Lee Terry

Mr. TERRY

Mr. TERRY. Mr. Speaker, I come to the floor today with a heavy heart. I am here to express the sadness and loss all Nebraskans feel at the passing of a selfless leader and volunteer, Dr. Liz Karnes. Dr. Karnes embodied the best values of our State. Her good deeds and commitment to public service are greatly admired. She is well known for her 17 years of service on the District 66 School Board in Omaha and her work as a member of the Omaha Airport Authority, and her national policy work on behalf of children and schools. But she is most known and committed to her finest work, raising her four daughters. A 1967 graduate of Westside herself, Karnes went on to earn her doctoral degree in education administration. Along the way she graduated magna cum laude from the University of Nebraska, where she met her future husband, Dave Karnes. When Senator Karnes was appointed a U.S. Senator, Dr. Karnes accompanied her husband to Washington and worked as a volunteer assistant to First Lady Barbara Bush to advocate literacy. In March 1991, Dr. Karnes was diagnosed with ovarian cancer. She began a courageous battle against the disease and she would survive. But in 2001 she developed kidney cancer which led to the complications that claimed her life late last week. Dr. Karnes heroically fought cancer and its complications for 12 years. Her faith in God and the loving support of her family, friends, and colleagues kept her spirits strong, but Dr. Karnes was the real fighter. She continued to attend meetings and family events throughout her ordeal. She did not let her cancer come between her and her family, her work or her advocacy for the issues she believed in. Today we must redefine our definition of the word ``hero.'' Our heros are closer to us. They are visible. They are walking among us. Dr. Karnes is such a hero.

Mr. TERRY

Mr. TERRY. Mr. Speaker, perhaps more than ever in our Nation's history, at least since the Revolutionary War, our citizens are rising up to their responsibilities to be on guard and report suspicious behavior and activities. Often these patriotic deeds go unnoticed and unheralded. This is true of one such person in my district. Harvey Rothman, a resident of Omaha, Nebraska, in 1987 was working as a trade specialist for the U.S. Department of Commerce. During that time, he received a phone call from a businessman who believed that some of his product was being delivered illegally to the country of Libya. Based on that information, Mr. Rothman brought the businessmen together with the Commerce's Department of Export Administration. That led to an investigation revealing that $275,000 in steel pipe was being diverted from Hanover, Germany, to the terrorist country Libya. As a result, an additional quarter million dollars' worth of product destined to this same terrorist country was canceled. Mr. Speaker, I bring this story to the attention of the House now not to give Harvey Rothman a pat on the back, which he has deserved over these past many years, but because it is a wonderful example to all our citizens that their watchfulness and vigilance could save lives and stop our enemies from terrorist acts.

Mr. TERRY

Mr. TERRY. Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the gentleman yielding me time. When I heard our ranking member, the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Dingell) talk about our rural co-ops, first of all, I heard from him a great deal when we passed this 2 years ago; but I have not heard from him, so it came as a surprise to me. But also I have in my hand a letter from the North American Electric Reliability Council, or NERC. Let me read a portion of that letter. They, NERC, stand in strong opposition to the Dingell amendment which would strike several provisions. Because of several reasons that they state in this letter, they urge support for the electricity title of H.R. 6 and oppose the Dingell amendment. Mr. Chairman, this is an important provision to support the bill, H.R. 6, as it stands; and I just want to give a quick story about a company that used to be located in Omaha called Enron. Enron was originally an Omaha company, and they defied and lied to everybody and then left town. But it is amazing when they defrauded their shareholders and consumers, what happened when that company was dissolved, a company called MidAmerica Energy was able to buy back the northern natural gas component of that. They were able to because PUHCA was not involved in the natural gas part of it, and they could buy it and bring those jobs back to Omaha. The same company, that would like to build power plants around, cannot because of PUHCA. If we want to resolve this Nation's energy crisis, Mr. Chairman, we need to adopt the provisions in H.R. 6 and vote against the Dingell amendment. Mr. Chairman, the letter from the North American Electric Reliability Council is as follows: North American Electric Reliability Council, Princeton, NJ, April 10, 2003. Hon. W.J. Tauzin, Chairman, House Committee on Energy and Commerce, Rayburn House Office Building, Washington, DC. Dear Chairman Tauzin: On behalf of the North American Electric Reliability Council (NERC), I would like to express NERC's strong support for the reliability provisions in the electricity title of H.R. 6, and our strong opposition to the Dingell amendment, which would strike these provisions. As you well know, the bulk power system is increasingly stressed. Today, there are no mandatory reliability rules enforceable against all users and operators of the bulk power grid. The reliability provisions in the electricity title of H.R. 6 would correct this situation. It is critical that this legislation be enacted as soon as possible to help ensure the reliability and security of the North American bulk power system. For this reason, we urge support for the electricity title of H.R. 6 and oppose the Dingell amendment to strike the reliability language from H.R. 6. Sincerely, Michehl R. Gent, President and CEO.

