Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, I rise in tribute to the 2003 Sacramento River Cats, the deserving winners of the 2003 Pacific Coast League Championship. The 2003 River Cats triumphantly completed the season by winning all its postseason games, including a three-game sweep of the Nashville Sounds. The 2003 River Cats demonstrated remarkable courage, determination, and teamwork that have made them a great source of civic pride and a local attraction. I ask all of my colleagues to join with me in saluting the remarkable 2003 Sacramento River Cats.

Throughout the course of the season, the Sacramento River Cats never left any doubt that they were top of the class of the Pacific Coast League. The River Cats displayed tremendous consistency and excellence as they finished with a league best record of 92 wins and 52 losses, a remarkable 18 games better than the closest competitor. The River Cats truly dominated the competition as 51 of the River Cats' victories were decided by more than 3 runs. Backed by a spirited and loyal fan base, the River Cats won a league-leading 50 games at home during the regular season. The River Cats also won the franchise's third division championship since relocating to Sacramento in 2000. By combining a high-octane offense; a tenacious pitching staff, and a steady defense, this year's River Cats posted the best overall record and road record in franchise history. It is clear that the 2003 Sacramento River Cats are one of the most dominant teams in the illustrious 100-year history of the Pacific Coast League.

The 2003 Sacramento River Cats are comprised of an outstanding blend of seasoned veterans with major league experience and exciting young players who are destined to be the superstars of tomorrow. This River Cats team is spearheaded by the all around excellence of Pacific Coast League's Rookie of the Year Bobby Crosby, Pitcher of the Year Justin Duchscherer and Most Valuable Player Graham Koonce. The 2003 River Cats became the first team to claim the three major individual awards in the history of the Pacific Coast League. This dazzling array of players, combined with a selfless commitment to team play, are major reasons why the River Cats enjoyed such unparalleled success during the 2003 season.

In addition to a wonderful roster, the 2003 River Cats also benefited greatly from the tutelage of one of the best coaching staffs and the leadership of one of the most progressive front offices in all of professional baseball. On the bench, the River Cats were lead by the 2003 Sporting News Minor League Manager of the Year Tony DeFrancesco. Mr. DeFrancesco and his able assistants were able to harness one of the greatest collections of gifted players in the Pacific Coast League into a balanced team that is epitomized by fair play and an unyielding commitment to teamwork. In the front office, the River Cats are led by the visionary leadership of President and CEO Art Savage and the astute management of Executive Vice Presidents Warren Smith and Robert Hemond. Under this leadership team, the River Cats have taken great steps to forge one of the strongest and most unique relationships in all of sports with their team supporters. Given the River Cats front office's commitment to the city of Sacramento, it is no wonder why the River Cats have led all of Minor League Baseball in attendance during each of their four years in Sacramento.

Mr. Speaker, as the Sacramento River Cats conclude their greatest season in franchise history and prepare to achieve greater triumphs in the future, I am honored to pay tribute to the many hard working men and women of the River Cats organization who brought so much joy and pride to the people of Capitol Region and River Cats fans everywhere. Their successes are considerable, and it is a great honor for me to have the opportunity to pay tribute to their accomplishments. I ask all my colleagues to join with me in congratulating the Sacramento River Cats on a wonderful season and wishing them greater success in future seasons.

Mr. Chairman, first of all, I would like to take this moment to thank the gentleman from Alaska (Mr. Young) for the work that he has done on this bill along with the ranking member, the gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Oberstar). The work that they have done in terms of putting this legislation together, the Corps reform proposals, the legislation, and, obviously, the projects, will go a long way in making sure America remains strong in terms of our infrastructure.

I would also like to thank Chairman Young and ranking member Oberstar and their staff along with the gentleman from Tennessee (Mr. Duncan) and the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Costello) for the wonderful work that they have done in helping the gentleman from California (Mr. Doolittle), myself, and the regional members in the northern California area put together, obviously, a piece of legislation within this bill that would take care of many of the water needs that the gentleman from California (Mr. Doolittle) and I have been concerned about over the years with respect to Sacramento County and the American River watershed.

We had a major flood problem in 1986, and then another in 1997, which almost broke our levee system. And as a result of that, the Corps of Engineers has come up with a chief report that would raise the current Folsom Dam by some 7 feet and, obviously, shore up the American River levee system.

