Fred Upton

Mr. UPTON

Mr. UPTON. Madam Chairman, may I just inquire how much time we have remaining on our side?

Mr. UPTON. Madam Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Sam Johnson) who serves on the Committee on Economic and Educational Opportunities, whose State would get $31.5 million more. (Mr. SAM JOHNSON of Texas asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. UPTON. Madam Chairman, I ask unanimous consent that the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Goodling) be allowed to control the balance of my time.

Mr. UPTON. Madam Chairman, I yield myself 20 seconds. Madam Chairman, I would note again there is no elimination of programs in this bill and that the State of Texas under this bill would get $31.5 million more. Madam Chairman, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Jones) whose district in his State will receive more than $4 million.

Mr. UPTON

Mr. UPTON. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize a special ceremony being conducted in my district in the town of Baroda. Today, the residents of Baroda are celebrating the issuance of the Organ and Tissue Donation stamp. This stamp has long been of extreme interest to me, and I am pleased to see it finally released today. Last November, I attended the Dedication ceremony in Washington, DC, and at that time I was given a large, poster-size copy of the stamp. Since that time, I have displayed it in my congressional office, providing all visitors with the powerful message of organ and tissue donation; it gives me great pleasure to know that this message will now be received by the entire country. Around our State and Nation, recipients of organ and tissue donation can testify to the need for greater public awareness of this issue. Although many lives have already been saved, those life-saving numbers can certainly go up through greater public involvement, education and outreach. The stamp being released today can help greatly in this cause. I'm pleased that the U.S. Postal Service chose Baroda as the site for one of the ``issuance'' ceremonies given the long-time involvement of Baroda resident Edward Heyn. For many years, Edward Heyn sought to commemorate organ donation with the issuance of a United States postal stamp. Through letters to my office and the Postal Service, he and thousands of other concerned citizens made a compelling case as to the importance of such a stamp. Although Ed passed away 4 years ago, his memory and willingness to help his fellow citizen will endure through endeavors like today's postage stamp. As many of us know, the need for organs is greater than the supply. Across the Nation, over 60,000 people are waiting for organs, with over 2,000 of those in Michigan. Ed Heyn was fortunate to receive an organ, and he had the vision to realize that with the issuance of a postal stamp the number of donated organs could only increase. Every time someone uses a postal stamp with the ``Share Your Life'' image, they will think of the importance of organ and tissue donation, and perhaps in return they will be more likely to donate themselves. Therefore, this postal stamp has a message that is two-fold: first to express the true life-giving power of organ and tissue donation, and second to raise awareness of medical issues, in hopes that the number of donations and lives saved per year will increase. It is wonderful to see Edward Heyn's vision manifested today, and it is only fitting to have this ceremony in his hometown where many of his family, friends and neighbors could share in this wonderful experience. One person can make a difference and clearly, Ed made a difference for generations to come.

