Marcy Kaptur

Ms. KAPTUR

Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to voice my concern with H. Res. 34, an imperfect resolution congratulating the Prime Minister- elect of Israel, Ariel Sharon, calling for an end to violence in the Middle East, and reaffirming the friendship between the Governments of the United States and Israel. While I will vote in favor of this resolution, as I did on earlier resolutions late last year, I hold serious and continuous concerns about its implications for the peace process. Like my colleagues, I applaud Israel on its open and democratic election process. While the process was encouraging, the results were disappointing. Voter turnout was the lowest in Israel's history and participation by the Arab population was minimal. This division in the population further fractures the possibilities for a lasting peace. According to statistics released from the Israeli Embassy, 55 Israelis have been killed since September 27, 2000, in riot-related situations. According to statistics released from the Palestinian Initiative for the Promotion of Global Dialogue and Democracy (MIFTAH), 366 Palestinians, Israeli Arabs, and Palestinians in southern Lebanon have been killed between the dates of September 28, 2000 and February 6, 2001. H. Res. 34 specifically calls on Yassir Arafat, Chairman of the Palestinian Liberation Organization (and President of the Palestinian Authority) to ``use his influence and resources to see that violence in the Middle East is brought to an end.'' This statement unwisely places the onus of peace solely on the shoulders of the Palestinians. I have been consistent in my calls for all parties to be accountable and willing to strive for a workable peace. Isn't it counterproductive to place the blame or praise wholly on one party? Americans must be concerned about how the new government will proceed. I strongly hope that Prime Minister Ariel Sharon will look to the future with the goal of peace and reconciliation. Israel, the Palestinians, and the Middle East Region overall have suffered greatly throughout the last century. This new millennium offers a chance for hope. It is my wish that Mr. Sharon will take that chance for peace. If the United States wishes to be an honest broker for peace, we must be fair-handed and aware of how our votes, actions, and statements will be viewed by all factions involved in this unsettled region of the world.

Ms. KAPTUR

Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to encourage President Bush to move forward on his recent commitment to create a national mental health commission. In fact, I would recommend to the President that he move it immediately and ask the leadership of our institution to move the bill on suspension so the commission can begin its critical work. As proposed, the commission part of a larger new freedom initiative would be charged with studying and making recommendations for mental illness treatment services and improving the coordination of Federal programs that serve individuals with mental illness. I have long fought for the creation of such a National Commission on Mental Illness. When Russell Weston, Jr., a diagnosed paranoid schizophrenic, fatally shot two U.S. Capitol Police officers, Gibson and Chestnut, in July 1998 right outside this Chamber, a bipartisan group of Members called upon our leadership to create such a commission to investigate the serious national dimensions of mental illness, including the lack of access to proper treatment and the violence that can result. But our pleas for the establishment of an interjurisdictional mental health advisory committee fell on deaf ears. It is tragic that despite the high number of major profile cases like Russell Weston, Jr., John Hinckley, Jr., Theodore Kazinski and, most recently, Robert Pickett, the man who fired his gun outside the White House just 2 weeks ago, that our mental health delivery system has largely been neglected. Mr. Weston, for example, received Federal Social Security insurance benefits but was not expected to check in to assure that he was receiving his proper medication. Indeed, it is strangely disturbing that a technological society that is smart enough to land people on the moon cannot see what is staring us in the face right here on earth. Today, the mentally ill face huge barriers to proper treatment. For many, the obstacles are simply too difficult to surmount. Many more fall victim to the gaping holes and lack of follow-up in our system. Since the deinstitutionalization of the mentally ill began decades ago, our Nation has spawned growing homelessness and neglect as well as violence. Now our local jails and Federal prisons become the primary domiciliaries for our Nation's mentally ill. It is sad. It is tragic. It is wrong. It is now estimated that over a third of our Nation's homeless population are mentally ill, and a 1999 Department of Justice study that we commissioned here showed that even at the Federal prison level, nearly a fifth of those housed have a serious mental illness. And I know that in our local jails, it can be as high as two-thirds. Dorothea Dix, the great social and political activist who worked on behalf of the mentally ill, precipitated major prison reform beginning in the 1840s, nearly two centuries ago, she would be horrified by our Nation's regression. It is wholly unacceptable that over 50 years later our prisons remain the primary home for our Nation's mentally ill. The situation is urgent, and that is why I would forcefully urge our new President to act swiftly on his commitment to create this commission. He would have the support of this Member, and I know other Members in this Chamber who understand the dimensions of this problem. The commission's establishment will be an important step toward what must be a greater role for the Federal Government in addressing this wide and growing crisis.

Ms. KAPTUR

Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to join my colleagues in recognizing the contributions of our Nation's Catholic schools. As Father Andrew Greeley of Chicago has observed: ``Our Nation's Catholic schools are a seventh sacrament.''. Today, we salute Catholic teachers and students around the world. As a product of Catholic schools, back home in Toledo I can attest to the quality of instruction, the professional and nurturing approach of the many fine sisters, priests and lay teachers whom I remember so fondly, and in fact still count among my friends and advisors to this day. Despite the coarsening of our popular culture, what I call the `poverty of affluence', it is heartening to know that total Catholic school enrollment for the 1999-2000 school year was over 2.6 million students at more than 8,100 schools. In my home state of Ohio, there are over 193,000 students attending 528 Catholic schools. In these quality institutions, joined by many fine public schools, character and commonly cherished values are instilled into generation after generation. Honesty, integrity, love of family and country, self- respect and self-discipline are just a few of the hallmark results of Catholic-based education. Catholic schools are one of the cornerstones of our educational system providing faith based educational opportunities to those families who desire their children to have a Catholic faith based education. Catholic schools accept young people from every walk of life, from all economic and ethnic backgrounds. These schools have played an historic role in welcoming and teaching the sons and daughters of immigrants, whether they be Irish, Polish, Hungarian or Russian, whether they are African-American, or Chinese or Latino, just to name a few. In the heart of our Nation's biggest cities and most humble rural towns, Catholic schools continue this missionary endeavor. It is my pleasure to honor the contributions of Catholic schools, both the men and women who lead and teach and care so deeply for our young people. Those students have made, and continue to make, a difference in the life of their families, communities and world. Our system of education is most appropriately conducted on the local level. Therefore, it is both our right and responsibility to support our schools, our teachers, parents, support staff, administrators, our sisters and priests, and our children, whom we know will one day inherit and take responsibility for all of our work and world.

