Michael Burgess

Mr. BURGESS

Mr. BURGESS. Mr. Speaker, coming back into town today and picking up a copy of one of the local papers, I read the headline, ``Members Seek UN Election Monitors.'' Quoting from today's Roll Call, ``a dozen Democratic House Members last week called on the United Nations to send monitors to oversee November's U.S. presidential election.'' Mr. Speaker, I submit that I was astounded to read that in the paper today. It seems that there are people in this House who cannot get over the facts of the election that was held in the Year 2000, and the facts are that George W. Bush won that election. He won it in the constitutionally prescribed manner of a majority of electoral votes; he won on election day; and he won on every single recount held thereafter, until the Supreme Court said enough recounting 34 days later, and the counts were stopped. But the President even won in the Miami Herald's recount that came out, I forget, in February or March of 2001, well into the President's first term. The Miami Herald finally acknowledged the fact that indeed George Bush had won Florida's electoral votes and had indeed won the election. Those 34 days of transition time were critical to the start of this administration. We had an economy that was headed into a recession, and, as we found out later in that year, we had enemies of this country who were gathering strength and preparing to attack this country. Thirty-four days in transition were critical days that were lost. But now comes this group who says that the events of the 2000 election are so serious that UN monitors are required on U.S. soil to monitor our electoral process. Mr. Speaker, I will tell you that the constituents of my district just simply do not understand what goes on in Washington, D.C. We have a candidate for the highest office in this land who says that foreign leaders would prefer him to be the President. Mr. Speaker, we have got a judicial branch that seems to keep its eye on what the foreign courts are ruling and what they are deciding. Now, I am sad to say, we have Members of this body who simply do not understand what ``sovereignty'' means, and how ironic is that at a time when we are celebrating sovereignty in the country of Iraq, we just celebrated Independence Day in this country, and Members of our own body do not grasp that simple concept. Mr. Speaker, when I was sworn in here 18 months ago, I swore an oath to uphold the Constitution. I think that is a good idea, to have that oath, to swear to uphold the Constitution. I think it might be a good thing if other Members of this body remembered why they are here.

Mr. BURGESS

Mr. BURGESS. Mr. Speaker, this week is the first week in summer. Gasoline prices are high as we enter into the summer driving season. So energy independence should be a goal of this Congress. Worldwide demand for petroleum has increased in the last decade, but the growth in production has been relatively flat. The inevitable result is higher prices at the gasoline pump. The reality is it takes a long time to go from an oil field to a gas station. We have lost considerable time in that regard. In 1995 in the 104th Congress, H.R. 2491 would have allowed oil exploration and drilling in the Alaska National Wildlife Refuge. The Department of Energy has estimated that between 1 and 1.3 million barrels of oil a day could be derived from this source. Unfortunately, this legislation was vetoed by the previous administration. And that was nearly 10 years ago. Given a timeline of 7 to 14 years for building a pipeline, it is time that we could scarcely afford. Mr. Speaker, I have been to ANWR. The vast coastal plain is unsuitable for habitation during the summer months because of its marshy consistency. The people who live in ANWR are counting on this Congress to do the right thing and allow them, the rightful owners of these mineral rights, to begin developing the resources that were granted to them upon statehood in 1959. As we say in Texas, ``Time's a wasting.''

