Michael Bilirakis

Mr. BILIRAKIS

Mr. BILIRAKIS. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he might consume to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Barton).

Mr. BILIRAKIS. Mr. Speaker, I would say that the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Barton) was here earlier, before even the votes. He wanted to really speak on this subject because he has a great interest in it, and I appreciate that interest. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he might consume to the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Hayes).

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

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

Mr. BILIRAKIS

Mr. BILIRAKIS. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the Senate bill (S. 286) to revise and extend the Birth Defects Prevention Act of 1998.

Mr. BILIRAKIS. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on S. 286, the bill now under consideration.

Mr. BILIRAKIS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I rise today in support of S. 286, which is the Birth Defects and Developmental Disabilities Prevention Act. This legislation will allow public health surveillance for developmental disabilities using records maintained by local educational institutions. A baby born in America today has a life expectancy 30 years longer than a child born at the turn of the century. Public health initiatives are largely responsible for this vast improvement, but we cannot rest on our laurels, Mr. Speaker, because much more remains to be done. Many of us have worked diligently to examine many of the difficult barriers we face in working to improve children's health and well- being, and this legislation, initiated by our colleague, the gentleman from New Jersey, (Mr. Ferguson), and helped to a large degree by another colleague from New Jersey (Mr. Smith) and so many others, the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Brown) and so many others, will assist the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention in accurately determining the size and scope of many developmental disabilities, including autism, mental retardation, and cerebral palsy. My hope, Mr. Speaker, is that this information will ultimately help us identify causes and possible cures for these disabling, very disabling conditions. I might add these diseases are not only disabling insofar as the child is concerned, but what it does to the parents is just unbelievable. I know we have all seen that, and, hopefully, we can find some way to find at least the causes. In any case, Mr. Speaker, I urge all of my colleagues to support this legislation that the Senate has already passed. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. BILIRAKIS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume, and I want to thank the gentleman for all those comments. He puts it so very well. My oldest son, Emmanuel, is a physician, an internist. He works awfully hard, puts in a lot of hours and does not make much money. Sort of like the late father of the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Brown). But when he was going through his rotation, he told me the toughest one was the one dealing with pediatrics, with children, and to see some of these parents, particularly with the autistic children. I would say that the children's health bill that the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Brown) referred to, a great impetus on that, to a large degree, was due to the actress Rene Russo. She really pushed us on that. She came here and testified, and I am just glad we were able to do it. But at the same time, we see all these terrible things happening. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Ferguson), the father of this bill, this very needed bill, this very great bill.

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

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

Mr. BILIRAKIS

Mr. BILIRAKIS. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and concur in the Senate concurrent resolution (S. Con. Res. 48) supporting the goals and ideals of ``National Epilepsy Awareness Month'' and urging support for epilepsy research and service programs.

Mr. BILIRAKIS. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks and to include extraneous material on H. Con. Res.48, the concurrent resolution now under consideration.

Mr. BILIRAKIS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of Senate Concurrent Resolution 48, a concurrent resolution supporting the goals and ideals of National Epilepsy Awareness Month. This resolution urges funding for epilepsy research and service programs. More than 2 million people in the United States have epilepsy. Approximately 300,000 of those 2 million are children or adolescents. November has been designated as National Epilepsy Awareness Month to increase public awareness of this very debilitating disease. Epilepsy is a chronic condition that produces random, temporary changes in the brain's electrical activities. These changes cause seizures that affect awareness, movement, or sensation. Although there is currently no cure, there is medication available that can help to control seizures and to enable people with epilepsy to lead normal lives. I would like to acknowledge, I guess I will call them the mothers of this legislation, Senator Lincoln from the other body, and the gentlewoman from Florida (Ms. Brown), my colleague from my home State, for their making us aware of this. As chairman of the Subcommittee on Health of the Committee on Energy and Commerce, Mr. Speaker, I believe it is important that Congress work to increase public awareness of epilepsy and to dispel any myths and stigma, and, gosh knows, even today, there is still some stigma associated with this disease, and to promote research into the causes, treatment, and possible cures. Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support the resolution. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

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

Mr. BILIRAKIS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, in closing, I would like to say how pleased I am to have worked with the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Brown) on these suspensions here today. We have had a number of them. We have been here quite awhile, about 4 hours; and it is an illustration of what we can do if we work together. I would also like to express my appreciation to the staff on both sides of the aisle. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. BILIRAKIS

Mr. BILIRAKIS. Mr. Speaker, as to the issue of concurrent receipt, which the other side keeps referring to as a tax on disabled veterans, as the Members know, and I appreciate all the kind remarks that I have received from both sides of the aisle, but I have worked on this for 18 years, and during the first half of those 18 years, the other party was in charge, and we have to ask ourselves what was done during all that period of time. I say to the Members nothing, nothing. I am searching my mind to try to find out how many hearings we were able to have on this issue during that period of time. We may have had one. I am not even sure we had even that. Never in any of their budgets had they even put a single penny into their budgets for full concurrent receipt, even the most recent ones. The discharge petition would bring H.R. 303 on the floor. There is going to be a motion to recommit, which basically says we have got to have the entire amount. Why did you all not crank those dollars into your budget? You have not chosen to do so. The gentleman has talked about his discharge petition. My discharge petition back in the early 1990s, 1993 I believe it was, failed. Where were all the signers from that side of the aisle back in 1993, or whatever that year was, when we had that discharge petition? Politics, I might say, politics, politics. Starting January 1 of next year, the proposal will phase in full concurrent receipt for all retirees who have disability ratings 50 percent or more. It expands the combat-related special compensation program to cover all 100 percent combat-related disability categories, as opposed to those that are 60 percent now. It also extends these benefits to the Reserve and National Guard, who have not been getting it up to now. Despite this breakthrough, Mr. Speaker, full concurrent receipt remains a priority goal for all of us. Only let us show it. Rather than just discharge petitions, let us put the dollars into the budget, if we will, on both sides of the aisle if we are really serious. I ask everybody to vote for this bill and to oppose the motion to recommit, Mr. Speaker, for the reasons stated.

Mr. BILIRAKIS

Mr. BILIRAKIS. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to call attention to a little-known but debilitating disease that profoundly impacts its victims. Vitiligo is an auto-immune disorder which causes the skin to lose its pigmentation, resulting in the development of white patches around the bodies of those afflicted with it. Although its physical effects are neither as severe nor life-threatening as some diseases, vitiligo profoundly impacts the social and psychological well-being of its victims, particularly children and African-Americans. Vitiligo may physically be painless, but the discrimination it precipitates hurts nonetheless. The more than 5 million American men, women, and children who have vitiligo know the sting and emotional distress it causes. I have seen it in the eyes and heard it in the voices of those with whom I've met who have it. I learned about vitiligo from one of my constituents, Stella Pavlides, who is the Founder and President of the American Vitiligo Research Foundation, which is headquartered in my congressional district in Clearwater, Florida. Stella is a tireless advocate who has dedicated her life to finding a cure for vitiligo and ending the hurt it causes. I have pledged to her that I will work with my House colleagues to raise public awareness about vitiligo so that we can make it a disease of the past and not the mystery illness shrouded in ignorance that it is today. Mr. Speaker, I want to commend our colleague, Congressman Todd Tiahrt, for taking a leading role in helping me bring this disease to the attention of our colleagues. I hope that all of our colleagues will join us in raising public awareness about vitiligo and dedicating ourselves to helping the medical and scientific communities find a cure for it.

Mr. BILIRAKIS

Mr. BILIRAKIS. Mr. Speaker, I appear to be the only speaker on this side. I do not know how many speakers the gentlewoman has.

Mr. BILIRAKIS. Mr. Speaker, what I would like to do is reserve the balance of our time and be the last speaker, just before the gentlewoman's closing.

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

Mr. BILIRAKIS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Ohio, particularly for his kind remarks. I rise in opposition to the motion to instruct offered by the gentlewoman from California (Mrs. Capps). This is just the latest, I think, in a long line of motions to instruct that hurt our ability to finish our Medicare bill and provide prescription drugs to seniors. I am going to focus my remarks principally on the comments made of saving money from taking money away from the H.R. 1 program, if you will, and putting it into providers. I have been a tireless advocate of fixing the formula that the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services uses to annually update Medicare payments to physicians. In fact, I introduced a bill in late 2001 that would have prevented that 5.4 percent cut in physician reimbursements under Medicare that went into effect in 2002. I believe the gentlewoman was supportive as were others. Physicians were slated to receive another cut, this time of 4.4 percent, were it not for congressional action that corrected flawed data in the update formula and provided physicians with a 1.6 percent update for 2003. However, persistent flaws in the update formula mean that physicians are looking at negative updates next year and through 2007, and this motion to instruct does not fix that. It makes no sense, and the others have said it, it makes no sense that we would be cutting payments to our Nation's doctors at the same time that their costs are rising. That is why the House bill contains provisions, and if this bill goes down, those provisions will not be applicable and the increases that we are all talking about would not take place. That is why the House bill contains provisions that will ensure that physicians will see their reimbursements under Medicare, rather than cut by 4.4 percent, would be increased by 1.5 percent in fiscal years 2004 and 2005. This will provide Congress with the time that it needs to make long-term reforms to the Medicare physician payment update formula so that physicians can count on predictable, rational payments from Medicare. It will also avoid a major physician access problem for Medicare beneficiaries. I would note, Mr. Speaker, that a number of organizations representing America's physicians, including the American Medical Association, the American Osteopathic Association and the Alliance of Specialty Medicine all strongly support the House bill. I would quote from an October 30, 2003, letter from the American Medical Association. I believe the minority is aware of this. The last few lines basically say: Pending Medicare payment cuts must be addressed now, not in 2010, which is basically what the instructions go to, and the flawed payment formula must be addressed through replacement of the formula. Simply attempting to transfer dollars from patients to physicians through some ambiguous, unspecified mechanism, as is intended under the Capps motion to instruct, would not change the flawed Medicare payment formula, and thus would not ensure long-term access for Medicare patients. I received another letter dated the same date, October 30, from the American Osteopathic Association. It starts out: On behalf of the 52,000 osteopathic physicians represented by the American Osteopathic Association, I write to thank you for your efforts to reform and improve the Medicare program. The AOA applauds the consistent effort by the committee and their staffs to finalize a legislative compromise that will improve the health care of millions of Medicare beneficiaries. We encourage the committee to complete work on the pending conference report, enabling both Chambers to approve the legislation before the end of the year. In the next paragraph it finishes up by saying: Additionally, section 601 of the bill includes reforms that reduce the future economic volatility of the physician payment formula. These provisions have strong bipartisan, bicameral support. We urge their inclusion in the final conference report. It goes on the next page: Given budget constraints, the AOA understands that a long-term solution for the physician payment issue could not be included in this legislation, and I add to that my own comment, unfortunately. However, we believe strongly that section 601 provides short-term relief that will allow physicians to continue participating in the Medicare program, preventing an increase in access problems for Medicare beneficiaries. Furthermore it provides Congress ample time to develop and implement long-term reforms of the Medicare physician payment. I would add parenthetically, in my own words, that I would hope we could work together with the minority to fix that terrible, terrible, unfair formula. We received another letter from the Alliance of Specialty Medicine basically saying the same sort of thing in a different way. It is signed by the American Academy of Dermatology Association, American Association of Neurological Surgeons/Congress of Neurological Surgeons, American Association of Orthopedic Surgeons, American College of Cardiology, American College of Emergency Physicians, American College of Radiology Association, American Gastroenterological Association, American Society for Clinical Pathology, American Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology. American Society for Cataract and Refractive Surgery, American Urological Association, National Association of Spine Specialists, Society of Thoracic Surgeons. Mr. Speaker, I would also note, and I hate to put it this way, but if my friends really would like to help America's physicians and, yes, I appreciate the fact that they are on our side in terms of trying to have an increase rather than that great, terrible decrease, then I would recommend that they support, or at least favorably, objectively, open-mindedly look at the balanced liability reform like H.R. 5, which is the HEALTH Act. The gentlewoman from California voted against this legislation. I do not question that she wants to help the providers. I certainly do not. But those people who voted against this legislation, I would like to think they basically did so with a closed mind which America's doctors so desperately, desperately need. I have heard a number of charges that Congress is considering handing Medicare over to the HMOs. That is not what the House did at all in the Medicare reform bill that we passed. What the House did do was to improve the Medicare+Choice program and set up a new system. It has been said that people have been dealt unfairly by virtue of losing their HMO because they moved out. That has happened in my district in Florida, too. I have reprimanded and I have admonished as far as that is concerned but, my gosh, if that is the case, then those programs apparently were liked. They were liked by the particular patients. They are distressed because they have been taken away. Their Representatives are standing on the floor of the House here and complaining that they have been taken away. So there must be some good to them. I am not sure that I would have recommended any of them to my parents, but that is my personal choice. What the House did do was to improve the Medicare+Choice program and set up a new system that will encourage regional plans to offer seniors another choice besides traditional Medicare. It is my hope that this will extend new choices to folks in rural areas who have not had a choice in Medicare before. I talked to the gentlewoman from Florida (Ms. Corrine Brown) on the floor of the House during our last series of votes. We talked about this. I said, what we're basically saying is let's be open-minded. Let's be objective. Let's take a look at new ideas. They may not be any good. There may be some good to them, there may be some bad to them, but let's be open-minded. That is basically what I was pleading. That is what we are trying to do in the conference. We are going back and forth. It is a bipartisan thing. I remember one of the most important gentlemen, the longest in seniority in the House basically calling a particular piece of legislation he introduced bipartisan when there was one Republican who cosponsored that legislation. So he called it bipartisan. We have two Senators in these gatherings. That is pretty darn bipartisan, I would say even more so bipartisan. But what the House did not do, and I would never support, and I very much appreciate the gentleman from Ohio making those comments, is force seniors to leave traditional Medicare. I feel very strongly about that. There are a lot of lengthy, sometimes heated discussions taking place regarding that. Any statements that characterize the House bill in any other way are, I say without any hesitation, 100 percent false. I would have voted, Mr. Speaker, in the mid-sixties, I like to think I would have if I had been in the House at that time, to establish the concept of Medicare. My parents, along with so many others, took advantage of it. They are both gone now. I certainly look forward to retiring one of these days and taking advantage of it. I am concerned that it be a viable system, it is a system that is hurting right now, but be a viable system. The reality that we are all facing and that many folks here in Congress seem to not want to address is that reforms must be made to ensure that Medicare continues to exist. It is a great program. There is no question about it. In my opinion it is. I say that. I do not hesitate. There are faults in it. It has got to be reformed. Anything that has been in effect for something like 40 years has got to be looked at again and possibly some changes made. We have got to ensure that Medicare continues to exist for future generations. As we add a $400 billion benefit, a $400 billion drug benefit to a program that already has, we forget this, do we not, $13 trillion in unfunded liabilities, we have got to take a serious look at how we can place the program on a sound financial footing for the future. The House and the Senate did take different approaches in trying to meet this goal. We are currently working through those differences, but I want to emphasize and what I do want to emphasize, and really emphasize, is that none of those options involve forcing any senior to ever leave traditional Medicare. Conferees are working around the clock, almost literally around the clock. We meet again tomorrow. We will meet Monday and Tuesday, on Veterans Day. My veterans back home will not be happy to hear that, but we will be up here meeting Monday, and we will be meeting on Tuesday and there is a possibility, a very strong probability, we may not have any votes in the House next week, but the conferees will be here as we were during the last few days when we did not have any votes for 3 days during the particular week. We are trying to reach a compromise on this issue. I am hopeful that we will emerge with a conference report that will add a new prescription drug benefit that will be available to all Medicare beneficiaries but be voluntary, provide seniors with new choices under Medicare and reimburse our health care providers, including physicians, fairly, so that beneficiaries will continue to have access to high quality care. Mr. Speaker, the gentlewoman means well, and we have worked well together in the past, but I submit that this motion to instruct will not help us to meet that goal. I urge my colleagues to oppose it. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. BILIRAKIS. Mr. Speaker, will the gentlewoman yield?

