Buck McKeon

Mr. McKEON

Mr. McKEON. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of H.R. 123, the English Language Empowerment Act. H.R. 123 provides encouragement for immigrants to learn English. Today, when many immigrants reach our shores, they settle in neighborhoods largely inhabited by people who speak their native language. This is understandable, as it is much easier and more comfortable to associate with people of the same culture speaking a familiar language. However, to gain the full benefits of coming to this great land, it is imperative to learn the English language. Learning English is necessary in order for immigrants to build a better future for themselves and their families. Many of the bill's opponents claim that H.R. 123 will isolate our recent immigrants from the rest of society. When in fact, it accomplishes the exact opposite--it brings us together as a nation united under one common language. Again, I urge my colleagues to support H.R. 123.

Mr. McKEON

Mr. McKEON. Mr. Speaker, I recently completed my latest series of town meetings across California's 25th Congressional District. These meetings not only provide my constituents the opportunity to discuss issues of national and local concern, but they give me the chance to meet and interact with the citizens I represent as well. Recently, I had the honor of meeting Mr. Howard F. Simmon of Lancaster, CA. Mr. Simon had never before been to a town hall meeting, yet managed to attend this latest round of discussions. His dedication to this Nation is embodied in a poem he presented me at this latest series of meetings. I would like to read that poem today. Justly be proud of America, ``Tis all that it is, and more, The land of the free, And the home of the brave, As 'twas said in the olden lore; So justly be proud of America, And rest on it, it's true, Where the sky spans o'er, From shore to shore It's a beautiful land, A wonderful land, The land of the free, and more.

Mr. McKEON

Mr. McKEON. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 2428, the Bill Emerson Good Samaritan Food Donation Act. This is an important piece of legislation and so appropriately named for our dear friend, Bill Emerson. H.R. 2428 is designed to encourage the donation of food and grocery products to nonprofit organizations engaged in distribution of such items to the needy. The bill will relieve concerns over liability that currently exist and that deter companies and individuals from donating as freely as they would like. Bill Emerson had a keen interest in nutrition programs and spent a considerable amount of time focusing and working to improve nutrition programs during his congressional career. The Bill Emerson Good Samaritan Food Donation Act compliments the existing programs nicely by encouraging community involvement in the effort to feed those in need. Again, this bill is a fitting tribute to Bill Emerson who is already greatly missed by this body. Enactment of this legislation will ensure that his work will continue to be recognized, especially by those involved in efforts to feed the needy, for many, many years to come. Mr. Speaker, I urge support for H.R. 2428, the Bill Emerson Good Samaritan Act.

Mr. McKEON

Mr. McKEON. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman from Illinois for yielding. Mr. Chairman, I was sitting in my office following the debate, and I heard the same old untrue tirade of how we are cutting student lending and how students will not be able to get help to go to college. I do not know how many young people we have scared into not even trying to get into school because of saying this untrue thing. It seems to me that there is enough difference philosophically and politically between us on both sides of the aisle that we can make our points while still telling the truth, and I would implore that we do that. That we not scare people needlessly with untruths. Let me just give a new facts about student loans. This bill that we are working on right now, the Labor-HHS-Education appropriation bill for Federal student aid, this year increases Federal student aid $2.4 billion to $40.7 billion from the $38.7 last year. We continue to make student aid one of our priorities, and we increase funding for all of the major student aid programs. Just a few examples: Pell grants we increase to $5.3 billion. That is a $428 million increase. The Pell grant maximum we raise to $2,500 from the $2,470. This is the highest maximum ever provided over the maximum that we increased last year. The work-study program we increase to $685 million. That is over $68 million increase from last year, higher than the President's request. The TRIO Program we increase to $500 million. That is a $37 million increase. The bill appropriately makes limited reductions in duplicative and outdated student aid assistance programs, but no student will have his or her aid decreased as a result of the bill. Student aid funding in combination with Federal entitlements like student loans will increase aid available to students, as I said, this year by $2.4 billion. So please ignore the false rhetoric and misleading statements regarding student aid in this bill. This is a good bill.

