Jim Walsh

Mr. WALSH

Mr. WALSH. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from New York (Mr. King) for that summation. It is right on the money, as always, and I certainly associate myself with the gentleman's remarks. I yield to another good friend, the gentleman from New York (Mr. Crowley), another newcomer to the House but someone who has been in the leadership as a private citizen and also as a member of the State legislature fighting for peace and justice in the United States and in Northern Ireland.

Mr. WALSH. Mr. Speaker, I yield time to my good friend and distinguished colleague, the gentleman from New York (Mr. King).

Mr. WALSH. Mr. Speaker, I rise tonight to take a special order at a very critical time in the peace process in Northern Ireland. I have asked a number of my colleagues to join me tonight, but at this late hour, I am not sure that they will. But in the event that they do, I would like to yield them time, because so many of us have for so long worked so hard to help support this fairly difficult and ``fairly difficult'' would be an understatement, this extremely difficult process. The news today is that the British Government has reimposed its sovereignty over Northern Ireland. After about a 2-year process of working and compromise and difficult negotiation, an agreement was reached and the Northern Ireland government took control of its own destiny in December of this past year. Now, because of a crisis that has been precipitated over the issue of disarmament, the British Government has reimposed its will and has re- extended its authority over Northern Ireland. There is a question, Mr. Speaker, over the constitutionality and the legality of that action, but nonetheless it is fait accompli and home rule has been taken back away and Britain is now again in control of Northern Ireland governmentally. That is a tragedy. After all these days and months and weeks of hard work and prayer and negotiation, we are back almost to where we started from. Reg Empey who was a unionist leader under David Trimble who is the Unionist Party leader, said today that the entire agreement now must be renegotiated, not just the issue of decommissioning or disarming but the Patten Commission which determines the reforms in the police, and the police is a major issue in terms of civil rights and justice in Northern Ireland, they say that will have to be renegotiated. The cross border agreements between the Republic of Ireland and Northern Ireland would have to be renegotiated. The Parades Commission, which oversees the licensing, the authorization of these parades that occur between and among the two traditions in Northern Ireland, that will have to be renegotiated. This makes it next to impossible to get the genie back in the bottle. David Trimble, the first deputy or prime minister of this new government, was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize for his actions in this. He has taken many chances to make this process go forward. Against great opposition within his own party and at certain times maybe today he leads a minority of the Ulster Unionist Party in support of the Good Friday Agreement. Nonetheless, his decision to tender his resignation prior to the completion of the Good Friday Agreement has precipitated this crisis. It was a reaction to his own internal party strife, there is no question, but in order to make this work, it requires that all the leaders lead from the front, and it is pretty obvious that the rank and file of the party are in control right now. Seamus Mallon of the SDLP party, who is the second in the government in a multi-party government, has said it was a mistake for Great Britain to take power back, to put the duly-elected government on the shelf. I agree with him. But, again, it is fait accompli. It has happened. So Mr. Mallon would like all the parties, the British, the Irish Republic, the political leaders of Northern Ireland, and I think the leadership of this country, to reengage quickly and resolve this and close the gap as quickly as possible. Gerry Adams, the leader of Sinn Fein, said at the beginning that he questioned the legality of Great Britain's action, and also the logic and common sense of this action. We have entered into a void, and no one knows how to come back out. There is no legal framework, there is no guidepath, there are no maps to getting us out of this quandary we are in in Northern Ireland. David Irvine, the leader of the Progressive Unionists, said this is far more dangerous than anyone knows. Those words, Mr. Speaker, are chilling when you consider the 30 years we have just come through in Northern Ireland. This has great meaning to the American public. Millions and millions and millions of Americans claim their heritage beginning in Ireland. This has been watched with great interest and great support among the American public at large, among the Members of Congress of both parties, by our President, who has shown great leadership, and by Senator George Mitchell, who has provided the glue to make this stay together. So now we are at a point where all the parties, all the players, have pretty much laid their cards out on the table. The IRA, the Irish Republican Army, they had declared a cease-fire 5 years ago; 5 years ago. There has been no breaking of that cease-fire, there has been no sectarian violence perpetrated by the Irish Republican Army. They have not responded to Protestant attacks on Catholics, Loyalist attacks on Republican Nationalist citizens in Northern Ireland, and there have been many. There have been many murders, and we have read about them, but they have not responded. They have shown great discipline. They agreed to participate in the International Commission on Decommissioning. They made public statements that the war is over, that they support the political institutions, that there is nothing to fear from the IRA in this peace process. They have shown support, they have shown discipline, they have supported peace, they