Mr. UPTON

Mr. UPTON. Mr. Speaker, I rise to express my strong support for the Patient Protection Act. Before I review the reasons that I support this legislation and will work hard for its enactment, I want to take this opportunity to single out two of my colleagues without whom this bill which will do so much to ensure quality of care would not be before us today. First, I want to thank Charlie Norwood, who saw early-on the need for strong patient protections. He introduced the Patient Access to Responsible Care Act and used this legislation as a vehicle to educate all of us to the need for reforms. Second, I want to express my deep regard for the leadership, patience, and effort that Denny Hastert has shown in the development of the Patient Protection Act, the legislation we are considering today. He had a Herculean task, and he did it with skill and grace. I am proud to be counted as a cosponsor of the Patient Protection Act. This legislation will ensure that our nation's health care system is patient-centered, no profit-centered and that no one, no insurance clerk or green eyeshade worrying about a fat profit, stands between the patient and the physician when potentially life and death health care decisions are being made. There are some who continue to argue that patient protection legislation is not needed--that the market will work over time to ensure patients have access to care when they need it and receive high quality care. That has not been my experience at all. Rarely a day goes by that I don't hear or read in my constituent mail of serious problems that individuals or their families are having with their managed care plans. Just yesterday, for example, I received a report of a Michigan woman who was experiencing severe pain from an ovarian cyst. She went to the nearest hospital, but her managed care plan would not cover her care at that facility. Instead, a plan clerk directed her to another, more distant facility. Unfortunately, that facility was affected by a massive power outage in the Detroit area and could not see her promptly. She requested permission to return to the first hospital, but was denied. By the time she was finally treated, she had a massive internal infection from the ruptured cyst. Her doctor said she was lucky to be alive. We need to stop this rising drum-beat of stories of patients being denied appropriate care by their health plans, and the Patient Protection Act will do this. Had the Patient Protection Act been in place, for example, this woman could have sought and received care at the nearest emergency room rather than having to seek prior authorization and go to another, more distant facility. Perhaps the single most important patient protection in this legislation is the right it will give patients to a timely review of plan determinations with which they disagree. Patients may seek an internal and then an independent external review, both of which must be conducted by physicians who are trained in the provision of the treatment under review. The patient may then go to court to enforce the ruling of the external review organization that a service should be provided or covered. If the court upholds the finding of the independent expert external reviewer, which is highly likely, the plan is subject to fines of $500 per day up to a total of $250,000. I think the internal/external review appeal process in this legislation is actually more likely to hold plans' feet to the fire for their decisions and ensure appropriate access to care than would be the case if patients could simply go to court and sue their plans or employers. While the penalties leveled in state torts might be greater in some cases, such cases can drag on for years and the outcome is never certain for individuals. And the uncertain, uncapped liability exposure to which employers could be subject under the state court suit option could lead to employers terminating plans and add significantly to the number of individuals and families with no health care coverage. In closing, I strongly urge my colleagues to join me in voting today for the Patient Protection Act. It ensures that our Nation's health care system is patient-centered, not profit-centered. It ensures that medical decisions are made by patients and their physicians with the well-being of the patient being the first consideration.

Mr. UPTON

Mr. UPTON. Mr. Speaker, last year I voted against MFN. I did so for a variety of good reasons--primarily because of changes regarding nuclear technology issues and the suspicion that indeed we had seen the transfer of such to other countries. I had a pretty good feeling that then, and now, MFN would continue. The issue of ``engagement'' would indeed prevail. But I voted against it in 1997 because I believed that we should send them a signal--if not now, when? The last number of days, I, and a number of my colleagues have had lengthy discussions with the State Department, Defense Department, USTR, and others regarding the real security of these technologies. I'm convinced, that we have made real progress in sending the message that any transfer of these technologies to other countries is simply not acceptable. Engagement this past year has indeed been productive on this front and I am glad to see real improvements. I am hopeful that this progress will continue and I will also continue to watch world events with a careful eye. My vote today will be cast in favor of normal trade between our two countries.

Mr. UPTON

Mr. UPTON. Mr. Speaker, it is a great pleasure for me to rise today to mark the one hundred and fiftieth anniversary of the City of Dowagiac, Michigan. On February 16, 1848, the city's founding fathers received official recognition, giving birth to a dynamic community that has been thriving ever since. Over the past century and a half, Dowagiac has served as a focal point for southwest Michigan's progress and development. Many industries have found Dowagiac a great place to do business. They know that if you want the job done right, you get it done in Dowagiac. Home to the campus of Southwest Michigan College and a great school district, Dowagiac is helping the next generation chart a course to the future. Dowagiac has seen a lot of change during the years. But in times of war and peace, prosperity and tough-times, there is one thing that remains constant. The people of Dowagiac have always cared for each other as neighbors and as a community. We realize that we cannot move forward until we move together. The city was founded in this spirit--it has allowed our town to thrive and will ensure its continued success for many years to come. I urge my colleagues to join me in recognizing this great American town and wishing the entire community another one hundred and fifty years of success.

