Vito Fossella

Mr. FOSSELLA

Mr. FOSSELLA. Mr. Speaker, on rollcall No. 298 I was inadvertently detained. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yea.''

Mr. FOSSELLA

Mr. FOSSELLA. Mr. Speaker, on June 21, the nations of OPEC will meet once again to determine the fate of practically every family across the country, and that is whether to increase oil production in those nations. Now, it is no secret, Mr. Speaker, to every family and business across this Nation that gas prices are through the roof. Lately, we have been hearing a lot of excuses as to why that is occurring. But let us not lose sight of why it is occurring. It is fundamentally a law of supply and demand. As we keep down production, and the demand for that product, in this case oil, continues to grow, prices will rise. So not only must we call upon our OPEC nations to increase production, to lessen the price at the pump, but we also I think have to look inside our unnecessary rules and regulations that cause those gas prices to jump as well. For months now, more than a year, Members of Congress, both Democrats and Republicans, have tried to plead with the administration to find ways to stimulate domestic production to decrease our reliance on OPEC nations. If they want to keep those production levels at what they are now, fine. That is their right. I do not agree with it, but that is their right. But why can we not, the United States of America, find ways to decrease our reliance upon OPEC nations and look right here in our 50 States to develop ways to lessen the burden to that family at the pump? Do the math. It is very simple. If you have a 15-gallon tank in your car, and you go to the pump, say, once a week, you are paying $10 to $15 more just to fill up your family car, to take your kids to the Little League game or to school. Over a month, you are looking at another $40 or $50 out of your family wallet. Over 6 months, you are in the $200 to $300 range. If you do a lot of driving, you have to fill up twice a week, we are talking about $500 or $600 for a 6-month period that has got to come from somewhere. It does not fall from the sky; it comes from the family wallet. That means no vacation perhaps; that means maybe we are not going to buy the clothes for the kids for school; maybe we are going to put off buying that microwave oven that we wanted. What do we hear from the administration? Let us see if there is price gouging. Fine, go, see if there is price gouging, but also be honest with the American people and tell them that there are a lot of unnecessary rules and regulations and a commitment to keep production in this country down. Only when we are totally honest with the American people can we find ways to truly decrease the price at the pump. If anybody thinks this is not affecting our everyday American out there, I think they are losing a lot of disks out in Los Alamos that they are so busy they cannot understand what is happening. Small businesses are forced to raise their fees, taxi drivers are forced to find alternative sources of income or go out of a job, small business owners who have to pay this additional freight, the additional gas costs. This is not right, and for so many folks who claim to feel the pain of others, we are turning our cheek, turning our head away from the folks who cannot afford the costs the most. Mr. Speaker, let me say that I think in more than the year of promises that were made and not fulfilled, the American people deserve more of a response that allows the United States companies to increase production, to decrease these onerous rules and regulations that do nothing but increase the price at the pump, and give the American family a break.

Mr. FOSSELLA

Mr. FOSSELLA. Mr. Speaker, I thank the chairman of the committee for yielding me the time and to add to those who have said prior how this will add, I think, to a wonderful legacy that the gentleman from Virginia (Chairman Bliley) has earned as chairman of the Committee on Commerce and the ranking member and others who participated. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of the conference report to S. 761, the Electronic Signatures in Global and National Commerce Act. The most recent Commerce Department report on the digital economy released last week was aptly titled Digital Economy 2000. Interestingly, this is a change from the two previous reports, which were entitled The Emerging Digital Economy. The Commerce Department's reasoning for the title change was simple: the digital economy is no longer emerging but, rather, it has already arrived. The Electronic Signatures in Global and National Commerce Act, better known as E-SIGN, is the most important step that Congress has taken to date ensuring that not only the benefits of the digital economy are sustained but, more importantly, that those benefits are grown and enhanced substantially. By according electronic records and signatures the same legal effect and enforceability as those enjoyed by non-electronic records and signatures, E-SIGN enables more complex transactions to take place among a wider range of economic participants. For example, the American consumer no longer will be limited to purchases of books or CDs on-line. Rather, with the enactment of E- SIGN, the American consumer can participate in complex on-line transaction, such as the purchase of a home, a life insurance policy, or the establishment of an IRA, to name but a few. Moreover, E-SIGN will empower small businesses to more effectively compete with large corporations. Those businesses will be empowered to engage in on-line transactions which are more complex in nature and greater in value. Both the American consumer and the small businessman can more fully harness the efficiencies and the value of the digital economy with E- SIGN. America's larger economies will also benefit from the added legal certainty brought to the digital marketplace with E-SIGN. With that, and for all those reasons mentioned above, Mr. Speaker, I urge strong support of this legislation.

