[Congressional Record Volume 145, Number 42 (Wednesday, March 17, 1999)]
[House]
[Pages H1341-H1342]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




PROVIDING FOR CONSIDERATION OF H.R. 820, COAST GUARD AUTHORIZATION ACT 
                                OF 1999

  Mr. GOSS. Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I call 
up House Resolution 113 and ask for its immediate consideration.
  The Clerk read the resolution, as follows:

                              H. Res. 113

       Resolved, That at any time after the adoption of this 
     resolution the Speaker may, pursuant to clause 2(b) of rule 
     XVIII, declare the House resolved into the Committee of the 
     Whole House on the state of the Union for consideration of 
     the bill (H.R. 820) to authorize appropriations for fiscal 
     years 2000 and 2001 for the Coast Guard, and for other 
     purposes. The first reading of the bill shall be dispensed 
     with. General debate shall be confined to the bill and shall 
     not exceed one hour equally divided and controlled by the 
     chairman and ranking minority member of the Committee on 
     Transportation and Infrastructure. After general debate the 
     bill shall be considered for amendment under the five-minute 
     rule. It shall be in order to consider as an original bill 
     for the purpose of amendment under the five-minute rule the 
     amendment in the nature of a substitute recommended by the 
     Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure now printed in 
     the bill. The committee amendment in the nature of a 
     substitute shall be considered as read. During consideration 
     of the bill for amendment, the chairman of the Committee of 
     the Whole may accord priority in recognition on the basis of 
     whether the Member offering an amendment has caused it to be 
     printed in the portion of the Congressional Record designated 
     for that purpose in clause 8 of rule XVIII. Amendments so 
     printed shall be considered as read. The chairman of the 
     Committee of the Whole may: (1) postpone until a time during 
     further consideration in the Committee of the Whole a request 
     for a recorded vote on any amendment; and (2) reduce to five 
     minutes the minimum time for electronic voting on any 
     postponed question that follows another electronic vote 
     without intervening business, provided that the minimum time 
     for electronic voting on the first in any series of questions 
     shall be 15 minutes. At the conclusion of consideration of 
     the bill for amendment the Committee shall rise and report 
     the bill to the House with such amendments as may have been 
     adopted. Any Member may demand a separate vote in the House 
     on any amendment adopted in the Committee of the Whole to the 
     bill or to the committee amendment in the nature of a 
     substitute. The previous question shall be considered as 
     ordered on the bill and amendments thereto to final passage 
     without intervening motion except one motion to recommit with 
     or without instructions.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Florida (Mr. Goss) is 
recognized for 1 hour.
  Mr. GOSS. Mr. Speaker, for the purpose of debate only, I yield the 
customary 30 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from the 
Commonwealth of Massachusetts (Mr. Moakley), my friend and colleague, 
pending which I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, I notice an outbreak of the wearing of the green around 
the Hill today, and I want to especially extend a happy congratulations 
for St. Patrick's Day to my friend, the gentleman from Massachusetts 
(Mr. Moakley), who has a very strong interest in this subject I am 
advised.
  During consideration of this resolution, all time yielded is for the 
purpose of debate on this subject only.
  Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to present another noncontroversial wide 
open rule from the Committee on Rules under the benevolent leadership 
of the chairman, the gentleman from California (Mr. Dreier).
  The rule provides 1 hour of general debate equally divided between 
