Chip Pickering

Mr. PICKERING

Mr. PICKERING. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that when the House adjourns today, it adjourn to meet at 12:30 p.m. on Monday next for morning hour debates.

Mr. PICKERING

Mr. PICKERING. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to address one of the many reforms I believe are necessary to improve the administrative processes of the Federal Communications Commission (FCC). The issue that I believe needs to be addressed immediately relates to the proliferation of merger activity in the telecommunications industry. Since passage of the Telecommunications Act of 1996, the industry has seen massive upheaval as companies try to position themselves for the new Information Age economy. Many of these companies are attempting to combine their strengths to better position themselves to compete in a deregulated marketplace. One of the problems these companies have faced recently is the regulatory uncertainty of the FCC's merger review process. As we all know, the telecommunications industry is one of the key driving forces of our economy. As such, we in the Congress need to ensure that unnecessary government intervention doesn't cause needless delay in bringing new and innovative products to the market. Even more so, we must ensure that the business community is not competitively disadvantaged by an endless regulatory review process. Whenever a company is required to seek approval of the government, there is some uncertainty, particularly as it relates to the length of merger review. My bill is narrowly crafted to remedy this situation. My bill would require the FCC to approve or deny a merger application within 60 days of being on public notice, the FCC can extend this by 30 days with a majority vote by the Commissioners. When reviewing mergers or acquisitions by small- or mid-sized companies the time frame is limited to 45 days with no extensions. It's that simple--no delays, no foot-dragging. When Congress passed the Telecommunications Act of 1996, the Congress imposed a variety of time constraints on the FCC. I believe that many of us who were involved in that process did not think that we would subject the business community to these lengthy and uncertain delays at the FCC. One of the biggest problems that some of my constituents have raised with me is not knowing if a merger will take 3 months, 9 months or even 16 months. There is simply no logic or rationale to the FCC's lengthy process. The uncertainty of the regulatory process can have devastating effects on both large and small companies. This potential for lengthy reviews can force companies to miss product roll-outs, miss a window of opportunity to raise venture capital, and at times has been manipulated by competitors to forestall a decision by the agency. We simply cannot allow these scenarios to continue. This legislation will do what all legislation should do--it requires the processes of government to work for the community they are meant to serve. Giving a definite time period for reviewing a merger will allow companies to better plan their entries into new markets. It will give Wall Street more certainty in making investment decisions. And finally, it will remove the oftentimes subjective nature of the review process and require the agency to reach a decision in a fair and efficient manner.

Mr. PICKERING

Mr. PICKERING. Mr. Speaker, I rise to pay tribute to Willie Morris-- the great Mississippi writer who dedicated a lifetime to exploring what it means to be a Southerner, and showing what it means to be a friend. And today many friends and admirers are grieving over his death earlier this week. Everyone who loved Willie and cared for his work understands what a terrible loss this is. In his own unique way, he touched countless souls with his emotional honesty and boyish sense of humor. His perspective was a refreshing retreat from the culture of cynicism that poisons our society, and corrodes our democracy. William Morris was an American original, and a Mississippi legend. And, the truth is, it's hard to imagine Mississippi without Willie Morris. Willie grew up in Yazoo City, Mississippi, a small town on the edge of the Delta, and went on to study at the University of Texas, where he was awarded a Rhodes Scholarship. At 32, he became the youngest editor-in-chief of Harper's magazine in New York City. In the 1980s he came back to his native Mississippi to teach writing at Ole Miss and to write books. Willie Morris wrote about the little things that make small-town life special--like football games, dogs, and hole-in-the-wall restaurants. He also wrote about the big things--like faith, family and friendship. But Willie never shied away from putting these heart-warming descriptions in the context of the South's racial history, or revealing the challenges of laying down its burden. He did this magnificently, I felt, in ``The Courting of Marcus Dupree''--a story about how the outstanding high school football star helped breakdown long-held hostilities between whites and blacks in Philadelphia, Mississippi. In this book and others, Willie acknowledged the progress made toward racial harmony in Mississippi and across America. As someone who lived through the transition from the Old South to the New South, he had seen dramatic change in his homeland. But one way or another, he always found a way to say: ``We must do better.'' Another favorite theme of Willie's was dogs. ``Every little boy ought to have a dog,'' he once said. In My Dog Skip and North Toward Home, he told some of the best dog stories I've ever heard, stories that inspire the warmest memories of the dogs of our own childhood. Many are so good they make you wish you had lived them yourself--like the time at age 12 when he taught his English Fox Terrier, Skip, how to drive a car: ``I would get the dog to prop himself against the steering wheel,'' he writes, ``his black head peering out the windshield, while I crouched out of sight under the dashboard. Slowing the care to ten or fifteen, I would guide the steering wheel with my right hand while Skip, with his paws, kept it steady. As we drove by the Blue-Front Cafe, I could hear one of the (old) men shout: `Look at that ol' dog drivin' a car!' '' Willie Morris loved life and all things in it. And most of all, he loved making friends and encouraging others. Several years ago, a young writer friend of mine from Texas met Willie and after their meeting sent Willie an essay he had been working on. Days later my friend received his essay, with excellent edits, and a hand-written note from Willie that said: ``You're a damn fine writer. Keep the faith, my friend!'' That letter now hangs framed, on my friend's wall, as a medal of encouragement. Mark Twain once said: ``the great people in life are the ones that tell others that they, too, can be great.'' Willie Morris was one of those great people. He was the kind of guy that once he made friends with you, he was a friend for life. Our good friend Willie Morris has gone away, but his beautiful words and sweet spirit will live on forever and ever. Our thoughts and prayers are with his wife, Joanne Prichard, and his son, David Rae, in this difficult time.

