Martin Sabo

Mr. SABO

Mr. SABO. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Delahunt), one of the members who always has very high interest in the Coast Guard.

Mr. SABO. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Michigan (Ms. Kilpatrick), a new member of our subcommittee. (Ms. KILPATRICK asked and was given permission to revise and extend her remarks.)

Mr. SABO. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. SABO. Mr. Chairman, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Lewis). (Mr. LEWIS of Georgia asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. SABO. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word. I yield to the gentleman from Maine (Mr. Baldacci) for the purpose of a colloquy.

Mr. SABO. Mr. Chairman, I remain confused.

Mr. SABO. Mr. Chairman, reclaiming my time, I do not know that we have often done that, although I hate to say never, on particular projects that are not demos.

Mr. SABO. I yield to the gentleman from Virginia.

Mr. SABO. Mr. Chairman, that was that big elevated thing in New York?

Mr. SABO. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word, and I yield to the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson-Lee) for the purposes of a colloquy.

Mr. SABO. But was that not a highway demo?

Mr. SABO. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman from Maine for his presentation. It is a new problem, and we will try and work with the gentleman in the future.

Mr. SABO

Mr. SABO. Mr. Chairman, at some point I think public works has come up with a clever idea on how we solve our budget problem. We simply declare everything off budget, and then say that all restraints do not count, and we simply make some additions which are paid for by a reduction in an unpassed tax bill. It is basically what we are doing in this bill. It makes no sense. Let us be clear about one thing. There is a surplus in the Airport Trust Fund today for one simple reason. We put over $55 billion of General Revenue Fund into the Airport Trust Fund over the years, taxes paid by people who do not travel the airlines, to subsidize the operations and the construction of airports. Maybe that is appropriate, but if it is, it should be decided within the context of overall budget discussion. We have differing views on what should happen with the future of our budget caps. I happen to think they should be raised. Others do not think so. Some put more priority on some types of tax cuts, different size of tax cuts. But those issues have been debated and argued in totality. What we do in this bill is say that we are going to continue the raid of general revenue for airports and that building airports and the operations of the FAA is more important than anything else that we do. It is more important than housing, which is in a crisis in our State, it is more important that education, it is more important than veterans' health care, it is more important than whatever we do to deal with our educational problems in this country or whatever else my colleagues think is important, dealing with our agricultural crisis. This bill says we are going to remove aviation, give them increased spending authority, totally out of context, to deal with what happens, be the priorities, of one particular industry, one particular group in our society and ignore the needs of the rest. We should adopt the Young amendment, and if it is not adopted, we should defeat the bill.

Mr. SABO

Mr. SABO. Mr. Speaker, as Women's History Month draws to a close today, I rise to salute a woman from my Congressional District in Minnesota who, by her own example, has helped open the door for all women who choose to serve in elected public office. Alice W. Rainville, a wife and mother of seven, was the first woman to serve on Minneapolis' Metropolitan Transit Commission. She was appointed to the post by Minnesota Governor Wendell Anderson in 1974--a rare achievement for a woman at that time in our country's history. Also in that year, Rainville served as the chair of the Democrat- Farmer-Laborer party in Minnesota's 54th Senate District. In 1975, she sought and won the Fourth Ward seat on the Minneapolis City Council. By doing so, Rainville became the fourth woman to hold a City Council seat in the history of Minneapolis. She was re-elected every two years thereafter until she retired in January, 1998. Although she was not Minneapolis' first female City Council member, Rainville became its first female City Council President. Becoming President in 1980, she led the Council until 1990--the longest tenure of any City Council President in Minneapolis. As President, Rainville played a major role in laying the groundwork for the new Minneapolis Convention Center, which opened in 1988. She worked with local officials and consultants on the initial plans and construction of this world- class facility, which is the largest public works project ever undertaken by the city of Minneapolis. She currently serves on the implementation team for a Convention Center expansion project and remains a valued resource for other development projects in the city. Since Alice W. Rainville carved out her niche in Minneapolis politics in the 1970's, more and more women have entered politics and government service in Minneapolis. Today, including Mayor Sharon Sayles Belton, a majority of the Minneapolis City Council members are women. By proving to other women that they, too, can achieve success in what had once been a male-dominated political world, Alice W. Rainville is a true pioneer. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to honor Alice W. Rainville in celebration of Women's History Month. I thank her for her contributions to the city of Minneapolis, and I wish her continued successes in the future.

