Jim Saxton

Mr. SAXTON

Mr. SAXTON. Mr. Speaker, I spoke on February 9, 1999, to remark that it was essential that we act to help stop the escalation of the crisis in the Horn of Africa, and particularly the Ethiopia-Eritrean war, if the region was not to slide further into chaos. Since then, the anticipated war between Ethiopia and Eritrea has erupted and it keeps escalating. The war has already long-term and dire ramifications for both countries--beyond the impact of the growing numbers of casualties on both sides. The war is largely a low-tech and fairly static war of attrition along long miles of rugged and inhospitable terrain. The new offensive just launched by the Ethiopians is yet to alter the overall character of the war. However, both sides have embarked on an intense effort to acquire high quality air power in order to break the deadlock. Both countries not only purchased several late model combat aircraft and helicopters from states of the former Soviet Union but also engaged a large number of air crews and technicians to fly and maintain them. This effort, that is yet to impact the situation on the front line, is rapidly exhausting the hard currency holdings of these already impoverished states, thus further reducing their chance of economic recovery and development. Dire as the situation in the Horn of Africa is, and as much as the casualties are lamentable, it is a valid question to ask: Why should we--the United States--care about yet another debilitating war in a remote part of Africa? Fortunately, the war has so far had little impact on the civilian population, there were no massacres, and there is no famine. Hence, there is no humanitarian catastrophe to attract our attention. Hence, I repeat, why should we care? The reason we should pay close attention to the mounting crisis and escalating war is the vital strategic importance of the Horn of Africa to the United States and its close allies. The geo-strategic position of Ethiopia is central to several mega-dynamics stretching all the way from the Middle East to East Africa. Thus, the impact of instability and war reverberates directly to the heart of such areas commonly accepted as vital interests of the United States as Israel or the oil producing states of the Persian Gulf. Here are several major strategic factors in the region, demonstrating its great importance to the security interests of the United States: 1. The security of the Red Sea/Suez Canal Sea Lane of Communication (SLOC), which vitally affects EastWest trade (not just the oil trade) between Europe and Asia, including particularly Japan and Australia. Within this context, the ability of Israel and Jordan to maintain adequate maritime access to the Red Sea (and therefore world trade) is significant. 2. The containment of the spread of Islamist radicalism and terrorism--a process currently sponsored by Sudan's National Islamic Front (NIF) Government with the assistance of Iran. The hub of international terrorism in Sudan supports subversion throughout the Arab world and East Africa. A personal patron of Osama bin Laden, Hassan al-Turabi, Sudan's spiritual leader, was instrumental in inspiring and sponsoring the bombing of the U.S. Embassies in Kenya and Tanzania. Having sponsored the eviction of the United States from Somalia, Khartoum is now trying to capitalize on the crisis in the Horn of Africa in order to evict the United States from the rest of this strategically critical area. Toward this end, the Islamists support several Islamist separatist movements in both Eritrea and Ethiopia, most notably the support for the radical separatist Oromo forces designed to break up Ethiopia still further. 3. The management of the Nile waters is critical to the stability, prosperity and growth of Sudan and Egypt, and therefore the stability of the entire Middle East. Egypt is completely dependent on the Nile water for its very existence and Cairo will therefore do anything to ensure the Nile's uninterrupted flow--including joining the radicals of the Muslim world, turning on the United States, Saudi Arabia, and Israel, etc. Sudan is also the driving force behind and key sponsor of the destabilization of Egypt. Gaining a foothold in Ethiopia will provide Khartoum with the possibility to manipulate the Nile's flow without direct implications. Thus, stability in the Horn of Africa, and especially the existence of a unified and pro-Western Ethiopia, is of crucial importance to the national security of the United States. We must care and worry about the escalation of the Ethiopia-Eritrea war and the Sudan-sponsored Islamist forces exploiting it. This position is shared by the Ethiopia Crown Council. In my previous comments, I urged that we help reinforce the position of Prince Ermias SahleSelassie, the President of the Crown Council of Ethiopia, who is attempting to restore a policy of unity and moderation on Ethiopia and the region. Recently, Prince Ermias has written an excellent analysis of the crisis for the Defense & Foreign Affairs: Strategic Policy, the journal of the respected International Strategic Studies Association. In this overview, he urges that we see the Eritrea-Ethiopia conflict in the context of the broader regional strategic situation, to ensure that radicalization of the region. Prince Ermias stresses the dire ramifications of the deteriorating situation in Ethiopia: ``What we see now [in Ethiopia] is far less democracy and opportunity and prosperity than was being created under the Constitutional Monarchy of Haile Selassie. What we are witnessing today is a society led by people who arrived on the scene by accident; who are mired in divisive, petty squabbling. The result is that the region is divided and at risk. And the risk is one shared by the entire world: a further breakdown in the region could lead to the collapse of the pivotal powers, and a total disruption of the trade routes and the Middle Eastern oil trade. But worse than this, by not seeing the Ethiopia-Eritrea dispute in the broader context and acting accordingly, the world may be condemning the peoples of the region, including those of Egypt and North Africa, Arabia and the Northern Tier, to many more years of despair.'' I share the view and the anguish. I add that the strategic posture of the United States is adversely affected by the reverberations from, and impact of, the continued war in the Horn of Africa. This is why we should not only pay attention to events there, but also act to bring an end to the war. However, any negotiated settlement that would leave the regional strategic posture unchanged would only be a short term and temporary solution. Ultimately, it is imperative that long-term solutions are attained--nation building and economic revitalization under condition conducive for flow of private funds, not just hand outs of humanitarian assistance. What makes the situation in the Horn of Africa so unique is that there is no need for a U.S. military intervention in order to establish such stability. There are indigenous forces in Ethiopia that, if properly supported, can help their own country and the entire region. I'm talking about the Ethiopian Crown Council. Constitutional monarchy, as was the case in the days of Emperor Haile Selassie, provides the best opportunity for Ethiopia. Mr. Speaker, it is clear that in Prince Ermias we have someone who understands, and can help stabilize the entire Horn of Africa. The situation is now becoming critical, and we must find ways to support him in the process of reunifying Ethiopia, which cannot be allowed to be dismembered, and in helping to bring about regional reconciliation--thus protecting and furthering national security interests of the United States and its close allies.

