Floor Statements

Mr. Chairman, I want to thank Chairman Wolf and Ranking Member Serrano for all their hard work in putting the Commerce-State- Justice and Related Agencies Appropriations bill together. This legislation, while never perfect, includes important funding for programs helping our local economies grow, and keeping our communities safe.

I particularly commend the Appropriations Committee for providing $106 million for the Manufacturing Extension Partnership (MEP) program within the Department of Commerce's National Institutes of Standards and Technology. Through a national network of manufacturing extension centers. MEP is designed to benefit domestic manufacturers by providing expertise and services tailored to their most critical needs. This includes assistance in process improvements, worker training, and information technology applications. In Wisconsin, MEP has served over 110 firms. Unfortunately, the Bush Administration has repeatedly cut funding for MEP; the President's budget request has consistently cut funding for MEP, proposing an 83 percent reduction in FY04 and a 60 percent reduction in FY05.

In western Wisconsin, the Northwest Manufacturing Outreach Center (NWMOC), one of two MEP Centers in Wisconsin, has provided assistance to more than 900 companies over the past 10 years. Frank Borg, Joe Benkowski, and their team at NWMOC travel throughout northern Wisconsin helping companies ensure businesses are able to compete and grow in the global marketplace. Restoring funding to $106 million is critical to MEP's success in Wisconsin and throughout the Nation.

I also want to thank the Committee for restoring funding for State and local law enforcement activities which the President's budget proposed slashing by over 80 percent. The legislation restores funding for the Byrne Justice Assistance Grants and Bryne Discretionary Grants. In addition, the legislation rejects drastic cuts proposed by the President for the COPS program. In western Wisconsin, and throughout the Nation, the COPS program is more important than ever. As many rural law enforcement offices are being called up for service in the National Guard and military Reserves, the COPS program provides resources necessary to help communities meet law enforcement challenges.

In addition, the legislation provides $60 million to help fight methamphetamine production and distribution. Methamphetamine abuse has been increasing in rural Wisconsin, and we must continue to help fight against this dangerous drug.

Mr. Chairman, the legislation before us provides many important resources for our local communities, and I urge my colleagues to support it.

Mr. Chairman, America's manufacturing sector has been in crisis for the past 4 years with over 2.7 million quality jobs lost, including 80,000 in my home state of Wisconsin. Congress must act to stem this trend and invest in programs that help our Nation's manufacturers compete and grow in the global economy.

Throughout the Third Congressional District, I have been meeting with local business owners, workers, educators, and government officials to discuss economic challenges facing Wisconsin to determine what can be done to help Wisconsin businesses grow. As a member of the Congressional Manufacturing Task Force, I have focused on how the federal government can most effectively help small- and medium-sized manufacturers compete and grow. There are no easy answers to this problem, but through good investments and smart practices, the federal government can better assist American companies and help America keep its economic edge.

One of the most successful programs helping manufacturers throughout the Nation is the Manufacturing Extension Partnership (MEP) program within the Department of Commerce's

National Institutes of Standards and Technology. Through a national network of manufacturing extension centers, MEP is designed to benefit domestic manufacturers by providing expertise and services tailored to their most critical needs. This includes assistance in process improvements, worker training, and information technology applications. In Wisconsin, MEP has served over 110 firms.

To strengthen this program, I support an amendment offered by Representative Gordon to increase the authorization limit for MEP and help states match funding so more businesses can benefit. With our manufacturing sector suffering, it is important that we build on the successes of the MEP program.

In addition, I support the amendment offered by Representative Jackson-Lee to halt a misguided proposal by the Administration to ``recompete'' MEP centers. Recompetition of MEP centers could destroy the effective national system of centers established over the past 14 years. This could result in fewer projects initiated and consumes valuable resources that could be used to help American businesses.

Mr. Chairman, it is important that we step up and help manufacturers in real, measurable ways. I urge my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to continue to invest in small- and medium-sized businesses.

Mr. Speaker, it is with great pleasure that I rise before you today to honor the historic village of Galesville, Wisconsin. On June 26, 2004, Galesville will be celebrating its 150th anniversary, and activities will include the opening of a capsule that was buried fifty years ago on the town's 100th anniversary.

This quaint community in western Wisconsin overlooks Lake Marinuka and sits among rolling hills, towering cliffs, forests and spring-fed streams. The first settlers of the Galesville area were the Native Americans, who planted their history on the same soil the town of Galesville rests today. The influence of the Native Americans remains strong; this is apparent in the naming of Lake Marinuka, which was named after the legend of Princess Marie Nounko, who was the granddaughter of the Great Chief Decorah, the chief of the Winnebago tribe. Princess Marie's grave lies at the north end of the lake, where she was buried in 1884. In addition, the town of Galesville is blessed with a unique 100 year old bowstring bridge, located alongside the historic McGilvray Road.

