Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor the continued efforts of the Portuguese Education Foundation of Central California and their numerous contributions to our community. The Foundation works tirelessly to educate the community and to recognize individuals for such efforts.

Tonight, the Foundation is honoring members of the community for their valued contributions and achievements. In addition, the Foundation is recognizing over 30 Foundation Scholarship recipients, lending these individuals strong support in their continuing pursuit of educational goals.

It is my distinct pleasure to pay tribute to the Foundation's 2003 community honorees.

Former Congressman Tony Coelho is being honored as the 2003 Citizen of the Year. Tony, my mentor and good friend, has been an exemplary member of the Portuguese community for many years. He served with distinction as Majority Whip in the United States House of Representatives and continues to think of our San Joaquin Valley as his home.

I am delighted to also recognize the achievements of Maria de Lourdes Silva. Maria has been selected as the 2003 Student of the Year by the Foundation. She is being honored for her outstanding academic achievement and research for the Portuguese Heritage Community of California. I commend her on her dedication to the community.

Finally, it is my honor to recognize Jose Luis da Silva, who has been selected as the 2003 Professor of the Year by the Foundation for his contributions and dedication to sharing

the language and culture of the Portuguese community with the many students of the San Jose High Academy. Mr. da Silva is a tireless advocate and tremendous resource for his students and our community.

The Portuguese Education Foundation of Central California continues to be a strong asset to our community. The Foundation's efforts are immense and I am honored to recognize them and their awardees this evening.

Mr. Speaker, H.R. 3157 would require USDA to designate employees of the Department to serve as disaster liaisons to State and local emergency agencies in a federally declared disaster area. These liaisons would be responsible for coordinating interagency programs and assisting agricultural producers in the area to navigate through the bureaucracy of Federal Government support.

I want to thank Majority Whip Blunt for taking the initiative to introduce this legislation on behalf of farmers and growers in the United States. I was more than happy to sign on as the lead cosponsor because of a situation faced by a handful of growers in my congressional district earlier this year.

During this past April, an unusual hailstorm descended upon Merced Country, ruining acres and acres of peach orchards. That event set off a chain of events involving numerous agencies within USDA, which in turn led to me and my staff to negotiate on their behalf with countless officials and administrators throughout USDA attempting to elicit some type of assistance from the Federal Government. It was a trying experience to say the least.

When a disaster happens now, multiple USDA agencies involved with numerous programs actively assess damage in a disaster area, while compiling information from hundreds of phone calls and by talking to numerous disaster victims. This information is then assembled and sent to representatives of the State. The farmer is left to fend for himself or herself with no point of contact for follow up.

Those situations are what Mr. Blunt and I are trying to avoid with this legislation.

When enacted, H.R. 3157 will require USDA to recognize the importance of quick response time to agricultural disasters by deploying an experienced disaster specialist to an affected area. This official will facilitate such things as crop insurance claims processing and other applications for economic assistance as well as provide one legitimate source of information and comfort from the Federal Government.

My growers affected by the hailstorm were continually given conflicting information from different USDA employees. It is imperative that growers, especially the more skeptical growers in my home State of California, be able to receive clear and concise information on how to proceed after a Federal disaster as been declared in order to most efficiently proceed to the next crop year.

H.R. 3157 is the right thing to do for America's agricultural industry and I am proud to be a sponsor of this bill.

Again, I would like to thank Chairman Goodlatte, Ranking Member Stenholm, and Majority Whip Blunt for recognizing the importance of the legislation. I urge an aye vote on this bill.

Mr. Speaker, I offer a motion to instruct.

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

Mr. Speaker, the motion we are debating tonight instructs the Medicare conference committee to reject the controversial plan of premium support and reallocate the money saved to increase payments to disproportionate share hospitals.

As a representative of an area with multiple DHS hospitals, I feel it is vitally important to provide them with the maximum Federal funding possible. However, let me first discuss the issue of premium support, and why I am concerned that this plan could potentially dismantle Medicare.

