Marcy Kaptur

Ms. KAPTUR

Ms. KAPTUR. Madam Speaker, I would like to reclaim my time and say that I have been working on this for 10 years, and I know the difference between foreign corporate money and money that should not be coming in here from noncitizens in the first place, and this bill is an absolute sham. I cannot believe it, after all the efforts that we have made and all the agreements. I am glad there is a Ross Perot, and I hope that that particular party runs candidates across this country because this bill is a sham. It does not close a loophole that the American people have known, they have known this has existed for years. This is a sham. This entire debate, cynically orchestrated by Newt Gingrich, is a sham--why? Because just a few days ago, the Republican Campaign Committee leader in the Senate [the other body] called him Mr. Money Bags from Kentucky, killed campaign reform for this year. Even if this chamber passed the finest reform in the country, nothing is going to happen. It takes both chambers to tango. This House bill is particularly cynical because the suspension procedure under which we are considering it is a gag rule. No amendments are allowed; it allows only 20 minutes debate on each side in this serious debate. What a travesty! And then to gain passage, it requires \2/3\ of the Members to achieve passage, not a majority. These bills have no spending limits; in fact, these bills allow wealthy individuals to triple the amount of money they can contribute. Yet, they cut off the legs of ordinary working men and women by demeaning their participation in our political life by requiring them to get written permission. What an insult. I urge the American people to call their Members of the House to urge them to sign on the discharge petition on the Shays-Meehan bill to get a real reform debate on the Floor of this House. And I wish to enter into the Record the editorial in the New York Times today that strikes the heart of the deceitful process underway here tonight--``The Plot to Bury Reform.'' The Plot to Bury Reform Newt Gingrich has selected today as the moment to line up his firing squad and kill campaign finance reform in Congress this year. Yet the House Speaker may be surprised. Republicans and Democrats who favor reform are so outraged over Mr. Gingrich's broken promises and heavy-handed tactics that they could seize the moment and force him to back down. Whether the reformers succeed depends on their ability to hold together and find ways to get genuine reform to the floor, where a majority of members appear ready to vote for it. Just how desperate Mr. Gingrich is to thwart reform is clear from the parliamentary tactics he is preparing to use. Last week, the Speaker broke his promise to debate the issue of a campaign cleanup and pulled all relevant legislation from the House agenda. In doing so, he virtually acknowledged that he and his wrecking crew lacked enough support from fellow Republicans to prevent passage of genuine reform. Then the Republican leadership abruptly announced it would bring four watered down reform bills up today, but under rules preventing amendments or substitutions and requiring a two- thirds vote for approval of anything. Clearly, the Speaker's goal is to insure that nothing gets passed, and hope someone else can be blamed. Republicans are ready to defy the Speaker by joining with most Democrats to vote for legislation sponsored by Representatives Christopher Shays of Connecticut and Marty Meehan of Massachusetts. The Shays-Meehan bill would ban the unregulated and unlimited donations to political parties that are known as ``soft money'' and were at the heart of the recent scandals. It would also establish exacting disclosure requirements and apply fund-raising limits to independent groups running attack ads on television. The bills that Mr. Gingrich is sponsoring are either anemic, irrelevant or tied to an anti-union provision repugnant to most Democrats. With a two-thirds approval requirement, they cannot pass. Of course Mr. Gingrich does not care if his own fraudulent legislations wins or loses. All he seeks is the chance to say the House considered campaign finance reform and was unable to pass a bill. It is a cynical maneuver that will come back to haunt Mr. Gingrich and any House member who supports it.

Ms. KAPTUR. Madam Speaker, will the gentleman yield?

Ms. KAPTUR. Madam Speaker, I would like to know if the gentleman's measure, where he says noncitizens, does that include foreign- controlled corporations?

Ms. KAPTUR. Madam Speaker, I would like to comment on this bill, since this is the subject I have been working on for over a decade and have tried to get a bill on this floor. I am very curious that the gentleman merely, as I read the bill which we only got a few minutes ago, essentially says noncitizens. Does this include foreign-controlled corporations and foreign-controlled trade associations as well as noncitizens, those who are not citizens of this country? I think the gentleman's bill is seriously lacking in covering where most of the money comes from, which is from legally incorporated foreign corporations which are back-dooring money into our elections. I do not believe the gentleman's bill covers that. Am I correct?

