Jerry Lewis

Mr. LEWIS of California

Mr. LEWIS of California. Mr. Speaker, I would like to bring to your attention today the fine work and outstanding public service of my good friend, Paul Thompson. Paul is looking forward to a full and productive retirement after serving Congress and the nation as a professional staff member of the House Appropriations Committee for 29 years. Paul first came to the Hill in 1970 as a detailee to the VA-HUD and Independent Agencies Subcommittee from the Department of Interior where he worked in the Bureau of Indian Affairs budget office. It was a VA- HUD that Paul found his home away from home and where he made himself over the years, quite literally, an invaluable part of the Appropriations process. With his knowledge of the legislative process, he became a technician's technician; he knew, better than most, how to put a bill together effectively from start to finish. Because Paul was never politically motivated, he has always been perceived by his colleagues, and more importantly, by Members of the House, as unfailingly fair and intellectually honest. During his tenure as both professional staff and majority clerk of the subcommittee, Paul served under six subcommittee chairs including Chairmen Walsh, Lewis, Stokes, Traxler, Boland and Evins. Not surprisingly, during that time, Paul and his chairmen developed remarkable professional relationships as well as genuine lasting friendships that continue to prosper and endure. There are, of course, a few things everyone should know about Paul. He loves a good laugh, maintains a work ethic from another era, and enjoys his Guinness in a coffee mug. When he's not working, you will find Paul on the water in his Ray Ban sunglasses with a cold drink in one hand while casting a line with the other. In fact, I expect many of Paul's friends will soon be receiving invitations to join him in his newly acquired fishing boat which he will tow behind the largest bright red pickup truck ever seen in the Rayburn garage. Those who know Paul best have nothing but the finest things to say about him. ``A greater guy I have never worked with,'' said one longtime Appropriations staffer. Another, remembering how he single- handedly ate two dozen crabs while on a daytime cruise of the Chesapeake Bay, observed, ``Paul loves his crab but he's never crabby himself.'' Mr. Speaker, professional staff come and go in the People's House but few ever make the type of contribution made by my good friend, Paul Thompson. As he begins his well deserved retirement, Paul leaves an institution filled with many admirers who love and respect him for his work, his gentle heart, and his integrity. All of us wish Paul, his lovely bride, Geri and his three sons--Rick, Bill and John--much happiness in the coming years. Having said that, Mr. Speaker, it is only fitting that the House pay tribute to Paul Thompson today.

Mr. LEWIS of California

Mr. LEWIS of California. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. LEWIS of California. Mr. Chairman, I would like to associate myself with the gentleman's remarks and express my appreciation for his leadership dealing with our national defense.

Mr. LEWIS of California

Mr. LEWIS of California. Mr. Chairman, reclaiming my time, I guess the point that needs to be repeated is that callable capital does not provide real offsets that provide real funding for the military. Indeed, if we go forward with this approach, we will be further taking these kinds of monies out of the hide of our basic military requirements. If we find ourselves later attempting to pay for the Kosovo requirements in a similar fashion, it could undermine many a critical program entirely across our military base. I urge the gentleman to reconsider his amendment, otherwise I urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on the gentleman's amendment.

Mr. LEWIS of California. I yield to the gentleman from Kansas.

Mr. LEWIS of California. Mr. Chairman, this is the very time that we need to bring the House together with a unified voice in support of our troops in Kosovo and in the Balkans and, indeed, exercise our responsibility to lead in the world at this very important moment. So I would urge my colleague to consider the question, a precedent, that says a $195 million expenditure for an emergency in Latin America, asking for offsets in a very special category, could lead to a circumstance where $2 billion becomes the question and should there be an offset. I would ask my colleague to recognize that this may very well be before us in a very short period of time, and I would urge the gentleman to respond, if he would, briefly.

