Nick Rahall

Mr. RAHALL

Mr. RAHALL. I thank the distinguished gentleman from Ohio and commend him for his work on this bill as well as the gentleman from Washington [Mr. Dicks], the ranking minority member.

Mr. RAHALL

Mr. RAHALL. Mr. Speaker, combating international terrorism is in the vital national interest of the United States. There can be no mistake about that. Nor can there be any question that the Clinton administration has worked tirelessly in pursuit of this objective. While the purpose of H.R. 748 is to assist in this effort, the ultimate consequence, albeit unintended, may very well be the opposite. If passed, H.R. 748 will prevent the administration from acting on foreign policy objectives and conducting basic diplomacy. In his opening remarks, Representative McCollum stated clearly, ``The bill strips the executive branch of the authority to issue regulations exempting transactions from the prohibition. It establishes instead a legislative exception * * *.'' By removing any flexibility the Executive branch has in implementing economic sanctions or prohibitions on financial transactions, the President is stripped of his ability to conduct the foreign policy affairs of the United States--a responsibility granted him by the Constitution. In addition, while this bill may be touted as a safeguard against loopholes in existing legislation, it is vital to point out that the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996 is an effective tool employed by the President to advance our counter-terrorism agenda in a manner he deems most appropriate, country by country. This restrictive legislation has serious implications--ultimately tying the President's hands in waging the war on international terrorism. While the bill may have an effect on various regions of the world, one can look to the Middle East peace process as a clear example of how it will restrict the President's foreign policy. Without the ability to engage Syria, the United States can not be viewed as a balanced intermediary between the parties to the process. The peace process itself, a critical foreign policy objective, would be hindered by such action because the bill would impede the Administration's ability to advance stated peace process objectives.

Mr. RAHALL

Mr. RAHALL. Mr. Speaker, I was unable to be present for rollcall Nos. 224, 223, 222, and 221 on June 20, 1997. Had I been present and voting, I would have noted in favor of these four amendments to the Defense authorization bill, H.R. 1119.

Mr. RAHALL

Mr. RAHALL. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to call my colleagues attention to a most beautiful tribute to Franklin D. Roosevelt, written by Shirley Klein of Dunbar, WV. As we are all aware, there has been much controversy recently over the dedication of the Franklin D. Roosevelt Memorial because it does not depict that much-loved President in his wheelchair. The disabled community has come out in strong favor of adding to the memorial, a statue of President Roosevelt in the wheelchair that was so much a part of his every-day lift as he struggled to lift this Nation from its knees during our worst depression, as well as to bring us to victory in World War II. I agree that the memorial ought to be augmented to show this great President in his wheelchair. Mr. Speaker, Shirley Klein is, like Franklin Roosevelt, disabled and in a wheelchair and, like Franklin Roosevelt, her heart and mind are strong and vibrant and immensely productive. Knowing they shared this particular challenge, even as a child, she wrote a most beautiful poem in tribute to him. If anyone still believes the Roosevelt Memorial ought not to depict him in his wheelchair, Shirley's poem will surely change their minds. Shirley's poem follows: Memorial (By Shirley Klein) Deny him not his throne of grace. Its wheels were his wings On which he flew To save a world, To heal a land. Let ages know This was a man Who seated firm, Towered tall. And I, a child Who saw him there, Knew at last I too could soar.

Mr. RAHALL

Mr. RAHALL. I thank the distinguished gentleman, the chairman of the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, for yielding me this time. Mr. Chairman, trust. An interesting term, that word. Trust. Webster defines it as an assured reliance on the character, ability, strength or truth of someone or something. That is why we call it the highway trust fund. Not the highway fund, but we call it the highway trust fund. To the American people, we have said, pay your motor fuel taxes. In return, you will receive those funds back in the form of better roads, highways, and bridges. That is a sacred trust that we entered into with the American people 41 years ago when the Congress established the highway trust fund. Yet today we find that that trust has been broken. It lays shattered at our feet. Over $24 billion in unspent funds has accumulated in the highway trust fund. There is no trust in that. At the same time, 4.3 cents per gallon in Federal motor fuel taxes is not even being deposited into the highway trust fund. There is no trust in that, either. In this budget resolution, this budget resolution will not even allow us to spend the amount of motor fuel tax receipts that are anticipated to be paid into the highway trust fund over the next 5 years. Crumbs for a crumbling infrastructure. That is all this current budget resolution gives us, is crumbs for a crumbling infrastructure. When it comes to highway spending, many of my colleagues have talked the talk. Almost 240 of our colleagues have cosponsored H.R. 4 to take the transportation trust funds off budget. A vast majority of my colleagues have requests pending before the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure for specific highway or transit projects. Those of my colleagues listening, just think of how many of those requests are pending. My colleagues may have talked the talk, but now it is time to walk the walk, to show what you are made of; to stand up for America, not to sit down on it; to build America, not tear it down; to promote America, not demote America; to expand America, not contract it; to do what is right, what is fair, what keeps faith with the people. Mr. Chairman, this is a battle for the heart and soul of America. This amendment is not just about asphalt and concrete. It is about safety. It is about saving lives. It is about our economy, about our competitiveness. It is about our jobs. It is about our standard of living. It is about the type of legacy that we will leave to our future generations. So, Mr. Chairman, I say to my colleagues, it is time to walk the walk. Vote ``yes'' on the Shuster-Oberstar-Petri-Rahall amendment. I commend the distinguished chairman for this initiative.

Mr. RAHALL

Mr. RAHALL. Mr. Speaker, on May 6, 1997, the name of the gentleman from Arizona, Mr. Matt Salmon, was inadvertently added as a cosponsor of H.R. 991 instead of adding the name of the gentleman from Texas, Mr. Max Sandlin. I apologize for this unintended error and respectfully ask unanimous consent that the name of the gentleman from Arizona, Mr. Matt Salmon, be removed as cosponsor of H.R. 991 and that the name of the gentleman from Texas, Mr. Max Sandlin, be added as cosponsor of H.R. 991.