Mr. BURGESS

Mr. BURGESS. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Bilirakis) for yielding the time and especially for his leadership in calling this hour this evening, because I do think it is so important that we get the word out, that we get the story out to seniors across the country of what is available. Mr. Speaker, I sat on the floor of this House in January of 2003 and heard the President deliver the State of the Union message, the first State of the Union message that I had ever heard as a United States Congressperson; and the President said in that State of the Union message that the Medicare prescription drug benefit was so important that it would not wait for another President, and it would not wait for another Congress. True to his word, he proposed legislation that worked its way through two committees and came to the floor, just about a year ago, the end of June 2003. We voted on the conference report in November, and the President signed it into law in December. And this bill provided what has been the missing link in Medicare for the past 38 or 39 years, and that is a prescription drug benefit. Now, Mr. Speaker, I was in my former life a simple country doctor, a practicing physician. I was not around when Medicare first came along; but back in those days, if a senior faced a hospitalization or a doctor bill, those would be the primary medical expenses that he could expect to encounter; but nowadays, we can do so much more with prescription drugs. Back in 1965, it perhaps was not important to have a prescription drug benefit, because there were only two medications, antibiotics and corticosteroids, and they were interchangeable; but now we can do so much more with prescription drugs. In January 1, 2006, the prescription drug benefit is going to come online; but between now and then, starting the first of this month of June of 2004, until that January 1, 2006 date, the prescription drug discount card is going to become available; and for the first time, for the first time seniors will have available to them complete transparency in the marketplace. They can call 1-800-Medicare. They can log on if they have the Internet or have their grandchildren log on for them to www.medicare.gov. You need to know a couple of things before you make that telephone call or before you log on. You need to know your ZIP code, and you need to know the medications that you are taking and the dosages that you are taking. You do need to know the specific medication names. It will not do to say that I have a little white pill in the morning and a little green pill at noon. You have got to know the specific medication names, but that is not that difficult. If you have those pieces of information, you can log on or call the 1-800 number, and get information that never before has been available to any group of consumers buying drugs in this country. That is, you can get very powerful market-driven transparent information about what the costs of drugs are. Mr. Speaker, what we have found in the first few weeks of this program is indeed the cost of drugs on those programs has come down as that transparency has worked its magic in the marketplace. I believe it was important to offer this discount prescription drug card as a transitional benefit. The chairman has already correctly pointed out that you cannot just start up with that part B Medicare that is going to be coming online in 18 months, but this is also giving us an opportunity to make sure that benefit when it comes online on January 1, 2006, is going to be the best benefit possible and there is going to be an enormous amount of data that is accumulated during that 18 months' time. Seniors starting the first of this month, June, so they can already be going onto the Medicare Web site, www.medicare.gov, or call 1-800- MEDICARE and enroll for a prescription drug discount card. They can either be walked through the process on the telephone or take themselves through that process online, but what they will get at the end of that interview or the end of that online session is a printout of what prescription drug cards are available in their market and what the costs of those cards are. By law it can be no more than $30. Many of those cards cost less than $30, and some are at no charge at all. Then they can comparison price. Do they want to shop at their neighborhood pharmacy, or do they want to use a mail order pharmacy? That pricing information will be available to them on that printout that they received at the end of the online session or calling into the 1-800-MEDICARE number. Mr. Speaker, it is easy. I did it myself. My hope is that as this process goes forward that caregivers, doctors, nurses will help patients with that; if patients are unsure how to negotiate the system, caregivers will help them chart those waters themselves and find out for themselves what the benefits for seniors out there are. A very important part of this, and the chairman has already alluded to that, it was important to cover the people who were sickest and the people who were poorest. Of those seniors who are at 135 percent of the Federal poverty level, there is going to be a $600 subsidy available this year, right now, on the prescription drug card, and there will be a similar benefit available next year. In fact, since this year is relatively short, what is left with this year, if there is money not used from that $600 benefit, it will roll over into next year. So there is basically a $1,200 benefit for the 18 months between now and the time the prescription drug card comes online. Again, Mr. Speaker, I would stress, this is a competitive, market- based solution that is available. It is the first time for any group of purchasers of prescription drugs that they are going to have the power of that transparency in the marketplace. I think we are going to find a number of good things come from that. I for one am very proud to have been part of the process. I realize that I came late to the table, but I appreciate very much having been here last year and watching that process through to its fruition.

Mr. BURGESS

Mr. BURGESS. Mr. Speaker, energy independence should be a goal of this Congress. Worldwide demand for petroleum has increased during the last decade, and the growth of production has been relatively flat. The inevitable result is higher prices at the gasoline pump, and the reality is that it takes time to go from the oil field to the gasoline station, and we have lost considerable time in this regard. In 1995, in the 104th Congress, H.R. 2491, which was passed, would have allowed oil exploration in the Alaska National Wildlife Refuge. The Department of Energy has estimated that between 1 and 1.3 million barrels of oil a day could be derived from this source. Unfortunately, in 1995, that legislation was vetoed by then-President Clinton. That was nearly 10 years ago; and given a time line of 7 to 14 years for building the pipeline structure, it is time we can scarcely afford. Mr. Speaker, I have been to ANWR. The vast coastal plain is unsuitable for habitation during the summer months because of its marshy consistency. Any caribou unlucky enough to calve in this region would likely die from exsanguination at the hands of the mosquitoes there. The people in ANWR are counting on this Congress to do the right thing and allow them, the rightful owners of these mineral rights, to begin developing the resources that are granted to them upon statehood in 1959. As we say in Texas, ``Time's a wasting.''