Mr. TERRY

Mr. TERRY. Mr. Speaker, the reviews are in on the February 20 FCC decision on the rules governing the Nation's telecommunications companies, and they are not good. Specifically, the reviews state that the requirements to make the RBOCs networks and systems available on an unbundled and subsidized basis are unsound. For many Members of this Chamber, economists, and industry observers, the FCC's proceeding was an opportunity to provide clear rules and regulatory rationality to an industry sector that has tumbled in recent years with job losses and reduced capital investments, which has affected a manufacturer in my district. Unfortunately, from these reviews on this decision, the FCC has failed miserably in their attempt to revitalize this necessary industry. Has this industry not suffered enough? Two trillion dollars of market cap, half a million telecommunications jobs lost, and $800 billion in debt have gone away. Hardware equipment and software manufacturers are stumbling. The FCC has taken a mess and made it harder to clean up. Somebody has to fix this: Congress, the courts, maybe even a miracle itself from the FCC.

Mr. TERRY

Mr. TERRY. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of H.R. 1104, the Child Abduction Prevention Act. Our nation rejoiced with the family of Elizabeth Smart when she was recovered safely after spending nine months at the mercy of her kidnapper. We will always remember her courage in the face of terror, the steadfastness of her family, the determination of law enforcement officers, and the life-saving help of the two couples who alerted police to her abductor. The remarkable conclusion to this kidnapping has inspired our nation and drawn further attention to the plight of missing children and their families. According to the U.S. Department of Justice, there were 58,200 children abducted by non-family members in 1999. Nearly half of these children were sexually assaulted, and about 100 were murdered. The National Center for Missing and Exploited Children reports that ``74 percent of abducted children who are murdered are dead within three hours of the abduction.'' H.R. 1104 will help recover children in these first crucial hours by aiding more states with setting up AMBER alert systems to utilize the eyes and ears of the public. This legislation will also help to keep career child rapists and killers off our streets by establishing a mandatory lifetime prison sentence for twice-convicted child molesters, and a 20-year sentence for non-family child abductors. These critical steps will help more families with missing children experience the joy of having their child come back home. Mr. Chairman, I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting this legislation to help save the lives of kidnapped children and prevent future abductions. I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. TERRY

Mr. TERRY. Mr. Speaker, today I am introducing, along with Mr. Doyle of Pennsylvania, the ``Homeland Infrastructure Power Security and Assurance Act of 2003.'' This legislation will encourage the deployment and increased use of advanced technologies for the production of secure, reliable, efficient, and clean electric power needed to reduce our dependence on foreign oil and to protect our energy infrastructure from terrorist threats. In a radio address to the nation President Bush stated: As our economy continues to grow, U.S. oil consumption is projected to increase by about one-third during the next 20 years. Our demand for electricity is expected to rise by 45 percent. America is already using more energy than our domestic resources can provide, and unless we act to increase our energy independence, our reliance on foreign sources of energy will only increase. (February 23, 2002 Radio Address to Nation) Reducing dependence on foreign oil is a significant aspect of America's homeland security strategy, and this will require better utilization of our nation's domestic natural resource fuels. Another critical goal is to minimize risk of terrorist attacks on the nation's critical power supplies, especially at military installations and major financial centers. In my own congressional district, First National Bank has installed fuel cells in its new building in downtown Omaha that can each produce 200 kilowatts of electricity using natural gas. The electricity produced by these fuel cells powers the bank's data center in a secure and reliable manner. The ultra-clean power plant located securely inside the First National's Data Technology Center assures that the facility has less than one second of power downtime a year. At another popular attraction in Omaha, the Henry Doorly Zoo, a fuel cell has been installed at the Lied Jungle that is a 200 kW unit that serves 50 percent of its power needs. It operates at a 75 percent capacity factor and generates more than 1.3 million kilowatt-hours annually. This use of distributed stationary power generation is a prime example of what we can do to protect our critical infrastructure facilities like military installations, financial entities, utilities, first responder facilities like firehouses and police stations, and information technology systems from potential terrorist threats. Dispersed networks of decentralized, distributed generation power modules are less vulnerable to attack, and there is a wide range of advanced distributed technology options that can be deployed by U.S. electricity generators in order to fortify America's energy infrastructure. Improving the reliability of our electric power infrastructure will also help our economy grow. It is estimated that power outages, brownouts, and other voltage disturbances cost U.S. industry up to $150 billion per year. On the other hand, it is estimated that energy efficient and renewable energy markets account for a $500 billion annual global market to U.S. companies and could lead to a net increase of 1.3 million jobs over the next 20 years. We need to use new, advanced turbines, fuel cells, and storage technologies to reduce these costly outages. We also need to export these technologies. This will improve both our energy security and our economic security. My legislation is directed at promoting and encouraging faster deployment of advanced technologies, primarily to protect the homeland, but with the added environmental benefits that come from clean and efficient power equipment. The legislation empowers the Secretary of Energy to administer an Advanced Technology Incentives Program. In order to receive incentive payments eligible owners and operators must submit an application to the Secretary that documents the use of qualifying technologies that reduce system costs, and improve performance and reliability of advanced distributed power generation and energy storage systems. This is a voluntary, not a mandatory program. The bill establishes two qualifying requirements for eligibility. First it must qualify as a ``qualifying advanced technology facility.'' Facilities meeting this requirement are eligible for payments based on 1.8 cents per kilowatt-hour generated during a fiscal year. If an owner or operator provides power that qualifies as a ``qualifying security and assurance power facility'' a bonus of 0.7 cents per kilowatt-hour may be earned. The maximum number of kilowatt-hours a single owner or operator may accrue for each year is 10 million kilowatt-hours. There is authorized $250 million for the first four years of the program and separate appropriations will be required. Mr. Speaker, this legislation is timely. America is engaged in a war with Iraq that may disrupt our access to world oil supplies. Weather in the United States this winter has been unusually cold--raising home heating fuel prices to millions of consumers. Recently, President Bush elevated the threat of terrorist acts to Level Orange--the secondhighest level. Our national critical infrastructure, including power plants, electric transmission lines, and the nation's information technology system, are all potential targets. Secure, protected, reliable power must be a priority of any homeland security measures undertaken by the new Department of Homeland Security. Finally, Mr. Speaker, as a member of the Energy and Commerce Committee, I look forward to participating in the Committee's early consideration of this year's version of the ``Securing America's Future Energy Act.'' I also urge my colleagues to consider including provisions that will encourage increased use of advanced technologies like fuel cells and other low emission, high efficiency energy technologies. These innovative advanced technologies must be a part of both our national energy and homeland security plans.

