media and the other side of the aisle as the radical extreme of this party. I want to say, thank you, Mr. Newt Gingrich. He first brought the Ryan White Act onto this House floor under a suspended calendar to prevent it from being intruded on by harmful amendments. Let me thank the gentleman from Louisiana, Bob Livingston, chairman of the Committee on Appropriations, for working so closely with Mr. Bilirakis to secure $105 million additional for the funding of the Ryan White Act this year alone. Let me thank my Republican colleagues for recognizing the severity of AIDS; that it affects Republicans, that it affects Democrats, that it affects Independents, that it affects men, it affects women, it affects blacks, whites, and Hispanics, that it affects heterosexuals as well as homosexuals. It affects America, our families, our children. This legislation brings us to the point where we are fighting a dreaded disease and we are fighting it in a bipartisan spirit, caring for the soul of the human being rather than their ethnicity, their race, their gender, their preference or their voting status. I think we embark today on a day of bipartisan spirit, and I hope the media genuinely reflects that it is a Republican majority that brings a bill to this floor to show care and compassion for human beings; it is a Republican majority, in concert with the gentleman from California [Mr. Waxman], and the minority who brings a bill together that funds a tragic, tragic thing in American life. It fights AIDS, it fights the battle, and it provides for human suffering when they need help the most. Again my commendations to the gentleman from Florida [Mr. Bilirakis] for his excellent leadership, and I urge the floor to vote solidly for the reenactment of the Ryan White Act.

Mr. FOLEY

Mr. FOLEY. I thank the gentleman from New Jersey [Mr. Pallone]. I appreciate it. It is a great honor.

Mr. FOLEY. Mr. Speaker, representing 42 miles of ocean coastline, I strongly support H.R. 1965. Many States such as Florida depend on a healthy coastline for commerce, transportation, fishing, and recreation. In fact, over half of our Nation's population live in coastal areas and this population is expected to grow by 15 percent in the next 20 years. Under this voluntary program, States receive Federal matching grants to implement a plan to protect coasts and prevent ocean pollution. This program also extends to our Nation's estuaries. In my community, the St. Lucie River Initiative, a group of concerned citizens, businesses and local community leaders, have worked together to protect the St. Lucie Estuary, the largest tributary to the Indian River Lagoon. This once vibrant body of water and habitat for plant and wildlife species is in serious decline today due to federally built canals that have disrupted the natural flow of water into the river. Today, we have an opportunity to continue the Federal-State partnership in protecting our Nation's estuaries and coastlines. I urge my colleagues to support the passage of H.R. 1965.