Ms. KAPTUR

Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Speaker, Ohioans, particularly those of Ukrainian ancestry, were saddened to hear of the passing yesterday of Cardinal Myroslav Lubachivsky, the head of Ukraine's Greek Catholic Church. Cardinal Lubachivsky was born in 1914 in the town of Dolyna in the Western Ukrainian province of Galicia and died not far from there in the city of Lviv, where he served as Archbishop and Metropolitan for millions of Ukrainian Catholics worldwide, including many in Ohio. Although the Cardinal was born in Western Ukraine and served his people as their spiritual leader until his last days, he spent more than half his life outside his native land, including 33 years in the United States. Cardinal Lubachivsky left Ukraine in 1938 as a young priest to study in Austria. After the Second World War, he came to America where he spent more than twenty years serving as assistant pastor at Sts. Peter & Paul Ukrainian Catholic Church in Cleveland's Tremont neighborhood. There he celebrated mass, presided over the marriages of happy couples, baptized their newly-born infants and spoke the final words over the graves of thousands of his parishioners. He even drove the school bus for children attending the parish grade school. This scholarly, yet humble man seemed content to serve God and his fellow Ukrainian- Americans in this quiet, unassuming way when unexpectedly he was elevated to be Metropolitan-Archbishop of Philadelphia. In 1980, he moved to the Vatican and in 1984, became worldwide head of the Ukrainian Greek Catholic Church following the death of the saintly Cardinal Joseph Slipy. Joseph Slipy had become the head of the Ukrainian Greek Catholic Church in 1944 when Western Ukraine was incorporated into the Soviet Union. Prior to that, Western Ukraine had been part of the Austrian Empire and Poland. Almost immediately, the Soviet Secret Police started carrying out Stalin's order to liquidate the Ukrainian Catholic Church. The entire clergy was either arrested or forced to renounce their faith. Most declined to do so and ended up in Siberia or were shot. Archbishop-Metropolitan Slipy spent 17 years in labor camps until Pope John XXIII finally negotiated his release in 1963. As a cardinal of the Catholic Church, Joseph Slipy went to work rebuilding his church in the underground in Ukraine and in places like Cleveland, Ohio where Myroslav Lubachivsky served as assistant pastor. In 1991 with the collapse of the Soviet Union, His Eminence Myroslav Lubachivsky, a Cardinal and a U.S. citizen, returned in triumph to the city of Lviv to preside over the Ukrainian Catholic Church and its historic St. George's Cathedral. ``This native church of mine was resurrected and rose from the grave,'' he said at the time. Tens of thousands of Ukrainian Catholics, many weeping and singing hymns, lined the streets to greet their Cardinal and Archbishop-Metropolitan. Cardinal Myroslav Lubachivsky had one of the most extraordinary and fulfilling lives that spanned nearly the entire 20th Century. He served through some of the most difficult periods of that turbulent era and he lived to see his faith and the faith of millions of his parishioners rewarded with the restoration of his church, which not only survived enormous evil, but ultimately prevailed over it. I join in paying tribute to this great man and offer my condolences to all those in Ohio and throughout the world who benefited from his spiritual guidance and leadership and now mourn his passing. With his entire life a prayer, Cardinal Lubachivsky walked in faith and toward the light that now shines over people and leaders that long for a new tomorrow. May he rest in peace.

Ms. KAPTUR

Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Speaker, Ohioans, particularly those of Ukrainian ancestry, were saddened to hear of the passing yesterday of Cardinal Myroslav Lubachivsky, the head of Ukraine's Greek Catholic Church. Cardinal Lubachivsky was born in 1914 in the town of Dolyna in the Western Ukrainian province of Galicia and died not far from there in the city of Lviv, where he served as Archbishop and Metropolitan for millions of Ukrainian Catholics worldwide, including many in Ohio. Although the Cardinal was born in Western Ukraine and served his people as their spiritual leader until his last days, he spent more than half his life outside his native land, including 33 years in the United States. Cardinal Lubachivsky left Ukraine in 1938 as a young priest to study in Austria. After the Second World War, he came to America where he spent more than twenty years serving as assistant pastor at Sts. Peter & Paul Ukrainian Catholic Church in Cleveland's Tremont neighborhood. There he celebrated mass, presided over the marriages of happy couples, baptized their newly-born infants and spoke the final words over the graves of thousands of his parishioners. He even drove the school bus for children attending the parish grade school. This scholarly, yet humble man seemed content to serve God and his fellow Ukrainian- Americans in this quiet, unassuming way when unexpectedly he was elevated to be the Metropolitan-Archbishop of Philadelphia. In 1980, he moved to the Vatican and in 1984, became worldwide head of the Ukrainian Greek Catholic Church following the death of the saintly Cardinal Joseph Slipy. Joseph Slipy had become the head of the Ukrainian Greek Catholic Church in 1944 when Western Ukraine was incorporated into the Soviet Union. Prior to that, Western Ukraine had been part of the Austrian Empire and Poland. Almost immediately, the Soviet Secret Police started carrying out Stalin's order to liquidate the Ukrainian Catholic Church. The entire clergy was either arrested or forced to renounce their faith. Most declined to do so and ended up in Siberia or were shot. Archbishop-Metropolitan Slipy spent 17 years in labor camps until Pope John XXIII finally negotiated his release in 1963. As a cardinal of the Catholic Church, Joseph Slipy went to work rebuilding his church in the underground in Ukraine and in places like Cleveland, Ohio where Myroslav Lubachivsky served as assistant pastor. In 1991 with the collapse of the Soviet Union, His Eminence Myroslav Lubachivsky, a Cardinal and a U.S. citizen, returned in triumph to the city of Lviv to preside over the Ukrainian Catholic Church and its historic St. George's Cathedral. ``This native church of mine was resurrected and rose from the grave,'' he said at the time. Tens of thousands of Ukrainian Catholics, many weeping and singing hymns, lined the streets to greet their Cardinal and Archbishop-Metropolitan. Cardinal Myroslav Lubachivsky had one of the most extraordinary and fulfilling lives that spanned nearly the entire 20th Century. He served through some of the most difficult periods of that turbulent ear and he lived to see his faith and the faith of millions of his parishioners rewarded with the restoration of his church, which not only survived enormous evil, but ultimately prevailed over it. I join in paying tribute to this great man and offer my condolences to all those in Ohio and throughout the world who benefited from his spiritual guidance and leadership and now mourn his passing.

