Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to congratulate an extraordinary group of students from Hillsboro High School in Nashville, Tennessee, who are this year's State winners of the Nation's largest annual competition in civics education: We the People: The Citizen and the Constitution. I am proud of these outstanding students for having earned a chance to represent our fine State and to compete in the national finals here in Washington.

These students should be honored not only for their achievements in this prestigious competition but for their interest in politics, government and current events. As citizens of this great Nation, we are all duty-bound to exercise the rights and obligations of citizenship. Recent times, however, have seen a steep decline in voter turnout and increased cynicism about the political process. I am refreshed by the energy and enthusiasm of these students and am impressed by their commitment to the democratic ideals of our Nation. These students will no doubt serve as role models for their generation.

I am also proud to support the annual We the People competition, which is the most extensive educational program in the country developed specifically to educate young people about the U.S. Constitution and Bill of Rights. This program is administered by the Center for Civic Education and funded by the U.S. Department of Education. Since its creation, We the People has won widespread recognition for its effective and innovative programs to encourage civic participation in our younger generation. I am confident that Congress will maintain its support of this fine program and ensure its continued success.

On behalf of the people of the Fifth Congressional District of Tennessee, I extend my heartiest congratulations to the following Hillsboro High School students: Emily Bacon, Susan Bursch, Molly Caldwell, Juliane Codd, Maeve Cornell-Taylor, Jonathan Cox, Emelyn Davies, Alice Floyd, Maisha Grigsby, Claire Hipkens, Anna Holt, Hal Nichols, Caitlin Pinhey, Kaitlin Reinhardt, Andrew Schneider, Lauren Smyth, Michael Terrell, Lee Tice and David Winjun. I also commend the leadership of their teacher, Ms. Catherine Bradshaw.

I applaud the tremendous achievement of these students and wish them well.

Mr. Speaker, the last point made by my friend from Texas (Mr. Stenholm) is entirely true. The House and the Senate have been under Republican control for some time now. The spending that has occurred on their watch exceeds the highest levels previously in American history, exceeded spending rate of growth under LBJ.

It is wrong for them to deny responsibility for the spending surge that has occurred. The Heritage Foundation, the CATO Institute, other conservative Republican think tanks have pointed out the spending explosion has taken place under their watch, under their leadership, with their votes. The vote we are about to cast on the motion to instruct is one of the most important votes that we will cast in this Congress or in many people's careers in this Congress because PAYGO, pay-as-you-go, is one of the most important principles that we have in this body to control spending and to get our deficit under control.

This is not a theory. It has worked and worked well beginning with the

first President Bush through the Clinton administration to tame budget deficits.

But now we are faced with the largest budget deficit in American history. We need that same spending control device. It is not theory. Ask Chairman Greenspan, one of the great economists of our time. He could remember the very day that the previous PAYGO requirement expired, September 30, 2002, because that was a black day in modern American history. It basically told this Congress and the Republican majority, spend as you will.

We need PAYGO back and we need real PAYGO, not fake PAYGO, not play- go, not pretend-as-you-go. We need real PAYGO, the way our bipartisan Senate has passed it, so that we can get our budget deficit under control.

This is a kitchen-table issue. People back home understand it. I am happy to defend this in any civic club in America, because small business men and women, they understand they have to pay their bills. One has to pay their bills. They cannot understand why this Congress gets so wrapped up in some sort of ideology or something we forget to pay our bills, and that is why we have the largest budget deficit in American history going on today under Republican leadership.

We have to have PAYGO. It should have been passed in the budget last week. It was not. This is a chance to try to correct that mistake.

So I would urge my colleagues, men and women of goodwill on both sides of the aisle, to set partisanship aside, to think common sense again, to think kitchen table, to follow the advice of Alan Greenspan, to follow the leadership of the bipartisan Senate vote on this issue and have real PAYGO again. Pay as you go so that we will not increase our deficit anymore.

As my friend, the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Stenholm) said, we will stop digging the hole that we are in. It is already $521 billion deep. It is not just a 1-year hole. We are facing such a massive structural budget deficit that the President's own budget as submitted to this Congress said that the current path we are on is unsustainable.

Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Lewis) for yielding me time.

Do not take my word for it. Listen to some of the most distinguished advocacy groups in this country, one, the veterans groups, DAV, VFW, American Legion. They have said that ``The Republican budget is a disservice to those men and women who have served this country and who are currently serving in Iraq, Afghanistan, and around the world in our fight against terrorism.''

