Rosa DeLauro

Ms. DeLAURO

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Speaker, It is with great pride that I rise today to join the Columbian Lawyers Association in paying tribute to one of the New Haven community's most outstanding citizens, and my dear friend, the Honorable Guido Calabresi. In recognition of his contributions, Judge Calabresi will be honored with the thirty-eighth annual Charles A. Rapallo Award. The first Italian-American appointed to the New York State Court of Appeals, Charles A. Rapallo has served as an example to many young law professionals. Each year, the Columbian Lawyers Association, a professional organization of Italian-American attorneys, honors an individual who has demonstrated a unique commitment to the field of law. Though he has been recognized with a myriad of honorary degrees, awards, and commendations--both in the United States and abroad--the Charles A. Rapallo Award is a true reflection of the many invaluable contributions Guido has made to the judiciary and the bench. Born in Milan, Italy, Judge Calabresi has become one of New Haven's most respected scholars in the field of Law. Graduating from Yale University, Oxford University, and Yale Law School, where he was first in his class, his impressive career has spanned nearly half a century. From clerking for United States Supreme Court Justice Hugo Black, to serving as Dean and Sterling Professor at Yale Law School, to his judicial appointment to the United States Court of Appeals--his has been a career that will leave a legacy which is sure to inspire generations to come. He has lived the American Dream. Throughout his life, Judge Calabresi has also demonstrated a unique commitment to his community. As a professor, he continues to touch the lives of hundreds. Though appointed to the United States Appeals Court nearly a decade ago, Judge Calabresi continues to serve as a member of the faculty of Yale Law School as Sterling Professor Emeritus and Professional Lecturer. Those he has trained will go on to teach others, for his is not just a legacy of books and articles but of ideas and inspiration. I have known Judge Calabresi for many years and consider myself fortunate to call him my friend. It is with great pleasure that I stand today to join his wife, Anne, family, friends, and colleagues in extending my congratulations to Judge Guido Calabresi on this very special occasion. Friend, teacher, public servant--he has left an indelible mark on this community and we have been fortunate to benefit from his brilliance and unparalleled generosity.

Ms. DeLAURO

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Speaker, pursuant to clause 7(c) of House rule XXII, I hereby notify the House of my intention tomorrow to offer the following motion to instruct House conferees on H.R. 2660, the fiscal year 2004 Labor, Health and Human Services, Education and Related Agencies Appropriations Act. I move that the managers on the part of the House at the conference on the disagreeing votes of the two Houses on the bill H.R. 2660 be instructed to insist on the Senate level for part B of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act.

Ms. DeLAURO

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Speaker, it is with great pleasure that I rise today to join the community of Hamden, Connecticut in welcoming one of their true community treasures and one of America's most adored actors-- Ernest Borgnine. Today, this star of stage, screen, and televison will spend the day meeting and greeting friends and fans from around Connecticut to benefit the Hamden Arts Commission's Arts & Culture fund which provides funding for local movie and theater projects. Perhaps best known for his portrayal of Lieutenant Commander McHale in the popular television series McHale's Navy, Mr. Borgnine has enjoyed an acting career that has spanned half a century. Born in Hamden, Mr. Borgnine grew up in my hometown of New Haven, Connecticut and soon after graduating from high school entered the Navy where he served our country for ten years. Returning home, he took the advice of his mother and enrolled in the Randall School of Drama in Hartford. Debuting on Broadway in the play ``Harvey,'' Ernest Borgnine soon became a household name across America. Awarded with Oscar, Emmy and Golden Globe awards, Mr. Borgnine's talent is acclaimed both here and abroad. The sincerity and honesty that he brings to each of his roles has made him one of the most beloved actors of our time. The joy that Mr. Borgnine has brought through his professional credits is only surpassed by the generosity he has demonstrated through his work with charity. Today's benefit is but a reflection of his tireless efforts to make a difference in the lives of others. His compassion and advocacy are unparalleled and we are certainly fortunate to have such a tremendous individual whose dedication touches the lives of so many. For his lifetime of contributions and in recognition of all of his good work, I am proud to stand and join the many who have gathered today in extending a warm welcome and my sincere thanks to Ernest Borgnine as he visits his home community of Hamden. His is a legacy that will continue to inspire generations to come--a true living treasure.

Ms. DeLAURO

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Speaker, it gives me great pleasure to rise and congratulate the New York Yankees for their stirring come-from behind last night against the Boston Red Sox in the 7th and final game of the American League Championship Series--proving, once again, that the greatest rivalry in professional sports is between the Yankees and the Red Sox. Roger Clemens pitching against Pedro Martinez--two of the greatest pitchers of all-time, one pitching what was potentially his final game against his former team, the other pitching what until the 8th inning was nothing less than a masterpiece. The first two Cy Young award winners ever to face each other in a Game 7. Despite an early deficit, the Yankees refused to give up. Two home runs from a struggling Jason Giambi. 3 runs in the 8th. And of course, the winning homer by Aaron Boone in the bottom of the 11th. This is how baseball is supposed to be played: with emotion, honor, grit--and plenty of drama. And that was only the 7th game. The six other games included so many gutsy performances by series MVP Mariano Rivera, two tough victories by knuckleballer Tim Wakefield and clutch hit after clutch hit by Jorge Posada and Hideki Matsui. It was in every respect a series for the ages. I would be remiss if I did not say a word for the fans of the Boston Red Sox, especially my friends Congressman Michael Capuano, Congressman John Larson and Senator Christopher Dodd, who once again saw victory snatched from the jaws of defeat. As heartbreaking as this game is for them, what makes these fans special is that every year, hope springs eternal for them and the rivalry begins anew. They are one big reason this match up is so extraordinary year after year. So let me again congratulate Joe Torre and his New York Yankees, as they prepare to take on the Florida Marlins in the 2003 World Series. On behalf of tens of thousands of Connecticut Yankee fans, you have again made the entire Tri-State area so proud. Go Yankees!

