Mac Collins

Mr. COLLINS

Mr. COLLINS. Mr. Speaker, the Unborn Victims of Violence Act, H.R. 1997, is a needed and important bill that must be passed. I believe that we must protect unborn children against acts of violence. It is for this reason that I have cosponsored H.R. 1997. Under current federal law, if a criminal assaults or kills a pregnant woman and causes death or injury to her unborn child, they face no consequences for taking or injuring that unborn life. The Unborn Victims of Violence Act would make any act that causes death of, or bodily injury to, a child who is in utero at the time the conduct takes place, guilty of a separate crime. If enacted, H.R. 1997 would afford protection to a completely defenseless life form, an unborn child, by creating a separate offense for acts of violence against the unborn child. We passed this bill by a solid majority in the last Congress. I am hopeful that this year, our Colleagues in the other body will be able to move this legislation and we can send a final bill to the President for him to sign into law. We have laws that protect men, women, and children from murder. We should have a law to protect the unborn, the most innocent and helpless of God's creations, from murder. This is a common-sense bill and a necessary bill. I'm proud to be a co-sponsor and proud to support this legislation. During the vote on H.R. 1997, had I not been traveling on Congressional business, I would have voted, ``yea'' on rollcall vote 31, final passage for H.R. 1997. I would also have voted ``nay'' on rollcall vote 30, the Lofgren amendment.

Mr. COLLINS

Mr. COLLINS. Mr. Speaker, during this week, the fifth annual National Nurse Anesthetists Week, I recognize the work of nurse anesthetists and the important role they play in the delivery of safe and effective health care. This year, millions of Americans will undergo surgery or deliver a baby, and most of them will receive their anesthesia care directly from a Certified Registered Nurse Anesthetist (CRNA). During this week devoted to recognizing the work of CRNAs, CRNAs are celebrating their long history of providing safe anesthesia care. I would like to thank the more than 30,000 members of the American Association of Nurse Anesthetists (AANA), AANA's president, Tom McKibban, AANA's Executive Director, Jeffery Beutler, and the staff of the AANA for their effort in promoting measures to ensure that Americans across our nation have access to quality health care services at the times they need it most. More than their promotion of commonsense legislation, though, I want to thank the AANA and its members for the work they do everyday in providing excellent care for their patients in what are often challenging and trying times for these Americans and their loved ones. In addition, CRNAs practice in every setting and are the sole anesthesia provider in more than two-thirds of all rural hospitals, ensuring that most Americans can have access to care within their own community. In addition to being a main provider within America's borders, CRNAs are also the main provider of anesthesia care to American service men and women stationed around the world. Overseas, CRNAs have been on the front lines supporting U.S. troops since World War I, and presently more than 165 nurse anesthetists are on duty in Iraq, comprising nearly 80 percent of the anesthesia providers serving in the conflict. For their service to their country and our men and women in uniform, our nation and this Congress will always be grateful. In my own state of Georgia, there are currently 793 AANA members who provide care for the people of Georgia. I would also like to thank these CRNAs, Martha Kral, the President of the Georgia Association of Nurse Anesthetists (GANA), and Janice Izlar, GANA's Federal Political Director, for the quality health care services they provide to the people of Georgia. It is my honor to recognize National Nurse Anesthetists Week and the work of CRNAs across the country. In the year ahead, I look forward to continuing to work with the AANA, that GANA, and CRNAs from across Georgia and across the nation to promote patient safety and to educate patients and their families about their anesthesia options and nurse anesthesia providers.

Mr. COLLINS

Mr. COLLINS. Mr. Speaker, I was not present for rollcall vote 634, the Captive Wildlife Safety Act (H.R. 1006); rollcall vote 635, Expressing the sense of Congress regarding the importance of motorsports (H. Con. Res. 320); rollcall vote 636, National Museum of African-American History and Culture Act (H.R. 3491); rollcall 637, Berkley Motion to Instruct Conferees; rollcall 638, Mutual Fund Integrity and Fee Transparency Act (H.R. 2420); rollcall 640, Honoring the victims of the Cambodian genocide (H. Con. Res. 83); rollcall 641, Honoring the Seeds of Peace (H. Con. Res. 288); rollcall 642, Commending Afghan Women (H. Res. 393); rollcall 643, Recognizing the Fifth Anniversary of the signing of the International Religious Freedom Act (H. Res. 423); and rollcall 644, Fairness to Contact Lens Consumer Act (H.R. 3140). Had I been present, I would have voted ``yea'' for rollcall votes 634, 635, 636, 638, 640, 641, 642, 643, and 644. I would also vote ``nay'' for rollcall vote 637.

Mr. COLLINS

Mr. COLLINS. Mr. Speaker, I was unavoidably detained and not present on rollcall vote 620, recognizing the Agricultural Research of the Department of Agriculture (S.J. Res. 22); rollcall vote 621, commending the Inspectors General (S.J. Res. 18); and rollcall vote 622, honoring Mr. Sargent Shriver (H. Con. Res. 299). Had I been present, I would have voted ``yea'' for rollcall votes 620, 621, 622.

Mr. COLLINS

Mr. COLLINS. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this time. I rise in support of this legislation, and I rise in support of it because I think it is long overdue that we address this problem. Approximately 8 years ago, a young man came to my office in Jonesboro, Georgia, to tell me about a situation that his small business was in. He was being denied a contract with the Air Force for building missile containers which he had been doing for several years. He fought it in court and won. He spent all of his cash doing so, only to see FPI come back again, this time successfully, leading to the demise of his business and the loss of about 150 jobs, people working to provide for their families, to pay their taxes, and they are playing by the rules. They had an unfair competition, a position of having a mandatory source that this small business did not have and could not overcome. It has been said that China is the enemy, not these inmates. I do not consider either an enemy. I consider the inmates having an unfair position toward competition with the mandatory source which has been long overdue to be changed. I do not see China as an enemy, I see them as competition and meeting competition with us with some advantages. There are a couple of things where they do not play by the rules as far as trade. They do not value their currency as they should, and they have tax provisions of tax laws which are much different from ours which make our workforce noncompetitive with their workforce. Here we are talking about law-abiding citizens competing with inmates. It is time to pass this legislation, do a 5-year phaseout of the program and get away from the mandatory source and the competition of contracting and bidding.

