Nick Rahall

Mr. RAHALL

Mr. RAHALL. Mr. Speaker, today I am pleased to join our colleague Representative Barbara Cubin in introducing the ``Abandoned Mine Lands Reclamation Reform Act of 2005'' in recognition of the pressing need to make continued progress in restoring the environment in coalfield communities throughout the Nation. Originally authorized as part of the landmark Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act of 1977, to date over $5 billion has been appropriated under the Abandoned Mine Reclamation Program in an effort to restore lands and waters adversely affected by past coal mining practices. These restoration projects normally involve threats to the public health and safety from dangerous highwalls, subsidence, refuse piles and open mine portals. They also include the construction of new water supply systems to coalfield communities where water supplies have been contaminated by past coal mining practices. Over the years, funds have also been made available under this program for emergency coal reclamation projects, the Rural Abandoned Mine Program, the Small Operators Assistance Program, certain noncoal mining reclamation projects and the administration of the program. The primary delivery mechanism for these funds is through annual grants made through the annual appropriations process to 26 eligible States and Indian tribes. This effort is augmented by funds expended by the Interior Department's Office of Surface Mining (OSM) in States and tribes without approved reclamation programs. By most accounts, this effort has been a success achieving far more in real on-the-ground environmental restoration than programs such as the Superfund. Yet, the mission of this program has not yet fully been accomplished which is the reason for the legislation I am introducing today. As it stands, there currently exists about $3 billion worth of high priority human health and safety threatening abandoned coal mine reclamation costs in this country. There are other costs as well, associated with lower priority abandoned coal mine sites. The fundamental purpose of the ``Abandoned Mine Lands Reclamation Act of 2005'' is to raise sufficient revenues which, when coupled with the unappropriated balance in the Abandoned Mine Reclamation Fund and the reforms proposed by the legislation, to finance the reclamation of the remaining $3 billion inventory of high priority coal reclamation sites and draw this effort to a successful conclusion. In this regard, it is essential to note that this program is not financed by the general taxpayer but rather through a fee assessed on every ton of coal mined. The unreclaimed coal sites eligible for expenditures under the program were primarily abandoned prior to the enactment of the Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act of 1977 which placed stringent mining and reclamation standards in place. The authority to collect these fees was originally for a 15-year period. However, on two prior occasions through legislation I sponsored the Congress extended those fees collections in recognition of the continued need to address health, safety and environmental threats in the Nation's coalfield communities. Those fee collections are currently set to expire at the end of June this year. A central feature of this legislation then is to extend that fee collection authority through the year to 2020. This is the period the OSM estimates will be necessary to generate the additional revenue to complete the high priority coal site inventory. However, that alone will not allow us to achieve that goal which is the reason for the reforms proposed by this bill. Simply put, in my view over the years there has been a hemorrhaging of some of the funding made available under this program to lower priority projects. One of the reasons this reduction in focus on health and safety threatening projects has occurred is due to a late 1994 OSM policy shift that corrupted what is known as the general welfare standard in the coal reclamation priority rankings. This new policy has had the affect of allowing States to bootstrap what would normally have been lower priority 3 projects into the higher priority 1 and 2 rankings. To be clear, not all States or even a majority of States have taken advantage of this new policy and I commend them for that. Yet it is a fact that as a result of this new policy the bona fide $3 billion inventory of unfunded priority 1 and 2 projects has swollen to over $6 billion. I do not recognize this $6 billion figure and neither does this legislation. The reforms proposed by this bill include eliminating the general welfare standard and restricting the use of State/tribal share grants and supplemental federal share grants to bona fide coal priority 1 and 2 projects involving threats to human health and safety. Once those projects are completed and only when those projects are completed, with two minor exceptions, can a State or tribe undertake the lower priority coal projects under the certification program with their State/tribal share grants. The exceptions to this rule involve situations where a priority 3 site is undertaken in conjunction with a priority 1 or 2 site, or where a priority 3 site is addressed in association with a coal remining operation. In effect, this legislation seeks to target the lion's share of available funding to coal priority 1 and 2s keeping faith with the original mission of the program. Among other reforms envisioned are federal approval of any additions made to the official Abandoned Mine Reclamation Inventory and a review of those additions made since the OSM policy shift on the general welfare standard. The purposes of these reforms are intended, as previously noted, to complete those projects which are necessary to complete for the sake of protecting the health and safety of coalfield residents. At the same time, they are also intended to give the coal industry which finances this program reasonable assurances that the fees it pays will not be squandered but put to good use, and to give the industry a time frame which it can count on when the assessment of those fees will no longer be necessary. I would like to make note of two additional changes to current law proposed by this bill. As already noted, in the past appropriations were made available from the Abandoned Mine Reclamation Fund to the Rural Abandoned Mine Program (RAMP), an Agriculture Department program. No such appropriations have been forthcoming for six fiscal years now. I find this disappointing. While the Interior Department and the States from the very beginning were against RAMP funding, contending it was duplicative of their efforts, this in my view and in that of many others was not the case. RAMP served a distinctly different purpose involving a closer working relationship with landowners and sought to address reclamation projects on a more holistic basis. Another problem that also dogged RAMP was the fact that while it is an Agriculture Department program, its appropriations were being made out of an Interior Department trust fund by the Interior Appropriations bill. Obviously, Interior officials had little interest in this arrangement and so beginning in 1995 we have not been able to obtain funding for RAMP. In my view, this situation will not change if the status quo is maintained. For that reason, the legislation I am introducing today would authorize RAMP for general fund appropriations rather than out of the Abandoned Mine Reclamation Fund so that funding can be pursued through the Agriculture Department's Natural Resources Conservation Service's budget. Finally, this legislation also seeks to deal in a comprehensive fashion with the problems which have been plaguing the coal miner health care program. In that regard, the bill would lift the restriction that interest accrued in the Abandoned Mine Reclamation Fund can only be transferred to what is known as the Combined Benefits Fund for unassigned beneficiaries. Under this bill, all accrued interest would be available to keep faith with the promise made by the federal government many years ago to guarantee health care benefit for certain retired coal miners. Further, this legislation would also make accrued interest available for what are known as the 1992 and 1993 Plans. Due to a variety of factors, such as the rash of steel company bankruptcies and the Horizon decision of last year, these plans are coming under financial hardship and we must also keep faith with those retired coal miners and their dependents covered by them. Mr. Speaker, it is time, far past the time, for this Congress to move forward with this legislation.

Mr. RAHALL

Mr. RAHALL. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor Rotary International for reaching its' 100th Anniversary, and for the monumental amount of achievements it has accomplished within its' time. Rotary Club was first founded in 1905 by Paul Harris, an attorney, in Chicago Illinois with the interest of organizing a booster club, which then expanded to Rotary International in 1922, and has grown to include over 1.2 million members in more than 31,000 clubs that span the globe in 166 countries. The Rotary District in my own Congressional District has 32 clubs within it that include some 1509 members. In my home district, Anthony K. Blankenship, the District Governor Elect of District 7550, has set a superb example for all business leaders in the area by serving on his local chamber of commerce and as the Ohio Valley Automotive Aftermarket Association's vice chair. He has also served in many capacities for the Matewan Rotary Club, including President. Each year the local Rotary District sponsors a Group Study Exchange to foster peace and understanding between nations that sends four Non- Rotarian business people and one Rotarian to a paired foreign nation to experience a different culture and way of life. This past year the 7550 District sent a member and four business professionals to Great Britain and has plans to send another entourage to Australia this year. Rotary International has encouraged and fostered the ideal of service as a basis of worthy enterprise, and thus adopted the 4-Way Test, formulated by its' own Herbert Taylor, who developed a standard code of ethics for businesses. The Rotary Foundation has been instrumental in funding many worthwhile service projects that have improved the lives of people across the globe by promoting world understanding and peace through humanitarian, educational, and cultural programs. The Rotary clubs in my district, led by the Beckley Rotary club, recently secured a $300,000 grant to build a clinic in India. Rotary International has enacted the Polio-Plus program that has collected over $500 million, contributed tens of thousands of volunteer man-hours, inoculated over 2 billion children since 1985 with the polio vaccine, and is slated to eradicate polio globally by December, 2005. Rotary has been actively involved in creating a peaceful world by fostering peace initiatives that have created Rotary Centers for International Studies at world-renowned universities in an effort to educate and train Rotary World Peace Scholars in conflict resolution, peace studies, and international relations. In fact, a West Virginia native of St. Albans was one of the first graduates of this program. Many students have excelled and benefited under the Rotary Youth Exchange, which funded by the Ambassadorial Scholarships, has become the international community's largest privately funded international scholarships program. The Matewan Rotary Club ensures each year that two local high school students will receive a scholarship to further their higher education goals. I wish to honor today and hope that my colleagues will join me in honoring Rotary International for continually striving to promote the ideal of service as an integral part of enterprise, and a sustained effort to maintain high ethical standards while promoting peaceful initiatives around the globe.