Mr. PICKERING

Mr. PICKERING. Mr. Speaker, on rollcall votes Nos. 360, 361, and 362, I was unavoidably detained. Had I been present, I would have voted ``aye'' on No. 360; ``no'' on No. 361; and ``aye'' on No. 362.

Mr. PICKERING

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

Mr. PICKERING. Mr. Speaker, I, too, would hope that when the gentleman from Texas goes to conference on this bill, that he will make an effort to see the amount of money used to provide relief to these married taxpayers is significantly greater than the amount set forth in the House bill. I also want to join my colleague, Mr. Speaker, in thanking the gentleman for his leadership on a great package of tax relief and thank him for his assurances on this issue as well.

Mr. PICKERING

Mr. PICKERING. Mr. Speaker, I was unavoidably detained and missed the following rollcall vote: Rollcall vote No. 295, H.R. 2466. Had I been present, I would have voted ``aye.''

Mr. PICKERING

Mr. PICKERING. Mr. Speaker, I rise in respect and remembrance of a gracious and remarkable lady in my district, Mrs. LaVonne Bishop, affectionately known as ``Miss LaVonne'' who passed away on July 10, 1999, at her home in St. Catherine's Village in Madison, MS. She was 95 years of age, and the widow of the late Herbert Bishop, a former mayor of Forest, and a banking official, who served for many years as the President of the Farmers and Merchants Bank in Forest, Mississippi, now known as Community Bank. Miss LaVonne was born in Magee, MS and moved to Forest, MS at an early age. She graduated from Forest High School in 1920, and earned her music degree from Belhaven College in the mid-twenties. Upon graduation from Belhaven, she returned to Forest and taught music in the Forest school system until her marriage to Mr. Bishop. For the greater part of her life, Miss LaVonne focused her efforts on building a strong church and community relations in Forest and Scott County. Very seldom was there a civic or community project developed within the city of Forest, or the county of Scott, that she did not have some input. Because of her efforts in community development, Forest was named a winner in the National Community Achievement Contest in 1960, and in 1962, Miss LaVonne was named Mississippi Club Woman of the Year. She also served as chairwoman for many Merit Programs sponsored by the State Chamber of Commerce. Further, for many years, she served as chairperson for the Forest Miss Hospitality committee, and actively participated in drives that benefited the Hospital Auxiliary, the Cancer Fund, the Heart Fund, and the March of Dimes Fund. At Forest Baptist Church, she was the church organist for more than 50 years. On a number of occasions, she served as President of the Women's Missionary Union, and was a teacher and pianist in the junior department. At St. Catherine Village, she was pianist for the choir and the residents of Siena, the nursing division of the Village. Up until her death, she and her piano partner, Grant Smith, performed periodic concerts in the area surrounding Jackson. Miss LaVonne was very devoted to her family. If you wanted to see pride and job at its apex, then start a conversation about her children, Neill (Mrs. Wade Barton) and Gene and their families, her late husband Herbert and his family, her parents the late Mr. and Mrs. H. H. Little and her brother Woodrow. Also, very dear to Miss LaVonne as her friend, Mrs. Alice Burke and her family, who worked at the Bishop household for many years. Miss LaVonne's life and legacy can be summed up with one word LOVE; Love for God, Love for Family, Love for Friends, Love for Country, Love for State, and by all means, Love for Forest and Scott County. She was truly a great Christian, and an American, and I extend my heartfelt sympathy to her family, while at the same time, expressing my appreciation, and that of all citizens of the 3rd district for her life of service.