Mr. SAXTON

Mr. SAXTON. Mr. Speaker, if permitted to escalate, the mounting crisis in the Horn of Africa will have dire ramifications on the strategic posture of the United States. Presently, there is no end in sight, other than war, in this Ethiopia-Eritrea conflict. The mediation of Assistant Secretary of State Susan Rice and former National Security Advisor Anthony Lake have so far failed to reverse the slide toward war. Vital interests of the United States, Israel and the West are jeopardized, particularly if the Islamist-supported further break-up of Ethiopia is permitted to occur. A unified Ethiopia is vital to the regional security and economic structure. If Ethiopia were to become fragmented, as Sudanese leaders seek, then Israel's economic and military security, as well as its access to the Red Sea would be jeopardized. Instability in Ethiopia would destabilize Egypt and Saudi Arabia and the vital Red Sea-Suez trade link. The key to the reversal of the Ethiopia-Eritrea conflict and the ensuing fragmentation of Ethiopia lies in the rejuvenation of Ethiopia's national identity. Toward this end, the US needs to help Ethiopia find the unifying symbols to strengthen the country and ensure its commitment to moderation. Until 1974, Ethiopia, the region and the US benefitted greatly from the statesmanship and friendship of Emperor Haile Selassie. Ethiopia has since declined into ethnic enclaves and divisiveness, and lays open to Eritrean, Sudanese and irridentist attacks. The Ethiopian Crown today is a Constitutional Monarchy, ready to return home to provide the inspirational symbolism under which elected day-to-day government can emerge and flourish. Moreover, the stature of the Crown throughout the Horn of Africa makes the Crown uniquely capable of mediating an indigenous solution to the building crisis and slide toward a regional and fratricidal war. The President of the Ethiopian Crown Council and grandson of Emperor Haile Selassie is Prince Ermias Sahle-Selassie, who has repeatedly exemplified the capable, unifying symbolism which Ethiopia desperately needs. By encouraging Prince Ermias's use of the prestige of the Crown and Ethiopia's traditional elders and institutions to resolve conflict, we can help heal the rifts which are a legacy of decades of civil strife. Mr. Speaker, I therefore urge Ethiopia's civil government to allow the Crown's return to help unify and stabilize the State, and thereby help preserve Ethiopian, regional and Western security and economic interests.

