Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker. last November Washington, DC lost one of its trademark voices. Eddie Gallaher, who entertained an entire generation of Washingtonians, passed away on November 26, 2003.

Mr. Gallaher was a radio performer who made his mark on the city during some of our century's most turbulent times. His decades-long career began in 1946 and didn't end until 3 years ago, when Mr. Gallaher was a spry 85. And though he was modest about his popularity, Mr. Gallaher was the man the biggest stars of the day always sat down to chat with when they came to visit the Nation's Capital.

Mr. Gallaher began his radio career at WTOP in Washington in 1946 as the host of the ``Magical Moondial'' show. In 1947, Mr. Gallaher began his ``Sundial'' morning program. As radio changed with the times and WTOP switched to an all-news format, Mr. Gallaher moved to WASH-FM and later on, WWDC-AM.

Mr. Speaker, in between spinning popular American standards and providing news updates and color commentary, Mr. Gallaher attracted listeners with his wit and homespun stories of life in Washington. His smooth voice was legendary as was his generous and affable nature. His reputation earned the attention of advertisers, who recruited his name for their on-air promotions.

Mr. Gallaher had a skillful knack for weaving in amusing anecdotes about the entertainment and political worlds that gave his audience a unique insider's perspective. Yet he enjoyed and valued the community feeling of the Washington area, and encouraged civic participation from his listeners. Mr. Gallaher's devotion to his fans was mirrored in his devotion to Fran Sisk, his partner for close to 50 years.

Mr. Speaker, it was a pleasure for many of us--public officials and private citizens alike--to know Mr. Gallaher. Our Nation's Capital and the radio industry has truly lost a grand, old star.

Mr. Speaker, I am going to support this resolution, of course, notwithstanding the most recent information I have received from our colleague. I congratulate the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Boehner) and the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Davis) for bringing it to the floor.

(Mr. HOYER asked and was given permission to speak out of order.)

Carlton R. Sickles, a True Public Servant

Mr. Speaker, a former colleague of our ours died last Saturday morning. He was an extraordinarily good human being and a very close friend. I want to pay tribute to a good and decent American, an absolutely wonderful individual, Carlton R. Sickles, who passed away early Saturday.

It is unfortunate that millions of people whose lives he touched during his 82 years never had the benefit of knowing him personally. I am blessed as many in this body were blessed by knowing him well. He was a veteran of

World War II and the Korean War, a former Maryland legislator, a gubernatorial candidate and a Member of the House from 1963 to 1967.

But he is perhaps best known, Mr. Speaker, for those of us who live in the Washington metropolitan area as the father of the Metrorail transit system which today serves millions of customers every single year, not only those who live in this region but those millions of people who come to the Washington metropolitan area to visit their Capitol and their Representatives.

On a personal note, Mr. Speaker, I will forever be indebted to Carlton for encouraging me to choose a career in public service. I wanted to run for the House of Delegates in 1966. He was running for governor. He urged me to run for the State Senate. I did not think I could win a State Senate seat. I was 2 months out of law school and thought that premature, but he continued to encourage me. And the third time he asked I ran, and I was fortunate enough to be successful. That has made a huge difference in my life.

He encouraged so many others to participate in public service. His own public service was a credit to elective office, a credit to this institution, a credit to Maryland, and his community.

To his wife Jacqueline, his children, and all his family, I offer my deepest condolences. Carlton was a role model who left a tremendous legacy. He will be sorely missed.

Mr. Speaker, in Southern Maryland we are blessed to have so many exemplary citizens who invest their time, energy and talent in making it a special place to live. One such citizen who has gone above and beyond and exemplifies the true spirit of American entrepreneurship is Harry Shasho. Harry believes in the community and has worked hard to improve the lives of Charles County residents now and in the future.

Mr. Speaker, it is my honor to acknowledge the deeds and fortunes of this outstanding citizen, Harry Shasho. Harry got an early start in business and in fact, says he has been a businessman since he was 12 years old. In 1976 when Harry moved to Charles County, he owned a small chain of camera and electronics stores on F St. in Washington, D.C. In 1985, he sold his portion of the business and began selling real estate; first residential, then commercial. In 1989, Harry went to work for Baldus Real Estate and started their Commercial Division. Now, Baldus is the best known Commercial Company in Southern Maryland.

As a businessman, Harry recognized the need to train future leaders and became involved in helping young men through Boy Scouts. Over the years, he has not only guided boys into becoming more effective and productive citizens, but has also trained adults to become better leaders. During his tenure as Scoutmaster, his scout troop has produced 12 Eagles Scouts, yet another tribute to his compassion. Mr. Shasho continues to serve on fundraising committees for the Boy Scouts of America.

