C. Young

Mr. YOUNG of Florida

Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Texas [Mr. Bonilla], a distinguished member of the Subcommittee on National Security of the Committee on Appropriations.

Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 4 minutes. Mr. Chairman, I have a good friend back home in my district, his name is Bob Schultz. He went ashore with the Marine Corps, the 2d Marine Division, in Tarawa more than 50 years ago. As we have talked about that many, many times, he keeps coming back to the fact that when an American goes ashore on an amphibious landing, what he hopes for is that our troops control the air and not the enemy, so they might have a good chance of surviving the amphibious landing. One of the Marine Corps Commandants, P.X. Kelly, made the same point in testimony before our subcommittee, that the first thing that a Marine wants is for an American force to control the air. The F-22 is going to be an air superiority fighter. The gentleman from Wisconsin [Mr. Obey] is correct; the F-15 is an outstanding aircraft. The F-16, the F-15, the F-18 are all good airplanes. However, as the future gets closer and closer, those airplanes get older and older. The technology is not as good today as it will be when the F-22 comes on board. If we take the $1 billion the gentleman from Wisconsin is talking about from this program, we do not cancel the program, we do not stop the F-22, we still going to have the F-22, and the gentleman from Wisconsin concedes that. What we are going to do is add billions of dollars to the cost, because the longer that we drag out the program, the more the program costs. Members do not have to take my word for it. Look back at every aircraft production program we have had. Every time we delay it or drag it out, it costs more money; we all understand we are going to have the F-22 so how do we get it the most cost-effective way? That is to provide the money now, as the Air Force wants to do, rather than dragging it out for 5 years and adding to the cost and getting nothing for that additional cost.

Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Mr. Chairman, I seek time in opposition to the amendment.

Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself the balance of my time.

Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Mr. Chairman, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from New York [Mr. Solomon], the distinguished chairman of the Committee on Rules. (Mr. SOLOMON asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from California [Mr. Hunter], a distinguished member of the Committee on National Security.

Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Texas [Mr. DeLay], the distinguished majority whip.

Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minute to the gentleman from Louisiana [Mr. Livingston], the very distinguished chairman of the Committee on Appropriations. (Mr. LIVINGSTON asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the distinguished gentleman from Mississippi [Mr. Wicker]. (Mr. WICKER asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from California [Mr. McKeon].

Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from Texas, Mr. Sam Johnson.

Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from California [Mr. Lewis], a member of the Committee on Appropriations.

Mr. YOUNG of Florida

Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks on the bill, H.R. 2126, making appropriations for the Department of Defense for the fiscal year ending September 30, 1996, and for other purposes, and that I may be permitted to include tabular and extraneous material.

Mr. YOUNG of Florida

Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that further [[Page H 8609]] consideration of the bill H.R. 2126 in the Committee of the Whole pursuant to House Resolution 205 shall also be governed by the following order: Before consideration of any other amendment it shall be in order to consider the following amendments--identified by their designation in the Congressional Record pursuant to clause 6 of rule XXIII--each of which may be considered only in the order specified, may be offered only by the Member--or one of the Members--specified, may amend portions of the bill not yet read for amendment, may amend portions of the bill previously amended, shall be considered as read, shall be debatable as specified, shall not be subject to amendment except as specified, shall not be subject to a demand for division of the question in the House or in the Committee of the Whole, and shall not otherwise be in order during further consideration of the bill for amendment: One of the amendments numbered 10, 11, 18, 34, or 56, by Representative Kasich or Representative Obey, to be debatable for 60 minutes, with 10 minutes controlled by Representative Kasich, 10 minutes controlled by Representative Dellums, 10 minutes controlled by Representative Obey, 15 minutes controlled by Representative Dicks, and 15 minutes controlled by Representative Young of Florida; one or more of the amendments numbered 37, 58, 59, or 61, by Representative Obey, to be debatable in the aggregate for not more than 20 minutes equally divided and controlled by the proponent and an opponent; and one of the amendments numbered 3 or 15, by Representative Dornan, together with the amendment numbered 48 as a substitute therefor, by Representative DeLauro, to be jointly debatable for 30 minutes equally divided and controlled by Representatives Dornan and DeLauro.

