Frank Wolf

Mr. WOLF

Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 1 minute. What the gentleman said is not accurate. My good friend from Illinois said it is to eliminate, and that is not true. There is nothing in the bill that says that, and it is not fair to go down to the well of the House and say something that is not in the bill. That is not fair. I would urge the gentleman from Illinois, my friend, to read what it says. It does not say that. I have a Boston Globe piece right here, Mr. Chairman. It said the plight of the native Americans is the unemployment rate, which is 43 percent. We argue in this body over is it going to go to 4 to 5 to 6 percent for non-Native Americans. Forty-three percent, says the Boston Globe. Employed, but living below poverty, 33 percent. I stand corrected; I just said it was 26 percent. It is 33 percent. Suicide rate for ages 15 to 24, the flower of the youth, 37.15 percent. We have to look at that. We have to look at that. So what the gentleman says, and he is a good friend, it is not to eliminate; it is to look at other ways in addition. We do not say that. Lastly, with regard to diabetes, my figure was too low; it is 9 percent. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Connecticut (Mr. Shays).

Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 15 seconds. It does not take it away from housing. It does not. It takes it away from the administration. It takes it away from the administration. We cannot come down and say things that are not accurate on the bill. It takes it away from administration; it does not take it away from housing. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Souder). (Mr. SOUDER asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

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

Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Chairman, what the gentleman from California (Mr. George Miller) said is not accurate with regard to more regulations than any other. In Atlantic City there are 12 casinos, and there are roughly 800 people, totally, who regulate them, 100 every day. In Indian casinos, there are roughly 200 casinos and there are a few dozen, probably about 36. So what the gentleman said, again, is really not accurate. Again, the fact deserves a cap on how much we are regulating. But that is not what we are talking about today. We are talking about health care and those other issues. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.

Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Alabama (Mr. Aderholt). (Mr. ADERHOLT asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 1 minute just to respond. The study does show, as the Boston Globe piece demonstrates, which we are bringing over, that 80 percent of the Indians have never received anything. Fifty percent of all of the revenues have gone to 2 percent. It is actually an area of location, where you are is what you do, and Indians on the tribes and the reservations in most parts of the country have received absolutely nothing. Secondly, it did not say what the gentleman said in that report. Lastly, what the report that we are asking for talks about is looking at the welfare of native Americans, including health, which everyone will acknowledge, and I stipulate the goodness of the gentleman on the other side; the health infrastructure, housing, and economic development, and educational, educational opportunities. They are all things that we all want for our families and for our constituents and others. Mr. Chairman, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from Connecticut (Mr. Simmons).

Mr. WOLF

Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, I want to thank the chairman; and as a member of the freshman class that we were part of, I want to pay tribute to you. God bless you, Joe, and your family. We are going to miss you, but we are going to stay in touch. You have been a good man. God bless, Joe. Mr. Chairman, there is an amendment in here that is going to be offered to strike an amendment, which would, I believe, help Indians. Keep in mind that 80 percent of the Indians in the United States have received no money from gambling. None. None. Not one dime. Fifty percent of the gambling money has gone to 2 percent of the Indians. What are they afraid of? Among Indians, the poverty level is 26 percent, and yet they do not want a commission to look at it. Health care among Indians, stroke, lung cancer, breast cancer, suicide is the highest in the Nation; and yet they do not want to look at it. The death rates among Indians is higher in seven categories; alcoholism, 620 percent higher, and yet they do not want to look at it; TB, 533 percent higher, and they do not want to look at it; diabetes, 249 percent higher, and they do not want to look at it. And on and on and on. I would urge the defeat of the amendment that is going to be offered by the gentleman from Michigan and the gentleman from Arizona. My amendment to strike is a good amendment. There are people on the commission on both sides, those who are for gambling and those who are against gambling. We have an opportunity to bring economic development, good housing, good health care, and good education for the Indians. I urge the defeat of the amendment if it is offered. If my colleagues really care about Indians, what are you afraid of? What are you afraid of, an 18 month commission to look back and make recommendations? What are you afraid of? Let us do something to help the Indians. Let us defeat their amendment and keep the language we have in the bill.

