Ernest Istook

Mr. ISTOOK

Mr. ISTOOK. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks on H.R. 2590, and that I may include tabular and extraneous material.

Mr. ISTOOK

Mr. ISTOOK. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Chairman, I am pleased to present to the House H.R. 2590. This is the fiscal year 2002 Treasury, Postal Service, and General Government appropriations bill. As reported, this bill, of course, is within the agreed-upon balanced budget that has been agreed to by the House with the Senate and the President. The bill, compared to the current fiscal year operations, is $1.1 billion above the current operations. It is also some $340 million above the original request from the White House, although that number, Mr. Chairman, was amended somewhat. The supplemental request included funds for the 2002 Winter Olympics, which has been funded through the supplemental and has been reallocated accordingly within this bill. As reported, Mr. Chairman, the spending allocation enables us to do a number of significant things regarding Federal law enforcement in particular. Mr. Chairman, realizing that we have been favored with a positive allocation from the full committee chairman, the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Young), it is a fair question how we have applied the extra $1 billion that has been made available. The short answer is we have sought to address some very significant needs, in particular in Federal law enforcement. Some 30 percent of Federal law enforcement is funded through this appropriation measure. We have also sought to address some very compelling needs regarding information technology. Let me give an example, Mr. Chairman. We are all aware that the IRS has had significant problems dealing with the complexity of the Tax Code and in having a modern information system that will enable taxpayers to have correct information in the hands of the IRS and not be receiving incorrect notices. This allocates significant funding to accelerate the information technology advancement in the IRS. In particular, within the Customs Service, we have what might be fairly called, Mr. Chairman, a rickety computer system that is utilized for handling some $8 billion worth of trade each day that goes through ports of entry with the U.S. Customs Service. That system is, frankly, on the verge of collapse; and we do not need to be losing $8 billion daily in trade because of an antiquated information system in Customs. Even beyond the pace set by the administration's budget, we have put the funding in for what is called the Automated Commercial Environment, which is the new Customs information technology system that ties together some 50 agencies that are involved in the imports and exports handled by the Customs Service to make sure that this trade that is so vital to the economy of the United States of America can flow unimpeded. So those areas, law enforcement, trade, drug interdiction as a key component of law enforcement, and the information technology, are the main areas in which we have provided investments through the Subcommittee on Treasury, Postal Service, and General Government bill. The bill places, as I mentioned, a priority on counter-drug efforts in law enforcement. Let me mention some the elements by which that is done. We have the Customs Air and Marine Interdiction Program, which has not had the aircraft or the boats to be able to keep up with the degree of smuggling of illegal drugs into the United States, such as in southern Florida, where I visited recently. They are in sore need of modern equipment to be able to stem the flow of illegal narcotics into America. We put significant new investments into the effort, the manpower, expanding the manpower where they are overburdened and overworked, and also expanding the equipment available to them to do that. We have funding for the Integrated Violence Reduction Strategy by Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms, which is trying to stem the use of illegal weapons, or legal weapons used illegally, by people in the commission of violent crimes. Both the Youth Crime Interdiction Initiative and the Integrated Violence Reduction Strategy receive significant new funding in this measure. Also significantly increased is what is known as HIDTA, the High Intensity Drug Trafficking Area program. Some $231 million in Federal