Tammy Baldwin

Ms. BALDWIN

Ms. BALDWIN. Mr. Speaker, I rise to today to recognize American Family Insurance, which was founded in Madison, Wisconsin 75 years ago today on October 3, 1927. American Family Insurance was originally founded as Farmers Mutual by Herman Wittwer. Its mission was to sell auto insurance to low-risk farmers. The first policyholder paid $15.22 for his annual premium, which was 25 percent less than the going rate. It did not take long for Farmers Mutual to become the fastest growing insurance company in Wisconsin. (As time went by, Farmers Mutual expanded its market and product line and changed its name to American Family Insurance.) Today, American Family is Madison's largest private employer and largest company as measured by annual revenue. It provides jobs to 3,500 employees in Madison and 7,500 employees across 17 states. American Family Insurance is the tenth largest property/casualty insurance company in nation and the fourth largest mutual insurance company. At the ranking of 337, it is Dane County's only listing on the Fortune 500. I am proud that through all of American Family's growth and expansion, the company has remained true to its Madison and Wisconsin roots. The company has shown its commitment to the area through its community giving and involvement. American Family donates more than $1 million annually to groups and organizations that help enhance quality of life and provide opportunities for everyone in our communities. Congratulations on 75 great years.

Ms. BALDWIN

Ms. BALDWIN. Mr. Speaker, I am most honored to be a member of the Committee on the Budget, and I want to commend the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Spratt) and the other members of our committee this evening for laying out what I think is a critical message at a moment of critical importance. I came to this Congress just about 4 years ago at a moment of what I regarded as real opportunity. I was excited about the fact that we were whittling away at the deficit and, in fact, on this upswing towards surplus. We were really paying down our national debt, and things were going in an extraordinarily hopeful direction. I viewed the moment that I came to Congress as an opportunity to start responding to some unmet challenges in this Nation. Perhaps we could call it righting the domestic wrongs that still exist. Well, clearly, we are now in a very, very different time. We are now looking at deficits for as far as the eye can see and squandering an opportunity which I think has been squandered for a wide multiplicity of reasons, but a number of them have to do with ill-advised policies enacted by the majority in this last 2 years. My constituents are worried. My constituents are very concerned about the country's economic security. They are worried about their family's financial security; they are worried about their retirement security; they are worried about their health security. Mr. Speaker, looking at chart 8, I want to just talk about the direction that we are going in, and I think this is subtitled, what should be going down is going up, and what should be going up is going down. If my role this evening is nothing else, I know that my colleagues laid a good groundwork on the big picture. I want to really localize this issue. I want to put a face on what is happening with our economy and the stewardship that we are not seeing of it right now. I want to focus right in on that second one on that list, the health care costs, because I cannot spend a moment in my district in Wisconsin without hearing the incredible concerns that people have. Whether it is a small businessowner who talks not about double digit increases, but sometimes 40, 50 percent health insurance increases; or a person who has just gone through a bargaining session with their employer and their entire cost-of-living increase has been wiped out by the health care costs; or whether it is one of my self-employed farmers who, at times of historic low commodity prices, can hardly afford, and many are not covering, their families any longer with health insurance because of the costs; whether it is the senior citizen who is struggling, once again, to try to figure out how to maintain their health, extend their life with a needed medication, but they cannot either afford that or maintain their other basic necessities; or whether it is the total lack of attention in this Congress on the plight of the uninsured and the underinsured. These are the people, these are the faces, these are the impacts that are being felt by the economic situation that we find ourselves in. Mr. Speaker, I can tell my colleagues that my constituents are asking questions. They are asking, What is on the congressional agenda? Why are you spending all of your time passing senses of the House and telling the other body what they should or should not be doing when we have an economic situation here in the country that needs your attention, that needs addressing immediately? The inactivity, the inaction on the part of the majority of this House is inexcusable at this time of great stress and great tension and great anxiety in our districts, and we have to see that turn around.

Ms. BALDWIN

Ms. BALDWIN. Mr. Speaker, today we gather here in Federal Hall to honor and recognized the courage and determination of the survivors of the horrible terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001. It is fitting that we do so. It was here in Federal Hall that the new Congress of the United States first met in 1789 to govern our new Nation. It was here in New York that our founding fathers passed the laws that are the foundation for our democratic political system. From this solid foundation, our Nation has grown and prospered. Our people have excelled in science, in the humanities, in art and culture. We have grown to be a great Nation, home to a great people, with tremendous hopes and incredible dreams for the future. And it all began right here in Federal Hall. One year ago, terrorists attacked America. Their targets were not simply the buildings they destroyed and the people they murdered. They were attacking the very ideals that define what it means to be an American. They wanted to drive us apart and make us afraid. Mr. Speaker, I am proud to say that they failed. Faced with tragedy and destruction, the people of the United States, and particularly the people of New York, came together as one community. We gathered the emotional resources to survive and heal, and we pulled together the financial resources to rebuild. This has not been easy. It takes incredible courage to move forward after a tragedy like 9-11. But we did find that courage within ourselves. That is why it is so fitting that we are here in New York today. One year after September 11, we are rededicating our Nation. The terrorists have not won. They have lost. Our Nation is stronger and more united. Our freedom, our courage, our determination, our unity, our diversity, our charity and our democracy are our strengths. New York has exhibited all of these strengths in abundance in the last year. And they are everywhere in America.

