Floor Statements

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

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of this rule and in support of the Lawsuit Abuse Reduction Act, and I do so because I have seen firsthand the very destructive nature that frivolous lawsuits have on our country, on our job creation, and on our health care costs.

Before coming to Congress I was in the private sector and ran a business, and every year we spent hundreds of thousands of dollars on liability insurance in an attempt to protect ourselves and our employees from frivolous lawsuits. We spent millions of dollars every year on inflated health care costs for our employees, and those suits that were filed against us were usually settled and they were usually settled in a fashion where the lawyers got millions of dollars and the plaintiffs essentially got pennies. In the end, we spent millions of dollars every single year to protect ourselves against frivolous lawsuits and to get rid of frivolous lawsuits.

Instead of spending millions of dollars on frivolous lawsuits, it would have been much more productive to spend that money on creating more jobs and lowering the health care costs for our employees. Every year frivolous lawsuits cost our economy $233 billion. That is 2.23 percent of our GDP, and it costs $109 for every single person in America.

Mr. Speaker, I do not think there are many things that we could do to give our economy a boost, to help American companies compete better in a global marketplace, than ending frivolous lawsuits. So I encourage all of my colleagues to support this rule and to support the Lawsuit Abuse Reduction Act.

Mr. Speaker, I find it interesting how night after night during this period of the evening we call Special Orders that my friends on the other side of the aisle come down and talk about allegations of scandals, of things like contracts with companies trying to help rebuild Iraq, outcries over misleading our Nation to war, charges of coverups and lack of cooperation; and so I would like to just address what the previous speaker talked about, which is this allegation that there is an attempt to delay the elections.

All the news reports I have seen in the last 24 hours is that there was never any request nor any really evidence of anybody trying to delay elections by any means at all. But sometimes we just do not let the facts get in the way of our opinions, and so we ignore those.

Mr. Speaker, I am going to ask my colleagues to imagine that there is a scenario like the following: imagine if the press had reported an alleged scandal that entailed $10 billion of illegal payments, and in that same article it was revealed that the head of the program that was the subject of those allegations was implicated and was suspected of directly participating in those illegal payments.

And then after this head of this program was implicated, he went back to the organization that he was running, and he sent out letters to all of the

companies that had contracts with this organization and said, now, remember, we have a contract that says you are not supposed to discuss any of our dealings with any third parties, and we will enforce that provision of our contract, and we expect you not to cooperate with anyone asking any questions. Now, that same contract said that we could waive this; but we are not inclined to do that, which means we really are not inclined to cooperate at all.

Also imagine if this same organization had done 55 internal audits and was now unwilling to share any of them with its stakeholders, the people that had invested in this organization, the people that were served by this organization. The people that had a stake in this organization were not allowed to see any of these internal audits because none of them were allowed to become public.

Now, if this had actually happened, I think there would be a great outcry, especially from my friends on the other side of the aisle. But, Mr. Speaker, the reality is that such a scandal truly exists, so we do not have to imagine a thing.

The Iraqi Free Press. Let me say that again. The Iraqi Free Press, which did not exist 18 months ago because there was no such thing as the Iraqi Free Press, broke a story about the U.N. Oil-for-Food scandal, which could potentially turn out to be the largest scandal in history. In that report they said there was a gentleman named Sevan, and possibly Benon Sevan, who ran the Oil-for-Food program, who may have gotten some of these illegal payments. And this same Mr. Sevan wrote to all of the U.N. contractors saying, now, remember, we have this clause that says you cannot discuss the details of our relationship with any third parties.

Now, Mr. Speaker, I would think that the U.N. would want to cooperate with an investigation; and if they truly wanted to cooperate, they would waive the provision that is in the contract and say, go ahead and cooperate with anyone who is investigating appropriately this matter, and do not worry about that provision because we really want to understand the truth in this matter.

Mr. Sevan will not allow the member states of the U.N. to see those 55 audits to understand exactly what was happening internally in the U.N., and specifically with the Oil-for-Food program.

Mr. Speaker, there is a ray of hope in this story. And the ray of hope is that former Federal Reserve Chairman Paul Volcker has recently been appointed to investigate this matter. He is a highly respected man and I am sure will do a very good job.

