Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to call attention to the important and essential role that oncology nurses play in providing quality cancer care. These nurses are principally involved in the administration and monitoring of chemotherapy and the associated side- effects patients experience. As anyone ever treated for cancer will tell you, oncology nurses are intelligent, well-trained, highly skilled, kind-hearted angels who provide quality clinical, psychosocial and supportive care to patients and their families. In short, they are integral to our nation's cancer care delivery system.

Cancer is a complex, multifaceted and chronic disease, and people with cancer are best served by a multidisciplinary health care team specialized in oncology care, including nurses who are certified in that specialty. This year alone, 1.3 million Americans will hear the words, ``You have cancer.'' In addition, 556,000 will lose their battle with this terrible disease. Every day, oncology nurses see the pain and suffering caused by cancer and understand the physical, emotional, and financial challenges that people with cancer face throughout their diagnosis and treatment. Oncology nurses play a central role in the provision of quality cancer care as they are principally involved in the administration and monitoring of chemotherapy and the associated side-effects patients may experience.

Today, more than two-thirds of cancer cases strike people over the age of 65, and the number of cancer cases diagnosed among senior citizens is projected to double by 2030. At the same time, many of the community-based cancer centers are facing significant barriers in hiring the specialized oncology nurses they need to treat cancer patients. It is estimated that there will be a shortage of 1.1 million nurses in the year 2015.

The Oncology Nursing Society (ONS) is the largest organization of oncology health professionals in the world, with more than 30,000 registered nurses and other health care professionals. Since 1975, the Oncology Nursing Society has been dedicated to excellence in patient care, teaching, research, administration and education in the field of oncology. The Society's mission is to promote excellence in oncology nursing and quality cancer care. To that end, ONS honors and maintains nursing's historical and essential commitment to advocacy for the public good by providing nurses and healthcare professionals with access to the highest quality educational programs, cancer-care resources, research opportunities and networks for peer support.

On behalf of the people with cancer and their families in Minnesota's 3rd Congressional District, I would like to acknowledge Eva Gallagher for her leadership within the Oncology Nursing Society as a member of the ONS Board of Directors. Through Eva's and ONS' leadership, our nation is charting a course that will help us win the war on cancer.

The ONS has 4 chapters in my home state of Minnesota. Located in the Bloomington, Esko, Hayfield and Milan areas, these chapters serve the oncology nurses in the state and help them continue to provide high quality cancer care to patients and their families in our state.

I commend the Oncology Nursing Society for all of its efforts and leadership over the last 29 years and thank the Society and its members for their ongoing commitment to improving and assuring access to quality cancer care for all cancer patients and their families. I urge my colleagues to support them in their important endeavors.

I thank my friend from New Hampshire for yielding.

Mr. Speaker, last year, the U.S. military began employing its first rest and recuperation program, known as R&R, since the Vietnam War. Soldiers who have served 12 straight months in a combat zone qualify for R&R.

Sadly, however, we all remember the televised interviews of combat- weary American soldiers back from Iraq on R&R and stranded at Baltimore-Washington International Airport, unable to afford a plane ticket home.

Sad but true, Mr. Speaker, too many of our brave and battle-fatigued soldiers were unable to get to their hometowns to see their loved ones because same-day airfare was too expensive for many of our troops to afford.

That is why last fall I introduced an amendment with my friend, the gentleman from Kansas (Mr. Moore), to make money available to cover troops' travel costs to their hometowns. With the support of the gentleman from California (Mr. Lewis), chairman of the Committee on Appropriations Subcommittee on Defense, our amendment was passed and the Pentagon began paying our troops' airfare all the way home.

Unfortunately, though, Mr. Speaker, the Pentagon did not implement this program retroactively, which means the first wave of troops who came back from Iraq for R&R and who managed to scrape up the cash for airfare home are still to this day stuck with the tab to see their families.

So, today, Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of S. 2057, which will cover retroactively the domestic travel costs our brave troops incurred while on R&R leave.

