Rosa DeLauro

Ms. DeLAURO

Ms. DeLAURO. Madam Speaker, American working families today want to use the budget surplus in a responsible way that protects, strengthens Medicare and Social Security, that pays down the debt. The Republican plan is out of step with American values. It does nothing to extend Social Security by a single day. It dedicates not one penny to Medicare. It would force deep cuts in education, crime fighting, and national defense. But let me tell my colleagues there is a quote from one of my Republican colleagues that sums up their views about working families, and I quote: The American people are not too enthusiastic about a tax- cut package because most of them are not paying taxes, and the top 1 percent of America earns 70 percent of all income and pays 32 percent of all taxes. The bottom 50 percent of America's income earners only pay collectively 4.8 percent of the taxes, so it is not surprising that they are not going to benefit. They do not want a tax cut. Not paying taxes? Not paying taxes? You talk to working families in this country today and find out whether or not they are paying taxes. They want and need targeted tax breaks. They also need to have Social Security and Medicare extended on their behalf.

Ms. DeLAURO

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me the time. This is an irresponsible special-interest tax giveaway. It is a tax cut for the wealthiest corporations and Americans that is paid for by the middle class. It reflects the upside down values of this Republican-led Congress and does not reflect the values of American families. It is risky. It threatens our economic progress. And it does not pay down the national debt. Tax cuts are a priority for those that support middle-class families who need a tax break. If we take a look at this chart, the family that makes under $30,000 a year gets $278 in the tax break and the family that makes $837,000 a year gets a $46,000 tax break. Where is the equity in that? This plan jeopardizes Social Security and Medicare to pay for special-interest tax breaks. Corporations can write off a three-martini lunch. And there is even a tax credit for burning chicken manure. A chicken manure tax break. Where are our priorities, Mr. Speaker? Hundreds of millions of dollars to chicken manure farmers but chicken feed for the rest of us. Vote ``no'' on this conference report.

Ms. DeLAURO

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding time to me. Mr. Chairman, I also want to praise the gentleman for the excellent work that he has done on this bill. With that, and saying that I am opposed to the bill, I will lay out the reasons why I am opposed to the Commerce-State-Justice appropriation bill. It is my view in this effort that in order for the Republican leadership to fund a massive tax cut, that this bill will ultimately do harm to the most vulnerable people in our society, to minorities and to communities attempting to make their streets safe. This bill cuts in half the funding for the Legal Services Corporation, which is the Republican leadership's attempt to phase out this program. It zeros out the hiring portion of the COPS program, meaning 50,000 fewer police officers will be on our streets. This bill freezes the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, which will hinder the agency's efforts to reduce the backlog of discrimination complaints. Funding for the Civil Rights Division under Justice is so low that it will tie the hands of investigators looking into prosecuting criminal civil rights cases, including hate crimes. The list goes on. The bill eliminates the Advanced Technology Program in order to pick a fight with the administration. It decimates funding for the Small Business Administration's work force, causing a reduction in force of more than 2,400 Federal employees, or 74 percent of the SBA's work force. It eliminates the entire $20 million to help the Justice Department initiate litigation against the big tobacco companies in order to recover Federal costs for smoking-related illnesses. It freezes State Department funds. It pretends to deal with U.N. arrearages, but makes them subject to authorization, so if the authorizing bill gets held up, the U.S. could lose its voting rights in the General Assembly. It guts the NOAA and the National Weather Service. Mr. Chairman, I believe that we ought not to vote to gut legal services, to gut civil rights, our police forces, or the Small Business Administration, or research on advanced technology. Vote no on the Commerce-State-Justice appropriation bill because I believe that it has America's priorities upside down.

Ms. DeLAURO

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Speaker, our families deserve health care that is affordable and accessible. They deserve to have their medical decisions made by their doctors and not by insurance company bureaucrats. For the past 2 years the American public has consistently asked for reforms that put medical decisions back into the hands of doctors and patients. What do they want? Simply to choose their own doctor, to have access to the nearest emergency room, to be able to see a specialist when necessary, to be free from an HMO gag rule that prevents doctors from discussing their treatment options, and yes, they want to hold HMOs accountable. The fact is that HMOs are making medical decisions for people today, and when something goes terribly wrong, the American individual has to have the opportunity to seek some redress and to have these HMOs be accountable. There are Members in this body who are doctors, Democrats and Republicans. They agree that these measures benefit patients, make our health care system stronger. We need to pass a meaningful Patients' Bill of Rights that reflects our values in this country for quality health care. Let us put patients ahead of profits.

