Zach Wamp

Mr. WAMP

Mr. WAMP. I yield to the gentleman from Massachusetts.

Mr. WAMP. Reclaiming my time, Mr. Speaker, I want to move the process forward. I want to get to the Senate. But I want a bill that is good for America. And I want the President's proposal. I want the 72 percent on renewables and energy efficiency and alternatives and clean fuels, extend the tax credit so people will drive these hybrid cars. This does not even extend that tax credit. It is not enough. We need to do more.

Mr. WAMP

Mr. WAMP. Mr. Speaker, I thank the chairman for yielding me time. Mr. Speaker, I come to the floor to just speak about the issue of being here in the first place. When I was home for a couple of days, several friends asked questions about this case. My mother even called to inquire. Like the gentlewoman from Colorado, I am just an earnest layman, not a lawyer or a physician, even though I have been very impressed from both sides with the input from the distinguished lawyers and physicians that are in these Chambers, and I think we should come often now as technology develops exponentially and just ask questions of ourselves about medical ethics and where we really are. I reject the notion that this is about politics. I do know something about politics, and I would say this is not good politics for either side. This is about life and death. I do believe that this is somewhat about ideology, though. The gentleman from Massachusetts said so, and I believe there is a culture of life that many conservatives are willing to stand for. I frankly think that many liberals for a long time used every tool at their disposal to push their perspective, and I am glad conservatives are finally figuring out that that needs to be done from time to time. I think this is a thoughtful process; I think it is a necessary process. I think the Federal representatives, when we face these issues, should not hide or shirk the responsibility. We should come here. Now, I am concerned about the separation of powers and the tenth amendment, and I have a record for a decade of standing on almost a libertarian platform on some of these issues. But I do not think we are going too far here. This is a review. It is simply a review. It is a reasonable step. To the gentleman from Massachusetts, you have a living will. To the whole country, if you do not want your family in this dilemma, and you should not, get a living will, so that it is clear, so it is not questioned, so that you will not have a case come to the floor of the House with you. The lesson here is everyone in this country should have a living will, so it is cut and dried, so we know, and the legislative bodies in Florida or Montana or Washington, D.C. will not have to be involved.

Mr. WAMP

Mr. WAMP. Mr. speaker, due to a family commitment in Tennessee, I was not present for two votes today, Thursday, March 3, 2005. Had I been present, I would have voted ``nay'' on the Motion to Recommit H.R. 841--Continuity of Representation Act and ``aye'' on final passage of H.R. 841.

Mr. WAMP

Mr. WAMP. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this time. It is good to see the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Putnam) on the Committee on Rules, managing the bill. I also recognize the distinguished gentleman from Florida (Mr. Young) for 6 awesome, fair, reasonable, very effective years as the chairman of the Committee on Appropriations. I cannot think of a better gentleman in the House than the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Young), and he has goodwill from every corner from this place and all across the country for so many of the right reasons, and I am grateful for his leadership. I am also grateful that he is going to continue working on the Committee on Appropriations in the days ahead. We are here today before Thanksgiving finishing all of the years' appropriations work because the staff on the majority and minority side did a lot of work while we were gone being reelected, and I am grateful. My 8 years on the Committee on Appropriations have seen these things slide beyond Thanksgiving, even into the next Congress, which this year we should be proud we are not allowing to happen. And it is complicated. We have honored the President's request to hold the line on spending. It was a big issue, and we have spent too much in previous years. This year we actually can take pride knowing we are meeting the responsibilities and not spending too much and holding the line on excess riders. I know there are some differences today over individual aspects of this bill, but, overall, it is a fairly clean product, considering the history of this body. Both sides, the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Obey) and the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Young), and the professional staff can take a lot of pride in knowing that we have got a good work product here and we are meeting the responsibilities of the government. We are doing it in a timely manner, compared to other years. While we are 6 weeks into it, the fact is this is early compared to previous years. I am very proud of that work. I am grateful, most importantly, to the staff. There is a changeover when term limits set in, and some staff may leave. I am not going to mention names but just say this staff on the Committee on Appropriations, minority and majority side, deserve a lot of credit. It is a 24/7 job, and they do an outstanding job for the country, and I am grateful.