The most important thing we do is not engage in a bunch of rhetoric and outcry and charges and allegations. The most important thing we accomplish here is to actually get to the root of the problem and understand the facts and understand exactly what happened here and understand whether the allegations are true: that $10 billion has somehow disappeared, money which was specifically supposed to go to help feed and provide for the health care of the Iraqi people because they are the ones that will ultimately suffer as a result of this scandal. They were supposed to be provided for with the oil riches of their nation in food and oil, and it appears that others used those riches for their own self-gain.

So I encourage all the Members of this body to express not outcry but sincere concern about this issue and use all the resources that we have at our disposal to make sure the U.N. cooperates in the Oil-for-Food scandal investigation and provides Chairman Volcker with all of the information and all of the resources that he needs so that we can thoroughly and properly investigate this matter.

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

Mr. Speaker, today I rise in support of H. Res. 684, a resolution honoring David Scott Tidmarsh, the 2004 Scripps National Spelling Bee champion. I want to thank my colleague, the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Davis), the chairman of the Committee on Government Reform, for moving this resolution so quickly through his committee.

Mr. Speaker, 14-year-old David Tidmarsh is truly a remarkable young man. Having had the opportunity to meet him and witness his accomplishments, I think I can say that with great confidence.

This soon-to-be freshman at Adams High School in South Bend, Indiana, is no stranger to the national spelling bee contest. He finished tied for 16th place in last year's spelling bee, but this year he knew he could do better, and he set out on a plan to achieve that goal.

David Tidmarsh has four dictionaries that he calls his own in his personal collection, including one that is so well worn that, if you shook it, it would probably fall apart. He has read through that one cover to cover twice. In fact, he compiled a list of words he thought might be included in the contest and typed them into his family's home computer. He also studied word lists from prior competitions.

Mr. Speaker, I think it is safe to say this is a very determined young man.

I was surprised to learn that in the 77-year history of the Scripps National Spelling Bee there has never been a winner from Indiana until this young man correctly spelled ``autochthonous,'' which is hard enough to say, very hard to spell, in the 15th round.

Mr. Speaker, I know that people from all over the country were holding their breath, watching David spell that final word on ESPN. I also know that his school and his hometown of South Bend, Indiana, was overwhelmed with excitement when he claimed the championship.

In fact, he has had quite a whirlwind tour since winning. He won the trophy on Thursday, June 3. That very night, he and his family traveled to New York City, and the next morning he appeared on the CBS Early Show, ABC's Good Morning America, NBC's Today Show, and, after that, he appeared on Fox News and CNN as well.

After that, he came back here to Washington, D.C., to deliver the speech at the bee's banquet that evening; and then he finally went back home to South Bend, Indiana, on Saturday.

On Monday, he attended a rally in his honor at his school, Edison Intermediate Center, hosted by the City of South Bend and the South Bend Community School Corporation. At the celebration, he was praised by Indiana's Governor, Joe Kernan, for the way he handled his victory. In fact, Governor Kernan was so impressed that he awarded David the State of Indiana's highest honor, the Sagamore of the Wabash Award.

But that was only the beginning of the accolades. South Bend Mayor Steve Luecke presented David with the key to the city and declared June 7, 2004, David Scott Tidmarsh Day. In St. Joseph County, Commissioner Cindy Bodle presented David with a key to the county.

Since that time in early June, David has thrown out his first pitch at a South Bend Silverhawks game, and I might say it was a strike, I was there to witness it, and he has appeared in numerous local parades and even had the opportunity to visit with the President of the United States in the Oval Office.

Everyone, including his very proud parents, his classmates, his extended Hoosier family, the Indiana Congressional Delegation and myself, are all extremely proud of David's accomplishments.

Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support this resolution.

Mr. Speaker, I have no further requests for time, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.

Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 2\1/2\ minutes.

The amendment I have offered is very straightforward. It is about simplicity, and it is about honesty in the budget process, which does not exist today.

It is about simplicity because it replaces 20 budget functions that we currently have in our annual budget process with five. Those five would include mandatory spending, defense and nondefense discretionary spending, interest, and emergency spending, or a rainy day fund.

By simplifying the process in this way, we make the budget process much easier; and we expedite it by focusing on overall spending, rather than focusing on 20 different so-called spending priorities. We spend too much time, frankly, debating and amending these spending priorities, when in the end they are not binding and they are ultimately, on too many occasions, ignored in the appropriations process.

My amendment is about honesty because it budgets money that we know we are going to spend. Every year we spend money on emergencies that are not budgeted. My amendment changes this practice by creating a rainy day fund that is based on the rolling 5-year average of actual money we spend on emergencies. By doing that, we will expedite the delivery of needed funds in the event of a true emergency, and we will provide a clearer definition of what an emergency is to deter characterizing routine spending and spending money in and above the budgeted and appropriated levels.

So, Mr. Chairman, this amendment would bring more clarity to the process; it would bring more simplification and bring more honesty. I encourage all of my colleagues to support this amendment.

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

Mr. Chairman, it is my pleasure to yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Hensarling).

Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Ryan).

Mr. Chairman, may I inquire how much time is remaining?

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

Mr. Chairman, let me just conclude by saying as I started out that this amendment is straightforward, and it is about simplicity and honesty. I think we owe the American people a simplified budget that they can understand, and by reducing the number of budget functions from 20 to 5, I think we are accomplishing that goal.

The 20 budget functions that we have already, as has been pointed out, are unenforceable and too often ignored in the budget appropriations process, and we are simply budgeting money that we know we are going to spend. Every single year we spend Federal money for emergencies that we spend above the budget and appropriated levels. So we are being honest with the American people, which I think they deserve.

So I encourage my colleagues to support this amendment, because it is based on simplicity and honesty. It is exactly what we should be doing here every day, exactly what the American taxpayers and the American citizens deserve.

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

Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.

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

Mr. Chairman, I came to Congress from the business world, and my first impression when I got here is that Congress, as a whole, is a lot like 535 general managers with no CEO. With all due respect to the Speaker and our leadership, there is no individual who can set spending priorities in the face of limited resources. We do not have a leadership problem here. We have a process problem.

When we take the facts, combined together that our budget process does not contain any of the realities that every family and every business in America faces; combined with the fact that our process is not enforceable; combined with the fact that our process only measures success by how much money we spend, never by how well we spend it; combined with the fact that people in this Chamber will come down here with a straight face and say that smaller increases are actually cuts; if we combine those facts with human nature, what we have is a lack of fiscal discipline and runaway spending.

I used to be a chairman of a publicly traded company, and if I accounted for and budgeted for my business the way government accounts and budgets for its business, I would, at best, be bankrupt and fired. I would more than likely be in jail. I find it very ironic when Members of Congress lecture business executives about truth in accounting and the importance of integrity in financial disclosure.

Mr. Chairman, what we need is a budget process that provides a framework of discipline. It simply fixes the process. It strengthens our enforcement tools. It requires truth in accounting, increases accountability and combats waste, fraud and abuse, and this is exactly what this amendment does. I encourage all of my colleagues to support it.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding to me, and I thank him for his leadership on this very important issue that I think is crucial to our economic security and job creation in our country.

As we focus this week on energy and its role in ensuring our economic security, I remind my colleagues, as my friend from Kansas just did, that the House of Representatives has passed three energy bills before this week, since 2001, all with the aim of exploring and increasing domestic energy production in hopes of staving off the type of energy crisis we face today.

Even though the employment rate has gone down significantly, and the economy as a whole is showing clear signs of improvement, the greatest impediment and risk to sustaining our growing economy is the rising cost of energy. Energy is the lifeblood of the American economy, and we can ill-afford to ignore the pressing need to pass comprehensive energy legislation. We cannot wait for another blackout of the kind that we saw last August or for another spike in gasoline prices that we see today.

Mr. Speaker, it is imperative that we act now. The energy conference report the House has passed is a jobs bill. We call a lot of things here in the House of Representatives job bills, but this bill clearly fits the description. It is estimated that 838,500 jobs will be created if this energy policy is actually enacted. From natural gas and coal, to nuclear and renewable energy exploration and expansion, our domestic energy reserves will be a dramatic boost to the American workforce.

