Joel Hefley

Mr. HEFLEY

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

Mr. HEFLEY. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and concur in the Senate amendments to the bill (H.R. 834) to extend the authorization for the National Historic Preservation Fund, and for other purposes.

Mr. HEFLEY

Mr. HEFLEY. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. HEFLEY. Mr. Chairman, I would be happy to enter into a colloquy with the gentleman from Oklahoma (Mr. Largent).

Mr. HEFLEY. I will work with the gentleman and other interested Members to make sure that we do not inadvertently put in place policies that may be contrary to what might be accomplished with the comprehensive electrical utility restructuring legislation. I want to reiterate to the gentleman from Oklahoma (Mr. Largent) that it is the intent of the provision to level the playing field in the acquisition and maintenance of military utility infrastructure. Section 2813 would require DOD's privatization initiative in this area to be conducted consistent with the Competition in Contracting Act. Moreover, we would require any awardee to conform to State regulations solely for the terms of that specific contract so that the same standards apply to infrastructure on both sides of the fence and that all parties to the competition for the contract are judged by the same standards. I agree that competition will get the best result for DOD and for the taxpayer.

Mr. HEFLEY. I would say to the gentleman from Oklahoma (Mr. Largent), I have committed to work with him to make sure that the language is not overly broad. We do not intend for it to be overly broad. We do not intend for it to create inconsistencies with State law and regulation. I am happy to work with the gentleman on that.

Mr. HEFLEY. I agree, and I would not want that unintended consequence either.

Mr. HEFLEY

Mr. HEFLEY. Mr. Speaker, someone at the Department of Education has a lot of explaining to do. A contract employee, who was hired by the department to take care of its telephone and computer needs, recently admitted to carrying out a criminal plot that cost the government more than $1 million. The contractor illegally steered more than $300,000 worth of equipment to an Education Department employee who was overseeing his work. The supervisor got a 61-inch television, cordless telephones, compact disk players, walkie-talkies, desktop and laptop computers, printers, digital cameras, computer scanners and Palm Pilots. In addition to diverting the merchandise, the contractor routinely performed errands for the employee, such as picking up her granddaughter from school, all on government time. In exchange for his work, the contractor and his coworker walked off with more than $600,000 in bogus overtime pay. Good grief. Who is minding the store? The Department of Education gets my ``Porker of the Week'' Award.

Mr. HEFLEY

Mr. HEFLEY. Mr. Chairman, I am really torn on this. There is nobody that has worked harder on this subject than the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Buyer). The gentleman has struggled, he has negotiated with the Committee on Ways and Means, and unless you have negotiated with the Committee on Ways and Means you do not know what he has been through. He has worked diligently and hard and not only that, his heart is in this subject. He wants this problem solved, and he has come up with a plan to solve it. On the other hand, I have worked for so many years on this subvention program. I can remember years ago, and I say to the gentleman from Mississippi (Mr. Taylor), I do not know if the gentleman remembers this or not, because we did not know each other well at that time, when we were before the committee and we were saying that we had made promises to these people that we were not keeping, and at that time the Pentagon was saying we did not really promise; that was overzealous recruiters that made those promises. And I say to the gentleman, remember, we waved in front of them recruiting brochures to show, back from the 1950s I think they were, to show that we had made those promises. We made promises and we need to keep those promises, and one way to do that was that we passed the subvention program, to give it a try. I sponsored that when it was not popular. There was no other sponsor in the House, there was no other sponsor in the Senate when that first started, but now it is a popular program. The retirees like that program, but it is not working like we planned, as the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Buyer) has well pointed out. Mr. Chairman, we made a bad deal on the payment schedule, and we need to correct that bad deal. The amendment of the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Buyer) will kick the ball down the field, and I think that is good. And if that is all we can get, I think that is good, but I think it has one flaw, I say to the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Buyer), and that is that it has to be cost neutral, and I am not sure it ever happens to expand it to those 12 or 13 if it is cost neutral unless we correct the problem with HCFA. Let me just say in closing real quickly, there are three things that I would like to come out of this whole deal, and it may have to come out in conference, I would like for us to make HCFA pay like they are supposed to pay. I would like that to happen, and I think we are going to have to write that in in conference. I would like the program extended nationwide, and I do not mind at all putting the sunset on it to take another look at it, and that is what the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Buyer) is trying to do there. So I think there is a way to compromise, do not make it permanent like the gentleman from Mississippi (Mr. Taylor) wants it and I would like it, but have a time to reexamine it, but extend it nationwide.

