Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, last night the House passed a $2.3 trillion budget, leaving a $500 billion hole and deficit, and showing that it is impossible to finance three wars with three tax cuts and get a different result.

In the 2000 election, President Bush said he was against nation- building. Who knew it was America he was talking about?

Let us look at the results of their economic program. An additional 2.5 million Americans are now unemployed since he has taken office; 44 million Americans without health care; 2 million more middle-class families have entered the rolls of poverty from the middle-class; we have the worst and most anemic wage growth since World War II at this time; and nearly $1 trillion worth of corporate individual assets have been foreclosed on.

We have spent nearly $112 billion in Iraq at this point, and we will vote today on another $25 billion. With this budget, the administration is telling the American people they have two values, two principles, two sets of books; one for Iraq and one for the United States.

Mr. Speaker, we need a change, a new direction, to balance our values and our budget priorities for America's future and our children.

Mr. Speaker, last night the Republican majority passed a $2.3 trillion budget that left a $500 billion deficit, showing it is impossible to finance three wars with three tax cuts.

They never miss an opportunity to stick it to working families and add to the deficit, in this case $228 billion. They never miss an opportunity.

When Ronald Reagan created the earned income tax credit and Bill Clinton doubled the size of it in 1993, we actually cut taxes and reduced the deficit. In 1997, we balanced the budget, invested millions of dollars in health care for uninsured children and created the $500 per child tax credit. We did it while balancing the budget.

They have taken the whole notion of fiscal responsibility, thrown it out, added $228 billion to the deficit, raiding Social Security at that time, just so they can have a tax cut and stick it right to working families who, more than just tires and braces, who do not have health care in some cases.

So you can actually have a tax cut, balance the budget, provide health care, open the doors to college education, but you have to govern and, as President Kennedy once said, to govern is to choose. Those are things that they refuse to do. They do not try to make those choices.

We have two proposals here to expand the child credit, but we have two different visions of America, two different sets of values. We are willing to make the choices that put working families, the interest of their health care, their children, their family, their college education, their savings at the front and center without raiding, without destroying, Social Security. In the last three times that they have

brought up tax cuts, they have never missed an opportunity to raid Social Security and add deficit.

In the last 3 years they have added $3 trillion to the deficit, 3 million Americans have been unemployed and they have had three tax cuts. I do not know what it is about the number three that they love so much. I have no idea.

What they have done here is they have decided to stick it to working families. We need to go back, to put our fiscal house in order, not raiding our children's future, provide a tax cut for working families and reduce the deficit. Not to say, ``I empathize with my colleagues on the other side about the importance of the deficit'' but to do something, after passing a budget with a $500 billion hole, do something that we can provide a tax cut finally to working families so they can get the resources and know it is there without raiding Social Security from their grandparents while you are doing it.

Mr. Speaker, twenty-two million new jobs, the beginning of an economic recession. Lifting 4.3 million families out of poverty, the beginning of an economic recession. Reduction of uninsured in this country from 44 million to 38 million, the beginning of our economic recession?

There is a rampant case of an inversion in the world. To the people that had those jobs, more people going to college, more people not in poverty, more people with health care, and the gentleman says that is the beginning of the recession? I could have sworn in the 1990s when I was around, all the Republicans talked about was that it had nothing to do with Bill Clinton; it had everything to do with Ronald Reagan's boom from the 1980s. Maybe the gentleman needs a rendezvous with history here and a rendezvous with his record.

He is right, we raised taxes on the wealthiest and we cut them on working families, and we reduced the deficit and had a balanced budget. I would recommend that the gentleman take a rendezvous with that record of what a balanced budget would look like, since his colleagues have done a great job of adding $3 trillion to the Nation's debt.

Mr. Speaker, I am proud to rise with my colleagues today to observe a moment of silence in honor of our fallen soldiers, including the nearly 800 U.S. troops who gave their lives in Iraq.

As Memorial Day approaches, we pause to honor each of the soldiers, sailors, airmen and Marines who gave their lives to defend our freedom. We will always remember their valor and sacrifices for America. We also pause to mourn with their families and friends who go on without their loved ones.

Today, more than 135,000 brave men and women remain in harm's way. Our continued attention should be focused on our troops, the success of their mission, and their safe return to their families.

I was proud to cast my vote for the defense authorization bill earlier today as a measure that honors their service and delivers much- needed relief. This legislation meets immediate warfighting needs, expands quality of life initiatives, and makes up for readiness shortfalls.

I am pleased to support a much deserved 3.5 percent pay raise for our troops, hardship duty pay increases, and a restored Survivors Benefit. I also strongly support the bill's increased production for armored Humvees and body armor as well as improvements to family housing, military medical facilities and schools.