Mr. McKEON

Mr. McKEON. Mr. Speaker, today Mr. Goodling and I have introduced a House Resolution dealing with the Student Right to Know and Campus Security Act. On June 6, 1996, the Subcommittee on Postsecondary Education, Training and Life-Long Learning held a hearing with respect to the Issue of campus crime. We were particularly interested in hearing about the Department of Education's implementation of Section 485(f) of the Higher Education Act, known as the Campus Security Act of 1990. The Student Right to Know and Campus Security Act signed into law by President Bush required colleges and universities throughout the United States to provide their students information on campus crime statistics and school policies related to campus security. This was a first step in providing students necessary information if they were to protect themselves from becoming victims of campus crime. During the course of the hearing, some concerns were raised that colleges and universities were not accurately reporting their crime statistics. In addition, several witnesses did not believe that the Department of Education considered the enforcement of the Campus Security Act a priority. The resolution we have introduced today directs the Department of Education to make the monitoring of compliance and enforcement of the provisions of the Campus Security Act a priority of the Department. It is imperative that colleges and universities comply with the requirements of the Campus Security Act and the Department of Education needs to give priority status to their enforcement responsibilities if we are going to accomplish our goal of protecting students from crime on our Nation's college campuses.

Mr. McKEON

Mr. McKEON. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the gentleman from Missouri, Mr. Clay, for yielding this time to me and also for setting up this effort on behalf of Mr. Emerson. It seems like we spend a lot of time on this floor berating each other and talking down the institution of Congress. I think it is wonderful that we are able to spend a little time now remembering some of the good things that happen here, and especially I think it has been interesting to me to sit here and listen to the many good things said about Mr. Emerson. He has been a real inspiration to me. I think he has been to many of us, and that is why so many of us are here on the floor today. I kind of thought that I had a special relationship with him, and so many of my colleagues have talked about instances that they had with him. I do not know how he was able to spread himself around so much. I first saw him when he fought hard against our leadership last year to preserve the task force on hunger. As the gentleman from California [Mr. Hunter] said, there were times that he fought if he only had two on his side. I think he was alone at that time., and he fought very hard because he believed in helping the underdog, those who needed help. Later I had the opportunity of serving on the task force on disaster that was set up by the Speaker, and he and the gentleman from Illinois [Mr. Durbin] headed up that task force. In serving with him on that, I had the opportunity to go to his office, and it is full of memorabilia. If Members have not visited his office, they should go do it. He has the picture there of him and the gentleman from Pennsylvania [Mr. Kanjorski] when they were helping carry the Congressmen out of here when they served as pages. He also served here as a staff member and then served as a Member of the House. And he loved the House and he loved each of the Members of the House and he loved all his constituents and his family. He had a great capacity for love. When we had our kickoff for the 104th Congress, I had the opportunity of setting up some of the day's activities, and the first thing we started with was the prayer service in the morning. I asked him if he would head that up and he did a fantastic job. He did not suffer from ego. He was just here to serve, and it was just a wonderful thing to work with him. I think the thing that hit me the most about Bill Emerson was the last few months here when he was fighting this illness, and every time I have talked to him he has been an encouragement to me. He did not talk about his suffering. I know he was going through great pain, but he always had a big smile and always was uplifting. Fantastic. Reminds me of the words of John Donne: No man is an island. No man stands alone. Each man's joy is joy to me. Each man's grief is my own. We need one another, so I will defend each man as my brother, each man as my friend. He was a great friend. He epitomized those words. We will miss him greatly, but I will always remember Bill Emerson. MR. CLAY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from Michigan [Miss Collins].

