Bob Ney

Mr. NEY

Mr. NEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. NEY

Mr. NEY. Mr. Speaker, I commend the following article to my colleagues: Bud Ralston has spent his life serving the people. He was born in McConnelsville on March 30th, 1926 and came to Caldwell in 1936 when his father purchased a drugstore which his mother continued to operate after his father's death later that same year. At the age of 17, Bud joined the U.S. Marine Corp. He served in the 77th Special Infantry Company from 1950 to 1964 and attained the rank of Platoon Sergeant. In 1948, he returned to Caldwell to help his mother run the drugstore. After his mother's death in 1962, Bud continued to operate the business until 1986. In 1957, he purchased Wehr's Clothing Store, which came to be known as ``Bud's Clothing.'' Bud served as Commander of the Veterans of Foreign Wars and was the first WWII Commander of the 5th District in the State of Ohio. His community involvement continued as a member of the Caldwell Volunteer Fire Department from 1948-1990, serving as Fire Chief for 18 years. He is a member of the Masonic Lodge, Scottish Rite and Shrine and the United Methodist Church. Bud has also been active with the Board of Directors of the Noble County Chamber of Commerce, of which he served as President, as well as the Caldwell Athletic Boosters. Since 1992, Bud has served as the mayor of Caldwell. During this time, he has upgraded the sewer and water plants, built the water tower and lines to the state prison and was instrumental in obtaining the Noble Correctional Institution. Additionally, Bud has overseen the pavement of many streets and alleys, planted over 250 trees, installed new water lines to surrounding areas and helped the village become a showplace in the Revitalization Project. Mr. Speaker, I ask that my colleagues join me in honoring the career of Bud Ralston. His lifelong service and commitment to the region is to be commended. I am proud to call him a constituent and a friend.

Mr. NEY

Mr. NEY. Mr. Speaker, on July 12, 2000, I was unavoidably detained and as a result missed Rollcall vote No. 395. If I were present, I would have voted ``Aye.''

Mr. NEY

Mr. NEY. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.

Mr. NEY. Reclaiming my time, Mr. Chairman, that is the thrust of my point. This amendment, in fact, does not mean that we are necessarily not going to open up avenues someday of communicating so all the Iranian people and all the American people can share a peaceful world.

Mr. NEY. I yield to the gentleman from New York.

Mr. NEY. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word, and I rise not in opposition to the amendment, but I just wanted to note that as well as these 13 Jews there are also Muslims. There are also Muslims on trial, and I think we should note that. I am not standing to say I am opposing this amendment, but standing to offer just a few words. I lived in Iran during the last year when the Shah was in power in Iran. If we look back at the history of the two countries, we have to also realize that the United States of America, after Dr. Mossadeq was in charge in Iran, the United States of America pulled a coup on Dr. Mossadeq. The United States, through the CIA, pulled a coup on Iran; and, in fact, we reinstalled the government of our choice. The Iranian people had a revolution, of course, of the Shah, and that can be debated for the next 20 years. But since that period of time, we have had zero contact. Now, I am not saying this is not a bad move to do, but I will tell my colleagues that we only fool ourselves in this U.S. House of Representatives and the United States Senate when we continuously pass other resolutions and we talk about strictly sanctioning Iran. Iran now has a freely elected parliament, where 78 percent of the people that were running were reform-minded. It has a freely elected president. We talk about doing business with China, where they hold Catholic priests and bishops in prison; yet we extend every option of trade avenue, and we are told we can reform them by engaging. All I am saying in regard to this amendment is not that I am opposing this amendment, but I am just simply saying that the day shall come when we wake up and realize that there are sins on our side, meaning the U.S., towards years of policy in Iran, and there are some sins on the Iranian side, obviously. At some point in time these two countries have to communicate, and then I think we can change each other's thinking in the sense of how we think towards each other. But maybe also we can change behavior through engagement. I have also seen and heard talk about the fact that if someone wants to talk to Iran, something is wrong with them. I think there are people on both sides of the aisle that realize the time has long come. We can hopefully help a lot of people on a humanitarian basis if we keep in mind that we need to communicate. So I think this amendment is done in that particular spirit.

