Michael Castle

Mr. CASTLE

Mr. CASTLE. Mr. Speaker, it is with great pleasure that I rise today as Delaware's lone member of Congress to honor and pay tribute to Carol Spiker, a dear friend and National Winner of the Sporting Goods Manufacturers Association (SGMA) Heroes Award. Carol Spiker, a resident of Wilmington, Delaware, is being honored as a very special individual who, through her unique commitment and humanitarian spirit, has made an exceptional and lasting contribution to the pursuit of sports excellence. She has shown herself to be a dedicated, compassionate, and driving force behind the creation of the Wilmington Lacrosse Association (WLA). Delaware is fortunate to have her as a resident and I am honored to call her my friend. In 1989, Carol Spiker's son expressed a desire to play lacrosse. With the help of another mom, she established a lacrosse league. She threw herself into this endeavor, using her time, talent, heart and soul. She spent countless hours doing everything including team registration, scheduling fields, teams and officials, coaching, sewing the practice pinneys and mowing and lining the fields. Carol found ways to cover equipment cost and league fees for children from families unable to afford the costs. Through Carol's enthusiasm and dedication, Delaware's lacrosse program grew from 24 boys in 1990 to eight different organizations in the Delaware league with close to 1,000 players today. In 1998, Carol Spiker and her family were in a terrible car accident that left her with irreversible spinal cord injuries and confined her to a wheelchair. Carol turned this tragedy into a triumph, battling her way back from this life-threatening injury. As she recovered, the support and encouragement from her family and friends in the lacrosse community gave her the strength and courage to keep going. Carol Spiker continues to run the league she started over 11 years ago with the same energy and compassion as when she began. She buys equipment and waives fees for children who could not afford to pay otherwise. She promotes the league, encourages the players, supports the families, and has been instrumental in helping students go on to private schools and colleges. I want to thank her on behalf of the people of Delaware for her leadership and dedication and for her lasting contribution to our state.

Mr. CASTLE

Mr. CASTLE. Mr. Speaker, I strongly support tax relief for all Americans. Broad based-tax relief this year should include significantly reducing the estate tax. Today, I am voting for immediate reform of the estate tax to protect families, small businesses and family farms. This plan would cut the estate tax by immediately increasing the exemption from $675,000 to $2 million for an individual and $4 million per couple in 2002 and increasing it to $2.5 million for an individual and $5 million per couple by 2010. I am voting for immediate relief from estates taxes to all those affected by it. This reform would exempt most Americans from any estate taxes. We must act to continue to reduce the estate tax to protect small businesses and family farms. Yet, today's proposal to completely repeal the tax is not the best approach. First, we can provide immediate and broad relief from the estate tax to more Americans affected by exempting more families without completely repeal. Second, attempting to enact complete repeal at this time makes it more difficult to provide other tax relief for more Americans, including small businesses. The President's plan calls for $1.62 trillion in tax cuts in the next 10 years. This estate repeal proposal could jeopardize the entire tax relief and balanced budget plan. This year I have voted with strong majorities in this House to reduce income tax rates for all Americans, provide marriage penalty relief, and increase the child tax credit. I want to provide more tax relief to Americans by allowing them to save more in IRA's, 401(k)a and other pensions. In addition, there are worthwhile proposals to reduce taxes by allowing more Americans to deduct their charitable contributions, increase education IRAs, expand deductibility of health care costs, and provide businesses with permanent credit for investing in research and development. It will be much more difficult to address these issues within our balanced budget plan if we insist on total repeal of the estate tax now. The current approach to estate tax repeal leaves far too little--only $70 billion over ten years--to cut taxes for millions of other Americans. We should provide tax relief as soon as possible. As currently constructed, H.R. 8 would not repeal the estate tax until 2011. Until that time, the top estate tax rate will still be over 50 percent. We would help more families right away by increasing the estate tax exemption to $2.5 million for individuals and $5 million for a couple. We should also reduce the top rate. Unfortunately, today, we have a weaker proposal that delays repeal for ten years. Instead of a weak repeal proposal, we could have a plan that provides immediate relief within our budget limits. All tax relief should help as many Americans as possible while maintaining our ability to pay down the debt and balance the budget. Today's proposal for complete repeal does not meet this test. It makes it more difficult to provide other tax relief and it would have a tremendous negative impact on the budget in 2011, just at the time we will need additional resources for the retiring Baby Boom generation. Fortunately, today's debate is just one step in the legislative process. We can reduce the estate tax this year. I hope the political jockeying will end soon so we get down to negotiating a balanced tax relief plan that cuts the estate tax and that can pass Congress and be signed into law.

