Steny Hoyer

Mr. HOYER

Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to introduce this resolution with my colleague from Arizona, Mr. Kolbe, and a bi-partisan group of 30 other Members. This resolution supports affordable housing for all Americans and promotes free trade of softwood lumber between the United States and Canada. This resolution expresses the Sense of the Congress that the 1996 U.S./Canada Softwood Lumber Agreement (SLA) should not be extended when it expires in 2001. The President should continue discussions with the Government of Canada to promote open and competitive trade between the United States and Canada of softwood lumber, and that all stakeholders should be included in discussions regarding trade of softwood lumber. The Softwood Lumber Agreement of 1996 was intended to promote free trade; however, it appears to have had the opposite effect. More importantly, the expansion of this agreement is directly affecting consumers by increasing the cost of lumber used for homebuilding. For many Americans owning a home is a dream come true, but if lumber prices climb and homes are not affordable, for many Americans it will remain a dream unfulfilled. Mr. Speaker, I urge support of this resolution that will help ensure affordable housing for all Americans.

Mr. HOYER

Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, the Republicans' risky and irresponsible tax schemes have more lives than Freddy Krueger, the marauder in the movie ``Nightmare on Elm Street.'' They died in August, and they are back in February. They just will not die no matter how bad they are. Last year's monster tax machine, a plan that primarily would have benefited the wealthiest Americans, is back to haunt us again this year. The majority has chopped a huge tax bill into smaller bills, and the marriage penalty bill before us is one of those pieces. Well, we are not going to stand by while they threaten the American economy. We are not going to stand by while they strengthen our sacred compact with seniors, Social Security. We are not going to stand by and let them turn Valentine's Day into the Valentine's Day Massacre of America's future. It is clear, the majority did not learn a thing after last year's tax debacle. The American people saw right through the Republicans' $792 billion risky tax scheme. They saw that the top 1 percent of American income earners would have reaped 41 percent, the top 1 percent, 41 percent of the benefits, according to an analysis by Citizens for Tax Justice. That unfairness is one reason why President Clinton vetoed that bill. And that is why, my colleagues, Senator John McCain called it ``a cornucopia of good deals for special interests and a nightmare for common citizens.'' That was John McCain. This is a nightmare the majority apparently wants us to relive today. Now the majority has even hitched its wagon to the tax plan put out by presidential candidate George W. Bush. The Bush campaign says its plan would cost an estimated $483 billion over 5 years. But what it does not say, my colleagues, is that the Bush tax plan would explode to $1.8 trillion by fiscal year 2010. The Bush plan not only would eat up the entire non-Social Security surplus, it would also raise as much as three-fourths, 75 percent, of the 10-year projected Social Security surplus, according to the Citizens for Tax Justice. We are not the only ones who see the dangers lurking. In Johnstown, Iowa, on January 16, again Senator McCain commented, ``Governor Bush's plan has not one penny for Social Security, not one penny for Medicare, and not one penny for paying down the national debt.'' In one of his television ads, Senator McCain stated, quote, ``There's one big difference between me and the others: I will not take every last dime of the surplus and spend it on tax cuts that mostly benefit the wealthy.'' That was Senator McCain. Neither will we. We have a rare opportunity in our Nation's history, and we must seize it. Let us use these surpluses to shore up our sacred promise of Social Security. Let us extend the life of and add prescription drug benefits to America. And let us pay down our national debt and keep our economy vibrant for future generations. I urge my colleagues to vote against this bill, the first of many that would only squander our budget surpluses.

Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, I would tell my good friend, because I know he is for accuracy, that he must know that the Dole-Reagan tax cut of 1982, that tax increase, was higher than the 1993.

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

Mr. HOYER

Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, my staff behind me has suggested that Members should not forget to smile. I think it is appropriate that we take a picture of the House of Representatives and its Members on an annual basis, or at least once during every Congress. I think this is not only a substantial memento for those who have the great honor and privilege of serving here, but as well, an historical record of those who are here, and of course I rise in strong support of the resolution. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. HOYER