We are proud to have the help of these distinguished veterans groups in this battle. We are also proud to have the help of the AARP that says that the Republican budget is unfair, flawed and should be rejected by the House.

Now, some people watching this debate may think that, well, the Democrats have outspent the Republicans again. Some people may be cynical and say that they may or may not benefit from some of the spending programs involved. They might not be veterans or seniors or some of the other groups that we clearly have a better budget for. But everyone feels they pay taxes. And some people feel, well, there the Democrats go, they are taxing us again.

Look at the facts of this budget. Democrats and all Americans should be proud of our tax relief in this bill because we have exactly the same tax relief for the middle class and our budget as our friends on the other side of the aisle do. And we are proud of that. That is a good thing. So average Americans, 99.5 percent of the population, that is the same tax situation. They do not need to worry that the Democrats secretly have a plan to tax them.

Now, there is a small group, a very small group of people, who make annually over $500,000 a year in income. So if you report gross income on your tax return every year of over $500,000, we do not take away your tax relief. We take away about half of it. The folks I know, and I used to be in this category for a while, make over $500,000 a year, they are still patriotic Americans.

They know we are still at war. They are happy to make their contribution, and only accepting part of the tax relief they are being offered, I think is something most folks in that elite income category would be delighted to do. These are good people. It is the American dream for all of us to make that much money.

So for 99.5 percent of the American people it is the same tax relief as in the Republican bill. But in the that top, top category, folks who make over $500,000 a year, we would reduce their tax relief a little bit. Is that too much to ask?

So I would ask the Members who are tuning in to this debate, think who would you prefer helping, our veterans who made the ultimate sacrifice for this country, our senior citizens, or are you so anxious to give 100 percent tax relief to the folks who make over $500,000 a year in income?

How many Americans have ever reported $500,000 a year in income? I am not talking capital gains here. I am talking in income on their tax return.

That is an amazing situation, and we can fund this budget with that tax provision.

Mr. Speaker, today I introduced a resolution honoring one of the foremost institutions in my district--Citizens Savings Bank & Trust of Nashville, Tennessee. Citizens Bank enjoys the distinction of being the nation's oldest continuously-operating minority-owned bank and is celebrating a truly significant milestone this year--its 100th anniversary.

Minority-owned banks have played a crucial role in the economic development and revitalization of minority communities across the country. Through dedicated investment in the neighborhoods they serve, minority-owned banks have provided a vital source of economic opportunity and entrepreneurial capital for countless individuals and small businesses, especially those who had historically been underserved by other financial institutions. With combined assets of more than $48 billion and more than 3 million depositors nationwide, minority-owned banks continue to serve as pillars of economic stability and trust.

Citizens Bank stands as a model example of a minority-owned bank that has made significant and lasting contributions to its community. Founded in 1904 as the One Cent Savings Bank, Citizens Bank has provided funding and economic assistance to entrepreneurs, civic and social groups, educational programs and public schools and universities.

The bank has been especially notable for its service to African- American churches in the Nashville area. Citizens Bank has served as a principal source of financing for the construction and operation of church-based day care centers, assisted living facilities, and other community-based centers that promote the social and economic well-being of Nashville residents. The bank has also donated a great deal of its resources to the economic empowerment of Nashville residents by offering free home-buying and consumer education seminars.

I am proud to be the lead sponsor of a Congressional resolution that recognizes the achievements of Citizens Bank and the achievements of all minority banks across the country. It is my hope that this Congress will

acknowledge the many contributions that minority-owned banks have provided to individuals, businesses and communities for generations. I also extend my sincerest congratulations to Citizens Bank for its 100 years of service to the people of my district and offer my best wishes for another prosperous century of service.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to celebrate the life of Mr. Athan Gibbs, of Nashville, Tennessee. Mr. Gibbs was a patriot, a pastor, and a visionary entrepreneur who took it upon himself to restore Americans' faith in the democratic process after the disheartening controversy we experienced in November of 2000. Democracy lost one of its chief champions with Mr. Gibbs' unexpected death on the morning of Sunday, March 14, and on behalf of Congressman Rush Holt and other colleagues, I send his family our heartfelt sympathy for their loss and deepest gratitude for his life.

A Memphis native who came of age in the 1950s and 1960s, Mr. Gibbs experienced first hand the struggle for equality at the voting booth. Four decades later, these seminal experiences informed his observations of the 2000 Florida election controversy, and drove him to invent a technology that would ensure the fair exercise of democracy--the first electronic voting system with a ``paper trail'' to allow voters to verify that their votes were appropriately logged and counted.