Mr. TERRY

Mr. TERRY. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for his introduction. Now, one of the realities that we must recognize as we debate our budget are the realities of today's economy and those facing our municipalities, our cities, and our States, and our families today. The reality is that when we have this economic slowdown, all of those entities that I just mentioned have made tough decisions to cut their budgets. I hear about families doing it all the time. The city of Omaha has done it, the State of Nebraska has done it. But yet when we are in the Federal Government, because we do not have a balanced budget amendment, heck, we just sit there and say, spend, spend more, give away all the money at a time of economic slowdown, at a time when we have to protect American citizens. So I am proud to stand in support of a budget that recognizes those realities today that face American families, that face our municipalities, that face our States, and make the same tough decisions that they have. I am proud that this budget, the Republican budget, controls spending. Yes, I would like to see it control spending even more. There is a lot of areas of this budget that I, frankly, do not think we are restraining the spending. In fact, I believe that the budget for veterans, actually we are increasing veterans spending under this proposed Republican budget. But what we are asking for in this budget, we are asking agencies to save taxpayers' money, just as Americans are sitting down at their tables trying to find ways to save money in their family budgets. And our economic growth is contingent upon responsible spending in all sectors of our economy: business, personal spending, and government. Now, this budget protects the fiscal soundness of our government and incorporates cost-cutting provisions that will pay dividends well into the future. Through responsible tax cuts, we are returning the power back to the people.

Mr. TERRY

Mr. TERRY. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of the rule and the bill. The consequence of allowing human cloning would be dire. Human embryos would be created for the sole purpose of being experimented on and killed. Cloned humans would likely have serious defects such as premature aging which may have led to premature death of Dolly, the cloned sheep. Women could be exploited through the buying and selling of their eggs for medical research, and children could be manufactured with specific genetic traits, making them commodities rather than precious gifts from God. This bill would prevent those horrifying scenarios from reality. This legislation would ban reproductive cloning and research cloning, which both involve creation of human life. As elected leaders, we have a responsibility to safeguard the future of humanity by placing clear, ethical limits on medical research. Our scientists should concentrate on promising avenues which raise no moral concerns such as adult stem cell research. Allowing human cloning would only devalue human life and permit women and children to be exploited. Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to vote in favor of the rule and H.R. 534.

