Benjamin Cardin

Mr. CARDIN

Mr. CARDIN. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.

Mr. CARDIN

Mr. CARDIN. Mr. Chairman, I thank my friend for yielding me this time. Mr. Chairman, I want to congratulate the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Goss), the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Pelosi), and all of the members of the committee for bringing forward an excellent bill. I encourage all of my colleagues to support the legislation. I wholeheartedly agree with the committee's report that the success of intelligence normally goes unnoticed, for obvious and correct reasons, while failures seem to be immediately brought to the public's eye. I want to commend the dedicated and hard-working employees of the NSA in my district who work tirelessly in secret with little public reward or praise for their many accomplishments. Mr. Chairman, I have visited NSA on many occasions, and I agree with the committee report that there are two critical challenges that NSA faces. One is sufficient linguists. We have talked about that already today, the fact is that the inability of budget support to attract sufficient linguists has compromised NSA's mission and that we need to improve the current language programs. The legislation before us authorizes additional funds for us to be able to accomplish that very important challenge. The second issue is how to deal with the buy-versus-make policy for the outsourcing of nonmission critical programs. I think the committee report addresses that issue appropriately. Mr. Chairman, the bottom line is that this legislation provides the additional resources to our intelligence community so they can collect and analyze the necessary information, set the priorities as to what is important for national security, and do that in a timely way. It also at NSA provides resources for additional research to protect U.S. communications. I think this is a very balanced bill. It is a bill that responds to the security challenges of our Nation, providing the resources and providing the direction that is necessary, and I urge my colleagues to support the legislation.

Mr. CARDIN

Mr. CARDIN. Mr. Speaker, the time is right for this body to act on corporate accountability. The other body got it right when it passed the Sarbanes bill by a unanimous vote. Corporate greed is affecting every one of our constituents, whether it is in their 401(k) plans or the performance of our economy, with job opportunity, and the list goes on and on. Mr. Speaker, let us act now. Let us act as the other body did, in a bipartisan way. Let us take up today and pass the Sarbanes bill, and let us send it to the President. He has indicated he will sign it. That will help restore confidence among our constituents and our economy.

Mr. CARDIN

Mr. CARDIN. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to ask my colleagues to recognize the accomplishments of Nathan Weinberg and thank him for his service to his country and his community as he retires as a trustee of the Harry and Jeannette Weinberg Foundation and his appointment as Civilian Aide to the Secretary of the Army. In 1917, Nathan Weinberg was the first of his six siblings to be born in America, and in 1941, was inducted into the U.S. Army. On December 25, 1945, Mr. Weinberg was discharged as a 2nd Lieutenant after service in Texas, Australia, New Guinea and the Philippines. After returning home to Baltimore, Mr. Weinberg worked in real estate and lived briefly in Texas and Pennsylvania working on business interests of his brother, Harry Weinberg. He remained a member of the standby reserve until October 1955 when he was honorably discharged. In 1960, Mr. Weinberg became an active officer and trustee of the Harry and Jeannette Weinberg Foundation. Since his brother Harry's death in 1990, Mr. Weinberg has remained one of five trustees to the Foundation, which is one of the largest private foundations in the United States. His leadership on the board has included projects supported by his brother, particularly housing and amenities for the elderly from Coney Island to Tel Aviv to Hawaii. Mr. Weinberg was appointed Civilian Aide to the Secretary of the Army in 2000. His military experience and his dedication to the Maryland Army National Guard has provided leadership, friendship and financial support for community outreach. Mr. Weinberg has a strong sense of family and a firmly held belief in equality and equitable treatment for all people. At ground breakings and ribbon cuttings, he is not shy about expressing his concern for the welfare of the audience, unhappy that the dignitaries receive special treatment while the audience is left to stand, swelter in the heat or freeze in the cold. His sense of justice guides his dealings with others and he expects others to pass along that philosophy as well. He is a leader by example and deeds. I would ask my colleagues to please join me in congratulating Mr. Weinberg on a life well lived and in thanking him for his service to his country. Our appreciation extends to his family, his wife Lillian and his three sons, Donn, Glenn and Joseph, their wives and children.

