Steny Hoyer

Mr. HOYER

Mr. HOYER. Postviability?

Mr. HOYER

Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, after 39 years of outstanding service the military career of Gen. John Shalikashvili will come to a close today. In my role as a cochairman of the bipartisan National Security Caucus [NSC] I had the honor and pleasure of presiding at a retirement ceremony for the General last week. I was joined by my fellow NSC cochairman, Senator Charles Robb (D-VA), as well as Senator Jack Reed (D-RI) and Representative Jane Harman (D-CA). Rather than saying ``farewell,'' the caucus organized this event to say ``well done'' to General Shalikashvili. He is truly deserving of this recognition because of his tremendous contributions to America's national security interests, and his life is a classic American success story. General Shalikashvili was born in Warsaw, Poland, in 1936. He was the first foreign-born Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, the first draftee to become Chairman and the first Chairman who was a graduate of Officer Candidate School. During his military career, General Shalikashvili held a number of prestigious commands. He served as commander of the 9th Infantry Division and was the commander of Operation Provide Comfort, the relief operation that returned hundreds of Kurdish refugees to Northern Iraq. His last position before being named Chairman of the Joint Chiefs was as Supreme Allied Commander, Europe and Commander in Chief, European Command. During the tenure of General Shalikashvili as Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, there was an explosion in the number of military operations conducted by the Armed Forces of the United States, in such diverse areas of the world as Haiti, Bosnia, the Taiwan Straits, Kuwait, the Korean Peninsula and in and around the Arabian Peninsula. While most of these operations were peacekeeping or humanitarian in nature, a significant number of them were strike or deterrent operations. Among the General's many accomplishments as Chairman have included NATO enlargement, the Partnership for Peace, the North Korean Nuclear Framework Agreement, new defense arrangements with Japan including revision of the status of Okinawa, as well as many projects concerning the Gulf States and Israel. One of the last accomplishments of the General's tenure was the production of the Quadrennial Defense Review [QDR]. The QDR began the serious solution of the biggest hole in our defense program: the $20 billion modernization shortfall. With personnel reduction and cuts in aircraft and other programs, the Chairman has reduced roughly half of the shortfall and has laid the groundwork for the reduction of the remainder. In short, as Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, General Shalikashvili confronted historic change, responded to nontraditional military missions and prepared America's Armed Forces for the challenge of the 21st century. General Shalikashvili's extraordinary service has brought great credit upon himself, the Armed Forces, the Department of Defense, and the Nation. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to place in the Record the remarks of Senator Max Cleland (D-GA) regarding the General's retirement. The Senator is also a cochairman of the National Security Caucus and is well known as a hero of the Vietnam war. Statement of Senator Max Cleland I am honored to be here to pay tribute to an outstanding American who exemplifies the highest of American ideals. Many Americans admire him for overcoming the tragedy of World War II by coming to the United States and fulfilling the American dream. Others praise him for the outstanding leadership he has shown over the past four years. Indeed, the military has faced many challenges over the past several years. General Shalikashvili's efforts, however, have insured that the military has not only met each of these challenges but has excelled. While I share these sentiments, as a Vietnam veteran, I am particularly proud of the fact that one of my comrades has led the Department. Those American soldiers who lived through the Vietnam era and its aftermath understand what soldiering is really about. They understand the meaning of sacrifice. They understand what a national defense really means. That without one cold, hungry, scared 19-year-old soldier being willing to leave his foxhole and advance we have no national defense. General Shalikashvili understands these principles. He learned them when he was a young child, a child who witnessed the horrors of war in Europe and returned there as an adult to lead the military of the world's foremost defender of freedom and democracy. General Shalikashvili did just that when he served as the Commander-in-Chief of the United States' European Command, a leader of all NATO forces. I am extremely proud of the service he has rendered to the United States. We owe him a tremendous debt of gratitude for a job well done. General, God bless you and your family on your retirement.

