Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, I rise to congratulate John M. McCann of Chicago on receiving the Dr. Robert Hamilton Special Service Award in recognition of his years of excellence and dedication to the DePaul University Athletic Department.

John McCann is being honored for his years of service to DePaul University as sports information director. From 1958 to 1973, John was the man responsible for the promotion of DePaul athletics, years that produced some of the most exciting times in Blue Demons history.

A lifelong Chicagoan, John was raised on the city's west side, attending St. Philip's School. During World War II, John was in the U.S. Navy, stationed on the USS Case. Upon his return from the war, John enrolled at DePaul University, beginning a relationship that would last a lifetime.

After graduating from DePaul in 1950, John began his career in education, first working as a teacher at DePaul Academy. He later joined the ranks of teachers and administrators in the Chicago public schools, eventually becoming the principal of Lakeview's Louis J. Agassiz Elementary School, a position he retired from in 1984.

But John's true passion was always with DePaul athletics. As sports information director, John oversaw the publicity and media coverage of dominant years in Blue Demons basketball, including the great teams of the 1960s that starred Howie Carl and Billy Haig. John was an integral part of the DePaul basketball family that was led by the legendary Coach Ray Meyer and his longtime assistant, the late Frank McGrath.

To John and his wife, Cay, family has always been a priority. Their son Kevin has followed in his footsteps as an educator, rising to his current position as principal of Jamieson School in Lincoln Park. John is most proud, though, that Kevin and his two siblings, Mary and John, all attended his beloved alma mater, DePaul.

Mr. Speaker, I join with the people of Chicago and the members of the DePaul family in recognizing the great honor being bestowed upon John McCann and wish him continued happiness in the future.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today as a proud cosponsor and in strong support of H.R. 1385, which extends the authorization of a special postage stamp to benefit breast cancer research.

Since its introduction in July 1998, the Breast Cancer Stamp has provided the American people with a way to directly support breast cancer research. The stamp carries a seven cent surcharge, which goes directly to the life-saving research efforts of the National Cancer Institute and the Department of Defense Breast Cancer Research Program. The American people have demonstrated that they care about this research by purchasing over 430 million stamps. That's a direct, voluntary contribution of over $30 million to this cause, one stamp at a time.

The American public has opened their hearts to women everywhere by acknowledging that breast cancer is a disease which can affect all of our families. Indeed, more than 2 million women in the United States have been diagnosed and treated for breast cancer. One in eight women will develop breast cancer during her lifetime, and 40,000 American women will die from the disease this year. Breast cancer is an issue that we should all care about, particularly since women from every State, of every ethnic and economic background are diagnosed and treated for the disease every year.

In my home State of Illinois, researchers estimate that over 10,000 women will develop breast cancer during the coming year. Their lives depend on early detection and early, effective treatment. When Americans send letters and cards using the Breast Cancer Stamp, they aren't just showing that they've contributed to the cause of research. They are reminding their friends and loved ones about the importance of self examination and mammograms. They are promoting vigilance, awareness, and involvement in the fight against breast cancer. They are showing that increased awareness makes a considerable difference for every woman diagnosed with breast cancer.

The American people have shown they recognize the necessity of investment in breast cancer research through their continued purchase of these stamps, and I urge my colleagues to support the reauthorization of this program. I also remind my colleagues that there is still work to be done.

Along with this bill, I am proud to have cosponsored six other breast cancer related bills which currently await further action in this Congress. Among them are proposals to provide funding and authorization for the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences to expand research on environmental and age-related factors in breast cancer prevalence, authorization of additional funding to the National Institute of Health for early detection and prevention programs, and legislation to require private health insurance plans to provide coverage for minimum hospital stays for major breast cancer-related surgery. I ask my colleagues to honor the spirit of the millions of citizens who made the Breast Cancer Stamp a success, by pledging your support to these potentially life-saving measures still awaiting action.

