Peter Visclosky

Mr. VISCLOSKY

Mr. VISCLOSKY. Mr. Speaker, parliamentary inquiry.

Mr. VISCLOSKY. Mr. Speaker, a certain four-letter word has been mentioned several times here on the House floor, and I am wondering if it is appropriate given the decorum of the House.

Mr. VISCLOSKY

Mr. VISCLOSKY. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, first of all, I would want to note for all of the Members in the Chamber that as we begin the debate on this conference report, this will also be the last time that the gentleman from California (Mr. Packard) will manage legislation on the House floor. As I mentioned in my earlier remarks during House consideration of this legislation, we ought to all just take a moment to appreciate the fact that for over 4 decades, every day of every year of more than 40 years, the gentleman from California (Mr. Packard) has dedicated his life not only to his family, but to his country. We are richer for that. And given the experience I have had during the last 2 years of working closely with the gentleman from California (Mr. Packard) as my chairman, I certainly would emphasize to all of the Members of the House that the golf game of the gentleman from California (Mr. Packard) will certainly improve, not that it needs much improvement, in his retirement, his family will see him more often, but we will be the poorer of it. Again, I would say to the gentleman from California (Mr. Packard), he has done a terrific job, and we ought to give him a hand. Mr. Speaker, I want to also not only thank the gentleman from California (Mr. Packard) and the members of the subcommittee and full committee, but to thank those who are truly responsible for ensuring that this legislation is on the floor, and that is the staff connected with the committee, as well as the personal offices. I want to thank Nora Bomar, who is in the office of the gentleman from California (Mr. Packard); Terry Tyborowski; Carol Angier; Tracey LaTurner; Witt Anderson; Sally Chadbourne; Jeanne Wilson; Bob Schmidt; Rich Kaelin; and, as a former associate staff person myself, all of the associate staff who worked so hard with the professional staff throughout the year to make this conference report a reality. Before getting into the merits of the bill, I would also want to express my regret and apology to Members who feel that, for whatever reason, their requests were not met in this bill. While we did receive a larger allocation after conference, there clearly was more demand placed on us than ability to perform. I do want to emphasize to Members that, regardless of which side of the aisle they were on, particularly on water projects, we tried to give everyone every serious consideration, every fair consideration, but clearly we could not do everything. I do regret that. I am sure that the gentleman from California (Mr. Packard) does as well. It was unavoidable. During House consideration and consideration in the committee, I expressed concern that as far as this country's investment in infrastructure, we have fallen short; and while we have moved strongly in the right direction during conference on this bill, I would reiterate that, for myself, I do believe that we continue to under invest in economic infrastructure, and I would continue to use the Army Corps as an example of that failure. There are $30 billion on the active construction list that are authorized, that are economically justified, and that are supported by non-Federal entity. Most of those will, unfortunately, not be funded in this bill, because, again, of the squeeze of our allocation. There is $450 million in backlog of critical deferred maintenance for next year alone, and the Corps estimates they need $700 million per year to permit projects to move forward on their most efficient schedule. The administration asked for a new initiative on recreational facility modernization, and the money was not available to do that. The administration asked for the Challenge 21 Riverine Exploration Program to begin, and there was not enough money for that. Generically, in constant dollars, we have seen expenditure on these kinds of projects to decline from 1996 of $5 billion to approximately $1.7 billion during the 1990s in constant dollars. So while we have improved this bill and increased funding for economic infrastructure, I think, generically, this institution and the administration has not paid enough attention to this critical need. I would also want to advise Members that while I am going to vote for this bill, they should all, as a matter of information, understand that the President has threatened to veto this bill because of a paragraph included in the Senate relative to a master water control manual for the Missouri River that is being developed by the Army Corps of Engineers. Relative to the House mark, the Army Corps of Engineers will have an additional $395 million, and I think that is a vast improvement. I am also happy that the compromise struck in the conference raised the dollars to the House level relative to the regulatory programs that the Corps has to undergo. That figure is $125 million. I would note, however, for the record that because of additional regulatory requirements that the Corps has now undertaken, as well as additional reporting requirements that we will be imposing on the Corps in this bill, it is my belief today that the Corps remains $6 million short. I warn Members that I hope we do not see a self-fulfilling prophesy; and that is during the debate on these new regulations and requirements the suggestion was this was going to slow down permitting process nationally, well, if you do not give an agency the required monies, that is not a possibility. It would not in this case be the Army Corps' fault. We had a debate during House consideration as far as monies set aside for civilian science. That number is higher today than it was in the House, and in fact is $356 million higher. Finally, we had an amendment in debate on renewable energy. The figure in this conference is $422 million. That is $59 million greater than when the bill left the House, but I would also note for the information of Members that it remains $30 million below the President's request. Again, I have these iterations essentially for the information of Members. It has been a pleasure to work with the gentleman from California (Chairman Packard). This is a good bill, I support it, but I do want Members to be fully informed before their vote. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Obey).

Mr. VISCLOSKY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Green), who also has been indispensable in working on the Houston Ship Channel Project. (Mr. GREEN of Texas asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. VISCLOSKY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from Michigan (Ms. Kilpatrick), a member of the full committee. (Ms. KILPATRICK asked and was given permission to revise and extend her remarks.)

Mr. VISCLOSKY. Mr. Speaker I have no further requests for time, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. VISCLOSKY. Mr. Speaker, I am happy to yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Markey).

Mr. VISCLOSKY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Bentsen) and would point out that his work on the Brays Bayou flight control project and the Houston Ship Canal has been critical. (Mr. BENTSEN asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. VISCLOSKY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from New York (Mr. Hinchey), a member of the full committee.