Mr. TERRY

Mr. TERRY. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of H.R. 4, the Personal Responsibility, Work, and Family Promotion Act of 2003. The welfare reform law of 1996 is a resounding success. The welfare rolls have been cut in half, the number of welfare recipients working for pay has more than doubled, the employment rate of single mothers has nearly doubled, and child poverty has reached a 25-year low. Millions of families have been freed from the shackles of government dependency. They are holding their heads up high as they earn a living, care for themselves and their families, and improve the future for their children. Today we have the opportunity to help more families escape from the vicious cycles of poverty and despair. I am a proud cosponsor of H.R. 4, which continues the truly compassionate policy of providing a hand- up instead of just a hand-out. By coupling temporary financial assistance with opportunities for higher education and vocational skills training, more families will achieve financial independence and improve their quality of life. As the saying goes, you can give a man a fish and feed him for a day, or teach a man to fish and feed him for a lifetime. H.R. 4 also continues the landmark program which has dramatically lowered teenage pregnancies in our nation. This program provided $250 million over five years for states to educate teenagers about abstaining from sex until marriage and remaining faithful afterwards. From 1994 to 2000, the number of unwed teenagers who became pregnant fell from 46.6 to 39.6 per thousand. The abstinence movement profoundly influenced this trend. Newsweek magazine recently reported that ``more than one-third of U.S. high schools teach abstinence until marriage and 700 abstinence programs spread the sex-can-wait gospel in all 50 states.'' The majority of these programs are a result of the 1996 welfare reform law. Their success can be measured by new Federal data revealing that virginal teenagers now outnumber sexually-active ones. The Youth Risk Behavior survey found that the number of teenagers who say they have never had sexual intercourse rose by 10 percent between 1991 and 2001. We must improve upon this success to give more teenagers the positive message of abstinence until marriage. There is a great need for this message. According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, three million teenagers contract a sexually-transmitted disease each year, and over half of high-school seniors lose their virginity before graduation. This is a tragedy of epic proportions. Thousands of young women are sterile for life after contracting the sexually-transmitted disease Chlamydia. Many will enter marriage without knowing they cannot conceive children. Abstinence until marriage education will save millions of teenagers from the heartache of infertility, the pain of having an incurable STD, the regret of giving too much of themselves too soon, and the anguish of being sexually abused. Many abstinence programs help teenagers protect themselves from sexual abuse by teaching them to recognize emotional blackmail and inappropriate sexual pressure. Failed ``comprehensive sex education'' and misleading ``abstinence plus'' programs have for too long given teenagers the message that ``anything goes'' as long as a contraceptive is used. These destructive programs have done incalculable damage by failing to inform teenagers about the full risks of STDs, the failure rates of contraceptives, and the strong emotional bonds formed during intercourse. Authentic abstinence education programs give teenagers the full truth: there is no contraceptive for a broken heart, and no guaranteed protection against pregnancy or STDs except abstinence until marriage and fidelity afterwards. Presdient Bush has rightly said that ``for children to realize their dreams, they must learn the value of abstinence. We must send them the message that of the many decisions they will make in their lives, choosing to avoid early sex is one of the most important. We must stress that abstinence isn't just about saying no to sex; it's about saying yes to a happier, healthier future.'' I am proud that H.R. 4 continues this commitment to our children. I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting this legislation to help lift more families out of poverty and protect more teenagers from the dangers of sexual activity outside of marriage.

Mr. TERRY

Mr. TERRY. Mr. Speaker, among the many tributes to the brave men and women aboard the space shuttle Columbia, let me add my condolences to each of the families that suffered a loss in this tragedy. These seven individuals devoted their lives to advancing our dreams of space exploration. In their hometowns, in our schools and communities, as well as in space, they worked to enhance our appreciation for their mission. They took time to educate everyone from the youngest aspiring astronauts to those of us who simply marveled at their achievements. In particular, Michael P. Anderson affected the constituents of Nebraska's second Congressional District. Michael was born in Plattsburg, NY, but was stationed at Offutt Air Force Base in Nebraska from 1986 to 1990. At Offutt, Michael flew EC-135s, or Looking Glass, missions. By 1990 he had earned his master's degree in physics from Creighton University in Omaha. Then in 1994, Michael was selected to join NASA as a future astronaut. In 1998, on his first mission to space, he became the first African-American to visit a space station. Even though he logged over 211 hours of space flight time, Michael never forgot his time in Nebraska. Michael's friends and former professors at Creighton frequently corresponded with him via email, even when he was in space. His continued relationship with the university provided unique opportunities to students and faculty. Michael's determination to inspire young people was evident in his visits to schools not just in the district I represent, but in communities across the country. His lessons still resonate with the students of Jesuit Middle School he visited in 1998. Before making his visit, Michael stepped into his NASA uniform and just as easily stepped into the role of hero to his young audience. Michael, as well as the other six astronauts aboard the Columbia, left a legacy of proud service. They were all active in their communities and all of them touched many lives. We will miss them, in Nebraska and around the world, and we will not forget their inspiring influence.

