[Congressional Record Volume 148, Number 101 (Tuesday, July 23, 2002)]
[House]
[Pages H5229-H5273]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




        TREASURY AND GENERAL GOVERNMENT APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2003

  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Lewis of California). Pursuant to House 
Resolution 488 and rule XVIII, the Chair declares the House in the 
Committee of the Whole House on the State of the Union for the 
consideration of the bill, H.R. 5120.

                              {time}  1510


                     In the Committee of the Whole

  Accordingly, the House resolved itself into the Committee of the 
Whole House on the State of the Union for the consideration of the bill 
(H.R. 5120) making appropriations for the Treasury Department, the 
United States Postal Service, the Executive Office of

[[Page H5230]]

the President, and certain Independent Agencies, for the fiscal year 
ending September 30, 2003, and for other purposes.
  The Chair designates the gentleman from California (Mr. Dreier) as 
the chairman of the Committee of the Whole, and requests the gentleman 
from Washington (Mr. Hastings) to assume the Chair temporarily.
  The Clerk read the title of the bill.
  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the bill is 
considered as having been read the first time.
  Under the rule, the gentleman from Oklahoma (Mr. Istook) and the 
gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Hoyer) each will control 30 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Oklahoma (Mr. Istook).
  Mr. ISTOOK. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Chairman, I am pleased to present to the House H.R. 5120. This is 
the fiscal year 2003 appropriations measure for Treasury, Postal 
Service and General Government. I believe we have a good bill, Mr. 
Chairman, one that puts the proper focus on homeland security and 
Federal law enforcement, on securing the borders and protecting our 
homeland.
  I am pleased to say this bill has the support of the gentleman from 
Maryland (Mr. Hoyer), the ranking member. I know that the gentleman 
from Maryland (Mr. Hoyer), as many of us, continues to have concerns 
about different provisions in this bill. That is common, and I am 
committed to resolving the concerns of all Members as we wind our way 
through the legislative process.
  Briefly, I would like to explain something about the overall numbers 
in this bill. We have received certainly a fair, a very good allocation 
from the chairman, the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Young), on our 
subcommittee's portion of this year's appropriation. Our committee's 
allocation is a total $18.5 billion in discretionary resources for 
fiscal year 2003. In the charts that accompany the report, some 
indicate that the level appears to be below the President's request by 
some $207 million. Although that certainly appears attractive to fiscal 
conservatives such as myself, I would like to point out what appears to 
be a reduction is the consequence of scorekeeping adjustments related 
to the fact that the President's proposal had some accrual accounting 
in his budget proposal for fiscal year 2003, accrual accounting that 
was not included in the actual bill.
  Therefore, there is something like a $745 million difference caused 
by those score-keeping adjustments. If we exclude that accrual 
accounting and we just compare apples to apples, programs for fiscal 
year 2003 to fiscal year 2002, we will find that when compared to last 
year's fiscal year 2002 enacted level, it is above the President's 
request, above fiscal year 2002 by $149 million and above the 
President's request by $538 million.
  This is not the result of extra spending that we wanted to accomplish 
except for that which is necessary for homeland security. Instead, it 
is because we have a special provision in this bill for $200 million in 
support of reforming election administration through the country to 
enable the purchasing of up-to-date, modern election equipment so we do 
not have the difficulties in future Presidential elections that we saw 
happen in 2000.
  Secondly, in the base operations for the U.S. Customs Service, which 
is charged with overseeing some $8 billion worth of goods that come 
into the U.S. each day and making sure those are not a conduit for 
bringing in a weapon of mass destruction or for bringing in someone 
else that might be a threat to our homeland, to fund those operations 
and continue the level of increases in border security that this 
subcommittee has been proposing in the past, we have $250 million that 
the President wanted to have offset by fee increases. We are not 
increasing the fees that are generated by the Customs Service, but we 
are handling this increase by direct appropriation.

                              {time}  1515

  Again, that is the other key reason why there are differences between 
our numbers and those in the President's proposed budget.
  As reported by the committee, this bill provides a total of $4.2 
billion for securing our homeland. This includes not only funding for 
the Office of Homeland Security, which is currently part of the 
Executive Office of the President, but it also includes funding for the 
U.S. Customs Service, for the Secret Service and for the Federal Law 
Enforcement Training Center, which is having to provide the training 
for the increasing number of Federal law enforcement officials that we 
have needed and been putting in place ever since 9/11 and, indeed, 
which this subcommittee was increasing even before 9/11.
  This bill also includes a total of $246.4 million for the HIDTA 
program. HIDTA is high intensity drug trafficking areas. This is 
providing special funding for Federal, State and local coordination to 
combat the scourge of illegal drugs. The HIDTA money is an increase of 
$20 million above the current year's funding.
  Although nominally the bill reduces funding for the national youth 
anti-drug media campaign by $10 million, it actually increases the 
amount that is going to be applied to the national campaign, the 
advertising campaign, to discourage the use of illegal drugs by our 
young people. What we have done is to take the difference out of the 
bureaucracy that had been growing within the Office of National Drug 
Control Policy and mandate that they increase the amount that is 
actually being expended on actual advertising.
  The bill also provides some $646 million for the construction program 
of the General Services Administration which, of course, is the 
landlord for the Federal Government. That includes site acquisition, 
design and/or construction of some 11 courthouses, trying to take care 
of the overburden that currently is being placed upon our judicial 
system.
  The bill has major funding regarding information technology. A lot of 
that is related to trade and to homeland security. The bill includes 
$439 million for the Customs automation program, including a total of 
not less than $317 million for modernizing the automated commercial 
system, the ACE program. Mr. Chairman, it is this modernization program 
within Customs that I believe will ultimately form the information 
backbone for the forthcoming Department of Homeland Security, because 
this database ties in not only Federal law enforcement but some 58 
Federal agencies, giving them the interfacing and the access to sharing 
information that we have seen is so sorely lacking today among Federal 
agencies. Not only is this an initiative our subcommittee has been 
accelerating, but it is something that has laid the groundwork for the 
forthcoming Department of Homeland Security.
  In regard to information technology, we also include $436 million for 
the business systems modernization of the Internal Revenue Service, so 
taxpayers will no longer have the waiting game and the wondering game 
that they sometimes have right now when trying to get their complex tax 
situations straightened out with the IRS.
  And we fund $5 million for the President's e-government proposal as 
well.
  In regard to legislative items, we have a number of historical 
provisions that are a part of this bill. One of them is maintaining the 
current law that prohibits using funds to pay for abortions through the 
Federal employees health benefits plan which is the insurance program 
for Federal workers. This is a provision that has been a part of this 
bill for a number of years, as is the continued requirement that FEHBP 
providers include coverage for prescription contraceptive services 
under certain circumstances and limitations.
  We also have a number of other measures in this bill that, frankly, 
Mr. Chairman, will probably consume most of the debate time, even 
though they are not the focus of this bill. The focus of this bill is 
the Treasury Department, the White House, the Executive Office of the 
President, Federal law enforcement, almost half of which is funded 
through this bill, the Secret Service, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco 
and Firearms, and the Customs Service with its significant role 
regarding border security and homeland security. However, probably most 
of the debate time will be consumed in debate, such as travel to Cuba, 
which I know is a subject of interest to a great many Members. It is 
not the thrust of this bill, but it is probably a debate that we will 
get into, nevertheless.
  Because we have so many amendments that Members wish to offer to

[[Page H5231]]

this bill, mostly to the general government provisions, I hope we do 
not consume the entire hour that is allocated for official debate on 
the bill itself so that we might move into the opportunity for Members 
to be presenting their amendments. But, of course, we will try to take 
the necessary time to cover those issues.
  Mr. Chairman, I include the following tabular material for the 
Record:

[[Page H5232]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH23JY02.018



[[Page H5233]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH23JY02.019



[[Page H5234]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH23JY02.020



[[Page H5235]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH23JY02.021



[[Page H5236]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH23JY02.022



[[Page H5237]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH23JY02.023



[[Page H5238]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH23JY02.024



[[Page H5239]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH23JY02.025



[[Page H5240]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH23JY02.026



[[Page H5241]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH23JY02.027



[[Page H5242]]

  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. HOYER. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  I want to thank the gentleman from Oklahoma (Mr. Istook), the chair 
of our subcommittee, for the leadership he has shown on this bill. I 
want to thank our staff, particularly our staff director, Ms. Michelle 
Mrdeza, Jeff Ashford, Kurt Dodd, Walter Hearne, Tammy Hughes and Randy 
Cogga, who is a detailee working with us. I also want to thank my own 
staff, Mike Malone and Scott Nance, who have done an outstanding job. I 
also want to thank Chairman Young for his assistance, and Ranking 
Member Obey for providing an allocation that is workable. And I want to 
thank Chairman Istook, as I said earlier, for working with us.
  Although we disagree on some of the funding levels and provisions 
included in this bill, our views have generally been incorporated in 
the bill. The bill provides for $18.5 billion in discretionary budget 
authority, $148 million higher than fiscal year 2002, a relatively 
modest number. This bill provides $3.128 billion for the Customs 
Service, $127.3 million above the President's request. This will allow 
the Customs Service to meet their homeland security needs as well as 
address other issues such as modernization of their antiquated import 
data system known as ACE.
  The bill provides $185 million to the Federal Law Enforcement 
Training Center, $30 million above the President's request, in order to 
handle the additional workload related to the training of 
Transportation Security Agency personnel.
  The bill adds $32 million back to Treasury law enforcement agencies 
that was cut in the President's budget for unspecified nonpay inflation 
costs. I intend to work with the chairman to add back funding to all 
Treasury agencies that were forced to take this cut.
  The bill provides close to the full funding amount for the IRS which 
will enable them, Mr. Chairman, to increase compliance efforts and 
continue to modernize their business systems.
  The bill, in addition, provides $246 million, $40 million above the 
request, for high intensity drug trafficking areas, and $55.8 million, 
$15 million above the request, for the counterdrug research and 
technology transfer programs at the Office of National Drug Control 
Policy.
  For the General Services Administration, the bill includes $606.4 
million for the construction of Federal buildings. I would like to 
point out that $177 million is included to construct a new census 
building in Suitland, Maryland, and $45.5 million for the continued 
consolidation of FDA.
  In addition to the $400 million included in the fiscal year 2002 
supplemental bill, this bill provides an additional $200 million for 
election reform administration. I want to thank our leaders, including 
Speaker Hastert and Chairman Young, for their commitment to include 
this important funding. I would observe, however, Mr. Chairman, that 
this funding, should the authorization bill pass, will be very 
substantially inadequate, and I will be seeking supplemental funds in 
the event that the election reform authorization bill passes prior to 
us completing conference or completing the final passage of this bill.
  The bill also includes several provisions that benefit Federal 
employees, including language that provides Federal employees with its 
comparability adjustment comparable to that of the military. This 
adjustment is 1.5 percent higher than the President's request.
  Although most of this bill is supportable, there are some issues in 
the bill that I disagree with. For the first accounts program, which 
attempts to provide access to those who are ``unbanked'' in this 
country, the bill provides restrictive provisions that may ruin the 
program. I am hopeful that we will drop those in conference. Although 
the bill provides $4 million for the program, $2 million above the 
fiscal year 2002 level, these provisions may severely limit the ability 
of the Treasury Department to have a successful program. These 
limitations seem to have been developed without full information, in my 
opinion, about their impact.
  I am also concerned about the committee's elimination of the savings 
bonds program's $22 million marketing budget. To have a program to sell 
savings bonds without the ability to market them, in my opinion, does 
not seem to make sense.
  I also continue to be concerned with the lack of information received 
from the Office of Homeland Security. This bill includes $24.8 million 
for that office, despite our frustrations with the limited amount of 
information provided to this committee. Let me speak to that for 1 
minute, Mr. Chairman. I asked the representative of the White House who 
testified on this budget whether or not he could tell me how this money 
was to be spent. He said he could not. I asked him had he put this 
money together and had he planned this budget. He said he had not. I 
asked him had he discussed this matter with Governor Ridge as to how 
these funds were to be spent. He said he had not. Notwithstanding that 
fact, Governor Ridge refused to testify before our committee. I want to 
say in fairness to Governor Ridge, I believe that was under the 
instructions of the White House and, furthermore, Governor Ridge did 
make himself available to the committee for discussions. But it was an 
item that we should have had hearings on, we should have had testimony 
on, and we did not. I continue to believe that the director of that 
office, Homeland Security, should testify within the regular committee 
hearing process so that we can exercise our constitutional right of 
oversight.
  On balance, however, Mr. Chairman, this bill is an improvement from 
the President's request, and despite some disagreements with its 
contents, I ask my colleagues to support it in its current form.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. ISTOOK. Mr. Chairman, I yield such time as he may consume to the 
gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Souder).
  Mr. SOUDER. Mr. Chairman, first I would like to congratulate my 
friend and colleague from Oklahoma for an excellent job with this bill 
and I enjoyed working with him.
  Mr. Chairman, I also would like to engage the gentleman in a brief 
colloquy with respect to the funding for the drug-free communities 
program. One of the items authorized and appropriated under that 
program is the National Community Antidrug Coalition Institute. This is 
a new program which was intended to be a grant to a private sector 
entity to help train local community antidrug coalitions. It is my 
understanding that the Federal grant manager has expressed its intent 
to exercise ``substantial Federal involvement'' in the institute's 
administration. This was not our intent in authorizing this program. Is 
it the chairman's intention that the appropriated funding here is to be 
used exclusively for a grant to a private sector entity and not for 
Federal administration or activities in connection with the institute 
other than grant administration?
  Mr. ISTOOK. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. SOUDER. I yield to the gentleman from Oklahoma.
  Mr. ISTOOK. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding.
  The committee intention is, as stated, to support the private sector 
and not to fund the conduct or administration of this program by 
government employees other than issuing the grant itself.
  Mr. SOUDER. I thank the gentleman for the colloquy.
  Mr. ISTOOK. Mr. Chairman, I yield such time as he may consume to the 
gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Chambliss).
  Mr. CHAMBLISS. Mr. Chairman, I would first of all like to also 
congratulate Chairman Istook on a fine bill that he and my friend, the 
gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Hoyer), have brought forth today. I would 
like to speak with him about an issue that is of particular importance 
to me, Mr. Chairman.
  Last year as a part of the Floyd Spence National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2002, I reinstated the Monroney 
amendment for Federal DOD employees.
  As the gentleman knows, the Monroney amendment provides that whenever 
there is a shortage of comparable occupations in private industry in a 
given wage area, the wage survey must use comparable pay data from the 
nearest wage area that is determined

[[Page H5243]]

to be similar in nature of its population, employment, manpower and 
industry. Previously this amendment was not available to Federal DOD 
employees.
  I would also like to stress the importance of this because of the 
problems we are having in recruiting and retaining a skilled workforce 
in our public military depots.
  I would particularly like to discuss the pay limit that is unfairly 
limited on blue collar Federal DOD employees during the transition to 
one wage scale. These blue collar employees are a key component to our 
national security and to our warfighting capability. Recruitment and 
retention of these highly skilled workers is imperative. However, 
during this transition to a fair and equitable pay adjustment, a pay 
cap in the Treasury-Postal bill hinders that progress.
  I ask the chairman that we discuss ways to overcome and work out the 
hurdles that stand in the way of eliminating this pay disparity.
  Mr. ISTOOK. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. CHAMBLISS. I yield to the gentleman from Oklahoma.
  Mr. ISTOOK. I thank the gentleman from Georgia for bringing these 
concerns to our attention, and certainly I am open to working with him. 
I am compelled to add, however, that the wage-grade issue is 
exceedingly complex, and I would want to be very careful about any 
proposals that may be advanced.

                              {time}  1530

  I should also add that the authorizing committees have jurisdiction 
over this issue and, therefore, it is necessary that they should be 
involved in any proposed reform that might involve this bill.
  Mr. CHAMBLISS. Mr. Chairman, reclaiming my time, I thank the 
gentleman from Oklahoma for his cooperation and understanding of this 
matter, and I appreciate the beginning of a dialogue on this issue.
  Mr. HOYER. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from New 
York (Mr. Serrano), for the purpose of entering into a colloquy.
  Mr. ISTOOK. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from New 
York.
  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore (Mr. Hastings of Washington). The gentleman 
from New York (Mr. Serrano) is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. SERRANO. Mr. Chairman, I would like to engage the chairman and 
ranking Democrat of the subcommittee in a colloquy.
  Since before I was elected to Congress, I have heard repeated 
requests from my constituents for assistance in dealing with Bronx post 
offices. Continuing problems include lost mail, misdelivered mail, late 
night deliveries. You name it, we have it.
  I have witnessed service problems firsthand. Whenever I send out a 
newsletter to my constituents, boxes and boxes containing undelivered 
newsletters get sent back to my office for different reasons. Sometimes 
the Post Office says there is no such address, but, most frustratingly, 
some get returned for insufficient postage. Some employees at the Post 
Office do not seem to recognize the Congressional frank.
  I have repeatedly tried to work with the local postmaster, as well as 
regional postal service officials. I have had a representative from the 
Postmaster come to my Washington office to try to work out the problem. 
We showed her the boxes and boxes that have been returned to my office. 
Unfortunately, while much was promised at these many meetings, little 
was delivered.
  My good friend and colleague who shares part of the problems with me, 
the gentleman from New York (Mr. Crowley) requested language included 
in your report to require a general study of the postal situation at 
Morris Park and the Bronx with recommendations to be made to ameliorate 
the problems. I salute his efforts.
  I would like to go further and work with the chairman and ranking 
Democrat to expand the study to the entire Bronx to send a strong 
message to the Postmaster General that the current situation in the 
Bronx is intolerable.
  Mr. Chairman, I would ask, would the chairman and ranking member work 
with me in putting an end to this long-term problem?
  Mr. HOYER. Mr. Chairman will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. SERRANO. I yield to the gentleman from Maryland.
  Mr. HOYER. Mr. Chairman, I certainly have every intention of working 
with the gentleman. It is a significant and real problem that he brings 
up, and we want to work with him on that.
  Mr. CROWLEY. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. SERRANO. I yield to the gentleman from New York.
  Mr. CROWLEY. Mr. Chairman, I thank my colleague and good friend from 
the Bronx for yielding during this colloquy to reiterate the statements 
made by him regarding the mail delivery problems we are experiencing in 
the Bronx in New York.
  Like the gentleman from New York (Mr. Serrano), I have heard from far 
too many of my constituents about mail delays, misdelivered mail, lost 
mail, late deliveries, 9 o'clock at night, and even no mail delivery at 
all. One of the most affected areas in the Bronx is the Morris Park 
Post Office.
  I would like to express my deep gratitude to the gentleman from 
Oklahoma (Chairman Istook) and the ranking member, the gentleman from 
Maryland (Mr. Hoyer), for including report language that was mentioned 
by the gentleman from New York (Mr. Serrano) mandating that the New 
York Post Office headquarters conduct a study and implement 
recommendations to improve the mail delivery in Morris Park.
  Stating that, this community's problems are just the tip of the 
iceberg. I have heard of mail complaints in Throggs Neck, Soundview and 
Co-Op City, just to name a few places, meaning more must be done.
  Again, I thank the gentleman from New York (Mr. Serrano) for yielding 
me this time, as well as the gentleman from Oklahoma (Chairman Istook) 
and the ranking member, the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Hoyer) for 
their actions to improve mail delivery for my constituents.
  I also want to recognize the great work of City Councilwoman Madeline 
Provenzano, as well as members of the Assembly, Kaufman, Klein and 
Rivera for bringing this issue to my attention.
  Mr. ISTOOK. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. SERRANO. I yield to the gentleman from Oklahoma.
  Mr. ISTOOK. Mr. Chairman, to answer the questions posed by the 
gentleman from New York (Mr. Serrano), yes, I think we can definitely 
work together to address his concerns about postal service in the 
Bronx. The gentleman is correct that we have included report language 
at the request of the gentleman from New York (Mr. Crowley) concerning 
the Post Office in Morris Park. We have recommended that the Postal 
Service investigate this situation and report recommendations for 
corrective action, reporting that to the committee.
  When we go to conference with the Senate, we can and will work with 
the gentleman from New York (Mr. Serrano) to come up with additional 
report language to take care of the issue regarding the Postal Service 
in the Bronx, presuming, of course, that the distinguished ranking 
member of the committee has no objections.
  Mr. HOYER. Mr. Chairman will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. SERRANO. I yield to the gentleman from Maryland.
  Mr. HOYER. Mr. Chairman, I echo the gentleman's comments. Certainly I 
will indicate I have no objections, and look forward to working with 
the chairman, with the gentleman from New York (Mr. Serrano) and with 
the gentleman from New York (Mr. Crowley) on these important issues 
that they have raised.
  Mr. SERRANO. I thank you both, and I congratulate you on bringing a 
good bill to the floor.
  Mr. ISTOOK. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from New 
York (Mr. Sweeney), a member of our subcommittee who has done excellent 
work on this measure.
  Mr. SWEENEY. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding me 
time.
  Mr. Chairman, I just simply wanted to take some time to come down at 
the introduction of this bill at the beginning of what will be a very 
long debate and long night on a number of issues important to the 
Nation and important to the Nation's security to congratulate my good 
chairman, the gentleman

[[Page H5244]]

from Oklahoma (Mr. Istook), for the tremendous work done and my friend 
the ranking member, the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Hoyer), for really 
balancing some critical priorities in this process.
  This is one of those bills that every year is critical to our 
homeland security, and I am very proud to be part of a committee that, 
not only in a period of time of great economic concern were we able to 
balance those economic needs and changing wants, but also, obviously, 
since September 11, it is a period of time in which our national 
security, our homeland security, are at greater risk and greater 
sensitivity to all of us.
  This subcommittee had a perilous task in balancing those priorities, 
and did so in such a responsible manner, in protecting our borders from 
threats, new and old, many of those threats changing in unimaginable 
ways in the past year. The bill provides critical funding to protect 
our borders in a time of heightened security.
  The Subcommittee on Treasury, Postal Service and General Government 
was able to respond to the changes we have faced. We have included 
increases of over $24 million for Customs Services' salaries and 
expenses, including over $21 million for its Northern Border Staffing. 
I am pleased with the response of the subcommittee in addressing the 
needs of the facilities protecting our borders, in particular, because 
close to my district in upstate New York the Port of Champlain Border 
Crossing has been in need for a great many of years, and this bill 
includes $5 million for desperately needed updates and facility 
repairs.
  Not only does the bill provide the necessary funding to protect our 
borders from newly exposed threats, it also maintains support for local 
law enforcement in fighting the war on drugs. An additional $20 million 
is appropriated for high-intensity drug trafficking areas. Stopping 
drugs at our borders and helping local law enforcement agencies is a 
critical function of this committee. We were able to do that, maintain 
those basic commitments to programs that preceded September 11, and 
indeed, adjust some of those priorities to address the new changing 
challenges.
  I want to, finally, thank and congratulate the committee staff who do 
a phenomenal job keeping Members informed. I remember the days 
immediately following the attacks of September 11 and the myriad of 
questions that were being asked by my constituents and the people of 
America, and this committee was on top of each of those. I want to 
spend this time to recognize them.
  Mr. HOYER. Mr. Chairman, I yield 5 minutes to the gentlewoman from 
Florida (Mrs. Meek), a very distinguished member of our subcommittee. 
The gentlewoman from Florida (Mrs. Meek) is the next ranking Democrat 
on our committee and does a great job, and I appreciate her help and 
assistance.
  Mrs. MEEK of Florida. Mr. Chairman, I want to thank my colleague and 
leader, the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Hoyer), for yielding me time. 
I want to thank my chairman, the gentleman from Oklahoma (Mr. Istook), 
and the staff, both majority and minority staff members.
  Also I want to thank the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Obey) and the 
gentleman from Florida (Mr. Young) for giving us the kind of 302(b) 
allocation that allowed our committee this time to fund the Customs 
Service program without having to resort to an additional fee increase 
on airline passengers. We did not really need that.
  While we only got enough money for a down payment on correcting the 
problems that arose during the 2000 presidential election, we needed 
more, the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Hoyer) did an outstanding job of 
leading this effort. Of course, $650 million is in the bill for 
election reform. That is a very good start.
  Mr. Chairman, this is a good bill that I intend to support. The bill 
before us today is a big improvement over the President's request. 
However, the bill has a number of problem areas that still need to be 
addressed before the process concludes, such as three ``poison pill'' 
restrictions on the First Accounts Program and the unfortunate decision 
to limit the future marketing of the savings bonds program.
  This bill became worse when we adopted a rule permitting a point of 
order to be raised against the DeLauro language that restricts the 
award of new Federal contracts to companies that have moved out of the 
United States and incorporated in tax-haven countries in order to avoid 
U.S. taxes.
  Let me mention just a few of the items in the bill and report that I 
particularly like, and then turn to problem areas. I commend my 
committee for restoring over $32 million of non-pay inflationary 
increases for Treasury law enforcement. That was needed, and I want to 
congratulate the committee for doing so.
  The $316.9 million investment that is proposed for the ACE, the 
Customs modernization project, is urgently needed. This money will help 
the trade community and law enforcement tremendously. It certainly is 
needed in Miami. Despite the President's failure to request it, I 
commend the committee and the gentleman from Oklahoma (Mr. Istook) for 
providing an additional $30 million to the Federal Law Enforcement 
Training Center for training Transportation Security Agency personnel 
in response to the attacks of September 11.
  Finally, I am pleased that the bill continues several favorable and 
important provisions for Federal employees, such as contraceptive 
coverage under the Federal Health Benefits Program, child care 
assistance for lower income employees and pay parity through a 4.1 
percent pay increase adjustment for all Federal employees.
  The bill does have some problem areas. As I previously discussed, 
South Florida needs more Customs employees at Miami International 
Airport and the Miami Seaport. We are very vulnerable in those two 
areas.
  I remain very concerned about the level of Customs staffing in South 
Florida and whether the overall level of staffing at Customs is 
sufficient to meet the many new challenges and threats that we are 
asking Customs to meet.
  We do need a very strong Customs Service serving as our first line of 
homeland defense. It is more important now than ever. Customs 
projections through its resource allocation model have demonstrated a 
need for thousands more staff, mostly inspectors and special agents. I 
cannot underline this need too strongly, Mr. Chairman. None of the 
Customs locations show a decline in workload or staff coverages, so 
reallocation of staff does not appear to be a realistic option. We 
should not have reallocated staff in that regard. We need to ensure 
that Customs receives the resources it needs to do its job effectively.
  Mr. Chairman, as I have noticed on many occasions, there is also a 
perception among many of my constituents that the IRS and the Congress 
care more about chasing tens and hundreds dollars from EITC claimants 
than collecting thousands and, in some cases, millions of dollars from 
high income taxpayers.
  In conclusion, Mr. Chairman, the First Accounts Program is a very 
important program, not only to me but to many of the unbanked people in 
this country. I do hope as this bill moves forward and goes into 
conference that the committee and the conference committee will think 
of trying to return banking privileges to these unbanked people.
  Mr. HOYER. Mr. Chairman will the gentleman yield?
  Mrs. MEEK of Florida. I yield to the gentleman from Maryland.
  MR. HOYER. Mr. Chairman, we will certainly support the gentlewoman's 
efforts in that regard. I think she is absolutely right.
  Mr. ISTOOK. Mr. Chairman, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from 
Florida (Mr. Shaw) for the purpose of engaging in a colloquy.
  Mr. SHAW. Mr. Chairman, I rise to engage the distinguished chairman 
of the subcommittee and the distinguished ranking member in a colloquy 
to discuss a matter of great concern to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. 
Wexler) and to me and of great concern also to our constituents.

