Frank Wolf

Mr. WOLF

Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Chairman, I am pleased to begin consideration of H.R. 2500, the Departments of Commerce, Justice, State, the Judiciary, and related agencies. The bill provides funding for programs whose impact ranges from the safety of people in their homes and communities, to the conduct of diplomacy around the world, to predicting the weather from satellites in outer space. The bill before the Committee and in the House today reflects the delicate balance of needs and requirements. We have drafted what I consider to be a responsible bill for fiscal year 2002 spending levels for the departments and agencies under the subcommittee's jurisdiction. We have had to carefully prioritize the funding in this bill and make hard judgments with regard to scarce resources. Overall, the bill before the committee recommends a total of $38.5 billion in discretionary funding, of which $38.1 bill is general- purpose discretionary, and $440 million is for the discretionary conservation function. The bill is $972 million above the enacted level for fiscal year 2001, and $600 million above the President's request. For the Department of Justice, the bill provides $21.5 billion in discretionary funding, $672 million above last year's level and $623 million above the President's request. This includes a $455 million increase to address critical detention requirements to house criminals and illegal aliens. It also includes $5 million in support of the President's faith-based initiative at the Federal Bureau of Prisons, including a pilot program at Petersburg, Virginia, and Leavenworth, Kansas, Federal penitentiaries. I firmly believe that faith can have a positive impact on the lives of those incarcerated, and I know that we must provide prisoners with something more positive than just putting them in prison; and a faith-based initiative which will be open to all faiths I believe can make a big impact in reducing recidivism. There is a $469 million increase for the Drug Enforcement Administration, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, and the U.S. Attorneys to enhance Federal law enforcement's ability to fight the war on violent crime and drugs and to combat cybercrime and national security threats. We have also included report language that will ensure that the Inspector General at the Department of Justice will have the full authority, for the first time, to investigate allegations of employee misconduct within both the FBI and the DEA. Again, this will be the first time that the IG will have permission to look at the whole Department, including the FBI and DEA. This move is significant, given the problems that have plagued the FBI, and the DEA to a lesser extent. Having this added measure of oversight will be a good thing for the FBI and the DEA, and it will hopefully begin to restore the American people's faith in these two valiant and extremely important organizations. There are good men and women who are in both agencies who serve the country very well; and by giving the IG having the ability to look, I think will be a good thing. There is a $252 million increase for the Immigration and Naturalization Service to enforce our immigration laws, hire additional Border Patrol agents, and continue the interior enforcement effort. This funding level also includes the President's request for an additional $45 million to achieve a 6-month application processing standard. There is a $150 million increase to enforce Federal and State gun laws and distribute gun safety locks. This also empowers local communities to fight crime by providing $4.3 billion for State and local law enforcement assistance. This includes funding for Violence against Women Act programs, victims of trafficking grants, the State Criminal Alien Assistance program, and local law enforcement block grant programs, COPS and juvenile justice programs. For the Department of Commerce, the bill provides $5.2 billion, $21 million above the request. It provides full funding for the U.S. trade agencies, Census, and the National Institute of Standards and Technology, an increase of $29 million over the President's request for the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, including the National Weather Service. The bill also includes $440 million on the conservation category as negotiated in the fiscal year 2001 Interior appropriations bill. The National Weather Service has been diligent in its pursuit of a new National Severe Storm Laboratory building in Norman, Oklahoma. The gentleman from Oklahoma, Mr. Watts has been vigilant in his pursuit to provide the required capabilities of this laboratory. Beginning in 1998, he has obtained funding to establish the National Severe Storms Laboratory. This year, through the efforts of the chairman of the Subcommittee on Treasury, Postal Service and General Government, the gentleman from Oklahoma (Mr. Istook), there is an agreement with the General Services Administration to actually construct this building. This committee has agreed to provide the above-standard GSA costs specific to the requirements for NOAA. This facility will allow NOAA to improve the detection of tornadoes nationwide. The bill also includes the full $440 million, as I said, under the conservation category program as negotiated in the fiscal year 2001 Interior appropriations bill. So this I think will help the gentleman from Oklahoma Mr. (Watts) and the gentleman from Oklahoma (Mr. Istook) and the University of Oklahoma to deal with that issue dealing with NOAA. For Judiciary, $63 million will begin the renovations at the U.S. Supreme Court, about half the amount needed to protect the life, safety and security of the millions of people who use that building. Also a cost-of-living increase to the attorneys who ensure the fairness of our criminal justice system by representing indigents in criminal cases. For the State Department and the Broadcasting Board of Governors, the bill provides $7.7 billion, $837 million above last year's appropriations, per the request of the Bush administration and per the request of Secretary Powell. It includes a programming increase of $419 million for diplomatic readiness and reform, including 360 new positions and major technology modernization, $1.3 billion, the full request, the full request, because of embassy security problems, for urgent embassy security needs, including the construction of new secure replacement embassies and consulates. Just last week, on July 12, the State Department released its first annual report on sexual trafficking in persons. The Congress ought to know that at least 700,000 individuals a year, many women and children, are trafficked each year across international borders for sexual purposes. These victims are often subject to threats and violence and horrific living conditions. We must not tolerate this equivalent of modern-day slavery. The bill includes $3.8 million for important new initiatives to combat trafficking, including the cost of an office within the State Department to coordinate interagency anti-trafficking activities, and an international conference to develop systematic international solutions to the problem. Fifty thousand people are brought to this country alone every year for that