Paul Kanjorski

Mr. KANJORSKI

Mr. KANJORSKI. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to Dr. E.M. (Ned) Whalen, who has been designated as the ``Man of the Year'' by the Greater Pittston Friendly Sons of St. Patrick in Wilkes-Barre, Pennsylvania. The Friendly Sons will honor Dr. Whalen at their annual St. Patrick's Day banquet on March 17, 1998. I am honored to have been asked to participate in this event. Dr. Whalen, the son of the late Raymond and Kate McLaughlin Whalen, was born in 1916. A captain in the Army in World War II, Dr. Whalen received the Bronze Star and Bronze Medal Cluster for his service. After graduating from Temple University Medical School in 1942, Dr. Whalen practiced general medicine in Wilkes-Barre, Pennsylvania from 1946 to 1954. He then did a residency in psychiatry at Danville State Hospital and practiced psychiatry until his retirement in 1989. In 1968, he was made a fellow in the Pennsylvania Psychiatry Association and in 1973, he was made a fellow in the national association. Mr. Speaker, Dr. Whalen devotes much of his time to community service. He is a member of the board of directors of the Glen Summit Association, the Georgetown Settlement House, the Council House, and the Luzerne/Wyoming Counties Mental Health/Mental Retardation Association. I applaud the Friendly Sons choice of Dr. Ned Whalen as this year's honoree and I am pleased to have the chance to bring his accomplishments to the attention of my colleagues.

Mr. KANJORSKI

Mr. KANJORSKI. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to the Catholic Youth Center (CYC) of Wilkes-Barre, Pennsylvania on its 50th Anniversary. I am pleased to have been asked to take part in a ceremony marking this important event on March 19, 1998. In 1947, Bishop William Hafey envisioned a special place for the young people of Northeastern Pennsylvania to socialize, recreate, grow, and enjoy. The original building purchased in 1948 housed a small gym, bowling alley, and auditorium. In January, 1949, the CYC was officially dedicated with a membership of 1,000 young people from around the region. In the five decades that followed, the expansion and growth of the CYC would surpass even Bishop Hafey's dreams. Over the next years, the CYC developed programs in archery, basketball, cheerleading and, with an addition of a pool, swimming. The swim team under the mentoring of Jim Higgins created a legacy in swimming competition in the Wyoming Valley. A student council was established to form a link to nearby schools and new programs continued to be added, including the Junior Basketball Officials Club, initiated by then-Director of Athletics Anthony D. English, Jr. In the 1970s Mr. English was promoted to Executive Director, He would serve with four priests over the next years: Father Francis Houston, father Paul Flynn, Father William Kearney, and Father John S. Terry who is the present priest-director. Mr. Speaker, the Catholic Youth Center survived the devastation of a 1972 flood that was at the time the most expensive natural disaster in American history. The CYC survived a severe funding shortage in the 1980's. Each time it was faced with crisis, the community rallied to save the CYC. Corporate support and community fundraising have made this facility into an outstanding center for youth activity in the Wyoming Valley. From basketball to daycare, the CYC is considered a leader in youth recreation and community service. I am extremely proud to commend the staff, Mr. Anthony English, Father Terry, Mr. Mark Soprano, and the Board of Directors of the Catholic Youth Center for their dedication to the youth of the Wyoming Valley. I send my heartiest congratulations on this milestone event and best wishes for continued success and prosperity.

Mr. KANJORSKI

Mr. KANJORSKI. Mr. Chairman, I rise today to respond to some of the impassioned arguments on the other side. Listening to the other side, one would think that they have just discovered performance and results. The fact of the matter is, this administration came into office in 1993 and made a commitment to the American people to reform government and to correct government as best it could. The President assigned the Vice President, Al Gore, to head up that effort. And what is the success of that effort? It is the most efficient Federal Government that we have had in place in more than 30 years. The accomplishments of this administration are evident across the board; 340,000 fewer Federal employees, a government that is more active and more responsive, with fewer people and less cost than any government we have known in the last 30 years. The other side has wailed about the success of the Results Act. Let us be quite certain that the performance in the Results Act was the process required and requested by this administration and carried out by this administration. The other side has even recognized a 60 percent improvement in the reform of the Federal Government on their own scores. What are they asking for now? They are only asking for political performance. They are asking for issues which may mislead the people and have them believe the scores are not high enough. But the American people are not stupid. As my good friend, the gentleman from California (Mr. Waxman) indicated, the other side has had the chance to respond in every respect. Whether it was the 1993 Budget Act or the 1993 Results Act, the cries were, it will not work, it will not work, we will not attain it. If I remember the Budget Act of 1993, the sky was going to fall, depression was going to occur. Why will our friends on the other side not admit that for the first time in 30 years this administration has balanced the budget in America? This administration presides over the strongest economy in the history of the United States. This administration has the lowest unemployment rate in the recent history of the United States. This administration has the lowest interest rates in the recent history of the United States. And lo and behold, this Congress is probably spending more money than ever spent before to tie up the administration in court processes, and to investigate every department, agency and bureau of the government. For what purpose? For political advantage. I suggest to my colleagues today that if we are really serious about the Performance and Results Act and finding out how government works, we should continue to support what the administration put in place in 1993; support the strategic plans of all these bureaus, departments and agencies and do not require them to go back and waste all that money and time rewriting these plans for political purposes. This is just another attempt to block the progress of a very useful, efficient and effective administration of government. I urge my colleagues, if they support good performance in government, to vote ``no'' on H.R. 2883.