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

Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I am once again pleased to cosponsor this resolution with the gentleman from California (Mr. Thomas), the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Boehner), and others. This resolution, as the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Boehner) has pointed out, provides for the annual commemoration of the Holocaust on May 4 of this year. Mr. Speaker, there is no occasion more important for the international community and for humanity than to remember the tragedy that occurred in the 1930s and 1940s, the massive loss of life and the reality of man's inhumanity to man. It is appropriate, I believe, that we use the Rotunda, the location of so many historic events, again to draw attention and focus on one of the greatest tragedies in human history. It reminds us, Mr. Speaker, that such events must never again be permitted to occur and that only through our vigilance will that be ensured. The ceremony will be a part of the annual Days of Remembrance sponsored by the United States Holocaust Memorial Council. It is intended to encourage citizens to reflect on the Holocaust, to remember its victims and to strengthen our sense of democracy and human rights. Mr. Speaker, I would observe that it is particularly important that succeeding generations who have largely grown up in a relatively peaceful world be called upon to remember this event. We have seen all too recently events similar in character, if not in scope, as we saw in Kosovo and in Bosnia. The gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Wolf) just mentioned Africa. The Holocaust is an event, a time in history, that we ought to remember so that successor generations never repeat it. The theme of this year's Days of Remembrance is ``The Holocaust and the New Century: The Imperative to Remember.'' Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of this resolution and urge its adoption.

Mr. HOYER

Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, as the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Boehner) has explained, the House originally proposed the printing of four documents about our government, all of which Members and their constituents find extraordinarily useful. By its amendment, the Senate has proposed the printing of two additional documents. I believe those documents are appropriately added, and I certainly urge Members to support this resolution. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. HOYER

Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, on Thursday, November 11, 1999, as the work of this House paused while Americans honored our veterans, we in the congressional community lost a veteran of our own. Timothy Leo Donohoe, a former House doorman and virtual fixture for many years at the Speaker's Lobby East door before his retirement in 1997, died suddenly on Veteran's Day at his home on Capitol Hill. Tim was only 54 years old, and he is greatly missed by the friends he leaves behind. And, Mr. Speaker, Tim Donohoe leaves many friends. Tim served the Congress for 25 years, most of them for the Doorkeeper and Sergeant-at- Arms, so he knew most everyone who worked on and around the House floor. It was Tim's job as a doorman to know every Member of Congress, including the Senators who often appeared at his door, and he did, whether a Member had been here for 20 years or 20 minutes. Tim also knew the many committee and support staff whose work brought them to the floor, as well as the many members of the Hill press corps who gathered in the Speaker's Lobby looking for news. All who worked with or around Tim appreciated his wit, his good humor, and his reliable information about what was really going on in the House. When the House was in legislative session, Tim was at that door--we could count on it. He always did his job diligently and magnificently, in the grandest traditions of the House. Everyone who had the good fortune to know Tim Donohoe well agrees that he was one of the kindest, most selfless people one could ever meet. Though these traits may have resulted from a classical Catholic education, which for Tim culminated in a master's degree in theology from St. Paul's College in Washington, I suspect they were innate, simply a manifestation of Tim's character. He cared about others more than himself, and it showed. Mr. Speaker, our world would be a far better place if there were more like Tim Donohoe. Our world is a better place for Tim's having been here. He is, and will continue to be, sorely missed.

Mr. HOYER

Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to the parishioners of the St. George's Episcopal Church as they celebrate the 200th Anniversary of their church building on Sunday, November 21st. Located in Valley Lee in the Southern Maryland County of St. Mary's, St. George's has been serving the faithful since the reign of William and Mary some 360 years ago--hence it is also known as the William and Mary Parish. Following the establishment of the Maryland Colony by Leonard Calvert in 1634, the settlement at St. Mary's began to grow with the establishment of St. George's Hundred, a piece of land across the St. Mary's River and west of the Capital settlement of St. Mary's City. Maryland is known as the birthplace of religious toleration in Colonial America and along with Catholic settlers and settlers of other faiths came followers of the Anglican church. Some of these colonists would establish the Poplar Hill Church--thought to have been built between 1638 and 1642 just 50 feet from the site of the present building. Over the years, the William and Mary Parish would worship in several buildings. A second church is believed to have been built on the existing site in 1692 and a third structure around 1760. In 1799, the existing structure was built and today we recognize this incredible 200 year journey. Just as members of the Parish no doubt celebrated the dedication of their new building in 1799 on the verge of a new century, today we celebrate two hundred years of progress at Poplar Hill as we count down the remaining days to the new millennium. The parishioners of St. George's have been witness to extraordinary events and their history bridges a time line of critical events in our Nation's history--from the fledgling colony of the 1600s, the rise of revolution in the 1700's, the Civil War and the abolition of slavery in the 1800's, and the transformation of St. Mary's County from its rural way of life to being the home of the world's premier and most advanced aviation testing facility with the establishment of Patuxent River Naval Air Station. And through it all, St. George's Episcopal Parish has been a beacon of faith serving to enrich its parishioners with God's word and providing a firm foundation to do His work. I commend St. George's Episcopal Church on the 200th Anniversary of their building and wish its parishioners all the best in the future.