Judge George Gale founded Gales College 150 years ago; soon after the town was born. In 1869, Rev. D.O. Van Slyke, circuit-riding preacher and Civil War veteran, believed Galesville was the biblical Garden of Eden because of its breathtaking surroundings. The term ``Garden of Eden,'' is still fitting to those walking the streets of this quiet village.

Galesville's Apple Affair has become a major Trempealeau County event. Since 1983, this annual event takes place on the first Saturday in October as part of Wisconsin's effort to promote the state's apple orchards. The Apple Affair draws many families from throughout the region. From apple pie to caramel apples, this annual celebration is a wonderful time to enjoy the outdoors, as well as get to know the friendly people of Galesville.

The 150th anniversary of Galesville highlights what is good and important about rural America to our country. There are thousands of small rural communities across this Nation that form the backbone of rural life; these communities are the incubators of local commerce, politics, education, recreation, entertainment and faith of rural neighborhoods. The hardworking citizens of small town America are the builders of our great Nation.

I am pleased to congratulate the citizens of Galesville on their sesquicentennial, and believe it is important to recognize their unique contribution to the growth of western Wisconsin. I wish them happiness and prosperity during the next 150 years.

Mr. Speaker, budgeting is all about priorities. I strongly believe that we can invest in those priority programs important to people in western Wisconsin and throughout the nation, while reducing the record deficits that threaten our economic prosperity.

As a member of the House Budget Committee, I worked with my colleagues to draft an

alternative budget proposal that would have done just that. Our alternative provided important funding for chronically underfunded education programs such as No Child Left Behind and IDEA. The federal government promised that when these programs went into effect, it would provide funding to carry them out. Under the President's budget and the Majority's budget, we are not meeting this promise, and it is hurting local school districts.

Our alternative budget also provided increased funding to meet the demands on our local first responders, provide more for veterans' health care needs, and improve the quality of life for our armed service members. Further, by making tough choices on spending and taxes, we provided more tax relief for middle income Americans while reducing the record federal budget deficits. We can do this if we can work in a bipartisan manner. Unfortunately, the budget resolution narrowly passed by the House earlier this year failed to make these key investments while still leading us down the road to the largest budget deficits in the history of our nation.

Today, we have been given the opportunity to address our budget shortfalls. The resolution offered by Congressman Obey targets increased funding toward ten top priority issues, while providing $4.7 billion to reduce future taxes on our children resulting from the these current budget deficits.

The Obey resolution:

Restores funding for training and equipment needs of state and local fire fighters, police, paramedics, public health officials, and emergency managers.

Fully funds veterans medical care at levels advocated by the bipartisan House Veterans Affairs Committee. Veterans organizations expressed outrage at the inadequate healthcare funding levels included in the Majority's budget.

Adds funding for military housing needs to help the families of our armed service members. The Department of Defense notes that over 120,000 service members do not have decent housing.

Funds the No Child Left Behind program.

Meets the minimum funding necessary to meet promises for special education.

Increases Pell Grants to more closely resemble inflation increases, helping lower income student afford college.

This is by no means unnecessary or wasteful spending. It simply restores cuts to programs important to the people of western Wisconsin and provides adequate levels of funding to meet government promises.

It is also fully paid for. As I mentioned earlier, budgeting is about tough choices, and included in this resolution is a reasonable trade off. In order to provide this important funding for military service members, students, veterans, and local first responders, the resolution propose reducing future tax relief for those wealthiest Americans with over $1 million in annual adjusted gross income. The tax packages of 2001 and 2003 included enormous benefits for the wealthiest 1 percent of Americans. The Obey proposal will keep many of these tax provisions in place. In fact, those with annual adjusted gross incomes over $1 million will still get around $24,000 in tax relief if this resolution is passed.

Contrary to the rhetoric coming from the other side, this will not hurt the vast majority of small business owners. This resolution only impacts those with over $1 million in adjusted gross income. I know and work with many business owners in western Wisconsin, and this resolution will provide more help to them and their communities.

Mr. Speaker, we need a new approach to help our local communities and this resolution provides important funding to meet critical priorities. I urge my colleagues to support the Obey resolution.

Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Visclosky) for his leadership on the committee and for yielding me this time.

