Jim Saxton

Mr. SAXTON

Mr. SAXTON. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material therein on S. 2327.

Mr. SAXTON. Mr. Speaker, I have no more requests for time, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. SAXTON

Mr. SAXTON. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of H.R. 4320, the Great Ape Conservation Act, and I compliment the author. Today, great apes face multiple threats to their very survival. These include habitat destruction, civil wars, and an explosion in the devastating illegal hunting of apes for the commercial enterprise known as bushmeat trade. Unless immediate steps are taken, these magnificent animals will continue their slide toward extinction. We must not allow that to occur. This legislation would continue the successful partnership established by the African Elephant Conservation Act by creating the Great Ape Conservation Fund, which would make grant money available to assist range state governments and nongovernmental organizations involved in the front-line battles to protect great apes. These monies will complement established programs and, at the same time, leverage additional financial support from other organizations. Mr. Speaker, great apes--defined as gorillas, orangutans, chimpanzees, bonobos, and gibbons--are listed both as endangered under the Endangered Species Act and Appendix I under CITES. In fact, one subspecies of gorilla--the mountain gorilla--made famous by the movie, ``Gorillas in the Mist,'' has been decimated to less than 700 animals, making it more endangered than the giant panda. These grand animals--with whom we share 98 percent of our genetic material--deserve our help. This bill is supported by the administration and by a diverse group of conservation leaders, including the American Zoo and Aquarium Association, World Wildlife Fund, Wildlife Conservation Society, and many other organizations. H.R. 4320 is noncontroversial and should be supported by all Members. I urge an ``aye'' vote on this important conservation legislation.

Mr. SAXTON

Mr. SAXTON. Madam Speaker, I am pleased that today the House is considering H.R. 4442, the National Wildlife Refuge System Centennial Act. I am joined in this important effort by 17 cosponsors, including the distinguished Chairman of the House Resources Committee, Don Young, the Ranking Democratic Member of the Committee, George Miller, the Ranking Democratic Subcommittee Member, Eni Faleomavaega, the Dean of the House of Representatives, John Dingell, and our colleague, Duke Cunningham. Since becoming Chairman of the House Subcommittee on Fisheries Conservation, Wildlife and Oceans, I have held many hearings on the operation, maintenance, and management of our nation's National Wildlife Refuge System. This unique system of Federal lands provides essential habitat for hundreds of fish and wildlife species, including more than 258 species listed as threatened or endangered under the Endangered Species Act. The first wildlife refuge was created at Pelican Island, Florida, in 1903 by President Theodore Roosevelt. Today the System has 521 refuges and 38 wetland management districts, which are located in all 50 States and the 9 Commonwealths, Territories, and island possessions. These units range in size from the smallest of less than one acre, the Mille Lacs National Wildlife Refuge in Minnesota, to the largest of 19.3 million acres in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge in Alaska. Money for refuge land acquisition primarily comes from the Land and Water Conservation Fund and the Migratory Bird Conservation Fund. During the past five years, my Subcommittee has taken a leadership role in approving legislation to improve our National Wildlife Refuge System. Without question, the most important change was the enactment of the National Wildlife Refuge System Improvement Act of 1997. This landmark Act, P.L. 105-57, was