Mr. Shasho has been a leader in the Charles County Chamber of Commerce for over 10 years, holding positions as Board of Director, Secretary, Treasurer, Vice President, President Elect, and is currently serving as the 2003 President. Under his direction as President, he has increased membership and built a strong alliance between the Chamber and County and State government officials. They have worked together on many issues which impact the business community.

In addition to serving with the Charles County Chamber of Commerce, Harry is Chairman of the Southern Maryland advisory board for BB&T Bank, a committee member of the Charles County Economic Development Commission, Member of the National and State Association of Realtors and has received a National Leadership award from the National Republican Congressional Committee.

Mr. Speaker, it is my pleasure to honor Mr. Harry Shasho, as he retires as President of the Charles County Chamber of Commerce on January 12, 2004. We are all so proud of the work he has done to improve the lives of everyone in Charles County and I am very proud to call him my friend.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to share with you remarks made at the 6th Annual Charles County Economic Development Summit by William Burke on the occasion of presenting the ``John Bloom Citizen of the Year Award'' to Mayor William Eckman. Mayor Eckman is a true American patriot whose compassion, caring and concern for the residents of LaPlata shined forward during the difficult tornado disaster of April 2002. All of us in the Charles County community share Mr. Burke's enthusiasm in recognizing Mayor Eckman.

To follow are the remarks presented by William Burke, Board Member, Charles County Economic Development Commission, President, Southern Maryland Title on October 28, 2003.

``I would like to start by stating that this award is not given out each year. Only when a citizen exemplifies the highest degree of devotion to the well being of our community, do we bring out this award. However, this year it is certainly necessary to acknowledge the devotion of Bill Eckman, the mayor of La Plata, with this award.

Bill Eckman first came to Maryland when AT&T transferred him here from Pennsylvania. He had been the Fire Chief in his Pennsylvania town. He joined the La Plata Volunteer Fire Department, where he served for 12 years. He has been a consistent and steady supporter, participant, teacher, writer and speaker for fire and rescue issues. He has traveled to many cities addressing fire and rescue infrastructure. He has started 9 specialized fire fighting training programs. After he retired from AT&T, he wrote a book about fire protection and water supply.

Bill and his wife Delores lead a bible study program focused on community. The program teaches others to build relationships and care for one another. Bill practices this philosophy in his activities with the Charlotte Hall Veterans Home where he regularly brings services and music with other lay preachers to the residents. This also gives him the opportunity to display another talent. Bill plays his trumpet with an informal group at the Veterans home.

Bill has been married for 52 years, has three children and three grandchildren.

Bill Eckman was a La Plata Town councilman for at least 10 years and has been mayor for 20 years.

In that time, La Plata has changed. The population has grown from under 2,000 to nearly 8,000. The Town Hall has had 4 homes and is getting ready to find a new location. The town staff has grown from 15 to 50.

He has devoted much of his adult life to municipal government. He has been the president of the Maryland Municipal League and is presently a well-respected member of the League's Legislative Committee. Often, he is asked to speak before the State Legislature.

It is safe to say that during this time Bill has made friends and earned the respect of elected officials on both sides of the aisle.

Bill has always wanted La Plata to be a happy place to live; a town that enjoys the fruits of good growth without losing the benefits of a small town. He has always wanted to plan, and whenever possible, to stay ahead of infrastructure needs. He has been known to get excited about the very unsexy jobs that come with being mayor--like putting in a new 15-inch sewer pipe.

Doug Miller, La Plata town manager, remembers when Bill first had the summer long concert ideas. Doug thought there might be a citizen turnout for 3-4 concerts, but thought Bill's vision was a bit ambitious. Well, for over 10 years, the La Plata Town Hall has hosted Friday night summer concerts to a packed lawn of families.

However, all the smart growth initiatives, concert series and sewer pipes were just sand in the bucket compared to the leadership Bill would exhibit after April 28, 2002. Every Mayor and Town Manager sweats weather conditions that have the potential of causing harm to their town and heaves a sigh of relief when storms pass on by, but this time they were not so fortunate. This time Bill had to go into high gear and get the job done. He had to stand strong for residents and businesses that faced ruin, despair and fear. He was dealing with a complete lack of services, the water tower was down, electricity was gone, telephone communication was hampered, helicopters were med-evac-ing the injured, and the press was descending. He will tell you that there were many people who made the miraculous recovery possible, but there always has to be a leader that makes everything seem possible.

Here is a quote from the newspaper. ``Every morning since the tornado hit early one Sunday evening, La Plata Mayor Bill Eckman has taken a walk around town to talk with demolition crews and neighbors.''

Regardless of how many people contributed there is a very interesting reason why recovery did not have to start from square one. Bill had already realized that La Plata was in transition and had previously put together a new town visioning process many months before the tornado.

The blue print for recovery was there because Bill is an optimist, a visionary and a leader.

