Joe Knollenberg

Mr. KNOLLENBERG

Mr. KNOLLENBERG. Mr. Chairman, I want to thank the chairman for yielding on my behalf, and I rise in strong support of this bill. Mr. Chairman, I want to thank the gentleman from New York (Chairman Walsh) for all the great effort and the great work that he has done as chairman of this subcommittee. I want to thank, also, the ranking member, the gentleman from West Virginia (Mr. Mollohan), who has teamed up with the gentleman from New York (Mr. Walsh) to make this thing work. I want to further thank the staff, led by Frank Cushing, for all the great efforts that they have made on this legislation. It is not easy, and I know that; and most people do not know how much time staff puts into the effort that brings forth a bill. This appropriations bill is unique in that it covers an array of diverse agencies ranging from the Veterans Administration to the EPA. And there is a lot of distance in between. It is not an easy task to bring this wide range of interest into a single bill. However, the gentleman from New York (Chairman Walsh) and the gentleman from New York (Mr. Mollohan), the ranking member, have a working relationship that I think makes this all possible. H.R. 4635 is a good bill and keeps us within the budget resolution. I would point out that the product before us contains, as undoubtedly has been commented on, no Member earmarks. In this respect, it is eminently fair because there are no winners or losers. The fiscal year 2001 VA-HUD bill is a fair piece of legislation produced under very difficult circumstances and is within, again, the budget resolution. It responsibly provides a $1.3-billion increase for veterans' medical health care, fully funds section 8 housing, and provides sound investments in research-intensive agencies, such as NASA and, as the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Frelinghuysen) just mentioned, the National Science Foundation. As this process moves forward, there will be plenty of opportunities for Members to offer their suggestions and amendments before the President finally signs the bill. I would implore my colleagues not to let perfection be the enemy of good. This is a good and responsible bill, and I encourage all my colleagues to support it. Again, the gentleman from New York (Chairman Walsh) is to be saluted for crafting this piece of legislation under these circumstances. He has worked in good faith with the ranking member on the other side in a bipartisan spirit to form a bill that the House has now before it. My colleagues, this is a fair bill and there will be time to strengthen it further as the process moves along. So I urge its support.

Mr. KNOLLENBERG

Mr. KNOLLENBERG. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word for the purpose of engaging in a colloquy with the chairman of the Subcommittee on Interior of the Committee on Appropriations, the gentleman from Ohio (Chairman Regula). Mr. Chairman, I know that the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Regula) shares my interest in ensuring that the Kyoto Protocol is not implemented without ratification and that unauthorized activities to implement the protocol are not funded. Likewise, I know that the gentleman shares my interest in developing fuel cells for building applications and specifically in proton membrane exchange technology for supplying residential electric power and hot water. I am asking that the gentleman work with me to address appropriately the first issue in conference and to identify any additional funding there might be for the fuel cell program in the event that additional funds are made available in conference.

Mr. KNOLLENBERG. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the requisite number of words. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong opposition to the amendment. I have a high regard for the gentleman from New Hampshire (Mr. Sununu) and the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Andrews), and the others that I have seen or heard that mentioned something about this issue. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition because, frankly, as much as it is, it is very difficult to take away from one area and give to another, and that is what they are doing here; but they are actually striking a program that does work, as has been pointed out by a number of people. This amendment would eliminate the funding to continue the partnership, a public-private sector program or plan that has worked. This is a program that has delivered proven technological results. It engages both the auto industry and the Government to develop the vehicles for the future, vehicles which are less polluting. I would remind everyone that, in the last 25 years, the emissions have been reduced substantially and the economy has more than increased by 100 percent. That is on automobiles. On trucks, it is over 60 percent. So I think what we should look at is what is happening within the industry and why it is so important right now that we look at delivering that performance and the comfort that the American consumer desires but in a vehicle that is more economical. Via the PNGV program, there have been great strides that have been reached on the development of these hybrid vehicles, vehicles by the way that combine so-called hybrid vehicles, the internal combustion with the battery concept. That is new stuff. It is beginning to work well. So I would just say the timing, I think, is out of touch with the current events. We have heard from individuals who talked about the price of gasoline. I do not have to point this out again. It has already been mentioned about the costs have skyrocketed in the Midwest, in particular, well above $2 a gallon. We as a country, as has been pointed out, are overly reliant on foreign petroleum supplies. So it is imperative that Congress do something to help the persons most affected by these price increases, and that is the American worker. The PNGV program is exactly one such program that will develop the technology that will stop our reliance on foreign oil and will improve the environment in the process. So with the funds appropriated in this bill, we can continue the vitally important research and development associated with this program. I reiterate my strong opposition for the amendment but support for retaining that funding in the bill. I ask my colleagues to defeat this amendment. Mr. Chairman, I yield to the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Upton). (Mr. UPTON asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. KNOLLENBERG. Mr. Chairman, reclaiming my time, I thank the chairman.

