Duncan Hunter

Mr. HUNTER

Mr. HUNTER. Madam Speaker. In answering my colleague with respect to getting out of town, I think a lot of us, Democrat and Republican, have come to the conclusion that the president will not take ``yes'' for an answer until it is politically expedient to do so. You can make an agreement in 5 minutes or 5 days or 5 months, and we obviously have great resistance at the White House right now. Madam Speaker, let me talk about an aspect of this administration which needs addressing in a very short period of time after the new President takes office. Today, national security is at a low ebb. I reflect back on Vice President Gore's new invention that he came up with in the last debate, in which, along with inventing the Internet and various other American inventions, he invented four Army divisions. He stated that when he came in as vice president, the Army had gone down, but that he increased the number of divisions. Well, in fact in January of 1993, when Vice President Gore took office, there were 14 divisions in the United States Army. A division is a big group. It is a large number of people, a lot of equipment, in some cases upward of 20,000 personnel. Today, after the Clinton-Gore administration has run down national security, I might say, for 6 years, there are only 10 divisions in the United States Army. So when Vice President Gore came into office, there were 14 divisions. He claims he increased the number of divisions, but today it is down to 10 divisions. So somewhere along the line the vice president has invented four Army divisions, which is not an insignificant thing. Now, if you look across the array of military equipment shortages and ammunition shortages, a number of things jump out at you. One thing we need to know is that since the vice president and President Clinton took over in 1992, we have cut the military almost in half. We have gone down, as I said, from 14 Army divisions January 1, 1993, to only 10 today, so we have cut the Army by a good 30-35 percent. We have cut the Navy from 546 warships to only 316 warships, so we have cut the Navy in numbers by about 40 percent. We have cut our fighter air wings from 24 fighter air wings to only 13 fighter air wings. So we have cut air power almost in half under this administration. Now, the interesting aspect of that, and I think the real tragedy of this slashing of national defense, is this: Usually when you cut an organization, whether it is a sports organization or a business organization, when you decrease it, when you cut it back in size, Americans presume that the core that is left after you have made these cuts is going to be well-trained, well-equipped and ready to go. The sad facts are that the small military that is left after Vice President Gore and President Clinton have taken the action to it, the small military that is left, this half a military that is left, is not as ready as the big military that we had that won Desert Storm in the early 1990s. Let me give you some examples. They are tragic examples. A few weeks ago we had the Chief of Staff of the Army, General Shinseki, testifying to us. He had to report to us that the Army is $3 billion short of critical ammo supplies. Ammunition. Now, you may not agree with the B-2 bomber, you may not agree with the F-22 fighter. Every American feels that it is good for our troops to have ammunition, because they may need it. This $3 billion shortage was not measured against any requirement that Congress laid on the administration, it was not measured against what the Senate or the House felt we needed in ammunition, it was measured against what the administration itself analyzed that we needed to be able to fight the so-called two regional contingency conflict. That is the kind of conflict where we might get involved in a Desert Storm operation against Saddam Hussein, or we might have a Kosovo operation, and, at the same time, the North Koreans, for example, might take advantage of that and try to come south on the peninsula, so American forces might have to deploy to two different areas of the world. We feel that to be safe and to give our service people the best chance of returning alive, we need to have the equipment, the ammunition and the capability of handling those two conflicts at about the same time, because it could happen. Well, that $3 billion ammunition shortage that General Shinseki spoke about is with respect to the two MRC contingency. So let us rebuild national defense. Madam Speaker, I think help is on the way.