have engaged in it, and they have engaged in negotiation. The latest statement by the IRA, albeit too late to prevent this from happening, made a very clear statement, understood clearly by the British government, the Irish Republican government, the political parties in the north and in this country, that they were committed to a process with clarity and definition and time lines. Unfortunately, they have had a penchant throughout this process of saying just enough a little bit too late, and, in this case, it gave the nihilists, the anti's within the Unionist Party, a reason to close the deal and break off the deal. It is terribly unfortunate. Mr. Mandelson, the Secretary of State for the Blair government in Northern Ireland, has done a good job. He just lacked persistence. He moved too quickly to accommodate the Unionist demands, and, like any kid knows, it is a lot easier to take a bicycle apart than it is to put it back together again. It looks like he made a mistake, and it gets harder and harder to get the wheels and the chain back on the bicycle. Tony Blair, the Prime Minister of Great Britain, has been a true leader. Today, this evening, tomorrow, he has got to show that leadership, and he has got to show courage, and he has got to be forceful, because the British government is the patron of the Unionist Party. The Unionist Party wants allegiance with Great Britain, Great Britain has to be the lead government in getting the Unionists back to the table. The Unionists, for their part, precipitated this crisis, not the IRA. Yes, they did make the jump in forming the Executive, 18 months too late, and only then just for a few weeks, but they did make the jump. Unfortunately, they did it with preconditions. Again, going outside of the initial Good Friday Agreement that 90 percent of the people on the island of Ireland supported, 90 percent. They pressured their leader, David Trimble, into setting an artificial deadline. And I just wonder if Jeffrey Donaldson must be proud of the disruption that he has wrought? Ken McGinnis and John Taylor, two Unionists who have worked with Mr. Trimble all the way through, need to be bold, and they need to stand up and they need to take leadership in support of Mr. Trimble and getting the Unionists back on track. This government can be put together again, but time is our enemy. The Irish government of the Republic of Ireland, led by Bertie Ahern, their view is that the British should have waited. There is no constitutional precedent for taking power back once it has been devolved, as they did in Scotland and Wales. Again, there is no map, there is no plan, there is no legal precedent for this. Bertie Ahern has been brilliant, but it is time to be strong. If this situation is not fixed soon, a vacuum is created, and throughout Ireland's history whenever a vacuum existed, violence fills the void. As my teachers in school used to say, an idle time is the devil's workshop. Ahern must insist that the British move quickly to close the gap. The partnership between the Republic of Ireland and the government of Great Britain has been essential. The two leaders, Blair and Ahern, have guided this process along with our President and the political leaders in the north to this point. They have to reimpose their will and take control of the situation. The United States' role, I am joined today by Congressman Peter King, who has been the true leader in the Congress on Irish issues throughout his career, as he has been in so many other areas, and Carolyn McCarthy, also of New York, has, while only in Congress for a brief time, become conversant with these issues, knowledgeable, forceful, and has become a real player. We have all spent dozens of hours meeting with the political leaders in Northern Ireland. We have visited there. I have been there personally five times in the last 3 or 4 years, to try to just let them know that the world is watching, that it is important what they are doing, that the people of America care deeply, and we can see over the horizon the bright future that they will experience if they can just hold this together. President Clinton has invested himself deeply in this. He knows the issues, he knows the players, and herein I think lies his greatest legacy. Mr. President, you must do something to help at this critical situation. I would not make a suggestion, other than that you need to think about it, you need to think about how far we have come, how much we have invested, and what can happen if this falls apart. Tonight I spoke with Rita O'Hare, the spokesman for Sinn Fein in Washington. She was actually in Dublin. There was grave concern in her voice, perhaps even fear, fear that we could lose what hard work and a little good luck and many prayers have gained. There is a great deal at stake, but it is still repairable, but I fear that it is not repairable for long. The way forward is still the Good Friday Agreement that everyone signed on to. The IRA has made a real commitment to disarmament. It must be coupled and symmetrical with a reduction in forces and arms on the part of the British, the Northern Ireland Police, the Protestant paramilitaries. Everyone, all sides, must get rid of their guns. Only then will we have real peace in Northern Ireland. But to hang the whole process on the issue of disarmament or decommissioning is bogus. There are far more issues at stake here, not the least of which is removing the causes, the root causes, of violence: Prejudice, injustice, bigotry, triumphalism. All of these things in time must be eliminated. Perhaps George Mitchell would be willing to once more try. He must cringe when he hears that, but he is the only one that has been able to put this back together at each and every juncture and each and every crisis. I do not know what the answer is. Hopefully my colleagues here in the House will be able to shed some light on it. Mr. Speaker, at this time I yield to the distinguished gentlewoman from Mineola, Long Island, New York (Mrs. McCarthy).

