Roy Blunt

Mr. BLUNT

Mr. BLUNT. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Chairman, in relation to this, the general topic here of the bill, I mentioned the importance of preparing these ballots in a quick period of time. I know that my friend, the gentleman from Rhode Island (Mr. Langevin), earlier, also a former Secretary of State, questioned whether 45 days was practical or not. I would just like to point out that 10 States already have a time frame that is 45 days or less. Rhode Island is pretty small. A State very close, New York, that is very big, has a 40-day time frame now. Texas has a time frame that is within the 45 days, and eight other States do as well. I certainly think that is a reasonable period of time, particularly in these extraordinary circumstances. I think we would see State election officials not only eager to help reconstitute the House but also encouraging the quick movement in the process of the selection of candidates and the preparation of ballots. Those ballots would then be mailed to military personnel and personnel overseas. And those individuals serving, as the gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Skelton) said, particularly those in the military serving at the point of the spear, would have the time that they would appropriately need to have to respond to this process.

Mr. BLUNT

Mr. BLUNT. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor a man who has distinguished himself as a dedicated and dynamic educator. Kevin Baker of Springfield, Missouri, is not only an eighth grade social studies teacher and basketball coach, but an innovator and motivator. For the past 20 years, Baker has found ingenious ways to recreate American history for his students at Pershing Middle School while motivating them to become responsible, caring individuals. Baker's tireless efforts to help his students meet their full potential helps build active and responsible citizens with unwavering values and discipline. Kevin Baker is perceived by the students and staff of Pershing Middle School as the most patriotic person they have ever met. Everyday he arrives at school adorned in red, white and blue attire and drives a vehicle covered with U.S. flags. But Baker's patriotism is not simply for show. His love for this country is demonstrated each day as he shares his passion for American history. Baker pushes his students to excel academically and socially, and commands respect by his unfailing integrity and enthusiasm. His positive attitude is contagious. Learning social studies is ``fun'' in Kevin Baker's classroom. Every year Baker takes the eighth grade students at Pershing on a field trip to Wilson's Creek National Battlefield. For weeks beforehand, Baker drills his students, transforming them into a well-trained army that marches with wooden muskets to noted battlefield locations. In addition to his efforts to bring the Civil War to life, Baker also organizes and chaperones over 150 students on a trip to Washington, D.C. during Spring Break. This annual trip, which Baker initiated during his first year at Pershing, has long since become an institution. This year will mark his 20th student trip to our Nation's Capital. Kevin Baker not only encourages his students, but also other teachers. His professionalism and expertise as a master educator in social studies is regarded highly by his community. Baker spends his summers planning and writing new Power Point presentations to complement the district's social studies curriculum, and his peers often ask him to share these presentations, as well as other classroom teaching techniques and tools, at district professional development meetings. Kim Finch, the principal at Pershing Middle School, praises Kevin Baker as a bright, inquisitive and multi-talented teacher who enables his students to blossom academically. Finch also commends Baker as a positive role model for both students and staff, practicing daily in his own life what he teaches in the classroom. Springfield and Pershing Middle School are lucky to call Kevin Baker one of their own. He is a valuable and cherished member of our community and nation.

Mr. BLUNT

Mr. BLUNT. Mr. Speaker, I want to talk briefly this morning about what is happening with Medicare. We are approaching a time when seniors will have an option for the transitional card that allows them to have immediate help with their prescription drug benefits. At CMS they are working right now on a plan where seniors will be able to call in, talk about the drugs that they personally are taking, and for that 18 months or so of transition receive the help that they initially can get as we are putting this first major change since 1965 of Medicare into place. Seniors across the country have been waiting for too long for Medicare to cover life-saving prescription drugs, not the fault of this House which for three Congresses now has tried to solve this problem and has voted to solve this problem. In 1965, when President Johnson signed Medicare into law, prescription drugs were not a big part of health care. In 2003, President Bush understood that they had become a big part of health care. The Congress understood that as well, and we have strengthened that program for millions of seniors to be able to rely on new coverage in the future. For the first time in Medicare's history, a prescription drug benefit will be offered to all 40 million seniors and disabled Americans to help them afford the cost of their medicines. No senior has to take this benefit, no senior has to make a choice about changing their Medicare if they do not want to, but this offer is available to all seniors and, again, available to all who have Medicare coverage because of a disability. Americans of all ages can benefit from the creation of health savings accounts, which will give individuals more control over the cost of their health care and access to affordable, flexible coverage; and for the 888,126 beneficiaries in my State of Missouri who will have access to a Medicare prescription drug benefit for the first time in history, help is on the way. In fact, 214,754 Missouri seniors will have drug coverage they otherwise would not have, and almost 270,000 beneficiaries in Missouri who have limited savings and low incomes, generally low income in that case would be for individuals with income below $12,123 a year or for couples with income below $16,232 a year, those individuals have even more benefits. Initially, they get the card for free. They get $600 of credit toward their drug bill on the card that they will receive this year and another $600 next year. They will pay no premium when it comes time for the prescription drug coverage, if they opt to take that coverage; and they will be responsible only for a very small copayment, no more than $2 for generic drugs, $5 for brand-name drugs. For people who have been struggling to pay for the drugs that their doctors told them they needed for their own health, this makes a huge difference in their ability now to have the kind of health care that they deserve, the kind of health care that is available, the kind of health care that will be covered under Medicare. Mr. Speaker, all these numbers add up to savings. They add up to access to life-saving drugs. They add up to better health care for seniors of this country. This is a huge and important change. I am pleased that this House could be part of it, that our friends on the other side of the building would join us and that the President signed this important legislation into law.

