Jim Saxton

Mr. SAXTON

Mr. SAXTON. Mr. Speaker, I rise before you today to recognize a group of Americans whose dedicated efforts truly made the proverbial difference in the lives of thousands of people. Too often in life we overlook the tremendous efforts of individuals who transcend their job descriptions and positively affect the lives of others. There are 60 men and women in my district of whom job descriptions don't exist. On May 1, 1999, these 60 men and women were civilian employees at Fort Dix Army Base in Burlington County, NJ. In less than twenty-four hours, however, these diverse professionals would be united as full- fledged participants in ``Operation Provide Refuge,'' an attempt to provide shelter for refugees from the Balkans. In just three days, these extraordinary individuals converted sterile Army barracks into a comfortable living space suitable for families. The Fort Dix civilians of Provide Refuge offered more than a housing facility to these refugees; they offered a home. As the first group of refugees arrived at Fort Dix on May 5, they were greeted with a tradition perhaps more American than any other: open arms. The first contingent of refugees--like the ones that would arrive later--spanned the entire age spectrum, but was comprised largely of the very old and the very young. These men, women and children were given the food, medical care, and shelter they so desperately lacked in their native land. On July 16, 1999, the last of the refugees left their temporary home at Fort Dix. In the two months that it was operational, Provide Refuge took in more than 4,000 refugees, restored them to health, and placed them with host families in 40 states across the country. While 4,043 people checked into the facility, by July 16, 4,050 had checked out: during the tenure of Provide Refuge, the medical staff ushered into this world seven new lives--seven new Americans. The reason I stand before you today, Mr. Speaker, is to thank the workers who were truly the backbone of Operation Provide Refuge: Diana Bain, Denise Berry, Bernice Bonaparte, Audrey Bracey, James Butler, Arlee Cane, Jr., Arlene Clayton, Robert Cole, Donald Conklin, Maureen Coughlin, Normal Cowell, Patricia Cunningham, Karen Currin, David Dennison, Perry Domelevich, Frederick Dudley, Richard Esbensen, Sharon Fegley, Walter Gibson, Kenneth Gordon, Bonnie Graham, Richard Grzegorek, Richard Hatfield, William Hodgkiss, Eric Hollinger, Robert Hurrell, Paul Imhof, William Kisner, Roberta James, Thomas Jones, John Laraway, Sarah Lawson, John Litterio, Harry Malatesta, Mary Marchut, Pedro Martinez, Raymond Matthews, Denise McCarthy, Diana Messersmith, Bernard Pierce, Joseph Randazzo, Kenneth Razillard, Norman Rimbey, Jacquie Roach, Gail Rosado, Richard Sanders, Douglas Satterfield, Jay Schopp, Ronald Sexton, Evlyn Stefula, Walter Streeter, John Sweeney, Joanne Tindall, Jose Toress, Robert Tucker, Leonard Valerio, Annemarie Walsh, John Wenner, Mary Wig, and Barbara Worthy. These names will be entered into the permanent record at the Library of Congress documenting their accomplishments. These individuals symbolize everything that is good about America. They serve as a daily reminder of what public service is all about. These men and women went above and beyond their basic responsibilities in order to make someone else's life a little easier, and--in doing so--make the world a little better place to live. Once again, I would like to thank all the participants of Operation Provide Refuge: your dedication and selfless service is an inspiration to our nation and the world.

Mr. SAXTON

Mr. SAXTON. Mr. Chairman, I rise to express my concern about the potential decision to eliminate funding for production of the F-22 Raptor. Our Department of Defense has consistently expressed a need for the development of the F-22 for many years. Indeed, Secretary Cohen has called the F-22 program ``the cornerstone of our nation's global air power in the 21st century.'' I agree that the F-22 program has faced unusual development challenges due to its many advances in aviation technology. I also recognize the need for the Armed Services Committee and this Congress to engage in continuing and intensive oversight of the program. Yet it is premature to close the production line and effectively end the F-22 program at this time. Congress should allow the Air Force sufficient time and aircraft for the intensive flight-testing and evaluation needed to assess the F-22's value. Only then can the Congress make an informed decision on the future of such an important component of our national security plans.

Mr. SAXTON. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of the F-22 program.

Mr. SAXTON. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. SAXTON

Mr. SAXTON. Mr. Speaker, we know that today our armed forces are facing serious shortfalls in recruitment. Already, these shortfalls are having a dangerous impact on our Nation's military readiness. We will have all the best tools, and no one to fight the war. In part, the problem may be caused by a blessing: America's flourishing economy, which leads our young people to enter a booming job market rather than the rigors of military service. Therefore, it is essential for our national security that our government do all it can to support our armed forces in effectively communicating to young people of recruitment age the advantages and benefits of service. Honor, patriotism, and the desire for adventure still engage and motivate America's young men and women. America's armed forces offer the opportunity to be part of something meaningful, to learn self- discipline and sacrifice. For many idealistic young people, that offers them an experience unmatchable elsewhere. So we have to get the message out about what service in the Army, Navy, Air Force, and Marines means to their country, and what opportunities such service entails. And we must recognize that in today's world, we are competing with some of the most effective marketing and recruitment techniques ever devised by U.S. companies, which quite reasonably want to catch as many of the best and the brightest as they can for themselves. Therefore, it is esssential that we convey our message by the most effective means possible, employing language and images engaging to young Americans of recruitment age. Programming messages by the U.S. Navy have scored significant recruiting success in recent months, partially reversing the downward trend of Navy recruitment. Programming directed toward high school students for post-graduation enlistment can be particularly well targeted and unusually effective means of increasing awareness of the military service option and positive attitudes towards it. As a result of this exposure, students in the Channel One schools are more likely to consider enlisting. Mr. Speaker, the use of innovative methods to educate and encourage young people about the benefits of service to their country is essential in today's marketplace. Our national security demands such an effort. At the same time, service in the United States military truly provides young Americans with an opportunity to gain by giving to their country. I intend to work hard to ensure that our government expands its support for our armed forces' efforts in this direction.