Ms. DeLAURO

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Speaker, it is hard to believe that we have been discussing this matter for 5 months now. 5 months ago, the extension of the child tax credit was stolen from six-and-a-half million families, 12 million children--a million of whom are in military and veterans families. 5 months have passed since we first discussed how every one of these low-wage-earning families pay more in taxes than Enron, a multibillion-dollar company that paid no taxes in the last 4 or 5 years. It is simply unconscionable. The other body passed a bill months ago. The president's spokesperson said then that the House should take it up, and the president would sign it. Why then is the Republican leadership so reluctant to lift a finger to help people who work-- people who pay taxes, people who have children? Republicans pass tax cut after tax cut for the wealthiest Americans, and then they cut out the families of 12 million children. As much as the other side of the aisle would like to say that they do not pay taxes, they do pay taxes--they pay property taxes, they pay sales taxes, they pay payroll taxes, and they work and live paycheck to paycheck. Unlike so many of the millionaires who received a $93,000 tax cut in the $350 billion tax bill, these families who earn between $10,500 and $26,000 per year and know what it is to work and pay taxes. We should walk in their shoes. And let me remind the majority who this injustice has affected disproportionately. Two-thirds of the parents who will not be receiving this tax cut are women. 4 million single mothers, a million married couples with stay-at-home moms. Fifty-five percent of all married- couple families. Two hundred thousand military families. All have been left out by this Republican majority. On average, these families would have received $276 in this year alone had the tax credit been extended to them. Maybe that does not sound like a lot of money to some, particularly those millionaires who are going to get their $93,000, but it can be a difference between a child going to school with or without school supplies, it helps the families of the 9 million children in this country without health insurance pay for the health care services that they need. Assisting these families, these 12 million children, is a moral issue. It is a matter of values. Mr. Speaker, we must call on the president to use his moral authority, do something about those six-and- a-half million working families. They have earned that child tax credit like we will never know. We should pass this motion to instruct.

Ms. DeLAURO

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Chairman, I stand behind our men and women in uniform who are sacrificing so much for their country in Iraq. Most importantly, I want to ensure that our troops receive the resources they need. In my view, this bill underfunds the immediate needs of the military, leaving the men and women serving there in a vulnerable position. This bill is a belated and a poorly-planned attempt to provide resources for a thinly-sketched occupation force and a laundry list of economic development projects that seem well beyond the scope of reconstruction. The administration needs to provide Congress with a more detailed and comprehensive reconstruction plan before we authorize an explosive increase in taxpayer dollars in Iraq. The military phase of the campaign has been over since May; yet the agencies formally charged with delivering foreign aid have taken a backseat to the Pentagon. Foreign aid is and should be the responsibility of the State Department. Their people are trained for it. It is time we let our men and women in the military focus on the security side of the effort and let them hand off efforts like getting water and electricity to the Iraqi people to the experts at the State Department and USAID. The Congress should not give the President a blank check. Congress needs specifics on important questions, the projected duration of the U.S. military occupation in Iraq, the estimate of the total cost of military operations and reconstruction, the schedule to restore basic services to the Iraqi people, the plan for withdrawal of American forces, and when will we begin to significantly share the burden with our allies. I am worried that greed may trump patriotism in Iraq. The President has chosen to conduct this process behind closed doors and by awarding no-bid contracts to friendly companies, with so much room for corporate abuse. I believe this process should mirror the historic Marshall Plan, which was conducted in a transparent way, under the authority of foreign aid experts at the State Department, with open bidding for contracts. The President and others have compared our efforts in Iraq to the Marshall Plan. I believe we should aspire to that historic reconstruction effort. Let us be clear; this is not the Marshall Plan. The Marshall Plan was not an unconditional grant from America's taxpayers, nor was it a blank check. This plan is packed with a laundry list of projects that lack accountability. We can do better. We owe it to the Iraqi people. Most importantly, we owe it to those young men and women who are putting their lives on the line every single day.