Mr. NEY. Mr. Chairman, I rise to offer an amendment to this bill. However, first I would like to congratulate the chairman of the subcommittee, the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Skeen) and the ranking member, the gentlewoman from Ohio (Ms. Kaptur), for their hard work and a job well done on this piece of legislation. Mr. Chairman, my amendment holds enormous significance for the researchers who will be affected by it and for the Nation as a whole, so I want to make it clear this is not just something specific to the 18th district that I represent, but the fact that this is something that is very specific to the entire country. The North Appalachian Experimental Watershed, known as NAEW, located in Coshocton, Ohio, is a nationally significant research facility whose mission is to conduct research on hydrology, surface runoff, groundwater quality and erosion in an agricultural context. It was established in 1935, and the research center has provided over 60 years of historic long-term data on small watersheds which has helped to develop a knowledge of basic water sediment and chemical movement. I personally have been to the facility, and I can tell my colleagues that people come from all over the world, not just all over the United States, to look at the facility and the data. This 60-year database of measurements has been collected from rain gauges, watershed flumes, and monolith lysimeters. Lysimeters, one of the facility's most unique features, measures surface runoff and percolating water, and provides the data necessary to understand the intricacies of land and water management as applied to agriculture. Soon after the facility went into full operation, it garnered the attention of scientists from all over the world who came to view this ``first-of-its-kind'' large-scale watershed hydrology research program in soil and water conservation. Today, the NAEW maintains a total of 11 large monolithic lysimeters and is one of the few lysimeter sites in the U.S. that is located in rain-fed agriculture. Having collected data from lysimeters since the 1930s, the NAEW has the longest water balance record of any U.S. weighing lysimeter site, the longest in the history of our country. The data collected from the lysimeters allow researchers to track nutrient movement. Mr. Chairman, I am aware much of this information I am speaking about may not jump out and grab my colleagues, but let me give some practical ways in which the NAEW provides our country with valuable information on land and water conservation practices and general land uses. One example is drought-risk assessment. The economic and environmental impacts of drought can be costly, as we all know, with billions of dollars spent during a drought. The National Drought Policy Commission, formed by Congress through the National Drought Policy Act of 1998, released its report and recommendations regarding the preparedness and response of drought. The overall recommendation of the Commission was for Congress to pass a national drought preparedness act. An element of the Commission's recommendations was research into different aspects of drought. Research is needed on science-based methods of determining the risks and probabilities of drought at a given location and under different climates. Research is also needed on environmental consequences of and preparedness for drought with respect to land management, water quality, and erosion. The NAEW has an archive of runoff, weather, soil moisture, lysimeter, and water quality data with which this research can be conducted. Some records, as I previously mentioned, are as old as 60-plus years. The existing runoff and weather monitoring infrastructure of the NAEW is invaluable for conducting watershed and weather-related research into these high-priority areas. Another area of research done at the facility applies to food safety. The importance of assessing the risks in plant and animal food safety and quality with respect to poisonous and carcinogenic substances has been acknowledged. As an example, the fungus producing aflatoxin grows in improperly stored nuts and grains, and thrives in crops such as peanuts during drought conditions, as well as from being under stress from prolonged wet periods. Risk assessments must incorporate both climate and physical conditions at a location, and long climate records are not available at most U.S. locations. Therefore, science-based models using existing weather records need to be developed for these kinds of food- safety- climate-variations risk assessments. The NAEW has a long-term weather database to collect this information and can provide the necessary research to assist in advancing food safety initiatives. Data and research collected at the site also provide information on other topics such as how pesticide runoff affects groundwater, how runoff for Midwestern farms produces ``dead zones'' in the Gulf of Mexico, the environmental impacts of grazing systems, flood mitigation studies, and the environmentally friendly land application of animal waste. Unfortunately, because of a flat-lined budget over the last several years, the facility has suffered severe setbacks in its ability to do research. Over 90 percent of its current funding goes to pay salaries and expenses at the station leaving very little money to fund the research that benefits the entire Nation. Several employees have already been forced to leave their jobs, and further layoffs are expected without this much needed increase. These employees who have a long-standing relationship with the center will be lost, and along with their loss will be many years of expertise on the subject. As if the loss of these employees' jobs were not enough, the fact is that valuable research opportunities will also be lost. And that is for the entire country. Portions of the NAEW research efforts will need to be terminated. Simply put, lost employees means lost research. Although I am aware that there are other facilities around the Nation that are facing the same funding situations, I believe that the unique nature of this facility for the good of our country and the invaluable research it provides warrants the small increase for which I am asking. I ask my colleagues to join me in supporting this small but important amendment. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. NEY. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.