Mr. SAXTON

Mr. SAXTON. Mr. Speaker, I rise before you today to recognize an organization which has served as the backbone for securing and protecting the rights of veterans of United States Armed Forces. This year, the Veterans of Foreign Wars of the United States celebrates its 100th year of providing a voice for the American military retiree. Central to the national organization's Centennial Anniversary celebration are the people who are a chief source of its success: the leaders of the local chapters. I am fortunate enough to number among my constituents in New Jersey's 3rd Congressional District the State Commander for the Veterans of Foreign Wars, Mr. G. Bruce Eveland, a resident of Medford, New Jersey. Mr. Speaker, I would like to take this opportunity to thank Mr. Eveland for all that he has done not only for veterans, but for his country. His persistence and hard work have ensured a better life for individuals who have certainly earned it: those men and women who have risked their lives serving the United States of America. Bruce Eveland is a tremendous asset to veterans everywhere, and, on the dawn of his homecoming celebration in Lumberton, New Jersey, I ask my colleagues in the 106th Congress to join me in recognizing his service.

Mr. SAXTON

Mr. SAXTON. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to introduce the Arctic Tundra Habitat Emergency Conservation Act. This legislation will address the devastating impact that an exploding population of light geese is having on the fragile Canadian Arctic tundra. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service has been monitoring light geese populations for over 50 years. During that time, the population that migrates in the Mid-Continent region has increased from 800,000 birds in 1969 to more than 5 million geese today. This population is projected to increase more than five percent each year and, in the absence of new wildlife management actions, there will be more than 6.8 million breeding light geese in three years. While these geese are fully protected under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act of 1918, this unprecedented population explosion is creating serious problems. The geese's appetite for Arctic coastal tundra has created a strip of desert stretching 2,000 miles in Canada. These birds are world-class foragers, and their favorite foods are found in the 135,000 acres that comprise the Hudson Bay Lowland Salt Marsh ecosystem. In fact, they like this vegetation so much they are eating it much faster than its ability to regrow. These geese are literally eating themselves out of house and home and, in the process, destroying thousands of acres of essential, irreplaceable nesting habitat. These wetlands are critical to the survival of not only light geese but hundreds of other migratory species including brants, black ducks, mallards, and dozens of songbirds. According to various scientists, one-third of the lowlands habitat has been destroyed, one-third is on the brink of devastation, and the remaining one-third is overgrazed. In response to this growing crisis, representatives from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Canadian Wildlife Service, various State fish and game agencies, and nongovernmental organizations including Ducks Unlimited and the National Audubon Society formed the Arctic Goose Habitat Working Group. This ad hoc group met over a period of many months, and the results of their deliberations were incorporated within a report entitled ``Arctic Ecosystem in Peril''. While this report issued in 1997 contained a number of recommendations, its clear conclusion was that the population of light geese must be immediately reduced by at least 5 to 15 percent each year. This report stated: ``This habitat damage is increasing in extent and will not be corrected or reversed by any known natural phenomenon. We cannot forecast how long it will be before most of the finite supply of habitat that is available for nesting by tundra and coastal-breeding birds will be permanently degraded or destroyed.'' On November 9, 1998, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service issued two proposed rules to reduce the ever-expanding population of light geese. These rules did not embrace all of the recommendations of the Arctic Goose Habitat Working Group. In fact, they were a modest effort to increase the harvest of light geese by authorizing the use of electronic goose calls, unplugged shotguns, and allowing certain States to authorize hunting outside of the traditional hunting season which normally runs from September 1st to March 10th. At the time, the Director of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service stated ``Too many light geese are descending each year on nesting areas that simply cannot support them all. If we do not take steps now, these fragile ecosystems will continue to deteriorate to the point that they can no longer support light geese or the many other species of wildlife that share this Arctic habitat. The steps proposed by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service are strongly supported by the Canadian Wildlife Service.'' After issuing these proposed regulations, the Service received over 1,100 comments from diverse interests representing State wildlife agencies, Flyway Councils, private and native organizations, and private citizens. A majority of the comments strongly supported the proposed actions by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, which has conducted a thorough environmental assessment of the various regulatory options to reduce the population. On April 15, 1999, the Subcommittee on Fisheries Conservation, Wildlife and Oceans, which I chair, conducted its second oversight hearing on Mid-Continent light geese. At that hearing, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service testified that ``virtually every credible wildlife biologist in both countries, believes that the Mid-Continent light geese populations has exceeded the carrying capacity of its breeding habitat and that the population must be reduced to avoid long-term damage to an ecosystem important to many other wildlife species in addition to snow geese.'' In addition, a representative of the National Audubon Society testified that ``these burgeoning numbers of Mid-Continent lesser snow geese have caused widespread and potentially irreversible devastation to two-thirds of the habitat that otherwise would be mostly pristine tundra west of Hudson Bay in Canada. If we do not act, nature will not `take its course' in the short time needed to halt devastation of the tundra.'' Finally, the Chairman of the Arctic Goose Habitat Working Group, who is also the Chief Biologist of Ducks Unlimited, stated that ``the finite amount of suitable goose breeding habitat is rapidly being consumed and eventually will be lost. Every technical, administrative, legal and political delay just adds to the problem. There is real urgency here as we may not be far from the point where the only choice is to record the aftermath of the crash of goose numbers with the related ecosystem destruction with all the other species that live there with the geese.'' At the same hearing, the Humane Society of the United States argued that a ``do nothing'' approach to the management of light geese was the preferred option. While the easy answer might be to let nature run its course, after all some have argued this is a Canadian problem, to sit idly by and allow this environmental catastrophe to continue to occur is simply irresponsible. Furthermore, man created this problem by providing these geese with an almost endless supply of food. In Arkansas, Louisiana, and Texas alone, there are more than 2.25 million acres of rice farms that have become a buffet bar for these birds. As a nation, we have also created dozens of National Wildlife Refuges that have become sanctuaries for these birds. As a result, these geese are living longer, are healthier, and are reproducing at an alarming rate. We have already altered the course of nature and that is why the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, the Canadian Wildlife Service, the International Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies, the Flyway Councils, and almost every well-known wildlife biologist has flatly rejected to ``do nothing'' approach. It is wrong and it will cause irreparable harm to the Arctic tundra habitat. I want to personally commend the Director of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Ms. Jamie Clark, for her tireless leadership and courage on this difficult issue. The Service went to extraordinary lengths to carefully evaluate each of the various management options, obtain the views of each of the affected stakeholders, and to do what was best for the species and its habitat. The regulations it issued were a responsible step in the right direction and they were fully consistent with the recommendation of the Arctic Goose Habitat Working Group. Sadly, in response to a legal challenge filed in U.S. District Court by the Humane Society of the United States, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service withdrew these two regulations on June 17th. While the judge did not rule on the merits of the regulations, the Service was instructed to complete an environmental impact statement. This process will take between 12 and 18 months to complete and during that time, the tundra will continue to be systematically destroyed an acre at a time. This is an unacceptable situation. Since I refuse to simply do nothing, I am today introducing the Arctic Tundra Habitat Emergency Conservation Act. This is a simple bill. It will legislatively enact the two regulations, already carefully evaluated and approved by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. What this means is that States would have the flexibility to allow the use of normally prohibited electronic goose calls and unplugged shotguns during the regular hunting season provided that other waterfowl and crane seasons have been closed. In addition, the 24 affected States are given the authority to implement conservation orders under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act that would allow hunters to take Mid-Continent light geese outside of the traditional hunting framework. Both of these rules will give States a better opportunity to increase their light goose harvest. My bill legislatively enacts these regulations in their identical form. In addition, the bill sunsets when the Service has completed both its environmental impact statement and a new regulatory rule on Mid- Continent light geese. This rule could be the same of different from those originally proposed in November of last year. My bill is an interim solution to a very serious and growing environmental problem. As Director Clark so eloquently state, ``For years, the United States has inadvertently contributed to the growth of this problem through changes in agricultural and wetland management. Now we can begin to say we are part of the solution. If we do not take action, we risk not only the health of the Arctic breeding grounds but also the future of many of America's migratory bird populations.'' I wholeheartedly agree with that statement and urge my colleagues to join with me in trying to stop this environmental catastrophe by supporting the Arctic Tundra Habitat Emergency Conservation Act. I am pleased that a number of our distinguished colleagues, including Don Young, John Dingell, Saxby Chambliss, Collin Peterson, Chip Pickering, Duncan Hunter, Duke Cunningham, and John Tanner have agreed to join with me in this effort.

