Nick Rahall

Mr. RAHALL

Mr. RAHALL. Mr. Speaker, the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr., once declared. ``A nation or civilization that continues to produce soft- minded men purchases its own spiritual death on the installment plan.'' Dr. King devoted his life to improving the minds--and the hearts and souls--of all Americans. That work continues today at Marshall University. For the fourth time in five years, the Corporation of National Service has awarded Marshall the Martin Luther King Day of Service Grant. It testifies to the energy and efficacy of their efforts. Their work endows children and adults of all creeds and races with a sense of social justice and a commitment of civil rights. Their January celebration of Dr. King's life and legacy epitomizes the purpose of this national holiday embodies his belief in public service. But just as Dr. King's teaching was not bounded by the walls of his church, Marshall's work in his spirit is not restricted to only one special day. In the upcoming year, for example, Marshall will sponsor a Youth Leadership and Development Program, an Investment in Youth Leadership Forum, and a Mentor Literacy Program, all supported by the CNS grant. Marshall's is a program that should be honored by all who value Dr. King's message and by any who strive to transmit it to future generations.

Mr. RAHALL

Mr. RAHALL. Mr. Speaker, last night's GMAC Bowl in Mobile, Alabama could have carried a warning from the Surgeon General: Not recommended for those with heart conditions. In the end, with all due respect to the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Jones), the best team won. In only its fifth year, the Marshall University Thundering Herd stampeded over East Carolina. Although the Herd was down 38-8 at half- time, the enthusiasm of Marshall's fans did not waiver. But Marshall rallied in the third quarter and charged on in the fourth. When time expired, the game was tied at 51. The noble opponents battled through two overtimes before Byron Leftwich connected on a pass to Josh Davis, ending the contest and securing the laurels of victory for our Thundering Herd. As the headline in the Huntington Herald Dispatch reads this morning, ``Miracle in Mobile.'' I congratulate Marshall's tenacious players and coaches, and applaud its faithful fans. Few football programs have suffered as severe a loss, struggled so valiantly, and risen to such heights, all in the course of 30 years. During half time, Coach Bobby Pruett, who hails from my hometown of Beckley, West Virginia, talked with his team of belief and faith. It is a lesson we should all remember, not only in times of need, but in our everyday lives.

Mr. RAHALL

Mr. RAHALL. Mr. Speaker, as our country began the long process of recovering from the Great Depression and World War II, people sought comfort and change in a variety of places and mediums. Consumers turned their attention to products that were both energetic and new, and Blenko Glass in Milton, West Virginia was one of the American companies able to adjust to this new consumerism with their award-winning pieces and unique designs. I would like to congratulate Huntington, West Virginia residents Deborah Novak and John Witek who have once again created an insightful and provocative documentary that chronicles three of Blenko's most famous and celebrated designers in the era of post-war modernism. Titled ``Blenko Retro: Three Designers of American Glass,'' it is the second of its kind by the Emmy-Award winners to highlight the significance of Blenko as the industry leader in modernity in American glass. Often said to be reflective of events that were occurring at that time, Blenko Glass was able to offer a new attitude to Americans, bringing the sleek and bold creations into their homes that were parallel to the thirst for modernity and change that swept the nation at the end of the World War II. Novak and Witek highlight the role of this American institution, emphasizing the important and permanent position that Blenko Glass and its designers hold in creative history.