Mr. WAMP

Mr. WAMP. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this time. We will hear a lot of demagoguery tonight and some just downright nonsense, but this is a beautiful thing if we look at the bipartisan coalitions that came together to bring this about. And as a representative from the great State of Tennessee, we are very pleased that farmers and growers of tobacco can finally move on after suffering for so long with the inequities that they have and that we are one of those seven States where sales tax is where most of our revenue comes, but there has not been any deductibility for 18 years of sales tax; and yet we do not have an income tax, and our sales tax is almost 10 cents on the dollar. I thank the distinguished gentleman from California (Mr. Thomas), chairman of the Committee on Ways and Means, who worked in a very fair manner with Members from both sides of the aisle. There was a lot of involvement here. And to the gentleman from upper east Tennessee (Mr. Jenkins) for really carrying this tobacco settlement through. The Senate spoke. The House spoke. We worked it out, and frankly, the tobacco companies now have to step up and put the money up to do this so that the growers and farmers are not penalized anymore in the tobacco business. But this sales tax equity is a beautiful thing. Politics is the art of the possible, and I am encouraged tonight that, even though it is near the end, there is almost an election here, people from both sides have worked together. I commend the gentleman from Washington (Mr. Baird) for carrying his sales tax issue and bringing a coalition today. The gentleman from Texas (Mr. Brady) was the champion. And the gentleman from Texas (Mr. DeLay), our majority leader, really helped us bring this about. And it is right for all of the people of this country because it really affects all 50 States, not just the seven States that have sales tax, because every State has the option of taking the income tax deduction or the sales tax deduction. This is good for America; $635 million of economic impact on the tobacco settlement alone for my State. That is important. We need to support the rule and pass the bill.

Mr. WAMP

Mr. WAMP. Madam Speaker, I thank the distinguished chairman for yielding me this time, and the gentlewoman from Missouri (Ms. McCarthy) for her 10 years of service here in the House. I have been here the whole time she has been here. She has grace and is decent and kind and has done an outstanding job for her people back in Missouri. This is a very important issue. I founded the Congressional Fitness Caucus 2 years ago, and cochair it with the gentleman from Colorado (Mr. Udall) for this exact same purpose, to try to encourage healthier lifestyles all across the country, particularly with young people, but especially here, where health insurance companies can join us and fight the obesity epidemic. Madam Speaker, Type 2 diabetes is climbing in this country. The human body is made to move. People need to watch what they eat and live healthier lives. We need to encourage it, and the entire health care delivery system needs to kind of change its approach to more preventive care; emphasizing maintenance, checkups, and all kinds of ways to take better care of ourselves to lower health care costs. There is no way Medicare and Medicaid, which are the Federal Government's responsibilities, can sustain the trends we see today in chronic health care problems associated with obesity. It is now on a par with tobacco as the number one killer in America, obesity-related illnesses. We have to get our arms around it. But I think it is going to take changing the paradigm and the culture, and it is going to take a national campaign. I, too, want to commend Secretary Tommy Thompson. He got his own body in better shape and now he is leading by example and carrying this message. The President is probably the most fit President in the history of our country. We all need to use our own walk to exhort the advantages of just moderate increases in physical activity and better diet and nutrition. Health insurance agencies or companies stand to gain a lot from their bottom line by promoting wellness, a holistic approach to better living. We can all take simple steps. America on the Move is a national program that Secretary Thompson helped start. In Tennessee, where I am from, we are towards the bottom in terms of health. We are in the fried chicken belt. But we have Tennessee on the Move, which is a grass-roots effort to promote wellness and physical activity. Again, this is going to have to be done on a variety of fronts across the country, so that all these little fires will burn together for a healthier America. I cannot think of a better legacy for my colleague from Missouri to leave than to encourage people to live a healthier life, to enjoy the quality of life, better sleep, increased productivity in the private sector and in all of our lives, but particularly with our children. They need to know the consequences early on of inactivity and a sedentary lifestyle. Get out of doors. Go play the game. Do not play it on the video; go play it yourself. We need to encourage more physical activity. Again, this human body, all human bodies, were made to move. Burn more calories and ingest fewer calories. With small, simple steps we will not face the problems associated with obesity in the future. Madam Speaker, this is a bipartisan effort and I thank the gentlewoman from Missouri for leading this effort.

Mr. WAMP

Mr. WAMP. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this time. This is an emotionally charged issue and I can understand why. I think it is important, though, that we adhere to the facts. The gentlewoman from the District of Columbia (Ms. Norton) used the words ``fallacious'' and ``ludicrous.'' It is ludicrous to suggest that if we had a gun ban all across the country, that the bad guys would not have guns and that the good guys would then be better off. It is ludicrous to suggest that bad guys that do not honor the law are not going to always have guns in this society. It is fallacious to insinuate to people that somehow they are going to be safer if you ban guns. There are no facts to back that up. Gun control does not work. I am not interfering in the District of Columbia, that is a fact everywhere in this country. Gun control does not work. There is no science to show that it works. As a matter of fact, what the truth is that when we control guns, the bad guys have plenty, and there is a gun culture, and the good guys cannot defend themselves. In the State of Tennessee, my father-in-law has a right to carry, and our family is safer because he does. We are in a new world. The last time that 3,000 innocent American lives were lost on September 11, guns were not used. Airplanes and fuel was. It was the most destructive, violent act in our country's history in this homeland. Guns were not there. I do not know what is next, but I think people have a right to defend themselves, and gun control simply does not work. Public policy should not be based on emotion, and this is emotionally charged. It should be based on science, facts, logic, and the truth. The truth is this policy does not work. I just came back from Africa. I was in Dar es Salaam and Johannesburg; dangerous cities. Interestingly, they remind me that the city I work in here is more dangerous than the cities there. Let us be honest about this, and let us rise above the emotion. Gun control does not work anywhere, including the District of Columbia.