Mr. SAXTON

Mr. SAXTON. Mr. Speaker, in honor of Mr. Earl H. Siegman for his remarkable dedication and efforts toward the improvement of the Southern New Jersey community at large, I would like to commend him for his extensive involvement with a myriad of volunteer organizations. Mr. Siegman is the recipient of the Southern New Jersey Development Council's Chairman's Award for expanding development in the Southern New Jersey region. As an accomplished businessman, Mr. Siegman uses his professional talents in assisting many service organizations. Mr. Siegman served as treasurer and helped to start the 200 Club of Burlington County. The Club provides scholarships and assistance to widows and their families through the collection of donations from businesses and individuals. He has volunteered with the fire fighting community with enormous dedication for many years and continues to do so. His involvements include 22 years of service with the Evesham Board of Fire Commissioners, the Kettle Run Volunteer Fire Company where he once served as Chief Fire Fighter, and the New Jersey State Fire Relief Association where he was treasurer. Mr. Siegman has additionally enjoyed 24 years of faithful service as a member of local and regional school boards. The Lenape Regional High School district has had the benefit of having Mr. Siegman participate in policy discussions which have helped to make the school system one of the best in the region. Its programs have encouraged many students to continue with great success at premier learning institutions throughout the country. Indeed, Earl Siegman has spent his entire adult life serving as a role model to the young people who have had the privilege of knowing him. As a steadfast leader, Mr. Siegman has served as President of the Southern New Jersey Development Council, where he continues to play an active role in the organization's endeavors to make the Southern New Jersey region a more conducive, as well as lucrative, place for doing business. His 25 years of service to this organization have helped it become a very unique public/private partnership where business leaders and legislators continually strive to improve this often-forgotten area of New Jersey. Mr. Speaker, Mr. Siegman represents the type of leader who is a tremendous source of inspiration for volunteers and the organizations that they assist. His endless enthusiasm, boundless energy and dedicated interest in improving the communities that he serves comprise a compendium of qualities for which we should all strive. I personally have known Earl Siegman for over 20 years and have witnessed first-hand his sincere devotion to the public good. Earl deserves a great deal of our gratitude and admiration for his tireless service. We congratulate you, Earl H. Siegman, on this well-deserved award.

Mr. SAXTON

Mr. SAXTON. Mr. Chairman, let me first congratulate the chairman of the committee on his usual fine job. Mr. Chairman, just before Secretary Cheney was due to leave office the better part of a decade ago, he said that we needed a smaller, more mobile force. He may have had in mind that we needed fewer Army divisions and fewer ships in our Navy and perhaps fewer fighter wings; but I am sure he did not have in mind at the time to hear statements like the ones that have been accurately stated here today relative to back-to-back deployments, relative to lack of spare parts, relative to aging, old aging equipment, relative to the effect on military personnel and decline of readiness. These were not issues that were in Secretary Cheney's mind when he talked about a smaller, more mobile force. I think that H.R. 1401 is a beginning point to change what we have done to create a more efficient, mobile, smaller force that will meet our readiness needs.