Mr. RAHALL

Mr. RAHALL. Mr. Speaker, the United States is an economic powerhouse. We work to keep the economy strong and to maintain a high standard of living for the people who reside here. Yet we have a drain on the economy estimated to be $137 billion annually, a drain that goes unchecked and relatively unpublicized because it is not a ``glamorous topic.'' This drain is spreading, continually invading our natural spaces and crowding out our native flora and fauna. In this regard, I am referring to harmful non-native species, invasive species; an issue which is not yet fully in the public's eye. Even if a person has little concern with native fish and wildlife and the habitats they live in, even if that person resides in a city where the major wildlife is found only in alleys, the fact remains that invasive species are a drain on our economy. Included in the $137 billion figure I referred to earlier are the negative impacts on agricultural production, control costs, and costs in lost land and water resources and uses. This number is too large to ignore, particularly when trends suggest that the number will only go up over time. For example, my home State of West Virginia is a relatively small in terms of land mass, but here are only a few of the impacts felt from harmful nonnative species: The balsam fir tree, on the state list of rare plants, is being infected by a small insect, the balsam wooly adelgid, which sucks the sap, killing the tree. This tree is a unique species for the State, and unless drastic measures are taken, it will be completely wiped out by this insect. Shale barrens, one of the most unique natural plant habitats in West Virginia, have been invaded by many non-native species over the years, but two of the most problematic are spotted knapweed and barren bromegrass. These plants out-compete native species and slowly eradicate them from these unique ecosystems. In a continuation of the plight of the Great Lakes, the zebra mussel has found its way to West Virginia. So far, the zebra mussel is responsible for the federal listing of five species of mussel in the Ohio River, not to mention economic damage from its clogging of water pipes. These are only three of the over 150 harmful non-natives that currently affect West Virginia. In my view, we have an obligation to our native species to protect, conserve and restore them from the introduction of harmful invasive species. For these reasons, today I along with the gentleman from Maryland, Wayne Gilchrest, and the gentleman from Guam, Robert Underwood, are introducing a bill to protect, conserve and restore our native fish, wildlife and their habitats by addressing the threat of these space invaders, harmful invasive species. Maryland, for example, has a nutria problem, too many nutria, and the veined rapa whelk, both of which I know Mr. Gilchrest has great concern with. Mr. Underwood has chosen to be an original cosponsor because of the enormous impacts the brown tree snake has on Guam, its power lines and native bird species. The Species Protection and Conservation of the Environment Act, or SPACE Act, would provide the missing link in existing efforts to combat the pernicious and destructive space invasion of some of our most valuable natural areas by: 1. Providing incentive money to States to write State-wide assessments to study exactly where their native species are being threatened by harmful nonnative species; 2. Providing incentives for projects to implement the State assessments; 3. Encouraging the formation of partnerships among the Federal government and non-Federal land and water owners and managers; 4. Addressing harmful nonnative species' migratory pathways; 5. Implementing specific recommendations of the National Strategy written by the National Invasive Species Council; 6. Creating a Federal-level rapid response capability; and 7. Tasking the National Invasive Species Council to develop standard monitoring requirements for projects combating harmful nonnative species. Using a two-pronged approach, the SPACE Act would provide resources to States and U.S. territories, including Indian Tribes, to address real problems and real solutions. The first prong is a grant program to provide resources to States, territories and tribes to develop assessments to control their harmful nonnative species. Participation in the program would be voluntary, but once this bill becomes law we believe that all States, territories and tribes will want to take advantage of this opportunity and the benefits it can bring to them, aiding them in the organization, prioritizing and specific actions with regards to their harmful non-native species problems and allowing them to apply for what the bill refers to as Aldo Leopold Grants. Technical assistance would also be available to the States, territories and tribes through the National Invasive Species Council to ensure that all assessments would be effective and include the recommendations of the Council's overarching Management Plan. The second prong is implementing the assessments through what would be known as Aldo Leopold Native Heritage Grant Program, which would be available on a 75% federal, 25% non-federal cost sharing basis. Through a variety of partnerships land and water owners and managers would be eligible to receive grants administered by the Secretary of the Interior. The approved assessment would serve as a guide for developing projects with partners, including Department of Interior and Forest Service lands, working together to control or eradicate harmful nonnative species on the lands and waters under their governance. With the assessment as the foundation for all projects, this legislation would encourage addressing all problems at the ecosystem level and including all land and water owners. To support the use of innovative methods and technologies, grants would be available on an 85% federal, 15% non-federal basis if new techniques are used. Reporting and monitoring requirements are mandated by the grant, allowing for the creation of a database which would track the methods and results of each project, both over the short and long term. To facilitate and demonstrate how these relationships between federal and other public and private lands and waters should work, the SPACE Act would also create a demonstration program with the National Wildlife Refuge System. This program would implement cooperative projects to be carried out on lands and waters of the National Wildlife Refuge System and their adjacent neighbors, demonstrating cooperation and helping to address the operations and maintenance backlog of the Refuge System. Because this is a demonstration project, the non-Federal lands involved would not have to have a State assessment yet in place. These projects would be the first to operate under this Act, and the results would be reported to the Council for inclusion in a database. Finally, this legislation would create a rapid response capability under the National Invasive Species Council. The Governor of a State experiencing a sudden invasion of a harmful nonnative species may apply to the Secretary for monetary assistance to eradicate the species or immediately control it. All assistance would be given by the Secretary in consultation with the Council, and each rapid response project would have the same monitoring and reporting requirements as an Aldo Leopold Grant project. Mr. Speaker, while there are a number of initiatives already in place aimed at combating invasive species, there is a void in existing statute as no current law is designed to directly protect and conserve our native species from harmful non-native species at the federal or any other level. There are laws directly addressing harmful nonnative species, but mainly through prevention. These include the Non- indigenous Aquatic Nuisance Prevention and Control Act, the Alien Species Prevention and Enforcement Act, the Federal Plant Pest Act, the Plant Protection Act, and the Federal Noxious Weed Act. In the development of this legislation, we have worked with a number of organizations including the Wildlife Management Institute, the National Wildlife Federation, Defenders of Wildlife, the National Audubon Society, the Aldo Leopold Foundation, the National Wildlife Refuge Association, the Izaak Walton League, the Wildlife Society, the American Fisheries Society and Trout Unlimited. Also consulted were the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation, the National Invasive Species Council, the Northeast Midwest Institute, the International Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies, The Nature Conservancy, the Natural Resources Defense Council, the American Birding Association and the Wildlife Conservation Society. I look forward to working with all interested parties as well as the members of the Resources Committee to facilitate the enactment of this bill.