Ms. KAPTUR

Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Speaker, with great respect, gratitude, but sadness, I enter into the Congressional Record the life story of Mr. James Daken, one of the most accomplished city managers in our nation, who died earlier this year in Peoria, Illinois. For those of us who knew Jim as City Manager for the City of Toledo, there is no question his professionalism and leadership remain with us even until today. He served our community honorably, beginning in 1967, and then moved to Peoria in 1979 to continue his work building America's midwestern heritage. For certain, it was Toledo's loss and Peoria's gain. I can remember Jim as the type of manager that would compliment other city employees, even beginning staffers in low level positions. He was a team builder and lifted public administration to a higher level in our community, for which we remain grateful always. To his wife, children, and family, may I officially extend deepest sympathy coupled with true admiration for a superb public servant who moved America forward in the 20th century. [From the Blade, Toledo, OH, July 12, 2000] Ex-Toledoan Set U.S. Record as City Manager James B. Daken of Peoria, Ill., a former Toledo city manager who was America's youngest manager of a major city when he took the job at age 29, died of lung cancer Monday in his home. He was 58. In 1971, the International City Management Association named him one of its 10 outstanding young men. Mr. Daken, who was born, raised, and educated in Cincinnati, came to Toledo in July, 1967, when he took the job of assistant city manager. He was promoted to city manager in March, 1971, and held the post until October, 1976, when he moved to Hartford, Conn., to become its city manager. Former Mayor Harry Kessler credited Mr. Daken with being ``largely responsible for the success I had as mayor. He and [the late] Frank Pizza did the most. I was questioned seriously about hiring a 29-year-old as city manager, but Jim was a 29-year-old going on 39 years old or 49.'' Under the city charter at the time, city council selected the city manager from candidates recommended by the mayor. Mr. Kessler said after he became mayor, he organized a citizens committee to study municipal government to help city officials identify problems and possible fixes. ``More than 90 per cent of the committee's recommendations were adopted,'' Mr. Kessler said. ``Jim Daken was responsible for organizing the recommendations of the committee so that they could be made into ordinances that would pass council's scrutiny.'' Ohio Supreme Court Justice Andy Douglas said he was a member of the Toledo council committee that selected Mr. Daken for the city manager's job. ``His major contribution was bringing stillness to troubled waters,'' Justice Douglas said. ``He inherited a number of cumbersome, difficult, and complicated matters, and he provided solutions generally acceptable to all.'' Expansion of Toledo's water and sewer services to outside communities in Lucas and Wood counties was a priority with Justice Douglas as a councilman, and he credited Mr. Daken with helping the city to achieve those sales. ``The only thing the city makes money on is the sale of water,'' Justice Douglas said. ``I think the city's water- pumping capacity was increased from about 140 to 160 million gallons a day, and there are plans to raise that to more than 200 million gallons. He was directly involved in bringing that about.'' Former Toledo Councilwoman Carol Pietrykowski said she was chairwoman of the council committee that hired Mr. Daken. She noted that ``Jim came in and made a presentation, very professionally, and I was impressed with it. Whatever Jim did, he did well.'' Later, Mr. Daken as city manager impressed Mrs. Pietrykowski again with his ability to explain to each council member complicated legislation that was coming before council. ``He was the most communicative and the easiest city manager to work with while I was on council,'' Mrs. Pietrykowski said. ``When there was an issue, he would come to every councilman. He would answer every question we had. And he was very fair with the city council's office staff.'' Mrs. Pietrykowski added that Mr. Daken ``knew who he worked for. It was city council in those days.'' J. Michael Porter, a former city manager, said that when he was Toledo's director of natural Mr. Porter added that Mr. Daken was a ``professional's professional. He believed in the city-manager system and did everything he could to enhance the profession.'' Mr. Daken was city manager in Peoria from 1979 to 1987 and was vice president of the Foster and Gallagher, Inc., mail order and telemarketing firm in Peoria from 1987 to 1996. He was executive director of the Peoria Historical Society from 1997 to 1999, when he took his most recent job as Peoria County administrator. His daughter, Amy, described him as a very intelligent and just person who ``had a lot of integrity. I think he just really tried the hardest to do what he truly believed was right. He had a very strong sense of social justice and civil rights: He always stood for people who were oppressed and always thought about them.'' She added that he recently told her a story about his trip to Peoria just before he became city manager there. ``The first thing he said was, `Show me the slums, because that's what the state of the city is,' '' she said. He also recently refused to get a higher pay increase than the people working for the county under him, she said. Raised in Cincinnati where he finished high school, Mr. Daken held a bachelor's in political science and a master's in public administration from the University of Cincinnati. In 1964, he began his career as a student intern for the city of Cincinnati. He later worked as a budget analyst for the city of Cincinnati until the city of Toledo hired him as its assistant manager. Mr. Daken was a member of Toledo's Downtown Kiwanis, Old Newsboys Goodfellow Association, American Society for Public Administration; Children's International Summer Villages Association and YMCA, Peoria Rotary Club, where he was president in 1997, and the Peoria Symphony, for which he was a longtime member of the board. Surviving are his wife, Peggy; daughters, Amy and Sarah, and sons, Russ and Kevin. Memorial services will be at 10 a.m. tomorrow in St. Vincent de Paul Church, Peoria. Visitation will be after 4 p.m. today in Wright and Salmon Mortuary, Peoria. The family request tributes to a charity of the donor's choice.