Mr. LEWIS of California. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the requisite number of words and, hopefully, in the process of doing so, have a dialogue with my friend, the gentleman from Kansas (Mr. Todd Tiahrt). I would hope in the process of this discussion I might urge my colleague to consider, at least consider, withdrawing his amendment. Let me explain why I would even begin to suggest that this might be appropriate when I know very well how serious the gentleman is about this amendment and how hard he has worked to develop it. The circumstances in Central America are critical circumstances involving humanitarian efforts that very much relate to our efforts to build relations south of our border. At the peak following that disaster we had some 5,000 troops in the region. We have flown nearly 1,000 humanitarian air sorties there. We have rescued over a thousand people from floods. The military was involved in building temporary bridges that allowed lifelines, food and medicine, to be delivered. Indeed, there are hundreds of temporary structures built by those military personnal in an effort to respond to this emergency. These are not classic military activities, but, nonetheless, we raised the American flag there in defense of the well-being of a sizable population of our neighbors for reasons well beyond just the humanitarian reasons alone. The American military is ofttimes the only one who can respond quickly enough and effectively enough to get the life saving job done. In this case we are talking about the prospects of an offset that arguably is not really an offset. It is very clear when we are dealing with callable capital that we do not impact funds that might be available for Social Security, and I would urge us to be very careful about further discussion about that possible implication. The reason for my touching on the edges of suggesting that the gentleman might consider responsibly to withdraw the amendment involves the fact that at this very moment American troops and materiel are involved in an incursion in Kosovo, a very, very serious circumstance where, in combination with our allies in NATO, we are involved in an effort that could cost not hundreds of millions of dollars, but a billion dollars or more. Let me make this point to my colleague. Indeed, the amendment that the gentleman has before us could be a very serious precedent that could impact future requirements as it relates to Kosovo. One of the most impressive experiences I have had in the time I have been in Congress has taken place over the last 10 days, an experience in which the President of the United States has invited Members from both bodies to the White House and, together, we have spent almost 10 hours discussing questions which swirl around how we meet the challenges in Kosovo and the Balkans. Democrats and Republicans from both bodies argued on both sides of our being involved. It was a very, very healthy discussion, bringing us to the point where there was a very healthy debate last evening in the other body, after which, finally, a vote took place in which support was given for America's effort, along with our NATO allies, in that region. Today, we find ourselves in a circumstance where, indeed, action is moving forward. It is very important that the debate we have from this point forward be as nonpartisan, as positive as possible, and as nonsensational as possible. And, indeed, we must recognize as we go forward that there will be very real military costs. There will be a bill one day soon that will request a supplemental that may involve the kinds of dollars that I was describing earlier, maybe as much as $2 billion. Indeed, if one were to begin to talk about offsetting that expenditure, either from social programs, from callable capital or otherwise, we could find ourselves in a debate that could undermine our ability to respond to that very critical circumstance.

Mr. LEWIS of California

Mr. LEWIS of California. Mr. Speaker, I would like to very much express my appreciation to our chairman, the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Spence), and the gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Skelton) for the wonderful work they have done. And congratulations to both the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Weldon) and the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Spratt) for their bipartisan effort. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 4. This morning prior to the start of this debate, every Member had the opportunity to be briefed on the growing threat to Americans from ballistic missiles. What is extremely alarming is the emerging threat posed by North Korea and Iran. As we know, both countries are of particular concern because they are actively seeking to develop medium- to long-range ballistic missiles. In fact, with regard to North Korea, the Rumsfeld Commission issued a clear warning. Their report said: There is evidence that North Korea is working hard on the Taepo Dong 2 (TD-2) ballistic missile . . . the TD-2 could be deployed rapidly . . . This missile could reach major cities and military bases in Alaska and the smaller, westernmost islands in the Hawaiian chain. Light-weight variations of the TD-2 could fly as far as 10,000 km, placing at risk western U.S. territory . . . from Phoenix, Arizona, to Madison, Wisconsin. The actual launch of a three-stage Taepo Dong 1 in August 1998, just a month after that report was issued, served as unambiguous demonstration of North Korea's capability. The threat emanating from unfriendly rogue nations like North Korea is why I strongly support this legislation. Unfortunately, opponents of this bill argue that the U.S. is not ready to deploy missile defense and that the system is not technically mature. Others will say, the system is too costly and that the bill mandates deployment and ignores important issues such as the threat environment, ABM treaty implications and START agreements. To those who oppose this legislation on these grounds, I say the language of the bill is simple. It states: ``That it is the policy of the United States to deploy a national missile defense.'' What is important is that it does not say that missile defense should be deployed before it is ready or technically mature. It does not say that the U.S. should deploy a missile defense system regardless of cost or that policy makers should ignore the threat environment. Perhaps most important, the bill does not say that the U.S. should abrogate the Anti-Ballistic Missile (ABM) Treaty nor does it say the U.S. should abide by the treaty. H.R. 4 simply says the Congress and the Administration are committed to protecting American citizens against ballistic missile attack. The White House says that it wants to protect the American people against the emerging long-range threat and asserts that the decision to deploy National Missile Defense will be based on four factors: (1) the threat environment; (2) the cost of the system; (3) treaty implications, and; (4) the technology and operational effectiveness of the system. If handled in an expeditious manner, it is my view that this is not an unreasonable list of considerations. In fact, as Chairman of the Appropriations Subcommittee on Defense I will be very interested in the cost of the system. Therefore, I believe this bill is an opportunity to get bipartisan agreement on a critical policy and yet it is flexible enough to allow for continued discussion on matters concerning cost, technology and treaty implications. The time is right to secure an agreement on the policy of protecting our citizens against a potential limited ballistic missile attack. I commend Mr. Weldon for introducing this legislation and I strongly urge Members to vote for the bill.

