Steven LaTourette

Mr. LaTOURETTE

Mr. LaTOURETTE. Mr. Chairman, I was unfortunately detained for rollcall vote No. 336 to the Department of Defense Appropriations Act. Had I been present I would have voted ``yes''. As my voting record will reflect, I have consistently voted against additional B-2 funding. I was not present for the vote because I was testifying before the National Capital Memorial Commission in support of my legislation, H.R. 1608, the Pyramid of Remembrance Act. As you know, H.R. 1608 would establish a memorial in the District of Columbia or its surrounding areas for soldiers who died in undeclared military conflicts and training exercises. I am proud to report that the idea for this bill came from high school students at Riverside High School in my district. Since its introduction, the bill has gained bipartisan support in the House of Representatives. I am looking forward to working with the leadership in moving the bill through the legislative process so that the lives of these brave and selfless soldiers are not forgotten.

Mr. LaTOURETTE

Mr. LaTOURETTE. Mr. Chairman, it has recently come to my attention that the Army Corps of Engineers is planning to restructure its Great Lakes and Ohio River Division by first severely reducing the number of employees, particularly those with decision-making authority, at its Chicago office and eventually closing it down entirely. This plan is documented in an internal Army Corps memo that I have obtained from the International Federation of Professional and Technical Engineers Local 777. This plan would leave the Great Lakes region with only one office, in Cincinnati, and would obliterate the institutional memory that is so vital to Army Corps operations in this region. Losing the Chicago division office to Cincinnati will mean that the Great Lakes will most likely lose resources, funds, and priority consideration for projects in this region. Last year, when this Congress passed the Energy and Water Development Appropriations Act for fiscal year 1997, the Army Corps was directed to reduce its divisions to no less than six and no more than eight. The Department of the Army's Office of Civil Works submitted a plan to the Congress which detailed the restructuring plan, approved by the Secretary. This plan stated that, ``The Great Lakes districts of the North Central Division will be combined with the districts of the Ohio River Division to form the Great Lakes and Ohio River Division. Division headquarters will remain in both Chicago and Cincinnati, each with a regional deputy commander and SES.'' The closure of the Chicago office would affect my State as well as the entire Great Lakes region, and I am troubled by this action on the part of the Army Corps. When the Appropriations Committee wrote the language directing the Army Corps to reduce its overall division structure, I do not believe that it was the Committee's intention that a region with projects as important as those in the Great Lakes should suffer disproportionately. The operations directed at the Chicago office are vital to projects conducted on the Great Lakes, and its closure would impede progress on many projects that my colleagues in the Great Lakes and I consider important. Mr. Speaker, I would like to include for the Record two documents that are the basis for my concern. The first is a January 22, 1997, outline of the plan submitted by the Army Corps and approved by the Secretary of the Army to reorganize its division structure pursuant to the Energy and Water Development Appropriations Act of fiscal year 1997. This plan clearly indicated that the Army Corps intended to maintain dual Division headquarters offices in both Chicago and Cincinnati, each with decision-making staff. The second document that I am submitting for the Record was provided by the International Federation of Professional and Technical Engineers Local 777 in Chicago, IL. It includes an internal Army Corps memorandum from the Commander of the Great Lakes and Ohio Division regarding Division restructuring dated May 27, 1997. This memo states clearly the Army Corps' intention to severely reduce and eventually to close the Chicago Division office of the Great Lakes and Ohio Division. Mr. Speaker, thank you for allowing me this opportunity to bring this matter to my colleagues' attention. Department of the Army, Office of the Secretary of the Army, Washington, DC. Information for Members of Congress The Energy and Water Development Appropriations Act of fiscal year 1997 (PL 104-206) requires that the Secretary of the Army develop a plan that reduces the number of U.S. Army Corps of Engineers divisions to no less than six and no more than eight, with each division responsible for at least four district offices. The Secretary has approved such a plan; the purpose of this paper is to inform you of its provisions. An outline of the plan is attached. The key elements of this plan are as follows: 1. The Corps will convert New England Division to district status and assign it under the North Atlantic Division. 2. The Alaska District will be transferred from the North Pacific Division to the Pacific Ocean Division (POD). POD headquarters will remain in Honolulu. 3. The Great Lakes districts of the North Central Division (NCD) will be combined with the districts of the Ohio River Division to form the Great Lakes and Ohio River Division. Division headquarters offices will remain in both Chicago and Cincinnati, each with a regional deputy commander and SES. 4. The districts of the North Pacific Division (less Alaska) will be combined with the districts of the Missouri River Division to form the Northwestern Division. Division headquarters offices will remain in both Portland and Omaha, each with a regional deputy commander and SES. 5. Two districts located along the Mississippi River (currently assigned to NCD) will be combined with the districts currently assigned to the Lower Mississippi Valley Division. The division will be renamed as the Mississippi Valley Division. 6. One district will be transferred from the Southwestern Division to the South Pacific Division. A briefing on the components of this plan will be provided, if desired. Please contact the Director of Civil Works, Headquarters, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers at (202) 761-0108 to request such a briefing. Furnished by: Office, Assistant Secretary of the Army (Civil Works) U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS DIVISION RESTRUCTURING PLAN, Jan. 22, 1997 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Current alignment Final configuration ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Engineering and Support Center, No change. Huntsville, Alabama. Transatlantic Programs Center, Winchester, No change.

