Tom Udall

Mr. UDALL of New Mexico

Mr. UDALL of New Mexico. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as she may consume to the gentlewoman from New York (Ms. Velazquez), our ranking member and a very hardworking member on this piece of legislation.

Mr. UDALL of New Mexico. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. UDALL of New Mexico. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, let me just thank the chairman of the committee, the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Manzullo), once again. I want to echo what has been said earlier, that we have one of the most bipartisan committees in the Congress, and I know because of all of the chairman's hard work we have gotten this bill through and gotten this done. I want to take the opportunity to thank the staff on both sides and my staff member, Tony Martinez, who has worked very hard on this. Members from both parties talked about visiting my district and learning from those experiences out there, and I think one of the things they learned is that we can make a real difference for Native American entrepreneurs with this piece of legislation. So let me once again just thank the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Manzullo) for all of his hard work.

Mr. UDALL of New Mexico. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from Ohio (Mrs. Jones).

Mr. UDALL of New Mexico. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. First of all, let me thank the majority leader for allowing this legislation to come before the House for consideration. I also would like to thank the gentleman from Illinois (Chairman Manzullo) and the ranking member, the gentlewoman from New York (Ms. Velazquez), for their work and commitment to expanding small business opportunities for all Americans. H.R. 2538 will establish a 3-year pilot program for providing grants to Small Business Development Centers for assisting Native American, Native Alaskan and Native Hawaiian populations with their small business development needs. Today we have demonstrated how important small business is to the health of our economy, but there are still places in this country where economic prosperity has often failed to reach. These areas deserve our attention and assistance. Consider this: nowhere in America has poverty persisted longer than on or near Native American reservations, which suffer an average unemployment rate of 45 percent. However, the number of businesses owned by Indian tribe members and Native Alaskans grew by 84 percent from 1992 to 1997, and their gross receipts grew by 179 percent in that period. This is compared to all businesses which grew by 7 percent, and their total gross receipts grew by 40 percent in that period. I would like to continue this growth and expansion of small enterprise through this legislation. My bill ensures that Native Americans, Native Alaskans and Native Hawaiians seeking to create, develop and expand small businesses, have full access to the counseling and technical assistance available through the SBA's SBDC program. The business development tools offered by SBDCs can assist Native Americans with the information and opportunity to build sustainable businesses in their communities. The Native American Small Business Development Act would permit State Small Business Development Centers to apply for Federal grants to establish one or more Native American Small Business Development Centers. In an effort to ensure the quality and success of the program, the proposal requires grant applicants to provide the SBA with their goals and objectives, including their experience in assisting entrepreneurs with the difficulties in operating a small business. In addition, the applicant must show their ability to provide training and services to a representative number of Native Americans, Native Alaskans and Native Hawaiians. Most importantly, applicants must seek the advice of the local native population on specific needs and the location of services they will provide. It is clear we can do more to aid Native American entrepreneurs. Not enough has been done to assist Native Americans in building their businesses, which in turn helps benefit their communities. I hope to change that with this legislation. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. UDALL of New Mexico. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Davis).

Mr. UDALL of New Mexico. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from the Virgin Islands (Mrs. Christensen).

Mr. UDALL of New Mexico

Mr. UDALL of New Mexico. Mr. Speaker, we all agree that small business is the engine of economic growth in our Nation. As a member of the Committee on Small Business, I have worked with my colleagues in both parties to ensure that access to capital is there for those who need it, especially women and minority-owned businesses. I am pleased to join today the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. McGovern) in introducing legislation that will allow us to determine if financial institutions are responding to the credit needs of minority- and women- owned businesses. From this data, we will be able to determine what is working and what needs fixing. This legislation is supported by the National Women's Business Council, the Women's Business Development Centers, the National Community Reinvestment Coalition, and the Hispanic Economic Development Corporation, to name a few. I look forward to working with the gentleman from Massachusetts and all my colleagues to achieve passage of this important legislation.

