Charles Taylor

Mr. TAYLOR of North Carolina

Mr. TAYLOR of North Carolina. Mr. Chairman, I yield 7 minutes to the gentleman from Oklahoma (Mr. Coburn). (Mr. COBURN asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. TAYLOR of North Carolina. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. TAYLOR of North Carolina. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Pitts).

Mr. TAYLOR of North Carolina. Mr. Chairman, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Smith).

Mr. TAYLOR of North Carolina. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.

Mr. TAYLOR of North Carolina. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent that all debates on this amendment and all amendments thereto close in 30 minutes, and that the time be equally divided among the parties.

Mr. TAYLOR of North Carolina. Mr. Chairman, I believe that this is not legislating. It is not subject to a point of order. The Board wishes to spend and does spend interest earned on the money that it has without this body's appropriating it. It would be somewhat analogous to the Treasurer of the United States investing money of the people of the United States, and then stating that he, himself, could spend that money without it being appropriated by the people of the United States. So I do not believe that this is subject to a point of order.

Mr. TAYLOR of North Carolina. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the amendment. Mr. Chairman, I agree, when you are talking about $5.2 billion, which is an enormous amount of money for a city that is a little over 500,000 people, $600,000 or a little under $600,000 is not a lot of money. What we are going to do as a body in performing our duty many times is to speak about, in small sums, to make points about what has happened to this city over a number of years. As I mentioned a moment ago, it has not been just the money. It does not need a new or additional appropriation, but it has been mismanaged in such a callous way that the entire nation knows that it has been mismanaged. I pointed out a moment ago about the latest newspaper story about the welfare department making almost $12,000 of 1-900 sex calls from the department. That was today. If you look at the ANCs, you will see that there have been numerous abuses. In fact, the newspapers point out that for 20 years, the ANC has fallen short of what its purpose was aimed for in the beginning. The District Auditor has pointed out that numerous times the ANC has failed to meet the requirements that the city provides in accounting or any other phase. In fact, the auditor in this headline points out, the D.C. auditor's office has recommended the city cut off funds to the Advisory Neighborhood Commission in the northwest until its books are balanced. In addition, we have a letter from the D.C. Federation of Civic Associations, and they recommend, by resolution, Resolved, that it is the sense of the Executive Committee that the Federation of Civic Associations should work through the Committee of the ANC toward recommendations that the Advisory Neighborhood Commissions be abolished. Now, we have the auditor recommending abolition, we have the D.C. Federation of Civic Associations, and your own good judgment should tell you, we should not continue to fund these associations. We have internal financial controls, and I will point out that grants awarded by the ANC are in violation of laws, internal financial control procedures are not followed, questionable disbursements are disallowed, diversions of funds to personnel use of the commissioners, noncompliance with financial guidelines, inadequate record keeping. Thirty-two percent of the ANCs had not filed required quarterly reports, 19 percent have not filed those reports in a year, and one has not filed in four years. Over one-half of the money appropriated to the ANCs are not spent due to the ANC failures. Now, this is an example. It harkens back to a time in D.C. that we are trying to remedy. It should not be kept in a thought of reminiscence. It should be abolished. We should abolish this fund, and then talk with the City Council, and they would have the right to come forward to see if there is really a need for the ANCs. Now, the purpose of the ANC essentially is to represent people in the District with a number of their problems. Few communities get $600,000 for the community to come forward and represent them. We have a City Council with Members paid $85,000 per member to represent the people of this city. We have the Control Board, not elected, but appointed, that represents in some sense the people of the city. We have the gentlewoman from the District of Columbia (Ms. Norton), who is a nonvoting Member of Congress, who represents the people of the city, and she does it quite effectively. Every Member of Congress represents the people of this city. So, I would say, let us delete this $600,000 expenditure and move forward.

