Denny Hastert

Mr. HASTERT

Mr. HASTERT. I am opposed to the motion.

Mr. HASTERT. Mr. Speaker, I object.

Mr. HASTERT. Mr. Speaker, I reserve all points of order.

Mr. HASTERT. Mr. Speaker, I insist on a point of order.

Mr. HASTERT. I yield to the gentleman from California (Mr. Thomas).

Mr. HASTERT. Mr. Speaker, I object.

Mr. HASTERT. Mr. Speaker, I reserve a point of order against the motion.

Mr. HASTERT. Mr. Speaker, I withdraw my point of order.

Mr. HASTERT

Mr. HASTERT. Mr. Speaker, we have heard a lot of diatribe over here about health care, but the fact is that what the Republican Party is doing and what we are going to deliver to the American people is for the American people to make the choices of where they want to go on health care. Also, I think most American people want to be able, if they have a malady or an illness, to get to a doctor's office or get to a hospital. They do not want to take the bypass to the courtroom or, heaven forbid, have to go hire a lawyer before they go get their health care. Our friends on the other side of the aisle say one has to go to a lawyer, one has to go to a courtroom before they are going to get health care. Most people do not want that. They want to be expedited into the health care provider that they choose to get the health care that they want and to get it as cheaply and affordably and as quickly as possible. That is exactly what the Republican health care bill does. It expedites people into health care and into the hospital room, not into the courtroom. Our friends on the other side have the Patients' Bill of Rights, and really it is probably the lawyers' right to bill. We do not want to do that. We want to give people good, quick, accessible health care, and that is what this bill does.

Mr. HASTERT

Mr. HASTERT. Mr. Speaker, on rollcall No. 248, I was unavoidably detained. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yes.''

Mr. HASTERT

Mr. HASTERT. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 3824, the Fastener Quality Act Amendments. I would like to commend the work of the Science Committee, Chairman Sensenbrenner and Mr. Brown; as well as the efforts of Chairwoman Morella and Mr. Barcia of the Technology Subcommittee. Mr. Speaker, H.R. 3824 is important and urgently needed legislation. As my colleagues know, the Fastener Quality Act was enacted eight years ago when there was considerable concern about defective and counterfeit fasteners, mostly manufactured in foreign countries, which were found in military equipment, bridges, and airplanes. However, much has changed over the past eight years, especially in terms of the technology now employed by the fastener industry to guarantee quality. This bill accomplishes two important goals. First, it eliminates the unnecessary and duplicative regulatory burden on fasteners produced to the standards and specifications of aviation manufacturers which are already regulated by the FAA. And, secondly, this Act delays implementation of the Final Rule for the Fastener Quality Act issued on April 14, 1998 and due to be implemented on July 26, 1998. During this delay, the Secretary of Commerce will undertake and review the Fastener Quality Act in light of the new advances in technology made by the fastener industry and determine what changes are needed, if any, to assure consumer safety on the one hand and prevent unnecessary and outdated regulation on the other. Mr. Speaker, the simple fact is that in many ways the industry has moved beyond the Fastener Quality Act passed eight years ago. Since 1990, enormous strides have been made by both the manufacturers of fasteners and their customers in the way they insure the quality and safety of their products. For example, although the Fastener Quality Act originally envisioned an end-of-the-line lot testing procedures, the fastener industry's quality assurance systems have evolved substantially beyond this to testing throughout the manufacturing process. Even NIST concedes that this method is far superior to lot testing. Although NIST attempted to accommodate these new procedures in their Final Rule, I am concerned that they were not able to go far enough. The Final Rule does not fully accommodate the new advances in quality demanded by major users of fasteners such as the auto industry. Because of this, if the Final Rule is allowed to go into force on July 26, 1998, serious disruptions to our economy could result. I am particularly pleased that during the delay in implementation of the Final Rule, this bill requires the Secretary of Commerce to issue a report to Congress on possible changes needed in this Act to account for the advances in quality techniques now common in the fastener industry. It is important that Congress gain a clear understanding of the impact this regulation will have upon our economy, the technological improvements that the fastener industry has made over the past eight years, and the improvements in quality that are likely to occur in the future as the result of further technological advances. It is probable that, as a result of this report, Congress will have to revisit the Fastener Quality Act to insure that the highest quality standards, either in place now or that will arise in the future, are not legislated out of existence. Mr. Speaker, this is clearly a case of where the best intentions went astray. Although the concerns that prompted the adoption of the Fastener Quality Act were real, the solution proposed by this legislation actually threatens the very quality it seeks to insure. The clear problem with the Fastener Quality Act is that it attempts to legislate advances in technology. It is very difficult for anyone to see into the future and determine what tools will be available to industry in terms of their manufacturing processes and quality control. It is my hope that the Secretary of Commerce in his report to Congress will suggest ways in which changes to the law can be made to guarantee the quality and safety of critical fasteners, but in a manner that allows for, and promotes, both the technology of today and of the future. Mr. Speaker, I again wish to thank the distinguished Chairman of the Science Committee and urge my colleagues to support this important legislation.