Mr. CASTLE

Mr. CASTLE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to introduce the ``Fallen Firefighters Act of 2001.'' This legislation serves as a remembrance to the heroic men and women who have died in the line of duty by requiring the American flag on all federal buildings be lowered to half-staff one day each year on the observance of the National fallen Firefighters Memorial Service. Nearly 1.2 million men and women serve our country as fire and emergency services personnel. Approximately one-third suffer debilitating injuries each year making it one of the most dangerous jobs in America. Furthermore approximately 100 men and women die in the line of duty every year--many are volunteers. Since 1981 every state in America, as well as the District of Columbia and Puerto Rico, have lost firefighters serving in the line of duty. In 1990, Congress designated the national monument in Emmitsburg, Maryland to serve as the official memorial to all fallen firefighters. Since 1981, the names of 2,077 fallen fire heroes have been added to the Roll of Honor. This year, the name of Arnold Blakenship, Jr., of Greenwood Delaware, will be placed on the 2000 memorial plaque along with 85 other firefighters. Sadly Mr. Blakenship is not the first firefighter in Delaware to be memorialized. Lowering the flag on federal buildings one day a year will remind all Americans of the patriotic service and dedicated efforts of our fire and emergency services personnel. These men and women work tirelessly to protect and preserve the lives and property of their fellow citizens. Through this legislation, we can show our support and respect for America's fire heroes and those who carry on the noble tradition of service. We must always remember the contributions of all of our public safety officers. In 1962, Congress passed a Joint Resolution honoring America's peace officers who died in the line of duty in recognition of their dedicated service to their communities. Today, we take the first step in bestowing the same respect on the 1.2 million fire and emergency services personnel who also serve as public safety officers. I urge my colleagues to cosponsor this legislation and recognize these heroic men and women.

Mr. CASTLE

Mr. CASTLE. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this time. I rise with some concern about this particular rule for sort of a reason most people are not even familiar with, but it is the rainy-day fund or the budget reserve which was set up. I thought the chairman of the committee did a wonderful job of setting it up. The fact that we were going to have a strict way of handling emergency appropriations in this Congress which we have just never had before, it has always been a Christmas tree in the past. And unfortunately, as it wended its way to the floor here today, it has been watered down substantially in terms of leaving the definition up to the Committee on Appropriations and essentially they can spend it on whatever they want and then save the real emergencies for a separate appropriation. I do not think that is right. Frankly, I think this is an issue that we have to address in this Congress. I have introduced legislation to do this. The gentleman from Iowa (Mr. Nussle), the chairman of the Committee on the Budget, has supported that legislation. He has supported the concept of what we are doing, and I think it is something we should do. So for that reason I am vitally concerned about the rule here today, and I have some great difficulty in supporting it. I will say about the budget itself, I think it does some good things in terms of tax reduction and education and other things; and I am sorry this point comes up, but the bottom line is that this is an area I think we need to address.

Mr. CASTLE

Mr. CASTLE. Mr. Chairman, I rise today to express my opposition to the changes that were made to the emergency budget reserve account language in the FY02 Budget Resolution reported out of the House Budget Committee. The reported budget reserve account language was meaningful. It created a $5.6 billion budget reserve account that could only be used for major emergencies. The most important feature was that the Budget Committee held the keys to determining whether the spending proposed met the legal definition of an emergency. The compromise that has been negotiated since then guts the budget reserve account. The Appropriations Committee unilaterally determines if the proposed spending meets the definition of an emergency. Furthermore, the Appropriations Committee can exhaust the $5.6 billion budget reserve account with low level ``emergencies'' and rely on Congress to pass legislation to fund ``major'' emergencies above the discretionary caps when the time comes. I urge my fellow colleagues to join me and Chairman Nussle in sponsoring legislation that will be introduced today to make a real budget reserve account a permanent feature of our budgeting process. In closing, I want to thank Chairman Nussle for his efforts to reform our budget process. He has been at the forefront of this issue since he first came to Washington, D.C. As the process moves forward, I will be pleased to support his efforts every step of the way.

