Steven LaTourette

Mr. LaTOURETTE

Mr. LaTOURETTE. Mr. Speaker, it is my pleasure to yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Hyde), the distinguished chairman of the Committee on the Judiciary.

Mr. LaTOURETTE

Mr. LaTOURETTE. Mr. Speaker, before I had the pleasure of serving as a Member of Congress, I was a prosecuting attorney in Ohio. And while I prosecuted thousands of cases and saw many defendants in court, there was one in 1990 that was notorious; and the facts of the case do not matter; and the defendants, who are all in prison, really do not matter. But what does matter is that that case, because of its notoriety, gave me the things that those of us in public life need to be successful: name recognition, approval ratings. But, more than that, it gave me a friend for life, Chief Dennis Yarborough of the Kirtland Police Department. Chief Yarborough served in the special forces posted at the White House. He was a highway patrolman in Pennsylvania, and he served as a deputy sheriff before coming home to his beloved Kirtland, where he served as chief of police for 19 years. Kirtland, Ohio, is a beautiful town. It is a city of faith, it is a city of trees, many churches. It is the home, and those of the Mormon faith will know Joseph Smith stopped in his travels in Kirtland, Ohio, and built the Kirtland Temple. It is a city of good people, and it is a place that Dennis very much loved. The last case in this series of cases, because of the pretrial publicity, was transferred hundreds of miles from our home; and Dennis and I lived for weeks at a time in 1990 out of our suitcases. And although it prepared me for this life, I have to say that I do not enjoy living out of a suitcase any more today than I did then. But we did have the chance, when we had dinner at the end of the day or when we had breakfast before going to the courthouse in the morning, to talk; and, just like here, it is good to not talk always about legislation and things political. It was good not to talk about the case all the time. Dennis' conversation always focused on three things. It focused on the community, Kirtland, where he grew up, a city that he loved, a place that he very much wanted to serve and protect; and it was obvious today at his funeral, Mr. Speaker, that the City of Kirtland loved him. As we left the driveway of the church, men, women and children lined the street and waved goodbye to their beloved chief. Store merchants put signs on their marquees thanking him for his 19 years of service and saying goodbye. He talked about his children, Jim and Marcy, and how proud that he was to have been able to participate in the raising of such fine, fine Americans and how he was glad that if he had done nothing else on Earth he was able to provide two young people with a good start in life so that they could be proud Americans as well. And, lastly, he talked about his wife Gail, his wife Gail whom he had been with since they were 12 years old. As a matter of fact, in our hotel in Toledo the chief had never been away from his wife for an extended period of time, and he could not sleep. So he would get up in the middle of the night, and he would walk the halls of the hotel, and that is how he passed his time. Today, not only Kirtland, Ohio, but the United States and certainly the area that I represent lost a great man. On Thursday last, while jogging, another one of his passions, he collapsed and died of a heart attack. Tonight, Mr. Speaker, Dennis Yarborough, Chief Dennis Yarborough of the Kirtland Police Department, I believe is in God's arms. And I also pray this evening that the good Lord watches over his family, Gail and James and Marcy; and I know that this country, my district, Kirtland, Ohio, is better for the fact that Dennis Yarborough came their way.

Mr. LaTOURETTE

Mr. LaTOURETTE. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding this time to me. Mr. Chairman, I have the highest regard for the chairman of the Committee on the Budget, who will make a great President of the United States one day, but I am going to tell my colleagues his amendment predicts that there is no politics played in the local level in the State of Ohio or any other State. I can point the gentleman to half a billion dollars of road projects within spitting distance of the State capital that we share in Columbus, Ohio. I can also point the gentleman to roads in my area of the State where for 26 years there have been promises made, where young people die every day and improvements never come. Mr. Chairman, the gentleman's amendment takes the decision out of the hands of 435 Members of this House who are elected by 600,000 people and gives it to 50 men and women across this country who are elected by millions. H.R. 2400, BESTEA, makes sure that local decision-making is preserved. Ohio receives $300 million more per year than it received under ISTEA. This bill is a good bill, and it needs to be passed.

