Floor Statements

Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on the subject of this Special Order.

Madam Speaker, I rise tonight to highlight an important

issue that has been the topic of much discussion across the country, Social Security. The Republicans in Congress have joined together to form teams to highlight important issues facing our Nation today, and I am proud to serve as the chairman of the Retirement Security team and to be joined by a number of my colleagues to discuss this important topic tonight.

First, I would like to invite the gentlewoman from Tennessee (Mrs. Blackburn), my colleague, to share with us some of her perspectives on Social Security and how we address those challenges.

Madam Speaker, I want to thank the gentlewoman from Tennessee (Mrs. Blackburn) who has been such a leader in our conference and is so eager to participate in this conversation.

There is a lot of misinformation about Social Security that is being promulgated across this country, but I think the most important facts that we can share with our constituents is that of every program and every idea that has been put forward, nobody wants to change anything for today's seniors, and there is a good reason for that.

For today's seniors, there are enough workers in the system that their Social Security check is protected. They are going to be fine. For those people that are about to retire, there are enough workers and enough money in the system to protect them. But for younger workers who are going to bear the responsibility for those who retire before them, there will not be enough workers to provide for their Social Security check. So what we want is to allow younger workers to begin to build their own nest egg so they can prepare for their own retirement as they shoulder the responsibility for those that retire before them.

Madam Speaker, I welcome the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Chocola) and thank the gentleman for being part of this discussion tonight. I know the gentleman is involved in talking about Social Security in his community. Please discuss some of what you hear and some of the misconceptions.

Madam Speaker, that is very reflective of the numbers in my district. There were about 2,000 inside listening to the President. There were a number of organizations that tried to stir up a lot of activity outside to protest. There were about 100 people outside protesting.

That morning AARP had held their own roundtable, their own town hall meeting in order to share why they thought the President was wrong on this issue. They of course have massive organization, a huge mailing list, and they actually got 40 people to their town hall meeting. So I think people know that the organizations that are saying there is no problem and we should not be doing anything about it, whether it is to seniors as in seniors that are retired or seniors as in seniors in college that might be found on the Notre Dame campus, both of those groups are eager to talk about it and be part of the discussion.

Madam Speaker, sometimes I use the analogy of the American family. Adults in that family come home from work, and from every single paycheck if they put $100 in a cookie jar for their children's college education, and then they borrow to buy a car, buy clothes, go on vacation, whatever they used it for, when the child is 18, they would have a cookie jar full of IOUs. And there is still the bill for the college tuition and no money in the cookie jar. That is essentially what has happened.

Social Security was a pay-as-you-go system. Whatever came in, whether it was taken out as part of your payroll tax or part of your income tax or part of your FICA, it went into the general treasury. Those dollars paid old age benefits and paid for services that the government provided.

So none of the dollars have been saved. Maybe many of us wish, especially those of us about to retire, wish this was not a tough or impending crisis, wish back when it was established in 1945 and subsequently that they had truly put the money aside in a trust fund and it had been earning interest. But that was not done back then and it has not been done, and so we need to wrestle with the facts.

We have some good ideas. We have some ideas that will make this a good system that will be there for our children. We know it will be there for our moms and dads. My mom is 82. Obviously, I want to make sure that everything is fine for her. And I want to make sure that for those about to retire, the trust they have had in the system that they be reassured that their benefits are secure.

But when we talk about it as a crisis, I will use another analogy and say it is like jumping off an 80-story building. As you pass the 40th floor, you can say, well, nothing bad has happened yet, but clearly intervention is needed. And intervention is needed today in Social Security.

It is amazing that people talk about this being a risky solution when, in fact, the riskiest thing we could do is to do nothing. The fact is that as we wait, each year it grows worse. In fact, right now because Social Security is bringing in a surplus, we still have a few years left where we could use those dollars to help fund a transition. For every year we wait, we lose one of these years that we are in surplus and we pick up at the other end of the 75-year spectrum that we are looking at, a year where we have $600 billion of additional unfunded liability. So we not only give a year of transition up, we gain a year where we have huge, impossible-to-meet deficits and unfunded liabilities.