Mr. UPTON

Mr. UPTON. Mr. Speaker, is this the appropriate time to offer a tobacco amendment?

Mr. UPTON. Parliamentary inquiry, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. UPTON

Mr. UPTON. Mr. Speaker, a good friend is retiring in Michigan and I wanted to share a letter that the Michigan delegation sent to John Lobbia, CEO of Detroit Edison Company. Mr. John E. Lobbia Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, The Detroit Edison Company, 2000 2nd Avenue, Detroit, Michigan Dear Mr. Lobbia. On behalf of the entire Michigan Congressional Delegation, it is a great honor for us to wish you a long, healthy, and happy retirement. Congratulations on the completion of an outstanding career. Under your guidance, Detroit Edison has emerged as a national leader, known for its quality, competitiveness, and innovation. More than two million Michigan homes and businesses count on Detroit Edison for their energy needs. Your success at meeting those demands has helped to power Michigan through its economic renaissance and emerge as one of the nation's most successful states. But we recognize that many of the milestones of your career occurred outside Detroit Edison. Your unwavering support for a number of civic and community organizations has left an indelible mark on our state. Clearly, your caring and support of our community runs deep--the mark of a true leader. Again, congratulations on your many years of service to Detroit Edison and to Michigan. With respect and admiration we remain, Very truly yours, Fred Upton, Member of Congress. John Dingell, Member of Congress.

Mr. UPTON

Mr. UPTON. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize the contributions of a great educator, community leader, and good friend to all of Southwest Michigan, Dr. Charlotte Wenham. After thirty years of dedicated service to the students and community of St. Joseph, Michigan, Char is stepping down from her position as Assistant Superintendent of St. Joseph Public Schools. Since 1968, Dr. Wenham has helped to shape young minds in the St. Joseph Public Schools. First at the head of the class as teacher, then at the head of a school as principal, finally spending the last few years heading an effort to develop innovative and creative programs, curriculum, and policies for the district. While her talents will be missed, I am happy to report that she will be pursuing other interests in our community and will continue to lend her vast knowledge. While she may be changing roles, her dedication to students, to learning, and to creating a brighter tomorrow won't change. Mr. Speaker, I know that all of my colleagues join me in wishing her many more happy and healthy years. On behalf of southwest Michigan, I would like to thank her for all of her service, dedication and commitment to St. Joseph.

Mr. UPTON

Mr. UPTON. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay tribune to a dedicated and devoted friend of Southwest Michigan, Mr. Anthony Belski. This month he is retiring after thirty-six years of service to St. Joseph Public Schools. For twenty-nine of those years, Mr. Belski presided over Lincoln Elementary School as its principal. During his tenure, Mr. Belski has seen a lot of change but through it all, one thing remains the same--his enduring dedication to the kids. Principals are in a unique position to touch so many lives and to help mold so many futures. As an educator, Mr. Belski is in a unique position to have his hard work live on in each of his students--clearly southwest Michigan is a better place thanks to his efforts. Mr. Speaker, please join me in thanking Mr. Anthony Belski for all of his work and wishing him a long, productive, and happy retirement.

