Rosa DeLauro

Ms. DeLAURO

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Speaker, I just want to let the gentleman know that it costs the Federal Government $288,000 a week to cart Members back from their districts, across this country, to bring us here to do nothing because the Republican majority of this House has no agenda; Mr. Speaker, $288,000 a week. Think about what working middle-class families in this country would be able to reap the benefit of if they had that kind of money. Earlier this week, the Washington Post labeled this Gingrich Congress the do-nothing Congress. It is true. This Congress has spent the last 3 months doing a whole lot of nothing. My colleagues on the other side of the aisle have refused to produce a budget, refused to hold hearings on campaign finance reform, refused to schedule action on kids' health care, and refused to schedule a vote on any of the Democratic education initiatives: how to get kids to school and have working families be able to afford that. The Republican majority would like to continue to do nothing. So be it. But get out of the way so others can talk about an agenda that helps working families in this country.

Ms. DeLAURO

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Speaker, let me just say that I intend to support veterans preferences. Four hundred and thirty-five Members of this body, all of the Members who are here today, are going to vote for this bill. That is not the issue. This is a noncontroversial item. It is under a suspension calendar. We will vote without any bit of controversy. Suspensions are usually noncontroversial. They are considered on Mondays and Tuesdays in the House, so in fact we could have considered this vote yesterday when we adjourned at something like 10 after 5 or 5:15. We could have done this yesterday. We are going to try to defeat the previous question this morning in an effort to be able to use our time in order to talk about campaign finance reform legislation so that we can vote on what is a pressing issue before the Memorial Day district work period. It is hard to open a paper these days without reading about the lack of accomplishments of this Congress, in fact the do-nothing Congress. But the worst of it is that the Congress is doing nothing when the issue of campaign finance reform cries out for action and early action at that. Yes, let us continue on with the investigations, but what we in fact do know is that the system is broken and that it needs to be fixed. Let us have that discussion. The 1996 elections broke all records for campaign spending: $2.7 billion. The Washington Post shows that 8 in 10 Americans agree that money has, quote, too much influence on who wins elections. The amount of money in politics disenchants the American people and tells citizens, ordinary citizens in this country, that their votes are not as important as fundraising dollars. The record amounts spent in 1996 are a powerful argument for meaningful limits on campaign spending. We need less money in politics, not more. And if we are to achieve limits on campaign spending, we need to act immediately, because every delay takes us closer to the next election. I doubt the American people want more money spent the way that the Speaker would. Let us have the debate on campaign finance reform, and let us just stop fooling around.

Ms. DeLAURO

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank my colleague for yielding to me. Also, I want to commend my colleagues for coming down this afternoon to talk about the issue of this investigation. I wanted to be here as well to join in the commentary in order to support the efforts of my colleagues in calling for an open and a fair investigation of campaign finance issues, campaign finance reform, and of what our administration practice is. But I also believe that we ought to take a look at the Congress as well and what has happened, and look at what may be potentially there to have an open and fair investigation. However, I would just say to my colleagues that I think that there are clear motives on the part of the Republican majority to have a one- sided investigation, and the reason is what they do not want to do is to look into the practice that they were heavily engaged in in the last session of this Congress and during the election, of lobbyists writing the legislation in this body in exchange for campaign contributions. Today on the floor of this House, the majority whip gave us his own revisionist history lesson on campaign finance reform. The majority whip, the gentleman from Texas, was widely criticized during the last Congress for allowing lobbyists to write legislation in his office. Article after article documented meetings where GOP donors were invited to draft bills on issues of concern to their special interests. One such article from the Washington Post on March 12, 1995, and these are the words of the article and I am not making this up, this is documentation, documents an organization called ``Project Relief'' that included 350 industry members and lobbyists. Instead of just proposing legislation, the majority whip let them draft the laws directly. In other words, he would let paid lobbyists do what House Members, Members who are duly elected by the 500,000 or 600,000 people they represent in their districts to come here to carry the interests of those folks to this body, to craft that legislation in terms of good and meaningful public policy in the lives of American taxpayers, he would let the lobbyists do what House Members are elected to do. The gentleman even admitted the practice, saying that the lobbyists have, and this is a quote, ``They have the expertise.'' Today the gentleman from Texas claimed it never happened. Once again Republicans do not want an open investigation. I will tell the Members the other items they do not want to look into. The tobacco industry gave the [RNC] Republican National Committee, $7.4 million. They passed a product liability that would have saved the tobacco company millions of dollars. The NRA gave $2 million. The GOP worked to try to kill the assault weapons ban in the last session of the Congress. The GOP Congress let big business help write a workplace safety bill. In January of 1995 big business lobbyists wrote up a 30-item wish list for limiting certain workplace safety regulations. When the bill was finished in early June, virtually every single item on that wish list had been incorporated into the final version of the bill. Business lobbyists even worked closely in drafting the legislation. There were other areas in terms of other non-legislative outrages. I am just going to hold up this book. This is the National Republican Campaign Committee, this is the tactical PAC project, PAC being Political Action Committees. These were folks who were given a friendly or unfriendly notation by their name. This was circulated to the GOP representatives based on how much money these folks gave to Republicans or Democrats. The majority whip, who was nicknamed ``the Hammer,'' and is very proud of this appellation here, for his fund raising techniques, has been known to greet lobbyists with this book, thumbing through it, and saying, see, you are in the book, one way or the other. The long and short of it, I think what we ought to do is to continue with a lot of this information, to get it out. The public ought to know this. We ought to try to get it out, so that the public has both sides. This needs to be a fair and open investigation. No one is saying that we should not investigate. We should, because wrongdoing, wherever it occurs, ought to be stopped. Let us do the right thing by the American people. Let us open this investigation and make sure that both sides are heard. I thank my colleague for having this special order today and for allowing me some time to speak.

