Frank Wolf

Mr. WOLF

Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, I reserve a point of order.

Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, I make a point of order against the amendment because it provides an appropriation for an unauthorized program; therefore, it violates clause 2 of rule XXI.

Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of the amendment and want to commend the gentleman from Texas (Mr. DeLay) for offering the amendment. The gentleman from California (Mr. Lantos) can almost argue that we should be sending the Chinese government a bill if we look at the precedent that was set with regards to Serbia and the destruction of their embassy. But I think it is a great amendment, and I hope that it is passed by unanimous vote and that this sends a message to the Chinese government.

Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong opposition to the amendment of the gentlewoman from New York. Mr. Chairman, we recognize the importance of many of the small business programs in this bill, particularly the 7(a) business loan. However, I think everyone should understand that we have already funded the Small Business Administration very generously in this bill. We are over the President's request by $186 million. Let me go back again: this bill is over the President's request by $186 million. For the 7(a) program, we have provided $77 million in new budget authority. This amount, along with anticipated carryover funding, will support $10 billion in loans for fiscal year 2002, which is an increase of over $1 billion above the current level. So we are going to be over $1 billion above the current level. So even without this amendment, the 7(a) program for fiscal year 2002 will represent a significant increase above the current level. The other two programs the gentlewoman seeks to fund, PRIME and BusinessLinc, were not included in the President's budget. These programs were judged by the administration to be duplications of existing programs to assist entrepreneurs, including microloan technical assistance, new markets technical assistance, small business development centers, women's business centers, business information centers, all of which are funded for fiscal year 2002. The increases proposed by this amendment are unnecessary. We also would oppose the gentlewoman's proposal to further increase SBA programs at the expense of the State Department. Both sides of the aisle for the last several years have talked about giving the Secretary of State the necessary resources. This amendment will cut $15 million from Secretary Powell's initiatives to make urgently needed improvements to diplomatic readiness and to the Department's optimally automated system. So we would be taking this from the Defense Department at the very time both sides want to meet Secretary Powell's concerns. In addition, the amendment includes a cut which, though small, would have a serious impact on the Department of Commerce, a 5 percent cut to the Department's management accounts, which is overwhelmingly where we get the real dollars and salaries, which may very well result in reductions in force. So we are over, we are well over, we are beyond with the carryover. We are well over last year. Potential risks really create a difficult time for Secretary Powell, so I strongly urge opposition to the amendment.

Mr. WOLF

Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, I move that the Committee do now rise.

Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the amendment. It is also, I can tell Members, a flawed amendment because it does not do anything. It just kind of moves money around without having any kind of stream of thought to it. The amendment would again move funding from various census appropriation accounts to other accounts in a very, very confusing way. I understand what the gentlewoman and the gentleman are trying to do, but the professionals have made a decision and many believe that this would be the camel's nose under the tent, the slippery slope. Although the 2000 census is considered to be the most accurate in history, it is understandable that some have had some concern. But the professionals would be opposed to this. We really cannot go back. It does not really do anything other than flip money around and back and forth in a very, very confusing way. So we would urge a strong ``no'' vote on this amendment.

Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the gentleman bringing this issue to our attention. We would want to work with both of the gentlemen from Florida to find the most appropriate way to assist this community.

Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, I reserve a point of order.

Mr. WOLF. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the amendment. My colleague, the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Miller), has done an outstanding job with regard to this issue. He probably knows more about the issue of the census than most Members will ever ever know. There will be a report, the gentleman from Florida has been on top of it; but in the interest of time we will deal with this issue, and we will accept the amendment.

Mr. WOLF. Yes.

Mr. WOLF. If the gentleman will yield further, that is right, yes. We are not trying to hurt anybody, obviously, and I would want to be protected, since we did get here earlier for certain reasons, maybe. It would be helpful, though, if maybe anyone is listening, if they are listening to the House debate and they had an amendment that was up, it would be helpful if the gentleman found the Member and told them that we had moved a little faster. We are hoping to get home earlier than normally we would have been able to get home, so the longer we delay, the harder it will be. We did accord two Members last night that opportunity.

Mr. WOLF. Is this the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Hastings) that the gentleman from New York is speaking of?

Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, out of consideration, if somebody comes within the next 5 minutes, even if they miss it, I would not be so strict. I think if they come in 2 hours, it would be a little bit different.

Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. WOLF

Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, the gentleman from Michigan is absolutely correct, quite frankly, if they needed $2 million to do a good job, particularly with regard to China, but we will agree and make sure that that $1.5 million is in there as per the request of the gentleman from Nebraska (Mr. Bereuter) and the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Levin). Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes and 30 seconds to the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Gilchrest).

Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Murtha).

Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Nebraska (Mr. Bereuter) for a colloquy.

Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for his interest in the Chesapeake Bay. Quite frankly, no one has done more for the bay than the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Gilchrest). The committee does not intend to limit the ability of NOAA to implement the Executive Order 13158 on marine protected areas. Furthermore, the committee fully supports the President's budget request for marine protected areas.

Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Regula). (Mr. REGULA asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 30 seconds. Mr. Chairman, I will thank the gentleman. This will be the last time I thank him for his comments. I think there will be no negative amendments like that, and I ask Members on final passage to support the bill. Mr. Chairman, I yield the balance of my time to the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Ehlers).

Mr. WOLF

Mr. WOLF. That is correct.

Mr. WOLF. Mr. Speaker, I would tell the gentleman, that is correct.