Ms. KAPTUR. I yield to the gentleman from Michigan.

Ms. KAPTUR. That is correct.

Ms. KAPTUR. Madam Speaker, the gentleman is not answering my question. More than foreign individuals contribute, and they do so illegally. That is the very point.

Ms. KAPTUR. How about hard money that comes through foreign corporation and foreign trade associations?

Ms. KAPTUR. So the gentleman would define foreign interests or foreign citizens as including foreign corporations in which over half the stock is owned by foreign interests, as well as foreign trade associations in which over half of the money comes from foreign individuals or foreign interests, so this bill does cover that?

Ms. KAPTUR. Now I want to say to the gentleman I have testified before his committee. We have defined foreign interests. Those include not only foreign citizens but foreign-controlled corporations and trade associations through which the majority of these dollars flow. When the gentleman defines noncitizens, does that include foreign- controlled corporations and foreign-controlled trade associations?

Ms. KAPTUR. Madam Speaker, will the gentleman yield?

Ms. KAPTUR

Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Speaker, I rise to pay tribute to a remarkably able man dedicated to his family, his church, and his lifelong love of the profession of law. John Stoepler, professor of law, former Dean of The University of Toledo Law School, and interim President of the University, put the justice and betterment of others above all else. He died on January 19, 1998, at 66 years of age. In his early years, John attended school in Toledo, Ohio and then his high intelligence led him to the University of Notre Dame, where he took his first degree. He never forgot his roots, though, and after serving in the army and obtaining a master's degree in law from Yale, he came back to Toledo to teach and raise his family. His classes at the local university were the first to fill up because the students knew that John really wanted them to succeed. He greeted the challenge of teaching with energy and enthusiasm that was always evident. As former student Tom Pletz remembers, John welcomed each day of teaching with ``a twinkle in his eye.'' The zest that John brought to his teaching was also found in the work he did for his church as parish operations manager. His love of education and respect for people of faith were combined when he sat on the education council of the Roman Catholic Diocese of Toledo, an organization which oversees area Catholic schools. His commitment to education did not go unnoticed; he quickly ascended through the ranks at the university's law school, becoming dean in 1983 and interim university president in 1988. He played an integral role in the expansion of the school both academically and strategically as the ground was broken for a new facility on its own corner of campus. He also became a member of the Ohio Supreme Court's commission on continuing legal education and of the national education development committee of the American Institute of Planners. Though he dabbled in politics as an extension of his respect for the lawmaking process, his own political campaigns were not successful. He was, however, appointed to many government positions in the city, county and state, and served the community with dignity and sagacity from those posts. Long time friend Rev. Robert Kirtland said that John thought of the ideal lawyer ``as a person of integrity.'' That certainly describes him and earned for him the deepest respect, from a community that will never forget him. Our thoughts are with his wife, Katherine; sons, John and Michael; daughter Charlotte; his brother and sister, Robert and Anne; and all of his grandchildren. It is our hope that they will be comforted by the prayers of a community bettered by his idealism, and a nation regirded in its fundamental precept of justice through law.

Ms. KAPTUR

Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize the 10th anniversary of the Edison Industrial Systems Center. On November 6, 1997 EISC will celebrate its long history of achievement and contribution to the businesses and citizens of Ohio at a celebration to be held at the center of science and industry in downtown Toledo, OH. EISC has been a tremendous force in helping to link companies to high tech resources in Ohio and throughout the Nation. These connections have been instrumental in increasing production and in improving the quality of products and employee skills in industry. One of EISC's major accomplishments is the revolutionary and much acclaimed Toledo Technology Academy. The academy's goals are to prepare high school students for high-tech careers or for further education in engineering disciplines. Food production is Ohio's largest industry and EISC's food technology centers work to modernize food producers who still rely on outdated technology for quality control. Modernization provided by EISC through this program vastly improves plant safety, product consistency and profits. Among the innovations created under the food technology centers are several new types of food sensors that measure quality. Germ free packaging methods instructed by EISC are another helpful addition to the industry, improving the safety of our food. The center for technology commercialization offers a variety of services to firms. Attorneys, accountants, and financial institutions maintained by this division are available to companies as a form of cost-effective support. Companies in the city of Toledo, OH, and throughout the Nation are indebted to EISC for its work. I will be pleased to join my community on November 6, 1997, to commemorate the strides EISC has made in 10 years of growth and betterment to industry.