Ms. DeLAURO

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the Workplace Preservation Act, which bars OSHA from issuing vital ergonomics standards until the National Academy of Sciences has completed its study on this issue. This legislation is unnecessary. The NAS study duplicates work that has already been completed by the National Association for Occupational Safety and Health. OSHA could have published regulations this year if it could move forward on this issue. This is another scheme to prohibit OSHA from carrying out its mandate, which is to protect employees across the country from hazards of the workplace. Ergonomic injuries are the most common serious workplace health problems that face workers. Each delay means another 620,000 employees involved in everything from heavy lifting to data entry will suffer injuries associated with repeated trauma such as carpal tunnel syndrome. One of three workers' compensation dollars goes to repetitive stress injuries. The number continues to rise. Let me just mention that, in fact, ergonomic guidelines are good for employees and are good for business. Let me give my colleagues two examples from the State of Connecticut. In New Haven, at the Ives Company, which is a hardware manufacturer, they reduced employee injuries by 90 percent by cutting out manual lifting. Aetna Life redesigned its workstations and productivity increased by 64 percent. Businesses can win. Ives cut its injury costs from $88,400 to $8,700. Aetna calculated its productivity increase and brought it to $621,000 annually. Ergonomic guidelines are good for hard-working men and women. They are good for businesses, large and small. We need to end this delay, and we need to support progress. We need to support and protect hard- working men and women and save money in health care costs and lost wages. I urge my colleagues to oppose this bill.

Ms. DeLAURO

Ms. DeLAURO. Madam Speaker, for the past 2 years the American people have consistently asked for reasonable health care reforms that put those decisions back in the hands of doctors and patients and out of the hands of insurance company bureaucrats. People want to be able to choose their own doctor, to have access to the nearest emergency room, to see a specialist when necessary, to be free from HMO gag rules that prevent doctors from discussing treatment options for them, and to have the right to hold HMOs accountable for their decisions. This Congress can and should pass these reforms now. The Members of this body who are doctors, whether Democrats or Republicans, almost all agree that these measures will benefit patients, make our health system stronger. In the past year, thousands of Medicare recipients have been dropped by their HMOs. Millions of Americans have health care without basic coverage protections. We must pass a meaningful Patients' Bill of Rights. It must reflect our values for quality health care in this country. If we do, we can once again make the doctor's office a place for medical decisions.

Ms. DeLAURO

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Speaker, today, I am proud to stand and honor my good friend, Maria Morales who, at the age of 105, passed away July 27th. Maria was a resident of Casa Otonal, an Hispanic residential and service community in New Haven, Connecticut. Living for over a century, Maria witnessed many sweeping changes to our Nation's history. Born in Juana Diaz, Puerto Rico, she came to Connecticut with her son in 1958. For over 20 years she was an active and committed member of the Casa Otonal Senior Center--sharing a myriad of stories with her many friends and family. I often spoke with Maria during my many visits to Casa Otonal. Bright and articulate, she was well-versed in many areas including politics and had a unique gift for patchwork quilts and other hand-crafted specialties. Just this past May, Maria participated in the 13th Annual Centenarian Reception and was the oldest member of the honored group. ``Maintaining a strong faith and an active lifestyle'' was her secret to a long and successful life. With five children and dozens of grandchildren and great- grandchildren, Maria's life was full and joyous. It was an honor to have known her. Maria Morales was an exceptional woman and I am pleased to stand today to pay tribute to my dear friend and join with her daughter, Domitila, granddaughter, Carmen, family, friends, and the Casa Otonal community as they celebrate her life. Her vitality and spirit continues to shine in the many wonderful memories of her that we all share.

Ms. DeLAURO

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Speaker, we have a projected Federal surplus, the first in three decades. We must be responsible. We must use that surplus so that it reflects our values as a people and as a Nation. Sadly, the Republican leadership would rather give whopping tax breaks to the wealthiest Americans. Instead of reasonable tax relief targeted to working, middle-class families, the House Republican leadership passed a scheme that gives 65 percent of the benefit to the top 10 percent of Americans. Their plan does nothing to extend Social Security by a single day. It dedicates not one penny to strengthening Medicare. It forces deep cuts in education, crime fighting and national defense. These tax breaks for the wealthy are evidence that Republican values are out of step with the American people. I hope we will heed the advice of the Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan who warned that, and I quote, the time is not right for whopping tax breaks. I call upon cooler heads to prevail so that we can use this surplus to strengthen Medicare and Social Security to keep faith with our parents and with our children, give tax relief to middle-class families and reduce the Federal debt.

Ms. DeLAURO

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentlewoman for yielding time to me. I rise in opposition to this amendment. It is a death sentence for thousands of women and children worldwide. This debate is not about abortion. Under current law, not one penny of U.S. funds can be used for abortion. This debate is about improving the health of women and children and saving lives. Each year around the world 600,000 women die in childbirth. Access to family planning in the developing world would reduce unintended pregnancies by 20 percent, thus reducing abortions, saving the lives of more than 120,000 women who would die in childbirth every year. U.S. family planning aid saves the lives of children. It allows families to choose how many children they want and when they will have them. Improved birth spacing can improve the chances of infant and child survival by 20 percent. If this amendment passes, millions of desperately needed funds now dedicated to family planning would be diverted. More mothers, infants, and children will die. I desperately urge my colleagues to oppose this wrongheaded amendment.

Ms. DeLAURO

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman and rise in support of the Democratic substitute and in opposition to the Republican proposal which is an irresponsible tax giveaway. It jeopardizes Medicare and Social Security and in fact the health of our economy at the expense of the middle class. It reflects the upside-down values of this Republican-led Congress and does not reflect the values of American families. When it comes to the budget, our money is where our values are. I support targeted tax cuts for middle class families, tax cuts for education, a per-child tax cut, small business tax cuts, those that make sense and that we can afford, but not a Republican tax giveaway where 65 percent of the benefit goes to the wealthiest 10 percent of Americans. This trillion dollar Republican tax giveaway is paid for by cutting programs that assist veterans, children and seniors. It is shameful, and America is better than this. Let us not betray our values, values that say in America every child will have the opportunity to succeed in school and in life, values that say we will meet the needs of our veterans who put their lives on the line to protect our freedoms, values that say we will take care of our parents and grandparents in their old age. Vote for the Democratic substitute and for the values of this country.

Ms. DeLAURO

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to Robert Tobias, the dedicated president of the National Treasury Employees Union who, after 16 years of leadership, has decided to step down from his post to pursue writing and teaching the next generation about the importance of protecting the rights of workers everywhere. It gives me great pleasure to acknowledge his years of leadership and service to his fellow workers, and to his country. Since he first joined the NTEU 31 years ago, Robert Tobias has stood up for the fundamental rights of his fellow federal employees--fair pay, health coverage, the right of employees to have a role in overseeing their agencies, and a secure transition to stable retirements. He has played a vital role in building the labor- management partnership in the federal government today. His extraordinary work and dedication in carrying out his duties has had a profound impact on the hard working men and women throughout the NTEU. Robert Tobias' distinguished career has been a great source of pride. His dedication and determination to improve the lives of the hard working families of federal employees will be his lasting legacy. The members of the NTEU and the nation have all benefitted from his unwavering commitment. For this, I join my colleagues in offering him our gratitude.

Ms. DeLAURO

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the Defense Appropriations bill overall, which includes a number of very vital items, including a 4.8 percent pay raise for military personnel, additional funds to enhance troop recruitment and retention, 36 Black Hawks which are the premier helicopter in the sky today. The bill also includes over $180 million for breast cancer, ovarian cancer, research, and prostate cancer. Items that are so critically important to the future of this Nation. But let me express my concern today, as my colleagues have, about the $1.8 billion cut for six F-22s, which are vital to long-term U.S. national security. The Secretary of Defense, Bill Cohen, seven former Secretaries of Defense have stated that, if we cancel the F-22, we cannot guarantee air superiority in future conflicts. The F-22 was the world's first stealth air superiority fighter. Replacing the F-15 is critical to maintaining our defense superiority in the next century. Its stealth technology, speed, and ability to counter advanced surface-to-air and air-to-air missiles is unsurpassed. The F-22 engine is easier to fix than any other fighter's engine. The engine allows the aircraft to fly farther and faster on less fuel. Our first priority must always be the long-term safety and the security of American families. With the F-22, our Air Force will be able to protect America from the threats to our national security in the next century. I urge my colleagues to address this critical issue in the conference in the weeks ahead.

