Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, this Member rises today to express his support for H.R. 1276, the American Dream Downpayment Act. This bill, of which this Member is an original cosponsor, authorizes $200 million in grants to be made available as part of the HOME program to first- time low-income families for downpayment assistance. This important legislation is strongly supported by the Administration and is a priority of the distinguished Secretary of the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) (Mr. Martinez).

First, this Member would like to thank the distinguished gentlelady from Florida (Ms. Harris) for introducing this legislation. Furthermore, this Member would also like to thank both the distinguished gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Oxley), the Chairman of the House Financial Services Committee, and the distinguished gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Frank), the Ranking Member of this Committee, for their support in bringing this measure to the House Floor.

One of the main obstacles for families who want to purchase a home is that they do not have the resources for a sufficient mortgage downpayment. As a response to this pressing need, this legislation would provide downpayment assistance grants to more than 40,000 first- time low income families.

The American Dream Downpayment Act would be administered as part of HUD's successful HOME program which currently provides grants to states and entitlement communities (over 50,000 in population) to use for affordable housing. This bill authorizes $200 million in new authorized funds to be used for downpayment assistance by states and entitlement communities. Furthermore, this bill would preserve the flexibility of the HOME program by allowing these states and localities to craft a package of downpayment assistance which meets their specific needs.

Mr. Speaker, in closing, as a Member of the House Financial Services Subcommittee on Housing and Community Opportunity, this Member strongly supports H.R. 1276, the American Dream Downpayment Act. This Member encourages his colleagues to support H.R. 1276.

Mr. Speaker, this Member wishes to express his strong support for the Health Care Safety Net Amendments Technical Corrections Act of 2003 (H.R. 3038) and would like to commend the distinguished gentleman from Florida [Mr. Bilirakis], the Chairman of the House Energy and Commerce Subcommittee on Health, and the distinguished gentleman from Ohio [Mr. Brown] the ranking member of the House Energy and Commerce Subcommittee on Health, for introducing this important legislation. This Member would also like to commend the distinguished gentleman from Louisiana [Mr. Tauzin], Chairman of the House Energy and Commerce Committee, and the distinguished gentleman from Michigan [Mr. Dingell], the ranking member of the House Energy and Commerce Committee, for their efforts to improve access to quality preventative and primary health care for the medically underserved--including the millions of Americans without health insurance coverage.

Yesterday, Nebraskans celebrated the opening of the People's Health Center of Lincoln--the first Federally Qualified Health Center (FQHC) in this Member's congressional district. The health center will provide valuable primary health care services to the residents of Lincoln and Lancaster County.

As the Peoples' Health Center of Lincoln becomes an established entity in the community and begins to grow in terms of size as well as patients served, this Member has no doubt that the facility will call upon the National Health Service Corps (NHSC) for assistance in meeting the critical needs of Nebraska's underserved population.

This technical corrections bill is extremely important to new and current FQHCs across the nation. The measure makes clarifying changes to reconfirm that facilities, like the Peoples' Health Center of Lincoln, automatically receive Health Professional Shortage Area (HPSA) designation, and subsequently become eligible for the placement of National Health Service Corps (NHSC) personnel. This Member would personally like to thank Representative Bilirakis and his staff for their help with clarifying the automatic HPSA language in particular.

The NHSC and the Health Centers program are both intended to address the health care needs of our nation's most underserved rural and urban communities. Previous requirements mandated that health centers and rural clinics apply for and obtain HPSA designation, even though each center already serves a Federally-designated Medically Underserved Area or population, to become eligible for the placement of NHSC personnel. This process certainly seems unnecessary and duplicative, resulting in a delay of needed practitioners at high-need health centers.

Mr. Speaker, in closing, this Member urges his colleagues to support H.R. 3038. Such action will reduce bureaucratic barriers and allow for the coordinated use of Federal resources in meeting the health care needs of areas that lack sufficient services.

Madam Speaker, this Member wishes to add his strong support for H.R. 3146 and would like to commend the distinguished gentleman from California [Mr. Thomas], the Chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee, for introducing this important legislation and for his efforts to extend the authorization for the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) program, as well as related welfare reform initiatives, such as the mandatory child care program, the abstinence education program, and the transitional medical assistance program. Moreover, this Member would like to thank Chairman Thomas for including language in H.R. 3146 to address Medicare payment disparities between rural and urban hospitals.

The Rural Health Care Coalition, which this Member currently leads as the Interim Co-Chairman, has been diligently working to bring equity to the rural health care delivery system. One of the Coalition's key priorities has been to address hospital payment disparities to ensure that facilities in rural areas and small cities can stay in business and continue serving patients who need care.