Mr. Chairman, in a few minutes, I am going to be offering a very important amendment to highlight an incredibly valuable program that affects the

Upper Mississippi River basin, the Environmental Management Program. It has been in existence since 1986. It deals with habitat restoration along the river, along with long-term resource monitoring so we can better manage the river basin and the ecosystem. I look forward to being able to continue the work on this important project with the chairman and the ranking member of the committee as we move to conference in dealing with the funding issue.

But right now, Mr. Chairman, I want to recognize and draw attention in this Chamber to a very important and fun event that is going to occur in the Upper Mississippi River over the next week. It is the re- creation of the Grand Excursion that occurred there 150 years ago. The Grand Excursion is regarded as one of the greatest promotional trips ever devised in our Nation's history, one that changed the face of the Upper Mississippi River forever. In 1854, the Chicago and Rock Island Railroad became the first railroad to reach the Mississippi River.

To celebrate, the owners and contractors for the railroad proposed an excursion for a select group of stockholders, friends, and family. But word spread quickly about the occasion, resulting in a 1,200 person entourage traveling from Rock Island, Illinois, to what is now known as Minneapolis, Minnesota. It was the Grand Excursion of paddle boats up the Mississippi River.

My district in Western Wisconsin has more miles along the Mississippi River than any other district and will play host to this excursion coming through our communities over the next week.

According to the Chicago Tribune, the excursionists were considered ``the most brilliant ever assembled in the West.'' Statesmen, historians, diplomats, poets, newspaper editors. As the media wrote home to their newspapers, word spread about the wonders of the Nation's ``dark interior.''

This event turned into an opportunity to show some of our Nation's most influential people the fantastic beauty, numerous resources, and the unlimited opportunities that the Mississippi River and the West could provide. The year after, steamboat traffic along the Upper Mississippi River doubled, flooding the region with new settlers. The Grand Excursion also brought millions of dollars of investment to the area and positioned the Upper Mississippi region as a dominant force in the development of the Nation in the 19th Century.

The Grand Excursion of 2004 is an opportunity now to draw awareness from around the Nation and around the world about the recreational, the commercial, and the environmental opportunities that the Mississippi River and all its communities provide. In addition to the ``Grand Flotilla,'' the retracing of the Grand Excursion's journey by trains, paddlewheelers, and steamboats, over 50 communities along the 419 mile route will hold festivals and educational events to commemorate their 150th anniversary. Those who are unable to participate firsthand in the celebrations will be able to experience the excitement through the dynamic Web site that has been created.

I wish the participants of the Grand Excursion much fun and success in the upcoming week.

Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.

Mr. Chairman, based on previous conversations and the agreement I had with the Chair and the ranking member of the committee, I was offering this amendment with the intent to ask unanimous consent to withdraw and continue working with them and with the conferees in regards to a very important program that affects the upper Mississippi river basin, the Environmental Management Program.

It is an authorized program that first passed in 1986. It was reauthorized on a permanent basis in 1999. The authorization level has gone up to $33 million. My concern is that we have over the last few years been backtracking in regards to the funding of this important program.

As co-chair of the bipartisan upper Mississippi river basin Congressional task force, I have worked with my colleagues from this five-State region to build consensus about how best to protect and restore the nationally significant and environmental treasures of the upper Mississippi River.

I want to commend my colleagues who are here today, the gentlewoman from Minnesota (Ms. McCollum) and my good friend, the gentleman from Missouri, Mr. Hulshof, for their strong support for the EMP program and the support we have had in the bipartisan Mississippi River Caucus.

Earlier this year, 013 of us of the River Caucus wrote to the committee asking the committee to respect and appropriate funds for EMP at the President's budget request of $28 million. The committee, however, in this underlying report is only recommending $16 million.

The fear is we are backsliding on current projects that are in the works that will delay the completion of these projects by years. It will delay the implementation of new identified habitat restoration projects along the upper Mississippi River, along with the crucial long-term resource monitoring and the data collection which helps us better manage this important national treasure that we have in middle America.

The upper Mississippi and the entire Mississippi River basin area is North America's largest migratory route for waterfowl. It is the primary drinking source for 33 million Americans. It adds countless billions of dollars to our regional economy through industry and companies and farmers with the commercial navigation that is available along the Mississippi, not to mention a $6 billion tourism impact on the upper area and close to $2 billion recreation impact in the upper Mississippi River area.

And we have always recognized the legislation that has preceded us today that this is a multi-use river system between commercial navigation, which has existed in the past since the 1930s when the lock and dam system was created to harness the power of the river, to the recreation and the tourist impact.

The EMP program was established in the 1980s recognizing the need to maintain that important balance along the river between the infrastructure needs that are ongoing, but also the habitat restoration and long-term resource monitoring that the EMP program currently does. But, unfortunately, again, we have had backsliding over the last few years in regards to the commitment of the program.