Mr. UDALL of New Mexico

Mr. UDALL of New Mexico. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong opposition to this rule and urge my colleagues to join me in defeating it. I object to this rule because the implications of its unfairness go beyond the petty political games of life in Washington. This rule actually threatens the national security of the United States. At a time when our country faces such serious challenges to our security and way of life, it is unconscionable that this body would attempt to pass a rule that squelches debate and prevents the Congress from appropriating money that is so desperately needed to ensure our safety. But the debate today is about more than simply a rule for considering the defense appropriations bill; it is about addressing urgent needs that have been neglected for far too long. America is facing the most serious threat of the last sixty years, a threat so great the world has united in response to the tragedies of September 11. The President of the United States has called upon all Americans to live as if we are in a state of war, and he has asked for--and received--unprecedented authorities to combat terrorism. In this atmosphere, the country expects the Congress to do its duty and contribute its share to the effort. Across the country, from Maine to California, Americans are losing their jobs, hotels remain half-empty, airliners fly with empty seats, shop-owners wait in vain for additional customers, and children of laid-off workers face the prospect of a bleak Christmas. Just this week, the National Bureau of Economic Research officially announced that the longest peace time economic expansion in American history had ended and that we are now in recession. But we did not need an official announcement to know we face real problems These are serious problems we face. Terrorism. Recession. Unemployment. It is our job as the Congress to do what we can to help our constituents through these times. Our constituents need us to act in their interests. Our constituents need us to secure our nation. Our constituents need us to rebuild the damage done by terrorists. Our constituents need us to stimulate the economy. This rule fails all of these tests. Why does this rule not allow for the urgent funding needed to prepare our defenses against the threat posed by biological weapons? Why does this rule not allow for the urgent funding needed to pursue justice in Afghanistan? Why does this rule not allow for the funds to hire additional air marshals and airport safety equipment? Why does this rule not allow for the funds needed to secure our postal system? What will we say to our constituents who ask us if the Congress has done everything possible to protect them from the threats we know about? What will we say to our constituents who ask us if the Congress has done everything possible to protect them from the threats we don't know about? What will we say at town hall meetings in the upcoming weeks when asked if America is safer today than it was on September 10? These are serious times in which we live, and we must act deliberately and swiftly to protect our constituents and the nation. We must do our duty under the Constitution--a duty to which we swore in this very chamber eleven months ago--by responding as best we can to the threats we face, both at home and abroad. The Constitution tells us that we must ``provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity.'' I believe in these words, yet I do not believe that today this body is acting faithfully to fulfill them. Defeat this rule. Vote for a substitute that will allow for a full debate and the inclusion of funding to guard our nation against biological weapons, to hire new border patrol agents and law enforcement officers, and to purchase new airport security equipment. Do not allow the Congress to be distracted from the issues before us from doing what we all know is right.

Mr. UDALL of New Mexico

Mr. UDALL of New Mexico. Mr. Speaker, I rise today as a Member of the House Veterans' Affairs Committee in strong support of S. Con. Res. 44 and urge its immediate passage. Designating December 7 of this year as National Pearl Harbor Remembrance Day is most appropriate and is a fitting tribute to the men and women who were present on that fateful day. December 7 of this year marks the 60th anniversary since that ill- fated Sunday morning when the dreaded news of death and destruction rang out across this nation. The surprise attack by the Imperial Japanese naval air forces upon our naval base at Pearl Harbor and the airfields around the island of Oahu went on to forever change our world. This unprovoked attack sank or heavily damaged 21 ships, destroyed or damaged 323 aircraft, killed 2,338 military personnel and civilians, and wounded 1,178. Reactions to the news varied from disbelief and shock, to anger. Later, these feelings would translate into a sense of mission, duty, and responsibility which would drive the American war machine and keep the recruitment offices flowing with eager volunteers. The raid on Pearl Harbor is an event which will forever be ingrained in the hearts and minds of those old enough to remember. The war is over, but we shall never forget. We shall not forget the destruction and sorrow which drew this nation into World War II. President Roosevelt told Americans that December 7, 1941, would be ``a date which will live in infamy.'' Indeed, this day has proven a constant reminder of the heroism and sacrifice of thousands of men and women who defended our freedom and liberty. My home State of New Mexico proudly hails approximately 200 Pearl Harbor Veterans within its borders. All across the Land of Enchantment on December 7 families and friends will gather to pay tribute to these brave Americans. I salute each and every one of them. I want to also recognize Stanley White who is the President of Chapter 1 of the Pearl Harbor Survivors Association for proudly representing all Pearl Harbor Veterans in New Mexico. Be assured that as we commemorate the 60th anniversary of the attack on Pearl Harbor, the bravery, valor, and service of these men and women in defense of their country and its deals are not forgotten. Please accept the thanks of a grateful nation forever indebted to your service.

