Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, today I rise to honor a great Tennesseean and a legend in country music. Merle Kilgore is a businessman who has bridged his early music experience with today's growing country music industry.

Merle began his career in Shreveport, Louisiana at the age of 14, carrying Hank Williams, Sr.'s guitar. Since then, Merle has risen as a leader in the country music industry. He co-wrote the ``Ring of Fire'' with June Carter-Cash, as recorded by Johnny Cash. That great hit sold more than sixteen million records. Merle didn't stop there; he continued to write hit after hit developing his catalog to over 300 songs. All together his song collection has sold close to fifty million records. Merle's first Top Ten record was self penned ``Dear Mama,'' and he has accumulated several others since.

Merle moved to Nashville in 1962 and began his management career. Merle has been affiliated with Hank Williams, Jr. for more than thirty years. On April 7, 1986, Merle was named the Executive Vice President and head of management of Hank Williams, Jr. Enterprises.

In addition to managing Hank's career, Merle has served as Vice President of the Country Music Association and has served on the CMA Board of Directors since 1989. He has been President of both the Nashville Songwriter's Foundation, as well as the Nashville Songwriter's Association International. In 1987 he was named an honorary State Senator for Tennessee, and in 1998, Merle received the Legendary Songwriter's Award from the North American Country Music Association.

Merle is an accomplished singer, songwriter, and actor. He is a shining star in the nation's entertainment industry. However, Merle is definitely not just ``resting on his laurels.'' For Singer-Songwriter- Manager Merle Kilgore, the best may be yet to come. Today I rise to recognize Merle and thank him for his dedication and his willingness to share his incredible talents with Tennesseeans and country music fans worldwide.

Mr. Speaker, we are going on an Easter break and spending time back in our districts, and before I head back to the Seventh District of Tennessee I wanted to take just a couple of moments and talk just a little bit about the headlines that are out there today.

``U.S. job growth soars.'' That is from CNN Money. ``308,000 jobs: Far better than Wall Street's forecast.'' I have got other copies of articles here, Bloomberg, My Way, talking about jobs growth.

There are reasons for this, Mr. Speaker, and it is the Bush tax cuts that this body passed last year, the third largest tax cut in history. This check, $1,133, this is what the average family, 91 million American taxpayers, saw last year. Over 25 million small businesses are seeing about $2,800 in tax cuts. That is why the economy is growing.

The tax cuts are working, 308,000 new jobs.

Mr. Speaker, pursuant to clause 1, rule I, I demand a vote on agreeing to the Speaker's approval of the Journal.

Mr. Speaker, I object to the vote on the ground that a quorum is not present and make the point of order that a quorum is not present.

Mr. Speaker, I was at home this weekend in the good Seventh District of Tennessee reading the Nashville Tennessean and there on the front page of the business section was a story with the headline, ``Some Seniors Begin to See Benefit From Medicare.''

Mr. Speaker, if you had been listening to the Democrats for the past 6 months, you would be stunned that the seniors were going to see benefits from Medicare. But here it is in black and white. This is what the story says:

``Seniors who do belong to a Medicare HMO have been showered with new benefits thanks to the Medicare Modernization Act Congress passed last year.''

And this is all before the prescription drug card and the eventual prescription drug benefit even take place. Clearly, the Medicare reform President Bush and this Congress passed is helping seniors and that is exactly what it is supposed to do.

Mr. Speaker, today I rise to recognize Franklin, Tennessee. Franklin and Williamson County, Tennessee, were recognized today and were given a great honor. They received the Preserve America Community distinction. This comes from the White House Advisory Council on Preservation. Franklin deserves this. We were so excited that the Preserve America distinction came to them today. They are one of only 28 towns in America to receive this award. This has come because of a tremendous commitment from the community over the past several decades. We have had thousands of volunteers. It has been a partnership effort between volunteers and also between the local, the State and the Federal elected officials, and the hard work and the dedication to preserve the history and the heritage of Franklin and Williamson County, to educate future generations and to let them see what makes this community unique and special. That was recognized today.

Mr. Speaker, we applaud them, we say congratulations to Franklin, Tennessee. We know the best is yet to come.

Mr. Speaker, late last October I traveled to Iraq with several other Members of Congress, and what I saw was a country in tatters, a country that had experienced little or no infrastructure investment in decades.

But I also saw a people who, despite torture, government-sponsored slaughter and oppression on the scale of Lenin, a people who, despite all this, retained a glimmer of hope. And I thought, is it not amazing? Thirty years of torture, and Saddam and his henchmen could not break the spirit of the Iraqi people. They still had that thirst for freedom and that thirst for opportunity.

Today, watch the news that comes from Iraq. Occasionally look past the newscaster, actually take a look at the hustle and bustle behind the newscaster. You will see marketplaces, traffic jams, people on their way to and from work. That is the free market at work.

President Bush is the focus of an enormous amount of partisan political criticism. There are those, mostly on the other side of the aisle, who believe that simply getting bin Laden would end terrorism. They think we were wrong to go to Iraq, that Saddam could be contained. In short, those opposed to our work in Iraq believe Saddam's regime had no role in terrorism and that our effort will not bear any positive results for America and the world.

What a shortsighted, small view of the world and a basic misunderstanding of terrorism. Terrorism will not be stopped by removing a leader or a command structure. Terrorism is not going to be that easy to tackle.

What is going to make a difference could be this: Iraq has an interim Constitution on schedule and they are moving toward freedom. Iraq's electricity levels are exceeding pre-war capacity. They passed that benchmark last fall. The international community has pledged $32 billion to improve schools, health care, roads, water and sanitation. The nation now has a stable currency. A free press is growing. Iraqis have access to more diverse, independent sources of news. Hundreds of democratic meetings are taking place all across Iraq. America has captured 45 of the 55 most-wanted members of Hussein's regime. There are 900,000 telephone subscribers and 225,000 wireless subscribers. All of Iraq's 22 universities and 43 technical institutions and colleges are open. And, this may not sound important, but its value is immeasurable, the Iraqi children no longer have to recite ``long live leader Saddam Hussein'' each morning.

Some still believe all of this is irrelevant to the war on terrorism. Do you think terrorists are worried about what we are doing in Iraq and Afghanistan? Absolutely. Do you think terrorists fear this President? Do they fear America? You bet they do. The terrorists fear America. I do not mean that figuratively. Those who would destroy America, they literally fear this President and the resolve of the American people and our military, because we have not been afraid to take swift, decisive action.

President Bush said America would not tolerate al Qaeda, that we would not tolerate a Middle East that pumped out hatred and vitriol. Our engagements in Afghanistan and Iraq speak volumes to the terror network.

Does our work in Iraq make hostile nations think twice about supporting terrorism? Yes, indeed, it does. Will our effort to bring the Iraqi people into the modern world, into the free marketplace, the community of free nations, make a difference in the long struggle to destroy what breeds terrorism? Absolutely it will.

Mr. Chairman, I rise to thank the gentleman from Iowa (Mr. Nussle) for presenting a budget that cuts spending and continues the tax relief passed by Congress last year, and also to thank the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Hensarling) for his work on our RSC budget, which is the most ambitious of our efforts.

The RSC budget and the Budget Committee version differ in two areas: First, the deficit is cut in half within 3 years in the RSC budget, 1 year earlier than the committee-reported budget. It is $63 billion lower over the next 5 years as compared to the committee-reported budget; and while the committee budget does include measures to enforce the budget provisions, the RSC substitute includes the budget process reforms that are a critical first step to long-term change in how we spend.

The RSC budget includes elements of the Family Budget Protection Act to make it more difficult for future Congresses to bypass spending ceilings and allows appropriations savings to apply to tax relief or deficit reduction.

I call on my colleagues to vote in favor of the RSC budget amendment to make a major step toward fiscal responsibility.