I came to the House 8 years ago. There has not ever been a leader in the White House and certainly resolving this problem is going to take all the leadership potential that we have in this country and we need the White House. There has never been a leader in the White House that was willing to roll up their sleeves and to say, Let's work our way through this, let's bring everybody to the table, let's put all the ideas on the table and certainly a solution is going to take multiple ideas and maybe more than just one idea, personalized accounts or whatever. But if we had done this right when I first came to Congress back in 1996, before I understood how serious and how quickly the situation was deteriorating for future generations, I think if we had addressed the problem then, we would have gotten 8 more years of surpluses and certainly those surpluses before we had the war on terror, before we had some of the other challenges, and we would not be where we are today if we had addressed those. And so to wait even one more year is going to make the situation more costly, more difficult, we are going to lose a year of surplus that could help finance this transition. That looks like a crisis to me.

We know that we could not possibly tax our way out of these problems, we could not raise taxes enough and have a viable economy left if we tried to solve the Social Security problem with tax increases. We can look across the ocean to economies, for example, France where they did not address the Social Security problem, the Social Security challenge that they have there and because now the cost of those senior survivor benefits are so high in France, their economy is crumbling under the weight of those costs. In fact, no matter what solution we have, we depend on growth in this economy to fund the transition. And so we have to have two things. We have to have a plan to save and strengthen Social Security for our children. It is safe for today's seniors but for our children, to make it safe and secure and solvent for them, and we need a growing economy so that they can have those good jobs, so that they can build the personal accounts while they meet the Social Security needs for those that were in the workforce before them. And so growth and a new plan to enhance the Social Security for future generations are both needed. We cannot trade a growing economy in order to strengthen Social Security, because raising taxes would have a chilling effect on our economy and at the same time it would only be a very short-term fix.

I think these conversations, conversations with the American people, conversations with our constituents when we go back home and conversations between each other are helping us grow to better understand, better analyze the problem and to put forth good ideas. I am excited about the ideas that are being put forth. They are not scary to me. They are exciting.

I yield to the gentleman from Indiana to share with us his closing thoughts.

Mr. Speaker, I move that the House do now adjourn.

The motion was agreed to; accordingly (at midnight), the House adjourned until today, Thursday, March 17, 2005, at 10 a.m.

Mr. Speaker, I would to recognize the recent accreditation of the Louisville Zoological Gardens by the American Association of Museums (AAM) which was awarded for the excellence of its animal, botanical and non-living collections. Accreditation

by the AAM is the highest honor a museum can receive and is a testament to the professionalism and the public service provided to my community and the nation by the Louisville Zoo.

Founded in 1969, the Louisville Zoo has made tremendous strides to become one of the nation's premier botanical and zoological facilities. To achieve its mission of educating the public about the wonders of animal and plant life and raising awareness for wildlife conservation, the zoo currently has over 1,300 animals exhibited in beautiful natural settings, including some of the rarest species found on the planet. It offers state-of-the-art animal care and award-winning exhibits that educate residents and visitors of all ages. Almost 800,000 people visit the Louisville Zoo each year.

In 1980, the Louisville Zoo obtained its first major professional recognition when it received accreditation by the American Association of Zoos and Aquariums (AZA). In 2003, the AZA presented its Exhibit Award to the Louisville Zoo for outstanding commitment to conservation in the construction of its new, four-acre Gorilla Forest exhibit space which so closely replicated the natural habitats for the gorilla.

Accreditation by the American Association of Museums is a major accomplishment for the Louisville Zoo. It signifies excellence within the museum community and is recognition of the ethical and professional practices employed by the organization.

The process for accreditation is difficult and intensive. Over the period of three years, the Louisville Zoo underwent a thorough self- evaluation, a total audit of all collections, an accounting of business and operating procedures and a review of the procedures and protocols that govern the tasks of plant and animal management. After all this was done, a team of museum association peers conducted an on-site inspection.

As a result of this rigorous review process, very few museums have received this recognition. Only 750 of the Nation's 16,000 museums, or less than 5 percent, are currently accredited and the Louisville Zoo is one of only four institutions in the Commonwealth of Kentucky to receive this honor.