Fortunately, the administration sees it a little bit differently. Based on a

letter that I wrote to the administration requesting funding earlier this year, the President responded to my request by a letter dated April 20, and I quote, ``As you know, the President submitted his 2005 budget on February 2004. I am pleased to say that the budget identifies EMP as one of the eight highest priority Army Corps of Engineer construction projects in the Nation and proposes $28 million in funding for it an increase of $9 million or 47 percent from the previous fiscal year.''

The point is, this has received wide bipartisan support, support from the governors and the five States of Wisconsin, Minnesota, Iowa, Illinois, and Missouri, that have supported this project. Various groups that are concerned about river management issues are very supportive of the environmental management program. The Corps of Engineers has had a multiyear, multimillion dollar navigation study that they have initially released a preliminary report upon asking in part for $5.3 billion ecosystem management project to go along with a proposed lock and dam expansion project.

In light of where we seem to be heading in regards to the river management issues, we would hope we could get more support for the funding of a program that has proven itself year in and year out with wide bipartisan support, with tangible results that we see along the upper Mississippi River, something that thousands of people will see in the coming week as the 1854 grand excursion is recreated with a grand flotilla going up the Mississippi and finally ending up, I believe, in the district of the gentlewoman from Minnesota (Ms. McCollum) for a 4th of July celebration.

The river has played an incredibly important role in the development of middle America, the Great Plains States, and the upper Midwest generally. From the exposure it received in 1854 with the Grand Excursion to the great American novels that Mark Twain wrote of two kids growing up on the Mississippi, Tom Sawyer and Huck Finn, to the ongoing uses of the river, we believe we need to do a better job of funding the EMP; and hopefully with the leadership's cooperation, we can accomplish that in conference.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of the Child Nutrition and WIC Reauthorization Act. As a member of the Education and the Workforce or Committee, I am pleased with the process in which this bill has been considered; it is a critical bill that will greatly benefit our nation's children as well as family farmers.

Ensuring that our youth receive proper nutrition is a top priority for me in Congress. I have traveled across western Wisconsin, meeting with people both in and out of the schools who are active in administering child nutrition programs, and consistently I hear how important these programs are for our youth. I have also met with parents and children who participate, and I hear how many of these families depend on federal child nutrition programs for a healthy start in life and healthy meals as their children grow. Sadly, too often, a federally subsidized meal is the only complete meal some children eat in a day. This reality underscores the importance of this bill that will improve access to such important programs while also increasing the nutritional value of federal food programs.

Specifically, I am pleased that several provisions were included in the base bill, which I coauthored in previous legislation. H.R. 3250, the Child Nutrition Improvement Act of 2003, which I sponsored with Representatives Bennie Thompson, Gil Gutknecht, and Tom Petri, will combat the increasing problem of child obesity through increased child milk consumption by preventing commercial beverage companies from pressuring schools to remove milk vending machines. Another provision included in the base bill from H.R. 3250 will improve child nutrition by making it easier for schools to offer milk in a variety of flavors and fat contents to better meet students' varying tastes and needs. With 90 percent of teenage girls and 70 percent of teenage boys currently not getting enough calcium, it is imperative to provide increased availability of milk products in schools.

Additionally, S. 2507 includes legislation that I sponsored with Representative Upton, H.R. 2626, The Farm-to-Cafeteria Projects Act of 2003. This provision focuses on connecting local agriculture to schools in every state through a competitive, one-time matching grant directly to local communities. This allows each locality to design a farm-to- cafeteria project tailored to specific farm and school community needs. Experience has shown that kids' food choices can be improved by connecting farms to the lunchroom.

Mr. Speaker, again, I am proud to support this bill on the Floor today. Our goal in the 21st century should be to ensure that every child receives proper nutrition needed to succeed in school. It is a simple fact: good nutrition is an educational tool that improves children's performance in school.

Mr. Chairman, I thank my friend for yielding me time, and I rise in opposition to the Republican budget legislation.

Mr. Chairman, we are here today to debate a very important issue, and that is reinstituting fiscal disciplinary rules in the budget process. We need a meaningful pay-as-you-go rule, one that offsets both spending and tax cuts to achieve balance.

Unfortunately, what is before us today is more like ``pray-as-you- go'' or more like ``pay-a-little-bit-as-you-go'' and leave a legacy of debt to the next generation to inherit.