Mr. WALSH

Mr. WALSH. Mr. Speaker, I want to ask my colleagues today to join me in recognizing the public service record of one of our own--a recently- retired employee of the House of Representatives, a member of my staff, John McGuire. Although John has left public service and gone on to another stage in life in which he now focuses his energy entirely on family and friendly pursuits, he has left behind a record of admirable service. Over the course of his professional career, and in addition to his time on my staff, he has brought great credit to the federal government. He has helped me understand the importance of our debt to veterans and he has excelled at constituent service in general. A combat U.S. Marine veteran, John was indeed a very special liaison for me with the community of veterans who live in Central New York. But his camaraderie with those who have served our nation never limited his reach. For many Central New Yorkers, John has been the federal government's helping hand. We who count ourselves among his friends are proud of his natural tendency to open his door to others in hours of need. His empathy has been matched only by his skills, his concern matched only by his optimism, and his value as an employee matched only by the good he does for others who are his friends. The United States of America, the greatest country on earth, is strengthened by patriots and civil servants like John McGuire. Thank God for that. I join others of his admirers in recognizing his contributions and thanking him for his selfless dedication to principle and public service.

Mr. WALSH

Mr. WALSH. Mr. Speaker, congratulations to the chairman. We did it. We balanced the budget, as we said we would. We cut the national debt by over $100 billion with this budget, as we said we would. And we did it without touching the Social Security trust fund for the first time in this half century. Remember back in his State of the Union address, the President promised to spend 38 percent of the Social Security trust fund for the surplus for Social Security. We said, no, Mr. President, we want 100 percent of that surplus. And that is what we did. We gave our troops in the field a good solid pay raise, and they deserve it. Let me say, Mr. Speaker, on dairy, it would be terribly wrong for us to harm 75 percent of the farmers, the dairy farmers in this country by supporting the Glickman-Clinton dairy proposal. It is wrong for the country. The Congress is on record opposing that legislation. What is in this bill was supported by 380 Members of the Congress. This is good legislation. I urge my colleagues to support it.

