Timothy Bishop

Mr. BISHOP of New York

Mr. BISHOP of New York. Mr. Speaker, subject to rule XXII, clause 7(c), I hereby announce my intention to offer a motion to instruct on H.R. 1, the prescription drug bill. The form of the motion is as follows: Mr. Bishop of New York moves that the managers on the part of the House at the conference on the disagreeing votes of the two Houses on the Senate amendment to the bill H.R. 1 be instructed to reject division B of the House bill.

Mr. BISHOP of New York

Mr. BISHOP of New York. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in recognition of the Gold Star Mothers of America, a Congressionally chartered organization, and the celebration of Gold Star Mother's Day. This event was held on Sunday to commemorate the significant sacrifices and contributions of the Gold Star Mothers. In 1936, by proclamation of President Franklin D. Roosevelt, and the Congress concurring, the last Sunday of every September is dedicated to ``the greatest source of the Country's strength and inspiration'', the American mother. I am proud to honor these women who have shown the utmost courage in supporting the goals of this Nation. Each member of the American Gold Star Mothers has dealt valiantly with the overwhelming suffering that accompanies the loss of a son or daughter, yet they continue to believe in the good of America, our veterans and the armed forces. As our country continues to engage in struggle overseas, we are increasingly dependent on the good works of organizations like the Gold Star Mothers. Wherever they exist, the Gold Star Mothers perpetuate the ideals for which, their sons and daughters fought and died. They strive to assist veterans and veterans' organizations across the country while offering support to each other and a newly grieving nation. This past Sunday, government buildings and individuals across the world showed their true appreciation for the Gold Star Mothers by flying the U.S. flag and holding public gatherings. At America's preeminent resting-place for American soldiers, Arlington National Cemetery, a solemn gathering and wreath laying ceremony was held at the Tomb of the Unknowns. The dedication and triumphs of the Gold Star Mothers stem from a shared bond. As they describe it, ``The success of our organization continues because of the bond of mutual love, sympathy, and support of the many loyal, capable, and patriotic mothers who while sharing their grief and their pride, have channeled their time, efforts and gifts to lessening the pain of others. We stand tall and proud by honoring our children, assisting our veterans, supporting our nation, and healing with each other.'' It is important that we take time to recognize such a laudable organization as the American Gold Star Mothers. I am consistently impressed with their dedication to our Country, Armed Services, veterans and of course, to their own children. Through only the greatest hardship can membership in the American Gold Star Mothers be accorded. Our country is forever indebted to them for their ability to transform their grief into positive action and undying dedication to the past, present and future heroes of this Nation.

Mr. BISHOP of New York

Mr. BISHOP of New York. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to acknowledge the sad passing of Charles B. Forbes, who leaves a lasting impact on the district I represent. Charlie is survived by his wife Barbara Cameron Forbes, known to all as Cam. While the passing of this fine man saddens me, I am grateful for the 80 years he lived, many of them publishing local newspapers and serving community organizations. This morning, the Times-Review papers on Long Island published an obituary on Charlie's life. I'd like to submit this piece for the Record. Charles Bowman Forbes Charles B. Forbes, former publisher of Long Island's first Sunday newspaper, The Sunday Review, and the state's largest newspaper, The News-Review of Riverhead, died Sept. 22 at his home in Hampton, N.H., at age 80. The youngest of five sons, he was born in New Rochelle, N.Y., on May 24, 1923, to T. Harold and Carrie Forbes. Mr. Forbes was a graduate of Manhasset (L.I.) High School and Colgate University, and served with the U.S. Army during World War II. He started his newspaper career at the New York Daily News. After he sold The Sunday Review and The News- Review to Cowles Communications in the 1970s, Mr. Forbes worked for The Traveler-Watchman in Southold and WRIV Radio in Riverhead. Mr. Forbes was a longtime member of the Riverhead Rotary Club and Riverhead Chamber of Commerce, a former president of the Quogue Board of Education and a member of Quogue Fire Department. He and his wife, Barbara (known to all as ``Cam''), were among the early members of the St. Patrick's Day Parade Committee in Westhampton Beach and are the only husband and wife to be honored and named, separately, as grand marshals of the popular parade. He later relocated to New Hampshire and worked with his son, Tom, founder of Forbes Marketing Group, an advertising specialties business. Mr. Forbes is survived by his wife; his son; five daughters, Susan Lilley, Cameron Howard, Lisa Ryan, Shelley Natalie and Melissa Forbes; and four grandchildren.