Due to the efforts the members that I just mentioned, obviously, we have put together a proposal that would take care of both water needs and, certainly, the needs of the people in the County of Sacramento.

So I just want to take this moment to thank again the members, particularly the gentleman from Alaska (Mr. Young) and the gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Oberstar) for working out this proposal with the gentleman from California (Mr. Doolittle), myself and the regional members from our area.

Again, I want to make that effort because obviously this is a matter that has been going on for 20 years. I want to thank all members involved in this process.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in tribute to Sacramento Regional Transit District. On September 26, 2003, the Sacramento Regional Transit District will celebrate the grand opening of the South Line Light Rail Extension Project. As the people of Sacramento gather to commemorate this momentous occasion, I ask all of my colleagues to join me in welcoming one of the Capital Region's most important transportation projects.

The Sacramento Regional Transit District began operations on April 1, 1973. During its first decade of service, the Sacramento Regional Transit continued to expand bus service to the growing Sacramento region while a cooperative effort emerged among city, county and state government officials to develop a light rail system. In 1987 the 18.3- mile light rail system opened, linking the northeastern (Interstate 80) and eastern (Highway 50) corridors with Downtown Sacramento.

Today, the Sacramento Regional Transit District (RT) operates 77 bus routes and 20.6 miles of light rail covering a 418 square-mile service area. Buses and light rail run 365 days a year using 36 light rail vehicles, 152 buses powered by compressed natural gas (CNG) and 55 diesel buses. Passenger amenities include 31 light rail stops or stations, nine bus and light rail transfer centers and 10 free park- and-ride lots. RT also serves more than 3,800 bus stops throughout Sacramento County.

Annual ridership has steadily increased on both the bus and light rail systems from 14 million passengers in 1987 to more than 27 million passengers in fiscal year 2002. Weekday light rail ridership averages about 29,500, which accounts for approximately 30 percent of the total system ridership. Bus weekday ridership has reached an average of 62,500 passengers per day.

The South Line Light Rail Extension Project is a two-phased, 11.2- mile extension of the existing line to south. Phase I, which extends 6.3 miles from Broadway south to Meadowview Road, is expected to increase daily ridership by 15,000 passengers by 2015. Grounded on extensive community outreach, each of the seven new stations has been individually created to reflect the character of the neighborhoods they serve.

The South Line Light Rail Extension Project comes at an important in the renaissance of the South Sacramento area. South Sacramento's population is expected to grow from 67,313 in 1998 to over 85,000 in 2022. The South Line Rail Extension Project will provide residents of the area with less traffic congestion, improve mobility in and around the downtown area, reduce parking demands and costs, and improve air quality. For these reasons, the South Line Rail Extension Project serves as a shining example of the great value of public transportation and the benefits of investing in local, state, and federal partnerships.

Mr. Speaker, I am honored to welcome the South Line Rail Extension to the South Sacramento Community. I would like to thank all the people who, through their commitment and hard work, have made this project a reality. I am confident that this project will yield tremendous benefits for the people of Sacramento. I ask all my colleagues to join with me in wishing the Sacramento Regional Transit District continued success in all its future endeavors.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor the Employee Benefit Research Institute (EBRI) on its 25th Anniversary. Over the last quarter century, Congress has been expertly informed by the Institute's bipartisan and balanced analysis of retirement and health benefits issues. I, therefore, ask my colleagues to join me in saluting this important milestone for EBRI.

Efforts to privatize Social Security, the ongoing corporate governance and pension scandals, and the need to add a prescription drug benefit to Medicare make the work of EBRI now more important than ever. Members have come to trust the Institute's data and analysis of these complex issues and today we recognize their contributions to the ongoing debates in these areas.

In addition, I appreciate the fact that they are not advocates. Instead, the Institute simply provides the unvarnished data and let the numbers speak for themselves. Their work has helped me to more thoroughly evaluate policy options. I would like to thank them for the assistance they've provided over the years.

Mr. Speaker, as the Employee Benefit Research Institute celebrates its 25th Anniversary, I ask my colleagues to join me in paying tribute to its significant accomplishments and dedication to public service. I'm sure they will continue to serve Congress and our nation for decades to come.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in tribute to Rinban Kosho Yukawa. Rinban of the Sacramento Betsuin is one of Sacramento's greatest citizen leaders. Rinban Kosho is retiring after forty-two years of wonderful service as an ambassador and teacher of Buddhism; Rinban Kosho will be retiring on August 31, 2003. As his friends and family gather to celebrate Rinban Kosho's numerous achievements, I ask all of my colleagues to join with me in saluting one of Sacramento's most respected and honorable citizens.

Rinban Kosho comes from a long line of Buddhist ministers of the Jodo Shinshu sect. A prominent branch in Japan and the faith embraced by the Buddhist Churches of America. Rinban Kosho's family has maintained a temple for about 250 years. Rinban Kosho's parents had immigrated to the United States, and he was born in Tacoma, Washington as the Depression started. In 1940, Rinban Kosho and his family moved to Japan, where they stayed until 1949. At the encouragement of his father, Rinban Kosho returned to San Francisco on his own to finish high school and junior college.

Rinban Kosho joined the U.S. Army and worked as an interrogator during the Korean War. Rinban Kosho's experience during the war affected him deeply, leading him to pursue a career in the ministry. After completing a seminary program in Japan, Rinban Kosho was ordained and assigned to the Sacramento church in 1961. During his first decade of service in Sacramento, Rinban Kosho served as a youth minister at a time when the baby boom was at its peak. At one time, Rinban Kosho had about 650 children enrolled in the Dharma School.

After his stint in Sacramento, Rinban Kosho worked at churches in Union City and San Jose before taking a five-year hiatus from the ministry to work in his brother's publishing business. The call to serve came back when Rinban Kosho was assigned to the Tacoma Buddhist Temple where his father had served.

In 1996 Rinban Kosho returned to the Buddhist Church of Sacramento. During his tenure, Rinban Kosho successfully made the Jodo Shinshu sect of Buddhism relevant to third and fourth generation Japanese Americans, as well as to other ethnic groups. Because of his great reputation as a minister, mentor, teacher of the Dharma and his popularity as a caring friend, the Sacramento Buddhist Church has become the largest membership temple within the Buddhist Churches of America.

Rinban Kosho's unparalleled success in the ministry and in the community truly makes him one of Sacramento's most accomplished and treasured citizens. His commitment to help others is a shining example to everyone who follows his leadership. In his retirement, Rinban Kosho plans to return to his native Tacoma/Seattle area with his wife, Michiko. The Yukawas look forward to being near and enjoying the company of their children and their families.

Mr. Speaker, as Rinban Kosho friends and family gather for his honorary farewell banquet, I am honored to pay tribute to one of Sacramento's most honorable residents. His success are considerable, and it is great honor for me to have the opportunity to pay tribute to his contributions. I ask all my colleagues to join with me in wishing Rinban Kosho Yukawa continue success in all his future endeavors.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the Democratic leader for yielding me this time.

It is really unfortunate what is going on here. My colleague on the Democratic side of the aisle, his reputation is being besmirched in order to avoid the real issue, and I think it is really outrageous that the gentleman from Louisiana is doing this.

This is not about the gentleman from California (Mr. Stark), because the Capitol police came to visit us, and I was in that room in the library behind the Committee on Ways and Means hearing room, before the completion of the reading of the bill was going on. That was before the gentleman from California (Mr. Stark) and the gentleman from Colorado (Mr. McInnis) had even their discussion; and, as a result of that, the Capitol police were called before the gentleman from California (Mr. Stark) had even said anything.

As a result of that, what the gentleman is doing to the gentleman from California (Mr. Stark) is doing major damage to his credibility at the same time when the real fault is the chairman of the Committee on Ways and Means. He called the Capitol police. And, frankly, when later on the Sergeant of Arms came in himself, he said, he said to all of us, he said I was called, we were called because there was a disturbance. There was a disturbance back here in this room, and we were asked to remove all of you.

This was not about the gentleman from California (Mr. Stark). This was about removing Members on the Democratic side of the aisle on the Committee on Ways and Means from a room that was not being used because the chairman of the Committee on Ways and Means just decided to lose his temper on the situation. I think it is really outrageous. We ought to debate the issues. We ought not to try to point the finger at somebody who was innocent in this discussion.

I really think it is really outrageous. I think the gentleman from Louisiana owes the gentleman from California (Mr. Stark) an apology by trying to make the issue about him rather than about the chairman of the committee.

Mr. Speaker, on rollcall No. 322, had I been present, I would have voted ``no.''

