Jim Ryun

Mr. RYUN

Mr. RYUN. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of H.R. 1534. Mr. Chairman, one of the pillars of our democracy is the right of every individual to own private property. In 1792, James Madison said this, and I quote: ``That is not a just government nor is property secure under it where the property which a man has in his personal safety and personal liberty is violated by an arbitrary seizure of one class of citizens for the service of the rest.'' Because our Founding Fathers understood this very important principle, they included a guarantee in the Bill of Rights to protect private property owners from politicians and bureaucrats who believe that they know best how to use someone else's lands. The fifth amendment to the Constitution assures the Government cannot take a person's private property without first providing the owner due process and just compensation. Unfortunately, the fears which motivated our Founding Fathers to include this property guarantee are being realized today. For example, in the first 10 years after the enactment of the 1983 Rails to Trails Act, trails groups and State governments used that law to take the property from 62,000 landowners. Yet, not one of those aggrieved farmers and homeowners has received a single penny in compensation for their loss. While courts have ruled that compensation must be paid to the property owners, endless bureaucratic redtape would first require a small Kansas farmer to retain a high-priced Washington lawyer to begin jumping over administrative hurdles. This lawyer would then need almost 10 years of expensive court time before securing a farmer's compensation for his strip of land that was taken to create a recreational trail for others to use. All we have to do is do a little math, and if the value of a farmer's confiscated land is about $30,000 but a Washington lawyer would charge the farmer $100,000 to pursue the farmer's claim, there is no farmer who will be able to afford any compensation. That is why this private property rights bill, this one particularly, H.R. 1534, is so important. It is our duty as Members of this House, the peoples' House, the House of Representatives, to protect private property owners from arbitrary actions and guarantee their right to due process. Mr. Chairman, I urge my colleagues to vote ``yes'' for property rights, to vote ``yes'' for due process, and to vote ``yes'' on H.R. 1534.

Mr. RYUN

Mr. RYUN. Madam Speaker, when I was a young boy growing up in the great State of Kansas, my friends used to play a game in which we would blindfold someone, spin them around until disoriented, and then hand them a paper tail with a thumbtack attached and point them toward a wall where a donkey was drawn. While blindfolded they were to pin the tail on the donkey. That game represents what the Democrats are doing to the public. They have attempted to confuse and disorient the general public on campaign finance reform. Madam Speaker, this must stop. The Democrats wrote the campaign finance rules when they were in the majority. The Democrats have now broken the rules while they are in the minority. Let us remove that mask and unblindfold the public. Before we consider fixing campaign finance reform, let us pin the tail of blame fully on the Democratic donkey, and find out what went wrong with the Democrats first before we change the system.

Mr. RYUN

Mr. RYUN. Mr. Speaker, I rise today not only in support of S. 1000, but also in support of one of my State's greatest citizens, Senator Bob Dole. Bob Dole faithfully served the people of Kansas for 46 years, starting in the State House, continuing through his leadership in Congress, and ending with a run for the Presidency. Even before this service though, Bob Dole answered his country's call. He bravely served in the Army during World War II where he was gravely injured. By the grace of God and a strong will, Bob Dole overcame adversity to continue his fight for America. This designation--the Robert J. Dole Courthouse--is but a small symbol of our Nation's appreciation for his years of selfless sacrifice and his fight for our freedom. I have admired this great man since I was a boy running through the Kansas countryside. That was back when Bob Dole was helping run the country as a Member of this great legislative body. Now, as a freshman Representative from Kansas' Second District, I am grateful for Bob Dole's legacy. Senator, a grateful Nation honors you today for a lifetime of dedicated service to your country.

