Ralph Regula

Mr. REGULA

Mr. REGULA. For natural resource research only in USGS. That is the only place it is affected. Fish and Wildlife is in no way affected in the use of volunteers. The Park Service is not affected. The other divisions of the USGS are not affected. And all I have done in the proposed amendment is transfer additional money to the Fish and Wildlife Service to do the functions you are talking about, and specifically the breeding bird survey.

Mr. REGULA. If the gentleman will continue to yield, all the activities you described are not affected in any way.

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

Mr. REGULA. Mr. Chairman, I would say to the gentleman that this is to try to address the property rights issue. As you know from service on the authorizing committee, there is a divergence of opinion. As I know the gentleman is the senior member of the minority on the authorizing committee, he is going to be addressing this problem in that committee and I would suggest that the volunteer issue should be raised by the gentleman in developing authorizing legislation.

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

Mr. REGULA. Mr. Chairman, the amendment transfers $1,200,000 from the U.S. Geological Survey, surveys, investigations, and research appropriation, natural resources research activity, to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, resource management appropriation, migratory bird management activity to support the Patuxent bird banding lab and the breeding bird survey, the latter of which is conducted largely by volunteers and is essential in the promulgation of Federal migratory bird hunting regulations. This transfer also includes $200,000 for the related waterfowl survey work on the Yukon Delta refuges in Alaska. These activities were formerly funded in the Fish and Wildlife Service and were transferred to the National Biological Survey when it was established. The amendment does not transfer back the computer support for this program, with the expectation that the data analysis needs of the breeding bird survey be given the highest priority within the resources research activity.

Mr. REGULA. In responding, to a certain extent, to the dissenting views of the ranking member of the full committee, and he addressed the breeding bird issue, the migratory breeding birds and, the fact that the great bulk of the volunteer effort is expended on doing the surveys on the migratory breeding birds. And the gentleman is a sportsman and understands that very well.

Mr. REGULA

Mr. REGULA. Mr. Speaker, I move that the House resolve itself into the Committee of the Whole House on the State of the Union for the consideration of the bill (H.R. 1977) making appropriations for the Department of the Interior and related agencies for the fiscal year ending September 30, 1996, and for other purposes; and pending that motion, Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that general debate be limited to not to exceed 1 hour, the time to be equally divided and controlled by the gentleman from Illinois [Mr. Yates] and myself.

Mr. REGULA

Mr. REGULA. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman from Ohio and I rise in strong support of the rule. Mr. Speaker, I would urge all the Members to vote for the rule. I say that because the rule allows ample opportunity to debate all the issues involved in this bill. It offers an opportunity, through amendments to change the dollar levels, to subtract from a program if you choose to do so. I know some would like to make a change in the dollars on NEA and NEH, and under this rule, they have every opportunity to do so. The rule does provide waivers for some of the legislative items in the bill. But I want to say to all of you that at the urging of the leadership, we communicated very frequently and very thoroughly with the authorizing committees. For example, on NEA, NEH and IMS, we followed the guidelines of the authorization bill that was passed out of the full committee of jurisdiction. The same thing is true on a number of other instances in the bill. So, in the process of putting this bill together, we made every effort to ensure that it did represent something that was approved by the authorizing committees, that we were not appropriating in opposition to the legislative intent of the committees of jurisdiction. And, therefore, since there are some legislative issues and programs for which authorizations have expired in the bill, which we have worked out with the authorizers, they are protected by a waiver. But that does not preclude anyone from offering amendments to take out money or, for that matter, to add money. We have tried in this bill, in the face of a reduction of almost $1.8 billion in budget authority, if you include the rescission bill, and a reduction of almost $1 billion in outlays, from 1995, or roughly 11 percent to help with the deficit reduction package, but nevertheless, to ensure that we provide ample funding to allow the people of this Nation to have access to the resources they enjoy. I think we have, working with the subcommittee members, with the authorizers, with the leadership of the full Committee on Appropriations and others, crafted a bill that I think is responsible. I think it does the things that are important to the people of this Nation, addresses their needs while at the same time saving money. We also tried to eliminate things that have downstream costs, which is necessary if we are to leave as a legacy to our children and grandchildren a balanced budget, something Alan Greenspan said in testimony before the Committee on the Budget, would result in providing them an improved standard of living over ours. If that is to be our legacy, we have to get on a glide path that will take us to a zero deficit in 7 years. Therefore, in crafting the bill, we tried to avoid starting programs or funding programs or funding new construction, things that will have a substantial downstream cost because we recognize that in future years we will have even less to meet the challenges of this bill. Having said all those things, I would strongly urge the Members to support the rule so that we can get on with an open debate on the policy issues. I want to say there are a lot of policy issues involved here. I hope the Members will pay attention to the debate so that they can help make the decision, because as we address these policy issues by virtue of amendments and vote on them, we are fulfilling our role under the Constitution. We are the legislative branch. It is our role to set policy. It is the role of downtown, the President and his team, to execute policy. And there will be a number of opportunities under this rule and under the amendments that will be offered to make, I think, some rather significant policy choices. We have tried in crafting the bill not to put a personal spin on it but to, rather, bring those issues to all the Members of this body. So, again, I urge the Members to support the rule. You will have your opportunity during the open debate and the amendment process to express your concerns and your ideas on the policy issues embodied in this legislation.