Mr. HOYER

Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Following up on the comments of the gentleman who has just spoken, this is not a back-door way to do anything. The amendment that the gentleman refers to, as I understand it, has been introduced in the form of a bill. It is in committee. It can be reported out. The fact of the matter is, we could add the amendment that the gentleman suggests to any bill being considered by this House. It is not germane on this bill because nothing in this bill deals with pay, as the gentleman knows. I presume he knows that. If he does not know it, I will inform him. Nothing in this bill deals with pay.

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

Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of this conference report. The chairman has outlined well the provisions of this conference report. I think all of the Members on my side of the aisle, as well as all of the Members on the chairman's side of the aisle, can be pleased with the fact that this bill addresses significant law enforcement problems: fighting drugs, fighting crime, providing funds to the ONDCP to make sure that our young people know of the dangers of drugs, and convince them to stay off and to just say no, as Mrs. Reagan so aptly suggested. It also provides other funds for the IRS to make sure that we have a system that works. We have new people in place that are addressing the problems that the committee has seen and that the Congress has seen, and very frankly, I think this bill is a good bill that could be unanimously supported by the committee. I want to make a point to the chairman. I do not see the major chairman on the floor. I understand there is a colloquy, and I will wait perhaps and hopefully the gentleman from Louisiana, Chairman Livingston, will be on the floor. I understand he is on his way. I understand the gentleman from Arizona [Mr. Kolbe] has a colloquy to enter into. Mr. Speaker, let me simply say that I congratulate the gentleman for his work on this bill, I congratulate him on the bipartisan fashion in which he has worked toward fashioning a bill that I think is acceptable to all parties. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from Cleveland, OH [Mr. Kucinich].

Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I want to reiterate why Members ought to vote for this bill. The reason they ought to vote for this bill is because it does some things that are very important to average Americans, families in neighborhoods, in communities, concerned about the safety of their children, concerned about the safety of their families, concerned about the safety of their neighborhoods. It provides $3.9 billion for law enforcement efforts. Every Member in this House supports that kind of effort. The fact of the matter is, $1.6 billion of that money is for antidrug activities. We could all talk about making communities safe. We can go back to our town meetings and say, I want to keep America safe from drugs; I want to keep American kids off of drugs. But the fact of the matter is, this effort makes that happen. This is an important initiative. ONDCP, which is the organization that General McCaffrey heads up, as all of you know, the most decorated soldier in America, General McCaffrey heads up the ONDCP. He has organized an effort across the Government to make sure that we maximize our effort to make our communities safe. We provide for monies to go on television. We know that there is nothing that impacts young people in America like television. What this bill does is provide funds so that we can communicate with young people with reference to staying off drugs, as I said earlier, just saying no. That is a critically important effort. I would ask Members to focus on that. There are some of you who think this bill is not perfect. You are absolutely right, it not perfect, but it is a very important effort in trying to address the drug problem in America, safe communities in America.

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

Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, let me get that figure for the gentleman. Maybe the chairman has the exact figure.

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

Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, the answer to the gentleman's question is yes, but I would point out to the gentleman, the bill is over $200 million below what the President felt necessary to fund the IRS. The committee cut that figure by over $200 million.

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

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

Mr. HOYER. I appreciate the chairman's clarification. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. HOYER. To the extent that we cannot get any COLA adjustment if Federal employees do not get it, that is accurate. It is not included in this bill. No, sir. Nothing in this bill deals with the COLA's of Federal employees; nothing in this bill deals with the COLA's of Members; nothing, not one jot or tittle.

Mr. HOYER. I thank the chairman for his comments. That is, indeed, my understanding, that the four vacancies, two Republicans and two Democrats that are pending now, three being nominated, one Republican to be nominated, they would be subject to these limits, to the extent that they could serve the term for which they are now nominated and one additional; that is, sitting members, now, could be reappointed for one term, but that all future commissioners would be limited to the one term.

