Deborah Pryce

Ms. PRYCE

Ms. PRYCE. Mr. Speaker, I include the following extraneous material for the Record: House Rules Committee Spearheads Major Reforms in the 104th Congress ``The Rules Committee not only hit the ground running on the opening day of the 104th Congress,'' recalls Chairman Gerald B.H. Solomon (R-NY), ``we had parachuted behind the lines weeks before that to lay the groundwork for the most monumental reform of the House in nearly a century.'' Solomon continued, ``And we didn't rest on our reform laurels following that historic and marathon 14-hour opening day on January 4th of 1995. Our Committee has been spreaheading further reforms ever since because we recognize that House restoration and rejuvenation must be an ongoing and dynamic process if we are to keep the People's House close to the people and enable it to confront the problems of the next century.'' Below is a summary released by Chairman Solomon today of the House reforms adopted to date. Opening Day House Rules Reforms (H. Res. 6, adopting House Rules for the 104th Congress, Jan. 4, 1995).--The resolution adopting House Rules for the 104th Congress included ten items from the ``Contract With America'' plus 23 other changes in House Rules. These include reforms that: Abolished 3 House standing committees (Post Office & Civil Service, Merchant Marine & Fisheries, and District of Columbia); Limited committees to no more than 5 subcommittees (resulting in the elimination of some 25 subcommittees); Reduced committee staffs and funding by one-third from the previous Congress; Placed 6-year term limits on committee and subcommittee chairmen, and an 8-year term limit on the Speaker; Abolished the use of proxies (``ghost voting'') in committees and subcommittees; Required publication of committee rollcall votes in reports; Guaranteed broadcast media the right to cover public committee meetings and hearings; Required three-fifths vote to pass income tax rate increases and prohibited retroactive income tax increases; Abolished legislative service organizations (taxpayer subsidized special interest caucuses); Required committee transcripts and Congressional Record to be verbatim accounts; Prohibited introduction or consideration of commemorative legislation (establishing special days, week, months, etc.); Required committees to adopt and implement oversight agendas; Required a comprehensive outside audit of House books; Abolished joint bill referrals to multiple committees, while requiring designation of a primary committee and time limits on sequential referrals to secondary committees; Abolished ``rolling quorums'' that permitted ``drop-by voting'' to report bills. Congressional Accountability Act (H.R. 1, passed House Jan. 4, 1995; companion bill, S. 2, enacted into law Jan 23, 1995, Public Law 104-1).--Brought Congress under the same employment laws that apply to the private sector. Committee Hearing Schedules (H. Res. 43, adopted Jan. 31, 1995).--Required committee hearings to be noticed at least a week in advance unless chairman and ranking minority member agree or committee majority vote on shorter notice. Unfunded Mandate Reform (H.R. 5, passed House Feb. 1, 1995; Senate companion bill, S. 1, enacted into law March 22, 1995, Public Law 104-4).--Required special procedures and points of order in the House and Senate to identify and vote on unfunded mandates on private sector and state and local governments contained in bills reported by committees and in amendments offered from the floor. House Corrections Calendar (H. Res. 168, adopted June 20, 1995).--Established a new House Corrections Calendar to consider bills reported by committees to correct ``dumb'' regulations and clarify intent of Congress by reversing certain court decisions. House Gift Ban (H. Res. 250, adopted by House Nov. 16, 1995).--Prohibited House Members and staff from accepting gifts from persons other than relatives and close personal friends. Book Contracts (H. Res. 299, adopted Nov. 30, 1996).-- Prohibited House Members and senior staff from accepting advances on books and required pre-approval of contracts by ethics committee. Deficit Reduction Lock Box (H.R. 1162, passed House Sept. 13, 1995).--Established process for crediting amounts saved on amendments to appropriations bill to apply to deficit reduction. Legislation Line-Item Veto (H.R. 2, passed House Feb. 6, 1995; Senate companion bill, S. 4, enacted into law April 9, 1996, Public Law 104-130).--Authorized President to cancel certain spending items, special interest tax breaks and entitlement provisions from laws, subject to Congressional override votes). Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. PRYCE