Ms. DeLAURO

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Speaker, for the first time in 3 decades, the Federal Government projects a surplus. Congress is faced with using this surplus in a way that reflects our values as a Nation. Democrats propose that we strengthen Social Security, strengthen Medicare, pay down the national debt, and provide targeted tax cuts to middle-class families. Republicans want to use this surplus for a one-time tax break that mostly benefits the wealthy and jeopardizes our economic health. Our money is where our values are. The Republican tax plan will force deep cuts in crime, education, national defense, and risks returning our Nation to an era of big deficits. Medicare is a pillar of retirement security that provides our parents with independence and dignity in their later years. It says that I am willing to work for my mother and father and that my children are ready to work for me and for my husband. The Republican tax scheme saves not 1 penny for Medicare. It lets it slowly twist in the wind. This surplus should be used in a way that reinforces and bolsters our values. Anything less is irresponsible.

Ms. DeLAURO

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Chairman, I first want to thank the gentlewoman for yielding me this time, and as we today debate the authorization for the State Department and other agencies, I rise in strong support of the Gilman-Campbell-Maloney amendment, which, in fact, reinstates the United States' contribution to the largest internationally funded source of family planning assistance and, in fact, will protect the lives of women and children around the world. This is not about supporting abortion. Under current law, not $1 of U.S. family planning funds can be used to perform or even counsel women to obtain abortions anywhere in the world. This amendment retains that prohibition. This is not about supporting China. This is about preventing illness and saving lives. U.S. family planning aid saves the lives of women. Around the world, 500,000 women die in childbirth every year. Access to family planning in the developing world would reduce unintended pregnancies by one-fifth and could save the lives of as many as 120,000 of those women. The aid saves the lives of children. Family planning allows women and men to choose how many children they want and when to have them. Spacing children further apart, being able to breast-feed them, improves the child's chance of survival by up to 20 percent in most developing countries. If we fail to pass this amendment today, in 1 year alone there will be an estimated 22,500 additional infant deaths and 1,200 additional maternal deaths. For many women, the health services provided by the United Nation's Family Planning Assistance program are the only source of preventive health care that can detect diseases such as cervical cancer in the early stage and save lives. I call on my colleagues today to support this amendment, support women's health, support children's health and vote ``yes'' when it comes time on the Gilman-Campbell-Maloney amendment this afternoon.

Ms. DeLAURO

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of the Olver- Pelosi-Foley Amendment to express the sense of Congress that addressing the AIDS crisis in sub-Sahara Africa must be a central component of U.S. foreign policy. Throughout Africa, AIDS is destroying entire families and communities. It is tearing apart the social, and economic foundations of the continent. In May, USA Today dedicated a series of articles focusing on the human face of this devastation--outcast children, dying infants, destroyed families. And the statistics alone are numbing. In all, 11.5 million people have died in sub-Saharan Africa since the disease emerged in the early 1980's and 22.5 million now living with the HIV virus are expected to die in the next ten years. By the end of 1997, at least 7.8 million children in this area of Africa alone were left orphans by the age of 14 due to AIDS. This amendment addresses the tragedy and the urgency of this crisis and affirms that addressing the HIV/AIDs epidemic must be a central part of our foreign policy now and in the next century. We cannot expect to make progress on economic development in Africa unless our policies sufficiently address the catastrophe of AIDS. I strongly urge my colleagues to vote for the Olver-Pelosi-Foley Amendment.

Ms. DeLAURO

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2\1/2\ minutes to the gentlewoman from Michigan (Ms. Kilpatrick). (Ms. KILPATRICK asked and was given permission to revise and extend her remarks.)