Mr. HEFLEY. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in strong opposition to the amendment offered by the gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Skelton), a friend that I usually find myself in agreement with, but not today, not on this amendment. If adopted, the amendment of the gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Skelton) would codify the President's fundamentally flawed agreement with the Governor of Puerto Rico concerning an irreplaceable training area. Under the President's agreement, the Navy and Marine Corps are only allowed to use inert ammunition, ammunition that does not provide the type of combined arms training required to ensure combat readiness. In fact, the Chief of Naval Operations, Admiral Jay Johnson, has stated that due to the moratorium of training with live ordnance, the Battle Group and Amphibious Ready Group will not be assessed by the Commander in Chief of the Atlantic Fleet as fully combat ready, as previous Battle Groups that have had the use of Vieques for integrated training. Additionally, Mr. Chairman, voting in favor of the Skelton amendment is an endorsement of a referendum on Vieques, as outlined in the President's agreement. This referendum sets a bad precedent. Allowing a local community to vote on the type of training that can be conducted on our military ranges endangers our military's access to other critical facilities, both in the United States and overseas. What are we going to do? Are we going to have a referendum at Fort Carson, Colorado, and say we cannot use live fire anymore; a referendum at Fort Sill, Oklahoma, or any innumerable sites across the United States and say we cannot do it anymore? Where are we going to train? H.R. 4205 protects U.S. national security by ensuring our military's access to this vital facility, while at the same time taking into account the concerns of the citizens of Vieques. It allows the transfer of the western ammunition area and the $40 million in economic assistance, once uninterrupted live fire training resumes. It denies the transfer of any portion of the eastern maneuver area, where the critical ranges are located, and places restrictions on the amount and type of training that the Navy can conduct on Vieques. I oppose the Skelton amendment. I ask my colleagues to oppose the Skelton amendment.

Mr. HEFLEY

Mr. HEFLEY. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Spence), the chairman of the committee. (Mr. SPENCE asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. HEFLEY. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Bateman). (Mr. BATEMAN asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. HEFLEY. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 2 minutes, and I rise to oppose the amendment. Mr. Chairman, let me talk about the area of the bill that I know the most about, and that is, as chairman of the Subcommittee on Military Installations and Facilities, I remain concerned about the deteriorating conditions of our military installations, and I am especially concerned about the impact of inadequate facilities and military housing on readiness and retention. The House Committee on Armed Services has played a bipartisan role in addressing the needs of the military personnel, their families, and has shown a commitment to acquire decent housing, improve child development centers, and other quality of life improvements for those who serve in the Armed Forces. The gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Frank) talks about helping these people. Well, we are trying to help these people. The amendment would have the practical effect of reducing total defense spending by 1 percent. In carrying out such a reduction, no cuts could be made in operations and maintenance or from the personnel accounts. This would require that a disproportionate amount be taken from the other defense accounts, including military construction and military family housing, thus diminishing the improvements that our service members deserve. H.R. 4205 contains a number of important provisions affecting these accounts which will help alleviate part of the problems I mentioned previously. Decreasing the MILCON authorization level, a level to which the House Committee on Armed Services unanimously agreed, and a level that complies with the concurrent resolution on the budget, would contribute to the deteriorating conditions for our service members and their families, and signal to them that we as a Congress are uncommitted to addressing the unfunded infrastructure accounts. Military construction and military family housing continue to receive too little attention in the overall competition for resources. We cannot afford to reduce authorization levels for vital infrastructure programs. This will only accelerate the long-term degradation of quality of life, training, and readiness. I urge the defeat of this amendment. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. HEFLEY. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. Hunter).

