Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to thank an outstanding and dedicated constituent of mine who is retiring after a lifetime of caring for our nation's most beautiful places.

Roger Giddings is a 42-year veteran of federal service who began his career in 1960 as a seasonal park ranger for Glacier National Park in Montana and Everglades National Park in Florida. Giddings landed his first permanent National Parks Service assignment as a supervisory park guide at Carlsbad Caverns National Park in New Mexico. He has worked at Colonial National Historic Park in Virginia, Natchez Trace Parkway in Mississippi, the NPS Headquarters in Washington, DC, and Grand Canyon National Park in Arizona before becoming superintendent of Hot Springs National Park in Arkansas in 1981.

His work in Arkansas has resulted in preservation and restoration of our national treasure, our bathhouses. In the late 1980's he helped to establish the Friends of Fordyce group that worked to get the Fordyce Bathhouse rehabilitated into the Park's Visitor Center. For this effort, the National Trust for Historic Preservation awarded the park it's highest honor, the Historic Preservation Honor Award.

Giddings's greatest challenge was to save and restore the unique and historic Bathhouse Row in Hot Springs, where an essential stabilization project is already underway. When he arrived at Hot Springs National Park, he set to work not only to revitalize the bathhouses, but all of downtown Hot Springs as well. The results of his efforts can be seen by all who come to visit, and his work has ensured that many more will visit Hot Springs National Park in the future.

On behalf of all who have visited, enjoyed, and shared the beauty of our National Parks, I want to thank Roger Giddings for his persistent efforts not only at Hot Springs National Park, but also at some of the most amazing places in our great nation.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to help commemorate an event in our Nation's history that we can all join together in celebrating.

With the stroke of a pen in 1803, President Jefferson doubled America in size, making us one of the largest Nations in the world. The Louisiana Purchase comprised more than 600 million acres at less than 3 cents an acre in what today is the greater part of 13 states between the Mississippi River and the Rocky Mountains.

Arkansas was one of those states--the third state formed after Louisiana and Missouri. Two hundred years later, Arkansas continues to prove itself a valuable asset to our Nation. Our state has contributed much to our great country--our agriculture and other industries feed our Nation and fuel our economy; our State's natural beauty is an endless source of enjoyment for families and visitors. Arkansas has supplied our Nation with food and fiber, entertainers, and even a president.

The 828,000 square mile west of the Mississippi River is some of the most beautiful and bountiful land in our country. If only $15 million could go that far today! I invite my colleagues and our Nation to join me in celebrating one of the single most noteworthy events in our Nation's history--the Louisiana Purchase. This year as we celebrate the bicentennial, I hope that you will visit Arkansas and any of the other states that were purchased for so little, and that now prove to be priceless.

Mr. Speaker, it has been 860 days since President Bush and the Republican party embarked on their economic plan for our country.

During that time, the national debt has increased by $1,167,994,451,600.72. According to the Web site for the Bureau of the Public Debt at the U.S. Department of Treasury, yesterday at 4:30 p.m. eastern daylight time the Nation's outstanding debt was $6,808,319,837,959.49. Furthermore, in fiscal year 2003, interest on our national debt or the debt tax, D-E-B-T tax, is $304,978,878,641.11. That is through August 31.

Mr. Speaker, we must stop deficit spending and pay this debt down.

Mr. Speaker, I rise to voice my opposition to the pay increase that Members of Congress voted to grant themselves during the debate on the Treasury and Transportation spending bill.

Every year, Congress votes on this pay raise, and every year that I have been a Member of this body, I have stood against it. It's simply not right for us to give ourselves more money when there are so many people waiting for an increase in the minimum wage.

Many of my colleagues feel the same way about the Congressional pay raise, but unfortunately the House leadership did not allow us to vote for this specific item, because it was included within a broader spending bill. Voting against this bill would mean voting against billions of dollars for our roads and other worthwhile projects. Rather, we were forced to voice our opposition in the form of a procedural vote, and I did so.

There are thousands of people in my district who hold minimum wage positions, people I was elected to serve. I would only be serving myself if I voted to raise my salary, and that is not why I'm here.

I will continue to vote against congressional pay raises until the minimum wage is increased for working families.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Maine for leading the motion to instruct on this very important issue this evening.

