Jim Moran

Mr. MORAN of Virginia

Mr. MORAN of Virginia. Mr. Speaker, I think it is instructive to review the history of how we got to this debate tonight. Yes, Saddam Hussein does deserve to be demonized, but after the Shah of Iran was overthrown in the late 1970s, Saddam became our guy in the Persian Gulf. During the Reagan years, we helped train his army and equipped him with weapons we now deplore his using against Iran in their deadly 10-year war. In fact, The New York Times reported back then that our satellites provided the coordinates for some of the deadly attacks against the Kurds and Iranians. We even inadvertently, I trust, gave him some reason to believe that the U.S. would not react if he attacked Kuwait over disputed oil fields. Well, President Bush did react, but, in retrospect, he reacted in a more responsible manner than what his son now proposes. He waited until just after the mid-term congressional election. He sought and got the support of the other Arab nations. He worked with and through the United Nations Security Council. When the U.N. deadline for withdrawal arrived, Saddam ordered a retreat out of Kuwait. We attacked the next day. While we killed tens of thousands of retreating Iraqi conscripts, we lost very few American lives, but we did leave a Republican Guard largely intact and Saddam still in charge. He proceeded to massacre the Shiites and the Kurds we had encouraged to rebel from his rule. We stationed our troops in Saudi Arabia as a residual measure to prevent further Iraqi aggression, motivating a homicidal terrorist, Osama bin Laden, also trained by the United States in the Mujahedin's war against the secular Russian presence in Afghanistan, to attack this country on that infamous day in September. Now, a decade after the Persian Gulf War, President Bush's son is still stuck with the same demon. This President Bush had followed his father's example in preparing to attack Iraq by working through the United Nations Security Council and getting the support of his Arab neighbors. But Kuwait recently agreed to a bilateral trade agreement with Iraq, and no other Arab nation thinks it is in their interests or ours to attack Saddam at this time, particularly with the intensity of animosity generated by the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. What we should do is lay out the same arguments the President presented to the American people last night to the United Nations and to the rest of the free world. Do we really think that other nations are less concerned about homicidal tyrants in their midst, less protective of their families and their freedoms? But when we go it alone, we create resentment, even among our allies. We become a singular target for vengeance for the deaths that we cause, and it will likely become our principal responsibility to rebuild the human and the fiscal infrastructure we destroy. We should be focusing on making Saddam weak and irrelevant by discovering and destroying all weapons of mass destruction, their storage and production facilities and any missile capability to deliver them. The President cannot obtain a sufficiently robust, coercive resolution from the United Nations that includes all Saddam's palaces and all 500 to 600 potential sites or, if Iraq again interferes with U.N. inspectors as they did during the 1990s, this Congress will assuredly give our President authority to use all necessary military force on an expedited basis. But, Mr. Speaker, we should be marginalizing Saddam Hussein, not marginalizing the United States Congress. We should vote for the alternative resolution that has been made in order, consistent with Senator Levin's and Senator Biden's approach in the Senate. Preemptive unilateralism is not what made us the undisputed leader of the free world. Constructive cooperation and resolution, principled leadership is what has made us great and is what should guide us in this profoundly important vote.