Athan Gibbs' TruVote system was a timely invention, and the product of a unique career. As a student of both business and theology, Mr. Gibbs entered public service in 1970 as a financial analyst with the Tennessee Public Service Commission. But while he pursued this public service career and later his own tax business, he served double duty as a pastor, most recently at the Mount Zion Baptist Church. In the words of a friend, The Reverend Enoch Fuzz, ``Athan was consumed by a desire for justice, equality and freedom for all people.''

Mr. Gibbs' desire for justice and equality was matched only by his tenacious drive to realize these goals. After reading studies quantifying the unequal treatment of African-American votes in the 2000 Florida election, he saw an opportunity to put his accounting skills to work in pursuing his overall democratic goals. In 2001, he founded TruVote in order to prevent disenfranchisement and restore faith in the democratic system. His invention caught on quickly and earned the backing of state and local officials, the World Conference of Mayors, and Microsoft. Last spring, my colleague Mr. Holt introduced H.R. 2239, a bill requiring that voting systems provide a verifiable paper receipt, just as Mr. Gibbs had envisioned and invented two years previously. This bill now has bipartisan backing from 128 cosponsors.

While the nation and the democratic world lost a dedicated patriot and talented innovator when it prematurely lost Athan Gibbs, his vision and mission live on through his family and colleagues who pledge to carry on his work. On behalf of the fifth district of Tennessee as well as my colleagues in Congress, I send my deepest condolences to Athan Gibbs' family and loved ones, and celebrate the life of this remarkable American.

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased today to honor one of the nation's leading physicians, Dr. Deborah German, who was recently named by the American Medical Women's Association as a winner of the ``Changing the Face of Medicine: Local Legends'' award. Dr. German is a highly skilled physician, a noted medical educator, an experienced healthcare administrator, and a supportive colleague who has actively encouraged others to succeed in medicine.

Dr. German is presently the CEO of the nonprofit Saint Thomas Hospital in Nashville, TN, as well as senior vice president and chief academic officer for Saint Thomas Health Services, but her rich career has encompassed clinical practice, research, and academia. After graduating from Boston University and Harvard Medical School, Dr. German completed a fellowship in rheumatic and genetic disease at Duke University Medical Center following her residency. While there, she was a research associate in the Howard Hughes Medical Institute and published and presented work on adenosine metabolism at international meetings. She became director of Duke Gout Clinics and the associate dean of medical education at Duke University Medical School.

An appointment as associate dean of students brought Dr. German in 1998 to Vanderbilt University Medical School, where she was later named senior associate dean of medical education. While at Vanderbilt, she was honored with the Chancellor's Award for Human Rights and Affirmative Action.

In addition to numerous awards, publications and professional leadership positions, Dr. German was granted the 2002 AAMC Women in Medicine Leadership Development Award and held the Louisiana State University School of Medicine ``Distinguished Woman in Medicine'' Visiting Professorship in 2000. Dr. German is a founder and past president of both Tennessee Women in Medicine and the Society of Executive Leadership in Academic Medicine. She was awarded the 2000 Athena Award, given locally to women who have made significant contributions to the advancement of women in our community, and she was inducted into the YWCA Academy for Women of Achievement.

The AMWA's award is only the latest in a long series of awards and achievements for Dr. German, and the people of the 5th District of Tennessee are fortunate to benefit from her talents and from her dedication to excellence in medicine. On behalf of the 5th District, I congratulate Dr. German.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor the heroes of the Army's 101st Airborne Division (Air Assault). This famous division needs little introduction. Brave members of the ``Screaming Eagle'' division have fought for their country in countless towns and cities in

the 62 years of the division's service to America. In earlier wars, and in places such as Normandy, Eindhoven, Bastogne, and the A Shau Valley, thousands of brave Americans have fought while proudly wearing the emblem of the 101st on their left sleeve.

Today I honor a new generation of heroes from the 101st. After almost a year overseas in the Persian Gulf and in Iraq, thousands of the brave men and women of this storied unit have returned home. Of course, thousands of other US troops--soldiers, sailors, airmen, and marines-- have also served in Iraq or serve there today, including more than a thousand members of the Tennessee Army and Air National Guard. However, today I pay special tribute to the members of the fabled ``Screaming Eagle'' division in honor of their return to Tennessee.

These soldiers have seen a great deal since they were last home at Fort Campbell. First came the excitement of a rapid deployment and intensive training in Kuwait. For veteran and new recruit alike, this was a time of mixed emotions. On one hand, I'm sure they all felt the excitement of being on the verge of doing what they've trained for years to do: fight and win our nation's wars. At the same time, the thought of real combat was surely a source of worry and concern. Throughout the division, soldiers asked themselves the same question that soldiers have asked for centuries: When the time comes, will I measure up? When my buddies need me, will I be there for them? And most importantly--will I make it home?

Then came the first phase of the war in Iraq--the drive to Baghdad. During this phase of the war, the 101st fought in dozens of towns and cities. As is often the case in war, they encountered challenges they did not expect. But, as is also often the case in war, the fighting spirit and ingenuity of the American soldier overcame these challenges. In back alleys, across barren desert, on vital bridges, in tall buildings, and lowly huts, the troops of the 101st Airborne Division lived up to the reputation of previous generations of ``Screaming Eagles.'' On the road to Baghdad they added new towns--like Karbala and Najaf--to the already long list of places where members of the 101st Airborne Division have made us proud.

Once Baghdad fell and Saddam went into hiding, the war entered a new, and in some ways more difficult phase--a guerilla war against remnants of Saddam's regime. For this phase the 101st was assigned an enormous and diverse section of northern Iraq, where they had the challenging dual mission of continuing to fight the enemy while also starting Iraq on the long road to democracy and economic reconstruction. Though it should not come as a surprise, the soldiers and leaders of the 101st showed that they were once again up to the challenge. The 101st succeeded in missions as diverse as building schools, training policemen, repairing utilities, and distributing new currency--all the while continuing to conduct combat operations against insurgents.

The members of the 101st Airborne Division (Air Assault) clearly deserve our thanks for their fine service in Iraq, but so does another group of patriots--the families at Fort Campbell and elsewhere that had to stay behind. So, while I congratulate the men and women of the ``Screaming Eagle'' division, I want to also add my personal thanks to the family members and friends of the brave troops who served in Iraq.

Mr. Speaker, I think I speak for all members of Congress when I congratulate the 101st Division on a job well done in Iraq, and I pray for the safe return of all our troops serving overseas.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor my friend, Dixie Taylor-Huff, for her years of selfless service and dedication to the health and welfare of all Tennesseans. Dixie, who hails from Lebanon, is the honored recipient today of the American Health Care Association's Joe Warner Patient Advocacy Award. This award recognizes civic leaders who have shown exceptional dedication to the welfare of elderly and disabled Americans and who have been especially successful in raising awareness of such issues among local, state, and federal policymakers. We are all grateful to Dixie for her outstanding efforts and applaud her national recognition.

Dixie's leadership in the healthcare field and beyond has benefited countless lives in our great state. As the owner and operator of several skilled nursing facilities and home healthcare agencies, Dixie has long been a leader in the field of long-term health care. Her expertise has led several governors to seek her counsel by appointing her to various commissions and task forces dedicated to these issues. As the former president of the Tennessee Healthcare Association, and as a regional vice-president of the American Health Care Association, she has been a passionate and effective advocate for State and Federal policies to improve the quality of long-term care.

In addition to her work in health care, Dixie has served as a prominent civic leader in our district. As a trustee for both Cumberland University and Volunteer State Community College, she has been a vocal proponent of affordable high-quality public education. She is now the immediate past-president of the Nashville Women's Political Caucus and is treasurer of the Tennessee Democratic Party. I know that our colleagues in Tennessee value her greatly, and it is with the deepest respect and pride that I, on behalf of the people of the 5th District of Tennessee, seek to recognize this remarkable citizen.

Dixie, thank you again for your contributions to our great State and congratulations.

Mr. Speaker, in honor of Black History Month, I am pleased to speak today in recognition of Nashville's distinguished role in the history of the Civil Rights movement.

Forty-four years ago this week, a group of young Nashville college students came together to organize the Nashville sit-ins, a nonviolent campaign to desegregate the city's lunch counters. From that moment in 1960, and from that campaign's extraordinary leaders, emerged a passion for justice and equality that helped to guide the civil rights movement.

Nashville was a principal training ground for some of the nation's most important leaders in the civil rights movement, many of whom were schooled in the techniques of nonviolent protest by the Rev. James Lawson. Rev. Lawson was the second African-American admitted to Vanderbilt University's Divinity School, and his famed workshops on nonviolent resistance later earned him a reputation as ``the teacher of the civil rights movement.''

Lawson's students came to include such prominent figures as Diane Nash, Dr. James Bevel, Dr. Bernard Lafayette, and Rev. C.T. Vivian, as well as my distinguished colleague, Congressman John Lewis of Georgia. As students and young activists, they formed the organizational core of Nashville's civil rights movement, which Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. later described as ``the best organized and most disciplined in the Southland.''

Nashville's lunch-counter protests began on Feb. 13, 1960. Three months later, after a dramatic confrontation with then-Mayor Ben West, the students earned their first major victory when six Nashville lunch counters began serving African-Americans. The Nashville protests came to serve as models for later protests throughout the South, and its leaders, Ms. Nash, Dr. Bevel, Dr. Lafayette, Rev. Vivian and Mr. Lewis, went on to make pivotal contributions to the success of the civil rights movement, including the Freedom Rides of 1961 and the historic protests in Selma, Alabama.

This weekend, a number of the original leaders of Nashville's movement will be reuniting both to commemorate the anniversary of those first organized sit-ins and to honor the opening of the new Civil Rights Room at the Nashville Public Library. This library, located at 615 Church Street in Nashville, now stands in place of several downtown restaurants that refused to serve African Americans before the historic protests.

Dr. King best summed up the legacy of the Nashville movement when he came to visit shortly after the protests succeeded in desegregating Nashville's lunch counters. He said, ``I came to Nashville not to bring inspiration, but to gain inspiration from the great movement that has taken place in this community.''

It is with great honor and pride that I pay tribute today to the men and women of Nashville whose leadership and courage in the fight for racial justice still serve as inspiration to us today.

Mr. Speaker, I addressed the House last night on the subject of President Bush's State of the Union message and compared his words on that evening in this Chamber just some 3 weeks ago in which he said he would present to us a budget which paid for the war, and let me read his words exactly. ``In 2 weeks, I will send you a budget that funds the war.''

Well, 2 weeks later, the President failed to do that. He failed to include any of the cost for the conflict in Iraq and Afghanistan in his budget. You might think that is just a conflict, maybe a miscommunication with speech writers. But yesterday on the Senate side in a very important hearing the service chiefs of the Marines, Army and Air Force all said that this funding gap, the possible failure of our forces in Afghanistan and Iraq to have the money that they need come this fall, could create serious consequences.

Let me read the article from today's New York Times. ``In an unusual display of difference with the White House, the top officers of the Army, Marine Corps and Air Force all raised questions on Tuesday about how the Bush administration plans to pay for operations in Afghanistan and Iraq after the current financing runs out at the end of September.

``Appearing before the Senate Armed Services Committee, three of the four chiefs of the Armed Services expressed concerns about a financing gap, perhaps of 4 months, for the two missions, whose combined cost is about $5 billion a month.

