David Wu

Mr. WU

Mr. WU. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in opposition of the Terry amendment. While I applaud the gentleman's effort for attempting to increase funding for the Merchant Marine Academy, the offsets that the gentleman has proposed will be devastating to an already depleted National Marine Fishery Service budget and thus devastating to America's rural fishermen. Like farmers, fishermen are a cornerstone of our country's cultural heritage as well as our economy. The U.S. commercial and recreational fishing industries generate more than $25 billion to our economy and employ approximately 300,000 men and women per year. As important as they are to our economy, many fishermen in my district and in the Northwest are going through difficult times. Stocks are minimal and harvest is declining. Rural fishermen in my district, especially in towns like Astoria, Warrenton, Hammond and Clatskanie are going through a difficult transition period as we work to rebuild depleted stocks of salmon and steelhead. Their livelihood depends on what they yield from the rivers and oceans. As a country, we have recognized that through a variety of different causes, the fish that these fishermen harvest are threatened to the point of extinction. We have committed desperately needed resources to help restore salmon runs and trout populations. By cutting the NMFS budget further, we are underfunding fishermen in my state and all over the country. The National Marine Fishery Service works with state and local entities to ensure the stability and restoration of our ecosystem. An additional $14 million cut to the NMFS budget, beyond the $27 million already cut in the bill, would significantly reduce the agency's already compromised ability to fulfill its congressional mandates to conserve and rebuild our nation's valuable marine fisheries and marine resources. Not funding NMFS at adequate levels is equal to an unfunded mandate. We have heard the rhetoric of this country's commitment to rural Americans, and yet this is one more attack on rural America. These rural fishermen depend on the harvest they get from their nets and depend on NMFS to ensure that there will be a harvest for their children. The monitoring of fish stocks that NMFS oversees is helpful in two ways: one, if the stocks are improving, fishermen are made aware and harvest will increase; two, if the stocks are collapsing, fishermen are made aware and harvest will decrease, so that the remaining fish are saved. The gentleman's amendment strikes at the very heart of NMFS ability to help endangered and threatened species recover. A 15% cut in conservation and management programs and a 20% cut in endangered species recovery programs would gut much needed assistance to rural farmers. I urge my colleagues to join with me in voting against the Terry amendment.

Mr. WU

Mr. WU. Mr. Speaker, as my colleagues know, I have been a strong proponent of reducing classroom size by adding 100,000 additional qualified teachers across America. But we need classrooms for these teachers to teach, and modern, decent facilities where these students can learn. That is why I strongly, strongly support the school modernization initiative which will help build more school space and modernize aging school facilities. Schools like Findlay Elementary School near my home in Oregon which has trailers, trailers in the front lawn and in the parking lot; school districts like that in Astoria which has not added a new classroom since 1927. Many classrooms there have only one electric plug in the wall. This does not evidence a commitment to our children. We show that we value our children by giving them the facilities where they can truly learn. We should start building additional modern school facilities today.

Mr. WU

Mr. WU. Mr. Chairman, I want to thank the gentleman from Washington for bringing such an important issue to the forefront of the debate. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of efforts to provide much-needed resources to the Pacific Coast Salmon Recovery Fund. This fund will help local efforts in Oregon, and across the Pacific Northwest, to restore native salmon runs. I also want to commend Oregon Governor John Kitzhaber and Washington Governor Gary Locke for their hard work and interstate cooperation on this issue. Salmon are a cultural icon in the Pacific Northwest; indeed, they are part of our identify. But salmon are also a national treasure, and more importantly, they are an indicator species. Like the canary in the coal mine, the health of salmon tell us volumes about how clean and safe our rivers and streams are. Steep declines in Northwest salmon have led to several species listings under the Endangered Species Act. The four H's which have contributed to the consistent decline of salmon are habitat, hatcheries, hydro and harvest: Only by making sound investments in the programs that address these four H's, will we be able to bring salmon back. The Pacific Coast Salmon Recovery Fund, which was included in the President's Budget at a level of $100 million, will support local initiatives to save salmon. It will help give states the ability to improve habitat, and bring salmon back. The Pacific Coast Salmon Recovery Fund will help local communities continue efforts such as mass marking, which help commercial and sport fisherman determine the difference between habitat fish and wild fish. Mass marking can reduce the amount of wild fish that are mistakenly taken and thus continue economic stability by harvesting hatchery fish. Finally, the Pacific Salmon Recovery fund could help local communities build Fish ladders, purchase fish friendly turbines and continue with mitigation around dams. These are just a few examples of important initiatives that people in Oregon and the Northwest have taken upon themselves to restore salmon. All of these local initiatives are in desperate need of federal help. Several species of salmon are on the verge of extinction, and we now find ourselves with a choice to make. Are we going to honor the commitments we have made to our children? Will they have the chance to enjoy clean water and healthy streams in the future? Will they inherit a healthy ecosystem that includes indigenous salmon? Or are we going to stand idly by and let salmon vanish? By funding the Pacific Coast Salmon Recovery Fund, we can continue the process of helping coastal states recovery salmon. I want to work with my friend from Washington, Mr. Dicks, and the entire subcommittee to help ensure that the Pacific Coast Salmon Recovery Fund is funded at the maximum possible level, and that Oregon gets its fair share.