Mr. RYUN

Mr. RYUN. Madam Speaker, I am here today to discuss one of the most fundamental rights contained in the Constitution, the right to own private property. My bill, the Railway Abandonment Clarification Act, protects private property owners whose land once held a railway. Specifically, it returns powers to the States to determine how to develop railways into trails. It boils down to this: The farmer owns a piece of land. The farmer allows a railroad to lay a railway, that is, the ties and the tracks, across his land, and to use the land. He grants the railroad an easement, but keep in mind, the farmer still owns the land. When the railroad stops operating its trains and removes the tracks and railroad bed, again, the farmer still owns the land. However, the problem is that the Federal Government currently tells farmers they cannot use their own land. Instead, the Government tells farmers that the land belongs to the public. Now, let us talk for a moment about how in the world private land becomes public. In 1983, Congress passed the National Trails Act, which took power from the States and determined that when a railroad removes its tracks, the land is not abandoned--no tracks, no ties, and yet, the land is still not considered abandoned. It seems to me that this is a prime example of the absurdity of Federal Government. The way this 1983 law is written, the Federal Government not only prevents the farmer from using his land, but it invites special interest groups to come and use the farmer's land for recreational purposes. These special interest groups are granted permission for interim use of the farmer's land. The Federal law tramples on the property owner's rights and it tramples on the rights of many State governments. Kansas law, for example, says that when a railroad ceases to use its tracks on the farmer's property and the trains stop rolling, the use of the land automatically reverts to the rightful landowner. The Founding Fathers wrote the fifth amendment to the Constitution to protect private property rights. While best known for its protection against self-incrimination, the fifth amendment also contains what we call the ``takings clause'' which states, ``no person shall be deprived of property without due process of law, nor shall private property be taken for public use without just compensation.'' This clause provides a constitutional shield that specifically rejects the idea that the Government can seize the property of landowners without compensation, regardless of what public good is accomplished. In the first 10 years after the enactment of the National Trails Act, the Government took property from 62,000 landowners, and thousands more have lost their property in just the last few years. Not one of these aggrieved farmers, landowners, or homeowners has received any compensation for their loss. It is evident that our constitutional right to own property is eroding, and this must stop. My bill will head us in the right direction. The Railway Abandonment Clarification Act ensures that farmers and property owners have the use of their own land. It conforms Federal railway abandonment law to the Constitution. It preserves a State's right to determine private property issues, and it continues to encourage trail development. I want to make it clear that my bill does not repeal the National Trails System Act. It does return constitutionally granted powers to the States and allows them to determine how trails will be developed. As a runner, I have covered many miles on trails, more than I care to count, and I appreciate good surfaces to run on. But my own desire to run on a trail should not come at the expense of a property owner, whose constitutional rights rest in the balance. Again, the farmer owns the land, he owns the soil and everything beneath the ties and the tracks. The ties and the tracks belong to the railroad. When the railroad removes those ties and tracks, there is nothing left but the land owned by the farmer. Somehow, the Federal Government does not believe that Kansans and Americans know how best to use their own land. Instead of making the rights of private property a priority, the Government has made recreational use a priority. This error in Federal legislation needs to be rectified. My bill would change the law and restore private property rights issues to the State, and ensure Kansas farmers and property owners the use of their own land by conforming the national railway abandonment law to the Constitution. Madam. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support this bill and to restore private property rights to Americans.

Mr. RYUN

Mr. RYUN. Madam Speaker, the great historian, Will Durant, wrote, and I quote, A great civilization is not conquered from without until it has destroyed itself within. The essential causes of Rome's decline lay in her people, her morals, her class struggle, her failing trade. . . her stifling taxes. Madam Speaker, as in ancient Rome, our tax burden is stifling, and instead of working to reduce taxes, just as Members have heard, the Democrats are trying to promote class warfare. We should not be arguing over who is rich in this country; we should provide a $500-per-child tax credit for all Americans who honestly pay an income tax. There are more than 130,000 children in my second district of Kansas whose families need this tax cut. These Kansans deserve relief from a crushing tax burden and an oppressive government that undermines the family unit. Madam Speaker, when we balance the budget for the first time in 30 years and cut taxes for the first time in 16 years, we will come a step closer to the America envisioned by our Founding Fathers, where we have freedom, faith, and families that prosper.