Mr. KNOLLENBERG. I yield to the gentleman from Ohio.

Mr. KNOLLENBERG

Mr. KNOLLENBERG. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of the repeal of the death tax. I am a proud cosponsor of this legislation, and have been since I came here some 8 years ago. Under the guise of making the rich pay their fair share, the death tax discourages savings and investment and has a negative impact on the entire economy. Ironically, those that are most affected by the death tax are not the wealthy. They have the resources to shelter assets. But family-owned businesses, which are often asset-rich and cash poor, cannot meet those requirements. The death tax hits these businesses especially hard when the owner passes away. The result is that many family-owned businesses cannot survive in the family. Even prior to death, the death tax impacts many businesses, forcing the owners to divert money from productive uses, such as capital investment and job creation, to, guess what, estate tax planning. So for those who are out there who would vote against the death tax repeal, please think again. They are not hurting the wealthy, they are hurting the little guy.

Mr. KNOLLENBERG

Mr. KNOLLENBERG. Madam Speaker. I rise today to express my support for House Resolution 509 which extolls the contributions of African- American music to American culture. I would like to thank the gentleman from Pennsylvania, Chairman Goodling, and the gentleman from Pennsylvania, Mr. Fattah, for their fine work in crafting this resolution and also for allowing me to insert language into this bill recognizing the importance of the Motown Sound. Motown, as many of us will remember, Madam Speaker, is the recording label started in Detroit, Michigan back in 1959. The Motown story is the story of Berry Gordy, Jr., who was born in Detroit, Michigan on November 28, 1929. He was the seventh of eight children of Berry, Sr. and Bertha Gordy who themselves moved to Detroit from the South. After being drafted into the Army in 1951, he obtained his high school equivalency degree while in the Army. When Berry got out of the Army 1953, he opened a jazz-oriented record store called the 3-D Record Mart with his family's help. By 1955, the store had failed and Berry was working on the Ford automobile assembly line. While working on the line, Berry constantly wrote songs, submitting them to magazines, contests, and singers. His first break as a songwriter came in 1957 when Jackie Wilson recorded ``Reet Petite'', a song he, his sister Gwen and Billy Davis (under the pseudonym of Tyran Carlo) had written. ``Reet Petite'' became a modest hit and netted Berry $1,000 for the song. The rest, as they say, is history--a wonderful history of African-American contributions to American music and culture. The list of entertainers that share their roots in Motown is long and incredibly distinguished. Their music forms an integral part of the American experience. This list includes Jackie Wilson, the Miracles, the Four Tops, Marvelettes, Martha and the Vandellas, Supremes, the Temptations, Marvin Gaye, Stevie Wonder, Mary Wells, Mickey Stevenson, Smokey Robinson, Holland-Dozier-Holland, the Funk Brothers, Gladys Knight and the Pips, the Isley Brothers, Diana Ross and the Supremes, Marvin Gaye, Michael Jackson, the Jackson 5, the Commodores, and Lionel Ritchie to name only a few. Motown afforded these and many other talented performers the opportunity to showcase their music to all of America. In 1970 Motown established a new subsidiary label called Black Forum that released the historical speeches of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., Stokely Carmichael and black poets such as Langston Hughes and Margaret Danner. The Motown label continues to thrive today, ensuring that future generations will be able to enjoy this rich musical tradition. For ready information about Motown I would like to express a special thank you to Mike Callahan and his web page, http://www.bsnpubs.com/ motownstory.html. I would also like to recommend and thank the web site of the Recording Institute Of Detroit at http://www.recordingeq.com/ motown.htm. There you can find a photo essay tour of the Motown Historical Museum guided by Robert Dennis, Former Mastering Supervisor, Motown. For the museum's excellent photos I would like to thank Nick David for REQ and the Motown Historical Museum. An in-person visit is always better. You can contact the museum at (313) 875-2264. The Motown Historical Museum is housed in two adjacent and connected buildings at 2648 West Grand Boulevard, Detroit, Michigan. These are the two original buildings out of the eight West Grand Boulevard buildings that Motown owned on the boulevard in the 1960's--before the company moved its headquarters to a ten-story office building on Woodward Avenue in downtown Detroit. The Motown Studio A remained at Hitsville, USA. In light of Motown's historic musical contribution, I felt it necessary that we include recognition of the Motown Sound in this resolution and highlight a fantastic chapter of the Detroit area's place in history. Congratulations and thank you to Motown!