Mr. WAMP

Mr. WAMP. Mr. Speaker, I am a very proud sponsor of H.R. 2966, the Right to Ride Livestock on Federal Lands Act of 2004. Pack and saddle stock animals were a critical element in many early Americans' livelihood. Today's bill directs the Secretary to provide for the management of public lands to preserve and facilitate the continued use and access of horse and saddle stock animals on such lands, including wilderness areas, national monuments, and other specifically designated areas where there is a historical tradition of such use. Not later than 120 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall issue final rules to define the meaning of a ``historical tradition of use'' by pack and saddle stock animals on federal lands. Defining managed recreation of this historical practice within our national forests is critical in recognizing the cultural contributions and precedent of pack and saddle stock in our public lands above simple recreational use. I believe that horse and saddle stock hold a unique place in our heritage. We must pass this bill to ensure its historical preservation and continued enjoyment as a national pastime.

Mr. WAMP

Mr. WAMP. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the requisite number of words. Mr. Chairman, I will be very brief, just to add that this is one of those rare opportunities for the Appropriations Committee and the Ways and Means Committee to meet at the water's edge. Sometimes we put limitation amendments on appropriations bills and they strike those through a point of order, which they have the right to do here. Yet they chose to agree with us and say that this GAO study needs to be completed and all the science needs to be brought to bear before this rule is actually implemented. Let me just say that one of the greatest areas of innovation in our health care delivery system in this country is inpatient rehabilitation hospitals where virtually every family in America has had somebody benefit from one of those hospitals, and they are wowed at what we are doing. It is a very fluid area of health care. It is changing every month because of new technologies and new procedures. Yet some of these rules are antiquated in these 13 categories. They need to be changed based on what is happening in health care, not a bean counter at OMB saying, we only have this much money or we want to reduce this much money, therefore, this is what you are going to be reimbursed for. In our health care delivery system, we need to reimburse wherever the innovation is, wherever the patient is, wherever the need is, wherever the cure is; and that is what this does is allow science to prevail and not some arbitrary limitation that is set down the street by any administration or any government bureaucrat. That is, frankly, where the Congress is doing its job to weigh in, because we are sensitive to these things; and, frankly, sometimes the Appropriations Committee can be very helpful by using the power of the money flow and the appropriations process to say, wait a second, stop the trains, we are going in the wrong direction. This is a win-win. Congratulations to all and thanks especially to Ways and Means for letting us live to fight another day on behalf of patients and inpatient rehabilitation hospitals across the country. I thank the gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. Lowey) and the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. LoBiondo). It is always a pleasure to work with them.

Mr. WAMP

Mr. WAMP. Mr. Speaker, I thank the chairman for yielding me time, and I thank all of those involved for bringing this legislation to the floor in the form of a conference report. I have to come to the floor, though, saying it is frustrating for me as a Member of the Subcommittee on Homeland Security of the Committee on Appropriations that it took a year to get the bill from the House floor back to the House floor in the form of a conference agreement, since time is very much of the essence. Also I want to tell a story. About a year ago, when I brought ``Buy America'' provisions to the floor trying to insert them in this legislation, received assurances from Secretary Thompson and the gentleman from Louisiana (Chairman Tauzin) that every effort would be made to buy America where possible in all of the implementation of not just Bioshield, but all of the different treatments and antidotes that fall under Bioshield or not. Then later in the fall I had an Assistant Secretary of Health and Human Services in my office, and I spoke about the treatment for a radiation event and how that was going to be procured. It is called Prussian Blue, and I was told that that was still in the process of being competed. Little did anyone know in the room under this interagency working group that a month earlier, an exclusive contract had already been committed to procure Prussian Blue and fill up our stockpiles to a German company. I have got to tell you, in Tennessee that does not go over very well, when there are U.S. manufacturers prepared to do this and time is of the essence. The FDA, HHS, DHS, we need to coordinate better. I am very concerned about ceding the responsibility to interagency working groups and not having an accountable person. This is billions of dollars. It is, frankly, late. We have been appropriating the money. It cannot go forward, and time is of the essence. We are going to the conventions, and the threats are real, and we do not have the stockpiles full. I commend the authorizers; but, darn, everybody involved needs to move quicker because we do not have the stockpiles full of these treatments, and many of them are available and on the shelf by U.S. manufacturers. I was in Tampa, Florida, a week ago Monday; and I saw those treatments, and they are not on the streets of New York or Boston or across the country, or in Athens, Greece; and U.S. manufacturers can export them. We have the best technology in the world. We do not have to lean on the French or the Germans to fill up our stockpiles for treatments in the event of more terrorism. It is not just Bioshield, it is Chemshield and Nukeshield. It is all of the major threats. So, yes, vote for this. It is long overdue. Move it quickly to the President's desk. And then get the administration to coordinate better together. I called Assistant Secretary Simonson today. I said, I need to talk to you. I am still waiting for the phone call. The legislation is on the floor. I am on the subcommittee. I am waiting for the phone to ring. We need action. The American people demand no less. This is the most target-rich environment in the next 4 months that we have ever faced in the history of this country. Let us get it on.