Ms. DeLAURO

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Speaker, it is with deep sadness that I rise today to mark the passing of Millie O'Neill, the beloved wife for 52 years of our late, and also beloved Speaker, Tip O'Neill. At the same time, I am honored to stand before you to pay tribute to a truly remarkable woman, who was widely admired for her warmth, her unbiased honesty and her uncommon sense of perspective. Tip O'Neill dedicated his autobiography, Man of the House to her: ``For Millie--The Speaker of My House.'' And she was. She had such a strong sense of family. Together they had five children and many more grandchildren, and no one doubted where her priorities lay. Millie never failed to make the point to members and their spouses that while the all-encompassing work that we do here is significant, it is our families to whom we owe our first loyalty and responsibility. She lent that critical perspective to new members. It was good advice, and it was greatly appreciated. It was common knowledge that Millie was her husband's equal in political judgment. She was his eyes and ears, always in touch with the politics back home, providing advice and helping him become the immensely popular and effective Speaker that he was for so many years. As the Washington Post pointed out, ``She scouted the opposition and reported on the grassroots. In 1966, she hosted a tea for 800 and ran 120 women volunteers on shifts for a phone bank.'' She was a very good judge of character, and more than a political wife, she was her husband's political partner ensuring his success throughout their long and remarkable marriage. But it is important to point out that Millie O'Neill followed her own compass. She had her own set of priorities about how government should serve the needs of people--and that was recognized by the people who knew and worked with her. She graciously volunteered her time on behalf of people less fortunate, and served as chairman or executive board member for the March of Dimes, the Congressional Wives Club, the International Club and an organization called So Others Might Eat. She was the chair of the Ford's Theatre and was awarded the theatre's Lincoln Medal in 1984 for her fundraising efforts. Millie O'Neill was not one to be taken for granted, least of all by her powerful husband. As the Washington Post reported in her obituary, ``She kept her own counsel about voting. Her husband made a habit, on Election Day, of asking his wife for her vote as they left the house for the polls. She always replied, `I'll give it every consideration.' '' One measure of a legacy is the family that one leaves behind. Her children Susan, Rosemary, Tommy, Kip, and Michael before he died--all succeeded and achieved in their own right. They carry the family name, and the solid values instilled by their strong and loving mother. Millie O'Neill was a role model on so many levels--as a wife, a mother, a politician, a manager and a volunteer. She led a life of fulfillment and she was an inspiration to us all.

Ms. DeLAURO

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Speaker, immigrants who come to this country today work hard in the lowest-paying jobs, sometimes working two or three jobs just to support their families. They earn very little money for their efforts, but they bring the richness of hope to our civic and our cultural communities. They pay taxes. They are overwhelmingly honest and hardworking, and they deserve our respect. They wanted only a fair opportunity to share in the prosperity of this great country. They only want what so many others received before them. Today, because of outdated and unnecessarily burdensome immigration restrictions, many immigrants live their lives underground, cannot get an opportunity for a more formal, legal status and get the opportunity to work for citizenship. Immigration laws and policies that deny people opportunities for permanence or that leave them exploited should certainly be challenged. We should allow immigrant workers without documentation to seek permanent residency status without being forced to leave the country. Undocumented workers, who have lived here lawfully and productively, should be eligible for immigrant visas based on family relationships and job skills. They should have the opportunity to become legal permanent residents and eventually U.S. citizens. I join the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Solis) in her support of the Freedom Ride Resolution and urge the President to reform our broken immigration system.

Ms. DeLAURO

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Speaker, for 70 years, overtime pay has meant time and a half in this country. Without overtime, countless Americans, including police officers, firefighters, nurses, and EMTs would be forced to take a second job to make up for the lost earnings, meaning more time away from their families and higher child care costs. The administration's rule is designed to give flexibility to companies, not to families, but flexibility to withhold rightfully earned pay from their employees by weakening the 1938 Fair Standards Labor Act, protections that safeguard our workers' rights today and make mandatory overtime a less attractive option for the employer. This comes at a time when we have more than 9 million Americans out of work, when income is declining, poverty is increasing, and nearly 44 million Americans are without health insurance. Mr. Speaker, this is a matter of values, of our country's long-standing contract with working people that says hard work deserves to be rewarded, especially when that work is above and beyond the call of duty, after normal working hours. That contract must be honored. I urge our conferees to include the Harkin amendment in the conference report.

Ms. DeLAURO

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Speaker, it gives me great pleasure to rise today to join the Gateway Small Business Center in celebrating the 50th Anniversary of the United States Small Business Administration. The SBA has played an integral role in developing and nurturing the spirit of entrepreneurs and thus, strengthening the foundation of communities across the country. We have been especially fortunate in my home state of Connecticut where, with nearly seventy percent of jobs found in small businesses, the SBA has forged strong bonds of partnership and--more importantly-- friendship with countless organizations and communities. I would like to extend a special note of thanks and appreciation to Marie Record, Connecticut District Office Director, not only for her dedication and commitment, but also for all the assistance that she has provided to myself and my staff over the years. She has and continues to be an invaluable resource for us all. I have often said that small business is the backbone of our nation's economy and the heart of our communities. From the General Mercantile to today's Mom & Pop storefronts, small businesses have been an important vehicle for delivering the American Dream. In addition, they are often what defines the character of a neighborhood, a town, or even a city. In my childhood neighborhood of Wooster Square, my grandmother, along with my mother and aunts, ran a small pastry shop, Canestri's. Many of our neighbors were also involved in the family businesses which lined the neighborhood streets--Sally's and Pepe's Pizza, Libby's Italian Pastry Shop, Lucibello's Pastry Shop, Iovanne's Funeral Home, and Lupoli's Funeral Home are just some of those which continue to thrive today. Small business comprises seventy-five percent of net new jobs added to the economy annually. To date, nearly twenty three million small businesses are operating across the United States. Representing over ninety-nine percent of all employers and employing over fifty percent of our nation's private workforce, small businesses are not only an invaluable piece of our heritage, but are vital to the growth and prosperity of any community. We, as a nation, recognized that with the establishment of the SBA. Throughout their history, the SBA has delivered nearly twenty million loans, loan guarantees, contracts, counseling sessions and other forms of assistance to small businesses. Over the past ten years they have helped over four hundred thousand small businesses receive loans totaling over ninety-four billion dollars. Last year alone, the SBA backed more than twelve billion dollars in loans. It has been through their assistance that so many have been able to make their dreams come true. Today, as we celebrate the 50th anniversary of the SBA, I am proud to join with the Gateway Small Business Center and all of those who have benefitted from the SBA in extending my deepest thanks and appreciation for all of their good work. Our communities would not be the same without the unparalleled contributions of the United States Small Business Administration and its dedicated staff.