Mr. KNOLLENBERG

Mr. KNOLLENBERG. Mr. Speaker, this is an historic day for the workers, business leaders, and reformers in China and the United States. Today Congress has the opportunity to push our relations forward by breaking down the walls surrounding China and supporting its entrance into the World Trade Organization. As we cast our votes today, I ask my colleagues to carefully consider the incredible potential this opportunity offers for the Chinese and American people. Passing PNTR supports freedom in China. As long as China's barriers to the United States remain, our relationship with the Chinese people will be restricted. By breaking down Chinese barriers to trade, while enhancing our own protections, we are creating new opportunities for American and Chinese people to work together and develop new ways to agree. Bringing China into the WTO will increase the exchange of cultures and ideas, which will in turn foster new areas of cooperation and progress. This is the most effective way to provide support for the reform-minded Chinese people who need our help the most. On their behalf, Congress should extend PNTR to China. Passing PNTR also supports the United States. Some Members may come to the floor today to claim the United States workforce and economy will suffer from greater competition with China. However, these Members are misinformed. To the contrary, the United States Trade Representative should be congratulated for her effective negotiations. This is a one-way deal. The United States will continue our current tariff levels on all Chinese imports, with new protections, and in return China will drop its average tariff level by 62 per cent. By voting yes, only China will have to change its laws. This vote is about the power of economic freedom and prosperity, as displayed in the United States. It is true that as China expands into the world markets of goods and services, the United States will face new competition. It is also true that for the first time, the domestic Chinese economy will face direct competition from the United States. The American economy is leading the world--primarily as a result of the strength of the American workforce. I have faith in the productivity and entrepreneurial spirit of the American economy to continue this leadership and find new opportunities for success in China. Congress should embrace trade with China, and the competition it brings, because this will lead to a higher standard of living for the people of the United States as well as the people of China. That is how we make progress. Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to carefully consider the incredible opportunity this vote offers. On behalf of American and Chinese workers, businesses, and reformers, I urge my colleagues to support progress with China and vote for PNTR.

Mr. KNOLLENBERG

Mr. KNOLLENBERG. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor a great man, Karol Jozef Wojtyla. Now known to the world as Pope John Paul II, this leader of the Catholic Church has championed the cause of promoting human rights and eliminating poverty and hunger around the world. Called by some the man of the century, John Paul II has been unafraid to articulate his vision of a better world and has the passion and integrity to work toward that goal. The bottom line in the debate over the nature of truth and freedom, he argues, is the sanctity of all humans who are created equal and are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, including life and liberty--as written in our very own Declaration of Independence. He was also a key figure at a pivotal juncture in world history. As a Cardinal in Poland, he was a shrewd and unflinching opponent of communism, advancing the church's agenda without allowing outright hostility and repression to develop. As Pope, his support of the Solidarity movement was instrumental in the downfall of the government. Today, just over nineteen years after a would-be assassin shot him on May 13, 1981, we vote to award Pope John Paul II with the Congressional Gold Medal. I ask all Members and the world to acknowledge his faith, his intellect and his wonderful contributions.