Mr. WAMP

Mr. WAMP. Mr. Chairman, I thank the chairman for yielding me this time, and I thank both the ranking member and the chairman for the work they do. Having served on this subcommittee for 6 years, I know the important work that they do. Mr. Chairman, the American people probably do not pay a whole lot of attention to this bill, because a lot of it is inside the Beltway, but I know the American people are keenly aware of the rising cost of gasoline and the need for our country to be independent of energy sources and not so dependent on oil. And I do not want to encourage any extra government spending whatsoever. A number of Members either take a mileage reimbursement for official travel, which is totally permissible under the rules, or they lease a vehicle at government expense. And in either case, this resolution encourages Members to use hybrid electric or alternatively fueled vehicles. Why? Because the American people expect us to lead. And a lot of them are asking what are we going to do about our dependence on foreign oil; what can we do to lower our cost of fuel. In the past, the options have not been too good. But this fall, in this country, there are at least eight hybrid electric vehicles in the marketplace for American consumers, including domestic vehicles, from pickup trucks to SUVs, where you can double your gas mileage. The new Ford Escape, and I have one on order, will get 38 miles per gallon. It is a small SUV. Throw your kids in the back, or if you are taking staff around the district, drive one of those. Or even a foreign model, if your constituents like that or will allow that. Some will not. But you have all the options, and we want to encourage this. The resolution simply says it is the sense of the House of Representatives that Members of the House who use vehicles in traveling for official or representational purposes, including Members who lease vehicles for which the lease payments are made using funds provided under the Members' Representational Allowance, are encouraged to use hybrid electric or alternatively fueled vehicles whenever possible, as the use of these vehicles will help to move our Nation forward toward the use of a hydrogen fuel cell vehicle and reduce our dependence on oil. We need to accelerate the transition to a hydrogen economy away from a petroleum-based economy, clean up the air, secure our liberty, and Members should lead by example. As the cochairman of the Renewable Energy and Energy Efficiency Caucus here in the House, the Republican cochairman, with my colleague, the gentleman from Colorado (Mr. Udall), we have over 228 to 232 Members, well over a majority of this body are members, we encourage the use of these hybrid electric vehicles, and it begins with us. Lead by example. If my colleagues are taking the mileage or if you lease a vehicle, we encourage you to use these alternative-fuel vehicles, double your gas mileage, and move us towards a secure energy future. I commend the chairman for including this important language.

Mr. WAMP

Mr. WAMP. Mr. Speaker, I certainly appreciate the gentlewoman's leadership. I do come as an appropriator today to say thanks to the authorization committee, and thanks to the chairman of the Committee on Science, the gentleman from New York (Mr. Boehlert); the Chair of the subcommittee, the gentlewoman from Illinois (Mrs. Biggert); the ranking members, the gentleman from Tennessee (Mr. Gordon) and the gentleman from Tennessee (Mr. Davis). Mr. Speaker, I am proud that Tennesseeans stand together in a bipartisan way today. Of course, I represent the Oak Ridge National Laboratory in Oak Ridge, Tennessee, and Oak Ridge is a lead laboratory for high-speed computing. So I come with great excitement today because our Subcommittee on Energy and Water Development of the Committee on Appropriations has actually gone beyond what we were authorized to do or what the administration asked for on supercomputing, because our chairman, the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Hobson), believes, as we believe, that this is the seed corn for the future; that we must make these investments if we are to have a robust economy and a very high quality of life and experience the growth that this country deserves and, frankly, we should expect. And it comes with scientific investment. Basic research, for years, through the physical sciences, led to the breakthroughs that we enjoy today. Space had a lot to do with it. And then the life sciences of the last 15 years, as we tried to get our arms around diabetes and Alzheimer's and Parkinson's; and so we invested heavily in life sciences. But there is a whole new field that is part of the physical science arena called high-speed computing, computer simulation and modeling. We are going to be able to do things with computers that we will not even need a laboratory for, because we can simulate with the use of high-speed computing. It is a whole new field. I will tell my colleagues that as we invest in it, our economy will grow and the budget will come closer to balance because we are making these investments. We are not going to balance the budget in the world we live in today by cutting spending, because there are too many needs. But if we grow the economy with these kinds of investments, we can balance the budget. This is critical. The authorizers have stepped up. This is real good for America. It is great for our laboratory systems. And I want to give a lot of credit, while I have the floor, to the DOE Office of Science, because this administration is way out in front on these investments. This is the right thing to do. This is where the Congress comes together in the very best way to make investments not for next year necessarily, but for the next generation. They will reap a high return. So congratulations to the gentlewoman from Illinois (Mrs. Biggert). I thank her for her leadership in all science investment for our country. She is helping us on the Committee on Appropriations expand the fence so we can fund these necessary investments. Without the authorization, without the statutory framework that the gentlewoman is establishing today, and the many other times that she has brought quality legislation to this floor, we cannot fund it. With this, we can fund it and then some. So I thank all involved very much.