Mr. BISHOP of New York

Mr. BISHOP of New York. Mr. Speaker, tomorrow marks the second year anniversary of the most brutal acts of terrorism to ever take place on our Nation's soil. On September 11, 2001, let us not forget that families were torn apart and our way of life threatened as over 3,000 innocent lives were tragically lost in devastation at the Pentagon, World Trade Center and in Pennsylvania. Let us also remember that September 11 was as much a day of loss and sorrow as it was a day of unprecedented heroism that poignantly demonstrated core American values of compassion, patriotism and service to country. On that faithful morning, heroes were born as hundreds of our Nations first responders, firefighters, police officers, and other emergency personnel, selflessly and bravely lost their own lives to secure the lives and safety of others. A good friend of mine and a resident of Long Island, Police Officer Vincent Danz, was one such hero of September 11. Vinnie Danz was among the first to respond on September 11 after a hijacked airliner crashed into the World Trade Center. Officer Danz, a member of the New York Elite Emergency Service Unit, spent his final moments helping the remaining occupants of the North Tower escape before it collapsed at 10:29 a.m. For those who knew Vinnie Danz, it was not at all surprising that he spent his last breath courageously filling his oath to protect and serve innocent civilians. As a 14-year veteran of the New York City Police Department, he had previously earned 17 decorations. Throughout his life, Vinnie not only dutifully answered the call to serve the residents of New York, but also his country. He was enlisted in the United States Marine Corps and at the time of his death was a marine safety technician with the Coast Guard Reserves. Friends of Vinnie remember him as an avid Mets and Rangers fan, a straight-laced cop who loved to kid around, and most of all a loving father and husband. On September 11, Vinnie left behind his wife Angela and three small girls, Winnifred, named after his sister, and Emily and Abigail, whom he adored. In remembering Police Officer Vinnie Danz, we honor the memory of a man whose life embodied the best of American ideals. Vinnie selflessly and courageously lived by the principles of service to community and country. In doing so, he demonstrated compassion and steadfast commitment. Even in performing his final agents of heroism at the World Trade Center, Vinnie did not show concern for himself. Rather, he asked his wife in a final phone message to, ``Say a prayer that we get some of these people out. I am okay, but say a prayer for me.'' Vincent Danz was not the only Long Island hero of September 11. Lieutenant Andrew Desperito, a New York city firefighter from East Patchogue, New York, was on the 23rd floor of One World Trade Center when he found out that Tower Two had already collapsed. Before exiting the building, he ordered the rest of his team ahead and he stopped to help a woman having trouble making her escape. He had just exited the building when it collapsed. He did not survive. There were also the Vigiano brothers, Joseph of Medford, an emergency service unit detective and his firefighter brother, John Vigiano, both of whom died that day in the line of duty when the Twin Towers fell. The brave acts of New York's first responders helped to save the lives of 25,000 World Trade Center victims on September 11. Of those who perished, 33 were from the first district of New York. These people were professional rescuers, the finest New York had to offer. Our community's loss is great, and so is that of their families. Their plans for the future ranged from seeing their children through college to soon retiring from the force. In their common mission of saving lives on September 11, their dreams were lost and their families shattered. For their sacrifice, we owe a great debt to the police officers, firefighters and emergency workers who risked their lives on September 11. As a Congress we not only have the responsibility to remember their acts of courage, but to carry out our duties with the same love of country, compassion to others and commitment to service. To properly pay tribute to the lives of these courageous people, we in Congress must ensure that first responders have the support they need to remain safe and effectively carry out their life-saving duties. In addition, we must reaffirm our commitment as a Congress and as a Nation to prevent terrorists from ever again carrying out these heinous and offensive acts against Americans and other innocent people around the world. In remembrance of these first responders from New York's first district, I will enter the names of those who perished into the Record. James M. Amato, Frank Bonomo, Peter Brennan, Daniel J. Brethel, Donald James Burns, Thomas M. Butler, Nicholas Paul Chiofalo Jr., John A. Crisci, Michael Sean Curtin, Martin N. DeMeo, Andrew J. Desperito, Jerome Mark Patrick Dominguez, Michael K. Healey, Timothy B. Higgins, Andrew Jordan, Thomas Richard Kelly. Patrick Lyons, Joseph E. Maloney, Peter C. Martin, William J. McGovern, Martin McWilliams, Thomas Moody, John Napolitano, Daniel O'Callaghan, Michael Thomas Russo Sr., Gerard Patrick Schrang, Stanley S. Smagala Jr., Kevin Joseph Smith, Lawrence T. Stack, John James Tipping II, Joseph Vincent Vigiano, Kenneth Thomas Watson, Walter Edward Weaver. May we always remember their bravery, compassion for others, and ultimate sacrifice. We will always miss them and we will never forget.

Mr. BISHOP of New York

Mr. BISHOP of New York. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to take the time of the gentleman from New York (Mr. Owens).