The rising cost of gas prices is just one of the most visible consequences of lacking a national energy policy, and it is a stark reminder of our need to utilize and explore our domestic energy supply. By hindering exploration and utilization of our country's energy potential, we continue our reliance on foreign energy sources. Since 2001, the United States has sent over $300 billion and countless American jobs to OPEC and other foreign Nations to meet our energy needs here at home. According to the U.S. Department of Commerce, America loses 12,389 jobs for every $1 billion we spend on imports. This translates to 1.7 million jobs America has sent overseas for oil every single year.

This legislation will help ease our dependence on foreign oil by requiring 5 billion gallons of renewable fuel to be included in all gasoline sold in the United States by 2015. This increase in the use of ethanol will save 1.3 billion barrels of oil by 2016, and improve the trade deficit by $28.5 billion over the next 15 years, and adds $135 billion to the American economy by 2016 through increased agricultural demand and new capital spending, and generate $32 billion in income for American consumers over the next 15 years.

Along with oil, natural gas has been an indispensable energy source in this country. Natural gas is responsible for 20 percent of our Nation's energy production and is expected to play an increasingly important role in addressing our Nation's future energy needs. Yet the volatile price of natural gas over the past new years is constricting our economic growth. For example, an estimated 85,000 jobs have been lost by the U.S. chemical makers since U.S. natural gas prices began to rise in mid-2000. Over the past few years, our reliance on natural gas has left our small business community susceptible to the fluctuations of the natural gas market, and it is hurting our economy and our workforce.

Mr. Speaker, I find it ironic that last August, on the same day that we saw a blackout in parts of the Midwest and the northeast, I chaired a hearing in my District, in the 2nd District of Indiana, on natural gas prices. At that hearing, we heard from school districts, we heard from businesses, we heard from social service organizations about the devastating effect that the rising cost of natural gas has had on their endeavors. Probably one of the most interesting things I learned during that hearing is that here in the United States, in our non-park, non- wilderness lands, we have enough natural gas to supply 100 million households for 157 years.

I would like to share just one quick story about a company in my District called Koontz-Wagner Electric that testified at that hearing and talked about the impact that the rising cost of natural gas has. They utilize natural gas to run the energy needs of their plant and much of their equipment, and this year, they saw an increase of $60 to $90,000 above their expected levels in natural gas costs. That is money that could have been invested in their business, could have helped create jobs, but instead went to pay for the energy costs that made them less competitive in the global economy.

Just last week, I spoke with a fertilizer company, one of the largest employers in one of the counties in my District, and they have seen their main input cost, $90 percent of their cost is nitrogen, and over the last 2 weeks they have seen their nitrogen costs increase by 15 percent, putting their company and their employees at risk. They have seen that not only in the last 2 weeks, but week after week they

have seen double digit increases in their most important costs, again, putting their company at risk.

But there is a solution, and it is enacting a comprehensive energy policy in this country. A comprehensive energy bill includes such provision as the creation of a natural gas pipeline from the Alaska North Slope to the lower 48 States. This pipeline will improve access to natural gas and promote competition in the exploration, development and production of natural gas to help secure our Nation's energy future. This legislation also provides for more natural gas exploration and development by providing royalty relief for deep and ultra deep gas wells in the shallow waters of the Gulf of Mexico. Improved access to North America's abundant natural gas resources will help to reduce high utility bills, create jobs and provide more than $500 million of increased revenues for the U.S. economy.

Mr. Speaker, as I said, energy is the lifeblood of our economy. We can no longer afford to ignore this pressing need. We must remain committed to pursuing a comprehensive energy policy in order to reduce our dependence on foreign oil, lessen the cost of gasoline and home utility bills, and help create more jobs right here in America.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Kansas (Mr. Tiahrt) for bringing this Special Order to the floor to talk about this very important issue. I urge my colleagues to support enactment of this energy policy.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding and I thank my good friend from Texas for taking the leadership in talking about this very important subject, and I commend all my colleagues who have come down to the floor tonight to talk about what is going on in their States and their districts and sharing good news. I think it is so important that we do share this good news, because much of the economy is based on the confidence of the American people, and when they hear the good news I am confident that their confidence will swell and they will continue to do their job so well in growing the economy.