Mr. RAHALL

Mr. RAHALL. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to salute Snowshoe Resort and its adaptive skiing program's extensive commitment to enabling disabled persons to enjoy the recreation of alpine sports. The Snowshoe Resort adaptive skiing program, under the direction of Dave Begg, has been very active in providing opportunities for a wide range of disabled persons and has seen continued growth over the past decade. The program uses certified Professional Ski Instructors of America, trained in adaptive skiing, to teach many disabled persons to ski, including those with spinal cord injuries, amputations, cerebral palsy, sight and hearing impairments, traumatic brain injury, and development disorders. Snowshoe has worked in cooperation with the Challenged Athletes of West Virginia organization to improve the quality of life for persons with disabilities through outdoor sports and recreation. This organization has sponsored training events at Snowshoe for the adaptive skiing program and is actively involved in creating other outdoor recreational opportunities for disabled persons for not only their enjoyment, but also as part of a rehabilitation process. The program also works extensively with veterans of past wars and those returning from our current conflicts abroad, for which this program should be commended for providing our soldiers with ample opportunity to continue a healthy lifestyle through outdoor recreation. Each student who enters into the program is worked with on a one-on- one basis by a professional instructor as well as with help from one of the many volunteers who come to assist the program. There is a multitude of equipment for the adaptive skiers to choose from when they hit the slopes, so that they may find what they feel is the most comfortable to use while skiing. The adaptive skiing program at Snowshoe has continually provided a venue for disabled persons to maintain an active and healthy lifestyle, and I wish to honor them for this. I implore my fellow members to join me in honoring Snowshoe Mountain Resort and also to encourage all ski resorts to follow the example of Snowshoe Mountain in promoting the equal opportunity for all disabled persons to participate in sports.

Mr. RAHALL

Mr. RAHALL. Mr. Speaker, in my capacity as the ranking Democratic member of the Resources Committee, I would like to register my strong support of H.R. 62, to create the office of chief financial officer for the territory of the U.S. Virgin Islands. This Chamber passed similar legislation in the 108th Congress because of the tireless and tenacious efforts of Mrs. Christensen. Today, we are bringing up this legislation early in the Congress hoping the Senate will act on it expeditiously. The financial condition of the Virgin Islands remains in trouble. Skyrocketing deficits coupled with inadequate fiscal controls have left the local government struggling to provide basic services to the people of the Virgin Islands. Just last week, the U.S. Department of Education issued an order to the Virgin Islands Government to hire an independent contractor to manage approximately $35 million in annual grants because the local government did not have a financial system in place to adequately account for the grants. Regrettably, this recent order was not the first of its kind by one of our Federal agencies levied against the local Virgin Islands Government. Clearly, the lack of financial accountability and the potential for financial insolvency of the territory did not occur overnight. Nevertheless the introduction of this measure, by the distinguished representative of the Virgin Islands, Donna Christensen, continues to be met with controversy and opposition from many local political leaders. Donna Christensen has made it clear that this legislation is something that she would rather not have to do, but the circumstances of her territory have made the choices for her. She is a brave woman for fighting for what she believes is in the best interest of her constituents and for her island and she should be commended. Virgin Islands history will tout this legislation as a turning point in the fundamental approach that the territory handles its financial affairs. I have said it before, and I will say it again today: When the next chapter in Profiles in Courage is written, it will be about the gentlelady from the Virgin Islands, Donna Christensen. I urge my colleagues to support favorable passage by this body of H.R. 62.

Mr. RAHALL

Mr. RAHALL. Mr. Chairman, I rise today to voice my support for the transportation bill currently before us. TEA-LU was crafted as the result of bipartisan compromise, which is the tradition of the Transportation Committee. I congratulate Chairman Don Young, Ranking Member Oberstar, Chairman Tom Petri and Ranking Member Peter DeFazio for bringing this bill to the floor. I also congratulate the staffs on both sides of the aisle for their hard work. While I know I speak for many of us who would have preferred an increased funding level--more in line with the needs of our country this bill serves as a good first step as we move to reauthorize TEA 21. Investment in transportation is one of the wisest decisions this Congress can make. For every $1 billion spend on infrastructure, 47,500 new jobs are created. That is certainly welcome news in my home state of West Virginia. Transportation funding also spurs economic growth and development. Goods and services are delivered more quickly and efficiently, which benefits both the producer and the consumer. In West Virginia, we have tied transportation investment to technology and tourism. New and improved roads allow for the tourism industry to thrive and the seeds of enhanced technology to be planted. In sum, transportation investment is a win-win for southern West Virginia. As a member of the Committee, I know how hard our Chairmen and Ranking Members have worked to bring this bill to the floor. I urge my colleagues to support the underlying bill. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time. Sequential Votes Postponed In Committee Of The Whole

Mr. RAHALL

Mr. RAHALL. Mr. Speaker, it is with great sadness that I discuss the life of the late Congresswoman Tillie Fowler. I knew Tillie during the eight years she served in the House of Representatives and remember vividly her strong work as a member of the House Transportation Committee. I join my colleagues in mourning her loss. Tillie Fowler was born into a family with a tradition of leadership and service. Her father was a member of the Georgia legislature for 44 years. He urged her to go to law school because he had seen widowed women during the Depression unable to get a job and earn a decent living. Following her graduation from law school, she worked as a House aide and as a general counsel in the White House Office of Consumer Affairs. As Vice Chairwoman of the House Republican Conference--number 5 in House leadership--she represented her constituents well and with distinction. She was a tireless advocate for a strong national defense, which was natural for her because her district was in the midst of several naval installations. Out of Congress she sustained her interest in the Armed Forces by serving on several influential panels. As always, she brought passion and professionalism to these difficult tasks. I had occasion to work with her as a member of the Transportation Committee. I remember her as cordial and gracious, but always intensely passionate about the needs of her constituents. These traits helped her get the nickname ``Steel Magnolia.'' I join my colleagues in mourning the death of Tillie Fowler. She was a strong leader and good friend to all of us. On behalf of the people of the Third District of West Virginia, I extend condolences to her husband Buck and two daughters, Tillie and Elizabeth.