purpose, and the subcommittee plans on holding a hearing, in-depth hearings on this, when we come back after the Labor Day break. The bill also includes $479 million for the Broadcasting Board of Governors, $9 million above the request, which includes funding for broadcasting initiatives in East Asia and the Middle East, and also making sure that the broadcasts get to the country of Sudan, where we know that they have slavery. For the miscellaneous and related agencies, the bill includes $2.1 billion, $300 million above the current year level; $728 million for the Small Business Administration, an increase of $186 million above the President's request for important lending and assistance programs for the Nation's entrepreneurs; $232 million for the Maritime Administration, an increase of $128 million above the President's request, including funding for the Maritime Security Program, the title 11 loan program and the important efforts to dispose of the backlog of obsolete merchant vessels, which we hope we can finally put to rest once and for all. $438 million, the requested amount for the Securities and Exchange Commission. I strongly support the SEC's recent effort to strengthen their enforcement of disclosure rules. Foreign corporations doing business in Sudan and other places playing a direct role in human rights abuses in Sudan have been able to offer securities to American investors; and as a result, these investors are unwittingly helping to subsidize these atrocities. American investors are helping to subsidize terrorism. American investors are helping to subsidize slavery. We appreciate what the SEC did, and we will continue to insist on the full exercise of existing authorities to inform and protect American investors in this area, and this message goes out to the new chairman of the SEC when he takes over. But I appreciate the acting chairman's efforts in this regard. Mr. Chairman, this bill provides funding of $3 million for the Commission on International Religious Freedom to monitor violations of religious freedom abroad and make policy recommendations to the State Department. I am particularly concerned about the denial of equal treatment to Coptic Christians by the government of Egypt. Funding for this Commission will help to ensure that such violations are given the attention they deserve by our foreign policymakers, whether being Egypt, whether being China, or wherever it may be. This is a very quick summary of the recommendations before the House today. The bill gives no ground on the ongoing war against crime and drugs and provides the resources to State and local law enforcement that has helped bring the violent crime rate down to its lowest level since the Justice Department began tracking it. It includes major increases for the State Department to allow the Secretary, Secretary Powell, to rejuvenate and reform the Department and to continue the important, ongoing efforts to improve embassy security. It represents our best take on matching the needs with scarce resources. I want to thank the gentleman from New York (Mr. Serrano), the ranking member, who has been very effective and, I might say, these get to be sort of pro forma things, but, really, the gentleman is a good friend and someone we have worked very, very closely with. I want him to know that I appreciate his principal commitment, his thorough understanding of the programs in this bill, and I like sitting next to him with his great sense of humor, so I just wanted to thank him. I also would like to thank all of the members of the subcommittee for their help. The gentleman from Kentucky (Mr. Rogers), who had been the chairman of this committee for 6 years, has helped me with regard to a number of issues. I would also like to thank the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Kolbe), the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Taylor), and the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Regula), the gentleman from Iowa (Mr. Latham), the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Miller), the gentleman from Louisiana (Mr. Vitter), the gentleman from West Virginia (Mr. Mollohan), the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Roybal-Allard), the gentleman from Alabama (Mr. Cramer), and the gentleman from Rhode Island (Mr. Kennedy). Finally, I want to thank the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Young), the full committee chairman, and the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Obey), the ranking member, for their help in moving this bill forward. I would also be remiss if I failed to mention how much I appreciate the professionalism and the cooperation of both the minority staff and the majority staff. I would like to thank the majority staff, Mike Ringler, who handles the budgets of the State Department and the United Nations; Leslie Albright, who ably works the Justice Department law enforcement programs, including the DEA, the U.S. Marshal Service and the FBI; Christine Ryan, a former FBI professional who oversees the Commerce Department budget and who is marrying a Marine Corps officer in a few short weeks when we finally finish this bill. I also want to thank Julie Miller, an extremely professional OMB official, who may even stay with the committee if we can get the approval, who has been detailed to the committee; and Carrie Hines, another top-notch professional who has been detailed to the committee. I appreciate the top-notch efforts of Gail Del Balzo, whose experience on the Senate Budget Committee, as assistant parliamentarian of the Senate and as general counsel of CBO, has prepared her well for the position of clerk of this subcommittee. These young professionals put in countless hours working weekends and late into the night. It is time spent away from their families and their friends, and yet they are dedicated to doing what is best for the American people, and we really appreciate them very much. On the minority side, I want to say exactly the same thing. In particular, I would like to thank Sally Chadbourne, Lucy Hand, Nadine Berg, Rob Nabors and Christine Maloy from the democratic staff who were willing to pitch in during all the long hours spent putting this bill together. It has been a unique experience. It has been more bipartisan than I have seen, quite frankly, for a long, long while. With that, I will just end by saying we tried hard to produce the best bill possible. It probably is not like the Ten Commandments. It is not perfect. I am sure there could be some changes here. While there cannot be any changes to the Ten Commandments, there can be in this bill, but we did not have that vision that the good Lord has, so we will be taking some amendments and doing some things, but I do hope Members will support the bill. [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH17JY01.001 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH17JY01.002 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH17JY01.003 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH17JY01.004 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH17JY01.005 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH17JY01.006 [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH17JY01.007 Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