Mr. HUNTER

Mr. HUNTER. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the gentleman from California (Mr. McKeon) for putting this special order together, and we talked about the serious side of Ron I think a little too much tonight. I need to tell you a couple of stories about this guy. The first story is, a number of people have talked about his patriotic service to the Nation as a Naval officer, indeed, a dentist; and there is one story that is floating around Southern California about a certain dentist who was seeing a large number of recruits. They were running them through pretty rapidly, filling teeth, pulling a few here and there and getting them in shape to go overseas. Ron and his cohort there, the other dentist who worked in the office, decided they would have a little fun. It involved a new technique, the technique of utilizing dynamite to remove bad teeth. So they had a rather large, naive young man who was in the chair, a little bit apprehensive about this dental work that was to begin. Ron very ceremoniously opened up a large volume, a big book; and he said we are going to try the new blasting technique on your teeth. I hope you like it. It is experimental, and Ron proceeded to take a piece, a little roll of gauze that he dipped in iodine that looked like a miniature dynamite stick. And as this horrified recruit, who had been promised good dental care in the U.S. Navy, lay back in that chair with just a look of horror on his face, Ron inserted this small stick of dynamite under one of the molars or on top of one of his molars, he looked back at the book and he said it now says we have to attach the fuse, and he pulled out a piece of dental floss, which if you light it will in fact fizzle and sputter and acted something like a fuse, then he plugged the fuse into the small stick of dynamite that was laying on top of a now horrified recruit's back molar. Ron then, a very, very solemn man. We all know Ron can be a solemn person. When Ron is solemn we all get solemn, and he very solemnly skipped a few lines in the book, and he says to his friend, his fellow dentist, that we have to take cover. So they led the fuse over behind the desk and got down behind the desk; and Ron then lit the fuse, and as this fuse sputtered and fizzled and the flame, the spark got closer and closer to this young recruit, the recruit got more and more agitated, as you may imagine, and finally leaped up with a squeak and raced out of the office. Ron was required shortly thereafter to visit the commanding officer. And this is pure Ron Packard. He has gotten away with stuff all of his life. He very solemnly went in and began to explain what had happened very truthfully, and his commanding officer wanted to be very severe, but after Ron had gone about halfway through the story, his commanding officer could not help himself, and he burst out laughing. He finally just admonished Ron and his colleague to get out of there, so they left. They promised not to harass any more recruits, and that is one of my favorite Navy stories. But that epitomizes the sense of humor that Ron has and Ron has carried that sense of humor over to today. In fact, he has a great sense of humor. He actually told the gentleman from California (Mr. Cunningham) and I we had good golf swings before he proceeded to take us for a small wager, of course not illegal; but we have had a lot of fun out there playing golf. Ron is a fairly tight-fisted guy. I had an opportunity to actually make a hole-in-one in a golf tournament that my colleagues played in, and I thought I would get a car. But I was informed that since Ron was running the tournament, I would not get any car. And I think I got just a couple of dollars for making this fabulous hole-in-one, even though another member of the conference then got a very nice car after he made a hole-in-one a couple of tournaments later. Ron wanted to present me with my car this year, which I understand was a small model about 5 inches long; so, Ron, I want to get that as soon as possible. My other favorite story about Ron Packard involves his family, and it involves where he comes from in that great area of the Snake River Plains in Idaho, where people work from dawn to dark and have a tremendous work ethic and where everybody looks the other guy right straight in the eye and where literally a big piece of American wilderness was carved into a very productive land, and that is where Ron and his 16 brothers and sisters, 14 boys and 3 girls, grew up near Meridian, Idaho, and the Snake River Plains there. His father was working for Morrison, Knudson just prior to the Japanese bombing in Pearl Harbor in World War II, and he was on Wake Island. He was working as a civilian worker. When Wake Island was taken shortly after the bombing of Pearl Harbor he was captured by the Japanese. His father became a POW. I think what his father did in that POW camp represents the character that Ron took on, and that has followed him all of his life, and that is that Ron's dad who became a POW was taken on one of the so-called hell ships to Japan and treated very brutally, helped to take care of the other POWs. He became the historian of the POW camp, and he wrote down the history of all of the members of that POW camp, and he kept a log on what happened to them. As you know, 30 percent of our POWs were killed in World War II that were incarcerated in Japan. He hid that little history, as I recall, in a piece of bamboo. And when he came back to the States, he made sure that he contacted every family that had a loved one in that POW camp and gave them the history of their loved one, who in most cases did not make it back or in many cases did not make it back before he went back to his own family, and then like Ron Packard, he told them, all the kids, what had happened, and then he talked very little about it. And that is Ron. He is the kind of guy who has got great character, a great caring and does not dwell on himself a lot. We have had little cabals, as the gentleman from California (Mr. Dreier) said in the California delegation. I like a good cabal myself, and a good secret meeting; Ron Packard is a guy that likes to bring people together and likes to put oil in the water and bring out the best in everyone. He really epitomizes what is best about this Congress. He has got a good heart. He looks you in the eye. He helps you whenever he can, and he is a great citizen. And I cannot help but think that it was that upbringing that the 17 boys and girls, 14 boys and 3 girls, on the Snake River Plains of Idaho and all that hard work that they had to endure and keeping that family going without a father that made Ron Packard what he is. We have been better for his presence. God bless you, Ron.

