Rob Portman

Mr. PORTMAN

Mr. PORTMAN. Mr. Speaker, Article IV alleges that President Clinton ``refused and failed to respond to certain written requests for admission and willfully made perjurious, false and misleading sworn statements in response to certain written requests propounded to him as part of the impeachment inquiry authorized by the House of Representatives.'' The ``written requests'' consisted of 81 written questions posed to the President by the House Judiciary Committee. I find President Clinton's responses to the Judiciary Committee's questions misleading, evasive and incomplete. They show disrespect for an authorized impeachment inquiry--the most serious proceeding the House can undertake. While President Clinton's responses show disrespect, even contempt, for the Congress of the United States, their most disturbing elements are really just repetitions of the perjurious statements alleged in Articles I and II. I am also concerned that the wording of Article IV could set a negative precedent for the balance of power between future White House and future Congresses. We do not want the President of the United States to be concerned about impeachment allegations every time a provocative communication is sent to the Congress or every time he responds in an aggressive manner to a Congressional inquiry. I am concerned that Article IV may have the effect of unduly weakening the Presidency. For this reason and because I believe its core is redundant to the other Articles, I cannot support Article IV.

Mr. PORTMAN

Mr. PORTMAN. Mr. Speaker, there is no joy in this task. This is a sad day for our country and for the Office of the President. I have listened carefully to the comments of my colleagues today just as I carefully reviewed the facts, the underlying articles of impeachment and the report of the Committee on the Judiciary that came before us this week. I do not question the motives of my colleagues who oppose impeachment, who do not find impeachable offenses, even as many of them have questioned the motives of those of us who will support one or more of the articles. For myself, I believe the evidence of serious wrongdoing is simply too compelling to be swept aside. I am particularly troubled by the clear evidence of lying under oath in that it must be the bedrock of our judicial system. I believe the long term consequence to this country of not acting on these serious charges before us far outweigh the consequences of following what the Constitution provides for and bringing this matter to trial in the United States Senate.

Mr. PORTMAN

Mr. PORTMAN. Mr. Speaker, on October 14, the Greater Cincinnati area lost one of its finest community and business leaders. John J. Schiff, the founder of Cincinnati Financial Corporation, passed away at the age of 82. A devoted family man, he was married to Mary Reid Schiff for 50 years and had three children. His business achievements and philanthropic acts left a lasting impression on everyone who knew him, on the insurance industry, and on the entire Cincinnati community. Mr. Schiff epitomized the American dream and embodied the idea that with dedication and hard work, anything is possible. What began as a small business which employed only Mr. Schiff and an assistant, grew into a thriving company of 2,700 employees with yearly earnings of $300 million. Mr. Schiff was born in Cincinnati in 1916 and graduated from Ohio State University in 1938. After returning home from valiantly serving his country in the Navy during World War II, he founded his own company, the John J. Schiff Agency. It was then that he began to visualize a better, stronger, company. With personal relationships, an unwavering work ethic, and intense loyalty serving as the foundation, he and his brother Robert, along with two other investors, formed the Cincinnati Insurance Company. The company focused on selecting the best agents to represent the company, and provided them with the highest level of service and support. He was dedicated to making life better for his associates, agents, community, policy holders, investors, and friends. Mr. Schiff's business savvy was second only to his unwavering philanthropic efforts to better his community. He was dedicated to civic, educational, and artistic endeavors. Many organizations benefited from his zeal, including: the Museum Association, Junior Chamber of Commerce, the Music Hall Association, the 1788 Club, Deaconess Hospital, the Salvation Army, and Shiloh Community Methodist Church, just to name a few. He was very active with his Alma Mater, Ohio State. He was recognized as a Great Cincinnatian by the Chamber of Commerce, Man of the Year by the Insurance Board, and was presented the Founders' Day award by Xavier University, where he was awarded an Honorary Doctor of Humanities degree. Mr. Schiff's success is proof positive to all of us that with hard work, dedication and a strong will to succeed we can attain almost any goal we strive for.