Mr. CARDIN

Mr. CARDIN. Mr. Speaker, first, let me thank the gentleman from California (Mr. Lantos) for his entire career of fighting prejudice and bias wherever it can be found in our communities. I also want to thank the gentleman from New York (Mr. Gilman). The gentleman will be deeply missed in this body. We thank him for his leadership on behalf of all of the people of this Nation. I want to thank the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Smith), my good friend, for his leadership in the Helsinki process. He took this resolution to Europe and we were able to get unanimous support among our fellow parliamentarians to speak out and develop an action plan against anti-Semitism. I thank the gentleman from New York (Mr. Crowley) for bringing this resolution forward; I thank him on behalf of all of us for stating what I would hope would be unanimously supported by this body. There is no question that anti-Semitic activities are on the increase in every state in Europe. We need to do more than just speak out; we need to develop an action plan, and that is what we were successful in getting in our visit on the OSCE Parliamentary Assembly during this past weekend. We have developed an action plan and will continue to monitor it to make it clear that international events cannot be used to justify anti-Semitic activities; that we need to work with the leadership, not just among parliamentarians, but the leadership in our communities from church groups and from educators. We have to work with children in our schools, and we have to deal with property restitution issues to make sure that people are fairly compensated for property that was wrongfully taken. In short, Mr. Speaker, we need a total plan to make sure the world understands that we will not tolerate anti-Semitic activities, period, the end. So I very much applaud the efforts on this resolution. It is important that this body speaks out, but it is also important that we follow it with action in all of the areas that we have mentioned.

Mr. CARDIN

Mr. CARDIN. Mr. Speaker, let me thank the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. McGovern) for yielding me this time, and I want to urge my colleagues to support the rule and the underlying bill. Mr. Speaker, I take this time to congratulate the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Olver) and the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Hobson) on a very fine Military Construction bill. I particularly want to thank the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Hobson) for his help in regards to a facility at the Naval Academy, that he has been very helpful in the new ethics center that will be constructed at the United States Naval Academy. Eight years ago a private fund-raising group began working with the Naval Academy and the Academy's Foundation to build a new ethics center and Jewish Chapel in Annapolis. While the Jewish Chapel facility will be entirely funded and endowed privately, the subcommittee's action reflects the fact that a significant portion of this new center will be used for an ethics center and a general Academy classroom, office, and common space. Mr. Speaker, this will be a tremendous addition to the Naval Academy in Annapolis. It would not have been possible without the help of the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Hobson). I really want to take this time to thank him for his efforts on this behalf.

Mr. CARDIN

Mr. CARDIN. Mr. Speaker, let me thank the gentleman from California (Mr. Stark) for yielding me time. Mr. Speaker, this bill is fundamentally flawed. It does not use the Medicare model for providing benefits; and with Medicare, when we provide benefits for physicians or hospitals, our seniors are guaranteed those benefits. In this bill for prescription drugs, they are guaranteed nothing. It reminds me of what we told our seniors with HMOs. Join HMOs and you will get prescription drug coverage. What happened as soon as they joined? The deductible, the co-pays went up, and the amount of coverage went down. There is no protection in this bill on premiums like under Medicare. In Medicare, our seniors know that their Part B premium is tied to 25 percent of the cost. They know how much it will be. There is no protection in this bill as to what the premium will be set at or how much it will increase. No protections to our seniors. In Medicare, we know that there will be a reimbursement system in our communities. You can always rely on Medicare. The underlying bill relies on private insurance. Mr. Speaker, there is no protection in this bill for those private insurance companies leaving our community. Look what happened with the HMOs. They enrolled seniors. They brought them in, and then they left town. Ask the people in Maryland. In 1996, we had eight HMOs writing seniors business, private insurance. Today, we have one with a capped enrollment. The private insurance companies will be there as long as they can make money; and as soon as they cannot make money, they will be gone. There is no protection in this bill to provide prescription drugs to our seniors. It is fundamentally flawed, and we should correct it. We will have an opportunity to do it with the motion to recommit. I urge my colleagues, if we are serious about providing prescription drug coverage for seniors, let us use the model that has worked. Let us use the Medicare model. Let us not use private insurance, solely private insurance. It has not worked in the past, and it will not work under this bill.