Mr. WALSH

Mr. WALSH. Mr. Speaker, I want to bring to the attention of the House of Representatives today the patriotic and noble intentions of students at St. Margaret's School in Mattydale, New York, in my home district. These young people, by way of Ms. Kimberly Arnold's Social Studies class, have taken it upon themselves this year to institute a new celebration honoring veterans of U.S. military service. On November 8, 1999 the students will celebrate the first Veterans Awareness Week. The program will include patriotic songs by the school choir, essay contest readings, distribution of ribbons and special recognition by children to veterans in their immediate families. This is a remarkable and worthy celebration of the sacrifices made by veterans in the United States. Worthy, because of the great service veterans have given our nation and the free world. Remarkable, because these young people have taken the initiative to recognize veterans in a time of peace. That their young lives include sensitivity to the fact that freedom is not free is wonderful tribute to our armed forces, past and present, and to the Founders of the United States of America.

Mr. WALSH

Mr. WALSH. Mr. Speaker, I thank the distinguished chair of the Subcommittee on the District of Columbia for yielding me this time. I want to address one point. While this bill may not extend the life of Social Security, and it was not intended to, what it is intended to do for millions is to extend the hope that their retirement promise will be kept. And this is the day that begins. My subcommittee bill includes the veterans budget, and I would like to respond to that issue directly. First of all, the President proposed no increase in veterans' medical care this year. Flat line. No increase. We propose a $1.7 billion increase in veterans' medical care. So even if this 1 percent across-the-board reduction were embraced by the Congress and the President, we are still $1.5 billion above the President's request, the largest increase ever given to veterans' benefits for medical care. We have done much more for the veteran on our watch than the opposition has, and I think it is important that we make note of that, a $1.5 billion increase over what the President requested, even with this shaving across the top of all the budgets. I want to address one other item that was discussed today, this idea of budget gimmicks. When I received the President's request for our VA- HUD bill, I looked and I found in that bill a $4.5 billion advanced appropriation for Section 8 housing. Now, the President proposes to be concerned about people getting public housing, and I think there is no question that he does. We all do. We are all very concerned. I said to staff, what is this advanced appropriation all about? I have been on the Committee on Appropriations for 5 years, and I had never seen anything like this before. They said, Mr. Chairman, that is a gimmick. The President has proposed to spend this money not this year but next year in order to fund Section 8 housing. We rejected that budget gimmick. Ultimately, it was accepted by the Senate and the President, and the House joined in. And as one of the President's secretaries explained to me, if everyone embraces the gimmick, then it is an offset. So the facts are here that the President introduced this advanced appropriation, this so-called gimmick, into our bill. We rejected it initially. Ultimately, working together in the spirit of compromise with the White House, we accepted it.

Mr. WALSH. Mr. Speaker, it is direct aid to people.

Mr. WALSH. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. WALSH. Mr. Speaker, we are talking about $2.5 billion in American taxpayer money going to Eastern North Carolina to help people solve their problems. That is our response.

Mr. WALSH. Mr. Speaker, I have to rise regarding this issue. The three or four Members from North Carolina who just spoke sent me letters as chairman of my subcommittee thanking me, thanking me for providing for $2.5 billion in disaster assistance to FEMA for North Carolina, while my part of the country, the Northeast, was terribly underfunded for disaster relief because of drought, and they have the temerity to stand here and accuse us of disrespecting the needs of the lives and well-being of the people of North Carolina. That is an outrage. It is an outrage for them on the one hand to demand that we help them, and I met with them, the entire delegation with their Governor, heard their pleas, heard their concerns, identified and empathized with them, and provided $2.5 billion in our bill on that request alone. For them to stand here and make these allegations against my party, I think it is just wrong, and I had to stand and state the truth.

