Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, on October 26, 2005, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad stated that ``Israel must be wiped off the map.'' It is shocking and unbelievable that the leader of any nation would call for the complete destruction of another.

These types of threats cannot stand unanswered. I join my colleagues today in condemning the president of Iran's remarks in the strongest of terms.

While the peace process has been moving along in the Middle East without much participation from the Bush administration, Iran continues to pursue nuclear armament with little interest shown by the president, and the United States remains bogged down in Iraq.

I hope these unconscionable statements will cause the Bush administration to renew its commitment to our allies in the region.

Let us make no mistake, such statements present a serious threat to the world. Iran's leaders are pursuing nuclear armament, and continue to call for the destruction of the state of Israel, one of the United States most important allies.

The statements made by President Ahmadinejad are not just a threat against the people of Israel, but they are a threat to the peace and stability of the entire world.

These words of hate must not go unanswered or unchallenged. The United States and the United Nations must stand firmly against such threats.

Mr. Speaker, during rollcall vote No. 548 on H.R. 65, I mistakenly recorded my vote as ``yes'' when I should have voted ``no.''

Mr. Speaker, the job loss in my State of Ohio continues, yet this Congress does nothing; no manufacturing policy, no industrial policy, bad trade policies, passing the Central American Free Trade Agreement in the middle of the night, a tax policy that benefits and gives incentives for corporations to outsource manufacturing jobs to China and New Mexico and to Central America, into other parts of the world, but does nothing to assist small manufacturers.

Mr. Speaker, this country's economic leaders and political leaders are taking this country in the wrong direction. It is time we passed better trade policy. It is time we passed a manufacturing policy. It is time we assisted America's and Ohio's small manufacturers, because they create the jobs and create the middle class in this country.

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

I am proud to support H. Res. 220, which recognizes America's Blood Centers. Founded 43 years ago, America's Blood Centers are North America's largest network of nonprofit, community blood centers. Seventy-six blood centers operate 600-plus collection sites in 45 States and provide nearly half the United States volunteer donor blood supply.

There are some facts about blood and blood donation that I think are worth noting. Four and a half million Americans would die each year without lifesaving blood transfusions. Approximately 32,000 pints of blood are used each day in our country. Every 3 seconds someone needs blood. One out of every 10 people in the United States entering a hospital needs blood. Just one pint of donated blood can help save as many as three people's lives. About 3 gallons of blood supports the entire Nation's blood needs for just 1 minute.

We all expect blood to be there for us when we need it, and that time is too often unexpected. Whether it is a 7-year-old battling leukemia, a father injured in a serious car accident, or a 65-year-old woman having heart surgery, every day hundreds of people in our communities need blood; and there is, of course, no substitute for it.

H. Res. 220 recognizes blood heroes who are ensuring that the safest possible blood is readily available whenever and wherever needed. As we recognize the important efforts of the blood centers, it is also important to recognize and encourage those Americans who routinely give blood. Both blood donors and blood centers are an essential lifeline for all of us.

I urge the entire House to vote ``yes'' for this important resolution.

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

Mr. Speaker, I have no further requests for time, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize Rosa Parks, who died yesterday at the age of 92.

Some 50 years ago, Mrs. Parks took a stand for freedom by sitting down. She refused to give up her seat on a city bus to a white man. Mrs. Parks was arrested and convicted of violating Alabama's segregation laws. Her actions sparked the Montgomery bus boycott and toppled the Jim Crow law under which she had been convicted.

Mrs. Parks was not seeking attention, was not trying to become a symbol at that moment of the civil rights movement. But by taking a stand against racial inequality, her arrest personalized the injustice to Americans of faith and strong belief, of all races, and personalized the humiliation of segregation laws.

Rosa Parks' courage and active defiance ignited the civil rights movement. Her understanding of equality and commitment to justice made her a gifted leader of that movement.

Today we mourn the loss of Mrs. Parks. We honor her personal strength, her determination, as a civil rights leader and her vision of a Nation where freedom is denied to no man and to no woman. The memory of Rosa Parks inspires the fight for social and economic justice.

Mr. Speaker, I would join all Americans in welcoming President Lee, during his historic visit to our Nation's capital from Taiwan.

I am pleased to know he will have the opportunity to meet with Members of Congress.

Taiwan is a beacon of democracy and freedom in the Pacific.

It is my hope Taiwan will continue to shine despite the continued threats across the Strait from China.

I hope in the near future all restrictions on high-level visits from Taiwan would be lifted, so that Members of Congress will be able to welcome the current president of Taiwan to DC as well.

