Ralph Hall

Mr. HALL of Texas

Mr. HALL of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I rise, of course, in strong support of this amendment. The National Science Foundation is one of the few agencies in the government that is investing in the Nation's future. While we are enjoying the very greatest prosperity and the finest economic conditions since I have been in Congress, 20 years, and two generations, I think this is a time when we ought to be increasing our investment and not decreasing it. If not now, when are we going to do it? We have not been able to with the deficits back for the last 15 to 18 years. NSF is shorted by $500 million from the President's request, and this amendment would fix this problem. If we adopt it, we would fully fund advanced information technology research that is endorsed today by leading American computer firms who tell us that we need it and we ought to do it. And these are important programs that will keep the U.S. at the forefront of new computer communications technologies. This is the same research this body unanimously supported in the February authorization. We supported it then, we ought to support it now.

Mr. HALL of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of the amendment. The EPA has already acted. The energy and commerce committee acted in 1990, laid it out fairly specifically. I certainly respect the gentleman from New York (Mr. Boehlert) but I differ with him on his interpretation of what the Court of Appeals said. He relayed some information that they had deemed something reasonable, but they also deemed it unconstitutional and they wrote I think very clearly. I think where the mistake is here, the gentleman from New York (Mr. Boehlert) says that to pass this amendment would unduly delay implementation. Of course it would. That is the whole idea of the amendment, asking them not to be unconstitutional, not to usurp the congressional authority here. They are presuming that the Supreme Court is going to bail them out. I presume the Supreme Court is going to follow the law and tell the EPA that they acted unconstitutionally, not to act. I think it is just that clear.

Mr. HALL of Texas

Mr. HALL of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of the Noncommercial Broadcasting Freedom of Expression Act. It is a bill, as has been said here many times, that will ensure that Americans are going to continue to enjoy the broadcasting of church services and other religious programming that is on our Nation's broadcast channels. I have high regard for the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Dingell) who just spoke. He named off a group of people that really should not have had access to the channels. They did have. But of the 12 the Master picked, one of them was bad, that was Judas, and that is about the only one most people can name. This is a bill that would preserve the freedom of religion and religious expression, and I think prevents the FCC from regulating the content like they did some time back. H.R. 4201 is an outgrowth of a decision by the FCC that would have restricted religious broadcasting on television. This action, and I think it was done without the benefit of any public comment or any congressional input, I believe it was done December 28 or 29 when Congress was not even in session and Congress was not even in town, would have forced some religious television broadcasters to either alter their programming or risk losing their licenses. The FCC ruling was wrong from both a procedural and a constitutional standpoint. It would have set a dangerous precedent that would have suppressed religious broadcasting and narrowed the definition of what is considered educational. In response to this ruling, several of us got together and thousands of Americans in protesting the action of the FCC and called for an immediate reversal of this ruling. Now, something happened after we made that calling and that insistence. The gentleman from Mississippi (Mr. Pickering) was among those, the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Oxley), and others of us. The FCC backed down on it. And unless they were definitely and totally wrong not only in their action but in how they took that action, they would not have taken that backward step. I also joined several of my colleagues in cosponsoring the Oxley bill, the Religious Broadcasting Freedom Act, which could have required the FCC to follow established agency rule-making procedures. H.R. 4201 is an outgrowth of these efforts and goes a step further by making it a little bit easier for religious broadcasters to obtain noncommercial educational broadcast licenses. I am pleased to join the gentleman from Mississippi (Mr. Pickering) and others on both sides of the aisle as a cosponsor of this important legislation. In closing, we need this bill to ensure that there will be no erosion of freedom of religious programming in America. Mr. Speaker, we need this bill to ensure that Americans will continue to enjoy the religious broadcasting that they have come to depend upon. And we need this bill to ensure that the Federal Government does not become involved in regulating content of our broadcast programming. I urge my colleagues to vote to uphold freedom of expression by voting in support of H.R. 4201 as it is now written.

Mr. HALL of Texas

Mr. HALL of Texas. Mr. Speaker, today I recognize an outstanding citizen of the Fourth District of Texas, Dorothy Harber, Dorothy and her husband, Lacy, are among the most admired and appreciated--and, yes, loved--couple in Texas. Dorothy was recently awarded the Outstanding Hunting Achievement Award from the Dallas Safari Club--the club's most prestigious honor--for her outstanding success as a big game hunter. Begun in 1980, the Safari Club's award is not necessarily given every year, and it is given only for outstanding feats in the hunting world. Dorothy and Lacy have been avid hunters for many years and also are strong advocates of hunter education, conservation, and humanitarian assistance. Dorothy has established exhibits at several local banks to educate children and adults about various wildlife throughout the world. During their many travels on safaris, they also have brought clothes and books to those in need in those countries. They have enriched all of the areas of the world they traveled and hunted in. No one can imagine the value of a gift of a jeep, equipment, tents, or one of the other numerous articles (coats, gloves, boots, hats, etc.) they take into the most remote--and the most poverty-stricken parts of the world. They leave them where they have hunted. Imagine leaving a jeep for a family in the poverty-stricken part of Russia--a family whose greatest income had been pennies per day--and the jeep worth thirty or forty thousand dollars. Dorothy and Lacy do not flaunt their generosity--but they certainly practice it wherever they are. The Dallas Safari Club endorses ethical hunting practices. A fair chase and hunting ethics affidavit must be submitted to the club along with an official score sheet compiled by an official measurer. Dorothy qualified for the award for having collected all of the nine spiral horned antelope of Africa, all record book animals, all the African major species and many subspecies, the African big five, and for taking a ladies' world record for Marco Polo sheep in Kirghizia. She has not been squeamish about her accommodations--nor has she shied away from bad weather, tough terrain, and/or dangerous spots in danger areas. Mr. Speaker, as we adjourn today, let us recognize the achievements of Dorothy Harber--and her husband, Lacy--for their contributions to the world of big game hunting and for their commitment to fairness and hunting ethics. They bring meaning to the word ``international neighbor''--and bring lasting admiration and respect wherever they go.