Mr. BLUNT

Mr. BLUNT. Mr. Speaker, like many other Members who voted for the addition of prescription drugs to Medicare and Medicare reform on both sides of the aisle, I have been out in my district talking to people about this first significant change in Medicare in 38 years. What I am finding is a tremendous reception to the changes we have made: The prescription drug card that will be available in June where people can call in and find out, based on the medicines they take, which card is best for them; the significant assistance to low-income seniors who not only get that card for free but also get $600 of credit on that card; and as we move into the full Medicare program in 2006, get their premiums paid if they choose to get their premiums paid. But, of course, as you are dealing with seniors and many of us who are not all that comfortable with change, the most important thing you can say is, You don't have to do anything if you don't want to, but you can look at these new options and see if these options are better for you than what you've got. If they aren't better for you than what you've got or you just don't want to change, you don't have to. The addition of prescription drugs to Medicare brings Medicare in line with medicine. It is about time, Mr. Speaker. I am glad we did it.

Mr. BLUNT

Mr. BLUNT. Mr. Speaker, today as we debate this resolution, I am more convinced than ever that our country's leadership in removing Saddam Hussein from power was both morally and strategically right. Saddam Hussein left no choice but for us to act. He systematically violated 17 separate U.N. Security Council resolutions. The U.N. chose not to act. He tried to conceal from the international community his desire to produce weapons of mass destruction. In November of 1999, our Secretary of State, Madeleine Albright, said that Saddam Hussein has chosen to spend his money on weapons of mass destruction and palaces for his cronies. No doubt David Kay was correct when he called Saddam a gathering threat during a recent congressional hearing. If you do not believe Mr. Kay, maybe we should ask the families of the thousands of Kurds Saddam gassed in 1988 or ask the first U.N. weapons inspectors who prior to 1998 revealed the presence of anthrax, mustard gas, VX nerve gas, chemical weapons casings, and bombs filled with germ agents. These weapons remain unaccounted for today. Saddam Hussein's regime's support of numerous other terror organizations is well documented. Iraq stoked terrorism and instigated violence in Palestinian territories by paying the families of suicide bombers $25,000 for attacking innocent civilians. Iraq harbored the notorious Abu Nidal, whose terror organization carried out more dozens of terrorist attacks in 20 countries that killed and injured nearly 900 people including many Americans. Iraq harbored Abu Abbas who was responsible for the Achille Lauro. Iraq also incorporated the MEK terrorist organization into its own military and security forces. Since Saddam's fall, Libya voluntarily opened its weapons program to inspectors. Pakistan is now taking overdue action to reign in its nuclear proliferators. And very importantly, the emergence of a pluralist and democratic Iraq is forcing the region to undertake democratic and social reforms which will enhance stability throughout the Middle East. Iraq has a bright future. Not every day is a bright day, but every day moves closer to constitutional government and democracy. On March 8, the governing council approved an interim constitution. Took us a lot longer to do that in our country. A sovereign government will assume authority for Iraq, we hope, later this year, later this summer even. There is plenty of work left to be done. But I think as we move this resolution today, we appropriately commend those who led this fight, the Iraqi people, for their incredible courage and optimism in the face of unspeakable horrors, and the proud men and women who serve us in the United States Armed Forces. For the reasons I just mentioned, along with many other reasons, I voted with the vast majority of my colleagues in 1998 in favor of the Iraq Liberation Act, which made it the policy of the Untied States that Saddam Hussein should be removed from power. And I commend the President for his leadership in taking action on this policy. And, Mr. Speaker, as a result of this action, there is no question that the United States and the world are safer. Decisive coalition action against this brutal dictator and his WMD programs has demonstrated our resolve. To name a few specific examples: First, in the weeks and months after the war, Colonel Gadhafi's regime in Libya voluntarily opened up its weapons program to inspectors after considering the cost of defying the United States and its partners in the war on terrorism; second, Pakistan is now taking overdue action to rein in its nuclear proliferators and, as a result, the network of illicit WMD suppliers is becoming more clear; last, Mr. Speaker, and this is very important, the emergence of a pluralist and democratic Iraq is forcing regional autocrats to undertake much-needed democratic and social reforms, which will lead to greater stability in a tumultuous region. For the first time in their lives, Iraqis will be guaranteed a free and fair election process, a Bill of Rights, and an independent judiciary; ideals which we here in America take for granted. All Iraqis, most notably Iraqi women, now have freedoms and rights they could have only dreamed of after a generation spent under Saddam's reign of terror. And more than 200,000 Iraqis have been trained and equipped by coalition forces to provide for the security, not the repression, of the Iraqi people. To be sure, there is plenty of work left to be done in Iraq. A society of terror and repression does not transform into a free and stable democracy overnight. But we must have faith in the Iraqi people. Early in our own Nation's history, regional and racial schisms threatened to tear the United States apart. Although the parallel is not perfect, many of Iraq's challenges today resemble those of early America as Iraq struggles to secure peaceful borders, build institutions, and draft a working democratic constitution in the face of great odds. The United States and the new Iraqi government must be strong allies in the war against terror, the effort to halt the proliferation of WMDs, and the ongoing struggles to bring fundamental human rights to all people. No other modern nation's people understand the need for these efforts like the people of Iraq. The normalization of relations with Iraq will provide us with opportunities to work closely with our Iraqi friends. I urge my colleagues to meet and work with Rend Rahim, the Representative to the United States from the Iraqi Governing Council, and who under the new sovereign government will become Iraqi Ambassador to the United States. Representative Rahim left Baghdad as a young woman in the 1970s. In 1991 she founded the Iraq Foundation and has become well-known as a passionate advocate for democracy in her homeland. In her new role she will work tirelessly toward fostering and maintaining the relationship between the United States and a free and democratic Iraq. Mr. Speaker, we must be prepared to stay the course in Iraq, to overcome the terrorists and Ba'athists who fear democratic principles, and to put forth the necessary resources to demonstrate to the Iraqis and to the world that the United States will always remain committed to a free and secure Iraq. I commend the President and our coalition allies for their leadership in deposing Saddam Hussein, a brutal dictator who procured and employed weapons of mass destruction, repressed and tortured his people, and actively encouraged global terrorists with financial rewards. I commend the Iraqi people for their incredible courage and prevailing optimism in the face of horrors you and I cannot imagine. And I commend the proud men and women of the United States armed forces, who have proven once again that when called upon in defense of freedom, their effectiveness is unmatched anywhere in the world.