Mr. COLLINS

Mr. COLLINS. Mr. Speaker, today, I am proud to introduce legislation that will protect American jobs and will create new job opportunities for those Americans in search of employment. The American Competition Enhancement Act of 2003 would ultimately provide an across-the-board tax cut of 5 percent for all corporations. Specifically, the ACE Act will cut the corporate tax rate by 3 points in 2004, initially lowering the corporate rate to a tax level of 32 percent. Three years later, the ACE Act would cut the tax rate by an additional 2 points, lowering the rate for corporations to 30 percent in 2007. Since 1996, our trading partners have realized that being competitive in the global marketplace requires cutting taxes of the businesses that employ their workers. Many countries, including Australia, Canada, France, Germany, Japan, Poland and Turkey, have cut their corporate tax rates drastically--some by 10 percent or more. In fact, the average top corporate tax rate for governments in the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) has dropped from a rate of 41 percent in 1986 to 30.9 percent in 2003, while the U.S. corporate rate has remained unchanged at 35 percent over the same period. When state and local taxes are added on top of this rate, the U.S. corporate tax rate averages 40 percent--which is more than 9 percentage points higher than the OECD average. While other countries have learned that lower taxation enables them to compete for business, and ultimately jobs, the United States has failed to respond, and American workers have suffered. Many in this Congress have remained content to sit idly by as other nations have lowered corporate taxes. Instead of freeing American businesses and our workers from oppressive taxation and burdensome regulations, this Congress has continued to support efforts to make our tax code more ambiguous and difficult to navigate. Over the past 20 years, the Congress has passed tax law that has led to the creation of complicated and excessive rules--rules that have negatively impacted the ability of American companies to compete in the world market. These have been ``defensive'' responses to competition, not ``offensive'' responses to increasing worldwide competition. Throughout, the Twentieth Century, the United States competed aggressively in the world market, and as a result our competitors responded. To remain competitive, this Congress MUST act again, and we MUST begin by reforming our tax policy that has become a choke collar on our American workers, restricting them from being free to compete with other workers in the world market. As this Congress debates export subsidies and global competition, we will continue to hear much about the challenges faced by American manufacturers. Yet, the first and foremost challenge that American manufacturers, and all American employers, face is an increasingly restrictive and oppressive tax code. The ACE Act would address this fundamental issue and enable American workers in all sectors, including manufacturing, to once again compete in the world market. This bill would instill confidence in our manufacturing industry and would entice many other industries to operate here instead of locating overseas. As the greatest workers in the world, there is little doubt about the outcome, if only the Congress will free our workers to compete. Some will say that we cannot afford the ACE Act, but American workers cannot afford the alternative--continued taxation that restricts, limits and chokes their ability to compete. Some are saying that any tax legislation must be budget neutral; yet, over the last two years, the corporate income tax structure remains unchanged, and corporate revenue has only declined. In fact, Corporate Income Tax Revenue has decreased significantly--from 2000 to 2001 Corporate Income Tax Revenues fell from $207.3 billion to $151.1 billion, a decrease of $56.2 billion; in 2002, Corporate Income Tax Revenue dropped to $148 billion--a decrease of $59.3 billion from the 2000 level. In 2 years, our corporate tax laws have resulted in lost jobs, lost dollars in American workers' pockets, and a combined loss in revenue of $115.5 billion (See Table F-3 of the Congressional Budget Office--Budget and Economic Outlook: Fiscal Years 2004-2013). Over the past 3 years the United States has seen a loss of 2.7 million manufacturing jobs--with an average of 60,000 job losses per month over the past 2 years. Some of these jobs have disappeared due to increased production efficiencies, but many more have been relocated overseas. History has shown that lower taxation leads employers to keep the employees they have, to invest in capital expenditures that create new jobs, and to increase their profits which, in turn, means economic growth, more jobs, more exports, more production, and, ultimately, more dollars flowing to the Federal Treasury. Let us learn from history and pass meaningful tax relief to stimulate economic growth and, in turn, increase the funds in workers' pockets; ultimately, this would mean more dollars for the Treasury of the United States. I urge my colleagues in this House to consider the actions of others around the world, to consider history's lessons, and, most importantly, to consider the effect of our tax code on workers in their own districts. I have considered this all and am determined that we must free American workers from the choke collar of taxation. This Congress must act and provide much needed relief for all American corporations that employ our people. Mr. Speaker, I call on the House to consider American workers and consider the challenges they face. It is time that the House pass solid, meaningful tax legislation that supports the American worker. [From the Tax & Budget Bulletin, CATO Institute] The U.S. Corporate Tax and the Global Economy (By Chris Edwards, Director of Fiscal Policy, Cato Institute) The corporate income tax is at the center of numerous policy debates today. First, the World Trade Organization has ruled that the U.S. Foreign Sales Corporation/ Extraterritorial Income Exclusion (FSC/ETI) tax break given to exporters is illegal. The European Union has threatened the United States with trade retaliation unless it repeals FSC/ETI by the end of this year. Next, corporate tax avoidance has been in the news in the wake of the Enron scandal. Finally, there is growing concern that the corporate income tax damages business competitiveness and reduces U.S. economic growth. In response to the WTO ruling, bills have been introduced to repeal FSC/ETI, including H.R. 2896 by Ways and Means chairman Bill Thomas (R-Cal.) and H.R. 1769 by Phil Crane (R- Ill.) and Charles Rangel (D-N.Y.). The Thomas bill, and a similar proposal by Senator Orrin Hatch (R-Utah), includes many useful tax reforms in exchange for repeal of the $5 billion per year FSC/ETI provision. However, more fundamental tax reforms are needed, including a large cut to the corporate tax rate. corporate tax reform is long overdue Global direct investment flows rose six-fold in the past decade, and research shows that these flows are increasingly sensitive to corporate taxes. To attract capital and build the economy, the United States should have a neutral and low- rate corporate tax. Instead, the United States has perhaps the most complex corporate tax and the second highest corporate tax rate among major nations. The U.S. statutory corporate tax rate is 40 percent, which includes the 35 percent federal rate and an average state rate of 5 percent. By comparison, Figure 1 shows that the average rate for the 30-nation Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development is 30.9 percent, down sharply from 37.6 percent in 1996. Aside from a high rate, the U.S. corporate tax has uncompetitive rules for firms that compete in foreign markets. The U.S. Treasury's assistant secretary for tax policy, Pam Olson, recently testified that ``no other country has rules for the immediate taxation of foreign-source income that are comparable to the U.S. rules in terms of breadth and complexity.'' The complexity of the U.S. rules on foreign income are infamous--Dow Chemical has calculated that 78 percent of its 7,800-page U.S. tax return relates to the rules on foreign income. Part of the problem is that Congress has viewed corporations as cash cows, and has shown little concern that high taxes reduce investment and drive capital and profits abroad. One example of how the demand for more tax revenue can backfire is the taxation of ``foreign base company shipping income.'' It used to be that the foreign income earned by cargo ships and other vessels owed by U.S. subsidiaries was not taxed until repatriated to the United States. However, Congress changed the rules in 1975 and 1986 to tax that income immediately as earned. But rather than raising federal revenue, the changes reduced revenue as the U.S.-owned shipping fleet shrunk and the tax base disappeared. The U.S. share of the world's open-registry shipping fleet fell from 25 percent in 1975 to less than 5 percent today. The Thomas and Hatch bills include a fix to this counterproductive tax provision. thomas bill includes modest REforms The corporate tax reform bill introduced by Bill Thomas would reduce the double taxation of foreign income earned by U.S. multinational corporations (MNCs) and simplify the rules for foreign tax credits and subpart F income. Simplifying and reducing taxes on MNCs would benefit the U.S. economy in a number of ways. U.S. MNCs would be able to increase U.S.- based research and other headquarters activities if their foreign operations were larger and more profitable. Also, MNCs could better penetrate global markets with U.S. exports if their foreign affiliates were more competitive. Indeed, U.S. Department of Commerce data show that U.S. MNCs account for two-thirds of all U.S. merchandise exports. By making U.S. MNCs more competitive, the Thomas bill would boost U.S. exports, employment, and incomes. The Thomas bill also includes other useful but limited reforms, including faster depreciation for some equipment investment, liberalizing the subchapter S rules for small corporations, and changes to the corporate alternative minimum tax. The Crane-Rangel bill provides a targeted tax break for manufacturing. A new deduction would reduce the tax rate for domestic manufacturing by 3.5 percentage points, but would not cut taxes for other types of businesses. This is poor policy compared to a broad-based tax cut because it would increase tax complexity and divide the business sector even further into separate lobbying camps, each wanting narrow breaks rather than overall reforms. more fundamental reforms needed Rather than provide narrow breaks, Congress should cut the 35 percent corporate tax rate to 20 percent so that the United States becomes a tax reform leader, not a laggard. In order not to increase the deficit, a rate cut could be paired with cuts to federal spending on business subsidies, which currently total about $90 billion per year. Such a reform package would increase investment and employment incentives for all firms and reduce government favoritism and business distortions. Beyond a rate cut, Congress should consider full repeal of the corporate tax or replacement with a cash-flow tax. A cash flow tax would increase domestic investment and make U.S. firms more competitive in global markets because firms would not be taxed on their foreign business income. A cash-flow tax would also reduce wasteful tax sheltering. Indeed, most of Enron's tax shelters would not have been possible under a cash-flow tax. Congress should aim to give this country the best possible corporate tax environment, not one of the worst. A good first step would be to simplify and reduce taxes for U.S. MNCs, and then follow up with a reduction of the corporate tax rate to 20 percent.