Mr. KNOLLENBERG

Mr. KNOLLENBERG. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding me time, and thank the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Markey) for his cosponsorship. As the chairman has just stated, I have been a Member of the Committee on Appropriations, and I believe I am very familiar with this framework, with KEDO and the substance of this amendment and why we have this amendment. Under KEDO and the administration's current policy with North Korea, as everybody knows, the U.S. is leading an effort to finance and build these two nuclear reactors. For whom? For North Korea, perhaps the most regressive regime in the world. It is not only illogical, but it is dangerous to the national security of this country. But let us talk about the thing that I think may have been overlooked here, experience. The North Koreans clearly do not have the expertise to safely operate two nuclear reactors. Who are the operators going to be? Who will handle the plant management? One cannot create a nuclear industry infrastructure by administrative fiat. It requires the time to educate, to train all the necessary people and to develop the required supply chain.

Mr. KNOLLENBERG. Mr. Chairman, I thank the chairman for yielding. The North Koreans simply do not have the equipment, they do not have the capability to handle this method of producing electricity. Now, the companies that are involved here realize this. They know what the dilemma is, and, therefore, do not want to accept the billions of dollars of risk associated with building nuclear reactors in such a dangerous rogue nation. There is nothing that the U.S. can do to assure companies that the inexperienced North Koreans will not improperly operate these plants, and, thus create radioactive mishaps or accidents. If there is anything that we have learned from our experience with North Korea, it is that there is no way that you can predict what they are going to do. Now, faced with this dilemma, the administration is now looking for a way to put the U.S. taxpayers on the hook for this enormous liability. I think that is simply unacceptable, and this amendment is necessary to prevent it from happening. Once again, I thank the sponsors, and strongly urge my colleagues to support this amendment.

Mr. KNOLLENBERG

Mr. KNOLLENBERG. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Young) for yielding this time. Mr. Chairman, I rise in total opposition to this amendment. No matter how well written an automatic CR might be, there are always special cases that must be addressed with legislation in order to maintain the continuity of operations. The census is a perfect example, as well as many research programs and construction projects, including those that are related to national defense. In practice, this prevents Congress from being able to pass a CR without any changes to any departments or programs. Because of this reality, any automatic CR will have to be supplemented with other legislation in order to work effectively and to avoid the semi-shutdown impacts across the Federal Government. Therefore, even with an automatic CR, we will be in a situation not that much different than what we currently face. In addition, I am also concerned about the change in context under which appropriations bills are negotiated with the President. Since the individual appropriations bills would no longer be viewed as must-pass, this has the possibility of prolonging negotiations between Congress and the President. This amendment will remove the backbone from appropriators because there will be no sense of urgency in passing appropriations bills. I understand the concerns of many of my colleagues about the effects of the threat of a government shutdown but government shutdowns can easily be avoided without an automatic CR. Prior shutdowns have not occurred over appropriations issues but over extraneous issues. Short-term CRs written as cleanly as possible have always been signed by the President. While I support the efforts to avoid any appropriations train wreck at the end of the year, I do not believe the automatic CR will accomplish this goal, and I urge my colleagues to oppose this amendment.

Mr. KNOLLENBERG. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this time, and I rise today in opposition to this amendment on biennial budgeting. I am concerned that in our haste to push forward this type of legislation we are overlooking unintended consequences that will drastically affect our budget process. Despite today's projections of enormous surpluses, these numbers will invariably rise and fall with the economic cycles, with emergencies and other factors that, frankly, are outside of Congress' immediate control. Last week, CBO updated their projections to show a $40 billion on- budget surplus, which is an increase of $14 billion from their estimate of last month. Over the last 4 years, CBO incorrectly estimated the deficit or surplus for the upcoming fiscal year by $99.5 billion. Given these inevitable fluctuations of our economy and Federal revenues, Congress needs every tool at its disposal to ensure that there are sufficient surpluses each year to meet its target for tax cuts and for debt reduction. One of the supposed benefits of biennial budgeting is to provide additional time to focus on oversight. The truth of this whole matter is that most experts believe otherwise. They believe that biennial budgeting actually reduces oversight. One of the most important tools that we have in this House, in holding the executive branch accountable, is the appropriations process. Oversight is best accomplished when the agencies are dependent on Congress for funding in the near term and, therefore, more responsive to Congress' intentions. The President, the executive branch and his agencies, will be less inclined to work with Congress once they receive their funding. In effect, it turns the Members of the House into fiscal lame ducks. Further, with no regular appropriations bills in the second session, Congress would be forced to consider massive supplemental bills or correction bills to take care of changing priorities, unanticipated events, and emergencies. I truly believe biennial budgeting is not the most effective way to solve our frustrations in the appropriations process.