I salute the brave men and women in uniform who will become our Nation's newest veterans upon their return. Now that over 14 months have passed since U.S. troops were deployed to Iraq, we wish them all a safe return and will work to ensure they have all the resources they need to accomplish the mission and bring them home safely to their families.

Mr. Speaker, our fallen troops will always remain in our thoughts and prayers. We will remember their sacrifices this Memorial Day and beyond, and we will do all that we can to support our troops currently deployed and to ensure their safe return.

Mr. Speaker, on April 24, President Bush visited the Timken Company, a plant in Canton, Ohio. He touted there his economic program and his tax cuts. Just the other day in Timken, Ohio, they closed the plant, firing 1,300 employees.

The President went on to say on his visit that his tax cut would end the double taxation of stock dividends which would mean, and I quote the President, ``companies like Timken have got a better capacity to expand, more jobs.'' He went on to say, ``We can do whatever it takes to overcome the obstacles in our way. I know you're optimistic about the future of this company.''

Three tax cuts, $3 trillion in debt, 3 more million Americans without jobs, 3 more million Americans in poverty since he has been President, and 43 million uninsured Americans. I am not sure we can afford this much progress in America. After announcing his tax cut in Timken, Ohio, the other day, just 2 days ago, the executive closed the plant firing 1,300 workers.

We can do better. There is a new direction in America that puts working families at the center of our economic policies rather than dividend tax cuts for contributors who support the President's reelection.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to this conference report.

In the 2000 campaign, President Bush declared that he was opposed to nation-building. Well, he has succeeded in keeping his commitment. When you leave $3 trillion of debt, a budget with $500 billion in deficit, 3 million Americans who have lost their jobs, 44 million Americans without health care, two more million Americans in poverty, George Bush can say he has kept his commitment against nation-building. Who knew it was America he was talking about.

This budget shows that you cannot finance three wars with three tax cuts and get a different result and continue the same policies by putting your foot on the accelerator on the same policy. You will get the same result: 3 million Americans without jobs, $3 trillion added to the Nation's debt, $500 billion in additional debt on top of that, and no ability to deal with the health care crisis and the college tuition crisis that middle-class families are facing.

We need new direction, a new set of policies to put middle-class families and their economic interests and the interests of their families at the heart of our economic policy. We need to break with the policies that continue to literally reward wealth at the expense of work.

Mr. Speaker, today I am proud to rise in strong support and as a cosponsor of H. Res. 605, recognizing the importance of increasing awareness of autism. Autism spectrum disorders and related developmental disabilities affect one in every 166 children--a dramatic increase from a decade ago when the prevalence was thought to be one in every 10,000. Prevalence is thought to be increasing by 10-17 percent annually, yet there remains little public awareness and understanding regarding these conditions.

Autism is a brain disorder, affecting a child's ability to communicate and interact socially. Parents of children with autism require a great deal of patience and support to properly care for these children. Congress must raise awareness of these conditions so that these parents receive the support of their communities and the expert assistance of trained medical professionals and teachers, regardless of income level.

It is not enough, however, to simply recognize the needs of people living with autism. As Members of Congress, we have a responsibility to follow through on commitments we have already made to the parents and teachers of these children. The Individuals With Disabilities Education Act requires the Federal Government to allocate funding for 40 percent of the cost of educating children with disabilities. Since this law was passed in 1991, Congress has never appropriated sufficient resources to meet this requirement. States are left to cover the costs of funding- intensive programs, such as special education programs for children with autism. As a result of insufficient funding, special education programs are chronically plagued by insufficient staffing, resources and training.

Congress must also provide resources to diagnose and treat children with autism before they reach school age, through training programs for medical professionals and initiatives designed to reach and treat autistic children during the crucial early stages of development. Medical professionals need to be educated so that they are aware of and recognize autism and its related disorders. Too often parents

are told not to worry if their child is slower than same age peers, especially if that child is a boy. Precious time is lost waiting for children to ``grow out'' of their symptoms when that time could be spent receiving early intervention services.

It is important to recognize scientifically valid methods that are effective in working with people with autism. At this time, there is no cure for autism. There are, however, many effective methodologies that can improve the lives of children with autism, and Congress has a responsibility to recognize and fund practitioners and trainers of these methodologies, while also educating parents on the limitations of current treatment so that they do not fall victim to unscrupulous individuals promising easy cures.

Teachers, therapists and doctors who treat children with autism are true American heroes and deserve the best training, support and recognition we can provide. I would also like to take this opportunity to recognize some of the leading organizations in the fight for proper treatment, care and research, such as the Autism Society of America, Cure Autism Now, the National Alliance for Autism Research and Unlocking Autism.