Ms. KAPTUR

Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Speaker, by defeating fast-track negotiating authority, the House holds a rare and, in fact, profound opportunity-- after nearly two decades of growing pleas from the American people--to define a new and responsible American free trade policy where trade becomes a two-way corridor--where reciprocity reigns; where America's trade ledgers move from deficit to surplus again; where fair treatment and a living wage is afforded people who work, and where the wages and benefits earned by America's workers rise again; where the rule of law gains ascendancy on a global basis; where respect for the world's environment is fundamental; where we as Members of Congress uphold our own sovereign constitutional responsibilities as this Nation's chief lawmaking body on trade. Congress must respond to the plight of people like Ethel Tyner or David Filipiak or Griselda Rodriquez--our fellow citizens who have paid the price of flawed trade agreements. Our trade policy cannot abandon people such as Wanda Napier of Missouri, who had worked for Lee Apparel for 14 years and whose job was terminated and moved south of the border. Like millions of other Americans who remain invisible to the persistent proponents of fast track, Wanda was on the losing end of fast track. Vanity Fair Corp., parent company of Lee Apparel which has been expanding its operations in Mexico and other foreign countries while terminating 1,650 more jobs in the United States, suddenly announced in September 1996 it was closing the plant where Wanda had worked for over a dozen years, throwing 350 Americans out of work. President Clinton, after failing to acknowledge her plight for nearly 2 years recommended the fast-tracker's panacea to Wanda--retraining. Well, she went for retraining. In her own words, We were ridiculed and humiliated by the local division of Employment Security. Even though most of us had never asked the United States government for a dime in their lives, we were treated like we were worthless and had our hands in the government till. We were told we couldn't go the schools we wanted or take the training we needed. We were told that the only training we could have was the quickest, the fastest, and the cheapest. Today Wanda works for two-thirds her former wage and receives no health benefits or pension. A vote against fast track is a vote of conscience that puts a human face on trade. It is a vote that says where trade is not a two-way street, serious human casualties prevail. The President claims that fast-track trade agreements create ``good, high-paying jobs at home.'' What jobs? The Economic Policy Institute has identified almost 400,000 more lost U.S. jobs, 19,000 in Ohio, just from NAFTA. In just the last 3 months, nearly 3,000 more jobs have been moved to Mexico alone. Yes, Mr. President, more people are working but they are working harder for less--4 percent less since NAFTA and GATT even in this time of economic growth, and 20 percent less over the last 20 years. Just ask thousands of Americans whose jobs are being fast-tracked outside the United States as we conduct this polite debate--the 279 recently terminated workers at Eveready Battery in Fremont, OH; or the 350 terminated workers at Jansport in Burlington, WA; or the 1,500 workers that got pink slips at Fruit of the Loom in Louisiana this Tuesday; or the 10,000 at Kodak in Rochester, NY and elsewhere who await their layoffs this week; or the thousands of vegetable farmers and production workers in Florida whose futures have been permanently altered because our Government failed to respond in a timely manner to the import surges that wiped out over 225 farm operations since NAFTA's passage. Talk to the hundreds of thousands of terminated workers whose jobs have been fast-tracked, and who if they have been re-employed, now earn $2 less per hour on average than on their previous job, many of them working part-time, or for reduced hours with lower or nonexistent health and pension benefits. On the global front, it's time for a realignment of U.S. trade policy that goes beyond the narrow tariff and investment focus of NAFTA and GATT. America must not trade away its middle-class jobs. Expanding trade must be linked to democracy building and social development abroad--free trade among free peoples. As John Kennedy taught us, ``economic growth without political freedom elsewhere remains an empty promise'' in history's long struggle toward the liberation of subjugated people. Tonight, we demand an international trade policy that respects people as much as it respects capital. Will the trade rules that govern that global market ensure that trade does not become a race to the bottom, undermining America's jobs, wages, and consumer and environmental protections? Will it lead to the development of democracy and the rule of law in other nations or simply enforce plutocracy? The question for the 21st century is whether the world trade regime will foster a global village or a global plantation. So far, U.S. trade negotiators have been successful in safeguarding capital rights--foreign investment, copyrights, and corporate prerogatives but unsuccessful in safeguarding people's rights--a living wage and decent working conditions, a safe environment, and a lift in the standard-of-living for our people as well as those from other lands. If America keeps its markets open while other global markets remain highly hurdled, we will continue to erode our middle-class standard-of-living and degrade the world's environment. America has a moral duty to assure that the global marketplace benefits everyone, not just those capital interests with the deepest pockets. U.S. Trade Deficits Have Exploded Let us look for a moment at the ledger. For a century, America has been the world's leading trading nation. We still are. Whether the United States will lead the world in the next century is not the question. The question is where will we lead. Until the mid 1970's, U.S. trade accounts had been generally in balance. But over the last 20 years, particularly