Mr. HOYER

Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, let's lift FEC reform out of legislative limbo where it has been for twenty years. Before we leave for the year let's pass H.R. 2668, a bill to streamline FEC procedures and improve FEC reporting. The bill is not controversial--it has broad support on both sides of the aisle and it is needed. There is simply no reason not to pass this bill today. In September I wrote to Speaker Hastert requesting that this bill be placed on the suspension calendar. It is a good bill--sponsored by House Administration Chair Bill Thomas--and voted unanimously out of the House Administration Committee earlier this year. The bill contains most of the provisions in the bill introduced earlier this year. It was prepared with the support and assistance of the six Republican and Democratic FEC Commissioners. In addition to the support of the Commission, H.R. 2668 is supported by Members on both sides of the aisle. It would: Improve disclosure of State activity; make it easier for contributors to comply with the law; remove obsolete provisions; and broaden candidate's commercial lending options. Earlier this year, we voted on this bill on the floor of the House. Like almost every one of my Democratic colleagues and a broad group of Republicans, I voted against the bill. I voted against FEC reform because it would have blocked a vote on the bi-partisan campaign finance reform bill sponsored by Reps. Shays and Meehan. FEC reform deserves our support on its own merits. It should not continue to be used as a pawn in the larger debate. In my opinion, FEC reform should not have been a part of that debate. That is because--as Chairman Thomas has repeatedly stressed, H.R. 2668 is not about campaign finance reform--H.R. 2668 is about making the routine procedural reforms that are needed over the course of time by all agencies. Unlike other Executive branch agencies that request and receive noncontroversial legislative changes to aid in the efficient and effective operation of the agency--changes requested by the FEC simply don't happen. For over twenty years, the FEC has annually sent to Congress requested statutory changes. And each year--just like in our recent campaign finance debate--provisions that are needed and have no real opposition become tangled up in our debate about how to ensure the integrity of our campaign finance system. But this year we can do it differently. We have a solid FEC reform bill that combines needed changes into one package. We have bipartisan support for the bill. If we fail to act it means that the work that we did in the House Administration Committee to create this worthwhile bill was just a cynical game to defeat comprehensive campaign finance reform. I have asked Speaker Hastert to bring H.R. 2668 to the floor on the suspension calendar--and I urge him to do so again today. FEC reform standing alone is worthwhile. We have the chance to pass it and we should.

Mr. HOYER

Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, I rise to pay tribute to a great statesman and leader in the State of Maryland. With the death of former state Senator Frederick C. Malkus, Jr., on November 9, Maryland, as well as the entire Country, lost a great patriot and a dutiful public servant. Frederick C. Malkus, Jr. died at the age of 86, having spent all of his adult life in the service of his fellow citizens. Senator Malkus, a conservative Democrat, served in the legislature for 46 years--12 in the House of Delegates and 34 in the Senate--before retiring in 1994. Upon his retirement, he was the longest serving State Legislator in the United States. Born July 1, 1913, in Baltimore, Senator Malkus moved to the 380 acre Egypt Road farm, nine miles outside of Cambridge, on Maryland's Eastern Shore where he was raised there by his aunt and uncle. He spent the past 83 years on the working farm that produces wheat, corn, and soybeans. He graduated for Western Maryland College in 1934 and received his law degree four years later from the University of Maryland Law School. During World War II, Senator Malkus served in the U.S. Army and rose to the rank of major. He returned to Maryland and in 1947 won a seat in the House of Delegates. He was, Mr. Speaker, an unforgettable individual who was a wonderful servant to Maryland and America. To know Fred Malkus was to know how deeply he cared for rural America and more specifically for the Chesapeake Bay region. Senator Malkus was at the forefront of the fight to save the Bay. Even though he was pro-business in his views, he was a great environmentalist. His legacy will no doubt live on and serve as a model for future leaders of our State and our Country. Senator Malkus is survived by his wife of 41 years, the former Margaret ``Maggie'' Moorer, his son, Frederick C. Malkus III, two daughters, Margaret Elizabeth ``Betsy'' LaPerch, and Susan Moorer Malkus, and three grandsons.