Mr. HASTERT

Mr. HASTERT. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of the Conference Report accompanying H.R. 2646, the Parent and Student Account PLUS Act of 1998 (PASS A+) and wish to commend Chairman Archer and Senator Coverdell for their work on this important bill. As an original cosponsor of this legislation I am pleased that today Congress is taking a positive step forward toward helping America's families with their efforts to educate their children. Mr. Speaker, our nation's schools face a growing crisis and it is clear that improvements need to be made. Consider the following evidence: Nearly 40% of students do not feel safe in school and 2000 acts of violence take place in schools each day; U.S. eighth-graders recently placed 28th in the world in math and science skills; almost one out-of-three college freshman require some remedial instruction; and 40% of all 10 year-olds cannot meet basic literacy standards. Mr. Speaker, the current state of America's K-12 education system is a serious threat to the health of the economy and to the future prosperity of American children. Thus far, school reform initiatives have focused on increasing funding to public schools. Since 1983, government funding to public K-12 schools has increased by 44 percent and average per-student spending has increased by 32 percent. Total spending for public K-12 education now totals nearly $300 billion per year. Yet for all these increases in federal government spending, our children are falling farther behind the children of other nations. In short, Washington-based solutions to our school's problems have not worked; nor are they likely ever to work. Mr. Speaker, to combat the pressing problem of a troubled educational system, I co-sponsored the Parent and Student Savings Account Plus Act (PASS A+). This bill allows parents, grandparents, or scholarship sponsors to donate up to $2,000 a year per child with the buildup of interest within that account to be tax-free if used for the child's education. Money from this fund could be used to pay for tuition, books, supplies, computer equipment, transportation, and supplementary expenses required for the enrollment or attendance of a student in an elementary or secondary public, private, or religious school--even associated costs for home schooling are covered. Mr. Speaker, the PASS A+ legislation is important because it provides American families with the one educational tool we know works--a choice. While our Nation's K-12 public schools have fallen farther and farther behind, our higher education system of colleges and universities continues to be the envy of the world. Why? simply put, colleges and universities must compete for students and their education dollars. This competition has forced colleges and universities to focus on excellence and improvement and the results speak for themselves. Mr. Speaker, PASS A+ works for parents and families because it helps them help themselves. If their local school will not provide the education their children need, this legislation will allow them to choose an alternative. In the same vein, if their public school is working, the proceeds from these accounts can help parents provide important educational tools for their kids--like a computer. In short, this bill is a ``win-win.'' It helps all kids, in all schools. I urge my colleagues to vote for our kids and support the Conference Report.

Mr. HASTERT

Mr. HASTERT. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 2097, the Tax Code Termination Act. I am pleased to be a co-sponsor of this legislation which will sunset the current tax code effective December 31, 2002 and require that Congress enact a new code by July 4, 2002. It is time that this Congress began the effort to fundamentally reform the way government collects revenue. Mr. Speaker: The reason I support this bill is simple: The current tax code is unfair, too complex, and too burdensome on America's families. The debate over the tax code is now becoming one on not whether it should be replaced, but how to do it. Whether it's a flat tax or a national sales tax, I believe that the federal income tax is economically destructive and that almost any alternative would be better than the status quo. I have been literally inundated by letters, calls, and emails from my constituents who are fed up with the unfairness and unnecessary complexity of our current tax code. Mr. Speaker: Just consider these appalling statistics--the total tax burden on Americans is the highest ever, a whopping 31.7 percent of income. Not only are our taxes way too high, the size and complexity of the current code serve to compound the burden. Families and businesses spend over $225 billion per year to figure out how to comply with our federal tax code. What began, in 1913, as a one-page form, 14 pages of tax law and a top tax rate of just 7 percent has evolved into the unwieldy monster we know today. Consider this as well--the current tax code is seven million words! Lincoln's Gettysburg Address is only 269 words, and the Declaration of Independence a total 1,337 worlds. Mr. Speaker, I have not made up my mind about the form a new tax system should take; but I am certain that no matter what replaces the current system it will undoubtedly be far superior. That is why passage of this bill is so important. Once Congress has determined that a change must occur--that the tax code will cease to exist on a date certain--one of the most important debates in the history of our great Nation can take place. In this clash of competing ideas, I am confident that we can come together on a new tax code that applies a single, low rate to all Americans, requires a supermajority of both chambers of Congress to raise new taxes, provides tax relief for working Americans, protects the rights of taxpayers and reduces tax collection abuses, eliminates the bias against savings and investment, and promotes economic growth, jobs, and opportunity. Mr. Speaker, I am proud to be part of this historic effort today. Sunsetting the current tax code is a first step along the road to fundamental tax reform. I urge my colleagues to support this important legislation. A vote for this bill is a vote in favor of the American taxpayer and the American family.