Mr. WU

Mr. WU. Mr. Chairman, I rise today on behalf of small business owners and workers in my home State of Oregon and in opposition to the amendment offered by the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Andrews). This amendment to abolish OPIC would damage the efforts of Oregon's small businesses in emerging markets overseas. In Oregon, OPIC has financed and insured projects worth $27 million. These efforts have generated over $33 million in Oregon exports. Many new jobs come through businesses that supply goods and services to projects insured or financed by OPIC, businesses like Hyster Sales Company in Tigard, Oregon, and Interwrap Industries in Portland, Oregon. OPIC helps level the playing field for American businesses of all sizes which compete for overseas projects. OPIC offers American businesses essential risk insurance for their investments in high-risk emerging markets. It provides temporary financing for investments when private sector support is lacking. But OPIC does all of this in a fiscally sound manner. Customers which benefit from OPIC repay the full principal amount. I urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on the Andrews amendment.

Mr. WU

Mr. WU. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from California for yielding time to me. Mr. Speaker, as the first Chinese American to serve in this House, as a high technology and international trade attorney, I have a special responsibility in this debate. I thank my colleagues for the honor of speaking now. This debate is not about engagement, because we all believe in engagement; but not just business engagement, because the business of America must be more than just business, and engagement must be through more than just the cash register. This debate is about how we view the Chinese people and about how we view ourselves. Cash register engagement views the Chinese people as just workers and consumers, 2 billion strong arms to do our work, 2 billion legs to wear American jeans. Full engagement recognizes that Chinese people are people like us, people with hopes and aspirations, aspirations to walk the path of freedom that we have blazed. That, Mr. Speaker, is what this debate is really about. It is about who we are as a free people, what are our values, what does this Congress stand for; our integrity as individuals. Can we live up to the legacy of our forebears, those in this Congress who swore themselves to liberty, and in so doing, pledged their lives, their fortunes, and their sacred honor? In this debate, in this debate I would like to address three groups. First, to the Chinese people, so rich in culture and history and heritage, I encourage them to strive not just for prosperity but for freedom, also, because if they achieve prosperity, their children will thank them. But if they achieve both prosperity and liberty, their children will view them the way that I view my parents, as ordinary people who rose to extraordinary challenges. And in rising to these great challenges, they became giants of their era. Just as I measure each day what I achieve against what my parents achieved in their era, their children will measure themselves against the legacy of freedom and prosperity that they can leave them. Rise to the challenge of history. To the people of Oregon, those who have honored me back home with the greatest honor that an immigrant boy who came to this country not being able to speak English could ever hope to have, to represent them in this Congress, I know that we have a trade-dependent State, but they and I understand that the business of America must be more than just business. We understand that those who came West, whether they came West across the ocean in creaking wooden ships or whether they came West across the prairie in creaking wooden wagons, they came West not just to get rich, they came West to be free. Oregonians expect to be represented by men and women of conscience. Join me in my vote of conscience today. Stand with me and stand with our forebears. Finally, to my colleagues in this Chamber, they know what it means to cast this vote in a trade-dependent district, but I ask them to stand with me and to stand with our forebears who put their lives, their liberties, and their sacred honor on the line. Stand with me, and stand with all those who would walk the path of freedom with us. For the past 10 years we have strayed from the path of liberty. Through two administrations we have listened to the siren song of the cash register. We have walked into a moral wasteland. What has it gained us but 10 years of growing trade deficits, $60 billion in an annual trade deficit, more Chinese prisoners of conscience than ever? We can change this with a vote today. Let me make this perfectly clear. If Members take away nothing more than this from this debate, know this, that with our vote today we can make one of the clearest differences of our congressional service. When we take this voting card and we insert it into that slot, when we insert it into that slot, we are literally reaching into the deepest, darkest dungeons ever built by man. When we face that red button and that green button, we can literally set people free by choosing that green button, because years ago, 6 or 7 or 8 years ago when the vote was close in this Chamber, the government in Beijing would set people free every single year in order to affect the vote in this Chamber. By choosing the green button, we can set people free today. For us, it is merely a choice between two buttons, green and red. For our forebears, it was their lives, their fortunes, and their sacred honors. Because of their sacrifice, we have an easier choice today. Choose the green button. Choose freedom today.