Mr. CARDIN

Mr. CARDIN. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of H. Res. 459, expressing the sense of the House of Representatives that the decision of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit in the case of Newdow v. U.S. Congress was wrongly decided. I believe that students should be able to continue to recite the full Pledge of Allegiance, including the phrase ``under God,'' if they so chose, as the Pledge is a central part of the heritage of the United States. Mr. Speaker, the day after the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, I took the floor of the House to remind members about the history and importance of our flag to the United States. On September 12, 2001, I stated: Mr. Speaker, it was 187 years ago this very evening that in Baltimore, Maryland, at Fort McHenry, this Nation, this young Nation, won its second war of independence. It was the beginning of the end of the War of 1812. Francis Scott Key on this very evening 187 years ago wrote his inspirational poem that became our National Anthem. In that third verse, he wrote some words that are helpful for us this evening: From the terror of flight or the gloom of the grave. And the Star-Spangled Banner in triumph doth wave. We survived the attack by a hostile power and became the strongest Nation in the world, and we will survive this attack on our democratic principles, and we will grow even stronger. Mr. Speaker, the Pledge of Allegiance is a simple, eloquent statement of American values. For more than four decades, school children have recited it in classrooms across the country. Students pledge allegiance not only to the flag, but to the nation and our values and principles. I was heartened to see Americans all across our great nation pause for the Pledge on June 14, Flag Day. The Supreme Court, Mr. Speaker, regularly opens its proceedings with the injunction ``God save the United States and this Honorable Court.'' Congress opens its business for the day with a prayer and the Pledge of Allegiance, as do many of our state legislatures. We should continue this fine tradition in our public institutions of government, as well as our schools. At this most trying time for our nation, when American values and our democracy are under attack from terrorist both at home and abroad. Congress should send a clear message to the nation that we believe the Pledge of Allegiance continues to unite us. Mr. Speaker, I urge passage of this resolution.

Mr. CARDIN

Mr. CARDIN. Mr. Speaker, this is a simple addition to the underlying bill to protect workers. I would urge my colleagues to support the motion and to support final passage.

Mr. CARDIN. Mr. Speaker, it is my pleasure to yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from North Dakota (Mr. Pomeroy), the sponsor of many of the provisions in the underlying bill, including the portability.

Mr. CARDIN. I thank the gentlewoman from New York (Ms. Slaughter) for yielding me this time. Mr. Speaker, I am somewhat confused by some of the debate that we have heard on this rule. I would think that all Members would want to support the rule. First of all, it allows the Democratic substitute to be offered that deals with the issues that the gentlewoman from New York raised. These are very valid issues. It gives us a chance to debate on the floor today, or when this bill comes up, corporate governance issues. They are important issues. I agree with a lot of what the gentlewoman said, and the rule makes that in order. The second thing the rule does is allow us to make permanent the provisions in the pension bill of last year. I strongly support that, Mr. Speaker. Some of my colleagues have talked about the fact that this was truly a bipartisan bill. I think that is difficult for some people to understand, but it did go through the normal, regular legislative process. It was developed in a bipartisan way. It was developed by Congress. It was not part of the President's tax proposals. It came into the President's tax proposals because we had bipartisan support in this House and in the other body. It was well vetted. My friend from California brings forward a letter from someone from Georgia. We have had congressional hearings on every one of the provisions in that bill. People were invited. In fact, my recollection is at one hearing we could not get anyone to testify against the bill; that everyone who testified said the provisions in the bill were well founded. Let us talk about the specific provisions, and I think you will find that every one of them advances the issues of people having more opportunity to provide for their retirement. That is why the underlying legislation was supported by organized labor. That is why the underlying legislation was supported by small business. It provides more opportunities. In all due respect, Mr. Speaker, Ken Lay's retirement security is not based upon increasing the IRAs from $2,000 to $5,000 a year. That is not the type of people who benefit from the changes that are in the underlying bill. We make modest adjustments in the 401(k) and defined contribution limits. We do not even keep up with inflation. These are very modest changes that affect middle-income people, not the wealthy. That is why the cost of this bill is extremely modest. It does not affect the overall fiscal condition of this country. It is $6 billion over 10 years. The Democratic substitute, which does some things that I happen to like as far as the small savers credit, costs $30 billion, or five times more than the underlying bill. I just bring that up because I think the underlying bill is a good bill, and it is worthy of continued support. Many of the people who have talked against it have consistently been against it. I understand that. But 185 Democrats joined a large number of Republicans with over 400 votes in favor of this bill on three separate occasions. There was good reason as to why Democrats and Republicans have worked together on this issue. Retirement security is an important issue for middle-income people. You cannot do it on Social Security alone. We need private savings. We need private retirement. The underlying bill helps advance those issues. I urge my colleagues to support the rule and support the underlying bill.

Mr. CARDIN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 1 minute. I am somewhat perplexed by the argument because most of the provisions, almost 100 percent of the provisions that are in the underlying bill, are in the Democratic substitute. So I am not sure what the arguments being made against the underlying bill are really about. There is a very small difference, and we will get the chance to talk about that as it relates to the highly compensated test that really helps companies provide matches for their employees, which help modest- income people. The overwhelming amount of dollars in the bill go to the same provisions that are in both the Democratic substitute and in the underlying bill. As I pointed out earlier, the Democratic substitute costs six times as much as the underlying bill. So I think the arguments being made may be reserved for the substitute, where there is a major difference between the Democrats and the Republicans and it is worthy of debate. But on the underlying bill and the importance of increasing the limits and increasing portability, helping women with the catch-up contributions, I am pleased to see that Democrats have incorporated in their substitute the same provisions as the underlying bill. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. CARDIN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 1 minute. Mr. Speaker, I agree at least in part with the gentleman from Washington (Mr. McDermott). I think we should be doing more for low- income workers, and we need to improve, not only extend, the low-income credit for workers, but it is going to take some more hearings and some more work. We have 5 years to get that into place. But let me just disagree with the numbers of the gentleman from Washington (Mr. McDermott). This is both in the underlying bill and in the Democratic substitute which deals with increasing the amount of money that individuals can put in their IRAs and 401(k)s. More than 69 percent of those people contributing to traditional IRAs contribute the full $2,000, and 61 percent of those have incomes under $50,000. Over half the cost of the bill is in the IRAs. The gentleman's numbers do not add up. The underlying bill helps the average worker. It does not help the individuals the gentleman is referring to. This is a good bill, and I urge Members to support it.

Mr. CARDIN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time. Mr. Speaker, as we have been getting into this debate, a lot of the issues that have been talked about on corporate governance will be debated when we get to the Democratic substitute. I appreciate the fact we may have different views on that. I am somewhat perplexed, as I have said before, on the underlying bill because there is not much difference between the Democratic substitute and the underlying bill on almost all of the provisions in the underlying bill. There is good reason for that. This bill was developed in a very bipartisan way. We had hearings. We in Congress initiated these changes. It did not come from the President. We made modifications as the bill worked its way through Congress on several occasions. We worked with Senators in the other body, both Democrats and Republicans. It was truly a bipartisan effort. As a result, we have done some things that I think are important for this Nation. We have increased the amount of money individuals can put away in their IRA accounts. We have increased the amount of money that people can put away in their 401(k) plans. We have dealt with portability, knowing full well that people change jobs regularly. Now individuals will be able to combine those accounts and keep them in retirement. That is an important provision. These provisions should be permanent. They should be permanent. We may have different views as to how we should handle Social Security and the protection of Social Security, but there should be no disagreement about the need to strengthen private retirement and savings. The savings ratio in this country is deplorable. Just 10 years ago, it was approximately 9 percent. We have actually had negative quarters. We are the lowest industrial nation in the world in the money that we put away for savings. We need to do a better job. We need to encourage, not discourage, employers to put money into retirement plans for their employees. I have heard arguments about, well, there are differences in the underlying bill. None of those differences go to the cost issue, though. We talk about the simplification provisions. I am going to talk about one, because I may not have a chance later, that deals with a subject that may seem controversial, highly compensated employees. But look at the underlying provision and why it was not controversial in this body, because it took away a penalty that employers suffered if they provided a match to their employees. We should be encouraging employers to provide matches to their employees. So we took away a penalty that was in the bill that will encourage more employers to get involved in matches for their employees. That is why we put that provision in the bill. That is why it was not controversial. It was never raised in controversy as it was considered. We have heard who benefits from the bill. Most of the money goes into the IRAs. IRAs are used by modest-income people. We keep hearing the 20 percent figure. You know, 20 percent is $68,000. I do not happen to think that someone who makes $68,000 is particularly wealthy. It is not the Ken Lays of the world. They are not the people who benefit from the 401(k)s and from the IRAs that we make more available under the bill before us. Mr. Speaker, there may be disagreements among our parties on some of the underlying issues concerning what happened in Enron, but there should be no disagreement as to the need to make permanent the pension provisions. I want to thank my friends on the other side, the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Portman), the gentleman from California (Mr. Thomas), and others who gave us an opportunity, Democrats and Republicans, many of us, to work on ways that we could help Americans save for their retirement. This bill is one part of that. The reason it enjoyed such an overwhelming vote was because the process was fair. We are going to certainly get into a debate on the substitute, but I would hope after we debate the substitute that we come back together and proudly support the underlying bill that will help Americans save for their future. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. CARDIN

