Dave Camp

Mr. CAMP

Mr. CAMP. Madam Speaker, the passage of the Taxpayer Relief Act of 1997 contained a signature initiative, the HOPE Scholarship Tax Credit. The HOPE Scholarship provides annual scholarship benefits to students. However, many of the students who need the most help do not benefit from the program. The gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. McGovern) and I are introducing legislation that would address these shortcomings. Currently, the HOPE tax credit can be used only for tuition and some expenses. However, college students must pay for much more than just tuition. Our legislation would allow the scholarships to cover required fees, books, supplies and equipment. Additionally, a student's eligibility is currently reduced by any other grants they receive. As a result, benefits have been limited primarily to middle and upper-middle income taxpayers. That explains why fewer than one-fifth of all full-time students attending community colleges qualify for maximum HOPE Scholarship benefits. Our legislation would ensure that any Pell Grants and other grants a student receives are not counted against the student's eligibility. Let us help make the HOPE Scholarship available to community college students. This legislation has bipartisan support and cosponsors, and also support from a number of higher education organizations. I urge the House to bring up this legislation in the near future.

Mr. CAMP

Mr. CAMP. Mr. Speaker, today I am pleased to introduce the Medicare Dialysis Benefit Improvement Act of 2001. This legislation takes important steps to help sustain and improve the quality of care for the more than 250,000 Americans living with end-stage renal disease (ESRD). More specifically, this legislation provides the Medicare reimbursement for a routine fourth dialysis treatment for End-Stage Renal Disease (ESRD) beneficiaries who require more than three dialysis treatments per week. Currently, Medicare's composite rate for hemodialysis for the individuals with ESRD is a one size fits all reimbursement system. This is despite the fact that more than 250,000 individuals with ESRD come in all ages, shapes, sides and health statuses. Historically, the standard frequency for hemodialysis treatments to remove excess fluid and accumulated toxins has been three times a week. Simply increasing the usual thrice weekly four hour treatment sessions will not solve a problem as there are diminishing returns for longer sessions and this would decrease the rehabilitation potential of these patients and increase noncompliance. It is estimated that only 10-15 percent of patients would actually receive a fourth treatment a week. While Medicare rules allow payment for additional hemodialysis treatments beyond the standard three times a week on a case by case basis for fluid overload, pericarditis and a few other unusual conditions, Medicare's fiscal intermediaries rarely approve claims for more than three treatments per week. Furthermore, this legislation takes into consideration the Medicare Payment Advisory Commission (MedPAC) report recommendation of a 2.6 percent increase to sustain patients'access to dialysis services in the 2002. This proposal would help ensure all dialysis providers receive the reimbursement that is in line with increasing patient load and quality requirements. The dialysis reimbursement is the only Medicare provider reimbursement that does not include an annual inflation adjustment. Therefore the only way in which dialysis reimbursement can be updated is by Congressional action. As Congress considers further improvements to the Medicare program, I urge my colleagues to support this important effort to ensure patients with kidney failure continue to have access to quality dialysis services. I thank my colleagues for working together on this bipartisan proposal.

Mr. CAMP

Mr. CAMP. Mr. Chairman, today, I rise in strong support of the amendment offered by my colleague and friend Mike Rogers from the State of Michigan. As we debate this historic education reform legislation, H.R. 1, one aspect that should not be overlooked is that too often the educational opportunities of our students and families are limited by tuition costs and overwhelming debts. We need to encourage low- and middle-class families to turn from borrowing to a saving. The best time to encourage parents to start saving for tuition costs is when their children are in elementary school. Today, all 50 States, including my home State of Michigan, have established prepaid tuition or college savings plans under section 529 of the Federal Tax Code. This amendment will empower the Secretary of Education to work with the States to advocate the benefits of these plans to elementary school parents and stress the importance of establishing an account as soon as possible. I thank the gentleman for offering this amendment and for his leadership in the State of Michigan on this important issue. I encourage my House colleagues to leave no child behind and support this amendment to encourage families to save early for their children's educational expenses.