Mr. McKEON

Mr. McKEON. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 3230, the Department of Defense Authorization Act. As many Members know, the decline in defense spending that began in the aftermath of the cold war has drastically accelerated under the Clinton administration. Troop levels, air wings, and naval vessels have all been impacted. At the same time, demands on our military are increasing and we must ensure that our military can effectively respond to these demands. I want to inform Members who might be concerned about the modernization levels in the bill that the President cut these levels after promising last year that modernization spending would rise. In fact, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff testified in support of a $60 million funding level for modernization accounts. Because we are reducing our overall troop levels and forward military presence, it is critical to finance these needs. H.R. 3230 will arm our bombers and fighters with smart weapons and protect our ships from missile attack. I urge support for this legislation.

Mr. McKEON

Mr. McKEON. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 2066, the Healthy Meals for Children Act. Last June, after the publication of the final regulations for the Healthy Meals for Healthy Americans Act, I was contacted by school food service providers from my congressional district. One particular individual, Richard Deburgh, director of food services for the Glendale Unified School District, expressed his concern about the regulations in a letter urging that we ``support the dietary guidelines but oppose dietary commandments.'' This sentiment was echoed by others who contacted me to express their concern that the regulations would affect their ability to prepare meals which were not only healthy and met the dietary guidelines, but which children would eat. As we all know, the same foods do not appeal to all children in all areas of the country. It is important to allow local school food service providers the freedom to provide students with meals they will eat. Mr. Speaker, those individuals who work with children each day in local schools know best what they will eat. They live in the local community, talk to the children each day as they pass through the cafeteria line, and have a vested interest in the health of these children. We need to provide them with the flexibility to design and serve healthy meals which children will eat. H.R. 2066 provides schools with this flexibility and at the same time, maintains the requirement that such meals meet the dietary guidelines for Americans. I urge my colleagues to support this important legislation.

Mr. McKEON

Mr. McKEON. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to briefly address a particular provision contained in H.R. 3019 which I believe should be implemented with careful attention by the Department of Education. The provision renders institutions of higher education ineligible for the Pell Grant Program if they have been eliminated from the student loan programs due to high default rates. Default rate calculations have been the subject of much debate and I anticipate that the debate will continue during the next reauthorization of the Higher Education Act. As we all know, the Department of Education has had problems calculating these rates accurately in the past and I would not want to see an institution and its students harmed due to an incorrect calculation. I also believe that the Department of Education, by working in consultation with institutions, should implement the exception categories included in the provision in an expeditious and cost effective manner. Institutions should not be forced to spend huge sums to prove that they, in fact, qualify under the exception categories in the provision. A careful and thoughtful implementation process on the part of the Department of Education will help avoid many of the problems encountered in the past. Again, we will be closely reviewing these types of important issues as we begin the process of reauthorizing the Higher Education Act.

Mr. McKEON

Mr. McKEON. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in support of H.R. 842, and commend Chairman Shuster for the work he has done to bring this bill to the floor. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in support of H.R. 842, legislation to separate the four transportation trust funds from the unified Federal Budget. Before being elected to Congress, I served on a city council and listened to many residents who were concerned about funding basic infrastructure needs. These same citizens are under the mistaken impression that the money they spend every day on gasoline excise taxes will be used to improve roads, bridges, airports, and waterways across the country. It is simply wrong to use the revenue dedicated to these trust funds for anything other than their original purpose--and we can act today to correct this matter. There are billions of dollars of unmet infrastructure needs in the United States and the sad thing is that we already have the money to pay for these projects--only it is not being spent. The cost to the taxpayer and our Nation to rebuild these roads will only increase if we continue to delay taking the four transportation trust funds off budget. I urge a ``yes'' vote.

