Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for taking a lead on this. He is quarterbacking tonight.

I think there are some great issues. Just so we know, we wonder sometimes when we stand on the floor how many people are out there watching. And I just got off the phone with my wife and she is changing from ``Law and Order'' to C-SPAN so that they can watch us here tonight. So we know we have a little bit of an audience out there. But, again, it is the Thirtysomething [email protected]. And I have a stack of e-mails here that we have received since we started doing this, and it is amazing the response we are getting.

I think as we have talked about this, and it was not too long ago that we were in college and participating in a variety of activities there, and we felt that the political leadership was not engaging us. And I think that is something that the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Pelosi) has made it a point that as a Democratic Caucus we are going to go out and we are going to pay attention to what the needs of the students are. We recognize that they are the future of the country. We do not just want to pay them lip service. We want to make sure that we are there for them with the issues that they care about and on the issues they need us to be there for them.

If we are going to continue to thrive as a democracy and country we are going to need to invest in our young people, and we cannot just say we are only going to take care of senior citizens. I think there is a responsibility there and we have a commitment there, but at the same time, we need to make sure that we let these young people know that we are committed to the issues they care about, we are committed to them, we want to see them get educated and see them recognize their own dreams, their own aspirations. In many instances, that is through a college education, period, end of story.

It is not the only thing you need but for a good many Americans, if you want to succeed, you have to do it by going and furthering your education.

So the question that we have here tonight is, are young people better off today, are students better off today than they were 4 years ago? I think if you look at the chart that we will put up and some of the statistics that we will talk about here today, it is clear that young people are not better off today than they were just 4 years ago.

In the past 4 years, the unemployment rate for people ages 16 to 24 has gone up 3.7 percent through the Department of Labor statistics. So there are thousands of kids who are young people who are out there trying to get jobs, trying to find work, and they cannot find work.

Then this is not so much off the subject, but I found this article today that I wanted to talk about and bring up today.

This is from San Jose, California, and the title of the article is Offshoring of U.S. Jobs Accelerating. We talk about how we have to educate our young kids. In every single trade agreement that we have passed, the commitment was we are going to continue to invest in education, K through 12, No Child

Left Behind, Pell grants, consolidation of student loans, investment in our young people. We are going to move the country forward by investing in our young people, and if you get an education, the promise was, then you have work in this country.

So this study that was done roughly, and that is a quote, roughly 830,000 U.S. service sector jobs ranging from telemarketing and accountants to software engineers and chief technology officers will move abroad by the end of 2005. Eight-hundred-and-thirty-thousand jobs will move offshore, high-tech jobs, by 2005.

This same outfit did a study a couple of years ago, and they said it was only going to be 588,000. Now it is 830,000.

So the question is, do you have the opportunity that you had if you would have graduated in 1999 or 2000 and the kind of job market that a Democratic Congress and a Democratic President created through balancing the budget and being fiscally responsible and leading an enormous economic growth and creating the kind of jobs needed?

Many Democrats lost their job over it because they made the sacrifice.

To do it right and to create long-term and probably really what we have, and I think young people sense this when I talk to them because they have grown up in the culture of where we are talking about stocks and politics, and they are a little more sophisticated than even we were just a few years ago, but a lot of those young people recognize that the decisions that are made in this body and the political decisions that are made are made for short-term political advantage, not long-term prosperity for the country.

I think you have seen it over the past few years that the decisions that are made about how can we win the next election, and I am from the school of thought that if you do right when you are in power, when you do right by leading, that the electorate will take care of itself and the people will vote for candidates who support issues that make the country better, make the country stronger, economically, politically and whatever.

But I think it is important for us to realize that the kind of atmosphere that we are creating here, the lack of investment in education, the lack of investment in K through 12, the lack of investment for our college kids is coming home to roost, and we are not creating any kind of new jobs. We are losing jobs.

But what is the next industry? If you are not investing in the young people, you are not going to be able to create the next industry.

I am going to share one statistic with you and then I am going to kick it back over to the quarterback here tonight.

Some of the major technology hubs over the past few years, Silicon Valley, famous; Seattle, booming; Austin, Texas, everything was great. Those areas now have a higher unemployment rate than the Nation at large, and I think when we are talking here tonight about what is the future prospects of the young people who are hopefully out there tonight watching this, if not studying and going to school and trying to make themselves better, what are the future prospects, and think when you hear statistics like that where great areas of concentration of high-tech wealth and job creation have higher unemployment rates than the Nation at large, I think that there is a lot of things that need to be done, and I think the answer to that is investment into education.

So I am hoping that through raising the awareness for the young people here that we have an opportunity to hopefully engage these young people like the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Pelosi) wants to do, reach out to these students and 20 somethings and 30 somethings and engage them in the process and let them know that they have a right to stand up and they have a right to be involved in this process.

I am not sure we want to talk about it because it is painful.

I drive back and forth from Ohio to Washington, and it is just, to try to get it on the turnpike or in a big city like Washington, shameful.

I think when you ask and we talk about what do you do, and I think there is ample evidence for criticism of what has been happening, not only in this chamber but the leadership throughout our government, the lack of leadership, I guess I should say, throughout our government, and the variety of issues that have not been

touched upon here tonight and a lot more that we have, but what are we going to do? What should we do? What is the answer? It is one thing I think to criticize and critique, but what is the answer?

I think part of the answer is all we have to do is look back throughout the history of this country from its inception, and many people like to say, well, the government is not worth anything, the government cannot initiate anything. If you look at all of the major advancements that have been made in the country from the post office, to land grant colleges, to the railroads, to the interstate highway, Medicare, Medicaid, civil rights, Social Security, the GI Bill, the Pell grants, Federal housing, all of these initiatives have, in one way or another, moved the country forward. Who was it that moved the country forward? It was always the government who was leading the way to move the country forward.

The research on the Internet was government investment. The research for diseases now at NIH, government investment, and now I just heard Secretary Abraham, Secretary of Energy, he wants $50 million for a new super high-tech fast supercomputer to give our country a competitive advantage. Who is the Secretary of Energy? Who does it belong to? Where does the money come from? It comes from here. It comes from the government.

The government always has had a role to play. It will continue to have a role to play, and I think the philosophy that people are trying to push down the American people's throats now of here is your 300 bucks, while tuition and fees has increased by 28 percent under this current administration; tuition and fees at 4-year public institutions increased by 35 percent; tuition and fee increases at public 2-year institutions increased by 60 percent; tuition and fees increased in 49 of the 50 States in 2003.

You and I come here at eleven o'clock at night. Our wives are watching and hopefully trying to engage some young people.

But why do it? Because we need to establish a program in this country that will move the country forward.