Mr. KNOLLENBERG

Mr. KNOLLENBERG. Mr. Speaker, later this month, Members of this House will be casting their votes on one of the most important issues that Congress has faced in recent years. Of course, this is a vote to extend Permanent Normal Trade Relations to China. As a result of decades of negotiations, China will soon become a member of the World Trade Organization. Congress now has the responsibility to extend PNTR to China in order for American workers and businesses to take advantage of this historic opportunity. For those Members, like myself, who have concerns about national security with China, human rights, Taiwan and other issues, we cannot afford to miss this opportunity. PNTR represents the greatest opportunity that America has had to break down the walls of isolation in China and provide the Chinese people with the tools they need to pursue freedom and democracy. By increasing the exchange of goods, services, and ideas between the United States and China, we will be taking strides to support reform for those who need our support the most.

Mr. KNOLLENBERG

Mr. KNOLLENBERG. Mr. Speaker, later this month, Members of the House will be casting their votes on one of the most important trade issues that we have faced in recent years. I am referring, of course, to extend permanent normal trade relations to China. The United States and the international community have been working together with China for decades to bring China into the WTO. For the first time in history, the doors of China's economy will be opened up to international commerce and competition. Congress will be faced with a simple choice then. If Congress passes PNTR, we will allow U.S. companies to freely participate in the nearly $4 billion Chinese economy. However, if we do not pass PNTR, American products and American workers will be denied this opportunity. Faced with these options, I think the choice is clear. I urge my colleagues to avoid the temptation to give in to the protectionist forces inside our country and instead support free trade and progress in China.

Mr. KNOLLENBERG

Mr. KNOLLENBERG. Mr. Speaker, I rise this evening to talk about the Armenian genocide commemoration. I am going to talk a little bit about Armenia. There are many positive things happening in Armenia today that give us confidence that progress is being made. Armenia has made remarkable, stable strides toward becoming a democratic free market economy even in the face of the setbacks, including the tragic assassinations of Armenian Prime Minister Vazgen Sarksyan and other Parliament members last October. I had gotten to know Mr. Sarksyan before this tragedy and found him to be a man of immense ideas. It was a tragedy that frankly we all look at with horror. It is behind us now. The government is strong. They have been able to go on in spite of this tragedy, and they have strengthened the situation to a point where it will prevent any future happening of this kind. Tonight, I would like to talk not so much about what is going on in Armenia and how it is growing but, rather, to talk about a dark period in the remembrance of the genocide that took place back in 1915. 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. Concern 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 a million and a half Armenians. This atrocious crime, as I mentioned, 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 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. 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 pain and suffering of the Armenian people. This proved to be a grave mistake. In a speech before his invasion of Poland in 1939, Hitler justified his brutal tactics with the infamous statement, ``Who today remembers the extermination of the Armenians?'' Six years later, 6 million Jews had been exterminated by the Nazis. 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. As we commemorate the 85th 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 of the forgotten genocide. For the sake of the Armenian heritage, it is a story that must be heard.