                              {time}  1545

  As the chairman knows, the first and most severe anthrax attack 
occurred in Boca Raton, Florida. One man died and many others were 
injured. The building itself, 67,000 square feet in the middle

[[Page H5245]]

of the city, is now under quarantine. The level of contamination is 
equal to that of the Daschle suite in the Hart Senate Office Building.
  While we still do not know who is responsible for the contamination 
in Boca Raton, we know the owners of the buildings are the victims of a 
terrorist attack resulting in a public health hazard. The problems now 
facing the community because of this attack are so serious and unusual 
in nature that it is, in my opinion, necessary for the Federal 
Government to become engaged and provide a solution.
  Local leaders, including the mayor of Boca Raton, Steve Abrams, and 
the city council, in addition to the owners of the building, have shown 
a willingness to work with the government in order to fix this problem. 
The solution that the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Wexler) and I have 
proposed, along with other Members of the Florida delegation, most 
notably the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Mica), (Mr. Deutsch), and (Mr. 
Hastings), has the bipartisan support of the entire Palm Beach County, 
Boca Raton community.
  I understand that the chairman has expressed some concern with our 
proposal. I appreciate and respect those concerns. Moreover, I greatly 
appreciate the time and effort that the gentleman and his staff have 
devoted to this issue. I am hopeful, I would say to the chairman, that 
we can continue our dialogue, as this matter is of great concern and 
urgency to the citizens of South Florida.
  Again, I want to thank the chairman and I want to thank also the 
ranking Democrat member for their efforts on behalf of our 
constituents.
  Mr. ISTOOK. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. SHAW. I yield to the gentleman from Oklahoma.
  Mr. ISTOOK. Mr. Chairman, I want to thank the gentleman from Florida 
(Mr. Shaw) for his remarks. I do fully appreciate the magnitude of the 
problem facing the citizens of his district, and I realize both its 
magnitude and its complexity. I hope that he and others understand 
that, therefore, we are trying to move circumspectly to see if we might 
be able to resolve it.
  The gentleman is correct in stating that I do have some concerns over 
the approach that he has proposed, although I recognize the need for a 
solution that is timely. I look forward to working together and 
continuing our dialogue in hopes that the problem can be resolved in an 
acceptable manner.
  Mr. HOYER. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. SHAW. I yield to the gentleman from Maryland.
  Mr. HOYER. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding.
  Mr. Chairman, I also want to continue to lend my support to the 
gentlemen from Florida (Mr. Shaw) and (Mr. Wexler) and the others that 
have been mentioned. I, like the chairman, will continue to work with 
the gentleman on this issue so that we can find a timely and meaningful 
solution that satisfies the concerns of the gentleman and the concerns 
of the local officials in Boca Raton.
  I do believe this is a public health problem. I do believe the 
Federal Government has a responsibility, and I want to see us help 
solve this problem this year.
  Mr. WEXLER. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. SHAW. I yield to the gentleman from Florida.
  Mr. WEXLER. Mr. Chairman, I rise to thank the chairman of the 
subcommittee, the gentleman from Oklahoma (Mr. Istook), and especially 
the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Hoyer), my friend and ranking member, 
for their work on this issue, as well as the gentleman from Florida 
(Mr. Shaw), for his leadership as we continue this debate.
  Let me reiterate how important it is for the Federal Government to 
take an active role in finding a solution to the cleanup of the anthrax 
contamination at the American Media, Inc. building and what it means to 
the people of South Florida and the rest of the Nation. I want to make 
clear that this is not our first attempt at requesting Federal 
assistance for this cleanup. Shortly after the October 1, 2001 anthrax 
attack on the AMI building in Boca Raton, Florida's governor, Jeb Bush, 
wrote to the Federal Emergency Management Agency asking for disaster 
assistance to help the State deal with the biological attack and the 
cleanup effort. The members of the Florida congressional delegation 
followed with a letter to FEMA, but the request was turned down.
  We must not forget that this incident in Florida was the first 
biological attack in the United States. Although the anthrax attack on 
the AMI building occurred before the anthrax attacks here in the U.S. 
Capitol, the AMI building is yet to be decontaminated. Now, 9 months 
later, a potentially treacherous health hazard continues to threaten 
the people of South Florida. We are now in the middle of hurricane 
season, and one can only imagine the potential for harm that exists 
each and every day that the AMI building remains contaminated.
  Let us not forget that this attack killed Mr. Bob Stevens and 
severely sickened another person. Every American that is victimized by 
a terrorist attack should have confidence that the Federal Government 
will come to their aid. Right now, the people of South Florida do not 
have that assurance.
  Again, I would like to thank the gentleman from Oklahoma (Mr. 
Istook), the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Hoyer), and the gentleman 
from Florida (Mr. Shaw), and I hope that we will be able to reach a 
positive resolution to this public health problem.
  Mr. HOYER. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 30 seconds.
  Mr. Chairman, I want to congratulate both gentlemen from Florida, 
(Mr. Shaw) and (Mr. Wexler), who have worked tirelessly on this issue. 
I know the chairman and I have spent literally hours with each 
gentleman because of their deep concern over the public health 
challenge that this causes the people of South Florida. I want to 
assure both of them that I know the chairman and I will spend a lot of 
time on this and try to bring this matter to a successful resolution, 
and I thank the gentlemen for their work.
  Mr. SHAW. Mr. Chairman, if the gentleman would yield just briefly, I 
thank the gentleman and the chairman for giving so much of their time, 
and I think the people of Boca Raton are very grateful, and we look 
forward to continuing to work with both of the gentlemen.
  Mr. HOYER. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished 
gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Wynn), my friend and colleague.
  Mr. WYNN. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of H.R. 5120, the Treasury-
Postal appropriations bill.
  This bill includes $45 million in funding to build a much-needed, 
state-of-the-art laboratory for the Food and Drug Administration's 
Center for Devices and Radiological Health. This project is a critical 
component of the overall consolidation of the Food and Drug 
Administration.
  I would like to, of course, thank the chairman, the gentleman from 
Pennsylvania (Mr. Istook), for his work and single out for thanks and 
appreciation to my Maryland colleague (Mr. Hoyer) who has been very 
active on behalf of the consolidation of the Food and Drug 
Administration.
  Currently, nearly 6,000 FDA Washington-area employees are housed in 
commercially leased space at approximately 39 different streetfront 
buildings, many of which are vulnerable to attack. This FDA 
consolidation would transfer all 6,000 FDA employees to state-of-the-
art laboratory and administrative facilities at the White Oak campus in 
Silver Spring, Maryland, facilitating easier communications between the 
FDA employees and the various centers.
  At a time when we are reorganizing the government for purposes of 
homeland security, the most important thing we can do is actually 
secure something. We have that opportunity to do that in this bill by 
providing a secure, fenced campus setting in White Oak, Maryland, 
formerly the Naval Surface Warfare Center.
  By moving the FDA to a government-owned facility at White Oak, the 
consolidation is expected to yield savings of approximately $300 
million in government lease costs over 10 years. The $45 million 
included in this bill will be used to construct laboratories for the 
Center for Devices and Radiological Health, which improves mammography 
scanners, x-ray machinery, and irradiation devices used to kill 
bacteria in food and in mail. Currently, several

[[Page H5246]]

such labs are housed in old, dilapidated, leased buildings scheduled 
for demolition in 2004.
  Importantly, this funding in the fiscal year 2003 budget means the 
construction of these labs will likely be finished by 2004, several 
months prior to the expiration to the leases in three separate 
facilities. This means savings of millions of dollars for the taxpayer 
in lease space and multiple moves.
  Mr. Chairman, I believe this is an excellent bill. I also note that 
it includes $177 million for the construction of a new Census facility 
in Suitland. I urge my colleagues to support the Treasury-Postal 
appropriations bill.
  Mr. ISTOOK. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from 
California (Mr. Ose).
  Mr. OSE. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this 
time.
  Mr. Chairman, I rise today in support of this important legislation. 
I want to thank the chairman of the subcommittee for allowing me to 
speak today, and I also thank him for his leadership in dedicating 
additional funding for the U.S. Customs Service.
  I stand before my colleagues to highlight the importance of Customs 
funding for the Sacramento International Airport. In 2001 the airport 
was granted Port of Entry status, paving the way for international 
flights. On July 1 of this year, Mexicana Airlines commenced scheduled 
international service from Sacramento to Mexico. I take great pride in 
our ongoing efforts at the local, State, and Federal level to expand 
this first class airport, including putting up $3.2 million of local 
money to construct the processing facility. New international service 
has just begun and it, in fact, is just the beginning.
  In order to gain this international service, the Sacramento 
International Airport signed an agreement to cover the cost of the 
Customs Service for this operation until the Customs Service could 
provide full-time personnel. The cost to the airport is approximately 
$475,000 per year.
  Interestingly, according to an economic analysis conducted on behalf 
of the airport, Federal, State, and local governments will receive 
approximately $1.5 million in new tax revenues because of this new 
international service provided by Mexicana Airlines. These flights will 
generate approximately 360 direct and indirect jobs, with over 100 of 
these jobs in the visitor and tourism industry. In the Sacramento area, 
personal income is estimated to increase by over $9 million per year.
  In the Treasury-Postal Appropriations Subcommittee report, which is 
House Report 107-575 accompanying H.R. 5120, the committee directed 
``the U.S. Customs Service to work closely with international airport 
authorities to ensure that Customs will meet the optimal staffing 
requirements at international airports in the United States.''
  The committee report goes on to recommend that the Customs Service 
``evaluate the feasibility of providing additional resources and 
staffing to include increased inspection services at Sacramento 
International Airport.''
  I appreciate the work the committee has done on behalf of Sacramento 
International Airport, and I look forward to working with the committee 
to secure funding for permanent Customs staff.
  Mr. Chairman, this is a successful local, State, and Federal 
partnership that has laid the groundwork for opening a whole new area 
of economic activity in Sacramento. I urge my colleagues to support 
this important legislation.
  Mr. HOYER. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the distinguished 
gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Delahunt).
  Mr. DELAHUNT. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding me 
this time.
  There will be a series of amendments offered during the course of the 
debate on this bill by a bipartisan group of Members, Republicans and 
Democrats, liberals and conservatives, who, after 43 years, recognize 
that there can be no doubt that our current Cuba policy has failed. It 
has failed the Cuban people because it certainly has not brought them 
freedom and political space, but it has also failed the American 
people, not just because it has denied us commercial opportunities but, 
more importantly, has unreasonably restricted one of our fundamental 
constitutional rights, the right to travel.
  Even Vice President Cheney admitted during the campaign, and I am 
quoting him now, ``restrictions, frankly, have not worked very well in 
Cuba.''
  Well, furthermore, this policy opens us to charges of hypocrisy. 
Americans can travel to North Korea and Iran; by my reckoning, that is 
two-thirds of the axis of evil, but not to Cuba. That makes no sense, I 
would suggest.
  We also helped pass the United Nations resolution that calls for 
virtually unrestricted trade with Iraq, the crown jewel of the troika 
of the axis of evil, yet we continue an embargo on Cuba. Well, that 
makes no sense, either.
  If we do not approve of one-party states where elections are a sham, 
where political and religious dissent is repressed, and the president 
names the editors in chief of the three largest daily newspapers, why 
do we not restrict travel and impose an economic embargo on Egypt, 
rather than sending them a $2 billion check every year? Why do we not 
impose Cuba-like sanctions on Saudi Arabia, one of the most oppressive 
regimes on earth, where women cannot thrive and our own soldiers are 
prohibited from leaving their bases, and an adult American woman born 
in Texas cannot leave to come home to America because her husband will 
not consent.

                              {time}  1600

  How can we justify that inconsistency? The amendments that we will be 
offering will eliminate that hypocrisy and help create a democratic 
opening in Cuba. I urge my colleagues to support these amendments and 
particularly also when the amendment offered by the gentleman from 
Florida (Mr. Goss) comes forward, to vote ``no.''
  Mr. HOYER. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. ISTOOK. Mr. Chairman, may I inquire how much time remains.
  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore (Mr. Hastings of Washington). The gentleman 
from Oklahoma (Mr. Istook) has 6\1/2\ minutes remaining, and the 
gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Hoyer) has 11 minutes remaining.
  Mr. ISTOOK. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
Georgia (Mr. Chambliss).
  Mr. CHAMBLISS. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding me 
this time and again congratulate him and the gentleman from Maryland 
(Mr. Hoyer) on a very fine bill coming forward today.
  Mr. Chairman, the Federal Law Enforcement Training Center, or what is 
commonly known as FLETC, in Glynco, Georgia, provides critical training 
for a range of Federal law enforcement personnel as well as State, 
local, foreign, and private sector security personnel.
  My Subcommittee on Terrorism and Homeland Security of the House 
Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence just completed a study of 
the intelligence deficiencies that left our Nation vulnerable to 
attack. We know that our intelligence agencies must do a better job of 
collecting and analyzing producing intelligence information, but that 
is only part of the solution. We need to ensure that we have a robust 
law enforcement and security force that can take that intelligence and 
use it to stop future attacks. The critical security training by FLETC 
is an integral part of protecting our Nation.
  I strongly support allowing our pilots to be armed as an additional 
layer of aviation security. Since FLETC will train our air marshals, 
FLETC is an appropriate place to train our pilots with the same 
standards. I applaud the efforts of the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. 
Kingston), who has done an outstanding job of working with FLETC to 
address their needs. I am pleased that under the gentleman from 
Oklahoma's (Mr. Istook) leadership this bill increases funding for this 
important facility. I thank the chairman for his support and for his 
commitment to ensuring that significant resources have been provided to 
fully train Federal law enforcement and security personnel at the 
Federal Law Enforcement Training Center.
  Mr. HOYER. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the distinguished 
gentlewoman from the District of Columbia (Ms. Norton).

[[Page H5247]]

  Ms. NORTON. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this 
time, and I rise to thank him for his work and to thank the gentleman 
from Oklahoma (Mr. Istook) as well and to support this appropriation.
  I want to talk about an important matter and that is about an 
amendment that I intended to offer. It may or may not have been in 
order, but I want to discuss it on the floor now. It is the closing of 
E Street. It remains closed even though the Secret Service signed off 
on a report recommending that it be open, a report of the National 
Capitol Planning Commission. There is no safety or security issue. 
There is an 800-foot setback from the back of the White House. It is 
closed for one and only one reason, and that is when the Secret Service 
closes something, it wants to always keep it closed. The Secret Service 
wanted to keep National Airport closed. Only because the entire region 
fought back is National Airport open. The Secret Service wanted to 
close Pennsylvania Avenue ever since the Eisenhower administration. It 
succeeded after Oklahoma City. We are not asking that Pennsylvania be 
reopened, but we cannot afford to see E Street remain closed; and I 
will say why in a few minutes.
  First of all, E Street is one of the few streets in the District that 
was prepared for September 11 because after Oklahoma City, E Street had 
been widened in order to make sure that the White House which has an 
800-foot setback was, in fact, safe. In fact, it opened for a year 
after Oklahoma City and after 9-11 closed. Another study done, that 
study shows that it can be opened. The Chair of the Subcommittee on the 
District of Columbia and I have sent letters. It is because we can get 
no response that I come to the floor to say if we do not get response 
within the next few months, I will take action that I think will result 
in the opening of E Street.
  There is new urgency which above all sends me to the floor today 
because the entire region is implicated. There has been a recent Court 
of Appeals ruling that this entire region is in ``severe violation'' of 
the Clean Air Act. What that means for the region, and the ranking 
member is deeply implicated here because he represents part of this 
region, is that this region very soon, unless we get at things that are 
causing congestion like the closure of E Street which has to take all 
of the traffic in Maryland, Virginia, and crosstown traffic in D.C., if 
we are not able to get ahold of matters like this, then this region 
will be able to build nothing with transportation funds, no metro, no 
roads; and here we are just caught up in this dilemma.
  E Street handles a lion's share of the traffic from the region, and 
of course it is a way that we get across town. It makes a very large 
contribution to traffic congestion and air pollution that must be 
cleared up if we are to continue to build in this town. It is time E 
Street was allowed to make the contribution the founders intended it to 
make to facilitate traffic across town. We closed E Street in front of 
Pennsylvania in front of the White House. We must not close off E 
Street in back of the White House.
  Mr. HOYER. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the distinguished 
gentleman from northern New Jersey (Mr. Pallone).
  Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in support of the bill and in 
opposition to any amendments that prohibit funds from being used to 
administer or enforce the ban on travel to Cuba or to enforce the U.S. 
embargo against Cuba.
  Mr. Chairman, I have said in the past doing business with Cuba means 
doing business with Castro. So long as Castro maintains his 
stranglehold on every aspect of Cuban life, lifting any aspect of the 
embargo or allowing Americans to travel to Cuba would mean subsidizing 
Castro.
  Contrary to popular belief, increased tourist travel to the island 
would not increase purposeful contact with the Cuban people and instead 
contributes to unacceptable practices of slave labor and racism.
  Canadians and Europeans have been traveling to Cuba for years, and 
yet there has been no measurable impact on or change in Castro's 
control over the people.
  Furthermore, 98 percent of Cuban citizens are forbidden even entry 
into the tourist areas, which is Fidel Castro's way of denying 
foreigners the ability to gain a glimpse into the reality of Cuban 
life. Those Cubans who do work at the resorts are forbidden to engage 
in certain types of conversations with foreigners, including any 
mention of Cuba's political situation, the U.S. embargo, and other such 
issues.
  Citizens who work at the resorts are employed by a state employment 
agency run by the Castro regime. The foreign resorts pay the workers' 
wages to the state agency in dollars, but the workers receive only 
pesos. Therefore between 95 and 97 percent of a workers' wages are kept 
by Castro.
  Mr. Chairman, most Cuban tourist operations are run by the Cuban 
military and internal security services. These so-called companies 
funnel money directly into the regime, earning them the hard currency 
necessary to perpetuate their repressive policies. Expanding tourism 
was the key to Castro's survival after the collapse of the Soviet 
Union. Tourism has helped to feed the personal fortunes of the Castro 
family and provide the necessary government revenues that Cuba's 
deteriorating sugar industry and failing state enterprises simply 
cannot.
  Mr. Chairman, by lifting these sanctions, with nothing in exchange 
from the Cuban Government, we would be betraying the very people that 
these policies were designed to help. Mr. Chairman, I urge my 
colleagues to join with me and oppose any amendments that lift travel 
restrictions or lift the embargo and to remain committed to their 
support and the U.S. Government's support for the Cuban people.


                              introduction

  Mr. NUSSLE. Mr. Chairman, I rise to speak on H.R. 5120, a bill 
providing appropriations for the Department of Treasury and related 
agencies and to express my continuing concern with the path the House 
is currently taking on appropriations.


                             overall levels

  As reported, H.R. 5120 provides $18.5 billion in budget authority and 
$18.2 billion in outlays for fiscal year 2003. It also exceeds the 
President's request by $537 million. To put this increase in 
perspective, appropriations for the agencies covered by this bill have 
climbed by an average of 10.5 percent a year over the last three years.
  The bill provides another $31 million for fiscal year 2004 for free 
and reduced mail for the blind as well as mail for overseas voting. 
This is included in the list of permissible advance appropriations 
pursuant to the House-passed budget resolution for fiscal year 2003 (H. 
Con. Res. 353).


                   compliance with budget resolution

  It is only fair to point out that this bill, like that of the 
Interior bill we considered last week, is within the reporting 
Subcommittee' 302(b) allocation. Hence, no budget-related point of 
order lies against consideration of the bill.
  To the Appropriations Committee's credit, it was able to meet its 
302(b) allocation without designating phony emergencies, which are 
effectively exempt from any budgetary constraints. Nor did it attempt 
to create the illusion of fiscal restraint by offsetting spending 
increases with rescissions in funds that would never have been spent.


                           the bigger picture

  My concern is less with the bill than in the direction in which we 
are heading. Unless we exercise more restraint in the less 
controversial measures like this bill, we will be forced to find 
savings in the remaining appropriations bills or breach the limits that 
both the House and the President agreed to earlier this year.
  The real test will come when we consider appropriations for VA-HUD 
and Labor-HHS, which the Leadership has agreed to bring to the floor 
before any other appropriations measures are considered. For every 
dollar we increase spending in this bill above the President's request, 
we must find an equal amount of savings from such agencies as Veterans' 
Affairs, Health and Human Services and Housing and Urban Development.
  I sincerely hope that both the Appropriations Committee and the 
Congress as a whole is up to this task.


                              other issues

  On a lighter note, for the second year in a row the bill includes a 
limitation that prohibits appropriations from being used to pay the 
salaries of any OMB staff who dare to compare the President's budget 
request with that of the 13 appropriations bills.
  It still seems curious to me that while the individual appropriations 
bills must be submitted to the President to become law, the President 
shouldn't be allowed to suggest how much should be spent on each bill.

[[Page H5248]]

                               conclusion

  In conclusion, I reluctantly support this bill because it is within 
the limits that were established for it by the House-passed budget 
resolution.
  At the same time, it continues the pattern of allowing appropriations 
for select agencies to grow significantly beyond the levels requested 
by the President.
  This will force us to exercise greater restraint than would have 
otherwise been required for such agencies as Veteran's Affairs, Housing 
and Urban Development and Health and Human Services.
  If we prove unable to meet that challenge, I will be forced to 
examine other remedies to bring overall appropriations in line with the 
budget resolution.
  Mr. MORAN of Kansas. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to a 
Congressional pay raise. I do not support this procedural motion, and I 
do not support the way this issue is being handled. Failure to allow an 
up or down vote on this issue only serves to increase cynicism towards 
the political process and confirms the feelings of many voters that 
their representatives are out of touch. This process needs to be 
reformed. Members of Congress should be on record with the citizens of 
their districts as to whether they believe an increase to their salary 
is justified. Given the opportunity, I would vote ``no.''
  Fiscal discipline must start with elected officials. At a time when 
farmers and ranchers and small businesses across Kansas are struggling 
and rural hospitals and other health care providers are curtailing 
services, there is no place for a Congressional cost of living 
increase, especially one born in a cloud of secrecy.
  Mr. DAVIS of Illinois. Mr. Chairman, I had planned to offer an 
amendment today that would have linked any increase in postage rates by 
the United States Postal Service (USPS) to Postal Reform. However, I 
have decided against that. But I would like to share with my colleagues 
and the American people the crisis in our mail system and its likely 
impact on our economy.
  The USPS is hemorrhaging--universal service is in real jeopardy. The 
Postal Service continues to operate under laws passed in 1970. They 
cannot raise rates to cover spikes in gas prices. The 1970 laws did not 
take into consideration e-mail, e-commerce or the impact that other 
advances in technology would have on first class mail. The USPS is an 
organization that comprises over 800,000 full and part-time workers and 
plays a significant role in our economy.
  The anthrax attacks on the Postal Service have tragically taken the 
lives of two postal workers and threatened thousands more. The pipe-
bomb attacks on rural mailboxes have stirred fear on many of our rural 
routes and put at risk rural letter carriers and residents. The attacks 
coupled with a lack of Postal Reform have the Postal Service spiraling 
dangerously close to bankruptcy. The Postal Service reports that in 
fiscal year 2002, mail volume is down by six billion pieces--an 
unprecedented decline.
  Last year, the Postal Service lost $1.68 billion dollars, and this 
fiscal year they are predicting losses of $1.5 billion. No business in 
America can continue to function with these type of losses.
  The Postal Service is unlike any other business--unique in its 
mission and goal. It is the anchor for the $900 billion dollar mailing 
industry--which employs approximately 9 million people. The mailing 
industry represents 8 percent of the gross domestic product. When the 
Postal Service gets a cold--the mailing industry gets pneumonia. We are 
almost at pneumonia crisis in the mailing industry. The uncertainty of 
the economy coupled with constant rate increased by the Postal Service 
to cover its budget shortfall could lead to lay offs and cuts at big 
mailing operations like RR Donnelley & Sons, AOL Time Warner, Lands End 
and others.
  The business industry needs and deserves stability in terms of 
projected increases in rates.
  A number of companies could be in real jeopardy if the Postal Service 
is not provided the tools they need in order to be competitive. A 
viable and competitive Postal Service provides the stability that 
printers, mailers, employees and consumers can count on. The impact of 
a weak Postal Service on our quality of life and economy are enormous. 
It is my hope that we will continue to press the issue for Postal 
Reform.
  Ms. SCHAKOWSKY. Mr. Chairman. I rise in support of the Rangel, 
Moran,and Flake amendments to the Treasury-Postal Appropriations bill. 
It is clear to me that the trade and travel embargo on Cuba must be 
lifted. I commend the following Chicago Tribune article on this subject 
to the attention of my colleagues, and I urge all members to vote to 
repeal the current policy, which is outdated and unwise. Allowing trade 
and travel between the U.S. and Cuba will help the Cuban people and 
will help the America public. I urge all members to join me in 
supporting the efforts of the Gentleman from New York, The Gentleman 
from Kansas, and the Gentleman from Arizona. As the Tribune puts it, 
this is ``a chance to think fresh on Cuba''.

                    A Chance to Think Fresh on Cuba

       With each passing day, the once-invincible Washington lobby 
     in favor of maintaining the U.S. economic embargo against 
     Cuba looks as absurd and irrelevant as the Flat Earth 
     Society. Unfortunately, and not as a matter or principle but 
     craven politics, President Bush vows to stick with his 
     support of the embargo to the point of vetoing any 
     congressional move to weaken it.
       He must give this new thought. The next few weeks will be 
     as propitious a time as any to shift course, be it from the 
     perspective of politics, economics or the national interest.
       Four amendments tot he Treasury and Postal Service bill in 
     the House seek to undo various parts of the embargo. Rep. 
     Charles Rangel (D-NY) wants to dismantle the embargo 
     altogether. Rep Jerry Moran (R-Kansas) proposes to lift 
     restrictions on private financing of trade deals with Cuba. 
     Finally, Rep. Jeff Flake (R-Ariz.) has introduced two 
     amendments, one to effectively lift restrictions on private 
     travel to Cuba and another to lift limits on remittances 
     Cuban-Americans to their relatives still in the island.
       The last three amendments have an excellent chance of 
     passage. A similar amendment by Flake last year received 240 
     votes, but was sidetracked in the Senate by the events of 
     Sept. 11. An even wider margin is expected when it comes for 
     a vote within the next few days. On Tuesday, the Senate 
     Appropriation Committee unanimously passed an amendment 
     identical to Flake's; full Senate approval is expected by a 
     wide margin.
       Except for incurring the wrath of some Cuban hardliners in 
     southern Florida--and possibly harming his brother's chances 
     for re-election as governor--there would not be much 
     political risk to President Bush if he were to get behind a 
     softening of the embargo.
       Economically, it would be good for the country. According 
     to the U.S.-Cuba Trade and Economic Council, a non-partisan 
     information organization, trade with Cuba last year amounted 
     to about $103 million and is expected to rise to $165 million 
     this year--all cash. That puts Cuba 57th among the 180 top 
     buyers of U.S. agricultural products. These shipments 
     originated in 30 states.
       A U.S. food and agribusiness fair, scheduled for Havana in 
     September, already has attracted 120 American exhibitors, who 
     are coming armed for business. Confirmed attendees so far 
     include two Illinois dairy cows plus two buffalo and a 200-
     pound pig from North Dakota. Approximately 20,000 attendees 
     are expected from both counties, including the Bearded One, 
     who has promised to stop by every day.
       Unless President Bush changes course, he will find himself 
     in the untenable position of having to recite the tired old 
     lines in support of the embargo even as Congress moves 
     overwhelmingly to vote in favor of easing it, and American 
     business people--many of them no doubt Republican--head for 
     Havana to sell their products.
       Certainly, the administration has more important foreign-
     policy issues on its agenda than maintaining an embargo 
     fueled by Cold War rancor rather than economic or political 
     reality.
  Mr. HOYER. Mr. Chairman, I have no further requests for time, and I 
yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. ISTOOK. Mr. Chairman, I remind Members that we appreciate their 
support of this important measure.
  Mr. Chairman, I have no further requests for time, and I yield back 
the balance of my time.
  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. All time for general debate has expired.
  Pursuant to the rule, the bill shall be considered for amendment 
under the 5-minute rule.
  The Chair shall accord priority in recognition to the gentleman from 
Florida (Mr. Goss), or his designee, to offer the amendment printed in 
House Report 107-585, which may be offered only at the appropriate 
point in the reading of the bill, shall be considered read, and shall 
not be subject to amendment.
  Except as otherwise specified, during the consideration of the bill 
for amendment, the Chair may accord priority in recognition to a Member 
offering an amendment that he has printed in a designated place in the 
Congressional Record. Those amendments will be considered read.
  The Clerk will read.
  The Clerk read as follows:

                               H.R. 5120

       Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 
     the United States of America in Congress assembled, That the 
     following sums are appropriated, out of any money in the 
     Treasury not otherwise appropriated, for the Treasury 
     Department, the United States Postal Service, the Executive 
     Office of the President, and certain Independent Agencies, 
     for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2003, and for other 
     purposes, namely:

[[Page H5249]]

                  TITLE I--DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY

                          DEPARTMENTAL OFFICES

                         Salaries and Expenses


                     (including transfer of funds)

       For necessary expenses of the Departmental Offices 
     including operation and maintenance of the Treasury Building 
     and Annex; hire of passenger motor vehicles; maintenance, 
     repairs, and improvements of, and purchase of commercial 
     insurance policies for, real properties leased or owned 
     overseas, when necessary for the performance of official 
     business; not to exceed $3,500,000 for official travel 
     expenses; not to exceed $3,813,000, to remain available until 
     expended for information technology modernization 
     requirements; not to exceed $150,000 for official reception 
     and representation expenses; not to exceed $258,000 for 
     unforeseen emergencies of a confidential nature, to be 
     allocated and expended under the direction of the Secretary 
     of the Treasury and to be accounted for solely on his 
     certificate, $187,241,000: Provided, That of these amounts 
     $2,900,000 is available for grants to State and local law 
     enforcement groups to help fight money laundering: Provided 
     further, That of these amounts, $5,893,000 shall be for the 
     Treasury-wide Financial Statement Audit Program, of which 
     such amounts as may be necessary may be transferred to 
     accounts of the Department's offices and bureaus to conduct 
     audits: Provided further, That this transfer authority shall 
     be in addition to any other provided in this Act.

        Department-Wide Systems and Capital Investments Programs


                     (including transfer of funds)

       For development and acquisition of automatic data 
     processing equipment, software, and services for the 
     Department of the Treasury, $68,828,000, to remain available 
     until expended: Provided, That these funds shall be 
     transferred to accounts and in amounts as necessary to 
     satisfy the requirements of the Department's offices, 
     bureaus, and other organizations: Provided further, That this 
     transfer authority shall be in addition to any other transfer 
     authority provided in this Act.

                      Office of Inspector General


                         salaries and expenses

       For necessary expenses of the Office of Inspector General 
     in carrying out the provisions of the Inspector General Act 
     of 1978, not to exceed $2,000,000 for official travel 
     expenses, including hire of passenger motor vehicles; and not 
     to exceed $100,000 for unforeseen emergencies of a 
     confidential nature, to be allocated and expended under the 
     direction of the Inspector General of the Treasury, 
     $35,424,000.

                Inspector General for Tax Administration


                         salaries and expenses

       For necessary expenses of the Treasury Inspector General 
     for Tax Administration in carrying out the Inspector General 
     Act of 1978, including purchase (not to exceed 150 for 
     replacement only for police-type use) and hire of passenger 
     motor vehicles (31 U.S.C. 1343(b)); services authorized by 5 
     U.S.C. 3109, at such rates as may be determined by the 
     Inspector General for Tax Administration; not to exceed 
     $6,000,000 for official travel expenses; and not to exceed 
     $500,000 for unforeseen emergencies of a confidential nature, 
     to be allocated and expended under the direction of the 
     Inspector General for Tax Administration, $123,962,000.

            Air Transportation Stabilization Program Account

       For necessary expenses to administer the Air Transportation 
     Stabilization Board established by section 102 of the Air 
     Transportation Safety and System Stabilization Act (Public 
     Law 107-42), $6,041,000, to remain available until expended.

           Treasury Building and Annex Repair and Restoration

       For the repair, alteration, and improvement of the Treasury 
     Building and Annex, $32,932,000, to remain available until 
     expended.

                 Expanded Access to Financial Services


                     (including transfer of funds)

       To develop and implement programs to expand access to 
     financial services for low- and moderate-income individuals, 
     $4,000,000, such funds to become available upon authorization 
     of this program as provided by law and to remain available 
     until expended: Provided, That of these funds, such sums as 
     may be necessary may be transferred to accounts of the 
     Department's offices, bureaus, and other organizations: 
     Provided further, That this transfer authority shall be in 
     addition to any other transfer authority provided in this 
     Act: Provided further, That none of the funds shall be used 
     to provide real property, automated teller machines or any 
     other equipment for use by any financial institution: 
     Provided further, That none of the funds shall be used to 
     support any program or activity that incurs costs in excess 
     of $100 for each participant who is expected to establish an 
     account: Provided further, That none of the funds shall be 
     used for any program or activity that does not provide at 
     least $0.50 in non-Federal matching funds for each $1.00 
     received from the Expanded Access to Financial Services 
     account.

                         Counterterrorism Fund

       For necessary expenses, as determined by the Secretary, 
     $33,000,000, to remain available until expended, to reimburse 
     any Department of the Treasury organization for the costs of 
     providing support to counter, investigate, or prosecute 
     unexpected threats or acts of terrorism, including payment of 
     rewards in connection with these activities: Provided, That 
     any Federal agency may be reimbursed for costs of responding 
     to the United States Secret Service's request to provide 
     security at National Special Security Events: Provided 
     further, That any amount provided under this heading shall be 
     available only after notice of its proposed use has been 
     transmitted to the Committees on Appropriations in accordance 
     with guidelines for reprogramming and transfer of funds and 
     such amount has been apportioned pursuant to 31 U.S.C. 1513.

                  FINANCIAL CRIMES ENFORCEMENT NETWORK


                         salaries and expenses

       For necessary expenses of the Financial Crimes Enforcement 
     Network, including hire of passenger motor vehicles; travel 
     expenses of non-Federal law enforcement personnel to attend 
     meetings concerned with financial intelligence activities, 
     law enforcement, and financial regulation; not to exceed 
     $14,000 for official reception and representation expenses; 
     and for assistance to Federal law enforcement agencies, with 
     or without reimbursement, $51,444,000, of which not to exceed 
     $3,400,000 shall remain available until September 30, 2005; 
     and of which $8,338,000 shall remain available until 
     September 30, 2004: Provided, That funds appropriated in this 
     account may be used to procure personal services contracts.