Before coming to Congress, I was a business person. I was part of the economy trying to grow a business and create jobs every day, and one of the differences I have learned between working in the private sector and being part of government is that facts do not always get in the way of people's opinions here in government. I think it is important that we recognize what the facts are, and I think the Wall Street Journal today tried to share some of the facts about the economy in an editorial they entitled Gloom and Boom.

Roughly, that editorial talked about how not long ago the critics of the economy said that this is the worst economy that we have seen since maybe the Great Depression, but then when economic growth was undeniable, the criticism was, well, there's growth, but there is no jobs. This is a jobless recovery, and now clearly there is robust job growth, so the criticism is, well, certainly there is growth and certainly there are jobs, but these are not good jobs; these are not good-paying jobs.

The editorial went on to point out that in fact these are good jobs, the economy is growing, personal incomes are up, and the people getting the jobs today are being paid more than the jobs of yesterday.

We can talk about Wall Street Journal editorials all night long. We can talk about national economic indicators all night long, and they are very, very important, but I find that the best national economic indicator is my local paper. So tonight I ran up to the files and looked in the file to try to find some examples of what is happening in the Second District of Indiana, and I just grabbed a few of the articles that were in the file from the last couple months. These are examples of the economic indicators we are finding in north central Indiana.

Consumer Confidence Climbs. Economy, Job Market Gain Strength.

Big New Business Here, 157 Jobs with Furniture Firm on the East Side. LaPorte Officials Celebrate ``Major'' Business Here.

Zimmer Adding 400 More Jobs.

Manufacturing Sees Expansion. March Results Give Hope for Job Growth.

Jobless Claims at Three-Year Low. Hopes Raised. Economy Has Turned Corner.

More Jobs on the Way. Manufacturer Adds New Product Line.

Dutchmen Constructs Facility to Inspect RVs.

RVs Roll to Big Total.

Encouraging Developments on the South Side.

Industry Upturn. Science Favorable For Manufactured Housing Market.

Adding and Saving Jobs. Announcements This Week Good News.

RV Business Opens Door in Argos.

Pace of Hiring Will Pick Up. Survey Shows Companies Intend to Hire More in '04.

Mr. Speaker, I could go on and on and on about the good economic news in the Second District of Indiana, and I certainly do not think we are alone. As we heard from our colleagues from Ohio and West Virginia, two States like Indiana that are very focused on manufacturing, very blue collar, districts and States that are starting to see robust economic growth, and I do not think that there is any denying this fact. And the fact is the American people have done their job so well.

We are going in the right direction, and we need to continue to go in the right direction, because our job is clearly not done, as many have pointed out tonight. And we need to do two things to make sure we continue to go in the right direction. Number one, continue to adopt and implement pro-growth policies that help create environments where businesses can do their best work and achieve their best results. Small business in America is the backbone of our economy. Government does not create economic growth. The American people do, and small business does. And we need to make sure that the American people continue to keep more of their own money in their own pocket, because when they do that, they go out and invest in their community, they invest in their headlines, and they create headlines exactly like this.

Mr. Speaker, I look forward to going home and reading more headlines like this and to congratulate the people of the Second District for doing such a great job, and I congratulate my good friend, the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Hensarling), in leading us in this very important discussion, and I encourage the people American people to keep up the good work and keep this economy going.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this time, and I join my colleagues tonight and rise in tribute to a great man, President Ronald Reagan.

In 1980, I turned 18, and the first person I ever voted for was Ronald Reagan. With that vote, the world changed. It changed because President Reagan clearly understood that the greatest strength of this Nation is the American people. He believed in us so much that he inspired us to believe in ourselves.

And in his typical humble fashion, during his last speech from the Oval Office, he said, ``I wasn't a great communicator, but I communicated great things, and they didn't spring full bloom from my brow; they came from the heart of a great Nation.''

