Jim Walsh

Mr. WALSH

Mr. WALSH. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word. Mr. Chairman, I yield to the gentleman from Kansas (Mr. Tiahrt) for the purposes of holding a colloquy.

Mr. WALSH. Mr. Chairman, reclaiming my time, let me first thank the gentleman from Kansas (Mr. Tiahrt) for his hard work in the area of disaster assistance. I know personally that he has been active and a vocal advocate in making sure that both FEMA, and in particular this committee are fully aware of the legitimate and urgent need for additional flood disaster assistance in Kansas. I, too, share the same concerns that the gentleman from Kansas (Mr. Tiahrt) has expressed regarding the current management of this vital program, and I look forward to working with the gentleman from Kansas during conference to see that this program is managed more effectively. Furthermore, I plan to work with both FEMA and the gentleman from Kansas (Mr. Tiahrt) to ensure that the State of Kansas and, in particular, Butler, Cowley, and Sedgwick counties, receive such assistance as is necessary and appropriate to compensate homeowners who are eligible for the much-needed buy-out assistance.

Mr. WALSH

Mr. WALSH. Mr. Speaker, the topic that I would like to discuss tonight is an issue of great importance in my home community of Onondaga County in which the city of Syracuse resides and I have represented now for 10 years in the Congress. When I first came to Washington back in 1988, we had the unfortunate distinction of having one of the highest infant mortality rates in the country. In 1987, 87 newborns died before they reached their first birthday. Over the 1987 to 1989 period, an average of 68 infants in the county, or 10 out of every thousand died, again before they reached their first birthday. These are horrifying statistics, and what makes it even worse, Mr. Speaker, is that the proportion of these deaths fell most heavily upon the minority community. Last year we through now 10 years of concerted work and effort and coordination and caring, we have some excellent news to report. While even one death is unacceptable, we have succeeded in reducing our infant mortality rate in Onondaga County by over 50 percent. This remarkable change did not happen without a concerted effort. A number of devoted people and organizations contributed. I have always felt that the best government will sponsor a partnership between local, state and Federal governments, and special initiatives undertaken by local communities and the private sector, and in central New York we proved this to be the case. The efforts which have been successful in reducing the number of infant deaths in Onondaga County began in the early 1990's. As a member of the Select Committee on Children, Youth and Families, I encouraged and was successful in bringing a former colleague of mine from New York, Mack McHugh, and others to hold a field hearing for that committee in Syracuse back in 1990. We had witness testimony from public health officials, physicians, nurses and parents about strategies for insuring healthy babies in upstate New York. As a result of these hearings, a number of projects were undertaken in the county with the goal of reducing infant death and increasing birth weight at the time of birth. Since that time, a number of these projects have proved to be very effective in dealing with infant mortality. Dr. Jim Miller and his successors, including Dr. Lloyd Novick, Commissioner of Health in Onondaga County, should be credited for the innovative efforts to address this issue by creating initiatives to reduce the instance of infant mortality and low birth weight babies. One of these programs is called Healthy Start. It works to reduce both infant mortality and adolescent pregnancy. Adolescent pregnancy and infant mortality are interrelated, births to young women who are not physically or psychologically prepared to give birth or to adequately raise the child. Adolescents often cannot provide the care necessary to ensure the health of infants and often get into the system too late. Healthy Start realizes that by addressing the issue of teen pregnancy the instance of infant mortality can be dramatically reduced. Low birth weight, as we know, is a key factor in the health of newborns, and all efforts were targeted toward healthy pregnancies and early intervention. Healthy Start is dependent on the work of many partners in the local community: hospital staff, university health professionals, case workers, local schools, task forces. All can provide health education and care to adolescents and their parents and must include State, county and Federal health agencies and officials. Doctor Sandy Lane is the Syracuse Healthy Start project director. She and her staff are to be commended for the committed efforts that they have made. She has been very modest about her program's ability to create the success. She credits involvement of local groups, partner agencies and the help of the Health Department programs and strongly praises the important Federal program, WIC, Women, Infant, Children, the feeding program to provide nutrition for both women and those children. Syracuse Healthy Start funding is a combination of Federal, State and local funding. Over 4 and a half million dollars of Federal money have come in to the program through the Department of Health and Human Services, the Health Resources and Service Administration. Healthy Start also looks to Blue Cross and Blue Shield and to New York State Department of Health to obtain supplemental funds. The program has been largely successful because of these efforts. Another such program is the Adolescent Risk Reduction Initiative. This seeks to address the issues of adolescent pregnancy and sexually transmitted diseases. It seeks to promote responsibility in sexual reproductive decision-making and parenting. The presumption is that responsible parents are better able to provide for the health of their children. Ways in which adolescent risk reduction initiative works provides for pure leadership, training youths to be responsible for themselves and to teach their peers to be responsible. Education on health issues. Parent workshops to get the parents involved. Mr. Speaker, having not concluded my remarks, I ask that the remainder be included in the Record, and I end by saying that any community in America that is struggling with this terrible condition should have hope. You can do it, too. Healthy babies are worth the effort. It just requires commitment, coordination and a lot of caring.

