Chip Pickering

Mr. PICKERING

Mr. PICKERING. Mr. Speaker, yesterday morning Mr. John Grayson Rothrock was sworn in as an Ensign in the U.S. Navy Reserve. John has been a loyal and effective member of my staff and I am proud to share him with the Navy. John fulfilled a lifelong ambition of serving his country in the U.S. Armed Forces. Surrounded by his mother, father and many friends he swore allegiance to the Constitution and its defense. I know that John does not take this oath lightly, because he is following a proud tradition in his family. His father, a combat veteran from World War II, participated in the ceremony and was able to receive the customary ``silver dollar'' for the first salute. I am proud of John and recognize him for hearing the call of duty and answering it with service in the U.S. Navy Reserve. It is a pleasure to have John serve in my office and I join my staff in wishing him the best of fortune in his new undertaking.

Mr. PICKERING

Mr. PICKERING. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to a man whose leadership and hard work has made the Mississippi band of Choctaw Indians a success story--that man is Chief Phillip Martin. Chief Martin has served the tribe for over 40 years--during that time he has strived to improve the health, wealth and welfare of the tribe by promoting self responsibility, self reliance and self governance. His mantra has been ``Choctaw self determination.'' Rather than rely on the Federal Government to address their needs, Chief Martin began to instill the values of self reliance in his tribal members and educate American businesses and industries about the economic opportunities available to them on tribal lands. As the Democratically elected leader of the Mississippi Band of Choctaw Indians, he has pursued a ``dual track'' to ensure that the tribe he leaves behind will be better than the one he was born into. First, Chief Martin has made enormous investments ensuring educational opportunities for the children of the tribe--including state of the art classrooms and scholarships for college-bound students. Next, he cultivated a business-friendly environment on tribal lands and developed more than a dozen commercial enterprises. These businesses now provide over 6,000 jobs to tribal members and their neighbors in the surrounding area--making the Choctaws the fifth largest employer in Mississippi and virtually eradicating unemployment among the Mississippi Choctaws. By believing in the abilities of the tribe and engaging businesses in the local economy, Chief Martin has proved that ``Choctaw self determination'' has worked.

Mr. PICKERING

Mr. PICKERING. Mr. Speaker, I was unable to return to the House floor because I was unavoidably detained and missed the following rollcall votes: (1) Rollcall vote No. 426, S. 2206. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yea.'' (2) Rollcall vote No. 427, H. Con. Res. 304. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yea.'' (3) Rollcall vote No. 428, H. Con. Res. 254. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yea.'' (4) Rollcall vote No. 429, H. Con. Res. 185. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yea.''

Mr. PICKERING

Mr. PICKERING. Mr. Speaker, I was unavoidably etained yesterday evening and today and missed the following Roll Call votes: Roll Call vote Number 383, the Souder amendment to H.R. 4276--FY 1999 Commerce, State, Justice, and the Judiciary Appropriations Act. Had I been present, I would have voted ``no.'' Roll Call vote Number 384, the Bass amendment to H.R. 4276--FY 1999 Commerce, State, Justice, and the Judiciary Appropriations Act. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yes.'' Roll Call vote Number 385, the Scott amendment to H.R. 4276--FY 1999 Commerce, State, Justice, and the Judiciary Appropriations Act. Had I been present, I would have voted ``no.'' Roll Call vote Number 386 the Gutknecht amendment to H.R. 4276--FY 1999 Commerce, State, Justice, and the Judiciary Appropriations Act. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yes.'' Roll Call vote Number 387, the DeGette amendment to H.R. 4276--FY 1999 Commerce, State, Justice, and the Judiciary Appropriations Act. Had I been present, I would have voted ``no.'' Roll Call vote Number 388, the Mollohan amendment to H.R. 4276--FY 1999 Commerce, State, Justice, and the Judiciary Appropriations Act. Had I been present, I would have voted ``no.'' Roll Call vote Number 389, the Pallone amendment to H.R. 4276--FY 1999 Commerce, State, Justice, and the Judiciary Appropriations Act. Had I been present, I would have voted ``no.'' Roll Call vote Number 390, the Engel amendment to H.R. 4276--FY 1999 Commerce, State, Justice, and the Judiciary Appropriations Act. Had I been present, I would have voted ``no.'' Roll Call vote Number 391, the Royce amendment to H.R. 4276--FY 1999 Commerce, State, Justice, and the Judiciary Appropriations Act. Had I been present, I would have voted ``no.'' Roll Call vote Number 392, the Bartlett amendment to H.R. 4276--FY 1999 Commerce, State, Justice, and the Judiciary Appropriations Act. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yes.'' Roll Call vote Number 393, the Talent amendment to H.R. 4276--FY 1999 Commerce, State, Justice, and the Judiciary Appropriations Act. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yes.'' Roll Call vote Number 394, the Stearns amendment to H.R. 4276--FY 1999 Commerce, State, Justice, and the Judiciary Appropriations Act. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yes.'' Roll Call vote Number 395, the Callahan amendment to H.R. 4276--FY 1999 Commerce, State, Justice, and the Judiciary Appropriations Act. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yes.''