resources is made available in this bill for coordinating the efforts between the State, the local and the Federal law enforcement agencies, which all must work together, especially in the areas where there are significant problems of drug trafficking. We also have, Mr. Chairman, an effort to try to address the accumulated backlog that is clogging up the court system. Federal courthouses are funded in this bill to the tune of $326 million in construction, following the priorities laid out by the administration and the General Services Administration and the Administrative Offices of the Courts, to make sure that we are putting the funding where the courts are most overcrowded. So this includes the funding for site acquisition, design and/or construction of some 15 court houses across the Nation, which is one beyond the number that was originally proposed by the President, but does follow the same priority list as everyone has agreed upon, including the administration. In regard to legislative items, I would like to point out, Mr. Chairman, that we continue the prohibition that is part of current law to make sure that Federal funds are not used to help pay for abortions through the Federal Employees Health Benefits Plan. This also continues the requirement that FEHBP includes coverage for prescription contraceptive services with certain circumstances for concerns of conscience and with key exceptions, but overall a clear policy on the coverage of contraceptives. As we move through consideration of this measure on the floor, Mr. Chairman, I know we will hear different amendments. I will not try to cover them all at this time, rather than give an overview of the bill; but I know we will hear many different policies proposed that, frankly, Mr. Chairman, I do not think will be in order under the bill, or, even though they might technically be in order, will not be proper for inclusion in this bill and should be addressed through other legislation. We hope to keep this appropriation bill clear of any extraneous riders that are not really part of the central purpose of the measure. I wanted to thank my colleagues on the subcommittee for all of their hard work and effort in putting this bill together. The gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Hoyer), the ranking member of the Subcommittee on Treasury, Postal Service, and General Government, has been especially helpful in working together to resolve differences; and, frankly, Mr. Chairman, we have been able to come to agreement on some things that sometimes there are significant policy differences on, but a lot of hard work with the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Hoyer) and everyone else has gotten us through that. I want to thank his staff members, including Scott Nance; the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Obey) and his staff; Rob Nabors; and of course, I would be remiss if I did not thank the excellent staff that we are able to enjoy on the Subcommittee on Treasury, Postal Service, and General Government: the chief clerk, Michelle Mrdeza; Jeff Ashford; Kurt Dodd; Tammy Hughes; and, on a delegated status from the Secret Service, Chris Stanley. It has taken a lot of hard work to go through the details in this bill, having as many different Federal agencies that are at the heart of the executive branch, including the White House, the Office of Management and Budget, the General Services Administration, Office of Personnel Management, the Treasury Department itself, and many of the core Federal agencies, including in particular law enforcement. I believe this is a good bill, Mr. Chairman, which merits people's support. It advances our objectives to combat the flow of illegal drugs, yet to improve the flow of legal commerce. It tries to address significant problems of overcrowding in the Federal courts by making sure that facilities are available to them. Mr. Chairman, I would ask every Member of this body to support this bill, and look forward to working with the Members in considering amendments that they may offer. Mr. Chairman, I include the following for the Record. [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH25JY01.001 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH25JY01.002 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH25JY01.003 Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. ISTOOK