Mr. WALSH

Mr. WALSH. Mr. Speaker, in the spirit of St. Patrick's Day, I am inviting all my colleagues to become a Friend of Ireland. The Friends of Ireland is a bipartisan Congressional organization established in 1981 by the late Speaker, Thomas ``Tip'' O'Neill. Every successive Speaker has carried on the tradition with Speaker Hastert and Minority Leader Gephardt serving as honorary Chairmen of the group. The purpose of the Friends of Ireland is to increase the bonds of friendship and understanding between the American people and the people of Ireland. We look for a peaceful solution to the problems of this troubled land. Our organization is open to all members of the 106th Congress who share its principles and has attracted widespread support over the years. There are also several Senators who are members of the Friends. Over the years, the statements of support for peace in Ireland, condemnations of human rights abuses, assistance to the International Fund for Ireland and general expressions of goodwill have made a difference. The voice of the United States Congress is listened to very attentively in Ireland both in the Republic and in the North. I would like to share with you this year's St. Patrick's Day Statement: Statement by the Friends of Ireland St. Patrick's Day 1999 On this St. Patrick's Day 1999, the friends of Ireland in the United States Congress join with the 44 million Americans of Irish ancestry in commemorating an extraordinary year for the people of the island of Ireland. We are proud of the dramatic progress achieved in last year's Good Friday Agreement. We commend those who contributed to this historic agreement. The Agreement is a unique opportunity to end a tragic conflict which has caused needless tragedy and destruction. It holds out the promise of a new beginning, honorable and realistic, for all involved. The Agreement was endorsed decisively by the people in both parts of the island of Ireland as a clear democratic mandate to their political leaders. We call on all those leaders to implement that mandate fully and fairly, and to embrace the opportunity for peace offered by the Agreement with courage, imagination and empathy. History will not deal kindly with those who fail to do so. We are pleased to welcome to Washington over the St. Patrick's Day period many of those who were central to the success of the negotiations leading to the Good Friday Agreement. We particularly welcome the Taoiseach, Bertie Ahern, whose outstanding commitment and leadership, both during the negotiations, and in the succeeding months, have been deservedly recognized. We also pay tribute to Prime Minister Tony Blair, Secretary of State for Northern Ireland Marjorie Mowlam, Minister for Foreign Affairs David Andrews, the leaders of the Northern Ireland political parties, and many other Irish and British Government officials for their courage and determination to reach agreement despite the opposition they faced. We congratulate John Hume and David Trimble on the award of the Nobel Peace Prize in recognition of their efforts for peace. We take pride in the contribution made to the peace process by President Clinton and many other leaders in the United States. We especially salute our former colleague, Senator George Mitchell, for his indispensable leadership, and welcome the recent establishment by the U.S.-Ireland Alliance of the Mitchall Scholarships in his honor. We welcome the generous $3 million contribution of the Irish Government to this scholarship fund, announced by the Taoiseach last September during our President's visit to Ireland. We also welcome the Irish Government's support of the John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts, through a grant to promote the Festival of Irish Arts, in May 2000. Ireland has given to America in many ways, including men to fight our battles from Revolutionary War to Desert Storm. In appreciation for these services, and as a special tribute to 12 Irish citizens who gave their lives as members of the U.S. Armed Forces in the Vietnam War, we are pleased to note that the Vietnam Veterans Memorial Fund's traveling wall, called the Wall that Heals, will be making a tour of Ireland from April 16 to May 3 this year. This July, we look forward to welcoming the first 4,000 young men and women who will enter the United States under special visas provided by the Irish Peace Process and Cultural Training Program Act of 1998. The visa will allow these young adults from both communities an opportunity to experience America's unique blend of cultural diversity and economic prosperity. After their visit, they will return home providing the crucial skill base needed to attract private investment in their local economies. That Congress initiated and passed this visa legislation with unanimous support is evidence of our continuing bipartisan commitment to supporting the Good Friday Agreement. We believe the most crucial task now facing the Irish and British Governments and all the political leaders in Northern Ireland is to build momentum for the full implementation of the Agreement. Inevitably, there will be continuing difficulties to surmount in resolving this deep and long- standing conflict. We believe the implementation of the Agreement offers the best way forward and the best yardstick to judge the policies and actions of those struggling to overcome these difficulties. We do not believe that the goals of the Agreement can be served by inaction or procrastination in implementing its provisions. Those who take political risks for the implementation of the Agreement can be assured of our consistent support. Following last month's decision by the Assembly to approve the designation of the Northern Ireland Departments and the list of cross-border bodies, and the signing last week by the United Kingdom and Ireland of the historic treaties to set up the institutions, it is vital that this decision be implemented without delay. Progress in all of these areas is, of course, dependent on the establishment of the multi-party Executive, as provided in the Agreement. We are dismayed at the delay in establishing the Executive, and urge it be established as soon as possible. It is the best way to create conditions for progress on other difficult issues, including the problem of decommissioning. The carnage inflicted on the town of Omagh last August was a grim reminder that, in spite of all that has been achieved, there are those who still do not recognize the futility of violence. The cowardly murder of Rosemary Nelson this week reminds of the urgency of the task at hand. The horror of these actions unites all the people of Ireland and Great Britain, and friends of Ireland everywhere, in a determination that such methods will be totally repudiated and will never succeed. We also condemn, in the strongest terms, the practice of sectarian attacks, punishment beatings,and other acts of violence. These actions are a violation of fundamental human rights, and serve only to promote further division and recrimination. Against this background of irresponsible and unacceptable reliance on violence, we commend all those who, notwithstanding the pressures caused by these attacks, refuse to be diverted from the pursuit of peace and political progress. We have in the past consistently drawn attention to the importance of developing a police organization in Northern Ireland capable of attracting and sustaining the support of all parts of the community. We welcome the creation of the Patten Commission to propose new arrangements for policing, accountable to and fully representative of the society. A major responsibility rests on the members of the Commission on this vitally important issue. Their mandate from the Agreement should lead to far-reaching change and we look forward to their report later this year. We attach particular importance to the provisions in the Good Friday Agreement which promote a new respect for human rights. Such respect is essential if the commitment to equality, which lies at the very heart of the undertaking, is to be given practical effect. We are heartened by progress in relation to the Human Rights Commissions and look forward to the development of close cross-border co-operation on this vital issue. We also hope to see early progress on the review of the criminal laws, and the dismantling of emergency legislation. We are concerned by evidence of the lack of protection for lawyers active on human rights cases in Northern Ireland, as described by the Special Rapporteur of the U.N. Commission on Human Rights, and urge an early response to calls for an independent inquiry into the murder of Belfast lawyer Pat Finucane. We will also continue to follow closely the progress of the inquiry into the tragic events of Bloody Sunday in Derry in 1972. As preparations for this year's marching season begin, we note with concern that, despite efforts to encourage dialogue, the situation at Drumcree remains disturbing. We call on all involved to uphold the decisions of the Parades Commission. The Friends of Ireland welcome the strong support which President Clinton and both parties in Congress have given to the peace process, and to the full implementation of the Good Friday Agreement, including the continuing support for the International Fund for Ireland. We salute the parties on what has been achieved thus far and believe that with commitment and determination, and a readiness to seek accommodation, the remaining differences can be overcome. As we prepare to enter the new century, the parties to the Good Friday Agreement have a truly historic opportunity to achieve peace with justice for the benefit of all generations to come. As always, we in the Friends of Ireland stand ready to help in any way we can. Friends of Ireland Executive Committee: Dennis H. Hastert, Richard A. Gephardt, James T. Walsh, Edward M. Kennedy, Daniel Patrick Moynihan, Christopher J. Dodd, Connie Mack.

Mr. WALSH

Mr. WALSH. Mr. Speaker, on Wednesday, March 24, 1999 at the Syracuse, New York Veterans Administration Medical Center, two Central New York constituents of mine, both veterans of World War I, will be honored by the French government with a presentation of the National Order of the Legion of Honor, that country's highest honor. As Chairman of the VA/HUD Subcommittee on Appropriations, I am extremely proud to know that these American warriors will be decorated in this way for their role in winning the war on French soil. They reflect the bravery and courage of thousands of young Americans who dutifully represented our nation and freedom-loving people everywhere. They are David Ginsburg and Eugene Lee, two men who left as teens and returned to their community in Syracuse to continue on with their lives, raise families, and cherish freedom even more--knowing that they had done their duty to country, and that they had seen the darker side of mankind, but also the rewards of valor. In 1917, David Ginsburg, who will celebrate his 101st birthday on April 18 this year, enlisted in the National Guard 4th Ambulance Company, a unit that was part of the American Expeditionary Forces sent to Mexico to capture Pancho Villa. After returning to the U.S., the unit was sent to France while World War I raged. After the war, Mr. Ginsburg joined the Marine Corps and served for 16 years. Today he is believed to be the oldest living Marine Corps Drill Instructor. He has been an active member of the Jewish War Veterans Post 131. He returned to civilian life in Syracuse to work for more than 35 years for the Eastwood, Netherland and Seneca Dairies. Also in 1917, Eugene Lee, who will celebrate his 100th birthday on the very day of this ceremony, enlisted in the Marine Corps. Among the first Marines sent to France, he was wounded while fighting the Germans at Belleau Wood on June 6 and 7, 1918. Following recovery, he served in Germany with the Army of Occupation. He was one of the last American troops to return home after the war. He was awarded the Purple Heart and Silver Star for Heroism. Mr. Lee returned home and worked 42 years for New York Lighting Company, which today is Niagara Mohawk. We applaud these two individuals on the occasion of this great commemorative honor. I also want to thank the French government for making this award.

Mr. WALSH

Mr. WALSH. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman from California (Mr. Campbell), my good friend, colleague, and classmate for his hard work on this important issue. Mr. Chairman, the Peace Corps not only benefits the world, it benefits our country, it benefits the individual. Everyone wins in this program. It is a remarkably ingenious idea. Take America's idealistic youth, send them around the world. They learn, the people in the other countries learn, there is a benefit to all. Then these young people come back to the United States and, throughout our society, they are engaged and active in making this a better country, just as they were when they visited Nepal or Ghana or any of the other Peace Corps locations around the world. Mr. Chairman, I have a bias, obviously, as a returned Peace Corps volunteer. But the fact is, the world is changing. We have seen great progress here in our country. But in some places in the world, the countries are actually poorer. People are in more difficult conditions than they were when I was a volunteer 25 or 30 years ago, so the need is still there. And, as the world changes, other countries open up to this idea, and we need to fulfill that need. I just recently returned to India and to Nepal to my village. It was a remarkable homecoming for me. I saw people who were there when I was there. I renewed relationships. Visually, it was very much the same as when I left, although there were improvements in permanent housing. They have electricity in the village now. They have municipal water in the village. We used to have to boil the water and put iodine in it to make sure it was drinkable. Today, they have municipal water throughout the village. Two weeks after I returned home, I received an e-mail from my village. Talk about amazing. When I was there, the only machine that I saw on a regular basis was the Thailand International jet that flew over on Tuesday. The world is changing dramatically and rapidly as it gets smaller, as the world gets smaller. And with this Internet now that is reaching out and touching every village, literally, in the world, the personal relationships that Peace Corps volunteers make and the associations they make with people from all these different countries can only benefit our country. We will be more and more a global citizen, more and more involved in all of these countries, and the more knowledge we have of the rest of the world through these individuals can only make us stronger. Mr. Speaker, those are the emotional, the idealistic views. Let me tell a few things about the Peace Corps. They are changing, too, with the improvements that Director Gearan has made. They have reduced headquarters staff by 13 percent. They have reduced the number of domestic recruiting offices. They have reduced the cost to support volunteers in the field. All of this with the thought in mind that we need to be better and smarter and work faster, reduce the cost of government. But, at the same time, the investment that we are making in these individuals in those countries and ultimately in our own country is a sound investment that we need to support today.

