Louise Slaughter

Ms. SLAUGHTER

Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Dingell), the ranking member of the Committee on Commerce. (Mr. DINGELL asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Louisiana (Mr. Jefferson).

Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Wynn).

Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Bentsen). (Mr. BENTSEN asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Stenholm). (Mr. STENHOLM asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Doggett).

Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. (Ms. SLAUGHTER asked and was given permission to revise and extend her remarks.)

Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Georgia for yielding me the customary 30 minutes. Mr. Speaker, this is a noncontroversial measure that came out of the Committee on Ways and Means unanimously. The measure would repeal over 3 years the 3 percent telephone excise tax imposed originally to finance the Spanish-American War. Under the bill, the 3 percent tax would be reduced to 2 percent 30 days after it becomes law, it will drop to 1 percent October 1, 2001, and would be fully repealed on October 1, 2002. The tax has been repealed on two previous occasions, but was brought back in different forms to pay for World War I and World War II, and then increased to help fund the Vietnam War. It was made permanent in 1990, with the money going into the general treasury. Phasing out this excise tax is a worthy objective, as is it is becoming increasingly difficult to administer as technological advances blur the distinction between taxable and nontaxable communications services. I would echo the concerns expressed by the administration, however, that this revision should be enacted as part of an overall budget framework for maintaining fiscal discipline, for paying down the national debt and for extending the solvency of Medicare and Social Security. The administration estimates that Federal receipts would be reduced by $1.5 billion in fiscal year 2001 and $20 billion over fiscal years 2000 to 2005. Mr. Speaker, again, I do not oppose the underlying bill, but the Committee on Rules missed a golden opportunity during consideration of this measure, an opportunity to address what is rapidly becoming a digital divide in our Nation between those who have access to technology and those who do not. Several of my colleagues offered amendments to tackle this divide, but the majority in the Committee on Rules chose to disallow their consideration. I am going to urge Members to vote no on the previous question, and, if the previous question is defeated, I will offer an amendment to the rule to make in order the Towns-Waters-Dingell substitute and the Wynn substitute. Both of these proposals immediately cut the telephone excise tax from 3 percent to 1 percent, and then eliminate it altogether by September 30, 2002. The Democratic amendments would use the revenues from the phased-out telecommunications excise tax to fund various programs and grants designed to bridge the digital divide. No one doubts that electronic commerce has the opportunity to dominate our country's economic future, but this will happen only if electronic commerce is available to everyone in the country. Electronic commerce cannot work if low-income populations in our urban centers, in our rural communities, as well as Native Americans, do not have access to it. The Federal Government has the responsibility for ensuring that our children and adults have the opportunity to acquire the skills needed to succeed in a digital work world. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Pallone).

Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. 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.

Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Maine (Mr. Allen).

Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Kansas (Mr. Moore).

Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I urge Members to vote no on the previous question. If the previous question is defeated, I will offer an amendment to the rule to make in order two substitutes. The Towns substitute phases out the telecommunications excise tax more quickly than the underlying bill and sets aside the proceeds in a Digital Bridge Trust fund. The Wynn substitute also sets aside the revenues to fund various programs to overcome the digital divide. If the previous question is defeated, Members will have the opportunity to vote up or down on those proposals. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to insert the text of the amendment to the resolution and extraneous materials into the Congressional Record immediately prior to the vote.

Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I urge a no vote on the previous question so that we may debate all the issues. Mr. Speaker, I include the amendment to the resolution and extraneous material that I referred to earlier, as follows: Amendment to H. Res. 511, the Rule Providing for Consideration of H.R. 3916, to Repeal the Telephone Excise Tax On page 2, line 7, after ``Ways and Means;'' strike ``and (2)'' and add the following: ``(2) without intervention of any point of order, one hour of debate on the amendment in the nature of a substitute printed in section 2 of this resolution to be offered by Representative Towns of New York, equally divided and controlled by the proponent and an opponent; (3) without intervention of any point of order, one hour of debate on the amendment in the nature of a substitute printed in section 3 of this resolution to be offered by Representative Wynn of Maryland, equally divided and controlled by the proponent and an opponent; and (4)'' On page 2, after line 8, add the following: Section 2. Amendment in the Nature of a Substitute to H.R. 3916, as Reported Offered by Mr. Towns of New York, Ms. Waters of California, or Mr. Dingell of Michigan Strike all after the enacting clause and insert the following:

Ms. SLAUGHTER

Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, even as we talk on the floor, the Chinese are planning not to comply with any of this. They say already that they have a cautious, go-slow approach, otherwise they will risk widespread unrest that could undermine their rule. They are not going to comply with WTO's 5-year rule. They say they will do everything they can to shelter their industries, and that is no surprise to us. Yesterday, on the floor, a colleague told me about a General Motors plant closing down in his district in Flint, and the last act that those workers had to do was to undo that piece of machinery and crate it up to be shipped over to its new homes and its new workers; and then General Motors had the effrontery to classify that as an export. Do we want to see that happen to all the jobs in this country? We want to trade with China, and we will trade with China. But would it not be wonderful if, for one chance in our life, that this would be absolutely fair trade? We are not going to be selling any goods over there. Everything is going to be manufactured there, as other colleagues have said before, and brought right back here at one-twentieth of the cost manufactured here, but it will be sold here at the maximum they could get.

Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to this bill. This is not a vote to trade or not to trade--the issue is yearly oversight or no oversight. Given China's record of violating virtually every international agreement it enters into, the leverage of oversight is critical. Trade and Oversight are not mutually exclusive. We can have both. Even U.S. Trade Representatives Charlene Barshefsky, during recent testimony before the House Ways and Means Committee, acknowledged that the U.S. could obtain all of the tariff cuts China would be required to make upon entry into the WTO even if Congress did not grant PNTR. The same arguments for PNTR were put forth by proponents of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA). The result of NAFTA has been 500,000 lost jobs for American workers and a ballooning trade deficit with Mexico of $22 billion. Why will no one talk about the impact of this agreement on our trade deficit? There is considerable foreign capital in our stock market which will leave the US if a better deal arises. Our overall trade deficit has already surpassed $331 billion, a figure that is beginning to sound alarms for many financial analysts concerned about the long- term stability of the U.S. dollar. The Secretary of the Treasury told me Monday and this problem must be addressed. Moreover, the $2 billion in goods the U.S. exports to China are not purchased by the Chinese. They are merely supplies for the U.S. plants that are operating there. Compare that to the fact that the Chinese sell $80 billion in goods to the US annually. If the Chinese continue their practice of not buying US goods, this will not be a home run for American China continues to threaten Taiwan, a country our nation has pledged to protect. Granting PNTR would send the wrong signal to Bejing that military action against Taiwan would be tolerated. Finally, large companies have lobbied hard for Congress to pass PNTR for China. Corporations must be concerned about their bottom line. But the 570,000 persons I represent have other issues. There has been no ground swell for this trade deal from our community. I have even received some letters from workers who say they've been asked to write in favor of PNTR but they fear if it passes, it will mean the loss of their jobs. Chinese laborers earn only one twentieth what American workers do. Trade will go on. Wouldn't it be nice if it were fair trade. Mr. Speaker, I include for the Record an article from yesterday's New York Times, as follows: [From the New York Times, May 23, 2000] Joining the Club: Like Others, China Will Try to Protect Its Own Industries (By Craig S. Smith) Shanghai, May 22--Sun Guomin, a poor farmer in a village west of here, represents an example of why American business executives and government officials may be disappointed once China enters the World Trade Organization. While American businesses have been dreaming of the vast potential markets for their goods and services in China, the government is unlikely to allow the West the kind of access those dreams are made of. For if Beijing immediately did everything the trade organization requires, Mr. Sun and millions like him could be driven out of business. And with droves of laid-off workers already mounting sporadic protests across the country, giving foreign competition a hand in wiping out whole industries could amount to political suicide for China's governing Communist Party. Agriculture is one of the most vulnerable areas. Mr. Sun, 68, is struggling to get by on his six and a half acres of land in the village of Nansong, west of Shanghai, where he lives in a mud house on a dirt path with his wife, Chen Baonan. He has already stopped growing barely, once a major crop in this part of the flat Yangtze River delta, because it does not pay. He and his neighbors still grow rapeseeed, the source of canola oil, and the plant's brilliant yellow flowers carpet the delta with color each spring. But the price the government pays for rapeseed has fallen so low, Mr. Sun says, that he is better off pressing the seeds himself and using the cooking oil at home. He would gladly lease his field to a factory, but the government will not let him, citing a need to preserve farmland. He and his wife have opened a small store in the front of their house, where they make about five cents a day selling cigarettes and beer. Joining the W.T.O. threatens to make China's agricultural economics even worse. Last year China imported record quantities of rapeseed and soybeans, because foreign oilseed production is cheaper and the quality often higher than that of domestically grown crops. But to enter the trade group, China has agreed to lift quotas that it now uses to restrict the import of edible oils. A surge in imports would further dampen demand for seeds from people like Mr. Sun. The problem exists pretty much across the board. The Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, a top government research institute in Beijing, recently estimated that prices for Chinese grain and other agricultural products would continue to exceed those of the global market for the next 20 years. Thanks to huge mechanized farms, the American cost of production is often lower than that in China, where farming employs as many as 600 million people, fields are fragmented and transportation is slow. And many other labor-intensive industries are in the same boat. Many of the country's 100-plus automobile assembly plants face extinction if imports surge as tariffs fall, and chemical plants could be crippled by foreign competition. The Chinese government wants to reform the economy, but it favors a cautious, go-slow approach rather than risk widespread unrest that could undermine its rule. ``It's important to think about stability,'' said Zhou Hanming, a lawyer who advises the government about the W.T.O. Mr. Zhou says that the two to five years in which the organization requires members to put most of its mandated measures into effect is too short a time, and that China will do what it must to shelter industries until they are ready to face global competition. ``We're working very hard on a large number of new laws and regulations that will offer protection of national industries, vulnerable industries, infant industries,'' he said. Mr. Zhou, one of dozens of experts Beijing has enlisted to prepare the country to defend its industries, is studying ways to use anti-dumping rules. Under China's trade deal with the United States, Washington insisted that it be allowed to levy punitive duties against imports that it deems to be sold below cost. Washington wanted the clause to protect the American textile industry from cheap Chinese imports, but China has seized on the provision to protect its own threatened industries. ``We're going to learn how to use the same weapon,'' Mr. Zhou said. The country will also use other means to give threatened industries an edge, including preferential bank loans and tax breaks. And Beijing may end longstanding tax breaks for foreign companies that were intended to encourage investment. But China does hope to use its membership in the trade group as a lever to move moribund state industries toward real reform. Take the pharmaceutical industry, which still relies largely on copies, often illegal, of Western compounds. China will come under pressure from the group to enforce the intellectual property rights of foreign drug makers. To survive, Chinese pharmaceutical firms will have to invest in research and development and begin producing original drugs. ``The pressure will help force us to depend on ourselves,'' said Wang Li, general manager of the Shanghai Joy Biopharm Company, a state-owned drug laboratory started five years ago to develop commercially viable pharmaceuticals for the domestic industry. And China hopes that membership in the group will spur foreign investment, which fell last year for the first time since investors withdrew after the crackdown on pro-democracy protesters at Tianamen Square in June 1989. Multinational corporations have already begun signaling their willingness to pump more money into China after it joins. Nonetheless, protection is high on Beijing's agenda. China is not known for its strict adherence to trade agreements. In 1995, Trade Minister Wu Yi signed a deal with the United States trade representative, Charlene Barshefsky, that promised to protect American intellectual property rights. But counterfeiting of computer software and movies on compact disks is now more common than ever. Street hawkers sell the latest Hollywood blockbusters in most Chinese cities, and the police ignore the activity. Nor has China proven a progressive member of another trade club. As a member of the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation forum, it has resisted moves to speed the liberalization of financial services. * * * * *