Unfortunately, we hear a lot of talk on the other side that the problem is always spending, too much spending. Well, if that is the case, then what have you been doing the last 4 years? Republicans have been in control of the House of Representatives. Republicans have been in control of the Senate. There is a Republican President sitting in the White House, and he has not vetoed one spending bill in the last 4 years. Instead, he inherits a 5.6 projected surplus, converts it into a $3 trillion deficit and now claims that spending has run away.

Instead, we could go back to a tried and true method that worked in the 1990s, a pay-as-you-go rule that made sense and brought balance and then budget surpluses that actually allowed us to reduce the national debt. That is what the Spratt substitute allows, and I encourage my colleagues to support the Spratt substitute.

Mr. Speaker, United States leadership in pursuit of peace in the Middle East is essential if we are to help bring about an equitable and fair peace accord between Israel and the Palestinians and end the bloodshed. The situation in the Middle East is a dominant issue on the minds of people in the region and throughout the world, and we cannot lose sight of the fact that stability in this region is tied directly to our own national security.

I applauded the United States leadership in crafting the ``Roadmap'' to Middle East peace coauthored by the European Union, Russia, and the United Nations. This promising commitment has suffered at the hands of continued bloodshed and disagreement. However, I believe we must push for follow-through on the principles embodied in the Roadmap as a building block for a viable Palestinian State and secure Israel.

Given the lack of progress in tandem by Israel and the Palestinian Authority, the region has suffered from the violence continuing to engulf the region. The need to break the deadlock is greatly apparent, and Prime Minister Sharon's proposal for Israel to unilaterally withdraw certain military installations and settlements from the Gaza Strip and West Bank is an opportunity for progress toward peace. Involvement by regional governments such as Egypt in pressuring reforms from the Palestinian Authority also hold promise that progress can be made. With continued involvement, we maintain the hope the next steps will be done through successful negotiation and compromise.

The resolution before us supports the concepts included in President Bush's letter to Prime Minister Sharon dated April 14, 2004, regarding recent actions taken by Israel and the United States commitment to the peace process. It includes a reaffirmation of America's commitment to Israel's security and reinforces that Israelis and Palestinians, and all states in the region and beyond, must work together to fight terrorism. It also highlights highly sensitive issues including future refugee resettlement and border lines based on negotiations, which have been part of peace talks started under President Clinton.

While I would prefer the language in this resolution to more closely focus on the international commitment to Middle East peace and the obligations of the parties involved, I believe the intention of the resolution is consistent with the Roadmap for Peace, and I will support it. We must stay engaged in this matter and constantly work toward peace and security for Israel and the Palestinian people.

Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the amendment offered by my friend and colleague, Congressman Rush Holt.

Yellowstone National Park is the flagship of the National Park Service and is a favorite to millions of visitors each year. Since the first explorers began documenting their discoveries to modern day, the features of Yellowstone National Park have virtually remained the same. The scenic beauty, the thermal features, the volcanic mysteries, the free roaming wildlife are all a throwback to bygone days that continues to captivate the hearts and minds to all who are fortunate enough to witness them.

Mr. Chairman, this wonderful experience should remain available to those who responsibly use a snowmobile to enjoy all that Yellowstone has to offer.

Snowmobiling is a very important recreational activity for many Wisconsin families each winter. In fact, there are over 210,000 registered snowmobiles in my state, and I am concerned this amendment would unnecessarily curtail a popular method of enjoying Yellowstone and negatively impact on the industries snowmobiling supports.

The manufacturers of snowmobiles have successfully labored to build quieter, cleaner machines. The four-stroke engines found in new generation snowmobiles emit far less hydrocarbons and carbon monoxides than the older, two-stroke models. In addition, they operate at a decibel level that is quieter than many vacuum cleaners.

The sixty-five thousand snowmobiles that enter the parks each winter on a limited road system is part of a new Winter-Use Plan that allows all Americans to enjoy the majestic beauty of Yellowstone, while still preserving the health of the Park and the wildlife that live there. In fact, the environmental impact of these machines on this national treasure is likely far less than that of the nearly two million cars and trucks that enter in the summer months.

Mr. Chairman, responsible snowmobiling has its place in the American outdoors, especially in national forests designed for multiple-use. I urge my colleagues to oppose this amendment.

Mr. Speaker, as ranking member of the Subcommittee on Energy and Minerals Resources of the Committee on Resources, I rise, once again, in disappointed opposition to H.R. 4503/H.R. 6.

The bill before us today is nearly identical to the Conference Report on the Energy Policy Act of 2003--absent of any new ideas that would ensure a more secure energy future for America; but with all of the same fatal flaws that would force ``mom-and-pop-taxpayer'' to fatten the already sizeable bottom line of some of our Nation's largest oil companies and pay for the clean-up of MTBE contaminated groundwater. I won't spend more of Congress' precious time listing all of my objections to this bill, but will simply include the statements I made last year on H.R. 6 for the record.