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

Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. The fact of the matter is that I would hope that Members would concentrate on what this bill is, not what it is not, what it possibly could be, what could be added. There are a lot of great things that probably could be added to this bill that are not added to this bill. There are probably a lot of great things or bad things that this bill could preclude that it does not. But what it is, what this bill is that Members are going to consider is an excellent bill that does good and is bipartisan in nature. We all gave to reach agreement. I thank the chairman for his leadership and effort on this issue. Request for Quorum Call

Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for his comments. Just briefly, obviously, that was an issue that there was strong feeling on, particularly in the Senate, and frankly it was impossible to prevail on that position from the House perspective. Mr. Speaker, I would enter into a colloquy with the distinguished chairman. The chairman and I have had long discussions and worked many years on the FEC. We differ in our perspectives in some respects, but we have come, I think, to what is a fair agreement on both sides, given the status of the conference report. Mr. Speaker, I would ask the gentleman, am I correct that under the language that we have adopted with respect to FEC term limits, that there are two Republican vacancies currently and two Democratic vacancies? As I understand it, there are three pending nominations and one Republican that was withdrawn and one that will be made. Hopefully both the executive and the legislative will cooperate to make sure those nominations are made prior to December 31. It is our understanding that under those circumstances, they would then be able to be reappointed once after the initial appointment. Is that correct, Mr. Speaker?

Mr. HOYER

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

Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from California for yielding to me. Mr. Speaker, the previous speaker either did not hear clearly the comments that were made, or has misrepresented them. I choose the former as the alternative. What I said was that an American citizen has the right to go to court to question the constitutionality under which someone is asking that citizen to do something. In this case, that citizen has done so. The court just 8 days ago, I would say to the gentleman from Georgia [Mr. Barr], decided that they did have the constitutional right, and 8 days later, we demand that the U.S. Attorney take action, without giving the U.S. Attorney the opportunity to do so. I think that is a precipitous and uncalled for action of this body sworn to uphold and defend the Constitution. That is what I said, I say to the gentleman from Georgia [Mr. Barr].

Mr. HOYER

Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, this is an important resolution. The outcome of this vote tonight on this resolution will not decide the Sanchez- Dornan case. It will, however, be a statement as to whether or not we are going to proceed in a fair, judicial manner. I agree with the gentleman from California, that is the way we ought to proceed. The gentleman from Massachusetts observed what has happened with this resolution. In the first instance, the committee proposed the harshest resolution it could ascribe, demanding that a U.S. citizen be indicted for crimes while under investigation by another body, the district attorney. My colleagues, that would not wash. It would not even wash with the majority of the majority party, and so that resolution was rightfully changed, and we did not object to that change. The title was not changed. It still demands that the U.S. attorney seek criminal action against a citizen who has, as we have pointed out, still his and the organization's constitutional rights to contest the validity of the subpoena that is pending. This resolution I have called precipitous. I believe it is. In response to the gentleman from Florida [Mr. Diaz-Balart] yesterday, I said that what we ought to do, if we feel this way, is write a letter to the U.S. Attorney and say we think that he ought to take the appropriate action because the subpoena has not been responded to. My colleagues attempt to adopt my suggestion by adopting language which now says that we demand, as the gentleman from Massachusetts [Mr. Frank] pointed out, that pursuant to its determination, that is the U.S. Attorney's office, that it is appropriate, according to the law and the facts. In other words, do what you think is right. Do we go around passing resolutions through the House of Representatives demanding that people do what they think is right when we know, my friend from California, the gentleman talks about the sanctity of a vote, the sanctity of the Constitution is something we are all sworn to preserve and protect, and it accords to every citizen that when the government moves against him or her that they have a right to go to the courts of this land and say ``I need not respond.'' Let us not put the House of Representatives in a position prematurely of demanding the denigration of that absolute constitutional right. Vote ``no'' on this resolution. Vote ``no'' on the final resolution.

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

Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, I was wondering if the gentleman was just going to be frank for a few minutes.