Mr. WU. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from California for yielding me this time. Mr. Speaker, as the first Chinese American to stand in this House, as a trade and international trade lawyer, I feel a special responsibility in this debate. But special responsibilities run deep in this House, because the Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled almost exactly 223 years ago committed themselves to the path of liberty and committed to each other their lives, their fortune, and their sacred honor. America has lead the way for 223 years on the path of freedom, sometimes with a certain stride and sometimes through great adversity, but always leading the way and shining a light for others to follow. What this debate is about, it is about who we are as a free people, what we stand for as a country, the courage of this Congress, and the integrity of each of us as individuals. What this debate is not about is engagement. Of course we must engage China, 1.2 billion people. We are engaged with China, and we will be engaged with China. We must be engaged with China culturally. There are 6,000 Chinese on cultural exchange visas here in the United States. We must be engaged with China educationally. There are 14,000 Chinese on student visas in the United States. We must be engaged with China on environmental issues, on labor issues, on human rights issues. We must be engaged with China on issues where we agree and where we disagree. Of course we must be engaged with China in business and trade. But the business of America must be more than business alone. An engagement must be through more than just the cash register. Let me give my colleagues the difference between cash register engagement and real engagement. Cash register engagement would have us see the Chinese people as workers and as consumers, as 2 billion strong-arms to do our work, as 2 million legs to wear American jeans. Real engagement recognizes the Chinese people as real people, people who have hopes and aspirations, people who would walk the path of freedom without. Cash register engagement would say they are not ready for freedom. Real engagement recognizes that freedom is young everywhere. It is only 220 years old here in America. It is 150 years old in Britain. It is 100 years old in France, 50 years old in Germany and Japan. I stand here as living proof that the Chinese people can fully participate in democracy. I stand here as proof that all people deserve to walk the path of freedom. Where have we been walking in the past 10 years? Through two administrations, we have been walking, not the path of freedom, but the moral wilderness. We have been called off the path of freedom by the siren song of the cash register, and we have closed our ears and our hearts and we have walked away from those who had walked the path of freedom with us. What has it gained us? What has it gained us? A larger trade deficit, more people in jail than ever. We have tried it the wrong way for 10 years. Let us try it the right way for this 1 year. I ask my colleagues to vote in favor of this resolution and against most favored nation status for the Chinese Government.

Mr. WU

Mr. WU. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in support of H.R. 2605, the Energy and Water Appropriations Bill. I would also like to thank Chairman Packard and Ranking Member Visclosky for their hard work on bringing a fair and balanced bill to the floor. I have the privilege and honor of representing the greater Portland area and the Northwest Coast of Oregon. For those of you who have had the pleasure of visiting this wonderful city, you will know that much of the vitality of our region depends on the Willamette and Columbia rivers. Commerce, recreation, and scenic beauty are three products of these Rivers. The Columbia River, stretching from the eastern part of Washington and ending at the mouth in Astoria is one of America's greatest resources. One in six jobs in the state of Oregon depend on the commerce from the Columbia River. The success of the river is vital to our economy and way of life. Unfortunately, as trade and technology increases, so does the need for passable channels for ships to continue to move in and out of the area ports. This bill includes important operation and maintenance funds to ensure that sorely needed dredging activities can take place and keep commerce moving. Commerce in Oregon will continue to prosper, and the benefits of a solid economy will follow. I hope to continue to work with the Corps of Engineers to insure that the disposal of dredged materials not affect the crab fishers on the Oregon coast and work to have the least amount of environmental impact as possible. Furthermore, with the deepening of the Columbia River channel, there is concern about the local efforts to develop the Port of Astoria as a deep draft port. As with all ports, development of extensive infrastructure must be market driven, and I am looking forward to doing all I can to look at viable options. I would also like to take this opportunity to thank the Committee for their support of the Clatskanie River and Fox Creek Projects. With the federal funding allocated, Clatskanie city officials will be able to commence with planning of the Lewis and Clark Bicentennial with a free flowing river; and fish will swim freely in Fox Creek. Finally, I would like to thank the committee for their support of the East Mooring Bay repair in the city of Astoria. These desperately needed funds, along with other funding, will allow Astoria to repair almost half of the breakwater. Again, Mr. Chairman, Chairman Packard, Ranking Member Visclosky, thank you for giving me the opportunity today to support the Energy and Water appropriations bill and more importantly to support the funding for the Columbia River Deepening Project.