Now, after 9-11, we had opportunities for energy efficiency, or another GI bill, or you could have asked the American people to ride to work on bikes and they would have gone out and done it because they were committed to moving the country forward and committed to doing whatever it takes. And yet look at the inaction, look at the one solution for every problem. This is a one-trick pony. Tax cuts, tax cuts, tax cuts. And they are not going to the people in my district.

Fifty percent of the people in my district in Youngstown, Ohio; in Niles, Ohio; in Warren, Ohio; and in Akron, Ohio, 50 percent of the people got a tax cut, but 50 percent did not.

Mr. Speaker, I think the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Meek) makes some great points. I believe this is a good opportunity for us to try to communicate some of these points.

To continue on a point that the gentleman was making, the gentleman was talking about the devolution of taxes and going from the Feds cut their taxes and they push it off onto the States. And the States, in many instances, cut their taxes too and have reduced revenue, and they are passing it on to the county. And we see the local school boards, we see the university raise its tuition prices, we see mental health levies, transportation levies, disability levies, and senior citizen levies for senior programs, parks; we see levies for just about everything.

We have the devolution down until it gets to the local level, and the reason why we have a Federal Government to pass money along is because a lot of those areas are poor. They do not have the money to treat people with mental health problems in their county. They do not have the money. We need the Federal Government and the States to come in and help those poor communities.

A lot of the school districts, and this is something that is going on in Ohio, some of the school districts, they do not have the local tax base to be able to fund an adequate education for their kids. So you need the State to be involved or you need the Federal Government to be involved in order to help them.

That is one stream that comes down, and it is pushing down on the poor citizens in our communities all across the country regardless of the State.

Then, as you reduce the Federal revenues and, as you said, you borrow the money, you reduce the Federal revenues; but then you have to figure out what you are going to give back because the revenues are not there to give back. It is not like we are returning surplus money to the millionaires, it is not like when Clinton left office, and we had billions of dollars to give back. There is no surplus to give back, and we keep giving back. So where do we get the money? We pull out the credit card. We borrow the money to give it to the top 1 percent.

So we are cutting services on this end. We are pushing the burden down to the local level, and then we are borrowing money to give to rich people; and then in this other area here, we are pushing the burden off on the next generation. It is a tax shift off onto your kids, to your grandkids some day, my kids and my grandkids.

So we are going to have a higher rate of taxes for your grandkids because of this indulgence, this binge that we have been on, the binge that this administration has been on; and we are pushing it down to these kids at the same time that the baby boomers are moving into our systems, our Medicare system and our Social Security system.

What are we thinking? This makes no sense to do what we are doing. It is mind-boggling.

I was on the floor a couple of hours ago with the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Brown) and the other gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Strickland) and we were talking about veterans. When you listen to this, if you are home just listening this, Law and Order is over, now you are turning on C- SPAN, watching us, you think those are two partisans down there talking, and a few hours ago there were three, just trying to score political points, just blatant politics. But then you look at the facts and you look at what is going on with our country and the lack of investment in people, the lack of investment in all of the programs that we have believed in for years, you begin to recognize it is an issue of priorities. It is an issue of we would rather give these tax cuts because we think in the long run it will help us win an election as opposed to what is best for the country.

Over the break, maybe we can get away from here and open up and let the creative juices roll, and we can come up with something.

Absolutely. I think an amazing number here, and I know viewers cannot see these at home, but these are official statistics.

Household debt in January 2001 was $6.6 trillion. Household debt today, $8.8 trillion; $2.2 trillion more of household debt. And that is the issue that we keep talking about because the debt tax, the tax per household from this reckless binge that we have been on over the past 3 years is ultimately going to cost your kids and your grandkids enormous amounts of money to pay for that debt.

Mr. Speaker, I think the gentleman from Florida is absolutely right, and he is as articulate as anyone is around here.

A couple of issues that I want to talk about. And we are going to wrap up here in a few minutes. The hour is getting late, but I think it is important to just say that what we want this Congress to do, what we want this President to do is to take a strong leadership role in creating a new economy for the young people of this country. And I come from an old steel town, very strong during the industrial age; and what I hear from the retirees, I hear from people who have been working in a lot of these mills over the years and are coming close to retirement, is, What are our kids going to do? And when we look back at how we succeeded during the industrial age, the GI bill, the investments in infrastructure, the investments in the interstate highway systems, and I think needs to be duplicated, not in the same, but look at the space program, the national priority to educate people. It was not just about going to the Moon, which was a great national priority; it was about getting people, young people and the country engaged in math and science and engineering and physics because that administration understood that that would spin off into the economy, and those engineers who were getting educated were not just working in the space program. They were working in a lot of other industries. So I think it is important for us to do that. That is one.

And, two, I have heard the President say the economy is turning around. I cannot help, as we are wrapping it up here in the final couple of minutes, but to just acknowledge the fact that just a few miles outside of my district in Canton, Ohio, Timken, which was a

staple in Canton and Massillon, some of the greatest high school football in the country, the Timken Company is going to close up shop, 1,300 jobs in this community. Howard Fineman just wrote a great article about Timken and its potential effect on the election, but 1,300 jobs in Ohio were bleeding. And the President and others want to say that the economy is turning around, and I cannot help but say, where? Where? Maybe if they have a little bit of stock, and the stock market is not even doing all that well. And gas prices are going up. I mean, where is it getting better? It is not. It is getting progressively worse. We have the financial albatross around our neck with the current war, and we are having a number of problems. So these are some things where we have to make education a national priority for us.

I will read a couple here and start wrapping things up here. Alan T, a senior at Oklahoma State University, sent us an e- mail.

``I am spending over $300 a semester for textbooks that have been used four or five times already by previous students. My best friend was unable to be the first in his family to graduate from a major university due to the fact that he was unable to pay for textbooks, parking permits and other student fees that are burdening students more and more,'' also probably a few parking tickets, if I remember college well. Those are also a cost that students must endure.

``I can either pay my bursar, or I can pay my rent. Next year, I won't buy my textbooks, so I can pay both.''

The fact that we have people making this decision, it sounds eerily similar to the decision that a lot of our senior citizens have to make between food and prescription drugs.

Joseph Oliver from North Dakota, a 20-year-old chemical engineering student:

``Full disclosure, I do want to tell you that I am historically, even though I am only 20, a conservative voting citizen. The investigation into textbooks,'' for those of you at home, we have a bill that is going to investigate the high cost of textbooks, also provide a $1,000 tax credit for you to be able to deduct that, or credit that, for your textbooks, up to $1,000 a year, or your parents up to $1,000 a year.

``The investigation into textbooks is long past due. I spent nearly $600 for three classes of books, then was unable to sell any of them back because the new editions were released.''

If anything gets you more upset in college, than you would drop hundreds of dollars for a textbook, and then you would go back at the end of the semester to get hopefully 10 or 20 bucks back, and they say, ``We are not buying these back any more.'' I mean, that was ridiculous.