Mr. LaTOURETTE

Mr. LaTOURETTE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to acknowledge and pay tribute to a scientist who has worked tirelessly for over 40 years to learn and teach about the Great Lakes environment. Dr. Alfred M. Beeton earned his post-secondary degrees in zoology at the University of Michigan and continued to conduct and direct research in the Great Lakes region until his appointment as acting chief scientist for the National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration [NOAA] in 1996. This brief statement can scarcely touch upon the depth and breadth of Dr. Beeton's career accomplishments, but I shall try to highlight some representative achievements. Dr. Beeton's work has spanned time beyond that of his personal career, from investigations into the evolution of the Great Lakes to recommendations for the future of policy affecting large lakes. In over 100 publications and speeches addressing scientists and policy makers, Dr. Beeton has touched on the most pressing issues affecting the quality of the Great Lakes. Some of the topics to which he has added his knowledge and insight include human factors affecting water quality, thermal pollution from powerplants, basic ecology of fish and other aquatic organisms, and how policy can begin to address these and other issues. Dr. Beeton's legacy will live on long after his retirement in August. Throughout his career as a professor at the Universities of Michigan and Wisconsin, Wayne State University, and Oregon State University, he trained hundreds of undergraduates and over 30 graduate students in aquatic science. In testimony before the Senate, Dr. Beeton helped to shape policies that initiated the restoration of the Great Lakes. He served for 10 years as director of the Great Lakes Environmental Research Lab [GLERL] in Ann Arbor, MI, helping to shape NOAA's mission on the United States' fourth coast. It was during his tenure as GLERL's director that I came to know Al Beeton personally. My district in Ohio is entirely within the Great Lakes basin, and includes the largest portion of Ohio's Lake Erie shoreline of any Ohio congressional district. Thus, the quality of the Great Lakes environment is inextricably tied to the quality of life for my constituents. Dr. Beeton has served as the embodiment of institutional memory for Great Lakes environmental issues. Al Beeton has been the person my staff could always turn to for an honest assessment of the status of our great natural resource. During the past several years of fiscal restraint, GLERL has faced a flat Federal contribution to its budget. This has meant a loss of staff and reprioritization of the lab's research programs. At the same time, interest in the restoration of Great Lakes resources has steadily increased. Threats to the Great Lakes from invading species and persistent toxins have been a continuous scourge and are not made less serious by Congress' intent to control the Federal budget. Throughout this period, Dr. Beeton has successfully led GLERL's efforts to study problems as large as the control of zebra mussels and the instantaneous forecasting of weather on the coastlines. As a result, we have a much better handle on how to protect the lakes and live safely on their shores than a decade ago. In 1996, Dr. Beeton planned to retire from his long and successful career and perhaps to enjoy the fruits of his labor while sailing. The Commerce Department tapped Dr. Beeton to serve as Acting Chief Scientist of NOAA and he began this new chapter in his life on June 21, 1996. In this position, he has coordinated with other NOAA administrators to establish the agency's scientific policy and to provide guidance to NOAA managers on scientific and technology issues. Among other things, the Office of the Chief Scientist is responsible for coordinating NOAA activities to implement the National Environmental Policy Act, managing NOAA's technology transfer program, and administering the National Climate Program. The appointment of a Great Lakes scientist to the highest scientific office in the Nation's ocean-oriented agency is an indication of the recognition of the fourth coast as an important aquatic resource. Al Beeton has brought prominence to a natural resource which was once treated more like a sewer than the national treasure it is. His efforts have been integral to the restoration of the lakes and we owe him our gratitude. Dr. Beeton will retire from his post as Acting Chief Scientist in August, and with this I bid him a fond farewell.

Mr. LaTOURETTE

Mr. LaTOURETTE. If the gentleman will yield further, I thank the chairman for his willingness to work on that issue. The second issue that I would like to address is the Army Corps' sediment remediation technology program, also known as ARCS 2, which was authorized in the Water Resources Development Act of 1996. This program is important to my district and Members' districts throughout the Great Lakes because of the huge quantity of contaminated sediments in the Lakes. Contaminated sediments in the Great Lakes are the largest repository of toxic pollution in the basin and pose a threat to human health as these toxins are slowly released into the water where they can enter the food chain through fish and birds. The sediments, primarily in harbors, collect many pollutants that have been entering the Great Lakes for decades. A total of 362 contaminants have been identified in the Great Lakes sediments, many of which are known to have potentially severe human health impacts. The current Energy and Water Appropriations bill does not include language regarding the ARCS 2 account. Pilot and laboratory-scale projects for the assessment and remediation of contaminated sediments were conducted under the assessment of remediation of contaminated sediments authority in the Clean Water Act. Section 515 of the WRDA bill of 1996 builds upon the old ARCS program by directing the Army Corps to conduct full-scale demonstration projects of promising sediment remediation technology. Such full-scale projects are an essential next step to removing the clean-up process from the planning to the implementation phase. Mr. Chairman, as you are aware, it is within your jurisdiction to see that this issue is addressed in the conference on the energy and water bill in the Senate. I would request on behalf of my colleagues in the Great Lakes region that you support the inclusion of language that will allow the Army Corps to move forward with this important sediment remediation program for fiscal year 1998. I would further yield to the chair.

Mr. LaTOURETTE. Mr. Chairman, I rise tonight to engage the gentleman from Pennsylvania [Mr. McDade], an acknowledged friend and supporter of Great Lakes priorities, in a colloquy regarding the Army Corps of Engineers Division Reorganization Plan and recently authorized Sediment Remediation Technology Demonstration project. Mr. Chairman, it has recently come to my attention that the Army Corps of Engineers is planning to restructure its Great Lakes and Ohio River Division by first severely reducing the number of employees, particularly those with decision-making authority, at its Chicago office and eventually closing down that facility. This plan is documented in an internal Army Corps memo that I will submit for the Record at the appropriate time. This plan would leave the Great Lakes region with only one office, in Cincinnati, and would obliterate the institutional memory that is so vital to Army Corps operations in this region. Last year, when this Congress passed the Energy and Water Appropriations Act for fiscal year 1997, the Army Corps was directed to reduce its divisions to no less than six and no more than eight. The Department of the Army's Office of Civil Works submitted a plan to the Congress which detailed the restructuring plan, approved by the Secretary. Again, I will submit this document for the Record at the appropriate time. The plan stated that, ``the Great Lakes districts of the North Central Division will be combined with the districts of the Ohio River Division to form the Great Lakes and Ohio River Division. Division headquarters will remain in both Chicago and Cincinnati, each with a deputy commander and SES.'' Mr. Chairman, do you agree with me that it is imperative that we exercise congressional oversight authority over the reorganization plan? I will yield to the chairman.

Mr. LaTOURETTE. If the gentleman will yield further, Mr. Chairman, I wish to thank him for his wisdom and continued support of the issues important to myself and those in the Great Lakes region. I look forward to working with him on this and other matters. I thank him for his courtesy.

Mr. LaTOURETTE

Mr. LaTOURETTE. Mr. Speaker, I call to my colleagues` attention the attached editorial that appeared in the Cleveland Plain Dealer on Thursday, July 17, 1997. As the editorial accurately states, under H.R. 2014, ``fees for using the tax-supported airways would be more evenly distributed among the airlines, whatever their size. And the airline's (Continental) numbers support this contention.'' Than you, Mr. Speaker for allowing me this opportunity to raise this important issue which will significantly impact consumers and our Nation's airline industry. [From the Cleveland Plain Dealer, July 17, 1997] Making Airline Taxes Palatable U.S. airline passengers can expect to be squeezed to help pay for a range of congressional tax cuts. New taxes on air travel are inevitable, whether a Senate or House version of a revenue-raising measure is adopted. But the latter offers fliers a better and fairer deal. The country's major airlines say they are not opposed to such taxes in principle. After all, they should be intended primarily to guarantee a reliable funding source for the Federal Aviation Administration, which operates the national air traffic control system and other support services. But the big carriers have lobbied vigorously against the Senate's proposal to retain the existing 10 percent excise tax on most domestic tickets--reduced to 7.5 percent on some rural segments--and place a similar charge on the domestic portion of an international flight. Instead, they have embraced a plan by House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Bill Archer for a 7.5 percent domestic tax with an additional $2 charge for each segment of a flight. Both bills call for increased taxes on international travel. The House version is steeper, but is expected to be modified in conference. Texas Republican Archer's bill is favored by Continental Airlines, the largest operator at Cleveland Hopkins International Airport, among comparable carriers that charge a variety of fares on most of their routes. But Southwest Airlines and other discount carriers prefer the Senate plan. Continental rightly argues that under the Archer plan, fees for using the tax-supported airways would be more evenly distributed among the airlines, whatever their size. And the airline's numbers support this contention. Continental also complains that imposing a tax on the domestic portion of a one-stop international flight, as in the Senate version, would put U.S. flag carriers at a disadvantage against foreign airlines that operate nonstop from U.S. gateway cities. Cleveland's case for adding a London flight could be damaged if such a tax is introduced, Continental says. Airline excise taxes have been around since 1941, when a 5 percent levy was imposed on most means of travel. Before 1978, the government set ticket prices. But with deregulation's variations in ticket prices, different passengers on the same flight can pay different amounts in taxes for the same use of the air traffic control system. Continental and the other major airlines argue that the Archer plan beings the tax system closer in concept to a user fee, which they believe the public would support. But its bigger appeal, for now, is that it would not make such a dent in the pocketbook.