Ms. BALDWIN

Ms. BALDWIN. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of this conference report. I want to thank the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Sensenbrenner), our chairman; and the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Conyers), our ranking member; and the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Scott), the ranking member of the subcommittee, for their efforts to pass the first DOJ authorization bill in 2 decades. I have enjoyed working with them as a member of the Committee on the Judiciary and as a member of the conference committee to bring this legislation to the floor. This is an excellent piece of legislation that deals with a large number of important issues. I would like to focus on two of them today. I am very pleased that we were able to create a permanent Violence Against Women Office and make the director of that office a Senate- confirmed appointee. These provisions will strengthen the existing office, enhancing the Department of Justice's capacity to address the continuing problems of domestic violence and sexual assault. Domestic violence and sexual assault are still scourges on our Nation. The statistics are chilling. Nearly one in three women will experience either domestic violence or a sexual assault in her lifetime. These horrible crimes damage lives and tear families apart. The Violence Against Women Act is a proven part of the solution to these problems, and a permanent office with a strong director will help us continue to move forward to end this problem forever. I want to thank the gentlewoman from New York (Ms. Slaughter), my colleague, for introducing the original legislation; and I also want to appreciate the work of the gentlewoman from Maryland (Mrs. Morella) and the gentlewoman from Colorado (Ms. DeGette), and also appreciate the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Conyers), the ranking member, for their efforts to move this issue forward. I thank the chairman of the committee, the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Sensenbrenner), for the work that he did to make sure that we found appropriate legislative language that meets the great need for a strong Violence Against Women Office. Mr. Speaker, this bill also includes an important, although somewhat obscure, provision that will help promote education. The bill includes the Technology Education and Copyright Harmonization Act, also known as the TEACH Act. The TEACH Act extends the current exemption of educational use of copyrighted materials to distance learning. This will allow our schools, colleges, and universities to expand educational opportunities through new technology. Copyright holders and our educational institutions worked hard to develop this compromise language. I am pleased we were able to introduce it and include it in this bill, and I urge my colleagues to vote for this conference report.

Ms. BALDWIN

Ms. BALDWIN. Madam Speaker, as a member of the Committee on the Judiciary and the conference committee that produced the underlying bill, I am very pleased with much of the work reflected there. But I do think there is one enormous omission, and I rise to speak to that today. I urge my colleagues to defeat the previous question on the rule so that we can take immediate action to protect our Nation's family farmers and family fishermen. The gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Holden), the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Phelps), the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Delahunt), and I have introduced H.R. 5348 to permanently extend Chapter 12 bankruptcy protection. It is long past time for us to do so. Madam Speaker, it is increasingly evident that we will not see comprehensive bankruptcy reform this session. As in the last 5 years, it has stalled. Whatever one thinks of the merit of that bill, we have broad agreement of making Chapter 12 farmer and fishermen protection permanent as a good idea and good public policy. By defeating the previous question today, we can consider this important question now. During this current session of Congress, we have extended Chapter 12 bankruptcy three times, most recently as part of the farm bill. It is now due to expire again at the end of this year. The next 2 weeks may be our final chance to renew it before it expires once again, and we should do that today. Madam Speaker, it is time to stop using our farmers as pawns in the push for bankruptcy reform. It is time to stop pretending that this important protection has in any way helped win support for the comprehensive bankruptcy reform bill. It is time to protect our family farmers. A farmer who has a dairy farm in Belleville, Wisconsin, in my district contacted me recently about this issue. He has been farming like his dad before him most of his life. He milks 70 cows to make his living. Milk prices have remained low for most of the time he has been in farming. Now milk prices are again reaching historic lows. He simply cannot stay in business because he is losing money every day. He is scared he is going to lose his farm to his creditors and let his whole family down. Madam Speaker, let us amend this rule right now so we can take up my bill, H.R. 5348, and give all our family farmers and our family fishermen another chance to reorganize their debts and keep their farms or fishing operations in their families. I urge my colleagues to defeat the previous question and support this rule.

Ms. BALDWIN

Ms. BALDWIN. Mr. Speaker, I was absent during rollcall vote No. 418. However, if I would have been present on the Johnson of Texas Motion to Instruct Election Reform Conferees, I would have voted, ``yea.''

Ms. BALDWIN

Ms. BALDWIN. Mr. Speaker, on Wednesday September 4, 2002, I missed two votes due to flight delays. Although I received the appropriate leave of absence from the House, I wish to inform my colleagues and constituents of the 2nd District of Wisconsin on how I intended to vote on the roll call votes that I missed. On Roll Call vote 371, I would have voted No. On Roll Call vote 372, I would have voted Aye.