Mr. KNOLLENBERG

Mr. KNOLLENBERG. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this time, and I also want to thank the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Hall), and it would not be right if I did not thank the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Barton), who has really been the crusader on this issue for a long, long time, and one I think that we ought to get straight and pass. Since the beginning of the year, this Republican majority has succeeded in passing several tax cuts for the American people. We believe that couples should no longer be punished by the Tax Code because they are simply married. We enacted legislation that prevents senior citizens from being taxed excessively, and particularly when they continue to be positive contributors to society. And we had bipartisan support for that. We passed tax reduction legislation to help ensure that small businesses and family farms remain in the family. But while we shall continue to offer tax cuts every year, today we have a historic opportunity to take a great leap forward by limiting tax increases forever. Passage of this act would require two-thirds of Congress to raise taxes. It is too easy, too easy, for this government to pass unnecessary tax increases on the hardworking people of this country. I repeat that: it is too easy. If President Clinton, for example, had got his way this year in his budget, he would have increased taxes by $237 billion over the next 10 years. Why, Mr. Speaker, is the President trying to raise taxes in an era of budget surpluses? Why? Instead of raising taxes, should we not find ways to give the surplus, part of it at least, back to the people who have overpaid? With a surplus on hand, and CBO projecting future surpluses, there is no need for any new tax increases. Congress should be focusing on forcing Federal bureaucrats to cut waste, fraud and abuse and spend their budgets wisely. For too long the Federal Government has raised taxes on a whim. This bill is the best way to ensure that taxes are increased only when it is absolutely necessary. Currently, 14 States, as has been previously mentioned, have tax limitation provisions, and it has been demonstrated that States with limitation provisions have seen a reduction in the growth of spending. For a needed tax increase, a two-thirds majority would not be that difficult to obtain. We simply want to give the public the security that the Federal Government will not raise unnecessary and hasty tax increases. I think it is about time that we restore the public's faith in government. Instead of only saying we are against new taxes, let us actually show them. I urge my colleagues to pass this legislation and protect Americans from the Washington big spenders.

Mr. KNOLLENBERG

Mr. KNOLLENBERG. Mr. Speaker, with a determination to save the American dream for the next generation, the Republican Congress has turned the tax-and-spend culture of Washington upside down and produced a balanced budget with tax cuts for the American people. Now that the Federal Government's financial house is finally in order, the big question facing Congress and the President is, what is next? With the average family still paying taxes, more in taxes than it spends on basic necessities, the obvious answer is tax relief for the American worker. As we move from the era of budget deficits to budget surpluses, some people in this town will argue that we can afford to spend this money on new programs. However, that is the mindset that got us in trouble in the first place. For our children's sake, for common sense sake, it must be rejected once and for all. I urge, Mr. Speaker, my colleagues to continue fighting for the additional tax relief that the American people need and deserve.

Mr. KNOLLENBERG

Mr. KNOLLENBERG. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of granting Permanent Normal Trade Relations to China, so-called PNTR. Some would have us believe that, by supporting China's session to the WTO, and by granting China PNTR, we will be sending jobs overseas. This is simply not true. On the contrary, granting China PNTR will allow us to take full advantage of the bilateral agreement signed last November and drastically reduce the Chinese barriers to trade. As a result of increased opportunities to export, American businesses can only expand, creating new jobs of every kind, from unionized jobs to export control jobs. With expanded exports, companies will grow, making them able to offer greater benefits to existing workers, not get rid of them. I urge my colleagues to support PNTR for China on behalf of American workers, farmers, and businesses.

Mr. KNOLLENBERG

Mr. KNOLLENBERG. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this time. I rise in strong support of the resolution today. I want to commend the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Kasich) for the work that he has done. I wish the chairman luck in his future endeavors. He has made a substantial difference here, and his leadership has been extraordinary. The Republican budget pays down $1 trillion in debt, protects Social Security, strengthens Medicare, and increases funding for defense and education. With these priorities fulfilled, it is time to give back to Americans their hard-earned money. Promoting tax fairness is the subject. When the Government is running continuous on-budget surpluses and CBO is forecasting surpluses far into the future, it is now time to provide tax relief. If we cannot return the overpayment of taxpayers' money now at a time when we have surpluses and a strong economy, when can we? It is obvious that money left in Washington will be spent. Why do I say that? The Clinton-Gore budget creates 84 new Federal programs, increases spending at twice the rate of inflation, and despite our surpluses the administration again proposes to raise taxes and fees on working families. Our Republican budget would return the surplus back to the American people who earned it and who deserve it. The Republican budget provides at least $150 billion in tax relief, including the recently passed marriage penalty relief and small business tax relief. A very responsible $60 billion will be included for additional tax relief or further debt reduction. Let us look at facts. Facts are facts. American taxpayers are overpaying the Federal Government. This money does not belong in Washington, not to Washington bureaucrats. The budget is paid for by the hard work and the sweat of the American worker. With the strong economy and the Federal Government in the black, it is our responsibility to provide tax relief. The Republican budget is a responsible plan for our Nation's future. I urge my colleagues to support this budget resolution.