Mr. LaTOURETTE

Mr. LaTOURETTE. Mr. Speaker, I thank the chairman very much for yielding time to me. Mr. Speaker, this is a wonderful day for the 70 million Americans who belong to credit unions, including the 2.8 million members in my home State of Ohio. When the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Kanjorski) and I began this journey a little over a year ago, I do not think we could have imagined that our simple 6-line bill designed to update a 1934 depression era statute would grow to over 30 pages and enjoy 200 cosponsors in the House, including the Speaker of the House, the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Gingrich). The evolution of this legislation has everything to do with the strong grass roots campaign by the members of America's credit unions and the willingness of leadership on both sides of the Committee on Banking and Financial Services to work with the issue and develop a compromise that takes into account the concerns of many Members and many interests. I especially want to thank and recognize the efforts of the gentleman from Iowa (Mr. Leach), the gentleman from New York (Mr. LaFalce), the gentlewoman from New Jersey (Mrs. Roukema) and the gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Vento). Without their involvement following the Supreme Court decision and their willingness to work long hours and to talk through these issues, we would not be on the floor today. I also want to make an observation that working with a member from the other side of the aisle, as I have had a chance to do with the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Kanjorski) for the last year, is something that I would recommend to all my friends. This experience has given me the chance to realize what a fine man and representative the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Kanjorski) is and how lucky his constituents in Pennsylvania are that they have him representing their interests in the House. This effort would also not have been possible without the support and encouragement of Speaker Gingrich. Quite frankly, his cosponsorship of this bill greatly accelerated its pace and jump started the support of many Members. His willingness to be out front on this issue should be applauded. Mr. Speaker, why is it important for credit unions to be allowed to expand as they have for the last 16 years? The need was certainly illustrated to me in a letter that I received from a constituent, Betty Yelochen of Mayfield Village. Ms. Yelochen has been a member of Clark General Federal Credit Union for over 40 years and has worked as its manager the last 19 years. She writes about her credit union: Our original sponsor company, Clark Controller Co., went out of business a number of years ago. In order to survive, the credit union took in a number of mergers. When the policy was adopted in 1982 permitting multiple groups, we took in a number of smaller companies that couldn't support a credit union on their own. Our credit union is small, only $1.7 million in assets and approximately 1,300 members. All of my financing has been handled by our credit union. Clark General Federal Credit Union offers personalized service with minimal fees. It is as simple as this, Mr. Speaker. As Members have died, they have been replaced by Members from small companies, some of which join in increments of as few as four employees at a time. Additionally, in the 16 years following the relaxation of membership rules, Clark General Federal Credit has taken in a few smaller companies and credit unions including the Curtis Employees Credit Union of Eastlake, Ohio, which was on the brink of collapse after a protracted labor strike by Curtis employees. About 230 Curtis employees now belong to Clark General. Most members of Clark General Credit Union are elderly and have been members for 40 years or more. Betty Yelochen says it is kind of like home. It is run on a shoestring, and we are so reserved it is unreal. Still even this small credit union wants to remain viable, and to do so it has to be able to add new members and new services which H.R. 1151 permits it to do. It is important to note that this credit union has no aspirations of offering home mortgages or even second mortgages. Heck, they would be thrilled if they could just have a drive-through window or an ATM machine. This particular credit union exists largely because of its low-cost loans that it can provide to members and its low delinquency rate. It is doing the same things well today that it did for 50 years. Mr. Speaker, H.R. 1151 ensures credit union access to America's millions and millions of small businesses. This hard-working, prosperous and inventive work force will now have the ability to choose where they can conduct their financial dealings. Had the Congress let the Supreme Court ruling stand and prevented new employee groups, each with its own common bond, from joining credit unions, we would have been harming a huge chunk of America's work force. Remember, Mr. Speaker, our country's 22 million small businesses employ more than 50 percent of the private work force, generate more than half of the Nation's gross domestic product, and are the principle source of new jobs. When President Clinton announced plans to reinvent the Federal Government he indicated the goal was ``customer service equal to the best in business.'' Mr. Speaker, many credit union members believe this is precisely what they get today from their credit union, the best customer service in the business. Mr. Speaker, H.R. 1151 should not be considered pro credit union or antibank. Instead, it should be viewed as it was intended, pro consumer and pro competition, both of which are good things. I urge Members to pass this bill.

Mr. LaTOURETTE

Mr. LaTOURETTE. Mr. Speaker, over 40 years ago, President Eisenhower made a deal with the American public. If folks would pay gasoline taxes when they bought gas, the government would build and maintain highways so that they could travel to work, so that we could maintain our position in the world and move goods to market, and so that Americans could travel with their families on safe transportation systems. Sadly, during the 1960s, when the unified budget was used to hide the cost of the Vietnam conflict, the trust fund, and I want to emphasize the word ``trust'' fund, was used to mask the size of that overspending. Since that time, we have failed to keep faith with the Americans who pay the tax with the expectation that we will keep that deal made so long ago. Today, we have the opportunity to keep the contract with the American public by passing BESTEA. BESTEA will create jobs, it will keep our Nation competitive, and it will save lives. Unfortunately, Mr. Speaker, there is criticism in some quarters that BESTEA falls outside the budget deal of last year. The Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure has worked hard to make sure that BESTEA not only comes within those budget caps but also restores truth in budgeting. It says that the Highway Trust Fund is a contract with the American people, and today we in this House must force Washington to keep its end of the bargain.