Mr. PICKERING

Mr. PICKERING. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of Mr. Hutchinson's substitute to H.R. 1658, the Asset Forfeiture Bill. We all agree the fundamental principle of fairness should play a central role in asset forfeiture proceedings: the burden of proof should be on the government; the government should not hold property without probable cause; a property owner should have an early opportunity to challenge a seizure of assets and innocent owners should be protected. These examples of fairness are already important features of current asset forfeiture law, and are advanced in the Hutchinson substitute without undermining the important role asset forfeiture law plays in modern law enforcement. Today in my district, State and Local Law Enforcement officials confront sophisticated criminals and criminal enterprises in possession of illegal property, and in many circumstances, controlling vast ill- gotten resources. Asset forfeiture law allows State and Local law enforcement officials to separate these criminals and enterprises from their illegal resources, denying them the use of these resources to continue their criminal businesses or defend themselves from personal criminal charges. Any modification in asset forfeiture law should preserve this important effect of asset forfeiture on criminals. While reform of asset forfeiture law to reduce the already infrequent, occasional unfair outcome for a particular individual is appropriate, criminals should not benefit from the modifications designed to improve and bolster the rights of innocent property owners and law abiding citizens. The Hutchinson substitute produces this sensible reform without removing from our local law enforcement officials one of their most important and effective tools against criminals and their crack houses, drug money, drug vehicles and the myriad of other resources and property criminals possess. It is important to remember the focus of asset forfeiture law is the illegal property. The illegal property itself, be it drug money or its proceeds in the form of cars, or planes or houses, is subject to forfeiture because it constitutes the bounty of a criminal enterprise, and thus is illegal. It is illegal in and of itself, like heroin itself, or cocaine, and thus similarly subject to forfeiture. Insofar as a person unconnected to the criminal enterprise has a legal property interest in the property, he or she may state their claim and reclaim their property. Under current law, criminals and those with illegal interests in the property are distinguished from those with legal interests by procedures in the law which the Substitute preserves. Unlike the bill advanced by the respected Chairman of the Judiciary Committee, the substitute strengthens this distinction, protecting the innocent while disentitling the criminal. I urge passage of the Hutchinson substitute.

Mr. PICKERING

Mr. PICKERING. Mr. Chairman, I am proud and pleased to rise in support of the amendment as an original cosponsor with the gentleman from New Jersey. I would like to take a second to address some of the issues raised by the gentleman from Oregon. In 1996, the Telecommunications Act was passed that set up the E-rate that is now providing $1.6 billion in subsidies to link our schools and libraries to the Internet. Now, this opens up educational and discovery opportunities and learning opportunities as a tool for our teachers. It is a zone of discovery but it is also a danger zone. The gentleman from Oregon said that this is costly and difficult to do. What is the cost of not protecting our children? Let me share one example that I have learned of today. An 11-year-old boy went to a public library and began viewing a pornographic site. He returned to his neighborhood where there was a 5-year-old little girl next door and he molested her, acting out the scenes he saw at the public library. He was arrested. Pornography destroys families, as it destroyed the youth and the innocence of this little girl. The gentleman from Oregon mentioned cost, most of these filtering products are $25 to $50. Is that too high of a cost to protect our children from pornography? Each school district has the opportunity to decide which technology is best. It is flexible, it is workable, it is the right thing to do to protect our children. It is constructed in a constitutionally sound way. The Littleton violence that we saw, the young, violent offenders of Littleton were looking at Internet sites to see how to construct a bomb, hate-filled sites. With these commonsense filters, we can protect our children from access to violent, hate-filled sites, to pornographic sites, to obscene sites, which then lead them to act out very destructive behaviors. Mr. Chairman, I ask the Members of this body to support this amendment, to protect our children, and to do what is right.

Mr. PICKERING

Mr. PICKERING. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to have the opportunity today to introduce companion legislation to S. 1108, the Crop Insurance Equity Act of 1999, introduced by Senators Cochran and Lincoln on May 24, 1999. This legislation will effectively function to reform the problems farmers across the nation have encountered with the current infeasible federal crop insurance program. Participants in the federal crop insurance program will find that this legislation benefits farmers nationwide, not simply farmers in one region of the country. The Crop Insurance Equity Act of 1999 requires that the Federal Crop Insurance Corporation re-evaluate current rating methods and processes used in rating crop insurance rates by September 30, 2000. In doing this, the rates paid by many farmers may be reduced through these new procedures. However, if it is found that through this reassessment rates would increase for farmers in certain geographic areas, the current rating system is to remain in place. In restructuring these rates, FCIC will begin its reassessment with those commodities with the lowest participation rate of buy-up coverage plans. Currently, farmers who buy the highest levels of buy-up coverage receive the lowest levels of government premium subsidy. This is a direct link to the low percentage of farmers who purchase buy-up coverage in my state. The Crop Insurance Equity Act of 1999 will equalize all levels of buy-up coverage ensuring that all farmers, no matter what level of buy-up coverage they purchase, will receive equal assistance from the federal government in their purchase of buy-up coverage. This legislation will further work to make federal crop insurance more appealing by establishing a system of discounts and other policy options from which farmers may choose. Farmers who effectively manage farm risk through good management practices which reduce the risk of an insurable loss will receive discounts toward premiums on their insurance coverage. In doing so, the federal crop insurance program will work in a manner like other forms of insurance. If a driver has a good driving record, he or she should justly pay premiums that reflect such. In the same manner, under this legislation, farmers who rarely file insurable losses will receive premium discounts under the pilot program established by this bill. All farmers will benefit from the reform set by the Crop Insurance Equity Act of 1999 as this legislation raises the basic coverage level for catastrophic coverage, the lowest unit of crop insurance protection. Currently, this basic level of protection is completely free to the farmer and covers 50% of the grower's average production history at 55% of market price. This legislation will increase that basic coverage level to 60% of the farmer's average production history at 70% of the market price. Doing so will offer am ore feasible safety net to the producer should a loss be incurred. Mr. Speaker, farmers in my home state of Mississippi assert that one of the primary problems faced by the current crop insurance program is that it is sometimes abused and exploited by farmers who seek to swindle the federal government at the expense of fellow producers. The Crop Insurance Equity Act of 1999 will reduce insurance fraud through imposing stiffer penalties for anyone, including insurance companies, agents, and producers, who participate in fraudulent activities. This legislation will also protect new farmers or farmers who rent new land or decide to produce new crops by assigning them a fair yield until they are able to generate sufficient actual production data. In addition, farmers who encounter multiple year disasters will be protected by being assigned a yield equal to eighty-five percent of the county transition yield for nay year in which the farmer's yield falls below that eighty-five percent level. The Crop Insurance Equity Act of 1999 reforms the Federal Crop Insurance Corporation Board of Directors to include more farmers from different regions of the United States and creates an office to work with private insurance companies who develop new crop insurance products. The legislation goes further by reducing the amount of excessive underwriting gains received by these insurance companies. Mr. Speaker, our agricultural producers are demanding a more feasible and more affordable federal crop insurance program. I believe that this crop insurance legislation is a sound and fair proposal which can be supported by producers from all regions of the nation.