Mr. MORAN of Virginia

Mr. MORAN of Virginia. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor Margaret Vinson Hallgren, President of the National Military Family Association, NMFA, in recognition of her distinguished service to our country. For 18 years, while filling critical volunteer positions within NMFA, including four terms as director of government relations and an unprecedented six terms as president, Margaret has worked tirelessly to help partially offset the extraordinary hardships and sacrifices service members and their families endure while serving our Nation. Margaret Hallgren, whom I have the honor of knowing personally, has been a military family member all her life, first as an Army “brat,” then as an Army spouse. She is the widow of an active duty Army officer, W.H. Vinson, Jr., and is now married to Hal E. Hallgren, who retired after 30 years of active duty in the U.S. Army. She has four grown children and nine grandchildren. After earning her B.A. degree from Vassar College and a Masters of Accounting from Duke University in Political Science/International Law, Margaret worked for 2 years as an Intelligence Analyst for the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) in Washington, DC. Margaret later went on to an incredible career at the National Military Family Association, NMFA, where she has touched the lives of hundreds of thousands of active duty, National Guard, Reserve, and retired families in her unwavering efforts to enable them to achieve a reasonable quality of life. It is an understatement to say that Margaret has been in the vanguard of Congress’ and the Department of Defense's actions to sustain readiness and the All Volunteer Force. Among her numerous accomplishments, perhaps her biggest achievement comes from her visionary work as one of the 12 original cofounders of the Military Coalition, TMC. The Coalition was organized in 1985 for the sole purpose of attempting to repeal legislation which would have reduced retired pay cost-of-living adjustments by 22.5 percent over a 7-year period. After TMC's successful effort in this area, Margaret and other leaders in the Coalition had the foresight to recognize its future potential and kept it intact. Today, the Coalition is comprised of 33 military and veterans organizations and represents more than 5.5 million active duty, National Guard, Reserve, retired members and veterans of the seven uniformed services plus their families and survivors. Thanks to Margaret's insight, NMFA continues to be a leader in TMC on issues affecting military families. Mr. Speaker, Margaret Hallgren's extraordinary career of leadership, volunteerism and personal dedication in protecting the welfare and quality of life of every member of the uniformed services community is an inspiration and continuing lesson to all Americans. My best wishes and gratitude go with her. Margaret, I salute you on behalf of all our servicemen and women, past and present who have worn and continue to wear the uniform.

Mr. MORAN of Virginia

Mr. MORAN of Virginia. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H.R. 4600 which safeguards patients' access to medical care by implementing common sense reforms. Skyrocketing liability insurance has forced some physicians, hospitals, and other health care providers to cut back or end practicing medicine. Our best and brightest doctors are curtailing their medical practice or leaving the profession altogether because of the ballooning cost of medical malpractice insurance caused by an onslaught of frivolous, yet damaging, lawsuits. At the most basic level, this is an access to care issue. As the former ranking member of the D.C. Appropriations Subcommittee, I saw first-hand the lack of access to decent health care for the disadvantaged and under-served population. The District of Columbia is the only state or territory that has not made any changes to its civil liability system resulting in D.C. ranking number one in the country in terms of the average size of payments that juries award in malpractice suits. One of the nation's premier pediatric hospitals located in the District of Columbia, Children's Hospital, over the last two years has had the total cost for malpractice insurance increase by 200 percent for less coverage. That is an additional $3 million a year going to insurance costs instead of going to treat sick patients. Howard University Hospital has been its malpractice insurance increase by 300 percent this year alone. An Anacostia, OB-GYNs are terminating their practice because of the astronomical cost of medical malpractice insurance. Women are being denied access to critical prenatal care, gynecological services, and preventative treatment. Congress must pass this common-sense legislation and put a stop to the costs of the runaway litigation system paid by all Americans, I urge my colleagues to vote in favor of this legislation.