Mr. KANJORSKI

Mr. KANJORSKI. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to a man who is not only a highly respected leader in my community and an excellent educator, but also a very close friend of mine. This past Sunday, Dr. Christopher Breiseth was honored by the highly-respected S.J. Strauss Lodge of the B'nai B'rith as the recipient of the 54th Annual Community Service Award, which is presented to an outstanding citizen who, by courageous leadership and dedication on behalf of humanity, has made a valuable contribution to the fabric of our community life. It is my great privilege to join the entire Northeastern Pennsylvania community in congratulating Dr. Breiseth for this well-deserved award. Chris Breiseth became president of Wilkes College in Wilkes-Barre, Pennsylvania in 1984, and over the last fourteen years he has had a tremendous impact on the Wilkes-Barre community, as well as all of Northeastern Pennsylvania. He transformed the college into one of the region's finest universities, which has gained recognition as an increasingly-sophisticated regional center for teaching and research, as well as a rich source for cultural and public service programs. Under his leadership, Wilkes University established a six-year Doctor of Pharmacy degree program, the Allan P. Kirby Center for Free Enterprise and Entrepreneurship, a campus-wide computer network, and numerous new and refurbished facilities. Dr. Breiseth has been a tireless leader in all aspects of our community, including leadership positions with the Osterhout Library, the Wilkes-Barre Chamber of Business and Industry, Leadership Wilkes- Barre, and the United Way of Wyoming Valley. He has also taken an active role on the Executive Committee of the Association of Independent Colleges and Universities and chairs its Pennsylvania Independent Colleges and Universities Research Center. Although I appreciate everything Chris Breiseth has contributed to the community of Northeastern Pennsylvania, I am most personally gratified by the countless hours he has spent as the Chairman of the Board of the Earth Conservancy. In early 1991, we first began talking about the possibility of creating a unique organization which could purchase nearly 17,000 acres of land from a bankrupt coal mining company. Located in the heart of Wyoming Valley, this land held the key to our region's future, even as it bore the scars of the past. We shared the dream of reclaiming this land for the good of the community, and Chris Breiseth devoted a great deal of his life to achieving this dream. We endured skepticism, obstructionism, and downright hostility from nearly every quarter, but we persevered. The Earth Conservancy is now an important asset for Northeastern Pennsylvania, performing extremely valuable work. I am very proud of the work the Earth Conservancy is doing, and I am deeply grateful to Chris Breiseth for his leadership in this challenging endeavor. Chris is blessed with a wonderful wife, Jane, and three exceptional daughters, Abigail, Erika, and Lydia. The entire Breiseth family has contributed greatly to the Northeastern Pennsylvania community, and I am pleased they have made Wilkes-Barre their home. Mr. Speaker, every Member of Congress should be as fortunate as I am to have a friend and colleague like Chris Breiseth. It is a pleasure to bring his accomplishments to the attention of my colleagues in the House.

Mr. KANJORSKI

Mr. KANJORSKI. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to the Wilkes-Barre Council No. 302 of the Knights of Columbus on the occasion of its 100th Anniversary. I am pleased to have been asked to participate in this momentous event. The Knights of Columbus have been active in the Wyoming Valley in my District in Pennsylvania since the organization's founding in 1898. The Organization has served the community in all aspects of religious and civic concerns. In January of that year, a call was sent out to prominent Catholics in the area. The notice read: To promote sociability and patriotism among Catholic gentlemen of this city, it is proposed to form a Council of the Order of the Knights of Columbus, to be affiliated with the American Catholic organization of that name already existing. The call was swiftly answered. Preliminary arrangements began for organization. Meetings were held every few days until the first official Council was formed and officers elected. A prominent newspaperman, Thomas P. Ryder was elected to head the council as Grand Knight. The years to follow were filled with community activity and charitable undertakings. Council 302 had the unique distinction of having organized a complete military unit for active duty in World War I. In addition to the charity and community service activities, the members became involved in fraternal and social activities throughout the years. The Council formed many clubs which are still active to this day. Mr. Speaker, I am extremely proud to join with the community in extending sincere congratulations on the occasion of the Council 302's 100th anniversary. I am also pleased to have had the opportunity to bring this important event to the attention of my colleagues and send my best wishes for a most successful anniversary celebration.

Mr. KANJORSKI

Mr. KANJORSKI. At 7:17 when I am about to speak, let the record show that there are less than 20 Members of Congress on either side of the aisle present in the Chamber. Mr. Speaker, I am on the Democratic side, but I do not stand today as a Democrat. I stand today first and foremost as an American and secondly as a Member of one of the finest institutions I have ever had the opportunity to be a part of, the House of Representatives of the United States. I come here with a heavy heart, because I have a tradition in this House that goes back to 1953. I am probably the only Member of this House that participated in the McCarthy hearings in the Senate and many of the un-American activity hearings of the House of Representatives in that period of time. I am here because many of my friends are on both sides of the aisle, and I think about this issue as an institutional issue. We are about to close the opportunity to protect or allow for the protection of privacy and individual rights of private citizens, one of the few interferences that I can imagine and one of the few protections that private citizens have had for the last 50 years before this House. We know that in 1952, a request for noncoverage by television and radio was made and then-Speaker Sam Rayburn granted that permission. That was carried through the tradition of Joseph Martin as Speaker of this House in the 83d Congress; it was carried through into 1955 when another request was made and Sam Rayburn granted that request, that television and radio be turned off, and in every other respect a record and public appearance was had by that witness. In 1957, because of that same question, of carrying open television and radio of a witness, there was actually one individual from California, a cancer researcher, that instead of being televised, took his life, because as he wrote in his note, he had a fierce resentment of being televised and he felt that he preferred death over being assassinated by publicity. As a result of that act and the common rules of the House maintained by the precedents of Sam Rayburn, we folded into the reorganization rules of the House in 1970 a permanent right that an average American citizen, called upon to testify by a committee of this Congress involuntarily, through subpoena, would have the right to protect their privacy by not being displayed on tens of millions or hundreds of millions of television sets and heard on the airwaves the world over; that if they felt that their individual liberties would be impacted that way, they should have a right to assert a right not to be televised and not to be heard on radio. Today, the Congress is about to strip that right away, even though I understand that in some instances it has been used and abused. I think an official of the United States Government should never have the right to assert this. I suggested to the chairman of the Committee on Rules that an amendment be in order that the person would have the right to assert the right of privacy and not be televised, but that two-thirds of the members of any investigating committee could overrule that right, and in any instance where a Cabinet officer, an official of this government were called, I would have been one of those two-thirds that would override that right. But instead, by carte blanche, we are going to change the rule and say an individual involuntarily called to testify before this Congress, regardless of the significance or insignificance of their testimony, is going to have their privacy invaded to the extent that their picture and voice can travel the world over, when on the other hand, and I cited some of my friends on the other side, absolute hunting licenses for irresponsible Members of this body now and in the future, who can make any statement of fact in the presentation of their question and slander or libel that American citizen, who will have no recourse in law because we as Members of Congress are cloaked with absolute immunity in the actions on this House floor or in the committee. I think that unfairness is unforgivable and it is dastardly. I will make the point, we are coming very close in this House to tyranny by the majority. Mr. Speaker, the Constitution of the United States and the laws of this land have not been written for the protection of the majority. They have their protection in a system of government such as ours. The Constitution and laws of this land are put into place to protect the minority. Sometimes that minority is just one individual who does not want to surrender his family, himself, his reputation to degradation from irresponsible statements or irresponsible publicity. Before any Member on the Republican side or the Democratic side casts their vote, just remember that this is really an issue of individual rights in this country. We have life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. We have already had one life taken because of this fear. The liberty now is at risk of a private citizen who just for any number of reasons, good or bad, may not want to subject his family or himself to the insult or the embarrassment of going public with any story. He may not want to be subjected or libeled in public by an irresponsible Member of Congress, or slandered. And we are going to do away with that right and give no recourse to our private citizens. I think it is a sad day in the Congress of the United States when we, with all the might and power of the subpoena and all the might and power that is placed in us by our fellow citizens in the Constitution, feel that we must arm ourselves against the lowest of low individual, the single individual who may want to protect his right to privacy.