Mr. TERRY

Mr. TERRY. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of H.R. 5422, the Child Abduction Prevention Act. Parents across the nation have been alarmed by recent high-profile child abductions, such as 14-year-old Elizabeth Smart, who was taken from her own bedroom at gunpoint in front of her younger sister, and 5- year-old Samantha Runnion, who was abducted while playing with her friend in her own front yard, then found molested and murdered the next day. Congress has a responsibility to take tough and effective steps to combat the increasing boldness of sexual predators, kidnappers, and murderers who prey on children. According to law enforcement officials, the best chance of saving a child's life lies within the first few hours after an abduction. H.R. 5422 would expand the AMBER emergency alert broadcast system to give children the best chance for rescue during these critical hours. This system has already helped rescue 27 children across the nation from criminals intent on harming them. My home state of Nebraska recently implemented this system to aid police in quickly recovering missing children; establishing a special coordinator at the Department of Justice and providing $25 million will encourage the remaining 18 states to do likewise. Other vital provisions in H.R. 5422 include mandating lifetime sentences for second-time child molesters, allowing judges to order lifetime supervision of child sex offenders, increasing electronic surveillance authority for child exploitation cases, and criminalizing international ``sex tours'' involving children. The House of Representatives has already approved these important measures by overwhelming majorities; I hope the Senate will follow suit to protect the lives and innocence of children, and urge my colleagues to join me today in supporting H.R. 5422.

Mr. TERRY

Mr. TERRY. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of H.R. 5531, the Sudan Peace Act. Sudan is a nation ravaged by 19 years of vicious civil war. Over 2 million Sudanese have been killed, and thousands more are starving from war-induced famine. According to the U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom, the Khartoum government of Sudan continues to murder, rape, and torture citizens who refuse to convert to the state- sponsored version of Islam. Villages have been burned and looted, women and children enslaved, hospitals and relief camps bombed, and civilians arrested or killed for refusing to betray their personal religious convictions. Most recently, the Khartoum government walked away from promising peace negotiations and banned international relief flights for the delivery of humanitarian aid. I have personally listened to the heart-rending stories of Sudanese refugees who escaped the brutality by settling in the United States. Many of them were tortured, and saw their loved ones beaten, executed, or sold into slavery. The United States Congress must not stand idly by while these human rights abuses continue; we must take action to help end the bloodshed. H.R. 5531 would begin an important policy shift in how our government deals with the horrors in Sudan. It sets a six-month deadline for the Khartoum government to take effective and measurable steps towards peace and an end to the violence. If this deadline is not met, our President would broaden sanctions against the Khartoum government, and take measures such as petitioning the United Nations Security Council for an embargo on oil and arms in Sudan. The President will also have the authority to redirect humanitarian aid to ensure it reaches the people it is intended to help, irregardless of the Khartoum government's conscienceless dictate. Mr. Speaker, I strongly urge my colleagues to join me in supporting H.R. 5531 to help bring peace, hope and relief to the war-torn Sudanese people.

Mr. TERRY

Mr. TERRY. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of this resolution. In dealing with Iraq, we must act in the best interests of our national security. Based on the evidence against Saddam Hussein, we no longer wonder if he has weapons of mass destruction or if he will use them, but when. Defectors have reported the existence of mobile germ warfare laboratories. Dump trucks purchased through the U.N. humanitarian aid program have been converted into military vehicles. Saddam Hussein is an expert in dual technologies. Computers used in hospitals can also generate designs for nuclear weapons. Saddam imports dual-use technologies and then diverts them to military use. His regime is founded upon the hatred of America and Israel, his loathing for freedom and liberty, and his fear for democracy. Saddam is driven by the fantasy to triumph over the free world. We must implement a long-term solution to neutralize this threat that Saddam poses to America, to the free world, and to his own people. Military action is not the desired means of resolving the Iraqi situation. I do not take lightly the prospect of sending our young Americans to war. Force, however, may be an eventuality for which we must prepare. This resolution permits the use of force to prevent a ruthless dictator from using deadly weapons of mass destruction. Without regard to U.N. resolutions or international law he has sought, obtained, and used weapons of mass destruction even on his own people. Unless the U.N. resolutions are backed by action, he will brazenly frustrate similar attempts to inspect and disarm his arsenal. Military consequences are the only way to stop Saddam Hussein's games and force legitimate inspections.

