[Congressional Record Volume 143, Number 68 (Wednesday, May 21, 1997)]
[House]
[Pages H3071-H3079]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                RECEPTION OF FORMER MEMBERS OF CONGRESS

  The Speaker of the House presided.
  The SPEAKER. On behalf of this Chair and this Chamber, it is a high 
honor and distinct personal privilege to have the opportunity of 
welcoming so many of our former Members and colleagues as may be 
present here for this occasion. We all welcome you.
  The Chair at this time would recognize the distinguished majority 
leader, the gentleman from Texas [Mr. Armey], who may well be on the 
way. We were in session until 4 this morning. Many of you remember with 
fondness those particular events.
  Let the Chair proceed out of order, if he might. Since the 
distinguished gentleman from Maryland [Mr. Hoyer], the Democratic 
nominee, is here, the Chair will recognize him prior to the gentleman 
from Texas [Mr. Armey].
  The Chair would say after a 4 o'clock session, Mr. Hoyer does deserve 
a small round of applause for being here on time.
  Mr. HOYER. I know that all of you lamented the fact that you were not 
Members of the Congress of the United States last night, and you 
remember fondly those 3 o'clock in the morning sessions that we had, 
and you thought to yourself, what a great institution this is.
  I want to say that I am pleased to be here. Mr. Speaker, I am 
certainly pleased to be here with you. Last night was reminiscent of 
the first 100 days of the Contract With America, where it seemed to me 
we never stopped meeting.
  Mr. Speaker?
  He is not listening. That is typical of what we Democrats, the kind 
of respect we get around this House nowadays.
  I was pressed into service by a power even greater than the 
Speaker's. Charlie Johnson, our Parliamentarian, asked me to be here 
this morning, and he asked me at 3 o'clock in the morning, a 
particularly unfriendly request, I thought.
  But all of us spend a lot of money not to join your ranks. Senator 
Beall and my predecessor, Carlton Sickles, who held this seat, and I am 
so glad to welcome back my good friend and colleague, Bev Byron from 
Maryland. We have a number of Marylanders. Too many of them are former 
Members. I am not going to mention all of your names. But Lindy Boggs, 
I think probably only Bev Byron and Lindy Boggs have known me since 
long before I went to law school even.
  I am pleased to be here with you and welcome all of you back. It must 
be a great experience to come back and be with your colleagues. This is 
an incredibly wonderful institution. We kid about it. Obviously, there 
are tough times. You saw last night, I think, a demonstration of that.
  Mr. Speaker, I want to congratulate you on your remarks last night, 
which I thought were very appropriate. The President, the Speaker, the 
Democrats, and the Republicans in the House, coming together to try to 
pass a budget that nobody really thought was the budget they would have 
selected, clearly, but it was a budget that obviously a very large 
number of folks, indeed, I think only 99 voted against it, felt was in 
the best interests of our country.
  I see Larry Hogan, another one of my predecessors. Unlike Glenn, he 
is still constrained to sit on that side of the aisle. Old habits die 
hard, right, Larry?
  As a matter of fact, Larry's son ran against me just a few years ago, 
now that I think of it.
  This institution, of course, generates, I think, incredibly strong 
friendships among us on either side of the aisle, and although there is 
a great deal of

[[Page H3072]]

partisanship that has been reflected over the last few years, more than 
when I first came, which I think is lamentable personally, 
nevertheless, I think that as the newer Members get here, the longer 
they are here, the less partisan they become; not necessarily, as all 
of you have experienced, less convicted of the principles with which 
they came, but less convinced that the folks who do not agree with them 
are not good Americans as well.
  I think those of you who are former Members are not Republican former 
Members or Democratic former Members, but former Members who 
contributed greatly to your country, to your districts certainly, and 
your States, but to this institution as well. On behalf of Dick 
Gephardt and David Bonior and Vic Fazio and the rest of the leadership, 
I am very, very pleased to welcome you back and to thank you for the 
shoulders on which we try to serve as well as you did.
  Thank you very much.
  The SPEAKER. I want to note for the distinguished gentleman from 
Maryland that the Parliamentarian arrived during his talk, but shortly 
after his notice of the IOU that the Parliamentarian owes him, so the 
Parliamentarian should at some point be reminded of this institutional 
obligation.
  Let the Chair, on behalf of the majority, just say several things. 
First of all, the point that Mr. Hoyer made about all of us in a very 
real sense standing on your shoulders is literally true, partly because 
you trained us.
  I think back to working with Mrs. Boggs on the restoring of the House 
project. I think about times I worked with Chairman Tom Bevill as he 
put together the various water projects that we worked on together. I 
think of how much I learned from my very first leader, John Rhodes, and 
how much more I learned from Bob Michel.
  I can tell Bob in particular that there were several times yesterday 
when we were in the middle of an exciting vote, in an effort that ran 
from about 2 o'clock yesterday afternoon until 3 o'clock this morning, 
that I thought of the number of times that you had made a decision and 
decided to live it out, and you did not really know for sure whether 
you would win or lose, but you knew it was better to go ahead and stick 
to it once you had done it than it was to spend a whole lot of energy 
worrying about it. We worried a tad during the evening, but we ended up 
winning 216 to 214 in a magnificent show of bipartisanship.
  Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, excuse me for interfering. I did not know he 
was here, but in 1962 there was a House Member, and his office was next 
to Otis Pike's, and there was this young kid at the University of 
Maryland that wanted to get into politics. So he came to his office and 
he volunteered, and he ran a robo machine and then did that doggone 
machine that you did the newsletters on, that you got so dirty that you 
would never get the ink off, I thought. And that fellow is here. I 
worked for him for the last year I was at the University of Maryland 
and for 3 years at Georgetown Law School. He was responsible, very 
frankly, not only for my being able to go to law school but for the 
fact, I think, that I am here. Dan Brewster, former U.S. Senator from 
our State.
  The SPEAKER. I appreciate the gentleman's intervention. I would say I 
can hardly give you a better example of the point you were making and I 
am trying to reinforce. Literally, there is an organic chain of being 
that goes back to the very founding of this Congress, and in that sense 
we owe all of you a debt for having helped create the institution.
  The other thing I would say to you: We need your help. This 
institution, like virtually every institution in America, is changing. 
Many of you were here before C-SPAN. At least a few of you were here 
before we went to electronic recording of votes, and you know the 
institution was different when you had to stay on the floor long enough 
to get through the rollcall. You know that the whole social interaction 
was different.
  We are changing in many ways. I arrived at the very beginning of the 
C-SPAN era. Beginning in January 1995, we began to move toward putting 
the Congress on line. You can now access it through the Thomas System 
as well as a variety of other systems.
  When I announced in a 1-minute last Friday that the budget agreement 
would be available on the Internet literally before GPO could print it, 
in the first hour after my 1-minute speech there were 10,000 
connections with the site that had the budget agreement. People all 
over the country were getting it for free. They did not have to have a 
lobbyist; they did not have to have a subscription to a fancy service.
  However, the core of the institution, I think, has probably not 
changed since the Continental Congress or since the various assemblies 
of the colonies. Human beings have to come together from different 
places, each empowered by their citizens, each bringing their hopes, 
their dreams, their personalities, their idiosyncracies. They have to 
gradually find a way to work together, because if you can't, you can't 
get 218 votes and you can't get anything done. It is as frustrating, 
confusing, and human as it was in the very beginning.
  I think all of you can continue to serve your country and help all of 
us to the degree you can find the time, whether in a classroom or a 
civic club or in the news media, to explain and educate about this 
complex, frustrating, and difficult process.
  We have to get the country to understand that at the heart of the 
process of freedom is not the Presidential press conference, it is the 
legislative process; it is the give and take of independently elected, 
free people coming together to try to create a better product by the 
friction of their passions and by the friction of their ideas.
  Each of you, having lived it, having been there, having been here at 
4 o'clock in the morning, having been in the conference committees, 
having been in the subcommittees, having been in the hearings, each of 
you can do an immense amount to help younger Americans learn that this 
is the inevitable process by which freedom survives and renews itself.
  In that sense, I think that this 27th annual meeting of the U.S. 
Association of Former Members of Congress is a patriotic meeting and 
that you serve a patriotic service.
  Last year, I was very proud when you honored my leader, Bob Michel, 
with your Distinguished Service Award. This year, you are going to 
recognize a gentleman who has gone on to serve his country in new and 
even more famous ways, although I doubt if he will travel much more as 
the U.N. Ambassador than he did as a Member of Congress, because he set 
the alltime record for one-man delegations to weird and obscure places. 
But Bill Richardson certainly has earned the Distinguished Service 
Award by the act of distinguished service, and I am glad you are doing 
that.
  Now it is my great honor to request the past president of the 
Association to take this chair, the gentlewoman from Louisiana, Lindy 
Boggs.
  Mrs. BOGGS (presiding). Thank you, Mr. Speaker. It is an honor, of 
course, to be here to preside over this historic meeting. I am very, 
very pleased to be here.
  The Clerk will now call the roll of former Members of Congress.
  The Clerk called the roll of the former Members of Congress, and the 
following former Members answered to their names:

  Rollcall of Former Members of Congress Attending 27th Annual Spring 
                         Meeting, May 21, 1997

  William V. (Bill) Alexander of Arkansas;
  Chester G. Atkins of Massachusetts;
  J. Glenn Beall, Jr., of Maryland;
  Tom Bevill of Alabama;
  James H. Bilbray of Nevada;
  Lindy Boggs of Louisiana;
  Daniel B. Brewster of Maryland;
  William Broomfield of Michigan;
  Donald G. Brotzman of Colorado;
  Glenn Browder of Alabama;
  Clarence J. Brown of Ohio;
  James T. Broyhill of North Carolina;
  Jack Buechner of Missouri;
  Clair W. Burgener of California;
  Beverly B. Byron of Maryland;
  Elford A. Cederberg of Michigan;
  Charles E. Chamberlain of Michigan;
  Barbara Rose Collins of Michigan;
  William C. Cramer of Florida;
  Robert W. Daniel, Jr., of Virginia;
  E (Kika) de la Garza of Texas;
  Ron de Lugo of Virgin Islands;
  Joseph J. Dioguardi of New York;
  John N. Erlenborn of Illinois;

[[Page H3073]]

  Marvin L. Esch of Michigan;
  Louis Fry, Jr., of Florida;
  Robert Garcia of New York;
  Robert N. Giaimo of Connecticut;
  Robert A. Grant of Indiana;
  Gilbert Gude of Maryland;
  Robert P. Hanrahan of Illinois;
  Dennis M. Hertel of Michigan;
  Lawrence J. Hogan of Maryland;
  Margorie Holt of Maryland;
  Elizabeth Holtzman of New York;
  John W. Jenrette, Jr., of South Carolina;
  Don Johnson of Georgia;
  Hastings Keith of Massachusetts;
  David S. King of Utah;
  Herb Klein of New Jersey;
  Dan H. Kuykendall of Tennessee;
  Peter N. Kyros of Maine;
  Lawrence P. ``Larry'' La Rocco of Idaho;
  Norman F. Lent of New York;
  Jim Lloyd of California;
  Cathy Long of Louisiana;
  Romano L. Mazzoli of Kentucky;
  James A. McClure of Idaho;
  Lloyd Meeds of Washington;
  Robert H. Michel of Illinois;
  Clarence E. Miller of Ohio;
  John S. Monagan of Connecticut;
  G.V. ``Sonny'' Montgomery of Mississippi;
  Frank E. Moss of Utah;
  James L. Nelligan of Pennsylvania;
  Stanford E. Parris of Virginia;
  Claiborne Pell of Rhode Island;
  Shirley N. Pettis of California;
  J.J. Pickle of Texas;
  Otis G. Pike of New York;
  Richardson Preyer of North Carolina;
  Joel Pritchard of Washington;
  Bill Richardson of New Mexico;
  John J. Rhodes of Arizona;
  John J. Rhodes III, of Arizona;
  Matthew J. Rinaldo of New Jersey;
  Paul G. Rogers of Florida;
  Toby Roth of Wisconsin;
  Philip E. Ruppe of Michigan;
  Marty Russo of Illinois;
  George E. Sangmeister of Illinois;
  Harold S. Sawyer of Michigan;
  James H. Scheuer of New York;
  Richard T. Schulze of Pennsylvania;
  Phil Sharp of Indiana;
  Carlton R. Sickles of Maryland;
  Jim Slattery of Kansas;
  Neal E. Smith of Iowa;
  Al Swift of Washington;
  James W. Symington of Missouri;
  Charles W. Whalen, Jr., of Ohio;
  George C. Wortley of New York;
  Beryl Anthony of Arkansas;
  Richard Chrysler of Michigan;
  Ronald Coleman of Texas;
  Lane Evans of Illinois;
  Harry Haskell of Delaware;
  William Hathaway of Maine;
  Bill Lowery of California;
  Paul McCloskey of California;
  Howard Pollick of Alaska.
  Mrs. BOGGS. The Clerk has reported that 80 Members are present, so we 
will call this session together.
  It is now my tremendous pleasure to present the innovative, highly 
successful, intelligent, hard working president of the Former Members 
of Congress Association, the gentleman from Florida, Mr. Frey.
  (Mr. FREY asked and was given permission to revise and extend his 
remarks.)
  Mr. FREY. Madam Speaker, where were you when I was running for 
Governor?
  Mrs. BOGGS. Mr. Frey is recognized to give a report on his presidency 
and the work of the association in the past year.
  Mr. FREY. Madam Speaker, thank you for those kind introductory 
remarks. They are obviously deeply appreciated.
  All of us are pleased and honored to have this opportunity once again 
to be on the House floor to present the 27th annual report to the 
Congress. I want to thank the Speaker, Newt Gingrich, the minority 
leader, all Members of the Congress, and the gentleman from Maryland. 
Thank goodness there were not any more people from Maryland here; we 
would not have gotten to the meeting, I do not think.
  Madam Speaker, this association is in its 27th year since its 
inception, has over 600 members and an annual budget in excess of 
$700,000, which is going to reach this year probably close to $1 
million. We are a bipartisan, or probably more correctly a nonpartisan, 
organization, united by the knowledge it was a unique privilege to 
serve in the Congress and also with the understanding that we have an 
obligation to continue to give back to this country which has done so 
much for each and every one of us.
  Certainly it is an interesting time to serve in the Congress but is 
also an interesting time to be involved with the Association of Former 
Members, which has really changed significantly over the last number of 
years. What started out as basically an alumni association has changed 
into an organization that has taken on more and more government-related 
tasks and has developed, in accordance with its charter, a number of 
programs, both domestic and international, to promote the improved 
understanding of Congress as an institution and representative 
democracy as a system of government.
  There are probably several reasons for the dynamic change. The first 
is that fewer and fewer people are serving longer and longer in 
Congress, some by chance and some by choice. So people are leaving 
Congress. Some go on and serve in key positions, such as, obviously, 
the Vice President, or Tim Wirth. Many of our former Members have 
served in key positions, but many are still looking for something to 
do, something to do in the public service area, and this organization 
gives them that chance.
  Also, and the Speaker mentioned it, our institutions are under 
attack. Just this week there was a new book that trashed the Congress 
and said everybody who served here was basically either a sexist or 
stupid or both, I am not sure in what order, and it is obviously by 
people who have never been in combat as such, always the guy on the 
side lines. But it is the thing to do. It is really easy to do.
  As we travel around, I think we find that those of us who have 
nothing to gain or are not running for political office, who really 
love this place, in some ways have a certain degree of credibility for 
those of us in politics that maybe does not exist anyplace else, and I 
think it is important that we do get out to the colleges and campuses, 
as we have done.
  It is a difficult time to serve in public office, but this 
institution and what we have been given here is absolutely fundamental 
to the freedom that this country has. We haven't been free all that 
long. We are the longest lasting democracy, but it hasn't been all that 
long, and it isn't because we have been lucky, it is because people 
have worked at it, people of both parties who sincerely care about this 
country.
  One other reason this organization is becoming more and more needed 
is the demand for time. Late sessions obviously, but a Congressperson 
has so much to do, and there is so much media, so much need to educate. 
We are always on call. Sitting out here is more knowledge probably than 
in any place in this country, people who know more about issues and 
worked on them than anyplace else. It is an incredible asset for this 
Nation that we have and all of us have.
  I think, lastly, more than anything else, we are all united by a true 
love of this institution. I think the word ``privilege'' to me is the 
word that describes how I feel about this, and I know how each and 
every one of you feel about it.
  In a minute I am going to yield to various Members who have done and 
been involved in certain areas to let them tell you a little bit about 
what it is and let the people out there listening understand more about 
us, but because of a scheduling problem in terms of the need to get to 
a couple meetings and probably rescue some hostages, we are going to 
move out of order a little bit and give our distinguished service 
award. We do that each year to someone in the country who we think just 
epitomizes what is best about the Congress and being a public servant. 
Last year, of course, that was our former minority leader, Bob Michel. 
It was wonderful again to see Bob here.
  We rotate it from the Republicans to the Democrats.
  This year is a Democrat recipient, and of course it is the U.S. 
Ambassador to the United Nations, the Honorable Bill Richardson. Bill 
was elected seven times from his district, I guess served seven full 
terms before the President appointed him on December 13, 1996. As 
Ambassador, he is a member of the President's cabinet, a member of the 
National Security Council, and, of course, as a Member of the U.S. 
Congress, he held one of the highest ranking positions in the House 
Democratic leadership.