Mr. KANJORSKI. Mr. Speaker, because of the nature of this rule that is before the House, I would request of my friends that control the time on the Republican side that they allow at this time my questioning the presence of a quorum and that we have a quorum call of the House, so that all the Members of the House can take part and listen to the debate we are having.

Mr. KANJORSKI

Mr. KANJORSKI. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to a veteran newspaper reporter and noted labor leader from my Congressional District in Pennsylvania, Mr. Jack Wallace. This week Jack will be honored on the occasion of his retirement from the Citizens' Voice Newspaper in Wilkes-Barre, Pennsylvania. Jack is an institution in Wilkes-Barre, and I am pleased to join his friends and colleagues in recognizing his outstanding career. Although Jack's byline has appeared on only two articles during his 46-year career, he has written thousands of stories. And, though he has not gotten recognition for his authorship, he is the most recognized face at the Luzerne County Courthouse, his beat for 29 years. During the course of his career, he has covered eight District Attorneys beginning in 1968 and numerous County Commissioners, elected officials, and political campaigns. Jack began his career 46 years ago with the Wilkes-Barre Publishing Company in its maintenance department. As was common in those days, he worked his way up to reporter. A strong supporter of labor unions and the right for workers to organize for representation, he was actively involved with the Newspaper Guild. He served 3 years as an executive board member, 7 years as union vice-president and 29 years as the local president. Along with his journalistic endeavors, Jack is also active in the community. He is a member of St. Therese's church, the Friendly Sons of St. Patrick, the Donegal Society and the Ancient Order of Hibernians. He was a little league baseball umpire for 16 years. Mr. Speaker, I am proud to join with Jack's many friends, his family, coworkers and the community in honoring this dedicated professional. I send Jack my best wishes for a happy, productive retirement and congratulate him on an exemplary career in journalism.

Mr. KANJORSKI

Mr. KANJORSKI. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to have the opportunity to pay tribute today to a businessman and community leader from my congressional district, Mr. Max Bartikowsky. Next month the Jewish Community Center will honor Max at a surprise brunch. I am proud to have been asked to participate in this event. Max is the owner of one of Wilkes-Barre's finest retailers, Bartikowsky Jewelers. The store has been an institution in downtown Wilkes-Barre ever since Max's grandfather emigrated from Poland and founded the store 100 years ago. While other stores have fled for suburban shopping malls, it is a testament to Max's commitment to Wilkes-Barre that his store has remained as a cornerstone of downtown. The business has always been an extension of the Bartikowsky family's commitment to civic involvement by being a key supporter of the United Way, Northeast Philharmonic, American Heart Association, Hospice St. John, the Diabetes Association, Children's Miracle Network, and the city of Wilkes-Barre fire and police departments, Max has built on and continued the family's tradition both personally and professionally. Max's personal community activities also fill a long list. He is an active supporter of Wyoming Seminary, a prestigious local educational institution. Along with Wyoming Seminary, Max is also involved in supporting the Rose Brader Clinic where he was named person of the year in 1991. He has also been a strong supporter of Penn State University and has been active in the Knights of Saber, Wilkes-Barre Lions. His personal dedication to the Jewish Community Center is also well known. Mr. Speaker, I am proud to join with the members of the Jewish Community Center to recognize and pay tribute to an amazing and generous individual. I send my best wishes as the JCC honors one of its most distinguished and dedicated leaders.