Ms. DeLAURO

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this time, and I wish to associate myself with the comments made by the gentleman from Wisconsin and the gentleman from Maryland. Mr. Speaker, we have entered into a new era of irresponsibility in government, and this continuing resolution is representative of that. I understand the good work that went into trying to put this effort together, but as a Nation, we have very serious unmet needs: Health care, education, retirement security, and pension reform. Our States are laboring under the biggest fiscal crises that we have seen since World War II. We have an economy that is faltering. Millions of workers are unemployed. We have nine million workers unemployed and 3.3 private sector jobs gone in the last couple of years. We have 41 million without health insurance and an entire generation on the cusp of retirement. The people in charge have no plan to deal with these pressing needs, rather we have simply and systematically starved our capacity to do anything by imposing incredibly irresponsible tax cuts that benefit just a few wealthy individuals and special interests. We come to this piece in the process where we say we have limited resources in order to deal with these very serious unmet needs, but the fact of the matter is we need to deal with the fundamental question of why do we have so few resources? It is because so few in our society are receiving so much. We have 184,000 millionaires in the United States who are going to get a tax cut of $93,000, and yet we cannot do anything about people who make between $10,500 and $26,000 in terms of a child tax credit because we say we do not have the money to do it. With 184,000 people getting $93,000 in a tax break, we have so few getting so much. That is what we ought to be debating on the floor of this House. This Congress is undermining the capacity and the obligation of government to provide key social support to reflect the values and the issues and the interests of the American people. From prescription drugs to education, from veterans health and housing programs, they are undermining the idea that our society can act with a shared sense of purpose, with a shared sense of responsibility to address the tasks that are before our country. When we starve the government of the resources to meet its public commitments, in essence, we then are saying that government has no role to play. And while we know and we understand that government cannot play the sole role in people's lives, I believe that all Americans believe that we have, at the State and local and the Federal level, the obligation to assist people in a time of need to face the challenges that they have in their lives. We cannot remove government from participating in the lives of the American people. We cannot undo our social responsibility. We cannot let it happen. The American people deserve better. And as we strive to finish the remaining appropriation bills, we should remember that this Congress, this House, the people's House, has an obligation to promote the capacity of our country to act together on our shared values. That is what we were elected to do.

Ms. DeLAURO

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to express my deep disappointment. For months after the September 11 tragedies 2 years ago, America was a changed Nation, bound by a common purpose, steeled by our sense of community and shared responsibility. Americans from all over volunteered their time and energy to help those who were most in need, and President Bush created USA Freedom Corps to capitalize on that spirit, to energize our community. He called on America's volunteers, and all across this great Nation, we answered his call. But now, at a time when our volunteers are calling on him, no one is home at the White House. Today, 20,000 committed AmeriCorps volunteers are ready and willing to serve, but they are on the brink of being turned away, all because of management problems that they had nothing to do with. But management problems exist and management problems are being addressed as they should be addressed. The success of AmeriCorps is not in doubt. In only a decade, it has given a quarter of a million Americans to serve their community through fighting poverty, tutoring and mentoring neglected youngsters, cleaning up the environment, and providing long term care to the elderly. Just ask the over 350 college and high school students who depend on this funding in Connecticut's LEAP program. They give their valuable time to provide mentoring and service opportunities to 1300 kids. Every last one of LEAP's junior counselors graduate from public high schools, 80 percent go on to college. They know what the rest of America knows, that AmeriCorps is without question the premier national service program in the United States. All President Bush needed to do to keep these young people on was to use his moral leadership, call upon his leadership in the Congress to include the $100 million in emergency funding that AmeriCorps needs. Instead, he has only expressed vague support for the program, knowing full well that in doing so, he is effectively punishing the millions of people in communities who depend on the services that AmeriCorps provides. If we could bottle the spirit that guided this country 2 years ago through some of its hardest times, I honestly believe there is no challenge we could not meet. But by turning our backs on AmeriCorps, we squander one of the greatest resources, our young people, who are eager, willing and who want to be involved. That is not merely unfortunate, it is a tragedy. We should follow the lead of the other body. There was a bipartisan vote to include $100 million in emergency funding so that we can help to sustain AmeriCorps, help to engage young people in the good work of this country, and give them an opportunity to give back what America gives to all of us.