                FEDERAL LAW ENFORCEMENT TRAINING CENTER

                         Salaries and Expenses

       For necessary expenses of the Federal Law Enforcement 
     Training Center, as a bureau of the Department of the 
     Treasury, including materials and support costs of Federal 
     law enforcement basic training; purchase (not to exceed 52 
     for police-type use, without regard to the general purchase 
     price limitation) and hire of passenger motor vehicles; for 
     expenses for student athletic and related activities; 
     uniforms without regard to the general purchase price 
     limitation for the current fiscal year; the conducting of and 
     participating in firearms matches and presentation of awards; 
     for public awareness and enhancing community support of law 
     enforcement training; not to exceed $11,500 for official 
     reception and representation expenses; room and board for 
     student interns; and services as authorized by 5 U.S.C. 3109, 
     $152,951,000, of which $650,000 shall be available for an 
     interagency effort to establish written standards on 
     accreditation of Federal law enforcement training; and of 
     which up to $24,266,000 for materials and support costs of 
     Federal law enforcement basic training shall remain available 
     until September 30, 2005, and of which up to 20 percent of 
     the $24,266,000 also shall be available for travel, room and 
     board costs for participating agency basic training during 
     the first quarter of a fiscal year, subject to full 
     reimbursement by the benefitting agency: Provided, That the 
     Center is authorized to accept and use gifts of property, 
     both real and personal, and to accept services, for 
     authorized purposes, including funding of a gift of intrinsic 
     value which shall be awarded annually by the Director of the 
     Center to the outstanding student who graduated from a basic 
     training program at the Center during the previous fiscal 
     year, which shall be funded only by gifts received through 
     the Center's gift authority: Provided further, That the 
     Center is authorized to accept detailees from other Federal 
     agencies, on a non-reimbursable basis, to staff the 
     accreditation function: Provided further, That 
     notwithstanding any other provision of law, students 
     attending training at any Center site shall reside in on-
     Center or Center-provided housing, insofar as available and 
     in accordance with Center policy: Provided further, That 
     funds appropriated in this account shall be available, at the 
     discretion of the Director, for the following: training 
     United States Postal Service law enforcement personnel and 
     Postal police officers; State and local government law 
     enforcement training on a space-available basis; training of 
     foreign law enforcement officials on a space-available basis 
     with reimbursement of actual costs to this appropriation, 
     except that reimbursement may be waived by the Secretary for 
     law enforcement training activities in foreign countries 
     undertaken pursuant to section 801 of the Antiterrorism and 
     Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996 (Public Law 104-32); 
     training of private sector security officials on a space-
     available basis with reimbursement of actual costs to this 
     appropriation; and travel expenses of non-Federal personnel 
     to attend course development meetings and training sponsored 
     by the Center: Provided further, That the Center is 
     authorized to obligate funds in anticipation of 
     reimbursements from agencies receiving training sponsored by 
     the Center, except that total obligations at the end of the 
     fiscal year shall not exceed total budgetary resources 
     available at the end of the fiscal year: Provided further, 
     That the Center is authorized to provide training for the 
     Gang Resistance Education and Training program to Federal and 
     non-Federal personnel at any facility in partnership with the 
     Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms: Provided further, 
     That the Center is authorized to provide short-term medical 
     services for students undergoing training at the Center.

[[Page H5250]]

     Acquisition, Construction, Improvements, and Related Expenses

       For expansion of the Federal Law Enforcement Training 
     Center, for acquisition of necessary additional real property 
     and facilities, and for ongoing maintenance, facility 
     improvements, and related expenses, $31,800,000, to remain 
     available until expended.

                      INTERAGENCY LAW ENFORCEMENT

                 Interagency Crime and Drug Enforcement

       For expenses necessary to conduct investigations and 
     convict offenders involved in organized crime drug 
     trafficking, including cooperative efforts with State and 
     local law enforcement, as it relates to the Treasury 
     Department law enforcement violations such as money 
     laundering, violent crime, and smuggling, $110,594,000.

                      FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT SERVICE

                         Salaries and Expenses

       For necessary expenses of the Financial Management Service, 
     $220,664,000, of which not to exceed $9,220,000 shall remain 
     available until September 30, 2005, for information systems 
     modernization initiatives; and of which not to exceed $2,500 
     shall be available for official reception and representation 
     expenses.

                BUREAU OF ALCOHOL, TOBACCO AND FIREARMS

                         Salaries and Expenses

       For necessary expenses of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco 
     and Firearms, including purchase of not to exceed 822 
     vehicles for police-type use, of which 650 shall be for 
     replacement only, and hire of passenger motor vehicles; hire 
     of aircraft; services of expert witnesses at such rates as 
     may be determined by the Director; for payment of per diem 
     and/or subsistence allowances to employees where a major 
     investigative assignment requires an employee to work 16 
     hours or more per day or to remain overnight at his or her 
     post of duty; not to exceed $20,000 for official reception 
     and representation expenses; for training of State and local 
     law enforcement agencies with or without reimbursement, 
     including training in connection with the training and 
     acquisition of canines for explosives and fire accelerants 
     detection; not to exceed $50,000 for cooperative research and 
     development programs for Laboratory Services and Fire 
     Research Center activities; and provision of laboratory 
     assistance to State and local agencies, with or without 
     reimbursement, $891,034,000; of which not to exceed 
     $1,000,000 shall be available for the payment of attorneys' 
     fees as provided by 18 U.S.C. 924(d)(2); of which up to 
     $2,000,000 shall be available for the equipping of any 
     vessel, vehicle, equipment, or aircraft available for 
     official use by a State or local law enforcement agency if 
     the conveyance will be used in joint law enforcement 
     operations with the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms 
     and for the payment of overtime salaries including Social 
     Security and Medicare, travel, fuel, training, equipment, 
     supplies, and other similar costs of State and local law 
     enforcement personnel, including sworn officers and support 
     personnel, that are incurred in joint operations with the 
     Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms; of which 
     $13,000,000, to remain available until expended, shall be 
     available for disbursements through grants, cooperative 
     agreements or contracts to local governments for Gang 
     Resistance Education and Training; and of which $3,200,000 
     for new headquarters shall remain available until September 
     30, 2004: Provided, That no funds made available by this or 
     any other Act may be used to transfer the functions, 
     missions, or activities of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and 
     Firearms to other agencies or Departments in fiscal year 
     2003: Provided further, That no funds appropriated herein 
     shall be available for salaries or administrative expenses in 
     connection with consolidating or centralizing, within the 
     Department of the Treasury, the records, or any portion 
     thereof, of acquisition and disposition of firearms 
     maintained by Federal firearms licensees: Provided further, 
     That no funds appropriated herein shall be used to pay 
     administrative expenses or the compensation of any officer or 
     employee of the United States to implement an amendment or 
     amendments to 27 CFR 178.118 or to change the definition of 
     ``Curios or relics'' in 27 CFR 178.11 or remove any item from 
     ATF Publication 5300.11 as it existed on January 1, 1994: 
     Provided further, That none of the funds appropriated herein 
     shall be available to investigate or act upon applications 
     for relief from Federal firearms disabilities under 18 U.S.C. 
     925(c): Provided further, That such funds shall be available 
     to investigate and act upon applications filed by 
     corporations for relief from Federal firearms disabilities 
     under 18 U.S.C. 925(c): Provided further, That no funds under 
     this Act may be used to electronically retrieve information 
     gathered pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 923(g)(4) by name or any 
     personal identification code.

                     UNITED STATES CUSTOMS SERVICE

                         Salaries and Expenses

       For necessary expenses of the United States Customs 
     Service, including purchase and lease of up to 1,535 motor 
     vehicles, of which 550 are for replacement only and of which 
     1,500 are for police-type use and commercial operations; hire 
     of motor vehicles; contracting with individuals for personal 
     services abroad; not to exceed $40,000 for official reception 
     and representation expenses; and awards of compensation to 
     informers, as authorized by any Act enforced by the United 
     States Customs Service, $2,496,165,000, of which such sums as 
     become available in the Customs User Fee Account, except sums 
     subject to section 13031(f)(3) of the Consolidated Omnibus 
     Budget Reconciliation Act of 1985 (19 U.S.C. 58c(f)(3)), 
     shall be derived from that Account; of the total, not to 
     exceed $150,000 shall be available for payment for rental 
     space in connection with preclearance operations; not to 
     exceed $4,000,000 shall be available until expended for 
     research; not less than $100,000 shall be available to 
     promote public awareness of the child pornography tipline; 
     not to exceed $5,000,000 shall be available until expended 
     for conducting special operations pursuant to 19 U.S.C. 2081; 
     not to exceed $8,000,000 shall be available until expended 
     for the procurement of automation infrastructure items, 
     including hardware, software, and installation; and not to 
     exceed $5,000,000 shall be available until expended for 
     repairs to Customs facilities: Provided, That uniforms may be 
     purchased without regard to the general purchase price 
     limitation for the current fiscal year: Provided further, 
     That notwithstanding any other provision of law, the fiscal 
     year aggregate overtime limitation prescribed in subsection 
     5(c)(1) of the Act of February 13, 1911 (19 U.S.C. 261 and 
     267) shall be $30,000.


           Amendment No. 13 Offered by Mr. Rogers of Michigan

  Mr. ROGERS of Michigan. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Amendment No. 13 offered by Mr. Rogers of Michigan:
       In the item relating to ``United States Customs Service-
     salaries and expenses'', after the second dollar amount, 
     insert ``(increased by $700,000)''.
       In the item relating to ``internal revenue service-
     processing, assistance, and management'', after the first 
     dollar amount, insert ``(reduced by $700,000)''.

  Mr. ROGERS of Michigan. Mr. Chairman, I want to thank my colleagues, 
and I will ask for their help because Michigan today needs their help.
  In the Civil War we mustered 90,000 troops to defend the Union. We 
had the second most diverse crop of agriculture in the United States. 
We offer all the flavors of this great country to our fellow States 
around.
  Michigan is responsible for creating the permanent middle class in 
America when Henry Ford decided to pay the workers on the line $5 a 
day. We became, in World War II, we converted all of our automobile 
making capacity to be the arsenal of democracy for the world. We did 
that for the United States of America. We have 20 percent of the 
world's fresh water right there in Michigan, all of it worth defending. 
And I am here to tell you today that Michigan right now is under 
attack. And I need every colleague in this House from Maine to 
California to Florida and everybody in between to step up to the plate 
and say, We will stand beside you, those who have stood by America 
before.
  In the year 2000, Canadians sent 4.2 million cubic yards of waste to 
Michigan, nearly double from the year before. Canada is the second 
largest land mass country in the world, and yet they think they are 
unable to handle their own trash. This gets worse.
  Toronto is scheduled to close its last landfill at the end of the 
year. Recently, city workers in Toronto went on strike. I want to point 
this out to you. This is the scene in Toronto just a few weeks ago: 
trash blocking roadways. This is a park area they had to fill in with 
trash from Toronto. As you can see, the residents were just throwing 
bags over the fence, piling up everywhere all across their city.

                              {time}  1615

  Here is the bad news about that. All of that trash that my colleagues 
see right here, absolutely unregulated as to what is in its contents, 
is coming to the great State of Michigan. Let me just quote for my 
colleagues from someone from Toronto, when they settled the strike and 
said it is all over, she was quoted as saying ``I'm relieved that it's 
on its way. It was polluted, smelly and germy.''
  One hundred sixty trucks a day of polluted, smelly and germy Toronto 
trash coming to pollute the great State of Michigan, and at the end of 
this year, when their landfill closes, that is going to go to nearly 
250 trucks every day of this trash in our landfills. Michigan has had a 
long-term vision of this. Just with Canadian trash alone, it cuts our 
landfill capacity from 20 years to 10 years, and getting smaller every 
day.
  In the one landfill that we found that accepted Canadian trash, PCBs, 
soil

[[Page H5251]]

coffin waste, I do not know what that is, scares me to find out, the 
needle program in Toronto coming to a landfill near the great citizens 
of Michigan.
  This amendment is important today. There is a lot of work we need to 
do on this issue to stop it, but before we do that, we ought to be able 
to have the courage today to stand with our fellow Michiganders and say 
we are going to give them at least the hope to protect their 
environment in the great State of Michigan.
  The purpose is to hire six Customs agents to be stationed 24 hours a 
day on the Ambassador Bridge and the Detroit Windsor Tunnel, whose sole 
responsibility is to inspect Canadian trash coming into Michigan. The 
money includes equipment, training and benefits.
  Now, the only way that we are going to stop this trash, whatever is 
in that bag that that Torontan is sending to us, is to get our hands 
dirty and crawl around in it and inspect it and find out where the PCBs 
are coming from, where the soil coffin waste is coming from, where 
their bottles, which they refuse to have a deposit program like 
Michigan does, is coming from.
  This is the right and decent thing to do to let us in Michigan defend 
our borders as we have stood with the rest of this country to defend 
their borders.
  I am going to ask my colleagues again today, please strongly support 
this amendment. We want to make sure that every trash container coming 
into Michigan meets existing environmental and health regulations. 
Today, we have no idea if that is happening. Today, we have no idea if 
there is leeching from this material, ruining our lakes, our streams, 
ruining the great land of Michigan.
  Instead of spending a little more money going after grandma who owes 
the IRS 12 bucks, we are going to say please spend just a little bit 
less of that $4 billion that we are reducing to protect the health and 
environment of my home State, the great State of Michigan, and I 
challenge all of my colleagues to please support this issue. Stand 
loudly with us as we tell the Canadians to please handle their own 
trash and leave the littering to those who get a ticket.
  Mr. ISTOOK. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
  Mr. Chairman, I will not consume the 5 minutes. I certainly 
appreciate the passion of the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Rogers). It 
certainly is a significant problem. I am not quite sure what it will 
take to resolve it totally, but at this point anyway, we certainly 
would be willing to accept the amendment.
  Mr. HOYER. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the requisite number of 
words.
  Mr. Chairman, I agree with the gentleman from Oklahoma (Mr. Istook). 
I know that the gentleman from Michigan has worked very hard on this, 
other Members in Michigan, and we will have no objection to this 
amendment.
  Mr. BARCIA. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the amendment offered 
by my friend and colleague from Michigan, Mr. Rogers, who has been a 
leader on this issue of waste importation since coming to Congress.
  In 2000, Canadians sent 4.2 million cubic yards of waste to 
Michigan--nearly double from the year before, and that staggering 
figure is only going to increase as Toronto is scheduled to close its 
last landfill at the end of this year.
  Every day, more than 150 trucks carrying solid waste from Canada come 
across just two bridges into my home state of Michigan, headed for 
nearby landfills, another number sure to increase as landfills in 
Ontario shut down.
  What the importation of trash from Canada has done is to cut 
Michigan's landfill capacity in half, but what's worse, the trash often 
contains PCB's and other harmful waste which does not meet existing 
environmental and health regulations in this country.
  That leaves Michiganders suffering a variety of medical ailments and 
American taxpayers footing much of the bill for their treatment. And 
for what? So that we can dispense of Canadian trash.
  The amendment currently before the House takes less than 2 percent of 
the $3.8 billion in funding allocated by the bill for IRS Processing, 
Assistance and Management and uses it to hire six new customs agents to 
be stationed at two U.S. entry points in Michigan whose sole job it is 
to inspect the trash coming across our borders every day.
  These customs agents will protect American citizens--and not only 
those in Michigan--by preventing harmful waste from entering our 
country and our communities at the border.
  The importation of solid waste from Canada will still be a problem to 
communities across Michigan even if this amendment passes and this 
legislation is signed into law. But at least the people living in these 
communities will be able to sleep easy knowing that their health is no 
longer at risk from this trash.
  This amendment is very simple, very straightforward, and very cost 
effective, and I urge it's adoption.
  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore (Mr. Hastings of Washington). The question 
is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. 
Rogers).
  The amendment was agreed to.
  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. The Clerk will read.
  The Clerk read as follows:

                   Harbor Maintenance Fee Collection


                     (including transfer of funds)

       For administrative expenses related to the collection of 
     the Harbor Maintenance Fee, pursuant to Public Law 103-182, 
     $3,000,000, to be derived from the Harbor Maintenance Trust 
     Fund and to be transferred to and merged with the Customs 
     ``Salaries and Expenses'' account for such purposes.

  Operation, Maintenance and Procurement, Air and Marine Interdiction 
                                Programs

       For expenses, not otherwise provided for, necessary for the 
     operation and maintenance of marine vessels, aircraft, and 
     other related equipment of the Air and Marine Programs, 
     including operational training and mission-related travel, 
     and rental payments for facilities occupied by the air or 
     marine interdiction and demand reduction programs, the 
     operations of which include the following: the interdiction 
     of narcotics and other goods; the provision of support to 
     Customs and other Federal, State, and local agencies in the 
     enforcement or administration of laws enforced by the Customs 
     Service; and, at the discretion of the Commissioner of 
     Customs, the provision of assistance to Federal, State, and 
     local agencies in other law enforcement and emergency 
     humanitarian efforts, $190,000,000, which shall remain 
     available until expended: Provided, That no aircraft or other 
     related equipment, with the exception of aircraft which is 
     one of a kind and has been identified as excess to Customs 
     requirements and aircraft which has been damaged beyond 
     repair, shall be transferred to any other Federal agency, 
     department, or office outside of the Department of the 
     Treasury, during fiscal year 2003 without the prior approval 
     of the Committees on Appropriations.

                        Automation Modernization

       For expenses not otherwise provided for Customs automated 
     systems, $439,332,000, to remain available until expended, of 
     which not less than $316,900,000 shall be for the development 
     of the Automated Commercial Environment: Provided, That none 
     of the funds appropriated under this heading may be obligated 
     for the Automated Commercial Environment until the United 
     States Customs Service prepares and submits to the Committees 
     on Appropriations a plan for expenditure that: (1) meets the 
     capital planning and investment control review requirements 
     established by the Office of Management and Budget, including 
     OMB Circular A-11, part 3; (2) complies with the United 
     States Customs Service's Enterprise Information Systems 
     Architecture; (3) complies with the acquisition rules, 
     requirements, guidelines, and systems acquisition management 
     practices of the Federal Government; (4) is reviewed and 
     approved by the Customs Investment Review Board, the 
     Department of the Treasury, and the Office of Management and 
     Budget; and (5) is reviewed by the General Accounting Office: 
     Provided further, That none of the funds appropriated under 
     this heading may be obligated for the Automated Commercial 
     Environment until such expenditure plan has been approved by 
     the Committees on Appropriations.

                           UNITED STATES MINT

               United States Mint Public Enterprise Fund

       Pursuant to section 5136 of title 31, United States Code, 
     the United States Mint is provided funding through the United 
     States Mint Public Enterprise Fund for costs associated with 
     the production of circulating coins, numismatic coins, and 
     protective services, including both operating expenses and 
     capital investments. The aggregate amount of new liabilities 
     and obligations incurred during fiscal year 2003 under such 
     section 5136 for circulating coinage and protective service 
     capital investments of the United States Mint shall not 
     exceed $34,900,000.

                       BUREAU OF THE PUBLIC DEBT

                     Administering the Public Debt

       For necessary expenses connected with any public-debt 
     issues of the United States, $173,073,000, of which not to 
     exceed $2,500 shall be available for official reception and 
     representation expenses, and of which not to exceed 
     $2,000,000 shall remain available until expended for systems 
     modernization: Provided, That the sum appropriated herein 
     from the General Fund for fiscal year 2003 shall be reduced 
     by not more than $4,400,000 as definitive security issue fees 
     and Treasury Direct Investor Account Maintenance fees are 
     collected, so as to result in a final fiscal year 2003 
     appropriation from the General Fund estimated at 
     $168,673,000. In addition, $40,000, to be derived from the 
     Oil Spill Liability Trust Fund to reimburse the Bureau

[[Page H5252]]

     for administrative and personnel expenses for financial 
     management of the Fund, as authorized by section 1012 of 
     Public Law 101-380.

                        INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE

                 Processing, Assistance, and Management

       For necessary expenses of the Internal Revenue Service for 
     pre-filing taxpayer assistance and education, filing and 
     account services, shared services support, general management 
     and administration; and services as authorized by 5 U.S.C. 
     3109, at such rates as may be determined by the Commissioner, 
     $3,955,777,000, of which up to $3,950,000 shall be for the 
     Tax Counseling for the Elderly Program, of which $9,000,000 
     shall be available for low-income taxpayer clinic grants, and 
     of which not to exceed $25,000 shall be for official 
     reception and representation expenses.

                          Tax Law Enforcement

       For necessary expenses of the Internal Revenue Service for 
     determining and establishing tax liabilities; providing 
     litigation support; conducting criminal investigation and 
     enforcement activities; securing unfiled tax returns; 
     collecting unpaid accounts; conducting a document matching 
     program; resolving taxpayer problems through prompt 
     identification, referral and settlement; compiling statistics 
     of income and conducting compliance research; purchase (for 
     police-type use, not to exceed 850) and hire of passenger 
     motor vehicles (31 U.S.C. 1343(b)); and services as 
     authorized by 5 U.S.C. 3109, at such rates as may be 
     determined by the Commissioner, $3,729,072,000 of which not 
     to exceed $1,000,000 shall remain available until September 
     30, 2005, for research.

             Earned Income Tax Credit Compliance Initiative

       For funding essential earned income tax credit compliance 
     and error reduction initiatives, $146,000,000, of which not 
     to exceed $10,000,000 may be used to reimburse the Social 
     Security Administration for the costs of implementing section 
     1090 of the Taxpayer Relief Act of 1997.

                          Information Systems

       For necessary expenses of the Internal Revenue Service for 
     information systems and telecommunications support, including 
     developmental information systems and operational information 
     systems; the hire of passenger motor vehicles (31 U.S.C. 
     1343(b)); and services as authorized by 5 U.S.C. 3109, at 
     such rates as may be determined by the Commissioner, 
     $1,632,444,000, which shall remain available until September 
     30, 2004.

                     Business Systems Modernization

       For necessary expenses of the Internal Revenue Service, 
     $436,000,000, to remain available until September 30, 2005, 
     for the capital asset acquisition of information technology 
     systems, including management and related contractual costs 
     of said acquisitions, including contractual costs associated 
     with operations authorized by 5 U.S.C. 3109: Provided, That 
     none of these funds may be obligated until the Internal 
     Revenue Service submits to the Committees on Appropriations, 
     and such Committees approve, a plan for expenditure that: (1) 
     meets the capital planning and investment control review 
     requirements established by the Office of Management and 
     Budget, including Circular A-11 part 3; (2) complies with the 
     Internal Revenue Service's enterprise architecture, including 
     the modernization blueprint; (3) conforms with the Internal 
     Revenue Service's enterprise life cycle methodology; (4) is 
     approved by the Internal Revenue Service, the Department of 
     the Treasury, and the Office of Management and Budget; (5) 
     has been reviewed by the General Accounting Office; and (6) 
     complies with the acquisition rules, requirements, 
     guidelines, and systems acquisition management practices of 
     the Federal Government.

          Administrative Provisions--Internal Revenue Service

       Sec. 101. Not to exceed 5 percent of any appropriation made 
     available in this Act to the Internal Revenue Service may be 
     transferred to any other Internal Revenue Service 
     appropriation upon the advance approval of the Committees on 
     Appropriations.
       Sec. 102. The Internal Revenue Service shall maintain a 
     training program to ensure that Internal Revenue Service 
     employees are trained in taxpayers' rights, in dealing 
     courteously with the taxpayers, and in cross-cultural 
     relations.
       Sec. 103. The Internal Revenue Service shall institute and 
     enforce policies and procedures that will safeguard the 
     confidentiality of taxpayer information.
       Sec. 104. Funds made available by this or any other Act to 
     the Internal Revenue Service shall be available for improved 
     facilities and increased manpower to provide sufficient and 
     effective 1-800 help line service for taxpayers. The 
     Commissioner shall continue to make the improvement of the 
     Internal Revenue Service 1-800 help line service a priority 
     and allocate resources necessary to increase phone lines and 
     staff to improve the Internal Revenue Service 1-800 help line 
     service.

                      UNITED STATES SECRET SERVICE

                         Salaries and Expenses

       For necessary expenses of the United States Secret Service, 
     including purchase of not to exceed 610 vehicles for police-
     type use for replacement only, and hire of passenger motor 
     vehicles; purchase of American-made side-car compatible 
     motorcycles; hire of aircraft; services of expert witnesses 
     at such rates as may be determined by the Director; rental of 
     buildings in the District of Columbia, and fencing, lighting, 
     guard booths, and other facilities on private or other 
     property not in Government ownership or control, as may be 
     necessary to perform protective functions; for payment of per 
     diem andor subsistence allowances to employees where a 
     protective assignment during the actual day or days of the 
     visit of a protectee require an employee to work 16 hours per 
     day or to remain overnight at his or her post of duty; the 
     conducting of and participating in firearms matches; 
     presentation of awards; for travel of Secret Service 
     employees on protective missions without regard to the 
     limitations on such expenditures in this or any other Act if 
     approval is obtained in advance from the Committees on 
     Appropriations; for research and development; for making 
     grants to conduct behavioral research in support of 
     protective research and operations; not to exceed $25,000 for 
     official reception and representation expenses; not to exceed 
     $100,000 to provide technical assistance and equipment to 
     foreign law enforcement organizations in counterfeit 
     investigations; for payment in advance for commercial 
     accommodations as may be necessary to perform protective 
     functions; and for uniforms without regard to the general 
     purchase price limitation for the current fiscal year, 
     $1,017,892,000, of which $1,633,000 shall be available for 
     forensic and related support of investigations of missing and 
     exploited children, and of which $4,000,000 shall be 
     available as a grant for activities related to the 
     investigations of exploited children and shall remain 
     available until expended: Provided, That up to $18,000,000 
     provided for protective travel shall remain available until 
     September 30, 2004; Provided further, That funds appropriated 
     in this account shall be available, at the discretion of the 
     Director, for the following: training United States Postal 
     Service law enforcement personnel and Postal police officers, 
     training Federal law enforcement officers, training State and 
     local government law enforcement officers on a space-
     available basis with or without reimbursement of actual costs 
     to this appropriation, training private sector security 
     officials on a space-available basis with reimbursement of 
     actual costs to this appropriation, and training foreign law 
     enforcement officers on a space-available basis with 
     reimbursement of actual costs to this appropriation: Provided 
     further, That the United States Secret Service is authorized 
     to obligate funds in anticipation of reimbursements from 
     agencies and entities receiving training sponsored by the 
     James J. Rowley Training Center, except that total 
     obligations at the end of the fiscal year shall not exceed 
     total budgetary resources available at the end of the fiscal 
     year: Provided further, That the James J. Rowley Training 
     Center is authorized to provide short-term medical services 
     for students undergoing training at the Center.

     Acquisition, Construction, Improvements, and Related Expenses

       For necessary expenses of construction, repair, alteration, 
     and improvement of facilities, $3,519,000, to remain 
     available until expended.

             GENERAL PROVISIONS--DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY

       Sec. 110. Any obligation or expenditure by the Secretary of 
     the Treasury in connection with law enforcement activities of 
     a Federal agency or a Department of the Treasury law 
     enforcement organization in accordance with 31 U.S.C. 
     9703(g)(4)(B) from unobligated balances remaining in the Fund 
     on September 30, 2003, shall be made in compliance with 
     reprogramming guidelines.
       Sec. 111. Appropriations to the Department of the Treasury 
     in this Act shall be available for uniforms or allowances 
     therefor, as authorized by law (5 U.S.C. 5901), including 
     maintenance, repairs, and cleaning; purchase of insurance for 
     official motor vehicles operated in foreign countries; 
     purchase of motor vehicles without regard to the general 
     purchase price limitations for vehicles purchased and used 
     overseas for the current fiscal year; entering into contracts 
     with the Department of State for the furnishing of health and 
     medical services to employees and their dependents serving in 
     foreign countries; and services authorized by 5 U.S.C. 3109.
       Sec. 112. The funds provided to the Bureau of Alcohol, 
     Tobacco and Firearms for fiscal year 2003 in this Act for the 
     enforcement of the Federal Alcohol Administration Act shall 
     be expended in a manner so as not to diminish enforcement 
     efforts with respect to section 105 of the Federal Alcohol 
     Administration Act.
       Sec. 113. Not to exceed 2 percent of any appropriations in 
     this Act made available to the Federal Law Enforcement 
     Training Center, Financial Crimes Enforcement Network, Bureau 
     of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms, United States Customs 
     Service, Interagency Crime and Drug Enforcement, and United 
     States Secret Service may be transferred between such 
     appropriations upon the advance approval of the Committees on 
     Appropriations. No transfer may increase or decrease any such 
     appropriation by more than 2 percent.
  Mr. ISTOOK. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent that the remainder 
of the bill through page 44, line 12, be considered as read, printed in 
the Record and open to amendment at any point.

[[Page H5253]]

  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from Oklahoma?
  There was no objection.
  The text of the bill from page 26, line 13, to page 44, line 12, is, 
as follows:

       Sec. 114. Not to exceed 2 percent of any appropriations in 
     this Act made available to the Departmental Office--Salaries 
     and Expenses, Office of Inspector General, Treasury Inspector 
     General for Tax Administration, Financial Management Service, 
     and Bureau of the Public Debt, may be transferred between 
     such appropriations upon the advance approval of the 
     Committees on Appropriations. No transfer may increase or 
     decrease any such appropriation by more than 2 percent.
       Sec. 115. Not to exceed 2 percent of any appropriation made 
     available in this Act to the Internal Revenue Service may be 
     transferred to the Treasury Inspector General for Tax 
     Administration's appropriation upon the advance approval of 
     the Committees on Appropriations. No transfer may increase or 
     decrease any such appropriation by more than 2 percent.
       Sec. 116. Of the funds available for the purchase of law 
     enforcement vehicles, no funds may be obligated until the 
     Secretary of the Treasury certifies that the purchase by the 
     respective Treasury bureau is consistent with Departmental 
     vehicle management principles: Provided, That the Secretary 
     may delegate this authority to the Assistant Secretary for 
     Management.
       Sec. 117. None of the funds appropriated in this Act or 
     otherwise available to the Department of the Treasury or the 
     Bureau of Engraving and Printing may be used to redesign the 
     $1 Federal Reserve note.
       Sec. 118. The Secretary of the Treasury may transfer funds 
     from ``Salaries and Expenses'', Financial Management Service, 
     to the Debt Services Account as necessary to cover the costs 
     of debt collection: Provided, That such amounts shall be 
     reimbursed to such Salaries and Expenses account from debt 
     collections received in the Debt Services Account.
       Sec. 119. Section 122(g)(1) of Public Law 105-119 (5 U.S.C. 
     3104 note), is further amended by striking ``4 years'' and 
     inserting ``5 years''.
       Sec. 120. None of the funds appropriated or otherwise made 
     available by this or any other Act may be used by the United 
     States Mint to construct or operate any museum without the 
     explicit approval of the House Committee on Financial 
     Services and the Senate Committee on Banking, Housing, and 
     Urban Affairs.
       Sec. 121. None of the funds appropriated or made available 
     by this Act may be used for the production of Customs 
     Declarations that do not inquire whether the passenger had 
     been in the proximity of livestock.
       Sec. 122. The Federal Law Enforcement Training Center is 
     directed to establish an accrediting body that will include 
     representatives from the Federal law enforcement community, 
     as well as non-Federal accreditation experts involved in law 
     enforcement training. The purpose of this body will be to 
     establish standards for measuring and assessing the quality 
     and effectiveness of Federal law enforcement training 
     programs, facilities, and instructors.
       This title may be cited as the ``Treasury Department 
     Appropriations Act, 2003''.

                        TITLE II--POSTAL SERVICE

                   Payment to the Postal Service Fund

       For payment to the Postal Service Fund for revenue forgone 
     on free and reduced rate mail, pursuant to subsections (c) 
     and (d) of section 2401 of title 39, United States Code, 
     $60,014,000, of which $31,014,000 shall not be available for 
     obligation until October 1, 2003: Provided, That mail for 
     overseas voting and mail for the blind shall continue to be 
     free: Provided further, That 6-day delivery and rural 
     delivery of mail shall continue at not less than the 1983 
     level: Provided further, That none of the funds made 
     available to the Postal Service by this Act shall be used to 
     implement any rule, regulation, or policy of charging any 
     officer or employee of any State or local child support 
     enforcement agency, or any individual participating in a 
     State or local program of child support enforcement, a fee 
     for information requested or provided concerning an address 
     of a postal customer: Provided further, That none of the 
     funds provided in this Act shall be used to consolidate or 
     close small rural and other small post offices in fiscal year 
     2003.
       This title may be cited as the ``Postal Service 
     Appropriations Act, 2003''.