Mr. HOYER

Mr. HOYER. Madam Speaker, since the development of audio-recording technology in the 19th Century, composers, musicians, and others have joined to create thousands of sound recordings which have amused, entertained, and enriched us individually and as a Nation. Sadly, as the 21st Century approaches, many of America's most previous sound recordings, recorded on perishable media, may be lost forever unless we act to preserve them for the use and enjoyment of future generations. Today I am introducing, along with the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Ney), the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Davis), the gentlemen from Tennessee (Messrs. Clement, Gordon, Wamp, Tanner, Ford, Duncan, and Jenkins), the gentleman from New York (Mr. Serrano), and the gentlewoman from Missouri (Ms. McCarthy), an important measure designed to help preserve this irreplaceable aspect of America's cultural heritage. I hope all Members will join us in support of this effort. In 1988, Congress wisely enacted the National Film Preservation Act, which established a program in the Library of Congress to support the work of actors, archivists and the motion-picture industry to preserve America's disappearing film heritage. The bill we introduce today, the National Recording Preservation Act, follows the trail blazed by the Library's successful film program. The measure would create a National Recording Registry at the Library to identify, maintain and preserve sound recordings of cultural, aesthetic, or historic significance. Each year the Librarian of Congress will be able to select up to 25 recordings or groups of recordings for placement on the Registry, upon nominations made by the public, industry or archive representatives; recordings will be eligible for selection ten years after their creation. A National Recording Preservation Board will assist the Librarian in implementing a comprehensive recording preservation program, working with artists, archivists, educators and historians, copyright owners, recording-industry representatives, and others. A National Recording Preservation Foundation, chartered by the bill, will encourage, accept and administer private contributions to promote preservation of recordings, and public accessibility to the Nation's recording heritage, held at the Library and at other archives throughout the United States. The bill authorizes appropriations of up to $500,000 per year for seven years to fund the Library's preservation program, and up to $500,000 yearly for the same period to match the non-federal funds raised by the Foundation for preservation purposes. I include for the Record a letter received from Dr. James H. Billington, the Librarian of Congress, expressing his strong support for this measure, which will be introduced in the Senate by the senior senator from Louisiana (Mr. Breaux): Madam Speaker, my co-sponsors and I fervently hope that by enacting this modest bill, the Congress, working with the private sector to leverage the available resources, can spark creation of a comprehensive, sensible and effective program to preserve our Nation's sound-recording heritage for our children and grandchildren. We look forward to its quick enactment. Library of Congress Bicentennial 1800-2000, Washington, DC, November 9, 1999. Hon. Steny H. Hoyer, Committee on House Administration, House of Representatives, Longworth House Office Building, Washington, DC. Dear Mr. Hoyer: Thank you for seeking comments from the Library of Congress on your draft legislation to create a National Sound Recording Board and Foundation. We have had great success with a similar program to preserve the nation's film heritage, and I believe your legislation will allow the Library to build on that success in developing a national program for sound recordings. The key components of the legislation--a national recording registry, an advisory board bringing together experts in the field, and a fundraising foundation--have all been reviewed by the staffs of the Library's Motion Picture, Broadcasting and Recorded Sound Division and American Folklife Center, as well as our legal staff, and appear to provide the necessary elements of a comprehensive program to ensure the survival, conservation, and increased public availability of America's sound recording heritage. I am pleased that the legislation includes a directive for a comprehensive national recording preservation study and action plan, such as the one produced in 1993 under Congressional directive, which laid the framework for a national film preservation program. This study would serve as the basis for a national preservation plan, including setting standards for future private and public preservation efforts, and will be conducted in conjunction with the state-of-the- art National Audio-Visual Conservation Center we are developing in Culpeper, Virginia. The Center and the program created by your legislation will each benefit from the existence and work of the other. I support the bill in both goal and substance. I will need your support, however, in assuring that any funds appropriated for the Board or Foundation are new funds added to the Library's base. We cannot afford to absorb these costs, as happened this year with funds for the National Film Preservation Foundation. Please thank your staff members, Bob Bean and Michael Harrison, for their hard work and extensive consultation with the Library in developing this legislation. Please let me know if Congressional staff would like to visit the Library's sound recording program to see what we do currently and how your legislation might be implemented. Sincerely, James H. Billington, The Librarian of Congress.