Mr. Speaker, the Ramstad-Moore amendment put the House on record that the Federal Government should cover all travel and transportation costs necessary to return our brave troops home. That is why passage of this bill is so important. Now Congress must finish the job it began last fall, to make sure none of our troops fall between the cracks and are forced to pay their own transportation costs to get home.

Let us show today that we support our troops. Let us cover the costs that enabled our troops to return home for R&R, briefly reuniting wives and husbands, parents and children and other loved ones.

I urge all my colleagues to support this important bill.

I want to thank the gentleman from California (Chairman Hunter) of the Committee on Armed Services and the gentleman from New Hampshire (Chairman Bradley) for their support of this legislation, as well the gentleman from California (Chairman Lewis) of the Committee on Appropriations Subcommittee on Defense, for their continued support of covering troop travel costs, and also want to thank the majority leader for allowing this legislation to come to the floor.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of the Medicare Prescription Drug, Improvement and Modernization Act.

This is truly a historic day. After years of hard work, Congress is finally on the verge of delivering on our commitment to America's seniors. The bill before us will honor our promise to create a meaningful and long overdue prescription drug benefit for Medicare beneficiaries.

This legislation means seniors will no longer have to choose between purchasing life-saving drugs or the basic necessities of food and housing.

In addition to this important new prescription drug benefit, the bill modernizes and improves Medicare to give seniors better choices and greater access to state-of-the-art health care.

I am grateful for the many important provisions in this package from the bill I sponsored, the Medicare Innovation Responsiveness Act (H.R. 941), which will increase seniors' access to lifesaving medical technology. These provisions provide long needed reforms that will bring the Medicare program into the 21st Century.

As founded and co-chair of the Medical Technology Caucus, I have witnessed first-hand the remarkable advances that lifesaving and life- enhancing medical technology has made to treat and cure debilitating conditions. The current Medicare system is antiquated because of its failure to incorporate modern day advances in technology.

Currently, seniors face unconscionable delays of up to 5 years before Medicare grants access to new technology. This delay can literally be a matter of life or death for many seniors.

The legislation before us incorporates many of the reforms I proposed that will vastly improve medicare's coverage, coding and payment process. These reforms will remove barriers to FDA-approved, lifesaving technology for millions of seniors. The result will not only improve lives, but in many cases save lives as well.

Thanks to this legislation, we are finally eliminating the barriers that discourage innovation and deny America's seniors the medical technologies they desperately need. Seniors have waited too long for access to the same treatment options that other Americans routinely enjoy.

I am also pleased the bill includes legislation I introduced with Mr. Cardin to break down regulatory barriers facing specialized Medicare+Choice plans that serve the frail elderly.

I also worked diligently to ensure that seniors suffering from serious mental illness will have the necessary access, under the new drug benefit, to the psychotropic medication they desperately need. I am pleased that this legislation addresses this critical need.

Mr. Speaker, this package of reforms will improve the lives of today's seniors and seniors for generations to come. I urge my colleagues to support this landmark legislation and deliver on our promise to preserve, protect and strengthen Medicare.

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to rise in strong support of H.R. 1813, the Torture Victims Relief Authorization Act.

I am especially proud that the first Center for Victims of Torture in the United States is located in Minnesota. Minnesota's Center for Victims of Torture is certainly one of the premier centers for torture survivors in the entire world.

Minnesota is home to about 14,000 victims of torture, and there are some 400,000 victims of torture in our country. Even though people are becoming increasingly aware of the issue of torture, support and treatment for the victims have often been lacking.

That's where the center, with its excellent leadership, comes in. We in Minnesota have learned much, and now we want to bring that leadership, and the path-breaking work of the center, to the rest of the country.

Mr. Speaker, this important legislation provides support for Minnesota's Center for Victims of Torture and will enable our world- renowned Center to continue providing rehabilitation and other critical services to victims of torture.

All Minnesotans can be proud of our Center for Victims of Torture, which helps victims of torture recover from their horrific pain, suffering and scars.

Mr. Speaker, the issues of torture and human rights have finally penetrated the global consciousness, and I urge my colleagues to support passage of this important legislation.