Mr. WALSH

Mr. WALSH. Mr. Speaker, I want to ask my Colleagues today to join me in recognizing the public service record of one of our own--a recently- retired employee of the House of Representatives, a member of my staff, John McGuire. Although John has left public service and gone on to another stage of life in which he now focuses his energy entirely on family and friendly pursuits, he has left behind a record of admirable service. Over the course of his professional career, and in addition to his time on my staff, he has brought great credit to the federal government. He has helped me understand the importance of our debt to veterans and he has excelled at constituent service in general. A combat U.S. Marine veteran, John was indeed a very special liaison for me with the community of veterans who live in Central New York. But his camaraderie with those who have served our nation never limited his reach. For many in Central New York, John has been the federal government's helping hand. We who count ourselves among his many friends are proud of his natural tendency to open his door to others in hours of need. His empathy has been matched only by his skills, his concern matched only by his optimism, and his values as an employee matched only by the good he does for others who are his friends. The United States of America, the greatest country on earth, is strengthened by patriots and civil servants like John McGuire. Thank God for that. I join others of his admirers in recognizing his contributions and thanking him for his selfless dedication to principle and public service.

Mr. WALSH

Mr. WALSH. Mr. Speaker, I have no further requests for time at this time, so I will reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. WALSH. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I would just take one second, once again, to thank my colleague, the gentleman from West Virginia (Mr. Mollohan), for his cooperation on this bill. I have enjoyed working with the gentleman.

Mr. WALSH. I yield to the gentleman from West Virginia.

Mr. WALSH. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. WALSH. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Hayes).

Mr. WALSH. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Ehlers).

Mr. WALSH. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. The gentleman from Wisconsin just spoke regarding the offsets in the bill. I would remind him that when we left the House with our bill, we did not use the $4.2 billion advance appropriation that the White House used and that ultimately the Senate used. So I thought that we did it the right way. However, this is a process of compromise and negotiation, and when the House position was different than the Senate and the White House, I felt that it would be in our best interest to work with those two the way they determined their allocation. Selfishly, it made our job a lot easier to use that offset. But the fact of the matter is that this is an accepted offset. It is scored. All of this bill is offset according to CBO and OMB. They are in agreement that the bill is offset properly. So, therefore, we are within our rules. As the gentleman knows so well, rules can be helpful and they can be a hindrance. In this case, I think the rules were helpful. As far as the offset, the $4.2 billion advance appropriation, the White House suggested that we use that to fund section 8 vouchers. Section 8 vouchers provide housing for America's poor. So there was a real effort to try to make sure we had additional vouchers, because the program is working. The problem is when you use an advance appropriation, it puts off the problem more or less until next year. The outlay rate in the first year is very low. In the second year it is very high. It creates problems for us in the future to do things this way is the bottom line. So what we suggested to the White House when we accepted this advance appropriation is, you folks need to sit down with us, with CBO, with the House and Senate leaders in the housing arena, authorizers and appropriators, and resolve this issue, because if we do not deal with it next year properly, this section 8 housing voucher problem could implode. We do need to deal with this in a realistic way with real money and with a long-term plan. Everybody agrees section 8 is a good program, but we need to make sure we fund it in a proper way. I am not convinced that advance appropriations are the best way to do this, and I think the White House and the Senate would agree with that. So it will be a challenge for us, especially for the authorizers working with us to make sure that if we are going to pursue this section 8 as a viable alternative to public housing, we need to fund it properly. Mr. Speaker, I enter into the Record a chart regarding the overall expenditures of the bill and the breakdown. The document referred to follows: [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH14OC99.001 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH14OC99.002 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH14OC99.003 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH14OC99.004 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH14OC99.005 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH14OC99.006 Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Weldon).

Mr. WALSH. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Frelinghuysen), a member of the subcommittee.