Mr. UDALL of New Mexico

Mr. UDALL of New Mexico. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in strong support of H.R. 3240, the Reservists Education Protection Act. Up to 10,000 of the 50,000 reservists recently called to active duty by President Bush as a result of the September 11th attacks against the United States would lose educational assistance entitlement if they are forced to disenroll from school. In order to ensure that these reservists do not lose their education assistance entitlement, H.R. 3240 restores VA education benefits to veterans in reserve components who are using the Montgomery GI Bill earned by prior active duty. In addition, regular active duty servicemembers and veteran reservists who are transferred to a new duty station or assignment will also be covered under H.R. 3240. This bill will allow the servicemember to regain time to attend school by adding their mobilized tour of duty, plus four months, to the 10 years that they already have to use their MGIB benefit. I am an original cosponsor of this important legislation, which is similar to relief that Congress provided to servicemembers during the Persian Gulf War. I believe that Congress should again provide relief for the men and women who have been mobilized to help defend our country and ensure that these reservists are allowed to take full advantage of their education benefits. This week has been dedicated to honoring our nation's veterans of past wars. Today, with those veterans in our minds and hearts, let us also honor the mobilized reservists who this very instant are fighting here and abroad to defend liberty and freedom by passing H.R. 3240.

Mr. UDALL of New Mexico

Mr. UDALL of New Mexico. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of the agreement reached by the members of the aviation security conference committee. In doing so, I would like to commend the Members and their staffs who did an excellent job in negotiating the points of contention in this extremely important legislation. It is imperative that we turn airplane screeners into a professional, highly skilled, highly trained law enforcement workforce to ensure the best possible security for all airline passengers and crews. As such, I believe the conference report before us today takes significant steps to achieve that goal. The tragic attacks of September 11, followed by the recent security lapse at Chicago's O'Hare Airport have highlighted the need for improved airport security. Federalizing the airport screeners and requiring all luggage--checked and carry on--to be screened are two critical steps that need to be taken and I applaud their inclusion in this report. As we are now painfully aware, airport screeners are the front line in aviation security. This legislation will help transform them into a well-trained workforce capable of rising to the challenge and importance of their task. I urge my colleagues to support this bipartisan compromise forged by hours of hard work and dedication and help ensure the safety of Americans and restore their confidence in air travel.

Mr. UDALL of New Mexico

Mr. UDALL of New Mexico. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to object to this rule in the strongest possible terms. I believe that both the path taken and the point at which we have arrived this morning are an affront to the democratic process and are stunning examples of a breakdown in the systems that have served our country and the Congress for over two hundred years. The issues addressed in this legislation are of profound importance to the safety and security of our constituents and to the continued safety of the country as a whole. I believe that there is no more important duty undertaken by a member of this body than to protect the welfare of his or her constituents while also protecting the civil liberties for which so many Americans have given their lives. The procedural tactics employed this morning in the name of expediency, however, threaten not only to derail a legislative process that would have resulted in a widely supported bill to protect Americans, it also threatens to undermine the civil liberties enjoyed by Americans and the democratic principles enshrined in this very chamber. The outrage of this morning is tremendously disturbing to me and many of my colleagues. Rather than allowing a widely supported bill--passed unanimously by a committee that is often viewed as one of the most partisan in the Congress--to come to the floor for debate and a vote, the leadership of this body has decided to craft an alternative bill in the dead of night without providing the membership of the body at-large sufficient time to study its contents. I cannot understand why the leadership would threaten the wonderful spirit of bipartisanship that has flourished in the Congress over the last month by resorting to these types of procedural tactics and back-room deal making. I arrived at the Capitol this morning buoyed by the prospects that a thoughtfully deliberated and considered bill would be presented on the floor of the House for additional debate and consideration. I was monumentally disappointed to discover, however, that the bill had been pulled and replaced by an unstudied substitute, the contents of which remain largely a mystery to even many senior members of the Judiciary Committee. At nearly two hundred pages of esoteric and technical language, the bill is beyond the length that a member of this body may be reasonably assumed to have read and understood. By opposing this unfair rule, I am standing in support of fairness and the democratic process. I fully understand the need to implement new measures that will allow law enforcement to respond to the new threats posed to the United States by those who would do us harm, but I must urge my colleagues to oppose the rule. By defeating this rule, we will allow sufficient time to pass so that we may, in good conscience, examine this new bill and cast our votes confident that we understand its contents and its implications for law enforcement and democracy.