Mr. MORAN of Virginia

Mr. MORAN of Virginia. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor the memory of Meta Fuller Waller, a dear friend to many, a dedicated public servant and athletic team captain who tragically lost her life in the Pentagon on September 11, 2001. Born into a family steeped in the civil rights movement, Meta Waller learned at a very young age an appreciation for the arts and the value of a good education. Her two famous grandparents, Meta Warrick Fuller, an African American sculptor and Solomon Carter Fuller, the first African American psychiatrist in the United States, inspired Meta to pursue her dreams regardless of what stood in her path. These instilled values guided Meta throughout life, especially during the sorrowful loss of some of her closest family members. With a bachelor's degree from the University of Michigan and a master's degree from the prestigious Harvard Kennedy School of Government in 1982, Meta worked hard to meet the many challenges she faced as the Special Programs Manager for the Administrative Assistant to the Secretary of the Army. In her twelve years at the Pentagon, Meta was heavily involved in the Combined Federal Campaign (CFC), the annual fund raising drive conducted by Federal employees on behalf of numerous non-profit charities. She diligently served as the Army CFC administrator for 14 years and helped raise in excess of $30 million dollars to benefit the least fortunate in our society. An avid writer and poet, Meta charmed those fortunate enough to witness her literary talent. Meta's active imagination made her a gifted storyteller whose vividly refreshing tales could keep an audience spellbound for hours. Always in search of new challenges, Meta picked up the game of tennis much later in life than most. Despite a lack of past exposure to the sport, she rose to become captain of her women's tennis team, holding the position for three years. Ever conscientious and adventure seeking, Meta's passions led her to travel the world often. Her most recent trip took her to Durban, South Africa for the World Conference on Racism. Traveling with a group of schoolchildren, Meta gained a first-hand knowledge of the continuing struggle to end racism across the globe. Upon returning home, Meta told family members that the experience had changed her life. Mr. Speaker, Meta's life serves as a testament to us all that with love and determination we can overcome any odds and lead inspired lives. Everyone misses her dearly but the memory of her indomitable spirit will never be forgotten.

Mr. MORAN of Virginia

Mr. MORAN of Virginia. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor the diligent, innovative and civic-minded work of Mrs. Arlene Hewitt. After 35 years of dedicated service to INOVA Alexandria Hospital, Mrs. Hewitt has decided to retire, but her active role as a community leader in the Northern Virginia region will undoubtably continue. Raised in Brookline, Massachusetts, Arlene relocated to Alexandria, Virginia with her family in 1967, to join the former Alexandria Hospital in an effort to establish an innovative new program. Keenly aware of the poor social services available to the disadvantaged members of the community, Arlene began her tireless effort to establish and then direct the hospital's first social work department. Through this department, Arlene made numerous accomplishments, including initiating the Senior Health Access outreach program, establishing a hospital employee assistance program, collaborating with the Alexandria Health Department to create an early childhood immunization program, and playing an instrumental role in coordinating initiatives to reduce unintended pregnancies, stamp out teenage smoking and promote bike helmet safety. These socially conscious programs have given an enormous boost to the health services of Alexandria and the Northern Virginia region. Without Arlene's untiring dedication, these highly effective services that continually provide enormous benefits to the region would not exist. Outside of her job, Arlene has also served in a variety of positions with many outstanding organizations. She is actively involved in her synagogue, serving on the Board of Directors at Alexandria's Beth El Hebrew Congregation. Beginning with an appointment to the Executive Committee and later serving as Committee Chair, Arlene has been associated with the Alexandria United Way for over 30 years. Her unmatched devotion led to her being awarded a life membership to the Alexandria United Way and the prestigious 2002 Alexandria United Way Outstanding Services Award. While most people would end their philanthropic activities here, Arlene has repeatedly gone above and beyond the call to civic duty. She has also served on the Alexandria Committee on Aging, been a charter member of the Alexandria Health Advisory Commission, chaired the Alexandria Chapter of AARP's health council and has been specially recognized by the Northern Virginia Rotary District Governor for outstanding service to the [chyph]elderly. Mr. Speaker, words alone cannot adequately describe the communities' gratitude to Arlene Hewitt. She has touched many lives both directly and indirectly and given hope and guidance to those who need it most. It is an understatement to say that INOVA Hospital will greatly miss her presence, but fortunately for Northern Virginia and Virginia's 8th District, her living legacy will continue going strong.