It is for those qualities that we honor Bill Eckman as the 2003 Citizen of the Year.

Mr. Speaker, please join with me and the Charles County community in recognizing the numerous contributions Mayor Eckman has made to our County, our State and our Nation.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to take a moment to offer my congratulations to the Lackey High School Chargers football team of Indian Head, Maryland, for reaching the State finals this past Thursday, December 4, 2003.

The Lackey Chargers had a fairytale season led by their head coach, Mr. Scott Chadwick, and many devoted assistant coaches. In regular season matches, they were defeated only once, and this record allowed them to begin competing in championship games in early November.

The path that would lead the Lackey Chargers to the State finals began on November 7, 2003, when the Lackey Chargers defeated Westlake High School to become the Southern Maryland Athletic Conference champions. Their momentum continued on November 15, 2003, as they beat Northern High School, and they showed their strength once again on November 22, 2003, when they narrowly overtook Westlake High School to become the Regional Champions.

On November 28, 2003, the Lackey Chargers defeated Randallstown High School in the Maryland Triple A Semifinals, propelling them to the State finals at Ravens Stadium in Baltimore, Maryland, where they faced Linganor High School. Despite a valiant effort, the Lackey Chargers fell short in the end in a heartbreaking loss. Even without carrying home the title, Principal Jarvis Petty and the students, staff and parents at Lackey High School have shown their support for a football team that has made the entire Charles County community proud of their incredible season.

Mr. Speaker, please join me in recognizing each of these outstanding athletes, #2 Cameron Neal; #3 Courteney Knight; #5 Devonte Williams; #6 Avery Lancaster; #7 Aaron Smith; #8 Michael Young; #10 Damian Shorter; #11 Jason Murray; #15 Jesse Hitch; #16 Mark Herbert; #20 Morgan Green; #23 Darren Bullock; #25 Brandon Gaylor; #32 Ricardo Young; #34 Tre Gray; #40 Bryan Gibbons; #43 Kevin Glascock; #44 Robert Matthews; #48 Kyle Mckeown; #50 Jeremy Hairston; #52 George Kerr; #55 Mike Seman; #56 Aaron Williams; #60 Kenny Washington; #65 J.B. Walton; #66 Tyler McCready; #70 Joe Hughes; #72 Nate Leigh; #77 O.J. Huddleston; #79 D'antae Adams; #80 Quinton Stith; #81 William Johnson; #86 Donte Page; and #88 Justin Lucas. They have shown true dedication to their sport and I am extremely proud of their accomplishments. It is with great pride that we congratulate and wish them luck in all their future endeavors.

Mr. Speaker, will the gentlewoman yield?

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman for rising and for yielding as well. I had not heard of Joe's passing.

When I came to the Congress of the United States in 1981, my office was two doors from Joe Skeen's. As we all do, we had the opportunity to walk down the fifth floor corridor of the Longworth building to vote and we talk and get to know one another. And Suzanne, his chief of staff, and I became good friends, and Joe became an extraordinarily good friend. Joe chaired a subcommittee of the Committee on Appropriations.

Mr. Speaker, Joe Skeen was one of those Members who added greatly to the comity of this body. He had deep convictions, but he also had a deep respect for those with whom he served. Joe Skeen will be missed by New Mexico, by his family, but he will also be missed by this House and by the American people. At a time when the relations between the parties is not what really it ought to be in this House, and perhaps in this country, Joe Skeen was one of those who demonstrated that differences on policy did not need to be accompanied by enmity between the Members of this House. He will be sorely missed. And I thank the gentlewoman for giving me this opportunity to say how loved Joe Skeen was by all who knew him.

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

Mr. Speaker, today the leadership of this House breathes life back into the spirit of Ebeneezer Scrooge and for the second year in a row ignores the plight of America's unemployed during the holiday season. The majority's failure to extend emergency unemployment benefits for the long-term unemployed is not only unconscionable; it is cold- hearted.

In May, President Bush said, ``My economic plan is summed up in one word: jobs.'' But the truth is, even after 4 straight months of anemic job growth, President Bush is on course to become the first President since Herbert Hoover to preside over a net jobs loss during his 4-year term.

Yes, the economy added 57,000 jobs in November, but here is what they do not say: the economy has to create 150,000 jobs a month just to keep pace with the new folks coming into the employment arena. Overall, there are 8.7 million unemployed Americans today; and nearly one-fourth of them, Mr. Speaker, some 2 million people, have been jobless for more than 26 weeks.

Mr. Speaker, that is the highest percentage of long-term unemployment since July of 1983, 20 years ago; and there are about 4.2 million other workers who want a job, but are not even counted among the unemployed.