Mr. TAYLOR of North Carolina. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word. Mr. Chairman, I am not going to object to the amendment at this time, I am not going to object to this language at this time. The gentleman came to me for a $7 million study for the EPA to determine the extent of the environmental pollution at Lorton. We put that together and submitted the language to the gentleman as quickly as we could, and the gentleman stated through the staff, that the report language regarding those funds was adequate. Now, as the gentleman knows, there are a number of attempts to use this appropriations bill to remove the Lorton prison from the rightful control of the Department of Interior and to make transfers for the land, either part or all of it, without compensation to the city of D.C. which has a $3.7 billion debt unwritten by the American taxpayer, and the thought is to pass it to northern Virginia. Now I am sure the gentleman would agree that the authorizing committee of jurisdiction should deal with these issues and the entire Congress should be apprised as to what disposal is made of that money, and I would hate to think that it would be taken away from the District of Columbia to go to a park in northern Virginia. I can only say that there are a number of Democrats and a number of Republicans who have expressed concern about this transfer if it should happen, and I have reason to believe that it might. One Member of Congress in northern Virginia stated in a statement that was sent out by hundreds of thousands of leaflets: My preference is to devote a substantial amount of this property; that is, these 3,000 acres of Lorton prison, to the Northern Virginia Park Authority, to provide for a quality affordable golf course and some other things. Now this is one of the most wealthy parts of the State of Virginia, and I would hate to see the people of D.C. deprived of the money or the exchange of this property and realize nothing. I would also point out some nine pages have been presented to the Committee on Rules that would have set the matter up for transfer under the General Services Administration of any property on which the Lorton Correction Complex shall be transferred, to the Northern Virginia Recreation Park Authority. Now what I am saying is I will not object to the gentleman's amendment, but I will fight very strongly in conference any attempt to change language that would allow this property to be taken away from the people of this Nation and the people of DC without any compensation or recognition without the full understanding and agreement by this body.

Mr. TAYLOR of North Carolina. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself the balance of my time. In this year's bill we have appropriated $500 million more to the city than was appropriated last year. So we have not denied this city financially. It has always been a question of management, not money. In fact, every day you read about mismanagement in this city. In today's newspapers there was an article about $11,376 used over a two-month period by the Child Welfare Department for sex calls. The article was printed in this morning's papers. Every day there is mismanagement pointed up in the press. It is not a question of money. It has been a question of discipline, of obeying the law and of moving forward. We have tried to put all of this together, adequate funds with adequate discipline. We hope this body will vote for this bill.

Mr. TAYLOR of North Carolina. Mr. Chairman, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. Riggs) from the Committee on Education and the Workforce.

Mr. TAYLOR of North Carolina. Mr. Chairman, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Mica) who is a member of the Committee on Government Reform and Oversight.

Mr. TAYLOR of North Carolina. Mr. Chairman, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from Kansas (Mr. Tiahrt), who is an outstanding member of our subcommittee.

Mr. TAYLOR of North Carolina. They certainly did. But Madison pointed out there are situations throughout this land where the Federal Government will have its own rules, and the capital city will be one. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. TAYLOR of North Carolina. I will yield to the gentlewoman from the District of Columbia one more time.

Mr. TAYLOR of North Carolina. No, I am pointing out that Congress had an experience in Philadelphia where they determined as a body, and it was enacted and in the Constitution in the beginning, deliberately wanting to have control of the capital city. It was not a mistake. It was not something that was meant to be abrogated by some section of the Constitution later on. It was the deliberate intent of the framers of the Constitution. And I say that we will have to amend that by a constitutional amendment.

Mr. TAYLOR of North Carolina. I yield to the gentlewoman from the District of Columbia.

Mr. TAYLOR of North Carolina. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume to say that I do not wish to get into a long constitutional debate with my good friend, the gentlewoman from the District of Columbia (Ms. Norton). Of course, in the Federalist Papers Mr. Madison specifically addressed this at some length, about the duty of the Congress to administer the Capital city. And he said, among other things, ``It is the indispensable necessity of complete authority at the seat of government that carries its own evidence.'' Each of us in the Congress have a duty to administer the budget of the city of Washington. It is our Nation's Capital. And I would hope if it is ever changed, it will be changed in the due course of a constitutional amendment that would require us to do our duty within the law.