Mr. BISHOP of New York

Mr. BISHOP of New York. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Chairman, I rise today to urge the House to pass the Bishop amendment, which will continue the ban on the human testing of pesticides. Human testing of pesticides is wrong on many levels. It is morally wrong, it is ethically wrong, it is environmentally wrong, and it is even scientifically wrong. In the wake of World War II and the horrendous crimes committed against humanity, many of them by doctors, American judges wrote what is called the Nuremberg Code when those doctors went on trial. This code prohibits non-therapeutic medical testing. Pesticide testing does not meet that criteria. Pesticide testing is not about public safety; it is about private interests. Because of the stricter requirements of the unanimously passed Food Quality Protection Act of 1996, the pesticide industry has been under mounting pressure to reduce the risks that pesticides pose to infants and children. The industry has adopted a strategy to evade these requirements by testing pesticides on a small number of adult human subjects and to thereby remove safety factors and other protective requirements. And unlike human testing of drugs, which has the potential to benefit test subjects or to directly improve human health, the pesticide industry's purpose in conducting human tests of pesticides is to weaken otherwise applicable health protections and to increase their profits. Intentional dosing of humans with pesticides is unethical since it is done to advance industry interests and to weaken otherwise applicable health protections, not to benefit test subjects or the public health. At the end of the day, these tests are scientifically irrelevant for several reasons. Human tests of pesticides are scientifically invalid because they routinely test tiny numbers of healthy people, often just eight adult males, whereas a test of thousands of people is needed to yield statistically valid results for certain effects. The results of these tests are non-applicable because they are testing self-selected, healthy adult males; yet the protections we seek are for all Americans, including vulnerable children. It is ridiculous to somehow infer if you do not witness symptoms in a small number of adult males, that the level of pesticide is therefore safe for a child. When media reports first informed the American people that the pesticide industry was conducting human testing, the resulting outrage resulted in an EPA moratorium of the studies, as well as a panel to study the morality of the issue. In 2000, that panel concluded if the use of human subjects in pesticide testing can be justified, that justification cannot be to facilitate the interests of industry or of agriculture, but only to better safeguard the public health. That standard has never been met by the pesticide industry. More recently, in December of 2001, in the wake of a public outcry after reports that the Bush administration was considering using such human tests, EPA Administrator Whitman announced the EPA would not use these tests to make decisions. However, the pesticide industry sued, arguing that the EPA failed to follow the procedures required by the Administrative Procedures Act in adopting the policy. On June 3, 2003, a court agreed and set aside the Bush administration's temporary moratorium, ruling that the EPA followed the wrong procedures in adopting it. We simply cannot allow human testing of pesticides to proceed on a loophole. Let us be ethically right, environmentally right and scientifically right, and pass this amendment to prohibit human testing of pesticides.

Mr. BISHOP of New York. Mr. Chairman, I yield back my time.

Mr. BISHOP of New York. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.

Mr. BISHOP of New York

Mr. BISHOP of New York. Mr. Chairman, I rise to express my deep concern over the proposed Head Start legislation on which we will be voting this evening. Almost 1 million low-income children will be served by Head Start this year and 2,000 of them reside in my district. It is well established that Head Start gets children off to a positive start in life by providing them with an improved vocabulary, better writing skills and enhanced social skills, all tools they need in order to succeed. The reauthorization of Head Start was meant to help correct problems within the existing program, but this bill goes way beyond that. Title II of this bill would allow block-granting of Head Start in eight States without requiring any of the Federal Head Start program performance standards or guarantees as to the distribution or allocation of Federal funds by the States. This action will turn a program that has been a proven success over to States in fiscal crisis with unproven expertise in coordinating these types of services. The bill also lacks any real funding for teacher training and retention. Although the bill does take the positive step of requiring 50 percent of Head Start teachers to have a bachelor's degree, it does not provide the money and resources needed for them to achieve the requirements that we have set forth for them. This is a good requirement, but one that will be very difficult to achieve absent significant additional funding. The average salary of a Head Start teacher in my district is less than $20,000 a year. How will a Head Start program attract highly qualified teachers if the funds are not available to pay competitive salaries? Similarly, how will current staff achieve a bachelor's degree if funds are not available to support their return to school? H.R. 2210 is fundamentally flawed. I urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on H.R. 2210 and ``yes'' on the Miller amendment.

Mr. BISHOP of New York

Mr. BISHOP of New York. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.

Mr. BISHOP of New York. Mr. Speaker, I offer a privileged motion.

Mr. BISHOP of New York. Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the distinguished gentlewoman from California (Ms. Linda T. Sanchez). (Ms. LINDA T. SANCHEZ of California asked and was given permission to revise and extend her remarks.)