Mr. Speaker, yesterday I opened up Roll Call and among the first things to catch my attention was an article about the Democrats' message and their effort to get out the message on Medicare reform. I thought, well, better late than never. Perhaps they would now start talking about the plan this Congress and the President passed to help our seniors with their prescription drug costs for the first time ever. I thought that maybe the Democrats were finally ready to talk to our seniors about the inclusion of preventive care that starts with a free physical when the seniors enter Medicare. I thought that maybe Democrats would join us in talking about how we will, through the Medicare reform bill, begin working toward a 21st-century health care system for our seniors so that their prescription drug usage is better coordinated to prevent overusage and harmful interactions.

I should have known better.

Democrats continue to resist informing seniors about the new options available. This Medicare reform is law, and it will provide seniors with more options and more choices than ever. I hope my colleagues across the aisle will reconsider their tactics.

Mr. Speaker, last week I spoke about a Tennessee report showing 15,647 new corporations, LLCs and limited partnership registrations in my State. That was the best ever, the best on record. The tax cuts that President Bush and Congress passed are clearly giving those with the entrepreneurial spirit the room to take that leap and form new businesses. This is what America is all about, living out that American dream.

And today I have more good news. This time from the Nashville Tennesseean Business Section that speaks to the growth that this Republican tax relief is helping to generate.

Democrats and candidate John Kerry say the Bush tax cuts are not working, that they will repeal the Bush tax cuts and raise your tax bill so that they can fund more government spending. Well, I would like to recommend that they just hold on a minute before the Democrats rally around tax increases.

They should read this article. ``Businesses Using Tax Cuts to Get While Gettin's Good.'' This is from the Nashville Tennesseean. ``Businesses Using Tax Cuts to Get While the Gettin's Good.'' This is what we said would happen with tax cuts, businesses would grow.

Now the article is about John Aron, a business owner in Nashville. He runs The Pasta Shop, and his story is a testament to the Bush tax relief. Mr. Aron wanted to expand his business, but the cost of new equipment was nearly $81,000. After looking at the President's tax relief package that this Congress passed last year, and it gives businesses a tax break on equipment purchases, Mr. Aron went ahead and made the investment and expensed 57 percent of his equipment costs this year, saving his company $35,000 on his 2003 taxes.

Well, guess what he did next? He hired two employees. This is exactly what Republicans said would happen if we lowered the taxes.

Now, some across the aisle are saying, well, that is just one story and it cannot be a trend; but let me give you a few more examples. Brad Blevins spent $100,000 for a metal stamping machine for his company. He'll save $30,000 in taxes. Business grows.

Rivergate Partners in Nashville spending $350,000 on their 50,000- square-foot building. They will save $60,000. Business is growing.

Richards & Richards, able to write off $100,000 worth of storage shelving for their offices.

Get the point? Businesses are growing because of the tax relief. Mr. Aron said, ``The Bush tax cuts substantially reduced the risk of entry.''

If I were calling for tax increase, I would be feeling a little bit foolish right now for calling for those tax increases.

In 2003, 25 million small business owners saved an average of $2,853 on their tax bill. That is 25 million small business owners. The President and Republicans supported this relief because we know that it will spur investment and encourage Americans to start new businesses and reach that American dream.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to correct a few misplaced perceptions that have been allowed to go unchallenged far too long. The Democrats have criticized the President. They have slammed his foreign policy, his economic policy, and they often cite Europe as an example of the sort of countries that we ought out emulate.

I beg to differ.

The countries of Europe have created large, extensive welfare systems. They have outrageously high taxes. They tax and spend, all to support growing government social programs. And the result? In December 2003, Belgium had an 8.3 unemployment rate. In January 2004, France, a vocal critic of U.S. economic and foreign policy, had a whopping 9.3 percent unemployment rate. Germany, another consistent critic of the U.S., in January of this year had a 9.1 percent unemployment rate.

Mr. Speaker, in January of 2004 America had a 5.6 percent unemployment rate.

A leftist European model does not work in foreign affairs and it does not work here in economics. Unfortunately and unwisely, Democrats have adopted this kind of approach for their platform.

We have weathered a recession and September 11 with the $1 trillion impact it had on our economy, and we remain committed to tax relief. And this month the Employer Outlook Survey reported that 28 percent of the 16,000 employers that they surveyed expected to hire more workers from April to June of this year.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of this rule because I think it is a fair rule for a worthy resolution. And like a lot of my constituents, I have spent time reflecting on what September 11 and the war in Iraq has meant to our country, how terrorism affects our lives, and what all of this means in the context of our world community, and I have come to the conclusion that as complicated as our world is and as tangled as the diplomacy surrounding our economic and military ties with the rest of the world become, I know that there are certain basic truths. And one of the great basic truths is the constant struggle between good and evil. And there are times in our history when the struggle is very clear, and today we are at one of those moments of such clarity. The lines are drawn, and we know who is aligned on each side.

America leads a fight that we did not seek against a movement founded on distorted religious views and failed nations. This resolution marks a victory for good, and it is so very important that when good triumphs and advances that we celebrate that victory.

This resolution honors our men and women in uniform. They have made the world a safer place for our children, and there are fewer greater gifts than that. And today we are welcoming the Iraqi people into the community of free nations. The resolution says to the world that America was willing to take on this fight to dedicate the fruits of her labor to free a horribly, horribly oppressed people a world away. Iraqi success in rebuilding and being free is our greatest weapon against terrorism. Terrorism seeks to destroy. Freedom builds. And that is why we are in Afghanistan and why we are in Iraq.

Mr. Speaker, I thank our troops, I thank our families, and the communities that have supported them. And may God bless America.

Mr. Speaker, today I rise to talk about jobs and to talk about the success that we are seeing from the Bush tax cuts that this body passed last spring. The child tax credit, marriage penalty, expensing, depreciation, those are working for small businesses. They are working for entrepreneurs. They are working for the people that make this economy grow.

I want you to take a look at this article. I found it this weekend when I got home sitting on the top of my desk: ``Boom times ahead. LLC Formations Soar.'' What it tells us is that in Tennessee where these tax cuts are working, the State registered 15,064 new corporations, LLCs, limited partnerships. That topped the previous high of 14,500 in 1997 and is up 22 percent.

Now, jobs growth is working for small business. This is working for women, because the fastest growing sector of small business growth is women, women-owned businesses.

Tax cuts are working in Tennessee. I commend this body and the President.

[From the Nashville Business Journal, March 17, 2004]

Boom Times Ahead? LLC Formations Soar

(By Holly Dolloff)

The formation of limited liability companies in Tennessee

has soared over the past two years, a trend that could mean

the region's bleak jobs picture may soon brighten

considerably.

The Tennessee Secretary of State Division of Business

Services registered 7,412 LLCs last year--500 more than were

formed in 1998, the previous high mark, and 49 percent more

than in 2001.

The number of LLCs registered last year was more than

double the number of 1995, when companies first gained that

option from the state. Local attorneys attribute the recent

boom to several factors, from increased comfort levels with

the process to a sluggish economy.

``The LLC has come into its own,'' says Leigh Griffith, an

attorney at Waller Lansden Dortch & Davis. ``It's the entity

of choice for closely held companies.''

Total for-profit business formation also set a new high.

The state registered 15,064 new corporations, LLC, limited

partnerships or limited liability partnerships. That topped

the previous high of 14,565 set in 1997 and was up 22 percent

from 2001.

Griffith speculates the 2003 boom may have resulted from

the down-turn that began in 2001.

``As the economy gets softer, people get laid off and start

their own businesses,'' he says.

A very similar dynamic applies to higher education and

particularly graduate and professional programs. When the

economy goes south, enrollment very often will rise as out-

of-work professionals seek new opportunities or new skills.

Though their greater numbers may often be attributable to

past bad news, new LLCs could end up improving the local and

state economic picture as they grow into bona fide businesses

with multiple employees.

At this point, it is very unlikely that many of the new

companies are being counted in the local or state economic

statistics that show a stagnant job market despite optimism

from both consumers and business owners.

The record number of LLC formations last year also marked

only the second time--1998 was the first--that Tennesseans

created more LLCs than for-profit corporations. The year saw

7,209 corporations formed, up less than 1 percent from 2002

and 5 percent below their 2000 level.

Fellow Waller attorney Michael Yopp, who recently published

``Tennessee Limited Liability Companies: Forms and

Practices'' (DataTrace Publishing, 2004), says the 1996

renovations of state law facilitated understanding and

increased employment of the structure.

``Fairly extensive'' litigation involving LLCs in the late

'90s has also contributed to the higher numbers, he says.

Yopp is part of a group of attorneys currently revising the

LLC statutes.

Griffith was a prime author of the original statutes

creating LLCs and remains a proponent of them. He says the

most obvious benefit of an LLC is limited responsibility for

liabilities incurred by others, particularly in small

businesses.

``When you realize the fate of your company is in the hands

of a 19-year-old delivery boy who may be hung over from the

night before, and he hits someone with the delivery vehicle,

your house is on the line,'' says Griffith.

Partners in LLCs could lose their businesses in a smaller

situation, but their personal property is immune from

seizure. And the LLC format offers breaks from the taxes and

red tape that corporations incur.

``You don't have to have annual meetings and you're covered

by operating agreements and not by-laws or restrictive

stock,'' says Larry Papel, managing partner at Baker Donelson

Bearman Caldwell & Berkowitz, who has registered several LLCs

for clients.

One such client was a restaurant group with multiple

locations. Papel says such businesses may be better off

registering each entity separately, an assessment with which

Griffith agrees.

``If each restaurant in a chain is an LLC, they won't all

suffer if one has a problem,'' Griffith says.

Mr. Speaker, there is no better way to strengthen your country, than by strengthening your community. One great American has been strengthening her community for 50 years as a member of the Brentwood Garden Club. Frances Harris was one of the founding members of the organization in 1954, and she is the only original member still actively involved with the club.

The Brentwood Garden Club holds an exceptional flower show each year, and they have successfully organized projects such as home and garden tours, and refurbishing the landscaping at public buildings.

Frances is an accredited flower show judge. She is also a member of the Association for the Preservation of Antiquities and a founding member of the Heritage Foundation of Franklin and Williamson County. Through her community involvement, she has worked to make America beautiful. All of our nation's communities should be so fortunate to have a Frances Harris. I thank her for preserving our communities and promoting good citizenship.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to take my Special Order at this time.

Mr. Speaker, last week there was a quote attributed to John Kerry, the Democratic nominee for President, who said ``I've met foreign leaders who can't go out and say this publicly, but, boy, they look at you and say, `You got to win this; you got to beat this guy; we need a new policy,' things like that.'' He has not denied the statement.

Quite frankly, whether the statement is accurate or not, and I do not believe it to be accurate, America's foreign policy decisions are not designed to win popularity contests. They are designed to protect and defend America, her citizens, and her allies.

In the days since September 11, there have been those who actually seem to believe that if we had been more understanding of extremist regimes and terrorists that perhaps they would have left us alone. There is a troubling trend in this campaign season. It has become almost formulaic, and we are hearing it from everybody, from the Democratic Presidential candidates on down. Criticize the President, criticize our foreign policy, criticize our country, criticize what we offer, and do it as loudly and as often as they can.

The alternative to President Bush's bold, tough foreign policy that puts terrorists and rogue regimes on the run is one that relies on the international community to take collective action. We have been there. We spent 12 years letting the U.N. throw paper at Saddam Hussein while Saddam's military launched missiles at our pilots, at American pilots enforcing the U.N. no-fly zones over Iraq. For 12 years the U.N. turned a blind eye while such as France allowed its citizens to profit from the Iraq Oil for Food or, as some call it, the Oil for Palaces Program.