Mr. SAXTON

Mr. SAXTON. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to introduce the Price Stability Act of 1999 and to outline the reasons it is needed. More detailed information on inflation targeting is available in several studies I released on this topic as JEC Chairman in the 105th Congress. This legislation would institutionalize the successful informal inflation targeting policy used by the Federal Reserve in the last several years. This bill establishes that the primary and overriding goal of monetary policy is price stability. Price stability means that Federal Reserve policy is geared to preclude significant inflation or deflation. In the last several years the Federal Reserve has squeezed inflation out of the economic system, reducing inflation, interest rates, and unemployment together. By fostering and sustaining the economic expansion, this policy has led to a strong economy that has flooded the Treasury with tax revenue, erasing the deficit and creating large and growing budget surpluses. This policy has been an outstanding success, but its basis has not yet been fully explained. Fed Chairman Alan Greenspan confirmed to me in a JEC hearing last year that the Federal Reserve has carried out an informal inflation targeting approach to price stability. Chairman Greenspan also endorsed the idea of institutionalizing this inflation targeting approach in law. However, although inflation targeting is the norm in many countries, its significance in recent Federal Reserve policy often is not completely appreciated. The discussion of this legislation may serve to improve understanding of monetary policy and lock in the hard-won economic gains of the last several years. This legislation mandates that the Federal Reserve establish an explicit numerical definition of price stability using a broad measure or index of general inflation in the form of inflation targets that is available and accessible to the public. It also mandates that the Federal Reserve disclose any adjustment to inflation targets and specify the time frame for achieving price stability. The Federal Reserve would be required to specify in advance what actions it will take if its goals are not met within the specified time frame. Chairman Alan Greenspan's monetary policy has successfully reduced inflation and unemployment together, a feat that many economists regarded as unattainable. These successes of inflation targeting should be locked-in so that they are not dependent on the presence of one particular individual as Chairman of the Federal Reserve. This enactment of inflation targeting legislation would be a fitting tribute to Chairman Greenspan and his successful conduct of monetary policy.

Mr. SAXTON

Mr. SAXTON. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to my good friend, the late George Goldt, a man known far and wide as ``the gentle giant.'' As Undersheriff of Ocean County, George met Michael Gillick, a young cancer patient, and took him under his wing, naming Michael ``Honorary Sheriff.` In fact, when Michael was honored, even standing on a chair, he only reached George's waist. It was his interest in Michael that led to George's wanting to learn more about kids with cancer. George Goldt and Linda Gillick, Michael's mother, joined forced and began the organization, Ocean of Love, aptly named by George for Ocean County and for the love he felt for the kids. Starting with 12 children, Ocean of Love now helps over 200 afflicted children and their families. A person who never had to be asked twice, George Goldt worked tirelessly in behalf of the young people he loved and cared so much for. In fact, his last earthly act was trying to obtain food for a needy family, when he was felled by a heart attack at a very young age. He was instrumental in coordinating fund raisers, and always preferred to remain in the background, never seeking credit for his actions. The spirit of George Goldt, the gentle giant, will always be a large part of Ocean of Love due to his efforts in behalf of kids in need. I remember George best during the years he served as President of the Manchester Township Republican Club. During those years George and his wife Bev were among my most avid and energetic supporters. George knew what should be accomplished and made sure it was, and almost always without me even asking. The success of the club and the candidates it supported under his leadership speak volumes about George. The recipient of this year's Ocean of Love Public Service Award, George Goldt is truly deserving of this posthumous honor, and of the love and gratitude of the community.