Mr. RAHALL

Mr. RAHALL. Mr. Speaker, I rise to pay tribute to a most wonderful friend of mine, Kelly L. George, who was recently selected as West Virginia's Mother of the Year by American Mothers, Inc. Kelly George is deserving of this great honor. I wholeheartedly congratulate Kelly for being so honored by the American Mothers, as well as by the West Virginia State Senate which adopted a Resolution of Congratulation on behalf of this remarkable woman. Kelly was educated in the public schools of Cabell County, WV, where she grew up, and where she attended Marshall University in Huntington, and later completed studies at Cambridge School of Radio and Television and the Drake School of Drama in New York. Currently, Kelly is a legislative analyst, and she is active in the political process both State and Federal. She is a strong advocate of education and the arts. Kelly was named West Virginia's Mother of the Year, and the major reason for that is she has raised five successful young adult children, Vincent, Victor, Valerie, Von, and Vanessa. Her children have followed in her footsteps, constantly endeavoring to reach high academic accomplishments and achievements, with each having adopted Kelly's spiritual foundations for building inner strength as well as the basis for strong family values. Outside the role of mother, Kelly has volunteered her time for civic organizations, is a life member of the General Federation of women's Clubs and the National Committee of State Garden Clubs. She serves as international chair for the Pilot International World Association, is on the Thomas Hospital Board of Trustees, is a Kanawha County Parks and Recreation Commissioner, and is the chairman of the Board of WV Board of Risk and Insurance Management. She is also a historian and author. Later this spring, kelly will travel to Scottsdale, AZ, to meet with the delegation of other State winners where she will receive this most prestigious award. Again, my sincere and heartfelt congratulations to a good friend, Kelly George, as she receives the praise of her friends, her colleagues, her neighbors, and her wonderful family for having become West Virginia's Mother of the Year, 1997-98.

Mr. RAHALL

Mr. RAHALL. Mr. Speaker, as I did in the 104th Congress, I rise again today to introduce a House concurrent resolution expressing the sense of the Congress regarding the territorial integrity, unity, sovereignty, and full independence of Lebanon. You may ask what that means, and you may ask why it is prudent or necessary to introduce such a resolution once again. I will tell you. As a Lebanese-American Member of Congress, I am aware of recent events in the Middle East which may have slowed the peace process there to a point where it can no longer be revived. I have seen resolutions introduced in the House calling upon Syria to get its armed forces out of Lebanon--as though Syria is the only occupying force that needs to get itself out of Lebanon; as though Syria is to blame for every single averse thing that has happened to Lebanon in recent years. Mr. Speaker, Syria is no angel--but Syria isn't the only problem Lebanon has, or that the Middle East has, for that matter. We all know that to be true. I visited Lebanon recently, as well as a number of other nation- states in the gulf and Middle East region, and I was amazed at the consistency of their belief that we may have seen the end of the Middle East peace talks. They are gravely disappointed over the Israeli Prime Minister's provocative act to start building settlements in Har Homa, and the fact that the United States vetoed two United Nations Security Council resolutions condemning that provocative act. The leaders I met with nearly unanimously stated that the United States has lost sight of its role as an honest broker in the Middle East peace talks, have lost sight of the fact that the Arab States are friends of the United States. They said their patience was being worn very thin. The biggest problem, as always, appears to be that everyone views Lebanon as some kind of bargaining chip, or pawn, to be used by Israel and Syria, and then anyone else who seem to have an ax to grind in the region. It doesn't necessarily mean the ax to grind has anything to do with Lebanon directly, it is just that Lebanon sits directly in the path of Israel and Syria and so axes are ground at Lebanon's expense. The last major episode of ax-grinding in Lebanon was called Operation Grapes of Wrath. And the axes were turned into shells and rockets and so-called precision weaponry that allegedly could penetrate buildings in the middle of the city of Beirut and search out a floor with a window that supposedly was concealing Hizbollah, without harming the innocent mothers and children also living in that building. But the precision weapons turned out not to be so precise, and more than 100 Lebanese civilians were killed, 400,000 were displaced and many left homeless, injured, and suffering. This resolution is for Lebanon and about Lebanon. It isn't about Israel or Syria--except that all non-Lebanese forces are asked to get out of Lebanon. It is an idea whose time has come. Another idea whose time has come is that the United States Government--the Congress--the President of the United States--need to reformulate their policy toward Lebanon and they need to reaffirm their support for a country that has long been friendly toward the United States. Not only do they need to reformulate a policy, the policy needs to be implemented. Lebanon has a Government, and it has an army, and it is rebuilding and it is getting stronger and more secure every day. It is time that the United States Government began looking at and considering Lebanon as the master of its own house--the captain of its own ship--and understand that the United States Government should negotiate directly with Lebanon's Government on issues concerning Lebanon and its future. There is no need for the President, the Congress, or anyone else to look toward Syria to the north, or toward Israel in the south--as neither has a right to decide Lebanon's future. As a matter of fact, our Government needs to look backwards 18 years ago--and recall the United Nations Security Council's Resolution 425 which calls for the withdrawal forthwith of Israeli forces from Lebanon and for which the United States representative to the U.N. voted. The Taif agreement regarding Syria did not go far enough because it did not call for withdrawal. It did call for a redeployment of Syrian forces to the entrance of the Bekaa Valley and the disarmament of all militia in Lebanon, both of which Syria has ignored. And so, Mr. Speaker, I introduce this concurrent resolution, again. The resolution has changed somewhat from the one introduced in the last Congress. It commends the President for hosting the ``Friends of Lebanon'' conference this past December, and urges him to take further steps to assist Lebanon's reconstruction. By this resolution I and my colleagues who cosponsor with me call for the withdrawal of all non-Lebanese forces from Lebanon so that she will no longer serve as the preferred battleground for her neighbors. It tells the President that he need not wait upon the reconvening of the official Middle East peace talks, or the finalization of a comprehensive peace accord with all nation states in the region--to help Lebanon get non-Lebanese forces out of Lebanon. The resolution calls upon the President to negotiate directly with officials of the Government of Lebanon on issues pertaining to Lebanon. To negotiate directly means just that--without any middlemen. In closing Mr. Speaker, I submit this resolution to the House, calling also upon Lebanon to assert more independence to assure the international community that Lebanon has the political will and the military capability to guarantee security along her borders, for herself and her neighbors, and to disarm all militia upon the withdrawal of all non-Lebanese forces from Lebanon. This new Lebanon resolution also commends the Lebanese Government for its determination to hold municipal elections for the first time since 1963, and finally, Mr. Speaker, the resolution calls upon Lebanon, with democracy being a part of its national character, to respect freedom of the press, human rights, judicial due process, political freedom, the right of association and freedom of assembly. It is my genuine hope that the President will use the guidelines set forth in this resolution to formulate a new United States policy toward Lebanon, and let Lebanon be Lebanon.

