Doug Ose

Mr. OSE

Mr. OSE. Mr. Speaker, I do want to speak to the amendment, if I might, because I know the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Capuano) comes from district eight in Massachusetts, and clearly there has been an error in the third paragraph of the resolution. We are going to call this E-8 in the gentleman from Massachusetts' (Mr. Capuano) memory because I do not believe he meant to put the word ``payoff'' in there, and we are attempting to correct this. And I just want to assure folks of the district that the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Capuano) represents that it was an error made in good faith and that it was an error much like many errors in the past like Mr. Buckner has made, and I hope to never see such an error again in the next 86 years.

Mr. OSE. Mr. Speaker, I offer an amendment to the preamble.

Mr. OSE. Mr. Speaker, what did they bring to the parade?

Mr. OSE. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. OSE. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Government Reform be discharged from further consideration of the resolution (H. Res. 854) congratulating the Boston Red Sox on winning the 2004 World Series, and ask for its immediate consideration in the House.

Mr. OSE

Mr. OSE. Mr. Chairman, I yield the remainder of my time to the gentleman from California (Mr. Dreier), the chairman of the Committee on Rules and the champion in California on immigration issues and protecting our country. (Mr. DREIER asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. OSE. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from San Diego, California (Mr. Cunningham).

Mr. OSE. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Two speakers go, we had someone on that side talking about negotiations, that there are negotiations pending. The fact of the matter is negotiations have been going on for 6 years, and we are no closer to a solution. We had a speaker just previous from Oregon stand up and make an argument for doing nothing. I am sorry, I do not understand that. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent to extend the debate time on each side for 1 minute.

Mr. OSE. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 10 seconds. The original authorization to build this fence gave the Attorney General the opportunity to waive all of these things the previous speaker voted for. You cannot have it both ways. You are either for protecting this country or you are not.

Mr. OSE. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Chairman, before I yield to my good friend from San Diego, I want to make a point that the exemptions offered in section C of my amendment shall also incorporate section 102(c) of title I, subtitle A of the 1997 Omnibus Appropriations Act, that is Public Law 104-208, in its entirety. I will say there is a meeting that is going to take place in 2 weeks. It will be the sixteenth meeting this year alone trying to move this project forward. I think the meetings now take place so they can schedule more meetings. We need to get this finished. Mr. Chairman, I yield 90 seconds to my friend, the gentleman from San Diego, California (Mr. Hunter).

Mr. OSE. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Chairman, the purpose of this amendment is to secure our southern border immediately south of San Diego by completing the security fence that this Congress authorized and that President Clinton signed back in September of 1996. The rationale for this is very straightforward. Construction of this fence reduces illegal immigration. The Border Patrol has told us that the construction of the fence to date has reduced illegal immigration in that area by 80 percent. The gentleman from California (Mr. Berman) just 5 minutes ago talked about an integrated border security system that accomplishes just that, and this fence is part of that. Construction of the fence serves to protect our country from potential terrorist activity. I have a letter from the Secretary of the Navy here to our good friend, the gentleman from California (Mr. Hunter), that I will enter into the Record that highlights exactly that point relative to the naval base 4 miles north of the site in question. Construction of this fence is part of an integrated border security system identified in the 9/11 Commission report as a priority. I am not making this stuff up. This is part of an integrated border security system that this country has previously authorized that has been bogged down for 8 years in getting completed. I regret, I truly do regret, the impact this may have on environmental or cultural resources, but we need to make a choice. The votes we post will be clear: Are we for protecting this country by completing this fence, or are we not? Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. OSE. If the gentleman will yield further, as they relate to the fence, that is my intention.

Mr. OSE. Perhaps I can elucidate. The point of adding that particular provision is that, given the crush of time, I am a little bit concerned that we did not cover everything. There is no purpose here to include Davis-Bacon or employment or employee things. This is strictly an effort to remove impediments to the construction of this security fence.

