Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, when this administration took over the White House, the United States enjoyed a multi-billion dollar budget surplus. But a Republican-controlled Congress proved unable to stay the course. Instead, our public surplus has been surrendered--surrendered to special interests and their corrupt coterie of cronies.

Every time Big Oil or Halliburton or some other corporation that shifts its jobs and its profits offshore comes up here and asks for another tax break, this Congress waves the white flag of surrender. The commitment to any fiscal discipline is in full retreat. Now we have huge deficits as far as the eye can see.

At a time of war, Republicans demand no sacrifice from those at the top, no sacrifice from multinational corporations; and they demand that those at the bottom sacrifice their all.

Under this bill, the few individuals making over $1 million per year are rewarded, on the average, with over $50,000 in tax breaks. So those at the top, they can add another fancy foreign car to their fleet. But for the many who are earning up to $40,000 a year, that is over half of the people of the United States, they get an average of $30, maybe enough for a full tank of gas.

Once again, America sees that a true Republican Christmas is one where only the silk stockings get stuffed. And when the bill for this lavish Christmas give-away comes due, who is going to pay? Our children will pick up the tab in the form of endless national debt and with cuts to child care, cuts to assistance to abused and neglected children, cuts to child support enforcement, and cuts to student financial assistance.

The tax-writing body in this Chamber has truly become the ``Committee on Greedy Ways and Shifty Means.'' And this will be remembered as the ``Cut-and-Run'' Congress, cutting taxes greatly for the few, while running trillion-dollar deficits for the rest of us.

Mr. Speaker, the Bush Administration's inability to deal with natural disasters was demonstrated once again yesterday when the President's buddies at FEMA sent Thanksgiving greetings to the Katrina victims: ``Hit the streets in two weeks.'' The same ``compassionate conservatism'' demonstrated during the botched rescue is now being repeated in the aftermath.

In addition to victimizing the victims again, this will leave cities across Texas with a sudden increase in the homeless population; cities like Austin that are still owed over $2 million in what the Federal Government promised to pay for the Katrina disaster. While giving evacuees only two weeks to leave, FEMA took three weeks to issue the October 24 press announcement.

Mr. President, I understand your desperation for the distraction offered by foreign travel, but is it not time for you to get home and address one of the many failures of this Administration for Americans?

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me time.

Mr. Speaker, this bill fails the tens of thousands of Texans living along the Lower Rio Grande River Valley. It is difficult to fault the conferees for this failure since they approved every dollar requested by President Bush and his Administration for flood prevention, but this Administration appears to have learned absolutely nothing from the Hurricane Katrina disaster when it comes to protecting poor people from being inundated by the failure of defective levees.

Along the Rio Grande River in the Valley, we have some 270 miles of levees and numerous drainage structures and floodways that are meant to protect our citizens from flooding. All of this levee infrastructure, every bit of the levees, is not city, it is not county, it is Federal infrastructure.

The United States Section of the International Boundary and Water Commission (IBWC) is a tiny Federal agency based in El Paso, Texas, and it reports through the Department of State, through Secretary Condoleezza Rice here in Washington, to the President. Its director is appointed by the President. It was originally set up to define and protect the boundary between the United States and Mexico. Now it has responsibility for seeing that the levees under its jurisdiction protect the Valley's growing population, which includes one of the poorest populations in the United States.

Only the Federal Government can change, alter, or improve these levees. The dozens of local governments, the businesses, the homes of tens of thousands of American citizens are all at risk when the Federal administration shirks its responsibility to protect them as this one has done.

In New Orleans, we saw levees breached at a terrible cost, suffered by many, but a cost particularly borne by the poorest citizens of that city.

In the Valley, as in New Orleans, the Federal Government cannot justifiably claim that ``nobody anticipated a breach of the levees,'' as President Bush mistakenly declared on September 1 of this year, in offering his first of many excuses about the Katrina disaster.

In June of 2003, the IBWC itself, the Federal agency in the Bush Administration with the expertise and the sole responsibility for these levees along the Rio Grande, issued its report entitled ``Hydraulic Model of the Rio Grande and Floodways.''

It concluded that a 100-year flood, the type that could be produced by a hurricane with far less punch than Katrina, will result in the levee system being overwhelmed along many river miles at a variety of locations. This is the type of flooding that will shut down the McAllen-Miller International Airport, affect the international trade zone and bridges, and will inundate thousands of homes and businesses, endangering people across the Rio Grande Valley.

Nor do the similarities between the Rio Grande Valley and New Orleans end with the deficient preparation of the infrastructure that this bill fails to address. After Katrina, we learned that positions at the Federal Emergency Management Agency, FEMA, were filled with political cronies. Less well-known, but equally important, indeed more important to my constituents in Texas, are the findings that were made this year concerning President Bush's appointment of the Commissioner of the U.S. International Boundary and Water Commission, who recently departed. His appointee, who had responsibility for these levees and the protection of thousands of Texans, was criticized earlier this year by the General Accountability Office as ``rewarding long-time friends with ranking positions'' and ``provoking a hemorrhage of qualified personnel, personnel who protect against floods, monitor the safety of water, and assure back-up electrical power for Texas.''

Sounds a lot like the great job that Ol' Brownie did. And as the painful footage of Katrina shows, the price to be paid by Americans is grave indeed.

We know that sea levels are rising around the world, and the Gulf of Mexico has entered a cycle of intensified hurricane activity: Katrina, Wilma, Alpha, Beta, so many hurricanes we ran out of names for them. But for the grace of God, had they headed toward the mouth of the Rio Grande River, we would be seeing on the evening news flood victims in Hidalgo, in McAllen and in Mission being rescued. Yet, despite repeated calls for action, the Bush Administration did not add one thin dime to its construction budget in this bill to protect our Valley residents.

This is a chart right out of the IBWC's own report showing by color, 6 feet in purple, 6 feet over the top of the existing levees with a major flood. Five to 6 feet, all this red, 2 to 3 feet over the top of the levees. What is going to happen to the City of Hidalgo? What is going to happen to all the businesses and homes and tens of thousands of people who live in this area if we do not provide an adequate amount of funding to repair the levees?

This bill approves every dime the President asked for, but he is failing the Texas Valley. He is failing to learn the lessons of Katrina and protect the people of the Rio Grande Valley, who live in the poorest statistical metropolitan area, McAllen-Mission, in the entire United States. The Federal Government is failing to meet its responsibility to provide them the security that the people of New Orleans did not have.

Madam Speaker, I thank the Gentleman for yielding me this time, and I thank him and the Chairman of the Committee for their long labors on what is a $57.8 billion bill.

My concern is with what many might view as a mere footnote to this bill, the budget of a tiny federal agency that gets not billions, but only $5.3 million, with an ``m,'' out of this huge budget. But the budget of that tiny federal agency and a whim of nature are all that stand between tens of thousands of Texans along the southern tip of our country and disaster.

These are hard-working people along the Lower Rio Grande River Valley in one of the economically poorest parts of this country. But the threat of disaster to them is every bit as real as what we saw played out on our screens in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina in New Orleans.

This bill fails to deal adequately with that problem. I believe that the Committee recognized the Valley's need in the language that it added to the report that accompanies this bill. I cannot fault the Committee, though I do not agree with the result. This report includes the same dollar amount that the House had already approved and the Senate had already approved, which is 100 cents on the dollar of what President Bush requested. But the amount of money requested is not an adequate amount to protect people from a very real danger.

As the conferees noted in the report, and I quote: ``The conferees recommend that the Commission increase funding for the Lower Rio Grande Valley Flood Control Project above the $2,200,000 contained in the President's budget request. Studies by the U.S. Section of the IBWC conclude that the Rio Grande Valley levees are deficient in height, geologically flawed, and structurally unsound. The conferees expect the administration in the upcoming budget cycle to request sufficient funds to address these needs.''

And while that language is important, it does not provide the dollars necessary to fix this problem. It is language similar to that adopted by the Lower Rio Grande Valley Development Council, composed of all the governments in the three counties at the very tip of the United States where it borders Mexico.