Mr. UDALL of New Mexico

Mr. UDALL of New Mexico. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in opposition to H.R. 3162 because I support combating terrorism in a way that ensures the protection of our freedom and liberties as well as our security. Unfortunately, H.R. 3162 provides sweeping new authority to law enforcement without also providing strong safeguards against the abuse of these new powers, and I cannot support it. This issue is so important because it combines two of the most sacred responsibilities of the American government--protection of citizens' safety and the preservation of their liberty. Throughout our history, our government has sought the proper balance between the needs of law enforcement to conduct investigations in pursuit of suspected criminals and the needs of law-abiding citizens to live free from unnecessary government intrusion into their lives and activities. Until September 11, 2001, many felt we were equipped with the investigative tools they needed to investigate suspected criminals and prevent serious crimes. Since then, however, the need for new tools has become apparent. The terrorist attacks of September 11 showed all Americans that new protections are needed to keep Americans safe and to uncover the activities of those who would do us future harm. The terrible acts shocked the world with their brutality, and I strongly support the President as he moves to eliminate future terrorist threats both at home and abroad. I also believe that the law enforcement community needs to modernize its capabilities to address the new threats we face as a nation but that we should not act hastily without fully understanding how the new powers will affect American freedom. In response to the newly apparent need for changes in the law pertaining to criminal investigations, the House Judiciary Committee held hearings on the issue and crafted a thoughtfully designed bill to address the needs of law enforcement. The Committee's bill, H.R. 2975-- the PATRIOT Act, passed in an incredibly rare unanimous and bipartisan vote of 36-0. H.R. 2975 received widespread support among members of the House, and I was prepared to support its passage through the House. It was a comprehensive bill that would have given important new authority to law enforcement while maintaining strong protections for the liberty and freedom of all citizens. H.R. 2975 would also have retained the crucial oversight of criminal investigations and prosecutions by impartial judges charged with ensuring that law enforcement acts fairly and responsibly. The version of H.R. 2975 that reached the floor, however, was not the version I and many of my colleagues supported. Through a series of late-night negotiations held by a very small group of legislators, the language of H.R. 2975 was amended and altered to remove many of the vital protections contained in the original bill. I believe that laws affecting the civil liberties of Americans are among the most important considered by the Congress, and I could not in good conscience vote for a bill that I believe will threaten the liberties and freedoms we cherish. In the days following the passage of H.R. 2975 by the House, the conference committee of the House and Senate created a new bill, H.R. 3162, designed to eliminate the differences in the versions of anti- terrorism legislation already passed by both chambers. In spite of some hard work by the negotiators, I am unable to support this new bill because it does not strike the right balance between protecting our liberties and providing for the security of our citizens. Let me share with you a few of the bill's troublesome provisions to illustrate how it fails to protect our liberties and prevent abuse of the new powers. First, Federal prosecutors and the FBI are given broad access to very sensitive medical, educational, and financial records about individuals without having to show evidence of a crime and without a court order. Second, the CIA and other intelligence agencies are once again given the authority to conduct surveillance on Americans because they will be tasked with identifying priority targets for intelligence operations within the United States. The last time this happened, during the 1970s, the Congress discovered numerous serious abuses of this power. Finally, this new legislation expands the power of the federal government to conduct secret searches. These secret searches can be conducted against suspected terrorist activity but can also be used in routine criminal investigations not related to terrorism. These are only a few of the broad, sweeping powers granted to the federal government in this new law. As a former federal prosecutor and New Mexico's Attorney General, I am both familiar with the needs of law enforcement to pursue suspects and a strong supporter of law enforcement. I also am a strong supporter of civil liberties and believe that the fourth amendment to our Constitution must be guarded against encroachment, even in the name of security. In opposing H.R. 3162, I was expressing my belief that the needs of law enforcement can be met without eroding our liberty. My experience shows that this belief is true, and my convictions tell me that it is right.