Mr. WALSH

Mr. WALSH. Mr. Speaker, Today I would like to extend my best wishes and prayers to Bob Livingston and his family as he retires from the House of Representatives. I know he has put the best interests of the family ahead of politics and I respect him deeply for that. Chairman Livingston's leadership skills and productive energy will be sorely missed on appropriations and in the House. I know that others have praised Bob for his humor and his intellect. I want to echo those words while I add that Bob Livingston is also a very good friend. Since I came to Congress, he has been a mentor and much more. He has provided campaign support when I needed it, but more importantly he has assisted me with professional guidance as I learned the ropes in the Appropriations Committee. The House of Representatives has been affected positively by the work of our colleague Bob Livingston. I know his future endeavors will be equally successful. I hope he will remember us as fellow combatants in a fight to cut government waste and return control to the American people. It is a great honor to have served during this period with Bob Livingston and I know his work will be a testament to his dedication to public service for many, many years to come.

Mr. WALSH

Mr. WALSH. Mr. Speaker, I ask my colleagues to join me today in paying tribute to a man whose passing has left my community, and our nation, with one less hero. Former Onondaga County Sheriff John Dillon died January 14, 1999 and Central New Yorkers will grieve the loss for a long time to come. The quintessential ``Irish cop'', John Dillon was known far and wide as a man of great humor, deep compassion and innate fairness. It should also be said that he was tough. Throughout his four-decade career, he was the epitome of the public safety provider. In fact, to many he was the face of law enforcement in Central New York. John Dillon was a personal friend, so I know his attributes well, among them natural leadership. He was greatly respected by the men and women in uniform. A devout Catholic and loving family man, John Dillon was fiercely proud of his Irish ancestry. When the Irish Ambassador at the time, Dermot Gallagher, visited Syracuse in 1997, it was John Dillon who regaled the Ambassador with the history of the West End of Syracuse, the home to many immigrant families. With great pride and his characteristic dry wit, John Dillon recalled the layout of the neighborhood and, using nicknames for the colorful characters of his youth, told a touching story of an entire generation of Irish immigrant families. He told of the Stonethrowers, the young men who defied city officials by repeatedly breaking the red light over the green on the traffic light at the main intersection of Tipperary Hill on the West End. Never would the English red sit atop the Irish green, he told Ambassador Gallagher with fervor. And today, he pointed out, the green sits atop the red in one traffic light in America, Tipperary Hill in Syracuse, the birthplace of John Dillon. The man we came to respect and so deeply admire served 25 years with the Syracuse Police Department before retiring as the First Deputy Police Chief. He was elected Onondaga County Sheriff later that year and held that post until retirement in 1994. I want to add my sincere condolences to John's wonderful wife Ginny and their children. And I ask my colleagues to join me in this moment of recognition for a public official who served his community well.

Mr. WALSH

Mr. WALSH. I thank the gentleman. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the distinguished Chairman of the Committee on International Relations, a real leader on this issue of peace and justice in Ireland, the gentleman from New York (Chairman Gilman). (Mr. GILMAN asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. WALSH. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for his thoughtful comments and his leadership, as always, and I welcome the prospect of hearings in the Committee on International Relations on policing in Northern Ireland. It is a welcome addition to this overall equation, and I am sure it will be very, very helpful to all of us who are interested in this important issue. Mr. Speaker, I yield at this time to my distinguished friend, the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Neal).

Mr. WALSH. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman. As always, I am inspired by the thoughts and words of my colleagues. Certainly nothing stirs the blood of an American more than the issues of war and peace and freedom and liberty versus subjugation of philosophy or religion or free speech. My colleagues who have spoken tonight not only have given their thoughts and words to this, but their time. Many, many of them have traveled back and forth over the Atlantic to lend whatever assistance we can to this very critical process at a very critical time. I am inspired by their actions, and I am comforted by their actions, and I am comforted by the leadership that both parties have provided, that our president has provided. Progress would not have been made without that effort. I would also like to thank our dedicated staffs who have put so much time, of their time and energy into this, providing us with a the background, making the phone calls, staying on top of the issue. It is not just out of the fear that they will not have their job, they are doing it because they believe in it. Their effort is appreciated. I would also again like to thank my colleagues. There were many who had planned to attend this evening's special order, but with the change in schedule they headed home, people like the gentlemen from New York, Mr. Peter King, Mr. Vito Fossella, and Mr. Jack Quinn. For the good of the order, I would like to make my colleagues aware, and the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Neal) knows that, that the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Hastert), the new Speaker of the House, accompanied President Clinton on his first visit to Ireland back in 1995 at the historic beginning of the American role in this peace process under President Clinton's leadership. This is a critical time. As has been mentioned, there are several critical dates coming up. We will be watching. The price of failure is great. The judgment of history if we fail will be cruel and harsh. With the receipt of the Nobel Peace Prize, Mr. Trimble, along with Mr. Hume, was recognized. Their efforts were recognized, but the stakes were raised. Surely with the receipt of this prize comes a tremendous responsibility to fulfill the obligation of truly creating peace. If Mr. Trimble is to be a leader of all of the people of the north of Ireland, certainly he must address the hopes of the vast majority of those people who voted for the agreement, not his interpretation of the agreement. We have worked together well, Republicans and Democrats, House and Senate, President and Congress. We cannot stop now, we are so close to the end. I am reminded, after we had spent a good 5 or 6 days in Northern Ireland this summer with Speaker Gingrich, full of hope, we returned to the United States, only to be advised on landing that a bomb had exploded in Omaugh, killing little kids and pregnant women and old folks and people with hope and promise and belief that peace is at hand. Let us not let those lives go for naught. Let us continue this effort. Let us close the deal. Let us bring peace and justice to all of Northern Ireland.