But let me just say, Mr. Speaker, that there is no question our Nation needs a comprehensive and balanced energy plan--one that weens us off of our shaky strategic dependence of Middle Eastern oil toward more sustainable, cleaner, and renewable sources. Unfortunately, this bill--like last year's budget-busting behemoth--does not get us there.

There are, however, some worthy provisions in these bills that have wide, bipartisan support. So, instead of political grandstanding, I urge the House leadership to separate and pass these important measures.

One such example is the mandatory reliability standards, which would punish utilities who violate rules designed to limit how much electricity can be sold over the Nation's aging power grid. This measure could be perfected and passed by Congress today if it was allowed to be considered separately. The reliability of our Nation's interconnected power grid is critical to our economy and our security, but has been left at risk. In fact, Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham was recently reported as saying ``the U.S. power grid is in better shape than before last August's massive blackout but remains vulnerable this summer.''

Another widely supported proposal is the renewable fuels standard provision. This measure would increase the requirement that gasoline sold in the United States contain a specified volume of clean-burning ethanol or biodiesel. Under this measure, the annual average volume of renewable fuel additives would incrementally increase, starting at 3.1 billion gallons in 2005 and reaching 5 billion gallons in 2012--two and a half times the current requirement.

The American Farm Bureau has estimated the renewable fuels standard will have a significant economic stimulus tool for rural America by adding $4.5 billion to net farm income; create the need for $5.3 billion in rural captial investments; and create 216,000 new jobs. Ethanol and biodiesel are just two broad-based, diversified, environmentally friendly energy products American agriculture can produce. I have long stated that empowering U.S. farmers to assume a greater role in producing renewable fuels is a win-win situation deserving congressional support. Unfortunately, even though this provision has the consensus approval of Republicans and Democrats alike, House leadership has steadfastly refused to move it separately.

Mr. Speaker, I urge Members to oppose this bill and immediately move to work bipartisanly to pass these widely supported, and much needed provisions.

Mr. Speaker, over the past year, I, along with many other Members of Congress from both sides of the aisle have been pushing for congressional action to fix the international trade dispute over the extraterritorial income (ETI) and Foreign Sales Corporation (FSC) programs. We have a bipartisan, fully paid-for remedy that would reform these tax provisions, put the United States tax code in compliance with the World Trade Organization (WTO), and reduce the tax burden on American manufacturers and farmers. Unfortunately, the Majority leadership ignored this bipartisan approach in favor of a budget- busting, controversial bill that does little for small manufacturers in Wisconsin and includes multiple provisions completely unrelated to the trade problem we need to fix immediately.

Because of the House majority's previous inaction on reforming the FSC-ETI trade dispute, the European Union (EU) continues to ratchet up tariffs on nearly 100 categories of U.S.-produced exports. This costs American businesses and workers by making our products less competitive in the major European market. Unless we reform the FSC-ETI tax provisions, EU tariffs on American products will continue to climb, potentially costing American exporters over $4 billion.

With over 2 million American manufacturing jobs lost since 2001, it is critical that we act to reverse this trend by eliminating incentives for American jobs to be sent overseas and working to end trade barriers that hurt American exports. Anticipating the EU tariffs, Congressmen Crane, Rangel, Manzullo, and Levin introduced bipartisan legislation last year to address the FSC-ETI trade dispute. H.R. 1769, the Jobs Protection Act, would have eliminated the American tax breaks found in violation of WTO rules, and reinvested the savings back into American manufacturers by reducing their tax rates. I, along with 175 other Members of Congress, cosponsored this legislation and have pushed for the House to consider this legislation.

Despite this bipartisan compromise, the Majority leadership has brought to the Floor today a piecemeal, fiscally irresponsible bill that is filled with special interest breaks and will increase already record budget deficits. Further, the major provisions of H.R. 4520 provide over $30 billion in tax incentives for large multinational corporations while providing little to no tax relief to small and medium-sized manufacturers, farmers, and unincorporated businesses. The Republican chairman of the House Small Business Committee has expressed his opposition to this legislation because it fails to include smaller non-Chapter C corporations in its manufacturing benefit.

Because of strong bipartisan opposition to H.R. 4520, the majority has attached 400 pages of additional tax reforms, complications, and unrelated add-ons that dilute from our important mission to fix the FSC-ETI trade dispute, add tens of billions of dollars to the budget deficit, and curb potential investment in our manufacturing sector.