Mr. PICKERING

Mr. PICKERING. Mr. Speaker, today I am proud to introduce alongside my colleagues, Mr. Thompson of California and Mr. Chambliss of Georgia, the Wetlands Reserve Program Enhancement Act to extend authority for the Wetlands Reserve Program (WRP) to help family farmers stay on their land, and to benefit waterfowl and sportsmen at the same time. Across the country, thousands of private landowners have discovered the WRP is an attractive alternative to farming high-risk and high-cost cropland that is frequently flooded. WRP provides these landowners with a voluntary, financial incentive to restore such areas to wetlands. The landowner in turn is free to use his or her WRP incentive payment to refinance debt, upgrade machinery or to buy additional land to make their farming operation more profitable. In my hope state of Mississippi, WRP has been a very popular program with private landowners, and for good reason. With today's farm crisis, WRP is helping Mississippi farmers who could not otherwise afford to stay on their land or to pass it on to future generations. To give you a better idea of how popular WRP has been with farmers, let me share with you some statistics. Since 1992, nearly 4,000 landowners from 47 states have enrolled 655,000 acres in WRP nationwide. My home state of Mississippi has benefited through the WRP by enrolling more than 74,000 acres for the purpose of wetland conservation. However, due to limited funding, only about one-third of all eligible Mississippi landowners could be accepted into the program. In some states, landowner demand for WRP exceeds available funding 5 to 1. Mr. Speaker, many more wetland acres could be preserved nationwide through the provisions of this bill. The purpose of the Wetlands Reserve Enhancement Act is to extend WRP authority to help more landowners in the future. Specifically, my legislation extends WRP authority for enrolling new lands by three years to 2005, and replaces the current WRP acreage cap with a new 250,000-acre annual enrollment limit. This will allow 4,000 to 5,000 additional landowners to enroll in WRP over the next five years. This additional land enrolled in WRP will benefit not only farmers, but also waterfowl and other wetland wildlife. In the Mississippi Delta states, most of WRP land is planted in high-quality hardwood trees that flood in the winter and provide critical habitat for waterfowl and other wildlife. In fact, WRP has become one of the largest wetland restoration programs ever attempted on private lands. WRP is restoring waterfowl breeding habitat in states like South Dakota, Minnesota and Wisconsin. It is restoring migration habitat in Illinois, Iowa, Ohio and New York. Most of all, WRP is restoring waterfowl wintering habitat in such diverse states as California, Texas and Louisiana. Where there are ducks, there are duck hunters. Many waterfowlers have discovered that private land enrolled in WRP makes for excellent hunting. In places like Mississippi that have a proud waterfowling tradition, access to quality hunting sites is in high demand. In many cases, WRP is creating new opportunities for sportsmen to participate in this time-honored tradition. My legislation seeks to encourage more of these kinds of partnerships and to ensure that WRP takes every advantage of opportunities to restore and enhance wetland habitat for waterfowl. In summary, this legislation represents a win-win opportunity for farmers, conservationists, sportsmen, and wildlife. This is a commonsense proposal which I believe my colleagues in the House will find good reason to support. The WRP is the kind of non-regulatory, incentive based conservation program that landowners want and wildlife need as we enter the next century.