Ms. BALDWIN

Ms. BALDWIN. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to extend my congratulations to the New Glarus Volunteer Fire Department of Wisconsin, which is celebrating 100 years of excellence. This outstanding achievement is marked by the New Glarus Volunteer Fire Department's commitment to providing safe, efficient, and effective emergency services. New Glarus Volunteer Fire Department's standards of excellence were first instituted in 1902 with the formation of Company No. 1. From the incorporation of the village in 1845 until 1902, fires were fought by means of a bucket brigade. Company No. 1 replaced the old fashioned bucket brigade with the latest technology, circa 1902, a hose cart and hand-drawn ladder rig. Staffed by 24 dedicated firefighters, the equipment was housed in the New Glarus Town Hall, in which the first arriving firefighter rang a bell, alerting the remainder of the company to call. Today, the New Glarus Volunteer Fire Department is fully modernized, serving a 71-square-mile fire protection district that covers the village of New Glarus as well as the towns of York, Perry and Primrose in the rolling hills of Green and Dane Counties. In 1981, the current fire station was erected just west of the village hall, and has the capacity to hold up to ten pieces of apparatus. In addition to responding to fires, the totally volunteer department of 36 members, now reacts to motor vehicle, hazardous materials incidents and assists the New Glarus EMS. Although the bell has been replaced by a modern siren system, the call to tirelessly safeguard the lives and property of area citizens remains the same for the New Glarus Volunteer Firefighters. These courageous volunteers join the prestigious though often under- appreciated ranks of the ``everyday hero.'' Now, more than every, our nation is comforted by the knowledge that such citizens are prepared to protect our communities. So, when the siren sounds, those citizens served by the New Glarus Volunteer Fire Department are assured that they will receive the best possible assistance. I wholeheartedly congratulate the New Glarus Fire Department for 100 years of protecting their community and recognize their continuing commitment to excellence.

Ms. BALDWIN

Ms. BALDWIN. Mr. Speaker, whereas, cancer tragically touches the lives of thousands of our family members, friends, and neighbors, and Whereas, it is expected that there will be 25,300 newly diagnosed cases of cancer and 11,000 deaths related to cancer in Wisconsin this year, and Whereas, evidence suggests that one-third of cancer deaths are related to nutrition, physical activity, and tobacco use, and could be prevented, and Whereas, through education, prevention, early detection, and medical treatment the lives of many have been, and can be saved, and Whereas, the people of DeForest have come together for the sixth time to participate in the American Cancer Society Relay For Life to raise money to be used in the battle against cancer, and Whereas, in 2001 the DeForest Relay For Life raised over $131,000 that combined with the efforts of 132 other Wisconsin cities funded over $8.8 million for cancer prevention, treatment, education, advocacy, and service; and Whereas, the 2002 DeForest Relay For Life brings us one step closer to reaching the American Cancer Society's goals of a 50-percent reduction in cancer mortality rates and a 25-percent reduction in the incidence of cancer by the year 2015, then, Therefore, I, Representative Tammy Baldwin, as a member of the United States Congress and strong supporter of increased access to cancer prevention, diagnostic, and treatment therapies, commend the strides of each relay team participant, event volunteer, and the spirit of our community in this fight against cancer.

Ms. BALDWIN

Ms. BALDWIN. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to offer a motion to recommit with my colleague, the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson-Lee), that would provide an exception in order to protect the health of the mother. The families that are affected by this bill are dealing with the tragic circumstances of crisis pregnancies. In most cases, they have just learned that their babies will not survive. They are then confronted by choices that none of us would wish upon any human being. This is the context and these are the circumstances under which this legislation comes into play. And any suggestion to the contrary deceives the American public about the realities of this issue. The experiences that families face with crisis pregnancies are real. Their stories demonstrate the need for this exception to protect the health of the mother. Kathy and Chris, from Wisconsin, were married and were excited when they found out that Kathy was pregnant 6 years ago. They received the best prenatal care for their baby, and the pregnancy seemed to be going fine. She was over 6 months along when they went to their doctor to have an ultrasound and discovered that their baby was developing with no brain. There was a tumor in the baby's brain cavity and other factors that would compromise and jeopardize Kathy's health. Her doctor recommended that she have an abortion. Imagine the pain of these parents who so much wanted to have this child. Tragically, their doctor could not locate a provider in Wisconsin, so they also had to travel over a thousand miles to Colorado. After extensive tests, the doctor in Colorado determined that this procedure was medically necessary to protect Kathy's health. Because of the stigma associated with this procedure, neither Chris nor Kathy even told their parents that they had to have this procedure. But now she is speaking out because she believes that women must know that when they are faced with an extremely dangerous pregnancy, they deserve the right to protect their own health. Typically, women who must face this decision want nothing more than to have a child and are devastated to learn that their baby would not survive outside the womb. In consultation with their doctors and families, they make difficult decisions to terminate pregnancies, to preserve their own health, and, in many cases, to preserve their ability to have children in the future. This was the case for Kathy and Chris, who, because they took steps to terminate her first pregnancy, now have a beautiful 4-year-old son, Frederic. How can we look a woman like Kathy in the eye and tell her that she cannot have a safe procedure that would preserve her health and give her the best chance to have children in the future? Our compassion alone should be sufficient to justify a health exemption. But if my colleagues need more ammunition, the U.S. Supreme Court has made it clear that such an exemption is constitutionally required. In Stenberg v. Carhart, the court, in striking down a Nebraska statute, held that it was unconstitutional because there was no health exception for the mother. The language in this motion is taken directly from that Supreme Court's ruling. My colleagues, denying a maternal health exemption is wrong and it is unconstitutional. If this bill passes today without the adoption of this motion, women who are already dealing with the tragic consequences of a crisis pregnancy will have their health put in serious danger. I urge Members to support this motion to recommit on behalf of Kathy, on behalf of all which women who have faced this most difficult decision, and on behalf of Frederic and all the children who have been brought into this world because their mothers had access to safe abortions, including this procedure, and were able to have children again. Vote for this motion to recommit to preserve the life and health of women. Mr. Speaker, I yield 40 seconds to the gentlewoman from Colorado (Ms. DeGette).