Mr. SAXTON

Mr. SAXTON. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of reforming the International Monetary Fund (IMF). The reforms to be included in the appropriations bill, and particularly the enforcement provisions, are not nearly as extensive as I would have liked. Nonetheless, if these reforms are permitted to take effect, they will be steps in the right direction toward a longer-term reform of the IMF. The implementation of the IMF reforms in this bill will be an important test of the good faith and credibility of the Treasury Department and IMF. We in Congress will also have to do our part to maintain vigilant and intensive oversight to ensure these reforms are implemented in accordance with congressional intent, and I am planning to establish a systematic way to do this while also advancing an agenda for further IMF reform. With regard to the reforms themselves, a review of their development from earlier legislation is critical to understanding congressional intent. The structure of the reforms pertaining to transparency and market interest rates is clearly based on the IMF Transparency and Efficiency Act, H.R. 3331, which I introduced with Majority Leader Armey and others last March. The reform proposals in the budget bill are essentially narrowed versions of the policy changes mandated in the IMF Transparency and Efficiency Act. The biggest change is in the enforcement mechanism in this act, which has been replaced by a much weaker enforcement provision in the appropriations bill. Obviously I am disappointed with these changes, particularly with the weaker enforcement provisions, because it is unclear how diligently the Treasury and IMF will implement the reforms without airtight enforcement. Further enforcement measures will be called for if this mechanism proves insufficient. With respect to the IMF transparency reforms in the appropriations bill, suffice it to say they reflect a strong congressional consensus that IMF documents be publicly released, and that IMF minutes of IMF board meetings should be publicly released in some form. Any abuse of the flexibility provided in this language would clearly not be acceptable. With regard to the interest rate provisions, the higher interest rates are required any time the defined conditions of a balance of payments problem emerge. The compromise language uses some terms to describe these conditions also used by the IMF to describe an existing IMF loan facility, but there are essential differences that are important to note. Most importantly, the reform is to apply to all situations where the defined and rather typical characteristics associated with a balance of payments problem are present, whereas the IMF loan facility is to be used only in ``exceptional'' circumstances. Furthermore, the clear intent of this reform initiative is to require interest rates comparable to market interest rates, as expressed in H.R. 3331. What I intended in my bill was the use of a basic reference market interest rate, with an adjustment for risk added, so as to approximate the market interest rate a particular borrower would face. This would be at least equal to the market interest rates available to a borrower just before a crisis. Prior to these negotiations, the staff of the Joint Economic Committee devised a floor to permit an objective limit on how low the rate could go for the sole purpose of limiting the potential for egregious abuse. What emerged in the reform was an interest rate formula providing a floor, whereas in the IMF lending facility this approach appears to be effectively a ceiling. The interest rates floor in the reform should not be viewed as determining the appropriate interest rate, which will vary depending on the risk factors present in different borrowing countries. In the course of four hearings held by the Joint Economic Committee (JEC) the issues involving transparency and an end to interest rate subsidies were explored in extensive detail, as well as other issues. A complete legislative history of the IMF reforms about to be enacted with a view toward establishing congressional intent must include not only H.R. 3331, but also the germane material covered in these JEC hearings, the only hearings held that examined these reforms in any detail. In summation, the broad congressional intent behind these IMF reforms is clear, and is reflected in the legislative history. A good faith effort to carry out these IMF reforms in keeping with the letter and spirit of the law will be as evident as the failure to do so.