Mr. WALSH. Mr. Speaker, I would like to acknowledge at this time my good friend and colleague from Massachusetts (Mr. Neal) who will join me and other Members, including the gentleman from New York (Mr. Ben Gilman) in a bipartisan discussion concerning the Northern Ireland peace agreement. Mr. Speaker, the peace process in Northern Ireland is in serious trouble. The Good Friday agreement we cautiously celebrated last spring is now under attack from within. Ulster Party leader David Trimble, who signed the agreement just nine months ago, is now balking and trying to reopen, renegotiate and re-interpret the terms of that hard-fought agreement. Over the past few months we have seen deadlines pass, deals reneged upon and a return to the ugly politics of exclusion. Let me remind those who support the status quo that the people in Ireland, north and south, voted decisively for change in the referendums last May. History will not be kind to those who fail to deliver. The next couple of weeks are critical. On Monday the Northern Ireland Assembly will meet to formally approve the creation of the 10-member executive and cross-border bodies. Over the next two weeks the assembly will make preparations for the transfer of powers from the Northern Ireland office on March 10. David Trimble wishes to lay claim to the title of first Minister of Northern Ireland. If he is ever to fulfill the tremendous responsibilities of serving as the first minister for both communities in Northern Ireland, he needs to move forward to implement the agreement that he is a party to and to appoint ministers to the executive. If he fails to do so, the two governments party to the agreement, namely Ireland, the Republic of Ireland, and Great Britain should reject the Trimble veto, take responsibility into their own hands and implement the agreement. They must support those who are working for peace, who wish to govern and serve in a new Northern Ireland. They should implement the agreement. Mr. Speaker, why should the people of the United States care? Well, because first of all there are millions and millions of Americans of Irish descent who reside in the United States, some of whom have paid very close attention to this, others who have not but yet understand what all Americans understand, and that is that Northern Ireland must move forward into a pluralistic, democratically-elected government that makes it possible for everyone to live out their lives, and practice their religion, and practice their own philosophy, and raise their family and raise their children in a spirit of equality and under a government that allows for individual freedoms and beliefs. One of the issues that has really hung this process up is something referred to as decommissioning. Decommissioning is the term that is used by the political parties of the north that in effect would disarm all of the combatants in this process, and I stress the words all of the combatants. As you probably know, there has been for the last 30 years at least a period of strife, civil strife, violence, and it has been a very difficult time. Decommissioning would require under the agreement that all parties to the agreement, all political parties to the agreement, would use their good offices and their political capital to remove all of the guns and all the bullets from Northern Ireland. The agreement provided two years for this to take place and urged that all parties work toward that end, and at the end of the two-year period ideally all the weapons would be removed. Mr. Trimble has seized upon this issue and has, I think, really backed himself into a corner, because what he is saying now is that in order for him to implement the agreement, the IRA and the political leadership of Sinn Fein must deliver decommissioning prior to the implementation of the government, which is in direct contradiction to the agreement. The agreement says we all work together toward the end of violence and decommissioning, the end of arms, in a two-year period. Meanwhile we have deadlines that have to be met in order to put this government together, and if Mr. Trimble would stick to the agreement, progress would be being made now, and in fact one of the things that has to occur along the way is to eliminate the root causes for violence. And if those root causes are not eliminated, then regardless of whether the weapons disappear now or later, if the root causes are still there, the violence will return. So the agreement was hard-fought, every ``I'' was dotted and ``T'' was crossed with everyone watching, and words do matter over there. So the agreement needs to be implemented. I will take another moment and focus on another very important element in this agreement, and then I will yield to my friend from Massachusetts (Mr. Neal). The Good Friday agreement calls for a new beginning to policing in Northern Ireland and contains a clear and unmistakable mandate for a new approach in this area, one capable of attracting and maintaining support from the community as a whole. In doing so it acknowledges the major defects in the current policing arrangement and the vital need for change. At this critical juncture in the peace process, there is an enormous responsibility on Members of the Patten Commission. It is essential that they submit the kind of innovative proposals which the situation demands. It is no exaggeration to say that many in the Nationalist community will judge the value of the agreement by what the Commission delivers on policing. The terms of reference given to the Patten Commission, which are detailed in the Good Friday Agreement, are comprehensive and far-reaching. I propose today to include them in the record of the House. They require that the Commission deal with key issues, such as the composition, future police structure, and the whole culture and character of the force. The objective is to provide a police service with which both communities can identify. That is definitely not the case at present. The overriding problem is that the Nationalist community does not see the RUC, the Royal Ulster constabulary, as their police force. This is hardly surprising, given that 93 percent of the force is drawn from the Unionists, as opposed to the Nationalist community, and for much of its history the force operated as an arm, often an oppressive arm, of the Stormont Unionist administration. People in Nationalist areas recall in the not too distant past the use of lethal force by police, the use of plastic bullets, the use of physical abuse and torture in interrogation centers. They want to know that these features of policing are gone, and gone forever. In Northern Ireland, policing has been a major source of division, pushing the two communities farther and farther apart. In these circumstances, the demand for change is not about getting more Catholics into the RUC, it is about completely overhauling how policing operates in Northern Ireland. It is about creating a new police service with which the Nationalist community can fully identify. The situation cannot be resolved by tinkering with the problem or merely changing the name or the uniforms of the force, however necessary those changes may be. It requires a fundamental reappraisal of policing structures. The Good Friday Agreement identifies the objective, a police service enjoying the support of both communities. The Patten Commission must work back from that objective. It is its task to devise the kind of policing service which meets that standard. The status quo cannot be the point of departure. The new agreement must include fundamental changes in the composition, structure, culture and character of the police. The Commission's guidelines stress the need for the police to become accountable to the community that they serve. This means real power over policing at the regional and local level, with input into recruitment and direction of the force. The issue is not about adjusting simply the sectarian imbalance within the RUC. It is about creating a police service which Nationalists see as their own. They have never had that. It is no exaggeration to say that getting the policing issue right will have a major bearing on the ultimate success of the agreement. It is vital, therefore, that the Patten Commission's recommendations be acted upon without delay. We have seen too many examples of the so-called Securicrats, those shadowy bureaucrats who operate behind the scenes and appear to pay little attention to the political leaders, slowing down reforms to fit some alternative agenda. This must not be allowed to happen with policing. Mr. Speaker, I yield to my friend and colleague from Massachusetts, who has shown great leadership on this issue, Mr. Neal.

Mr. WALSH

Mr. WALSH. Mr. Speaker, on Christmas Day, the New York Times ran a wonderful article that tells a story about the careful and thoughtful work of a cadre of employees at the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) who test toys to ensure they do not injure or kill children. One CPSC employee, Bob Hundemer, who works in CPSC's engineering laboratory, calls his toy testing work a ``labor of love.'' The article goes on to describe some of the testing methods used to determine if certain toys are risks to children. The article quotes Robert Garrett, acting director of the lab: ``I walk out of here every day thinking we're made the world a better place,'' adding, ``I am not sure every government agency can say that.'' As the new Chairman of the VA-HUD Independent Agency Appropriations Subcommittee, which has jurisdiction over the CPSC, I am delighted to read about Federal employees who are so devoted to the mission of their agency. I commend this article to my colleagues. [From the New York Times, December 25, 1998] In Paradise of Toys, the Game Plan Is To Save Lives Washington, Dec. 24.--In the Washington suburb of Gaithersburg, Md., far from the intrigue of the capital and even farther from the North Pole, employees of the Consumer Product Safety Commission test toys of every description for dangers and defects. Bob Hundemer, an engineering technician, has tested toys at the agency for two decades. He has cultivated a scrupulous and unforgiving eye for potential hazards and quickly detects whether a toy is up to standard--whether it is safe as well as inviting beneath the Christmas tree. ``This is a killer,'' Mr. Hundemer said, pointing to a fluorescent yellow rattle with an unusually thin stem and tiny ball at the tip. ``The end could get jammed in a baby's mouth so easily and cause choking.'' Mr. Hundemer's office is a 5-year-old's paradise. A bookcase overflowing with brightly colored tops, dolls, toy cars, and jacks-in-the-box covers the back wall. A sign reading ``Caution: Adults at Play'' adorns his door. Robert Garrett, the acting director of the engineering laboratory, said: ``After years in the private sector, I realized that I could get a job with the Government doing about the same thing. I thought I'd died and gone to heaven.'' At the annual Toy Fair in February, giant manufacturers like Mattel and Hasbro, as well as small toy companies from around the country, gather in New York City to display their wares. Representatives from the commission attend the show and examine all the new toys. They discuss potential problems with the manufacturers and then work with them to insure that potential hazards are eliminated. ``The big retailers don't want to recall their products,'' said Kathleen P. Begala, the commission's director of public affairs. ``With mailings and bad press, it's a very expensive process for them, and so there is an incentive to cooperate with us.'' Mindful that injuries kill more children than any illnesses, the agency, which has requested just over $57 million for its 2000 budget, performs four tests on toys it reviews. One, the template test, examines small parts of a toy that could catch in a child's throat and affect breathing. Mr. Hundemer uses a truncated cylinder that represents an average child's mouth and throat. Any piece of a toy that fits into the cylinder is considered dangerous. The sharp-edge test uses a special tape to indicate whether any side of an object could cut the skin. The force test determines how easily parts of the stuffed animals, like eyes and noses, can be removed from the toy. Mr. Hundemer users an instrument that resembles pliers to grasp the eye of a stuffed toy, for example, and applies 15 pounds of pressure, about the strength of a 2-year-old. He tries to rip off the part for about 20 seconds. In the impact test, a toy is dropped four and a half feet to test durability. ``We use something pretty cheap,'' Mr. Hundemer said. ``It's called gravity.'' If pieces of the toy break off, and the shards of plastic fail the template test, the toy is considered not safe. The commission officially approves toys that survive the tests. Like veterans telling war stories, Ms. Begala and Mr. Hundemer recalled some of the most troublesome toys. They remembered the Cabbage Patch doll accused of ``eating'' a child's hair, the Chinese slap bracelets made with cloth and sharp metal that could cut a child and Woody, the cowboy with plastic spurs that had sharp edges and a small plastic badge. Mr. Hundemer added that this year's hot toy, the Furby, was safe. ``People shopping for toys need to be sure that toys do not contain parts smaller than their child's fist,'' Mr. Hundemer said. Mr. Garrett mused happily on his career. ``I walk out of here every day thinking we've made the world a better place,'' he said. Then, pausing, he added, ``I am not sure every government agency can say that.''