As the owner of a small town family pharmacy back home in Prescott, Arkansas, my wife and I got tired of seeing seniors walk through the doors of our pharmacy who could not afford their medicine or could not afford to take it properly. That was a big reason why I decided to run for the United States Congress in 2000.

The reason I am speaking to Members tonight from the Republican side of the aisle is this: I thought if there was ever an issue that would not be a Democratic issue or a Republican issue but rather a senior issue, this would be it. But instead, the Republican leadership has offered us nothing more than a false hope and a false promise for our seniors.

There are three problems with the bill. Number one, the drug manufacturers wrote the bill, and if Members do not believe that, read the bill. The Republican leadership had the nerve to put language in the bill that says the Federal Government shall be prohibited from negotiating with the drug manufacturers to bring down the high cost of medicine, and we call this a senior's plan.

Problem number two, we hear how prescription drugs are cheaper in other countries, they are. They are because the other countries tell the drug manufacturers if you want your drug in our country, you will give us a discount, and they do. The drug manufacturers know if we have 41 million seniors under one plan in America, we too will demand those kinds of discounts to help offset the cost of the program for our seniors.

Problem number three, all of the talk for months about a prescription drug benefit for our seniors on the floor of this House boils down to this. When you do the math, on the first $3,500 worth of medicine that a senior needs every year, Medicare is going to pay for $900, leaving the senior to pay $2,600 of the first $3,500. Tell me if that is going to help seniors choose between buying their medicine, buying their food, paying their utility bill, and paying the rent bill. Of course it will not.

This is Medicare fraud at its worse. I will not rest until seniors can walk into the pharmacy of their choice and pull out their Medicare card and be treated.

Mr. Speaker, I offer a privileged motion.

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

Mr. Speaker, tonight I am offering a motion to instruct conferees on the child tax credit. As Congress considered H.R. 2, the Jobs and Growth Tax Reconciliation Act, at a cost of more than $300 billion, one important provision was omitted that affects a majority of the hardworking families in my home State of Arkansas, as well as working families across our Nation.

The increase of a child tax credit that could be refundable to include low- to moderate-income families who earn between $10,500 a year and $26,625 a year was dropped from the conference agreement. Wage earners in this group include our men and women in the military, police officers, firefighters, and even our school teachers. Expanding the child tax credit to include the families of these people made up only 1 percent, let me repeat that, made up only 1 percent of the total cost of the tax cut package; but the impact of this omission on the millions of working families who need this relief is immeasurable.

I am very proud of our senior Senator from Arkansas, Blanche Lincoln, who led the effort in the United States Senate to correct this wrong, to right this wrong; and the Senate did so in a bipartisan way. The vote in the Senate was 94 to 2. Let me repeat that: in the Senate it was a bipartisan vote, 94 to 2.

Mr. Speaker, it is simply wrong. It is wrong to enact a tax cut in the name of economic relief and not give that relief to those who are trying to do the right thing and stay off welfare and work jobs with few or no benefits, struggling day in and day out to make ends meet and provide for their children and their families.

At the end of this week, some 25 million checks will be printed and put in the mail. Soon, the 25 million families who qualify under the new tax cut law will begin to receive those checks for child tax credits aimed at providing them with economic relief. This means that a mother of two who earns $65,000 a year will soon find an extra $800 in her mailbox. Meanwhile, a mother of two who earns up to $26,625 will get absolutely nothing, not one dime.

We had to explain today to a single mother from my congressional district back home, Arkansas' Fourth Congressional District, who earns $16,000 a year, she was under the impression that she would be getting the child tax credit. After all she works for a living; she pays taxes and wanted our office to settle an argument with a friend who insisted that she did not qualify. Even though she is trying to do the right thing and stay off welfare, her friend told her she does not make enough money to get money back in terms of a child tax credit.

We had to tell her that she lost that argument; and because House Republicans, this Republican national leadership has yet to act on a bipartisan, Senate-passed provision, I repeat again on a 94 to 2 vote in the United States Senate, a bipartisan vote, because the House has refused to act on the Senate version, she will be left out in the cold.

Mr. Speaker, if we act now, we can include some 6.5 million working families who need this help the most.