Mr. LaTOURETTE

Mr. LaTOURETTE. Mr. Speaker, with the break-up of the Soviet Union and the emergence of Russia and the Commonwealth of Newly Independent States [CIS] of Eastern Europe, management of the post-cold-war environment has proven to be a novel and challenging task. The securities and certainties of the ``us versus them'' world are gone. Today, traditional allegiances are blurred and future motives are questioned. The North Atlantic Treaty Organization [NATO], however, has prevailed as the one remaining post-cold-war constant. As during the cold war era, the NATO commitment to collective defense is the core of the alliance. It is this guarantee to deter aggression that has prompted the CIS to seek admittance into NATO. Realizing that Russia, still armed with nuclear weapons, might one day become more unstable and aggressive, NATO membership is highly prized. As one who supports a stable and secure Eastern Europe through the expansion of NATO, I am pleased that Congress has not let this situation go unnoticed. In fact, the NATO Enlargement Facilitation Act of 1996--PL 104-208--was adopted last Congress, which named Poland, Hungary, the Czech Republic, and Slovenia as having made the most progress toward meeting NATO membership criteria. In keeping with this sentiment, I encourage my colleagues to support the European Security Act of 1997 so that the door to NATO is not closed after the first round of enlargement and that additional European countries receive U.S. assistance for transition into NATO. I would also like to encourage the members of NATO to accept Slovenia into membership when it meets in Madrid this July.

Mr. LaTOURETTE

Mr. LaTOURETTE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to introduce legislation to correct what are well intentioned, but misguided efforts by the United States Immigration Service to protect our northern border against United States citizens who seek to reenter their own country after a recreational boating trip to Canada. In what appears to be a federally sanctioned game of waterway robbery, the Immigration Service is willing to forego its legal obligation to inspect all vessels returning to a United States port from Canada, if boaters are willing to pay a $16 per-person per-year fee to purchase what is known as the I-68 Canadian border boat landing permit. The I-68 permit program was established in 1963 but was not implemented nationally until a few years ago when Congress directed Federal agencies to begin charging a fee for some Federal programs. I have no problem with the fee-for-service approach, but where is the service? The I-68 program would have the boating public paying the INS for the convenience of not inspecting their boats. Its difficult to see how this approach would stem the tide of illegal immigration from Canada on recreational boats, a problem that is not well documented by the INS--if it exists at all. We do know, however, that the number of United States boaters visiting Canada from the Great Lakes Region fell 15 percent in the 1996 boating season to just under 40,000. This translates to a loss of over $2 million in destination spending on the Canadian side and it can be assumed that similar losses were felt on the United States side. It is unfortunate that the recreational boating community has been on the receiving end of some bad Government programs in recent years. We all remember the ill-conceived boat luxury tax, the FCC radio license fee and, most recently, the marine diesel fuel tax. Fortunately, all of these programs have been repealed by Congress as detrimental to boater safety and the recreational boating economy. However, once again, we are making it harder and more expensive for law-abiding boaters to enjoy their chosen form of recreation. I must confess that with all the complex issues to address during my first term in Congress, somehow the news of illegal immigrants cruising across the Great Lakes in power and sailboats got by me. Ever mindful of the problems experienced on our southern borders and with images of illegal aliens coming into Florida, California, and Texas burned into my memory. I rushed down to one of the many marinas in my congressional district, the Ashtabula Yacht Club. That Sunday afternoon was a sight to behold. Sure enough I witnessed 40 some sailboats boldly entering the harbor. At this point the threat became clear to me. Men, women, and children of United States and Canadian descent docked their sailboats and came ashore illegally. They were barely clothed, sunburned, and the worst among them were telling lies. While I expected the illegal aliens to soon depart to taste freedom in the interior of our great country--they did not. In fact, the next morning I watched as all of the Canadian boats returned to Port Stanley, ON. Soon after, I spoke to the Commodore of the Yacht Club to see how long this problem has been going on. He informed me that it was the 25th year of the Lake Erie International Sailboat Race between Ashtabula, OH and Port Stanley, ON, and that he hoped to expect the same type of trouble next season. I use this example to illustrate that things are not always as they appear. The cash registers of our local harbor district depend on this annual visit from our Canadian friends to help one of our most promising growth industries--recreational boating. Mr. Speaker, my bill would not eliminate the I-68 program, but would simply allow recreational boaters the option of using their U.S. passport in lieu of the I-68 permit in order to reenter the United States after returning from Canadian shores. It seems to me that if a U.S. passport is good enough for all other international travel purposes, that boaters traveling between two friendly countries should also be afforded this option. I would like to thank Representative Stupak and my colleague from Ohio, Representative Traficant for being original cosponsors of this simple yet important piece of legislation. I look forward to enthusiastic support from all Members of Congress bordering the Great Lakes.

Mr. LaTOURETTE

Mr. LaTOURETTE. Mr. Speaker, today I am reintroducing legislation to move the 4.3-cent gas tax from the general fund to the highway trust fund. The 4.3-cent gas tax, which was enacted in 1993, currently pumps an estimated $6 billion annually into the general fund. This is wrong, plain and simple. Motorists should benefit from a fee which they alone must pay. While no none enjoys paying gas taxes, many studies have shown that Americans are much more willing to pay gas taxes if they are used only to make our country's roads and bridges safer. This, unfortunately, has not been the case with the most recent 4.3-cent increase. Last Congress, when many had talked about repealing the 4.3, I studied the various ways to use the funds generated by the gas tax, trying to come up with a common-sense, useful proposal. My legislation will not add one dime to the deficit, and instead will force the Federal Government to be honest with taxpayers and use the gas tax for needed infrastructure improvements. For example, a recent study found that bridges throughout the State are badly deteriorating and in need of repair. At the local level, last year we experienced a frustrating and costly detour on Interstate 90 after the bridge over the Grand River shifted about 2 inches. Fortunately, workers from the Ohio Department of Transportation worked tirelessly to repair what could have been a perilous situation, and tried to minimize the inconvenience to motorists. It seems to me that If Government has a function it should be to make sure our Nation's roads and bridges are as safe as humanly possible. When you put your children in your car, you need to be assured that the bridge you travel over won't crumble, drop a few inches or collapse. Under my new bill, the 4.3-cent gas tax would be transferred from the general fund to the highway trust fund. As a result, $6 billion a year would be freed up for infrastructure improvements, and 20 percent of those funds would be earmarked for mass transit projects. This will come as welcome news for our cities that are struggling to meet the increasing demand for mass transit. Also, under this proposal we will not have to search for a way to offset the $6 billion a year in lost revenues. We will simply be transferring funds from one account to another, meaning it will be budget neutral. Ohio is not alone when it comes to needing road, bridge and infrastructure improvements. Studies show that we should be spending $60 billion per year on our highways but are only spending $6 billion. This is a national problem, and one that could be greatly eased if we simply leveled with the taxpayers and used the gas tax for the purpose it was intended.