Mr. WALSH

Mr. WALSH. Mr. Speaker, one century ago, on January 1, 1899, Central New Yorkers were treated to a new newspaper, The Post-Standard. That paper, one of a half-dozen at the time, remains today. Now it is one of two papers, and the only morning newspaper. I want to ask my colleagues to join me in congratulating the management and staff at this important milestone. In particular, I would like to congratulate the top management, Mr. Stephen Rogers and Mr. Stephen A. Rogers, the President and Publisher respectively, for their well-known civic leadership and faithful adherence to the best of principles of journalism in the United States. With the stewardship of a newspaper comes an important and historic responsibility. In the attached editorial, it is mentioned that a newspaper must be profitable to survive. But the newspaper must be sensitive to its special status in our nation's history. It is protected mightily by the First Amendment, and its right to print news and opinion without fear of retribution from any governmental quarter is unique in the world. Though we in this body are often at odds with newspapers, we know their value and we know they represent a fundamental tenet of freedom. I have included the attached editorial, which appeared January 1 this year, commemorating the centennial recognition of The Post-Standard. ``CENTENNIAL POST: Your morning paper is 100 today, still pursuing much the same mission. `A legitimate primary aim of the newspaper is to make money.' Thus read the editorial that appeared in the inaugural edition of The Post-Standard 100 years ago today. The principle remains true today. As the editorial noted, quoting an editor-senator from Rhode Island: `A paper that cannot support itself cannot be any service . . . to spend money upon it is like wasting fuel in an attempt to kindle a store.'' The Post-Standard boasts a tradition that extends back more than a century--to The Post, which traces its origins to 1894, and The Standard, dating to 1829, decades before the founding of the City of Syracuse. The consolidation of the two newspapers was described as a victory over `factionalism' in Onondaga County and the ascendancy of `a Republican newspaper, dedicated to the public weal along Republican lines, and representing a united Republicanism.' That partisan bias reflects an earlier era in newspaper publishing when journals were closely allied with parties and candidates. Most newspapers, including The Post-Standard, have long since declared their independence from rigid party orthodoxy, endorsing candidates based on their qualifications, performance and prospects rather than political affiliation. Of course, The Post-Standard continues to represent a region long known as a bastion of Republican fervor. Although the mission of The Post-Standard through the years has included some hard truth-telling, its editorial page since the beginning has attempted to build and strengthen the community. `The Post-Standard deems the blessings of life and of work too precious to be frittered away in perpetual contention and fault-finding,' wrote the editor in 1899. `To prove itself a cheery presence, seeking to say good of men and things always when it can, and consenting to say ill only when it must, shall be this newspaper's consistent aim.' Hewing to that aim is no easier today than in 1899. There never seems to be a shortage of rascals, ludicrous schemes and conspiracies afoot, no less in the Age of McKinley than the Age of Bill and Monica. Yet there is something uplifting and inspiring in the long- ago editoralist's aspiration for his paper to `preach the gospel of right living and bright living without being suspected of preaching.' He concludes: `If it can help to lift men or in any degree make better or cheerier or more wholesome the community with which its lot is cast, it will be glad and grateful for its opportunity.' We remain grateful for that opportunity today.''

Mr. WALSH

Mr. WALSH. Mr. Speaker, I submit to the House a December 16, 1998 editorial from the Syracuse Post-Standard entitled ``Duty Calls'' relating to the impeachment process presently before us. I ask my colleagues to carefully review this thoughtful and insightful piece. Duty Calls if laws are to have worth, the house must vote to impeach the president It is regrettable that the impeachment process never quite reached a high-minded tone of solemn purpose and bipartisanship, as those responsible for conducting it had vowed it would. It is vexing that a majority of American people apparently say, in response to opinion polls, that President Clinton should not be impeached. It is almost certain that impeachment by the full House of Representatives would make a political martyr of the president. But these are insufficient reasons for the House to avoid its duty. If the laws of this land have worth, if the office of presidency has sanctity left to protect, then the House must vote to impeach the president. His fate then goes in the full Senate which can, after trial and by a two-thirds majority, vote to remove him from office. Absent bold action by the congressmen and women, President Clinton will have shown brazenly that power begets exceptions to the law whenever those in power decide the lawless act is too trivial for pursuit. The House Judiciary Committee in votes almost strictly along party lines, has sent four articles of impeachment to the full House. The members will begin to debate them Thursday. Assent by a simple majority of the representatives on any one of the articles will result in Clinton's impeachment. The House should toss out the fourth article immediately. It relates to the president's answers to 81 questions submitted to him by the Judiciary Committee. It is more an expression of the committee's pique at the tone and evasiveness of the president's answers than a real finding of wrongdoing. It comes closest to appearing petty political. The first two articles, in contrast, have abundant supporting evidence. They accuse the president of perjury. These relate to the answers he gave in grand jury testimony last January about his relationship with Monica Lewinsky. The third article, obstruction of justice, has to do with accusations that he tried to influence testimony of others by, among other things, directing efforts to get Lewinsky a job. The intentions behind many of the facts here are at least debatable. What is beyond debate is Clinton's unyielding faith in his own ability to grease his exit from a knotty situation by the application of slick words. He remains a believer in a small truth--the precision of his own language--rather than the larger truths that his words defy. This is not Watergate, his defenders cry. But nothing in the Constitution says that Watergate is the standard for impeachment inquiries. It is merely one other case from history, with its own set of facts and its own kind of assault on this nation's core values. Impeachment is not the will of the people, other defenders say. But the people did not have this set of facts before them when they re-elected Clinton. They had only his word about Gennifer Flowers--which we now know to be a lie--when they first elected him president in 1992. Opinion polls are snapshots in time, framed by the way questions are asked and by the choices given to respondents, and are unreliable guides. Remember that Dick Morris had told Clinton many months ago that his own polls showed that the people would forgive adultery, but not perjury. Impeachment on charges of lying about sex trivializes the process, others say. Remember that this sex occurred between the most powerful man in America and an intern on his staff. That inherently abuses the power of office, a point on which many male and female feminists have been strangely silent. On the contrary. Failure to hold a president accountable for his misdeeds and his lies about them trivializes the law, the presidency and the meaning of truth. If it's possible to debase them more than Clinton has already. It's time for the House to take the next step to clean house.