Mr. BILIRAKIS. That $6 billion, as I understand it, is in the Senate version. There is no money contemplated in terms of a cost in the House version. But in any case I do not disagree with her on this $6 billion.

Mr. BILIRAKIS

Mr. BILIRAKIS. Mr. Speaker, I rise today with a heavy heart to honor Congressman Bill Cramer, one of our former colleagues who recently passed away. William Cramer, or Bill as he was known, lived a life of public service. He served 18 months as a Naval gunnery officer during World War II and was among the brave young men who invaded France and liberated Europe. He returned to the United States following the war, and after graduating from Harvard Law School, served as a city and county attorney in Pinellas County, Florida. He also actively involved himself with local volunteer and charitable organizations. Bill Cramer was a revolutionary in Florida politics. He was, when he won his seat in 1954, the first Republican from Florida elected to Congress since the Civil War. Congressman Cramer opened the door, so to speak, for Republicans seeking office in the Sunshine State. Before his election, many used to joke that Republicans could not get elected to anything in Florida, let alone a congressional seat. Congressman Cramer changed that and quickly became our party's standard bearer in the state. Congressman Cramer, in just his fifth term, became the ranking member on the House Public Works Committee. In 1964, he became Vice Chairman of the House Republican Conference, the second ranking House Republican behind Michigan Congressman and future President Gerald Ford. He vacated his House seat in 1970 for what ultimately was an unsuccessful bid for the U.S. Senate. One of Congressman Cramer's congressional aides, Appropriations Committee Chairman Bill Young, replaced him as the representative of Florida's Tenth Congressional District. Bill Cramer's public service did not end with his departure from Congress. He practiced law, held various positions with the Republican National Committee, and accepted several jobs in the Nixon and Ford Administrations. He then, as he later said, ``decided he wanted to spend more time back home'' where he grew up, so he returned to Florida where he continued to use his talent and influence to help Tampa Bay area residents. Mr. Speaker, next year marks the fiftieth anniversary of Bill Cramer's election to Congress. I hope that, as we approach that milestone, our colleagues on both sides of the aisle will join the Florida delegation in remembering him and his dedicated work in this institution on behalf of his constituents and his country.