Mr. VISCLOSKY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Pastor), a member of the subcommittee. (Mr. PASTOR asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. VISCLOSKY

Mr. VISCLOSKY. Mr. Speaker, it is with great pleasure that I rise before you to congratulate Purdue University Calumet as it holds its Chancellor's Gala and Hall of Fame Reception tonight, September 28, 2000, at the Center for Visual and Performing Arts in Munster, Indiana. Part of the internationally renowned Purdue University system, Purdue University Calumet, located in Hammond, Indiana, is a comprehensive regional university with some 9,300 students and 80 academic programs focused on the educational needs of the people in Northwest Indiana. Tonight's dinner will be in recognition of the people who helped make Purdue Calumet what it is today. As part of the gala event, Purdue Calumet Chancellor James Yackel and new Purdue University President Martin Jischke have the honor and privilege to induct this year's honorees into Purdue Calumet's Hall of Fame. The Purdue University Calumet Hall of Fame was founded in 1996 in honor of Purdue Calumet's 50th Anniversary. It is awarded to alumni and friends of Purdue Calumet who have made significant accomplishments and have displayed a lifelong dedication to the university, the community, and the world. This year's honorees include Steven C. Beering, the recently retired Purdue University President, Adam Benjamin, Jr., the late Northwest Indiana Congressman, and the Northern Indiana Public Service Company. Steven C. Beering, Purdue University President Emeritus, will receive the Chancellor's Award for Dedication to Higher Education and Extraordinary Public Service, and will be inducted into the Purdue University Calumet Hall of Fame for his long-time support of the Purdue Calumet campus. He served as president of Purdue University for 17 years before his retirement last month. During his tenure, the Purdue system experienced significant growth in both enrollment and facilities. Clear examples of his commitment to expanding facilities and services at Purdue Calumet can be seen in the development of the Donald S. Powers Computer Education Building, the Classroom Office Building, the Charlotte R. Riley Child Center, the Challenger Learning Center of Northwest Indiana, and Purdue Calumet's newest facility, the Center at Purdue University Calumet, a conference and special events facility. His colleagues at Purdue Calumet will sincerely miss President Beering and his commitment to educational and administrative excellence. The Chancellor's Award for Extraordinary Public Service will be presented posthumously to Congressman Adam Benjamin, Jr. Congressman Benjamin represented Indiana's First Congressional District from 1976 until his death in 1982. Prior to his election to Congress, Benjamin served as the zoning administrator and the executive secretary to the mayor in Gary, Indiana. He was elected to the Indiana State House in 1966 and to the Indiana State Senate in 1970. The late Congressman Benjamin tirelessly devoted himself to advancing the interests of his constituents in Northwest Indiana. He was characterized by many as a dedicated and effective public servant, sharing the hopes and dreams of the people he served and the community he represented. Northern Indiana Public Service Company (NIPSCO) will receive the Carl H. Elliott Award for exceptional Philanthropy for its extensive support of non-profit organizations in Northwest Indiana. Notably, NIPSCO has established an endowed scholarship at Purdue Calumet, and has provided start-up funding for the University's Resource Center and Entrepreneurship Center. The company's investment in the educational opportunities of those in its community has earned it the acclaim of students, educators, and administrators at Purdue Calumet. Mr. Speaker, I ask you and my other distinguished colleagues to join me in congratulating Purdue University Calumet and this year's Hall of Fame inductees for their lifetime dedication not only to the university, but to all of Northwest Indiana.

Mr. VISCLOSKY

Mr. VISCLOSKY. Mr. Speaker, it gives me great pleasure to pay tribute to an outstanding resident of Indiana's First Congressional District, Mr. Donald Hamilton. On September 29, 2000, Mr. Hamilton, along with his friends and family, will be honored for his 32 years of dedicated service to the Laborer's International Union Local #41, at a dinner to be held at the International Union of Operating Engineers Local #150, in Merrillville, Indiana. Mr. Hamilton's distinguished career in the labor movement has contributed to the safety and security of workers in his community and improved the quality of life for laborers throughout Northwest Indiana. Mr. Hamilton has devoted his entire working career toward the expansion of labor ideals and fair standards for all working people. For more than 30 years, Mr. Hamilton has been a member of Local #41, and has held several positions throughout his tenure. His peers were sorry to see him retire from perhaps his most important role at Local #41, that of Business Agent, on August 1, 2000. Don served admirably as Business Agent for Local #41 since his election 18 years ago. While this was his longest held position, and the one for which his co- workers at Local #41 will always remember him, he never limited his dedication to that one position. Mr. Hamilton served as vice-president of the Indiana State District Council of Laborers and HOD Carriers for eight years, sat on the executive board for six years, and served as auditor for three years. For five years, Don served as president of the Northwest Indiana Building and Construction Trades Council, two years as its vice president and three years as its secretary-treasurer. Don's contributions are not limited to labor causes. He regularly finds time to serve his community as well. He is the past president of the Lake County Planning Commission and was a board member for eight years. He has also spent two years as a board member of the Lake County Association for Retarded of Northwest Indiana. Don Hamilton has dedicated much of his life to efforts that benefit his fellow union members and advance the prosperity and strength of his community of Northwest Indiana and the entire state. On this special day, I offer my heartfelt congratulations to Don Hamilton. His large circle of family and friends can be proud of the contributions this prominent individual has made. His work in the labor movement provided union workers in Northwest Indiana with opportunities they certainly would not have otherwise enjoyed. Mr. Hamilton's leadership kept the region's labor force strong and helped keep Americans working. Those who have worked with him in the labor movement and in his community will surely miss Mr. Hamilton's dedication and sincerity. I hope my distinguished colleagues will join me in wishing Don Hamilton a long, happy, and productive retirement.