Mr. CASTLE

Mr. CASTLE. Mr. Speaker, I wish to recognize today Ms. Lynn Selmser for over 27 years of service to Members of the House of Representatives. As Chairman of the Subcommittee on Education Reform of the Education and the Workforce Committee, I have worked with Lynn only a few years, but I can say that her reputation as a talented and knowledgeable member of the Committee staff is well deserved. Lynn began her Capitol Hill career in the personal office of Illinois Rep. Robert McClory in 1974. She stayed with Rep. McClory for over seven years. Next, Lynn worked in the personal office of Pennsylvania Rep. Bill Goodling, her hometown representative. She stayed in Rep. Goodling's personal office until January 1989, when she moved to the Committee on Education and Labor staff, which is now the Committee on Education and the Workforce. During her time with the Committee, Lynn has educated me and many other Members of Congress on the intricacies of quite complex issues. She has covered issues and programs such as Child Nutrition, Impact Aid, Juvenile Justice, and child and adult literacy. I know all of the Members of the Committee will be at a disadvantage without her institutional knowledge and advice on these issues. I believe that Lynn is most proud of her work on family literacy issues. Lynn worked on this issue on behalf of Rep. Goodling from 1988, when he originally sponsored what became the Even Start Act. She cares deeply about improving the literacy of adults as a way to improve literacy in children, and I understand that she plans to continue to promote adult literacy following her retirement from the Committee staff. I know many Members of Congress and staffers, along with her friend and former boss, Rep. Goodling, join me in thanking Lynn for her many years of service and wishing her a relaxing and well-deserved retirement.

Mr. CASTLE

Mr. CASTLE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I have listened attentively to the debate here today. As everybody has indicated, I, too, would like to repeat my condolences to the families, friends, schoolmates, everybody associated with these young people at Santee. This is a very difficult matter for them. No matter how we phrase it, it is always going to be a difficult matter for them, for those who were fortunate enough to live, for their lifetimes and for all of us something we will all remember our lifetimes. For our friends here in the Congress who are from San Diego County, you, too, have endured a great deal of hardship as a result of this; and we understand that. We offer you our sympathy as well. For all of us here in Congress, and I agree with the sponsor of the resolution, the gentleman from California (Mr. Hunter), we do not want to react instantaneously to this, but I would also hope that in this country that we would take a holistic approach to what we are doing with respect to violence in our society, that we in Congress will look at whatever laws that we can pass that we can agree upon; and I hope we would make the effort to reach that agreement, to make sure that we have the best laws possible to control the use of weapons of violence. We hope our State and local governments would do the same. We hope that our culture would do the same, that which we see in movies and television, read in books, see on the Internet, whatever it may be, would understand that what they write about or what they put into visual arts is something which indeed can affect the lives of young people out there. Obviously, it has been stated so articulately by so many Members here today, the bottom line of looking after our young people, in families, in school, in every way we possibly can is something that we have to do. We need to stop this bloodshed as best we possibly can. We all have to do it together. We cannot blame and fault each other. We have to reach out and try to help each other. For that reason I am pleased to be able to encourage everyone to support this resolution.

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

Mr. CASTLE. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. Hunter), the sponsor of the resolution.

Mr. CASTLE. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and agree to the concurrent resolution (H. Con. Res. 57) condemning the heinous atrocities that occurred on March 5, 2001, at Santana High School in Santee, California, as amended.

Mr. CASTLE. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks on H. Con. Res. 57, as amended.