Mr. NEY

Mr. NEY. Mr. Chairman, I thank the distinguished chairman for entering into this colloquy. I appreciate all of his hard work on this bill and for taking the time to speak with me on a matter that affects really millions of people in Appalachia. I look forward to seeing this bill advance as the process moves along and offer any assistance that I can. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent to withdraw my amendment.

Mr. NEY. I yield to the gentleman from California.

Mr. NEY. Mr. Chairman, today I wanted to offer an amendment that would increase funding for the Appalachian Regional Commission. However, it is my intention to withdraw my amendment and ask the distinguished chairman the gentleman from California (Mr. Packard) if he would instead enter into a colloquy with me in regard to this matter. Mr. Chairman, I say to the gentleman from California (Mr. Packard) that I have offered my amendment today and have withdrawn it in order to bring attention to the funding level contained in the Energy and Water appropriations bill for the Appalachian Regional Commission. I assure the gentleman it is with my utmost respect to the chairman and members of the subcommittee and full committee that I bring this matter to the attention of the House because I am fully aware of the constraints placed on them with regard to the 302(b) allocation made to it. I commend the chairman and ranking member on the fine job they have done on this bill, considering the funding levels with which they have had to work. Unfortunately, because of the funding restraints placed on the subcommittee, the Appalachian Regional Commission is being funded at a level that is $3.149 million less than the appropriation in fiscal year 2000. That funding is also nearly $8.4 million less than was requested in the President's budget. As Members of Congress and as a Member of Congress that represents counties that have some of the highest unemployment rates in the State and are indicative of conditions within Appalachia, I believe it is important to properly and adequately fund the ARC so that these depressed counties can take advantage of the economic development opportunities that ARC provides. It is my understanding that the chairman, along with other members of the subcommittee, including the distinguished gentleman from Kentucky (Mr. Rogers) who is also well aware of the needs of Appalachia residents, would consider increased funding for ARC should the subcommittee's 302(b) allocation be increased. I ask the gentleman, am I correct in assuming that?

Mr. NEY. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.

Mr. NEY. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for his comments. It is also my understanding that the other body intends on appropriating a level for ARC which is higher than the level proposed in this bill. As a result, I would like to inquire further of the chairman if it would be his intention during conference negotiations that he could support an agreement to increase this funding for ARC at least to the fiscal year 2000 levels even if an increase in the 302(b) allocation is not made?

Mr. NEY

Mr. NEY. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the requisite number of words. Mr. Chairman, I also want to thank the gentleman from New York (Mr. Walsh) for including my amendment in the en bloc. My amendment reduces the EPA's program and management budget which is $1.9 billion by $5 million and transfers the dollars to medical research in the VA. The EPA's account in this section encompasses a broad range of things, including travel and expenses for most of the agency. I believe the EPA can tighten their belts on some travel to the tune of $5 million so that our veterans can continue to receive the medical care that they need and deserve. With passage of Public Law 85-857 in 1958, Congress gave official recognition to a research program with a proven record of contributing to the improvement of medical care and rehabilitation services for the U.S. veteran. The law formally authorized medical and prosthetic research in the VA and led to the establishment of four organizational units, medical research, rehabilitation research and development, health services research and development, and the cooperative studies program. There are over 75 some groups which I have listed here that, in fact, support the increase for VA medical research. I want to again thank the gentleman from New York for his indulgence to support the veterans.