Ms. DeLAURO

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Speaker, it gives me great pleasure to rise today to join the congregation of St. Michael Church in New Haven and pay tribute to an outstanding member of our community and my dear friend, Harry DeBenedet, as he is honored with the ``Man of the Year'' Award. Throughout his life, Harry has shown a unique dedication to the City of New Haven and its residents. A native son of the City, he has and continues to enrich the lives of many through both his professional and personal contributions. We are fortunate to have such a person who so willingly gives of himself to ensure the betterment of our community. In a career that has spanned over three decades, Harry has been a member of both the New Haven Police Department and the Yale University Police. As a law enforcement officer, he has dedicated his career to serving and protecting our families and neighborhoods. The myriad of awards and citations which he has earned are a reflection of his commitment and outstanding service to our community. During his twenty years with the New Haven Police Department, Harry served in many divisions. For twenty-five years he was a member of the Bomb Squad where he was cited for co-inventing several tools, which continue to be utilized across the country, designed to allow for a safer approach to explosive devices. Upon his retirement from the New Haven Police Department, Harry joined the Yale University Police Department where he continues to serve today. Among others, Harry also serves on the Mayor's Emergency Preparedness and Response Committee, the Yale Emergency Planning Committee, and the New Haven Terrorist Task Force. Beyond his professional contributions, Harry has always generously donated his time and energies to local charitable organizations. Among many others, he has long been an advocate, fundraiser, and vocal supporter for the St. Jude's Hospital, the Marine Cadets of America, New Haven Teen Challenge, and the Leukemia Society. Harry has touched the lives of thousands and has left an indelible mark on this community. It is an honor for me to stand today to extend my sincere thanks and appreciation to Harry DeBenedet for his countless contributions as he is named St. Michael's ``Man of the Year.'' He has made such a difference and the City of New Haven is indeed a better place because of his good work.

Ms. DeLAURO

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the Sanders amendment, which would protect the pensions of older workers who have seen their retirement benefits slashed by as much as 50 percent as a result of age discriminatory cash balance pension conversions. On July 31, a federal court ruled that IBM's cash balance pension plan violates federal anti-age discrimination law. The court found that IBM knew that older workers would lose up to 47 percent of their pensions under the cash balance conversion. This ruling was a welcome outcome for the 130,000 IBM employees who were represented in the case--and for the millions of other Americans whose employers have already converted to one of these age discriminatory plans or might in the future. The Treasury Department is moving ahead with proposed regulations that permit the same cash balance pension plans that the court ruled are illegal. The Sanders amendment would specifically prohibit the IRS from issuing regulations that would conflict with this federal court ruling. It has now been nearly two years since the collapse of Enron, more than a year since the collapse of WorldCom, and what has this body done to protect the pensions of American workers? Not a thing. We have passed legislation--legislation that fails to allow employees the right to fully diversify their stock, legislation that fails to hold executives who are fiduciaries of the pension plan accountable if they violate the law--executives like Ken Lay. We have passed legislation that allows employers to give the same conflicted financial advice the Republicans tried to push on the American workers last fall before the Enron scandal broke. And today, if the Administration's rule is allowed to go forward, we head back down the same road. With companies like Xerox, Georgia Pacific and the Bank of Boston already having switched from traditional defined benefit plans to cash balance pension plans that leave older employees with their pensions slashed by up to 50 percent, this rule would actually make it easier for more companies to adopt such practices. It would make it easier for companies like Motorola to put another $38 million into the retirement funds of their executives while they contribute not a cent to their workers' already underfunded pension fund. Quite frankly, this rule does absolutely nothing to limit runaway executive compensation or protect employees from these unfair benefit cuts. It seems obvious to everyone but this Republican majority and Administration that our pension rules do not do enough to protect helpless employees. It does not protect them from being locked out of their pension plans while their life savings go down the drain or protect them from venal executives who would take their money and run. The majority seems to think that is somehow acceptable behavior. Today, with the Sanders amendment, we have an opportunity to protect the working men and women in this country. We can tell them today that, yes, we want to protect your pensions because the fruits of your life's work have to be there for you and your family when you retire. That is what this country is built on. That is what our values are. That is the direction we should go in. I urge my colleagues to support the Sanders amendment.

Ms. DeLAURO

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Speaker, it is with great pride and excitement that I rise today to extend my sincere congratulations to the Orange 9-10 Girls Softball Team who recently won their second consecutive State Championship title. I am certainly proud to stand with the Orange community in saluting these youngsters on this tremendous accomplishment. For too long young women were often discouraged from participating in sports. It has only been in the last decade that women's sports have exploded onto the national stage. With the continued and increasing interest in women's collegiate and professional teams, so many opportunities are opening up for our young people. This team of fourteen girls worked hard and played well--enjoying an extraordinary season. More importantly, they have learned one of life's most valuable lessons--teamwork. Softball, like all sports, teaches us the value of team work, practice, camaraderie, and commitment to excellence. These skills will serve these young people well as they begin to make a difference in the world. Working together, they have already accomplished so much and who knows--perhaps the next Lisa Fernandez or Christa Williams is among them. I have every confidence that they will enjoy great success in all of their future endeavors. I would be remiss if I did not take this opportunity to extend my thanks and congratulations to some very special parents. It is with great pleasure that I also recognize Coaches Ken Slowik, Bruce Post, and Bill McNeil--all of whom have worked hard to give these young people the chance to play. Without their efforts, the success of the team would not have been possible. This evening, as they celebrate their victory, I would again extend my heart-felt congratulations to these youngsters as well as my very best wishes for continued success. I am thrilled to join the Orange community in recognizing this outstanding accomplishment and only wish that I could share in tonight's festivities. You have made us all proud.