In asking for $10 million in construction moneys every year, they said, ``Without necessary improvements, the levee system could be overtopped or fail structurally at various locations, leaving thousands homeless and creating extensive property and environmental damage to the region.''

After a period of cronyism at the IBWC, well-documented by the General Accountability Office, President Bush replaced his first failed appointee with an acting appointee. We had the USIBWC's Acting Commissioner down in the Rio Grande Valley last month. He said in a meeting there that he needed $10 million a year, not for the agency, but for construction, and a total of $125 million over 10 or 11 years in order to solve this problem. Madam Speaker, $2.2 million is about a fifth of what is needed in construction every year for the next 10 years if we are going to resolve this problem.

Earlier this year, we had Hurricane Emily. It hit about 35, 50 miles south of the area that I am talking about. It was a mere Category 1, yet it caused extensive flooding along some of these levees. As all of America knows, we have had so many hurricanes this year, we have run out of names, and it is forecast to only get worse this year and the year after that as we go through this cycle in the Gulf of one hurricane after another.

If we have even a category 3 hurricane, we will overtop these levees along 38 miles. If we have a Hurricane 5 like Katrina, it will be 102 miles that are overwhelmed. This is just one small section along the Rio Grande.

But I just want it clear that this administration and this Congress has in living color the recommendations of their own agency showing where the levees will be topped up to 9 feet over the existing levees; 6, 5, 4, 3 feet, whatever it is, it is an amount of water pouring over these levees. While we can talk about categories of hurricanes and whether it is a 5 or a 4 or a 3 and follow the tracking on television, what we have had from this Administration since Katrina for the poor people of the Rio Grande Valley is a ``Category 0'' effort, and it is that effort that has to be changed either in the supplemental appropriation they currently have under consideration, or in next year's appropriations bill, because every day we wait, exposes tens of thousands of people to considerable danger.

Madam Speaker, will the gentleman yield?

Madam Speaker, the language the gentleman quotes is the same language that I quote. I applaud the committee for adding that in there.

The problem is that the total amount of money for the agency was not changed, and to get any more than $2.2 million, they will be taking it out of existing projects that they have on the Colorado River. And the head of the agency is saying they need five times as much as the President asked for.

Yes, I think it is in writing. It is in the cost estimates or in the reports that have already been forwarded up to the State Department. But I do not think they were ever forwarded to the committee.

I applaud the committee concerns about this and the language that they added, and I am glad the gentleman will be submitting further letters and the like, because this is a small part of this budget, but a big problem for our folks. And they get out of this, even if they go from $2.2 to $3 million, only about a third of what the agency itself says is needed, not just this year, but each year for the next 10 years.

If the gentleman will yield, let me just assure him I have done all those things short of walking in Mexico because this only covers the cost of repairing the U.S. side of the levees. It does not concern any repairs to the Mexican side.

Well, Mexico, I think if they see that we are moving to raise the levees on the American side, they will be caused to take action on the Mexican side. This is simply, the cost that I have talked about is only the U.S. side of the levees. It is not the Mexican side of the levees. That is their responsibility to act on that.

That is why I say, naturally, the kind of budget challenges they face in Mexico, if they say we are raising our side to meet this flood problem, we believe that they will act to raise it on their side also.

I accept that challenge already having done most of that. It has not just been my request, but the request of three of us, four of us, actually, from the Rio Grande Valley to the President and to the State Department, and we have been unable to get any movement from them. And I understand we need their cooperation in order for your committee to move forward. Thank you for your interest.

Mr. Speaker, this bill provides very limited administrative flexibility, essentially just legalizing what a handful of States are already doing with foster care. But this tiny finger of flexibility given with one hand is taken away with both hands from the same abused and neglected children in the companion legislation that this same group of Republican leaders has so enthusiastically endorsed in our committee and which it plans to foist off on the American people this week.

So extreme is the Republican demand for tax breaks and more tax breaks and more tax breaks for those at the top of the economic ladder and the multinational corporations that will not pay their fair share of the tax burden that Republicans have demanded that the same abused and neglected children that they say they would help today, would be the ones to pay the tab for these tax cuts.

Those across America who realize that we need to be doing more for children who are physically or sexually

abused by a parent, or merely abandoned without food or support by a parent who is caught up in a drug habit, need to know that those kids need more help. They need to know that the companion legislation the Ways and Means Committee has approved for consideration in the full House this week would deny those children almost $600 million of federal support.

Most of this is taken from battered, abused, and neglected children who found a new home with a loving family member. Think about it: a grandparent who realizes their child has gone astray and they take their abused, neglected grandchild back into their family to try to give them a chance.

The only federal court, an appellate court, that has interpreted our existing federal foster care law in the case, Rosales v. Thompson, issued a decision that is so clear that the Bush administration chose not to appeal it to the United States Supreme Court. However, the Bush administration has said it will not apply the court's decision to the law in this country outside a number of Western States. Under the court's ruling, abused, neglected, and battered children who seek the safety and stability of a home with grandparents, or other relatives who are not formally licensed as foster caregivers are eligible to receive, quite wisely, federal foster care assistance.

The Republicans are now saying we should deny funding to these grandparents and other relatives that care. The would tear apart tens of thousands of families and disregard the very purpose of the Adoption and Safe Families Act, a Federal law that directs a preference be given to placements with relatives.

For some reason, after endless speeches proclaiming a concern for ``family values,'' the only families that count are those that are sitting up at the top of the economic ladder, while the families that have taken in an abused and neglected child are left behind. This companion bill is the so-called ``reconciliation'' which really ought to be spelled W-R-E-C-K, ``wreck,'' because it is a wreck for these tens of thousands of loving and caring families. It is speeding through this Congress and speaking volumes about how much ``family values'' really count up here.

To say that the Republicans would literally take food from the mouths of babes to fund tax breaks for the rich might sound like partisan rhetoric, but if you watch this Congress this week, that is exactly what you will see.

This very year, President Bush's Office of Management and Budget rated the federal child support program among the highest and most efficient programs in the Federal Government; and yet, in the same bill in which they plan to take away about $600 million from families caring for abused and neglected children, they plan to deny federal support for child support enforcement, as amazing as that might seem.

There has been a 75 percent increase in child support collections from deadbeat dads since fiscal year 1996, adding up to $21.2 billion, a big figure, but it translates, just like these monies for the foster families, into hundreds of thousands of small amounts that put food on the table and allow kids to have the clothes to go to school.

Apparently, the folks that are running this place, the Administration and the House of Representatives do not know what it is like to be a single mom out there trying to get kids through school or to be a single grandmother having to start a second family to care for a grandchild while trying to keep them out of trouble and struggling to put food on the table. A few hundred dollars a month--whether it is from a deadbeat dad or through this foster care program for abused and neglected families--can make a big difference. That little bit of money makes the difference between a child who has a future and a child who ends up just like the abused and neglected parent that placed them in this horrible situation.

And, in the same bill that is a companion to this, House Republicans go even farther than cutting off support for programs that address deadbeat dads and abused and neglected children, they also cut child care funding to the tune of about $500 billion. Those funds are cut from those who are struggling to get off welfare and will result in 270,000 fewer children of poor working families being able to get access to child care in the next 5 years.

This Republican reduction in our federal investment in children will cost us millions and billions of dollars in the long run, but, most importantly, it will deny too many children in this country the opportunity to achieve their full, God-given potential. It is wrong. And while this minor piece of uncontested legislation ought to be approved today, we need to reject this attempt by extremists in this Congress to place all the burden of their fiscal mismanagement on the most vulnerable people in our society.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to claim the time of the gentleman from California (Mr. George Miller).

Mr. Speaker, it has been a long, long, long slog, whether measured in lives or limbs lost.

So many days with no real plan for peace, no real plan for security for our families, so many tears shed by too many families. Too little armor and too little equipment for those who were too quickly placed in harm's way.

Over 2,000 fallen American heroes. Over 15,000 wounded Americans, and tens of thousands of Iraqi civilians who have died in this conflict. The administration is attempting to relieve itself from the duty to offer any strategy at all, even as it constantly recasts the purpose of its tragic go-it-alone invasion.

Like the President's wishful, staged declaration of ``Mission Accomplished'' on that aircraft carrier 2\1/2\ years ago, the Vice President blithely states that the insurgency is in its ``final throes.'' Well, each day's news shows how out of touch he continues to be.

But for this administration, any sense of genuine accountability is certainly in it final throes. Its credibility is certainly in its final throes, and the patience of the American people with an administration that lacks any plans for success in Iraq is in its final throes.

And with each wasted week, other families with a son or daughter, with a husband or a wife in Iraq, who are seeing their first or second or maybe even their third tour of duty, they wait, they hope, they pray, and some toss and turn in the middle of the night fearing that knock on the door will ultimately come.

All who have fallen are heroes, and all who have lost their limbs, their lives, their sight, or their way of life because of this very unnecessary conflict are heroes to whom our Nation owes an enormous debt.

But we do not honor the memory of these fallen by building permanent bases in Iraq, by licensing the CIA or others to torture in the name of the United States, or by calling on the same military families to again and again send their loved ones into danger, even while the richest corporations and the wealthiest Americans are not asked to sacrifice a dime, but are rewarded with tax breaks and no-bid contracts and crony appointments in this administration.

More than any grim statistics can reveal, each of these unique losses is measured by the milestones of life missed by loved ones: births and baptisms, ball games and holidays, graduations, weddings, grandchildren, the natural journey of life, cut short or completely sacrificed in this administration's war of choice.

And even as this morass in Iraq worsens, more than 90 percent of the American deaths have come about since President Bush declared an end to major combat operations. The administration's plan, if it ever even had one, has simply failed to evolve. So the budget deficit soars, gas prices rocket, billions upon billions of taxpayer dollars that are needed here are sent there, and the numbing count of dead and wounded continues to soar.

Beyond the power of any prosecutor, it is history that will indict this administration.

Mr. Speaker, I applaud the gentlewoman for her very important motion to instruct. It is a motion to instruct that is designed to prevent an ideological experiment being conducted on some of the most vulnerable people in our society. It is about what has gone wrong in Texas, but it is much more than that because we are about to have a very bad precedent established that will spread across this country affecting the old, the poor, the hungry, the victims of Katrina, and the victims who are left behind.

As all the Nation saw in the disaster that was the Federal response to Katrina, a hurricane is not the only time that working poor people in this country get left behind. The Texas experiment on poor people suggests that the answer to food security that food stamps provide is to close one out of every four offices that people go to to assess their food stamp needs, to fire a significant number of public employees who have expertise in this area, and to suggest to old and poor and hungry people that what they need to do instead of turning to a public servant is to log on the Internet.

Yes, that is actually what the State of Texas is suggesting. And they offer to these poor people, not all of whom are literate in English or Spanish much less literate in the language of e-commerce, they offer them an alternative, which is the one that so many American families have faced, to dial in and be put on hold, much as the victims of Katrina were put on hold. You punch in a number and then you get referred to another number and you get to wait and wait and wait; and maybe eventually this company, Accenture, which chose to establish its base not in America but in Bermuda so it could dodge as much of its tax responsibility as it possibly could, that this company will substitute for a face-to-face evaluation.

I represent the poorest county in the United States, Starr County, Texas, the poorest statistical metropolitan area, McAllen-Mission; and a lot of people along the way through the Mesquite trees up to Austin, Texans, who depend on food stamps for enough nourishment to get their kids to school, or to be able to survive as a senior. These folks are going to be directly affected.

Currently, they are able to go in, and certainly along the border area if they feel more comfortable in Spanish, to talk face-to-face with someone who has expertise in this area, to talk with them and have that experienced public servant assess what their needs are and ensure that taxpayers are protected, and that there is not fraud, and ensure that their needs are fully satisfied.

Now those folks in Hebbronville, San Diego, George West, and Lockhart are being told go to the Internet or go to some long-distance number because you will no longer be able to assess your needs on the local level. And in McAllen, Mission, and Austin, staff will be cut by 50 percent.

That is why, Mr. Speaker, I have been joined by 10 of my Texas colleagues in questioning this scheme and raising questions to the U.S. Department of Agriculture. And I will provide for the Record a report from the Center on Public Policy Priorities in Austin, an excellent report, under its director, Judge F. Scott McCown, and with the able participation of Celia C. Hagert, analyzing this, as well as an editorial that is on point in today's Houston Chronicle.

[From the Houston Chronicle, Oct. 19, 2005]

An Untested Plan

Texas Health and Human Services officials continue to

discuss with their federal counterparts at the Department of

Agriculture an unprecedented billion dollar welfare

privatization contract. It delegates certification and

enrollment of recipients for programs including food stamps,

Medicaid and the Children's Health Insurance Program known as

CHIP to a private firm, Accenture LLP.

There are a number of troubling features in this deal that

justify delaying its implementation while it is tested on a

small scale around the state.

The pact allows Accenture to set up a handful of calling

centers in Texas where operators would help applicants

navigate the federal and state aid bureaucracy. Meanwhile,

Texas Health and Human Services will lay off thousands of

food stamp workers and close more than a quarter of state-run

eligibility offices around the state. In their place,

Accenture plans to hire staff at low hourly rates while

depending on community organizations for volunteers to screen

applicants, fill out Web-based forms and drive clients to the

remaining offices for certification.

Six Texas Democratic members of Congress have written Eric

Bost, U.S. undersecretary for food, nutrition and consumer

services, to express concerns. They point out that closing

state offices would require longer travel distances for

clients, primarily the elderly, children and the working

poor, many of whom do not speak English. They charge that the

expectation of a million hours of volunteer service to make

the plan work is unrealistic and ``would place an

unacceptable and perhaps impossible burden on these

organizations, many of whom are volunteer-run themselves.''

According to the lawmakers, including Chet Edwards of Waco,

Eddie Bernice Johnson of Dallas, and Lloyd Doggett of Austin,

the current plan to launch the new system statewide in 11

months ``is a reckless timetable that does not allow time to

test or evaluate the new technology or its impact on food

stamp recipients.''

The U.S. Senate already has banned such mass privatizations

of food stamp programs. Similar legislation is pending in the

House. Texas stands to lose federal food assistance funding

if it goes forward with the Accenture contract and the

privatization prohibition becomes law.

The issue of conflict of interest by state officials in the

awarding of the contract has been raised in the past year in

Houston Chronicle reports. The HHS chief information officer

involved in pre-award negotiations was a former employee of a

firm partnering with Accenture, and the former HHS deputy

commissioner who helped develop the bidding procedures

subsequently went to work for Accenture. IBM, which also

sought the contract, has sued the state agency alleging bias

in the awarding of the pact.

The Austin-based Center for Public Policy Priorities is

urging Texas lawmakers to support a pilot program to test the

Accenture system before putting it into effect statewide. As

staffer Celia Hagert points out, the issue involves access to

life supporting benefits for the most vulnerable Texans and

is particularly important for Harris County where 13 percent

of Texas food stamp recipients reside.

There are plenty of unanswered questions about the awarding

of the Accenture contract and its feasibility to justify a

delay in implementing this radical revamping of the way Texas

administers social services. Nothing is put at risk by

testing the company's ability to adequately fulfill its

contract on a small scale. There's plenty to be lost in

liquidating a state-run system that has worked well in the

past and in potentially imperiling the health and welfare of

tens of thousands of people.

Madam Speaker, calling this partisan Republican scheme ``bipartisan'' reminds me of those tinhorn dictators who attempt to mask their authoritarian regimes by calling their countries ``democratic.

We need an independent citizens commission like the 9/11 Commission to explore the failures of every level and every branch of Government. The administration and its House Republican cohorts oppose this independent citizens commission just as they opposed the 9/11 Commission and just as the administration erected roadblocks to that Commission's work at every turn.

I say to them: Save the stonewall to rebuild the levees. With thousands stranded, this administration would not lead, and now it wants its buddies in the Congress to lead the cover-up.

As with the formation of the 9/11 Commission, if enough Americans get informed and demand a genuine, independent investigation, we can end this Republican charade.

Our safety demands real accountability. With such incompetence and indifference, what reason is there to believe that what we have witnessed might not happen in our own backyard, that the fate of those we saw in New Orleans would not be the fate of other people, be they poor folks in the Rio Grande Valley from hurricane, flooding or any other disaster, be it human-caused or natural or both? Without knowing objectively what, why, and how the rescue mission failed, there is no way to ensure that the horror that we have seen would not be repeated in our own communities.

There is nothing to prevent these folks from having all of the congressional investigations, all of the budget hearings that they want to have. What we are asking for today is that you not have a sham ``bipartisan'' commission. You bring in the citizens from around the country and have the kind of independent inquiry that led to a best- selling book, by the 9/11 Commission.

We owe it to the dead, to the displaced, to all who could become the next victims of a catastrophe to support a true and genuine, independent inquiry.

Mr. Speaker, it is possible to enjoy the many benefits of trade extolled here tonight without having a race to the bottom on working conditions. It is possible to enjoy the benefits of expanded trade without endangering our environment. It is possible to enjoy trade without yielding our sovereignty by granting foreigners more legal rights than Americans will have under this agreement--special preferences that these foreigners can use to undermine our health and safety laws. It is possible to have a modern 21st-century trade policy, which recognizes that we cannot measure the benefits of trade solely on how many widgets move across the border while forgetting what happens to the workers and the air we breathe and the water that we drink.

But it is impossible to accomplish any of this when the negotiators for our side come from an administration that cares as little about workers in America as those in Honduras, an administration that views the environment as just something to exploit.

I am against CAFTA because, basically, I am against protectionism. I reject an administration that protects polluters, that protects corporate wrongdoers, that protects those who think that arrogance alone can represent an effective foreign policy. I am proud to stand with the NAACP and LULAC and the League of Conservation Voters and so many Americans, who say we need a new trade policy, not yet another failed foreign policy from a narrow-minded administration.

Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the amendment, but I do not believe it is a good enough cure to make this sick legislation well.

I believe that most of what America needs to know about the PATRIOT Act is reflected in its deceptive title. Its authors deliberately designed a name to question the patriotism of anyone who questions them. Are you for patriotism, or are you against patriotism? Are you with America, or are you against America?

The American patriots who declared our independence in 1776 were true patriots who risked their lives in order to secure our liberties.

True patriots defend liberty.

Real patriots do not surrender our freedom, unless there is absolutely no other way to protect our lives.

Patriots demand accountability, restraint, and judicial review of encroachments on the freedoms that make our country unique.

While some portions of this proposed renewal of the PATRIOT Act strike the right balance, other provisions simply strike out. We must balance the demands of keeping our Nation secure with the freedoms that we cherish. We must not sacrifice our democracy in a misguided attempt to save it.

Wrapping this collection of misguided policies under the rubric ``the PATRIOT Act'' is a true mark of how really weak the underlying arguments are for this measure.

Surely we can secure our families' safety without becoming more like a police state, which would deny the freedoms that define us as Americans.

The dangerous road to government oppression begins one step at a time. It does not all happen at once. This bill, I believe, is a step in the wrong direction, a step in the direction of suppressing our freedoms. I believe that it

is very important that we patriotically preserve our liberties and freedoms as Americans by rejecting the measure in its current form.

Mr. Speaker, I submit the following eulogies honoring, J.J. Jake Pickle the Doggett Special Order.

(By Peggy Pickle)

Austin, TX, June 22.--Good afternoon! Hot tamale!!! This is

not going to be a sad funeral. This is a celebration of a

remarkable life. I'm Jake and Beryl's daughter, Peggy. My

father asked me to speak on behalf of our family at his

memorial service.

Everyone in this sanctuary knows what kind of man Jake

Pickle was. Most of you are familiar with his life and

career: born in West Texas in 1913, attended the University

of Texas, served in the Navy during World War II, had a

lifetime love affair with politics which included 31 years

representing the 10th Congressional District of Texas in the

United States House of Representatives. He had two wives,

three children, six grandchildren, and four great-

grandchildren.

He was a tolerant and demanding man. Tolerant because he

didn't believe in forcing

his opinions on others. Demanding because he had high

standards for himself and those close to him.

It is trite to say that a person left this world a better

place, but in his case it is true. Hardly a day goes by

without my being stopped and told, ``Your father helped me

when my Social Security benefits dried up,'' or ``When my son

was injured in Vietnam, Jake Pickle cut through the red tape

and got him home.'' What Daddy loved about serving in

Congress was the clout he used to get things done. He

considered his staff family. Together they accomplished great

things.

But my assignment today is to talk about Jake Pickle from

the standpoint of his family. He was the fourth child in a

tight-knit family of seven whose values and work ethic

defined the rest of his life. Jake's sister Judith and

brother Joe and their families are in this audience, along

with the families of deceased sisters Janice and Jeanette.

The familial bonds which sustained Jake as a child taught him

to treat people and relationships with respect.

Jake and Beryl both endured the loss of their first

spouse--my mother, Sugar, in 1952, and Beryl's husband,

Graham McCarroll, in 1948. In 1960, Beryl and Jake married

and began their own family: Jake, Beryl, Dick, Peggy, Graham

and a goofy collie dog named Ike. It was a semi-normal life

for two years--and then Jake up and announced he was running

for the U.S. Congress!

Having Jake Pickle for a husband and father was an

interesting experience. He was gone a lot. Except in cases of

family emergency, work came first. He was ``On Duty'' every

day except Christmas, and even then if a constituent had

trouble. He believed that public officials are answerable to

The People 24-hours-a-day, so our telephone number was listed

in the phone book. The phone rang all the time, sometimes at

3 a.m., when the constituent was drunk or had an ax to grind.

Jake loved to work the crowd. One of his favorite places to

eat was Luby's Cafeteria because there was that long line of

people whose hands he could shake. We all know Jake was tight

with a buck. Once he said to me, ``If you've got some money,

I'll take you to Luby's.''

Sometimes Daddy worked the crowd when I least expected it.

One morning 20 years ago, I drove out to Dillards in Barton

Creek Mall to buy, of all things, a Weed Whacker. I got there

early so I could cut my grass before it got hot, so I was

there when the doors opened. I rode the escalator up to the

second floor, picked out a Weed Whacker, and took it to the

register.

By now it was maybe 10:05 a.m., there were few people in

the store, and nobody but me in the appliance department.

When I wrote the check and gave it to the clerk, he looked at

my name on the check and said, ``Pickle? Are you related to

Jake Pickle?'' I said I was.

``Well by golly,'' the guy said. ``Mr. Pickle was here this

morning, you just missed him.''

``But how?'' I stammered. ``The store just opened!''

``Oh, he addressed our employee meeting at 8 a.m.,'' the

clerk said. ``Everybody ate in the lounge. That man sure

seems to like his job!''

So I paid for my Weed Whacker and left. It was funny, but

it also gave me an eerie feeling that Daddy could be

anywhere, and probably was. He was always ten steps ahead,

with the rest of us scrambling to catch up.

Jake was quick to make friends and quick to forgive. It was

a wonderful trait for a politician because he made few

enemies and nursed no grudges. Both Democrats and Republicans

voted for him and worked with him; Jake wasn't partisan, he

just wanted to get things done. If at times it was hard to

have a legend in the family, it also made us proud. We knew

that he was the Gold Standard. The usual temptations like

money, women, alcohol and power were no match for Jake's

addiction: work. Growing up surrounded by politics, I cannot

describe the comfort of knowing that no matter what nastiness

was abroad, I would not open the newspaper and read my

father's name tainted by scandal.

Daddy was a great motivator, and not only about

Congressional business, but about Jake Pickle business: his

bees, his garden, his pear relish, his longhorns, his stumps

that needed rooting at Niederwald. He rallied people with

such enthusiasm that it was only later, when you went home,

that you realized your aching back and calloused hands were

all you had to show for his project.

Two of Daddy's other projects concerned Christmas. For

years our family had a ``Hats Off to Christmas'' tradition on

Christmas morning, as Jake and Beryl distributed hats they

had gathered during the year while on junkets--oops!, I mean

``fact finding tours.'' During the 1990s, Daddy, dressed as

Santa, arrived in increasingly outrageous ways: in Don Cook's

Model A Ford, in a fire truck, on a donkey, in a sidecar

motorcycle. He always claimed he wanted to arrive by climbing

down a rope ladder from a hovering helicopter, but thank God,

he never tried it.

Jake didn't care much about stuff--life's fancy trappings--

and looking ridiculous never occurred to him. In 1961, when

Jake had just been appointed Texas Employment Commissioner,

he often drove Dick's used car to work at the fine new TEC

office in the Capitol Complex. Dick's '52 Ford was rusty

gold, with a '55 front grill, '53 headlights and two bent

antennas, but to the new TEC commissioner, it was damn fine

transportation.

Years ago in Washington, Daddy had a vivid dream in which

he was being chased by a bear. In his sleep, he hollered and

flew out of bed, cracking his head on the bedside table.

Beryl woke to find him holding his bleeding nose, but happy

he had outrun the bear. For weeks, my father went to work on

Capitol Hill with black eyes that faded to green and yellow.

Cheerfully, he told everybody about his dream--and his narrow

escape. I always wondered what people thought. Probably oh,

that's just Jake!

He was a stickler for details, always carrying around a

piece of paper and a pen in his coat pocket so he could make

notes. It will surprise no one that he helped plan this

funeral. He was habitually late because he was always coming

from another event--and on his way to the next one. His

memory was phenomenal. When he ran into a constituent, he

remembered their name, their spouse or where they worked.

He loved his family and friends, ice cream, a good story,

playing the harmonica, Christmas, the University of Texas,

this church, the principles of Democracy, banging on the

piano, the hymns of his childhood, dominoes. . . . and a

thousand other things. He was innately curious and asked

questions constantly. He was a very tough old bird. He

endured treatment for cancer which at his age should have

killed him, but he hunkered down and got through it. He won

remission from cancer an incredible five times. Being

weakened irritated him; it cut into his schedule! Right up to

the end, he found life interesting. Mom and Pop Pickle

whispered in his ear: he always tried to do the right thing.

After my father retired from Congress, and during the years

of his decline, many of the people in this Sanctuary--and

others not present today--came to visit Jake and Beryl. If he

worried that once out of the public eye, he would be

forgotten, he needn't have. On behalf of our family, we thank

you. Your visits, laughter, advice and friendship meant the

world to them.

My father's legacy is considerable. There are buildings,

schools, research facilities, an airport runway and children

named after him. Legislation he helped pass changed this

country for the better. He counted the mighty among his

friends, but treated no person better than another.

But of all his legacies, the one I'm most grateful for is

his allowing me to be my own person. He raised me with easy

affection instead of a preconceived idea of how a little girl

should act. As an adult I have come to understand that the

worst thing you can do to any person, especially a child, is

to stifle their spirit. Jake Pickle made you want to do your

best. I can think of no greater accolade for any person.

I enjoyed a 59-year relationship with my father. Because he

was ill for a long time and I witnessed his suffering, I've

already grieved for him. I do not grieve for him today.

Instead, I am proud of the person that he was and the life he

tried to live, right up to the end.

We have other speakers today. As Daddy would say, ``Keep it

short. People need to get back to work!''

Thank you for being here to help us say goodbye.

Eulogy for Congressman J.J. Pickle

(By Paul Hilgers)

Austin, TX, June 22.--Surely you would all know that it is

a great honor to be asked to represent the people who worked

on Mr. Pickle's staff.

Once you were on the staff, it was a lifetime appointment.

Whether you were on the payroll or not, it did not matter. We

work for him because we love and respect him.

Like all Pickle staffers, I never knew how hard I could

work in one day, or how many people I could help in one day

until I started working with Jake Pickle.

We are a proud bunch, those of us who worked in the

``Pickle Factory'' as we called it. I would like to ask all

of you who served on Mr. Pickle's staff to stand. There are

many more who could not be here today and a few were already

doing advance work in heaven.

Those who worked in his office understood the importance of

their job. Whether it was the District Director, the

Administrative Assistant who ran the office in Washington,

the legislative assistant, the caseworker, or the person who

was on the real front line answering the phone and greeting

people, he made you feel that what you were doing was

critical. He knew that it all had to work together to

properly serve the public. He valued the role we each played.

We have a bond that will never be broken, built upon his

singular dedication to public service. It is a bond built

upon the common experience of knowing this very uncommon man

who was so proud of the service we provided together.

We are also bound together by the great Pickle stories.

Now, Dr. Cunningham, I need to mention just a couple that

escaped your remarks about his time at the University. Like

the time he got caught stealing turnips from one of his

professor's garden. And, while he did love being in Little

Campus, there were stories about nailing their roommates

furniture upside down to the ceiling. There are so many

stories, way too many stories to tell.

So, when the staffers get together, only a word or a phrase

is needed to spark memories of the experiences we shared:

squeaky pickles, the county black books, 1000 acres of

beautiful topsoil, the Pickle Float, full tank

of gas and an empty bladder, retrieving that Stetson, the dry

run, the Virgil Conn story, playing the harmonica and the

piano, the pump organ.

There were the annual episodes of serving Venison Chili to

the entire House of Representatives every Texas Independence

Day, or feeding catfish from the Inks Lake Fish Hatchery to

the Interior Appropriations Subcommittee.

And stories about parades! Parades with and without squeaky

pickles, cars that worked, and cars that did not. Once, there

was a car with a stick shift that Ms. Pickle had to drive.

Always a convertible so he could be seen and so he could

throw his pickles. Parades where he was the Grand Marshall

and the first car in the parade, and the one where he

followed the horses, after his third parade of the day.

At the end of the parade route--Mr. Pickle would stop the

car, get out and walk both sides of the route personally

shaking every hand and handing out more squeaky pickles.

Most of all he was fun--he was fun to be with.

Our stories are his lasting legacy to us--which is fitting

because he was the master storyteller. He knew how to use

humor to communicate his message. He would make people laugh,

just before he would make them think about a serious issue

facing our Nation or our community.

Staffers who took Mr. Pickle to an event were asked two

questions just as we arrived: (1) ``what is my key message'',

and (2) ``tell me something funny to say.'' We had the old

regulars--the Claude Pepper story, the Round Rock story,

Dollars for Democrats, but not a Nickel for Pickle story.

Many times he would turn to Mrs. Pickle for some of his best

material.

We worked hard but his sense of humor made the job

enjoyable. But, no one worked harder than he did.

He would start the week with a 6:20 a.m. flight to

Washington on Monday mornings. He would put in 15 hour days

in Committee hearings, holding meetings with people from the

District or from associations and businesses, casting

countless votes on the floor of the House, working the

phones, signing the mail, reviewing legislation, and then

attending 2-4 receptions before going home to Ms. Beryl.

He would keep that schedule everyday until Friday about

12:00 noon when he would fly back to Austin at 5:00 p.m. We

would go immediately to the office where he would sign all

the mail that had been prepared by the District staff that

week. He signed virtually every piece of mail that went out

of his Office. This is how he kept up with what was happening

to his constituents.

We would often sign the mail on Friday and see one of those

constituents at an event that weekend. He would tell them how

their case was going, or that we had just sent off the

letter. That made an impression on people--they knew that he

cared.

He would go to Church on Sunday and we would have some

event that evening before I had to get him back to the

Airport on Monday mornings. No matter how tired I would get,

spending the weekend with Mr. Pickle would re-energize you.

His love of public service and his energy was contagious.

He campaigned even harder! He was relentless. On weekends,

we would have to have three shifts of staff just to keep up!

So many times people would say . . . he is the only

Democrat I ever voted for . . . or, I don't always agree with

him, but I always voted for him. He wanted every vote. He

earned every vote.

Just one example: a person came to him and asked for help

in finding a job--just one of thousands who asked for help.

Mr. Pickle sent out the man's resume a number of times who

always seemed to be a finalist for the job, but without

success. After several months of writing letters and

requesting interviews, I asked Mr. Pickle one day while I was

driving him home if he had not done enough and why he was

trying so hard to help this man?

He looked at me and said simply, ``Paul, the man asked me

for help. Is there any other reason that I need to try and

help him?'' He loved helping people.

Mr. Pickle represented the people of Central Texas to the

Federal government, but he was also a representative of the

Federal government to the people of Central Texas. He loved

welcoming people from the District to Washington. No one gave

a tour of the Capital like a Jake Pickle tour of the Capital.

He took people in places where you just are not supposed to

go. He made the Capital come alive with its history.

He had a vision and a love for Central Texas that no one

could match. He was our strongest lobbyist and he lobbied for

so many things in addition to UT and SEMATECH. Boggy Creek, a

Wildlife Refuge, airports (big ones and small ones), the

right of way for MoKan. He worked on behalf of the Austin

Housing Authority, the Boy Scouts, Veterans Outpatient

Clinic, IRS Service Center, the LCRA, Bergstrom Air Force

Base, Flood Control on the Upper San Marcos Watershed, the

Visitors Center at the LBJ National Park, the Gary Job Corps,

and literally a thousand other things for Central Texans.

Yes, Mr. Pickle worked hard for Central Texas, but he was

one of Washington's most respected members of Congress. He

believed in having personal relationships with other members

of Congress . . . on both sides of the aisle. This is evident

by those in attendance today.

Integrity, Honesty, Loyalty, Courage, Determination,

Tenacity--these are the qualities that he relied upon to

become a trusted legislator. These are the qualities that

defined Jake Pickle.

Of all of the legislative work and votes over 31 years, he

took the greatest pride in one of his first: the Civil Rights

Act. He would get tears in his eyes every time he told the

story when President Johnson called him the night the Civil

Rights Act passed. The President demanded that Mr. Pickle

call him no matter what time of night so he could tell him

how proud he was of his vote.

He was also proud of his work as Chairman of the Ways and

Means Subcommittees of Social Security and Oversight. His

most important legislative accomplishment was in maintaining

solvency of the Social Security system in 1983. He worked

closely with Senator Bob Dole on legislation that represented

a bi-partisan approach to the problem. He told me many times

that providing a sense of security to tens of millions of

Americans gave him a deep sense of pride and meaning.

Third, was his work in the area of pensions and pension

reform. He could see problems in the system long before they

became the crisis they are today. In fact, if not for some of

the reforms he put into place, the crisis would be much

greater today. He would say pensions are not a very

newsworthy subject, but it was damned important to families

counting on them.

The J. J. Pickle formula for success in government was

really very simple: a dedication to public service plus a

love of helping people, multiplied by a deep faith in our

system of government.

He placed the highest priority on constituent service

because he thought the highest calling of government was to

help people with their problems. He was committed to being

responsive and accessible.

Mr. Pickle often referred to the Congressional Office as

``the big buffer'' between the individual and ``big

government.'' It was the place where any citizen, rich or

poor, democrat or republican, could come for help when there

was nowhere else to turn.

Finally, Mr. Pickle had a truly unique ability to balance a

short-term immediate focus with his long-term vision. He

taught us that the best public policy always made the best

politics.

Social Security legislation was to be based upon solvency

of the system, pension policy based on protecting the pension

holders not big business, civil rights legislation based on

justice and equal protection.

Locally, his long-term vision included the need for inter-

modal transportation systems, two runways at Bergstrom

Airport, flood control systems, public power, solar energy,

habitat for endangered species and protection of water

quality, a first class research facility at UT's Balcones

Research Center that bears his name.

There is a phrase he used in some of his later speeches,

``In the Shadows of Greatness''. Referring to the portion of

MoPac north of U.S. Hwy 183 that runs between MCC and the

J.J. Pickle Research Campus--he talked about how people would

drive through that corridor not realizing that they were

actually traveling ``in the shadows of greatness'' because of

the world class research being conducted in the buildings

they were passing by.

Those of us on the Pickle staff understand a different

meaning for this phrase. We worked in the Shadows of

Greatness every day we were with him. He had an impact on

this world and particularly on this community that is--as he

predicted--already being forgotten by most.

But, his fingerprints are everywhere. His legacy of public

service, of loyalty to his University, of his commitment to

good and responsive government has been recognized through

the naming of the Federal Building, the Research Center, the

Elementary School, the Pickle Runway at Bergstrom Airport,

and even a peach orchard on Town Lake.

So, on behalf of your eternal staff . . . we will never

forget what you taught us. We will always celebrate and

treasure our time with you. My prayer is that you are

already--cheating at dominoes with all of your friends--

friends who have been waiting so long for you. I am confident

that the quality of life in heaven just got better.

God Bless You, Great Leader, for your service, for your

legacy, for giving us the opportunity work in your great

shadow!

We had a great ride!!

Mr. Speaker, today the minimum wage is at a level so low that it represents only one-third of the average hourly wage for American workers as a whole. This represents the lowest level for a minimum wage since 1949. This is not a ``living wage''; it is not even a ``minimum wage.'' It is actually a ``sub-minimum wage.'' Today, American families need a minimum wage increase because there is no maximum on gas prices at the pump. American families need a minimum wage increase because there is no maximum on the cost of prescription drugs and a doctor's visit. American families need a minimum wage increase because there is no maximum on the cost of getting a college education.

While the Bush administration sits on its hands as gas prices, tuition expenses, housing, and health care costs go through the roof, it nails the lid shut on most hard-working Americans as to how much they can earn.

Administration friends, like Halliburton, get no-bid, billion-dollar, open-ended contracts; but the administration cannot spare an extra eight quarters and a dime for those Americans that are doing some of the hardest and dirtiest work in our society.

Republicans call debate on this issue today ``out of order.'' I think it is really our economy that is out of order, when nurses who care for all of us cannot afford child care; when teachers' aids cannot put their own children through college; and when first responders, our police, fire fighters and EMT, cannot afford to live in the neighborhoods that they help protect.

Republicans have helped to make the richest richer than ever with one tax break after another and one special interest piece of legislation after another going through this House. Corporate executives have seen their compensation skyrocket, and the latest economic studies show that the gap between rich and poor in this country approaches Third World standards.

It is long past time for this Congress today, right now, to raise the minimum wage for those workers who are striving to climb up that economic ladder and share in the American Dream like the rest of us. Let us vote in favor of giving American workers and American families the minimum wage they deserve and do it today.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on this subject.

Mr. Speaker, I rise on the joyous occasion of celebrating the life and the public service of a great Texan and a great American, J.J. Jake Pickle of Austin, Texas. Congressman Pickle led a long life, 91 years. He led a long period of public service in this Congress, some 31 years.

And tonight provides an opportunity to draw attention to that public service and that life and give Members of this House an opportunity to incorporate their remarks into the Record in honor of Congressman Pickle's service.

Mr. Speaker, with the announcement just before we began tonight that there would be no votes tomorrow, and with our running now approaching 8:30 here in Washington, a number of Members have asked to have their remarks incorporated into the Congressional Record already.

I have those of the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Eddie Bernice Johnson) extolling particularly her long service with Congressman Pickle, and his important vote for the 1964 Civil Rights Act, and the statement of the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Smith) who, following redistricting, now has a portion of Travis County that he represents for us in Congress.