Ms. KAPTUR

Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Speaker, it is with great sadness that I rise to pay tribute to the remarkable life and career of our trusted former colleague, the Honorable Henry Gonzalez of Texas. Dogged, brilliant, committed, indefatigable, a champion for the destitute--such was our Chairman of the Banking Committee. During my early years in the Congress, as a member of that committee, I had the great pleasure of serving with this able gentleman. He served in the tradition of Franklin Roosevelt, a man who believed in opportunity for all Americans and dedicated his life to that cause. On the Banking Committee, his work in improving housing for people from all walks of life and incomes is legendary. In him ticked a strong democratic heart. Every corner of America is better because of his service. He stood up for human rights here at home and abroad, no matter what the cost. He was unflinching when he knew his cause was just. Recently, as we broke ground for the dedication of the new World War II Memorial in our Nation's capital, I especially named Henry Gonzalez as a key figure in congressional efforts to pass legislation to bring that element to full life as a part of our Nation's history. He was a gentleman with many facets, and many concerns. He was a son of the World War II generation that preserved liberty for modern times, and his selfless dedication grew from that experience and his own humble beginnings. I include here those remarks for the Record. In extending deepest sympathy to his family, including his son Charles who has succeeded him in this Congress, I am mindful that those of us who have been influenced by his great mind and soul have been lifted to service above self. May he rest in peace and the good works that he fashioned inspire others for generations to come. Truly he was a man both ahead of his time, and a pioneer to the future. Remarks by the Honorable Marcy Kaptur at World War II Memorial Groundbreaking Ceremony, November 11, 2000 Reverend Clergy, Mr. President, Honored Guests All. We, the children of freedom, on this first Veterans' Day of the new century, gather to offer highest tribute, long overdue, and our everlasting respect, gratitude, and love to Americans of the 20th century whose valor and sacrifice yielded the modern triumph of liberty over tyranny. This is a memorial not to a man but to a time and a people. This is a long-anticipated day. It was 1987 when this Memorial was first conceived. As many have said, it has taken longer to build the Memorial than to fight the war. Today, with the support of Americans from all walks of life, our veterans service organizations and overwhelming, bipartisan support in Congress, the Memorial is a reality. I do not have the time to mention all the Members of Congress who deserve thanks for their contributions to this cause, but certain Members in particular must be recognized. Rep. Sonny Montgomery, now retired, a true champion of veterans in the House, and Senator Strom Thurmond, our unfailing advocate in the Senate, as well as Rep. Bill Clay, of Missouri and two retired Members, Rep. Henry Gonzalez and Senator John Glenn. At the end of World War I, the French poet Guillaume Apollinaire declaring himself ``against forgetting'' wrote of his fallen comrades: ``You asked neither for glory nor for tears.'' Five years ago, at the close of the 50th anniversary ceremonies for World War II, Americans consecrated this ground with soil from the resting places around the world of those who served and died on all fronts. We, too, declared ourselves against forgetting. We pledged then that America would honor and remember their selfless devotion on this Mall that commemorates democracy's march. Apollinaire's words resonated again as E.B. Sledge reflected on the moment the Second World War ended: ``. . . sitting in a stunned silence, we remembered our dead . . . so many dead . . . Except for a few widely scattered shouts of joy, the survivors of the abyss sat hollow-eyed, trying to comprehend a world without war.'' Yes. Individual acts by ordinary men and women in an extraordinary time--one exhausting skirmish, one determined attack, one valiant act of heroism, one digged determination to give your all, one heroic act after another--by the thousands--by the millions--bound our country together as it has not been since, bound the living to the dead in common purpose and in service to freedom, and to life. As a Marine wrote about his company, `` I cannot say too much for the men . . . I have seen a spirit of brotherhood . . . that goes with one foot here amid the friends we see, and the other foot there amid the friends we see no longer, and one foot is as steady as the other.'' Today we break ground. It is only fitting that the event that reshaped the modern world in the 20th century and marked our nation's emergence from isolationism to the leader of the free world be commemorated on this site. Our work will not be complete until the light from the central sculpture of the Memorial intersects the shadow cast by the Washington Monument across the Lincoln Memorial Reflecting Pool and the struggles for freedom of the 18th, 19th, and 20th centuries converge in one moment. Here freedom will shine. She will shine. This Memorial honors those still living who served abroad and on the home front and also those lost--the nearly 300,000 Americans who died in combat, and those millions who survived the war but who have since passed away. Among that number I count my inspired constituent Roger Durbin of Berkey, Ohio, a letter carrier who fought bravely with the Army's 101st Armored Division in the Battle of the Bulge and who, because he could not forget, asked me in 1987 why there was no memorial in our nation's Capitol to which he could bring his grandchildren. Roger is with us spiritually today. To help us remember him and his contribution to America, we have with us a delegation from his American Legion Post, the Joseph Diehn Post in Sylvania, Ohio, and his beloved family, his widow Marian his granddaughter, Melissa, an art historian and member of the World War II Memorial Advisory Board. This is a memorial to heroic sacrifice. It is also a memorial for the living--positioned between the Washington Monument and Lincoln Memorial--to remember how freedom in the 20th century was preserved for ensuing generations. Poet Keith Douglas died in foreign combat in 1944 at age 24. In predicting his own end, he wrote about what he called time's wrong-way telescope, and how he thought it might simplify him as people looked back at him over the distance of years. ``Through that lens,'' he demanded, ``see if I seem/substance or nothing: of the world/deserving mention, or charitable oblivion . . .'' And then he ended with the request, ``Remember me when I am dead/and simplify me when I'm dead.'' What a strange and striking charge that is! And yet here today we pledge that as the World War II Memorial is built, through the simplifying elements of stone, water, and light. There will be no charitable oblivion. America will not forget. The world will not forget. When we as a people can no longer remember the complicated individuals who walked in freedom's march--a husband, a sister, a friend, a brother, and uncle, a father--when those individuals become simplified in histories and in family stories, still when future generations journey to this holy place, America will not forget. Freedom's children will not forget.

Ms. KAPTUR

Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize the 100th anniversary of Block Communications, Inc. The Block family and its extended mass communications family celebrates this significant milestone on November 2, 2000. Born in Lithuania, moving to Germany for a time until his family immigrated to the United States, Paul Bloch began working in the newspaper business at age eleven when the Elmira Telegram in Elmira, New York hired him. Through age twenty, Paul Bloch--who by now had Americanized the family name to Block--worked in every department of the Elmira Telegram learning the trade and becoming especially adept at sales. Then, in 1895 and with the encouragement of his employer, Paul Block made the move to New York City where he found employment selling advertising for newspapers across the country as a national representative for the A. Frank Richardson Company. In 1900, Paul Block decided to venture out on his own, and by 1910 Paul Block and Associates was among the major national newspaper advertising representative firms. Further branching out, Paul Block organized a group of investors in order to purchase the Newark Star Eagle in 1916. Purchases of several other newspapers soon followed, and in ten years Paul Block owned the Detroit Journal, The Toledo Blade, and the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette. Paul Block struggled to keep his business alive through the decade of the Depression, and the company was again thriving upon his death in 1941. The company continued in the Block family and eventually became known as Blade Communications Inc. Through the latter half of the century the company diversified to include cable and broadcast television, telecommunications, and Internet opportunities. Blade Communications Inc. holds fourteen communication companies today. To mark the company's centennial, the company's name was changed once more to Block Communications Inc. The Block family remains a strong fixture in Toledo, Ohio and Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, where it still owns The Blade and the Post- Gazette. The Block imprimatur is evident in many of these cities' major projects and institutions, and the family remains an integral component of both communities. I join with many others as we salute one hundred years of Block family tradition in communications and community, and look forward to the next one hundred years.