TITLE III--EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT AND FUNDS APPROPRIATED TO 
                             THE PRESIDENT

        COMPENSATION OF THE PRESIDENT AND THE WHITE HOUSE OFFICE

                     Compensation of the President

       For compensation of the President, including an expense 
     allowance at the rate of $50,000 per annum as authorized by 3 
     U.S.C. 102, $450,000: Provided, That none of the funds made 
     available for official expenses shall be expended for any 
     other purpose and any unused amount shall revert to the 
     Treasury pursuant to section 1552 of title 31, United States 
     Code: Provided further, That none of the funds made available 
     for official expenses shall be considered as taxable to the 
     President.

                         Salaries and Expenses

       For necessary expenses for the White House as authorized by 
     law, including not to exceed $3,850,000 for services as 
     authorized by 5 U.S.C. 3109 and 3 U.S.C. 105; subsistence 
     expenses as authorized by 3 U.S.C. 105, which shall be 
     expended and accounted for as provided in that section; hire 
     of passenger motor vehicles, newspapers, periodicals, 
     teletype news service, and travel (not to exceed $100,000 to 
     be expended and accounted for as provided by 3 U.S.C. 103); 
     and not to exceed $19,000 for official entertainment 
     expenses, to be available for allocation within the Executive 
     Office of the President, $50,715,000: Provided, That 
     $8,650,000 of the funds appropriated shall be available for 
     reimbursements to the White House Communications Agency.

                      OFFICE OF HOMELAND SECURITY

                         Salaries and Expenses

       For necessary expenses of the Office of Homeland Security, 
     pursuant to Executive Order 13288, $24,061,000: Provided, 
     That the Office of Homeland Security shall submit a report 
     identifying estimated obligations for each function assigned 
     to this Office pursuant to Executive Order 13288 to the House 
     Committee on Appropriations no later than November 1, 2002.

                 EXECUTIVE RESIDENCE AT THE WHITE HOUSE

                           Operating Expenses

       For the care, maintenance, repair and alteration, 
     refurnishing, improvement, heating, and lighting, including 
     electric power and fixtures, of the Executive Residence at 
     the White House and official entertainment expenses of the 
     President, $12,228,000, to be expended and accounted for as 
     provided by 3 U.S.C. 105, 109, 110, and 112-114.

                         Reimbursable Expenses

       For the reimbursable expenses of the Executive Residence at 
     the White House, such sums as may be necessary: Provided, 
     That all reimbursable operating expenses of the Executive 
     Residence shall be made in accordance with the provisions of 
     this paragraph: Provided further, That, notwithstanding any 
     other provision of law, such amount for reimbursable 
     operating expenses shall be the exclusive authority of the 
     Executive Residence to incur obligations and to receive 
     offsetting collections, for such expenses: Provided further, 
     That the Executive Residence shall require each person 
     sponsoring a reimbursable political event to pay in advance 
     an amount equal to the estimated cost of the event, and all 
     such advance payments shall be credited to this account and 
     remain available until expended: Provided further, That the 
     Executive Residence shall require the national committee of 
     the political party of the President to maintain on deposit 
     $25,000, to be separately accounted for and available for 
     expenses relating to reimbursable political events sponsored 
     by such committee during such fiscal year: Provided further, 
     That the Executive Residence shall ensure that a written 
     notice of any amount owed for a reimbursable operating 
     expense under this paragraph is submitted to the person owing 
     such amount within 60 days after such expense is incurred, 
     and that such amount is collected within 30 days after the 
     submission of such notice: Provided further, That the 
     Executive Residence shall charge interest and assess 
     penalties and other charges on any such amount that is not 
     reimbursed within such 30 days, in accordance with the 
     interest and penalty provisions applicable to an outstanding 
     debt on a United States Government claim under section 3717 
     of title 31, United States Code: Provided further, That each 
     such amount that is reimbursed, and any accompanying interest 
     and charges, shall be deposited in the Treasury as 
     miscellaneous receipts: Provided further, That the Executive 
     Residence shall prepare and submit to the Committees on 
     Appropriations, by not later than 90 days after the end of 
     the fiscal year covered by this Act, a report setting forth 
     the reimbursable operating expenses of the Executive 
     Residence during the preceding fiscal year, including the 
     total amount of such expenses, the amount of such total that 
     consists of reimbursable official and ceremonial events, the 
     amount of such total that consists of reimbursable political 
     events, and the portion of each such amount that has been 
     reimbursed as of the date of the report: Provided further, 
     That the Executive Residence shall maintain a system for the 
     tracking of expenses related to reimbursable events within 
     the Executive Residence that includes a standard for the 
     classification of any such expense as political or 
     nonpolitical: Provided further, That no provision of this 
     paragraph may be construed to exempt the Executive Residence 
     from any other applicable requirement of subchapter I or II 
     of chapter 37 of title 31, United States Code.

                   White House Repair and Restoration

       For the repair, alteration, and improvement of the 
     Executive Residence at the White House, $1,200,000, to remain 
     available until expended, for projects for required 
     maintenance, safety and health issues, and continued 
     preventative maintenance.

                SPECIAL ASSISTANCE TO THE PRESIDENT AND

                   THE OFFICIAL RESIDENCE OF THE VICE

                               PRESIDENT

                         Salaries and Expenses

       For necessary expenses to enable the Vice President to 
     provide assistance to the President in connection with 
     specially assigned functions; services as authorized by 5 
     U.S.C. 3109 and 3 U.S.C. 106, including subsistence

[[Page H5254]]

     expenses as authorized by 3 U.S.C. 106, which shall be 
     expended and accounted for as provided in that section; and 
     hire of passenger motor vehicles, $3,160,000.

                           Operating Expenses


                     (including transfer of funds)

       For the care, operation, refurnishing, improvement, heating 
     and lighting, including electric power and fixtures, of the 
     official residence of the Vice President; the hire of 
     passenger motor vehicles; and not to exceed $90,000 for 
     official entertainment expenses of the Vice President, to be 
     accounted for solely on his certificate, $324,000: Provided, 
     That advances or repayments or transfers from this 
     appropriation may be made to any department or agency for 
     expenses of carrying out such activities.

                      COUNCIL OF ECONOMIC ADVISERS

                         Salaries and Expenses

       For necessary expenses of the Council of Economic Advisors 
     in carrying out its functions under the Employment Act of 
     1946 (15 U.S.C. 1021), $3,763,000.

                      OFFICE OF POLICY DEVELOPMENT

                         Salaries and Expenses

       For necessary expenses of the Office of Policy Development, 
     including services as authorized by 5 U.S.C. 3109 and 3 
     U.S.C. 107, $3,251,000.

                       NATIONAL SECURITY COUNCIL

                         Salaries and Expenses

       For necessary expenses of the National Security Council, 
     including services as authorized by 5 U.S.C. 3109, 
     $7,803,000.

                        OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATION

                         Salaries and Expenses

       For necessary expenses of the Office of Administration, 
     including services as authorized by 5 U.S.C. 3109 and 3 
     U.S.C. 107, and hire of passenger motor vehicles, 
     $92,681,000, of which $17,495,000 shall remain available 
     until expended for the Capital Investment Plan for continued 
     modernization of the information technology infrastructure 
     within the Executive Office of the President: Provided, That 
     the Executive Office of the President shall submit a report 
     to the House Committee on Appropriations that includes a 
     current description of: (1) the Enterprise Architecture, as 
     defined in OMB Circular A-130 and the Federal Chief 
     Information Officers Council guidance; (2) the Information 
     Technology (IT) Human Capital Plan; (3) the capital 
     investment plan for implementing the Enterprise Architecture; 
     and (4) the IT capital planning and investment control 
     process: Provided further, That this report shall be reviewed 
     and approved by the Office of Management and Budget, and 
     reviewed by the General Accounting Office.

                    OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND BUDGET

                         Salaries and Expenses

       For necessary expenses of the Office of Management and 
     Budget, including hire of passenger motor vehicles and 
     services as authorized by 5 U.S.C. 3109, $61,492,000, of 
     which not to exceed $5,000,000 shall be available to carry 
     out the provisions of chapter 35 of title 44, United States 
     Code, and of which not to exceed $3,000 shall be available 
     for official representation expenses: Provided, That, as 
     provided in 31 U.S.C. 1301(a), appropriations shall be 
     applied only to the objects for which appropriations were 
     made except as otherwise provided by law: Provided further, 
     That none of the funds appropriated in this Act for the 
     Office of Management and Budget may be used for the purpose 
     of reviewing any agricultural marketing orders or any 
     activities or regulations under the provisions of the 
     Agricultural Marketing Agreement Act of 1937 (7 U.S.C. 601 et 
     seq.): Provided further, That none of the funds made 
     available for the Office of Management and Budget by this Act 
     may be expended for the altering of the transcript of actual 
     testimony of witnesses, except for testimony of officials of 
     the Office of Management and Budget, before the Committees on 
     Appropriations or the Committees on Veterans' Affairs or 
     their subcommittees: Provided further, That the preceding 
     shall not apply to printed hearings released by the 
     Committees on Appropriations or the Committees on Veterans' 
     Affairs: Provided further, That none of the funds 
     appropriated in this Act may be available to pay the salary 
     or expenses of any employee of the Office of Management and 
     Budget who, after February 15, 2003, calculates, prepares, or 
     approves any tabular or other material that proposes the sub-
     allocation of budget authority or outlays by the Committees 
     on Appropriations among their subcommittees.

                       ELECTRONIC GOVERNMENT FUND


                     (including transfer of funds)

       For necessary expenses in support of interagency projects 
     that enable the Federal Government to expand its ability to 
     conduct activities electronically, through the development 
     and implementation of innovative uses of the Internet and 
     other electronic methods $5,000,000 to remain available until 
     expended: Provided, That these funds may be transferred to 
     Federal agencies to carry out the purposes of the Fund: 
     Provided further, That this transfer authority shall be in 
     addition to any other transfer authority provided in this 
     Act: Provided further, That such transfers may not be made 
     until 10 days after a proposed spending plan and 
     justification for each project to be undertaken has been 
     submitted to the Committees on Appropriations.

          ELECTION ADMINISTRATION REFORM AND RELATED EXPENSES


                     (including transfer of funds)

       For necessary expenses for the implementation of election 
     administration reform, and related expenses, $200,000,000, to 
     remain available until expended: Provided, That such amount 
     shall not be available for obligation until the enactment of 
     legislation that establishes programs for improving the 
     administration of elections: Provided further, That, upon the 
     enactment of such legislation, the Director of the Office of 
     Management and Budget shall transfer the specific amounts 
     authorized, for the purposes designated, to the Federal 
     entities specified by such legislation, and according to the 
     provisions established in H.R. 3295, as passed by the House 
     of Representatives on December 12, 2001: Provided further, 
     That, within 15 days of such transfers, the Director of the 
     Office of Management and Budget shall notify the Congress of 
     the amounts transferred to each authorized Federal entity: 
     Provided further, That the entities to which the amounts are 
     transferred shall use the amounts to carry out the applicable 
     provisions of such legislation: Provided further, That the 
     transfer authority provided in this paragraph shall be in 
     addition to any other transfer authority provided in this or 
     any other Act: Provided further, That the Federal entities 
     referred to in the second proviso shall establish a program 
     under which the entity shall make a one-time payment to the 
     chief election authority of each State which, on a Statewide 
     basis, obtained optical scan or electronic voting equipment 
     for the administration of elections for Federal office in the 
     State prior to the regularly scheduled general election for 
     Federal office held in November 2000: Provided further, That 
     the amount of the payment made with respect to a State under 
     the program under the previous proviso shall be equal to the 
     costs incurred by the State in obtaining the optical scan or 
     electronic voting equipment used to administer the most 
     recent regularly scheduled general election for Federal 
     office in the State, except that in no case may the amount of 
     the payment exceed $6,000 per voting precinct in the State at 
     the time of the election: Provided further, That total 
     payments made under the program under the sixth proviso shall 
     not exceed $23,000,000.

                 OFFICE OF NATIONAL DRUG CONTROL POLICY

                         Salaries and Expenses


                     (including transfer of funds)

       For necessary expenses of the Office of National Drug 
     Control Policy; for research activities pursuant to the 
     Office of National Drug Control Policy Reauthorization Act of 
     1998 (21 U.S.C. 1701 et seq.); not to exceed $10,000 for 
     official reception and representation expenses; and for 
     participation in joint projects or in the provision of 
     services on matters of mutual interest with nonprofit, 
     research, or public organizations or agencies, with or 
     without reimbursement, $24,458,000; of which $2,350,000 shall 
     remain available until expended, consisting of $1,350,000 for 
     policy research and evaluation, and $1,000,000 for the 
     National Alliance for Model State Drug Laws: Provided, That 
     the Office is authorized to accept, hold, administer, and 
     utilize gifts, both real and personal, public and private, 
     without fiscal year limitation, for the purpose of aiding or 
     facilitating the work of the Office: Provided further, That 
     $5,000,000 of these funds shall not be obligated until the 
     Director submits performance measures of effectiveness for 
     the High Intensity Drug Trafficking Areas program to the 
     House Committee on Appropriations: Provided further, That 
     none of the funds appropriated shall be used to submit a 
     fiscal year 2004 budget request that is not supported by 
     performance measures of effectiveness data, including 
     supporting justifications for each High Intensity Drug 
     Trafficking Area and an optimal spending allocation based on 
     the same measures.

                Counterdrug Technology Assessment Center


                     (including transfer of funds)

       For necessary expenses for the Counterdrug Technology 
     Assessment Center for research activities pursuant to the 
     Office of National Drug Control Policy Reauthorization Act of 
     1998 (21 U.S.C. 1701 et seq.), $55,800,000, which shall 
     remain available until expended, consisting of $26,064,000 
     for counternarcotics research and development projects, and 
     $29,736,000 for the continued operation of the technology 
     transfer program: Provided, That the $26,064,000 for 
     counternarcotics research and development projects shall be 
     available for transfer to other Federal departments or 
     agencies.

                     FEDERAL DRUG CONTROL PROGRAMS

             High Intensity Drug Trafficking Areas Program


                     (including transfer of funds)

       For necessary expenses of the Office of National Drug 
     Control Policy's High Intensity Drug Trafficking Areas 
     Program, $246,350,000, for drug control activities consistent 
     with the approved strategy for each of the designated High 
     Intensity Drug Trafficking Areas, of which no less than 51 
     percent shall be transferred to State and local entities for 
     drug control activities, which shall be obligated within 120 
     days of the date of the enactment of this Act: Provided, That 
     up to 49 percent, to remain available until September 30, 
     2004, may be transferred to Federal agencies and departments 
     at a rate to be determined by the Director, of which not less 
     than $2,100,000 shall be used for auditing

[[Page H5255]]

     services and associated activities, and at least $500,000 of 
     the $2,100,000 shall be used to develop and implement a data 
     collection system to measure the performance of the High 
     Intensity Drug Trafficking Areas Program: Provided further, 
     That High Intensity Drug Trafficking Areas Programs 
     designated as of September 30, 2002, shall be funded at no 
     less than fiscal year 2002 levels unless the Director submits 
     to the Committees on Appropriations, and the Committees 
     approve, justification for changes in those levels based on 
     clearly articulated priorities for the High Intensity Drug 
     Trafficking Areas Programs, as well as published Office of 
     National Drug Control Policy performance measures of 
     effectiveness.

                        Special Forfeiture Fund


                     (including transfer of funds)

       For activities to support a national anti-drug campaign for 
     youth, and for other purposes, authorized by the Office of 
     National Drug Control Policy Reauthorization Act of 1998 (21 
     U.S.C. 1701 et seq.), $240,800,000, to remain available until 
     expended, of which the following amounts are available as 
     follows: $170,000,000 to support a national media campaign, 
     as authorized by the Drug-Free Media Campaign Act of 1998, 
     including no less than $150,000,000 for media buys; 
     $60,000,000 for a program of assistance and matching grants 
     to local coalitions and other activities, as authorized in 
     chapter 2 of the National Narcotic Leadership Act of 1988; 
     $6,000,000 for the Counterdrug Intelligence Executive 
     Secretariat; $2,000,000 for evaluations and research related 
     to National Drug Control Program performance measures; 
     $1,000,000 for the National Drug Court Institute; $1,000,000 
     for the United States Anti-Doping Agency for anti-doping 
     activities; and $800,000 for the United States membership 
     dues to the World Anti-Doping Agency: Provided, That such 
     funds may be transferred to other Federal departments and 
     agencies to carry out such activities.

                          UNANTICIPATED NEEDS

       For expenses necessary to enable the President to meet 
     unanticipated needs, in furtherance of the national interest, 
     security, or defense which may arise at home or abroad during 
     the current fiscal year, as authorized by 3 U.S.C. 108, 
     $1,000,000.
       This title may be cited as the ``Executive Office 
     Appropriations Act, 2003''.
  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. Are there any amendments to that portion of 
the bill?
  If not, the Clerk will read.
  The Clerk read as follows:

                     TITLE IV--INDEPENDENT AGENCIES

 COMMITTEE FOR PURCHASE FROM PEOPLE WHO ARE BLIND OR SEVERELY DISABLED

                         Salaries and Expenses

       For necessary expenses of the Committee for Purchase From 
     People Who Are Blind or Severely Disabled established by 
     Public Law 92-28, $4,629,000.

                      FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION

                         Salaries and Expenses

       For necessary expenses to carry out the provisions of the 
     Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971, $49,426,000, of which 
     no less than $5,866,700 shall be available for internal 
     automated data processing systems, and of which not to exceed 
     $5,000 shall be available for reception and representation 
     expenses.

                   FEDERAL LABOR RELATIONS AUTHORITY

                         Salaries and Expenses

       For necessary expenses to carry out functions of the 
     Federal Labor Relations Authority, pursuant to Reorganization 
     Plan Numbered 2 of 1978, and the Civil Service Reform Act of 
     1978, including services authorized by 5 U.S.C. 3109, and 
     including hire of experts and consultants, hire of passenger 
     motor vehicles, and rental of conference rooms in the 
     District of Columbia and elsewhere, $28,677,000: Provided, 
     That public members of the Federal Service Impasses Panel may 
     be paid travel expenses and per diem in lieu of subsistence 
     as authorized by law (5 U.S.C. 5703) for persons employed 
     intermittently in the Government service, and compensation as 
     authorized by 5 U.S.C. 3109: Provided further, That 
     notwithstanding 31 U.S.C. 3302, funds received from fees 
     charged to non-Federal participants at labor-management 
     relations conferences shall be credited to and merged with 
     this account, to be available without further appropriation 
     for the costs of carrying out these conferences.

                    GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION

                        REAL PROPERTY ACTIVITIES

                         Federal Buildings Fund


                 limitations on availability of revenue

                     (including transfer of funds)

       For an additional amount to be deposited in, and to be used 
     for the purposes of, the Fund established pursuant to section 
     210(f) of the Federal Property and Administrative Services 
     Act of 1949 (40 U.S.C. 490(f)), $325,711,000. The revenues 
     and collections deposited into the Fund shall be available 
     for necessary expenses of real property management and 
     related activities not otherwise provided for, including 
     operation, maintenance, and protection of federally owned and 
     leased buildings; rental of buildings in the District of 
     Columbia; restoration of leased premises; moving governmental 
     agencies (including space adjustments and telecommunications 
     relocation expenses) in connection with the assignment, 
     allocation and transfer of space; contractual services 
     incident to cleaning or servicing buildings, and moving; 
     repair and alteration of federally owned buildings including 
     grounds, approaches and appurtenances; care and safeguarding 
     of sites; maintenance, preservation, demolition, and 
     equipment; acquisition of buildings and sites by purchase, 
     condemnation, or as otherwise authorized by law; acquisition 
     of options to purchase buildings and sites; conversion and 
     extension of federally owned buildings; preliminary planning 
     and design of projects by contract or otherwise; construction 
     of new buildings (including equipment for such buildings); 
     and payment of principal, interest, and any other obligations 
     for public buildings acquired by installment purchase and 
     purchase contract; in the aggregate amount of $6,961,930,000, 
     of which: (1) $646,385,000 shall remain available until 
     expended for construction (including funds for sites and 
     expenses and associated design and construction services) of 
     additional projects at the following locations:
       New Construction:
       Arkansas:
       Little Rock, United States Courthouse Annex, $77,154,000
       California:
       San Diego, United States Courthouse Annex, $23,901,000
       District of Columbia:
       Washington, Southeast Federal Center Site Remediation, 
     $6,472,000
       Florida:
       Fort Pierce, United States Courthouse, $2,744,000
       Iowa:
       Cedar Rapids, United States Courthouse, $5,167,000
       Maine:
       Jackman, Border Station, $9,194,000
       Maryland:
       Montgomery County, FDA consolidation, $45,500,000
       Suitland, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration 
     II, $9,461,000
       Suitland, United States Census Bureau, $176,919,000
       Mississippi:
       Jackson, United States Courthouse, $7,276,000
       Missouri:
       Cape Girardeau, United States Courthouse, $49,311,000
       Montana:
       Raymond, Border Station, $7,753,000
       New York:
       Brooklyn, United States Courthouse Annex--GPO, $39,500,000
       Champlain, Border Station, $5,000,000
       Massena, Border Station, $1,646,000
       New York, U.S. Mission to the United Nations, $57,053,000
       North Dakota:
       Portal, Border Station, $2,201,000
       Oregon:
       Eugene, United States Courthouse, $77,374,000
       Tennessee:
       Nashville, United States Courthouse, $7,095,000
       Texas:
       Austin, United States Courthouse, $13,809,000
       Utah:
       Salt Lake City, United States Courthouse, $6,018,000
       Washington:
       Oroville, Border Station, $6,572,000
       Nationwide:
       Judgment Fund Repayment, $3,012,000
       Nonprospectus Construction, $6,253,000:

     Provided, That funding for any project identified above may 
     be exceeded to the extent that savings are effected in other 
     such projects, but not to exceed 10 percent of the amounts 
     included in an approved prospectus, if required, unless 
     advance approval is obtained from the Committees on 
     Appropriations of a greater amount: Provided further, That 
     all funds for direct construction projects shall expire on 
     September 30, 2004, and remain in the Federal Buildings Fund 
     except for funds for projects as to which funds for design or 
     other funds have been obligated in whole or in part prior to 
     such date; (2) $978,529,000 shall remain available until 
     expended for repairs and alterations which includes 
     associated design and construction services: Provided 
     further, That funds in the Federal Buildings Fund for Repairs 
     and Alterations shall, for prospectus projects, be limited to 
     the amount by project, as follows, except each project may be 
     increased by an amount not to exceed 10 percent unless 
     advance approval is obtained from the Committees on 
     Appropriations of a greater amount:
       Repairs and Alterations:
       California:
       Los Angeles, Federal Building, 300 North Los Angeles 
     Street, $93,166,000
       San Francisco, Appraisers Building, $20,283,000
       Tecate, Tecate U.S. Border Station, $5,709,000
       Connecticut:
       New Haven, Robert N. Gaimo Federal Building, $18,507,000
       District of Columbia:
       Federal Office Building 10A Garage, $5,454,000
       Harry S Truman Building (State), $29,443,000
       Illinois:
       Chicago, U.S. Custom House, $9,000,000
       Iowa:
       Davenport, Federal Building and U.S. Courthouse, 
     $12,586,000
       Maryland:

[[Page H5256]]

       Baltimore, Metro West, $6,162,000
       Woodlawn, Operations Building, $96,905,000
       Massachusetts:
       Boston, John F. Kennedy Federal Building Plaza, $3,271,000
       Missouri:
       Kansas City, Bannister Federal Complex, Building 1, 
     $16,130,000
       Kansas City, Bannister Federal Complex, Building 2, 
     $3,148,000
       New Hampshire:
       Manchester, Norris Cotton Federal Building, $17,668,000
       Portsmouth, Thomas J. McIntyre Federal Building, 
     $11,149,000
       New York:
       New York, Jacob K. Javits Federal Building, $7,568,000
       Ohio:
       Cleveland, Howard M. Metzenbaum U.S. Courthouse, 
     $15,212,000
       Pennsylvania:
       Pittsburgh, William S. Moorhead Federal Building, 
     $68,793,000
       Texas:
       Dallas, Earle Cabell Federal Building--Courthouse and Santa 
     Fe Federal Building, $16,394,000
       Fort Worth, Fritz Garland Lanham Federal Building, 
     $15,249,000
       Washington:
       Seattle, Henry M. Jackson Federal Building, $26,832,000
       Nationwide:
       Chlorofluorocarbons Program, $8,000,000
       Design Program, $45,027,000
       Elevator Program, $21,533,000
       Energy Program, $8,000,000
       Glass Fragmentation Program, $20,000,000
       Terrorism, $10,000,000
       Basic Repairs and Alterations, $367,340,000:
     Provided further, That additional projects for which 
     prospectuses have been fully approved may be funded under 
     this category only if advance approval is obtained from the 
     Committees on Appropriations: Provided further, That the 
     amounts provided in this or any prior Act for ``Repairs and 
     Alterations'' may be used to fund costs associated with 
     implementing security improvements to buildings necessary to 
     meet the minimum standards for security in accordance with 
     current law and in compliance with the reprogramming 
     guidelines of the appropriate Committees of the House and 
     Senate: Provided further, That the difference between the 
     funds appropriated and expended on any projects in this or 
     any prior Act, under the heading ``Repairs and Alterations'', 
     may be transferred to Basic Repairs and Alterations or used 
     to fund authorized increases in prospectus projects: Provided 
     further, That all funds for repairs and alterations 
     prospectus projects shall expire on September 30, 2004, and 
     remain in the Federal Buildings Fund except funds for 
     projects as to which funds for design or other funds have 
     been obligated in whole or in part prior to such date: 
     Provided further, That the amount provided in this or any 
     prior Act for Basic Repairs and Alterations may be used to 
     pay claims against the Government arising from any projects 
     under the heading ``Repairs and Alterations'' or used to fund 
     authorized increases in prospectus projects; (3) $178,960,000 
     for installment acquisition payments including payments on 
     purchase contracts which shall remain available until 
     expended; (4) $3,153,211,000 for rental of space which shall 
     remain available until expended; and (5) $1,925,160,000 for 
     building operations which shall remain available until 
     expended: Provided further, That funds available to the 
     General Services Administration shall not be available for 
     expenses of any construction, repair, alteration and 
     acquisition project for which a prospectus, if required by 
     the Public Buildings Act of 1959, has not been approved, 
     except that necessary funds may be expended for each project 
     for required expenses for the development of a proposed 
     prospectus: Provided further, That funds available in the 
     Federal Buildings Fund may be expended for emergency repairs 
     when advance approval is obtained from the Committees on 
     Appropriations: Provided further, That amounts necessary to 
     provide reimbursable special services to other agencies under 
     section 210(f)(6) of the Federal Property and Administrative 
     Services Act of 1949 (40 U.S.C. 490(f)(6)) and amounts to 
     provide such reimbursable fencing, lighting, guard booths, 
     and other facilities on private or other property not in 
     Government ownership or control as may be appropriate to 
     enable the United States Secret Service to perform its 
     protective functions pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 3056, shall be 
     available from such revenues and collections: Provided 
     further, That revenues and collections and any other sums 
     accruing to this Fund during fiscal year 2003, excluding 
     reimbursements under section 210(f)(6) of the Federal 
     Property and Administrative Services Act of 1949 (40 U.S.C. 
     490(f)(6)) in excess of $6,961,930,000 shall remain in the 
     Fund and shall not be available for expenditure except as 
     authorized in appropriations Acts.

                           GENERAL ACTIVITIES

                      Policy and Citizen Services

       For expenses authorized by law, not otherwise provided for, 
     for Government-wide policy and evaluation activities 
     associated with the management of real and personal property 
     assets and certain administrative services; Government-wide 
     policy support responsibilities relating to acquisition, 
     telecommunications, information technology management, and 
     related technology activities; providing Internet access to 
     Federal information and services; and services as authorized 
     by 5 U.S.C. 3109, $65,995,000.

                           Operating Expenses

       For expenses authorized by law, not otherwise provided for, 
     for Government-wide activities associated with utilization 
     and donation of surplus personal property; disposal of real 
     property; telecommunications, information technology 
     management, and related technology activities; agency-wide 
     policy direction and management, and Board of Contract 
     Appeals; accounting, records management, and other support 
     services incident to adjudication of Indian Tribal Claims by 
     the United States Court of Federal Claims; services as 
     authorized by 5 U.S.C. 3109; and not to exceed $7,500 for 
     official reception and representation expenses, $77,904,000, 
     of which $17,463,000 shall remain available until expended.

                      Office of Inspector General

       For necessary expenses of the Office of Inspector General 
     and services authorized by 5 U.S.C. 3109, $37,617,000: 
     Provided, That not to exceed $15,000 shall be available for 
     payment for information and detection of fraud against the 
     Government, including payment for recovery of stolen 
     Government property: Provided further, That not to exceed 
     $2,500 shall be available for awards to employees of other 
     Federal agencies and private citizens in recognition of 
     efforts and initiatives resulting in enhanced Office of 
     Inspector General effectiveness.

           Allowances and Office Staff for Former Presidents


                     (including transfer of funds)

       For carrying out the provisions of the Act of August 25, 
     1958 (3 U.S.C. 102 note), and Public Law 95-138, $3,339,000: 
     Provided, That the Administrator of General Services shall 
     transfer to the Secretary of the Treasury such sums as may be 
     necessary to carry out the provisions of such Acts.

          GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION--GENERAL PROVISIONS

       Sec. 401. The appropriate appropriation or fund available 
     to the General Services Administration shall be credited with 
     the cost of operation, protection, maintenance, upkeep, 
     repair, and improvement, included as part of rentals received 
     from Government corporations pursuant to law (40 U.S.C. 129).
       Sec. 402. Funds available to the General Services 
     Administration shall be available for the hire of passenger 
     motor vehicles.
       Sec. 403. Funds in the Federal Buildings Fund made 
     available for fiscal year 2003 for Federal Buildings Fund 
     activities may be transferred between such activities only to 
     the extent necessary to meet program requirements: Provided, 
     That any proposed transfers shall be approved in advance by 
     the Committees on Appropriations.
       Sec. 404. No funds made available by this Act shall be used 
     to transmit a fiscal year 2004 request for United States 
     Courthouse construction that: (1) does not meet the design 
     guide standards for construction as established and approved 
     by the General Services Administration, the Judicial 
     Conference of the United States, and the Office of Management 
     and Budget; and (2) does not reflect the priorities of the 
     Judicial Conference of the United States as set out in its 
     approved 5-year construction plan: Provided, That the fiscal 
     year 2004 request must be accompanied by a standardized 
     courtroom utilization study of each facility to be 
     constructed, replaced, or expanded.
       Sec. 405. None of the funds provided in this Act may be 
     used to increase the amount of occupiable square feet, 
     provide cleaning services, security enhancements, or any 
     other service usually provided through the Federal Buildings 
     Fund, to any agency that does not pay the rate per square 
     foot assessment for space and services as determined by the 
     General Services Administration in compliance with the Public 
     Buildings Amendments Act of 1972 (Public Law 92-313).
       Sec. 406. Funds provided to other Government agencies by 
     the Information Technology Fund, General Services 
     Administration, under section 110 of the Federal Property and 
     Administrative Services Act of 1949 (40 U.S.C. 757) and 
     sections 5124(b) and 5128 of the Clinger-Cohen Act of 1996 
     (40 U.S.C. 1424(b) and 1428), for performance of pilot 
     information technology projects which have potential for 
     Government-wide benefits and savings, may be repaid to this 
     Fund from any savings actually incurred by these projects or 
     other funding, to the extent feasible.
       Sec. 407. From funds made available under the heading 
     ``Federal Buildings Fund, Limitations on Availability of 
     Revenue'', claims against the Government of less than 
     $250,000 arising from direct construction projects and 
     acquisition of buildings may be liquidated from savings 
     effected in other construction projects with prior 
     notification to the Committees on Appropriations.