Mr. UDALL of New Mexico

Mr. UDALL of New Mexico. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in strong support of Mr. Oberstar's substitute amendment to H.R. 3150. As we are all now painfully aware as a result of the hijackings and attacks of September 11, Congress must act to strengthen the level of security on flights and in the airports throughout the country. I believe that Mr. Oberstar's amendment most effectively achieves this goal. Mr. Oberstar's amendment is identical to S. 1447, the Aviation Security Act, which passed the Senate 100 to 0 on October 11, 2001. This measure places responsibility for aviation security with the Federal Government to ensure that professional law enforcement agents are in charge of securing the airports and airplanes. According to the General Accounting Office and the Transportation Department Inspector General, airport security screeners are still often paid less than fast-food workers, which contributes to an average employee turnover rate of more than 120% nationally and more than 400% at some airports. If, when discussing these facts, we were discussing local police officers, U.S. Customs Service Agents, Border Patrol agents or other agents who are tasked with protecting the American People from harm, everybody in this Chamber would demand reform. It is abundantly clear that these airport screeners are the front line in aviation security and therefore are as important as the thousands of men and women in the other areas of law enforcement and citizen protection. Mr. Chairman, it is imperative that we turn airplane screeners into a professional, highly skilled, highly trained law enforcement workforce to ensure the best possible security for all airline passengers and crews. I urge my colleagues to support Mr. Oberstar's substitution amendment.

Mr. UDALL of New Mexico

Mr. UDALL of New Mexico. Mr. Speaker, I visited the airport in my State over the last weekend, and there were many new security measures in that airport put in place, and the National Guard was greatly appreciated in terms of their presence. But we can do a lot better when it comes to security. We should match all bags with passengers, we should federalize airline security, we can require overseas airlines to disclose passenger lists before they arrive in the United States, and we can require all luggage be X-rayed for bombs. The Senate has acted 100 to nothing. We do not have a bill on the floor. We need a bill. We need a bill now. It is absolutely unacceptable that we are not working on airline safety.

Mr. UDALL of New Mexico

Mr. UDALL of New Mexico. Mr. Speaker, I supported the bipartisan bill that came out of the Committee on the Judiciary; and sadly, that is not before us today and it is not the bill that we would have been able to support and that I could have supported with enthusiasm. The bill that passed the House was improved upon by the conference. Court supervision was added to the grand jury provisions. Money laundering provisions are now in the bill; and as we know, the first shot that was fired by this administration was one using the freezing of assets and monetary measures. Probably the saving grace here is that the sunset provision forces us to come back and to look at these issues again when heads are cooler and when we are not in the heat of battle.

Mr. UDALL of New Mexico

Mr. UDALL of New Mexico. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of H.R. 2716, the James Drappeaux-Stuart Collick-Heather French Henry Homeless Veterans Assistance Act. I am proud to be a cosponsor of this measure and I would like to thank Chairman Smith, Ranking Member Evans, and my colleagues on the Veterans Affairs Committee for their hard work on this importannt legislation. For far too long, too many of the men and women who have served in our nation's military have been homeless. It is a sad fact that an estimated 225,000 veterans throughout the United States live on the streets. That is why I am pleased today to support the passage of H.R. 2716, which is a critical step in addressing this shameful situation in our country. Among several other provisions included in this bill, H.R. 2716 authorizes 2,000 additional HUD section 8 low-income housing vouchers over 4 years for homeless veterans, establishes a grant program for homeless veterans with special needs, and establishes a limited dental provision for veterans using VA homeless programs. In addition, H.R. 2716 establishes evaluation centers for programs that serve homeless populations and requires annual program assessments to be submitted to Congress. These are just a few of the many critical provisions in H.R. 2716 that will help eliminate the problem of chronic homelessness among veterans. I ask my colleagues to join me in support of this important legislation for the men and women who have sacrificed so much in defense of liberty and democracy.

