Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to revise and extend my remarks on this Medicare proposal that takes Medicare from patient care.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to urge all my colleagues to vote against the Medicare Conference Report offered by the Republican leadership. Seniors want a prescription drug benefit that is affordable and guaranteed under the Medicare system.

Passage of this bill would weaken prescription drug benefits, fail to lower drug costs, and weaken the Medicare program.

Congress needs to pass a good Medicare bill that actually helps seniors and not just any bill that benefits pharmaceutical companies, HMOs, and special interest. Our colleagues on the other side of the aisle have a take it or leave it attitude. They want the American public to believe that if this conference report is not passed then all opportunities for a real prescription drug benefit under Medicare is lost. However, I submit to you that if a true bipartisan effort was made at the conference table, then much could be accomplished.

Mr. Speaker, there are dozens of reasons why this conference report should be defeated and never become law. Many of these reasons have already been mentioned but I want to take this time to highlight a few.

The three Democratic House conferees were shut out of the process and were not allowed in the conferee meeting. The treatment of these House Members is reasons enough for every member of this body to reject this conference report.

The legislation would not create a prescription drug benefit until in 2006. However, HMOs, insurance companies, and pharmaceutical companies receive billions of dollars upon enactment of the conference report.

The bill also explicitly prohibits the Secretary of Health and Human Services from negotiating lower drug prices on behalf of America's 40 million Medicare beneficiaries.

The bill does not allow Americans to import drugs from Canada and other countries where prices are lower. International comparisons of pharmaceutical prices have shown that elderly and uninsured consumers in the United States often pay more for prescription drugs than consumers in other countries. As a result, more and more elderly consumers are traveling outside the country to find cheaper, more affordable prescription drugs. My district borders Windsor, Ontario, Canada, where I have known many of my seniors travel to get their prescriptions filled.

The GOP plan includes provisions that will privatize Medicare and force senior citizens into HMOs and other private insurance plans.

Millions of senior and Americans with disabilities currently covered by Medicare would actually find themselves worse off if the conference report becomes law. Low-income seniors who get additional assistance form Medicaid will pay more for their prescriptions because they will lose their Medicaid benefit.

Currently, Medicare beneficiaries who receive medicine through Medicaid either pay no co-payments or are charged nominal amounts per month per prescription. Under the new plan, people will pay three-to- five dollars per month, per brand-name prescription and one or two dollars for generic drugs. Depending on their income. These co-payments will increase each year.

The GOP plan creates an unlimited program of Health Savings Accounts (HSAs). This tax break benefits the healthy and wealthy and could dramatically raise health insurance premiums for other Americans-- particularly families with moderate incomes and those with high health expenses.

Seniors will lose their retiree health benefits. More than two million seniors in employer-based retiree plans are in jeopardy of being dropped from coverage because the bill creates incentives for employers to drop prescription drug coverage.

Mr. Speaker, the Medicare Conference Report before this body will have a detrimental effect on senior and disabled citizens in my home state of Michigan.

143,000 Medicare beneficiaries in Michigan will lose their retiree health benefits.

183,200 Medicaid beneficiaries in Michigan will pay more for the prescription drugs they need.

90,000 fewer seniors in Michigan will qualify for low-income protections than under the Senate bill because of the assets test and lower qualifying income levels.

44,980 Medicare beneficiaries in Michigan will pay more for Part B premiums because of income relating.

Providing affordable prescription drugs to our seniors and the uninsured should have been the goal. The Republican lead Congress squandered this opportunity to include a real prescription drug benefit within the Medicare plan.

Mr. Speaker, there are hundreds of national, state, and regional organizations that have

come out against the Medicare conference report. I stand today with the seniors in my district and across the nation in opposition to this bill.

I ask my colleagues to stand with me and vote against this Medicare Conference Report that fails to provide an affordable and reliable Medicare prescription drug coverage, gives billions to HMOs, insurance companies, and pharmaceutical companies, prohibits drug reimportation, and privatizes Medicare.

Mr. Speaker, one Republican more accurately characterized H.R. 6,

the Energy Policy Act, as the ``No Lobbyist Left Behind bill.'' This bill gives $20 billion in tax breaks and subsidies to the oil, gas, coal and nuclear industries. No one has had a chance to look over this bill. I read from the papers that the bill is more than 1,700 pages in length. You can believe that there are many provisions contained in this bill that the other side does not want the public to know. So what better way to disguise this bad legislation than by burying it inside of 1,700 pages.

This bill is bad for our national security--it facilitates the proliferation of nuclear fuel. It reverses a long-standing prohibition on the reprocessing of spent fuel from commercial reactors. It promotes, through the Department of Energy's Advanced Fuel Cycle Initiative, joint nuclear research efforts with non-weapon states, and encourages the advancement of advanced nuclear weapons systems.

This bill encourages production over conservation. The conservation provisions are estimated to amount to only 3 months of U.S. energy consumption between now and 2020.