Mr. CARDIN. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor Ernest R. Grecco, an extraordinary leader and community activist who serves as President of the Metropolitan Baltimore Council AFL-CIO Unions. Mr. Grecco is recognized for his commitment to ``the right of all working people to join unions'' and his ongoing work in serving the Baltimore area. Mr. Grecco's distinguished involvement with the labor movement has flourished since his initial engagement while working for Calvert Distilleries. Ernest Grecco's perseverance and open mindedness have allowed him to rise through the ranks of AFL-CIO Unions leadership. First serving as the COPE Director of the Metropolitan Baltimore Council AFL-CIO Unions in 1976, he became the director of the Maryland State and District of Columbia branch of this organization in 1983. Then in 1987, as a result of his genuine dedication to bettering the lives of people, Mr. Grecco advanced to his current role as the President of Metropolitan Baltimore division of this organization. Since then, Ernest Grecco has maintained his commitment in providing services to working people. His support for the Community Service division of the Metropolitan Baltimore Council AFL-CIO Unions has strengthened projects in areas of education, job placement and community action. However, his message of hard work, dedication and justice is not confined to the labor movement. Ernest Grecco is extensively involved it all facets of the community. Not only is he the Secretary of the United Way Board of Directors, but Mr. Grecco also serves as a member of the Private Industry Council, the Governor's Work Force Investment Board and the Empower Baltimore Committee, among countless other distinguished organizations. Through all his public service, Mr. Grecco has distinguished himself in the state of Maryland. He proclaimed that ``Labor is alive and well in Maryland'' and works hard each day to improve the lives of workers. In July, Mr. Grecco will be celebrating his 60th birthday with family and friends. I urge my colleagues to join me in honoring Mr. Ernest R. Grecco for his service to the AFL-CIO Unions and devotion to the people of Maryland.

Mr. CARDIN

Mr. CARDIN. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor David H. Koshgarian who has served as my Chief of Staff since my first election to Congress. Over the past fifteen and one half years David has been an outstanding leader for my office and a partner with me in carrying out all my Congressional duties. I, and the people of Maryland's Third Congressional District, have been well served by his commitment, knowledge and skill. It is with all sincerity that I thank him for his service to the nation. For more than 25 years, David Koshgarian has served on Capitol Hill working for several Members of the House of Representatives, including Richard Kelly of Florida, Geraldine Ferraro of New York, and Chet Atkins of Massachusetts. Having grown up in Rhode Island and attended George Washington University here in Washington, Dave and his family have long made their home in Maryland and I appreciate that his longest service has been to a Maryland Representative. The United States House of Representatives is the world's greatest democratic institution. As much as any staffer I have ever worked with on Capitol Hill, Dave has taken joy in the democratic process of governing this nation. His interest and enthusiasm has always enlightened my work, as well as that of our staff and interns. Dave's presence and spirit has always made my office a better place to work. Dave came to my office after serving as Legislative Director for Rep. Chet Atkins and he never lost his primary interest in legislation and policy. Throughout my service on the Ways and Means Committee, Dave has handled tax and budget issues. Dave's deep intellect and long experience have been well tested in this position on a great variety of complex issues. He has mastered each challenge and often been most successful in effecting change in the Committee's consideration of key issues. I am also proud that after many years of Ways and Means tax policy work in ``Gucci Gulch'', where the concerns of wealthy and corporate interests are most often heard, David has unfailingly focused on the lives and struggles of the neediest among us and worked to ensure that the policies of the nation provide real opportunity to low-income and working class Americans. His efforts have been in the best traditions of the Democratic Party. The dramatic expansion of the Earned Income Tax Credit is one recent example of our successful work in this area. Dave has made a specialty of pension issues--an area where few people have long focused, but where much good can be done. At this point I am confident he knows as much as any staffer on Capitol Hill in this complicated facet of tax law. Pension policy is an area where sound federal policy can directly benefit the lives of every working American. Dave's effective work in this area is the clearest demonstration of his commitment to the people who most need our help. Passage of the individual retirement and pension enhancement provisions of HR 1836, the 2001 Economic Growth and Tax Relief Reconciliation Act is testament to Dave's skills and commitment. I doubt those provisions would have been enacted without David's ongoing, focused work on this issue. Dave should leave Capitol Hill proud of his many legislative accomplishments over the years. David has also proven himself a solid administrator and inspiring leader and educator of staff. With many offices facing great turnover and little historical knowledge of a Member's work for a District, my office has always been very different, with relatively long and accomplished tenures by staff people. To large extent this is a result of Dave's daily caring and concern for staff. His joy in our responsibilities and spirit in the office will be greatly missed. The hard work of the many loyal staff to the House of Representatives is too little rewarded and too rarely acknowledged. David, on behalf of the people of the nation, Maryland, the Third Congressional District, the many staff people and interns you have worked with and most of all myself, I want to thank you for your proud career of public service. Best wishes for all your future endeavors.