Mr. COLLINS

Mr. COLLINS. Mr. Speaker, it is with great pleasure that I introduce the Reverend Dr. Benny Tate from Rock Springs Congregational Methodist Church in Milner, Georgia. June and I are regular visitors to Dr. Tate's church. Dr. Tate reminds me of a quote from Alexis de Tocqueville who came to America in 1831 to study democracy. And he wrote, and I quote, ``I sought for the greatness and genius of America in her commodious harbors and her ample rivers, and it was not there; in her fertile fields and her boundless forests, and it was not there; in her rich mines and her vast world of commerce, and it was not there; in our democratic Congress and her matchless Constitution, and it was not there. Not until I went into the churches of America and heard her pulpits flame with righteousness did I understand the secret of her genius and power. America is great because she is good. And if America ever ceases to be good, America then will cease to be great.'' Fourteen years ago Dr. Tate relocated to Georgia to pastor the Congregation of the Rock Springs Congressional Methodist Church. Under his tenure, the average Sunday morning attendance has grown from 30 to 750. To accommodate this growth, the church is in a building program at this time to build and construct a 1,100-seat sanctuary. Their motto is if God builds it, they will come. Dr. Tate is the author of two books, Happy Wife, Happy Life, and, One More Night with the Frogs. He also hosts a popular weekly radio program, Apples of Gold. He and his wife Barbara and their daughter Savannah reside in Griffin, Georgia. Dr. Tate is a pastor that I love, a pastor that I enjoy, and a pastor with a message that if God builds it, they will come because his message is one of righteousness. I am proud to introduce, Dr. Benny Tate.