Mr. HEFLEY. Mr. Chairman, I yield the balance of my time to the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Weldon).

Mr. HEFLEY. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Hayes). (Mr. HAYES asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. HEFLEY. Mr. Chairman, let me say I have been through several chairmen of this committee. I have been through chairmen that were partisan. I have been through chairmen that were contentious. I have never had a chairman like the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Spence), who can finesse this thing with courtesy and respect for every single Member of the committee, be they Democrat or Republican. I want to say thanks to the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Spence) for the way he has handled himself. He is a testimony of why we should not have terms limits for committee chairmen. Beyond that, down to business, I rise in strong support of H.R. 4205. The authorizations for the military construction and military family housing programs of the Department of Defense for the fiscal year 2001 contained in this legislation continue a strong bipartisan approach to the efforts of this Congress to enhance living and working conditions for military personnel and their families and to improve facilities supporting the training and readiness of our armed forces. I regret very much the lack of emphasis by the Department of Defense on what the record, most of which was developed through taking testimony from senior officials and the uniform leadership of the DOD and the military departments, clearly indicates is a crying need. This year's budget request continued the broad trend that began with fiscal year 1996 MILCON program. The Department of Defense requested fewer total dollars for these key infrastructure accounts that was enacted by the Congress the year before. The department's budget request of $8.03 billion for the MILCON program was 4 percent below current spending levels, and 5.5 percent below the levels authorized for appropriations in the current fiscal year. More significantly, the budget request was 25 percent below the funding level requested by the Department for fiscal year 1996. While the Department of Defense has consistently underfunded the military construction and military family housing programs, the House has played a key bipartisan role in addressing the needs of military personnel and their families. In fact, just yesterday the House passed the Military Construction Appropriations Act for the coming year by a vote of 386 to 22. The gentleman from Ohio (Chairman Hobson) and I have worked very closely to make sure our bills compliment each other, and I am grateful for his cooperation and hard work on our common approach to the MILCON program. H.R. 4205 would continue our efforts both to provide additional investment in military infrastructure and to continue innovation in facilities acquisition and management. The bill would commit approximately $8.43 billion to the military construction and military family housing programs for the coming fiscal year. Although we all would prefer to do more, we recognize the imperative to balance the unmet needs in the infrastructure arena with the additional and growing list of unfunded modernization, readiness, and personnel requirements confronting our military services. In closing, I want to express again my appreciation to the members of the subcommittee, especially the ranking member, the gentleman from Mississippi (Mr. Taylor) and the committee who have contributed to our work this session. I want to also express my deep appreciation again to the gentleman from South Carolina (Chairman Spence) for his steadfast efforts to increase the defense budget, and his willingness to support significant improvements in the MILCON program over the years. This is truly a bipartisan effort, and I urge all of my colleagues to support this bill without reservation. It is a bill we can be proud of.

Mr. HEFLEY

Mr. HEFLEY. Mr. Speaker, every year for the last 30 years we have granted China most-favored-nation status. The presidencies of Reagan, Bush and Clinton have all stated that most-favored-nation status will open China to freedom and democracy. Let us look at the scorecard a little bit regarding this strategy. We gave most-favored-nation status and they continue their policy of population planning with forced abortion. We gave most-favored-nation status and they continue not to tolerate any dissent of any kind. The imprisonments, the torture and the killings go on. We gave most- favored-nation status and they continue to try to stamp out religion that is not state-supported religion. We gave most-favored-nation status and they made plans to invade Taiwan. We gave most-favored- nation status to them and they have the biggest buildup of nuclear missile development of any country on the face of the earth. We gave most-favored-nation status and they continue to occupy Tibet. We gave most-favored-nation status and they pour money into American elections. Are we nuts? Can we not learn? America sometimes has the reputation of being willing to do anything for a buck. On this vote, we are set to prove that that is true.