Mr. MORAN of Virginia

Mr. MORAN of Virginia. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to the life of a good man, and an inspirational Virginian, Mr. Wayne Ford Buckle. Wayne was a selfless patriot and civic-minded community leader who contributed greatly to the Northern Virginia area. Wayne Buckle left us on March 24, 2002, but what he gave during his 85 years will remain a lasting legacy. As a lifelong and charter member of the Church of the Brethren in Arlington, Virginia, Wayne Buckle and his wife Wilma led by example, actively participating in many facets of the life of the church. In 1960, Wayne achieved distinction by serving as the first lay District Moderator in the Church. One program that Wayne especially enjoyed focusing his energies on was the District Camping program. Wayne frequently gave his time as a camp counselor and was deeply involved in the development and growth of Shepherds Spring, the Church of the Brethren Youth Camp in the Mid-Atlantic District. Perhaps Wayne Buckle was best known for his fierce loyalty to his beloved Democratic Party. A member of the Mason District Democratic Committee of Fairfax County since 1956, Wayne remained a dedicated standard bearer for the party all his life. For over two decades, his prowess as alternating treasurer for the Mason District Democratic Committee, the Northern Virginia Democratic Club, Virginia's 10th District Democratic Committee and Virginia's 11th District Democratic Committee allowed these organizations to grow and prosper under his watchful eye. A strong union supporter till the end, Wayne also played a big role with the American Federation of Government Employees, serving as their trusted treasurer for many years. Wayne's wisdom, patient nature and unshakable spirit were able to overcome obstacles that would have stopped most people in their tracks. Loved by many and respected by all, Wayne exemplified the well-rounded family man, civic, and political leader whose insatiable thirst for life provided a role model to us all. Wayne Buckle's lifelong devotion to improving the lives of the disadvantaged and dispossessed epitomizes FDR's quote that ``the test of our progress is not whether we add more to the abundance of those who have much; it is whether we provide enough for those who have too little.'' Those of us who knew him will miss his gentle and not-so-gentle reminders that we can be better than we think we can be. We will miss you dearly Wayne, but your legacy will not be forgotten.

Mr. MORAN of Virginia

Mr. MORAN of Virginia. Mr. Speaker, I rise today on the first anniversary of 9/11, a day which changed America's history. For the past 12 months, this nation has collectively experienced a full range of emotion, from the initial fear and uncertainty of that fateful day, to anger and outrage at the loss of American life and the violation of two of our nation's most recognizable symbols. We have mourned and continue to mourn for the victims of this horrible attack. Their families and friends are constantly in our thoughts and prayers. Embedded firmly in my mind is the image of streams of people who came to the ridge overlooking the Pentagon to pay their respects and sanctified that hill with flowers, candles and notes of remembrance. Yet, in the midst of all the sadness, Americans have sought an outlet for their grief by renewing their sense of community service and patriotic pride. Our country, which has a strong history of bridging many differences, has become one. In Northern Virginia alone, we witnessed friends, neighbors and colleagues coming together to help rebuild and unite. With the round-the-clock dedication of the Pentagon Renovation team, the revival of the Pentagon has served as the quintessential symbol of our country's resilience and renewal. A special debt of gratitude goes out to those workers and planners who orchestrated this rebuilding. As we bear witness to the powerful images and experiences of the past year, we are proudly reminded of what it means to be an American. The heroic acts of the firefighters, police officers and emergency responders who rushed into the inferno of the Pentagon and World Trade Center Towers to save lives, touches a special place in all our hearts. It is a place where love of country and for our fellow man is second nature. This unique American spirit is what wills us to go the extra mile and put our lives on the line for what we know is right. So, Mr. Speaker, on the one year anniversary of September 11th, let us honor the many sacrifices that have been made by our police, firefighters, emergency responders and our men and women in uniform. Their efforts to heal, protect and preserve this great nation deserve the utmost respect and admiration.