Mr. HOYER

Mr. HOYER. Mr. Chairman, I yield to the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Obey), the ranking member on the Committee on Appropriations.

Mr. HOYER. Mr. Chairman, I thank the distinguished majority leader for yielding to me. Mr. Chairman, might I inquire of the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Armey) that in the event that the appropriations bills are not ready to be voted upon on Friday, does the majority intend to have the Members come back on Friday to vote on the suspension bills?

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

Mr. HOYER. I yield to the gentleman from Texas.

Mr. HOYER

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

Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of this resolution which, as the gentleman from Florida has so aptly pointed out, provides for authority to reprint four documents of particular interest. Those of us who have been around the Congress for most of our adult lives, either as students working here, as interns, or as Members and anything in between, know that although this seems like a mundane responsibility, authorizing the reprinting of four documents and the provision of copies to Members and to the public is a profound action. It is profound because these documents are so profound. These documents have had a tremendous impact on not only the citizens of the United States, but, I would suggest, a great impact on all the world. I remember, as I am sure the gentleman from Florida remembers, when Vaclav Havel, the President of the Czech Republic, stood at the rostrum in front of the Speaker, and spoke about the emergence of Czechoslovakia from behind the Iron Curtain into freedom, both politically and economically, and democratically. He observed that two of the documents, the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution, impelled the movement in Czechoslovakia from behind the Iron Curtain. Havel spoke dramatically about human rights, political rights, civil rights, and economic rights. It is critically important that every American student, every American adult be familiar with the source documents of our Nation which articulate our principles and outline how we accomplish democracy, how we debate and resolve differences of opinion, how we, as minority leader often observes, substitute debate on this floor for bullets on a battlefield. Debate is, in fact, the substitute for violence; it is the way we in America have, since the Civil War resolved our differences without bloodshed. It is a lesson for all the world, but particularly a lesson for our own people. The reprinting of these documents will provide a ready supply for Members to distribute and for the public to access. So I join the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Mica) in supporting this very important resolution. I support him in his observations with reference to having available not only the pocket Constitution, but the annotated Constitution as well for the public and for Members so that we better understand the genius of our Founding Fathers and the contribution that American democracy makes to all the world. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. HOYER

Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize the Tenth Anniversary of the fall of the Berlin Wall. Perhaps no act in the latter half of this century better represents the human quest for freedom and dignity. Perhaps no barrier more aptly symbolized the moral bankruptcy of an entire political movement--a movement that subjected its citizens to forcible detention. As President Kennedy noted during his famous speech in West Berlin in 1963, the Wall was erected to keep its citizens within. As we all knew, the Wall was fundamentally flawed and had to come down. Its dismantling foreshadowed the collapse of the Soviet Union and communist domination of Eastern Europe. Who would have thought that less than 10 years later three former members of the Warsaw pact would become members of NATO? Who would have predicted that NATO would survive as an engine of security and democracy-building in Europe? When I was appointed to the Helsinki Commission in 1985, there were serious questions in the United States about the viability of the Helsinki process. Had the process emphasized security at the expense of human rights? Was it perhaps time to reconsider the process in the absence of tangible progress on human rights questions? Today, we celebrate the freedom yielded by our steadfast commitment to the process and by our demand that the former Soviet bloc countries adhere and implement the human rights standards enshrined by the Accords. The fall of the Berlin Wall transformed the world and demonstrated unreservedly the dignity of man as fundamental to democracy. The Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) took a stand--that human dignity, tolerance and mutual respect would be the standards for all the nations of Europe as we entered in 1990s. Almost immediately, the fall of the Wall ushered in new members to the OSCE--Lithuania, Latvia, Estonia and Albania. All were freed from the shackles of Soviet domination, and began to express a desire to join the Helsinki process. Why would they want to join when in effect we had won? Because the Helsinki process could serve as a source of values and act as an agent of conflict resolution. It provided participating States with a blueprint by which to guide them away from the legacy of the past. But most importantly it reminded members--old and new--of their responsibilities to their own citizens and to each other. This lesson would be sorely tested in the years following the Wall's fall with the dismemberment of Yugoslavia, the genocide of Bosnia, the economic collapse of Albania and the emergence of new threats to the citizens of Russia. The emphasis on rule of law in the Helsinki process would become even more relevant for all of Europe. One year after the fall of the Wall, at the OSCE Paris Summit, former political prisoners like Vaclav Havel and Lech Walesa, who had fought for the rights espoused at Helsinki in 1975, led their countries to the table and recommitted themselves and their governments to the principles of human rights, security and economic cooperation that are the foundation of the Final Act. Today, 54 nations of Europe, the Caucasus and Central Asia are committed to the Helsinki process as participating States of the OSCE. Mr. Speaker, as we reflect on this anniversary we understand that the countries and peoples of the region are still in transition and will be for decades to come. Great strides have been made by many former communist countries in building democratic societies and market economies. Poland, Hungary and the Czech Republic are our NATO allies and are actively pursuing admission to the European Union. Other central and eastern European countries are taking steps to join NATO and the EU. Yet, progress has been uneven and much remains to be done. It is critical that the United States remain engaged with the peoples and governments of Europe and the countries which emerged from the former Soviet Union, especially Russia, during this difficult period. I agree with President Clinton when he said that we must `'reaffirm our determination to finish the job--to complete a Europe whole, free, democratic, and at peace, for the first time in all of history.'' It is in our strategic and national interest to do so.

