Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, on Tuesday, September 23, 2003, I was detained in Baltimore while assisting my constituents in dealing with the devastating damages from Hurricane Isabel.

While estimates on the economic damages are not yet available, we do know that the hurricane damaged or destroyed 3,300 homes on the eastern shore of the Chesapeake Bay displacing thousands of Marylanders. It caused over 1.34 million Marylanders to lose power. All of Baltimore County's 70 marinas were destroyed, devastating a $225 million dollars a year industry. Thousands of businesses, including ISG's Bethlehem Steel plant, are flooded ruining their daily operations.

Today, Department of Homeland Security Secretary Tom Ridge, Governor Robert Ehrlich, and I toured an area of Baltimore County that experienced extensive damage. After viewing the damage and I encouraged Secretary Ridge to expedite efforts to assist Maryland's Second Congressional district. It is important that the Federal, State and local governments work together.

Hurricane Isabel devastated Maryland's Second Congressional District and I was there assisting my constituents in their discussions with the Federal Emergency Management Agency, the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, and the Small Business Administration to help re- establish their homes and businesses.

Mr. Chairman, I have interest in a company that does business with a financial institution that one way or another might be impacted by this legislation, so I have decided to vote present on H.R. 2622, the Fair & Accurate Credit Transactions Act and the accompanying amendments on September 10, 2003. This includes all roll call votes starting at #495 until the end of the consideration of this measure. It also includes any motion to recommit and final passage on H.R. 2622, the Fair & Accurate Credit Transaction Act.

I do support the efforts of this legislation in combating identity theft and applaud authors of this measure.

Mr. Speaker, I offer a motion to instruct conferees.

The Clerk will report the motion.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I have not come to the floor today to carry someone else's torch in partisan battle. I am not here to fight a political battle just for the sake of fighting one. I am here because we need to get past the idea of Democrats versus Republicans and cut to the chase.

I do not have to convince anyone here today that we need a child tax credit. That is not the battle. The battle is whose version of a child tax credit this Congress will send to the President for signature. And I am here to argue that the Senate version simply makes more sense. We are facing a troubled economy, rising unemployment numbers and an exploding deficit caused by tax cuts that is just not working. We are fighting a war on terrorism, a war in Afghanistan, and a war in Iraq. We have our servicemen and -women deployed throughout the world. We are trying to do everything and we need to focus on our priorities.

One thing we need right now is a child tax credit for all families, including military and veteran families, including the families of manufacturing workers, farmers, teachers, steelworkers and restaurant workers. We need to include families who have not benefited from the tax cut plan because they did not get dividend or capital gains relief from this administration's tax cut, families who need this child tax credit now to pay for housing, clothing, food and health care.

Now, I have been listening to arguments from all sides. Last night I heard some of my colleagues from the other side of the aisle say that the House's version of the child tax credit does provide for all families. But this is not what the bill says. The House version does not cover all families. My colleagues on the other side of the aisle said that their bill provides for military families. But the House version does not provide specific child tax credit relief for military families. Only the Senate version does this. And the House version is expensive. It will cost over $80 billion, which will only balloon the deficit, and we simply cannot afford that right now.

We need to be more fiscally responsible. We need to find solutions that fix problems without creating new ones. And the Senate version of the child tax credit does this. It provides tax relief for all American families and it does it without adding to the deficit. It is fully offset and that is more fiscally responsible.

The reality is we could not have an unlimited pot of money for everything that we want or need. We have to make choices among tough priorities, and that is our job. But the House passed a tax law in May that left 6.5 million hardworking taxpaying families without a child tax credit. And we need to fix that and we need to fix it now. There has been a lot of debate and rhetoric about the House and Senate versions of the tax credit bill. I think debate is healthy, but I think the rhetoric has been misleading.

Let us get to the facts. My colleagues on the other side of the aisle say we already passed a tax credit bill. We did, but it is too expensive and the wrong bill. We need the Senate version. The Senate version focuses solely on giving the 6.5 million families the child tax credit relief they need. The Senate version fixes the problem created by the last tax cut without creating more problems. The Senate version expands the child tax credit and provides relief specifically for military families, and it does not cost more money.