Mr. MORAN of Virginia. Mr. Speaker, I rise today on the first anniversary of 9/11, a day which changed America's history. For the past 12 months, this Nation has collectively experienced a full range of emotion, from the initial fear and uncertainty of that fateful day, to anger and outrage at the loss of American life and the violation of two of our nation's most recognizable symbols. We have mourned and continue to mourn for the victims of this horrible attack. Their families and friends are constantly in our thoughts and prayers. Embedded firmly in my mind is the image of streams of people who came to the ridge overlooking the Pentagon to pay their respects and sanctified that hill with flowers, candles and notes of remembrance. Yet, in the midst of all the sadness, Americans have sought an outlet for their grief by renewing their sense of community service and patriotic pride. Our country, which has a strong history of bridging many differences, has become one. In Northern Virginia alone, we witnessed friends, neighbors and colleagues coming together to help rebuild and unite. With the round-the-clock dedication of the Pentagon Renovation team, the revival of the Pentagon has served as the quintessential symbol of our country's resilience and renewal. A special debt of gratitude goes out to those workers and planners who orchestrated this rebuilding. As we bear witness to the powerful images and experiences of the past year, we are proudly reminded of what it means to be an American. The heroic acts of the firefighters, police officers and emergency responders who rushed into the inferno of the Pentagon and World Trade Center Towers to save lives, touches a special place in all our hearts. It is a place where love of country and for our fellow man is second nature. This unique American spirit is what wills us to go the extra mile and put our lives on the line for what we know is right. So, Mr. Speaker, on the one year anniversary of September 11, let us honor the many sacrifices that have been made by our police, firefighters, emergency responders and our men and women in uniform. Their efforts to heal, protect and preserve this great nation deserve the utmost respect and admiration.

Mr. MORAN of Virginia

Mr. MORAN of Virginia. Mr. Chairman, Congress enacted civil service protections and collective bargaining rights so the U.S. Government could attract the very best to government service. As we stand together to fight terrorism, we should also stand together for the rights and well-being of those people who are on the front lines of that fight. It is no secret that one of the Federal Government's biggest challenges is recruiting and retaining highly qualified workers. Within 3 short years, the Federal Government will face a mass retirement of Federal employees. Given the composition of the workforce, this is a given. I support the Morella amendment because it will ensure that Federal employees at the new Department of Homeland Security will retain their rights to belong to unions. This provision would guarantee that the 50,000 employees, only about 25 percent of those expected to be transferred to the new department, who are currently under collective bargaining agreements, retain their union representation. Let us be clear this amendment would apply only to those who currently have collective bargaining rights and would in no way affect those employees who are not currently members of unions. The need to establish this new department should not be used as a veiled attempt to strip Federal servants of the fundamental protections and collective bargaining rights they enjoy today.