Mr. SAXTON

Mr. SAXTON. Mr. Speaker, as Chairman of the Congressional Task Force on Terrorism and Unconventional Warfare, I strongly support Section 117 of the Treasury Appropriations Conference Report now part of the FY 1999 Omnibus Appropriations Bill, which was passed by the House of Representatives on October 20, 1998. This Section arose out of a need to assist American victims of terrorism or extrajudicial killing in recovering assets of states that sponsor terrorism in order to help satisfy civil judgments against such state-sponsors. I would like to comment briefly on the operation of Section 117. Subsection (f)(1)(A) clarifies existing law to allow the post-judgment seizure of blocked foreign assets of terrorist states to help satisfy judgment resulting from actions brought against them under section 28 USC 1605(a)(7), the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act's exception to immunity for acts of state sponsored terrorism involving the death or personal injury of a United States national. Subsection (f)(2)(A) establishes requirements upon the Secretary of Treasury and Secretary of State to assist in the location of the blocked assets of terrorist states in order to facilitate attachment and execution. Section (d) allows the President to waive the requirements of Subsection (f)(2)(A). Section (d) however does not allow the waiver of subsection (f)(1)(A), as that subsection modifies existing law, but imposes no ``requirement.'' The Clinton Administration understands the operation of Section (d)'s waiver and has strongly opposed it. During the negotiations over the Omnibus Appropriations Bill, the Administration vigorously sought to expand the scope of the waiver to include Subsection (f)(1)(A). Various proposals to expand the waiver to include Subsection (f)(1)(A) were received from Under Secretary of State Eizenstat, the National Security Counsel Staff and the Department of State's Office of the Legal Advisor. Each of these many proposals were rejected by Congress. The intent of Congress is clear. We will not tolerate the murder of our children in acts of state sponsored terrorism. When a Court of competent jurisdiction has determined that a terrorist state has sponsored acts of terrorism resulting in the death or personal injury of a United States national, any and all of their assets in this country may be attached and executed to satisfy the judgment. The significant financial loss to terrorist states will be a critical deterrent to further acts of terrorism targeted at the citizens of this country. I applaud all those members who helped make section 117 a reality.

Mr. SAXTON

Mr. SAXTON. Mr. Speaker, in the next day or so we will be voting on the spending plan, the rest of the spending plan, for fiscal year 1999. An important part of that is a matter involving the International Monetary Fund, and there were many of us who said that we would only vote for that provision with proper reforms. Mr. Speaker, I am now able to rise in support of reforming the International Monetary Fund and the provisions claimed in the bill ahead of us. The reforms to be included in the appropriations bill, and particularly the enforcement provisions, are not nearly as extensive as I would have liked. Nonetheless, if these reforms are permitted to take place and to be in effect, they will be steps in the right direction toward longer-term reform for the IMF. The implementation of IMF reforms in this bill will be an important test of the good faith and credibility of the Treasury Department and IMF officials. With regard to the reforms themselves, our review of their development from earlier legislation is critical to understand the intent of Congress. The structure of the reforms pertaining to transparency and market rates is clearly based on the IMF Transparency and Efficiency Act that was introduced earlier this year by myself and some others known as H.R. 3331, which was introduced, I might add, in conjunction with the majority leader. The reform proposals in the budget bill are essentially narrower versions of the policy changes mandated in the IMF Transparency and Efficiency Act. The biggest change is in the enforcement mechanism in this act, in the coming act, which has been replaced by a much weaker enforcement provision in the appropriations bill we will vote on in the next day or so. Obviously, I am disappointed with this change. But with respect to the IMF transparency reforms in the appropriations bill, suffice it to say they reflect a strong congressional consensus that IMF documents be publicly released, and that the minutes of the IMF board meetings should be publicly released in some form. Any abuse of the flexibility provided in this language would clearly not be acceptable. Second, with regard to the interest rate provisions, the higher interest rates are required any time the definition of conditions of a balance of payments problem emerge, regardless of other problems that may also exist. The compromise language uses some terms to describe these conditions also used by the IMF to describe an existing IMF loans facility, but there are essential differences that are important to note. Finally, or next, the clear intent of this reform initiative is to require interest rates comparable to market interest rates, as expressed in H.R. 3331. Prior to these negotiations, the staff of the Joint Economic Committee devised a floor to permit an objective limit on how the rate could go in an attempt to prevent backsliding. In the course of four hearings held by the Joint Economic Committee, the issues involving transparency and an end to the interest rate subsidies were explored in extensive detail, as well as many other issues. A complete legislative history of IMF reforms about to be enacted with a view towards establishing congressional intent must include not only H.R. 3331, but also the germane material covered in these JEC hearings, the only hearings held to examine these reforms in detail, I might add. Mr. Speaker, in summary, the congressional intent behind the IMF reforms is clear. It is reflected in the legislative history. A good- faith effort to carry out these IMF reforms in keeping with the letter and spirit of the law will be as evident as will the failure to do so.