Mr. BLUNT

Mr. BLUNT. Mr. Chairman, with any luck, a future member of the chairman's subcommittee. Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the great work the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Upton) did on this bill, bringing this bill to the floor at this time. I also want to say how much I appreciate the gentleman from Texas (Chairman Barton), the new chairman of our committee, moving quickly to get this legislation to the floor, and also to join my colleagues in our appreciation for and our concern about our former chairman, the gentleman from Louisiana (Mr. Tauzin), as he and his family deal with a health crisis right now. Mr. Chairman, I think this bill is a bill that we need to do. The gentleman's amendment is one that improves the bill and clarifies the process through which people would have to go if they are subject to the penalties of the bill. I think the penalties here, the enhanced penalties we heard from many, many people, that the current penalties just are not a deterrent. Not only are the penalties now more in the range that they become a real thing for people who are given custody, temporary custody, of the airwaves to think about, but there is also the possibility they could actually lose their license if they become repeat offenders. Anybody can have something happen on one occasion that they do not expect to happen, do not anticipate happening, do not approve, are embarrassed by, but the gentleman's bill makes the case that these airwaves do belong to the American people, that this is commercial airspace. If repeatedly somebody chooses to try to benefit financially by what they put on the air that goes beyond the bounds of decency, goes beyond their agreement when they are given custody and right to use these airwaves, I think this bill and the gentleman's clarifying amendment is an amendment that the House needs to deal with. We all know that it was the Super Bowl half-time show that sort of brought this issue to everybody's attention in this current context, but we also know that if you watched the Super Bowl, if you were watching sort of halfway as I was the half-time show, that we see so much there drifting beyond where we need to be in family entertainment. There are plenty of opportunities in other kinds of entertainment that are not on the airwaves used by commercial television and radio for that. I appreciate the gentleman's hard work in bringing this bill to the floor in such important and quick fashion, and I rise to support the bill and the gentleman's important amendment to it.