The reality is this: if the President and Congressional Republicans refuse to extend Federal temporary unemployment benefits, which are scheduled to be phased out beginning December 21, an estimated 80,000 to 90,000 jobless workers who exhaust their State benefits every week will be completely cut off. That is 80,000 to 90,000 people per week.

That is not only callous; it is unnecessary. We have the funding to extend these benefits. That is right, there is $20 billion in the Federal fund dedicated to unemployment benefits, which is financed by unemployment taxes deducted from workers' paychecks.

Mr. Speaker, I know the President and our Republican colleagues would like nothing more than to pronounce our economy healed and to unfurl the banner reading ``Mission Accomplished,'' but it is plain that millions of Americans continue to be hurt. The least we can do is reach out a helping hand.

Mr. Speaker, we did this last year, and we left 800,000 people on December 31, 2002, falling off the unemployment roles. With the money in the pot to help them, why do we leave this day without addressing this problem? There is no explanation, Mr. Speaker. I predict to you that the President will, 2 weeks from now, say, oh, my goodness, we should have done that.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this time, and initially I would like to submit for the Record at this point in time my remarks with reference to the Office of Federal Detention Trustee.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the distinguished gentleman from Virginia, Mr. Wolf, the chairman of the Commerce, Justice, State Appropriations Subcommittee, for the opportunity to discuss the roles and authorities of the Federal Detention Trustee.

It is my understanding that the language in the report addressing the building of detention facilities by the Office of Federal Detention Trustee clearly indicates that the Office does not have the authority to solicit contracts to build a new detention facility and directs the Office to withdraw any solicitation for such activities.

While the language is report language and is not binding, I believe it is sufficient to prevent the Office of Federal Detention Trustee from going forward with its plans to solicit contracts to build a new detention facility.

Chairman Wolf has committed to working with me to ensure that the Detention Trustees abides by the clear intent of the Congress that contracting for a new facility is not an allowable use of funds.

I yield to the gentleman from Virginia.

Mr. Speaker, reclaiming my time, I rise again, as I always do, to say that the chairman of our committee is extraordinarily fair. I wish I could vote for this bill. I voted for many of the bills that are in here, as the chairman knows.

But, Mr. Speaker, we have a very bad process that is going on here. We act in the House, the Senate acts the same way, and it goes to conference and magically it disappears, or it comes back here 180 degrees different. This is a corruption of the democratic process. It has ignored the will of the House and the Senate on outsourcing, Cuba travel, drug reimportation, school vouchers in the District of Columbia. Funding in the omnibus for the No Child Left Behind is too low; funding for NIH represents a real reduction. The congressional branch does not work, Mr. Speaker, for the executive.

I would urge the majority party, my friends on the other side, to let the executive department know that this is a democracy. It is not a kingdom; it is not a dictatorship. And just because the House passes something, the Senate passes something, and they do not like it, that does not mean the Congress of the United States ought to turn tail and run. Mr. Speaker, I would hope that we would be able to resolve some of these issues that the House and the Senate have agreed upon. I agree with the chairman, some of these are authorizing matters; but both Houses agreed and the White House did not like it, so it was dropped.

The outsourcing is particularly, in my opinion, egregious because we had a conference. The chairman, as always, was fair and open. Senator Stevens was fair and open. We had an agreement. That agreement was adopted in an open conference, and lo and behold it has disappeared. It was totally changed. It has undermined the very protections for Federal employees we wanted to build in the bill.

Mr. Speaker, if the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Young) was in charge, and he is in charge of our committee, no doubt about that; but if he made the final decisions, this would not have happened, and I know that and I lament it.

Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for making that observation. He is absolutely right. And I want to make the public aware of the fact that we differ from time to time on partisan issues, but if the chairman of this committee, the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Young), had not been such a tenacious supporter both of revising and reforming our election apparatus and then funding it, it would not be there.

I want to thank the chairman profusely, because I think he, as he knows, and I think the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Hastert), our Speaker, has also been very responsible for this bipartisan accomplishment, and I thank the gentleman for his support. It is an important step. There are a lot of good things in this bill, and I would like to support it.

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

Mr. Speaker, there are many of my colleagues who are new to this House and who do not know its history and do not know perhaps the words of your side of the aisle. So I want to give you a little history. I want to take you back to October 28, 1987. The House was considering a controversial Democratic budget reconciliation bill, which I tell the gentlewoman from Connecticut that we thought was very important. The vote stood at 206 to 205. Twenty-four Members had not voted.

The Speaker of the House, in attempting to pass what he believed to be a very important bill, kept the clock going for less than 30 minutes, a little more than 25; and a vote changed, and we prevailed. Your side was outraged. Let me remind you of some of the quotes.