Mr. SAXTON

Mr. SAXTON. Mr. Speaker, I rise to congratulate and pay tribute to Colonel Steven S. Hoffman as he retires from the United States Air Force following 28 years of outstanding military service. During his distinguished career, Colonel Hoffman has served his country, the U.S. Air Force, and the community of McGuire Air Force Base with distinction and honor. Since July 1996, Colonel Hoffman has been the Director of Staff and Inspector General at the 305th Air Mobility Wing, McGuire Air Force Base, New Jersey, a responsibility that cannot be overestimated nor underappreciated. It is during this period that I have gotten to personally know and appreciate Steve's professional integrity and positive outlook. As the Director of Staff, Steve directed and supervised the daily operational activities of 17 wing staff agencies. In his other role as the Inspector General, he was responsible for a base population of over 11,000 personnel with resources over $1.1 billion and an annual budget exceeding $250 million. Steve excelled under a high operations tempo requiring his leadership and dedication at McGuire Air Force Base. A native of Shandanken, New York, Steve entered the Air Force in 1970 through the Reserve Officer Training Corps and earned his pilot wings as a KC-135 pilot at Laredo Air Force Base, Texas. Although initially trained as a pilot, Steve sought early in his career to work with people and improve the personal and professional relationships within the Air Force. In addition to his piloting, his tours in the Air Force included positions in Public Affairs, Operations, Plans and Security, Air Force Liaison Officer and Commander/Publisher of the European Stars and Stripes. Steve's devotion to country and the Air Force is evidenced by the awards he has so richly earned. These awards include the Defense Superior Service Medal, Meritorious Service Medal with two oak leaf clusters, Air Medal and the Air Force Commendation Medal with one oak leaf cluster. Col. Hoffman, his lovely wife Joyce and their two daughters, Jessica Marie and Jennifer Gabrielle will soon begin a new life in his hometown in New York. I know I speak for the entire McGuire community in wishing Steve and his family the very best as they leave the U.S. Air Force. I offer my personal thanks and the thanks of an appreciative nation as he begins a new chapter in his life.

Mr. SAXTON

Mr. SAXTON. Mr. Speaker, I have no further speakers at this time, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. SAXTON

Mr. SAXTON. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the Senate bill (S. 391) to provide for the disposition of certain funds appropriated to pay judgment in favor of the Mississippi Sioux Indians, and for other purposes, as amended.

Mr. SAXTON. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I rise in support of S. 391, the proposed Mississippi Sioux Tribe's Judgment Fund Distribution Act of 1998. S. 391 would provide for the disposition of judgment funds appropriated by Congress in 1968, plus accrued interest to pay the Mississippi Sioux Indians for 27 million acres of ancestral lands which the Indian Claims Commission ruled were taken without justification. Mr. Speaker, I recommend that S. 391 be passed by the House and be sent to the President. I would also just like to commend Rick Hill for his hard work on this bill. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time. (Mr. MILLER of California asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. SAXTON