Mr. LEWIS of California

Mr. LEWIS of California. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay a heartfelt tribute to Robert L. Ozuna, Chief Executive Office of New Bedford Panoramex Corporation from 1966 to date. My good friend died on Saturday, March 6, 1999, at Queen of the Valley Hospital in West Covina at the age of 69. Robert Ozuna was the oldest of four children born in Miami, AZ to Mexican-American parents. In 1940, after his father's early death, the family moved to East Los Angeles where he grew up with his mother, brother, and two sisters. Robert was required to seek steady work at an early age to assist the family in meeting their financial burdens. Robert Ozuna emerged as one of the leading Mexican-American entrepreneurs in Southern California as Founder and President of New Bedford Panoramex Corporation (NBP). He gained his business experience on the job and his engineering education by attending night school in the California community and junior college system. In 1966, Mr. Ozuna began to build his company with a second mortgage on his residence, a few electrician's hand tools, hard work and entrepreneurial instincts into the thriving electronic manufacturing business it is today in Upland, CA. NBP engages in the design, development, and manufacturing of electronic communication systems and remote monitoring systems for its primary client, the U.S. Government. Mr. Ozuna's hard work and dedication has been rewarded by receiving the Department of Transportation Minority Business Enterprise Award in both 1987 and 1991. He received the Air Traffic Control Association Chairman's Citation of Merit Award in 1994. He continued to be an active member of the California Chamber of Commerce for various cities and a founder of Casa De Rosa Annual Golf Tournament which he instituted to raise funds for the Rancho de Los Ninos Orphanage in BajaMar, Mexico. As industrious as he has been in business, he has been equally involved in sharing his prosperity with many philanthropic activities in his community. He is the sponsor of many events in the Hispanic neighborhood where he grew up and was a founding director in the East Los Angeles Sheriff's Youth Athletic Association, which promotes educational, athletic and drug awareness programs for more than 60,000 youths in the Los Angeles Metropolitan area. Robert Ozuna is remembered by his employees at New Bedford Panoramex Corporation as a handsome man who had a passion for life. His concern for his employees and their families along with his abundant generosity to them was always present. Robert Ozuna was married for 35 years to Rosemary, who passed away in November 1998. He is survived by his mother, Amelia Ozuna; his sons, Steven Ozuna and Jeff Dominelli; his daughters, Nancy DeSilva and Lisa Jarrett; his sisters, Lillian Gomez and Vera Venegas; and his brother, Tony Ozuna. He also leaves eight grandchildren. Mr. Speaker, Robert Ozuna epitomized the American Dream. It is a dream that promises that any citizen of this country can achieve anything to which he or she aspires, as long as they work hard and play by the rules. Robert Ozuna achieved that dream and he will be greatly missed. I ask my colleagues to join me in paying tribute to him today.

