Congressional Record, Volume 148 Issue 101 (Tuesday, July 23, 2002)

[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.

____________________