Bill Thomas

Mr. THOMAS

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

Mr. THOMAS. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and agree to the concurrent resolution (H. Con. Res. 206) permitting the use of the rotunda of the Capitol for a ceremony as part of the commemoration of the days of remembrance of victims of the Holocaust.

Mr. THOMAS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, the concurrent resolution that we have before us is a renewal of what has become an annual and a moving event. House Concurrent Resolution 206 permits the use of the rotunda in the Capitol for a ceremony as part of the commemoration of the days of remembrance of victims of the Holocaust. The two names most associated with requesting this event through the House of Representatives are the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Yates) and the gentleman from New York (Mr. Gilman). The sum and substance of this concurrent resolution is to allow for the physical use of the Capitol rotunda to remember, quite appropriately at the seat of freedom, the victims of the Holocaust. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. THOMAS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I want to commend the gentleman from Connecticut because what he has done is pointed out the fact that although a number of people believe this to have been a historical event with no real relevance to the present, the clear indication that there are people who are living who actually have this as a portion of their lives brings home how close it is to a number of Americans. I want to underscore the fact that when we began this commemorative, it was before the opening of the Holocaust Museum, and that it tended to appear to be an annual event. One of the nicer aspects of the Holocaust Museum as one of the key places to visit in the Capital today is that it is an ongoing remembrance, because clearly we do not want to just commemorate what occurred; we want to remember to make sure that it does not happen again.

Mr. THOMAS. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.

Mr. THOMAS

Mr. THOMAS. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on the concurrent resolution just considered.

Mr. THOMAS

Mr. THOMAS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I am not pleased that the primary argument being made is once again name calling and guilt by association. In the minority's own views that were filed today, they say there may have been mistakes, problems or even illegalities in the election in the 46th district. Our job was to get to the bottom of that. I am just sorry that there was an attempt to argue something entirely different than what this was about, and apparently it continues on the floor even today. It simply will not wash. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from California (Mr. Rohrabacher).

Mr. THOMAS. Mr. Speaker, that is correct.

Mr. THOMAS. Mr. Speaker, my assumption was that the time was ordered, the time was allotted, and the time should be consumed. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from California (Mr. Campbell), someone who has been extremely helpful in getting us to understand the mathematical theories and the false assumptions that have underlain previous attempts to examine elections. (Mr. CAMPBELL asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. THOMAS. Is the gentleman's intention to yield the additional minute, if necessary, or is he going to reserve it?

Mr. THOMAS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time. Mr. Speaker, I find it ironic the picture that is painted by the now minority in terms of this process. Would that someone who held a valid election certificate signed by the chief election officer of their State been allowed to be seated, the Democrats did not seat him. The Republicans honored the certificate of election. We do things differently than you do. You name-call. You argue that there is no fraud in this election and yet, based upon your minority report, you indicate that there were flaws in the election. You argue that the INS data is not sufficient for us to prove our point, but you use the same INS data to say that our point is invalid. You cannot have it both ways. I understand you are disappointed that you are no longer the majority and you can not continue to shut down questionable elections as you did for 40 years. But what this majority now will do on this case and in the future is to get to the bottom of problems in elections. One thing this House can do is thank Mr. Dornan because he looked at the Contested Election Act and said, it is a catch-22 if people can stonewall while trying to get to the bottom of it. It has been said on your side that you need to know the truth. The truth will set you free. What is wrong with trying to get to the bottom of what happened in an election? If you try to find out who the honest voters were, you are automatically a racist. If you try to determine an accurate count, it is a ``witch-hunt.'' What in the world do you folks do with a recent headline that says ``INS Proposing Citizenship Test Overhaul''? There is a new screening process to cut fraud and delays. It was the political people, the political appointees of the Department of Justice who stonewalled. We are familiar with that tactic from this administration. The professionals at INS cooperated initially in California. Had we gotten that kind of cooperation, we would have brought this to a conclusion much faster. We did not have a preordained result. We wanted to get to the bottom of it. We have gotten to the bottom of it as best we are able. We need to change the laws to fully understand who is on the rolls, responsibly and properly, and who is not.

Mr. THOMAS. Mr. Speaker, I would urge all colleagues to vote aye and I move the previous question on the resolution and on the preamble. The previous question was ordered. Motion to Recommit Offered by Mr. Hoyer

Mr. THOMAS. Mr. Speaker, I have a parliamentary inquiry.

Mr. THOMAS. As the motion was presented, it is its entirety. Can the gentleman then be partially for and partially against a motion to recommit? The gentleman is not opposed to the motion in its present form?

Mr. THOMAS. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentlewoman from Washington (Ms. Dunn), a former member of the committee.

Mr. THOMAS. I tell the gentleman that I have a number of speakers that want to speak a long time. The outrage of what went on requires a lot of time consumption.

Mr. THOMAS. One minute, Mr. Speaker, plus the time that people have been getting after each speaks.

Mr. THOMAS. My understanding from the Speaker is that you have 10 minutes more than we do. And it is usually customary in debate to try to even the time up. You have 25 minutes. We have 14.

Mr. THOMAS. Mr. Speaker, we have the right to close and we have two speakers. Is the gentleman from Maryland saying that he is the only one remaining or there will be additional ones arriving?