Mr. TAYLOR of North Carolina. Mr. Chairman, I would like to announce also that a member of our committee, the gentleman from California (Mr. Cunningham), is in the hospital for surgery. The surgery was successful and he is doing fine and we wish him well. He submitted a letter today showing his support for the bill and his constant concern for education, for which he has made a major contribution to this committee. I ask that his letter be included for the Record. Chairman Taylor: As you know, I would much rather be with you today working on the people's business than to be where I am now. I appreciate everyone's get well wishes, and want you to know that I'm doing fine. I'm keeping an eye on you via C- SPAN. And I'll be back in action very soon. Mr. Chairman, as a member of the DC Appropriations subcommittee, I appreciate you entrusting me with the task of working on the education provisions of the District of Columbia Appropriations bill. This is tough work. Washington is a world capital, but the educational opportunities for the District's children have for years fallen far short of world- class. However, I am pleased to say that we are seeing real signs of progress for the children of the District: First, math and reading test scores are up in every grade-- not as much as we would like, but they are up. Second, the evidence shows that the children of Washington, D.C., want to learn. This is true of children everywhere. But when the Washington Scholarship Fund offered 1,000 opportunity scholarships to children of low-income families to have the same educational choice as Washington's wealthy citizens, the Fund received over 7,000 education scholarship applications. And this summer, some 20,000 students signed up for summer school--many of them without having been assigned to attend. And third, the DC Schools new superintendent, Dr. Arlene Ackerman, has cut bloated central office bureaucracy, and is placing the schools' focus on the things that count: teaching and learning. She's getting it done. So we are seeing changes in the right direction--changes that this DC Appropriations bill rewards with out support and our confidence. This bill provides $545 million in local funds for DC schools, which is the full funding request. And the bill fully funds innovative public charter schools--32.6 million, sufficient for a significant increase in enrollment and in the number of charter schools. The House will have an additional chance to provide the children of the district even more educational choice and opportunity. I want to express my support for Rep. Armey's amendment to provide opportunity scholarships for tuition and tutoring for thousands of the district's least fortunate young people. Last April, my Irish colleague Mr. Moran, the subcommittee's ranking member, gave an eloquent speech for opportunity scholarships for the District's children. He said, ``85 percent of the children in Ward 3, the wealthiest ward in this city, have a choice of schools, and they choose to send their kids to private schools. Why should the parents in other wards of the city not have the same choice? Why should their kids suffer so because of the accident of their birth?'' He went on to say, ``It is not fair to deny hope to even 2,000 children. What is fair is to support this bill.'' And I agree. Let's give the District's children a fighting chance to achieve the American Dream. Let's make sure they get a good education. For the children,, and for their future, I urge my colleagues to support the DC bill. With warm regards, Your wingman, Randy ``Duke'' Cunningham, Member of Congress. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Davis), who is the authorizing chairman for D.C.

Mr. TAYLOR of North Carolina. Mr. Chairman, I wish to be heard on the point of order.

Mr. TAYLOR of North Carolina. Mr. Chairman, I move that the Committee do now rise.

Mr. TAYLOR of North Carolina. Reclaiming my time, I will do anything to cut time, so I would do that.

Mr. TAYLOR of North Carolina. I yield to the gentleman from Virginia.

Mr. TAYLOR of North Carolina

Mr. TAYLOR of North Carolina. Mr. Speaker, I ask consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks on H.R. 4380, and that I may include tabular and extraneous material.

Mr. TAYLOR of North Carolina

Mr. TAYLOR of North Carolina. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that during the further consideration of H.R. 4380 in the Committee of the Whole, pursuant to H. Res. 517, no amendment shall be in order thereto except for the following amendments, which shall be considered as read, shall not be subject to amendment or to a demand for a division of the question in the House or in the Committee of the Whole, and shall be debatable for the time specified, equally divided and controlled by the proponent and a Member opposed thereto: Mr. Largent, made in order under the rule for 15 minutes; Mr. Bilbray, made in order under the rule for 10 minutes; Mr. Barr of Georgia regarding ballot initiative and the Controlled Substances Act for 10 minutes; and Mr. Armey made in order under the rule for 50 minutes.