Rodney Frelinghuysen

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in support of H.R. 4, Securing America's Future Energy Act. First, let me commend President Bush for his leadership and the committees in the House who have worked on this most important national priority. Mr. Chairman, gas prices are down, and so far this summer in New Jersey, the lights have stayed on. But make no mistake about it, we have an energy crisis in America. Many families face energy bills two to three times higher than they were a year ago. Millions of Americans find themselves dealing with rolling blackouts. Employers are laying off workers to absorb the rising cost of energy. Even families vacationing across America this summer may have noticed a new ``energy'' surcharge tacked onto their motel bills. Let's face it, we live and work in a nation that demands more energy than we can adequately supply. We are a nation that relies on fossil fuels, and whether we think that's good or bad, it's not going to change. Oil, gas and coal fuel our nation. In fact, 52% of our nation's electricity is generated in power plants that burn coal, 20% of our nation's electricity is nuclear powered, and 18% of America's lights are turned on thanks to natural gas. We won't go from huge gas-guzzling SUV's to small, electric vehicles overnight. Nor will we unplug our computers and televisions, and run our homes and businesses on solar energy just because someone says that's a wise thing to do. It's just not realistic. What is realistic, however, is the fact that we can be smarter and more efficient about the way we produce and consume energy. That's why I applaud President Bush for his leadership on the issue of energy. You and I may not agree with each and every proposal he has put forth, but one thing we can all agree on is the fact that we need a comprehensive strategy to ensure a steady supply of affordable energy for America's homes, businesses and industries. President Bush has called for such an energy policy, one that is balanced, long term and provides answers that will ensure the United States has that safe, stable and reliable national energy supply we so desperately need. Congress worked hard to shape the President's vision. It is important to keep in mind that this problem was created as a result of eight years of neglect and ``knee-jerk'' reactions to various energy crises ``of the moment.'' Thus, since this crisis worsened over many years, there is no overnight solution to our nation's energy woes. Furthermore, once our strategic plan is implemented, it will require constant monitoring. We will need to update the plan as new technology is developed and alternative energy sources are found. But having a plan already in place will make it easier to make necessary adjustments in the way our nation produces and uses energy. The President's plan has many components. Among the provisions Congress is addressing are funding increases for the Low Income Home Energy Assistance Program, setting stricter standards for energy use in Federal buildings, and offering tax credits for consumers, home and business owners that focus on energy conservation, reliability and production. A large part of the President's plan calls for funding increases to improve conservation efforts, reduce energy consumption and to encourage research and development of renewable energy, oil, gas, coal and nuclear energy. He also wants us to focus on the development of the most promising new sources of clean energy, including hydrogen, biomass, and alternative fueled vehicles. These are just a few examples of the many areas in energy science, conservation and public assistance we will be addressing over the coming months. For my part, you should know that I serve on the Appropriations Subcommittee which oversees the budget for the Department of Energy. In that role, I have and will continue to support increased funding for research, development and greater consumer use of renewable energy. Over the last 7 years the Federal government has invested some $2.2 billion in renewable energy. I also remain a steadfast supporter of fusion energy research, much of which is conducted in New Jersey at Princeton University. Fusion energy has the potential to become an unlimited, safe, environmentally friendly, affordable energy source. I appreciate the budget support, some $240 million this year for continued research, from the President and Secretary of Energy, Spencer Abraham. As a nation, we want the lights to come on whenever we flip the switch. We expect our computers to run and the air conditioning to work. Fortunately for New Jerseyans, unlike our fellow Americans in California, our power still flows--the lights come on, the computer runs and the air conditioning works. This is in large part due to the fact that most of New Jersey's electric power is generated by nuclear energy--75 percent of our electricity comes to us thanks to nuclear power. Nuclear energy has come a long way. It's proven to be safe, stable and reliable. But much of our nation does not have the benefit of such an abundant, reliable source of energy and that's exactly why we need a comprehensive national energy plan. As a nation, we cannot afford any more ``California'' crises. The bottom line is America must be energy self-sufficient. Currently, our nation imports over 55% of the oil we consume from foreign oil cartels. This must change. When more than half of our energy needs comes from foreign sources, particularly OPEC, that alone is a security risk. We need more American oil, more American gas, and more use of American clean-coal technology, to name just a few. This is the only way to guarantee an uninterrupted supply of energy when we need it. But this drive to produce more energy domestically does not mean that energy development and environmental priorities cannot co-exist. They must. There must be a balance between energy development and the protection of our environment. For the record, when I say balance is needed, I mean drilling in the Alaskan National Wildlife Refuge, or off the coasts of New Jersey or Florida are not options. Obviously energy has enormous implications for large and small businesses, homeowners, our economy, environment, and our national security. Under the President's leadership, I am confident that we will better manage America's energy problems. It won't be easy and there will be many disagreements. No one person, or no one political party, has all the answers. That's why the debate in Congress on America's energy plan for the 21st Century is so important. And, part of our obligation is to listen to our constituents and educate all Americans about the reality of our energy situation, and what it will actually take to improve it. Mr. Chairman, the situation is not as `cut and dry' as some people on both sides of the issue would like to make it. We cannot simply throw caution to the wind and build pipelines all over the place, and drill for oil or gas anywhere the oil companies want. Neither can we simply oppose an energy plan because we are pure environmentalists. The reality is we are a nation of homeowners, commuters and computer users--we consume energy in practically everything we do. That's why I am working to provide the necessary balance to our energy plan that will help us better manage our energy production and consumption. There's no way to escape it--we need a strategy on energy, and that's exactly what we are working on. At the same time, we can ill-afford to give up on our historic obligation to our children to protect our nation's air, water, wildlife and open spaces. We can, and will, do both. Again, Mr. Chairman, I support H.R. 4 and urge my colleagues to do the same.