Mr. VISCLOSKY

Mr. VISCLOSKY. Mr. Speaker, it is my distinct honor to congratulate some of the most dedicated and skilled workers in Northwest Indiana. On September 30, 2000, the Ironworkers Local #395, of Hammond, Indiana, will honor their newly retired members as well as their members with fifty, forty, thirty-five and twenty-five years of continued service. These individuals, in addition to the other Local #395 members who have served Northwest Indiana so diligently throughout the years, are a testament to the American worker: loyal, dedicated, and hardworking. The men and women of Local #395 are a fine representation of America's working families. I am proud to represent such dedicated men and women in Congress. Those members who recently retired from Ironworkers #395 include: Anthony Bobrowski, Steve Bodak, Bruce Brown, Jack Bullard, Howard Cassidy, Jimmy Chandler, Nicholas Danko, Stanley Downs, LeRoy Garmany, Frank Hall, Richard Haynes, James Hendon, Harvey Hollifield, Peter Leon, Jr., Robert Morton, Harold Mowry, William Rathjen, Joe Rumble, Jacob Stoyakovich, Fred Strayer, George Ward, Dallas Woodall, and Austin Yale. The members who will be honored for fifty years of service include: Glen Bacon, Norman Barnhouse, Robert Bird, Alfred Bruce, Charles Coleman, Paul Condry, Joe Demo, Harold Eason, Floyd Evans, Herbert Goodrich, Wilbur Kissinger, Willard Lail, George Rosich, Russell Thomas, and Van Walker. Those members who will be recognized for their forty years of service include: Gerald Black, John Bowman, Howard Cassidy, Jimmy Chandler, Nicholas Danko, Jr., Donald Eagen, Arthur Erickson, Jr., Wayne Fiscus, Lowell T. Hannah, James P. Harrison, Richard Haynes, Donald Hendrix, Robert Jackson, Edgar Johnson, Karl Langbeen, Jerry Lee, William Libich, Roger Long, Gerald McBride, Robert C. McDonald, William McNorton, Richard Ogle, John Peyton, Joseph Quaglia, Ace Robertson, Richard Samplawski, Larry J. Sausman, Charles Schwartz, Louis D. Sewell, John Spicer, Larry M. Strayer, Joseph Sullivan, Robert D. Swanson, Ned Toneff, Gerald Trimble, Donald Vick, Lawrence D. Watson, Frank Wheeler, and Gerald Wilson. The members who will be honored for thirty-five years of service include: Thomas Anderson, Tony Bobrowski, Michael Cary, Ed Corrie, Joseph Dado, James E. Davis, James Eagen, Terry Evans, Arthur Gass, Jr., Arthur Gaynor, Franklin Gerwing, Donald E. Goodrich, Kenneth Hamilton, John Haugh, Dennis Hummel, Dennis Hutchens, Richard Jemenko, Barney Kerr, Michael Klaker, Kenneth Kollasch, Max Korte, Charles Langston, Robert Langston, Eugene Lemons, William Lundy, William Okeley, Jr., James Penix, Ronald Penix, Wilbert Risch, Terry D. Sausman, Tim Skertich, Daniel Stevens, Gerald Vasko, John Ward, William Weigus, Gerald Wheeler, David Wilmeth, Dallas Woodall. The members who will be honored for their twenty-five years of dedicated service include: Henry Abegg, Donald Barringer, Paul Beck, Robert Brunner, Jr., Lenard Campbell, Everett Cleveland, Jr., James A. Curry, Clint Denault, John Grube, James Guzikowski, John Hillier, Timothy Jones, Sr., Thomas Kintz, Gary Komacko, Jack Kramarzewski, Dennis Quinn, William Robertson, John Schuljak, Stanley Siwinski, Douglas Splitgerber, John Williams. I would also like to congratulate those individuals that graduated from the apprenticeship program. These individuals include: James Anderson, John Anderson, Eric Blevins, Robert Brazeal, Jeremy Camplan, Steven Elliott, Thomas Franciski, Jr., Geno George, Anthony Gutierrez, Michael Hamilton, Anthony Hammerstein, Benjamin Lauper, David Maday, George Martinez, Brian McClain, David Ross, John Sechrest, Brian Swisher, Robert Thomas, Timothy Tinsley, Corey Weiland, and James Wilkie. Mr. Speaker, I ask that you and my distinguished colleagues join me in congratulating these admirable and outstanding members of the Ironworkers Local #395 for their efforts in fulfilling the American ideal of success through hard work and determination. I offer my heartfelt congratulations to these individuals, as they have worked arduously to make this dream possible for others. They have proven themselves to be distinguished advocates for the labor movement, and they have made Northwest Indiana a better place to live, work, and raise a family.

