Jim Gibbons

Mr. GIBBONS

Mr. GIBBONS. Mr. Speaker, there are almost 40 million Medicare beneficiaries in the United States, and I can say with confidence that no two beneficiaries are just alike. So why would this administration want to create a one-size-fits-all Medicare prescription drug program? Our seniors should not be forced into a big government Washington- based drug benefit program, a program run by Washington bureaucrats that do not know the difference between Motrin and Resulin. Our seniors and disabled Americans deserve and want a better plan. The House bipartisan prescription drug benefit plan will provide an affordable, available, and voluntary drug benefit program allowing each Medicare beneficiary to choose which program best serves their individual needs. Mr. Speaker, the American people cannot afford the $100 billion Clinton-Gore cookie cutter prescription drug plan scheme, whatever you call it, which thoughtlessly neglects individual health care needs of our seniors.

Mr. GIBBONS

Mr. GIBBONS. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding time to me. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong opposition to the amendment offered by my friend, the gentleman from New York. Here we go again. The EPA is rushing to implement a new arsenic standard in the water with very little justifiable new scientific evidence. They will tell us that the new, more stringent standards of our communities will be at risk, and therefore we must plow ahead. No one on this floor wants anyone's drinking water to be unsafe. I, for one, am not condemning the EPA for setting scientific safe and reasonable drinking water standards. But there is a consequence to these authoritative actions. I oppose the EPA requiring small, rural community water districts to spend $10 million to $20 million to comply with the current arsenic standards when the EPA is going to mandate an entirely new and more stringent standard in January of 2001. This tactic is simply going to force small rural water districts to unnecessarily spend millions of taxpayer dollars to build a new water treatment facility to comply with current standards, and then 6 months later spend an additional $10 million to $20 million to build an entirely new facility to comply with the new EPA standards. If the EPA, Mr. Chairman, has its ways, these small communities will spend up to $35 million to comply with two separate standards. Would it not make sense for communities to build one safe and adequate facility that seeks to comply with the new more stringent standard, rather than 6 months down the road spending an additional $20 million? This situation occurs throughout my State, it occurs throughout a number of other States. I am sure that there are many communities around who are concerned, whether they are small or large, with the attempt to have to comply with the current existing arsenic standards, facing the new future standards as well. Let me say, Mr. Chairman, that this is a wrongheaded tactic. Why should any community, large or small, be forced to spend that extra $1 million? I stand here, Mr. Chairman, in opposition to this amendment. We should oppose the Hinchey amendment because it is unnecessary. This is a commonsense report language, and in no way ties the hands of the EPA. It merely allows communities to concentrate on meeting one arsenic standard, build one water treatment facility, and save rural water districts millions of dollars in unneeded and duplicative and costly regulations. Mr. Chairman, I ask all my colleagues to oppose the Hinchey amendment.

Mr. GIBBONS

Mr. GIBBONS. Mr. Speaker, last year a 75-year-old woman in Las Vegas had to let her homeowners insurance policy lapse just to pay for her prescription heart medicine. Tragically her home was destroyed in the floods that ravaged the Las Vegas valley last year as well. Mr. Speaker, such a tragedy should never have been allowed to happen. This Congress has an opportunity to provide a voluntary, affordable and accessible Medicare drug benefit plan to all our Nation's seniors. The House bipartisan prescription drug plan will solve this very serious problem currently facing our Nation's seniors. With this plan, senior citizens will no longer have to choose between food, shelter and medication. Instead, the only choice they will have to make is which prescription plan best meets their individual needs. I urge my colleagues to support the House bipartisan prescription drug plan. It is the fair thing to do, but, more importantly, it is the right thing to do.

Mr. GIBBONS

Mr. GIBBONS. Madam Speaker, once again, our national security has been endangered by the incompetence of the Department of Energy. It seems that the DOE cannot keep track of our Nation's most sensitive and top-secret information. After nuclear weapons information was stolen last year from the Los Alamos lab, the American people were promised, they were promised that the lab security would be enhanced and such a security breach would never again occur. Well that was 1999, Madam Speaker. So much for the Clinton-Gore administration promises. It seems that the enhanced security did not take into consideration the human element. The human element is not one's pet dog. Perhaps the DOE thought that the potential threat aliens from Mars posed to our national security needed to be addressed before ensuring that our top-secret information was secure from real-life human beings. It is time that this administration wake up and make our national security a top priority. I yield back the administration's so-called security policies which fail to protect our Nation's secrets.