Mr. UPTON

Mr. UPTON. Mr. Speaker, this was an easy bill for me to introduce, and it was cosponsored by every single member, Republican and Democrat, of the Michigan delegation. Carl Pursell served in this House from 1977 to 1993, and the post office we are naming today is in fact very close to Carl's home in Plymouth, Michigan. Carl served in the Army, he was a businessman, he was an elected official, both at the county level as well as a State senator, and he and his wife, Peg, a teacher in Plymouth, have lived in Plymouth virtually all their life. I got to know Carl as a member of his softball team when I was a staffer on the Hill back in the seventies, and I got to know him quite a bit more when I served at the Office of Management and Budget, as Carl Pursell was a founder of the Gypsy Moths. The Gypsy Moths, this was a Republican group, certainly a distinct minority, Republicans were, back in the early eighties, but they led the way to forging bipartisan cooperation and agreements with the other side of the aisle and were able to pursue Ronald Reagan's successful agenda that passed here in the 1980's. Carl Pursell served as ranking member on the Subcommittee on Labor- HHS of the Committee on Appropriations. The chairman of that subcommittee, Mr. Natcher, he and Carl were very committed to education and health research, and helped maneuver those bills through law, and impacted millions and millions of Americans through this House floor. Carl Pursell deeply cared about the budget deficit. In fact, through his work in the 92 Group and others, he worked on a freeze budget, freezing outlays, no more than inflation, and his budget, in fact, failed in the House by only one vote, as I recall. Had that budget passed back in the eighties, we would have gotten a balanced budget long before today. In 1992, Michigan lost two Congressional seats because of redistricting. Sadly, Carl Pursell's was one of those. Yes, he could have run in another part of his old district, but he would have had to move from his residence and his community of Plymouth, Michigan, and he decided that he would stay. Always a competitor, Carl Pursell, whether it be on a tennis court or rooting for the Detroit Tigers, thank goodness for the Detroit Red Wings, he now serves on Eastern Michigan's board and coaches kids' soccer in Plymouth, where he was, in fact, earlier this afternoon. Only he and Ebeneezer Pennimon, who served as a Whig in this House from 1851 to 1852, have ever served in the Congress hailing from Plymouth, Michigan. This Federal facility is deserving of his fine name through his excellent public service, and I would urge all of my colleagues to respect Carl Pursell and to vote ``yes'' on this bill later this afternoon.

Mr. UPTON

Mr. UPTON. Madam Chairman, not too long ago I spent some time with one of the most distinguished journalists in this country, David Broeder. He made a very good point that the most popular thing that Americans watch and enjoy is probably NFL football or college football. They do not focus on the missed pass patterns, the overthrown passes, the blocks that go awry. They look at the TDs, a Desmond Howard running back, a punt return, a Charles Woodson making a great defensive play in the end zone, a Brian Griese getting that touchdown pass in the Rose Bowl. Sadly, our political system, indeed, focuses on the bad, the opposite, the negatives. So-and-so is against the elderly. They are a big spender. They are for higher taxes. They are for pornography, even kiddie porn. That is what we have come down to with these negatives. And, sadly, those negatives are led not by the candidates. The candidates are not responsible for that kind of junk, but, instead, the independent interest groups that have taken over the system. They have discovered a gigantic loophole. They have discovered that they can pour unlimited amounts of money into a campaign, hundreds of thousands, maybe even a million dollars. It is not reported, it is not disclosed, and, in fact, they have no direct responsibility. Well, that buying of this House has got to end. It is time to return this House to the people's House. I can remember not too long Speaker Foley did not really allow an open rule on campaign finance reform. A gentleman here by the name of Mike Synar, myself, and the gentleman from Louisiana (Mr. Bob Livingston) worked together on a bipartisan campaign plan, and it was a good one, and we were turned down by the Committee on Rules on a vote by just a handful of votes, 220 to 213. I applaud our bill leadership, and I applaud the gentleman from California (Mr. Bill Thomas) for working to construct the bipartisan vote that we had last night that is an open rule so that Members from every stripe in this Chamber can debate the issues for perhaps a couple of weeks based on the amendments that were filed, and we can sort this thing out and we can end some of these abuses and return this House to the people's House. Madam Chairman, we need reform. The country wants reform. We want reform. Together, we can do it. Let us look at these issues. Let us look at all of the amendments and the substitutes. And, at the end of the day, let us not fall short and reject what comes out. Let us pass something and get it back to the Senate.