                     MERIT SYSTEMS PROTECTION BOARD

                         Salaries and Expenses


                     (including transfer of funds)

       For necessary expenses to carry out functions of the Merit 
     Systems Protection Board pursuant to Reorganization Plan 
     Numbered 2 of 1978 and the Civil Service Reform Act of 1978, 
     including services as authorized by 5 U.S.C. 3109, rental of 
     conference rooms in the District of Columbia and elsewhere, 
     hire of passenger motor vehicles, and direct procurement of 
     survey printing, $31,788,000 together with not to exceed 
     $2,594,000 for administrative expenses to adjudicate 
     retirement appeals to be transferred from the Civil Service 
     Retirement and Disability Fund in

[[Page H5257]]

     amounts determined by the Merit Systems Protection Board.

  MORRIS K. UDALL SCHOLARSHIP AND EXCELLENCE IN NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL

                           POLICY FOUNDATION

 Morris K. Udall Scholarship and Excellence in National Environmental 
                           Policy Trust Fund

       For payment to the Morris K. Udall Scholarship and 
     Excellence in National Environmental Policy Trust Fund, 
     pursuant to the Morris K. Udall Scholarship and Excellence in 
     National Environmental and Native American Public Policy Act 
     of 1992 (20 U.S.C. 5601 et seq.), $1,996,000 to remain 
     available until expended: Provided, That up to 60 percent of 
     such funds may be transferred by the Morris K. Udall 
     Scholarship and Excellence in National Environmental Policy 
     Foundation for the necessary expenses of the Native Nations 
     Institute.

                 Environmental Dispute Resolution Fund

       For payment to the Environmental Dispute Resolution Fund to 
     carry out activities authorized in the Environmental Policy 
     and Conflict Resolution Act of 1998, $1,309,000, to remain 
     available until expended.

              NATIONAL ARCHIVES AND RECORDS ADMINISTRATION

                           Operating Expenses

       For necessary expenses in connection with the 
     administration of the National Archives (including the 
     Information Security Oversight Office) and archived Federal 
     records and related activities, as provided by law, and for 
     expenses necessary for the review and declassification of 
     documents, and for the hire of passenger motor vehicles, 
     $249,731,000: Provided, That the Archivist of the United 
     States is authorized to use any excess funds available from 
     the amount borrowed for construction of the National Archives 
     facility, for expenses necessary to provide adequate storage 
     for holdings: Provided further, That of the funds made 
     available, $11,837,000 is for the electronic records archive, 
     $10,137,000 of which shall be available until September 30, 
     2005.


           Amendment No. 19 Offered by Ms. Millender-McDonald

  Ms. MILLENDER-McDONALD. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Amendment No. 19 offered by Ms. Millender-McDonald:
       Page 61, line 12, insert before the period the following:

     : Provided further, That, of the funds provided in this 
     paragraph, $600,000 shall be for the preservation of the 
     records of the Freedmen's Bureau, as required by section 2910 
     of title 44, United States Code, and as authorized by section 
     3 of the Freedmen's Bureau Records Preservation Act of 2000 
     (Pub. L. 106-444)
  Ms. MILLENDER-McDONALD. Mr. Chairman, I would like to thank the 
chairman and the ranking member for their support and leadership on 
this issue.
  As we began to deliberate and consider fiscal year 2003 Treasury 
Postal appropriations, I am pleased to offer an amendment to include 
continued funding for the Freedmen's Bureau Preservation Act of 2000. 
This legislation that became public law authorized $3 million over a 5-
year period for the National Archive and Records Administration to 
microfilm the records, create a surname and locality index and to put 
this index on-line for access by the public.
  These efforts are intended to preserve an important piece of American 
history for future generations. There are many historians, genealogists 
and family researchers interested in exploring the vast context and 
content of these records. As ship manifests are the vital link between 
European Americans and their European ancestors, the Freedmen's Bureau 
Records are the link for African Americans to their slave history.
  For historians and genealogists, these records provide the critical 
link between the Civil War and the 1870 census, the first to list 
African Americans by name. Former slaves, recognized earlier in 
government census records only by sex, age and color, were named in the 
Bureau records as individuals in marriages, government rations lists, 
lists of colored people, labor contracts, indentured contracts for 
minors, medical and school records and as victims of violence.
  So far in fiscal year 2002, the National Archives has completed 
filming the records of the Freedmen's Bureau field offices in Florida, 
approximately 15,000 images, and Alabama, approximately 35 images. 
Copies of the resulting film are being shipped to all 15 of the 
microfilm reading rooms managed by the National Archives throughout the 
country, with two locations in California.
  Filming of approximately 23,000 images of Arkansas field office 
records is currently underway. Also, the National Archives has 
microfilmed approximately 5,000 images of marriage records included 
among Freedmen's Bureau's records at the headquarters level.
  The agency has provided copies of the Florida field office film and 
the marriage records film to Howard University for use in testing 
indexing techniques.
  Fiscal year 2003 funding will help to continue the National Archives 
work to complete the next phase of microfilming and begin the process 
of placing the index on-line in partnership with historically black 
colleges and universities.
  This investment in preserving the records of our past is also an 
important investment in our future as these records provide a unique 
insight into American history.
  Mr. Chairman, I urge the House to pass this measure to preserve and 
protect this unique chronicle of our country's past.

                              {time}  1630

  Mr. HOYER. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word, and I rise 
in very strong support of this amendment sponsored by the gentlewoman 
from California, who chairs the Congressional Black Caucus and has been 
an outstanding leader on behalf of the recognition of the contributions 
of African Americans to the history of this country.
  This amendment will provide $600,000 to be spent on records 
administration for the Freedmen's Bureau. She has well outlined the 
contributions of the Freedmen's Bureau and the historical importance of 
maintaining the records of the Freedmen's Bureau. This was arguably one 
of the most significant times in the history of African Americans; and 
as a result, the retaining of those records, the ensuring that those 
records are not only preserved but are available for researchers, for 
academics, and for the general public, is very, very important. So I 
commend her on her leadership on this.
  The records of the Freedmen's Bureau are quite extensive, Mr. 
Chairman, according to the NARA. The inventory of the records of the 
bureau headquarters includes about 240 record ``series'' and much more 
voluminous records, more than 4,400 ``series'' of the field offices of 
the State assistant commissioners and their subordinate officers. Many 
of the latter series contain unique data about the freedmen. And I 
might add that freedmen, of course, also means freed women.
  In fiscal year 2002, the committee provided $600,000 for preservation 
and access activities associated with the records of the Freedmen's 
Bureau. This was an increase, I might add, of $450,000 over the 
President's request. The amendment of the gentlewoman from California 
(Ms. Millender-McDonald) will ensure that that same $600,000 will be 
spent this year to ensure that this effort is continued and enhanced. 
These funds will be used to help microfilm the records, assist 
researchers in using related documents, provide better access to record 
inventories, and create partnerships for developing indexes.
  Mr. Chairman, I think this amendment is a very, very important 
amendment and will, as I say, help NARA in pursuing this project. I 
might add, on behalf of the leadership of NARA, they are very 
enthusiastic about pursuing this, and this will help them do that; and 
it will certainly justify the fact that they spend the resources 
necessary to effect the ends that the gentlewoman from California seeks 
and that we all seek in making sure that we know this history, which 
was so critically important as this country moved from a country that 
articulated a premise that all men and women were created equal and 
endowed by their creator with certain inalienable rights.
  Unfortunately, as Martin Luther King so dramatically and powerfully 
intoned, we were not living up to that promise, and the Emancipation 
Proclamation started us on that road. We are still not at the end of 
that road, and perhaps we will never get to the end of that road; but 
we can learn from this period of our history, and we can expand upon 
the promise that it made.

[[Page H5258]]

  Mr. ISTOOK. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the requisite number of 
words, and I rise in response to the motion of the gentlewoman from 
California (Ms. Millender-McDonald).
  I want to say that certainly I propose accepting the amendment. We 
had a line item in the bill last year regarding the Freedmen's Bureau, 
and I realize the preservation of the records and the history is very 
important to preserve the heritage of this country and particularly of 
the group of people that were involved in the former institutions of 
slavery and being freed from it.
  So I believe that this is something that would have been funded by 
the National Archives and Records Administration with or without the 
amendment. We have had enough conversations with them, but I appreciate 
the gentlewoman's desiring to be certain on this, and I support her 
desire for that certainty; and I certainly support and accept the 
amendment.
  The CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentlewoman from California (Ms. Millender-McDonald).
  The amendment was agreed to.
  Mr. ISTOOK. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent that the remainder 
of the bill, through page 67, line 21, be considered as read, printed 
in the Record, and open to amendment at any point.
  The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from 
Oklahoma?
  There was no objection.
  The text of the bill from page 61, line 13, through page 67, line 21, 
is as follows:

                        Repairs and Restoration

       For the repair, alteration, and improvement of archives 
     facilities, and to provide adequate storage for holdings, 
     $10,458,000, to remain available until expended, of which 
     $1,250,000 is for the Military Personnel Records Center 
     preliminary design studies, and $3,250,000 is for repairs to 
     the Lyndon Baines Johnson Presidental Library Plaza.

        National Historical Publications and Records Commission


                             grants program

       For necessary expenses for allocations and grants for 
     historical publications and records as authorized by 44 
     U.S.C. 2504, $7,000,000, to remain available until expended.

                      OFFICE OF GOVERNMENT ETHICS

                         Salaries and Expenses

       For necessary expenses to carry out functions of the Office 
     of Government Ethics pursuant to the Ethics in Government Act 
     of 1978 and the Ethics Reform Act of 1989, including services 
     as authorized by 5 U.S.C. 3109, rental of conference rooms in 
     the District of Columbia and elsewhere, hire of passenger 
     motor vehicles, and not to exceed $1,500 for official 
     reception and representation expenses, $10,486,000.

                     OFFICE OF PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT

                         Salaries and Expenses


                  (including transfer of trust funds)

       For necessary expenses to carry out functions of the Office 
     of Personnel Management pursuant to Reorganization Plan 
     Numbered 2 of 1978 and the Civil Service Reform Act of 1978, 
     including services as authorized by 5 U.S.C. 3109; medical 
     examinations performed for veterans by private physicians on 
     a fee basis; rental of conference rooms in the District of 
     Columbia and elsewhere; hire of passenger motor vehicles; not 
     to exceed $2,500 for official reception and representation 
     expenses; advances for reimbursements to applicable funds of 
     the Office of Personnel Management and the Federal Bureau of 
     Investigation for expenses incurred under Executive Order No. 
     10422 of January 9, 1953; and payment of per diem and/or 
     subsistence allowances to employees where Voting Rights Act 
     activities require an employee to remain overnight at his or 
     her post of duty, $128,986,000, of which $24,000,000 shall 
     remain available until expended for the cost of the 
     government-wide human resources data network project, and 
     $2,500,000 shall remain available until expended for the cost 
     of leading the government-wide initiative to modernize 
     Federal payroll systems and service delivery; and in addition 
     $120,791,000 for administrative expenses, to be transferred 
     from the appropriate trust funds of the Office of Personnel 
     Management without regard to other statutes, including direct 
     procurement of printed materials, for the retirement and 
     insurance programs, of which $27,640,000 shall remain 
     available until expended for the cost of automating the 
     retirement recordkeeping systems: Provided, That the 
     provisions of this appropriation shall not affect the 
     authority to use applicable trust funds as provided by 
     sections 8348(a)(1)(B), 8909(g), and 9004(f)(1)(A) and (2)(A) 
     of title 5, United States Code: Provided further, That no 
     part of this appropriation shall be available for salaries 
     and expenses of the Legal Examining Unit of the Office of 
     Personnel Management established pursuant to Executive Order 
     No. 9358 of July 1, 1943, or any successor unit of like 
     purpose: Provided further, That the President's Commission on 
     White House Fellows, established by Executive Order No. 11183 
     of October 3, 1964, may, during fiscal year 2003, accept 
     donations of money, property, and personal services in 
     connection with the development of a publicity brochure to 
     provide information about the White House Fellows, except 
     that no such donations shall be accepted for travel or 
     reimbursement of travel expenses, or for the salaries of 
     employees of such Commission.

                      Office of Inspector General


                         salaries and expenses

                  (including transfer of trust funds)

       For necessary expenses of the Office of Inspector General 
     in carrying out the provisions of the Inspector General Act, 
     including services as authorized by 5 U.S.C. 3109, hire of 
     passenger motor vehicles, $1,498,000; and in addition, not to 
     exceed $10,766,000 for administrative expenses to audit, 
     investigate, and provide other oversight of the Office of 
     Personnel Management's retirement and insurance programs, to 
     be transferred from the appropriate trust funds of the Office 
     of Personnel Management, as determined by the Inspector 
     General: Provided, That the Inspector General is authorized 
     to rent conference rooms in the District of Columbia and 
     elsewhere.

      Government Payment for Annuitants, Employees Health Benefits

       For payment of Government contributions with respect to 
     retired employees, as authorized by chapter 89 of title 5, 
     United States Code, and the Retired Federal Employees Health 
     Benefits Act (74 Stat. 849), such sums as may be necessary.

       Government Payment for Annuitants, Employee Life Insurance

       For payment of Government contributions with respect to 
     employees retiring after December 31, 1989, as required by 
     chapter 87 of title 5, United States Code, such sums as may 
     be necessary.

        Payment to Civil Service Retirement and Disability Fund

       For financing the unfunded liability of new and increased 
     annuity benefits becoming effective on or after October 20, 
     1969, as authorized by 5 U.S.C. 8348, and annuities under 
     special Acts to be credited to the Civil Service Retirement 
     and Disability Fund, such sums as may be necessary: Provided, 
     That annuities authorized by the Act of May 29, 1944, and the 
     Act of August 19, 1950 (33 U.S.C. 771-775), may hereafter be 
     paid out of the Civil Service Retirement and Disability Fund.

                       OFFICE OF SPECIAL COUNSEL

                         Salaries and Expenses

       For necessary expenses to carry out functions of the Office 
     of Special Counsel pursuant to Reorganization Plan Numbered 2 
     of 1978, the Civil Service Reform Act of 1978 (Public Law 95-
     454), the Whistleblower Protection Act of 1989 (Public Law 
     101-12), Public Law 103-424, and the Uniformed Services 
     Employment and Reemployment Act of 1994 (Public Law 103-353), 
     including services as authorized by 5 U.S.C. 3109, payment of 
     fees and expenses for witnesses, rental of conference rooms 
     in the District of Columbia and elsewhere, and hire of 
     passenger motor vehicles; $12,432,000.

                        UNITED STATES TAX COURT

                         Salaries and Expenses

       For necessary expenses, including contract reporting and 
     other services as authorized by 5 U.S.C. 3109, $37,305,000: 
     Provided, That travel expenses of the judges shall be paid 
     upon the written certificate of the judge.

      WHITE HOUSE COMMISSION ON THE NATIONAL MOMENT OF REMEMBRANCE

       For necessary expenses of the White House Commission on the 
     National Moment of Remembrance, as authorized by Public Law 
     106-579, $250,000.
       This title may be cited as the ``Independent Agencies 
     Appropriations Act, 2003''.

                      TITLE V--GENERAL PROVISIONS

                                This Act

       Sec. 501. No part of any appropriation contained in this 
     Act shall remain available for obligation beyond the current 
     fiscal year unless expressly so provided herein.
       Sec. 502. The expenditure of any appropriation under this 
     Act for any consulting service through procurement contract, 
     pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 3109, shall be limited to those 
     contracts where such expenditures are a matter of public 
     record and available for public inspection, except where 
     otherwise provided under existing law, or under existing 
     Executive order issued pursuant to existing law.
       Sec. 503. None of the funds made available by this Act 
     shall be available for any activity or for paying the salary 
     of any Government employee where funding an activity or 
     paying a salary to a Government employee would result in a 
     decision, determination, rule, regulation, or policy that 
     would prohibit the enforcement of section 307 of the Tariff 
     Act of 1930.
  The CHAIRMAN. Are there any amendments to that portion of the bill?
  If not, the Clerk will read.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       Sec. 504. None of the funds made available by this Act 
     shall be available for the purpose of transferring control 
     over the Federal Law Enforcement Training Center located at 
     Glynco, Georgia, and Artesia, New Mexico, out of the 
     Department of the Treasury.
  Mr. SMITH of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.

[[Page H5259]]

  Mr. Chairman, I would like to engage in a colloquy with the gentleman 
from Oklahoma, the chairman of the subcommittee, about a provision in 
the underlying bill.
  First of all, I wish to express my concern about a provision in the 
underlying bill that prevents the transfer of the Federal Law 
Enforcement Training Center from the Treasury Department to another 
Department of the executive branch. I know, for example, that the 
Department of Justice and the Select Committee on Homeland Security 
would at least like to have the option of perhaps transferring that 
Federal Law Enforcement Training Center out of the Treasury Department.
  Mr. Chairman, could the gentleman give me some reassurance that that 
proposed transfer, if in fact it occurs and is a part of the 
recommendation of the select committee, will not be blocked by the 
underlying language in the bill?
  Mr. ISTOOK. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. SMITH of Texas. I yield to the gentleman from Oklahoma.
  Mr. ISTOOK. Mr. Chairman, the provision the gentleman refers to, 
section 504 of the bill, is one that was crafted, I believe, prior to 
the recommendation for the Department of Homeland Security being 
formed.
  It is certainly my intent, and I will endeavor to make sure our bill 
is consistent with this, that whatever is ultimately adopted by this 
body and by the other body, what is ultimately adopted by Congress 
regarding where the Federal Law Enforcement Training Center should be 
situated, whether it be in the Department of Justice, the Department of 
the Treasury, the Department of Homeland Security or elsewhere, 
whatever ultimately is the enactment as far as the Department of 
Homeland Security, is something that I will make sure that we have 
language consistent with that in the ultimate House-Senate version of 
the Treasury, Postal appropriation.
  Mr. SMITH of Texas. Mr. Chairman, reclaiming my time, I thank the 
gentleman from Oklahoma for his reassurance.
  Mr. KINGSTON. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word, and I 
wanted to say to the chairman and the gentleman from Texas that in 
terms of moving the Federal Law Enforcement Training Center out of the 
Department of the Treasury and into the Department of Justice, as 
somebody who represents a significant portion of the Federal Law 
Enforcement Training Center, the first I learned about that was 
actually this morning. And while there have been rumors about the 
Department of Justice's interest in FLETC, I have not seen any case 
made to make that transfer possible.
  So I would certainly oppose moving the Federal Law Enforcement 
Training Center out of the Department of the Treasury and strongly be 
opposed to it moving into the Department of Justice, based on the lack 
of information to make such a move; and I wanted to express that to the 
chairman.
  Mr. ISTOOK. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. KINGSTON. I yield to the gentleman from Oklahoma.
  Mr. ISTOOK. Mr. Chairman, let me say that I believe that the interest 
of the gentleman from Georgia and mine in this situation are very akin 
to each other. What I wanted to do in the colloquy I just had with the 
gentleman from Texas (Mr. Smith) was, frankly, avoid trying to 
unnecessarily get into a debate today, since we have so many other 
things that are going to be consuming debate time on the floor.
  Although I believe that the Federal Law Enforcement Training Center 
should not, under current proposals, be transferred to the Department 
of Justice, nevertheless, I do not think it serves any purpose to try 
to engage in a debate on that today. Of the 21,000 students and 223 
student-weeks of training that are currently conducted at FLETC, the 
Federal Law Enforcement Training Center, only about 5 percent of that 
training involves agencies that, under the proposal that will be on the 
House this week, would be under the Department of Justice. I do not 
think it would make sense to have FLETC be under the Department of 
Justice when only 5 percent of the work of FLETC is under the 
Department of Justice.
  Now, I do not know if, under what we do later, things might remain in 
the Department of the Treasury or if they might go to the Department of 
Homeland Security; and those probably would give us some idea of what 
is the best solution. But I do not think that we need to have that 
debate today. We are going to be having debate on that, and similar 
things, later this week. And I think what we want to do is to make sure 
that ultimately we take a consistent position; that what comes out of 
our appropriations bill will ultimately be consistent with whatever the 
entire Congress and the President adopt regarding the Office of 
Homeland Security.
  So, therefore, we had the colloquy rather than engaging in a debate 
on the amendment over this issue today.
  Mr. SMITH of Texas. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. KINGSTON. I yield to the gentleman from Texas.
  Mr. SMITH of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I thank my friend from Georgia for 
yielding, and I also want to suggest to him that his concerns may be 
unjustified or unfounded, simply because, even if the training center 
were moved to another agency or another Department, that does not mean 
it is going to leave the State of Georgia.
  So I do not think the gentleman needs to necessarily be concerned 
about losing that training center, even if it were to be transferred to 
another agency.
  Mr. KINGSTON. Mr. Chairman, reclaiming my time, I thank my friend, 
the gentleman from Texas, for pointing that out. We do, of course, want 
to keep the physical plant, the jobs, and all the related benefits in 
Brunswick, Georgia, as part of it; but also I want to say it is not 
just that. It is that inside of FLETC there is a lot of angst and 
concern about moving it from the Department of Treasury to the 
Department of Justice, and we have not seen any justification for doing 
that right now. So it is not purely provincial that I am pushing this.
  Mr. SMITH of Texas. Mr. Chairman, if the gentleman will continue to 
yield, we can continue the debate later, as the gentleman from Oklahoma 
suggested. But when we have the Department of Justice and the Select 
Committee on Homeland Security wanting to transfer it, let us have that 
debate another time; but let us not dismiss the equities of that 
argument.
  Mr. KINGSTON. Once again, reclaiming my time, Mr. Chairman, I agree 
with my friend and thank him for his openness and look forward to the 
discussion with him and the chairman.
  Mr. HEFLEY. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
  Mr. Chairman, I was in a defense conference with the Senate and 
missed my opportunity to offer this amendment on page 57. We have 
barely passed it. I do not think the committee is going to accept it, 
but I would at least like the opportunity to offer it. If they would 
grant me unanimous consent to do so, I would appreciate that.
  The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman asks unanimous consent that we go to page 
56 in the bill. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from 
Colorado?
  Mr. ISTOOK. Mr. Chairman, reserving the right to object, as I 
understand it, this has to do with funding of the Office of Former 
Presidents, which, frankly, could open a time-consuming debate on this. 
Is the gentleman aware that it may be possible for him to offer his 
amendment at a later stage in the bill?
  Mr. HEFLEY. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. ISTOOK. I yield to the gentleman from Colorado.
  Mr. HEFLEY. Mr. Chairman, I am aware we could do a reach-back 
amendment and do it later. However, I would rather do it now, when it 
is closer to the actual subject matter, than trying to amend it into 
the total of the overall bill. This would relate directly to what I am 
trying to get at rather than the total figures at the end of the bill. 
And I do not plan to take much time with it, if the gentleman does not.

                              {time}  1645

  Mr. ISTOOK. Mr. Chairman, although I wish to accommodate the 
gentleman, lest we set a precedent that would keep us from considering 
other amendments that come before us and having to constantly reach 
back in the bill, I object, although I would certainly cooperate with 
the gentleman in the mechanics where he can do it later in the bill.

[[Page H5260]]

  The CHAIRMAN. Objection is heard.
  The Clerk will read.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       Sec. 505. No part of any appropriation contained in this 
     Act shall be available to pay the salary for any person 
     filling a position, other than a temporary position, formerly 
     held by an employee who has left to enter the Armed Forces of 
     the United States and has satisfactorily completed his period 
     of active military or naval service, and has within 90 days 
     after his release from such service or from hospitalization 
     continuing after discharge for a period of not more than 1 
     year, made application for restoration to his former position 
     and has been certified by the Office of Personnel Management 
     as still qualified to perform the duties of his former 
     position and has not been restored thereto.
       Sec. 506. No funds appropriated pursuant to this Act may be 
     expended by an entity unless the entity agrees that in 
     expending the assistance the entity will comply with sections 
     2 through 4 of the Buy American Act (41 U.S.C. 10a-10c).
       Sec. 507. (a) Purchase of American-Made Equipment and 
     Products.--In the case of any equipment or products that may 
     be authorized to be purchased with financial assistance 
     provided under this Act, it is the sense of the Congress that 
     entities receiving such assistance should, in expending the 
     assistance, purchase only American-made equipment and 
     products.
       (b) Notice to Recipients of Assistance.--In providing 
     financial assistance under this Act, the Secretary of the 
     Treasury shall provide to each recipient of the assistance a 
     notice describing the statement made in subsection (a) by the 
     Congress.
       Sec. 508. If it has been finally determined by a court or 
     Federal agency that any person intentionally affixed a label 
     bearing a ``Made in America'' inscription, or any inscription 
     with the same meaning, to any product sold in or shipped to 
     the United States that is not made in the United States, such 
     person shall be ineligible to receive any contract or 
     subcontract made with funds provided pursuant to this Act, 
     pursuant to the debarment, suspension, and ineligibility 
     procedures described in sections 9.400 through 9.409 of title 
     48, Code of Federal Regulations.
       Sec. 509. No funds appropriated by this Act shall be 
     available to pay for an abortion, or the administrative 
     expenses in connection with any health plan under the Federal 
     employees health benefit program which provides any benefits 
     or coverage for abortions.
       Sec. 510. The provision of section 509 shall not apply 
     where the life of the mother would be endangered if the fetus 
     were carried to term, or the pregnancy is the result of an 
     act of rape or incest.
       Sec. 511. Except as otherwise specifically provided by law, 
     not to exceed 50 percent of unobligated balances remaining 
     available at the end of fiscal year 2002 from appropriations 
     made available for salaries and expenses for fiscal year 2002 
     in this Act, shall remain available through September 30, 
     2003, for each such account for the purposes authorized: 
     Provided, That a request shall be submitted to the Committees 
     on Appropriations for approval prior to the expenditure of 
     such funds: Provided further, That these requests shall be 
     made in compliance with reprogramming guidelines.
       Sec. 512. None of the funds made available in this Act may 
     be used by the Executive Office of the President to request 
     from the Federal Bureau of Investigation any official 
     background investigation report on any individual, except 
     when--
       (1) such individual has given his or her express written 
     consent for such request not more than 6 months prior to the 
     date of such request and during the same presidential 
     administration; or
       (2) such request is required due to extraordinary 
     circumstances involving national security.
       Sec. 513. The cost accounting standards promulgated under 
     section 26 of the Office of Federal Procurement Policy Act 
     (Public Law 93-400; 41 U.S.C. 422) shall not apply with 
     respect to a contract under the Federal Employees Health 
     Benefits Program established under chapter 89 of title 5, 
     United States Code.


                Amendment No. 17 Offered by Mr. Kucinich

  Mr. KUCINICH. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
  The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Amendment No. 17 offered by Mr. Kucinich:
       Page 71, beginning on line 1, strike section 513 (relating 
     to applicability of cost accounting standards to Federal 
     Employees Health Benefits Program).

  Mr. KUCINICH. Mr. Chairman, this Congress has spoken at long length 
on the floor of the House about corporate accountability. If there is 
one thing that we have learned, it is that we must have standards and 
the companies must abide by them. Why then in this bill are health 
insurance companies in the Federal Employees Health Benefits Program 
exempted from cost accounting standards? Has Congress not learned from 
Enron, not learned from WorldCom?
  My amendment would strike section 513 in this bill, which is the 
section which grants a waiver from complying with governmentwide cost 
accounting standards. This is a special exemption from Federal 
accounting standards. By granting this waiver, it exposes the 
government to increased risks from fraud and abuse. Federal employees, 
unions, the administration, and even some of the insurance carriers 
themselves have opposed this special exemption.
  Given the public's lack of confidence in corporate accounting 
standards, it makes no sense for Congress to give an exemption for 
accounting standards to contractors participating in its own health 
care program, especially when these same accounting standards apply to 
every other Federal contractor. Cost accounting standards are designed 
to prevent fraud, overcharging and abuse. They serve as an important 
safeguard to save taxpayer money. They allow the government to track 
the cost of goods and services provided under specialized contracts 
when there is no market price available.
  These accounting standards apply when Federal contractors charge the 
government based on negotiated cost-based pricing arrangements, and 
ensure that costs are properly calculated. If an exemption is truly 
needed and warranted, there is a process that Congress established in 
case such a situation arose. The Cost Accounting Standards Board, CASB, 
includes accounting experts for this very purpose.
  Last year the statement of administration policy on this bill stated, 
``The administration opposes section 513 which would continue the 1-
year moratorium on the application of cost accounting standards under 
the FEHBP. A statutory moratorium is not required as existing law 
provides for an administration process which allows the CASB to exempt 
contracts from any or all CAS requirements.''
  There is no reason that FEHBP contractors should get a special pass 
around the board. Congress created the Cost Accounting Standards Board 
specifically to deal with such issues. By allowing this waiver, it 
places insurance carriers of the FEHBP above the law. These carriers 
report charges annually to the FEHBP of billions of dollars, and when 
they do so, they report them in the manner of their own choosing and 
design. When they report their costs go up 10 or 15 or 20 percent, or 
even more, Congress has no way of effectively verifying those claims, 
or whether they may be losing millions of dollars to fraudulent claims.
  In the current climate when health care costs continue to increase, 
it makes the exemption for FEHBP health plans even more egregious. The 
second largest participant in the plan, First Health, opposes this 
exemption. First Health, which has been in FEHBP for over 20 years and 
includes 1 million participants, recently wrote to the gentleman from 
Wisconsin (Mr. Obey), ``I urge the Committee on Appropriations to not 
include language prohibiting the imposition of cost accounting 
standards to the FEHBP in the fiscal year 2003 Treasury-Postal 
appropriations bill.''
  Clearly even the companies who benefit from the exemption understand 
the importance of abiding by government cost accounting standards. Now 
is not the time to be exempting companies from accounting standards. 
Enron and WorldCom have done enough. Other industries do not need 
Congress to give them a hand. Support the Kucinich amendment to strike 
section 513.
  Mr. ISTOOK. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
  Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Kucinich). I recognize that cost accounting 
standards and accounting propriety is something that we all support and 
seek and we want to make sure that it is done. The difficulty, of 
course, is that this particular provision has been carried in this bill 
since 1998 at the request of the authorizing committee, namely the 
Committee on Government Reform. Why? Because, as the Office of 
Personnel Management has told us, the accounting standards that through 
the CAS are sought to be applied to insurance carriers through the 
Federal Employees Health Benefits Plan, as OPM told us, are in 
``incompatible conflict'' with the accounting standards that are used 
within the insurance industry.
  I think that the Chairman, as well as many Members, are aware that 
there are accounting differences depending

[[Page H5261]]

on the type of business, whether it is a publicly held corporation, 
whether it is a partnership or small business, whether it is a public 
utility, or in this case whether we are talking about an insurance 
company.
  The concern is this: If we adopt this amendment, we may force out of 
the market insurance carriers that provide coverage to hundreds of 
thousands of Federal workers by arbitrarily and immediately cutting 
them off. I do not want to see hundreds of thousands of people lose 
their insurance benefits or be told now they have to shop around and 
find a different carrier under the FEHBP just because we made a quick 
and not fully informed decision on the floor of the House that we 
wanted to take some regulation that was meant to apply to other types 
of companies and apply them to insurance carriers under the FEHBP. That 
is my concern with the gentleman's amendment.
  His desire to make sure that we have accounting propriety is well 
taken; but let us make sure that we do that in a reasoned way. Let us 
make sure that we go back to the authorizers, the Committee on 
Government Reform that originally asked for this provision to be 
carried in this bill several years ago, ask them to look at it, look at 
it in proper depth and with correct understanding of the accounting 
differences for different types of businesses.
  I have been informed that more than half of all Federal employees 
could have their insurance coverage put at risk if we adopt the 
amendment of the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Kucinich). Members may agree 
or disagree that that is the case, but I for one do not want to take 
the chance without having a much more informed understanding of this 
situation.
  It is a very technical amendment. It is a technical circumstance. The 
gentleman has excellent motives, but I think it is also an excellent 
motive to protect the insurance coverage of half or more of the Federal 
workers that we have in the United States.
  So I oppose this amendment, but I look forward to working with the 
gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Kucinich) to make sure that whether it be 
through FEHBP or through any other person or entity that does business 
with the Federal Government or with the taxpayers, we have proper, 
reliable accounting standards applied.
  Mr. WELDON of Florida. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the requisite 
number of words.
  Mr. Chairman, I rise to speak in opposition to the gentleman's 
amendment. The gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Kucinich) is a Member whom I 
enjoy working with on a host of issues, and I fully understand the 
gentleman's passion for establishing good cost accounting standards.
  The cost accounting standard that we are trying to apply to the FEHBP 
program is a cost accounting standard that was essentially developed 
for defense contractors, and the issue that was brought up to us in the 
subcommittee, and the gentleman from Oklahoma (Mr. Istook) mentioned 
that the authorizing committee opposes this amendment and supports the 
exemption, I am the chairman of that committee and this exemption was 
initially put in place by the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Mica) and 
continued by the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Scarborough), and it has 
been continued by myself.
  The central issue here is we are trying to take cost accounting 
standards that were developed for defense contractors, and we are 
trying to apply them to the health care insurance industry.
  Now the real issue here is Blue Cross/Blue Shield, and that is really 
what we are talking about. Blue Cross/Blue Shield insures 80 million 
Americans, and 4 million of those Americans are Federal employees. A 
lot of those Federal employees live in many of the affiliated States 
within the Blue Cross/Blue Shield system. Nationwide it is 5 percent, 4 
percent of the entire Blue Cross/Blue Shield workforce, but in some 
States it is even less than that, and they are not going to want to 
participate.
  The way I understand this works under the law within FEHBP, it is an 
all-or-none situation. It cannot be like Blue Cross/Blue Shield will 
stay in the system here in Washington, D.C. where they might have 
several hundred thousand employees, and let all of the affiliates in 
Oklahoma and Iowa withdraw. They have to participate nationally.
  Now some of the other insurance carriers, I think maybe virtually all 
of them, have complied with the standards. But as I understand it, for 
all of them, they only do business with FEHBP. Blue Cross/Blue Shield 
is in a very unique position. What I have been told is essentially that 
they will withdraw, that it will be too much of a burden on them to 
convert their entire system over to comply, to meet the requirements 
for this relatively small percentage of their business, and that they 
will withdraw.