Mr. CAMP

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

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

Mr. CAMP. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Cardin) for his effort on this legislation, and also for his comments. As the gentleman from California (Mr. Thomas), Chairman of the Committee on Ways and Means, mentioned, he would like to work with the gentleman in terms of finding a way to assist special-needs adoption, adoptive parents with the costs, and do it in a way that really had some connection to the adoption expenses that might actually be incurred by a family. Because, obviously, we are all here, and we heard from a number of speakers from both parties who are very much wanting to strengthen the ability of people to adopt, to strengthen families, to try to find a way to make adoption easier and more frequent, and I am hopeful that we can resolve that. Mr. Speaker, this is a good day in the Congress. This is excellent legislation that has been worked on for more than this Congress, and really was the effort of former member and chairman Mr. Bliley to bring this increase in the adoption tax credit to the floor, obviously make it permanent, so that the planning of families and agencies can go forward in trying to find and place children into loving homes. This is an excellent bill, and I urge its adoption.

Mr. CAMP. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Smith).

Mr. CAMP. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Pitts).

Mr. CAMP. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Cantor).

Mr. CAMP. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from Virginia (Mrs. Jo Ann Davis).

Mr. CAMP. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Alabama (Mr. Bachus).

Mr. CAMP. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. English), a distinguished member of the Committee on Ways and Means.

Mr. CAMP. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from California (Mr. Horn).

Mr. CAMP. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. DeMint), the sponsor of the bill.

Mr. CAMP. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I want to thank the gentleman from California (Mr. Thomas), the chairman of the Committee on Ways and Means, for his leadership on this very important issue. This bill would not have come to the floor without his support and effort. Also, I am grateful for the bipartisan effort that this bill has enjoyed. Mr. Speaker, I think it is important to also mention that the former chairman of the Committee on Commerce, the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Bliley), originally introduced this bill in the last Congress, and along with the gentlewoman from Ohio (Ms. Pryce) and the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. DeMint) helped bring this bill to the floor. Obviously, I support the Hope for Children Act, H.R. 622, which would raise the tax credit for adoption to $10,000. Currently the maximum credit is $6,000 for families who adopt a special-needs child and $5,000 for all other adoptions. The credit is set to expire this year, and H.R. 622 would make the credit permanent. The special-needs credit, as the gentleman from Maryland mentioned, is permanent now. But furthermore, the Hope for Children Act applies to all adoptions, both domestic and intercountry. As the lead sponsor of the Adoption and Safe Families Act, which was signed into law in November of 1997, I am pleased that we are continuing our efforts to make adoptions easier. I supported the legislation which was signed into law that provided adoptive parents a $5,000 per child adoption credit, but now it is time to expand this tax credit and make it permanent. Families can spend anywhere from $8,000 to $30,000 to adopt a child; and we need to ease the financial burden that really gets in the way of children finding permanent and loving homes. I have heard from many families like William and Susan Logan of Midland, Michigan, who would like to open their home to a child, but are prevented or delayed from doing so because of the high cost of adoption. The good news is that the Logans will be traveling abroad in the next couple of weeks to bring home the newest addition to their family. Regrettably, there are thousands more children who are without permanent families, and it is time we work together to ensure they find a loving home. I believe that now is the time to help those children find the families they are waiting for so that they may enjoy a wonderful, loving relationship. I urge my colleagues to vote ``yes'' on H.R. 622. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. CAMP. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman for yielding me this time, and for her leadership on the issue of adoption. Mr. Speaker, since 1995, we have made tremendous progress from the creation of the credit, to ending discrimination in adoption, to the Adoption in Safe Families Act, a stamp commemorating adoption, the Intercountry Adoption Act to help people who are adopting children from abroad, and the Child Citizenship Act to make sure that children who are foreign born who are adopted by American parents receive automatic citizenship. That had been a real hang-up for families who are adopting. And also for the Abuse and Neglect Act; and now, of course, today increasing the credit. Mr. Speaker, I support this rule. This bill represents a unanimous bipartisan effort from the Committee on Ways and Means and from the House. There are well over 289 cosponsors, a significant amount of support. This rule will provide extra time for my colleagues to debate and discuss the importance of this act. The credit, as I said, was originally enacted in the mid-1990s. A portion of that original law is set to expire. So if we do not act, we will lose the adoption credit, and we need to update the language of this bill to better reflect the realities and cost of adoption today. The Hope for Children Act will make permanent an update of the adoption tax credit, increasing the credit to $10,000 per eligible child and raising the income caps and exempting the credit from the Alternative Minimum Tax, so there are no adverse tax consequences for people who use this credit. It will also extend the gross income exclusion for employer-provided adoption assistance programs and raise that maximum exclusion to $10,000 as well. As has been stated, this is about children and families and about finding a loving home for children who do not have homes. That is the most important thing in this bill. Mr. Speaker, again I wanted to commend the leadership on the bipartisan effort of this bill, and especially the leadership of the gentlewoman from Ohio (Ms. Pryce) who has brought the issue of adoption to the floor.