Mr. LaTOURETTE

Mr. LaTOURETTE. Mr. Speaker, tonight I rise to pay tribute to Officer William Glover, of the Ashtabula Police Department. On November 17, 1997, William Glover was senselessly killed in the line of duty, shot execution style by a 21-year-old man wanted by police for aggravated robbery. It was a Monday afternoon and Bill Glover was responding to a call when he spotted the suspect on West 43rd Street in Ashtabula. Knowing that an arrest warrant had been issued, Patrolman Glover radioed in that he was pursuing the suspect on foot. Seconds later police received a 911 call saying that shots had been fired in the area. Fellow officers found Officer Glover lying in the snow critically injured, his service revolver still in its holster. He had been shot three times, once in the torso and twice in the head. He was flown by medical helicopter to Cleveland's MetroHealth Medical Center, where he died early the next day. Bill Glover, age 30, left behind a wife, Marianne, and three small children and a community and department in mourning. It had been four decades, Mr. Speaker, since another Ashtabula officer had been shot and killed in the line of duty. Bill Glover had been a police officer since 1988, and had worked as chief of police for the Roaming Shores Village before joining the Ashtabula Police Department just 6 months before his death. His death deeply affected the citizens of Ashtabula and particularly the residents of the city's public housing complexes. Bill Glover had been hired by the Ashtabula department as part of a drug elimination grant awarded to the Ashtabula Metropolitan Housing Authority. In the short time that he patrolled the city's housing complexes, he had become well-known and well-liked. His efforts to eradicate the area of drugs and crime were genuinely appreciated by residents. Since his death, Mr. Speaker, every resident of one of the public housing complexes he patrolled, Bonniewood Estates, has signed a petition to rename Bonniewood Drive to Glover's Lane and hope to establish a recreation center in his name. Perhaps only in death will Patrolman Glover's family, friends, and community truly understand the impact that he had on the city's residents. One Bonniewood resident summed it up this way: To a lot of kids here, Officer Glover was the only male role model they had and they are going to miss him. While renaming Bonniewood Drive in Bill Glover's memory is undoubtedly appreciated by his widow, it cannot fully ease her pain or diminish her loss, nor should it be expected to. For Marianne Glover, Bill Glover was not just one of Ashtabula's cherished ``Men in Blue,'' he was her beloved husband and the father of her three children, Philip, 10, Sean, 7, and Amanda, 5. Mr. Speaker, it is regrettable that a profession as important as law enforcement is so fraught with danger. A law enforcement officer dies in this country every 54 hours, a rate of about three a week nationwide. That, Mr. Speaker, is unconscionable. I have submitted Bill Glover's name for inclusion in the National Law Enforcement Memorial in Washington, D.C., which honors the more than 14,000 law enforcement officers who have been killed in the line of duty during our Nation's history. It is my hope that Bill Glover's name will be added to the memorial's walls where the names of fallen officers are displayed in random order. Each May during an annual candlelight vigil the new names of fallen officers are added to coincide with the National Police Week. With the addition of each name, the theme of the memorial is reinforced: It is not how these officers died that made them heroes, it is how they lived. As we pay tribute to Ashtabula Patrolman William D. Glover, Jr., I hope that we will all remember the heroism that marked his life, the infectious joy and enthusiasm that he brought to his work, and the tremendous pride that he felt in being part of that elite corps of men and women in blue. Words, Mr. Speaker, cannot adequately convey all that he did in his life nor how his death has affected so many. While we mourn the senseless passing of the life of yet another good cop, we can take comfort knowing that Officer Bill Glover left his mark on this world and he left this world a safer, better place. To his wife, Marianne, to his children, to his family, his community, and his department and his brethren in law enforcement, our most heartfelt sympathies are offered. In his sacrifice, he was able to leave earth and join hands with God. And I know that his watchful, caring eyes will continue to watch over and protect the family, department, and community that he loved so much. Mr. Speaker, may God bless Ashtabula Patrolman William D. Glover, Jr., and may God rest his soul.

Mr. LaTOURETTE

Mr. LaTOURETTE. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from New York (Chairman McHugh), and also the ranking member of our subcommittee, the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Fattah), and his able stand-in, the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Davis), and the chairman of our full committee, the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Burton), and also our ranking member, the gentleman from California (Mr. Waxman), for allowing this bill to come forward to the floor in such a timely fashion. Mr. Speaker, as the gentleman from New York (Mr. McHugh) stated, Karl Bernal did so much for the community in which I live, and it is more than fitting that his legacy be permanent with the addition of the Karl Bernal Post Office. Karl Bernal was not one who simply paid lip service to a cause, but rather one who embraced so many causes and did not let go until he had affected some positive change. He was a giant in Lake County, Ohio, and with his passing last May, he is an individual who is sorely missed. He was active in the Lake County Salvation Army, the United Way, where he was awarded with the Lake County's Good Neighbor Award. He was named the Painesville Chamber of Commerce Outstanding Citizen of the Year in 1989 and the recipient of the Distinguished Service Award from the Lake County Mental Health Board. He received a Distinguished Service Award from Lakeland Community College, and he was also given the Outstanding Pacesetter Award from the Ohio NAACP, and, probably most important to him, he was elected as a member of the Lake County Senior Citizen Hall of Fame. I only had the pleasure of knowing Mr. Bernal during the last 20 years of his life. As the gentleman from New York (Mr. McHugh) stated, he died when he was 76, but his was a rich life, and, through his life, he made the community that I have the honor of representing richer for all of our citizens, and, for that reason, I respectfully ask all of our colleagues to support the naming of this Post Office in his memory, the Karl Bernal Post Office in Painesville, Ohio.

Mr. LaTOURETTE

Mr. LaTOURETTE. Mr. Speaker, as a proud co-sponsor to H.R. 1500, America's Red Rock Wilderness Act of 1997, I would like to insert the following poem, written by Ms. Anna Taft on October 27, 1997, into the Congressional Record: The desert gave me a package: a pile of sand wrapped in a bundle of cottonwood leaves. This gift contains a mixture of all the medicine of this land. It has red and white powders from slickrock sculptures, crushed juniper berries and pinon nuts, tiny bits of cryptogamic castles, damp sand from deep canyon streams, desert varnish from narrow blackened slots, and minuscule shards of Anasazi cookware. All blended together, its contents are no longer discernible, but it smells distinctly of triumph over adversity, of trees sprouting up far from water, of pothole creatures emerging from dormancy as raindrops rehydrate their world, of topographic contour lines at last clicking into place to match landforms, of hikers passing packs past the last ledge to reach a canyon rim, of warm sleeping bags inside a megamid covered with snow, of evaporation off of hot bodies as they emerge from a sweat lodge into cold night air, of a group of people learning to live together in harmony in the desert, of balance, neither superabundance nor emptiness. This bundle is wrapped tightly, but as I travel its leaves will start to come apart. The sand inside will spill out, spreading its magic through all the places I go. Everyone I meet will smell the job of accomplishment, the peace of harmony. One or two of them will recognize the scent and pull out their own little bundles, letting their own magic flow over them again. The others will smell and know of the wonderful things that are out there. For some, it may be the signal to go out and find that essence of life for themselves. For others it will be enough simply to breathe deeply and understand. If I don't keep the leaves moist, they will dry out and crack and I will lose more sand. But some will always be with me and the medicine will always be there. The desert has given me a package, but what can I give to the desert? I can give only sweat and blood, perhaps tears, and my love and gratitude, my commitment to walk softly and protect this land as best I can. The desert asks only this in return: that I let it live and share its magic with others, that they, also, may learn to love the land.