Mr. TERRY

Mr. TERRY. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of H. Con. Res. 116 to recommend the integration of Lithuania, Latvia, and Estonia into the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO). Since its inception in 1949, NATO has served as a vehicle for peace and stability throughout Europe. While the imminent threat of the Warsaw Pact has passed, one need not look far to see the continued utility of NATO. Far from becoming a defunct organization when the Berlin wall fell 13 years ago, NATO has adapted to the changing security dynamics of the post-cold war era and has continued to be a means through which we can achieve peace in Europe. One of the most measurable successes of NATO is the eagerness of former Warsaw Pact countries and former Republics of the Soviet Union to join the western alliance. Three years ago, we officially welcomed Poland, Hungary, and the Czech Republic. At the Prague Summit in November the alliance will once again consider expanding its membership. We should recognize the tremendous gains the states of Lithuania, Latvia, and Estonia have made by accepting them into the NATO fold. Lithuania, Latvia, and Estonia have all individually made extraordinary advances toward democracy and free market principles. Each has successfully thrown off the yoke of Soviet oppression and has instituted government structures that assure freedom and rule of law for their citizens. Each has demonstrated a respect for human rights and a desire to be oriented toward the freedom-loving states of the West. Each has actively worked to achieve the standards necessary for accession into NATO, and each has succeeded in this endeavor. Membership in NATO will help cement the progress the Baltic states have made since achieving independence in 1991. More importantly, NATO expansion to incorporate the Baltic states, as former republics of the Soviet Union, will serve to strengthen the alliance in its mission to secure peace and security in the Euro-Atlantic region. As a member of the House Baltic Caucus, I applaud the strides that Lithuania, Latvia, and Estonia have made and urge my colleagues to join me in supporting this resolution.

Mr. TERRY

Mr. TERRY. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of H.R. 556, the Unlawful Internet Gambling Funding Prohibition Act. In 1997, there were only 12 illegal Internet gambling sites. Today, there are close to 2,000. Testimonies received during Congressional hearings underscored that children and problem gamblers are the most frequent visitors to online gaming sites. Financial ruination and despair are all too often the results for their families. Most Internet gambling sites are based in the Caribbean or Central America, beyond the reach of the U.S. Justice Department. It is estimated that the American market generates up to 60 percent of their revenue. The local governments of these jurisdictions are also profiting from online gambling. For example, the Antigua and Barbuda governments are now licensing virtual casinos at a cost of $75,000 to $85,000 per site. While the scourges of gambling addiction are well known, less understood is the fact that Internet gambling poses a serious threat to national security. A recent report by the General Accounting Office emphasized the concerns of law enforcement officials that gambling sites can serve as covers for illegal money laundering by terrorists and organized crime. Enacting H.R. 556 would give law enforcement officials and bank regulators the necessary tools to crack down on illegal Internet gambling. Banks and credit card companies would be required to block payments to Internet casinos and other gaming operations, and accepting payment for illegal online gambling transactions would be a crime. Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting this common-sense legislation to help put a stop to illegal Internet gambling for the benefit and protection of American families and businesses.

Mr. TERRY

Mr. TERRY. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to the Houses of Worship Political Speech Protection Act (H.R. 2357). While I am a strong defender of the fundamental freedoms of religion and speech, I am deeply concerned that H.R. 2357 could have serious unintended consequences. For example, this legislation would allow churches, mosques, and synagogues to make hard and soft money contributions to political campaigns, run issue advocacy advertisements for and against candidates, and use tax-free donations to sponsor political fundraisers. Simply by paying their tithing, parishioners could be contributing to a political campaign without their knowledge or consent. This would jeopardize the integrity of religious institutions and endanger the rights of citizens to choose who they will and will not support for public office. Tithes and offerings would be better spent feeding the poor and hungry, and helping other disadvantaged members of our society find hope and healing. The primary mission of houses of worship is to save souls, comfort the afflicted, and uplift and inspire the people. Our Constitution guarantees the freedom of religion, and the government specifically exempts religious institutions from taxation in recognition of their crucial work. Religious leaders have, since the founding of our country, spoken out on moral and spiritual issues, serving as the catalyst for the anti-slavery and prohibition movements. I am extremely concerned that some spiritual leaders now feel they cannot adequately address moral issues without risking the loss of their church's tax- exempt status. I strongly support further investigation into the IRS regulations on political speech by tax-exempt organizations so a workable and appropriate solution can be found. However, H.R. 2357 is not the answer. While churches would be able to participate in political campaigns, involving their parishioners in electioneering and partisan politics would ultimately undermine their mission of hope and comfort. Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to join me in opposing H.R. 2357 and working toward a more effective and appropriate solution to address the legitimate concerns of religious leaders.