Mr. WOLF

Mr. WOLF. Mr. Speaker, each year the Veterans of Foreign Wars (VFW) of the United States and its Ladies Auxiliary conduct the Voice of Democracy audio-essay scholarship competition designed to give high school students the opportunity to voice their opinion on their civic responsibility to our country. The program is now in its 55th year and requires high school student entrants to write and record a three-to five-minute essay on an announced patriotic theme. This year over 85,000 secondary school students participated in this contest competing for the 58 national scholarships. The contest theme was ``Reaching Out to America's Future.'' I am pleased to announce that Elizabeth Buckner from the 10th District of Virginia has been named a national winner in the 2002 Voice of Democracy Program and the recipient of the $1,000 Roy Chandler VFW Post 762 and Ladies Auxiliary Award. Elizabeth, a senior at Clarke County High School, is the daughter of Larry Buckner and Michele Worthing. She was sponsored by VFW Post 9760 and its Ladies Auxiliary in Berryville, Virginia. Mr. Speaker, I would like to share Elizabeth's scholarship-winning essay with our colleagues: 2001-2002 VFW Voice of Democracy Scholarship Contest--Reaching Out, to America's Future (By Elizabeth Buckner) Imagine if you will, the year 2020. The intense winter sun is fading on the city of New York and a light dusting of snow glistens on the sidewalk. As you hurry home from work, you stop inside a small bakery where the warmth and the aroma of holiday cookies surrounds you. Initially the sound of jumbled words is all that you hear, but soon you can distinguish between the different voices and various languages that have entranced you. First Italian, then Arabic and Chinese. Although, you cannot understand the words, the emotions of excitement and joy are universal. And as you slowly make your way home in this city, which is alive with energy and hope, you read the newspaper and think about all the events, some memorable, some already forgotten, that have transpired today in this great nation. Although this episode may seem ordinary and insignificant; in actuality, it is a phenomenon, made only more significant because it is common and widespread in this country. This episode is a vision of America's future, where prosperity, freedom and diversity flourish. Today, the United States is a country of unparalleled prosperity and security. Our nation celebrates pluralism in, culture, language, religion and custom. It is the land of freedom of expression, freedom of belief, freedom of information, and freedom of opportunity. Each day, however, we are faced with a difficult question. How can we, both as individuals and as a society, reach out to this vision of the future, and how can we guarantee that the country our posterity will come to know is ever greater than the one we have experienced? The answer to this question, the only one that can be given, is through the present. The future can only ever be built on the events of the past and the present. So the question becomes, not how can we, but how are we already reaching out to America's future? The ways in which we are reaching out to America's future are: 1. By exercising the rights we are guaranteed in the Constitution 2. By educating our children and instilling them with the values that we cherish 3. By defending our country and our way of life against outside attacks 4. By embracing our freedoms and our diversity First, we as individuals, are exercising the fights that are guaranteed to us in the Constitution. For example, on November 6th, millions of U.S. citizens went to the polls to take part directly in our government and its processes. By voting, and helping to elect our representatives at both the state and federal levels. we are helping to influence the future of legislature and our country. Secondly, we as a society realize that our children are our future. Everyday we strive to provide them not only with an economically sound, but also a healthy and happy future. In order to achieve this goal, we guarantee our children a public education, we help provide health care, and we instill our values of freedom, patriotism and equality in them. Third, currently our country is fighting a war for our future. We are fighting for our freedom, and defending our country against the ineffable attack that our nation experienced on September 11th. We are fighting in order to ensure that our children and our grandchildren will know the peace and the prosperity that we have enjoyed for so long. Lastly, we are currently embracing the diversity in our own culture. We are witnesses of this diversity. We worship in the churches, temples, and mosques; we speak and hear the different languages, and we observe the contrasting beliefs and opinions presented by the media. By acknowledging our differences, and by protecting our civil liberties today, we are ensuring that in the future, the citizens of our country will know and will accept such diversity and will experience and enjoy such freedom. In conclusion, the only way that we can truly reach out to America's future is to affirm our principles of freedom and equality each and every day. The truth is that, while we are caught up in our busy lives and absorbed by our personal concerns, the eternal rhythm of time will persist. And we will not even notice. But all too soon, we will open our eyes and realize that the vision of tomorrow has faded and has become the gift of today. Only then, when America's future has become it's past, on those wintry nights when we are hurrying home, enjoying all the benefits of American society, will we truly be able to appreciate the significance of today.