Mr. FOLEY

Mr. FOLEY. Mr. Speaker, I certainly appreciate the opportunity, and we are glad to be back in our Nation's Capital, and obviously it is tax week. April 15 has come and gone, and the American public has obviously hopefully filled out all of their appropriate papers. But it gives us cause to look at Government and talk about how we are trying to make a difference here in Washington, trying to get Government to look at itself and reflect on what its true mission is, to look at all levels of spending, to look at all that we do in trying to determine what is the most appropriate role for the Federal Government, what would be best reserved for the States, what would we expect from our leaders. I am particularly pleased that the National Taxpayers Union released its report on Congress. The National Taxpayers Union released its ratings from the 1995 session of Congress, the first of the 104th. I was proud to note 78 Members of this body scored an A rating. I was particularly delighted in the fact that 33 Members of the freshman class were A rated this year. In their release, the National Taxpayers Union suggested that Members did not only talk about reduction of spending in their districts, they emphasized it here on the floor of this Chamber. They showed by their deeds and by their actions their commitment to reducing the size and scope of Federal Government. Yes, we need to make priorities. Yes, we need to seek the direction that this Nation hopes to accomplish. But, by these ratings, we have clearly indicated, at least this Member personally, that we are prepared to make the tough votes, to bring us in balance in our Nation. We are spending in excess of $200 billion a year that we do not have. We have a $5 trillion national debt. It is costing us $300 billion in interest payments on the debt alone to service that debt. Even in the year 2002 when we fully balance the treasury and we do not have more going out than we have coming in, we will still have in excess at that point of $6 trillion in debt. Now, when you are spending $300 billion alone this fiscal year on interest payments, no principle reduction, you are clearly spending that $200 billion, and you are spending in excess $100 billion further in reducing the debt. Without that $300 billion you would have a surplus revenue to the treasury of over $100 billion. So part of the significant concern is reducing the debt, ratcheting it down, much like an individual does on a 30-year mortgage. They start paying down the debt, small incremental principle reductions, in order to bring down that devastating debt burden on our Nation. If the Members would think of $300 billion of free flow cash that could be used to enhance programs, actually you would have $100 billion, but you take that toward education, pre-K programs, Head Start, things vitally important to getting our Nation's youth up and running so they enter first grade with reading and writing skills, basic skills, in order to become productive. I talked a little bit about what we tried to do in the crime areas in this Nation. It is time we stop coddling the criminals. I was entirely depressed the other day when I read the story about the gentleman from Texas who had committed sexual offenses against minors, who was being released from prison, and readily acknowledged that he would commit the crimes again. In our society we suggest that he be released and we put a monitoring bracelet on him. Here is a man that indicates he is going to perpetrate crimes against children, he may kill his next victim, and our Nation releases him. The penal system in Texas releases him because they claim they cannot hold him any longer. The mere utterance of the fact that he threatened bodily injury on another human being I think should have proven beyond a reasonable doubt that he should have been held in custody. If we are going to get tough on crime, we are having to get tough on sentences like this, where they are releasing perpetrators of serious felonies against children out into our society. We are not going to prove to the young people of America that crime does not pay, if in fact they witness daily people being released by judges, released by prisons, serving half the time allocated by the judge, serving 25 percent of the allocable time. We tried to mandate we will not provide prison funds for States if they do not require serving 80 percent of sentences. We come up with gimmicks like ``three strikes and you're out.'' What is wrong with the first strike? Why do we need baseball metaphors to feel safe in our homes? Why not put them away the first time. When kids bring knives and guns to school, do not suspend them from campus. Do not send them home into the communities with guns and knives so they can rob homes while we are working. Put them in a boot camp. No marine wants to go back to basic training. Once they have completed it, they never want to return to basic training. The same could be held for our young juvenile offenders. If in fact they commit these types of crimes, put them in a boot camp and make them serve a sentence so they will not commit a crime again or will think twice about it. We can make a difference in America in this Congress. We can get tougher on criminals. We can balance the budget and save the Nation from fiscal collapse. But we must act now in the week of IRS' big gulp. Let us get the taxes reduced and Government off our backs.