Mr. Speaker, President Reagan captured the hearts of the American people and he unleashed the power, the hope, and the optimism that comes with a sincere understanding and love of freedom and democracy. President Reagan changed the world by simply reminding us all of exactly who we are. He inspired us to become the Nation we were all along. He always saw the shining city on the hill, and he gave us the vision to see it with him.

Although we deeply mourn his passing, Ronald Reagan's life was a gift to the world, a gift that will never be forgotten by all who love freedom and the shining example he gave us.

Thank you, Mr. President, and God bless Ronald Reagan.

Mr. Speaker, tonight I rise in support and cooperation of my colleagues, the Washington Waste Watchers, who were here earlier this evening.

I unfortunately come to the floor tonight to share another example of wasted taxpayer dollars. Mr. Speaker, according to a report released by the General Accounting Office in May, taxpayers have paid hundreds and thousands of dollars and, in reality, probably much, much more for Federal employees to obtain bogus degrees from unaccredited postsecondary schools, also known as diploma mills. These so-called diploma mills sell academic degrees based upon life experience, sometimes based on negligible academic work, and some require no academic work at all. They simply sell degrees for a price.

The first 2 days of congressional hearings on fake degree-granting institutions, the director of GAO special investigations testified the data collected on just two of those diploma mills show Federal payments of almost $170,000 for bogus degrees. He also said the number is likely an underestimate, even for those two institutions; and he expects a broader investigation of nearly 140 known diploma mills would reveal many more cases of federally financed phony degrees.

The GAO report found that 463 Federal employees, including 28 senior- level officials, have listed diploma mill degrees on their resumes. And one of those senior-level officials even received a Federal tuition reimbursement of nearly $2,000 in connection with a phony degree from a bogus school.

Mr. Speaker, Democrats want to raise our tax to pay for more of this. That is just the tip of the iceberg because the GAO only received data from eight government agencies. The other agencies could not even respond to the inquiry. As an example, the Department of Health and Human Services told the GAO that it could not produce records of employee education payments because it maintains records in five different accounting systems. It has no way to differentiate academic degree payments from other types of training and does not know whether degree payments made with credit cards are even captured in its payment records.

What is worse, Mr. Speaker, is the taxpayers have given these fake- degree employees a raise. Now while their managers contend that their promotions were based on experience and not education, the GAO does not buy it and neither do I.

Mr. Speaker, developing simple standards for assessing the degrees used as credentials by Federal employees in determining which degrees, if any, the Federal Government should pay for, these agencies could have saved hundreds of thousands of taxpayer dollars.

Mr. Speaker, it is time for the Federal Government to clean up its act. It is time to hold Federal employees accountable for its actions. And by eliminating this type of waste, fraud and abuse government-wide, we can save the taxpayers hundreds of billions of dollars.

Finally, Mr. Speaker, our measurement of success here in Washington should never be how much we spend, but simply how well we spend taxpayer dollars.

Mr. Chairman, I want to thank the chairman for yielding me time and for his leadership on bringing this very important legislation to the floor.

This legislation supports our American men and women in uniform and it helps give them the tools to defend the freedoms that we all hold so dear and to keep our country safe. Specifically, I want to thank the chairman for his wisdom in investing $830 million approximately in Humvee production.

Humvees are manufactured in my district in Mishawaka, Indiana, by AM General. The men and women at AM General certainly do a tremendous job in manufacturing this very effective tool in the war on terror. And the investment in this production is certainly good for the 2,500 employees at AM General, it is good for our local economy, but most importantly, it provides a force protection tool for our soldiers that saves American lives.

As an example, about a year ago I went to Bethesda Naval Hospital and I met with a young Marine who had been injured in combat in Iraq. He told the story of the Navy corpsman, after he was hit, that dragged him to safety between two Humvees that were strategically placed in the battlefield.

Just 2 weeks ago I met another Marine that had lost his right arm in combat in Iraq. I flew to my district with the President, and as the President stepped off the plane, the Marine shook his hand and told him the story about how he owed his life to the fact that he was in an up- armored Humvee when he was injured.