Some of the additional provisions included in H.R. 4520 are items that I have consistently supported including a temporary incentive to repatriate overseas profits in the United States, and extensions of important tax benefits such as the research and development tax credit, wind and biomass electricity production credit, Work Opportunity tax credit, and small business expensing rates. I am hopeful that these items can be acted on by the House separately from this unacceptable legislation.

The substitute authored by Congressman Rangel was based on the bipartisan FSC-ETI reform bill, H.R. 1769, and would have included extensions of the R&D tax credit, renewable energy production credits, increased small business expensing provisions, tax deductions for teachers, and other important tax provisions. Further, the substitute would provide better treatment of small businesses, farming cooperatives, and domestic manufacturers, while not adding to the federal budget deficit. Unfortunately, the Majority leadership did not even allow debate on the Rangel substitute fearing it would gain wide bipartisan support and displace the unrelated provisions included in

Madam Speaker, I thank my good friend from the great State of Kansas for yielding me this time.

Madam Speaker, I, too, rise today to mark the death of President Ronald Reagan and to pay tribute to a great American. I extend my deepest sympathies and prayers to Mrs. Reagan and the entire Reagan family. With President Reagan's death, our country lost yet another member of the greatest generation, a member who typified his generation with his work ethic, his optimism, and his patriotism.

I believe that all of us, regardless of political affiliation, were impressed by how much President Reagan loved America, how much he believed in its basic goodness and the decency of this great country. He was so proud to represent a country that stood for freedom and equality, and he worked for many years to help spread freedom across the globe.

I was fortunate enough to witness firsthand the effect of freedom spreading across the world. After graduating from college, I had the privilege of traveling to Europe and spending time in the countries that were formerly part of the Soviet Union that were struggling to gain a place in the world as free nations. My travels included a stop in Berlin to celebrate the reunification of Germany. I hammered away with a sledgehammer at the Berlin Wall with thousands of people from all over the world. I still have a piece of that wall, which sits on my desk.

It was inspiring to be a part of history in this way, and I can only imagine how wonderful it must have been for President Reagan to have played such a seminal role in the transformation of the Soviet Union and the Eastern Bloc nations. With the end of the Cold War, we face an exciting new world of independent nations throughout Eastern and Central Europe.

As we face current challenges throughout the world, I look back to the patriotism and optimism with which President Reagan approached international and domestic issues, and I feel grateful that we have his example.

Aside from his leadership on issues of international importance, I also appreciate President Reagan's willingness to find bipartisan compromise in order to achieve results. To him, politics was not a blood sport; it was the art of the possible. Coming to Congress several years after both President Reagan and Speaker Tip O'Neill had retired, I always enjoyed listening to my colleagues tell of the two men swapping stories and jokes as they negotiated important pieces of legislation.

President Reagan's bipartisan spirit and constant optimism are testament to his leadership skills and his love for his country. It is an approach to governing and it is an approach to leadership that we need to restore.

May God bless his soul.

Mr. Speaker, rise today to recognize Karen Schoenfeld and all of the faculty and students at La Crosse Roads School, which is a high school in my district in western Wisconsin. The students and faculty at the school are performing a great service to our country and deserve our praise and recognition.

Four years ago, after listening to my father and uncle talk about their experiences serving our country overseas, I realized that our Nation needed to record the valuable stories of our veterans and those Americans who supported them. And it was this simple experience that led me to author the Veterans Oral History Project Act. After passing the House and Senate unanimously and being signed into law by President Clinton, the project was turned over to the able staff at the Library of Congress's Folklife Center. This small but dedicated staff relies heavily on volunteers to collect the stories of veterans, and La Crosse Roads School has risen admirably to this challenge.

Partnering with the local Rotary Club, of which Karen is a member, the students and faculty at La Crosse Roads have taken on the task of contacting and interviewing veterans and submitting their interviews for inclusion in the Veterans History Project. The interaction between these high school students and our Nation's veterans has been an amazing one to watch. The teenagers tell me that they have never before been interested in history; by hearing our veterans' stories first-hand, they are not only interested, but they also feel that they are a part of preserving an important part of American history. They are making a significant contribution to our country and get enormous satisfaction from doing so. The veterans, some of whom have never talked about their experiences before, feel gratified that their stories are important to others. The excellent work done by Karen and the students has been aided by the National Court Reporters, led by my wife Tawni, who are transcribing the interviews. In all, the work that Karen and the students have done has been incredibly successful. They are an excellent example of the kind of partnerships that make the Veterans History Program a national success.