Mr. CAMP

Mr. CAMP. Mr. Speaker, today, I am reintroducing legislation that would encourage the development of projects that capture landfill gas and use it as an alternative energy source. Furthermore, this bill would add incentives to landfill gas (LFG) projects by making the existing tax credit in Section 45 of the tax code available to them. Section 45 currently provides a tax credit for electricity generated by projects using wind, closed-loop biomass or poultry waste. I believe the host of environmental and renewable energy benefits that can be provided by LFG projects, as described below, also deserve federal support. Additionally, our legislation would extend the current tax credits for wind, closed-loop biomass and poultry waste. LFG is produced as waste decomposes in the many landfills that serve our communities. If not captured, the gas is odorous, presents a fire hazard, and contributes to local air pollution. This tax credit will encourage the installation of LFG utilization projects which capture and use the gas which would otherwise go unused. This captured product can then be used to generate electricity or as a fuel for heating. In addition, the captured gas can be used for industrial and commercial use and fuel cells or alternative fuel vehicles, decreasing our dependence on foreign fuels. For communities owning municipal solid waste landfills, sale of the electricity or gas from such projects can provide a welcome stream of revenues to offset the cost of environmental controls at the landfills, including Clean Air Act requirements, and other costs related to solid waste management and recycling services. LFG's use can also significantly reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Currently, there are about 270 LFG projects in existence, the bulk of which were made possible by a previous federal tax credit for development of non-conventional fuels. It is estimated that between 400 and 500 additional LFG projects could be brought on line if a tax credit were provided. With these potential energy projects on line, the nation could save more than 40 million barrels of oil annually.

Mr. CAMP

Mr. CAMP. Mr. Speaker, today, I am reintroducing legislation that would provide incentives to encourage the development of alternative fuel technologies and consumer acceptance of these products. The primary purpose of the legislation is to enhance overall energy security and diversity goals by reducing U.S. dependency on foreign oil. Transportation accounts for nearly 2/3 of all oil consumption and is almost 97% dependent on petroleum. Providing tax incentives for a limited period of time to consumers is needed to help offset the higher costs associated with new technology and alternative fuel vehicles. As the vehicles gain consumer acceptance and production volumes increase, the cost differential between these vehicles and conventional vehicles will be reduced or eliminated. This legislation will develop market acceptance of a wide range of advanced technology and alternative fuel vehicles including: Fuel Cell Vehicles, Hybrid Vehicles, Dedicated Alternative Fuel Vehicles and Battery Electric Vehicles. Historically, consumers have faced three basic obstacles to accepting the use of alternative fuels and advanced technologies: the cost of the vehicles, the cost of alternative fuel, and the lack of an adequate infrastructure of alternative fueling stations. My legislation provides a tax credit of 50 cents per gasoline-gallon equivalent for the purchase of alternative fuels at retail establishments. To give customers better access to alternative fuel, we are extending an existing deduction for the capital costs of installing alternative fueling stations. We also provide a 50 percent credit for the installation costs of retail and residential refueling stations. Finally, my legislation provides tax credits to consumers to purchase alternative fuel and advanced technology vehicles. To make certain that the tax benefits we provide translates into a corresponding benefit to the environment, we split the vehicle tax credit into two. One part provides a base tax credit for the purchase of vehicles dedicated to the use of alternative fuels or vehicles using advanced technologies. The other part offers a bonus credit based on the vehicle's efficiency and reduction in emissions. Tax incentives will sunset within 6 years for all applications with the exception of fuel cell vehicles which are extended to 10 years. With minimum development cycles of 2-4 years for new vehicles, incentives are needed now to move existing designs to the market so they can accelerate the process for customer acceptance.