Ms. BALDWIN. Mr. Speaker, I yield the balance of my time to the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson-Lee).

Ms. BALDWIN. Yes, I am.

Ms. BALDWIN. Mr. Speaker, I offer a motion to recommit.

Ms. BALDWIN. Mr. Speaker, I demand a recorded vote.

Ms. BALDWIN

Ms. BALDWIN. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?

Ms. BALDWIN. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding to me. Last February, when the first case of chronic wasting disease was documented in my district, a quiet panic began to race against south central Wisconsin. People wondered how seriously this disease would affect the health of the deer population, as well as the health of their own families. On behalf of my constituents, I would like to thank the chairman, the gentleman from New Mexico (Mr. Skeen), the ranking member, the gentleman from Washington (Mr. Dicks), and the dean of our delegation, the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Obey), for understanding the importance of this needed funding. This funding will be vital in slowing the spread of the disease, as well as learning a lot more about it.

Ms. BALDWIN

Ms. BALDWIN. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to have the next hour on the floor to discuss with my colleagues a grave situation in our country, the issue of the uninsured. I would like to set the stage on this topic before calling on a number of my colleagues who are equally committed and tenacious about fighting to bring this issue back to the forefront. We are facing an extremely serious health crisis. I listen carefully to those that I represent in Congress. I hear from constituents every day who have lost their health insurance and have nowhere to turn. I hear from mothers and fathers who are afraid that their healthcare premiums will become so expensive that they simply cannot afford them any more. I hear from small business owners who are facing skyrocketing premium increases and may not be able to offer health care coverage to their employees any more. I believe that it is time once again to bring the issue of the uninsured and health care for all back to this House floor. I believe we need to act soon if we are going to save those families teetering on the edge of losing their health insurance, and I believe that it is unconscionable that in our country, the richest country on earth, that almost 40 million Americans have no health care coverage at all. During 1999, about 15 percent of our population was uninsured. The Government defines being uninsured as being uninsured for a full year, but almost three out of every 10 Americans, more than 70 million people, were uninsured for at least a month over a 3-year period between 1993 and 1996. Although the uninsured population decreased slightly in 1999, the long-term trend has been growing of uninsured people. Without substantial restructuring of the opportunities for coverage, this trend is likely to continue. It is clear that the time to take action to solve this crisis is now. I am sure many are aware of the recent reports issued by the Institute of Medicine of the National Academy of Sciences regarding the uninsured in America. The Institute of Medicine is in the process of conducting a 3-year study on the uninsured. It has two major objectives. The first is that the study will assess and consolidate evidence about the health and economic consequences of being uninsured for persons without health insurance and their families, for health care systems and institutions, and for communities as a whole. Secondly, the study will raise awareness and improve understanding for the public and the policymakers about the magnitude and nature of the consequences of lacking health insurance. The 16-member committee on the consequences of the uninsured has already issued two reports and plans to issue four more by September of next year. The first report, Coverage Matters: Insurance and Health Care, concluded, and I should mention not surprisingly, that the high cost of health insurance along with public policies prevent tens of millions of Americans from obtaining health care coverage. The Institute on Medicine report also found that there are persistent misperceptions about the uninsured that present obstacles to addressing the issue constructively. I would like to talk briefly about some of these misconceptions. First, many people may think that the number of uninsured in the United States is not large and that it might not have increased in the recent years. But despite a very modest dip at the end of the 1990s and in 2000 following an obviously extended period of economic prosperity and growth and low unemployment in our