Mr. HUNTER

Mr. HUNTER. Mr. Speaker, Tuesday, October 10th, marked the National Day in the Republic of China on Taiwan. The so-called ``Double 10''-- the tenth day of the tenth month--commemorates the founding of the Republic of China on October 10, 1911. This ``Double 10'' observance in Taiwan this year is cause for both celebration and sobriety. The reason for celebration is obvious. As every Member knows, Taiwan once again conducted a national election, this past March. Chen Shui-bian, the former mayor of Taipei and a veteran of the pro-democracy campaign in the 1980's, was elected president. As the reins of government were transferred from one party to another, the final phase of Taiwan's democratic transformation was completed. And a remarkable transformation it has been over the past decade--a renegotiation of the ``social contract'' that was conducted without the kinds of chaos and confrontation that have attended such sweeping political changes in some other countries. There are many heroes in the democratization of Taiwan. President Chen, for one; and, his predecessor in the presidential office, Lee Teng-hui, for another. The 22 million people of Taiwan, who have taken so readily to democracy and have participated so enthusiastically in the whole electoral process, are also heroes. So on the occasion of this year's ``Double 10,'' all of Taiwan and its many American friends can join in a celebration of democracy and in a renewed commitment to the principles of a free society and a free market economy that have proved so successful in Taiwan, the United States, and many other countries. But, Mr. Speaker, this is also a time for sobriety. The past seven- and-a-half years have witnessed a fundamental shift in U.S. policy toward Asia. Without the benefit of a thorough strategic analysis or an informed national debate, there has been a concerted attempt to redirect U.S. policy into a China-centric focus at the expense of our other traditional allies. The perception in international circles that Taiwan has been stigmatized as the ``problem'' in U.S./China relations was most dramatically reinforced during President Clinton's trip in July 1998 to the People's Republic of China, during which he implicitly endorsed the P.R.C.'s interpretation of the ``One China'' doctrine. Concurrent with the ill wind from Washington has been the rapid and provocative buildup of forces in the P.R.C.'s People's Liberation Army. A member of Representative Rohrabacher's staff, Al Santoli, traveled to the region during August and filed a report that was published by the American Foreign Policy Council. Among Mr. Santoli's key findings: The PLA's modernization and joint war fighting capabilities are developing at a rate far more rapidly than the Pentagon's previous predictions. The Nanjing Region exercises have showcased the PLA's new high-tech capabilities, based on U.S. military tactics with information technology and weapons systems purchased or stolen from the U.S., Russia, and Israel. During ongoing large-scale military exercises, China has demonstrated significant new joint-service war fighting skills ``under high-tech conditions'' that are steadily altering the balance of power in the Taiwan Strait . . . The PLA's doctrine of ``asymmetrical'' warfare emphasizes paralyzing the high-tech strength of the U.S. and our allies, through attacks on military, economic, and governmental computerized information systems. Mr. Speaker, there is much more that could be said. I will leave it simply at this: No one can predict with certainty when the hour of maximum danger will come, but it is entirely possible--if present trends are permitted to continue much longer--that the candidate we elect as President next month will be the man who will eventually be confronted with a choice between defending Taiwan and its democracy or appeasing Beijing and thereby sacrificing U.S. strategic interests in Asia for generations to come. So during this year's observance of ``Double 10,'' let us celebrate what has been achieved in Taiwan--the victory of democracy and the blessings of a free society. Let us also be resolved to do whatever is necessary to protect Taiwan and to preserve its way of life. In standing by Taiwan, we are also standing up for ourselves.

Mr. HUNTER

Mr. HUNTER. Mr. Speaker, I thank the chairman, the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Spence), for yielding me this time. Mr. Speaker, I want to congratulate the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Spence) also for his great leadership in maneuvering this bill through some pretty tough waters here in the last several weeks, and the gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Skelton) for his leadership; and also for my ranking member, the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Sisisky), who worked as my partner to help put together the procurement package that is manifest in this bill. Mr. Speaker, let me just run over a few things that we did for the services. The Army General Shinseki needed a light armored force that could be quickly moved around the world to react to emergencies. We do not have that capability right now. We have heavy armor, and we have soft bodies in the airborne groups. We do not have that ability to move a light armor around; and he is working to develop that transformed Army, and we rewarded his initiative with some money to put these first several brigades of new Army units together. He is moving out on that program. With respect to the Navy, we preserved the option to keep some 688 submarines that otherwise would be junked or retired because of refueling costs. We put in money to refuel them so we can get that attack submarine force up from the 56 or so boats that we have now up to around 65 or 70. With respect to the Air Force, we reinstated the caps for the F-22; but we gave a little breathing room, a percent and a half of breathing room, for EMD so they can have a robust testing and manufacturing program for the F-22. We think that is important for the Air Force. Now we still have major problems with procurement, and we are spending $30 billion too little annually to upgrade the force structure that we have now to keep modern equipment in the force structure that we have now. The Joint Chiefs testified the other day, General Shinseki, that we are $3 billion short on critical ammunition supplies for the Army. The CNO testified that we have about a 50 percent shortage of Tomahawk missiles and the Air Force said we are 50 percent short of munitions. We have a lot of ground to make up. We are going to try to do that in the next year or so, but this was a good bipartisan bill and a good start.