sponsored by Chairman Don Young and, for the first time, it created a comprehensive ``organic law'' governing the management of the world's largest and most diverse network of lands devoted to fish and wildlife. This historic measure also created a statutory shield to ensure that hunting and fishing and other forms of wildlife-dependent recreation will continue within the Refuge System, and it facilitates these traditional activities where compatible with conservation. The second improvement, which I was honored to sponsor, was the National Wildlife Refuge System Volunteer and Community Partnership Enhancement Act. This legislation will improve the infrastructure of the Refuge System by encouraging volunteer activities. In 1999, over 28,000 individuals volunteered more than 1.3 million hours, which was worth more than $11 million in services. These services included staffing visitors centers, conducting hunter safety classes, landscaping, and operating heavy equipment. My bill, which was signed into law on October 5, 1998, and will encourage additional volunteers by establishing up to 20 pilot projects for the purpose of hiring full- time volunteer coordinators. It also made it easier for interested individuals and groups to donate money or services to a particular refuge. Finally, during the past four years, a bipartisan group of Members, including myself, Don Young, George Miller, Eni Faleomavaega, Neil Abercrombie, John Dingell, and others have vigorously lobbied the House Appropriations Committee to increase funding to reduce the Refuge System's operations and maintenance backlog. Together with the Cooperative Alliance for Refuge Enhancement [CARE], we were successful in persuading our Appropriations colleagues to increase funding for this account by $86 million, which is a down payment on the maintenance backlog. While these increases were significant, there is much work to be done to reach the goal of having a fully operational Refuge System by 2003. The legislation we are considering today recognizes the vital importance of the Refuge System and the fact that the System will celebrate its Centennial Anniversary in three years. Under the terms of this bill, a Commission will be established to promote awareness of the System; develop a long-term plan to meet the priority operations, maintenance and construction needs of the System; and to improve public use programs and facilities. The National Wildlife Refuge System Centennial Commission would be composed of 11 voting members, including the Director of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. In addition, the Chairman and Ranking Minority Members of the House Resources and Senate Environment and Public Works Committees, plus the Congressional Members of the Migratory Bird Conservation Commission, would serve as ex officio members. The Commission would be charged with the responsibility for preparing a plan to commemorate the 100th Anniversary of the System, coordinating activities to celebrate that event, and hosting a conference on the National Wildlife Refuge System. The Commission would issue annual reports and would terminate no later than September 30, 2004. Finally, this bill directs the Secretary of the Interior to prepare and submit to the Congress a long-term plan to address priority operations, maintenance, and construction needs of the National Wildlife Refuge System. Madam Speaker, the American people deserve the finest Refuge System in the world. This bill is supported by the Administration and is noncontroversial. It is an appropriate next step in our efforts to ensure that the legacy of Theodore Roosevelt, one of our nation's greatest conservationists, will live on in the years ahead. Again, I want to thank my distinguished colleagues for joining with me in this endeavor, and I urge enthusiastic support for the National Wildlife Refuge System Centennial Act.