This bill is bad for consumers as it repeals the Public Utility Holding Company Act (PUHCA). The PUHCA protects consumers by limiting the size and scope of utility companies and subjecting utility holding companies to Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) regulation. PUHCA also required revenues from utility ratepayers to go into electric infrastructure maintenance, instead of risky financial investments like we saw in the Enron case. In fact, it was PUHCA that kept Enron from owning more than one electric utility and prevented their bankruptcy from affecting more utility customers. Repeal of PUHCA would allow venture capitalists to put utility ratepayers into almost anything they wanted.

The conference agreement is also bad for the environment. The bill exempts the construction activities at oil and gas drilling sites from compliance with the Clean Water Act. Clean air requirements are relaxed in order to delay reductions in smog pollution. A process to extract oil and gas trapped underground by injecting chemical solutions is exempted from the Clean Water Act. The ability of States to protect their coasts and beaches from energy development projects is weakened.

A provision inserted by the Republican Leadership exempts manufacturers of MTBE, Methyl Tertiary-Butyl Ether, from liability resulting from ground water contamination. Not only does the bill release MTBE manufacturers from limited liability but also rewards those companies with $2 billion in federal aid. So the bill shifts a potential $29 billion clean up cost from MTBE manufacturers to taxpayers and water customers. This bill turns the concept of ``the polluter pays'' on its head.

Finally, H.R. 6 does little to enhance our domestic energy security and lessen our dependence on foreign oil supplies. America has only 3 percent of the world's oil reserves; whereas, countries affiliated with the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries [OPEC] control more than 70 percent of the world's reserves. As was previously cited in today's debate, America is a technological giant. But instead of investing in our ingenuity to make us a country that is more efficient in its usage of energy resources, this bill assumes we can fulfill our energy needs by drilling for more oil and natural gas supplies and excavating our way to energy independence.

The bill represents a failed promise for energy consumers. They will be asked to pay more in energy costs as well as provide subsidies to the energy industry. At the same time, Americans are asked to sacrifice their environmental responsibilities and surrender their rights as energy consumers. This is a bad deal for my constituents in Detroit and southeast Michigan. It is a bad deal for America, and I urge my colleagues to vote down the conference agreement that has been handed to us.

Mr. Speaker, one Republican more accurately characterized H.R. 6, the Energy Policy Act, as the ``No Lobbyist Left Behind bill.'' This bill gives $20 billion in tax breaks and subsidies to the oil, gas, coal and nuclear industries. No one has had a chance to look over this bill. I read from the papers that the bill is more than 1,700 pages in length. You can believe that there are many provisions contained in this bill that the other side does not want the public to know. So what better way to disguise this bad legislation than by burying it inside of 1700 pages.

This bill is bad for our national security--it facilitates the proliferation of nuclear fuel. It reverses a long-standing prohibition on the reprocessing of spent fuel from commercial reactors. It promotes, through the Department of Energy's Advanced Fuel Cycle Initiative, joint nuclear research efforts with non-weapon states, and encourages the advancement of advanced nuclear weapons systems.

This bill encourages production over conservation. The conservation provisions are estimated to amount to only three months of U.S. energy consumption between now and 2020.

This bill is bad for consumers as it repeals the Public Utility Holding Company Act (PUHCA). The PUHCA protects consumers by limiting the size and scope of utility companies and subjecting utility holding companies to Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) regulation. PUHCA also required revenues from utility ratepayers to go into electric infrastructure maintenance, instead of risky financial investments like we saw in the Enron case. In fact, it was PUHCA that kept Enron from owning more than one electric utility and prevented their bankruptcy from affecting more

utility customers. Repeal of PUHCA would allow venture capitalists to put utility ratepayers into almost anything they wanted.

The conference agreement is also bad for the environment. The bill exempts the construction activities at oil and gas drilling sites from compliance with the Clean Water Act. Clean air requirements are relaxed in order to delay reductions in smog pollution. A process to extract oil and gas trapped underground by injecting chemical solutions is exempted from the Clean Water Act. The ability of States to protect their coasts and beaches from energy development projects is weakened.

A provision inserted by the Republican Leadership exempts manufacturers of MTBE (Methyl Tertiary-Butyl Ether) from liability resulting from ground water contamination. Not only does the bill limit MTBE manufacturers from limited liability but also rewards those companies with $2 billion in Federal aid. So the bill shifts a potential $29 billion clean up cost from MTBE manufacturers to taxpayers and water customers. This bill turns the concept of ``the polluter pays'' on its head.

Finally, H.R. 6 does little to enhance our domestic energy security and lessen our dependence on foreign oil supplies. America has only 3 percent of the world's oil reserves; whereas, countries affiliated with the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) controls more than 70 percent of the world's reserves. As was previously cited in today's debate, America is a technological giant. But instead of investing in our ingenuity to make us a country that is more efficient in its usage of energy resources, this bill assumes we can fulfill our energy needs by drilling for more oil and natural gas supplies and excavating our way to energy independence.

This represents a failed promise for energy consumers. They will be asked to pay more in energy costs as well as provide subsidies to the energy industry. At the same time, Americans are asked to sacrifice their environmental responsibilities and surrender their rights as energy consumers. This is a bad deal for my constituents in Detroit and Southeast Michigan. It is a bad deal for America, and I urge my colleagues to vote down the conference agreement that has been handed to us.

Mr. Speaker, due to personal business, I was unable to record my vote on four votes ordered for Nov. 7. Had I been present I would have voted ``aye'' on the motion offered by Representative Marshall to recommit the bill H.R. 1588, the Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2004, rollcall No. 616; ``no'' on final passage of the conference report on H.R. 1588, rollcall No. 617; ``aye'' on the motion to instruct conferees to H.R. 6 offered by Representative Filner, rollcall No. 618; and ``aye'' on the motion to instruct conferees to H.R. 1 offered by Representative Cardoza, rollcall No. 619.

Mr. Speaker, due to personal business, I was unable to record my vote on four votes ordered for today. Had I been present I would have voted ``no'' on the amendment offered by Representative Green to H.R. 1829, rollcall No. 610; ``no'' on the amendment offered by Representative Jackson-Lee to H.R. 1829, rollcall No. 611; ``aye'' on final passage of H.R. 1829, the Federal Prisons Industries Act, rollcall No. 612; and ``aye'' on the motion offered by Representative DeLauro to instruct conferees to H.R. 2660, the bill making appropriations for the Departments of Labor, Health and Human Services and Education for Fiscal Year 2004, rollcall No. 613; on the motion to instruct; ``aye'' on the motion offered by Representative Becerra to instruct conferees to H.R. 1308, child tax credit legislation, rollcall No. 614; and ``aye'' on the motion offered by Representative Capps to instruct conferees on H.R. 1, Medicare reform legislation, rollcall No. 615.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Kolbe) for his leadership. I enjoy working with him and the things we do together.

To my ranking member, the gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. Lowey), who continues to be a bright spot as we help and serve countries all over this world, I thank her for her leadership, generally and particularly on the HIV/AIDS issue.

Mr. Speaker, I rise to support the motion to instruct and ask that this body also support the motion to instruct. The pandemic that we see all over the world, HIV and AIDS, is serious trouble. That is what a pandemic is.

It started in the continent of Africa, moving to Asia, to India, to the former Soviet Union and other places of the world. This is truly a pandemic that can be contained, not cured, but can be contained with the proper resources.

As has been mentioned before, HIV/AIDS, TB, and malaria are illnesses and diseases that, if contained properly with education of those who are infected and in those regions of the world, we can cease the pandemic and begin to address the problems that we now face.

The motion to instruct provides the resources that our country can give to those countries who find themselves in assault. We must do no less than to support the motion to instruct.

We know how to contain this. We know where it is in pandemic proportions. When the resources are available in our world community, in our world global AIDS effort, we will find more children more healthy in their communities, in their families, in their countries. The troops that we send out across this world in these various places where the pandemic is, we then have resources to address that so that they do not then encounter these very same illnesses.

The nongovernmental organizations, the NGOs that practice and actually teach and educate, and in some instances actually treat and provide the services, are there, are up and ready and can dispense the money that we have available.

The faith-based network that is around this world, they give resources, training, education, as well as treatment. So I support the gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. Lowey) in her effort. It is important that we go along with the Senate. And this motion to instruct is a small step towards the $3 billion and the $15 billion commitment that this President made for a 3-year commitment.

I hope that we will support the motion to instruct. It is the right way, and again, less than the President has advised he would do but better than what we have right now. I urge Members to support the motion to instruct.

Mr. Chairman, I rise for the purpose of responding to the comments of the gentleman from Pennsylvania, Congressman Murtha. As the gentleman from Pennsylvania knows, I am interested in seeing that Army Air Force Exchange Service obtains adequate funding, so it can recover some of the losses it has incurred in supporting our troops in immediate combat areas. It is my understanding that the Committee intends to allocate $30 million of the funds allocated to the Army Operations and Maintenance account to the Amy Air Force Exchange Service, but I understand the needs of the AAFES is $40.5 million.

I was considering offering an amendment to increase the amount for AAFES by $10.5 million. However, it is my understanding that the Defense Appropriations Subcommittee shares my concern in this area and is willing to address the funding shortfall when we prepare an Omnibus Appropriations bill.

Mr. Speaker, I offer a motion to recommit.

Yes, in its present form, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, I rise to recommit the bill and ask that the Members please look at this closely. Here we have an amendment before you to recommit that would require that 50 percent of the funding for reconstruction be given in a loan, and we have had much discussion over that, although we did not finish the discussion. Because Iraq has at least $2 trillion of oil reserves in the ground it is anticipated that they will be able to cultivate over the next year, because Iraq will have the wherewithal over the next 5 years to repay much of their debt, the question before us is should we require 50 percent of our reconstruction funds be repaid back?

It is very disturbing to this Member that we are worried about Iraq's debt and not worried about our grandchildren's debt. This is a very straightforward amendment that would ask that 50 percent of our reconstruction dollars be in the form of a loan to Iraq. We have talked about it quite a bit, and it is because the long-term tax burden will be great on our own United

States citizens that we do this at this time so that we will see, in our own efforts, that half of the money for reconstruction be given back to the American taxpayers to lighten their burden over the next several years. There are no surpluses projected for our own country over the next 10 years, and the least we can do is ask that half of the reconstruction money be in the form of a loan.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Tennessee (Mr. Gordon).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Stenholm).

And so, Mr. Speaker, we ask Members to support the motion to recommit. Are we going to take care of the taxpayers of America and our children and our health centers and our roads and bridges? Are we going to allow a country who has $2 trillion in oil reserves in the ground not to pay us back at a time when our country sees no surpluses and will, in fact, be in debt over the next 10 years? I urge a vote of ``aye'' on the motion to recommit.

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

Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentlewoman from New York for yielding me this time.

I too rise to support the Obey-Lantos amendment. It is a good amendment. We do need to make sure that we do what is necessary here, and I believe this amendment is a step in the right direction.

If we do the 50/50 separation now, it gives us a chance to take a look at it and also allows Iraq, which must become a sovereign nation, time so that they can use that $2 trillion worth of oil reserves they have to pay back some of the money that we are now lending and giving to them. It is the proper way to go.

I too have an amendment that I will withdraw and support this Obey- Lantos amendment. We had a good amendment in committee. It did not seem to make its way to the House floor, but this is a good amendment, and I hope that our colleagues would support it.

Iraq is not a poor country. They do have the wherewithal to pay the resources back. We right now need our own schools built better. We need our own roads. We need our judiciary system better financed and funded. So the very same things that we are helping Iraq with, we have got to do it for our own country. This will allow us to do some of that and to recoup some of the moneys that we are giving to Iraq.

As the Members know, this $87 billion builds Iraq better than Iraq was built before. We do have some responsibility there. We must take care of our troops. We must see that they get what they need.

So, Mr. Chairman, this is a good amendment. I rise to withdraw my own amendment and to support the Obey-Lantos amendment and ask that the entire Congress follow.

Offered By: Ms. Kilpatrick

Amendment No. 59: Page 51, after line 11, insert the

following new section:

Sec. 3007. None of the funds made available in this Act

under the heading ``Iraq Relief and Reconstruction Fund'' may

be provided on a non-repayable basis.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me the time.

This is a very difficult time for me as a Member of this body to come before my colleagues and ask you to seek out, to write, to call, to e- mail and to fax your United States Congressperson, your United States Senator and the President of the United States, letting us know, America, how you feel about $87 billion being spent on the country of Iraq at this time; $66 billion of that is for our troops; 18 plus billion of it is for the reconstruction of Iraq.

I stand before my colleagues as an appropriator, one who has sat in two hearings on the $18 billion of your tax money. At the same time that we are building their electricity, their water, their schools, their hospitals, ours are crumbling. I believe that we should help Iraq, and I think the American people believe that, but we should not be building Iraq better than Iraq was built before the U.S. invaded. I think that is wrong, and I think the American people should speak out on that.

We are in trying times in our own country. Many schools, many hospitals are in dire need. Our judicial system is falling and failing, and yes, we are going to rebuild their judicial system. I think something's wrong with that, and we need to speak out on that, and we need to hear from you, America, on this very question this week. As this supplemental goes this week, today, tomorrow, and probably early Friday

morning, we need to hear from you. It is your money. I am really appalled that it is going through quickly.

I strongly support giving the troops what they need for the next 3 to 6 months. This supplemental is for 15 months. How many hospitals in America will be closing during that time?

How many schools will be crumbling? How many people are out of work? We need investment in America. Yes, we need to help Iraq, after all, we have bombed it, with over 5,000 people killed and two or three of our soldiers being killed every day.

Terrorism is an international problem, and we must address it with leadership and with leaders. So I urge you, America, speak out, let your voices be heard. Fax, call, write or e-mail your Congressperson, U.S. Senator, and President Bush.

Announcement by the Speaker Pro Tempore

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Skelton), our ranking member on the Subcommittee on Defense of the Committee on Appropriations.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Oregon (Mr. DeFazio).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Green).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Maine (Mr. Allen).

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

(Mr. SHERMAN asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Washington (Mr. Smith).

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

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Oregon (Mr. Blumenauer).

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

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Doggett).

(Mr. DOGGETT asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Pallone).

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

I first want to say that we have for the next several hours, the next 48 hours, a general debate and a final vote on what we will do with $87 billion of the taxpayers' money that is not paid for. Are we going to saddle our children and grandchildren with this debt? Can some of this be a loan and what is needed right away be sent out forthwith? Those are the kinds of questions, and we hope that some of the amendments will be adopted as we debate the supplemental. Iraq is not a poor country; $2 trillion of oil reserves now can be used to secure and pay back some of this money.

Mr. Speaker, it is important that we get engaged, that we speak to one another, that some of the amendments do

go forth and that we keep America strong, keep our troops healthy and protect them as God would have it.

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

Mr. Chairman of our Congressional Black Caucus, thank you for continuing to be the beacon as we speak out and remain the conscience of the Congress and the conscience of our country. This is a serious time for the world, a serious time for American people. As our people struggle to raise their families, to feed them, to house them, to clothe them, to send their children to institutions of higher education, at a time when unemployment is the highest it has been in several years, many people who have worked all of their lives find themselves unemployed in this country.

So we as Members of the Congressional Black Caucus come to the American people tonight to ask you to fax, to e-mail, to call and to write your Congressperson, your U.S. Senator, and, yes, President Bush. It has already been shown that over the last 2 weeks the American people get this. Over 60 percent do not want us to spend $87 billion in Iraq. Many of them want their own children, their own families, their own communities to be able to participate in the American Dream.

And over the last 2 years, with over 3 million jobs lost across this country, the people of America are crying out. And we, the Members of the Congressional Black Caucus, come to you, America, and ask you to speak up, to fax, to e-mail, to call, and to write the President, your United States Senator, and your Congressperson and let us know how you feel.

I am an appropriator. I sit on the Committee on Appropriations and I am honored to serve there, one of two people from the State of Michigan. Last May this Congress gave, as has been mentioned, $79 billion to the President, asking no accountability. And you know what, American people? We have not gotten it, and that was our mistake. When we let that money go in

May, we should have asked for accountability. And the principles that the Congressional Black Caucus adopted then and that we present to you tonight, ask for a full accounting of the $79 billion.

The families of many of the people who are active in Iraq and Afghanistan today have come to us and other Members of this body to say that their sons and daughters do not have the training that they need in such a situation, do not have the protective body armor they need to protect themselves, and equipment; and they do not have what is needed to fight such a war as this that the President declared was over a few months ago. The war is not over. We are in a new phase of it.

And the $79 billion then, which was not spent for training and armor and keeping the equipment up to date, the equipment is falling apart. They have been fighting in the desert. The PXes where the soldiers get their water, their personal items are almost empty. We have got to put the money back in for that. The President asked for $87 billion more just on September 7.

I am happy to say that this Congress, both the House and the Senate, want to take a look at what he is asking us to do. You see, the $87 billion on September 7, and the $79 billion in May, is $166 billion. There are 13 appropriations bills. This $166 billion is larger than seven of those bills combined. We have had over 40 hearings on those bills. So we must not rush to do this.

We must first protect our troops, give the soldiers what they need, make sure we do what is right. And as an appropriator and as members of the Congressional Black Caucus, we are committed to doing that. $166 billion over 6 months' time and we have soldiers who do not have the protection they need to protect their lives? Many of our vehicles are out of operable order.

Where has the money gone? That is what this Member wants to know. Where has the money gone? How much money is really needed right now? I support giving the government what they need, giving our troops what they need. But we have not been given the documentation. Where is that documentation? Where has the money gone? Why can we not get that information?

And as we come to you tonight, America, we want you to ask those same questions.

Appropriations, I sit on the Foreign Operations subcommittee, so I am talking to you about what I know, what we get, the little we can sift through and find. On the Foreign Operations subcommittee we have had two hearings on the reconstruction money. As the President proposed it, he asked for $20.3 billion. That is what the two hearings were held on. Today it went into the Committee on Appropriations. Tomorrow morning I understand the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Young) of the Committee on Appropriations has reduced that by $2 billion. And his mark before us tomorrow morning will be for $18 billion.

Is it needed now? Must we do it all now? Can we fund until January so that we can get the information that this caucus has requested in our principles? I believe that we have to demand that. And I believe that you, America, have to demand that. Why would we build Iraq better than Iraq was before we entered it, before we unilaterally struck them? Why? Why would we build their roads and bridges and clean water and schools and hospitals and justice system when our very same things are crumbling? Why? Why will we give them a Cadillac at a time when our people are unemployed and we need to help our citizens when we could give them a Ford?

Most American people want to help them, but they do not want to do it at the expense of our own country. That is what we have to talk about. That is why we need the information. We do not have to rush for this one.

Tomorrow morning in the Committee on Appropriations, and I will be there, one of many Members discussing this supplemental bill that is before us, why can we not bifurcate it? Why can we not get the details that the troops need, the armies need, the vehicles, the weaponry they need and funds for the next 3 months until the first of the year? That would give us time to study this.

Why can we not look at the reconstruction money that is being asked for and perhaps fund it for the next 3 months so that we can look into the American people's money and at the same time fund those things that families need? We as Members of the Congressional Black Caucus are demanding that. As has been said already, we believe that we must help the Army, Navy, Marines, Coast Guard, and give them what they need to fight this battle.

I am one who voted against a unilateral strike. We have always been a country of defending ourselves. We have never unilaterally struck another nation. And there was no imminent threat then. And now the President has told us what we already knew, there was no imminent threat, that we could have addressed this better. We could have worked with the United Nations, 183 nations of the world, and had partners in this effort. Yes, Saddam Hussein was a bad man. Yes, we are happy that he is gone.

Iraq is not a poor country. Iraq has the second largest oil reserves in the world. The value of those oil reserves are over $2 trillion. Why, then, do we take our meager dollars at a time when American citizens are suffering and families are out of work and our hospitals are closing and our schools are crumbling? And what about our blackouts? We had a blackout, America; do not forget that. Your State may have been one of them. Mine certainly was. We have got to put our electric grids back up. We have got to see that our power companies invest back into the power system. I contend we can do both.

We have got to go back to the United Nations and try to get a coalition. The Madrid Conference is coming up in a couple of weeks. There we will find out what countries will come to the table and be allies with us. We were told in appropriation that 61 small countries, 61 can only come up with $1 billion. And they want one country to come up with $87 billion of your money? I do not think that is necessary.

And I think, America, the Congressional Black Caucus urges you to write, fax, call and e-mail your Congressperson, your U.S. Senator, and, yes, our President Bush, to let us know how you feel.

If we would freeze the highest 1 percent of Americans, the millionaires, if we would freeze the tax cut that has been given to them over the next 6 years, we could recoup $80 billion. This is a time of giving. It is a time that we all must put in.

Terrorism we must rid in the world. And it is going to take a collective, international effort to do that. We have got to do it at the same time that we keep our families strong, that we keep our men and women working and their families keeping their children together and protecting our seniors, who today have to choose between eating and getting their medicines, paying their rent and getting their medicines. Why are we not talking about that?

Mr. President, this is not right. And we as Members of the Congressional Black Caucus, you have our principles. Look at them. Talk to us. It is our community too. It is our country too. And if we are going to sustain ourselves as the world leaders that we are, if God is going to protect us as we carry out the business of the country, I think we need more time.

There is no need to push an $87 billion supplemental through in this short period of time. So I thank the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Cummings) for the leadership that he has provided. Thank you to my brothers and sisters in the Congressional Black Caucus who remain the conscience of the Congress. We come as 39 Members representing over 26 million people. Many of our districts are not majority African Americans. Some are; some are not. We represent Arab Americans, Latino Americans, European Americans, Native Americans. We have the microcosm in our districts of America.

And what we are here tonight to say to the American people, you have to act. You have to speak now or forever hold your peace. This is serious times for America, for our children, for our families and as we live, and as members of the caucus who stood here and took the oaths, we pledge that we will do our support, we pledge that we will uphold this Constitution, and we pledge that we will represent to the very best of our ability.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to commend the Women's National Basketball Association Championship team the Detroit Shock. Last night, over 22,000 people came to our stadium in Auburn Hills and watched the women's national basketball team win the championship in beating the two-time champions Los Angeles women's team.

I just want to say how important Title IX is in the rearing of these young women all over America who participate in women's sports and how important it is.

I want to commend Bill Laimbeer, the coach of the team, and for bringing them forward and to bringing another spirit to our team.

So you go get them, women. We are proud of you all over the country. Let us move forward the Women's National Basketball Association that will give young women opportunities to move forward and have the confidence they need to tackle the problems of the world. Congratulations to you, Detroit Shock. We look forward to your next year. You go, girls.

Mr. Speaker, to our distinguished chairman, who continues to keep us focus in speaking to the needs our constituents, I thank the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Cummings).

I rise as one of the 39 members of the Congressional Black Caucus. We represent over 26 million Americans all over this country. The majorities of our districts are not African American. Some are. Most are not. And collectively we call ourselves the conscience of the Congress and the conscience of these United States.

Over the last 10 days after the President's announcement, my office has been inundated with my constituents asking me, What are you going to say? What are you going to do? Are you going to give them a blank check? You already did that. Will you speak up?

And I am so proud of my colleagues in the Congressional Black Caucus for organizing this action tonight because it us who have been charged by God to speak out, to work in a bipartisan way in the interests of the people of this great country. I represent over 680,000 people, as many of my colleagues do, and 11 different communities in the State of Michigan. Some of God's finest. Some have served in the Armed Forces. Some have families who have died in the Armed Forces. All of them want us to fight to protect our right of democracy that so many have fought and died for in this country. We come here today and I as a member of the Committee on Appropriations where I hope much of this discussion will be had, and I want to say just from the outset the President proposes and the Congress disposes, and that is our constitutional right; that we as Members of this House, 435 of us, must demand that the committees of jurisdiction receive the supplemental request, that we are able to hold hearings on this request, and that we be able to get information so that we can make those intelligent decisions that our constituents sent us here to do. We have the time. We must act, as the Constitution allows us to, that the appropriate committees, the Select Committee on Homeland Security, that the appropriate committees, the Committee on Appropriations, Defense Subcommittee, authorization, all those committees that are involved, the members, and some of those committees have 60 or 70 people on them, must have an opportunity to hear and see and act on this supplemental request. I implore our leadership to make sure that that happens. Eighty-seven billion dollars now. Less than 6 months ago we gave them $79 billion because we said we had to do that. The President requested it and we were at war. Unilaterally first striking a country. We have never done that in the history of our country. We call it the Department of Defense because we defend our country. We do not strike a country. Somebody said we ought to change that to the War Department. I am not quite there yet. We must solve this crisis. And it is an international crisis. It was then and it still is. That, as my colleague has mentioned, is why we are footing much of the bill, and we know this will not be the last supplemental unless we are able to bring in the international community.