Mr. BILIRAKIS

Mr. BILIRAKIS. Mr. Speaker, I rise proudly to celebrate ``oxi'' day. The historical significance of this day and what it meant to the outcome of World War II cannot be overstated. By October of 1940, World War II had begun and the Nazi war machine was already in high gear. Along with Hitler's ally, Italian dictator Benito Mussolini, the German and Italian forces were threatening the whole of Europe. European nations were bowing to tyranny and destruction as the Germans and the Italians marched through Europe. Great Britain endured German's aerial bombardment, forcing Hitler to seek another avenue to subdue the British. Hitler intended to eliminate British operations in the Mediterranean in order to weaken their ability to deter German advances. To achieve this, Hitler needed the Axis powers to strike at British forces in Greece. By conquering Greece, Hitler would gain access to an important connecting link with Italian bases in the Dodecanese Islands. This would give the Italians a stranglehold on British positions in Egypt where British forces were already facing attack from the Italian Army in North Africa. The British considered the defense of Egypt vital to Allied positions in the oil-rich Middle East. On October 28, 1940, the Italian ambassador in Athens presented an insulting ultimatum to Greek Prime Minister Metaxas, demanding the unconditional surrender of Greece or Italy would declare war and invade Greece. Mussolini had given the Greek Prime Minister Metaxas 3 hours to reply. Prime Minister Metaxas responded with the now historic word ``oxi,'' which means ``no'' in Greek. Italy then invaded. It is important to note that in addition to Greece having a population seven times smaller than Italy, the disparity in their armed forces was even greater. Italy had close to 10 times the firepower of Greece in its army and navy and seven times the troops. Italy's large air force had total air superiority, since Greece had a very small defensive air force. However, despite their lack of equipment, the Greek army proved to be well-trained and resourceful. Within a week of the invasion, it was clear that Italian forces were suffering serious setbacks, despite having control of the air and fielding superior armored vehicles. On November 14, the Greek army launched a counter-offensive and quickly drove the Italian forces back into Albania. The fighting continued for a few more months. In a last ditch effort to bring the war to a close before the Italians would be forced to ask Hitler to intervene, they launched another assault on March 12, 1941. After 6 days of fighting, the Italians made only insignificant gains, and it became clear that German intervention was necessary. On April 6, 1941, Hitler ordered the German invasion of Greece. It took the Germans 5 weeks to finally end the conflict. This delay proved to be critical to the outcome of the war. Due to Mussolini's humiliating defeat by the Greeks in Albania and Greece, Hitler was compelled to capture the Balkans, mainly Yugoslovia and Greece, thus delaying his Barbarossa plan to invade and capture the Soviet Union before the winter of 1941. The Greek resistance, both in Albania and in the other famous battle in Crete, altered, favorably for the allies, his Barbarossa timetable by at least 6 months. Perhaps most importantly, the Germans never gained the advantage against the British. Although Germany had conquered much of Europe, its inability to decimate British and Russian forces early in the war would eventually prove to be fatal. Thanks to the heroic Greek resistance and their countless sacrifices, the war tide had been permanently changed for Hitler due to the delay of this critical timetable. Nearly one million Hellenes died during that time. That was 14 percent of the population in 1940. That is equivalent, Mr. Speaker, to losing 39 million people in this country today in the case of a war to defend our country. The entire Western world, discouraged and fearful of the Axis powers and the growing ugly war, took hope from these incredible victories. British Prime Minister Winston Churchill said of the Greeks, ``Today we say the Greeks fight like heroes; from now on we will say that heroes fight like Greeks.'' A very small number of those Greeks who fought like heroes are still alive today. Some now are American citizens. One of these heroes lives in my Congressional district, Mr. Demetrios Palaskas, who, along with others, has shared those traumatic stories of the mountain fighting by the rag-tag Greeks against such a powerful equipped invader. We all salute you, Mr. Palaskas, you and your many fellow heroes, for helping to keep the world free. Mr. Speaker, ``oxi'' day is an inspiration to all those who cherish democracy and freedom. It marks defiance against terrible odds. As an American of Greek descent, I am proud to honor the memory of those brave patriots who fought for freedom for themselves and ultimately for all the free world on this important day.