Mr. RAHALL

Mr. RAHALL. Mr. Speaker, on Wednesday, April 23, 1997, I was unavoidably detained and missed rollcall votes Nos. 86 and 87. Had I been present and voting, I would have voted ``yes'' on each of the amendments to H.R. 400 as offered by Mr. Campbell of California.

Mr. RAHALL

Mr. RAHALL. Mr. Speaker, in acknowledgment of the 41st anniversary of the independence of the Republic of Tunisia, I wish to help commemorate March 20, 1997 as an historic day of celebration for the people of Tunisia. This year is particularly important, as Tunisia will be commemorating the bicentennial of the Treaty of Amity, Commerce and Navigation that was signed on August 28, 1797. Tunisia has taken bold steps toward a more democratic system of government by broadening political debate, advancing social programs, developing economic programs encouraging privatization of the banking and financial sectors, and improving the quality of life for the people of Tunisia, in spire of instability emanating from neighboring countries. Further, Tunisia has acted as leader and catalyst for peacekeeping missions in suffering countries, contributing military contingents to operations in Cambodia, Somalia, the Western Sahara and Rwanda. Tunisia has been a voice of moderation in the Arab-Israeli peace process had has called for greater international efforts to fight terrorism. Tunisia has, and continues to be a success story in a very volatile region of the world. I am pleased and proud to witness stronger relations between the U.S. and Tunisia. I have had the fortunate opportunity to spend time with Tunisia's Ambassador, His Excellency Azouz Ennifar, and have the strong impression that Tunisia is emerging as a healthy, independent and politically secure country. I encourage and support continued commitment and cooperation between our two countries and urge my colleagues to take this occasion to salute the Tunisian Government and its people.

Mr. RAHALL

Mr. RAHALL. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to Virgil Tresenwriter. Virgil was a native of Beckley, WV, my hometown. In 1995, at the annual dinner of the Beckley/Raleigh County Black Business Association, Virgil's solo performance with the New Gospel Singaleers captured my spirit, leaving me in a state of awe, almost too speechless to deliver my keynote address. It was a profoundly moving experience. And no wonder. Virgil was ordained by God from the very beginning of his life to sing praises to the Lord. It was a sweet sound and a joy divine--just as the gospel hymn says--to hear the deep baritone voice of Virgil ``Pee-Wee'' Tresenwriter ring out the heavenly melodies. What a blessing it was to be stirred and moved in your spirit from the sounds that came from the very depths of his heart. If you were burdened down and sinking, to rise no more, you were lifted up when Pee-Wee sang ``His Eyes Are On The Sparrow and I know He Watches Me.'' Then Virgil would remind you that he loves to praise His name, because He is a rock, a sword, and a shield--He's just a jewel in the middle of a wheel. Virgil's life was a blessing in so many ways to those who knew him, an inspiration to children who imitated him as he performed with the New Gospel Singaleers, with colorful attire reminiscent of the more famous singing groups of older times. With his God-given talents, it was nothing for Virgil to challenge groups such as the Mighty Clouds of Joy, or the Canton Spirituals, when performing on the same program. It is with the same pride that I take this opportunity to honor a man who gave the very best of himself, using his God-given talents to inspire, encourage, and lift the hearts of those who knew him. Virgil will be missed immensely, now that he has joined the heavenly choir to sing with the angels of God. His songs, and the spirit in which he sang them, will sing out in our hearts forever.

