Tom Udall

Mr. UDALL of New Mexico

Mr. UDALL of New Mexico. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in opposition to H.R. 4954, the Medicare Modernization and Prescription Drug Act. It's a sad day for seniors all across this country and especially in my congressional district in New Mexico. It is sad because the Republican leadership has decided that the House will only consider their pharmaceutical company-backed Medicare prescription drug benefit program. The majority does not seem to care about making affordable prescription drugs available to all of our seniors. Instead, they only care about making political capital at the expense, literally, of our low income-seniors. For Congress after Congress, Democrats have called for making affordable prescription drugs available to seniors. And now that the Republicans fear losing their majority, they have brought a bill forward that has been industry-bought and industry-paid for. The Democrat alternative that we have proposed, and that the majority refuses to allow us to debate, has been bought and paid for by the American people, many who are seniors that have sent us here to represent their interests and not the interests of America's pharmaceutical companies. Our bill which has been endorsed by most senior advocacy groups would charge a $25 monthly premium and a $100 deductible and require co-payments of 20 percent up to $2,000. After that amount, the government would pay all costs. The Democratic plan has no gaps in coverage and low-income seniors are protected under our plan. The majority says it is too expensive. Why? Because all the money was spent last year on the $1.3 trillion Bush tax cut for the wealthy few. The Republican proposal is a ridiculous sham that has been introduced to fool our senior citizens into believing that they will finally have a prescription drug plan under Medicare that works. Republican strategists believe that their passage of any drug bill will inoculate their candidates against criticism. Even the spokesman for House Republicans' campaign committee has been quoted in the Washington Post as saying, ``The fact that the House will have passed a prescription- drug bill will take away the Democrats' ammunition, and will make Senate Democrats look worse for failing to pass it.'' Ar you kidding me? This shouldn't be about politics. It should be about policy. Prescription drugs are nothing more than a political game to the majority. Frankly, this is slap in the face to every American senior and not to mention insulting. My poor constituency in New Mexico cannot afford the outrageous prices of prescription drugs. Many of them drive hundreds of miles across the U.S./Mexico border to buy affordable prescription drugs. Many of them have to go without paying their bills in order to afford prescription drugs. Many of them have to forgo buying groceries, clothes, and other basic necessities to afford prescription drugs. We owe it to America's seniors to do the right thing and propose a plan that offers a real prescription drug benefit. We owe it to America's seniors to be able to debate a plan that offers real prescription drug benefits. We owe it to American's seniors to debate our bill. Our seniors deserve a prescription drug plan that works with a defined benefit plan, guaranteed premium and access, and protection for low-income seniors. The democratic alternative is the real prescription drug plan and not hoax on low-income seniors. I urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on H.R. 4954. Send this back and give us a fair vote on a real prescription drug plan.

Mr. UDALL of New Mexico

Mr. UDALL of New Mexico. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to an outstanding New Mexican, my friend, Nadine Milford. On June 30, after a successful three-year term, Nadine will step down as the Mothers Against Drunk Driving State Chair. I will take this time to pay tribute to Nadine for her efforts to eliminate the scourge of drunken driving and to improve the lives of countless New Mexicans. When tragedy strikes, we can do one of two things. We can either allow it to defeat us or we can use the experience to empower us to become an effective advocate for change. People living in New Mexico in 1992 will never forget that December. What started out as an ordinary holiday season was soon changed into one of devastating heartbreak. It was Christmas Eve and there were pockets of snow across the country. There was a sense of electricity in the air as there usually is during the holidays. At one home in Albuquerque, Bob and Nadine Milford were especially excited about spending the holiday with their children and grandchildren. On Christmas Eve, 1992, gifts were waiting under the Milford's Christmas tree--gifts that never were to be opened. Across town on that fateful night, Paul and Melanie Cravens picked up Melanie's three daughters--Kandyce, Erin and Kacee Woodard--at their father's west-side Albuquerque home. They decided to go see the lights from Nine Mile Hill, west of the city on Interstate 40. But before they topped the hill, they were struck by a pickup driving down the wrong side of the highway. Melanie and the three girls were killed instantly. Paul Cravens somehow survived, as did the driver of the pickup. Blood tests later showed that the driver was well over the legal alcohol limit. Mr. Speaker, I will not go into the legal debacle that ensued on this case for the next several years, other than to say it was painful and finally created the traction necessary for stronger drunk driving laws. New Mexicans were inconsolable that Christmas Eve when the local news began reporting what had occurred. Then they got mad. Our citizens demanded action to combat the state's DWI problem--and they got it. I have been fortunate enough to be a first-hand witness to Nadine's many accomplishments. At the time, I was proudly serving as the Attorney General of New Mexico. Earlier that year, I had appointed a DWI Task Force to study what our state could do to fight drunk driving. We issued our report to the State Legislature as they convened in January. Throughout the next few years, we worked to lower the legal blood- alcohol limit, toughened penalties for drunk driving and set aside millions of dollars to fund local anti-DWI efforts. The state also began widespread use of sobriety checkpoints and passed a ``zero tolerance'' law that strips minors of their licenses when they are caught drinking and driving. Throughout all of this, there was one person in the spotlight who became the focal point of this crusade, and that was Nadine. She could have sunk under the depression that engulfed her. Instead, she leaned on her deep faith and the love of her family and seemingly overnight transformed herself into the new face of DWI reform. Nadine could never have imagined that she would one day be tapped to lead such a worthy fight. Ultimately, I cannot think of anyone better to have done it. When Nadine was selected as the Mothers Against Drunk Driving State Chair in 1999, she was totally devoted to fighting for MADD's mission to stop drunk-driving. She has also comforted countless numbers of families who have been affected by a drunk driving death. Being so modest, I doubt that Nadine even realizes the positive impact that she has had on New Mexico. Mr. Speaker, I have touched only on a small list of Nadine's many personal and professional accomplishments. Vera Nadine Fuchs Milford was born in Los Angeles, California and has resided in New Mexico since 1961. Her husband, Robert, still owns Bobby Joe's Auto Sales. In addition to Melanie, she has four other children--Terrell, Celeste, Pauline and Lance. After graduating from Victory Bible College, Nadine taught school for a time. Of everything she has done, I know how proud she is of her family. She has been a wonderful wife and mother. New Mexicans feel as though they know Nadine because they have shared so much of her grief over the years. Nadine's motto is ``persistence wears resistance.'' Without a doubt, she has lived this motto throughout the years that have passed since Christmas Eve, 1992. She has stood tall and is truly a hero to many. Much of my admiration for Nadine Milford stems from her enduring commitment to fighting the good fight. Her values are reflected not only in the way she lives her life, but also in her intelligence and honesty. She will undoubtedly be missed at MADD, but her legacy will endure, and she will never stop advocating for the elimination of drunk driving. Nadine, I wish you well in whatever future endeavors you pursue.