Mr. REGULA

Mr. REGULA. Mr. Speaker, I withdraw my motion to go into the Committee of the Whole.

Mr. REGULA

Mr. REGULA. Mr. Speaker, President Kennedy said that a journey of a thousand miles begins with the first step. Today we took, earlier, a giant step toward a balanced budget for the year 2002. That is the passage of the budget resolution. Now we have an opportunity to take another step. That is to support this rescission bill. I say that because many of the programs, many of the construction projects that were rescinded, would have great outyear costs. By stopping these programs, slowing them down, rescinding buildings, rescinding other expensive projects, it will save money as we go down the road. Therefore, this bill becomes very important if we are to reach the goal of a legacy of a balanced budget and a strong economy for future generations in the next century. Mr. Speaker, I would also just add that we do deal with a forest problem that enables us, in the Forest Service, to take diseased, dead trees, trees that have been scarred by fire, and use that lumber for the benefit of the young people of this Nation that want to build homes at a reasonable cost. I was out in California and spent 2 days looking at the program. I think it will work very well. It will not in any way harm the forests, and it will provide for their health by removing trees that could be a potential fire hazard for the future. Therefore, I think this bill has a lot of good features. Mr. Speaker, I would strongly urge my colleagues to support this second, very important step towards a balanced budget.