Mr. HASTERT

Mr. HASTERT. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that the business in order under the Calendar Wednesday rule be dispensed with on Wednesday next.

Mr. HASTERT

Mr. HASTERT. Mr. Chairman, I'm proud to rise in support of this legislation today. I'm especially pleased with the lengths to which this bill goes in punishing those who utilize the Internet to prey on our children. The great need for protecting children from Internet-based crimes was reinforced to me last fall when Deborah Boehle (Bay-Lee), the mother of a 9-year-old girl, met with me in my Batavia, IL, office. Mrs. Boehle explained to me the hardship which her family endured because of an incident on the Internet, and which then led her to move her family into my district from their home in Juliet, IL. At the time, my colleague, Jerry Weller was moving quickly to address this incident legislatively, and I am proud that I was able to work with him and Chairman McCollum in addressing this ever-increasing problem. The culmination of those efforts is this legislation which establishes fines, and sets prison sentences of up to 5 years for individuals using the Internet to facilitate the contact of a minor for illegal sexual activity. Just like those who recklessly drive on our roadways and pose a danger to the traveling public, we have to pull over and lock up those criminals who are abusing the information superhighway. Although the Internet is by and large used for well-intentioned purposes, we have to be mindful of those twisted individuals who want to use it as a vehicle to threaten our children and their families. As we've seen in northern Illinois, crimes against our kids over the Internet can and do happen. It's for that reason it's so essential we update our laws for the information age. Although there are no legislative fixes for the anxiety and anguish the Boehle's have suffered, I'm hopeful that this legislation will prevent future crimes against kids over the Internet, and keep other families from having to experience the same heartache and hardship that the Boehle's have had to endure.

Mr. HASTERT

Mr. HASTERT. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman from Connecticut for yielding to me. I am pleased to announce that we have concluded legislative business for the week. The House will meet next week on Monday, June 15, at 12 noon for a pro forma session. There will be no legislative business and no votes that day. On Tuesday, June 16, the House will meet at 1:30 p.m. for morning hour and at 2:00 p.m. for legislative business. On Tuesday, we will consider a number of bills under suspension of the rules, a list of which will be distributed to Members' offices. Members should note that we do not expect any recorded votes before 5:00 p.m. on Tuesday, June 16. On Wednesday, June 17, the House will meet at 10:00 a.m. to consider the following legislation: the conference report for H.R. 2646, the Education Savings Act for Public and Private Schools; and H.R. 3097, the Tax Code Termination Act. The House will also resume consideration of H.R. 2183, the Bipartisan Campaign Integrity Act of 1997. On Thursday, June 18, the House will meet at 10:00 a.m. to take up H. Res. 463, a resolution to establish the Select Committee on U.S. National Security and Military/Commercial Concerns for the People's Republic of China. We will also continue consideration of H.R. 2183, the Bipartisan Campaign Integrity Act of 1997, on Thursday afternoon and on Friday, June 19. Mr. Speaker, we hope to conclude legislative business for the week by 2:00 p.m. on Friday, June 19. I thank the gentlewoman for yielding to me.

Mr. HASTERT. I believe that rule will be up on Wednesday afternoon.

Mr. HASTERT. Yes.

Mr. HASTERT. We expect late nights both on Wednesday night and Thursday night.

Mr. HASTERT

Mr. HASTERT. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that when the House adjourns today, it adjourn to meet at noon on Monday next.

Mr. HASTERT

Mr. HASTERT. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that when the House adjourns on Monday, June 15, 1998, it adjourn to meet at 12:30 p.m. on Tuesday, June 16, 1998 for morning hour debates.