Mr. GIBBONS

Mr. GIBBONS. Mr. Speaker, ladies and gentlemen, today is Flag Day, of course, and a day to honor the symbol of our Nation, a symbol of our independence and a symbol of American ideals. Historically, the idea of celebrating an annual holiday honoring the United States flag and the anniversary of the official adoption of ``The Stars and Stripes'' is believed to have first originated in 1885 by a school teacher in Wisconsin. In the years following, the tradition grew; and in 1916, President Woodrow Wilson established Flag Day by a proclamation. Over 3 decades later, President Truman would sign an Act of Congress officially designating June 14 of each year as National Flag Day. I, like many Americans, look at our flag and see our history, our triumphs; and most importantly, I see our future. Today is a day to unite to pay tribute to the symbol which has grown with our country and represented our Nation's ideas since it first flew as ``The Stars and Stripes'' in 1777. On this day, I am proud to honor our flag and all that it represents.

Mr. GIBBONS

Mr. GIBBONS. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to express my gratitude to a member of our Nevada staff, Dr. Robert Johns, for his dedication, hard work and commitment to this Nation. Dr. Johns has not only worked diligently serving the people of Nevada in our northern Nevada district office but has also served as the vice chairman of the President's council on historic preservation for two terms during the Reagan administration. As a retired World War II naval officer, Dr. Bob Johns has dedicated most of his life to public service. He is a real American hero, Mr. Speaker. We both grew up in the same small town, Sparks, Nevada, just a few blocks apart. I have been honored to have Bob Johns as a true friend and a member of my staff since my time in the Nevada State legislature. On May 30, Mr. Speaker, Dr. Johns celebrated his 80th birthday. He continues to work every day serving as an active and vital public servant in his home State of Nevada. Thank you, Dr. Johns, for your friendship, your hard work and your commitment to the people of Nevada and to this Nation.

Mr. GIBBONS

Mr. GIBBONS. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to discuss a problem that affects too many Americans, the death tax. It seems absurd that our government would tax someone just for dying; yet that is exactly what has been happening in this country for years. Too many Nevadans are forced to sell acres of their family farms and ranch lands after the death of their parents or grandparents in order to pay their huge estate tax bills, all courtesy of the death tax. Many of these farms and ranches have been in families for years, but now these families must sell part of their family heritage in order to pay the IRS. For many Americans, the American dream is to start a small business and pass it on to their children; yet our government is preventing millions of Americans from realizing this dream. This is wrong; it must end. Mr. Speaker, I hope all of my colleagues will support the Death Tax Elimination Act and restore the American dream and do it today.

Mr. GIBBONS

Mr. GIBBONS. 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. GIBBONS

Mr. GIBBONS. Mr. Speaker, Woody Allen once said that ``death should not be viewed as the end, but as a very effective way to cut down expenses.'' Well, unfortunately, this maxim just does not hold true. Currently, at the time of death, Americans are assessed an additional tax on the value of their property known as the death tax. This added expense is why over 70 percent of the family businesses do not survive to the second generation. Mr. Speaker, it is simply shameful that the Federal Government requires an American to pay up to 60 percent of their savings, their businesses, or their farm in taxes when they die. Therefore, I encourage all of my colleagues to support H.R. 8 which will eliminate the unfair death tax over the next 10 years. Americans should not have to mourn the loss of a family, a business, or a farm in addition to the loss of a loved one. It is time to bury the death tax once and for all.

Mr. GIBBONS

Mr. GIBBONS. Madam Speaker, today we honor the U.S. servicemen who participated in the invasion of Western Europe by the Allies on June 6, 1944. It is only fitting, however, that we pay special tribute to a gentleman who is admired by millions of our veterans. Bob Hope is beloved for his tireless efforts to entertain U.S. troops around the globe, from World War II to the Persian Gulf War. As one of the countless soldiers that he entertained during Vietnam and Desert Storm, I know personally of the positive impact that his visits made to uplift our spirits. Last week, Americans were saddened to learn of the legendary entertainer's illness requiring a stay at the Eisenhower Medical Center, near his home, in Palm Springs. With his devoted and loving wife, Delores, by his side, Mr. Hope is recovering, and the family has asked that everyone keep Mr. Hope in their prayers. Mr. Hope, from those of us who were blessed by your courage and commitment to our efforts around the globe, may God bless you. And, Mr. Hope, we all hope that you get well soon, and our best wishes go out to you and your family.