Mr. HOYER

Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, almost one year ago today, October 20, 1998, the then-speaker Newt Gingrich came on this House floor and chided the Republican perfectionist caucus. Two disastrous government shutdowns and rhetoric hot enough to heat this building on a cold winter day taught him one thing, government is the art of compromise; but he is not here. That lesson has been lost on today's House leadership. The perfectionist caucus, the crowd that says it is my way or no way, rides on. The majority whip says the leadership will negotiate with the President on his knees. The Republican leadership rammed an irresponsible tax cut through the House, even though it would suck the Social Security surplus dry, and now they claim they will not spend one dime of that Social Security surplus. They have already dipped into that surplus to the tune of $17 billion and it is going to be well over on their way to spending $30 billion plus. Let us get real. Let us do the people's business.

Mr. HOYER

Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, I thank my friend, the gentleman from Texas, for yielding time to me, and I thank the gentleman from California (Mr. Horn) for his comments. I thank both of them for their leadership in facilitating the movement of this bill to the floor today. At the outset, I want to say what a privilege and pleasure it is to work with the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Portman), who is one of our finest Members, and who is one of our Members most focused on legislative accomplishments. Too often we spend time trying to make political points, and I am involved in that and others are involved in that as well. But the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Portman) has been throughout his career focused on substantive accomplishment, and it is a real privilege and pleasure to work with the gentleman. I thank him for his leadership on this effort. Mr. Speaker, over the years Congress, as has been pointed out, has created hundreds of programs, 600-plus, of categorical programs to help communities and families deal with various different issues. We did so because we wanted to make sure that the quality of life of our constituents was as good as it possibly could be. Each of the programs was created, however, with its own nuanced rules and regulations. In some areas local needs do not fit specifically into the designations that are included in the programs. In other areas, there is overlapping and the programs duplicate each other. For many years as a member of the Subcommittee on Labor, Health and Human Services, and Education, I have talked to the secretaries of those three departments about coordinating their programs so that, whether it is a child or a worker or family, that that family could more easily access the services available across departmental lines. This bill deals specifically with making sure that grant applicants have an easier time and a more efficient time and a less expensive time in accessing dollars that we want to get as simply and directly as possible to the recipients that are intended to be the beneficiaries of the programs we adopt. Right now caseworkers spend far too much time dealing with red tape and paperwork. The Federal government has created hundreds of different taps through which assistance flows. Communities, programs, and families must run from tap to tap in many instances with a bucket to help the people that we want to help so well. One of the analogies I have made is that it is a shame at the Federal level we do not say we want to help child A or family B, and we have a lot of different programs to do that from a lot of different departments, whether it is housing, whether it is nutritional programs out of agriculture, whether it is job programs out of the Department of Labor, education programs out of the Department of Education, Head Start out of HHS, a myriad number of programs, it is a shame that we do not really have a big funnel up here with a spout, and child Mary or family A or B would get the programs coordinated for them by us, that we created. This bill goes some way towards doing that. I want to again congratulate the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Portman) for his leadership on this. It requires the Office of Management and Budget to work with other Federal agencies to establish a uniform application for financial assistance for multiple programs across multiple Federal agencies. That seems to make a lot of sense, as the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Turner) has said, but it really has not happened too often. Each agency has had its own perspective on one little question that it had to have answered so that it would approve the application, where the other agency did not need the answer to that question, it needed an answer to another question. Mr. Speaker, it is all the same tax dollars appropriated by and authorized by the same Congress, and what this legislation says is, come on, fellows, let us get our act together and let us have the locals tell us what we need to know in a uniform way, rely on that, and get that grant money out to them without them wasting dollars on administrative procedures. Some people denigrate bureaucrats. I do not do that, I represent a lot of them. But that does not mean I want to see a proliferation of