Mr. FOSSELLA

Mr. FOSSELLA. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from New York for yielding, and I thank the gentlewoman from Washington (Ms. Dunn) for bringing this bill to the floor, and I support the rule. The story of Alvin Conklin and his idea of opening up a small lumber shop on Staten Island represents one man's hope of securing the American dream for himself and his family. Established in 1888, Farrell Lumber remains a family-owned and family-operated business in its truest sense. For 112 years, Alvin Conklin and then Harry Farrell and his wife, and today, their children, Bob and Don, and grandchildren all helped make Farrell Lumber a thriving small business with an impeccable reputation for quality and service. They are a proud member of the Staten Island community. However, the estate tax threatens their small business much like it threatens so many small businesses in America today. For the Farrells, the estate tax could potentially confiscate the valuable family business and, worse, strip the Farrells of their dream to pass it on to their children and grandchildren. It is evident that the death tax discourages savings and investment and entrepreneurship and punishes families like the Farrells who work 7 days a week, 15-hour days to grow and expand their business. Repealing the estate tax would ensure economic fairness for all Americans, while encouraging expanded growth and prosperity for our country as a whole. Let us not forget the 35 people who work for the Farrells. Those are the guys who load the truck with lumber, who drop it off at your house, or the lady who helps you select a door. If the Farrells are forced to close their doors, those 35 people will be out of work. There is a story like that across America. Let us end it and make it a good one for the Farrells.

Mr. FOSSELLA

Mr. FOSSELLA. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Linder) for yielding me this time. Mr. Speaker, again, the focus here is 102 years, 102 years of a temporary tax. I do not know about other Members here, but I can say that people back home, when they get that phone bill and they have difficulty understanding all those charges that appear and they ask why, and we are forced to tell them, well, believe it or not 102 years ago Congress passed a temporary tax. Now this Congress, I sense in a bipartisan way, will do the right thing and repeal that unnecessary tax that impacts every American family, and there may be people who have and will come to the floor to defend it and that is their right; but one has to ask themselves, I think, if we are not willing to repeal a 102-year-old temporary tax today, when we are enjoying the surplus generated by the American people, then when will we do it? So I applaud those who have introduced this legislation.

Mr. FOSSELLA. I yield to the gentleman from Wisconsin.

Mr. FOSSELLA. The gentleman's point being that we should not repeal it today?

Mr. FOSSELLA. Reclaiming my time. So much for semantics. The gentleman has every right to cast his vote to keep this tax alive, to say to the American people that he wants to keep this tax alive. I, in good measure and in good faith, say to the people of America that they deserve a break.

Mr. FOSSELLA

Mr. FOSSELLA. Mr. Chairman, I am not recorded on rollcall No. 214, an amendment to H.R. 4392. I was unavoidably detained and was not present to vote. Had I been present, I would have voted ``no'' on rollcall No. 214. Announcement by the Chairman Pro Tempore

Mr. FOSSELLA

Mr. FOSSELLA. Mr. Speaker, I am not recorded on rollcall No. 154 for the rule to provide for consideration of H.R. 3709, the Internet Nondiscrimination Act. I was unavoidably detained due to inclement weather, and therefore, was not present to vote. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yes'' on the rule.

Mr. FOSSELLA

Mr. FOSSELLA. Mr. Speaker, on rollcall No. 142 I was absent due to illness. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yea.''

Mr. FOSSELLA

Mr. FOSSELLA. Mr. Speaker, on rollcall No. 143 I was absent due to illness. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yea.''