Mr. WU. I thank the chairman and the ranking member and encourage the Corps to interact with the Institute as this remarkable project moves forward in Oregon.

Mr. WU. I yield to the gentleman from California.

Mr. WU. Mr. Chairman, there is a pilot project at the mouth of the Columbia River, established through the Oregon Graduate Institute and the Marine Environmental Research and Training Station in Astoria, Oregon which provides both realtime and historical model forecasts. The technology from this pilot project could have numerous applications, including channel deepening, habitat restoration and the reduction of flood hazards. Is it the chairman's understanding and the ranking member's understanding that the Army Corps of Engineers can exchange information and provide professional advice to the Oregon Graduate Institute and the Marine Environmental Research and Training Station in the Institute's development and implementation of this system?

Mr. WU

Mr. WU. Mr. Speaker, during rollcall vote No. 306 on H. Res. 250, I was unavoidably detained. Had I been present, I would have voted ``no.''

Mr. WU

Mr. WU. Mr. Chairman, it is with pleasure that I join my colleague, the gentlewoman from Oregon (Ms. Hooley) in offering this amendment. I would like to thank the gentlewoman from Oregon (Ms. Hooley) and the gentleman from California (Mr. Miller) for their support on this amendment, and the gentleman from Ohio (Chairman Regula) and the ranking member, the gentleman from Washington (Mr. Dicks) for their hard work in bringing a good appropriations bill to the floor. Mr. Chairman, the Wu-Hooley amendment improves a good appropriations bill by taking an environmentally sound and fiscally responsible approach to preserving our national forests for recreational and commercial users. This is truly a win-win proposition, proof that what is good for our environment is good for business. The Wu-Hooley amendment scales back the timber sales management program by $24 billion to the administration-requested level of $196 million, and redirects the freed-up funds to vitally needed watershed improvements and to protect fish and wildlife. Restoring forests does not just make outdoor lovers happy, it provides a future for resource-based industries. Every year more and more species of important forest and aquatic life are listed as endangered or threatened. This loss of wildlife jeopardizes both our natural resources and our natural resource-based industries. The future of the forest products industry, the very future of harvesting timber, is dependent on healthy forests, healthy watersheds, and healthy ecosystems, not degraded to the point where either human water supplies or fish and wildlife become so endangered that we must close our forests to important commercial activity. Unless we take adequate steps now to protect watersheds, fish and wildlife, it will be much, much more difficult to harvest timber in the future. The Wu-Hooley amendment strikes a balance between current timber harvests and restoring fish and preserving wildlife, both for their own sake and for the future of timber harvesting. It protects all of these valuable natural treasures for the long term. The Wu-Hooley amendment is an attempt to address the shortfall of funding for watershed and fish and wildlife protections. Communities across America and in my State, such as Salem, in the district of the gentlewoman from Oregon (Ms. Hooley) and Carlton in my district, and Lake Oswego near the border between the district of the gentlewoman from Oregon (Ms. Hooley) and my own get their drinking water from watersheds on forest land. When I go home in August, I would like to tell parents in Oregon that Congress recognizes the importance of safe drinking water and the need to restore our forests for their family's health. The Wu-Hooley amendment is also an exercise in real fiscal discipline. The administration requested $196 million for this line item and the committee funded it at $220 million. Meanwhile, efforts that are essential to the Pacific Northwest and to America, like watershed improvement and fish and other wildlife protection, are being neglected. Our amendment scales back timber sales management funding to the administration's request. Mr. Chairman, I urge my colleagues to exercise fiscal responsibility and demonstrate a real commitment to the long-term interests of healthy forests and clean drinking water. I urge my colleagues to vote yes on the Wu-Hooley amendment.