Mr. SAXTON. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, the bill before the House, S. 2095, provides for the reauthorization of the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation. Since its creation in 1984, the Foundation has fostered many partnerships through a challenge grant program, awarding over 2,800 peer reviewed competitive grants to more than 825 organizations, leveraging approximately 85 million Federal dollars into $300 million for on-the- ground conservation. New Jersey is typical of the many activities and partnerships the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation enables. At Cape May, for example, the foundation has supported migratory bird habitat improvements. In my area it has supported the improvements at the Edwin B. Forsythe National Wildlife Refuge, and one of its Earth Stewards student grants to the Smithville Elementary School won a prestigious national award. During the 105th Congress, the Subcommittee on Fisheries Conservation, Wildlife and Oceans of the Committee on Resources held several hearings on the effectiveness of the foundation, the success or failure of its matching grants program and whether our taxpayers' money is being soundly invested. This bill addresses many of the concerns that the Members raised in the oversight process. We have kept the current authorization level for the Department of Interior at $25 million, the same as it was in 1994. The bill provides for the use of foundation grants to cover lobbying and litigation and revokes authority to prohibit State and local condemnation. Mr. Speaker, this bill is a combination of issues that both Members of the House and Senate were interested in having addressed in a final bill. This bill will allow the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation to continue the good work that they do for our Nation's fish and natural resources. I think it is a compromise that the House of Representatives should support, and I urge my colleagues to join me in adopting this bill.

Mr. SAXTON. Mr. Speaker, I have no further speakers at this time, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. SAXTON. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the Senate bill (S. 2095) to reauthorize and amend the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation Establishment Act, as amended.

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 on the 3 bills just passed.

Mr. SAXTON

Mr. SAXTON. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the Senate bill (S. 2505) to direct the Secretary of the Interior to convey title to the Tunnison Lab Hagerman Field Station in Goodling County, Idaho, to the University of Idaho.

Mr. SAXTON. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of S. 2505, a bill introduced by our colleagues from Idaho, Senators Larry Craig and Dirk Kempthorne, to transfer the Tunnison Lab Hagerman Field Station to the University of Idaho. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as she may consume to the gentlewoman from Idaho (Mrs. Chenoweth) to explain the bill.

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

Mr. SAXTON

Mr. SAXTON. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of the Medicare Home Health Care and Veterans Health Care Improvement Act. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to come here today to vote for the Medicare Home Health Care and Veterans Health Care Improvement Act. This bill takes a step in assisting efficient home health agencies around the country that were hit so hard by the Medicare Interim Payment System. The home health agencies of New Jersey have provided exemplary care to the seniors of our State while keeping their costs very low and should not have been unfairly penalized by IPS. As always, I continue to support efforts to rid the Medicare system of waste, fraud, and abuse. IPS did not fairly address these problems. I do hope that at some time in the very near future, we can revisit this issue and identify and rid Medicare of such fraudulent practices which only hurt our seniors and the quality of care they receive. Also, Mr. Speaker, while H.R. 4567 does offer much needed relief to the home health providers in my State, the effects of the IPS during FY98 have been extremely detrimental to them. I must request that retroactivity be implemented for low cost agencies as we continue this process. Mr. Speaker, the 60,000 seniors who live in my district in New Jersey are united behind us and our efforts to fix the IPS. Thank you Mr. Thomas and Mr. Bilirakis for realizing the needs of cost-effective agencies.

Mr. SAXTON

Mr. SAXTON. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to present the House S. 2094, the Fish and Wildlife Revenue Enhancement Act. This bill would amend the Fish and Wildlife Improvement Act of 1978 to enable the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to utilize funds obtained from the sale of certain abandoned or forfeited products. Mr. Speaker, I know of no controversy with regard to this bill. I, therefore, will ask that the balance of my statement be placed in the Record. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

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

Mr. SAXTON. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the Senate bill (S. 2094) to amend the Fish and Wildlife Improvement Act of 1978 to enable the Secretary of the Interior to more effectively use the proceeds of sales of certain items.

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 on S. 2505, the bill just passed.

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 on S. 2094, the bill just passed.

Mr. SAXTON

Mr. SAXTON. Mr. Speaker, pursuant to House Resolution 575, I announce the following suspensions to be considered tomorrow: