Martin Frost

Mr. FROST

Mr. FROST. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Peterson).

Mr. FROST. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Mississippi (Mr. Taylor).

Mr. FROST. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Doggett).

Mr. FROST. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Pallone).

Mr. FROST. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Georgia (Ms. McKinney).

Mr. FROST. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. FROST. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Klink).

Mr. FROST. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time. Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on the previous question. If the previous question is defeated, I will offer an amendment to make in order the McKinney amendment to establish a corporate code of conduct and the Peterson amendment to expand the role of the Committee on Agriculture in reviewing trade matters. I urge my colleagues to postpone debate on this issue. There is no chance to pass it today. We should not sacrifice long-term, bipartisan cooperation on fast track for short-term political gain. Mr. Speaker, the text of the amendment to be offered if the previous question is defeated is as follows: Amendment To Be Offered If Previous Question Is Defeated On page 2, line 10, strike ``and'' the second time it appears. On page 2 line 11, after ``(2)'', add the following: ``a further amendment printed in section 2 of this resolution and numbered (i), if offered by Representative McKinney of Georgia or her designee, which shall be in order without intervention of any point of order, shall be considered as read, and shall be separately debatable for thirty minutes equally divided and controlled by the proponent and an opponent; (3) a further amendment printed in section 2 of this resolution and numbered (ii), if offered by Representative Peterson of Minnesota or his designee, which shall be in order without intervention of any point of order, shall be considered as read, and shall be separately debatable for thirty minutes equally divided and controlled by the proponent and an opponent; and (4)'' On page 2, after line 11, add the following new section: ``Section 2. The text of the amendments follows: (i) Amendment to H.R. 2621, as reported, to be offered by Representative McKinney of Georgia In section 102(b)(7), add the following at the end: (C) To ensure that any entity that receives benefits under any trade agreement entered into under this title adopts and adheres to the following principles in all domestic and foreign operations: (i) Provide a safe and health workplace. (ii) Ensure fair employment, including the prohibition on the use of child and forced labor, the prohibition on discrimination based upon race, gender, national origin, or religious belief, the respect for freedom of association and the right to organize and bargain collectively, and the payment of a living wage to all workers. (iii) Uphold responsible environmental protection and environmental practices. (iv) Promote good business practices, including prohibiting illicit payments and ensuring fair competition. (v) Maintain, through leadership at all levels, a corporate culture that respects free expression consistent with legitimate business concerns, does not condone political coercion in the workplace, encourages good corporate citizenship and makes a positive contribution to the communities in which the entity operates, and promotes ethical conduct that is recognized, valued, and exemplified by all employees. (vi) Require, under terms of contract, partners, suppliers, and subcontractors of the entity to adopt and adhere to the principles described in clause (v). (vii) Implement and monitor compliance with the principles described in clauses (i) through (vi) through a program that is designed to prevent and detect conduct that is not in compliance with such principles by any employee of the entity, or any employee of the partner, supplier, or subcontractor of the entity, and that includes-- (I) standards for ethical conduct of such employees which refer to the principles; (II) procedures for assignment of appropriately qualified personnel at the management level to monitor and enforce compliance with the principles; (III) procedures for reporting violations of the principles by such employees; (IV) procedures for selecting qualified individuals who are not employees to monitor compliance with the principles, and for auditing the effectiveness of such compliance monitoring; (V) procedures for disciplinary action in response to violations of the principles; (VI) procedures designed to ensure that, in cases in which a violation of the principles has been detected, reasonable steps are taken to correct the violation and prevent similar violations from occurring; (VII) procedures for providing educational and employment- related counseling to any child employee in violation of the principles; and (VIII) communication of all standards and procedures with respect to the principles to every employee, by requiring the employee to participate in a training program, or by disseminating information in writing that explains the standards and procedures. (ii) Amendment to H.R. 2621, as reported to be offered by Representative Peterson of Minnesota Page 12, strike line 19 through 23 and insert the following: (A) consult closely and on a timely basis (including immediately before initialing an agreement) with, and keep fully apprised of the negotiations-- (i) the congressional advisers for trade policy and negotiations appointed under section 161 of the Trade Act of 1974 (19 U.S.C. 2211); (ii) the Committee on Ways and Means and the Committee on Agriculture of the House of Representatives; and (iii) the Committee on Finance and the Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry of the Senate; and Page 23, line 17, insert ``and the Committee on Agriculture'' after ``Rules''. Page 24, line 7, insert ``and the Committee on Agriculture'' after ``Rules''. Page 25, line 3, insert ``and the Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry'' after ``Finance''. Page 25, line 4, insert ``and the Committee on Agriculture'' after ``Ways and Means''. Page 27, line 8, insert ``and the Committee on Agriculture'' after ``Ways and Means''. Page 27, line 10, insert ``and the Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry'' after ``Finance''. Page 32, line 14, strike ``or'' and insert a comma. Page 32, line 16, insert ``, or the chairman or ranking minority member of the Committee on Agriculture'' after ``Rules''. Page 32, line 19, insert ``and the Committee on Agriculture'' after ``Rules''. Page 32, line 20, strike ``either'' and insert ``any such''. Page 33, line 7, insert ``and the Committee on Agriculture'' after ``Rules''. Page 31, insert the following after line 6 and redesignate the succeeding paragraphs accordingly: (1) Disapproval of the negotiation.--The trade authorities procedures shall not apply to any implementing bill that contains a provision approving any trade agreement that is entered into under section 103(b) with any foreign country if the Committee on Finance or the Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry of the Senate or the Committee on Ways and Means or the Committee on Agriculture of the House of Representatives disapprove of the negotiation of the agreement before the close of the 90-calendar day period that begins on the date notice is provided under section 104(a) with respect to the negotiation of the agreement.