Ms. PRYCE. Mr. Speaker, today I rise to pay tribute to the Honorable Greg Lashutka, the mayor of Columbus, OH, on the occasion of his earning the Distinguished Eagle Scout Award [DESA]. Through the course of my 18 years of public service, I have had the privilege of working closely with Mayor Lashutka and can thus attest firsthand to his unparalleled devotion to the betterment of the city of Columbus, his tireless involvement in civic activities, and his remarkable commitment to God and family. Mayor Lashutka truly embodies the spirit of this extraordinary award. The highest award administered by the National Eagle Scout Association, the Distinguished Eagle Scout Award honors an elite few who have achieved a state of eminence through their chosen careers and lifeworks. Recipients are determined by the Distinguished Eagle Scout Award Committee, which is comprised entirely of previous DESA winners. The selection process is rigorous and deliberate, and a substantial percentage of nominations is declined. Among those honored with the DESA include former President Gerald R. Ford, several governors, CEO's of Fortune 500 companies, nationally known doctors, lawyers, and educators, and some of my colleagues in this body. Mayor Greg Lashutka will be only the second Distinguished Eagle Scout Award winner in central Ohio. In 1958, a 14-year-old Greg Lashutka was awarded the Eagle Scout Award at the Bethany English Lutheran Church in Cleveland, OH. Thirty- seven years later, Mayor Lashutka has rightfully earned the admiration and respect of all those with whom he has come in contact. His resume reflects his all-American experience: Co-Captain of the 1965 Ohio State University football team; a decorated naval officer in Vietnam; city attorney for the city of Columbus; a successful private attorney with a prestigious Columbus firm; and finally mayor of the 16th largest city in the United States. Under his adept leadership, Columbus has grown profoundly, becoming nationally renown for its crime prevention, cultural activities, international trade, and business-friendly environment. His innovative and thoughtful leadership has earned Columbus a designation as an All-American City in 1992, and himself the honors of 1996 president of the National League of Cities as well as 1993 Municipal Leader of the Year Award from American City and County Magazine. Equally important, however, is Mayor Lashutka's social and civic involvement. His active participation in countless organizations and groups--often as a board member or as chairman--is truly remarkable. The mayor devotes much of his already scarce time to the Boy Scouts of America; the boys and girls clubs of Columbus; the Columbus Civic Center Committee; the Columbus Urban League; the Heart Fund; the Big Brother Association of Columbus; the German Village Society; the Central Ohio Chapter of the March of Dimes; and other outstanding, philanthropic organizations. Mayor Lashutka is happily married to Catherine Adams and is a loving father of four. Mr. Speaker, it is with great pleasure that I ask my colleagues to join me in congratulating my good friend, Mayor Greg Lashutka, for being awarded the Distinguished Eagle Scout Award, and in recognition of his astonishing lifelong service to the city of Columbus.