Mr. BLUNT

Mr. BLUNT. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor a man who has distinguished himself in southwest Missouri by his commitment to improving our manufacturing sector and expanding our markets abroad. Jack T. Gentry of Springfield, MO, is a builder, creator, innovator, and motivator. He has worked aggressively to give manufacturers a voice in their community and government. Ten years ago, he was the driving force in creating the Springfield Area Manufacturers Association (SAMA), the region's first manufacturer's association, and then served as its president. In September 2002, SAMA broadened its focus to include 40 manufacturers throughout southwest Missouri, and the name was changed to the Southwest Area Manufacturers Association. Today the organization represents more than 60 manufacturing companies. The association's mission and Jack Gentry's aim is to represent the economic, political, educational, and social interests of southwest Missouri area manufacturers and their employees, while promoting the betterment of the local economy and the environment, as well as the well being of the manufacturing industry in southwest Missouri. Jack Gentry has always been ahead of manufacturing trends and issues. More than a decade ago, Jack and the Manufacturing Association began taking action on issues that are center stage in manufacturing today. With his leadership, the Association developed awareness programs about how to find, create, and train a literate labor force. The association contributed $37,000 to public schools for technology and provided career awareness opportunities for high school students by hosting plant tours, internships, and school-to-work initiatives. In 1993, Positronic Industries, Jack's company and a founding SAMA member, began working with the U.S. Department of Labor and Ozarks Technical Community College to develop company-paid apprenticeships in order to meet the need for a skilled workforce. To date, 128 employees have completed their training in nine areas and received Department of Labor certification. The association also initiated discussion about the impact of taxes, workers' compensation, and health care costs on the manufacturing sector with government leaders. It was the first time in southwest Missouri that manufacturers spoke with a unified voice about their concerns. Positronic Industries, founded by Jack in 1966, embodies his manufacturing philosophy--work smart, expand markets, keep ahead of trends, and deliver a reliable, dependable product. The bedrock of that philosophy is a workforce of skilled employees. Positronic employs 800 individuals worldwide manufacturing high performance, high reliability electronic connectors in ten facilities located throughout southwest Missouri, Puerto Rico, France, and Singapore. In the face of adversity, Jack has demonstrated repeatedly both his commitment to his employees and his refusal to quit. When the Positonic plant in Rogersville, MO, was destroyed by fire in 1983, Jack promised to rebuild and put the 200 employees back to work quickly. He kept his promise. In 6 weeks, the plant was back in full production with full employment. In the two decades that followed, Jack's superior management skills enabled Positronic to flourish in an unpredictable economic environment. At the same time, Jack gave his time and energy to benefit those following in his manufacturing legacy. During his service on several boards and agencies, he has offered the government invaluable advice on policy and practices. Over the course of his career, Jack has served as a Technical Advisor on Electromechanical Components for Electronic Equipment to the International Electrotechnical Commission, which sets worldwide standards for electronic equipment, and as the Secretariat of the International Electrotechnical Commission committee. In addition, he has been appointed to the Industry Sector Advisory Committee, which establishes policy for imports and exports for electronic components and was chairman of the Rectangular Connector Committee for the Electronic Industries. Jack Gentry is a member of the President's Council of the National Association of Manufacturers and a strong advocate for American goods in the international market. He will be honored for his work and leadership by the Southwest Area Manufacturers Association on February 18, 2004, and awarded lifetime honorary membership in SAMA as President Emeritus. These honors are a fitting tribute to Jack Gentry's untiring effort to advance manufacturing, expand markets and improve the economies of southwest Missouri and the United States.

Mr. BLUNT

Mr. BLUNT. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to a Southwest Missouri golf legend who has joined Sam Snead, Gene Sarazen, and Ben Hogan on that first tee in the sky. Herman Keiser, a native of Springfield, MO, passed away December 24, 2003, at the age of 89. His death marked the end of a wonderful career as a golf professional, who in 1946, after a 31-month tour of duty in the U.S. Navy fighting World War II, won the 1946 Masters, a golf event that has been held at Augusta National Golf Club since its inception in 1934. Mr. Keiser began his golfing career as an assistant golf professional at Portage Country Club in Portage, OH. Shortly after his arrival, he became the head golf professional at Firestone Country Club in Akron, OH, which hosted the World Series of Golf just this past year as well as numerous PGA and Champion Tour events. The highlight of his career came when in 1946 Herman Keiser found himself on the first tee at Augusta National Golf Club preparing to play in a tournament founded by legendary Bobby Jones and won twice by Horton Smith. In fact, he had the pleasure of playing some practice rounds with Horton Smith prior to the first round of the tournament. During these cherished moments, Smith gave Keiser some very important tips that enabled him to read the difficult greens at Augusta. After three rounds of golf, Keiser found himself 5 strokes ahead of legendary golfer Ben Hogan. Others in the field included the likes of Byron Nelson and Sam Snead. In his final round, Keiser shot a 74 which placed him at 6 under for the tournament. He was emotionally and physically spent and waited to see what Hogan would do after Keiser three-putted the 18th hole for his 74. All Hogan had to do was par the 18th hole, a very difficult Par 4 dogleg right. His second shot landed 12 feet from the hole where Hogan three putted giving Keiser the win that he so deserved. Keiser had remembered what Horton Smith had told him during the practice round. Unfortunately for Hogan, he did not have the same lesson. For Keiser, his 1946 win was ``the greatest thing that ever happened to me.'' In 1947, Keiser continued his golfing excellence by becoming a member of the successful Ryder Cup team that defeated Britain 11 to 1. Shortly after the team's success, Keiser returned to Ohio, where he purchased a driving range and became a life member of the Professional Golfers' Association of America. Mr. Speaker, Herman Keiser came from Springfield, MO, to carve a small place for himself in the history of professional golf. He lived a wonderful life and contributed much to the game of golf. He will always be remembered in my home State and will be missed.