Mr. UDALL of New Mexico

Mr. UDALL of New Mexico. Mr. Speaker, I want to take time today to recognize and express my deep appreciation to a gentleman who has worked for me since I came to Congress. Professional staff, for the most part, work in the back stage of history, but their work is fundamental to our duties as representatives of the people. They are dedicated and professional public servants, and I commend them for their service to their country and their contributions to the House of Representatives. Juan Lucero, who serves as my casework manager in my Santa Fe office, is retiring this year at the age of 63 after a remarkable career. He spent over 3 decades of his life serving the people of New Mexico in some capacity. I stand here today not only to recognize him but to also thank him on behalf of thousands of people that he has helped over the years. Juan has had jobs ranging from being a fruit picker in California to being a DJ at a Spanish radio station in Albuquerque and in serving in the Nation's military as a paratrooper in the U.S. Army. This diversity has given him a unique perspective on people and their personal situations. His career as a civil servant in New Mexico began in 1969, when he worked at the State Welfare Department. For 10 years, Juan worked tirelessly to help people with their claims for food stamps and Medicaid. From 1979 to 1983, he worked for Lieutenant Governor Roberto Mondragon. He remembers many successes as a caseworker in this progression, for example, helping clear up a $10,000 hospital bill for a destitute woman. Juan stayed in this position from 1983 to 1987, while working for the next Lieutenant Governor, Mike Rybbeks. Juan then found himself working for the New Mexico State Senate Chief Clerk's Office, where he worked on cases on behalf of State senators. Juan continued his governmental service when he came to work for my Democratic predecessor in 1991, Congressman Bill Richardson. It was in this position where Juan began helping his fellow New Mexicans resolve their problems with the Federal Government. He had his first experiences with Social Security, the Veterans Administration, the Internal Revenue Service, and other agencies that make our government work. At any given time, he handled over 250 cases. He stayed in this position until Bill Richardson left the Congress in 1997. Before he came to my office in 1999, Juan worked for the Social Security Administration Teleservice Center in Albuquerque. He assisted hundreds of callers each day, often utilizing his outstanding Spanish skills, taking calls from Puerto Rico and all over the country. He also worked as a prison chaplain at the Estancia jail in New Mexico. Juan has a natural gift for helping people during hard times. Our constituents that come to our offices for help are usually at the end of their rope and frustrated by miles of red tape and bureaucracy that they have had to endure. Wherever Juan absorbed his passion for service, it has been a fulfilling aspect of his life. As he once explained: ``This is one place where you can really help people, and the most desperate person can come here and at the very least they can find an ear to let out their frustrations. To be able to make someone's life more meaningful is a special privilege. People come to their Congressman with life-changing events. Their problems are serious. To me, all cases are important because they mean so much to the individual. The reward in this type of work is so much greater than money.'' For about 15 years, Juan has been commuting to Santa Fe from his home in Torreon, 4 hours round trip. Neither rain nor snow nor hail nor heat nor the gloom of night has kept him from faithfully doing his job. I cannot begin to describe the casework successes that we have shared together. Juan has also earned several letters to the editor in various newspapers in New Mexico thanking him for his diligent work. Those examples speak volumes about Juan's work ethic. Juan is a veteran, a husband of 40 years, a father to 13 children, and a grandfather to 26. I know that more than anything he ever did in his professional career he is most proud of his loving family. He has a true passion for his Spanish heritage. He enjoys explaining to those of different backgrounds the traditions and the history of his people. He has helped me in my quest to provide justice to Hispanic land grant heirs of the Southwest. He is a talented musician and takes great pride in performing with his family throughout New Mexico. He loves music and has written many corridos, Mexican ballads, during his life. Some of these songs are archived at the University of New Mexico Department of Music. I applaud Juan for his great public service.

Mr. UDALL of New Mexico

Mr. UDALL of New Mexico. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H.R. 3250, the Code Talkers Recognition Act. This bill expresses Congress' recognition towards the Native American Code Talkers for their honorable contribution in the U.S. victories during World War I and II. The Sioux, Comanche, and Choctaw Code Talkers served on the frontlines of World War II in the European fronts and on the Pacific. During World War I the Choctaw Code Talkers served as radio airmen who were positioned in the widest possible area for communications that resulted in the successful transferring of their unbreakable code. Many Native American Code Talkers provided vital combat information in their native language, regarding the enemies' locations and their strength. As a result, countless American soldier's lives were saved in battle. As a member of the House Committee of Veteran Affairs, I acknowledge the magnitude of commitment these men carried out in order to defend our Country and to grasp victory. Last year on July 26, 2001, I had the privilege to participate in the Congressional Gold Medal award ceremony for the Navajo Code Talkers. Mr. Speaker, I support this legislation that will honor additional heroes of America, the Sioux, Comanche, and Choctaw Code Talkers. These code talkers respectfully deserve equal recognition for their heroic support in World Wars I and II.

Mr. UDALL of New Mexico

Mr. UDALL of New Mexico. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to announce the Santa Fe National Forest has received a donation of approximately 154 acres of private land from Ms. Frances Baca, of Circleville, Ohio. This undeveloped forested land has been in the Baca family for over 50 years. The Baca property was the last remaining private parcel of land in Santa Fe Canyon located within the boundaries of the Santa Fe Municipal watershed, just east of the City of Santa Fe. Ms. Baca inherited the parcel from her mother, Antoinette Hanna Baca--the first woman commissioned Officer in the National Guard and later appointed Assistant Adjutant General--who owned a larger parcel in the watershed but sold part of it to the renowned artist Randall Davey. Eventually, Randall Davey left his property and houses to the Audubon Society--which uses the facility as a conference and education center. After this donation, either the City of Santa Fe or the United States of America own all of the lands within the watershed. With the recent release of the Santa Fe Municipal Watershed Management Plan to improve forest conditions through thinning and burning portions of the municipal watershed, having access to this property is considered key to the successful implementation of the project. Among the most valuable assets in northern New Mexico are its deep- rooted culture and pristine beauty. Together, they are a large part of why generation after generation has chosen to live here and why new neighbors arrive every day. This new land will only add to those treasures. I know how grateful the Santa Fe National Forest Supervisor Leonard Atencio is for this generous donation. I, too, want to thank Ms. Baca for this unprecedented gift on behalf of all New Mexicans and visitors to the Land of Enchantment. This land will forever serve as a testament to the legacy of your family and symbolizes the special connection that our citizens feel to the land.

