Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, it is an honor for me to acknowledge our guest chaplain today, the Right Reverend John Clark Buchanan. What a joy it was to hear his voice once again, inspiring me and others to do good work.

John Clark Buchanan is the retired Episcopal bishop of West Missouri, having served our area from 1989 to 2000. He has a diverse background, having been a lawyer in private practice and in the insurance industry prior to his ordained ministry.

Bishop Buchanan currently serves as a parliamentarian for the House of Bishops of the Episcopal Church. We in western Missouri are very grateful for the 11 years he served us. He created the most successful Bishop Spencer Place, a moderately priced retirement center for our elderly.

He also, in his 11 years, established stable financial funding for the church, and also did extensive planning for new churches in the area outside of greater Kansas City. Key among his reforms and his instrumental efforts were, of course, reaching out and creating and establishing Hispanic missions.

Bishop Buchanan lives in Charleston, South Carolina, with his wife Peggy. They have two daughters and two grandchildren. I thank him for taking his time to come and deliver this thoughtful prayer with us this morning.

Mr. Speaker, our economy is on the ropes, with unemployment rising, investments eroding, and families feeling increasingly insecure about their futures. We have serious problems. But they will not be solved by wrong remedies.

I will vote against this bill tonight for two reasons: First, it is bad tax policy and questionable politics. And second, it is reckless and irresponsible fiscal policy, and we can't afford it.

Basic principles of tax policy include certainty and fairness.

This bill isn't certain. It undermines rational tax planning or responsible budgeting. It shoehorns a size ten tax cut into a size three budget. That may be impressive acrobatics, with enough twists and turns to rival a pretzel. But it's bad policy, as even the sponsors candidly acknowledge.

To fit under the budget caps, the bill has more sunsets than a Florida vacation: now you see the tax break; now you don't. Here for two years; gone tomorrow. Every provision but one in the bill expires between 2004 and 2008, sinking beneath the horizon.

Taxpayers are confused now by our Tax Code. This adds complexity. Indeed, it's complexity on stilts. How can taxpayers plan with disappearing provisions? They can't. That's an antigrowth policy.

One thing is certain, however. The bill invites tax shelters. It's a bonanza for them. The Senate's curb on tax shelter abuses by corporations vanished in the conference. And loophole hunters will surely shift income from wages to capital gains when possible to take advantage of lower rates.

Nor is the bill fair. Look at the numbers. Over half of the tax cuts go to the wealthiest five percent of taxpayers. Almost two-thirds goes to the top 10 percent. But the bottom 60 percent of taxpayers get only 8 percent of the tax cuts, averaging less than $100 a year over the next 4 years.

An Urban-Brookings Institution Tax Policy Center analysis shows that 36 percent of all U.S. households would receive no tax cut at all in 2003 under the conference bill, and 53 percent of households would receive a tax cut of $100 or less.

For households in the middle of the income spectrum--the middle fifth of households--the average tax cut in 2003 would be $217. But taxpayers with incomes about $1 million a year would average over $90,000. That's not fair.

Someone once said that you need to set a banquet table for the rich to get a few crumbs for the poor. This isn't even a few crumbs.

The child credit increases from $600 to $1,000 in the bill. But the refundable part of the child tax credit, targeted to working families with incomes between $10,000 and $30,000, isn't accelerated. Twelve million low-income children and their families--one of every six children in the Nation--were dropped by the conferees.

Fair? Here's what the Center for Budget and Policy Priorities said: ``The final agreement is, in fact, tilted against lower-income working families with children. The conference agreement accelerates all of the child tax credit and marriage penalty relief provisions of the 2001 tax-cut legislation that benefit middle- and upper-income families, while failing to accelerate either of the child tax credit and marriage penalty relief provisions enacted in 2001 that are targeted on low- and moderate-income working families. The consequence is that low-income working families--the very group most likely to spend rather than save any tax-cut dollars they receive--are largely left out of the legislation.''

There was also case to be made for eliminating the double taxation of dividends--also good tax policy, if we could afford it. But this bill skipped that, too.

So it is bad tax policy, lacking fairness or certainty, and missing the reforms and balance so essential to good legislation.

And I will vote against this bill also because it's irresponsible fiscal policy.

I think America knows we're borrowing money to pay for this, that it deepens our budget deficit, that it risks our future. And the polls reflect that. So America understands.

But our citizens may not realize how reckless this tax cut really is. President Bush proposed a $726 billion tax cut over 10 years. We couldn't afford that since our surpluses have evaporated. But this bill will cost far, far more. It's a Trojan Horse of hidden costs.

This bill is advertised as costing $350 billion, less than half of Mr. Bush's cuts. But if the bill's provisions, except the Alternative Minimum Tax brief relief, are extended, as all observers seem to expect, the cost through 2013 will be $807 billion to $1.06 trillion. And we clearly can't afford that--deficits as far as the eye can see, as we hand the bill to our children and grandchildren.

Mr. Speaker, the goals originally set for this bill are noble, and needed: jobs, growth, tax relief. Unfortunately, the result in this conference bill fall short. There are measures we could have passed that would have provided the right balance and the right help. But this isn't one of them. Instead, it is the height of fiscal folly.

And so, Mr. Speaker, this bill is bad tax policy, bad fiscal policy, unfair, and unwise. It helps those who don't need help. It hurts those who do. And we can't afford it.

I urge my colleagues to vote no on H.R. 2.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the Democratic Jobs and Economic Growth Plan and in opposition to the Republican tax cut. The Democratic package is fair, fast acting, and fiscally responsible, while the Republican plan is not fiscally responsible nor will it stimulate the economy. Unfortunately, debate has once again been stifled and we will not even have the opportunity to vote on the Democratic package which provides real tax relief to more Americans at no cost to the Federal Treasury over 10 years. By continuing down the path of irresponsible tax cuts that add to deficits and increase long term costs, the Republican plan will do nothing to stimulate the economy. Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan has said that by increasing the budget deficit through tax cuts, as the majority party is attempting to do today, Congress will ``induce a rise in long- term interest rates . . . significantly undercutting the benefits that would be achieved from the tax cuts.''

I am a long time supporter of lower capital gains taxes, but the bill before us takes an irresponsible approach. I am proud to be an original cosponsor of H.R. 44, the Investment Tax Incentive Act. This bill would take a responsible and stimulative approach to cutting the capital gains tax by creating a 2 year investment window allowing investors to lock in lower rates on capital gains by purchasing new assets now. The higher cost of the Republican tax plan before us today does not result in increased economic stimulus because $115 billion of the $297 billion from the capital gains portion will go to the 184,000 households who make more than $1 million annually. This results in an investment tax cut of $625,000 per millionaire household over 10 years. Accelerating income tax rates as lucrative as the dividend tax proposal, so that it returns funds to only a few Americans without putting money in the hands of the middle class, who will spend the money. According to the Urban Institute, the average American household will receive $217 per year in tax relief, which will do little if anything to spark economic growth. On May 2, a Goldman Sachs Economics Analyst said ``the dividend tax exclusion looks especially ineffective as a stimulative measure, providing only 8 cents on the dollar.'' Let's not drive future generations further into debt with irresponsible and ineffective financial policy.

The Democratic growth package offers $44 billion in aid to prevent sales and property tax increases and education cuts. If these cuts continue at the state level, economic growth will continue to slow, regardless of what Congress does. For less than 20 percent of the cost of the Republican dividend tax cut, we would give states $50 billion to prevent sales and property tax increases and education cuts during these difficult economic times. Rather than act responsibly, the Republicans have again turned to failed tax cuts policies which have resulted in the loss of 2.7 million jobs since January 2001. History has demonstrated that the failed tax policies of 1981 revisited in the tax policy before us today will result in the same dire consequences for working men and woman in America.

To avoid raising taxes, the Missouri House and Senate agreed Wednesday to cut elementary and secondary education fundings by $200 million, which will result in fewer teachers, larger class sizes, and other adverse conditions. As a former Missouri State Representative, I know firsthand the difficulties that the states are facing today having experienced similar budget shortfalls in the 1980's when the economy was soft and impacted by the Regan era tax cuts. Also, a former teacher, it breaks my heart to see critically needed investments removed from educating our children. Instead of the House passing tax cuts that create larger deficits, we should create policies which invest in children, not borrow from them.

The Democratic package focuses on job creation and helping all Americans, not just millionaires. The plan expands the 10 percent income tax bracket, giving each working American a tax cut. In addition, the package immediately increases the child tax credit to $800 per child and eases the marriage penalty. I strongly support these two provisions alone for their immediate benefits to working men and women. For businesses, the plan encourages investment and creates jobs by increasing small business expensing and accelerating depreciation for all businesses. These provisions will help business invest today when the economy needs it most. The package also provides 6 months of extended unemployment benefits and broadens coverage to include low wage earners and part time workers. Economy.com cites this as the top way to stimulate the economy, injecting $1.72 into the economy for each federal dollar spent. Best of all, the Democratic package is fiscally responsible, and it is 100 percent offset by freezing top income tax brackets at today's rates and closing offshore tax shelters.

I urge my colleagues to oppose the reckless tax plan and vote on a plan which will offer real tax relief for all Americans without breaking the budget. Our future generations must not be forced to pay for our actions today.

Mr. Speaker, during rollcall vote No. 82, I was unavoidably detained. Had I been present, I would have voted ``nay.''

Mr. Speaker, during rollcall vote No. 83, I was unavoidably detained. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yea.''

Mr. Speaker I rise in opposition to H.R. 5 and in favor of the motion to recommit.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in opposition to H.R. 5, a measure which restricts the rights of legitimately injured patients harmed by medical malpractice, restricts the rights of doctors in favor of insurance companies and does nothing to curtail frivolous law suits nor restrains insurance rates.

In addition to trampling on patient rights, this bill tramples on state's rights. H.R. 5 takes the constitutional concept of federalism to the extreme by severely limiting the traditional rights of plaintiffs seeking damages, a matter that should not be decided by Congress because it proposes tort reforms that are traditionally, and possibly constitutionally, areas to be decided by state legislatures and state courts.

Twenty-five states including Missouri cap non-economic damages to victims. The average Missouri award is $81,000 well below the $250,000 cap presented in H.R. 5, as well as Missouri state law. Twenty states courts have ruled that caps on damages are unconstitutional. H.R. 5 enacts a statute of limitations which 18 state courts have ruled unconstitutional. It is inappropriate for Congress to limit the rights of individuals when state courts have ruled that their rights are protected under state constitutions.

Missourians Jay and Sue Stratman have a son, Daniel Lee Stratman, who is only 11 years old. In July of 1996 Daniel was checked into the hospital for ``minor'' outpatient hernia repair surgery. Daniel was set to be released that same evening. Daniel was not released until November 8 of that year and nothing has been the same for either Daniel or his family.

Daniel is permanently disabled due to severe brain damage, which was a result of multiple repeated anesthetic errors during the supposedly routine surgery for inguinal hernia repair. As a result of the medical errors, Daniel has suffered profound neurological damage including severe cognitive deficits, a decreased level of awareness, diminished bowel and bladder control, and severe gross and fine motor skill injury. He is cortically blind due to the lack of oxygen and perfusion to his brain during surgery. His comprehension level and communication capability have been severely diminished. Daniel requires 24-hour vigilance and this will be true for all of his remaining 70-year life expectancy.

The cap in H.R. 5 unjustly penalizes those individuals without income, like Daniel. Others that fall into that category include: stay- at-home moms and the elderly. When a stay-at-home mom dies, or a child dies, or a senior citizen suffers irreparable harm, there is no economic loss because it is impossible to prove damages from loss of income.

By capping punitive damages, H.R. 5 limits protection for injured patients like Daniel. Instead the bill before us protects HMOs and big insurance companies from legal responsibility. HMOs and big health insurers, who are also big campaign contributors, should not receive special treatment under the law.

Further, H.R. 5 does nothing to reduce insurance premiums for doctors--the very thing Congress needs to address. Currently, medical malpractice insurance rates are rising because insurance companies are squeezing doctors to make up for investment losses over the last few years, investment loses most citizens have also experienced. Instead of penalizing doctors, hospitals and patients Congress should make major reforms to the insurance industry.

I support the Conyers-Dingell motion to recommit because it rightly focuses on giving Americans quality healthcare and weeding out frivolous lawsuits while maintaining the rights of patients with legitimate claims, and respect for the humanitarian doctor's perform.

I urge my colleagues to oppose H.R. 5 and support the motion to recommit to include patient's rights and state's rights.

Mr. Speaker, today I rise in strong support of H.R. 1047, the Miscellaneous Trade & Technical Corrections Act. This bill contains a variety of provisions that temporarily suspend or reduce duties for certain imported products that are not produced domestically, streamline current customs laws, and make technical corrections to trade laws.

The bill suspends the duty of several products which are not produced domestically. Most of the time, tariffs are in place to protect domestic industries from foreign competitors, which can often undercut prices because of cheap labor or lax environmental standards. This bill rightfully suspends and/or reduces the tariffs on imported ingredients to domestically produced products. The reduction of 12 tariffs relating to ingredients of pesticides produced by the Bayer Corporation in Kansas City, maintain jobs in my district.

In addition, H.R. 1047 gives the President the authority to restore Normal Trade Relations to the former Yugoslavian Republics of Serbia and Montenegro when they are confirmed to cooperate with the International War Crimes Tribunal and the Dayton Peace Accords. Following Serb aggression in Bosnia and Croatia, NTR was withdrawn in 1992. I look forward to a day when Serbia and Montenegro can again become normal trading partners to the benefit of all countries.

H.R. 1047 authorizes the Customs Service to work with Canada to increase security at vulnerable U.S. cross border bridges and tunnels by allowing U.S. Customs officials to be stationed on the Canadian side of the border to inspect vehicles. This preemptive approach will help stop smugglers before they enter our country.

The bill makes several corrections to the Sub-Saharan Africa Free Trade Act of 2002. It clarifies that duty free treatment should be granted to apparel created from U.S. and regional components but formed in sub-Saharan African countries. This will provide a much needed boost to the economies of these nations.

I commend the Chairman and Ranking Member of the Ways and Means Committee for their bipartisan approach to this bill. I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting H.R. 1047 to ease unnecessary Customs restrictions and improve the ability of domestic companies to produce goods for all of the world to enjoy.

Mr. Chairman, during rollcall vote No. 37, I was unavoidably detained. Had I been present, I would have voted ``aye.''

Mr. Speaker, during rollcall vote No. 38, I was unavoidably detained. Had I been present, I would have voted ``aye.''

Mr. Speaker, during rollcall vote No. 39, I was unavoidably detained. Had I been present, I would have voted ``no.''

Madam Speaker, today members of the House will approve H.R. 395, the Do-Not-Call Implementation Act. this measure is designed to return privacy to consumers, but more must be done to close loopholes and fully protect consumers from unwanted telemarketing phone calls to their home.

My main interest in the implementation of a national Do Not Call registry is to ensure that such a list improves rather than diminishes the laws already in place in 27 states, including my State of Missouri. Missouri's Do Not Call list, which was implemented on July 1, 2001, gives consumers the ability to choose whether they would like to receive unsolicited telemarketers calls. 1,133,636 phone lines have registered with the Missouri Attorney General's office as of this February to avoid unsolicited phone calls, more than half of the households in the State. These results are representative of other states that have implemented a Do Not Call list.

More than 90 percent of the reported ``violations'' of the state law are not illegal, which confuses consumers. This is due to freedom of speech which enables political, charitable, and government regulated businesses to make unsolicited phone calls. Financial services companies and phone companies are not regulated by the Missouri Attorney General, thus these entities can legally solicit anyone in Missouri by phone. These loopholes, as well as others permitting ``consultations'' but not

sales, have allowed unsolicited calling to continue, even of those consumers who have registered on the state Do Not Call list. I urge the Federal Trade commission (FTC) and Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to follow the spirit of H.R. 395 and restrict calls by regulated industries such as credit card companies and phone companies which account for a majority of the telemarketing calls. In addition, the FTC and FCC must work to transfer state Do Not Call lists to the federal list so that consumers who have signed up locally will not have to do so nationally. Even though not explicitly stated in the bill, a rule to provide this convenience will enhance the effectiveness of this effort.

FTC Chairman Timothy Muris told the Energy and Commerce Committee that the Federal Do Not Call list is to be funded by the telemarketers who must purchase an updated Federal Do Not Call list every three months, ensuring protection to consumers. The text of H.R. 395 does not explicitly state this, thus the measure leaves room for loopholes for specific telemarketers. I look forward to studying the required FTC & FCC reports to Congress ensuring that H.R. 395 successfully protects those who choose not to receive telemarketer calls. H.R. 395 should follow the original intent of state Do Not Call laws and use Federal jurisdiction to close loopholes that states cannot.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in grief and gratitude to remember the seven brave men and women who perished in the February 1st disaster of the space shuttle Columbia. In the words of the President from the memorial service on February 4, ``We remember not only one moment of tragedy, but seven lives of great purpose and achievement.'' Commander Rick D. Husband, pilot William C. McCool, payload commander Michael P. Anderson, payload specialist Ilan Ramon, mission specialist David M. Brown, mission specialist Kalpana Chawla, and mission specialist Laurel Clark now take their places in our collective memory, alongside the seven astronauts lost in the 1986 Challenger disaster.

The President, NASA, the House Science Committee and the Senate Science Committee have each begun their investigations. What we learn from these inquiries will enable us to improve our international space program for the betterment of mankind.

My heart goes out to the families who have just lost their loved ones who gave themselves to the greater service of mankind. While the world mourns the loss of the Columbia crew, my community joins the extending condolences to the family of Commander Laurel Clark, whose sister lives in Kansas City. Laurel's sister, Lynne Salton, joined the observers for the launch of Columbia on January 16th and was anxiously awaiting her older sister's return on Saturday. We cannot know the magnitude of the loss they feel.

In memory of their bravery I wish to share a poem by John Gillespie Magee, Jr., entitled ``High Flight''. It was quoted at the memorial service for the 1986 Challenger disaster, and is etched on the memorial plaque at Challenger Memorial Park in Clear Lake, Texas.

Oh! I have slipped the surly bonds of Earth

And danced the skies on laughter-silvered wings;

Sunward I've climbed, and joined the tumbling mirth

Of sun-split clouds,--and done a hundred things

You have not dreamed of--wheeled and soared and swung

High in the sunlit silence. Hov'ring there,

I've chased the shouting wind along, and flung

My eager craft through footless halls of air . . . .

Up, up the long, delirious burning blue

I've topped the wind-swept heights with easy grace

Where never lark, or ever eagle flew--

And, while with silent, lifting mind I've trod

The high untrespassed sanctity of space,

Put out my hand, and touched the face of God.

Mr. Speaker, I join my colleagues in honoring the memory of the seven brave souls who were aboard the illfated space shuttle, Columbia, and who will now dance above us in the ether.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to celebrate the preservation of American creative culture. Librarian of Congress James H. Billington announced today the first annual selection of 50 recordings to the National Recording Registry. I am proud to congratulate my colleagues who supported the National Recording Preservation Act of 2000, legislation that made this historic moment possible. I worked diligently in shepherding this legislation through Congress with the help of then House Administration Ranking Member Steny Hoyer, now Minority Whip.

Under the terms of the National Recording Preservation Act of 2000, the Librarian of Congress is charged with selecting recordings annually that are ``culturally, historically, or aesthetically significant.'' And the list of offerings is just that: cultural, historical, and aesthetic jewels that tell the story of our beloved America. Congress created the registry to celebrate the richness and variety of our audio legacy and to underscore our responsibility to assure long term preservation of that legacy so that it may be appreciated and studied by generations to come. The creation of the registry, inspired by the National Academy of Recording Arts & Sciences (NARAS), is one part of the legislation that charges the Library of Congress with developing a comprehensive national recording preservation program, and first of its kind.

The National Sound Recording Preservation Act of 2000, Public Law 106-474, created an advisory National Recording Preservation Board appointed by the Librarian of Congress, and consists of experts from organizations representing composers, musicians, musicologists, librarians, archivists and the recording industry. The National Recording Preservation Board in turn makes the selections of works to be included in the National Recording Registry. The National sound Recording Preservation Act of 2000 also created a fund raising foundation to restore and preserve the Library's music collection. All three components are conducted under the auspices of the Library of Congress, providing the necessary elements of a comprehensive program to ensure the survival, conservation, and increased public availability of America's sound recording heritage.

William Ivey was named Chairman of the Board of Directors of the National Recording Preservation Foundation and was instrumental in creating the National Recording Registry when he was President of the National Endowment for the Arts. The foundation is a charitable and nonprofit corporation created by the Preservation Act to promote and ensure public accessibility of the nation's sound recording heritage. The foundation will accept gifts and administer a grants program to support sound preservation in archives throughout the United States. Ivey is past chairman of the National Endowment for the Arts and presently the Branscomb Scholar at Vanderbilt University. His work in this tireless effort is appreciated.

Included in the 50 releases are masterful brushstrokes on the canvas that is American cultural history. The list includes such groundbreaking recordings as the Edison Exhibition Recordings (Group of three cylinders): ``Around the world on the Phonograph;'' ``The Pattison Waltz;'' ``Fifth Regiment March.'' (1888-1889); ``Stars and Stripes Forever'' Military Band. Berliner Gramophone disc recording (1897); Lionel Mapleson cylinder recordings of the Metropolitan Opera (1900-1903); Scott Joplin ragtime compositions on piano rolls. (1900s); Booker T. Washington's 1895 Atlanta Exposition Speech (1906 recreation); ``Vesti la giubba'' from Pagliacci-Enrico Caruso (1907); ``Casey at the Bat'' DeWolf Hopper, reciting (1915); ``Down-Hearted Blues'' Bessie Smith (1923); President Franklin D. Roosevelt's radio ``Fireside Chats'' (1933-1944); Billie Holiday's ``Strange Fruit'' (1939); Bob Dylan's Freewheelin' (1963); and Precious Lord: New Recordings of the Great Gospel Songs of Thomas A. Dorsey-Thomas Dorsey, Marion Williams, and 38 others (1973).