Mr. RYUN

Mr. RYUN. Mr. Speaker, this morning I would like to review some recent history. It is a matter of record that the American people have not had a tax cut in 16 years. It is also a matter of record that the Federal budget has not balanced in 28 years. It is a matter of record that we have never had Medicare reform. Mr. Speaker, the 105th Congress is about to change all of that. This Congress is on the verge of passing the first tax cut in 16 years. This Congress is about to achieve the first balanced budget since 1969. This Congress is about to enact the first major reform in the Medicare Program in history. While I do not believe the tax cuts go far enough and the budget will not be balanced soon enough, I do believe that we are moving toward the goal of less government and more freedom for the citizens of this Nation. The American people whom we serve deserve this.

Mr. RYUN

Mr. RYUN. Mr. Speaker, what we are debating today is very simple: Do we believe, on the one hand, in more government, or, on the other hand, in more freedom? Throughout recorded history, from the Magna Carta to the Constitution of the United States, the struggle has been the same: freedom from government tyranny. Political freedom, economic freedom, religious freedom, the focus of the struggle changes, but the direction and the goal of the inspiration for the cause have always remained the same: The human soul desires freedom from government oppression, freedom for control of one's destiny, and freedom to worship one's God. The Republican agenda is an answer to that yearning. Mr. Speaker, we will meet one of those yearnings if we pass, when we pass, the Taxpayer Relief Act of 1997. The hard-working people of my district, the Second District of Kansas, are yearning to keep more of what they earn. After 16 years of wasteful government spending, it is high time that we grant them this freedom.

Mr. RYUN

Mr. RYUN. Mr. Speaker, when our Founding Fathers were debating the Constitution in Philadelphia in 1787, one of the most important subjects they discussed was concerning our freedoms. Some thought too much governmental power was the threat to freedom. Others thought too much power in the hands of the majority would be a threat to the freedom of minorities. Yet others thought that too much power in the hands of factions or what we call today special interest groups was the greatest threat to the general public. Men such as Thomas Jefferson and James Madison wrote extensively about these threats to freedom. Thomas Jefferson and James Madison were right about all three of these threats to freedom. Today I would like to call special interests or special attention to the threat to freedom that Thomas Jefferson feared the most: Too much power in the hands of Government. When the Government takes between one-fourth and one-half of everyone's income, that is too much power in the hands of Government. Let us heed the words of Thomas Jefferson and reduce the power of Government by passing the first tax package in 16 years, one that guarantees a $500-per-child tax credit, allowing families to keep more of what they earn.