Mr. GIBBONS

Mr. GIBBONS. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of H.R. 4489, the INS Data Management Improvement Act, which will be coming before this Chamber later today. The bill will support our border law enforcement objectives without adversely affecting U.S. commerce, trade, or tourism. H.R. 4489 does not create a new, cumbersome inspection system. It does not mandate additional documents be required for entry into the United States. H.R. 4489 simply requires that the INS develop and maintain an electronic database of information already collected at our borders. It also establishes a joint public-private sector task force to evaluate and report on ways to improve the flow of traffic at all ports of entry. This sensible legislation supports our border law enforcement efforts, as well as the travel and tourism industries of many States, including Nevada. I urge all of my colleagues to support the INS Data Management Improvement Act.

Mr. GIBBONS

Mr. GIBBONS. Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the chairman of the full committee, the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Stump), a veteran himself, who has been a dedicated individual for veterans rights, for granting me the time to speak on this bill. Mr. Speaker, I am honored to rise today in support of S. 1402 and this important update to the historic Montgomery GI Bill, a bill which was originally sponsored by my good friend, Sonny Montgomery from Mississippi, who is present with us today. I think it is an honor for all of us to have an opportunity to help educate hundreds of thousands of veterans and service members and their families. This bill will go a long way, especially addressing some of the needs of our guard and reserve members as well. Best of all, it will help them now. Mr. Speaker, America is proud, and rightly so, of its tradition of defense by its citizen soldiers; and we in this Congress are, for the first time, beginning to reverse decades of declining resources dedicated to equipping our soldiers, sailors, airmen and Marines for their combat roles. This bill now under consideration does the same for equipping them in advancing their educational goals. This budget-neutral bill will increase the Montgomery GI stipend by a third over 2 years, it will increase the monies available to surviving families of deceased service members, and it will provide the licensing or certification of funds for veterans who are integrating into the civilian workforce. Mr. Speaker, I join the gentleman from Arizona (Chairman Stump); the ranking member, the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Evans); and the chairman of the Subcommittee on Benefits (Chairman Quinn) in urging your support for the strong and much deserved bipartisan Veterans and Dependents Millennium Education Act.

Mr. GIBBONS

Mr. GIBBONS. Mr. Speaker, well, it took almost 2 years, but memos from FBI Director Louis Freeh regarding the Democratic fund-raising scandal have finally been turned over to Congress. Perhaps the Clinton administration was hoping that the memos would never turn up, especially since they state that key administration officials were under a lot of pressure not to go forward with the investigation because the Attorney General's job might hang in the balance. The American people have a right to expect the Department of Justice to investigate wrongdoing, no matter where it may occur. Mr. Speaker, the Clinton administration is not exempt from the laws of our Nation. It is my hope that the ongoing congressional hearings and investigations into these scandals will reveal the truth once and for all. I yield back the continuing scandals and illegal cover-ups that have become an unfortunate characteristic of this administration.

Mr. GIBBONS

Mr. GIBBONS. Mr. Speaker, yesterday the White House announced that it would work to compensate the victims of the Los Alamos wildfire. Well, Mr. Speaker, how generous of the administration to compensate the victims of a wildfire which its own agency, the National Park Service, is responsible for starting. Of course, neither the administration or the Park Service accepts responsibility for the environmental disaster that has left hundreds of people stranded, over 400 homes destroyed, and has burned almost 50,000 acres. Instead, they have pledged compensation, which will ultimately cost the American taxpayers millions of dollars. Meanwhile, the local superintendent who has acknowledged responsibility for igniting the blaze, in spite of adverse weather warnings, was given a paid vacation. They might as well have said congratulations. Mr. Speaker, the National Park Service and its personnel need to be held responsible for their actions, especially when those actions result in such extensive environmental devastation. I yield back the administration's disgraceful inability to accept responsibility for its own negligence.