Mr. HUNTER

Mr. HUNTER. Mr. Speaker, today I rise to recognize the outstanding service and dedication of my friend from San Diego, Lieutenant Commander Temple L. Allen. His career in the United States Navy spans three decades and has earned many awards and recognitions, including Navy Commendation Medal presented to him by the Secretary of the Navy. I would like to take a moment a commend Temple's exceptional service to our country. Temple began half a century ago in Ontario, California where he enlisted, and upon finishing submarine school was assigned to the U.S.S. Catfish. Since then, Temple went on to provide expert organizational guidance and leadership that was required to effectively repair many submarines at the NEREUS facility. He was recognized by his peers for his outstanding responsiveness in the NEREUS repair department and the high quality of work that was directly attributed to him. Throughout his tenure in the Navy, Temple inspired leadership, professionalism, and devotion to duty to those he served with and has continually conducted himself with the highest traditions of the United States Navy. Mr. Speaker, in an era when the U.S. military is often not given sufficient recognition, outstanding leaders, such as Temple, exemplify the commitment our armed forces has to superior performance. As a veteran and Chairman of the House Subcommittee on Military Procurement, I would like to commend Commander Temple L. Allen for all of his efforts and years of service and to the United States Navy and our country.

Mr. HUNTER

Mr. HUNTER. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to celebrate the 150th anniversary of California's admission into the Union. I am fortunate to represent the 52nd Congressional District, a beautiful area along our international border with a rich history and culture. Home to the deserts and agriculture fields of Imperial County, as well as the mountains and urban areas of East San Diego County, the 52nd is as much diverse as it is unique. As the winter home of the Navy's Blue Angels, and thousands of ``snowbirds'' from all over the country who come to enjoy the scenery and weather, Imperial County is known as the place ``Where the Sun Spends the Winter.'' It is the home of the Glamis Sand Dunes, the Brawley Cattle Call, and the best farm land in the country, which provides delicious fruits and vegetables the entire country enjoys year-round. Imperial County is also home to the largest body of water in California, the Salton Sea, as well some of the best Mexican food a person can find. San Diego County draws its name from San Diego de Alcala, a designation credited to Spaniard Don Sebastian Vizcaino, who sailed into what is now San Diego Bay on November 12, 1603, and renamed it in honor of his flagship and his favorite saint. The County of San Diego was established by the State Legislature on February 18, 1850, as one of the original 27 counties of California with an estimated population of at least 3,490. Today, almost 100,000 people and 5,000 businesses reside in San Diego's East County alone. Places like El Cajon, which means ``the box'' in Spanish because the city is completely surrounded by mountains, provides the perfect recreation spot with horseback riding, golf courses, campgrounds, parks and easy access to the many attractions of Southern California. Another city in East County, La Mesa, is known as the ``Jewel of the Hills'' to the 56,000 people who call this desirable city their home. La Mesa's location places it close to the cultural facilities, sports, recreation and water-related activities afforded by its proximity to the county's metropolitan center, beaches and bays. The 52nd Congressional District is made up of communities in which the residents and business people take an active role in protecting and enhancing the quality of living. The number of service clubs and organizations, school and church related groups, and other civic and social organizations, give tangible evidence of the vitality of its citizenry and their active interest in the community. It is a commitment to ``community'' that gives the 52nd a special identity.

Mr. HUNTER

Mr. HUNTER. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to this initiative to revoke the Federal Charter of the Boy Scouts of America. Mr. Speaker, as a former Boy Scout who only attained the rank of second class, I nonetheless recognized early on the great contribution that this nation receives from the Boy Scouts. We are a nation of great industrial production. No other nation manufactures the wide array of products that stream from our assembly lines. But the greatest American product is character. It is the character of strength, compassion, integrity and courage that makes the last 100 years ``the American century.'' The Boy Scouts of America have been a primary factory of American character. Their ideals and values strengthen us. They also offer wholesome association for the boys of America, many from broken families. In this world that has become increasingly dangerous for youngsters, the Boy Scouts is a safe haven for those who want their children to grow in an environment of traditional American values that has illuminated the world in the 20th century. Support the Boy Scouts.

Mr. HUNTER

Mr. HUNTER. Madam Speaker, I want to commend the author of this act, the gentlewoman from Florida (Ms. Ros-Lehtinen), one of our great leaders in the House on these issues. It is very clear, Madam Speaker, that we have built a great and enormous system of safeguards to protect criminal defendants, and that is because we are very concerned about their rights. I would suggest that this bill attempts to transfer just a small part of that concern that we have about the criminal, just a very small insignificant fraction of that concern, to that unborn child. We should be able to give just a little bit of that concern to that child, and that is what we are doing right now. Our criminal statutes reflect the need to deter and to punish; and they can, at the same time, reflect our humanity, and that is what we do today. Let us protect the innocent children. Let us pass this act.