The House version will cost over $80 billion. This will only add to our exploding deficit, and it does nothing to help our economy. The House version is not fiscally responsible.

The critical question here is which version of a child tax credit helps military families more. My colleagues on the other side of the aisle argued last night that their bill provides for military families. That is true. There are military benefits in the House version of the Child Tax Credit bill, but the House version does not include a specific child tax credit benefit for military families.

Instead, the House leadership has taken provisions from a completely different bill and thrown them into this bill. Military fairness is something I will always fight for, but we need to tackle the child tax credit problem now. The House bill does not do this for military families.

Remember, none of the provisions in the House version provides specific child tax credit relief for military families. Only the Senate version does that. Only the Senate version considers combat pay in the formula which means that military families will receive larger tax credit relief. That is not rhetoric, that is fact.

I have to ask my colleagues what message are we sending to military families. The tax cuts signed into law May 2003 cut major veterans programs, including health care and housing. These cuts will total $14.6 billion in benefits over the next 10 years. We have had proposed cuts to imminent danger and family separation pay, and I am very disturbed about this.

While we were away on our August break the Department of Defense put out and attempted to cut combat pay and pay for our families that are separated. We have our American service people over in Iran and Iraq putting their lives on the line. We need to do whatever we can to support them, and for them to be over there protecting our freedom and liberty and to cut any of their combat pay or their military family separation pay is wrong.

I have a letter, after hearing about this, that I sent to Secretary Rumsfeld, and I want this to be made a part of the record, asking him not to do this, that it is wrong, and I want to make this a part of the record, but to this date, I have received no response from Secretary Rumsfeld or the Department of Defense, but this is something we have to make sure we stay on top of.

I will insert the letter that I referred to earlier at this point.

Congress of the United States,

House of Representatives,

Washington, DC, August 14, 2003.

Hon. Donald H. Rumsfeld,

Secretary of Defense, The Pentagon,

Washington, DC 20301.

Dear Secretary Rumsfeld: I am very disturbed by recent

press accounts of the Pentagon's attempt to decrease both

imminent danger pay and family separation allowances. I am

asking you for a quick response to my inquiry.

We have over 148,000 troops in Iraq and 9,000 troops in

Afghanistan, many military families rely on this pay to help

make ends meet when their loved ones are away serving our

country and fighting for our freedom. I was shocked to learn

that as part of the Pentagon's interim budget request, there

was a recommendation to return to the lower rates of special

pay pending further inquiry by military experts. This sends

the wrong message to our soldiers and their families. It says

to them that the Pentagon does not care about their well

being. It suggest that their efforts in Iraq and Afghanistan

are no longer dangerous. In my view, we cannot let our

soldiers and their families feel like we do not understand

and appreciate what they are going through.

Our troops face daily guerrilla attacks. They face

unbearable temperature, and they have to deal with missing

their families and loved ones. This is not the time to reduce

their special duty pay.

As Congress goes to conference on the Defense

Appropriations bill, I hope that you will not proceed with

the Pentagon's combat pay reduction recommendation and

instead submit a request to Congress for additional funding

so that we can honor our soldiers abroad and their families

at home. I would also request that you support the Senate

language that calls for making the increase in combat pay

permanent. These men and women make a huge sacrifice and we

need to make sure that they receive all the resources and

compensation they need to ensure that their families are well

supported.

Thank you for your time and I look forward to a speedy

response to our letter.

Sincerely,

C.A. Dutch Ruppersberger,

Member of Congress.

Why is this occurring? Because we do not have the money. The tax cut is not

working, but we cannot take it out on our military families.

We also had a $200 million cut to Impact Aid, denying military school children a decent education, again because we do not have the money. We need to reprioritize where we are putting our money, and after all these cuts, we are denying 200,000 low-income military personnel a child tax credit. That is wrong.

What message do we want to send to our service men and women and their families? The House version does nothing to help military families specifically. Only the Senate version does this, and it does it without increasing the deficit.

Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself as much time as I may consume.

First, the gentleman from Arizona has made some good points. His rhetoric is excellent. However, I would like to get into the facts again.

To begin with, the 40 million people who are not covered do pay taxes. They pay property taxes. They pay payroll taxes, Social Security taxes, sales taxes. This is not a bill that is fair for all.

Secondly, the issue on fiscal accountability. I never thought, as a Democrat, I would be here asking my colleagues in the other party, on the other side of the aisle, to be more fiscally responsible. If my colleagues look at the two bills, we cannot afford this bill. The Senate bill has a setoff. It makes sense. We have enough fiscal problems right now, but if they are serious about military fairness, which we all are, and we all agree that we are, the Senate bill is at the desk right now. Let us bring it up and let us vote on it.

Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself as much time as I may consume.

Mr. Speaker, just to respond to my friend, the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Hayworth), I think there has been some debate about refundability and about the tax credit that the Senate bill stops after 1 year.

Both sides of the aisle I think have misinterpreted this to an extent based on some of the debates that I have heard. We already have a law in effect that the President signed. That law is automatic. And after this year the refundability automatically kicks in. That is what the law says. Those are the facts.

So let us not confuse it. I heard the colloquy before we took the floor, an argument that the other side has been using. It is not going to stop. It kicks in automatically, and that is the law. And that is something that is important. That is fact.

Secondly, if we are talking about fiscal accountability, again, the Senate bill has the set-offs. This bill does not.

We are in a difficult time in this country right now. We need to be fiscally responsible. And I will say it once and I will say it again: I think it is extremely important that we work on both sides of the aisle as a team to get control of this economy and to do what is right.

The Senate bill has the off-sets that are necessary for this child tax credit bill. This House version will cost us $80 billion. We cannot afford that.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes and 15 seconds to the gentleman from California (Mr. Cardoza).

Mr. Speaker, may I request the time remaining on both sides.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 6 minutes to the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Moran).

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Just in response to the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Hayworth), let us crunch the numbers and get to the facts. The military families would do better with a child tax credit than no taxes on combat pay. But why are we here debating either one of them? If Members really cared about the military, men and women putting their lives on the line, we should be doing both.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. Honda).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 30 seconds to the gentleman from California (Mr. Honda).

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 1 minute.

The gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Hayworth) made a comment that I said that I was in favor of taxing combat pay. That is not what I said. I said when we look at the facts, a person in the military would do better by going forward with the child tax credit than not paying taxes on military combat pay. What I said was when we have our men and women risking their lives on behalf of us for our freedom and liberty, we should do both.

I yield to the gentleman from Virginia.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Speaker, this debate is healthy. That is what it is about in the United States Congress. We both have difference of opinions; but what we are here about today is trying to get the conference committee together so we can talk about these issues. We have already debated the merits of the bill and where we are, but now we need to come together.

I would ask the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Hayworth), it has been 3 months since we have had this on the table, and the leadership in the House will not meet for a conference. It amazes me that we cannot get the conferees at least to take these issues we have discussed today and try to resolve them. The threat of partisan politics aside, this is an important issue to our country and to our military, and I would yield to the gentleman.

I yield to the gentleman from Arizona.

Mr. Speaker, reclaiming my time, I thank the gentleman for his comments and that he does not have the authority, but he is a very persuasive individual, a great orator, and I would hope that he uses his great expertise, with his new-found look, to help us in that regard.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Brown).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Ryan).

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

My colleagues on the other side have said they are already helping the military. We talked about the military because we are at war now and that is a component of this bill that we are discussing here today. If that is the case, and I believe very strongly that we all care about the military, then why not continue the effort and pass the child tax credit bill which helps our men and women putting their lives on the line on our behalf? That just makes sense. That is American. That is what we need to do.

The other Chamber talked about issues of fiscal responsibility. If you look at the Senate bill versus the House bill, there are the offsets that are there. It does not increase this deficit. We are in a difficult situation now in this country. We need to be fiscally responsible. The Senate bill does that. But really what we are talking about here today, and I have been just as guilty as anyone else, we have been debating the merits of the legislation and where we need to be, but what we are talking about is let us just get to the conference. Let us get to the conference. Three months and we have not sat down. We need to sit down in a nonpartisan way because this is so important to our country, to our families and our communities and our military.

Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.

Mr. Speaker, subject to rule XXII, clause 7(c), I hereby announce my intention to offer a motion to instruct on H.R. 1308, the child tax credit bill. The form of the motion is as follows:

Mr. Speaker, I move that the managers on the part of the House in the conference on the disagreeing votes of the two Houses on the House amendment to the Senate amendment to H.R. 1308 be instructed as follows:

Number one, the House conferees shall be instructed to include in the conference report the provision of the Senate amendment (not included in the House amendment) that provides immediate payments to taxpayers receiving an additional credit by reason of the bill in the same manner as other taxpayers were entitled to immediate payments under the Jobs and Growth Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2003.

Two, the House conferees shall be instructed to include in the conference report the provision of the Senate amendment, not included in the House amendment, that provides families of military personnel serving in Iraq, Afghanistan, and other combat zones a child tax credit based on earnings of the individual serving in the combat zone.

Three, the House conferees shall be instructed to include in the conference report all of the other provisions from the Senate amendment and shall not report back a conference report that includes additional tax benefits not offset by other provision.

Four, to the maximum extent possible within the scope of the conference, the House conferees shall be instructed to include in the conference report other tax benefits for military personnel and the families of astronauts who died in the Columbia disaster.

Five, the House conferees shall, as soon as practicable after the adoption of this motion, meet in open session with the Senate conferees and the House conferees shall file a conference report consistent with the preceding provisions of this instruction, not later than the second legislative day after adoption of this motion.

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the leadership of the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Bell) for working to bring equity to the 6.5 million working families.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of the motion to instruct conferees on H.R. 1308, the Child Tax Credit bill. I am disappointed that we are still here one month after that bill passed both the House and the Senate asking yet again for this motion to instruct. Frankly, time is running out.

The Treasury Department will send out millions of checks to American families qualifying for the child tax credit provision on July 25. Unless my calendar is off, those checks go out next Friday, the same day the House leaves for recess; and when those checks are placed in the mail, 6.5 million working and military, military families will be left out, families from every district across the country, including my own, Maryland's Second Congressional District.

The bill as it stands now ignores families already coping with financial problems in this troubled economy through no fault of their own. It denies tax relief that would help military families with loved ones serving in Iraq, Afghanistan, and around the world fighting to protect our freedoms. Congress has the ability to correct this situation this week, today, right now.

Let the conferees debate the details but let the voice of those 6.5 million families be heard in the discussion. These American families deserve a seat at the table, and I support this motion to instruct because it will give them just that.

Mr. Chairman, I too want to acknowledge the leadership of the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Goss), the chairman, and the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Harman), the ranking member. I have been in local politics for 18 years, and we have tremendous leadership on this committee, and I think all members of this committee put the Nation first.

I rise in support of H.R. 2417. The bill reflects the committee's support for the Intelligence Community and the men and women who serve in the intelligence agencies. Often unrecognized, these individuals have made great sacrifices to secure our homeland and to support the war in Iraq, the global war on terrorism and other important national priorities. I am proud to represent many of the men and women who work for the National Security Agency, NSA, in Fort Meade, Maryland, my Second Congressional District.

This bill addresses concerns for the health and well-being of NSA employees by providing additional funds to ensure a cleaner, healthier and better maintained workforce. It provides tort liability protection to NSA security officers so that they have legal protections similar to those provided other law enforcement officers.

The bill gives NSA the authority to provide living quarters to the bright and talented students participating in NASA's summer and cooperative educational programs.

It also encourages NASA to continue its acquisition reform initiatives and bring its processes in line with standard commercial and government practices. It increases funds available for the recapitalization and modernization of NASA's technical systems which will allow the Nation's Signals Intelligence Systems to keep pace with changing technology.