Mr. MORAN of Virginia

Mr. MORAN of Virginia. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in support of the amendment offered by the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Tom Davis). In fact, this amendment is actually an abbreviated version of a bill that he and I sponsored, H.R. 2435, the Cyber Security Information Act. Some people thought our bill was too broad, so we worked together in a bipartisan manner with the administration and all the committees of jurisdiction, the interest groups, and the public to craft a very narrow restriction on public disclosure of information about the private industry's critical infrastructure. The FOIA exemption at issue here is deliberately narrow, but it has addressed concerns that are legitimate. We all rely on the critical infrastructure of this Nation, and over 90 percent of that critical infrastructure is private. This is where our principal vulnerability lies. In Presidential Directive 63, which was issued by President Clinton, it enabled the owners of this private infrastructure to communicate with each other and formulate effective response plans to any acts of terrorism, extortion, or hacking; but that Presidential Directive 63 found that companies would not share information about threats to their infrastructure because of their concerns about FOIA antitrust and liability. So today, as we continue to fight our war on terrorism, many companies want to help us by sharing what they have discovered; but they will not because they are legitimately concerned that in revealing actual or potential network risks and vulnerabilities, they may inadvertently heighten their own risks if all the information they provide the government has to be published under the Freedom of Information Act. Without exemption from FOIA, businesses are likely to spend a lot of valuable time and resources scrubbing virtually all information supplied to the new Department of Homeland Security so that they do not inadvertently disclose market-sensitive information to their commercial rivals. This narrowly crafted freedom of information exemption in this bill will alleviate this widespread industry concern and accomplish a fundamental goal of this legislation: collaborative and constructive business-government cooperation in the cause of homeland security. We faced and solved a potential crisis like this before with our Y2K act. Everybody remembers when we woke up the morning of January 1, 2000, we wondered if the Y2K preparations were enough, or if we would face shutdowns of our critical infrastructure, banks, and other computer systems. But everything worked, and there were no Y2K disasters because of that legislation, which did very much the same thing that this legislation does. The success of our approach to Y2K should be followed now. As with Y2K, we have to create an environment where private industry can discuss and share with the government information about threats, best practices, and defenses against terrorism. And I have to say, I do not think the objections raised are based on an accurate description of the language in this bill. Contrary to what it's opponents are saying, our FOIA provisions are not a mechanism to hide corporate wrongdoing or environmental disasters. The FOIA provisions in this bill provide no immunity from liability. There is no limit on discovery of lawsuits, and no free pass on criminal activity. Moreover, all required disclosures under the environmental statutes such as the Clean Air Act or the Clean Water Act must continue. Without this legislation, we will not be able to say that we did everything we could to prepare our people and prevent disasters and defend our homeland. This very limited restriction on FOIA can contribute to winning the war on terrorism. That is why we need to support it. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. MORAN of Virginia. Mr. Chairman, I really like and respect its author, but I have to urge my colleagues to vote against the Schakowsky amendment on the Freedom of Information Act. This is a very narrow restriction on public disclosure of information about the private industry's critical infrastructure. We all rely on that privately owned infrastructure of this Nation: computer networks, phone and power lines, airplanes, et cetera. As the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Tom Davis) said, 90 percent of our critical infrastructure is owned by the private sector. In President Clinton's Directive 63, an effort was put into play to enable the owners of this infrastructure to communicate with each other and formulate effective response plans to terrorism, extortion, and hacking. However, PD-63, that Presidential directive, found that companies would not share information about threats to their infrastructure because of their lawyers' concerns about FOIA and antitrust. Sharing such information would put them in an even more vulnerable position with respect to their customers, their shareholders, and their competitors. I have to say, some of the objections that this amendment addresses are misleading. It is not unprecedented. Congress passed Y2K legislation to exempt information-sharing about critical infrastructure vulnerabilities from use in lawsuits and disclosure to third parties. It is narrower than that Y2K legislation. It contains numerous definitions. It provides no immunity from liability, no limit on discovery or lawsuits, no free pass on criminal activity. All required disclosures under the Clean Air and Clean Water Act must continue. If we do not include this limited FOIA restriction, we will not be able to say we did everything we could to prepare and defend our homeland. It is a narrowly crafted restriction on FOIA, and it can help win the war on terrorism; so I urge my colleagues to join me in voting against the Schakowsky amendment and for the Davis-Moran amendment, which comes up next.

Mr. MORAN of Virginia. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume to close. Mr. Chairman, the distinguished gentleman from California (Mr. Waxman) threw me for a loop a bit there when he said the language restricting lobbying had been taken out. But in looking through this, it is moot because this has nothing to do with lobbying. The Congress just passed legislation to address corporate accountability. The President is going to sign it. There are a total of 11 sections in title 18 of the Civil Service Code. These are criminal law provisions. They govern the behavior of Federal employees and they restrict and prohibit acting as a lobbyist, being lobbied, revolving- door activities, financial conflicts of interest, making political contributions, lobbying with appropriated monies. The information that we are talking about here has nothing to do with lobbying. It is critical infrastructure vulnerabilities to terrorism. Electric dam supervisors are not going to be having anything to do with lobbying. It has to be in good faith and no evasion of law is allowed. These are telecommunications managers, they are financial service people, they are people that have identified vulnerabilities, vulnerabilities that we need to be protected by. We have been told by the FBI, by the Office of Critical Infrastructure Protection. They desperately need this kind of language. The Department of Homeland Security needs it. Otherwise we cannot act effectively. We are not going to be able to protect the people of this country if our private sector that runs 90 percent of critical infrastructure is not able to disclose all of the information that might be relevant to protecting the American people. That is the reason for this amendment. It has nothing to do with lobbying. And it has everything to do with protecting the security of the American people. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. MORAN of Virginia