Mr. UDALL of New Mexico

Mr. UDALL of New Mexico. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H. Res. 438, expressing the sense of the Congress that improving men's health through fitness and the reduction of obesity should be a priority. Physical fitness is key towards the prevention and reduction of obesity. As a nation we should encourage all men to continue to live an active life beyond their high school sports and other extra curricula activity years and well into their retirement years. It's hard to believe that in the age of technological advances there are still very simple steps we can take to improve our health. Experts agree that moderate exercise; just 30 minutes a day, 3 times a week can have a significant impact on health. That's just an extra 15 minutes in the morning and evening. Exercise such as walking can reduce your risk of chronic, disabling and often fatal diseases like diabetes, cardiovascular disease, depression, stroke and cancer. It can reduce and even eliminate dependence on medications resulting in a significant amount of cash savings. Furthermore, exercise improves mental alertness and fosters healthy muscles, bones and joints. The technology of the 21st century has spoiled us. The World Wide Web has put the world at our fingertips. With our busy schedules we have grown dependent on the Internet for shopping, paying bills and even purchasing groceries. With a push of a button food is delivered directly to our homes. Obesity is one of the biggest public health challenges in our time. The high number of uninsured individuals, the outrageous prices of prescription drugs and the down turn of the economy have forced us to take initiative and control over our health. The estimated medical cost for physically inactive Americans is $77 billion. We must rely on cost- effective proven practices such as exercise that will contribute to the prevention and reduction of obesity. That is why I support their resolution. Although technology has advanced by leaps and bounds our health has suffered by many of life's new conveniences. We are eating more, exercising less and becoming obese. H. Res. 438 does not expect our men to become tri-athletes rather it recognizes that physical activity is the key to reducing and preventing obesity. I urge all of my colleagues to support H. Res. 438. I also encourage families, health professionals, businesses, community leaders, schools and universities to join in an effort to improve physical fitness through innovative approaches. Together we can join forces and conquer obesity and its cruel ramifications.

Mr. TOM UDALL of New Mexico

Mr. TOM UDALL of New Mexico. Mr. Speaker, today I honor the memory of a delightful New Mexican, Angelina Sosaya Biddle, who recently passed away. All those who knew her will forever remember her fondly. Angie was known as one of Santa Fe's most wonderful and lively characters. Angie was a common sight to many clothing stores and people along the Plaza and Acequia Madre Street. She loved to visit with store owners and discuss the latest fashions. Angie had worked with clothing designer Agnes James and at Suzette's at the La Fonda Hotel. While working for Agnes James, Angie designed the Buffalo Hunter shirt and the Bustle-Back broomstick skirt. Her sister, Stella Montoya, continues to still use the original patterns. In her twenties, Angie enjoyed going out with the crew of the movie Santa Fe Trail. Her beauty was well known, and she was often used as a model by many of Santa Fe artists in the 1930's and 1940's. Angie enjoyed regaling her family with stories of when she and her cousin Fray Angelico Chavez were young, and would accompany her parents on the long drives to Albuquerque. She would tell how she and Fray Angelico often found it necessary to get out of the car and help to push it over La Bajada Hill. Throughout her life Angie remained interested in fashions and kept that desire burning in her sisters and nieces. She always let her nieces know that they could wear pearls at anytime and with anything, and many of them still wear their pearls just that way. Angie had a love for anything French and had enjoyed her visits to France. The first time she traveled to Europe was with her mother aboard the Queen Mary. She was often seen at this French Pastry Shop at the La Fonda Hotel, where she loved to indulge in the crepes. She also loved to drive her ``French'' cars--her Renault and her beloved Peugeot. While her nieces and nephews attended Acequia Madre elementary school, Angie would be a common sight, always stopping by to bring them treats and small gifts. Born in 1910 to Augustin and Victoria Sosaya, she was preceded in death by her parents, her sisters, Mary, Consuelo, Delores, and Florence, her husband Martin Biddle, and her son Michael Biddle. She is survived by sisters Anita Nelson, of California, Stella Montoya and husband Eloy, Monica Sosaya Halford and husband Richard, of Santa Fe, and her brother Augustin Sosaya and wife Priscilla, of California. Numerous nieces and nephews also survive her. Mr. Speaker, Angie will be missed not only by her family and many friends, but by her community as well.

Mr. UDALL of New Mexico

Mr. UDALL of New Mexico. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the Pomeroy-Thurman alternative to the Republican Estate Tax Repeal extension. The alternative, crafted by the gentleman from North Dakota and the gentle lady from Florida, offers immediate and permanent estate tax relief beginning January 1, 2003 by increasing the exemption to $3 million for individuals and to $6 million for couples. It is a balanced plan that will protect the few small business owners and farmers that are ever subject to this tax. In this time of deficits and pressing national needs like homeland security, Social Security and Medicare, should we be directing a costly tax cut only toward our wealthiest citizens? Under current law, estates of up to 43.5 million for any individual or $7 million for a couple will be exempt from any estate tax when reform is fully implemented in 2009. According to current estimates, only 22 estates in my home state of New Mexico would be subject to this progressive tax by 2009. The average worth of those estates is $18.6 million. It is completely unacceptable in a time of war to pass a permanent tax break for the nation's wealthiest Americans. In every other war in American history taxes have been raised to help the effort. Tragically, the House leadership and the Bush administration appear to be charting precisely the opposite course. And, what about the nation's other needs? Where will the money come from to improve education, provide prescription drug coverage, and strengthen national defense? Where will the money come from to pay down our long-term national debt? We've got to save and invest now to strengthen the economy for the future, keep Social Security and Medicare solvent, and prevent far more difficult choices down the road. Of all the urgent problems and commitments facing the nation right now, the sunset of last year's repeal of the estate tax nine years from now should not be at the top of the list. A far more responsible use of our time would be to begin to recognize new realities and craft a bipartisan budget plan to return to the long-term surpluses that were so hastily squandered last year. I urge my colleagues to join with me and vote no on permanent estate tax repeal, and yes for responsible reform.