Mr. KNOLLENBERG

Mr. KNOLLENBERG. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this time. I would just like to say I have the greatest respect for the Blue Dogs; I think they honestly approach things in a straightforward fashion. I just think they are a little shy when it comes to the amount of money that they are getting back to the taxpayer. With taxes at an all-time high and non-Social Security surpluses growing, we need to provide tax relief to the hard-working Americans who earned it. The Blue Dog budget, as I understand it, would provide a net tax cut of only $36 billion over the next 5 years. That will not even begin to pay for the marriage penalty relief; it will not pay for the Social Security earnings limit or the small business tax relief bills that have been demanded by the American people. The Republican budget provides tax relief of at least $150 billion over the next 5 years, and an additional $60 billion for tax relief or debt reduction. The Republican budget is a responsible plan for all Americans. We have set our Nation on a course to pay down the public debt, to protect Social Security, to provide needed funds for Medicare reform and with prescription drug coverage. With these priorities met, how can we not justify providing tax relief for the American worker? Mr. Chairman, this is not our money. It does not belong to Washington bureaucrats; it does not belong to Members of Congress. This budget is paid for by the hard work and the sweat of the American worker. Americans know how better to spend their money than a micromanaging Washington bureaucrat. By lowering taxes, we will be telling the American people they are more important than bloated government bureaucracy. The Federal tax burden is at an all-time high, as I have said; and taxpayers frankly have overpaid. If we cannot give them their money back now, with the Government in the black and taxes at an all-time high, when the economy is strong, when can we do it? Mr. Chairman, I urge a no vote on this amendment so that we can give the taxpayers what they rightly deserve.

Mr. KNOLLENBERG

Mr. KNOLLENBERG. Madam Speaker, I rise in support of this bill, and I commend the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Upton) as well as the Committee on Commerce's efforts in pressing for responsible nuclear waste legislation. It is high time we took the bull by the horns and dealt honestly and professionally with the issue of nuclear waste. We might ask why, why is this piece of legislation needed now? The answer, Madam Speaker, is very simple. We rely on civilian nuclear power plants for almost one quarter, let me repeat that, almost one quarter of our Nation's electric power supply. Last year, our 103 nuclear power plants, which is down from a few years back, were more productive than ever before by producing safe, reliable, inexpensive electricity, more than ever before. Nuclear power is one piece, and by no means, a small piece. It is a part of the engine that drives the American economy. We cannot afford to be small-minded and throw up our hands and walk away from this issue; something must be done. The thousands of tons of radioactive fuel currently sitting in spent fuel pools across this Nation cannot sit there forever. The United States Government made a commitment to the Nation's nuclear utilities and to its people, a commitment that it would build a repository and begin receiving spent fuel in 1998, a responsibility under law passed in this very Chamber. That deadline is well passed, and a most optimistic estimate for what the Department of Energy now says to begin taking shipments would be the year 2010. The failure by the administration and DOE to live up to its responsibilities is now forcing the nuclear industry to expend considerable sums of money to construct additional storage. This after those same utilities have kicked in over $12 billion to the Federal coffers for the expressed purpose of constructing a geologic repository. It is very clear that something must be done, and S. 1287 is a step in the right direction. We have to face reality, the reality of the Clinton administration's lack of leadership with respect to nuclear power and nuclear waste, the reality of opposition by the Nevada delegation in the Senate, and, most importantly, the reality that we, as a Nation, desperately need a repository. And Yucca Mountain is the best place in this country for it to be built. The amendments to the 1982 act found in this bill will get us back on track by setting up a mechanism through which the costly legal battles between the utilities and the Government are resolved. It sets out the necessary milestones to be met and provides for early receipt of Yucca Mountain spent fuel or spent fuel for Yucca Mountain, potentially as early as 2006. It is a vital step, Madam Speaker, for those plants with limited existing storage capacity. It ensures that transport of the depleted fuel is done safely along the lines established for the Waste Isolation Plant. Let me assure you that the transport of spent fuel along the Nation's highways and railways is safe. With over 3,000 shipments since 1964, and shipping casks that can withstand the impact of a speeding locomotive, we certainly know how to safely ship radioactive waste. And S. 1287 leaves the setting of radiation standards up to the EPA and ensures that EPA is aided in its decision by the formidable scientists and engineers at the National Academy and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. We need to allow sound science to guide us here and remove the setting of radiation standards from the political arena. Madam Speaker, Yucca Mountain is perhaps the safest place in the world to store spent nuclear fuel. S. 1287 protects the citizens of Nevada and protects those living near the plants and along the transport routes. The administration has been irresponsible in its failure to live up to its obligations. S. 1287 gets it back on the path to a permanent solution for our Nation's nuclear waste. Madam Speaker, we need to send to the President S. 1287, and he should sign it. I urge and I vote for this bill.