Under premium support, in the year 2010, private insurance companies and traditional fee-for-service would compete against each other to provide services to beneficiaries. Monthly premiums would be set according to an average and beneficiaries would then be given something similar to a voucher for which they could purchase coverage.

However, premium support will create a system where seniors' benefits can vary widely from county to county, State to State, and their choice in doctors can be restricted, vital services may not be covered, and their monthly premium can radically fluctuate. That is if the private plans even participate at all.

We need to look no further than the administration to find proof that this is an impending problem. A recent report by the Department of Health and Human Services actuary showed radical disparities in the monthly premiums by region. For example in Davidson County, North Carolina, Medicare beneficiaries would only pay $53 a month under premium support. However, my constituents in Stanislaus County would be forced to pay a whopping $117 per month, so more than double.

I am very concerned about subjecting a trusted health care system like Medicare to the uncertainty of the private market. I am especially hesitant about a system that relies on HMOs and other private insurance plans to administer services to our seniors. In my hometown of Merced County, there is not one, not one Medicare+Choice plan that my constituents can participate in, not one. However, for someone residing in Los Angeles County, 200-250 miles down the road, they have a pick of 11 different plans. HMOs have made it abundantly clear that serving rural America is not profitable, and, therefore, they have pulled out of those regions in a mass exodus. Now, the House bill relies on these plans to provide services for Medicare beneficiaries.

Mr. Speaker, to me it just does not make sense. So let us not take a gamble with our seniors. Instead, let us spend our resources on something far more tangible, disproportionate share hospitals. These are America's safety net hospitals caring for the sickest and poorest of our citizens, and they must not be abandoned in their time of need. Currently, there are over 40 million Americans without health insurance, and the number continues to rise. DHS hospitals accept every patient, regardless of their financial status, and provide the best possible care available day in and day out.

In my district, my hospitals fall between the cracks of not quite big enough to be considered urban, and just a little too large to be considered rural; but we have one of the largest uninsured populations in the country and increasing DHS funds are absolutely essential for their survival. Mercy Hospital in Merced County is facing severe financial shortages because of a lack of payments in this area and because of a high indigent population.

My motion not only directs the conferees to use funds saved by premium support for DSH hospitals but it also insists that the final legislation retain the most generous DSH provisions from the House and Senate versions of the Medicare legislation.

As we all know, DSH hospitals are facing the possibility of falling off a proverbial cliff due to the drastic reduction in Federal funding as directed by the Balanced Budget Act of 1997. Section 1001 of this bill increases DSH allotments in fiscal year 2004 to that of 120 percent of fiscal year 2003. Section 602 of the Senate bill increases the floor for low DSH States from 1 percent to 3 percent of total Medicaid spending. This provision is extremely important for States of Alaska, Arkansas, Delaware, Idaho, Iowa, Kansas, Maryland, Minnesota, Montana, Nebraska, New Mexico, North Dakota, Oklahoma, Oregon, South Dakota, Utah, Wisconsin, and Wyoming who are bound by law not to spend more than 1 percent of their Medicaid dollars on DSH hospitals. Hospitals in these States are suffering as well, and we cannot let them fail, either.

Mr. Speaker, I urge every Member of this body to support my motion to instruct the Medicare conferees. America's seniors deserve a guaranteed Medicare benefit and America's safety net hospitals deserve our assistance.

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

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

I would say to the gentleman from Texas that it is my understanding that we have never offered a proposal that costs three times as much. In fact, the gentleman alluded to the fact that he favored a plan much like the plan that Members of Congress currently have. That is something that we have proposed. We have never heard that plan from the Republicans. We would certainly be willing to entertain a plan that was something similar to what Members of Congress have for our seniors, without a doughnut hole.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Stenholm), the ranking member of the Committee on Agriculture and the cochair of the Blue Dog Coalition.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Brown), a member of the Committee on Energy and Commerce, who has over the years become a leader in this body on health care in America.

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

I would like to first assure the gentleman from Texas that I have not attempted to score debating points since I graduated from high school, and I think this issue dealing with Medicare for our seniors, prescription drugs for our seniors, is far too important to consider debating points. What we are concerned about is the fact that we have been excluded, predominantly, from a conference committee that is critically important to the vast majority of our seniors in this Nation. So this is the only method we have to have input into that conference process. I would also like to make the point that administrative costs in private plans are approximately 15 percent and under the Medicare system that we have in this country is probably one of the most efficient possible ways of delivering health care to our seniors. We only have a 2 percent administrative cost.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from California (Mrs. Capps), my friend and colleague who has been a leader on the Committee on Energy and Commerce in fighting for maximum Federal dollars for Medicaid DSH hospitals.

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

Mr. Speaker, I would respond to the gentleman from Texas by saying that those seniors in my district are already scared. They are scared about the fact that they cannot afford prescription drugs now. They are scared about the fact that all of the HMO+Choice plans have pulled out. They are scared about the fact that, in some parts of this country, it will be $53 a month, and in my district the administration says it will be $117 a month, which they do not know where it is going to come from.

I yield to the gentleman from Texas.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Sandlin), my fellow Blue Dog and a member of the Committee on Ways and Means.

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

Mr. Speaker, I would respond to the gentleman from Texas by saying it is my understanding that we have offered to do the Congressional plan both in committee and here on the floor, and I would just say to the gentleman from Texas that I would be happy to join with him in this. In fact, the gentleman from Texas is in the majority, and he could propose that proposal tonight, if he so chooses.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from Indiana (Ms. Carson), whose district is faced with a growing problem of uninsured.

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

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson-Lee).

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

I would first like to thank all of my colleagues who spoke on behalf of this motion today. I would like to thank my colleague from Texas (Mr. Brady) from across the aisle for participating in this debate. We may differ in our opinions about which way is the best way to reform Medicare, but I appreciate his willingness to engage, in any case.

I would like to urge my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to consider supporting my motion to instruct. The premium support provisions in both the House and Senate versions of this bill are a recipe for disaster for our seniors. If premium support is enacted, our seniors will be subjected to vastly different premiums and benefits depending on where they live, they will be forced to assume all the risks associated with health care, and they will most likely lose their ability to choose their preferred doctor and hospital, that is, if the private plans even participate.

In my district, all but one of the supplemental private insurance plans we have once had have pulled out of our area, leaving my constituents in a serious lurch. Let us not take this giant risk again, Mr. Speaker. Let us instead spend our resources helping our safety net hospitals survive. DSH hospitals are the backbone of our communities, and the number of uninsured continue to grow, as do their responsibilities to serve these populations. My motion retains the best provisions from both the House and Senate, and allocates any monies saved from dropping premium support to DSH hospitals across the United States.

Mr. Speaker, I urge an ``aye'' vote.

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

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

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor Ms. Sharon Schuchert of Stanislaus County who is being awarded the Department of Heath and Human Services Adoption Excellence Award. It is truly an honor to recognize all of her achievements as a dedicated social worker in our community.

Ms. Schuchert is the recipient of the 2003 award of Adoption Excellence Award, for her outstanding accomplishments in achieving permanency for America's children waiting in foster care.

In 1969, Ms. Schuchert began her public service career as a social worker for Stanislaus County Community Services Agency and in 2001, in collaboration with other community leaders, she founded Camp A Life With Adoption Yields Success (A.L.W.A.Y.S.). Camp A.L.W.A.Y.S. mission statement is to provide every member of an adoptive family with a supportive environment. At Camp A.L.W.A.Y.S. adoptive families spend time in Pine Crest, California learning about the unique challenges facing adoptive families in a positive family oriented setting. For many families who attend Camp A.L.W.A.Y.S. this is one of the few times they are surrounded by others with similar family structures.

Ms. Schuchert's award is especially relevant as November is National Adoption Month. There are roughly 130,000 children ranging toddlers to teenagers who are currently in foster care waiting to be placed in a safe, permanent home. Recognizing their plight on a national level is an important first step to permanency. By providing children in need with the opportunity to grow and succeed through adoption, we can help them on their journey to becoming confident and successful members of society.

Mr. Speaker, the county of Stanislaus, and the 18th Congressional District of California have been greatly strengthened by the efforts of Ms. Schuchert and Camp A.L.W.A.Y.S. America's children must not be forgotten and through the leadership of individuals like Ms. Schuchert we can continue to fight on their behalf.

I ask my colleagues to help honor Ms. Sharon Schuchert today for her service to this great nation.

Mr. Speaker, subject to rule XXII, clause 7(c), I hereby announce my intention to offer a motion to instruct on H.R. 1, the Medicare Prescription Drug and Modernization Act of 2003.

The form of the motion is as follows:

I move that the managers on the part of the House at the

conference on the disagreeing votes of the two Houses on the

Senate amendment to the bill H.R. 1 be instructed as follows:

(1) To reject the provisions of subtitle C of title II of

the House bill;

(2) To reject the provisions of section 231 of the Senate

amendment

(3) Within the scope of conference, to increase payments

under the medicaid program for inpatient hospital services

furnished by disproportionate share hospitals by an amount

equal to the amount of savings attributable to the rejection

of the aforementioned provisions

(4) To insist upon section 1001 of the House bill and

section 602 of the Senate bill.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of this motion by the gentlewoman from California (Mrs. Capps), who has done fantastic work in this area.

This motion instructs the Medicare conference committee to reject the controversial and risky privatization scheme of premium support and reallocate that money to increase the payment to physicians who care for Medicare beneficiaries.

Let me first discuss the issue of premium support and why I am concerned that this scheme could potentially dismantle the program of Medicare. I am concerned about subjecting a proven health care delivery system like Medicare to the uncertainty of the private market. I am especially hesitant about the system that relies on HMOs to provide this service to our seniors.

In my home area of Merced County, there is not one Medicare+Choice plan that my constituents can participate in. HMOs have made it abundantly clear that serving the rural areas and serving rural America is not profitable; and, therefore, they have pulled out of those regions in a mass exodus. Now the House bill relies on these private plans to provide services for Medicare beneficiaries. It just does not make sense.

Additionally, since its inception, Medicare has been a defined benefit system for which seniors pay a guaranteed premium each month and receive a guaranteed benefit.

In the House Medicare proposal, seniors' health care costs would be subsidized in the form of a voucher which they could then use to buy coverage in the private market. Their benefits can vary widely. Their choice of doctors can be restricted. Some services may not be covered, and so and so forth.

In theory, this system is supposed to cut costs by introducing competition into a Federal entitlement program. Unfortunately, all this plan really does is pass the costs of health care on to our constituents.

The basic foundation of Medicare is that we are all in this together and that everyone shares the risk. With premium support, the risk stays in the Medicare pool while healthy beneficiaries are picked off by private insurance companies in order to make a profit.

Seniors do not want this. They do want their choice of doctor, they do want a choice of hospital, and most importantly, they want to be able to afford their health care. So let us not take a gamble with our seniors. Let us use the money that we will save by striking this provision and put it toward something more tangible. If we increase payments to doctors who see Medicare patients, we will ensure that they continue to offer the highest quality care and not be forced to drop Medicare patients because the system cannot cover the basic cost of their treatment.

Mr. Speaker, physicians are being forced out of providing services to Medicare patients at an alarming rate. In fact, CMS just announced they would be imposing a 4.5 percent reduction in physicians' Medicare reimbursements effective January 2004. This is a disservice to our Nation's doctors and to our seniors. I urge a ``yes'' vote on this motion.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor Mr. Edward J. Chavez who is retiring as the Chief of Police for the city of Stockton, California. It is truly an honor to recognize all of his achievements as a dedicated law enforcement officer in our community. He has served the people of my district with integrity and he will truly be missed.

Chief Chavez has shown his dedication to serving our community and our country in countless ways. As a member of the U.S. Air Force from 1962-1970, Mr. Chavez demonstrated this very commitment.

Through hard work and a commitment to furthering his education, Mr. Chavez earned a Bachelor of Arts from California State University, Sacramento, a Master of Science from California State Polytechnic University, Pomona, and graduated from the prestigious Federal Bureau of Investigation Academy.

In 1973, Chief Chavez became a police officer and his prestigious career began. As a leader in the Department, Edward Chavez rose through the ranks to become a Captain and Deputy Chief of Police in 1990, and finally to become the Stockton Police Department's Chief of Police in 1993. As a role model to law enforcement officials, Chief Chavez has served the city of Stockton with the utmost respect and honor for residents and coworkers alike.

Not only has Chief Chavez been a leader to the Stockton Police Department, but has served his community by being a member of over twenty civic and professional organizations. He has been affiliated with the Board of Trustees for Humphreys College School of Law, Stockton Rotary, Hispanics for Political Action, Greater Stockton Chamber of Commerce, International Association of Chiefs of Police, California Peace Officers Association, and on the selection committee for the Stocktonian of the Year.

Mr. Speaker, the city of Stockton has been greatly strengthened by the effort and dedicated service of Chief Chavez. I ask my colleagues to help honor Chief Edward J. Chavez today for his service to this great Nation. It is a privilege to represent him, and to call him my friend.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to welcome Taiwan's President, Chen Shui-bian as he travels through the United States later this month. President Chen recently celebrated his third anniversary in office; a term of service which has been marked by Taiwan's

strong support and friendship with the United States.

During his time in office, President Chen has shown that he is a thoughtful, responsible leader, which has been evident in his handling of cross-strait relations with the People's Republic of China. President Chen has consistently stated that both sides of Taiwan Strait have an obligation to uphold the principles of ``goodwill reconciliation, active cooperation and permanent peace.'' Regrettably, despite his many calls for dialogue and cooperation, the Chinese government has insisted on the dated ``one country, two systems'' formula as the solution to the Taiwan issue.

President Chen's has asserted that ``Taiwan is not a province of one country'' but a sovereign nation. I strongly agree with his assertion and believe that President Chen is right to guide his country and his people toward a brighter, more prosperous future.

As a strong supporter of Taiwan and its people, I believe the widespread praise President Chen has received is well earned. He has proven to be an effective leader for all of his people, with an unswerving dedication to continued democratization, economic reform and basic recognition of human rights.

I believe President Chen's U.S. visit will further enhance U.S.- Taiwan relations and friendship. The Untied States and Taiwan have been allies, partners and friends and this unique relationship will continue to grow stronger in the future.

Mr. Speaker, America welcomes President Chen and salutes him upon the many successes and achievements of his administration.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of the motion by my colleague from Ohio.

As a Representative of a rural area in California, I must voice strong opposition to any provision in the Medicare conference that would put my seniors at risk of higher premiums and reduced quality of care as this so-called premium support would do.

The House plan includes provisions that would for all intents and purposes, I believe, could spell the demise of Medicare system as we know it.

In the year 2010 Medicare beneficiaries would be given something similar to a voucher that they could use to purchase health care services in what the majority would have you believe would be better than the Medicare system provides.

The move creates a defined contribution system in one that for decades has been a defined benefit. Just trying to explain it to my constituents at home has been a trying experience. Medicare has always been a program that you are eligible to receive at age 65. In the current program, once you reach that golden age, you know exactly what you are going to receive and exactly what services you are going to be covered with.

Premium support creates a situation where seniors will receive a benefit determined by their health, by where they live, or by what they are willing to risk.

Why do we not put our resources, Mr. Speaker, into crafting a Medicare bill that will actually help those who need the assistance? Why do we not close the doughnut hole? Why do we not give our hospitals the basic funding levels that they need to survive? Why do we not give seniors a prescription drug benefit that they can understand?