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

Mr. WU. Mr. Chairman, I want to emphasize that this amendment leaves salvage harvesting intact. There is a separate fund for salvage harvesting which in the last fiscal year totaled approximately $110 million. And my amendment leaves that fund intact.

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

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

Mr. WU

Mr. WU. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman from Texas for yielding me this time. Most teenagers do involve their parents when making major life decisions like the one we debate today. However, in situations where the young woman cannot share her decision with a parent, she should not be isolated from other sources of counsel and support. Whether it is a grandparent, clergy member, or some other trusted adult, young women are better served by talking through the decision and having someone to lean on rather than being all alone. While most young women do involve a parent in their decision, not every young woman has that choice. Whether a parent is absent or abusive or worse, we know that not every family is a model family. This law would endanger some young women who have the misfortune of difficult family circumstance. This law would make criminals out of people whose only crime is to help a young person in distress. H.R. 1218 isolates young women, puts them at risk, and restricts access to reproductive choice. Let us stop building walls and barriers around our children and let us start having a real discussion about how we can best nurture them, educate them, and raise them to be responsible and productive citizens.

Mr. WU

Mr. WU. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to Taiwanese- Americans across the country. After 50 years of a strong and mutually beneficial U.S.-Taiwan relationship, the Taiwanese-American community continues to be the bedrock of that relationship. There are more than one-half million Taiwanese-Americans across the United States. From science and education, to politics, Taiwanese- Americans have made profound contributions to the strength and diversity of this great nation. This year also marks the 20th Anniversary of the Taiwan Relations Act, which links the United States and Taiwan in friendship and cooperation. Since 1987, the Taiwanese people have possessed the right to select their own leaders, practice their religions, and speak freely. Taiwan is vibrant and democratic. The people of Taiwan and the United States share a bond in their adherence to the principles of freedom, democracy, and human rights. That bond is made stronger each day by the Taiwanese-American community here in the United States. Today, as the first U.S. Congressman born in Taiwan, I am proud to pay tribute to the contribution and commitment Taiwanese-Americans have made to the United States.

Mr. WU

Mr. WU. Mr. Speaker, today I would like to recognize Dr. Michael F. Reardon, a constituent of mine, who will soon retire from an 8-year term as provost of Portland State University; one of the nation's leading urban universities. Michael Reardon has had a long and distinguished career as a professor and higher education administrator. He has served Portland State University and the academy with distinction for more than 30 years. Dr. Reardon received his bachelor's degree from Georgetown University in 1960, and his doctoral degree in history from Indiana University in 1965. After receiving his doctorate, Dr. Reardon accepted a position as an Assistant Professor of history at Portland State University. Before being selected as the Provost in 1992, Dr. Reardon served as Chairman of the department of history, Director of the Honors Program, Associate Dean of the College of Liberal Arts and Sciences and Vice Provost. Dr. Reardon is recognized for his work in the history of European thought, French intellectual history, the development of disciplinary knowledge, and on culture of the professions. He is also known for his positions as Vice-President and President of the Western Regional Associations of Honors Programs and as an officer in the National Collegiate Honors Conference. Many here in Washington know Dr. Reardon as a consultant to the National Endowment for the Humanities, for his work with the American Council on Education and other national associations of higher education. Provost Reardon's interest in curricular reform has encouraged innovative changes in undergraduate education at Portland State University and around the nation. His publication on curricular reform and cost containment in the Handbook of Higher Education has brought about a renewed commitment to providing quality post secondary education to all Americans in urban areas. These distinctions alone would be sufficient to merit my gratitude for Dr. Reardon's work, however, I would especially like to offer my sincere appreciation for Provost Reardon's administrative vision and his excellence as a teacher who has encouraged students to pursue their careers and ambitions. In 1994 under Provost Reardon's guidance, a nationally recognized general education program was developed and implemented at Portland State University. The four-year program encourages civic responsibility through outreach to regional organizations, high schools and businesses. The program enables students to work in a team environment using critical thinking skills and interdisciplinary problem-solving approaches to contemporary issues. This program is based on collaborative partnerships between the university and community; in effect each student at this university must, to receive their degree, serve the community. Dr. Reardon's strong commitment to the university as Provost is paralleled by his equally firm commitment to students and teaching. Throughout his years as an administrator, Dr. Reardon has always found time to teach undergraduate and graduate students in his areas of expertise and develop programs such as an internship program in Washington that has provided students with an opportunity to work and learn in Nation's capital city. Dr. Reardon's students are professors, teachers, business leaders, college administrators, research scientists, and lawyers. Oregon and the nation will benefit from Dr. Reardon's dedication and his commitment to education. It is with great pleasure that I honor Dr. Reardon for his service to Portland State University, to Oregon, and to the nation. I look forward to his continuing work as professor and consultant to universities and associations of higher education in the coming years.