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

I have to first of all say that I am extremely disappointed that my colleagues on the other side of the aisle have put this bill before us. It is a shame because if they would have thought through the matter better and instead of bringing up those tax cuts, particularly the dividend tax cut and

the capital gains tax cut, we could have gotten a bill on the floor that all Americans could be proud of, and every senior citizen in this country would not only be proud of, but would have an adequate benefit.

I think this bill is a sham and I think instead of covering senior citizens, what we are doing is giving my Republican colleagues cover, political cover that eventually the senior citizens will lift and begin to understand what this bill is really all about. I guarantee Members by the fall of this year, senior citizens in America will understand this bill and they will be very, very unhappy with a vote in favor of this legislation.

When we think about it for a minute, this bill does not do much at all. If a senior citizen has $5,000 worth of prescription drug coverage in any given year, the senior citizen will have to pay $4,000 immediately, $4,000 of the first $5,000 of coverage before they can even get $1 of Federal government benefit. They have to have $670 that they have to pay out in the form of monthly premiums, in the form of copayments.

And so this bill is not a good bill for senior citizens.

In addition to that, this bill will ultimately in the next 5 years begin the erosion of Medicare as we know it. Newt Gingrich had said when he became Speaker of the House a few years ago that he wanted to see Medicare wither on the vine. We had the gentleman from California (Mr. Thomas) just the other day say on national television, ``Those who say that the bill would end Medicare as we know it, our answer is, `We certainly hope so.' '' Because what they really want to do is privatize Medicare, make it so that insurance companies could increase premiums to whatever they want to do and only insure the healthy senior citizen so that the chronically ill will ultimately wither on the vine.

This system that is being put forward today is one that will in fact do major damage to the Medicare system in America. Why did we have Medicare in 1964 in the first place? Because we knew senior citizens could not get coverage because seniors by their very nature are the ones that get ill and the ones that ultimately go into very, very difficult physical situations. And so ultimately what we are going to have is going back to 1964 with this legislation. That is their intent, because they want to see Medicare wither on the vine.

This bill is a bad bill and we need to vote ``no'' on it so the American public understands exactly what my colleagues on the other side of the aisle are attempting to do.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H. Res. 294. I am deeply saddened by the loss of lives at the hands of terrorists, and it is of great disappointment to me that the terror has escalated since the Aqaba summit. As the violence continues, even in the face of efforts by all sides to bring peace to the region, the United States must show nothing short of steadfast support for Israel as it continues to bear the entire burden of ending the violence.

The U.S. and Israel both agree that Prime Minister Abbas is the legitimate alternative to Yassir Arafat as leader of the Palestinian people. We welcome his statements acknowledging the need to stop terror both on moral and political grounds. However, the terrorist infrastructure is committed to the undermining of Prime Minister Abbas and the peace process.

Earlier this month, 22 innocent Israelis were killed and many others have been injured in continuous suicide bombings. Among the obligations in the roadmap is the responsibility of the Palestinians to stop all terror and violence against Israel. Merely negotiating a cease-fire with the terrorist groups is not sufficient. Terrorist groups can simply use this time to rearm and plan future attacks against innocent civilians. Militants must be arrested and arms collected to dismantle the terrorist infrastructure.

As long as Palestinian leaders do not aggressively go after the terrorist infrastructure, the Israeli government has the sole responsibility of protecting its citizens against further terrorist attacks. Israel has an obligation to safeguard its citizens and like every other sovereign nation, Israel has the same right to self- defense. If the Palestinian Authority does not act against terrorism, Israel must.

U.S. policy needs to be supportive of Israel in its fight against terror. Just as the U.S. has the right to send soldiers around the world to fight terrorists, Israel has the same right to fight terrorism in its own neighborhood and its own capitol.

The people of Israel are confronted with the grim realities of terrorism on a daily basis. Yet the darker reality is that were it not for the successful actions Israel takes in defense of its people, terrorism against them would increase tenfold. As Israel embarks on the difficult path to peace, it is essential that her efforts to quell acts of senseless terror have the full support of the United States.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in tribute to the Sacramento Valley Union Labor Bulletin, one of the oldest labor newspapers on the west coast. On August 15, 2003, the Sacramento Valley Union Labor Bulletin will celebrate its 75th Anniversary with the publication of a Labor Day Special Issue. It is my honor to ask all of my colleagues to join me in saluting one of Sacramento's most trusted and important publications.

The Sacramento Central Labor Council and the Sacramento-Sierra's Building & Construction Trades Council, both AFL-CIO councils, own the Sacramento Valley Union Labor Bulletin. On September 3, 1928, under the leadership of editor Charles W. Lyons, the Sacramento Valley Union Labor Bulletin first went to press with a Labor Day issue. In the ensuing seventy-five years, the Sacramento Valley Union Labor Bulletin has enjoyed unparalleled success. It has published without interruption. Every issue of the Sacramento Valley Union Labor Bulletin is stored and available to the public at the California Room of the California State Library.

About 22 unions subscribe to the Sacramento Valley Union Labor Bulletin for their members. These unions range from service unions such as the Northern California Media Workers Guild, Bakers, Amalgamated Transit Union, Sacramento Area Fire Fighters to Building Trades Unions such as the Sheet Metal Workers, Glaziers, Plumbers, Painters, and IBEW. The great diversity in readership is a great reflection of the far-reaching importance of the Sacramento Valley Union Labor Bulletin in the Capital Region. Overall, there are 17,000 paid subscribers.

Throughout the course of its history, the Sacramento Valley Union Labor Bulletin has provided a vital forum for the expression of the messages and attitudes of the local labor community. In good times and bad, one can always look to the Sacramento Valley Union Labor Bulletin in order to discern the pulse of the labor community.

The Sacramento Valley Union Labor Bulletin has also provided Sacramento with some of its most distinguished community leaders. Former editor J.L.R. Marsh's stewardship of the bulletin was so admired that Mercy Hospital dedicated its Memorial Physical Therapy Unit in his honor. Another former editor, Richard Marriott, would go on to become one of the most beloved mayors in Sacramento history.

Mr. Speaker, as the Sacramento Valley Union Labor Bulletin celebrates its 75th Anniversary, I am honored to pay tribute to an invaluable resource to the Sacramento community. The Bulletin's commitment to the local labor community has been commendable. I ask all of my colleagues to join with me in wishing the Sacramento Valley Union Labor Bulletin continued success in all its future endeavors.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in tribute to the city of Rancho Cordova, California and its dedicated citizens. On July 1, 2003, Rancho Cordova will officially be incorporated and become California's newest municipality. I ask all my colleagues to join with me in wishing the city of Rancho Cordova the best of luck as it embarks on an exciting and promising future.

The modern history of Rancho Cordova began in 1846, when William Alexander Leidesdorf settled in his newly acquired 35,500-acre domain, the Rancho Rio de los Americanos. Within a few years, the massive flow of gold seekers, the FortyNiners, en route to the gold fields, would come to identify the area as Hangtown Crossing. In the 1870s, the construction of gristmills brought a new wave of residents to the area. These residents would eventually abandon the name of Hangtown Crossing for the more prosaic name of Mills Station.

In the 1950s, postal officials and local vineyard owner, Ronald S. Federspiel, met to determine a new name for the area. In the years before, a great number of homebuyers related to the name, Rancho Cordova, since it was the name of their new neighborhood. When the postal officials and Mr. Federspiel discovered that the name fit perfectly on a stamp, the name Rancho Cordova was officially adopted.

In 1950, Aerojet General Corporation, developers of rocket fuels and space engines, choose Rancho Cordova as its home base. Subsequently, Mather Air Force Base, with the only navigation and electronic warfare training wing in the U.S.; McDonnell-Douglas Aircraft, missiles and space systems test center; PMI Manufacturers, Pittsburg Des Moines Steel Co., and many smaller industries would come to call Rancho Cordova home.

In many regards, Rancho Cordova already features some of the essential traits of a well-established city. By comparison, the city's population of approximately 57,000 is bigger than Santa Cruz, Fountain Valley, or San Rafael. In the Sacramento region, the only cities with greater populations are Sacramento, Davis, Roseville, Citrus Heights, and Elk Grove. Furthermore, Rancho Cordova is already the home to an impressive and growing list of businesses; Bank of America, Aerojet Industries, MCI, and Delta Dental, just to name a few. With another 55,000 jobs projected in the next decade, Rancho Cordova is well on its way to becoming one of the most important cities in the Sacramento region.

During the nearly two-decade drive to cityhood, the community leaders and citizens of Rancho Cordova displayed remarkable dedication, determination, and civic pride in ultimately achieving their goal. Judging from its citizens overwhelming commitment to promote and serve the best interest of the city, I have every confidence that Rancho Cordova will continue to achieve and realize greater goals and ambitions in the future.

Mr. Speaker, as the city of Rancho Cordova celebrates its cityhood; I am honored to welcome this vibrant community into our growing region. Rancho Cordova's future is bright and limitless. I ask all of my colleagues to join with me in wishing the city of Rancho Cordova continued success in all its future endeavors.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from New York, the ranking Democrat on the Committee on Ways and Means, for yielding me this time.

I can understand why the majority does not want to debate this issue. Perhaps he wants to catch a plane to California, I do not know. But I can understand why he would not want to debate this issue, given the fact that the President of the United States and the U.S. Senate, on a 94 to 2 vote, basically came up with a bill that was totally different. It basically paid for its tax cuts and, at the same time, it tried to restrict itself basically to the main issue, that is, taking care of families that make between $10,000 and $26,000 a year.

I might just for a moment go back to May 23 when the conference report was passed. As my colleagues know, the big issue on that bill was the dividend reduction and the capital gains tax reduction. At the same time, as we know, that bill also took out from the other body the provision that would have taken care of people that made, families that made between $10,000 and $26,000 a year, a measly tax credit of $150 to $400.

At the same time, what this bill did, Mr. Speaker, it might be kind of interesting to really discuss why there is a lot of concern about this. We looked at the FCC filings of the annual report of Microsoft Corporation. Bill Gates, and this is not anything about Bill Gates, but Bill Gates will get, under the bill that passed, that became law on May 23, $14,538,000; $14 million. Sandy Weill, again, somebody who is a good person, Citicorp, will get $2.7 million.

What is very interesting, what is very interesting, Mr. Speaker, if we would have just taken that $14 million from Bill Gates and given it to families that earn between $10,000 and $26,000 a year, we could have taken care of 52,000 families.

So I can understand why the majority does not want to discuss this; I can understand why they do not want to see this have the light of day, because they are really taking care of people that do not need the money. This will not help the economy of the United States. It is basically just game-playing, and it is really unfortunate that this is happening. This bill will not become law because the other body will ensure it does not become law because it is not paid for. I would have hoped that we would have adopted the other body's legislation.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H.R. 2030, a bill to designate the United States Postal Service facility located at 120 Baldwin Avenue in Paia, Maui, Hawaii, as the ``Patsy Takemoto Mink Post Office Building.'' I want to thank my colleague from Hawaii, Mr. Case, for introducing this bill, and ask all of my colleagues to join with me in supporting this legislation to ensure that the people of Hawaii and all those who visit there remember this remarkable woman.

I cannot say enough about Patsy Mink. She was a trailblazer--the first woman of color elected to Congress in 1964, the first Asian- American woman to practice law in Hawaii, the first woman president of the Americans for Democratic Action, the list goes on . . . By the time I was elected to Congress in 1978, she had already won passage of a major piece of civil rights legislation: Title IX expanded opportunities to female student athletes across the United States. Mindful of the beautiful region she represented, Patsy was also fiercely committed to protecting our natural resources and fought to ensure a healthy environment for all Americans. And her work on welfare reform later in her career reflected her fundamental belief that families living in poverty deserve the opportunity to share in the America dream. The country has benefited tremendously from Patsy's dedication to her values and her devotion to social progress. And those who had the privilege to know her benefited from her warmth, kindness, and friendship.

Patsy Mink's unyielding commitment to issues of social justice and equality will be deeply missed in the House, as will her friendship and leadership. I urge my colleagues to support this bill as a small token of appreciation for all that Patsy Mink gave to this body, the people of Hawaii, and our great nation. As we remember her today, let us hope that naming this building in her honor will inspire others to follow her example of tireless dedication to public service.

Mr. Speaker, at a later moment in this Special Order the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Spratt), the ranking member of the Committee on the Budget, will be speaking more fully about Al Davis, the chief economist for the Committee on Ways and Means, and formerly the economist for the House Budget Committee.

Today I come to the floor to pay tribute to Al Davis and express my deepest sympathy to Mary, Al's partner for more than 20 years. Al had a remarkable life, one in which he made an unforgettable and immeasurable contribution to the scope of this country's economic and budgetary policies. Although most Americans will never know his name or his extraordinary contributions, he has influenced each of us in our lives for the better.