Mr. RAHALL

Mr. RAHALL. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in praise once again for U.S. Senator Robert C. Byrd, a man of grace, a man of conscience and compassion, and indeed a great West Virginian. On January 11, 1997, it was my high honor to have been present at the unveiling of the Robert C. Byrd statue in the West Virginia State Capitol in Charleston, WV, and to hear Senator Byrd's eloquent remarks regarding his ``long journey through life encompassing 79 years'' that brought him this far, and ``about all those he met along the way'' who helped him achieve the pinnacle of recognition in the form of a life-size bronze statue of himself being unveiled that day. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that Senator Robert C. Byrd's own personal remarks be reprinted in the Congressional Record as he acknowledged and thanked all those who made this historic day possible. Remarks by U.S. Senator Robert C. Byrd--On the Occasion of the Robert C. Byrd Statue Unveiling During the course of my life, I have often been referred to as a ``self-made'' man. But, while one's ego might like to lay claim to such an august achievement, no mere mortal can, in reality, claim to be ``self-made.'' Every person owes any success he or she might have in this life to hundreds of other persons. Tennyson said, ``I am a part of all that I have met, . . .'' Always profound, Tennyson may have been at his most profound with that line. When I reflect upon my own 79 years, I am at once struck by the enormous debt which I owe to others: poor, but loving foster parents who taught me how to live and how to die; teachers who took the time to encourage a country lad who liked to memorize; friends who unselfishly gave guidance and counsel; adversaries who helped me to toughen and to preserve; my wife and family who sacrificed and, still and all, stood by me; colleagues who taught me what they had learned in the legislative areas; staff members who worked over the years to help me meet my goals for West Virginia; and the people of this magnificent state who have, time and time again, believed in me, trusted me, and honored me far beyond my wildest imaginings. And now, I have come to this place in my road. But, I have not traveled alone. I have journeyed with all of you. I have never felt more keenly my deep ties to you, to this state and to all of those who have influenced my life. Blessings have been heaped upon me. And I stand before you humbled by this day and by the enormity of this occasion. Perhaps no one before me has ever known the unbelievable awe of gazing at their own form cast in bronze and standing ten feet high in one of the most beautiful state capitol buildings in the nation. What an experience! The boy who bugged the beans has certainly come a long mile. If my old mom were alive today, she would be surprised and proud, but she would also be quick to remind me not to be ``gettin' above my raisin','' just like she always did. How I wish that she and my old pap could see this. But, then, I think they probably can. I thank all of you who have worked to make this day a reality. Your generosity and gracious kindness are simply overwhelming.I thank Gaston Caperton, the best Governor West Virginia has ever had, for his cooperation and hard work. I thank Ann Brotherton and Judge Brotherton and Mike Perry for all they have done to make this day a reality. Your generosity and gracious kindness are simply overwhelming. I also thank each of you for the part you have played in my life--for what each of you has taught me and for your contribution to my work and to my personal enjoyment of my time on this planet. Long after I am gone from this life, there will be left for future generations whatever good which may evolve from my work, and this remarkable statue. Cato the elder once observed that he would rather people ask why he had no statue than inquire why he had one. But, my hope for the totality of my work is well known--a better life and more opportunity for all West Virginians. My hope for this sculpture is that it will stand as an inspiration, especially to young West Virginians. I hope that it someday may serve as a beacon for anyone who may aspire to achievement. For, in this miracle of a country, anything is possible. And dreams do come true, even for a poor lad from West Virginia who gathers scraps to feed the hogs on a rough hillside farm. Thank you and may God bless and keep each of you always safe from harm. The woods are lovely, dark, and deep, But I have promises to keep, And miles to go before I sleep. And miles to go before I sleep.

Mr. RAHALL

Mr. RAHALL. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to reintroduce a bill which was pending before the 104th Congress concerning the applicability of the Railway Labor Act to flight crews of United States air carriers engaged in flight operations outside the United States. Mr. Speaker, the bill I and my colleagues have reintroduced clarifies the intent of Congress that the RLA covers the collective bargaining right of flight deck crew members employed by U.S. air carriers when they are based overseas or are performing their duties exclusively outside the United States. Historically, airlines and the bargaining representative of their pilots have negotiated and honored numerous agreements governing their overseas operations. It is our contention that coverage of these agreements is currently available under existing law, namely the RLA. However, there have been at least two conflicting Federal court decisions over the past two decades on the issue of the enforceability of such agreements under the RLA. The opinions in these cases acknowledge that Congress has the power to apply its laws in extraterritorial circumstances, but it must do so expressly; and the courts have held that in the case of the RLA the intent of Congress to do so has not been clearly expressed. The legislation introduced today will once and for all clarify existing law. Doing so would confirm that the terms and conditions of the overseas flight operations of U.S. airlines are subject to negotiation between their managements and the selected bargaining representatives of their pilots under the same statutory authority as the terms and conditions of their domestic flying. The legislation does not impose our labor laws on foreign countries; it does not cover employees providing ground and related services for U.S. carriers exclusively in foreign countries; it does not preclude negotiation of wages and terms and conditions of employment tailored to flight deck crew members that perform overseas operations. If any of my colleagues are interested in becoming cosponsors of this important legislation, or if you have any questions, please call me or Mrs. Kyle on my staff at extension 53452.

Mr. RAHALL

Mr. RAHALL. Mr. Speaker, due to flooding in my District, I was with Vice President Gore and local officials to discuss the flood this morning in Kenova, WV. Due to weather, my flight to Washington was canceled and I unavoidably missed Record votes numbered 29, 30, and 31. On Rollcall vote No. 29, House Concurrent Resolution 17, congratulating the people of Guatemala on negotiations for a peace process, I would have voted ``yes'' had I been present. On Rollcall vote No. 30, House Concurrent Resolution 18, congratulating the people of Nicaragua on the success of their democratic elections, I would have voted ``yes'' had I been present. On Rollcall vote No. 31, House Concurrent Resolution 31, a sense of Congress that Ten Commandments can be displayed in Government buildings, I would have voted ``yes'' had I been present.

Mr. RAHALL

Mr. RAHALL. Mr. Speaker, on May 10, 1875, 70 students arrived at a rough frame building for the first session of classes, under the leadership of Capt. James Harvey French as princiapal--a result of action taken by the West Virginia Legislature to establish a branch of the State Normal School at Concord in the county of Mercer. On February 28, 1997 Concord College will observe its 125th anniversary--celebrating one and one-quarter centuries of excellence. This expansion of higher education was motivated by the educational reform movement of the 1870's and the need for producing qualified teachers for elementary and secondary schools. The enabling legislation provided that no State funds were to be used in the construction of the school building. Residents of the town raised over $1,700 by subscription to erect the first building on land donated by William Harvey Martin, at the site of the present Athens Elementary School. By 1885, the State Legislature, impressed by the service given to the State by the school, appropriated $5,000 for a new brick building, which was completed in June 1887. But fire was to claim the downtown location of the Normal School in November 1910, rousing a determined faculty and students to hold classes the very next day wherever they could find space throughout town. The current campus was selected as the new site, and it was purchased by the people of Athens from the Vermillion family for that purpose, only to have a second fire in 1912 that was even more damaging than the first--but again, a determined faculty and residents of the local community banded together to rebuild and rededicate Concord School. The college awarded its first baccalaureate degree to three graduates in June 1923, and in 1931 the institutions' name changed to Concord State Teachers College. Today, under the current leadership of President Jerry Beasley, Concord has grown to a comprehensive State college of 2,400 students studying in Athens, Beckley, and other southern West Virginia locations. The town in which is has always been located even changed its name to Athens in 1896 in recognition of Concord's role as a center of education. Concord College, under previous Presidents such as Cap. James Harvey French, whose early title was ``Principal,'' to President Joseph Franklin Marsh, to President Meredith Freeman, to the excellent administration of its current President Jerry Beasley, has expanded far beyond its original teacher preparation mission--with programs of study offered in business, social work, the arts and sciences and the other pre-professional fields. The college believes strongly in the advantages that a broad liberal arts education can add to the job preparation skills which the public now demands. In an era in which job change and career shifts are on the rise, the value of this fundamental education--learning how to learn for a lifetime--is even more pronounced. Mr. Speaker, it is my high honor to represent the people who live in southern West Virginia--the State's third Congressional District--where Concord College was established and where it is now a thriving campus. I take this opportunity to pay tribute to Concord College, to its faculty, students and to its many friends as it celebrates its 125th anniversary on February 28, 1997. At 11 a.m. on that date, a full academic processional will enter the Alexander Fine/Arts Center of the Athens campus for a program commemorating the college's beginning--and its future. I join with the officials of Concord College, the newly elected Governor Cecil Underwood, the State College System board of Directors, the local delegation to the West Virginia Legislature and representatives of Concord's constituent and support groups, in congratulating Concord College for this enormous success in serving family and student needs in Athens and surrounding areas. Mr. Speaker, it is through these kinds of lasting efforts continued down through centuries and more, that we continue to be able to improve and enhance higher education for all our people. From its inception, the local people of Athens, the students and faculty, and the enormously talented Presidents named above who served Concord from 1872 to 1997, all sharing their ideas and their ideals and acting upon them for the common good--have culminated in the highly respected and greatly loved Concord College that we pay tribute to today.