Mr. RAHALL

Mr. RAHALL. Mr. Speaker, the events of September 11th demanded a great deal from all those involved in ensuring the safety and security of our Nation. Countless individuals and organizations were called upon to aid our country in this time of need, and many answered this call with a great amount of effort and dedication to the American cause. I would like to take this opportunity to commend the United States Coast Guard's Marine Safety Office of Huntington, West Virginia, the recent recipients of the Commandant's Quality Award for 2001. This honor rewards the leadership, strategic planning, customer focus, information and analysis, human resource focus, process management and business results produced by individual U.S. Coast Guard offices. In addition, the Huntington office was specifically recognized for their development of efficient business practices after the tragedy our Nation suffered on September 11th. Despite the fact that this office is one of the smallest of the 45 marine safety offices nationwide, their newly developed risk assessment plan was praised in Washington for their invaluable contributions to the Coast Guard as a whole in this area. I would also like to recognize the achievements of United States Coast Guard Auxiliary member James Perry of Huntington, WV. As the communications director for his local office, he was singled out for improving that particular office's pager, cell phone and voice mail systems, all of which have proven to be crucial for operations in the post-September 11th era. The article in the Herald Dispatch is included on this hero. Coast Guard Office Honored for Business Practices (By Bob Withers) Huntington.--The local U.S. Coast Guard's Marine Safety Office was honored Tuesday for developing efficient business practices that influenced the entire Coast Guard after the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11. Master Chief Petty Officer Vincent W. Patton III of Washington, D.C., the Coast Guard's highest-ranking enlisted member, presented the unit with the Commandant's Quality Award for 2001 during a ceremony at the local headquarters. The annual honor--patterned after the Malcolm Baldrige National Quality Award, the nation's premier award for performance in business and industry--recognizes commands and major staff elements that, through commitment to customer and employee satisfaction and continuous improvement, serve as examples for other Coast Guard organizations. The award encompasses several categories of management-- leadership, strategic planning, customer focus, information and analysis, human resources, process management and business results. Patton said officers in Washington were particularly impressed with the local office's newly developed risk assessment plan. ``We needed that information after 9-11,'' he told the members ``When emergency situations arise, we need a frame of reference to measure our use of personnel, money and assets. You have no idea what your plan is doing for us back in Washington.'' Patton compared the accomplishments of the local unit--one of the smallest of 45 marine safety offices nationwide--to the heroics of the outmanned and outgunned crew of the ``tiny, dinky'' revenue cutter Eagle, which was driven ashore in Long Island Sound in October 1814 in an encounter with the British brig Dispatch. The crew dragged their few weapons up a bluff and continued the battle, using log books for cartridges and returning the enemy's small shells that had lodged in the Eagle's hull. Cmdr. Lincoln Stroh, commanding officer of the local office, also honored U.S. Coast Guard Auxiliary member James Perry of Huntington, the local office's communications officer, for improving its pager, cell phone and voice mail systems. Stroh also praised Perry for working extra hours to help the office meet increased port safety and security responsibilities following the terrorist attacks.