This motion to instruct does a few simple things. It tells the conferees to agree to the Senate language, the bipartisan language that passed the Senate 94 to 2. It tells the conferees to let this language provide for tax credit checks to be mailed immediately to low-income family, those earning up to $26,625 a year. It provides that the tax credit be extended to personnel in combat zones in Iraq, Afghanistan and elsewhere around the globe. It provides assistance for the families of those who died in the tragic Columbia shuttle disaster, and yes, it ensures that this minimal cost is fully offset. In other words, we are not adding to the national deficit through this motion to instruct.

The conferees could easily accomplish these changes and bring us a final bill within 2 days, which is what this motion calls for.

For those who argue that a tax cut should not be provided for those who do not pay taxes, I am here tonight to say that that dog won't hunt. We are not talking about a tax credit for welfare recipients. We are talking about a tax cut for working families. There are hard- working people in our own offices who fall in this income level. Check out their next pay stub and tell me that they do not pay taxes.

Working individuals who pay a significant part of their income in taxes, including Social Security and Medicare taxes and gas taxes and sales taxes and property taxes, taxes which are never cut, should be entitled to share in the benefits of a tax cut, particularly since it is their Social Security Trust Fund, their children's Social Security Trust Fund, and their grandchildren's Social Security Trust Fund that is being raided to pay for this tax cut for the wealthy.

It is only fair that tax cuts benefit all Americans who contribute. Let us right the wrong and make sure that those 76,000 working families in my

State, and the 6.5 million working families across our country, the families of our firefighters, our policemen, our schoolteachers, and even families with loved ones fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan will be included in this effort to provide economic relief. Let us provide it to those who need it the most. Let us provide it to those who will actually spend the refund on items their families need, and in doing so will help get this economy moving forward once again. Let us provide it to America's working families because it is the right thing to do.

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

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume to respond to the gentleman from Arizona.

All the things he was criticizing H.R. 2 does. In fact, he voted for it and the President signed it. So I am at a loss as to what he was talking about, although I think it is important that I point out to the gentleman from Arizona that back home, in Prescott, Arkansas, just outside of town, off the kill road at my deer camp, we have a saying: ``Don't let the facts get in the way of a good story.'' But we are not at the deer camp tonight, we are in the United States House of Representatives, and we are talking about the future of 6.5 million working families.

I will tell my colleague that he is right about one thing. I did fail to mention one thing in my opening statement, and that was that this motion to instruct will help 123,000 families who do not get the child tax credit in the gentleman's home State; 19 percent of the working families in his home State.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Scott).

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

If I might quickly address the gentleman from Arizona's remarks, I do not understand what the problem is. Why is he arguing against this when the House has already passed this motion to instruct? The President says he likes it. In fact, the President's press secretary, White House Press Secretary Ari Fleischer, quote, he the President wants to sign this legislation. Hopes that Congress will get it to him quickly. He believes that what the Senate has done is the right thing to do, a good thing to do, and he wants to sign it. President Bush's press secretary from June 9, 1 month ago or so. And the GOP Senators like it, 94 to 2. It was a bipartisan vote.

To the other matter that he keeps bringing up, he tries to tell us that folks who earn $26,625 a year do not pay income taxes. Yes, they pay income taxes; and yes, they pay sales taxes and property taxes and gas taxes and the list of taxes goes on. Please tell me one time when the gas tax, the sales tax, the property tax has been cut. We are talking about people that are trying to do the right thing and stay off welfare and work in the jobs with no benefits. If you earn $80,000 a year and you have got three children at home, in about 2 weeks you are getting a check for $1,200. If you earn $26,000 a year and are a policeman, a fireman, a schoolteacher or serve in the United States military and you have got three children at home, guess what you are getting week after next? Zero. Not a dime. There is nothing fair about this. The President has said so and the Republicans in the Senate have said so. It is time for the Republican leadership in the House to step up to the plate, put partisanship aside, and do what is right by these 6.5 million working families.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from Louisiana (Mr. Alexander), a member of the Democratic Blue Dog Coalition, a good conservative Democrat who I am proud to call my colleague.

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

If I could make just one quick point. The gentleman from Arizona likes to keep referring to his friends on the left. From where the Speaker stands tonight, we would actually be on the right.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Sandlin), a fellow Blue Dog, a good member of the Blue Dog Coalition and someone that I think will help us and hopefully help the gentleman from Arizona understand why he needs to support this as his President has asked, our President has asked, and as the Senate voted 94 to 2 in a bipartisan way to pass.