Mr. PORTMAN

Mr. PORTMAN. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to our former colleague Bill Gradison, who served the constituents of Ohio's Second District in exemplary fashion for eighteen years until his retirement on January 31, 1993 when he was named President of the Health Insurance Association of America (HIAA). As many of my colleagues know, at the end of this year, Bill will be stepping down from his presidency at HIAA. During the time Bill represented the citizens of Ohio's Second District in the House, he was influential in many important areas, such as strengthening our health care system, helping steer us toward a balanced budget, promoting a reduction in the tax burden working Americans face every day, building a lasting social security program, and increasing trade opportunities for our businesses. In his life after Congress, Bill remained dedicated to his work on providing high quality, affordable health care coverage. Mr. Speaker, today I invite my colleagues to join me in congratulating Bill on his years of hard work and dedicated service to the Congress and to the HIAA, and wishing him all the best in his future endeavors, wherever they may lead him. I know we will continue to benefit from his contributions to our deliberations on the best ways to improve our health care system for many years to come.

Mr. PORTMAN

Mr. PORTMAN. I really appreciate my friend from Florida yielding. I want to commend him for all the hard work he has done on this issue. He has really taken the lead on trying to curb the supply of drugs into this country which he has just said is so important. We have had a doubling of teenage drug use in the last 5 or 6 years. More and more kids are falling prey to this, ruining their lives and their dreams and even taking the lives of so many of our young people. What I am excited about in this final package we will vote on tomorrow is that we also have provisions to reduce the demand for drugs in this country. This problem I think ultimately has to be solved around the kitchen table in our homes and in our schools and in our streets. There are a number of provisions that I like. One is new provisions to get the drugs out of our schools, to use the drug-free school money better in the workplace, the Drug Free Workplace Act that the gentleman supported which essentially gives small businesses the opportunity to get up and running drug free workplace programs that will keep people away from drugs and in turn increase productivity. It requires the Drug Czar's office to tell us how to streamline the effort which is so important. We now have 54 agencies and departments involved in drug prevention in our Federal Government. We have got to do better and we can and we are requiring under this legislation that they do that. The revolving door with violent crime and drugs has got to be stopped. We have got to get prevention into our prisons, into our jails. This legislation does this on a model basis, the first time this Congress has really taken a step in that regard. Finally, it doubles the funding for the Drug Free Communities Act, something this Congress passed. We are now stepping up to the plate and saying again we have got to get parents involved, school administrators involved, we have got to get the business community involved, religious leaders involved, everybody at the community level. And we are saying we are not going to solve this problem here in Washington, it is a community problem, it has got to be solved at that level. But I want to thank the gentleman for letting me talk a little about the demand side and say that I am very excited, it is not the end of the road, we have got a lot more to do, but this is a darn good start to reducing the demand for drugs in this country.

Mr. PORTMAN

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

Mr. PORTMAN

Mr. PORTMAN. Mr. Speaker, I am very disappointed with the comments of my colleague and friend from California. He knows as well as I do this legislation does not go into effect until after the 15-month period. He knows as well as I do that the applications under this particular WTO consistent regime go into effect November 15. He knows as well as I do we are going out of session this week. He knows as well as I do we have to do it before we go out. He knows as well as I do that we asked for a letter from the administration, a very straightforward letter saying that they will enforce the international trading rules. He knows as well as I do that under WTO, this case is pending under WTO. We have a right to do that. He knows as well as I do that the legislation is consistent with WTO. He knows as well as I do that all of those other products he listed, if he get through the WTO process, if they got to the point where they make a decision, it may win an appeal. Mr. Speaker, I just have to say that I have worked with the gentleman on this for the last week. We just need to stick to the facts. We need to stick to the facts. If we stick to the facts, we will determine that it is time for this Congress to have the United States follow its international obligations.