Mr. RAHALL

Mr. RAHALL. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to Michael Louis ``Mitch'' Mansour, of Huntington, WV, who, after half a century in the grocery business, retired on November 4, 2001. For thirty-eight years Mitch owned and operated ``Mansour's Market,'' a family neighborhood grocery market that survived the intense competition brought about by ``superstores'' and continues to thrive today. Mitch Mansour's entrepreneurial career began almost from birth. The son of Lebanese immigrants, Mitch was born in 1930 next door to his father's modest grocery store. Even before adolescence Mitch worked alongside his father, Elia, cultivating customer relationships and a solid work ethic. Mitch eventually took over this small store in 1954 after returning home from service during the Korean War. In 1963, Mitch and his bride, Melanie, began ``Mansour's Food Market,'' which has served as a source of quality foods and employment for hundreds of residents from the local community. From loyal employees that have built careers in catering, meat cutting, grocery management, and customer relations to summer and part-time employees who have pursued professions in law and medicine, ``Mansour's'' has been a solid and reassuring pillar in the Huntington community. An innovator in customer service, Mitch would not just point the customer to the desired aisle, but walk them to the display and personally present the product choices. In the 1960's, ``Mansour's'' began their grocery home delivery service, which continues to be a valuable service today, especially for elderly and disabled residents. If a customer cannot make it to ``Mansour's,'' ``Mansour's'' comes to them. In today's transient world it's rare to find someone who spends their life so closely entwined in their community. Michael Mansour and ``Mansour's Market'' has been an important part of the Huntington community and will continue to be for a long time. I ask that my colleagues join me in offering sincere congratulations to Mitch on the event of his retirement and best wishes for the future.

Mr. RAHALL

Mr. RAHALL. Mr. Speaker, I have no further speakers, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. RAHALL. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. RAHALL. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, S. 1389 was passed by the Senate on November 15. I would also note that virtually identical language is contained in the Senate- passed version of the fiscal year 2002 defense appropriations bill. In both cases, the measures were adopted by the other body without opposition. With that noted, I would like to take this opportunity to commend the bill sponsors, Senators Daschle and Johnson, for their persistence in seeking the enactment of this legislation. It is at their request that those of us on this side of the aisle have agreed to expedite the consideration of S. 1389 this evening. With that noted, we do not object to the passage of this bill by the House. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. RAHALL

Mr. RAHALL. Mr. Speaker, this month marks the end of a 38-year career in government service for National Park Service Deputy Director Denis Galvin. For many people, both within and outside of the National Park Service (NPS), Denny is ``Mr. Park Service.'' The breadth and scope of his knowledge of national park issues is tremendous as evidenced by the wide range of NPS leadership positions with which Denny has been entrusted. Beginning as a civil engineer at Sequoia National Park in 1963, Denny rose through the ranks of the National Park Service to hold such positions as Deputy Regional Director, Manager of the Denver Service Center, and Associate Director for Planning and Development. At two different points in his career, Denny has served as Deputy Director of the National Park Service and on a number of occasions he has been the Acting NPS Director. Denis is well known as a strong advocate for the National Park Service, defending both NPS employees and the work of the agency itself. It is heartening to see a civil servant who has exhibited such a love for his work and for the agency for which he works. The National Park Service administers many of our Nation's greatest natural and historical resources. We in West Virginia are blessed to have some of these resources within our borders and I am proud of the work of the National Park Service in preserving and interpreting these resources for the benefit of present and future generations. This work is made possible because of the efforts of people like Denis Galvin. On Thursday, December 13, 2001 Denny is being honored by his friends and colleagues at a retirement dinner. I join Denny's many friends and colleagues in saluting him for all his efforts on behalf of the National Park System and wish Denny and his family the best in his retirement.