Karen is truly a remarkable person who brings her enthusiasm and energy to the classroom working with these ``at-risk'' students. There is no half-effort or lower gear for Karen, and that is reflected in the success her students achieve. She not only has had her students involved with the Veterans History Project for the past three years; she has also worked with the local CESA office to develop a website and lesson plan for other teachers and students to use for the project. And every year Karen teams with a WWII veteran, Bill Bruring, to have an awards ceremony in La Crosse to recognize the students and particularly the veterans. It is a very moving and patriotic ceremony that I have had the pleasure of attending.

Many of us were lucky enough to be on the Mall this past weekend and visit with some of the veterans who were here for the dedication of the National World War II Memorial. It was truly inspiring to talk to these great men and women, who had sacrificed so much and have a great deal to teach us. I believe that Karen and her students have learned many important lessons from our veterans, and I would like to end by reading a poem Karen wrote that beautifully expresses the experience she and her students have had with the veterans:

I Never Saw Your Face Before

I never saw your face before.

I never knew your name.

But now our paths have crossed

And I will never be the same.

I never saw the flag before.

Not really, not its soul.

I only saw the stars, the stripes,

a fabric on a pole.

Now as I gaze upon the flag

I can see young faces.

All called away from our proud land

to other distant places.

They did what they were called to do.

They put their dreams on hold.

They knew that others needed them.

They did what they were told.

And you, my friend, have taught me this--

the sacrifices made.

You helped me know what I have earned

From the price that others paid.

I've been in class, I've read the books.

I've seen the movies too.

But now I know our freedom's price--

All this I've learned from you.

Karen Schoenfeld

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

Charlie, they say that politics is a sea of conflict. If that is true, then you have been the steady hand that has guided this ship of state, our democratic process, through so many years of calm and troubled waters. You will be missed. We have appreciated your service. You are the epitome of what public service is all about.

And, as I encouraged Terry just before his retirement, and I have enjoyed the conversations that we have had in regards to the tradition and the history and the culture of this place, I encourage you to record your memories and maybe put it in book form to share with the rest of the world because in so many ways, you are also the repository of a lot of the knowledge and memories that are embodied in this place.

So we all wish you well today. We wish you Godspeed and may you have a very long and happy and healthy retirement. Thank you.

Mr. Speaker, I strongly support providing tax relief to middle-income Americans and I support permanent extension of tax cuts aimed at helping working American families. However, I am not in favor of a new tax break for families making over $300,000 per year, which is exactly what H.R. 4359 provides, and I rise in opposition to this legislation.

The legislation before us today is a dangerous tax cut Trojan Horse. Disguised as an extension of the child tax credit increase included in the 2001 and 2003 tax cut packages, this bill provides an entirely new tax cut for the wealthiest of Americans by expanding eligibility for this tax cut to families making over $300,000 per year. This more than doubles the previous high point of $110,000 per family where the child tax credit started to phase out, and provides those in the top 10% of income earners over $70 billion in tax cuts.

This is not surprising considering the House leadership decided not to include a child tax credit benefit for working families making between $10,500 and $26,625 during the 2003 tax cut package. By loading on tax breaks for the very wealthy, H.R. 4359 is simply another demonstration of the majority's contempt for working American families.

Further, it is unfair to Americans today, and especially the next generation, to delude ourselves by thinking the record budget deficits facing our nation, estimated by the White House at over $500 billion this year alone, will simply go away. H.R. 4359 as drafted contains no offsets, and will add $288 billion to the budget deficit over the next 10 years at a time when the raid on the Social Security and Medicare Trust funds continues.

As a member of the House Budget Committee, I supported a budget resolution that would have extended the child tax credit at the current levels, while still reducing the deficit. This approach required touch choices, prioritization, and a commitment to helping working families. Unfortunately, this was not the approach taken by the House leadership, putting tax relief for middle-income Americans in jeopardy.

I support the alternative offered today by my colleague Representative Levin that fully extends the child tax credit increase for middle-income Americans. It would prevent any tax increase in 2005, and will not increase the budget deficit because it is fully paid for through a responsible offset. Further, it provides more tax relief to more families making up to $110,000 by indexing the child tax credit for inflation--bringing it up to $1,100 by 2009. It also benefits our military families by allowing combat pay to be counted toward the refundable portion of the credit. This approach makes sure that during these difficult economic times, the vast majority of the benefits of the child tax credit help the vast majority of Americans.

In conclusion, I urge my colleagues to support the Levin alternative and reject the new tax break for the wealthiest of Americans. Without the Rangel alternative, this legislation creates more harm than good; it not only increases the budget deficit of today, but also increases the debt of the future at the expense of working families.