Mr. WALSH. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, it is a terrific day to be here, I think, with the results that we have. It has been a remarkable process beginning back in the spring, the hearings over these many, many different and, by definition, sundry departments, lots of priorities with competing needs. I think that the process worked its way through in a very nonpartisan fashion. Mostly, the competition is between the Departments within the bill. We had wonderful cooperation from the minority. Specifically the gentleman from West Virginia (Mr. Mollohan), the ranking Democrat on the subcommittee, was very, very constructive and very, very helpful all the way along, not only in helping us establish priorities, but in getting votes to pass the bill as we first came through the House. I owe him a deep debt of gratitude. He had a very difficult personal period at the same time, and he just kept moving forward with us. Without him, we could not have been successful. So I thank the gentleman from West Virginia (Mr. Mollohan). I also thank his staff and my staff who worked so well together, and also the members of the Senate, Senator Bond who chaired the conference, and Senator Mikulski, the ranking Democrat from the Senate. We felt that, by working out the issues amongst ourselves before we sat down and discussed these issues with the White House, we would be in better shape to bring the priorities together. That is what we did. We had pretty much a consensus legislative position, and then we sat down with the White House and asked them what their priorities were, and it worked fairly well. The bottom line here is that this bill provides total discretionary and mandatory spending of $93.1 billion, which includes disaster relief of $2.4 billion and also includes the largest-ever increase for veterans' medical care, and also an increase of $2 billion for section 8 housing vouchers. The bill nets out at $257 million dollars below our budget authority allocation. It also comes out $2 million below our budget allocation for outlays. I think that is a remarkable achievement considering the fact that we met all of the Congress's priorities, including the House and Senate and also the White House's priorities. We increased VA medical care $1.7 billion above the President's initial request, bringing the total to $19.6 billion. That account is fully offset. I would like to thank the gentleman from Arizona (Chairman Stump), the chairman of the full committee, as well as Members, including the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Frelinghuysen) on our subcommittee who worked so hard on the veterans' issues. Regarding HUD, which is the largest part of this subcommittee bill, it preserves the taxpayers' substantial investment in existing affordable housing stock by increasing public housing operating subsidies and modernization funds above the President's request. We felt very strongly that, with the huge investment that we have in public housing and while there are other options, including section 8, we need to take care of the existing housing stock and protect that investment. That we have. I thank the White House for coming forward and providing an additional offset so that we could increase operating subsidies by $135 million. Operating subsidies are at $3.138 billion, as I said, an increase of $135 million. And the capital improvement account is $2.9 billion, an increase of $345 million. This provides funds for 60,000 new housing vouchers, as well, which are fully offset. That was a priority of Secretary Cuomo and of the White House and of my colleague, the gentleman from West Virginia (Mr. Mollohan); and we were able to work that issue out so that I think everyone was more than satisfied with the resolution of that issue. Selective Service. We do provide funds for the regular operations of the Selective Service. The House vote was very strong in taking the position to end Selective Service. However, the Senate position prevailed. I think that debate will continue next year. Although, there are members of the subcommittee, including the gentleman from California (Mr. Cunningham), who felt very strongly that we should hold to the Senate position. The Americorps program is funded at $434.5 million. This is a priority of the President. We knew that this bill would not achieve a Presidential signature if we did not resolve that, and we did. It also provides $2.5 billion for FEMA for disaster relief. Governor Hunt of North Carolina came in to see me, and I believe he saw the gentleman from West Virginia (Mr. Mollohan) with the entire North Carolina delegation, Republican and Democrat, and made a very strong case that we need to have emergency funding. The CBO said that we would run out of money before the end of January next year, and we felt, quite frankly, that this would help our bill if we had disaster relief in the bill. It does not need to be offset. It is true emergency spending; and, therefore, it increased our allocation but did not break any budget caps. It was important to the people who have been suffering under the flood from Hurricane Floyd that we provide relief and give them some hope. On NASA, it provides an increase of $75 million for NASA, including a $152 million increase for vital aeronautics programs; and it fully funds current space science missions. I know Administrator Golden was very pleased with the end result. I spoke with him personally. Also, I know the gentleman from West Virginia (Mr. Mollohan), the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Bateman), the gentleman from Alabama (Mr. Cramer), the gentleman