Mr. KANJORSKI

Mr. KANJORSKI. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to a community leader and close personal friend from my district in Pennsylvania, Alvin ``Buddy'' Rothstein. This week, Buddy will be honored by the Ethics Institute of northeastern Pennsylvania, and I am proud to have been asked to participate in this event. A businessman in the northeastern Pennsylvania community for over 50 years, Buddy graduated from Wharton School of Business at the University of Pennsylvania. Serving in the U.S. Army Air Corps, Buddy was shot down four times during World war II. Following his tour of duty, Buddy returned home to begin a soft drink manufacturing and distributing company in 1945. His business flourished, and he expanded to the ice cream franchise business covering 31 States, Canada, and Puerto Rico. In 1963, Buddy began Rothstein Inc., a realty company and Rothstein Construction, Inc., a development company, both of which he operates to this day. Mr. Speaker, Buddy Rothstein's business accomplishments are well known in our area; his community involvement is also to be highly commended. He is extremely active in Rotary International, chairing several important committees and served as president of Wilkes-Barre Rotary from 1988-89. Buddy also sits on the executive committee of B'nai B'rith Housing for the elderly. Buddy has also been president of the Wilkes-Barre Board of Realtors. He has served the local Jewish community by being involved with several organizations. Along with his service to the Jewish Community, Buddy has also been involved with the Economic Development Council of northeastern Pennsylvania. His love for and dedication to improving the quality of life for the people of northeastern Pennsylvania are evident in everything he does, and we are, indeed, fortunate to have him as a member of our community. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to join with the community and the Ethics Institute in honoring my good friend, Mr. Alvin ``Buddy'' Rothstein, and I am extremely proud to bring just a few of his many accomplishments to the attention of my colleagues.

Mr. KANJORSKI

Mr. KANJORSKI. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to Luzerne County Community College, which is celebrating the 30th anniversary of its founding this month. I am pleased and proud to have been asked to participate in this significant celebration. In 1965, the Luzerne County Board of Commissioners took a very bold step. They adopted a resolution to sponsor a 2 year college which would be affordable to all Luzerne County residents. A study was needed and the board called upon the County Board of School Directors to initiate planning of the project. In less than a year, an application was made to the Pennsylvania State Board of Education for permission to establish and operate a community college. The State board granted permission in September 1966. Two months later, Luzerne County Community College was officially in operation. A board of trustees was formed and a president was appointed to lead the college. On October 2, 1967 the college opened its doors for the first time in small quarters located next to the Hotel Sterling in downtown Wilkes-Barre. The college's first class of 195 students graduated in May 1969. Mr. Speaker, the foresight of the County Commissioners; Ed Wideman, William G. Goss and James B. Post, 30 years ago has made it possible for more than 13,000 young people to begin a college career or earn a 2 year degree for professional advancement. Over 200 area businesses employ Luzerne County Community College alumni. In 1974, the college moved to its present impressive campus in Nanticoke, Pennsylvania. This modern campus includes an educational conference center, general academics building and two technical arts buildings with state of the art labs and classrooms. The campus also includes medical and dental arts facilities and the newest addition, the advanced technology center. Mr. Speaker, Luzerne County Community College has come a long way since its humble beginnings in downtown Wilkes-Barre 30 years ago. I am extremely proud to join with the community in commending the board of trustees, management, and staff of the college in providing educational opportunity to thousands of area residents. I would also like to recognize the Luzerne county commissioners who have continued to play an active role in supporting this important educational institution. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to bring the history of this fine institution to the attention of my colleagues and send my sincere best wishes for continued success.