Mr. RYUN

Mr. RYUN. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to address a very difficult issue that we've been wrestling with for some months now. As a freshman, this is my first vote on most-favored-nation status for China. And I have listened very carefully to both sides on this matter. This has been a very healthy debate. It is a debate about religious freedom and human rights in China as well as about how to promote democracy and economic freedom throughout the world. I agree with the many missionaries in China who have told me personally that denying MFN status to China would only isolate that country, pushing it further from our ideals of religious freedom and democracy. I do not believe that slamming the door to freedom and trade would improve human rights in China. Instead, it would close off the avenues of greater Western influence. In a recent memo, a group opposing the renewal of MFN to China quoted an editorial from the Economist which stated: If you hear your neighbor beating up his children, do you give a shrug and say it is none of your business? My answer is absolutely no. And I hope that all of us here would go next door and try to stop the abuse. That's how the United States should deal with China. To deny MFN would be to shrug and say that the human rights abuses are not our problem. Some have argued that we should ignore the violations, pull up our drawbridge, put on our blinders and turn inward, leaving China to continue its policies of persecution and population control. We have been down that road. And what did it produce? A decade-long terror called the Cultural Revolution. I believe the best way to affect change in China--morally, economically and politically--is through interaction with the Chinese. We should demonstrate the American way of integrity, honesty, and openness. Today, United States exports of goods and services to China total about $14.4 billion and support over 200,000 jobs. Kansas exports to China in 1996 were $53.2 million, up from $6 million in 1990. And China is my State's 13th largest trading partner. Let's make sure that in our zeal to rap the knuckles of the Chinese Government, that we do not slam the American farmer and manufacturer with a 2 by 4 and cause the loss of thousands of American jobs. We need only be reminded of the Soviet grain embargo imposed by President Carter in the 1980's. I can assure you that Kansas wheat farmers have not forgotten it. I believe there are more effective ways to foster freedom and curb human rights abuses in China. We should: First, ban companies controlled by the Chinese military from commercial activity in the United States; second, deny visas to Chinese officials involved in human rights abuses, religious repression or population control or who engage in selling high-tech weaponry; and third, increase exchange programs for Chinese students to come to the United States. So, by renewing MFN status, we choose to go next door and persuade our neighbor to treat his children lovingly. The United States should remain a positive influence on its neighbor by keeping our doors open to demonstrate how families in a free and prosperous nation live together in peace. Let us remember the words of President Reagan in his last State of the Union Address: One of the greatest contributions the United States can make to the world is to promote freedom as the key to economic growth. A creative, competitive America is the answer to a changing world, not trade wars that would close doors, create great barriers, and destroy millions of jobs . . . Where others fear trade and economic growth, we see opportunities for creating new wealth and undreamed-of opportunities for millions in our own land and beyond. Where others seek to throw up barriers, we seek to bring them down; where others take counsel of their fears, we follow our hopes. After much prayerful thought, I will vote in favor of extending most- favored-nation status to China. I urge my colleagues to support normal trade relations with China in hopes of continuing our influence of religious and economic freedom.

Mr. RYUN

Mr. RYUN. Mr. Chairman, as a freshman member of the Committee on National Security, I rise in strong support of H.R. 1119, the fiscal year 1998 National Defense Authorization Act. Although hampered by a limited budget, this bill funds quality of life initiatives, modernization efforts and reforms to increase efficiency, and cut waste in the Defense Department. Unfortunately, the President's request for military construction, which includes family housing, was 16 percent below current spending levels. This bill, however, adds $750 million to his request. Fort Riley and Fort Leavenworth, which are in the Second District of Kansas, are historic posts that were built over 100 years ago to help open and expand the American frontier. Unfortunately, many of the buildings at the post date from the era when General Custer left Fort Riley to ride off to the Little Big Horn battle. Corroding pipes, lead paint, aging plumbing and electrical systems are some of the problems plaguing these structures. It is simply not right to require our service men and women to live and work in these conditions. The Committee on National Security recognizes this situation and has made military construction a priority in the bill before us today. Finally, the committee addressed an issue that I believe in, a very important one, and that is the issue of active duty end strength. It maintains our current force levels, and I believe these levels are necessary to carry out our national security requirements and to be able to fight two nearly simultaneous major theater wars. I am strongly opposed to further cuts in the military personnel. Why am I so concerned about the number of soldiers in today's Army? Well, I hope these facts will have the impact on my colleagues that they have had on me. Today's Army is the smallest active force since 1939. It is at the highest operations tempo since the Vietnam war. From 1950 through 1989 the United States has engaged in 10 deployments. Since 1990 we have deployed 27 times just in the Army. We have asked the Army to do more with less over these past 7 years and their performance has been exceptional, but as deployments continue to go up and the size and funding continues to go down, I am concerned that we will reach a breaking point and that our readiness and retention will suffer. I urge support. I believe this is a great measure for the country and I hope all my colleagues will vote for it.