Mr. PICKERING

Mr. PICKERING. Mr. Speaker, I would like to pay tribute to Mr. W.A. ``Bill'' Taylor, a friend of mine in Louisville, Mississippi. He is truly a man for all seasons. Mr. Taylor is a business leader, a philanthropist, and the CEO and Chairman of the Board of The Taylor Group, Inc. Mr. Taylor's company was formed by his father, Mr. W.A. ``Spec'' Taylor is 1927 as a small, family-owned automotive and machine repair business. Today, it employs more than 1,000 people and is comprised of seven subsidiary companies that manufacture all types of machinery. Its ``Big Red'' product line is synonymous with quality and durability throughout the world. Mr. Taylor built his company on three words: Faith, Vision, and Work. He has used that motto successfully in business as well as other aspects of his life. Civic and community service activities continue to be a major part of Mr. Taylor's life. He served as a director of the National Association of Manufacturers (NAM), Construction Industry Manufacturers Association, Mississippi State University Development Foundation, Jackson Symphony Orchestra, Kidney Foundation of Mississippi and the Pshmataha Council of Boy Scouts of America. This week, he was inducted into the Mississippi Business Hall of Fame. Mr. Taylor's pride and joy are his wife Mitzie, his sons Lex and Robert and their wives, his daughter Teresa, and four grandchildren, Alexis, Bailey, Davis, and Zachary. He has prioritized his life to put his faith, family, and community in the forefront of his life. He is truly a leader in the Third District of Mississippi and I am proud to call him my friend.

Mr. PICKERING

Mr. PICKERING. Mr. Speaker, I would like to pay tribute to an extraordinary Mississippian, Mr. J.P. ``Jake'' Mills. I am sad to say that he passed away on Saturday, April 17, 1999. I am proud to say that Jake Mills was a friend of mine and I am thankful for the time I spent with him. Jake Mills was truly a remarkable person. He touched countless lives, traveling extensively across the country where he formed friendships and ties that made him such a special person. He had a quick wit and a broad knowledge of Biblical scriptures--sometimes combining the two to make a serious point in a humorous way. He was very active in a wide variety of religious, business, and community organizations. Jake was a devout Christian and he lived his life in a way that reflected his beliefs and values. He served on the board of ``Ministry to Men,'' an organization dedicated to strengthening families through personal responsibility. He also worked to found the Mississippi Fellowship of Christian Athletes. As an advocate for improving education, he served as an outspoken member of the State College Board in Mississippi. He always stood up for his beliefs and was never shy about expressing his views on what needed to be done to improve higher education for our state. In 1973, Jake founded J.P. Mills, Inc., a successful business in Tupelo, Mississippi. He served on numerous boards including the Community Development Foundation, Mississippi Economic Council, Petroleum Marketers Association, Business Industry Political Education Committee. My heartfelt sympathy goes out to his wife, Jane, and their entire family. Mississippi has lost one of our finest leaders in Jake Mills. He set an example for all of us to follow and our country is a better place because of his life.

Mr. PICKERING

Mr. PICKERING. Mr. Speaker, Abraham Lincoln once said ``To care for him who shall have borne the battle, and for his widow and orphan . . .'' Today, we must follow his counsel. When veterans joined the military, they were promised ``free'' health care for life. There are some who would like to see the commitments this Nation made to our veterans just fade away--not to honor the promise that this Nation made to them. I do not believe we can allow that to happen. For that reason, Congressman Jerry Moran and I are introducing the Veterans Health Care Improvement Act of 1999. This legislation will enable us to deliver on the promises our country made to its veterans who answered the call to duty. The men and women of America's Armed Forces have been faithful in their service. They have not asked much--just what they were promised. Our Nation pledged to provide these veterans quality health care. We have fallen short on that promise. The Veterans Health Care Improvement Act of 1999 will make health care for our veterans better and more accessible. First, the bill establishes a voluntary Medicare subvention demonstration project that allows Medicare to reimburse the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) for Medicare health care services furnished to certain veterans at VA medical facilities. This will give veterans more flexibility in choosing their health care providers. The bill directs the administering Secretaries to select up to ten demonstration sites in geographically dispersed locations for program participation. Of these ten sites, one must be in an area near a base closed by the base realignment and closure law and one must be a predominantly rural area. None of the demonstration project funds may be used to build new buildings or expand existing ones. This 3-year program begins on January 1, 2000. The bill also authorizes the Secretary of the VA to establish and operate four managed health care plans at demonstration sites. Tricare, the health care program for all branches of the military must be reformed. Many veterans are refused by physicians because Tricare is notorious for delinquent reimbursements and because the reimbursement rates often fall below those allowed by Medicare. This bill takes a big step toward leveling the playing field for our veterans. The bill directs the Secretary to ensure that health care coverage available through the Tricare program is substantially similar to the health care coverage available to Federal employees; makes benefits portable; minimizes the certification requirements for access to the extent possible; and requires that claims be processed and payed in a simplified and expedited manner. These changes will begin to eliminate the bureaucratic red tape and improve access and payments for beneficiaries. The bill also allows the Secretary of Defense to increase the reimbursement rate for Tricare if it is necessary to ensure quality health care for veterans. The bill includes a sense of Congress urging the Secretary of Veterans Affairs to ``review their policies and procedures to identify areas in which the administration does not currently process claims for veterans in a manner consistent with the objectives set forth in the national performance review, and to initiate the necessary actions to process such claims in such manner and report to Congress on measures taken to improve the processing time of claims.'' In summary, this bill will do much to improve the quality of health care for our Nation's veterans. The heart-wrenching film ``Saving Private Ryan'' portrayed the enormous dedication and sacrifice our veterans endured on behalf of this Nation. As the number of elderly veterans continues to increase, it is imperative that we take the necessary steps to protect them--and to honor our commitment to them. I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting our veterans by improving their health care system.