Ms. PRYCE

Ms. PRYCE. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from New York [Mr. Solomon], my friend and the distinguished chairman of the Committee on Rules, for yielding me this time, and I appreciate having the opportunity to work with him on some of the underlying legislation and in managing this important rule. Mr. Speaker, as the chairman described, House Resolution 503 has the customary 1 hour granted for debating conference rules in the House, and I urge all my colleagues to give it their full support. Mr. Speaker, the conference report on the Small Business Job Protection Act contains many very important elements. First, we provide for an increase in the minimum wage, a provision fought so hard and passionately for by the gentleman from New York, Mr. Quinn, my Republican colleague from New York, Mr. Quinn. The report also provides for a series of tax incentives designed to make it easier to start up and then expand small businesses, and also the numerous provisions outlined by the gentleman from New York [Mr. Solomon] at the outset of his remarks. Our Nation's economic health depends in large part on the success of America's small businesses. They are the engine of economic growth, creating nearly 75 percent of all new jobs in the United States in any given year, but we cannot expect them to survive, much less prosper given the regulatory and tax burdens imposed on them under current laws. That is why the tax incentives contained in the conference agreement are so important to the future of small business and jobs in this country. Together, they will provide small business owners and entrepreneurs alike with the financial tools they need to grow and compete and to create the kind of stable and lasting jobs that the American people need. Mr. Speaker, the third, and to me the most personally significant, element of the bill is made up of the provisions designed to remove barriers that currently discourage hundreds and hundreds of caring families each year from seeking to adopt children. As many of my colleagues know, I am an adoptive parent myself. Since coming to this body, I have worked hard to find ways to make it easier for parents to adopt, especially young parents with moderate incomes. While progress is being made, the high costs associated with the adoption process, which can be as much as $15,000 or more in many cases, still pose very significant obstacles. To help families defray these costs, the conference report provides a valuable tax credit of up to $5,000 for qualified adoption expenses, and it recommends the necessary offsets to pay for the credit. In addition, the conference report seeks to remove barriers to interracial adoptions by prohibiting a State or any other entity that receives Federal assistance from denying or delaying a child's adoption because of the race, color, or national origin of the child or the prospective parents. Hopefully, this change will make it possible for more children to find their way into loving, permanent homes regardless of the race of the family seeking to adopt. Mr. Speaker, these pro-adoption provisions were originally included in legislation passed by the House earlier this year, but unfortunately the other body has not acted as quickly on this important measure. I congratulate the gentleman from Texas, Chairman Archer, and the conferees for ensuring that these beneficial pro-family provisions are enacted into law this year. Mr. Speaker, this week we have passed major legislation to reform welfare and to expand access to affordable health care coverage. With this legislation, we will add to those victories by easing the financial burden on small businesses, by lifting the barriers that discourage more families from seeking to adopt. I urge my colleagues to support this fair rule and to vote for the conference report.

Ms. PRYCE

Ms. PRYCE. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Florida [Mr. Goss] for yielding me this time and for his tireless work on this landmark legislation. Mr. Speaker, today marks another historic day in the House as we move one step closer to enacting common sense health care reform. For years the American people have asked us to enact meaningful reform, and today Congress has come together in a bipartisan way to break Washington gridlock and accomplish this important task. In 1994, the American people soundly rejected the health care reform plan that put the Federal Government in the driver's seat, controlling prices, benefits, and physician choice. The legislation we will vote on today offers a more practical, even-handed approach to reform that leaves American individuals in control, not government bureaucrats. I have said all along, through these years of the debate on health care, let us get on with it. Let us at least fix what we can all agree upon. And finally, lo and behold, through the hard work of so many, today we are about to do just that: Portability provisions to relieve job lock and no more, nor more exclusions because someone is unfortunate enough to have a preexisting condition. Both Republicans and Democrats can claim victory today. This is truly a bipartisan effort. This is a happy day for our country. Much, much good will come of this. Mr. Speaker, our vote today on this conference report is about more than just reform. It represents a giant step forward in our effort to ensure that as many Americans as possible will have access to the most advanced and reliable health care system in the world. Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to answer the call of the American people for health care reform that ensures them greater access, security and freedom by supporting this fair rule on the underlying legislation.

Ms. PRYCE

Ms. PRYCE. Mr. Speaker, I thank the distinguished chairman of the Rules Committee for yielding me this time. I rise in strong support of this fair rule to bring about real welfare reform. Mr. Speaker, a generation ago, Americans began a much-celebrated war on poverty in the hope of creating a Great Society. But nearly 30 years and more than $5 trillion later, what we are left with is a failed welfare system that has deprived hope, diminished opportunity, and literally destroyed precious lives. Our country, and the future generations of Americans who will lead her, deserve a better system. Today we will consider a conference report that replaces a welfare system debilitated by strict Federal control with a system based on innovation and flexibility at the State and local level. Instead of promoting dependency and illegitimacy, this conference agreement is built on the dignity of work and the enduring strength of families. By taking the Federal bureaucracy out of welfare, this legislation promotes creative solutions closer to home and offers a real sense of hope to the truly needy and the less fortunate. Mr. Speaker, despite the comments we will hear today, this is a compassionate bill. Helping those who by no fault of their own have fallen on hard times is the right thing to do. This bill responds to that in the finest American tradition. But when we help people that are able-bodied, when we just hand them a check, those people who make little or no effort to help themselves, we risk destroying the American spirit and undermining our society at large. This conference agreement represents a true bipartisan attempt to change welfare as we know it. I hope the President will not shy away again from this historic opportunity for change. In closing, Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to have the courage to set aside the status quo, to think of the children and families of this Nation and to embrace real reform. I urge a ``yes'' vote on both sides of the aisle for this rule and the conference report.