Mr. HALL of Texas

Mr. HALL of Texas. Mr. Speaker, today I celebrate the life of Jeanie Gale-Anderson, who passed away on February 6, 2000, after her fight with lung cancer. She leaves behind a powerful legacy of devotion to her family and a passion for life that lives on in the hearts of those who knew her and loved her. I learned of her great love and the effect she had on the lives of her family--her tenderness and warmth--through one of her 10 grandchildren, Adam, who was a valuable and key legislative advisor in my Washington congressional office for a long period of time. She was Georgeana Louise Gallucci for 22 years, proud daughter of George and Dorothy Gallucci of Jefferson, OH. One of six children, she is remembered and loved by her sisters, Garman, Natalie, Connie and brother, Freddy. For 53 years she was Jeanie Gale-Anderson, lifetime partner and devoted wife of James Sidney Anderson. For 52 years she was Mom to Jim, Tina, Jann Sydney, Pat and Tim. For 31 years, she was Nanny to 10 adoring grandchildren: Michael, Matthew, Bobby, Lisa, Adam, Aaron, Kacie, Duke, Ryan and Reid. Finally, for 4 years she was a great-grandmother to Ahna, Sara and Owen. The rich fabric of her life was woven by her commitment to husband and family, the loving care and nurturing of her five children, and the delight and pleasure in her ten grandchildren and three great- grandchildren. She shared her love, boundless energy, tireless humor and wit with so many. Her life shown brightly for 75 years, with a full spectrum of qualities that her family will hold tightly in their hearts--her commitment, her courage and her faith in all things possible. Her passion for life and for those she loved lives on in the memories of her family. Hers is a life to be celebrated, emulated and kept vibrantly alive by the deep-abiding relationships that do not end in death but rather deepen and grow richer with time until her family can be united again in eternity with Christ. Her family loved her so much, as she loved them. She had loving hands a loving heart that touched, healed and nurtured her family. The values and guidance she taught have influenced all that they do. Laughter accompanied their triumphs and their failures. She was tireless in her efforts to provide physical, emotional and spiritual needs to her children. She treated them equally, but respected their differences, taught them to be determined, honest and responsible, and taught them to be patriotic--loving their heritage and our country. Most of all, through her, her family learned what love truly is. ``We have been blessed to pass this down to each of our children,'' her family writes. ``What a legacy mom has left us all. Only the heart knows how to find what is precious and we have found it, all of us, through her. Our mother added a dimension to life impossible to measure or explain. Always our mother and teacher, she asked to be remembered by these special words she chose for us: Light after Darkness, Gain after Loss/Strength after Mystery, Peace after Cross/Sweet after Bitter, Hope after Fears/Home after Wandering, Praise after Tears/ Sheaves after Sowing, Sun after Rain/Sight after Mystery, Peace after Pain/Joy after Sorrow, Calm after Blast/Rest after Weariness, Sweet rest at Last/Near after Distant, Gleam after Gloom/Love after Loneliness, Life after Tomb/After Long Agony, Rapture of Bliss . . . RIGHT was the PATHWAY Leading to THIS.'' As we adjourn today, Mr. Speaker, let us do so in memory of this extraordinary woman, Jeanie Gale-Anderson.