Mr. LEWIS of California

Mr. LEWIS of California. Mr. Speaker, it is with a heavy heart that I rise in support of the articles of impeachment before the House today. Tomorrow, the House of Representatives will make one of the most solemn decisions it can make--whether to indict, or impeach, the President of the United States. The historical significance of this week's action does not escape me. This is only the second time in our nation's history that Congress has voted on an impeachment inquiry. As we approach the votes that will occur later this week, I feel a burden of responsibility as never before during my years in public affairs. Like most people in public service, President Clinton serves as a mentor to young people who come to the nation's capital with idealism and hope that they might learn the functions of government and participate in the legislative process. It is quite clear that the President grossly violated his responsibility as a mentor to a young woman working in the White House. As a parent, I find his behavior immoral and highly offensive. It shows a fundamental lack of judgment and a total disregard for human decency. Truth is the cornerstone of our legal system; it must be upheld if our legal system is to endure. Lacking truth, our legal system means nothing. No man, not even the President, is above the truth or above the law. From the very beginning, I have wanted to give the President every benefit of the doubt. I have wanted to believe that he was telling the truth. But it is now clear that he repeatedly lied to the American people, to the Congress, to his staff, and to his own wife and family. The time this investigation has taken, and the toll it has taken on our country, is a direct result of the President's efforts to deny and evade the truth. He could have--and should have--told the truth from the very beginning but instead he chose to lie. Anyone who has served in a court proceeding knows the significance of raising one's hand and taking an oath to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. A violation of that oath is perjury. It is now evident that the President has lied--repeatedly lied--while under oath. The first lie begot the second and the third lie which became a pattern intended to obscure the truth. He has also clearly violated the oath of office he took upon becoming President. To maintain the fundamental integrity of our system of government, the President, like every other citizen, must be held accountable for his actions. His actions, detailed by the Judiciary Committee, provide sufficient evidence of obstruction of justice and represent an abuse of power. For this reason, I will vote to impeach the President on each of the four articles of impeachment when this matter comes before the full House. President Clinton is an American President who has every political gift and who at one time had every opportunity to be one of the truly great presidents. Like most presidents, he could rightfully take credit for the many good things that have occurred under his watch--a robust economy, relative peace at home and abroad, and so much more. Unfortunately, this president will not be remembered for these things but for his inability to speak the truth. The verdict of history will cast a shadow upon this once promising presidency. While history remembers that George Washington could not tell a lie, it now appears that history may well remember Bill Clinton for his inability to tell the truth. Imagine the difference telling the truth would have made upon the historical legacy of William Jefferson Clinton.

Mr. LEWIS of California

Mr. LEWIS of California. Mr. Speaker, I want to express my appreciation to the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Spence) and to the gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Skelton) for their marvelous leadership insofar as our national security is concerned. Today, I simply want to rise and say to my colleagues that today we are seeing the Congress of the United States at its finest. We come together in support of the Commander in Chief and in support of our troops when their lives are put in danger. In defense of freedom, we are the leader of the world. In these days ahead of us, we are going to have more difficult times in which we will see some division in the House. But at this moment, Democrats and Republicans alike are standing hand in hand in support of this resolution, which is an expression of bipartisan and nonpartisan support of our troops facing danger overseas and defense of freedom.