I predict that if we pass this measure with the provisions that are in it currently, we will be acting upon a repeal within months. Privatizing Medicare is not the answer.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of this legislation. I want to thank its sponsor, my good friend, the gentleman from California (Mr. Pombo), the chairman of our committee, for his leadership on this issue.

Just a few weeks from now on November 11, our Nation will observe Veterans Day. I believe one of the most moving tributes to our veterans is in fact this Vietnam Veterans Memorial Wall which honors the service and sacrifice of over 3.5 million Americans who served in Southeast Asia during that conflict.

Our Nation suffered the loss of 58,000 men and women and more than 300,000 came home injured or wounded. The Vietnam wall honors those we lost and pays a testament to their sacrifice. The fact that the wall is the most visited monument in Washington speaks to the experience it offers to every visitor.

As impressive as the wall is, I believe we can enhance the experience by establishing a facility to educate visitors about the sacrifices that our troops made during the conflict. The legislation we are considering today would authorize the creation of an underground educational visitors center within the memorial's existing 2-acre site. The facility will feature photographs of those who were killed or remain missing, as well as some of the more 60,000 items that have been left at the wall over the last few years.

The visitors center would be funded by private donations through the Vietnam Veterans Memorial Fund, a nonprofit organization that raised money to build the memorial wall.

Earlier this year I was pleased to take part in a Committee on Resources hearing on the grounds of the national Mall next to the memorial. I believe an educational visitors center will serve as an important learning tool for the millions of visitors who will visit the wall each year, especially those too young to remember the conflict in Vietnam.

Through the passage of this legislation today, we can help the American school children and the public at large have a greater access to the information about service, sacrifice, and patriotism for those whose names are inscribed on the Vietnam Veterans Wall.

Mr. Speaker, I recently had the opportunity to travel to Israel with the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Hoyer), the gentleman from New York (Mr. Crowley) and over 20 of my Democratic colleagues.

As timing would have it, our visit preceded the departure of Palestinian Prime Minister Abu Mazen by 1 week. We met with the Prime Minister, who told us that he was trying to implement important reforms within the Palestinian Authority. But during the Prime Minister's 4- month tenure, Mr. Arafat consistently opposed his reform efforts and took steps to maintain his hold on power and erode support for Mr. Abbas among the Palestinian people.

As these events have demonstrated, measurable progress will not be realized as long as Mr. Arafat remains in power.

If the Palestinian Authority will not or cannot destroy Palestinian terrorist groups, the Israeli Government has every right to defend its citizens against further violence. The Israeli Government has started building a security fence for exactly that purpose. I believe the United States should support Israel's efforts, which is a reasonable measure of self-defense against suicide bombers.

Further, I believe it would be a terrible mistake for the U.S. to reduce its loan guarantees to the State of Israel. At this time of great peril, we must stand side by side with Israel and its citizens in the fight against terrorism.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to posthumously honor Max and Verda Foster who are receiving the ``Pioneer Award'' from the California Poultry Federation. As the founders of Foster Farms, they provided countless economic opportunities to local workers and shaped the poultry industry today.

Max and Verda Foster launched Foster Farms in 1939 on an 80-acre ranch just outside of Modesto, CA. With a small loan and his earnings as City Editor of The Modesto Bee the couple was able to raise their first batch of chickens and turkeys. Dedicated to their vision of providing better, safer farm products to the consumer they expanded their company to dairy as well as poultry. Blazing the path in both the dairy and poultry industry they remained steadfast in their determination to uphold the principles upon which Foster Farms was founded: Excellence, Honesty, Quality, and Service.

Always a leader in the industry, Foster Farms always accepted and embraced new technology. In fact, the Fosters were often leaders in this arena as well. With the consumer in mind, Max Foster worked to revolutionize the industry by computerizing both the poultry and dairy operations. Many of his ideas are still in use today.