Mr. RAHALL

Mr. RAHALL. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to introduce a bill to provide for the permanent resident status for certain Persian Gulf War Evacuees. During the Persian Gulf War, the United States decided to evacuate some 200 families, approximately 2,000 individuals, the majority of whom are stateless Palestinians, who had been living in Kuwait. The United States Government evacuated these families to the United States after Iraq's invasion of Kuwait but before the United States military intervention in that conflict, because the families all had American children and some had harbored American citizens during Iraq's occupation. The families initially were given temporary protected status, and before President Bush left office he approved deferred enforced departure [DED] for the families. This status was continued each year thereafter by President Clinton. However, on December 31, 1996, the White House did not continue the DED status. Once in the United States, these families began making a life, including having additional children. The majority of the families have received permanent residency status. However, approximately 47 families have not received permanent residency status and have now suddenly found themselves faced with deportation. Kuwait will not accept them back into the country. Most of the parents hold Jordanian passports, but are not necessarily Jordanian citizens. Even if Jordan could accept them, Jordan is already burdened with tens of thousands of Palestinians who left Kuwait during the War. In addition, in Jordan the families will have no economic assistance, no jobs in an economy that is already burdened with unemployed people, and no health care for their children. This will all work to create severe hardship on the children who are American citizens and essentially will sentence them to a life of impoverishment. These families are principally composed of professionals and technical people who are dependent upon no one for their support in the United States except by their own labor. They have maintained an excellent record of citizens training. They are a definite asset to this country. Mr. Speaker, going through with the deportation would be an act of great injustice for a small group of people who did not ask to be evacuated here in the first place. But now that they are here, fairness would require that they be permitted to adjust their status so that they may continue to raise their American citizen children in this society. Mr. Speaker, I call upon my colleagues to join me in cosponsoring this legislation to allow this small group to adjust their status to permanent residents [immigrants]. Many of the families placed themselves at grave risk by harboring American citizens during Iraq's occupation of Kuwait--keeping them safe until they could leave or until American intervention could drive the Iraqi's out. Deporting these few [47] families with American-born children is not the way for a grateful Nation to show its thanks. Enacting this bill, granting them permanent immigrant status, is.

Mr. RAHALL

Mr. RAHALL. Mr. Speaker, today we take the time to observe Black History Month and pay tribute to those individuals who have made significant contributions to history and to our society. One such individual is Rev. Leon Howard Sullivan, a clergyman and civil rights activist, from Charleston, WV. Leon H. Sullivan was born on October 16, 1922. Growing up, he lived in an environment that was severely limited both economically and socially. In spite of his circumstances, Sullivan focused his after school energies on religion and sports. At the remarkably early age of 17, he was ordained a Baptist minister, and soon thereafter, he entered West Virginia State College, a historically black college, on an athletic scholarship. His contribution to society and to West Virginia State College led to the construction of Sullivan Hall in 1970. Sullivan Hall houses the women students at West Virginia State College and the West Virginia Graduate Studies Administrative and College Offices. In 1942, Sullivan met former U.S. Representative, Adam Clayton-Powell who was visiting West Virginia. Sullivan so deeply impressed Powell that at Powell's suggestion, Sullivan moved to New York City to study theology at the Union Theological Seminary and sociology at Columbia University. After completing his studies, Sullivan became the pastor of the Zion Baptist Church in Philadelphia from 1950 to 1988. In the 38 years he served at the Zion Baptist Church in Philadelphia, the congregation increased from 600 to 6,000 members. Sullivan expanded the church's activities to include a daycare center, a credit union, an employment agency, a community center for youth and adults, adult education reading classes, athletic teams, choral groups, and family counseling services. In an effort to provide opportunities for African-American business ventures, in 1962 Sullivan established the Zion Investment Association in Philadelphia. He has constantly fought the war against racist hiring practices and organized protests and economic boycotts. In 1964, he demonstrated another act of courage on behalf of justice and equality when he established the Opportunities Industrialization Center [OICA], the first organization of its kind in the United States dedicated to providing comprehensive employment training and placement for disadvantaged, unemployed, and unskilled Americans of all races. Today, there are more than 70 OIC centers across the United States and 28 centers in countries such as Africa, Poland, Central America, England, and the Philippines. Reverend Sullivan's concerns regarding housing for the poor and the elderly resulted in the construction of more than 1,000 housing units in major cities including Philadelphia, Kansas City, Oklahoma City, and Indianapolis. His OIC training programs have trained more than 2 million people for better job opportunities in America and Africa. He is the recipient of more than 100 national and international awards, and in 1992, President George Bush presented Reverend Sullivan with The Presidential Medal of Freedom. He serves on the board of directors of numerous companies such as Mellon Bank and is the director emeritus of General Motors Corp. where he was the first African- American to sit on the GM board. This is but a thumbnail sketch of the many achievements of Rev. Leon H. Sullivan. With a mind full of ideas and the motto ``We help ourselves,'' Rev. Leon H. Sullivan has contributed immensely to the advancement of African-Americans and to society as a whole. He is a man of great wisdom with many hopes and dreams for his fellow Americans and is an inspiration to us all.