Mr. HALL of Texas

Mr. HALL of Texas. Mr. Speaker, today I pay tribute to an outstanding American who served his country with distinction both as a military officer and as an engineer who was dedicated to protecting and improving the quality of life of all our citizens. Leonard James Keller, a citizen of Bonham, TX, in the Fourth District, died on November 27, 1999, leaving behind a legacy of service to his country. Born on February 25, 1925 in Duenweg, MO, Leonard Keller fought in both World War II and the Korean war. He was commissioned an officer and cited for heroism while serving with the 43d Infantry Division in Luzon, Philippine Islands. After the wars, Mr. Keller graduated with honors in mining engineering and geology at Missouri School of Mines and Metallurgy in 1955 and received the W.A. Tarr Award as the outstanding graduate in the earth sciences field. He also was honored in Who's Who of North America. As a registered professional engineer, Mr. Keller was an inventor of record, with a remarkable 17 U.S. patents in his name. An expert in his field, he authored numerous technical papers, some of which have previously been entered into the Congressional Record. Mr. Keller spent 15 years working for five major U.S. corporations in engineering, research, and technical services and management before cofounding the Keller Corp. in 1969. In 1975, he also cofounded the Methacoal Corp. of which he served as president. His coinventor partner, the late Austin N. Stanton, also of Bonham, TX, who died 5 years earlier to the day, was a renowned inventor who received numerous awards and is known as the inventor of microcircuitry--the precursor to the computer age--and the founder of Varo Corp. Mr. Keller was a visionary in his field. His inventions likely will come to fruition in the coming years. These include a BiRotor device that will enable the direct methanol fuel cell to power automobiles, a water purification system that turns sea water into distilled water, an environmental oxygen system, the use of methacoal instead of coal to reduce smog and hurricane-proof, tornado-resistant homes. These are just a few of the technologies that Mr. Keller developed with his partner, Mr. Stanton--technologies designed to improve the quality of life for everyone. Mr. Keller was a dedicated member of the First Christian Church, Disciples of Christ, in Bonham, where he served as an elder, and he was active in the Veterans of Foreign Wars Post 4852 in Bonham. He also was dedicated to his family and is survived by his wife of 57 years, Marjorie Maxine Keller; sons Jerry, Steve, and David; one grandson; two granddaughters; five great-grandsons; one nephew; and two nieces. Mr. Keller will long be remembered for his many contributions to his country and community, and he will be sorely missed by his loving family and his many friends in Bonham. As we adjourn today, Mr. Speaker, let us pay our last respects to this outstanding American, Leonard James Keller, who envisioned a better future for all of us.

Mr. HALL of Texas

Mr. HALL of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding time to me. I am honored to be here. I had with me just a few moments ago a couple of little exhibits I was going to take with me to the podium, but they had to go back to the gallery to their mother. They are from my home county, 4 years old and 6 years old. It is really for youngsters like them that we need to really look at this Code. I think they would tell me, if they could understand, that they need a date certain Tax Code for this House to do something. That is not putting them under the gun too much. I will tell Members what it does, it tells us that we need to go out and come in again with a Code. The sensible part of it is that we are not going out before we come in. The provisions are that we have to come in with a bill, a sensible bill to take the place of the Code before the Code goes out. I really do not see anything pressing about that. It simply says to us, get about your work now, and do not wait until the last day and rush in there and try to get it done. I think it also knocks out estate tax, capital gains taxes, a lot of things that a lot of people want to knock out, but they are waiting to put it with something that is more desperate or tougher to pass. We will get a chance to get rid of those two things now, too. A lot of us have signed onto one or both of the bills. I do not care what bill comes down the line, I think I am a coauthor on it. We need a change. That is not to say that everything about the present Code is bad or everybody that works for the IRS is bad. There are a lot of good people with the Treasury Department, and a lot of them are embarrassed about the actions of some in the Treasury Department. I would just say, we need to go out and come back in again. When I say go out, I am talking about go out into the countryside, go out into the district, talk to Republicans, Democrats, talk to anyone in any occupation and ask them, would you like to have a new Tax Code? Do you like the Tax Code you are operating under? I think that little 2-year-old and little 4-year-old and 6-year-old that were here that I was going to use as exhibits, I think they would tell us 10 out of 10, yes, we need a new Code. That Code was brought in when our grandfather was not even born. We need a new Code.

Mr. HALL of Texas

Mr. HALL of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I do think it has been a spirited debate. I have not heard all of it. If I repeat some of the things of those who propose this, forgive me for it. But I would like to answer some of the questions that have been asked. The gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Kleczka) made a very good speech and asked why are we having it at this particular time. Well, that answer is pretty simple. We asked for it at this time because this is the time when most of the people of the United States are thinking about how high their taxes are. I think it is good to try to get their attention. I believe, though, that we may be starting at the wrong level, we may be starting up here, when we really ought to be starting in our precincts and in our counties in our States at home. If we only close the gap today, or if we come close to closing the gap, or whatever votes we get today, we are going to count them for next year; and we are going to be in there trying to get it to emanate from the grassroots. Because I think if we get the grass-roots people and ask them the question, do they think it ought to be a little bit tougher to vote taxes on hardworking Americans, I think about all of them would say, absolutely yes. It has also been suggested that this was politics. Everything we do up here has some politics to it. I would always say to my colleagues that it is not bad politics to be telling hardworking Americans that we are going to make it a little tougher to tax them. I think that is good politics. If it is politics, it is doggone good politics where I come from. I cannot go anywhere in my district and talk to anybody there that does not complain about the taxes. Now, ask them, go home, conservative, Democrat, liberal, whatever, ask them, would they like for it to be a little more difficult for the United States Congress to tax them and take money out of their left hip pocket? I guarantee my colleagues that nine out of nine and probably a hundred out of a hundred are going to tell us, absolutely yes. So I am here to express my support for the tax limitation agreement. We would not have had the sad 1986 Tax Reform Act if it had taken two- thirds, a reform act that set this country back to where we are just now getting over it. A lot of things would not have happened if it would have taken two-thirds. There is a lot of difference in asking two-thirds vote to tax people and asking two-thirds vote to support various programs. I agree with the gentleman on the fact that it should only take a majority on supporting some of these programs. But when we go to taxing the American people, a direct tax from us to them, from our mouth to their left hip pocket, I think it ought to take two-thirds of us. I believe most of the people in this country, all of the good-thinking people in this country, would say, yes, make it a little tougher up there in Washington, D.C., for them to take our money away from us.

