Don Young

Mr. YOUNG of Alaska

Mr. YOUNG of Alaska. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and agree to the resolution (H. Res. 1087) designating Room H-139 of the Capitol as the ``Henry J. Hyde Room''.

Mr. YOUNG of Alaska. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, House Resolution 1087 designates room H-139 of the United States Capitol as the Henry J. Hyde Room. This designation will become effective January 3, 2007. It is an honor to speak today on this resolution, which is a tribute to one of the finest Members of this Chamber, Congressman Henry Hyde. Congressman Hyde has served this country well. In 1942, he enlisted in the U.S. Navy, serving in combat in the Philippines. When he retired, he held the rank of commander. He attended Loyola School of Law in 1949 and was a successful attorney in Illinois. He became a State legislator in 1966 and was eventually elected to be the majority leader of the Illinois House of Representatives. In 1975, he was elected to this Chamber by the good people of the Sixth District of Illinois and has served them well over the past 32 years. Congressman Hyde has been a true champion and hero during his time in Congress. As chairman of the Judiciary Committee and International Relations Committee, Congressman Hyde has authored ground-breaking and effective legislation and has pushed for the promotion of democracy around the world. Over the past 32 years, Congressman Hyde has served in this building with honor, respect, and prestige. It is only fitting that we name H- 139 in his honor as a lasting tribute to his accomplishments and his steadfast dedication to his constituents and the American people. I support this legislation and encourage all my colleagues to do the same. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from California (Mr. Hunter).

Mr. YOUNG of Alaska. Mr. Speaker, I yield whatever time he may consume to the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Pence). (Mr. PENCE asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. YOUNG of Alaska

Mr. YOUNG of Alaska. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 6316) to extend through December 31, 2008, the authority of the Secretary of the Army to accept and expend funds contributed by non-Federal public entities to expedite the processing of permits.

Mr. YOUNG of Alaska

Mr. YOUNG of Alaska. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent for the immediate consideration of the concurrent resolution (H. Con. Res. 491) providing for a correction to the enrollment of H.R. 6233.

Mr. YOUNG of Alaska

Mr. YOUNG of Alaska. Mr. Speaker, I insert this exchange of letters between Don Young and Sherwood Boehlert for the Record. House of Representatives, Committee on Science, Washington, DC, September 29, 2006. Hon. Don Young, Chairman, Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, Washington, DC. Dear Mr. Chairman: I am writing to you concerning the jurisdictional interest of the Science Committee in matters being considered in H.R. 6233--To amend the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users to make technical corrections, and for other purposes. The bill amends research portions of H.R. 3, Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (P.L. 109-59), which are within the Science Committee's jurisdiction. The Science Committee acknowledges the importance of H.R. 6233 and the need for the legislation to move expeditiously. Therefore, while we have a valid claim to jurisdiction over the bill, I agree not to request a sequential referral. This, of course, is conditional on our mutual understanding that nothing in this legislation or my decision to forgo a sequential referral waives, reduces or otherwise affects the jurisdiction of the Science Committee, and that a copy of this letter and of your response will be included in the Congressional Record when the bill is considered on the House floor. The Science Committee also asks that you support our request to be conferees on any provisions over which we have jurisdiction during House-Senate conference on this legislation. Thank you for your attention to this matter. Sincerely, Sherwood Boehlert, Chairman.

Mr. YOUNG of Alaska. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding, and I want to thank Mr. DeFazio and Mr. Petri, and especially Mr. Oberstar, the ranking member. This is a good team. We wrote a good bill, but the bill was quite large, and there were some errors in printing and errors in judgment in the sense that somebody had misinterpreted what we wrote, and this bill is truly a technical corrections bill. The reasons it take a little time. As the gentleman from Minnesota mentioned, is because this is a two-body form of government, and there was some difference of opinion in the other body on what I will not mention, and it has taken us a long time to try to arrive at this technical corrections bill that gets done what we tried to do and intended to do and will do now in SAFETEA-LU. I would like at this time, again it has already been said, but to thank the staff, minority and majority, Graham Hill, Ward, and Jim Tymon, and everybody that has worked on this legislation, along with the other body. We now are at a point in the last days of this session that we will be able to get this bill done so we can go forth and implement what we did in SAFETEA-LU and that is getting transportation built within this country as it should. The gentleman from Minnesota also mentioned about the foundation, and I have to say this because I know we are on this TV or C-SPAN and I will say that right now the institution of knowledge about previous law is crucially important for the next step in building infrastructure in this country. Much of SAFETEA-LU was based upon what was done in the previous transportation act and the next one, 4 years from now, will be based upon SAFETEA-LU, and that is crucially important to understand where we were before we can go forward from where we should be. So for Members that say, well, this is an important institution, it is not important. If you want transportation to be built adequately and justifiably, then you go back through history and go forward on the blocks of building which we established in this legislation. I just want that it is a good technical correction bill. It will be done, I believe, tonight; and the other body has agreed to accept this, even though I cannot speak for them, but in doing so we will get the roads built, the bridges built and all the other programs the gentleman from Minnesota and the gentleman from Oregon and the gentleman from Wisconsin mentioned and that are in this SAFETEA-LU. So I congratulate those that worked so hard and took the time. I congratulate you for taking the effort, and I do think we ought to step forward and strongly support the passage of this legislation.