Mr. RAHALL

Mr. RAHALL. Mr. Speaker, I wish to discuss the Administration's proposed budget cuts to Amtrak. I want to be clear from the very beginning: if the Administration's proposed cuts go into effect, Amtrak will not survive. And, in many cases, the millions of people who depend on Amtrak's services will be left with no reliable means of rail transportation. This would result in a serious problem for rail passengers, and represents a tremendous misjudgment by this Administration. The Administration has made clear its position on Amtrak. The result of their cuts to Amtrak would ``lead to the elimination of operations.'' I am concerned that the ``elimination of operations'' would result in a significant hardship for the people of southern West Virginia, and Amtrak riders everywhere. Practically speaking, the millions of passengers who depend on Amtrak's services would be stranded. Those who can afford a car or plane ticket would descend on our already heavily congested roads and airports. Those without the means to purchase an airline ticket or pay for the ever-increasing price of gasoline--and those in rural communities without direct access to airline or highway travel--would be left twisting in the wind. In West Virginia alone, Amtrak served nearly 51,000 passengers in 2004. Two of the largest cities in the 3rd Congressional District, Huntington and Hinton, represent nearly half that total with nearly 24,000 riders. In addition, Amtrak pumped $3.7 million into the state's economy--which helped foster job creation and economic development opportunities for West Virginians. The economic impact of Amtrak on my state, and states throughout the country, cannot be overlooked. Importantly, Amtrak is making great strides to improve itself from within. Capital investment is up substantially; a new and detailed five-year plan has been developed; unprofitable services have been eliminated; and significant overhauls and needed maintenance operations have been undertaken. And Amtrak's ridership has, and continues to, increase. I urge this House, this Congress and this Administration to recognize the improvements Amtrak is making, the need Amtrak fills for millions of Americans and the importance of Amtrak on America's transportation infrastructure.

Mr. RAHALL

Mr. RAHALL. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from California for yielding me this time, and I thank him for his help on this resolution. I thank as well the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Hyde), the chairman of the full committee; the gentlewoman from Florida (Ms. Ros-Lehtinen), subcommittee chairwoman; and especially the gentleman from California (Mr. Issa) for his invaluable help in drafting this resolution. I thank the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. LaHood), the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Dingell), the gentleman from Louisiana (Mr. Boustany), my initial co-sponsors, for their quick action as well following the events of Monday morning this week. Mr. Speaker, both of my grandfathers were born in Lebanon. It is a heritage of which I am proud. I am proud as well about the relationship between our two countries. I am proud of the Lebanese people. I am proud of the contributions that the Lebanese society has given to not only America but to the world and vice versa. We can look across all sectors of American life, cultural, educational, medical, and see examples of where our two people have worked closely for the betterment of humankind. And that relationship is strong. It has been strong over decades and decades, and it will continue to be strong. I have traveled Beirut a number of times. I was there at the height of the Israeli bombardment in July/August of 1982. I have been in Lebanon at the height of the fighting, at the height of the hostage taking. I have been in Lebanon in peaceful times. Recently, I have seen the reconstruction and the beauty that has returned and the safety and security that has returned to that city and most all of the country. And that has made me proud of the land of my grandfathers. It has made me proud of the Lebanese people, the dedication they have. They have been through a lot, there is no doubt about it. The civil war took its toll on the country. During that time, we saw Lebanon serve as the chessboard for many outside foreign forces to play their power games upon the land of Lebanon. The government was weak then. They could not control their borders. They could not control the outside forces that came into Lebanon to play their deadly, deadly games. But in 1990 that civil war came to an end. It came to an end with the tremendous help of the former Lebanese prime minister, he was not prime minister at that time, Rafik Hariri. He was born in Lebanon but raised and made most of his fortune in Saudi Arabia. He represented that country as well as Lebanon in bringing the various militias together to end the civil war in the early 1990s time frame. He also used his personal wealth to rebuild that country, as has already been stated on the floor today. Solidaire, the reconstruction company that rebuilt downtown Beirut, did it in a fashion that much of ancient history was preserved at the same time that Beirut looked forward to the future. And it was done in a way that had to reconcile many factions within Beirut itself. So Rafik Hariri spent not only his personal fortune in this rebuilding, but he put his life on the line for his native country of Lebanon. The fate that he suffered this past Monday morning is a fate that no human being on the face of the Earth should suffer. It was a criminal act; it was a heinous act of terrorism from those who do not have the courage to work through the political systems or differences. I do not know who is to blame. Certainly there are enough outside forces in the region that once again are looking at Lebanon to play their ugly, deadly games. It is well known Rafik Hariri's background with the Saudi royal family. They have enemies in the region. Certainly we know that al Qaeda would use every chance to strike at the Saudi royal family. Much has been said about the Syrian influence. Syria is a neighborly Arab country, a brotherly country to Lebanon; and it certainly has its interest in that country, as two neighbors always will have. But that is beside the point today. As the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. LaHood) said today, we honor the legacy and the presence of a man who was huge in Lebanon, but huge in the world as well. He was a friend to many in this country, including the current occupant of the White House. When Rafik Hariri would come to Washington, D.C., he was received with respect, and he was received with hospitality by many of my colleagues and by many around this country. So today to his widow, to his sisters and brothers, to his children, we extend our deepest sympathy; and we know that his presence is big in Lebanon and around this world and is big in this Congress of the United States because he had many friends here, and we pay our respects to him today.

Mr. RAHALL

Mr. RAHALL. Mr. Speaker, it is with deep regret that I announce the loss of a true pioneer of whitewater rafting in southern West Virginia. Jon Dragan, dubbed the ``Father of Whitewater Rafting,'' passed away on Saturday at the young age of 62. Jon came to Fayette County West Virginia in 1964 to explore our wonderful rivers, the New and the Gauley. By 1968 he had opened the first commercial whitewater rafting company on the New River and the rest is history. It was my great pleasure to work with him in my early years as a Congressman to establish the New River Gorge as a National River and part of the National Park system in 1978. His efforts in the process were instrumental and the end result has been a lasting wonder for southern West Virginia. Throughout his career he continued to take part in exciting whitewater adventures, all while finding time to help out the community. He was a true public servant to West Virginia, and he leaves behind many people who were glad to know him, many fond memories and a great whitewater rafting industry. Whitewater rafting is a huge part of the economy in southern West Virginia. It is one of the many wild, wonderful things that bring tourists to West Virginia and the entire industry was started by Mr. Dragan. We owe a great debt to him for all of his hard work and he will forever be remembered in Fayette County and across Southern West Virginia.

Mr. RAHALL

Mr. RAHALL. Madam Speaker, it is indeed a high honor for me to rise today to introduce our guest chaplain, the Reverend David F. Allen, Pastor of the Welcome Baptist Church, located in my Third Congressional District in my hometown of Beckley, West Virginia. Pastor Allen was born and raised in Greenstown, West Virginia, and is one of eight children raised by his mother, a single parent. He was educated in the Fayette County public school system and holds several teaching certificates and certifications through the National Baptist Convention. Pastor Allen received his call to the preaching ministry at the age of 14, and since that time he has actively pursued his calling. He has been the Pastor of Welcome Baptist Church for the past 12 years. Pastor Allen is the Vice Moderator and District Missionary of the Winding Gulf District Association. He has served as Supply Minister to many area churches and does extensive work in the evangelistic field. Pastor Allen is also the founding Bishop of Tsidkenu Ministries, a State-chartered outreach ministry. In addition, Pastor Allen is the President of the Christian Ministers Alliance of Beckley, West Virginia, and vicinity. He is married to Gloria J. Allen, who is with us today, and they are the proud parents of five children and grandparents to five grandchildren. Pastor Allen states that he is a God-called, spirit- filled preacher of God's Word. Madam Speaker, again it is an honor for me to introduce and welcome to the U.S. House of Representatives the Reverend David F. Allen, Pastor of the Welcome Baptist Church in Beckley, West Virginia, to deliver our opening prayer. Thank you.