Mr. RYUN

Mr. RYUN. Mr. Speaker, today I rise to honor a great woman, a great Kansan, and a great American. Amelia Mary Earhart was born on July 24, 1897 in Atchison, KS as the grandchild of original Kansas pioneers. The pioneering spirit never left Amelia as she achieved a collection of firsts and world records in which we should all take pride. These include the first woman to receive pilot certification, the first woman to fly nonstop across the United States; the first woman to fly solo across the Atlantic Ocean; and the first woman to receive the Distinguished Flying Cross. Amelia Earhart was an early advocate of commercial aviation and lectured in the 1930's that one day people would fly through the sky every day to get from one place to another. Earhart's commitment to aviation was equaled by her commitment to advancing equality and opportunity for women. She served as an aeronautical adviser and women's career counselor at Purdue University. She promoted equality for women in public presentations and appearances, but most importantly, Amelia Earhart led by example, by doing things that no one thought possible. Even in her disappearance, Amelia Earhart was striving to do that which had never been done, to become the first woman to circle the globe. This year marks the centennial celebration of the life and achievements of Amelia Earhart. We recognize this daughter of Atchison, KS, and honor her extraordinary contributions to women, science, aeronautics, and the Nation.

Mr. RYUN

Mr. RYUN. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that my name be removed as a cosponsor of H.R. 586. The SPEAKER pro tempore [Mr. LaTourette]. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from Kansas?

Mr. RYUN

Mr. RYUN. Mr. Speaker, the Lord has blessed my wife and me with four precious children. When they were babies I held them, I fed them, I took care of them, and I even helped change their diapers. I knew then that if anyone would really try and hurt them, that I would do whatever I could to defend them, and as I know all the Members would here with their children. This is the time to stand up and to defend the innocent, the children of our country. We in this Chamber have been elected to defend the truths of our country, one of which is we believe in the rights of the individual, the pursuit of life and liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Have we as citizens allowed our minds and hearts to be seared in such a way that the crushing of the skull that was described earlier and the sucking out of the brains of a head that is still in the mother's womb is really be considered a defensible act? This is a gruesome act, and if Members winch when I talk about that, then they should. How can we allow this to continue? We must stop this. A Nation cannot long endure which condones participation in such brutality and uncivilized acts. Mr. Speaker, I challenge my colleagues that are here today and will vote later that we end this uncivilized and brutal act of partial-birth abortions.

Mr. RYUN

Mr. RYUN. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for the time and thank him for yielding. I also thank the gentleman from New Jersey for having mentioned the great State of Kansas in his comments about the movie ``Gone With The Wind'' and the ``Wizard of Oz.'' Kansas is a great State and I am pleased to represent the second District. I am also pleased that my freshmen colleagues have chosen to come and speak on a subject that is dear to all of us, and that is the family. As a father of four children, ranging in ages from 21 to 26, I know how important this subject will be to them and their future families. Normally, we send our children to school as freshmen, but in this case my family, our children, sent me to Congress as a freshman, and it is a pleasure to be here and serve the second District and to also speak on how important this issue is for families. Mr. Speaker, it is important, I believe, that we look at the issue of balancing the budget, because what it does, it protects not only our children and our future children, but it protects our Nation. The current national debt is approximately $5 trillion. Just how much is $5 trillion? Well, if we paid a million dollars a day for 365 days, that is every day of the year, it would take us 13,699 years to pay off our national debt. It is also a terrible tragedy when we saddle our children born today with a debt. They owe the Federal Government $200,000 just on the interest on the debt alone. That is something we need to correct. That is why balancing the budget is imperative. Balancing the budget would reduce the interest rates, according to Federal Reserve director Alan Greenspan, by as much as 2 percentage points. What does that mean? Well, that means that for a typical family, it would save them in these particular areas: Say a student loan, a typical student loan, it would save them $216 per year. It means if a family had a typical car loan, it would save that family as much as $180 a year. For a family that is purchasing a 30-year mortgage on a $50,000 home, with 15 percent down, it would mean that it would save them $1,230 of their hard-earned money. It means that a family who would be purchasing, let us say, a $100,000 home, putting down 15 percent, again on a 30-year mortgage, it would mean a savings of $2,160 back to families, back helping them in the areas that they should be receiving an award. We all agree we are facing a tremendous budget crisis. The reason we are facing the budget crisis is not because we are taxed too little, it is because the Government simply spends too much. I know, Mr. Speaker, like all of us that are seated here, we have to learn to balance our checkbook. That is what we are really asking the Government to do, is not to spend more than it really has. The $1.6 trillion in revenue that makes up the President's budget request is not the Government's money; it is the product of hard work and sacrifice that belongs to American families and Kansas families. It is hard earned money. They should be receiving their rewards. The Nation's capital does not create wealth. All the money that sits in the U.S. Treasury was taken from someone's pocket; that is, the hardworking taxpayers. I would like to put that money back into the pockets of the American people, back to the people of the Second District. They simply are taxed too much. We need to make those changes. Families deserve tax relief from this crushing tax burden. A $500 per child tax credit would benefit the families who need it. It would also help single mothers who have incomes less than $25,000 a year, helping them specifically. A repeal of the estate tax and gift tax would enhance the chance for families, family farms and family businesses to succeed and pass it on to the next generation. Reducing the capital gains tax would simply create more jobs, it would help the economy grow, it would encourage better jobs for more people, it would encourage them to work and to save more and to invest more. Balancing the budget and relieving the American taxpayer, families in general, taking away that crushing tax burden is pro-life, Mr. Speaker, and it is imperative that we do it.