Mr. WU

Mr. WU. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Guam (Mr. Underwood) for yielding to me. It is a special pleasure for me to stand here in honor of Asian Pacific American Heritage Month. I am proud to serve as the Vice Chair of the Congressional Asian Pacific American Caucus, and it is my great privilege to stand on the floor of this House as the first Chinese American to serve in this body in the 220-year history of this country. We all may have our small footnotes in history, but I try to keep a touch of humor, and in this town maybe even tougher, a touch of humility about what happens around here. I would like to share a little story that happened right here in this Chamber. The story is only slightly humorous, but perhaps more importantly, it helps illustrate the point which I would like to make tonight. When I was younger, I attended one year of medical school, and sometime during the fall of that year decided that I wanted to leave medical school to make a broader difference. When I called home to share that with my father, let us just say that he was not pleased. He was not pleased at all. During the next year, when I took a leave of absence and worked for a while, I received a stream of articles, newspaper articles from my parents, from my dad in particular, and it was all about doctors, doctors who were doing wonderful things in impoverished neighborhoods, really working in communities where they were needed. It was also about lawyers and those articles about ambulance-chasing lawyers who were up to no good. My father was really, really hoping, I think, that I would go back to medical school. Now fast forward 20 years, and I was sitting just about there on this floor. It was January 6 of this year. I was about to be sworn in as a Member of Congress, probably the proudest day of my live. My parents were sitting right up there. My wife was somewhere over here. My in- laws were somewhere over here, and I could not see them. But I could see my father. I could see my father. As I looked up at him, I could not help but think, I wonder if he still wishes that I graduated from medical school? I am telling that story because I think that it is something very positive in our community, that we have a lot of people who have become prosperous, who are engineers, who are scientists, who are business owners, but very few people who have gone on to fields like law and politics. But I am proud to say that there is a movement afoot across America, and I am proud to report to the House tonight that there is a very positive trend occurring in Asian American communities. Gordon Quan in Houston, Max Inge in New York City, Barry Chang, whom I just visited in California, Silicon Valley, Charlie Woo, who is visiting in Washington today but who is starting a movement in Los Angeles, and other places like my home in Portland, Oregon, from Chicago to St. Louis to Washington, D.C., where Asian Americans are recognizing the importance of encouraging the next generation to branch out, to branch out from the traditional professions like science, like engineering, as good as those professions are, from dentistry, from medicine, into new fields like art or journalism or law or even politics. I believe that it is vitally important for Asian Americans to participate in the political process. We often hear complaints about not being fairly treated in the media or in other public bodies. But I submit to my colleagues that the only way to make a truly lasting and positive and constructive difference is to get involved and to stay involved, to become part of shaping the dialogue and influencing the process ourselves. That is what is happening across the Nation today, to do what groups across America are doing to continue to instill in our generation and the next the importance of taking school seriously, and not just taking school seriously but taking participation in the political process seriously, to pass on to our young folks what we have learned from our lives and the lives of our parents: that the opportunity to participate in the American dream is a gift of the American spirit, and that we should not let any part of this gift slip away. We must fully participate in the process. I am grateful every day to share in that process. I do my job each and every day with the faith that we are serving a larger process. We all need to participate as Americans. This is the message being brought to other Asian Americans, to urge them to get involved and to stay involved. Each new immigrant group that comes to America has learned, sometimes the hard way, that to be a voice at the table, we must make sacrifices. We as Asian Americans are clearly in the early formative stages of political participation. Like every other group that has come to America before us, so many sacrifices have been made already. But one more sacrifice is left to be made. I add this to Asian Americans of the older generation, to those of my parents' generation, perhaps to anyone who is older than I: You who have made so many sacrifices already, you have come to a foreign country, learned a foreign language, you have worked hard to make your families prosperous. You have really helped your children get an education and helped them become Americans. That is perhaps one of the largest sacrifices that you have made, to encourage your children to grow up in this country, to be a part of this culture and, in so doing, to become different from you. It is a great sacrifice for any parent to make, and countless generations of immigrants before you have made that sacrifice. But I am here to ask you to make one more sacrifice, and that is to encourage your children to pursue their passions, no matter what that passion is, whether that is to become a doctor or become a dentist or teacher. But if they choose to become an artist, a journalist, a lawyer, or even to enter into public life, to encourage them in the pursuit of that passion, to make one more sacrifice for your children. I will say to your children that it is a two-way street. When I was young, my parents encouraged me to keep up my Chinese and to study hard. There was always something better to do, whether it was to go out and play with my friends or because the ice cream truck was coming by. I say to the younger generation, listen to what your parents have to say. Keep in touch with the culture and the language. It is good for you, and your parents are asking something that will be ultimately good for you, and you will appreciate it in the years to come. Mr. Speaker, I am proud to stand on the floor of the House tonight on the occasion of Asian Pacific American Heritage Month and report to my colleagues that, while much still remains to be accomplished, we have made great progress, and we will continue to make that progress year by year, generation by generation.