Mr. SAXTON. Mr. Speaker, it is clear that over the course of the last decade the United States' military has been in a constant state of decline. With the current challenges confronting U.S. armed forces in the Yugoslav Republic of Kosovo, our ability to meet worldwide commitments is increasingly strained; our ability to conduct even smaller military operations is at risk, as well. This rule provides an answer to these concerns. The Joint Chiefs of Staff cited the diminished quality of life, readiness, and modernization requirements that have pervaded the armed forces. With respect to the National Defense bill, allow me to state for the record that this bill begins to address each of these flaws. The bill increases our forces' quality of life by providing $8.6 billion for military construction and family housing, $3.1 billion more than the administration's request. The bill specifically addresses the readiness of our military, providing $106.5 billion for operations and maintenance, $2.8 billion more than the administration's request. The bill ensures that the United States will not maintain the status quo but will continue modernization by providing $3.7 billion for the Ballistic Missile Defense Organization, a $417 million more than the administration's request. As we near the dawn of a new millennium, the international political situation is growing increasingly unstable. Our current involvement in the Balkans reminds us that the end of the Cold War has brought with it not a more stable world, but an increasingly volatile one. Our only insurance against future confrontations is a powerful and adept military; this bill provides the funding to ensure one. Overall, this bill strengthens our military and ensures the safety of both our troops and our citizens. This is a good rule, and I strongly urge you to support our troops by voting for it.

Mr. SAXTON

Mr. SAXTON. Mr. Speaker, it is not often at this particularly troubled era in world affairs that we can take time to celebrate a major advance in freedom and democracy. However, on May 29th we may do just that, as Nigeria, the most populous state and largest economy in Africa, moves firmly back into the camp of democratic nations. On May 29th, President Olusegun Obasanjo will become President of Nigeria, having won a decisive victory in democratic elections in February. President Obasanjo assumes the leadership of more than 120 million Nigerians, and he will be assisted in this task by a democratically elected bicameral Assembly, elected state assemblies and elected state governors, in a political system which now mirrors the United States' own democratic process. The new government in Abuja is determined to develop Nigeria as a democracy and a friend of the West. During his transition period, President Obasanjo visited many world capitals, including Washington, to begin the process of binding Nigeria into the global diplomatic framework. No other African state has introduced a new government with greater care and preparation, and President Obasanjo has been careful to learn the attitudes of the world's major trading states and to brief them in return on Nigeria's great challenge of rebuilding its economy and its state. President Obasanjo comes to this position with a strong electoral mandate, and with many decades of experience as a statesman, diplomat, soldier and farmer. He was heavily involved in helping to negotiate the transition from apartheid to democratic government in South Africa some years ago. He was a political prisoner under the military government of General Sani Abacha, who died last year, paving the way for the restoration of Nigerian democracy. President Obasanjo is therefore highly conscious of Nigeria's need to play a leading role in African and international peacekeeping and diplomacy, and is, of course, thoroughly familiar with Nigeria's historic commitment to UN and OAU peacekeeping efforts. Furthermore, Nigeria is once again poised to become a major force for peace and stability in Africa. The US is going to benefit from a democratic and prosperous Nigeria. After all, Nigeria is the largest single supplier of foreign oil to the United States, and is, as a result, integrally linked into our economy. It is potentially a large export customer for the US, as well. Therefore, I believe the United States should cooperate with Nigeria to the fullest extent possible in order to ensure that its democratic, economic and governmental structures flourish to the fullest degree possible. Mr. Speaker, we need to send our congratulations today to President Obasanjo, and all of the officials elected to the two houses of Nigeria's Federal Assembly, and to the newly elected State Assemblymen, and State Governors, and to the elected municipal officials. This is a great watershed for Nigeria, a great day for Africa, and a great opportunity for us to participate in helping to make Africa a vibrant, democratic and self-sustaining continent and a healthy part of the world trading system.

Mr. SAXTON

Mr. SAXTON. Mr. Speaker, the conference report for H.R. 1141, the Emergency Supplemental Appropriations Act, contains good news for northeastern striped bass and blue fish fishermen. That's because important food sources for these species--herring and mackerel--have been protected by virtue of a provision in this bill. The provision would prohibit the National Marine Fisheries Service from issuing permits to allow large factory-type trawlers into the herring and mackerel fisheries without the expressed consent of the governing Fishery Management Council under the Magnuson-Stevens Act. Why is Congressional intervention in management of these two species needed? Herring and mackerel are two fisheries on the East Coast that have not been fished to the limit--YET, and these fish are a major food source for at least two near shore species, stripers and bluefish, that are favorites of recreational fishermen. Over the last several years, mackerel world market prices have increased substantially because Eastern European countries can no longer depend on government price supports, which kept prices artificially low for decades. This has created new fishing pressure. Herring populations have recently recovered from severely low numbers. The population collapsed in 1978 after years of over fishing, mostly by foreign factory trawlers. Now, largely because of the exclusion of foreign vessels under the original Magnuson Act and the lack of a major U.S. market for herring, the population appears to be healthy. However, four large factory trawlers are trying to enter the herring and mackerel fisheries. One of these vessels alone is capable of harvesting more herring than the entire existing fishery in the Gulf of Maine. Similarly, the vessel is capable of harvesting one-third of the estimated long-term sustainable catch for mackerel. During the herring recovery, New England fishermen had to find alternative fisheries to survive. They increasingly turned to cod and haddock at Georges Bank. Sadly, the story is too familiar--the populations of these fish in Georges Bank have since crashed. Now, herring are being targeted again. The Atlantic herring and mackerel fisheries are facing a new disastrous threat because large fishing vessels are poised to enter these fisheries. High prices and the apparent abundance of these species have attracted the attention of fishermen and businessmen throughout the world, who have responded by investing in large fishing vessels to harvest this American resource for sale overseas. The capacity of each of these vessels exceeds 50 metric tons per year. Coincidentally, the total take in these fisheries, for the entire herring and mackerel fleet is just about 50 metric tons, IN TOTAL. It is therefore imperative that we establish safeguards to prevent another fishing disaster like those suffered by redfish, shark, striped bass, cod and haddock. I introduced legislation last Congress and again this year to close the herring and mackerel fisheries to new large vessels until a stock assessment could be completed, and until fishery management plans for the two species were in place that specifically allowed for large vessels. In the last Congress, that bill passed the House but was not acted on in the Senate. This year, the measure has been approved by my subcommittee, and it awaits full Resources Committee action. The moratorium on large fishing vessels is a good idea. This provision allows the councils, with concurrence of the Secretary, to decide when and how it is appropriate to let these large vessels into the fishery. The councils need the time to react to what could be a sudden, unsustainable increase in harvest. This bill gives them the time to develop fishery management plans. Sadly, the NMFS seems content to wait until the stocks crash before taking action to protect these fisheries. As someone who has witnessed the pain and economic suffering experienced by those fishermen in New England, I do not believe that we should fish now and pay later. We must end this cycle of destroying our resources without knowing how much fishing pressure they can endure. This provision will help to conserve our Atlantic herring and mackerel stocks, and preserve the food source for stripers and bluefish. I urge the adoption of this important measure.