Mr. BURGESS

Mr. BURGESS. I thank the gentleman from Indiana for yielding. I will also extend happy birthday to the gentleman from Indiana and thank him for putting together this hour this evening. I think this is extremely helpful. I, too, listened to the first hour of the debate from the other side, and I will not repeat everything that has been said here so eloquently tonight by the gentleman from California (Mr. Rohrabacher), the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Burton), and the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. McCotter); but I want to go to one word that was spoken on the other side and that word was ``misrepresentation,'' and it was used in the context of the Kay report. This is an unclassified document. In fact, it is Mr. Kay's testimony before the Senate select committee last October. In that report, Mr. Kay says that Iraq's weapons of mass destruction programs spanned more than 2 decades, involved thousands of people, billions of dollars, and were elaborately shielded by security and deception operations that continued even beyond the end of Operation Iraqi Freedom. Mr. Kay went on to say, we have discovered dozens of weapons-related program activities and significant amounts of equipment that Iraq has concealed from the United Nations during inspections. A list of these included a clandestine network of laboratories and safe houses within the Iraqi Intelligence Service that contained equipment subject to U.N. monitoring and suitable for conducting chemical and biological weapons research; a prison laboratory complex used in human testing of biological agents; reference strains of biological organisms concealed in a scientist's home, one of which can be used to produce biological weapons; new research on biological weapon applicable agents, Brucella and Congo Crimean Hemorrhagic Fever. This is a viral illness that is very similar to the e-bola virus. We heard a lot of discussion last year about the smallpox virus, and truly smallpox is a frightening chemical agent because it is so infective. This organism is not only infective but its early detection can be easily confused with other illnesses such as the flu. People put into our midst who are suffering from smallpox would actually quickly become apparent because they look sick and they are covered with sores. Individuals with Congo Crimean Hemorrhagic Fever would look for all the world like someone suffering from a summer cold and could work a good deal of mischief in this country by infecting individuals going about their business. In addition, they found documents and equipment hidden in scientists' homes that would have been useful in resuming uranium enrichment by centrifuge and electromagnetic isotope separation and a line of unmanned aerial vehicles not fully declared at an undeclared production facility. Most people do not consider a missile a weapon of mass destruction, but when that missile has a range of 1,000 kilometers, and Iraq was expressly prohibited from having missiles beyond 150 kilometers, depending upon what you put in the warhead of that missile, that, Mr. Speaker, is a weapon of mass destruction and found by the Kay Iraqi survey group. Finally, I will just sum up, as Dr. Kay himself did, deception and concealment were the watchwords of the Iraqi Government. You do not have those as your national priorities unless you have something to hide. Saddam, at least as judged by those scientists and other insiders who worked in his military-industrial programs, had not given up his aspirations and intentions to continue to acquire weapons of mass destruction. Another term that we heard over on the other side was whether or not Saddam was involved in September 11. I do not know the answer to that question; but so much was stated as fact from the 9/11 Commission, the commission that is studying the events around 9/11. In today's Washington Times, and anyone is free to pick this up, it only costs a quarter, and read it for themselves: ``Iraqi Officer an Al Qaeda Operative, Papers Show.'' ``There is at least one officer of Saddam's Fedayeen, a lieutenant colonel, who was a very prominent member of al Qaeda,'' said September 11 commission member and former Navy Secretary John Lehman. Although he stressed that the intelligence ``still has to be confirmed,'' Mr. Lehman told NBC's ``Meet the Press'' on Sunday that the information came from ``captured documents'' shown to the panel after the September 11 Commission's staff report had been written. What we heard quoted tonight was from that staff report; so I would just tell the American people, Mr. Speaker, that the final word has not been written from the 9/11 Commission, and I would caution people about coming to conclusions based on data that is incomplete. Mr. Speaker, I know that time is somewhat at a premium, so I will wrap up; but President Clinton said in 1998 that Saddam had weapons of mass destruction, he had used them in the past and someday, some way, if you don't take them away from him, I guarantee you he will use them again. Mr. Speaker, I have been to Iraq a couple of times, and this is not a picture that I took, but this picture was taken by a member of the Corps of Engineers down in my district, Mr. Doug Cox, who was in the town of Kirkuk, Iraq right after Operation Iraqi Freedom started, and actually he was with one of the forward groups. And this picture was on the wall of the airport there in Kirkuk, the military training base, and this picture was in a room where apparently there was some sort of training facility. There were a lot of pictures on the wall, and we one might relate it to some type of training facility we might have seen in this country, but these pictures were obviously used for a purpose in training Iraqi military individuals. If people cannot see it well on C-SPAN, let me just describe it. It shows an individual here, who has a tank and an airplane and a couple of missiles at his disposal, and he is aiming them at a country, the United States of America, or the USA, as is abbreviated there, and we see an individual standing there in a cowboy hat or a Pilgrim hat, and we see the crosshairs on this individual's chest. It does not take a great deal of imagination to guess what was being taught in that training exercise in this military installation in Kirkuk, Iraq. And, finally, the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Burton) did such an eloquent job of talking about the times in the past that Saddam Hussein had used chemical weapons against his own people, and this was the true threat of Saddam Hussein. Yes, there are other countries that had perhaps helped terrorists in the past. Saddam Hussein was the only world leader who had ever used weapons of mass destruction in an offensive fashion, and that is what made him so dangerous. We have the proof from, as the gentleman pointed out, northern Iraq. We also have the proof from our poor individuals, our poor soldiers in the first Gulf War who suffered from Gulf War Syndrome, and Gulf War Syndrome was a result of neurologic chemical agents. Individuals who were susceptible, who had a specific enzyme defect, who were exposed to low levels of those neurologic agents, then became susceptible to Gulf War Syndrome. So it is not a point for discussion that Saddam had weapons of mass destruction. He clearly did. He used them offensively, and he clearly had designs on using them again.

Mr. BURGESS

Mr. BURGESS. Mr. Speaker, we have all heard the story about the visiting room in prisons that are packed on Mother's Day but empty on Father's Day. This simple story illustrates the oftentimes unrecognized power of fatherhood as a force for the good in the lives of our children. In fact, almost three-fourths of means-tested welfare aid goes to children in homes without fathers. Children without fathers are more likely to become involved in crimes, fail in school, abuse drugs, and end up on welfare as adults. Children raised in household structures without fathers are subject to significantly increased risks of harm. Social science overwhelmingly demonstrates that children do far better when they are raised by two married parents in a stable family relationship. So this weekend we honor our Nation's fathers, and we should do so with the understanding of the enormous, yet sometimes silent and almost unrecognized impact that our fathers make on society at large. As a society, we should recognize that we undervalue fathers at our peril. We should honor our fathers. I know I honor mine. Thank you, dad.

Mr. BURGESS

Mr. BURGESS. Mr. Speaker, it is my duty to clearly state the necessity of men's health awareness. This week is National Men's Health Week, and it comes at an important time as we pause to honor our Fathers. As a practicing physician for over 20 years and Chairman of the House Policy's Health Subcommittee, I wholeheartedly understand the importance of regular health screenings. In May of last year, I introduced H.R. 2151, the Medicare Osteoporosis Measurement Act to address the issue of male osteoporosis. Osteoporosis is a degenerative bone condition that can make bones fragile and can gradually erode quality of life for our seniors. But contrary to popular belief, osteoporosis is a serious health problem for men, as well as women. Two million American men suffer under this debilitating illness, and 12 million more are at risk for developing the disease. It is crucial that men everywhere seek out regular health check-ups. Routine medical examinations are key to detecting--and preventing-- serious men's health concerns like high cholesterol and blood pressure, prostate cancer, cardiovascular disease, and osteoporosis. In addition, men should strive to equip themselves with the knowledge and information necessary for personal health awareness. They need to know about important illnesses facing men and at what age specific screenings are needed. Dr. Kenneth Goldberg, of the Male Health Center, has been a leader in the field of men's health for 30 years. He is a member of the advisory committee for National Men's Health Week, Men's Health Network and Men's Health Magazine and author of the book How Men Can Live as Long as Women. The Male Health Center is located in Lewisville, Texas--my 26th Congressional District. Opening its doors in 1989, it is a premier facility in its field as the first center in the United States specializing in men's health issues. The Male Health Center treats hundreds of patients from all over the country and meets the crucial need of men's health specialists. The fight for better men's health is a partnership. It's a partnership between men and their physicians. For this reason, I honor Dr. Goldberg, his staff and National Men's Health Week.

Mr. BURGESS

Mr. BURGESS. Mr. Speaker, energy and independence should be a goal of this Congress. Worldwide demand for petroleum has increased in the last decade. The growth in production has been relatively flat. The inevitable result is in higher prices at the gasoline pump. This reality is that it takes time to go from an oil field to the gasoline station, and we have lost a considerable amount of time. In 1995, the 104th Congress passed H.R. 2491, which would have allowed oil exploration in the Alaska National Wildlife Refuge. The Department of Energy has estimated that between 1 and 1.3 million barrels of oil a day could be derived from this source. Unfortunately, this legislation was vetoed by President Clinton, and that was nearly 10 years ago. Given a time line of 7 to 14 years for building a pipeline structure, it is time we could scarcely afford to waste. Mr. Speaker, I have been to ANWR. The vast coastal plain is unsuitable for habitation during the summer months because of the marshy consistency of that plain. Any caribou unlucky enough to calve in this region would likely die from exsanguination at the hands of mosquitoes there. The people who live in ANWR are counting on this Congress to do the right thing and allow them, the rightful owners of these mineral rights, to begin developing resources.

Mr. BURGESS

Mr. BURGESS. Mr. Speaker, heralded as the first Presbyterian church in Denton County, Flower Mound Presbyterian Church is celebrating its 150th Anniversary. I am proud to congratulate Flower Mound Presbyterian on this great accomplishment. Flower Mound Presbyterian Church's main priority is to foster a sense of ``family'' within its membership and, at the same time, open its doors wide to welcome the community. They continue the church's rich legacy of religious service to Flower Mound residents. The church has lovingly preserved its original furnishings and all of the cherished memories that go with them. Each Sunday, the sanctuary is flooded with music from an old-style piano donated years ago. The original pews still sit in their initial circular arrangement around the lectern which also dates back to the church's beginnings in 1854. The church remembers its past with numerous photo albums depicting the congregation as it has grown in number and traditions through the years. Images of the church's steeple being constructed provide a visual representation of the changes the church has undergone over time. The church's white clapboard building, located in the area formerly known as ``the Long Prairie,'' witnessed Flower Mound's growth from a sleepy rural hamlet to a vibrant suburban community. Flower Mound Presbyterian Church will commemorate its 150 years by erecting a historical marker in its cemetery. Congratulations to the congregation at Flower Mound Presbyterian Church on their anniversary. One hundred and fifty years of worship is a milestone to be celebrated.

Mr. BURGESS

Mr. BURGESS. Mr. Speaker, as we pause to remember the life and service of the late President Ronald Reagan, no greater testament to his achievements as leader of this nation exists than the sentiments of gratitude being offered by millions of Americans. It is my great honor to lift up just a handful of the reflections on the passing of Preside Reagan made by residents of my congressional district: He was a great American; his message was one that still resonates today.--The Honorable Jane Nelson, Texas Senate. I had a chance to tell him how much I wanted him to run for president and that if he did, I promised to work really hard for him. He was just the same up close as you perceived him to be on television. He was very sincere, very nice. When he talked to you, he talked to you. He didn't pay attention to things going on around him; you had his attention. The world is certainly a better place because of Ronald Reagan being here and serving as the president of the United States. I'm sad we lost him, but it's wonderful he's now receiving his just rewards.--The Honorable Mary Horn, Denton County, Texas. President Reagan made us feel good again about being Americans, and not just being proud of our country, but really invoking that patriotic spirit again. We've lost a great, great man.--Dianne Edmondson, Chair, Denton County

Mr. BURGESS. Mr. Speaker, it has been said that Ronald Reagan loved Texas and Texas loved Ronald Reagan right back. So it was especially poignant that news of his passing occurred during our State Republican convention this past weekend. Indeed, State Senator Jane Nelson from my district in north Texas was quoted in the newspaper as saying, ``We stopped at that point. We had a preacher on hand that gave him a beautiful tribute. We were able to come up with a picture, and we all sang `Amazing Grace.' There were a lot of tears, mine included.'' County judge Mary Horn was quoted in my local paper as saying, ``He was the same up close as you perceived him to be on television. He was very sincere and very nice. When he talked to you, he talked to you. He didn't pay attention to things going on around him. You had his full attention.'' State representative Myra Crownover said, ``I remember that while Reagan was the oldest elected President, what sticks in my mind was the way he connected to young people. We had been through a decade of young people being disconnected with taking pride in America, and he lit that spark again.'' Representative Crownover went on to say, ``You have to be appreciative of what his family is living through.'' Someone described it once as being halfway to heaven. I am so glad he has been released so he could go the rest of the way.

Mr. BURGESS

Mr. BURGESS. Mr. Speaker, I rise this morning with so many of my friends to pay tribute to the 40th President of the United States, Ronald Wilson Reagan, and to extend my condolences to his wife Nancy and to his family. President Reagan will always be remembered as the architect of policies that ended the Cold War, peace through strength. He more than anyone else was directly responsible for giving us the possibility of a world that could live in peace. He ended the Cold War. He ended the threat of hostilities between the United States and Russia, and he brought an end to the Soviet domination in Eastern Europe. He unleashed the power of the American economy. Yes, it cost money to defeat the Soviet Union. It cost money to defeat Soviet tyranny, but in the long run, was it worth it? You bet it was, for this generation and for the generations to come.

Mr. BURGESS

Mr. BURGESS. Mr. Speaker, to the new prime minister of Iraq, Dr. Ayad Allawi, let me say you are most welcome, sir. Dr. Allawi, in addition to being selected as the new prime minister for the country of Iraq, provided a very vociferous ``thank you'' to President Bush and the United States of America for ridding his country of the scourge of Saddam Hussein. We have now seen two significant events this year, the standing up of the new Iraqi constitution, a constitution that respects majority rule but also respects the rights of the minority; a constitution that contains a robust bill of rights and the protection and the involvement of women in government. There is a clear goal understood by all who are involved in that process, to see the Iraqi people free and in charge of Iraq for the first time in generations. America's task in Iraq is not only to defeat an enemy. It is to give strength to a friend, a free, representative government that serves the people and fights on their behalf. The sooner this goal is achieved, the sooner our job will be done. The Iraqi interim government takes power on 30 June. It will serve for only 7 months until a new government is chosen through democratic elections to be held as soon as possible, but no later than the end of January, 2005.

Mr. BURGESS

Mr. BURGESS. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to congratulate the following homebuilders from in or around my congressional district for their recent recognition as Oncor 2004 ENERGY STAR for Homes--Outstanding Achievement Award: Ashton Woods Homes; Beazer Homes of Dallas; Buescher Homes; Coleman Homes; D.R. Horton; David Weekly Homes; Highland Homes, LTD; History Maker Homes; KB Homes; Landstar Homes; Legacy Homes; Lennar Homes; Mercedes Homes; MHI; Morrison Homes, Oak Creek Homes, Optima Homes, Paul Taylor Homes, and Ryland Homes. Forty-six builders participated in the 2003 Oncor ENERGY STAR Homes program. Each of the Award recipients registered with the EPA and constructed at least 50 ENERGY STAR homes in 2003. Collectively, winners built 11,505 ENERGY STAR qualified homes. The ENERGY STAR program is a government industry partnership for promoting energy efficient products. ENERGY STAR eligible homes use considerably less energy than standard homes. Because of lower energy usage, ENERGY STAR homes save homeowners money because they cost less to heat and cool. In addition, they help to reduce air pollution--a particular concern in the Dallas/Fort Worth area. Nationwide almost 20 percent of air pollution results from energy used in homes. Just one ENERGY STAR home can reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 4,500 lbs per year. Energy efficiency is an important part of a balanced energy policy. That is why President George W. Bush and the U.S. House of Representatives included a provision in H.R. 6, The Energy Policy Act of 2003, which would expand the ENERGY STAR program. The homebuilders who participate in the ENERGY STAR program recognize the importance of energy conservation. Once again, I would like to thank these 21 North Texas homebuilders for their commitment to constructing ENERGY STAR qualified homes.

Mr. BURGESS

Mr. BURGESS. Mr. Speaker, here it is June 1, and the Medicare prescription drug benefit starts today. This drug benefit is a long time in coming. In fact, it is the missing link from when Medicare was passed back in 1965. The Medicare prescription drug benefit is going to occur in two phases, and the first phase starts today and that is the Medicare prescription drug discount card which is available to any senior calling 1-800-Medicare or logging on to the Internet, www.medicare.gov. The formal program is choice based, consumer driven and affordable. In fact, low-income seniors will receive an extra $600 subsidy this year and next year. When the full Medicare prescription drug benefit kicks in on January 1, 2006, seniors will have the choice whether or not to opt into the program. Taking the prescription drug benefit discount now in no way obligates a senior to a future Medicare prescription drug benefit in the year 2006. The most important thing about this legislation is that for the first time it actually empowers seniors to make the best choices based on value. For the first time, a senior can call 1-800-Medicare or log onto the Web site medicare.gov, and if they know the name of their prescription drug, their dosage and their ZIP Code, they can find out which Medicare prescription drug card would be best for them, which would cover the medications they are taking, which would provide the best benefits. Whether it be a mail order pharmacy or a neighborhood pharmacy, seniors will have that information at their fingertips. Seniors are used to comparison shopping. They shop on line for cruises, they shop on line for clothes at various retail outlets. For the first time, they are going to have the ability to use that same consumer savvy with the purchase of their prescription drugs. The site is far from perfect, and there will be additional improvements that occur along the way. I myself envision a day where the site will be very much like perhaps Travelocity, where you just go in and type in the drug that you need and you will come up with several options on where to purchase it for the lowest price. But, for right now, this provides for the first time a database, a consumer-driven database that consumers may access at no cost to them to find out whether or not this program will be beneficial for their particular prescription drug needs and in their particular area. Rather than a one-size-fits-all program that almost never works, rather than having the government tell you where and when you can buy your medications, this allows seniors to be in the driver's seat.

Mr. BURGESS

Mr. BURGESS. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman for bringing this hour to the House of Representatives this evening, and I am so glad that she brought that chart because that chart really is so powerful in describing just what we are trying to do, what is available to seniors with this card, and that is by the free and full dissemination of information. We live in the information age, and that information now being readily available on the telephone or the Internet, with the free availability of information, we have driven the cost of commonly prescribed drugs down a significant amount in the first 2 or 3 weeks that this discount program has been around. I need to say again that the Medicare prescription drug benefit that we passed in this House last November 21 and was signed into law by the President in December will occur in two phases. The first phase begins today, begins June 1, and is a prescription discount drug card that is going to be available to every senior, but low-income seniors will receive an additional $600 benefit. What is important about that $600 benefit, you might say. Well, gosh, we are halfway through the year, so what is going to happen if I have not used all of my $600? It rolls over until the next year. So my good friend, the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Gingrey), who pointed out there is not one good reason not to buy or not to avail yourself of one of the Medicare prescription drug discount cards, there is even more reason to look at that card because essentially a low-income senior gets a $1,200 benefit over the next 18 months' time until the full prescription drug benefit rolls out January 1, 2006. The card will be voluntary. The prescription drug benefit program in 2006 will be voluntary, and no one locks themselves into purchasing that part B Medicare in 2006 if they take the discount card that is available to them today; and, again, what is so powerful about taking that prescription drug discount card today is we are likely to see prices change even more over the next month, over the next year, indeed, over the next 18 months until the full prescription drug benefit kicks in. Now, in the interest of full disclosure, I did go on the Medicare Web site, and I did log in myself and put in my own ZIP code. I am fortunate enough not to be on any medications on a regular basis, but I made some up and put them in. Indeed, you can get information about your pharmacy or your mail order pharmacy if you use one. Some of the prescription drug cards do cost money, and perhaps that would be a reason where one of the gentleman from Georgia's (Mr. Gingrey) constituents would not buy into the program because the card costs $30; but I submit to you the savings are going to be a great deal more than $30 over the course of the next 18 months' time; and even more importantly, some of those cards do not cost anything at all. They are available simply from filling out the form, and no expenditure is necessary up front at all. So if you are not hooked onto the Internet, your child or grandchild undoubtedly is; and, again, one of the other powerful things about this program is that we may even see physicians use this program and compare prices for their patients. If their patient comes in and says I would love to be on that Fosamax so my bones do not get so brittle, but doggone, it costs so much money, I do not know that I can afford it, perhaps their physician will even take the time and trouble to go on to that Medicare Internet drug site and find the best bargain for that senior so that they can take their medicine so they are not forced to choose between a life-saving medication and food on the table. But for the first time, seniors are going to have highly competitive pricing available and readily available at their fingertips. They can shop for what is best for them; and most importantly, they can make an informed choice, but the choice will be up to them. It will not be up to someone sitting on the other side of this House who wants to do everything for them. If you like this system, you can stay with this system after 2006, but the program will be voluntary. The prescription drug benefit program will be voluntary, and no one locks themselves into a future benefit by taking advantage of the prescription drug benefit card this month. I submit again that the prescription drug discount card benefit that is available in 2006 will be even better because of the work that the gentlewoman from Connecticut (Mrs. Johnson) has been doing on bringing the prices down by making the information free and available and readily available to anyone who cares to look it up. I thank the gentlewoman.

Mr. BURGESS

Mr. BURGESS. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to take my Special Order speech at this time.