Mr. UPTON

Mr. UPTON. Mr. Speaker, I rise this afternoon in strong support of H.R. 2202, the National Bone Marrow Registry Reauthorization Act of 1998. I want to also commend my good friend and colleague, the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Young) for introducing and working hard and diligently for the consideration of this legislation, and my subcommittee chairman, the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Bilirakis) and his ranking member, the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Brown), for the smooth passage through the committee process. Mr. Speaker, this program is a vital one. This holds out promise for nearly the approximately 12,000 people each year who are diagnosed with diseases for which bone marrow transplantation may offer the possibility of a cure. The National Bone Marrow Donor Registry established by this program provides for a central registry of bone marrow donors, linking a network of 100 donor centers, 111 transplant centers, and 11 recruitment groups across the country. The registry is also a research organization, studying the effectiveness of unrelated marrow transplants. This program has been effective in increasing the availability of unrelated bone marrow transplants, which have grown in number from 200 in 1989 to almost 1,300 in 1997 last year. In my State of Michigan our donor centers have, as of March of this year, registered over 92,000 donors and facilitated some 291 transplants. However, estimates suggest that those who could benefit from bone marrow transplants far outnumber the actual recipients by a 2- or 3-to-1 margin. All of us have individuals in our districts hoping desperately that they will be successfully matched with a volunteer donor. For too many, that hope will not be realized. Mr. Speaker, this is particularly true for minority individuals, who are underrepresented in the donor registry. This legislation that we are considering this afternoon strengthens the program's focus on minority recruitment. I encourage all of us here to register as a volunteer donor. I did, because of my relationship with the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Young). The process is very simple. You have to go to a donor center and give a blood sample. That is all it is. You can literally give the gift of life to another individual through this simple act.

Mr. UPTON

Mr. UPTON. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of legislation that I am introducing to address a very serious and growing problem in this country--tobacco use by our youth. I have long been concerned about the increasing number of teens--and increasingly younger teens--who start smoking every year. Every day, 3,000 teens begin smoking. Teenagers typically begin to smoke at 14\1/2\ and become daily smokers before age 18. We know that if individuals do not start smoking as teenagers, they will probably never smoke. For many thousands of Americans, discouraging teens from tobacco use and making it much more difficult for them to purchase tobacco products is literally a matter of life and death. That is why I am introducing the ``Teen Tobacco Use Prevention Act of 1998.'' This legislation amends the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act to keep tobacco products out of the hands of our nation's children, strengthen warning labels, and restrict tobacco product advertisements. Specifically, the legislation includes the following provisions: 1. Content and warning labels. Requires more complete product constituent labeling and increases the number, prominence, and strength of tobacco product warning labels on packages and print ads. Includes the requirement that the FDA promulgate a rule governing the testing, reporting, and disclosure of tobacco smoke constituents that the Agency determines the public should be informed of to protect public health. Prohibits the advertising of cigarettes and little cigars on media subject to FCC jurisdiction. 2. Statement of intended use. Requires manufacturers, distributors, and retailer advertising of tobacco products to include, after the product name, a statement of intended use as specified in the bill. For cigarettes, for example, the intended use statement is: ``Cigarettes--A Dangerous Tobacco Product Intended For Use Only By Persons 18 or Older.'' 3. Vending machine sales. Prohibits the sale of cigarettes or smokeless tobacco products from vending machines, except in those locations in which the retailer or operator ensures that no person younger than 18 years of age is present or permitted to enter at any time. Includes a provision requiring the FDA to monitor compliance with the vending provisions for two years and to propose additional restrictions if there is evidence that young people are continuing to purchase tobacco products from vending machines. 4. Minimum age. Prohibits the sale or distribution of tobacco products to anyone younger than 18 years of age. Permits states to set a higher age. Requires retailers to verify that purchasers are 18 or older by checking identification that includes the bearer's date of birth and photograph for anyone 26 years of age or younger. Includes civil monetary penalties for the sale of tobacco products to minors. For the first offense, the FDA will send a letter to the violator describing the law, describing the violation, and describing the potential liability facing the retailer for subsequent violations. For the second violation, the penalty shall be $250. For the third, $500. The penalty will double in size for each subsequent violation. 5. Enforcement. States are required to strictly enforce restrictions on sales to minors and report annually on their progress in reducing such sales and the strategies they are or will be using. States are required to conduct random, unannounced inspections to ensure compliance. If states fail to comply, the Secretary is authorized to reduce their Substance Abuse Prevention and Treatment allotments. 6. Individual cigarettes and packages of less than 20. Prohibits sales or distribution of either. 7. Sampling. Prohibits. 8. Distribution through the mail. Prohibits the distribution of tobacco products through the mail, except for mail order sales subject to proof of age requirements. Manufacturers or others who wish to distribute tobacco products through the mail must first file with the Secretary of HHS for approval of the system they will use to ensure that these products will go only to persons 18 years of age or older. The Secretary will review these sales after two years to determine whether minors are obtaining tobacco products through the mail. Imposes the same penalties as those imposed for sales to minors. 9. Tobacco product use reduction targets. Requires the Secretary of HHS to establish a benchmark rate of current tobacco use by children and adolescents, measure youth tobacco product use annually, and report this information to Congress three years from the date of enactment, together with recommendations for additional recommendations if rates are not substantially declining (declining at a rate that would produce a 35 percent or greater reduction in the rate of youth tobacco use five years from the date of enactment; at least 50 percent by the seventh year; and at least 80 percent by the tenth year). 10. Effective Date. January 1, 1999. Mr. Speaker, I am introducing this legislation because I believe that reducing teens' access to tobacco products and desire to use them must be at the heart of any tobacco initiatives we consider this year. I am very open to suggestions for improvements in the legislation I am introducing today, and I am most interested in working with my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to pass meaningful tobacco control and reform legislation in this session of Congress.