Mr. LEWIS of California

Mr. LEWIS of California. Mr. Speaker, I would like to bring to your attention today the 125th anniversary of the first ascent of Mt. Whitney, the highest mountain peak in the continental United States at 14,494 feet, located in California's Inyo County. Having climbed Mt. Whitney in 1986 with my dear friend, Hulda Crooks, I wanted to share some of the storied history of this majestic mountain with my colleagues. In the early 1870's, as the Owens Valley community first began to attract settlers, local residents often visited nearby Soda Springs to fish, hunt, and to escape the summer heat. In August 1873, a large group of Lone Pine locals were camping in this area when three of them decided to take a hike up to the summit. Previous attempts to climb this mountain had been made by Clarence King, in party with a California Geological Survey expedition sponsored by Josiah Whitney. King identified the mountain and named it ``Mount Whitney'' in 1864. He claimed to have reached the summit in 1871, but it was soon discovered that he missed the mark and accidentally climbed another peak. The ``Three Fishermen'' (locals Charley Begole, Johnny Lucas and Al Johnson) credited with Whitney's first ascent made the hike from Soda Springs to the summit and back in one day on August 18, 1873. They christened the mountain ``Fishermen's Peak,'' which touched off a controversy that lasted several years. The Lone Pine residents were not in favor of the name ``Mount Whitney,'' since they did not share a high opinion of Mr. Whitney. Local residents petitioned in favor of the names ``Fishermen's Peak,'' ``Fowler's Peak,'' or ``Dome of Inyo,'' anything but ``Mount Whitney,'' which is the name that stands today. Undaunted by the unwanted name, local residents raised funds and built a trail to the summit in 1904. Mr. Gustave F. Marsh of Lone Pine, was the engineer who led this effort. He also served as contractor and supervisor for the Smithsonian Institute in 1909 when the trail was repaired and the summit shelter was built. Local residents again pitched in to raise funds for this effort. As one ponders this sequence of events, the baffling question is, ``What motivated these early settlers to build a trail?'' There was not a large tourist industry in the area at that time; there were no automobiles; and the only people interested in mountaineering were college professors or researchers-- people of science and letters. The summit hut was originally financed by the Smithsonian for astronomical and atmospheric research purposes. In contrast, the early residents were largely farmers and miners. And yet, as the trail and hut stand today, no one really knows how many hundreds of thousands of people from all walks of life and from all countries of the world have climbed to the summit of Mount Whitney. Without the efforts of the first settlers, would this have been the reality today? Also, very little has ever been mentioned of the Native Americans, who knew of the peak and in their world, called it ``The Old One,'' or ``The High One.'' On August 18, 1998, as a tribute to these early settlers, another group of local residents climbed Mount Whitney to pay honor to the contribution that these pioneers made, and to bring recognition to their efforts. Several descendants of the original group still live in the Lone Pine area. I can well remember donning a backpack and sleeping bag and hitting the trail with Hulda Crooks, better known on the mountain as Grandma Whitney, in August 1986. A friendship was born over those days that has been among the most special and enduring of my life. Because of her legacy, Congress passed legislation and Hulda returned to Mt. Whitney in 1991 for the announcement that Crooks Peak, adjacent to the Whitney summit, would forever bear her name. Hulda was a mentor and teacher to me, personally, and remained one of my dearest friends over the years until her passing last November. Mr. Speaker, I ask that you join me and our colleagues in paying tribute to the men and women who have provided Mt. Whitney with its rich and textured history. Without any question, for every person who has ever climbed or tried to climb this magnificent peak, Mt. Whitney holds its own special memories, and its own meaningful place in their life.

Mr. LEWIS of California

Mr. LEWIS of California. Mr. Speaker, while the end of the Cold War eased international tensions, it led to a significant downsizing of the U.S. armed forces. Nearly one tenth of our country's population, or 26 million people, have served in uniform. Over two million have left military service since the end of the Gulf War. Approximately 275,000 veterans of military service are being discharged each year, projected well into the next century. Once again, as in previous post-war periods, American employers have the opportunity to access men and women returning to civilian life in large numbers. Unlike previous periods, when American were drafted for service, these men and women are volunteers. Surprisingly, the harsh reality for many of them is that a successful military career is not a guarantee of gainful employment in the private sector. This is a startling phenomenon, especially considering the extensive experience, diverse talents, and strong work ethic of military professionals. Clearly, much needs to be done to uncover and address the reasons for the continued underutilization of this highly trained and motivated force. Indeed, a comprehensive survey conducted for the Joint Chiefs of Staff by a national executive search firm, Wesley, Brown and Bartle (WB&B) reports that stereotypes and myths caused businesses and professional recruiting services to discard an alarmingly high percentage of resumes submitted by our veterans. There are disturbing dimensions to the problem. The Bureau of Labor Statistics reports that the jobless rate for male veterans discharged since 1994 is seven percent, considerably higher than the current national average of 4.5 percent of all Americans. The rate of unemployment for female veterans is 5.9 percent. Even more alarming is the state of underemployment of former military. Our downsizing of the Army by 60 percent since the Gulf War has thrust hundreds of thousands of early retirees from military service into the private sector. The WB&B survey showed that they are not being welcomed as they should be by civilian employers, perhaps only because only one in every 147 of them has prior active duty military service, compared with one in every ten after World War II. Indeed, retired Admiral Stanley Arthur, the Navy's top commander in the Gulf War, said that ``the military is no longer an institution with which most--even many--people can identify.'' A random survey of 1700 recently transitioned military personnel found most of them to be active job seekers. More than half of them sent out at least 50 resumes. Another 30 percent distributed more than 100 resumes. Three in every four of them received not one reply. Only one of about every six who heard back received even a single job offer. Among those who accepted, 80 percent were found to earn less than $20,000. Wesley, Brown and Bartle is to be commended for founding the Center for Military and Private Sector Initiatives which was established to help military men and women more effectively transition from active duty to civilian life. Through the Center, corporate America has a rare opportunity to forge partnerships that will positively impact the transition of military professionals and enhance America's workforce. Mr. Speaker, the Center for Military and Private Sector Initiatives is to be commended for providing American business with the value that former military professionals bring to the workplace, making corporate America more competitive. When American businesses capitalizes on the value of the military experience, America wins.