Mr. COLLINS

Mr. COLLINS. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this time. Mr. Speaker, there is a lot of rhetoric that goes on in this Chamber and in this town when it comes to different issues, and I know the intent of a lot of people is different from the intent of others. And I know that there are those who would like to see this child tax credit given to a lot of people. In fact, the bill that we voted on here, this some--$80 billion tax relief would do what a lot of people would like to see done, and that is the child tax credit spread around more. But as I go back to the district at home, and not just in my district, but traveling throughout Georgia, I have the question asked of me: How in the world, Mac, can you give a tax credit or a refund to people who actually did not have a tax liability? And that is a difficult question to answer, because the Tax code is supposed to be set up in a way and in a fashion that people pay based upon their income; and if they do not have the income to pay the tax, then they have no tax liability. So, therefore, there is some concern with people who do as to why we should give a tax credit, a refundable tax credit to those who do not. But you know what is interesting about all of this conversation and all of this rhetoric about the different tax provisions, whether it be the payroll tax or whether it be the income tax, whether it be the corporate income tax or whatever it may be, it just fuels the fire at home. And I like this fire. I like to see it fueled, and I appreciate some of my colleagues bringing it up and doing so. But it just accelerates and fuels the fire of those who would like to see a total tax reformation here in Washington of the Tax Codes. As Mr. Archer used to say, just pull it up by the roots and do away with it and put in place a different type of system. I am often asked by my constituency at home and other parts of the State about a representative from Georgia who has introduced such a measure that is called the Fair Tax introduced by the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Linder). That is the reason I am a co-sponsor of it, because of the complexity and the cost of complying with this type of system and how it treats people who pay tax far differently than it does those who do not pay tax. I am a strong supporter of the gentleman from Georgia's (Mr. Linder) Fair Tax. I have asked the chairman of the committee to let us hold some hearings on the Fair Tax. Let us see just exactly how it would be implemented and how it would change the makeup of the tax system in the United States and how that makeup today is far different from other nations and how, if we changed it, it would make us a lot more competitive in the world marketplace, which we need to be. Just in the last couple of years we have lost over 2 million manufacturing jobs from this country to offshore, many of those U.S. companies who have moved offshore. I believe if we were to reform this tax system we would see a lot of those companies maybe change their mind and relocate back here or at least change the mind of some of those who want to relocate offshore. I kind of like the idea that they bring all of this rhetoric to the floor of the House of Representatives and expose the fact that we have a very complicated, complex tax system that treats people who actually get out and work every day and take a risk and invest and try hard to provide for their families, but yet some of their funds are taken from them and transferred to people who do not have a tax liability because some of them do not have enough income or they have a far larger family than the income requirements for the tax liability. So I appreciate the fact that they will bring this type of information to the floor and this type of rhetoric. It just fuels the fire of the gentleman from Georgia's (Mr. Linder) Fair Tax bill that I am a strong supporter of and would like to see the House Committee on Ways and Means address it with hearings. I thank the chairman of the committee for yielding me time.

Mr. COLLINS

Mr. COLLINS. Mr. Chairman, I too rise in strong support of H.R. 2417, the Intelligence Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2004. It is a good bill with bipartisan support and, hopefully, it will be adopted, and I feel sure it will. Since the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks on our Nation, the Select Committee on Intelligence has noted the urgent need for better information-sharing between and among our various Intelligence Community's agencies, and Federal, State, and even local law enforcement are enjoying better shared intelligence. Since joining the committee earlier this year, I have observed the chairman, ranking member, and committee members, how they have advocated the implementation of new policies and technologies which are designed to facilitate the timely sharing of important information among our intelligence agencies and our local law enforcement. Technical shortfalls in communications and collaboration systems, however, have undermined efforts to fully share information across the Intelligence Community. This bill makes an effort to correct those issues. These technical limitations can be overcome with proper management and capital investments. This bill provides significant funding to assist the Intelligence Community's leadership in developing and sharing useful information, management tools, capabilities, and operating systems throughout the Intelligence Community. As important as technological solutions to information-sharing are the needs for updated policies to direct the flow of information. The community's leadership has not been sufficiently clear about its information-sharing policies with its various component agencies. As a result, information becomes irrelevant due to outdated directives or conflicting opinions about what information can or cannot be shared, and with whom. One of the key lessons learned by the committee's 9/11 inquiry last year was that a failure to communicate sensitive data on an urgent basis among intelligence law enforcement agencies can cost our Nation dearly. The committee has taken steps to improve this situation with this important bill. It is a good piece of legislation, a strong piece of legislation. I encourage its passage and support it fully.

Mr. COLLINS

Mr. COLLINS. Mr. Speaker, I rise to introduce the Asbestos Claims Tax Fairness Act. Asbestos liability issues have reached crisis stage. The costs of the current and potential lawsuits filed against these companies by claimants are staggering. More than 200,000 tort claims regarding exposure to asbestos are pending today, and more than 50,000 new claims are being filed each year. Many former manufacturers of asbestos stopped using and distributing asbestos long before 1986. However, most of these companies or their corporate descendants, are bankrupt or nearing bankruptcy. As a result, asbestos liabilities are being shouldered alone by the dwindling number of former asbestos manufacturers and distributors that remain in business. This spiraling cycle into bankruptcy means asbestos victims are faced with the decreasing likelihood that they will be compensated for their injuries in the future. In the 107th Congress, along with more than 125 of our colleagues, my colleague from Georgia and I introduced tax legislation that would help provide compensation to victims of asbestos and help companies beset by asbestos liabilities to continue as viable employers. That bill, H.R. 1412, was the continuation of efforts begun in the 106th Congress. Since the beginning of that effort, the plight for victims has worsened and the economic viability of those entities responsible for meeting those obligations has deteriorated significantly. Today I again introduce a bill that will help to ensure that there are funds available to pay victims of asbestos exposure. The legislation has two components. First, it would increase the amount of resources available to pay injured asbestos victims by exempting from federal tax settlement funds established to pay asbestos victims. Hundreds of thousands of individuals rely on these funds for compensation. Under current law, these funds are taxed at the top income tax rate of 35-percent rate. Second, the legislation would ease tax-law limitations on asbestos defendants who are emerging from bankruptcy. More than 60 companies currently paying asbestos victims have been forced into bankruptcy. Our legislation would exempt these companies from certain tax-law rules that limit use of a bankrupt company's tax assets. This relief would be provided only in situations where the company's restructuring in bankruptcy results in the company continuing as a going concern. Mr. Speaker, the legislation I am introducing today is not intended to solve all of the problems caused by the asbestos crisis. But these measures will help companies emerge as soon as possible from bankruptcy, minimizing the potential for job losses in the economy and reducing the risk of lost benefits to asbestos claimants. I urge my colleagues to join me in this effort.

Mr. COLLINS

Mr. COLLINS. Mr. Speaker, I would like to recognize a remarkable woman on the occasion of a very special anniversary. In 1993, Mrs. Rebecca Sue Spears, of Fayetteville, Georgia, was diagnosed with breast cancer. This year marks the tenth anniversary of Mrs. Spears being ``cancer free.'' Today, a woman is diagnosed with breast cancer approximately every 2 minutes. Thanks to the efforts of people like Mrs. Spears, we are making great strides to eradicate this devastating disease. As a breast cancer survivor, Mrs. Spears continues to raise money and awareness to fight breast cancer and is a true servant leader. In 2002, at the age of 59, Mrs. Spears participated in the Avon 3-Day Breast Cancer Walk in Atlanta, Georgia. During this inspiring event, Mrs. Spears walked twenty-miles per day for 3 days and represented women everywhere that are battling this terrible disease. Recently, in Atlanta, she walked in the Susan G. Kormen Race For the Cure; an event that is celebrating its 20th Anniversary and is now the largest series of 5K races in the world. Thanks to dedicated volunteers like Mrs. Spears, the Susan G. Kormen Breast Cancer Foundation has raised over $250 million for education, research, screening and treatment. On June 7, 2003, Mrs. Spears will walk again in her quest to fight cancer, here in our Nation's Capital, in the National Race For the Cure. I am honored to recognize Mrs. Rebecca Sue Spears on this momentous occasion. She is an inspiration to her husband, James E. Spears, her two daughters, Kathryn and Karen, her two sons Jimmy and Steven, her six grandchildren, and countless others who are battling this disease. In her own words she describes her relentless determination by saying, ``I walk and will continue to walk until a cure is found with hopes and prayers that my daughters, grandchildren, other family members and friends, as well as millions of others, will never have to be told-- `you have cancer.' ''