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Chairman, I rise today to offer an amendment along with my colleague, the gentleman from New York (Mr. Hinchey), to prevent the Veterans Administration from using the existing Veterans Equitable Resource Allocation formula to allocate veterans medical dollars across the country. This is the 3rd year in a row that I have offered this amendment with the gentleman from New York (Mr. Hinchey). In 1997, Congress passed legislation that authorized the VA to develop a new formula for allocating veterans medical care dollars across the Nation. The resulting formula, VERA, has not worked as intended. VERA has had a terrible effect of restricting access to veterans medical care in my part of the Northeast, including my district in New Jersey, which is part of Veterans Integrated Service Network, or VISN, 3. This network, which serves parts of New York and New Jersey, has borne the brunt of this funding shift. According to the VA's own figures, funding for VISN 3 has been reduced by 6 percent or $64 million at a time when most other networks have received funding increases. New Jersey has the second oldest veterans population in the Nation behind Florida. Our State has the fourth highest number of complex-care patients treated at our hospitals. Yet New Jersey's older, sicker veterans are routinely left waiting months for visits to primary care physicians and specialists or are denied care at our two VA nursing homes. Something is fundamentally wrong with the VERA allocation formula if it continues to decrease funding for areas where veterans have the greatest medical needs. All veterans, regardless of where they live, have earned and deserve access to the same quality of medical care, care that is too often denied under the current formula. Mr. Chairman, I am going to withdraw this amendment today, but this issue must be addressed. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

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

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent to withdraw my amendment.

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. I thank the Chairman of the Committee on Veterans' Affairs for his comments. As the gentleman knows, I and nearly 30 of my colleagues have introduced legislation to address the problem of resource allocation within the VA health care system. Many of us believe that areas of the country with the high cost of living have been unfairly disadvantaged under the existing resource allocation formula. I also know that the gentleman is working on several VA health care initiatives that are designed to improve the VA health care system to provide better service for our veterans. My question is, what is the best way to ensure that veterans health services, particularly specialty care services like spinal cord injury treatment, are adequately maintained for all of our veterans, and not just those in certain parts of our country?

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Mr. Chairman, I yield 4\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Nebraska (Mr. Bereuter). (Mr. BEREUTER asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. I yield to the gentlewoman from Ohio.