Mr. WU

Mr. WU. Mr. Speaker, the tragedy at Columbine was heartbreaking for all Americans, but it was particularly difficult for the people in my home state of Oregon, where we endured a similar tragedy just one year ago at Thurston High School in Springfield. At Thurston High, two young students were killed, and America reacted with sadness and sympathy. At Columbine High, as we all know, thirteen students were killed by the two gunmen. America reacted with profound grief and a renewed sense of urgency. Ladies and Gentlemen, thirteen children die every day in America--the result of handgun violence. Columbine happens every single day. It is not nearly as dramatic, there are no CNN cameras, the nation does not stop and hold its breath, and watch . . . But, every day in America, 13 children die unnecessary deaths from guns. This is a children's health epidemic--and it is high time this Congress start paying attention to it, and take some steps in the right direction. Now is the right time to begin the search for answers. Clearly, this is not an easy task. There are many approaches we can take to reduce youth violence: We can make it easier for parents to spend time with their children. We can reduce class size so teachers can identify troubled children, and get them the help they need. We can better teach our young people the value of human life. We can devote more resources to school counselors and mental health providers. And we can simply open up the channels of communication between adults and teenagers . . . What I've learned from listening to Oregon students in their schools, is that perhaps the most important thing we can do to make schools safer, is to create an atmosphere where it is more acceptable for students to talk to adults when they see danger signs. These are all important steps . . . Each will be helpful, but none alone or all together will be effective enough to curb this health epidemic without a commitment from this Congress to make guns less accessible to young people. Conflicts and emotions that get the better of people can sometimes be sorted out with words, sometimes they get sorted out with fists, or with knives . . . But the only tool of anger that can mow down thirteen students in a school library--is a gun. Simply passing laws will not address the root causes of this tragedy, but there are steps we can take to keep guns out of the hands of violent juveniles. That is why I urge my colleagues to support reasonable gun safety measures being introduced by Democrats: First, let's close the ``gun show loophole,'' which allows criminals to trade weapons anonymously. By instituting background checks for those seeking to anonymously purchase firearms at gun shows, we can make guns less accessible to criminals, and to violent youths. Second, let's raise the minimum age for handgun purchases from 18 to 21. Third, let's make sure that guns are childproofed at least as well as a bottle of aspirin--by requiring gunmakers to equip all guns with child safety locks. And finally, let's show the American people that we're serious about stopping the illegal transfer of guns. I hope my colleagues will join Mr. Wexler of Florida, myself, 95 other Democrats, and one Republican, Ms. Morella, in supporting HR 315--a bill which limits the number of handgun purchases to one per month. Once again, I don't think that any law will ever be a complete solution. None of us do. But we're not expected to always find the complete solution. We are here to do what we can to make this country better, safer, healthier, and more prosperous. These sensible measures are steps in the right direction, steps down a right and sensible path. I hope our colleagues on the other side of the aisle will take these steps with us. Sooner rather than later. Because this is an epidemic that waits for none of us. Every day we wait--thirteen more children die--another Columbine--every single day.