Mr. LaTOURETTE

Mr. LaTOURETTE. Mr. Speaker, on a December morning in 1996, Lake County Coroner William C. Downing walked into my district office in Painesville, OH, with a photograph taken 44 years earlier in Okinawa, Japan. The photograph showed a young Dr. Downing being presented with a scroll of appreciation from the Governor of Okinawa. About the time Dr. Downing stopped by my office, there had been a rash of bad publicity about U.S. servicemen in Okinawa following the rape of a 12-year-old girl. Dr. Downing, a former Army surgeon, was distressed by it all, and remembered how warmly he had been received by the Okinawan people nearly five decades earlier. He hoped that the story behind the aging photograph might make up for some of the negative images Okinawans had of Americans in uniform. Doc, as he was known by everyone in Lake County, handed one of my caseworkers the photograph, taken January 9, 1952, and asked for our assistance in locating the folks in the picture. We realistically did not know if we would be successful, as the picture had been taken almost a half century earlier. But Dr. Downing was adamant about trying to find out what became of the people in the photograph, especially the 4-year-old girl who was held by her parents. After all, in 1952 he performed life-saving surgery on the child in the photograph, Sachiko Ikei. Dr. Downing recalled how the little girl had swallowed a game piece about the size of a checker, and for more than a week it had been lodged in her throat. Her parents had taken her to every doctor on the island but no one could help her. Young Sachiko was unable to eat and could barely drink. ``The doctors said to take her home and let her die,'' Doc recalled. As a last resort, Sachiko's parents brought her to Ryukyus Army Hospital in Okinawa where Dr. Downing, then about 30 years old, was chief of general surgery. Dr. Downing, the handsome, young American surgeon, agreed to perform lifesaving surgery on the little girl, at no cost to her family or the Okinawan Government. As Dr. Downing explained it to us, there was no hesitation in his decision to save the little girl's life. He had never forgotten the first autopsy he performed as a young physician in training. It was in 1946 in Cleveland, and a 5-year-old boy had died after choking on a bean from a toy beanbag. Dr. Downing recalled removing the swollen lima bean blocking the boy's larynx, and thought it so senseless that an innocent child had died from playing with a toy. Six years later, he had the chance to save a child in a similar predicament, and he did. He made an incision in the girl's neck, and then entered her esophagus to retrieve the game piece. Over the years, Dr. Downing married, had a family, and worked for 30 years as a general surgeon before becoming the Lake County Coroner in 1985. Over the years he thought about the little Okinawan girl often, but never knew what became of her or her family. Shortly after leaving Okinawa, he had been transferred to Tokyo, where he served as chief of surgery in a M*A*S*H hospital for the tail end of the Korean war. Although Dr. Downing had never forgotten Sachiko, it took the rape of a 12-year-old girl in Okinawa to prompt him to start his search for the child he had saved decades earlier. His wife, Jan, after much searching, found the photo in a box of old memorabilia. Armed with nothing more than an aging photograph, our office set out to find the people in the picture. We contacted Army officials, the U.S. State Department, and the congressional affairs section of the Embassy of Japan. Dr. Downing believed if the people in the photograph were still alive, someone would be able to locate them. He never imagined it would happen so fast, however, Within 2 weeks of receiving the photograph, our office was able to determine the whereabouts of all those in the photograph. Most of the folks in the photo had passed away, including Sachiko's father, who had died in 1970. Sachiko's mother, meanwhile, was alive and well and lived in Okinawa. The little girl in the kimono, then just 4 years old, was now a mother and grandmother. She lives in Opelica, AL, and works for the State of Alabama for the department of vocational rehabilitation. Her name is Sachiko I. Thompson. The first time Dr. Downing called Sachiko she wept, as she had never had been able to thank the kind American doctor who had saved her life. As it turned out, Sachiko had moved to the United States in 1973 and had never returned home to Okinawa in all those years. She had met an American while working in a photography studio in Okinawa, and wound up marrying his brother. Sachiko said she often wondered what happened to the American doctor, and remembers trying to learn more about him when she was about 13. All she had was a picture with what seemed like a hundred staff members from the Army hospital, plus the tall man in the white lab jacket. Sachiko said she was so touched when she learned that Dr. Downing was looking for her after all these years. ``I thought about it and wondered if he ever thought about me, but I never imagined this,'' she said. Of course a few phone calls weren't enough for Dr. Downing, and he set out to complete the mission he'd begun when he walked into my office. Last year, at his own expense, Dr. Downing traveled to Okinawa to meet the little girl whose life he'd saved so many years before. It afforded both Sachiko and her mother, now 76 years old, with an opportunity to thank the man who'd changed their lives with his humanity and kindness. Dr. Downing died today after a brief battle with cancer. I had the privilege of knowing him the last 18 of his 77 years, and considered him a dear, trusted friend and colleague. For many years we worked side by side, as our jobs often overlapped in the most unpleasant of circumstances--he was the county coroner, and I was the county prosector. I was always impressed by his professionalism and his uplifting spirit. He was a man of great, legendary humor and great integrity. Dr. Downing spent many years of his life surrounded by death, but always reveled in the life around him. I have to believe it was his love of life and his love for our country that led him on his journey to Okinawa. It is fitting that in the final year of his life he was able to meet a woman whose life he had forever changed. The rest of us, meanwhile, will forever be changed and blessed for having known this wonderful, caring man.