Mr. FROST. Mr. Speaker, I object to the vote on the ground that a quorum is not present and make the point of order that a quorum is not present.

Mr. FROST

Mr. FROST. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. FROST. Mr. Speaker, I would like at this point, before we begin debate, to acknowledge the presence on the floor of our colleague, the dean of the Texas delegation (Henry Gonzalez) who has been ill for the last year but who has returned to be with us during these closing days of the session.

Mr. FROST. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of this rule and this vital conference report. Providing for our common defense is one of the primary constitutional duties of the Congress, and this conference agreement seeks to fulfill that obligation within the constraints imposed by the balanced budget agreement. But as the ranking member of the Committee on National Security said last night when the Committee on Rules met to grant this rule, the task of trying to address the many issues affecting our Armed Forces was much more difficult this year than it has been in years past. The gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Skelton) makes a very good and very important point. Mr. Speaker, last week the Joint Chiefs and the unified combat commanders told the President that their increasing duties at home and abroad have placed enormous strains on each of the branches of the Armed Services and that the readiness and operational capabilities of the Services are suffering. As it was reported in The New York Times yesterday, the commanders told the President that funding shortfalls have eroded their readiness to fight and win the next war, have led to shortages of spare parts for war planes, cuts in training, and difficulties in recruiting and keeping qualified troops. Mr. Speaker, this bill attempts to address those shortfalls, but it is abundantly clear that defense spending must increase in future years. I am especially pleased to learn that the administration has taken the warnings of the Joint Chiefs to heart and that the President intends to propose adding $1 billion to the emergency supplemental to address some of the shortfalls outlined to him, and that the President has also indicated his support for a significant increase in military spending in the coming fiscal year. I would certainly endorse those increases in military spending to ensure that our military might and superiority does not suffer needlessly. I want to congratulate Secretary Cohen and General Shelton for their ongoing commitment to the men and women in uniform who serve our Nation and their commitment to a strong and vital military. Mr. Speaker, the conference report does a good job within the constraints of the Balanced Budget Act, which has capped spending for the Department of Defense. The conference report addresses pressing needs in improvement in pay and allowances, family and troop housing, improved medical care and education for military dependents. These improvements are key if we are to keep family men and women in our Armed Forces. This conference report increases funding for several categories of operations and maintenance as well as readiness and recruiting. These funding increases are critical to maintaining our military superiority in all corners of the globe. This conference report also provides $279.9 million in funding for post-production support of the B-2 bomber fleet, $2.2 billion for research and development, and advance procurement for the F-22 Raptor fighter. The Raptor is the 21st century attack fighter that will ensure the air superiority and maintain the air dominance of the Air Force. The conference agreement also authorizes $742.8 million for the acquisition of 8 V-22s, which will replace the aging Marine Corps helicopter fleet to ensure our combat troops can be ferried quickly and efficiently to combat situations. Mr. Speaker, this is a good bill that deserves the support of the House. The men and women who serve their country deserve the best this Congress can give them. While these funding limits may not be able to give the Department of Defense everything it needs, this conference agreement does a great deal to ensure our most critical priorities are addressed. I urge adoption of this rule and the conference report. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. FROST. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Skelton).