Mr. TERRY

Mr. TERRY. Mr. Speaker, last May 26, I voted with 239 of my colleagues to scrap the marriage penalty once and for all. We didn't vote to phase it out over ten years and then bring it back; we voted to get rid of it. Why? Because, above all, our tax code must be fair. Is it fair to tax marriage? Is it fair to tell a young couple on the event of marriage that, aside from paying for the invitations, caterer, photographer, music, and reception hall, they'll have to pay an additional $1400 in taxes every year? What kind of message are we sending to the American people when we can afford wasteful spending like tattoo removal programs, but are not willing to invest in marriage? Well, how's this for bringing home pork: phasing out the marriage penalty once and for all will return $81.2 million to the 58,000 couples in the Second District of Nebraska. That way, they can spend their money the way they want. I keep hearing from the other side of the aisle that tax cuts cost money. Who does it cost? It certainly costs the 175,000 couples in my state of Nebraska, who pay the marriage penalty every year. But, it doesn't cost the federal government anything. If we fail to work to make provisions of President Bush's tax cut permanent, the American taxpayers will experience the single greatest tax increase in U.S. history: more than $380 billion in the year 2012. Mr. Speaker, this tax is unfair, unnecessary, and wrong. It defies American morals, it defies logic, and it flies in the face of family values. Let's bring some common sense back to our tax code. Vote for this legislation.

Mr. TERRY

Mr. TERRY. Mr. Speaker, this Conference Report does not include a permanent Judgeship for the State of Nebraska. Since 1998 Nebraska has exceeded the weighted standard of 430 filings per judge, and in 2001, that number grew to 482 filings. Without this permanent Judgeship, over the next year filings are expected to rise to over 600 per Judge. Currently, the caseload in Nebraska is the 9th heaviest in the Nation, and is only expected to increase. Nebraska has a higher drug prosecution rate than any other federal court in the 7th and 8th circuit; 65 percent of our drug cases are methamphetamine prosecutions, compared to a national average of 14.5 percent. The continued absence of this Judgeship hurts the citizens of Nebraska and brings an already over-worked court system to near standstill. This permanent Judgeship was included in the House-passed Department of Justice Authorization bill, and I would like to thank Chairman Sensenbrenner and Ranking Member Conyers for their assistance in this effort. However, I learned last night that the Nebraska's permanent judgeship designation had been stripped from the conference report. I have no idea why this language was stripped out, and it upsets me that I've been unable to obtain a definitive answer. I'm left to believe that this designation was eliminated due to political concerns, and it was not a decision based upon merit or need. Nebraska has had a temporary Judgeship since 1990 and will expire in November 2003. What occurred in conference is unfair to the State of Nebraska, and will negatively impact an already strained court system. Nebraska Temporary/Permanent Judgeship Issue, April 8, 2002 (Currently three permanent and one temporary judgeship) 1. Need for permanent judgeship in Nebraska is critical: A. Temporary judgeship created in 1990. B. Expires first judge to leave after November 20, 2003. C. Based on 430 weighted standard, Nebraska eligible for even a fifth judge, but not asking for that. D. Since 1998, District of Nebraska exceeded 430 weighted filing per judge. E. 2001--weighted case load was 482 per judge, with a 95 percent confidence level of 525-440 cases. F. 2001 busiest year in last 6 years with 1500 new filings and 1242 pending cases. G. Weighted filings in 2001--482, highest in last six years, compared to 377 in 1996. H. Without this judgeship, weighted filings expected to exceed 600 per judge. 2. Criminal filings very heavy: A. Very heavy for last 12 years and continues to increase. B. 17th heaviest in nation in 1998, 12th in nation in 1999, and 9th in nation in 2001 (ranks 9th out of 94 districts). C. Caseload per judge is double that of 1996: 118 per judge vs. 58 per judge. D. Average caseload is 50 percent greater in criminal cases than average federal judge. E. Heavier criminal case load than judges in New York City, Chicago, or Los Angeles. F. Highest drug prosecutions than any other federal court in the 7th and 8th Circuits. G. Nebraska's drug docket is 66 percent, while national average is less than 40 percent. H. 64 percent of drug cases is methamphetamine, compared to national average of 14.5 percent. I. Nebraska ranked 2nd in the number of high level drug trafficking defendants indicated and convicted in the Central Region (includes 12 states). J. Criminal caseload is expanding; crack cocaine defendants doubled over last year, and meth defendants increased 88 percent. 3. Senior judges: A. Two senior judges, and each carry about 100 cases. B. Will not be able to continue to carry a caseload that heavy. C. Both judges are over 75, and one has indicated he wishes to cut his caseload by 50 percent in 2002. D. No additional help from senior judges available. E. Note that one active judge has serious cancer, but no senior judges available in future to help with that caseload. 4. Magistrate judges: A. Three magistrate judges, two in Omaha and one in Lincoln. B. All three are fully utilized in criminal cases, preliminary civil dispositions, ADR management, and consent trials. 5. Visiting Judges: A. Forced to request assistance of visiting judges in 2001 to handle the heavy volume of criminal/civil cases. B. Will not address severe problem. 6. Current legislation: A. H.R. 2215 does not include a recommendation that Nebraska temporary judgeship be converted into a permanent one, although recommendations for other states (Central District of Illinois, Southern District of Illinois, and Northern District of Ohio) are addressed. B. Nebraska must be included in that legislation.