Mr. LaTOURETTE

Mr. LaTOURETTE. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Minnesota [Mr. Oberstar] for yielding, and I thank him because he has gone above and beyond reaching across the aisle to make sure we can get this done. I thank the gentleman from Pennsylvania [Mr. Shuster], the gentleman from Pennsylvania [Mr. Borski], but most of all I thank the gentleman from New York [Mr. Boehlert] without whose persistence and shepherding we would not be here, and I thank his staff, in particular Ben Grumbles. Also, Mr. Speaker, it happens to be Chairman Boehlert's birthday and I am not going to hold him up any longer. I would hope that we could all support this bill and I thank all my colleagues for making it happen. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of H.R. 4283, the National Invasive Species Act, as amended by the Senate. We arrive at this point today due to strong bipartisan cooperation. Many concerns were raised about the potential impact of the Senate amendments. After careful review, I am pleased to report that the Senate amendments will not compromise the fundamental purpose and goals of H.R. 4283. H.R. 4283 will build upon the Nonaquatic Nuisance Prevention and Control Act of 1990 that addressed zebra mussels and other invasive species in the Great Lakes. However, it is important to note that H.R. 4283 is national in scope, extending a voluntary incentive-based approach to all coasts and regions at risk. H.R. 4283 coordinates agencies, research institutions and others to prevent and control the introduction and spread of invasive species primarily through voluntary ballast water exchange and management education and research. Mr. Speaker, we are in the closing minutes, so I will make my comments brief. I would like to thank Mr. Shuster for his tireless efforts moving H.R. 4283. Additionally, I would like to extend my thanks to Ranking Member Oberstar for his support and Ranking Member of the Water Resources Subcommittee Mr. Borski for his time and attention on this issue. Mr. Speaker, we would not be here today without the stewardship and persistence of the chairman of the Water Resources Subcommittee, Mr. Boehlert, my sincere thanks to him. I would also like to thank the cosponsor of H.R. 4283. I would also like to thank our colleagues in the Senate, especially the senior Senator from Ohio, Senator Glenn, a Great Lakes champion who has been a catalyst on this issue. Mr. Speaker, I would be remiss if I did not take time to thank the staffers who, unfortunately, do not get near the credit they deserve. These men and women have spent countless hours on H.R. 4283, and they have my deep appreciation and my thanks. I would hate to leave someone out, but let me thank Rochelle Sturtevant of my staff, Ben Grumbles of the Water Resources Subcommittee, the staff of the House Committee on Resources, the House Committee on Science, as well as Allegra Cangelosi of the Northeast-Midwest Institute. Mr. Speaker, I ask my colleagues to support this truly bipartisan effort that will prevent other areas throughout our Nation from facing the costs and environmental damage that we in the Great Lakes have witnessed.

Mr. LaTOURETTE

Mr. LaTOURETTE. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Ohio, Mr. Traficant, for yielding me this time, and I want to also thank the gentleman from Maryland, Chairman Gilchrest, for moving this legislation so that we can complete it before we complete our work here in this session of Congress. Mr. Speaker, in April of this year Ambassador Carl B. Stokes died of cancer. Those of us in Washington may know Carl Stokes because he was the younger brother of one of our colleagues, U.S. Representative Louis R. Stokes. For many other Americans, however, Carl B. Stokes was a trailblazer who became the first black mayor of a major metropolitan U.S. city and paved the way for so many other African-Americans to seek public office. Carl B. Stokes grew up in the ghetto in 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 B. Stokes became the first black Democrat to be elected to the Ohio House of Representatives, winning a seat in Cuyahoga County, which at that time was only 14 percent black. Three years later, he made a bid for mayor of his hometown, Cleveland. He ran as an independent in the 1965 race and narrowly lost to the Democratic incumbent. The loss would have deterred many, but it served as motivation to Carl B. Stokes. In 1967, Carl B. Stokes returned to the fray and beat the city's mayor in the Democratic primary by 20,000 votes. Carl B. Stokes, who was raised by a single, widowed mother in one of the country's first public housing complexes for the poor, then faced a member of one of Ohio's and this country's most notable political families--the Tafts. That November, Carl B. Stokes, the great-grandson of a slave, defeated Seth Taft, the grandson of President William Howard Taft. At that time, less than 40 percent of Cleveland's population was black. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., said of this historic election, ``Once again American voters have successfully hurdled the barrier of race.'' Meanwhile, at his election-night victory party, Carl B. Stokes said until that very moment he had never known the full meaning of the words ``God Bless America.'' Carl B. Stokes served two terms as mayor of Cleveland, and became the first black to head the National League of Cities in his second term. He left Cleveland to face other challenges, and wound up in New York City, where he became that city's first black television anchorman. Carl B. Stokes returned to his hometown in the 1980's, and later was elected a Cleveland Municipal Court Judge, serving from 1983 to 1994. In 1994, President Clinton appointed Carl B. Stokes as ambassador of the Seychelles Islands in the Indian Ocean. He served in that post until a year ago June when he was diagnosed with cancer of the esophagus. At his funeral, Carl B. Stokes was remembered with great fondness and admiration. The Reverend Jesse Jackson delivered the eulogy, calling Carl B. Stokes a ``dream maker, an odds buster,'' and noting that he never internalized ``ghetto limitations.'' President Clinton, meanwhile, praised Carl B. Stokes' ``legacy of public service that continues to inspire us all.'' Of course, few were able to capture the essence of magic of Carl B. Stokes more than his brother, Lou, 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. In Cleveland, OH, Carl B. Stokes is revered. Cleveland will never forget his contributions as Mayor Stokes, Judge Stokes, and Ambassador Stokes. He served his city and his country with dignity and purpose. It is now left up to his very capable brother, Lou, to continue the Stokes' family legacy of service to others. It is only fitting that an important piece of the Cleveland architectural and political landscape be memorialized in his name. It is for that reason that I have proposed naming the new Federal courthouse at Huron and Superior roads in Cleveland the ``Carl B. Stokes United States Courthouse.'' Carl B. Stokes was a true visionary and one of Cleveland's most remarkable sons. He forever changed the face of urban governing, and left an indelible mark on his hometown and his country. Carl B. Stokes honored his city, and it is appropriate that his city honor him in return, making permanent his legacy in the ``Carl B. Stokes United States Courthouse.''