bureaucracy that money for children and families goes to, simply trying to get through the system. It is critically important not to have to deal with all kinds of different forms when basically the information we are seeking is the same. Secondly, this bill will simplify reporting requirements and administrative procedures, and again facilitate, not impede, dollars getting to people that we at the Federal level, our State colleagues and local colleagues, all want to assist. Thirdly, Mr. Speaker, it will develop electronic methods. My friend, the gentleman from Ohio, spoke about that. This is a critically important aspect of this legislation. I was pleased to ensure that we got this online, so to speak, as quickly as possible. It will help develop electronic methods for applying for and reporting of Federal financial assistance funds. I think, as I have said, that this is critically important. In my opinion, the Federal Government's responsibility will be facilitated by this act. I agree with the gentleman from Texas, and I know the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Portman) does as well, we are not saying that we do not want full accountability. We have a responsibility to the taxpayers when we authorize and appropriate this money that the money will be spent in a manner that is effective and accomplishes the result for which it is planned. On the other hand, we want to facilitate, not impede, the application of those dollars, while at the same time requiring accountability. I believe that S. 468 and the House bill that we are now considering will add a much-needed focus on the coordination of program requirements, both within and across Federal departments. Mr. Speaker, in closing, I want to mention what I mention a lot of times on this floor, unfortunately, the American public that watches C- SPAN sees too often us fighting with one another, and they do so because really what gets on this floor most of the time is the disagreements that we have, because the agreements that we have are done in a much briefer time frame and do not get the focus that the disagreements get. Here is a perfect example of a bipartisan piece of legislation worked on by the majority party and its leadership and the gentleman from California (Mr. Horn), the minority party and our leadership, the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Turner), resulting in a bill put together by the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Portman), with my help, but he has been the leader on this, he really took up where Senator Glenn left off when Senator Glenn left. That is, I think, going to make a very significant, perhaps not front page news but nevertheless significant step forward for facilitating the application of Federal funds in an efficient and effective manner to make the lives of our constituents better. I thank the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Portman) for his leadership and work on this issue. As I said, it has been a pleasure working with him, and I thank the gentleman from California (Mr. Horn) and the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Turner).

Mr. HOYER

Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker I rise today in support of the District of Columbia College Access Act. This legislation would allow high school graduates from the District of Columbia to pay in-State tuition rates at public colleges and universities in Maryland and Virginia. Specifically, the bill would allow District students to apply for up to $10,000 a year, subject to a $50,000 cap, to offset the difference between in-State and out-of-State tuition rates. Furthermore, students who choose to attend private schools in the District and the adjacent Maryland and Virginia counties may also apply for up to $2,500 to offset the cost of their private tuition. Although the District of Columbia Appropriations Act has not been signed into law, I am pleased the latest version contains $17 million for this important initiative. As many of you know, I graduated high school just across the border in Prince Georges County in 1957. My parents were from very modest means and quite frankly were not in the financial position to help me pay for college. I consider myself lucky though. Lucky because when my stepfather, who was in the Air Force, was transferred up to Andrews Air Force Base our family settled in Maryland. Going part time I was able to go to the University of Maryland. I used to go to school during the day and at night I worked first as a file clerk at the Central Intelligence Agency and then on Capitol Hill. It was not always easy balancing school and work and it took me 6 years to earn my undergraduate degree. However, I was able to do it because I had in-state tuition and I consider my decision to attend the University of Maryland as one of the best decisions I have made in my life. The legislation that we have before us affords high school graduates in the District of Columbia the same opportunity that I had. The opportunity to attend an excellent university at a reasonable cost. I would like to thank Congressman Davis and Congresswoman Norton for all their work on this legislation which I am pleased to cosponsor. Additionally, I would like to thank D.C. Appropriations Subcommittee Chairman Istook and Ranking Member Moran for including funding for this legislation in their bill.