Mr. PORTMAN. Mr. Speaker, I thank the distinguished vice chairman of the committee for yielding me this time, and I want to support the fair rule that the Committee on Rules has come up with today. Mr. Speaker, I would like to back up for a minute, if I could, and focus on why we are here today and why this is, I think, such a critical vote for the future of the international trading system and for our economy. This is about whether the World Trade Organization, the WTO that was talked about previously, which is the international organization charged with resolving trade disputes between nations, will work as we have promised it would. If Members will recall, this is the highly touted WTO agreement that this Congress approved just 4 years ago, calling it, among other things, ``A vital tool for eliminating the remaining trade barriers facing U.S. farmers and ranchers,'' which is at stake here. I voted for the WTO, and I sold it to my constituents on the basis it would resolve these disputes, as did most Members of this House on both sides of the aisle. A majority on both sides of the aisle stood up here and said we are finally going to get to the point, finally, where we are resolving these trade disputes and forcing our trading partners, almost all of whom are more protectionist than us, to comply with international dispute resolution panels. Unfortunately, Mr. Speaker, our competitors in Europe have threatened to turn this highly touted WTO into a paper tiger, and in doing so they have threatened the world economy. After several years of litigation, the European Union has lost two important WTO disputes, one involving bananas, the other involving beef hormones. When the U.S. has lost, incidentally, we have complied. When the Japanese have lost, they have complied. But the EU has consistently refused to abandon their protectionist regimes and come into compliance with these international rulings, and has engaged in a calculated and deliberate foot-dragging strategy for years. In fact, it is even worse than that. They have proposed new regimes that all objective observers have agreed are even more inconsistent with international trading rules and, thus, the WTO. Indeed, our own able U.S. Trade Representative, Ambassador Charlene Barshefsky, has said that the EU's proposed solution is, ``Even more WTO-inconsistent than their original WTO-inconsistent regime.'' Remember, we are here because that more inconsistent regime with regard to the banana case goes into effect on January 1; with regard to beef hormones, it is in May. With so much hazy economic news in the headlines these days, Mr. Speaker, the last thing the world economy needs is a provocative and destabilizing protectionist strategy by the European Union that threatens to undermine the WTO, the only things that stands between orderly international trade and the economic disaster of protectionism worldwide, the law of the jungle. U.S. farmers, companies and workers, who depend on international trade, are counting on us to ensure that the world marketplace has a level playing field for U.S. products and for U.S. services. As the gentleman from California noted earlier, the WTO system can only work if there is a threat of punishment for violations, because of the sovereignty clauses. These two first cases will set the precedent. Unfortunately, they are the first two cases. We have no choice in that. They are going to set the precedent to determine whether the United States will have the tools and will have the willpower to be able to respond when other nations willfully exclude American products from their marketplaces. That is where we are. The legislation is very simple. It is a clear, straightforward bill, carefully crafted to be consistent with section 301 of the U.S. trade laws, and designed to get the European Union to do the right thing and follow international law. It simply requires the U.S. Trade Representative to take the very actions authorized by international agreement, if the EU does not come into full compliance with the WTO, by the authorized specified deadlines. In fact, these are the very actions that the U.S. Trade Representative has indicated she wants to take anyway, but she can't guarantee to this Congress. By voting for this measure, we can send a clear message to our international competitors. We will not stand idly by while they exclude our products and violate the international trading rules they have agreed to. We will not sit on our hands while they hurt U.S. jobs, U.S. businesses, U.S. farmers. We will not jeopardize the health of the world economy and the world trading system by their attempts to undermine the multilateral trading system under the WTO. Mr. Speaker, whether we are free traders, whether we are fair traders, whether we are self-proclaimed protectionists, we must be for enforcing international trade agreements we have signed. We have to be. Vote yes today for American workers, American farmers and American businesses.

Mr. PORTMAN

Mr. PORTMAN. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 4567, the Medicare Home Health Care and Veterans Health Care Improvement Act. Home health care is a vital service for Medicare beneficiaries that provides patients with peace of mind by allowing them to stay in their homes during their golden years. Without this service, many individuals would be forced into more expensive assisted living facilities or nursing homes. The bill is necessary because HCFA has told us that, as a result of the Y2K computer problem, it cannot implement the prospective payment system for home healthcare by October 1, 1999 as required by the Balanced Budget Act. This means home health agencies, through no fault of their own, will be hurt by the interim payment system and will continue to be paid under it longer than Congress intended. This unfortunate situation threatens the very existence of many agencies, including some from my Congressional district that have been responsible and have operated efficiently to keep their costs down. H.R. 4567 is designed to provide needed relief to such agencies under the interim payment system while HCFA sorts out its computer problems. I agree with those agencies that feel additional measures are needed, but that just isn't possible under our current budget constraints. The real solution is for HCFA to redouble its efforts to implement the PPS without further delay. In the meantime, H.R. 4567 will help agencies get through this difficult period. I urge passage of this bill to ensure that agencies can continue to offer essential health care services to seniors in southwest Ohio and around the nation, and I call on HCFA to do whatever it takes to see that agencies can get out of the interim payment system as soon as possible.

Mr. PORTMAN

Mr. PORTMAN. Mr. Speaker, I move to lay on the table the motion to reconsider.