Mr. REGULA

Mr. REGULA. Mr. Chairman, let me preface my remarks by saying that I applaud the hard work that has gone into producing this budget resolution, a resolution that puts us on a path to a balanced budget. I want to particularly recognize my colleague from Ohio, the chairman of the Budget Committee, Mr. Kasich, for his unwavering dedication to the balanced budget objective. He has never lost sight of the finish line and while I may not personally agree with all of the assumptions in this resolution I plan to support this budget because I too believe the goal of a balanced budget must be paramount. I would like to discuss one of the aspects of the proposed budget resolution that concerns me and that is the assumption that the functions of the Department of Energy should be phased out. Many of these functions are important to the future of this Nation. It is our responsibility to do these in the most cost-effective way possible. The argument for phasing out the Department is based on the assumption that it was solely created to deal with an energy crisis the country experienced in the 1970's. The crisis no longer exists and therefore the rationale for the functions of the Department no longer exists. It is unwise, for us as a nation, to be so complacent as to assume that another energy crisis is not only not a probability, but not even a possibility. Just 4 short years ago--in the action Desert Storm--we put over 400,000 American men and women into harms way to protect the availability of energy resources that we are once again taking for granted. Much of the work the Department or its successor organizations is doing, in partnership with American industries, is the very reason we can hope to avoid a future energy crisis and, I would argue, that the money spent on those research, development, and demonstration projects is far more cost effective than putting American lives at risk to protect Persian Gulf oilfields. A recent op-ed piece written by former President Reagan's Energy Secretary, Don Hodel, ``Forebodings of Another Oil Shortage,'' put it starkly: America is sleepwalking into a disaster. Within the next two years, we will experience another oil shock. According to the former secretary the threat of this crisis once again comes from the unstable Persian Gulf which currently supplies 44 percent of United States oil imports. The recent DOE annual energy outlook projects this figure rising to more than 65 percent by the year 2010. Saudi Arabia alone supplied almost 19 percent of the United States import market last year and provided over 25 percent as recently as 1992. The stability in that region is once again in question. In February of this year the President concurred with the Department of Commerce's finding that the Nation's growing reliance on imports of crude oil and refined petroleum products threaten the Nation's security. In 1993 U.S. oil imports surpassed the 1977--a time of crisis--record level by 1.8 percent. The warning signs are clear and yet today we are sending signals that either we do not believe a crisis is a possibility or that energy is not a critical commodity. My second point relates to the actual programs and mission of the Department or its successors and their impact on our international posture in terms of maintaining and improving our global competitiveness and our goal of continuing to grow the economy. To be truly strong, the American economy must be efficient, clean and fueled by stable and affordable supplies of energy. Assuring this supply and improving efficiencies and environmental performance of our energy resources is one of the important missions of our energy policy. Many of the energy programs are cost shared partnerships with U.S. industries that hold the key to achieving these goals. Just last week I received a letter from one of the participants in just such a partnership. The company, a small one located in Cleveland, OH is attempting to develop and commercialize a process for the recovery of usable materials from salt cake, a waste produced by the aluminum industry. Commercialization of this technology would not only reduce the operating costs in the aluminum industry through reduced energy expenditures, but it would also eliminate the 550,000 tons of salt cake that are presently being landfilled in the U.S. each year. This small company is cost sharing in excess of 70 percent of the total project cost with the Department. As the President of this company concluded in his letter to me, this research is ``critical to the development of new technologies by American companies such as ours.'' Despite the fact that each of us is heavily reliant on energy in our daily lives, it is one of those luxuries that is easy to ignore as long as it is plentiful and reasonably priced. In the not too distant past, energy was an afterthought in economic planning. Today, energy is a principal factor in any business strategy and American businesses today are cognizant of the importance of energy in their bottom line and are constantly working to reduce energy costs to maintain or improve their competitiveness. [[Page H5147]] Transportation is one good example. It is a key industry and a key component in our overall energy equation accounting for 27 percent of our total energy consumption and 66 percent of the total petroleum use. Moreover, 97 percent of the transportation sector's energy demands are satisfied by petroleum. Clearly to reduce our dependence on oil imports it is imperative that we change the transportation sector's energy demand patterns. The programs funded in my subcommittee's jurisdiction, in partnership with DOE are addressing that issue. These programs are projected to reduce oil imports by 2.3 million barrels a day by the year 2000 cresting a savings for drivers and a trade deficit reduction of $47 million per year. Energy use is an environmental issue as well. The production and use of energy cause more environmental damage than any other human activity in the world today. Without significant changes in energy sources and consumption patterns, the problem will worsen. Without cleaner energy sources and technologies, worsening environmental problems can be expected to lead to regulatory actions that can severely hamper economic growth. I have repeatedly said during my subcommittee's hearings that what the November election was about was not abolishing government, but making it work more efficiently and more effectively. I am persuaded that many Departments and Agencies a healthy dose of streamlining and downsizing and I am equally persuaded that they are getting the message. For example the Secretary or DOE recently announced a proposed $14 billion contribution to deficit reduction over the next 5 years. I applaud these initiatives and I am committed to working with the Agencies such as DOE or its successors to make those promised savings a reality. I believe there are core, fundamental missions in the field of Energy. With respect to the programs I am most familiar with those missions involve promoting, in partnership with U.S. industries, fundamental science and technology advances which will help keep us competitive in a global economy and which provide the long-term basis for economic growth, job creation and improved quality of life; and enhancing our energy security by helping safeguard against energy supply disruptions and their associated threats to the United States. These missions can be accomplished in streamlined Departments, and Agencies but may be lost in a costly realignment that could be necessitated by their complete dismantlement. Energy is the lifeblood of a strong expanding economy that is essential if we are to be successful in balancing the budget. Public-private partnerships can do much to reduce the cost of government while maintaining our technological leadership and making our programs very cost effective.