It is important these visits take place so that a balanced understanding of both sides of the Taiwan Strait will be directly available to Congress, the Administration, and the American public.

Congress and the American people remain unequivocally committed in their support for the people of Taiwan.

The Taiwanese should be praised for their continued commitment to freedom, human rights and democracy.

Through the tireless efforts of President Lee, Taiwan will continue to shine as a beacon of democracy and freedom.

Again, we welcome President Lee to Washington, DC during this historic visit.

Mr. Speaker, today the House of Representatives is doing the right thing about health care. The QI program helps low- income beneficiaries cover the cost of the Medicare premium. Without this program, many elderly Americans would sink below poverty as they attempt to pay for doctors' visits out of pocket. That not only places the elderly at risk; it is wasteful from a fiscal perspective. When Medicare eligibles cannot afford the premium associated with doctors' visits and other outpatient services, Medicaid becomes their insurer of last resort. Absent QI, this program, more elderly Americans and individuals with disabilities would need Federal and State assistance through Medicaid in addition to their Medicare hospital coverage.

Investing in premium assistance now saves both Federal dollars and State dollars.

This bill also extends the Transitional Medical Assistance Program,

TMA. It provides health insurance to families as they move from welfare to the workforce. It is both a public health imperative and a jobs initiative.

Similar to the QI, it is an investment to the Federal budget in the long run, in this case by promoting workforce participation.

Ideally, today's legislation would make QI and TMA programs permanent so that these all-too-frequent reauthorizations would no longer be necessary. I hope we can work on a bipartisan basis to secure a permanent authorization.

At the beginning of my remarks I said today the House of Representatives is doing the right thing about health care. Unfortunately, yesterday they were not, this body was not. The day before this body was not doing the right thing about health care, and week before, week before, week before this they were not doing the right thing about health care.

Now, as we talk about Katrina, paying for this terrible tragedy that happened along the gulf coast, some Republicans want to cut Medicaid by $12 billion, $15 billion cut, cut other kinds of programs, increase Medicare premiums, cut out all kinds of programs that serve the working poor. Other Republicans simply want to add this cost of Katrina, as they add the $1 billion a week for the Iraq War, to the national deficit so that our kids and our grandkids can pay the cost.

Unfortunately, no Republican, to my knowledge, is standing up and saying maybe we ought to cancel the tax cuts that are for the wealthiest 1 percent of Americans. So the choice has become this. My friends on the other side of the aisle say let us give tax cuts to the wealthy, and then we have to cut Medicaid. Then we have to raise Medicare premiums. Medicare premiums already having gone up 50 percent in the last 4 years, 50 percent in the last 4 years. Seniors were just notified they are going to pay almost $90 a month for their Medicare premium, and do my colleagues know why? It is because my friends on the other side of the aisle are slavish devotees to tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans.

So, as wealthy Americans see their incomes go up and up and up, as the minimum wage has stayed flat for 5 years, as wages for 95 percent of the American people have been stagnant, we have got to give tax cuts for the wealthiest people in this country, to the richest people making over $250,000, $300,000 a year, and then we have to cut Medicaid. Then we have to increase Medicare premiums. Then we have to take from the middle class and the working poor.

It is immoral, it is wrong, and my colleagues should listen to what the gentleman from Washington (Mr. McDermott) said when he quoted from the New Testament and talked about we will be judged by our deeds. We also should think about our faith in terms of social justice. We also should think about our faith in doing to the least of these among us.

We ought to think about our faith in making this country a better place, and frankly, my friends on the other side of the aisle have failed miserably on that account.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 2 minutes, and I thank the gentleman from Washington for yielding the balance of his time.

I rise in support of this legislation, which reauthorizes the QI program. This program helps low-income Medicare beneficiaries cover the cost of the Medicare premium. Without this, many elderly Americans would sink below poverty as they attempt to pay for doctor visits out of pocket. That not only places individuals at risk, it is inefficient from a fiscal perspective.

For low-income beneficiaries who cannot afford the Medicare premium, Medicaid becomes the insurer of last resort. Absent the QI program, more elderly Americans and individuals with disabilities would need Federal and State assistance through Medicaid in addition to their Medicare coverage. Investing in premium assistance now saves both Federal and State dollars in the future.

And there is untapped potential in the program. Uncertainty surrounding funding for this program has had a dampening effect on enrollment. States are hesitant to reach out to eligible individuals, resulting in artificially low enrollment figures. It is in the public interest to address this problem in the future, but extending QI-1 is a necessary first step, and I am pleased the bill takes that step.