Mr. KANJORSKI

Mr. KANJORSKI. Mr. Speaker, on September 10, 1897, near Hazleton, PA, a seminal event in American labor history occurred. In one of the earliest efforts by workers to organize to seek better working conditions and higher wages, 19 men died and at least 36 others were wounded in what is now known as the Lattimer Mine Massacre. These men forever changed the face of the American labor movement. It is difficult to imagine today the working conditions of the miners of 1897. Not only were workers paid low wages for extremely long hours under dangerous and sometimes deadly working conditions, but the coal companies maintained control over virtually every aspect of the miners' lives. They lived in company-owned houses, were forced to buy from company-owned stores, and were treated by company doctors. The coal mined in northeastern Pennsylvania was the energy source for the industrial revolution in America. Jobs in the coal mining industry gave the newly arrived immigrants from Eastern and Southern Europe of the late 1800's a chance to make better lives for themselves and their children. Immigrants from Italy, Hungary, Poland, and other countries faced enormous prejudices and difficulties in assimilating into American culture and becoming accepted by the native-born population. On September 10, 1897, 400 men began what was to be a peaceful march and demonstration to fight to obtain better wages, better working conditions, and the ability to organize. A posse of armed citizens led by the local sheriff attacked the miners in a massacre that left at least 19 men dead and countless others injured. The Lattimer Mine Massacre and the subsequent trial, which ended in an acquittal of the massacre leader mine superintendent Gomer Jones, brought national attention to workers rights and the plight of the men who toiled under abysmal conditions in our Nation's coal mines. The massacre led to a strengthening of the United Mine Workers of America as the voice for anthracite miners and was the first step in helping to empower miners and break down the walls of anti-immigrant sentiment which these men faced. Mr. Speaker, in 100 years the labor movement has come a long way. The right of workers to organize and bargain collectively is no longer questioned. Regulations now help ensure the safety of mines and other workplaces. Mr. Speaker, on the 100th anniversary of this terrible tragedy in American labor history I would like to remember the spirit of the miners that is summed up in the following statement from the monument memorializing the massacre: ``It was not a battle because they were not aggressive, nor were they on the defensive, because they had no weapons of any kind and were simply shot down like so many worthless objects; each of the licensed life takers trying to outdo the others in butchery.'' Mr. Speaker, I would also like to include a copy of a story from the Hazleton Standard Speaker from September 10, 1995 which recognized the 98th Anniversary of this event. This article provides a background on what transpired 100 years ago today. Ninety-Eight Years Ago, Guns Rang Out in Lattimer (By Ed Conrad) Today marks the 98th anniversary of the Lattimer Massacre, one of the most gruesome days in the annals of American labor. On Sept. 10, 1897, a group of striking anthracite miners at the A.D. Pardee & Co. colliery near Harwood were marching toward Lattimer Mines in an effort to persuade miners at the Pardee mining operation there to join their cause and walk off their jobs. Luzerne County Sheriff James Martin and members of his posse, brandishing firearms reported supplied by mining operators, formed a roadblock near the village in an attempt to prevent the unarmed marchers from gaining access to the colliery. Martin was ordering the miners to turn back when, suddenly, the sheriff fell to the ground, either by accident or when pushed by one of the strikers. Almost immediately, a shot was fired--by whom has never been precisely determined--and members of the posses began firing their weapons at the marchers and a bloodbath ensured. Nineteen striking miners were shot and killed, with six more succumbing to their gunshot wounds within two weeks. The total of 25 men killed and many others injured made it one of the worst incidents of labor violence in the nation's history. It was due to the growing unrest by striking miners in the Hazleton area that Martin had been asked to intervene and try and keep the peace. The trouble in the Hazleton area mining area had begun a few weeks earlier at the Honeybrook Colliery, near McAdoo. Twenty boys who held jobs as mule drivers refused to obey an order from Gomer Jones, division superintendent of the Lehigh and Wilkes-Barre Coal Co., to stable their animals. The boys refused to do so unless they received extra pay. Consequently, Jones fired the boys and triggered a strike that would leave an indelible mark on labor relations in Pennsylvania's coal fields. Although, strikes were relatively common in northeastern Pennsylvania's coal fields, this one was worse than most as the miners' resentment against the coal operators continued to escalate. Martin was notified of the situation and came to Hazleton where he deputized 87 men, some of them prominent persons. They reportedly were instructed to use whatever means necessary to quell any and all disturbances. Martin, a former mine foreman, also solicited the assistance of sheriffs from both Carbon and Schuylkill counties. Jointly, the three county sheriffs issued a proclamation banning mob parades and demonstrations. In open defiance, striking miners began marching from colliery to colliery. Workers in Harwood were told to leave their jobs and join the effort. It is not generally known but an ugly incident had occurred earlier on the infamous day of the Lattimer Massacre. The same group of marchers, who hours later would be mowed down in Lattimer, had arrived in the vicinity of Hazle Mines where they attempted to get some of the miners there to join their strike. However, the sheriff and his deputies stepped in and a brawl erupted, but no member of the posse fired his gun. In the melee, several of the strikers were injured and two of them arrested. Nevertheless, organizers of the march felt they had accomplished something because quite a few miners at Hazle Mines, apparently fearing for their well-being, left their jobs and fled from the vicinity of the colliery. It was at this point that word spread among the marchers that they would leave Hazle Mines and head for the A.D. Pardee mining operation near Lattimer. As they approached Lattimer, there were approximately 150 marchers who were carrying a pair of American flags. Then came the confrontation--and the bloodshed. Martin had given conflicting statements to two different newspapers about what had triggered the gunfire. ``I halted the marching column and read the proclamation but they refused to pay attention and started to resume their march,'' he had told a reporter from the Philadelphia North American. ``I called the leader to stop but he ignored my order and I attempted to arrest him. I hated to give the command to shoot and was awful sorry that I was compelled to do so, but I was there to do my duty.'' Later that same day, apparently on the advice of his attorney, Martin told a reporter from another newspaper that he had not ordered the deputies to open fire. News of the massacre enraged residents of the entire Hazleton area and violence was feared. In order to prevent a serious uprising, five regiments of the state National Guard were ordered into the Hazleton area by Gov. Daniel H. Hastings. Charles McGlynn, a charter member of the original three-man Lattimer Massacre Memorial Committee and currently chairman of that committee, has conducted extensive research on the incident and identified the 19 men who were killed at the scene.

Mr. KANJORSKI

Mr. KANJORSKI. Mr. Speaker, I rise today, to celebrate the 25th anniversary of the founding of Help Line, a nonprofit, informational, advocacy, and crisis intervention agency serving the Wyoming Valley area of my congressional district in Pennsylvania. Administered by the Family Services Association, Help Line was created by Anne Vernon in 1972 when the raging flood waters of Hurricane Agnes shut down all communication in the Wyoming Valley. It provided a centralized source of vital information to the victims of the devastation. In 1975, the agency entered into an agreement with area agencies to provide 24 hour crisis services. Soon other agencies signed on to the service and Help Line became the crisis center for all Wyoming Valley social service agencies. The information and referral component of Help Line now lists over 500 agencies in its local data files and over 1,700 total listings. Throughout its existence, Help Line has responded to special community needs. For example, it assisted in the coordination of the local United Way's Emergency Day Camp Program, establishing services for the speech and hearing impaired, and assembling a list of physicians for people who were unemployed and without health insurance. Mr. Speaker, the Wyoming Valley has grown to rely on the services of Help Line. Help Line has established the Family Action Network, addressing the problems of teen pregnancy, HIV infection, juvenile delinquency, and substance abuse just to name a few. Under the able leadership of its director, Mr. Michael Zimmerman; assistant director, Mr. Gary F. Smith; family services director, Mr. Dennis Gourley, and its outstanding board of community leaders led by Mr. Tom Bigler, Help Line is one of the most comprehensive 24 hour crisis centers and information and referral centers of its kind in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. Its well trained and dedicated staff are on duty to handle crises round the clock. Mr. Speaker, I am proud to join with the Board of Family Services Association and the entire Wyoming Valley in congratulating the fine management and staff of Help Line for providing quality service for 25 years.

Mr. KANJORSKI

Mr. KANJORSKI. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself the balance of my time. I think the debate shows what is going to happen. There are those interests in the House that still want to hold on to the peanut support system. I hope that this amendment serves one good purpose. Which is to point out that we can no longer afford to continue to do business in this institution as it has always been done. If we are really going to go to a supply and demand free enterprise economy, we have got to wean ourselves from the subsidy systems of the last 63 years. I urge my colleagues to vote ``yes'' on the Neumann-Kanjorski amendment.

Mr. KANJORSKI. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from Washington, Mrs. Linda Smith.