Mr. McKEON

Mr. McKEON. Mr. Speaker, on Friday, March 22, 1996, I was in California, and therefore, was absent for consideration of H.R. 125. If I has been present for recorded vote No. 92 on passage of H.R. 125, I would have voted ``aye.'' H.R. 125, the Gun Crime Enforcement and Second Amendment Restoration Act, repeals the misguided prohibition on the manufacture, transfer, and possession of semiautomatic assault weapons. I have consistently opposed any ban on these types of weapons. The notion that assault weapons are disproportionately used in committing crimes is false. The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms estimates that there is approximately one assault weapon traced for every 4,000 violent crimes reported to the police. Clearly, these are not the weapons of choice for criminals. Furthermore, I believe that crime deterrence lies not in gun control but in the enforcement and strengthening of our laws. For example, H.R. 125 enhances our laws by creating mandatory minimum prison sentences for violent or drug-related crimes committed with a gun and establishing Federal task forces in each U.S. attorney's district to coordinate State and local law enforcement officers in Federal prosecution efforts. Finally, despite predictions that the assault weapon ban would significantly reduce crime in America, it has become apparent that, in fact, the only effect the ban has had was to place more restrictions on honest law-abiding gunowners.

Mr. McKEON

Mr. McKEON. That $18 billion, by the way, is just in 1 year.

Mr. McKEON. Mr. Speaker, as my colleagues know, Mr. Cunningham just made a good point on the debt. Our country is a little over 200 years old, and the first 200 years, the debt increased very, very slowly, until, at the end of 200 years, we had a debt in 1980 of about a trillion dollars. And then it started accelerating because spending accelerated, taxes were cut, revenue increased, but spending went up even greater. And so from 1980 to 1982 that debt increased from $1 trillion to $4 trillion. And then in the last 2\1/2\ years, 3 years, it has gone up even faster, now to $5 trillion. So it does not take a rocket scientist to figure if the curve is like this, and then it goes like this, what we can look forward to. When we are talking about education, we are talking about children, and I have 6 children, I have 11 grandchildren, and one more on the way, that I know of. And you know I think that many times they, the other side, paints us as not caring. Well, if I did not care, I would not be here, and if I did not care about those children and grandchildren and nieces and nephews that I have, I would not be here. Mr. Speaker, I think it is important that we get a handle on our fiscal responsibility. Maybe these 760 programs would be good, and maybe they should all be funded fully, and if we had the money, maybe that is something that we should do. I personally think that is probably not the case, and I think we are on the right track in trying to look at these programs, especially when we find out that they are also showing very poor fiscal responsibility. But we do not have the kind of money. When we are in that kind of debt, to pass that $187,000 onto that new granddaughter that I just had born does not make very good sense to me, and that is what she is going to have to pay in her lifetime just to serve interest on the debt, if we do not get this taken care of. You know, we used to spend--hardworking people, the people that settled this country, the pioneers that moved across the plains to establish this country, did not look to the Government to help them, You know, if their wagon wheel broke, they did not send a telegram or a Pony Express rider to Washington to ask somebody to come out and fix their wagon wheel. You know, they took care of themselves. And when the President said the other night in the State of the Union something about the effect that people--it was terrible that they should have to depend on themselves. You know, I think some way we missed the boat. Mr. Speaker, I think we should also mention tonight a little bit about student loans. You know, there has been a lot of talk about how we killed student loans, and I have some real concerns that there are young people out there that maybe will not even go to school this year because they will believe some of the rhetoric that they have heard emanating from Washington, that when the other side says that we have killed student loans they may think what is the use; you know, why even try? I think that we ought to set the record straight, that, if anything, we have increased student loans from $24 billion to $36 billion in the next 7 years, and every single student that goes to postsecondary education, that applies for a loan, can get a loan. Whether they are poor, whether they are wealthy, has nothing to do with it. The money is there, it is available, we increased that money, and every single student can get a student loan, and I think it is important for us to clarify that.