Mr. HUNTER

Mr. HUNTER. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this time, and let me say to all my colleagues who have been engaged in this debate that I think it has been a high-level debate. I think the theme that my colleague and good friend, the gentleman from California (Mr. Dreier), just made was a central theme that has been advanced by the side in favor of most favored nation trading status for China. It is a theme that has resonated throughout this debate. The theme is essentially that when the United States moves trade dollars abroad and we engage in liberal trade practices with a nation, good things happen; and, therefore, we can expect good things to happen with China. I am reminded that in 1941, Carl Anderson, one of our former colleagues, the gentleman from Minnesota, warned his colleagues, and this was about 6 months before Pearl Harbor, that there was a chance that the American fleet might at some point be engaged with the Japanese fleet in combat. And he said at that time that when that engagement occurred we would be fighting a Japanese fleet that was built with American steel and fueled with American petroleum. Six months later, at Pearl Harbor, a lot of ships were sunk, a lot of planes destroyed, and 5,000 Americans killed and wounded by a Japanese fleet that was built with American steel and fueled with American petroleum. That attempt at engagement with Japan's coprosperity sphere for Southeast Asia did not work. In fact, the fruits of American trade came back to kill Americans on the battlefields in the South Pacific. Similarly, the United States was one of the biggest investors in Nazi Germany, and I think we can all conclude that that massive transfer of funds did not work. It did not bring about good things. Now, let us examine what China is doing with the trade dollars we are sending them. The second of the Sovremenny-class missile destroyers has now been delivered to China. This is the missile destroyer type built by the Russians for the sole purpose of killing American aircraft carriers. It is armed with the high speed Sunburn anti-ship missiles, which are very difficult to defend against. And that transfer is accompanied by the transfer of SU27 fighter aircraft, very high performance aircraft, also air-to-air refueling capability, which is now being purchased by the Chinese with American trade dollars. American trade dollars are also going to help construct the components of weapons of mass destruction and rocketry that is also being diffused around the world to such nations as Iraq and Syria. So we are helping to build with American trade dollars a military machine, a war machine, in China. And I think it is a tragedy. Because in the century we have just left, where 619,000 Americans were killed in the bloodiest century in the history of the world, we left the century in a position of dominance, of absolute military dominance, having disassembled the Soviet empire. Now, with our own hand, with $70 billion a year in this trade imbalance with China, $70 billion in American cash, we are helping to raise up with our own hand another superpower, which one day, either in proxy or by direct conflict, may engage American forces on battlefields and may kill American soldiers and sailors with technology and equipment that has been purchased with American trade dollars. That is the tragedy of this MFN for China. I realize it is a fait accompli, but I hope my colleagues will reflect on the military machine that we are constructing in this new century.

Mr. HUNTER

Mr. HUNTER. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding to me. Mr. Chairman, I just want to rise in support of the amendment of the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Kingston). Let me just say there are people, a number of people, at the laboratories who have clearances and access to classified material; that is, nuclear material or nuclear design material. Also what we know is special access programs, it is absolutely imperative that we have the right to polygraph those folks, and it is absolutely equitable and fair that those who would refuse to take the polygraphs cannot be paid, cannot be employed in this capacity. Mr. Chairman, I support the gentleman. I think it is an excellent amendment. I thank the subcommittee for agreeing to accept this amendment.

Mr. HUNTER

Mr. HUNTER. Mr. Chairman, I want to thank the gentlewoman. I also have the same concern the gentlewoman has about job losses under PNTR. I think the amendment is an excellent one, and commend it to all of my colleagues.

Mr. HUNTER. Mr. Chairman, will the gentlewoman yield?