Mr. CAMP

Mr. CAMP. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from California (Mr. Thomas), Chairman of the Committee on Ways and Means, for yielding the time to me. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of H.R. 6. American families are working longer and harder than ever, and more and more of their money is going to Washington. In fact, today's couples spend an average of 40 percent of their income in taxes; and if there is nothing else that we do in this body, we should strengthen families. I am pleased to stand before you today because this legislation represents an historic and long overdue step for families. H.R. 6 provides tax relief to families. This legislation provides relief on two fronts, by eliminating the marriage penalty and doubling the child tax credit. Last year, the House passed with strong bipartisan support the same proposal to eliminate the marriage penalty. This year I am confident we will finally be able to bring tax relief to American families. H.R. 6 will ensure that these couples are never again penalized just for being married, and it will make a promise to future couples that they will not be punished for making the decision to get married. H.R. 6 doubles the current child tax credit. The legislation also extends present law refundability of the tax credit. This is a huge win for families. It will allow parents to keep more of the money that they earned to invest in their future and to provide an education for their children and to spend less and less time working to send their money to Washington. Mr. Speaker, I urge support of this bill.

Mr. CAMP

Mr. CAMP. Mr. Speaker, I rise to discuss a tragic and horrible situation plaguing our society, the incidences of school shootings. I would like to call the attention of my colleagues to the following article by Mr. John Telfer, which appeared in the Midland Daily News on Sunday, March 11, 2001. He offers great and truthful insight into the appalling social problem of school shootings. He correctly writes that the answer is not more unnecessary gun laws, but rather we must find a solution that addresses the moral breakdown in our society. He truly writes about ``The Heart of the Matter.'' The Heart of the Matter (By John Telfer) President Bush, in the aftermath of the latest school shooting, did not make a new call for gun control when commenting on the tragedy. Instead, he focused on the heart of the matter. ``All adults in society can teach children right from wrong, can explain that life is precious,'' he said. The media seemed almost disappointed. The last line of an Associated Press story read: President Clinton used a rash of school shootings during his term to call for stiffer gun control laws. Bush did not mention the issue. Thank goodness. It is time for America to stop trying to use Band-Aid fixes to solve problems of the heart. Instead of seeking more gun control, we should be asking why some of our children think it is OK to kill people they dislike. Let that sink in a moment. Some of our children think it is OK to shoot a person who has hurt them. That's a gun control issue? We need to face the facts as a nation that these kids no longer believe the commandment ``thou shall not kill'' applies to them. They have come up with their own definition of reality and it has nothing to do with what most people would deem morally correct. A radio commentator the other day said we shouldn't be surprised by the violent actions of some young people. Every day they live in a world that encourages them to come up with their own definitions of right and wrong, from sexual promiscuity to illegal drug, alcohol and tobacco use to underage viewing of violent R-rated movies and more. We encourage young people to come up with their own solutions to problems in school and life, often telling them there is no wrong answer. We don't want to place limits on their answers--that might stifle creativity. We expose them to images, concepts and viewpoints that require maturity to understand. We expect them to make good choices. But in giving them all this freedom to choose, some kids are having a hard time figuring out where the boundary line is between acceptable and unacceptable behavior. The fact is our children need boundaries. They need rules. They need to know there are many incorrect solutions to the problems they are encountering. They need to be taught what is right and what is wrong and they need it pounded in their heads over and over and over again until you are so sick of doing it you are ready to throw in the towel as a parent. And then they need it again. It's time for America to quit asking ``why'' these shootings keep happening. We know that answer. These kids have sick hearts. And they don't know the morally correct way to deal with the problems they are facing. Our kids need to be taught right from wrong. They need to have boundaries they cannot cross without facing consequences. They need to know some values and beliefs are not negotiable. And they need all of these things while being taught under a forgiving umbrella of love. Then, and only then, will America be attacking the heart of the problem.