Ms. DeLAURO

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the Flake amendment which would prohibit funds in the underlying bill to enforce the current ban on travel to Cuba. I believe it is the right of all Americans to be able to travel wherever they choose. It is unAmerican to prohibit our citizens from choosing where they want to travel. And why? Why should we single out Cuba? We have a right to travel almost anywhere. This is clearly not about whether U.S. citizens should travel to an undemocratic or militarily repressive country. If that were true, then Americans would not be able to travel to countries such as China, Sudan, Syria, Iran, North Korea. And do you know what? Americans are able to travel freely to these countries. Yet, they are forbidden to travel to Cuba. Thus, the real question is why do we continue to prohibit travel to Cuba? Why do we deny American citizens a right Cubans are denied in Cuba, to travel freely? Human rights activists Elizardo Sanchez and Vladimiro Roca have said it best, and I quote, ``Just as we insist on the right of Cubans to travel, to leave and return to our country freely, a right now denied to us, so do we support the right of Americans to travel freely, including travel to Cuba.'' The travel ban is an archaic part of our archaic foreign policy on Cuba. We are not defending the Cuban government or its poor human rights record, especially in light of the most recent crackdown on its dissidents. We must always speak strongly against the abuse of human rights in this world and hold these repressive governments accountable. But Cuban dissidents regularly tell us that they oppose the travel ban because they believe American travelers would have a positive impact on Cuba. Further, Human Rights Watch reports that the U.S. embargo has not only failed to bring about human rights improvements in Cuba, it has actually, and I quote, ``become counterproductive to achieving this goal.'' Current U.S. policy towards Cuba hurts the 11 million innocent Cuban men, women and children who could benefit from our travel, our new ideas, our steadfast belief in democratic ideals, freedoms and way of life. We will not advance rights to the Cuban people by embracing a policy of isolation that has failed for 40 years. Further, the more we normalize relations with Cuba, the faster Fidel Castro will lose his grip on the Cuban people. It has worked in Vietnam. It has begun to work in China, and it can work in Cuba. Mr. Chairman, I urge my colleagues to support this amendment. Our policies have failed, and this is the right thing to do for the Cuban people.

Ms. DeLAURO

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Chairman, I cannot tell you how proud I am to stand tonight with the gentleman from Tennessee (Mr. Cooper) and the gentlewoman from Michigan (Ms. Kilpatrick) to offer this amendment, which in essence just says let us redirect. It does not close any doors. Let us redirect some of the funds intended for the IRS's EITC precertification program to increase tax compliance for mid- and large corporations. In fact, what this new IRS rule is all about is creating a two-tiered tax enforcement system, one for high-income Americans and one for low-wage workers that is far more burdensome. My colleague from Tennessee pointed out child care records, school records, medical records, leases, religious records, a letter on letterhead from a member of the clergy, child care providers, employers, health care providers, landlords, utility managers, third- party affidavits. That is what they are asking of low-wage workers. No other group of taxpayers has got to go through those kinds of gyrations. But it is what we could anticipate. This is the same crowd that says no to a child tax credit for people who make $10,500 a year to $26,000 a year. They are workers, hard workers; they just happen to make low wages, so let us go after them. That is what this new rule is about. We know their problems with the EITC. No one here is defending overclaims, but let us not forget a 2001 GAO report found that about 4.3 million eligible households did not claim the EITC in 1999. Overall, we know that every year we lose about $30 billion through underpayment of taxes. Only a very small proportion of this comes from the EITC. The vast majority is high-income earners and corporations. And it is worth repeating what my colleagues have said tonight. The estimate of taxes that the IRS says are avoided, evaded or not paid by individuals, $132 billion, offshore accounts $70 billion. Let us remember offshore accounts. Only a few minutes ago on this floor the gentleman from Virginia got up and said we should not take up the issue of expatriates. These are companies that go offshore to avoid paying taxes then come back to the Federal Government to get contracts to further their own business interests. They do not want to discuss that. Seventy billion dollars is lost on taxes by those corporations who go offshore just specifically for the purpose of not paying taxes to the U.S. Government. Where is the task force, where is the task force that is going after that $70 billion? They do not want to go down that route. Partnership investors. Thirty billion dollars is lost. The fact of the matter is that the number that my colleague uses of $10 billion is a 1999 number as well. There have been subsequent changes to the tax law that would reduce that. We are talking about $6.5 billion, yes, that undeserved EITC tax credits paid, nowhere near what individuals or offshore accounts do. The government loses $6.5 billion in direct tax revenue annually from mid- and large corporations not audited due to the fact that the IRS does not have enforcement dollars to go after them. According to an end-of-term report by former IRS Commissioner Rossotti, the IRS lacks the resources to address 28 percent of the mid- and large corporation workload that should be accomplished each year. This amendment would begin to address that problem. It redirects $75 million of funding from the EITC precertification initiative towards the investigation of high-yielding tax compliance activities. It does not stop the EITC initiative from moving forward. It will provide $25 million for that program in addition to the $150 million that is already there to take a look at this issue. It simply ensures, quite frankly, that we will focus our interests on the area that gives us more bang for the buck. None of us wants to see fraud go unpunished; but let us be fair, my friends. Let us not require the lowest-income Americans to meet precertification standards that no one else is required to meet while at the same time failing to crack down at all on fraud in businesses and higher-income taxpayers. Support the Cooper-DeLauro-Kilpatrick amendment.

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?

Ms. DeLAURO. I thank the chairman for his efforts.