[[Page H3074]]

  I think we also know that even though he was not the U.S. Ambassador 
to the United Nations, he was somebody who probably was doing the job 
before he got it. He was all over the world, rescuing hostages, 
helping, really serving as just a tremendous part of U.S. foreign 
policy.
  In 1996, he held a historic meeting with Cuba's Fidel Castro, during 
which he successfully negotiated the release of three political 
prisoners and got visas for their families.
  I think all of us who know Bill and who served with him and know him 
knows he has tremendous energy, he is highly intelligent, he is 
uncompromisingly honest and he truly represents what is best in a 
public servant. I know all of you share my feelings of respect and 
admiration for Ambassador Richardson. I would appreciate it if he would 
come forward now to receive the award.
  Time out for glasses. It reads, I think, ``Presented to the Honorable 
Bill Richardson for exemplary service to the Nation, including seven 
terms as U.S. Representative for the Third District of New Mexico, 
numerous humanitarian and diplomatic special assignments, and his 
current service as U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations. Washington, 
DC, May 21, 1997.''
  Bill, there is also a scrapbook of letters from your friends, which 
there is a lot more we have got to add to it, but you are obviously 
respected and loved, and we are just so proud to be able to give you 
this award.
  Mr. RICHARDSON. Marty Russo said he would start chiding me if I went 
over 2 minutes.
  Thank you very much. This is a great honor for me, especially when I 
see so many friends. I served 14 years in the House, and I think I have 
served with about 70 percent of you, and the Speaker made a little joke 
about congressional travel. But really, in my 14 years, I felt that 
through this travel is where you get to know people from both sides of 
the aisle, where true bipartisanship, and they had this Hershey 
conference on civility. As I recall, whenever we bonded together on 
some of these trips, and I see Clinger back there and my wife saying to 
me that she found Democratic and Republican wives people that she could 
relate to, and she could not understand why there were such differences 
between the two parties, when as Americans we were very much together.
  Let me just say that at the United Nations, it is a challenge. But if 
I brought some skills to the United Nations, they were skills that I 
learned right here as a Member of the House, skills of negotiating, of 
relating to each other, of doing the thousands of town meetings that 
many of us have done. This is where you learn to negotiate and deal 
with people and cut deals and relate and extricate things from somebody 
else. At the same time, the camaraderie, the collegiality we had as 
Members, is something that I know we will never forget.
  So I am very humbled in getting this award. I want you to know that 
public housing is existing well at the Waldorf Towers in New York. You 
are all most welcome to come. We have a lot of bedrooms. As former 
Members of Congress, I can assure you, you will be treated just as well 
as any member of the President's Cabinet.
  So in accepting this award, let me say that it is most gracious of 
you to give it to me. Regrettably, I have to go back to New York for a 
Security Council meeting which will deal with sanctions on Libya. It is 
a skill, as I said, in terms of my committee assignments, the work that 
we did together, that I have learned with you.
  So I look forward to being active in this organization. I noticed 
early on my name was not called, so that means I probably have to pay 
some dues. But to all of you, if I do not get a chance to see and hug 
each one of you, and I know because of the schedule we will not be able 
to, I want you to know that I remember one incident about each and 
every one of you that is lodged in my being and my heart, that is a 
good one. And whether I made funny noises at you or whether we had a 
chance to do something together, that is something that I will always 
cherish.
  To Lou Frey, thanks for that very nice introduction. To all of you, I 
mean it, New York, the Waldorf, the U.N., I hope we get a chance to 
visit again.
  Thank you so much.
  Mr. FREY. Thank you, Mr. Ambassador, for those kind remarks, and good 
luck at the Security Council.
  As I indicated before, a number of Members have been involved in 
various activities, and what I would like to do is yield to some of the 
Members to briefly describe what they have done and what they have 
taken part in.
  As I indicated, the association has provided opportunities for the 
Members to share their congressional experiences overseas. In the past 
we have had 16 study groups that have been carried out through the 
country and throughout the world. I would like to yield, if he is here, 
to the gentleman from Missouri, Jack Buechner, who will talk about a 
trip he and Congressman Hertel took to Africa in October of 1966. Is he 
here? Two demerits. His dues get doubled.
  Here he is. I just was warming up. It is all yours.
  Mrs. BOGGS. The gentleman from Missouri, Mr. Buechner, is recognized.
  Mr. BUECHNER. Thank you for yielding, Mr. President, and fellow 
former Members. It is good to be here back in the well. It has been a 
long time. Let me take this off, because it is bad for the camera, if 
you remember that.
  I am trying to make this brief, but I have to tell you, taking a trip 
with Dennis Hertel and encapsulating it in a few minutes is a pretty 
tough task, because Dennis loves to talk to people. We went to 
Zimbabwe. The U.S. Information Agency sent us there ostensibly to talk 
about the Presidential elections in United States.
  But once we got there, they said you know, this is a one-party state, 
and they always say that the U.S. political system is the same, because 
there is not a nickel's worth of difference between the Republicans and 
the Democrats. We probably disagree about that, but our goal was to 
sharply define the differences between the two parties.
  So in the political game, we always try to talk about our colleagues 
and that we agree on this and disagree on that and agree to disagree. 
But Dennis and I went at it hammer and tongs, including the national 
broadcast that we had. We had their top anchorman interview us, or 
moderate the debate at the U.S. Information Agency's offices, went 
throughout the country, and Dennis and I tried to as sharply define the 
differences between the two political Presidential campaigns and the 
candidates as possible. We really had a great time, probably maybe 
leaning to the extremes on issues to define the differences.
  The most interesting thing was that wherever we went, and we had 
probably five different occasions with legislators, parliamentarians, 
with Cabinet officials, with university professors and students, we 
went and met with them, I just want to close because I know the time is 
limited, that we had a great time, we pointed out that there was a 
difference between the parties and between the candidates, and that in 
the United States there was an opportunity for this difference to be 
shown to the American public, and that was very good for us and it was 
good for those people in Zimbabwe that were trying to promote a 
pluralistic society.
  But one of the things that always came up was, people were asking us 
why we were picking as a country on poor old Fidel Castro. And at one 
of these occasions, all of a sudden Dennis remarked about what a thug 
that Castro was, and that there were no multi-parties and freedom of 
political participation in Cuba, and he went on saying that if Castro 
was such a great guy, how come he did not do this and did not allow 
travel, and he went through these things.
  Afterwards, I said, ``You know, Dennis, I did not know you were that 
really philosophically opposed to Fidel Castro.'' He said, ``I do not 
give a damn about Fidel Castro, but I am getting tired of being picked 
on.''
  So we expressed our individualism and our political partisanship. We 
had a wonderful time, and I think the U.S. Information Agency said the 
former Members of Congress did as good a job of letting people in a 
part of the world that is very interested in the transition to 
democracy, especially following upon South Africa and building upon 
that, and this is something I would encourage you to do.
  I want to remind you, we flew coach. It is a 25-hour portal-to-portal 
trip. It is not for the faint of heart. But I have

