Joe Knollenberg

Mr. KNOLLENBERG

Mr. KNOLLENBERG. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding me time. Mr. Chairman, I strongly oppose this amendment. It does nothing more than punish the automobile industry for making cars that people want to buy. I am opposed for many reasons, but let me focus on three. This amendment will force Americans to drive smaller cars that are less safe than what we drive now. Smaller cars mean more traffic fatalities; a fact confirmed by the recent NAS report. This amendment will also have the devastating economic impact of affecting every worker in the auto industry whose job will be affected. There are seven others affected as a spin-off from the one worker in the factory. This amendment will also impose these new standards on an impossible timetable, which the NAS report explicitly argued against. Why should Congress adopt policies that cause economic hardship, reduce consumer choice and lessen auto safety? Obviously we should not. I urge my colleagues to oppose this harmful and dangerous amendment.

Mr. KNOLLENBERG

Mr. KNOLLENBERG. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding time to me. I rise in very strong support of this agreement, Mr. Speaker, and I urge my colleagues on both sides to support passage. The U.S.-Jordan Free Trade Agreement will provide economic benefits to both countries. That is what we are really here about. This agreement will eliminate tariffs on virtually all trade between the two countries within 10 years. Passage of this agreement offers the prospect of rapid growth in the U.S.-Jordan trade relationship. In addition to economic benefits, this agreement will help to strengthen our association with a key ally in the Middle East. Jordan is a trusted friend and ally of the U.S. and is strongly committed to liberalizing its economy. The agreement provides important support to Jordan's commitment. In addition, the U.S.-Jordan FTA builds on other U.S. initiatives in the region designed to encourage economic development and regional integration. This includes, of course, the 1985 U.S.-Israel Free Trade Agreement and its extension to areas administered by the Palestinian Authority in 1996. Again, Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to vote yes on this agreement.

Mr. KNOLLENBERG

Mr. KNOLLENBERG. Mr. Speaker, Congress must pass trade promotion authority. International trade is an essential part of the U.S. economy. But when it comes to trade agreements, the U.S. is lagging behind significantly. Of the 130 preferential trade agreements that exist, the U.S. is a party to only two: NAFTA and a free trade agreement with Israel. That is it. The European Union has 27, 20 of which have been negotiated in the last 10 years. While the rest of the world is moving rapidly ahead, we are not. Canada, our neighbor to the north, has agreements throughout the southern hemisphere. There are currently over 12 million U.S. jobs that depend upon exports. American jobs that export goods pay up to 18 percent more than the U.S. national average. As we can see, trade agreements are a crucial element for the success of the U.S. economy. Remember, the jobs stay here; the products are exported overseas. Mr. Speaker, in order to get back in the game and develop a stronger economy, I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting trade promotion authority.

Mr. KNOLLENBERG

Mr. KNOLLENBERG. Mr. Chairman, I want to thank the gentleman first of all for yielding me time and I in particular want to thank the gentleman from New York (Mr. Walsh) and the gentleman from West Virginia (Mr. Mollohan) for the very, very difficult and hard work that they have done on this bill. We have to obviously recognize Frank Cushing, who heads the staff, and all of the staff, who have done, I think, yeoman's work in bringing about the expertise that produces a product that is one that, I think, we should all be happy to support. The quality of the committee members should be highlighted along with the quality of their work product as well. This appropriations bill is unique in that it covers an array of diverse agencies ranging from the Veterans Administration to the EPA. That is quite a broad stretch. It is not easy. It is not an easy task to bring this wide range of interests together into a single bill. But the gentleman from New York and the gentleman from West Virginia have a working relationship that I think makes all this possible. The fiscal year 2002 VA-HUD bill is a fair piece of legislation produced under difficult circumstances, and it is within the budget resolution. It responsibly provides a $1 billion increase for veterans' medical health care, and increases funding for the Veterans Benefits Administration to reduce the backlog of claims. The bill increases funding for the Department of Housing and Urban Development by $1.4 billion and fully funds section 8 housing. H.R. 2620 also provides sound investments in research with a 9 percent increase for NSF. The gentleman from New York, I believe, should be saluted for crafting this piece of legislation under these difficult circumstances. He has worked in good faith with the ranking member and the other side in a bipartisan way to forge the bill that is now before the House. As this process moves forward, we will have plenty of opportunities from Members to offer their suggestions and amendments before the President finally puts his signature on it. This is a good, responsible bill. I encourage strongly my colleagues to support it.