Mr. SABO

Mr. SABO. Mr. Speaker, as Women's History Month draws to a close today, I rise to salute a woman from my Congressional District in Minnesota who has dedicated most of her life to encouraging all citizens to exercise their right to vote and play an active role in government. Upon moving to Minneapolis from New York City, Florence Gray joined the League of Women Voters (LWV) of Minneapolis in 1948 to get more involved in her new community. The LWV of Minneapolis is a non-partisan organization which works to influence public policy through education and advocacy, providing election-related services, and sponsoring various educational forums and projects. In 1948, Gray helped create a new unit of the LWV along with a group of friends--many of them other young mothers like herself--and served as its chairperson. As the years passed, her leadership positions accumulated. During the 1960s, she was elected to the Minneapolis LWV Board as Treasurer, then became Vice President, then led the group as President from 1963 to 1965. She also served as the Minnesota vice president of the LWV. After years of public service in the League of Women Voters, Gray went back to college in 1968 to complete her bachelor's and master's degrees at the University of Minnesota. In 1974, she was appointed Associate Director of the Epilepsy Research Center of the University of Minnesota's Neurology Department. After 17 years with the Center, she ``retired,'' though she continued to serve as a part-time consultant for the Epilepsy Program. During this time, she rededicated herself to the LWV, heading the LWV of Minneapolis' 75th Anniversary Planning Committee. In 1994, she was presented with the LWV's esteemed Bess Mlnarik Award for her years of tireless efforts serving on the LWV. One of Florence Gray's fellow LWV members once described her as ``hard working, dedicated, tenacious, resilient, witty, wise, and wonderful. She has long since earned whatever honors we can give her.'' It is indeed fitting to salute Florence Gray for her lifetime of community service. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to honor Florence Gray in celebration of Women's History Month. I thank her for her contributions to both the state of Minnesota and to our country, and I wish her continued successes in the future.

Mr. SABO

Mr. SABO. Mr. Speaker, as Women's History Month draws to a close today, I rise to salute a woman from my Congressional District in Minnesota whose long commitment to community service has proven her to be a true leader. Betty Benjamin has been a lifelong proponent of women's reproductive rights, playing an active role in the pro-choice movement for 31 years. A former teacher and social worker, Benjamin helped organize the Abortion Rights Council of Minnesota in 1966, in light of her concern that existing law prohibited a woman's right to choose and caused many women with unwanted pregnancies to seek illegal, dangerous abortions. Through her leadership in the ARC--today known as the Minnesota National Abortion Rights Action League (NARAL)--Benjamin and the other unpaid volunteers worked countless hours in their effort to ensure that women have legal access to abortion. Their educating, lobbying, and fundraising efforts were rewarded in 1973 when the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Roe v. Wade to legalize abortion. But Benjamin's work did not end there. She has remained active in the pro-choice movement because of her concerns that the Roe v. Wade decision could be eroded. She led the Abortion Rights Council in Minnesota as president for 14 years, and has served as a board member of the National Abortion Rights Action League since 1967. She represents Minnesota NARAL as incoming chairperson of the Women Candidate Development Coalition, which recruits women across the state to serve in public office. She currently is a member of the National Organization for Women (NOW), at both the state and national levels. Recently, Minnesota NARAL established the Betty Benjamin Leadership Development Fund to help identify, educate and train interested Minnesota college students for future leadership roles. Benjamin's tireless efforts and many accomplishments on behalf of women's right to choose may best be explained in her own words: ``My concern is that the full range of safe reproductive choices will be accessible to all our daughters and granddaughters. To make that a reality there is much each person can do.'' Betty Benjamin's life is a testament to her words. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to honor Betty Benjamin in celebration of Women's History Month. I thank her for her contributions to both the state of Minnesota and to our country, and I wish her continued successes in the future.

Mr. SABO

Mr. SABO. Mr. Chairman, I thank the ranking member for yielding me the time. First let me say that I think the most irresponsible budget that I have ever seen on this House floor by a majority is what we have before us today. Secondly, I am going to vote for this misinterpretation of the President's budget for one fundamental reason. I have differences with it and many things. He is over-optimistic about what we can do in the year 2000. The budgets that we have are unrealistic for dealing with any legitimate need. But the President did put forward before us a realistic proposal to deal with the funding of Social Security and Medicare. His program adds significantly to the reserves of the Social Security trust fund. Yes, he does. He adds significantly to the reserves for Medicare. It does not solve the problems in total, but it is an important beginning step to deal with them. The Republican proposal adds penny zero to the Social Security trust fund, adds penny zero to the Medicare trust fund. The President is on the right track. And as a symbolic vote for the real leadership that he has provided, I will vote for this misinterpretation of his budget.