Mr. WALSH

Mr. WALSH. Mr. Speaker, today I intend to vote for impeachment based on the careful consideration of the charges, the facts in the case, and many conversations with my constituents in central New York. My decision to vote for impeachment was difficult, but not on the facts. There is no doubt in my mind that the President lied many times under oath. I also believe beyond a reasonable doubt that he obstructed justice by coaching, indeed, suborning, potential witnesses in the grand jury proceeding. I further believe that these crimes are clearly serious enough to be grounds for impeachment. Weighing the public discomfort with this constitutional process against the need to defend the rule of law, the scales tip to the truth. We must not allow the President of the United States to get away with lying under oath. Americans have the right to expect that everyone, even the President, must tell the truth while testifying in court, be it small claims, civil, criminal, or the Supreme Court of the United States. If the truth is absent, justice cannot prevail for any of us.

Mr. WALSH

Mr. WALSH. Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this time. I also would like to extend my deepest thanks to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Smith) for allowing us to move this bill as expeditiously as we have. This whole process has been a remarkable achievement for all of us. In all of my experience here in the Congress in 10 years, I have never seen a more bipartisan or nonpartisan, bicameral, multi-branch of government-supported project as this Irish peace process. The gentleman from Texas allowing us to move ahead; Speaker Gingrich who recently visited Northern Ireland and in support of the peace process in every word that he uttered. President Clinton, who has provided just remarkable leadership, truly the catalyst behind this process, along with his colleagues Berty Hearne, the Teshok of the Republic of Ireland and Tony Blair, the Prime Minister of England. My good friends on the Democratic side, the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Neal) and the gentleman from New York (Mr. Manton), the gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. McCarthy) and the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Coyne), and my hat especially goes off to the gentleman from New York (Mr. Manton) for the leadership that he has provided. He taught a lot of us about these issues. On our side, the gentleman from New York (Mr. King), not only a brave and vigilant spokesman for peace and justice in Ireland, but all over the world. The gentleman is willing to go anywhere and pay any price to make sure that people have their freedom and justice, and I thank him for his leadership. Over the last few months the world has witnessed events in Northern Ireland symbolizing both the hope for its future and the tragedy of its past. The politics of the gun has been replaced with the politics of the ballot box. The majority of men and women on all sides of this conflict have given overwhelming support for the Good Friday agreement and stood firmly together in condemnation of violence and terror. The Visa for Peace legislation is aimed at helping those who are working for that new beginning, a new Ireland. As chairman of the Friends of Ireland and a member of the Ad Hoc Committee for Irish Affairs, I have personally been involved with this effort to help bring peace to Ireland. Back in May, the Speaker of the Irish Dail, Mr. Seamus Pattison, led a delegation to Washington for meetings between the newly established U.S.-Ireland Interparliamentary Group. During those meetings, the Irish representatives repeatedly raised the idea of a transitional visa program designed to support the implementation of the peace agreement. After a few weeks of research, consultation and negotiation, we, all of us, came to share their enthusiasm and introduced H.R. 4293. The Irish Peace Process Cultural and Training Program Act legislation creates 12,000 temporary, nonimmigrant work visas targeted at young men and women from disadvantaged areas from Northern Ireland in the border counties. It aims to assist the region in its transition to a peacetime economy. As a new low-cost, low-risk, high return investment in peace, this visa affords individuals an opportunity to obtain valuable job skills needed for the 21st century and the experience of working in the world's greatest economy. After their visit, they would return home prepared to provide the crucial skill needed to attract private investment to their local economies. The program would provide up to 4,000 visas a year for 3 years, allowing the holder to live in the United States for up to but no more than 36 months. It would identify disadvantaged areas within Northern Ireland and the border counties which require public and private sector activities to break the cycle of structural unemployment, retrain the long-term unemployed and out-of-work youth, and in doing so, assist in the regeneration of the economies in these locales. It would encourage grass roots support for long-term peace and economic stability by providing a release valve for the tensions and disillusionment of communities in despair. It would promote cross-community and cross-border initiatives which expose individuals from these disadvantaged areas to the business and social life of other communities. These objectives can be achieved by a non-immigrant program targeted at young adults from both sides of the border, and on all sides of the sectarian divide. Drawing on the experience and empirical evidence from the universally respected Project Children program, it is believed that exposing individuals who have been subjected to a wartorn sectarian environment to the diverse, cooperative, multicultural environment present in the United States can provide long-lasting social and economic benefits. It is this interaction with alternative cultures within a neutral environment that will provide people from the targeted areas the sense of confidence and worth they will need to rebuild their economies and their lives. Last month I accompanied both the Speaker, the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Gingrich), and President Clinton on their separate visits to Ireland and Northern Ireland. During those trips we were constantly thanked for the support that Congress has given to advancing the peace process, and reminded of the need to maintain our involvement. As the gentleman from New York (Mr. King) spoke, we saw firsthand the benefits of public and private investment in the distressed areas that have suffered from the violence of the last 30 years. American investment through the International Fund for Ireland has been successful in reaching out to all sections of the community, and has been very successful in promoting cross-border business activities. The Northern Ireland Visa for Peace would leverage existing and future private investment. At a time of fiscal austerity and lack of support for foreign aid, our visa program would be a relatively inexpensive way to promote peace, reconciliation, and stability. America is also tired of sending its men and women overseas as peacekeepers. I believe it would be a lost opportunity not to try out a new, creative attempt at conflict resolution. For those who are concerned that these temporary visas might encourage permanent emigration from Northern Ireland, I would respond that those fears do not stand up to the current facts. I would like to submit for the Record an article from the New York Times detailing how thousands of Irish are returning home from the U.S. The Irish government's Central Statistics Office documents that 6,600 Irish immigrants have returned from the United States this year, with a net migration to Ireland of over 15,000 individuals in the last 2 years. This figure will increase as the economy continues to thrive in the north, or begins to thrive in the north. Our bill is an attempt to duplicate that success in Northern Ireland. The people of Northern Ireland will enjoy the same benefits as those in the south, if peace holds and the conditions for private investment are met. Our visa proposal is a response to the demands made by the U.S. Trade and Investment Conferences of 1995 and 1996. Those conferences called for ways to assist the economy in the north through on-the-job training of young adults with cross-community and cross-border participation. In the past several years, we have seen 800 years of Irish history take a dramatic shift towards peace and justice for all. I believe that this Visa for Peace legislation will further cement that progress. I hope all Members will join me in supporting this low-cost, low-risk, high-return investment in support of peace in Northern Ireland. I would like to thank the chairman, the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Smith) and his staffers, Jim Wilon and George Fishman, for their efforts to bring this bill to the floor. I would like to thank John Mackey, of the staff of the gentleman from New York (Mr. Ben Gilman), Mr. Mackey has been just an absolute soldier in this process, and my staff, John Simmons and Pat Togni, who have worked so hard to bring this to its fruition. I thank the committee for its indulgence. Madam Speaker, I include for the Record the following article: Leaving America--Ireland, New Promised Land (By Mike Allen) Yonkers, N.Y.--Between retrieving thrown juice cups and cleaning up crushed cookies, the moms in the mother-toddler group at the Irish Community Center here talk about home. But unlike generations of homesick Irish women before them, many of them aren't just talking. They're going. With the Irish economy thriving and now an agreement for peace in the long-bloody North--resoundingly ratified in a referendum last weekend--the motherland's pull on its exiles in America seems more powerful than ever. Many young Irish adults are breaking with earlier generations of Irish immigrants who settled in the United States for good: The Irish Government reports that over the last two years, 13,000 more Irish moved back to Ireland from America than went the other way. reversal That reversal breaks with previous decades of Irish immigration to the United States, one of the oldest, largest, most sustained and most culturally influential migration flows of American history--reaching nearly a million in the 1850's after the Irish potato famine, but dwindling lately to just a few thousand a year. For a few years now, the Irish have been celebrating the surprising return of their countrymen from England and Australia as well as America, a trend that the peace agreement seems sure to accelerate. Now the Irish in America, who once saw little choice but to come here, are confronted with a happy dilemma: choosing between this land of opportunity and a land more familiar to them that has been newly vested with promise. To economists, Ireland is now ``the Celtic tiger.'' Thanks largely to American and other foreign investments in high- tech manufacturing plants for computers, pharmaceuticals and other products, newly created jobs have brought unemployment in Ireland down to 9 percent from nearly 16 percent in 1993. Investors, in turn, are bullish largely because next year Ireland (unlike neighboring Britian) will adopt the European Union's unified currency, the euro. Participation in the euro imposes economic discipline on countries using it and is expected to reduce the cost of doing business within the European Union. Jerry J. Sexton, a labor-market specialist for the Economic and Social Research Institute in Dublin, said most of those returning from the States are in their mid-20's to mid-30's, and usually have some education or skills. Across the Atlantic, his assessment is affirmed in interviews with Irish immigrants. James Dalton, an Irishman who owns Dublin Construction Inc. in Woodside, Queens, said he typically employs 20 of his countrymen as carpenters or laborers--and typically one leaves for home every week. After spending the day refitting a pub in mahogany, two of his 20- year-old carpenters--both out of Ireland just two months-- ordered a round of Guinness and confided their dream: saving enough money to start a construction business back home. In many of the Irish bars that dot New York, similar stories are being told, some that sound much like the fantastic tales that envious dreamers in the Old World once told about America. Seamus Gillespie, a 44-year-old asbestos remover who was sharing a pint and a cigarette with a co- worker and his fiancee at another bar in Woodside, leaned in to give the news about the Irish economy. ``They're not building houses,'' he said. ``They're building mansions!'' whole households Historians of American immigration say revolving-door migrations like this one are nothing new, despite popular myths about America as the promised land. But they note that the Irish exodus is unusual in that it seems to involve whole households (as opposed to men without families), making the departure of the Irish more noticeable. Dr. Kerby A. Miller, a history professor at the University of Missouri who specializes in Irish immigration, calls the turnabout simply astonishing for a people long motivated by starvation and political and religious repression to forsake their homeland. In the past, he said, ``Irish immigrants longed to return, at least sentimentally, but they realized it was impractical or impossible.'' Among the factors motivating the new Irish returnees, Irish immigration counselors say, are frustrations and delays in winning American citizenship, given the United States' current anti-immigrant political climate. Lately, though, the peace agreement for the British province of Northern Ireland provides another incentive for those already weighing a decision to return. Arriving at the Irish Community Center in Yonkers to pick up his wife and young son, Andrew J. Convery, a taxi driver from the Bronx, said the prospect of peace was a big factor in their decision to return. A Catholic from Northern Ireland, he came here six years ago in search of the American dream, and met his future wife, Kerry, a Catholic from Dublin, when he picked her up as a fare. Now they are moving back so their 1-year-old, Ciaran, can be raised the way they were. But without the bombs. ``Before, there wasn't much to go back to,'' Mr. Convery said. The Irish exodus raises as yet unanswerable questions about the subtler cultural effects on two countries that have long drawn on each other's richness. Several neighborhoods in Queens and the Bronx look like Potemkin Irish villages: Newsstands sell papers from each Irish county, convenience stores carry ox-tail soup mix and butcher shops offer grouse. Lately in the United States, Irish culture, once shunned by the upper crust, has enjoyed a broad revival. ``Angela's Ashes,'' Frank McCourt's Pulitzer Prize-winning memoir of growing up poor in Limerick (interestingly enough, after his family returned from America), has been on The New York Times Best-Seller List for 89 weeks. And in recent years, ``Lord of the Dance,'' the choreographed extravaganza created by Michael Flatley, an Irish-American, has made Irish folk- dancing almost hip. The Irish cultural vibrancy here could be diluted by Ireland's new drawing power, says Dr. Timothy J. Meagher, the director of the Center for Irish Studies at Catholic University in Washington. ``If you lose the immigrant base, it threatens the culture,'' he said. The flow of Irish from the United States can be expected to increase as the Irish Government and business groups rev up the welcome wagon. Ireland's Department of Social Welfare, which earlier published ``Thinking of Going to London?'' and ``Thinking of Going to the United States?'' last year switched gears and put out ``Thinking of Returning to Ireland?''--a guide to housing, pensions and workers' rights. A hopeful headline asked, ``Home for Good?'' A private group called Returned Emigrants was started last year and has grown to 180 members in three chapters; they gather to vent shared frustrations, including their experiences with the pokey Irish telephone service. To other returnees, however, such flaws are quaint reflections of a more leisurely pace of life, which to them is one of Ireland's big draws. Pauline A. McGovern, who moved back to County Kerry in May with her husband, Brendan, and their son, said that within days of returning, her husband found work as a plumber. When they lived in Yonkers, he had to leave every workday at 6:45 A.M. to catch a train and then the subway for work in Manhattan. Now, he hops on his bike at 8:55 and rides 20 blocks to work--and comes home at noon for dinner. Their 3-year-old son, Ryan, sleeps three hours later. ``I think it's in the air,'' Mrs. McGovern said.