Mr. LaTOURETTE

Mr. LaTOURETTE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to commemorate the 25th anniversary of the Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement [GLWQA]. This groundbreaking agreement between the United States and Canada was signed on April 15, 1972, by President Richard Nixon and Canadian Prime Minister Pierre Trudeau as a binational pledge to reduce and prevent Great Lakes pollution. The GLWQA grew out of a need to reverse the decades-long trend of decline in the health and beneficial uses of the Great Lakes. My constituents have been especially impacted by water quality since my district includes the longest Lake Erie shoreline of any Ohio congressional district. In the late 1960's, Lake Erie was considered to be a dead lake, with stinking mats of algae growing profusely, and huge parts of the lake rendered uninhabitable for fish due to lack of oxygen. After a comprehensive study of this problem was conducted, it became apparent that these problems were the result of eutrophication, or the overfertilizing of the lake. Too much phosphorus was being dumped into Lake Erie from various sources, including farms, factories, and private homes. The 1972 GLWQA included provisions for the reduction of phosphorous loadings into Lakes Erie and Ontario. As a result of the 1972 GLWQA, phosphorus levels significantly decreased in the Great Lakes. In Lakes Erie and Ontario, phosphorus loadings have been reduced by almost 80 percent. The United States and Canada achieved this binational goal through improvements in sewage treatment, lowering the levels of phosphorus in detergents, and reducing agricultural runoff. In 1978, the GLWQA was revised and the two countries pledged to restore and maintain the chemical, physical, and biological integrity of the waters of the Great Lakes basin ecosystem. Toxic substances were a major concern by the late 1970's, and the two countries committed themselves to achieving zero discharge of toxic substances in toxic amounts and the virtual elimination of persistent toxic substances. These persistent toxics bioaccumulate in organisms and increase in concentration up the food chain. Some of these substances, such as PCB's and dioxin, have been shown to cause adverse health effects in humans and wildlife. Again, my constituents have been impacted by the constant plague of persistent toxics which were dumped into the lakes during a time when the consequences of pollution were not understood. The Ashtabula River and harbor in northeast Ohio was a dumping ground for toxic waste for years. The 1987 protocol to the Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement reinforced the 1978 commitments of the United States and Canada and highlighted the importance of human and aquatic ecosystem health. Provisions were added to clean up 42 local areas of concern in the Great Lakes and included the development and implementation of remedial action plans [RAP's] and lakewide management plans [LaMPs]. The Ashtabula River and harbor was designated as an area of concern by the International Joint Commission [IJC] in 1985, and a remedial action plan has since been developed to clean the river up. Under the leadership of the IJC, a coalition of interested parties has worked continuously to make the Ashtabula River and harbor one of the first successful cleanup sites in the Great Lakes. The Ashtabula River Partnership has made great strides in recent years to secure the commitment of the Army Corps of Engineers to safely dredge the sediments and dispose of them in a manner consistent with our obligation to protect the environment. The accomplishments under the GLWQA extend beyond my constituents' corner of the Great Lakes. As a result of the United States and Canadian commitment to reducing toxic substance releases, cormorants in the Great Lakes region have significantly increased in population from the 1950's to the 1970's levels when the number of nesting pairs of cormorants dropped by 86 percent. Concentrations of DDE and PCB, both persistent toxic substances, decreased in cormorant eggs by more than 80 percent between 1971 and 1989. Concentrations of chlorinated compounds, such as dioxins and furans which are used in the bleaching process of pulp and paper mills, have decreased in the Great Lakes by 90 percent since the late 1980's. On November 1, 1997, in Niagara Falls, NY, the International Joint Commission, with Canada and the United States, celebrated the 25th anniversary of the GLWQA. This event was attended by many people in the Great Lakes community hailing from United States and Canadian Government agencies, environmental organizations, public interest groups, and industry. The key speakers at the celebration were Deputy Secretary John Garamendi, United States Department of Interior, and the Honorable John Fraser, Canadian Environment Embassador, as well as a member of my staff, Mr. Brett Kaull. At this landmark anniversary of the GLWQA, we must not rest on the laurels of the accomplishments of the past, for there is still much to be done to restore the environment of the Great Lakes, This effort will require vigilance and commitment from the United States and Canada, Federal and local governments, industry, and the public. In 1999, the United States and Canada will review the agreement's objectives and terms to determine whether to update its scope. Let us continue to work together in a concerted effort to achieve the goal of bringing back the Great Lakes to their former preeminence as a natural resource to be enjoyed for generations.

Mr. LaTOURETTE

Mr. LaTOURETTE. Mr. Speaker, I wish to announce the following suspensions for the 1-hour notice requirement: H.R. 2977, S. 1378, S. Con. Res. 61, S. Con. Res. 62, S. Con. Res. 63, H.R. 2979, H.R. 764, H.R. 2440, H.J. Res. 95, H.J. Res. 96, S. 1079 and H.R. 1604.