since, fast track has become a device to end run Congress, America has amassed enormous trade deficits that today lop one full point off of U.S. GDP, representing $1 trillion in lost income. The pattern is familiar. Dole Pineapple, for example, closes down all its production in Hawaii, abandoning thousands of employees, moves its operations to low-wage havens such as Vietnam and Thailand where field workers are paid with three meals a day. Dole's female processing workers earn pennies an hour, and the pineapple they can is then shipped here to the United States for sale. All the while the price- per-can increases. Dole stock rises on Wall Street, but the workers on Hawaii's main street get pink slips, while the productive capacity of Hawaii is diminished. The story is the same whether it is a Japanese corporation such as Bandai, or Nike, or dozens of others who trade off people's sweat for money. What we see is a handful of giant global firms, many with assets larger than nation states, who hold no national allegiance and gravitate to the lowest common denominator in wage scales. They are the ones who have the front row seats at the World Trade Organization in Geneva. They continue to monopolize the benefits of the current trade regime. I can understand why these groups support fast track and other means to limit congressional debate and perusal of these vital agreements. What other measures that come before Congress are subject to after- midnight votes, Congress being held hostage, and such arm-twisting. Let me remind you these global firms have not created a single net new job here at home in the past quarter century. So isn't it time for us to take account of their ledger, and demystify it for the American people. What has happened in the past 25 years is that the United States has become the residual importer for world markets that largely remain closed to us. The important figure is the net of exports minus imports. On this the United States has been the clear loser for over two decades. The United States racked up a $170-billion trade deficit for 1996. Add this to the deficits of the previous 20 years and the trade debt represents $1.8 trillion of wealth transferred from the American people to foreign creditors--a massive loan from foreign countries which must eventually be repaid. Our trade deficit with China will surpass $40 billion this year; post-NAFTA, our surplus with Mexico has fallen to an $18-billion deficit; our annual $50-billion deficit with Japan remains intractable. In fact, for every country with which the United States has negotiated a fast-track agreement, our Nation has fallen into deficit. Since the United States hold a positive trade balance with Chile and the MERCOSUR nations, why rock the boat? Shouldn't Congress exercise its responsibility to correct that which is wrong with the current system before expanding it? If the trade deficit keeps growing at this rate for another decade, the United States will essentially be paying the equivalent of 2.5 percent of our GDP in trade debt service--virtually all of the recent annual increase in the GDP! This means our people pedal harder but their bicycles still slip backward. Moreover, this continued hemorrhaging of U.S. jobs and industry hollows out our manufacturing and agricultural base. There is a difference between Wall Street's paper money and productive wealth. If the United States does not take the initiative to modernize our trade policies at this historical moment at the dawn of the 21st century, I ask, what country will? Who will carry the burden to root our trade agreements in our fundamental national values, beginning with individual dignity and justice for all. The ongoing fast-track debate has served to illuminate the deficiencies of oldstyle trade agreements. It cannot pass on its merits. The frantic wheeling and dealing by the White House and the Republican leadership that characterized the last 100 hours of the debate shows the opponents of fast track have already won a great moral and intellectual victory. So in a historic and troubling last-minute search for votes, every conceivable lure has been used to dangle in front of undecided members--Christmas tree provisions in appropriation bills, threats to take away Members' chairmanships, tax breaks for southern towns, bridges, roads through national forests, financial help in upcoming primary and general elections, trade preferences for sub- Saharan African nations, tobacco subsidy guarantees, wheat ad wine deals--you name it; it's on the table. It my 15 years in Congress, this type of tawdry, unyielding pressure convinces me just how powerful the forces resisting change are. It also tells me how strong are the oaks in this Chamber who have stood against the wind. We have scored a real victory for the American people and light a roman candle for the dignity of working people everywhere. Does the President Need Fast Track? This and preceding administrations have negotiated over 220 trade agreements without fast-track authority. The Uruguay round of the GATT proceeded for several years without fast track. The Clinton administration is currently negotiating a multilateral agreement on investment without fast-track authority. The United States-Israel Free Trade Agreement was negotiated without fast track. The President has constitutional authority to negotiate with other sovereign nations. The only reason the President needs fast track is so he doesn't have to seriously consult or negotiate with Congress. Think about it. Without fast track, U.S. trade negotiators will be in a stronger position vis-a-vis our trading partners if they have to sell the deal to Congress. The suggestion that our trading partners won't deal with us without fast track is ludicrous. If President Clinton can say, ``I want to do this, but Congress is insisting on inclusion of these provisions . . .'' doesn't that strengthen his hand? Congress certainly is capable of dealing with extremely complex legislation. Each year, we pass 13 highly complex appropriation measures, thousands of pages in length. Each year, we