Mr. LEWIS of California

Mr. LEWIS of California. Mr. Speaker, my colleague Mr. Ney and I would like to bring to your attention today the 50th wedding anniversary of our dear friends, Irene and Al Dalpiaz of Dover, Ohio. Al and Irene will mark the occasion during a special celebration with their children and grand-children next weekend in Medeira Beach, Florida. Irene Sikora and Albert Dalpiaz were married on October 2, 1948 at St. Mary's Church in Dennison, Ohio. From their first meeting at a dance, Al and Irene knew they shared a special bond. Irene was the oldest of eight daughters and, in the early days of their courtship, usually had a difficult time getting rid of her sisters when Al would come calling. From the beginning, they were a handsome couple. Unfortunately, the wedding photographer forgot about their wedding and only showed up at the end of their ceremony. Ironically, Al and Irene spent their honeymoon in Washington D.C. Al and Irene's first son, Larry, was born in 1954. Seven years later, the family moved to Dover, Ohio and their favorite (and only) daughter, Elaine, was born. Kevin was born four years later. Al was the co-owner of Tusco Service where he was a genius installing and repairing air conditioning and refrigeration units. In those days, especially, that was a bonus; their home was the first on the street to have central air conditioning. Al left Tusco in the 1970's and worked at Cummins Diesel until his retirement in the late 1980's. After a stint of being a full- time mom, Irene returned to work as a secretary at Dover Public Schools in the late 1970's. The Dalpiaz family was, and remains, a very tight-knit family. Family summer vacations to the Smokey Mountains, Daytona Beach and Myrtle Beach were very common. Like most Italian families, ``la familia Dalpiaz'' was tremendously dedicated to those things in their life that meant the most to them--spending time with grandparents, aunts, uncles, and cousins as well as their commitment to work, school, the needy, and the Catholic Church. That commitment is extraordinarily special today as it relates to their grandchildren, Anthony and Gabriel. For many years, Al and Irene have also looked out for those less fortunate and to this day provide the most needy in Tuscarawas County with food and clothing. In short, they have made a special commitment to showering their family and those around them with love. While Al and Irene are officially retired, one would not know it from watching them. Like many people half their age, these two are always on the go. In recent years, they have traveled to Hawaii, England, Scotland, Florida, and their favorite destination, Las Vegas. In all of our days, we have rarely seen a Catholic woman like Irene with such a serious affliction for gambling on the nickel slot machines! Al tells his friends that the reason he and Irene enjoy their travel so much is because they are casually spending their kids' inheritance. Al, himself, has a tremendous reputation and has made local headlines for his marvelous garden where he produces garlic, parsley, lettuce, beans, and enough tomatoes to feed the entire state. In fact, Al has shared seeds with us both and his reputation continues to grow. He also enjoys spending time at the local Elks Lodge and VFW Hall in Dover. Mr. Speaker, we ask that you join us and our colleagues in recognizing the 50th anniversary of these two very special people. Al and Irene Dalpiaz are among the kindest people we know and it is only fitting that the House of Representatives pay tribute to them today.