Mr. Speaker, today I am introducing the ``Affordable Housing Preservation Tax Relief Act,'' legislation to maintain and increase the stock of affordable housing in this country. I am delighted to be joined in this effort by my friend and colleague from Maryland, Mr. Cardin.

In 1999, Congress recognized the need to look at this issue by establishing the bipartisan Millennial Housing Commission (MHC). That Commission was charged with taking a thorough look at what the government was doing to fill the huge unmet gap for affordable housing.

The MHC released their report in May of 2000. The report stated, ``In 1999 one in four--almost 28 million--American households reported spending more on housing than the Federal Government considers affordable and appropriate (more than 30 percent of income).''

The MHC report also contained a list of 13 recommendations for making housing more affordable. One of those recommendations was for Congress to provide a ``new tool'' to encourage the transfer of affordable housing to entities that agree to maintain these properties and keep them affordable. They recommended doing so by forgiving the depreciated recapture tax for owners who sell their properties to purchasers who agree to maintain them for a 30-year period and to keep them affordable. The MHC recommendation would still hold owners responsible for any capital gains taxes due above and beyond the depreciated amount.

The lack of affordable housing is something I hear about and see all across my congressional district and my State. Indeed recent data shows that approximately 35 percent of renters in Minnesota pay over 30 percent of their income on housing and 15 percent of renters pay over 50 percent of their income on their housing.

The legislation we are introducing today tracks closely with the recommendation made by the MHC. I believe enactment of this legislation would be an important step toward maintaining and increasing affordable housing in this country, and I urge my colleagues to join me as a cosponsor of this legislation.

Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.

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

Mr. Chairman, I rise today to offer an amendment to the supplemental appropriations bill to provide travel and transportation costs for our brave troops to return home during R&R breaks. I want to thank my friend, the gentleman from Kansas (Mr. Moore), for his work on this important legislation. I would also like to thank the chairman and ranking member for their tireless work on the underlying legislation, which is so critical to our mission in Iraq.

Mr. Chairman, our military recently began employing its first Rest and Recuperation program during the Vietnam War. This means that soldiers who have served 12 straight months in Iraq qualify for R&R, and some 700 troops per day are currently returning to the United States to see their families. Unfortunately, once the troops reach our shores, they are too often stranded at the airport. That is because the airports to which they are flown are nowhere near their homes or families, and same-day airline fares are far too expensive for most of our troops to afford. Being stranded at the Baltimore Washington Airport will not provide much rest or relaxation to those who are making such great sacrifices to defend our freedom.

Anyone, Mr. Chairman, who has served in the military knows how important it is to get home, especially those serving in combat. The Ramstad-Moore amendment simply shifts $98 million in funds from the Iraq Freedom Fund to the Army's personnel account.

Mr. Chairman, an amendment stating Congress' intent to expand the R&R program to cover domestic travel costs was agreed to by unanimous consent during the other body's consideration of the Iraq supplemental. This amendment today would provide the funding necessary to pay for these costs and would put this body on record in support of this important initiative for our brave troops.

The Federal Government should clearly cover all travel and transportation costs necessary to return our brave troops to their homes, briefly reuniting wives and husbands, parents and children, friends and loved ones. Getting our brave troops home for rest and recuperation is the very least we can do to show our troops and their families that we appreciate their service and their great sacrifice, and I urge my colleagues to support this amendment.

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

Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume to thank the distinguished chairman for accepting this important amendment to show our troops that we truly do appreciate their important service to our country and their great sacrifice.

Mr. Chairman, how much time remains?

Mr. Chairman, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Kansas (Mr. Moore).

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

Offered By: Mr. Ramstad

Amendment No. 7: Page 2, line 9, insert after the dollar

amount the following: ``(increased by 98,000,000)''.

Page 30, lines 1 and 4, insert after the dollar amount

the following: ``(reduced by 98,000,000)''.

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

Mr. Speaker, I believe the Members of the body are very familiar with the issues at stake in this motion to instruct conferees, for I believe this is the 13th time now that this body has debated the motion.

