Ric Keller

Mr. KELLER

Mr. KELLER. Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me time. Madam Speaker, I rise today on this solemn occasion to speak in support of the joint resolution authorizing the use of force against Iraq. The choice before us is clear. Do we sit back and allow Saddam Hussein to keep his weapons of mass destruction and hope that he voluntarily chooses not to use them against us, our allies, or do we take action to separate him from those weapons of mass destruction? I support this resolution authorizing the use of military force against Iraq for two reasons: First, Saddam Hussein has thumbed his nose at the United States and the United Nations by failing to destroy his weapons of mass destruction, failing to destroy his long-range missiles, and by kicking out the U.N. weapons inspectors in 1998. A second reason to support this use of force against Iraq is because time is of the essence. Saddam Hussein is now less than a year away from developing nuclear weapons, according to reports we have received in the last month from the CIA and the International Institute for Strategic Studies. The only thing Saddam is missing now is enriched uranium. We know he has 200 Ph.D.s working around the clock on this process. We also know he could assemble these nuclear weapons within months if he obtains the enriched uranium on the black market from foreign sources. And we know from a recent CIA report that he has up to $3 billion to spend to obtain this enriched uranium as a result of his recent sale of oil on the black market. Given these facts, does anyone really believe that it is beneath Saddam Hussein to bribe some down-and-out vulnerable nuclear scientist from North Korea or Pakistan who regularly works with enriched uranium? But even if Saddam Hussein is not successful in obtaining nuclear weapons within a year, time is still of the essence. Because we know that Saddam Hussein has chemical and biological weapons of mass instruction such as anthrax and nerve gas which he could easily give to terrorist organizations such as al Qaeda. And we know that Saddam Hussein is sympathetic to al Qaeda and Osama bin Laden because, after September 11, Saddam Hussein callously told the world that he was happy that thousands of Americans were killed. Specifically, just after September 11 Saddam Hussein said, ``Bush wants me to send my condolences, but if I do that I would be lacking respect for my people. Americans should feel the pain they have inflicted on other peoples of the world.'' The decision before this Congress could not be any more serious, but it also could not be much clearer. We are on notice. Saddam Hussein is a remorseless, pathologically aggressive dictator with a history of striking without warning, a history of using weapons of mass destruction to kill people, and a burning desire to have his finger on the button of a nuclear weapon pointed in our direction. The danger from Saddam Hussein's arsenal is far clearer than anything we could have seen prior to September 11. History will judge harshly any of us who saw the dark cloud on the horizon but passively chose to look the other way. Mr. Speaker, we have discussed this issue at length. It is the only course for us to follow. Why should we wait any longer? We owe it to our children and to future generations to take action to deal with this problem right here, right now. Let our country boldly move forward, not to devastate and to concur, but to reestablish the reign of peace. Madam Speaker, I urge my colleagues to vote yes to authorize the military force against Iraq.

Mr. KELLER

Mr. KELLER. I thank the gentleman for yielding me this time. Mr. Chairman, I rise tonight in support of the Weldon amendment to move the visa office from the State Department to the new Department of Homeland Security. I have the happy privilege of representing Orlando, Florida, which is the world's number one tourist destination. Orlando was devastated by the events of September 11. Nothing would be more harmful to Orlando's tourism-based economy than another terrorist attack. So I care deeply about this issue. Some of you may initially be reluctant to support the Weldon amendment because you have heard that Colin Powell and Henry Hyde oppose any attempt to strip the State Department of its power to issue visas to foreigners. I certainly do not blame you for deferring to these individuals, and I do not pretend to have the same level of expertise in foreign relations as these two esteemed gentlemen. But I am reminded of the words of President Ronald Reagan: facts are stubborn things. So let me give you the facts with respect to one country, Saudi Arabia: Fifteen of the 19 airplane hijackers on September 11 were from Saudi Arabia and were issued visas by the State Department. Ten of those visas were issued by a single foreign service officer, yet we know from a recent GAO investigation that the State Department did not interview that officer after 9-11 to learn what might have gone wrong. Three of the other Saudi terrorists obtained their visas through the State Department's ``visa express'' travel agency program and were never even interviewed by the State Department prior to obtaining their visas. In fact, in the 3 months prior to 9-11, the State Department failed to do a personal interview on 97 percent of the 22,360 Saudis they issued visas to. Shockingly, despite September 11, the State Department continued the visa express program until just this week. Let me ask my colleagues a simple question: As a Member of Congress, how will you feel if there is another airplane hijacked in the United States because a poorly trained, entry-level State Department diplomat-wannabe issued a visa to yet another terrorist from Saudi Arabia? Vote ``yes'' on the Weldon amendment.