Mr. WOLF

Mr. WOLF. Mr. Speaker, I want to call to the attention of our colleagues the remarkable career of a dedicated federal employee who just retired from the Federal Bureau of Investigation after nearly 63 years of service to her country. When Mrs. Mildred C. Parsons--known as ``Millie''--ended her career on June 28 at age 88, she was the longest continuously serving employee in the FBI. What's even more extraordinary, Millie Parsons never took a day of sick leave in her 62 years and nine months of work at the FBI. She was 25 years old in September 1939--Franklin D. Roosevelt was president of the United States and World War II was beginning--when she began her career at the FBI as a junior clerk-typist in the chief clerk's office at FBI headquarters. The next year she transferred to the Washington Field Office, where, over the course of her career, Mrs. Parsons served as the secretary to 30 agents in charge of that office, the second largest division in the FBI. She proudly displayed all the portraits of her bosses lining a corridor leading to her office. Van A. Harp, assistant director in charge of the FBI's Washington Field Office, recently commented that ``Millie, who embodies all the positive attributes of Fidelity, Bravery and Integrity, has certainly contributed to the fine reputation of the FBI. Her career and dedication have been a hallmark for those who follow in her path. Millie will be missed by all of her associates.'' A native of Frederick, Maryland, and a widow since 1967, Mrs. Parsons has lived in the Maryland suburbs of the nation's capital during her career with the FBI. She says she plans to relax and travel--now that she has some leisure time. Mr. Speaker, Millie Parsons stands as an outstanding role model for all in public service to emulate. We wish her the best in her retirement.

Mr. WOLF

Mr. WOLF. Mr. Speaker, last week, President Bush announced the recipients of the Presidential Medal of Freedom, the nation's highest civilian honor. A.M. Rosenthal, a Pulitzer Prize winner, former executive editor of the New York Times, and human rights advocate was named as one of the prominent Americans to receive the Presidential Medal of Freedom. Mr. Rosenthal led the fight against tyranny, against communism and he provided a valuable voice in raising America's attention to the problem people from a variety of faiths being horribly persecuted simply for their religious beliefs. Mr. Rosenthal should serve as an inspiration to the future American generations that one can change the world by passionately seeking truth and justice. Congratulations Mr. Rosenthal on winning this prestigious and honorable award. I want to enclose for the record this article from the Washington Times that describes in more detail the contributions of Mr. Rosenthal and the other recipients of this elite honor. {From the Washington Times, Friday, June 21, 2002] 12 Receive Presidential Medals--Mandela, Nancy Reagan, Rosenthal, Mr. Rogers Honored (By Joseph Curl) President Bush yesterday announced the recipients of the Presidential Medal of Freedom, a list that includes two writers, three entertainers, an athlete and a former first lady. Among the dozen to receive the nation's highest civilian honor is A.M. Rosenthal, a Pulitzer Prize winner for foreign correspondence who became the executive director of the New York Times. He writes a weekly column now for the The Washington Times. ``Believe me, it never occurred to me that I would be given a medal by the president--or anyone else,'' Mr. Rosenthal said in a telephone interview last night. The White House praised Mr. Rosenthal's efforts ``to highlight the suffering of oppressed people, especially religious minorities.'' Mr. Rosenthal began in newspapers in the 1940s traveled the world as a foreign correspondent. In 1960, won the Pulitzer Prize for his reporting from Poland. He served a stint in India before returning to New York to become the top editor at the New York Times. The other recipients, all of whom will receive their medals in a White House ceremony in July, are: Nancy Reagan, wife of former President Ronald Reagan, for her long anti-drug work as first lady and her continued work against drug and alcohol abuse through the Nancy Reagan Foundation. Nelson Mandela, who led the fight to end apartheid in South Africa over the course of his 73-year public life. Mr. Mandela was imprisoned by the South African government in 1962 and was released on Feb. 11, 1990. Mr. Mandela was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in 1993 and inaugurated as the first democratically elected president of South Africa on May 10, 1994. Katharine Graham, who led The Washington Post until 1993 and, the White House said, ``was known as an editor who maintained excellence by supporting her reporters and encouraging those who worked for her.'' She was chairman of the Post, but actually never held an editing position. Hank Aaron, who holds the career records for home runs, at 755. Mr. Aaron, who was inducted into the Baseball Hall of Fame in 1982, played first on a team in the old Negro League and, the White House said, ``was unfettered in his pursuit of excellence by frequent encounters with racism throughout his career.'' Bill Cosby, a one-time stand-up comedian and one of the most popular television performers of the 1980s with ``The Cosby Show,'' which revolutionized the portrayal of blacks on television. ``Throughout his career,'' the White House said, ``Dr. Cosby has appealed to the common humanity of his audience, rather than the differences that might divide it.'' Placido Domingo, a renowned opera singer, conductor and arts administrator over his 44-year career. ``He was blessed with an unusually flexible voice, which has allowed him to perform in 188 different roles, more than any other tenor in the annuals of opera performance,'' the White House said. Fred Rogers, host of ``Mister Rogers' Neighborhood'' for over three decades, making the show the longest-running program in the history of public broadcasting. ``All of his work has been emblematic of the same philosophy and goal: to encourage the healthy emotional growth of children and their families,'' the White House said. Peter Drucker, a prominent pioneer of management theory. ``Dr. Drucker has championed concepts such as privatization, management by objective and decentralization'' and is ``currently applying his expertise to the management of faith-based organizations,'' the White House said. Dr. D.A. Henderson, best known for his leadership of the World Health Organization's global small-pox-eradication campaign from 1966 to 1977. ``He was also instrumental in initiating the WHO's global program of immunization which now vaccinates approximately 80 percent of the world's children against six major diseases,'' the White House said. Irving Kristol, author, editor and professor. ``Mr. Kristol's writings helped lay the intellectual groundwork for the renaissance of conservative ideas in the last half of the 20th century. His approach adapted traditional conservative thought with contemporary societal issues and became the framework for compassionate conservatism,'' the White House said. Gordon Moore, co-founder of the Intel Corporation who directed the company's growth as the most successful development of the microchip. In November 2000, Mr. Moore and his wife established the Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation with a multibillion-dollar contribution, funding projects in higher education, scientific research, the environment and San Francisco Bay Area projects. The Presidential Medal of Freedom was established by President Truman in 1945 to recognize civilians for their service during World War II, and it was reinstated by President Kennedy in 1963 to honor distinguished service. It is the nation's highest civilian award.