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

Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, the gentleman from Texas has played a leading role in trying to close safe havens abroad, and I share his desire to do that. In response to the gentleman's concerns, the committee has included report language for the Department of State to work with the Department of Justice to bolster our efforts to negotiate extradition treaties. We expect that the Department of Justice and Department of State will use increased funding in fiscal year 2002 for this purpose. Let me add, if the gentleman from Texas would like, after we move beyond debate and pass the bill, we can have a meeting with Department of Justice and Department of State to make sure that they know the intensity that both of us feel with regard to this.

Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong opposition to the gentleman's amendment. This amendment would take $11 million from the Broadcasting Board of Governors, International Broadcasting Operations account. A reduction of this magnitude would trigger a significant reduction-in-force affecting up to 100 employees; it would silence the Voice of America in at least a dozen foreign language services around the globe; and it would force reductions of worldwide broadcast hours. In fact, it goes just the opposite. We are trying to broadcast in the Sudan where there is slavery, terrorism, and this would take us back the other way. The amendment would also eliminate funding for a new program initiative already under way to improve and expand broadcasting to the Middle East and Sudan in Arabic. This new program is designed to give the U.S. a voice in a very, very critical area. U.S. broadcasting to the region is now ineffective, and the U.S. is not playing a role to counterbalance hate radio that is prevalent in the Middle East. This amendment would prevent this revamping of current programming and transmission strategies from moving forward. The amendment would cause a rollback of efforts to fight jamming of U.S. broadcasts by governments such as China. When I was in Tibet, everyone I spoke to in Tibet listened to Radio Free China. Also, Vietnam that denies their citizens access to information. This jamming cuts off what for many is the only available source of objective news and information. These offsets that the gentleman has chosen are simply unacceptable and would pretty much wipe out what the committee did. I strongly urge the rejection of the amendment.

Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, earlier I had promised the gentleman from Utah (Mr. Cannon) that his amendment could be in order and be offered and he was not here. I know there is at least one Member on the other side. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent that the gentleman from Utah (Mr. Cannon) be permitted to go back and offer his amendment and that the gentleman from New York (Mr. Hinchey) be permitted to do the same.

Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the amendment. Mr. Chairman, we accept the amendment. We sympathize with the gentleman's concerns regarding individuals not receiving their compensation payments. The bill includes $10,766,000 to make payments to individuals who qualify for compensation under the original Radiation Exposure Act. The gentleman has a very, very good point. This program has now become in effect an entitlement program, with little or no discretionary funds available to pay for it. Both the administration and the budget resolution propose to convert this to a mandatory activity. I strongly support this proposal. I think the gentleman has a very good point. I read the article in the newspaper the other day about the elderly lady in Maryland whose husband died of radiation. Most of these people are getting very old, so I think it is important to provide it so everyone can be involved.

Mr. WOLF. I yield to the gentleman from Utah.

Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, I rise in very strong opposition to this amendment. A reduction in funding for the buildings and facilities program will delay construction of seven partially funded projects. One should go to a prison and see the conditions in the prison. One of the biggest problems in prison is prison rape, where the men are double and tripled bunked and have no place to go. The Bureau of Prisons is currently operating at 33 percent above the rate of capacity, system-wide. Crowding at medium-security facilities is 58 percent above the rate of capacity, and 48 percent at high- security penitentiaries. While the gentleman has some merit to the concept of what he wants to do, he should not take money from the prisons. You cannot put a man or woman in prison for 15 years with terrible conditions and no rehabilitation and expect them to come out and be decent citizens. Higher levels of crowding potentially endanger staff, inmates, and the community. In fact, as you can almost say, to do this could bring about riots in the prisons. Further, the Bureau of Prisons is experiencing its third consecutive year of record population growth in fiscal year 2000, of over 11,400 inmates; and all indications are that it will continue to grow. The projections are inmate population will increase by 36 percent by the fiscal year 2008. Infrastructure at existing Bureau of Prisons facilities is severely taxed by over-utilization, which causes maintenance problems, premature deterioration of physical plants. Of the Bureau of Prisons' 98 facilities, a third are over 50 years old and over half are over 20 years old. These facilities were not designed to operate at this level. Finally, reducing the new construction funds means there will be no additional capacity for female inmates. The Bureau of Prisons female population is expected to increase 50 percent by the end of fiscal year 2008, resulting in a critical shortage of bed space for female inmates. Since 1994, only one facility has been added to provide female capacity, and that was accomplished with the conversion of a male facility for female use. Delaying the secure facilities for female offenders would also increase the system-wide crowding levels, since male institutions cannot be returned to housing male offenders as planned. Before I got elected to Congress, I worked in a program called Man- to-Man down at Lorton Reformatory. This amendment would be a terrible thing to do. Had the gentleman been able to find some other money some other place, we could look at it, but to take it out of the construction of prisons, where the conditions in the prisons are so miserable. In fact, I am going to be introducing a bill with a Member from your side with regard to asking for an investigation and study of prison rape. If you could see the number of men who are raped in prisons around this country, it would be a worldwide disgrace. We want people to see it so we can do something about it. Mr. Chairman, I strongly urge my colleagues to vote against this amendment. This would be bad, and I think it would create conditions that I think, frankly, would be unfortunate for the prisons.

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

Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, we cannot take it out of the prisons. The conditions there, I agree, I will be with the gentleman tomorrow or the next day on not granting MFN or PNTR to China, but I just do not think you can take it out of the prisons. The conditions in the prisons are so difficult and so bad. So that is the problem that I have with the amendment. We just cannot take it out of the prisons.

Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the gentlewoman's amendment. The provision in the bill the amendment seeks to strike does only one thing: it prohibits Federal tax dollars from paying for abortions for Federal prison inmates, except in the case of rape or the life of the mother. This is a very longstanding provision, one that has been carried in 12 of the last 13 Commerce, State, Justice, and Judiciary appropriation bills. The House has consistently, year after year, rejected this amendment. Last year, this very amendment was rejected by a vote of 254 to 156. Time and again the Congress has debated this issue of whether Federal tax dollars should be used for abortion, and the answer has been no. Mr. Chairman, I urge the rejection of the gentlewoman's amendment.