Mr. COLLINS

Mr. COLLINS. Mr. Speaker, America has always been a nation which values human life. We have spent trillions of dollars, and sacrificed the best and bravest of our men and women in far-flung lands to prevent the destruction of innocent life. We as a nation fight for the right of every man and woman to live without tyranny. Our foundational document, the Declaration of Independence states ``We hold these truths to be self evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are Life . . .'' The issue before us today is not about choice. It is not about convenience. It is not about privacy. The issue before us today is whether the United States will live up to its responsibilities, its foundational principals, and protect innocent human life. I won't describe the brutal and barbaric practice of Partial Birth Abortion. What I will do, is urge every person within the sound of my voice to consider what allowing this practice to continue says about the American people. In the most prosperous nation in the world, we currently allow 4,000 to 5,000 infants each year to be brutally murdered in this manner moments before they take their first, liberty laden breath. On September 11, 2001, more than three thousand Americans lost their lives. This tremendous loss of life lead to tremendous outrage, military action, and was the most tragic experience this nation has ever faced. Yet each year we allow the brutality of between four and five thousand partial birth abortions to occur. Mr. Speaker, I am proud to be an original cosponsor of this bill. I am proud that the American people have said ``enough'' and elected us to represent them here today so that we can prevent any more needless, tragic, painful, barbaric deaths from partial birth abortion. I urge my colleagues to defend these innocent ones. I urge the Members of this House to support this ban on partial birth abortion.

Mr. COLLINS

Mr. COLLINS. Mr. Speaker, I thank the chairman for yielding me this time. Mr. Speaker, I never have met Mr. Buffett. But if he is going to get $358 million out of this tax bill, I hope he will sign the check on the back, give me a call, and I will go pick it up and bring it back and give it to Mr. Snow at Treasury. That will maybe please him and please a lot of other folks. Let me tell the Members about a young couple in Georgia, making about $40,000 a year, three children. The wife does not work. She is raising the children. She called today and said, Momma, I heard on the radio that we are going to get a refund check on the child tax credit. Is that true? We sure could use it. It is true. But not only is that true, but the bottom line of her husband's paycheck will be better because of the repeal of the marriage penalty, because of the reduction in the marginal rate, and they are going to enjoy those few extra dollars that they earn whether Mr. Buffett enjoys his or not, but I bet he will invest it. He will not send it back. There are millions of families like that across this country that are going to benefit from this tax bill, this growth and jobs bill. And it is a jobs bill. It is a workers' bill. Because we are changing provisions of the tax law that will make us more competitive with foreign nations, and our workforce in this country competes with the workforce in those nations. This is going to benefit millions of people who get up every day and go to work. They work hard to provide for their families. They work hard to provide to the community and to contribute to their church. They pay their taxes. They play by the rules, millions of families like that just like the girl that called today and said, Momma, is it true? We sure could use the money. And my wife says, yes, it is.

Mr. COLLINS

Mr. COLLINS. Mr. Speaker, I would like to bring to your attention an editorial that appeared in Georgia's Columbus Ledger Enquirer newspaper on April 9, 2003 entitled ``Georgians Make a Difference in National Defense.'' The editorial was written by Georgia State Senator Seth Harp, Chairman of the Veterans and Military Affairs Committee, and highlights the F/A Raptor Jet Fighter as essential investment to achieve air dominance for 21st Century military operations. The F/A 22 is important to my constituents, nearly 600 of them are working on the program in Columbus, Georgia and the plane itself is being assembled in Marietta, Georgia, but its real importance lies in the safety it provides our fighting men and women, and the security it brings to our national interests. Georgians Make a Difference in National Defense Military preparedness is as important today as it has ever been. As the war against Saddam Hussein illustrates, it is incumbent upon the military industrial complex to provide our fighting men and women with the most sophisticated, accurate and state-of-the art weaponry in the world. When the United States makes the decision to enter a conflict, it faces two challenges: achieve the ultimate goal as quickly as possible; and bring our sons and daughters, fathers and mothers, neighbors and friends home safely. That is why next generation aircraft, such as the F/A-22 Raptor, deserves the full consideration, funding and support of Congress and the Pentagon. This jet fighter is currently in the testing stage, but with full deployment close at hand, we are about to see a revolution in how battle is waged in the sky. The F/A-22 is supersonic, allowing our pilots to get to their target, drop their payload, and return to base faster and with a diminished threat of interception. The plane has stealth technology, allowing the jet to enter enemy airspace without detection and, for the first time, giving commanders an opportunity to use fighter planes during the daylight hours at the outset of a campaign instead of relying on the cloak of darkness. It has the most sophisticated avionics and weapon systems in the world, ensuring the dominance of air space by our fighter pilots. Bottom line: The United States stands on the verge of advancing fighter jet technology to levels unmatched, unimagined and unbeatable by any other nation on Earth. There is a certain inevitability that the F/A-22 has its detractors. There are those that believe we don't need improvements in fighter jet technology and that we already have air superiority. Still others have pet projects that they want funded with research, development and construction dollars being spent on the F/A-22. And some argue that our national security interests are being met and, in fact, we need to scale back on funding next generation technology. My response is we can agree to disagree. I believe strongly that if the technology exists to advance the safety and security of our nation and the men and women who fight to protect us, we should aggressively foster the research and development of those opportunities. The F/A-22 is proving itself to be a giant leap in that direction, and Fred Reed said it best in a recent article in the Washington Times: ``Many weapons are just incremental improvements over existing designs. Occasionally, however, a weapon makes a major transition, as from propeller power to jet, and becomes a completely new thing. The F-22 was one of these.'' Right here in Columbus, nearly 600 of our neighbors are working on the F/A-22 program, and the plane itself is being assembled at the Lockheed Martin plant in Marietta. This jet fighter is an important component to our nation's defense, and we should be proud that Georgians are leading the effort to bring it from conception to reality. As officials at the Air Force said: ``Air superiority saves the lives of America's sons and daughters who we send into harm's way in the air, on the ground and at sea. The F-22 is an essential investment to achieve that air dominance--the key for 21st century military operations.'' It deserves our support, and those Georgians working on bringing the F/A-22 to the frontlines of our national defense deserve our thanks.