Five years after serving in the U.S. Army from 1969 to 1971 during the height of the Vietnam War, Al began his lifelong career as an economist while working for the Wisconsin Revenue Department until 1980. While there, he rose from an analyst to the bureau chief in the research and analysis division in a very short period of time.

During the early 1980s, he served as senior analyst on the Taxation and Finance Committee with the U.S. Advisory Commission on Intergovernmental Relations. And from 1994 to 1998, he was chief economist for the Democratic budget staff and then was the economist since 1999 until his tragic passing just last month as the chief economist for the Committee on Ways and Means.

Al was a master of economic and budgetary policy through four administrations. He helped our committee staff navigate every economic budget and tax proposal put before the U.S. Congress.

Al called us, that is the Members of Congress and his colleagues on the House Committee on Ways and Means and the Committee on the Budget his customers, and he provided us with realms of memos and charts and analysis that only Al could produce. He did it with insight and humor. He stripped away the clutter to extract the critical details of major issues facing the American public.

You would often hear about Al's ability to translate complex and difficult economic concepts for Members, staff, and, of course, the press. On his own, he was a unique gift, but what made Al truly remarkable was his delivery of his translation and the integrity that he actually had which he imposed upon all of us because anyone dealing with Al Davis knew they had to be honest with themselves because of his basic decency and honesty.

When Al found a provision or proposal that he analyzed to be unfair to the American public, this translation, without fail, was laced with humor and simultaneously expressed his frustration, and he always exposed the unfairness of whatever he was working on if he believed it to be unfair.

Over the years, Al Davis provided the Democratic Members of the Committee on Ways and Means with probably 150-200 memos. Most of us read all of them, not only because of the analysis that he gave us, but also because of his humor and his sense of humanity. I would like to take a moment to quote two paragraphs in a January 30, 2003 memo. The subject from Al Davis to the Committee on Ways and Means Democrats is ``Snow Hearing Next Week and Budget Deficits.'' Of course, we had a lot of snow during the month of January, so it was snow hearing and budget deficits. And the caption is ``The Return of Budget Deficit as Far as the Eye Can See.'' He says, and I do not mean to be partisan here, but it is humorous. It is not dry. He says, ``Normal mortals would be in the hospital with whiplash if they changed their positions as radically as my Republican colleagues.'' And then in the same memo he states. ``Tax cuts and war look cheap because we are about to put them on a national credit card and pass the costs on to our children.''

Al had a way of saying the obvious and stating public policy by actually communicating with a sense of humor to all of us. I have to say, Mr. Speaker, that we in this country are very blessed because we have always had through the agencies, through the executive branch and the judicial branch, but particularly through the legislative branch of our government, people who are dedicated to the betterment of our country, and truly Al Davis was a symbol of that standard that all of us are here to certainly aspire to.

Al, we are going to miss you very much and we thank you for everything you have done for all of us.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 5 minutes.

Mr. Speaker, it is kind of astonishing 2 years after Enron and WorldCom we are finally, again, taking up a bill that presumably is supposed to deal with the particular issues that Enron and WorldCom raise. Unfortunately, I do not think the bill does, which is really tragic in America today.

Almost every study I have seen and many people have seen over the last 5 years has indicated that the baby boom population, which is now retiring, does not have adequate retirement benefits for their future. And as a result of that, many Americans are going to be working longer, even though the unemployment rate is going up.

This legislation on the floor presented by my Republican colleagues unfortunately does not address the issue of pension benefits and retirement security for Americans that are about to retire. Let me just give you some examples of that.

The gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Boehner) talked about, well, we are going to allow independent investment advice for some of these companies for their employees. The only problem is it is kind of a ruse, because, in fact, this legislation will allow a conflict of interest for those investment advisers that they will then be able to make misleading information and statements to their employees.

Secondly, which is probably even more difficult to understand, is that this legislation, believe it or not, holds harmless from liability the employer when these advisers give misleading advice or fraudulent advice. So the worker is basically left without any remedy or resources and at the same time probably will be able to get advice that is misleading and full of conflicts of interest.

It allows cash balance plans. The only problem is if you are 50 or older, you can end up losing your retirement benefits because, as all of us know when you are in the workforce, the closer you get to retirement the greater benefit you get; but if you move to a cash balance, that is eliminated. And it does not give the employee the option to say, I want to go into a new plan or stay in my old plan. So automatically the employee is going to be damaged.