Mr. VISCLOSKY

Mr. VISCLOSKY. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Fattah) for yielding the time to me. Mr. Speaker, I do rise today to urge my colleagues to support S. 1295, a bill that was sponsored in the United States Senate by Senator Lugar, a bill to rename the Harbor Branch Post Office at 3813 Main Street in East Chicago in honor of a true hero, Lance Corporal Harold Gomez. I did have the privilege of introducing the House version of this measure, as the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Fattah) mentioned, H.R. 2358 and would like to thank each of my colleagues from the State of Indiana, Republican and Democrat alike, for their complete bipartisan support of the measure. Mr. Speaker, I would also like to give special thanks to the gentleman from Indiana (Chairman Burton), chairman of the Committee on Government Reform, for all of his assistance in bringing this bill to the floor and would like to thank the gentleman from New York (Chairman McHugh) and the ranking member, the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Fattah), for all of their diligent service in ensuring that this legislation would be heard. Mr. Speaker, as the first resident of East Chicago, Indiana to be killed while in service to his country during the Vietnam war, Corporal Gomez is a hero and his community would like to honor him in this special way. The gentleman from New York has already reiterated on the House floor the numerous awards and battle ribbons that the corporal has received and though Harold Gomez' life was tragically cut short, he touched many lives and was admired by both friends and colleagues alike. Mr. Speaker, I am deeply honored to offer this legislation to honor a true hero of Northwest Indiana. Corporal Gomez distinguished himself in combat and is a source of inspiration to both the residents of East Chicago and the rest of our Nation. He is worthy of the recognition. On behalf of all of the citizens of Northwest Indiana, particularly our young people and our veterans, I am proud to support this legislation to name the East Chicago Post Office in honor of Corporal Harold Gomez and do ask my colleagues to support it.

Mr. VISCLOSKY

Mr. VISCLOSKY. Mr. Speaker, it is my distinct pleasure to congratulate Porter-Starke Services, located in Porter County, Indiana, as it celebrates its 25th anniversary this Friday, September 22, 2000. Porter-Starke Services will commemorate its 25 years of dedicated service to the community of Northwest Indiana in a gala celebration entitled ``A Silver Lining,'' to be held at the Porter County Expo Center in Valparaiso, Indiana. The celebration will serve as an opportunity for Porter-Starke to reaffirm its commitment to excellence in mental health services for individuals in Valparaiso, Portage, and the surrounding communities. Porter-Starke Services grew from a grassroots effort initiated by citizens located within ten miles of a large state mental hospital. Concerned with the quality of care provided by the state hospital, the volunteers sought to provide improved care alternatives for those whose lives are affected by mental illness. To that end, Porter-Starke Services was incorporated in 1967 as LaPorte-Porter-Starke Services, and those volunteers served as its first board of directors. The name of the center reflected the three counties involved in the original effort. By 1968, LaPorte County had withdrawn from the group to form its own center, the Swanson Center for Mental Health. Thus, in 1968, the charter was altered, and Porter-Starke Services was born. From 1967 through 1973, Porter-Starke Services' volunteer board of directors worked tirelessly to raise the capital to build an adequate facility, find a location suitable for the main center, and organize a comprehensive and effective program. Ultimately, land was donated by the Urschel family, and state and local funding was secured for financing construction of a facility in Valparaiso, Indiana. During the past two decades, Porter-Starke has continued to grow and change, reflecting the needs of the communities while remaining committed to the highest caliber of mental health care. Over its 25 years of development, Porter-Starke has been fortunate enough to receive support and assistance from numerous community leaders and good Samaritans in Northwest Indiana. This year, Porter- Starke Services and the Mental Health Association of Porter County are recognizing several of these individuals for their dedication and commitment to the mental health field at a special dinner, prior to the gala celebration at the Expo Center. Larry Sheets and Lee E. Grogg will receive the Aled P. Davies Award for Public Policy on Health, the Gale C. Corley President's Award will be presented to Charles Walker, and the Patient Care and Advocacy Award will be given to John Wilhelm. Marilyn Lindner will receive the Porter-Starke Award for Community Mental Health, while Karen Conover will receive the Robert Anderson Community Education and Service Award. The Mental Health Association of Porter County will present Randy Zromkoski the Distinguished Service Award, Julane Corneil the United Way Agency Volunteer of the Year Award, and the Cooks Corners Elementary School, Kenya Jenkins, and Velma Strawhun will all receive the Friends of the Mental Health Association Award. Mr. Speaker, I ask you and my other distinguished colleagues to join me in commending the administrators, health care professionals, and countless individuals who, over the years, have contributed to Porter- Starke's success in achieving its standard of excellence. Their hard work has improved the quality of life for everyone in Indiana's First Congressional District.

Mr. VISCLOSKY

Mr. VISCLOSKY. Mr. Speaker, it is my great pleasure to congratulate St. Ann of the Dunes Roman Catholic Church, in Beverly Shores, Indiana, as it celebrated its 50th anniversary as a parish this past Sunday, September 10, 2000. I would also like to take this opportunity to congratulate Father John B. Barasinski, pastor, on this joyous occasion. Adjacent to the scenic Indiana Dunes National Park, St. Ann of the Dunes celebrated its half-century of history during a special mass last Sunday with Bishop Dale Melczek and the Reverend Charles Doyle, who presided over the church as its pastor for 30 of its 50 years. From humble beginnings, St. Ann of the Dunes began as a nomadic church, taking up weekly residence wherever it could find space. Parishioners held services in houses, restaurants, and even a fire station, until 1954, when Helen Wood donated five acres that were once home to the Beverly Shores Golf Course. On this donated land, parishioners built a simple, rectangular church which served them well until 1971, when this building underwent extensive renovations and additions. St. Ann of the Dunes parish continues to be home to a close- knit congregation. With many of its members descended from Lithuanians and Poles, evidence of Central European ethnic pride can be seen throughout the interior of the church. Numerous parishioners have used their artistic talents to beautify the facility. The altar and stained glass windows were hand-crafted and donated by church members. Parishioner and local artisan, Richard Kiebdaj, carved the candlesticks and baptismal font. He also created the main crucifix in the church, which is made from amber donated by various members of the parish. Sharing its geography with the Indiana Dunes National Lakeshore, St. Ann of the Dunes' peaceful setting is inviting not only to the people of Beverly Shores and surrounding communities, but also to the visitors from the nearby state and national park campgrounds. During the summer months, parishioners and travelers come to celebrate mass outdoors in the beautiful and natural setting of the neighboring park amphitheater. The generosity of the parishioners is typical of the care and dedication they show for the church and each other. The parishioners are committed to a tithing program, dedicating 10 percent of the weekly parish collection for local, national and international causes to assist people in need. Mr. Speaker, I ask you and my other distinguished colleagues to join me in congratulating the parish family of St. Ann of the Dunes, under the current guidance of Father John B. Barasinski, as they celebrate their 50th anniversary. All past and present parishioners and pastors should be proud of the numerous contributions they have made out of the love for their church and devotion to their community throughout the past 50 years.