Mr. BLUNT

Mr. BLUNT. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to urge support for the Rural Disaster Liaison Bill (H.R. 3157). This past May, my district saw devastating losses in the aftermath of a series of tornadoes. Estimates indicate that our agriculture community in southwest Missouri lost an estimated $27 billion in damages. On the ground at home following those tornadoes, I noticed that the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) had no staff in the statewide disaster field office (DFO) where officials from FEMA and the Small Business Administration were helping individuals and business owners. Because Disaster Act declarations make no arrangements for a USDA representative, a single voice from USDA was noticeably absent on the ground in Southwest Missouri during disaster response discussions in the days and weeks after those terrible tornadoes. This legislation will bring greater coordination from the USDA's three major agencies--Natural Resources Conservation Service, the Farm Service Agency and Rural Development--by requiring that a liaison from USDA be a member of future Federal disaster response teams. This individual would be dispatched to a disaster to work side-by-side with representatives from the local Farm Service Agency (FSA) for 30 days to help find relief for those disaster victims. Once the 30 days are up, the liaison will return to his or her post in Washington, DC, and continue to work on behalf of the farmers and others who need the services that the USDA provides. Mr. Speaker, I hope that a disaster response team is never necessary in any of the districts my colleagues represent. However, should disaster strike, let's make sure that our agriculture communities are represented and that they get the help they deserve in a prompt fashion. I urge my colleagues to support the passage of H.R. 3157.

Mr. BLUNT

Mr. BLUNT. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to commend the Students In Free Enterprise (SIFE) 2003 World Cup Champion Team from Drury University in Springfield, Missouri. These exceptional university students demonstrated on an international stage what it means to practice free enterprise with common sense in a socially and ethically responsible manner. Drury University's SIFE team prepared both a live presentation and a written report of their activities over the past year and competed against students from 30 countries to receive this prestigious award. A panel of 18 international business leaders, including representatives from KPMG, Wal-Mart, Sara Lee and Pepsi-Co, named Drury University's SIFE Team World Cup Champions for the second time in three years. SIFE students are making a positive impact in their community and beyond, through service projects that teach entrepreneurship, market economics, ethics and financial responsibility to struggling business owners, school children and economically disadvantaged individuals. By applying the concepts they are learning in the classroom to everyday life, they are taking the guesswork out of economic theory. Drury University's SIFE team worked on a number of projects over the past year, helping high school students develop a t-shirt company that is self-sustaining and student-run. The Drury team also established an entrepreneurial camp to teach young people in southwest Missouri's growing Hispanic communities the entrepreneurial skills needed to develop their own businesses. Drury University SIFE team volunteered more than 5,000 hours of service to their community last year. The students at Drury, however, are not alone. SIFE teams around the world engaged in hundreds of thousands of hours of community service, impacting millions of people. Too often, the energy and idealism of our youth are never fully utilized. In SIFE, young people are given an opportunity to contribute meaningfully to their society. It is encouraging to see bright, passionate college and university students work to ``change the world'' with a common sense approach that stimulates economic empowerment. Mr. Speaker, I commend the achievements of Alvin Rohrs, the President and CEO of Students In Free Enterprise, and his team of co-workers at the SIFE World Headquarters in Springfield, Missouri. His leadership has enabled SIFE to plant the seeds of free enterprise on campuses across our nation and around the world. Mr. Rohrs and his team work tirelessly to ensure the principles of free enterprise are firmly rooted in the hearts and minds of college and university students on more than 1,500 campuses worldwide. By encouraging social entrepreneurship among SIFE students, Mr. Rohrs and his staff have fostered real change in countries around the globe. In Ghana, SIFE teams taught impoverished villagers how to make and market soap from locally available resources. For the first time in that community, money now changes hands, and the people who live there have a source of income. Alvin Rohrs and his team are also supporting programs in places where free enterprise education is rare. In China, a SIFE team is helping managers of a state-owned enterprise privatize the business and develop a plan for success in the face of an emerging market economy. The success of SIFE has been well documented by both the national and international business community. Business and industry leaders frequently participate in SIFE competitions, judging SIFE teams and scouting future business leaders. They see and understand the importance of SIFE to the economic future of our nation and our world, as we all learn to compete in a global market that emphasizes education and communication. Mr. Speaker, I want to congratulate the students from Drury University's SIFE team. These students may be completing their studies on a small campus in southwest Missouri, but they are making a difference. Along with their peers in 37 countries, these young people are changing the world, one person, one community and one project at a time.