Mr. HALL of Texas

Mr. HALL of Texas. I think as the gentleman well knows, we represent a conservative area. We both represent a part of the old Rayburn congressional district. We talk about balanced budgets and all that. Mr. Rayburn had a balanced budget the last 8 years of his service here; and as he went back home to Bonham, Texas, to die, he looked back over his shoulder at a balanced budget. I think we could use some of that good common horse sense now. I think the people of this country want to be able to keep more of the money they are making. I just do not believe the argument that we have a lot more money now, so this amendment is not as important. I think this amendment is more important now than it was during the deficit times, because they have more to lose, and it is going to look like it is easy to put taxes on people. I just think it is a golden opportunity to raise the bar and protect hard-working Americans from tax increases in the future that are not supported by a majority of two-thirds of the people. I think it is critical that we make a statement that we are committed to controlling government spending, rather than raising taxes, in order to maintain a balanced Federal budget. I just think that the 10 people that I would talk to on Front Street in Tyler, Texas, or any part of Kaufman County, or any part of the district we share in Dallas County, we would talk to these people and ask this simple question; and I think we ought to invite the rest of the Congress to go home and do the same thing, ask them what do you think about the fact we are trying to make it a little bit more difficult to put taxes on you. What do you think their answer would be?

Mr. HALL of Texas. I thank the gentleman from Texas for yielding. Mr. Speaker, I am here today, of course, to express my support for the tax limitation amendment. I have been for this amendment from the word go. I really do not understand that it ought to be a Republican or a Democratic thrust or a liberal or conservative thrust because I think it is an American thrust. Requiring a two-thirds vote to raise taxes would force very serious consideration on this legislation at any time that they would attempt to raise taxes; and it would require, as the gentleman from Texas has said, a supermajority vote on any proposal that would impact the pocketbooks of every hard-working American. The major test of this legislation would be not what class supports it. We are in for at least 5 wonderful years in this country. We now have, rather than the deficits of the 1980s and the 1990s, a surplus; and we are going to have good times for the next 5, maybe for the next 10, years to have money to be that that we ought to be for people who have no lobby, pay a lot of it on our debt. That is tantamount to a tax break for everyone. I think that if we would go into our district, and I say ``our district'' because the gentleman and I share districts in Texas. I have part of Dallas County in my district. He has a much larger part of it. I have most of Kaufman. He has a part of Kaufman in his district. He has a part of Smith County which is Tyler; Tyler, Texas. We represent the same type of people, people who want less government, people who want to keep the money that they work for, people who want to plan ahead, people who want to have money in September to buy school clothes without having the taxes that are put on them, that have been historically put on them by a 50 percent vote. A lot of those votes like the Tax Reform Act of 1986 would never have happened if it had taken a two-thirds vote. So I think if they would go out into their district, into any part of our district, and talk to the first 10 people they see and ask them would you like to see it a little bit more difficult for the Congress of the United States to take money out of your left hip pocket, what do you think their answer would be?

Mr. HALL of Texas. I thank the gentleman for the time, and I certainly am pleased that he has accepted the leadership of this amendment. I pledge that I will work side by side with the gentleman and we will work this floor. I do not know how we are going to come out, but I do know that we are going to still be swinging at it. I suggest that, no matter how the vote turns out, that we start anew the day we have either won or lost it, to working the other end of the situation and asking those 10 people what they think about it, and asking each Member of Congress here to go home and ask their first 10 people what they think about it. Maybe we are working at the wrong end of the deal here in Washington, D.C. Maybe we ought to be working at home.

Mr. HALL of Texas

Mr. HALL of Texas. Mr. Speaker, it is my privilege to rise today to recognize an outstanding citizen of the Fourth District of Texas, Clara McKinney Reddell. Mrs. Reddell was selected by the Heritage Guild of Collin County last year to be the Guest of Honor at ``Celebrate the Century'', and she previously was nominated for the Sesquicentennial Award at the McKinney Chamber of Commerce Awards Banquet. Mrs. Reddell is the great-great-granddaughter of Collin McKinney and the great-granddaughter of J.B. Wilmeth. Both of these men were integral in the development of their community, and Mrs. Reddell has dedicated her life to preserving the memories of the pioneers of McKinney and Collin County. Not only has she preserved the history of her community, she also has strived to keep them at the forefront of the community's consciousness. This is evidenced by her authorship of a widely circulated pamphlet entitled ``McKinney and Collin County'' which chronicles the history of the city, the county, and her namesake. Her latest endeavor to keep the history of this area alive is to spearhead a campaign to name the new public high school after J.B. Wilmeth. Mr. Wilmeth opened the first free school in the county in his own home in 1848. Mrs. Reddell's contributions to her community have been enormous. In 1941, Mrs. Reddell became the McKinney Chamber's secretary. She worked on numerous projects, including the Veterans Administration Hospital, Lavon Dam, and Ashburn General Hospital. In addition to these duties, she served as the secretary-treasurer of the Chamber of Commerce Managers and Secretary Association of East Texas which spanned 72 counties. She was also certified for 21 years of study in Chamber of Commerce management at East Texas Short Courses for Chamber Managers and Secretaries. She also contributed her time and seemingly boundless energy to the Heritage Guild. She would perform the laborious tasks of sanding, removing tacks, stripping, and staining in order to restore furniture and in keeping with her character Mrs. Reddell absorbed the material costs of these endeavors. In addition to her community service, Mrs. Reddell raised a wonderful daughter, now Shirley Ann Reddell Cooper. Mrs. Reddell was married to her late husband, Eugene R. Reddell, for eight years before his tragic death. Mr. Speaker, Mrs. Reddell has devoted a lifetime to her family, to her community, and to the preservation of history in Collin County. As we adjourn today, let us do so in honor of this great lady, Clara McKinney Reddell.