He goes on to say, ``That was the biggest unseen cost of college.'' He also goes on to talk about the variable interest rate for student loans. ``I have a fixed rate of nearly 3.4 percent right now. If that were to change, the light at the end of the tunnel would get a little less bright. I work 18 hour days in the summer to afford the opportunity of continuing school. I get upset every year, because I get penalized for working hard, among other factors, when it comes to receiving financial aid.''

I am going to wrap up here and just, again it is an honor to be here with the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Meek) to talk about these issues. I think it is important, if you are there, please send us your e-mail to us, find the rockthevote about voter suppression. But continue to send us these, because it is important for us to know exactly what your issues are.

I do want to take this opportunity, since we are not going to be here next week and this is my first term in Congress, to wish my mother a happy birthday. She is 60-years-old, so I wanted to wish her a happy birthday. Also my cousin, Phil Guerra who is also turning 60 this year.

I wanted to take this as an opportunity to wish them a happy birthday before we take off for our Memorial Day break. And just to say again, we got to keep plugging away. We got a long road here. But you establish what you stand for, you take it to these young students, these young kids, and I think you have an opportunity to change the way the country is run, and I think that is a great opportunity that we have here.

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

Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of H. Con. Res. 409. This important resolution recognizes the service and sacrifice of our World War II veterans, the domestic contributions of Americans in support of the allied victory, and celebrates the completion of the National World War II Memorial located on the National Mall here in Washington, D.C.

I thank the gentleman from Kansas (Mr. Moran) for his work on this resolution, as well as all of my colleagues who assisted in its drafting. I especially thank the gentlewoman from Ohio (Ms. Kaptur) for all of her work and perseverance to ensure the establishment of the National World War II Memorial and for her hard work on behalf of the many veterans in the great State of Ohio.

Most importantly, I thank and express my gratitude to all of the World War II veterans. Without their efforts and sacrifice, this world would be a quite different place. This resolution is indeed important and appropriate as we prepare to dedicated the National World War II Memorial. Not only does it recognize the heroic veterans of World War II, but it also commends the individual and collective contributions that American citizens have made on the homefront in support of the Nation's war effort. This memorial that we will soon dedicate and celebrate will stand before us as a reminder of the great sacrifices and the great triumphs of the Greatest Generation.

I am proud and humble to represent the 17th Congressional District of the State of Ohio where many veterans of World War II reside. This resolution is for them and all of those who have fought to protect this great country, and I thank them.

Mr. Speaker, I support this measure, and I urge all Members to do the same.

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

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Smith) for his leadership and for the gentleman's work on the previous resolution on Vietnam human rights today, and also those people who fought in the past for our freedoms that we have today.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Rodriguez).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Evans), and a personal friend of mine.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentlewoman from Ohio (Ms. Kaptur) who initiated this whole process.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 30 seconds to the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Evans).

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 30 seconds just to say that as a Member of this body who arrived here at 29 years old, a member of the generation or two to follow the greatest generation, I would just like to thank all of the veterans who gave us this great system that we have, where young men and young women from all over this country can run for office and get voted on by their community to come down here and represent their views. We have a tremendous system here that was achieved by great sacrifice from those who came before us. Again, I thank everyone who has brought forth this particular resolution and the World War II Memorial that we will be celebrating here in the next few weeks.

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

Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.

Mr. Speaker, we are here on our second weekly 30- something working group, and I am joined by the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Meek). We started this last week on Tuesday. Every Tuesday night we are going to come here and talk about issues facing the young people, not only in our own communities in Florida or in the State of Ohio, not only young people who are at universities or private schools throughout the country, but people who are in their 20s, in their 30s and the kinds of challenges they are facing in society here today.

As Members can see, the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Pelosi), who we would like to thank for the opportunity to do this, sponsoring the 30-something working group, we are going to ask young people, and you do not have to be 30, you can be 20, 40, 50, to contact us by e-mail at [email protected], and we will repeat the mailing address later, but just to talk about issues that are facing young students, young people today.

Last week we talked for about an hour about the challenges that are facing young people with summer jobs, student loans, Pell grants, and issues related to getting into college, having access to college, having access to higher education in this country. The majority of the discussion we talked about last week revolved around the priorities of the country. As we sit in this Chamber late on a Tuesday night, the issue again is priorities.

We just want to communicate to young people today that there is active participation in this democracy in which young people who think that democracy does not matter, who think that their vote does not count, who think that somehow they cannot participate in the system, we are here to tell them that they can, and they do have an opportunity to participate in this system; and for two young people like the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Meek) and myself and several others who are here, have gotten to this establishment, this institution, the United States Congress, through the help of a lot of young people. You can either say no, reject the system, you can say no, we do not have an opportunity to talk, we do not have an opportunity for our voice to be heard, or you can say, yes. Yes, we can participate in the system; we can participate in our democracy.

I heard some of the gentlemen before us talk about how the democratic process works and how people will, if given the opportunity, they will dictate what kind of government we get and what kind of government as citizens we receive; but it has to be active participation.

We are here to say we believe, and I know I believe passionately and have spoken on the House floor and I know the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Meek) has also participated in these discussions, that we believe that the priorities of this institution over the last year, year and a half, several years, have not represented the interests of young people. The Republican Party has controlled the House since 1994. They have controlled the Senate for a good portion of the years since then. They have controlled the White House for the last 3\1/2\ years; and the agenda for young people, the agenda for students has not been addressed. As we talked about last week, our discussion had a lot to do with Pell grants and access to college.

The question that we want to present to young people today, tonight, is: Do you agree with the priorities that this administration has established for you? Do you agree with trillions of dollars of tax cuts over the next 10 years? Do you agree with borrowing money to pay for the deficits that we have today in order to give tax cuts primarily to the top 1 and 2 percent? I know the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Meek), who has been very active in this discussion, has agreed with the majority of us on the Democratic side that we believe that money would be better spent balancing our budget, making sure we have fiscal responsibility in the country, and making sure we make the proper investments. We believe that some of those investments, and it would be misleading to say all of those investments, but a good portion or many of those investments should be made to our young people.

Mr. Speaker, on that point, we have many kids in school surrounded by their peers who want to participate in the process, who are campaigning for a certain candidate or referendum on a State ballot, but they are from another State. How do they register to vote? I remember being from Ohio, and I went to school in Bowling Green which is across the State, how do you get registered to vote? Should it be by absentee ballot? You have to send a formal letter and you have exams, and you are trying to balance your duties at school to try to achieve a better life; and it becomes a very complicated process, instead of saying register to vote where your school is and being able to participate in the process.

There are many instances where we have a college or university in a congressional district that is controlled by a Member of Congress or a party that is not representative of the people who are at that university, where if all of those kids would be able to register to vote at that university, they would swing a congressional election.

Go to rockthevote.com. Or, if the C-SPAN cameras can come in here, [email protected]. Send us some e-mails. We received a bunch just from last week, our first week here. Send us some e-mails. Let us know what you think, what your issues are so we can develop a students' bill of rights in order to advocate.

I would like to welcome a great new Member of our freshman class the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Linda T. Sanchez).

Mr. Speaker, the gentleman was extremely articulate in his analysis of the situation that we are in, and I think he is right, that a lot of us that are here, and I have seen

many Members who are just a few years older than us, have maintained that attitude that say this institution and politics in general is about what can be for the rest of society.

We have talked a little bit about health care, and I think there are two ways to look at this. I think both are very valuable, but the one is we need to cover people because it is a justice issue. It is an issue where we all believe that every person in America should have adequate health care regardless of one's wealth, period, end of story. That should not be a debate that we are having in the 21st century in America.

And as we provide health care for young people, we are beginning to educate them on the way to behave, the way to treat themselves, the way to be more healthy, so that when they are in the Medicare program one day, that they are not costing us as much money as they would have cost us had they not had the education that they had at a young age.

This should not be just about providing health care coverage. This should also be about teaching wellness in our schools, whether it is through Leave No Child Behind or some other Federal program that we have, but to make sure we are teaching people at a very young age how wellness is the best way to approach life. That is one.

And then the second reason is an economic argument. Imagine if we were providing health care to manufacturers here today. Young kids graduate from school. They go and they work. Maybe they do not even go to college. They go get a 2-year degree, run the new machines, have a technical degree, and they have health care. Imagine the burden that would be released from those people who were owning small manufacturing shops and the money that they would save that they could put back into their business to create economic wealth in the country again.

So this is an investment that I think when we want the government to invest money, we say we want to get the best bang for the buck. We get a justice issue solved, and we also want to get economic development and assist small businesses in a way that they have not been assisted under the current regime that we have here in the United States.

Mr. Speaker, so in essence we do have universal health care in the country but it is through the emergency room.

Do not do it.

Mr. Speaker, reclaiming my time, as we are wrapping up here, I want to thank the gentleman from Florida, the gentlewoman from California and the gentleman from Alabama.

I want to take this opportunity to say e-mail us, 30-SomethingDems at mail.house.gov, and check out rockthevote.com for the voter suppression.

I just want to read a couple e-mails real quickly that we received last week. Melanie from Maryland said that she heard us last week. It almost brought her to tears, that people in the Congress were actually talking about her.

Amy from Abilene Christian University wrote. And there was also one other student who called and said he never watched C-SPAN, but ended up watching it for 45 minutes last week to watch ``Gregory Meeks, Tim Ryan and one other guy.'' That ``one other guy'' was the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Meek).

We will be back next Tuesday. Drop an e-mail to us. We are going to continue to have this dialogue and make sure that the students and 20- somethings and 30-somethings of this country are represented in the United States Congress.

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

I also want to thank the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Burton) for his leadership on this issue and a lot of other issues. Regardless of party and regardless of what the political pressure is, the gentleman has taken a stand; and being a new Member of Congress, I want to thank the gentleman for an opportunity to be able to witness that up close.

Mr. Speaker, the issue of Dr. Wang is a very interesting one, for a variety of reasons. The one reason that strikes me, and the gentleman from Indiana alluded to this, is that he was meeting with a labor activist. I find that very interesting, and I find this particular situation a symptom of a larger disease that we are trying to deal with.

They are saying there was a violation of three articles of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. There is obviously no longer a Universal Declaration of Human Rights because countries like China do not agree to this kind of standard that we have set.

So this man was trying to help organize labor in China and trying to help bring some dignity and justice to the labor industry in China. It is obvious that China does not want it, but I think it is becoming more and more apparent that the major corporations in the United States who do business in China do not want China to have labor standards either.

If citizens of the regime in China try to unionize, they will be arrested, they will be beaten, they will be tortured. Many of the workers are bonded workers that come from the farms and go in to work in some of the factories. These people in China and the government of China do not enforce the minimum wage standards that they have, nor some of the safety rules that they have.

Why do they not want to do this? Because if they enforce these rules, as the AFL-CIO has indicated to us, there would be a 10 percent to 77 percent increase in the cost of goods coming out of China. We do not want to say that we want to raise prices, but I thought that this would bring about global competition, and I thought we were going to spread democracy. We want to lift the Chinese worker up. We want to lift them up to live, hopefully, one day, with the standards that we have here in the United States of America.

But just think, if this would happen, if there would be a 10 to 77 percent increase in the goods coming out of the Chinese market, the U.S. worker would finally be able to compete, Mr. Speaker, would finally be able to compete; and it would eliminate the problem we are even having dealing with the currency right now, if we would have those kinds of labor and human rights standards put in place.

I want to share a quote from the President of the United States when he was in Cleveland, Ohio, on March 10, 2003. He said to the workers in Ohio, ``Ohio workers, if given a level playing field, can outproduce any worker anywhere on Earth,'' if we had a level playing field.

What we need to do is ask this administration to get tough on China. A level playing field will not just fall out of the sky.

Then when we saw, and the AFL-CIO petitioned for, an opportunity to try to fix the currency manipulation problems and some of the labor rights problems, four Members of this administration's cabinet said that the administration's efforts at diplomatic engagement with Beijing on these two issues, currency and labor rights, would produce more results than threatening punitive tariffs.

Efforts at diplomatic engagement? This is coming from an administration that, when they walk the halls of the United Nations, it is like a bull in a china shop. They have no diplomatic touch. We have alienated all of our allies. Now we want to go and try to deal with China with diplomacy, while they are abusing workers, while they are abusing people, going to Vietnam to pick people up who are going to help workers organize in China.

Something needs to be done, and something needs to be done now. I appreciate the opportunity that the gentlewoman from California has given me and the gentleman from California.

I rise in support of this; but, again, I think it is a symptom of a larger problem that needs to be dealt with, and this administration and this Congress need to continue to push China to enforce the human rights that we have been exporting from this country for many, many years and want to continue to export out of this country.

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

Mr. Speaker, I also rise in support of H. Res. 598. Today's resolution honors the role that military impacted schools, teachers, administrators, counselors, and other staff play in educating children of military families. These individuals deserve our thanks, and they deserve our support. Hard-working teachers, principals, and superintendents across the country are doing all they can to help the 650,000 military children served in public schools. They are making a difference in the lives of the children, helping them learn, helping them succeed in school and in life.

In Congress today we commend them, the parents, the teachers, the superintendents, the principals, for working on the front lines at home to educate students during times of peace and times of conflict. We should be doing all we can to support them in this important work.

Yet President Bush and the Republican Congress are not providing these children and the families with the support they deserve. Why? Because they are failing to provide adequate funding for schools serving military children. These shortcomings are even more pronounced while these children's parents, our soldiers, are defending us in Iraq, Afghanistan and around the world.

We need to be doing more, not less, for these children and their families.