Mr. WOLF

Mr. WOLF. Mr. Speaker, I commend to our colleagues' attention an editorial from yesterday's Wall Street Journal that highlights the many cases of American women who have been forcibly taken to Saudi Arabia. Even though they are U.S. citizens, once taken to Saudi Arabia, they have not been allowed to leave. I hope the 107th Congress and this Administration will put a stop to this practice and receive assurances from the Saudi Government that it will not happen again. [The Wall Street Journal; Review and Outlook] All the President's Women White House spokesman Ari Fleischer should stop referring to grown women as children. The women in question are Amjad Radwan and Alia and Aisha Gheshayan, three American citizens in Saudi Arabia whose fate has finally become an issue for Congress. When reporters at a White House press briefing recently deluged Mr. Fleischer with questions about whether President Bush had raised their plight during an Oval Office chat with the visiting Saudi Foreign Minister, he repeatedly--eight times by our count--invoked the word ``custody'' or ``custody of a child'' to characterize how the ``President views this.'' It's true that a number of American mothers have had an awful time getting children out of Saudi Arabia, though even here it beggars belief to reduce these to custody disputes. But two of the three cases that the House Government Reform Committee aired during its hearings did not involve children. Amjad Radwan is 19 years old and, unlike her older brother, cannot leave Saudi Arabia because she is a woman and must have the permission of her Saudi father, who refuses to give it. In highly charged testimony delivered via videotape, Amjad's mom, Monica Stowers, told the House she remains in Saudi Arabia because she fears for her daughter's life; Miss Stowers further reported that both her son and daughter were raped by members of her former husband's family. Alia and Aisha Gheshayan are also adults. When pressed on this point, the State Department says it has made every effort to ascertain the women's wishes about returning to America. In the case of Miss Roush's daughters, however, State concedes that it hasn't seen them since the mid-1990s. Moreover, its own human-rights report on Saudi Arabia declares that ``physical spousal abuse and violence against women'' is ``common'' and that the Saudi government tends to look the other way. Translation: The only way these Americans are going to be able to speak freely, without fear of returning home to a beating, is to insist that Riyadh give them the exit visas that will allow them to come here. The truth is that there isn't soul at State or the Saudi Foreign Ministry who doesn't understand that if President Bush were to express his displeasure to Crown Prince Abdullah, then Alia, Aisha and Amjad would be on the next plane for New York. And things would never have reached this dismal stage if the State Department hadn't signaled from the start that it was willing to let all the ground rules be set by Saudi law and custom--even in defiance of U.S. courts, arrest warrants and rights. Last June, 23 Senators, including leaders Trent Lott and Tom Daschle, signed a letter urging Secretary of State Colin Powell ``in the strongest possible terms, to intervene forcefully and in person with the Saudi authorities at the highest levels to secure the prompt release and repatriation of Alia and Aisha Gheshayan.'' The immeidiate answer was the standard State kiss-off: a letter explaining that the women were ``subject to Saudi law.'' But it seems that Congressional interest can have a catalyzing effect on Foggy Bottom. At hearings last Tuesday before the House International Relations Committee, William Burns, Assistant Secretary for Near Eastern Affairs, disclosed that Mr. Powell has now raised the issue with the Saudi Foreign Minister and that he himself brought it up with Crown Prince Abdullah 10 days earlier, on the eve of the Government Reform Committee's hearings. But Mr. Burns continued to define the issue as a custody dispute. And his remarks suggest that State still refuses to treat this as a state-to-state issue, in favor of a touchy- feely approach about ``keeping families connected.'' This is a long way from ``Perdicaris alive or Raisuli dead''--Teddy Roosevelt's tart reaction when a Berber bandit chiefain took an American hostage in Tangier. In a TV spot running under the title ``Allies Against Terrorism,'' the Saudi government urges Americans to ``listen to America's leaders'' when it comes to the ``facts'' about the country that spawned 15 of the 19 September 11 hijackers. It features President Bush vouching for how the Saudis have been ``nothing but cooperative.'' This is their chance to prove it.