There was no intelligence given to this Member and others before our unilateral first strike that said Osama bin Laden and Saddam Hussein were connected. Osama bin Laden, we already know we must find and rid out the terrorists and the terrorism that he has perpetuated on the world, which is why this is an international crisis that we find ourselves in. Osama bin Laden on the one hand, Saddam Hussein on the other, never at all before this unilateral first strike was there any connection, intelligence-wise, that connected the two together. Now, 5\1/2\, 6 months later, we are not sure.

The President says that Iraq is the epicenter of terrorism now. The way that we have disrespected the Muslim religion and any religion in this country, we have to think about that. To them it is a religious war. There is something different about a religious war. They think they are in jihad as we read and discuss.

It is so critical at this time that we, as the world leaders, sit down and try to work out in an international way the problems of the world. Terrorism has to stop. No one in the world is safe as long as terrorism is allowed to rear its ugly head wherever it must strike. We already heard $166 billion should they be successful in getting this. As was mentioned, that is three times more than we spend on education for our children. It is two times more than the Department of Homeland Security has today, and it is nearly three times more than we spend on our transportation budget today.

We have got to protect our troops. We have got to make sure that they are safe. And the parents are saying bring their children home, 18 to 25 years old. Some not properly trained. Some do not have the proper equipment. We are a better Nation than that. That is why the Congressional Black Caucus have come together tonight to talk to America about what we think must happen, and we want the people to fax, write, call, and e-mail their Congresspeople and let them know how they feel. We want the people to fax, call, e-mail and write the White House, let them know how they feel. The power is in the people of America. It always has been and always will be.

So I want to put in the Record at this time the principles, the principles that the Congressional Black Caucus adopted on March 18, 2003, and the reassuring of the principles we adopted today and present to the people today. These are the principles that the Congressional Black Caucus must see as we talk about this $87 billion of the people's tax dollars.

We affirm our stated principles from March of this year. We also affirm our principles from October of 2002. Despite the President's failure to follow our original statement of principles in his decisions leading to the war, we express our full resolve to support and protect our troops and their families. We, the members of the Congressional Black Caucus, believe that the administration should provide an accounting of all funds expended to date that were provided previously appropriated by the Congress, which is the $79 million for Iraq and Afghanistan, including details about all contracts for work related to Iraq and Afghanistan. We know that there is a problem with many no-bid contracts given out right now, billions of dollars. We want an accounting of that money.

We believe that the President should provide sufficient details about how the proposed funding will be spent to enable Congress and its committees to evaluate separately funding proposed for the protections and maintenance of our troops and funding proposed for rebuilding Iraq. We, the members of the Congressional Black Caucus, as was mentioned, believe our troops should be protected and secure. We also believe that the humanitarian assistance that we are contemplating, some $20 billion, needs further scrutiny. The investment in their infrastructure when our electric grids are breaking down, we need that here. We need it for our schools. We need it for our health centers.

We, the members of the Congressional Black Caucus, believe that the President should provide full details about how the efforts will be paid for, including a full accounting of Iraqi resources, recovered and anticipated, and how the President proposes to use those resources to reduce or to reimburse the U.S. obligation.

We, the members of the Congressional Black Caucus, believe the President should provide full details about the future obligations of the United States personnel, funding, and decision-making and about how responsibility and authority for these obligations will be shared with the United Nations and/or other nations going forward.

We, the members of the Congressional Black Caucus, believe the administration should provide to Congress full details of information relied on by the President in his decision to go to war in that first unilateral strike earlier this year.

We believe the President should provide details of the criteria he will expect to be met before bringing U.S. troops home and what the exit strategy must be.

Those are the principles that 39 members of the Congressional Black Caucus today present to the President and to our American citizens across this country. They are simple. We want a response. We want it timely. And the 26 million people that we represent want to hear from him.

I thank the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Cummings) for his leadership.

The Congressional Black Caucus Principles Regarding President Bush's

$87 Billion Supplemental Request

We reaffirm our Statement of Principles issued in October

2002.

Despite the President's failure to follow our original

Statement of Principles in his decisions leading to the war,

we express our full resolve to support and protect our troops

and their families.

The Administration should provide an accounting of all

funds expended to date that were previously appropriated by

the Congress, including details about all contracts for work

in or related to Iraq.

The President should provide sufficient details about how

the proposed funding will be spent to enable Congress and its

Committees to evaluate separately funding proposed for the

protection and maintenance of our troops and funding proposed

for rebuilding Iraq. Congress should vote on these funding

proposals separately.

The President should provide full details about how the

efforts will be paid for, including a full accounting of

Iraqi resources (recovered and anticipated) and how the

President proposes to use those resources to reduce or

reimburse the U.S. obligation.

The President should provide full details about the future

obligations of the United States (personnel, funding and

decisions making) and about how responsibility and authority

for these obligations will be shared with the United Nations

and/or other nations going forward.