                              {time}  1700

  I guess we are going to try to call their bluff and see if they 
really will withdraw. But if they do withdraw, 4 million people are 
currently within the Blue Cross/Blue Shield FEHBP plan. Many of them 
are current Federal employees. Many of them are retirees. Some of them 
have been in Blue Cross/Blue Shield. And the important point I want to 
stress in all this is that OPM has testified to us that they have 
copious amounts of data, that they do not need more data. They did not 
say they had adequate levels of information. They said they have all 
the information they needed to verify that Blue Cross/Blue Shield 
within FEHBP is not skimming money away, that they are not engaging in 
any fraudulent behavior, that they have all of the insight that they 
need, and OPM has testified to us that they do not need this and that 
it is going to provide no additional information.
  We are all for good, solid, especially in this climate, good, solid 
accounting standards; but the agency in the Federal Government, the 
Office of Personnel Management, is telling us they have all the insight 
they need; they have more than enough insight. So the net effect of all 
this may be, even if you did apply it to Blue Cross/Blue Shield, no new 
information, and the net effect may be that millions of Federal 
employees and retirees may actually ultimately withdraw.
  I would encourage a ``no'' vote on the gentleman's amendment. I know 
his heart is in the right place, but having studied this through the 
subcommittee, I believe this exception should be kept in the current 
law. I strongly urge a ``no'' vote on the gentleman's amendment.
  Mr. OBEY. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the requisite number of 
words.
  Mr. Chairman, I think the previous speaker has raised many legitimate 
points, but out of courtesy I yield to the gentleman from Ohio.
  Mr. KUCINICH. I thank the gentleman for yielding. With all due 
respect to my good friend, the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Weldon), I 
do not think we need to worry about Blue Cross/Blue Shield withdrawing 
because of the imposition of government cost accounting standards, 
because, in effect, Members should know that Blue Cross/Blue Shield is 
already complying with government accounting standards in Medicare and 
also the Tricare program which serves our veterans.
  Furthermore, for my friends who indicate that a statutory moratorium 
would be required, the statement of administration policy has indicated 
that a statutory moratorium is not required, as existing law provides 
for an administrative process to exempt or waive classes or categories 
of contracts from any or all CAS requirements. So you do not need to go 
to the authorizing committee.
  My friends who indicate that government cost accounting standards are 
not appropriate for FEHBP health plans should know that cost accounting 
standards are certainly appropriate for such plans if not more so than 
any other Federal contractors. The cost of health care is increasing, 
which makes it even more important for health care plans to account for 
the cost increases. Hewitt Health Care Resources reported last June 
that HMO premiums may increase 22 percent in 2003 and Congress should 
not be allowing health care plans a waiver from accounting for these 
types of dramatic increases.
  Finally, where my friends indicate that government cost accounting 
standards are incompatible with the already existing accounting system 
used by the health care industry, they should know that any other 
government contractor faces the same issue

[[Page H5262]]

whether it has government as well as commercial clients, that this 
argument is not unique to health plans. Moreover, health plans have had 
more than 3 years to make the necessary changes in order to abide by 
the government cost accounting standards which, I might add, Mr. 
Chairman, is plenty of time. So if cost accounting standards are truly 
a legitimate problem, Congress has already established a cost 
accounting standards board to determine if a waiver is appropriate. 
This board is staffed by experts who have knowledge and expertise to 
make that determination. Allowing a blanket exemption by statute puts 
the FEHBP health plans above the law.
  Mr. HOYER. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the requisite number of 
words.
  The ranking member of our committee indicated, and I agree with him, 
that the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Weldon) raised some very 
legitimate and good points. The good news is that we have time to, I 
think, develop this issue further between now and the time of 
conference. I am pretty confident that the Senate will include similar 
language in their bill, so this will be a conferenceable item if it is 
not in the bill.
  Clearly what the gentleman from Ohio seeks to do is to raise the 
issue of whether or not there ought to be a consistency in reporting 
costs so that OPM on behalf of Federal employees and Federal employees, 
generally, can make an assessment as to the costs that are being 
incurred by the insurers and, determining the cost, then what ought to 
be the appropriate level of premiums for the insurance that is gotten.
  I think this is particularly cogent in a time when health care costs 
and premiums in particular for Federal employees and for all employees 
are starting to rise very, very substantially. So I understand what the 
gentleman from Ohio is saying. I think the gentleman from Florida (Mr. 
Weldon), who chairs the relevant subcommittee, makes some very good 
points; but I think either way what the gentleman from Oklahoma (Mr. 
Istook) is saying, we need to look at this very carefully, and I am 
convinced that the gentleman from Oklahoma and I and the subcommittee, 
whatever happens on this amendment, are going to look very carefully at 
this between now and the markup.
  Mr. WELDON of Florida. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. HOYER. I yield to the gentleman from Florida.
  Mr. WELDON of Florida. Mr. Chairman, I just want to raise a couple of 
points in response to some of the statements my friend from Ohio made 
but really just one in particular and, that is, as it relates to the 
Blue Cross/Blue Shield systems complying with the cost accounting 
standards within the Medicare plan, those are very distinct plans. In 
many cases the Medicare operation is actually housed in a wholly owned 
subsidiary and for some of these FEHBP plans, they have provider 
networks and they overlap with the products that they are offering 
employers in the region and it is not really an entirely separate 
system.
  This is the problem that you get into specifically with the Blues as 
it relates to FEHBP. They are taking on a Federal employee, and they 
are taking on somebody who works in industry; they are offering the 
same product, and really what you are essentially asking the Blues to 
do with your amendment is adopt this new standard nationwide for all of 
their 80 million customers in order to keep this 4 million people 
within their system. It would be very costly for them to develop a 
separate standard for the 4 million people in FEHBP.
  Frankly, I think what you are doing is essentially saying to them, 
are you going to do it? Are you going to withdraw?
  Mr. HOYER. Reclaiming my time, I want to say, as I said before, and I 
think the gentleman raises obviously the problem that Blue Cross 
raises. On the other hand, it is interesting that OPM, I guess, through 
the administration, the administration opposes this provision. So the 
gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Kucinich) essentially is offering the position 
of the administration on this amendment if you read the statement of 
administration policy.
  Mr. KUCINICH. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. HOYER. I yield to the gentleman from Ohio.
  Mr. KUCINICH. I want to say what a pleasure it is to be able to do 
that on behalf of the administration.
  Mr. HOYER. Reclaiming my time, I know the gentleman's happiness at 
the present position he finds himself in.
  But the point I want to make is, this is clearly not a partisan 
issue. This is an issue of judgment as to clearly we want to keep the 
Blues in the program. Some years ago we lost Aetna. We do not want to 
lose competitors in the program that will adversely affect Federal 
employees and adversely affect taxpayers who participate, as you know, 
in 70 percent of the average cost of the FEHBP. So clearly I think we 
all want to get to the same place, but I think there is some question 
here, and I tried to contact OPM today to follow up on this without 
success after I found out that the administration was for essentially 
the Kucinich amendment.
  They did not mention that amendment. They simply mentioned that they 
were in favor of this provision being dropped. But clearly I want to 
assure the gentleman from Florida, and I know that having talked to the 
gentleman from Oklahoma (Mr. Istook), the chairman of our committee, 
about this, whatever happens on this amendment, we are going to look 
very carefully at it; and we are not going to allow anything to happen 
which will adversely affect the Federal employees and which will 
unfairly affect Blue Cross/Blue Shield.
  Mr. WAXMAN. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the requisite number of 
words.
  Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of the Kucinich amendment 
which would strike section 513 of the bill. That provision contains a 
waiver from cost accounting standards for the insurance companies 
participating in the Federal Employees Health Benefit Program. In 
today's environment, the Federal Government should be setting an 
example by holding its own contractors to accounting standards in a 
consistent manner, not granting legislative waivers at the behest of 
insurance companies.
  The accounting standards involved here are important. They ensure 
that the government is not overcharged for labor and materials, and not 
charged at all for certain unallowable costs like travel and 
entertainment. They also ensure that the government pays only its fair 
share of things like depreciation of equipment and pension costs.
  Some insurers, like Blue Cross/Blue Shield, argue that these cost 
accounting standards are burdensome and will cost them too much money 
to adopt. That is really a very strange contention, given that Blue 
Cross/Blue Shield already complies with cost accounting standards for 
their contracts with the military's Tricare health program. And even if 
they did not already comply, the expenses related to implementing the 
accounting standards is an allowable cost which could be billed to the 
FEHBP. So I am afraid that this argument just does not hold water.
  There is widespread opposition to this waiver. The administration 
opposes this waiver because the standards ensure consistent reporting 
of costs on Federal contracts. Federal employees oppose the waiver 
because they are rightly concerned that overcharges will result in 
unjustifiably high premiums for their members. And even some of the 
insurance carriers, such as First Health, oppose the waiver because 
they do not want to be associated with waivers from accounting 
standards in the current climate.
  The taxpayers' money is at stake here. Granting a waiver from these 
standards exposes the government to waste and fraud. According to the 
Congressional Budget Office, the failure to apply these standards has 
already cost the taxpayers millions. There is an old adage: ``A good 
example is the best sermon.'' There has been a lot of sermonizing 
lately in Washington on the topic of corporate and governmental 
accountability. Today we have a chance to set a good example by 
adopting the Kucinich amendment.
  I urge a ``yes'' vote on this important amendment.
  Mrs. MINK of Hawaii. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of Congressman 
Kucinich's amendment to strike the section of the Treasury-Postal FY 
2003 Appropriations bill that exempts companies in the Federal 
Employees Health Benefits Program (FEHBP) from following Cost 
Accounting Standards (CAS).

[[Page H5263]]

  These accounting standards are written by an independent board within 
the Office of Management and Budget. The standards were created due to 
concerns about the pricing and accounting practices of defense 
contractors. Before the creation of the CAS, there was no consistency 
within and between contractors' cost accounting practices. Auditors 
could not conduct reviews, and the public had no assurance that the 
government was purchasing the best value for their tax dollars.
  These standards are not an onerous set of accounts rules and 
regulations. The committee that creates the standards generally gives 
companies numerous cost accounting options for each regulation.
  The CAS are needed to make sure greedy corporations do not defraud 
the government. They help ensure the accuracy of the charges submitted 
to the federal government. Yet, due to the hard work of a small group 
of health care providers, the CAS have never been applied to the FEHBP. 
Congress has waived these accounting standards in every Treasury-Postal 
Appropriations bill since FY 1999.
  The exemption simply does not make any sense. The FEHBP covers nearly 
nine million active and retired federal employees, and it is the 
nation's largest employer-sponsored health insurance plan. Every year 
the government pays more than $20 billion to the health care providers 
in the plan. What corporation in America would pay this much money 
without having any way to rationally examine their expenses?
  With daily stories of new scandals in the corporate world, now is not 
the time to exempt companies from basic accounting standards. Congress 
must remove this special exemption for the health insurance companies 
in the FEHBP.
  I urge my colleagues to improve the accountability of FEHBP health 
insurance providers by supporting the Kucinich amendment.
  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore (Mr. Simpson). The question is on the 
amendment offered by the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Kucinich).
  The amendment was agreed to.
  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. The Clerk will read.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       Sec. 514. For the purpose of resolving litigation and 
     implementing any settlement agreements regarding the 
     nonforeign area cost-of-living allowance program, the Office 
     of Personnel Management may accept and utilize (without 
     regard to any restriction on unanticipated travel expenses 
     imposed in an appropriations Act) funds made available to the 
     Office pursuant to court approval.
       Sec. 515. No funds appropriated or otherwise made available 
     under this Act shall be made available to any person or 
     entity that has been convicted of violating the Buy American 
     Act (41 U.S.C. 10a-10c).
       Sec. 516. None of the funds made available in this Act may 
     be transferred to any department, agency, or instrumentality 
     of the United States Government, except pursuant to a 
     transfer made by, or transfer authority provided in, this Act 
     or any other appropriations Act.

                      TITLE VI--GENERAL PROVISIONS

                Departments, Agencies, and Corporations

       Sec. 601. Funds appropriated in this or any other Act may 
     be used to pay travel to the United States for the immediate 
     family of employees serving abroad in cases of death or life 
     threatening illness of said employee.
       Sec. 602. No department, agency, or instrumentality of the 
     United States receiving appropriated funds under this or any 
     other Act for fiscal year 2003 shall obligate or expend any 
     such funds, unless such department, agency, or 
     instrumentality has in place, and will continue to administer 
     in good faith, a written policy designed to ensure that all 
     of its workplaces are free from the illegal use, possession, 
     or distribution of controlled substances (as defined in the 
     Controlled Substances Act) by the officers and employees of 
     such department, agency, or instrumentality.
       Sec. 603. Unless otherwise specifically provided, the 
     maximum amount allowable during the current fiscal year in 
     accordance with section 16 of the Act of August 2, 1946 (60 
     Stat. 810), for the purchase of any passenger motor vehicle 
     (exclusive of buses, ambulances, law enforcement, and 
     undercover surveillance vehicles), is hereby fixed at $8,100 
     except station wagons for which the maximum shall be $9,100: 
     Provided, That these limits may be exceeded by not to exceed 
     $3,700 for police-type vehicles, and by not to exceed $4,000 
     for special heavy-duty vehicles: Provided further, That the 
     limits set forth in this section may not be exceeded by more 
     than 5 percent for electric or hybrid vehicles purchased for 
     demonstration under the provisions of the Electric and Hybrid 
     Vehicle Research, Development, and Demonstration Act of 1976: 
     Provided further, That the limits set forth in this section 
     may be exceeded by the incremental cost of clean alternative 
     fuels vehicles acquired pursuant to Public Law 101-549 over 
     the cost of comparable conventionally fueled vehicles.
       Sec. 604. Appropriations of the executive departments and 
     independent establishments for the current fiscal year 
     available for expenses of travel, or for the expenses of the 
     activity concerned, are hereby made available for quarters 
     allowances and cost-of-living allowances, in accordance with 
     5 U.S.C. 5922-5924.

                              {time}  1715


                             Point of Order

  Mr. SMITH of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I make a point of order against the 
language beginning with ``Provided'' on page 74, line 15, through the 
word ``law'' on line 25. These provisos, which affect federal criminal 
rules of evidence and criminal laws, constitute legislation on an 
appropriations bill in violation of clause 2(b) of rule XXI of the 
House of Representatives.
  The CHAIRMAN. Does any Member wish to be heard on the point of order?
  Mr. ISTOOK. Mr. Chairman, we concede the point of order.
  The CHAIRMAN. The point of order is conceded and sustained.
  Mr. ISTOOK. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent that the remainder 
of the bill through page 103, line 10, be considered as read, printed 
in the Record and open to amendment at any point.
  The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from 
Oklahoma?
  There was no objection.
  The text of the remainder of the bill through page 103, line 10, is 
as follows:

       Sec. 605. Unless otherwise specified during the current 
     fiscal year, no part of any appropriation contained in this 
     or any other Act shall be used to pay the compensation of any 
     officer or employee of the Government of the United States 
     (including any agency the majority of the stock of which is 
     owned by the Government of the United States) whose post of 
     duty is in the continental United States unless such person: 
     (1) is a citizen of the United States; (2) is a person in the 
     service of the United States on the date of the enactment of 
     this Act who, being eligible for citizenship, has filed a 
     declaration of intention to become a citizen of the United 
     States prior to such date and is actually residing in the 
     United States; (3) is a person who owes allegiance to the 
     United States; (4) is an alien from Cuba, Poland, South 
     Vietnam, the countries of the former Soviet Union, or the 
     Baltic countries lawfully admitted to the United States for 
     permanent residence; (5) is a South Vietnamese, Cambodian, or 
     Laotian refugee paroled in the United States after January 1, 
     1975; or (6) is a national of the People's Republic of China 
     who qualifies for adjustment of status pursuant to the 
     Chinese Student Protection Act of 1992: Provided, That for 
     the purpose of this section, an affidavit signed by any such 
     person shall be considered prima facie evidence that the 
     requirements of this section with respect to his or her 
     status have been complied with: Provided further, That any 
     person making a false affidavit shall be guilty of a felony, 
     and, upon conviction, shall be fined no more than $4,000 or 
     imprisoned for not more than 1 year, or both: Provided 
     further, That the above penal clause shall be in addition to, 
     and not in substitution for, any other provisions of existing 
     law: Provided further, That any payment made to any officer 
     or employee contrary to the provisions of this section shall 
     be recoverable in action by the Federal Government. This 
     section shall not apply to citizens of Ireland, Israel, or 
     the Republic of the Philippines, or to nationals of those 
     countries allied with the United States in a current defense 
     effort, or to international broadcasters employed by the 
     United States Information Agency, or to temporary employment 
     of translators, or to temporary employment in the field 
     service (not to exceed 60 days) as a result of emergencies.
       Sec. 606. Appropriations available to any department or 
     agency during the current fiscal year for necessary expenses, 
     including maintenance or operating expenses, shall also be 
     available for payment to the General Services Administration 
     for charges for space and services and those expenses of 
     renovation and alteration of buildings and facilities which 
     constitute public improvements performed in accordance with 
     the Public Buildings Act of 1959 (73 Stat. 749), the Public 
     Buildings Amendments of 1972 (87 Stat. 216), or other 
     applicable law.
       Sec. 607. In addition to funds provided in this or any 
     other Act, all Federal agencies are authorized to receive and 
     use funds resulting from the sale of materials, including 
     Federal records disposed of pursuant to a records schedule 
     recovered through recycling or waste prevention programs. 
     Such funds shall be available until expended for the 
     following purposes:
       (1) Acquisition, waste reduction and prevention, and 
     recycling programs as described in Executive Order No. 13101 
     (September 14, 1998), including any such programs adopted 
     prior to the effective date of the Executive order.
       (2) Other Federal agency environmental management programs, 
     including, but not limited to, the development and 
     implementation of hazardous waste management and pollution 
     prevention programs.
       (3) Other employee programs as authorized by law or as 
     deemed appropriate by the head of the Federal agency.
       Sec. 608. Funds made available by this or any other Act for 
     administrative expenses in

[[Page H5264]]

     the current fiscal year of the corporations and agencies 
     subject to chapter 91 of title 31, United States Code, shall 
     be available, in addition to objects for which such funds are 
     otherwise available, for rent in the District of Columbia; 
     services in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 3109; and the objects 
     specified under this head, all the provisions of which shall 
     be applicable to the expenditure of such funds unless 
     otherwise specified in the Act by which they are made 
     available: Provided, That in the event any functions budgeted 
     as administrative expenses are subsequently transferred to or 
     paid from other funds, the limitations on administrative 
     expenses shall be correspondingly reduced.
       Sec. 609. No part of any appropriation for the current 
     fiscal year contained in this or any other Act shall be paid 
     to any person for the filling of any position for which he or 
     she has been nominated after the Senate has voted not to 
     approve the nomination of said person.
       Sec. 610. No part of any appropriation contained in this or 
     any other Act shall be available for interagency financing of 
     boards (except Federal Executive Boards), commissions, 
     councils, committees, or similar groups (whether or not they 
     are interagency entities) which do not have a prior and 
     specific statutory approval to receive financial support from 
     more than one agency or instrumentality.
       Sec. 611. Funds made available by this or any other Act to 
     the Postal Service Fund (39 U.S.C. 2003) shall be available 
     for employment of guards for all buildings and areas owned or 
     occupied by the Postal Service and under the charge and 
     control of the Postal Service, and such guards shall have, 
     with respect to such property, the powers of special 
     policemen provided by the first section of the Act of June 1, 
     1948 (62 Stat. 281; 40 U.S.C. 318), and, as to property owned 
     or occupied by the Postal Service, the Postmaster General may 
     take the same actions as the Administrator of General 
     Services may take under the provisions of sections 2 and 3 of 
     the Act of June 1, 1948 (62 Stat. 281; 40 U.S.C. 318a and 
     318b), attaching thereto penal consequences under the 
     authority and within the limits provided in section 4 of the 
     Act of June 1, 1948 (62 Stat. 281; 40 U.S.C. 318c).
       Sec. 612. None of the funds made available pursuant to the 
     provisions of this Act shall be used to implement, 
     administer, or enforce any regulation which has been 
     disapproved pursuant to a resolution of disapproval duly 
     adopted in accordance with the applicable law of the United 
     States.
       Sec. 613. (a) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, 
     and except as otherwise provided in this section, no part of 
     any of the funds appropriated for fiscal year 2003, by this 
     or any other Act, may be used to pay any prevailing rate 
     employee described in section 5342(a)(2)(A) of title 5, 
     United States Code--
       (1) during the period from the date of expiration of the 
     limitation imposed by section 613 of the Treasury and General 
     Government Appropriations Act, 2002, until the normal 
     effective date of the applicable wage survey adjustment that 
     is to take effect in fiscal year 2003, in an amount that 
     exceeds the rate payable for the applicable grade and step of 
     the applicable wage schedule in accordance with such section 
     613; and
       (2) during the period consisting of the remainder of fiscal 
     year 2003, in an amount that exceeds, as a result of a wage 
     survey adjustment, the rate payable under paragraph (1) by 
     more than the sum of--
       (A) the percentage adjustment taking effect in fiscal year 
     2003 under section 5303 of title 5, United States Code, in 
     the rates of pay under the General Schedule; and
       (B) the difference between the overall average percentage 
     of the locality-based comparability payments taking effect in 
     fiscal year 2003 under section 5304 of such title (whether by 
     adjustment or otherwise), and the overall average percentage 
     of such payments which was effective in fiscal year 2002 
     under such section.
       (b) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, no 
     prevailing rate employee described in subparagraph (B) or (C) 
     of section 5342(a)(2) of title 5, United States Code, and no 
     employee covered by section 5348 of such title, may be paid 
     during the periods for which subsection (a) is in effect at a 
     rate that exceeds the rates that would be payable under 
     subsection (a) were subsection (a) applicable to such 
     employee.
       (c) For the purposes of this section, the rates payable to 
     an employee who is covered by this section and who is paid 
     from a schedule not in existence on September 30, 2002, shall 
     be determined under regulations prescribed by the Office of 
     Personnel Management.
       (d) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, rates of 
     premium pay for employees subject to this section may not be 
     changed from the rates in effect on September 30, 2002, 
     except to the extent determined by the Office of Personnel 
     Management to be consistent with the purpose of this section.
       (e) This section shall apply with respect to pay for 
     service performed after September 30, 2002.
       (f) For the purpose of administering any provision of law 
     (including any rule or regulation that provides premium pay, 
     retirement, life insurance, or any other employee benefit) 
     that requires any deduction or contribution, or that imposes 
     any requirement or limitation on the basis of a rate of 
     salary or basic pay, the rate of salary or basic pay payable 
     after the application of this section shall be treated as the 
     rate of salary or basic pay.
       (g) Nothing in this section shall be considered to permit 
     or require the payment to any employee covered by this 
     section at a rate in excess of the rate that would be payable 
     were this section not in effect.
       (h) The Office of Personnel Management may provide for 
     exceptions to the limitations imposed by this section if the 
     Office determines that such exceptions are necessary to 
     ensure the recruitment or retention of qualified employees.
       Sec. 614. During the period in which the head of any 
     department or agency, or any other officer or civilian 
     employee of the Government appointed by the President of the 
     United States, holds office, no funds may be obligated or 
     expended in excess of $5,000 to furnish or redecorate the 
     office of such department head, agency head, officer, or 
     employee, or to purchase furniture or make improvements for 
     any such office, unless advance notice of such furnishing or 
     redecoration is expressly approved by the Committees on 
     Appropriations. For the purposes of this section, the term 
     ``office'' shall include the entire suite of offices assigned 
     to the individual, as well as any other space used primarily 
     by the individual or the use of which is directly controlled 
     by the individual.
       Sec. 615. Notwithstanding any other provision of law, no 
     executive branch agency shall purchase, construct, and/or 
     lease any additional facilities, except within or contiguous 
     to existing locations, to be used for the purpose of 
     conducting Federal law enforcement training without the 
     advance approval of the Committees on Appropriations, except 
     that the Federal Law Enforcement Training Center is 
     authorized to obtain the temporary use of additional 
     facilities by lease, contract, or other agreement for 
     training which cannot be accommodated in existing Center 
     facilities.
       Sec. 616. Notwithstanding section 1346 of title 31, United 
     States Code, or section 610 of this Act, funds made available 
     for the current fiscal year by this or any other Act shall be 
     available for the interagency funding of national security 
     and emergency preparedness telecommunications initiatives 
     which benefit multiple Federal departments, agencies, or 
     entities, as provided by Executive Order No. 12472 (April 3, 
     1984).
       Sec. 617. (a) None of the funds appropriated by this or any 
     other Act may be obligated or expended by any Federal 
     department, agency, or other instrumentality for the salaries 
     or expenses of any employee appointed to a position of a 
     confidential or policy-determining character excepted from 
     the competitive service pursuant to section 3302 of title 5, 
     United States Code, without a certification to the Office of 
     Personnel Management from the head of the Federal department, 
     agency, or other instrumentality employing the Schedule C 
     appointee that the Schedule C position was not created solely 
     or primarily in order to detail the employee to the White 
     House.
       (b) The provisions of this section shall not apply to 
     Federal employees or members of the armed services detailed 
     to or from--
       (1) the Central Intelligence Agency;
       (2) the National Security Agency;
       (3) the Defense Intelligence Agency;
       (4) the offices within the Department of Defense for the 
     collection of specialized national foreign intelligence 
     through reconnaissance programs;
       (5) the Bureau of Intelligence and Research of the 
     Department of State;
       (6) any agency, office, or unit of the Army, Navy, Air 
     Force, and Marine Corps, the Federal Bureau of Investigation 
     and the Drug Enforcement Administration of the Department of 
     Justice, the Department of Transportation, the Department of 
     the Treasury, and the Department of Energy performing 
     intelligence functions; and
       (7) the Director of Central Intelligence.
       Sec. 618. No department, agency, or instrumentality of the 
     United States receiving appropriated funds under this or any 
     other Act for the current fiscal year shall obligate or 
     expend any such funds, unless such department, agency, or 
     instrumentality has in place, and will continue to administer 
     in good faith, a written policy designed to ensure that all 
     of its workplaces are free from discrimination and sexual 
     harassment and that all of its workplaces are not in 
     violation of title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as 
     amended, the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967, 
     and the Rehabilitation Act of 1973.
       Sec. 619. None of the funds made available in this Act for 
     the United States Customs Service may be used to allow--
       (1) the importation into the United States of any good, 
     ware, article, or merchandise mined, produced, or 
     manufactured by forced or indentured child labor, as 
     determined pursuant to section 307 of the Tariff Act of 1930 
     (19 U.S.C. 1307); or
       (2) the release into the United States of any good, ware, 
     article, or merchandise on which the United States Customs 
     Service has in effect a detention order, pursuant to such 
     section 307, on the basis that the good, ware, article, or 
     merchandise may have been mined, produced, or manufactured by 
     forced or indentured child labor.
       Sec. 620. No part of any appropriation contained in this or 
     any other Act shall be available for the payment of the 
     salary of any officer or employee of the Federal Government, 
     who--
       (1) prohibits or prevents, or attempts or threatens to 
     prohibit or prevent, any other officer or employee of the 
     Federal Government from having any direct oral or written 
     communication or contact with any Member, committee, or 
     subcommittee of the Congress