Ms. SLAUGHTER

Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, today I would like to take a moment to recognize the 80th birthday of Dick Dougherty, a man who has spent over 50 years of his life involved in journalism in New York State. Currently, he is widely known by the people of Rochester, New York for his editorials in the Democrat and Chronicle, our hometown paper. I consider him to be a national treasure and without the dose of sanity and humor his column provides me five days a week I would be lost. According to his wife Pat, Dick's family was not certain about his future success after he flunked out of his first year of engineering school at Duke University. After this, he went on to serve in the military as a soldier on the European front during WWII. When he came home, his perseverance led him to complete a journalism degree at Syracuse University. On June 15, 1948 he began his 50 year career with his first journalism job at the Binghamton Press. After two years with the Binghamton paper Dick came to Rochester as a reporter for the morning Democrat and Chronicle and has remained in our city ever since. In 1975 he was assigned by the Times-Union, a Rochester afternoon paper until 1997, to report on a transcontinental bicycle trip. It was on this trip that he discovered his unique talent and love for reaching out and touching the lives of others with his words. At the age of 56 when most people are beginning to look forward to retirement Dick began his career as a columnist by writing an editorial three times a week for the Times-Union paper. This column now runs daily in the Democrat and Chronicle as Dick continues to captivate the people of Rochester with his unique point of view and perspective on life. Personally, I love to share his columns with my friends, family, colleagues and I have been known to send them to the President. It is my distinct privilege to recognize Dick Dougherty as a resident of my home district in Rochester, New York. I offer him my heartfelt congratulations on the celebration of his 80th birthday on May 9th, 2000 and I invite my colleagues to do the same as we acknowledge this significant and important man.