Mr. BLUNT

Mr. BLUNT. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of an important initiative undertaken by the National Association of Broadcasters and the Armed Forces Relief Trust. With over 140,000 troops stationed in Iraq, in Afghanistan, and around the world, military families' budgets are stretched thin. In many cases, the personnel deployed are the sole breadwinners for their family, making it difficult to cope with unexpected expenses. Last year, the relief agencies for each branch of the military raised and distributed over $109 million in assistance to military families in need. This year, with the support of the National Association of Broadcasters and its local radio and television station members, the four relief agencies have come together to form the Armed Forces Relief Trust. In support of that effort--and to help respond to the escalating needs of military families, the NAB and its 6,000 radio station and 1,000 television station members have produced, distributed and aired Public Service Announcements to raise monies for the Trust. Considering recent events in Iraq, I think Americans everywhere are looking for ways to support our troops. The AFRT provides valuable services to the family members of our brave men and women who are fighting terrorism abroad. The program pays for airfare so personnel can fly home to the funeral of a loved one. It provides needed medical attention for the spouses of military personnel. It can help offset the cost of college tuition for the child of a soldier. While the military is dedicated to taking care of its own, the needs will only continue to escalate as the length of deployments stretch out. The Trust can help make up for some of the shortfall. By providing access to the airwaves, local television and radio stations are supporting what I believe to be an important and timely cause. I'm therefore well aware that deployments are not only emotionally trying for military families, but financially trying as well. I therefore commend the AFRT for providing needed relief to these families and the National Association of Broadcasters for helping get out the word.

Mr. BLUNT

Mr. BLUNT. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this time, and I rise in support of the rule. We have had hours of debate on this legislation. It started 3 days ago. There have been plenty of opportunities to discuss what needs to happen and what this House needs to do. Our appropriators have done a great job. They have asked the hard questions. The gentleman from California (Chairman Lewis) and the gentleman from Florida (Chairman Young) in the subcommittee and in the full committee have asked questions. We have not given the President everything he asked for, because part of our job is to put the difficult questions to the administration and try our best to do the right thing. We all know the right thing here is to continue to work for peace and freedom in Iraq. The international community is beginning to respond. This is exactly the moment when this House should step forward, when our country should step forward and show we have a commitment that will not stop. The message we send to others in the international community who can help needs to be sent today. The message we send to the donor conference to meet later this month is important that we send and we send it strongly and clearly. Iraq is not a nation that needs to be saddled down with debt that they cannot deal with. The President has asked us to make a commitment not just to bullets and ammunition, but to the basic services that keep our troops alive. I had someone from St. Louis in my office the other day; and as he was leaving, talking about a totally different topic, he pulled out a picture of his son in his pilot's outfit who is in Iraq and said, all of the money the President asked for will keep my kid alive. So this is a country where people have not had basic services for 25 or 30 years. But for the last 25 or 30 years when they came up and they were mad in the morning and they got out on the streets, the tyrants that worked for Saddam Hussein just killed them or put them in jail. We do not do that any longer. We can make a commitment to the fundamental infrastructure of this society. We can make a commitment to our troops. We need to do that here today. Afghanistan and Iraq are now central to the war on terrorism. This is a war that we all knew months ago would not be over in a short period of time. We have to engage the terrorists where they are. We have to show the kind of resolve that the world respects and people in all parts of the world respect. Mr. Speaker, it is not just the American soldier and sailor, Marine and airman who is a target in Iraq; it is anyone who wants to bring stability to that country. It is policemen in their headquarters. It is Iraqi policemen lined up to get their paychecks. It is a Muslim cleric who sends signals he wants to work with us for peace and stability. We need to do what we can to win this war on terror, and an important part of that is to show our commitment to those who live in the center of this most dangerous part of the world. The committee has brought a product that allows us to do that. We do not need to continue to debate this for more than 3 days. This debate has gone on for hours. I urge not only support of this rule, but quick and speedy action that sends a message to the world; and that action needs to happen today.

Mr. BLUNT

Mr. BLUNT. Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the gentleman from Maryland's work on getting this bill out of committee unanimously and the fact that it is totally included in his substitute. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Washington (Ms. Dunn).