Mr. KANJORSKI. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 4 minutes. Mr. Chairman, I come from Pennsylvania, and I understand the pleas of all my friends from the agricultural States, the arguments that they make, and they are credible arguments. I heard the gentleman from Georgia argue about how we are getting into the key commodity and economic activity of the State of Georgia. I understand that. Then I watch my friend, the gentleman from Virginia, a very good friend of mine. I had the occasion to talk to him. This does affect and impact his district. We are not trying to completely end the peanut subsidy program here today, because I think that would be unfair. We are merely trying to set in the appropriation bill a 10-percent reduction, from $610 a ton to $550 a ton. Furthermore, it is only effective through the next year, the life of this appropriation bill. Mr. Chairman, we do this in this way and support this amendment because we are sensitive to economies that need help, and to sectors of economies that need help. But I know as an addict of nicotine that, regardless of how many pledges you make, you invariably will go back to smoking until you find a substitute or you find a way to wean yourself from your addiction. Now we have a price support addiction. It is a pathetic addiction. If we were arguing that these quotas were farmers' quotas alone and all the profit went to the farmer, the person who worked in the field, that would be one thing. But when we read the statistics: over 68 percent of these quotas are traded as securities by very wealthy people in this country who are buying and selling quotas, and then renting those quotas out to little old farmers who are really their tenant farmers. The major part of the peanut profit goes to these speculative investors. Sixty-three years of that support system. When this program started, I have no doubt that in 1934 the State of Virginia, the State of North Carolina, the State of Georgia, the State of Alabama, needed that help. I would have been one of the Members of Congress who would have argued for this program or any other that would have supported the peanut farmer at the time or the family farmer. But suddenly we grandfathered this provision. You now inherit a quota from the U.S. Government because your grandaddy had one. You can go out and buy it speculatively in the market and trade it and negotiate it and sell it. We have created Government-supported securities here that are being readily traded in the market, all with the idea that we are saving the economies of these peanut-producing States. I say, if Virginia, North Carolina, Georgia, and Alabama need economic development money, I will be the first one up here to vote for it. But we will not have it grandfathered and we will not have it in speculators' hands and it should not exist for 65 years. There has to be a time that you wean off Federal support. I am speaking to many Members on my side because I think we sometimes have a hard time getting away from subsidies, but I want to talk to my conservative friends on the Republican side that are always telling me about the great nature of the free enterprise system: ``Let the market work. Do not vote and create favoritism.'' What are we doing, after 63 years, is continuing this favoritism. And what States are we now supporting? I know there are rural areas of Georgia that need help, but there is no more dynamic economy in the United States than Georgia today, with a 2-percent unemployment rate. I urge my colleagues to start the process of weaning us off peanut quotas by supporting this amendment.

Mr. KANJORSKI. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Delaware [Mr. Castle] the former Governor.

Mr. KANJORSKI. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from New York [Mrs. Lowey].

Mr. KANJORSKI

Mr. KANJORSKI. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay honor to a courageous young man from my district who persevered to overcome extraordinary circumstances in order to obtain his dream. Dr. James B. Post, a quadriplegic since age 14, recently received his medical degree from the Albert Einstein College of Medicine. At age 14, a diving accident at a Boy Scout camp left Jim Post paralyzed from the neck down. He cannot move his legs and has only partial use of his arms, yet Jim went on to become an Eagle Scout and later attended King's College in Wilkes-Barre, PA. At King's, Jim studied premed and finished in the top 10 percent of his class. I have known this young man and his family for many years, and I can attest to the strength of character he demonstrated during his extraordinary struggle not just to survive, but to excel. With the constant love and support of his family, Jim Post rose to meet challenges most teenagers without disabilities never face. Mr. Speaker, while these accomplishments alone deserve praise, Jim continued to pursue his dream and applied to 10 medical schools. Each of the 10 schools refused him admission because of his disability. However, he did not give up, fighting on television and in the press, his story gained State and national attention and soon found many supporters. His battle for admission led to a State Senate investigation and a 1993 law barring Pennsylvania colleges from discriminating on the basis of disability. After speaking with faculty at the Albert Einstein College of Medicine, Jim applied and was accepted on the condition he hire a physician's assistant to help examine patients. Along with this help and with his wife Saretha and son James by his side, Jim began the rigors of medical school undaunted. Mr. Speaker, Jim Post, not only graduated from medical school, he was admitted to an honor society Alpha Omega Alpha which only admits students in the top 15 percent of the class who possess proper attitude and professionalism toward patients. Currently, Jim is preparing to begin his internship at Lenox Hill Hospital in New York. He plans to specialize in either nephrology or endocrinology. Mr. Speaker, Dr. James B. Post is a living testament to the triumph of the human spirit. It is with great pride and admiration that I bring the remarkable accomplishments of this courageous young man to the attention of my colleagues and add my best wishes for his continued success.

Mr. KANJORSKI

Mr. KANJORSKI. Mr. Speaker, my intentions were to reiterate some of the arguments made by myself and other members of the committee, but actually, after having heard the 5 minutes from the chairman of this committee, the question comes to my mind, why do we need an investigation? The chairman has just written the conclusions and the facts that he intends to find in his opening statement here trying to justify why we need an investigation. We could save an awful lot of money if the chairman of the committee just writes the report up, as the chairman has said it now. Obviously, his facts are found, his conclusions are made, and the purposes for this investigation are for no other purpose but for political purpose. The majority has an opportunity today, a simple opportunity. If it wants any credibility in this investigation, if it wants any appearance of fairness, it could adopt the rule that Mr. Clinger and past examinations of this Congress have always honored; that is, the majority chairman and the ranking member, with concurrence, would issue subpoenas. That is the only process that should be used. I urge that this is not going to be an investigation to find fact. This is a political witch-hunt.