Mr. Speaker, Louisvillians are proud of the achievements of the Louisville Zoo and appreciate the contributions it has made to our community. Recognition by the AAM confirms what Louisville residents have known all along: that the Louisville Zoo provides a first-class experience and education to students and animal lovers of all ages, and it will continue to do so for many years to come. I would like to offer my heartfelt congratulations to all of the Louisville Zoo's staff for this most recent honor.

Mr. Speaker, due to a death in my family, I was unable to participate in today's votes. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yea'' on all four of today's recorded votes.

Mr. Speaker, due to a death in my family, I was unable to participate in today's votes. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yea'' on both of today's recorded votes.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize the 150th anniversary of the Louisville Board of Independent Insurance Agents.

The story of the Louisville Board began on February 15, 1854 when a dozen of the city's leading insurance officials met to organize the Board of Underwriters. The organization's first constitution stated that it was formed

in view of the benefits resulting from uniformity in the

rates of insurance, in the conditions under which insurances

should be made, in the principles and practices of adjusting

losses, and in view also of elevating the character of

insurance transactions. . . .

In 1858, the Louisville Board presented the city of Louisville with its first steam-powered fire engine. At a cost of $5,000, the money to purchase the fire engine was donated from insurance companies and local merchants.

In 1896, Louisville Board members played a prominent role in the creation of a state insurance association within Kentucky. This organization still operates today as the Independent Insurance Agents of Kentucky. Additionally, Louisville Board members played an instrumental role in the creation of a national agents' association.

In 1951, the Louisville Board inaugurated a series of monthly luncheon forums, which continue to this day.

Mr. Speaker, the Louisville Board has been a valued partner in our community for the past 150 years. I congratulate them on a historic anniversary and wish them continued success in the future.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize Hilliard Lyons' 150th anniversary. During 2004 this respected investment firm completed its 150th year of doing business in Louisville, Kentucky.

The Hilliard Lyons story began in 1854 with the creation of the firm Quigley and Lyons. The Civil War split the partnership but Henry J. Lyons continued the business. The business grew and Lyons bought a seat on the New York Stock Exchange in 1878. During the same time period, John James Byron Hilliard entered the banking business under the name J.J.B. Hilliard & Son.

As Louisville and Kentucky grew, so did Hilliard Lyons. When Kentucky sought to link itself to important markets, Hilliard Lyons helped finance the first bridge across the Ohio River at Louisville. Furthermore, as technology changed, Hilliard Lyons was on the cutting edge of business innovation. Moving from ticker tape to keypunch machines in its early days, the firm has been eager to embrace technology. In fact, Hilliard Lyons was the first brokerage firm outside New York to automate the processing of stock trades.

In 1972, the firm replaced its partnership business model with a corporation. Further changes came in 1998 when PNC Financial Services Group purchased Hilliard Lyons.

Hilliard Lyons is a proud resident of downtown Louisville. The firm's headquarters are located in the former Stewart's Dry Goods department store on Muhammad Ali Boulevard in downtown Louisville. Hilliard Lyons has occupied this location since 1986.

Today, Hilliard Lyons is a full-service investment operating 80 branch offices in 13 states. Hilliard Lyons employs 1,300 people who serve 250,000 customers.

Mr. Speaker, I am proud to honor Hilliard Lyons after 150 years of service to Kentucky and the Nation. The citizens of Louisville are proud of Hilliard Lyons and we congratulate them on this historic milestone.

Mr Speaker I rise today to recognize the incredible accomplishments of one my district's premier hospitals in the field of medical technology advancements. Jewish Hospital HealthCare Services is a regional network of more than 50 health care facilities providing services for Kentucky and Southern Indiana residents. It has recently opened the doors of a ``next generation'' medical center, Jewish Hospital Medical Center East, offering the region's most advanced outpatient diagnostic procedures and treatment options in the areas of outpatient surgery, endoscopy, gender-specific medicine, diagnostic medical imaging, cardiopulmonary services, rehab services and occupational health.