Mr. GIBBONS

Mr. GIBBONS. Mr. Chairman, I strongly support H.R. 4392, the Intelligence Authorization Act for fiscal year 2001. But, Mr. Chairman, before I speak to the issue of the bill before us, I would like to take a moment to recognize the great bipartisan leadership that Chairman Goss and the ranking member, Mr. Dixon, have brought to the Intelligence Committee and, moreover, to the creation of this bill. I have had the privilege of serving on the Intelligence Committee for the past 3 years, and I can attest to the commitment these two leaders make to the committee, our intelligence community, and the security of our country. Chairman Goss, thank you for your leadership. And, thank you, Mr. Dixon, for your service to our intelligence community. Mr. Chairman, as one of only 16 members of the Intelligence Committee, I fully recognize the trust placed on us by all Members of the House to ensure that the highly classified work we do is in the proper interests of the United States of America. I take the responsibilities of that trust very seriously. That said, I can tell you that the Intelligence authorization bill before us today is one that I strongly support, and one that I urge all Members to support. Is it a perfect bill? No, it's not perfect. Truth is, I would rather that the bill were proposing a larger increase in spending for the national intelligence functions. It is not hyperbole to tell this body that the world is a much more volatile and unpredictable place than it was during the cold war. Crises around the world pop up literally overnight and are stretching our limited intelligence assets to the breaking point. These crises require a great deal of intelligence effort. Just because a hot spot doesn't threaten the very existence of the United States, doesn't mean that we can provide any less intelligence support if even one U.S. life is at stake. A single nuclear, chemical or biological weapon can still do tremendous damage, as can one large truck bomb. Usama Bin Laden and his cohorts continue to terrorize parts of the world. These asymmetric threats to our national security are real and we must have the intelligence means to know as much about them as we can. To properly respond to these threats we need more human sources around the world, we need more and better technologies to help our intelligence analysts interpret the vast amounts of data they must work through, and we need better collaboration among the various intelligence disciplines. All this takes money. Unfortunately, the budget requests we have been provided have not adequately addressed the proper funding necessary to ensure we have a strong ``first line of defense''--our intelligence community. And, the small increase that we've made to the national intelligence effort does not do all we need to do. In that respect, Mr. Chairman, this is not a perfect bill. However, is this a good bill? Yes, Mr. Chairman it is. We have made specific and, in some respects, dramatic recommendations to improve intelligence system modernization, collaboration, and communication. On the tactical intelligence side, we focused a great deal of attention on the testimonies of the theater commanders in chief and have provided significant funding for critically needed tactical intelligence systems. They told us often and loud that they required more intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance assets. To that end we have made recommendations for providing the military with badly needed reconnaissance aircraft and training systems. We have made recommendations for funding spare equipment and for providing commercial satellite imagery support. We have also recommended funding for improved imagery and signals intelligence systems. In short Mr. Chairman, this is a good bill that addresses the most critical intelligence needs of our military and our national leadership. And, it does it with a modest increase to the overall request. I encourage my colleagues to support H.R. 4392.

Mr. GIBBONS

Mr. GIBBONS. Mr. Speaker, I was pleased to learn earlier this week that the United Nations diplomats for the first time in 30 years, three decades, will finally reconsider the allocation of peacekeeping costs. Mr. Speaker, it is about time. Currently 30 countries pay 98 percent of the U.N.'s peacekeeping budget, while 158 countries pay only 2 percent, regardless of their economic performance. In addition, it is the United States' share of nearly one-third of that cost of the United Nations peacekeeping overall budget that bothers most of us. Since 1973, when payment proportions were established, the economies of many of the member nations have improved tremendously. Now these nations can afford to pay their fair share, but unfortunately they just do not want to. Mr. Speaker, it is about time that the member nations pay their fair share of U.N. peacekeeping costs. The United States cannot afford nor should it be called upon to be the world's policeman and its banker. I yield back once and for all the unfair U.N. peacekeeping payment system that has punished the U.S. and our taxpayers for too long.