Our substitute, which will come up later, will address that issue, just like it will address the issue of independent advice.

In addition to that, which is somewhat surprising, is the whole issue of executive compensation, the whole issue of executive compensation which was the issue of Enron and WorldCom. It states that in terms of the 401(k) plan that the Enron employees had, they had to hold that Enron stock in there for an indefinite period of time.

The gentleman from Ohio's (Mr. Boehner) bill says you can take it out after 3 years. The problem is it is discretionary with the employer. So Enron could have made them keep the money in beyond 3 years, and that would have resulted in the same problem. So this bill does not do anything to overcome the Enron problem. In fact, the Attorney General of the State of New York, Eliot Spitzer, said, ``This legislation opens a loophole that will sharply erode, rather than enhance, safeguard for employees seeking independent and untainted advice how to invest in their retirement savings.''

The Attorney General of New York has said this; this legislation will actually do more harm than good.

Let me just conclude by making a couple other observations in my time, Mr. Speaker. This bill also would currently allow Ken Lay, the CEO of Enron Corporation, to keep his retirement benefits even though the company had filed bankruptcy and even though almost every Enron employee ended up losing their entire retirement benefits because most of their stock was held in Enron company stock in their 401(k) plans. This bill would have allowed that to continue on.

In addition, this bill would do nothing to help the American Airline employees, and all of us know the American Airline executives attempted to preserve a golden parachute for themselves and at the same time ask their employees, which is somewhat ironic, to cut their benefits.

So this bill does not address some of the major issues that I think the American public are concerned about in terms of its own income security.

Let me just say this, in terms of coming up with legislation to protect income security and fraud, we need to reexamine this legislation. Our Democratic substitute to be offered by the gentleman from California (Mr. George Miller) will address these issues, but this bill does not.

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

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished gentlewoman from the State of Connecticut (Ms. DeLauro).

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 30 seconds.

I would just like to say to the gentleman from Delaware, I know he read the bill, but the problem with the bill that the Republicans have offered us is it actually makes the situation worse. Instead of giving independent advice, as the gentleman stated, it actually cloaks it in independent advice, it really does not.

What it basically does is allow conflicts of interest and hold harmless to the employer, and at the same time I think the whole issue of diversification, no, only subject to the whims of the employer will that be allowed. Enron would have not allowed it. So nothing would change. That is the problem.

The Democratic substitute, I am sure the gentleman has read that, will take care of these problems that the gentleman has raised and talked about, but not the Republican bill.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2\1/2\ minutes to the distinguished gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Delahunt).

Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. Speaker, it allows them to do this, but with a potential conflict of interest, obviously the disclosure conflict of interest, but the problem is that the employer is held harmless from liability. That is what the problem with the bill is.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Cardin), a distinguished member of the House Committee on Ways and Means, ranking member of the committee, who will actually address this issue.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2\1/2\ minutes to the distinguished gentleman from California (Mr. Becerra), a member of the House Committee on Ways and Means.

I have an additional speaker here.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Frank), the ranking member of the Committee on Financial Services.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2\1/2\ minutes to the distinguished gentleman from Washington (Mr. McDermott), a member of the House Committee on Ways and Means.

(Mr. McDERMOTT asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time, 1 minute, to close.

If I may, Mr. Speaker, because a lot has been said to address the issue of the independent advice that my colleagues seem to be really hung up on, it is a question of definition. The way they say independent advice is that if the independent adviser says I may have a conflict of interest, one time, then after that it is Katy, bar the door. They can say whatever they want.

Most employees do not just work 3 days a week, on Tuesday, Wednesday, and Thursday, like we in the House of Representatives do. They have kids to take to school. They have a lot of obligations. They do not remember when people say I may have a conflict of interest. And as a result of that, it is meaningless what my colleagues on the other side of the aisle are doing. There will be conflicts of interest; but the real problem is, obviously, that the employer will be held harmless from liability when the conflict of interest actually does damage to the employee.

I am just going to conclude by saying this. This bill will not help the average American, this will not help individuals who have 401(k) plans, and it definitely will not help the baby boom population that is about to retire now and who has inadequate funds for their income security. We need to address this in a much larger context and actually not do the kinds of damage that this bill will do under the so-called ruse of being good government.

This is not a good government bill. It will do more damage than the status quo.