Mr. RAHALL

Mr. RAHALL. Mr. Speaker, 50 years ago yesterday, January 8, 1997, the senior Senator from West Virginia, Robert C. Byrd, began his service in the U.S. House of Representatives where he served for 11 years, moving to the Senate in 1958 where he has served for the past 39 years. As we all know, Senator Byrd celebrated having cast his 14,000th vote in the U.S. Senate last year, at which time he had a 98.7 percent voting average. Senator Robert C. Byrd is the nationally recognized historian in residence in the Senate--the uncontested expert on the Senate as an institution, and the leading, nationally recognized expert on parliamentary procedures. West Virginia's citizens recognize Senator Byrd and applaud his achievements as a researcher, lecturer, writer, and parliamentary magician. That is all well and good, they say. It makes them very proud. But what makes Senator Byrd's people in West Virginia most proud is that he is also one of them--that he is someone they can go to, take their troubles, trials and tribulations to, and know that he will hear them and he will intervene on their behalf at every opportunity to make things better. West Virginians know that Senator Byrd's every waking moment of service in the U.S. Senate is in their service--their best interests, their well being--and they know this without one single iota of doubt. Residents of West Virginia can name with pride the many accomplishments of Senator Byrd--those noted above first of all. But, in addition, West Virginians can tell you that during his Senate tenure he has served as secretary of the Senate Democratic Conference, Senate majority whip, Senate majority leader, Senate minority leader, and President pro tempore. Further, Senator Byrd has served his State and his country throughout an integral part of the high drama and history of the second half of the 20th century--including the cold war, Vietnam, Watergate, Iran- Contra, the collapse of the Soviet Union, and the gulf war. He has served under nine Presidents, one of whom was assassinated, the other forced to resign the highest office in the land. Senator Byrd is widely recognized for having achieved many milestones during his career, among them being only one of three U.S. Senators in history to have been elected to seven 6-year terms; being the first sitting Member of either House of Congress to begin and complete the study of law and obtain a law degree while serving in the Congress; being the first person in the history of West Virginia ever to serve in both chambers of his State Legislature and both Houses of the U.S. Congress; obtaining the greatest number, the greatest percentage, and the greatest margin of votes cast in statewide, contested elections in his State; being the first U.S. Senator in West Virginia to win a Senate seat without opposition in a general election; and having served longer in the U.S. Senate than anyone else in West Virginia history. Mr. Speaker, these are remarkable achievements for one man, and we honor Senator Byrd for them. His greatest feat, in my estimation, is that he has brought dignity and civility to the U.S. Senate every day of his life, throughout his tenure there. Senator Robert C. Byrd is a gentle but firm leader, who has the ability to share, in his writing and vocally, his deep and abiding reverence for the Senate as an institution. He constantly lectures, through his weekly history lessons, on the importance of knowing and observing, and above all else, respecting, the traditions of the Senate, its rules of engagement and the parliamentary procedures that govern it as an institution. And so it is with great personal honor that I rise on the occasion of his 50th anniversary year of U.S. Senate service, to pay tribute to the well cherished and beloved senior Senator from West Virginia Robert C. Byrd, and to wish God's blessings upon himself personally, and upon the important work he will do in the coming years on behalf of his institution, his countrymen nationwide, and his especial work on behalf of his fellow West Virginians.