Mr. RYUN

Mr. RYUN. Mr. Speaker, the Federal Government is taking too much of the American taxpayer's money. As the representative from the Second District of Kansas, I have been elected to be a custodian of their money and I am here to make a report that their taxes are too high. Right now Americans, and Kansans in particular, pay more in taxes than they do on three essential things: food, shelter, and clothing. All of those things combined, they pay more taxes. They have to work until May 7 before they can realize even one penny of their hard-earned money. That means that January, February, March, April, and the first 7 days of May, they have to work to support the Federal Government before they can realize even one penny of their hard-earned money. In 1992, families were promised a tax cut, only to have that promise broken and to see the largest tax increase in American history. I along with others have personally felt this tax increase. As a small independent businessman, there were times as I finished collecting and putting together the payroll that I would come up and I would say to my family, I would show them in fact what I earned, say, 10 years before and what I earned last year and I would show them that the difference was taxation. It is too large, it is too much, and we need to make a change. Some people do not understand that, though. They think that the Government is entitled to every penny that they earn. They need to realize and here is an opportunity to realize that it is their hard- earned money, it is not the Federal Government's money. Recently I was in Pittsburg, KS, seeing some of my constituents, and as I was leaving, traveling to another southeast Kansas city, I was stopped on the highway by a construction worker as I was waiting for construction to be completed. The young man that was holding the sign came back to me, and as we talked at the window I began enlisting him hopefully in support of my campaign to elect me to the Second District of Kansas. I handed him one of my fliers and he responded by saying, ``I'm not involved in the process, I don't vote.'' And so as we continued to talk, he began explaining to me that he did not want to be a construction worker the rest of his life but that he would like to be an underwater welder like his uncle and earn lots of money. I then reached over to the side of my car where my wife normally sat and gave him a voter registration, and I explained to him that when he started earning more money and started paying taxes like the rest of us, he would want to be involved in this process and have more say-so as to how his taxes were being spent. Specifically, I think we need to help Kansas families, Kansas working families, and there are four areas. One of them is in the area of the marriage penalty. We need to eliminate that. Another area is in terms of capital gains. We need to reduce capital gains. By reducing capital gains, we will free up more money, we will provide for better jobs and we will provide more opportunities for hard-working Kansas family members. We need to reward Kansas families. The $500 per child tax credit would be an opportunity to do that. Finally, we need to eliminate the estate, or I would like to say the death tax. When you have been taxed all of your life, there is nothing worse than one more insult from the Federal Government. I intend, Mr. Speaker, to work hard with other freshmen, my freshman colleagues and other Members from both sides of the aisle who are willing to reduce the level of taxation on families. We need to restore back to the American public the opportunity to see more of their hard- earned and realized dollars.