Medicare pays for inpatient services in large urban areas using a standardized amount that is 1.6 percent larger than the standardized amount used to reimburse hospitals in other areas (both rural areas and small urban areas). The Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2003 (Public Law No. 108-7) provided a six-month base payment increase for rural and small urban hospitals from April 1, 2003 to September 30, 2003. Specifically, this measure raised the inpatient base rate for hospitals in rural and urban areas to the level of the rate for those in large urban areas.

The bill before us today will extend this payment increase until March 31, 2004. Such action is cruical--especially for cash-strapped rural facilities which are near the breaking point and in need of urgent aid. This policy will help maintain access to care in rural and less populated urban areas of the country by better aligning hospitals' payments to their average costs. The estimated impact of eliminating the base rate differential for six more months will result in $3.8 million for Nebraska hospitals, according to the Nebraska Hospital Association. This Member will continue to work on initiatives to bring even greater Medicare equity to Nebraska this year.

In closing, this Member urges his colleagues to support H.R. 3146. Reducing the difference in Medicare reimbursement levels between rural and urban hospitals is critical. Rural hospitals receive less Federal funding than hospitals in urban areas for providing the same services. This legislation will keep base payments at the same level as those in urban areas for six more months.

Mr. Speaker, last Thursday while Washington was consumed with the arrival of hurricane Isabel, a significant celebration was taking place in Sofia, Bulgaria.

On September 18, the United States and Bulgaria marked the 100th anniversary of diplomatic relations between our two countries.

Since the fall of the Berlin Wall, Bulgaria has worked hard to build a stable democracy and to provide its people the very freedoms we have for so long taken for granted in this country. The people of Bulgaria should be proud of what they have accomplished over this past 13 years.

Bulgaria has also worked to reaffirm and strengthen its friendship with the United States. Bulgaria has worked with us to promoted stability and peace in the Balkans by providing peacekeeping forces in Bosnia and Kosovo.

After the tragedy of September 11, 2001, Bulgaria was among the very first countries to denounce terrorism and pledge active support to the United States in the fight against global terrorism. Bulgaria supported Operation Enduring Freedom and the International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) in Afghanistan and is presently providing 500 infantry soldiers to the Iraq stabilization force.

Mr. Speaker, in closing, on the occasion of this 100th anniversary of United States-Bulgarian diplomatic relations, it is appropriate to reflect on this important relationship and to dedicate ourselves to promoting good relations for the next 100 years.

Mr. Chairman, this Member rises today in strong support of H.R. 2557, the Water Resources Development Act (WRDA). This Member commends the distinguished gentleman from Alaska (Mr. Young), chairman of the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, the distinguished gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Oberstar), ranking member on the committee, the distinguished gentleman from Tennessee (Mr. Duncan), chairman of the Water Resources and Environment Subcommittee, and the distinguished gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Costello), the ranking member on the subcommittee, for all their hard work in bringing this bill to the floor.

This important legislation presents a tremendous opportunity to improve flood control, navigation, shore protection and environmental protection. This Member is pleased that the bill includes necessary provisions which assist the Sand Creek watershed project in Sanders County, NE. Among the many benefits it provides, the Sand Creek project will help meet Federal environmental restoration goals, address local flooding problems and preserve water quality. The Sand Creek Project can serve as a showcase of emerging science and restoration techniques for secluded wetlands with their multiple environmental benefits to the Great Plains and other States. The project is sponsored jointly by the Lower Platte North NRD, the City of Wahoo and Saunders County.

The Sand Creek section of the H.R. 2557 allows the local sponsor of the project to complete needed soil, water and other environmental restoration work and ultimately to receive proper financial credit in its matching share of Federal funds in this project. This action would result in significant cost and time savings. Additionally, the enclosed would authorize the Secretary of the Army to accept advance non-Federal project sponsor funds until Federal funds are available in order to move this project forward consistent with State plans to relocate U.S. Highway 77 as an expressway.

The Sand Creek project received conditional authorization in the Water Resources Development Act of 2000. Earlier this year, the Corps formally approved the project. The Sand Creek project has attracted widespread support.

In closing, Mr. Chairman, this Member urges his colleagues to support this important bill.

Mr. Speaker, this Member rises in opposition to this motion to instruct House conferees to H.R. 1588. Certainly, this Member has no objections to expediting citizenship for non-citizen members serving in U.S. armed services and supports efforts to provide appropriate incentives for a very small percentage of the few non- citizens who meet established requirements to join our professional military forces. However, in granting citizenship to these qualified men and women, it is not necessary or desirable to also grant priority to their parents, spouses, and children. And it is certainly not appropriate to waive the requirement that such family members financially support themselves in the U.S. Unfortunately, the provisions in the Senate-passed version of H.R. 1588, which this motion instructs House conferees to accept, would have that effect.

Through the provisions, the spouses, children under the age of 21, and parents of men

and women who have been granted citizenship based on their service in the U.S. armed forces and who have died in the line of duty would be authorized to seek permanent resident status on an expedited basis. Then, unlike other people seeking legal immigrant status, these family members would not be required to meet financial thresholds which indicate that they would not immediately be public charges.

Most of the American public is unaware of these provisions. Enacting such excessive inducements for joining the U.S. military is a step in the wrong direction, particularly if it results in this country increasingly depending upon what could come to be thought of and called ``foreign mercenaries'' to serve in the armed forces. This practice has too many similarities to the mercenary forces of the Roman Empire in its decline as Roman citizens themselves became unwilling to serve in the Roman legions. Imagine, too, the reactions of foreign nations that begin to see our military personnel as serving almost solely to gain citizenship for themselves and their families.

Mr. Speaker, this Member encouraged his colleagues to vote against the Rodriguez motion to instruct.

Mr. Chairman, this Member rises today to express his support for H.R. 2622, the Fair and Accurate Credit Transactions Act of 2003 (FACT Act). This important legislation permanently extends those provisions in the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA) which relate to the preemption of State laws. These provisions in the FCRA are set to expire on December 31, 2003. The FCRA is the Federal law which governs the furnishing of reports on the credit worthiness of consumers.

This Member would like to thank the distinguished gentleman from Alabama (Mr. Bachus), the Chairman of the House Financial Services Subcommittee on Financial Institutions and Consumer Credit, for introducing this important legislation. Furthermore, this Member would like to thank both the distinguished gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Oxley), the Chairman of the House Financial Services Committee, and the distinguished gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Frank), the Ranking Member of this Committee, for their support in bringing this measure to the House floor.

This legislation, H.R. 2622, is essential since it ensures the continuity of the nationwide credit system while providing important consumer protections. This Member supports this legislation for many reasons. However, he would like to focus on the following three reasons.

First, this legislation provides for a free credit report annually for consumers. Typically, credit reporting agencies charge consumers up to $9 for the disclosure of the information in their credit files. Under current law, a consumer may receive a free consumer report from a reporting agency only under certain circumstances, such as when a consumer receives a notice of an adverse action by a reporting agency. The FACT Act would provide for a free credit report annually for consumers for any reason. This Member believes that this provision will promote consumer awareness of a person's credit history as well as provide an opportunity for the consumer to correct any inaccurate information on one's credit report.

Second, this legislation provides important provisions to curb identity theft. To illustrate the need for these provisions, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) released a survey at the beginning of September of this year which showed that a staggering 27.3 million Americans had been victims of identity theft in the last 5 years, including 9.9. million people in the last year alone. This bill provides the following consumer protection tools against identity theft: Allows consumers to place ``fraud alerts'' in their credit reports to prevent identity thieves from opening accounts in their names; allows consumers to block information from being given to a credit reporting agency and from being reported by this agency if such information results from identity theft; and prohibits furnishers of credit information from forwarding to reporting agencies information on a consumer if the furnisher has substantial doubts as to its accuracy.

Lastly, this bill continues the Federal preemption of State laws as it relates to the corporate affiliate sharing of financial information. During the consideration of the 1996 amendments to the FCRA, this Member authored a provision, which was signed into law, that required a consumer opt-out nontransactional is shared among corporate affiliates. Examples of nontransaction information include data from a consumer credit report and information on an application such as a consumer's income or assets. This provision on consumer notice is very important as it was the first consumer ``opt out'' on the sharing of financial information that this Member is aware of that was signed into Federal law.

In conclusion, for the reasons stated above and many others, this Member encourages his colleagues to support H.R. 2622.

Mr. Speaker, our good friend and very able U.S. Trade Representative, Ambassador Robert Zoellick, about to represent America at the WTO trade summit in Cancun this week, should be given a message and a mission. The message comes from this Member of Congress, a strong supporter of trade liberalization, one of the farm-state Members from the Great Plains and Midwest Caucus that together has been a strong and crucial force for trade liberalization over the years.

Mr. Speaker, here is the message with which we should arm Ambassador Zoellick on the subject of agricultural trade:

First, we must harmonize, we must have harmonization. That is to say, developing countries must agree to sharp reductions in their tariffs on agriculture imports, and developed countries like the European Union countries and Japan must cut their higher production subsidies proportionally more than the U.S. Large agricultural exporters classified as developing countries, like Brazil, also must steeply cut their agricultural subsidy.

Second, we must have an end to the large agricultural export subsidies of the European Union; and America can end its small export subsidies, which are used occasionally as a shot across the bow of the

Mr. Chairman, this Member wishes to add his support for the District of Columbia appropriations bill for fiscal year 2004 (H.R. 2765) and would like to comment on what is probably the most controversial provision of the measure--the appropriation of $10 million in Federal funds for a scholarship program that would allow certain low-income District of Columbia parents to send their children to private schools.

Although this Member does not support school vouchers because they have the potential to do great damage to many public school

systems, this Member believes that the District of Columbia warrants special consideration.

The District of Columbia has one of the most troubled public school systems in the United States. School choice would offer hope to parents and students by giving them the opportunity to select a school that meets their educational needs, while the competition school choice brings would improve the overall educational atmosphere for the parents, teachers, and administrators who continue to work to improve the District of Columbia public school system.

School children in the District of Columbia have been trapped in failing schools for too long. Providing funding for a school choice program would provide certain low-income parents residing in the District of Columbia with the financial means needed to enroll their children in higher-performing schools in the District of Columbia. In addition, the funds these students receive could also be used to pay for transportation, fees, and tuition costs.

The House of Representatives has used the District of Columbia appropriations bill to provide school choice proposals for District of Columbia students in the past. In fact, both the fiscal year 1996 and 1999 District of Columbia appropriations bills, as passed by the House, contained language permitting the use of funds for a scholarship program (although the language was not enacted into law). This Member has supported these efforts in the past and believes it is essential that this appropriations bill contain similar language allowing for a District of Columbia scholarship program.

This legislation would not establish a voucher system; it is a system of scholarships. In a voucher system, the public school money would go with the child to the private or public school that the parents choose for their child. However, under this scholarship program, if a student receives a scholarship and decides to go to a private school, no funds would be taken from the specific public school that the child was attending. Therefore, the Washington, DC, school system would lose no money if low-income children choose to attend private schools with the scholarship money.

Opponents of the scholarship program claim that the District of Columbia public school system overall would lose money under this plan. However, the District of Columbia Mayor, Anthony A. Williams, has indicated he will lead to hold District of Columbia schools harmless, meaning that the public school system will keep more than $16 million in local per pupil aid for the 2,000 children they will no longer have to educate. This idea is briefly mentioned in the September 3, 2003, Washington Post editorial, entitled ``Washington's Children Deserve More Choices,'' written by Mayor Williams; Mr. Kevin P. Chavous, a member of the DC Council and Chairman of its Education Committee, and; Ms. Peggy Cooper Cafritz, President of the DC Board of Education. The article says, ``. . . our public schools will not be penalized financially for the loss of students to private or parochial schools.'' This Member has confirmed the Mayor's ``hold harmless'' provision with staff at the Government Reform Committee and the Education and the Workforce Committee.

Mr. Chairman, in closing, this Member urges his colleagues to support

Mr. Speaker, on September 4, 2003, this Member unavoidably missed rollcall vote No. 465. Because this was a 5-minute vote, in contrast to the normal practice of 15 minutes employed on the floor when votes are not predicted, this Member returned to Committee and was unaware that the normal practice was not pursued. Several other Members were in the same position. Had this Member been present, this Member would have voted ``aye'' on this procedural vote to table the motion to reconsider the previous vote.

Mr. Speaker, this Member rises to commend the governments of Greece and Turkey for the agreement that they have reached on confidence-building between their armed forces.

On Wednesday, Lord Robertson, the Secretary General of NATO, announced that the two NATO member countries have reached agreements on cooperation between their national defense colleges and on exchanges of military personnel for training purposes.

This Member is pleased to note that the talks between the two countries are expected to continue, with the aim of reaching further confidence-building measures.

Mr. Speaker, this Member commends Secretary General Robertson and the Greek and Turkish governments for this initiative.

Mr. Chairman, this Member offers his strong support for H.R. 2861, the Veterans Affairs (VA)/Housing and Urban Development (HUD) Appropriations Act for FY2004. This Member would like to thank the chairman of the VA/HUD appropriations subcommittee, the distinguished gentleman from New York (Mr. Walsh) and the ranking member of the subcommittee, the distinguished gentleman from West Virginia (Mr. Mollohan) for their dedication to crafting this measure.

1. Department of Veterans Administration (VA)

This measure provides $60.7 billion for veterans programs including $27.2 billion for veterans health care. Although H.R. 2861 does not provide veterans funding equal to the levels authorized in the FY2004 congressional budget resolution (H. Con. Res. 95), the funding levels in H.R. 2861 exceed not only FY2003 appropriation levels by 5 percent but also the Administration's budget request. (This Member would remind his colleagues what he reminds his constituents about the congressional budget process--the levels in the budget resolution are a framework as Congress determines actual funding levels. Of course, the actual funding levels are determined through the annual appropriations process.)

Mr. Chairman, it is simply not true that, as often recently alleged by numerous sources, the Federal Government is cutting back on financial support for veterans' health care or that Congress or recent presidents are not supportive of veterans. Each year, Congress sets new records on the amount of appropriations for veterans' health care, not only because of higher health care costs but also due to a huge bulge of WWII and Korean War veterans who are understandably making larger demands for health care because of their age, plus a very large number of Vietnam War and other veterans who require medical care. During 2002, approximately 4.7 million individual veterans received VA medical care. Outpatient visits are increasing rapidly, with 43.8 million visits last year. Both the general VA inpatient caseload and acute care cases are also increasing, with the daily inpatient caseload projected to be over 57,000 and the acute care up 2,700 over last year. Yet thousands of veterans are on waiting lists for medical care, after waiting months for appointments to see medical staff.

Between FY1998 and FY2003, the appropriation has increased 4 percent, an increase nearly six times greater than the average increase of federal domestic programs. The appropriation for VA medical care in fiscal year 2003 jumped to $23.8 billion--$1.1 billion more than the President's request. Each year, the President asks for a far larger increase than in almost any other domestic program, and each year the Congress exceeds that request. In his budget request for FY2004, for example, the President has requested $25.2 billion for VA medical care.

Mr. Chairman, the health care needs of military veterans must be met to the fullest extent possible, and this Member is committed to continuing to see that veterans receive the benefits they deserve with the resources available. Veterans fought to protect our freedom and way of life. As they served this nation in a time of need, the Federal Government must remember them in their time of need. The people of the U.S. owe veterans a great deal and should keep the promises made to them. Voting for H.R. 2861 is an important step in keeping those promises.

2. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) Economic

Development Initiative

This Member is pleased and appreciative that $450,000 is appropriated in this bill as a HUD Economic Development Initiative (EDI) for Falls City, Nebraska. This appropriation, which could be used for economic development and job creation, represents a continuation of my efforts for Falls City. In the FY2003 appropriations bill, $526,500 was earmarked as a CDBG EDI for the renovation of a Falls City business industry incubator building which is necessary for job creation.

Falls City is a community in extreme Southeast Nebraska, an area of the state with serious economic needs. For example, 51 percent of Falls City's population is categorized as either low or low-moderate income. Moreover, continuing a forty-year trend, the population of the City again has declined by 3.2 percent from 1990 to 2000. In addition, in July of 2001, the U.S. Department of Agriculture designated Richardson County, of which Falls City is the county seat, as a county in severe economic distress. As a result, this funding request for infrastructure is needed to help maintain the economic viability of Falls City.

This is the largest community and employment center in a four-county region that needs economic stimulation: very recent job losses have accentuated the problems; and this community and area really needs the help.

3. Missouri River Sanitary Sewer Connection Between Nebraska and Iowa--

$400,000

This Member greatly appreciates the inclusion in the bill of $400,000 toward the construction of a sanitary sewer connection across the Missouri River which is the boundary between Nebraska and Iowa. This new connector is a very immediate need for the community of South Sioux City, Nebraska, and a much more cost-effective approach than adding to a separate sewage treatment program in this Nebraska suburb of Sioux City, Iowa.

The existing connection is 40 years old and early last year, the trunk sewer carrying sewage between South Sioux City to the treatment plant in Sioux City, Iowa, broke, For several weeks, about 1.6 million gallons of raw sewage each day was dumped into the Missouri River. The sewer connector was eventually replaced, but the incident highlighted the need for a second connector. The new trunk line connector proposed is to be located south of the city. It would provide a more direct link to the regional sewage treatment plant in Sioux City.

Since the original sewer pipe was installed in the early 1960s, South Sioux City's population has increased more than 60 percent. Also, the community's industrial base (with difficult treatment requirements) continues to grow, which places an additional burden on the sewer system. In an effort to meet the growing needs for an improved sewer system, the city's residents have seen significant rate increases over the past several years, including a 27 percent jump in 2001 and a 37 percent jump in 2002. It is now clear that Federal assistance is necessary to assist this municipality meet this unusual and expensive infrastructure project.

4. Indian Housing Loan Guarantee Program

This Member commends the support for the Section 184, American Indian Housing Loan Guarantee Program. An amount of $5.3 million is appropriated for FY2004 for the Section 184 program which, it is estimated, would guarantee up to $197.2 million in commercial loans for Indian families who would otherwise be unable to secure conventional financing due to the trust status of Indian reservation land. As the author of the Section 184 program, this Member strongly supports this innovative program.

This Member is particularly supportive of this funding level in light of the Administration's inadequate request of $1 million for the Section 184 loan guarantee program for FY2004 . Unfortunately, the Administration's request for FY2004 is projected to only guarantee up to $27.5 million of commercial home lands for American Indians.

The Administration's inadequate request for the Section 184 program is also inconsistent with the Indian Lands Title Report Commission which was authorized into law in year 2000. In some parts of the country and on some Indian reservations, the Section 184 program is bringing results, while on others it is stymied. This can be attributed to the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) apparent inability to oversee and track the leases and the rights in trust-held land which continues to inhibit mortgage loans on American Indian reservations.

To help solve this problem, the Indian Lands Title Report Commission was authorized to study the system of the BIA for maintaining land ownership records, title documents, and title status reports. Subsequently, Congress or the Executive Branch will be able to use the findings from this one-year commission to eliminate any BIA/HUD national or regional problems or barriers remaining to the use of Section 184 Indian Housing Loan Guarantee Program on American Indian reservations.

5. Rural Housing Efforts by HUD

This Member also would note his disappointment with the fact that the $25 million which is appropriated for the Office of Rural Housing and Economic Development in the Department of Housing and Urban Development in this appropriations bill. This Member testified earlier this year and also last year before the Veterans, HUD, and Independent Agencies Appropriations Subcommittee, that HUD should not be the source of funding rural housing and rural economic development projects. Although this Member has been and remains a strong and long-term advocate of rural housing and rural development during my tenure in the House, he believes that we need to avoid inappropriate duplication in the efforts of the Federal Government in rural housing and economic development. This Member supports the full funding (and even larger funding) of rural housing and economic development programs through the Rural Development offices of the United States Department of Agriculture. This is the agency that has the real interest and expertise to make such programs work in the more rural parts of non-metropolitan America; HUD doesn't.

6. AmeriCorps Funding

This Member is concerned about AmeriCorps funding. The bill provides a 25-percent increase in funds over FY2003. Indeed, including the $64 million in the first supplemental appropriation passed in April, there is still a slight increase over last year. However, this amount is still inadequate to deal with the results of the bad management decisions that have occurred possibly since the very beginning of the program.

As a long-time AmeriCorps supporter and one of 19 original Republican cosponsors which created this program in 1993, this Member is disappointed to say that the administrative incompetence at the national level of AmeriCorps is largely responsible for creating the current situation. For example, it is amazing and totally unacceptable that AmeriCorps could not even provide an accurate count of the number of participants when asked. Instead, a very faulty and under-estimated count was provided to the Congress which then was used to establish what seemed a reasonable employee cap of 50,000 participants. A basic requirement of proper program administration, at least, is to know the number of people employed by the organization. Another problem is that the AmeriCorps drop-out rate was grossly over-estimated in allocating sufficient educational trust funds.

Real reforms must happen in this program that provides such excellent opportunities for thousands of people around the United States. This Member is hopeful that significant improvements can be made in a reauthorization bill before the end of the year.

Mr. Chairman, in closing, this Member urges his colleagues to vote in support of this important bill.

Mr. Speaker, many people will talk about the substance of the bill. I want to talk about what is really at stake here tonight and what is really at stake is the integrity of the legislative process.

The gentleman from Ohio just talked about the spending program that has gone on here by the pharmaceutical industry. We are all knee-deep in Washington, D.C., with money being spent on this issue. Extraordinary numbers of groups have been brought to bear on this issue, massive spending, nothing like it that I have ever seen since I have been here.

When I went to my town hall meetings, I saw my name, my picture, informing me by the Senior Coalition exactly why counterfeit drugs were so potentially lethal and such a big loss to the protection of consumers. It was funded by the Senior Coalition. Ask AARP how much money from the pharmaceutical industry comes to the Senior Coalition.

What is at stake here, I would say, is whether or not this is the people's House, whether or not we have integrity in this House to do what is right for our constituents.

Four of my colleagues actually have a Dear Colleague out which says, ``The Canadian-European socialistic price controls already dictate drug prices in the United States because drug-makers and policy-makers are willing to pander to price control systems overseas. We enable protectionism and fixed high prices at home,'' and that is exactly right. What we have is massive cost-shifting on drug costs in this world, and it is all coming on the back of the American consumer. Every developed country on Earth has price controls. We do not.

Of course, research and development is important, but it is being paid for primarily by American consumers, and its costs ought to be spread across the world to at least a reasonable degree.

I think it will be interesting to compare what the pharmaceutical industry spends on advertising and what it spends on inducing health professionals to prescribe their particular drugs. Compare that with what they are spending on R&D, it would be very interesting for constituents to see that.

My constituents understand what is happening there. I think we need to protect the integrity of the House. Vote for the Gutknecht bill. It is the best thing we have, and we ought to proceed with it.

Mr. Speaker, as an original cosponsor, this Member wishes to add his strong support for the Pharmaceutical Market Access Act of 2003 (H.R. 2427). This legislation would provide American consumers with access to markets where they can obtain more affordable prescription drugs.

This Member would like to commend the distinguished gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Gutknecht) for sponsoring H.R. 2427 and for his personal interest in providing Americans with access to world class drugs at world market prices. This Member would also like to commend the gentlewoman from Missouri (Mrs. Emerson) for her persistence on this issue and her work to ensure that this measure was debated on the House Floor.

Mr. Speaker, this Member recognizes that American consumers pay the highest prices in the world for prescription drugs. Canadian and European senior citizens frequently pay half or less of the amount U.S. seniors pay for the same drugs. The same drugs are often even less expensive in Mexico. This anomaly has led some Americans to travel outside of the U.S., particularly to Canada, to purchase prescription drugs.

This Member has concluded that drug companies charge Americans what they believe the market will bear and that high pricing probably is abetted by the fact that effectively under current law, only the drug companies themselves can import or reimport prescription drugs into the U.S. In fact, all or nearly all developed countries have imposed price controls on drugs. Thus, there is huge international cost-shifting; pharmaceutical companies are charging what the market will bear in America. American consumers are being forced to subsidize the dramatically lower prices paid by consumers elsewhere.

Mr. Speaker, the Pharmaceutical Market Access Act provides a solution to this problem. This legislation would provide individuals, pharmacists, and wholesalers in America with access to FDA-approved drugs from FDA-approved facilities in industrialized nations abroad. Those countries are limited to: the European Union, Australia, Canada, Iceland, Israel, Japan, Lichtenstein, New Zealand, Norway, Switzerland, and South Africa.

The pharmaceutical industry has spent millions of dollars trying to defeat the concept of market access. The industry claims that H.R. 2427 would undermine the safety of the U.S. drug supply and place American consumers at risk. This is simply hogwash! There have been no reported deaths from Americans taking imported pharmaceuticals.

Mr. Speaker, if prescription drugs are not affordable, they are not accessible. American consumers cannot afford to continue to pay excessive prices for prescription drugs so that Canadians, Europeans, and individuals of other countries can pay significantly lower prices for their pharmaceuticals. American citizens should not continue to be held captive from the global marketplace.

In closing, this member urges his colleagues to support H.R. 2427.

Mr. Chairman, this Member rises to express his support for H.R. 2799, a bill making appropriations for the Departments of Commerce, Justice, State and the Judiciary for FY 2004. In particular, this Member would like to thank the distinguished gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Wolf), Chairman of the Subcommittee and the distinguished gentleman from New York (Mr. Serrano) for their hard work under difficult budget circumstances.

As a member of the House Caucus to Fight and Control Methamphetamine, this Member strongly supports the inclusion of $60 million for Methamphetamine Enforcement and Clean-Up, otherwise known as the ``hot spots'' program. These funds are critical in State and local efforts to combat the scourge of methamphetamine that is sweeping across our country.

This Member also appreciates the Subcommittee's commitment to Nebraska's efforts to fight a growing plague in Nebraska--the manufacture, trafficking and abuse of methamphetamine. The Nebraska State Patrol will continue the work began with the $500,000 appropriation from FY 2003, with an emphasis on funding for the cleanup of clandestine labs. In 1999, approximately 37 labs were discovered in Nebraska. By 2002, the problem had increased exponentially to 372 which in turn has placed a huge burden on Nebraska law enforcement. The Nebraska State Patrol will also use the funds for the State crime lab to investigate methamphetamine cases and to continue a drug treatment program for methamphetamine addicts.

Furthermore, this Member is pleased that $615 million is included in the bill for the popular and vital Byrne grant program. This appropriation is a top priority for Nebraska law enforcement. The Byrne grant program is critical in crime fighting efforts--and especially helpful to Nebraska law enforcement in fighting crimes related to drug use. Clearly, methamphetamine alone is the driving force behind the increase in crime in Nebraska.

The bill also includes important funds for the Juvenile Accountability Block Grants (JAIBG). These funds have been used throughout the State, and specifically assisted Douglas, Sarpy, and Lancaster counties in developing juvenile drug courts. Almost 50 young people have graduated from the drug courts over the last two years. In addition, Douglas and Lancaster counties have also utilized funds to develop computerized information systems and local graduated sanctions programs.

An additional program of importance to Nebraska law enforcement is the Regional Information Sharing Systems (RISS) program. This Member is pleased that funds are provided for this program. Nebraska is part of the regional Mid-States Organized Crime Information Center (MOCIC). The RISS program provides Nebraska law enforcement with a secure nationwide state-of-the-art information sharing system that uses web technology, allowing officers to access criminal activity information around the country in real time. Additional services include, but are not limited to, analytical assistance, high-tech surveillance equipment loans, intelligence publications, investigative funds, computer forensics and specialized training. As members of the MOCIC, many law enforcement agencies in Nebraska are able to share critical crime-fighting information that these agencies would otherwise not be able to access. As today's criminals become more mobile and technologically advanced, law enforcement's demands for RISS services continues to grow.

