Hal Rogers

Mr. ROGERS of Kentucky

Mr. ROGERS of Kentucky. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong opposition to the amendment offered by the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Sensenbrenner) and in support of the base bill before us. The bill before us effectively achieves its purpose, to prevent people from using credit on illegal gambling activities, particularly offshore Internet sites. But if this amendment should be adopted, we might as well just call this bill the ``Horse Racing Prohibition Act'' because it will literally kill that entire industry. The intent of the amendment is not to prevent illegal activity, rather it is intended to make current legal activities illegal. If the language regarding State license domestic wagering were eliminated or changed, this legislation would not simply prohibit credit in connection with Internet gambling, it would restrict the day- to-day wagering activities of millions of horse racing fans by limiting financial clearing transactions with domestic wagering facilities. As a result, this would severely curtail simulcast wagering and personal account wagering on any horse race. Not surprisingly, over 80 percent of the amount bet on horse racing is wagered at locations other than where the race is run. The result of this amendment, should it pass, would be catastrophic to the $34 billion racing/horse breeding industry, especially to the States that rely on it for tax revenue and the 500,000 full-time jobs it supports. In Kentucky alone, there are 460 thoroughbred farms, 150,000 horses, 8 tracks and 52,000 jobs which add $3.4 billion directly to the State's economy. On top of this, the U.S. horse racing industry is already one of the most highly regulated industries in the country, governed by both Federal and State laws. States like Kentucky have highly sophisticated systems in place to ensure that each transaction is made in accordance with the law. Because of this State regulation, the integrity of gaming site operators, the identity of the participants, consumer fraud and money laundering are not at issue. It is ironic that this Congress would stand here today and attempt to trample on the rights of States to regulate their own businesses. The adoption of this amendment would be the triple crown of injustices. It would put hardworking folks out of work, it would take away much-needed revenue from the States, and it would deprive honest folks the fun of putting a couple of bucks down on their favorite horse to win, place, or show. I ask Members to reject the Sensenbrenner amendment and support the bill as written.

Mr. ROGERS of Kentucky

Mr. ROGERS of Kentucky. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor the career of my friend and eastern Kentucky native Charlie Parker, president and CEO of Buckhorn Children's Foundation. Charlie is retiring after 21 years of service to the children and families of Kentucky. It is only fitting to take this opportunity to recognize all that he has accomplished. Buckhorn Children's Foundation's mission is to alleviate the suffering of children and families and bring hope to otherwise hopeless lives in Appalachia. Through a variety of programs, Buckhorn has helped thousands learn about themselves, feel pride in who they are, and become successes in life. Although they actively seek out the most troubled of our youth, Buckhorn can boast of an over 70 percent success rate, which is far above the national average. Coming on board in 1982, Charlie took over Buckhorn's one residential campus with a budget of $650,000. Under his vision and leadership, that one residential campus has grown to three with a budget of $18 million. Its reach has extended beyond the hills of Eastern Kentucky into more urban areas. Without question, this would never have been accomplished were it not for the tireless efforts of Charlie. While we have taken much time recently to recognize our heroes that have defended our freedom abroad, we must also recognize our heroes at home. I know that the many young people that Charlie has positively affected consider him a hero, as do I. Thank you, Charlie, for giving young people one of the greatest gifts of all--a future.

Mr. ROGERS of Kentucky

Mr. ROGERS of Kentucky. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to a dedicated public servant, all around great Kentuckian, and someone I am proud to call a friend, Karen Engle. As Executive Director of the PRIDE program, Karen has worked tirelessly to improve the lives of people throughout southern and eastern Kentucky. I want to take this opportunity to express my deepest gratitude for her many contributions. Born and raised in Pike County, Kentucky, Karen has spent much of her life working to make her region a better place. I first had the opportunity to get to know Karen when she joined my congressional staff in 1994. From the very beginning, it was clear that she was bright, motivated, and a natural born leader. For almost five years, she served as a Project Manager and Field Representative in my Pikeville District office. Her knowledge of the region and its people, along with her professionalism and commitment to service, made her a most valuable part of my team. In 1999, 1 asked Karen to put her insight and leadership skills to work by taking the helm of the PRIDE program. Under Karen's leadership, this federal, state, and local partnership has made significant strides in cleaning up our region's rivers and streams, helping our counties address sewage and trash problems, and educating our children about the importance of a clean environment. Since the program's creation in 1997, more than 74,500 PRIDE volunteers have worked over 225,000 hours cleaning up 286 streams, 1,294 illegal dumps, and 3,000 roadways. Additionally, PRIDE has eliminated 20,560 straight pipes and failing septic systems that have long polluted our region's waterways. Thanks to Karen's unwavering commitment, the PRIDE program has soared to amazing heights and is going strong. There is no doubt that the people of Kentucky will continue to benefit from her contributions for many years to come. Mr. Speaker, on behalf of my colleagues and myself, I want to thank my friend Karen Engle for the time, energy, and devotion she has put into the lives of others. I am especially grateful for her unwavering commitment to the PRIDE program and the people of southern and eastern Kentucky.