Mr. MORAN of Virginia. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of Trade Promotion Authority. This legislation reflects a solid product that extends to President Bush the trade negotiating authority that Congress has extended to the past five presidents. It also enables the president and the Trade Representative to begin negotiations on a new WTO trade round that can lead to further trade liberalization on American products and services overseas. World trade lifts people out of poverty and stimulates economic development in developing countries, which results in more stable and law-abiding government. There's no denying that our economy is changing and with that change comes new industries and economic opportunities. The hallmark of the United States' economic vitality is the ability of our country to innovate and develop new products and services. TPA will help enable our trade negotiators to open new doors to international trade that are essential if we as a country want to remain a leader in world trade. If we do not approve TPA today, we are forfeiting a critical mechanism to influence negotiations on new trade agreements. I believe that approval of trade promotion authority legislation is essential to the health of our economy. It benefits American consumer and workers alike. By providing trade promotion authority to the President, the Congress is signaling its support for the Administration to negotiate trade agreements that benefit Americans and that require Congressional consultation. More importantly, we are sending an important message about U.S. leadership in the global economy. Without TPA, our trade representative cannot demonstrate Congressional support for a new round of WTO negotiations. This bill also provides some much needed assistance for workers who have been displaced by Trade. Under this bill, for the first time displaced workers will be eligible for a 65 percent advanceable, refundable tax credit that can be used to pay for COBRA. This bill recognizes how difficult it can be for older workers to change careers and provides wage insurance to bridge the gap between old and new earnings (up to $10,000 over 2 years). But that's not all--there's a TAA program for farmers and ranchers, and an expanded training budget (retraining for displaced workers), and extends the availability of benefits for up to 2 and a half years. As I have always said, I may be pro Trade, but I am also pro helping displaced workers, and this bill delivers on that promise. We must act with one voice in supporting this legislation and the responsibility of Congressional oversight in trade. We now live in a global economy that has been brought together through advances in technology, transportation and communications. International trade is not only a reality, but it is a necessity if we plan to thrive in the 21st century. In this climate marked by a global economic downturn and a war on terrorism that crosses international borders, this legislation is an opportunity to signal U.S. leadership in the world. Trade opens economic opportunities that minimizes the conditions that give rise to extremist groups, dictatorships and violations of human rights. America's role in the world is defined largely by trade and economic ties with other countries. Our security is dependent upon prosperity. We could spend countless hours modifying this bill, but the question comes down to whether this Congress supports a vision whereby America continues to be a global leader. If we reject this balanced proposal, we send entirely the wrong signal to other countries that America does not support an ongoing policy of trade expansion that has been the hallmark of our country's prosperity and a model for people and democracies the world over. I urge my colleagues to vote for this proposal and stand on the side of economic opportunity and openness. It is the right time and right thing to do.

Mr. MORAN of Virginia

Mr. MORAN of Virginia. Mr. Chairman, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Strickland). (Mr. STRICKLAND asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. MORAN of Virginia. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the distinguished gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Davis). (Mr. DAVIS of Illinois asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. MORAN of Virginia. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Rothman).

Mr. MORAN of Virginia. Mr. Chairman, how much time is left?

Mr. MORAN of Virginia. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Wolf).