Mr. REGULA

Mr. REGULA. Mr. Speaker, every year I sponsor a student congressional council in the 16th District of Ohio. High school students are selected to participate and are assigned issues of national importance to research and debate. This year the students were told to formulate their own ``Contract With America.'' The students spent many weeks researching and discussing the annual topic. They conclude the project by holding a mock Congress. On this final day the students debate and vote on their contract proposals. The students considered over 30 pieces of legislation. I am proud to insert the following proposals which passed their student legislature into the Congressional Record: The participating high schools are: Alliance, Central Catholic, Glen Oak, Fairless, Fredericktown, Hillsdale, Hoover, Louisville, Marlington, Minerva, Northwestern, R.G. Drage, Tuslaw, and West Holmes. Welfare Reform It is clear that the current welfare system is slowly destroying the very fabric of our society. The current system encourages both irresponsible behavior and fraud. In an attempt to save the American society by strengthening the American family, encouraging responsibility, and eliminating unnecessary illegal behavior, I urge the passing of this bill. A bill to establish guidelines for the Aid to Families with Dependent Children program. In order to quality for and receive Aid to Families payments all applicants and recipients must be at least 18 years of age, a legal citizen of the United States, and either possess a high school diploma, have passed the Graduation Equivalency Test, or currently be enrolled in a course of study leading to a GED test. All applicants or recipients whom the State determines to be addicted to alcohol or any type of drug shall be required to participate in and successfully complete an addiction treatment program. Those applicants and recipients whom the State determines to be addicted to alcohol or any type of drug shall also be subject to random alcohol and/or drug testing. All guardians of children whose parent(s) are currently incarcerated shall continue to children. All States shall have the power to require recipients of AFDC payments to perform community service, providing that they offer child care to those whom they determine need it. All unwed mothers must establish paternity in order to receive AFDC payments. Once paternity is established, AFDC benefits will not increase for those women who are currently on welfare who give birth to additional children. All fathers that fail to pay child support shall not be eligible to receive AFDC payments, however, job training and placement assistance shall be offered to these men. All States shall be required to terminate AFDC payments to recipients who have received these payments for at least three years. All States shall have the power, however, to end these AFDC payments after one year, providing that they offer a job training and assistance program to their recipients. All State-provided job training and placement assistance programs shall be funded through block grants, comprised of the savings generated by denying AFDC benefits to those under the age of 18. All State-provided child care to recipients of AFDC payments may also be funded through these block grants, or States may provide the position of child care administrator as a community service opportunity to those recipients whom must complete a State determined requirement of community service. Stricter Legislation Regarding Persons on Trial, Punishments, and Their Appeals A bill to have a stricter legislation regarding trials, punishments and appeals of accused persons. If a person is accused of committing a felony, they should be tried as an adult regardless of their age when they committed the crime. There should be stricter psychiatric evaluations for accused persons claiming temporary insanity. Useless questioning or the use of irrelevant evidence should be abolished. There should be stricter punishments for criminals convicted of crimes involving guns, drugs, and other serious felonies. Any criminal convicted of any 3 felonies will be locked up in prison for the rest of their life. Life sentences should be serviced for the remainder of the criminal's life. We should cut back on jail privileges for the white collar criminals, such as tennis courts, exercise rooms, swimming pools, etc. A convicted criminal should only be allowed to receive two appeals. By doing this, it will eliminate the use of tax payers' funding of useless court trials. If released, the criminal must pay court fees. Mandatory Railroad Crossing Warning Light and Gate Placement and Repair This bill would impose mandatory placement of lights and gates at all railroad crossings in use and require immediate repair of all faulty gates and lights. A bill to create gates and lights for all railroads in use. Sec. 1. The federal government will allocate funds from Department of Transportation to state governments for the building of railroad crossings that are in use. Sec. 2. All faulty gates and lights must be repaired immediately. Gates and lights that are not working or are being repaired must have signs posted to notify this to drivers. Sec. 3. If a railroad crossing does not have gates of lights then trains must reduce their speed to 25 m.p.h. through the crossing until the installation of gates and lights is complete. Sec. 4. If a state does not comply with this bill all federal funding for highways will be cut off for that state.