Mr. BURGESS

Mr. BURGESS. Mr. Speaker, I rise today during National Small Business Week to recognize Dr. Sam Rainey, the founder and owner the Family Pet Clinic, a small business located in my Congressional District. Dr. Rainey runs a successful veterinary clinic in Denton, Texas that employ seven North Texans--and he plans to hire another person very soon. It is small businesses like the Family Pet Clinic that are driving America's economy today. They create the majority of new jobs and account for half of the economy's private output. In 2002, 99.7 percent of all businesses were small businesses. Small businesses have had an enormous impact on innovation and progress in America. Historically, the bulk of breakthrough products emerged from small businesses. Small firms produce 13 to 14 times more patents per employee than large companies. The 108th Congress has passed a number of initiatives to bolster small businesses including the Jobs and Growth Reconciliation Act of 2003 which included a provision that tripled the amount that small businesses can immediately expense and increased bonus depreciation for the purchase of capital equipment. In addition to fiscally helping small businesses, the House of Representatives passed Association Health Plan legislation that would enable small businesses, of similar trade and profession, to pool their employees for better health care coverage benefits. By joining together, small employers will enjoy greater bargaining power, economies of scale and administrative efficiencies. In conclusion, as we celebrate National Small Business Week, congratulate Dr. Sam Riley and his thriving small business and urge the U.S. Senate to show their support of America's small businesses by passing initiatives, like association health plans, that are important to small businesses and their employees.

Mr. BURGESS

Mr. BURGESS. Mr. Speaker, this weekend we are going to mark the 6- month anniversary where we in this House passed the conference report to modernize Medicare. Since that time, in 6 months' time, we are now on the threshold of having the Medicare prescription drug discount card, which will come to us June 1, and that will make a user-friendly database available to seniors across the country. For the first time, seniors will be able to comparison shop for their prescription drugs, just like they do for cruises, shoes and other necessities. Also, since that time, we have seen the growth of Health Savings Accounts that were part of that legislation. There are some interesting figures about Health Savings Accounts. Almost half of the people signing up for Health Savings Accounts earn under $50,000 a year, hardly a program that just benefits the rich, but we hear that over and over again. Fifty-six percent of the people that have signed up for Health Savings Accounts are under 40 years of age. Sixty-two percent are families, as opposed to just individuals, and there are comparable benefits after the deductibles are met. The most important thing, though, Mr. Speaker, is this is money that patients own and they control. It is their accounts, not the government's.

Mr. BURGESS

Mr. BURGESS. Mr. Speaker, and so it was said by Pericles, the Athenian leader some 24 centuries ago, ``Not only are they commemorated by columns and inscriptions, but there dwells also an unwritten memorial of them, graven not on stone but in the hearts of men.'' As Memorial Day 2004 approaches, I am awed by a greater sense of pride for our fallen soldiers and those serving aboard. We approach this day with solemn affirmations of the sacrifices of our brave men and women, and in celebration for every joy and freedom bestowed to us from the Almighty. This day was born of human necessity and the answer to an overwhelming desire to honor those who have given the ultimate sacrifice so that we may live without fear, but with hope. No matter where he has fallen, a soldier stands in place for you, for me, for us as a country and for freedom everywhere. May they always be honored for their commitment and respected for their bravery. For the stance taken by each man and woman is written down in the archives of history. The stories and memories shape our vision of the world and provide footsteps for future generations. Bow one head; lay one flower; remember one soldier; pray continuously; and may you be blessed this Memorial Day.

Mr. BURGESS

Mr. BURGESS. Mr. Speaker, there is no question in my mind that the availability of the Medicare prescription drug discount card this June is going to have a dramatic influence on the cost of prescription drugs in this country. For the first time, seniors are going to have an open and transparent market; and we have seen in the last 3 weeks how this has brought the price of medications down with people being able to be compare for the first time, go to a database on the Internet and compare drug prices for themselves. 1-800-Medicare, that the gentleman from Georgia pointed out, or www.Medicare.gov can take you through the process. I have done it myself. It is easy. It is simple. It is self-explanatory. Simplicity and efficiency are the keys to bringing the cost down in this market. Liability reform is not a special interest reform. It affects everyone in this country. The embedded costs of liability in the medical justice system in this country and the results of defensive medicine that we all pay for cost the Medicare system $50 billion a year.

Mr. BURGESS

Mr. BURGESS. Mr. Speaker, this week is a good week. The American College of Surgeons is in town visiting us in our offices on Capitol Hill, and so it is of some note that we passed again a measure for liability reform last week in this House. We did that a year ago and unfortunately got stalled over somewhere by the rotunda. I hope this year it can indeed go forward because, Mr. Speaker, it is so important for people to realize and for my friends at the American College of Surgeons to realize that right now we have got a President who will sign major medical liability reform. We have a candidate running for that office who has either voted ``no'' or been absent when that vote has been taken in the other body. We can no longer afford the crippling costs of defensive medicine that are layered upon our existing health care system. Mr. Speaker, it is time for Americans to sit up and take notice of this problem. Our professional people and our patients are indeed in peril.

Mr. BURGESS

Mr. BURGESS. Mr. Speaker, last week in this House, we passed yet another version of the medical liability reform act in this Congress. We passed similar legislation in March 2003. That bill that we passed last year and likely the bill that we pass this year is going to stop dead on the other side of the Capitol and will not be enacted. It is a shame, Mr. Speaker. Right now we have a President in the White House who has said he will sign this bill into law if it is given to him. We have a candidate running for the office of President who has either voted ``no'' or been absent when that vote has come up across the rotunda on the other side of the Capitol. Mr. Speaker, this is important. I met with a group of doctors back in my district this weekend. There is no greater peril to our profession of medicine than the current medical justice system. The reforms that we have passed in this House closely mirror the Medical Injury Compensation Reform Act of 1975 passed in the State of California that has brought some semblance of sanity back to the medical justice system in that State. Residents of the other States, physicians in the other States, and their patients deserve no less.

