Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to extend my congratulations to Dr. Jerauld D. Ferritto, Jr., a successful and respected podiatrist from my district, upon the completion of his tenure as President of the American Podiatric Medical Association.

Following in the footsteps of his father, Dr. Ferritto began his podiatric career at the Ohio College of Podiatric Medicine, Cleveland, Ohio, in 1972. In 1977 he established a practice in Grove City, Ohio.

Dr. Ferritto's unwavering integrity, trailblazing spirit, and energetic quest to expand recognition for the field of podiatric medicine serve as a role model for countless young practitioners of that fine profession. His credentials include Board Certification by the American Board of Podiatric Surgery and by the American Board of Podiatric Orthopedics and Primary Podiatric Medicine. He is generous in his giving, and has served the profession in a myriad of ways, including tenure on the Council on Podiatric Medical Education and Medicare's Region V Carrier Advisory Committee.

It is my honor to represent a constituent whose leadership helps ensure the continued mobility and independence of our citizens through the delivery of medically necessary and appropriate foot and ankle care.

Mr. Speaker, I come to the floor today to speak on behalf of Ohio's seniors and America's seniors.

Mr. Speaker, about 14 million low-income seniors, 438,000 of them in Ohio alone, will now be receiving their medications for a mere $2 to $5. They understand that this new law, the new law about Medicare reform and prescription drugs, is a step in the right direction. The countless baby boomers who devote portions of their monthly paycheck to help buy grandma and grandpa's medicine, they understand that this expansion of Medicare is important. They know that when they are able to devote a little less money to prescription medicines for their parents, they might be able to devote a little more of that money to their kids' college tuition.

The many older Americans who have experienced a tragic illness that requires a litany of medications, they understand the peace of mind that this law provides to the catastrophic coverage. Because of this law, the cost of their many, many medicines is kept at a minimum, instead of spiraling off into infinity.

The millions of seniors who live in rural areas across America and doctors who serve them, they understand the benefits of this new law, especially the increased financial assistance to rural providers.

The hundreds of patient organizations who endorsed and support this new law, groups like AARP, the American Medical Association and the Alzheimer's Association, they understand that the law represents a good first step in improving the lives of millions and millions of patients.

I could go on and on, showing the countless benefits of this new law. Instead, I will boil it down into the simplest of terms: while this plan may not provide the entire solution for every senior's particular medical and financial problem, it does provide some solutions to the substantial number of seniors who formerly were choosing between food and medicine, gasoline and medicine, heating fuel and medicine. Those choices were untenable.

The law is not 100 percent perfect, but it is 100 percent more than what seniors had before, which was nothing. Unfortunately, there are some who do not share the same mind set. Indeed, there are small group of obstructionists who seek to mislead seniors about this new law, instead of informing them about how to use it to their advantage. Their goal is to scare, instead of to educate; and their tactics aim to thwart instead of to improve. It is really sad.

A prime example is the left-leaning Families USA, who have taken their MediScare campaign across the country. In fact, they are scheduled to be in my home State of Ohio during the coming weeks.

To the seniors in my home State and to the seniors across the country who will be subject to the half-truths that Families USA and their allies will be pushing, I will say, beware of those who peddle fear and distrust. The flashy videos and the shiny brochures that these groups will provide will do nothing but tell you what is wrong with this new law. They will tear it down and trash the very thing that seniors have been pleading Congress to do for years, add prescription drug coverage to Medicare. They will not bat an eyelash nor turn the slightest shade of red while they claim there is absolutely nothing good about this new law.

Mr. Speaker, I have too much faith in Ohio's seniors. I know that they will not be used as pawns in the politicization of a new law of the land. I know that our seniors will take the time to learn more about this law, and they will like what they see. They will understand that Congress acted to improve the quality of their lives. This is a good first step. They will understand that groups who scare them about what a law does not do are not helpful nor productive, and that the people who instruct them about what a law does are actually trying to make a difference in their lives.

Mr. Speaker, I want to be to Ohio seniors one of those who helps them, helps them understand what this law does do for them. I want to be part of that productive group, that group that knows that progress comes in incremental steps and understands that obstructing and thwarting accomplishes nothing, that group that looks for solutions, not partisan points.

Passing a Medicare drug plan and getting it signed into law with President Bush's cooperation is finally a step forward for this Nation's seniors. Let us not ever step back.

Mr. Speaker, as we consider the budget today, my colleagues on the other side of the aisle will talk about their budget for America, which includes repealing tax cuts we fought so hard for. But their quote-unquote repeal is nothing more than job-killing tax increases on American workers. Period. Their alleged ``plan'' would blow America's economic engine. It would be like hitching a heavy trailer to the back of a motor scooter. I cannot think of a better way to turn it into a dead weight, a useless vehicle that would take us nowhere. Job-destroying tax increases are like a trailer full of bricks that will stop this economy dead in its tracks.

Mr. Speaker, let us pass a budget that strengthens our national defense, a budget that grows our economy, a budget that creates jobs, a budget that will get rid of Washington waste and excessive spending. We have that opportunity today, Mr. Speaker. Let us take advantage of it.

Mr. Speaker, I stand before Members to strongly urge my colleagues to support this resolution for freedom and democracy in Iraq.

Life under Hussein's ruthless regime was unlike anything we have ever experienced. His cronies, in order to get information out of men, would rape their wives and their sisters and mothers. Women in Iraq frequently lost their husbands to ``the law,'' never knowing what happened to them, where they went or why they were arrested. These same women, forbidden to go to work to support their families, were left to starvation.

The Iraqi women under Saddam Hussein's regime were someone's mothers, wives, and sisters, and they suffered tremendously. I led a women's delegation to Iraq and heard these atrocities firsthand from the women who now are free. They no longer dread the strong arm of Saddam Hussein's injustice. Coalition forces are now protecting the newly acquired rights of all Iraqis. I learned of the story of these two women who were protesting.

Mr. Speaker, 2 years ago they would have been executed for protesting. They were protesting to get the rights of women included in the Iraqi constitution. One of these women was waving her husband's death certificate saying, we have not waited all these years to be denied freedoms. A reporter, an Islamic reporter, went up to ask, Are you Sunni or Shiite? These women said, We may be one of each, but it is none of your business, we are Iraqis now.

That is what this is all about. This is what freedom stands for. This is what it means to two women, one who lost her husband and had no way of knowing what happened to him. This is what we are celebrating today. This is what has been accomplished by our Armed Forces, by the will of this administration.

Saddam Hussein, the ruthless murderer, is now in jail. He will be tried by his own people in his own country, and he will get his just rewards, and these two women, despite the fear and dread and horror of their past, will live in freedom. We should be very happy today.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor pro golfer Kirk Triplett for introducing a winning cause to his professional golf game: helping find permanent homes for foster children as he competes on the 2004 PGA Tour.

Working with the Dave Thomas Foundation for Adoption, Triplett, at each tournament, will prominently display a photo of a local child on his golf bag. The public stage provided by the Tour will enable Triplett to portray each child's story to the media, spectators, and viewers at home.

In addition to his support for the Dave Thomas Foundation for Adoption, Kirk and his wife, Cathi, have organized their own foundation, known as Fore Adoption, which provides funding for financially challenged parents seeking to adopt. Kirk will also host the Dave Thomas Desert Classic this month, an event which will help to raise money to support the Dave Thomas Foundation for Adoption.

Having adopted two children themselves, Kirk and Cathi take a personal interest in helping to connect foster children with quality parents across America. No experience is more rewarding than providing a child with a set of loving arms and giving them the opportunity to fulfill their dreams. I commend Kirk for his dedication and commitment to foster children in this country, and wish him the best of luck this year on the PGA Tour.

Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I call up House Resolution 459 and ask for its immediate consideration.

Mr. Speaker, for the purpose of debate only, I yield the customary 30 minutes to the gentlewoman from New York (Ms. Slaughter), pending which I yield myself such time as I may consume. During consideration of this resolution, all time yielded is for the purpose of debate only.

Mr. Speaker, yesterday the Committee on Rules met and passed this resolution waiving clause 6(a) of rule XIII, requiring a two-thirds vote to consider a rule on the same day it is reported from the Committee on Rules against certain resolutions reported from the Committee on Rules. The resolution applies the waiver to a special rule reported on or before the legislative day of Friday, November 21, 2003, providing for consideration or disposition of the conference report to accompany the bill, H.R. 1, the Medicare Prescription Drug, Improvement, and Modernization Act of 2003.

Mr. Speaker, as my colleagues are aware, the conference committee has completed its work and the conference report has been filed. In the spirit of bipartisanship to accommodate the request of the minority, the Committee on Rules met this morning, as opposed to last night, to give members of the minority an opportunity to come to the Committee on Rules at a convenient time and so that the witnesses could come to the Committee on Rules at a convenient time to talk about this extraordinarily important conference report which delivers to America's seniors a voluntary, universal, and guaranteed prescription drug benefit.

This morning, the Committee on Rules received testimony for more than 4 hours on this conference report from many Members in anticipation of reporting a rule to bring this very important and historic legislation before the House. Adoption of this same-day rule and a subsequent rule will simply allow us to consider the historic prescription drug and Medicare modernization plan today, hopefully moving us one day closer to sending this measure to the President of the United States for his signature and sending a strong message to the American people that this Congress is committed to ensuring our seniors that they have access to affordable medications that will keep them healthy and active.

Mr. Speaker, I strongly urge my colleagues to support this rule and allow the House to complete its work on this landmark legislation. America's seniors have waited far too long. It is time for us to act.

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

Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from California (Mr. Dreier), chairman of the Committee on Rules.

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

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

This bill has been online on the Committee on Ways and Means Web site and the Committee on Rules Web site since last night. This is no secret to anyone, least of all the American public, and anyone is free to look it up and read it at their leisure.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Linder), my friend and colleague of the Committee on Rules.

Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from the great State of Texas (Mr. Sessions), my friend and colleague from the Committee on Rules.

Mr. Speaker, I must take 1 minute to say that the gentleman has misspoken. Our most needy seniors, the seniors who need it most will be getting help with their prescription drugs, the best tool medicine has to offer, by next spring if we pass this bill. But if we delay, if we continue to defeat our efforts, the Republican efforts to bring prescription drugs to the American people, we will never provide them help. We have to start and we have to pass this bill today.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Gingrey), someone who should know a lot about this.

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

Mr. Speaker, I continue to reserve my time.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Washington (Mr. Baird) for yielding. This was just put in front of me. I would defer to the chairman of the Committee on Ways and Means or a member of the Committee on Ways and Means because this is their jurisdiction and certainly not the jurisdiction of the Committee on Rules.

Mr. Speaker, I will continue to reserve my time. We do not have any more speakers at this point.

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

And in light of the comments of the gentleman from Tennessee (Mr. Cooper), the last speaker, I would say that every major hospital association in this Nation is on board with this legislation. He should be supportive of it. Not only the hospital associations, but the American Association of Retired Persons, the AARP, who speaks for every senior in this country. They are on board. The AIDS Institute, the Alzheimer's Association, the Coalition for Medicare Choices, Hepatitis C Global Foundation, International Patient Advocacy Association, Kidney Cancer Association, National Alliance for the Mentally Ill, the National Council on the Aging, the Seniors Coalition, United Seniors International Association, We Are Family Foundation, Academy of Family Practice Residence Directors, Alliance for Quality Nursing Home Care, Alliance to Improve Medicare, American Academy of Dermatology Association, American Academy of Family Practitioners and Physicians, American Academy of Home Care Physicians, American Academy of Neurology, Ophthalmology, Osteopathy, Pharmaceutical Physicians.

Mr. Speaker, this list is pages and pages long. Every significant health care provider, every significant person in this country who is touched by health care and feels the pain of seniors and understands their health care needs is on board with this legislation. Anyone who cares about the future of health care for seniors should be on board as well.

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

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

Mr. Speaker, the gentleman from Arkansas (Mr. Ross) says that the AARP does not speak for seniors of America? The AARP represents 35 million seniors, dues-paying, card-carrying voting seniors. These seniors care what we do, and they are watching what we do, and we better do right by them.

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

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

I would just like to remind the gentleman that last year's Democrat prescription drug bill cost $1 trillion, $1 trillion, almost three times what this bill costs.

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

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

I remind my colleagues that this body is about to embark on a monumental endeavor. We are about to consider the most significant benefit America's seniors have ever seen since the creation of the Medicare program nearly 40 years ago. We are about to give seniors the best tool that medicine has to offer, prescription drugs. A tool that they have been denied, that our government has not supplied to them. We are about to give that to them, Mr. Speaker. That is not even to mention the most significant and deliberative reform that Medicare has ever seen.

I urge my colleagues to support American seniors, to support the future of the Medicare program, and to support this Congress in one of the most promising endeavors I have ever been a part of in my years in this esteemed body. Join me in taking a bold step closer to consideration of this extraordinary legislation. I ask the Democrats, stop defeating these attempts, stop delaying help to our seniors, and stop destroying their trust in their government.

Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time, and I move the previous question on the resolution.

Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I call up House Resolution 463 and ask for its immediate consideration.

Mr. Speaker, for the purpose of debate only, I yield the customary 30 minutes to my colleague and friend, the gentlewoman from New York (Ms. Slaughter), pending which I yield myself such time as I may consume. During consideration of this resolution, all time yielded is for the purpose of debate only.

Mr. Speaker, H. Res. 463 is a standard rule waiving all points of order against the conference report to accompany H.R. 1, the Prescription Drug and Medicare Modernization Act of 2003. The rule also waives all points of order against its consideration.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in full support of the rule and of the underlying bill. I would like to thank Chairman Thomas and Chairman Tauzin for their outstanding coordination, their remarkable leadership, and the inspiring vision that they have provided on this critical legislation. The conferees have all worked extraordinarily hard to

produce the most sweeping Medicare bill in generations.

Since 1965, Medicare has provided a guarantee of health care coverage for most all Americans. Stability, longevity, and integrity have been the hallmarks of this program, offering the promise of a secure retirement. But a lot has changed since 1965. Our investment in research and medicine has yielded us advanced medications, therapies, and technology that have paved the way for our seniors to live longer, healthier lives. Unfortunately, Medicare has not changed with these medical advancements. The most obvious shortcoming is the lack of prescription drug coverage, the best tool medicine has to offer.

Before us today is an opportunity to pass landmark legislation that addresses these shortcomings and finally propels the program of Medicare into the 21st century, most notably by covering these prescription drugs. If we do not act and pass this plan before us today, the future of our seniors will be in doubt, with their happy and healthy lives uncertain. And if we do not act today, the fate of Medicare will be certain: bankruptcy.

So today we will accomplish two long overdue goals. First, we will strengthen Medicare to save it for future seniors; and, second, we will enhance the program by providing much-needed prescription drug coverage, bringing this 1965 health care program into the 21st century. And to those who are telling us to slow down, I say seniors have waited too long. This House has passed a Medicare prescription drug plan three times since Republicans have controlled Congress, each time only to be scuttled. Today we will finally end the denial of benefits to our seniors and end the delay.

Folks in my district tell me that they cannot go another year without the help of Medicare prescription drug coverage. They want us to speed up the process. They tell me that when you are sick and you are elderly, Medicare is not just health care; it is peace of mind. Well, we listened and we acted, producing this historic package.

Our seniors are not the only ones who have spoken out in support of this plan. Let me tell you, some very knowledgeable folks on the front lines of health care delivery, people who understand the needs of our seniors and the problems with Medicare, have made their support for this bill very clear. Allow me to name just a few: the American Association of Retired Persons, the AARP, the largest senior group in the Nation representing 35 million seniors, card-carrying, dues-paying, voting seniors; the American Medical Association; the American Hospitals Association; employers Coalition on Medicare; the Alzheimer's Association; American Society of Radiology and Oncology; Rural Hospital Coalition; National Hospice and Palliative Care Organization; the College of Obstetrics and Gynecology; American Society of Anesthesiologists; American Physical Therapy Association; pathologists; nurse practitioners. The list goes on and on. It includes hundreds and hundreds of supporters. They back this plan because they know how important and long overdue it is, plain and simple.

There are many reasons to vote for this package, but I want to call attention to a few that are significant. First of all, this prescription drug plan is voluntary, universal, and guaranteed. Period. If you are over 65 and you qualify for Medicare, you qualify for this benefit. If you want it, you can have it. If you do not, you do not have to take it. With this benefit, 40 million seniors will begin receiving significant savings on their medications.

To begin with, we offer immediate savings with the prescription drug discount card that will offer up to 25 percent in savings early next year. This drug discount card is a tremendous first step while the larger benefit is implemented.

After the drug is fully phased in in 2006 it will work like this: After a $250 deductible, Medicare will pay 75 percent of seniors' drug cost up to $2,250 a year. Medicare will then provide catastrophic protection, giving seniors 95 percent coverage for out-of-pocket drug costs. That is beyond $3,600. On average this reduces seniors' cost of medication by 50 percent.

This package also switches the focus of health care from reactive disease treatment to proactive disease prevention. The old saying ``an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure'' could not be more appropriate in this instance. Gone are the days of waiting until the symptoms are so obvious and the disease is so advanced that the only options are expensive hospital stays and surgeries.

Twenty-first century medicine can prevent, preempt, and predict illnesses through advanced screenings and innovative tests. In many cases taking a pill is all that it takes to prevent a chronic disease from becoming a life-threatening illness. Medicare will cover the preventative medications that keep our seniors out of the hospitals and off of the operating tables. And with this revolutionary shift in focus, Medicare will cover the $20 prescription before the $6,000 surgery even becomes necessary. That is not only real savings for the American taxpayer, but it is a real life savings for our seniors.

This landmark bill improves health care for our seniors, especially those who need it most, through significantly increased assistance for so-called ``disproportionate share hospitals.'' Such hospitals, as the term implies, care for a disproportionate share of low-income patients, and the last thing they need is funding cuts. Under this plan the hospitals will see a significant increase and allow them to care for these low-income families and seniors.

In addition to its strong commitment to our lower-income seniors in general, the plan is particularly good news for women. Since women make up a majority of Medicare beneficiaries and tend to suffer more from chronic illnesses, this landmark improvement in the Medicare system will radically change their lives for better. Half of the senior women who are under Medicare will receive complete drug coverage, an extraordinary step forward for these women who are suffering unnecessarily high drug cost burdens even as we speak. The disease management aspect of this bill will help prevent the progression of the chronic illnesses from which a majority of senior women suffer.

Clearly, this plan means a better life for women and for all of our seniors, but it also will lessen the burden upon the Medicare program by creating a health savings account. Health savings accounts allow forward-thinking and penny-wise workers to start saving for their future medical costs tax free. These accounts are allowed to grow without burdensome taxation, providing all Americans with the opportunity to save for their own future medical expenses. Who can argue with the promotion of these strong values, values like personal responsibility, savings, financial discipline? These things have been gone from our health care delivery system for decades now. It is time we bring them back. And who can argue against a voluntary program that relieves the financial burden of Medicare and the taxpayers who fund it?

Finally, this package includes a provision that I have championed for many years. Under the current system, anticancer drugs are only covered if they are injected or intravenously delivered. But today with the new advances in cancer therapy, many anticancer drugs can be taken orally, and, therefore, are not covered by Medicare. This plan begins to change that finally.

The plan will deliver the comforting pain-relieving and cancer-curing drugs that these patients so desperately need to deal with their illnesses. They need these medications now, and they are going to start to get them now.

Mr. Speaker, there is a value attached to this legislation that resonates not only among our seniors but to all Americans. The value is the freedom to choose the plan that works best for someone in their own situation. Each senior is different with different needs and different family situations. With this plan these differences can, for the first time, be honored. Seniors who are happy with traditional Medicare in their current coverage are free to stay where they are, but if they choose, seniors will have many options available to them and they will be able to pick the coverage that best meets their health care needs. If they are not

content with the current coverage, they can choose from other plans to save on their medications and preventative care. This is a win-win solution, a commonsense approach. So today the vote is simple. It is either ``yes'' in favor of millions of seniors who plead for us to pass this bill, or it is another ``no,'' another ``no'' in favor of politics, another ``no'' in favor of partisanship, another ``no'' with an eye toward the upcoming election. In short, another ``no'' against American senior citizens and against the future viability of the Medicare system upon which they rely. Members can choose to listen to the seniors who are asking them to put partisanship, politics and election strategy aside, or they can oppose this bill.

But to those of my colleagues who plan to vote ``no,'' I would ask: How is this package not an improvement for our seniors who have no coverage and are struggling to pay for their medications? Why would they rather give our seniors nothing at all than give them this plan that will help them? How will they explain that to future generations, their children, their grandchildren why they did not support bringing Medicare up to speed with their generation and their needs?

I remember the opponents of the tremendously successful welfare reform of 1996. They predicted doomsday scenarios, millions of women and children out on the streets starving. The reality is that 7 years later, the welfare rolls have dropped from 14 million to 5 million. The reality is that welfare reform made the American Dream possible for millions of Americans who were previously trapped in generational cycles of poverty and helplessness.

These same naysayers are making the same claims about this Medicare plan today. I say to my friends, their shouts, their cries, their failed predictions were myths in 1996 and they are myths today. To those who plan to vote against strengthening America, I urge them to be bold, to exercise leadership and show courage by propelling America's health care system into the 21st Century. Vote for this bill. If the Members think this bill does good but does not go far enough to help our seniors, then I ask them to support it and let us work together to improve it in the future. Do not let the perfect become enemy of the very good. Our seniors deserve our support, all of our support.

I urge this Congress to pass the underlying bill, but first of all, let us pass this rule.

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

Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from California, the chairman of the Committee on Rules (Mr. Dreier).

Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased to yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Lincoln Diaz-Balart), my friend and colleague from our Committee on Rules.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to gentleman from California (Mr. Dreier), the very distinguished Chairman of the Rules Committee.

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

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Washington (Mr. Hastings), my friend from our Committee on Rules.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from the State of New York (Mr. Reynolds), my very good friend from the Committee on Rules.

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

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Burton).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from the State of Florida (Mr. Shaw), from the Committee on Ways and Means, who worked so hard on this bill.

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

Mr. Speaker, I yield for a unanimous consent request to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Shaw), a member of the Committee on Ways and Means.

(Mr. SHAW asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks, and include extraneous material.)

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

I have one remaining speaker.

Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate that. Earlier today, and once again now, a statement was placed in front of me, a statement which was a long, drawn out document, and he was asking me to explain it, and it is very unfortunate that we were not provided with that in advance.

Mr. Speaker, may I inquire as to the time remaining and how many speakers the gentlewoman from New York has?

I have one speaker.

Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased to yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from West Virginia (Mrs. Capito), my friend and colleague.

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

We have heard a lot of rhetoric tonight, as the gentlewoman from West Virginia (Mrs. Capito) mentioned. You would think we were talking about different bills. But the truth is the 35 million seniors that the AARP represents cannot be wrong. This bill is what America's seniors need. They know it and we know it. We have heard them.

And let me remind my colleagues that we have before us today a historic opportunity, an opportunity to make the most sweeping changes to the outdated Medicare program since it began in 1965. Bring our seniors the financial relief and the lifesaving medications that they so desperately need and deserve. Support this rule and the bipartisan legislation that it supports.

The text of the amendment referred to previously by Ms. Slaughter is as follows:

Strike all after the resolving clause and insert in lieu

thereof the following:

``That upon adoption of this resolution it shall be in

order to consider the conference report to accompany the bill

(H.R. 1) to amend title XVIII of the Social Security Act to

provide for a voluntary program for prescription drug

coverage under the Medicare Program, to modernize the

Medicare Program, to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986

to allow a deduction to individuals for amounts contributed

to health savings security accounts and health savings

accounts, to provide for the disposition of unused health

benefits in cafeteria plans and flexible spending

arrangements, and for other purposes. All points of order

against the conference report and against its consideration

(except those arising under clause 8(a)(1)(A) of rule XXII)

are waived.''

Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time, and I move the previous question on the resolution.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this time and for his strong leadership on this measure.

Mr. Speaker, today is a great day for America's children. Today we will stand with the President of the United States on an extraordinary piece of legislation, legislation that will have the effect of dramatically improving the health and well-being of our Nation's children.

About this time last year, my good friend and former Member, Connie Morella, and I introduced this legislation to put into law the Pediatric Rule, a rule that required drug companies to conduct safety tests of adult medicines that were likely to be given to children. We introduced that bill even before a U.S. district court struck down that rule finding that the FDA did not have the authority to enforce it. We felt then, as we do now, that this rule must be strengthened and codified to ensure advancements and effectiveness in medicines that we give to our children.

In light of the district court's ruling, Members of this body renewed our efforts this year to see that the rule would be put into law for good. With the hard work of the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Greenwood) and the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Eshoo) and the blessings of the gentleman from Louisiana (Chairman Tauzin) and the gentleman from Florida (Chairman Bilirakis) and the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Brown), ranking member, we have found ourselves today ready to move forward.

The rule is so important for a few very simple reasons. Many people wrongly assume that children's bodies are just smaller versions of adult bodies. That is just not the case. Simply reducing the dosage of medicine for the treatment of a child is not always effective and is definitely not always safe. By protecting this rule, the Pediatric Rule, and continuing to provide incentives for testing medicines for kids, we will give doctors the information they need to provide our children with the best quality health care.

Mr. Speaker, when I told my constituents at Children's Hospital in Columbus, Ohio, that this legislation would be up for consideration today, I was greeted with elation. Those who care for and treat our children want the very best for them. They know what they need to deliver the very best. They need the Pediatric Rule and believe it is critical to preserving the long-term health and safety of our kids. That is exactly what this bill does. I am proud to be a part of making these safeguards permanent and this bill a reality.

Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to join me in strengthening the health of our children by adopting this legislation. Every pediatrician will rest easier. I am certain that every parent will.

Mr. Speaker, I would like at this point to engage the chairman in a colloquy as well.

Mr. Chairman, I seek clarification of section 704 which amends section 303(c) of the Energy Policy Act. I understand there are basically two ways vehicles are procured by Federal agencies. Either GSA acquires the vehicles and sells or leases them to agencies or in some cases agencies may acquire the vehicles directly.

Is it the intent of this provision to require GSA to allocate the incremental cost of all alternative vehicles it procures for other agencies, either by lease or purchase, so that the costs are allocated on a Federal Government-wide basis and not just across the vehicles procured by an individual agency? In other words, under this amendment will GSA be required to allocate the incremental cost of all alternative fuel vehicles it procures each year across the entire fleet it is responsible for?

I yield to the gentleman from Louisiana.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the chairman for that clarification, and I will proceed with my statement.

I thank the gentleman for yielding me this time. I rise today in support of this rule and the underlying bill that will make much needed improvements in the efficiency and security of our Nation's energy supply. Three months ago we experienced a blackout in the Midwest and Northeast unlike anything we have seen in almost 20 years. We never want to see a dark day like that again, a day where storefronts are dark, factories are shuttered, and the economy is brought to a halt. The repercussions of that day stretched far beyond the cities directly affected. They made every American feel vulnerable. They made every American wonder if their city was next. And after the lights came back on, everyone agreed on one thing, that the crisis could have been prevented if the system had not been neglected. If reliability had been fostered, and if the correct incentives for maintenance, modernization, and expansion of our electricity grid had been created by an energy policy. Americans would not have been left hunting for candles or stranded in subway cars. The lack of a modern and coherent energy policy to ensure a consistent supply of energy left us very vulnerable. Approving a comprehensive overhaul of our energy system will accomplish two very important objectives: It will enhance our national security, and it will strengthen our economy through job creation.

We are making incredible progress on a prescription drug bill that will pass in a few days, I believe, but before our seniors can worry about drugs, they have to be able to keep themselves warm at night. So the leadership of this House has worked tirelessly to ensure that we formulate an energy policy that keeps the lights on while lighting the fire of our economy. This bipartisan plan will create nearly 1 million jobs in the energy and manufacturing sectors, recovering some of the lost jobs that high energy prices have stripped from Americans. This plan will put construction workers back to work. It will put truck drivers back on the road transporting raw materials for our energy needs and engineers back on their jobs designing a modern energy system that will propel us into the 21st century. This is how it should be. This is how our economy and our energy sector should work together, strengthening, rather than weakening, each other.

And, lastly, this bill will increase our supply and use of renewable fuels and, very importantly to Ohio, ethanol. Ethanol makes our gas burn more cleanly and helps our skies become more clear. The bill contains important steps towards fixing the ethanol tax penalty on the Highway Trust Fund. This fix could mean more than $100 million for Ohio's transportation needs alone.

Now is the time when the rubber meets the road. Let us pass this bill without further ado and demonstrate our commitment to keeping the lights on in America's homes and businesses and our commitment to keeping Americans at work.

Mr. Speaker, I urge adoption of this fair rule and look forward to what I expect to be a very spirited debate today.

Mr. Speaker, as the leader of the first all women's United States Congressional Delegation to Iraq, it is my pleasure on behalf of Representatives Jennifer Dunn, Sue Kelly, Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, Marsha Blackburn, Katherine Harris, Darlene Hooley and Carolyn McCarthy, to commend the excellent work being done at the Women's Social and Cultural Society of Mosul. Today, with great honor and privilege, I would like to recognize the major milestones the organization has achieved.

The Women's Social and Cultural Society, comprised of more than 200 members, represents a variety of ethnic, religious and professional affiliations. These women are truly creating a new ideal within their country as they promote social, political and educational equality for all Iraqis. For too long, Iraqi women have suffered without equal or even adequate access to education, justice within the legal system, employment opportunities, and representation within the government. The members of the Women's Social and Cultural Society of Mosul must be applauded for their commitment to end decades of oppression against women by fighting to give them a voice and a respected role of leadership within their communities. The challenge is immense, but their determination is steadfast and unwavering.

We commend and praise the Women's Social and Cultural Society of Mosul today and urge our colleagues to wish them continued success as they pave the way for future generations of Iraqi citizens.

Mr. Speaker, today the House considers legislation that makes important progress in our fight against crime. H.R. 3214 represents months of bipartisan work by Members who are dedicated to improving law enforcement in our country. Through the increased and improved use of DNA evidence, law enforcement officials will be able to better identify criminals while protecting the innocent. I wholeheartedly support this bill.

Across the country, States are experiencing unprecedented backlogs in analyzing DNA evidence in criminal cases. These backlogs create interminable delays, robbing our system of the accuracy and efficiency necessary to identify the innocent, punish the perpetrators, and provide justice to victims. President Bush has recognized the gravity of this problem, and H.R. 3214 provides $755 million to help enact his initiative to reduce the backlogs of unanalyzed DNA evidence.

More specifically, H.R. 3214 includes essential provisions that provide for the testing of thousands of unexamined rape kits. According to the Department of Justice, across the United States there are at least 350,000 rape kit DNA samples that need to be analyzed. Many of these kits have been sitting on the shelves of laboratories for years. As a woman and as a Member of Congress, I find the delay in the processing of these kits appalling and unacceptable.

DNA evidence from rape kits can provide solid evidence of a perpetrator's identity. Often, these samples are the key piece of evidence, providing ``cold hits'' in cases for which there is no suspect. It is a crime in itself that the processing of these kits has been delayed so long. It is time for the Federal Government to provide the States with the assistance and direction needed to correct this injustice.

The bill we consider today provides $151 million each year for the next 4 years for

States to eliminate their rape kit backlogs. The bill also ensures that private laboratories can assist in processing rape kits. These measures will ensure that thousands of women in the United States will finally have closure.

I urge my colleagues to support this important legislation.

I thank the gentleman for yielding me this time.

Mr. Speaker, everyone in this Chamber needs to support this important funding package. The President made it very clear when he articulated his plan to fight the war on terror. In no uncertain terms he declared that Iraq is now the central front in this war. The job is only half done, though. Terrorists still roam the globe and threats still exist. If we leave Iraq now, we essentially allow the country to become a terror magnet, a flypaper that attracts terrorists from all over the world to its vast deserts and its countless caves. Iraq will become their home base as they wage their war against freedom, their war against civilization.