Mr. BISHOP of New York. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. There has been some discussion of what the majority leader did or did not say. One thing he was widely quoted as saying with respect to this issue is, he said there were a lot of other things that were much more important for this House to deal with than by expanding this credit. And I think that statement speaks volumes with respect to the order or the level of priority with which the majority treats this issue. Mr. Speaker, I yield 7 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Miller). (Mr. MILLER of North Carolina asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. BISHOP of New York. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. The hour is late; so let me say two quick points. One, as a clarification, the House-passed bill does, in fact, deny the child tax credit to military families in combat zones. And, secondly, let me say that if the majority party were as serious about providing this credit to these needy families as they profess to be, then we would be passing the Senate bill now. We can get this done before we go home on Friday or Saturday or whenever it is we are going to go home. It has already passed the Senate 94 to two. It is fair. It provides an immediate benefit, and it does not worsen an already staggering deficit situation for this country that imperils our ability to provide the kinds of services that our people in this country need and deserve out into the future. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. BISHOP of New York. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I rise today to urge conferees on H.R. 1308, the child tax credit legislation, to do the right thing and act now to give lower-income families the tax refunds they deserve. This Friday, Uncle Sam will drop checks in the mail to millions of families who will benefit from the child tax credit. However, if the House would simply put an end to stalling tactics over the Senate bill and act to extent the child tax credit, 4 million additional families would receive a much-needed check in the mail, and 2.5 million families would enjoy a larger check than they are currently scheduled to receive. Earlier this year, this Congress passed a $350 billion tax cut bill that failed to provide families of low-income children with a child tax credit. The Senate acted in early June to extend the child tax credit to include low-income families. The Senate bill was deficit neutral, as its costs were offset by other revenues. The House responded to this $9.5 billion deficit-neutral Senate bill with a bloated $82 billion plan, every dime of which adds to a deficit that is already of staggering proportions. Why? It is difficult to resist the conclusion that the House leadership chose this response to the Senate bill precisely because they knew it would be completely unacceptable to the Senate. This is perfect, right? Give the illusion of responding to a real problem when in fact the response makes the solution even more elusive. Now, the House continues to stall, unwilling to give an inch so that low-income families can receive the same $1,000 child tax credit other families are expecting. We have an opportunity to call off the stonewalling and follow the Senate's lead in passing meaningful relief for low-income families and we should do it. Refusing to take the time before Congress goes on vacation to provide low- and middle-income families with a child tax credit is nothing short of an assault on the working poor. At the present time, when our economy has taken a nose dive and families are forced to cut their budgets left and right, it defies logic to engage in such a blatant form of class warfare. Any Member who thinks it is acceptable to leave town to go on vacation and to push off the urgent business of 6.5 million hardworking families is sending an unmistakable message about misplaced priorities. This kind of attitude may be acceptable in Washington, but it is not okay in my district. I am ashamed to return home to Long Island as the representative of a Federal Government that has turned a blind eye to the needs of the 20,000 families in my district estimated to lose out if we deny them their benefits without a fight. If this House sees wisdom in giving millionaires alone a $90 billion tax break, certainly we can give families making between $10,500 and $26,000 a small break. That is $10,500 to $26,000. Yet there is a great resistance to offsetting the cost of extending the child tax credit by reducing the dividend and capital gains relief flowing to millionaires by a remarkably trivial amount. We were sent to Congress by people we represent to make choices. When the original conferees excluded families making from $10,500 to $26,000 from sharing in the benefit of the expanded tax credit, they had several options available to them. The cost of extending the child tax credit to these families is $3.5 billion, or one percent of the total cost of the bill. Surely somewhere in the remaining 99 percent of the bill, the conferees could have found $3.5 billion in adjustments, but they chose not to. Instead, they chose to remain within the $350 billion limit of the bill, arbitrary and illusory as it is, by telling these families, these working poor, that it was more important to assist millionaires than it was to assist them. That is the choice they made. The tax cut is cleverly referred to as the Jobs and Growth Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2003. If the real goal of this tax cut bill, as stated in its title, is to create jobs and growth, I believe we would not be here tonight having this debate. If we were really interested in job growth, we would not be so concerned about a negligible decrease in the refund going to the wealthiest Americans who hold the largest pool of discretionary money and who are probably going to use this tax cut to bolster their savings accounts. If we were really interested in job growth, we would not hesitate to invest in lower-income working families who are going to immediately reinvest the money from the tax cuts in the economy. Any observer of spending patterns will tell my colleagues that putting money into the pockets of those who need it the most will provide an immediate and welcome shot of adrenaline to our damaged economy. Close to 12 million children nationwide and 43,000 children in my district stand to benefit from an expansion of the child tax credit to lower-income families. If these families receive their checks this summer, certainly our economy will benefit from an immediate economic stimulus. Their money is not going to go to savings accounts. Rather, their money will be reinvested because it will go to families in my district just in time to purchase back-to-school supplies for children. One need not be a Nobel Laureate in economics to figure this out. If we put money in the hands of people who live paycheck to paycheck, and certainly families making $20,000 a year live paycheck to paycheck, they are going to spend it immediately on the necessities of life. Conversely, when we add to the income of those whose discretionary income is already generous, their spending and purchasing patterns are likely to be affected modestly or not at all. Where is the economic benefit? How many jobs will we really create? I am here in the wee hours of the morning because I believe that Congress must not fail the American people by leaving town without extending the child tax credit to low-income families who so desperately need it. Earlier I mentioned the failure to provide relief to struggling families as emblematic of misplaced priorities. This is only the latest in a long line of misplaced priorities, and I find it very troubling. Our government seems to think it is okay to crack down on low-income children in the school lunch program, children and families who make less than $23,000 a year, while Congress refuses to address the issue of offshore tax havens. It is ludicrous to spend time taking sandwiches away from low-income children while continuing to allow large corporations a free pass on offshore tax havens costing taxpayers billions of dollars a year. Similarly, it makes no sense to devote government resources to crack down on filers of the earned income tax credit who earn less than $33,000 per year, while we are giving millionaires billions of dollars in tax breaks; and it is certainly counterintuitive to keep a child tax credit out of the hands of working families who will use it to care for the immediate needs of their family and boost our economy. This is more class warfare; and if we have any decency as a Nation, we will see to it that it stops. President Bush has urged us to do right by these families, and I urge my colleagues to do the same. We should put an end to these delaying tactics and deliver immediate tax relief to our Nation's neediest children. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. BISHOP of New York. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume, and I want to thank the gentleman from Missouri and commend him for being here with us this evening. This is certainly a very important subject and it deserves full and complete debate. He is quite right that the subject of our votes on the tax bills that have come before us is a matter for discussion at another time. I would say simply that I would be delighted to vote for a tax cut package that is properly targeted to the families that need it the most and is not obscured by a package that provides tax relief to people who need it the least. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 6 minutes to the distinguished gentlewoman from Connecticut (Ms. DeLauro).