Mr. HOYER

Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Maryland for yielding me the time. Mr. Speaker, 3 minutes does not give me an opportunity, obviously, to discuss this bill or the fiscal shenanigans that are going on in this bill. But I do want to focus on one facet of this bill, the National Institutes of Health. We have all heard the phrase ``women and children first.'' That, essentially, means that we want to give to women and children priority. This phase has been women, children, and the sick and workers last. This bill has been held hostage to the last. Why? Because the President places a priority on women, children, workers, and the sick. My distinguished chairman of the subcommittee, the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Porter), cares a lot about NIH. I want to tell the chairman, and I am sure he knows this, I am surprised that he would support this bill. Because under this bill, Mr. Speaker, they are proposing to spend this fiscal year that we are in now 1.5 billion less than President Clinton suggested. Hear me, $1.5 billion less. I will tell my colleagues that people are concerned about this because it will delay such a large part. NIH budget will be a massive managerial challenge but much more importantly will force the delay of research grants and delay of clinical trials. My friends, the chairman of our committee so critically involved in bone marrow transplants knows how timely action is. We are delaying clinical trials for cancer patients. We are delaying clinical trials for victims of heart disease. We are delaying clinical trials for victims of AIDS. We are delaying clinical trials for children with serious, life-threatening diseases. We are delaying them until September 29 and 30. That is 11 months away. Who of my colleagues would stand and say to a critically ill child, wait 11 months while we underfund by $1.5 billion what the President asked for NIH funding? We pretend that we are giving NIH $17.9 billion. But we are saying, hey, guess what. Forty-two percent of it they cannot spend. Women, children, sick and workers last. Why have we done this? To save Social Security? The majority leader of their party says that Social Security ought to be done away with. Let us reject this bill.

Mr. HOYER

Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize the extraordinary service of Mother Pearlie Mae Brown, a woman of strong devotion and commitment to her community and our Nation. Pearlie Mae Brown is currently the First Lady of the Greater Bible Way Church in Prince Frederick, Maryland, where she is the most active and most cherished member of its congregation. Her talents have her serving as President of the Field Missionary Board, the New Members Club, as advisor to the all Women's Auxiliaries and President of the newly formed Evangelistic Board. Her tireless energy and determination in bringing the word of God to all have also taken beyond the boundaries of her own community to the National level where she was the President of the Clergy Wives and Widows for 19 years and currently the President of the International Women's Council. She is also the First Lady of the Maryland-Washington Metropolitan Diocese, the Vice Chair of the Board of the Interdenominational Council of Ministers' Wives and Ministers' Widows of Washington, D.C. and Vicinity and is also involved in the numerous other comprehensive programs throughout the region. While Pearlie Mae Brown takes part in all of these wonderful service organizations, she takes the most pride in being the First Lady of the Greater Bible Way Church in Prince Frederick and the proud wife of First Vice President Bishop Joseph N. Brown, D.D. Together they have four children and five grandchildren who are all an integral part of their life. It is through the strength of her family that she gains the true inspiration to carry on her mission to serve God and her community. We recognize all of these many achievements on the eve of the 40th Annual Women's Convention being hosted by the Greater Bible Way Church under the direction of Pearlie Mae from November 10th through November 12th in Prince Frederick, Maryland. This convention, which is held in Prince Frederick every ten years, celebrates women's participation in religious affairs and explores the ``total man and women--body, spirit, and soul. This year's convention is expected to include around 800 participants from throughout the Nation in addition to people from Trinidad, England, Africa, and Jamaica. Pearlie Mae's life has been punctuated with zeal and enthusiasm, commitment and servitude, honor and distinction. She is an example for all to follow and the people of communities far and wide have benefitted from her determination, tremendous dedication and hard work. As she embarks on the 40th annual Women's Convention may she have strength in accomplishing her mission and satisfaction in knowing she has touched the lives of thousands.