Mr. KELLER

Mr. KELLER. Mr. Speaker, I rise this afternoon to salute one of the most beloved and valuable citizens in central Florida, Mr. Jim Turner, who is marking 30 years on the job this summer. It is not just any job. Jim Turner is the morning show host on AM 580 WDBO in Orlando, one of central Florida's most important radio stations. When severe weather hits, when natural disasters strike, when terrorism comes home, the people of my district tune into Jim Turner. Cinderella's castle at Walt Disney World was still considered a new home when Jim moved to Orlando back in 1972. WDBO offered him the big money the work at their radio station, $200 a week. One of the funniest stories about Jim's tenure behind the microphone was told to me by his friends on WDBO's morning show, ``Officer Jim'' Bishop and Kirk Healy. Years ago, Jim Turner wanted to be the first person to wish former Orlando Mayor Bill Frederick a happy birthday. So at 6:30 in the morning, he dialed the mayor's house and got into an argument with Mayor Frederick's wife, who refused to wake up the mayor. As rumor has it, City Hall received numerous calls that morning wondering why the mayor's wife was so obstinate with Jim. Well, the joke was on the mayor. Jim had actually called his own home and had set up the whole bit with his wife, who impersonated Orlando's first lady. Nearly 30 years and 8,000 radio shows later, Jim is still doing what he does best, giving Orlando area listeners breaking news in a humorous and objective manner. His alarm clock still goes off at 2:30 in the morning. He still rolls into work by 4 a.m. Mr. Speaker, I would like to see how efficient Congress would work if we were required to start our business every day at 4 a.m., but I digress. Having been a guest of his on his program so many times, the greatest thing about Jim is the fact that his on-air personality is identical to the guy he is off the air. There is not an ounce of pretentiousness, only professionalism. When asked to reflect on his 30 years in the business, Jim recently said, ``You meet people and you realize they depend on you to find out what's going on. There's an obligation to make sure the facts are right, to present often-complicated things in an understandable fashion.'' All of my colleagues should be so fortunate to have a man of Jim Turner's skill and character waking up the people of their districts with such a blend of information and humor. I wish Jim Turner a happy 30th anniversary at WDBO. I know I speak for all of central Florida when I say how much we look forward to the next 30 years.

Mr. KELLER

Mr. KELLER. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of the Recreational Marine Employment Act, which I recently introduced with broad bipartisan support. The purpose of this legislation is to create thousands of jobs in the recreational marine industry by ensuring that marinas, boat builders, and recreational boaters will not have to pay the unnecessary and exorbitant insurance premiums under the Longshore and Harbor Workers' Compensation Act. Individuals who work in the recreational marine industry are already covered under State worker's compensation laws, and Congress never intended that these jobs also be covered under the longshore act, which is supposed to apply to commercial ships, not recreational boats. This bill will provide the commonsense clarification needed under the longshore act. A recent survey indicated that employers in the recreational marine industry would save an average of $99,000 a year if this legislation passes, and 95 percent of those employers said they would use the money to create additional jobs. I urge my colleagues to call my office today to sign on as a cosponsor of H.R. 4811.