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

Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Young), the chairman of the full Committee on Appropriations.

Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Chairman, I would like to clarify something. There were a number of questions by Members with regard to the gun safety lock issue. I would like to make a clarification for the Record in the interest of this. Regarding the distribution of gun safety locks, the report accompanying this bill expresses the committee's support for the use of gun safety locks, and would encourage the distribution of these locks to handgun owners. The report also expresses the committee's concern regarding reports that some of these safety locks have failed or do not work on certain handguns. We understand that the Department of Justice is reviewing the availability of standards for gun safety locks, and private industry groups have also sought the promulgation of such standards. The report directs the Department of Justice to develop national standards for gun safety locks. The committee intends for the Department to consult with private industry groups and other interested parties in the development of these standards. Further, we understand the interim standard for gun safety locks could be in place in 6 months. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

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

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

Mr. WOLF

Mr. WOLF. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks on H.R. 2500, and that I may include tabular and extraneous material.

Mr. WOLF

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

Mr. WOLF. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that during further consideration of H.R. 2500 in the Committee of the Whole, pursuant to House Resolution 192, no further amendment to the bill may be offered except 1. Pro forma amendments offered by the chairman or ranking minority member of the Committee on Appropriations or their designees for the purpose of debate; and amendments printed in the portion of the Congressional Record of the legislative day, July 17, 2001 or any Record before that date, designated for the purpose specified in clause 8 of rule XVIII, which may be offered only by the Member who caused it to be printed or his designee; shall be considered as read; shall not be subject to amendment, except pro forma amendments for the purpose of debate; and shall not be subject to a demand for a division of the question in the House or the Committee of the Whole; And 2. The Clerk shall be authorized to print in the portion of the Congressional Record of the legislative day July 17, 2001 designated for that purpose in clause 8 of rule XVIII all amendments to H.R. 2500 that are at the desk and not already printed by the close of this legislative day.

Mr. WOLF

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

Mr. WOLF

Mr. WOLF. Mr. Speaker, I want to share with you this statement presented before a hearing at the House International Relations Subcommittee for Human Rights and International Operations on June 27, by Wang Guoqi, a physician from the People's Republic of China. Mr. Wang was a skin and burn specialist at the Paramilitary Police Tianjin General Brigade Hospital. Mr. Wang writes that his work ``required me to remove skin and corneas from the corpses of over one hundred executed prisoners, and, on a couple of occasions, victims of intentionally botched executions.'' In a very graphic example, Mr. Wang describes how he harvested the skin off of a man who was still living and breathing. What kind of government skins alive its own citizens? I urge our colleagues to read this statement and to keep this egregious abuse of human rights in mind when voting on China's trade status this year. TESTIMONY OF WANG GUOQI, FORMER DOCTOR AT A CHINESE PEOPLE'S LIBERATION