Mr. NEY

Mr. NEY. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the requisite number of words. Mr. Chairman, I yield to the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Frelinghuysen).

Mr. NEY

Mr. NEY. Mr. Speaker, Whereas, The United States Army was established by the First Continental Congress on the 14th day of June, 1775; and Whereas, The United States Army exists to defend the freedom of our citizens and our nation's security interests; and Whereas, Many citizens of the Ohio Valley have served their nation and given the ultimate sacrifice in defense of our freedoms; and Whereas, The United States Army is to be commended for 225 years of dedicated service; and Therefore, I join with all residents of Ohio in recognizing the United States Army as it celebrates its 225th Birthday this June 14, 2000. Furthermore, I declare the period from June 12 through June 18, 2000, as United States Army Week.

Mr. NEY

Mr. NEY. Mr. Speaker, due to my flight originating from Columbus, Ohio on June 12, 2000, being delayed several times, I missed rollcall votes No. 255 and No. 256. If I were present, I would have voted ``no'' on both rollcall votes.

Mr. NEY

Mr. NEY. Mr. Speaker, if we want to send a message to the Chinese people, we might as well try to mail it in a letter because they will not hear it in the sweatshops and the prisons. And the text of this bill does not do anything for them. So if we want to send a message to the Chinese people, we should vote ``no,'' and then we can really try to help them out.

Mr. NEY. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Norwood) and all the Members that are fighting so diligently to bring the side of the American workers to the floor here of the House. Let me just re-stress, and I made these statements last night, this is from the Ohio Department of Commerce, Director Gary Suhadolnik, and this documents where baby chickens were fed arsenic in the water. They were killed. They contained 18 percent arsenic in their systems, and they were put into the Easter baskets of American children. Luckily, we caught 350 of the baskets before the rest could come over the market. There are other examples in here of hideous examples of dangers to American children because these products come in. China does have respect for our American children. They do not have respect for what comes over from China. If this agreement passes, we are going to have more of this. We are going to have our markets flooded. On the other end, we have been so comfortable. We wear engagement here like a coat. It gets a little bit hot, one takes it off, the word engagement. We talk about the farmers, once again the gentleman from Washington (Mr. Nethercutt) has a bill that unleashes all the sanctions around the world. But all of a sudden, we cannot talk about engagement when we talk about the Nethercutt bill, which if my colleagues really want to help the farmers, they would pass it. If my colleagues want to pass this bill to help the farmers like my colleagues say, that 9 percent tariff reduction is going to vanish. It is going to vanish instantly when they manipulate their currency in China like it happened in Mexico, and my colleagues know it. We have got to stand up for American workers. Despite all the lucrative predictions that the China WTO deal will open up new opportunities for American farmers and businesses, I remain convinced that this trade deal represents a bad deal for the United States. The International Trade Commission analyzed a similar trade deal that was on the table in April and concluded that it would lead to an increase in the U.S. trade deficit. Then people say, well, this is not permanent. You bet your life if my colleagues vote for this, the undecided Members of Congress, Mr. Speaker, if they hear this message, if they vote for this, it is going to be permanent. It will not be undone. Stand up for American workers for a change.