The gentleman from Texas (Mr. Smith), the gentleman from Texas (Mr. McCaul), the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson-Lee), and I, along with the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Thomas), the gentleman from New York (Mr. Rangel), and the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Barton), were among those who traveled to Austin, Texas, a couple of weeks ago now, for the memorial service at the First United Methodist Church.

And while all of our hearts were heavy with the loss of Congressman Pickle, I cannot say that I have ever been to a happier memorial service. Because, in addition to being a father, a grandfather, a great-grandfather and a public servant, Jake Pickle was quite a story teller and there were plenty of stories told in the course of that beautiful memorial service, which will be made a part of our Record, here as a part of the Congressional Record in this tribute.

And there were many stories told outside of that memorial service that added even more to the meaning of friends sharing the tremendous service that Jake Pickle represents.

I am reminded of it, of course, each time that I travel back to my hometown, because when you land at the Austin airport, you land on the Pickle Runway or the Lyndon B. Johnson Runway. And when you travel into the City of Austin, of course you see the University of Texas tower, very closely identified with J.J. Jake Pickle, the research center there at the University of Texas, north of the main campus named for Congressman Pickle, not far from the J.J. Pickle Elementary School, a unique concept of a community center and health center and elementary school all in one.

I noted among the tributes to Congressman Pickle, the words of the first principal of that school, Claudia Kramer Santamaria, who said, I was honored to open the J.J. Pickle Elementary School and have Jake celebrate time after time with our school community. He brightened our day with his visits, told unforgettable stories to our students, and gave endless support to our school.

The Pickle School family will continue to cherish and live out his example of genuine kindness and giving never-ending pride to our children. Jake set an example for me, not just the school community. He will remain in our hearts.

And with the new school year coming up, another generation of young students will benefit from his work in public education and the work that goes on in the St. Johns neighborhood in the Pickle Elementary School and the community health center that is located there.

You know, there are these physical monuments, and of course when I travel into my office, along with other Federal officials there in Austin, that is also the J.J. Pickle Federal Office Building. There are those many physical tributes to Congressman Pickle. But I think those tributes that are most meaningful are the ones that are reflected in the stories of his service.

Normally, when someone appears here in the House, they do so without lapel pins or labels. I chose tonight to wear my Jake green pickle button. And there were lots of those that were at the memorial service. There were many of them that were passed out through the years, along with the squeaky green pickle that was Jake's symbol that he would pass along to kind of warm up, establish a tie to someone that he was meeting for the first time.

He continued passing out those pickles even after he announced his retirement in 1994 at a gathering that I was at, as if he had an endless supply of pickles and an endless supply of energy and interest in working with people.

He really did set the standard for public service. Naturally, the Congressman could not have accomplished this without the support of a loving and supportive family. First and foremost his wife throughout this service, Beryl, there was a great photograph of her and Jake boarding a Braniff airplane for Washington, just after he was elected in 1963, coming up, I suppose, to celebrate Christmas here in Washington after he was elected in a special election there.

I knew him first as Peggy's dad, because Peggy Pickle and I were in Austin High School the same year that he was elected to Congress. Peggy gave a wonderful tribute to her father at this memorial service. And of course the even broader tribute that exists from her, in working with Jake and the many stories that are incorporated in a book that they wrote and presented together called ``Jake'' in 1997.

Peggy; her husband, Don; Dick McCarroll and his wife, Missy; Graham McCarroll and his wife, Marsha. Jake's brother. There was something I remember going to, I believe it was an 80th birthday party at the University of Texas Alumni Center a decade ago. And there were all of those people in their 80s from the Big Spring and the Roscoe area. There was something good in those big springs in that Howard County area, because many people with long lives, great stories and great service in their own way, and one of those who remains with us, our friend, the brother of Jake Pickle, Joe, his sister Judith Pickle Lancaster, and her husband Jonathan, six grandchildren, including my former neighbor Bergan Casey, four great granddaughters, including her son, Peyton Casey, the McCarrolls, the Caseys, the other expanded family of the Pickle family, sharing a special place in their hearts for all that this man contributed to the public, but for the family man that he was, and recognizing the sacrifices that they made so that he could continue to be in there day in day out working so hard for people throughout central Texas.

He was also blessed with a tremendous staff. I can remember coming here to Washington for the first time as a University of Texas student myself and the warm feeling that one got in going into Jake's office over in the Cannon Building, an office that when he first came to Washington, with Jake Pickle, he served in a more humble way, I believe as a night watchman, probably at hours like this, a job he told me he was never very good at; but he was sure good at what was happening working night and day, first for Congressman Lyndon Johnson, and later in his own right on behalf of the thousands of people across Texas that he represented.

In the Washington office, Molly Kellogg was always there at the front desk greeting people so warmly and giving them that Texas hospitality that we all relished when we came to see Jake in Washington.

In the Austin office, a similar role was played for many years by Dorothy Elliott. Here in the Austin office, Paul Hilgers headed up the team as they passed the torch to me there in Austin. And there are so many others: Sandy Dochen, Joyce Arnold, my long-time friend from the University of Texas, Cliff Drummond, Judge Bill Schroeder and Kay Schroeder from down in Lockhart, Fleetwood Richards, who was at this memorial service who served Jake early in his career in the Congress.

Kathy Morris, Michael Keeling, Minnie Lopez who was there working on behalf of veterans as Jake worked to the last day in 1994 in his office there in Austin.

Missy Mandell, George Phoenix, Reg Todd who served admirably as a district director there in the office, Ateja

Dukes who was there assisting Paul in the office, Joe Grant. So many others that have continued to serve in different ways here in Washington.

People like Janice McCullough and Barbara Pate who served here with Rob Portman on the Ways and Means Committee. One person after another who was inspired by Jake's own level of activity to be active participants in the process, not only working with Jake Pickle, but working after they completed their official tour with Jake Pickle, as indicated by the large number of Pickle staffers, both at this memorial service and at a great celebration of Jake's birthday here about a year ago. Once on this Pickle team, always a part of it.

It really is an humbling experience to try to capture just a little of the essence of this great American because while his focus was on his home folks, the folks of central Texas that he represented, he was also a great American leader. He played a pivotal role in the eighties in what was a very bitter and divisive debate over the future of Social Security. And by making some changes in the Social Security system then, he was able to bring it that additional solvency from which we continue to benefit today.

He was a person who knew a time in America when there was no Social Security system. He recognized how really important it is to provide that basic safety net for all of our seniors. His work for Social Security, for Medicare on the House Committee on Ways and Means, was extremely important to preserving that for another generation of Americans.

There is a great deal for us to learn from the work that he did at that time to try to bring people together to address Social Security problems, but to do it in a constructive way so that Social Security, the same Social Security Franklin Roosevelt signed into law could be there for generations of Americans to come. His work in oversight on the Committee on Ways and Means, investigating organized crime and its involvement with the pension fund, seeking to assure that nonprofits were complying with the law and not abusing the public trust and the public treasury are the kind of things that fill the footnotes but are extremely important to the operation of our government.

As I talk, though, with people on the Committee on Ways and Means, almost all of whom will have remarks to be inserted in the Record, they are mainly telling me the stories of Jake Pickle and how he could take a moment of divisiveness, perhaps of acrimony, and turn it around into a moment of humor. That is why a delegation of both Republicans and Democrats join together to bring honor to him at this memorial service and will be joining together as a part of this special order to reflect on their experiences with Jake Pickle.

One of Jake's longtime friends, Eric Stumberg, summarized him as a man with a heart for children and the underdog, a vision for possibilities, a great storyteller, and a wit and simple wisdom to humble the arrogant. And he always left a smile and an ideal to ponder along with that plastic Pickle.

Jake was a man of ideas and he was far ahead of his times. In addition to some of the other areas that he worked in over 20 years ago, he was named the Solar Power Congressman of the Year. He seemed to have energy from many sources, but he recognized the importance to our energy future of alternative energy sources. His attention to the need for research and development was unfaltering as he doggedly pursued one funding project after another for the University of Texas.