It is because of thousands of stories like this that I urge my colleagues to support H.R. 4200, because it does exactly what it should do. It provides our troops with the tools they need to win the war on terror and supports them in their efforts so they can be successful.

I thank the gentleman for yielding me this time.

Mr. Chairman, this is an amendment simply about fairness. We can try to complicate this issue with all kinds of charts, all kinds of numbers, and all kinds of formulas; and we can all find a chart or a formula that is going to serve our particular opinion. But the bottom line is this: every State in the Nation sends money to the Federal gas tax trust fund and every State, for every dollar they send, they may get a little bit more or a little bit less back. But under TEA LU as it currently stands, every single State in this Union gets less of a minimum guarantee. As an example, the State of Indiana currently gets about 88 cents for every dollar we send in. Under TEA LU, we will get 76 cents back. But this is not about Indiana going backwards. This is about every single State in the Union going backwards with their minimum guarantee. There is no chart that can dispute that. There is no formula that can dispute that.

This amendment is simply about fairness, about no State going backwards and about staying where we are, so every State can get the minimum guarantee that they currently enjoy and not go backwards. That is why we need to pass this amendment, because it is about fairness for every single State in this Union.

Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.

The Chairman pro tempore. The Clerk will designate the amendment.

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

Mr. Chairman, my amendment is simple, straightforward, and based on common sense. I think we have all driven down the highway and have seen trucks parked at night at rest areas and truck stops and we have seen that they are idling or running. The reason that they are doing that is because the drivers inside require electric power to run their heat or cooling or microwave or whatever other electronics they may have in their cab.

The problem with the trucks idling or running all night is that they use fuel and they emit pollutions into the environment. So my amendment simply would allow a 400-pound exemption to encourage trucks to utilize on-board independent power systems.

According to studies by the EPA and others, long-haul trucks, they idle up to 8 hours per day over 300 days per year. They consume about .8 gallons of diesel fuel each hour that they idle, and that adds up to over 1,900 gallons per year, and they emit 19 metric tons of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere while they are idling. So by reducing the unnecessary truck idling, we can save fuel, we can reduce greenhouse gases, we can cut air pollution, and we can save money.

For the past 6 years, the companies in the country that have worked on these independent, on-board power systems, they have worked with the EPA and they have worked with the Department of Transportation to come up with systems that provide the power necessary to run the heating, air-conditioning, and other electronic needs. The tests that they have run on these systems have yielded a 65.5 percent reduction in the idle time of trucks that use them and a 59.6 percent reduction in fuel consumption.

According to the EPA, we would reduce greenhouse gases, we would reduce nitrogen oxides, we would reduce particulate matter emissions, and save nearly $3,000 a year in fuel costs and lower engine maintenance costs as well.

I think my home State of Indiana is a great example. Indiana alone has 17,000 truck parking spaces; and if you drive down the highway at night, every one of them is filled.

So, Mr. Chairman, I believe that by offering this exemption we can encourage the use of this technology, resulting in reduced truck emissions, reduced fuel consumption. It would be very beneficial to the United States, and I think that everyone can agree that this is a very beneficial amendment.

The amendment is supported by the American Lung Association, the American Trucking Association, the National Association of Truck Stop Operators, and the EPA, and Schneider International, the Nation's largest trucking fleet.

Mr. Chairman, the bottom line is we are asking for a one-half of 1 percent weight exemption to implement a very common-sense solution that helps our environment, helps our energy needs, and certainly I think we should pass this amendment.

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

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

This is a very commonsense approach to a real problem that we have in our Nation's highways and Nation's environment; 400 pounds is one-half of 1 percent weight exemption on an 80,000 pound rig. So adding 400 pounds is a relatively lightweight solution. So I think it is very much based on common sense.

It is a simple approach to a real need we have. It is a specific solution that I think that we can implement today by passing this amendment that will not only help our environment; it will help our Nation's reliance on foreign energy.

Over $3,000 a year, as the price of fuel goes up and savings goes up, that will be beneficial to every single American. I do not think when you take the risk-reward analysis that the risk is too great when we add \1/2\ of 1 percent to an 80,000 pound rig, as compared to the reward that really every American is going to benefit.

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

Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. Chairman, that is correct.