Mr. FOSSELLA

Mr. FOSSELLA. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I commend my good friend the gentleman from New York (Mr. Crowley) for his leadership on this issue, and also again for helping us out so much with getting a Congressional Gold Medal to be bestowed upon Cardinal O'Connor, and the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Pelosi) for coming in and offering her thoughtful words as well. As the gentleman from New York (Mr. Crowley) said, Mr. Speaker, it has all been said. As Catholics, as Christians, we are taught to believe in eternal life, and the Cardinal through his daily mass celebrated the Eucharist and celebrated not only life here on Earth, but what he thought would be entering into the Kingdom of God, where he will rest forever in peace and love. I am very fortunate to represent the people of Staten Island, Bay Ridge, Brooklyn, Dykker Heights, Bensonhurst and Grave's End. While those folks are not in the diocese that the Cardinal controlled, like Mr. Crowley's mother, they loved the Cardinal as well. If anything, New York, this country, the Catholic Church, has lost a bit of its soul with the passing of Cardinal O'Connor, but it has not lost the legacy that he has left for all of us to emulate. A true leader, Mr. Speaker, does not say do as I say; he says do as I do, come follow me. Whether it was at the alter at St. Patrick's Cathedral or on the 5th Avenue on the St. Patrick's Day parade, or just touching the hand of a young child in a Catholic school who might not otherwise get a good education but for his steadfast commitment to ensuring that he gets one, or that person suffering from AIDS who had but a few moments left on this Earth, he was there to lend a helping hand and prayers, or for the homeless or the poor, the working men and women who were just looking for a better life when they land on these shores, Cardinal O'Connor, in my opinion, Mr. Speaker, will go down as a truly great American. I thank and applaud my colleagues, especially the gentleman from New York (Mr. Crowley), the gentleman from New York (Mr. King), the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Sherwood), the gentleman from New York (Mr. Rangel) and others who have spoken for taking the time to acknowledge his greatness, his contributions to this country and his church, and, above all, Mr. Speaker, the Speaker of the House, the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Hastert) and the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Armey) for allowing us to bring this to the floor in such an expeditious manner, and all my colleagues here, both Democrats and Republicans, for paying tribute to a great man.

Mr. FOSSELLA. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Government Reform be discharged from further consideration of the concurrent resolution (H. Con. Res. 317) expressing the sense of the Congress on the death of John Cardinal O'Connor, Archbishop of New York, and ask for its immediate consideration in the House.

Mr. FOSSELLA. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from New York (Mr. Rangel) for his beautiful words. He truly was a friend of the Cardinal, and I thank him for his leadership and eloquence on this. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. Kelly).

Mr. FOSSELLA. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman from Ohio (Ms. Kaptur) for again her thoughtful words and words of praise for the cardinal. While New York claimed him as our own, he was born in Philadelphia and immediately before coming to New York he was the Bishop of Scranton, a great town in Pennsylvania, for one year. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Sherwood), who is here to speak for those great folks of Scranton and who represents Scranton.

Mr. FOSSELLA. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I take this time to commend the gentleman from New York (Mr. Crowley) for all of his efforts and support, especially in garnering support for the Congressional Gold Medal. He was very instrumental in that effort. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from New York (Mr. Gilman), the chairman of the Committee on International Relations. (Mr. GILMAN asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. FOSSELLA. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that the time be divided, 30 minutes on each side, with the 30 minutes on the other side being controlled by the gentleman from New York (Mr. Crowley).