Mr. HUNTER

Mr. HUNTER. Mr. Speaker, the American people are viewing the Los Alamos tragedy, this latest tragedy of the losing of two hard drives in one of our most secure places in that nuclear weapons development institute, and having those hard drives lost for a long period of time, and it is still unclear exactly how long they have been lost, having them suddenly reappear behind a copy machine in a place that had been previously searched, and America debates what we should do with respect to this crisis; who should be fired, what reorganization should be made. I think what we need to do now is to focus not just on this particular incident, but on four major occurrences that have taken place in the last 8 years that constitute in my estimation what I call the Clinton-Gore security gap. Let me talk about the first of those things. First, Dr. Wen Ho Lee was focused on in August of 1997 after we discovered that plans for the W-88 nuclear warhead had been stolen, and it appeared to be in the possession of the Communist Chinese. Dr. Wen Ho Lee, we focused on him and determined that he was a suspect in the theft of nuclear secrets. This was a very serious thing. At that time, in August of 1997, the head of the FBI, Louis Freeh, met with the Clinton-Gore Department of Energy head, the Secretary of Energy, then Mr. Pena, and the head of the FBI said, essentially, ``This guy appears to be a spy of nuclear secrets. Right now he is sitting there with total access to America's most critical nuclear secrets. Get him out of there. Get him out of there.'' He said that in August of 1997. A few weeks earlier, he had met with Mr. Pena, Under Secretary of Energy, Elizabeth Moler, and according to Mr. Trulock, who was the head of security, told her the same thing, get this guy out of there, he may be a spy and may be accessing this very critical material. Seventeen months later, somebody looked around at Los Alamos, after the Cox Commission had started to investigate and said, hey, the suspected nuclear spy, is he still in the nuclear weapons vault with access to our most important secrets; and somebody else slapped their forehead and said, yes, I guess he is still there. In the series of hearings that we had on this incident, there was lots of finger pointing. Elizabeth Moler said Mr. Trulock was supposed to fire him. Mr. Trulock said that she was very definitely told to get this guy out of there and that he told her how to go about doing it. And yet the Clinton-Gore administration allowed a suspected nuclear secrets spy to stay in place for 17 months after the head of the FBI personally met with the Secretary of Energy and said these are the circumstances, get him out of there. Secondly, Mr. Speaker, we saw one of America's corporations, Loral Corporation, transfer missile technology to China in 1996. They allowed their scientists to engage with the Communist Chinese scientists and tell them what was wrong with their missiles, the Long March missile, because a lot of them were failing. Now, that is important, because that same Long March missile, besides carrying satellites, also carries nuclear warheads, some of which are aimed at American cities. And the Loral Corporation, in fact, according to the Cox Committee, did help Communist China make their missiles more reliable. A very serious thing. Yet a few months after that, against the recommendation of his own Justice Department, and after he had received $600,000 in campaign contributions from Bernard Schwartz, who was the President and CEO of Loral, President Clinton gave them another waiver to launch yet another satellite in Communist China. Also, Mr. Speaker, the Clinton-Gore administration allowed 191 supercomputers between 1987 and 1998 to go to Communist China. Now, that is dangerous because they can use those supercomputers in making and designing nuclear warheads in their nuclear weapons complex. So they have an obligation, the Clinton-Gore administration had an obligation, under the law that we have, to go over and check on those computers and make sure they are not being used in the nuclear weapons complex. They have that right. Of the 191 supercomputers that were transferred to China in that 1-year period, they only checked on one supercomputer to make sure it was not being used to design nuclear weapons. And lastly, Mr. Speaker, we have this case where these hard drives were taken out of this vault, and it has now been testified to that the vault custodian, the person who is supposed to identify that very small group of people who are allowed to come in, that vault custodian would sometimes leave for 2-hour time periods. This is the Clinton-Gore security gap. We have to close it with a clean sweep.

Mr. HUNTER

Mr. HUNTER. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor and thank one of my constituents, Mr. Lynn McDougal, for his many year of dedicated service to the people of San Diego East County. Lynn will shortly be retiring after 32 years as the City Attorney of the City of El Cajon. He has also represented many other government agencies including the cities of Carlsbad, Coronado, Del Mar, El Centro, Imperial Beach, Poway, Alpine Union School District, San Marcos Unified School District and the El Cajon Redevelopment Agency. Lynn McDougal came from modest beginnings in Atwood, Kansas. His father was a bowling alley owner and his mother a teacher. After attending the University of Kansas on a Naval Scholarship, McDougal spent three years of active duty, followed by 14 years in the Naval Reserve, attaining the rank of Lt. Commander. At his father's suggestion, he enrolled in law school at the University of Colorado, graduating in 1959. A few years later, he moved west and settled in El Cajon. Lynn is a member of the State Bar of California, the Colorado Bar Association and the San Diego County Bar Association. He is admitted to practice before the U.S. Supreme Court. He is the Founder and Past President of the San Diego and Imperial County City Attorney's Association. He has served as Second Vice President, First Vice President and the President of the City Attorney's Department of the League of California Cities. He is Past President and a member of the Foothills Bar Association. Lynn has had a distinguished career in the area of law, but perhaps more importantly, he has dedicated his life in service to others in various other ways as well. This was recognized when he received the El Cajon Chamber of Commerce Citizen of the Year Award in 1974. Lynn has been a member of the Board of Directors of the Boys and Girls Club of El Cajon and served as a member of the Board of the Boys and Girls Club Foundation. He exemplified the Rotary motto of ``Service Above Self,'' as the President of the Rotary Club of El Cajon and being a charter member of both the El Cajon Historical Society and the El Cajon Sister City Association. The latter organization works to improve relations between the people and City of El Cajon and several foreign cities. Through his endeavors, Lynn has had the support of his lovely wife Anne. He has a son, Tim, and a daughter, Kyle, and has five wonderful grandchildren. It is people like Lynn McDougal, with his commitment to his nation, his family and his community, that makes the United States the great country that it is. I congratulate him and honor him on his retirement as the City Attorney of El Cajon.