the chairman and the ranking member of the Committee on Transportation 
and Infrastructure. The rule makes in order an amendment in the nature 
of a substitute as an original bill for purposes of amendment. It 
authorizes the chair to accord priority of recognition to those Members 
who have preprinted their amendments in the Congressional Record. This 
is an option available to all Members.
  Finally, the rule provides one motion to recommit, with or without 
instructions. It is a good rule and it should not engender any 
opposition. The subject matter is important.
  Mr. Speaker, while the Coast Guard is the smallest of our armed 
services, its responsibilities are great and vitally important. It is 
an agency with many missions. We ask the Coast Guard to be responsible 
for such critical areas as the navigation and safety of our waterways 
and emergency search and rescue.
  As a branch of the Armed Forces, the Coast Guard has also helped 
defend America in every war since 1790. It has a brave and long 
tradition. To maintain an effective and ready force, H.R. 820, the 
Coast Guard Authorization Act of 1998, authorizes 44,000 active duty 
military personnel by the end of fiscal year 2001.
  Most important to today's debate is the evolving role the Coast Guard 
is playing on the war on drugs. Last year this Congress reached an 
agreement with the White House to win the war on drugs, not just trim 
it back a little and settle for a stalemate. We want to win it. We 
intend to win this war that is so critical to the future of our 
youngsters, and this particular legislation helps us on that path.
  As so often in this city, we have discovered that talk is cheap. The 
Clinton White House has submitted a budget that is negligent on the war 
on drugs and abandons the commitment made by the Clinton White House 
just last fall to help win that war on drugs. In fact, the Clinton 
budget request does not implement anything within the Western 
Hemisphere Drug Elimination Act beyond that contained in last year's 
omnibus bill.
  H.R. 820 puts our money where our mouth is. It fully funds the 
Western Hemisphere effort, with an additional $290 million in operating 
expenses for the next 2 years. This money will have a direct impact at 
the source of the drug scourge, including additional coastal patrol 
boats, the creation of a regional law enforcement center in Puerto 
Rico, several maritime patrol aircraft, several cutters and vessels to 
be received from the United States Navy. Americans have a right to 
demand results, not more talk, but results on the war on drugs and H.R. 
820 delivers.
  A recent study by the Institute for Defense Analysis examining 
effectiveness of cocaine interdiction found strong links between supply 
disruptions and rising street prices in the United States. It also 
found that, when street prices rise, use falls, especially among casual 
users. We know that interdiction works and that taking dead aim at the 
supply side must be a large piece of our effort. That does not diminish 
from the efforts, of course, on the demand side that we also must make. 
H.R. 820 makes good on our commitment on the supply side.
  Mr. Speaker, this is a fair rule that allows open debate and 
consideration of all germane amendments. I urge a yes vote on the rule 
as well as the underlying bill.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. MOAKLEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague, the gentleman from Florida (Mr. 
Goss), my dear friend, who I hope stays with me in the House for a few 
more years, for yielding me the customary half-hour.
  Mr. Speaker, today is March 17. It is not only a great day for the 
Irish, but it is a great day for the Coast Guard. Mr. Speaker, during 
the last 84 years, the United States Coast Guard has been protecting 
people at sea and enforcing United States law.
  This bill for which the rule provides consideration will authorize 
funding for the Coast Guard for another 2 years, including $380 million 
for drug interdiction efforts in keeping with last year's Western 
Hemisphere Drug Elimination Act. It will also provide funding to finish 
the design work and the replacement for the Great Lakes icebreaker 
Mackinaw.