President Bush has shortchanged children and military families in several ways. First, passing tax cuts that leave hundreds of thousands of military children behind. While millionaires receive checks averaging $93,500 from the government, the hard-working parents of 12 million children receive nothing because Congress refused to close the loophole in the massive tax cut to the richest Americans. Even 260,000 children of active military parents were excluded from the child tax credit that the President signed.

Second, flat-funding the Impact Aid program. The Impact Aid program provides funds for schools which serve heavy concentrations of children from military families. Unfortunately, the Bush administration has failed to invest adequate resources in this program. First, by proposing to cut the program last year, and then flat-funding it in the fiscal year 2005 budget submitted only 3 months ago. Also by freezing school construction funding.

Under the Impact Aid program, school construction funding is reserved for the military school districts with the most pressing facility needs. In his fiscal year 2005 budget, President Bush proposed to freeze construction funding. Worse yet, the level of funding for school construction has declined considerably and is less than one-third of the level President Bush proposed when he entered office in 2001.

This President has also broken the promise to fund No Child Left Behind. President Bush has underfunded No Child Left Behind by nearly $27 billion since it was enacted. Schools serving military children generally have high numbers of disadvantaged children. No Child Left Behind's funding is targeted to school districts with high concentrations of disadvantaged children.

This lack of commitment to funding hits military-impacted districts especially hard. If this budget becomes law, military children across the country will be shortchanged.

For instance, in my home State of Ohio, children in my district, the 17th congressional district, are being short-changed. Children in Title I schools in are eligible for $574,200 in Title I funding, but the President's budget provides only $399,000, for a shortfall of over 30 percent, nearly $175,000. Southeast school district children are eligible for $351,000 in Title I funding, but would get only $241,000 under the President's budget, for a shortfall of over 31 percent.

Mr. Speaker, it is these programs and many more that are being cut by this President's budget or frozen by this President's budget.

We are going to support this resolution. We are going to support our teachers, the faculty, and the parents of these children.

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

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

I would also like to say to the gentleman from North Carolina, our comments today in no way take away from our ability to thank these teachers for all of their hard work. We just think that there are opportunities here that this Congress and this President could move to make this a better program, to help our children more. This is not a criticism of the teachers or principals or the teachers who are active in this program.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from California (Mrs. Davis).

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

Mr. Speaker, there are several other issues here that I wanted to touch upon. One is the zeroing out of the counseling program; it was $32 million, it has been zeroed out. Children of military families struggle to deal with a lot of the issues that are brought forth during times of war, during times of conflict. President Bush has zeroed out the elementary and secondary school counseling program. The program represents one of the few counseling efforts that the Federal Government supports, and especially as children struggle with the uncertainties facing their families in deployment during a time of war.

Also, another issue that must be touched upon here. I do not think we can have a debate about the military schools or the military impact program or any education program without looking at the whole picture. We cannot ignore IDEA. We cannot ignore No Child Left Behind. We cannot ignore construction for these facilities. We cannot ignore the counseling programs. Education is an integrated process, and by ignoring any of these, I do not think we fully touch upon the issues that we want to talk about here today.

Military-impacted districts have, on average, dealing with IDEA, more children with disabilities than nonmilitary-impacted districts. So they are clearly going to be affected in a deeper manner than an average school, and by failing to fully fund IDEA, President Bush is exacerbating the challenges that military-impacted districts face. These districts and these taxpayers get hit twice. The government comes in, they buy the land up, they are not getting the proper amount of reimbursement from this program and, at the same time, because you have less land, you are getting an increase in your own property tax.

So this hits these families in these communities that more often than not need a lot of help. And I know Windham and Southeast and Maplewood in my congressional district, they need this assistance. Ohio is a State that has lost over 200,000 jobs. We need to begin to educate our kids.

No Child Left Behind has been reported by the Ohio Department of Education, a Republican-controlled general assembly, every Statewide officeholder in Ohio is a Republican, and they have said that the No Child Left Behind program is underfunded in the State of Ohio by $1.4 billion. We cannot talk about any kind of education programs without looking at the whole pack.

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

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

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

Mr. Speaker, just one final closing point, and we do not need to beat a dead horse here, but I do believe that we cannot have an honest debate about this education program or any other education programs without looking at the money, and we need to fund these education programs.

Again, we commend the teachers. We commend the principles and the people who were involved in this program. And there is no doubt about the outstanding work that they provide, the outstanding leadership that they provide for our young students who are there. We will support this resolution. But, in the current fiscal year 2004 appropriations, $61.6 million, it would take $1.1 billion to fully fund this program.

When you look at that in the light of all the tax cuts that we have given to the top one, 2 percent of the people in this country, the wealthiest 1 and 2 percent of the people in this country, we just believe on this side of the aisle that it is time for us to take this responsibility seriously.

We are losing jobs left and right, and we want every single child to have an opportunity to get a quality education with the new facility with the proper education in these time of great need for these children.

We are supportive of this resolution. I thank the gentleman for bringing it up. It is a great idea to take time out of our busy schedules here in Congress to commend these teachers and these people who are leading the future youth of this country.

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

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

The gentleman from Michigan makes a valid point. We are spending more on education, but there are more mandates that have been placed on these local schools, and the money that we have given has not equaled the amount that is needed to fulfill the obligations that the Federal Government wants to impose on the local school districts and the States.

I was in the State legislature, too. I know State legislators want more Federal money; there is no doubt about that, and I apologize to the gentleman from Nevada. We are getting a little off the point here, but my point was that here we have a Republican-controlled legislature, we have a Republican State for the most part controlled by Republican- elected officials, soon to become a Democratic State in the fall, but a Republican State controlled, and my point is that the Department of Education in Ohio is not going to throw it back in the Republican Congress' face and criticize them unnecessarily so. So if anything, it was a proper analysis of the funding that was needed.

Back to H. Res. 600. I do rise, Mr. Speaker, in support of H. Res. 600, a resolution congratulating public charter schools for their ongoing contribution to our educational system.

The first charter school opened its doors in 1992 in Minnesota; and since that time, the number of charter schools has grown. While they only educate a small portion of all children that attend public schools, these schools have added to the importance and purpose of our public school systems. The truly great aspect of our

country's educational system is its public schools. Whether it is charter schools or traditional public schools, all of our public schools exist to educate our Nation's children.

America cannot succeed without a robust and successful public school system. Charter schools are one important part of this system.

I do want to say that this is not a resolution of us agreeing to abandon the traditional public schools, abandon funding for the traditional public schools at both a local, State level, and at Federal level. This is not that resolution.

We do want to commend all the hardworking teachers and principals and leaders in the schools and the kids who go to these schools as students who attend. They are great kids. I have had an opportunity to meet with them and speak with them. They are great kids who deserve all the respect and admiration that this body can give them.