Ms. SLAUGHTER

Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I was unavoidably detained on business and unable to be present for rollcall vote No. 187. Had I been present, I would have voted ``no.''

Ms. SLAUGHTER

Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I was unavoidably detained on business and unable to be present for rollcall vote No. 192. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yes''.

Ms. SLAUGHTER

Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, today I commemorate the life of Dr. Renan Beckman, who on February 29, 2000, died of multiple gun shot wounds at the age of 45. I had the bittersweet pleasure of meeting Renan's mother and children, who were here in Washington, DC for the Million Mom March. As a young woman, Renan was a model student, graduating Phi Beta Kappa from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology before receiving her medical degree from Johns Hopkins Medical School. After completing her education, Renam married Robert Wills. She was a loving mother to two children, while at the same time she worked as an anesthesiologist and primary care physician at Calkins Health Commons in Henrietta, New York. Sadly Renan and her husband began having marital difficulties, and they moved toward divorcing. Dr. Robert Wills, who had no criminal record, purchased a 12-gauge shotgun on February 7 from a local sporting goods store. On February 29, Renan called 911 and in response to the operator's questioning said, ``No, there is no gun in the house.'' Renan died three minutes later of multiple shot gun blasts fired at close range by her husband. This kind of domestic violence is unfortunately not unique in my district or elsewhere in our country. However, Renan's death also highlights the fact that domestic violence can cross all class, race, and age boundaries. I hope Renan's death will serve as an inspiration to us all on why further gun control is needed in this country. The unexpected passing of Renan Beckman has left a void in her family and the community. We will miss her greatly. My thoughts and prayers are with her family and all her friends. Mr. Speaker, and colleagues, I ask that you join me in paying tribute to the life of Renan Beckman.

Ms. SLAUGHTER

Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I was unavoidably detained on business and unable to be present for rollcall vote No. 183. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yes'' on rollcall vote No. 183. (Mr. DINGELL asked and was given permission to speak out of order for 5 minutes.)

Ms. SLAUGHTER

Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Washington for yielding me the customary 30 minutes, and I yield myself such time as I may consume. (Ms. SLAUGHTER asked and was given permission to revise and extend her remarks.)

Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, we have an extraordinary measure before us today. The Conservation and Reinvestment Act, CARA, H.R. 701, is the most sweeping commitment to the protection of America's public land, marine and wildlife resources in over a generation. Utilizing the proceeds from offshore oil and gas development, this measure will provide steady funding for the preservation of our natural resources for decades to come. These offshore revenues were promised for this objective 36 years ago, and this bill fulfills and builds on that commitment. Mr. Speaker, this has been a critical program for many areas of the country. In just a few years' time, from the late 1970s, early 1980, my district in Monroe County received over $2 million for recreational areas, neighborhood parks and historic preservation. Today, more than ever, our Nation's natural resources are under enormous pressure from development, congestion, pollution and competition. Communities like Rochester, New York, are fighting to preserve the open spaces that exist. I am delighted that my district will once again have the tools to preserve our community for future generations. Mr. Speaker, H.R. 701 provides Federal, State and local communities the ability to work cooperatively with private organizations and citizens to preserve these resources for the future. This legislation contains no incentives for additional offshore oil development. Supporters have built a nationwide coalition ranging from State and local officials, sporting organizations, environmental groups, wildlife and recreation organizations, historic preservationists, professional sports teams, police, and many, many more. Mr. Speaker, 316 Members of Congress, of the House, are sponsoring this measure, and I am proud to be one of them. Mr. Speaker, H.R. 701 includes many environmental goals my colleagues and I have worked towards for years, including full and permanent funding of the Land and Water Conservation Fund, increasing funding for State fish and wildlife programs, increased incentives to conserve endangered species by private landowners, and increased support for coastal conservation programs. The San Francisco Chronicle said it best when it urged Congress to ``reclaim this opportunity to enhance the Nation's quality of life. It is past time for Washington to live up to the bargain with the American people and their natural resources that Congress made in 1964. The Miller-Young bill would do just that. The House would accept no substitutes or weakening amendments, and a deal is a deal, and the Land and Water Conservation Fund is a particularly good one.'' That is a quote from the San Francisco Chronicle, May 8, 2000. Mr. Speaker, the rule before us today is a structured rule, and while the rule makes in order numerous amendments, it still restricts full and open debate. An open rule would have allowed Members the opportunity to consider all germane amendments, but nevertheless, I will not oppose this rule. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Stenholm). (Mr. STENHOLM asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Oregon (Mr. Blumenauer).