Ms. PRYCE

Ms. PRYCE. Mr. Speaker, I thank my friend from Utah for yielding me this time. I rise to express my strong support for this rule and for the Working Families Flexibility Act. First, this is a fair rule. The modest conditions outlined in the rule will ensure that Members have the opportunity to review all germane amendments prior to their consideration. Second, as a cosponsor of the bill, I support restoring some flexibility to the American workplace. Today more than ever before in the history of America, both parents of a family find themselves in the workplace. As this percentage steadily grows, employers find that current law hampers their ability to provide workers the flexibility that they want and need to balance family and work interests. H.R. 2391 would restore flexibility by simply allowing overtime compensation to be given in the form of comp time off, and only if the employee wants this form of compensation. Mr. Speaker, this is 1996. We are near the start of a new century. It is time for American labor law to catch up from the conditions and perspectives of the 1930's that helped shape landmark laws like the Fair Labor Standards Act. No matter how well-intentioned their creation, labor laws today simply must be reformed to reflect the changing nature of the modern workplace. Over the past 25 years, the American economy has rapidly expanded. Competition has increased, and more women are working today than ever before. As a result, employees are looking for support and fairness as they struggle to balance family needs and job responsibilities. by freeing workers and their employers from the arcane 1930's standards, H.R. 2391 recognizes that a productive workplace can be achieved while also giving employees the flexibility to care for their families, creating a more family-friendly work environment and making it easier for the households where both parents work. Allowing comp time is a good step toward revamping Depression-era labor laws. This bill is a winner for employers, employees, and families alike. The big union bosses and my colleagues on the other side should put the American worker first and stop playing paternalistic big brother. American workers are perfectly capable of deciding whether they want to be paid for their overtime service in dollars or in comp time. In this day and age, to many families, time is more valuable than dollars. I urge support for this important pro- family legislation and a vote for this very fair rule.

Ms. PRYCE

Ms. PRYCE. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to rise in strong support of this fair rule and the underlying Welfare Reform Act. Mr. Speaker, a generation ago, President Lyndon Johnson launched his much-celebrated War on Poverty with the hope of creating a Great Society here in America. Well, here we are in 1996, 30 years and more than $5 trillion later, ready to launch a new war. Only this time, the war is not so much against poverty itself, but against a failed welfare system that has trapped the less fortunate in our society in a seemingly endless cycle of poverty and despair. The bill that we will soon consider under the terms of this structured, but very fair and balanced rule, takes welfare in an entirely new direction--one which replaces strict Federal control with increased flexibility and more room for innovation at the State and local level. Instead of promoting dependency and illegitimacy, this bill seeks to replace a failed system with one based on the dignity of work and the strength of families. Most importantly, this legislation promotes creative solutions closer to home and offers a real sense of hope to the truly needy and less fortunate among us. Unfortunately, we'll hear some complaints from those who prefer to keep the status quo in place. But, Mr. Speaker, there is nothing wrong with a welfare reform plan that advocates commonsense principles like requiring welfare recipients to find work, or even cutting off benefits for parents who refuse to cooperate with child support authorities. And speaking of children, who are often the most vulnerable in our society, I've seen the effects of generational welfare in my courtroom, and I can say that the current welfare system takes a terrible toll on the well-being of children. That's why I am very pleased that this bill looks out for the best interests of children by emphasizing child care, protection, and nutrition. So, Mr. Speaker, I would urge my colleagues to vote for this fair rule and to support putting an end to the status quo in our welfare system. It takes courage to vote for change, but change is exactly what is so badly needed if we are to transform welfare into a temporary helping hand in times of trouble, and not a hand-out that becomes a way of life. Vote ``yes'' on the rule and ``yes'' on the Welfare Reform Act. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from California [Mr. Dreier], vice chairman of the Committee on Rules, from greater San Dimas, CA, and surrounding areas. (Mr. DREIER asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Ms. PRYCE