Mr. LaTOURETTE

Mr. LaTOURETTE. I very much thank the gentleman from New York [Mr. Boehlert] for yielding me this time, and thank him also for those kind words. Mr. Speaker, I want to add my thanks to Chairman Shuster, the chairman of our full Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, for helping expedite consideration of H.R. 3217 together with the gentleman from Minnesota [Mr. Oberstar], the ranking member, and also the ranking members of the other two subcommittees. This would not have been possible without the leadership of the gentleman from New York [Mr. Boehlert], our chairman of the Subcommittee on Water Resources and Environment. I think it is also appropriate, and sometimes we do not take time to thank the staff, not only the staff of the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee but also the staff at the Northeast-Midwest Institute and in particular a woman by the name of Allegra Cangelosi who was talking about zebra mussels and its infestation in the Great Lakes before many other people were even recognizing it as a problem throughout the United States. I have to praise all of the staff for working to gain a consensus of the interested parties including maritime organizations, environmental organizations, and water users throughout the coastal United States. It is also appropriate to recognize that the Committee on Resources and also the Committee on Science, which had jurisdiction over portions of this legislation, worked hard to get together with the Transportation and Infrastructure staff to present this final version before the House today. Mr. Speaker, there is an urgent need for this particular piece of legislation. A single aquatic nuisance like the zebra mussel can literally cost our economy billions of dollars. In Cleveland, OH, which is just to the west of the district which I have the honor of representing, the vessel that brings in water from Lake Erie for our drinking water system becomes encrusted and literally costs hundreds of thousands of dollars each year to have the zebra mussels removed. Water users along the Great Lakes experience a similar cost and a similar problem, and no one can accurately predict where or when the next invasion will occur. The 1990 Invasive Species Act addressed the invasion of nonindigenous species in the Great Lakes only. This bill expands the scope of the 1990 act to all waters of the United States. However, it does not take the same regulatory approach. Instead of mandating ballast water exchange, NISA begins with voluntary guidelines which will become enforceable only if the Secretary of Transportation determines that the maritime industry is not complying. This approach gives the benefit of the doubt to the maritime industry's intention to act in good faith while maintaining the teeth of the bill to ensure that the program is taken seriously by all affected parties. This balanced, moderate approach has broad bipartisan support. There are now 40 cosponsors to this legislation. There are some interests who want an enforceable regulatory program immediately, while there are others who only want voluntary guidelines with no possibility of mandatory regulations. This bill chose to take the middle ground, the compromise approach of requiring mandatory regulations only if they are necessary. The bill we are considering today includes both amendments passed by the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, as well as amendments subsequently worked out in consultation with the House Committees on Resources, Science and Agriculture, with personnel staff, with the Senate staff, and representatives of the maritime industries and Federal agencies. These amendments represent a compromise position which works to the satisfaction of all involved parties, and I believe has the strongest possibility and probability of being passed into law this Congress. I sincerely urge my colleagues to support this bill. It takes major steps to address the threat of invasion of aquatic nuisance species into our Nation's waters. Again, I thank the gentleman from New York, Chairman Boehlert, for his kind words and all Members for their attention.

Mr. LaTOURETTE

Mr. LaTOURETTE. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on the bill, H.R. 3864.

Mr. LaTOURETTE. Mr. Speaker, I have no further requests for time, and I yield back the balance of my time urging my colleagues to support this bill.

Mr. LaTOURETTE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, the General Accounting Office has provided the U.S. Congress and the American people with information about the operation of the Federal Government since 1921. Since that time, the GAO has investigated, audited and testified about nearly every topic under the Sun. When Members of Congress need accurate, objective facts, they turn to the capable work of the auditors and investigators at the GAO. However, many things have changed since 1921. Title I of this bill eliminates over 100 statutory mandates that Congress has previously imposed upon the GAO. Most of these mandates are auditing and reporting requirements that no longer represent the most effective use of the GAO's limited resources. The bill also transfers certain executive-type functions from the GAO to the Office of Management and Budget and other executive branch agencies which are better suited to perform these functions. The GAO has undergone a 25-percent reduction in its budget over the last 2 years. Enactment of H.R. 3864 will help the GAO deal with the effects of this large budget reduction. GAO officials have estimated that relieving the agencies of the mandates covered by this bill will result in a savings of between $7 to $10 million, which can be applied against the budget reductions already made. The Congressional Budget Office has also estimated that the enactment of this bill will result in a savings consistent with the 25- percent reduction in GAO's budget. The amendments to H.R. 3864 conform the bill to the version reported by the Committee on Government Reform and Oversight. A list of the mandates that are included in this bill was circulated for review by all chairs and ranking members of each House committee having jurisdiction over them. There were no objections to the repeals and transfers now contained in the bill. Finally, H.R. 3864 has been reviewed by OMB, and no objections were raised. Title I of the bill makes conforming amendments to provisions of law that reflect transfer of GAO functions to other agencies enacted last year by section 211 of the fiscal year 1996 Legislative Branch Appropriations Act. Mr. Speaker, I include in the Record with my remarks a section-by- section analysis of the bills. Section-by-Section Analysis of H.R. 3864

Mr. LaTOURETTE. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 3864) to reform the management practices of the General Accounting Office, and for other purposes, as amended.

Mr. LaTOURETTE

Mr. LaTOURETTE. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this time. I rise today in the strongest support of the Water Resources Development Act of 1996. On behalf of the people that I represent back in Ohio, I want to commend the gentleman from Pennsylvania, Chairman Shuster, and chairman of our subcommittee, the gentleman from New York, Congressman Boehlert, and also the ranking members of our fine committee, the gentleman from Minnesota, Congressman Oberstar, and the gentleman from Pennsylvania, Mr. Borski, for making this a truly bipartisan bill that we can all be proud of. This bill is good for the water resources of the Nation, it is good for the environment, and for the Great Lakes it is great. Many of the ports and harbors within the Great Lakes are suffering from light loading problems, where because of our inability to open late, dispose of dredge spoils, contaminated and otherwise, we have a situation that makes our ports and harbors noncompetitive. The environmental dredging section of this particular bill will again allow the Great Lakes' ports and harbors to be competitive for areas like Eastlake and Ashtabula and also the City of Cleveland, OH. I thank the chair and committee for bringing this bill forward today in this manner, and I would urge every Member of this House to vote in favor of its passage.