Mr. SABO

Mr. SABO. That is the heart of my point. This bill declares everything here an emergency, exempt from all the budgetary caps, but then we pretend we do these change of guarantees as an offset, which saves us no actual dollars of outlays.

Mr. SABO. I thank the gentleman.

Mr. SABO. Mr. Chairman, I would ask the gentleman, if we change these guarantees, how much outlay savings does it give us this year?

Mr. SABO. My question is, Mr. Chairman, obviously this bill declares these expenditures an emergency. The outlay is exempt from the budgetary caps. If we make this change that the gentleman is suggesting, how much outlays does that save us towards the discretionary caps?

Mr. SABO. No outlay savings?

Mr. SABO. Mr. Chairman, this is a strange bill, particularly all of these speeches we hear about offsets. In my judgment, this bill is a legitimate emergency, under the budget rules can be handled as an emergency without being offset and that is how it should be handled, but we are going through this pretense that we are making offsets when in reality we are not. Let me suggest to all the Members they look at this bill. Page 3, they will find this language: Provided that the entire amount is designated by the Congress as an emergency requirement pursuant to section so and so of the balanced budget and emergency deficit control act of 1985, as amended. What does that mean? It means that the outlays in this bill are exempt from the budgetary caps, and the law we are passing, we are saying it is an emergency, the outlays are exempt from the caps, but then we get into a discussion of a whole series of offsets, which really are not offsets to the outlays. We are actually spending this money outside of the caps but then we do a whole series of offsets that do damage but does not solve the budgetary problem; primarily reducing the callable capital for the international banks. What is the reality of this type of cut? It is as if I signed as a second signatory on a loan for $100,000, but then I decided I wanted to buy a new car for $30,000 and pay cash for it. What I would do is I would send a letter to the bank saying I am sorry, this guarantee I made is reduced from $100,000 to $70,000 and somehow think that gives me $30,000 of cash to go out and pay cash for a car. It clearly does not work, but that is the mentality we are using in these offsets. The bank would probably call the loan back on the mortgage I had signed for because my guarantee was only now good for 70 percent of it and I would not get $30,000 to go and buy a new car. That is what we are doing in this bill. We are still pretending or saying it is an emergency. That is real. The outlays are exempt from the caps, but then we do these series of cuts which do damage but do not change the nature of the fact that our outlays are still considered emergencies.

Mr. SABO. I yield to the gentleman from Alabama.

Mr. SABO

Mr. SABO. Mr. Speaker, most Americans and Members of the House of Representatives agree that our campaign finance system must be reformed. During this Congress, I hope we will be able to build on last year's progress by passing legislation to give ordinary Americans a greater voice in campaigns for the U.S. House. Reforming our campaign finance system is one of the most difficult problems before Congress. In the past, sweeping comprehensive reform has yielded a multitude of unintended consequences. Our campaign system is complex, and it will not yield to easy solutions or quick fixes. That is why I am introducing legislation that takes a small but important step in the right direction--toward limiting campaign spending and leveling the playing field between challengers and incumbents. My bill, the Citizens' Choice Act, creates a voluntary system of publicly financed general elections to the U.S. House of Representatives. Under my bill, a House of Representatives General Election Trust Fund would be funded by a voluntary $5 check-off on income tax returns, and would consist of one account per political party in every congressional district. Candidates who accept money from this fund must agree to spend no more than $600,000 on their campaigns. The spending limit would be waived if a candidate's opponent refuses to participate in the public funding and raises at least $100,000. My bill also includes a blanket prohibition on all House general election candidates from loaning more than $50,000 to their own campaigns. My bill addresses the most common criticism of public financing proposals: taxpayers should not subsidize the campaigns of candidates they oppose. That is why I would allow people to choose which party would receive their tax dollars. This eliminates the problem, while creating greater opportunity for citizens to get involved in the electoral process. Mr. Speaker, some Members are too ready to believe that citizens strongly oppose public financing. I believe it is time for Congress to take another look at public financing of campaigns. Widespread frustration with our current system has grown to the point that Americans demand new solutions. People want fair campaigns, and I believe the American people will understand that an appropriate combination of public financing and spending limits is an effective way to govern our campaign system. I also believe citizens will welcome the opportunity to support our political system through my proposed check- off. I urge my colleagues to look beyond any preconceived notions they may have about public financing of campaigns, and support legislation that gives citizens a choice in financing our electoral process.