Mr. BLUNT. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Sam Johnson), a member of the Committee on Ways and Means and a leader on this issue. (Mr. SAM JOHNSON of Texas asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. BLUNT. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, let me say, as we look at this substitute again, that this is a substitute that really encompasses the bill and that suggests we add other things to the bill that I think can be better handled in other pieces of legislation. The effort to work with the Treasury Department and the administration on tax shelters is in a bill which should be before the committee at any time. The social services block grant, I think, better fits another bill. This is a bill about charitable giving. It is a tax bill. We specifically eliminated the things about program delivery from a similar bill that the House passed last year because we wanted to focus on charitable giving. We did not want to focus on other programs. We wanted our focus to be on those things that changed the character of our communities because they encouraged people to assist others in their community. The House passed bills that really give the States $20 billion already, $10 billion is for Medicare costs, and $10 billion is totally flexible to the States. There is another $9 billion that is available to the States because of unspent TANF funds and welfare reform funds. That is $19 billion States could spend for these purposes. This bill is well within the amount of money we set aside this year in the budget, which I think all of the proponents of the substitute probably also oppose the budget; but the budget did pass, and it set aside money for tax relief. This is tax relief that does not just cost the Federal Government money, but it truly does encourage people to invest their money in the things they care about, in the charities they care about, in the communities they care about, in the individuals and families they care about that are assisted there. That is what this bill is about. This bill is not about trying to codify some very technical tax policy retroactive or not that, as I understand it, not being a member of the Committee on Ways and Means, as I understand the tax policy, would suggest that it is interpreted differently in almost every circuit of the country, you cannot invest money or spend money if you are a business that you would not invest in if the Tax Code did not exist. Most businesses wish the Tax Code did not exist, but it does exist and it does affect the bottom line. It does affect decisionmaking. How many Americans would buy a home if there was no Tax Code incentive to buy that home? Do we want to say we cannot make any decisions in the country, make it illegal to make any decisions in the country based on tax policy? How many decisions are made by Americans every single day based upon the tax policy of the country? This is a very complicated thing. It does not belong on this bill. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to yield the balance of my time to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Sam Johnson), and that as a member of the Committee on Ways and Means, he may control that time.

Mr. BLUNT. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time. Amendment in the Nature of a Substitute Offered by Mr. Cardin

Mr. BLUNT. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from Connecticut (Mrs. Johnson).

Mr. BLUNT. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Wilson), my colleague and assistant whip.

Mr. BLUNT. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Pence). (Mr. PENCE asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. BLUNT. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased that the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Portman) and the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Camp), the next speaker, have done such a good job to get this bill to the floor. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Camp).

Mr. BLUNT. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Portman).

Mr. BLUNT. I thank the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Sam Johnson) for yielding me this time and for being here to represent the committee on this bill. I want to thank the committee for voting the bill out of committee unanimously and my chief cosponsor the gentleman from Tennessee (Mr. Ford) and all of the other bipartisan cosponsors that have gotten behind this bill. This will make a difference in the charitable community. I am confident that our commitment to this bill will be so great today that we will be able to move quickly to a conference, quickly to the President's desk and begin to see the impact of this bill right away. Certainly I urge my colleagues to reject the substitute, reject any further efforts to delay this measure. Let us get this bill passed today, get it headed toward a final conclusion and toward the President's desk.

