Wayne Gilchrest

Mr. GILCHREST

Mr. GILCHREST. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson-Lee) for her beautiful statement about this legislation, about the intent of the legislation. I also want to emphasize that in our legislation we have assured equal access to this program but her addition to that ensures that in an enhanced way and we are prepared to accept the gentlewoman's amendment.

Mr. GILCHREST

Mr. GILCHREST. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 2234) to revise the boundary of the Tumacacori National Historical Park in the State of Arizona, as amended.

Mr. GILCHREST. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, H.R. 2234, introduced by the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Pastor), would authorize the expansion of the boundary of the Tumacacori National Historical Park to include 310 acres of adjacent land. These lands were originally part of a chain of missions established by the Spanish from north-central Sonora, Mexico, to San Xavier del Bac near present-day Tucson. In 1908, President Theodore Roosevelt set aside 9 acres immediately around the church and declared it a national monument. Since that time, boundaries have been changed to include other significant missions, and in 1990 the monument was declared a National Historical Park. The park's general management plan identifies the need to acquire these additional lands, which were all a part of the original mission. The expansion would allow the Park Service to replant the orchard and add a program with livestock and farming, while enhancing the development of the Juan Bautista de Anza National Historic Trail. The current landowners of the property are willing sellers and are supportive of this legislation. Mr. Speaker, this legislation is supported by both the majority and the minority as well as the administration, and I urge my colleagues to support the bill. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. GILCHREST. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Kolbe).

Mr. GILCHREST. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume to highly compliment the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Pastor) and the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Kolbe) for their dedication to this legislation and for an informed statement about the history of this area. I know it must be beautiful to both gentlemen, and I am sure that they are very happy it is going to be protected.

Mr. GILCHREST. Mr. Speaker, I have no further requests for time, and I yield back the balance of my time and urge an ``aye'' vote on the legislation.

Mr. GILCHREST

Mr. GILCHREST. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and concur in the Senate amendment to the bill (H.R. 700) to reauthorize the Asian Elephant Conservation Act of 1997.

Mr. GILCHREST. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. This legislation was introduced by our distinguished colleague the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Saxton) and it was overwhelmingly approved by the House on June 12. This measure will extend the Asian Elephant Conservation Act at its existing authorization level. Since its enactment in 1997, Congress has appropriated $2.9 million to fund 46 conservation projects in 12 range countries. These funds, which are the only continuous source of money for the Asian elephants, have had a dramatic, positive impact on the ongoing international struggle to save this flagship species from extinction. While many Americans were thrilled by the recent birth of an Asian elephant at the National Zoo, it is essential that natural habitat be preserved and protected for these animals. This is a fundamental goal of H.R. 700 because the battle to save the irreplaceable species is far from won. During consideration in the other body, a number of technical corrections were made to the Multinational Species Conservation Fund. We have reviewed those modifications and support them. Furthermore, the other body extended the authorization for the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation for 2 years and corrected a mistake made last year in their authorization levels. The National Fish and Wildlife Foundation was created by Congress in 1984 to conserve fish, wildlife and plants and the habitats on which they depend. In nearly 20 years, the Foundation has funded over 5,000 projects which have restored nearly 20 million acres of habitat, and over 11,000 miles of streams and waterways have been enhanced. In addition, the Foundation has been extremely successful in leveraging limited public dollars with corporate, private and other nonprofit funds. By any objective standard, the foundation has done an effective job of promoting healthy populations of fish, wildlife and plants. I support these improvements and I urge an aye vote on H.R. 700 so that we can send this important legislation to the President for his signature, and I urge an aye vote on this legislation. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time. Report of Committee to Notify President

Mr. GILCHREST. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Saxton), the author of the legislation. (Mr. SAXTON asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. GILCHREST. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume to also compliment the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Saxton) for his effort on this issue, and the staff, and all those who helped push this bill through. I urge my colleagues to vote ``aye'' on this legislation.

Mr. GILCHREST. Mr. Speaker, I have no further requests for time, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. GILCHREST