Mr. YOUNG of Florida

Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Mr. Chairman, I rise to commend the chairman of our subcommittee for his leadership on this bill under the most difficult of circumstances. Discretionary spending in the bill we consider today is $9.2 billion below the 1995 bill, a reduction of 13 percent. This is the reduction required by the allocation given our subcommittee under the direction of the House Budget Committee. Needless to say, our subcommittee was required to make some very difficult decisions and to establish spending priorities for fiscal year 1996. The criteria we used emphasized programs that work well, provide the maximum return on our investment in them, and save lives. We also sought to make better use of Federal funds by eliminating or consolidating duplicative or ineffective programs to provide maximum program dollars and minimum bureaucratic overhead. In all, 170 programs were terminated in the bill. High priority was given to continued funding for the National Institutes of Health, which received $642 million or 5.7 percent over the 1995 level. NIH remains the preeminent biomedical research program of its kind anywhere in the world. Our investment in unlocking the mysteries of many diseases and determining effective and lifesaving treatments is repaid many times over in lower health care costs, a higher quality of life, and a cure for many diseases for which there was no successful treatment just a few years ago. We have made great strides in the war on cancer, heart disease, stroke, diabetes, mental illness, and other diseases that rob the young and old of valuable years of life and leave many disabled and suffering. As with any battle when we are so close to victory on many fronts, now is not the time to retreat from our commitment to remain the world leader in this field. One area of special interest where a small but continuing investment by our committee over the past few years has paid off is the National Marrow Donor Program. Through advances in research sponsored by NIH, doctors and researchers determined that unrelated bone marrow transplants were just as effective as related bone marrow transplants in curing patients diagnosed with leukemia or any one of 60 other fatal blood disorders. The problem, however, was the lack of access to a large pool of prospective unrelated individuals who might have matching bone marrow for patients in need of transplants. With the great diversity in the genetic makeup of people, the chances of finding a matched bone marrow donor range from 1 in 20,000 to 1 in a million. Having brought the need for a national registry of potential bone marrow donors to the attention of our committee in 1986, I am proud to say that my colleagues have provided support to me in this effort every step of the way. The result of this effort is a program that is a true medical miracle which is saving lives every day throughout our Nation and around the world. The National Marrow Donor Program now maintains a registry of 1.7 million prospective donors and is growing at a rate of 36,000 donors per month. My colleagues may recall that early in my search for a home for the national registry, some Federal officials told me we would never recruit more than 50,000 volunteers who were willing to donate their bone marrow to a complete stranger. We proved them wrong and in doing so have given a second chance at life to thousands of men, women, and children and the numbers are growing. As the registry continues to grow so do the number of transplants. More importantly, we have given hope to thousands of families who otherwise would have faced the prospect of certain death for a loved one. Our committee has included in the bill $15,360,000 for the continued operations of the national registry under the oversight of the Health Resources and Services Administration. Responsibility for the registry was transferred last year from NIH to HRSA. The U.S. Navy also continues to play a leading role in providing operational support and direction to the program with additional funding made available by our Appropriations Subcommittee on National Security. Other small, but significant programs supported by our subcommittee likewise save lives. The Emergency Medical Services Program for Children celebrates its 10th anniversary this year and we have included $10 million to continue its operations. These funds increase public awareness and train health care professionals for the unique emergency medical needs of acutely ill and seriously injured children. Forty States have now established training programs to improve the quality of care available for children. The leading cause [[Page E 1608]] of death for them continues to be accident and injury. Children in the United States also continue to be at risk from illness due to the lack of timely immunizations, which can prevent diseases such as measles, mumps, and whooping cough. Unbelievably, our Nation continues to rank far below many lesser developed nations in the immunization rate for children. Our committee remains concerned about this problem and has consistently provided additional resources for childhood immunization programs. Again this year, we fulfill this commitment with increased funding to procure and distribute vaccines through public health centers and clinics. We have made a significant investment in this bill in other areas of preventive health care. Funding is increased for the Centers for Disease Control to continue its breast and cervical cancer screening program, its surveillance for chronic and environmental diseases, screening for lead poisoning, tuberculous and infectious diseases, and for education and research activities to prevent injuries. In another area of the bill, our committee maintained its commitment to the Social Security Program. For the first time, our committee has provided funding to a newly, independent Social Security Administration. Our bill includes $5.9 billion for the administrative costs of the program, a $300 million increase over the 1995 level, this despite the severe constraints faced by our committee. This increase will enable the Social Security Administration to continue to make the investments necessary to automate agency operations based on a strategic plan that will improve the quality and efficiency of services. It will also allow for improvement in the processing of disability cases and in providing face-to-face phone service. This reaffirmation of our support for Social Security sends a message that we strongly support the program, its almost 50 million current beneficiaries, and the countless millions of current contributors to the program who are future beneficiaries. We recognize the need to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of Social Security service delivery. Mr. Chairman, we have had to make many difficult decisions in the preparation of this legislation, but we have clearly defined some high priority areas in which the Federal Government must maintain its leadership responsibilities. This was not an easy task and it is one that will continue as this legislation moves through the House, Senate, and into conference.

Mr. YOUNG of Florida

Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Mr. Chairman, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from Pennsylvania [Mr. Goodling].

Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Louisiana [Mr. Livingston], the distinguished chairman of the Committee on Appropriations.

Mr. YOUNG of Florida

Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding. Mr. Chairman, I would like to say first that the committee is very much aware of this amendment, and we worked with both of the authors, the gentleman from Wisconsin [Mr. Neumann] and the gentleman from Oregon [Mr. DeFazio], and we are prepared to accept this amendment. Mr. Chairman, I would like to, if I might, point out that this amendment to reduce this money does not include aircraft assigned to the unified combatant command's, so it does not have a negative effect on any of our combatant air activities. Mr. Chairman, I would also like to say to both gentlemen that it is the intention of our subcommittee to hold specific hearings shortly after the House reconvenes in September on this very issue. But we agree strongly with what both gentlemen have said and we intend to pursue that.

Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Mr. Chairman, if the gentleman will yield, I would say to the gentleman that we understand the issue; we did have some concern about who really should be paying for this, and it is a good project, but our concern was who should pay for it. Mr. Chairman, the gentleman from Pennsylvania [Mr. Murtha] has stated our position very well. In the conference with the other body, we believe we will be able to work this out.

Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Mr. Chairman, will the gentlewoman yield?

Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Mr. Chairman, we appreciate the amendment being offered. We are very much aware of the amendment and agree with this amendment, and we are prepared to accept it.

Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last requisite number of words. Mr. Chairman, again, I would say to the gentleman that the subcommittee, as he knows, reduced this account by $40 million. We do believe that the additional $50 million will not create any undue burdens, and we are prepared to accept this amendment.

Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?

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

Mr. YOUNG of Florida

Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks on the H.R. 2126, making appropriations for the Department of Defense for the fiscal year ending September 30, 1996, and for other purposes, and that I be permitted to include tabular and extraneous material.