Mr. UPTON

Mr. UPTON. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of legislation that I am introducing with my colleague and friend Rep. Ed Towns to provide a stable source of funding for our nation's poison control centers, create a national toll-free number to provide ready access to these centers, and increase public education about poison prevention and the availability of poison control resources. Poison control centers provide vital, very cost-effective services to the American public. Each year, more than 2 million poisonings are reported to poison control centers throughout the United States. More than 90 percent of these poisonings occur in the home, and over 50 percent of poisoning victims are children under the age of 6. For every dollar spent on poison control center services, seven dollars in medical costs are saved. In spite of their obvious value, poison control centers are in jeopardy. They are currently financed through unstable arrangements of various public and private sources. Over the last two decades, the number of centers has steadily declined, jeopardizing access to services. The legislation I am introducing today will provide up to $27.6 million per year over the next five years to provide a stable source of funding for these centers, establish a national toll-free poison control hotline, and improve public education on poisoning prevention and services. The legislation is designed to ensure that these funds supplement--not supplant--other funding that the centers may be receiving and provides the Secretary of Health and Human Services with the authority to impose a matching requirement. I encourage my colleagues to join me in support of this very cost- effective investment in the safety and health of the American public, especially our children.

Mr. UPTON

Mr. UPTON. Mr. Chairman, a couple of weeks ago Lake Champlain was added as a sixth Great Lake over in the Senate, and it was added primarily to take money away from the Sea Grant College Fund. There are many of us here that thought it was highway robbery and are delighted that the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Shuster), the gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Oberstar), the gentleman from New York (Mr. Solomon), as well as Mr. Abraham and Mr. Leahy in the Senate, agreed to language that removed it from the Great Lakes status. Mr. Chairman, I want to commend our two Michigan Members for their work on this highway bill, the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Barcia) and the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Ehlers). For many years we have been a donor State, and as one that believes in trust funds, we ought to use the money in the trust funds for the purposes that they were intended for, whether it is the Coast Guard or the Airport Trust Fund and certainly the Highway Trust Fund. I have said from the beginning that the money that we pay needs to be used as it was intended instead of financing other parts of the government. Either spend the money on our roads or give it back to us in reducing our gas tax. This bill ensures that our gas tax dollars go from the pump to the pavement. This is a good bill.