Ms. PRYCE. Mr. Speaker, House Resolution 479 is an open rule providing for the consideration of H.R. 3814, the Commerce, Justice, State and related agencies appropriations bill for fiscal year 1997. The rule provides 1 hour of general debate equally divided between the chairman and ranking minority member of the Committee on Appropriations. The rule includes a limited number of waivers to facilitate the orderly consideration of the bill. For example, the rule waives clause 2(L)(6) of rule 11, regarding the 3-day availability of the report, and clause 7 of rule 21, regarding the 3-day availability of printed hearings and reports on appropriations bills. The rule also provides for the consideration, before any other amendment, of the amendment printed in part 2 of the Rules Committee report, if offered by Mr. Rogers of Kentucky or his designee. The amendment will be considered as read and shall not be subject to a demand for a division of the question. Since authorizing legislation for most programs within the bill has not been finalized, the rule further provides the necessary waiver of clause 2 of rule 21, which prohibits unauthorized appropriations and legislation on general appropriations bills, as well as clause 6 of rule 21, which prohibits transfers of unobligated balances. As we have done in the past, the rule accords priority in recognition to those amendments that are pre-printed in the Congressional Record, and it allows the Chairman of the Committee of the Whole to postpone and shorten votes during further consideration of the bill. After the reading of the final lines of the bill, a motion to rise, if offered by the majority leaders or his designee, will have precedence over a motion to amend. Finally, the rule provides one motion to recommit, with or without instructions. Mr. Speaker, as our colleagues know, the Commerce, State, and Justice appropriations bill covers a lot of ground, from projecting our diplomatic presence overseas, to promoting trade, and to preserving the safety and well-being of our citizens. As a former judge and prosecutor, I recognize that the Federal Government has an important role to play in the fight against drugs and crime, and I am especially pleased that this year's legislation devotes significant resources to law enforcement and related activities. This important commitment to public safety is reflected in the increased dollars that are provided for drug enforcement initiatives, for enforcing our immigration laws and border control, for implementing the recent anti-terrorism bill, and for assisting State and local governments in their drug control and crime fighting efforts. By targeting funding at the State and local level, the bill continues to broaden our policy of empowering local authorities to develop local solutions that best address their own unique situations. But, Mr. Speaker, not all crime is front-page news. Many victims are defenseless women who suffer in silence at home or even in the workplace. Too often, violent crimes committed against women are not even reported to law enforcement agencies. That's why I'm very pleased to note that the bill provides a substantial increase in funding for the Violence Against Women Act, a step which recognizes the importance of combatting the many forms of domestic violence despite the budget constraints that we face this year. This bill does provide a reasonable and responsible increase in funding over last year's level, with all increases going to critical law enforcement purposes, it is still within the subcommittee's budget allocation. And that, Mr. Speaker, is vitally important to keeping us on the glidepath toward a balanced Federal budget. Mr. Speaker, Chairman Rogers and the subcommittee have worked very hard this year to craft a bill that balances the need for continued fiscal responsibility with the need to provide adequate funding for law enforcement, diplomatic missions, trade, and many other related activities. In closing, let me just emphasize that the rule before us is both fair and open. Any Member can be heard on any germane amendment to the bill at the appropriate time, as long as it is consistent with the normal rules of the House. This rule was reported unanimously by the Rules Committee yesterday and I urge its expeditious adoption by the House. Mr. Speaker, the information I am submitting for the Record is as follows:

Ms. PRYCE. Mr. Speaker, for purposes of debate only, I yield the customary 30 minutes to my good friend, the gentleman from California [Mr. Beilenson], pending which I yield myself such time as I may consume. During consideration of this resolution, all time yielded is for the purpose of debate only. general leave

Ms. PRYCE. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks on this resolution and that I may be permitted to insert extraneous materials into the Record.