This legislation also extends the transitional Medicaid program, or TMA, and provides health insurance to families as they move from welfare to the workforce. It is a public health initiative and a jobs initiative which I strongly support.

It is my strong preference to make these two programs permanent rather than having Congress repeatedly reauthorize them sometimes multiple times in a year. I hope we can work with the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Deal) and others on a bipartisan basis to secure a permanent authorization. In the meantime, I am pleased the House is taking up this legislation, and I urge my colleagues to support it.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Washington (Mr. Inslee), a member of the Committee on Commerce and very knowledgeable about health care issues.

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

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

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 2 minutes.

Mr. Speaker, there may not be a Member of this body who cannot share a personal story about cancer. Cancer is a health risk for all of us. It has taken friends, family, and others from each of us.

With the help of a very real Federal commitment to research, through coverage and access, through development of new standards and innovative treatment, American medicine is fighting cancer on every front.

I am a proud supporter of the National Cancer Institute's 2015 goal to eliminate suffering and death due to cancer within the decade. While we work to eliminate the cancer threat, the Federal Government is also working to make sure that treatment for cancer, specifically chemotherapy, is administered in the best possible manner for patients.

Earlier this year, Medicare implemented a demonstration project to collect data and study the quality of care being provided to patients undergoing chemotherapy. This project is a vital tool for policymakers to use as we work to determine the most appropriate reimbursement strategies for this complicated treatment regimen. It is important that the administration extend this demonstration through 2006 so we can ensure that Medicare beneficiaries and every American has access to high-quality treatment.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Hall), the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Gene Green), the gentleman from New York (Mr. Towns) and others for their work on this resolution. Extending this demonstration will maintain an important tool in our country's fight against cancer.

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

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

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 2 minutes.

Mr. Speaker, over 80,000 Americans, 5 million people worldwide suffer from idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis. As with so many diseases, the difficulty in diagnosing IPF indicates that the actual numbers may be much higher. Members of this body, as the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Deal) said, all have a personal connection to this disease. Our colleague, the distinguished member of our subcommittee, the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Norwood) has battled the disease since 1998 and underwent a lung transplant about a year ago.

There are currently no effective treatments or cure for idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis. The only option for patients is a lung transplant, which simply does not come in time for so many who suffer from the disease. There is hope, but it requires the continued investment in the development of new treatments. Drugs designed both to treat the lungs scarred by the fibrosis and to suppress the inflammation it causes are currently in the experimental stages. We need to build on that progress and move on towards a cure.

This resolution reflects several important goals as we, government, patients and their doctors and society at large fight this disease. First and foremost, it underscores the need for research, not just in a new treatment for IPF, but into the causes of the disease so we can understand more about this and some 200 other related diseases, particularly various kinds of lung disorders.

It also underscores the point of funding NIH and CDC, not making huge tax cuts and underfunding these very important government programs that we realize in this country more and more are so important for all people in this country.

It is appropriate this body recognize the goals and ideals of a National Idiopathic Pulmonary Fibrosis Awareness Week.

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

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson-Lee).

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

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

Mr. Speaker, I listened to this debate, and I hope that all of my friends on the other side of the aisle who support this resolution, as we all should, keep this in context. As we spend a billion dollars a week in Iraq, as my friends on the other side of the aisle insist on tax cuts for the wealthiest people in our society, as we continue to drive this Federal budget deficit up and up and up, and I hear some people in this body say we need to cut National Institutes of Health spending, that we need to cut Centers for Disease Control in the gentleman from Georgia's (Mr. Deal) area, that we need to cut programs on Medicaid and Medicare, I hope they will remember this debate tonight about how important this program is to the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Norwood) and how important this program is to so many in our country who, frankly, do not have the good health plans and the good insurance that Members of this institution have.

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

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

Mr. Speaker, so many of us in this body prayed for and were thrilled by recovery of the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Norwood), and I appreciate tonight, all of us do, how he has said so well how he, because he has insurance, because he knew how to negotiate the whole medical care system, health care system, how lucky he has been, and how so many in this country are not so lucky. I appreciate that he said that.

As I said earlier, I hope we in this body can get serious at some point about the 45 million people without health insurance and about what we are going to do about Medicaid in this body, not to make cuts in Medicaid, but to make our health care system work better than it has in the past.

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

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

Mr. Speaker, I thank my friend from Massachusetts for the time.

H.R. 250 should have been a good idea. It makes sense to encourage ties between manufacturers and academic institutions; but as the gentleman from Tennessee (Mr. Gordon) and the gentleman from California (Mr. Honda) said, the restrictive rule prevented consideration of a number of amendments that would have improved the bill, especially amendments to strengthen the Advanced Technology Program, which is especially important in manufacturing-intensive States like the gentleman from Ohio's (Mr. Gillmor) and mine, which struggles with ever-increasing energy costs.