Earlier this year, Health and Human Services Secretary Tommy Thompson announced a legislative plan to electronically link health records nationwide, part of President Bush's call for an electronic health record for every American in the next 10 years. The aim is to make patient information available to several

physicians in multiple locations and to expand the capacity for monitoring disease trends and other indicators, as well as to facilitate research.

The benefit of linking medical records nationwide is clear: even when you are out of town and unable to reach your doctor or hospital, the staff at any ER or medical facility will have your medical history available at their fingertips. That can save valuable--possibly life- saving time. It is the healthcare of the future, but it's already happening in Louisville at Jewish Hospital.

The electronic health records system in place at Jewish Hospital Medical Center East is now referred to as a ``show-site'' for medical technology. Accessing medical records, in the past, would take anywhere from 30 minutes to an hour. Now the process is instantaneous. And according to an HHS report, only 13 percent of hospitals and between 14 and 28 percent of physician practices have such computerized patient records. The Louisville facility is, indeed, ahead of the curve.

I applaud the efforts and advancements in medicine pursued by Louisville's Jewish Hospital and offer them up as a model of health care excellence for the nation.

Mr. Chairman, on rollcall No. 517, I inadvertently voted incorrectly. I had every intention of voting ``no'' on the amendment but mistakenly pushed the green button. I did not realize my mistake until the vote was closed.

Amendment No. 15 Offered by Mr. Smith of New Jersey

Mr. Chairman, on July 7, 2004, I inadvertently voted ``nay'' on an amendment to the fiscal year 2005 Commerce, Justice, State and the Judiciary Appropriations bill (H.R. 4754). I respectfully request the Record reflect that I supported the Paul Amendment withholding funds from the United National Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization (UNESCO), and intended to vote ``aye'' on rollcall vote No. 333.

Mr. Speaker, last week our nation honored the life of one of the most beloved, and most important, presidents of the twentieth century. During the 1980s, President Reagan did what many considered the impossible.

As we faced great challenges at home and abroad, he helped us believe that it was ``morning in America,'' and that we would overcome our difficulties. With the will of the nation behind him, President Reagan's steadfast leadership led to the defeat of communism and a robust economic recovery.

When President Reagan took office a quarter century ago, communism was on the march, threatening to bring the free world to its knees. But President Reagan's policy of ``peace through strength'' starved the Soviet bloc and made it safe for freedom to flourish in new nations. ``No weapon in the arsenals of the world is so formidable as the will of free men and women,'' he said.

Here at home, our country was in the worst recession since the Great Depression, with high unemployment, inflation, and interest rates. But President Reagan trusted the entrepreneurial spirit and cut taxes from 70 to 28 percent, creating 19 million new jobs and twenty years of growth. His economic policies formed the foundation upon which American families prosper. ``We believe that no power of government is as formidable a force for good as the creativity and entrepreneurial drive of the American people,'' he said.

By rallying the will of our country, by reminding us of our remarkable abilities--of what it means to be Americans, President Reagan reunited us as a confident and hopeful nation. And with a focused vision, he set us on a course that preserved our liberty and allowed our domestic economy to prosper again.

In life, President Reagan was a guiding light for our nation. Even when times were tough, he rejected the idea that America's best days were past, insisting that there is no limit to what our nation and our people can endure--or accomplish. And he was right.

Today we face a new enemy of liberty, in the war on terror. It is my hope, Mr. Speaker, that the confident optimism and clear vision that President Reagan gave to this nation will light our path.

May God bless President Ronald Reagan.

Mr. Speaker, on rollcall No. 214, I was unavoidably detained. Had I been present, I would have voted ``aye.''

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to a tireless group of Kentuckians who exhibit incredible dedication to serving others in my home state and throughout the country. Nurses are at the forefront of the healthcare system, working day in and day out to provide quality care to every patient in settings from the hospital emergency room, to the battlefield, and to the bed of a nursing home. The American Nurses Association and the Kentucky Nurses Association have declared May 6 through May 12, 2004 Kentucky Nurses' Week, and I encourage all Kentuckians to join with me in honoring the nursing profession.