Mr. PICKERING

Mr. PICKERING. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Mississippi (Mr. Wicker) for yielding. I rise with him to recognize the Mississippi Concert Singers and their accomplishment. They come from the University of Mississippi, the same place where the new director of the National Endowment for Humanities, Dr. William Ferris, the author of the Encyclopedia of Southern Culture. In Mississippi, where we have the tradition of being the birthplace of blues, of rock and roll, and in my district, Meridian, the birthplace of country music with the grandfather of country music, Jimmy Rogers. And today we celebrate our additional contribution to our State's culture and our Nation's culture to the world, the Mississippi Choral Singers, and the great achievement that they have won by being the first American choir to win this preeminent distinction and competition in Rome. So I rise with the gentleman from Mississippi (Mr. Wicker) and to acknowledge and to appreciate this great accomplishment.

Mr. PICKERING

Mr. PICKERING. Mr. Chairman, I understand and agree with the Chairman.

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

Mr. PICKERING. Mr. Chairman, the letter from Secretary Shalala reads, ``The implementation of a pro rata proportionate distribution of payments for contract support costs will result in the reduction of funding to a significant number of tribes,'' we are not talking about just one tribe, ``a significant number of tribes and tribal organizations that have assumed,'' have taken the responsibility and the steps required of them, ``that have assumed the operation of IHS health programs.'' And then later in the letter it says, ``We therefore must object to the proposed proviso in S. 2237, since the tribes have not been consulted and since the abrupt and unforeseen funding reductions to many of the tribes currently receiving these payments would have a severely disruptive effect on health care delivery by these tribes.''

Mr. PICKERING. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the Parker amendment. The tribe that the gentleman from Mississippi (Mr. Parker) has mentioned today happens to be my in home district, the Mississippi Band of Choctaws, which I believe is probably one of the best models, if not the best model, in the Nation of tribal leadership and self- determination. They have taken the steps where, 20 or 30 years ago, a generation ago, you had the highest rates of unemployment, of illiteracy, of poor health care; now they have the best in health care, they have world class facilities, they have the best in education. They have invested in manufacturing facilities and we now have the lowest unemployment in this area of my State that we have had in 30 years, and it is because they have done what we asked them to do. They have taken the steps consistent with the Indian Self-determination Act of 1975. What I am concerned about is here we are breaking that commitment, breaking our word, in essence abrogating a contract. We are penalizing and punishing those who have taken the right steps. Mr. Chairman, I commend and thank the ranking member and chairman for their efforts of addressing this problem and adding $26 million where the Senate did nothing. The problem we have and the problem that the gentleman from Mississippi (Mr. Parker) has is we are trying to fix it on a pro rata basis. We do not distinguish or differentiate between the good tribes and good leaders that have taken the action under self- determination and those who have not. Now, we think there are several violations of principle. One, breaking the word, breaking a contract, and penalizing those who have done the right thing. What we are trying to do is find a way to support the $26 million, but to see if there is a better way to apportion and allocate whatever funding is made available, so we do distinguish between those who have taken the steps consistent with the Self- determination Act. So I would urge the chairman and ranking member to work with us, to see if there is a better way. There is a working group right now that is trying to take steps, in consultation with all parties, to find a better solution to this. All we are asking is for the time to find a better way, a better approach, consistent with our principles.

Mr. PICKERING. Mr. Chairman, if the gentleman will yield further, we have talked about IHS and their input into this process, but let me read from a letter from Secretary Shalala.

Mr. PICKERING. Mr. Chairman, if the gentleman will continue to yield, if I could suggest to the chairman and ranking member possibly one solution. The controversy here is over the allocation of whatever funds are available. The $26 million is greatly appreciated, but if it is done on a pro-rata basis, there is no distinction or difference between those who have taken steps consistent with the Self-Determination Act. We would like to work going into conference, work with the administration, work with the working groups to see if there is a better way of allocation that would still try to address the needs.