Mr. McKEON. I appreciate the opportunity of being here with you tonight and participating in this special order. You know, sometimes the best intentions can do the worst harm. When we attempt to help, we often simply burden. When we attempt to inspire, we may only discourage. With all the helping that the Federal Government has done in the last 30 to 40 years, you would think that the previous majority should have admitted that something was not working and that some of these programs maybe could have been eliminated. Perhaps we needed to explore other methods of giving our children the first-rate education that they really need and deserve. You know, a few weeks ago Chairman Goodling held a hearing about what was working in public education. A few months earlier Mr. Hoekstra held a similar hearing in Chicago to highlight public and private schools in low-income areas that were successfully educating their students. I personally have visited several schools in my district and elsewhere that are having a positive impact on children. The good news is there are many good things that are happening in education, and they are working quite well under the jurisdiction of local school boards and administrators and teachers and parents that really care and want to make things happen, and they are able to do that across this land. They do not have to wait until someone from Washington decides what is best for them and what program we decide they should participate in. These hearings and site visits have all led to the same conclusions about what factors are behind that success; namely, success is not a matter of how many Federal programs the school participates in or how much money a school spends per student. Rather, the picture that is quickly developing from these hearings and site visits is that committed parents, strong local leadership, and an emphasis on basics is the recurring theme behind successful schooling. The success stories that we have seen are about what local administrators, parents, and teachers are able to do together to make academic achievement a reality in their schools for their children. This message, however, is not being heard in Washington. You know, we held a press conference a few days ago, and we had a pile of paperwork, you know, the chart there that you have of the 760 programs. This paperwork was only what was required for about a third of those programs. And yet it was a pile stacked this high. The Clintons believe that it takes a village to raise a child. What we have found is it really takes a village to fill out the paperwork. Duplicative Federal programs begat State paperwork, State paperwork begat local paperwork, and local paperwork takes teachers away from their job of teaching our children. I spent time on a school board, and I know how much work is done to write grants, how much work is done to fill out reports to send somewhere, and, hopefully, maybe somebody reads them. You never really knew. You just knew that you had to fill out the paperwork. The out-of- control paperwork load required for these programs too often leaves out rural and poor school districts that do not have the sophisticated grant writers, so they simply do not apply for the programs. There has been such a severe focus on an investment in bureaucracy surrounding education that we really have failed our children. It should be an assault to our sensibilities, with the massive increase in spending citizens have supported through their taxes over the years. You know, it is interesting in this chart here, it shows, and I do not know if we can focus in on that down in the corner, it shows the taxpayers, and the money goes from the taxpayers to Washington, siphons through those 760 programs and then eventually some of its reaches the children. When I first came here, I figured out that from California, just in rough numbers, we send over $2 billion a year to Washington, more than comes back to California, to benefit the children just by running it through this siphon here in Washington. We saw we still have a great deal of work to do in identifying the breadth and depth of Federal intrusion here. This 760 that we have, I would add, is we know is not complete. We know we have to do more, but we are going to work on this until we complete this project. You known, we do not currently know how much of each Federal dollar gets down to the local classroom after the large amounts are siphoned off here in Washington. We do know the cost is extremely high. Just one example, the cost of Boston University. According to their provost, the university spent 14 weeks and about 2,700 employees hours completing the paperwork required to complete funding for title IV. They were hampered by the use of separate definitions in 26 separate schedules required to complete their application. They were slowed by repeated corrections and clarifications requested by the department. In the end, after spending the equivalent of 1.5 personnel years compiling what turned out to be a 9-pound application, the university delivered its final product, this despite the fact that the form said this should take 3 hours to fill out. I do not know if anybody in Washington determined that and ever spent the time to figure it out. Now, if you figure there are 6,500 institutions of higher education that participate in title IV across the country, each one responsible for their own 9-pound pile of paperwork, assuming similar burdens as experienced by Boston University, it would take 9,750 full-time employees to merely complete the applications submitted in title IV. That makes one wonder how many employees it takes to read, review, process, and file these forms here in Washington once they are submitted. We talked to the Department of Education. They did not know how many employees they had. Title IV is only the tip of the iceberg, only one of those 760 programs, compared with the enormity of the universe of Federal education spending. As we continue to pursue this aggressive review, we fully expect those who benefit from the status quo to challenge us, as we see here tonight, in an attempt to defend the current state of education. It is inconceivable to me how anyone can defend this bureaucracy and say this is what is best for the children of this country. Mr. Speaker, we welcome the debate. We hope at least to have an energetic dialogue that results in the best education system we can give our children and grandchildren. I thank the gentleman again for this opportunity to participate here tonight.