Mr. WAMP

Mr. WAMP. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this time. I come to the floor today to thank the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Wolf), chairman of the subcommittee, and, of course, the gentleman from New York (Mr. Serrano), ranking member. But the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Wolf) just got back from the Sudan. He has a passion for human beings, all human beings, and he works to protect their life. And I just thank him for that work. In human rights there is really not a Member of this House that cares more, that does more, that goes into more dangerous places than the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Wolf). I thank him and I thank him for this bill. In the foothills of Appalachia, where I live, in east Tennessee, methamphetamine production has been overtaking us. But I want to thank the leadership of this subcommittee, going back to when the gentleman from Kentucky (Mr. Rogers) was the chairman of this subcommittee, this subcommittee began to resource what is now the East Tennessee Methamphetamine Task Force. It is 42 counties. We have seized over 3,500 meth labs in the last 5 years in east Tennessee, 3,500, with the support of this subcommittee at $1 million a year. It sounds like a lot of money. In the scheme of things in this bill, it is not; but 3,500 labs have been seized. I want to hail Sandy Mattice, our U.S. Attorney; Russ Dedrick, our assistant U.S. Attorney; and the entire task force, who are sheriffs, local government, the DEA, the FBI. It is a true local-State-Federal partnership. It is state of the art, and we are winning the battle on methamphetamine; but it is destroying families. In these pockets of pain in rural America, methamphetamine production is catastrophic; but this is very helpful, the money that this subcommittee is targeting, putting in to help organizations like the East Tennessee Meth Task Force. It needs to be done at the local level. This is really a grassroots effort, not a Federal program. But the Federal Government is assisting local government, fighting this problem. And we cannot clean the labs up without the Federal money. We do not have the resources at the local level, and the coordination needs to happen at the local and regional levels. It is happening in east Tennessee. And I thank the committee and the people that are in the field fighting methamphetamine production to save our children.

Mr. WAMP

Mr. WAMP. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Sessions) and state what a great Member of Congress the gentleman is. I want to come this morning, after a long year, and thank the staff. Kevin Cook, the majority staff and the minority staff have worked diligently and have created a very balanced product. There are a few things that are not as high as we would like and are not funded as much as we would like, but overall it is excellent work. Over the last year and a half, the gentleman from Ohio (Chairman Hobson) has been all over the country familiarizing himself with our varied missions, both in the Corps of Engineers and the Department of Energy. The gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Visclosky), the ranking member, is a thoughtful and diligent member who has made enormous contributions; and this is possibly the best bipartisan work we will see through the appropriations process this year. The things I want to point to during the debate to bring the rule up and pass this bill with tremendous bipartisan support today are, first and foremost, frankly, in the wake of September 11, the enhanced security at our nuclear weapons facilities that is manifested in this bill. This is the result of a chairman who went out and looked at these facilities, many times in a very classified setting, but came back and really dug in to get to the bottom of what needs to be done and accelerate those improvements as much as possible in this bill. I want to thank him because I represent one of those facilities, and we are going to be much more secure in the months and years ahead because of the leadership of the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Hobson). Secondly, I was with the Secretary of Energy yesterday; and we were touting how this bill even ramps up the administration's commitment to science and research, supercomputing, fusion energy, the next breakthroughs that will lead to a productive society in future years in this bill. The Congress is even doing more than the administration. The administration is doing more than last year. We are making great breakthroughs. This is the seed corn of a productive American society, and this Congress is responding through this committee's work. I am excited. We really do have a team of leadership on the subcommittee that gets it, and we need it. We have nanoscale research now at a level we have never had. This subcommittee is honoring that. Another great initiative of this administration is we have all of these nuclear weapons facilities from the Cold War legacy. We have been maintaining them at billions and billions of dollars of annual cost. We should clean them up quicker. It is called accelerated cleanup. It is a Bush-Abraham initiative. This Congress is fully funding accelerated cleanup all across the country. Spend more money early so we do not have to spend all that money later. Accelerated cleanup is honored in this committee's work; and I am very grateful, again representing one of those sites where for a number of years we were just stirring the money around in a pot every year and asking for more. We were spending money to stir it, instead of cleaning it up. Mr. Speaker, important water projects, infrastructure investment are in this bill. It is very balanced between energy and water. Sometimes the Senate goes more towards energy investments and takes away water money, sometimes the House has more water, less energy. This committee has balanced the approach from the very start, which is what we need. For instance, in the Tennessee Valley, we have this river system with a number of dams and locks, but we have one lock with bad concrete growth problems. The Corps of Engineers has said for a number of years it needs to be replaced, but it is a $300 million ticket. This bill starts the process of replacing the Chickamauga lock on the Tennessee River. The gentleman from Tennessee (Mr. Duncan) from the Subcommittee on Water Resources and the Environment, our chairman, he wrote a bill to replace this lock; and we passed the bill. The President signed the bill into law. This committee puts the money in to start the process. We need to get it rolling and clean it up. Now, what does this bill not have? This bill does not have everything we need to keep the nuclear energy program in this country robust and growing which has been flat for a number of years because of the long- term waste issue. That is the Yucca Mountain piece. We do not have the money. We are going to keep fighting. We believe that nuclear is a safe, clean alternative to fossil emissions. If Members want clean air, we need nuclear power. Other countries get it. Other countries which are more environmentally sensitive, from time to time, than America are in the nuclear business because they see it as clean green energy. We need that, but we have to work out this long-term storage issue. That is Yucca Mountain. We fully funded it last year. The chairman knows that we have to have this, but we do not have the money. But we are not giving up. This is the beginning of the process with the Senate, with the budgeteers and all of the people who would have imposed caps on it. This is a great bill with bipartisan support.