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Chairman, I thank my colleague for giving me the opportunity to talk for a moment about the issue of corporate expatriates. I would like to express a serious opposition to the point of order that was offered by the gentleman from Virginia earlier tonight which removed the corporate expatriates contracting ban from this bill. I would like to point out the hypocrisy of what my friends on the other side of the aisle are doing here this evening. This is like deja vu for me. The same thing happened in June when we debated the homeland security appropriations bill. The Committee on Appropriations accepted my amendment by voice vote, only to turn around and use a legislative technicality to justify stripping it from the bill. In fact, the gentleman from Florida (Chairman Young), for whom I have the utmost respect, promised during the committee consideration that he would support protecting this amendment when it went to the Committee on Rules. This amendment, let me just be honest, is a simple one; very, very simple. Quite frankly, some of what we are talking about here tonight would simply prohibit the Treasury Department from contracting with corporate expatriates. These are companies that operate here in the United States but they set up a shell corporation overseas for the express purpose of avoiding paying their taxes. They do not want to pay their taxes; and once again, we have not set up any kind of special task force within the IRS or anywhere else to investigate these folks. No one is doing that. It is the height of irony. Even the IRS, the agency that we have been talking about here tonight, which is looking at low-income wage earners and enforcement of low-income wage earners and what they ought to be doing to pay their taxes and not take any taxpayer dollars without precertifying, the IRS, the agency charged with collecting taxes, has willingly contracted with a company that has moved overseas in an effort to avoid paying their taxes. I think we have an obligation to address this issue. American companies, particularly those contracting with our government, ought to pay American taxes just like every citizen in this country. By this action, the Republican majority is once again demonstrating that they do not hold these same values. Recent data show that corporate expatriates have actually increased the amount of Federal contracts they receive. Despite abandoning our country and costing our government $5 billion in lost tax revenue, corporate expatriates reaped $1.4 billion in Federal contracts last year alone. They do not pay their taxes; they go overseas and they get the largesse of the Federal Government to the tune of $1.4 billion, funds sorely needed particularly in the current fiscal climate. One example: While the committee has provided $900 million in funding for Amtrak, that funding level is far below the $1.8 billion requested by Amtrak and which is sorely needed to address a backlog of capital repairs. It is long past time that we stopped hiding behind procedural sleight-of-hand to disguise the fact that some in this body want to condone this practice. I will not call for a vote at this time, but I want to make clear that this issue is not going to go away. It is time that we draw a line in the sand and tell these corporate expatriates that they will no longer be rewarded with government contracts for taking and putting their business overseas, expressly for the purpose of not paying taxes in the United States. Let us be honest about what we do in this body and who ought to be paying their taxes if they expect to reap the benefits of Federal contracts. Let us not go after low-wage workers and have this two-tiered enforcement practice and allow these folks to get away without paying their taxes and come back and get billions in taxpayers' dollars that we so earnestly do not want to allow to low- income wage workers but are willing to squander billions to those who care not to pay their taxes to the United States Government while they make their profits here.

Ms. DeLAURO

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the requisite number of words. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of the Olver amendment. Let me talk about my home State of Connecticut, where Amtrak service is a vital component of daily life, as it is to thousands of cities and towns. The same is true all along the East Coast. Over 1 million Connecticut citizens rely on Amtrak annually; 411,000 in my hometown of New Haven. People rely on Amtrak to commute to work to New York City. They rely on Amtrak to bring commerce and tourism into cities without a commuter airline service. In the Northeast, people travel Amtrak because it quite simply is the most convenient and time-efficient method of traveling from city to city, alleviating heavy rush-hour traffic which is faced by so many commuters today. In doing so, it is a major contributor in reducing emissions that contribute to respiratory illnesses like asthma, and it helps to keep the air clean and our children healthy. If you have ever been on the I-95 corridor, you will know that it does not make any difference what time of day you are traveling that road by car, it is always jammed. For us, being able to alleviate some of that problem by putting people on trains would be well worth an investment. Amtrak means jobs as well. Nearly 700 employees are in Connecticut. Amtrak owns and operates a rail yard in New Haven, Connecticut where maintenance and equipment repair take place. Given the continual underfunding of Amtrak, over 100 cars in the fleet remain sidelined waiting for repair due to inadequate capital. Deferred maintenance on all Amtrak locomotives and passenger cars has reduced reliability, revenue, and raised costs, further hindering overall financial performance. I speak from experience as a dedicated Amtrak traveler. For 13 years I have frequently commuted between Connecticut and Washington, D.C. Amtrak represents the best of what public transportation has to offer: convenience, comfort and efficiency. Sadly, though, for over 3 decades, funding for America's passenger railroad has barely been enough to keep the system operating on a year- to-year basis, which prevents it from meeting its longer-term public service mission, not to mention its capital obligations. Mr. Chairman, this country and its transportation system was created and its vision was a bold and daring vision, where people invested in infrastructure and made it possible for people to go from coast to coast, from city to city, by rail, to transmit goods by rail, and it was visionary on the part of those who invested in that effort. That needs to happen with this institution. It needs to be visionary in understanding what the infrastructure needs are with regard to rail travel. Pruning or eliminating the long-distance network will not make Amtrak profitable. Failure to provide the necessary funds will not only mean the suspension of Amtrak service in the busy northeast corridor, but the likely permanent loss of its long-distance trains. It will not only strand thousands of commuters around the Nation, it will also mean the loss of production, the loss of millions of dollars for communities and companies in the areas it services. That simply is unacceptable. It should be unacceptable. We need to embark on that bold vision that those folks of yesteryear had in putting in the dollars needed for rail travel and its maintenance. Support Amtrak and vote for the Olver amendment.

Ms. DeLAURO

Ms. DeLAURO. I thank the gentleman, and I understand the point that you are making, except the fact of the matter is that Enron paid no taxes the last 4 out of 5 years. There are companies who are paying zero in taxes, and yet they are the beneficiaries of a very, very hefty tax cut.