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. I yield to the gentleman from New York.

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Mr. Chairman, I yield 5\1/2\ minutes to the gentlewoman from New Mexico (Mrs. Wilson).

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the requisite number of words, and I yield to the gentleman from New York (Mr. Walsh).

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this time. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of the VA appropriations bill and to thank, as others have done, the gentleman from New York (Mr. Walsh) for his leadership and the gentleman from West Virginia (Mr. Mollohan) for his leadership and cooperation. Our bill, Mr. Chairman, helps the Veterans Administration provide health care to over 3.8 million men and women, who required last year over 717,000 inpatient visits and over 39 million outpatient visits to our Nation's 172 VA hospitals, 135 nursing homes, and over 600 outpatient clinics countrywide. This bill provides for those purposes this year an additional $1.1 billion over last year's level for their medical care, for a total in the medical care account of $21.2 billion. With this latest increase, Congress will have provided an additional $4 billion for veterans' medical care over the past 3 years. On a specific issue, our bill continues to direct Secretary Principi to address the serious issue of hepatitis C among the veterans population, particularly those of the Vietnam era. On the housing front, the bill provides $30 billion for that agency, an increase of $2 billion over last year's level, and it continues our commitment to increasing housing opportunities for all people in need but especially for individuals with disabilities. This bill that we consider today will provide funding for nearly 8,000 vouchers specifically to provide decent, accessible housing for individuals with disabilities who often must compete with programs that provide housing for the elderly. On the environmental protection front, the committee has provided $1.2 billion for the Superfund hazardous waste cleanup program. This vital program cleans up our Nation's most polluted sites and, in many cases, can restore formerly toxic sites to new productive uses. My own State has more of these sites than any other State in the Nation. Despite local successes in the Superfund cleanups, there are many more sites to be cleaned up and more sites and brownfields sites than ever. Like the chairman, I think we need to highlight the fact that this bill substantially increases funding for the National Science Foundation by $415 million, or 9 percent, over last year's level, for a total of $4.8 billion over last year's amount. Basic scientific research funding is critical, and I particularly commend the gentleman from New York (Chairman Walsh) for his leadership and responsiveness which led to this much-deserved increase. The committee has also provided $14.9 billion for NASA, an increase of $641 million over fiscal year 2001. While the committee rightly has concerns about cost overruns of the International Space Station, overall NASA is responsible for a number of research initiatives. For this and other reasons, I support the bill.

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of H.R. 2590, the Treasury and Postal Appropriations Act for Fiscal Year 2002. I congratulate Chairman Istook on his leadership on this bill. This bill meets our requirements under the Balanced Budget Act and properly provides for critical operations of the Treasury Department and other important agencies. I also want to thank the Subcommittee, in particular, for including a requirement that I requested to prevent federal government websites from collecting personal information on citizens who access federal websites and doing so without the knowledge of the person visiting the site. This is an important policy for our government--it is a policy that makes clear that we will lead by example when it comes to protecting peoples' privacy on the web. Mr. Chairman, last year I added a provision to the Treasury, Postal Service and General Government Appropriations bill to prohibit federal agencies funded under this bill from using funds to monitor and collect personally identifiable information from the public who access government websites. Unfortunately, the previous Administration chose to ignore this law and allowed federal websites to continue to use tracking software to gather personal information from citizens who visit the website of federal agencies. Even more disturbing, this past April a summary report by the Inspector Generals of each federal agency found that 64 federal websites are still using unauthorized tracking software, despite our direction to do otherwise. What that means to the average citizen is that our government could be creating a database that would know about your visit to the IRS website and what you looked at there, your visit to the NIH website where you may have looked up information on a personal health matter, or that your child visited the website of the Drug Czar's office to do a report on the dangers of drug abuse. Do we really want to allow the government to keep that information about you and do so without your knowledge? The answer is clearly no. Given the fact that my previous efforts have gone largely ignored, this year I expanded the provision to apply government-wide to all federal agency websites. Mr. Chairman, the federal government has a responsibility to set the standard for privacy protection in the information age. Federal websites are fast becoming a primary source of information for the public and that's an excellent development. Now, it is essential that we not allow the public to lose confidence in the Internet or their taxpayer funded federal websites. These websites were designed to serve the public--they were not designed for the government to secretly collect personal information and track our movements on the Internet. Mr. Chairman, we must ensure that if you visit a federal government website, both our tax dollars and our privacy are protected. With this prohibition in place, we do just that. Again, my thanks to Chairman Istook for his help and leadership on this issue. I urge support of the bill.