Mr. RAHALL

Mr. RAHALL. Mr. Speaker, is nothing sacred in this Administration's budget? At a time when our greatest generation is relying more and more on the VA to provide health services and our newest veterans are returning from Iraq and Afghanistan, the White House is proposing to slash their benefits and force them to pay ever increasing premiums. What happened to keeping promises to our nation's veterans? With the constantly rising cost of health care, the proposed funding falls well short of what is needed for our veterans. These veterans paid their service to our Nation and they earned a lifetime of health care coverage--we promised it to them. Now, as the President wants to spend trillions of dollars to privatize Social Security, he also wants to break that promise and make veterans pay for their healthcare again! The absurdity of this would be laughable if it weren't such a serious and disturbing proposal. Thomas P. Cadmus, the National Commander of the American Legion sees and understands the absurdity of this as well. He said, and I quote: ``It is incomprehensible that our veterans will pay for the shortfall in VA health-care funding from their own pockets as tax dollars flow out the back door of America.'' And these tax dollars aren't just flowing out the back door of America in additional foreign aid funding, they are also flowing out the front door in the form of tax cuts for the wealthiest one percent of our Nation. We have the money to keep our promise to our veterans and I urge the White House to reevaluate the budget and make the changes needed to reinforce the promise to our veterans. I am also enclosing a press release from The American Legion which I submit for the Record to accompany my remarks. Legion Leader Says Proposed Budget Reaches Deep Into Veterans' Pockets WASHINGTON, February 7, 2005.--The leader of the nation's largest military veterans organization reacted strongly to the effects that President Bush's budget plan will have on veterans. He called it a smoke screen to raise revenue at the expense of veterans. ``This is not acceptable,'' said Thomas P. Cadmus, national commander of the 2.7 million-member American Legion. ``It's nothing more than a health care tax designed to increase revenue at the expense of veterans who served their country.'' Cadmus was referring to the portion of the proposed budget that would double the co-payment charge to many veterans for prescription drugs and would require some to pay a new fee of $250 a year to use their own their own health care system. ``Is the goal of these legislative initiatives to drive those veterans paying for their health care away from the system designed to serve veterans?'' Cadmus asked. ``The President is asking Congress to make `health care poaching' legal in the world's largest health care delivery system.'' ``When the President first came to Washington, among his first official acts was to triple the prescription co-payment from $2 to $7,'' Cadmus said. ``Once again, the President wants to double the co-payment and fortunately, Congress has wisely rejected that proposal. Making veterans pay for timely access to quality health care is wrong.'' This is the third year in a row the President has attempted to establish an enrollment fee for those veterans making co- payments and third-party reimbursements to the VA. ``Many of these veterans are Medicare-eligible and already paying the federal government for their part A and B coverage, so why should they have to pay an additional enrollment fee? VA can't even bill Medicare,'' Cadmus said. ``Other veterans with private health insurance make co- payments and then VA is reimbursed for services. Again, why should they be forced to pay an additional $250 to go to VA medical facilities?'' ``During my visits to VA hospitals, I have not run into Bill Gates, Donald Trump, or Ross Perot seeking care. I see mostly veterans--many on small fixed incomes--trying to make ends meet and exercising their very best health care option.'' Cadmus observed. ``Veterans' health care is an ongoing expense of war,'' he added. ``You don't thank veterans for serving their country and then tell them, `By the way, better not get wounded or you'll have to pay extra for your health care.' This is offensive to every veteran in America. That is why this government must move VA health care out from under the umbrella of discretionary spending to mandatory spending,'' Cadmus stressed. The American Legion has requested a $3.5 billion increase in health care spending in FY 2006. The President is proposing $9.5 billion in foreign aid, about $2.1 billion more than the current level. ``As young Americans in uniform battle terrorism in Iraq and Afghanistan, as well as 119 other countries, it is incomprehensible that our veterans will pay for the shortfall in VA health care funding from their own pockets as tax dollars flow out the back door of America,'' Cadmus said. ``We reminded the President of our position on veterans' health care needs during his campaign and I personally testified on the issue on Capitol Hill last September,'' Cadmus added. ``Our budget request is very realistic when you consider the Secretary has slammed the door in the face of hundreds of thousands of veterans eligible, but currently forbidden from seeking quality care from VA.'' ``The current appropriations process is broken and is not adequately funding VA medical care,'' Cadmus said. ``President George W. Bush's Task Force to Improve Health Care Delivery for Our Nation's Veterans on May 26, 2003, identified the mismatch between demand and funding as a major obstacle in meeting the nation's commitment to veterans. The American Legion and nine other veterans' organizations believe the answer lies in changing VA health care funding from discretionary to mandatory appropriation.'' ``No active-duty service member in harm's way should ever have to question the nation's commitment to veterans. This is the wrong message at the wrong time to the wrong constituency.

Mr. RAHALL

Mr. RAHALL. Mr. Speaker, today I am introducing legislation to restore the prohibition on the commercial sale and slaughter of wild free-roaming horses and burros. My legislation is necessary because of 36 lines that were hidden away in the recently enacted Consolidated Appropriations Act that overturned more than 30 years of national policy on the protection and management of wild free-roaming horses and burros. This backdoor legislative maneuver, enacted without public notice, will make these animals available to the highest bidder for processing into commercial products. We need to stop this senseless and inhumane policy change before it can be carried out. This body needs to be reminded of the public outcry, much of it from the voices of children across the United States, that sparked Congress in 1971 to pass the Wild Free-Roaming Horses and Burros Act (Public Law 92-195). That law established as national policy ``that wild free- roaming horses and burros shall be protected from capture, branding, harassment, and death; and to accomplish this they are considered in the area where presently found, as an integral part of the natural system of the public lands.'' Just as importantly, the law directed that ``no wild free-roaming horse or burros or its remains may be sold or transferred for consideration for processing into commercial products.'' It has been illegal for the past 33 years to sell or transfer wild horses and burros for processing into commercial products because many Americans abhor the thought. They would be aghast to know that these animals now can and will be slaughtered so their meat can be offered on menus in France, Belgium and Japan. The 1971 Act directed the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) and the Forest Service to enforce the law on public lands. Unfortunately, these agencies, especially the BLM, have not lived up to the task. Reports of the Government Accountability Office and the Inspector General, as well as newspaper exposes, have outlined numerous instances where the BLM has failed to properly manage these animals. Instead of addressing these long-term and widespread management problems, we have just seen the enactment of a quick and dirty fix. Now under the guise of ``managing'' these living symbols of the American West, the agency will be permitted to allow the slaughter of animals that they had been previously charged with protecting. What makes this slaughter provision all the more senseless is that humane alternatives exist and federal agencies have the authority to carry out such humane actions as adoption, sterilization, relocation, and placement with qualified individuals and organizations. To suggest that an acceptable solution to a federal agency's management shortcomings is commercial slaughter is an irresponsible approach to our public lands and the wildlife that roam them. A public outcry has again begun across the United States over the change in law that now allows the commercial sale and slaughter of wild free-roaming horses and burros. We need to act before it is too late for thousands of these animals. I am pleased to introduce my legislation today with my colleague from Kentucky Mr. Whitfield. I urge my other colleagues to support this bill so that we may have the prompt restoration of a just and humane policy for wild free-roaming horses and burros.