H.R. 2417 emphasizes the need for the Federal Government to improve information sharing with State and local governments. As the Baltimore County Executive, I was the county executive during 9/11, this is very important, and where appropriate, private companies.

To make this possible, the bill allows the Director of Central Intelligence to establish pilot projects to train State and local officials to increase the flow of information between them and Federal agencies. Advisory councils on privacy and civil liberties and State and local issues will help ensure the protection of individual rights, and the needs of State and local governments need to be properly addressed.

I am also pleased that this bill provides additional funding to the Armed Forces Medical Intelligence Center to enhance the analysis of health risks to our deployed forces.

Together, the enhancements provided for in H.R. 2417 will contribute to our Nation's efforts to prevent terrorism and to curb the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction around the globe. I urge my colleagues to support this bill.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to celebrate and acknowledge the observance of Flag Day, June 14, 2003.

The American Flag is an integral component of many national holidays commemorating the creation of our nation, the lives of our Founding Fathers, the legacies of great leaders, and the sacrifices of our military service men and women, veterans, and retirees. But Flag Day is the one day we acknowledge the American Flag itself and all it symbolizes. On this day, we celebrate the 53rd National Flag Day.

As our national symbol, the American Flag is our ambassador to all corners of the globe and beyond, reminding people of who we are and what we stand for. The Flag symbolizes what is great about American democracy: the liberties and freedoms provided by the Constitution. It serves as a hopeful symbol of freedom to many people in the world, embodying the great American Dream of equal opportunity for all citizens.

The American Flag serves as a source of pride for special and outstanding achievements, from athletes winning Olympic gold medals to astronauts reaching the moon. It has inspired poets, musicians, and artists. It was the very inspiration for Francis Scott Key in 1814 to write the Star Spangled Banner. With the British attacking Fort McHenry in Baltimore, Maryland, Key was overwhelmed by emotion when the sun rose revealing the war-torn flag was still there.

The Flag continues to inspire people across the world and encourages them to recognize their potential and ability to achieve their own version of the American Dream. It is a focal point of respect for our active duty service men and women, military retirees, veterans, and those who work tirelessly to protect us: our police, firefighters, and first-responders.

In times of difficulty the tattered Flag reminds us of the sadness of war and terror, and the tragic loss of life that all too often occurs. Yet in such difficult times, the Flag inspires and reminds us that we are still here, and that we remain steadfast in our commitment to American democracy.

From school children to Members of Congress, many begin their day by reciting the Pledge of Allegiance. We do not do this as mere habit nor do we do it lightly. I, along with my colleagues and fellow Americans, have great respect for the American Flag and for all it represents. It is a great privilege to represent the Maryland 2nd Congressional District and to honor the American Flag for all it embodies at this critical time in our nation's history.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor all of the hard work of civil servants during the Public Service Recognition Week.

As a former Baltimore County executive, I had an opportunity to work directly with men and women who serve on the local government level. Their commitment to excellence continues to be a great source of inspiration. Public service employees have contributed significantly to American greatness and prosperity. It is with pleasure that I support a resolution commending public servants, especially our Federal workforce, for their dedication and continued service to our Nation.

Public Service Recognition Week represents an opportunity for us to honor and celebrate the commitment of individuals who serve the needs of the Nation through work at all levels of government. It is also a time to call on a new generation to consider public service. Public service civilian employees are critical in demonstrating that the government workforce is a valued component to our country and to our national security. Thanks to all those who serve at the local, State, and Federal level.

Mr. Speaker, the last few weeks have been a time of solemn reflection and debate in this country. It has been an impassioned and peaceful process with many voices heard, which have again reinforced the United States as the world's greatest democracy.

We owe our system of democracy and self-concern to America's veterans, who have given so much to ensure its legacy. Today our military is once again on the brink of a great sacrifice in the name of security and freedom for America and the rest of the world. Without reservation, it is time for all Americans to come together to support our men and women in uniform and their families back home. Our country's focus must now be on the success of their mission.

I urge every American to join with the Congress and our President to wish our Armed Forces Godspeed and safe return from abroad. However, we must not lose sight of our mission at home, the mission of our police officers, firefighters, and emergency personnel, our first-line responders, in the event of a terrorist attack that might occur.