Mr. SAXTON

Mr. SAXTON. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor Trooper Rodney Goodson for performing above and beyond the call of duty. While on duty at the Red Lion Barracks, Mr. Goodson witnessed a traffic accident on a busy highway. One of the cars involved in the accident began to spin uncontrollably. Mr. Goodson attempted to stop the circling automobile but was unsuccessful. He then ran after the still spinning car, and reached through the broken drivers side window in order to steer the vehicle. When this too failed, Mr. Goodson steered the damaged car into his own. In honor of this heroic achievement, Mr. Goodson received the Prosecutor's Commendation award at the PROCOPS Banquet on May 18. Mr. Speaker, please join me in commending Mr. Goodson for his heroism, above and beyond the call of duty. He risked his life to protect the lives of others. In doing so, he has brought pride to his family, his community, and his country.

Mr. SAXTON

Mr. SAXTON. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased that today the House is considering H.R. 4408, a bill to reauthorize the Atlantic Striped Bass Conservation Act. Striped bass are extremely important to many people on the east coast, including my home State of New Jersey. In New Jersey, commercial fishing is prohibited but recreational anglers spend a great deal of time and money pursuing striped bass. These anglers support State tourism industries, including charter boat captains and bait and tackle stores. I introduced H.R. 4408 to continue the recovery program for this important species. The recovery of this species stands as a rare example of bringing an irreplaceable resource back from the brink of disaster. Reauthorization of the Atlantic Striped Bass Conservation Act is a critical component of the management strategy for striped bass. The original striped bass legislation was enacted in 1984, several years after the Atlantic Coast stock of striped bass suffered a severe population crash. The Striped Bass Act provides a means to enforce a single interstate management plan through the Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission. As it turns out, this was the action that was needed to save the species. Over the last 16 years this program has succeeded beyond any expectations. In 1984, the outlook was truly bleak for striped bass and the fishermen who depend on them. Striper populations have since recovered to fishable levels. The stocks appear to be strong, although there is some concern that we have continued to allow overfishing in some areas. H.R. 4408 is a simple bill to reauthorize the Striped Bass Act. The bill provides funding for the ongoing striped bass research that has been carried out through the National Marine Fisheries Service at universities such as Rutgers. The restoration program relies on this research to make informed, science-based management decisions. H.R. 4408 authorizes an additional $200,000 a year to carry out these studies. It is my hope that this additional funding will be used to focus on the predator/prey relationships between striped bass and bluefish, as required by the act. H.R. 4408 also includes $250,000 to study the population structure of Atlantic striped bass. I am concerned that the Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission has allowed fishermen to overharvest the larger and older striped bass. Stock assessment data for 1998 indicate that fish over 8 years old are rare, and that the fish may have been decimated by fishing pressure. These bigger fish are not only valued by the recreational fishermen in my district, but they play an important ecological role in ensuring sufficient numbers of young fish in the next generation of striped bass. The larger fish produce proportionally more eggs, and are the most important age group during the spring spawning runs. Despire their importance, reauthorization of the Striped Bass Act and continuing research on the species is not enough. Congress needs to provide adequate funding to NOAA and the National Marine Fisheries Service to continue regular stock assessment and data collection for this species. We also need to continue to investigate other factors that affect striped bass, such as pollution, environmental change, and competition with other species. We need the best information possible to protect the gains that we have made. Mr. Speaker, today we have the opportunity to build upon our past successes with Atlantic striped bass, and I urge the House to support this measure.

Mr. SAXTON

Mr. SAXTON. Mr. Speaker, our tax code has many features that are economically counterproductive, but few are as destructive as those aiirned at personal saving and investment. The current tax system undermines personal saving and investment in many ways, but today I would like to address the tax treatment of mutual fund capital gains distributions. Middle income savers and investors involuntarily receive these distributions from their mutual funds, and must pay tax on them even though they may have sold no shares in the fund. Today, I am introducing legislation to provide a partial exclusion limiting the federal taxation of these involuntary distributions. Essentially, the current law forces middle income savers and investors to pay tax on capital gains they have not realized. Even if the value of their shares has declined or they have owned them for only a short time, they can be slammed with a huge tax liability. As a recent Joint Economic Committee study pointed out, this tax can reduce the pre-liquidation rate of return by 10 to 20 percent. Furthermore, due to the complexity of the law, many taxpayers can easily pay this tax twice. This is unfair and undermines incentives to save and invest. In recent years, mutual funds have enabled many ordinary Americans to share in the tremendous economic gains that resulted from the technological innovation, productivity gains, and surge in wealth of the 1990s. Tens of millions of ordinary Americans now have substantial investments in the financial markets, many of them through mutual funds. Federal policy should accommodate these efforts of our citizens to provide for their retirement security, education, housing, and other needs. Federal tax policy should not erect excessive tax barriers undermining the incentives and ability of middle income taxpayers to plan for their own needs. Today, I am introducing legislation providing a $3,000 tax exclusion for individuals, and a $6,000 exclusion for couples, to shield annual capital gains distributions. When taxpayers sell their shares in the mutual fund, they would pay the tax on these gains, but these exclusions would shield most middle income taxpayers from immediate taxation and potentially double taxation on capital gains distributions. Other investors generally are not taxed on an accrual basis on their capital gains, and we should do what we can to level the playing field, and end tax discrimination against personal saving and investment. As the eminent economist Irving Fisher once wrote, ``A tax on accretion penalizes those who are rising the social scale, the builders of the nation . . .'' The current tax bias against thrift should be a major target of reform for the foreseeable future.