Mr. SAXTON

Mr. SAXTON. Mr. Speaker, I rise to pay tribute to Major General James McIntosh, a highly distinguished leader of the New Jersey Air National Guard who is retiring after many years of dedicated service to our great Nation. Major General McIntosh was assigned to the 108th Air Refueling Wing and the 204th Weather Flight, both stationed at McGuire Air Force Base, and the 177th Fighter Wing, which is based at Atlantic City International Airport. He has served our Nation's military with great pride and is exemplary as a leader. Major General McIntosh entered the Air Force in 1959 through the Aviation Cadet Program at Harlington Air Force Base, TX, and was commissioned as an aircraft navigator in 1960. He is a Master Navigator with over 6,400 flying hours including 100 combat missions during the Vietnam War. General McIntosh entered the New Jersey Air National Guard in 1978, commanded the 170th Air Refueling Group from 1989 to 1992, and has commanded the New Jersey Air National Guard since 1992. As our Nation proceeds with its involvements around the globe, the National Guard will continue to be an integral part of the total military force structure. Highly qualified citizens participating in the National Guard are the backbone of our national strength. Leaders such as Major General McIntosh command and guide many through the necessary training efforts that sustain a world-class organization. It has been my privilege to know Major General James McIntosh and witness his dedication to the National Guard. He is a true leader and asset to the armed forces. Major General McIntosh serves as a model upon which future leaders should be based.

Mr. SAXTON

Mr. SAXTON. Mr. Speaker, on rollcall 92: To Authorize the President to Award a Gold Medal on Behalf of the Congress to Rosa Parks; rollcall 93: Condemning the Murder of Human Rights Lawyer Rosemary Nelson; rollcall 94: Education Flexibility Partnership Act Conference Report; and rollcall 95: Earthquake Hazards Reduction Authorization Act; I was unavoidably detained and unable to cast my votes. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yea'' on rollcall 92, ``yea'' on rollcall 93, ``yea'' on rollcall 94 and ``yea'' on rollcall 95.

Mr. SAXTON

Mr. SAXTON. Mr. Speaker, on April 22, 1999, the New Jersey Conference of Mayors will bestow to Theresa D. Brown, Esq. the Freeholder of the Year Award for her dedicated service to Burlington County and the State of New Jersey. Having worked closely on several issues with Ms. Brown, I believe that the Conference of Mayors made an outstanding selection. Ms. Brown is the daughter of retired Air Force M/SGT Walter and Julie Brown. As a military dependent, Ms. Brown grew up in exotic locales including France, the Philippines, Hawaii, and several other places within the United States. Upon graduating from Princeton University, Ms. Brown became a certified K-12 teacher in Social Studies, English, and French at the intermediate and high school levels in the East Windsor regional School District in Hightstown, New Jersey. From there, Ms. Brown worked with the New Jersey Education Association lobbying before the New Jersey Legislature and the United States Congress for the state's largest teacher's union. Additionally, Ms. Brown worked as the Planning Manager for mercer County Legal Services in Trenton. Seeking more challenges, Ms. Brown graduated from Seton Hall Law School and worked as a law clerk for the Honorable Michael Patrick King, P.J.A.D., Superior Court of New Jersey, Appellate Division of Westmont, New Jersey. Theresa moved on to become an associate with the Trenton firm of Picco, Mack, Herbert, Kennedy, Jaffe, and Yoskin and then an Assistant City Attorney for the City of Camden. Ms. Brown served as an Assistant Director of litigation for the New Jersey Department of the Public Advocate where she litigated automobile insurance rate-making cases before the Office of Administrative Law and the Appellate Division. Ms. Brown moved on to become a partner in the Camden firm of Derden and Brown and later served as an attorney with the New jersey Protection and Advocacy, Inc. in Trenton where she represented persons with disabilities. Currently, Ms. Brown practices in the area of family law. On January 1, 1997, Ms. Brown her 3-year term on the Burlington County Board of Chosen Freeholders. With her election, she became the first African-American woman elected to hold that position in Burlington County. Among the many duties she performs, Freeholder Brown oversees the operations of Burlington County College, the Special Services School, and the Institute of Technology as well as Culture and Heritage, the county Library and the Consumer Affairs office. Freeholder Brown's public service does not end with her duties on the Board of Freeholders. Freeholder Brown volunteers her time to civic organizations and is President of the Girl Scouts of the South Jersey Pines, Inc. which serves girls in Atlantic, Burlington, Cape May, Cumberland, and Gloucester Counties. Freeholder Brown is also a member of Girl Scouts of the U.S.A.'s Special Committee on Fund Development. Additionally, Freeholder Brown is a member of the Board of Directors for the Burlington County Chapter of the American Red Cross and also serves on the Burlington County Board of Social Services. Mr. Speaker, it is my sincere privilege to honor a dedicated public servant and this year's recipient of the New Jersey Conference of mayors' 1999 Freeholder of the Year Award, Freeholder Theresa D. Brown. A finer selection could not have been made.