Mr. CARDIN

Mr. CARDIN. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me time. Mr. Speaker, last night I had a chance to meet with members of the medical community in a new part of my district and with senior advocates, and they asked me what Congress was going to do about prescription medicine because of the dire need in our community. They wanted to know what was going to happen with hospital and physician reimbursement rates, because there is a real critical need in that community. They wanted to know whether seniors were going to have greater choice in their options under Medicare. But they wanted to know whether the funds would be available in Congress to deal with these issues. I explained to them the budget problems that we are currently confronting, and they certainly understand the fact that we do not want to use Social Security funds in order to deal with these pressing needs. They understand the dilemma we are in, primarily because of the tax bill that we passed last year. I know that there are Members on both sides of the aisle that share our concern about acting this year on prescription medicines for seniors and protecting the Social Security system. So, quite frankly, Mr. Speaker, I do not understand why we are considering this bill at this time. The bill takes effect 10 years from now. If we learned anything during the debate last year, it is that we cannot even predict 1 year in the future, let alone 10 years in the future. Last year we thought we had a $5.6 trillion surplus. We are now told that under the unified budget that the deficit this year, not surplus, deficit, will be between $150 billion to $200 billion. We cannot predict 1 year into the future. How can we predict 10 years in the future? We do know that this legislation, when implemented, will cost another $25 billion a year and add to our deficits. We do know that at the time this legislation takes effect, the baby boomers will becoming eligible for Social Security and Medicare, putting greater stress on both Social Security and Medicare. Mr. Speaker, one thing is clear and that is that if you are going to go back this weekend and talk to your medical communities and your senior advocates and you are going to tell them how much you are in favor of prescription medicine coverage under Medicare and dealing with the other issues and that you are for fiscal responsibility, if you are going to do that, you cannot do that with a straight face and still vote for the legislation that is before us. I urge my colleagues to reject the legislation.

Mr. CARDIN

Mr. CARDIN. Mr. Speaker, on June 20, 2002, Maryland elected officials, University officials, faculty, staff, students, alumni and friends will honor Dr. Barbara Heller for her many years of visionary leadership as Dean of the University of Maryland School of Nursing. After 12 years, Dr. Heller is leaving to accept a position as the first Executive Director of the newly formed Center for Health Workforce Development. She will also assume new responsibilities as the School of Nursing's first Rauschenbach Distinguished Professor, an endowment professorship dedicated to the improvement of nursing and nursing education. During her tenure as Dean, Dr. Heller is credited with building a new state-of-art nursing school building to support the School's research, teaching and service mission. Another key milestone in Dr. Heller's tenure is the recruitment of nationally known nurse researchers and scientists, resulting in a 900% increase in grants and contact awards for the School of Nursing since 1990. As Dean, Dr. Heller has guided the School of Nursing through many challenges, not the least of which is the national nursing shortage. With aggressive strategies of outreach, increased scholarship support, marketing and student recruitment, Dr. Heller's term has been marked by significant increases in enrollment and diversity. The School's minority student population has more than doubled in the past dozen years, from 15% to 35%. U.S. News and World Report has consistently ranked the School among the top ten in the nation, and in 2000, accorded the same status to five of the School's graduate specialties. Recently, the School was designated a Pan American Health Organization/World Health Organization Collaborating Center for Nursing in Mental Health Promotion, significantly expanding opportunities for international research and dialogue for faculty and students. Dr. Heller's leadership in service to the community also deserves special notice. During her tenure, a new model of clinical instruction and health care service has expanded to include five Wellmobiles, 14 school-based wellness centers, a high-school based family support center, the Open Gates Health Center, and the Pediatric Ambulatory Care Center. The latter is managed and operated jointly by the Schools of Nursing and Medicine, providing primary care services to more than 400 children each week who would not otherwise have access to adequate health care. Due in great measure to Dr. Heller's leadership, expertise, knowledge and determination, the University of Maryland School of Nursing is well positioned to meet the challenges of the future. It has been a great privilege to work with Dr. Heller. I wish to congratulate her on her successful tenure as Dean and extend best wishes to her in her new position.