Mr. RAHALL

Mr. RAHALL. Mr. Speaker, today, I am reintroducing legislation to reform the mining law of 1872. I am pleased to note that the distinguished gentleman from California, George Miller, is joining me in introducing this measure. Mr. Speaker, we are sponsoring this legislation with the full knowledge that it will probably not see the light of day in the Resources Committee as long as that committee is chaired by our dear friend and colleague, the honorable Don Young of Alaska. Indeed, this bill is the very same which passed the House of Representatives by a three-to-one margin during the 103d Congress. Reintroduced into the 104th Congress, our colleague Don Young put it under lock and key. This begs the question: Why reintroduce the bill? The answer lies in the fact that there remains within the broad membership of the House of Representatives enough votes to pass meaningful reform of the Mining Law of 1872. Last Congress, for example, we reimposed the moratorium on the issuance of mining claim patents by a vote of 271 to 153 during House consideration of the fiscal year 1996 Interior appropriation bill. In addition, the bill we are reintroducing today, which was designated H.R. 357 in the 104th Congress, attracted 92 bipartisan cosponsors during that period. The issue of insuring a fair return to the public in exchange for the disposition of public resources, and the issue of properly managing our public domain lands, is neither Republican or Democrat. It is simply one that makes sense if we are to be good stewards of the public domain and meet our responsibilities to the American people. This means that the mining law of 1872 must be reformed. I and other Members will continue to work toward that goal during the 105th Congress. If reform can be accomplished within the context of the bill I am introducing today, so much the better. If this bill's fate is to serve as a rally cry for reform, with substantive reform efforts moving forward independently, than that is satisfactory as well. In any event, the eyes of the Nation will continue to focus, to an even greater extent than ever before, on how this Congress addresses natural resource issues such as this one. Congress ignores these matters at its own peril. Following is a brief explanation of the Mining Law of 1872 and how the legislation I am introducing proposes to reform it: Mining Law of 1872 Reform The year was 1872. U.S. Grant resided in the White House. Union troops still occupied the South. The invention of the telephone and Custer's stand at the Little Bighorn were still four years away. And in 1872 Congress passed a law that allowed people to go onto public lands in the West, stake mining claims, and if any gold or silver were found, mine it for free. In an effort to promote the settlement of the West, Congress said that these folks could also buy the land from the Federal government for $2.50 an acre. That was 1872. This is 1977. Yet, today, the Mining Law of 1872 is still in force. And, for the most part, it is not the lone prospector of old, pick in hand, accompanied by his trusty pack mule, who is staking those mining claims. It is large corporations, many of the foreign controlled, who are mining gold owned by the people of the United States for free, and snapping up valuable Federal land at fast food hamburger prices. Remaining as the last vestige of frontier-era legislation, the Mining Law of 1872 played a role in the development of the West. But is also left a staggering legacy of poisoned streams, abandoned waste dumps and maimed landscapes. Obviously, at the public's expense, the western mining interests have had a good thing going all of these years. But the question has to be asked: Is it right to continue to allow this speculation with Federal lands, not to require that the lands be reclaimed, and to permit the public's mineral wealth to be mined for free? Today, anybody can still go onto Federal lands in States like Nevada and Montana and stake any number of mining claims, each averaging about 20 acres. In order to maintain the mining claim, until recently all that was required was that the claim holder spend $100 dollars per year to the benefit of the claim. In the event hardrock minerals such as gold or silver are found on the claim, they are mined for free. There are no requirements that a production royalty be paid to the Federal government, or for that matter, a rental be paid for the use of the land. It is estimated that $1.8 billion worth of hardrock minerals are annually mined from Federal lands in the western States. Yet, the Federal government does not collect one penny in royalty from any of this mineral production that is conducted on public lands owned by all Americans. Under the Mining Law of 1872, claim holders can also choose to purchase the Federal land being claimed. They can do this by first showing that the lands have valuable minerals, and then by paying the Federal government a mere $2.50 or $5.00 an acre depending on the type of claim. This is called obtaining a mining claim patent. Perhaps a good feature in 1872, when the Nation was trying to settle the West. But today there is hardly a need to promote the additional settlement of LA, San Francisco or Denver. Note: The Interior Department is currently subject to a Congressionally imposed moratorium on the issuance of mining claim patents which must be renewed on an annual basis. Moreover, once the mining claim is patented, nothing in this so-called mining law says that it has to be actually mined. The land is now in private ownership. People are free to build condos or ski-slopes on the land. For example, not too long ago the Arizona Republic carried a story about a gentleman who paid the Federal government $155 for 61 acres worth of mining claims. Today, these mining claims are the site of a Hilton Hotel. This gentleman now estimates that his share of the resort is worth about $6 million. Claim holders can also mine these Federal lands with minimal reclamation requirements. The only Federal requirement is that when operating on these lands they do not cause `unnecessary or undue degradation.' What does this term mean? It means that they can do whatever they want as long as it's pretty much what all of the other miners are doing. The issue of Mining Law reform does not deal with coal, or that matter, oil and gas. These energy minerals, if located on Federal lands, are leased by the government, and a royalty is charged. Further, Mining Law reform does not deal with private lands. The scope of the Mining Law of 1872 and legislation to reform it is limited to hardrock minerals such as gold, silver, lead and zinc on Federal lands in the Western States. The Rahall bill to reform the Mining Law of 1872 would prohibit the continued give-away of public lands. It would require that mining claims are diligently developed. It would require that a holding fee be paid for the use of the land, and that a royalty be paid on the production of valuable minerals extracted from these Federal lands. And, it would require industry to comply with some basic reclamation standards .

Mr. RAHALL

Mr. RAHALL. Mr. Speaker, today, I am reintroducing legislation that I have sponsored for several Congresses now to form the Federal Black Lung Program. This legislation reflects the frustration of thousands of miners and their families with the extremely adversarial nature of the current program as administered by the Labor Department. As it now stands, disabled miniers who suffer from the crippling effects of black lung disease are faced with the Federal bureaucracy so totally lacking in compassion to their plight, that it appears intent upon harassing their efforts to obtain just compensation at every single step of the claim adjudication process. In fact, today we are witnessing less than a 10-percent approval rate on claims for black lung benefits. This figure does not attest to any reasonable and unbiased comportment of the facts. Rather, it represents nothing less than a cruel hoax being perpetrated against hard-working citizens who have dedicated their lives to the energy security and economic well being of this Nation. The original intent of Congress in enacting legislation to compensate victims of black lung disease was for this to be a fairly straightforward program. This intent has been defeated by years of administrative maneuverings aggravated by some extremely harmful judicial interpretations. Under this bill, we will return to a program that reflects the statutory commitment Congress, and indeed, the Nation, made to compensate these coal miners and their families. Make no mistake about it. Victims of black lung disease are not people who are looking for a handout. They are people who worked their lives in one of the most dangerous occupations in this country. They are people who were promised compensation by their Government. And they are people who now see their Government break that promise. It is time, indeed, long past the time that Congress move legislation on behalf of the thousands of miners, their widows, and families who are being victimized by this program, the very program that was intended to bring them relief. In general, this measure contains the following proposals: I. New Eligibility Standards: A miner would be presumed to be totally disabled by black lung if the miner presents a single piece of qualifying medical evidence such as a positive x ray, ventilatory or blood gas studies, or a medical opinion. The Secretary of Labor could rebut the presumption of eligibility only if he can show that the miner is doing coal mine work or could actually do coal mine work. II. Application of New Eligibility Standards: The new standards would apply to all claims filed after enactment of the Black Lung Benefits Act of 1991. All pending claims, and claims denied prior to enactment of the Black Lung Benefits Act of 1991 would be reviewed under the new standards. III. Elimination of Responsible Operators: All claims would be paid out of the coal industry financed Black Lung Disability Trust Fund. The purpose of this provision is to eliminate coal operators as defendants in black lung cases and the advantage they have over claimants by being able to afford to pay legal counsel. IV. Widows/Dependents: A widow or dependent of a miner would be awarded benefits if the miner worked 25 years or more in the mines; the miner died in whole or in part from black lung; the miner was receiving black lung benefits when he died; or medical evidence offered by the miner before he died satisfies new eligibility standards. Widows who are receiving benefits and who remarry would not be disqualified from continuing to receive the benefits, and a widow would be entitled to receive benefits without regard to the length of time she was married to the miner. V. Offsets: The practice of offsetting a miner's Social Security benefits by the amount of black lung benefits would be discontinued.