Mr. YOUNG of Alaska

Mr. YOUNG of Alaska. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding. I want to thank the Texas delegation for working together to bring forth this bill and solving a problem. My job is to solve problems, and this bill does solve a problem. It takes two cities and puts them together, and allows the State to go forward and we won't have this problem before us anymore. A lot of times we lose sight of solving problems in this body by hanging up on jurisdiction or hanging up on a small clause. But we are the people that write the laws, we create the laws, and we try to make them work. This is a bill that will take and rectify a mistake, I believe, in the past, and bring both parties together, both cities together, all airlines together, and provide for the service of the people of Texas and this Nation. I urge the passage of this bill.

Mr. YOUNG of Alaska

Mr. YOUNG of Alaska. Mr. Speaker, I insert in the Record a letter from me to Speaker Hastert regarding H.R. 5689, making technical corrections to SAFETEA-LU House of Representatives, Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, Washington, DC, September 29, 2006. Hon. Dennis J. Hastert, House of Representatives, Washington, DC. Dear Mr. Speaker: On June 28, 2006 the House passed H.R. 5689, making technical corrections to the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA: LU). Yesterday, I introduced a bill that revises H.R. 5689 to incorporate changes that the Senate has asked us to include (H.R. 6233). These changes are necessary to ensure that all policies, programs and projects embodied in last year's long-term highway, transit, and highway safety authorization bill are implemented as intended by the Congress. On September 14, 2006 the House passed H. Res. 1000, instituting a new standing order of the House with regard to earmarks in authorization, appropriations, and tax measures. H. Res. 1000 provides that, in order to consider a bill, the committee of jurisdiction must list all earmarks included in the bill and committee report along with the names of Members requesting the earmarks. The bi-partisan bill that I introduced yesterday has not been reported by the Committee, so there is no report or list of earmarks. In reading the standing order, I concluded that the requirement that a list appear with this bill does not apply because the point of order described in section 1(c) of H. Res. 1000 does not lie against a bill considered under suspension of the rules. I intend to move to suspend the rules of the House to pass H.R. 6233. This bill does not increase the amount of funding that is designated for projects in SAFETEA: LU. There are changes to the descriptions of projects that are currently in SAFETEA: LU and there are some projects to replace projects in SAFETEA: LU that cannot be executed or implemented. In this correction bill, however, the total amount of funding designated for projects is identical to the amount that was designated in SAFETEA: LU. Where this bill does provide funding (which is offset by a rescission of contract authority), the legislative sections providing such funding do not meet the earmarking definition, because no entity is named as the intended recipient of the funds. Where this bill does designate specific entities, or amend underlying project designations in SAFETEA: LU, it does not provide new funding. In addition this bill provides for no new outlays. In fact, the Congressional Budget Office has scored the bill as reducing contract authority by $4 million over five years. Thank you for your consideration of this matter. Sincerely, Don Young, Chairman