Mr. ISTOOK. Mr. Chairman, reclaiming my time, I thank the chairman very much, and I appreciate the opportunity through the colloquy to assure everyone involved that full necessary funding for security at the Olympics is forthcoming, as this is certainly a major event attracting so many thousands of people from throughout the world. I thank the chairman for providing the assurances and add my own that we will make sure that these needs are fully met to provide that security.

Mr. ISTOOK. I yield to the gentleman from Utah.

Mr. ISTOOK. I yield to the gentleman from Florida.

Mr. ISTOOK. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word. Mr. Chairman, I rise to engage in a colloquy with the distinguished chairman of the Committee on Appropriations, also with my colleague, the ranking member of the Subcommittee on Treasury, Postal Service and General Government, and the gentleman from Utah, who is a representative of the host State of the 2002 Winter Olympics. Mr. Chairman, the Winter Olympics of 2002 have been designated as a National Special Security Event. That designation was made in August of 1999. Under Presidential Decision Directive 62, and now in statute under Title 18, Section 3056 of the United States Code, the United States Secret Service now has responsibility for planning security and operations for the entire event and the venues of the Winter Olympics to be held in Utah in 2002. In addition, the Secret Service has to concurrently provide for their traditional missions of protection and investigation. Although almost 2 years has passed, Mr. Chairman, since the designation of this as a National Special Security Event, the President's submitted budget for Fiscal Year 2002 did not include necessary funding set aside for the planning of security and operations of the Treasury law enforcement for the 2002 Winter Olympics, in particular, the Secret Service, as well as related agencies. In contrast, Mr. Chairman, as you know, the original Fiscal Year 2002 budget did include funding for security-related requirements of other Federal agencies, such as the FBI and the Federal Emergency Management Administration. I am pleased that the supplemental request sent by the President for 2002 does fund the requirements to meet the security at the Olympics of Treasury law enforcement and, in particular, the United States Secret Service. However, Mr. Chairman, as you know and we have discussed, the committee in this particular bill has not provided that funding, although it was part of the President's request. This colloquy is for the purpose of explaining why, less it be misunderstood. Quite simply, the money is not needed in the current fiscal year, which ends September 30. The funds will be required to cover activities that take place during the time period shortly before and during the Olympics in February of 2002. So what I wish to make clear, Mr. Chairman, is that certainly as chairman of the relevant subcommittee for providing this funding, I fully support the President's request to provide the funds for security at the Winter Olympics, and I want to affirm my intention to include the full necessary amount in the regular appropriation bill for fiscal year 2002.

Mr. ISTOOK. I yield to the gentleman from Maryland.

Mr. ISTOOK. I yield to the gentleman from Utah.

Mr. ISTOOK

Mr. ISTOOK. Mr. Speaker, I support this measure wholeheartedly. If we do not, what we have before us with the proposed regulations, those are the Titanic. It is headed straight for the iceberg. But before businesses have to abandon ship, before workers have to hit the lifeboats, we are stopping the engines. We are saying we are going to bring this thing to a safe halt and steer a safer course. The Secretary of Labor, the former Secretary of Labor, I had the chance to visit with last year about these provisions that they are proposing. They were going to hire 300 brand-new people, train them for 30 days, hundreds and thousands of pages of these red-tape strangling, minute jargon regulations, and put them in charge of micromanaging businesses all across the country; millions of workers under the command of these brand-new government bureaucrats. That is a formula for disaster. That is a disaster that is not going to happen this time. We are going to stop this ship before it hits the iceberg and we are going to bring it home safely and it is going to be safer for the workers on board American businesses.

Mr. ISTOOK

Mr. ISTOOK. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Appropriations be discharged from further consideration of the bill (H.R. 5633) making appropriations for the government of the District of Columbia and other activities chargeable in whole or in part against the revenues of said District for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2001, and for other purposes, to the end that the bill be hereby passed; and that a motion to reconsider be hereby laid on the table.

Mr. ISTOOK. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Virginia for yielding to me. This is identical to the conference report on the original D.C. appropriations bill for fiscal year 2001, H.R. 4942, with one technical exception, that exception is simply adding a new section, section 167 that makes the joint explanatory statement in the conference report on H.R. 4942 to apply to this new bill. Mr. Speaker, that is the only difference, and it is just a technical one for the sake of a clear record.