[[Page H3075]]

to tell you, Dennis Hertel managed to speak to everybody that he met 
for long periods of time, and he spent more time being a former Member 
of Congress than I did. I slept and read a lot.
  Thank you very much. I yield back.
  Mr. FREY. I would now like to yield to the gentlewoman from Maryland, 
Beverly Byron, to talk about the trip to China in September 1996 and 
the result of the trip. The former Members paid their own international 
travel costs, and the costs in China were paid by the Foreign Affairs 
Committee of the National People's Congress.
  Mrs. BOGGS. The gentlewoman from Maryland, Mrs. Byron, is recognized.
  Mrs. BYRON. Let me say that, Lou, I have to have this side of the 
aisle, I am sorry. I cannot speak from the other side. It just does not 
work. It is like church and the movies; you know which side you are 
comfortable on.
  Let me say that we were able to pull together a delegation of 10 
former Members, of 4 spouses, 2 daughters, no animals, to meet in 
Beijing in September of last year, and we began a 10-day study tour of 
China at the invitation of their Foreign Affairs Committee.
  This group of former Members, many of whom had been in China before, 
were able to gain a great deal of comparison with the previous visits. 
Prior to the trip, we held briefings with the State Department, the 
Foreign Affairs Committee staff of the House, and received many, many 
pages of background material.
  While we were in Beijing, we held meetings with the chairman of the 
Foreign Affairs Committee, our host, Zhu Liang, and since he stated 
that since launching a reform campaign, economic development is China's 
first priority. The United States position is still one China. That was 
discussed on numerous occasions. That has not changed.
  We will see the magical date of July 1, 1997, approaching, and the 
world will be looking at the transfer of Hong Kong and how China 
handles the current vibrant, economically stable city that is presently 
there.
  A second meeting was held with the chairman of the standing 
committee, and that was a discussion on the public influence in the 
United States of the press, and it is important to have a continuing 
dialog. It was discussed that an exchange program should begin between 
our two countries.
  The Vice Premier, Minister of Foreign Affairs Qian Qichen, stated, 
and this is rather interesting, that China must be economically stable 
to have a peaceful world. As this body begins its discussion in the 
next few weeks on most-favored-nation status for China and the vote is 
taken next month, I quote the Vice Premier. Human rights have improved 
greatly since 1940.
  That is 56 years.
  He also stated, but China's leaders are working on correcting a 
number of areas.
  It will be interesting to see what areas.
  Ambassador Sasser and his DCM were extremely helpful with us, and we 
had in-depth briefings with his country team.
  The remainder of the trip was outside Beijing. We went to Xian, where 
the Provisional People's Congress were our host. They talked about 
trade and education. There are 47 universities and 10 military 
academies in Xian alone. Shanghai, which was a municipality, was our 
host.
  Much of the discussion was on foreign trade, with $48 million spent 
last year, $8 million with the United States, and last September there 
were 15,000 joint ventures, of which 1,700 were with U.S. companies.
  We were able to export a little bit of the U.S. culture when Carlton 
Sickles gave us a rendition on his miniature harmonica and Nancy 
Schulze and Judy Brewster belted forth with ``Edelweis.'' I am not sure 
how the German exchange program song sheet got with us, but it did.
  We moved on to Quilin, and there we were able to see the sister city 
of Orlando, FL, even to the fireworks that they held as we were on 
board a riverboat. This city is visited by 8 million Chinese visitors a 
year and a half a million from overseas. Much of the discussions were 
on environmental, water, electric issues, and they were very pleased to 
talk about their new airport that was to open in the next week which 
will give 10 times the capacity of the current airport.
  Several members of our delegation did some in-depth research on 
medical issues and, at every point and turn in the visit, tried 
acupuncture. I will let them report that on their own.
  As a result of our trip, I think it is the intent of this 
organization, the former Members, to create and encourage sponsorship 
of an exchange program of the U.S. Congress and the Nation's People's 
Congress. The board of directors has approved this, and we are going to 
be looking to fund that.
  We have a delegation report that has been filed with various Members 
of the House and the State Department. Were it not for Lou Frey and 
Linda Reed, this trip would not have been possible, and I want to thank 
them and look forward to many more of this group that is before us 
today taking part in such an exchange.
  Thank you.
  Mr. FREY. I thank the gentlewoman. She is chairman of the committee 
to work on this with a number of the people who went on the trip, so we 
certainly appreciate that.
  I would next like to yield to the former president of the 
association, who really put together a trip through the Ford Foundation 
to Cuba. One of the things I think we found is that there are times 
that we, as former Members, can do things relatively unofficially that 
it is difficult for sitting Members to do, and maybe this Cuban trip 
was one of them.
  So the gentleman from Missouri, Mr. Symington.
  Mrs. BOGGS. The gentleman from Missouri, Mr. Symington, is recognized 
for his remarks.
  Mr. SYMINGTON. Madam Speaker, Mr. FMC President Frey, thank you.
  The week of December 9 to 15, 1996, I was privileged to join three 
other former Members and two then sitting Members of Congress on a 
bipartisan fact-finding trip to Cuba.
  The delegation of three Democrats and three Republicans consisted of 
our association president, Lou Frey of Florida, as its chairman, myself 
as co-chairman, Mike Barnes of Maryland, Dennis DeConcini of Arizona, 
Toby Roth of Wisconsin, and Jon Christensen of Nebraska.
  Our very full schedule of visits and appointments, arranged in part 
privately and in part via the Cuban Government, brought us together 
with ordinary people, students, academicians, church leaders, political 
dissidents, industrialists, Government officials, members of the 
diplomatic corps, and the U.S. intercession. For these contacts and 
opportunities, we were indebted to our very able association 
consultant, Walter Raymond, and to the good offices of a former Cuban 
hand, retired Ambassador Timothy Towell, who advanced and accompanied 
us on this trip.
  We were well briefed prior to the visit by the State Department and 
National Security Council; Mr. Eizenstat, the President's Special Envoy 
on Cuban Affairs; leaders of the Cuban-American communities; and 
Members of Congress and key legislative aides. Upon return, we were 
debriefed by these same individuals and offices and particularly the 
chairman of the House foreign affairs committee, international affairs 
committee, Ben Gilman, and the ranking member, Lee Hamilton, and their 
staffs. Our recommendations were placed in the Record by Mr. Hamilton.
  Briefly, they reflected the consensus of this group that, first, the 
lives and prospects of the Cuban people are still, as my fellow 
Missourian, Mr. Buechner, intimated, under rigid government control; 
and, second, that a policy of selective engagement would prove more 
effective in diminishing those rigidities than one of unremitting 
isolation and sanctions.
  We specifically recommended the permitting of food and other 
humanitarian assistance, properly handled, without the present 
obstacles to travel and shipment. The Cuban people themselves, 
including those in endangered opposition, when given the opportunity, 
expressed the hope that Americans would soon return in great numbers on 
business or vacation or both. The larger questions thus raised remain 
before our Government and Congress for review and consideration.
  Thank you very much.
  Mr. FREY. Thank you, Mr. Symington.
  C-SPAN was nice enough to cover it. We had a press conference. We 
came