Mr. VISCLOSKY

Mr. VISCLOSKY. Mr. Speaker, it is my distinct honor to commend two of Northwest Indiana's most distinguished citizens, Arthur and Ida Ander Friedman. On Sunday, September 10, 2000, Art and Ida will be honored for their exemplary and dedicated service to Northwest Indiana and to the State of Israel. Their praiseworthy efforts will be recognized at the annual Northwest Indiana-Israel Dinner of State, as they receive the Jerusalem-City of Peace Award. The State of Israel Bond presents the City of Peace Award to worthy recipients who demonstrate their dedication and outstanding service to Israel and their community. This year's recipients, Mr. and Mrs. Arthur Ander Friedman, are two of the most caring, dedicated, and selfless citizens of Indiana's First Congressional District. Art and Ida hail from Hammond, Indiana and Davenport, Iowa, respectively. Art is a World War II Veteran, and proudly served under General Patton in the European Theater. He is actively involved in several organizations, including B'nai B'rith, his Synagogue's Men's Club, and the Marcus-Wallack Heart Fund. Ida shares Art's dedication to Northwest Indiana and the Jewish community there, and invests extraordinary time and energy in important community and national groups. She has been active in Jewish Women International, the Synagogue's Sisterhood, Hadassah, and the Marcus-Wallack Heart Fund. While serving the greater community has always been an extremely important part of the Friedmans' lives, their dedication to their family is unparalleled. Art and Ida have three wonderful, grown children, Gary, Richard, and Steven. Their four grandchildren are constant sources of pride and happiness. The special guest at this gala event will be Mr. Morton Klein. Mr. Klein is the National President of the Zionist Organization of America. He is a strong defender of Israel and a respected leader in the American Jewish community. Mr. Speaker., I ask you and my other distinguished colleagues to join me in commending Art and Ida Friedman for their lifetime of service, success, and dedication to Indiana's First Congressional District and the State of Israel.

Mr. VISCLOSKY

Mr. VISCLOSKY. Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Scott) yielding me this time. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H.R. 4033, the Bulletproof Vest Partnership Grant Act of 2000. I would like to recognize the over 260 of my colleagues who have joined as cosponsors of this bipartisan legislation designed to save the lives of police officers. Foremost among them, I would want to thank the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. LoBiondo) who has proven that he is an indispensable leader on this vital issue and that his commitment to police officers is absolute. I would also express my appreciation to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. McCollum), the chairman of the Subcommittee on Crime, as well as the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Scott), the ranking Democrat, who have lent their powerful voices to this important cause and who have been indispensable and tireless in ensuring that this legislation is brought to the floor. Mr. Speaker, after me, the gentleman from West Virginia (Mr. Wise), will also speak and I will recognize his tireless efforts as well to secure many of the cosponsors of this legislation. Mr. Speaker, studies show that between 1980 and 1996, there were over 2,182 felonous deaths of police officers due to firearms and that of those deaths, 924 of the officers were not wearing bulletproof vests. The Federal Bureau of Investigations has estimated that the risk of fatality from a firearm for officers not wearing body armor is 14 times higher than those wearing the armor. The gentleman from Colorado alluded to the 2,500 police officers whose lives have been saved from gunfire since its introduction in the mid-1970s. But despite these statistics, tens of thousands of law enforcement officers do not even have access to a vest. In order to alleviate this problem, in 1997, the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. LoBiondo) and I introduced the Bulletproof Vest Partnership Grant Act. This law provided a program which authorized $25 million per year to pay up to 50 percent of the costs of bulletproof vests for local and State law enforcement agencies. In order to ensure that smaller jurisdictions received a fair share of the funds, the money was to be distributed evenly with half going to jurisdictions under 100,000 residents and half going to larger jurisdictions. In each of the first 2 years of this program, the Bulletproof Vest Partnership Grant Act has provided over 3,000 law enforcement agencies with funding to purchase over 90,000 bulletproof vests and body armor. Mr. Speaker, I would point out that we are talking about reauthorizing legislation today, but I would also want to add my ``thank you's'' to the gentleman from Kentucky (Mr. Rogers) who chairs the subcommittee, as well as the gentleman from New York (Mr. Serrano), who is the ranking Democratic member, for ensuring that in each of the first 2 years of this Act the full appropriation was granted. However, in the most recent year of the program, funding was insufficient to provide any law enforcement agency with the full matching grant requested under the program. And, in fact, the average grant award represented only 30 percent of the cost of the vest, a 20 percent shortfall on the Federal side. For many smaller agencies, the shortfall is devastating and could end up taking away funding from other important departmental programs. Mr. Speaker, we must honor our commitment to provide these agencies with the full 50 percent of the cost of these vests, and in order to do so H.R. 4033 doubles the yearly authorization for the program to $50 million. The original authorization of this program also included a provision to allow the purchase of stabproof vests for corrections officers and sheriff's deputies who regularly face violent criminals at close quarters in our Nation's jails. Unfortunately, the Department of Justice decided that requests for funding for stabproof vests under the program were not valid until a national standard was developed for such vests by the National Institutes of Justice. After 2 years of development, NIJ continues to delay the implementation of such a standard. In order to address this issue, we supported an amendment to this bill offered by the gentleman from Florida (Chairman McCollum) during subcommittee consideration which will allow States to develop their own stabproof vest standards until the NIJ makes good on their promise. And, finally, this bill would take extra precautions to ensure that those small agencies which are often most in need of additional funding for vests would receive the entire grant for which they apply. The program has fallen short of giving many of these agencies a full grant and, therefore, H.R. 4033 includes a provision which ensures that smaller jurisdictions, again those under 100,000 residents, will receive all of the funding they request before money is allocated to larger jurisdictions. Mr. Speaker, in this age of cross-country drug and illegal firearms trafficking, even rural and small town police officers increasingly find themselves faced with dangerous, well-armed criminals. We must protect the Crown Point, Indiana, police officer who unknowingly pulls over an armed drug dealer on Highway 231 as much as the New York City police officer involved in an orchestrated drug raid. Our legislation is intended to reauthorize a highly successful program in order to make sure that every police and corrections officer who needs a bulletproof vest gets one. It was clear to us that every officer on the street should have a vest and that the need to supply officers with vests is important enough to warrant direct Federal assistance. Mr. Speaker, at the heart of this effort is our desire to save the lives of police officers. When we make this commitment we offer protection, not just to the officers but to every community in America, we prevent the suffering of families of fallen officers, we prevent the loss of leaders in our community. Perhaps most importantly, we give those who protect us the ability to do their job better, more confidently, and with the knowledge that their entire Nation is behind them every day, even in the most dangerous of situations. Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support this legislation.