Ms. PRYCE. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that during the consideration of H.R. 3814 in the Committee of the Whole, one, it may be in order immediately after disposition of the first amendment made in order by House Resolution 479, and without intervention of any point of order, to consider the amendment relating to the Advanced Technology Program that I have placed at the desk, if offered by the gentleman from Kentucky [Mr. Rogers]; and, second, if that amendment is adopted, then points of order under clauses 2 and 6 of rule XXI shall be waived for all provisions of the bill, as amended. Mr. Speaker, it is my understanding that the minority has been consulted and has no objection to this request.

Ms. PRYCE. Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I call up House Resolution 479 and ask for its immediate consideration.

Ms. PRYCE. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time, and I move the previous question on the resolution. The previous question was ordered. the resolution was agreed to. A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.

Ms. PRYCE. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. PRYCE. Mr. Speaker, I continue to reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. PRYCE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I just wanted to conclude by thanking the chairman and the ranking member for their hard work and bipartisan cooperation through this process. I once again urge my colleagues to support this fair and open rule.

Ms. PRYCE. I yield to the gentleman from Kentucky.

Ms. PRYCE

Ms. PRYCE. Mr. Speaker, I thank my friend from Florida, Mr. Goss, for yielding me the time, and I rise in support of both the rule and the Labor-HHS appropriations bill. First, this is another open rule. With the exception of the legislative branch appropriations bill, which we considered earlier today, all of the regular spending bills that have come to the floor of the House this year have been considered under an open amendment process, and we continue that same spirit of unrestricted debate today. Second, I'd like to commend Chairman Porter for crafting a very responsible bill--one that keeps our commitment to preserving and protecting the health, welfare, and Social Security of the American people. Although this year's bill freezes spending for many programs at last year's level, the bill does provide increased funding for education and Head Start, for block grants that support child care and community services, for the Violence Against Women Act, for the National Institutes of Health, and for valuable outreach and support programs like TRIO--which encourages young people in my district of Columbus, OH, to pursue a college education. Even with the increased funding levels, Mr. Speaker, the bill is within the 602(b) allocation, and as our colleagues know, that is crucial to keeping us on the glidepath to a balanced Federal budget. As we work to get our fiscal house in order, we must ensure that all funding is spent efficiently and where it is most effective in our society. This bill achieves this important goal by emphasizing, among other things, local control, parental involvement, and basic academics. Notwithstanding the challenge of balancing the Federal budget in 6 years, I believe H.R. 3755 makes the right kind of investment in education, job training, and health, while also shrinking the size of government and funding only those programs that have demonstrated their effectiveness. Mr. Speaker, the Labor-HHS bill is one of the largest of the 13 annual spending bills, and under this open rule, we will have the opportunity to discuss spending priorities in a fair and open manner, and I look forward to that debate. I urge my colleagues to support this open rule and the underlying legislation.

Mr. PRYCE

Mr. PRYCE. Mr. Speaker, today I rise to pay tribute to the outstanding philanthropic efforts of the 17 semifinalists for the 1996 JC Penny Golden Rule Award. I am proud to represent these people and organizations in Congress, for their commitment and devotion to the central Ohio community is truly exemplary. The Golden Rule Award ceremony publicly honors local volunteer efforts, and is presented in more than 200 markets in 45 States. The 1996 semifinalists have proven themselves to be clearly deserving of this recognition, having demonstrated continued, selfless sacrifice to the Columbus, OH, area. They serve as a model to us all. America's generosity both at home and abroad is unsurpassed on this planet. Regrettably, however, the day-to-day volunteer efforts of so many Americans go regularly unnoticed. We take for granted their generous work with the poor, the elderly, the sick, and the neglected. But their unheralded and noble deeds are duly noted by those they help, often providing a bit of hope during times of great distress. At a time when our Nation demands that government become smaller and spend less, the importance of voluntarism and community service grows profoundly. These semifinalists prove once again that the most important work done in our country is not done within the beltway, but within the shelters, pantries, and soup kitchens of our local communities. We must never lose sight of the fact that Americans' innate sense of sacrifice continues regardless of what may transpire in Washington. I proudly salute the following people and organizations for their inspiring work, and join with my colleagues in congratulating them for this most deserving recognition. Ms. Julie Rose Cook, Court Appointed Special Advocates (CASA), Franklin County Volunteer Guardian Program, Hyatt Force on Capitol Square, Bob Merideth/Skip Teaford--Christmas in April. Parents of Murdered Children and Other Survivors of Homicide, Capital University Circle Kiwanis, Residential Care Team, Teen Parent Connection Volunteers. Kaleidoscope Youth Coalition, L.E.A.D.E.R. Institute, Jean ``Rambo Granny'' Smith, Rick Baumann, Dorothy Burchfield, Dianne Glaser, Dora Browne.