adopt a defense authorization bill thousands of pages in length. And hasn't Congress dealt with budget and tax measures thousands of pages in length, controlling hundreds of billions of dollars in spending and taxes? Making It There and Selling It Here The United States represents about 4 percent of the world's population and enjoys about 22 percent of the world's products. To maintain our standard-of-living, it is argued, we have to sell to the other 96 percent of the world's population. But of the world's 6 billion potential consumers, 80 percent are only window shoppers, low- wage workers or subsistence farmers. Under the fast track agreements, we don't sell a net positive balance of consumer goods to other countries; we send capital and capital goods out of our country where goods are assembled by low-wage workers often employed for ``hunger wages,'' and then re-exported back to the United States and sold here at high prices--U-turn goods. Mexico is the prime example. NAFTA assured that Mexico would become one of the primary low-wage export platforms to the United States market, presently surpassed only by China. Nearly 3,000 plants have located just south of the border and they are called ``in-bond'' plants. I agree; labor is held in bondage. Since NAFTA, the Mexican domestic market has shrunk but its export market, primarily to the United States, has expanded dramatically. This process keeps putting severe downward pressure on United States living standards. If Europe and Japan maintain positive trade balances with Mexico, why is it only the United States that keeps digging a hole of debt with Mexico deeper and deeper? And with China? And with Canada? Health, Safety and Drugs What does a fast-tracked trade policy mean for the quality of American life? Danger. Since 1990, food-borne outbreaks in the United States from imported food have included: shigellosis from imported green onions; salmonella from imported cantaloupe and imported alfalfa seeds; cyclospora from imported raspberries; and cholera from imported coconut milk. In Michigan earlier this year, more than 200 cases of hepatitis A were associated with frozen strawberries imported from Mexico and illegally labeled as United States grown. Strawberries imported from Mexico were found to have an 18.4 percent violation rate for illegal levels of pesticides in 1993. A 47-count indictment was brought against a California firm for fraudulently labeling Mexican grown strawberries as United States grown. On May 29 the Centers for Disease Control reported that imported raspberries were the cause of a 1996 outbreak of hepatitis. Yet inspection of produce for pesticides on imported food has been reduced. The absolute number of imported food sample inspections decreased from 6,463 in 1993, to 5,448 in 1994, and to 5,032 in 1995--a decrease of 28 percent over that period. Inspection of imported Mexican produce declined from 1,820 samples in 1993 to 1723 samples in 1995 even though imports doubled. The food provisions of NAFTA constrain food safety and agricultural disease and pest inspections. NAFTA specifically forbids imported food from being inspected at the border more thoroughly than the same domestic commodity. Moreover, under NAFTA we have not just opened our southern border to unsafe food. We have thrown the door open for the importation of the illegal drugs that degrade and destroy our communities. Key provisions for cross-border trucking have been relaxed resulting in Mexico becoming the primary route for the importation of drugs into the United States. The vast majority of trucks entering the United States from Mexico enter without inspection. During the closing moments of the NAFTA debate in 1993 when it was clear that our position was on the short end of the votes, we promised the American people during that singularly compelling moment here in the House that our fight would continue in the tomorrows to come--a fight against the narrow visions of the elites and Wall Street who would abandon those who work in our factories, on our farms, and on Main Street. We have continued valiantly in our efforts, and we can be proud as we vote here today. For it is in our hearts, that reside the truest principles of democracy, prosperity, and respect for ordinary people of extraordinary spirit. Our victory gives hope to those in our world who struggle for democracy, for labor rights, for human health and safety in the workplace, and for the right to speak out as we have spoken out today. When the vote on GATT occurred, we said when that vote was over, it would not be over. Its consequences would be felt for years to come. As a result of the elections of 1994 and 1996, we have been joined by many new Members of Congress, on both sides of the aisle, who fought to be our new partners and in that fight to forge a new American responsible trade policy. These colleagues did not share our experience as we battled NAFTA in 1993 and GATT in 1994. But they have heard the will of the American people as they campaigned for the seats they now hold, and they have made the difference. Out of these many battles in a long struggle has come a deep awareness on the part of the American people that trade and jobs are inextricably linked and that people matter more than profits. On the floor of this House, we not hear the voices of those who bear the pain of NAFTA, the indignities of GATT. We must now proceed to constructively fashion a trade policy that moves America and the world into an era of trade-linked advancement for people or ordinary means. I said in 1993 and again in 1994 during the GATT debate--also scheduled after midnight during a lame duck session of Congress--that working people would remember those votes. I say again America's working families will remember this vote as well. Let history show it was here, together, in the people's House where the journey began to enshrine in trade laws the highest ideals of a free people. Let us inspire a world where the majority long for a better way of life along the path that leads, not back to the 19th century, but forward to the 21st.