Mr. RAHALL

Mr. RAHALL. Mr. Speaker, in my capacity as the Ranking Democrat on the Committee on Resources I was a conferee on the fiscal year 2002 Defense Authorization bill for certain matters within the jurisdiction of my committee, including a provision in the original House-passed version of this legislation dealing with Vieques, Puerto Rico. Unfortunately, I am withholding my signature from the pending conference report in protest of the manner by which this legislation treats the controversy surrounding U.S. military exercises on Vieques. In effect, language contained in the pending legislation represents a major retrenchment from agreements between the federal government and Puerto Rico relating to Vieques in current law, as well as positions advanced by the Bush Administration in this area. To those of my colleagues who believe that U.S. citizens should not be subjected to live-fire military training exercises, that bombs and munitions should not be exploded in the vicinity in which they live, and that their land should not be laid waste with a legacy of unexploded ordnance and toxic substances, I say to you that this conference agreement seals their fate to these very situations. Currently we have in place the Clinton-Rosello agreement, negotiated by the former U.S. President and former Governor of Puerto Rico and enacted into federal law. I supported this agreement and I still support it today because it gives the people of Puerto Rico, our fellow Americans, assurances that their concerns and their voices were being heard in the halls of this Congress. Clinton-Rosello demonstrated that the threat to American citizens living within earshot and bull's-eye range of our own U.S. military, did not fall on deaf ears or blind eyes. Under this agreement, the people of Vieques were given an opportunity to participate in a referendum to determine whether a portion of the island should remain available for live-fire training. It also authorized $50 million in economic assistance to the people of Vieques if they chose to allow continued military exercises. Most importantly, however, this agreement mandated that if the people of Vieques simply said no to further live-fire training by the U.S. military on their island, that activity would halt and land administered by the Navy on the eastern side of the island would be transferred to the Secretary of the Interior to be managed as a wildlife refuge. This was a good and fair agreement, keeping within the traditions of this great country, by empowering the people themselves to make decisions that will affect their lives and livelihoods. On some level President Bush thought so too. As the Republican Presidential candidate, he stated that he would uphold the Clinton- Rosello agreement. And despite his own party's resistance, I think President Bush has made his best effort to keep with the spirit of those terms. Though the Administration is not supporting a referendum in Puerto Rico on continued military training, President Bush did announce over the summer a target date for the withdrawal of military forces from the Vieques range. The critical point here is that under either the Clinton-Rosello agreement, or the positions stated by the Bush Administration, there was a light at the end of the tunnel for the people of Vieques because they could reasonably expect the withdrawal of the U.S. military from the island. Yet, the Republican majority in this body apparently felt otherwise. The version of the pending legislation originally passed by this body runs roughshod over the Clinton-Rosello agreement and flies in the face of the stated Bush Administration positions by containing provisions that almost guarantee the military will not withdraw from Vieques. These are draconian changes to current law and policy, and changes that have largely been incorporated into the final conference agreement pending before us today. What the people of Puerto Rico now face, what the residents of Vieques now must contend with, is not the Clinton-Rosello agreement and not the Bush Administration's stated May 2003 military withdrawal from Vieques. Rather, under the pending legislation it would be up to the Secretary of the Navy to decide the fate of the island by certifying to the President and the Congress the military's intention to cease using Vieques for military training exercises. I find it highly unlikely the Navy would take that action. Yet, this legislation dictates that even if the Navy Secretary did halt military training on the island, after consultation with the Chief of Naval Operations and the Commandant of the Marine Corps, it would be conditioned upon the identification of one or more alternative training facilities and the immediate availability of such a facility or facilities. So what once was an agreement responsive to the concerns of Puerto Rico, respecting our citizens' right to choose what is better for them, has degenerated into what the Republican Majority in this body wants to impose on them. Mr. Speaker, we have entered a new century, yet what is contained in this conference report as it relates to Vieques harkens back to the age of colonialism. This legislation gives the people of Vieques, U.S. citizens, no opportunities for economic growth. No chance to demonstrate their patriotism. No option to assert for themselves what they truly desire. We give them no voice. Mr. Speaker, this is a tragedy of epic proportions. Certainly, I realize that our world has changed since the terror of September 11th. Every American, whether residing in a State or a Territory, understands how important it is to protect our freedom. And everyone is willing to do his or her part. We seem to have forgotten that Puerto Ricans, also serve in our military, die in our wars, and are just as eager to preserve freedom and democracy. We are taking away from Puerto Ricans the very ideal on which our country was founded and continues to fight for. That is truly unfortunate.

Mr. RAHALL

Mr. RAHALL. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased that the House will finally have the opportunity to send the ``Railroad Retirement and Survivors' Improvement Act of 2001'' to the White House to be enacted into law. We will send this bill to President Bush for his signature shortly. In the Third District of West Virginia, I represent 8,300 citizens who will benefit from this bill. This ranks southern West Virginia seventh in the nation. The bill will double benefits for widows of railroad retirees, reduce the retirement age from 62 to 60 years of age with 30 years of service, and allow a person to be vested in the system after five years of service, rather than 10 years, as currently required. I constantly hear from anxious constituents asking when the bill will be enacted. Projections suggest benefits, which are modest to begin with, will nearly double after this bill passes. This bill means a lot to railroad retirees. It is an example of the type of legislation in which people can see direct benefits to improve their daily lives and quality of life. We have endured a long, rough road getting to this day. This bill includes the exact provisions of H.R. 4844, which I helped to write in the 106th Congress, and which passed the House by an overwhelming bi- partisan vote of 391-25 on September 7, 2000. My constituents were disappointed and frustrated last year when the bill was not enacted into law, especially since it is a product of two years of negotiation between railroad workers and management of the railroad industry. Now, in the 107th Congress, we have done our job in the House. We passed the House version of Railroad Retirement bill H.R. 1140, on July 31st by another overwhelming bi-partisan vote of 384-33. Finally, the Senate passed the bill last week, on December 5, 2001, by a vote of 90-9. When this bill becomes law, it will enable railroad retirees and widows to enjoy a better quality of life, by receiving the increased benefits they greatly deserve, and which they have worked so long to earn. They spent their working lives paying into their retirement, and they deserve decent, adequate benefits to live comfortably in their retirement years. Mr. Speaker, I have no further requests for time, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. RAHALL