Mr. WALSH

Mr. WALSH. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from California (Mr. Dreier) for yielding me time to come here and say some nice things about my friend, Jerry Solomon, as so many others are. You are rich in friends, Mr. Chairman, and it is deservedly so. You are truly one of the leaders of our country. You are truly the leader of the New York State delegation. I owe you my position that was just mentioned on the Committee on Appropriations. Without your strong support, fiery support, I probably would not be there. So I am indebted to you for that. You are a gentleman, a soldier, a Congressman, and a true defender of this country, its flag, and its veterans and all its marvelous institutions. We thank you for your sense of humor and, more importantly, we thank you for your sense of honor.

Mr. WALSH

Mr. WALSH. Mr. Speaker, this past Labor Day my home district endured one of the most furious storms ever to assault Central New York. A violent line of thunderstorms, which the National Weather Service calls a ``derecho,'' began their attack just after one o'clock in the morning. With swirling winds surpassing one hundred miles an hour, Mother Nature unleashed her wrath--ripping roofs off buildings, smashing trees against houses, snapping telephone poles and leaving a path of desolate neighborhoods and a fractured infrastructure. As the gusts finally deteriorated into breezes and the rain subsided, the members of the Central New York community showed their true spirit. People helped one another remove the debris from their yards and newspapers were full of stories about neighborhood heroes. But there is a group of ``professional'' heroes, too--the utility workers, telephone linemen, postal workers, the National Guard, fire fighters, local police and state, county, city and town public works crews. Not to mention the ``official'' heroes, those elected representatives of the people who did their jobs with the energy and skill we always expect. Emergency workers from all municipalities and members of the New York Air and Army National Guard emerged to aid those in need. New York Governor George Pataki, Onondaga County Executive Nicholas Pirro and Syracuse Mayor Roy Bernardi took immediate action to guarantee a rapid recovery for all affected. Working in conjunction with utility company crews on loan from all over New York, Pennsylvania, Ohio, Maine, New Jersey and the Canadian provinces of Ontario and Quebec, the members of local fire and police departments, emergency and medical personnel and employees of local telephone and cable companies as well as the Niagara Mohawk Power Corporation toiled for countless hours to restore power and phone service. Mr. Speaker, I am proud of my office's role in working with Federal Emergency Management Agency Director James Witt to mitigate the aftershock of this disaster. Indeed we were on the phone within eight hours of the end of the storm and FEMA responded quickly and professionally. I ask my colleagues to join me in commending those who contributed their sweat, tears and labor to the recovery effort in Central New York during this time of crisis.