Mr. GIBBONS

Mr. GIBBONS. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of this rule. It is well crafted and well focused and will bring about much important debate on our national security. Mr. Speaker, when we talk about our national defense, we must all remember that our national security is multifaceted. It is not solely built and maintained by our military soldiers, sailors, airmen and Marines. We must also recognize those citizen veterans of the Cold War who served our country by building and testing the American strategic arsenal of democracy. Although we cannot give these individuals a Purple Heart for their injuries, I, along with some of my colleagues, have been diligently working on a comprehensive compensation program for these injured workers. During our committee markup of this bill, I offered just such an amendment to establish such a comprehensive worker's compensation program but, unfortunately, the complex committee jurisdictional programs forced its withdrawal. I did, however, get commitments of support from the chairman of the full committee and the Subcommittee on Military Procurement for introduction of such a piece of legislation. In light of this support I, along with my colleagues, the gentleman from Kentucky (Mr. Whitfield), the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Strickland), the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Kanjorski), the gentleman from Tennessee (Mr. Wamp) and the gentleman from Colorado (Mr. Udall) have offered our bipartisan sense of Congress amendment, and I want to thank the Republican leadership and my friend, the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Sessions), as well as the gentleman from California (Mr. Dreier), the distinguished chairman of the Committee on Rules, for this rule, which makes this amendment in order and allows for that much-needed debate on the issue. Mr. Speaker, contrary to the arguments of those who simply want to jump on the bandwagon and then immediately demand to steer, this sense of Congress amendment will provide the necessary momentum to get this vital compensation program actually enacted into law. Again, I support this rule, and I urge all Members to support the rule and our amendment, which issues a clarion call for swift action on a comprehensive Department of Energy injured worker compensation program.

Mr. GIBBONS

Mr. GIBBONS. Mr. Chairman, as we all learned in basic first aid, some wounds heal faster than others. The wounds of war, of course, can be the worst of all to heal. As a representative of the Nevada Test Site, I rise in strong support of this amendment. Today, the bipartisan sponsors of this amendment and I are calling for long overdue first aid to protect and help our constituents: Those forgotten, wounded, citizen veterans of the Cold War. Their injuries and their wounds, for which no Purple Heart can ever be awarded, were received in Cold War battles waged in our laboratories and weapons plants all across America. The culmination of these atomic laborers lit the skies and ripped the grounds in the deserts of the Nevada Test Site. They left poisoned workers in their wake, poisoned with radiation from the test and with silica from the dangerous underground tunneling the test required. This amendment calls for action to address these wounds and to regain the trust and faith of these ill Cold War workers, and I call on all my colleagues to support this amendment.

Mr. GIBBONS

Mr. GIBBONS. Mr. Speaker, after a lifetime of hard work, our senior citizens should be able to enjoy their golden years. But unfortunately, instead of enjoying their retirement, the rising cost of prescription drugs forces many seniors to choose between putting food on the table or buying lifesaving medications. Forcing seniors into this type of decision is wrong and it must stop. The Republicans have brought forward a responsible, common sense prescription drug plan that provides our seniors access to affordable prescription drugs. Under the Republican proposal, seniors will have the power to choose prescription drug plans that best fit their needs instead of being forced into the Democrats' inefficient, dangerous, big-government, price control scheme. The Republican plan assures that no senior citizen or disabled American will have to choose between food and medicine again. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the administration's dangerous one-size- fits-all, government-dictated drug scheme which fails to meet the needs of our seniors.

Mr. GIBBONS

Mr. GIBBONS. Mr. Speaker, one of the worst wildfires in history rages continually out of control in New Mexico today and so far has burned over 10,000 acres of land in that State. And it is the National Park Service who is to blame. Thousands of residents have been evicted, hundreds of homes have been destroyed or damaged and the lives of these families threatened. Yet all of this devastation and upheaval could have been prevented if the National Park Service had not blatantly ignored key information. The National Weather Service informed the Park Service hours before a controlled burn was to begin that weather conditions were actually a blueprint for spreading a fire. But in spite of this warning, the fire was started, anyway. Our heartfelt sympathies go out to all those families who have lost everything as a result of this man-made disaster and our deepest appreciation goes out to the firefighters now risking their lives battling a wildfire which should never have occurred. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the negligence and incompetence of the National Park Service, an agency supposed to be responsible for protecting our national land.