Mr. Speaker, I commend the gentleman from California for introducing this important legislation, and I ask my colleagues to support the passage of H.R. 1385.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of the proclamation to commemorate the 200th anniversary of Constantino Brumidi's birth. Often referred to as the Michelangelo of the Capitol, Constantino Brumidi's frescoes decorate the Capitol Rotunda, House Chamber, committee rooms, and corridors of the Capitol with their incorporation of classical artistic traditions and patriotic American themes.

Born in Italy in 1805, Constantino Brumidi studied at the Italian Academy of Arts and demonstrated his talent for fresco painting at a young age, painting several Roman palaces and working three years in the Vatican. He immigrated to America in 1852 at the age of forty-seven and settled in New York City. The artist later took on other important works such as the frescoes in St. Stephen's Church and an allegorical depiction of the Holy Trinity in a Mexico City cathedral. It was upon his return from Mexico that Constantino Brumidi stopped in Washington and visited the Capitol where he was excited about the opportunity to decorate its interiors.

Constantino Brumidi was hired by Captain Montgomery Meigs and his first art work in the Capitol was in the House Committee on Agriculture's room. Because his art garnered such favorable attention, he was awarded more commissions and eventually became a Government painter. While Brumidi created scores of frescoes depicting allegories and scenes from American history, perhaps his most important work was ``The Apotheosis of George Washington'' which appears in the Rotunda of the Capitol dome and depicts Washington's ascension to heaven. Today, no visit to the Capitol is complete without viewing this incredible work. Although immigrating to America later in life, he drew from his Italian artistic experience and blended it with the history of his new country. The artist took great pride in his new home, even signing one fresco, ``C. Brumidi Artist Citizen of the U.S.''

Mr. Speaker, on behalf of my district's more than 62,000 constituents of Italian descent, I am proud to join this body in celebrating Constantino Brumidi's lasting contributions to our country as the 200th anniversary of his birth approaches.

Mr. Speaker, last week we learned the administration's budget projects a $521 billion deficit. What we also have learned, based on that budget, is that not only are they running a budget deficit, or a fiscal deficit; they are also running a credibility deficit. It is impossible to wage three wars with three tax cuts and expect a different result. They have, time and again, whether we are dealing with the issue of weapons of mass destruction, the benefits of their tax cut, or with the issue of Medicare, on point after point, they are running a credibility deficit.

The other day, Time Magazine ran a cover story about the growing credibility gap for the President of the United States. It is all because of the actions he has taken. Let us take the issue of Medicare. We debated here whether we were going to charge the

taxpayers $400 billion for a prescription drug benefit; and before a single benefit has been issued, which is questionable, but before a single benefit has been issued to a single senior citizen, the taxpayers were charged another $150 billion, and the administration knew all about it all along. We did nothing to bring down the price of prescription drugs, which are going up next year 15 percent and are going up the following year another 15 percent. Yet they knew all along, while we were debating a prescription drug benefit that will not be seen by a single senior citizen for another 2 years, they knew the bill was actually $550 billion. That is what our seniors and our taxpayers are going to be charged, and we did nothing to drive down or bring down the prices, which will continue to go up. That was the beginning of a credibility deficit.

Now, the President has submitted a budget with a $500 billion to $520 billion deficit that his administration calls ``manageable,'' ``within acceptable range.'' Yet the International Monetary Fund said it is the single largest drag on the economy. Goldman Sachs, the respected firm of Goldman Sachs where the President's Director of the Office of Management and Budget comes from, referred to the budget that the President submitted as ``not credible'' and ``an accounting fiction.''

And we learned recently in Ron Suskind's book on ``The Price of Loyalty'' that the President of the United States knew all along the reason for the deficit. Mitch Daniels said, Mr. President, if you pass this tax cut, you are going to have deficits for the entire first and second terms of your administration. Yet now he wants to blame it on 9- 11. He wants to blame it on an inherited recession, which was not a recession, and he wants to blame it on corporate scandals. Yet he was told by his own Director of the Office of Management and Budget that the reason for deficits are his tax cuts, which have nothing to do with economic recovery. But the President of the United States had the wisdom to ask, appropriately: Have we not done enough for the top rate? Have we not taken care of the very wealthy yet?