Mr. GILCHREST. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Delaware for yielding me this time, and I want to thank the gentleman from Nebraska (Mr. Osborne) for offering this legislation, this resolution, to us this afternoon and to all those people who this afternoon have participated in this discussion and expressed their feelings on the concept of mentoring and the benefit that is the result. A number of us in here, I am sure, have done some type of mentoring throughout our adult years and have found that specific relationships between adults and children are generally, especially in the context of mentoring, long lasting, they provide friendship between the mentor and the child that is being mentored, they provide an avenue, an opportunity for the child to understand what is beyond the next curve, what are the opportunities that are out there, what are the fears that I have for the future or my present circumstance. Mentoring is an extraordinary opportunity to do a number of very positive things. A number of years ago, shortly after I got out of the service and I was in my early twenties, and I thought I was quite old when I was in my early twenties, myself, some of my brothers and some friends who had recently come back from Vietnam or were starting college got together with a lawyer and a minister to create a Boy Scout troop for designated legally, judicially designated juvenile delinquents. We had 20 young teenagers in that troop. Ten were white and 10 were black. None of us had a college education, but we understood the relationship between young people and responsible adults to open an avenue of opportunity. We stayed with those teenagers for about a year; then we all went off to college or we got married or we went someplace else. Mr. Speaker, those teenagers are now in their forties. They are not young adults. They are middle-aged adults. Whenever we run into them periodically, they still talk about the first time that they caught a fish, the first time they built a campfire, the first time they went on a long hike, the first time they actually sat with an adult and read a book. The idea of mentoring is a long-term idea; and the positive benefits to the child, the teenager, the young adult and the adult that is involved is rather enormous. Mr. Speaker, I will close with this statement: there are many Americans that have extraordinary talents. Those talents are in music, they are in art, they are in math, they are in the sciences, they are just in being a human; and each one of those adults that has a specific talent is unique. That unique person can give that young child a perspective on the wonders of our country and the world, opportunities that can be unmatched.

Mr. GILCHREST

Mr. GILCHREST. 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 in the Record on the two bills just considered, H.R. 700 and H.R. 2234.

Mr. GILCHREST

Mr. GILCHREST. 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 matter on the three bills just considered, H.R. 2187, H.R. 107, as amended, and H.R. 3334.

Mr. GILCHREST

Mr. GILCHREST. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of H.R. 3334, a bill to name the Humboldt Bay National Wildlife Refuge Visitor's Center after Mr. Richard J. Guadagno. Mr. Guadagno was a refuge manager until his life was tragically ended on September 11 by terrorists with the crash of United Airlines Flight 93 in Pennsylvania. Mr. Guadagno was only 38 years old, and spent 17 years working for the Fish and Wildlife Service. During his distinguished career, he was a biologist, wildlife inspector, refuge employee at five units of the system, and he became the refuge manager for the Humboldt Bay National Wildlife Refuge in March of last year. As a refuge manager, Mr. Guadagno was a dedicated, hard-working, and energetic public servant who made the completion of the visitor's center one of his highest priorities. According to his colleagues, it was his vision that the American people should have an enhanced opportunity to see the natural wonders and the wildlife diversity of Humboldt Bay, and gain an appreciation for their beauty and importance. This refuge is home to more than 200 bird species, four endangered species, and hundreds of acres of essential wetland habitat. This refuge, which is on the northern California coast, is a popular attraction for thousands of visitors each year. It is a fitting tribute to name the visitor's center for him in recognition of his tireless efforts to make this a place of peace, rest and learning. Following his untimely death, Secretary of the Interior Gale Norton wrote to Mr. Guadagno's parents, to tell them that their son was a beloved colleague, a model professional, and one of our Nation's heroes. In addition, the acting director of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Mr. Marshall Jones, wrote a letter to the 8,400 employees of the service in which he said that ``Rich was proud to achieve his goal of becoming a project leader of a major refuge. He never lacked the courage to do the right thing.'' Finally, his immediate supervisor, Ms. Anne Badgley, a regional director of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, wrote, ``Rich was one of our finest managers in the National Wildlife Refuge System, and he will be sorely missed.'' The Richard J. Guadagno Visitor's Center will be more than brick and mortar. It will be an ever-regenerative repository of knowledge and hope. Mr. Speaker, I want to compliment the author of the bill, the gentleman from California (Mr. Thompson) for his leadership, and I urge an aye vote on H.R. 3334. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. GILCHREST. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 3334) to designate the Richard J. Guadagno Headquarters and Visitors Center at Humboldt Bay National Wildlife Refuge, California.

Mr. GILCHREST. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the gentleman from Guam (Mr. Underwood), the staff, and the gentleman from California (Mr. Thompson) for this legislation. The House salutes Mr. Guadagno and his family in their time of sorrow.