Mr. WAMP

Mr. WAMP. Mr. Chairman, I would like to engage in a colloquy with the distinguished chairman, and I appreciate very much his fielding it, for a clarification on some language in the report. Mr. Chairman, is it your understanding that the language under the fusion energy section of the report dealing with the additional funds for development of ``compact Stellarator Experiment'' should actually be ``experiments'' plural?

Mr. WAMP. Mr. Chairman, reclaiming my time, I thank the gentleman for the clarification.

Mr. WAMP

Mr. WAMP. Mr. Chairman, I thank the chairman for the time. I appreciate not only the gentleman yielding me time but just his extraordinary time over this last year and a half since we began this new subcommittee here in the House. The gentleman who just spoke is a very thoughtful, well-educated and very energetic member of the subcommittee, and as we have worked through all these issues over the last year and a half he has been very helpful, but what he just said is drivel, drivel. The fact is tax cuts are one issue that helps the economy. It is a policy matter that was made by the Congress. This is homeland security, where we have spent billions of dollars and done extraordinary work. It is nonsense to bring up the tax issue while we are talking about appropriating the money for homeland security. That is a fact. That is a different debate for a different day, but this is also not cost sharing with local government from the Federal Government. We cannot do everything, and for a lot of people on this side we cannot appropriate enough money. It does not matter what the level is, they will want more, and they will play politics with this issue because they think it can resonate, and this is unfortunate because the best work here is when we get together and we do what is right, and that is what we are trying to do on this side of the aisle. The chairman and his staff have done an extraordinary job. Now I am not totally happy with the Department of Homeland Security at all, and my colleagues know that at the hearings I have been very hard on the Homeland Security Department, particularly in the Science and Technology Directorate, and they need to hear us long, loud and clear. They need to do a better job, but overall, I have to tell my colleagues, this subcommittee has done extraordinary work. Our intelligence work is dramatically better than after September 11. We are allocating the money to the best of our ability, but it is not a bottomless pit, and when my colleague talks about reports that show that firefighting organizations around the country do not have everything they want or need, there are 55,000 local law enforcement and firefighting organizations in this country, and the Federal Government cannot fund them all with everything they need. The responsibility still lies at the local and the State level, and this subcommittee has done an extraordinary job, and the Congress has a balanced approach, and this is not a bottomless pit. I just want to say that we are at a critical juncture going into the next several months in this country with events that are very important, and I think it is important that we pull together. I hope this subcommittee can stay above some of the mindless kinds of rhetoric that comes to the floor when we pass important appropriations bills, and I hate to hear some of the most educated and informed Members dumb this down to a debate over tax cuts versus necessary spending. This is necessary spending, and we are meeting those needs. I want to applaud the leadership. Our chairman and his staff have done an excellent job. Secretary Ridge is doing an excellent job. We still have miles to go before we get there, but we are on our way.

Mr. WAMP. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the requisite number of words.