country, the number of uninsured people has grown over the long term. According to the Institute of Medicine report, the number of uninsured people is greater than the combined population of Texas, Florida and Connecticut. In 1992 Congress debated health care reform and a plan that would guarantee every American the health care they needed. That vision was never realized. And now we have more Americans who are uninsured than we did back in 1992. The second misperception is that it is assumed that the people who are uninsured do not live in families that work. This is incorrect. According to the Institute on Medicine study, 80 percent of the uninsured children and adults live in working families. Included among the uninsured are parents who are working two, sometimes three, jobs just to make ends meet. But increasingly they work in sectors of our economy like small business, family farms, the service sector or maybe part-time employment that do not offer health insurance coverage to their employees or that require them to pay so much of it that they simply cannot afford it and do not take the coverage. Even families with two full-time wage earners have a one-in-ten chance of being uninsured. The third myth is that it is improper to assume that the uninsured get adequate medical attention. A report by the Kaiser Commission on Medicaid and the Uninsured found that the uninsured receive less preventative care and are diagnosed at more advanced stages of diseases. The uninsured are less likely to see a doctor within any given year and have fewer visits annually, and they are less likely to have a regular source of medical care. Uninsured persons receive fewer preventative services and less care for chronic conditions than those who have health insurance. This ultimately adds to the costs because in many cases their medical conditions become much more serious, producing adverse outcomes that will need extensive follow-up care. It is clear that the costs associated with the delay of care for the uninsured could be prevented if they had access to affordable coverage. Another problem we are facing in our system is that the cost of health care services and insurance premiums have been steadily increasing and more employers and consumers are viewing coverage as prohibitively expensive. A gap in the ability to purchase health care coverage has been growing ever since the growth in the cost of health insurance has outpaced real income. This gap has added almost 1 million people to the ranks of the uninsured every year. Now many employers absorbed premium increases during the economic boom of the 1990s, but they cannot be expected to continue this practice in our current economy. Many lower wage workers pass up on coverage because they cannot afford their share of the premium. On average, workers pay 14 percent of the costs of individual coverage and 27 percent of family coverage. Over the past 20 years, private sector employers have become less likely to cover part-time workers or new employees. And small businesses are faced with hurdles such as higher group premium rates and frequently do not offer coverage these days to their employees. A business owner in my district could no longer provide health insurance to her employees because of the high costs of the premiums. Nancy Potter owned a bakery in New Glaris, Wisconsin for 25 years. Her health insurer left the region, and when she sought coverage from other companies, the quotes she received represented a 180 percent increase in premiums. She would have had to pay an additional $50,000 each year to continue offering coverage. Unfortunately, she had to tell her 20 employees that she could no longer provide health insurance to them and their families. Even more devastating to her was the knowledge that one of her employees had recently been diagnosed with cancer and was undergoing treatment. This tragic state of affairs is not isolated and it is simply wrong. On that note I would like to recognize one of my colleagues who has been a champion of the uninsured and of health care for all. We have worked very closely together and it is my privilege to yield to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Lee).

Ms. BALDWIN. Mr. Speaker, I would next like to recognize a physician Member of this House of Representatives, and a distinguished member of the Committee on Ways and Means, and a champion for universal health care, the gentleman from Washington (Mr. McDermott).

Ms. BALDWIN. Mr. Speaker, next I would like to recognize the gentlewoman from Indiana (Ms. Carson), a colleague who has been a tremendous champion on advocating for the uninsured and advocating for universal health care.