Mr. WOLF

Mr. WOLF. Mr. Speaker, I want to share with our colleagues my statement regarding the Federal Trade Commission's recent announcement of an initiative to educate parents about children and Internet gambling. This Congress must make it a priority to pass Internet gambling legislation this year. Our children and families deserve nothing less than our best effort on this critically important issue. Statement by the Honorable Frank R. Wolf of Virginia FTC Internet Gambling Initiative Commerce-Justice-State Appropriations Subcommittee Thank you all for being here today. I also want to thank and recognize the efforts of the others who will speak after me: Timothy Muris, chairman of the Federal Trade Commission; Dr. Rachel Vollberg, board member on the National Council on Problem Gambling, and Dr. Marianne Guschwan, chair of the American Psychiatric Association's Committee on Treatment Services for Addicted Patients. Thank you all for appearing here today and for offering this public education initiative on an urgent issue facing this country's youth and families--the proliferation of Internet gambling, As a member of Congress, I have been deeply concerned about the spread of gambling in this country. Perhaps no where has the proliferation been more explosive than in Internet gambling. In 2000, Bear, Stearns & Co. Inc. reported that there were then at least 650 Internet gambling web sites, and that total revenues for 1999 had been $1.2 billion (an 80 percent increase from 1998) and would grow to $3 billion by this year, 2002. Others estimated that Internet gambling could soon easily become a $10 billion-a-year industry. Several new gambling sites appear on the web every day. The negative consequences of online gambling can be as detrimental to the families and communities of addictive gamblers as if a bricks and mortar casino were built right next door. Just as with traditional forms of gambling, online gambling can result in addiction, bankruptcy, divorce, crime, and suicide--the costs of which must ultimately be borne by society. In its 1999 final report to Congress, the bipartisan National Gambling Impact Study Commission expressed alarm about the growing problem of youth gambling. The commission said, ``Adolescent gamblers are more likely to become problem or pathological gamblers.'' Several studies also have shown the link between youth gambling and its association with alcohol and drug use, truancy, low grades and illegal activities to finance gambling. As the gambling commission noted, youth gambling like youth smoking is often an issue of accessibility and marketing. There is perhaps nothing more accessible to children today than the Internet. The commission's report asked, ``How do we as a nation quantify the values in lost opportunities to these young individuals?'' According to the gambling commission, gambling on the Internet is especially enticing to youth, pathological gamblers, and criminals. But there are currently no mechanisms in place to prevent young people--who make up the largest percentage of Internet users--from using their parents' credit card numbers to register and set up accounts for use at Internet gambling sites. The National Gambling Impact Study Commission recommended that a total prohibition of gambling on the Internet would provide law enforcement with the additional authority it needs to prosecute dishonest operators. Internet gambling evades existing anti-gambling laws, endangers children in the home, promotes compulsive gambling among adults, preys on the poor, and facilitates fraud. I could stay here all day cataloging story after story of ruined families, bankruptcies, suicides and official corruption which at their root you can find a history of gambling. Gambling is a dangerous product. Study after study has shown that for many in our society, it is also strongly addictive. Gambling's proliferation over the Internet in the last few years illustrates just how pervasive and accessible it is to our youngest citizens. I am hopeful that Congress will pass Internet gambling legislation this year. In the mean time, the FTC, the National Council on Problem Gambling, and the American Psychiatric Association have taken the lead in calling to the public's attention the risks of online gambling. These organizations deserve public praise. Internet gambling is particularly targeted to young people, and public education about the inherent dangers of online gambling is vital to helping parents protect their families.