Mr. WAMP. Mr. Chairman, I rise, as a member of the subcommittee, to speak in opposition to the amendment but with the highest respect for the unity from the New York and New Jersey delegations. It certainly transcends party, and I love New York. The older I get, the more I love it. And I especially love the way that they all pulled together after September 11 and continue to stick together on important national priorities such as this. But I just want to make a couple of points. We had well over 50 hearings at the subcommittee, we have had in the last year and 5 months. Many of these are highly classified or even at the top secret level. And while I am not going to talk about anything that is talked about, we have to assume, we have to assume, that terrorists plotting a future attack may very well commit that attack on several fronts simultaneously and certainly not just in an urban setting. For instance, in the foothills of east Tennessee after September 11 people felt relatively safe and secure even within days of the attack because they did not live in a highly populated area. We must assume that the terrorists in the future will want every American, regardless of where they live, to be afraid and to live in fear because that is their weapon is fear. These grants under the formula are heavily weighted towards population. But they are not heavily weighted towards infrastructure targets. And I will give another example. On the west side of the State I live in, Tennessee, Memphis is there, and Memphis qualifies for some of these grants under high density. But I have got to tell the Members that the nuclear weapons are in my district in east Tennessee, but the most populated area is over there but not around the nuclear weapons plant. Frankly, we do not want the nuclear weapons plant to be in the heart of all the people, but it is a target, and so are our nuclear plants and our dams and the infrastructure that is there. So I think we have to have a balanced approach. I really love it that my colleagues are willing to fight for their people. I really believe that they are doing the right thing. But I think we had better be careful as a subcommittee that we do not get carried away or even send the signal inadvertently to the terrorists that most of the money is going to go into the big cities and the highly populated areas. They need to know that we are covering all of our bases and all of our infrastructure and that we expect them to hit us on multiple fronts simultaneously in the future and that we are spending the money in a comprehensive way around the country and that we are not putting almost all of our eggs in a few baskets, and that their method before, which was primarily to use airplanes as weapons of mass destruction, is probably not the kind of attack they are going to launch in the future. It will be different, and it may be with biological or chemical agents. And I have got to tell the Members those first responders in those communities had better be ready as well. And that is what we are trying to do is make sure that the whole country is covered. I know the chairman and I are from a more rural area, but please do not believe for a second that we do not want to make sure that all of the highly populated areas are covered, not just satisfactorily but well. And we are going to work with them on this and I think we have done a reasonably good job. And I know they are coming down here tonight to defend the people that they love and we love. But this whole country cares about New York City and New Jersey and all the people that perished, and we are all going to stand together to make sure that we are covered.

Mr. WAMP. I yield to the gentleman from Kentucky.

Mr. WAMP

Mr. WAMP. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for taking the leadership tonight. The previous speaker, the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Goode), myself, and President Reagan all shared one thing in common as many do in this House and that is we used to be Democrats and we are Republicans. That brings me to what I want to share tonight, which is the change in the political landscape brought about by the life and service of Ronald Wilson Reagan; but I want to start by saying that I believe, and I think this honors his memory, that neither party has an exclusive on integrity or ideas, neither party always has it right or always has it wrong and the two-party system continues to serve our country extremely well. I am proud of the first half of my life when I was a Democrat and proud of the second half of my life as a Republican, but the story in my life as a Southern conservative Democrat goes way back generations. My father's great great grandfather, Enoch Alldredge, served in the 19th century in the Alabama General Assembly for in excess of 40 years. My mother's great uncle Reuben Alldridge served in the 20th century in the Alabama General Assembly for a number of years, both very prominent political figures from the northern part of Alabama, all as Democrats. So I grew up honestly as a Southern conservative Democrat. As a matter of fact, my first real memory of it all as a young person was watching my parents be involved in local campaigns and then, in the fall of 1976, going to Woolen Gym at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill as a 19-year-old freshman and voting for Jimmy Carter as President of the United States and then having my parents attend the inaugural in Washington here with Franklin and Emmy Haney, two of the biggest Democrats in the State of Tennessee and being proud that my parents were here and saluting the new President, Jimmy Carter. But the years that followed in my formative years certainly gave me an opportunity and hope when I saw Ronald Reagan. I saw the malaise we were in. Let me say that Jimmy Carter has proven what a fine and outstanding man he is over these last 24 years since leaving office. It was a low point in our country's history, but he is a good and decent man; and frankly I will stand by that vote as a Democrat at that time, but over those next 4 years at the University of North Carolina, we saw a real low in our country's history and then all of a sudden there was a new day in 1980, and it seemed like someone came from the West and actually kind of showed us the hope and opportunity that you heard repeated on this floor over and over and over again. I can remember as the campaign generated momentum in 1980 at UNC, my fraternity, the Sigma Nu house, got real energized about the campaign and by the convention when they had that strong conservative Governor from the West team up with maybe the best person on paper that had run in 100 years, George Herbert Walker Bush. It was like that did it. That sealed the deal. What a great team. And on election night in the fall of 1980 we loaded up in cars from UNC. It was Lee Ives and Tom Nesbit and Tony Floyd and Allen Miller and Lyn Thornburg and a group of us, and we drove to Washington, D.C. and we were here that night in 1980 when Ronald Reagan was elected President of the United States. I was a Southern conservative Democrat who became a Republican. Our entire family shifted from our party identification over the hope, the opportunity, the fresh start that Ronald Reagan brought to the political process. That changed the political landscape in the United States of America, and it moved our country from what was more left of center to slightly right of center. The Founding Fathers did not want things to change dramatically. This is like a big ship of state. If you turn it one degree, you arrive at a different destination. The country went from being left of center to right of center over the leadership, the strength and what I would say is the constancy of Ronald Reagan. He stood for something, and he simply articulated to this country what he stood for, and he never wavered. When people elect a President, they want a strong leader that can make a decision, that will stand his ground. When the wind blows, he stands firm. Ronald Reagan did that. That is why the 8 years is a legacy beyond measure. As the previous speaker said, in our lifetime, the model, the great leader is Ronald Reagan. I salute him. He made a Republican out of me, and I have been in the House of Representatives as a Republican elected official for 10 years. I ran once and lost to get here, and I am proud of the whole story. I am very typical of a lot of Southern boll weevil conservatives that believed in that simple limited government, personal responsibility, traditional values, strong national defense, lower taxes, take care of yourself and your family first and your extended family, look to the government last, but do it with a smile on your face and love in your heart. He is like a father, a big brother, a great leader who we could trust and have confidence in. Today we remember a truly great American President, Ronald Wilson Reagan.

