Pete Sessions

Mr. SESSIONS

Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment made in order under the rule.

Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Chairman, the amendment that I am speaking on today would require a background check on a person whose gun is returned to him by a pawnshop if that gun has been stored at the pawnshop for more than 1 year. Pawnshops are small businesses contributing to communities all across America. They provide access to credit for people who may have difficulty obtaining a loan from a standard financial institution. These loans are secured by the physical delivery of collateral against the loan. One of the preferred forms of collateral for these loans is a firearm. Guns, unlike electronic appliances or furniture, are easily stored, have value that is easy to establish, and do not depreciate or become outdated. This amendment deals only with returning a gun to its owner. These guns have not transferred ownership. Rather, they have merely been stored in the pawnbroker's vault until the owner has repaid the money that was loaned against the firearm. Currently, all pawnbrokers who pawn guns are already required to have Federal firearms licenses. Most of them buy and sell guns, as well as taking them as collateral in pawn loans. This amendment does not affect sales. Sales at pawnshops follow the same procedure as sales at any other gun store. Over the course of a year, some 10 million guns are stored in pawnbrokers' vaults, almost as many guns as are sold in America. Guns stored in pawnshops are locked securely in vaults. They are safe from theft and unauthorized access. States and and municipalities already require pawnbrokers to report the identity of anyone who pawns a gun. Additionally, pawnbrokers are also required to report the type and serial number of each pawned gun. This provides more information for law enforcement than the NICS system, allowing the police to check on the person, as well as checking that the firearm has not been reported as lost or stolen. Most of these reporting systems are computerized, allowing this data to be transmitted instantly to local authorities. In most major metropolitan areas, the local reporting process to law enforcement has been in place for over 20 years. We want to encourage people to legally utilize licensed, regulated pawn stores if they choose to pawn their guns. If we discourage people from utilizing licensed, regulated pawn stores, these guns will be out of the tracking ability of local law enforcement. I urge my colleagues to support the Sessions-Frost amendment to provide commonsense background checks on guns pawned for more than 1 year. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. SESSIONS

Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Hayworth).

Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I call up House Resolution 189 and ask for its immediate consideration.

Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. Speaker, I have no further requests for time, I yield back the balance of my time, and I move the previous question on the resolution. The previous question was ordered.

Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. Speaker, for purposes of debate only, I yield the customary 30 minutes to the gentlewoman from New York (Ms. Slaughter), pending which I yield myself such time as I may consume. During consideration of this resolution, all time yielded is for the purpose of debate only. Mr. Speaker, H. Res. 189 is an open rule providing 1 hour of general debate, divided equally between the chairman and ranking minority member of the Committee on Resources. The rule makes in order the Committee on Resources' amendment in the nature of a substitute as an original bill for the purpose of amendment, which shall be considered as read. Members who have preprinted their amendments in the record prior to their consideration may be given priority in recognition to offering their amendments if otherwise consistent with House rules. The Chairman of the Committee of the Whole may postpone votes during consideration of the bill and reduce voting time to 5 minutes on a postponed question if the vote follows a 15-minute vote. Finally, the rule provides for one motion to recommit, with or without instructions. Mr. Speaker, H.R. 150, the Education Land Grant Act, is the product of tireless efforts of my colleague, the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Hayworth). The gentleman is looking for innovative ways to provide educational resources for State and local governments. Like many western States, Arizona has scarce non-Federal resources within the National Forest land system, making it very expensive and cost-prohibitive for school districts to buy land needed to expand or build the necessary school facilities. The gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Hayworth) recognized this clearly when he had to fight to convey 30 acres of Forest Service land to the Alpine School District for the purpose of building new school facilities during the 104th Congress. The Education Land Grant Act would codify this process for all Forest Service land. This legislation authorizes the Secretary of Agriculture to convey Forest Service lands for educational purposes, as long as the school is publicly funded, the conveyance serves the public interest, and the land is not environmentally sensitive or needed for the purpose of the National Forest System. This process mirrors the Recreation and Public Purposes Act, which allows Congress to sell or lease Bureau of Land Management land to State and local governments, and qualified nonprofit organizations for public purposes. I am proud of the work my colleague, the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Hayworth) has done. Mr. Speaker, I urge support for the rule and the underlying legislation, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Nevada (Mr. Gibbons).

Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. Speaker, continuing debate on H.R. 150, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Utah (Mr. Hansen), the chairman of the Subcommittee on Public Lands and National Parks.

Mr. SESSIONS

Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. Speaker, in celebration of VFW's 100th anniversary, I want to recognize the efforts of this worthwhile organization that continues to assist tens of thousands of veterans, as well as their dependents and survivors. Today, the VFW's 2 million veterans, and its auxiliaries' 750,000 members, provide $2.7 million annually in scholarships and awards to U.S. high school students. In addition, the VFW provides $3 million annually for cancer research and $15 million for veteran-service programs. In Texas alone, there are approximately 174,452 retired military who have done their part in defending our country--we need to recognize their service. On Memorial Day, I will be presenting the Bronze Star Medal to Army Captain James Flowers who served our country during World War II. During an invasion of Normandy, Mr. Flowers lost both legs. The tragedy Mr. Flowers suffered should not go unrewarded. I am consistently awed by the great sacrifice committed by so many of behalf of this great nation. Let us not forget the goals of the VFW as noted in the 1936 congressional charter: ``To assist worthy comrades; to perpetuate their memory . . .; and to assist their widows and orphans; to maintain true allegiance to the Government of the United States; to maintain and extend the institutions of freedom; and to preserve and defend the United States from all her enemies, whomsoever.''

Mr. SESSIONS

Mr. SESSIONS. Madam Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Gekas), the subcommittee chairman of the Subcommittee on Commercial and Administrative Law. (Mr. GEKAS asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. SESSIONS. Madam Speaker, I yield such time as she may consume to the gentlewoman from Ohio (Ms. Pryce).

Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. Speaker, for purposes of debate only, I yield the customary 30 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Frost), pending which I yield myself such time as I may consume. During consideration of this resolution, all time yielded is for the purpose of debate only. H. Res. 158 is a fair, structured rule providing 1 hour of general debate divided equally between the chairman and ranking member of the Committee on the Judiciary. The rule waives points of order against consideration of the bill for failure to comply with section 302 of the Congressional Budget Act which prohibits consideration of legislation which exceeds a committee's allocation of new spending authority, or section 311 of the Congressional Budget Act which prohibits consideration of legislation that would cause the total level of new budget authority or outlays in the most recent budget resolution to be exceeded or cause revenues to be less. The rule provides that it shall be in order to consider as an original bill for the purpose of amendment under the 5-minute rule the amendment in the nature of a substitute recommended by the Committee on the Judiciary now printed in the bill. The rule waives all points of order against the committee amendment in the nature of a substitute and amendments thereto. The rule makes in order only those amendments printed in the Committee on Rules report accompanying the resolution. The rule provides that amendments made in order may be offered only in the order printed in the report and may be offered only by a Member designated in the report. These amendments shall be considered as read and be debatable for the time specified in the report equally divided and controlled by the proponent and opponent. They shall not be subject to amendment and shall not be subject to a demand for division of the question in the House or in the Committee of the Whole. The rule allows for the Chairman of the Committee of the Whole to postpone votes during consideration of the bill and to reduce voting time to 5 minutes on a proposed question if the vote follows a 15- minute vote. Finally, the rule provides one motion to recommit with or without instructions. Mr. Speaker, H.R. 833, the Bankruptcy Reform Act of 1999, will fundamentally reform the existing bankruptcy system into a needs-based system. I am proud of the tireless efforts of the House Committee on the Judiciary to address this issue and ensure that our bankruptcy laws operate fairly, efficiently, and free of abuse. This should not be a controversial issue because Congress has spoken on this issue before. Both the House and the Senate overwhelmingly approved bankruptcy reform legislation last year on a bipartisan basis. Although the measure fell short in the waning days of the 105th Congress because the Senate failed to act on the conference report, the House voted by a veto-proof majority of 300 to 125 to pass very similar legislation last year. There is great need for this bill now. A record 1.42 million personal bankruptcy filings were recorded in 1998. This is a stunning increase of 500 percent since 1980. Despite an unprecedented time of economic prosperity, unemployment, and rising disposable income, personal bankruptcies are rising, costing over $40 billion in the past year. Without serious reform of our bankruptcy laws, these trends promise to grow each year, costing businesses and consumers even more in the form of losses and higher costs of credit. As we debate and vote today, we should keep in mind two important tenets of bankruptcy reform. First, the bankruptcy system should provide the amount of debt relief needed that an individual needs, no more and no less. Second, bankruptcy should be a last resort and not a first response to a financial crisis. As a businessman with over 16 years' experience in the private sector and because of many conversations that I have had with leaders, consumers and others who are associated with loan defaults, I am well aware of the problems that are associated with the abuse of our bankruptcy laws. A record 1.4 million personal bankruptcies were filed last year. That is one out of every 75 households in America. The debts that remained unpaid as a result of those bankruptcies each year cost American families that do pay their bills on time $550 a year in the form of higher cost for credit, goods and services. Unfortunately, much of the debt that was eventually passed on to the consumers last year was debt that bankruptcy filers could have avoided by simply repaying those bills because they had the ability. That is why it is so important to pass real bankruptcy reform. Opponents of this bill have tried to divert the discussion away from the merits of the bill and claim that it would make it more difficult for divorced women to obtain child support and alimony payments. However, nothing could be further from the truth. This bankruptcy reform protects the financial security of women and children by giving them a higher priority than under current law. The legislation closes loopholes that allow some debtors to use the current system to delay or even evade child support and alimony payments. The bill recognizes that no obligation is more important than that of a parent to his or her children. Currently, child support payments are the seventh priority, behind such things as attorney's fees. Make no mistake about this, H.R. 833 puts women and children first, at the head of the list. We should provide greater protection to families who are owed child support, and this bill will do just that. The bill also address other problems, including needs-based bankruptcy. The heart of this legislation is a needs-based formula that separates filers into Chapter 7 or Chapter 13 based upon their ability to pay. While many families may face job loss, divorce or medical bills, and therefore legitimately need the protection provided by the Bankruptcy Code, research has shown that some Chapter 7 filers actually have the capacity to repay some of what they owe. The formula directs into Chapter 13 those filers who earn more than the national median income which is roughly $51,000 for a family of four, if they can pay all secured debt and at least 20 percent of unsecured non-priority debt. This bill recognizes the need for consumer education and protection. It includes education provisions that will ensure that debtors are made aware of their options before they file for bankruptcy, including alternatives to bankruptcy such as credit counseling. And the bill cracks down on ``bankruptcy mills,'' law firms and other entities that push debtors into bankruptcy without fully explaining the consequences. I urge my colleagues to support this rule and the underlying legislation. Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. SESSIONS. Madam Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Linder), who is subcommittee chairman of the Subcommittee on Rules and Organization of the House.

Mr. SESSIONS. Madam Speaker, I yield the balance of my time to the gentleman from California (Mr. Dreier), the chairman of the Committee on Rules, to close debate.

Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I call up House Resolution 158 and ask for its immediate consideration.

Mr. SESSIONS. Madam Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Tennessee (Mr. Bryant), who is the vice chairman of the Subcommittee on Commercial and Administrative Law. (Mr. BRYANT asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. SESSIONS. Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Orlando, Florida (Mr. McCollum), the chairman of the Subcommittee on Crime. (Mr. McCOLLUM asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. SESSIONS. Madam Speaker, I object to the vote on the ground that a quorum is not present and make the point of order that a quorum is not present.

Mr. SESSIONS. Madam Speaker, I move the previous question on the resolution.

Mr. SESSIONS. Madam Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Chabot), a member of the Committee on the Judiciary.