Mr. LEWIS of California

Mr. LEWIS of California. Mr. Speaker, the House of Representatives will today make one of the most solemn decisions it can make next to a declaration of war--whether to proceed with a full congressional inquiry into allegations that the President's actions warrant his removal from office. A bipartisan majority of the House, including members of the President's own political party, will support the resolution to hold hearings and further investigate the President's conduct. The historical significance of today's action does not escape me. This is only the third time in our nation's history that Congress has voted to proceed with an impeachment inquiry. Today, particularly, I feel a burden of responsibility as never before during my years of public service. Like most Americans, I have weighed very carefully the evidence presented thus far by the Independent Counsel. From the very beginning, I have wanted to give the President every benefit of the doubt. I have wanted to believe that he was telling the truth. But it is now clear that he has not been truthful with the American people, with the Congress, with his staff, and with his own wife and family. No man, not even the President, is above the truth or above the law. Each man and woman must be held accountable to the duly established laws of the United States. In this matter before us, it is very important that the legal process, as outlined in our U.S. Constitution, continue to its conclusion. That means that the Congress, and more specifically, the House Judiciary Committee, will now hold hearings to determine if the President's actions warrant his impeachment. The time this investigation has taken, and the toll it has taken on our country, is a direct result of the President's efforts to deny the truth and delay the process. He could have--and should have--told the truth from the very beginning but instead he chose repeatedly to lie. Anyone who has served in a court proceeding knows the significance of taking an oath to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. A violation of that oath is perjury. It is now evident that the President has lied under oath. To maintain the fundamental integrity of our system of government, he must be held accountable for his actions. These actions have not taken place in a vacuum. From the Oval Office to the President's Cabinet, the President has had a dramatic effect upon our responsibilities at home and abroad. While it is still too early to predict the outcome of this crisis, one thing has become increasingly clear: by his own evasion of the truth, the President's effectiveness and the standing of the United States throughout the world has been severely diminished. Meanwhile, the work of this Congress is continuing. While the media is focused primarily on the Judiciary Committee's work, Congress continues to address the enormous challenges facing our country and the world. The United States now faces enormous tests on both the domestic and world stage--terrorist bombings, of our embassies, Saddam Hussein thumbing his nose at UN inspections, North Korea's development of nuclear weapons, and an increasingly fragile peace in Northern Ireland. Closer to home, we are addressing real challenges before us--the future of Social Security, improving education, reducing taxes on American families, and averting a government shutdown. In closing, President Clinton's careful and calculated legal response has not served him or our country well. This is a sad day in our nation's history. The President and the President alone bear full responsibility for the action Congress is taking today. We must move forward with this process. In encourage our Members to support the Committee's resolution.

Mr. LEWIS of California

Mr. LEWIS of California. Mr. Speaker, I would like to bring to your attention today a recent editorial from one of the finest weekly papers I know, the Desert Trail newspaper in Twentynine Palms, California. This editorial pays tribute to two remarkable woman who have made, and continue to make a tremendous differnce to the people of Twentynine Palms. [The Desert Trail, Thursday, Sept. 10, 1998] Congrats to Our City Clerks There are upsides and downsides to every situation, and the announcement this week that Deputy City Clerk Char Callies will succeed retiring City Clerk Margaret Roberts is no exception. We all knew the day would come when Margaret would hang up her city of Twentynine Palms seal and head into ``retirement'' with her husband, Marine Sgt. Maj. Alex Roberts. That day will officially come on Dec. 18, when Margaret closes the door on an 11-year career with the city, City Manager Jim Hart announced Wednesday. ``Margaret was the city's first full-time employee and she was instrumental in helping guide the new city after incoporation. We all owe Margaret a sense of gratitude for her efforts on behalf of the city,'' Hart said in announcing that her resignation had been accepted reluctantly by the City Council for the end of the year. There's probably not anyone in this city who doesn't owe Margaret some debt of gratitude. For more than a decade she has represented the city of Twentynine Palms in a most gracious and straightforward fashion. It seems there's nothing she can't do, nothing and no one she cannot handle with aplomb. She has guided council candidates, provided information and assistance of all kinds to just about everyone and their brother and been there to lend an ear when needed. Margaret has never failed to provide The Desert Trail with information we've requested and never hesitated to pick up the phone and let us know when a story needed to be told. We will all miss Margaret, even as we wish her well, when she and Alex head East to pursue the next part of their lives together. That said, we don't think the City Council could have made a better choice to replace Margaret than Char Callies. A longtime resident of Twentynine Palms, Char is personable, caring, efficient, strong, hard-working and no- nonsense, just like her predecessor. ``Char has been working hard over the past three years to gain the knowledge and experience the City Council felt was needed to become city clerk,'' Hart said in announcing her promotion. ``She has done an outstanding job as the city manager's secretary and deputy city clerk and this promotion is a recognition of Char's efforts.'' We wholeheartedly congratulate Char on her promotion and look forward to working with her come mid-December. It's nice to know that she'll be on the job when Margaret says goodbye. Mr. Speaker, please join me and our colleagues in recognizing the incredible contributions and achievements of these fine women. I know that the entire City of Twentynine Palms is proud of their fine work. It is only fitting that the House of Representatives pay tribute to them today.