Mr. WAMP

Mr. WAMP. Mr. Speaker, I arise today to honor the works of the Chattanooga Bar Association and the Chattanooga Human Rights Commission in my hometown of Chattanooga, Tennessee and join them in celebrating the CBA's upcoming Law Day Luncheon on May 24, 2004. Law Day, USA is set aside each year on May 1st by a joint resolution of Congress and Presidential proclamation as an occasion for honoring the place of law in our lives. It is not a national holiday, nor is it a ``lawyer's day.'' Instead, Law Day is an occasion for all Americans to learn more about our law, our legal system, and our rights. It is also a day to reflect on our legal heritage, our responsibilities as citizens, and the principles of our democratic government. Law Day has been a vital part of American life for several generations. Law Day has celebrated our great heritage of liberty, justice and equality under law since it was first proclaimed in 1958 by President Eisenhower. Law Day gives us the opportunity to reflect on how the law protects and guides America's quest for equal justice and equal opportunity, just as it permits us to express our opinions, select our leaders, worship where we choose, and pursue our livelihood. Thanks to the freedoms guaranteed by our Constitution, and protected by our laws and courts, we Americans have the opportunity--unmatched anywhere in the world--to develop our capabilities to the fullest. This year, the Chattanooga Bar Association and the Human Rights Commission will celebrate the 50th anniversary of one of the United States Supreme Court's most important cases. Brown v. Board of Education, decided on May 17, 1954, changed the civil rights landscape in America forever. Brown showed that resolute citizens, served by dedicated lawyers, can strike powerful blows against social injustice through law and courts. On May 24th, the Chattanooga Bar Association will honor the legal community of Chattanooga, Tennessee with their annual Law Day Luncheon. The featured speaker is Cheryl Brown Henderson. Mrs. Henderson is one of the children of the late Reverend Oliver Brown, namesake of the landmark U.S. Supreme Court decision of 1954. During the luncheon, the Chattanooga Bar Association will honor James R. Mapp with the 2005 ``Liberty Bell Award.'' This award, given to a person who is not in the legal profession, is one of the CBA's highest honors. The purpose of the ``Liberty Bell Award'' is to recognize community service that has strengthened the American system of freedom under law. In selecting the recipient of this award, the Chattanooga Bar Association considers activities which: (1) promote a better understanding of our Constitution and the Bill of Rights; (2) encourage a greater respect for the law and the courts; (3) stimulate a deeper sense of individual responsibility so that citizens recognize their duties as well as their rights; (4) contribute to the effective functioning of our institutions of governments; and (5) foster a better understanding and appreciation of the rule of law. I ask all Members of the House of Representatives to join me in congratulating James R. Mapp for his contributions to the Chattanooga community. The winners of the Law Day Essay Contest, which is open to all Hamilton County, private and home school students, grades 9-12, are: 1st place winning the $2000 college scholarship is Lindsay Frost of Girls Preparatory School. The Second place winner is Stephanie Liu of Girls Preparatory School. The Law Day poetry contest is open to all Third through Fifth graders of the same demographics. Winning 1st place is Caroline Holloway of St. Peter's Episcopal School; 2nd place is Chris Cooper of St. Peter's Episcopal School. The Law Day art contest is open to all Kindergarten through Second graders of the same demographics. Winning 1st place is Sloan Lewis of St. Peter's Episcopal School; winning 2nd place is Lauren Hood of St. Peter's Episcopal School. Mr. Speaker, I ask the United States House of Representatives to join me in thanking the Board of Governors of the Chattanooga Bar Association for their contributions and commitment to the legal profession and to the Chattanooga community. The members of the Board of Governors Executive Committee are: Lynda Minks-Hood, Executive Director; Alan L. Cates, President; Michael K. Alston, President-elect; Joseph R. White, Secretary-Treasurer; Honorable Rebecca J. Stern, Immediate Past President. Board members include: Marcia J. Eason, Steven W. Grant, James M. Haley, IV, Wade A. Hinton, Steven M. Jacoway, Jason L. Thomas and John M. Phillips.

Mr. WAMP

Mr. WAMP. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment. The Chairman pro tempore. The Clerk will designate the amendment.

Mr. WAMP. Mr. Chairman, this issue is not about moving the program to the Department of Labor. That is another issue for another day. That may come up at a later time. This is about making the program as it is currently written work much better. That is why I really hope that everybody that has a dog in this hunt will help us do this today. It is just one step forward, but it needs to be made short of sweeping reforms, which I know are pending before the Senate, but that is a whole different issue, and a lot of people have to get back in line and start over if that does happen. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.