I thank the gentleman from Massachusetts for introducing this important resolution, and I urge my colleagues to vote for it. I also urge my colleagues to promote sufficient funding this year to address the critical needs this condition presents to people living with autism nationwide.

Mr. Speaker, this is, since April 1, the 16th day the House has been in session. And here is a sample of what we have done: we have named 11 post offices, recognized the Garden Club of America, recognized the importance of music education in America, and authorized the use of the Capitol grounds for the Soap Box Derby.

What has happened to our troops in Iraq in that time? We lost 184 Americans, our loved ones, bringing the total to 785. As we name post offices, our constituents are asking questions of the whys and hows of Iraq and want us to get the answers.

This week how are we handling the controversies in Iraq? We are going to name three more post offices; authorize the use of the Capitol grounds, appropriately, for the World War II memorial services; and consider the Paperwork Reduction Act. Then we are going on recess.

This House has surrendered its oversight role, which is constitutionally enacted and guaranteed, by rubber-stamping the policy in Iraq without asking the questions our constituents are asking and not seeking the answers they need.

As President Kennedy once said, ``To govern is to choose.'' We need to make choices here.

Offered by: Mr. Emanuel

Amendment No. 1: At the end of title V (page 200, after

line 24), insert the following new section:

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of H. Res. 613, recognizing Vietnam Human Rights Day. This resolution marks the tenth anniversary of the day the Manifesto of the Nonviolent Movement for Human Rights in Vietnam was announced. This landmark document was written in 1994 by the great human rights leader Dr. Nguyen Dan Que, who called for an end to human rights violations in Vietnam.

Dr. Que is one of the most prominent advocates for democracy, freedom and human rights in Vietnam. He has remained in Vietnam since 1975, after the fall of Saigon and the departure of the last American troops. Even in the face of significant peril, Dr. Que defied the communist regime by speaking out in defense of human dignity and the rights of all Vietnamese people. He has been imprisoned intermittently for the past 20 years, and remains under constant supervision and subject to frequent harassment by the Socialist Republic of Vietnam. He continues his struggle in order to focus the world's attention to the thousands of his countrymen and fellow dissidents who are also harassed, tortured or imprisoned for openly criticizing the government.

One such dissident is Father Thaddeus Nguyen Ly, a Roman Catholic priest who was invited to testify before the United States Commission on International Religious Freedom in 2001. Although he was denied permission to leave his country to testify in person, his statement cited several specific actions taken by the Government of Vietnam that violated religious freedom and which he described as ``extremely cruel.'' He called for a ``non violent and persistent campaign'' to achieve full religious freedom for all people in Vietnam.

The Vietnamese government imprisoned Father Ly on the basis of that testimony. He was branded a traitor for ``slandering'' the Communist party, and ``distorting'' the religious policy of the government. Father Ly was arrested and tried without the benefit of counsel. In a trial that lasted only a single day, he was convicted of all charges and sentenced to fifteen years in prison and an additional five years of administrative probation. Father Ly's nephews were also imprisoned, further demonstrating this case of egregious oppression of human rights and its devastating impact on Father Ly's family.

Mr. Speaker, it has been ten years since the United States ended its trade embargo with Vietnam and normalized relations with Hanoi under the policy known as ``constructive engagement,'' which has proven effective with our previously closed societies in which human rights violations were prevalent. While the U.S. continues to open diplomatic relations with Vietnam, we must continue to advance constructive engagement to ensure a more open, democratic and prosperous Vietnamese society. It is our responsibility to promote greater freedom of speech and religion and greater respect for basic human rights in Vietnam.

Mr. Speaker, human rights shall always remain a firm pillar of U.S. foreign policy. Accordingly, I thank the gentleman from Virginia for introducing this important resolution and I urge my colleagues to support it.

Mr. Speaker, Chairman Grassley from the other body said, ``We Republicans have never quite reached the level of competent oversight that the Democrats developed. We tried to emphasize legislating and we have delegated so much authority to the executive branch of government and we ought to devote more time to oversight than we do.''

This Congress in the last 43 days has been in session 14 days. What have we done with our time? We have named 11 post offices, recognized the Garden Club of America, recognized the importance of music education, authorized the use of the Capitol grounds for the Soap Box Derby.

What has happened to our troops? 175 have died in the last 43 days, bringing the total in Iraq to 775.

While we name post offices and recognize sports teams, our constituents are asking questions of how we got in a war without an exit strategy, and for what purpose did we miscalculate and how did we miscalculate our entry into that war.