Mr. COLLINS

Mr. COLLINS. Mr. Speaker, this is a workers' bill. This bill will benefit the American worker. It will open jobs, 1.2 million by the end of 2004, half a million by the end of this year. This is good news for the American worker. We hear about 6 percent unemployment, but we do not hear the flip side: 94 percent of Americans are employed. This bill is about maintaining those jobs and adding jobs and making workers more competitive in the global marketplace. There is talk about unemployment benefits. Mr. Speaker, the best unemployment benefit is a job so that people in this country can collect a paycheck. This bill does that. This bill helps businesses grow so jobs will grow. Provisions of this bill will keep American companies here in America and keep those jobs here. There is nothing that the American worker cannot do. Given a level playing field of tax policies, American workers can out-produce, out- compete, and out-perform any other nation's workforce. Some people claim this tax bill is only for the rich. That is wrong, and they know it. The President has submitted a tax bill here that will help 104 million American taxpayers. Two-thirds of this workers' bill goes to child tax credits, expanding the number of taxpayers in the 10 percent bracket, eliminating the marriage penalty, accelerating marginal rate cuts, and ensuring that middle-income families do not face the alternative minimum tax. Mr. Speaker, this is a good bill. The biggest problem is that it does not go far enough. I would like to see more. However, it will stimulate the economy, it will grow jobs, it will make American workers more competitive than foreign workers. I support this bill and urge my colleagues to do the same.

Mr. COLLINS

Mr. COLLINS. Mr. Speaker, I have been a Member of Congress for ten full years, going on my eleventh year now. Since 1993, when I was elected, the ``Home of the Infantry,'' Fort Benning has consistently been selected as the best installation in the nation, and a few times as best in the world. As a politician, something inside me wants to take credit for that, but as a statesman, I realize that it has been the fine leadership of people like Major General Paul Eaton and Colonel Joe Torres and those who have preceded them who are really responsible for the outstanding performance of Fort Benning. As a major power projection platform for the Army, Benning serves a very transitional community of soldiers. With our war in Iraq and Afghanistan, more than 7,000 Fort Benning troops are stationed overseas. Obviously, this kind of deployment leaves a hole. Additionally, several thousand more soldiers from other bases have passed through Benning's gates to receive specialized training before deploying to the field. This has placed a great deal of demand on the services offered. But, in spite of all of these challenges, Fort Benning has been recognized again this year as one of the top 10 military installations in the world with the Communities of Excellence Chief of Staff Award. Competing on the Training and Doctrine Command level, Benning has demonstrated a better, more efficient, faster way to provide outstanding service to the community which calls Fort Benning home. Additionally, Fort Benning is an integral part of the tri-community, Columbus, GA, Phenix City, AL, and Fort Benning. The military and the civilian communities strive to mutually support one another and each community compliments the others. This is the result of tireless effort by the military, the community leaders of Columbus, and Phenix City. Their effort has paid off and I am glad to see it recognized with this award. Fort Benning, while it has a proud legacy as the foremost training center of the Army, is only a patch of Earth and some buildings. It is the people who work there that make it an outstanding example of military efficiency and service. It is the dedication of those people and the leadership of its commanders which drive the level of excellence higher each year. The consistent performance of Fort Benning reflects well on the Army and demonstrates why Fort Benning is a shining example of the Army being all it can be. I congratulate Major General Eaton and his fine staff on receiving this award and thank them for their service to America and to the community which makes Benning its home.

Mr. COLLINS

Mr. COLLINS. Mr. Speaker, I was inevitably detained at the White House and was not able to be present on rollcall vote 149, providing for consideration of H.R. 1350; to reauthorize the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yea'' on rollcall vote 149.

Mr. COLLINS

Mr. COLLINS. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this time.

Mr. COLLINS. I yield to the gentleman from California.

Mr. COLLINS. Mr. Speaker, reclaiming my time, I rise in full support of the bill as presented by the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Shaw), the chairman of the Subcommittee on Social Security. With all the respect I have for the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Green) and what is he is attempting to do, I do have to oppose his amendment. I can appreciate what he is doing, what he is intending to do, but this is a very serious loophole that does exist. It has benefitted a number of teachers in Texas, it has benefitted a few from Georgia. There is a difference in how the teachers in each State went about it, but it is unfair to the majority of the population of this country who pay into the Social Security system based on their employment for years and years. This has nothing to do with the government pension offset. It has nothing to do with the windfall benefit. It is all about spousal benefits, and it is a loophole that needs to be closed. It is one that has existed for some time. The Social Security commissioner has recommended that it be closed, the Government Accounting Office has also recommended it be closed, and as the chairman of the full committee mentioned, it can have benefits of upwards of almost $100,000 for those who may work 1 day or 1 year in the system that is covered by Social Security, having worked the majority of their time in a system that is not. This has caused a lot of the districts in Georgia, the school districts who do not participate in Social Security, to lose teachers to other districts who do, and it is a loophole that needs to be closed.

Mr. COLLINS

Mr. COLLINS. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me time. Mr. Speaker, I congratulate the gentleman from California (Chairman Hunter) and the gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Skelton) for bringing this resolution to the floor. Mr. Speaker, in early February, the Speaker asked five of us to travel to the Middle East, first stopping in Kurdistan, on into Uzbekistan. We attempted to get into Afghanistan, but, due to bad weather, we were unable to; and also on into Kuwait city. The purpose of that trip was to deliver a message from the Congress of the United States about the support that we have for Enduring Freedom and for the operation that is going on that they are carrying out today. On our visit to each of the stops, we had four ways of expressing our gratitude. One, we had banners, banners that had inscribed the words from the President's State of the Union Address, when he addressed the troops and said, you believe in America, and America believes in you. Those banners were signed by hundreds of people, not just Members of Congress, but people from across the country who visited here in Washington. Each of those banners was signed by the Commander in Chief. Another way that we had of expressing the gratitude of the Congress was a video, a 10-minute video which began with the Speaker of the House delivering a message personally, the Commanding General of Fort Benning, Georgia, people from the PX, people from the streets, also the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Harman), the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Bishop), Vice President Dick Cheney, and ending by a message from the Commander in Chief, President Bush. The third way that we expressed our gratitude from the Congress was with a flag. We presented each stop, each unit that we visited, with a flag that had been previously flown over the Capitol of the United States. Five of us were traveling; the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Pascrell), the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Capuano), the gentleman from Alabama (Mr. Everett), the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Wilson) and myself. Never once did we identify ourselves at any stop as other than Members of Congress. We did not carry a label by party, just Members of Congress, to express our gratitude. The fourth way was there in person, to personally deliver the message. We never heard one complaint, and we shook the hands of thousands of men and women in uniform. Not one complaint, but a lot of fine compliments to the Congress and to the Commander in Chief. Proud to serve both. But to our surprise in Uzbekistan, as we were presenting these gifts and expressions of gratitude of the Congress, they had a gift for the Congress. They had a flag that they had flown over the air base, K-2 in Uzbekistan, a forward operation base for Enduring Freedom. But not only did they fly it over the base, they put it aboard a C-130 gunship and flew it over Afghanistan, because they wanted to express to us their gratitude for what we do as Congress and for our Commander in Chief. Should we not be doing that today in the same fashion that the five of us traveled, as Members of Congress; not by party label, just Members of Congress, proud to be so, and proud of our soldiers and our airmen, our sailors, our marines, our Coast Guard. God bless each and every one, and God bless our Commander in Chief.

Mr. COLLINS

Mr. COLLINS. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to introduce legislation which corrects an inequity in the Internal Revenue Code which affects the sale of certain assets. Under current law, landowners who are occasional sellers of timber are often classified by the Internal Revenue Service as ``dealers.'' As a result, the seller is forced to choose between a ``lump sum'' payment method or a pay-as-cut contract which often results in an under-realization of the fair value of the contract. While electing the pay-as-cut contract option provides access to capital gains treatment, the seller must comply with special rules in Section 631(b) of the Internal Revenue code. The provisions of Sec. 631(b) require these sellers to ``retain an economic interest'' in their timber until it is harvested. Under the retained economic interest requirement, the seller bears all the risk and is only paid for timber that is harvested, regardless of whether the terms of the contract are violated. Additionally, since the buyer pays for only the timber that is removed or ``scaled'' there is an incentive to waste poor quality timber, to under scale the timber, or to remove the timber without scaling. The legislation I am introducing will provide greater consistency by removing the exclusive ``retained economic interest'' requirement in IRC Section 631(b). This change has been supported or suggested by a number of groups for tax simplification purposes, including the Internal Revenue Service. I urge my colleagues to join in this tax simplification effort and strongly urge its passage.

Mr. COLLINS

Mr. COLLINS. Mr. Chairman, H.R. 4 reflects the President's and Congress' proposals to move more Americans off government dependence toward individual financial freedom. Prior to the passage of the 1996 welfare law, many mistakenly forecast that welfare reform would place more people in poverty. Instead, welfare rolls were cut by more than half and more than 9 million recipients left the welfare rolls and began collecting paychecks. In fact, one of the greatest success stories of the 1996 welfare reform law has been my home State of Georgia. Some have stated that States will not be able to meet the new work requirements in this legislation; this is not the case with the state of Georgia. Last year, as the House was considering welfare reauthorization legislation, I had the opportunity to speak with Georgia's Labor Commissioner Michael Thurmond about the increased work requirements in this legislation. Before serving as Labor Commissioner, then Governor Zell Miller selected Michael Thurmond to direct Georgia's Workfirst program to move Georgians from welfare to work. It was this program that laid the foundation for Georgia's success in moving so many from welfare to work. In our conversation, Commissioner Thurmond stated with the confidence that Georgia will be able to meet these standards. By passing this legislation today, this House is both honoring and building on the success of States like Georgia who are breaking the cycle of dependence and placing more Americans on the road to financial independence. Through the passage of H.R. 4, my home State of Georgia, and other States, will be able to build on the success of the 1996 law and place more Georgians and more Americans on the road to self-sufficiency.