Mr. FOSSELLA. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I would like to echo the words of the majority leader, the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Armey), and also to express our appreciation to him and the Speaker as well in allowing Members to pay our respects to the great Cardinal O'Connor, who we bury on Monday in New York. Mr. Speaker, it is a sad day for New Yorkers and the Nation. America has lost a good priest and a great leader, John Cardinal O'Connor. Normally, resolutions such as this are tinged with regret. For often, when someone passes away, we worry that we may have missed the opportunity for not having said something to one that we loved or respected; for not expressing something that we felt. But I am pleased that this is not the case today. I am pleased because this House expressed the gratitude of the Nation for the work of John Cardinal O'Connor while he was still alive. Just a few weeks ago, the House voted to recognize Cardinal O'Connor with a Congressional Gold Medal, the highest award that this Nation bestows upon a civilian. And sadly, while he will never have the opportunity to see or to hold that medal, I know that he was deeply touched by being recognized by Congress. Just to have his name placed up for the Congressional Gold Medal was an honor to him, and I would like to thank each and every Member of this House for voting to award Cardinal O'Connor that great honor. He considered his work that of a simple priest. We here today know that his modesty cannot obscure his greatness. John Cardinal O'Connor touched the hearts and lives of millions of people. He was a man of deep compassion, great intellect, and tireless devotion. His words transcended religion, and his actions reminded us that American heroes still exist. The cardinal was a guiding light for Catholics and non- Catholics alike. He was and is truly loved, truly admired; and he will truly be missed. Cardinal O'Connor served this Nation for 27 years in his military career. He had a tour of duty in Korea, where he volunteered to become a chaplain; two tours of duty in Vietnam, often giving mass and celebrating mass in a foxhole, and giving the last rites to so many young men who gave their lives for their country. He was there in the heat of battle. And when he came back, I think above all he had the fondest memories of being a chaplain in the United States military. I am sure there are people around the country who remember Cardinal O'Connor as that chaplain, and I am sure they share the grief that we all have today. In his responsibilities as Archbishop of New York, as a great spiritual leader, perhaps one of the most influential in this country, he was truly committed to those who needed help the most, the poor and the homeless. And when it came to education, he was steadfast in his commitment to ensure that Catholics and non-Catholics alike have the greatest opportunity to receive a quality education. But for the strength, the guidance, and the principal positions that he often took, and that sometimes were referred to as controversial, his commitment to the church, his commitment to his people, his commitment to parishioners was a force that could never be forgotten. So his legacy will live on in many ways, and I thank the House for giving us this opportunity to honor his life and his legacy. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. FOSSELLA. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from New York (Mr. King), a good friend of the cardinal, the man from Nassau County.

Mr. FOSSELLA. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. FOSSELLA

Mr. FOSSELLA. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on H. Con. Res. 317.

Mr. FOSSELLA

Mr. FOSSELLA. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Linder) for yielding me this time. Mr. Speaker, I think the question that we need to ask ourselves and the question that I think we owe to be answered by the American people is, does anybody in this Nation truly understand the Tax Code? I have yet to find anybody who truly understands the Tax Code. So then we have to ask a follow-up question: Is that right? Is it right for the American people not to understand their own Tax Code; that the taxi driver or the small business owner or the nurse or the teacher that when they get their tax bills at the end of the year and they are trembling when they have to go see an accountant because they have no idea what they are doing; is that right? Should the Congress be sending out a signal to the American people, here is the Tax Code and we do not care if they do not understand it? Is it not taken for granted the genius of the American people, the spirit of the American people, the productivity of the American people, the creativity of the American people, and then we give them this Tax Code? Then we have a reasonable approach that says, know what, Congress has a habit too often of imposing mandates on the private sector, to say to the private sector do this by such and such a date, and we do not care what the costs are, we do not care what they have to do to meet those goals. Congress speaks; they do, they follow. Well, now Congress, some people in Congress, are urging Congress to impose those standards on itself, to say to the American people we hear their plea, we hear their plea that the Tax Code is too complicated. We are going to give them a Tax Code that they can understand. What is wrong with that? One would be led to believe that this building is going to crumble, that the world is going to fall apart; but in reality what is going to happen is the responsible people in this House and across our country are going to say give us something simple; give us something that encourages productivity, encourages economic growth and does not penalize the hardworking taxpayers of this country.

Mr. FOSSELLA

Mr. FOSSELLA. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this time and the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Oxley) for his efforts as well as members of the minority. There are two important aspects as I see it to this bill. One is that it will allow low-power radio to proceed. It will protect listeners, and it will prevent interference, which is something I think the American people are accustomed to and frankly want. That has been expressed through the Members of Congress in the last couple of years. Why we are here today in a somewhat expedited way is because the FCC overruled the will of the people. They overruled the will of Congress, which leads to a second and probably more disturbing portion of this debate and that is what the gentleman from Louisiana and the gentleman from Ohio alluded to at the very beginning. The FCC, for a lot of Americans who do not know, is a regulatory body and many businesses have to go before this regulatory body for satisfaction, for answers to really carry out their business plan, to bring products to the American people. What we see too often, especially lately, is that good honest business people have to go on bended knee before the regulators, and if they do not get their way, the regulators, they take it out on those good honest American business people. We talk about the land of the free and the home of the brave, that is not the American way. The American people deserve honesty from people holding public office. They deserve to be treated fairly and openly, and not to be subject to idle or explicit threats. With that, I urge the adoption of this bill.

Mr. FOSSELLA

Mr. FOSSELLA. Mr. Speaker, on rollcall No. 56, I was unavoidably detained. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yea.''