International consensus, multilateralism? These are terms the policy wonks and the intellectual elites love to use. They are terms that sound great on paper, but an unyielding dedication to them has proven disastrous in the real world. Multilateralism and collective action are terms that we in the real world know to mean that America should stop leading and let the status quo remain. Those who profited from a status quo that allowed Saddam to remain in power, that allowed terrorists to grow and flourish in Afghanistan do not want us to act.

Nations that have neither the will nor the military capability to take on terrorism on a truly global scale should not criticize those that do.

It was 3,000 Americans, our buildings, our Pentagon that were targeted on September 11, and those responsible needed to know that we were going to do more than lob a few missiles. We have taken steps to reshape the world for the better, and whether this pleases the French is irrelevant. We alone have the capability and the responsibility to stamp out terrorism, and it is to President Bush's credit that he was not deterred by apologists for terrorists and Saddam.

Should America make a turn backward, back to the days when multilateralism and collective action were more important than promoting freedom and targeting terrorism, when we relied on the U.N. to slap dictators on the wrist and sit idly by as Afghanistan became a giant terrorist training camp? If we take that step back, then we are signifying our weakness.

The debate is very clear: Do you prefer that we act preemptively to prevent another September 11? Do you believe swift, decisive action in lands breeding terrorism is preferable to emergency response on the streets of our cities in the aftermath of an attack? Do you want American foreign policy dictated by your elected leaders or those in Europe?

I think the answer to this is clear. We all know the answer to this and, certainly, when we read polls like this one from the Iraqi people who say their life is better today than it was a year ago, we know the answer to that question.

Mr. Speaker, a few months ago I came down to the floor to talk about our economy and the steps that President Bush and Congress have taken to offset the recession and the trillion-dollar impact of September 11 on our economy.

Part of my remarks that day focused on tax relief and the effect it has had in helping our families, working families, and small businesses weather what has been some tough economic times; and I think it is important that we reiterate our support for tax relief because there are those across the aisle who are increasingly supportive of raising your tax bill. I want to let my constituents in the Seventh Congressional District of Tennessee know that I am standing beside tax relief legislation. I stand with cutting their tax bills.

In 2003 under Republican leadership and under Republican tax legislation, 91 million taxpayers received on average a tax cut in the amount of $1,126. This is real relief for 91 million Americans. So when the rhetoric from the other side of the aisle starts flying that tax relief is only for the rich, you can judge for yourself whether you think 91 million Americans would consider themselves rich.

A few months ago, candidates for the Democratic nomination were all calling for tax increases. Virtually all of them opposed the tax relief which has allowed 91 million Americans to keep more of their hard- earned paychecks. On July 28, a Washington Post column proclaimed: ``Candidates Not Shying Away From Tax Talk: Candidates Discuss Raises, Not Cuts.''

It is important to note they may think you can tax your way to prosperity, but you cannot. You cannot. We know that it is important to leave that money with the taxpayer. Well, today we have a single Democratic candidate, and he is on record for raising some income tax brackets to pre-Bush levels. The question every American needs to consider is this: Why should we raise taxes? What do higher taxes do to the economy? It is a simple answer: higher taxes take capital out of the private sector and give government more money to spend.

I think a vast majority of Americans, and I know the folks in my district, know that higher taxes do not grow our economy; they grow the government.

Something else I think the American people should know is that the tax relief that we have passed, the tax relief responsible for giving 91 million Americans an average of $1,126 in relief last year is not permanent. In short, this tax relief will end in 2011; and at that point, virtually all taxpayers will start facing higher tax bills. Democrats largely do not support making this relief permanent. Americans will again be subject to the marriage tax, the death tax. A family of four making $36,268 will see a tax hike of over $2,000; that is if we do not make permanent our tax relief legislation, and that is something that we are working to do.

The President and this Congress are working to ensure that this relief is permanent, and I look forward to the debate because we are on the side of lower taxes, economic growth, not tax hikes and big government. We are for leaving the money with those who earn it.