Not only were the Fosters dedicated to the consumer but also dedicated to protecting farm land as well. They always used natural chicken fertilizer on their dairies and led the industry by having the first Manurial Lagoon. Both Foster Farms' dairy and poultry products continue to be hormone free.

The Fosters' impact can be felt among many in their local community as well. Foster Farms currently employs more than 9,000 people in their poultry and dairy operations. They are one of the largest employers in Stanislaus County. The vision and passion for quality shared by Max and Vera Foster in 1939 remains the legacy of every Foster Farms employee today. Leading it to become the largest poultry company in the Western United States with annual sales in excess of $1 billion. It is my honor and distinction to recognize the efforts of Max and Verda Foster and to represent their legacy Foster Farms in the 18th Congressional District.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to posthumously honor Mr. Xia Chia Xiong for all of his service to the Lao community in Merced, California. As the first President of the Merced Lao Family Community, Inc. he touched many lives.

Born in 1940 in Laos, Mr. Xiong dedicated his life to helping the Lao community. From 1957-1961, he was an assistant to the Chief of Nam Chanh District, City of Mong Pheng, Vangvieng Province, in Laos. During the Vietnam War, he worked for the United States Central Intelligence Agency and was bestowed the rank of major. With the fall of Laos in 1975, he led a group of Hmong refugees to take refuge in Thailand and served these refugees until he immigrated to the United States in 1980.

In the United States, Mr. Xiong served the first President of the Merced Lao Family Community, Inc. for 4 years. He then served as their Project Director for 2 years. His work in the community is recognized by many. It is my honor to also recognize his achievements.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor Mr. Frank Johnson, who has delighted the community of Modesto as a ticket taker for the Modesto A's Baseball Club, Inc. for 31 years. As one of the most well known and popular members of the Modesto A's staff, Mr. Johnson has become an endeared friend to all of the team's fans.

Mr. Johnson began working in Modesto baseball in 1958 when he worked in the concession stand for the Modesto Reds at Del Webb Field. Since that time he witnessed five different minor league professional baseball teams call Modesto home. From the New York Yankees to the Oakland Athletics, Mr. Johnson is a testament not only to baseball, but to the many changes the City of Modesto has experienced.

As a constant face to all of the attendees at the Modesto A's games, Mr. Johnson has become a part of local history. He is a reminder of all of the good things about baseball and youth. It is my honor and privilege to recognize Mr. Johnson's 50 years of commitment to our community.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the motion to instruct by my friend, the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Ruppersberger), the home State of my alma mater.

I rise to express my disappointment that there has been a refusal of this House to enact what I believe to be a sensible and fair child tax credit for 6.5 million working families, many of them members of the military who we need to protect as they protect us.

Over the August recess, a large number of people in our country went to their mailboxes and found the first installment of the child tax credit. That was good news to them.

Unfortunately, another large group of people went to their boxes but found them empty. I can imagine no excuse for not getting these families their fair share.

In my district alone, nearly 35,000 families, 65,000 children who live in them, were excluded from this benefit. Nationwide that adds up to 12 million children deliberately left behind.

We are talking about working families, as the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Ruppersberger) said. We are talking about those who pay taxes, who love their children, and aspire to better lives, as we all should.

By excluding these families from the child tax credit, the majority in this Congress is essentially telling them that the equality of opportunity is a myth in America.

A bipartisan Senate bill that has been discussed would have helped these 12 million children who were left behind. It passed overwhelmingly on a bipartisan basis in the other body, but was not allowed to become law.

Time and time again this bill has been defeated on a party-line vote in this House.

I am particularly dismayed by the fact, as I said before, that 262,000 military families have been denied this expanded child tax credit.

Mr. Speaker, it is time for the President to impose some compassionate conservatism on his side of the aisle for the sake of hard-working American families.

Mr. Speaker, we are all aware of the inadequacies in funding in the No Child Left Behind education program. Let us ensure that we do not leave them behind again by denying them a tax credit that they deserve.