[[Page H3076]]

back and were surprised. We thought four or five people would show up. 
We had about 70. National press was there. There is obvious continued 
press interest in this, which shows you how effective we can be.
  Next I would like to yield to the gentleman from Wisconsin, Toby 
Roth, who will talk about our Congressional Study Group on Germany 
which is funded primarily by the German Marshall Fund, and the 
Congressional Study Group in Japan funded by the Japanese-United States 
Friendship Commission.
  Mrs. BOGGS. The gentleman from Wisconsin is recognized.
  Mr. ROTH. Thank you, Madam Speaker and Mr. President. It is great to 
be here this morning with you.
  You and I share a distinguished place in American history in that we 
were fortunate, all of us, to serve in the U.S. Congress. And I think I 
know everyone in the room here this morning. I want to say it has been 
a real honor to serve with you, and I think of you often.
  Madam Speaker and Mr. President, I am delighted to thank you, the 
former Members of Congress, for the possibility of the two superbly 
managed study groups we have, one in Germany and one in Japan. I have 
had firsthand knowledge on the value of the Congressional Study Group 
on Germany. Last year I was with our congressional delegation when we 
visited Bonn. We met with Members of the Bundestag, the people in the 
Government, Foreign Minister Klaus Kinkel, statesmen like Graf Otto von 
Lambsdorff, and many other prominent Germans in the Government. I do 
not have to tell you, the former Members of Congress, how valuable 
these exchanges are.
  This year we had another delegation visit to Germany, and, of course, 
we look forward to working with the German delegations when they visit 
us here in the United States.
  The study group has sponsored 14 annual seminars and other meetings 
and has involved more than 100 congressional participants with our 
counterparts in the German Bundestag in various discussions. Ongoing 
activities with the study group include, for example, the one on 
Germany is sponsoring annual seminars involving Members of the U.S. 
Congress and their counterparts in the German Bundestag, conducting a 
hospitality program at the U.S. Capitol right here for distinguished 
guests from Germany, arranging for members of the Bundestag to visit 
congressional delegates' districts with the Members of Congress.
  I do not have to reiterate to you again how vital and important these 
activities are for the parliamentarians of both countries.
  The study group on Japan has some 70 Members of the Congress. The 
objectives of the study group are to develop a congressional forum for 
the sustained analysis of policy options on major issues in United 
States.-Japan relations and to increase opportunities for Members of 
Congress to meet with their counterparts in the Japanese Diet for frank 
discussions of those key issues.
  The end of the cold war has profoundly changed the way governments 
have been reacting and making decisions and reacting to events, but 
you, the former Members of Congress, know better than anyone else that 
no report, no Internet, no briefing can substitute for face-to-face 
meetings.
  I thank you, the former Members of Congress, for your commitment and 
dedication to these two outstanding programs.
  Mr. FREY. Thank you.
  I think it is important to note that under the rules of financing and 
many of the rules of the House, the former Members fill a vacuum for a 
service that cannot be done in the House. So we really are instrumental 
to keep these programs alive, and we are looking at other programs with 
other countries to do this.
  Now I would like to yield to the gentleman from Michigan, I do not 
know if it is the better or worse half of that dynamic duo, Dennis 
Hertel, to talk about our program in the Ukraine.
  Mrs. BOGGS. The gentleman from Michigan, Mr. Hertel, is recognized.
  Mr. HERTEL. Thank you, Madam Chairperson.
  First I would like to offer my congratulations to our chairperson as 
the Ambassador to the Vatican and the first woman from the United 
States to be appointed to that post to represent our Nation.
  Mr. FREY. You stole my closing line, but that is all right.
  Mr. HERTEL. I really do want to thank the staff of this association 
for all they have done. Linda Reed has done yeoman's work. There are so 
many things they can accomplish with so very few people and limited 
dollars. And Walt Raymond, who, as staff always do, has assisted me in 
preparing this report on our Ukrainian program. It is our broadest 
program.
  The association has been supporting a parliamentary democracy program 
for the past 3 years in the Ukraine. The Ukraine was selected for its 
vital importance to the region. A free and independent Ukraine 
favorably changes the political situation in the region and enhances 
European security.
  Our program of support of the Ukrainian Parliament was initiated in 
March 1994. Cliff Downen, a former senior staffer, has been our field 
representative. In his first year, he focused primarily as an adviser 
on basic parliamentary practices, including rules of procedure, 
committee processes, how to draft a bill, transparency, and related 
subjects.
  Several former Members and Bill Brown, our former Parliamentarian, 
also visited Kiev to help the Ukrainians in the first phase. Now we 
have moved on to provide key staff to their parliament and key research 
papers to their various committees, including the chairmen that are 
working on reforms there.
  These activities were the heart of our program in the second year. We 
brought in 35 Ukrainian interns who were competitively selected to 
represent a broad geographic cross-section of the country. Finally, now 
in the last year, we are supporting 45 young Ukrainians in the 
Parliament, over half of which are women.
  We have established with the leadership a better working relationship 
so that now, for 1997-98, we can increase the number of interns to 
establish a provincial program in at least three of their state 
governments in the Ukraine to expand significantly on support for 
research and analysis, and the latter is designed to follow up after 
the end of the congressional research program in the Ukraine, which has 
provided computers and related equipment and established the basis for 
a reference service.
  When we see the controversy and the great issues and problems facing 
the Ukraine and all the Soviet Union, former Soviet Union, we see how 
important this program has been and how well it has been supported by 
the members of the association.
  Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
  Mr. FREY. Thank you for that report.
  We have done this in some of the other former Iron Curtain countries, 
Slovakia, some of the others. We sent people over there to work with 
their parliaments on it. I have been to Slovakia three times, twice in 
the winter. It is not something you would volunteer for. They are 
starting at ground zero. It is really interesting. There is no 
institutional history whatsoever.
  Now I would like to yield to the gentleman from Kentucky, Mr. 
Mazzoli, who will talk about a trip that he and our former Member and 
Secretary of the Interior, Manuel Lujan, took to Mexico, to help us 
maybe set up an exchange program there.
  Mrs. BOGGS. The gentleman is recognized.
  Mr. MAZZOLI. Madam Speaker, Mr. President, ladies and gentlemen, my 
former colleagues, how great it is to see everyone and be with you 
today.
  The association serves many purposes, and under the excellent 
leadership of Lou Frey, our friend from Orlando, and the able staff 
work of Linda Reed, Walt Raymond, and the group, we really maximize the 
bounce for the buck.
  As a result of the work that has been done, the association affords 
us, as former Members, a chance to come together in this beautiful 
Chamber, which holds so many memories for all of us, as the scenes of 
our legislative efforts for our hometowns and States.
  It also affords us an opportunity, through the Campus Visit Program, 
to visit campuses around the country. It was my pleasure to visit the 
alma mater of Dick Lugar, our colleague from across the Capitol, 
Denison University in Granville, OH, last springtime. It was a 
wonderful visit. I spent time with the students and the faculty.