Ms. KAPTUR

Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Speaker, although the end of the Second World War occurred over a half-century ago, Americans still honor and continue to remember the hundreds of thousands of men and women who paid the ultimate sacrifice in this, the greatest conflict of all human history. I would like to take this time to honor the brave men who served on the U.S.S. Bullhead (SS-332). The U.S.S. Bullhead was the last major vessel lost by the United States in World War II, and with it went the lives of 84 American sailors. On August 6, 1945, the U.S.S. Bullhead was plying the waters of the Java Sea when it was suddenly attacked by Japanese aircraft, which proceeded to drop 500-pound bombs on the American submarine. Although presumed to have been sunk, the actual fate of the U.S.S. Bullhead could not be determined. On August 23, 1945, the U.S. Navy announced that ``The U.S.S. Bullhead is overdue and presumed lost.'' The U.S.S. Bullhead was the 52d U.S. submarine lost during World War II. It wasn't until long after the end of the war that the fate of the U.S.S. Bullhead and its crew was learned following the release of Japanese records. Mr. Speaker, in honoring the crew of the U.S.S. Bullhead, I wish to extend special appreciation to Mr. Richard L. Henshaw of Toledo, OH, who has strived to maintain the memory and honor of this submarine and its gallant crew. Mr. Speaker, I wish to include for the Record the following official history of the U.S.S. Bullhead: Bullhead (SS-332) was laid down on 21 October 1943 at Groton, Conn., by the Electric Boat Co.; launched on 16 July 1944; sponsored by Mrs. Howard Doyle; and commissioned on 4 December 1944, Comdr. Walter T. Griffith in command. Following a month's shakedown cruise in Narragansett Bay, the submarine sailed on 9 January 1945 for Key West, Fla., where she received two weeks of additional training before pushing on to Panama. She emerged from the canal on 11 February and headed for Hawaii. On the first day out, a near disaster occurred. During a practice dive, the main induction failed to close rapidly enough because of low hydraulic pressure, and tons of water flooded in before it could be shut. The ship was saved by shifting ballast, pumping out water, and continuing the dive. She proceeded on without incident and reached Pearl Harbor on 26 February. At the end of her voyage repairs, Bullhead left Pearl Harbor on 9 March. Ten days later, she paused at Guam to refuel and then got underway on the 21st for the northern port of the South China Sea and her first war patrol. The submarine hunted off Formosa through 30 March without encountering any enemy ships before shaping a course for Hong Kong. En route, she shelled targets on enemy-occupied Pratas Island. While off Hong Kong, she also provided lifeguard services for Allied aviators. On 8 April, an American ``Liberator'' mistakenly bombed Bullhead. All the bombs missed her, fortunately, by at least 75 yards and, while severely shaken, she sustained no damage. On 16 April, four miles off the China coast, the submarine recovered the crew of a downed Army aircraft, taking on board three survivors and the bodies of three casualties. The submarine terminated the patrol on 28 April in the Philippines when the safely arrived at the newly constructed base at Subic Bay, Luzon. Upon completion of her refit there, Bullhead spent eight days in training exercises off the coast of Luzon before getting underway again on 21 May for her second war patrol. This time, the submarine operated in a wolf pack with Bergall (SS-320) and Kraken (SS-370) in a coordinated sweep of the Gulf of Siam and the Java Sea. Bullhead entered the patrol area on 25 May but encountered no suitable targets until 30 May, when she made a machinegun attack on a 150-ton schooner and claimed to have sunk the Japanese vessel. On 4 June, the submarine moved to a new station south of Anabas Island, but this area proved to be barren. On the 16th, she entered the western end of the Java Sea, Bullhead discovered her next victim on the 18th. Once again, she trained her machine guns on a