Mr. RAHALL. Mr. Speaker, I want to congratulate our colleague, Brad Carson of Oklahoma, for all his hard work and sponsorship of H.R. 2741. Promised as the original Indian Territory, the State of Oklahoma has clearly been enriched through its Indian heritage from the Trail of Tears which moved eastern Indian tribes into the state, through the settlements of the Oklahoma Sooners, to the 39 tribes living within its border today. It is truly a story worth telling and I look forward to one day visiting the Native American Cultural Center and Museum we are authorizing today.

Mr. RAHALL

Mr. RAHALL. Mr. Speaker, reclaiming my time, the gentleman asks a good question; and certainly in the eyes of many in the region, those who suffer from this infliction of horror, their answer would be yes, that it is intentional. That would be their response. That is something we must understand from our perspective, if we truly want to end the horror and the violence that comes from all sides. Indeed, there is no side that is lily white in the Middle East. Make no mistake about it, we must truly look at the causes of terrorism.

Mr. RAHALL. Mr. Speaker, the gentleman just mentioned the Palestinian people. I wonder if that was mentioned in the resolution, expressing the concern for their plight as well. I wonder if that was in the resolution and I happened to overlook it.

Mr. RAHALL. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Michigan for yielding me this time and for his excellent leadership on the question before us today. Mr. Speaker, I strongly condemn the horror that was inflicted upon innocent Israeli men, women and children by suicide bombers. I condemn that violence at all times and all places. I think it is important to note that we can either oppose or vote present on this resolution today and still be considered a supporter of the State of Israel and a friend of Israel and a supporter of the long- standing relationship between the United States and Israel, and do not let any outside group in this town try to characterize Members in any other way, because it is possible. Secretary Powell said it best when he phoned Chairman Arafat after the latest bombings and said this was an attack upon Arafat's authority as well as an attack upon innocent men, women and children. I think that has been lost today. In all of the demands that Arafat must go, we have lost sight that these suicide bombers were indeed attacking Chairman Arafat himself. As I condemn the horror of the past weekend, I strongly condemn the horror that has been inflicted upon innocent Palestinians, men, women and children, carried out by the Israeli Occupation Forces, including, within the last 2 weeks, five innocent Palestinian schoolboys killed in the Gaza refugee camp just within the last 2 weeks. Such terror, such disproportionate use of power and force, continued humiliation, demolition of homes and one's livelihood by destroying their crops on their own land, such daily restriction of one's movements of the Palestinians by the Israeli Defense Forces, and I could go on and on, all of which have been accelerated over the past 14 to 15 months, but all of these events, both sides should be just as equally deplored by those concerned about human rights abuses around the world, about fairness and about peace. Every one of these attacks should be condemned. Some in the Israeli government obviously very clearly by their own words want to get Arafat. Some statements today have alluded very strongly to the fact that we have got to get Arafat. But such action, indeed such action as this resolution today and those that call for Arafat's demise, will do zero, will do nothing to reach that just peace and may even exacerbate and take us backward from achieving that just peace that we all want to achieve. Getting Arafat is no solution. Continued humiliation is no solution. This is the method of operation of bullies, not of those who want to return to the peace process, to the negotiating table, where, as any individual involved in negotiations knows, each party has to give a little. There is a give and take in the negotiating process. Is that the real fear here? The military option will not secure a peace in the Middle East. The military option will not work. No peace can be achieved; and indeed, as I read through this resolution, and there are good points in this resolution about condemning terrorism, but I fail to find the word ``peace'' mentioned once in this resolution. Peace. Peace. Maybe I need to read it without my glasses, but I have not found the word ``peace'' mentioned once in this resolution before us today. Now, it is all good, or some of it is good, not all good, but some of it is good. Yes, prosecute such terrorists. Provide them with the stiffest possible punishment. Yes, ensure that they remain in custody. Well, my question is, the Israelis today are bombing all the Palestinian police stations, their security operations. Where is Arafat going to keep those he arrests, in the living room by the fireplace in his home? So the Israelis are making it impossible to fulfill the demands that are being placed upon Arafat in this resolution today. What if every demand in this resolution were met by 9 o'clock tomorrow morning? Would that end terrorism? Would we have peace? Indeed, I might announce to my colleagues, as we speak, an announcement has been reached of a cease-fire, a 12-hour cease-fire, just announced between Chairman Arafat and the Israelis; and he has until whatever the 12-hour expiration time is to arrest certain militants. So let us let the parties work their will. So, let us look at the consequences of our actions here today, and, indeed, actions of this body, regardless of whether they have the force of law or not, which this, of course, does not. But they do send a message to the participants in the Middle East. I have traveled the region enough, extensively, including less than 2 weeks ago, having met with Chairman Arafat, President Mubarak, the Prime Minister of Lebanon, President Assad of Syria; and I know that they get a wrong signal when we pass resolutions of this nature. So I say to my colleagues, let us truly get at the roots of terrorism. We know the causes of hatred in this part of the world. Secretary Powell said it in his speech of November 19. The occupation must end. The occupation must end, the continued expansion and building of new settlements. That is confiscation of Palestinian land. Mr. Speaker, I say to my colleagues, please understand, that is the root of the problem here. That is what we should be addressing in this very good debate. And I commend all sides for conducting this debate today. But let us not ignore the true roots of the problem, if we indeed want to restart the peace process.