Mr. MORAN of Virginia. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Chairman, to respond to the gentleman from Oklahoma (Mr. Istook), I have a letter that I would like to share with the gentleman from the Federal Managers Association, which represents 200,000 executives, managers, and supervisors in the Federal Government. They say: ``This amendment would simply allow agencies to have the flexibility to make the best decisions for the use of taxpayer dollars without being forced to comply with target percentages.'' That is all they want to be able to do, to be able to exercise their executive judgment. The FAIR Act, which we supported, intentionally left the decision to the agencies on how many or how few jobs to contract out, so those agencies would have the discretion to determine how best to balance their work loads with their budgets. I do not understand why it would jeopardize the Federal taxpayers' money when private contractors are now receiving $120 billion just for services and Federal payroll is $108 billion. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from Maryland (Mrs. Morella), who is a valued member on the Subcommittee on Civil Service, Census and Agency Organization.

Mr. MORAN of Virginia. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. The gentleman is absolutely wrong. The Federal executives will be able to contract out all the jobs they want based upon their judgment of what is in the best taxpayers' interest. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Washington (Mr. Dicks), the ranking member on Interior appropriations.

Mr. MORAN of Virginia. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. MORAN of Virginia. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Tom Davis).

Mr. MORAN of Virginia. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the very distinguished gentlewoman from the District of Columbia (Ms. Norton), our foremost advocate for civil rights and civil service.

Mr. MORAN of Virginia. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. This amendment is necesary because the Office of Management and Budget has issued an arbitrary requirement on all of the Federal agencies to privatize 127,500 Federal jobs by the end of this fiscal year, and as many as 425,000 Federal jobs by the end of fiscal year 2004. That is nearly a quarter of the entire Federal workforce. OMB's one-size-fits-all arbitrary privatization quotas do not consider the unique needs of different Federal agencies, and we believe will harm the ability of those Federal agencies to most effectively carry out their missions. My amendment today is wholly consistent with what is called the FAIR Act. This is an act that requires the Federal agencies to identify what jobs could possibly be performed by the private sector. In other words, what jobs could be subject to outsourcing. This amendment does not put a halt to any agency's ability to contract out a single Federal job, and I am not opposed to privatization where it works. There is $120 billion being contracted out now. In fact, there are more people working for the private sector doing Federal work than actual Federal employees. What this amendment is all about is imposing arbitrary one-size-fits-all quotas on all of the Federal agencies. They are not all alike. The Internal Revenue Service is different from the Department of Defense; the Department of Defense is different from the Department of Justice; and on and on. We think managers should be able to exercise their own individual judgment and knowledge of their agency's mission. I supported the FAIR Act, I still do, but the FAIR Act intentionally left those decisions on how many or how few jobs to contract out to Federal executives. Now, there was a Commercial Activities Panel, controversial because many of the Federal employee union organizations felt that they were not adequately represented, but they stated, as one of their principles, that the Federal Government should avoid arbitrary numerical goals. That is what this amendment does. It simply says that OMB cannot issue these arbitrary quotas across all the Federal agencies. The Commercial Activities Panel said the success of government programs should be measured by the results achieved in terms of providing value to the taxpayer, not the size of the in-house or the contractor workforce. The use of arbitrary percentages, and I am quoting, ``the use of arbitrary percentages or numerical targets can be counterproductive.'' That is the purpose of this amendment. On that panel was Kay Coles James, who is Director of the Office of Personnel Management, and Angela Styles, the Administrator of the Office of Federal Procurement Policy. The Federal workforce has been reduced by 600,000 Federal jobs for functions carried out by private contractors. That trend is going to continue, but it should continue in a logical, intelligent, responsible way. This quota approach is not responsible, Mr. Chairman. Now, as I said, there is over $120 billion for services being contracted out. That does not include any of the submarines ships, planes, tanks, et cetera. This is an effort that is going to continue, but it should continue in a responsible manner. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. MORAN of Virginia. Mr. Chairman, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from California (Mr. Waxman). (Mr. WAXMAN asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)