Mr. COLLINS

Mr. COLLINS. Mr. Speaker, a man from Butts County, Georgia, Carl Kelly of Pepperton Cottonmill Village, has recently been reintroduced to his community and to new generations as a true hero. Just prior to World War Two, First Sergeant Kelly was a member of the Jackson Rifles of the Jackson National Guard. 1st Sgt. Kelly was sent to Europe with very little training and very little equipment. While he was there he was one of the thousands of Americans who went ashore on Utah Beach during the Normandy Invasion. He was later wounded in St. Lo, France and awarded his first Purple Heart and the first of his three Bronze Stars for gallantry. Following the war, Kelly remained in the military and was deployed very shortly thereafter to Korea, where he was given a field promotion to 2nd Lieutenant. While in Korea, Lt. Kelly was wounded a second time. Once he returned to action, he repeatedly risked his own life to cover the retreat of a pinned down artillery unit, ultimately receiving a mortal wound. Lt. Carl Kelly is, from all available records, the most highly decorated veteran of Butts County. While bravely serving his nation he was awarded three Purple Hearts, three Bronze Stars, the Silver Star, and dozens of other honors. What has brought Lt. Kelly's actions to the attention of the public is a book chronicling the life of an infantryman in World War Two and Korea. In his recently published book, Warrior By Choice in World War Two, By Chance in Korea, author Jack M. Anderson tells Kelly's story in an excerpt describing the first man he ever saw die. As we prepare to send our young men and women into combat, I think that it is fitting that we remember the sacrifice of men like Carl Kelly, and finally give him the honor that has been so long overdue. Recently my hometown newspaper, the Jackson Argue-Progress, published an article about Kelly's life of commitment, and I would like that article and these comments to be submitted together for the Record. In this way, I wish to honor the memory of a hometown hero, a father, a husband, and an example of valor to all Americans, on behalf of a grateful nation. [From Jackson Argus-Progress, Jan. 29, 2003] Remembering Butts County's Lt. Kelly (By Herman Cawthon) In the recently published Warrior By Choice in World War II, By Chance Korea, author Jack M. Anderson tells of his 24- plus years of service as a United States Infantryman. In his book Anderson includes an excerpt of a Butts County warrior, Carl Kelly. Anderson describes Kelley as follows: ``From Butts, Georgia 1st Sgt. Carl Kelly, Hq Co, 1st Bn, 38th Inf was wounded the same time I was. He would return to duty and be killed the day before I was captured. He was the first man I would watch die. We started to move him to the Bn Aid Station, but he said not to, but wanted us to get a hometown friend of his who was the Bn S4 Sergeant. ``Carl told Stewart (I hope that name is right) that things were going slowly dim and he wanted Stewart to be sure to tell his wife and kids that he loved them and would meet them in heaven. He talked for a few minutes more, then just closed his eyes and was dead. I had seen others killed and would see more, but that was the first time I watched a man die.'' Anderson and Kelly both had very similar military careers up to the death of Kelly. Both were in the National Guard when World War II started and both were sent into action with little training and even less to work with; not only guns and ammunition, but food and lodging. Kelly went to the European Theater and Anderson to the Pacific. Both were wounded and decorated several times. Anderson details how the US troops improved and how they wound up with so much more than the enemy. After World War II, both joined the regular Army, so when the Korean Conflict started, they were sent into battle immediately. Again Anderson tells how the U.S. was very short on supplies and had very few men with any training and experience. At the beginning, he describes the hardships experienced by the troops as they fought the larger, better trained enemy troops. Both men were prisoners and escaped. Again, the U.S. wound up with superior troops and equipment. After reading the book, Cary Kelly, son of Lt. Carl Kelly, wrote the following letter: ``To Whom It May Concern: The following is a brief military history of Lt. Carl Kelly from Jackson, Georgia. ``Carl Kelly began his military career by joining the Jackson National Guard, then called the Jackson Rifles, while still in his teens. When WWII started, the Jackson National Guard was called upon to train for the war in Europe. Carl Kelly was made 1st Sergeant before leaving for Ireland to wait for the invasion of Normandy. ``After landing on Utah Beach the 8th Army division fought their way inland to France. There in St.-LoFrance, then 1st Sergeant Kelly was wounded in action and was awarded his first of two bronze stars for gallantry. He also received his first Purple heart for being wounded in action. As soon as he was able he rejoined his outfit and continued fighting into Germany until the Germans surrendered. ``By this time Sgt. Kelly had made the decision to enlist in the military for a career and was a full time military personnel. ``When the Korean Conflict began Sgt. Kelly was immediately sent to Korea. (How President Harry Truman could call it a conflict when over 50,000 American soldiers were killed is beyond me). It was a terrible war, often fought in hand-to- hand combat in temperatures of 20 degrees below zero, fighting against not only North Koreans but Chinese as well. ``After distinguishing himself on the battlefield as being a leader of men, Sgt. Kelly was awarded a battlefield commission to 2nd Lieutenant. Soon after he was again wounded in action. ``After recuperating from wounds, Lt. Kelly returned to active duty and soon after was involved in a battle involving an artillery unit that had been ambushed and was trying to retreat. According to records, intense enemy fire was preventing the withdrawal of the field artillery battalion. ``Lt Kelly reconnoitered the enemy positions and organized the artillerymen into fighting groups. With complete disregard for his personal safety, Lt. Kelly repeated aggressive actions, wiping out enemy forces and weapons. Besides instilling confidence in the artillerymen, his conspicuous actions served to center the fire of the enemy on himself. Although enemy fire became more intense and deadly, Lt. Kelly continued to expose himself in leading the assaults. Finally he was struck by enemy fire and fell mortally wounded. ``Before he died he told a friend to tell his wife and children that he loved them very much and would see them in heaven someday. He received the Silver Star Award posthumously. ``Lt Kelly was in service for eleven years. He received three Purple Heart Medals, three Bronze Star Medals and the Silver Star medal, as well as the many service medals awarded by the United States Army, during the period of time served. ``I feel my father is a forgotten Hero from Butts County. From all the records I can find, he was the most decorated soldier from Butts County. He was also the only military man and officer to serve in both World War II and the Korean Conflict who was killed in action. He received a battlefield commission from 1st Sgt. to 2nd Lieutenant. Our family also received a letter of condolence from General Douglas MacArthur (which we still have). ``To me this is not a bad resume for a young man from Pepperton Cottonmill Village who started out in the Jackson National Guard and died a hero at the ripe old age of 32. ``I believe that every young man and woman form Butts County who gave their life in defense of their country are heroes and should be recognized. In a time when roads, highways and buildings, are named after people at the drop of a hat, none of these young heroes even have a small plaque on a park bench in Butts County. Even on Veterans Day and/or Memorial Day their names are only brought up by family members. I feel that other counties in Georgia are way ahead of Butts County in this matter. ``Very Sincerely, Cary V. Kelly'' Carl Kelly is not the only hero in the family. His wife, Edna is a hero to many of her friends. At the time Carl was killed she had three young sons, Cary, Tim and Pat. All three served in the military. Tim was killed in a motorcycle accident in California after being discharged and on the way home. Pat was a disabled Vietnam Combat Veteran and was killed a couple of years ago in a truck accident. A few years after Carl's death, Edna married Ed Daniel, another Veteran and they had two sons, Chip and Joe. Both sons are now veterans, too. Ed passed away a few years ago after an extended illness. When asked how she had handled so much tragedy and could still have a smile and her special laugh, she pointed upward, and said she had a lot of help from above.

Mr. COLLINS

Mr. COLLINS. Mr. Speaker, for security reasons our delegation trip departed prior to the conclusion of legislative business. Had I been present for the conclusion of legislative business, I would have voted ``nay'' on the Motion to Recommit (rollcall No. 29), and ``yea'' on Final Passage (rollcall No. 30) of H.R. 4--Personal Responsibility, Work and Family Promotion Act of 2003. In addition, Mr. Speaker, I would have voted ``nay'' on the Motion to Recommit (rollcall No. 31), and ``yea'' on Final Passage (rollcall No. 32) of H.J. Res. 2--the Fiscal Year 2003 appropriations Conference Report.