I think that it is noteworthy that when Jake was elected to Congress, his district stretched from the Johnson ranch out in Blanco County all the way to the Harris County line. He went from the hill country to the Texas Gulf. He went through dozens of small rural Texas communities, farming and ranching communities. And when he left office some 31 years later, he represented basically the City of Austin, Travis County, because it had grown to such a significant town. A city which would soon have, in 1 year, two $1 billion semi-conductor fabricators going up. And this man's ability to adapt over that period of time to those changing conditions and to be a force for change in helping get the research dollars, the government support, realizing that government certainly has to be restrained at times but that it can be a force for positive good in the lives of communities and in the lives of individuals. He recognized that.

He transformed, played a transforming role in our community in helping Austin become a really world class center for technology. And I think at the same time was able to preserve those values and those relationships which served him well from the first day that he got to Austin, Texas, from out in Big Spring. Indeed, I think everyone who was with us recently at the First Methodist Church there in Austin took note of the fact that Lady Bird Johnson, First Lady of America, and her daughters, Luci and Linda, were there at the service as they have been at every Pickle public event that I believe I have ever been to, as a tribute of the close relationship between the Johnson family and the Pickle family that served them well in politics but also served them well as individuals who respected each other, learned from each other and contributed to make a better central Texas and a better America and I believe a better world.

I am pleased to be joined by one of our colleagues who I see has Jake's book, as we all do, the book that Jake and Peggy put together here a few years ago. The gentleman from Texas (Mr. Gene Green) served with Jake. He represents the Houston area. And the gentleman may want to add a few stories. I have not really gotten into the storytelling part. I have just talked about the storyteller himself. I really appreciate the gentleman coming out, as I know the family and staff of the Congressman do, to add words at a time here when we are officially in recess and with so many of our colleagues heading off to the shuttle launching tomorrow.

Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for being here and for participating and sharing those thoughts.

Our colleague, the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Edwards) already spoke earlier this evening before we formally began this special order, but his remarks, the various written remarks of our colleagues of both parties will be made a part of this Record.

We talked about the stories of Jake Pickle and what a storyteller he was. I liked the one, in the aftermath of his passing away, that came from a local Austinite and admirer of Jake Pickle, John Kelso, in the Austin American Statesman. He said, ``Jake Pickle was like your barber. You knew his name, and you knew what he did.''

But the story amongst several that John tells that I think really captures the essence of what Jake was all about was, could you pick your representative from Washington out of a line up? Maybe not, but you could not say that about Jake Pickle. You could have had seven Jake Pickle clones in an eight-man line up with Jake Pickle and you could tell which one was Pickle. He would be the one shaking the other seven guys hands and telling funny stories. And there was one after another out of the Pickle barrel that he would tell around here and to our colleagues.

He also could be very eloquent in discussing the needs of the people of central Texas and of our country. During one very lengthy debate here in 1983 here over Social Security, he pointed to Daniel Webster's quotation at the Speaker's podium and read the words: ``Let us go forth to build up and protect our national resources that we too in our time may do something worthy to be remembered.''

Certainly, from his first major vote on the Civil Rights Act to his hard-fought preservation of Social Security, there is no doubt among those who know of his deeds, his constituents, his colleagues and friends, that his contribution will be remembered long after in the very words that Webster spoke.

I believe that of all the votes that Jake cast here and the speeches he gave at this very spot that the one that he talked about the most, that was the most significant, was among his first votes on the 1964 Civil Rights Act. That vote took place in the aftermath of the assassination of President Kennedy at a time of great strife in our country over civil rights and our future. It was a critical vote to the rebirth of our country and to trying to cope with some of the wrongs, many wrongs of the past.

Congressman Pickle, representing a southern State, was a new Member, faced a difficult decision, and he describes that at some length in the book that we have referred to and will incorporate portions of as a part of this Record. But I have heard him personally tell, as so many have here, about casting that vote and about calling the White House to talk to the President, it being so late, and then getting the opportunity to hear from the President of how very proud he was of the fact that Congressman Pickle cast one of the only votes from the southern States in support of this very critical piece of legislation.

From there he went on to add a road here, a project there, assist a constituent with a veterans health care

problem here, and someone who had a Social Security problem there. For each of those people that he assisted directly, and for those that he encouraged by the example of public service that he provided, his hard work, his integrity, his commitment, his gentle nature, I think he will long be remembered in our community.

I was just noting another of the comments that I saw in the aftermath of his passing away where one of our neighbors there in central Texas, who identified herself as a Republican, Marcia Manor, said, ``When I would take my mom to vote, she always said, `I only care about voting for Jake.' She would of course vote for some other candidates, but Jake Pickle was the important vote. And when I asked her why, she said, `Because he always kisses me when he sees me.' '' Well, Jake kissed and hugged a lot of folks across central Texas because he had that genuine warmth, that genuine Texas hospitality for which our community is known.

I think that it was that individual touch and contact with people more than the detail of a piece of legislation that had the most meaning to people in our community. We will, through this Special Order, have an opportunity to add more extended remarks honoring Jake. I have been contacted by a number of our colleagues who will, over the course of the next several days, want to add their remarks to the Record and make it a part of the history of this body, reflecting on 31 years of faithful service here in this House.

I would just say that, Jake, I feel we owe you a tremendous debt in setting such a high standard for what it really means to be a public servant; for someone who worked the hardest for those who had the least; for someone whose sense of duty kept him and his loyal staff working long hours; and for making it all look so very easy. Thank you for reminding us how much one person can accomplish; what a difference one person can make in his or her community, world, country, State; and reminding us how much one person can accomplish when you devote your life to the service of others.

Texas and a grateful Nation salute you and say, ``J.J. Jake Pickle, a job well done for America.''

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

Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding.

You know, of all the many, many injustices for which this House Republican leadership is responsible, surely there are few that are less defensible than their defense of corporations that flee America. And how appropriate that we bring to the House this amendment at this time as we approach our Nation's Independence Day on July the 4th, because a few corporations have declared their independence from America when it comes to paying their taxes. They formally fled our shores. They dodge their taxes by reincorporating in some tax haven, buying a mailbox and having a beach-side board meeting.

To add insult to injury, the same corporations that renounce America stretch their hand out to all of us who are paying our fair share, businesses and individuals, and say ``can we have some of your tax money?'' They ask to be given the opportunity to bid on government contracts that they are not contributing to pay for. That is right. An outrage that exists that has been defended by this Republican leadership. Why do we do this in an appropriations bill? Because the House Ways and Means Committee, on which I serve, has, under the Republican leadership, as its primary responsibility to protect corporations just like those that flee and then ask to do government business.

What about this argument that these corporations are paying taxes on their government business? Well, frankly, it is a half truth. Let me tell you, these corporations do not go to Bermuda for the shorts. They do not go there for the suntan. They go there to dodge taxes. And the way they do that, as in the case of Accenture, one company that has been mentioned, is to strip away earnings and have them taxed there--at non tax rates really--in Bermuda. For example, the name Accenture did not exist a few years ago.

And so Accenture used its American presence to advertise and build up the value of the name. And so when they come to their name being owned by a foreign corporation, when they come to calculate any taxes they owe in the United States, they deduct all the royalties that they pay to that foreign corporation. So they may be paying a certain tax rate on their income, but they do not include all their income because they have stripped it and sent it abroad.

What of the argument that we will lose the opportunity for the best contract? We are not saying that Accenture or any other company cannot contract for business. Just pay your fair share of taxes like every other American is all that we say through this amendment.

And what makes the opposition to this amendment particularly shameful at this time is that wealthy tax-dodging corporations are not sacrificing at all, while we call on some young Americans to give their all and sacrifice for America. Middle-class Americans are paying hundreds of billions of dollars for this adventure abroad, while tax dodgers and tax cheats avoid paying their fair share. It is wrong. We ought to correct it with approval of this amendment.