Mr. REGULA

Mr. REGULA. Mr. Speaker, the meetings that begin today in Canada between the world's four economic powers mark another critical juncture in this country's ongoing effort to level the playing field for Japanese-American automotive trade. Although progress has been made in this area since talks began 4 years ago, much remains to be done. This is not a question of demanding one-sided concessions: an improved trade situation is in the interest of both countries. Motor vehicle and equipment manufacturing is the largest U.S. manufacturing industry, and a cornerstone of America's industrial base. The ``Big Three'' alone--Chrysler, Ford, and General Motors--employ almost 700,000 Americans, and are among the largest employers of research engineers and scientists in the country. Thus the health of the U.S. auto industry has far-reaching implications for the larger U.S. economy and its competitiveness. Japan stands to gain, as well, including Japanese consumers, who currently pay prices for auto parts that are on average 340 percent higher than for identical parts in the United States. Resolution of this crucial imbalance can set an important precedent, not only for anyone seeking access to Japan's markets, but also for American access to and competitiveness in other critical markets overseas. I strongly urge Ambassador Kantor to continue his effective leadership on this issue. I am confident that with a healthy balance of trade, this important relationship can flourish rather than flounder.

Mr. REGULA

Mr. REGULA. Mr. Chairman, how much time do I have remaining?

Mr. REGULA. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 1 minute and 50 seconds. (Mr. REGULA asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. REGULA. I just want to advise Members of the situation. In the subcommittee, we took out $5 million from NEA, remembering last year we cut it 2 percent on the floor and sustained that in the conference. That $5 million comes out of individual grants. There will be no money left in the NEA for individual grants which have been the problem. None. Zero. If this amendment is passed, this will have to come out of the grants all over the United States to small communities with symphonies, ballet, and museums. It will mean the concert on the mall on the Fourth of July and Memorial Day, I hope many Members have seen it on C-SPAN, it is a great thing. Basically, if you vote for this amendment, you are voting against those small amounts that reach out across the United States for educational programs, for the small groups within the communities, for the grants to the State arts commissions. You are not voting against individual grants. We have already eliminated all the money for the individual grants in the subcommittee which was ratified by the full Committee on Appropriations. The Committee on Educational and Economic Opportunities will have to hear the question of reauthorizing the NEA, so that is the place to deal with the problem. If we do not want NEA, we do not have to reauthorize it for fiscal year 1996 and prospectively. But let us not cut out that little bit of money that is being spread across the United States to many of the things that you cherish in each of your respective communities.

Mr. REGULA. I yield briefly to the gentleman from Illinois.

Mr. REGULA. Mr. Chairman, I yield the balance of my time to the gentleman from New York [Mr. Houghton].