``They were left out of President Bush's budget request for the 2005 fiscal year, with the administration saying it would make a supplementary request for up to $50 billion probably next January, after the elections this year.

```I am concerned,' General Peter J. Schoomaker, the Army Chief of Staff, said in response to a question from Senator Jack Reed, Democrat of Rhode Island, `on how we bridge between the end of this fiscal year and whenever we could get a supplemental in the next year.'

``General Michael W. Hagee, the Commandant of the Marine Corps, and General John P. Jumper, the Air Force Chief of Staff, agreed with General Schoomaker's concerns.''

A little further down in the article, General Schoomaker stated, ``We are all concerned about maintaining continuity of operations. We want to make sure that we minimize the bridge.'' He emphasized that the timing and mechanics of seeking a supplemental spending bill were up to the Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld and White House officials. He said that he was simply describing the possible consequences for the Army.

Mr. Speaker, America knows we are at war. We know that 120,000 of our men and women in uniform are in daily, constant danger in Iraq, and 10,000 more troops are at danger in Afghanistan. Yet none of the cost of this war is in the President's budget. The President has said that he will get a supplemental request to us after the election. That is probably not time enough, according to these top military officials.

Our men and women in uniform deserve better treatment. They deserve full funding, full continuity of funding, and full, honest accounting of how much this operation costs, and the American taxpayer is ready to step up

to those needs. We should not hide the true cost until after the election and risk undercutting our men and women in uniform in the field when they are at war because of politics in this political season. Let us do better in this House to fully fund our men and women in uniform.

Mr. Speaker, I am here tonight to make one very simple point. Sometimes the simplest points are the most powerful.

Families across America are probably eating supper about this time, a little worried about the future of the country, wondering whom they can trust.

Well, just a few weeks ago in this Chamber, we had the great speech of the year, the President's State of the Union message. And the President walked down this aisle in a crowded Chamber, most of the House and the Senate and the Supreme Court and other dignitaries were here. It was broadcast, of course, live on national television. And at this podium right here the President spoke and delivered a powerful message. There were many lines where there was applause; and one of them was this one, because we knew on that day, on January 20, that the President would be delivering his budget. That is a very complicated document. It is thousands of pages long. It takes months to prepare, and probably on that very night it was already at the printers, the type being set.

Well, perhaps the President was poorly served by one of his speech writers, but one of the lines in the President's important message was this one: the President said on the night of January 20 in this Chamber, he said that ``in two weeks I will send you a budget that funds the war, protects the homeland, and meets important domestic needs.''

Well, in 2 weeks he did send us a budget. It arrived here on February 2. Most of us have had a chance, especially those of us who have the privilege of serving on the Committee on the Budget, to dig through that budget and find what is in and what is not there. And to our surprise and disappointment, especially after the President's remarks just a few weeks ago in this Chamber on live national television, the budget does not fund the war. In fact, to read the President's budget, you would think that we are not at war at all.

Now, the President's budget does include over $400 billion to fund our Defense Department, and that is good; and most of this Chamber will support it and support it strongly. But that is largely a peace-time budget. That number would have been the same whether we were involved in fighting in Afghanistan or Iraq or not. So the budget that the President promised us that funds the war, and presumably he meant here the war on terrorism, the war where 120,000 of our troops are currently serving in Iraq and 10,000 of our troops are currently serving in Afghanistan, presumably the President meant the war most Americans worry about when they go to bed and pray about when they wake up in the morning because almost every day there is a casualty.

I think American families want the truth. We support our President. We want him to succeed. We want our Nation to succeed. We want our troops to win in Iraq and Afghanistan, but we need to be told the truth. We need to be

told the extent of the sacrifice that we are being asked to make.

The rumor around here is that we will be asked after November's election to come up with another $50 billion to fund the war. I will probably support that. I supported the $87 billion supplemental request that the President asked us to support because we cannot leave our troops hanging in the fields. We have to support our men and women in uniform, and I am delighted to do that. But should we not be told the cost up front?

In the President's budget, which he promised to deliver to us and which would fund the war, he has essentially a zero figure for funding our men and women in uniform. Zero, nada, zilch, nothing.

Well, that is not accurate. That is not fair. That is not honest. I think that undermines the support of our men and women in uniform who are out there risking their lives for us and for our freedom every day. And in our budget, our central planning document for this government, we have nothing for them.

Many of us are aware of the shortcomings of supplies for our troops already. Our troops did not have the bullet-proof vests that they have needed to protect themselves in Iraq. Many of our vehicles, our Humvees and Bradleys, did not have sufficient spare parts. We did not have sufficient equipment to try to deal with the IEDs, the improvised explosive devices, that our troops are threatened with every day.

