Frank Wolf

Mr. WOLF

Mr. WOLF. Yes, that is my understanding.

Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, if the gentleman will yield, yes, that is my understanding clearly.

Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.

Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, I offer a technical amendment to strike the proviso that appears on the top of page 26. The proviso inadvertently changed the payment of the tax credit to Amtrak made by the Tax Payer Relief Act. That was not the intent of the committee. The committee merely intends to ensure that the Federal funds available to the corporation in fiscal year 1999 would be available only after Amtrak developed a comprehensive capital plan for the expenditure of the tax credit as proposed by the President's budget. The Committee on Ways and Means brought this oversight to our attention, and again it was not the committee's intent to change the payment of the TRA funds in any way. Mr. Chairman, it is technical in nature, and I urge its immediate adoption.

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

Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, this would save a lot of lives, and make truck safety much better throughout the Nation and keep accidents from taking place, but I concede the point of order.

Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, I concede the point of order.

Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, I concede the point of order.

Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, I have reviewed the gentleman's amendment, and I understand the grave concerns that are posed to the public health and safety by closing the Coast Guard station specifically in the case of the Eaton Neck's Coast Guard station on Long Island. However, if the gentleman would kindly withdraw his amendment, I am confident we can find a suitable alternative to closing the Eaton Neck's Coast Guard Station. I would be willing to set up a meeting next week with the gentleman and Admiral Loy, the Commandant of the Coast Guard, to find an alternative solution to closing the Coast Guard Station at Eaton's Neck.

Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, I do not, but I move to strike the last word. Mr. Chairman, this amendment is opposed by the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Lamar Smith), who is apparently on his way to the floor. It deals with the immigration reform bill, which was passed by this Congress in another Congress. We know very, very little about it. We were told that there was a colloquy that was going to take place between the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Barr) and the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Smith). We just called the office of the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Smith). He apparently is opposed to the bill, and is on his way over. I would just say that in lieu of the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Smith) walking hopefully very fast over, I would rise in opposition to the amendment, which would prevent the Department of Transportation from implementing a regulation. If I might say, without me going through this as a waste of time, would the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Barr) agree to withdraw the amendment until the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Smith) gets here, and allow us to take the amendment from the gentlewoman from New Jersey (Mrs. Roukema)? Then the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Barr) could offer his amendment again, and then the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Smith) would be here. The gentleman could offer it again, as a courtesy.

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

Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, if the gentleman will yield, I would be glad to. Before I begin, let me just say we do accept the gentleman's amendment. I think it is a good amendment. I think we can work with the DOT and IG. Having said that, I would be glad to engage with him in a colloquy.

Mr. WOLF. The answer to that question is yes.

Mr. WOLF. The gentleman is correct.

Mr. WOLF. The answer is yes.

Mr. WOLF. Somehow I want to say no, but the answer is yes.

Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

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

Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, I make a point of order against the amendment because it proposes to change existing law and constitute legislation in an appropriation bill and, therefore, violates clause 2 of rule XXII. The rule states in pertinent part no amendment to a general appropriation bill shall be in order if changing existing law. I would ask for a ruling from the Chair.

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

Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, I would tell the gentlewoman, I think it is a great amendment, and I accept it.

Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, I accept the amendment.

Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, if the gentleman will continue to yield, upon forwarding all essential documents to the appropriate Federal agencies by the State and local offices, the committee expects the Federal Highway Administration and other Federal resource agencies to streamline and expedite the review for all projects, including this particular one, consistent with NEPA.

Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. LoBiondo).

Mr. WOLF. If we do have any other allocations which I hope we will at the end for defense, we plan on asking for some of that so we can beef up the Coast Guard in many of these areas, including additional funding in the area of drug interdiction.