Mr. RAHALL

Mr. RAHALL. Mr. Speaker, regardless of the fact that the Federal Government holds land in trust for the American people, sadly it appears that what the people own, the people may not necessarily ever get to use. Last year, I informed this House of the case of two tiny islands in the western Carribean. It is a story worth repeating. Navassa and Desecheo islands have interesting histories, but I doubt most Americans even know they exist, let alone that the islands are, in fact, part of our very own country. The story of Navassa Island is a classic tale of American capitalism. It came to be part of America in the late 1800's through the mining and sale of petrified bird guano, yes, guano, as fertilizer. It is also the site of one of our Nation's early, ugly labor disputes. Over time, guano went out of fashion, but the outpost served a new purpose for 80 years, as a light source to guide ships through the islands of the Caribbean. In 1996, with the advent of new technologies, the lighthouse went dark. The property, however, remained part of the U.S. Eventually that island and Desecheo Island, a former military training range, were incorporated into the National Wildlife Refuge system. The designation rightfully recognizes the unique qualities of the two islands, which are rich in uncommon plant and animal life. But, in turn, it has also led to their being essentially fenced off from the people who own them, the American public. For in fact, today, the Fish and Wildlife Service bars legal access to these two islands apparently under any circumstance. That might be the end of the story, were it not for a group of Ham radio operators, who, after having been granted special use access to these public lands for 20 years, were suddenly denied permission to visit the islands to broadcast. Indeed, for no sensible reason, the Fish and Wildlife Service, the same agency that had been granting access to these radio operators, arbitrarily reversed course and denied permits for a non-controversial recreational activity that had been approved for two decades of responsible and uneventful public use. Not only did the agency cut off these broadcasters, it did so even after they agreed to assume all liability, to submit to any regulation or permit condition, and even to pay all administrative, management and travel costs for the Federal agency to remove all financial and logistical hurdles. It has also come to my attention recently that Ham radio operators have also been denied access to the Farallon National Wildlife Refuge located off the California coast 28 miles from San Francisco, even though this refuge allows access by special use permits. Moreover, there are eight broadcast antennae already on one of the islands that provide radio communications and the transmission of weather and seismic information to the mainland. This is an instance of outrageous administrative arrogance to deny permits for a recreational use that has been shown to be harmless to fish and wildlife. Public recreation at our National Wildlife Refuges is as much a part of the history of Refuge System as the critters themselves. The Secretary of the Interior has been given congressional authority to grant special use permits for just such circumstances, when a public use is not incompatible with the purpose of the refuge. Yet, for some reason that escapes me, this Secretary will not budge. In the case of these two islands, the Secretary's discretionary powers amount to guano. Such hubris cannot be allowed to stand unchallenged. Along with my colleague, the chairman of the Resources Committee, Richard Pombo, I am introducing today legislation to address this deplorable situation and to restore the public's right of access to its Federal public lands. The liberation of Navassa and Desecheo Islands begins today. This legislation would accomplish two main goals. First, it would require the Fish and Wildlife Service to provide public access, use of, and recreational opportunities to resolve this particular dispute. Second, the legislation would require the Service to establish at least one period of time each year for public access to each refuge. Of great importance to me, language authorizing the Service to specify use periods and to attach reasonable permit restrictions in order to protect resources and public safety should provide adequate flexibility to balance the competing interests of resource protection and public recreation. Another benefit of this legislation will be to help harmonize existing use policies at these refuges with three other remote refuges in the Pacific, Baker Island, Johnson Island and Jarvis Island. These three refuges, all accessible by way of special use permits, show plainly that controlled public recreational access is possible even at extremely remote and fragile refuges. In fact, the ham radio operators were successful in securing a permit to visit Baker Island as recently as 2002. In fairness, the same access should be provided to Navassa Island and Desecheo. I am fully aware of the Service's need to balance public access with the Refuge System's overall ``wildlife first'' mission. The Service cannot, however, be allowed to selectively choose to implement those parts of its authority it favors but ignore those requirements to provide for public recreation which are clearly stated in existing law. I urge members to support this important legislation.

Mr. RAHALL

Mr. RAHALL. Mr. Speaker, I cannot begin to guess how many times throughout my years of service in this institution I have heard my colleagues stand on this floor and pay homage to America's workers. I could probably paper these walls a dozen times over with the copies of speeches delivered here that have praised American working families for their contributions to our economy and our culture. Patriotism, fairness, loyalty, a belief in hard work--these are just some of the qualities I have heard so accurately ascribed to America's working families. They are certainly traits deserving of public admiration. But I believe that they are also qualities that deserve to be preserved and maintained by Congress, because these are the threads that form the fabric of American life. Today, the quality of life and the core values of America's working families are under siege, again, and the work of Congress faces unraveling. In particular, I raise the matter of a court decision last fall that knocked loose a core underpinning of the Coal Act. In horrendous decisions, a federal judge thumbed his nose at Congress, and its work to ensure that the federal promise to America's miners would be kept. In a wrong-headed decision, that court placed in jeopardy the health care of thousands of elderly and ill retired miners and their spouses. The case involved Horizon Natural Resources--the nation's fourth largest coal company--which had gone to court to seek a way out of its obligations to its workers. This was not so much a matter of a company whose tills were empty and whose assets were gone. It was, more precisely, a matter of a company that wanted the books to look better for prospective buyers who could scoop of the existing mines and processing facilities free of the weight of Coal Act obligations. So Horizon went to court and asked a judge to let it use bankruptcy loopholes to circumvent its legal duties to its workers under the Coal Act. The company, quite plainly, wanted a seal of approval to turn its back on the men and women who had devoted their lives to it. Then, in September, almost inconceivably, the judge gave Horizon the final nod. It was OK, it was ruled, for an American company to so devalue the American worker and to go around the intent of Congress. Horizon could merely dump its obligations, and go along its merry way. It is not just the workers of Horizon who will suffer. In turn, the cost of the benefits legally owed by Horizon have been thrown onto already financially strained benefits plans. Consequently, Horizon and the courts, have sent a shock wave that jeopardizes the health care benefits of thousands of other retirees and beneficiaries. The weight of those obligations cannot long be managed in the current scenario. And if other companies follow suit, collapse will only be hastened. The need for a fix is urgent. I have, therefore, joined with Senator Rockefeller in introducing legislation intended to address this court decision. My bill will make it clear that the benefits and obligations mandated by the Congress through the Coal Act cannot be modified by the bankruptcy courts. It will, as well, prevent additional companies from trying to circumvent the Coal Act through bankruptcy, while leaving others, who play by the rules, holding the bag. I am all too familiar with the struggles of working men and women in our country. I have always believed that a fair day's labor deserves a fair day's wages. I believe, too, that a company has certain obligations to a faithful worker who has devoted his life to laboring for the good of the company. It has been here, in the halls of Congress, where these beliefs have found refuge in the form of legislation, such as the Coal Act. The bill I introduce today reaffirms a federal promise made to America's coal miners and helps to fulfill the duty of Congress to America's working families.

Mr. RAHALL

Mr. RAHALL. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to a woman who had a very distinguished career as a State extension specialist in the State of West Virginia Mrs. Tanner Johnson Livisay. Mrs. Livisay was a retired State extension specialist and associate professor at West Virginia University and was a resident of Princeton, West Virginia. Mrs. Livisay graduated in 1923 from the former Douglas High School in Huntington, West Virginia and later went on to earn her Bachelor of Science degree in home economics from West Virginia State College in 1927. She then taught in Jefferson and Wyoming counties for the next 14 years. Mrs. Livisay earned her Masters degree from West Virginia University and completed further studies at Merrill Palmer Institute in Detroit, Michigan, University of Michigan, University of Cincinnati, Cornell University and Colorado State University. In 1941, Mrs. Livisay began her work as a home demonstration agent in West Virginia. Her territory included Mercer, McDowell and Cabell counties in my district. She organized home and garden clubs, 4-H clubs, and established the West Virginia State Farm Homemakers Council, under the auspices of West Virginia State College, West Virginia University and the U.S. Department of Agriculture. She was the district home demonstration agent and became program development leader. After 27 years in the Extension Service, Mrs. Livisay retired as a specialist in child development and human relations. A personal account of the work of the West Virginia Extension Service for African-Americans is recorded in the book, ``Reaching Out with Heart and Hands--The Memories of An Extension Worker,'' written by Mrs. Livisay in 1994. A diamond soror and life member, Mrs. Livisay was initiated into Nu Chapter of Alpha Kappa Alpha Sorority Inc. in 1925. She was a charter member of Epsilon Delta Omega Chapter in Beckley, West Virginia and at the time of her death, she was a member of Eta Iota Omega Chapter, in Inkster, Michigan. Mrs. Livisay, was the proud mother of four children, Carolyn L. McGhee, Marilyn L. Stewart, Jackson P. Livisay, Jr. and Osborne Livisay. Mr. Speaker, I am honored today to pay tribute to the late Mrs. Tanner Johnson Livisay, for her many accomplishments and achievements and the legacy she leaves for her family and the great State of West Virginia, and in particular, my third congressional district.