Ms. BALDWIN

Ms. BALDWIN. Mr. Speaker, there is a crisis in America. People are out of work and are worried about losing their jobs. In Wisconsin, I hear from the families that I represent. Wisconsin families' investments, college funds and retirement savings have been losing money for almost 2 years now. Without action to shore up the confidence of the American public, our faith in the stock market will be shattered and, along with it, the backbone of our country's financial system. This crisis is rooted in one thing, and that is greed, the greed of the corporate CEOs that cooked their books, falsely reported earnings, exercised stock options and, when the bubble burst, walked away with millions in guaranteed salary payments and bonuses. But the crisis goes deeper than a dozen CEOs and the crooked accounting firms that are hoping to pad their pockets. It stretches right into the halls of Congress and the Oval Office, where corporate CEOs have sought to roll back investor protection legislation and gain access to the Social Security funds. WorldCom's recent announcement that it had overstated company profits by $3.8 billion over the last five quarters gives it the dubious distinction of being the largest case of false corporate bookkeeping, or, simply put, fraud. Companies like Enron, Rite Aid, Merck, Tyco International, Global Crossing and Adelphia Communications are currently under investigation for a variety of reasons, such as insider trading, avoiding taxes and using fraudulent accounting practices, as Enron did. I believe that we have come to the point where Congress and the administration must come together and take swift action to stop the corporate abuses that have infected our country. The enormity of the Enron collapse alone sent shock waves throughout our economy. In Wisconsin, the Public Employee Retirement System lost an estimated $40 million in stock and $38 million in bonds because of Enron's illegal actions. The WorldCom debacle is estimated to have cost the Wisconsin Public Employees Retirement System $29 million through the sale of WorldCom bonds. Nearly half a million current or former employees of Wisconsin State agencies, school districts and local governments participate in the Wisconsin retirement system, which is also the tenth largest public pension fund in the United States. This does not even begin to account for the millions of Americans, and you know that 52 percent of Americans are stockholders, and the institutions that invested retirement savings in Enron or WorldCom or any of the numerous other companies who have cooked their books to show false profits or hide their debt. While most corporate abuse has hit individual and institutional investors the hardest so far, I think it is important to realize that the same corporations that are under investigation have had a tremendous amount of influence in government and, essentially, over the very policies that matter to people most. In fact, just one week before the revelation by WorldCom of their financial impropriety, they were handing over $100,000 for a dinner featuring President Bush and benefiting the National Republican Congressional Committee and the National Republican Senatorial committee. That makes me question will these same officials really go after these CEOs and accounting companies and also pass legislation that will prevent future Enrons and WorldComs. Mr. Speaker, it is time for accountability; it is time for the administration and the Republicans in Congress to say to their traditional base of big business and corporate CEOs, ``Enough is enough.'' There is a crisis in America. People are out of work or are worried about losing their jobs. In Wisconsin, I hear from the families that I represent. Wisconsin families' investments, college funds, and retirement savings have been losing money for almost two years now. Without action, to shore up the confidence of the American public, our faith in the stock market will be shattered and along with it, the backbone of our country's financial system. This crisis is rooted in one thing--greed. The greed of the corporate CEOs that cooked their books, falsely reported earnings, exercised stock options, and when the bubble burst, walked away with millions in guaranteed salary payments and bonuses. But this crisis goes deeper than a dozen CEOs and crooked accounting firms hoping to paid their pockets. It stretches right into the halls of Congress and the Oval office, where corporate CEOs have sought to roll back investor protection legislation, and gain access to Social Security funds. WorldCom's recent announcement that it had overstated company profits by more than $3.8 billion over the last five quarters, gives it the dubious distinction of being the largest case of false corporate bookkeeping, or simply put, fraud. Companies like Enron, Rite Aid, Merck, Tyco International, Global Crossing, ImClone, and Adelphia Communications are currently under investigation for a variety of reasons such as, insider trading, avoiding taxes, and using fraudulent accounting practices as Enron did. I believe we have come to the point where Congress and the Administration must come together and take swift action to stop the corporate abuses that have infected our country. The enormity of Enron's collapse alone sent shock waves through our economy. In Wisconsin, the public employee retirement system lost an estimated $40 million in stock and $38 million in bonds because of Enron's illegal actions. The WorldCom debacle is estimated to have cost the Wisconsin public employee retirement system $29 million through the sale of WorldCom bonds. Nearly half a million current or former employees of Wisconsin state agencies, school districts and local governments participate in the Wisconsin retirement system, which is also the tenth largest public pension fund in the United States. This doesn't even begin to account for the millions of Americans (you know, 52 percent of us are stockholders) and institutions that invested retirement savings in Enron or WorldCom, or any of the numerous other companies who have cooked their books to show false profits or hide costs and debt. Perhaps the biggest accomplishment for corporate America this year was during the debate of passage of an economic stimulus bill. Their provision in this bill was so shocking it is a moment that I will not be able to forget for a long, long time. Our country was languishing in recession, and every day I heard from friends, neighbors, and constituents who said they were experiencing trauma in our struggling economy. They told me how important extending unemployment benefits would be in helping them to meet the next month's mortgage payment and keeping food on the table. At the time, no one knew how long our economic downturn would last; the genuine fear they expressed to me is something I'll never forget. During this debate, the House leadership refused to consider a bill that would extend unemployment benefits for an additional 13 weeks. I urged the House to follow the State of Wisconsin's lead and pass a bill to extend unemployment benefits so displaced workers would have more time to get back on their feet and look for another job. Instead, the leadership put the concerns of huge corporations first. Valuable time was wasted as the House passed three bills that the Senate refused to consider because they centered on giving huge corporations millions of dollars in tax breaks instead of helping those who needed immediate relief. The bills included a provision that would have given energy- trading giant, Enron, a tax rebate check worth more than $250 million-- even though the corporation hadn't paid taxes in 4 out of the last 5 years. It is time to return the confidence that investors once had. It is time to make corporate CEOs pay for their crimes and serve time for their crimes while strengthening the oversight ability of Congress and the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) so that we never again have to hear tale of illegal accounting practices and massive CEO payouts. It is time that the rest of Congress stand with me and my Democratic colleagues and return investor confidence to the free market system.