Mr. HUNTER

Mr. HUNTER. Mr. Speaker, I thank my great chairman, the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Spence), for yielding to me, and I want to thank him also for his great service to our Nation, and the gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Skelton), our ranking member, and all of our colleagues who have commented. I want to pay homage to a couple of Army guys who I know who were in the 173rd Airborne, the unit I served with, without distinction, in Vietnam. The gentleman from California (Mr. Thompson) was a member of the 173rd Airborne in Vietnam during a very difficult time, and the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Norwood) was also a Member of the 173rd Airborne and was a great member of that brigade, which is being stood up and has in fact just been stood up again and brought to life again in Italy just within the last couple of weeks. I wish I could have been with that unit when that momentous event occurred. But let me just say to my colleagues, we have just left the bloodiest century in the history of the world and in American history. It was one in which 619,000 Americans, or more than that number, were killed in combat. We had an incredible century in which we experienced some very profound moments, ones in which we stood side-by-side with Winston Churchill and helped to defeat Hitler, and one in which President Ronald Reagan stood down the Soviet empire and helped to provide for a more benign climate for this country to enter this century. A lot of that was carried on the back of the United States Army. The United States Army, unlike other armies in the world, has to take and hold ground in very difficult places. This was commentary when the U.S. Army hit the shores and engaged in the battles in France and the enemy was amazed when they saw that German troops would rise out of trenches and begin to fall at 800 meters, because Americans with rifles knew how to shoot. We held very difficult ground and took very difficult ground in World War II. My secretary, Helen Tracy, in San Diego, was General George Patton's secretary during World War II, and she will recount the difficulties that the Third Army went through in that very momentous war. We fought difficult battles in the cold war, from Vietnam to Korea. Those were all battles in the Cold War in which we ultimately prevailed. The Army was a major player in that massive conflict and sacrificed greatly. My cousin, Jan Kelly, is with us tonight, who just happened to come into Washington, D.C., and I thought it was particularly appropriate that her husband, Ron Kelly, who was a captain, a professional Army officer in Vietnam and Korea, and could be in Washington, D.C., on this anniversary. I want to also say a word about Pop Carter, who was my platoon sergeant in Charlie Rangers in Vietnam, who came home and ran his farm in Georgia, and whose son, Bobby Carter, went wrong and somehow joined the Marine Corps, but is today a great young warrant officer in that service, and Pop was a symbol of dedication to his country. Lastly, I just want to mention the last of Ronald Reagan's speech in 1981, when I was sworn in, and I stood by a gentleman named Omar Bradley, then in a wheelchair, while Ronald Reagan pointed out to the Washington Monument. And he said, ``There is the monument dedicated to the Father of Our Country, and beyond that is the Lincoln Memorial, dedicated to the man who saved the Union. But beyond those monuments are thousands of monuments marked with crosses and Stars of David that are dedicated to Americans who gave every full bit a measure of devotion to their country as the Founding Fathers, and that, of course, is Arlington Cemetery.'' Ronald Reagan said, ``Under one of those crosses lies a man named Martin Trepto, who left his little barber shop in 1917, joined the U.S. Army in the Rainbow Division in France, and after Martin Trepto had joined the Rainbow Division in France in 1917 and he had been there only 3 weeks in a country, he was killed. His friends, when they recovered his body, found that he had maintained a diary, and the last entry in the diary said these words: `I must fight this war as if the success or failure of the United States of America depends on me alone.' '' That is the spirit of the United States Army that has carried us safely through this century. God bless the Army. Happy birthday.