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

Mr. OSE. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent that my amendment be modified in the form at the desk.

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

Mr. OSE

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

Mr. OSE. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks on H.R. 3242, the bill under consideration.

Mr. OSE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I am familiar with the marvelous bounty of the previous speaker's district, and I understand his concern. I welcome his cosponsorship of this bill because it has been an important part of our success. I also want to make sure that all parties know the integral part that the chairman and the ranking member played in getting this bill to this point. They have been most accommodating in providing us with guidance and insight as to the art of the possible, and I think we have achieved that. I know that everybody on the committee when we had markups spoke very positively about the days ahead, as we work together within the agricultural family so that all of our producers have the opportunity to succeed. Mr. Speaker, I have no additional speakers, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. OSE. Mr. Speaker, I want to recognize the able assistance of certain members, both majority and minority staffs, specifically Brent Gattis and Elizabeth Parker on the majority staff, and Ms. Lisa Kelley on the minority staff. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of the United States speciality crop industry; an industry united behind a strong beginning to what will eventually become great changes in the history of Federal agricultural policy. I rise to support H.R. 3242 and a united specialty crop industry. This industry is comprised of fruits and vegetables, nuts and nursery crops as well as many other agricultural niche markets. This industry represents the largest farm gate value in the country, $58.7 billion according to USDA's Economic Research Service. It also represents the largest nutritional value in the Nation, providing over 60 percent of the recommended daily servings for the United States. This industry does not receive price support payments and is frequently subjected to foreign price support mechanisms. Due to the industry's diverse array of products, the specialty crop industry in the United States faces a higher number of emerging pests and diseases every month than any other market in the world. This problem is compounded by frequent trade restrictions and the imposition of sanitary and phytosanitary barriers placed on our commodities to protect other countries from the very pests we are attempting to keep out of our borders. Despite these sweeping problems, the growers, shippers, and packers remain committed to participating in this vital agricultural sector. For these reasons I introduced H.R. 3242, along with my colleague, Cal Dooley. This bill seeks to expand on successful domestic policies, not by undermining our neighbors here at home, but by beating back the competition that seeks to crush our domestic producers. The concepts contained within H.R. 3242 are about exporting product; the movement of product out of the United States, to meet the global competition head on. To liberalize trade outside the boundaries of the United States and within, our domestic producers must be given the proper tools to compete. A viable specialty crop industry is imperative to maintaining the concept of liberalized trade. The future of U.S. agriculture, both at home and abroad is entirely dependent on the industry as a whole cooperating and communicating to build successful Federal policies together. Fighting here at home amongst ourselves diminishes the strength of a U.S. domestic policy and makes us vulnerable to our competitors who view this as weakness. This industry must learn to beat back competitors together, accomplish objectives together, and ultimately take back the market share that has been lost. This is a small step, however significant to giving a sector of the industry the opportunity to compete globally, export internationally, and create or expand niche markets here at home. H.R. 3242 also provides a venue for an exchange of ideas on different levels of success in all areas of agriculture. This bill that I have offered here today seeks to lay a foundation for success for all of our producers. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. OSE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. (Mr. OSE asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. OSE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. (Mr. OSE asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks, and include extraneous material.) Mr. Speaker, I will include in the Record at this point an exchange of letters between the Committee on Agriculture and the Committee on Ways and Means regarding H.R. 3242. House of Representatives, Committee on Ways and Means, Washington, DC, October 6, 2004. Hon. Bob Goodlatte, Chairman, Committee on Agriculture, Longworth House Office Building, Washington, DC. Dear Chairman Goodlatte: I am writing concerning H.R. 3242, the ``Specialty Crops Competitiveness Act of 2004,'' which is scheduled for floor consideration today. As you know, the Committee on Ways and Means has jurisdiction over matters concerning the Office of the United States Trade Representative (USTR). Section 301 of the introduced bill establishes at least one position within the USTR having sole responsibility over trade matters concerning specialty crops, and thus falls within the jurisdiction of the Committee on Ways and Means. Because you have removed this provision during Committee action, and in order to expedite this legislation for floor consideration, the Committee will forgo action on this bill. This is being done with the understanding that it does not in any way prejudice the Committee with respect to the appointment of conferees or its jurisdictional prerogatives on this or similar legislation. Thank you for your letter which confirms this understanding with respect to H.R. 3242, and I would ask that a copy of our exchange of letters on this matter be included in the Congressional Record during floor consideration. Best regards, Bill Thomas, Chairman.