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to introduce legislation to ensure that all veterans, regardless of where they live, have equitable access to the best health care at VA medical centers across America, and especially in the Northeast. Along with Congresswoman Kelly and Congressmen Grucci, Hinchey and Gilman, we are introducing two bills to improve the way the VA allocates funding for veterans medical care across the nation. In 1997, Congress passed legislation that authorized the VA to develop a new formula for allocating veterans medical care dollars across the country. At the time, veterans were moving from the Northeast and Midwest to the South and West, and the VA's formula then did not address how to allocate funding with this shift. Unfortunately, the new formula developed by the VA still failed to address the changing demographics of the veterans population. The so- called Veterans Equitable Resource Allocation formula (VERA) did begin to provide additional medical care dollars to areas with growing veterans populations, but unfortunately, the VA did so by slashing funding to states with veterans populations that remained stable, like my own state of New Jersey and others in the Northeast. I know firsthand about the law of unintended consequences. VERA has had the terrible effect of restricting access of veterans to medical care in my part of the country because my district in New Jersey is part of Veterans Integrated Service Network (VISN) 3. This VISN has borne the brunt of VERA's funding shift. According to the VA's own figures, funding for VISN 3 has been reduced by 6 percent, or $64 million, at a time when other VISNs saw their allocations increase by as much as 47 percent or even 53 percent! I continue to ask the VA how this practice is equitable and why medical care in the Northeast should be reduced. New Jersey has the second oldest veterans population in the nation, behind Florida. Our state has the fourth highest number of complex care patients treated at VA's hospitals. Yet New Jersey's older, sicker veterans are routinely left waiting months for visits to primary care physicians and specialists or denied care at New Jersey's two VA nursing homes. Something is fundamentally wrong with the VERA allocation formula if it continues to decrease funding for areas where veterans have the greatest medical needs. All veterans, regardless of where they live, have earned and deserve access to the same quality of medical care-- care that is too often denied under the current formula based. That is why I rise today with nearly 30 of my colleagues to introduce these two bills. The first bill, the Veterans Equal Treatment Act, would repeal the VERA formula and direct the VA to devise a truly equitable allocation formula based on need. The second bill, the Equitable Care for All Veterans Act, would require the VA to take steps to account for regional differentials--the differences in the costs of providing care in some areas of the country due to the high cost of living, long travel distances, and like--in determining the national means test threshold. This threshold currently stands at $24,000 for veterans across the country, regardless of where they live. We know that the costs of such basic necessities as housing and utilities differ across the country. According to the National Low Income Housing Coalition, the ten least affordable States include New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania, New Hampshire, Massachusetts, Maine, Vermont and Rhode Island. These States are parts of VISNs 1, 2 and 3-- all three VISNs fare the worst under the present VERA allocation formula. Mr. Speaker, VERA should be adjusted to reflect factors such as the high cost of housing in the means test. It is the least we can do to ensure that all veterans who need and deserve care are provided with access to VA medical centers. I strongly encourage the Chairman of the House Veterans' Affairs Committee to hold hearings on these issues, and to move forward with changes to the VERA allocation formula as outlined in these two bills.