Mr. WALSH

Mr. WALSH. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Shuster) for organizing this wonderful tribute to our good friend and colleague, the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. McDade). The gentleman from California (Mr. Cox) alluded to his Notre Dame background and his Irish heritage. I too am of Irish heritage. This is a little bit like an Irish wake, a lot more subdued than a lot that I have been at. But the good news is that the honoree is quite alive and lively to hear these nice things, and what a treat it is for all of us. Congressman McDade got me started off on the Committee on Appropriations. To this day, he still refers to me as ``mayor,'' having appointed me to the Subcommittee on the District of Columbia of the Committee on Appropriations, and I had no idea what a challenge that would be. But he was always there with advice and counsel along the way, as he has been on so many things. Congressman McDade is a friend, not only of mine, but of my family. My dad, Bill Walsh, who served with Joe back in the 1970s sends his regard and his best wishes. And Joe never hesitates or forgets to ask about dad, and he is doing quite well. Congressman McDade is a man who never forgot where he came from. He has the same positive outlook about life in spite of all of the difficulties that you go through in public life, quick to smile, quick with advice, thoughtful, serving on the Committee on Appropriations and being in conference meetings when things get hectic and tense. Joe always spoke with authority and with knowledge of the issues. If there is one thing that separates the wheat from the chaff in a legislative endeavor, it is when someone with authority and knowledge speaks. Everyone else stops, and they listen because chances are they are listening to find a way out of the thicket that they are in. Joe is always there with that thoughtfulness, with that ability to help us to get through to work out the compromise, to make things work. It is that approach to government that has inspired so many of us to try to capture that same view and to continue that fine tradition that he has laid down for all of us. So, Joe, thank you for everything. Both personally and as a citizen of the United States, we owe you a great deal.

Mr. WALSH

Mr. WALSH. Mr. Speaker, this December it will be ten years since the downing of Pan Am Flight 103 over Lockerbie, Scotland. Thirty-five Syracuse University students, returning from a study abroad semester, were killed in that bombing. This event had a profound effect on the Syracuse community and time is still healing the wounds left by this terrible tragedy. Jonathan Matthew Taylor, the current Student Government Association Parliamentarian, has asked for the words of a predecessor, John M. Mandyck, to be placed in the Record. The words of Mr. Mandyck were delivered January 18, 1989 at a tribute to the thirty-five Syracuse University students killed in the Pan Am Flight #103 bombing. Along with Mr. Matthews, I believe it is appropriate to pay tribute again. I submit Mr. Mandyck's speech to be placed in the record and invite my colleagues to join with me in remembering those students who lost their lives in this terrorist attack. A Tribute--Syracuse University Flight 103 Memorial Service Carrier Dome, January 18, 1989 (By John M. Mandyck) We have come together today to pay tribute to our lost colleagues, friends, and loved ones. Meager words that I may think or say cannot eliminate pain or wipe away tears; they may unite us in one thought. May these words begin to ease the sorrow that has been felt from coast to coast, and ocean to ocean. We may not have personally known one or more of the students called from this life, but we all share a common bond to our alma mater and loved each of the students in our own very special and personal way. I knew one student well. His name was Frederick Phillips--or ``Sandy''--as friends called him. Sandy wrote to me from London several times. I never had a chance to respond to his last letter. Over the semester break, I finally wrote that response. I gathered my thoughts and put them on paper to Sandy. I know I won't be sending this letter, but I thought I'd read it here today, because I know he and the others are listening. Dear Sandy, Time has stopped for a while on our campus. It's a little quieter here. People don't seem to laugh as much. And it's cold. It's been cold since we heard the news. For almost a month now, we've been mourning your death and the loss of your companions on that flight. Our university family is a little smaller now, but I think we're a little closer too. I think this closeness has spread to all college students as seen from the dozens of sympathy letters I've received from around the country. So many are sharing in our grief, Sandy, but these letters don't explain your loss--I'm not sure anything will. I'm not even sure if I should look for answers because answers lead to more questions, and questions take time. Time as I have learned is so precious. Sandy, I'm glad I got to know you for the short time you were with us at Syracuse. You made friends laugh, classrooms brighter, and you made this dome a little louder for those winning touchdowns and tie-breaking baskets. You made our campus better. Sandy, we may have lost you but we didn't loose your spirit. I see it every day now in others, and it's less painful knowing a part of you lives on. When I first heard the cold news, I wanted to say a prayer. I didn't quite know what to pray for, now I do. I pray that we all live our lives, dream our dreams, walk forward like you did when you were here with us. You and the others have taught us that life is precious, and life too is short. I think you'd want us to know that tragic thoughts, guilty feelings, and profound grief tick away on our own timeclocks. So we've been grieving for a month now. And I told you time stopped for a while on our campus. Tomorrow, will you mind if we start the clock again? You see, Sandy, the ink is drying on this chapter of our lives. Tomorrow I want to start a new chapter. You, yourself, won't be in this one because I can't bring you back, but you'll be guiding me--you and the others will be guiding all of us. You'll turn the pages as we write, you'll inspire our pens. You see, we all have a responsibility now . . . this book called ``life'' must read on. Someday I'll look through the book of my life and in my browsing I'll find a chapter that ended on January 18, 1989. I'll be grateful because you helped me turn that page and write so many others. I'll be thankful that you taught me on Earth, and reminded me from Heaven, how precious time and life really is. Tomorrow, Sandy, we'll be writing a new chapter with your help. One where clocks tick again, knowledge is sought again, and people laugh again. And Sandy, with your help, I think tomorrow our campus will be a little bit warmer.

Mr. WALSH

Mr. WALSH. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to my good friend, the distinguished gentleman from California (Mr. Jerry Lewis), chairman of the subcommittee on VA, HUD, and Independent Agencies of the Committee on Appropriations, and friend of the gentleman from California (Mr. Vic Fazio).

Mr. WALSH. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time, and I move the previous question on the conference report. The previous question was ordered.

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 H.R. 4112 and that I may include tabular and extraneous material.

Mr. WALSH. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Colorado for yielding me this time and for his kind words and for the voice vote that we received in the Committee on Rules. It is somewhat unusual. But I think it reflects the approach that my very good friend and colleague, the gentleman from New York (Mr. Serrano), and I have taken in this bill. Our staffs work very, very closely together. We share ideas. We try to honor each party's requests. After all, this is the budget that funds the workings of this body and of the Senate. And what is in the interest of the Democratic Party is also in the interest of the Republican Party when it comes to making sure this House runs efficiently. Bipartisanship is not always possible. In fact, the Founding Fathers set it up so that partisanship would be the catalyst that really makes this country move forward progressively. But in the case of this bill, I think bipartisanship is an important ingredient, and I am very pleased that we have been able to work together. I would like to thank the Committee on Rules for honoring our request on the rule. I would also like to thank the gentleman from New York (Mr. Solomon), who has provided great leadership to the House and to the Committee on Rules over the years. This is the last legislative branch bill to come before him in his chairmanship, and I want to take this opportunity to thank him personally for all the good advice and counsel that he has provided to me over the years. He is one of our New York State leaders and has set a high standard for all of us. I would also like to take this opportunity, and I will thank the other members of the subcommittee during the discussion of the bill, and the staff, but I would just like to take the opportunity to join with my colleagues in thanking the gentleman from California (Mr. Vic Fazio) for the leadership that he has provided throughout the years on this sometimes most difficult of bills. I remember when I first came to the Congress back in 1988, took office in 1989, there was a big to-do about a pay raise. Now, if one is going to go through hell in the legislative process, the pay raise is probably the best way to get there. Because it is never popular, no matter what. And people will say, well, we should have a pay raise when the country has a balanced budget. Well, we have a balanced budget, but I would suspect if we did a poll, most people would say Congress still does not deserve a pay raise. But the fact of the matter is, on occasion, all good workers should be compensated. Vic Fazio took that challenge. He also did this subcommittee a favor, by the way, by moving that from this subcommittee to another subcommittee so that the gentleman from New York (Mr. Serrano) and I do not have to deal with that sticky issue anymore. But the fact of the matter is Vic Fazio has been a leader, a stand-up guy for the Congress, and it is a tough role for anyone to fill, and it is not always politically popular. But he has never used the subcommittee to do anything but give credit to the Congress. Vic is a good Democrat. As a Republican, I think I can say that. He is a partisan, but when it comes to the conduct of this office and the conduct of the subcommittee and the protection of this very important and integral body in our government, Vic Fazio has shown real leadership over the years, and we are deeply indebted to him. Mr. Speaker, I will save the remainder of my remarks for the bill, and I urge unanimous support of the rule.