He knew that his economic program and his first tax cut had taken care of the wealthy, but he went along and decided to once again repeat a tax cut to the very wealthy in this country at the expense of middle- class families who are seeing no increases in assistance in college education, who are seeing no increases in health care, 33 million Americans who work and who have no health care. And he knew that that tax cut was going to take care of the wealthy and drive us into a deficit. Yet he went along and tried to pass it for something it was not, and then accused every Democrat who raised the same question the President of the United States raised as waging class warfare. The President of the United States went along with a tax cut that was skewed to the wealthiest.

On the issue of weapons of mass destruction, the issue is not whether Saddam Hussein was developing weapons of mass destruction. The issue was whether he was an imminent threat, and we were told he was an imminent threat. Now we learn, after having derided and belittled the United Nations, that the President of the United States went out on TV and said one thing, knowing the facts to be something else.

That is why this President now has with the American people, for the first time in his Presidency, when he had the benefit of the doubt from what happened to this country, to all Americans after 9-11, he has a growing credibility deficit. If we listen to what he says and we see what he does, the two things are not the same, from tax cuts to the deficit to Medicare, to weapons of mass destruction. Let us take the issue of the weapons of mass destruction. We will have to have the countries of the world be on our side when we face North Korea and our word must be important.

Then, and let me read one last thing and I will finish, as Time Magazine reported, ``Any of those challenges might have been manageable alone. The problem was that each news cycle brought a new question about Bush's judgment and candor, which Democrats lost no time exploiting. Fiscal conservatives have been howling for months about a budget that seemed totally out of control.''

Mr. President, this country now is facing a credibility gap, not only around the world, but your administration is, because of its words and its actions.

Mr. Speaker, I am proud to introduce the Flu Prevention Act of 2004 with my colleagues Mr. Shimkus, Ms. DeGette and Mr. Engel. This bill takes important steps to ensure that the widespread vaccine shortages of this flu season, which resulted in the deaths of 110 children will not occur in the future. The bill is an identical companion to bipartisan Senate legislation, introduced by Senators Bayh, Craig, Landrieu, and Durbin.

This bill uses a multifaceted approach to ensure adequate flu vaccine supply and educate American families about the importance of the vaccine. It provides tax incentives for vaccine manufacturers to expand their production capacities. It also allows the Centers for Disease Control to share the financial risk of vaccine overproduction with vaccine manufacturers, so as to eliminate the current financial incentive to under-produce vaccine.

Additionally, the Flu Prevention Act provides funding for and requires CDC to implement a protocol if the flu reaches epidemic or pandemic levels. It establishes a public awareness campaign to provide education and outreach efforts on the importance of receiving the vaccine, which populations should receive the vaccine, and vaccine safety.

Mr. Speaker, I encourage my colleagues to support this legislation as a strong preventative measure to protect our nation's children from future flu outbreaks.

Mr. Speaker, last week we learned that after extensive debate we were told that the Medicare bill would cost $400 billion to the taxpayers. We learned that the real number, and known all along, was $540 billion. Not a single benefit has been accrued to a senior citizen. Not a single prescription drug or reduction in cost has been accrued to a senior citizen, and yet the taxpayers are being asked to foot the bill not for $400 billion but for $540 billion.

In the last 2 months since this Congress passed the prescription drug bill, three things have happened. First, the taxpayers have been asked to pay an additional $140 billion. Second, Mr. Scully, who is over at Health and Human Services and negotiated this bill, got a huge lobbying contract and became a lobbyist. And in today's Wall Street Journal, there was an article about Delphi gets boost in new drug law where they are able to write off $500 million in costs for health care for their seniors and retirees, and yet not a single new benefit from the Medicare bill. So we have one individual becoming a lobbyist, the taxpayers getting an additional bill of $140 billion, and corporate America gets to write off more of their health care costs. Not necessarily a bad thing, but seniors have to wait until 2006 to see any benefit at all, if there is one, from this legislation.

That to me is exactly what was wrong with this bill is that we have HMOs and pharmaceutical companies getting huge dollars and huge investments of taxpayer-paid benefits, and no money, no resources towards our senior citizens.

This article talks about Delphi's benefit but Caterpillar, GM, Lucent Technologies, all with a number of their retirees who have health care plans as retirees, will now be able to accelerate the write-off on their bottom line. The Delphi article talks about them being able to accelerate a $500 million write-off, and yet no new benefit in prescription drug benefit has been delivered to a single senior citizen.

I will say one thing. The pharmaceutical industry, the insurance industry, and other special interests have surely gotten their money's worth out of this Congress, and so I applaud them for their hard work.

A number of my colleagues on the other side always talk about how they would like government to start emulating and working like a business. There was a bipartisan group that talked about how to make the government, and specifically prescription drugs, operate like a business, creating in Medicare a Sam's Club entity, 41 million seniors would be pulled together, the purchasing power of the seniors. We could save hundreds of billions of dollars by negotiating bulk prices, just like Sam's Club does, just like private insurers do. But the legislation that was passed in this Congress at the behest of the pharmaceutical industry prohibits Medicare from doing what private industry does, what Sam's Club does or private insurance companies do, what even the Veterans Administration does, negotiate on behalf of who they represent, using the leverage power of a quantity of people. In this case it would be 41 million seniors.

Another way of reducing the price and delivering the prescription drugs would be allowing people to buy their drugs in Canada and Europe, again proving we pay 40 percent more here in the United States than anywhere else in the world. People are allowed to use competition in choice to buy their medications. We would have lower prices here in the United States, save our senior citizens dollars and our taxpayers dollars, but both attempts to get the government to operate like a business, to save money, to be more efficient, wring out synergies, has been prevented.

I have found in the last 2 weeks one of the most incredible news on this legislation.

First of all, I believe if we had known the true number and not been lied to or not told the truth or denied the access to the truth, and we had been told that the number was $540 billion, the legislation never would have passed. But that information was consciously, specifically denied access in the public debate, as has been in the past for cases where the administration has refused to share information. Now we know the true number, and the taxpayers are going to be asked to pay an additional $140 billion on top of the $400 billion, and we do not have the money to do it. Yet we are asking them to do it, and not a single benefit.

Mr. Scully, nothing against that, has negotiated himself a wonderful contract to be a lobbyist on the prescription drug benefit, and companies like Delphi will now be eligible to accelerate and write down $500 million on their taxes, and yet not a single benefit has been given for seniors. Everybody sat here and talked about what we were doing for seniors, and this year the prices of prescription drugs will go up 15 percent. They are projected to go up another 15 to 18 percent the following year, and we have done nothing to affect the price.

After this type of behavior in this Congress and the actions taken by this Congress, I am surprised that anybody wonders why people are cynical about politics. We have done a great job out of this institution, taking care of the special interests. Hopefully we will return and look at this legislation and once again think about how we can

save our seniors money and our taxpayers.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today with a heavy heart. Early this morning, the people of Chicago lost a great friend in John J. Sexton who passed away after a long and difficult illness. John Sexton was a man who lived life to its fullest, and the friends and family he had are a testament to the quality of his character and the type of man he was.

John Sexton achieved his success in life through hard work and determination. He spent his life in public service and was dedicated to the people of Chicago, rising through the ranks with the City, from machinist, to foreman, to Assistant Superintendent of the Meter Division of the City's Water Department, and finally Superintendent of the Meter Division. His dedication to his job and the city he loved is an example of why Chicago is known as ``The City That Works.''

But, it was John's connection to and involvement in his community that John's friends will remember. John loved the northwest side of Chicago, his home for his entire life. John raised his family in the Hiawatha Park neighborhood where he was very active as president of the Hiawatha Boys Baseball Organization.

As church life plays such an important role in the lives of so many Chicagoans, John was a member of several esteemed Northwest side parishes. He grew up in Presentation Parish, attended grammar school at St. Angela's and high school at St. Michael's. As an adult he was a member of St. Francis Borgia Parish.

The Northwest side has produced some of Chicago's finest leaders, and John Sexton played an active part in the success of many of their careers. John's passion for politics began at 16, working as a precinct worker for former Alderman Thomas Casey. As a precinct captain in the mighty 36th Ward Regular Democratic Organization, John became a close confidant and friend to many elected officials, especially Alderman William J.P. Banks and State Senator James A. DeLeo.

John's top priority was always his family, and the love and support they provided him was the most important thing in his life. For 31 years he was married to his wonderful wife, Rosetta. Their family also includes their daughter, Laurie Moran, and her husband Joseph, their son, John Jr., their daughter, Diana, and John's sister, Mary Kay Kuhter.

Mr. Speaker, I join with the people of Chicago in mourning John Sexton, a man I was proud to call a friend. May God bless the Sexton family and the memory of a man who was truly loved by his friends, his community and his family.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of H. Res. 492, a resolution honoring the contributions of Catholic schools and supporting the goals of Catholic Schools Week.

The accomplishments of Catholic schools and their tremendous impact on students and communities throughout the nation is evident in the Fifth Congressional District of Illinois, where schools like St. Ferdinand Catholic Elementary, St. Patrick High School, and Notre Dame High School for Girls provide a quality education while instilling values that will serve their students throughout their lives. These schools provide strong academic curriculums and engender significant parental involvement. They not only teach students the importance of academic achievement, but also provide a balanced perspective on life that promotes responsibility, justice and social service.

Catholic schools also promote ethnic and racial diversity. Increasing numbers of children in Catholic schools in my district come from our minority communities. Students in Catholic schools achieve exceptionally high graduation rates, with increasing numbers advancing to higher education and giving back to the community through volunteer service.

It is also important to recognize that the Catholic school experience fosters more than just scholastic excellence. It provides spiritual guidance to students by encouraging fundamental ideals and an appreciation for family values, community service, and faith in their own lives. This, in turn, shapes Catholic school students into leaders of tomorrow.

I want to take this opportunity to applaud the recent accomplishments of two teachers at a Catholic school in my district--Mother Theodore Guerin High School in River Grove, Illinois--who have been recognized for their outstanding service to their students and to their community. Sister Adelaide Ortegal received the Dr. Nathan Jones Special Achievement Award last October. This honor is awarded to educators for their outstanding work with African-American students. Sister Ortegal has taught Art for thirty years and is the sponsor of the African- American Club at Mother Guerin.

I also want to recognize Mary Stephany, a social science teacher at Mother Guerin who has been chosen as an Ambassador to Chicago's Field Museum for 2003-2004. In this role, Ms. Stephany will be a liaison for her school, serve on education advisory committees to the museum, and mentor other teachers.

I thank these two outstanding individuals as well as all of the dedicated Catholic school teachers in my district for their love of learning and their devotion to their students.

Mr. Speaker, I support this important resolution and encourage Catholic schools in my district and across the United States to continue contributing to the development of strong moral, intellectual and social values in America's young people. I thank my colleague, Representative Vitter, for introducing this resolution, and I thank the National Catholic Educational Association and the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops for their sponsorship of Catholic Schools Week.

Mr. Speaker, in today's number reporting a deficit $500 billion, a historic number, it goes to prove that we cannot fight three wars with three tax cuts, having now produced a record deficit in the economy.