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Speaker, today the Federal Government is sending out checks to 25 million families in this country. More than 2 months after this House passed the President's tax bill, among those receiving their checks in the coming days will not be 6\1/2\ million taxpaying families, taxpaying families, taxpaying families: property taxes, payroll taxes, sales taxes. They pay taxes. They make low wages, yes. So what is wrong with making low wages? Those who make low wages do pay taxes. My mother was a factory worker. She worked in the old sweatshops. She did not make a lot of money, but she paid her taxes like others do. Why should families not be allowed to have a child tax credit? These families were denied what they were rightfully due, the extension of the child tax credit, because they make low wages and for the last 2 weeks on this floor Democrats have been offering a motion to instruct conferees. We have implored the leadership of this House: do what is right; act on what the other body's legislation is. Mr. Speaker, my colleagues on the other side of the aisle have criticized our motion. They argue that this would drop the child tax credit from $1,000 to $700 immediately after the 2004 election. There is a word for this type of argument: hypocritical. The child tax credit will already drop after the 2004 elections. That is no coincidence. It is a result of a deliberate decision made by the Republican majority to drop the credit once these families go to the polls with the impression that they are going to get the credit again in 2005. Not so, my friends. Under the Republican-passed tax legislation, as the law stands today, the $1,000 credit goes down, it goes up, it goes down. It is more a seesaw than tax law. When it came time to choose between a child tax credit or the tax cuts for the wealthy, they chose the latter over and over and over again. To meet their $350 billion goal, they cut out people who make $10,500 a year to $26,000 a year in favor of those who make over a million dollars a year who are going to get $93,000 in a tax cut every single year. The President said it yesterday, he said it in June: adopt what the Senate has done. Fix this issue. Let us give these families what they want. Mr. Speaker, let us abide by that. Let us go with that. Let us make sure that what we do allows today those 25 million people who are going to get their child tax cut. Let us make sure that those families who make $10,500 to $26,000 they get their child tax credit. They deserve it. It is the right thing to do. It is the moral thing to do, and that is the obligation of this House.

Ms. DeLAURO

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Speaker, I oppose this rule. This bill critically underfunds veterans health care, affecting the lives of more than 26 million veterans in our country and 75,000 veterans in my State of Connecticut. For over 200 years our veterans have made sacrifices for our country. Some of them continue their sacrifices after they come home. They may require continued care, rehabilitation, help with job training, college, promises that were made to them when they volunteered to serve. Shamefully, we are going back on those promises now. This bill breaks the promise by the House Republican leadership to veterans by providing $2 billion less than the budget resolution. The administration recognized the shortfall in their budget request, but claimed that they made up much of the difference implementing so- called, quote, management efficiencies by outsourcing a large portion of the medical care workforce. Outsourcing medical care will in all likelihood mean inadequate care for many of the 2.3 million veterans currently receiving benefits for service-related disabilities. It could mean longer lines for the more than 134,000 sick and disabled veterans who have already been waiting more than 6 months to simply get an appointment at veterans hospitals. In my State, almost 2,000 veterans will be frozen out of VA enrollment entirely. I am troubled that the President has made no attempt to request emergency funding to restore enrollment for new priority 8 veterans. If this is not an emergency, then what is? The respect and the fair treatment of veterans is an issue that hits close to home to me, Mr. Speaker, because my dad, an immigrant to this country from his native Italy, was a veteran. He proudly served in the United States military. He would find it unconscionable that this Republican Congress would renege on a commitment they made to our soldiers at the very moment our men and women are securing the peace overseas. Mr. Speaker, you cannot support our troops and not support our veterans. Mr. President, you cannot support our troops and not support our veterans. You cannot pay for today's military services by cutting the funds for those who served in the past. It is wrong. We should honor the legacy of sacrifice made by American soldiers by supporting our veterans and the services that they rely on. We owe our veterans better.

Ms. DeLAURO

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Speaker, I am disappointed that this bill does not include funding for AmeriCorps. AmeriCorps is about fortifying our democracy, energizing and unlocking the potential of young people, and improving our communities. AmeriCorps has given a quarter million Americans the opportunity to serve millions of their fellow citizens in countless ways, fighting poverty, tutoring and mentoring neglected youngsters, cleaning up the environment, and providing long-term care to the elderly, to name a few. It is the premier national service program of the United States. Critical vital services in our communities would not be the same without the efforts of the dedicated young volunteers whose energy, compassion, and commitment touch people's lives every single day. The Corporation for National Community Services, yes, has had management problems. They have been identified. They are being addressed by the managers and administrators, and it is vital that we remain vigilant that these reforms continue. In doing so, we should not punish the communities, the thousands of young volunteers. Why do we want to dampen their enthusiasm and their spirit? Why do we want to hurt those people who rely on their services, simply because top administrators failed to do their jobs? And without funding, more than 20,000 AmeriCorps volunteers will lose their positions. Counselors at the LEAP program in my hometown of New Haven, Connecticut provides mentoring and service opportunities for area kids. It shows 1,300 children across Connecticut with over 350 college and high school students lending their time. One hundred percent of LEAP's junior counselors graduate from public high schools, and 80 percent go on to college. If we lose that sense of community spirit, shared responsibility, and shared purpose of our young people, in addition to the services they provide to millions of Americans, everybody in this country loses. Mr. Speaker, 228 Members of Congress and 43 Governors have written to the President of the United States asking for his support. The President says that he supports AmeriCorps and the idea of public service and national service. Keep this program alive. Let us defeat the previous question, and make sure we provide this opportunity for our youngsters.