Mr. FROST. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from the District of Columbia (Ms. Norton).

Mr. FROST. Mr. Speaker, we have no additional speakers, I urge adoption of the rule, and I yield back the balance of our time.

Mr. FROST

Mr. FROST. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor Representative Vic Fazio, who is leaving us after an exemplary career of service to our country. For 10 terms in Congress, Representative Fazio has tirelessly served this body with the greatest of honor and dedication. I would like to thank Vic for all the years of hard work and determined effort he has given to the Democratic Party and to the U.S. House of Representatives. Vic your model behavior in leadership and direction has been an inspiration to all of us. You have guided so many of us through both good and difficult times. We thank you for your loyalty to this institution and the guidance you have bestowed upon us over your many years of service. The time and energy you have invested throughout the years warrants the utmost respect and regard from this entire body. Congressman Fazio, thank you for all of the intelligence and integrity you have demonstrated throughout your years in Congress. This Congress will miss you and your devoted commitment to the entire country.

Mr. FROST

Mr. FROST. Mr. Speaker, this morning I am joining with my colleague, the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. John Linder), the chairman of the Republican Campaign Committee. I serve as chairman of the Democratic Campaign Committee. We are announcing a policy of the two committees. The level of public discourse in this country right now cannot continue at the depth that it has fallen to. While we cannot control what goes on outside this Chamber, the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee and our Republican counterpart will not fund any Democratic candidate who initiates an attack on the personal private life of an opponent in the coming election. The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee will fire any employee who initiates an attack on the personal private life of an opponent in this election.

Mr. FROST

Mr. FROST. Mr. Speaker, it is my intention to make a fairly brief opening statement and then to yield back all of our time in an effort to try and move this along. Mr. Speaker, while I rise in support of this rule and this bill making appropriations for the Department of Transportation for fiscal year 1999. I am concerned that a point of order may lie against an amendment which seeks to limit expenditures of funds for a highway project funded in this bill. Mr. Speaker, should this point of order be pursued and ultimately upheld, the House will set a terrible precedent which may have ramifications far beyond this transportation appropriations. The matter is now being negotiated, but I do want to express my concern that a major change in the rules that govern this House was included in T-21 and was never even considered by the Committee on Rules. That being said, Mr. Speaker, while the funding level of this appropriations bill is slightly below the levels requested by the President in several areas, overall, the Committee on Appropriations did a good job of providing adequate funding for most of the programs and services in the bill. Mr. Speaker, while I rise in support of this rule and this bill making appropriations for the Department of Transportation for Fiscal Year 1999, I am concerned that a point of order may be against an amendment which seeks to limit expenditures of funds for a highway project funded in this bill. Mr. Speaker, should this point of order be pursued and ultimately upheld, the House will set a terrible precedent which may have ramifications far beyond this transportation appropriation. The matter is now being negotiated, but I do want to express my concern that a major change in the rules that govern this House were included in TEA-21 and were never even considered by the Committee on Rules. That being said, Mr. Speaker, while the funding level of this appropriations bill is slightly below the levels requested by the President in several area, overall the Appropriations Committee did a good job of providing adequate funding for most of the programs and services in the bill. The bill provides a total $46.9 billion, a nine percent increase over last year's funding levels, much of which is required for the new and guaranteed funding levels for highway and transit programs pursuant to the recently enacted TEA-21 bill. I am particularly pleased that the Committee has provided $10.6 million for RAILTRAN funding for Phase II of a modern and efficient commuter rail connection between the cities of Dallas and Fort Worth. While funding for the Dallas Area Rapid Transit system North Central line is considerably less than the amount that had been requested, I remain hopeful that the Committee will, within the constraints imposed upon it by subcommittee allocations, be able to increase this funding when the bill goes to conference. Mr. Speaker, I would like to express my concern about a particular problem that has been brought to my attention which affects a number of cities in the Dallas-Fort Worth metropolitan area. Because TEA-21 zeroed out operating assistance for transit systems in large urbanized areas, suburban cities within those metro areas have also found that they too have been restricted in the manner in which they can use federal transit funds. In my own congressional District, the cities of Arlington and Grand Prairie will be particularly hard hit by the elimination of operating assistance. In both instances, the suburban city transit systems are used exclusively to provide transportation for the elderly and the disabled but neither city has a dedicated sales tax to pay for such a system. Consequently, Mr. Speaker, I am currently writing legislation that seeks to correct this problem now confronting cities like Grand Prairie and Arlington. I hope to be able to introduce this bill before the August recess and would urge the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee as well as the Transportation Committee to give this legislation careful consideration. If the Congress does not provide a remedy, cities like Grand Prairie which serve 3,500 disabled and elderly persons a year will most likely have to cut back their services by 50 percent next year. Mr. Speaker, given the constraints with which the Committee must address the concerns of individual Members as well as the component parts of the Transportation Department, this is a good bill. I urge my colleagues to support the rule and the bill. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. FROST. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. (Mr. FROST asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. FROST