Mr. CASTLE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H. Con. Res. 57 offered by the distinguished gentleman from California (Mr. Hunter), to express my profound sorrow for the loss endured by the students, teachers and families of the southern California community of Santee. Today, you are foremost in the thoughts and prayers of all Americans as you struggle to rebuild your community and the sense of safety and security that a school building is supposed to embody. Mr. Speaker, I join this body in its continuing search for answers, but it was not so long ago that I stood in this place hoping and praying that April 1999 events at Columbine High School would not be repeated, and taking refuge in the facts offered by various agencies which claim that school-associated violent deaths were still rare. While I do believe that schools are one of the safest places for our children, it is equally clear that no school is immune from this type of tragedy. For this reason, it will take all of us working together to make our society safer and smarter and to prevent any further reoccurrences. While we cannot reclaim the lives of those lost and we cannot make whole those who have suffered as a result of this latest school shooting, we can honor them by resisting the temptation to execute a quick fix, issue the press release, and absolve ourselves from further responsibility. We must accept the fact that we have a society-wide problem that will only be solved by a society-based solution, and it will take time. As chairman of the Subcommittee on Education Reform, I will work to ensure that no child, regardless of background or family income, will be forced to risk his or her life in order to learn. Often it is easy to forget, but we have a Federal program that is specifically designed to help stem the tide of school violence. I hope to work with my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to make sure that this money is a sufficient amount to allow schools to implement the types of programming and take the types of measures that will really make a difference in the school environment. Then we will make information about the use of this money widely available to parents and the communities to assure them that we are spending Federal money to best ensure their children's safety. Yet, violence is not a problem that we can expect our schools to solve alone. In the days that follow, I hope that every American remembers how they felt the day they learned of the shooting and said with a heavy heart ``not again.'' We must rededicate ourselves. From friends and classmates who hear about bullying in the school yard to families who have difficulty communicating with each other, from businesses that market violence, to every level of government, we must do our part. By now we all know what that is, to be a friend, to be a parent, and to be responsible for those who have entrusted their most valuable possession, their child, to our care. All that said, first things are first. I want to offer my heartfelt sympathy to the families and friends of the two students who were killed and the 13 who were injured. Today we are united by our sorrow. Tomorrow, I hope we still will be united, not by grief or fear, but by our collective resolve to prevent another tragedy from turning our schools into a place of violence, teaching our children a lesson that no one should ever have to learn. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. CASTLE. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. Hunter), the distinguished sponsor of the concurrent resolution.

Mr. CASTLE. Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. DeLay), the distinguished majority whip.

Mr. CASTLE. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. Issa).

Mr. CASTLE

Mr. CASTLE. Mr. Speaker, it is with great pleasure that I rise today to as Delaware's lone Member of Congress to honor and pay tribute to a leader in the Delaware community, Thomas P. Eichler. Tom Eichler is a dedicated, caring, compassionate, and effective individual who led two state agencies in Delaware during my tenure as Governor and after my departure. I felt fortunate to have him serve with me and I am proud to call him my friend. As Secretary of Health and Social Services for Delaware, Tom Eichler instituted Welfare Reform before it became popular. Under Tom Eichler's leadership, Delaware's First Step Program was initiated to assist welfare recipients transition from welfare to work. Many of the individuals who participated in this program are now working and providing a brighter future for their families and our communities. In addition, Tom was a leader in health care reform and helped to pave the way for all children in Delaware to have access to health care. As the Secretary of the Department of Children, Youth and Their Families, Tom helped guide and develop improvements for the Ferris School and Juvenile Justice programs. His efforts to provide better programming and educational facilities for juvenile delinquents at the Ferris School has been seen as a national model that other communities are attempting to emulate. He also established Child Mental Health programs that assist many young members of our community. Tom Eichler's impact on the State of Delaware has touched many people, and most importantly in a positive manner. I first came to know Tom when he was attempting to change individuals' views on ocean dumping and he assisted me with testimony before Congress. From there he went to work as Regional Administrator for Region III, EPA. In the mid-1980's I asked him to serve in my cabinet where his assistance was outstanding. After my departure he continued to serve Delaware in the Department of Children, Youth and Their Families. He was called upon to serve several Governor's, to assist in difficult situations, and he served the people of Delaware admirably. His ability to take on the toughest jobs, reach consensus and have positive outcomes for our community were unsurpassed. As he retires from working for the State of Delaware I want to honor and thank him on behalf of the people of Delaware for his commitment to making our state a better place for all of us to live and work.