[[Page H3077]]

  Our association also offers opportunities to travel abroad. As our 
President said, Congressman Lujan and I did travel to Mexico. We spent 
a week there in June of last year between Mexico City and Guadalajara. 
There are many memories. We had meetings, as all of us have, with 
parliamentarians, with the academic community, with the business 
community, the government leaders, our counterparts in the assembly. We 
came away with many feelings. We filed that, Mr. President, in a full 
report which you have, I think, received permission to file in the 
Record.
  But essentially, we found the attitude much improved, and I think 
that serves to underscore the outstanding work that our colleague, Jim 
Jones, has done in Mexico as Ambassador. His counterpart in this 
country, Jesus Silva Herzog, we will hear from at lunch today, the 
Ambassador from Mexico, who has visited with us both here on the Hill 
and in the Embassy to talk about ways that these visits can be 
institutionalized, because, Mr. President, as you have said many times, 
former Members have opportunities to speak to issues and to address 
concerns that we cannot, as sitting Members, do.
  So I think we offer not only this repository of information and 
knowledge and experience and, we hope, some wisdom, but also the 
opportunity to speak without the necessary problems of constituency 
concerns and speak to issues that really advance the understanding 
between nations.
  So even as we, I think, have, by reason of President Clinton and 
President Zedillo Ponce de Leon's relationship, advanced the Nation's 
agenda, then I think we, as former Members, can do the same thing.
  Mr. President, the only thing I would say is, I hope there is some 
mechanism we can use to institutionalize these trips. Only because of 
your fertile imagination and your inventive accounting have these trips 
been made possible. So there has to be some method to institutionalize 
them. I hope we can. I think they are very valuable, and I am honored 
to have played a part in this.
  My first trip to Mexico was in 1981. My next and only other visit was 
last June. In the intervening 15 years, Mexico's political, social, 
economical, and educational climate has changed profoundly. And, in no 
way is this change more dramatic than in the way Mexico views the 
migration of its people.
  In Mexico 1981, Mexican officials rejected the premise that Mexico 
and the United States had a mutual interest in controlling illegal 
entry of Mexican nationals into the United States. These officials 
declared that Mexican citizens had the right and the authority under 
Mexican law to leave the Nation without control or question and without 
exit documents.
  Fifteen years later I found a starkly different attitude exhibited by 
the Mexican academics, Government leaders, and business leaders with 
whom I spoke during my week in Mexico with former Congressman and 
former Secretary of the Interior, Manuel Lujan, of New Mexico. Our 
trip, jointly sponsored by the U.S. Department of State, and the 
Association of Former Members of Congress, included nearly 4 days in 
Mexico City and a day and a half in Guadalajara.
  This time around, Mexican officials, to a person, agreed that the 
United States has sovereignty over its border and has the right as well 
as the responsibility to institute programs to control the border 
between the United States and Mexico. The 1981 references to the right 
of Mexicans to travel freely were absent. Instead, we heard frequent 
and favorable references to the importance of continued contacts 
between the two nations.
  This is not to say that Mexicans were silent on the topic of 
immigration or muted in their criticism of the way their Mexican 
brothers and sisters are sometimes treated by United States immigration 
authorities. But, in sharp contrast to 1981 when the polemics and 
broadsides flew freely, on this visit our Mexican hosts and hostesses--
I found many more women now than in 1981 in positions of influence--
endorsed collaborative United States-Mexican initiatives on immigration 
and drug intervention.
  One jarring note to Secretary Lujan and me was the belief held by 
many Mexicans, even some who have spent time in the United States, that 
there exists in the United States a selective dislike and antipathy 
toward Mexican people. Several made the point that the two immigration 
bills then pending before the 104th Congress singled out Mexican 
nationals for the brunt of the enforcement and control effort.
  Secretary Lujan, himself of Hispanic descent, and I did our best to 
assure everyone that Americans bore no ill nor animus toward Mexicans 
in a generic or a class sense. I did, however, point out that the 
frustration of the American people grows because of increased violence 
at the border committed by aliens seeking to enter the United States 
illegally and by organized Mexican drug smugglers. Frustrations are 
also fanned by stories in the media detailing the abuse of America's 
welfare and health care systems by undocumented Mexican aliens.
  To be fair, it must here be noted that not everyone who enters at the 
southern border is from Mexico--many of them are from elsewhere in the 
Americas and the world--and not everyone who is in America illegally 
has crossed the border to get here--many have overstayed their visas.
  In our discussions in Mexico, I resorted to a familiar and, I feel, 
powerful argument: Mexicans in positions of influence over their 
nations' public policy should support United States efforts to control 
illegal immigration from Mexico in order to preserve legal immigration 
programs--which benefit Mexico more than any other nation in the 
hemisphere--which are not being challenged on Capitol Hill in response 
to the citizen frustrations I have referred to earlier.
  Furthermore, the growing export and import trade between United 
States and Mexico--under NAFTA--and the expanded financial 
relationships between the nations--illustrated by the recent support 
program for the peso engineered by the United States Treasury 
Department--suggest that Mexico gains much by supporting United States 
sovereignty over its international borders.
  All in all, I came away from this recent trip to Mexico both 
heartened and disappointed.
  I am disappointed that many deeply rooted and highly emotional issues 
between our nations remain which make it difficult for Mexico and the 
United States to come together in common cause. thankfully, the efforts 
of President Bill Clinton and President Ernesto Zedillo Ponce de Leon--
who have developed a cordial and effective working relationship--and 
members of both nations' Cabinets working through organizations such as 
the United States-Mexico bi-National Commission, the Summit of the 
Americas, the organization of American States, and the Border Governors 
group have led to binational and multinational institutional frameworks 
for the development of solutions to mutual problems.
  On the positive side of the ledger, Secretary Lunjan and I also found 
an extraordinary interest in what Mexicans team ``federalism'': How 
governmental systems optimally should function. Mexico has long had an 
extremely strong executive branch of Government under which the 
Presidents are guaranteed not only personal wealth when their terms end 
but a virtual hegemony over the entire nation during their term of 
office. In that setting, the legislative branch of government in Mexico 
has been impotent and passive. today members of the Mexican Senate and 
the House of Delegates are devoted to gaining a rightful role as a 
coequal branch of government. For us in the United States, this is 
plain vanilla federalism. In Mexico, it is revolutionary.
  Sitting Members of Congress, as well as former Members such as 
Secretary Lujan and I, along with constitutional experts and political 
scientists have an unprecedented opportunity to assist our counterparts 
in Mexico in fashioning a new government for the next century. It is a 
matchless opportunity to do something good as well as do something 
smart.
  On another subject, Secretary Lujan and I were never far from 
complaints about the so-called Helms-Burton Act which penalizes 
domestic and foreign companies which do business in Cuba involving 
property confiscated from United States firms or citizens at the time 
of Castro's takeover. Because of the extraterritoriality of Helms-
Burton and because of its retroactivity feature, it has excited great 
opposition as well as calls for retaliation from Canada and Mexico and 
from nations of the European Union and of the Organization of American 
States. As we now know, but did not last June, President Clinton has 
somewhat quieted the issue by exercising the various options, waivers, 
and discretionary authorities which he is accorded under the law.
  Soon after my return from Mexico, I traveled to El Paso, TX, to take 
part in a naturalization ceremony at which 4,078 persons from 53 
nations became United States citizens on the campus of the University 
of Texas at El Paso. Taking part in this ceremony was particularly 
impressive for me both personally--my own father was an immigrant from 
Italy--and professionally--while in Congress, I was the coauthor of the 
Simpson-Mazzoli bill, the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986, 
under whose provisions many in that audience in El Paso were being 
naturalized.
  It is in these naturalization ceremonies that all the separate 
threads of the immigration story are woven into a complete garment. 
Naturalization programs give us a better purchase on the complex and 
complicated thing called