Ms. PRYCE

Ms. PRYCE. Mr. Speaker, I thank the distinguished chairman of the Rules Committee for yielding me this time, and I congratulate him for his leadership in crafting a fair and balanced rule that carefully addresses both sides of the MFN issue. First, let me say that I am a strong proponent of extending MFN trade status for China, and that I intend to oppose the disapproval resolution. But having said that, I think even the strongest proponents of renewing MFN recognize that there are problems in China. During this debate, we will hear accounts of egregious human rights abuses, proliferation of nuclear technology, intimidation of Taiwan, and piracy of intellectual property. That is why the companion measure to be offered by our colleague from California is so important. Under this fair rule, Members can vote to renew MFN and at the same time send a strong signal to Beijing that Congress will not turn a blind eye to China's trade practice, human rights record, and other very legitimate concerns. But while the Cox resolution is sure to put pressure on China, I continue to believe that an even stronger, more effective tool to induce change in China can be found in a trade policy that engages China. Why? Because market forces promise the kind of economic freedom that gives birth to lasting democratic reforms. Our own economic and national security interests also require us to maintain a productive relationship with China. We cannot ignore that country's potential as the world's most populous nation, as a member of the U.N. Security Council, and as a regional power with nuclear technology. And, let's not forget our friends in Taiwan and Hong Kong who would most certainly be hurt by the revocation of China's MFN status. The bottom line is that we cannot write off a market with 1.2 billion people. We have to stay engaged and we have to work to see that our policy concerns are addressed productively--and that means leaving MFN in place. So again, I congratulate our chairman for his efforts in writing a balanced rule that allows us to achieve both objectives--a clear vote on renewing MFN and a clear vote that sends a strong message to the Chinese Government. I urge a ``yes'' vote on the rule and support for the extension of MFN for China. I yield back the balance of my time.

Ms. PRYCE

Ms. PRYCE. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks on House Resolution 455, and that I be permitted to submit extraneous materials into the Record.