We also missed an opportunity today to dramatically increase funding for MEP and to target increased Federal assistance to States that have suffered especially high manufacturing job-loss rates.

The story of this bill is a story of missed opportunity. This Congress has no manufacturing policy. We pass trade bill after trade bill. Our trade deficit has gone from $38 billion my first year when I ran for Congress 12 years, 13 years ago, to $617 billion, from $38 billion to $617 billion in a dozen years. Job loss has become more and more prevalent.

Whether it is Tennessee or Michigan or California or Massachusetts or my State of Ohio, we have lost almost a quarter million manufacturing jobs in the last 5 years; and as the gentleman from New York (Mr. Rangel) and the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Levin) know, we continue passing tax legislation that gives incentives to companies, the large manufacturers that

outsource to India and China, rather than giving incentives to companies that manufacture in this country.

Mr. Speaker, we need a manufacturing policy. What the gentleman from California (Mr. Honda) and the gentleman from Tennessee (Mr. Gordon) have advocated will move us in that direction. We should defeat the rule. We should start again and do it right.

Mr. Speaker, the Manufacturing Extension Program helps small manufacturers in my State of Ohio and nationwide to improve their efficiency, increase their competitiveness, and stay in business.

With funding of about $111 million in 2003, the Manufacturing Extension Program, MEP, helped over 18,000 U.S. manufacturing firms increase sales by almost a billion dollars and cut costs by almost $700 million.

In Ohio, that meant helping some 2,700 businesses to create or retain over 1,100 jobs, increase sales by $20 million, cut costs by over $47 million, and increase investments by $58 million. But despite that track record of success, President Bush, in order to pay for the tax cuts that go overwhelmingly to the 1 percent wealthiest people in this country, President Bush has repeatedly put the Manufacturing Extension Program on the chopping block.

He proposed another round of MEP funding cuts for next year. The President's 2006 budget cuts MEP funding by 56 percent, understanding all of the manufacturing jobs lost in State after State after State, some 2\1/2\ million jobs in the last 5 years, the President wants to cut one of the few programs that works for American manufacturing.

Today the House passed H.R. 250, legislation which would extend MEP by adding a new component that links small manufacturers with academic institutions. But this bill should have given us an opportunity to do much more for American manufacturers.

Members of the House Science Committee, the gentleman from Tennessee (Mr. Gordon) and the gentleman from California (Mr. Honda), had planned to offer amendments that would have strengthened MEP's partner program,

the Advanced Technology Program, that helps manufacturers improve their energy efficiency.

The Republican-led Congress did not agree to allow that amendment. We also missed an opportunity to expand and improve MEP itself. We should have used that bill to dramatically increase funding so that we can help U.S. manufacturing. Congress chose not to.

My home State of Ohio has lost one in six, one-sixth of its manufacturing jobs since 2001. An improved MEP could have made the difference for many small businesses who must fight every day to survive, but the Republican leadership used the partisan Rules Committee to block even attempts at amendments.

The problem, Mr. Speaker, is this Congress, this country, this government, has no manufacturing policy, no policy to retain manufacturing, no policy to expand manufacturing in this country. America's trade deficit the year I ran for Congress in 1992 for the first time was $38 billion. The trade deficit last year was $618 billion. From a $38 billion trade deficit, that means we have bought $38 billion more than we had sold back in 1992, to a $618 billion trade deficit today. That is a result of huge outsourcing of jobs and a major loss of U.S. manufacturing jobs.

Our trade deficit with China was $162 billion, with China alone last year. The United States has become the world's largest debtor Nation, adding $2.5 trillion to our national debt in 2002 alone.

Countries like Japan and China are quickly gaining control over our economy as they buy up more and more of our debt. These failed trade and fiscal policies have hit manufacturers in our country hard.

So Congress today had an opportunity, a lost opportunity, with the Manufacturing Extension Program. We failed in the opportunity to pass Crane-Rangel, a bill that would reward manufacturers that stay in the United States and manufacture here. Instead, this Congress continues to give tax breaks and incentives to those large corporations that outsource, that go offshore and produce their jobs there.

We passed an alternative that gave billions of dollars to these multinational corporations. Mr. Speaker, this Congress has been a Congress of lost opportunity for American manufacturing. We should change the direction of our trade policy. We should change the direction of our tax policy.

We should help these manufacturers in the United States, those small companies of 50, 100, and 200 employees that have really built our industrial base and built the middle class of this country. We can do much better than this.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize a distinguished Ohioan, Tianna Madison. In August, Ms. Madison, a graduate of Elyria High School, won the long jump at the World Track and Field Championships held in Helsinki.

A nine-time State champion, Ms. Madison shocked the world when she leaped 22 feet, 7\1/4\ inches to win the title, defeating Russian Olympic silver medalist Tatyana Kotova.

During her senior year in high school, Ms. Madison became only the third athlete in Ohio history to capture four events in a State meet 2 years in a row. The first was another long jumper, Jesse Owens.

At 19, Ms. Madison is one of the youngest-ever world track champions. When asked by the Plain Dealer if she was surprised by her stunning performance, she replied, ``I expected it. I prayed about it. I knew it was going to happen. I just did not know which year.''

Mr. Speaker, it is my honor to congratulate Tianna Madison on her remarkable achievement.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to claim the time of the gentleman from Oregon (Mr. DeFazio).

Mr. Speaker, for too long we have borne witness to relentless attacks on America's poor and working families. Abandoned by corporate America, betrayed by the political right, largely ignored by the mainstream media, our Nation's poor have become little more than an afterthought, most recently evidenced by what we saw in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina.

While productivity is up in this country, while profits are up in this country, wages are falling, and poverty is increasing. Since 1973, not coincidentally the year that America went from a trade surplus into a trade deficit, since 1973 the average worker has seen her wages or his wages go up about 10 percent in real dollars while that worker's productivity has increased about ninety percent. Productivity up ninety percent, wages up only 10 percent.

It used to be in this country since World War II that when productivity went up, workers' wages went up roughly the same amount. And this is the key, that workers shared in the wealth they created for their employers. So productivity jumped up 90 percent, wages went up only 10 percent, profits skyrocketed for employers. Workers have not shared in the wealth they create.

An August census report revealed around the same time as Hurricane Katrina that in the United States the number of uninsured Americans has increased dramatically as has the number of families living below the poverty line; 1.1 million Americans dropped into poverty in 2004 alone, 2 million more Americans enrolled in Medicaid that year. Yet in the face of growing poverty and the rising number of uninsured Americans, this administration and Republican leadership are demanding that we cut $10 billion, that is billion with a B, $10 billion from Medicaid.

Think about that again. More and more people need Medicaid, not just because of Katrina but because of layoffs, because of plants closings like Michigan, in my State of Ohio, other places, because more and more employers are dropping their coverage. The congressional response is cutting Medicaid by $10 billion so that the President and Republican leadership can give tax cuts to the wealthiest 1 percent of people in this country.

Think about that. That is a choice. We give tax cuts to the wealthy, more tax cuts to the wealthiest 1 percent. The way to pay for it is to cut Medicaid by $10 billion. That is a choice that politicians and elected officials made. Give tax cuts to the wealthiest people. Cut programs like Medicaid that really matter for people who have lost their jobs, for the working poor, for people that have suffered from Katrina, for all the reasons that people have been down on their luck.

Household incomes fell for the fourth year in a row in 2004, something that has not happened since the Depression. In every segment of the American society except for the very wealthy, every segment has seen income decline in the last 5 years. America's men and women working full-time, the recent productivity is up; but they are not sharing in the wealth they create.

The number of people living in poverty increased by 1.1 million people. The infant mortality rate in this country is rising. The infant mortality rate in Washington, DC, is twice the infant mortality rate in Beijing. The infant mortality rate in this country went up last year for the first time since 1958. Our Nation cannot survive as a thriving democracy under policies that rely on trickle down economic theories.

Now, 2 weeks ago President Bush signed an executive order that will allow companies that win Federal no-bid contracts, Halliburton, Bechtel, some of the other friends of the President's and the Vice- President's, his executive order will allow those companies to pay less than the prevailing wage. We give them unbid contracts and huge profits, as they have had in Iraq. They will have these huge contracts in Mississippi, Louisiana, and Alabama; and yet they are exempt from paying the prevailing wage.

When government should be in its most proactive to ensure the return of a thriving economy, this administration is actively working to lower wages. The community hit hardest by Katrina is the working poor. These men and women will literally do the heavy lifting and the rebuilding of Louisiana, Alabama, and Mississippi. Yet the President is saying, Cut their wages.

Cheating workers out of fair wages robs them of the ability to take ownership in their community. The goal should be to put wealth in those communities from people that are working and rebuilding those communities. One must ask why the President would depress wages for a community in crisis. Cutting wages for people who are struggling to rebuild their lives is a betrayal of American values. The President of the United States should know better.