And this week, how are we handling controversies in Iraq? We are going home a day early. President Kennedy once said, ``To govern is to choose.'' We can name post offices, or we can ask questions, and even this Congress might try to do both.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to this bill. I do it as the son of a pediatrician and the brother of an oncologist. I appreciate that the Congress today and the Senate, the other body, is having a debate about health care. Senator Kerry is out presenting his health care plan; the only person lacking a health care plan in this debate, after 3 years in office, is the President of the United States.

The Institute of Medicine estimates that 18,000 Americans die prematurely because of not having health care. This is not just a problem of the poor. The fastest growing group of working uninsured in this country are people earning up to $50,000 a year. Kaiser Family Foundation found that the system, the insurance system, literally pays somewhere close to $125 billion to cover the uninsured who do not receive health care. All of us who have health care pay an uninsured premium in our health care cost for those who show up at hospitals without health insurance, getting critical care rather than preventive care.

Even as we spend more money than any other industrialized nation on health care, we have 44 million uninsured, of whom 33 million work and 10 million are children.

To address the needs, we can do better than the bill which experts say will damage, rather than benefit, the insurance market. We can do better than a bill that takes away important insurance requirements like cancer screenings and other critical preventive care rather than relying on the emergency care which is what the uninsured patient receives today.

This bill would actually increase the uninsured premium all of us pay who have health insurance by putting additional strains on the insurance system and increasing premiums for many Americans. In 2000, the health costs for a family of four was $6,500. Today it is $9,000. It is going up exponentially by a third. Nobody has gotten an increase in salary by a third. What is the driving force behind that inflationary fact in health care insurance premiums? The uninsured who show up at hospitals. Hospitals recoup the cost by passing it on, which raises premiums.

Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to reject this bill and pass the substitute which will help small businesses provide health insurance, reduce the number of uninsured while reducing the premiums the rest of us pay.

Mr. Speaker, it is with great honor that I rise, on behalf of 111,000 of my constituents who are of Polish descent, to recognize the anniversary of the ratification of Poland's Constitution on May 3rd. We remember the men and women who first penned their historic constitution 219 years ago. We have another reason to celebrate as this year's anniversary will be the first since Poland has joined nine of its neighbors in achieving membership in the European Union.

In many ways, the foundation of Poland's constitution parallels our own, written only four years later. Following our model, the Polish Constitution of 1791 establishes three equal branches of government--a Legislative, an Executive, and a Judiciary Branch. It also promotes the philosophies of liberty, democracy, and religious freedom for all people. The constitution remains a landmark document that inspired generations of Poles through the turbulence of the eighteenth century, both World Wars and communist rule. Its longevity and survival exemplifies the strong democratic tradition and values of the Polish people.

Polish immigrants have imported these same traditions and values into the United States. Throughout our own history, Polish-American citizens have contributed to local communities. In the 5th district, from the lakefront to the western suburbs, the Polish-American community shares a leading role in business, fine arts, charity and many other forms of public service. The Polish-American influence has shaped the city of Chicago and our nation into the strong and vibrant communities they are today.

Mr. Speaker, Poland has stood shoulder-to-shoulder with the United States and its friendship has never wavered through the tumultuous events in our own history. Now is the time when we must return the favor by contributing to Poland's prosperity and security as it enters a new era as a full and respected member of the EU.

Poland's loyalty to the U.S. and its generous commitment of resources and manpower throughout the global war on terror and in the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq will never be forgotten by our grateful nation. Poland has repeatedly proven itself a steadfast ally from the beginning, sending more than 1,700 troops and special forces, second only to Great Britain, to help with Operation Iraqi Freedom and the reconstruction efforts.

Still, our Polish friends visiting their families in the United States are treated differently than other allies. Despite its proven loyalty and contributions to our security, Poles must still apply and pay for visas to enter the United States. That is why I have introduced H. Res. 601 in response to this discrepancy. My resolution calls upon the State Department to include Poland in the Visa Waiver Program. What better way to celebrate Poland's anniversary than to grant this waiver.

Mr. Speaker, the Polish Constitution is a symbol of pride and strength for Polish citizens throughout the world. I look forward to working with my colleagues and in support of Poland's efforts to flourish as an integral partner of the global economy and coalition against terror. Together we can continue to achieve the same principles of freedom and democracy that both our constitutions set forth over two centuries ago.

Mr. Speaker, today I rise in strong support of H. Con. Res. 352, honoring the contributions of Indian-Americans and the people of India to the United States. This important resolution recognizes the benefits of our two nations working together towards our common goals of promoting peace, prosperity, and freedom among all countries of the world.