Mr. HASTERT

Mr. HASTERT. Mr. Speaker, not to detract from next week's Drug-Free Athletes and Role Models Week, but today I must speak directly to the role models of our Nation's youth, and that most certainly includes the Hollywood elite. The toxicology report is back on the death of actor Phil Hartman, and my colleagues guessed it. Hartman's assailant, his wife, was high on cocaine, other drugs and alcohol when she pulled the trigger ending his life. How many more personal and public tragedies must this country endure at the hands of illegal drugs? Phil Hartman's passing, along with the deaths of Chris Farley and John Belushi, are not part of some so-called ``Saturday Night Live'' curse. These talented people are fatal victims of drug abuse. As chairman of the Speaker's Task Force for a Drug-Free America, I urge the Hollywood elite to join this Congress in its commitment to win the war on drugs by the year 2002. As we all know, actions speak louder than any laws or any words.

Mr. HASTERT

Mr. HASTERT. Mr. Speaker, today I have the pleasure to recognize a great citizen of Illinois and one of the Air Force's finest officers on the date of her retirement from active duty. For over 23 years, Colonel Mary Tripp has served the Air Force with pride and with tremendous dedication. On April 15, Colonel Tripp returned to her family home in West Chicago, Illinois. We wish her God's speed and the gratitude of the Nation for her loyal service. Colonel Tripp's final assignment was the director of the very successful program to honor the 50th anniversary of the U.S. Air Force. This 16 month project blended a brilliant campaign of motivational and historic information, energizing both her fellow airmen and the American public. From the national recognition at the Tournament of Roses Parade to the Pentagon Cake Cutting Ceremony with the President, the hard work and dedication of Colonel Tripp shined in every event. She led a program which truly captured the hearts of each Air Force veteran and every American. The magnificent record of the United States Air Force over the past 50 years is a story worth telling. Through the handiwork of Colonel Tripp, this legacy will continue to grow. Mr. Speaker, it has been my distinct honor to offer this tribute. As Colonel Tripp retires to private life, I ask my colleagues to join me in commending the outstanding service she has given to our great country. On behalf of the people of the 14th Congressional District and especially her neighbors in the city of West Chicago, I wish her the very best.

Mr. HASTERT

Mr. HASTERT. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Traficant) and the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Buyer) for yielding me the time. Mr. Chairman, as you know, the national security of this country is threatened. It is not city to city. It is not State to State. But it is country to country. We have 400 tons of cocaine, we have hundreds of hundreds of tons of marijuana, we have multiple tens of tons of heroin coming across our border every year. We lose 20,000 kids a year either to drugs or drug violence. If that is not national security, I do not know what it is. If we lost 20,000 kids today in Bosnia or the Middle East, this country would be up in arms. We darn well better do everything we can, including putting our troops with civil authorities along the borders to stop the scourge of drugs. We have to stand up. It is a matter of national will. It is a matter of national understanding and desire to solve a problem. I salute the gentleman from Ohio for his amendment. We need to stand behind him and make sure it becomes law.

Mr. HASTERT

Mr. HASTERT. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Florida for yielding me the time. This bill has been a long time coming. I have taken about four or five trips to the border myself to try to look at the problems, understand what is going on. If we go to Tijuana, the crossing there, if we go to Laramie, if we go to El Paso, if we go to Nogales, what they tell us time after time is, Congressman, we have a problem. Because if this lane of traffic has an INS inspector and this lane of traffic has a Customs inspector and, in fact, in El Paso they sit up on the bridge over in Mexico and they look with their binoculars and they say, with their telephones, go into lane 3 because an INS inspector is there and they cannot lift the trunk because that is in the contract. And we know that the drug smugglers know who these people are. They know what lane they are in. They said, we cannot get everything we should get because these union contracts stand in our way. When I talk about that to my folks back home, they say, well, that is a common-sense thing. Why do we not change things that should be changed? The other problem, part of this problem, if we have a Customs agent who has been on a job and, according to their contract, they can bid on a job and they can live on the border for 20 years, the same place, their brother-in-law can live across the border. It is common sense that maybe the potential for corruption happens when somebody is too long in one place and too close to situations. Maybe we ought to change that; and when the contract comes up to be renewed, maybe those are the things that ought to be renegotiated. So I take my hat off to the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Crane), the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Archer), and the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Shaw) for coming forward with a good, common-sense bill. That is not all this bill does. It also brings in 1700 new officers so that we can attack smuggling from Florida, the Gulf Coast and our southwest and Canadian borders. This bill puts some teeth into what we need to do. I support it and ask for Members' positive vote.