Ms. KAPTUR

Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Speaker, it is a great honor for me to be able to enter these precious remembrances of our dear friend and able attorney, Congressman Sidney Yates, into the Congressional Record. His illustrated career spanned half a century, 24 terms as a Member of the people's House. And what a stellar human being, citizen, and Member he was! I had the distinct pleasure of serving with him on the Appropriations Committee and in that capacity deepened my respect for him each passing year. When I think of this true gentleman from Illinois, I remember his engaging smile, his brillant intellect, his love of the arts and of the environment, his puckish humor, and his devotion to human and civil rights. His knowledge of the Rules of the House knew no equal. And he applied his legislative skills with a mastery that elevated us all. Yes, Sid Yates, Master of the House. How many times I recall Sid standing up for recognition in the Committee to carry his arguments. Eloquent. I admired his ability highly. So erudite was he, holding the attention of all listeners. Were it not for the fact that he left the House briefly to run for the U.S. Senate, I have no doubt he would have attained the Chairmanship of the Appropriations Committee. He certainly possessed all the ability and respect required of it. Just before Sid left Congress, I asked him what he considered his major accomplishments as a tenured Member of this body. I thought he would answer that his legacy included major expansion of our national park system, or our institutions of art and culture, or improvements to his home district on Chicago's northwest side. Or, I imagined he would mention the major donations of art he had given to museums across our nation. For indeed his accomplishments included all of these. Yet he mentioned none of this. First, he said he considered his efforts to achieve the integration of the Capitol Police Force in the late 1940's to be a stellar achievement. Then, he said helping establish the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum would remain in his memory always. One cold winter evening, when the National Gallery of Art had a modernist exhibition, I was strolling through the galleries and came upon Sid with his beloved wife, Addie. As always, he greeted me warmly and called me ``dearie'', too, as I imagine he did with all the women Members. He was always encouraging, cajoling, lifting us all. I think he took special satisfaction in helping the minority of women in this institution rise to full acceptance. My heartfelt sympathies go out to the family of this magnificent man who loved his nation and dedicated his entire life to the business of democratic governance. What a joy to have known him and learned from him! What a legacy he has left for America.

Ms. KAPTUR

Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Speaker, today I along with my colleague, Representative Barbara Cubin, introduced important legislation to improve the standard of care for the mentally ill under the Medicaid program, the Medicaid Intensive Community Mental Health Treatment Act of 2000. This legislation provides each state with the option of covering intensive community mental health treatment under the Medicaid program. These community health programs are intensive treatments for adults and children with a diagnosed and persistent mental illness if they meet certain criteria under Medicaid. This bill amends title XIX of the Social Security Act to provide states with the option of covering intensive community treatment under the Medicaid program. With this bill, the states can use 24-hour, 7-day-a-week intensive case management programs, psychiatric rehabilitation, discharge planning, and other evidence-based approaches such as assertive community treatment. These programs have been proven more effective and less expensive than inpatient care. The severely mentally ill are not receiving the help they need under the current programs covered under Medicaid. This bill helps states reduce the costs of inpatient care under Medicaid. Trials have demonstrated that the use of these services substantially reduces the need for inpatient mental illnesses. This bill focuses the treatments used to benefit the severely mentally ill and thereby reduces the amount spent on inpatient care. Current federal financing for community-based metal health care is spread across six or more optional Medicaid service categories. There exists a patchwork of state and country programs characterized by a lack of coordination, inflexible funding streams, and missing service components. This bill brings together a number of proven treatments for the severally mentally ill. States are given a choice, not a mandate, to adopt these improved services. The people in our country who suffer from severe and persistent mental illnesses are not receiving the care they deserve. Without this specialized and intensive treatment it is extremely difficult for them to improve their lives. Many of the severely mentally ill are habitual inhabitants of the prison system or are homeless. If they have access to the specialized intensive care provided by these programs, cyclical regression to their illnesses may be avoided. This bill puts the choice squarely on the states: they can and should exercise the option to provide the quality of care individuals with severe mental illnesses deserve. This bill does not cover everyone seeking psychiatric therapy. It covers only those with severe and persistent mental illnesses who meet one of the following criteria: a history of hospitalization or of repeated arrests for minor offenses; A history of poor outcomes from lesser treatments; who cannot meet their own basic needs; or have a history of coexisting substance abuse for at least 12 months. The Medicaid Intensive Community Health Treatment Act of 2000 gives states a clear choice to improve the lives of their severely mentally ill residents.

Ms. KAPTUR

Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Speaker, I wish to pay tribute to an extraordinary man from my district, Mr. Art Edgerton. Art unexpectedly passed from this life on Tuesday, September 26, 2000 in his home in Perrysburg, Ohio. Art exemplified artistry, humanitarianism, and zest in every aspect of his being. Well known to Northwest Ohioans, Art was a most talented and accomplished musician who made his mark nationwide. Though he began his professional career as a drummer at the tender age of nine, Art's piano playing was legendary and he played with various bands through the early 1950s. Even after settling in Toledo, Ohio and pursuing other employment, Art continued playing the piano, entertaining audiences in his adopted hometown. In 1957, Art entered into a new career, that of broadcasting. Beginning as a part time disc jockey with the former WTOL radio station, he soon transitioned to a report for both radio and television covering civic affairs. Art broke into this field at a time when his race and his disability made this pursuit very difficult. Still he persevered, enduring prejudice with grace, covering the 1963 March on Washington and, blind since birth, taking notes in Braille. An early colleague best summed up Art's style: ``. . . a very accomplished reporter. He was extremely sensitive at a time when being a black reporter presented him with a lot of obstacles.'' The colleague noted how it was not easy for many people to accept Arts' use of Braille writing as he reported an event, and highlighted ``Art's ability to maintain his composure and to deal fairly with everyone he dealt with, even if they didn't deal fairly with him.'' Even as he continued in his journalism and music careers, Art took on a new challenge in the late 1960's becoming an administrative assistant in the external affairs office of the University of Toledo and later, the Assistant Director for Affirmative Action. Active in community affairs as well, Art served as Board President of the Ecumenical Communications Commission of Northwest Ohio, Board Member of the Greater Toledo Chapter of the American Red Cross, member of the President's Committee on Employment of the Handicapped, President of the Northwest Ohio Black Media Association, and the National Association of Black Journalists. In 1995 he was inducted into that organization's Regional Hall of Fame. Among all of his awards and accolades, Art was perhaps most proud of receiving the 1967 Handicapped American of the Year Award which was presented to him personally by Vice President Hubert Humphrey. Coming from an unhappy childhood in which his parents could not accept his blindness, his wife explained why this particular award affected him so deeply, ``With his upbringing, how he had to scuffle, he just figured he would never be recognized. The fact that somebody recognized what he done gave him that much more determination to continue and do better.'' Mr. Speaker, Art Edgerton was a friend and a trusted advisor throughout the years I have served in this House. I shall miss deeply, as will our entire community. He made us better through his caring and talents spirit. He always advocated for the rights of people with disabilities. Exceedingly gracious, completely endearing, unfailingly honest, yet with a core of steel, Art Edgerton was a man among men. We offer our profoundest and heartfelt condolences to his wife of 35 years, Della, his sons Edward and Paul, his grandchildren and great- grandchildren. May their memories of this truly great man carry them forward.