Mr. KELLER

Mr. KELLER. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Delaware for yielding me time. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of my resolution to honor National Charter Schools Week House Concurrent Resolution 386. This resolution recognizes the many contributions charter schools have made to strengthen America's public school system. I introduced this resolution because of my firm conviction that charter schools work to benefit all students and all schools. This resolution honors the 10th anniversary of the opening of the Nation's first charter schools. It acknowledges and commends the charter school movement and it honors the parents, teachers and students across the Nation for their ongoing contributions to education and for strengthening the Nation's public school system. Since 90 percent of the children in this country go to public schools, it is critical that we do what we can to strengthen the public school systems. Charter schools have done just that. In just 10 short years, there are already almost 2,500 charter schools serving half a million students across the country. Currently, 37 States, D.C. and Puerto Rico have passed charter school laws. Florida's public school system already has over 200 charter schools serving almost 30,000 children. There are 11 charter schools in my districts alone. I often hear of the successes of Lake Eola Charter School and Hope Charter School in Orlando, Florida. What are charter schools and why do they offer alternatives for our parents and children? Charter schools are public schools established under State law that are given varying degrees of autonomy from State and local regulations. Charter schools must meet the same Federal student achievement accountability requirements as all other public schools, and they often set higher and additional goals to ensure that they are a high quality and truly accountable to the public. This flexibility and exchange for accountability often translates into higher test scores and innovative practices. They provide an option to parents, often from low-income families, who desire an alternative to their local school. Charter schools, by their very nature, place more emphasis on parental involvement, increased instruction, higher academic standards, and character education. They routinely measure parental approval and student progress. Otherwise, they would cease to exist. A charter school is created out of the demand for an alternative to the local school and is often started up through a group of active parents and teachers. Many of them serve a specific need in the community. Some can be oriented toward math and sciences and others exist to satisfy a need for liberal arts. Each is unique, but necessary. President Bush's landmark legislation, the No Child Left Behind Act, contains multiple provisions which support the expansion of charter schools. It provides for an additional $200 million to help establish 700 new charter schools, and we expect an additional $100 million this year for construction of new charter school facilities. Mr. Speaker, I would again like to congratulate the students, parents, teachers, principals, and administrators who have embraced the charter school movement and have made it such a success. The bottom line is that charter schools work because they are free from burdensome regulations and, in return, are held accountable for academic results. I urge my colleagues to recognize the role charter schools have made to strengthen our public school system and vote ``yes'' on House Concurrent Resolution 386.

Mr. KELLER

Mr. KELLER. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to announce the filing of the Keller-Shaw Combat Pay for Combat Risk Act of 2002. How does it work? If our troops are deployed in support of Operation Enduring Freedom and they are receiving hazardous duty pay, they will not have to pay any Federal income taxes. Currently, we have troops in the Philippines, Malaysia, and Indonesia who are at risk of combat in their fight against terrorism who are still paying income taxes. The Keller-Shaw bill will fix this discrepancy and not tax their pay. I urge my colleagues to support our U.S. troops who are fighting terrorism abroad, and call my office today to sign on as a co-sponsor to this important bipartisan legislation, H.R. 4152.

Mr. KELLER

Mr. KELLER. I am aware that a lot of people who are members of the class are shocked and appalled to find out.

Mr. KELLER. I am aware of the opposite.

Mr. KELLER. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Goodlatte).

Mr. KELLER. I am not aware of that most of the time.

Mr. KELLER. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Chairman, this is a straightforward amendment relating to the disclosure of attorneys' fees. Simply put, if there is a settlement or a judgment for the plaintiffs in a class action suit, the plaintiffs' attorneys shall be required to disclose to their own clients the full amount of the attorneys' fees they are charging. Why is this necessary? Too often, lawyers cash in while the client gets a coupon or a de minimis cash payment. For example, in a class action suit against General Mills over a food additive in Cheerios cereal, lawyers were paid $2 million in fees while their clients received a coupon for a free box of cereal. In a class action lawsuit against Chase Manhattan Bank, the lawyers reached a settlement which provided the lawyers with $3.6 million in attorneys' fees and provided their clients with 33 cents each. In another settlement agreement reached last year with Blockbuster, the trial lawyers received $9.25 million in attorneys' fees and their clients got two free movie rentals and $1-off coupons. In a Texas class action suit against two auto insurance companies, the lawyer who filed the suit got $8 million in attorneys' fees. The policyholders got $5.50. In a class action suit brought against manufacturers of computer monitors, the trial lawyers settled the case for $6 million in attorneys' fees for themselves and $6 for their clients. The list literally goes on and on. This amendment simply brings some much-needed sunlight to this situation by requiring attorneys to disclose their own fees. It does not tell them how much to charge, how little to charge, but whatever they charge they are going to have to disclose to their clients. I ask my colleagues to vote ``yes'' on the Keller amendment and vote ``yes'' on final passage of the Class Action Fairness bill. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. KELLER. You asked me a question.

Mr. KELLER. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent to modify the amendment and further request that such modification be considered as read.

Mr. KELLER. If the gentleman will yield, I am aware that if that is the case, then he should have no objection to my amendment.

Mr. KELLER. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

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

Mr. KELLER. To answer your first question?

Mr. KELLER. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Chairman, this is a straightforward amendment. We are just shedding some sunlight on the situation and requiring that the plaintiffs' attorneys tell their clients the full amount of fees they are charging. It is as simple as that. We are not saying how much they can charge, how little they can charge, just shed some sunlight on the situation. We have heard three principal objections to this amendment. First, we hear that some class actions may have merit, and you hear about the Enron case. Well, I agree. I think the Enron class action probably does have merit and probably think there are other class actions that have merit. This has nothing to do with the merit or lack of merit or any particular class action. It has nothing to do with how much they can charge. It simply relates to disclosure of attorney fees, shedding some sunlight on the situation. The second thing we have heard is this language of the Keller amendment is already in the bill. Well, it is not in the bill; but even if it were, then so be it. That would be great news. Vote for final passage. The third thing we hear is, well, defense attorneys should be required to tell their clients how much they charge. In fact, they do. In fact, defense attorneys, unlike the poor people in the class, actually hire and fire their attorneys. They get a monthly statement as to how much they are being charged. There already is full disclosure on that side. So there is a clear distinction. Mr. Chairman, I urge my colleagues to vote ``yes'' on the Keller amendment. Let us bring some much-needed sunlight to this situation to require attorneys to disclose their fees.

Mr. KELLER. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Chairman, I was asked several questions and really did not get a chance to respond to them, but I will go ahead and respond to them now. I was asked are you aware you already have this identical language in section 1715? First, I would make the point if the language really were there, then the gentleman, of course, would have no objection to this amendment, which he obviously does, so that is a little bit of a supercilious argument. Second, having looked directly at section 1715, I can say that language is not there. There is language talking about on the front end providing notice to members of the class as to a perspective amount of payment. My amendment deals with the actual payment that the attorney has received after there has been a judgment or a settlement. So it is distinctly different and is worthy of support. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. KELLER. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. The gentleman from Texas says, well, let us have the defense attorneys reveal how much they are charging. What he does not point out is that the class members themselves in this plaintiffs' suit are bound to class actions unless they affirmatively opt out. Defendants, in contrast, actually hire and fire their attorneys. There is a stark difference. They get those bills on an hourly basis every month. They know precisely what they are being charged and how much the attorneys make. It is the poor guy who gets the Cheerios coupon and then sees the attorney get several million dollars who is a little bit upset. And he is the one who needs some sunlight here; there already is sunlight on the other side. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. KELLER

Mr. KELLER. I thank the gentleman for yielding me this time. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in strong support of the gentleman from Texas' campaign finance reform bill to completely ban all soft money. I support this bill for three reasons: First, this bill completely bans all soft money to national, State and local parties, unlike the Shays-Meehan bill which has a $60 million loophole for soft money to State and local parties. Second, the Shays-Meehan bill is blatantly unconstitutional, because it attempts to ban outside groups from running any television or radio ads 60 days before an election. The gentleman from Texas' bill contains no such constitutional problems. Third, it is critical that we pass the Armey campaign finance reform bill in order to send this legislation into the conference committee so that the President of the United States will have some input into the campaign finance reform debate. Specifically, President Bush has repeatedly said that paycheck protection is an important component to any campaign finance reform bill, yet there currently is not a paycheck protection component to the Shays-Meehan bill.

Mr. KELLER

Mr. KELLER. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to announce the filing of the National Mentoring Act legislation by myself, along with a broad group of bipartisan cosponsors. The mentor act would give tax credits to businesses that allow their employees 1 hour a week of paid time off to mentor children at risk of dropping out of school and getting involved with drugs. The reason for this bill is simple, to make it easier for mentoring organizations to recruit mentors. Why is this important? Well, there was a recent study completed of 1,000 young people on the waiting list at Big Brother-Big Sisters. The list was divided into two groups: one group got a mentor; the other group did not get a mentor. Eighteen months later, the children with mentors were 46 percent less likely to begin using illegal drugs, 27 percent less likely to begin using alcohol, 53 percent less likely to skip school, and 33 percent less likely to engage in violence. That is why this bill has been endorsed by every major mentoring organization in the United States, including Big Brothers-Big Sisters, America's Promise, and the National Mentoring Partnership Act. I urge my colleagues today to call my office and sign up as cosponsors to this important legislation.