Mr. RAHALL

Mr. RAHALL. Mr. Speaker, l have always believed that, in America, hard work leads to reward. I grew up in a family that inspired me by example to work hard, to be fair, and to be loyal. They are values worth instilling in future generations. They are concepts that, I believe, set our Nation apart and above the rest of the world. Increasingly, however, these American ideals are being swept aside in the corporate chase for the almighty dollar, and it does not bode well for the future of our country. In recent months, the media in my State have been running stories about a series of court cases concerning Horizon Natural Resources--the Nation's fourth largest coal company. The once robust company was ailing financially and it was seeking protection through the bankruptcy codes. It is the kind of story that might normally engender sympathy. But how this company went about trying to protect itself wipes away any semblance of pity. Horizon went after its employees, current and past. It went after their benefits, including their health care. In a cold and callous act, Horizon Natural Resources went to court and asked a judge to allow it to abandon its obligations to those men and women who had labored long and hard in the mines and coal-processing facilities to earn an honest living for themselves and the boys in suits. In a final, appalling decision in September, a federal judge gave the ``all clear'' to Horizon to use bankruptcy loopholes to turn its back on its workers. Armed with that decision, Horizon took years of the hard work and the loyalty of thousands of employees and their families and heartlessly tossed it all out the courtroom window. As a result, Horizon's mines and coal-processing facilities are enabled to continue to operate under new names, but its employees and retirees have suffered egregious losses, including, for some, the loss of their promised health care. Such court decisions, to my mind, do not even vaguely resemble justice. They make a mockery of the word. Moreover, they thwart the intent of Congress when enacting the Coal Act which was supposed to guarantee those health care benefits. As a result of its courtroom victories, Horizon is not only permitted to chuck its obligations to ensure certain benefits for its own employees, it is able to dump its liabilities on already financially strained benefit plans that provide for thousands of other retirees and their beneficiaries. Benefit plans, I might add, that are largely being financed by other coal companies. As such, the Horizon ``bankruptcy'' decision resulted in several bad decisions that may have long-term, far-reaching implications for benefits and employer obligations under the Coal Act, including the level of benefits that are required to be provided. In handing down such a poorly considered decision, one federal judge set off a domino effect that will also cost numerous companies that are playing by the rules. This is exactly the type of egregious corporate behavior the Coal Act sought to address. It is wrong. It goes against the American grain. It turns on its head the ideals of hard work and loyalty and fairness. This series of court decisions cannot be allowed to stand. In response, today I, along with West Virginia Senator Jay Rockefeller, are introducing legislation to seek a remedy to this situation. Our bill will make clear that the benefits and obligations mandated by the Coal Act cannot be modified by the bankruptcy courts. It will prevent other companies from attempting to skirt the Coal Act through bankruptcy, and help to provide more stability to already over-burdened benefit plans and those families who depend on them. Moreover, our bill will send a message that financial bankruptcy is not an excuse for moral bankruptcy, and that loyalty and hard work are worthy ideals still valued in America today.

Mr. RAHALL

Mr. RAHALL. Mr. Speaker, in my capacity as the ranking Democratic member on the Committee on Resources, it has been both a pleasure and an honor to oversee the management of our Federal public lands and resources. It is not an exaggeration to say that our system of public lands--our parks, forests, refuges and wilderness areas--is second to none when it comes to providing world-class opportunities for Americans to enjoy outdoor recreation. That is, of course, when the general public is actually allowed to access and use their public lands. Regardless of the fact that the Federal Government holds land in trust for the American people, sadly it appears that what the people own, the people may not necessarily ever get to use. This is the case with two tiny islands in the Western Caribbean. Navassa and Desecheo islands have interesting histories, but I doubt most Americans even know they exist, let alone that the islands are, in fact, part of our very own country. The story of Navassa Island is a classic tale of American capitalism. It came to be part of America in the late 1800's through the mining and sale of petrified bird guano--yes, guano--as fertilizer. It is also the site of one of our Nation's early, ugly labor disputes. Over time, guano went out of fashion, but the outpost served a new purpose for 80 years, as a light source to guide ships through the islands of the Caribbean. In 1996, with the advent of new technologies, the lighthouse went dark. The property, however, remained part of the U.S. Eventually that island and Desecheo Island, a former military training range, were incorporated into the National Wildlife Refuge system. The designation rightfully recognizes the unique qualities of the two islands, which are rich in uncommon plant and animal life. But, in turn, it has also led to their being essentially fenced off from the people who own them--the American public. For in fact, today, the Fish & Wildlife Service bars legal access to these two islands apparently under any circumstance. That might be the end of the story, were it not for a group of Ham radio operators, who, after having been granted special use access to these public lands for twenty years, were suddenly denied permission to visit the islands to broadcast Indeed, for no sensible reason, the Fish and Wildlife Service--the same agency that had been granting access to these radio operators-- arbitrarily reversed course and denied permits for a non-controversial recreational activity that had been approved for two decades of responsible and uneventful public use. Not only did the agency cut off these broadcasters, it did so even after they agreed to assume all liability, to submit to any regulation or permit condition, and even to pay all administrative, management and travel costs for the Federal agency to remove all financial and logistical hurdles. This is an instance of outrageous administrative arrogance to deny a permit for a recreational use that has been shown to be harmless to fish and wildlife. Public recreation at our National Wildlife Refuges is as much a part of the history of Refuge System as the critters themselves. The Secretary of the Interior has been given congressional authority to grant special use permits for just such circumstances, when a public use is not incompatible with the purpose of the refuge. Yet, for some reason that escapes me, this Secretary will not budge. In the case of these two islands, the Secretary's discretionary powers amount to guano. Such hubris cannot be allowed to stand unchallenged. Along with my colleague, the Chairman of the Resources Committee, Richard Pombo, I am introducing today legislation to address this deplorable situation and to restore the public's right of access to its Federal public lands. The liberation of Navassa and Desecheo Islands begins today. This legislation would accomplish two main goals. First, it would require the Fish and Wildlife Service to issue regulations within 120 days after the bill's enactment to resolve this particular dispute. Second, to ensure access at both refuges the legislation would require the Service to establish at least one period of time each year for public access for each island. Language authorizing the Service to specify use periods and to attach reasonable permit restrictions in order to protect resources and public safety should provide adequate flexibility to balance the competing interests of resource protection and public recreation. Also important, this legislation will help to harmonize existing use policies in regard to Navassa and Desecheo Refuges with three other remote refuges in the Pacific--Baker Island, Johnson Island and Jarvis Island. These three refuges, all accessible by way of special use permits, show plainly that controlled public recreational access is possible even at extremely remote and fragile refuges. In fact, the ham radio operators were successful in securing a permit to visit Baker Island as recently as 2002. In fairness, the same access should be provided to Navassa Island and Desecheo. I am fully aware of the Service's need to balance public access with the Refuge System's overall ``wildlife first'' mission. The Service cannot, however, be allowed to selectively choose to implement those parts of its authority it favors but ignore those requirements to provide for public recreation which are clearly stated in existing law. I urge members to support this important legislation.