Mr. WOLF

Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this time. (Mr. WOLF asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of the bill. I do want to just say, though, for the membership of the body and for the administration, the gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Sabo) is right. We have to be careful on this truck issue. Five thousand people a year die in the United States from trucks. If you go out on a truck inspection of American trucks, you will be fearful when you go out on the road sometimes. Mexico has no hours of service. None. Mexico has no drug testing. None. Mexico has no alcohol testing. None. Mexico has no commercial driver's license. None. Mexico has no truck inspection. None. Mexico uses leaded gasoline and not unleaded gasoline. Frankly, the administration has not thought this thing through, and we do not even have an Office of Motor Carrier Administration yet on the job. Now, I know the gentleman from Kentucky (Mr. Rogers) said we will watch this carefully and I appreciate that. But this is an important issue. I tell the administration, you better be careful and you better handle this right, because if this is not handled right, people will die. So this is an important issue, and I appreciate the chairman's commitment to making sure that those regulations are good. I think the Congress ought to be very careful and the administration especially so, to listen to what the gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Sabo) was trying to say. The truck safety issue is one that I advocated as the chairman of the House transportation appropriations subcommittee over the past six years. I sat in hearings and heard testimony about the widespread safety problems involving trucks from Mexico, including testimony from the inspector general at the U.S. Department of Transportation. That office issued a December 1998 audit report which ``concluded that neither the Office of Motor Carriers nor the border states, with the exception of California, are taking sufficient actions to ensure that trucks entering the United States from Mexico meet U.S. safety standards.'' I understand the requirements under NAFTA permitting cross-border trucking services. Nevertheless, the U.S. needs to ensure that trucks coming across our borders and traveling on our highways will meet U.S. safety standards. The Department of Transportation must establish a consistent enforcement program that provides reasonable assurance of the safety of trucks from Mexico entering the United States. The United States and Mexico must establish, test and implement a comprehensive truck safety program at our borders. It is unacceptable to have unsafe trucks from anywhere on U.S. highways. These trucks could be traveling on I-81 through the Shenandoah Valley in the heart of my congressional district, or on I-5 in California, or on the streets of the nation's capital. We have an obligation to protest our families, our friends and our neighbors who use the nation's highway system every hour of every day. I urge the Bush Administration to take every precaution necessary to ensure that no lives are lost because of unsafe trucks on our highways. I have spent considerable time on this issue over the past six years and believe it deserves your close attention. Congress of the United States, House of Representatives, Washington, DC, February 7, 2001. Hon. Norman Mineta, Secretary, Department of Transportation, Washington, DC. Dear Secretary Mineta: I am very troubled by the news reports today that the U.S. government may be poised to allow trucks from Mexico to cross U.S. borders under the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA). I am writing to urge that you tread very carefully on this issue because lives are at stake. The truck safety issue is one that I advocated as the chairman of the House transportation appropriations subcommittee over the past six years. I sat in hearing and heard testimony about the widespread safety problems involving trucks from Mexico, including testimony from the inspector general at the U.S. Department of Transportation. That office issued a December 1998 audit report (TR-1999-034) which ``concluded that neither the Office of Motor Carriers nor the border states, with the exception of California, are taking sufficient actions to ensure that trucks entering the United States from Mexico meet U.S. safety standards.'' A copy of the report is enclosed. I understand the requirements under NAFTA permitting cross- border trucking services. Nevertheless, the U.S. needs to ensure that trucks coming across our borders and traveling on our highways will meet U.S. safety standards. Already more than 5,000 people die every year on our roads in accidents involving heavy trucks. That number could skyrocket if unsafe trucks from Mexico are allowed on our highways. According to the December 1998 IG report, barely 1 percent of the 3.7 million trucks from Mexico crossing the border were inspected. Of those, nearly half were placed our of service because of safety violations. The Department of Transportation must establish a consistent enforcement program that provides reasonable assurance of the safety of trucks from Mexico entering the United States. In addition, I am concerned that no drug and alcohol testing program exists for truck drivers from Mexico. Mexico also has no hours of service regulations. This means that a truck driver from Mexico could have been driving for 24 hours straight before even entering the United States. Furthermore, no database exists between Mexico and the United States to exchange information on past violations of drivers from Mexico. The United States and Mexico must establish, test and implement a comprehensive truck safety program at our borders. It is unacceptable to have unsafe trucks from anywhere on U.S. highways. These trucks could be traveling on I-81 through the Shenandoah Valley in the heart of my congressional district, or on I-5 in California, or on the streets of the nation's capital. We have an obligation to protect our families, our friends and our neighbors who use the nation's highway system every hour of every day. I urge the Bush Administration to take every precaution necessary to ensure that no lives are lost because of unsafe trucks on our highways. I have spent considerable time on this issue over the past six years and believe it deserves your close attention. I would be happy to talk with you about this critical matter. Lives are at stake. Please do not hesitate to call. Best regards. Sincerely, Frank R. Wolf, Member of Congress.