Mr. VISCLOSKY

Mr. VISCLOSKY. Mr. Speaker, it is my pleasure to honor the activities of the Puerto Rican Parade and Cultural Organization of Northwest Indiana. On Sunday, July 16, 2000, I had the privilege of attending this year's kickoff of the organization's festivities, at the Puerto Rican Dia Del Camp Kickoff Picnic in East Chicago, Indiana. On Thursday, July 20, 2000, the organization will be hosting its 18th Annual Dignitary Banquet at Hijos de Borinquen in East Chicago, Indiana. The annual celebration for Northwest Indiana's Puerto Rican community will culminate on July 22, 2000, with the traditional festival at East Chicago's Block Stadium, and the community parade on July 23, 2000. I especially would like to congratulate Ms. Betty Paine, President of the Puerto Rican Parade and Cultural Organization of Northwest Indiana, as well as all other members for their time-honored dedication to the preservation of their Puerto Rican heritage. Joining the celebration at the Dignitary Banquet will be Mayor Luis Oliver, of Lares, Puerto Rico, and Jose Luis Gonzalez, Director of the Tourism Board in Lares. The history of Puerto Rico is one of great pride and honor. In 1493 Columbus found the island of Borinquen (the Amerindian name for Puerto Rico) to be inhabited by Taino Indians, a subgroup of the Arawak thought to have arrived on the island 1,000 years before from South America. The Taino Indians who greeted Columbus showed him gold nuggets in the river and told him to take all he wanted. The town founded near this river was named Puerto Rico, or ``rich port,'' with the island being named ``San Juan Bautista,'' for St. John the Baptist. It was not until later that the two names were switched. The rich culture of the people of Puerto Rico evolved progressively over the centuries. Immigrants brought influences from Europe, Africa, Asia, and other Caribbean islands to Puerto Rico, and blended them to create a unique society found nowhere else. Today, more than 2 million Puerto Ricans have migrated to the United States. The values and traditions that were brought with them have strengthened American society, and our country has been enriched with the infusion of Puerto Rican culture, folklore, hospitality, and way of life. Mr. Speaker, I ask you and my other distinguished colleagues to join me in commending the Puerto Rican Parade and Cultural Organization of Northwest Indiana for its commitment to remembering Puerto Rican heritage, as well as its commitment to improving the quality of life for all residents of Indiana's First Congressional District. May this year's cultural celebration be a joyous one.

Mr. VISCLOSKY

Mr. VISCLOSKY. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this time. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the resolution of the gentleman from California and essentially do so for two reasons: the first is, we have, I think, an opportunity to provide an incentive for the Chinese to engage in fair international competition. I think we have an opportunity to provide an incentive for the Chinese to improve their labor standards, human rights standards. I think we have an opportunity to provide an incentive for the Chinese to improve their environmental standards. However, I think if we continually on an analyzed basis and potentially on a permanent basis grant most favored nations status to the country of China, we have removed that last incentive to do these things. I think it is incumbent upon all of us that believe those changes are necessary is to say if you are going to do them, show us that you will. Secondly, I do think that we have to change the focus of the debate and recognize that we have a choice to make today and every day, and that is whether we are going to fight and negotiate to raise environmental standards, raise international labor standards; or are we simply going to engage in a race to the bottom because that is the way the world is today as we find it; that is the way we will accept the world as we find it, and we will accommodate ourselves. Mr. Speaker, for 50 years we have spent the Treasury of the United States, and tens of thousands of young Americans have given their lives to secure our freedom, to win the Cold War, and to provide an opportunity for democracy to spread across the world. I think we have to make the same commitment to have our economic form of government also spread across the globe and not race to the bottom, but work every day to improve those international standards. We are not doing that if we do not support the gentleman's resolution.