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

Might I just simply respond by saying this, that the gentleman from Arizona likes to talk about how while we want to provide a $1,000 child tax credit for those who earn less than $26,625 a year, he constantly reminds us that it falls back to $700 in 2004. Guess why? Because that is exactly what your bill does that passed, H.R. 2. It falls back to $700 in 2004, and we are here trying to help these working families who earn less than $26,625 a year.

You are here fighting that. We know if we tried to extend it to do more than your bill does for all the wealthy folks, you would certainly fight it even more. So let us make sure that we do not confuse the facts here. We are simply trying to provide those who earn between $10,500 and $26,625, the same playing field, the same parity, the same tax cut that will be received by those who earn over $26,625 a year.

Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Utah (Mr. Matheson), a fellow Blue Dog member, a good conservative Democrat, someone who is here to speak on behalf of the 62,000 working families in Utah who have fallen through the cracks under this concocted plan by the Republican national leadership, someone who is here to try to make sense out of this for us.

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

Mr. Speaker, before I go any further, I would just like to make one point. The gentleman from Arizona likes to point out and thank all these conservative Democrats who have appeared here tonight for their support of various tax cuts over recent years, which demonstrates to me that the conservative Democrats that have appeared tonight on behalf of these working families that are being left out of the child tax credit, it appears to me that these are common sense, bipartisan Members, and it looks like to me it would be something that the gentleman from Arizona would stop and think, well, wait a minute, you know, these are folks that agreed with us, and now they do not. It looks like a light would come on and he would recognize that this is an act of fairness.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 30 seconds to the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Scott), another fellow member of the fiscally conservative Democratic Blue Dog coalition, a new Member, a shining star in the Democratic Party and a voice of reason.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the remaining time.

Let me say that I came to this Congress back in 2001 to try to offer up some commonsense solutions to the problems confronting this Nation. Like many Americans, Mr. Speaker, I am sick and tired of all of the partisan bickering that goes on in our Nation's Capital. It should not be what makes the Democrats look good or bad or what makes the Republicans look good

or bad; it ought to be about doing right and providing a voice for the people of America, including the 6.5 million working families that have been shut out of tax relief.

We are faced with the Nation's largest deficit in our country this year: $455 billion and growing, a deficit that our kids and grandkids have to pay for, money that is coming from the Social Security trust fund. Yet, the Republican national leadership managed to find a way to cut taxes to the tune of $300 billion, but they left out 6.5 million working families. They can talk about how these are folks who do not pay taxes all night long; but the reality is, we are talking about men and women in uniform, policemen, firemen, schoolteachers, folks earning up to $26,625 a year. They have children, and they too deserve the same tax cut as those who earn much more than that.

Mr. Speaker, I ask for support and a ``yes'' vote on the motion to instruct conferees on this issue.

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

Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Dingell), the ranking member, for yielding me the time.

As the owner of a small-town family pharmacy, I got sick and tired of seeing seniors who could not afford their medicine or could not afford to take it properly. That is why back in 2000 I decided to run for the United States House of Representatives.

But tonight, what we are debating is nothing more than a false promise for our seniors. Seniors need an accountant to figure out this plan.

I put a calculator to it, and here is what the Republican national leadership plan offers our seniors. Seniors will pay the first $2,520 of the first $3,500 worth of medicine they need every year. Now, let us contrast that a moment to a health care plan provided for Members of Congress, those who wrote this plan. Guess what they pay? Seven hundred dollars of the first $3,500 worth of medicine.

They want to provide seniors with little help while continuing to take care of Members of Congress. It is simply wrong. This is not a seniors bill, this is a bill written by the big drug manufacturers for one reason only. To privatize Medicare. To privatize Medicare so that Medicare cannot command discounts.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H.R. 1904, the Healthy Forests Restoration Act. Our Nation's forests are facing a crisis, a crisis that, if not addressed, could have an overwhelming effect on the property and livelihood of Americans all across these United States.

Tens of millions of acres of public and private forests throughout the country face catastrophic damage from a host of pests, like the southern pine beetle and the red and white oak borers throughout the South and Midwest.

The southern pine beetle is the most destructive insect pest of pine trees in the southern United States. From 1960 through 1990, this insect caused $900 million of damage to pine forests. This aggressive tree killer is a native insect that lives predominantly in the inner bark of pine trees. During epidemics, southern pine beetle infestations often begin in weakened or injured trees, but the populations can invade and overcome healthy, vigorous trees by attacking in large numbers over a short period of time. These attacks are not limited to private or public lands. This insect destroys indiscriminately.

Red and white oak trees in the South are also facing serious conditions. In Arkansas, Missouri, and Oklahoma, over a quarter of standing saw timber are red oak trees, and it is expected that we will lose up to 33 percent due to borer infestations and related causes. This translates to over $1 billion in losses in those three States alone.

These pest outbreaks are not normal. Although oak borers are frequently found in oak-dominated forests, scientists report that the current outbreak is of epidemic proportions. Nearly 1 million acres of national forestlands, almost one out of every three acres, in Arkansas are at risk of losing key ecosystem components. These acres will be eligible for the expedited procedures authorized by this bill.

In addition to its original intent to address catastrophic wildfires, H.R. 1904 will also allow us to act fast due to the threat unhealthy forest conditions present to our southern forest ecosystems, air quality, and water quality. We must act fast to help protect our national and private forests throughout the southern and eastern United States and the jobs they provide.

I urge my colleagues to support this measure.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to take a moment to recognize and honor Katie Beck for being named 2002 Pre-Teen America National Sr. Titleholder, and thank her for her outstanding contributions to her community. Competing against talented young ladies from all across the country, Katie distinguished herself through a demonstrated commitment to community, steadfast character, and drive: all the values that we, as parents, teachers, community members, and legislators, hope to instill in our next generation.

As a parent, I understand the demands that our young people face, which is why I am so encouraged by what Katie has accomplished. In addition to being an active member of her church, captain of the dance team, and the starting pitcher for her softball team, Katie has maintained an A average in school from grades first through eighth. Her energy and dedication have earned her numerous accolades and honors including: Duke University TIP Award, President's Education Award, and the National Science Award. At a time when our country needs youth leadership more than ever, Katie has answered the challenge and set a course that can serve as an example for us all. This is a young lady who exemplifies the Arkansas spirit, and who is destined for great things.

Just qualifying for the rigorous Pre-Teen program speaks volumes for the character and accomplishments of the young women who compete; however, by being named Pre-Teen America Sr. Titleholder, Katie has also shown maturity and poise beyond her years on top of her many accomplishments. And already, at such a young age, Katie has demonstrated leadership, and exemplary character and grace.

Again, I say to Katie, ``Congratulations.'' You are a credit to yourself, your wonderful parents, your community, and your state, which is

why it is such an honor for me to be able to thank you again for your contributions to the community and residents of White Hall.

Mr. Speaker, it was only two years ago that I was congratulating the Warren High School Lumberjacks, and their head coach, Bo Hembree, for winning the Arkansas AAA Boys High School State Football Championship, and here we are again. It is an impressive feat just to win one state title, but winning two in three years is a real testament to preparation, character, and purpose. I think it also demonstrates the spirit of determination and hard work that has always distinguished Arkansans.

As a concerned parent, I understand even more that paramount among my duties as a U.S. Congressman is to provide the necessary resources to our students, teachers, and schools that will enable our young men and women to excel and succeed in all their endeavors. Educating the next generation is an important issue not only in the classroom, and the halls of Congress, but also around our kitchen tables at home.

I have long been an advocate of athletics and extracurricular activities as a supplement to academic excellence for their ability to instill leadership, character, and perseverance. Activity outside the classroom instills a habit of serving the community, preparing them to take leadership roles and eventually shape the larger world around them.

Championships are won in the heart as much as on the field. The will to overcome adversity, the daily drive to succeed, and the mental toughness to perform under pressure carried the young men during their championship season, and will provide them with a well to draw from throughout their entire lives.

That is why it brings me so much pleasure to again congratulate the Warren High School football program on winning the AAA Boys High School Football Championship: It is evidence of a culture of excellence and hard work among the student body, coaching staff, Warren High School faculty, and the community. We can all take great pride in the accomplishments of this team, and how they achieved their goals. I am proud of you. It is an honor for me to salute the coaches, parents, and players who stayed the course, and met adversity and challenge to become champions.

Mr. Speaker, today, I rise to pay tribute to Bart Lindsey, a beloved resident of the community of Helena and a distinguished Arkansan, who recently passed away at age 56. Mr. Lindsey's life-long contributions to family, community, and country will be missed.