Mr. PORTMAN

Mr. PORTMAN. I yield to the gentleman from Washington.

Mr. PORTMAN. I thank the gentleman for his support, too, and for his yielding time. Mr. Speaker, again I want to thank the Members in this body for helping make this possible, because George Bush does represent the highest values and principles in public service, integrity, honesty, and has set an example really for all of us. This is the appropriate recognition of his remarkable and inspirational service to our Nation.

Mr. PORTMAN. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Florida for yielding me the time and for his strong personal support from the outset for the worthy effort to designate the CIA compound in Langley, Virginia ``The George Bush Center for Intelligence.'' Earlier this year with the help of the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Goss), with the help of the gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Skelton), the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Hamilton), the gentleman from California (Mr. Dreier), the gentleman from Washington (Mr. Dicks) and others we were able to get such legislation passed. I want to thank the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Goss) and the gentleman from Washington (Mr. Dicks) as well as Senators Dick Shelby, Bob Kerrey and others in the conference committee for including the Bush legislation in this very important authorization bill today. It is a very fitting tribute to George Bush, the only President to have served as CIA Director. His tenure from 1976 to 1977 was a difficult time when the agency was under fire from investigative committees up here on the Hill, from the press and from the public. The CIA was demoralized and in need of new leadership and direction. George Bush turned the tide. He was key to developing an executive order to prevent future violations of the agency's mandate and, most important, he provided the steady hand of leadership at a turbulent time and in doing so improved the mission and morale of the CIA. When he resigned his post, Senator Daniel Inouye said, ``Bush was one of the best CIA directors we had. The morale of the intelligence community has been inspired by Bush's leadership.'' Mr. Speaker, as a decorated Navy pilot in World War II, a distinguished Congressman, U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, Liaison to China, CIA Director, Vice President and President, he has ably served our Nation for over 50 years and inspired many of us. He exemplifies the highest values and principles of public service.

Mr. PORTMAN

Mr. PORTMAN. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to speak in tribute to Jerry Solomon and his many years of service and leadership to this country. Chairman Solomon is a strong, effective and passionate chairman of the Rules Committee. He is a true Leatherneck--no-nonsense, patriotic and capable of getting the job done. I had the pleasure of working closely with Jerry Solomon on the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act--which has effectively ended the irresponsible practice of Congress passing the bill to state and local governments and the taxpayers they represent. Jerry's commitment to unfunded mandates relief--and his tireless advocacy were key to passage of this landmark legislation. Jerry has also been one of the most vocal Members of Congress in the vital fight to reduce drug abuse in this country. I've been pleased to work with him on a number of issues--the Drug Free Communities Act and the recently passed Drug Demand Reduction Act. There is no member of this body more committed to reducing substance abuse than Jerry Solomon. The issue burns in his heart. The U.S. House of Representatives is losing a real fighter in Jerry Solomon. Happily, he is leaving the Rules Committee's gavel in capable hands, but we'll miss his drive, energy and determination. I know Chairman Solomon will be watching C-SPAN in upstate New York to keep an eye on us, and I hope and expect to continue to hear his firm and passionate voice on issues of concern to our country.

Mr. PORTMAN

Mr. PORTMAN. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay special tribute to a leader in the Cincinnati community, Mr. John Pepper, who has recently announced his decision to step down as the Chief Executive Officer of the Procter & Gamble Company at year-end. Under Mr. Pepper's leadership, Procter & Gamble has introduced exciting new products, moved into new markets overseas, and established a strong strategic plan for continued sales growth that will benefit the people of Southwest Ohio. While he is highly regarded in business circles for his outstanding work at the helm of Procter & Gamble, his contributions to the Greater Cincinnati community, our state and our nation go well beyond his business successes. For years, he has devoted an enormous amount of his personal time and energy to improving the quality of life for all Americans. Education has been his passion: he is a founder of an innovative youth development program called the Cincinnati Youth Collaborative, through which he has touched the lives of many thousands of young people in our area. He has led the effort to get businesses directly involved in improving public education, both in Ohio and nationwide, through the National Education Summit, the Business Roundtable, The Governor's Education Management Council and various other state and federal efforts. John Pepper has also shown his commitment to service through over 30 years of volunteering for the Cincinnati United Way and Community Chest. In 1994, he chaired the most successful United Way Campaign ever in Greater Cincinnati. I have had the opportunity to know John Pepper both in my official capacity and through our mutual involvement with the Coalition for a Drug-Free Greater Cincinnati and the National Underground Railroad Freedom Center. In both efforts he was a founding trustee whose credibility and guidance was crucial to the success of the organization and its mission. Time and time again he has proven himself to be a business leader willing to give generously of his time and energy to help others. While John Pepper's leadership as CEO of Procter & Gamble will be missed, I know many of us look forward to continuing to work with him on projects to make a difference in our community.