Mr. VISCLOSKY

Mr. VISCLOSKY. Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Hall) yielding me this time. Mr. Speaker, I want to reference language that is contained in this bill that is identical to language included in the Agriculture appropriations bill that was offered as amendment No. 58 by the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Knollenberg), who just spoke relative to the Kyoto Protocol. I would like to follow up my remarks made during the floor debate on the Agriculture appropriations bill. I was supportive of the amendment offered by the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Knollenberg) and as agreed to by myself and other Members. I also agree with the gentleman's characterization of the language as identical to the provision offered on Energy and Water and as contained in this bill today. Essentially, it is also the same language as contained in the VA-HUD and CJS appropriations bills. However, I would adamantly disagree with one of the gentleman's characterizations of the provision, both in his statement relative to the Agriculture bill as well as to his statement just made now relative to his use of the word ``specifically.'' They do not reflect our agreement with the statutory language that is now contained in the Agriculture bill and in this bill. I would note for the Record that the word ``specifically'' is not used in terms of authorization in the bill language in this legislation. The assertion of the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Knollenberg) that activities must be specifically authorized from my perspective is not correct. There are many activities that the administration engages in that fall within generally authorized activities. He has stated that he has no intention of disrupting these constitutional authorities or the ability of the administration to negotiate the climate change treaty or to engage developing countries in a manner consistent with Senate Resolution 98, for instance; and yet his characterization in the Record that activities must be specifically authorized is not reflective of the statutory language that was agreed upon and adopted by this House. Additionally, the gentleman from Michigan has stated in the past that the United Nations Framework Convention, which was ratified by the United States Senate in 1992, requires specific implementing legislation for programs or initiatives. That is also, from my perspective, not correct. A ratified treaty carries the weight of law. The U.S. has many obligations and commitments that it agreed to under this ratified treaty and that are authorized without ``specific implementing legislation'' beyond the treaty. No one, I believe, can reinterpret the law or a treaty by making statements for the Record. Finally, there are many programs and activities that are funded by the Congress and carried out by the administration that are not ``specifically authorized'' by Congress. I am very concerned about the use on the floor. The gentleman's use of the word ``specifically authorized'' in his floor remarks, for example, could include voluntary nonregulatory programs or initiatives to reduce greenhouse gases, programs that also reduce energy bills, improve the Nation's energy security, and reduce local air pollutants. I do want to make it clear that, again, I agree with the language contained in this bill, in the Agriculture bill, the Energy and Water bill, as well as CJS and VA-HUD. I would note that the word ``specifically'' is not included in any of the report language and is not included in any of the bill language, and I would not want there to be confusion about the use of this word.

Mr. VISCLOSKY. Mr. Speaker, there is language contained in this bill that is identical to language included in the Agriculture Appropriations bill as amendment #58 by Mr. Knollenberg relating to the Kyoto Protocol. I would like to follow up my remarks on the floor, during deliberations on the Agricultural Appropriations bill. I was supportive of the amendment offered by Mr. Knollenberg, and as agreed to by myself and other members. I agree fully with Mr. Knollenberg's characterization of the language as identical to the provision adopted on Energy and Water, and contained in the Foreign Operations bill, and essentially the same as on VA/HUD and CJS. However, I would disagree with one of Mr. Knollenberg's characterizations of the provision, both in his remarks made on the floor, and as submitted for the Record. They do not reflect our agreement or the statutory language which is now contained in the Agricultural Appropriations bill and the other bills mentioned. Mr. Knollenberg's assertion that activities must be specifically authorized is incorrect. There are many activities that the administration engages in that fall within generally authorized activities. Mr. Knollenberg has stated that he has no intention of disrupting these constitutional authorities, or the ability of the administration to negotiate the climate change treaty or to engage developing countries in a manner consistent with Senate Resolution 98, for instance. And yet, his characterization in the Record that activities must be specifically authorized is not reflected in the statutory provision that was agreed upon and adopted. Additionally, he stated that the United Nations Framework Convention, which was ratified by the United States after consent by the Senate in 1992, requires specific implementing legislation for programs or initiatives. That is also incorrect. A ratified treaty carries the weight of law, and the United States has many obligations and commitments that it agreed to under this ratified treaty, and that are authorized without ``specific implementing legislation'' beyond the treaty. No one can reinterpret the law by making statements on the floor. Finally, there are many programs and activities that are funded by the Congress, and carried out by the administration, that are not ``specifically authorized'' by Congress. For example: Mr. Knollenberg's characterization made on the floor using the word ``specifically''-- which is not contained in this bill, the Agriculture, Energy and Water, or VA-HUD bills, implies that some regulatory and non-regulatory programs that have bipartisan support and that save money for businesses and consumers, help the environment, and improve public health would have to be rolled back. Mr. Knollenberg's use of the word ``specifically'' authorized in this floor remarks would include voluntary, non-regulatory programs or initiatives to reduce greenhouse gases--programs that also reduce energy bills, improve the nation's energy security, and reduce local air pollutants. Let me be clear. The language in this bill and those mentioned before very deliberately does not include the word ``specifically'' and I wanted to ensure for the record that the gentleman's floor characterization does not represent our agreement on this issue and it is not the congressional intent in this bill. The language included in this bill does not do anything to interfere with valuable research, existing programs, or ongoing initiatives designed to carry out the United States' voluntary commitments under the 1992 Climate Change Convention.''