Mr. WOLF

Mr. WOLF. Reclaiming my time, I want to thank the gentleman for his comments, too; and I want to thank both of the gentlemen for the pay parity. I have written the administration, written Mitch Daniels and asked him to send up a supplemental or something with regard to pay parity.

Mr. WOLF. The gentleman is exactly right. That is why I am committed to bringing a bill and making sure that we give the FBI, and I know the gentleman from Ohio was a former FBI agent, to give them the resources, because quite frankly the gentleman from New York is right, outdated. That is why I was so concerned that we are in essence taking this away from the other categories in the bill which would be a defeat for the war on terrorism. I know the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Oxley) will work this out.

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

Mr. WOLF. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for his response.

Mr. WOLF. I yield to the gentleman from New York.

Mr. WOLF. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 3764 and strongly support the additional funding for the Securities and Exchange Commission. However, I would like to point out a concern I have with some of the language in the bill. This bill requires not less than $134 million for the Division of Corporate Finance and the Office of Chief Accountant and not less than $326 million for the Division of Enforcement. These amounts are double the level of funding requested by the President for these activities in fiscal year 2003. Enacting this legislation will require other programs to be cut by $231 million. Our allocation of this bill, which has the FBI, DEA, INS, State Department, embassy security, the Karachi bombing last week and all of these other programs, is now down $393 million below, our allocation right now, $393 million below what the administration requested. So you add $393 million and $231 million, and I think you get a disaster for the Commerce Department, for the State Department, for the Justice Department, for the FBI, for the DEA, for the Bureau of Prisons. So the Subcommittee on Commerce, Justice, State and Judiciary of the Committee on Appropriations, which has jurisdiction of the SEC, will have to reduce the funding requested for other agencies funded by the committee. I hope, particularly in this war against terrorism, we really cannot cut the FBI. If you have a loved one working at an embassy around the world, we really cannot cut back embassy security. Anyone who thinks we can cut INS really has not been following the paper. I would hope we could work on revising this bill language before the bill is conferenced with the Senate, or else I think we will have a major substantive defeat for the war against terrorism. The administration I think has to do more with regard to the SEC. Pay parity is very important. But as you take these numbers with the allocation we will have a disaster.

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

Mr. WOLF. Reclaiming my time, I know he is a good fellow and a classmate, that 54 group that came in 1980 changed America, but Customs brings in much more money than it costs to run Customs. The INS brings in much more money. I think this has always been a bookkeeping matter, and it does come out of the allocation. If this were to hold true, in addition to the allocation we would have to cut the FBI dramatically in addition to INS and the others.

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

Mr. WOLF. Mr. Speaker, I agree. Also, I will tell you, we are getting a little bit off the issue, but what concerns me is this money will come out of the FBI. The FBI today is underfunded.