[[Page H5265]]

     in connection with any matter pertaining to the employment of 
     such other officer or employee or pertaining to the 
     department or agency of such other officer or employee in any 
     way, irrespective of whether such communication or contact is 
     at the initiative of such other officer or employee or in 
     response to the request or inquiry of such Member, committee, 
     or subcommittee; or
       (2) removes, suspends from duty without pay, demotes, 
     reduces in rank, seniority, status, pay, or performance of 
     efficiency rating, denies promotion to, relocates, reassigns, 
     transfers, disciplines, or discriminates in regard to any 
     employment right, entitlement, or benefit, or any term or 
     condition of employment of, any other officer or employee of 
     the Federal Government, or attempts or threatens to commit 
     any of the foregoing actions with respect to such other 
     officer or employee, by reason of any communication or 
     contact of such other officer or employee with any Member, 
     committee, or subcommittee of the Congress as described in 
     paragraph (1).
       Sec. 621. (a) None of the funds made available in this or 
     any other Act may be obligated or expended for any employee 
     training that--
       (1) does not meet identified needs for knowledge, skills, 
     and abilities bearing directly upon the performance of 
     official duties;
       (2) contains elements likely to induce high levels of 
     emotional response or psychological stress in some 
     participants;
       (3) does not require prior employee notification of the 
     content and methods to be used in the training and written 
     end of course evaluation;
       (4) contains any methods or content associated with 
     religious or quasi-religious belief systems or ``new age'' 
     belief systems as defined in Equal Employment Opportunity 
     Commission Notice N-915.022, dated September 2, 1988; or
       (5) is offensive to, or designed to change, participants' 
     personal values or lifestyle outside the workplace.
       (b) Nothing in this section shall prohibit, restrict, or 
     otherwise preclude an agency from conducting training bearing 
     directly upon the performance of official duties.
       Sec. 622. No funds appropriated in this or any other Act 
     may be used to implement or enforce the agreements in 
     Standard Forms 312 and 4414 of the Government or any other 
     nondisclosure policy, form, or agreement if such policy, 
     form, or agreement does not contain the following provisions: 
     ``These restrictions are consistent with and do not 
     supersede, conflict with, or otherwise alter the employee 
     obligations, rights, or liabilities created by Executive 
     Order No. 12958; section 7211 of title 5, United States Code 
     (governing disclosures to Congress); section 1034 of title 
     10, United States Code, as amended by the Military 
     Whistleblower Protection Act (governing disclosure to 
     Congress by members of the military); section 2302(b)(8) of 
     title 5, United States Code, as amended by the Whistleblower 
     Protection Act (governing disclosures of illegality, waste, 
     fraud, abuse or public health or safety threats); the 
     Intelligence Identities Protection Act of 1982 (50 U.S.C. 421 
     et seq.) (governing disclosures that could expose 
     confidential Government agents); and the statutes which 
     protect against disclosure that may compromise the national 
     security, including sections 641, 793, 794, 798, and 952 of 
     title 18, United States Code, and section 4(b) of the 
     Subversive Activities Act of 1950 (50 U.S.C. 783(b)). The 
     definitions, requirements, obligations, rights, sanctions, 
     and liabilities created by said Executive order and listed 
     statutes are incorporated into this agreement and are 
     controlling.'': Provided, That notwithstanding the preceding 
     paragraph, a nondisclosure policy form or agreement that is 
     to be executed by a person connected with the conduct of an 
     intelligence or intelligence-related activity, other than an 
     employee or officer of the United States Government, may 
     contain provisions appropriate to the particular activity for 
     which such document is to be used. Such form or agreement 
     shall, at a minimum, require that the person will not 
     disclose any classified information received in the course of 
     such activity unless specifically authorized to do so by the 
     United States Government. Such nondisclosure forms shall also 
     make it clear that they do not bar disclosures to Congress or 
     to an authorized official of an executive agency or the 
     Department of Justice that are essential to reporting a 
     substantial violation of law.
       Sec. 623. No part of any funds appropriated in this or any 
     other Act shall be used by an agency of the executive branch, 
     other than for normal and recognized executive-legislative 
     relationships, for publicity or propaganda purposes, and for 
     the preparation, distribution or use of any kit, pamphlet, 
     booklet, publication, radio, television or film presentation 
     designed to support or defeat legislation pending before the 
     Congress, except in presentation to the Congress itself.
       Sec. 624. None of the funds appropriated by this or any 
     other Act may be used by an agency to provide a Federal 
     employee's home address to any labor organization except when 
     the employee has authorized such disclosure or when such 
     disclosure has been ordered by a court of competent 
     jurisdiction.
       Sec. 625. None of the funds made available in this Act or 
     any other Act may be used to provide any non-public 
     information such as mailing or telephone lists to any person 
     or any organization outside of the Federal Government without 
     the approval of the Committees on Appropriations.
       Sec. 626. No part of any appropriation contained in this or 
     any other Act shall be used for publicity or propaganda 
     purposes within the United States not heretofore authorized 
     by the Congress.
       Sec. 627. (a) In this section the term ``agency''--
       (1) means an Executive agency as defined under section 105 
     of title 5, United States Code;
       (2) includes a military department as defined under section 
     102 of such title, the Postal Service, and the Postal Rate 
     Commission; and
       (3) shall not include the General Accounting Office.
       (b) Unless authorized in accordance with law or regulations 
     to use such time for other purposes, an employee of an agency 
     shall use official time in an honest effort to perform 
     official duties. An employee not under a leave system, 
     including a Presidential appointee exempted under section 
     6301(2) of title 5, United States Code, has an obligation to 
     expend an honest effort and a reasonable proportion of such 
     employee's time in the performance of official duties.
       Sec. 628. Notwithstanding 31 U.S.C. 1346 and section 610 of 
     this Act, funds made available for the current fiscal year by 
     this or any other Act to any department or agency, which is a 
     member of the Joint Financial Management Improvement Program 
     (JFMIP), shall be available to finance an appropriate share 
     of JFMIP administrative costs, as determined by the JFMIP, 
     but not to exceed a total of $800,000 including the salary of 
     the Executive Director and staff support.
       Sec. 629. Notwithstanding 31 U.S.C. 1346 and section 610 of 
     this Act, the head of each Executive department and agency is 
     hereby authorized to transfer to or reimburse the ``Policy 
     and Citizen Services'' account, General Services 
     Administration, with the approval of the Director of the 
     Office of Management and Budget, funds made available for the 
     current fiscal year by this or any other Act, including 
     rebates from charge card and other contracts. These funds 
     shall be administered by the Administrator of General 
     Services to support Government-wide financial, information 
     technology, procurement, and other management innovations, 
     initiatives, and activities, as approved by the Director of 
     the Office of Management and Budget, in consultation with the 
     appropriate interagency groups designated by the Director 
     (including the Chief Financial Officers Council and the Joint 
     Financial Management Improvement Program for financial 
     management initiatives, the Chief Information Officers 
     Council for information technology initiatives, and the 
     Procurement Executives Council for procurement initiatives). 
     The total funds transferred or reimbursed shall not exceed 
     $17,000,000. Such transfers or reimbursements may only be 
     made 15 days following notification of the Committees on 
     Appropriations by the Director of the Office of Management 
     and Budget.
       Sec. 630. Notwithstanding any other provision of law, a 
     woman may breastfeed her child at any location in a Federal 
     building or on Federal property, if the woman and her child 
     are otherwise authorized to be present at the location.
       Sec. 631. Nothwithstanding section 1346 of title 31, United 
     States Code, or section 610 of this Act, funds made available 
     for the current fiscal year by this or any other Act shall be 
     available for the interagency funding of specific projects, 
     workshops, studies, and similar efforts to carry out the 
     purposes of the National Science and Technology Council 
     (authorized by Executive Order No. 12881), which benefit 
     multiple Federal departments, agencies, or entities: 
     Provided, That the Office of Management and Budget shall 
     provide a report describing the budget of and resources 
     connected with the National Science and Technology Council to 
     the Committees on Appropriations, the House Committee on 
     Science; and the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and 
     Transportation 90 days after enactment of this Act.
       Sec. 632. Any request for proposals, solicitation, grant 
     application, form, notification, press release, or other 
     publications involving the distribution of Federal funds 
     shall indicate the agency providing the funds and the amount 
     provided. This provision shall apply to direct payments, 
     formula funds, and grants received by a State receiving 
     Federal funds.
       Sec. 633. Section 403(f) of Public Law 103-356 (31 U.S.C. 
     501 note) is amended by striking ``October 1, 2002'' and 
     inserting ``October 1, 2003''.
       Sec. 634. (a) Prohibition of Federal Agency Monitoring of 
     Personal Information on Use of Internet.--None of the funds 
     made available in this or any other Act may be used by any 
     Federal agency--
       (1) to collect, review, or create any aggregate list, 
     derived from any means, that includes the collection of any 
     personally identifiable information relating to an 
     individual's access to or use of any Federal Government 
     Internet site of the agency; or
       (2) to enter into any agreement with a third party 
     (including another government agency) to collect, review, or 
     obtain any aggregate list, derived from any means, that 
     includes the collection of any personally identifiable 
     information relating to an individual's access to or use of 
     any nongovernmental Internet site.
       (b) Exceptions.--The limitations established in subsection 
     (a) shall not apply to--
       (1) any record of aggregate data that does not identify 
     particular persons;

[[Page H5266]]

       (2) any voluntary submission of personally identifiable 
     information;
       (3) any action taken for law enforcement, regulatory, or 
     supervisory purposes, in accordance with applicable law; or
       (4) any action described in subsection (a)(1) that is a 
     system security action taken by the operator of an Internet 
     site and is necessarily incident to the rendition of the 
     Internet site services or to the protection of the rights or 
     property of the provider of the Internet site.
       (c) Definitions.--For the purposes of this section:
       (1) The term ``regulatory'' means agency actions to 
     implement, interpret or enforce authorities provided in law.
       (2) The term ``supervisory'' means examinations of the 
     agency's supervised institutions, including assessing safety 
     and soundness, overall financial condition, management 
     practices and policies and compliance with applicable 
     standards as provided in law.
       Sec. 635. (a) None of the funds appropriated by this Act 
     may be used to enter into or renew a contract which includes 
     a provision providing prescription drug coverage, except 
     where the contract also includes a provision for 
     contraceptive coverage.
       (b) Nothing in this section shall apply to a contract 
     with--
       (1) any of the following religious plans:
       (A) Personal Care's HMO; and
       (B) OSF Health Plans, Inc.; and
       (2) any existing or future plan, if the carrier for the 
     plan objects to such coverage on the basis of religious 
     beliefs.
       (c) In implementing this section, any plan that enters into 
     or renews a contract under this section may not subject any 
     individual to discrimination on the basis that the individual 
     refuses to prescribe or otherwise provide for contraceptives 
     because such activities would be contrary to the individual's 
     religious beliefs or moral convictions.
       (d) Nothing in this section shall be construed to require 
     coverage of abortion or abortion-related services.
       Sec. 636. The Congress of the United States recognizes the 
     United States Anti-Doping Agency (USADA) as the official 
     anti-doping agency for Olympic, Pan American, and Paralympic 
     sport in the United States.
       Sec. 637. Not later than 6 months after the date of 
     enactment of this Act, the Inspector General of each 
     applicable department or agency shall submit to the Committee 
     on Appropriations a report detailing what policies and 
     procedures are in place for each department or agency to give 
     first priority to the location of new offices and other 
     facilities in rural areas, as directed by the Rural 
     Development Act of 1972.
       Sec. 638. Section 7131 of title 5, United States Code, is 
     amended by adding at the end the following:
       ``(e)(1) Each agency shall submit to each House of the 
     Congress, the Office of Personnel Management, and the Office 
     of Management and Budget, at the time the budget is submitted 
     by the President to the Congress in each calendar year, a 
     report on the use of official time within such agency during 
     the fiscal year last ending before the date of the report's 
     submission.
       ``(2) Each such report shall include, with respect to the 
     fiscal year to which it pertains--
       ``(A) the number of hours of official time that employees 
     spent on labor organization activities;
       ``(B) the number of employees who used official time for 
     labor organization activities;
       ``(C) the number of employees who spent 100 percent of 
     their time on labor organization activities;
       ``(D) the dollar value of the official time spent on labor 
     organization activities;
       ``(E) the dollar value of the office space, equipment, 
     telephone use, and supplies provided to employees using 
     official time for labor organization activities; and
       ``(F) the benefits and disadvantages of using official time 
     for labor organization activities.''.
       Sec. 639. (a) Annual Identification of Susceptible Programs 
     and Activities Susceptible to Improper Payments.--The head of 
     each agency shall, in accordance with guidance prescribed by 
     the Director of the Office of Management and Budget, annually 
     review all programs and activities that it administers and 
     identify all such programs and activities that may be 
     susceptible to significant improper payments.
       (b) Estimation of Improper Payments.--With respect to each 
     program and activity identified under subsection (a), the 
     head of the agency concerned shall--
       (1) estimate the annual amount of improper payments; and
       (2) include that estimate in its annual budget submission.
       (c) Reports on Actions To Reduce Improper Payments.--With 
     respect to any program or activity of an agency with 
     estimated improper payments under subsection (b) that exceed 
     1 percent of the total program or activity budget or 
     $1,000,000 annually (whichever is less), the head of the 
     agency shall provide with the estimate under subsection (b) a 
     report on what actions the agency is taking to reduce the 
     improper payments, including--
       (1) a statement of whether the agency has the information 
     systems and other infrastructure it needs in order to reduce 
     improper payments to minimal cost-effective levels;
       (2) if the agency does not have such systems and 
     infrastructure, a description of the resources the agency has 
     requested in its budget submission to obtain the necessary 
     information systems and infrastructure; and
       (3) a description of the steps the agency has taken to 
     ensure that agency managers (including the agency head) are 
     held accountable for reducing improper payments.
       (d) Definitions.--For the purposes of this section:
       (1) Agency.--The term ``agency'' means an executive agency, 
     as that term is defined in section 102 of title 31, United 
     States Code.
       (2) Improper payment.--The term ``improper payment''--
       (A) means any payment that should not have been made or 
     that was made in an incorrect amount (including overpayments 
     and underpayments) under statutory, contractual, 
     administrative, or other legally applicable requirements; and
       (B) includes any payment to an ineligible recipient, any 
     payment for an ineligible service, any duplicate payment, 
     payments for services not received, and any payment that does 
     not account for credit for applicable discounts.
       (3) Payment.--The term ``payment'' means any payment 
     (including a commitment for future payment, such as a loan 
     guarantee) that is--
       (A) made by a Federal agency, a Federal contractor, or a 
     governmental or other organization administering a Federal 
     program or activity; and
       (B) derived from Federal funds or other Federal resources 
     or that will be reimbursed from Federal funds or other 
     Federal resources.
       (e) Application.--This section--
       (1) applies with respect to the administration of programs, 
     and improper payments under programs, in fiscal years after 
     fiscal year 2002; and
       (2) requires the inclusion of estimates under subsection 
     (b)(2) only in annual budget submissions for fiscal years 
     after fiscal year 2003.
       (f) Guidance by the Office of Management and Budget.--The 
     Director of the Office of Management and Budget shall 
     prescribe guidance to implement the requirements of this 
     section.
       Sec. 640. (a) Notwithstanding paragraph (17) of subsection 
     (a) of the Policemen and Firemen's Retirement and Disability 
     Act (sec. 5-701(17), D.C. Official Code) or any other 
     provision of such Act to the contrary, for purposes of 
     determining the amount of any annuity required to be paid 
     under such Act with respect to an officer or member of the 
     United States Secret Service who retired during fiscal year 
     1995, the officer's or member's average pay shall be the 
     officer's or member's basic salary at the time of retirement.
       (b) Subsection (a) shall apply with respect to any annuity 
     paid--
       (1) during fiscal year 1995 or any succeeding fiscal year, 
     in the case of a survivor's annuity paid with respect to an 
     officer or member of the United States Secret Service 
     described in such subsection; or
       (2) during fiscal year 2003 or any succeeding fiscal year, 
     in the case of any other annuity paid with respect to an 
     officer or member of the United States Secret Service 
     described in such subsection.
       Sec. 641. Section 902(b) of the Law Enforcement Pay Equity 
     Act of 2000 (as enacted into law by Public Law 106-554), 
     shall cease to be effective on January 1, 2003.
       Sec. 642. No funds appropriated under this Act or any other 
     Act with respect to any fiscal year shall be available to 
     take any action based upon any provision of 5 U.S.C. 552 with 
     respect to records collected or maintained by the Secretary 
     of the Treasury or his delegate pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 846(b), 
     923(g)(3) or 923(g)(7), or obtained by the Secretary or 
     delegate from Federal, State, local, or foreign law 
     enforcement agencies in connection with arson or explosives 
     incidents or the tracing of a firearm, except that the 
     Secretary or delegate may continue to disclose such records 
     to the extent and in the manner that records so collected, 
     maintained, or obtained have been disclosed by the Secretary 
     or delegate under 5 U.S.C. 552 prior to the date of the 
     enactment of this Act.
       Sec. 643. (a) The adjustment in rates of basic pay for the 
     statutory pay systems that takes effect in fiscal year 2003 
     under sections 5303 and 5304 of title 5, United States Code, 
     shall be an increase of 4.1 percent.
       (b) Funds used to carry out this section shall be paid from 
     appropriations which are made to each applicable department 
     or agency for salaries and expenses for fiscal year 2003.
       Sec. 644. (a) Section 9505(d) of title 5, United States 
     Code, is amended by striking the second sentence and 
     inserting the following: ``Such amount may not exceed the 
     maximum amount which would be allowable under paragraph (3) 
     of section 5384(b) if such paragraph were applied by 
     substituting `the Internal Revenue Service' for `an agency'. 
     ''.
       (b) The amendment made by subsection (a) shall apply with 
     respect to fiscal years beginning after September 30, 2002.
       Sec. 645. None of the funds made available in this Act may 
     be used to finalize, implement, administer, or enforce--
       (1) the proposed rule relating to the determination that 
     real estate brokerage is an activity that is financial in 
     nature or incidental to a financial activity published in the 
     Federal Register on January 3, 2001 (66 Fed. Reg. 307 et 
     seq.); or
       (2) the revision proposed in such rule to section 1501.2 of 
     title 12 of the Code of Federal Regulations.
       Sec. 646. Corporate Expatriates. (a) Limitation.--None of 
     the funds made available in

[[Page H5267]]

     this Act may be obligated for payment on any new contract to 
     a subsidiary of a publicly traded corporation if the 
     corporation is incorporated in a tax haven country but the 
     United States is the principal market for the public trading 
     of the corporation's stock.
       (b) Definition.--For purposes of subsection (a), the term 
     ``tax haven country'' means each of the following: Barbados, 
     Bermuda, British Virgin Islands, Cayman Islands, Commonwealth 
     of the Bahamas, Cyprus, Gibraltar, Isle of Man, the 
     Principality of Liechtenstein, the Principality of Monaco, 
     and the Republic of the Seychelles.
       (c) Waiver.--The President may waive subsection (a) with 
     respect to any specific contract if the President certifies 
     to the Appropriations Committees that the waiver is required 
     in the interest of national security.
  The CHAIRMAN. Are there any other points of order?


                             Point of Order

  Mr. DAVIS of Virginia. Mr. Chairman, I make a point of order under 
clause 2(b), rule XXI, legislating on an appropriations bill, against 
section 646, beginning at page 102, line 19, through page 103, line 10.
  The CHAIRMAN. Do other Members wish to be heard on the point of 
order?
  If not, the Chair finds that this provision includes language 
requiring a new determination by a certification. The provision, 
therefore, constitutes legislation, in violation of clause 2, rule XXI.
  The point of order is sustained, and the provision is stricken from 
the bill.
  Are there any other points of order?
  If not, are there any amendments?


                     Amendment Offered by Mr. Goss

  Mr. GOSS. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
  The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Amendment offered by Mr. Goss: Amendment printed in House 
     Report 107-585:
       Page 103, insert after line 10 the following new section:
       Sec. 647. Any limitation in this Act on the use of funds to 
     administer or enforce regulations restricting travel to Cuba 
     or transactions related to travel to Cuba shall apply only 
     after the President has certified to the Congress that the 
     Cuban Government--
       (1) does not possess and is not developing a biological 
     weapons program that threatens the homeland security of the 
     United States;
       (2) is not providing to terrorist states or terrorist 
     organizations technology that could be used to produce, 
     develop, or deliver biological weapons; and
       (3) is not providing support or sanctuary to international 
     terrorists.
  Mr. GOSS. Mr. Chairman, there exists a nation that for over 40 years 
has repeatedly declared its hostile intentions towards the United 
States of America and American citizens. It has consistently allied 
itself with our enemies, it has sought nuclear weapons on its soil, and 
abused its own citizens. It has violated human rights in an egregious 
way. This nation today is on the State Department list for sponsoring 
terrorism, and in the past it has provided funds and shelter for 
terrorist groups, groups such as the ETA, the Basque Nationalists, 
Colombian guerrillas, committing some of the great atrocities going on 
in our hemisphere now, IRA leaders, possibly even Iranian agents and 
others.
  This nation's dictator has failed to share any useful intelligence 
information with us since 9/11, and calls our military response in 
Afghanistan not ``a war on terrorism,'' but ``a war for terrorism.'' 
The state, of course, I am referring to is Cuba, a nation only 90 miles 
from the southern boundaries of the United States of America.
  Coming from a south Florida district, Mr. Chairman, I have long heard 
the arguments from both sides about the Cuban embargo and travel ban. 
Usually this debate evokes emotional issues on topics like human rights 
and free trade. I have not come to the floor today to rehash the old 
fights on those scores, because while these concerns are certainly 
still valid and will certainly be debated, I think the center of 
gravity in this discussion has shifted very dramatically since 9/11.
  There is no doubt that Cuba has sponsored terrorist activity in the 
past. That is not arguable or debatable. It is fact. Whether it is a 
terrorist sponsor today remains a difficult, open question and one 
which of our executive agencies are working on, and one we do not want 
to have answered the wrong way or the hard way.
  I do not see how, in good conscience, we can do business with Cuba's 
current regime when its activities are veiled by a closed society. How 
can we tell the world we will not tolerate terrorism, but, at the same 
time, open our economic door and all the benefits that that implies to 
a clearinghouse for those who harm innocent civilians?
  Castro's coffers should not be enriched by the bounty of American 
travel dollars if he is aiding and abetting brutal criminals. Our 
tireless enemies are disciplined, they are persistent, and they are 
adaptable, as we have found out to our regret. They leave us few 
physical targets to attack and they are difficult to track.
  However, they are vulnerable. Terrorists, like any other 
organization, need residence, they need logistic support, they need 
travel aid, they need money, they need safe harbor. Without these, they 
are little more than bitter outlaws.
  Back in September, President Bush drew a clear line for all nations 
of the world when he declared, ``You are either with us, or you are 
with the terrorists.'' It is essential that groups like al Qaeda never 
again find a safe haven from which to rebuild, especially a place so 
near our nation.
  For this reason, I bring this amendment to ask that the President 
certify a clean bill of health for Cuba before travel is allowed. The 
amendment specifically asks the President to certify that Cuba is not 
developing biological weapons and that it is not providing technology, 
shelter or assistance to terrorists.
  I strongly support President Bush's efforts to bring real democracy 
to the people of Cuba. We all want a better life for our innocent 
neighbors that have long suffered off our shores. However, in our rush 
to help the oppressed people of Cuba, let us ensure we are not 
strengthening a regime that is now running a terrorist comfort station.
  Our job is to look out for the national security of the United States 
of America and Americans at home and abroad. This is a simple amendment 
to give us an extra measure of assurance in that area. Should the 
administration determine that the Cuban-Castro regime passes the test, 
then there is no problem with those who object to this amendment. If he 
does not pass the test, then there is every reason why this amendment 
should pass.
  Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
  The CHAIRMAN. Without objection, the gentlman from Massachusetts is 
recognized for 5 minutes.
  There was no objection.
  Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Chairman, I rise in very strong opposition to the 
amendment offered by the gentleman from Florida.
  I have the utmost respect for the chairman of the Permanent Select 
Committee on Intelligence and my colleague on the Committee on Rules, 
but I am disappointed that he would offer this amendment, which further 
restricts the ability of U.S. citizens to travel to Cuba. And let us be 
clear, that is the only thing the Goss amendments would do, keep 
Americans from traveling to Cuba.
  If Members are seriously alarmed about bioweapons being developed or 
exported by Cuba, then serious action is required, not this. The United 
States should present to our allies and the international community 
information backing up these claims. But we have not done so.
  The United States should call upon the United Nations and the OAS to 
form a reputable inspection team, send it to Cuba, investigate these 
allegations and determine whether or not they have merit. We are not 
doing that either.
  Officials from the Bush Administration should be informing all 
relevant committees, Members of Congress and the press of the 
documentation they have to back up their claims. But that is not 
happening either.
  Instead, high officials of the Bush Administration have deliberately 
distanced themselves from the one individual, Under Secretary of State 
John Bolton, who made such claims in a May 6 speech at the Heritage 
Foundation.
  Following Mr. Bolton's remarks, Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld 
was asked about the matter. He replied that he had not seen the 
intelligence to back up such charges. Secretary of State Powell, the 
U.S. has always stated that Cuba has the capacity to develop such 
bioweapons, but there was no information that Cuba had developed offer 
was exporting bioweapons technology.

[[Page H5268]]

  In hearings in the other body, not only did the State Department 
refuse to allow the Under Secretary of State Bolton to testify on this 
matter, but the person they did send, Assistant Secretary of State for 
Intelligence and Research Carl Ford, Jr., stated that he had no 
evidence to back up the suggestion that Cuba was working on the 
development of biological weapons or passing that technology on to 
rogue states. He concluded that the State Department ``never tried to 
suggest that we had a smoking gun.''
  The possession, development or export of such bioweapons by Cuba or 
any other weapon of mass destruction has not been cited in any CIA, 
Pentagon or State Department report issued over the past decade, 
including those wholly researched, written and issued by the Bush 
Administration.
  The State Department's own May 2002 report on global terrorism issued 
3 weeks after Bolton's charges made no mention, not even a hint, of 
bioweapons in Cuba. The July 11 letter sent by Secretaries Powell and 
O'Neill to the Committee on Appropriations chairman, the gentleman from 
Florida (Mr. Young), does not mention Cuba developing bioweapons. And 
the July 18th statement of the administration policy issued by the 
White House, also no mention of bioweapons development in Cuba.
  Certainly, Mr. Speaker, Cuba has the capability to develop and 
manufacture such weapons. But, then again, so does every single country 
in the world that produces aspirin.
  The President has stated clearly that he wants no changes in the 
restrictions on Cuba; he supports the status quo. He has absolutely no 
incentive to certify, no incentive to prove or disprove the charges 
made against Cuba.
  The gentleman from Florida has crafted an amendment that he knows the 
administration has no intention of ever pursuing, let alone certifying. 
The amendment, if approved, overrides every other measure passed by 
Congress to lift the restrictions on travel to Cuba. Even if the Flake 
amendment once again passes overwhelmingly, it would not be able to go 
into effect.
  I wish the gentleman would have simply opposed the Flake amendment 
and let the chips fall where they may, because if you are serious about 
fighting terrorism, you do not go about it by adding more restrictions 
on the right of American to travel freely to Cuba.
  This amendment trivializes the war on terrorism. It accomplishes 
nothing. It is just the latest effort in a series of efforts to thwart 
the overwhelming will of the majority in both bodies to lift the 
restrictions that prohibit U.S. citizens from traveling to Cuba.
  This is not a debate, Mr. Chairman, about trusting Castro, it is 
about trusting the American people. I urge my colleagues in the 
strongest possible terms to oppose the Goss amendment.
  Mrs. EMERSON. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
  The CHAIRMAN. Without objection, the gentlewoman from Missouri is 
recognized for 5 minutes.
  There was no objection.
  Mrs. EMERSON. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the Goss 
amendment for one primary reason, and that is because its purpose is to 
undo what our colleague, the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Flake) will 
offer following this, and that is an amendment to end the travel ban to 
Cuba. First of all, I just want to go through a few points about this.
  Number one, a main premise, if we all remember, of American policy 
toward the former Soviet bloc that was enshrined in the 1975 Helsinki 
Accords was that travel restrictions should be ended. From the American 
perspective, the purpose was to expose closed societies to western 
influence.
  If, in fact, that was the premise then, it should be the premise 
today, and anything that would stop us, as the Goss amendment would do, 
would, in fact, not allow us to spread our values, our democratic 
society, to those people who desperately need it, those people in Cuba.
  Like many people, and any people who have lived under communism, 
Cubans want contact with the rest of the world and not isolation from 
it, and they do benefit materially from foreign visitors. Contact with 
foreigners brings information, news and foreign influence. It erodes 
the information monopoly that the government and the communist party 
attempt to maintain.
  In spite of what anyone will say, and having been on two occasions to 
Cuba, tourist dollars do reach the people directly. Think of Cuba's 
artisan markets, the bicycle taxies, the private taxies, the private 
restaurateurs, the thousands of Cubans who rent their rooms to 
tourists, this is the 4 percent of the Cuban workforce that is employed 
as private licensed entrepreneurs.
  No, it is not nearly enough, but it is a beginning. They live largely 
on the money tourists spend when visiting Cuba.
  Then there are the hotel and restaurant employees, who do earn tips, 
some directly, some because all employees in a hotel pool the tips and 
divide them. They get dollar wages, they get dollar bonus, but, most of 
all, they do get the money that Germans, Spaniards and French and all 
the other tourists to Cuba give them, perhaps under the table, but they 
do have this to supplement their income.
  Finally, tourist spending has a secondary impact. Cuba's farmer's 
markets and the private farmers who supply them, and all the small 
entrepreneurs prosper when tourism is up and artists, restaurateurs, 
taxi drivers, bellhops and chambermaids have disposable income. 
American tourism would make this entire Cuban private sector boom.
  I, quite frankly, do not understand what anybody is afraid of, why 
people are afraid for Americans to travel to Cuba. In my opinion, it 
would only help the Cuban people in the long run.
  Mr. BALLENGER. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
  The CHAIRMAN. Without objection, the gentleman from North Carolina is 
recognized for 5 minutes.
  There was no objection.
  Mr. BALLENGER. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the amendment 
offered by the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Goss). The chairman of the 
Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence is raising a reasonable 
point. In his amendment he is asking that before we lift the Treasury 
Department restrictions on travelers spending money in Cuba without a 
license, we should get some answers to some critical home security 
questions: Does Cuba have an offensive biological weapons capability? 
Is Cuba sharing dual use biotechnology with rogue states? Does Cuba 
harbor and support terrorists?
  Our administration has released statements approved by our 
intelligence community that say that our government believes the answer 
to the first two questions is yes. As for the third question, Cuba is 
on the State Department's list of state-sponsored terrorism.