Mr. LEWIS of California

Mr. LEWIS of California. Mr. Speaker, I would like to bring to your attention today the outstanding and dedicated career of Sergeant Arthur Eugene Hibbetts of Barstow, CA. Sergeant Hibbetts is retiring from the Barstow Police Department after a long and distinguished career with the City of Barstow. Arthur Hibbetts has served the Barstow Police Department for 32 years. He was hired on October 31, 1966 and will retire officially on October 31, 1998. He served as a police patrol officer from 1969 to 1974 and focused on undercover and general investigation work as well as traffic accident investigation. In 1974 he served as a detective and focused on all major crimes including homicide, robbery, burglary, narcotics, theft and fraud. Later that same year, he became the patrol sergeant and served as the watch commander and supervisor of patrol officers. In 1986, Sergeant Hibbetts was promoted to detective sergeant and served as the supervisor of detective and the clerical staff of the investigation division. In 1989, he became patrol traffic sergeant and has served since then as the watch commander and supervisor of the uniform patrol and traffic program. Sergeant Hibbetts received his education at Barstow Community College, the San Bernardino County Sheriff's Academy, and the FBI National Academy. Over the years, Sergeant Hibbetts has received extensive police training from numerous law enforcement organizations and has received professional certification from the FBI and the California Commission on Peace Officer Standards and Training. Mr. Speaker, please join me and our colleagues in recognizing the incredible contributions and achievements of this remarkable man. Sergeant Hibbetts has served the City of Barstow for 30 years with distinction and honor. I know that the entire City of Barstow is proud of his fine work and many achievements. It is only fitting that the House of Representatives pay tribute to him today.

Mr. LEWIS of California

Mr. LEWIS of California. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the resolution.

Mr. LEWIS of California

Mr. LEWIS of California. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks on the conference report to accompany H.R. 4194, and that I may include tabular and extraneous material.

Mr. LEWIS of California. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time, as I congratulate Louis Stokes on his fantastic career.

Mr. LEWIS of California. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. By way of closing the discussion on this bill, I first want to take a moment myself to express the same level of appreciation and respect to our very fine staff that was expressed by my colleague Louis Stokes earlier: Frank Cushing and Del Davis, Paul Thompson and David Reich, Valerie Baldwin, Fredette West; Jeff Shockey of my personal staff and Alex Heslop who have helped so extensively with this work. Tim Peterson and Dena Baron. And, of course, Louis, Arlene Willis had something to do with all this. An item that may or may not be known by the gentleman from Ohio because in this world that we work in, there are no secrets, but you never can tell, we might have preserved one. Mr. Speaker, there is one matter that I do want to bring to the House's attention. It concerns my good friend Louis Stokes. For 24 years, the gentleman from Ohio has served on this subcommittee, what is now called the VA, HUD and Independent Agencies appropriations subcommittee, first as a member and then as chairman. While he is now ranking member, he will always be my chairman. During that time, he has always been a strong supporter of veterans, and that is especially true for minority veterans. Among other things, Louis Stokes has worked to get the VA to reach out to minority veterans. He has worked to get VA to increase the number of minority employees in higher grades. He has worked to get the VA to make certain that more contract funds were available to minority firms. Louis Stokes served honorably in the U.S. Army from 1943 to 1946. To honor and to recognize Congressman Stokes' long and distinguished career in support of veterans and veterans programs, the conferees on the VA-HUD appropriations measure have, I would say discreetly, my staff wants me to say secretly, agreed to rename the Cleveland VA Medical Center at Wade Park as the Louis Stokes Cleveland Department of Veterans Affairs Medical Center. Mr. Speaker, I believe that all Members will agree that it is both fitting and proper to name the Cleveland Medical Center for our friend and colleague Louis Stokes.

Mr. LEWIS of California. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from New Jersey (Mrs. Roukema). (Mrs. ROUKEMA asked and was given permission to revise and extend her remarks.)

Mr. LEWIS of California. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume just by way of a brief reaction. I could not help but pay close attention to the comments of the gentleman from California, for he was expressing concern about report language in the bill, and we have discussed this before. He knows the relative impact of report language. But what he may not know is that for the riders he is really concerned about, we had serious discussions and negotiations and work with the Senator from West Virginia (Mr. Byrd) who was the key player involved in all of this and want to make sure we understand that he is a Democrat, that we recall that. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. LEWIS of California. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from New York (Mr. Lazio), the chairman of the subcommittee of the Committee on Banking and Financial Services that deals with housing, as I thank him for his cooperation and fine work this year.

Mr. LEWIS of California. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. Solomon), the chairman of the Committee on Rules.