Mr. SAXTON

Mr. SAXTON. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to my dear friend, William Zimmerspitz, who is being honored this evening for his contributions to the community and his efforts on behalf of Judaism. Born in 1926 in Crakow, Poland, Bill survived the horrors of the Crakow-Plascow, Auschwitz, Rounienburg-Sachsenhausen and Mauthausen concentration camps during World War II. Arriving in America in 1949, Bill lived first in Pennsylvania. He served as Vice President of Congregation Ohev Zedek, and was an active supporter of its day school, Beth Jacob, for 13 years. Oftentimes, when funds were low at the day school, Bill personally provided funding to meet the school's expenses. Bill Zimmerspitz is justly proud of his service as President of the Sabbath Observance Council of Pennsylvania. Congregation Sons of Israel in Cherry Hill, New Jersey, is fortunate to number him among its dedicated Board members. At Congregation Sons of Israel, Bill takes an active part in various charitable efforts, most notable of which is the Gernilot Chesed fund, of which he was Chairman. Through this fund, those in need secure loans at favorable rates of interest. As Chairman of the Cherry Hill Political Action Committee, Bill has provided outstanding leadership and much time and effort to influence U.S. policy on many issues of importance. Members of the U.S. Congress, governors and other government officials have been better able to do their jobs because of his extensive efforts. Bill has served for several years on New Jersey's Commission of Holocaust Education, for which he spent a great deal of time traveling the State of New Jersey providing a vivid ``verbal picture'' of life in the ghetto and of his deep hope and belief that events such as these should never happen again. Bill's reputation as a noted lecturer, teaching today's youth of the devastating consequences of hatred cannot be overemphasized. Unfortunately, health problems have surfaced which cause him to be unable to carry out the rigorous schedule he believes is necessary to continue his mission. Mr. Zimmerspitz met his wife, Nancy, while living in Philadelphia, and there founded the W-Z Jewelry Company. Bill and Nancy have two daughters, Faye and Rochelle, and five grandchildren, of whom they are very proud. Three grandchildren, Aviva, Ricky and Ami live in Israel while two grandchildren, Jennifer and Ricky, live in Clifton, New Jersey. While his contributions to Holocaust education will surely be missed, I am pleased to pay tribute to William Zimmerspitz, a true gentleman and one of the finest human beings I have ever had the privilege of knowing. A finer man you will never meet.

Mr. SAXTON

Mr. SAXTON. Mr. Chairman, I indicated in my opening statement here that there were some factors that were important in terms of how our economy has performed. One of the factors is certainly the way we have been able to control spending. The spending controller who is standing to my left, the chairman of the Committee on the Budget, is as responsible for that as anyone. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Kasich).

Mr. SAXTON. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Sanford).

Mr. SAXTON. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Chairman, I am going to conclude the contribution to the discussion of the Joint Economic Committee today by saying this: I laid out very carefully, I think, a case in which I believe very deeply, and that is that Fed has been responsible and successfully so in giving us an economy in which there is an inflation rate of darn near zero. I think that that is primarily responsible for the growth that we have seen, along with other items that I also pointed out. However, one of the speakers from the other side, following my presentation, suggested that the tax increase that occurred in 1993 was somehow responsible for lowering inflation and lowering interest rates. In fact, the facts do not bear that out in any way, shape or form. I would just like to say to my friends on the other side of the aisle that when the tax increase occurred, which is now, of course, referred to as the budget arrangement that created this expansion, which I think is false, but when that tax increase occurred in 1993, it went into effect, the vertical line here indicates the time period during which that tax increase went into effect, interest rates actually spiked upward, not downward, as one of the previous speakers indicated. The spike upward is indicated here on the chart by the red line. As well as the Federal funds rate also went up, as indicated by the yellow line, and the discount rate went up, as indicated by the black line. So when individuals try to make the case that somehow the tax increase that took place in 1993 had the effect of lowering interest rates, quite the opposite is true. For the following 12 or 13 months after the tax increase went into effect, interest rates went up, not down. So I think it is somewhat, I must say, misleading, to be kind, to make the claim that somehow the President's tax increase had a positive effect on economic growth. I do not want to shift the entire credit to the Federal Reserve. I think they did a good job. I think they have squeezed and squeezed and squeezed on targeting inflation and have successfully gotten it out of our system. It is true that restraint in government spending has played a part. As a matter of fact, in 1992, our government consumed 22 percent of GDP. Today our government consumes 19\1/2\ percent of GDP. I think that is good and good for growth. I believe that lower marginal tax rates that remain in place today, in spite of the increases in 1990 and 1993, are good and provide a positive effect on growth. The marginal rates are lower today than they were in the fifties or the sixties or the seventies. Investment has also worked to expand capacity. Business has been encouraged to invest and, of course, global competition and freer trade have also played a role in fostering growth. This is the economic report of the President, and incidentally, I think it is very appropriate that the cover is red, which claimed that the tax increase in 1993 produced lower interest rates. This book does not even mention, does not even mention, the role of the Fed, when the facts claim quite conversely that the tax increase also created an increase in interest rates across the board. I am very pleased to have been able to manage this time on behalf of the Joint Economic Committee. I hope it has been a contribution to the understanding that we all have as to what happened to the economy. Mr. Chairman, I yield the balance of my time to the gentleman from Iowa (Mr. Nussle) to control.