Mr. UDALL of New Mexico

Mr. UDALL of New Mexico. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman very much for those very kind words. Let me first say that I very much appreciate the bipartisan leadership on this piece of legislation. Ranking Member Lantos and Chairman Hyde, I think, have done an excellent job on making sure this gets through the House of Representatives. Clearly Chairman Smith and the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Roemer) have worked very hard on this piece of legislation and made sure that it is on the floor today. It gives me great pleasure to rise today in strong support of H.R. 4073. This is extremely important legislation that holds great promise for improving the lot of many of the world's poorest individuals. According to the World Bank, more than 1.3 billion people in the developing world, or one-fifth of the world's population, subsist on less than $1 a day. Last year, nearly 10.5 million children under the age of 5 died from largely preventable malnutrition and disease and more than 100 million children of primary school age remain out of schools in developing countries throughout the world. These children and their families are some of the poorest people in the world who lack access to many of the most basic necessities that we in the United States often take for granted. One tool that has proven to be an effective remedy is microcredit loans. These very small loans and other financial services, available to the poorest people, allow them to start and expand tiny businesses without depending on money lenders who demand exorbitant interest rates. In addition, the access to these small loans allows the poor to reap the benefits of their hard work. Mr. Speaker, I have heard firsthand the stories of women from Pakistan and India, who as a result of these important loans, which often average around the small sum of $150, were able to pull them and their families out of poverty. They spoke of the incredible returns to their families and communities, stating that almost 90 percent of the return they were able to generate from the loan went to paying for better living conditions, better food, and better education for their children. In addition, communities that have had numerous individuals receive these microloans have experienced an increase in more responsible family planning. The U.S. has been a major provider of funding for international microenterprise programs, providing $155 million for fiscal year 2002. Through the funding provided by the U.S., many microenterprise institutions are now operating independently of foreign aid. Their existence would have been impossible without previous grants for start- up and expansion. I am extremely pleased to see that H.R. 4073 increases microenterprise authorization to $175 million for fiscal year 2003 and $200 million for fiscal year 2004. Microcredit helps borrowers improve the quality of their lives and the futures of their children. I strongly support this legislation and urge my colleagues to do so as well. A vote in favor of H.R. 4073 will help provide hope and assistance to corners of the world greatly in need of both. I want to once again thank the Members on both sides of the aisle who have worked so hard on this piece of legislation. They have created a good example of how we should work with each other.

Mr. UDALL of New Mexico

Mr. UDALL of New Mexico. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word. (Mr. UDALL of New Mexico asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. UDALL of New Mexico. Mr. Chairman, this is a very important bill that we have before us. It supports the troops and our brave men and women overseas. It supports homeland security. And I think all of us here in this Chamber support those efforts. And yet, we hear Members from the other side get up and say that we are making this issue political. Nothing could be further from the truth. When this bill came before the Committee on Appropriations, it passed with a large overwhelming bipartisan majority; Democrats and Republicans working together to put out an appropriations bill to further our war effort and our homeland security effort. And it was only when the Committee on Rules intervened and devised this devious rule to join up this raising of the national debt and our war effort together that we had this serious problem before us. And it is our friends on the other side of the aisle that control that Committee on Rules that have made this a political process. There are a large number of controversial riders in this bill which we should be able to vote on individually. There is an increase in our involvement in the civil war in Colombia. This bill requires Medicare provider reimbursement increases in parts of the country while ignoring others without a vote. This bill requires textiles to be dyed and finished in the United States without a vote. There are other important foreign policy issues. There are important health care issues. But we are demeaning this institution, this fine democratic institution, if we do not allow votes on these important national issues. I am beginning to feel like Bill Murray in ``Groundhog's Day.'' Every day I wake up expecting that the Republican leadership will want a lively debate on the extremely important public policy issues that we are asked to consider in this body. Unfortunately, when I get to work, it is always business as usual. No open debate; no democratic process. The Republican leadership and this administration are attempting to conceal their efforts to raise the national debt by attaching it to a bipartisan appropriations bill. Instead of working to undo the fiscal mess their budget created, they are pursuing a policy that would simply raid the Social Security trust fund to paper over their fiscal mismanagement. According to the President's own numbers, the national debt will be roughly $2.7 trillion greater than it was projected last year. $1.9 trillion of that loss cannot be explained by the terrorist attacks or the economic downturn. It is the direct result of an irresponsible fiscal policy of this administration. Large deficits mean higher interest rates, and higher interest rates means millions of hard- working Americans will face what is essentially a tax increase. This increase falls hardest on the middle class and the working poor, those people who have the most debt. Sixteen cents out of every dollar, or roughly $1 billion per day, goes to pay interest on the national debt. Since much of that interest is paid to foreign investors, American taxpayers send nearly $100 billion out of the country each year. Now, I remember when the Republicans accused Democrats of irresponsibility because Treasury Secretary Ruben wanted to raise the debt ceiling. Now, with President Clinton and the Democrats working hard, we have balanced the budget and our friends on the other side of the aisle are calling for a run of deficits into the future. Current projections put us 10 years out on deficits. And, again, the Democrats are being proactive in searching for ways to fix the problems created by this administration's fiscal policy. The Democratic leadership has called for a bipartisan summit to discuss the Nation's financial problems and to work toward bipartisan solutions. I hope my Republican colleagues will join with us to seek out long-term solutions, not deceptive policies that will lead to more debt and less economic security. We should not allow fiscal mismanagement and the raiding of Social Security to slide through without a vote. Let us all remember one year ago, this President and the Republicans on this floor told us that we could do it all. We could pay down the debt. We could protect Social Security and Medicare. We could have other urgent dollars to pay for needs. Now today we are no longer paying down the debt. Mr. Chairman, to my friends on the other side of the aisle, we are borrowing, borrowing from our grandchildren. Shame on you in this procedure.