And what we need now is a balanced budget that is in balance with our priorities. Not all government spending is good, and not all tax cuts lead to the same economic benefit. We need a strategy and an agenda that brings our budget into balance with our priorities, where we can make sure that Americans can afford the education and the health care for their children that they need as well as make sure that we have the security and the investments in our defense that we need. And as we lay out our agenda and understand where we are as a country and the priorities, I think that today's deficit proves that while the economy is supposedly growing, the deficit should be going down, not going up. And the reason it is going up is because we neither have a strategy nor the priorities that are correct for this country and for the future of our country. So we must once again dedicate ourselves to the principle of bringing the budget into balance, in balance with our priorities.

Mr. Speaker, last year, Americans on average saw their health care costs increase by 9.3 percent. That is on top of the year before where health care inflation ran at 12 percent. Today, we have 44 million Americans without health insurance and 32 million Americans who work full-time without health care.

In fact, the problem with our health care system today is that many people with health care insurance pay an uninsured premium for those who work, but show up at emergency rooms without health care. Hospital costs are skyrocketing through the roof. We all pay for their health care, and they do not get it.

What ails our health care system is that there is not enough competition. We need competition in pricing of prescription drugs where we have competition, where people can buy drugs in Canada, in Europe. That competition and choice would drive prices down. What we need to do for the uninsured is also create a competitive system.

I have offered and will be offering soon a piece of legislation for a health care voucher for the working uninsured where they will get a voucher equal to the dollar amount of the tax credit the President proposed and buy into a subsidiary of the Federal employees health care plan.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of this resolution honoring the memory and lasting contributions of Paul Simon.

I was honored to work on his election to the Senate, where he made all of the people of Illinois and America proud. When we look across Illinois today, we see that we have an Attorney General who worked for Paul Simon and started a career in politics working for Paul Simon, a Member of Congress, a State Senator, a county commissioner. Although he is very famous for those who say that John Kennedy touched a set of idealisms for people to go into public service, for a number of us in Illinois, regardless of our party, Paul Simon

touched that chord of idealism; and we knew then that reaching for our ideals was possible by seeking a life in public service.

Despite winning five elections and winning elections in five different decades serving his State, his area, and his country in many different capacities, his character, integrity, and intelligence are what endure; and it is why Paul Simon today remains one of the most popular figures in the State of Illinois.

Long before they were fashionable, Paul Simon championed civil rights, education, and campaign finance reform. He saw in those areas his ideals being realized. In everything he did, he was guided by a deep, deep desire to help those who needed a voice. And for a number of us in Illinois, we can still hear his voice with ``how are you today'' and that deep sense that you were Paul Simon's person that he was talking to. And he always had a sense that he was not up here to be a vote, but to be a voice for our values, regardless of what party we came from. He taught many of us, and some of us, in fact, have come to this lesson hard in life, that you can disagree without being disagreeable.

After his retirement from Congress, he did not leave public service. He spent the remaining days of his life pursuing what he cared most about, which was education. As this resolution states, he remained an unapologetic champion of the less fortunate and a constant example of caring and honesty in public service.

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleagues for the opportunity to recognize a true hero for many of us in Illinois. We will always remember Paul Simon and honor his enduring contributions to the State of Illinois and to this country. His memory will be a blessing to those who follow in his path.

Mr. Speaker, last year's 9\1/2\ percent increase in health care spending and costs was the largest in 11 years. Our health care spending per capita doubles that of European nations; yet 43 million Americans have no health care coverage and millions more receive inadequate care.

Many Americans listened to the State of the Union address last night in hopes of hearing solutions to skyrocketing prescription drug costs and insurance costs, driven largely by the uninsured who show up in hospitals and emergency rooms seeking care, forcing all of us who do have health care to pay what I call an uninsured premium, which is one of the great causes of our health care inflation in this country.

Unfortunately, the President's speech did not propose new ways to tackle these problems. The President touted his Medicare bill but ignored the fact that that bill does nothing to address skyrocketing prescription drug prices. We pay in this country 40 to 50 percent more than Canadians and Europeans pay for the same prescription drugs.