Mr. HALL of Texas

Mr. HALL of Texas. Mr. Speaker, it is a privilege to share with my colleagues a speech written by an outstanding citizen of the Fourth District of Texas, Mr. Aaron Kinsey, who thoughtfully describes the elements of the free enterprise system upon which our country was built. Mr. Kinsey notes that there are four basic freedoms: ``The first of these freedoms is simply the freedom of economic choice. We, as Americans, inherently have the freedom to choose where we will work and for whom we will work. As business owners we have the freedom to make and sell whatever products we choose within the limits of public safety and welfare, and to charge whatever prices we feel will be the most profitable. And finally . . . we are free to take risks. Ultimately, the choices we make will determine our success and failure, and if we do fail, we know it was by a choice that we ourselves made. ``Our second basic freedom . . . is voluntary exchange . . . The priorities that determine what we do with our money are different for everyone, but the bottom line is that the decision is ours. In a free enterprise system, voluntary exchange works to the perceived advantage of both persons making the exchange. ``Our next basic freedom is our right to private property. This freedom gives us the right to do as we wish with our possessions. Our Founding Fathers showed us that they guarded this freedom by passing the 5th Amendment, which aside from addressing other issues, guarantees us our right to private property. These great men knew that private property gives an incentive for people to work, save, and invest. Naturally, people know that the harder they work, the more rewards they will receive. These rewards can be passed on to their children so that they can have a better life. ``Another freedom we as Americans have is a motivation to earn and increase our wealth. Under the free enterprise system, we are free to take risks in order to enhance our wealth and well-being. Any entrepreneur takes the risk; some succeed and some fail. For example, Ninfa Laurenzo of Dallas, Texas, was widowed with five children in 1969. In 1973, she faced bankruptcy, but by 1993, she was the head of a multi-million dollar corporation. Ninfa's Inc. now operates 34 restaurants and employs 1,300 people . . . ``Finally, no discussion about free enterprise can be complete without addressing the importance of competition. Competition is the force that prohibits market anarchy. Competition does this by allowing businesses to enter and leave the market as they wish. When businesses are in a market together, they keep that market moving and improving. This improvement allows the customer to have the best product at the best price. Without competition, the monopolistic business can decide what the customer should have in addition to being able to set the price.'' Mr. Kinsey concludes that, ``American society would be very different if our Founding Fathers had not established a government in which free enterprise could thrive. Fortunately, we live in a system that allows us the freedoms of economic choice, voluntary exchange, private property, and profit motive. It is these freedoms that have helped make the American economy the greatest and most coveted in the world.''

Mr. HALL of Texas

Mr. HALL of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H.R. 3660, the Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act. This important legislation reaffirms this Chamber's commitment to the preservation of life--and the rights of unborn babies to be protected from a procedure that is morally unconscionable. Mr. Speaker, it is time to put an end to this inhumane and cruel procedure that ends the life of a fetus while it is partially outside the body of the mother. Our colleagues who are medical doctors have stated their belief--and others in the medical community have testified--that this procedure is never needed to protect a woman's health and some say it is needed in only rare cases to protect a woman's life. The Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act makes it a federal crime to perform this particular form of abortion, but it does not prevent other procedures that are considered necessary to protect the life and health of the mother. The President has vetoed this legislation twice. Twice the House has voted to override the veto, but unfortunately the Senate has been unable to achieve the two-thirds vote necessary to override the veto. Since 1995 we have had fifteen votes in the House on this issue--votes on the rule, votes on amendments, votes on final passage--and fifteen times I have voted in support of banning this procedure. Those of us who support this ban will not give up until this fight has been won. Mr. Speaker, my record has always been pro-life. I have listened to considerable debate and discussion from the experts on this issue over the years. I have personally talked to many constituents about abortion and pro-life issues, and I have consistently come down on the side of life. Today I will once again come down on the side of life and vote for the Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act, and I urge my colleagues' support.

