Frank Wolf

Mr. WOLF

Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I was led to believe the gentleman was going to withdraw the amendment. In the interest of time, I would just say that I understand what the gentleman is saying. He makes some very valid points. We can look into that. But if the gentleman is going to withdraw it, I will not take the body's time.

Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent that title II of the bill through page 52, line 17, be considered as read, printed in the Record, and open to amendment at any point.

Mr. WOLF. I want to thank the gentleman from Wisconsin for his comments. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Culberson).

Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Tom Davis).

Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 1 minute. Mr. Chairman, I rise in very strong opposition to the amendment. It would inflict a major blow to the Nation's basic scientific research. The Nation has reached a crisis point in terms of science and technology. Any advantage that we have enjoyed is rapidly eroding. The research budget should be considered part of the national security budget. It is the most strategic investment we make in maintaining America's leadership in the world. We worked hard within our limited allocation to provide an increased funding level in the bill for NSF's basic scientific research, $157 million above last year's level. Every outside group said this is good. It is above what the Bush administration had, and to take it out now would send a message to the scientific community and the university community that would demoralize them. It would make us a second- and third-rate Nation. I urge a strong ``no'' vote on the amendment. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from New York (Mr. Boehlert), chairman of the Committee on Science and one who knows so much about this issue. (Mr. BOEHLERT asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, yes, I would be happy to provide the Committee on Government Reform with information received from the administration regarding e-government initiatives. Amendment No. 1 Offered by Mr. Chocola

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

Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, I do. I thank the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Tom Davis) and the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Ruppersberger) for their statements and leadership. I think by their speaking today it sends a message to the world with regard to the importance of us promoting democracy and freedom in Venezuela. Democracy and human rights, whether it be in Venezuela or any place else, are basic fundamental freedoms that must always be preserved and supported. The United States should always stand with those fighting for those freedoms. The United States should continue to send a clear message to everyone that we will stand with people like Ms. Machado and others like her who speak out for democracy. I think what the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Tom Davis) and the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Ruppersberger) have done is send a message to the world. They have sent a message to the National Endowment For Democracy that when there is another grant application, that application should be met so she has that opportunity for freedom.

Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, I make a point of order against the amendment because it proposes to change existing law and constitutes legislation in an appropriation bill and therefore violates clause 2 of rule XXI. The rule states in pertinent part: ``An amendment to a general appropriation bill shall not be in order if changing existing law.'' The amendment proposes to state a legislative provision.

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

Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, I reserve a point of order against the gentleman's amendment.

Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Chairman, let me just respond to what the gentleman said about this ``narrow ideology.'' My mom died of cancer, my father died of cancer, there have been many people in my family on my mother's side who died of cancer. I, at one time, supported this and changed my vote in the Congress because I have seen the devastation that drugs can have on young people, the devastation that it is doing to many people. So people can have differences of opinion. But when the gentleman uses these inflammatory rhetoric of ``narrow ideology,'' it is like all truth is on their side, I think that is really the wrong tone. This is a serious issue. There are good and decent people on both sides. But I think the gentleman's tone and comments were really not exactly accurate. I care as much about this issue, and I care as much about suffering and pain as the gentleman. I stood with my mom when she died and with my father when he died. Mr. Chairman, I yield the balance of my time to the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Souder).

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

Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 1\1/2\ minutes. I rise in opposition to the amendment. Not only does the amendment hurt law enforcement's efforts to combat drug trafficking, but it really sends the wrong message to our children. Marijuana is the most abused drug in the United States. According to the ONDCP and the DEA, more young people are now in treatment for marijuana dependency than for alcohol or all other illegal drugs. Mr. Chairman, if I could just read that one more time: according to the ONDCP and the DEA, more young people are now in treatment for marijuana dependency than for alcohol or for all other illegal drugs. This amendment does not address the problem of marijuana abuse, and I know and I want to stipulate that it is not the intention of the authors, but it possibly makes it worse by sending the message to young people that there are going to be health benefits for smoking marijuana. I think it is confusing to young people for the Congress to do that. I understand what the authors of the amendment are trying to do, but it would be confusing and I think the wrong message. Last year, this amendment failed by a vote of 148 to 268, and I urge rejection of the amendment. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

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

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

Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, I think this is a good amendment and I accept it.

Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 30 seconds. The committee is dedicated to addressing the methamphetamine problem; and now with the additional funds freed by the amendment, we can dedicate more funds to combat the meth problem. So I am offering this amendment which adds $34 million to the COPS program to combat meth production and trafficking and enhance policing initiatives. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

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

Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent that the remainder of title I of the bill through page 34, line 11, be considered as read, printed in the Record, and open to amendment at any point.

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

Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, I yield half of my time to the gentleman from West Virginia (Mr. Mollohan) and ask unanimous consent that he be permitted to control that time.

Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 1 minute. I think the gentleman makes some decent points. There were the Gingrich-Mitchell recommendations which have been made. The gentleman said that he would withdraw the amendment if we got a GAO study. I think we ought to look at this thing. I think that the committee will ask the GAO to do a study to look at the cost and make sure. It is hard to argue against the gentleman for wanting a study because we now know, and being the author of that task force, that the U.N. failed on the Oil-for-Food program. I think it makes sense. With that, I will pledge and I will wait to hear what the gentleman from West Virginia says, but we will ask the GAO for a study to look at these things. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Connecticut (Mr. Shays).

Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself the balance of my time. Mr. Chairman, Hamas and Hezbollah and al Qaeda are opposed to liberty. The gentleman was wrong last year, because he has changed his amendment from that. So he was wrong last year, so maybe he is wrong this year. We are at war, as the gentleman from Connecticut (Mr. Shays) said. Go to the Pentagon and look at the monument, go to the World Trade Center. Two of my children live in the district of the gentleman from New York (Mr. Nadler), and I know that gentleman does not speak for them on this issue. When in doubt, do no harm. Be careful. The Justice Department made a mistake on the Moussaoui. They did not look at what was in his computer, and as a result of that mistake, we have paid a tremendous price. And if we make a mistake here, we may pay another tremendous price. Please, vote ``no'' on the Sanders amendment and let the Committee on the Judiciary deal with this.