Mr. LaTOURETTE

Mr. LaTOURETTE. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Tennessee [Mr. Duncan] for not only his leadership, but for making sure that this bill expeditiously gets to the floor. Mr. Speaker, the purpose of this legislation is to provide authority to the Secretary of Transportation to waive a deed restriction on the parcel of land currently under the ownership of the city of Cleveland for aviation purposes. Since 1970, Congress has granted this authority to the Secretary; however, the parcel in question was deeded by the Federal Government to the city of Cleveland in 1967 and is currently restrained by a reverter clause. This noncontroversial conveyance of the land from the city of Cleveland to the city of Brook Park is critical to the expansion plans for Cleveland Hopkins Airport. It is supported by the Federal Aviation Administration given its importance for public aviation purposes. I have been honored to have the assistance of my colleague from Cleveland, OH [Mr. Kucinich]. He represents this portion of the city of Cleveland, and I represent the city of Brook Park, and he cosponsored the House companion language to S. 1347. We also are thankful to our senior Senator from the State of the Ohio for moving this bill through the Senate. The bill enjoys bipartisan support from the leadership of the House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure. Mr. Speaker, Congress has a history of enacting specific provisions that allow the Secretary to waive reverters and other deed restrictions for deeds preceding 1970. I would appreciate the support of the House to support this technical correction for public aviation purposes.

Mr. LaTOURETTE

Mr. LaTOURETTE. Mr. Speaker, today, I rise to salute our beloved Cleveland Indians on an outstanding season, and a gutsy, nail-biting trip through the playoffs and the World Series. It truly was an exceptional series, right down to the edge-of-your-seat, extra-innings' game seven finale. While we all wish we could have enjoyed a different outcome, we have every reason to be extremely proud of this team and all it accomplished this year. We also have reason to be especially proud of one of our hometown heroes, and one of the stars of the 1997 American League Champion Cleveland Indians--Brian Anderson. Tribe pitcher Brian Anderson grew up in Geneva and graduated from Geneva High School in 1990. He played ball in college at Wright State University near Dayton, and was selected by the California Angels in the first round of the draft in 1993. In fact, he was the third pick overall, and was named the American League's Rookie Pitcher of the Year in 1994 by the Sporting News. Much to the delight of Anderson's loyal fans, he was traded to the Indians in February 1996, and has proven himself to be one of the Tribe's most reliable pitchers, and is a part of a formidable bullpen that is admired throughout the league. Every young boy who grows up near Cleveland and spends his days playing catch with his dad dreams of one day playing for his hometown team. Brian Anderson not only achieved that dream, he surpassed it this year when he pitched in front of his hometown in the World Series. Each time he stepped on the mound, he displayed the guts, brawn, and tenacity that are the hallmarks of Indians' baseball, and showed the world that he is a force to be reckoned with. Brian Anderson didn't bow to the pressure of the playoffs or the World Series. Instead, he showed remarkable composure, and didn't seem the least bit fazed by the magnitude of the task that was before him. Two performances in particular stand out--when he pitched 3.2 innings of game 3 of the World Series and gave up just two hits, and when he and Jaret Wright combined for a 6-hitter in game 4. Brian Anderson and the Tribe had 49 years of cruel history placed squarely on their shoulders this season, as the Tribe has not won the World Series since 1948. Next year, half a century of history will be the burden the Tribe must carry, and it is the belief of Tribe fans everywhere that the Indians will rise to the challenge and assume their rightful place as World Series champions. As a lifelong Tribe fan, it will be a great comfort for Brian Anderson to be a part of the new generation of Indians who will guide us into the next century. On behalf of the 19th Congressional District, I congratulate Brian Anderson on his exemplary play this season, and I congratulate his folks, Jim and Janice, for raising such an outstanding young man. We all look forward to many more years of witnessing Brian's greatness on the field as an integral member of the Cleveland Indians. Brian Anderson has made his family, friends, and fans burst with pride, and he is living proof that with hard work and perserverance, and the loving encouragement of a fine family, no dream is too great and the biggest dreams of all can come true.

Mr. LaTOURETTE

Mr. LaTOURETTE. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent that half of my 10 minutes in support of the amendment be given to the coauthor of the amendment, the gentleman from Ohio [Mr. Traficant], and that he be permitted to yield time.

Mr. LaTOURETTE. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding me the time. To amplify on what our good friend from Youngstown, OH, had to say, in 1981 Amtrak unions negotiated an agreement calling for a package of wage increases. Soon after the passage of that agreement, that contract, the unions were told by Amtrak and Members of Congress that Amtrak could not afford what the company just agreed to. The workers were told that they had to defer two-thirds of those increases. It is now 1997, 16 years later, and that wage increase remains deferred. Amtrak workers have sacrificed for the good of Amtrak. Again, to reiterate, the Quinn amendment, if we think of a train ride from New York City to Los Angeles, the train stops in Buffalo sadly. It does not get all the way to Los Angeles. In order to get all the way to Los Angeles, we need to reject the Quinn amendment and support LaTourette-Traficant. The CHAIRMAN pro tempore [Mr. Thornberry]. The gentleman from Minnesota [Mr. Oberstar] has the right to close debate as he is defending the committee position on a substitute amendment.

Mr. LaTOURETTE. Mr. Chairman, I want to say in response to the gentleman from New York [Mr. Quinn], my good friend, I am certainly not saying that his amendment is an anti-labor amendment. I think everybody on our side recognized the gentleman as a friend of labor. My problem with the Quinn amendment is this: It walls off freight labor, but it does nothing for the men and women who work for Amtrak. The fact of the matter is if the Quinn amendment passes we will not have a vote on the LaTourette amendment. What that means is that all of the labor provisions that are in place 254 days after the enactment of the bill, that are in place for all the men and women who work so hard for Amtrak, will blow up. That clearly will put the management at Amtrak, which issued a memorandum to itself saying that they should be careful not to give themselves no more than a 15 percent increase, while the wages of the Amtrak employees have continued to decline. The observation that I made in the Committee on Rules and that the gentleman from Minnesota [Mr. Oberstar] made on the floor the other day is exactly right. The Quinn amendment is a good amendment, but it is half a loaf. We need the whole loaf to protect the good men and women that work for Amtrak.