Mr. TERRY

Mr. TERRY. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 4965, the Partial- Birth Abortion Ban Act. Two years ago, the Supreme Court ruled 5 to 4 that my home state of Nebraska's ban of this grisly procedure was unconstitutional. Justice Scalia wrote in his dissent that ``the notion that the Constitution prohibits the States from simply banning this visibly brutal means of eliminating our half-born posterity is quite simply absurd.'' He further noted that even ``the most clinical description of [a partial- birth abortion] evokes a shudder of revulsion.'' H.R. 4965 contains several provisions to address the Court's concerns. A partial-birth abortion is more clearly defined to distinguish it from the ``dilation and evacuation'' procedure used to end early-term pregnancies. The bill also contains extensive Findings of Fact based on years of Congressional hearings and testimony. They prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that partial-birth abortion is unrecognized by the mainstream medical community, never necessary to preserve the health of the mother, and may in fact harm her health. I sincerely hope these changes will withstand the scrutiny of the Court. I urge my colleagues to join me in voting to end the barbarism of partial-birth abortion once and for all and protect children who are just inches away from taking their first breath.

Mr. TERRY

Mr. TERRY. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the requisite number of words. I thank the Chair for allowing me these 5 minutes to speak on this, and the gentleman from Washington (Mr. Nethercutt) certainly raises some very good points here, and ones that we as the fiscal conservative group, that some, a renegade group as we have been branded here, suggested have discussed that, and we certainly do not want that type of an omnibus bill where the shenanigans take place where there are so many riders and additional spending that gets thrown in and it is thrown up at 9 o'clock in the morning and voted on at 10 o'clock in the morning, like what happened in my first year here with the smaller omnibus bill. I voted no on that one, just as I would vote no on any new one. Still, it just frustrates me that those of us that are sincerely frustrated with the increased spending, especially at a time of decreasing revenues, are somehow branded as intellectually dishonest by the other gentleman from Washington, or somehow I forget the name that he called us, but the fact of the matter is that I am sincerely worried about the type of spending that we are engaging in; that I came here because I wanted to restrain spending; that I felt that that was important to our children's future; that we were taking out a credit card and passing the bill to our children. The other gentleman from Maine had a very sincere discussion about family budgets and that at times the family budgets need restraint, and the businesses, a person certainly would not take away revenues and criticizing those of us, including me, and I am proud of the tax votes that we have taken because I think empowering families and allowing them to keep more of their own money, especially at a time of an economic downturn, is just simple, common sense, good economic family policy. We have to adopt in coordination with a tax-cutting policy fiscal restraint. Certainly, most every family has to live on a budget, even we in Congress, even though I get a lot of e-mails suggesting otherwise. We have to live on a budget, and if my revenues are running short, that means we take less trips to Target, and I am not apologetic that I stand up here and support amendments to decrease our trips to Target because that is what we are doing. This Interior bill is $950 million over last year's spending, $775 million over what the President had suggested. All we are standing up here and doing is asking for a little bit of fiscal restraint on particularly these types of items. This amendment that I rise in favor of reduces the Bureau of Land Management's land and resources to $664,678,000. It just simply takes $162 billion out of it. It just reduces it by a small percent. What we are trying to do here is find little bits of money here and there so at the totality of this bill, we bring it down or maybe even below last year's spending level. That is just the purpose here. It is not as malicious as the gentleman from Washington suggests.

Mr. TERRY. Well, granted.

Mr. TERRY. Mr. Chairman, I assume that is more of a rhetorical question to put me on the spot for voting for a farm bill, and I am anxious to see the Agriculture appropriations bill. But I will admit to the gentleman, coming from the State of Nebraska, that I will have leanings towards securing, especially in a time when we are in a severe drought and I have already been told that for the State of Nebraska, from the gentleman's committee and the White House, not to expect any disaster relief; that we will have to find it within the budget. I am glad to do that. I am glad to take those type, instead of going off-budget like we had done when Texas certainly needed disaster relief. I am willing to take our money out of that.

Mr. TERRY. I yield to the gentleman from Florida.

Mr. TERRY. Mr. Chairman, the amendment, as I understand it, was not a dramatic spending increase, but, as the gentleman from Maine suggested, that we have other priorities such as defense spending, national security, and he is absolutely right, and I think all of us in the House share those priorities. So it becomes a time where if we want to have the secondary goal of saving money, where do we cut?

Mr. TERRY. I yield to the gentleman from Washington.