Mr. McKEON. The gentleman from Pennsylvania mentioned the careers bill. I think it is important that people understand this is an effort that you started in the last Congress and could not even get a hearing on the bill. This year, with the change, we were able to take it and on a bipartisan way, take 128 Federal programs, like we are looking here tonight at 760. And while it is not into law yet and we are still working on it with the Senate, we have taken those 128 programs down to three block grants, made efficient use of the dollars, and we have. We block grant that money out to the States and local communities where it will really be efficient, instead of having several cross programs working at odds with each other. Mr. Speaker, I want to commend the gentleman for his leadership on that, and for the continued effort. I think it is important that people understand that we are doing some very positive things here that will bear some great results as time goes on. What we need now is a President that will sign some of the bills that we have passed, so we can have true welfare reform, so we can have a balanced budget, so we can really get this country moving forward to get our fiscal house in order. I thank the gentleman very much.

Mr. McKEON. Good idea.

Mr. McKEON

Mr. McKEON. I thank the Chairman for his clarification.

Mr. McKEON. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me the time. Could the chairman please describe the outcome reached by the conferees on S. 1124 with regards to the B-2 bomber program?

Mr. McKEON. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Florida [Mr. Diaz-Balart], a distinguished member of the Committee on Rules, for yielding me this time. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the rule and the revised conference report on the Department of Defense Authorization Act. While I preferred the conference report that a majority of Members supported last month, I support adoption of this measure and urge the President to sign it into law. This legislation deserves our strong endorsement. The bill before us will result in substantial Federal acquisition reform, which will eliminate paperwork and procedural hurdles and will save the Defense Department and taxpayer's billions of dollars. The bill also authorizes a full pay raise for active duty military personnel and provides equity in cost of living payments for our military retirees. Chairman Spence and the leadership of the National Security Committee have also addressed shortfalls in military construction and basic equipment such as trucks, jeeps and ammunition. We also provide additional F-15 and F-16 fighters, which will meet a critical Air Force need. In addition, the production base for the B-2 Stealth Bomber is maintained, which will enable additional aircraft to be manufactured and will allow older bombers, which are prohibitively expensive to operate and support, to be retired. This is sound legislation and I ask for a ``yes'' vote on the rule and the conference report.

Mr. McKEON. I thank the chairman. Is it therefore the chairman's perspective that the purpose for which the additional $493 million is being authorized is the facilitization and acquisition of long-lead items necessary to procure additional B-2 aircraft if such a decision is made in the future?

Mr. McKEON

Mr. McKEON. Mr. Speaker, I thank the chairman for yielding me time. There has been a lot of talk about the Republicans killing student loans in the last few months, and today, I want to set the record straight. The Balanced Budget Act that the President vetoed actually enhanced the postsecondary student's ability to get a loan. Under our plan, every student will be able to receive a student loan. The student loan provisions in the Balanced Budget Act achieve our goal of protecting student loans for every student and saving taxpayer dollars. Student loan dollars increase by 50 percent over the next 7 years. Every student who applies will be able to receive a student loan. No parent or student pays more for a loan under our budget than they do under the current law or under the President's budget, for that matter. More importantly, our budget spends money to give students more flexible repayment terms. The President's budget fails to include such a provisions, making one wonder why the President does not feel that all students should have the same opportunity to select from various repayment terms.

Mr. McKEON

Mr. McKEON. I thank the chairman. In the interest of time, I ask that the remainder of our colloquy be placed in the Record.

Mr. McKEON. I ask that the remainder of the statement be inserted in the Record.

Mr. McKEON. I thank the chairman. Is it therefore the chairman's perspective that the purpose for which the additional $493 million is being authorized is the facilitization and acquisition of long-lead items necessary to procure additional B-2 aircraft if such a decision is made in the future?

Mr. McKEON. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me the time. Could the chairman please describe the outcome reached by the conferees on the B-2 bomber program?