Mr. BISHOP of New York. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 additional minutes to the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Miller).

Mr. BISHOP of New York

Mr. BISHOP of New York. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to the Sag Harbor Fire Department. On March 26, 2003, the Sag Harbor Fire Department of Sag Harbor, New York, marked a momentous occasion that very few fire departments in our country have achieved. Since 1803 the volunteer firefighters of Sag Harbor have been answering their neighbors' calls for help. This year they are celebrating their 200th anniversary. Located on the South Fork of Eastern Long Island, The Sag Harbor Fire Department is one of the oldest volunteer fire departments in the nation, the second oldest in the state of New York, and the oldest in Suffolk County. It was chartered on March 26, 1803 and today, 200 years later, it has 165 volunteer members who cover the county with support and protect 5,000 winter residents and 15,000 summer residents in an area of 27 square miles. These dedicated volunteers operate out of four different stations and comprise five companies: Gazelle Hose Company No. 1, Montauk Hose Company No. 2, Otter Hose Company No. 3, Murray Hose Company No. 4, and the Phoenix Hook & Ladder Company No. 1. The Department also has three special squads: Heavy Rescue, Fire Police and the Dive Water Team. During the year-long 200th anniversary commemoration, the Department has received proclamations from the Village of Sag Harbor, the New York State Legislature, the New York Department of State and the Fire Association of New York State. I would like to add my heartfelt congratulations and best wishes to this outstanding fire department not only for its longevity but also for the dedication of its members. Volunteer firefighters are selfless men and women who risk their lives to protect and provide fire, emergency medical and rescue services to others in their community without financial compensation. Sag Harbor's volunteer firefighters proudly carry on the 200-year-old tradition started by their forefathers--answering the alarm, serving their neighbors and protecting the citizens of Suffolk County. The Department will officially celebrate this milestone with a week- long series of events beginning on August 19th that includes a gala parade, fireworks, raffles and the selling of many different souvenirs including a commemorative coin created especially for the occasion. I invite my colleagues in the U.S. House of Representatives to join me in honoring the Sag Harbor Fire Department on its 200th anniversary. These men and women represent the best of the volunteer spirit that has built our great Nation.