Mr. Speaker, to vote against this funding package and the goals it seeks to achieve would be to vote in favor of terror and against America's homeland security. It is that critical. This package will provide the funds necessary to establish a working society in Iraq. A government that is run by free Iraqis is a government that provides hope to her people. A free government responds to the wishes and desires of those whom it governs. People who live under a responsive and fair government have no need for terrorism. They do not experience the desperation and destitution that so often are the precursors to a life dedicated to terror.

So, Mr. Speaker, a free Iraq keeps terror out of that country and, therefore, out of ours. A free Iraq will send a clear message to people of the Middle East and around the world that freedom and democracy, not violence and terrorism, are the best paths for the future. Hope and stability in Iraq translate into security and peace for Americans here at home. We are close. Iraq is experiencing the first fruits of freedom and now they must be completely transitioned into a state of stability. So far, the coalition provisional authority has made significant progress on infrastructure improvements and governmental restructuring. All of Iraq's hospitals are now fully functional. Schools are opening and running. They are now places for young minds to receive information, not indoctrination.

Colleagues of ours who have been there talk of wheat fields and oil fields and cotton fields. This is progress. It is a beautiful picture of what comes of our noble pursuit in the fight for freedom and the war against terror. But more is needed to secure Iraq to bring our troops home soon. The funding in this package will provide the body armor that is so essential to protect them from terrorists. It will provide extra pay and benefits to the soldiers who are already sacrificing so much on our behalf. It will provide our troops the weapons and systems necessary to finish the mission we started and get our troops home to their families. Finally, this package will effectively help to revolutionize Iraq, turning this country from a terrorist breeding ground into yet another beacon of democracy in the Middle East. Terror will be shunned rather than invited.

Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to vote in favor of this bill to secure America by stabilizing Iraq.

Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I call up House Resolution 338 and ask for its immediate consideration.

Mr. Speaker, for the purpose of debate only, I yield the customary 30 minutes to the gentlewoman from New York (Ms. Slaughter), pending which I yield myself such time as I may consume. During consideration of this resolution, all time yielded is for the purpose of debate only.

Mr. Speaker, House Resolution 338 is an open rule which provides 1 hour of general debate, equally divided between the chairman and ranking minority member.

Mr. Speaker, H.R. 2861, the Fiscal Year 2004 Department of Veterans Affairs and Housing and Urban Development and Independent Agencies Appropriation Act we are hearing today. The rule waives all points of order against consideration of the bill and against provisions in the bill, except as specified in the resolution.

After general debate, any Member wishing to offer an amendment may do so as long as it complies with the regular rules of the House. The bill shall be read for amendment by paragraph and the rule authorizes the Chair to accord priority in recognition to the Members who have preprinted their amendments in the Congressional Record.

Finally, the rule permits the minority to offer a motion to recommit with or without instructions.

Mr. Speaker, there is much to be said about what is good in this bill.

Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time at this point, and will speak about it later.

Mr. Speaker, I reserve my time.

Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased to yield such time as he may consume to my distinguished colleague, the gentleman from New York (Mr. Walsh), the chairman of the Subcommittee on VA, HUD and Independent Agencies of the Committee on Appropriations.

Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased to yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from California (Mr. Dreier), the very distinguished chairman of the Committee on Rules.

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

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

In closing, when Members of Congress met in the subcommittee to write this appropriations package, planning the most effective and efficient way to fund many of these programs, they did not pick random funding level. Quite the contrary. The gentleman from New York (Chairman Walsh) and the gentleman from Florida (Chairman Young) had a good solid record of success to guide them upon which to build. They were able to look at all of the significant battles that Congress has fought and won for our veterans in the past, the measurable steps we have taken to provide better and better and better benefits and care for our veterans.

In the fight to enhance veterans access to high-quality health care, we have won many battles. Through the Veterans Benefits and Health Care Improvement Act, we ensured quality medical staff through competitive compensation for VA nurses. Through the Veterans Millennium Health Care and Benefits Act, the House has increased access to geriatric evaluation, nursing home care and adult day care.

In our fight to improve job training, education and employment placement for veterans, we have won many battles as well. Through the Jobs for Veterans Act, Republicans have provided a new system of incentives and accountability measures aimed at enhancing economic security. Through the Veterans Entrepreneurship and Benefits Improvement Act, the House has provided veterans with assistance in starting and growing small businesses.

In our fight to enhance veterans survivor benefits, we have won many battles. Through the Survivor Benefits Improvement Act, Republicans have provided $100 million in new health care benefits for surviving spouses and extension in life insurance coverage to families in their time of need. In our fight to improve the overall quality of life for veterans and their loved ones, we have won many battles. Through the homeless veterans law, we have provided $1 billion to help homeless veterans receive housing vouchers and assistance for those veterans undergoing treatment for mental illness and substance abuse.

Today we are here to add to that long list of successes. Today we are claiming victory. Today we have an opportunity to make greater gains for our veterans and their communities by approving this significant funding plan. This bill provides $27.2 billion in total budgetary resources for the Veterans Health Administration, a $1.4 billion increase over last year. A $1.4 billion increase over last year, that is not a cut, Mr. Speaker.

This package includes nearly $16 billion for medical services, $4 billion for medical facilities, $408 million for veterans medical and prosthetic research. In addition, this plan makes significant investments in America's communities. There is more in this bill than what we have just discussed today. Over $2 billion to assist low-income families in making down payments as they purchase a home, invest in their communities, and achieve the American dream; $850 million for safe drinking water, nearly $16 million for NASA further space exploration.

In nearly every way, this funding package builds on our past successes for our veterans and for our own communities.

Is it everything on our Christmas list? No, it is not. Is it everything that we had ever hoped to provide our veterans, their families and America's communities? Not even close. But is this progress? Yes, sir, this is progress. It is one more achievement that will encourage us to return and fight harder tomorrow, next month, and next year for more for our veterans and for our communities.

Mr. Speaker, America's veterans have served our Nation in invaluable ways. Repaying them for upholding our values of liberty and freedom seems nearly impossible, but we will continue to try. Each year we will work harder and harder to reward their sacrifices. Each year we make progress, and each year we fall short because, very honestly, freedom has no price tag. We can never repay what we owe them. But step by step, bit by bit, we can continue to make gains in honoring their service with better health care, enhance access to housing and job opportunities and more generous benefits for their loved ones, and that is what this plan does. It places us one step further in the ongoing and never-ending quest to reward those who have upheld the liberty we all enjoy. Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to pass the rule and approve the underlying bill.

Mr. Speaker, I move the previous question on the resolution.

The previous question was ordered.

Mr. Speaker, by the direction of the Committee on Rules, I call up House Resolution 336 and ask for its immediate consideration.