Mr. UDALL of New Mexico

Mr. UDALL of New Mexico. Mr. Speaker, let me begin by saying that if we are to be successful with moving people from welfare to work, then we must make sure there are adequate resources for transportation, childcare and training. In rural America, Mr. Speaker, I can tell you these services are critical. I have several concerns with the H.R. 4737's strict and unrealistic work requirements. These requirements are a bad idea for any area of the country, but particularly in the areas of rural New Mexico that I represent. With the extreme unemployment in rural areas and in tribal lands, the idea of imposing harsher requirements is not just unrealistic, it is bad social policy. For that reason, I introduced an amendment that would have provided much-needed flexibility to states struggling to cope with extremely poor areas with high unemployment. Unfortunately, the Republican leadership has chosen not to allow Democratic amendments today. As I said before, that is not a democratic process. It does not serve this body well. It does not serve the country well. TANF recipients in rural or tribal areas who wish to move into gainful employment are faced with a tight job market aggravated by the lack of economic development. The last 6 years have shown that rural and Native American TANF recipients were far less likely to leave the TANF roles, and those who left were far more likely to quickly find themselves unemployed or barely scraping by. Some tribal lands have unemployment rates approaching 80 percent and the national poverty rate on tribal lands is 54 percent. Those who are lucky enough to find jobs must overcome the woeful inadequacy of transportation and childcare that is so common in rural and tribal areas. In today's economic conditions, it is unreasonable to expect State and tribal TANF programs to enforce the strict and unfair work requirements being proposed by the administration. TANF recipients in these areas cannot be expected to find jobs where there simply are no jobs, or inadequate services to make a working lifestyle possible. Governors, legislatures, TANF caseworkers and the American people all agree that it is unreasonable to demand quick results in areas where residents face such significant barriers to employment. Even without the new work requirements, Native American tribes that have chosen to run their own TANF programs need assistance. While these programs have made admirable strides in serving their populations, they still face many problems. Many State TANF programs are unable to assist tribal programs, and tribes are left with insufficient funds to provide cash assistance and other programs. Ironically, those that can afford cash payments are often forced to forego programs intended to move people from welfare to work. This is all tribes can afford in the short term, but in the long term this path is extremely expensive, both in terms of dollars and in terms of human suffering. Many tribal TANF programs need help to develop the infrastructure that state and Federal welfare programs already have. Tribal programs must struggle to provide services from dilapidated buildings, and they do not have the resources to reorganize and modernize their facilities. The Nation's rural and tribal areas need flexibility and support, not unrealistic work requirements. As we work to bring TANF into the 21st century, let us not forget the obstacles and challenges facing rural areas; let us work to assist them in overcoming those challenges and pursuing a vibrant future. Unfortunately, Mr. Speaker, the majority's bill falls far short in addressing these problems for rural Americans and those living in Indian country. I urge my colleagues to support the Democratic substitute and vote ``no'' on final passage of this unfair bill.

Mr. UDALL of New Mexico

Mr. UDALL of New Mexico. Mr. Speaker, we have passed welfare reform out of this body; and as a result, we are putting more people to work. Welfare rolls have been cut in half in many States. With these successes in mind, now is the time to look at what is working and what is not. One of the biggest problems is how reform is impacting the rural areas of America. In rural America, where there are not many job opportunities, we are telling people to leave their homes and move to the city. In rural New Mexico, many people have been tied to the land and their homes for generations. Forcing people to move is not good public policy, and it is undermining the vitality of rural America. The solution is flexibility for States to design their programs, and the solution is transportation. Transportation should be a key part of any welfare reform. Another issue relates to the jobs people are filling. Is this the kind of employment where an individual can move up the economic ladder and support a family? Many times these are minimum-wage jobs with no real future. So we must provide meaningful job training so that an individual not only gets a job, but that that job opens the doors to better future opportunities. Welfare recipients want to work, but they also want to take care of their children. This is the common dilemma faced by welfare parents, many of whom are single mothers with children. The last thing we should do in the name of reform is send parents to work and leave the children without adequate nurturing and care. That is why child care is a critical component of a successful welfare reform effort. If we have learned anything in this reform effort, it is that States should have the flexibility to meet the goals of putting people to work in good jobs, while children get good quality day-care. Inner cities and rural areas face enormous challenges because frequently jobs do not exist nearby. With flexibility, States have been able to achieve big strides. Without flexibility, States will fail in these important tasks. Unfortunately, the administration bill that the House is going to consider this week fails to recognize why we have made progress. It undercuts the flexibility of the States. It provides for rigid Federal mandates which are good political talking points, but bad public policy. The Bush administration also fails to recognize we are in different times. In 1995 the economy was expanding. We had unprecedented job growth. Now we have high unemployment, and it is sluggish growth. It is essential that the States receive adequate resources to do the job. The administration shortchanges these reforms at a time when State budgets are in deficit. The administration bill imposes massive new mandates and additional costs on States that cannot be met. The Congressional Budget Office has estimated the new work requirements in the bill will cost the States up to $11 billion over 5 years. Yet this bill contains no new funding. Governors, State legislators, mayors, welfare directors and poverty experts have all indicated that these mandates cannot be met. Forty- seven out of 47 States surveyed by the National Governor's Association indicated that the bill requires fundamental changes in their welfare programs. Why would an administration which supports States rights craft a bill with so many Federal mandates and so little State flexibility? Just a word on how we deal with these bills. I would urge the Republican leadership to have a full and open debate on the issue of welfare reform and temporary assistance to needy families. Too many times in recent days we have taken up bills where no amendments are allowed by the minority. Many times no opposition bill is even allowed on the floor, or a motion to recommit. That is not a democratic process. It does not serve this body well. It does not serve the country well. Mr. Speaker, I would urge the Republican leadership to bring this bill before this body under an open rule, allow full debate, and allow the House to work its will.

Mr. UDALL of New Mexico

Mr. UDALL of New Mexico. Mr. Chairman today, the House is considering H.R. 4546, the Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2003. At a time when the men and women of our armed forces are spread across the globe defending our nation and helping to combat terrorism, this is a critically important piece of legislation that deserves to have a full debate on a wide range of issues that affect our fighting men and women and will determine how we defend America in the 21st Century. Unfortunately, Mr. Chairman, the majority has once again rigged the system to prevent the minority from offering the American people a real debate on these critically important issues. Even more unfortunately, Mr. Chairman, is the sad fact that I'm not really surprised any more when the majority presents us with so few choices. This isn't the first time we've had sham rules on the floor, and most certainly, it won't be the last. Repeatedly, we are given fewer opportunities to offer amendments on the important legislation. Mr. Chairman, today, once again I am saddened that the majority has prevented us from offering important amendments to improve this bill on a wide range of issues. We won't have a real debate on whether or not we should change our national nuclear policy. I find it amazing that the Administration seems to be steering our nation towards expanding nuclear weapons, and we seem to be allowing this without any debate. We also don't have a chance to debate the impact this legislation will have on the environment. We won't debate the Administration's attempt to gut our national environmental protection laws by exempting the Department of Defense from the Migratory Bird and Endangered Species Acts and by waiving protections found in the Wilderness Act. As many of my colleagues have stated, these issues and many others are of such national significance, it's unconscionable that we aren't having an open and fair debate on them. This sorry excuse for a Rule provided for by the majority is patently unfair. And it's patently undemocratic. These issues are too important to allow the majority to gag us once again.