While our Armed Forces have our full support, the front lines of our homeland and hometown security are our cities, counties, and towns. We must equip our first-line responders the same as we equip our military abroad.

Since the fall of 2001, local governments all over America have had to bear the burden of equipping and training all of our first responders against an unknown threat. My district, which is the Second Congressional District in Maryland, is home to two Army bases, the Port of Baltimore, Baltimore-Washington International Airport, and

the 17th largest city in the country. This lack of funding directly affects every community in our metropolitan area.

Last year the Baltimore region alone spent more than $14 million to protect itself. Cities, counties, and towns cannot do it by themselves; they need Federal funding to equip our first-line responders. We must train our first-line responders. We must give them the equipment to protect themselves so that they can protect us in the event that there is a terrorist attack.

Put against a tax cut that equals $117 billion, $3.5 billion is not asking for too much to protect and to give the resources to our front- line responders. I urge my colleagues across the aisle to reconsider their budget priorities so that they better reflect the priorities of the American people as it relates to our protection and our security. We must provide the tools necessary to our first responders that would protect our citizens.

In today's Washington Post, the Secretary of Homeland Security, Tom Ridge, said that the President plans to propose a supplemental Federal budget to pay for more counterterrorism measures. I applaud that; however, for the sake of our country, our citizens, our hometown, our homeland, I hope these counterterrorism measures include more resources for local governments and first responders.

Mr. Chairman, I am not in favor of cloning humans for reproduction but I do favor the medical research that the Greenwood substitute would provide. Every day in this country hundreds of thousands of Americans suffer from the effects of degenerative disease and spinal cord injuries. As a young attorney I was in a car accident where I nearly lost my life. Maryland's Emergency Medical Shock Trauma system saved my life. Medical research saved my life. To this day I continue to serve as vice chair of the Shock Trauma Board. My work with shock trauma has put me in contact with a number of people who are suffering from degenerative diseases and spinal cord injuries.

My good friend Burt Greenwood from Baltimore has Lou Gehrig's disease. Every day he fights to stay with us. Every day he hopes that stem cell research someday will give him a chance. That is why I stand in support of the Greenwood amendment. We must make continued research a reality and not just a hope for the families that we represent.

Let me quote Dr. Jeffrey Rothstein, a professor of neurology and the director for ALS research at Johns Hopkins University:

No responsible scientist wants to clone a human.

Responsible scientists want to continue the research for

cures to degenerative disease. Stem cell research holds the

only hope for thousands of suffering Americans.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the ranking member from Texas for yielding me time.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in favor of the omnibus conference report, but I do so with serious reservations about how this conference report was brought to the floor.

It is only with the knowledge that this bill will keep afloat programs important to the American family that I feel my vote today means something. But I think the American family would be outraged to know that actual debate over the funding of their government lasted just 1 hour. The American family would be outraged to learn that minority points of view concerning the health, well-being and security of this country were given just 1 hour for debate.

The process in which this conference has been brought to the floor goes against the American democratic process. The issues at stake here are too important, some life and death, not to be thoroughly debated. The fact that we did not get the chance to debate the homeland security needs of our first responders is almost unthinkable. Simply put, the issues at stake here are too important to be mired in the blatant partisanship of House rules.

Mr. Speaker, in the spirit of the American way of life, I urge the majority to give the voice of the American family a chance to be heard.

Mr. Speaker, on the issue of first-line responders, I was a former Baltimore County Executive. Baltimore County is a county of over 750,000 people. The Second District that I represent has BWI Airport and the Port of Baltimore. We are very much concerned about the issue of the monies being put into the budget as it relates to first responders.

One of the most important issues that we have if there is another terrorist attack, which we understand there will be, is that we need to be prepared. Our police officers and our firefighters are the first responders. Not only do they need to be protected themselves, but if they are not protected, they will not be able to protect our citizens.

So we urge the President and urge Congress to move forward with the monies that are necessary to make sure that we secure our homeland.