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the Waters Amendment. We are all concerned about the AIDS epidemic in Africa and we should do more. President Bush and Secretary Powell have proposed a broad new initiative to help African countries address this horrible epidemic and Chairman Hyde is working on that $1 billion initiative. And as a Member of the Appropriations Committee, we just completed work on a Foreign Operations bill that doubles the U.S. contribution to fight global AIDS. But in our efforts to help the world community address the spread of HIV and AIDS, we should not sacrifice the rightful ownership and control of American innovations and products that help keep men, women and children healthy both at home and overseas. In point of fact, because we do protect intellectual property rights, our country's scientists and companies have led the way in developing the very AIDS treatments that we are trying to get to the people of Africa. It is also the very same system of intellectual property protection that will lead to the next generation of much needed AIDS treatments. Without protecting new innovations and products, where will the next and better treatments for AIDS and so may other diseases come from? We should do more to help fights AIDS around the globe. We will do more to help fight AIDS around the globe. This amendment is simply not the remedy for addressing the very real needs of people suffering from AIDS around the globe.

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of our American flag, and as a proud original cosponsor of House Joint Resolution 36 to prohibit the physical desecration of our most cherished national symbol. The American flag is probably the most recognizable symbol in the world. Wherever it flies, it represents freedom. Millions of Americans who served our nation in war have carried our flag into battle. They have been killed or injured just for wearing it on their uniform, because our flag represents freedom and liberty, the most feared powers known to tyranny. Where there is liberty, there is hope. And hope extinguishes the darkness of hatred, fear and oppression. America is not a perfect nation. But to the world, our flag represents that which is right in our nation. To Americans, it represents what Chief Justice Charles Evans Hughes referred to as our ``National unity, our national endeavor, our national aspiration.'' It is a remembrance of past struggles in which we have persevered to remain as one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. Those who would desecrate our flag and all it represents show no respect for the brave men and women for whom the ideals and honor of this nation were dearer than life. Mr. Speaker, this bill will not make individuals who desecrate our flag love our nation or those who sacrificed to secure the freedoms we have today. But, by protecting our flag, we will give Americans a unified voice for decrying these reprehensive acts. I urge my colleagues to support this amendment.

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this time, and I rise in opposition to the Sanders amendment, which will literally endanger the safety of our constituents. First, there is no doubt that we must and will act to help seniors with the high cost of prescription medicines, but this amendment is not the answer. Secondly, we debated this same issue a year ago. The only thing that has changed is that we now have confirmation from both the former Secretary of Health and Human Services, Donna Shalala, and her successor that this amendment could endanger our constituents. Anyone who thinks the threat is not real, I would refer them to the recent testimony of the U.S. Customs Service and the recent news reports that counterfeit drugs are already coming into this country that pose a serious health threat to our citizens. This amendment would essentially make that practice legal and allow unscrupulous marketers to invade our markets and endanger our constituents. Our Nation, with the FDA, has the world's gold standard for ensuring the quality and safety of medicines used by consumers here in the United States and around the globe. Let us not undermine these high standards for consumer safety.

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the Gutknecht amendment. Like the Sanders amendment, this amendment would expose our constituents to potentially unsafe and harmful drugs. We all want to do more to help our seniors with access to affordable medicines but exposing them to potentially unsafe medicines as a way to do so is unacceptable. As Members of the authorizing committee will rightfully argue, any proposed changes to the consumer safety standards in our country--a system that now ensures our medicines are the safest in the world-- should only be done after thorough investigation and consideration. To date, that investigation has shown that the Customs Service and the FDA are already overwhelmed at the border and at international mail facilities with drugs being shipped in for personal use and only a small portion of those shipments are currently investigated for their safety. In fact, our health and safety experts are recommending that we strengthen protections against these imported mail order drugs, not weaken them. And if you won't heed the warnings of the experts, listen to the people who rely on us to keep their medicines safe. The ALS, Lou Gehrigs's Association wrote with their concerns: This amendment would deprive the FDA, pharmacies and thus, our patients and families of the confidence we now have that our medicines are safe, have been properly stored, and are not counterfeit. The Gutknecht amendment would only compound the safety risk to our constituents of counterfeit and unsafe medicines. I urge opposition to the amendment.