Mr. LaTOURETTE. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself the balance of my time. Mr. Chairman, I rise just briefly, not to rebut but to make a response. This bill, 254 days from the date that it is going into enactment, repeals all of the labor protection statutes that are available to Amtrak workers. It creates no incentive. There was an observation made that there is no incentive there for the workers to negotiate. It creates no incentive for the Amtrak workers to negotiate, because they are all gone. After 16 years of deferrals, wage freezes, entry level wage decreases, the Amtrak worker who just as late as 1980 made a buck- seven, less than a BART worker in San Francisco, now makes $7.39 an hour less. That is not right. Mr. Chairman, this is the right amendment, and just because of the confusion I want to stress one thing. We need people to vote ``no'' on Quinn so we have a vote on LaTourette-Traficant.

Mr. LaTOURETTE. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Chairman, like the chairman of the full committee, I have great respect for the chairman of the Subcommittee on Surface Transportation, but I would again point out that Amtrak has yet to point out one single employee who has successfully accessed the horrible 6-year severance package they are talking about. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Ohio [Mr. Traficant], the distinguished ranking member of the full committee,

Mr. LaTOURETTE. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Chairman, initially I want to thank the cosponsor of this amendment, my fine colleague, the gentleman from Ohio, [Mr. Traficant]. I also want to commend the chairman of our full committee, the gentleman from Pennsylvania [Bud Shuster], for not only his work on this bill, but also in the way that he has been willing to work with us, and even appear at the Committee on Rules and suggest that this amendment be made in order. This bill is sound in many respects, as it serves to reform Amtrak and many important areas. There is no doubt that one reason that Amtrak continues to run deficits is due to the lack of reform. Where I must respectfully part company, however, with our chairman, is whether the C-2 labor protections for Amtrak are part of that problem. I supported this bill in the last Congress and in committee this year out of respect for our chairman and the arguments that he made. But that support was based upon the argument that C-2 protections were adversely impacting the financial health of Amtrak. Based upon information received during the committee hearing, I have doubts, serious doubts, about those claims. Amtrak's current net loss is in the neighborhood of $322 million. In 1995 and 1996 Amtrak paid out only $2 million in labor protection to approximately 2,000 employees. This works out to approximately $1,000 per employee. The cost of labor protection and contracting out is open to debate, and in regard to C-2 labor protections, which we heard so much about during the course of the rule debated, Amtrak has been unable to produce a single individual who has ever received the C-2 labor protection. In a July letter written by Tom Downs, the CEO of Amtrak, which I will include for the Record, he stated Amtrak does not experience a significant cost in C-2 expenses, so that the impact of the repeal of C-2 would not save us any significant funds except ultimately in the bankruptcy of Amtrak. I also state that I would prefer to be able to negotiate C-2 provisions with labor than to have Congressman date changes. I mention the Downs letter simply to stress there is an honest difference of opinion regarding the issue of existing labor protection and the prohibition of contracting out. Given this fact, it is only fair that these issues be subject to collective bargaining. The amendment will provide for these issues to be bargained between Amtrak and its union organizations and ensure that neither party negotiates from a disadvantaged position. Mr. Chairman, I urge my colleagues to support the LaTourette- Traficant amendment and reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. LaTOURETTE. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment, made in order under the rule.