Mr. GIBBONS

Mr. GIBBONS. Mr. Speaker, Will Rogers once said that ``Baseball is a skilled game. It's America's game, it and high taxes.'' Well, it seems like he was right. The Clinton-Gore fiscal year 2001 budget includes 106, that is 106, Mr. Speaker, separate tax increases. Taken together, these tax increases total over $180 billion. Mr. Speaker, the American pastime should be baseball. Unfortunately, the Clinton-Gore administration has a new pastime, increasing the crushing tax burden placed upon American taxpayers. It seems that the administration wants to keep taking more and more money from hard-working Americans to pay for their growing, yet inefficient, bureaucracy. I encourage my colleagues to reject the Clinton-Gore tax and spend plans and to let Americans keep more of their hard-earned money. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the Democrats' anti-American tax increases, which only serve to demoralize the American working families spirit.

Mr. GIBBONS

Mr. GIBBONS. Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Chabot) for yielding me the time here to speak on this issue. Madam Speaker, I rise in proud support today of this important bill, a bill introduced by my friend and colleague the gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Ramstad), along with the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Stupak), a bill which will honor and recognize those peace officers slain in the line of duty, as well as all peace officers who risk their own personal safety every day to protect the citizens of the United States. There are approximately 740,000 sworn law enforcement officers currently serving in the United States. Every day these officers courageously serve and protect the safety and welfare of all Americans. They are motivated by their own personal sense of good will and responsibility and not by a desire for praise, recognition, or glory. As citizens, we must rely on their dedication, their commitment, and their bravery. Yet, oftentimes we are unaware of the enormous risks that they take every day. Since the first recorded police death in 1794, there have been more than 15,000 law enforcement officers killed in the line of duty in the United States. In the past 10 years alone, over 1,500 law enforcement officers have died in the line of duty. Madam Speaker, that is an average of one death every other day. The State of Nevada has lost 54 officers over the years. These fallen officers leave behind wives, children, other family members, and friends as a result of their dedication to law enforcement and to the public they serve. I encourage all my colleagues to support this important bill, which recognizes the risks and sacrifices that our police officers make every day to protect our families and our property and welfare. It is my hope that we honor these men and women not just today, but every day. Finally, let us never forget these officers who made the ultimate sacrifice with their lives in service to the people of this great Nation.

Mr. GIBBONS

Mr. GIBBONS. Mr. Chairman, this amendment is part of the big picture of sound land management. This is a common sense, bipartisan amendment which addresses the large amount of federally controlled land in the United States. In no way, Mr. Chairman, would this amendment change CARA. All it would say is if the Federal Government is going to spend approximately $1 billion per year on land acquisition, then there should be a simple, fair and thoughtful way for the Federal Government to sell its unwanted land. In my State, where almost 90 percent of the land is government-owned, our rural counties have been placed under tremendous financial strain due to the lack of private property taxes as a tax base. This has severely degraded the ability of these local governments to provide necessary services such as school repairs, police and fire protection, medical service and infrastructure improvements. This amendment provides a mechanism to sell back lands that the Bureau of Land Management, that in their own land management plans, has identified to be unwanted, difficult, costly or unnecessary to manage. Currently, there is no effective means by which the BLM can, in a timely and efficient manner, sell government land that they do not want. First, the Secretary and the State and the counties that have jurisdiction over government land identified for disposal can choose, jointly, the mechanism of disposal, be it offered for competitive sale or exchange. Additionally, this amendment allows States and counties to file for an R&PP to obtain the land for local public use or recreational purposes before it is offered for sale. The Secretary will also have to coordinate land disposal activities which affect counties so they take into account local land use planning and zoning recommendations. It is important to note that the public and the government will be justly compensated for land disposed under this amendment. This amendment instructs the Secretary to sell the land at a price that is not less than the fair market value as determined by the Secretary. Additionally, the sale of this public land must be conducted through a competitive bidding process that allows fair and equal footing to all interested parties. Also of note is that a proposed sale of land will be terminated, should it be determined that the Federal cost of sale preparation and processing are going to be more than the proceeds of the sale. This amendment also sets up a distribution of the monies generated by the sale of land. The money will be divided into three categories: A small percentage will go to the State in which the land is located for use in their general education fund. A percentage will go to the county for use in health care, law enforcement and schools, and the remaining funds shall be used by the Federal Government to repair and maintain existing government lands. This amendment creates a fair and equitable mechanism to dispose of unwanted Federal property, and without it, the Federal Government will continue to own more land without being able to give up any, even the stuff they say they do not want. Mr. Chairman, I respectfully encourage favorable consideration of this amendment. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. GIBBONS. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.

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