Mr. SAXTON

Mr. SAXTON. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to announce the introduction of my bill in the House that puts partisan politics aside and ensures Social Security is preserved for our seniors today and in the future. We've all heard about the economic outlook for the Social Security program. We must be concerned. By 2037, the trust funds of the Social Security program will be depleted, jeopardizing the retirement security of future retirees. And while 2037 sounds far away, it will be here before we know it. With each passing session in Congress, the opportunity to work towards a meaningful solution to the financial woes of our nation's retirement program slips through our fingers. Political rhetoric has worked its way into the debate over preserving Social Security. The time has come to separate politics from the substance of this important debate. We must put the financial security of our nation's retirees first, instead of allowing politics between our two parties to get in the way. Working together to protect Social Security will be essential if we are to find a sensible solution to preserving the future of the most critical pillar of retirement security. This bill outlines objectives for comprehensive reform of the Social Security system and establishes a bipartisan Congressional Commission to develop a reform plan consistent with those objectives. Specifically, this legislation sets forth six broad objectives for Social Security reform, including (1) beneficiaries must receive the benefits to which they are entitled based on a fair and equitable reform of the system, (2) long-term solvency of the system must be guaranteed for at least 75 years, (3) every generation of workers must be guaranteed a reasonable rate of return on their payroll tax contributions, (4) all workers must be given the opportunity to share in the nation's economic prosperity through participation in a private investment account within the Social Security system, (5) Social Security Trust Funds must be protected from congressional or other efforts to spend on non-Social Security purposes, and (6) Non-Social Security surplus revenues must be available to shore up the system while implementing reform. Also, the bill establishes a 13-member Social Security Protection, Preservation, and Reform Commission charged with developing a legislative proposal for comprehensive reform of the Social Security system, consistent with the objectives stated in the bill. This Commission is composed of 12 voting Congressional Members, equally divided between Republicans and Democrats. The members would include the Chairmen and Ranking Members of the Senate Finance and House Ways and Means Committees, and two Congressional appointees each by the Speaker and the Minority Leader in the House and the Majority and Minority Leaders in the Senate. The Commissioner of Social Security would also serve as a non-voting, ex-officio member of the Commission. In order to ensure Congress doesn't continue to drag its feet on this issue, the bill requires the Commission to submit a detailed legislative proposal to Congress by September 2001 and includes a process for expedited Congressional action on the Commission's recommendations by the end of next year. The concept is simple: principles and process for Social Security reform. This bill focuses on the goals we want to achieve in any proposal that protects Social Security while ensuring action is taken in an expedient matter. It forces Congress to forget about the politics and concentrate on what matters most: safeguarding Social Security for our nation's retirees. With this plan, we can work together and concentrate on what's best for the millions of Americans who depend on our nation's retirement system. Retirees don't need political rhetoric; they need a Social Security system they can depend on. For this reason, I am honored that Representatives Neil Abercrombie (D-HI) and Mark Sanford (R-SC) have joined me in supporting this legislation. Together, we can work in a bipartisan fashion and find a sensible solution to the financial problems of the Social Security program once and for all.

Mr. SAXTON

Mr. SAXTON. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.

Mr. SAXTON. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Chairman, I rise today to offer an amendment to increase the funding by $33.9 million under the Environmental Protection Agency's Environmental Programs and Management Account to fund the National Estuary Program. Mr. Chairman, the National Estuary Program has been a tremendous success, but is drastically underfunded. This year's appropriation provides approximately $18 million for this purpose, and it is inadequate to fund the National Estuary Program for the 28 estuaries that are included in the program. If anyone is from almost any coastal State where there is a high density population in a coastal area you will find that your estuaries are under stress. And the National Estuary Program, which came into being a number of years ago, was set up to provide for a partnership arrangement between the Federal Government and Federal dollars and State and local people who know well the problems involving their estuaries and who know well how to study and fashion solutions for various types of estuarine problems. I first became aware of this program with the trip to Narragansett Bay, which was part of the National Estuary Program, a number of years ago. Then Representative Claudine Schneider introduced me to the problems of Narragansett Bay; and now, 10 years later, because of the National Estuary Program, Narragansett Bay is well on its way to recovery. I wish I could say the same was true for all of the estuaries that are included in the National Estuary Program, but such is simply not the case. We need to move forward with this program, and we need to fashion a financial program that will adequately take care of these needs. Congress recognized the importance of preserving and enhancing coastal environments. With the establishment of this program as section 320 of the Clean Water Act, and the Clean Water Act amendments of 1987, this program was passed by the House on May 8, 2000, to reauthorize it. We also authorized an appropriation of $50 million for fiscal year 2001 for the purpose of facilitating the State and local governments preparation of the Comprehensive Conservation Management Plan, CCMPs, for threatened and impaired estuaries. This is a simple, straightforward program that addresses a variety of unique needs of these stressed bodies of water. I rise to urge an aye vote on this amendment, as I think it is extremely important to coastal areas, coastal States, and the inhabitants thereof. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. SAXTON