Mr. RAHALL

Mr. RAHALL. Mr. Speaker, today I ask a very serious question. Why is it, the Cheney-Bush bunch allow us to import foreign made flu vaccines, but won't allow Americans to shop for American made cheaper drugs across our borders? We all know the importance of getting our flu vaccines every year. The Washington Post reports that last year's flu season was the worst flu season we've had in 4 years, and the flu killed 142 people. As all Americans are aware, there is another flu vaccine crisis in our country. America's supply of the flu vaccine has practically been cut in half, because the world's second-leading supplier, The Chiron Corp. based in Britain, was shut down because of contamination reported in its batches of the vaccine. 48 million vaccines were due to be shipped before this shutdown. I repeat, 48 million doses of this vaccine were to be imported into this country, to help combat a life-threatening illness. Mr. Speaker, I speak to address a glaring policy inconsistency on the part of the Cheney-Bush administration. Why is it, that a long-standing health policy, that is wildly effective and successful, be permitted with respect to one killer, but denied to every other disease? 142 people died from the flu last year, and it causes outrage and action. 250,000 people die from heart attacks before they even get to the hospital each year, and it's accepted as just another statistic. How many of these 250,000 could have been saved, if only they'd had medicine to lower their cholesterol? How many of these 250,000 could have been saved, if only they'd been able to afford their medicine? According to a recent press release from the University of Michigan Health System, nearly half of patients who have a prescription for any of the cholesterol-fighting drugs called statins fail to fill their prescription every time--or stop filling it altogether! The University goes on to say that the higher the prescription cost, the lower the number of prescriptions filled. Let's ignore, for a moment, that Europe has been importing drugs safely and effectively for over 20 years. Let us also ignore that countries like Canada, the United Kingdom, Germany, and France also have higher life expectancies and lower child mortality rates than the United States does. But let us not ignore a new FDA proposal. A proposal that would require customs agents to return all drugs sent from foreign addresses back to their senders. William Hubbard, a senior associate commissioner at the FDA, told Congress on June 7th, ``We need to make a blanket assessment that these drugs are not safe for American consumers and they should be turned back.'' Unless, of course, it's the flu vaccine. And then it's OK if they come from the United Kingdom, as in the case of the Chiron Corp. Or if it comes from the world's largest supplier of the flu vaccine, the French company, Aventis Pasteur. Yes, there are criticisms about the safety of imported drugs. One might be able to look to this most recent flu vaccine scare and say that this is a perfect example of why we don't import drugs. The safety of the supply could be compromised. I would say that this is a perfect example of why we should import from countries like Canada or the United Kingdom. They have safeguards in place, just as we do, that protect the integrity of the prescription drug supply. On August 12th, the acting FDA commissioner Lester Crawford expressed his concern that al-Qaida may attack the supply of drugs coming into this country. I will tell you that I am JUST AS CONCERNED about the 28 percent of older adults with diabetes who, as reported in the February 2004 issue of Diabetes Care, are going without food or other essentials to pay for their insulin. Why, in the richest nation on Earth, with this so-called comprehensive new Medicare program, are people going without food to afford their drugs? Why is the Administration so opposed to a program that would help so many? So, Mr. Speaker, I urge not only the duly elected Representatives of the citizens in these United States, but also the President to do what is in the best interests of these citizens. I urge both Congress and the President to embrace prescription drug re-importation and reject the influence of the pharmaceutical companies.

Mr. RAHALL

Mr. RAHALL. Mr. Speaker, as we draw to the end of this, 108th Congress, we are about to lose Bill Lipinski to retirement. A valued friend, a highly respected colleague, and a great representative for his constituents in the Third District of Illinois, the southwest side of Chicago and suburban communities, Bill's presence will be missed around here. But our loss will turn out to be the gain of his lovely wife, Rose Marie, his two children and their spouses, and his two grandchildren, as he heads home to spend more time with his family and to reportedly lend his efforts to worthy causes around his lifelong home, southwest Chicago. In additions to his duties as a longtime congressman and ward committeeman, Bill has been my close colleague on the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee where I've personally been able to work with him and see him, up close, and in action. Over the course of the 108th Congress, he has served the Transportation Committee in the critical role of Ranking Member to the important Subcommittee on Highways and Transit, which has crafted the major, bipartisan, surface transportation and jobs bill, H.R. 3550, the Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users. Bill's contributions, along with those of my colleagues Don Young of Alaska, Jim Oberstar of Minnesota, and Tom Petri of Wisconsin, have been invaluable in getting us a bill that the House passed with overwhelming support from both sides of the political aisle, and that currently is being considered in conference by members of the House and the Senate. In the past, he has effectively used his skills to deliver millions of federal dollars to build the Chicago Transit Authority's Orange Line, and to provide for improvements to both Midway and O'Hare airports. Over the last 22 years, the time during which Bill has served both his constituents and this House so capably, he has won respect from his peers and established strong relationships with members on both sides of the aisle. The statements, here, of his colleagues in regard to his retirement provide testament to just how warmly he is regarded. Now, he will have more time to devote to his family. But, even if he's planning on getting away from this House, I don't really think Bill will be totally detaching himself from the political profession in which he has made such an indelible mark. Politics is in the family blood; his wife, Rose Marie, has served as a presidential elector for their home state of Illinois, and his son Dan is the Democrat nominee to succeed Bill in the Illinois Third District. So, Bill will have no option but to remain connected, even if only to keep up with the rest of his family. Bill, I salute you, and I will miss you, both personally and professionally, but I sincerely wish you well in your future endeavors.

Mr. RAHALL

Mr. RAHALL. Mr. Speaker, Congress was supposed to reauthorize the major surface transportation and jobs bill, the successor to TEA 21, a year ago. Now, because of the indifference of the Bush Administration and the Republican Leadership in Congress, we are about to embark on the sixth extension of TEA 21, rather than completing work on a bill that would address our current and future infrastructure needs as well as providing sorely needed jobs and economic stimulus. The House and Senate versions of transportation and jobs bill passed both houses by margins larger than is required in Congress for amendments to the Constitution. But the bill is on a road to nowhere because the Cheney-Bush reelection bunch wants to make up for their Medicare debacle by trying to appear tough on spending. Meanwhile, we have the votes in both the House and the Senate to override a threatened presidential veto and pass a meaningful bill, but the Republican House and Senate leadership are just caving into the Bush Administration's reelection efforts. In so doing, they're failing to uphold the Constitutional obligation of Congress. Although Americans are crying out loud and clear for the need to reinvest in our country, the Bush Administration and the Republican leadership don't bother to listen. As an example of what I'm talking about, I have an editorial from a widely-read newspaper in my district, the Beckley Register-Herald, which I would like to submit for the record to accompany my remarks. Yesterday, in response to Congressional inaction on the transportation and jobs bill, the Register-Herald ran the editorial appearing below: [From the Beckley Register-Herald] Highway Bill While politicians play election-year politics, W.Va. suffers. Heard the latest? A multiyear highway spending bill, crucial to progress here in southern West Virginia, appears to be off until after the election. The existing six-year highway and mass transit spending bill, funded at $218 billion, ran out a year ago and has had to be prolonged by several short-term extensions because of differences over spending levels between Congress and the White House. The White House, citing the need for fiscal restraint, recommended $256 billion and threatened to veto any bill that would add to the deficit. The Senate approved a $318 billion package. The House originally came in at $284 billion, and recently the two chambers united around a figure of $284 billion in guaranteed contracts plus another $15 billion in contracts that have yet to be carried out. But politicians are playing election-year politics, and, of course, nothing of substance is getting done. As we pointed out a few days ago, no one can accuse this Congress of overwork--it's only been in session roughly one day out of every three. Sadly, lawmakers sent to the president only a fraction of the 13 spending bills necessary to fund the government for the fiscal year that starts Friday. That includes the transportation bill to fund highway and transit projects for the next six years--vitally important to southern West Virginia. The Mountain State faces unique challenges when it comes to building highways. It can cost up to $20 million to build one mile of a highway here. This state relies heavily on the federal program to build highways. A total of $2.2 billion was secured for West Virginia in the House version of the bill, $2 billion of which are projects in southern West Virginia. Interstate links developed here in recent years have brought new jobs and the potential for attracting new businesses. These roads provide modern access and position West Virginia as a crossroads for business developers looking for locations in the East. They provide our families a safer means of getting to and from school and work. Ordinary West Virginians can't afford to see these opportunities go by the wayside, or even delayed. We suffer while Congress engages in gridlock. Enough is enough. Congress and the Bush administration need to get in gear and produce a highway spending package that's adequately financed.