Ms. KAPTUR

Ms. KAPTUR. Madam Speaker, I rise to express my strong support for this legislation, S. Con. Res. 145, that expresses the sense of Congress that the construction of the National World War II Memorial should be constructed expeditiously and that the appropriate site for the Memorial is on our National Mall at the Rainbow Pool. I want to thank Senator Warner, Chairman Stump, and all the other Members of Congress who worked to bring this legislation before us today. As we enter the new century, it is appropriate that we reflect on the turning point of the past century. The World War II Memorial will commemorate that period between 1939 and 1945 that so profoundly reconfigured the modern world. So long as there is an America, this hallowed ground will pay homage to the superlative devotion that elevated duty, honor, and country to sacred proportion. The location of the World War II memorial between the Washington Monument and the Lincoln Memorial is not only appropriate, but also historically coherent. Those two memorials commemorate the defining national events of the 18th and 19th centuries: our Nation's founding in the Revolutionary War and our unification during the Civil War. It is only fitting that the event that reshaped the modern world in the 20th century and marked our Nation's emergence from the chrysalis of isolationism as the leader of the free world be commemorated on this site. As we all know, the site and the form of the memorial have been the subject of ongoing qualification and even some controversy. This is how public dialogue should ensue in our country. I believe that the site and respectful style of the memorial are most appropriate. The refined design is a beautiful tribute to a generation of Americans who sacrificed their lives in service to our country with unparalleled valor and distinction. This design enhances the Mall's representation of American history. It retains open vistas--north and south as well as east and west. And it adds trees, plantings, and waterfalls while also capturing for visitors and all Americans the significance of this most historic event of the 20th Century. More importantly, we must acknowledge that the open, expansive process by which decisions have been made about this site and this design. The democratic process these brave Americans fought to defend has been pursued. The congressional deliberations--extensive hearings, floor action, and two separate bills--that led to the authorization of the memorial were long, frustratingly long, but they were thorough. As one sage commented, ``It has taken longer to build the memorial than it did to fight the war.'' I can now say it has taken us twice as long to build the Memorial as to fight the war--over 13 years. Our first bill authorizing the memorial was filed in 1987, and the final bill was passed in 1993. The Administrations of two presidents, five Congresses, and a decade of administrative reviews have elapsed. After authorization, the procedures of the American Battle Monuments Commission and the other bodies responsible for approving the memorial have been open and fair. There have been 17 open, public meetings held on the proposed Memorial since 1993. Questions have been raised and suggestions offered by Members of Congress, the general public, and interest groups about the site and style of the memorial. With that deliberative process, the concept has been refined and become more elegant and appropriate for this hallowed site. The concept of a World War II Memorial in Washington sprang from a dogged Army veteran, my constituent, Roger Durbin of Berkey, Ohio, who fought with the 101st Armored Division in the Battle of the Bulge. It was Roger's question to me about why there was no memorial to World War II in Washington to which he could take his grandchildren that inspired the historic project that is before us today. The thought of Roger reminds me of that auspicious day, Veterans Day, 1995, when the memorial site was consecrated with soil from American battlefield cemeteries around the world. Roger Durbin participated in that dedication, accompanied by his wife Marian. He wrote about it as follows: I stood on the site of the Memorial, November 10, 1995, watching the activity thereon. Touch football, stickball, Frisbee, picnicking, etc. as people enjoyed a sunny day as they would have in an ordinary public park. The next day I stood with President Clinton at the end of the glorious site dedication ceremony and scattered sacred soil gathered from 16 military cemeteries from around the world and Arlington upon the sparse and worn grass. That is when it became the most sacred, revered, beautiful spot in America. Sadly, Roger passed away earlier this year. Roger was deeply wounded that he would not be able to see his idea come to fruition. The architectural rendition of the Memorial was framed above his fireplace, and he has assembled a copious note and scrapbook about the legislation and administrative proceedings for the record. For thousands of other veterans, the same is true. Since the site dedication in 1995, perhaps a third of the World War II veterans then living have left us. There are fewer than 6 million World War II veterans living today, and we are losing them at a rate of 1,000 a day! I feel a great urgency to complete this project on schedule. As many as possible of the brave Americans who served during that conflict, abroad and on the home front, should bear witness to this memorial in its final form. Is this too much to ask? Of course, all veterans' organizations and students of history recognize what this generation achieved in the triumph of freedom over tyranny. As Americans in future generations visit our Nation's Capital, they will have an opportunity to stop along the Mall to reflect on a time when America went to war to defend our fundamental political values. Millions of visitors every year traverse this site already as they wend their way between the various memorials, parks, roads, and special events that give our National Mall its public character. They will be able to reflect on the level of commitment that engaged millions of Americans and our allies in combat during World War Il. The World War II memorial will thus serve as a symbol of our legacy to the future centuries: a determination to defend democracy at any cost. The world's political landscape was reshaped for all time as a result of the Allied victory. I urge the Commission to approve the architectural and landscape design as presented today. Let us move expeditiously toward the groundbreaking this coming Veterans Day in the first year of a new century and the advent of the new millennium. Again, Madam Speaker, I fully support S. Con. Res. 145 and urge its passage.

Ms. KAPTUR

Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished gentlewoman from North Carolina (Mrs. Clayton), a member of the Agriculture authorizing committee.

Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Lee), the very able member of the Committee on International Relations.

Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2\1/3\ minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Stenholm), the very distinguished ranking member of the Committee on Agriculture.

Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of this conference report as a significant improvement over the measure that originally moved through this body. Before I get into the details, let me just say that I particularly this afternoon rise with great respect and true admiration for the gentleman from New Mexico (Mr. Skeen), our chairman of the Subcommittee on Agriculture, Rural Development, Food and Drug Administration and Related Agencies, who under current Republican caucus rules is serving his last year as a fair, caring and truly outstanding chairman. I will say that I know that as a regular committee member, the gentleman will continue to be exemplary in his service, but I will miss him in his current position. Mr. Speaker, I wish to express genuine support and thanks to our subcommittee staff, Hank Moore, Martin Delgado, John Ziolkowski, Joanne Orndorff and our detailees Anne DuBey and Maureen Holohan, and also our minority staff, David Reich, and on my own staff, Roger Szemraj for doing such a tremendous job in sheperding this major legislation through the Congress. I also want to say to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Young), the chairman of the Committee on Appropriations, he kept his word on both sides of the aisle, so that our conferees could meet and fully engage in debate as we did in every single line item of this bill. I say thanks to the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Obey), who is our ranking member on the full committee who participated in every single meeting. I actually do not know how he does it, so tirelessly, and I want to thank the people of Wisconsin for sending him here for service to the Nation. I want to thank the Members on our side of the aisle, the gentlewoman from Connecticut (Ms. DeLauro), the gentleman from New York (Mr. Hinchey), the gentleman from California (Mr. Farr), and the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Boyd). We thank them for yeoman's service in the construction of this very important measure. Mr. Speaker, overall the conference report spends over $78.5 billion. A little over three-quarters of that is in what we call mandatory spending for programs, especially our food programs, breakfast programs, lunch programs, elderly feeding programs, surplus commodity programs, that are used from coast to coast. $28 billion dollars, nearly half of that, goes to the Commodity Credit Corporation for net realized losses as we move product around the world and here at home. Mr. Speaker, another $1.7 billion goes for crop insurance. The base bill in addition to this has $15 billion in discretionary spending in important areas, such as new research for fuels of the future, the extension service to bring the latest in research right down to the farm and the ranch, conservation programs--so much a part of America's rich natural heritage and essential to sustainability of the future, food safety programs, rural housing and development, all of our feeding programs, international assistance and certainly the Food and Drug Administration. In this bill, also, and this is of critical interest to those who tie their livelihoods to the rural countryside, we have more than $3.6 billion for disaster, farm assistance, and rural development programs. I will say more about that in a moment, but we were also able to incorporate into this measure portions of the Hunger Relief Act. We know as welfare reform really kicks in in every State across this country, thousands of people go to work for minimum wage without health benefits. In this bill, we have provided housing and vehicle allowances and the right to food for those workers and their children to help them transition to the marketplace off of welfare. We are very, very pleased to be able to do that on this particular committee. Mr. Speaker, I also have to say, of course, we were not able to defeat the rule and bring a real prescription drug reimportation provision before the Congress. That is truly sad, and every one of us will have to account for that before the voters this fall. In addition to that, the sanctions language in this bill is absolutely unworkable; even the Cuban Government has said that the provisions may be worse than the status quo, and we really will not be able to sell product in Cuba because of the restrictions in this measure. However, the needs of the country outweigh any one of those provisions, and we have to vote on the overall bill based on its merits. I will quickly tick off key provisions of the bill: we do provide additional funds for market concentration investigation in our Grain Inspectors, Packers and Stockyards Administration; food safety, full funding in that program; additional funds for our Farm Service Agency operations, including extra funds to administer the disaster program so essential across this country this year; for our conservation programs, a decent level of support; research, which is key to the future; in APHIS, while the Animal Plant Health and Inspection Service, it has been funded in a manner that dedicates an inordinate amount of funds to the boll weevil program. We have so many other invasive species such as Asian longhorn beetle and others where we do not have equal levels of support. That is unfortunate. We were not able to work out fair apportionment of these funds completely. In rural development, we do provide an increase over last year; in food donations, in the PL480 provisions and in title 2, an increase there to help move surplus product into the international market so as to help farm prices here at home; and then in the Food and Drug Administration, some additional assistance there, but certainly not what the agency was looking for. I wanted to spend my final few minutes here talking about the emergency funding provisions in more detail, because this is so important across the country. For crop losses due to disasters, during the 2000 crop year, including those losses due to quality losses, we have funded what is necessary. We estimate across America that will require over $1.6 billion in funding. There is funding in this bill for dairy producers to compensate for their low prices. There is livestock assistance. We had many questions on that from people representing ranching communities. Also there is targeted assistance for our apple and potato producers, cranberry producers, honey producers as well as wool and mohair. There is no reason just because you are not a row crop producer that you should not have some type of assistance if you are going to lose your operations. There is authority in this bill to enroll an additional 100,000 acres in the Wetlands Reserve Program, and $35 million for the Natural Resource and Conservation Service for technical assistance in relation to that program, as well as the Conservation Reserve Program. There is an additional $20 million in this program for cooperative development, for new co-ops to help farmers and ranchers reposition to meet the market in this very difficult period for them. Also there are additional funds for water and sewer across our country. We just cannot meet the entire need; the line of applicants is much longer than we are able to accommodate. We have done the very best we could in this bill. Mr. Speaker, I would just ask the Members, in spite of the loopholes--and they are significant in the prescription drug provision and the sanctions portions of the bill--to vote for this bill. Overall the other provisions require our support. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the very distinguished gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Dingell), the incredibly hard working ranking member of the Committee on Commerce. (Mr. DINGELL asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the distinguished gentleman from California (Mr. Berman), a Member of the Committee on the Judiciary.

Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Speaker, I would like to inquire as to the remaining time on both sides.

Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume in order to place in the Record language from the New York Times this morning refuting what my very dear colleague, the gentlewoman from Missouri (Mrs. Emerson), has indicated. It says Dr. Jane Henney, the Commissioner of Food and Drug, said, ``Nothing in the bill requires a manufacturer to give the approved label to an importer or to allow use of the label by an importer, which means that it is not enforceable.'' And then today we receive from the Office of the President, the Office of Management and Budget, the following. And I enter the direct language in the Record because in the future we will have to repair the damage that is going to be done when this bill is passed today. It says, ``The administration is disappointed that the prescription drug reimportation provision in this bill will fail to achieve its goal of providing needed relief from the high costs of prescription drugs. The majority leadership chose to end bipartisan negotiations and, instead, produced a provision in the conference report that leaves numerous loopholes that will render this provision meaningless. Specifically, it allows drug manufacturers to deny importers access to FDA-approved labeling required for reimportation so that any and all drug companies could, and probably would, block reimportation of their medications. Second, a sunset was added that ends the importation system 5 years after it goes into effect. This will limit private and public sector interest in investing in this system.'' And I would just depart from that to say to my colleague that sunset was not in the Jeffords bill, as the gentlewoman indicated earlier today. And, finally, third, this letter says, ``The conference language permits the drug industry to use contracts or agreements to provide financial disincentives for foreign distributors to reimport to U.S. importers. It is wrong that U.S. citizens pay the highest prices in the world for medications, leaving many with no option than to go abroad to obtain affordable prescription drugs. But it is also wrong to provide false hope that this provision will work to address the problem. Moreover, Congress has thus far failed to pass a meaningful Medicare prescription drug benefit that will not only provide price discounts but will ensure seniors and people with disabilities against the catastrophic costs of medications.'' That is a direct quote from the Executive Office of the President. And, Mr. Speaker, the full content of the statement is as follows: Statement of Administration Policy (This statement has been coordinated by OMB with the concerned agencies.) h.r. 4461--agriculture, rural development, food and drug administration, and related agencies appropriations bill fy 2001 (Sponsors: Skeen (R), New Mexico; Cochran (R) Mississippi) This Statement of Administration Policy provides the Administration's views on the conference version of the Agriculture, Rural Development, Food and Drug Administration, and Related Agencies Appropriations Bill, FY 2001. The conference report includes support for a number of important priorities for the Nation. In particular, the bill includes full funding for the President's Food Safety Initiative, significant increases in rural development programs to help rural communities and residents take part in the national economic expansion, provisions that will enable food stamp recipients to own dependable cars and have better shelter without losing their eligibility, and relief to farmers and ranchers who suffered losses from natural disasters. While the Administration continues to support a range of conservation efforts, such as the Farmland Protection Wetlands Reserve, and Environmental Quality Incentives Programs, and is disappointed that this bill did not provide full funding for these efforts, we do appreciate the increases that were provided including funds for conservation technical assistance. However, while the Administration supports this conference report, it has concerns with several provisions in the bill. The Administration is disappointed that the prescription drug reimportation provision in this bill will fail to achieve its goal of providing needed relief from the high costs of prescription drugs. The majority leadership chose to end bipartisan negotiations and instead produced a provision in the conference report that leaves numerous loopholes that will render this provision meaningless. Specifically, it allows drug manufacturers to deny importers access to the Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-approved labeling required for reimportation so that any and all drug companies could-- and probably would--block reimportation of their medications. Second, a ``sunset'' was added that ends the importation system five years after it goes into effect. This will limit private and public sector interest in investing in this system. Third, the conference language permits the drug industry to use contracts or agreements to provide financial disincentives for foreign distributors to reimport to U.S. importers. Finally, despite the Administration's repeated requests, the conference requires FDA to pay for the costs associated with this provision from within resources needed to perform its other important public health activities. It is wrong that U.S. citizens pay the highest prices in the world for medications, leaving many with no other option than to go abroad to obtain affordable prescription drugs. But it is also wrong to provide false hope that this provision will work to address this problem. Moreover, Congress has thus far failed to pass a meaningful Medicare prescription drug benefit that will not only provide price discounts but will insure seniors and people with disabilities against the catastrophic costs of medications. On the ``Trade Sanctions Reform and Export Enhancement Act of 2000,'' which is included in the conference report, there are two major concerns to the Administration. First, the restrictions on the ability of the President to initiate new sanctions and maintain old ones are overly stringent. This effectively disarms the President's ability to conduct foreign policy while providing potential targets of U.S. actions with the time to take countermeasures. Second, the provisions of the bill affecting travel to Cuba would significantly set back our people-to-people exchanges that are in the interest of opening up Cuban society. They also would preclude travel by technicians and others needed to conduct normal business by the U.S. Interests Section in Havana, as well as travel for humanitarian purposes. With respect to the provision, ``Continued Dumping and Subsidy Offset Act of 2000,'' the Administration agrees with the findings that state that unfair trade laws have as their purpose the restoration of conditions of fair trade. However, that is the purpose of the anti-dumping and counter-vailing duties themselves, which accomplish that purpose. By raising the price of imports they shield domestic producers from import competition and allow domestic manufacturers to raise prices, increase production, and improve revenues. Consequently, distribution of the tariffs themselves to producers is not necessary to the restoration of conditions of fair trade. In addition, there are significant concerns regarding administrative feasibility and consistency with our trade policy objectives, including the potential for trading partners to adopt similar mechanisms. Such concerns were raised and examined with regard to a similar proposal considered during passage of the Uruguay Round Agreements Act. That proposal was ultimately rejected. In addition, the Administration believes the provision removing the authority of USDA's Undersecretary for Natural Resources and the Environment has no justification, will interfere with the agency's ability to manage itself effectively, and sets a highly undesirable precedent. The Administration is also disappointed that the bill prohibits the Secretary of Agriculture from designating any part of a USDA research lab in Ft. Reno, Oklahoma, as surplus land, thereby preventing any consideration of returning land to the Cheyenne-Arapaho tribe. The Secretary should retain his authority to effectively manage USDA property and consider its alternative uses.

Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Waters), the ranking member of the Subcommittee on Domestic and International Monetary Policy of the Committee on Banking and Financial Services, who is so very passionate and committed and intelligent.

Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time. I just wanted to end by pointing out an important clarification here. The gentlewoman from Missouri indicated there was a Supreme Court case or an appeals court case and inferred that it supported her point of view. Let me say that the Supreme Court declined to review the SmithKline case so the appeals court stands. If the law requires you to use labels, you must. And that is exactly what the Democratic amendment required, exactly what the Waxman amendment required, exactly what the DeLauro amendment required in the subcommittee markup.

Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the very distinguished gentleman from Maine (Mr. Baldacci).

Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 15 seconds only to say that the reason, I say to the gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Gutknecht) that we do not have prescription drug legislation is because this Congress did not pass it. And this is our only chance, and, unfortunately, a flawed bill is being presented as the only option that a few people here negotiated on their own, not in a bipartisan way.

Ms. KAPTUR

Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Moakley) for yielding me this time. Mr. Speaker, I rise to oppose this rule and to ask our Members to vote ``no'' on the previous question on the rule. Now, why do I do that, as ranking member of the subcommittee? The base bill is good; however, we want to defeat the previous question in order to offer an amendment that would allow us to have a real prescription drug benefit provision for the American people. And the only way we can get that amendment is by voting no. In fact, this will be the only measure in this Congress where we will be able to help lower prices in prescription drugs for the American public. In this bill there is a so-called provision for prescription drugs, but I ask my colleagues to read it. What does it do? First of all, it expires after 5 years. So what importer or wholesaler is going to want to get in the business of bringing in drugs from Canada, at Canadian prices, which are lower than U.S. prices, when you know it would not be continuing down the road? In addition to that, the underlying measure has a provision that would permit the big drug companies to insert contracting provisions that if any drugs are brought back into our country, for example, from Canada, they could only be sold at the higher U.S. prices rather than at Canadian prices. Our amendment says they cannot do that. They cannot have those kinds of restrictive contracts. In addition, in the base bill, there is a provision that would deny the ability of the importers in our country to use the FDA-approved label so that we have the same name of the drug and we know that it is scientifically approved by FDA. They actually deny that in the underlying amendment. They would not allow us to amend the bill when we were in the conference committee. So I would urge the membership to please give us our only opportunity in this Congress to vote for a real prescription drug benefit for the American people. Vote ``no'' on the previous question, this rule.