Mr. PICKERING

Mr. PICKERING. Mr. Speaker, I would like to pay tribute to a remarkable lady, Mrs. Fay Martin Johnston. Mrs. Johnston was one of my constituents from Forest, Mississippi. She passed away on February 27, 1999. Mrs. Johnston was born in Edwards, Mississippi and was a resident of Forest since 1941. Mrs. Johnston was the wife of the late Eric E. Johnston, Jr. He was the former editor and publisher of the Scott County Times newspaper, Mayor of Forest, and noted author of books related to Mississippi politics. During World War II, Mrs. Johnston assumed publication of the Scott County Times newspaper when her husband was called into the Army. She literally ``did it all''--writing, editing, and operating the printing press in order to get the paper published. Mrs. Johnston was a charter member of the Scott County Chapter of the Daughters of the American Revolution and was actively involved in the Forest Presbyterian Church. Mrs. Johnston's pride and joy was her family that included daughters Carol (Mrs. Bob Lindley), and Lynn (Mrs. Ben Catalina) and their families, her son Erle ``Bubby'' Johnston III, and his wife. Mr. Sid Salter, current editor and publisher of the Scott County Times said, ``Fay Johnston was a great lady and matriarch of a great newspaper family in Mississippi. She and Erle dedicated their lives to this community and were good stewards of the newspaper. In return they had the respect of the community and many, many friends here. The Johnston family has left a great mark on this city and county.'' The legacy Mrs. Johnston leaves behind may best be described as love of God, love of family, love of Mississippi and country, and certainly love of Scott County and the town of Forest. I wish to extend my sympathy to her family, while at the same time, express my appreciation for her life of service.

Mr. PICKERING

Mr. PICKERING. Mr. Speaker, I was unavoidably detained and missed the following rollcall vote: Rollcall vote No. 71, H. Res. 130. Had I been present, I would have voted ``aye.''

Mr. PICKERING

Mr. PICKERING. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H.R. 1212, offered by my good friend, the chairman of the Committee on Agriculture, and I commend him for his leadership on this issue. I also want to recognize the ranking member, the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Stenholm), as this is a bipartisan effort to address a very critical need for our American farmers. Today, through no fault of their own, many hard-working Mississippi farmers are left with crop insurance that does not meet the needs of their farming operations or, even worse, they are left with no crop insurance at all. I share the chairman's view that leaving farmers in this predicament is unacceptable, and gladly, H.R. 1212 fixes that problem. H.R. 1212 gives Mississippi farmers, and farmers throughout the country who have already been adversely affected by this ordeal, a new window of opportunity to buy the insurance coverage they need. Mr. Speaker, American farmers borrow more money each year and every year than most of us borrow in a lifetime, to plant a crop so that we can all enjoy low prices at the grocery store and so that the whole world can eat. Each and every year this is an incredible gamble for each of the farmers, because markets may not even provide these farmers enough to pay back their loans or cover their costs of production. Worse yet, the weather could rob them of their crop completely. H.R. 1212 offers our Nation's farmers the chance they need to protect this huge investment and gives them just a little peace of mind. Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to vote for this very timely and important piece of legislation. I also want to join with my colleagues to say that this is just an interim fix, that the long-term crop insurance reform for a comprehensive solution is coming, and we need to all work with the same type of bipartisan consensus and effort to fix the underlying problem of an inadequate crop insurance program. I look forward to working with my colleagues on this and the long-term solution in the days to come.

Mr. PICKERING

Mr. PICKERING. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H. Res. 121, condemning hatred and bigotry in all forms. But I rise today with a certain amount of sadness about the nature of this debate. If my colleagues do not mind, I would like to talk in a personal way about my family and life experience as it comes to this issue and what my hope is for my service and my contribution to this body. In 1963, the day I was born, my father was elected as county attorney in Jones County, Mississippi, one of the most violent and turbulent places in the country during the civil rights initiative. During that period of time, he testified against the Imperial Wizard of the KKK, Sam Bowers. In 1968, because of his stand against the Klan and against the violence, and because he testified against Sam Bowers, he lost his next election. But I can tell my colleagues that, as his son, I am very proud of what he did during that time. He left me a rich legacy, an example of courage. I hope I can do the same for my five boys. In 1969, my first grade class was the first to be integrated in Mississippi. I want to be part of a new generation that brings reconciliation among our races. This debate today, I am afraid, is not about reconciliation, and it is not about unity. It is about dividing. It is about personal destruction. It is about partisan advantage. I hope we can all step back and look not only at the objective of racial reconciliation and condemning all bigotry and all hatred, but to see it this way, that this House, that this body can come together in everything we do with a true goal, a true purpose of reconciliation, of unity. Then this country and this House will be a better place because of it.