Mr. NEY

Mr. NEY. Mr. Chairman, this debate could not occur today in China without both sides being arrested, and this bill does not make a difference to change that. I am for engagement, but this bill engages the throats of the American workers. My colleagues talk about farmers and the great 9 percent tariff. Well, as soon as this bill passes, the currency is going to be manipulated, and it is going to vanish like that. It happened in NAFTA; it is going to vanish. We want to talk about helping farmers, the gentleman from Washington (Mr. Nethercutt) has a bill, where is that bill? All of the sudden, we have to have sanctions and cannot engage countries. Do my colleagues know why the bill of the gentleman from Washington (Mr. Nethercutt) is not here on the floor? Because Wall Street does not want that bill. There is not enough money to be made, but Wall Street wants this bill. A few on Wall Street want this bill, not the entire American business community, but a few on Wall Street because they want to go over there, manufacture the products and sell them back here. The U.S. Chamber says we are going to get jobs out of this? That is like saying that you are going to send Jesse James to bring in the Dalton brothers. We are not going to get a single job out of this. The American worker is on a treadmill; they are strangled. They can barely make it, and what is going to happen with this agreement is that Wall Street is going to take over. And it is not going to be Main Street; it is going to be Wall Street. Mr. Chairman, I hope the undecided Members of this Congress realize they have a choice today to stand up for American workers. All we are asking for is a level playing field, not an advantage, just a level playing field. That is what this is about. I hope the undecided Members, Mr. Chairman, realize that this is the most critical vote in 50-some years, if we want to support American workers, their families and their communities. We are not helping a single Chinese individual by this bill. All we are doing is ripping down the American work structure. Do not permanentize this. If this is forced to be renegotiated, let me tell my colleagues, the American worker will win. Vote no.

Mr. NEY

Mr. NEY. Mr. Chairman, also I want to praise the chairman of the committee for what I think is a fine bill. I do rise today to support the gentleman from New Jersey's amendment. During the debate on the last two transportation appropriation bills, I have worked closely with the gentleman from New Jersey to both reduce funding for the Amtrak Reform Council, ARC, and to ensure their funds were used properly. In both years we were successful in passing amendments to keep the ARC Council's budget in check. Unfortunately, after last year's successful effort to reduce the funding for what I think is an arguably misguided situation with the council, an increase in funding was restored in the final version of the bill. As a result, of course, as has been mentioned, we are again here to take our case to the House floor to again contain an ever increasing reform council budget. The gentleman from New Jersey's amendment, which reduces the budget from $980,000 to $450,000, is an attempt to place a necessary constraint on an organization that really I do not think does seek the reform of Amtrak. As was mentioned previously, also, the budget has doubled in the past 2 years and I know that we had an overwhelming vote on this. It had tremendous support. I urge my colleagues today to support the Andrews amendment as they have previously done and to reject the increase and give the ARC a fair and certainly adequate budget.

Mr. NEY. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. NEY

Mr. NEY. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor Lyle W. Lipps, the minister of the Second Street Church of Christ in Frazeysburg, Ohio. Minister Lipps and his family have traveled to our Nation's capital from Ohio so that he may serve as the Guest Minister for the House today. I am honored to have one of my constituents represent our area and our State in such a manner. Minister Lipps has been involved full time in the ministry for the last 12 years of his life. Prior to his work at the Second Street Church of Christ, he spent 4 years with the Adena Road Church of Christ in Chillicothe, Ohio. Minister Lipps is a 1989 graduate of the Cincinnati Bible College and Seminary in Cincinnati, Ohio. Minister Lipps, his wife Connie and their son Luke reside in Nashport, Ohio. Mr. Speaker, I ask that my colleagues join me in honoring Minister Lyle Lipps. His commitment and dedication to his family, his community, his church and his Nation deserve to be commended.

Mr. NEY

Mr. NEY. Mr. Speaker, I commend the following article to my colleagues: Whereas, Yolanda Ingram was born May 15, 1917 to Giovanni and Giovanna Marie Caiazza. Whereas, Irene married William Ingram and spent fifty-one years working for Bank One. In addition, Yolanda has spent a lifetime in dedication to her family and her community. Whereas, I ask that my colleagues join me in wishing Yolanda a wonderful 83rd birthday. I am proud to call her a constituent and a friend.