The Administration should provide to Congress full details

of information relied on by the President in his decision to

go to war.

The President should provide details of the criteria he

will expect to be met before bringing US troops home and of

his exit strategy.

Congressional Black Caucus Principles on Military Action in Iraq

1. We oppose a unilateral first-strike action by the United

States without a clearly demonstrated and imminent threat of

attack on the United States.

2. Only Congress has the authority to declare war.

3. Every diplomatic option must be exhausted.

4. A unilateral first-strike would undermine the moral

authority of the United States, result in substantial loss of

life, destabilize the Mideast region and undermine the

ability of our nation to address unmet domestic priorities.

5. Further, any post-strike plan for maintaining stability

in the region would be costly and would require a long-term

commitment.

Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to H.R. 2765, the District of Columbia Appropriations for 2004. I oppose the bill because of the Davis, Frelinghuysen/Boehner amendment that seeks to authorize a school voucher program in the District of Columbia.

Proponents of the amendment contend that it will afford options to parents who want to improve the quality of education that their children will receive by providing $7,500 in funds for students to attend private elementary or high schools in the District. The proposal and the amendment are flawed because the District would have a program forced upon it. The members of the city council are opposed to the provision. The residents of the District are overwhelmingly opposed to this measure. Furthermore, I agree with the detractors of the proposal that the funds being proposed could be better used to fully fund public education programs in the District.

The impetus for the amendment is based on a parochial attitude by the authors that they know what is best for the students, families and residents that rely on the DC public education system. This provision undermines the principles of ``home rule''. I urge my colleagues to support the Norton amendment to strike down this harmful and ill- conceived provision designed to de-fund the DC school system and undermine support for public education.

Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the requisite number of words.

Mr. Chairman, I too am from the State of Michigan and, yes, our State did turn down the voucher proposal as did this United States Congress and other States around the country. Over 90 percent of America's children go to public education. If this Congress really wanted to fix public education, we could do that. I support the Norton amendment because it is about home rule, about the people of each jurisdiction deciding as Michigan did, as this Congress did for the country, that they did not want vouchers.

I support all forms of education, but public money for public schools. That is what our Constitution says and that is what most State Constitutions say, as well as our country. If we really wanted to help the D.C. public schools, let us help all 70,000 students. How do you pick 2,000 out and say, okay, we're going to do it for you but not for you 68,000. If we, the United States Congress, are overseers for Washington, D.C., unfortunately, why not take all 70,000? How do you pick 2,000 of what some have described as one of the worst systems? I do not know about that, either, if it is the worst system. What is worse and what is bad is that this Congress, this United States Government, does not fund public education adequately where 90 percent of America's children attend.

Education is the difference between success and failure in a person's life. The budget is $2.2 trillion; $800 billion of it is discretionary. If we had the commitment for these 2,000 children, just think what we could do with the 70,000 with that $750 billion discretionary budget that we have. Do not fool ourselves. There is only one pot of money. When you take money from this end, as we are doing for the 68,000, it does not make it better. It destabilizes public education.

I am a teacher. I am a parent. I have been in institutions of higher learning. I know when children, and you all know them, are bright, wide-eyed and bushy-tailed at 3, 5 and ready to go, they can be taught. All children can be taught. Someone said earlier, some kids are not teachable. I do not believe that. I think God created all of us equal and that all children can be taught in adequate schools that have trained teachers and the technology of today. And the commitment from not just the city, not just the State but, yes, this United States Congress should do what is right.

I want to congratulate the gentlewoman from this District. She fights very hard and in very difficult circumstances as this United States Congress does not allow her to represent her people who have spoken, irrespective of what the Mayor does, and I respect his opinion, but many people in the D.C. District and its city council and its school board have spoke loudly, they do not want vouchers. If you are going to save this District, they say save all 70,000 of us and help us in that vein.

In Michigan, we voted down vouchers. Other jurisdictions voted down vouchers. Public money for public schools. Let us teach our children. Give them the opportunity they need to succeed in this world. They do not need to be 2,000 against the 68,000. In D.C. if you are going to have a United States Congress, let us do it for all 70,000. How do you pick 2,000 out of that? I think it is despicable. I think the people of D.C. have spoken. What we must do as a United States Congress is reinforce our children and provide for them the best education that they can have wherever they go to school. In Taiwan, they spend 70 percent of their Federal budget on education. In the United States we spend less than 2 percent of our Federal dollars on education. There is something wrong with this equation. It is not the D.C. community, it is not the District that is bad, it is not that the children are not performing. It is that this country has not made the commitment yet to God's children in this country to give them the very best that we can offer.

I commend the gentlewoman from the District of Columbia. I hope this Congress will support her.

Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman from Oklahoma for his chairmanship in having gone through our budget for the first time, as well as our ranking member, the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Olver), for his first time.

I do believe that we have a balanced budget before us. It is a good budget with some modification as we go through the amendments today.

I first want to bring to the Members' attention the earned income tax credit which in this bill allows $100 million for 45,000 people to be looked at to see if they are in compliance in order to receive the