Ms. BALDWIN

Ms. BALDWIN. Mr. Speaker, over the last several weeks, the voices in favor of sweeping corporate reforms have been loud. Now I believe it is time for Congress' actions to be tough. Virtually every day brings another announcement in which a company has cooked their books, misled investors, or threatened the jobs of American workers. In my home State of Wisconsin, Enron and WorldCom's deceptions have caused the public employee retirement system to lose over $110 million. This retirement system is the safety net of nearly half a million current and former public employees, including thousands of hardworking teachers and policemen. It is time that this House and this Congress say enough is enough and restore the confidence that investors had in the corporations of this Nation and the confidence that our constituents had in this government by walking the walk of all the talk.

Ms. BALDWIN

Ms. BALDWIN. Mr. Speaker, I rise to today to recognize the Madison Civics Club. For 90 years, the Madison Civics Club has brought world leaders, illuminating thinkers and local innovators to the citizens of Madison. The club began in 1912 through the tireless efforts of five charter members. These five had just spent several grueling, and unsuccessful, months trying to convince members of the Wisconsin Legislature to adopt women's suffrage. The founding members--Georgia Lloyd Jones, Alice Bleyer, Edna Chynoweth, Lucille McCarthy and Mary B. Orvis--decided to gather for lunch, review their mistakes, seek strength and ``lick their wounds generally.'' From that effort, the club was born. Its goal was, and remains to this day, developing a civic conscience through being informed on local and foreign affairs. The Madison Civics Club has flourished. Its members number more than 800. It has hosted such world leaders as Winston Churchill, Nelson Rockefeller and Eleanor Roosevelt. The Madison Civics Club brought those who have mastered the arts to Madison, including Carl Sandburg, Arthur C. Clarke and Peter Bogdanovich. Amelia Earhart, Bella Abzug and Alex Haley are just some of the inspirational individuals who have illuminated Madison's citizens. Those that shape the message of our mass media, including David Broder, Ray Suarez and Hedrick Smith, have been a part of Madison Civics Club history. Prominent citizens, including those on the faculty of the world-class institution, the University of Wisconsin-Madison, also have addressed Madison's local concerns. The 2002-03 season shares the hallmark of again promising an engaging and thoughtful series of speakers. The theme, as determined by the 2002-03 chair Lynn Stathas, is ``The American Dream.'' Speakers include: Harry Wu, Chinese dissident and human rights activist; Judith Miller, an author and Pulitzer-Prize winning correspondent at the New York Times who is considered an expert on terrorism and was in fact the target of one of the heinous and infamous anthrax letters that were mailed in 2001; Wisconsin Supreme Court Chief Justice Shirley S. Abrahamson, the first female chief justice on the Wisconsin high court and an important figure, the 150th anniversary of the Wisconsin Supreme Court; Diana L. Eck, a professor of Comparative Religion and Indian Studies at Harvard University; and Dr. David Satcher, the 16th Surgeon General of the United States. Through these speakers, as in past years, the Madison Civics Club celebrates the enduring freedoms our nation has sustained and nurtured, building a civil society for more than 200 years. America has built a legacy of justice, freedom and hope that will be heralded through the Madison Civics Club in its 90th year. As the representative for the 2nd Congressional District of Wisconsin, I wish the Madison Civics Club officers and members, and its past and upcoming speakers, all the best as they continue their exemplary tradition of molding a civic conscience that builds communities and benefits all.

Ms. BALDWIN

Ms. BALDWIN. Mr. Speaker, I rise to express my opposition to this bill, which I deem to be a betrayal of the women of the Greatest Generation. Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to vote against this sham of a bill. It lays the groundwork to privatize Medicare and does not provide a real, guaranteed, defined benefit that our seniors desperately need. The Republican bill that is on the floor today forces seniors to shop around for prescription drug coverage through Medicare HMOs and private insurance plans. The prices and benefits under this private coverage would vary from region to region, so that a senior in Wisconsin would have to pay a different premium than a senior in Florida for the exact same benefit. These geographic disparities are simply unacceptable. There are no assurances in this bill that prescription drugs will be affordable. In fact, this bill would cover less than one-fifth of the estimated drug costs of Medicare beneficiaries over the next ten years. In addition, there is a huge gap in coverage. Seniors who need more than 2,000 worth of drugs a year must pay 100% out-of-pocket, and keep paying premiums, until they reach the $3,700 out-of-pocket cap. Millions of seniors will fall into this gaping hole. I believe all seniors deserve affordable prescription drug coverage, and we should not help some seniors cover their drug costs while leaving others out in the cold. Seniors will not be guaranteed access to the drugs they need or to their local pharmacies. The bill would allow private insurance plans to limit access to covered drugs, even if the drugs are on an approved list. Seniors would be restricted to certain pharmacy providers or would be forced to pay higher costs to use the pharmacy of their choice, even a pharmacy they have been using for years. I know many seniors in my district who have developed relationships with their pharmacists over the years and would hate to have to go to another provider or pay extra to keep going to their same trusted pharmacist. I hear from seniors in my district who cannot afford their prescriptions. They send me receipts for their drug bills and ask me how they are supposed to afford their rising drug costs on a fixed budget. They take less than the required dosage to save money, which puts their health at even greater risk. I support the Democratic proposal that adds a new Part D in Medicare to provide voluntary prescription drug coverage for all Medicare beneficiaries. This proposal would provide the same benefits, premiums and cost sharing for all beneficiaries no matter where they live. It guarantees fair drug prices by giving the Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services the authority to use the collective bargaining clout of all 40 million Medicare beneficiaries to negotiate drug prices. Savings will then be passed on to seniors. Unlike the Republican bill, there are no gaps in coverage in the Democratic proposal. Coverage is provided for any drug a senior's doctor prescribes. Seniors will be able to choose where to fill their prescriptions and will not have to join an HMO or a private insurance plan to get drug coverage. This is the proposal seniors have been waiting for. Unfortunately, it is not the proposal that was brought to the floor today. Today we are voting on a bill that is a sad mockery of what the seniors in our country deserve. Instead of providing a comprehensive Medicare prescription drug benefit for America's seniors, the Republicans have decided to make sure this bill suits big drug companies. Close ties to the pharmaceutical industry have influenced this bill at the expense of our seniors. That is just plain wrong for the retirees of the greatest generation who worked hard, lived through the depression won a war, and raised their families. Seniors need a comprehensive prescription drug benefit that is affordable and dependable for all--with no gaps or gimmicks in coverage. The Republican proposal fails on all these counts. I urge my colleagues to vote against H.R. 4954.