Mr. PORTMAN

Mr. PORTMAN. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding to me, and I guess I have to start off by saying how old I was when Lee Hamilton was first elected. Lee, I was 10, and it was shortly thereafter, living in Cincinnati, Ohio, in a district that actually borders Mr. Hamilton's district, we are in Southwestern Ohio, he is in Southeastern Indiana, that I began to hear about Lee Hamilton. I worked up here on the Hill briefly for my predecessor, Bill Gradison, and looked up to Mr. Hamilton as someone of high integrity. And particularly in the foreign policy area, he was deemed, even in those early days, as being truly an expert. He has been talked about tonight by a lot of people, including the chairman of the Committee on International Relations as an expert on international matters, and he is. Free trade is something that Lee has taken a courageous stand on over the years in that context, and I appreciate what he has done for our country in that regard. He has often stood up against his own party and done what is not necessarily popular politically, whether it is free trade generally or talking about our misguided sanctions policy, because he believes strongly in the fact that through trade we will create jobs and make a better country. He has put the Nation first, I really think, on foreign policy, again and again. And I am one of those who want to stand up here tonight and tell him that we appreciate that. I got to work with Lee not too long ago on the Tropical Forest Conservation Act. Again, he put the interests of his country first and, frankly, gave us credibility to be able to promote that idea, which is a debt-for-nature swap. It makes all the sense in the world. I then went down with Lee to Santiago, Chile, for the Summit of the Americas, several months ago, and got to see him in action not only as someone who is highly regarded by the current administration, in terms of his foreign policy expertise, they do turn to him frequently, that is when all the right decisions are made, Lee, I understand, but also by leaders from around the hemisphere. There were 34 presidents there from 34 countries in our hemisphere, and it was amazing the respect that he has among those leaders and among their foreign ministers, their trade ministers and so on. And I got to see that firsthand, Lee, and was greatly impressed. Again, he came to my aid recently. I told him on that trip to Santiago about an effort underway to try to pay tribute to George Bush, our only President who had served as the Director of the Central Intelligence Agency. And it was Lee Hamilton who stood up, when needed, and provided a strong bipartisan support for that effort, which I think will probably be enacted into law, Lee, here in the next few weeks. And, again, I personally appreciate what you did there, putting your country first and making sure that this place continues to operate on a bipartisan basis. One thing I want to mention briefly, if I might, and is something that folks may not be as familiar with about Lee's background and his interests. He has been known, again, as truly one of the most distinguished leaders on foreign policy in this body, but he has also focused on illegal drugs in a very interesting way, not only on the interdiction side, which would make sense, given his focus and his experience, but also in his own back yard, in rural Indiana. Lee has held meetings throughout rural Indiana, talking with law enforcement officials, talking with parents, talking with school administrators, talking with people in the trenches who are trying to deal with the problem of illegal drugs. He has spearheaded a project called Rural Indiana Profile, a comprehensive study that gives community officials, public officials throughout Indiana a sense of what is going on in our rural communities with regard to the illegal drug problem that is robbing so many of our young people of their dreams, indeed of their lives at times. And, Lee, I want to thank you for that, which is something that probably is not well-known in this body. He was also a strong supporter of the Drug-Free Communities Act that was signed into law last year because of his recognition that we are not going to solve this problem just by focusing on source country problems, interdiction, but that we also have to look into our own hearts to see what we are doing wrong in our own communities and to begin to change the attitudes of our young people. Mr. Speaker, my neighbor, Lee Hamilton, is truly an example of the best in public service. The gentleman from Wisconsin said earlier that he has been a role model. He certainly should be a model for all of us who have been fortunate enough to serve with him in Congress. I will miss his friendship in Congress. I hope we can stay in touch in his new role at Woodrow Wilson School and at Indiana University. I will miss his common sense. He has the most commonsensical haircut in the United States Congress, incidentally. And I wish him very well in his new responsibilities and also in his renewed responsibilities. I know he had other opportunities to lead this country and to serve this Nation in very substantial and prestigious ways with the current administration and, instead, chose to remain here, closer to his family, closer to his beloved wife, and so I also wish him luck in his renewed responsibilities as a husband, as a father, and as a grandfather.