Mr. REGULA

Mr. REGULA. Mr. Chairman, members of the committee, in 1989 a 2-by-4, 8 feet long, was $1.75. Today that same 2-by-4 is $3.02 Now what that means is that as young people in America want to achieve the American dream of owning a home, they are going to pay an extra 5 to $7,000 more for timber. The point of that is that let us take advantage of this salvage. It is salvaged timber. It is diseased, burned; it is not live trees. There are three reasons we need to do this, and one is that these trees are a threat and fire hazard because, if they stay there, they fall over and become fuel for a forest fire that will hit living trees. Second, we need to clean the land so that it can be regenerated. Part of the money that is earned by these salvage sales will be used to replant, reforest, the land so that the wildlife will have habitat in the future and there will be timber available in the future. Timber is a resource, but it is also a crop. Third, Mr. Chairman, it is important that we salvage these burned and diseased trees that can be made into lumber like this if we do it within 2 years. Otherwise it rots, and it is no longer useful, no longer in the condition that can be made available for home building and for the things that we use timber for. For all of those reasons I think it is important that we get this salvage, harvest it, clean up the land, regenerate it for future generations, and I would point out that this is only a 2 year bill. It terminates at the end of 2 years for the simple reason that we have to do it or the trees will no longer be of the quality that can be used for saw logs. So I urge the Members to reject this amendment, leave the language in that is in.

Mr. REGULA

Mr. REGULA. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding to me. Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the gentleman's willingness to allow the administration to exempt matters relating to the GATT negotiations from the moratorium, as addressed in the bill, and as amended by the gentleman from Indiana [Mr. Burton]. As a member of the GATT task force and as a member of the Congressional Steel Caucus, I was an active participant in negotiating the Uruguay round agreements. I am concerned that the language could possibly result in extensive litigation, and given the overall Republican goal to reduce the amount of litigation that goes on in this Nation, I would hope we could address this. We should reduce litigation, encourage streamlining of regulations, and promote the sound administration of our trade laws. Accordingly, I would hope that the gentleman agrees that the intent of the bill language and the amendments would exempt all mat- ters relating to section 301, the antidumping and the countervailing duty laws.

Mr. REGULA. I thank the gentleman for clarifying the intent of the language, Mr. Chairman. amendment offered by mr. wise

Mr. REGULA

Mr. REGULA. Mr. Speaker, this past weekend one of our colleagues won yet another election; the gentleman from Oklahoma, Congressman Steve Largent, received football's ultimate honor, election to the Pro Football Hall of Fame in Canton, OH, my home district. Induction into the Hall of Fame is reserved for only the greatest ever to play the game, and Steve won that honor in his first year of eligibility. He held six major career records at the time of his retirement. Steve retired 5 years ago with the well-deserved reputation of playing cleanly and with integrity. As a freshman in Washington, our friend Steve has already developed the same reputation in his new career. I congratulate him on the honor of his induction and look forward to his trip to the 16th District for induction ceremonies in July. Mr. Speaker, I also want to honor the other four 1995 inductees: Kellen Winslow of the San Diego Chargers, Lee Roy Selmon for the Tampa Bay Buccaneers, the late Henry Jordan of the Green Bay Packers, and the late Jim Finks, general manager for Minnesota and Chicago during their treks to the Super Bowl. All are outstanding men who richly deserve this honor.

Mr. REGULA

Mr. REGULA. Mr. Speaker, today is truly a momentous occasion. After serving in the minority for 11 terms, new and historic horizons are being opened as Republicans become the majority party in the House of Representatives for the first time in 40 years. We are beginning the first day of the 104th Congress with a full schedule of much-needed internal reforms in the House of Representatives. We will vote on eight separate reforms including a reduction of committee staff by one-third, requiring that committee meetings be open to the public and requiring that members of committees be present for votes in their committees. This new openness in the committee process is important because it is the first step in establishing the accountability that the American people are demanding of the Congress. The most important decisions on legislation are often made during committee deliberations. Members of committees become experts in the areas of the committee's jurisdiction and other Members rely on their judgment. One of the most important reforms we are voting on today is the ban of proxy voting in committees. Proxy voting allows another Member to cast a vote on legislation for a Member who is absent. Of the 22 standing committees in the last Congress, only 4 banned absentee voting. I am a member of the Appropriations Committee which has never allowed the use of proxy voting. All Members should be present to vote on issues before the committee. Accountability to the American public begins in the committee system by Members being present for meetings and votes, and those meetings being open to the public. We must assure all of our constituents of the seriousness with which we approach our work of deliberating the issues of importance to our country. Only then can the integrity of the Congress be reestablished. Today's action can be defined in five words: ``Accountability in the People's House.''