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this time. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in support of the energy and water appropriations bill for this year. Let me thank first the gentleman from Alabama (Mr. Callahan), the chairman of the subcommittee, for his leadership on our subcommittee's work, and to the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Visclosky), the ranking member, for his bipartisan approach to our bill, and my thanks to the subcommittee staff for their tireless efforts in putting this bill together. The gentleman from Alabama (Mr. Callahan) has produced a bill that ensures our Nation's continued commitment to work in partnership with our States and local communities to address such vital needs as flood control, shore protection, environmental restoration, and improving our Nation's many waterways. By doing so, we are helping meet our critical economic, environmental and public safety needs in virtually every State in the Nation, and we are doing so in keeping with our 302(b) allocation, which means we are working within the confines of a balanced Federal budget. As the chairman can attest and has attested, there are many more requests for funding than our budget allocation can provide for. The No New Start policy contained in this bill is difficult, but very necessary. We are focusing our limited dollars on ongoing projects that are on schedule and on budget. The chairman deserves special recognition for rejecting forthright the proposition that we should change in midstream the Federal Government's funding formula commitments to these ongoing projects. For more than 170 years, the Federal Government has worked in partnership with our States and local communities to provide solutions to critical flooding, dredging and environmental problems, as well as beach and shore protection. In my home State of New Jersey, these projects have kept our port of New York and New Jersey open for business, and prepared us for the future of bigger ships. I want to thank the chairman in particular for his strong support of dredging for our port, and with this bill we are helping to keep 127 miles of our beaches in my State open for visitors from around the country and around the world. This is a $30 billion industry of tourism for our State. It employs over 800,000 people. Finally, to help protect people, their homes and businesses from the ravages of flooding, we are helping to purchase wetlands for natural storage areas, and we are working alongside local governments in Somerset and Morris Counties and elsewhere to develop long-term solutions to keep people safe and our communities whole in the event that floods reoccur, and they will. Let me also address part of our bill which provides funding for the Department of Energy. Here we have focused our critical dollars on the central programs where the Federal Government can truly make a difference. I especially want to thank the chairman for his support of $248 billion for the fusion program and $25 million for laser research. In the President's national energy plan, fusion energy was actually highlighted as having the potential to serve as an inexhaustible and an abundant clean source of energy. The President's energy plan suggests that fusion should be developed as a next-generation technology, and I agree. Finally, let me say a word about funding for the renewable energy resources, since they are a focus of so much public attention. Let us be clear. Everyone supports renewables, and we fund these programs at $376 million. In fact, in the 7 years I have served on this subcommittee, we have invested over $2.2 billion in renewable energy. This year's added funding maintains our commitment to renewables. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of this bill, and I urge my colleagues to do the same.

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the amendment. I commend Chairman Callahan for producing a bill that ensures our Nation's commitment to work in continued partnership with our state and local communities to address the vital need of shore protection and for supporting the traditional funding ratio that worked so well. In my home state of New Jersey, tourism is vital to keeping our economy. With 127 miles of our clean beaches open for visitors from around the country and the world; this federal/state partnership helps maintain a dynamic tourism industry that employs over 800,000 people in my state alone. Mr. Chairman, I urge my colleagues to oppose this amendment.

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman from Alabama (Mr. Callahan) for yielding me the time; and I rise in opposition to this amendment. Last year, Mr. Chairman, at this time, we were rightfully fixated on the security of our national labs and protection of our secrets and the protection of our nuclear weapons program and data and research, et al. This amendment would strip dollars away from the National Nuclear Security Administration's weapons activities program, the very programs we have worked to strengthen in last year's budget as a result of well- publicized security breaches. As important as support is for renewable energy programs, the sponsor better find a better account to take it from. I oppose the amendment.