Mr. HALL of Texas

Mr. HALL of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in recognition of the East Texas Literacy Council, which recently was selected to be the first literacy agency in the nation to receive accreditation from Literacy Volunteers of America. The Literacy Council is well known in my district for its outstanding work in promoting adult literacy, and it is with a great sense of pride that I join citizens and officials of Longview, TX, and Gregg County in paying tribute to those community leaders and volunteers who have contributed so much to the success of this organization. Literacy Volunteers of America is a national, nonprofit organization consisting of more than 375 community programs in 42 states. The organization delivers local literacy services through a network of more than 50,000 volunteers nationwide who have helped more than half a million adults and their families gain literacy skills. It is quite an accomplishment for the East Texas Literacy Council to be chosen as the first local affiliate in the nation to receive accreditation from the Literacy Volunteers--and it is a testament to the dedication, hard work and quality of service of the Literacy Council's staff and volunteers. The East Texas Literacy Council was founded as a community-based, nonprofit organization in 1987. Through collaboration with other community agencies, the Literacy Council provides opportunities for adults in Gregg County to develop the basic literacy skills necessary to attain self-sufficiency and to function successfully in their community. Last year more than 500 adults benefitted from this program--almost 200 learning basic literacy skills and more than 300 learning English as a Second Language. These adults were instructed by more than 100 volunteer tutors who received ten hours of basic literacy training. Executive Director of the East Texas Literacy Council is Freda Peppard, who has provided effective leadership for the organization over the past nine years. Current officers of the Board of Directors are Mary Price, president; Clement Dunn, vice president; Jerre Jouett, secretary; and Jennifer Slade, treasurer. Others who have been instrumental in the Council's success include Cissy Ward, longtime community leader who helped organize the East Texas Literacy Council and became its first Executive Director, and Retta Kelly, formerly publisher of the Longview News-Journal, who served as the Council's first Board president. Another influential community leader, Nancy Jackson, served as Executive Director following Mrs. Ward's tenure. Mrs. Ward and Mrs. Jackson continue to advise and work with the Council. The East Texas Literacy Council is a community success story--and an example of what can be accomplished through public/private funding and through community-based partnerships. Funding sources for the Literacy Council include the United Way, Community Development Block Grant funding and various fund-raising initiatives. Affiliations include Longview Partnership, Laubach Literacy Action, The Nonprofit Coalition and Literacy Volunteers of America. Mr. Speaker, the cost of illiteracy to individuals, to their families and to society is enormous. Literacy programs, such as those sponsored by the East Texas Literacy Council, are vital in our efforts to help individuals acquire the skills they need to be productive citizens and to be able to support themselves and their families. It is a privilege to pay tribute today to this exemplary literacy organization in the Fourth District of Texas--the East Texas Literacy Council--and to those dedicated staff members and volunteers whose hard work has helped make this organization such a success.

Mr. HALL of Texas

Mr. HALL of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I rise today on this legislation by my good friend from New York (Mr. Gilman)--not to point fingers at anyone for finding ourselves in the circumstances we find ourselves in today, but simply to make a plea--that we develop and implement a workable national energy policy. Today's legislation does not do that. In fact it deals mostly with symptoms of the problem--not the underlying problem itself. OPEC is only a transitory problem. Oil prices rise and oil prices fall--and it has been that way since oil took its place as the fuel of choice for such basic uses as transportation, hearing and industrial processes. The measures contained in this bill to bring the OPEC cartel to its knees are nothing more than a reiteration of authorities that already exist in law today. One of the real problems is availability of competing fuels in the areas of the country reliant on heating oil. And there are others. Let's look at the northeast. Natural gas provides a clean alternative to heating oil, but they can't burn it in those areas if they can't get it. The federal government can do more to ensure that natural gas is more readily available to industrial New England as well as its residential consumers. I believe fuel competition would do wonders for fuel prices in the Northeast and help clear the air in the process. Let's work on things like getting natural gas into the northeast-- things that we can accomplish--not tilt at windmills like OPEC--which we are unlikely to influence in the short term. The OPEC members will have a falling-out--just like they always do--and prices will fall. Let's pay more attention to what we can do domestically to avoid the problems of this winter. I'm going to vote for this bill but without any enthusiasm. I believe it will accomplish little or nothing and it detracts from dealing with the hard issues that really will help bring about stable oil prices. The northeast and the oil patch have a common objective--stable prices, and we ought to have the opportunity to bring legislation to this floor which will do that. Let's don't kid ourselves. It's easy to beat up on OPEC. The hard part is finding agreement on things that really work--like increasing domestic production, expediting pipeline projects, opening up some of our public lands to exploration and development. When we take on those issues, I will know that we are really serious about finding solutions that will help us out the next time prices run-up. Let's finish our fun today, then turn our attention to the really hard issues.