[[Page H3078]]

immigration and they demonstrate that while every nation in history has 
had problems with migration and immigration--the United States is no 
exception to this historical verity--our Nation has an opportunity and 
a solemn responsibility to address this vexing and challenging subject 
with balance, sensitivity, forbearance and charity.
  Where do we start?
  By continuing to work with Mexico to control illegal immigration. In 
1981, Father Theodore M. Hesburgh, former president of the University 
of Notre Dame, and chair of President Carter's Immigration Reform 
Commission said: ``If we don't close the back door--control illegal 
entry into the United States--we won't be able to keep open the front 
door.'' through which people enter the United States legally. The only 
way to avoid this undesirable result is to heed Father Ted's prescient 
advice.
  By urging our legislators and the President to adopt a broad 
perspective on immigration and to oppose nativist, racist or mean-
spirited proposals despite their political and popular allure.
  By attending a naturalization ceremony. Normal ceremonies at the 
Federal courthouses may not be as large as the one in El Paso, but they 
are no less impressive.
  By attending a religious liturgy celebrating immigration such as 
those sponsored annually by the U.S. Catholic Conference during 
National Migration Week.
  By attending ethnic festivals in which the food and customs and 
heritage and music of immigrant people are showcased and good times are 
had by all.
  By attending programs such as those sponsored by churches and temples 
and mosques where newcomers are welcomed, counseled, and given help 
with language training, job and craft skills, and acculturation.
  By attending graduation programs at local high schools, colleges and 
universities, and noting the ethnic diversity of the academically 
distinguished graduates. Many of them are immigrants or the sons and 
daughters of recent immigrants.
  Immigration is fascinating and frustrating precisely because it is 
the story of the sweep of human history. It is the story of the 
nobility and of the fallibility of humankind. Rarely has a people had a 
greater opportunity to impress its hallmark on history and humankind 
than we in the United States possess here and now. By welcoming the 
strangers in our midst, we will enrich and revitalize our Nation and 
the world in the process.
  Mr. FREY. Thank you, I think.
  The crown jewel of what we do really is working with young people. I 
think that probably gives each of us the most satisfaction of anything 
we do, the chance to go to college communities to talk with young 
people, to spend 2, 2\1/2\ days with it. We have started now a 
Congressional Campus Fellowship Program. It actually began in 1976 and 
sort of teetered along for a while. We went to a number of places. But 
we have really institutionalized it.
  Part of the reason is, we have been able to work with the Stennis 
Center for Public Service in Mississippi State University. They have 
acted as secretariat of it for us and sent groups out. This year I 
think we went to 10 schools, and our goal next year is 20 or 25 schools 
around the country.
  I would like to yield to the gentleman from New York, who went on one 
of those trips and was highly successful, to tell us a little bit about 
his time on campus. Mr. Wortley.
  Mrs. BOGGS. The gentleman from New York, Mr. Wortley, is recognized.
  Mr. WORTLEY. Madam Speaker, Mr. President, I do feel more comfortable 
at this lectern than perhaps the other one.
  Mr. FREY. I am a little nervous over here.
  Mr. WORTLEY. I might digress for a moment to say that the United 
States representation at the Holy See will never have been in better 
hands than with the Ambassador-elect.
  I am pleased to report this morning that the United States 
Association of Former Members of Congress Campus Fellowship Program is 
active, healthy, and delivering a bipartisan message to the campuses of 
America's universities. During this past academic year, the association 
cosponsored the program with the Stennis Center for Public Service in 
Mississippi. Bipartisan teams of former Members of Congress, one 
Democrat, one Republican, have made 2- to 3-day visits to nine 
university communities from California to Florida, Georgia, 
Mississippi, Ohio, Oklahoma, and New Mexico.
  The former Members donated their time. The Stennis Center paid the 
transportation expenses, and the hosting institutions provided our room 
and board.
  I was joined at Cameron University in Lawton, OK, by Dennis Hertel, 
who seems to be the most popular man on the floor this morning, Dennis. 
You are all over the world. We lectured six, political science classes, 
participated in one 30-minute television panel, gave a \1/4\ hour 
newspaper interview over lunch, as well as a second luncheon where the 
U.S.-U.N. relationship was the topic of discussion. We were also the 
subject of a couple minutes of TV coverage on local news shows and were 
guests at a department reception.
  In our off hours, we enjoyed a dinner hosted by the college president 
and another at the home of our host.
  Dennis and I found an interesting blend of students that included 
several retired and retiring military personnel from nearby Fort Sill, 
as well as the usual undergraduate age group. The students were alert, 
inquisitive, and kept both even Dennis and I on our toes at all times.
  Did we make a difference? Yes, we did make a difference. I believe we 
gave the students new insight into the process and hopefully dispelled 
some of the misconceptions that exist today about this great 
institution. We were living examples that reasonable men can disagree 
but never need to be disagreeable.
  I would note that at Cameron University we were the guests of the 
Department of Political Science and Criminal Justice. I am not sure if 
there was any significance in the pairings of those two subjects.
  Oh, yes, we did come away with at least two students who expressed 
interest in running for Congress, one of whom had lost a recent race 
for the mayor of Lawton, OK. Perhaps if Dennis and I had gotten there a 
little earlier, we might have made a bigger difference.
  But I am hopeful that our campus fellowship presentations have made a 
difference and the day will come, Madam Speaker, when you will see the 
results of our efforts in this Chamber.
  Thank you.
  Mr. FREY. I might add as the result of this and going to the 
campuses, we have been asked to write a book about the Congress from a 
personal standpoint, and I sent out a message, some of you have sent it 
in. Some, like the gentleman from California, Pete McCloskey and Larry 
Coughlin and a few others who I have not named, haven't gotten their 
chapters in, so this is a gentle reminder for it.
  But we are working with the head of the Political Science Department 
at Colgate University to publish the book, and we think it will be 
unique. There have been books on Congress, but there has never been a 
book on various aspects of Congress written by the people who really 
were here and lived it. So if everybody gets their chapter in, we may 
have that done by the first part of the year.
  Just very quickly, getting to the end of this, as you can see, we are 
really doing a lot. We are really out there, involved in different 
things. There are opportunities, hopefully, for you and for some who 
are not here to get involved. There are also opportunities for 
corporations and foundations who are listening, who want to help the 
kids in this country, to contribute and work with us to do this. It 
would be great if we could get the 50 universities. It would be 
wonderful. We have had 106 Members volunteer and probably another 30 
just over this time. So we have the people. It is just the funding 
mechanism to do it. So anybody listening, if you are interested, you 
know where to get us. We should have a 1-800 number up there. It is a 
worthwhile thing to do.
  We maintain close relations with the associations of former Members 
of Parliament around the world, and in that I would like to recognize 
one of our guests who has been with us before. Barry Turner, president 
of the Canadian Association of Former Parliamentarians, is with us 
today.
  Barry, would you please stand up and be recognized.
  Barry has written a chapter for the book on comparing our system with 
the Canadian system.
  We really appreciate your help on that.
  Obviously, the officers of the association, Matt McHugh, John 
Erlenborn, John Lancaster, the board of directors, really have done an 
incredible job. This is a working group, not people who have let their 
names be used on the organization. We have an auxiliary headed by Annie 
Rhodes, who has run the