Mr. HEFLEY

Mr. HEFLEY. Mr. Speaker, Americans love to celebrate landmarks and anniversaries: Christmas day, Independence Day, New Year's Day. But yesterday was one of my personal favorites, Tax Freedom Day. That is the day when hard-working Americans have finally paid their tax burdens and can begin earning for themselves and their families. This chart illustrates when that day is over the years. I invite Members to use this opportunity to reflect on the problems with our current tax system. First, it is cumbersome. Our Tax Code exceeds 2.8 million words, more than War and Peace and the Bible combined. It is unfair. It discriminates against married couples, the elderly, even the dead. It is discouraging. It punishes investing and saving and steals profits from healthy businesses and confuses a large majority of Americans trying to decipher its complicated forms. Today, I encourage my colleagues to support reform and tax reduction measures that will truly provide tax freedom for hard-working Americans.

Mr. HEFLEY

Mr. HEFLEY. Mr. Speaker, it is with great pleasure that I share with you an update on the first-ever scheduled closure of a Department of Energy (DOE) nuclear weapons facility. In less than seven years, residents along the Front Range of Colorado will no longer live in the shadow of Rocky Flats, a 6,500 acre former weapons component manufacturing facility. What once was home to more than 100 tons of plutonium and plutonium byproducts will become history. More than 700 structures representing 3.5 million square feet will be demolished. The two on-site landfills that contributed to soil and groundwater contamination will no longer exist. Since the early years of the Nuclear Age to the end of the Cold War, Rocky Flats, a mere 16 miles northwest of Denver, was a manufacturing site for plutonium triggers and other nuclear weapons parts. In 1989, the FBI and the EPA closed the site due to alleged violations of environmental law. A joint company headquartered in my district has developed a fast- track closure plan, which DOE fully supports, that shaves decades off the original clean-up schedule. Originally expected to take 65 years and cost more than $35 billion, the accelerated closure plan will be completed by 2007 for under $8 billion. To date great progress has been made at Rocky Flats such as cleaning up the majority of the top 10 environmental risk areas, including the removal of 30 tons of depleted uranium. Thousands of liters of plutonium and uranium solutions have been drained from dozens of tanks and stabilized. Most recently, the weapons research and development facility was decontaminated and demolished--six months ahead of schedule. Within this decade, all nuclear materials and radioactive waste will be shipped to off-site storage facilities. Environmental remediation will be completed so that land is available for open space and industrial use and downstream water supplies are protected. Moreover, billions of taxpayer dollars that have been used in the operations, security and cleanup of Rocky Flats can be reallocated to similar sites throughout the country. Imagine, after more than 50 years as a top-secret nuclear weapons facility that contributed to winning the Cold War, the Rocky Flats acreage will once again be available to the people of Colorado. Please join me in congratulating the DOE, the State of Colorado, and the companies involved for this extraordinary effort.

Mr. HEFLEY

Mr. HEFLEY. Mr. Speaker, I think this is the very reason for this Code. We have heard the view of the left-wing extremists about the Tax Code. They think the present Tax Code is just real spiffy. We have also heard the numbers: 17,000 pages, 7 million words, 54,000 changes, $134 billion in earlier compliance costs. Let me state that the last figure, $134 billion in compliance costs, imagine what our families, our small businesses, and even our big corporations could do with $134 billion they are spending on a hopelessly complex Federal Tax Code. I think this is the greatest legacy this Congress could leave the American people is to scrap the Code we have now, get rid of the IRS as we know it now. Everywhere I go, talk radio, town meetings, when this subject is brought up, there is disagreement on what the new tax system should be, but there is almost no disagreement about getting rid of the present system. No law-abiding citizen should be intimidated and made fearful by their government. Yet, if one gets an envelope in our mailbox, in our area it is from Ogden Utah, a little brown envelope from Ogden, Utah, we know it is from the IRS and we freeze in utter fear, no matter how honestly and carefully we have filled out our taxes, because we know we are probably about to get an audit. That is not right. We need a fair, we need a simple code that we can all understand and it will make us not fear our government. We need to pass this bill and we need to pass this rule.