Mr. BISHOP of New York

Mr. BISHOP of New York. Mr. Speaker, subject to rule XXII, clause 7(c), I hereby announce my intention to offer a motion to instruct on H.R. 1308, the Child Tax Credit bill. The form of the motion is as follows: Mr. Speaker, I move that the managers on the part of the House in the conference on the disagreeing votes of the two Houses on the House amendment to the Senate amendment to H.R. 1308 be instructed as follows: One, the House conferees shall be instructed to include in the conference report the provision of the Senate amendment not included in the House amendment that provides immediate payments to taxpayers receiving an additional credit by reason of the bill in the same manner as other taxpayers were entitled to immediate payments under the Jobs and Growth Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2003. Two, the House conferees shall be instructed to include in the conference report the provision of the Senate amendment, not included in the House amendment, that provides families of military personnel serving in Iraq, Afghanistan and other combat zones a child credit based on the earnings of the individuals serving in the combat zone. Three, the House conferees shall be instructed to include in the conference report all of the other provisions of the Senate amendment and shall not report back a conference report that includes additional tax benefits not offset by other provisions. Four, to the maximum extent possible within the scope of conference, the House conferees shall be instructed to include in the conference report other tax benefits for military personnel and the families of the astronauts who died in the Columbia disaster. Five, the House conferees shall, as soon as practicable after the adoption of this motion, meet in open session with the Senate conferees and the House conferees shall file a conference report consistent with the preceding provisions of this instruction, not later than the second legislative day after adoption of this motion.

Mr. BISHOP of New York

Mr. BISHOP of New York. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to urge conferees on H.R. 1308, the Child Tax Credit legislation, to do the right thing and act now to give lower-income families the tax refunds they deserve. Earlier this year we enacted a $350 million tax cut that lavished tax breaks on millionaires but failed to provide low-income families with a child tax credit. Last month we attempted to right this wrong by passing a bill that will provide low-income families with the same $1,000 child tax credit other families will receive. However, the House failed to include an important provision that would put these refund checks into the pockets of low-income families in the same timely way that checks land in the mailboxes of other families. Conferees should do the right thing by these 12 million children and insist upon the Senate-passed measure that would eliminate the delay and provide rebate checks to these families in the same timely manner provided to other families. This is what the President would like for us to do, and failing to quickly correct this problem is simply wrong. The Senate-passed measure has the added advantage of not adding to a deficit rapidly escalating out of control, whereas the House-passed version adds $82 billion to a deficit that is already staggering. If the goal of this tax cut bill is to provide an economic stimulus and we are serious about stimulating the economy, then we should act as quickly as possible to get this money into the hands of families who will immediately spend it. Tax cuts resulting in an immediate return will result in a welcome shot of adrenalin to our damaged economy. Families nationwide will be receiving their tax credit this summer, just in time to purchase back- to-school supplies for their children. We owe it to low-income families to get their refund check to them in the same timely manner. This is unquestionably the right thing to do. Conferees should put an end to their delaying tactics and deliver immediate tax relief to our Nation's neediest children by adopting the Senate-passed measure.

Mr. BISHOP of New York

Mr. BISHOP of New York. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to express my concern about the 2.1 million workers who will lose their regular unemployment insurance during the 6 months after May 31 if we fail to do the right thing and act now to extend their benefits. I believe we should not only extend benefits, but also improve unemployment assistance by increasing the extension of benefits from 13 weeks to 26 weeks. Acting now to extend and improve unemployment benefits will help an estimated 3.9 million workers. This past December Congress faced a pending expiration of benefits and ran into an unfortunate and completely avoidable situation when the benefits of unemployed workers were allowed to expire for a week. This time we have the opportunity to act now and to do the right thing to help workers who are unemployed. There are workers on Long Island in the area I represent who desperately want to work, but for whom jobs simply are not available. Everywhere I go in my district I hear from workers who are out of work or who fear that they will soon be out of a job. These are very real concerns to people on Long Island and nationwide. Our country faces a serious crisis. We have Americans who want to work and who are actively seeking work, but are unable to secure employment and are worried about putting food on their dinner tables. I believe that extending unemployment insurance to these workers will not only provide working families with relief, but will also serve as an immediate and much-needed stimulus to our economy. New York State has been particularly hard hit by the ongoing economic downturn. During the past month alone New York has lost 10,300 jobs, and since the end of 2001, our State has suffered from a loss of an estimated 301,000 jobs. Nationwide the unemployment numbers are staggering. Our unemployment rate is at 6 percent, and there are 8.8 million unemployed Americans. Of this number, 1.9 million Americans have been unemployed for more than 27 weeks. In addition to these numbers, there are approximately 4\1/2\ million workers who are working part time because they are unable to find full-time employment. If we want to find real economic stimulus, we should readjust our priorities and provide a helping hand to those who are out of a job rather than provide yet another fiscally irresponsible tax break to this Nation's wealthiest citizens as we just did this past Friday. We should do right by our workers and act to stimulate the economy by putting a little extra money in the pockets of working families. We should contrast how the tax bill went through this Congress. It raced through this Congress, and yet we are taking our time providing relief and comfort to the millions of unemployed workers. That is not fair, and we need to address that. The tax cut was presented as an economic stimulus package, and yet studies have shown that for every dollar we invest in extending unemployment benefits, our economy would receive a $1.73 boost. This boost is real, and the impact would be felt immediately. I urge my colleagues to take this important step to extend and improve unemployment benefits. American workers provide the engine that drives our economy, and we have the best workforce in the world. By helping workers out now when they need it the most, we will reap a huge return in our investment.