Mr. CASTLE

Mr. CASTLE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of H.R. 3, ``The Economic Growth and Tax Relief Act of 2001.'' This $958 billion proposal to reduce income tax rates over the next ten years represents the center piece of President George W. Bush's tax plan for the American people. It also represents a very fair form of tax relief because it does not give tax relief to special interests. Instead, it gives money back to every American who paid more in income taxes than is necessary to operate the Federal government. All working Americans of every income level deserve to have some of their tax dollars returned to them. I congratulate President Bush for his leadership putting tax relief for every American ahead of special interest groups. This proposal demonstrates his commitment to changing the culture in Washington, D.C. The rate reductions in this bill would cut rates for taxpayers from 15% to 10% on the first $12,000 a couple earns; 15% for income from $12,000 to $45,200; from 28% or 31% to 25% for income from $45,200 to $109,250; and from 36% or 39.6% to 33% for income above $109,250. In addition, the plan adjusts the Alternative Minimum Tax to protect taxpayers from being penalized for claiming the child tax credits they are promised under the tax code. In recent months, there has been much discussion about the fairness of tax cuts. When one looks beyond the rhetoric of class warfare, there is strong evidence that President Bush's tax cut proposal is truly fair. When the tax cut is fully implemented, families earning less than $18,000 [the bottom quintile (0%-20%) of income earners in this country] will see their after-tax income rise 1.1%. With the Earned Income Tax Credit program they receive an income tax credit without paying federal income taxes. It is also important to keep in mind that we will continue to fund an important array of federal programs that provide assistance to low-income Americans. More than $3.7 trillion in federal funds will be spent over the next ten years on programs that are intended to help low-income Americans. We must help low-income Americans and we will continue to do so. Mr. Speaker, taxpayers in my state of Delaware are large contributors to the Federal Government. Delawareans receive only 84 cents in return for every tax dollar they pay to the federal government. I am proud that I come from a successful and well-run state. However, when their federal taxes will help create a true budget surplus of $2.7 trillion, it is proper for Delawareans to ask for some share back so they can use their hard-earned money to help their families and keep their local communities strong. According to one estimate, the rate reduction in this bill could return $3.8 billion to Delawareans as a whole. These funds will be invested in ways to create jobs and keep Delaware's economy strong and growing--helping all families. The tax relief under this plan is intended to help lower income Americans. Families earning less than $35,000 [income earners representing second quintile (21%-40%)] currently pay 0.5% of all federal income taxes. Under President Bush's rate reduction plan, their after tax income would rise 1.5%. In fact, if the President's child tax credit is enacted in addition to this rate cut, a married couple with two children living on one income, will pay no income taxes on the first $39,000 they earn. Will the highest income taxpayers continue to pay their fair share? Yes, and a larger percentage of federal taxes as well. Taxpayers at the top 10% of income levels, these families earning more than $140,000 currently pay 61.3% of all federal income taxes. This is up from 57.3% in 1988. The reason is that in 1990 the top income tax rate was raised from 28% to 31%. Then, in 1993, it was raised again to 39.6%. The justification cited at that time was that these funds were needed to reduce the federal budget deficits. Those deficit spending days are gone and taxpaying families that shouldered the extra burden for the last decade also deserve some tax relief. Instead of returning the top income tax rate to 28%, President Bush's plan reduces it to 33%. Upper income taxpayers will continue to pay the largest portion of federal taxes, but they will receive some tax relief. Apart from the question of fairness, is the question of the overall size of the tax cut and the soundness of the assumptions upon which the surplus projections rest. $958 billion over the next 10 years falls within the range of tax cuts that both Republicans and Democrats believe is reasonable within the projected $2.7 trillion surplus. However, 10-year surplus projections are inherently uncertain. One only needs to look at projections from a few years ago that predicted budget deficits. I support additional steps to ensure we achieve the predicted surpluses and continue to reduce the national debt. One safeguard that should be considered is a trigger on the phase in of future tax cuts and new spending. Like Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan, I support adding a trigger that would delay the phasing in of these tax rate reductions if the surplus does not materialize as projected and the national debt is not reduced. Contrary to some interest groups' political spin, a trigger does not raise taxes. I also note that Chairman Greenspan's support for tax cuts is conditioned upon this surplus materializing. He still believes that debt reduction is the first priority. I agree with his views that debt reduction, used as a tool to decrease the interest many Americans pay on credit care debt, home mortgages, and education loans, is the best way to bring financial relief to our country and spur economic growth. Mr. Speaker, even though this initial tax relief legislation does not contain a trigger, I still support its passage for three reasons. First, I recognize that this is the beginning of the 2001 tax debate, not the end. There will be other opportunities to improve the final budget and tax legislation and I look forward to that discussion with you. Second, the Federal Government has a spending problem. In budget negotiations with the previous Administration, there was a serious lack of fiscal control in both parties. Spending increases far exceeded the rate of inflation. If this were sustained, there would not be room in the surplus for a tax cut or debt relief. Third, triggers on tax cuts represent only half the story. Those who have listened carefully to Chairman Greenspan note that he supports both a trigger on tax cuts and on long-term spending. During the upcoming budget debate, there will be opportunity to discuss the value of a trigger on both spending and tax cuts. I believe Americans need to hear both sides of this story. Mr. Speaker, again, I am proud to support ``The Economic Growth and Tax Relief Act.'' It meets the tests of fairness by providing meaningful relief to all income levels. It is fair and brings relief to my state of Delaware. Its size is compatible with debt reduction goals. Finally, it sends the proper message to Washington, D.C. that broad- based tax relief is more important than ever-increasing levels of government spending. I will continue to work to ensure that the ultimate tax relief and budget legislation is fair to all Americans, protects the surplus and pays down the debt. I look forward to this effort.