Great American poet Walt Whitman noted that: ``Perhaps the best of songs heard . . . is the resume of them, or any of them, long afterwards, looking at the actualities away

back past, with all their practical excitations gone. How the soul loves to float amid such reminiscences!'' Mr. Speaker, with the release of these, the first 50 of the sound recordings preserved in the National Recording Registry, my soul is floating atop the marvel of what is to become of the National Recording Registry and the possibilities of cultural awakening for coming generations. Congratulations to all who are making this dream come true.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor and celebrate the many accomplishments of Catholic schools. On January 26 the annual weeklong national recognition of Catholic schools began across the Nation. I am proud to have several of the nation's high achieving Catholic schools in my district in metropolitan Kansas City, Missouri. As a former educator I understand the importance of recognizing the achievements of education throughout our Nation, and I welcome this opportunity to applaud the Catholic school community nationwide.

For 165 years, the Catholic schools of the Kansas City Diocese have prepared thousands of competent young adults fully for lives as productive citizens. There are over 40 Catholic education centers in metropolitan Kansas City, and they are all known for their high academic standards and rigorous educational instruction. These centers currently serve 14,000 students in my district. Every day over 1,000 dedicated faculty offer the guidance and instruction that make these students some of the best the Nation has to offer. Not only do the metropolitan Kansas City Catholic schools promote excellence in the classroom, they also encourage community service. In the first semester of this school year, our 14,000 students offered 87,978 hours of service to their communities by working to combat hunger and to provide care for the elderly.

One of the brightest educational beacons in the Kansas City Diocese is St. Elizabeth School in Kansas City. They are recipients of the prestigious Blue Ribbon Award from the United States Department of Education. The award recognizes St. Elizabeth's for exceeding local, State, and national education goals. I participated in the announcement of this award and was overjoyed to see the level of excellence embodied throughout the school. They expressed their gratitude by giving me a remembrance of our day together: a Kelly green sweatshirt that I cherish, especially in St. Patrick's Day parades.

St. Teresa's Academy, another blue ribbon school of excellence in my community, is the oldest school and women's institution in Kansas City. The school was founded and is sponsored by the Sisters of St. Joseph of Carondelet who, since their founding in the 17th century in France, have been in the forefront of preparing young women for the future.

I had the pleasure of accompanying the Secretary of Education, Roderick Paige, to St. Francis Xavier School in Kansas City, St. Francis is one of the seven Central City Catholic Schools established by the Catholic Diocese of Kansas City-Saint Joseph to provide educational support to children of the urban core of Kansas City. It serves a diverse population of students, some of whom are Catholic, but all come to receive their outstanding educational instruction offered as a part of the St. Francis Xavier curriculum. There is also a commitment to serving the whole child. More than half of the students at St. Francis qualify for free or reduced lunch. The school also participates in partnership with community organizations, including the Rockhurst University School of Education for teacher and parent training; Rockhurst High School in establishing a ``Middle School Academy'' to align curriculum, share resources, and setting up a mentoring program; and Young Audiences, to enrich the curriculum through the arts by having visual and performing artists work with teachers. St. Francis is part of the President's Service alliance and all students are required to perform community service. St. Francis students get real life experiences as part of their curriculum through partnerships the teachers establish with the community. The students also have a connection to students in the global society fostering the development of cultural awareness.

I have also visited St. Thomas More School for a presentation by 6th Graders on the Federal minimum wage. This was part of a class project titled ``That is Not Fair,'' a program which emphasizes social justice issues. I was accompanied by Brigid Flanigan, principal; Leanna Kilgore, Cindy Rapp, Barbara Mingori, and Paula Pawlewicz, 6 grade teachers; Ann Harbin, facilitator of the ``That's Not Fair program; and Michael Poulin, social justice program coordinator. After listening to the presentation and hearing the students' hopes and aspirations of the future I challenged the students to reach high and achieve their goals. With the first rate education provided by St. Thomas More and throughout the Kansas City Diocese, there is no question that they will be prepared to do just that.

Mr. Speaker, these are but a few of the Catholic schools in metropolitan Kansas City which play an important role in gifting students with the abilities to excel academically, socially, and civically. And I ask all of my colleagues to join me in celebrating the legacy and the bright future of the Catholic schools in the 5th District of Missouri and of the Nation.