Mr. FROST. Mr. Speaker, today I am introducing legislation that will address a serious problem facing certain small transit operators in large urbanized areas. My bill will allow for the continuation of operating assistance for small transit operators in large urbanized areas. With the passage of the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA-21), a number of new programs will be implemented which will benefit and enhance mobility across the country and in the Dallas/ Fort Worth area. However, due to the elimination of transit operating assistance to cities in large urbanized areas, funding for certain small transit operators will also be cut. The elimination of this funding will cause extreme hardship for those operators, particularly those that provide transportation exclusively to the elderly and disabled. My bill will direct the Secretary of Transportation to allow small transit operators that have fewer than 20 revenue service vehicles located in a large urbanized area to continue to use funds for operating costs, if the Secretary finds that providing no assistance to the small transit operator for such operating cost have caused, or will cause, the small transit operator to suffer undue hardship. Small transit operators are usually more reliant on Federal operating assistance than larger operators since they do not have dedicated sales tax to help fund their systems. Federal operating assistance has been eliminated, from the fiscal year 1995 level of $710,000,000 to $0 in fiscal year 1999. The elimination of operating assistance over the 4- year period provided little time for many small transit operators in large urbanized areas to adjust, and without the resources to make up this gap, these small transit operators might have to cut service and raise fares. In fact, two cities in my congressional district, Arlington and Grand Prairie, may be forced to cut back their Handitran transit service to the elderly and disabled by 50 percent. The loss of federal funds comes at a time when the North Texas Council of Governments is recommending that the City of Arlington substantially expand Handitran in response to a growing need for the service. According to Arlington officials, 64% of the riders of Handitran are disabled, 23% are elderly and 14% are both elderly and disabled. Without these funds, cutbacks in services to those most in need may prove to be a reality. I urge my fellow colleagues to examine this legislation and support this important bill.

Mr. FROST

Mr. FROST. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I rise in reluctant support of House Resolution 508. This rule is a mixed bag. While it provides for the consideration of the appropriations for the important functions of the Departments of State, Justice, and Commerce, it also makes in order an amendment which overturns an executive order which prohibits discrimination in employment in the Federal Government based on sexual orientation. While the rule makes in order an amendment by the subcommittee ranking member to allow full debate on the issue of the manner in which the year 2000 Census will be conducted, the Committee on Rules did not allow for an amendment which would have aided in the hiring of Census enumerators, who will be necessary to ensure that an accurate count is made of all the residents of this country. While the bill provides $20 million for programs to combat school violence, the Republican majority did not allow an amendment which would have earmarked $100 million for specific programs which would give schools and communities even greater opportunities to reduce violence in our public schools. I hope the bill can be improved and that amendments which may trigger a veto can be defeated. I would also like to address the three issues I have just outlined. To begin, Mr. Speaker, the provisions in the committee bill relating to the year 2000 Census are unreasonable and, quite frankly, unacceptable to Democratic members and to the administration. The committee has only provided for 6 months of funding for this massive and constitutionally required project, and has placed restrictions on planning that will result in delays and disruption in the management of the project. The Republican majority, in their quest to force a political showdown with the administration over the issue of sampling, is risking not only a veto of this bill, but also a failed Census. The Republican majority's insistence on denying the Census Bureau the option of using statistical sampling as a means to aid in the gathering of an accurate and complete count of the number of individuals who are residing in this country is dangerous. I am pleased that the rule will allow for the consideration of an alternative amendment to be offered by the gentleman from West Virginia (Mr. Mollohan) which will remove these restrictions on funding, to allow planning for this enormous undertaking to go forward so that the count will be as accurate as possible. Mr. Speaker, we must allow the Census Bureau to go forward in its planning for the year 2000 Census. It is incumbent on the Members of this body to support the Mollohan amendment. Secondly, Mr. Speaker, it is unfortunate that the Republican majority has seen fit to include in the rule the amendment offered by the gentleman from Colorado (Mr. Hefley). The Hefley amendment seeks to reverse Executive Order 13087, which was issued on May 28 by the President. As Members are very well aware, this executive order prohibits discrimination against individuals in Federal hiring because of their sexual orientation. Mr. Speaker, this amendment is nothing but veto bait, and it is unfortunate that the Republican majority must use this issue as material for campaign brochures and speeches. I am sorry that the extreme agenda of the ultraconservative wing of the Republican Party must use the civil rights of gays and lesbians as a way to hold up funding for the important functions of the Departments of State, Justice, and Commerce. There are other amendments which, if adopted, could trigger a veto. I urge my colleagues to resist adding language or reducing funding which would jeopardize the timely enactment of this bill. If this bill is vetoed, Mr. Speaker, we risk providing timely funding for important Justice Department programs, such as providing $25 million to help State and local law enforcement agencies provide bulletproof vests for police officers, which is funded as part of the total $1.4 billion for the hugely successful COPS program. To date 76,771 additional police have been put on the beat on the streets of our cities and towns since this program began in fiscal year 1994. The funding in this bill will allow for an additional 17,000 officers to be hired. COPS is a successful program, and has played a large part in the reduction of violent crime in this country. Its funding should not be jeopardized. Mr. Speaker, this bill also includes an important earmark of $20 million for the unobligated balances of the COPS program, to be used for grants to policing agencies and schools for programs aimed at preventing violence in our public schools. This is a fine beginning as we struggle with the issue of violence in our schools. I commend the committee for including these funds. In June I met with about 30 school administrators and schoolteachers in my congressional district to talk about what can and should be done to instill discipline in the classroom and to combat violence. The times have changed since I grew up in Fort Worth. Listening to these dedicated educators drove home that point. Mr. Speaker, I was shocked to learn that more than 6,000 students were expelled from schools across the country last year for bringing a firearm to school, just as I had been shocked and deeply saddened by the violence that has taken the lives of 14 students and teachers and injured 47 others since last October. But I came away from that meeting with a concrete idea of what we can do here in Washington to help schools in our home towns deal with disruptive students, gangs, drugs, and guns, because those concerned educators told me that one of their most pressing needs was more uniformed police officers in schools. They told me that having law enforcement officers in a school not only cuts down on crime, but also gives the students the opportunity to talk to an authority figure about what is happening on campus. I have introduced H.R. 4224, the Safe Schools Act of 1998, as a follow-up to this forum. My bill would provide $175 million in funding to allow local communities to hire sworn law enforcement officers to patrol in and around their schools. This money will allow up to 7,500 police to be hired, in addition to the 100,000 new police who have been or will be hired under the COPS program. While these funds are not part of this bill, it is my intention to work to see them included in next year's appropriation. Mr. Speaker, some schools already have uniformed law enforcement officers. In fact, a number of school districts in my own congressional district already do. I would like to quote Sergeant James Hawthorne of the Arlington Texas Police Department, who has endorsed the continuation and expansion of this idea. ``It is worth every penny. You cannot put a price on a child's life. And above and beyond that, you hope to be a positive influence on kids throughout their lives.'' I could not agree more, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. FROST. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. FROST. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Sawyer).

Mr. FROST. Yes, that is my understanding, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. FROST

Mr. FROST. Mr. Speaker, it is my intention to make a fairly brief opening statement and then to yield back all of our time in an effort to try and move this along. Mr. Speaker, while I rise in support of this rule and this bill making appropriations for the Department of Transportation for fiscal year 1999, I am concerned that a point of order may lie against an amendment which seeks to limit expenditures of funds for a highway project funded in this bill. Mr. Speaker, should this point of order be pursued and ultimately upheld, the House will set a terrible precedent which may have ramifications far beyond this transportation appropriations. The matter is now being negotiated, but I do want to express my concern that a major change in the rules that govern this House was included in T-21 and was never even considered by the Committee on Rules. That being said, Mr. Speaker, while the funding level of this appropriations bill is slightly below the levels requested by the President in several areas, overall, the Committee on Appropriations did a good job of providing adequate funding for most of the programs and services in the bill. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.