Mr. PICKERING

Mr. PICKERING. Mr. Speaker, I would like to request that the following be included in the Extension of Remarks. It is a op-ed written by a Mr. Chester Thigpen, a constituent of mine from Montrose, Mississippi, that appeared in the Clarion-Ledger on February 27, 1999. Mr. Chester Thigpen has worked his entire life as a tree farmer to provide for his family--his wife and four children. Mr. Thigpen's first day's work, in 1918, yielded him 35 cents but, today he is a successful tree farmer. He has been a tree farmer for over forty years and is living the American dream. In his editorial, he raises some valuable points that members should bear in mind and I encourage them to read this editorial. [From the Montrose Clarion-Ledger, Feb. 27, 1999] Planting Trees May Help Reduce Global Warming (By Chester A. Thigpen) I hope that I can be forgiven for feeling like a bystander in the national debate on global warming. As I try to sift through the news coming out of Washington, the problem seems to pose a high environmental as well as economic danger. Yet something can be done about it, if President Clinton and Congress will mobilize Americans in a campaign to plant trees everywhere they will grow, especially on millions of acres of marginal farmland. As a farmer in Mississippi, I know something about the value of trees. Stands of loblolly pine on my 650-acre farm provide shade and prevent erosion, and they soak up huge amounts of carbon dioxide. There is plenty of reason to believe that a coordinated program to plant trees and properly manage our nation's forests is precisely the way to minimize the greenhouse warming problem, and it can be done without harming American living standards. Climate change affects us all, yet I'm struck by how little attention is being paid to actually dealing with the problem. Yes, President Clinton has asked Congress for $105 million to conduct research into how forest can offset greenhouse gas emissions by absorbing carbon dioxide. But convincing proof of nature's role in carbon storage already exists. Recently, a team of scientists, including experts from Columbia University and Princeton University, determined that more carbon may be stored by forests and other ecosystems in the United States than is released by industrial activities in this country. Scientists believe that one reason global temperatures have not increased as much as expected over the past half century may be that the forested portion of the Western world has grown during that time. Because young trees take in and store carbon dioxide, they act as nature's ``sink'' for vast amounts of carbon. It is through photosynthesis that trees and other vegetation generate life-giving oxygen and store carbon for decades in the form of wood. A nationally coordinated program to plant large numbers of trees and improve the health of the nation's forests could have a major impact. A study by American Forests, the nation's oldest conservation organization, estimated that such a program could offset 20 percent to 40 percent of the estimated 1.5 billion tons of carbon dioxide emitted each year in the U.S. Why not launch a serious tree planting effort now? Anything that can be done to save forests and plant trees on millions of acres might have more effect on global warming than all the emission regulations combined. Acre-for-acre, U.S. forests store 20 times more carbon than croplands do. Under the Federal Conservation Reserve Program, an estimated 4 million to 5 million acres of eroded land once used to grow crops have been converted to timberland. But with appropriate incentive to landowners, more than 100 million acres of marginal land considered biologically suitable for trees--an area three times the size of North Carolina--could be reforested. Planting large numbers of trees would provide many additional benefits--erosion control, protection of drinking water sources and better habitat for wildlife. Moreover, forests provide great economic benefits in valuable wood products. We should also plant more trees in cities and suburbs. By increasing the amount of shade in residential areas, trees and shrubs reduce the need for air conditioning while storing carbon from automobile exhausts and other fossil-fuel combustion. More trees mean cleaner air, and they provide green space for recreation.

Mr. PICKERING

Mr. PICKERING. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to a remarkable lady, and constituent of mine from the Third District, Mrs. Mary Cooper Stringer, who passed away on Friday January 15, 1999, in Forest, Mississippi, following a short illness. The Mississippi State Senate adjourned January 18, 1999, in her honor. Mrs. Stringer, along with her husband Robert P. ``Bob'' Stringer, lived in the Forest community for the past 40 years and was actively involved in community and local affairs. She was a graduate of Mississippi State College for Women, a member of the Eastern Star, and worked for the Pentagon after graduating from college. When not doting on her husband, Mrs. Stringer was cheering and backing her favorite team, the Mississippi State Bulldogs and striving to make her hometown the best it could be. Mrs. Stringer's first love was her husband Bob, their two daughters, Jean and Anne and their two sons, Robert and Johnny, along with their 13 grandchildren and one great grandson. Mrs. Stringer was a very astute businesswoman and a close friend of my predecessor Congressman G.V. ``Sonny'' Montgomery. She was very helpful and active in the planning of the Annual Montgomery Hunters Stew which Bob hosted for Congressman Montgomery each January, for the past 22 years. Mr. Stringer served on the Forest Board of Alderman for four terms before his retirement in June 1997. The legacy that Mrs. Stringer leaves behind will be very hard to emulate. She was a much admired lady. I extend my sympathy to her husband ``Bob'', and other family members while expressing my appreciation and that of every citizen of the 3rd District for her life of service.

Mr. PICKERING

Mr. PICKERING. Mr. Speaker, I was unavoidably detained and missed the following rollcall vote: Rollcall vote No. 25, H.R. 438. Had I been present, I would have voted ``aye.''