Mr. RAHALL

Mr. RAHALL. Mr. Speaker, in my capacity as the Ranking Democratic Member of the Resources Committee, I would like to register my strong support of H.R. 3589, to create the office of chief financial officer for the territory of the U.S. Virgin Islands. I commend the gentlelady from the U.S. Virgin Islands, Donna Christensen, for her tireless work in getting this legislation to the floor for our consideration. As has been noted this evening, the financial condition of the Virgin Islands is in trouble. Skyrocketing deficits coupled with inadequate fiscal controls have left the local government struggling to provide basic services to the people of the Virgin Islands. The potential financial insolvency of the territory did not occur overnight. Nevertheless the introduction of this measure, by the distinguished representative of the Virgin Islands, Donna Christensen, was still met with controversy and opposition from many local political leaders. Donna Christensen has made it clear that this legislation is something that she would rather not have done, but the circumstances of her territory have made the choices for her. She is a brave woman for fighting for what she believes is in the best interest of her constituents and for her island and she should be commended. Virgin Islands history will show that this legislation was a turning point in the fundamental approach that the territory handles its financial affairs. Indeed, this evening may one day be looked upon by the residents of the Virgin Islands as one of those rare moments when history itself seemed to hold its breath. When the voice of the people, on that beautiful Carribean island, rose louder and louder and thundered over various political obstacles and was heard, and acted upon, in this hallowed chamber that is the U.S. House of Representatives. I have said it before, and I will say it again this evening. When the next chapter in Profiles in Courage is written, it will be about the gentlelady from the Virgin Islands, Donna Christensen. I urge my colleagues to support favorable passage by this body of H.R. 3589.

Mr. RAHALL

Mr. RAHALL. Mr. Speaker, as the Ranking Democratic Member of the Resources Committee, it is a pleasure and privilege to have H.R. 3257, sponsored by our esteemed colleague from Ohio, Tim Ryan, be considered on the floor today. The dramatic tapestry of our Nation's cultural heritage is one which many of us are seeking to preserve for the benefit of not just current, but future generations, in the form of National Heritage Areas. We do this not just for educational or inspirational purposes, but also, because heritage areas are engines for economic development. While the measure pending before us today is the logical first step, an authorization of a feasibility study for a proposed Western Reserve Heritage Area, I am confident that once completed, it will find that this particular region of Ohio deserves national recognition for the special cultural and historic resources values it contains. And when that day arrives, it will be a tribute to the untiring dedication and hard work of Representative Tim Ryan. Indeed, although a freshman Member of this body, Tim Ryan has already garnered a reputation as a fighter for the people of the 17th District of Ohio. The bill we are considering today is reflective of their good judgment in sending a person such as Tim Ryan to Congress to represent them. I urge my colleagues to support H.R. 3257.

Mr. RAHALL

Mr. RAHALL. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to congratulate our first Americans on this, the long awaited opening day of the National Museum of the American Indian. If, indeed, the last shall be first, this is a fine example as this museum dedicated to our first Americans is located on the last spot open on the National Mall. This a joyous day. At this very moment, thousands of native Americans who traveled from all the corners of our country, Canada, and South America are participating in a procession on the Mall leading to the museum itself. They are dressed in unique traditional attire, stopping along the way to celebrate with dance, song, and drums. I am honored to say that as a member of the Interior and Insular Affairs Committee, I worked with then Chairman Mo Udall on the legislation to build a museum devoted solely to the culture, art, and history of our Native Americans. Although Mo is no longer with us, I am certain that he is smiling down upon us today. I encourage everyone to visit this magnificent National Museum of the American Indian and use its resources to learn about the rich history and legacy of Native Americans, as well as contemporary Indian life. I promise your lives will be enriched by the experience.

Mr. RAHALL

Mr. RAHALL. Madam Speaker, few places possess both the scenic beauty and historical significance of Harpers Ferry. Enactment of this legislation is critical because it will enhance both the scenic and historic resources of this unique place. Like my home State of West Virginia itself, the pivotal location of Harpers Ferry has allowed it to serve as the backdrop for many of the most significant events in American History. As a result, some of the icons of American freedom and discovery--George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, Merriweather Lewis, John Brown, ``Stonewall'' Jackson, Abraham Lincoln and Frederick Douglas--have walked the ground that now makes up this Park. From the earliest settlement of this great Nation, through the founding of the railroad, John Brown's raid, the Civil War, reconstruction, the industrial revolution and integration, Harpers Ferry has been the stage on which many of the most significant chapters in American history have unfolded. As for the scenic beauty of the place, none could describe it better than a visitor did in 1783 when he wrote that, ``The passage of the Potomac through the Blue Ridge is perhaps one of the most stupendous scenes in nature.'' That awestruck visitor was, of course, Thomas Jefferson. And during his distinguished career in the United States Senate, Harpers Ferry National Historical Park has had no better friend, no better protector, than Senator Robert C. Byrd. Back in 2000, Senator Byrd recognized the need for this Park expansion but was also well aware that units of the National Park System work best when the local community feels a sense of ownership and pride in the Park. Senator Byrd directed the National Park Service to conduct extensive public outreach to provide the local community information regarding the needs of the Park and the impacts of any potential expansion. Once that process was complete, Senator Byrd had accomplished the near- impossible: Surveys show that 94 percent of the respondents support this legislation. I share Senator Byrd's great love of history--West Virginia's history in particular. Harpers Ferry is an incredibly powerful tool for telling the great story of our State, our People and our Nation. These proposed additions will allow the Park to tell those stories even more powerfully and more completely. I salute Senator Byrd for his tireless efforts on behalf of Harpers Ferry and West Virginia and urge my colleagues to support S. 1576.

Mr. RAHALL

Mr. RAHALL. Mr. Speaker, again I wish to discuss the Transportation bill. This time, I want to discuss this much-needed bill in light of President Bush's recent visit to my hometown of Beckley, West Virginia last Friday, July 16, 2004. This week, Congress will again have to extend the authorization for the previous Transportation bill because we still do not yet have a reauthorization. The previous authorization originally expired almost a year ago. Now, we will be extending that previous authorization for the fifth time--that's right, the fifth time--because Congress still hasn't done its work and completed a new bill. The reason Congress still hasn't done the Transportation bill is that the White House clearly does not want us to finalize this bill in an election year, and the Republican Leadership in the House and the Senate just follow the Administration's orders. As I have said repeatedly, we should complete the bill, and if the White House wants to veto it, it can go ahead; there are clearly enough Republican and Democrat votes to override a veto and get the Transportation bill finished. But by doing nothing, the House and Senate Republican Leadership are siding with the White House, and preventing Congress from carrying out its Constitutional role as a coequal branch of government. As I said last week, here on the House floor, States like my home state of West Virginia have been waiting for far too long now to see just what, if anything, they could expect to receive from the Federal Government. This money will help finance important highway and transit projects such as the Beckley Intermodal Gateway, provide good-paying jobs that are sorely needed in this uncertain job market, and sustain our economic growth at this critical point in time. Mr. Speaker, I have an editorial from a distinguished newspaper in my hometown, the Register Herald, which I would like to submit for the Record to accompany my remarks. This editorial from Friday, July 16, 2004, graciously welcomes the president to Beckley. Importantly, it also goes on to note how badly Southern West Virginia needs the highway funding that President Bush is blocking. The editorial reads as follows: Mr. President--Welcome to Beckley Today, for the first time in history, a sitting United States president will be in Beckley. President George W. Bush is scheduled to make a campaign appearance around 4 p.m. today at the Raleigh County Armory Civic Center. The city, Raleigh County and all of southern West Virginia are proud to have been chosen for a visit. We're happy to see him in person and are most interested to listen to his thoughts on the issues that face us as a Nation. However, we want to ask Mr. Bush one thing in return. Soon to come before him will be a highway appropriations bill which he's threatened to veto if it carries a price deemed too expensive. Included in this bill is more than $2 billion to help finance a number of projects that are crucial to the economic development of Berkley, Raleigh County and southern West Virginia. If the economy is to continue the turnaround that Mr. Bush says is gathering steam, we need this money to keep it running. We trust Mr. Bush enjoys his visit here. We wish he could stay longer and enjoy the beautiful mountains we call home. No matter which party you're supporting in the upcoming presidential election, partisan politics should be put aside when the president comes to town.