Mr. LaTOURETTE

Mr. LaTOURETTE. Mr. Chairman, I was prepared to rise in opposition to the gentleman from California's amendment today; and I, like my colleagues from the Great Lakes, appreciate his offer to withdraw the amendment. Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the support that Chairman Rogers has shown in controlling the sea lamprey in the Great Lakes by providing level funding in this bill of over $8 million for the sea lamprey program. The bill before us, however, already redirects over $4 million to the Department of Commerce for administration by NOAA. This in my opinion and the opinion of others from the Great Lakes region, jeopardizes a program that has been very successful, so successful in fact that we have seen an eradication to over 90 percent from record levels of the sea lamprey. For those in the Chamber who are not familiar with the sea lamprey, let me assure you that it is not something you want in your backyard. In the Great Lakes we have seen an invasion of this eel-like nonindigenous species. In addition to being just a hideous-looking thing, it is parasitic and during its parasitic period can devour between 10 and 40 pounds of fish. Before the creation of this commission, the sea lamprey virtually destroyed our entire region's prosperous recreational and commercial fisheries, practically wiped it out. We cannot backslide on these efforts. I look forward to not only working with the chairman, but also the gentleman from California and Members on both sides of the aisle.

Mr. LaTOURETTE

Mr. LaTOURETTE. Mr. Speaker, Monsignor Robert Blair, who passed away last month, was a clergyman in the Cleveland diocese for more than half a century. While many were saddened by his death, so many more were enriched by his warm heart, his full life and his unparalleled devotion to the church. At his funeral last month, Auxiliary Bishop A. James Quinn delivered a thoughtful, uplifting address that captures the spirit of Monsignor Robert Blair. I wanted to submit it to the Congressional Record as a lasting tribute to a remarkable man who, in the words of Auxiliary Bishop Quinn, ``used well the time God gave him.'' What follows are the June 11, 1996, remarks by Auxiliary Bishop A. James Quinn. Tribute to Monsignor Robert Blair We are not here out of sympathy. Another mood prevails. When someone like Monsignor Robert Blair leaves the rest of us behind to join the Lord in heaven, it leaves me with a sense that something must be said in terms of gratitude about graces that came to us through one of God's very best. We give thanks to God, therefore, for the life and friendship of Monsignor Robert Blair, in our lives and in the lives of all touched by his priesthood. The readings Bob chose for his funeral speak eloquently of the spirit of his life and the vision of his priesthood. His readings reflect a priest who walked by faith, not sight. He faithfully served four bishops, but only one master. From simple things like birds and wildflowers, or coins and horses, he drew lessons of what to run after, with the wisdom of one who trusts in the Lord, knowing he has a dwelling place awaiting him in heaven. When I was a kid hanging around an old fire house on West 112th Street in Cleveland, I came to understand how pairs of boots became sentimental to firemen. The boots of those lost in the line of duty or curbed by injuries were revered, not wasted or neglected. Firemen's boots, as hand-me-downs, met respect, like numbered jerseys in halls of fame. They especially respected those who died with their boots on. To die in service, in the line of duty, being what they were trained to be, putting life on the line! Such values involve commitment, faithfulness, loyalty, dedication... and lots of love of who you are and what you do. Let's ``rap'' a bit about Monsignor Blair who cherished his priesthood and couldn't quit, not even in retirement, because of who and what he was. The story of his vocation. I think of Frost's ``The Road Not Taken.'' ``Two roads diverged in a yellow wood. And sorry I could not travel both.'' Bob, and his brother Ted before him, must have wondered what path in life to take, knowing ``how way leads on to way'' and there is ``no coming back.'' Two roads diverged in a wood, and Bob took the one less traveled. And that made all the difference! For him, and for us, it made a difference when young Bob Blair chose priesthood. The Story of every man's vocation? I venture Bob could have been anything he wanted. He had smarts, personality, wit, enthusiasm . . . even good connections. But Bob chose priesthood . . . more than once because he found himself in several classes due to tuberculosis. Bob chose priesthood, and, hand to the plow, never looked back. Bob gushed the great grace of conviction that he had chosen well. Actually, it was God who chose Bob. But Bob accepted God's call, thank God. We all have stories to tell. Bob Blair added color and fun to life, but never at the cost of responsibility or pastoral care. He spent himself on people and on projects that prospered people. With all his wit Bob was serious minded and had volumes to preach about things of moment, things that make a difference. In some ways Bob was a visionary, but a realist, too. He knew how not to let a vision sink over someone's ``Why bother.'' His blend of wit and wisdom kept his visions soluble in reality, so not to curdle into some forsaken sediment of impracticality. Other higher up might get the credit, but we know Bob made things happen. He made a difference! Like you, I'll miss Bob because he was a friend, not just one of those acquaintances we make in life, but a friend who understands what is literal in life. He good naturedly absorbed sharp edges and burrs that surface what is me and you. For all his fun loving ways Bob was a gentleman. Not formal or fussy, not stiff or starched, but a fun-loving gentleman who saw the best in life before he let the worst get him down. A touch of class wrapped in laughter! Like you, I account it a great grace we met. I thank God. I learned. I laughed. I struck it rich to be included among his friends. And so did you, I suspect. These days since Wednesday past I skim a book of memories that run deep, and swell my estimation of the value that is friendship, a friendship that I pray is friendship ever more. I treasure the measure of time we worked together, at the old Archbishop's house, in the Chancery and Cathedral. I hope future years will not allow this brook of memory to trickle out of speed except to soak deeper into the recesses of gratitude. After all, old friendships are best because they withstand the tests of time and cross currents and counter-currents of life. As surely as the golden sun melts down to night, gold here can never last. But good friendships last forever in resurrection life. Speaking of friends, by now Bob's paired off with Frank Carney. He liked Frank: the repartee was always suburb. While different lights led them, both were equipped for friendly mental combat. As you know, Bob enjoyed placing an occasional wager on some nag a tout or two would recommend as fast of hoof. But down the home stretch of Bob's own distance, his pace was slowed by sickness. Bob was thoroughbred fast until the evening of life when strokes struck, sight flexed and diabetes reaped its toll. It's painful to witness a worker bee in health's gloaming. Disability plays treason to future hopes and dreams. In sickness, life's space became so confined that Bob could scarcely enjoy a view except from a wheelchair. Bob had to count on family and friends who love him so, good friends like Bob Cronenwett and Maggie Patton and his dear, fond Brigade of Captain's Men, so loyal and true. They'll miss him, sure. Time takes its toll. Why, what is inland in nature becomes ocean isle, with eddies swirling around what once was mountain peak. Why not time's toll on man? Time levels snowy peaks to running brooks. No wonder time took its toll on Bob. Ah, but Bob used well the time God gave him. He enjoyed the blessings of today, every day, not wasting the joy of a moment on what was past or could be future. Perhaps most importantly, Bob didn't entrust to time anything he would need forever. That is to say, he was not only kind but generous. He once said to me when I spoke of his personal generosity that he sometimes thought it scary, how when he gave away, God returned him twice or more. Of course God said it would be so. Bob teaches me, and you, to trust and give more. Even now Bob's priesthood is not silenced but speaks through the beauty of this Cathedral he loved and served. The Cathedral he embellished marks the site of his priestly ordination and final funeral rite. How very fitting! His priesthood speaks, too, at the airport chapel, his beloved Regina Caeli. Looking back, Bob dusted our days with the pollen of cheerful conviction that there is plenty of work to do. He needn't be told ``what'' because Bob was a self starter who foiled challenges with wit. Challenge was invitation. The impossible intrigued him. And success was his hallmark, be it a parish festival or a million and more in renovation. Who else would tackle an airport chapel and the ACLU? Others would say: ``Why bother?'' I think heaven gives a glimpse of vision, don't you, to those who risk the strength of God to do what they can't do? Labors of love? The cathedral renovation and the airport chapel, while not the most of what he did in ministry, should install him into the diocese's Hall of Fame. Bob Blair was a modest coin collector who knew how to option short gains into capital investment. His racer's instinct at the mutuals gave him an edge at the bank. Really, God was his broker and the Church was his escrow. Bob retired, but never retired. He worked on. Then, like a farmer at planting time, working, came the call that dinner is on the table! A feast and he's expected. How leave off work with so much to do and time's light dimming? It's not easy to yield to the drift of age or illness, nor to bow and accept the end of labors love. Yet the planter reluctantly thrusts his hoe into the ground and heads for home, the home from whence he came. The Master calls. We hate to die. Only in faith do we deny the lie that dead is dead. In faith, the grave that draws the living avows new life beyond. Then, again, Bob always liked fresh starts. I wonder now what new projects will rise in heaven? I pray Bob up there continues to remember us whom he served so well in ministry and friendship. We all have projects that could use his vision, wit and wisdom. I pray he will strengthen our resolve and even excite fresh ideas of what can be done with gifts God gives us. Soon enough, when we break through the pane of time and wade ashore on heaven's side, Bob will meet and greet us. No doubt introduce us to his new visions, this time beatific in size. Tomorrow has come forever to Bob who breezes with Ted and Frank and even Solomon in all his glory. Folks, in retirement, and from a wheelchair, Monsignor Robert Blair died with his boots on. Big boots to fill. Empty boots now that challenge us to fill. When two roads diverge Bob, with wisdom and wit, often took the one less traveled by. That made a difference. He made a difference. Sympathy aside, today. Quite frankly, we gratefully thank God that Monsignor Robert Blair made a difference in our lives. And now we pray, God rest his soul until we friends come the path he traveled by.''