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Mr. Chairman, today I rise in support of H.R. 2299, the fiscal year 2002 Transportation Appropriations bill and I urge my colleagues to do the same. First, I want to thank Chairman Rogers and Ranking Member Sabo for all their hard work in crafting this bill, and for their assistance in addressing New Jersey's transportation priorities. A special thanks to Rich Efford and the Transportation Subcommittee staff for their help. Mr. Chairman, as we debate this important bill, thousands of my constituents back in New Jersey are struggling right now to battle traffic delays on Interstate 80, in Denville, in the heart of my Congressional District. The westbound lanes were closed last week after a fiery tractor trailer collision last week damaged the roadway beyond immediate repair. This is a major commuter route into and out of New York City, and commuters snarled in rush hour traffic this morning learned that extensive repairs to the highway may not be completed until this October. My constituents--these commuters stuck in traffic--know only too well that New Jersey's mass transportation projects deserve our full commitment. Because New Jersey is the most densely populated state in the nation, innovative commuter light rail projects such as the Hudson-Bergen Light Rail and Newark-Elizabeth Rail Link are vital to relieving traffic congestion in some of the most densely populated areas of our state. I am pleased to report that these two commuter rail projects, New Jersey's top transportation priorities, have received major support and funding, within the confines of the overall budget allocation, which keeps our commitment to the Balanced Budget Agreement of 1997. I also am pleased to note that President Bush recognized the need for these projects and fully funded them in his budget request in April. I thank the President for his leadership on these top New Jersey priorities. The Hudson-Bergen Light Rail system will result in a 21-mile, 30 station corridor connecting commuters along the Palisades and Hudson River waterfront with vital transportation arteries in and out of New York City. The Newark-Elizabeth Rail Link will be an 8.8 mile light rail system connecting the Newark City Subway with revitalized downtown Newark and Elizabeth. It will provide an important connection between the Newark Broad Street rail station and Newark Penn Station, a major commuter hub along Amtrak's Northeast rail corridor while providing commuters who travel on NJ Transit's Morris/Essex and Boonton Lines with a connection from Newark's Broad Street Station to one of our nation's busiest airports, Newark International. Our investment in the Hudson-Bergen and Newark-Elizabeth light rail projects will also help our state meet environmental standards as outlined in the Federal Clean Air Act and keep New Jersey on the right track so that we can ensure tomorrow's economic prosperity and environmental protection. I am also pleased that this bill will provide a minimum of $8.5 million specifically for the ongoing Federal Aviation Administration's New Jersey/New York Metropolitan Airspace Redesign. For too long, constituents in my district have been suffering from the daily burden of aircraft noise. We have been repeatedly told by the FAA that the only way to alleviate aircraft noise in New Jersey will be through the comprehensive redesign of our airspace. That is why continued, dedicated funding for this redesign effort is vitally important, and I thank the subcommittee for its continued commitment to this vital effort. Again, I want to thank Chairman Rogers and Ranking Member Sabo for all their hard work, and urge my colleagues to support this legislation.

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of H.R. 2217, the Interior Appropriations bill for fiscal year 2002. In this bill, we make clear our historic commitment to protecting and maintaining our nation's parks and wildlife refuges, and to preserving more open space. Let me start by offering my thanks to Chairman Skeen, ranking member Dicks and the Interior Subcommittee staff, specifically Debbie Weatherly and Chris Topik, for their hard work in putting this important piece of legislation together and working to satisfy so many demands! Overall, this bill provides $1.32 billion for the Title VIII Conservation Trust Fund that was established in last year's Interior Appropriations bill. As some may remember, last year's agreement created a separate budget category to support these efforts. This funding will help our states and the Federal government to protect and preserve our nation's forests, fields and wetlands--green spaces that, especially those of us from the Northeast know only too well, are disappearing much too quickly. I want to particularly congratulate President Bush for fully funding the Land and Water Conservation Fund at $900 million in his Fiscal Year 2002 Budget Request, a critical component of the conservation trust fund. This bill maintains and improves our stewardship of America's greatest natural resources, our national parks and wildlife refuges. Each year, 285 million of our constituents will visit and enjoy our national parks and experience the beauty of over 83 million acres of preserved open lands. And it just two years, we will celebrate the centennial of our wildlife refuges--535 national treasures that exist in communities across the country. Mr. Chairman, in my home state of New Jersey, the most densely populated state in the nation, the preservation of open space is a top priority. That is why I am especially grateful for the support of my colleagues for a number of key New Jersey priorities. At my request, H.R. 2217 contains continued funding for the preservation of New Jersey's Highlands, one of our state's most threatened, and most important watersheds. This bill provides critical funding for land purchases within the Highlands; in fact, it is the most significant Federal commitments ever to preserving this area. Equally as important, the bill directs the Department of Interior and Agriculture to work in partnership with state and local resources, already in place, to protect the Highlands. The Federal government should be a major partner in this preservation effort, as we were when Congress successfully preserved Sterling Forest in the same region. This bill also builds on our past successes in Congress to expand New Jersey's national parks and wildlife refuges. In my own Congressional District, there is funding to further expand our nation's oldest historic park, the Morristown National Historical Park, and to protect a huge collection of artifacts and Revolutionary War material related to George Washington. There is also money to allow for additional land purchases at the Great Swamp National Wildlife Refuge. Our delegation also appreciates your support fo the Cape May, E.B. Forsythe and Walkill National Wildlife Refuges and the Delaware Water Gap National Recreation Park. Finally, it is important to note that we meet these national priorities, and do so within the confines of our budget agreement. Mr. Chairman, let there be no doubt about it: with passage of this bill, this House is fully committed to maintaining and improving our nation's treasured national parks and wildlife refuges.