Mr. HALL of Texas

Mr. HALL of Texas. I thank the gentleman from Minnesota for yielding, and I am honored to be a part. Mr. Speaker, I like others here rise to support the use of a portion of our surplus to pay down on our national debt. We have got a golden opportunity in front of us. For the first time in 30 years we have a budget surplus. During most of my tenure here, the great budget challenge has been to get control of the deficit. In the last 2 years, the landscape has completely changed. We are now focused on what to do with the surplus. That is a very good feeling. I am thrilled that the term surplus has entered our vocabulary up here. Now comes the hard part. Everyone has an idea as to the best way to use this surplus, tax cuts, new government programs, protecting the solvency of Social Security and Medicare and paying down the national debt. As a Member of the Blue Dog coalition, I think the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Stenholm) and the gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Minge) are members of that coalition, we have advocated using half of the on- budget surplus for debt reduction, a fourth for shoring up Social Security, Medicare, education and our national infrastructure and the last fourth or parts of it for tax cuts. That can be eased around and changed some, if it takes more for Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, infrastructure, national defense, whatever we see that is a necessity, that we can move that fourth from one to the other. But I think what I am hammering hard on is paying at least half of it on the debt. By applying the framework, this framework to the budget, we are told that we can pay off the national debt by the year 2012. It would retire over 30 percent of the debt in 5 years. I think that is just amazing. Many of us can see 5 years down the road. I think this is the most sound way to both plan for the future and reap both short and long-term rewards from the growing surplus. As anyone outside the Beltway knows, when you have some extra money, it is important to pay off your debts. This is a simple idea that many Americans practice whenever they can. We should learn from them and do the same thing here in Washington. The benefits of paying down the debt are enormous and long lasting. One of the most important is the more we lower the national debt, the less we will have to pay in interest on that debt. As of 5 p.m. this afternoon, this very day, our national debt was approximately $5.75 trillion. During FY 1999 we paid $229 billion, Mr. Speaker, in interest on this debt. To put that number in perspective, during the same year we spent $275.5 billion on national defense. That is only $46 billion more than our interest payment. Our interest payment is estimated to go down to $220 billion in our current budget year because we are paying off a small portion of the debt. It certainly affects it. This is a portion of our Federal budget that we cannot reduce by any other means other than paying down on the national debt. Imagine how we can reduce that number if we really dedicate ourselves to it. This is money that would be available for tax cuts, many of which I support, assistance of senior citizens and other efforts to maintain our economic growth and improve the future for our children and for our grandchildren. Tomorrow, Mr. Speaker, we will vote on a framework for the coming year's budget. As we look at the surpluses from anywhere from $200 billion to $637 billion over the next 5 years, the most responsible thing we can do is dedicate half of it to paying down on the debt.

Mr. HALL of Texas

Mr. HALL of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in tribute to Donald C. Donaldson, a man who dedicated more than thirty-five years of his life to federal service, who died on December, 12, 1999. Mr. Donaldson was born on May 27, 1922, in Akron, Ohio. He lived through the Great Depression and went on to attend Akron University, where he enrolled in the ROTC program. The following year, in August of 1941, he enlisted as an Aviation Cadet in the Navy Reserve V-5 program. He was enlisted in the Naval Cadet Program at NACSB in Detroit. He went through flight preparation schools and graduated from Naval Air Training Command in Pensacola, FL, in 1944. This period in Mr. Donaldson's life was signified by his realization of his life's passion, which was to fly airplanes. Mr. Donaldson subsequently accepted a commission in the United States Marine Corps as 2nd Lt. and took his oath of office on May 13, 1944. At this time he also received his Civil Aeronautics Administration Certificate for single engine aircraft. He served in the Pacific Theater of World War II, and at the end of the war, he was stationed in Okinawa. Afterwards, he returned to a reserve squadron in Akron. 2nd Lt. Donaldson worked tirelessly to become qualified on an astounding number of airplanes. He was certified to fly more than forty different aircraft at the end of his life, with the F4U Corsair being his favorite. 2nd Lt. Donaldson continued to improve his aviation skills and knowledge by attending numerous flight schools. He attended the Naval Justice Program at the U.S. Naval Academy. In January of 1951, he was promoted to the rank of Captain, and he was subsequently transferred to Carrier Air Group, Fleet Marines Fleet Pacific, Marine Corps Air Station El Toro. Attached to VMF(N)-513, Captain Donaldson flew over thirty-three missions against the supply routes of North Korea and was awarded the Air Medal at the forward airbase of 1st Marine Air Wing. In May of 1955, Cap. Donaldson was presented with permanent citations and Gold Stars for his service. On June 30, 1956, Cap. Donaldson resigned his commission and was given his Honorable Discharge. Upon his departure from the USMC, Cap. Donaldson was a highly decorated officer. He had been presented with the Distinguished Flying Cross, Air Medal, PUCW 1*, American Defense, WWII Victory Medal, Asiatic Pacific 1*, Korean Service Ribbon 1*, UN Ribbon, National Defense Service Medal, Presidential Unit Citation with 1*, American Campaign Medal, Asiatic Pacific Campaign, Korean Service Medal w2*, UN Service Medal, Korean PUC, and the Organized Res. Medal. After the military, Cap. Donaldson continued to pursue his passion for aviation by accepting a job with the Goodyear Aircraft Corporation, where he continued to gain certifications on numerous aircraft. He then left Goodyear to accept a position with the National Aviation Facilities Experimental Center in Atlantic City, NJ, as an experimental systems pilot. He participated in the ``Runaway Jetliner'' experiment as well as being involved in the development and modernization of the national system of navigation and traffic control facilities. He tested the Doppler radar which is now widely used in airports. In 1967, he was transferred to Dallas, where he became an Air Carrier Inspector with the Air Carrier District Office. He would later become a supervisor. Upon his retirement in 1986, he was recognized as the pilot qualified to fly the most airplanes as First seat. He is survived by his wife of forty-nine years, Darlene Donaldson; his four sons James, Richard, Robert, and David; four granddaughters; and one grandson. Captain Donaldson dedicated his entire life to his family and country, all the while pursuing his life's calling aviation. So, Mr. Speaker, as we adjourn today, let us do so in the memory of Donald C. Donaldson and his many contributions to his family, aviation, air safety, and the people of America.