Mr. RAHALL

Mr. RAHALL. Mr. Speaker, today I along with Representative Tom Petri are reintroducing legislation we sponsored during the last Congress to transfer to the highway trust fund revenues received from the 4.3 cents of the Federal motor fuel tax that is currently going to the general fund. Many of us concerned with our surface transportation infrastructure were troubled when in 1993 this tax of 4.3 cents per gallon of motor fuel was imposed not for the purpose of bolstering receipts into the highway trust fund, but for the purposes of deficit reduction. As we all know, the basic premise of the Federal motor fuel tax is that it is a user fee collected for the express purpose of making improvements to our road and highway infrastructure. It is one of the few taxes where Americans can see an immediate and direct result for having to pay it as they drive on the Nation's highways. Last year we debated repealing the 4.3 cents-per-gallon tax. At the time, I offered an alternative. Restore it to the highway trust fund. Today, I do so again. Few, if anyone in this body, can say that the areas they represent do not require road and highway improvements. The legislation I am introducing today will not only restore faith with the American people on the uses of the Federal motor fuel taxes, but will certainly assist in making needed surface transportation enhancements. I would note that as introduced, this legislation would dedicate the entire 4.3 cents-per-gallon tax to the highway trust fund, and would not earmark any portion of this amount for mass transit, or for that matter, for any proposed new area of eligibility such as for Amtrak. This is not to say that I am necessarily opposed to the use of some portion of the 4.3 cents-per-gallon tax for these purposes and policy decisions of that nature can certainly be made during further consideration of this legislation.

Mr. RAHALL

Mr. RAHALL. Mr. Speaker, I yield 30 seconds to the gentleman from West Virginia [Mr. Wise].

Mr. RAHALL. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I say to the gentleman from New Jersey [Mr. Pallone] that I never said the President supported this bill. I said the Office of Pipeline Safety within DOT supports this legislation. In regard to the risk assessment provisions, we did not and we have not in this bill taken the risk assessment language of the Contract With America word for word. We have made it more flexible. We have actually improved the risk assessment language, and the Senate bill went even further than our original House legislation. We made it more flexible. We have increased the authorization levels for the Office of Pipeline Safety. So we have dramatically improved this bill over what it was originally, and it is not the prescriptive language that the gentleman from New Jersey would ascribe to it. I would say in addition to that, we have had hearings on this issue. It has gone on for well over 18 months as we have heard now. We have not had hearings on the Senate bill precisely but we have had hearings on this issue and it has been dealt with quite a bit. We asked the gentleman from New Jersey early on in the process, throughout the process, what are his recommendations for improving the bill, what are his amendments, please present them in the process and we will talk further with you and negotiate further with you. We received no such process. So yes, I guess in that sense the process did break down. Mr. Speaker, I urge support of the legislation.

Mr. RAHALL. No, Mr. Speaker, I am in favor of the bill.

Mr. RAHALL. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I come from an area of the country where, at times, terror springs forth from deep within the Earth. The ground shakes, fire and smoke belch forth, the siren wails, and then the process of counting the dead begins. It is unfortunate, but true, that this is part of the legacy of underground coal mining in Appalachia. For deep within many of these mines stalks a silent killer: It is known as methane gas. As it accumulates, it takes just one spark to set off a disaster that leaves many families without a father, son, or daughter. In many parts of the country, another potential silent killer lies beneath the ground. It is the natural gas that flows through the 1.6 million miles of pipelines which run through rural and urban areas alike. A natural gas pipeline, lying beneath the Earth, can explode, and it can cause the same terror, the same trauma, and the same consequences to life and property as occurs with mine disasters. It is from this perspective that I approach the pending measure, and it is from this perspective why I am pleased to rise in support of the pending legislation, Mr. Speaker. The basic purpose of this bill is to reauthorize the natural gas and hazardous liquid pipeline safety programs through the year 2000. In this regard, the pending legislation provides authorization levels that are consistent with the administration's budget request for the Office of Pipeline Safety. The bottom line is that this legislation would not diminish pipeline safety whatsoever. At the same time, it provides the necessary authorization for the Office of Pipeline Safety to continue with its very important work of ensuring the safety of the American public as their safety relates to potential hazards associated with gas and liquid pipeline. I would note as the gentleman from Pennsylvania [Mr. Shuster] noted, that this bill passed the Senate in a bipartisan fashion, and it is generally supported by the Office of Pipeline Safety at the Department of Transportation. In this body, the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure reported a reauthorization, as has already been stated bill on May 1, 1995. We did so in a bipartisan fashion. Under a sequential referral, the Commerce Committee reported its version on June 1, 1995. It did not do so in a bipartisan fashion, and that is where we find ourselves today. The Transportation and Infrastructure Committee is bipartisan in its support of the pending measure. In fact, from my perspective, the Senate version is superior to what the Transportation Committee Democrats agreed to last year. This is because the risk assessment provisions of the Senate bill are far more flexible than what was in the House bill, and basically comports with what the Office of Pipeline Safety is already undertaking. Further, the Senate bill has a higher authorization level than what is in the House measures. I see my very good friend from Michigan, the ranking Democrat on the Committee on Commerce, on the floor at this moment, and I realize fully that my distinguished friend from Michigan and his Committee on Commerce views itself rather as being second to none. Indeed our friendship is probably second to none in this body. It is a powerful committee, and it deserves our respect with all due respect to my friend. But in this case, in this particular piece of legislation, it is the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure which has the primary jurisdiction in this body, and we are united in our support thereof, Democrat and Republican alike. So I would urge my Democratic colleagues to support the pending measure and certainly realize that this came out of the bipartisan Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.