from California (Mr. Rogan), and the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Weldon) all weighed in very heavily for additional funds for NASA, just to name a few. There was very strong support for improving what the House position was for NASA. On EPA, we provided $7.59 billion for EPA, which is virtually level spending with fiscal year 1999. The conferees have kept the growth of the agency in check while providing at least $800 million over the budget request for State and local drinking water and waste water construction grants. We feel very strongly and the House held its position that we need to be there for our communities who are under court order to meet clean water standards. I agree the EPA needs to keep all of our communities' feet to the fire to clean up the water, to raise the drinking water quality standards in all of our lakes and rivers and water features around this country. It is critical. And this bill I think goes farther than many others have in the past to meeting that commitment to clean up our air and to clean up our water. I am very, very proud, Mr. Speaker, that, this being a Republican-led Congress, that we actually put more money in to resolve those clean water and clean air issues than the President, and I am very proud of that. I think that, just to be partisan for just one brief moment, our party has gotten criticism over the years, I think undeservedly so. And I think we stepped up to the plate in this bill, met our commitments, supported our local community, whether they were Republican or Democrat communities, supported them to meet the challenge of these court orders that they are under, all in keeping with making water cleaner. And we are doing that. The water in this country is getting cleaner as we speak, and I think we can all be very proud of that regardless of our party. Research at EPA is a priority, as well, as the conferees provided $645 million in new spending, a shade under last year. Lastly, the National Science Foundation reaches an all-time high of $3.9 billion, an increase of $241 million over fiscal year 1999. I think once again the Congress has shown its commitment to research and development, to the support of our research institutions, primarily our colleges and universities across the Nation who lead the world in research, who are making the investments now that will keep Americans living longer, healthier lives in a cleaner environment, with better jobs, better products, and keeping the United States competitive at the top of the game globally. This investment will pay huge dividends in the future, as it is doing today. This support once again demonstrates our commitment to science. People like the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Ehlers) and again the gentleman from West Virginia (Mr. Mollohan) have argued very strongly for increasing National Science Foundation funds. Let me conclude my remarks by thanking my subcommittee members, who worked so hard and so long to make this product come out the way it did. I would like to thank our staff, who put in a tremendous amount of work. And it is not just the clerical work that they do. It is the advice that they provide, it is the experience that they have, it is the institutional memory that they bring to the table that makes our job so much easier. I would also like to thank the White House, President Clinton, OMB Director Jacob Lew for coming to the table I think in a very genuine way seeking to help us to solve some of our problems with us being able to help them solve some of their problems. And when they came and asked for additional spending, they said, we will provide the offsets. And they did provide the offsets. Mr. Speaker, in conclusion, this is a major commitment on the part of the Congress to a balanced budget. We will have a balanced budget this year, and to a large degree it is because of the work that we did to scrub this budget to get it in under our spending allocation. And we are going to do this. We are going to have this balanced budget on budget without affecting our Social Security Trust Fund. For the first time in 40 years, at least, we will bring a budget to the American people that is balanced, balanced on each side of the ledger, without reaching across and dipping into the Social Security Trust Fund. Mr. Speaker, if it seems that I am very proud of this accomplishment, I am. But there is no way that it could have been accomplished without the support of all the others that I have mentioned. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. WALSH. Mr. Speaker, pursuant to House Resolution 328, I call up the conference report on the bill (H.R. 2684) making appropriations for the Departments of Veterans Affairs and Housing and Urban Development, and for sundry independent agencies, boards, commissions, corporations, and offices for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2000, and for other purposes, and ask for its immediate consideration.

Mr. WALSH. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Maryland (Mrs. Morella).

Mr. WALSH. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. Rohrabacher), a member of the Committee on Science.

Mr. WALSH

Mr. WALSH. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks on the conference report to accompany the bill (H.R. 2684) making appropriations for the Departments of Veterans Affairs and Housing and Urban Development, and for sundry independent agencies, boards, commissions, corporations, and offices for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2000, and for other purposes, and that I may include tabular and extraneous material.