I am the minority leader. Excuse me, I am the minority whip. I understand that. The minority whip at that time is now the Vice President of the United States, Dick Cheney. He was angry. The vote was 206 to 205. This bill, for over 2 hours, had an absolute majority of the House of Representatives supporting it, with 218 Members opposing the bill, the proposition that we fought for.

Thirty minutes. And here is what Mr. Cheney said about keeping the ballot open: ``The Democrats' tactics are the most grievous insult inflicted on the Republicans in my time in the House.'' October 1987. He was quoted as saying something else. ``It was,'' he said, ``the most arrogant, heavy-handed abuse of power I have ever seen in the 10 years I have been here.''

Less than 30 minutes, 206 to 205. The Vice President of the United States. The most arrogant abuse of power he had seen. And then the Republican minority whip referred to the Speaker as follows, and listen, my colleagues, particularly those who are new. Referring to the Speaker of the House, he said, ``He's a heavy-handed,'' and he used an epithet that we know as SOB, except he fully articulated it, ``and he doesn't know any other way to operate. And he will do anything he can to win at any price. There is no sense of comity left,'' said Dick Cheney.

I tell the gentlewoman from Connecticut, this was an important bill, but so was the bill that Speaker Wright was following and trying to pass. Dick Cheney, with less than 30 minutes, ``There is no comity left. The most heavy-handed arrogant abuse of power.''

That is what this is about, treating one another with respect and treating the American public with respect. My colleagues had an opportunity to offer their bill. It was offered, we voted on it; and 218 people voted no, and they stuck no for over 2 hours. But my colleagues refused to accept the judgment of democracy. You refused to accept the judgment of this House.

Bob Walker said, ``We found out the majority is perfectly willing to change its rules to crush the minority.'' I know this is not a rule, I say to the gentleman from California (Mr. Dreier); but I also know that at the beginning of this session, the Speaker, whom I respect and would never demean by addressing him in the terms that Dick Cheney addressed our Speaker, this House's Speaker, said this at the beginning of this session: ``The Speaker's policy announced on January 4, 1995, will continue through the 108th Congress.'' That was Newt Gingrich.

On that occasion, referring to October 30, 1991, the House was considering a bill in the Committee of the Whole under a special rule that placed an overall time limit on the amendment process. We did it in 15 minutes. The Speaker concluded at the beginning of this session, ``Each occupant of the Chair will have the full support of the Speaker in striving to close each electronic vote at the earliest opportunity.'' In this instance it was almost 3 hours. Not 15 minutes, not 17 minutes, not 27 minutes, but 3 hours.

``I just want to serve notice,'' this gentleman said, ``if the majority, which clearly has the rights under sheer voting power, insists on stripping the right away from the minority, then we have an absolute obligation to take the necessary steps to communicate our dissatisfaction with that kind of legislative process and do everything possible to stop it.'' Newt Gingrich, August 5, 1991.

Those of you who are new to this House who believe in democracy, who believe that this is the people's House, ought to accord to every one of us, Democrats and Republicans, the respect due a person chosen to represent 650,000-plus Americans in this House, to put up our votes on that board, to have the majority prevail, but to have them prevail in a time frame that does not, as Mr. Cheney referred to it, reflect ``the most arrogant, most heavy-handed abuse of power I have ever seen in my 10 years.''

My Republican friends, let me ask something: If keeping the ballot open for 25 minutes is the most arrogant abuse of power that Mr. Cheney had ever seen, what is keeping it open 3 hours? Ask yourself that question, and then understand why this resolution is on this floor.

Madam Speaker, I am pleased to support S. 1152, bipartisan legislation to reauthorize the important work done by U.S. Fire Administration R. David Paulison and his dedicated staff in Emmittsburg, MD and Washington, DC.

The Federal Fire Prevention and Control Act of 1974 established the United States Fire Administration and its National Fire Academy to reduce life and economic losses due to fire and related emergencies, through leadership, advocacy, coordination and support.

Since that time, through data collection, public education, research ad training efforts, USFA has helped reduce fire deaths by at least half--making our communities and our citizens safer. For the past three years, the Fire Administrator has been tasked with administering the Assistance to Firefighters Grant program, created by Congress to adequately train and equip our career and volunteer firefighters across the country.

This $750 million program is vital to our firefighters, too many of whom risk their lives on a daily basis to protect our homes and our families without the modern equipment and advanced training they deserve. The Fire Grant program has succeeded at getting much-needed dollars to fire departments in fair, efficient manner, and USFA has been widely praised for its work in administering the program.

Authority for the Fire Grant program has now been moved to the Department of Homeland Security, and Members of the Fire Caucus, and all supporters of the fire community, will closely monitor the administration of the Grant program to guarantee that it continues to meet the needs of our fire departments.