Mr. KNOLLENBERG

Mr. KNOLLENBERG. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this time, and I rise to support H.R. 6, the Marriage Tax Penalty Relief Act of 2000. This says it all, though. I have heard a lot of rhetoric, obviously from both sides, but this placard, this sign, says it all: Zero. And I think that when we look at the budget surpluses that we produce by refining government, that are projected as far as the eye can see, how can we really truly deny giving back to the American people what is theirs? The nonpartisan Joint Committee on Taxation has been talked about, and, yes, that is part of the problem with the Democratic substitute. Because what it does is it provides no relief. None. Under the Democratic plan, the Democratic substitute, the provisions do not go into effect until, get this, a Social Security certification, a Medicare certification, and public debt elimination. Until the middle of this century, 2050, to get all three of those out of the way. That tells me that the Democratic body really does not want relief. They want all the lights to be green before they start across down. And we know that is an improbability. I would say this: Let us pass this legislation and give the American couples a Valentine gift they deserve.

Mr. KNOLLENBERG

Mr. KNOLLENBERG. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to remind my colleagues of the fact that the Committee on Ways and Means is marking up marriage penalty relief and also to talk about the negative impact of the marriage penalty. Under current law, 21 million couples are required to pay on average an additional $1,400 a year in taxes simply because they are married. The marriage penalty is a ridiculous policy that is undermining the institution of marriage and making it harder for working families to get ahead. Mr. Speaker, the marriage penalty is especially hard on the family's second wage earner, often the wife's salary, because their income is taxed at higher marginal rates. In response to these higher rates, many people, especially the second earners, choose not to work or to work less. This not only makes these couples worse off because of their decreased income, because it also reduces the national output. In short, the marriage penalty punishes success. I commend the leadership for making the marriage penalty relief a top priority, and I urge my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to pass this common-sense legislation.

Mr. KNOLLENBERG

Mr. KNOLLENBERG. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 1838 and I thank my colleagues on both sides of the aisle for their efforts to bring this bill to the floor today. The United States relationship with the Republic of China is vital to our economic and national security interests. Through its financial success and blossoming democracy Taiwan remains a model for other countries in Asia, including China, to follow. The story of Taiwan's economic success is now widespread. During and after the Asian financial crisis, Taiwan's free-market economy fared much better than its centrally controlled neighbors. Their economy, in fact, maintained a GDP growth rate of 4.8 percent over 1998. It is also wise for us to remember that Taiwan is the United States 7th largest trading partner and an important part of the successful economy we enjoy today. In February 1998, Taiwan and the United States negotiated a market access agreement as a prelude to Taiwan's entry into the World Trade Organization. This strong economic relationship with Taiwan and our successful negotiations with Taipei have helped to lead China into its own successful market access negotiations with the United States. Later this year in fact, Congress will pass legislation to grant China permanent normal trade relations status so that United States companies will benefit from China's entrance into the WTO. This will also improve our ability to provide support for the Chinese people who need our help the most. Unfortunately, the administration's confused policies and actions in recent years have damaged our relationship with Taiwan and Congress must now pass this bill to steer us back on the right course. The United States, as the world's leading democracy, has a responsibility to support the security of Taiwan, one of the world's smallest yet one of the most important democracies.