To address the worsening problem of the uninsured, the President referred again to a refundable tax credit worth $1,000. The reality is in the marketplace it is impossible to find plans, individual plans, for $1,000 worth of any health care coverage, coverage none of us in Congress would take at all.

Until we commit ourselves to market-based solutions that embrace the principle of competition and choice, we will not bring down health care prices and costs. Access problems will only get worse for the uninsured and insured.

By asking our taxpayers to spend $400 billion on a Medicare prescription drug bill while paying the most expensive prices in the world, we are shortchanging our seniors, and we are shortchanging our taxpayers. They deserve the common decency and courtesy to get the best prices in the world, not the most expensive prices.

By not taking steps to lower all health insurance costs through market-based, cost-effective solutions, we are compromising the care all Americans receive who are struggling to try to pay for the premium increases and cost increases in their health care system.

Prescription drug spending increased by 15.3 percent in 2003. In Europe, where there is competition and choice for medications, prices on average are 40 percent below what they are here in the United States. In every other industry, food, software, cars, consumer electronics, worldwide competition keeps prices down here in the United States; yet for pharmaceutical drugs, we have a closed market, and we pay the most expensive prices in the world.

Polls show that more than two thirds of Americans think they should be able to purchase drugs from Canada and Europe; yet the final Medicare bill did not include these provisions. President Bush should work with Congress this year to lower prescription drug prices through greater reliance on competition and market forces and not threaten to veto such legislation. To do this, we should continue to work for market access legislation similar to the Pharmaceutical Market Access Act, which passed the House last year.

We should also expand the limited provisions in the Medicare bill to increase access to generics. We should remove the provision on the Medicare bill that prohibits the Secretary of Health and Human Services from doing both negotiation, setting up a Sam's Club-like entity of Medicare and using the 41 million seniors who purchase prescription drugs to reduce prices, just like the Veterans Administration and just like private plans.

The other major skyrocketing health care cost for the rest of us is the uninsured, and this is not just a problem for the poor. The fastest-growing group of people who are working without health care are people who earn $50,000 to $75,000 a year. The uninsured in this country who work is a middle-class problem.

Today, all insured Americans pay an uninsured premium in their taxes and their insurance policies, but all the

while the uninsured go without coverage. By addressing the health care needs of the uninsured, the entire system will work more efficiently, more cost effectively. Instead of trying to solve this problem with a tax credit that forces the uninsured to shop in the inefficient and expensive individual market, we should shape a policy for the uninsured around the principles of market competition.

I will propose legislation this year that provides the uninsured a voucher, a health care voucher, to purchase health insurance through a subsidiary of the Federal Employees Health Benefit Program, the same program where Members of Congress and the United States Senate and members of the administration get their health care. This plan will use the efficiencies of the group health insurance market to provide comprehensive insurance and reduce prices, while giving people a voucher. It also will keep the prices in a competitive range to the tax credit the President proposed.

There is nothing wrong with the health care system that competition and choice cannot fix.

Mr. Speaker, on behalf of more than 111,000 of my constituents who are of Polish descent, I proudly rise to recognize the official designation of St. Hyacinth's Church on 3636 West Wolfram as a basilica for the Chicago Archdiocese.

My hometown of Chicago was once said to contain more Poles than any city outside Warsaw. Still today, in St. Hyacinth's parish, the area's largest and most prominent Polish Catholic parish, residents are just as likely to speak Polish as English.

St. Hyacinth's was founded in 1894 with less than 50 members and has grown tremendously over the years. Today, St. Hyacinth's serves over 8,000 worshippers each week under the guidance of the Resurrectionist Fathers, who have served the congregation since its founding.

Under the leadership of its rector since 1995, Rev. Michal Osuch, St. Hyacinth's has actively engaged in the sacramental life of the church by developing programs of evangelization that emphasize connecting adults, particularly with the sacraments of confirmation and marriage. The church also provides a welcoming home for new immigrants every month by hosting free English-as-a-Second Language classes, a Polish language school for children and many other community activities for adults, youth and children.