Mr. KNOLLENBERG

Mr. KNOLLENBERG. Mr. Speaker, Americans are looking for quick answers on the present energy prices and burden that is put on families and farmers. Nuclear power can help lead us in the right direction to address this problem. Nuclear power plants provide about one-fifth of America's electricity, and about 30 percent of California's electricity. They also run 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, and are not affected by inclement weather, such as solar and wind. Besides being able to run efficiently, nuclear power has a strong environmental record. For example, nuclear plants are free of numerous gases such as sulfur dioxide, mercury, carbon emissions, and nitrogen oxide. Mr. Speaker, it is clear that nuclear power is the answer to at least alleviating the current energy crisis. Nuclear power is shown to be a reliable source, which is why the Congress must take the necessary steps to use nuclear power to address the energy shortages, not just in California, but, of course, the rising energy prices across the country.

Mr. KNOLLENBERG

Mr. KNOLLENBERG. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong opposition to this amendment. What this amendment attempts to do is equate the valuable work of the Export-Import Bank with a fatally flawed provision of the Kyoto Protocol. This attempt is misleading at best, and at worst damaging to the developing world. The production of energy is a fundamental element of economic development. The countries of the developing world need energy in order to raise the standard of living for their people and make progress in essential areas such as education and healthcare. Without energy, this progress is not possible. Unfortunately, this amendment would prohibit the Export-Import Bank from helping developing countries to address these important needs. Mr. Chairman, fossil fuels remain essential to the production of energy and no amendment is going to change that reality. The fact of the matter is fossil fuels are the dominant source of energy in the world--and particularly in developing countries. According to the Energy Information Administration, in 1999, 85 percent of the world's energy production came from fossil fuels. If you exclude OECD countries, those which essentially exclude the industrialized world, that number increases to 92 percent. In essence, 92 percent of the energy produced in the developing world comes from fossil fuels. Without fossil fuels, the majority of the world, and particularly the developing world, simply would not have energy. Without energy, mortality rates remain high, education remains low, and economic growth doesn't exist. Developing countries need energy and Ex-Im has an important role to play in meeting that need. Unfortunately the sponsors of this amendment are misinformed. The Kyoto Protocol is fatally flawed because, among other reasons, it does not include rapidly industrializing nations like Mexico, Brazil, China, and India. These countries account for over 40 percent of the world's population. This has nothing to do with the Export-Import Bank. Furthermore, the Kyoto Protocol is not based on sound science. The recently released National Academy of Sciences report on climate change has wrongly been characterized as proving the earth will continue to warm and that human-induced greenhouse gases are a significant culprit. The reality is, it does no such thing. In fact it uses the words ``uncertain'' and ``uncertainty'' 43 times in a 28-page report. On the very first page it states ``current estimates of the magnitude of future warming should be regarded as tentative and subject to future adjustments, either upward or downward.'' When it comes to climate change, the only thing we know for sure is that there are too many gaps in our knowledge of global warming to commit to the Kyoto Protocol. Mr. Chairman, this amendment is ill-advised and misleading. It would do nothing more than prevent the Export-Import Bank from helping to make progress in the developing world. I urge all members of the House to oppose this amendment.

Mr. KNOLLENBERG

Mr. KNOLLENBERG. Reclaiming my time, I think it would be out of line to cut now because that does not do anything for the gentleman's problem.

Mr. KNOLLENBERG. Reclaiming my time, Mr. Chairman, I would just say to the gentleman that there is a review process in place. They are looking at the gentleman's concerns.

Mr. KNOLLENBERG. I yield to the gentleman from West Virginia.