Madam Speaker, this legislation also contains provisions important to the National Fallen Firefighters Foundations, which was established more than a decade ago through the leadership of Senator Paul Sarbanes to create an organization that would properly honor all of America's fallen fire heroes--and take care of the surviving families and loved ones as they cope with their grief and attempt to move on after their loss.

The Foundation carries out this mission with great compassion and dedication, and they have achieved a tremendous record of assisting the families of our fallen firefighters through the many programs, projects and activities they promote throughout the year. The provisions included in this legislation will allow the Foundation to continue, and to improve upon, the important work we have charged them to do.

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to support this legislation, and urge my colleagues to do the same.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to this rule. And I invite the 41 Members of this side of the aisle who wrote a letter just a few days ago, those 41 Members, all Republicans, said to the gentleman from Illinois (Speaker Hastert) and the gentleman from Texas (Majority Leader DeLay) that this is one of the most important issues that this Congress, or any Congress, will consider, and give us at least, they said, 3 days to consider this bill.

This bill is over 1,100 pages in length. It will affect not only the 40 million Americans who are eligible for Medicare, but it will also affect their families, their children, their sons and daughters who are confident that this country will provide for health care security for seniors.

I invite those 41 Members, this is about the process, this has been a terrible process, a shameful process. Speaker Hastert, an honorable man, appointed the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Dingell), the Dean of this House, serving here since 1955, one of the most knowledgeable people, not Democrats or Republican, most knowledgeable Americans with respect to health care and Medicare and Social Security. And then he appointed one of the most senior Members of this House, the gentleman from New York (Mr. Rangel) to this conference, and the gentleman from Arkansas (Mr. Berry), the only pharmacist that serves in this House.

Shamefully, shamefully, they were neither invited, nor allowed, to come to the table to discuss this bill. I invite the 41 signers of this letter, if they meant what they said in this letter, to vote no on this rule. To vote no on this rule so that we can, in fact, look at it closely. Just 2 more days this bill, 1,100 pages in length, which was put on the Web just last afternoon, just approximately 24 hours ago.

I say to the signatories on this letter, if you meant what you said, if you believe the processes of this House ought to be followed, if you believe this issue is important enough to know what you are doing, to read the bill, to digest its consequences, to understand the adverse consequences that it will have on the poor, on those who were left behind in Medicare when the HSAs take the healthiest and wealthiest out of the system and force premiums higher for those who can least afford it, read this bill, understand this bill. You have not done so.

Some of our most respected colleagues signed this letter, Republicans all. I ask every Democrat to vote against this rule, to give ourselves and our constituents further time to consider this bill. I ask the Republicans honor their letter, honor their rules. Vote no on this one.

Mr. Speaker, this Medicare conference report is, sadly, a missed opportunity. I was here in 1983. Ronald Reagan, Tip O'Neill, and Bob Michael joined together to save Social Security. They came together, President Reagan, Speaker O'Neill, and Minority Leader Michael and said, we need to have a bill that has bipartisan support and will get the job done.

It did.

The Republicans rejected that model. Most Members of this body on both sides of the aisle recognize that it is long past time that we provide for our seniors and give them a prescription drug program; but it is not this bill that they expected, a feeble benefit that forces them to pay 80 percent of their costs.

I will tell the gentlewoman from Florida (Ms. Ginny Brown-Waite) her dad was right. He was a Democrat because this party has historically and now believes that we should have done better by our seniors. Even the conservative Heritage Foundation, which is against this bill because they want to see Medicare done away with, says this, ``The politically engineered premiums and deductibles, coupled with the odd combination of `donut holes' or gaps in drug coverage, are likely to be unpopular with seniors.''

The Heritage Foundation said that. Not Steny Hoyer, not Democrats. Even Dick Armey, the immediate past leader of our party wrote in the Wall Street Journal on Friday that this conference report is ``bad news for seniors.''

Your majority leader just past said that. Now, he wants to do away with Medicare. He does not believe we ought to have Medicare. He nevertheless says this is bad news for seniors. Because it is bad news for seniors, we ought to vote against this bad bill.

Mr. Speaker, reserving the right to object, and I am not going to object, I am not going to put people to the purpose of voting; but I will again say the democratic process is that we come to this floor. I will remind you that you said we had 17 minutes to vote. You made it very clear. You sent us a notice, and you said come with 15 minutes; we will give you 2 more minutes.

This vote has now been held open longer than any vote that I can remember. I have been here 23 years. Perhaps some of you have been here longer. The outrage that was discussed when Speaker Wright held the vote open for far less time than this was palpable on your side of the aisle. Democracy is about voting. But just as you cannot say on Tuesday of Election Day, we will keep the polls open for 15 more hours until we get the result we want, you ought not to be able to do it here, Mr. Speaker. We have prevailed on this vote. Arms have been twisted and votes changed. And I will continue to reserve.