Mr. KANJORSKI

Mr. KANJORSKI. Mr. Speaker, Bill Emerson was a colleague to all the Members that are here on the floor. To me, he was my oldest and dearest personal friend. As all my colleagues have learned, as we go through life, particularly in politics, friends and associates come and go, but our real friends are from our childhood. Bill and I were fortunate enough to meet at the tender age of 15, and I do not think there was ever a year that went by in our lives that we did not have an opportunity to get together, visit with each other or talk with each other. I went through many of his trying times and many of his joys in his lifetime. Bill Emerson represented something that I want to speak to, because I think it is germane. Maybe we should think about forming the Emerson Society. Because Bill, whenever I look in the back of the Chamber, I see a little smoke and I know that you are still standing at the rail. He was the type of guy, although he was a Republican and I a Democrat, with whom I could argue and disagree on philosophy and on ideology. But on humanity we agreed. He was a man that understood the traditions of this great body and of opportunity. He and I served here as young pages and then came back to this great House as Members. He suffered great pain as he saw the stress of conflict that grew in the 1980's in this House. And toward the end of his life, I think that was the most disappointing part that Bill experienced--that Members could lose civility, comity, and respect for each other above and beyond the disagreement that they had; that it had started to go to personalities. If Bill were here today, he would say, wait a minute, life is very short; we are here in a very honored and sacred House that has great traditions. From a small Nation in its formation in 1789 until 1995, we have become the model, the ideal of the world, and the hope for humanity. He would ask why can we not walk across the aisle and get to know each other as human beings, identify what we have in common, and find that we have much more in common than we have in disagreement. He would also say that when we disagree, they should be honorable disagreements. Because Bill reflected that most of all, as the gentlewoman from Missouri, Mrs. Jo Ann Emerson, has said. I remember Bill talking about his most honored day when he thought about leaving the House, because he thought the Republican Party would be the perpetual minority. And I am probably a little bit to blame, because I said it was my prediction that his opportunity in the Sun was just around the corner. And he stayed that extra term or two and finally made it. The most important moment of Bill's life, I think, was on the first day of the 104th Congress, where after 14 years of having been in the House of Representatives and 43 years since the last Republican majority, he had the opportunity to assume the gavel and the Acting speakership of the House. Those Members that were here during Bill's term know that when he exercised that gavel, he was truly a Speaker pro tempore for the whole House. He was not just a Republican. I hope that my friends on both sides of the aisle--and I have been on both sides of the aisle in my life--take a moment to reflect that, when we lose our bearing, when we let anger rule over our reason, that there were people like Bill Emerson that understood what this institution is all about. That is, we should go to the basic core of humanity, reach across the aisle, take the opportunity to walk and sit with our adversary, find out what we can agree upon, and work toward it together, as opposed to conflict, arrogance, and just meanness. Bill would be disappointed today if he saw the continued decline in of the demeanor of the House. I would hope that maybe we can think about putting together the Emerson Society and say this is the bottom and let us get together. It is very close. We have a lot of work to do. Let us try to do it in the tradition and in the spirit of my friend, Bill Emerson.

Mr. KANJORSKI

Mr. KANJORSKI. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to a beloved educator and religious leader from my district in Pennsylvania, Sister M. Vianney, O.S.F. Sister Vianney is retiring from her position as principal of Holy Rosary School in Duryea, PA. Sister Vianney has served in this position for almost half of her religious life. A native of Altoona, PA, Sister Vianney began her career as a first- grade teacher. Before coming to Holy Rosary she worked in several other schools in the Northeast. Of all the schools, she considers the staff and children of the Holy Rosary School her family. Beloved by all, Sister Vianney can frequently be found tossing a ball in the playground or engaging in a game of jump rope with the students. Along with being a friend and role model to the students Sister Vianney has led the school through two major expansion projects in 1989 and 1991 to accommodate preschoolers and a kindergarten. Mr. Speaker, Sister Vianney has made caring a concern and quality education a tradition at Holy Rosary. We all know how important the role of a good teacher is in providing a strong education to our children. Sister Vianney personifies these important core values. When area residents offer praise to a well-mannered child, they often say ``Oh you are so good, you must go to Holy Rosary.'' Mr. Speaker, I am pleased and proud to join with her many friends, colleagues and the children and parents of Holy Rosary in thanking Sister Vianney for her years of service and congratulating her on a job well done. I wish her continued success in her retirement.

Mr. KANJORSKI

Mr. KANJORSKI. Mr. Chairman, I do not take the floor very often, but I wanted to get these 2 minutes. I have listened to the minority leader, and I have thought about this proposal over the last several weeks as the negotiations unfolded. I have to say that one of the prior Members who spoke on the Republican side talked about the reason he came to Congress. It was to straighten out the fiscal responsibility of the United States. That is the reason I came here, and I think probably the reason most of us came here. When I came to Congress in the 1980's the Congress was suffering from delusion: magicians, smoke and mirrors. We were saying that you could raise defense spending and you could balance the budget at the same time, after you cut taxes. That was 1981. We went through 1981 to 1986, and finally Bill Bradley in the Senate and Dan Rostenkowski in the House put together a tax bill that went to real supply and demand, instead of tax credits for tax credits' sake. In 1986 we took away false choices. We went to a closer economic picture. Then in 1991 some of us sweat blood here on two or three occasions after we had a special summit over there in Virginia. We stopped and forced the President of the United States to reverse his speech promises of ``read my lips, no new taxes.'' He adopted taxes, we passed it, and we started a trend to contain deficits in the United States. In 1993, William Jefferson Clinton began his service as President and had the guts to increase taxes and to deal with necessities in the administration, while all my friends on the Republican side said that the sky had now fallen. It was no longer illusion. It was that we on our side were suffering from delusion. Now we come to 1997, and truly know what delusion is. We found that $225 billion in the attic that the majority party in 1996, in 1995, closed this Government down twice not to accept those figures of OMB, but did accept them in the wee hours of the night to arrive at this agreement. The American people should not be fooled by illusion or delusion. The American people ought to sit back tonight and listen to these great speeches. If all of this is true, I ask why in 1993 not one of our friends on the other side put their seat on the line to raise taxes and to cut the deficit that has put us in the economic picture. Let me tell the Members what they have to believe. After 74 months of economic prosperity, the second longest in the history of the United States, the longest being 106 months, we have only 32 months possibly to go to be the longest recovery period in the history of the United States. That means in 2\1/2\ years this budget agreement will fail miserably as a result of the recession that will occur. Vote ``no'' on this agreement.