Mr. WOLF

Mr. WOLF. Mr. Speaker, after more than 11 years of study, effort, and public comment, I am proud to announce that today Senator John Warner and Congressman Bob Goodlatte and I are introducing legislation to create the Cedar Creek Battlefield and Belle Grove Plantation National Historical Park. The concept for the establishment of a new national park in the Shenandoah Valley was one of the key recommendations within the Management Plan for the Shenandoah Valley Battlefields National Historic District. This legislation is the result of work from a broad range of interest groups including the National Park Service, local partner organizations, locally elected officials, local landowners and others. I want to recognize their efforts to produce this legislation. I believe the strength of this legislation lies with this widespread public interest. Legislation for the new park is an outgrowth of a bill sponsored by Senator Warner and the late Congressman French Slaughter in 1988 and the law passed in 1996 which established the Shenandoah Valley Battlefields National Historic District sponsored by Senator Warner and myself. The local citizen-based commission established for the Battlefields District recommended that Cedar Creek Battlefield be established as a new national park. The accompanying Park Service study found in fact only Cedar Creek met the criteria to be designated a national park. Originally conceived as purely a battlefield park, the local stakeholders expanded the vision to include a broader scope of history. The new park will preserve and interpret the rich story of Shenandoah Valley history from early settlement through the Civil War and beyond and protect the historic landscape which features panoramic views of the mountains, natural areas, and waterways in the northern Shenandoah Valley. Importantly too, the other nine Civil War battlefield sites within the Shenandoah Valley will benefit from the national park designation in the valley and increase in tourism at the new park, but each will continue to be protected and managed locally. The proposed park boundary includes approximately 3,000 acres at the intersection of Frederick, Shenandoah and Warren counties and is based on the 1969 boundary establish for the Cedar Creek and Belle Grove National Historic Landmark. Today, of the 3,000 acres, Shenandoah County and three private preservation groups, including Belle Grove Plantation, collectively protect nearly 900 acres within the park boundary. For years it has been the burden of local organizations to protect, honor, and interpret these nationally significant lands. Given increased development pressure, federal involvement is needed to help support the local efforts, to preserve historic lands for future generations, and to ensure continued high quality interpretation of the area. This park is a model for a new type of national park for the future. A key provision allows all landowners to continue their right to sell their land whenever and to whomever they choose. The keys to this model are: A national park based on partnerships and local community involvement. A park where private organizations, families, and individuals will continue to live, work, and play within the boundary, A park that shares with visitors the full range of its cultural and natural history. A park created by the local community for the benefit of this and future generations. The park also will work with the community as land use and zoning decisions will continue to be administered by local authorities at the county or municipal levels. There are several landowners who will become key partners to the park by operating independent anchor sites within the 3,000-acre park boundary that serve to collectively benefit the visiting public. For example, the Cedar Creek Battlefield Foundation will continue to host the annual Battle of Cedar Creek Reenactment Weekend and other events and the Belle Grove Plantation will continue to be open to the public as a private museum holding living history, education, and charity events within the new park. In addition, Shenandoah County has plans to develop a light recreation county park with hiking trails and scenic overlooks on nearly 150 acres along the North Fork of the Shenandoah River within the national park boundary. Local involvement has played a key role in the crafting of the park legislation. The adjacent towns of Middletown and Strasburg enthusiastically endorsed the creation of the new national park. Private landowners within the proposed boundary shared thoughts and ideas on ways to ensure private property rights and quality of life and these important themes have been included within the legislation. The concept Is for this to be a local park first and foremost--park that is part of and benefits the local Shenandoah Valley community.

Mr. WOLF

Mr. WOLF. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding time to me. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to the motion to instruct conferees of the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Obey). I believe that such a motion would prompt almost a guaranteed, if you will, veto, and would absolutely unnecessarily restrict the ability of the conferees in negotiating with the other body. This is probably the most important bill that we will pass in this Congress, and in some respects, if we were to do this, it may very well jeopardize the passage, or if not jeopardize, certainly bog down the process. The President has already indicated that he would veto the bill as being too costly, and if we move forward with this motion and go to all those higher levels, then the bill would go well beyond and above the funding level proposed by the Senate. So for those reasons and the reasons that the gentleman from Kentucky (Mr. Rogers) had covered, and the chairman, the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Young), I would urge Members to vote no on the motion.