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

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from the District of Columbia (Ms. Norton).

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

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

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

We support this resolution. We appreciate the gentleman's efforts on this. I want to make perfectly clear that we want to show our support and congratulate the public charter schools for their contributions to the system, and say what great students and kids they have, and how we want to support them and their families. This is not a resolution to abandon our traditional public schools, but to show our support for charter schools.

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

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

I support this resolution which honors the importance of school-based music education. Specifically, this resolution recognizes that music education, grounded in rigorous instruction, is an important component of a well-rounded academic curriculum, and should be available to all students. It also recognizes that school music programs play an important role in the academic and social development of children. Any music educator will tell you that the school music program enriches the academic environment of our schools, and also enhances the intellectual development of our children. Music education is very important. I am pleased to support this resolution.

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

Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Tennessee (Mr. Cooper), and more specifically, from Music City, U.S.A.

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

Mr. Speaker, again, I want to reiterate our support and thank the gentleman from Tennessee (Mr. Cooper) for his leadership on this particular piece of legislation and also all of his work as far as encouraging music in our schools. We have stories abound about famous musicians who have stumbled onto music class somehow or other. One story I am familiar with is Boyd Timsley, the famous violinist from the Dave Matthews Band. He started off in a middle school strings class, and the rest is history. The next thing we know, we have one of the premier violinists in the history of the world. We want to encourage this, but I also agree with the gentleman from Tennessee (Mr. Cooper). We want to take this to the next level.

We cannot rely on organizations like Save Our Music to try to help encourage this. This is our government. We understand the importance of the arts. We understand the importance of the stamp of approval that the Federal Government has. I think we also want to start putting our money where our mouth is on this issue. I thank the gentleman from Nevada and the gentleman from Tennessee and all who were involved in this. We are going to support this resolution.

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

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

I also would like to congratulate the gentleman and the University of Connecticut. I will not be participating in the cheer, however. They were very exciting games and a very exciting year for the University of Connecticut. I rise in support of this resolution. I notice that the gentleman does have a few extra T-shirts over there that I will be more than pleased to take off his hands if he needs to get rid of any of those extra ones.

I extend a hearty congratulations, too, to both of the head coaches, both Coach Calhoun and Coach Auriemma. It is just fantastic. One, the excitement of the Final Four and the college basketball tournament. There is nothing in professional or collegiate athletics like the Final Four and the road to the Final Four. Again, we congratulate you. We will let you boast throughout the day today without being bitter at all.

I want to just say, the great sportsmanship, the excellent play, the great strategy and tactics of both coaches, it was very, very enjoyable to watch. It was a great year. I look forward to the Ohio State Buckeyes maybe participating in a little better fashion next year.

Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the distinguished gentleman from Connecticut (Mr. Larson).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentlewoman from Connecticut (Ms. DeLauro).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from Connecticut (Mr. Larson).

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume just to say I have been proud to be part of the Connecticut delegation here today.

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

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

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H. Con. Res. 408, a resolution congratulating the University of Denver for winning the NCAA hockey national championship. Just last month, the Pioneers captured the national championship after a hard fought Frozen Four. This championship culminated in an impressive season. College fans, student athletes, and the general public were treated to an exciting final game.

I want to extend my hearty congratulations to Head Coach George Gwozdecky. Also to be congratulated are a number of players, Adam Berkhoel, who made 24 saves. I also want to extend my congratulations to North Dakota, who, despite their loss, showed the quality of their school and their athletic talent through great sportsmanship.

Winning this championship has brought national acclaim to the University of Denver. I hope the Pioneers' fans and the university community treasure this moment for many years to come.

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

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

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of this resolution and want to thank the gentleman from Georgia, congratulating Kennesaw State University for winning the NCAA Division II men's basketball national championship.

Two months ago, the Owls captured this title, culminating in a very impressive season. Kennesaw State won their last 26 games. Unbelievable. College fans and student athletes and the citizens of the State of Georgia were treated to a very exciting basketball season.

I just want to extend my congratulations from the great State of Ohio. It is obvious that the gentleman from Georgia has great passion about the influence that student athletes can have on the future of our society and on the future of the State of Georgia, and I want to rise in support.

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

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Florida and the gentlewoman gentlewoman from California for bringing up these issues. I just recently moved up into the 30-Something. I was in the 29 something caucus all by myself before we started here.

A couple of issues. I missed the beginning of the special order here, but I have three universities in my district. I have a local campus, branch campus of one of those universities, and I think the one issue that I faced being in the State Senate in Ohio with tuition increases going up by 10, 15 percent across the board, is that the one issue that young kids and young students could sniff out more than anything else is when someone is trying to pull the wool over their eyes, when someone is trying to tell them one thing and do something else. And the last presidential election, the students, the college students, the technical students, of this country were promised by the President of the United States that he was going to raise the Pell grant award to $5,100 for all freshmen students. Now today the maximum Pell grants is still $4,050.

So we try to engage young students, we try to engage young people into the process, and we try to tell them that we care about their needs. But here once again in 2000 they were told one thing by a typical politician, as they would see it and they would call it, who would promise one thing and then something else happened. They did not deliver on the promise. And, again, I heard the gentleman from Florida reiterate, as has been reiterated many times here in this Chamber, that again we have the priorities for the top 1 percent. They are the people that we care about. We garner all the energy of this Chamber to help the top 1 percent. But we cannot make one move to help college students. And as he said, I am sure in Florida it is the same way as it is in Ohio: 10 percent this year, 10 percent next year, 13 percent the next year, 15 percent the next year for college education.

And these are the States that are getting hardest hit by the job loss. So they lose their job or they are underemployed; so they go from a job making 15 or 20 bucks an hour with health insurance down to 9 bucks an hour. Now they are at Sam's Club, now they are at Super-K, now they are at Kohl's or Bed, Bath & Beyond, trying to make ends meet for their family, and they have a 15 percent tuition increase to try to make ends meet for their kids.

So I am glad that the leader has also organized this. This is a great opportunity, I think, for us to try to address some of the issues here in the United States Congress and let people know out there, let young students know out there on a Tuesday night at nine o'clock, as they are flipping through watching Comedy Central or MTV or VH1, that they could maybe tune in here once a week, and they do not have to do it every night, but once a week find out there are Members of the United States Congress that are trying to address some of their needs.

I know we have some other speakers. I would be happy to stick around and talk a little bit.

Mr. Speaker, that is right. If the gentleman would yield further, I would say to the young students who may be watching this or may hear about this through their college newspapers, that they can check the statistics. We are not going to stand on the floor of the House of Representatives and try to lie to you. We are going to present to you statistics we have had verified, information we have had verified from members of our staffs and different organizations.

Check it out. It is not us saying it. It is not a Democrat or Republican issue. Unfortunately, the Congress has been controlled by the Republicans for a good many years, the White House has been in the hands of the Republicans for now 3\1/2\ years, and the Senate has been in Republican hands for a few years now. If they wanted to address the needs of college students in the United States of America, they had the opportunity.