Mr. BISHOP of New York

Mr. BISHOP of New York. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize and honor Luis A. Rosero a dedicated and noteworthy public servant from Queens, New York. Luis A. Rosero engages our society with enthusiasm and vigor. From humble beginnings in Queens, NY, Luis Rosero has dedicated himself to a career in public service, protecting the rights of all citizens in the democratic process. Luis fights for what is good in our world. Since my arrival in Congress at the beginning of this year, Luis has ably served the people of the First Congressional District of New York as my District Office Director. He has offered his years of experience to develop a new office, train new employees and manage the multi- faceted challenges of a busy New York office. Luis has offered comfort and assistance to my constituents, whether they need intervention with a federal agency, an answer to a vexing question of policy or someone to simply hear their concerns. Luis' passion and energy have also made him a known and appreciated individual to his neighbors in his home community, and they now call him back to represent them as a New York City Councilman. Many individuals aspire to make positive changes in the community in which they live, though some fail in their efforts through a lack of dedication and perseverance. Luis has the qualities of a leader and a deep belief in our system of government: I believe he will not fail to meet the demands of a public he has dedicated himself to serve. I extend my best wishes and support for Luis Rosero in all of his future endeavors. I am sorry to see him leave my staff, but I am grateful for his efforts and I know he will go on to do great things. I wish Luis many years of good fortune and service to the public. Mr. Speaker, I know my colleagues join me in wishing Luis A. Rosero the best of luck in all of his endeavors.

Mr. BISHOP of New York

Mr. BISHOP of New York. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to shed light on an attack committed under cover of darkness and to praise our heroes who turned back that assault. I am speaking of the dishonorable conduct of the members of this House, which at 3 o'clock in the morning on March 21 voted for devastating cuts to the Department of Veterans Affairs--totaling $14 billion over 10 years--including cutting health care and compensation for disabled veterans. Under ordinary circumstances, this would simply be the wrong thing to do. But to cut this funding while hundreds of thousands of our soldiers--soon to be war veterans--are thousands of miles away fighting for our freedom, is hypocritical in the extreme and displays a shocking lack of gratitude for the sacrifice and selflessness of our troops. I am proud to support our veterans. And I believe that in war and peace, we must show veterans the utmost respect. Many people come to this floor and say they respect our veterans and say that our veterans are their priority. However, I believe that a priority is only a priority when it is adequately funded. In other words, we need to put our money where our mouth is and give veterans the resources they need. It is particularly offense that we are not giving veterans what they need and deserve in order to fund hundreds of billions of dollars of tax cuts which will disproportionately benefit the already very wealthy. This assault on our veterans did not escape the notice of the vigilant veterans' watchdog groups. The Veterans of Foreign Wars, American Legion and Disabled American Veterans were outspoken in their opposition. I was particularly struck by the words of Edward R. Heath, Sr., National Commander of the Disabled American Veterans, who said: Cutting already under funded veterans' programs to offset the costs of tax cuts is indefensible and callous. It is unconscionable to cut benefits and services for disabled veterans at a time when we have thousands of our service members in harm's way fighting terrorism around the world and when we are sending thousands more of our sons and daughters to fight a war against Iraq. Fortunately, thanks to the forceful opposition of veterans' groups and pressure from congressional advocates in Congress, I am optimistic we may not only prevent cuts to veterans programs, but possibly even increase funding. The Chairman of the House Budget Committee has reversed course and stated that he will follow the lead of the Senate, which has approved increases for veterans. While I am encouraged by this change of heart, until the Chairman's words are enacted into law, it is vital that advocates for veterans remain vigilant and ensure he keeps his promise. Mr. Speaker, our veterans are watching, and the American people are watching. Now more than ever, let's show our troops that this Nation will always support them. Let's put actions ahead of words and make funding our veterans a real priority of this Congress.