Mr. Chairman, this solution gives all options available. Certainly the Idle Air technology is still very valid. It is very beneficial. And trucks that travel routes where Idle Air technology is available, they certainly can avail themselves of that. But the technology that I am promoting is portable. It can be installed on any truck in the Nation. So it makes the benefits of the Idle Air technology available nationwide.

And so by adding this exemption, every truck has the opportunity to enjoy the reduced idling benefits even if the Idle Air technology is not available in their region.

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

Mr. Chairman, I do think it is a commonsense approach to a problem that we have. There are different ways to approach this problem that have benefits. But the one I am suggesting makes available to every truck on the Nation's highways the opportunity to incorporate reduced idling technology anywhere in the country in that they can have the opportunity to shut their engine off at night, quit polluting our air, quit using fuel unnecessarily. And I think everyone will benefit from that.

We can continue to look for new solutions, but this is something we can do today to help our trucking industry, help our economy, create jobs, and help our environment all at the same time.

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

Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.

Mr. Speaker, during the next 3 months, Medicare beneficiaries will begin to see real savings on the cost of their prescription drugs with the help of voluntary Medicare-approved discount drug cards.

Starting in April, Medicare beneficiaries will be notified by mail of their discount card eligibility, discount card offerings, and enrollment procedures. By June, all Medicare beneficiaries, except those who already have Medicaid drug coverage, will be able to buy a card for about $30 and take it to their local pharmacy and receive 10 to 25 percent off of the regular cost of their drugs.

People with incomes below 135 percent of poverty who sign up for the card will be eligible for an additional $600 of additional assistance per year to help further reduce the cost of their prescription drugs in 2004 and 2005. This low-income assistance will benefit over 12,000 Indiana Hoosiers in my district, the second district of Indiana, and almost 200,000 Hoosiers statewide.

Mr. Speaker, I applaud my colleagues who voted to support the bipartisan Medicare bill and the creation of a discount drug card program that will reduce the cost of prescriptions for our seniors and provide additional relief to low-income Medicare beneficiaries.

Mr Speaker, I rise today to congratulate two of my constituents for receiving recognition by the ninth annual Prudential Spirit of Community Awards; Alexandra Holderman of Mishawaka, Indiana, and Karva Vaidyanathan of Granger, Indiana. These awards constitute America's largest youth recognition program based exclusively on volunteerism. The program was created by Prudential Financial in partnership with the National Association of Secondary School Principals in 1995 to impress upon all youth volunteers that their contributions are critically important.

Alexandra was named one of the top two youth volunteers in Indiana for 2004. She will be honored at the national awards ceremony

in Washington, DC, this coming May. Nominated by LaSalle Elementary School, Alexandra has collected and delivered more than 1,200 bundles of baby clothing, blankets, diapers, and other supplies over the past five years for infants born to needy single and teen-age mothers.

Karva has been named a Distinguished Finalist by the program's judges, and will receive a bronze medallion for her outstanding volunteer work. Karva collected 25 cartons of school supplies and $3,000 to purchase computers for orphans attending a vocational training school in India.

I am proud of the work accomplished by Alexandra and Karva, and I commend them for taking an active role in their communities. They have demonstrated a level of commitment and accomplishment that is truly extraordinary in today's world, and they deserve our sincere admiration and respect. Their actions show that young Americans can--and do--play important roles in our communities, and that America's community spirit continues to hold tremendous promise for the future.

Mr. Speaker, one of the most important issues that we face as a Nation today domestically is the rising cost of health care. The most effective way to address that issue is to return more ownership and control of health care coverage. That is exactly what the health savings accounts created under the bipartisan Medicare bill do. HSAs are portable accounts that allow individuals to save and withdraw tax-free dollars for their health care needs and medical expenses not covered by their insurance. Individuals own the accounts and the savings can be carried over year after year and from job to job, and people can build wealth into their retirement.

By offering individuals ownership and control of their health care coverage, we return control to the patients; and that is exactly where it should be. Mr. Speaker, I applaud my colleagues who have voted to support the bipartisan Medicare bill which will help reduce medical expenses and improve the health care system in America.