Time and time again, we took the opportunity to engage the top 1 or 2 percent, to make sure they got hundreds of thousands of dollars back in some instances. So this is a priority issue for this Congress; and if you do not believe

us, go right ahead and check our facts, just the facts.

Mr. Speaker, if the gentleman will yield further, I want to thank the gentleman, because the 30-somethings are always looking for some support from the 50-somethings, without a doubt. But I think the gentleman raised a couple of very good points.

The one point is, let us think about a young student today who may be just finishing up high school, or a sophomore or junior in high school, getting ready to go, or maybe a kid 10 or 12 years old. What kind of student loan burden are they going to have? If the colleges, public universities go 10 percent, 10 percent, 10 percent, 10 percent over the next 4 or 5 years, Pell grants are not adjusted for inflation, the same problems with the student loans, we tack on more user fees and everything else, and then the debt from the tax cuts. So by the time they get through law school, if they are 15 now, by the time they are 27, 28, 30 years old, they have all of that educational burden. Then they have the burden that we are putting on them from the past 2 or 3 years here.

Where is the economic machine going to move at that point when you have so much debt? We are really putting chains not only on our kids, but on the economy. That is one point I would like to make.

The other point I thought of is that not only are we strapping ourselves

with our debt, but we have less kids that are going to be on the border that we need to create the new economy. We do not know what the new economy is going to be. We know it is not industry. We know industry has been on the decline for the last 30 years, trade agreements we have signed and a variety of other issues, whatever they may be, technology. So what is the new economy going to be? The best thing we can do is just educate these young kids and say, you go out and create it. We do not know what it is going to be yet.

So I appreciate the gentleman stopping down, and hopefully he can make it down in the next weeks and months to come.

The great investment of the GI Bill, which sprang our economy into the world domination we now have. I look at my grandparents' generation, who many accessed the GI Bill, doctors, lawyers and engineers.

The space program, it was not just about going to the Moon; it was about getting mathematicians and scientists and engineers and physicists. They were not all going to work for NASA, but they went out into the private sector and drove this economy forward throughout the '50s, '60s, and '70s when we had a lot of success. We need to make those investments again.

That is right. I think a lot of people out there listening now who are young students who may not be tuning in tonight but, may be in the future, I do not think if you cross-reference the stories of those of us who are standing here, probably many of the Members here, the stories would be much different.

You work hard, you go to college, you get a summer job, you work in a steel mill in the summer, you cut grass in the summer, you do what you can to help move things along, and you hope that you are blessed with families who help you, parents who support you, grandparents who want to step in and support you to make sure that you can have what you have. That is becoming less and less available.

I think part of the reason I am here is because I was blessed to have a family who was able to help me out. I was blessed to have a summer job. Kids today are not even going to be able to get a summer job, because the market is so terrible that people who have been unemployed for the last 7 or 8 months are taking the summer jobs FROM the college kids, so that job I got cutting grass at Trumbull County and I would drive the thing on the side of the highway and drop the arm down to cut grass to make 6 bucks an hour so you would have money in the summer so you were not a further burden, those jobs are not available. The summer employment working the steel mill on the midnight shift, those jobs are not available because no one is hiring.

So there is a connection to all of this. It is not just about the student loans, it is about the economy, it is about the tax decisions that we are making here, it is about the money we are spending, it is about the deficits, it is about the irresponsible fiscal policies that we have here that are all, that are all affecting this for all students and people who are going to get a 2-year degree, or do not even go to school at all. They are still affected by the job market.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to see the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Meek) pull his wallet out again.

Mr. Speaker, one issue before we get into the books, I want to talk about the GI Bill. I do not know how many stories, if this is anecdotal or what, but I have heard a lot over my lifetime about people who are in the greatest generation and they are telling the story of their life and they say, well, and then I went to medical school, or well, and then I went to become a lawyer. And I would always ask, well, why? And they said, well, I did not know what I was going to do and the GI Bill was going to pay for it, so I went.

Now, how many kids are out there right now who, if we gave them that opportunity, they would say, I do not know what to do, I have a bachelor's degree in political science, I know I cannot make a very good living off that. What are you going to do? I am going to go to law school, I am going to go to medical school, I am going to go do something that is important.

But I think one issue that we do want to touch on before we leave here is to talk a little bit about textbooks. And nothing, nothing in my educational career got me more hot under the collar than when I had to return a textbook that I paid, or my mother or my grandparents paid $120 for, and you bring it back at the end of the semester, and they will give you 5 bucks, 10 bucks back for it.

So we have a piece of legislation here, just to shout out to all of the college students, we did not forget you. We know this is a major issue, we know this is a major problem.

There are textbooks that are sold in the United States that are sold for half the price in England. So the gentleman from Oregon (Mr. Wu), a Member of Congress here, has a bill that we are kind of jumping on that is going to ask

the General Accounting Office to investigate these high prices of college textbooks and the disparity of prices between textbooks sold in the United States and overseas. There is no way a textbook sold in the United States, written in the United States, published in the United States, copyrighted in the United States should be $100, and they are sold at a bookstore in England or in London for $50. There is no reason why that should happen. So we want to do an investigation. We want to see why that is.

We are also on the brink, and I think we dropped it last week, of having a piece of legislation that would give parents or students a $1,000 tax credit for the price of college books. That should cover a good portion of the books that people spend in a year.

Maybe one of these weeks we could talk about No Child Left Behind. And I do not want to get into a K through 12 debate now, but it is the same issue. In Ohio, for example, the State legislature did a study, No Child Left Behind underfunded by $1.4 billion. So now that means that the State, in order to fulfill their obligations to the Federal mandate, must come up with more money. Does that mean they will take more from the college subsidies for higher education that the State puts on? Does that mean more of an increase to the property tax of someone who is paying property tax in the State of Ohio? Where will we get this money?

I guess the thing I want to communicate is that this is doable. The beautiful thing about this democracy is that it belongs to us. And if young people want to participate in this system and in an election from Republican to Democrat, then they can do it. There are enough students out there to make this happen.

If you want the millionaires' tax cuts to go away or not necessarily even go away, just a portion of it going away to pay for this, that is doable. If you get active and you get involved, let us know, 30somethingdems@mail. house.gov.

Let us know what your ideas are. We need young people to participate in this process and replenish this system because it has become very stagnant down here. It has become a very small group of people who raise money, dump it into this institution, get the legislation they want. That legislation helps them make more money and they take their profits and it is a cycle that goes on and on. And the only thing that combats that is democracy and young people getting involved in the process.