Mr. Speaker, for purposes of debate only, I yield the customary 30 minutes to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Hastings), pending which I yield myself such time as I may consume. During consideration of this resolution, all time yielded is for the purposes of debate only.

Mr. Speaker, House Res. 336 makes in order the bill H.R. 2210, under a structured rule. The rule provides 1 hour of debate to be equally divided and controlled by the chairman and ranking minority member of the Committee on Education and the Workforce.

The rule provides that in lieu of the amendment recommended by the Committee on Education and the Workforce, it shall be in order to consider as an original bill for the purpose of amendment, the amendment in the nature of a substitute printed in part A of the Committee on Rules report accompanying this resolution and provides that it shall be considered as read. The rule waives all points of order against the amendment in the nature of a substitute printed in part B of the report.

It makes in order only those amendments printed in part B of the Committee on Rules report, which shall be considered only in the order printed in the report, may be offered only by a Member designated in the report, shall be considered as read, shall be debatable for the time specified in the report equally divided and controlled by the proponent and opponent, shall not be subject to amendment, and shall not be subject to a demand for a division of the question in the House or in the Committee of the Whole. All points of order are waived against the amendments printed in part B of the report.

Finally, the rule provides for one motion to recommit with or without instructions.

Mr. Speaker, there are many things in this world that I can be content with, fully satisfied. Watching a beautiful sunset, eating a good piece of chocolate cake, or reading a great ending to a nail- biting suspense book. But there are other things in this world with which we should never be content; ideals which we should never tire of championing, that we should never stop striving for. And the quality of our children's education is one of those items with which we should never be content. We should always want more for them.

Mr. Speaker, the debate today is in many ways a vote on the status quo. Do we keep the existing system as it is, or do we demand more for our children? More specific to our debate: Are we completely satisfied that the quality of our children's education is fine, or do we demand more? The bill before us today, the School Readiness Act, strengthens the Head Start program, the Federal Government's largest effort to prepare the Nation's most disadvantaged children for school.

An immensely popular program, Head Start provides a range of services including education, nutrition, health, and parent training to over 20 million preschool children and their families who are living in poverty. But Head Start can do better.

The legislation before us aims to reform and improve Head Start so that disadvantaged children hold the same level of academic preparedness as all of their peers before entering kindergarten. Specifically, this plan aims to enhance school preparedness, improve teacher quality, and close the ``readiness gap'' that exists between Head Start and non-Head Start children.

First, this education package will help enhance each school's effectiveness by providing certain select States with more flexibility and control over the operation of prekindergarten initiatives through a measured pilot program. Currently, States lack the ability to fully coordinate their State's early childhood programs with Head Start. This inefficiency results in the duplication of programs and services, underenrollment, gaps in services, and missed opportunities. With this pilot program, however, States and local communities will be able to tailor their programs and services to best meet the needs of local families.

It is important to note that this pilot program in no way eliminates basic programs and services, nor is the program an unfunded mandate or a loophole for States to cut early childhood education programs. Let us be crystal clear: this bill in no way cuts funding for any of Head Start's education, nutrition, or health services. Quite the opposite, Mr. Speaker. This package provides safeguards to prohibit participating pilot program States from making funding cuts. In addition, the Head Start package authorizes a $202 million increase in funding for the program, an amount that has nearly doubled in the past 7 years.

This legislation will also ensure that more Head Start teachers are adequately trained and educated in early childhood development, particularly in teaching the fundamental skills of language, prereading, and premathematics. These provisions will help to meet a goal set recently by the National Head Start Association itself, which calls for 75 percent of the Head Start teachers to have at least an associate degree by the year 2005 and for all Head Start teachers to have at least an associate degree by 2008.

And, finally, for our country's most, most disadvantaged children, this education plan will help close the Head Start readiness gap and ensure that all children achieve academic parity.

Most children entering Head Start hold academic skills far below national standards. That is very sad. And while most children make improvements in these schools while enrolled in Head Start, the average Head Start child still lacks many of the premathematics and prevocabulary skills that their peers attain.

Head Start students are learning, but they are not learning enough. In fact, for the brightest 25 percent of Head Start kids, there is no evidence of academic progress while enrolled in the program. This bill makes significant improvements to the program, fine-tuning its focus on a strong curriculum and academic excellence.

And so we find ourselves faced with the same questions I asked just moments ago: Is Head Start better and more effective than it was yesterday or last year?

It is a worthy question, especially when faced with the long list of studies that shows the sad truth, that Head Start children simply do not begin kindergarten with the same level of academic preparedness as their more fortunate peers.

So I ask the opponents of this legislation, are you satisfied with this readiness gap? Are you comfortable with the status quo? Well, I am not. Parents are not. And neither are the supporters of this bill.

The level and quality of our children's education is something with which we can never be completely content. It is an on-going struggle, an area where we must be willing to constantly demand more.

There is no rest when it comes to fighting for a better education and a brighter future for the youngest in our society. There is no such thing as a perfect classroom, a perfect teacher, or a perfect student. There is always room for improvement.

Mr. Speaker, this plan raises the bar on our standards and our expectations. It closes the readiness gap between disadvantaged and more affluent children, and it will enhance teacher quality and school effectiveness.

In short, Mr. Speaker, it is a bill that demands the best for our children, and I urge my colleagues to pass the rule and agree to the underlying bill.

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

Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased to yield 5 minutes to my distinguished colleague, the gentleman from the great State of Ohio (Mr. Boehner), the chairman of the Committee on Education and the Workforce from which this bill arose.

Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased to yield four minutes to my distinguished colleague, the gentleman from Nebraska (Mr. Osborne), a member of the Committee on Education and the Workforce.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 4\3/4\ minutes to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Mica), a member of my very own class in Congress.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Regula), the distinguished colleague of mine and the dean of our delegation, a former elementary school teacher and principal himself, and, most importantly, the chairman of the Appropriations Committee on Health and Human Services that funds this bill.

Mr. Speaker, I would inquire of the gentleman as to how many speakers he has?

The gentleman may as well go ahead then, please.

Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased to yield 1 minute to the distinguished gentleman from New York (Mr. Houghton), a very thoughtful member of this conference.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from Delaware (Mr. Castle), the chairman of the Subcommittee on Education Reform, the chief sponsor and author of this legislation.

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

It is time to demand the best for our children. The gentleman from Delaware (Mr. Castle) and the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Boehner) are offering us that opportunity this evening. I urge my colleagues to pass this fair rule and agree to the underlying legislation. It is time to improve our children's chances.

Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I call up House Resolution 312 and ask for its immediate consideration.