Mr. UPTON

Mr. UPTON. Mr. Speaker, we need full and immediate disclosure, and that is what H.R. 3582 does. At the end of next month, most of us will file our FEC report for the first time since 1997. I cannot imagine a Member here or a challenger that does not have a fax machine, a telephone, e-mail, the ability to get on the Internet. This bill will require reports by all committees that raise or spend $50,000 to be filed electronically so that we can see an immediate reporting of contributions and expenditures within 24 hours. What is wrong with that? Nothing, and that is why every Member here should support it. This bill is an important first step as we look for full disclosure and the need to enforce the law. Last year, there was a report in the magazine, The Hill, that all of us receive here in Washington in our offices, and it said that most Members do not comply fully with the laws that are already on the books. Well, I have a fourth grader at home, and I know that when she does not fully comply with her homework assignment, that her dad, myself, or her mom, makes sure that in fact that work is done before she goes to school the next day. I would say that both this bill and other measures will seek full compliance with the law so that every constituent can see how we raise and spend money which is very important as we look forward to the days when we receive the full confidence that our constituents should have in the Members that run for office.

Mr. UPTON

Mr. UPTON. I thank the gentleman for yielding. I just want to say I was very pleased to have joined this bipartisan effort, certainly not only as a Republican but more as an American, to actually have walked in the footsteps and to see some of those struggles. For me growing up in Michigan, never having really been to the South, never certainly been to Alabama until this weekend, two weeks ago, it was an amazing, extraordinary adventure for me. As I think about my district, diverse in so many needs and issues, whether rural and urban, industrialwise, in agriculture and diverse too in ethnicity, this was a very important trip for me, not only to understand some of the divisions that existed not only in the North but to see the real footsteps that the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Lewis) led in the South. As the gentleman from New York (Mr. Houghton) indicated before, though there were many of us that were sad that we were not with him back in the 1960s, for me I had an excuse as I might have been 7 years old, we want to finish this trail with the gentleman from Georgia. As we traveled this way and spent substantial time not only on the bus talking about the trials and tribulations that he went through, but I know that for sure the dozen of us that were there are indeed much closer as Americans and as Members of this House in respecting those convictions that all of us have for each other and our views and our districts that each of us represents. As the gentleman from New York (Mr. Houghton) indicated, it was a religious experience. One cannot describe it, certainly in the hour that we have here tonight, but in discussions certainly the Faith in Politics Institute began several months ago, as we see these unfold in the future. We love him. We love all that he did for America and for this House in terms of his leadership then and now. We certainly look forward to walking this path with him, with all Americans, as we try and end hatred and racism and things that sadly exist in far too many homes across this country.