Bart Lindsey first made a name for himself in the banking business. Always active in the community, and with an early interest in banking, Bart would come home for summer breaks from the University of Arkansas at Fayetteville to work as a teller for First National Bank of Phillips County. After graduating college and serving in the military, where he earned a Bronze Star and Army Commendation Medal for his service in Vietnam, Bart returned home to the community he loved and accepted a position at that same bank, where he would eventually rise to become chief executive officer.

Bart's life provided an example to us all. He found time to serve as an elder in his church, and to serve as vice chairman of the Board of Directors of the Arkansas-Oklahoma Presbyterian Foundation. He served his State and community by sitting on the Board of Directors of the American Bankers Association, and by serving as chairman of the Board of Trustees of the University of Arkansas, and president of the Helena- West Helena Rotary and Kiwanis clubs.

But of all his professional accomplishments, I think the one that demonstrates the true depth of Bart Lindsey's character was the Best Boss Award. For 5 years running, Bart held this title because, as one employee put it, ``All of the employees loved him and he always took time to speak to everyone.'' It is a fantastic tribute to Bart's memory that he put people first, and was able to leave for us a lasting legacy of hard work, service, and compassion. While Bart Lindsey may no longer be with us, his spirit and his legacy live on in the example he set and the many lives he touched.

Mr. Speaker, today, I would like to acknowledge the life and legacy of Ronald LaGrone, a colleague and a friend of mine from Hamburg, Arkansas. I was honored to have known Mr. LaGrone, a man who, in deed and action, distinguished himself as a husband, father, businessman, and church and community leader.

Ronnie LaGrone owned and ran the LaGrone Drug Store in Hamburg with his brother Fred. For 38 years, he helped to care for the health of his friends and neighbors. Ronnie leaves behind him a proud legacy of service and compassion. He served as Deacon of the First Baptist Church, as Hamburg City Councilman, and as board member of the Arkansas Pharmacy Association.

As a pharmacy owner, I owe him a debt of gratitude for his long service of leadership to our profession. Ronnie set out to improve the lives of others through both his professional and his private life. As a member of a small community, I know what men like Ronnie mean to their neighbors; his service was out of true concern for their livelihood.

Ronnie's contributions were recently recognized by the Hamburg Chamber of Commerce, as he was named winner of the Fred LaGrone Lifetime Achievement Award for his role as community pharmacist and as community leader. Clearly, his community mourned his loss. I know Ronnie's passing was especially difficult for his wife, Patricia, and their three daughters, Terri, Kelli, and Staci, and I have kept all of them in my thoughts and in my prayers. While Ronnie LaGrone may no longer be with us, his spirit and his legacy live on in the example he set and the many lives he touched.

Mr. Chairman, I rise today in objection to the treatment of our veterans in the House-passed budget. Last October, we authorized President Bush to send our men and women in uniform into battle. Is this how we show our support for the brave soldiers who are risking their lives to fulfill their missions, by slashing funding that will take care of them after they have served time taking care of us?

Last week the House managed to pass a budget that cuts veterans' benefits by $28.3 billion over the next ten years. This includes cuts to disability payments and pensions, the Montgomery GI Bill, the VA Health Care System, and other veterans programs.

I reject the notion that we need to cut funding for veterans and retirees in order to pay for a multi-billion dollar tax cut package. During this time of military conflict, we have no business supporting tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans over benefits to provide for the needs of our veterans.

As the conference committee meets to resolve the House and Senate budget differences, I urge them, on behalf of those who have served our country and those who are serving our country right now, to restore funding to the veterans programs that protect those who protect us.

Madam Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman from California. We have heard a lot of talk tonight about the Blue Dogs. There are 35 of us in the United States Congress who are conservative Democrats that make up the Democratic Blue Dog Coalition. We have one mission as a coalition, and that mission is to promote fiscal discipline, fiscal responsibility, and to bring common sense to our Nation and its budget process.

We rise tonight because we are concerned about this country and its future. This country is $6 trillion in debt; and under President Bush's budget that he just released to Congress, over the next 10 years, this country will go from $6 trillion in debt to $9 trillion in debt.

This country spends $1 billion every single day simply paying interest on the national debt. What does that mean to all of us? It means a lot. Madam Speaker, $1 billion a day. We could build 200 brand- new elementary schools every single day in America just with the interest that we are paying on the national debt. I have several interstate highway programs under construction in my congressional district back home that will create jobs while the roads are being built and will create jobs long term because of an improved infrastructure which will allow more industry to come and locate in the Delta region, one of the most impoverished regions of the country. I could finish those highways in less than a week just with the interest that we are paying on the national debt. I call it a debt tax. The gentleman from Texas (Mr. Turner) had it right. That is one tax that cannot go away because as the debt grows, the amount of interest that we as a Nation are required to pay on that debt also grows.

The first $2,559 that every single taxpayer in this country pays each year does not go to educate our children, it does not go to improve roads or to create jobs or improve health care, or to make it affordable and accessible, or to

provide prescription drug coverage as a part of Medicare for our seniors, no. The first $2,559 that every taxpayer in this country pays each year simply goes to pay interest on the national debt. We have got to get this debt under control. But now it is getting worse.

From 1997 through 2001, this country did not deficit spend. Last year, President Bush's budget put us back in the days of deficit spending to the tune of $199 billion. This year it will be $300 billion. It is projected to be $307 billion next year. We are headed in the wrong direction. We must get out of the days of deficit spending, and we must begin to pay down this debt.

Social Security. The President's budget for fiscal year 2004, he wants over a 10-year period to borrow $2.3 trillion from the Social Security trust fund. Our government has already borrowed $1 trillion from the Social Security trust fund, and I think it is time for the politicians in Washington to keep their hands off the Social Security trust fund.

There are those in government who will tell us that we must invest that money until the time that we need it somewhere, and that may be true. But let me tell my colleagues something. When I go to the bank to get a loan, they want to know how much I am going to pay back and when I am going to pay it back. This country has already borrowed $1 trillion, getting ready to borrow an additional $2.3 trillion from the Social Security trust fund with absolutely no provision on how it ever gets paid back. Guess what? Assuming it does get paid back, Social Security as we know it today is still broke in 2041, because beginning in 2011, we will have more people earning Social Security benefits than paying into the system.

Medicare as we know it today is broke in 2030.

Now, the President wants another tax cut for the wealthiest people in America. I am not here to beat up wealthy people. This is America. Many people grow and realize the American dream of being successful, and there is nothing wrong with that. But we are asking our men and women in uniform to now make a sacrifice. We are asking people all across America to sacrifice during this heightened time with the potential for war and terrorism. I think now is not the time to pass additional tax cuts.

Let me say this, Madam Speaker. I was one of 28 Democrats to vote with President Bush for his tax cut about a year ago. It was the biggest tax cut in 20 years, $1.3 trillion. But a lot has happened since then. We have gone from a $5.6 trillion projected surplus to a $215 billion debt over the next 10 years. We have had 2.5 million people in America, 2.5 million in America lose their jobs; and anyone who has a retirement plan, a 401(k) plan or invests in the stock market knows exactly what has happened there. We may need dividend tax reform, but now is not the time to do it.

Madam Speaker, as I travel my district back home, I have people come up to me and they talk about how they are unemployed for the first time in their lives. They talk about how they are trying to get by on a $600 Social Security check with a $400-, $500-, $600-, even $700-a-month drug bill. People come up to me and talk about how they are struggling to figure out how they are going to afford to send their kids to college; but never has anyone walked up to me back home or anywhere, for that matter, and said, you know, I am having trouble feeding my kids because I am paying too many dividends, too many taxes on my dividends.

Now is not the time for that reform. Now is the time to be fiscally responsible. Now is the time to begin to get out of the days of deficit spending and to pay down, to begin to pay down this debt.

Here is why it is so important, and here is why the Blue Dog budget addresses those things, and here is why the Blue Dog budget is the right answer during these difficult times to begin the process of getting us out of deficit spending and beginning to pay down the debt. The reason is simple. My grandparents left this country just a little bit better off than they found it for my parents, and my parents left this country just a little bit better off than they found it for our generation. And I think we have a duty; no, I think we have an obligation to leave this country just a little bit better off than we found it for our kids and for our grandkids.

Well, let me say that this is not a partisan issue for me. I was one of those who supported President Bush's tax cut about a year ago. I just think now is not the time for additional tax cuts, not at a time when we are asking our men and women in uniform to sacrifice, and not at a time when we return to the days of deficit spending, and this country is $6 trillion in debt. Again, we are spending $1 billion a day just paying interest on the national debt. Now is the time to restore fiscal discipline to our national government, to pay down this debt, and to get out of the days of deficit spending.