Mr. LaTOURETTE

Mr. LaTOURETTE. Mr. Speaker, today I wish to draw your attention to the efforts of some extraordinary young people from my district who have embarked on an ambitious and unique project. They want to erect a monument in Washington, DC, to pay tribute to our sons and daughters who have lost their lives while serving their country, but not in the arena of war. I have introduced a bill, the Pyramid of Remembrance for the Forgotten Ones Act of 1996, to help them realize their dream. Our country is home to many war memorials--from the Civil War to Vietnam. Some of these memorials are located in our hometowns, some are located here in our Nation's Capital. What we do not have, however, is one collective memorial for those whose sacrifice does not fit into a one tidy category--one that honors those whose lives were lost in undeclared conflicts. The Pyramid of Remembrance will fill that void. This will be the monument to honor our sons and daughters in the Army, Navy, Air Force, Marines, and Coast Guard. It will honor those who lost their lives in places like Somalia and Bosnia, and in peacetime training missions. While we may not perceive these as combat fatalities in a technical sense, the loss of these lives is just as great, as is the service and devotion to country from these young men and women. Three years ago, the students of Mary Porter's art concept class at Riverside High School in Painesville, OH, began work on this project. The students were haunted by images of the body of a United States soldier being dragged through the streets of Mogadishu, Somalia, and decided to design a monument to honor the victims of such tragedies. Several proposals were presented, but the students settled on a 30-foot high, four-sided pyramid made of red or porphyry marble. One side of the monument will feature engraved symbols for the Army, Navy, Air Force, Marines, and Coast Guard; the others will have the words ``Faith, Honor and Remembrance'' etched into them. At all times, water will stream down the sides of the pyramid to symbolize that this is a living monument. While the students who initially planned the monument have all graduated and moved onto college, the underclassmen at Riverside High School have been unwilling to let this project die. They have enlisted the support of area veterans groups, have had architectural renderings of their monument completed, and have set up a Pyramid of Remembrance Foundation to assist in fundraising efforts. The students I have met with do not want this to simply be a Riverside High School project, or an Ohio project. They intend to enlist the assistance of high school and college students and young people across the country in 21st century style, via the Internet and the power of MTV. They want this to be a monument inspired and created by the youth of America, a tangible contribution from their generation. They see this as a way of proving that our Nation's youth--Generation X--has a deep commitment to country and community service. No Federal funds will be used for the establishment of this monument. These students realize they face an uphill battle, and that many obstacles stand in their way. But they are undeterred and accept the challenge that every great American success story began with the same four words: It can't be done. I leave you with the thoughts of these special students, the kind of young people America should be proud to call its own: The purpose of the Pyramid of Remembrance is to acknowledge the supreme sacrifice made by military personnel when engaged in non-combat situations. The lives of these men and women are just as valuable to our nation and their families as those heroes that died in armed conflicts. It matters not whether a military life is lost in basic training or in a peacekeeping mission abroad; a life was still lost in service to the United States of America.

Mr. LaTOURETTE

Mr. LaTOURETTE. Mr. Speaker, today the Congress presents its highest honor, the Congressional Gold Medal, to the Reverend Billy Graham and his wife, Ruth. It is fitting that such an honor be bestowed upon the Reverend Graham, as he has played such a pivotal and selfless role in shaping and maintaining the moral fiber of our country. Perhaps Reverend Graham's greatest appeal is that his message pertains to all and excludes no one. Here in our Nation's capital, the party of Lincoln often speaks of the big tent, and how everyone is welcomed into it. While I believe that to be true, I also accept that our tent, when compared to the tent the Reverend Graham has built over the years, is more like a pup tent. He has the capacity and love to reach millions through the word of God, and has made that his lifetime cause. The Reverend Graham instills in us the importance of hope, salvation, goodness and spiritual renewal, and how these measures require a lifetime commitment. He does not preach by whim or trend; in the Reverend Graham's world family values is not a recent phenomenon, but rather a way of life. For those who have lost their way and whose faith has been tested or questioned, the Reverend Graham is always there to welcome them back, to begin the process of spiritual rebirth with new vigor. Whether he is acting as an unofficial spiritual adviser to one of the many U.S. presidents he has counseled over the years or preaching to the youth of America in one of his many crusades, the Reverend Graham has an uncanny ability to connect with people. Unlike so many evangelists whose sincerity seems manipulated for television audiences and who have become seduced by greed and power, the Reverend Graham has never strayed from the ethical, moral, and spiritual highroad. The only thing scandalous about this great man is that his life and preaching is devoid of scandal, which in this day and age is rare. When I think of Rev. Billy Graham, I think of him as perhaps the best elder statesman America has known. I also think of his crusade in Cleveland a few years back, when he transformed the cavernous Cleveland Municipal Stadium into a massive sanctuary, touching and enriching the spiritual lives of so many. And, I think about the wonderful partnership he has with his wife, Ruth, which is proof positive that behind every great man is a great woman. On this day when we award the Grahams the Congressional Gold Medal, we also give thanks for their years of devotion and inspiration, and for a constant affirmation of all that is right with America. I have always believed our country has been touched and blessed by the hand of God. Today, we as a nation acknowledge that we also have been touched and blessed by the hand of the Rev. Billy Graham.