Mr. PORTMAN

Mr. PORTMAN. Mr. Speaker, I thank the chairman for yielding my this time. Mr. Speaker, I want to commend the chairman for putting together a great tax package. This is not only a tax package that offers a sound package of tax relief for working families in America, but it also takes unprecedented steps to preserve Social Security. We have never done this before. We are setting aside adequate funds to preserve Social Security in the future. Earlier this year, Mr. Speaker, right up there at that podium, the President of the United States said that we should save every dime of the so-called budget surplus, which was less than half that it has turned out to be for this fiscal year. Since that time, the pledge has been broken. The President himself, as we heard earlier today, has agreed to spend already this year $2.9 billion to support our efforts in Bosnia. Collectively, as I add it up, our friends on the other side of the aisle and the President suggests spending another $13 billion of the surplus for spending. By the way, where is the President's proposal to save Social Security? Talk is cheap. I do not think this is a question of preserving Social Security or providing tax relief. The real question is, this year are we going to use the expected budget surplus only for more spending or are we going to give some needed tax relief, a break to the very people whose hard work and ingenuity has gotten us into this position of having a budget surplus? If we put our minds to it, if we are sincere, we can do both. We can put together a Social Security plan over the next couple of years that works. This plan allows us to do that. Again, it is unprecedented. We are putting aside the surplus to do that. We have heard a lot of good things about the tax plan today. Even Democrats have taken to the well saying it is a great plan. I think it is a great plan because it helps families, senior citizens, job- creating small businesses, farmers and ranchers. But I want to give my friend, the gentleman from New York (Mr. Rangel), some more confidence. It is even better than that. It provides unbelievable simplification of the tax code. A million people will not have to file anymore under this. Six million people will be able to stop itemizing under this proposal. Ten million people can go from filing a 1040 or a 1040A to the much simpler 1040EZ. Seven million Americans will not have to file a Schedule B for interest and income. This is not only responsible tax relief, it is responsible tax simplification.

Mr. PORTMAN

Mr. PORTMAN. Mr. Speaker, I thank my friend, the gentleman from California, for yielding time to me. I would like to say to the gentleman who just spoke, this is not a debate today about trade policy. If he wants to talk about trade policy, he ought to talk to President Clinton about what kind of multilateral agreements he might want to negotiate with foreign countries. This is about giving the President the ability to enter into those agreements. This is so straightforward. I cannot believe this Congress on both sides of the aisle is not going to allow this administration, on behalf of our country, to negotiate trade agreements with countries that are entering into agreements with other trading blocs and, thus, we are losing markets. The way it currently stands, if we do not have this trading authority, we will not be able to enter into extremely important multilateral agreements that have to do with the future of the U.S. economy. Over one-third of our growth is directly related to exports. We have the freest country in the world in terms of trade. Other countries have higher barriers. It is very simple. We want to knock those barriers down. Look at this chart. Here are some negotiations coming up within the next year that the United States will not be able to participate in because this Congress will not give this administration the ability to enter into these negotiations with some sort of credibility, with some sort of authority. If Congress in the end decides the agreements they reach are not agreements we can support, we can always vote those agreements down, but let us give them the ability to get in there and fight for America. Latin American trade negotiations, a $300 billion, import market. WTO negotiations next year in Geneva on agriculture. What could be more important for the U.S. economy, particularly at this point when our agriculture community in this country is suffering so much? WTO government procurement negotiations, a $1 trillion global market. We are not going to be able to get in there and negotiate on behalf of the United States. WTO services negotiations. Finally, there is the Asia- Pacific negotiations. This chart is an indication of the number of dollars, trillions of dollars, involved in these negotiations. Mr. Speaker, I think this is a no-brainer. I urge my colleagues to put politics aside, allow America to regain its place as a leader in this world with regard to trade, and support fast track.