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to rise in support of H. Res. 423, recognizing the 5th anniversary of the International Religious Freedom Act of 1998, legislation that established the Office of International Religious Freedom within the Department of State.

This office is most often associated with its Annual Report on International Religious Freedom, which describes the status of religious freedom in each foreign country, government policies violating religious belief and practices, and U.S. policies to promote religious freedom around the world.

This document serves as an important tool for both Congress and the administration in making policy decisions regarding our relations with, and support for, countries around the world.

But in addition to the report, and frankly just as importantly, the Office develops strategies to promote religious freedom, both to attack the root causes of persecution and as a means of promoting other fundamental U.S. interests, such as protecting other core human rights, and encouraging the development of mature democracies.

The importance of this work cannot be overstated--the promotion of religious freedom is intimately connected to the promotion of other fundamental human and civil rights, as well as to the growth of democracy.

A government that acknowledges and protects freedom of religion and conscience is one that understands the inherent and inviolable dignity of the human person, and is more likely to protect, the other rights fundamental to human dignity, such as freedom from arbitrary arrest or seizure, or freedom from torture and murder.

But our interest in promoting religious freedom runs deeper than our support for democracy and stability--it is, simply put, our most important core value, the very reason the 13 colonies were established. American support for religious freedom abroad certainly predates passage of this legislation in 1998. I am particularly proud of the role I played during my tenure as the Chairman and Ranking Member of the Helsinki Commission to raise awareness of religious persecution in Eastern Europe and the former Soviet Republics, and the work of the Commission to promote the protection of religious minorities in the Eastern Bloc and elsewhere around the world.

Religious freedom is the first of the freedoms enumerated in the Bill of Rights--a reflection of the founders' belief that freedom of religion and conscience is the cornerstone of liberty.

As Thomas Jefferson wrote in 1803, ``It behooves every man who values liberty of conscience for himself, to resist invasions of it in the case of others; or their case may, by change of circumstances, become his own.''

I was an active supporter of the original legislation, I am proud of the work done by the office since its creation, and am pleased to help commemorate this important anniversary.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the distinguished gentleman from Florida (Mr. Hastings) for yielding me the time.

I rise in strong support of this motion to instruct. I would add, Mr. Speaker, however, that I appreciate his giving me and the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Ney), the chairman of the Committee on House Administration, credit. We worked hard on this.

Mr. Speaker, this was the most bipartisan bill in the last Congress. But substantial credit is also due the Speaker of the House, the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Hastert), as well as Republicans in the Senate, Senator McConnell, Senator Bond, and Senator Dodd. It was, in my opinion, an example of how the Congress ought to work. We sat down together, we talked about the problem, and we tried to solve it.

In 347 days, on November 2, 2004, the American people will again go to the polling places. And every State in this Nation will exercise the most fundamental right in any democracy, which is, of course, the right to vote. And when they do, they will be reminded of one of the most painful episodes in American history, the disenfranchisement of an estimated 6 million Americans in the election of November 2000.

Mr. Speaker, in my opinion, we have a moral obligation to ensure that the election problems that plagued us 3 years ago and which undermined this great democracy in the eyes of the world, and indeed in the eyes of many of our citizens, will not be repeated. That is precisely the point of this important motion made by the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Hastings). It instructs the House to recede to the $1.5 billion in spending for election reform in fiscal year 2004 called for by the other body.

Mr. Speaker, I mentioned the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Hastert). I also want to mention the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Young), the chairman of the Committee on Appropriations. Without the gentleman from Florida, we would not have received the funding of approximately $1.5 billion that we included in last year's bill. But in the HAVA, the Help America Vote Act, we promised the States that they would receive assistance from the Federal Government to achieve the reforms we felt essential.

That bill, proclaimed as the most important election reform legislation since the adoption of the Voting Rights Act of 1965, established minimum Federal standards for Federal elections. Properly funded HAVA will improve the security and accuracy of this Nation's election and registration system and prevent a repeat of the 2000 debacle.

Despite HAVA's enormous promise, however, States have had considerable

difficulty implementing the law's requirements because Congress provided only $1.5 billion of the $2.16 billion authorized in fiscal year 2003. In other words, Mr. Speaker, we are over $600 million behind as of this date.

HAVA also authorized $1 billion for this year. However, the House only appropriated $500 million in the Transportation-Treasury bill. Recently, the other body, in a bipartisan way, added a billion dollars to the transportation bill which already included $500 million. This amount not only fully funds HAVA at the fiscal year 2004 authorized level, but it also covers the shortfall from fiscal year 2003.

This motion should attract the support of every Member of this body. It is consistent with the numerous pledges made by the Speaker, the gentleman from Florida (Chairman Young), the White House, and this Congress in a bipartisan way.