Mr. UDALL of New Mexico

Mr. UDALL of New Mexico. Mr. Speaker, nuclear utilities intend to keep producing nuclear waste, and with talk about creating new reactors this would only add to the growing waste problem. The Bush Energy Plan calls for doubling the number of nuclear reactors in the U.S. by 2040. Yucca Mountain is only designed to contain the waste from existing reactors. The GAO report concludes it would be premature for the Secretary of Energy to recommend Yucca Mountain as the nation's nuclear waste repository for 77,000 metric tons of radioactive waste because many technical issues remain unresolved. Energy Secretary Abraham recommended the site anyway. The report said the Department of Energy (DOE) is unlikely to achieve its goal of opening a repository at Yucca Mountain by 2010 and currently does not have a reliable estimate of when, and at what cost, such a repository can be opened. Two hundred ninety-three unfinished scientific and technical issues have yet to be resolved before the site can be opened. For example, additional study is needed on how water would flow through the repository area to the underlying groundwater and on the durability of waste containers which are needed to last tens of thousands of years. We should use sound science to solve these unresolved issues to determine if Yucca Mountain is really ready to receive nuclear waste.

Mr. UDALL of New Mexico

Mr. UDALL of New Mexico. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to rise today in strong support of H.R. 4231, the Small Business Advocacy Improvement Act. Created in 1976 by Congress, the Small Business Administration's (SBA) Office of Advocacy's primary mission is to protect, strengthen and effectively represent small businesses within the Federal government's legislative and rule-making process. The Office of Advocacy works to reduce the burdens that Federal government policies impose on small business and encourage policies that support the development and growth of American small business. However, the Office of Advocacy is forced each year to negotiate with OMB and the Administration on the provisions in its budget. In order for the Office of Advocacy to strengthen its voice and credibility for small businesses, it must be independent of any undue interference or influence that might hinder its ability to speak out objectively on behalf of small businesses. To that end, H.R. 4231 requires that Advocacy's budget request be included in the President's budget submission to Congress each fiscal year without being changed. This will give the Office of Advocacy greatly increased fiscal independence from the Administration and will allow Advocacy to stay true to its core mission of providing support to small businesses and entrepreneurs. In addition, continuation of service for the SBA Chief Counsel for Advocacy, unlimited authorization for the Office of Advocacy, and replacing the ``minority enterprises'' terminology to include women owned businesses and veteran businesses in the primary functions of the Office of Advocacy are also important provisions included in H.R. 4231. I urge my colleagues to join me in support of this important legislation and help improve the support provided to our nation's small businesses by the SBA's Office of Advocacy. Vote ``yes'' on H.R. 4231.

Mr. UDALL of New Mexico

Mr. UDALL of New Mexico. Mr. Speaker, there are less than 65 legislative days in the calendar, and we have not dealt with one of the most important concerns: the issue of prescription drugs. Our seniors should not have to make a choice between paying rent or buying food and purchasing their prescription drugs. In the 1960s, we stepped up to the plate and provided medical coverage for those over 65 years of age. The Congress passed and President Johnson signed the Medicare program in 1965. The program has grown, and now over 40 million seniors are a part of Medicare. It is a good, solid program which provides basic medical care, but it has not kept up with new medical developments. Since 1965, a lot has changed in how we treat patients. Today if we were designing the medical care system for those over 65, prescription drugs would be an integral part of the whole. We have not adapted Medicare to modern medicine. Many of the chronic illnesses in our senior population can be treated effectively with new drugs which have been recently developed. A prescription drug component to Medicare must have several key provisions: No. 1, it must be available to all of those covered by Medicare; No. 2, it must be affordable; No. 3, it must be voluntary; No. 4, a reasonable premium must be charged; And No. 5, it must cover basic prescription drug needs. Unfortunately, our Republican friends have proposed a proposal and a program which only covers 6 percent of the senior population. This is nothing more than a Band-Aid for a serious medical crisis. We must act to provide comprehensive coverage for all who want it, and we must do so now. The other important action we must take is to eliminate the price discrimination in prescription drugs. The Prescription Drug Fairness Act does that. Today, an uninsured senior pays far more than an HMO for his or her prescription drugs. In a recent survey in my congressional district in northern New Mexico, uninsured seniors paid 115 percent more for their prescription drugs than large purchasers pay. That is more than double the price for uninsured seniors. These big drug companies have set up a two-tiered system of pricing. The uninsured senior gets the higher-priced drugs, while the large corporate purchasers, like HMOs, get a preferred customer price, a lower price. To be fair, we must eliminate price discrimination. The Prescription Drug Fairness Act does just that. If any customer is charged a preferred customer price, then all customers are entitled to purchase at that price. This simple legislative solution would substantially reduce the price of prescription drugs, and we must pass this piece of legislation. Just several words on our approach to passing prescription drug legislation. We cannot pass this legislation in a couple of hours. We must dedicate significant committee and floor time to find a bipartisan solution. Ramming a bill through the House in a couple of hours and then blaming the Senate for not acting is not responsible legislating. I urge the Republican leadership to give this legislation the time it deserves, and to allow the Democrats the opportunity to fully participate in the legislative process.

Mr. UDALL of New Mexico

Mr. UDALL of New Mexico. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of Israel, its people, and its future as a vibrant and stable democracy. I also rise in support of the Palestinian people and their rights to a homeland and to live in peace and security with their Israeli neighbors. I rise in support of a future for the Middle East in which children--Israeli and Palestinian alike--no longer have to go to school in armored busses and no longer have to worry about the safety of their mothers and fathers. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to give my support to a peace process that benefits from the full engagement of the United States and is possessed of a fair and balanced approach to the problem. I rise to support a plan that understands the concerns of both sides and works to ensure that all voices in the region are heard and understood. I rise in support of the idea that peace in the Middle East is achievable and that two peoples brought together by history and geography can put their differences aside in the interests of future generations. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the notion that the United States can and must serve as the indispensable nation in the Middle East. Only the United States is prepared and equipped to serve as the impartial negotiator that is so desperately needed in the region, and I hope that our engagement in the current crisis will increase in intensity and focus. The current Administration has made a good start in this regard, but they can and should do more. Mr. Speaker, I rise today, finally, in support of the goals contained in United Nations Security Council Resolution 242, which calls for the ``termination of all claims or states of belligerency and respect for an acknowledgement of the sovereignty, territorial integrity and political independence of every State in the area and their right to live in peace within secure and recognized boundaries free from threats or acts of force.'' I urge all parties in the region to vigorously pursue efforts to establish a just, lasting, and comprehensive peace in the Middle East that will enable Israel and an independent Palestinian state to exist within the context of full and normal relations.