Mr. HALL of Texas

Mr. HALL of Texas. Mr. Speaker, it is good when one can make something happen that ought to happen, and that is exactly what the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Oxley) and others that he has given credit to, have done here. I rise as a cosponsor of the Religious Broadcasting Freedom Act. It is a bill that, of course, will help ensure that freedom of religious broadcasting is not threatened by the whims of the government policy decisions. I want to thank the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Oxley) for his outstanding leadership on this, for his immediate leadership on it, and for his immediate action on it. I want to thank him for inviting me to be the lead Democrat on this, because I am honored to get to be. Mr. Speaker, I would be remiss if I did not thank the gentleman from Oklahoma (Mr. Largent), who wrote and signed a letter with me to the commission and, of course, the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Stearns), who is always on the right side of most issues that I come in contact with him on as I serve on the Committee on Commerce. Mr. Speaker, in a recent ruling which was subsequently reversed in the wake of congressional and citizen opposition, the Federal Communications Commission stated that programming ``primarily devoted to religious exhortation, proselytizing or statements of personally- held religious views and beliefs, generally would not qualify as `general education' programming.'' Now, the FCC also noted that church services normally would not qualify as general educational programs, so we can see where they are coming from. This ruling was issued, as the gentleman from Ohio has said, without the benefit of public hearing. It was issued without any benefit of public comment, and it was issued while Congress was in recess. Actually, I think it was sometime between Christmas and New Year's Day. It constituted what I consider is an outrageous infringement on constitutional guarantees of freedom of religious expression; and it threatened to set a very dangerous precedent that could lead to the narrowing of a definition of what is considered educational. Now, if that is going to be the subject of hearings, we want Congress to be in session. We want to have the right to introduce testimony. We want people to come from the far corners of this country that want to testify and have some input on what we consider is educational. We do not leave it up to a handful of people that are appointed and answerable to one person. Well, the FCC was dead wrong from both a procedural and a constitutional standpoint. They acknowledged that they had created a ``widespread public confusion'' as a result of its ruling. At least they turned the table back, and at least they killed their ruling. Yet, we have not gone far enough. We have to pretty well put something in stone to give them some direction for the future. Now, that is what the gentleman's bill does. Religious groups and thousands of concerned citizens have joined all of these Members of Congress that the Chairman has talked about in expressing their strong opposition to this initial ruling. I am pleased that the FCC listened to the American people and listened to the gentleman, and I am pleased that they listened to Congress and quickly reversed their onerous decision. However, our efforts do not end here. We have to ensure that the FCC will follow its normal rulemaking procedures, which include taking public comment and listening to people; people having a chance to express themselves in the future. Mr. Speaker, H.R. 3525 will help ensure that such confusing policy decisions do not reoccur, and it will signal our support for continued freedom of religious broadcasting on our Nation's networks and support for the First Amendment. Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to join in support of the Religious Broadcasting Freedom Act.

Mr. HALL of Texas

Mr. HALL of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I yield 6 minutes to the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Eddie Bernice Johnson).

Mr. HALL of Texas. Mr. Chairman, this is another of the gentleman's many efforts to urge buy American and to support and push this country. I urge the adoption of the amendment. I totally support it.

Mr. HALL of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the amendment. Mr. Chairman, I certainly join the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Sensenbrenner), the chairman of the Committee on Science, in recommending this amendment. It simply directs the GAO to conduct a study after 1 year of the effects of this bill on lower income families, minorities, and women. This is one of many thoughtful and well-constructed amendments from the gentlewoman from Houston, Texas (Ms. Jackson-Lee). I certainly support it and recommend that it be passed.

Mr. HALL of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of the amendment. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman from Connecticut (Mr. Larson) who is a very thoughtful and hard-working Member of the Committee on Science. As a matter of fact, since entering Congress, he has been in the forefront of publicized problems of the ``digital divide.'' He has proposed a series of legislative measures to focus on this situation, including this amendment. I strongly concur in the policy behind these legislative efforts, which is to ensure that all communities, including rural and inner city areas, have adequate access to advanced information technology. One of the keys to maintaining a surging economy that offers opportunities for all of our citizens is to provide the very best educational tools to all of our Nation's students. Mr. Chairman, if, for no other reason, there are many other reasons to support it, but if for no other reason, this amendment is worthy of support, because the study at a minimum will identify the true present status of high-speed large band width capacity access to all public, elementary, and secondary schools and libraries throughout the country and, as the gentleman from Wisconsin (Chairman Sensenbrenner) said, at a fair figure. In conclusion, I strongly support and urge the adoption of this amendment.

Mr. HALL of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I of course am privileged to congratulate the gentlewoman from Maryland and to recommend her amendment. It simply authorizes as the gentleman from Wisconsin has said the funding for National Institutes of Health. It formally funds the NIH contribution to the interagency research program. We urge the acceptance of this amendment.

Mr. HALL of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support, of course, of this amendment by the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Smith). It is entirely appropriate that the U.S. Geological Survey participate in the interagency information technology research program. I would also observe that the gentleman from Michigan learned this subject well at the feet of his father, a longtime member of the USGS team. We certainly support this amendment and urge its adoption.