Mr. THOMAS

Mr. THOMAS. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Indiana for yielding. Mr. Speaker, I think it is appropriate at this time to rise and provide some facts for the record since there has been a series of statements that are just factually inaccurate. First of all, this is not a new or innovative idea, that is using Social Security numbers for voter identification. There are currently more than half a dozen States that do it. So my assumption is that those who have gone to the well on the other side of the aisle to argue that this is somehow un-American believe that the States of Georgia, Hawaii, Kentucky, New Mexico, South Carolina, Tennessee, and Virginia are all un-American because they utilize Social Security numbers for verification. In addition to that, I found it interesting that the gentlewoman from Connecticut (Mrs. Kennelly) is concerned about the burdens on the Social Security Administration, after we heard from the gentleman from Kentucky (Mr. Bunning) with his praise of the amendments that made sure none of the trust fund money would be spent. There are no dollars from the Social Security trust fund that are going to be utilized for this purpose. What the chairman did say, if we listened to him, was that the program was going to be modeled after an employer's program that is already on the books. We are allowing elected local officials to function as employers currently do in a pilot program. Returning to the question of the INS and its records, obviously after our inquiries and our attempt to work with the professionals at INS, although we were stonewalled by the political appointments at the Department of Justice, the INS professionals have come to realize that they have to do better; do better for all Americans. The Coopers & Lybrand report said that they are going to have to have digitized photographs and electronic fingerprints at several stages of the citizenship process. My assumption is that the INS and the Clinton administration will now be called racist because they want verification. What is wrong with verification? Frankly, if we have voter rolls that people know are honest, that would strengthen motor voter, not weaken it. To the degree we have people going on the rolls and we continue to have fraud in voting, there is going to be a massive effort to fundamentally reform the motor voter bill. This effort will be led by the local election officials who have to enforce motor voter. If my colleagues were truly interested in trying to make sure that a person's right to vote is protected, they would be supporting this kind of legislation. Then we can ensure that the rolls are accurate and that the motor voter law is not undermined.

Mr. THOMAS. Mr. Speaker, how much time do I have remaining?

Mr. THOMAS. Mr. Speaker, okay, then I will be with the gentleman in 3 minutes. Mr. Speaker, this is a very modest attempt, based on what we now know from the contested election in California's 46th District that there will be people who go to the polls and who will not be voting legally. Any Member who does not want to support this very reasonable check to provide election officials with tools to make sure their voting rolls are accurate are, in fact, damaging the very argument they argue that they are trying to support, and that is the advances that we have made in allowing more people to come on the rolls would be sustained.

Mr. THOMAS

Mr. THOMAS. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks on House Resolution 355, the resolution just agreed to.

Mr. THOMAS

Mr. THOMAS. Mr. Speaker, it gives me great pleasure to congratulate a truly exemplary individual, Lynelle Echeverria, upon being named the 1998 Kern County Cattlewoman of the Year. The Kern County cattle industry has bestowed this award upon Lynelle because of her superb achievements in the beef industry as well as her contributions to the community. Lynelle has devoted many years supporting the beef industry at both local and state levels. She chairs the highly successful fund-raiser titled ``The Celebration of Western Culture'', which is held every year in Kern County. She also has led the Kern County Cattlewomen's Association and is a member of the scholarship committee for the California Cattlewomen. Her long-time involvement and dedication to the industry deserves recognition. It did not take long for Lynelle to know that she was born to be a cattlewoman. She joined the renowned girls riding group, ``the Wranglerettes'' at age 11 and performed with them until she was 21. She went on to Cal Poly, majoring in biological sciences with an emphasis on Botany. In addition to her untiring commitment to the industry, Lynelle also contributes to her community. She is a notable Western artist who has painted, taught and participated in art shows across the country. She has been an active member of the Women Artists of the West for the past 10 years. Somewhere in between she found time to raise a family along with her husband Matt, who is Senior Vice-President of the Tejon Ranch Company and President of the California Cattlemen's Association. They have two children, Debbie and Michael. Lynelle Echeverria is a remarkable woman who aptly fits the role of Cattlewoman of the Year. She embodies the spirit and dedication of family in one of the West's most historic industries. She has dedicated her life to the cattle industry but also to her family and community. I am proud to congratulate her on being named the Kern County Cattlewoman of the Year.

Mr. THOMAS

Mr. THOMAS. Mr. Speaker, I am proud to have this opportunity to recognize John Tracy of Buttonwillow, California. John Tracy, a fourth generation Kern County rancher, is the recipient of the 1998 ``Kern County Cattleman of the Year'' award. Kern County is one of the country's biggest agricultural counties, and cattle are one of Kern's most important products. The Tracy family has been in Kern County over 120 years, and John is carrying on in his family's footsteps. John took over running his family's ranch when he was just 22 years old, after the death of his father. Armed with a Bachelor of Science in farm management from Cal Poly, Mr. Tracy carried on his family's proud heritage and made many innovations in the ranch's operation. Among these were reorganizing his cow-calf grazing operation into an intensive feedlot enterprise and using agricultural by-products in a scientifically balanced nutrition program, thus making conservation and recycling work. Since taking over his family's operation nearly 30 years ago, John Tracy has become an integral and active part of the agricultural community in Kern County. He has been director of both the Kern County Cattlemen's Association and the California Beef Council. The work of John and his family with the Kern County Fair's Junior Livestock Auction has made him an outstanding role model, as well as for the young people of Kern County. John Tracy has earned the respect and admiration of his peers and of his neighbors. He has served as Buttonwillow's honorary Mayor and last year received the Buttonwillow Peace Officers Recognition of Merit. He has been described by other ranchers as ``a 21st century businessman with 19th century cattleman values.'' As director of the California Cattlemen's Association, he has worked on behalf of other cattlemen against the inheritance tax, so that family farms, like his own, can be passed from one generation to the next. He has also worked for grazing and endangered species reform. I sometimes think that people like John Tracy should be at the top of the nation's endangered species list; he is a family rancher, struggling against nature, a tough economy, and federal encroachment, while trying to keep his family's proud heritage intact so he can pass it to the next generation. I congratulate John Tracy on being Kern County's Cattleman of the Year.