Mr. SAXTON. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Ryan).

Mr. SAXTON. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Chairman, in the late 1970s a law was enacted called the Humphrey-Hawkins Act, and the purpose of it was to provide, among other things, for this Congress to have oversight over budgetary policy in terms of how it may or may not have a positive, or how it may have a negative effect, for that matter, on the economic performance in our economy. And so I would just like to use some time, if I may, to take a break from Republicans blaming Democrats and Democrats blaming Republicans, to try to take an overall look at what has transpired to create this wonderful surplus that we have in this fiscal year and the surpluses that we are now able to anticipate in the coming years. Let me first say that our current expansion is now the longest expansion in modern history during peacetime. I think it is well for all of us to take credit and give each other credit, to the extent that we can. Employment, income and wealth gains are impressive, and we are experiencing the lowest unemployment rates since the 1970s. Sometimes we all like to exaggerate the impact, as if the world actually revolves around Washington, D.C. But the fact of the matter is that workers all across this country, business people, laborers, all share in being able to take responsibility for what has happened here. And our system itself, our system of free enterprise, has worked well. Recently, in trying to take credit for some things that happened in our country, the Vice President took some ribbing for claiming that he was the inventor of the Internet, and his strong ties to the rural farmland of northwest Washington, D.C. all drew some chuckles. Well, as a matter of fact, I wish him well, but his comments and other comments suggesting that the administration invented the current economic expansion are just excessive. Let me try to say what, after much study, the members of the Joint Economic Committee have concluded has happened. Yes, the Republicans can take credit for being the initiators of tax cuts. That started back in the 1980s. And with the exception of 1990, during the Bush administration, and 1993, during the current administration, taxes have been kept quite low. And, yes, we can give ourselves some credit around here for helping to control spending. Those have been important factors but not, in my view, the primary one. I think I may surprise my colleagues when I try to give at least some credit, and maybe the majority of the credit, for what has happened to an institution that is not directly associated with the Congress of the United States. Of course, all my colleagues know I am referring to the Federal Reserve. As a matter of fact, the key reasons for the expansion are not generally very well understood, and that is why I want to take this time, under the provisions of Humphrey-Hawkins, to at least express this view for the consideration of my colleagues. One of the most important explanations for this record-setting and sustained expansion is the anti-inflationary monetary policy being pursued by the Federal Reserve. Pursuing anti-inflation policy or price stability policy in a gradual, sustained manner has worked to lower inflation. Who would have thought a decade ago that we could stand here today and say to America, inflation is almost zero? That is an impressive accomplishment brought about by the Fed. And interest rates have followed inflation downward and it has fostered economic growth. This chart here to the left of me shows how inflation and interest rates have come down together. And anyone who tries to deny the positive effects of this on the economy has simply not got it straight. This is an extremely important factor. And I believe that, along with other policies, this has been a major stimulus to the growth that we have seen. We have observed not only a lower rate of inflation, but also a lower rate of unemployment and healthy economic times all at the same time. As a matter of fact, during the last several years we have gone a long way to diffuse or to disprove an old theory that in the circles of economics is referred to as the Phillips curve. This second chart demonstrates something that is perhaps not a new phenomenon, and perhaps there were a minority of people who believed that this could happen over time. But throughout recent economic history, there was a common belief among lawmakers and a common belief among some economists, perhaps many economists, that we could not have long-term, sustained economic growth without inflation. This period of economic growth has disproven that theory. This chart shows that the unemployment rate, which is a by-product, of course, of good economic growth, has gone down, as inflation has, so that we now have historic low rates of unemployment and historic low rates of inflation. And again, we have to look across the street or downtown to the offices that house the members of the Federal Reserve to understand how this happened. The Federal Reserve has simply pursued policies through monetary policies to gradually squeeze inflation out of our economy. And so, while it is neat for us to be able to say that we have done this through the budgetary process, and we have contributed to it some, and while it is very encouraging that we have been able to over the last two decades reduce the impact of taxes, the fact of the matter is that most economists today agree that this policy of squeezing inflation out of the economy, which has fostered lower interest rates, has been an extremely important factor. Let me make four points. First, lower inflation works to lower interest rates. We have already demonstrated that here on our charts. Both long-term and short-term interest rates have declined and have done so with this lower inflation and with expectations that there is no inflation around the corner. While long-term rates recently have picked up some, they are not far from their historic lows as compared to interest rates over the last 30 years. Interest-sensitive sectors of the economy, like housing and investments, have performed exceptionally well during this period because of low interest rates, again brought about by Fed policy on price stability and inflation. The second point that I would make is that price stability works to calm financial markets and this helps to create long-term growth. Lower inflation fosters less volatility, less uncertainty and, therefore, more stability in financial markets. As a result, market participants tend to become more confident and more willing to invest and take risks and to innovate. And so we see this as an important factor. Point number three: Lower inflation acts like a tax cut. Anytime we give more money or provide an opportunity for investors to have more money to invest and consumers to have more money to consume and savers have more money to save, we provide economic stimulus which works to create long-term growth. And in this case, lower inflation reduces the rates of interest rates and again we have seen a positive result. Point number four: Lower inflation enables the price system to work better by reducing the noise and distortions in the pricing system. In other words, expectations of prices tomorrow being about the same as they are today because there is no inflation is an important factor in creating the atmosphere that we need for long-term growth. So, Mr. Chairman, I wanted to point this out today because, as I sat here waiting for my time to come up, I listened to both sides blaming the other for this or that or the other thing. The fact of the matter is that this Congress, both Houses, the administration, have done some things correctly during the last couple of decades. But during this decade, if one wants to single out one element in our economic structure in Washington, D.C., to give the credit to, we honestly need to look at Fed policy. Now, I will say one other thing, and that is that this policy of controlling inflation has worked so well that there are some of us who are looking at the possibility of amending the Humphrey-Hawkins act to provide that this be the central feature carried out and the central objective carried out by the Fed. We think it is proof positive that this has worked, and we look forward to hopefully many, many more years of economic growth brought about by this policy. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. SAXTON. Mr. Chairman, I yield 6 minutes to the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Ryan), a new member of the Joint Economic Committee.