Ms. BALDWIN

Ms. BALDWIN. Mr. Speaker, what are the priorities of this Congress? Recently, it seems that the primary concern of the majority is passing tax cuts costing trillions of dollars that benefit the very wealthy and do not even go into effect for 10 years from now. Next week, the majority will finally bring to the floor a bill that is the ultimate concern of thousands of seniors in the United States, the Medicare prescription drug bill. Unfortunately, the Republican bill is such a sham that it will not even stand up to the scrutiny of a truth-in-advertising law. If we put the concerns of seniors who desperately need help in paying for their prescriptions first, then we must pass a benefit that is affordable. I recently received a letter from Donna O'Keefe, a retiree who lives in Baraboo, Wisconsin. Her drug bills total $400 a month, and she receives only $640 a month from Social Security. Seniors like Donna need a comprehensive prescription drug benefit that has no gaps and no gimmicks. They need real drug coverage under Medicare.

Ms. BALDWIN

Ms. BALDWIN. Mr. Speaker, it was one year ago that this House was considering the merits of President Bush's $1.6 trillion tax cut proposal. The House Leadership claimed that the sky was the limit for our budget surplus and that the ten-year projections would just continue to grow, and grow, and grow. At the time of the debate, I too, offered support for tax relief, but with the caveat that it should go to those who need it most--hardworking American familes--and that it should not curtail our ability to fund our nation's priorities or hinder our ability to address unforeseen events. I believed Congress had a duty to be fiscally responsible and move slow on tax cutting measures to make certain the projections came true. After all, it is virtually impossible to tell what our federal budget will look like one year from now--let alone ten. Sadly, the concerns I raised a year ago were warranted. Our $5.6 trillion surplus has virtually vanished, and once again, we face large federal budget deficits. While the events on September 11 and the sluggish economy played a role in slicing the surplus, there is no doubt that the large Republican tax cut was the main culprit. It is evident that the priorities I talked about at the time will be much more difficult to address: it will be hard to shore up Social Security for the soon-to-be retiring baby boomers; it will be very difficult to pay down our national debt; it will be an enormous challenge to provide a prescription drug benefit under Medicare; it will be a real struggle to fund the growing needs of our educational system. With the new budget concerns and all of the problems that Congress has failed to fix, I found it irresponsible of the House to devote more time and energy considering H.R. 4019, or the Marriage Penalty Relief Act. This bill would permanently extend marriage penalty relief past the 2010 sunset date. Moreover, the cost of this bill would total about $330 billion in the ten-year period from 2013-2022--at a time when the nation's budgetary demands will increase because of the retirement of the baby boomers. I support the Matsui Substitute on Marriage Penalty Relief. This bill would permanently extend marriage penalty relief, but goes a necessary step further that adds a much-needed trigger mechanism to impose financial discipline: the repeal will only go forward if the Director of the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) certifies that permanent repeal will not result in a raid on the Social Security trust fund over the following ten year period. If, on the other hand, OMB determines the repeal will require a raid on the trust fund, the repeal would be put on hold. In the past, I have supported legislation that would fix the marriage penalty; it's a serious problem for thousands of married couples in Wisconsin and throughout America. However, I find myself hearing the same arguments the House Leadership made last year: that permanently extending marriage penalty relief will not take money away from the Social Security Trust Fund, will not debilitate our ability to meet our priorities, and will not limit our ability to meet unforeseen challenges head on. I respectfully disagree with this argument--again-- and believe that we should address the permanent extension of the Marriage Penalty Relief Act years from now when we have a clearer picture of what our budgetary challenges and what national challenges are.