Through HAVA, Mr. Speaker, we can make sure that the States have resources to make election reform a reality. And we can restore the public's confidence in our election system. We must do so. And this motion calls upon us to effect that end.

In closing, Mr. Speaker, let me say that I talked to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Young), the chairman of the Committee on Appropriations, and I have talked to the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Ney). It is my understanding the administration has pledged to include in the 2005 budget the $800-plus million left on this Congress's pledge to the States to ensure that every American not only has the right to vote but every American is encouraged to vote, every American is facilitated in casting their vote, every American will have an opportunity to check that they voted correctly and that every American's vote will be counted accurately.

Mr. Speaker, when we come back for the second session of the 108th Congress, there will be a new face in the House Radio-TV Gallery. That is because, after 20 years of service, the Deputy Director Beverly Braun is retiring December 12th.

When Braun came to the Gallery in 1983, she and her colleagues sat up there in the southeast corner of the House chamber taking notes on floor proceedings by hand because they didn't have a computer, and the television reporters who covered out activities had to physically transport tapes to their bureaus. Beverly has shepherded the staff from learning to use a single 10K floppy disk drive machine to having individual 60 Gig hard drive laptops, and has helped incorporate technical developments that now afford the broadcasters use of fiber optic transmission lines.

In the past 20 years Beverly Braun has worked under five speakers, under both Democratic and Republican control of the House and has been involved in coverage arrangements of many diverse events. Some were annual like State of the Union Addresses, St. Patrick's Day luncheons and Christmas Tree lightings. Some were periodic like mock swearing-ins of new members. Some were joyful like the joint meeting to celebrate Harry Truman's 100th birthday. Some were tragic like that lying in honor for Officers Chestnut and Gibson, and September 11th. Some were historical hearings such as Iran-Contra and Waco. Some were historical visits such as those by Queen Elizabeth, Nelson Mandella, Vaclav Havel, and most special to Braun, the Dalai Lama.

As part of her regular Gallery work Braun worked with many Congressional staffers and committee members, but in recent years has primarily served as liaison to the Ways and Means, Financial Services and Rules Committees. In addition to her regular Gallery work, Braun helped with broadcast arrangements for 10 Democratic and Republican national political nominating conventions and provided on site assistance in San Francisco, Dallas, Atlanta, New Orleans, New York City, Houston, San Diego, Chicago, Philadelphia and Los Angeles.

Braun was born to Phyllis (Lawson) and Ray Nicholas in Warren, Ohio in 1942, attended Ohio University and graduated from St. Vincent School of Medical Technology in Cleveland in 1961. She and her first husband Roland Braun lived in Pittsburgh PA where her son Stephen was born in 1964, and in Ramsey NJ where her daughter Leslie de Vries was born in 1966. They moved to Minnesota in 1967 where Braun became active in politics and women's rights organizations and where she ran unsuccessfully for a state senate seat in 1972. She later served as Communications Director for the Minnesota Bicentennial Commission, Director of the Small Business Division of the Minnesota Department of Economic Development and managed a Small Business Development Center for Control Data Corporation.

Braun and her second husband, Skip Loescher, moved to Washington, D.C. twice, staying here since their second move in 1981. After spending 20 years with WCCO-TV and a short stint with Senator and Vice President Walter Mondale, Loescher has been the Washington correspondent for CNN Newsource for the past 12 years. Prior to her employment with the Gallery, Braun worked in Washington with the National Women's Education Fund and later founded a business which provided services to companies that did not have a Washington Office.

Braun and Loescher's families are spread all across the country. Braun's mother Phyllis Beadle lives in Queensbury NY. Braun's son Stephen and his wife Anne live in Columbia MD. He has a son Nicolas and daughter Katie. Braun's daughter Leslie and her husband Jackson Griffith live in Sacramento CA with daughters Emma and Ellie and son Will. Loescher's son Jeff lives in Portland OR with wife Carol, daughter Nicole and son Tyler. Loescher's son Mick and wife Erin live in Peabody MA with sons Sean and Christian. Loescher's daughter Suzy and husband Jeff Quinlan live in Covington GA with son Alex and daughter Kate. Both Braun and Loescher are also blessed with aunts, uncles, cousins, former classmates and friends in almost every other state represented by the members in this chamber.

After leaving Congress, Braun plans on possibly teaching, writing and doing more gardening at her home in Annapolis where she and her husband moved after 19 years on Capitol Hill. She also wants to address end of life issues. She and her husband hope to eventually pursue training and taking therapy dogs in hospitals, nursing homes and hospices . . . and spending more time with all those adorable grandchildren.

Braun has always been a helpful and cheerful professional and she will be missed. So at the end of her career with us, let us say to Beverly as we have heard her say at the end of many a photo op . . . ``Thank you . . . lights!''