Let me say at the outset, Members on both sides of the aisle want to provide for immediate increased refundability of the child credit. That is exactly what the bill that passed the House would provide to many low-income families. But let me remind my colleagues of the families who would be disadvantaged by this motion to instruct conferees and this goes really to the heart of this debate, Mr. Speaker.

Under the motion brought by my friend from Alabama, the same low- income families who would benefit from the increased refundability of the child credit would see their credit actually drop in the year 2005, after the elections. By contrast, the House-passed bill would ensure that the child credit remains at $1,000 per child through the year 2010. Will low-income families need this crucial tax relief any less in the year 2005? Of course not.

Under the motion brought by my friend from Alabama, the marriage penalty in the child credit would be eliminated only in the year 2010. By contrast, the House-passed bill immediately eliminates the marriage penalty, which is unfair and unconscionable and discriminates against people who are married, taxpayers who are married, and denies millions of children the full benefit of the child credit simply because their parents are married. Why should a married couple anywhere, let us say a teacher and a firefighter, be denied this crucial tax relief for their children?

Under the motion also brought by my friend from Alabama, families would actually receive less tax relief, those families in the military. Let me repeat that. Military families would actually receive less tax relief under the motion brought by my friend from Alabama.

Under the House-passed bill, the child credit is not denied to military families. Military families, including those serving so bravely abroad, are already receiving a refundable child credit and will continue to receive this credit under the House-passed bill. This motion to instruct would only increase the refundable child credit for some military families by allowing them to take into account tax-free income when they compute their refundable credit. At the same time, the motion to instruct would deny over $800 million in tax relief to military families. That is a lot of money and that is real money to those troops serving us so bravely and so well.

The House bill contains the military tax relief that has passed this body a number of times. By contrast, the bill passed by the other body, which this motion to instruct would have us adopt, does not contain this essential

tax relief for the brave men and women defending our country.

Mr. Speaker, let me remind my colleagues of the military tax relief that is missing, that is absent from the other body's bill. Our House- passed tax relief bill ensures that members of the Armed Forces and Foreign Service are not denied the very important capital gains exclusion on home sales if they cannot meet the 5-year residency test because they are transferred away from home on official extended duty, which happens obviously frequently to members of both the Armed Forces and the Foreign Service.

Our bill ensures that the full $6,000 death gratuity payment received by survivors of military personnel is tax-free. Only half of the payment is tax-free under current law.

Our bill furthermore ensures that payments received by members of the Armed Forces under the home owners assistance program are tax-free. These payments compensate our men and women of the military for a drop in home values resulting from military base closures or realignments.

Moreover, our bill extends the combat zone filing rules to individuals serving in contingency operations so they are given more time to file tax returns and meet other deadlines. As I have heard from many military families who have loved ones in combat zones currently, this provision is also very important.

Further, Mr. Speaker, our bill modifies the definition of a qualified veterans organization to make it easier for veterans organizations to retain their tax-exempt status. This is very important, as members of the American Legion and VFW and the other veterans organizations have told me repeatedly.

Also, Mr. Speaker, our bill clarifies that dependent care assistance provided under a military dependent care assistance program is tax- free.

Further, the House-passed bill ensures that families are not hit with that dreaded 10 percent penalty for withdrawals from their Qualified Tuition Plans from Section 529 Plans or the Coverdell Education Savings Account if their children are appointed to military academies. This practice is simply wrong, and we correct that. This is the same treatment given to families whose children receive scholarships.

Finally, Mr. Speaker, our House-passed bill provides an above-the- line deduction for up to $1,500, $1,500 of training expenses incurred by members of the National Guard and Reserve who serve more than 100 miles away. I am proud to say, Mr. Speaker, that this provision is based on legislation I sponsored with the help of many others on both sides of the aisle.

So let me conclude, Mr. Speaker, by saying this, and this really is the bottom line: The House-passed bill provides more tax relief to more families. The House-passed bill provides more tax relief to more members of our military. I urge my colleagues to defeat this motion.

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

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

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 30 seconds.

Mr. Speaker, I would just remind the body that the motion to instruct brought by my friend from Alabama would deny over $800 million in tax relief to members of the military and their families.

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

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 30 seconds.

Mr. Speaker, I would just remind my friend from New Jersey that this is not a joke to many low-income families. Under the motion brought here today, the same low-income families who would benefit from the increased refundability of the child credit would see their credit actually drop in 2005, coincidentally, right after the elections. By contrast the House-passed bill would ensure that the child credit stays at $1,000 per child through the year 2010. I challenge anyone to say that low-income families would need this crucial tax relief any less after 2005. This is not a joke. This is serious business.

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

Mr. Chairman, I rise today in strong opposition to the VA-HUD appropriations bill.

The funding level in the bill for veterans' health care is totally inadequate and breaks Congress' promise to America's veterans.

As a proud member of the American Legion, I agree with Minnesota Department Commander Michael Neubarth that it is ``blatantly wrong to slash veterans' medical care by $41.8 billion.''

We should not break our promise to veterans to keep pace with hospital inflation and the increase in the number of enrolled veterans.

America's 25 million veterans deserve better. It's outrageous that 200,000 veterans have been waiting over 6 months for a basic health care appointment.

Congress should honor our Nation's veterans and take care of their medical needs as promised.

I urge my colleagues to vote against this bill.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of H.R. 2738, the ``U.S.-Chile Free Trade Agreement Implementation Act.''

Last Congress, we passed Trade Promotion Authority to open markets for American products, create jobs and get the best deal possible for our businesses and workers. Our legislative efforts are beginning to pay off with our first two bilateral Free Trade Agreements, with Chile and Singapore.

Mr. Speaker, Chile represents a particular benefit because it is the first free trade pact between the U.S. and a South American country, opening important new inroads into the continent.

Through the personal mission work I've done in South America, I can tell you firsthand that it's long past time we pay more attention to the economic problems of our South American neighbors. And our initial inroads in Chile, hopefully followed by a Central American Free Trade Agreement will go along way toward achieving our goal of a Free Trade Area of the Americas.

Mr. Speaker, Chile has one of the fastest growing economies in the world. Over the last two decades, Chile has established a vigorous democracy, a thriving and open economy built on trade and a free-market society.

The U.S.-Chile Free Trade Agreement will help Chile continue its impressive record of growth, development and poverty alleviation. It will help spur progress toward our larger goal of creating a Free Trade Area of the Americas and will send a strong message to the rest of the world that we will work in partnership with those who are committed to free markets.

The best part, though, is that reducing trade barriers is not a zero- sum game. Free Trade agreements open markets for American companies, improving the American economy and providing more American jobs!

Unfortunately, because we are so behind in international trade agreements, U.S. companies are at a steep competitive disadvantage in Chile because other countries, including Canada, Mexico and the European Union, already have Free Trade Agreements with Chile.

The U.S.-Chile Free Trade Agreement takes away the advantage these countries have and will expand U.S. GDP by approximately $4 billion.

Mr. Speaker, it's long past time the U.S. actively engaged our foreign trade partners to negotiate bilateral and multi-lateral trade agreements. Our manufacturers, farmers and businesses depend on our swift action in opening up new markets for their products. The U.S.- Chile Free Trade Agreement represents an excellent start to what I hope will lead to several more bilateral and multilateral Free Trade Agreements in the near future.

Mr. Speaker, let's pass this legislation and help put people back to work!

Mr. Chairman, I don't understand why the administration wants to fix a program that's not broken.

Head Start is one Federal program that works and gives parents a voice in how to best meet their children's educational needs.

I have visited a number of Head Start classrooms, and I have seen firsthand that Head Start is working well for ``at-risk'' preschoolers and their families.

I oppose this bill to recast Head Start because it would disrupt Head Start's comprehensive mission of education, health and nutrition. Comprehensive services, along with parental involvement, are the foundation that make Head Start successful.

This bill diverts funds from local programs to the States, while relieving States of the responsibility to meet current performance standards.

Early childhood experts agree that the proposed changes would be devastating for Head Start and the children and families it serves. The last thing Congress should do is experiment with a successful program.

I urge my colleagues to vote against this legislation.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to submit into the Record a letter I have received from seven former Secretaries of the Department of Health and Human Services and its predecessor, the Department of Health, Education and Welfare. The letter, sent to many Members of Congress, and especially to the leadership of both bodies, requests that during our work on Medicare modernization we not forget about the benefits of disease prevention.

The letter specifically references a report by Partnership For Prevention, ``A Better Medicare for Healthier Seniors: Recommendations to Modernize Medicare's Prevention Policies,'' which states that Medicare should increase its emphasis on keeping seniors healthy, not just treating them when they become sick, as a roadmap for a modernizing Medicare's prevention practices.

The Partnership For Prevention (PFP) is a highly respected non-profit partnership of public and private sector organizations committed to finding solutions to health issues in a non-partisan and rigorously scientific manner. The report and other recommendations can be viewed and downloaded at the PFP Web site, http://www.prevent.org. I encourage my colleagues to read the attached letter, look at the Partnership For Prevention report and consider their recommendations in our further efforts to modernize Medicare.

The Former Secretaries of Health and Human Services and

Health Education and Welfare

June 25, 2003.

Hon. Jim Ramstad,

U.S. Representative, House of Representatives, Washington, DC

20515.

Dear Mr. Ramstad, as former Secretaries of Health and Human

Services (or Health, Education and Welfare), we write to

encourage you to include disease prevention in discussions

about Medicare modernization.

Congress created Medicare In 1965 based on the knowledge of

health and medicine at that time. Thus, Medicare came into

being as a national insurance system to cover hospitalization

and visits to clinicians' offices for diagnoses and

treatment.

In the nearly four decades since Medicare's creation,

considerable research and practice have yielded proven ways

to not just diagnose and treat disease, but to prevent it and

promote longer, healthier life. Today we know that postponing

disability, maintaining social function, and sustaining

independence are achievable for seniors through evidence-

based health promotion and disease prevention services. It is

nearly always preferable, both for the individual and for

society, to prevent disease instead of waiting to treat it.

Congress has added selected preventive services to Medicare

but has not included other services that are proven

effective, nor has it encouraged Medicare to take a

comprehensive approach to disease prevention and health

promotion for America's seniors.

A recent Harris Poll found that nine in ten American adults

want Medicare to be modernized and to put as much emphasis on

disease prevention as it does on disease treatment.

The roadmap for this Medicare modernization is laid out in

a new Partnership for Prevention (Partnership) report, A

Better Medicare for Healthier Seniors: Recommendations to

Modernize Medicare's Prevention Policies, which you already

have received. These recommendations would move the U.S.

toward realization of our nation's two overarching national

health goals: Increasing life expectancy and improving

quality of life, and reducing disparities in health among

different segments of the population.

Respectfully yours,

Joseph A. Calafano, Jr.

Richard S. Schweiker.

Margaret M. Heckler.

David Mathews, MD.

Louis W. Sullivan, MD.

Donna E. Shalala, PhD.

Otis R. Bowen, MD.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of the Medicare Prescription Drug and Modernization Act.

Today is an historic day. Congress is finally delivering on our promise to create a meaningful and long overdue prescription drug benefit for Medicare seniors and people with disabilities.

This bill means seniors will no longer have to choose between purchasing life-savings drugs or the basic necessities of food and housing.

In addition to this important new prescription drug benefit, the bill modernizes and improves Medicare to give seniors better choices and greater access to state-of-the-art health care.

I am grateful for the many important provisions in this package from my Medicare Innovation Responsiveness Act (H.R. 941), which will increase seniors' access to lifesaving medical technology.

As founder and co-chair of the Medical Technology Caucus, I have seen first-hand the incredible advances that medical technology and prescription drugs have made to treat and cure debilitating conditions. The current Medicare system is crying out for reform with its failure to incorporate these critical improvements.

Currently, seniors and people with disabilities face unconscionable delays of up to five years before Medicare provides access to technology that can literally be a matter of life or death.

The bill before us incorporates many of the reforms I have proposed in Medicare's coverage, coding and payment process that will speed access to lifesaving technology.