There are many needs that our troops have that we have not adequately funded and that we should fund and that the American taxpayer, I think, would be glad to pay for. But we have to be told the price. And it is only fair and honest to tell us the price before the election, not to hide it until after election day.

Mr. Speaker, I think most Americans as they sit at home eating dinner, and as we try to do our jobs in this body, want to listen to and believe the President's message, want to follow as much as we can what he asks us to do because he is our Commander in Chief, but he has got to tell us the truth.

Mr. Speaker, I have the privilege today of honoring Kathy Cloninger, the new Chief Executive Officer for the Girl Scouts of America.

Ms. Cloninger is a native of Nashville, Tennessee in my district. She has been a longtime advocate for the Girl Scouts and has an accomplished history in not-for-profit leadership. Before her recent appointment to the post of CEO, Ms. Cloninger served as the head of the Girl Scout Council of Cumberland Valley in Nashville. During her tenure there, Girl Scout membership in our region rose to more than 25,000 girls--an increase of nearly 40 percent. She was also responsible for creating an outreach program that tripled the number of African American Girl Scouts, increased the participation of Hispanic girls, and brought more than 1,000 girls in public housing into the program.

In Nashville, Ms. Cloninger also helped to found the Association of Non-Profit Executives and has served on the boards of numerous organizations, including the Center for Non-Profit Management, Leadership Nashville, and the United Way of Metropolitan Nashville. She has also held top-level positions at the Kellogg Foundation and the

Mr. Speaker, this is a very sad day for this House. I bring a unique perspective, I think, to this legislation because I represent probably more hospitals than any other Member of this body. Because Nashville, Tennessee, is the headquarters town for most of the for-profit hospitals in America. We also have a leading academic medical center and many nonprofit hospitals with some 300 health care companies headquartered in our city. We are Health Care U.S.A.

I have also been a professor of health care policy at Vanderbilt Business School; the last 7 years studying these issues. And in my prior service in Congress, I was one of the leaders in trying to craft bipartisan health care policy, getting Democrats and Republicans to work together, to do the right thing for our Nation's seniors and for all of our citizens.

This bill, which we were finally allowed to see a few short hours ago, is a travesty. First of all, very few, if any, Members really know what is in it. There simply has not been enough time. And our seniors deserve better than a martial law rule. Why not at least the regular 3 days, so Americans can see what is in this bill? What is the other side afraid of? What are they afraid of?

Sunshine is the best policy. Sunshine is the best disinfectant for what may or may not be in this bill.

Now, I had a head start, I have been trying to follow proceedings closely over the last several months of the conference from which all Democrats have been excluded in the House. But I have tried to pick up bits and pieces here or there. I have tried to read everything available on this. And the best I can tell, the policies in this bill come up way short.

Now, our hospitals in Nashville are proud of the 3 to 5 percent of the bill that covers their activities, but the rest of the bill, the other 95 percent, has severe policy shortcomings that I am afraid the other side feels cannot stand the light of day, cannot stand full debate.

So our seniors deserve better, Mr. Speaker. Let us give them a better bill. Let us take the time to do it right.

Mr. Speaker, I have a particular interest in the provisions of the Energy Bill Conference Report regarding modernizing the management structure of the Tennessee Valley Authority, in Title XIV Miscellaneous, Subtitle C, of H.R. 6.

Senator Frist introduced a version of these changes earlier this year (S. 1351), and I introduced my own version (H.R. 3044) several months later. The two bills were substantially similar.

I was very disturbed to discover that two key provisions that had been in both Senator Frist's and my bills have been omitted in the Energy Bill Conference Report. These provisions concern the intended bipartisan nature of the new nine-member board--no more than five members of one party, and four of the other, and the requirement that prospective board members believe in the mission of TVA, as described in the TVA Act. Without these key provisions, modernizing the TVA board could become, at worst, and entirely partisan enterprise and/or an effort to privatize TVA or disrupt TVA's historic mission.

Due to the last minute drafting of this legislation, and the waiving of the customary 3-day layover rule for such bills to be studied carefully by members, which I just voted against an hour ago, mistakes like this have been made. I was not a member of the Conference Committee and had no access to the drafting of the language, and was only given a copy of the language less than an hour ago. This hurried legislative process is an outrage and deprives both parties the ability to have properly drafted legislation. I intend to work with my colleagues to remedy these errors of omission so that the original language and intent of Senator Frist's and my legislation can be restored to the bill.

In the meantime, it is important for all participants in the board modernizing process to honor the omitted provisions so that there is no danger of partisanship on the board, or of damage to TVA's historic mission. I will be watching very carefully in order to protect the interest of TVA ratepayers.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Texas for yielding me this time. This is a very important topic. I am a cancer survivor myself, but I think every family in America has been touched by serious illness, and the NIH can help if it is properly funded. We are very grateful for the increases in the past. I celebrate the leadership of the gentleman from Ohio; he is a great Member of this body. But I worry that others in his party who call themselves compassionate conservatives have left out the compassionate part.