Mr. UPTON

Mr. UPTON. Mr. Speaker, it is with a heavy heart that I rise today to pay tribute to a great journalist, a community leader, a dear friend, but most importantly of all, a father and beloved husband. Tony Griffin succumbed to cancer on December 30, 1997 only a few weeks after being diagnosed. It is rare that a single voice makes such an impact on so many people, in so many different ways. But Tony Griffin was just such an outstanding individual. As news and public affairs director at WMUK in Kalamazoo, Michigan, he was all a reporter should be--aggressive, accurate and fair. An alumnus of Western Michigan University, Tony returned home to his alma mater to work at the university's National Public Radio station. He would have celebrated his 25th service anniversary with the station in March of this year. Under his direction, WMUK won a wall full of prestigious awards, including recognition by the Voice of America, Michigan Associated Press, the Public Radio News Directors, and the Michigan Bar Association. He built his career and reputation as a dogged, shrewd journalist. A healthy dose of skepticism coupled with voracious appetite for the truth wrapped around a sharp wit and always generous laugh. But the Tony we all knew and loved was more than just a journalist. Tony took time-out on the other side of the microphone to serve his community. He lent his enormous skills and energies to the local Red Cross, Van Buren County Community Corrections, and a host of other organizations dedicated to improving the quality of life in the Kalamazoo area. He truly cared about the community he represented. Tony's leadership and dedication will be missed in each of these roles--but not nearly as much as in his most important one. Tony leaves behind a wonderful wife and beautiful daughter. Over the years, my family grew close to Tony's. Our daughters are just a few years apart. We spent a great deal of time talking about the joys of fatherhood and our hopes and dreams for our daughters. Shortly before Tony passed away, the two of us had an unforgettable discussion at his bedside. But as it became painfully clear that the end was near, Tony kept his love of life and sense of humor until the very end. He explained to me what would happen if all politicians and leaders had received the same diagnosis he had. It would be amazing how quickly the mountains we've built between ourselves would come down. We'd realize that the important things--family, community, friends--really outshine everything else. Tony's words are an important lesson for us all. His memory will continue to live in each of us and grow stronger as the days go by. The greatest tribute we can pay to this man is to care for our community, to fulfill our civic duties, love and support our families, and to understand his lesson. Mr. Speaker, I encourage my colleagues today to share with me in recognizing the accomplishments of a dear friend, Tony Griffin.

Mr. UPTON

Mr. UPTON. Mr. Chairman, I would remind my colleagues that the Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982 required that consumers of nuclear- generated electricity pay a fixed fee to the Nuclear Waste Fund for the government to manage for this program. Of the $13 billion that has been committed to the fund since 1983, about $6 or $7 billion in fact has been used for other activities not relating to this one. In 1982, I worked for President Reagan. I can remember his signing statement in 1982 when Congress passed that bill. Some of us here, not me, but some of the Members here voted for that bill, and President Reagan thought that in a few years this thing would be done. Here it is, 1997, 15 years later, we are debating a bill that, when enacted, still will not see this thing completed for another 10 or 15 years. We do not need this amendment. The ratepayers are paying already tooth and nail for this program. Not all of the money has been spent for the program as it was originally intended. To lift the cap on this program is not necessary. I would urge my colleagues to vote no.

Mr. UPTON. Mr. Chairman, I did not want to leave my friend from Massachusetts' comments unresponded to with regard to the thousand years. Here is what it looks like. Looks like the moon. I would like to propose that we might get a unanimous consent amendment to put a statue of Ed Markey out in front with some of the speeches that he has delivered. I can guarantee my colleagues that no one will be close to this thing for 2,000 years, let alone 1,000, and we will not need the Park Service to build a $330,000 commode for 950 years from now. I wonder if the gentleman would object to such a unanimous consent amendment?

Mr. UPTON. Mr. Chairman, reclaiming my time, this Ensign amendment would require that the Department of Energy undertake a risk assessment before it takes any action under the act. The amendment would stop the nuclear waste program in its tracks and would prevent the Department of Energy from taking any action for years. It would guarantee that all nuclear waste in this country stays right where it is, spread out all over the country, rather than going to one safe site. I would say, too, that the risk assessments required by the Ensign amendment are in addition to the requirements that the Department of Energy prepare EIS, environmental impact statements, before major actions. Under this amendment the DOE would have to perform a risk assessment and prepare an environmental impact statement. There is no need for the risk assessment required by this amendment. The Department of Energy nuclear waste program is probably the most closely scrutinized Federal program created. There is layer after layer of oversight. The State of Nevada oversees the program, as does the Nuclear Waste Technical Review Board and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. All of this oversight is funded by consumers, and this would be viewed as a killer amendment. I would urge my colleagues to vote ``no.''