America boasts many men and women in the nursing profession who proudly represent all races, religions and creeds in a variety of settings. They are the personal hand and comforting voice of the healthcare system, and I'm sure we can all remember a time when a nurse's kind words or gentle smile provided reassurance. Every year, the Kentucky Nurses Association recognizes over three hundred nurses for their excellence in service. I wholeheartedly support these efforts to recognize the unsung heroes of the medical community.

This year's theme, ``Nurses: Your Voice, Your Health, Your Life,'' personifies the commitment to service so evident in the nursing profession. With a wide variety of responsibilities, nurses are always prepared to offer the best possible health care to their patients. They are there to help the sick to get better and to make sure the healthy stay that way. I am proud to call attention to all of the nurses in our Kentucky community and hope you will join with me in celebrating the tireless efforts of these angels of mercy.

Mr. Speaker, on rollcall Nos. 602 and 603, I was unavoidably detained. Had I been present, I would have voted ``aye.''

Mr. Speaker, I rise to add my voice to others' about the importance of education and making sure that quality education is available to every child. As the mother of six children, when I have students that visit Washington, they often ask me, where did you learn what you needed to know to be a Member of Congress? Of course, they expect me to talk about my years in the State legislature or what I studied in college. But I tell them the answer and I tell them that the truth is I learned most of what I needed to know as the mother of these six children, all of whom had different talents and different challenges, all of whom went through school needing the advice and the special programs that would be available to them so that they could succeed.

That is what is so important for all the children in this country, and that is what we are struggling with.

I believe my colleagues on the other side of the aisle also want every child to have an opportunity for a quality education, and they have always focused on input, asking for more programs and more dollars. In fact, my experience in Washington, compared to my experience in the State legislature, has been a take-your-breath-away experience over the last 7 years, as every single appropriation meeting is about more, more, more; more dollars, more programs. No matter how much more is proposed, there are always amendments to spend even more than that.

In every single markup of education bills and other bills, there are proposals for $1 billion here and $1 billion there. I will never forget sitting in one markup for one education appropriation bill, and there was over $10 billion proposed for new spending, something that the Democrats voted for almost en masse in that markup of that bill. Every program, more money, more money, more money.

On the other hand, as a mother, what I found is that I needed to be able to go to school and talk to my children's teachers and ask, what can we do to help this child with their math? What can we do to help this child with reading? I needed to know that for the children that were disorganized, that the teacher would help me in formulating a program to help them become more organized; that for the child that struggled in writing, we could address those challenges.

And what teachers tell me in my district is nothing about more money, more money, more money. That is not what parents talk about. They talk about red tape; they talk about their hands tied; they talk about Federal limitations.

When No Child Left Behind was passed, overwhelmingly I heard thank you for rolling so many of these different programs together, giving teachers and schools the ability to address the challenges that were unique to their school. Did they need more computers? They could spend the dollars there. Did they need more remedial reading programs? They could spend the dollars there. Did they need more flexibility, so that the challenges of other children could be met? They could do that. Instead of having every single dollar sort of outlined for them, they could address the unique challenges that their students, in their schools, had.

What our side of the aisle has focused on is not only investing more money in education, but in the outcome, how do we make sure that those dollars help children achieve at a higher level? And why is that important? Because, after all these years of Federal investments, what were we looking at when we passed No Child Left Behind? Sixty-eight percent of our fourth graders could not read at grade level. We knew that minority children and children from disadvantaged families were falling behind at even a faster and greater rate than any time in our past, so we knew that we had more money, and more programs were not the answer.

Many of the objections that my colleagues on the other side of the aisle refer to are actually talking about programs that have been wrapped together so that a school that needs more after-school programs can spend the dollars in a way that meets those needs; schools that need more tutoring or more intervention for kids that have learning disabilities can use the dollars there. What we are talking about is not only the investment, but making sure we get the benefits of those investments.

I want to thank our chairman. He has done a wonderful job of making sure that with No Child Left Behind, that we invested 18 percent additional dollars into our school systems. There are those that think that before those dollars are even out the door, that that is not enough. They almost imply that that 18 percent is not carried over to the next year and the next year. But, of course, we have built on that each year since then. I thank the chairman for the balance and the investment for our children.