Mr. VISCLOSKY

Mr. VISCLOSKY. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the Knollenberg amendment. His characterization of the language is absolutely correct. It is the same as energy and water, it is the same as full committee has reported for foreign operations and essentially the same intent as Veterans Administration, HUD and Urban Development as well. Mr. Chairman, I appreciate his work in a bipartisan fashion and, again, I agree with the premise of the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Knollenberg), Kyoto is not the law of the land, but we want to ensure that where we have authorized programs and where there is duplicate language that the law can also be followed. I do appreciate the initiative of the gentleman and would ask my colleagues to support his amendment.

Mr. VISCLOSKY

Mr. VISCLOSKY. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to condemn the actions of the Iranian government against 13 members of that Nation's Jewish community. The citizens arrested over a year ago have been accused of spying for Israel. Ten of the 13 have been in prison since their arrest last year. All have been brought before a court with no jury, in which the judge also serves as the prosecutor, to face accusations that they have not heard, without the assistance of a lawyer or any contact with their families or friends. This would, unfortunately, not be the first time a show trial in Iran resulted in the deaths of members of the Jewish community. Since the Islamic revolution in 1979, 17 Jews have been executed in Iran. I say it is time for this to stop. I call on those in Iran who represent reason and reform to intervene and prevent a brutal outcome to this trial.

Mr. VISCLOSKY

Mr. VISCLOSKY. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to H.R. 4680. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to express my strong opposition to H.R. 4680, the Medicare Rx 2000 Act. This overly complicated bill fails to guarantee affordable prescription drug coverage for all seniors and disabled persons. Prescription drug coverage for seniors is one of the most serious issues facing this Congress, and it is time to stop making empty promises. I am a strong supporter of responsible Medicare prescription drug coverage for our senior citizens. Coverage that ensures that seniors do not have to make life and death monetary choices, coverage that at the same time does not bust the budget and represents a promise we can keep. I therefore believe that any program we pass must have a co-pay, premium, and benefit cap. It is important that we pass meaningful and real prescription drug coverage. To do less is a cruel hoax to the elderly of this country. When Medicare was created in 1965, prescription drugs did not play a significant role in the nation's healthcare. Today, prescription drugs have become an increasingly important part of seniors' health care. The drugs that are now routinely prescribed for seniors to regulate blood pressure, lower cholesterol, and ward off osteoporosis had not even been invented when Medicare was created in 1965. Instead of frequent doctor visits and expensive hospital stays, today's innovative drugs keep more seniors out of the doctor's office and away from hospitals. Unfortunately, drug prices have been rising rapidly. National spending on prescription drugs increased 51 percent between 1990 and 1995. More than one-third of seniors on Medicare spend over $1,000 a year on their drug prescriptions. There are approximately 13 million seniors with no prescription drug coverage, and another 13 million have coverage which is inadequate, costly, or both. As this trend continues, drug expenses threaten to erode many seniors' modest incomes even further, placing more and more Americans in a difficult position reminiscent of an earlier era. A constituent of mine, Eunice Bailey, a 69-year-old resident of Hammond, Indiana, receives a monthly Social Security check of $840. Unfortunately, Ms. Bailey is not only a diabetic, but suffers additionally from high blood pressure, high cholesterol, arthritis, and osteoporosis. In an average month, Ms. Bailey can spend close to $300 for her prescription drugs, not to mention $225 in rent, $280 in groceries, and $120 for her utilities and telephone. This leaves Ms. Bailey with a deficit of $85. Since she cannot possibly afford to buy medicine and pay for her basic living expenses, Ms. Bailey saves money by either splitting her pills in half, or simply does not purchase her medicine at all. In addition, Ms. Bailey sometimes finds herself reducing the amount of food she purchases, a dangerous thing to do considering she is a diabetic. I find this absolutely appalling. In a country as wealthy and as good as the U.S., no citizen should have to decide between buying food or buying medicine. Unfortunately, the Republican bill provides subsidies to private insurance companies while denying a real prescription drug benefit for all. The plan would only provide financial incentives to encourage private health insurance companies to offer ``Medigap'' policies to provide prescription drug coverage. This approach simply will not work. It will force seniors to deal with private insurance companies rather than having the choice of getting their prescriptions through Medicare. The Health Insurance Association of America has even stated that many private insurance companies still will not offer Medigap drug policies because they will not want to assume the financial risks. The end result is that millions of individuals will not be guaranteed access to prescription drug coverage at an affordable price. Additonally, it will do nothing to control the cost of drugs since it would not provide for direct negotiations with prescription drug companies. Instead, it creates small purchasing groups that will have little leverage in getting better prices for seniors. We need to be providing seniors the same benefits that other large purchasing groups, like HMOs, currently get. The only way to guarantee an affordable prescription drug coverage for all elderly and disabled persons is to expand the Medicare program to include prescription drug coverage. Like the existing hospital and medical coverage under Medicare, a new prescription drug program should benefit everyone, not just the insurance companies. There is no reason why we cannot be fiscally responsible while balancing people's health care needs. Providing a prescription drug benefit for our seniors will result in savings to both consumers and American taxpayers by reducing expensive hospital stays and medical bills. As you cast your vote this week, remember that the Republican plan is a huge misstep toward providing real Medicare prescription drug coverage for our seniors. A stand-alone, drug-only policy will not work. It provides false hope to people who need help, and will do more harm than good. It is time to move past the empty rhetoric and join together in the fight to provide substantive assistance to America's senior citizens like Eunice Bailey.