Mr. PORTMAN

Mr. PORTMAN. Mr. Speaker, this is a bizarre debate today. I guess the bottom line is, if you are for fast track, you think this legislation as presented to the House today makes sense, vote for it. Then we can pass this thing. If all the Members who have come up here and said that they are for free trade truly are for free trade and are sincere about it, we can pass this thing. This is a bizarre debate in another respect. For years Ronald Reagan and George Bush got fast track authority from a Democrat Congress. They went out and they negotiated agreements that were in the interest of this country. Now we have a situation where President Clinton is coming before a Congress that is dominated by Republicans, and the Republicans are willing to give him fast track authority to negotiate on behalf of our country to open up foreign markets. Yet the Democrats are not giving it to their own President. It has only lapsed twice in history, in 1988 and again in 1993. This is the longest lapse in duration by far. It has been 6 years since this President has had full fast track authority. We need to provide it. Thirty percent of our growth in our economy is directly related to exports. We have the freest market in the world. We need to knock down the barriers in these other countries. We have a whole slew of multilateral agreements that are being negotiated over the next couple of years. We have to be at the table. The fact is, we are not going to be taken seriously either by individual countries in our negotiations on a bilateral basis or by the rest of the world on our multilateral negotiations unless the President has the authority under fast track to bring an agreement to this Congress for an up or down vote. Remember, we retain our right to turn down any agreement we do not like. So this is not even about specific trade policy issues. This is about allowing the American economy to move forward. We cannot stick our heads in the sand. We are living in a global economy. We need to have America out there as a leader in that global economy to make it a freer economy, to help with regard to jobs and exports in this country. I urge my colleagues, forget the politics. Forget the Republicans and the Democrats. Do what is in your heart. If you really believe in free trade, vote for fast track today.

Mr. PORTMAN

Mr. PORTMAN. Mr. Speaker, I want to take this opportunity to recognize and support September 21-27 as National Pollution Prevention Week which is currently being observed in the Second District of Ohio and around the Nation. Protecting the environment while not adversely affecting a community's business climate is sometimes challenging but it is absolutely necessary. One of the most cost-effective ways to have clean streets, drinkable water, and breathable air is to focus on eliminating pollution before it is created. Clearly, it is much better to eliminate or reduce pollution at its source rather than have to dispose, treat, or release it into the air, water, or land. Pollution Prevention Week is an excellent opportunity to heighten public awareness of these effective efforts. It can serve to encourage government agencies, the business community, environmental organizations, community groups, and most importantly, the general public, to work toward a cleaner environment and a more competitive, prosperous and sustainable business climate. This is a concept that we can all support, and is one embraced by the Greater Cincinnati Earth Coalition and other constituents on Southwest Ohio to achieve these goals to improve the quality of life for everyone.

Mr. PORTMAN

Mr. PORTMAN. Mr. Chairman, if the gentleman would continue to yield, I deeply appreciate those assurances from the gentleman from Alabama and I look forward to continuing to work closely with him in the future in implementation of the Tropical Forest Conservation Act. Amendment No. 19 Offered by Mr. Torres

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

Mr. PORTMAN. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman from Alabama (Mr. Callahan) for yielding to me, and I would like to enter into a colloquy with the gentleman. Earlier this session, as the gentleman knows, by a vote of 356 to 61, this Congress passed and the President signed into law the Tropical Forest Conservation Act of 1998. This law provides the administration with the authority to reduce debt where appropriate for less developed countries that have globally outstanding tropical forest with the intention of protecting these valuable and rapidly dwindling natural resources. Mr. Chairman, $50 million was authorized for this new program for this year. While I am disappointed that those funds are not included in the pending appropriations bill, I realize that the authorization was enacted into law after the subcommittee completed its work and that budget constraints make it difficult to fund new programs this year. I would still hope, Mr. Chairman, that something could be worked out with the Senate. But in any case, it is my sincere hope that the House Committee on Appropriations will be able to fund this program in the next budget cycle. There is a provision of the recently enacted law that can be implemented at no cost to the U.S. Treasury. This provision amends section 808 of the Foreign Assistance Act to authorize common sense and cost-free debt-for-nature swaps and debt buybacks. However, I have been informed that in order to implement this provision, a technical amendment must be made to the appropriation for ``debt restructuring'' in the current appropriations bill. I realize that the gentleman from Alabama is not entertaining legislative amendments, and I respect that. However, I would inquire of the subcommittee chairman, the distinguished gentleman from Alabama, if this critical change could be made in a conference committee with the Senate.

Mr. PORTMAN

Mr. PORTMAN. I yield to the gentleman from Massachusetts.

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