Mr. BURGESS

Mr. BURGESS. Mr. Speaker, yesterday on the floor of this House, we passed legislation that will once again reform the civil justice system in regards to medical liability. Then the question came up last night during the hours of debate on this House as to how in the world is that going to lower the cost of health insurance for the uninsured. Well, true enough, lowering the cost of liability insurance will not have a direct effect upon the cost of providing insurance for the uninsured, but certainly removing the embedded cost of the civil justice system and the embedded cost of defensive medicine from the medical justice system will go a great way towards alleviating the crisis in the cost of medical insurance. It is estimated from a study done in 1996 that $50 billion a year could be saved in the Medicare program if doctors were not practicing defensive medicine. The fact of the matter remains, Mr. Speaker, we passed that bill in the House, it is awaiting action on the other side of the Capitol, we have a President right now who will sign that bill, and I think that is an important part for the American people to bear in mind.

Mr. BURGESS

Mr. BURGESS. Mr. Speaker, I have had the opportunity for the last hour to listen to some of the rhetoric coming from the other side. I will just have to say we have heard a lot of stuff on the floor of this House today about health care and medical liability insurance. My firm belief is we need choices and options for the uninsured. Unfortunately, the other side chooses to characterize that as a piecemeal approach, but I believe that is an approach that is working and will continue to work, if we will simply give it the chance to do so. There are fundamental differences between the Democrat side and the Republican side of this House. The Democrats believe that the government should be in charge of all health care and mete it out as they see fit. Mr. Speaker, I worked for over 20 years as a private practitioner, as a physician, back in Texas, and I will just tell you I cannot imagine giving up that control over that much of my life to the Federal Government. I would much rather see people own their health insurance, be in charge of their health care themselves. I believe if you put people in charge of their health care, they will ultimately make better health decisions, and they will certainly help keep the costs of delivery of health care down. One of the really painful things that I had to listen to over this past hour was discussion of the initiatives that were passed on this House floor today, particularly medical liability reform and the Association Health Plans. Yes, those are Republican initiatives, and a Republican House has passed both of those initiatives, well over a year ago in the case of medical liability insurance, and last June for Association Health Plans. But, unfortunately, 440 feet away from us, we cannot get that legislation taken up; not because our Republican colleagues are opposed to this legislation, but because of the arcane rules of the other body preventing that from even coming up to a vote on the other side. I think that is a shame. Mr. Speaker, when the President came and addressed us in the State of the Union Address in January, he outlined three proposals that would help reduce the number of uninsured in this country. Remind you this was back in January, this was four months ago, so time is a-wasting. What the President outlined, he said, ``We already did Health Saving Accounts in the Medicare Modernization Act that I just signed into law last month. What I think we ought to do now is provide a full deductible for a catastrophic health insurance plan, so that someone could purchase that with before-tax dollars and put those contributions for the deductible into their Medical Savings Account and build wealth with that.'' Mr. Speaker, I had a Medical Savings Account myself for 5 years before I came to Congress, and I will just tell you, that is a powerful way to build wealth in a savings account dedicated to your health care needs. The President went on to talk about Association Health Plans. There is no aspect of Association Health Plans that involves cherry-picking. Far from it. This allows a much larger group to capture the purchasing power of a large group and to disburse that purchasing power then amongst small businesses. I think that is an idea that only makes sense, and we ought to allow that to go forth. But unfortunately, again, the longest 440 feet in the world is the distances between the two Chambers here in this building. Finally, Mr. Speaker, tax credits. I have no problem with tax credits. I believe they ought to be given to individuals and not small businesses. I believe if we provide small businesses the purchasing power of large corporations with association health plans, let us save the tax credits for the true working poor, those who otherwise would not be able to afford insurance, a prefund, if you will, that would occur at the beginning of every year to allow an individual to purchase health care or health insurance on their own, and that money would not be able to be used for any other purpose. It would not subsidize any other activity in that person's or that family's life, only expenditures for the purchase of health insurance. Mr. Kondracke, who writes a column for Roll Call, not necessarily known as a friend of the President or a friend of the Republican Party, disparaged the President at the State of the Union address and said, my gosh, with these three proposals we would only cover about a quarter of the uninsured. Mr. Speaker, I maintain that if we have within our power, within our hands the power to cover one-quarter of the people who are right now in the ranks of the uninsured, today, without any heavy lifting, we ought to do so. I urge my colleagues on the other side to encourage their colleagues to help us get those three commonsense solutions passed. Finally, I have just got to say a word about medical liability reform. No, it is not the cost of the doctors' liability insurance that is driving up the cost of health care. No one believes that to be true; no one has said that that is the cause of health care costs rising. It certainly can limit access, as doctors decide they cannot afford liability insurance and drop out of the market or move to a more favorable market, but that in and of itself is not going to be driving up the costs of the uninsured. What drives up the cost of health care with the problems that we have with our medical justice system right now are the costs of defensive medicine. A patient comes into the emergency room, midnight on Friday night, the doctor is called in to see them: gosh, it is probably just a tension headache and I can treat that conservatively and send them on their way, but if I miss the opportunity to do the CAT scan and to diagnosis the more serious illness, I will have a hard time defending that in court. That drives the cost of health insurance up.