Mr. CASTLE

Mr. CASTLE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to introduce the ``Child Support Fairness and Federal Tax Refund Interception Act of 2001.'' This legislation expands the eligibility of one of our most effective means of enforcing child support orders--intercepting the Federal tax refunds of parents delinquent in paying their court-ordered financial support for their children. Under current law, the Federal tax refund offset program operated by the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) is limited to cases where the child is either a minor or a disabled adult. It goes without saying that a parent who brings a child into this world is responsible for providing for that child's physical needs regardless of any conflict with the child's custodial parent. In July 1999, I received a letter from Lisa McCave of Wilmington, Delaware. She wanted to know where the justice was in the IRS allowing her husband to collect a $2,426 tax refund when he still owed her nearly $7,000 in back child support just because her son is no longer a minor and is not disabled. Since her son was three, Ms. McCave has had to work two jobs to make up for child support installments that were never paid. She has spent the better part of her time away from work tracking down her former husband, who has often quit his job as soon as his wages were garnished to repay this debt. Now, she is trying to pay off $55,000 in parent loans she incurred to send her son to college. Mr. Speaker, we all know the answer to Lisa McCave's question. Under the current law, there is no justice in limiting the eligibility for this tax intercept program to minors and disabled adults. The good news is that we can correct this injustice. Improving our child support enforcement programs in neither a Republican nor a Democrat issue--it is an issue that should concern all of us. According to recent government statistics, there are approximately 12 million active cases where a child support order requires a noncustodial parent to contribute towards the support of his/her child. Of the $22 billion owed pursuant to these orders in 1999, only half have been paid. I am confident we can all agree to fix this injustice in our Federal tax refund offset program and help some of our most needy constituents receive the financial relief they are owed. I would like to clarify for everyone's benefit that this legislation does not create a cause of action for a custodial parent to seek additional child support. The existing program merely helps custodial parents recover debt they are owed for a level of child support that are set by a court after both sides had the opportunity to present their arguments about the proper size of the child support. In the 106th Congress, this legislation passed the House by a vote of 405 to 18 as a provision in H.R. 4678, the ``Child Support Distribution Act of 2000.'' The Senate version of this bill also enjoyed strong bipartisan support, but the 106th Congress expired before the Senate could complete its consideration. The Federal tax refund offset program is responsible for retrieving nearly one-tenth of all back child support collected. The time has come to make it a greater success. I urge my colleagues to cosponsor this legislation and look forward to working with the House Ways and Means Committee to work to bring this bill to the House Floor.