Mr. LaTOURETTE

Mr. LaTOURETTE. Mr. Chairman, today I rise in strong support of H.R. 2974, the Crimes Against Children and Elderly Persons Increased Punishment Act. This measure will amend the Violent Crime Control Act of 1994 and toughen the penalties against those who commit crimes against our nation's most vulnerable--our children and senior citizens. It will cover crimes of assault, homicide, rape and--perhaps most important of all to our Nation's seniors--adds the crime of robbery to the Federal definition of violent crime. Under current Federal sentencing guidelines, sentencing is determined by pre-set guidelines where each criminal act is ranked and given an appropriate sentence. Right now there are 43 different levels. This measure will automatically increase the severity of a crime by five sentencing levels, and in most cases nearly double the minimum and maximum sentences for these thugs. Also, a judge can take into account a host of other circumstances when determining an appropriate sentence, such as if a gun was used, or if a person was assaulted during the commission of another crime, or if the criminal has previously been convicted of a serious crime. All these circumstances would add months or years to the base sentence. I was a county prosecutor before coming to Congress. I distinctly remember a case my office tried involving the rape of an elderly woman. This woman was alone in her mobile home, some thug broke in, shoved a pillow over her face to muffle her cries, and viciously raped her. The victim, in her seventies, played ``possum'' so her deranged attacker would think she was dead. It worked. The rapist fled, thinking he had not only raped but killed the woman. Fortunately, he later was apprehended and convicted. In fact, this was the first case in my county when DNA evidence was used. While this crime was heinous and despicable under any circumstance, it truly was--in this instance--a crime against the truly helpless. While we were able to put the rapist away for a long time, it is inherently wrong that he was eligible to receive the same sentence as if he had attacked a strapping 40-year-old teamster who at least has a prayer of defending himself. We have heard such horror stories of crime in our country, crimes where our children are shot and killed in gang-related violence and drive-by shootings, and raped by the most perverse in our society. We also hear alarming tales of our senior citizens living in fear, unable to protect themselves in their own homes, where their personal safety should be secure. We need to focus our efforts on punishing those who choose to violate others, who cannot abide by the thin blue line that separates our law- abiding society from those bent on harm and destruction. We also need to send a serious message to anyone who thinks they can commit crimes and be treated with a slap on the wrist: Those days were over. By doing this, we can send a message to our Nation's children and our elderly--we are trying to make your world as safe as possible, and we will do all within our power to protect you. If you are victimized, at the very least we must assure you that the criminals get the punishment they deserve.

Mr. LATOURETTE

Mr. LATOURETTE. Mr. Speaker, the U.S. Coast Guard earlier this year presented its highest lifesaving honor, the Gold Lifesaving Medal, to Kenneth M. Bauer of Mentor, OH. On the afternoon of June 21, 1995, Bauer was mowing the backyard of his father's home on Thunderbird Drive in Mentor-on-the-Lake when he heard cries for help coming from Lake Erie. He could see two men about 200 yards offshore, both struggling to retrieve an inflatable raft. With no thought to his own safety, Bauer grabbed two floatation devices and ventured into the 65-degree waters, battling the merciless, 5-foot Lake Erie waves. I would like to think if we were faced with the same circumstances as Bauer--two men pleading for help in the choppy waters of Lake Erie, unable to reach their raft, we would react in the same manner and place the lives and safety of others above our own. However, I think we know that would not be the case. Some would react with cowardice, indifference, paralyzing fear or panic. Fortunately, Bauer did not. He swam out into the lake, gave one of the personal floatation devices to the nearest victim, Tim Novak, and continued farther out to reach the second victim, Christopher Arhar. By the time Bauer reached Arhar, he had slipped under the water. Bauer didn't give up. Instead, he continued to dive under the waves until he reached Arhar, dragging him to the surface by his arm. For 15 minutes, without any flotation device of his own, Bauer held onto Arhar, keeping his head above water. Tragically, a wave crashed down and Arhar was ripped from Bauer's grasp. Again, he searched for Arhar, but could not find him. Exhausted, Bauer returned to shore. What Ken Bauer attempted to do that afternoon was not only heroic, but miraculous. One man, Novak, owes his life to Bauer. Another, Arhar, sadly lost his, withering in the icy grip of the lake that has claimed so many over the years. Shortly after the heroic rescue, Bauer spoke to reporters about the last words he heard from Arhar before his struggle ended: ``Please help me.'' I would imagine Bauer has relived this scene in his mind countless times, and maybe even second-guessed himself. ``Please help me'' are words that would haunt anyone. However, this extraordinary man should know that he did all within his power to save these two men, far more than most would do. At that moment in life when Bauer faced a true gut- check, he showed a valiant, selfless side we all must admire. Bauer possesses the proudest of legacies of what it means to be an American--about our absolute necessity to help others in times of dire crisis. He restores our faith that good deeds indeed happen. This is one that will not go unnoticed. There are times in life when we need affirmation that ours is a Nation made up of compassionate, thoughtful people. Sometimes we need to be reminded that Americans do extraordinary deeds for others every day, not because they seek recognition, but because everyday life requires it. What Ken Bauer did last June 21 was, by definition, an extraordinary deed. On behalf of the residents of the 19th District of Ohio, he deserves our highest praise and thanks.

Mr. LaTOURETTE

Mr. LaTOURETTE. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in strong support of H.R. 842, the Truth in Budgeting Act. This is a measure that will affect every American who buys gasoline in his or her car or buys airline tickets. Americans currently pay an 18.4-cent tax on gasoline and a 10- percent tax on airline tickets. This money, approximately $80 million a day, is placed into the transportation trust fund and is supposed to be used to pay for urgently needed infrastructure such as maintenance of our highways. Instead, the Federal Government for years has been hoarding much of this tax money and using it to mask the true size of the deficit. This means the Federal Government is essentially stealing from Americans each time they travel. What does this all mean to Ohio drivers? The Ohio Department of Transportation estimates that Ohio sends about $1 billion in Federal gas taxes to Washington annually. Unfortunately, the State gets back only about $600 million of that money. Of the remaining millions, $345 million is used to hide the size of the deficit while the rest of the money disappears into what ODOT calls a bureaucratic black hole inside the Beltway. Mr. Chairman, I urge support and passage of H.R. 842.