[[Page H1342]]

  This bill will authorize 40,000 active duty Coast Guard personnel who 
perform all kinds of services, including safety inspections of 
freighters, transporting sick or injured people to medical attention, 
measuring the catch of a commercial fishing boat, searching for sailors 
lost at sea, breaking ice in the northeastern rivers, and on and on and 
on.
  The first Coast Guard district in my hometown of Boston oversees 30 
cutters, 11 aircraft, and more than 200 small boats to ensure boaters' 
safety. Mr. Speaker, let me tell my colleagues, these people earn their 
keep. Every day the Coast Guard saves an average of 12 lives. Each year 
they save about $2.5 billion in property, which is nearly the entire 
operating budget.
  Earlier this month, a Coast Guard cutter saved an 85-foot tug off the 
coast of Sakonnet Point in Rhode Island that was taking on water and 
absolutely would have sunk if the Coast Guard did not come on the 
scene.
  Last month, Coast Guard personnel responded to a 200-gallon gasoline 
spill in New Haven Harbor; and before allowing the boat to load any new 
cargo, the Coast Guard ensured that that boat had been properly 
repaired before it went underway.
  Mr. Speaker, earlier this year a Coast Guard helicopter rescued from 
a New Bedford fishing vessel a fisherman whose arm was hanging off 
because it was injured in a severe accident by a winch and they flew 
this injured seaman to a Rhode Island hospital, where he recovered.
  In January, the United States Coast Guard crew saved six people on a 
72-foot sailing vessel in trouble seven miles south of Glouchester, 
Massachusetts. And every day the Coast Guard is out there protecting 
people on American waters. They do us a wonderful service, and this 
bill would keep them up and running.
  I would like to commend the chairman, the gentleman from Pennsylvania 
(Mr. Shuster) and the ranking member, the gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. 
Oberstar) for putting together a truly bipartisan bill which should 
pass the House with very little opposition.
  Mr. Speaker, this bill will enable the Coast Guard to continue its 
great work, and I urge my colleagues to support it.
  Mr. GOSS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  I join my colleague from the Commonwealth of Massachusetts in heaping 
praise on the Coast Guard for extraordinary work under extremely 
difficult conditions. Anybody who has been in New England in the winter 
knows just what he speaks of when he talks about being out there on the 
high seas.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. MOAKLEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from 
Ohio (Mr. Traficant).
  Mr. TRAFICANT. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me 
this time.
  This is a great day for the Irish, a great day for the Coast Guard, a 
great day for the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Moakley), and maybe 
a great day for America's steel industry and steelworkers. I support 
the rule on the Coast Guard. But I also plan to speak out of turn on 
the rule that will follow since it is limited for time.
  Ronald Reagan came to my district in 1980. He stood on a flatbed 
truck. Struggling steelworkers were pleading with the President for 
help. Ronald Reagan made a pledge. He said, ``I will support the steel 
industry. I will make significant investments to help retool the steel 
industry.'' And he said, ``I will also make significant investments to 
retrain steelworkers so they can deal with the new steel 
technologies.''
  Those steelworkers did not even support Ronald Reagan. Ronald Reagan 
lived up to every word. From the investment tax credit, to retraining 
money, Ronald Reagan lived up to his word.
  In 1992, a candidate named Bill Clinton came through my district all 
through the steel Rust Belt and went down through Wierton, West 
Virginia. He said, ``I will ban illegal trade to protect the steel 
industry.'' And he even said, ``I will stop and I will ban scab 
labor.''
  In 1993, President Clinton had a Democrat House and a Democrat 
Senate. There was not one word about scab labor, regardless about how 
we feel on the issue. And in 1999, Bill Clinton has not done one thing 
about illegal trade.
  Labor unions and working people supported this President by more than 
95 percent. Today's legislation is not perfect. Not all of us are 
totally enamored with all parts of it. But until this moment, the 
President is saying he may not support it. I say, on the House floor, 
labor unions have been the suckers. How many more cock-and-bull stories 
are they going to hear?
  Now, the only statement I will make is I want to support this bill. I 
support this rule even though it is a closed rule. And it is time for 
Congress to take one other stand. See, I do not believe we should be 
debating illegal trade. I do not believe we should be legislating 
illegal trade. I think illegal trade should be banned and we should 
have taken this opportunity to send a message to the world.
  The only thing that bothers me about the bills since I have been in 
Congress is I keep hearing Members say, ``it is the best we can do.''

                              {time}  1045

  What I say is if the best we can do is not the best for America, then 
it is not the best we can do and we should not do it.
  I am going to support this bill. I believe if this President vetoes 
this bill, his veto should be overridden, and if he vetoes this bill, I 
think the American worker better take a good look at a lot of promises 
that have been made over the years by this administration that have not 
been lived up to.
  Mr. MOAKLEY. Mr. Speaker, I have no further requests for time, and I 
yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. GOSS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. 
Lest Members might be a little confused, the gentleman who just spoke 
so passionately and eloquently about the steel matter and talking about 
a closed rule was not talking about the rule that we have on the floor 
now. This is a wide open rule, and I urge its strong support by all 
Members.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time, and I move the 
previous question on the resolution.
  The previous question was ordered.
  The resolution was agreed to.
  A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.

                          ____________________