Mr. Chairman, in conclusion, this Member urges his colleagues to support H.R. 2799.

Mr. Speaker, this Member wishes to add his strong support for H. Res. 240, expressing the sense of the House of Representatives that there should be established a National Community Health Center Week to raise awareness of health services provided by community, migrant, public housing, and homeless health centers.

This Member would like to commend the distinguished gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Tom Davis), the Chairman of the House Government Reform Committee, and the distinguished gentleman from California (Mr. Waxman), the ranking member of the House Government Reform Committee, for bringing this important resolution to the House Floor today. This Member would also like to commend the distinguished gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Davis) for sponsoring H. Res. 240 and for his personal interest in protecting and strengthening access to health care services for all under-served Americans.

On June 18, 2003, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services notified this Member that the Peoples' Health Center of Lincoln, Nebraska, has been awarded a $650,000 grant to establish a Federally Qualified Community Health Center. This will be the first Community Health Center in the First Congressional District of Nebraska.

This Member's congressional district has not had a Community Health Center for far too long and I believe one is essential as residents of this locality are in great need of access to comprehensive preventive and primary health care services.

This Member and his staff have been working for more than one year with the Peoples' Health Center Steering Committee to obtain funding for the Community Health Center, which will serve a significant number of residents of Lincoln and Lancaster County. This Member requested support for the Health Center from the Health Resources and Services Administration and subsequently testified before the Labor, Health and Human Services, and Education Appropriations Subcommittee to express his strong support for an appropriation of $830,000 to support the construction of the Peoples' Health Center.

Construction of the Peoples' Health Center will take place in two phases: Phase I (a west building) and Phase II (an east building). Phase I is being funded entirely with local funds. The funding this Member requested from the Subcommittee would be used for Phase II which will allow for the construction of an 8,300 square foot building which will be attached to the current Phase I building. Three dental operatories and expanded dental staff areas will be included in Phase II of the building. Space for a small radiology room, expanded offices for mental health and substance abuse counselors, as well as expanded conference and training space for health education and promotion is also planned for the Phase II building. Expanded medical services will be provided by moving existing administrative staff from the Phase I building into the Phase II building. This will result in approximately 2,500 new dental patients, 1,800 new behavioral health patients, and 2,500 primary medical patients.

The People's Health Center would not have happened without the leadership of the Lincoln-Lancaster County Health Department under the direction of Mr. Bruce Dart. Mrs. Judy Halstead, of the Lincoln- Lancaster County Health Department, has been instrumental in leading the `Peoples' Health Center Steering Committee. Additionally, Ms. Charlotte Liggett from St. Elizabeth Regional Medical Center and Mr. Brad Sher of BryanLGH HealthSystem have served on the Peoples' Health Center Executive Committee and helped secure the significant hospital contributions for the Health Center. Numerous other individuals and organizations spent a significant amount of time and energy on the project. This Member commends all involved in the project for their extraordinary efforts and dedication to providing uninsured and underinsured with access to health care services.

This Member has met with the Steering Committee several times in the past year to discuss their plans. Certain members of the Steering Committee also visited his Washington office to show him the plans, and accompanied this Member's staff to an urban Community Health Center in Washington, DC. Mr. Craig Kennedy and Ms. Lisa Cox of the National Association of Community Health Centers were most helpful in planning this visit. A staff member of this Member's Washington, DC. office, Ms. Michelle Spence, has played a very important role in assisting the

Lincoln effort and in promoting their case successfully within the Federal agency, and this Member commends her for her outstanding effort.

The Peoples' Health Center will be built on 27th and Y streets in Lincoln. The buildings that existed on that land have been demolished and a shell for the health center currently exists. Construction and dry walling has just begun. It is expected that the Health Center will open on September 30, 2003.

The proposed target population will include approximately 47,000 Lincoln and Lancaster County residents, including more than 50 percent with incomes below 200 percent of the Federal poverty level, 36 percent uninsured, and 24 percent minority residents. It is anticipated that the patients using the health center will include 40 percent Medicaid eligible, 40 percent uninsured/sliding fee, 10 percent Medicare, and 10 percent other third party pay.

The resolution before us today expresses the sense of the House of Representatives that there should be established a National Community Health Center Week to raise awareness of health services provided by community, migrant, public housing, and homeless health centers; and the President should issue a proclamation calling on the people of the United States and interested organizations to observe such a week with appropriate programs and activities.

It is this Member's hope that the establishment of the Peoples' Health Center of Lincoln will raise awareness of the Health Centers program to Nebraska residents and that this Center would participate in National Community Health Center Week if one were established.

Mr. Speaker, in closing, this Member urges his colleagues to support H. Res. 240.