Mr. Speaker, for the purpose of debate only, I yield the customary 30 minutes to the gentlewoman from New York (Ms. Slaughter), pending which I yield myself such time as I may consume. During consideration of this resolution, all time yielded is for the purpose of debate only.

Mr. Speaker, House Resolution 312 is an open rule which provides for 1 hour of general debate, equally divided between the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Regula) and the ranking member, the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Obey), on H.R. 2660, the fiscal year 2004 Labor, Health and Human Services, and Education, and Related agencies appropriations bill.

The rule waives all points of order against consideration of the bill and against provisions in the bill, except as specified in this resolution. After general debate, any Member wishing to offer an amendment may do so, as long as it complies with the regular rules of the House.

The bill shall be read for amendment by paragraph, and the rule authorizes the Chair to accord priority in recognition to Members who have preprinted their amendments in the Congressional Record.

Finally, the rule permits the minority to offer a motion to recommit, with or without instructions.

Mr. Speaker, we have before us today the Labor, Health and Human Services appropriations act for fiscal year 2004, a funding package that makes good on our promises to America's children, workers and families. Before I summarize the main components of this package, a larger context must be established so that Members of both sides of the aisle fully understand what we are debating here and what is at issue today.

When Members of Congress met in subcommittee and in committee to write this appropriations package, planning the most effective and efficient way to fund many of these domestic programs for education, for health care, for labor, they did not pick random funding levels. Setting funding levels was not decided by a game of darts or ``eenie, meenie, minie, moe.''

A war in Iraq, a slowly recovering economy, and limited government revenues placed very clear and very real limitations on the resources, and the need to be fiscally responsible with the taxpayers' dollars was great. Despite these challenges, the gentleman from Florida (Chairman Young) and the gentleman from Ohio (Chairman Regula) and their colleagues created a funding plan that reflects our priorities, meets our goals, and places the greatest funding in the areas we need it most.

So when they drafted a plan to fund teacher quality grants, they thought of the millions of students who learn something new each day when they are taught by well-qualified teachers; and when they created a package to give assistance and training to dislocated workers, they thought of the many unemployed men and women who diligently search for a new job, but always seem to meet a dead end; and when they thought to craft a plan to help critical agencies such as the Centers for Disease Control and the National Institutes of Health, they thought of America's communities, which need increasing assistance in fighting the growing threats of terrorism, especially those of bioterrorism. As a result, we have seen dramatic increases in both agencies, even after NIH's funding has doubled over the past 5 years.

When they considered the significance of programs, such as the Low Income Home Energy Assistance Program, they thought of all the families who are forced to forego other needs in order to afford heat for their homes during cold winter months; and when they created a plan to provide comprehensive nutrition programs for women, infants and children, they thought of the thousands of soon-to-be and new mothers who wanted to provide the best possible care for their children and themselves by eating right and living healthy lives.

Mr. Speaker, I mention these things at the risk of sounding repetitive, because the debate over this appropriations plan is likely to turn quite heated. These Members of Congress that I have mentioned, the ones who have worked so hard under the constraints of very finite resources, may not be rewarded here today. Instead, they may very well be maligned by many of our colleagues from the other side of the aisle who will suggest that this plan is cruel and that those that have created it are uncaring.

So when these opponents begin to suggest that the amount of money is indicative of the size of a person's heart, I would ask them to ponder a quote by one of our former presidents, Ronald Reagan, who said, ``The size of the Federal budget is not an appropriate barometer of social conscience or charitable concern.'' And that is so true.

Do we have limited resources to spend? Yes. Can we still meet America's needs with those limited resources? Absolutely. And is more money always the best answer or the only answer? Absolutely not.

For example, in 1994, when my colleagues from the other side of the aisle controlled Congress, the Labor-HHS appropriations plan increased education spending by a mere 2 percent, and even then there were no additional education reforms. The message of their plan was more spending equals better education; more dollars equals better education.

Now, fast forward to 2002 when the Republican-controlled Congress increased funding by 18 percent: 2 percent when they had it, 18 percent when we have it. And we also implemented the landmark No Child Left Behind plan to allow local school districts more flexibility in exchange for greater accountability and for student achievement.

Our message: more efficient and effective spending equals a better education.

Mr. Speaker, funding America's priorities can be both generous and responsible, and this appropriations package is proof positive of that fact. It provides significant increases for vital programs and services while maintaining wise stewardship over taxpayers' dollars.

One issue that I have championed for many years, greater funding for children's medical hospitals, received significant increases in this bill, and I want to thank both the chairman and the ranking member for recognizing the need for continued support for those working to improve children's health and end critical and deadly diseases.

But all Americans are touched in one way or another by this legislation. The gentleman from Ohio (Chairman Regula) has provided tremendous leadership, working tirelessly to assure that Congress spends generously, but wisely. As a result of that fact, as the gentleman from Ohio (Chairman Regula) says, we should call this legislation the Hope Act, because it provides hope for nearly every single person in America it touches.

Hope for new medical cures, hope for stronger schools, hope for a new job. Whether you are an at-risk youth who will be able to attend an after-school program, or whether you are a senior who will benefit from increased efficiency and improved service in receiving your Social Security benefits, or whether you are a child who will receive better care from the extra assistance for children's hospitals and the teaching that goes on in them, the message that this appropriations plan sends out is very clear. Our priorities are the same, and our commitment is unwavering: quality education, adequate quality health care, safe work environments, and secure jobs. These are our goals, and they are reflected in this funding package.

I urge all of my colleagues to pass the rule and approve the underlying bill.

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

Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased to yield such time as he may consume to my very distinguished colleague from the grand State of California (Mr. Dreier), the chairman of our Committee on Rules.

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

Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from the State of Florida (Mr. Foley).

Mr. Speaker, we reserve our time on this side for the time being.

Mr. Speaker, may I inquire as to the time remaining.

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

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. Cunningham).

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

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 additional minute to the gentleman from California (Mr. Cunningham).

Mr. Speaker, I am most pleased to yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Regula), my distinguished colleague, the dean of the Ohio delegation, and the chairman of the Subcommittee on Labor, Health and Human Services, who has done such great work to bring this bill to the floor of the House.

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

Mr. Speaker, in closing, this really is the Hope Act. This bill will provide the needed funding to supply people with new skills and new opportunities, hope for a better job. It will lay the groundwork for new medical cures, hope for the gift of life, and it will provide for stronger schools and a better education, hope for a brighter future. The message is clear and our commitment is unwavering. Quality education and health care, safe work environments and secure jobs, these are our goals and are reflected in this funding package. I urge my colleagues to support this open rule and adopt this important legislation.

Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time, and I move the previous question on the resolution.