Mr. WOLF

Mr. WOLF. Mr. Speaker, it is my pleasure to welcome the newest Member of the House, Randy Forbes, of Chesapeake, Virginia. Randy won a hard-fought battle to represent the Fourth District of Virginia, which was represented by our former colleague and very, very good friend, Norman Sisisky, for the last 18 years. Randy comes to Congress with a strong legislative background. He has served in the Virginia General Assembly since 1990, first as a member of the House of Delegates, then as a State senator since 1997. He held leadership positions in both bodies. Randy also has served as the chairman of the Republican Party of Virginia. He had tremendous success recruiting candidates and is credited with helping Republicans take control of the Virginia House of Delegates for the first time in modern history. While in the General Assembly, Randy was a leader in the Commonwealth's drive to abolish parole and enact truth-in-sentencing laws. He was the chief patron of a bill that allows teachers to enforce discipline in their classrooms without fear of being sued. And he led the effort to create a school construction grants program to assist localities with the skyrocketing costs of building new schools to help reduce classroom overcrowding. I have known Randy for a long time. He is good, he is honest, he is ethical, he is decent, he is moral. He is a very capable legislator. I know he will be an outstanding addition to the United States Congress. He has a longstanding relationship with a number of other Members, particularly with those of us from the Virginia delegation and will have no trouble at all adapting to how things are done here in Congress. Randy earned his law degree from the University of Virginia and was the valedictorian of his 1974 graduating class at Randolph-Macon College. He and his wife of 22 years, Shirley, live in Chesapeake, Virginia. They have four children. Mr. Speaker, it is my pleasure to welcome Randy to the United States Congress. Joining us today are Senator John W. Warner and Senator George Allen. I, along with my other colleagues from Virginia and across the country, look forward to working with you.

Mr. WOLF

Mr. WOLF. Madam Speaker, I rise in support of H. Res. 160, which condemns and deplores the continued detention of Li Shaomin, Gao Zhan, Wu Jianmin, Tan Guangguang, Teng Chunyan, and other scholars detained on false charges by the Government of the People's Republic of China, and calls for their immediate and unconditional release. The resolution condemns and deplores the lack of due process afforded to these detainees, and the probable coercion of confessions from some of them. Furthermore, it condemns and deplores the ongoing and systematic pattern of human rights violations by the Government of the People's Republic of China. Also, the resolution strongly urges the Government of the People's Republic of China to consider the implications to the broader United States-Chinese relationship of detaining and coercing confessions from United States citizens and permanent residents on unsubstantiated spying charges or suspicions. In addition, the measure urges the Government of the People's Republic of China to consider releasing Liu Yaping on humanitarian grounds. In addition, the measure expresses the sense of the House that human rights violations inflicted on United States citizens and residents by the Government of the People's Republic of China will reduce opportunities of United States-Chinese cooperation on a wide range of issues. I congratulate Representative Smith for his work in bringing this resolution to the floor. This is an important statement by the people's House today. It says to the Government of China, that the U.S. House of Representatives cares about the human rights abuses committed by the Government of China. Just two months ago in March, I had the honor of leading a ceremony in which my constituent, Dong Hau Xue, husband of the imprisoned American University scholar named in this legislation, Dr. Gao Zhan, became a U.S. citizen. This ceremony was bittersweet. When he and his wife first applied for permanent residency 1998, it had been their hope and prayer that they would experience the joyous day of citizenship together, having both completed the requirements of citizenship. But this was not to be. Gao Zhan should have been standing alongside her husband and their 5-year-old son Andrew. Instead, Gao Zhan was languishing in a Chinese prison, thousands of miles away, separated from her family and loved ones. Today marks Gao Zhan's 134th day in captivity. Gao Zhan is an academic researcher at the American University studying women's issues. What kind of government imprisons academics who focus on women's issues? I know how grim conditions can be in Chinese prisons. I visited Beijing Prison #1 in 1991 where some 40 Tiananmen Square demonstrators were being held. When I was in Tibet, I talked with several individuals who had been in Drapche Prison who told me of the horrible conditions. It is an outrage that a country pressing to host the athletes of the world during the 2008 Summer Olympic games continues to abuse the basic human rights of citizens and visitors to their nation. If the Chinese government ever hopes to have any credibility in the world community, China must immediately release Gao Zhan, an innocent women, wife and mother; U.S. citizens Dr. Li Shaomin and Mr. Wu Jianmin; permanent U.S. residents Mr. Qin Guangguang, Mrs Teng Chunyan, and Mr. Liu Yaping. I urge a unanimous vote in support of H. Res. 160 and I implore the government of the People's Republic of China to free Gao Zhan and the other scholars and reunite them with their families.