Mr. SAXTON

Mr. SAXTON. Mr. Speaker, on February 19, 1999, the County of Burlington in New Jersey lost a dedicated public servant. Someone who has tirelessly fought for justice, the rights of victims, and heightened the awareness of domestic violence, Michael E. Riley will truly be missed. After 19 years of public service to Burlington County, Mike Riley has stepped down as First Assistant Prosecutor to enter private practice. During his tenure, Mike became well known as one of New Jersey's most respected trial attorneys. Described as the most experienced prosecutor in New Jersey, Mike successfully prosecuted nine capital murder cases, never losing a single homicide case, the most in Burlington County history. Outside of the courtroom, Mike was involved with many important civic groups. Mike was Co-Chair of the first Domestic Violence Working Group and was the first Director of the Burlington County Narcotic Task Force. Additionally, Mike shared his experience and expertise with others. He served as an adjunct professor at Widener Law School for 10 years and has served on the faculty of Monmouth College and Burlington County College. Many accolades can be bestowed upon Michael E. Riley, but I think the most honored one was summed up by a colleague when he stated that Mike ``can't be replaced.'' This truly demonstrates the respect that Mike has among his peers. On behalf of the people of Burlington county, I thank Michael E. Riley for his dedicated service to the County of Burlington and wish him well in his future endeavors.

Mr. SAXTON

Mr. SAXTON. Mr. Speaker, over the past several months Chairman Yasser Arafat has repeatedly threatened to unilaterally declare a Palestinian state in the West Bank on the Gaza Strip with, of course, East Jerusalem as its capital. We cannot recognize any such declaration, and we urge Mr. Arafat not to pursue this reckless course. Such a declaration will have a destabilizing effect on the Middle East and will render the Oslo Accords and the Wye agreements meaningless. Recently, however, Mr. Arafat suggested a PA confederation with Jordan. Perhaps that could be subject to negotiation, but only after Mr. Arafat and the PA have concluded successfully the promises that they have already made. For example, first, Mr. Arafat and the PA must reduce the size of the Palestinian authority to the agreed upon level so that it does not violate the Oslo Accords. Second, Mr. Arafat and the PA must end all PA-run incitement of violence, and anti-Semitism, and vilification of Jews and make meaningful reconciliation between Jews and Arabs a real possibility. Third, Mr. Arafat and the PA must renounce the validity of the right of return, a policy which by definition challenges the viability of the state of Israel even after Palestinian independence. Fourth, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Arafat and the PA should renounce and cut off ongoing ties to terrorists. Their insistence on releasing terrorists who plan acts of terror and provide the wherewithal to commit such acts must come to an end. And fifth, Mr. Arafat and the PA must establish modes of economic transparency and accountability relative to foreign aid received by them, thus preventing endemic corruption and theft currently plaguing the very structure of the Palestinian authority. Among the many disturbing incidences noted in Point 2 is the PA-run anti-Semitic incitement mainly to children via textbooks, newspapers and television and radio programs. The PA through international anti- Semitic rhetoric, even in school books, is attempting to raise Palestinian children with a deep rooted hatred toward Israel and Jews. Simply put, the PA and Yasser Arafat are subverting the peace agreements signed and perpetuating hostile feelings toward Israel and ultimately brainwashing Palestinian children. Therefore, I conclude by saying I support H. Con. Res. 24 and continue to oppose the creation of a Palestinian state on a unilateral basis.

Mr. SAXTON

Mr. SAXTON. Mr. Speaker, the current tax system has many problems, but one of its main defects is its bias against personal saving. Personal saving is taxed once out of income, and then the return to saving is taxed once again. This multiple taxation penalizes personal saving, a major source of economic growth. So it is no surprise that America has one of the lowest personal savings rates in the world. This bias can be addressed by increasing the tax deduction for IRA contributions, currently set at $2,000 annually. Today I am introducing legislation to boost IRA deduction limits $500 per year over several years. When fully phased in, a middle class family could deduct up to $7,000 for an annual IRA contribution. I strongly urge that an increase in IRA deductions be a part of any tax relief plan offered in this Congress. An increase in IRA deductions would help middle class families save for the future, become more financially independent, and become better able to deal with unexpected events. Expanded IRAs would also give middle class families a greater stake in the U.S. economic system. It is a tax incentive that average Americans would understand and strongly support. An increase in IRA deductions would increase personal saving, a major source of investment and economic growth. This would help firms to supply their workers with the best and most advanced tools, thus increasing their productivity and income. The current treatment of saving in our tax code is literally counterproductive. This is hampering our economy over the long term and reducing the American standard of living relative to what it would otherwise be. Many in Washington bemoan the low savings rate, but if we want personal saving to increase, we should increase IRA deductions for middle class taxpayers. A tax code that penalizes saving and investment makes no sense. Middle class taxpayers need a means of addressing their responsibilities to save for retirement, higher education, medical expenses and long term care, and unemployment. My legislation provides for penalty-free withdrawals for these purposes. Federal tax policy should not discriminate against taxpayers willing and able to take on these responsibilities but are prevented from doing so by the destructive impact of the current tax system. Let's limit the tax discrimination against personal saving.