Mr. CAMP

Mr. CAMP. Mr. Speaker, I thank the chairman for yielding me this time. Over the next 10 years, the Federal Government will collect more money than it needs to operate. Even after setting aside money to protect Social Security and Medicare, the government will collect much more than it needs. If that money is left in Washington, there is no doubt that it will be spent, when in all fairness it should be returned to the American people. Today, the average American family pays more in taxes than on food, clothing, and shelter combined. Every dollar that passes through the taxpayers' hands on its way to Washington is a dollar that could be saved for a child's education, used for necessary living expenses or household repairs. In my district in Michigan, I know these dollars could be used to help with the high cost of gasoline and heating fuel. High taxes are not only a tax on the ability to create wealth for working people, they are a tax on opportunity itself; the opportunity for Americans to determine their own destiny, make their own choices, and keep more of what they have worked so hard to earn. These values are the essence of democracy itself. It is the people's money. They worked hard for it, and they deserve it. They deserve a refund. Today, we have a great opportunity. It has been 20 years, since Ronald Reagan was a new President, to see any significant Federal tax relief. Let us vote to give the American people a refund.

Mr. CAMP

Mr. CAMP. Mr. Speaker, I wish to honor Lithuania's Independence Day, which occurred on February 16th . This is the 83rd Anniversary of this historic event. The Republic of Lithuania declared independence on February 16, 1918. The Lithuanian people enjoyed a 22 year period of self-rule and freedom before the occupation of the Soviet Union in 1940. Their traumatic times did not end there. In 1941, Nazi Germany invaded and 90% of Lithuania's 250,000 Jews were killed. The Soviets regained control over the area in 1944, resulting in a 46 year occupation, during which 700,000 Lithuanians were either deported to Siberia, forced into exile, imprisoned or shot. Throughout all of their struggles, the Lithuanian people never gave up on their dream of independence. In 1990, they were the first Baltic State to secede from the Soviet Union and declare independence. After a hard fought struggle with the former Soviet empire, Lithuania finally regained independence. I offer my congratulations on the stability of the country as a republic with a strong hold on democracy and a growing economy. I wish the Republic of Lithuania the best as they work for full integration into the world community, NATO and the European Union. The people of Lithuania are proud and courageous, and I salute their faithfulness, endurance and patriotism. I extend my warmest wishes to the Republic of Lithuania as they celebrate another year of freedom.