Mr. ISTOOK

Mr. ISTOOK. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, this bill constitutes the conference report on the annual appropriation to the District of Columbia. In addition to that conference report, which I believe has been resolved to the satisfaction of both sides of the aisle, in addition to that, the bill also includes the annual appropriations for the Commerce, Justice and State Departments. The debate on that, Mr. Speaker, will be presented by the gentleman from Kentucky (Mr. Rogers) and persons through him, as he chairs that particular subcommittee. But let me address myself first regarding the District of Columbia bill. I believe we have worked out something that is quite satisfactory to all persons concerned, persons in the District, persons on the other side of the aisle, persons on our side of the aisle, and I appreciate the effort that was put forth to bring people together on a bill that some people did not think we were going to be able to do. But we have. The amount in the bill that is presented in the conference report to the House is higher than the House appropriation number when the bill left here, and lower than the Senate number. It is an appropriation of $445 million. The House had passed $414 million; the Senate passed $448 million. I should note for the record that the bill is approximately 1.5 percent above what the appropriation was last year, but it would only be one-half of one percent, were it not for the inclusion of $6 million to help defray costs of the Presidential inauguration that will occur in January. The bill resolves several issues that we had before. It provides full funding for the College Tuition Support Program for high school graduates from the District of Columbia. It has the full requested Federal contribution for the new and very important New York Avenue Metro Station, which is important not only in the sense of transportation, but also as a focal point of economic development and improvement of job possibilities here in the District of Columbia. We have appropriated $3.5 million for brownfield remediation to clean up the Poplar Point area, so it can be back to usefulness once more. We continue to have funding for environmental cleanup of the Anacostia River. We have special appropriations for making sure that character education, values education, are included within the D.C. public schools. We have a provision that we hope will help the District to get a handle on the annual funding problems of D.C. General Hospital. Among other things, it requires the Mayor and the Council and the PBC, the Public Benefits Corporation, to make the tough decisions, that they are willing to make, of significant downsizing of their personnel so that they can get that facility out of the major, major red ink under which it has been operating. We also have the provisions in this bill to assist in strengthening the charter schools within the District of Columbia, these being public schools, but which are operated under a charter, rather than the normal school operation. I believe the enrollment of public school students in the District of Columbia that are attending charter schools, by choice of their parents, is now up to 13 percent, Mr. Speaker. We want to make sure that they have the proper access to the same resources that other public schools do. We could talk about other provisions that are in the bill, Mr. Speaker; and, if necessary, we can delve into them, but I recognize the main debate on this legislation is not going to be over the D.C. appropriation, which has been worked out to the satisfaction of all significant parties involved, but is going to be on the Commerce, Justice, State appropriation. Rather than recounting more about the D.C. bill, Mr. Speaker, I will reserve the balance of my time. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to present to the House today the conference agreement on H.R. 4942, the District of Columbia Appropriation Act for fiscal year 2001. The conferees met on October 11th and resolved the matters in disagreement between the House and Senate bills. The conference report includes the Commerce, Justice, State and Judiciary Appropriations Act for FY 2001 and has been filed in the House. I will discuss that part of the conference report that relates to the District of Columbia. The gentleman from Kentucky (Mr. Rogers) will discuss the Commerce, Justice, State and Judiciary items in the report. For the District of Columbia, the conference agreement we reached with the Senate totals $445 million in Federal funds which is $31 million above the House bill and $3 million below the Senate bill. The $445 million recommended is $8 million or about one and one-half percent above last year's appropriation. Were it not for the appropriation of $6 million for the Presidential inauguration, the increase would be one-half of one percent. Regarding the major funding issues, the conference agreement includes the requested $17 million in Federal funds for the college tuition assistance program for District residents we started last year as well as the full $25 million in Federal funds for the new Metrorail station on New York Avenue. We are able to retain in conference $112 million for the largest-ever drug testing and treatment program to crack down on the link between drugs and crime, so that DC's streets and neighborhoods will be far safer. For children, we continue the availability of $5 million in Federal funds to provide incentives to move children from foster care to adoption in safe, loving and permanent homes. We also provides $500,000 in Federal funds for the Child Advocacy Center, which cares for the young victims of abuse and neglect, and we include $500,000 for the network of satellite pediatric health clincs for children and families in underserved neighborhoods and communities in the District. We also recommend $1 million to establish a day program and comprehensive case management services for mentally retarded and multiple handicapped adolescents and adults in the District as well as $250,000 for the DC Special Olympics which we all know is a very worthy program. A major milestone