Mr. CARDIN

Mr. CARDIN. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to Georgene Brodie, a dedicated wife, mother and teacher who has faced life with courage, compassion and strength. Georgene is suffering from ALS (Lou Gehrig's Disease), and she is using the time she has left to help others who are suffering from the same disease. I have been touched by Georgene's enormous capacity to give to others. She founded the Georgene Brodie Foundation for the Future to raise funds for The Johns Hopkins Center for ALS and The Muscular Dystrophy Association. She and her family know that a cure for ALS and other similar diseases will be found only through research and clinical work. The Hopkins Center for ALS Research is the only center in the country dedicated to finding the cure for ALS. While Georgene may be suffering from ALS, she is much more than the disease that afflicts her. As a teacher, she has dedicated her life to helping young children experience the joy of learning; as a mother she has raised two marvelous daughters--Kimberly and Ellen; and as a Grandmother she has lovingly embraced her four grandchildren, Matthew and Melissa Hopkins and Austin and Andrew Jarrett. As the wife of M. Jay Brodie, head of the Baltimore Development Corp., she has been one of Baltimore's staunchest cheerleaders. From its neighborhoods, to its artistic and cultural institutions to its ethnic heritage, Georgene loves and appreciates the spirit of Baltimore. In fact, as the owner of the Crab Line, she was one of the original ``Harborplace'' merchants, helping make Harborplace one of Baltimore's most identifiable landmarks. I hope my colleagues in the U.S. House of Representatives will join me in saluting the accomplishments of Georgene Brodie. Her love of life and calmness of spirit has touched all who know and care for her.

Mr. CARDIN

Mr. CARDIN. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from California for yielding me the time. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to the legislation we are considering and in support of the Democratic substitute. Mr. Speaker, this is first a matter of fairness. Currently only 2 percent of estates are subject to estate taxes and of that only .3 percent to the family farms and family businesses. A very small number today are subjected to tax. Under the Democratic substitute 99.7 percent of all these estates will avoid any estate tax. This is not about family farms and family businesses. We all agree that they should be able to avoid the estate tax for a modest wealth upon death. What this is about is what Forbes Magazine said. The 400 richest families in America will avoid somewhere between 200 to $300 billion, that is billion dollars, in taxes under the bill. It is for the super-rich; it is not even for the rich. The second is affordability. When this legislation passed last year, we had a $5.6 trillion projected surplus. Mr. Speaker, we are now projecting large deficits. We are in a war effort. We cannot afford the extra hundred billion dollars that this legislation will cost. There is a better alternative. The Democratic substitute, about 5 percent of that cost. Yes, reform is needed. The Democratic substitute raises the unified credit to 3 million per individual, 6 million per family, takes care of the problems immediately, not 5 years from now or 10 years from now, but does it in a responsible, affordable and fair way. Mr. Speaker, this is a matter about priorities. What are the priorities of this Congress? When the estate tax repeal is fully implemented, it costs about $75 billion a year or $750 billion over the next decade. That is $750 billion. That is what our Congressional Budget Office says. We are going to be debating prescription medicines for our seniors. That costs about $750 billion if you want a good plan. What is more important, a permanent repeal of the estate tax or helping our seniors with prescription medicines? Helping people with wealth over $6 million or helping seniors try to deal with the costs of their prescription medicines? At the same time that the estate tax repeal comes into full effect, we need the money for the baby boomers in the Social Security system. What is more important, the repeal of the estate tax for estates over $6 million or preserving our Social Security system for America's future? Mr. Speaker, this is a matter of priority. We cannot have everything. We have to make hard choices. This is the wrong decision. I urge my colleagues to reject the bill.

Mr. CARDIN

Mr. CARDIN. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the requisite number of words.

Mr. CARDIN. I yield once again to the gentlewoman from California.

Mr. CARDIN. I yield to the gentleman from Michigan.

Mr. CARDIN. I yield to the gentlewoman from California.

Mr. CARDIN

Mr. CARDIN. Mr. Speaker, I have no further requests for time, and I yield back the balance of my time.