Mr. SAXTON. Madam Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 3292) to provide for the establishment of the Cat Island National Wildlife Refuge in West Feliciana Parish, Louisiana, as amended.

Mr. SAXTON. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks and to include extraneous material on H.R. 3292, as amended.

Mr. SAXTON. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Madam Speaker, H.R. 3292 was introduced by our distinguished colleague the gentleman from Louisiana (Mr. Baker). This measure would establish the Cat Island National Wildlife Refuge in Louisiana. Cat Island is a unique habitat of bottomland hardwoods that has never been leveed, and it is one of the few natural resources along the Mississippi River that still experiences seasonal overflows. It is an area that is teeming with wildlife, and it contains prime habitat for many species of shorebirds, 1,000-year-old bald cypress trees, and millions of migratory ducks. According to testimony received, the forested wetlands typical of Cat Island represent one of the most valuable and productive wildlife habitat types in the United States. Under the terms of H.R. 3292, the Secretary of the Interior would be directed to acquire by purchase or donated property that would form the basis of the proposed Cat Island National Wildlife Refuge. At the subcommittee markup, I offered an amendment in the nature of a substitute that expanded the size of Cat Island Refuge from 9,477 acres to 36,500 acres and clarified the purposes for establishing the refuge. This amendment was supported by both the sponsor and by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Once established, this would become the 21st National Wildlife Refuge in the State of Louisiana. I want to compliment the gentleman from Louisiana (Mr. Baker) for his outstanding leadership in this matter. I know that he has spent an extraordinary amount of time working with both local and State officials, industry representatives, and conservation groups to develop this refuge. This is how the process should work, and I remain convinced that local support for a proposed refuge is absolutely essential. Madam Speaker, I urge an aye vote on H.R. 3292. Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. SAXTON. Madam Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. SAXTON

Mr. SAXTON. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Madam Speaker, H.R. 946 would restore Federal recognition to the Indians of the Graton Rancheria of California. The Graton Rancheria is one of over 40 Indian tribes which were terminated in 1958 by Public Law 85-671. Today there are approximately 355 members of the Federated Indians of Graton Rancheria living in the general vicinity of Santa Rosa, California. H.R. 946 provides that the service area for the tribe shall be Marin and Sonoma Counties, that nothing in the legislation shall expand, reduce or affect any hunting, fishing, trapping, gathering or water rights of the tribe, that real property eligible for trust status shall include certain Indian-owned land, and that the Secretary of the Interior shall compile a membership roll of the tribe. This bill also provides for an interim tribal council, the election of tribal officials, and the ratification of a constitution for the tribe. Section 5(d) of H.R. 946 provides that real property taken into trust for the benefit of the tribe pursuant to the bill shall not have been taken into trust for gaming purposes pursuant to section 20(b) of the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act. Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. SAXTON. Madam Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. SAXTON. Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on H.R. 946.

Mr. SAXTON. Madam Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 946) to restore Federal recognition to the Indians of the Graton Rancheria of California.

Mr. SAXTON

Mr. SAXTON. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks and to include extraneous material on S. 1967.

Mr. SAXTON. Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to yield the balance of my time to the gentleman from Mississippi (Mr. Wicker) for the purposes of controlling the time.