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. I thank the gentleman for yielding time to me, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to this amendment, which would harm the existing Veterans Administration budget in three vital areas that would affect our Nation's veterans. First, in health care, we have all fought for increased medical care funding on a bipartisan basis. This amendment would cut almost $70 million from veterans' medical care, resulting in furloughs of many employees that look after these very needy and sick veterans. This amendment would be in addition to the over $45 million that was cut from the VA medical care as a result of the first across-the-board cut. Secondly, the fiscal year 2001 VA-HUD act delays funds for building repairs and equipment purchases until August 1. This amendment would cut the amount of money available for hospital and clinic repairs, patient safety corrections and new medical equipment for our veterans. In addition, it would cut money from vital VA research accounts. Lastly, Mr. Chairman, this supplemental provides increased funding of $19 million to expedite claims. These claims would be hurt because they would not be processed.

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Mr. Speaker, I am proud to offer my sincerest congratulations to the Caldwell Volunteer Fire Department on the occasion of its 100th Anniversary Celebration on Saturday, June 9, 2001. While the Caldwell Fire Department was officially established in 1901, its origin goes back to the late 1890's when a group of concerned local residents purchased a horse drawn fire wagon from the town of Montclair. Housed in a barn on Roseland Avenue in Caldwell, local farmers and businessmen provided the horses needed to pull the fire equipment because the town refused to pay for the horses to pull the fire wagon. On occasions when horses were not available, the men pulled the wagon themselves. To summon the men to a fire call, the metal trolley wire poles along Bloomfield Avenue were struck with a metal object. The original horse drawn fire wagon was replaced with a used motorized fire truck in the early 1930's. Over the past 100 years the Caldwell Volunteer Fire Department had several homes. In 1921 a new borough hall was built at 14 Roseland Avenue, which housed the fire equipment and the police department on the first floor. In the early 1920's, the borough hall was moved to its present location on Provost Square while the firehouse remained at 14 Roseland Avenue. In 1937, the firehouse was expanded to accommodate Caldwell's new 1937 La France Pumper and Ladder Truck. The building had to be expanded again in the early 1960's to accommodate larger pieces of equipment. Outgrowing the building at 14 Roseland Avenue, the fire department moved to its current headquarters at 30 Roseland Avenue in 1980. The current building is home to five fire trucks, three reserve trucks, administrative offices, and all of the equipment necessary to maintain an active fire department. When the Caldwell Volunteer Fire Department officially formed in 1901 it had 18 volunteers. Today the department is made up of 38 volunteers. With the exception of a paid driver during the late 1940's and a paid chief for a few years in the late 1960's, the fire department has successfully served the Borough of Caldwell with an all-volunteer staff. On Saturday, June 9, 2001 fire departments from across the State of New Jersey will join the Caldwell Fire Department to celebrate its history and future. Mr. Speaker, I ask my colleagues to join me in offering congratulations to the Caldwell Fire Department.