Mr. UDALL of New Mexico

Mr. UDALL of New Mexico. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in support of H.R. 3231 and urge my colleagues to join with me in voting for an important piece of legislation. This bill, inspired by the dedication and hard work of the late former Congresswoman Barbara Jordan of Texas, comes before the House at a crucial moment in our history. During the past several months, we have been forced to witness the difficult truth that our Nation's immigrant laws and agencies are in disrepair and in need of major structural changes. As a free Nation and open society built on the strength, ingenuity, hard work, and discipline of immigrants from around the world, this strikes us especially hard. I am pleased that the bill before us takes important steps toward improving our Government's management of immigration while preserving the ability of immigrants to build new lives for themselves and their families in the United States. I am pleased to support H.R. 3231 for several reasons, not the last of which is its innovative approach to the reorganization of the Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS). Beyond reorganizing the INS into two separate bureaus within the Department of Justice, this bill will also create several new offices dedicated to improving the quality of the service provided to immigrants and protecting the rights of unaccompanied child immigrants. The bill, by placing the two new bureaus under the direct supervision of a new Associate Attorney General with experience in managing large and complex organizations, will also increase the importance placed on our immigration policies and the accountability of those responsible for enforcing our laws. With the passage of H.R. 3231, the House will take an important first step in reforming the way the United States deals with immigration. The next step, addressing the security of our borders, will hopefully be taken soon. Together, today's reforms along with upcoming efforts to strengthen border security will make America safer from those who would use our country's openness to do us harm. These reforms will also preserve America's commitment to remain open to immigrants who seeks a better life and will reaffirm our long tradition of finding strength in our diversity. This will be a key part of the legacy of the 107th Congress, and I am pleased to cast my vote as we begin this important effort.

Mr. UDALL of New Mexico

Mr. UDALL of New Mexico. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of Mr. Baca's motion to instruct conferees to restore food stamp benefits to legal immigrants. I applaud Mr. Baca's efforts on this issue and am happy to support him in this worthy endeavor. In addition, I would also like to applaud President Bush's effort to restore food stamps for legal immigrants, which is of critical importance to so many families all across this country. Unfortunately, conferees from the President's own party voted to block the Administration's proposal to restore food stamps to legal immigrants on April 10th. Instead, they voted for a far more stringent proposal that would make it virtually impossible for immigrant families to qualify for food stamp benefits. This opposition is preventing more than 350,000 people from benefiting from this program that helps poor families feed their children. Mr. Baca's proposal contains the same provisions that were in the Administration's proposal, which passed the Senate by the overwhelming vote of 96 to 1. These provisions include allowing legal immigrants access to food stamps after 5 years, allowing individuals with 16 quarters of work to be eligible for food stamps, and restoring food stamp benefits to children and other vulnerable populations regardless of date of entry. I urge my colleagues to support this motion to instruct conferees and help ensure that all legal immigrants, especially children, are eligible for food stamps. Legal immigrants who work hard, live by the rules, pay taxes, and even serve in our armed forces deserve access to food stamps. Lets do the right thing and pass this motion to instruct conferees.

Mr. UDALL of New Mexico

Mr. UDALL of New Mexico. Mr. Speaker, we all know that our schools will never be any better than the men and women who teach in them. I rise today to pay tribute to a remarkable teacher who has made Corrales Elementary one of the best in my home state of New Mexico. Corrales has been truly fortunate to have someone of the talents and dedication of Mr. Haire within the community. It is an honor to be able to recognize him on this special occasion. After serving as an exemplary elementary school teacher in New Mexico for more than 32 years, Richard Haire is retiring the chalk, and will end a career that will conclude with teaching a fifth grade class of children at Corrales Elementary for twenty-three consecutive years. I say he is retiring the chalk because I know that he will continue to contribute to the community in a variety of ways. Mr. Haire graduated second in a class of 360 in 1965 from Commack High School in upstate New York, where his classmates voted him most likely to succeed. He graduated cum laude from the State University of New York with a BA in psychology, and then received his Ms in Education from Syracuse University. In addition to teaching children, Mr. Haire was a mentor to scores of his colleagues. Indeed, he is a teacher's teacher. His greatest service to our community lies in his devotion as an educator to his students. He deserves the greatest praise both from the families of these young individuals, and from all those whose lives he has touched. His efforts are an invaluable investment in New Mexico's future and we are all truly blessed that we had such a dedicated professional in the classroom. It is impossible to find a former student whose life has not been changed positively by Mr. Haire. Everyone can point to a turning point where his teaching caused each to embark upon a course of action. In his service to education, Mr. Haire embraced the principle that one person can make a difference, by leading by example, getting people involved, touching everything and everyone in the community. Teachers like Richard Haire do make a difference. I believe so strongly in education. I know that as we battle the ills of our society--poverty and hopelessness--education is the great beacon and the great hope. I strongly believe that our public school system will continue to meet the challenges of the 21st century. The commitment Mr. Haire has made to children both in and out of the classroom continues to illustrate the power of a single person. Mr. Speaker, in 1818, Thomas Jefferson said, ``A system of general education, which shall reach every description of our citizens from the richest to the poorest, as it was the earliest, so will it be the latest of all the public concerns in which I shall permit myself to take an interest.'' This quotation embodies Richard Haire's career. We will dearly miss his service at Corrales Elementary.

Mr. UDALL of New Mexico

Mr. UDALL of New Mexico. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to speak out against the administration's 21 percent cut of the Payments in Lieu of Taxes Program. Many of our western States have substantial Federal land within their borders. On the one hand, these lands provide many opportunities for all Americans. But for local counties who are financially strapped, Federal lands mean the loss of a tax base. To deal with this issue fairly and so that the Federal Government is a good neighbor, we pay a portion of the lost tax revenue. This is called Payments in Lieu of Taxes. It is a good program that should be fully funded, although it never has been. By cutting this valuable program, the administration is turning its back on many western counties. I urge my colleagues to reject this unwise and unsound cutback.