I am proud to count among my friends and neighbors many people of Indian origin, and I have seen first-hand the contributions they have made to the well-being and prosperity of our community. Indeed, the Fifth District of Illinois is enriched by the presence of longtime residents and recent immigrants from India, who have contributed their talents and energy to small business development, health care, science and the fine arts. Through their hard work and commitment to public service, our Indian neighbors have proven that America is made stronger by the contribution of its immigrant communities.

I am also pleased to recognize the continuing and growing friendship between the nations of India and the United States. India is the most populous democratic country in the world and has historically been a steadfast ally and loyal friend of the United States. We have benefited from our close and mutual friendship with India, through cooperation on security, trade and technological advancements which improve lives in both countries and help promote safety throughout the world.

With this bipartisan resolution, the American people recognize that we will be more effective and successful with India as a strategic partner in achieving our mutual objectives to promote democracy, combat terrorism, pursue nuclear non-proliferation, strengthen the global economy and trade, and slow the spread of HIV/AIDS.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlelady from California for introducing this concurrent resolution, and I urge my colleagues to support it, as well as to continue all of our efforts to promote peace and cooperation between these two great nations.

Mr. Speaker, since April 1, 42 days, the House has been in session 12 of those 42 days; and in that period of time, we have lost 171 of our fellow citizens, bringing the total to 772.

While that was happening, what has Congress done? We have named eight post offices, recognized the Garden Club of America, recognized the importance of music education, and authorized the use of the Capitol grounds for the Soap Box Derby. That is what Congress has done in the last 42 days, 12 days working; that is what we have done while we have lost loved ones in this country.

Our constituents are asking the whys and the hows of this war. They want us to get the answers. We have a constitutional responsibility, the checks and balances, to ask those questions. It is imperative that we do that.

President Kennedy once said, ``To govern is to choose.'' We can name post offices, or we can ask the hard questions about the direction of our Nation. We may even be able to do both.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman from New York for yielding me this time. I rise in strong support of the motion of the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Frost) to move the previous question and allow a vote on the two bills that are essential to lowering health care costs and helping

Americans afford their prescription drugs.

I would like to note the irony that today in the House of Representatives we are dealing with health care, the Senate is dealing with health care, and Senator Kerry is dealing with the issue of the uninsured and health care. The only person missing from this debate is the President of the United States, who still lacks an agenda as it relates to health care.

As we are focusing on health care costs, for the last 6 years the cost of prescription drugs in this country have gone up on average 18 percent. This year alone they are going to go up 18 percent. They are projected to go up next year 20 percent. That is five times the rate of inflation. The two bills that this motion would bring up on the floor would make an immediate and lasting impact on the cost of prescription drugs that our seniors are being asked to pay and our taxpayers are being asked to also pay. People from around the world come to America for their medical care. Yet Americans are forced to go around the world for their medications. That is wrong, and we can do better.

Just recently, the CEOs of Walgreens and CVS now came out in favor of allowing people to buy their drugs in Canada and in Europe. Secretary of Health and Human Services Tommy Thompson, who has opposed it, now supports allowing Americans to buy their prescription drugs in Canada and in Europe. The Secretary of Health and Human Services uses Lipitor. Where is that made? Ireland. The difference between that Lipitor that he buys and the people in Canada and Europe is that in the United States that costs 67 percent more here in the United States than it does in Europe and Canada, yet it is made from the same factory in Ireland and we import it into this country. It is distributed worldwide from one country.

Last year alone we imported $14.5 billion worth of prescription drugs. They are safe. The only thing different with those drugs from anywhere else in the world is those drugs here in the United States at our pharmacy cost 50 to 60 percent more here in the United States than they do in Canada and in Europe. It is high time we bring competition and choice to market and bring prices down. This legislation would allow us to do that.

In addition to that, half the States in the country now have legislation or some ability allowing people to buy prescription drugs in Canada and Europe. Congress has passed this on a bipartisan basis. It is not a Democrat-Republican issue. It is between right versus wrong. It is high time we bring this legislation back up and give people real financial relief from a cost where inflation is running 2 percent, prescription drug costs are running close to 20 percent each year for the last 6 years. It is time we bring competition to bear on the market and allow prices to drop through choice and through competition.

I would hope that my colleagues on the other side, given that 83 Members voted for this, allow this legislation to bear so we can finally force the other Chamber to allow prescription drugs prices to be driven down. This is about cost, cost, cost. When somebody tells you it is not about money, it is about money. The prescription drug companies have a hold on this Congress. It is time we break the hold and allow the voices of our constituents to be heard and the pressure on their wallets to be relieved.