Mr. RAHALL. I yield to the gentleman from California.

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

Mr. RAHALL

Mr. RAHALL. Mr. Speaker, the Scriptures tell us, ``Blessed are the pure in heart, for they shall see God.'' Paul Ambrose surely looks upon His face today. Paul Ambrose possessed a clerical passion for public health. After graduating from the Marshall University School of Medicine, he completed his residency in family medicine at Dartmouth. He then earned a master's degree in public health from Harvard. Paul used his ample political skills to influence health policy as the Legislative Affairs Director for the American Medical Student Association and as a fellow with the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. Most recently, he worked as a family physician in Arlington, VA, helping mostly poor Salvadoran immigrants. C. Everett Coop said that Paul Ambrose would have made a great U.S. Surgeon General. Paul's heart found joy in helping improve the lives of others. His influence spread far beyond his medical practice. Visitors to the American Medical Student Association website are invited to share their thoughts and remembrances of him. The single-spaced entries fill 12 printed pages. The words of those who knew him well describe the vibrant human being inside the talented physician. ``The most amazing thing about Paul was his ability to inspire hero- worship, even among the skeptical. ``Paul listened to cool music, read odd books, and watched obscure movies. He marched to this own beat and made us all feel cool by association . . . he danced at my wedding.'' ``My memories of Paul always included his most popular question, `How can I help?' '' ``I knew that he was going to be fun to work with when he arrived at AMSA with the cappuccino machine for his office . . . He's the only person I know who could wear steel-toed boots with a suit and pull it off.'' ``It wasn't unusual to see people hanging out at his office door, taking in the ambience, talking about everything, getting inspired, enjoying Paul's wit and wisdom.'' ``I hope that I am able to raise my son to feel as passionate and committed to causes that make as large a difference as that for which Paul tirelessly worked.'' ``I try not to think of what it was like on those four doomed airplanes. And yet, I can picture Paul being a comfort to others. Listening to someone who needed to talk, saying some reassuring words. Or maybe, and perhaps, just as likely, saying something so off-the wall that the other person would be able to temporarily forget their surroundings and situation and think to themselves, `what is that guy talking about?' '' He was only 32. He and his fiancee were planning a wedding and a life together. He boarded a plane that awful morning for California and a meeting about his professional passion, public health. In 6 quick years, Paul rose from a medical student to a confidant of the U.S. Surgeon General. His work lengthened people's lives. His talents could not have been more nobly used. Dr. Paul Wesley Ambrose should not have been taken from us on September 11. We must maintain a firm resolve to bring to justice the agents of global terror who killed him, and will gladly kill again if given the chance. We must do justice for Paul. Justice for his family Justice for liberty.

Mr. RAHALL

Mr. RAHALL. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Washington (Mr. Inslee), a member of our Committee on Resources.