Let me tell the gentlewoman two things that concern me. If the President is just dying to spend $700 billion on something, let me tell my colleagues some things we ought to do in this country. We ought to quit talking about modernizing Medicare to include medicine for our seniors and we ought to do it, and we ought to fund it to where seniors can walk into the pharmacy of their choice, pull out their Medicare card and be treated just like they are when they go to the doctor and when they go to the hospital.

We hear a lot about homeland security. We hear a lot of talk about it, but it is way underfunded. On February 7, four members of the Cuban Coast Guard on a 30-foot boat made the trip across the waters from Cuba to Key West. They docked at the marina at a hotel in Key West with two machine guns, and they walked the streets of Key West for a number of minutes trying to find somebody to defect to. Thank God it was the Cuban Coast Guard, and thank God they were here to defect. What if it had been terrorists? We have to quit talking about homeland security, and we have to fund it. We have to keep America safe. We have to keep our children safe. We have to keep our grandchildren safe.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Pallone), the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson-Lee), a State that neighbors my State, and the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Ballance), who was here tonight to talk about such an important issue.

Back in the year 2000, there was an election and everyone talked about the need to truly modernize Medicare to include medicine for our seniors. Two years went by and nothing happened. Then we had another election in the year 2002. Everyone talked about the need to truly modernize Medicare to include medicine for our seniors, and nothing happened. There are a few of us that are not going to rest until we see a Medicare prescription drug plan for America's greatest generation, our seniors.

We hear folks on both sides of the aisle talk about how seniors have to choose between their medicine and their light bill and paying their rent and their groceries. I am here tonight, Mr. Speaker, to state that that is not rhetoric. It is true. I am a small town family pharmacy owner, and before coming to Congress I saw too many seniors come through the doors of our small family pharmacy with a handful of prescriptions after going to the doctor, which Medicare covered, and having tests run on them, which Medicare covered; and then the doctor included the medicine they needed to get well. And they would come through the door of the pharmacy with a handful of prescriptions, and sometimes even one prescription, but sometimes they could not afford that one prescription or they could not afford to take it properly.

I live in Prescott, Arkansas, a town of about 3,400 people. We do not even have a hospital anymore. But living in a small town I see seniors that come through the doors of the family pharmacy we owned back home, that could not afford their medicine; and being from a small town, I would learn that a week later that they were in the hospital 16 miles up the road in Hope, Arkansas, running up a 10 or $20,000 Medicare bill simply because they could not afford their medicine or could not afford to take it properly.

This is America. We can do better than that by our seniors.

A few months ago, I ran into another senior citizen, a retired pharmacist in my district who happened to have been the relief pharmacist at the pharmacy my mom and dad used when I was growing up in the 1960s. She said back in those days which was not that long ago, she said if I had a prescription that cost $5, I would go ahead and fill the next one in line while I built up enough courage to go out and tell the patient that their medicine was going to cost $5. And I think that graphically demonstrates and tells a story about how today's Medicare was really created for yesterday's medical care.

Health insurance companies are in the business of making a profit. They have got it. They understand it. They now cover medicine. They now know it holds down the costs of doctor visits, needless hospitals stays, and needless surgeries. No one has accurately portrayed how much money we will save in Medicare part A and part B if we truly modernize Medicare to include medicine for our seniors.

Now, the President has another plan, and we have heard about his plan to provide seniors with a discount card. Anybody that watches late night TV, you can buy them every night on TV for $7.95. And if you buy one and take it to a pharmacy, chances are you will pay more money for your prescription; and when you have a savings, you will save 50 cents to $3. A senior with a $600-a-month drug bill on six medications, let us give them the benefit of the doubt and say they save $3 a prescription, saving $18 dollars on a $600 drug bill does not help seniors choose between their medicine and their light bill and their groceries and so forth and so on.

And now the President says we will give you some prescription drug coverage if you will sign up for this HMO and let us tell you who your doctor is going to be. That is wrong. And I am not going to rest until our seniors can walk into the pharmacy of their choice, pull out their Medicare card, and be treated just like they are when they go to the doctor and when they go to the hospital.