Ms. PRYCE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, House Resolution 455 is an open rule providing for the consideration of H.R. 3662, the Interior and Related Agencies appropriations bill for fiscal year 1997. The rule provides 1 hour of general debate equally divided and controlled by the chairman and ranking minority member of the Committee on Appropriations, after which time the bill will be open to amendment under 5-minute rule. Under this open rule, any Member can be heard on any germane amendment to the bill at the appropriate time, as long as it is consistent with the normal rules of the House. It is important to note that of the four previous appropriations bills that have been reported to the House this year, all have been considered under an open amendment process. As we have done in the past, the rule empowers the Chairman of the Committee of the Whole to give priority in recognition of Members who have preprinted their amendments in the Record prior to their consideration. The Committee on Rules continues to believe that the option of making amendments available for our colleagues to read in advance of floor action is a very useful tool for improving the quality of debate in the House. Mr. Speaker, the rule also provides a limit but necessary number of waivers to facilitate the orderly consideration of the bill. For example, the rule waives clause 2(l)(6) of rule XI, regarding the 3-day availability of the committee report, and clause 7 of rule XXI, regarding the 3-day availability of printed hearings and reports on general appropriations bills. Since authorizing legislation for several programs within the scope of the bill has not yet been approved by the House, the rule provides the necessary waiver of clause 2 of rule XXI, which prohibits unauthorized and legislative provisions in appropriations bills. However, Members should be aware that the waiver of unauthorized provisions does not extend to that section of the bill regarding the collection of States sales taxes on tribal businesses, or to the first two provisos under the heading of ``Strategic Petroleum Reserve.'' In addition, at the recommendation of the Budget Committee, the rule provides for the automatic adoption of an amendment striking the final proviso under the heading of ``Strategic Petroleum Reserve'' from the bill. It is the Rules Committee's understanding that the provision, if it were not removed from the bill, would constitute a significant violation of the Budget Act. Furthermore, the rule allows the Chairman of the Committee of the Whole to postpone and shorten votes during further consideration of the bill. After the reading of the final lines of the bill, a motion to rise, if offered by the majority leader or his designee, will have precedence over a motion to amend. Finally, the rule provides for one motion to recommit, with or without instructions, as is the right of the minority. Mr. Speaker, the focus of this year's Interior appropriations bill has been to make good government choices, and I congratulate my colleague from Ohio, the distinguished chairman of the subcommittee, for his leadership in balancing the need for meaningful deficit reduction with the need to enhance and protect our Nation's natural and cultural resources. Although the bill appropriates $500 million less than last year's enacted level, the committee has provided reasonable increases for the national parks, wildlife refuges, and forests. Special increases are provided for Everglades restoration, the earthquake program, and for two new initiatives--the new Southern California Natural Communities Conservation Planning Program and the Appalachian Clean Stream Program. Funds have also been added to address important Indian health and education needs. As I am sure my colleagues know, summer is the time when many of our constituents travel to the Nation's Capital to visit the city's treasured landmarks, and I am pleased to note that in the bill priority was given to funding increases in both operations and relieving critical maintenance backlogs for some of our Nation's major cultural institutions. These include such popular sites as the Smithsonian Institution, the National Gallery of Art, the John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts, and the National Holocaust Memorial Museum. While the committee was able to provide modest funding increases for these programs, I should also point out that the bill responds to the American people's call for smaller, less costly, and more effective government. In order to fund these and other priorities, the committee has taken responsible steps to eliminate duplication and layers of management, and to do away with functions that the committee believes are not inherent Federal responsibility. By continuing to reduce unnecessary spending and focusing reasonable funding increases on the core programs contained in the bill, Chairman Regula and members of the Appropriations Committee have been able to save the American taxpayers $500 million, and at the same time fulfill the commitment to preserve and enhance our national treasures. Mr. Speaker, in closing I would emphasize again that the rule before us is both fair and open. Any remaining areas of concern or disagreement can be addressed through the normal amendment process. House Resolution 455 was reported unanimously by the Rules Committee yesterday and it will allow our Members to participate most fully in the deliberative process. I urge my colleagues to vote ``yes'' on the rule and ``yes'' on the underlying legislation. Mr. Speaker, I include the following information for the Record.

Ms. PRYCE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of the time remaining on this side, and I thank the gentleman from California [Mr. Beilenson] for his remarks. Mr. Speaker, we have heard a lot of criticism here this morning about the funding levels contained in this bill. Let me say that I, for one, recognize that Chairman Regula and the members of the committee have made difficult choices in crafting this year's bill. It is never easy to reverse years of spiraling increases and bloating bureaucracies. The chairman's system of prioritizing the must-do's, the need-to- do's, and the nice-to-do's, reflects the kind of fiscal restraint and responsibility that we need in order to keep us on the glidepath to a balanced Federal budget. The 1997 Interior appropriations bill is all making good Government choices and responsible spending decisions. It saves the American taxpayers $500 million from last year's level, and roughly $1.5 billion from the 1995 level, while focusing resources on programs that are important to the American people--the national parks, forests, wildlife refuges, and the Nation's great cultural landmarks. Under the terms of this fair and open rule, the House will have an opportunity to give full consideration to the environmental, cultural, and Native American programs contained in this year's bill. I urge my colleagues to give this rule their full support. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time, and I move the previous question on the resolution. The previous question was ordered.

Ms. PRYCE. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. PRYCE. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from New York [Mr. Solomon], the distinguished chairman of the Committee on Rules, my friend from the great Empire State.