Mr. KANJORSKI

Mr. KANJORSKI. Mr. Speaker, I rise today out of concern for all senior citizens. As you may know, I represent one of the oldest congressional districts in the country. In fact, well over 20 percent of the people living in my district are aged 65 or older. Many of my constituents consequently depend on Social Security. Because many of those receiving Social Security live near the poverty level and because Social Security often represents their only source of income in retirement, they especially depend on their annual cost-of-living adjustments COLA's to maintain their standards of living. As my colleagues should be aware, the Federal Government currently calculates the annual COLA for Social Security recipients using the consumer price index for wage earners [CPI-W]. Because the market basket used to determine the [CPI-W] does not precisely reflect those goods and services purchased by senior citizens, some fear that the elderly may actually experience a higher rate of inflation. Therefore, the Bureau of Labor Statistics [BLS] at the request of Congress has for a number of years calculated an experimental price index for the elderly. As a result, the BLS found in 1994 that the CPI-W may actually understate the annual inflation rate for the elderly by four-tenths of a percentage point on average. This difference comes as a consequence of two well-known factors. First, older Americans spend more of their income on out-of-pocket costs for medical care, despite coverage by Medicare. Second, medical care prices have risen faster than the average of all other prices. If the price of medical care increases faster than average, then, other things being equal, the actual inflation experienced by senior citizens will be more rapid than is described by the CPI-W. Despite evidence that the CPI-W may understate the rate of inflation for the elderly, many people still have the perception that the measure overstates inflation. In a time of budgetary pressures, many policymakers have consequently come to view adjusting the CPI as the panacea for balancing the budget because curbing COLA's would reduce budget deficits and ease long-term entitlement funding. COLA's are such an important issue because about one-third of Federal budget outlays are automatically adjusted each year given changes in the CPI-W. I have closely followed all of the debate about whether the BLS overestimates inflation when it calculates the consumer price index. Therefore, when the budget negotiators announced their deal late last week. I was relieved to learn that they did not agree to any risky political tinkering with the CPI. A political determination in this matter would have compounded the efforts of Government economists to determine the accuracy of the measure. Moreover, it would have led to greater public confusion about the issue and distrust in the accuracy of Government statistics generally. Still further, any political effort to manipulate this statistic downward would have likely had a significant negative impact on those elderly individuals living close to the poverty line. Instead of a politically motivated vote on the accuracy of the CPI, what is needed is a factual, technical determination based on sound economic analysis. Despite the well-publicized findings of the Boskin Commission, several economists have recently issued reports that the CPI may understate inflation. The BLS has the expertise, tools, resources, and experience to weigh the conflicting evidence and develop an accurate and appropriate inflation measure. Moreover, allowing the BLS to make this determination will help to maintain the integrity, objectivity, and the reliability of the Federal statistical system. Ultimately, I believed that people should receive an accurate inflation adjustment, not one that gives them an unintended bonus or reduction. I, therefore, encourage the Bureau of Labor Statistics to continue its efforts to identify the most appropriate and accurate criteria for measuring inflation. I would also be interested in learning of the agency's recommendations on whether Congress should use the CPI for the elderly to adjust Social Security benefits and other programs for the elderly. Further, I encourage my colleagues in Congress to continue to protect our senior citizens and others on fixed incomes in any future effort to balance the budget. My Speaker, thank you for allowing me to raise this important issue. The Bureau of Labor Statistics alone should make adjustments, if any are needed, to the methodology used to determine the Consumer Price Index. In the upcoming weeks and months, I, for one, will continue to vigilantly watch the actions of the Bureau of Labor Statistics on this issue. I am also certain that senior citizens will also continue to closely examine the actions of my colleagues on this matter.

Mr. KANJORSKI

Mr. KANJORSKI. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to an icon from my district in northeastern Pennsylvania, Mr. Manny Gordon. This month Manny will be honored by the board of the Pennsylvania State University Wilkes-Barre campus for his years of service to the community and the university. I am pleased to have been asked to participate in this tribute to Manny. Mr. Speaker, Manny Gordon has had a long and distinguished career. His work protecting the environment is legendary in northeastern Pennsylvania. He served the State Bureau of forestry for 44 years, retiring nearly 20 years ago in 1979. For many of those years he was the district forester supervising more than 1.2 million acres of Pennsylvania's beautiful forest. His years of dedicated conservation and public relations won him many awards during his tenure. Included is the coveted Forester of the Year award from the Society of American Foresters, and the Merit of Honor from the Daughters of the American Revolution. He was also named a distinguished Pennsylvanian by the William Penn Chapter of the Philadelphia Chamber of Commerce. Having served as an Army sergeant in Europe in World War II, Manny was in charge of 28 POW forester camps in Argonne and Ardennes France, and began his career in forestry. Following the war Manny served as the commander of Post 25 of the Veterans of Foreign Wars in Scranton PA. Mr. Speaker, his years of service to northeaster Pennsylvania as a forester left Manny with a deep and abiding love of the environment. In the 20 years since his retirement, Manny has been highly regarded as an outdoors advocate and environmental champion. Manny has had a very successful and distinguished career. Of all his achievements he is probably best know for his famous public service spots on radio and television highlighting Pennsylvania's great outdoors. His famous motto of ``Enjoy, Enjoy'' has brought the beauty of Pennsylvania's natural resources to thousands of people. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased and proud to join with the board of directors of the Wilkes-Barre campus of Penn State University and the entire community by paying tribute to this beloved public figure, Mr. Manny Gordon.