Mr. CASTLE

Mr. CASTLE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of this resolution to honor the life of Dale Earnhardt and express Congress' condolences to his widow, Teresa, his four children, and the rest of his family. On Sunday, February 18, 2001, at the age of 49, Dale Earnhardt died as a result of injuries sustained in a crash on his final lap of the Daytona 500. Throughout his stellar career as one of the most beloved NASCAR drivers in history, Earnhardt shared his gift and entertained millions of Americans. On behalf of the thousands of Delawareans who are NASCAR and Dale Earnhardt fans, I am grateful to have this opportunity to recognize Dale Earnhardt for his many accomplishments, including his many races in Dover, Delaware. Considered an international hero in the world of race car driving, Earnhardt won the Winston Cup championship seven times, tying for the all-time record as he accumulated 76 career wins including the Daytona 500 in 1998. At Dover Downs International Speedway in Delaware, he finished in the Top 10 in 25 of his 44 races, and earned first place three times, including a sweep of the 1989 events. This past weekend Dover Downs opened its gates to give Delaware fans the opportunity to gather at the Start-Finish line, pit area, and Victory Lane, along with a special prayer service in honor of Earnhardt. Earnhardt's personal appeal stems from his humble beginnings, as he worked his way up by tinkering with cars in the garage his father had built in the barn behind the family's home in Kannapolis, NC. Innate ability and pure determination earned him the nickname ``The Intimidator'' on his way to conquering the racing world. Unlike other superstars, Earnhardt was a man to whom dedicated NASCAR fans could relate. He was a regular guy, driving a pickup truck and always seen sporting jeans and sunglasses. By his appearance, one would never know he was one of the most financially successful athletes in the nation. Mr. Speaker, Dale Earnhardt's death is a great loss not only to the world of NASCAR, but to everyone who admires hard work and determination. However, we can take solace in his own words. He told reporters once, ``I'm a lucky man. I'm telling you, I have it all. The Lord's looked after me, I reckon.'' Race fans in Delaware and across the Nation will never forget Dale Earnhardt.

Mr. CASTLE

Mr. CASTLE. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Ohio for yielding time to me. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of this resolution honoring Catholic schools and their contributions to our communities throughout our Nation. Catholic Schools Week is an annual celebration of the important role that Catholic elementary and secondary schools across the country play in providing a values-added education for America's young people. This tradition of honoring Catholic schools is 27 years old this year and is one I believe should continue. Just last week, students from St. Hedwig Elementary School in Wilmington, Delaware, visited me in Washington, D.C. during Catholic Schools Week. I was impressed by all they have been learning and achieving, and I compliment them for their hard work and interest in our democratic process. While the majority of our students are enrolled in public schools, Catholic schools still play a key role in our entire society. Over 2.5 million children attended 8,000 Catholic schools last year throughout the United States. In my State of Delaware, which is the size of a congressional district, we have over 15,000 students attending 38 Catholic schools, all of whom obviously contribute greatly to their communities. I thank the students, teachers, principals, and the administrators for making the Catholic community shine in my State. I regard Catholic schools as a team player with public schools, other private and parochial schools and home schools in defining America's education system. According to the National Catholic Educational Association, the graduation rate of students in Catholic schools is nearly 95 percent. The dropout rate is just about 3 percent. Eighty-five percent of all Catholic school graduates go on to college. These achievements impress me and deserve to be honored today on the House floor. I would just add, Mr. Speaker, the importance of the integration of all the education of our young children, as they get into more choice, more opportunities for our kids, more comparisons, the Catholic schools, along with all the other schools, add to this mix. Our goal should be to educate every child in America as well as we possibly can. Certainly Catholic schools aid in that; and for that, we are very blessed. I honor them and appreciate them and encourage support for this resolution.

Mr. CASTLE

Mr. CASTLE. Mr. Speaker, I would like to ask some questions, perhaps in the form of a colloquy, of the chairman of the Committee on Rules about the changes which we are facing between committees. I am a member of the Banking Committee and the details elude me. First about the insurance question. In establishing the question on financial services, this resolution adds a term, and I quote, ``insurance generally'' to the jurisdiction of that committee. However, no such jurisdiction existed in rule X in the 106th Congress. Can you describe for me what the term ``insurance generally'' is intended to convey?

Mr. CASTLE. Mr. Speaker, let me ask next about some securities issues. Regarding securities and exchanges, does the transfer of this jurisdiction to the Committee on Financial Services include underwriting, dealing, and market making?

Mr. CASTLE. Another question. Does it include accounting standards applicable to capital raising under applicable securities laws and the Securities Act of 1933?

Mr. CASTLE. Does it include exchanges, investment companies, and investment advisors?

Mr. CASTLE. I thank the gentleman very much for clarification on these issues.