Mr. YOUNG of Alaska

Mr. YOUNG of Alaska. Madam Speaker, I an exchange of letters between Don Young and Richard Pombo for the Record. House of Representatives, Committee on Resources, Washington, DC, September 28, 2006. Hon. Don Young, Chairman, Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, Washington, DC. Dear Mr. Chairman: I have reviewed the text of H.R. 5681, the Coast Guard Authorization Act of 2006, and believe that the Committee on Resources has a jurisdictional interest in provisions in this important legislation dealing with fisheries. Specifically, we have identified a provision dealing with the Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands crab fishery in the Northern Region of the management plan. Recognizing that the House of Representatives has a dwindling number of legislative days left before the 109th Congress adjourns, I will forego seeking a sequential referral of H.R. 5681. Waiving the Committee on Resources' right to a referral in this case does not waive the Committee's jurisdiction over any provision in H.R. 5861 or similar provisions in other bills. In addition, I ask that you support my request to have the Committee on Resources represented on the conference on this bill, if a conference is necessary. Finally, I ask that you include this letter in the Congressional Record during debate on H.R. 5861 when it is considered by the House of Representatives. I appreciate your leadership on this bill and I look forward to working with you on H.R. 586. Sincerely, Richard W. Pombo, Chairman.

Mr. YOUNG of Alaska

Mr. YOUNG of Alaska. Mr. Speaker, I come to the House floor today to express my profound sadness for the loss of a constituent and a friend, Lloyd Wayne Waggoner. He was a husband, father, father-in-law, grandfather, brother, and a friend. Known by most people as ``Wayne'' or ``Gotebo,'' the little town in Oklahoma in which he grew up, Wayne was an Alaskan for more than 40 years. He arrived shortly after the 1964 earthquake with a friend who asked him to ride along on his trip to the last frontier. And like many people in Alaska, Wayne fell in love with the beauty, independence and kind people that Alaska had to offer, and he never left. When he first came to Alaska, he worked on an oil rig on the North Slope. During his years in the Last Frontier, he pursued such varied career interests as holding the first Seiko watch distributorship in the State, running for state office, operating a wholesale jewelry business, serving on the Anchorage Zoning Commission and opening Wayne's Diamond Center stores in Anchorage, Wasilla, and Fairbanks. He also gave his time generously to the Anchorage Lions Club, the Shriners, and the Freedom Frog program, which promotes recovery from substance abuse and addiction. Wayne had experiences, met people, and lived a life that most people only dream about. He regaled his family and friends with stories he told about the little bar in Laguna Beach that he gave to a friend when he decided not to return from Alaska; his dislike for salmon because that was all he ate for 3 weeks on a cargo ship he boarded as a stowaway in the Mediterranean; his one and only hole-in-one that he shot in 2001 at Fort Richardson Golf Course; the night he met the beautiful pianist--the love of his life, Karen--at the bar up at Stuckagain Heights; and the time he and his daughter saw a moose calf taken down by a sow bear right in front of them while fly-fishing in Naknek River. Wayne was a patriot, a great American who served his country honorably and a true sourdough Alaskan. With a story and a smile for everyone, he was a person that made people think, ``boy, am I glad I met him.'' We are all better for having known him, for having loved him, and for having been loved by him. For the person he was, for the lessons he taught us, for the love he shared with us, he will always be in our hearts. We celebrate his life and cherish our memories. Mr. Speaker, in Wayne's words I leave you with his favorite toast ``may you work like you don't need the money, may you dance like no one is watching, and may you love like you've never been hurt.''

Mr. YOUNG of Alaska

Mr. YOUNG of Alaska. Madam Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support this legislation. The Coast Guard has a great deal of authority, but they need the money and they need further authorization to do the missions we have charged them as the United States Congress. I hope and ask all of my colleagues to see the movie ``The Guardian.'' It explains a great deal what the Coast Guard does and why this bill should be supported. I compliment Mr. LoBiondo, the chairman of the subcommittee, and those who work on the minority side to make sure that this legislation is good. This legislation is well-thought out, and as it is presented tonight, I urge my colleagues to pass this legislation.