Mr. KELLER

Mr. KELLER. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this time. I rise today as a supporter and original cosponsor of Coach Osborne's mentoring resolution, which honors National Mentoring Month and recognizes the benefits of mentoring. I would like to tell my colleagues a little bit about my background and why mentoring is important for education. Before getting elected to Congress, I had the happy privilege of serving as the volunteer chairman of the Orlando/Orange County Compact Program, which is the largest mentoring program for public schools in the State of Florida. I also had the opportunity to serve as a mentor myself to two students at Boone High School in Orlando. I learned firsthand how important that is to education, particularly as it relates to preventing children from dropping out of high school. In the State of Florida, we had a big problem. Only 53 percent of our children were graduating from high school, worst in the country. In Orlando, my hometown, we decided to do something about it in 1988 by creating the Orlando/Orange County Compact Program, which is a mentoring program that matches up students at risk of dropping out of high school with business people from the local community, sort of like a Big Brothers/Big Sisters, program where they meet 1 hour a week. The results of mentoring proved to be dramatic. Over the past 10 years, 98 percent of the students in the Compact program graduated from high school, the number-one graduation rate in the United States. From worst to first. Let me just give one example why this was successful. There is a young man named Lennard who is an African American student at Jones High School, an inner city school in downtown Orlando. He was struggling in school, making Ds and Fs, skipping school, had been arrested for selling drugs. He was going to drop out. He agreed to have a mentor on one condition. He said, ``Just don't give me a white guy.'' Naturally we matched him up with a white mentor, an AT&T executive named Paul Hurling. He worked with him every week. They became friends. To make a long story short, by the end of his high school career, Lennard went on to become Orange County Student of the Year. He won two tickets to an Orlando Magic basketball game through a school raffle. He called up his mentor and said, ``I'm so excited, I won two front row tickets.'' His mentor replied, ``That's great. Why don't you invite your best friend.'' Lennard replied, ``That's why I called you.'' Mentoring literally makes a difference in people's lives. I commend Coach Osborne for bringing forth this resolution. I urge all my colleagues to support it. I know in Florida, Governor Jeb Bush has just announced this week a mentoring initiative throughout the entire State that is going to result in 115,000 people having mentors. I think Congress is appropriately recognizing the importance of National Mentoring Month. I urge my colleagues to vote ``yes'' on this important resolution.

Mr. KELLER

Mr. KELLER. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman for yielding me this time, and I rise today as a strong supporter of President Bush's No Child Left Behind Act. I support this important education reform legislation because it will bring about a meaningful change in what I call the three R's: reading, resources, and red tape relief. First, I will address the reading issue. A child's success in school, and indeed in life, is dependent on his or her ability to read. Unfortunately, 70 percent of the fourth graders in our inner-city schools cannot read at a basic level. In other words, they cannot read and understand a short paragraph that one would find in a simple children's book. This legislation addresses that issue head on by investing $5 billion over the next 5 years in reading for children in grades K through 2. That means that next year Federal funds for improving reading will be triple. The second reason I support this legislation is because this bill represents the single largest investment of Federal dollars in K through 12 education in the history of the United States. For example, we are investing 43 percent more dollars in education than last year, and we have a 57 percent increase in the amount of money we are investing in title I. This will help to make sure that all children, rich or poor, will have the opportunity for a first-class education. The third reason I am supporting this legislation is because of red tape relief. This bill gives our local school boards the freedom to do their job without a lot of unnecessary red tape from Washington. For example, under this legislation, local school districts will have the flexibility to spend up to 50 percent of the Federal dollars they receive on locally determined priorities, from class size reduction, to higher teacher salaries, to more computers in the classroom. And 95 percent of the funds will go directly to the classroom. In short, this education reform legislation achieves the three R's of reading improvement, resources, and red tape relief. For these reasons, I urge my colleagues to vote ``yes'' on H.R. 1.

Mr. KELLER

Mr. KELLER. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of the Bipartisan Trade Promotion Authority Act, and this is why: 95 percent of the world's population is outside of the United States. It is critical that we give the President the tools he needs to open up markets all across the world for our goods and services. By increasing America's export markets, we will increase the number of high-paying high-tech jobs in the United States. A good example of that is the Recoton Corporation in central Florida, which is the Nation's largest consumer electronics manufacturer in the area of car stereo speakers. Recoton's president, Mr. Bob Borchardt, is also the chairman of the Electronics Industry Alliance. Mr. Borchardt tells me that only 10 percent of his company's sales are outside of North America, and that passing Trade Promotion Authority will help open up foreign markets and will result in his company creating many new jobs in central Florida. Mr. Speaker, now is not the time to isolate America. Let us pass TPA and give our economy a much-needed boost.