Mr. BISHOP of New York

Mr. BISHOP of New York. Mr. Speaker, I rise this evening to talk about the budget resolution we will be asked to consider tomorrow, a budget that I believe is one of misplaced priorities. Just a few hours ago, the gentlewoman from Oregon and I went before the Committee on Rules to urge support for what I believe must be one of our foremost priorities. The gentlewoman from Oregon and I asked that an amendment be declared in order that would provide $2.2 billion in funding to first responders not next year, but immediately, in fiscal year 2003. I believe that we can and must agree to put aside our differences and fund first responders. It is my sincere hope that we will be able to consider this important amendment on the floor tomorrow. We say first responders are a priority, but as happens all too often in Washington, it is one thing to call an initiative a priority, and it is an entirely different matter to devote the funding required to validate that priority. In this particular case, there is no question that the need is real, immediate and essential. I represent the First District of New York, the western boundary of which is no more than 40 miles from the border of New York City, clearly one of the most prominent targets for terrorists, and I have spoken with our firefighters throughout our district, our police officers throughout our district, and they recognize that they are ill- equipped to respond. They need training, they need equipment, and the Federal Government must provide the support that they require. I also come to the floor today to discuss our priorities as a Nation and to talk about how I believe the Republican budget that we will consider tomorrow is a budget of misplaced priorities. As we consider this budget, we have an opportunity to make the right choices for our Nation, choices that will strengthen our families, secure our communities and send us back down the road to economic security. Instead, my colleagues on the other side of the aisle are forcing a vote on a budget that is the antithesis of fiscal responsibility and sends our Nation back to deficits. These deficits stretch out as far as the eye can see, and they squander desperately needed programs for working families. If the goal of the Republican budget is to provide a shot of adrenalin to our economy, in my opinion this plan falls far short of that goal. The Republican budget puts forth a costly economic growth package with less than 3 percent of the proposed tax cuts occurring this year when it is most needed. On the other hand, the Democratic proposal would provide four times the amount of stimulus provided by the House Republican proposal with $136 billion in targeted tax breaks applicable immediately. These tax breaks will encourage investments by business and help those who are in the greatest need of relief. Both the Democratic and the Republican budgets would balance by the year 2010. The difference is that the Republican budget would do so by forcing what I believe are unconscionable cuts to key mandatory and discretionary funding programs. The Republican budget would cut important programs such as student loans, veterans' benefits, and school lunch programs by as much as $98 billion over 10 years. Today when so many families are sacrificing and struggling, it is not the time to crack down on veterans, students trying to earn a college diploma and schoolchildren from low-income families who deserve to eat a nutritious meal. Why do we not try this? If we are going to crack down on anyone, why do we not crack down on corporations that relocate offshore exclusively for the purposes of evading their United States tax obligations? Further, the Republican budget would undermine domestic appropriations by $244 billion below the amount needed to continue programs at today's level. Passing this budget will hurt working families, children, the elderly, veterans, seniors, and so many others. These types of cuts are difficult to justify under any circumstance. They are impossible to justify when one considers that they result from an irresponsibly large, massive package of tax cuts geared to the very wealthy. Why should we give an additional tax cut to the top 2 to 5 percent of wage earners in this country when doing so requires us to seriously undermine so many important programs, and doing so also imperils the long-term security of Social Security and Medicare? We need to do the right thing tomorrow and pass a real stimulus package, one that stabilizes our communities by delivering results for small businesses and working families now rather than later. Now is not the time to be forcing damaging budget cuts that undermine the social fabric of our communities just so that we can provide additional tax breaks to those who make the most. Now is the time to act with fiscal responsibility in mind to jump start the economy and to provide lasting investments in our families. I believe that we know what our priorities should be, and I urge my colleagues to vote for the Democratic budget substitute tomorrow.

Mr. BISHOP of New York

Mr. BISHOP of New York. Madam Speaker, I rise today to speak about the importance of fully funding the Violence Against Women Act of 2000, otherwise known as VAWA. Domestic violence is a crisis that plagues far too many families in our communities. In New York State alone, the State division of criminal justice service has received 55,558 police reports of family domestic violence offenses in 1999. This alarming number reflects only the incidences where a police report was actually filed. Domestic violence knows no boundaries, crossing all economic, race, and other barriers to disrupt families. VAWA funds critical programs that assist millions of battered women and children nationwide. Congress took the right steps last year by fully funding the VAWA programs administered by the Department of Justice; however, several critical programs in the Department of Health and Human Services were funded at amounts well below what was needed and what was authorized in VAWA 2000. Some VAWA programs were not funded at all. We just found out that the President's fiscal 2004 budget would cut $19.2 million from crucial VAWA programs. I urge my colleagues to join me in opposing these cuts. At a time when States face a looming budget crisis and a broad spectrum of important programs are slated for funding cuts, I believe that we owe it to families caught in the devastating cycle of domestic abuse to fully fund all VAWA programs.