Mr. HUNTER

Mr. HUNTER. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me time. Mr. Speaker, in March of 1941 our former colleague, Carl Anderson, a Representative from Minnesota, warned us about the danger of arming potential adversaries. He said then that the chances of war with Japan were 50-50, and, that if our fleet had to meet the Japanese fleet, we would meet a fleet which was built with American steel and fueled with American petroleum. A few months later at Pearl Harbor, 21 American ships were destroyed, 300 planes were destroyed, and 5,000 Americans were killed and wounded by a Japanese fleet that was built with American steel and fueled with American petroleum. Well, whichever side of this debate one is on, everyone here has to concede American dollars are arming Communist China today. Let us look at what they have done with the $350 billion that they have amassed in trade surplus over the last 8 years. The Sovrenny class missile destroyers, straight from the Russians, designed for one purpose, to kill American aircraft carriers, were purchased with American trade dollars. The SU-27 fighter aircraft, high performance aircraft, capable of effective warfare against America's top line fighters, were purchased with American trade dollars. On top of that, kilo class submarines, AWACS aircraft, air-to-air refueling capability, sophisticated communications equipment, all purchased with American trade dollars, and compounding the danger, China's own sales to nations like Iraq, Iran, Libya, Syria and North Korea of components for weapons of mass destruction. Mr. Speaker, we have just left the bloodiest century in the history of the world. In a way it is a century of triumph for America. The story of the 20th century is the story of a great Democrat President, FDR, who stood with Winston Churchill against Germany's Hitler. It is the story of a great Republican President, Ronald Reagan, who faced down the Soviet empire and disassembled Soviet Union. But it is also a story of tragedy, because 617,000 Americans lie in cemeteries across this country and in the oceans of the world and the battlefields of the world as people who were killed in action saving the world for freedom in this last century. Many of them fought in wars for which we were unprepared; that is a tragedy of the 20th century. But the greater tragedy, which could be the tragedy of the 21st century, could happen if this country, having fought and bled and sacrificed to dissolve the Soviet empire, through a massive infusion of cash produces, by our own hand, another military superpower, and if the cemeteries of this country one day hold the bodies of Americans in uniform killed with weapons purchased by American trade dollars. That will be the greatest tragedy of this new 21st century. Mr. Speaker, let us avoid that tragedy. Vote no on PNTR.

Mr. HUNTER

Mr. HUNTER. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding. Mr. Speaker, I would simply say, if we supplied the American dollars for the missile destroyers, we supplied American dollars for the AWACS and air refueling equipment and for the kilo submarines that China is acquiring, we at least owe the commitment to Taiwan to condition those supplies of American cache with a commitment to have a benign relationship with Taiwan on the part of mainland China.

Mr. HUNTER

Mr. HUNTER. If the gentleman will continue to yield, I just want to thank the gentleman for the great work that he did, along with his colleagues on the Subcommittee on Military Personnel, in developing this good program for our veterans and for our retirees. I appreciate the fact that he is walking down through this road, these problems, which are fairly complex and which have a lot of potential options, and trying to put together a responsible program for our veterans and our retirees.

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

Mr. HUNTER. Mr. Chairman, I agree to work with this gentleman and with all the Members who have shown so much concern for these folks who are Cold War warriors and veterans in practically every sense of the term. I think we realize three things on the committee. One is that we do have a duty to take care of our Cold War veterans, including people who experienced exposure in trying to develop the strategic systems of this country that even today keep this country safe. Number two, science has shown that there has been exposure, fairly major exposure, to a lot of our workers. Number three, the fact that we do have a responsibility to take actions and perhaps to abandon this position that we have taken, which has been a presumption against the worker in the past. So let me just thank all of my friends who have worked on this, and I support totally the Whitfield amendment and I want to let everybody know that we will be holding hearings. We will be working in cooperation with the gentleman, and we did put a couple of million dollars in the bill already to direct DOE to start to construct a program. So let us all work together and put this thing together and we will work with the gentleman.

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

Mr. HUNTER. Mr. Chairman, I thank my friend, the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Buyer) for yielding me this time. Mr. Chairman, it has been stated in this debate by the proponents that somehow there is a different standard in the military than there is in the rest of society. I think that is true. I think, in fact, it is a higher standard, and interestingly, when polls are taken among the American people about which institutions they respect the most, the American military is number one, because the American military does have higher standards in a number of areas and this is one of those areas. It is absolutely true, if one listened to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Weldon), a former military physician, that military physicians come in with a sense of honor to serve their country, to save lives, and it is an enormous imposition on them to ask them to carry out the social dictates of a few folks who would devalue, in my estimation, devalue human life. So let us keep that high standard, duty, honor, country, for the American military. Let us not drag them down into the abortion mess.

Mr. HUNTER. I thank the gentleman for yielding to me, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, I think it would be good for the gentleman to tell us a little bit about the pharmacy benefit and what the retirees can expect. It has not been talked about a lot in the base bill.

Mr. HUNTER. I thank the gentleman. We have a limited amount of time. I thank him for his championing of the subvention system. Let me just say to my colleagues that we have the three options, FEHBP and supplemental and subvention. Let us give them all a chance. Let us go with Buyer.

Mr. HUNTER. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this time. I want to thank all my colleagues, the gentleman from Mississippi, the gentleman from Indiana, all of the folks that have spoken on this important issue, because I think together you are all a great team and we have come a long ways. With respect to the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Bartlett) talking about the promises that were made and the brochures that were distributed, I just want to let my colleagues know that when I went down to the post office and signed up to go to Vietnam, all they told me was ``get on the bus,'' but I know that promises were made and extended to American veterans and retirees deserve that reciprocity and that trust. Mr. Chairman, I yield to the gentleman from California (Mr. Cunningham) so he can finish his statement. He is the father, at least in my mind, of subvention, and he did a lot of great work on it in the early times.