Mr. OSE. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 3242) to ensure an abundant and affordable supply of highly nutritious fruits, vegetables, and other specialty crops for American consumers and international markets by enhancing the competitiveness of United States-grown specialty crops, and for other purposes, as amended.

Mr. OSE

Mr. OSE. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to have the name of the gentlewoman from Missouri (Mrs. Emerson) removed as a cosponsor of H.R. 3242.

Mr. OSE

Mr. OSE. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Tennessee for yielding me this time, and I thank the gentleman from Illinois for his kind remarks. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H.R. 4807, the Adam G. Kinser Post Office Act. Adam was a national hero, a loving son and brother, a dedicated student, an athlete, and a proud father to be. These are just a few phrases that can be used to describe him. Frankly, while no list of descriptions can ever do justice to understanding his bravery, the compassion of this young man who gave his life for his country at age 21 merits recognition. Adam Gareth Kinser was born in 1983, and from the age of 5 was raised in Rio Vista, California the very southern portion of my district. He and his four younger siblings grew up there. Even as a child, Adam stood out in his community, not only to his family and friends but also to his peers, teachers and teammates. He was a hardworking student. Adam was even a teaching assistant in some of his high school classes, and a former teacher described him as, frankly, the best the United States has to offer. His positive attitude, his willingness to help others, his kind heart made him a natural role model to his friends and classmates. He was a leader on the field. He was also an outstanding varsity athlete. He ran track, played basketball, and he started on the football team as quarterback for three seasons, so as a sophomore, junior and senior. Adam's leadership and compassion extended beyond school and the athletic fields into his home, where he acted as a mentor and a protector to his younger siblings, one of whom recalls that Adam ``was always protecting me, even when I didn't want it.'' A true role model and leader in his community, Adam also wanted to serve and protect his country, even as such a young man. During his senior year in high school, he joined the Army Reserve and was attending boot camp at Fort Bragg, North Carolina, on September 11, 2001. Adam was called up for active duty in July of 2003 and served in Afghanistan with the Army Reserves' 304th Psychological Operations Company. During Christmas 2003, Adam returned home for some well-earned R&R, where his wife, Tiffany, surprised him with the amazing gift of an ultrasound of their soon-to-be-born son. Adam was ecstatic to be a father, and after returning to fulfill his duty in Afghanistan, he literally was counting down the days until he would be reunited with his wife and new baby. As my colleagues have said, a tragic turn of events prevented Adam from coming home. On January 29 of this year, Adam was among nine soldiers doing his duty working on a weapons cache near Ghanzi, 60 miles southwest of Kabul. An explosion took place that took his life and that of eight others. Adam's death sent the Rio Vista community into a period of mourning and a recognition of loss for the young man that many knew and loved. They had watched Adam with pride from the time he was 5 years old, growing up to become a strong athlete, an excellent student and a brave soldier. Adam was the first Rio Vistan to give his life in wartime since the Korean War, and he will be missed by his newborn son and his family as well as by the whole community of Rio Vista. Mr. Speaker, in order to ensure that the memory of this young man, this father, this brave soldier lives on, I am sponsoring this legislation to rename the post office in Adam's hometown in his name. It would be a great honor not only to his family but also to the Rio Vista community for this country to honor this true hero who valiantly gave back to his country that which is most precious, his life.