                              {time}  1730

  We need to take a closer look at these potential threats to our 
citizens. That is what the Goss amendment does. It says to the 
President, look into this and certify to Congress whether these things 
are true. There are also some commonsense questions about Cuba's 
possible motives for developing biological weapons that we ought to be 
asking. Why is it that the government of this poor nation has poured 
many, many millions of dollars into developing a biotech industry? Can 
we really accept at face value Cuban claims that they are only pursuing 
medical research? Cuba has on numerous occasions over the years falsely 
accused the United States of deploying biological agents against Cuba. 
Could such paranoia motivate the regime in Havana to develop biological 
weapons? Since the Cuban regime says it fears a U.S. invasion, is it 
possible that such a perceived threat would motivate the Cubans to 
develop offensive biological weapons?
  I urge my colleagues to support the Goss amendment so Congress could 
get the answer to these questions.
  Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
  The CHAIRMAN. Without objection, the gentlewoman from Florida is 
recognized for 5 minutes.
  There was no objection.
  Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. Mr. Chairman, I rise to lend my strong and 
unequivocal support to the amendment offered by the distinguished 
gentleman from Florida (Mr. Goss), chairman of the House Permanent 
Select Committee on Intelligence.
  This is an amendment which seeks to protect our citizens from the 
imminent

[[Page H5269]]

threats emanating from a state sponsor of terrorism, a declared enemy 
of the United States in our own backyard. On Tuesday of just this week, 
President Bush presented his national strategy for homeland security, 
and in it he outlined what is the beginning of a long and difficult 
struggle to protect our Nation from the threat of terrorism. It 
establishes a foundation upon which to organize our efforts and it 
provides initial guidance to prioritize the work ahead, and two of the 
most important objectives include preventing terrorist attacks within 
the United States and reducing America's vulnerability to terrorism. 
The Goss amendment before us, Mr. Chairman, accomplishes just that.
  The Castro dictatorship, a totalitarian regime long known to be a 
safe haven for terrorists and a nerve center for international 
espionage, is a continuing and growing threat to our national security 
that we cannot afford to underestimate. We must be acutely aware of the 
reality that the closest foreign staging ground friendly to terrorist 
elements is a mere 90 miles from our borders.
  The Goss amendment recognizes the inherent danger posed by this 
dictatorship whose maniacal leader has pledged to ``bring America to 
its knees,'' a regime which along with other pariah states plays a 
critical role in abetting and facilitating terrorist operations, a 
regime with an expansive network of spies, equipment, and facilities 
that are targeting military, political, and economic information from 
and about the United States only so that they can share it with other 
terrorist nations. Without the provisions by rogue states such as Cuba 
of training facilities, sanctuary, financial support, safe havens and 
other passive forms of support, many terrorist groups would find it far 
more difficult to continue to operate.
  To reiterate, the Goss amendment acknowledges this reality and it 
implements steps to help us counter the threats stemming from a nation 
so close to our own. Further, it establishes a mechanism to address and 
protect our great Nation from a new wave of terrorism, one potentially 
involving the world's most destructive weapons. Our enemies are working 
to obtain chemical, biological, radiological, and nuclear weapons for 
the purposes of wreaking unprecedented damage on America. The Castro 
regime is no different, Mr. Chairman. Dr. Ken Alibek, the former head 
of the Soviet Biological Weapons program, has referenced in 
congressional testimony the existence of a center close to Havana 
involved in military biological technology. He asserts that the Castro 
regime has the capacity and the desire to develop such biological 
weapons. And the former director of research and development at Cuba's 
Center for Genetic Engineering and Biotechnology, Dr. Jose de la 
Fuente, has detailed the Castro regime's sales of technology to Iran 
which could be used to produce lethal agents like anthrax.
  The concerns are not new nor are they limited to the statements by 
Under Secretary John Bolton earlier this year. In 1997 a Defense 
Intelligence Agency report raised concerns about Cuba's potential for a 
biological weapons program. This is a very real possibility and one 
which the Goss amendment seeks to address. The Goss amendment is 
crucial to reducing our vulnerability to the threats posed by Cuba's 
terrorist regime, by requiring a presidential certification that the 
regime is not facilitating nor engaging in any of the following three 
fronts critical to our homeland security efforts. It requires proof 
that the Castro regime first does not possess and is not developing 
biological weapons.
  Do we not want that assertion that it does not provide terrorist 
states technology that could be used to produce, develop, or deliver 
biological weapons, do we not want such proof?
  And, lastly, the regime must state and the President must certify 
that it does not provide support or sanctuary to international 
terrorists.
  Mr. Chairman, following the deplorable acts of September 11, 
President Bush divided the world into two camps with a basic guiding 
principle, ``Either you are with us or you are with the terrorists.'' 
Ironically enough, today the United States is facing the same question 
and that is what the Goss amendment seeks to address today, and I urge 
my colleagues to adopt the Goss amendment.
  Mr. ROTHMAN. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
  The CHAIRMAN. Without objection, the gentleman from New Jersey is 
recognized for 5 minutes.
  There was no objection.
  Mr. ROTHMAN. Mr. Chairman, first let me thank the distinguished and 
honorable gentleman from Oklahoma (Mr. Istook) and the gentleman from 
Maryland (Mr. Hoyer), the ranking member, for all their work in 
crafting a bill that deserves all of our support. I am proud to serve 
with them on the Subcommittee on Treasury, Postal Service and General 
Government, and I thank them for their leadership.
  I come here this evening, however, to wholeheartedly support and 
endorse, and I ask my colleagues to support, the Goss amendment. In my 
opinion, the United States should not lift the travel ban to Cuba until 
several important conditions are met. Foremost on this list of 
conditions is the requirement that Cuba return convicted American 
fugitives now living in Cuba who have been given sanctuary in Cuba by 
the Castro government.
  My passion for this particular condition is rooted in the 74 cases of 
American fugitives from justice now living under Castro's protection in 
Cuba.
  Let me tell my colleagues about one of these fugitives from American 
justice. Joanne Chesimard, a convicted cop killer. On May 2, 1973, New 
Jersey State Troopers Werner Foerster and James Harper pulled over 
Joanne Chesimard and two of her companions in a routine traffic stop. A 
shoot-out began and Trooper Foerster, who had served on the force for 
less than 3 years, was shot and killed. Trooper Harper was wounded.
  A jury here in the United States of America, a jury found that 
Trooper Foerster had been shot in the back of his head, execution 
style, at point-blank range. The jury convicted Joanne Chesimard of 
murder and sentenced her to life in prison. But she escaped in 1979 
with the help of four accomplices when they took a prison guard 
hostage, a prison van was driven, and she was permitted to escape. She 
lived underground in America for 4 years until she found sanctuary in 
Castro's Cuba where she lives today, free, enjoying the protection of 
the Castro government.
  In addition to Joanne Chesimard, a convicted U.S. cop killer living 
in Castro's Cuba under his protection today, there are 73 other 
fugitives living under Castro's protection in Cuba, including Victor 
Manuel Gerena, an armed robber and a member of a terrorist group who 
has carried out bombings of U.S. military and civilian targets and is a 
member of the FBI's 10 Most Wanted List, as well as Michael Robert 
Finney and Charles Hill, who are wanted for the murder of New Mexico 
State Police Officer Robert Rosenblum.
  Mr. Chairman, the United States of America should not allow Fidel 
Castro, Cuba's dictator for the last 43 years, to enjoy the financial 
benefits of America's tourism until he returns Joanne Chesimard, the 
convicted cop killer, and until he returns the other 73 fugitives from 
American justice.
  It is only fair, it is only right. What do we say to the widow of 
Werner Foerster and his child? What do we say to all of the other 
victims of terror, American victims of terror and their children and 
their relatives if we do not seek justice for the fugitives given 
sanctuary by Castro today in Cuba?
  If we simply remove the travel ban without any regard to these 
fugitives now under Castro's control, we say to any terrorist who would 
kill a United States trooper, State trooper or any other first 
responder, we would say to those terrorists, those murderers, it is 
okay, you can escape American justice, even if you are caught and 
convicted by a U.S. jury, if you can escape to Cuba. That is wrong, I 
say to my colleagues. We should not allow travel to Cuba until Castro 
returns the 74 fugitives from American justice.
  Mr. Chairman, I support the Goss amendment, and I ask all of my 
colleagues to do so.
  Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. ROTHMAN. I yield to the gentleman from Massachusetts.
  Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Chairman, I would simply say to the gentleman

[[Page H5270]]

that I agree with him that we need to bring fugitives who have 
committed crimes in this country to justice, not only in Cuba, but in 
other countries, including some of our allies who we do not have 
extradition treaties with. Perhaps the gentleman would urge the United 
States to try to negotiate an extradition treaty with Cuba in order to 
get those fugitives back to the United States where they can stand 
trial, rather than deny U.S. citizens freedom.
  Mr. ROTHMAN. Mr. Chairman, reclaiming my time, I would do what the 
gentleman suggests, but I am not going to before that allow Castro to 
have the benefits of tourism from the United States until he returns 
these cop-killers and 74 fugitives back to the United States.
  Mr. COX. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word, and I rise in 
strong support of the Goss amendment.
  The CHAIRMAN. Without objection, the gentleman from California is 
recognized for 5 minutes.
  There was no objection.
  Mr. COX. Mr. Chairman, very shortly, we will see the anniversary of 
September 11. At this point, reflecting back on the events of last 
year, we can take comfort that the entire civilized world has joined us 
in condemning the acts of terrorism committed here in Washington, in 
New York, and in Pennsylvania. Nowhere has this support for our war on 
terrorism been stronger than in our own hemisphere where the leaders of 
every nation have joined in our fight; all, that is, except one, 
because the Castro regime does not support the war on terrorism.
  President Bush asked the leaders of the civilized world to declare 
themselves with us or against us, but the Castro regime has made it 
very clear that they oppose the war on terrorism.
  According to Secretary of State Colin Powell and Secretary of the 
Treasury Paul O'Neill, in an extraordinary joint letter to Congress: 
``The Cuban government has refused to cooperate with the global 
coalition's efforts to combat terrorism, refusing to provide 
information about al Qaeda.''
  ``On June 8, 2002,'' and I am still quoting from this letter from the 
Secretary of State and the Secretary of the Treasury, in an 
extraordinary joint letter to Congress, ``On June 8, 2002, Castro 
compared the U.S. campaign against terrorism with Hitler's Third Reich. 
Castro said, 'What is the difference between America's antiterrorism 
philosophy and those of the Nazis?'"
  It does not end there. Cuba is working with the government of Iran 
and Ayatollah Ali Khamenei to undermine America. In a meeting with 
Khamenei last year, Castro said that in cooperation with each other, 
Iran and Cuba can destroy America. He added that, ``The United States 
regime is very weak and we are witnessing this weakness from close 
up.''
  Senior State Department officials have discussed publicly the threat 
of Cuba's bioterrorism program.

                              {time}  1745

  As we rush to protect our citizens from small pox and anthrax, Castro 
is diverting the resources of his desperately poor economy to offensive 
biological warfare research and development. And he is selling bio-
technology to other rogue states. Even more than with al Qaeda 
terrorists based in Afghanistan, Pakistan, or Somalia, Cuba's 
geographic proximity to the United States offers Castro's agents 
opportunities to gain access to U.S. territory and to our critical 
infrastructure.
  In this connection, the current regulations on U.S.-Cuba travel are a 
crucial tool for law enforcement to prevent the use of bio-weapons 
against the American people.
  Today we will vote on legislation to lift aspects of the embargo on 
Cuba. The Goss amendment will only take effect if this Chamber votes to 
do so. It requires a Presidential precertification to Congress before 
such a new law would take effect of three things: first, that Cuba does 
not possess and is not developing biological weapons that threaten the 
homeland security of the United States; second, that Cuba is not 
providing to terrorist states or terrorist organizations technology 
that could be used to produce, develop or deliver biological weapons; 
and, third, that Cuba is not providing support or sanctuary to 
international terrorists.
  These are exceedingly reasonable and vitally important questions to 
have answered. And if President Bush cannot give Cuba a clean bill of 
health on these three questions, then, lifting any aspect of the 
embargo must be dependent upon Castro's beginning to change these 
practices.
  The embargo and the promise of lifting it provides the necessary 
leverage for the President to achieve our antiterror objectives. If 
Congress were to give the Castro regime the trade and tourism dollars 
they now seek without any reform in exchange, we would simultaneously 
undermine U.S. policy and subsidize our hemisphere's most notorious 
state sponsor of terrorism. Castro, for his part, would use any easing 
of the embargo to redouble his efforts to undermine America and to 
tighten his grip over the Cuban people, but we must not give him that 
chance.
  As we continue to wage the war on terrorism, now is the time to fully 
support President Bush by giving him the tools he needs to win. I urge 
my colleagues to vote ``aye'' on the Goss amendment.
  Mr. FARR of California. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
  The CHAIRMAN. Without objection, the gentleman from California is 
recognized for 5 minutes.
  There was no objection.
  Mr. FARR of California. Mr. Chairman, I appreciate being recognized.
  Let me ask Members to consider what this amendment is about. It is 
not about terrorism. It is about trying to destroy the amendment that 
the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Flake) will offer that will allow 
Americans to travel to Cuba. Yes, this amendment coats itself in words 
about terrorism, but if it were serious you would not allow Canada to 
send all of their people to Cuba because of terrorism; you would not 
allow the European allies that are helping us send all of their folks 
to Cuba. In fact, what this amendments says is that travel to Cuba 
shall apply only after the President has certified to Congress that the 
Cuban Government does not possess and is not developing a biological 
weapons programs that threatens the homeland security of the United 
States.
  The President cannot certify that about our own country. Where did 
the anthrax come from?
  We allow our tourists to go to China. We could not certify these 
things about China. We allow our tourists to go to North Korea, and we 
could not certify these things about North Korea. We allow our own 
tourists to go to Iran, and we certainly could not certify these things 
about Iran. This is an issue to kill the Flake amendment.
  The only wise thing to do if you really want the ability of Americans 
to sell the American message, to sell what it is about America that we 
love and possess is to allow Americans travel to a tiny little island 
with 11 million people.
  We are asking the question in the Middle East, Why do they hate us? 
What do you think the Cuban people are asking? Why do the Americans 
hate us so much that they will not allow their own people to come here 
to our country?
  If we want to prohibit Americans from traveling to Cuba, then we 
ought to support the Goss amendment. But if you really think after 40 
years of failed policy we ought to try something different, then you 
ought to join me in defeating the Goss amendment.
  Mr. CUNNINGHAM. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
  The CHAIRMAN. Without objection, the gentleman from California is 
recognized for 5 minutes.
  There was no objection.
  Mr. CUNNINGHAM. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of the Goss 
amendment. The sanctions on Cuba remind me of the people that want to 
lift those sanctions as the turtle and the snake story. A snake came up 
to the river and could not swim across it. So he asked the turtle, 
Please let me climb on your back and take me cross the river. And the 
turtle said, I cannot do that because when I get on the other side, you 
will sink your fangs into me put venom into me and kill me. The snake 
said, Trust me. I will not do that. So the turtle says, Hop on my back. 
And the turtle takes the snake across and just as they get to the other 
side, the snake sink his fangs into the turtle and envenomates him. The 
turtle said, But you gave me your word

[[Page H5271]]

that you would not bite me, you would not kill me. And the snake turned 
to the turtle and said, I do not know what you are complaining about, 
you knew it was in my nature.
  This is in Castro's nature. Have we forgot about Che Guevara? Have we 
forgot about Angola? Have we forgot about the MIAs and the prisoners of 
war that died under his henchmen, his interrogators in Vietnam? I 
remember that. And until those people are brought to justice, the 74 
people that Castro is harboring that are cop killers, and we are even 
conceiving of lifting the embargo on Castro. It is amazing.
  There is documented evidence that Castro works with terrorist 
organizations and groups. Iran, with a recent visit, biological 
warfare; and we are considering raising these sanctions? Remember the 
Bay of Pigs? You do not think he would not put missiles there and use 
them on us?
  Think who Castro is. Look at the history of this man and you want to 
allow the snake to climb on the United States' back and trust him? I 
cannot do that. It is wrong.
  I look at Elian Gonzalez. Maybe if you are Janet Reno this would be 
okay; but to me and those who have fought for this country, to allow 
someone that in every case in every place, when I was in the United 
States Navy when we would go when Cuba was getting money from Russia, 
we would have Cuban advisors there, Cubans in Vietnam, Cubans in 
Angola, Cubans in every place that the United States were going to go, 
ready to kill Americans, and you want to lift the embargo? It is beyond 
comprehension.
  I guess the best thing is the President will veto it. Maybe you are 
trying to make a political issue, but the President is going to veto 
this if it goes in. But Cuba is the only nation in the hemisphere where 
political activity of all kinds is a crime. Take a look at what this 
man is. And you are trying to raise those sanctions? Do not let him on 
our backs. I support the Goss amendment.
  Mr. NETHERCUTT. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
  The CHAIRMAN. Without objection, the gentleman from Washington is 
recognized for 5 minutes.
  There was no objection.
  Mr. NETHERCUTT. Mr. Chairman, I have listened to part of this debate 
today and find it interesting. This subject is fascinating to me, and I 
have great respect for people on both sides of the issue.
  What strikes me in this amendment is that we are debating not the 
future of the United States' relationship with Cuba, but we are trying, 
it seems to me by this amendment, to restrict that future and the 
potential for it. It is couched in terms of bio-terrorism and chemical 
warfare, but it is an inconsistent argument because if you look at the 
history of the United States and its relations with other countries of 
the world who have had terrorist tendencies, terrorist records, we only 
need look to the places like the Soviet Union and China with which we 
normalized relations, an opening of a relationship, an opening years 
and years ago that led to a relationship of civility and some respect 
mutually, some relationship, in fact, rather than isolation.
  That is why I urge my colleagues today to think carefully about this 
issue of this Goss amendment. The gentleman from Florida (Mr. Goss) is 
a strong figure in this House of Representatives. I have great respect 
for him. I also feel the same way about the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. 
Flake), whose approach to change this policy in his amendment really, 
it seems to me, is being thwarted by a secondary amendment that has a 
purpose that should not be the one we focus on today. The focus ought 
to be, in my judgment, the relationship between the United States and 
Cuba post-Castro.
  I will stand with everyone here in condemning the regime of Fidel 
Castro, but I will stand with a lot of people in this Chamber who 
support the 11 million people and the potential relationship we could 
have with them if we have a change in policy.
  This policy has not worked. Castro has not yielded to the embargo 
that has existed for all these years. And so my sense is that as we 
open the door to trade, the door to a relationship through food and 
medicine which occurred here a couple of years ago with broad 
bipartisan support, that has opened the door to a future relationship 
which I think has merit, not as it relates to Castro certainly, but as 
it relates to the Cuban people.
  When we engaged with the Soviet Union years and years ago, it led to 
a relationship that has been one of mutual discussion and 
consideration, not isolation. We never in all the years of Soviet Union 
ownership of weaponry, of terrorist activity, of spying, of all of 
those things that we object to in a free society, we never restricted 
the travel there.
  In China, people travel there regularly now. There are 13 categories 
of travel that exist today for people of the United States to go to 
Cuba. And most of the proponents of the restrictive amendment, I would 
argue, have never been to Cuba, have never had a chance to talk with 
any of the people there on that soil and get a sense of what the future 
potential is for a relationship.
  I want to let my colleagues know that the American Farm Bureau 
Federation strongly supports the Flake amendment, strongly opposes the 
Goss amendment for reasons that our American agriculture sector has a 
huge potential, I believe, to do business with Cuba, that is, take 
Castro's money, take the government of Cuba's money and provide food 
and medicine for the people of Cuba, to assist them.
  So I urge us to think beyond just the issue of terrorism that I 
happen to feel is something of a pretext here to frustrate the Flake 
amendment and think carefully about the future relationship. Think 
carefully about whether we are harming the potential future 
relationship for helping it, as we look at the 11 million people who 
are in Cuba who yearn to be free, I would argue. And I think only by 
opening your relationship, having communication, letting them 
understand that America should not be the scape goat of Fidel Castro. 
It is a convenient scape goat for him, this embargo. He must love it 
because it allows him to rail against the United States when, in fact, 
probably his worst nightmare would be if we lifted the opportunity to 
travel and flooded the people of Cuba with exposure to democracy and 
freedom. That would be his worst nightmare.
  So I would just say to my friends, this is a highly emotional debate 
for a lot of people. People feel very strongly about this issue, but I 
would urge we reject the Goss amendment and support the Flake 
amendment.

                              {time}  1800

  Mr. DELAHUNT. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
  The CHAIRMAN. Without objection, the gentleman from Massachusetts 
(Mr. Delahunt) is recognized for 5 minutes.
  There was no objection.
  Mr. DELAHUNT. Mr. Chairman, I know some of my friends on the other 
side are concerned about or they have expressed their fears about 
bioweapons and bioterrorism, but I think I should point out that 
General Gary Spear who is the commander of the U.S. Southern Command 
said just recently in a New York Times article that he knows of no 
evidence that Cuba is producing biological weapons from biomedical 
research programs.
  Then, of course, we have the individual who should know, the 
Assistant Secretary of State for Intelligence and Research who 
testified recently before a Senate committee, Mr. Ford, Secretary Ford. 
In a response to a question from a Senator, he said, ``Do I go home 
every night and worry about it? No.'' He also said that Cuba is far 
from the number one concern of the people in our government who monitor 
chemical and biological weapon threats.
  So I would hope that their fears would be somewhat alleviated, but we 
have an amendment before us that would, in effect, continue to subvert 
the constitutional right of Americans to travel by requiring a brand 
new presidential certification that applies to no other country but 
Cuba.
  For example, it would not apply to China, where just recently nine 
Chinese companies, presumably owned by the People's Army, sold goods 
and technology to Iran, where they were used for conventional and 
chemical weapons programs, but no need for certification when it comes 
to China. In fact, recent reports indicate that the United States is 
contemplating an expansion of our military ties with that

[[Page H5272]]

Communist government, but certification of Cuba, of course.
  Some might suggest that not only is this inconsistent but 
hypocritical. While on the subject of Iran, I think it was the 
gentleman from California (Mr. Cox) that talked about Iran, and 
remember, that is one of the originals in the axis of evil, but no need 
for certification there either.
  This amendment does not mention Iran, and in case my colleagues did 
not know, Americans can travel to Iran today without a license. 
Supposedly we are worried about Iran and its support for terrorist 
organizations like Hamas and Hezbollah. In fact, our own State 
Department recently announced that Iran remained the most active State 
sponsor of terrorism in 2001, but there is no certification for Iran in 
this amendment.
  Again, some might suggest that this is hypocrisy, and then what about 
North Korea, the other in the troika of the axis of evil. Surely one 
would believe that this amendment would include North Korea in its 
certification requirements, especially since there is no U.S. policy 
prohibiting travel to North Korea if an American citizen wants to 
exercise his or her constitutional right. Furthermore, we have an 
agreement with North Korea where we give them hundreds of millions of 
dollars of aid annually for not pursuing a nuclear weapons effort. I 
bet the Cubans would love that deal. The North Koreans are not included 
in this amendment. Inconsistent, hypocritical, I do not know.
  Then, of course, one might expect that there would be a certification 
requirement in this amendment for Saudi Arabia, since 15 of the 19 
hijackers who were responsible for the death of more than 3,000 
Americans on September 11 were Saudi citizens. Of course, there appears 
to be compelling evidence that Saudi money went to support the 
extremist religious schools, the so-called madrassas that are a 
breeding nest for terrorists, but no, they are not included either, 
despite being one of the most oppressive regimes on the planet. Maybe, 
just maybe, if Cuba had a few massive oil reserves, this amendment 
would not be before us.
  Again, I think it opens us to charges of inconsistency at best and 
hypocrisy at worst. We could discuss other nations, Syria, Sudan, both 
of which Secretary Bolton said may be pursuing biological weapons, but 
I think my colleagues get the picture.
  This amendment makes no sense. It does not pass the smell test. It is 
not about terrorism or foreign policy. It is about domestic politics, 
and it deserves to be defeated.
  Mr. HYDE. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
  The CHAIRMAN. Without objection, the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. 
Hyde) is recognized for 5 minutes.
  There was no objection.
  (Mr. HYDE asked and was given permission to revise and extend his 
remarks.)
  Mr. HYDE. Mr. Chairman, I listened to the speeches, impassioned on 
both sides, and they are very instructive. Someone mentioned 11 million 
Cubans yearning to be free. The only advice I would give them is do not 
get in a boat and try to get out into the ocean because they will get 
shot alive.
  I have heard comparisons of our attitude toward China and my 
colleagues are perfectly right. It is very inconsistent. China is so 
big, it is like when banks go bankrupt. It is too big to fail. Our 
attitude towards China is one that I have difficulty supporting because 
of their human rights, but that does not, in any way, diminish the 
offensiveness of the Castro regime.
  A friend of mine, he is deceased now, Vernon Walters, had a great 
description of Cuba. He said it is the biggest country in the world. 
Its administration is in Havana, but its government is in Moscow; its 
army is in Africa; and its population is in Miami. That is not true 
anymore, but it is a good line, and I would like to revisit it.
  On this bill, a country that cannot recognize its enemy is in great 
difficulty, and Cuba, under the Castro regime, is certainly our enemy. 
What does this simple amendment do? It says the President has to 
certify that Cuba is not developing biological weapons. Does anyone 
think it is a healthy state to have an avowed Marxist enemy of the 
United States developing biological weapons; is not providing state 
sponsors of terrorism or terrorist organizations with technology to 
create biological weapons, and is not providing sanctuary of 
international terrorists?
  Listen, he is the last Communist dictator in our hemisphere, one of 
the few left in the world, including China, and he is an outlaw. He 
ought to be treated as an outlaw.
  Earlier this year, the State Department publicly released 
unclassified information cleared by our intelligence community, and let 
me quote it. ``The United States believes that Cuba has at least a 
limited, developmental, offensive biological warfare research and 
development effort. Cuba has provided dual use biotechnology to rogue 
states. We are concerned that such technology could support biological 
warfare programs in those States.''
  The State Department has repeatedly designated Cuba as a State 
sponsor of terrorism. Cuba harbors fugitives from the Basque terrorist 
group ETA. Cuba also harbors fugitives from U.S. justice, including 
people who have murdered American police officers. Cuba harbors members 
of the FALN-Macheteros terrorist organization.
  They are not a friendly country. They hate America and there is no 
reason for us to embrace them and to have them point and say, well, we 
outlasted you, you are out of breath and so you are surrendering.
  I think Mr. Castro deserves to be treated as an outcast. We are 
treating him as such, and if we just persist, sooner or later he will 
leave. It is Cuba that must change its policy. He could do that if he 
wanted to. He is an enemy and he should be isolated as one. The 
gentleman from Florida (Mr. Goss) knows what he is talking about. He is 
chairman of the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, and I put 
my trust in him.
  Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
  The CHAIRMAN. Without objection, the gentleman from Oregon (Mr. 
Blumenauer) is recognized for 5 minutes.
  There was no objection.
  Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Chairman, this afternoon's debate is not about 
American security or about support for Castro's regime. It is not even 
about business opportunities that may avail should we change our failed 
policy. This afternoon's debate is about an attempt to continue to 
extend this failed policy from the last 42 years.
  We have heard people come forward already this afternoon, making the 
point that it is really hard to argue that Cuba is a serious threat to 
United States security. It has not been named as a state that possesses 
biological or chemical weapons. It was not mentioned in the State 
Department's 2000 report of the worrisome states pursuing or possessing 
biological or chemical weapons.
  Despite all the recent hoopla regarding Under Secretary of State John 
Bolton's notion of Cuba being a bioterrorist threat, the State 
Department's been sort of backing away from that ever since. No, even 
if that were, in fact, the case, Mr. Chairman, what we have before us 
here this evening is that there is really no cause and effect between 
what is purported in terms of terrorism and what is before us to vote 
upon.
  As has been mentioned, we allow Americans to travel to China, to 
Vietnam, to the axis of evil in Iran and North Korea, which I think 
many people feel do pose real threats, but we are not coming forward 
with that. In fact, we would be coming forward with a certification 
process that cannot be done as has been referenced by my colleague from 
California for this country, as well as many other countries where we 
permit travel. It is very likely to be an intensely political decision 
given the nature of domestic politics.
  Mr. Chairman, it is time to free America from the shackles of this 
failed policy, but most important, it is not about trying to have 
Americans there to change practices in Cuba. Although, I truly believe 
that by having the free flow of people in and out of Cuba, that it will 
hasten the day that there is a change in the Cuban regime.
  People here on this floor ought to be outraged with the interference 
with the American's constitutional right to travel. Former Supreme 
Court Justice Douglas said the ``freedom of movement is the very 
essence of our free society, setting us apart. It often makes all other 
rights meaningful.''

[[Page H5273]]

  Americans have the right to travel the world, to make their own 
judgments, whether it is in Burma, in China, Iran or North Korea. It is 
high time that we stop the tyranny of domestic policy that is 
interfering with the rights of Americans to be able to travel to Cuba 
as they see fit, to make their own judgments and, incidentally, hasten 
the demise of that regime.
  I strongly urge the rejection of this amendment, and as we have the 
proposals that come forward later in the evening from the gentleman 
from Arizona (Mr. Flake), that would move us incrementally towards a 
sense of rationality, I strongly urge support for them as well.

                              {time}  1815

  Mr. DeLAY. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
  The CHAIRMAN. Without objection, the gentleman from Texas is 
recognized for 5 minutes.
  There was no objection.
  Mr. DeLAY. Mr. Chairman, while Members may disagree about the impact 
that increased trade and unrestricted tourism could potentially play in 
reforming Castro's ruling regime, there is overwhelming opposition to 
any action that would compromise the war against terror.
  We have ample reason to suspect that Castro is developing weapons of 
mass destruction. America cannot allow a hostile regime just 90 miles 
from our shores to develop the world's most dangerous weapons. That is 
the difference between Cuba and China. That is the difference between 
Cuba and North Korea. Ninety miles. For that reason, we must completely 
be confident that Castro's regime is not either producing biological 
weapons or supporting terrorist organizations before any steps to relax 
the embargo are contemplated.
  Castro's Cuba has a long track record of hostility towards the United 
States, and freedom in general. Castro has long given refuge to 
terrorists and violent fugitives, and the Goss amendment raises a 
firewall between American tourism and Cuban biological weapons 
development and support for terrorist organizations.
  Castro's regime is a threat to our national security and a source of 
daily oppression to the Cuban people. Cuba has sponsored, trained, and 
directed terrorist groups operating in our hemisphere. History proves 
it. Cuban officials regularly collaborate with other state sponsors of 
terrorism. Just last year, Castro visited Libya, Syria and Iran, saying 
in Tehran, ``Iran and Cuba, in cooperation with each other, can bring 
America to its knees.''
  Cuban intelligence seeks to penetrate our Defense Department. A Cuban 
spy in the Defense Intelligence Agency, just discovered after September 
11, could have passed valuable information on American tactics and 
methods to hostile regimes through Castro's government and endangered 
our soldiers.
  A Cuban spy cell, the so-called ``Wasp Network,'' targeted our 
southern command and passed on information leading to the downing of a 
Brothers to the Rescue plane with Cuban migs.
  Despite U.S. appeals, Cuba has done nothing to cooperate in the war 
against terrorism. The State Department reports that Cuba has not 
turned over a single piece of useful information on al Qaeda and the 
terrorism networks. Castro and Cuban officials frequently attack the 
war on terror as American aggression. On June 8, just last month, 
Castro asked, ``What is the difference between the American war on 
terror's philosophy and methods, and those of the Nazis?''
  We know that Cuba has been working to develop weapons of mass 
destruction for years. Under Secretary of State John Bolton recently 
testified that the United States believes that Cuba has at least a 
limited developmental biological warfare research and development 
effort.
  The Goss amendment protects our national security by shielding 
funding for travel ban enforcement unless the President first certifies 
that the Cuban Government does not threaten our homeland security. 
Specifically, the President must make three very critical 
determinations that make good common sense:
  First, Cuba does not possess and is not developing a biological 
weapons program; second, Cuba is not providing terrorist states or 
terrorist organizations with the technology to build or use bioweapons; 
and, third, Cuba is not providing support for our or sanctuary to 
international terrorists. Very simple, straightforward commonsense 
approaches.
  Two generations ago, President Kennedy called Castro's Cuba ``the 
unhappy island.'' Four decades later, life for the Cuban people has 
only gotten worse under Fidel Castro's brutality. They are stripped of 
basic human rights, they are denied political rights, and they are 
deprived of the hope to improve their lives because Cuba still has not 
joined the 21st century.
  We should never stop working to bring freedom to Cuba. But until we 
can be certain that Cuba poses no threat to our national security, 
Congress should take no step that inadvertently strengthens the Castro 
regime and compromises our campaign against terror. Members should 
support the Goss amendment because it will ensure that the price of 
Cuban tourism will not eventually be measured in American lives.
  Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Mr. Chairman, I move that the Committee do now 
rise.
  The motion was agreed to.
  Accordingly, the Committee rose; and the Speaker pro tempore (Mr. 
Walden of Oregon) having assumed the chair, Mr. Dreier, Chairman of the 
Committee of the Whole House on the State of the Union, reported that 
that Committee, having had under consideration the bill (H.R. 5120) 
making appropriations for the Treasury Department, the United States 
Postal Service, the Executive Office of the President, and certain 
Independent Agencies, for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2003, 
and for other purposes, had come to no resolution thereon.

                          ____________________