has been achieved by the public charter schools in the District. The conference agreement includes $105 million for 10,000 students for the school year that started last month. Those numbers reflect a significant increase from the $28 million and 7,000 students in public charter schools during the previous school year. This growth in public charter schools is occurring while enrollment in the traditional public schools is declining. Parents, when given the opportunity, are choosing charter schools for their children. Four years ago there were three charter schools and 300 students; this year there are 33 charter schools and 10,000 students. This remarkable growth reflects the desire and recognition by parents that their children need and deserve a better education--and they are finding it in the public charter schools. We have all read the news stories of the mismanagement by the Public Benefit Corporation that operates D.C. General Hospital. The conference agreement allows internal transfers up to $90 million to restructure the delivery of health services in the District pursuant to a restructuring plan approved by local officials that will reduce personnel by at least 500 full-time equivalent employees without replacement by contract personnel. These problems have been going on for at least 10 years with hollow promises of corrective action by District officials. Those who need health care in the District are being ill served by a bloated and inefficient bureaucracy that local officials have been reluctant to correct. Language in the conference report requires that corrective action to be taken. Mr. Speaker, regarding the needle exchange program, we were able to reach agreement in conference on language in section 150 of the bill to prohibit any needle exchange program within 1,000 feet of a public or private elementary or secondary school, including public charter schools. the language also requires the Public Housing Police to submit monthly reports on illegal drug activity at or near any public housing site where a needle exchange program is conducted. The District is required to take appropriate action to relocate a needle exchange program if recommended by the housing police or by a significant number of residents of the site. The conference agreement also includes language from the House bill that prohibits the use of both local and Federal funds for abortions except to save the life of the mother or in cases of rape or incest. Another provision prohibits the use of both local and Federal funds to implement the District's ``domestic partners act''. The conference agreement also includes language prohibiting the use of both local and Federal funds for any needle exchange program or to legalize or reduce penalties associated with the possession, use, or distribution of marijuana and other controlled substances. Language in section 151 provides $100,000 in Federal funds for the Metropolitan Police Department contingent on the District enacting into law a ban on the possession of tobacco products by minors. The funds are to be used by the police to enforce the ban. Mr. Speaker, this is a good conference agreement that will provide significant benefits to the district's citizens while at the same time protecting the Federal interest in our Nation's Capital which we are charged to do by the Constitution. I will include a table showing the amounts recommended in the conference agreement compared with last year's enacted amount, the budget request, and the House and Senate recommendations. I will also include the fiscal year 2001 Financial Plan which is the starting point for the independent auditor's comparison with actual year-end results as required by section 132 of this bill. In closing, I want to thank all of our Members for their hard work and their contributions to this bill. The gentleman from Virginia, Mr. Moran, is the ranking Member and I appreciate his assistance. I especially want to thank our full Committee chairman, the gentlemen from Florida, Mr. Young, for his support and for his sage advice and counsel. The staff has done an outstanding job: John Albaugh, Chris Stanley and Micah Swafford of my staff; and from the Committee staff, Migo Miconi and Mary Porter. They really do a great job. Mary Porter has been doing this for 40 years--hard to imagine. I also want to thank the minority staff--Tom Forhan and Tim Aiken. Mr. Speaker, this is a good conference report and I urge its adoption. [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH26OC00.001 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH26OC00.002

Mr. ISTOOK. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks on the conference report on H.R. 4942, and that I may include tabular and extraneous material.

Mr. ISTOOK. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to yield 20 minutes to the gentleman from Kentucky (Mr. Rogers), and ask that he may control that time.

Mr. ISTOOK. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Bishop).

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

Mr. ISTOOK. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Shaw).

Mr. ISTOOK. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. ISTOOK. Mr. Speaker, I also yield the balance of my time to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Smith).

Mr. ISTOOK. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Davis). (Mr. DAVIS of Virginia asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. ISTOOK. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance my time.

Mr. ISTOOK. Mr. Speaker, I continue to reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. ISTOOK. Mr. Speaker, pursuant to House Resolution 653, I call up the conference report on the bill (H.R. 4942) making appropriations for the government of the District of Columbia and other activities chargeable in whole or in part against the revenues of said District for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2001, and for other purposes.

Mr. ISTOOK. Mr. Speaker, I continue to reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. ISTOOK. The gentleman from Virginia is correct, that is my understanding.