Mr. SAXTON. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the Senate bill (S. 1967) to make technical corrections to the status of certain land held in trust for the Mississippi Band of Choctaw Indians, to take certain land into trust for that Band, and for other purposes.

Mr. SAXTON

Mr. SAXTON. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of the Gilchrest amendment to H.R. 4205. The amendment allows the Department of Defense to activate 5 more crucial emergency response teams designated as Weapons of Mass Destruction Civil Support Teams, formerly called RAID teams, to address an emergency event caused by a weapon of mass destruction. As Chairman of the Special Oversight Panel On Terrorism, facts have been revealed to show that an event caused by a terrorist is becoming much more likely. It has also been revealed that first responders to such an event are not currently equipped to handle an incident that includes nuclear, biological, or chemical materials. There are many adversaries of the United States who are becoming increasingly sophisticated and well financed. So it is not a matter of . . . ``if' . . we are attacked by a weapon of mass destruction but . . . ``when'' . . we are attacked. Our nation needs to be ready with well-trained teams that can help local first responders in managing such an event. These response teams, as trained and equipped by the Army, are a valuable resource for respective state governors. Some parts of the country, such as my own area in New Jersey, are densely populated and have a great need for a response team. The New Jersey National Guard and the State of New Jersey needs to have a team that can easily reach the populated areas of its state and the surrounding region. Cities like Philadelphia and Atlantic City just to name two are far from the reach of even the closest response teams currently scattered throughout the country. It is important that we have enough response teams to be able to work in concert with various agencies such as the Federal Bureau of Investigation, Department of Justice, Federal Emergency Management Agency, State Police, local law enforcement agencies, fire departments, hospitals, and emergency medical technicians to respond to WMD events all over the country. It is equally imperative that the response team have the means for being mobile so that a team may expeditiously deploy to a region that otherwise would be inaccessible by normal transportation mechanisms. Mr. Chairman, I applaud the decision by the Secretary of Defense to create an organization that is immediately available to him for that expeditiously deploying resources in the event of a WMD incident. I also urge the Secretary to evaluate methods for enhancing prevention measures to complement the consequence management efforts. As individuals and groups gain an easier time to acquire information, materials, and resources, the need for our senior officials and citizens to have a sense of urgency becomes more evident. Mr. Chairman, our nation has yet to face a WMD event involving nuclear, biological, or chemical weapons and we owe it to ourselves to be prepared. Some of the nation's most populated region are currently unprepared and unprotected. This amendment will provide a valuable resource that may be applied some of those regions. I urge other members to emphatically support this measure.

Mr. SAXTON

Mr. SAXTON. I yield to the gentleman from Pennsylvania, the chairman of the Subcommittee on Military Research and Development.

Mr. SAXTON. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Sessions) for yielding me this time. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of the rule and wish to take this time to engage the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Weldon) in a colloquy. I would say to the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Weldon), the Navy theater-wide missile defense program is an important component of our Nation's defense against the threat of ballistic missiles targeted against the United States and against our Armed Forces and allies overseas. Last year the Congress provided an additional $50 million for a continuation of Navy's competitive development of the advanced radars for theater missile defense, as well as providing funds for the development of the multiyear, multifunction radar and volume search radar for fleet air defense and surveillance. The committee's report on the fiscal year 2001 national defense authorization notes that the Navy is considering an X-band radar high power discriminator and modifications to the current SPY-1 radar to meet ballistic missile defense radar needs for Navy theater-wide and recommends an additional $10 million for development of an alternative advanced radar technology for the 2010 time frame. The report also expresses the committee's concern that the Navy theater-wide defense deployment schedule is inadequate to meet the expected threats and is inadequately funded. In addition, the Senate Committee on Armed Services report on the fiscal year 2001 defense authorization does not add funds for additional radar development and if adopted by the Senate in its present form will establish an issue that will need to be resolved in this year's House-Senate conference on the Fiscal Year 2001 National Defense Authorization Act.

Mr. SAXTON. I thank the gentleman and look forward to working with him to provide the ballistic missile defense required to protect our armed services and our Nation.