Mr. PICKERING

Mr. PICKERING. Mr. Speaker, I rise today reluctantly in support of H.J. Res. 121. I served in the Bush administration and 5 years on the staff of U.S. Senator Trent Lott. During that time, I always supported the extension of Most-Favored Nation status, because I believed it was the right way to achieve our trade objectives. But, sadly, I have come to the conclusion that the current policy is failing. It is flawed, fundamentally flawed, and it needs to be changed and replaced. At a time where we are taking bold leadership in other areas of our policy with China, taking a stand with the passage of the Religious Persecution Act, trying to find ways to limit technology transfer and to limit the proliferation that we are seeing, we are sticking and staying in the rut of the status quo of the MFN debate. Mr. Speaker, year after year we have done that for the past 10 years, and no change. The deficit gets worse every year. Our objective of getting them into the World Trade Organization seems to be slowing and lessening. What incentives do they have now to join the international community, to play by the rule of law, to open their markets, to reform their state-owned entities? The truth is the incentives today all work against our trade objectives. This policy, the current policy, works against our objective of opening their markets. Let me be clear, my opposition is not one of closing our market. It is not one of isolating China, but it is advocating going from appeasement and an outdated policy from the Cold War to a policy of effective engagement, a constructive framework. I would join the gentleman from California (Mr. Dreier) and the others who care about opening the markets in China, but there is a better way, there is a better alternative. Mr. Speaker, I have been working with the gentleman from Nebraska (Mr. Bereuter) and the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Ewing) on an approach that has good support from the ag community and is gaining support in the business community as a new way, a new policy for the 21st century. This is the purpose of the legislation. It would simply say, if China joins the WTO, we will automatically, prospectively grant Most-Favored Nation status. We give them credible, date-certain incentives to join the WTO by the end of the year 2000, and failure to join could create reasonable and realistic cost incentives for them to join. There would be flexibility built into it that if there are snap-back provisions, that it could be sector by sector, so that waivers could apply. So it is certain, it is credible, it is doable, and it is flexible. We need a new framework for the 21st century with the right incentives to open their market. I would urge my colleagues to work with us as we go into the next year's debate, and I reluctantly support the present resolution.

Mr. PICKERING

Mr. PICKERING. Yes, I yield to the gentleman from Connecticut (Mr. Shays).

Mr. PICKERING. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent that my amendment be modified with the additional language at the desk. This language was printed under the unanimous consent agreement in Friday's Congressional Record.

Mr. PICKERING. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Chairman, I rise today to complete the debate that we started the other night on the amendment now before the House which will take away and close the loophole that will allow those who take contributions from foreign sources the legal defense of willful blindness. We used this illustration to show probably the best picture describing in a thousand words what can only be seen in this picture, and that is the expression and the term ``willful blindness,'' the ``Don't Ask, Don't Tell'' policy of foreign campaign contribution. What we want to do is stop the flow of illegal foreign contributions into our election process, to stop the money changing in our temple and to stop the money changing in our election and campaign process from foreign sources. I appreciate the support from both sides of the aisle on this amendment because I do think we can close the loophole and stop many of the practices that we saw in the last presidential and campaign cycle, examples like the fund-raising in the Buddhist Temple, Charlie Trie bringing envelopes of cash and suspicious money orders to the DNC, Johnny Chung funneling cash provided by the Chinese military officer to the DNC. Because, Mr. Chairman, what is at stake is our national security. As we have seen the proliferation and the nuclear proliferation issues in Asia and China and Iran and Pakistan and India, we want to make sure that these contributions or these types of contributions do not influence decisions and policies in this administration or any others to come. We want to clean the temple, we want to clean the process, and we want to have integrity in our election process. I accept, and I gladly accept, the cooperation from both sides of the aisle on this amendment. I look forward to the acceptance in a few minutes. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. PICKERING. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes time to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. DeLay).

Mr. PICKERING. Mr. Chairman, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. McIntosh).

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

Mr. PICKERING. Mr. Chairman, parliamentary inquiry. How much time do I have remaining?

Mr. PICKERING. Mr. Chairman, on roll calls nos. 301 and 302, I was unavoidably detained. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yes.'' Amendment Offered by Mr. Pickering, as Modified, to the Amendment in the Nature of a Substitute No. 13 Offered by Mr. Shays

Mr. PICKERING

Mr. PICKERING. Mr. Chairman, on rollcall No. 286, I was inadvertently detained. Had I been present, I would have voted ``no''. Personal Explanation

Mr. PICKERING

Mr. PICKERING. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment to the amendment in the nature of a substitute.

Mr. PICKERING. Mr. Chairman, my understanding is that it is a clarification of the ban on foreign contributions. The defense of the administration and many of those in the various investigations surrounding foreign contributions again go back time and time again to it was a lack of knowledge or it was a lack of a system of checks. But I believe it was a willful blindness, and this would simply take away that defense from those who are responsible in campaigns for raising money to know the source of the donors. If we look at the RNC, in their past practices, they have set in place an elaborate system of checks on all donors, all sources, and especially if they have any potential relationship to a foreign contribution.

Mr. PICKERING. If the gentleman will continue to yield, the high probability would become the standard in these types of cases and it would, I believe, set a clearer standard than the one we have today. The high probability that the contribution originated from the foreign national would set the definition and the standard by what is responsible for those who are accepting and raising and soliciting foreign campaign contributions.

Mr. PICKERING. It could be done either way, as the litigation and the different challenges progress through the campaign FEC process and through the court process. But I do believe that we would find an answer to the gentleman's question as far as case law and precedent on the term high probability. I would be glad to work with the gentleman to answer that question.