Mr. YOUNG of Alaska

Mr. YOUNG of Alaska. Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding. I would like to suggest one thing. I deeply respect the individual from New York that just spoke against the legislation. H.R. 5013 does not specifically address gun possession in emergency shelters. It addresses only housing except to prohibit future guns regulations above and beyond the Federal, State, and local law. This requirement was included to prevent the repeat of a short-lived FEMA effort to ban gun possession in the FEMA trailer parks in Louisiana. H.R. 5013 does not override Federal, State or local laws restricting gun possession in various locations often used as shelters such as schools, government buildings and sports arena. That is what this bill does not do. We address these issues, including the one where the Coast Guard was rescuing someone with a helicopter, they could not bring a firearm on board that vessel or that aircraft. I would like to suggest this would never have had to happen if someone, and I will say government people, of what branch or other had decided they would take law into their own hands and go into a law- abiding home and confiscate a gun from a citizen who had done no wrong, was only trying to protect their home. That is the premise of our democracy and our Republic, is the right to protect your castle. Regardless of whether it is the hoodlum, the burglar, the murderer, the rapist, or the government, no one has the right to take away my ability to defend myself, nor my cherished ones from he would intrude upon my being and my home. That is the second amendment; that is my right. To have a government, during a time of duress, the hurricane as bad as it was, to go into areas that were trying to protect themselves, and by the way, they went on television and said they did not have the manpower to address the looting, the rioters and the hoodlums but they had the manpower to go in and to take and confiscate arms from the law- abiding citizens of Louisiana, and by the way, I believe this is the only area it did occur. So what I am suggesting in this legislation, I want to thank Mr. Jindal especially being the prime sponsor, this legislation precludes the government from taking away what is my cherished personal right to protect those I love, in a time a duress and, yes, even in a time of peace because you will never know when that peace will be eroded and taken away from you. So this legislation is a step because someone else misstepped, and some would say it is not necessary, it will not happen again. I have been around here long enough to know never say it will not happen again. So we should look forward to this legislation and pass it. Get on with it and let those government agencies that misstepped know that they now are under the scope of reality and what is right for this great Nation.

Mr. YOUNG of Alaska

Mr. YOUNG of Alaska. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 5689) to amend the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users to make technical corrections, and for other purposes.

Mr. YOUNG of Alaska. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on H.R. 5689.

Mr. YOUNG of Alaska. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, H.R. 5689 amends the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Act: A Legacy for Users, or SAFETEA-LU, to make technical corrections. This bill was introduced by myself, Mr. Jim Oberstar of Minnesota, Mr. Peter DeFazio of Oregon and Mr. Petri from Wisconsin, who worked together on the development and passage of SAFETEA-LU authorization bill last year. Mr. Speaker, this bill is necessary because the technical corrections included in this bill have been identified by the Department of Transportation and are mostly of a conforming nature, or correct drafting errors. The most important correction we are making is the strengthening of the Federal highway research program by ensuring the continuation of legacy research programs carried out by the Department of Transportation. This bill has been scored by CBO and has no budgetary impact. Mr. Speaker, I support this legislation and encourage my colleagues to do the same. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. YOUNG of Alaska. Mr. Speaker, I have no further requests for time, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. YOUNG of Alaska