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Chairman, I offer this amendment on behalf of myself and several of my colleagues on both sides of the aisle. It is a bipartisan measure which would strike the provision in this bill which prevents health plans which participate in the Federal Employee Health Benefits Program from providing coverage for abortion services. On a more basic level, this amendment would restore fairness to the women serving in the Federal Government. As we all know, this bill provides funding for the Federal Employees Health Benefits Program, the network of health insurance plans for Federal employees, dedicated people who serve the public around the Nation, in Maryland and in Virginia, and our staffs right here in the House. They depend on the FEHBP for their medical care. That includes 1.2 million women of reproductive age. Until November 1995, Federal employees could choose a health care plan which covered the full range of reproductive health services, including abortion, just like every other employee in this Nation. Now our Federal employees no longer have that right. They are unable to choose a health care plan which includes coverage of this legal, and I repeat, this legal medical procedure. I would remind my colleagues that the right to choose has been upheld by the Supreme Court. It is protected by the United States Constitution. It is only July, but already we have been to the floor far too many times fighting to protect women's health against the personal agendas of some of our colleagues. To my colleagues who oppose this amendment, let me stress that I respect their beliefs, but it is unfair to foist those beliefs on others who may not share the same views and who are paying for the health care plans of their choice. Restricting access to abortion is dangerous to women's health. According to the American Medical Association, funding restrictions like the ones in this bill makes it more likely that a woman will continue a potentially life-threatening pregnancy to term or undergo abortion procedures that would endanger their health. Coverage of abortion services in Federal health plans does not mean that the government or the taxpayer is subsidizing abortion. I would bet that we will hear that argument repeated over and over again today. When an individual agrees to work for the government, he or she receives a salary and a benefit package. The health benefit, like the salary, belongs to the employee and not the government; and employees are free to use both as they see fit. The government contributes to premiums of Federal employees, and the employees purchase private health insurance and pay the rest of the premium. Each employee has the power to choose a health plan that best fits his or her needs. If employees do not want to choose a plan with abortion coverage, they do not have to. The choice is available. Approximately one-third of private fee-for-service plans and 30 percent of HMOs do not provide for abortion coverage, but Federal employees are left with no choice and no option if tragedy strikes. Let me read to my colleagues a short excerpt from a letter from one family affected by this restriction. It is a woman from Alabama, and she says, ``My doctor told me that my twins, which were boys, suffered from Twin-to-Twin Transfusion Syndrome. Both babies shared the same blood vessels. Because of this, the baby on top was giving his blood and water to the baby on the bottom. The smaller twin was about one month smaller in size than the larger twin. The doctor said the larger twin was growing too fast. After consulting with the doctor, my husband and I decided that the best thing to do would be to end the pregnancy. It was the hardest decision of my life.'' This family thought that in fact that they were covered by their insurance. This was right after the Congress made their decision to restrict this kind of coverage. What happened to this family is unbelievable. They had to file for bankruptcy. And I will quote the last line of the letter from this woman. ``Families like ours should not have to go bankrupt in order to receive appropriate medical care.'' I offer this amendment on behalf of my colleagues, as I said. But let me just say that when an individual does work for the government, they ought to be allowed to take their salary and their benefit package and have the choice of what kind of coverage meets their family needs. We must allow them to have the choice in that decision. It is unfair to ask people to spend the kinds of hours that they do day in and day out, who want to be loyal public servants, and to deny them what, in fact, they are willing to pay for and what they are paying for. By singling out abortion for exclusion from health plans that cover other reproductive health care, it is dangerous and it is desperately unfair to these employees. I urge my colleagues to give our public servants the right to choose the health care that is best for them. I urge my colleagues to support this amendment.

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from Maryland (Mrs. Morella).

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 10 seconds. Taxpayers are not paying for these abortions. Federal employees who are female contract with the Federal Government. They get a salary and a benefit package. They then should have the opportunity to choose a health care package which ought to include abortion services. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. Lowey). (Mrs. LOWEY asked and was given permission to revise and extend her remarks.)

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 15 seconds. In terms of polling data, 54 percent of respondents in a recent poll opposed proposals that would prevent health plans from providing coverage of abortion services for Federal employees. So there appears to be a difference in numbers that are out there. But that is not the issue. Polling data is not the issue. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. Maloney).

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Moran).

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from New York (Mr. Nadler). (Mr. NADLER asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Cummings).

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from Illinois (Ms. Schakowsky).