Mr. HEFLEY

Mr. HEFLEY. Mr. Speaker, not too long ago I gave Bill Clinton my porker award for his $72 million trip to the African continent. Well, it looks like he is at it again. Clinton just returned from India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, and Switzerland with not one foreign policy success. He did nothing to ease the poverty in Bangladesh, was scoffed at by the Indian parliament, dismissed by Pakistani leaders, and rebuffed by the President of Syria. Instead, he showered the America public with photos of himself playing with elephants, dancing with, quote, empowered women and touring the Taj Mahal with daughter Chelsea. The 10-day trip included a virtual aerial armada of 26 military cargo planes and more than 50 other support aircraft. The Air Force, which had to do 177 strategic lift missions and 460 mission launches, has estimated that the price tag for the Asian tour could top $75 million. Now I know the President needs to be protected but give me a break. ABC pegged this junket correctly when it said it was a protected sight- seeing tour. Bill Clinton gets my porker of the week award.

Mr. HEFLEY

Mr. HEFLEY. Mr. Speaker, the Clinton-Gore administration talked about reinventing government, but the Republican Congress is actually doing it. For example, Federal laws prohibit convicted criminals from receiving supplemental security income. However, for years, the Social Security Administration relied on convicted prisoners to notify them of their ineligibility for SSI benefits. Not surprisingly, hundreds of prisoners convicted of robbery, rape, and assault continue to receive welfare benefits while in jail, courtesy of the American taxpayer. Perhaps the worst example of this fraud and abuse, California's ``freeway killer,'' William Bonin, responsible for killing more than 44 people, received $80,000 in fraudulent SSI payments while on death row. In response, Republicans developed and passed a solution to this problem. As a result, taxpayers today will save over $3 billion.

Mr. HEFLEY

Mr. HEFLEY. Mr. Speaker, Republicans have a plan to pay Uncle Sam's credit card bills. For over 30 years, tax and spend liberals have racked up an enormous debt. It is just now beginning to be paid down, thanks to the GOP majority in the House and Senate. In our budget, we will pay down $3.6 trillion, yes, that is $3.6 trillion, in public debt by the year 2013. Why does this matter? If we ask a family in my district if they live better without debt, or if they would rather be sitting on massive credit card bills with high interest rates, it is pretty easy to guess the answer will be the former. They will have a hard time understanding the fact that a sizable chunk of our annual budget goes to pay creditors because government spending cannot be kept under control. Mr. Speaker, paying the public debt will benefit everyone. Seniors will not have their social security funds raided, homebuyers will have lower mortgage rates, car buyers will have lower interest rates. This country will function better with a zero balance and maybe even a surplus to be given back to the taxpayer. It is time to lift the burden of debt off our children. It is time to support the Republican budget and eliminate the public debt.

Mr. HEFLEY

Mr. HEFLEY. Mr. Chairman, I too rise in support of the amendment. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the bipartisan amendment offered by the leaders of the defense authorization committee and the defense appropriations subcommittee. There is no question that the military services are facing severe funding difficulties. The basic costs of operations of our overseas commitments are not properly budgeted. High operational tempo stresses military equipment and their maintenance. More critically, recruiting and retention are increasingly difficult for a variety of reasons. This Congress has reformed the pay table and provided a significant pay increase for military personnel. We have worked hard to improve basic living and working conditions. All of that has helped to keep some military personnel in the force who otherwise would have left the service. We need to do more and the situation is urgent. This amendment would continue our efforts by responding to the critical and immediate needs of military personnel and their families. By accelerating the buydown of out-of-pocket housing expenses, protecting military personnel from reductions in their housing allowances, and filling the gaps in the Defense Health Program, the adoption of the Lewis-Spence-Murtha-Skelton amendment will strengthen the All-Volunteer Force that is the backbone of our national security. The time to deal with the emergency confronting military service personnel is now. I urge a strong bipartisan vote in favor of this amendment.