Mr. GILCHREST. Mr. Speaker, I have no further requests for time, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. GILCHREST

Mr. GILCHREST. I thank the gentlewoman for yielding me this time. Mr. Speaker, I would like to reemphasize some of the comments. I also support the rule. I will vote for the rule, but I will not vote for the conference report. There are many good things in this legislation. The President has helped the House and the Senate develop a lot of positive things that the Federal Government can do to become involved in the process of stimulating curiosity, intellectual curiosity and knowledge. But the critical area that fails in this legislation in my opinion is based on the conversation that the gentleman from Florida just mentioned, and, that is, that the Federal Government is requiring, through a pretty heavy hand, that the State governments create a testing tool, whether it is diagnostic or not, that will have a fairly riveting effect, in my judgment, of sterilizing and taking away the uniqueness of each individual teacher's expertise. When you do that, you do not create an academic environment that the teachers thrive on or the parents or the students. Unfortunately, I rise to support the rule but oppose the conference report. I rise in opposition to the Conference Report on HR 1. While I am thankful for the President's commitment to improving America's schools, particularly those failing our most vulnerable children, I feel strongly that this legislation will take us in the wrong direction, and, in the end, alienate parents from their local schools, rob teachers of their passions and gifts, and deprive children of not only the opportunity to learn through curiosity, imagination, and investigation, but also the realization that a lifetime of education can be exciting and invigorating. Although this debate over how best to address the problems of our public schools has focused our attention on an issue we all cherish-- but too often neglect--and forced us to search for common ground-- something we too often forgo--I am more convinced now than ever that, through this legislation, we will be turning our backs on the heart of successful public education: local control of curriculum, parental and community involvement in school decisions, and the utilization of individual teachers' unique excitement and expertise. For this reason, I will not vote for the Conference Report. Throughout much of the 20th Century, Congress often followed a single formula when addressing domestic problems: take away the authority of local governments and rely on federal control. In many instances this formula left citizens and communities out of the process and forced federal taxes and spending through the roof. We also know that this formula failed to solve--and often made worse--many of our most serious problems. And yet, despite these lessons, this House is going to apply this same failed formula to public education. The testing provisions in the Conference Report are most indicative of this continued mindset and are the elements that trouble me the most. Because many here in Washington have decided testing is the key to school reform and accountability, this legislation will force states to create monolithic tests and subject curriculums, which the states will force upon local schools. Once again, we revert to believing all wisdom flows from Washington and state capitals. The unavoidable consequence of this legislation will be less freedom for school boards, principals, teachers, and parents to decide what is best for their schools. Tests, ordered by federal bureaucrats and crafted by state bureaucrats, will be the dim light guiding our schools. Tests will determine what gets taught, what gets left out, which schools get more funding, and which teachers get raises. All the while, parents and teachers, those most committed to the well being of our children, will be left with their hands tied, interpreting test results published in the newspapers. At times, however, this Conference Report seems to realize, though vaguely, that our schools should not be simply creatures of the Federal Government. It provides for increased funding going directly to localities and greater flexibility in the use of these funds. But if we trust the towns, counties, and neighborhoods of this country to make the right decisions with all of these federal dollars, why do we fail to trust them when it comes to what should be taught on the front line, day-to-day in the classroom? We are putting power in the wrong place, creating an environment where vindictive behavior can thrive, sterilizing curiosity and creativity and ensuring mediocrity. Competition between schools will not be academically motivated, but rather more politicized. Whether we are fighting for peace and stability around the globe, trying to create a more productive work place, or attempting to build dynamic research institutions, Americans have learned that one rule predominates: give honorable, hardworking, dedicated humans the freedom to think and create, and they will excel every time. Constant testing is not the answer. Empowering parents, teachers, and principals is. Democracy of the intellect is preferable to an aristocracy of the intellect.

Mr. GILCHREST

Mr. GILCHREST. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 2440) to rename Wolf Trap Farm Park as ``Wolf Trap National Park for the Performing Arts,'' and for other purposes, as amended.

Mr. GILCHREST. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. We have no further speakers on this issue. I would just ask my two colleagues from Virginia that when Wolf Trap Park holds traditional, historic country western music, if they would invite me to attend, I would be more than happy to do so.

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

Mr. GILCHREST. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, H.R. 2440 would change the name of Wolf Trap Farm Park to Wolf Trap National Park for the Performing Arts. Wolf Trap, located in Vienna, Virginia, enjoys a reputation as one of the premier venues for the Performing Arts in the country. The park plays host to every conceivable type of Performing Arts, from Native American folk festivals, to interpretive dance recitals, rock concerts and classical symphonies. While the Park Service maintains responsibility for the grounds and buildings, the non-profit Wolf Trap Foundation creates and selects programming, develops all educational programs, handles ticket sales, marketing, publicity and public relations, while also raising funds to support these programs. This bill would help alleviate confusion regarding its name and assist the nonprofit Wolf Trap Foundation in raising funds and resources for the park. The bill would not alter the legal status of the park nor its level of Federal funding. Mr. Speaker, this is a non-controversial bill, and I urge my colleagues to support its passage. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. GILCHREST

Mr. GILCHREST. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 1989) to reauthorize various fishery conservation management programs, as amended.

Mr. GILCHREST

Mr. GILCHREST. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks on H.R. 2440 and H.R. 1989.