Mr. UDALL of New Mexico

Mr. UDALL of New Mexico. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in opposition to H.R. 3762, the so-called Pension Security Act of 2002. As we all learned as a result of the monumental collapse of Enron, our pension system needs to be fixed to ensure that Americans' retirement savings are protected. This bill brought before us today, however, does not ensure this protection. What it does ensure is political cover for the majority so they appear to be protecting people's retirement savings while not creating friction with their corporate allies. H.R. 3762 doesn't really solve the problems we witnessed last year from the Enron debacle. The majority's bill still restricts employees from selling existing company stock in their pension accounts during the five-year phase-in, and requires them to hang on to employer stock for three years after it is contributed. While employees are restricted during this time, however, company executives would still be free to trade their own stock as they wished. The substitute bill, which I support, has no such five-year phase-in and allows employees to sell employer stock immediately, once they have been in the plan for three years. The substitute also ensures that employees will know, within three days, when executives are dumping large amounts of their company stock. Ken Lay used loopholes in securities laws to delay disclosure of sales of millions of dollars of company stock. Had employees known about these sales, they may have decided not to continue to purchase Enron stock. The substitute ensures that such information could not be kept from employees. Also, the substitute holds executives accountable for selling company stock in their special pension accounts by including stiff new criminal penalties for violations. H.R. 3762 also allows companies to offer workers investment advice, even if there is a clear conflict of interest. For example, an investment management company could serve as both the investment advisor and the plan manager chosen by the company. I urge my colleagues to oppose H.R. 3672, support the substitute, and help protect the savings of hard-working Americans. The Pension Security Act of 2002 is nothing more than lip service to protecting pensions. 15,000 Enron employees lost more than $1.3 billion. Clearly this calls for Congress to provide real security and real pension protection and reform of the system that allowed Enron officials to pull the sheets over the eyes of their employees. That is what the Rangel/Miller substitute does and that is the bill I will support. Thank you.

Mr. UDALL of New Mexico

Mr. UDALL of New Mexico. Mr. Speaker, this is a sad month for the State of New Mexico and at the same time a wonderful gain for the Nation. Colonel Jeff Remington, commander of the 27th Fighter Wing at Cannon Air Force Base will be leaving on March 28. After an admirable tenure, he has been selected to command the 18th Wing, Pacific Air Forces at Kadena Air Base in Japan. While we are disappointed to see him go, we are very grateful for the contributions he made to Cannon and eastern New Mexico in general. Since arriving in May 2000, Colonel Remington, with steadfast personal commitment, led the base with pride and honor. He continually demonstrated outstanding leadership in every manner. All who have served for or with Colonel Remington have nothing but praise and the highest personal regard for him. He is a man of exemplary character, and the highest sense of personal honor. He epitomizes all that the concept of being involved in the United States Air Force represents. Colonel Remington made a special emphasis on positioning Cannon Air Force Base as a community partner with the surrounding counties. He made a point to participate in local events, let the public know about the base's contributions to national defense, and in essence, became a neighbor. He never hid the joy that he had in this particular assignment. Indeed, in an editorial he wrote for the Clovis News Journal, he wrote, ``I have the best job in the Air Force at the best base in the Air Force.'' I traveled to Cannon shortly after the events of September 11, to receive a briefing from Colonel Remington about the role that the base was playing in light of the attacks. During our meeting, he expressed his absolute confidence in the men and women who served under him at the base. It was most inspiring to see a leader who believed so much in the people he was guiding. I believe it is that type of leadership that has made him so admired and effective at Cannon. Of course his tenure at Cannon is only one of many assignments that he has had in an Air Force career that spans twenty-five years. After graduating in 1977 from the U.S. Air Force Academy, he earned his wings as a distinguished graduate of pilot training at Williams Air Force Base, Arizona. Colonel Remington flew F-16s in Europe where he filled numerous positions, He was also a pilot for the Thunderbirds. His previous command assignments include the 80th Fighter Squadron at Kunsan Air Force Base in Korea and the 366th Operations Group at Mountain Home Air Force Base in Idaho. Such a distinguished career has led to a number of awards and decorations including the Defense Superior Service Medal, the Legion of Merit, the Distinguished Flying Cross, and others. Cannon Air Force Base has benefited from having such an accomplished and disciplined commander at its helm for the past two years. I know that Colonel Remington will positively impact all of his future assignments. For myself, I look very forward to meeting and working with his successor, Colonel Robert Yates, who is leaving as commander of the 355th Operations Group at Davis-Monthan Air Force Base in Arizona. Mr. Speaker, the residents of eastern New Mexico will miss this extraordinary gentleman who served our New Mexico so well. I hope that someday, somewhere, Colonel Remington reflects on his time in the Land of Enchantment and remembers the difference he made in our community. I am proud that I had the opportunity to work with him, and I remain confident that his example will continue to live in the hearts and minds of his fellow officers.

Mr. UDALL of New Mexico

Mr. UDALL of New Mexico. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H.R. 706, the Lease Lot Conveyance Act of 2002 introduced by my good friend Representative Joe Skeen. Let me begin by saying that the citizens of Sierra County, where this legislation is targeted, have been well represented by Chairman Skeen for the past 22 years. As a member of the House Resources Committee, it was a pleasure for me to support H.R. 706 during its committee process and a greater pleasure for me to support it today as the House prepares to vote on its passage. This legislation seeks to correct a situation that began on the Elephant Butte Reservoir in the 1930's. The Federal Government offered citizens the opportunity to build recreational homes on land leased from the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation. The covenants in the lease required leaseholders to make substantial investments on the four hundred sites released under the program. All leaseholders hoped that one day the government would privatize the land and offer it for sale. Because that has not occurred, this bill allows current leaseholders the opportunity to purchase the land. Mr. Charles Ward, President of the Elephant Butte/Caballo Leaseholders Association, who testified before the Resources Committee last year said, ``Our hold on the lease lots we call ``home'' is tenuous, at best. We are all acutely aware we can be removed at any time due to a clause in our lease agreement which states, if the government determines there is a greater need for these lots, they can give us a 60 day notice and we must return our lease lots to their original condition.'' These homeowners deserve to know that their lease fees will not increase, and deserve to have the safety and security of a permanent home. As far as I am concerned, this is a critical economic development issue for the citizens of Sierra County in Congressman Skeen's district. Again, it is a pleasure to support this legislation. I look forward to working with Chairman Skeen, during this second session of the 107th Congress on mutual issues that are of benefit to the people of New Mexico.