Mr. RAHALL. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 1 minute. Mr. Speaker, to respond to the gentleman from Arizona, I want to work closely with the gentleman on this issue. I am sorry if he got defensive, but I cannot see in my remarks where I was partisan. Perhaps I should have spoken a little slower when I said the mismanagement of Indian trust funds dates back almost 100 years. I do not believe that the gentleman's party has been in power that long, and it covers a number of administrations. It gets worse with each passing day. I further said, the Reagan administration, and perhaps I should have added ``to its credit,'' listed this as one of the top five Federal liabilities. If the gentleman interpreted my remarks as being partisan, I regret that misinterpretation of my remarks. I have written the gentleman from Utah (Mr. Hansen) under whose jurisdiction all Indian issues come directly before our full committee and requested a hearing on this and look forward to participating with the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Hayworth). Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Kildee), who has long been an advocate for Indian tribal rights.

Mr. RAHALL. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I rise in support of the pending resolution to recognize the accomplishments and contributions of American Indians and Alaskan Natives during this month designated as National American Indian Heritage Month. Native Americans continue to honorably contribute and serve our Nation in virtually every field imaginable, including medicine, education, the arts, the justice system, and scientific research. Tribal members have valiantly fought in every American military action from the Revolutionary War and continue today in the war against terrorism and elsewhere around the world. It is right that we honor their work and contributions. If this Congress truly wants to honor Native Americans, however, we need to do it by honoring our treaties and past commitments made to them. The Federal Government took control as legal trustee of Indian trust lands, promising to protect the lands, produce and collect revenue derived from them, and invest and manage all revenue. We have failed miserably in this task, and we continue to pile bad policy upon bad policy, leaving proper management of some 1,500 tribal and over 300,000 individual Indian trust fund accounts hanging in limbo. The mismanagement of Indian trust funds dates back almost 100 years and only gets worse with each passing day. The Reagan administration listed this as one of the top five Federal liabilities. Yet today, the Department of the Interior cannot tell us if the accounts have the correct money in them, if the money is invested correctly, or even if the names of the accounts are correct. Just last week, the Secretary of the Interior announced she was going to create a brand new agency to deal with trust funds. Unfortunately, this decision was made without consulting with the account holders or the Congress. In fact, details of this brand new agency are almost nonexistent, so we do not know if this is a good answer or just another hastily thrown together concept. I want to impress upon my colleagues that this is not just some messed up pile of Federal funds. These are funds, billions of dollars, belonging to Indian tribes and American Indians who depend on these revenues to pay rent and buy medicine and foods. Imagine if our banks sometimes correctly deposited our income into our accounts and sometimes did not, but then could not tell us what they did with the money or denied ever receiving it. Imagine if the IRS lost billions of dollars slated to be refunded to taxpayers. Imagine if the Department of Transportation sent billions of highway trust fund dollars to the wrong States. Imagine if billions of dollars of Social Security checks owed to senior citizens in each of our districts were unaccounted for. These events would make the front page of every newspaper in the Nation and would quickly be reconciled. I say that if we truly want to honor Native Americans, it is incumbent upon the Federal Government to restore the word ``trust'' when it comes to the management of tribal trust assets once and for all. Mr. Speaker, I am proud to support the pending resolution, but I would be much more proud if this Congress would put some muscle behind the idea of honoring Native Americans, not just this month but every month, by ensuring that the Federal Government's trust responsibilities to these people is being honored. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. RAHALL

Mr. RAHALL. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, during his career in this body, the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Dingell) has sponsored innumerable measures that have benefitted our entire Nation and he truly has fought hard for many of those. However, I believe the bill before us today that he is sponsoring is truly the stuff of legacy. It is landmark legislation that will stand as lasting testimony to the gentleman's foresight when it comes to enhancing the wildlife resources of our country. I say this is landmark legislation because it provides for the first time an international wildlife refuge designation. This designation, as the gentleman has explained, would occur along an 18-mile length of the Detroit River between the cities of Detroit, Michigan, and Windsor, Canada. In this regard, the portion on the U.S. side of this river has already been designated as an American Heritage River. In addition, the new international refuge proposed by this bill incorporates into its boundaries the existing Wyandotte National Wildlife Refuge. Obviously, fish and wildlife do not recognize political boundaries. This legislation recognizes that fact, and it does so in a fashion that vastly enhances the ecosystem of the Detroit River in both the United States and Canada for the benefit of not only the current but future generations of citizens of these respective countries. Again, I commend the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Dingell) for his foresight in proposing this legislation. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. RAHALL. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Dingell), the sponsor of this legislation and the distinguished dean of the House of Representatives, and a very dear friend of mine.

Mr. RAHALL. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Kildee), a member of our Committee on Resources.