In becoming a basilica, St. Hyacinth's was recognized for its prestige, its beauty, and its ability to accommodate large numbers of parishioners since a basilica is a community's focal point for worship and evangelization. Cardinal Francis George validated these features last Sunday by formally proclaiming it as ``a place of frequent and exemplary liturgical celebration.''

The petition for basilica status was reviewed by the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops and approved by the Congregation of Divine Worship in Rome. As a basilica, it maintains an obligation to uphold a high level of both worship and religious instruction, particularly through conferences and speakers.

Mr. Speaker, I wish to congratulate St. Hyacinth's on this high honor and its upcoming 110th anniversary next year. In earning the distinction of becoming a basilica, it has again proven its importance as a pillar of Chicago's Polish American community. On this day, I am proud to join the people of my district, as well as those of Polish descent around the City, in celebrating this historic achievement.

Mr. Speaker, I am proud to rise with Representatives DeFazio, and DeLauro as original cosponsors to introduce the War Profiteering Prevention Act of 2003. This is an identical companion to legislation introduced by Senators Leahy, Clinton, Durbin and Feinstein.

This bill closely resembles an amendment that I offered during consideration of the Iraq reconstruction bill. Unfortunately, the Rules Committee declined to allow debate on my amendment, which would have established tough criminal penalties for individuals who defraud the government involving contracts related to the war or reconstruction of Iraq.

As the government begins to spend the roughly $20 billion appropriated for rebuilding Iraq, it is essential that we protect these funds from waste, fraud and abuse. To that end, the War Profiteering Prevention Act establishes a maximum criminal penalty of 20 years in prison and fines up to $1 million for war profiteers and cheats who exploit the postwar relief efforts.

Unlike most nations where we send foreign aid, there is no functioning government in Iraq. While I believe the Coalition Provisional Authority is doing the best it can, it simply does not maintain the manpower necessary to adequately monitor reconstruction funds. Regrettably, a handful of politically connected corporations, including some with scandal-ridden business records, are taking advantage of this situation.

While anti-fraud laws protect against wasteful spending here at home, there are no such laws prohibiting war profiteering overseas. In response, my bill criminalizes overcharging taxpayers for any good or service with the specific intent to excessively profit from reconstruction. The legislation also prohibits fraud

and false statements in any matter involving a contract.

We need strong disincentives for those who defraud taxpayers. These controls must be in place now because criminal statutes cannot be applied retroactively. We cannot in good faith ask American families to sacrifice for postwar reconstruction and then allow so many others to unfairly profit at their expense.

Mr. Speaker, we must send a clear message that cheating U.S. taxpayers is completely unacceptable and will not go unpunished. For these reasons, I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting the War Profiteering Prevention Act of 2003.

Mr. Speaker, today, as the President signs the Medicare Reform Act dealing with prescription drugs, although this is going to be hailed around in Washington as a great day, we missed an opportunity to save our seniors dramatically on the cost of prescription drugs.

We could have included a provision that allowed prescription drugs to be purchased in Canada or Europe where prices are 40 to 50 percent cheaper, saving for seniors, on average, a good deal of money, as well as taxpayers a good deal of money. We could have included a provision to allow a Sam's Club-like bulk negotiating which the Veterans' Administration does for veterans, and we could have done that for Medicare, for 41 million Americans, to reduce prices. Either way, either of these issues, either through open markets and market access, allowing competition to bring prices down and give consumers choice, or allowing bulk price negotiations, which is what happens if you have a Sam's Club. In either manner, we in the government prevented that from happening and are forcing our seniors into higher prices and forcing our taxpayers to play inflated prices.

We have an obligation to the taxpayers to give them the best and most affordable prices for their taxpayer money, and we took a pass today on that legislation.