Mr. UDALL of New Mexico

Mr. UDALL of New Mexico. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to inform my colleagues that Intel New Mexico has become the first Excellence Award winner as part of my home state's Green Zia Environmental Excellence program. This is a significant achievement. The Green Zia program was launched three years ago, but no business had ever been named an Excellence Award winner, which is the program's highest honor. For the past two years, Intel New Mexico had won the program's Achievement Award. This award would not have been possible without the support of every employee of Intel New Mexico. Indeed, the company has a fully- integrated, prevention-based environmental management system in place throughout their site in New Mexico. Some of the company's major environmental achievements include: a water conservation rate of more than 50 percent; a recycling rate of 78 percent for solid waste with only 22 percent going to a landfill; and a 20 percent reduction in volatile organic compound emissions from last year. The company also has strong environmental programs for employees, including commute reduction, recycling, and several volunteer programs in which employees directly contribute. Mr. Speaker, Intel is one of the largest employers in my state, and I am pleased at the fine example they have set for other businesses. The crowning achievement of Intel New Mexico's efforts in environmental stewardship is proving that environmental protection is good business, that sound environmental practices are good for business, and that the environment is everyone's business.

Mr. UDALL of New Mexico

Mr. UDALL of New Mexico. Mr. Speaker, I oppose the rule.

Mr. UDALL of New Mexico

Mr. UDALL of New Mexico. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in strong support of H.R. 3061, the Labor-HHS--Education Appropriations bill for Fiscal Year 2002. This bill provides critical funding for our nation's students, teachers, doctors, patients, and numerous important programs within the Department of Labor. Before I go any further, I would like to take a moment to thank Chairman Regula, Ranking Member Obey, and the Majority and Minority Committee Staffs for their hard work on this excellent, bipartisan legislation. They all did an excellent job and should be commended for their efforts. Mr. Chairman, perhaps no resource in our great country is more important than our young people--our students. H.R. 3061 recognizes the vital role that this group plays in the future for our nation and for the world by increasing funding for the Department of Education by 16% over FY01 funding levels. Specifically, I am extremely pleased to see a funding increase of $1.4 billion for IDEA, $137 million increase for Impact Aid, $1.7 billion increase for Title I grants, just to name a few of the critical programs that are receiving an increase in funding. In addition, Mr. Chairman, funding for the Department of Health and Human Services has been increased by 13 percent in this legislation. Critical programs for rural health care providers and patients, which are very important to many rural areas that I represent in northern New Mexico, have received significant funds, including $142 million for the National Health Service Corps, $27.6 million for the Rural Telemedicine Grant Program, and $4 million for a State Offices of Rural Health Grant Program, just to name a few. Furthermore, this bill provides $120 million for the Community Access Program, which provides critical funding for 3 health care service providers in New Mexico. Also, of nationwide concern, this bill provides $ 100 million more than the FY01 level for countering bioterrorism programs at CDC and HHS. Last but not least, Mr. Chairman, a 3% increase for the Department of Labor will provide vital funding for adult job training programs, youth training programs, Job Corps, and OSHA. I urge my colleagues to support this bipartisan legislation. The committee has done an excellent job in crafting this bill to help address the many needs of our nation and I believe we should support the work of our colleagues on the committee.