Mr. BLUNT. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I am glad to be here to talk about this bill. This is a tax bill. It is a tax bill that really is an important step toward what we do for charities in this country. It is an important step in the President's faith-based agenda; but certainly as a tax bill that encourages charitable giving, all that giving is not necessarily done to faith-based institutions. This has broad bipartisan support. I am pleased with the way the Committee on Ways and Means dealt with this bill and brought this bill to the floor without any dissenting votes on Tuesday of last week. The gentleman from Tennessee (Mr. Ford), a cosponsor of the bill, worked hard on this bill; and we have over 80 bipartisan House cosponsors working with us on this bill. The truth is our charities need some encouragement. They have faced some difficult times. 2001 was the first year that charitable giving in this country was lower than the year before. Giving in 2002 seems to continue to reflect that trend. Corporate giving fell by almost 15 percent between 2000 and 2001. As we look towards what this does for charities generally, we can also look at what it does for faith-based charities which are so important in providing services in the country. Seventy-five percent of the food pantries in America are run by religious organizations, 71 percent of the food kitchens are faith based, 43 percent of the shelters are run by the faith-based community. This act really allows those who give to charity more ways to give and encourages them to give in new ways. This is a change in the Tax Code that has impact. In fact, the Congressional Budget Office estimate of the impact of this bill would indicate that $45 to $50 billion more will be given to charities over the next 10 years if this bill becomes law than would be given to charities if this bill does not become law. There are many things, particularly as charities reach out to individuals in need, food kitchens, shelters, food pantries, where the charity has proved to be such a compassionate way to deal with this problem with the most impact. Clearly the family unit intact is the best way to provide services to people. After that I think we could have a debate that my side would win advocating that when charities step in, they are almost always more compassionate, quicker, more cost effective, and get out more of the money available to them, and get help sooner and quicker and more effectively than any other way to do this. Of course, where both the family has failed, where individuals through the church and community have not been able to do the job, there is a place for government programs. But there is a clear place for charities. Let me talk about two or three things in this bill that make a difference in terms of how millions of Americans are affected. Eighty- six million Americans do not itemize their taxes, but of those 86 million Americans, many give money every week, every month, every year to a church or charity. The bill of the gentleman from Tennessee (Mr. Ford) and my bill changes the Tax Code in a way that lets those people who give to church and charity have credit for some of the giving that they do to church and charity. Just like people who itemize their taxes, they have to demonstrate that they did make that gift, but this treats them differently from the people who do not itemize their taxes and do not give. This really does reward giving for individuals and couples. The second big area of impact of the bill, I believe, will be the changes we make in those resources and how we deal with those resources that people have in IRAs. There are $2.5 trillion in the country today in IRAs. Many people, as they begin to utilize their IRAs, suddenly realize they do not have enough money in their IRAs to do all of the things that they would like to do; but many people realize through some good fortune in investing, an extraordinary commitment to funding their IRA, through that and the other things they have done providing for their retirement, their IRA is a big resource of money that they do not need or are not likely to need all of. Today, the tax consequences of gifting IRAs are such that almost none of that money is given to charity or faith-based charities. The change in this bill removes the tax obstacle from giving that money. After people reach the age of 70\1/2\ and begin to evaluate their resources and the need for those resources, suddenly that $2.5 trillion out there in IRAs is available for gifting potential. If we talk to our friends who raise money for their local college or university, for the Red Cross, for the blood center, for whatever it would be, they would say that this portion of the bill is the portion that they look to which has the greatest opportunity to change giving in the future. We raise the cap on corporate charitable contributions over the next 10 years from 10 percent that could be gifted of profits to 20 percent of profits. We extend current incentives for food donations to apply to even more farmers, more restaurants, more retailers, more wholesalers. We allow value added to those products to have a greater value in gifting than it has today. This bill reauthorizes a program which allows low-income working Americans the opportunity to build assets through matching savings accounts, known as IDAs, which can be used to purchase a home, expand educational opportunity, or to start a small business. This bill provides $150 million a year for a compassion capital fund to assist small community and faith-based organizations who want to start a charitable outreach to do that, to set up their organization or to expand their capacity to serve. This encourages conservation by private landowners by requiring certain Federal grant money for conservation be treated as tax free. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1\1/3\ minutes to the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Ryan) to respond to one statement made by the gentleman from California (Mr. Stark).

Mr. BLUNT. Mr. Speaker, I am sure the gentleman knows we sent that legislation to the Senate already. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2\1/2\ minutes to the gentlewoman from Connecticut (Mrs. Johnson). Mrs. JOHNSON from Connecticut. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me time. This is a very important bill that we are considering today. It allows people to contribute more to their local United Way agencies, their local YWCAs, their local church programs, that it can be very effectively focused on serving the families and individuals, meeting the needs of people in their own community. That is what is so wonderful about charitable giving. So this is an important bill that we need to move forward. I am a very strong advocate of the social services block grant. I am glad in this bill we do reaffirm by law that States will have the right to transfer 10 percent of their TANF money to other purposes. Now, in the appropriations bill earlier this year, we dropped that to 5 percent. So it is significant that we beef that back up in this law and the States do routinely use this transfer capability to better fund whatever programs they think are important to them. And for many States this is the way they use all of their TANF money and for many States they actually do not use all of their TANF money. There are some that use all of their TANF money and this social services block grant expansion is extremely important for that reason. On the other hand, the Senate bill does have an expansion in it and in conference we will be able to work on that. The problem with this bill is that it moves forward on an issue that we need to move forward in conference on, but it does it by adopting a pay-for that is real an unwise pay-for. The provisions in this bill that try to deal with tax shelters would put forward a whole new concept as one of its tests, the concept of a risk-free rate of return. Now, we have had trouble implementing the tax shelter law. The States at first interpreted some of the provisions of that law in varied ways. They are now moving toward consistent interpretation. We are now moving toward consistency in the courts, and so this is a particularly bad time to now change the law, putting in a concept that has had no judicial interpretation and is not in and of itself clear; that is, the concept of a risk-free rate of return. In addition, our own Assistant Secretary of the Treasury, Pam Olson, has stated that codifying the economic substance doctrine could be counterproductive and would drive tax shelters further underground. We have a solution to this problem in the American Jobs Creation Act, H.R. 2896, and I urge the body to solve this problem at that time and oppose the motion to recommit.

Mr. BLUNT. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Souder). (Mr. SOUDER asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)