If you are a young student sitting at home right now, watching this or hearing about these policies, what would you rather have? That is that democracy. It is that simple. What would you rather have, tax cuts? A millionaire getting $130,000 back or a program like this where you will get a credit for your textbooks; you will get ``I Have a Dream Scholarships'' for your community service;

help the States to make sure that they do not cut back; tax credits; increase in the Pell grants. What do you want?

If you are a student and you want certain things, then you have to get out and participate in the system.

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

Let us be straight about what is happening here. This is a $207 billion tax cut for people who make less than $1 million a year, the kind of people that need the tax cut. This is a tax increase, in order to pay for the bill, a tax increase of $207 billion for those people who make more than $1 million a year.

This is very simple math. We are not being irresponsible with this substitute. We all support getting rid of the marriage penalty. We all want to encourage marriage through the Tax Code. We do not want to penalize anybody for getting married. But to sit here and say that this is somehow a tax increase on middle America, on average Americans, is not telling the whole story.

This is a tax cut for people who are married and make less than $1 million a year. These are the people who are paying increased property tax and who are experiencing tuitions that have gone up by 15 percent, increased sales taxes, and health care costs that have gone up by 15 to 20 percent a year. These are the people we are trying to help here, and the Democrats are in support of that.

But we do not want to go out and borrow money and put it on the next generation. You borrow money, you have to pay interest on it. This is revenue neutral, so that when we have the challenges we need to face down the pike with Afghanistan, with Iraq, making sure our troops have the proper equipment, then we will be able to answer that call.

We are asking millionaires to give back only $30,000 of their Bush tax cut. They are still going to get $100,000. They are still going to get $100,000 back from the Bush tax cut. When are we going to ask the top 1 percent in this country to start making sacrifices? When? Now is the time with this substitute bill to say that we are not going to push it onto the next generation and we are finally, since this country had the greatest tragedy it has ever had in its history, finally we are going to ask the top 1 percent to sacrifice a little bit to help move the whole society along.

Really the only problem that I see right now with this substitute is that you need a job to be able to qualify to get it, because there are no jobs in this country. The previous speaker said the economy is growing. Where? If you have stocks, you may be doing okay. In Ohio, we lost 200,000 jobs, most of them manufacturing, and 2 million jobs nationwide. This is Herbert Hoover's economy.

Let us be responsible. Let us ask the top 1 percent, people making over $1 million a year, to pay their fair share. Only $30,000 of the Bush tax cut do they need to give back and they are going to give it back to average families who have seen increases in a variety of other tax structures, with their cities, with their counties, with their school districts, with their mental health levies. Those are the people we want to help.

I urge passage of this substitute. It is the right way to go about it by not pushing it off on our kids.

Mr. Speaker, I would just like to take this opportunity to thank Father Ron Nuzzi for his uplifting prayer this morning and his great work not only in the Catholic Church but in his leadership and developing catholic school teachers through his program at University of Notre Dame. He is a lifelong friend of mine and my family and has been there for me and my family for every special occasion, good and bad, that our family shares. So I would like to take this opportunity to thank him again for his wonderful prayer this morning.

Mr. Speaker, another week has gone by in the United States Congress, and nothing has been done with unemployment benefits for unemployed workers throughout this country; 2 million to 3 million workers still do not have work. Thousands in the State of Ohio are losing their unemployment benefits every single day. And we sit here and we want to take pot shots at different Members of this body, different members of the Senate, candidates for President.

The real issues today are people do not have any place to go to find work. Those people that did have work have lost their jobs, and they are looking for unemployment benefits to feed their families. They want to send their kids to school. We have no manufacturing program in this country. We are bleeding jobs every day.

We better get our act together in the Congress. I think it is time for a change. I think we need to focus on what is most important here and what our job is here, and that is to take care of the American people.

Mr. Speaker, it is always a pleasure to follow my fine colleague, the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Strickland), who I think touched on some very important points that we need to address in this Congress and we should not be leaving.

Many of us to go back to our districts, some of us to go on Easter vacation, before we address this issue of unemployment benefits; and I think this issue illustrates for the country exactly how removed the United States Congress actually is from the problems that we are dealing with in middle America.

It is easy for politicians to mouth words that somehow we are supposed to address the problems that we have in this country. But the American people are beginning to realize that the rhetoric that has been coming from the Nation's Capitol, the rhetoric that has been coming from this administration, has not been addressing the issues that face average working families in the State of Ohio. The unemployment rate actually crept up to 5.7 percent.

Do we want jobs to be created in this country? Absolutely. You will never hear me, or I think any other Member of this body, somehow downplay job growth as if it is a bad thing. Because we want the American people to go back to work.

But there is so much that needs to be done with this economy. Let us look for a second at the issue of the minimum wage. I want to talk about a couple of other issues, but for now we want to talk about the minimum wage.

During most of the 1960s and 1970s, working at the minimum wage kept a family of three out of poverty. Today, that same family is 24 percent below the poverty level.

The purchasing power of the current $5.15 per hour minimum wage is well below that of the 1960s and 1970s level. From its peak in 1968, the purchasing power of the minimum wage has declined over 36 percent.

If you are wealthy in the United States of America, you are doing pretty well, and you get all the benefits

and all the energy of this legislative body to help you in any way necessary. You need tax cuts? We are for tax cuts. You need subsidies? We are for subsidies. Whatever it is that corporate America, the top 1 and 2 percent of the people living in this country need, they get.

But people living in the United States of America who want unemployment benefits, they are not working, their unemployment benefits are going to run out, this legislative body has no time for you. If you are making the minimum wage and you are 36 percent below the purchasing power the same wage of 1968, we do not have time for you.

I think it is a shame that this Congress dictates its policies by who is contributing to the campaigns and who is making the biggest donations, and that is the problem. That is what the American people are going to have to decide in this next election that is coming up, is are the money people going to win out or the people who need help in this country?

Look at the kind of future we are leaving to our kids. Almost a $600 billion deficit. We give tax cuts now, we borrow money to pay for them, and we put the burden on our kids who are going to be left to foot the bill for this thing. It is wrong. It is a tax for our kids that they are eventually going to have to pay.

We talk about outsourcing jobs and competing on a global economy. We are underfunding No Child Left Behind by $1.5 billion a year in the State of Ohio, $1.5 billion a year. We say we want everyone to participate in the global economy, we say we want to move the last 25 percent of the kids in this country over the finish line, make them proficient, let them be happy, have the education they need to be able to compete in this country, but we are not willing to put the money up because we have to give tax cuts to the top 1 percent. That is the priority of this legislative body.

If we are going to outsource and if we are going to compete on a global level, which everyone has seemed to have agreed that we need to do, then we better put the resources in educating our kids. We better make sure we have an adequate, livable wage for people. Because there is going to be displacement. We better make sure everybody has health care in this country.

The American people are beginning to recognize that the rhetoric from this body and the rhetoric from this administration doesn't match the reality that needs to be addressed in middle America. It is time that we start addressing it.