Mr. UDALL of New Mexico

Mr. UDALL of New Mexico. Mr. Speaker, my vote on H.R. 2646, the Farm Security Act of 2001 has been a difficult one. I have struggled to determine how H.R. 2646 would benefit rural farmers and ranchers in northern New Mexico. I have always been a strong advocate for family farmers in New Mexico and I want these hardworking families to be successful and their farms profitable. However, H.R. 2646 fails these families in many ways. This new farm bill encourages overproduction while prices are low, fails to adequately help small farmers, and increases federal spending in times of economic uncertainty. After much thought, I must agree with President Bush and his analysis of H.R. 2646. I want to support a farm bill that is better for rural America, supports the environment, and expands the opportunities for our farmers in growing world markets. I agree with President Bush that H.R. 2646 fails to meet these objectives. For these and other reasons, I regret that I will vote against H.R. 2646 in its current form. I encourage the Administration to continue working with Congress to provide a plan that meets these new policy goals. Our current economic uncertainty, and some are starting to call it a recession, forces us to think wisely before spending. Combined with emergency aid, more tax packages and economic aid programs, we are facing some difficult fiscal hardships. For example, within the past several weeks, Congress passed a $40 billion emergency fund in response to the September 11th attacks; we have approved a $15 billion emergency aid package for U.S. commercial airlines; and we currently are negotiating with the President for an economic stimulus package that could reach $75 billion. With that in mind, I can not support H.R. 2646 in its current form and in our current climate. I agree with President Bush, and I call for a thorough examination of current farm policy. Our current farm bill does not expire until September 2002. Let's take the time to get it right. We must modernize the nation's farm programs to reflect changing technologies, markets, and environmental agendas. Yet, we must develop a farm program that protects and supports small family farmers and ranchers such as those in New Mexico. I question how the Farm Security Act would help the small farmers and ranchers in an equitable way. Mr. Speaker, the next generation of the nation's farm programs should have the flexibility to meet the diverse needs of all farmers and ranchers. It is time to seize this unique opportunity to develop long- term, progressive farm program solutions that are fair and benefit all farmers and ranchers. I am hopeful, however, that if this bill returns from a conference committee, it will contain the necessary improvements that will allow me to support this effort. I do support a new farm bill, but one that helps small farmers and ranchers, is strong on conservation, and is fiscally sound in uncertain economic times. I am confident the other body will produce a farm bill that we all can support to keep small family farmers and ranchers strong and in business.

Mr. UDALL of New Mexico

Mr. UDALL of New Mexico. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of this noncontroversial resolution and urge its immediate passage. It is most appropriate that we are considering this measure during the waning days of Hispanic Heritage Month. My home state of New Mexico has sent 17 Hispanic-Americans to Congress--that is a record. New Mexico is also the only state that has ever elected two Hispanic-Americans to the United States Senate. The presence of Hispanics predates the founding of our Nation, and, as among the first to settle on this continent, Hispanics and their descendants have had a profound and lasting influence on American history, values and culture. Since the arrival of the earliest Spanish settlers more than 400 years ago, these Americans have contributed immensely to our peace, freedom and legacy. I am honored to represent a state that has one of the largest percentages of Hispanic-Americans. This month, as we remember with special gratitude the gifts that Hispanics bring to every aspect of our country, I urge Hispanic-Americans, and, indeed, all New Mexicans, to take great pride in their heritage. Mr. Speaker, for these and countless other reasons, I ask that we pass this measure at once to celebrate the contributions that Hispanic-Americans have made in the United States Congress.

Mr. UDALL of New Mexico

Mr. UDALL of New Mexico. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. One historian once said that those that don't know their history are condemned to repeat it. We would never want to repeat the sad chapter of history known as the Long Walk. By designating this trail as a national historic trail, we can learn from our mistakes. Inhumane treatment of human beings, atrocities against native peoples, should never occur. The Long Walk National Historic Trail will stand as a monument, reminding us we can do better. We can be a better people. We can be a more compassionate and humane Nation. I would like to thank the gentleman from California (Mr. Radanovich) for his hard work on this and I look forward to working with him through the legislative process to get this done. I thank him very much for his bipartisanship. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. UDALL of New Mexico

Mr. UDALL of New Mexico. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to Mr. William J. Ivey, Chairman of the National Endowment for the Arts, who will be stepping down on September 31, 2001. Since 1998, when the United States Senate unanimously confirmed Mr. Ivey as NEA Chairman, he has forged effective working relationships with more than 250 members of the U.S. Congress. Through these relationships, Mr. Ivey helped secure a $7 million funding increase for the NEA's Challenge America program in Fiscal Year 2002, their first budget increase in a decade. The Challenge America program developed by Mr. Ivey supports arts education, services for young people, cultural heritage preservation, community partnerships and expanded access to the arts. Without a doubt, this program will contribute to the rich artistic and cultural fabric that has been woven over the course of our nation's history. Mr. Speaker, as the U.S. Representative for the 3rd Congressional District of New Mexico, I have the privilege of serving several well- known art communities. On behalf of them and all those throughout the United States of America, who like myself, cherish the various arts and their valuable contributions to our society and culture, I would like to thank Mr. Ivey for his work as NEA Chairman. It was a pleasure to work with him and I am sorry to see him go, but am greatly appreciative of all that he has done and will continue to do on behalf of the arts and I wish him the best of luck with all his future endeavors.