Mr. FOLEY

Mr. FOLEY. Mr. Speaker, I give strong compliments to the chairman, Mr. Roberts, and Senator Dole for their leadership on this excellent farm bill we are about to pass. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of the conference report to accompany H.R. 2854, the Federal Agricultural Improvement and Reform Act, historic legislation to completely overhaul this Nation's farm policy. Yet, as we move toward a more market-oriented agricultural policy in this Nation, one fact is easily overlooked in this entire farm bill debate--and that is Congress is about to pass the most environmentally sensitive farm bill ever. All of this is done without any new mandates, regulations, requirements or bureaucratic redtape. It makes the Federal Government a partner with agricultural producers in addressing agricultural changes, rather than an adversary. In particular, I am especially pleased that this conference report contains $200 million for funding of land acquisition and environmental restoration activities in one of our true national treasures--the Florida Everglades. Additionally, the bill does something that we should be all proud to support. It allows the Federal Government to dispose of surplus lands, up to $100 million, within the State of Florida for the purpose of acquiring additional environmentally sensitive lands in the Everglades. As the author of this provision in the House, I would like to take this time to thank those Members of Congress who worked so hard on finalizing this issue. First of all, I would like to thank Representative Richard Pombo from California, who was thrust into the role of attempting to reshape the legislation in conference and did an outstanding job in that role. Second, many thanks go to the House and Senate majority leadership--in particular Speaker Newt Gingrich who was especially instrumental in the role of discussing the idea of surplus land disposal for the purpose of environmental restoration. Senator Bob Dole played a vital role in inserting this language in the Senate bill when it was originally considered earlier this year. Special thanks go to my colleagues from Florida, especially the State's two outstanding Senators, Mack and Graham--both who worked in a bipartisan fashion to craft an acceptable provision to work on behalf of the Florida Everglades. Finally, thanks to my 299 Members of Congress who originally gave their stamp of approval to my amendment on February 29, 1996. Since there is no report language accompanying the Everglades provisions, I would like to further take this opportunity as the author of the House provision to explain in greater detail some of the background behind this measure. The Everglades ecosystem is a unique national treasure that includes the Kissimmee River, the Everglades, and Florida Bay. Its long-term viability is critical to tourism, fishing, recreational activities, and agricultural industries as well as to the water supply, economy and quality of life for south Florida's population of more than six million people. Additionally, the restoration of the Everglades will have direct benefits to the Federal Government in that the Everglades ecosystem includes the Loxahatchee Wildlife Refuge, and two National Parks, Everglades National Park and Biscayne Bay National Park. The State of Florida, in particular the State legislature has a long standing commitment to address the complex problems of the region and to restore this precious resource. Additionally, the agricultural industry south of Lake Okechobbee has committed up to $320 million for Everglades restoration as part of the 1993 Everglades Forever Act. While many would seek to find a single scapegoat for problems in the Everglades, I find this to be lacking in commitment to acting to preserve this precious resource. Therefore, today, it is important to remember that because south Florida is home to 7 of the 10 fastest- growing metropolitan areas in the country, restoration is clearly on a critical path. It is clearly understood by all who are involved in the efforts to restore the Everglades that there is a significant gap in or scientific knowledge about ultimate ecological and water management needs of south Florida, and this necessitates continued detailed study. Yet, the framework for restoration and the design of major projects for land acquisition, water storage and restored hydrology is clear. Restoration of one of the largest functioning ecosystems in the world is a massive undertaking, and success will depend upon the Federal Government, the State of Florida, and all local, regional, and tribal interests working in tandem. As the author of this language in the House, it is not my intent that these funds supplant any previous funds committed to south Florida for the purpose of Everglades restoration. However, it is my intent that the purchasing agents give the absolute highest priority to those lands owned by willing sellers but taxpayer dollars should not be wasted by paying more than fair market value for lands purchased with these funds. This underscores importance of the annual report to Congress by the Secretary of Interior describing all activities associated with the expenditure of these funds. Mr. Speaker, this is a historic day for the Hose of Representatives, and a historic day for the Everglades. I'm proud to be the sponsor of this original language, and I now would encourage my colleague to support the final passage of this bill and urge the President to quickly sign this bill into law.

Mr. FOLEY

Mr. FOLEY. Mr. Speaker, let me ask a question of the chairman of the Committee on Rules. Is it not a Democratic sponsor of the base bill, the gentleman from Texas [Mr. Chapman]?

Mr. FOLEY. Mr. Speaker, reclaiming my time, there is a lot of debate and the accusation is it is the Republicans selling out to the NRA. But it is a Democratic sponsor. The Republican leadership has allowed a Democratic bill on the floor for debate. First of all, let us make a point, folks. Guns do not kill the people, it is who is behind the trigger that kills the person. We keep trying to blame inanimate objects for crime. A serious problem in America, child abuse, physical and sexual abuse is going on; not created by a weapon; destruction of our children nonetheless. Let us work together in this Chamber to stop crimes, get after the perpetrators, bring swift justice, quit death row appeals time and time again, Wayne Gacey, 20 years, $5 million of appeals, on death row, killed 33 young people. Not with a machine gun, not with a knife, he killed 30 young men. $5 million on death row appeals.