[[Page H3079]]

Life After Congress seminar, which is a wonderful thing. This is the 
second time we have done it for people who are retiring. It sort of 
walks them through what they have and the problems and, frankly, 
discusses what they are facing when you get out, going from where 
everybody listens to you and calls to when all of a sudden the phone 
stops ringing and how do you handle that. The auxiliary is to be really 
congratulated.
  Linda Reed, our executive director, wears many, many hats and does an 
incredible job. We are lucky to have her and really just so proud of 
the job you do, Linda.
  Walt Raymond, who came on board with us to work part time and now 
works full time back there and who is really responsible for the 
tremendous growth of our overseas programs.
  Now it is my sad duty to inform the House of those persons who served 
in the Congress who have passed away since our report last year. The 
deceased Members of Congress are as follows:
  James F. Battin (Montana); Ray Blanton (Tennessee); Paul W. Cronin 
(Massachusetts); Hamilton Fish (New York); Edward J. Gurney (Florida); 
Seymour Halpern (New York); Oren Harris (Arkansas); Charles Hayes 
(Illinois); Chet E. Holifield (California); Harold E. Hughes (Iowa); 
Leo Isacson (New York); Harry Jeffrey (Ohio); Edward H. Jenison 
(Illinois); Coya Knutson (Minnesota); Paul J. Krebs (New Jersey); 
Robert M. Love (Ohio); Hugh Buenton Mitchell (Washington); William L. 
Scott (Virginia); Jessie Sumner (Illinois); and Paul Tsongas 
(Massachusetts).
  Madam Speaker, I respectfully ask all of you to rise for a moment of 
silence in their memory. May they rest in peace. Amen.
  Mrs. BOGGS. It is so ordered.
  Mr. FREY. May they rest in peace. Amen.
  Thank you.
  Madam Speaker, I would like obviously to offer on behalf of myself 
and everybody here, our congratulations. They just don't do it better, 
and we are obviously not only proud of the job you have done in 
Congress but for us, and now a new responsibility, and we are really 
lucky.
  Mrs. BOGGS. I thank the gentleman.
  Mr. FREY. Madam Speaker, this concludes our 27th annual report to the 
Congress by the United States Association of Former Members of 
Congress.
  I think I said earlier, and I truly believe it, that being a Member 
of this body was a privilege. It was the best thing that ever happened 
to me. There were times that I would look out the window and say, you 
know, am I really here? I never lost awe of this institution. I never 
lost feeling that being here was just an incredible opportunity and a 
privilege, and think to the same extent I feel that being a former 
Member is also a privilege, because we have got a chance to help the 
people in this country understand what we have been given, the 
incredible job that the people who wrote this Constitution did. A 
little over 7,000 words, and it still works somehow today.
  It is so easy to kick things around and be cynical; it is so easy to 
knock; but this body is what keeps it together. This is the keel on the 
sailboat that keeps us from tilting too far to the right or too far to 
the left, and we usually float back and forth through the center. There 
really is no other group in this country that has the ability to speak, 
that has the credibility to speak, and that are united, not with a 
``D'' or ``R'' after our names or whatever, that is really 
insignificant, but are united for our love for this institution. We are 
part of and have been part of the greatest legislative body in the 
history of the world. I say that without any false sense of pride, but 
I say it because I think this institution has earned the respect of 
those people in this country and those people around the world, and it 
is going to keep the respect. I look forward to working with each and 
every one of you for those things that we believe in.
  Thank you so much, Madam Speaker.
  Mrs. BOGGS. The Chair again wishes to thank the following Members of 
Congress for your presence here today and to announce that those of you 
who may have come in after the roll was called, that you may come and 
make your presence known to the Clerk here at the Speaker's desk.
  I would be very happy to have all of you registered and to thank all 
of you for your participation, not only in this session, but for your 
participation day after day, year after year, in carrying forward, as 
our President has just said, this great and wonderful Government under 
the enduring Constitution of the United States.
  I wish to thank all of you for coming, and I now declare that the 
session is over and that the House will reconvene at 10:30 this 
morning.
  Accordingly (at 10 o'clock and 15 minutes p.m.), the House continued 
in recess.

                          ____________________