maru, a 700-ton vessel which sank soon after suffering a hit at the waterline. Later that day, the submarine sighted a small convoy of two merchantmen and two escort vessels but was unable to attack because the ships took shelter along the Java coast. On the morning of the 19th, Bullhead engaged in a surface battle with two subchasers and two picket boats and took credit for sinking one 700-ton subchaser and damaging a smaller one of some 500 tons. The remaining Japanese vessels tried to take cover behind a point of land, but Bullhead closed the shore and continued firing on the boats. The encounter did not end until the submarine exhausted her supply of 5-inch ammunition. On 25 June, Bullhead opened fire with her 40-millimeter gun on a small Japanese vessel, set the boat ablaze, and believed that the Japanese boat had been sunk. She completed this patrol on 2 July when she moored at Fremantle, Australia. Despite claiming to have sunk several vessels, Bullhead was not officially credited with destroying any Japanese shipping during this patrol. During a brief refit period, the submarine received another 5-inch gun. The submarine left Fremantle on 31 July to begin her third patrol. She was to transit Lombok Strait and patrol in the Java Sea with several other American and British submarines. Bullhead rendezvoused with a Dutch submarine, O-21, on 2 August and transferred mail to her. Four days later, the submarine reported that she had safely passed through the strait and was in her patrol area. No further word was ever received from her; and, on 24 August, she was reported overdue and presumed lost. Postwar analysis of Japanese records revealed that a Japanese army plane depthcharged a submarine off the Bali coast near the northern mouth of Lombok Strait on 6 August. The pilot claimed two direct hits and reported a gush of oil and air bubbles at the spot where the target went down. It was presumed that the proximity of mountains shortened her radar's range and prevented Bullhead from receiving warning of the plane's approach. The submarine went down with the loss of all hands. Her name was struck from the Navy list on 17 September 1945. Bullhead won two battle stars for her World War II service.

Ms. KAPTUR

Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to a community leader in my district. Johnny McCloud, a minister, an activist, and organizer in Toledo, OH died suddenly on October 23, 1997 at the age of 52 years. Born and raised in Florida and Georgia, Johnny completed undergraduate studies and graduate studies at Southwestern Christian University, Abilene Christian University, University of South Florida, and Valdosta State College. He also attended International Seminary in Orlando, FL for post graduate work. A lifelong learner, his studies ranged from biology and medicine, to counseling and education, to administration and the Bible. He taught school, worked for the Economic Planning and Opportunity Association, and ran his own business. A noted orator, he was most known as a minister with North Side Church of Christ and Glass City Church of Christ, and as the executive director of the J. Frank Troy Senior Center in Toledo. Johnny McCloud's civic and community work was legion. He was highly involved in many organizations, for most of which he was an officerholder, including the National Caucus and Center of Black Aged, National Black Alcoholism Council, Northwestern Ohio Regional Council on Alcoholism, Interdenominational Ministerial Alliance, Interracial Religious Coalition, EOPA of Greater Toledo, Selective Service Board, the Republican Party, Neighborhood Business and Economic Development Committee, IBPOE, Holy Hill No. 4 Chapter--AF & AM, Rachel Chapter-- OES, Amaranth Chapter, Matrons Council, and Order of Masons. In all of these activities, he offered total commitment and dedication to all of these causes. Our heartfelt prayers are with his family and friends during this extremely difficult time. May his son Willie, his mother Evelyn Parker, and sister Betty Braham find some measure of comfort and peace in the condolences and gratitude of our community.