Mr. WU

Mr. WU. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in opposition to the Supplemental Appropriations Conference Report, and in support of the motion to recommit offered by Congressman Deutsch and Congressman Inslee. This bill contains anti-environmental riders inserted in dark of the night. Mr. Speaker, I have only served in this House for four months, but I can tell you already that this is NOT how we should go about passing substantive legislation. The people of Oregon, three thousand miles away from this House today--have entrusted me with the responsibility to represent them--and to keep a watchful eye out for this kind of reckless activity. Mr. Speaker, none of these provisions--which are so damaging to our natural environment--passed either the House OR the Senate. We have a system of public scrutiny and accountability in America-- this bill attempts to sneak by those mechanisms. This attempt to sneak anti-environmental stealth riders under the noses of the American people is unacceptable. The three anti- environmental riders that have been included in conference, have not had to face public scrutiny. One of the stealth riders inserted behind closed doors will effect my constituents who live along the Columbia River in Oregon. By reversing the Interior Solicitor's opinion to limit the size and number of waste sites associated with hardrock mining, river and groundwater sources will be jeopardized by acid mine drainage and heavy metals, such as arsenic. Mr. Speaker, we have a responsibility to the American people to call this legislation for what it is--back-room--stealth destruction of our natural environment. I urge my colleagues to support the Deutsch-Inslee motion to recommit.

Mr. WU

Mr. WU. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in opposition to the supplemental appropriations conference report and in support of the motion to recommit offered by the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Deutsch) and the gentleman from Washington (Mr. Inslee). The people of Oregon sent me 2,500 miles away to be careful with both their budget and with the environment. This bill is bloated on the budgetary side and is just flat wrong in the process and the substance of the decisions made in its environmental riders. Mr. Speaker, substantive environmental legislation should not be passed in the dark of night. They deserve full review by this body and by the Senate, and, quite frankly, the substantive decision to open up mining in the Crown Jewel Mine is something that I do not believe my constituents or the people of America would support as an independent freestanding bill. Therefore, Mr. Speaker, I stand in strong support of the motion to recommit submitted by the gentleman from Washington (Mr. Inslee) and the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Deutsch).

Mr. WU

Mr. WU. Mr. Speaker, Students Recycling Used Technology (StRUT) started in June 1995 with the goal of giving Oregon students the technical and business management skills they need for the next century. Over the next two years, four schools in my district: Forest Grove, Hillsboro, Tigard and Sherwood High School, refurbished 1,200 computers and donated them to local schools. This gave the students a working knowledge of computers and also provided their fellow students with better access to the Internet. What started as a partnership between the Northwest Regional Education Services District and Intel was encouraged to grow by our governor and State legislature. The success of the program spread quickly, and the consortium of organizations expanded to include the Oregon Department of Education, Portland General Electric, and US West. There are now 94 StRUT programs around Oregon with 1,500 students involved, and over 22,000 computers have been placed by this program in our K-12 system. This Friday, I will be meeting with teachers from around Oregon who will be trained in this exciting new program. I look forward to hearing their advice on how Congress can implement these kinds of programs at the Federal level. In fact, StRUT is already being replicated in Washington, California, New Mexico, Arizona, and Congresswoman Johnson's home state of Texas. By allowing students access to these essential technical and business skills, and by providing their fellow students with improved access to the Internet, we can help prepare our children to be successful citizens in the information age.

Mr. WU

Mr. WU. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support today of H.R. 1184, the reauthorization of the National Earthquake Hazard Reduction Program. I particularly applaud the farsightedness of the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Sensenbrenner), the chairman of the Committee on Science, and the gentleman from California (Mr. Brown), the ranking member, in authorizing $168 million over the next 5 years for expansion and modernization of the seismic monitoring infrastructure of the United States. Oregon is, unfortunately, at great risk for earthquakes, and I am looking forward to the benefits that will flow from such a modernization effort in Oregon and nationwide. My amendment, which has been incorporated into the bill, will add an additional $2.8 million over 2 years to the seismic network to procure two portable seismic networks. Seismologists routinely deploy temporary mobile networks to monitor aftershocks or to better understand the impact of an earthquake in a particular region. The two networks supported by my amendment would be a natural supplement to the permanent monitoring networks. The chairman has been conscientious in authorizing the elements of a seismic monitoring system contained in a plan that will be forwarded to us shortly by the administration. I believe these portable networks will also be part of that plan. These portable networks are very necessary to a comprehensive capability for post-earthquake monitoring. I would hate to see any delay in developing them, and I urge adoption of this amendment. In closing, I would like to commend the chair and ranking member of the Committee on Science and the chair and ranking member of the Subcommittee on Basic Research for facilitating bipartisan cooperation in this bill within the committee and here. With that, Mr. Chairman, I urge passage of this bill.