Mr. LaTOURETTE

Mr. LaTOURETTE. Madam Speaker, I want to thank the chairman of the subcommittee, the gentleman from Texas [Mr. Smith], for his cooperation and leadership on this bill. While, as the gentleman noted, we had a difference of opinion initially on this piece of legislation, I appreciate his willingness to work out a compromise and move H.R. 2027 to the floor. I also want to thank the gentleman from North Carolina [Mr. Watt], the ranking member of the subcommittee, and although I have not been as successful in convincing him of the worthiness of our bill as I was with the gentleman from Texas [Mr. Smith], I do want to thank him for his cooperation and also appreciate the thoughtfulness of his remarks. Madam Speaker, before I begin my remarks about the bill itself, I want to extend a personal apology to several supporters of this legislation who asked to be cosponsors of the bill, and, much to my disappointment, were not added. If there is one positive effect to this revelation, it is that I did not ignore any one Member of Congress, I excluded all of the potential cosponsors to the bill so as to not slight anyone. Accordingly, I want to take a moment to mention the champions of the boating public who serve in the House on both sides of the aisle and thank them for their efforts on this issue. I want the record to reflect their cosponsorship of H.R. 2027. They are the gentleman from Michigan [Mr. Bonior], who happens to be the cochairman of the Congressional Boating Caucus; the gentleman from Michigan [Mr. Dingell], the dean of the House, a bad one to leave off; my colleagues the gentleman from Ohio [Mr. Traficant], the gentleman from Ohio [Mr. Oxley] and the gentlewoman from Ohio [Ms. Kaptur]; the gentleman from New York [Mr. Paxon]; the gentleman from Michigan [Mr. Stupak]; also the gentleman from Washington [Mr. Metcalf], and also on the floor with us here today is the gentleman from New York [Mr. LaFalce], a tireless champion for the boating public as well. Madam Speaker, earlier this year I introduced legislation to modify the I-68 program to allow greater flexibility for recreational boaters from the United States that wished to call on a Canadian port and return home without the inconvenience that that current program places on boaters. The INS is charged with the important responsibility of keeping our borders secure from illegal immigration, a mission which I wholeheartedly support. Current law requires vessels that have visited Canada undergo a face-to-face inspection with INS upon return, but since 1963 boaters have been afforded the opportunity to apply for what is known as an I-68 permit that would allow multiple crossings without inspection. This permit was issued without charge until 1995. They then began charging a $16 personal fee and required that all passengers apply to the INS office. Until this change, many boaters thought they were complying with the law by calling in to customs and were unaware of the INS inspection requirement. This has caused much confusion along the Canadian-United States border because they are not required to pay a fee at Canadian- United States land crossings. These boaters rightfully wonder if once again they are being singled out as a broad target for additional user fees such as the ill-conceived FCC radio license fee. Madam Speaker, I am a supporter of the fee-for-service concept and I believe that if a particular class of citizens is receiving an individualized service from the government, it should help pay for it. However, there appears to be no discernible increase in INS inspection activities for the recreational borders along the border with the I-68. Additionally, if INS is willing to forego the face-to-face inspection requirement for a $16 annual fee, it appears it does not consider recreational boaters as a major conduit for illegal aliens, but rather as a source for additional revenue. The I-68 permit has caused an adverse economic impact in my district, and I would suggest all of the districts along the Great Lakes border. This has translated in my district to 6,000 less boat trips and an economic loss of about $2 million for each of the countries involved in the destination spending. With the counsel of the gentleman from Texas, Chairman Smith, and the support of other members of the subcommittee, we have crafted a bill that we think crafts a good compromise. It will give boaters an additional option to the I-68 without compromising the security of the United States-Canadian border. The bill will allow passengers on the vessel to utilize the U.S. passport, which is the document we use to travel all over the world, without paying an additional fee. Thanks to Chairman Smith's wisdom, we have also included a provision that there will be a report sent to Congress that will evaluate the effectiveness of our change and will also sunset after a 1-year exploration period. Also I wanted to commend the INS. They are now engaged in a pilot program where they have video phones installed in the district of the gentleman from New York [Mr. McHugh], and it is my hope that if we cannot eliminate either the fee or the I-68, eventually we can expand that pilot program to the ports of entry along the Great Lakes. Again I want to thank the gentleman from Texas, Chairman Smith, for his cooperation and also the gentleman from North Carolina [Mr. Watt], the ranking member. Madam Speaker, with the balance of the time that I have been yielded, I would ask the gentleman from Ohio [Mr. Traficant] if he has observations he wanted to make?

Mr. LaTOURETTE. Madam Speaker, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. LaTOURETTE. Madam Speaker, I want to thank the gentleman from New York [Mr. LaFalce] for his thoughtful comments and suggestions. I can assure the gentleman that I support both of the proposals to improve the current I-68 program. The original legislation, as the gentleman knows, proposed exactly the gentleman's thoughts. However, in working through the legislative process with the subcommittee, it became apparent that such a proposal would not win the approval of the committee and hence no floor action. I made it clear to our colleagues on the subcommittee that we hope the study included in this bill would give us evidence to come back and hopefully get rid of the fee and/or the I-68. I look forward to working with the gentleman, and I thank him for his thoughts.

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

Mr. LaTOURETTE

Mr. LaTOURETTE. Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman from California [Mr. Kim] for yielding me the time. Madam Speaker, I want to thank the gentleman from California [Mr. Kim], the chair of our subcommittee, for his assistance and also in getting this bill to the floor. I also want to thank the gentleman from Youngstown, OH [Mr. Traficant], ranking member of our subcommittee. I also want to extend my appreciation to the staff of the subcommittee on their hard work. Madam Speaker, this bill was passed by the House under suspension in the last Congress, but unfortunately the Senate adjourned before taking it up. I am pleased to report that, in the 105th Congress, the Senate has already passed this bill, sponsored by Senator DeWine of Ohio. If we are successful today, and given the bipartisan support this bill enjoys I assume we will be, we can complete this tribute. Madam Speaker, Carl Stokes grew up in the ghetto of Cleveland but never let his surroundings hold him back. In fact, he made it his life's devotion to make a difference in the lives of others and to help others aspire to the greatness lurking within them. In 1962, Carl Stokes became the first black Democrat to be elected to the Ohio House of Representatives, winning a seat in Cuyahoga County. At the time, the population of Cuyahoga County was only 14 percent black. In 1967, Carl Stokes came back and beat the Democratic mayor by 20,000 votes. And in 1967, he was elected mayor of the city of Cleveland. And he faced in that election one of Ohio's and the country's most notable political families, the Tafts. That November in 1967, Carl Stokes, who was the great-grandson of a slave, defeated Seth Taft, the grandson of President William Howard Taft. Madam Speaker, in April of 1996, cancer claimed the life of Carl Stokes. At his funeral, Carl Stokes was remembered with great fondness and admiration. Few, of course, were able to capture the essence of the magic of Carl Stokes more than his brother, the gentleman from Ohio [Mr. Stokes], our colleague for many years, who described his brother's life this way: A life that has been a series of `firsts' for African- Americans. A life that opened up doors and opportunities and raised the aspirations of African-Americans everywhere. He wrote a different American story. He wrote the poor American black boy's story. He didn't rise from rags to riches. He went from poverty to power. And he used that power to help people. Cleveland, Ohio will never forget Mayor Stokes' contributions, Judge Stokes' contributions, and Ambassador Stokes' contributions. He served his city and country with dignity and purpose. And it is only fitting that Carl Stokes, the true visionary, one of Cleveland's most remarkable sons, now be honored by the naming of the Carl B. Stokes U.S. Courthouse.