Ms. KAPTUR

Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Speaker, I think today was roads, highways, not bridges today.

Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?

Ms. KAPTUR

Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Speaker, I take this opportunity to remark upon the passing of an extraordinary man of my district. Erie Sauder of Archbold, OH died June 29, 1997 at the age of 92 years. Erie Sauder was a visionary, an entrepreneur, and a deeply spiritual man. A living legend in his own community of Archbold, he was well known among the larger community as well. In fact, even the world knew of him, through his company's products. Mr. Sauder was the founder and chairman of the board of Sauder Woodworking. The world's largest manufacturer of ready-to-assemble furniture, Sauder Woodworking employs 3,000 Archbold area residents. Along with two subsidiaries of the company and Mr. Sauder's signature piece, Sauder Farm and Craft Village, his enterprises are the lifeblood of the community. Sauder Farm and Craft Village is a living history of northwest Ohio, a recreation of a pioneer village which brings to life the day-to-day activity of its residents. The village also includes an auditorium, restaurant, and inn, and over two million people visit it each year to get a glimpse of an understanding of life in the 19th century. A man of faith and deep moral conviction, Erie Sauder was a scholar of the Scriptures and Mennonite Church history. He was an active congregant in four churches, most recently the Pine Grove Mennonite Church. His work with the church led him to become a founding member of the Mennonite Economic Development Association. Through this organization, he made 18 trips to Paraguay, directing a development project which put to work thousands of indigent Paraguayans. Mr. Sauder looked upon that project as his most satisfactory achievement. His spirituality and civic-mindedness is evident in the other boards on which he served: Sunshine Children's Home--for profoundly disabled children; Ohio Mission Board; Oaklawn Center; Farmers and Merchants State Bank; Goshen College and Defiance College. A grounded man who never forgot his roots, Erie Sauder received much recognition in his later years. He was honored as Archbold's Citizen of the year in 1969 and the State of Ohio's Senior Citizen of the Year in 1986. He was inducted into the Northwest Ohio Area Office on Aging's Hall of Honor in 1986. He received the Ohio Designer Craftsmen Award in 1987 and the Governor's Award in 1992. He has also been recognized by the Maumee Valley Girl Scout Council and the Ohio 4-H Foundation for his generous support of the organizations' programs. A man of considerable fortune who grew up poor on a Fulton County farm, Erie Sauder's charity was legendary. In addition to his contributions to the Sauder Farm and Craft Village, his business, and many other programs, his obituary notes that his good deeds ``ranged from donating an organ to his church to donating $1 million toward the construction of Archbold's new library.'' His community truly felt his presence and he treated everyone in it as his friend. Erie Sauder survived his first wife, Leona, their daughter, his sister Mabel and brother Leo. He leaves to this life his wife Orlyss, his sons Delmar, Maynard, and Myrl, stepdaughter Elaine, sisters Lucretia and Herma, nine grandchildren and eleven great-grandchildren. May they find comfort in his memory and in the lasting legacy he left in the form of his entrepreneurship and in living his faith.

Ms. KAPTUR

Ms. KAPTUR. Who objected to that?

Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Speaker, it is obvious to the membership that something is going on here. Something is going on here that should trouble the membership.

Ms. KAPTUR

Ms. KAPTUR. I object.

Ms. KAPTUR

Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to address the House.

Ms. KAPTUR. I hope for at least 3 minutes.

Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Speaker, if the gentleman will yield, I would like to ask the chairman a question or two.