Mr. SESSIONS

Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the rule today, and I want to extend my appreciation to the gentleman from California (Mr. Campbell) for his forthright and honest War Powers Resolution Act that he is bringing up. The purpose of the War Powers Resolution is to ensure that the collective judgment of both the Congress and the President will apply to the introduction of United States armed forces into hostilities or into situations where imminent involvement in the hostilities is clearly indicated by the circumstances, and to the continued use of such forces and hostilities or in such circumstances. What we are talking about today is a rule that would allow us the opportunity to bring forth the debate and the discussion about foreign policy and the use of troops in a foreign country. Mr. Speaker, what we are talking about is the use of ground forces that would be engaged in war, the debate about the probability and possibility that U.S. lives would be lost overseas. We intend to utilize this time to discuss not only our foreign policy, but what we intend to engage in and be involved in overseas. I am opposed to us being in Kosovo. I am opposed to the war being escalated and us not seeking a peaceful resolution. This is why a debate is so important. Obviously, the other side does not want to have this debate. Obviously, the President feels like that he does not even need to fall within the confines of this law. The bottom line is that what we are discussing is that which democracy brings about, which the laws of this country have brought about, and I believe that it is important for us to do this. Previous Presidents have submitted 72 prior reports on the War Powers Resolution. President Ford, 4; President Carter, 1; President Reagan, 14; President Bush, 7; and President Clinton, 46 times has asked for these types of powers. It is time that we openly engage in the debate.

Mr. SESSIONS

Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. Speaker, it is my pleasure to rise today in recognition of a group of young athletes from the Fifth Congressional District for an outstanding year in athletic achievement. On Saturday, December 12, 1998, the Trinidad Trojans became the first Henderson County high school football team to gain a state football championship in any division, by winning the six-man state championship game. This team of exceptional young athletes displayed the determination and tenacity required to achieve a perfect season by finishing the year with an unblemished record of 15-0. I would also like to recognize the Trojans' Coach, Kevin Ray for guiding these young men through training, practice and each test they met on the gridiron. The lessons that we learn from our High School Coaches apply throughout our lives and will resonate with Coach Ray's players for years to come. Thank you Coach Ray for your leadership and for preparing these players to achieve such monumental goals. I wish you luck in the 1999 season and Godspeed to your graduating seniors. Way to go Trojans!

Mr. SESSIONS

Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Barton) for yielding time to me, and allowing me an opportunity to stand up once again and to talk about why we need this important balanced budget limitation amendment. Last year we received 238 votes on the Floor of the House of Representatives. I believe that the importance of this vote means that we are talking about the future of our country. I think what we are talking about is accountability. I believe what we are talking about is responsibility. Just a few short years ago it was Republicans who made the case, as we argued all across this country, that millions, billions, and trillions, which is the amount of money that Congress deals with, was unwisely managed by the 40 years of Democrat control. We argued that we as conservatives and Republicans would respect the people who earned this money, for in the Fifth District of Texas, people deal with thousands of dollars and hundreds of dollars, not millions, billions, and trillions, so they were looking for someone to come to Congress who would understand that difference. I believe that is what I have done. I have brought to Washington, D.C. the same kind of responsibility and accountability that my colleagues have brought. Why does this matter? This matters because we have been able to control the spending that takes place here in Washington. Today we are talking about how we are going to control the tax scene. We both understand, all on this side understand, that the liberals in this country are all about tax and spend, tax and spend. Today accountability and responsibility will have another ring to it. When we talk about limiting taxes because of a supermajority, we are talking about helping once again interest rates in this country to go down even further. If we will guarantee that we will not raise taxes, I think we would see another reduction in interest rates, interest rates that rob each and every citizen in this country of the money they earn, also. Millions, billions, and trillions are not always easy to understand. I want to say for the American public, to put it into context for them today, put into other words, 1 million seconds equals 11 days, 1 billion seconds equals 32 years, and 1 trillion seconds equals 3,200 years. We do not confuse million, billion, and trillion on this side. The other side talks about tax and spend. I believe they do not understand where it comes from. We are going to ensure that we limit this taxing and spending. We are going to assure that we talk about accountability and responsibility, and it is the Republican Party that is standing up today, and conservatives across this country, who recognize that today, April 15, is the day the truth should be told once again. I support this bill.

Mr. SESSIONS

Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. Speaker, by the direction of the Committee on Rules, I call up House Resolution 138 and ask for its immediate consideration.

Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1\1/4\ minutes to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Miller), the chairman of the Subcommittee on the Census.