Mr. KNOLLENBERG. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the requisite number of words. Mr. Chairman, I rise to oppose the Visclosky-Mollohan amendment to cut the Export-Import Bank, and I urge my colleagues to do likewise and to join me in voting against it. The Export-Import Bank provides crucial support for America's exporting businesses, especially small businesses and the workers that those businesses employ. Support for Ex-Im means real jobs for real people. In fiscal year 2000, Ex-Im Bank financed more than 2,500 U.S. export sales, supporting $15.5 billion of U.S. exports to markets worldwide. Eighty-six percent of these transactions directly supported small business. In my district alone, since 1996, Ex-Im has supported 76 million in exports. Eleven of the 15 businesses supported are small businesses. Without Ex-Im, these transactions simply would not go forward. Ex-Im only gets involved when the private sector will not. Cutting Ex-Im means eliminating opportunities for American businesses and their employees. Especially with our economy wavering, this is simply the wrong thing to do. Exports are crucial to the U.S. economy. Exports account for over one-quarter of U.S. economic growth over the last decade and support an estimated 12 million American jobs. In order to grow the U.S. economy and also to increase the number of jobs, export opportunities need to grow as well. However, when it comes to international trade, the U.S. is falling rapidly behind. There are over 130 preferential-treatment trade agreements in effect in the world today. The European Union has 27, 20 of which they finalized in the last 10 years. Meanwhile, the U.S. is a party to only two, NAFTA and a free trade agreement with Israel. Exporting countries and other countries therefore have advantages in markets around the world that U.S. companies do not. In this environment, Ex-Im is increasingly important to support exports for U.S. businesses. Cutting Ex-Im will only push us further behind. Mr. Chairman, this amendment is especially troubling because it cuts $3 million from Ex-Im's administrative budget. That is a direct blow to small business. Eighty-five percent of Ex-Im's administrative budget is comprised of fixed costs. Out of the remainder, Ex-Im uses a significant portion for seminars and other efforts to reach out to small business. In reality, transactions involving small businesses are the most labor intensive. Therefore, cutting Ex-Im's administrative budget has the real effect of cutting out export opportunities for small businesses. I understand the sponsors of this amendment have concerns about a specific transaction. They want to make sure, and I understand this, that Ex-Im has appropriate economic impact protections in place. However, this amendment is clearly not the means to achieve that goal. First of all, Ex-Im does indeed have economic impact protections in place. More importantly, Ex-Im has responded to the concerns raised by the sponsors of this amendment by going through an extensive review of its economic impact procedures. The methods of evaluating economic impact are being reformed. In fact, the bank has released new draft procedures that are currently open for comment. So there is a process under way to address the concerns being raised by this amendment. Mr. Chairman, cutting Ex-Im means cutting U.S. exports, and cutting Ex-Im's administrative budget means squeezing out opportunities for small businesses. I believe this is the wrong thing to do, is not necessary, and should be defeated. I urge my colleagues to join me in voting against it.

Mr. KNOLLENBERG

Mr. KNOLLENBERG. Mr. Chairman, I want to thank the gentleman very kindly for those kind words; and I also want to rise in strong support of this appropriations bill. I want to suggest that my colleagues on both sides of the aisle rallied in support of this bill because this year, I think especially, we have an extraordinary bill. I must commend the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Kolbe) for his hard work and leadership as chairman of this subcommittee. He has consistently sought to accommodate all members, and I want to include myself in that group, because we all have different thoughts about how to prepare, how to put this bill together. But he has remained focused on bringing about a responsible and effective bill before us here today. Not an easy task, but one he has accomplished, I believe, with skill. I want to additionally thank my good friend, the gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. Lowey), our ranking member, for her leadership and her effort. As we have in years past, members from both sides of the aisle have once again worked together to make important progress on a number of foreign assistance issues. I thank the gentlewoman for her friendship and cooperation. Obviously, the staff, the extraordinary staff needs a great deal of thanks here, too, because they have been performing great work for us, a contribution that frankly has resulted in a bill that would not have been without their efforts, so I thank them, all of them, for their efforts. Foreign assistance remains an inseparable element of our Nation's overall foreign policy, including national security and economic interests. This is a responsible bill that effectively allocates the foreign assistance that we have available, while providing vital support for our Nation's interests. This bill provides, as my colleagues probably already know, $753 million in export financing for the Export-Import Bank, which is $120 million greater than the President's request. With this funding, I hope the bank will be able to maintain at least the level of activity experienced this year. The Export-Import Bank, sometimes looked upon as an unnecessary item, really has a critical role to play in support of American exports and the businesses and the workers who supply those products. Without support from Ex-Im, billions of dollars in American exports simply would not go forward. Ex-Im is especially important for small businesses. Small businesses benefit from over 80 percent of the bank's transactions. These exports remain crucial to our economy, and I will continue to support Ex-Im throughout the appropriations process. And I again want to thank the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Kolbe), the chairman, for his leadership in this effort to get more money into this account. One of the most important elements of U.S. foreign policy in this legislation is the annual assistance package to the Middle East. The United States has a vital role and has played a vital role in the Middle East for several decades. That role should and will continue. Congress has a responsibility to help shape our policy toward the Middle East through the financial assistance provided in this bill. Decisions regarding this funding must be carefully considered to ensure that a proper balance is maintained. I am also pleased that this bill fully supports the administration's request for assistance to our ally, Israel, the only democracy in the Middle East. I am also pleased that this bill continues funding for the excellent U.S. aid mission in Lebanon, as well as important programs in Egypt, Jordan, the West Bank, and Gaza. Together, these programs play a key role in advancing U.S. interests in the Middle East, including fostering credibility and stability at this crucial time. These programs should be continued, and this bill appropriately maintains them. The bill also strengthens our relationship to our friend and ally, Armenia. This year we have seen some progress in efforts to resolve the conflict among Armenia and Azerbaijan, Nagorno-Karabagh. During this time, Armenia has consistently shown its commitment toward a lasting peace, and has made notable progress with its economy and its effort to eliminate corruption. The assistance we provide remains important to these efforts. Therefore, I am pleased that this bill increases assistance there by $12.5 million over the President's request. I should note, however, that this is still a little less than last year. I look forward to working with the chairman in conference to develop some additional assistance on that issue. The legislation contains language directing the administration to release the remainder of the $20 million provided in 1998 for victims of the Nagorno-Karabagh conflict. There is great need in Nagorno- Karabagh, and USAID has an obligation to commit this money immediately. Mr. Chairman, there are other important programs in this bill, including microenterprise loans, foreign military financing for the Baltic countries, the resettlement of refugees in Israel, and, of course, also significant funding beyond the President's request to continue the fight against HIV/AIDS and the crisis in Africa and around the world. This is a good bill. I recommend that everyone get behind this bill and support it. Both sides I think will realize so much has been done with so little money.

Mr. KNOLLENBERG

Mr. KNOLLENBERG. Mr. Speaker, today I pay tribute to Dr. Richard W. McDowell, the longest-serving President in Schoolcraft College's history. He will be retiring on June 30, 2001. Dr. McDowell has been a great asset to his students, and served the Michigan educational community with diligence and excellence. In addition to his tenure as president, he has served on numerous educational and commerce boards, including the Livonia Chamber of Commerce, American Association of Community Colleges, and Council of North Central Two-year Colleges. After completing his tenure as vice-president and acting-president at two community colleges in Pittsburgh and Florida respectively, Richard McDowell joined Schoolcraft College in 1981, and helped guide the college through a 20-year period of academic growth and brilliance. On this end, he achieved high standards in increasing staff development, employee recognition, and provided the necessary direction to establishing the Business Development Center that has generated a billion dollars in grants to various local companies. The increased funds have enabled Schoolcraft College to be expanded considerably, which has made for a livelier and richer educational environment for students. On May 16th, 2001 the college broke ground on a $27 million facility that will house a state-of-the-art information technology center, and it's culinary arts department, which is recognized nationally. The college also plans to break ground on a $27 million facility that will house a state-of-the-art information technology center, and its culinary arts department, which is recognized nationally. Through his dedication and hard work to Schoolcraft College and the Michigan educational community, Dr. McDowell is a prime example of the kind of people that we need running the affairs of colleges and universities dedicated to providing the best environment and education possible to our students. I congratulate Richard on his fine achievements and wish nothing but the best in his future endeavors.

Mr. KNOLLENBERG

Mr. KNOLLENBERG. I thank the gentleman for yielding me this time. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong opposition to the amendment. The amendment is overly broad and would prohibit all agencies in the Energy and Water bill including the Corps of Engineers, the Department of Energy, and a portion of the Department of the Interior from expending funds for drilling in the Great Lakes. I have concerns that needed grants from these Federal agencies would be cut off as a result of this amendment. This is another attempt by the amendment's author and others to shift decision-making authority over the Great Lakes to the Federal Government, just like the water management issue. They would rather have bureaucrats in Washington to manage our resources than those of us who actually live there. I do not think that is right. The issue is under the jurisdiction of the State of Michigan and our State legislature and the governments of all the Great Lakes States. This is not just a Michigan issue. The Michigan State legislature has made a decision that this will be handled by State agencies, including the Michigan Department of Environmental Quality, Department of Natural Resources, and the State's Natural Resources Commission. They have made this decision on their own, free from Federal interference, which is as it should be. In fact, my home State of Michigan is not alone in this sentiment. It is shared by others. In a letter from the Interstate Oil and Gas Compact Commission, and I have a letter here, which has 30 of our Nation's 50 States as members, this letter went to EPA administrator Christie Todd Whitman, who writes, ``The member States of the OIGCC regard drilling beneath the Great Lakes and protection of the environment in relation to that drilling to be matters that are within the exclusive jurisdiction of the States and not the United States EPA or other Federal agencies.'' This amendment would be counter to the belief of the IOGCC and the majority of States in our Union. Remember again, there are 30 States involved here. Mr. Chairman, directional drilling should not be confused with offshore drilling. Directional drilling sites are inland. In the State of Michigan, they are prohibited from being closer than 1,500 feet from the shoreline. Conversely, offshore drilling done from ships or rigs directly in the water is prohibited by State law in five of the eight Great Lakes States. In 1997, the Michigan Environmental Science Board concluded directional drilling posed little or no risk to the contamination to the Great Lakes. Since 1979, there have been no accidents and no significant impact to the environment or public health. I think the evidence shows clearly that directional drilling is safe and an effective procedure and does not warrant any kind of Federal encroachment. State geologists estimate the production of new oil and gas resources from the Great Lakes could provide, contrary to what one might have heard, as much as $100 million to the Michigan Natural Resources Trust Fund, the State's sole source of funds for land acquisitions, recreational projects, and natural resource development projects. The revenue produced by leasing of land for drilling is crucial; and without it, state-owned natural resources could be taken without compensation by private wells drilled along the State of Michigan shorelines and the other States as well; on private lands, I might add. Furthermore, I believe directional drilling can be done in an environmentally safe manner, and it may be one solution, one solution, to some of our energy woes. This amendment is counterproductive because our Nation, particularly those in California, are currently experiencing an energy supply shortage and prohibiting directional drilling in the Great Lakes would cut off a critical supply source. Mr. Chairman, this amendment is little more than an example of mission creep by which the Federal Government slowly, slowly gains more and more authority. This mission creep amendment should not pass this House. I urge Members to oppose this amendment.

Mr. KNOLLENBERG

Mr. KNOLLENBERG. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to urge support for H.R. 2126, the Department of Energy University Nuclear Science and Engineering Act, which was introduced by the gentlewoman from Illinois (Mrs. Biggert), and I am proud to be an original cosponsor. The crisis in California has awakened our Nation to the lack of energy supply that confronts us. Nuclear power currently provides 20 percent of America's electricity. Interestingly, it provides 30 percent of California's electricity; and it is an obvious answer, I believe, to our energy needs. The nuclear science and engineering programs in our universities are crucial to this research in that they provide the critical foundation for our nuclear industry. Currently support for nuclear science and engineering programs is at a 35-year low. H.R. 2126 authorizes a critical investment of roughly $240 million over 5 years from the Department of Energy. Mr. Speaker, this modest investment will ensure that nuclear power will be able to meet California's needs and this Nation's demands. It is imperative that this crucial piece of legislation receives our support.

Mr. KNOLLENBERG

Mr. KNOLLENBERG. Mr. Chairman, I rise to offer an amendment to allocate $12 million of the District of Columbia's local funds for the city's summer school program. These funds are the city's own money and they are taken from the unobligated surplus funds. This amendment has no cost, no cost, to the Federal Government. Simply put, Federal money is not involved. I have long held that education is one area that I want to focus on as the chair of the Committee on Appropriations Subcommittee on the District of Columbia. In fact, my first trip into the city to visit some of the local schools and the subcommittee's very first hearing this year was on education. I am not alone in my attention to the District of Columbia schools. President George Bush and First Lady Laura Bush have visited schools in our Nation's Capital. The First Lady also champions a local initiative that will hire 100 professionals and put them into the city's classrooms. This amendment is the continuation of this mutual commitment. For the past few years, the D.C. public school system has received money from the Federal Department of Education, and the officials have been working with them to secure the summer school funds for fiscal year 01. Recently, it has become apparent that the funds will not be forthcoming from the Federal agency for the current fiscal year and local officials have been scrambling to find or address the looming shortfall. After all, if the funds are not available, the summer school doors will remain locked and the kids will not be able to get the education they deserve. I must confess some disappointment as to how we arrived at this point. The mayor and the city council sent a supplemental package to Congress on May 22, but it contained no money for the summer school program and I think surely someone must have known this was looming. In fact, I did not receive any notice about the $12 million shortfall until Friday, June 8, nearly 3 weeks after the mayor and the council sent their request to Congress. And I saw no justification or language until the following Wednesday evening, June 13, which was the night before the full committee markup of the supplemental. I know the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Fattah) and I were unprepared to address this last Thursday in full committee because details were still coming in at that time and there were remaining questions that had not been answered. Since then, further details have been slow to come, but most arrived just yesterday after some prodding from the gentlewoman from the District of Columbia (Ms. Norton), and I thank her for that assistance, and now we have what we want. I look forward to working more closely with District officials to ensure that we are provided with materials and answers to questions at the beginning of the process. Mr. Chairman, if this amendment is not a part of the supplemental bill, then thousands of kids will not be able to attend summer school in the District of Columbia. Regardless of how we got here this evening, it is critical we pass this amendment. I want to reiterate that the $12 million in the amendment is not Federal money, but merely allocating funds from the unobligated local surplus that the District has accumulated through the careful financial management by Mayor Anthony Williams. There will be no impact on the Federal budget as a result of this amendment. Mr. Chairman, I urge Members to support the amendment. I yield to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Young), the chairman of the full committee, for any comments he might wish to make.

Mr. KNOLLENBERG. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman.

Mr. KNOLLENBERG. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.

Mr. KNOLLENBERG

Mr. KNOLLENBERG. Mr. Chairman, I rise to offer support for H.R. 2052, the Sudan Peace Act, which will help facilitate solutions to the problems of famine and war in Sudan. First, let me say a special thanks to all the sponsors, especially Tom Tancredo, and the Committee on International Relations as well as the Subcommittee on Africa, for their hard work and leadership in developing this bill. I would like to also commend House leadership for bringing this bill to the House floor. The crisis in Sudan has resulted in two million casualties due to famine and the continuing war. The 18-year civil war in Sudan has fueled an on-going religious conflict between Muslins and Christians and has challenged our relations with Sudan due to its human rights violations and support of international terrorism. Despite this, I am hopeful this bill can help to address the problems and bring forth a peaceful resolution to the current situation. With that said, H.R. 2052 should be supported by the House and Senate chambers. In fiscal year 2000, the United States provided a total of $93.7 million in assistance to Sudan. These funds go to help create a civil administration, assist in conflict resolution and provide support for non-governmental organizations. Our financial assistance has eased the hardship for those in need of food assistance. Congress should adopt this legislation so we can help Sudan and improve our relationship with them as well. Again, I want to express my thanks to Tom Tancredo, and the Committee on International Relations, and the Subcommittee on Africa for their dedication and effort on this bill, and I encourage my colleagues to vote in support of H.R. 2052.

Mr. KNOLLENBERG

Mr. KNOLLENBERG. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to congratulate the city of Detroit and its residents on the 300th anniversary of the city's founding. As the oldest city in the Midwest, Detroit is the place where Henry Ford made the automobile affordable for all people through the implementation and perfection of mass production. I want to thank Congresswoman Carolyn Kilpatrick for introducing H. Con. Res. 80. The city of Detroit also provided assistance for more than 40,000 individuals eagerly awaiting freedom as a stop on the Underground Railroad. Additionally, the city of Detroit has been coined the ``Arsenal of Democracy'', as Motor City residents bravely gave their services to our nation, contributing tremendously to the United States' victory in World War II. With this year marking the 300th anniversary of Detroit's founding, it has grown into the tenth most populous city in the United States. Detroit has put the world on wheels, and exerts global influence in automobile manufacturing and trade. Furthermore, Detroit is an academic and cultural epicenter, and also exhibits a rich sports tradition. Many musical greats call Detroit home, and it was in this great city where the Motown Sound was born. I wish to extend to each resident my hearty congratulations on Detroit's 300th anniversary. Their dedication and hard work makes Detroit a city to be commended on its important contributions to the economic, social, and cultural aspects of the United States.

Mr. KNOLLENBERG

Mr. KNOLLENBERG. Mr. Speaker, I am honored to come to the floor today and help welcome His Holiness Karekin II, the Supreme Patriarch and Catholicos of all Armenians. Welcome to the U.S. House of Representatives. I thank His Holiness for offering such a wonderful prayer. I also want to thank the House chaplain for allowing the opportunity to celebrate this very special occasion. His Holiness Karekin II is the 132nd in a continuous line of pontiffs of the Armenian Church dating back to the 4th century. As the chief shepherd of the world's 7 million Apostolic Christians, Catholicos Karekin II administers the Armenian Church from the Mother See of Holy Etchmiadzin located in the Republic of Armenia. This year marks the 1700th anniversary of Armenia's conversion to Christianity. Armenians throughout America have waited with great anticipation for this special visit in celebration of this extraordinary anniversary. Mr. Speaker, I join all Armenian Americans and Armenian supporters throughout the United States in thanking His Holiness for making this trip to America and being with us here today.

Mr. KNOLLENBERG

Mr. KNOLLENBERG. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of the Hope for the Children Act and I am proud to be an original cosponsor of this important legislation. This bill will help more families provide loving homes to more children by increasing the adoption tax credit to $10,000 for all adoptions and increase the employer adoption assistance exclusion to $10,000. Because families can spend anywhere from $8,000 to $30,000 to adopt a child, this assistance is vital to ensure children quickly find a permanent, loving home. Many parents who want to open their hearts and homes to a child through adoption cannot because of the huge expense. This bill removes some of the financial obstacles to finding families for these children. Adoption is a beautiful expression of family values, for it allows people the opportunity to extend their homes and their hearts to people in need. It is my sincere hope that passage of this legislation will encourage many more people to adopt and encourage individuals to consider adoption as an alternative when they are not ready to be parents. It is essential to raise the awareness of the benefits of adoption in our effort to provide for all children throughout the world.

Mr. KNOLLENBERG

Mr. KNOLLENBERG. Mr. Speaker, I come to the floor on this very special and important day to join my colleagues and individuals throughout the world in commemorating the 86th anniversary of the Armenian Genocide. We must never forget the tragedy of the Armenian Genocide, and this commemoration makes an important contribution to making sure that we never do. When most people hear the word ``genocide'' they immediately think of Hitler and his persecution of the Jews during World War II. Many individuals are unaware that the first genocide of the 20th century occurred during World War I and was perpetrated by the Ottoman Empire against the Armenian people. Concerned that the Armenian people would move to establish their own government, the Ottoman Empire embarked on a reign of terror that resulted in the massacre of over 1.5 million Armenians, men, women and children. This atrocious crime began on April 15, 1915, when the Ottoman Empire arrested, exiled, and eventually killed hundreds of Armenian religious, political, and intellectual leaders. Once they had eliminated the Armenian people's leadership, they turned their attention to the Armenians that were serving in the Ottoman army. These soldiers were disarmed and placed in labor camps where they were either starved or executed. The Armenian people, lacking political leadership and deprived of young, able-bodied men who could fight against the Ottoman onslaught were then deported from every region of Turkish Armenia. The images of human suffering from the Armenian Genocide are graphic and as haunting as the pictures of the Holocaust. Why, then, it must be asked, are so many people unaware of the Armenian Genocide? I believe the answer is found in the international community's response to this disturbing event or, I should say, lack of response. At the end of World War I, those responsible for ordering and implementing the Armenian Genocide were never brought to justice, and the world casually forgot about the suffering and pain of the Armenian people, and that proved to be a grave mistake. In a speech that is now recorded, a speech made by Adolf Hitler just prior to the invasion of Poland in 1939, he justified his brutal tactics with the infamous statement, ``Who remembers the extermination of the Armenians?'' Tragically, 6 years later, the Nazis had exterminated 6 million Jews. Never has the phrase, ``those who forget the past will be destined to repeat it'' been more applicable. If the international community had spoken out against this merciless slaughtering of the Armenian people instead of ignoring it, the horrors of the Holocaust might never have taken place. Mr. Speaker, as we commemorate the 86th anniversary of the Armenian Genocide, I believe it is time to give this event its rightful place in history. This afternoon and this evening, let us pay homage to those who fell victim to the Ottoman oppressors and tell the story, the story of the forgotten genocide. This, for the sake of the Armenian heritage, is certainly a story that must be heard. Armenian Assembly of America Washington, DC. The Armenian Assembly of America, Commemoration of the Armenian Genocide On April 24, we remember and mourn the victims of the Armenian Genocide of 1915. Not a single family went untouched; none were spared the pain of that brutal slaughter. Because its victims and witnesses were ignored and its lessons unlearned, the Genocide set the stage for the Holocaust and the genocides that followed. The 20th century's first genocide continues to cast its dark shadow over the 21st century. The Turkish people and the Republic of Turkey should recognize that it is in their own best interest to come to terms with the role their Ottoman predecessors played in the Armenian Genocide and reject denial. No other country in the world should support Turkey's indefensible position. There is a growing awareness and understanding of this fact, even within turkey itself. We were encouraged this year by reports from Turkey that public discussion of the topic has increased significantly. It is our hope that the Turkish people, confronted with international recognition and spurred by desire to finally join the European family of nations, will reconcile with their past. Such reconciliation will lay the groundwork to build a better future. Hirair Hovnanian, Chairman, Board of Trustees. Van Z. Krikorian, Chairman, Board of Directors.

Mr. KNOLLENBERG

Mr. KNOLLENBERG. Mr. Speaker, I rise to offer two resolutions under the Congressional Review Act to rescind two egregious regulations promulgated by the previous administration that affect consumers nationwide. On October 5, 2000, the Department of Energy (DOE) issued proposed regulations on the energy efficiency of clothes washers, air conditioners and heat pumps. Myself, and many of my House colleagues strongly oppose these new mandates. At the end of the 106th Congress, I introduced H.R. 5613 along with 31 co-sponsors to extend the insufficient 60-day public comment period on these rulemakings. The former Clinton Administration, in its rush to issue a flurry of midnight regulations, overlooked both Congressional and public displeasure with these mandates and issued the final rule in the Federal Register in January. I am particularly troubled by the proposed rules as they pertain to household clothes washers. Nearly 81 million American households have washers and roughly 10 million new units are shipped every year. The impact of this new rule would effectively double the price of purchasing a new washer and eliminate consumer choice through a defacto mandate of side-loading washers. Many have argued that the proposed standards for clothes washers could be met with conventional top-loading designs, but the reality is that a side-loading washer design is the only means of achieving these efficiency standards. The cost increases associated with these pending regulations are extravagant. DOE estimates the cost to average consumers to be: $240 more for clothes washers, $274 more for residential central air conditioners, and $486 more for residential heat pumps. In fact, these products are available now and people do not buy them. Side-loading washers make up less than 12% of the washers sold in the U.S. today. Also, the new washing machines required by this regulation will require an additional ten minutes in run time per wash. Moreover, these machines will require a special brand of soap manufactured specially for these washers. In addition, fears exist that these appliances will require more expensive servicing. I am especially concerned that consumers have not been made aware of these mandates, and believe a 60-day comment period was insufficient to receive proper input. The poor, the elderly and those on fixed incomes cannot afford such a drastic change in price for the purpose of cleaning our clothes. The American public is not aware that this misguided regulation is being foisted upon them. We should trust the American people to make their own choices and have control over their own lives. Accordingly, I am introducing Congressional Review Act (CRA) resolutions to rescind these misguided regulations. The American consumers deserve no less.

Mr. KNOLLENBERG

Mr. KNOLLENBERG. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to introduce the Plumbing Standards Improvement Act of 2001. This bill would begin to restore common sense to our government by repealing the ridiculous Congressional mandates on toilet size and showerhead flow, 1.6 gallons per flush and 2.5 gallons per minute, respectively. With the help of the U.S. Department of Energy, environmental activist and plumbing manufacturers claimed it was essential to restrict water consumption in toilets and showerheads. Instead of allowing individuals to make their own choices, this group claimed the federal government should choose the types of plumbing fixtures Americans can use in their private and public bathrooms. As a result, this group was able to include an obscure rider at the eleventh hour to the Energy Policy Act (EPA), which Congress passed in 1992. Since passage of the 1992 EPA, the voices in opposition to this policy have become loud and clear. I have heard the cries from across the country and they want the federal government out of their bathrooms. While support for ending these mandates has steadily grown, the importance of this issue has grown even further. Last year the Department of Energy introduced new regulations on washing machines, air conditioners, and heating pumps. The federal government has become too intrusive; regulating people's private lives. The Plumbing Standards Improvement Act of 2001 does not implement any new restrictions or standards. It simply allows each individual consumer to make choices that best fits their needs. Washington has no business dictating to American consumers on the size of their toilet or the flow of their shower. One-size-fits-all mandates are unfair and a draconian measure to regulate resources. It assumes that every American faces the same situations in their daily lives. Our failed policy on plumbing fixtures has strangled the market, created innumerable headaches, and put us at risk of suffering further one-size-fits-all mandates. Now is the time to heed the call of suffering Americans, pass the Plumbing Standards Improvement Act of 2001 and restore wisdom to our federal government.

Mr. KNOLLENBERG

Mr. KNOLLENBERG. Madam Speaker, I rise today to celebrate the 180th anniversary of Greek independence. One hundred and eighty years ago, after nearly 400 years of oppression under the Ottoman Empire, the courage and commitment to freedom of the Greek people prevailed in a revolution for independence. It is an honor today to celebrate Greek Independence Day in the House of Representatives. Greece and the Greek people have made remarkable contributions to the United States and societies throughout the world. The achievements of Greek civilization in art, architecture, science, philosophy, mathematics, and literature have become legacies for nations across the globe. In addition, and most importantly, the Greek commitment to freedom and the birth of democracy remains an essential contribution for which we as Americans are eternally grateful. Greek civilization has inspired the American passion for truth, justice, and the rule of law by the will of the people. The forefathers of our nation recognized the spirit and idealism of ancient Greece when fighting for American independence and drafting our Constitution. Forty-five years after our own revolution for independence, this tradition and commitment to freedom was carried forward by the Greek people through their successful revolutionary struggle for sovereignty. Greek Americans can take pride today in the contributions of Greek culture and in their ancestors' sacrifice. The effects of the vibrant Greek people can be witnesses throughout the United States in our government, culture, and economy, as well as in our commitment to freedom and democracy throughout the world. We, as Americans, are grateful for these gifts. Madam Speaker, it is important for us to recognize and celebrate this day together with Greece to reaffirm our common democratic heritage. I am proud to join in this celebration and offer my congratulations to Greece and Greeks throughout the world on this very special day.