Thanks to this legislation, we are finally tearing down barriers that discourage innovation and deny America's seniors the medical technologies they desperately need. Seniors have waited too long for access to the same treatment options as other Americans.

In addition to the excellent work and leadership of Chairman Thomas and Chairman Johnson, I want to thank two unsung staff heroes--John McManus and Deb Williams--who have worked so tirelessly on these provisions.

I am also pleased the bill includes H.R. 841, legislation I introduced with Mr. Cardin to break down regulatory barriers facing specialized Medicare+Choice plans that serve the frail elderly.

Mr. Speaker, this package of reforms will improve the lives of our seniors and generations to come who count on Medicare. I urge my colleagues to support this landmark legislation and deliver on our promise to modernize and strengthen Medicare.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me time. I rise in strong support of this economic growth package to put Minnesotans back to work.

Mr. Speaker, too many people in Minnesota have lost their jobs, and, as a result, too many families are hurting.

Nationally, over 1 million Americans have lost their jobs over the last 2 years because of sagging economic growth.

We must pass H.R. 2, the economic growth and jobs package, to stimulate economic growth and create jobs. Economists predict this package of tax incentives and tax reductions will result in the creation of at least 1.4 million new jobs in the next 2 years.

Unfortunately, our friends on the other side who oppose this job- creating legislation fail to understand that economic growth is the key not only to job creation, but also to increased tax revenues to fund the necessary functions of government.

More jobs mean more taxpayers, which mean more revenues, the fundamental point missed by critics of this economy growth package from our Ways and Means Committee.

This critical job-creating legislation will accelerate the rate cuts, marriage penalty elimination and child tax credits; increase small business expensing to provide the core of our economy with incentives to grow; and cut taxes on corporate dividends and capital gains to give the stock market a boost and promote private investment.

Mr. Speaker, Minnesotans looking for work need jobs. The economy needs a boost. We need to increase business spending, consumer spending and investment. This legislation will provide the incentives and tax relief for the economic growth and job creation we need now.

Let's pass this legislation and help put people back to work.

Mr. Speaker, the University of Minnesota men's hockey team did it again. During our spring recess, Minnesota defeated New Hampshire 5 to 1 to win its second consecutive NCAA championship, the first time a team has repeated as NCAA hockey champion in 31 years.

Mr. Speaker, the key to these back-to-back titles has been hard work by talented athletes, superior coaching by Coach Don Lucia and his great staff, and the greatest fans in hockey anywhere.

In the title game, Minnesota and New Hampshire were tied 1 to 1 until the final period, but a three-goal outburst over 5 minutes and 20 seconds of the third period iced the team's second consecutive national championship.

Minnesota has a long and proud hockey tradition as the hockey capital of the world, and all Minnesotans are extremely proud of our national champion, Golden Gophers.

Unlike most repeat champions, Mr. Speaker, this one came as somewhat of a surprise. The Gophers started the season slowly, but that is to be expected of a team that lost so many players after beating Maine in overtime in last year's title game.

But thanks to Coach Lucia's inspiring leadership, great motivational skills and good chemistry, this year's team started gathering steam as players returned to the lineup from injuries. Each player, coach, trainer and manager played a pivotal role during the season, picking each other up at critical times.

Our University of Minnesota's men's hockey team also won the WCHA, the Western Collegiate Hockey Association, tournament on the road to its second consecutive national title.

Mr. Speaker, all Minnesotans and Gopher hockey fans everywhere are very proud of this great team. The 2002-2003 Gopher men's hockey team, our back-to-back national champions, are now part of college hockey history. We congratulate our national champions, for they are true champions, both on and off the ice.

I am glad to yield to the gentleman from hockey-rich Duluth, Minnesota.

Mr. Speaker, reclaiming my time, I thank the gentleman for his comments, for his great support of University of Minnesota athletics, both in Minneapolis and Duluth, and I was just as proud to support the Gopher women's team, the University of Minnesota-Duluth, as I am here today. Both are great teams, and that is why Minnesota, as the gentleman knows, is the hockey capital of the world.