Mr. YOUNG of Alaska. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased today to introduce the No Child Left Behind Improvements Act of 2006. This legislation will improve accountability for the academic performance of children enrolled in the nation's public schools. My bill builds on the major reforms of the No Child Left Behind (NCLB) Act of 2001 signed into law on January 8, 2002 and offers improvements that address many of the unintended consequences of the federal legislation while holding states and school districts accountable. As a former teacher, I am committed to providing our nation's children with the best possible education. I firmly believe in the original goals of NCLB but I understand that a ``one size fits all'' approach to student achievement is not possible. Alaska is more than two times the size the state of Texas, yet only has a population of 660,000 compared to the 22.9 million residents of Texas. As you can see, providing education services in Alaska can be difficult as 190,000 Alaskan students are literally scattered over 572,000 square miles. Alaska has approximately 500 public schools and they are organized into 53 school districts. These include 34 city and borough school districts and 19 Regional Educational Attendance Areas which serve students living in towns and villages in politically unorganized areas of rural Alaska. Alaska schools vary greatly in size. High schools in Anchorage, the state's largest city, may serve more than 2,000 students. Schools in other urban areas such as Juneau, Fairbanks, the Kenai Peninsula, or the Matanuska-Susitna Valley may serve hundreds and are similar to schools in small cities in the rest of the United States. However, many schools in rural areas are small, some with 20 or fewer students at a variety of grade levels. They may be many miles from population centers and services, and accessible only by aircraft or boat. In remote villages, schools often serve as centers of community activity. In addition to the geographic barriers, Alaska, like many other states is faced with cultural obstacles. There are 20 different Alaska Native languages spoken in the state and during the 2004-2005 school year, students in the Anchorage School District spoke 95 different languages. Roughly 42 percent of students are from ethnic minority groups including Native Alaskan, Asian and Pacific Islander, Hispanic, and African American. Alaska is not alone in having to face unique challenges as it struggles to educate its children. Each state in this country one has geographic, economic or cultural barriers that impede its schools from reaching a level of success as mandated by NCLB. My bill will establish an improved framework for accountability that fairly and accurately assesses student, school, and school district performance. As a result, states and local school districts will be able to more strategically use their resources to bring about meaningful and measurable results. This legislation contains more than 40 provisions that focus on five areas: Assessments, Measuring Adequate Yearly Progress, Sanctions, State Flexibility by the U.S. Department of Education and Non-Public Schools. Specifically the bill provides the following: Assessments. The bill offers greater flexibility to states in the use of alternate assessments for students with disabilities based on the individual education program (IEP) and authorizes states and school districts to count the scores in the calculation of AYP. The bill also offers states the flexibility to use alternate assessments for students who are not proficient in English. In both categories of students the assessment instruments must be valid and reliable in measuring the performance based on the specific needs of the student. The bill would also grant states the flexibility to assess students more than once within the full academic year, and to use the higher scores in calculating the performance of subgroups. Measuring Adequate Yearly Progress. The bill would authorize states to expand their AYP measurement systems to include gain score approaches like value-added and give partial credit for meeting basic proficient targets. Additionally, states would be permitted greater flexibility in using alternate methods of measuring AYP as long as the ultimate goals of NCLB are achieved. Use of these specific flexibilities would require approval by the U.S. Department of Education. Further, the bill would authorize school districts and schools with diverse student populations to calculate AYP in a way that more accurately reflects subgroup and school performance. Sanctions: Public School Choice and Supplemental Services. The bill would strengthen the use of sanctions by applying such sanctions only when AYP is not met by the ``same group'' for two or more consecutive years in the same subject on the same indicator rather than applying sanctions when different groups or different indicators are involved from year to year in that subject. Additionally, the bill offers greater flexibility to states and school districts in the sequence of offering supplemental services and public school choice. Finally, the bill requires more effective use of local funds by limiting the options of public school choice and supplemental services only to those students within the subgroup that failed to meet their AYP targets in the same subject for two or more years--not all the students in the school. The bill would also remove restrictions from the current law that prohibit local school districts from providing supplemental services solely because the school district did not make AYP or is in improvement, corrective action, or restructuring status. However, the state would have to grant such authority to local school districts. Restructuring. With respect to requiring schools or school districts to implement certain broad restructuring provisions, the total number of students not scoring proficient or above would have to exceed 35% of the enrollment, and Congress would be required to appropriate an increase for Title I of at least $2.5 billion over the previous year, and appropriate at the authorized levels contained in the Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act of 2004. State Flexibility. The bill would grant authority to the Secretary of Education to (1) approve state accountability plans that vary from the federal framework to align with effective state accountability systems, (2) grant statutory and regulatory waivers that are unnecessarily burdensome or duplicative of state requirements, and (3) make public any approved amendments to state accountability plans. Further, the bill would require that any waivers of the state's plan approved by the Secretary would be available to any state on a case-by-case determination provided the state or agency meets any requirements issued by the Secretary applicable to such waivers. Non-Public Schools. The bill authorizes students enrolled in non- public schools who receive Title I services to be given the same assessments as public school students; and gives states the option to withhold Title I support to the non-public schools if their Title I students do not make AYP and perform at lower levels than their counterparts in the area's public schools for three years or more. I am pleased to be working with the National School Boards Association and am looking forward to pushing this important legislation through the House and Senate. Accordingly, I urge my colleagues to support the No Child Left Behind Improvements Act of 2006.

Mr. YOUNG of Alaska

Mr. YOUNG of Alaska. Yes, it is the intent of the conferees that both the new king crab processor quota shares and the new c.opilio processor quota shares shall receive a designation based on the location in which crab was historically processed.

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

Mr. YOUNG of Alaska

Mr. YOUNG of Alaska. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. YOUNG of Alaska. At this time I yield whatever time he may consume to the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Coble).

Mr. YOUNG of Alaska

Mr. YOUNG of Alaska. Mr. Speaker, I would just close by urging my colleagues to support this legislation. The House has under consideration the conference report (109-413) to the bill H.R. 889 to authorize appropriations for the Coast Guard for fiscal year 2006, to make technical corrections to various laws administered by the Coast Guard, and for other purposes.

Mr. YOUNG of Alaska. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and agree to the conference report on the bill (H.R. 889) to authorize appropriations for the Coast Guard for fiscal year 2006, to make technical corrections to various laws administered by the Coast Guard, and for other purposes.

Mr. YOUNG of Alaska. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on H.R. 889.