Mr. CAMP

Mr. CAMP. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the distinguished chairman of the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure for his leadership on this legislation. Without his efforts, this bipartisan bill would not be on the floor today. Water scarcity is becoming a worldwide problem. Over 166 million people in 18 countries are suffering from water shortages, and almost 270 million in 11 additional countries are considered water stressed. Experts predict that by 2025, one-fourth of the world will suffer from lack of water. Given the pressures of dropping water tables, present- day water usage cannot be sustained. Some are trying to change fresh water from a resource to a commodity. Given these statistics, it is not surprising that there are now proposals to withdraw bulk quantities of water in the Great Lakes Basin. After all, the Great Lakes comprise one-fifth of the Earth's fresh water resources and contain over six quadrillion gallons of water. This year, lake levels are at an all-time low, which is especially concerning after the wet summer we have had. The Detroit News reported that Lake Superior is seven inches below its long-term average, near lows not seen since 1920; Lake Michigan and Huron are six inches below average. Now is the time to work on this matter. Prudent management of our natural resources means looking ahead and planning for the future. We must be responsible stewards of our environment to ensure that our children are not denied the resources that we are able to enjoy today. For the past 15 years, the governors of the Great Lakes States, in consultation with the Canadian premiers, have effectively managed the Great Lakes Basin. Today we have the opportunity to protect regional control of the basin and ensure its long-term stability. I have worked very diligently with the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Ehlers) and the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Stupak) and Senator Abraham in the other body to include language in this conference report which ensures that control of Great Lakes water remains in the hands of the Great Lakes governors. The language in this bill is the culmination of a great deal of work to assure that these waters are effectively protected. I urge Members of the Great Lakes States and all Members of Congress to join me in supporting this legislation.

Mr. CAMP

Mr. CAMP. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Florida for yielding me this time. Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Hyde), chairman of the Committee on the Judiciary, for all of his work, and the work of the entire committee for their work on this bill. I would also like to thank the gentleman from California (Mr. Horn) for his leadership in writing and drafting this bill. It is really about the safety of our citizens, and I believe he should be duly recognized for his efforts. On June 29, the gentleman from California (Mr. Horn) brought H.R. 4827 before the Speaker's Advisory Group on Corrections. The Corrections Group is a bipartisan group that seeks to fix, update or repeal outdated or unnecessary laws, rules or regulations. This bill received unanimous support from the Corrections Advisory Group. Earlier this year, agents of the General Accounting Office were able to enter Government buildings with ease by flashing fake badges and pretending to be law enforcement officers. These agents used badges purchased over the Internet. The agents passed through security at two airports without going through the regular security measures. Agents were also able to enter the Justice Department, State Department, FBI Headquarters, and the Pentagon. H.R. 4827 would prohibit the transfer, transport or receiving in interstate or foreign commerce of a counterfeit or a genuine police badge to an individual not authorized to possess such a badge. The bill would also make it a crime to enter a Government building under false pretenses. I am proud as chairman of the Advisory Group and as a cosponsor to be here today speaking in favor of H.R. 4827 and would urge support of this measure.

Mr. CAMP

Mr. CAMP. Mr. Speaker, I pay tribute to the Women's Olympic Softball Team for winning the gold medal at the 2000 Olympics in Sydney. The U.S. team beat Japan to win the gold medal for the second straight Olympics. In a remarkable comeback, the U.S. won four consecutive games to advanced to the gold medal round. They did that over the past three days, winning the last two victories in a ten hour span. Beating the Japanese team was quite a challenge. This goal medal represents more than just great athleticism, it is a tribute to hard work, determination and positive thinking. Facing adversity, the U.S. Women's team regrouped after unexpected losses and again established themselves as the World's premier softball team. I would also like to take this opportunity to recognize Margo Jonker, who serves as an assistant coach for the USA softball team. In addition to her duties as an Olympic softball coach, Margo also coaches softball for Central Michigan University. Entering her 21st season at the helm of the Chippewa program, Margo is one of the most successful coaches in college softball. She has a career record of 697 wins to 380 losses. Coach Jonker has led Central Michigan to eight Mid-American Conference (MAC) titles, nine NCAA regional appearances and a spot in the 1987 College World Series. Mr. Speaker, the competition associated with the Olympic games tests the body, mind and soul of individuals. The Women's Softball Team and Coach Jonker met the challenge head on and emerged victorious. I want to commend the U.S. Softball Team for winning Olympic gold. But, I would also like to personally thank Coach Jonker, for the pride that she has brought this Nation at the Olympics and for her wonderful service to Central Michigan University and the Fourth District.