To freeze the NIH budget at a time like this does serious damage to the research efforts that are going on all across this country, literally harming the futures of so many of our citizens. It is not the gentleman's fault. He has done the best that he can.

We all know that in this nonbinding motion that we are all about to vote for, it will really amount to very little change in that budget. We can and must do more. We must influence the President's budget- making process right now for his budget for next fiscal year. We need to make sure that we have no more freezes like this, no more inadequate increases, because the need is too great, whether it is cancer or heart or stroke or ALS or cystic fibrosis and a myriad of other diseases. People do not have the time to wait.

So it is very important that we tackle these issues. I would hope that the gentleman, as he votes for this nonbinding motion to instruct, and his colleagues, will do more than just put that vote up on the board and pretend that they are for a big increase, because we all know that in the President's budget this last year, there was not a big increase. There was not really much more than a freeze, and we have to do better than that.

So this is a time for us to really dig deep, to do the quiet, behind- the-scenes work that is necessary to make sure that our NIH budget genuinely increases to meet the terrific need, not only in our country, but around the world, because as the gentleman knows, we are inventing the cures for diseases around this world.

[From the Tennessean.com, Nov. 7, 2003]

Representative Jim Cooper: Don't Let Congressional Budget Cuts Slow the

War Against Cancer

(By Representative Jim Cooper)

Patty Corlew lives on a quiet street in Mt. Juliet. She's a

wife and mother. She works part-time. She helps out at Boy

Scouts and is someone folks describe as a solid friend and

good neighbor. Patty Corlew is not someone you'd likely

expect to be a protestor. Fortunately, you'd be wrong about

Patty Corlew.

``My boys were almost 2 and almost 6 when I was diagnosed

with breast cancer. Thanks for these last nine years. I only

wish my friend Mary and Elizabeth and others could have

shared them with me and watched their children grow and

become grandmothers like I hope to become. Please find a

cure.''

Patty Corlew is speaking out. She's added her name and her

story to the growing list of Middle Tennessee-area cancer

survivors who are concerned about the proposed level of

funding for the National Institutes of Health (NIH) currently

pending in Congress.

Those of us fortunate to live in Middle Tennessee don't

have to look far to see the potential impact of a slowdown in

NIH funding. Nashville is home to two of the leading medical

research institutions working in partnership with NIH and its

National Cancer Institute (NCI).

At the Vanderbilt-Ingram Cancer Center, a team led by Dr.

Ray DuBois was the first to establish the link between

colorectal tumors and an enzyme known as COX-2. Their

findings helped explain why people who took large quantities

of aspirin or drugs like ibuprofen over long periods of time

had a lower incidence of colorectal cancer. Dr. DuBois is now

the leader of a national study exploring whether COX-2

inhibitors might be used to prevent colorectal cancer as

well as a variety of other cancers.

Meharry Medical College recently launched a long-term study

of racial disparities in breast cancer. Women from minorities

are more likely to die of breast cancer today even though

they are less likely to get the disease. According to Dr. Ana

Grau, cancer surgeon and director of The Breast Health Center

at Metro General Hospital at Meharry, the center is

determined to improve breast cancer survival rates for all

women.

In another study, Vanderbilt-Ingram and Meharry are working

together to answer one simple but important question: Why are

African Americans, and all people in the South,

at greater risk of developing and dying from cancer than

other ethnic or regional groups? The NIH-supported study will

track more than 100,000 participants over five years to

determine what lifestyle factors may be related to higher

cancer rates for minorities and all residents in our region.

As these examples indicate, NIH is providing help and hope

to millions of Americans today. Without the appropriate

funding, however, future discoveries like these may be

threatened.

In each of the past five years, NIH funding has increased

by 14-15%. Last year, during congressional hearings, NIH

leadership said the current pace of medical breakthroughs

could only be maintained if NIH funding continues to grow at

a level of 8-10%. Yet the House and Senate Conference

Committee is expected to support the Bush Administration's

NIH request: an increase of just 2.7%.

Like Patty Corlew, I am a cancer survivor. I was fortunate

to discover my cancer early. And I am blessed to live in a

community where cutting-edge cancer research and treatment is

something we almost take for granted.

The examples described here of research being conducted at

Vanderbilt-Ingram and Meharry are only three out of many

promising studies currently underway at each institution. And

Vanderbilt-Ingram and Meharry are not alone in working at the

frontier of cancer research. More than 80% of NIH funding now

goes to support research conducted at universities around the

country.

In the next few weeks, Congress will be asked to decide the

future direction of NIH work, whether the pace of disease

exploration should continue at the aggressive level of recent

years. In these tough economic times, every budget decision

must be evaluated carefully. We must consider not only costs,

but potential return on each taxpayer dollar we commit.

How do you measure the value of good health and quality of

life?

As a member of the House Budget Committee, I am very

concerned about the current trend in government spending. I

strongly believe we cannot continue to ignore the rising

deficit. But I also believe we cannot turn our backs on the

progress currently being made in medical research. On the

issue of NIH fund, I stand with Patty Corlew.