Mr. ROGERS of Kentucky

Mr. ROGERS of Kentucky. Mr. Speaker, today, I am joined by Congressman Zach Wamp in reintroducing legislation to protect Fern Lake, an important part of our shared scenic heritage. Senator Mitch McConnell will be introducing identical legislation in the U.S. Senate today. This legislation will allow the National Park Service to purchase Fern Lake and incorporate these lands into the Cumberland Gap National Historic Park boundary. Further, this legislation will secure a clean and reliable water source for the city of Middlesboro, Kentucky. This bill authorizes the purchase of land now neighboring the Gap boundary and the 150-acre lake. The measure would also allow the Park Service to acquire another 4,500 acres of adjoining watershed from willing sellers if funds become available. By buying this property, we will protect this important national passageway for generations and address the resource needs of our local communities today. This legislation began with a petition, delivered to me by Ben Hickman, the mayor of Middlesboro. From there, we sat down with the National Park Service and brought them together with local officials to create this win-win opportunity for the park and the entire region both in Kentucky and Tennessee. This important acquisition fits into our efforts to create jobs, protect our environmental resources, and promote economic development by enhancing our potential for tourism. I am proud to have the support of Congressman Wamp and look forward to its passage at a later date.

Mr. ROGERS of Kentucky

Mr. ROGERS of Kentucky. Mr. Chairman, if the gentleman from Florida will continue to yield, I would respond that the gentleman is correct.

Mr. ROGERS of Kentucky. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding to me, and I will ask that the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Mica), chairman of the Subcommittee on Aviation, be yielded to.

Mr. ROGERS of Kentucky. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. ROGERS of Kentucky. In that case, Mr. Chairman, I accept this amendment.

Mr. ROGERS of Kentucky. Reclaiming my time, Mr. Chairman, it is my understanding that the gentlewoman would speak 5 minutes for all of the five all at once, 5 minutes total?

Mr. ROGERS of Kentucky. I yield to the gentlewoman from Texas.

Mr. ROGERS of Kentucky. I yield to the gentleman from Florida.

Mr. ROGERS of Kentucky. Then I have no problem.

Mr. ROGERS of Kentucky. So my understanding is if we accept this amendment, the gentlewoman would spend 5 minutes talking about all five of the others?

Mr. ROGERS of Kentucky. If the gentlewoman would like to discuss the other five in a 5-minute period, I would have no problem with that.

Mr. ROGERS of Kentucky. Well, I do not see any point in moving further on this. I was prepared to accept this one on condition that the gentlewoman would just simply withdraw the others. They are subject to a point of order anyway, and we could save a lot of time in that fashion. But if the gentlewoman is unwilling to do that, then I have no choice but to oppose this amendment and all of the others.

Mr. ROGERS of Kentucky. Well, Mr. Chairman, reclaiming my time, I was prepared to accept the amendment, but if we are not going to save any time by it, I do not see any point in accepting it. So I have no choice but to oppose it.

Mr. ROGERS of Kentucky. I yield to the gentlewoman from Texas.

Mr. ROGERS of Kentucky. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word, and I would ask the gentlewoman a question. Should this amendment be accepted, would the other amendments, the five other amendments the gentlewoman has tendered, be withdrawn?

Mr. ROGERS of Kentucky. Mr. Chairman, I am told this is the last amendment in this title, other than this amendment. Mr. Chairman, I withdraw the unanimous consent request.

Mr. ROGERS of Kentucky. Mr. Chairman, we have not had a chance to discuss this amendment with the gentlewoman, and I wonder if we might be able to delay the consideration of it for a few minutes while we do that. I do not want her to lose her opportunity to offer it, in case our conversation is fruitless. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent that this amendment be delayed until after whatever is next on the agenda, and that the right of the gentlewoman to offer the amendment would be preserved.

Mr. ROGERS of Kentucky. Mr. Chairman, could we have the amendment read for us, please?

Mr. ROGERS of Kentucky

Mr. ROGERS of Kentucky. Well, let us spend what we have already. If we need more, we will get it.

Mr. ROGERS of Kentucky. Mr. Chairman, there is $291 million available for first responders from fiscal 2002. Why do you not apply for it?

Mr. ROGERS of Kentucky. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. ROGERS of Kentucky. Mr. Chairman, let us just look at it. The fiscal 2002 grants, the money we appropriated a year and a half ago, $495 million for grants for our local communities to apply for, $291 million of that money is still lying there unspent. Nearly 60 percent of the fiscal 2002 monies are still available to communities, and the filing deadline is still available. It has been available since 2002, and the money is not applied for. What does the gentleman say about that?