Mr. PICKERING

Mr. PICKERING. Mr. Speaker, it is with malice toward none and forgiveness of individual failures, but with a love of the law and our country, I will vote for the articles of impeachment. Yesterday my fifth son was born. I held before me my legacy. I celebrated his birth. I wondered what country he will inherit. What standard will we set for him, what example today? For each reaffirmation of the rule of law, we have a new birth of freedom. But if we say with our actions that perjury and obstruction of justice and truth do not matter, then we lose our way. For all of these reasons and more that I will submit for the Record, I will vote for the articles of impeachment. Mr. Speaker, this week has provided me with the full range and intensity of emotions. Today, I mourn--our Nation mourns as we debate the tragic and difficult question of impeaching our President. Yesterday my fifth son was born and with him all the wonder, amazement and celebration of new life. The doctor allowed me the privilege of actually guiding my child from his mother into this world. I was the first to touch and hold James Harper Pickering. Whenever we are confronted with the beginning--or the end of life it reminds us of a larger, transcendent force and causes us to evaluate and examine our purpose--our meaning--our legacy. What will be my son's future, what kind of country will he inherit, what values and standards will guide him, his generation, his future. In the same way--what guides me in this difficult decision before us today? In 1963 a young man at the age of 26 won the nomination to serve as a county (prosecuting) attorney in Mississippi's Jones County [from 1964- 1968]. On his election day, his son was born. These were difficult and turbulent days for our Nation and in particular for Mississippi. These were days filled with violence and lawlessness. In an act that was rare for elected officials at that time--he organized a group of local officials to publicly condemn the Klan violence and intimidation and called upon the community to support the rule of law. During the trial of Sam Bowers, the imperial wizard of the KKK, for the murder and fire bombing of Vernon Dahmers, this young county attorney testified against Bowers. He was threatened physically and politically. But he didn't back down from the principle of equal protection for all. In 1968 he lost his next race. The polls of that place and time were against him. But, his principles stood the test of time. His courage and conviction give me an example which makes me proud. His legacy guides me today. For that young county attorney, now a Federal judge--continues to defend the rule of law, administer justice and ensure equal protection for all--he is my father. As I held my son yesterday--I prayed I would provide him with he same legacy. That just as our founders and generations since fought to preserve the rule of law and with it our freedom, it is our duty today to honor their legacy. And, for our sons and daughters our obligation to leave them a rich inheritance of which they can be proud. We must demonstrate that it does not matter if you're a civil rights worker or a working woman--struggling against sexual harassment--you are guaranteed equal rights under our Constitution, the right to a fair trial--free of corruption of perjury, witness tampering and obstruction of justice. Abraham Lincoln stood at Gettysburg and called for a new birth of freedom. From this tragedy--we can rededicate ourselves to the rule of law and the faith in our country to endure. We can send a message to all the Presidents that will follow, to ourselves and to our children-- tell the truth--keep your oath--none is above the law. It is with malice toward none and forgiveness of individual failures but with a love of the law and of our country, I will vote for the articles of impeachment. We hold our legacy before us. With each reaffirmation of the rule of law we have a new birth of freedom--but if we say with our actions that perjury and obstruction of justice and truth do not matter then we can begin the long, slow death of our land and law. In the play ``Man For All Seasons'' the following line captures the essence of this debate: ``The laws of this country are the great barriers that protect the citizens from the winds of evil and tyranny. If we permit one of those laws to fall, who will be able to stand in the winds that follow?'' I believe by our action today and tomorrow we can stand in the gap and hold up the barriers that protect us all. Even if the polls of this time may be against us--the principles of this action will stand the test of history. And as my son holds his son or daughter--I pray, he too will thank those who went before him.

Mr. PICKERING

Mr. PICKERING. Mr. Speaker, on rollcall No. 516, I was unavoidably detained. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yea.''

Mr. PICKERING

Mr. PICKERING. Mr. Speaker, on September 5, 1998, Harry and Nancy E. Rothrock, Jr., of High Point, North Carolina celebrated a special day in their lives--their Golden Wedding Anniversary. It is with great pride and personal interest that I congratulate them on this special occasion. In this day and age when fewer couples can claim fifty years of marriage, Harry and Nancy Rothrock are the exception to the rule. For they have based their long lasting relationship on open communications, a personal commitment to one another, and genuine love. From 1948 to 1998, they experienced many ups and downs, and many trials and tribulations, but I know they would both say it has been well worth it. Harry and Nancy met at High Point College in 1946 where they were active in many campus activities. Harry was a baseball and basketball star, while Nancy was the ``May Day Queen'' and a cheerleader, Rumor has it that it took Harry three attempts before Nancy would go out on a date with him, but, in the end, it was ``love at first sight.'' Their marriage has been complemented with four children--Nancy, Jr., Alan, John and Doug--and three grandchildren--Abbey, Darus, and Elizabeth. The family celebrated the anniversary with a private dinner and were joined by Nancy's sister, Mrs. Betsy (George S.) Bouldin. Again, I want to send my sincerest congratulations and heart felt wishes to Harry and Nancy Rothrock on celebrating their 50th Wedding Anniversary.