Ms. DeLAURO

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to this resolution for three important reasons. First, the funds requested by the majority are three times the amount authorized by the other body. We could match the other body's authorization and still provide 4,500 kids in this country with health care insurance next year with the funding that this resolution would provide. Second, the scope of this investigation makes it clear that this committee plans to conduct a blatantly partisan probe. My colleagues on the other side of the aisle have refused to let this investigation examine any Republican fundraising practices. Again, I advocate that we follow the example of the other body and vote to look into improper fundraising activities by members of both political parties. No one is challenging the right to investigate. Finally, the chairman of this investigation has requested unprecedented unilateral power to issue subpoenas without the consultation of any other member of the committee. No Member should be granted such unilateral authority, much less a Member who has himself engaged in very questionable fundraising practices. Spending taxpayer money on blatant partisan politics and partisan probes will further erode the reputation of this body with the American people. Vote against this resolution. (By unanimous consent, Mr. Ryun was allowed to speak out of order.) Removal of Name of Member as Cosponsor of H.R. 586

Ms. DeLAURO

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Speaker, on Monday, March 24, 1997 Connecticut will become the first State to participate in a State to State Day for the Ronald H. Brown Foundation. I am very pleased to rise today to pay tribute to the life and work of Ronald Brown and his family's efforts to continue his work through the Ronald H. Brown Foundation. Secretary Brown spent a lifetime working to improve and expand opportunities for Americans. He spent 12 years working for the National Urban League as Deputy Executive Director, General Counsel and vice president for its Washington organization. He will always be remembered for his tremendously successful tenure as chairman of the Democratic National Committee when he was instrumental in President Clinton's election. The President referred to Ron as ``a strong and independent leader and a forceful advocate'' when he nominated him to be the 30th United States Secretary of Commerce. Dynamic and persuasive, Ron Brown used his position in the Commerce Department to be a tireless crusader for economic policies which build a partnership between the public and private sectors. While Secretary of Commerce, Ron made working with small business and minority entrepreneurs one of his priorities. However, Ron Brown's focus did not stop at the United States borders. He realized that America had to retain the lead in international commerce to continue to grow and provide economic opportunity for all of its citizens. To this end, he traveled the world to promote trade and the export of United States goods and services. Indeed, he will long be remembered for his far- reaching vision and unique style. Ron Brown believed that economic opportunity would come from the integration of education, political development and international commerce. His legacy to us is the challenge of making his goals a reality. His family has taken on that challenge and founded the Ronald H. Brown Foundation to ensure that Ron Brown's lifetime of work will be carried on. The Foundation will focus on three areas: policy development, global commerce, and education. I am proud that Connecticut is the first State to participate in the State to State effort to get the Ronald H. Brown Foundation on its way. I thank Ron Brown's wife Alma and his children, Michael and Tracy, for allowing me to be a part of this exciting new venture. We all have great hopes for the Foundation and I know that Ron Brown would be pleased to see that the vision he dedicated his life to is now closer to reality. My congratulations to everyone involved in this extraordinary project.

Ms. DeLAURO

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Speaker, this week's news report makes it clear why my colleagues on the other side of the aisle have adamantly refused today to allow an investigation into 1996 Republican fundraising activities. As it turns out, the Republican chairman of the committee charged with investigating campaign fundraising improprieties has himself engaged in very, very questionable fundraising practices. Today's Washington Post editorial said it best: Mr. Burton should step aside. To have this chairman preside over this investigation would make a mockery of the proceedings. Let me quote the chairman. Calling the charges distortions and outright lies, he said, I have never tried to put the arm on anybody in my life. But he acknowledged asking Mark Siegel for cash and complaining to Pakistan's ambassador when he did not deliver. My, my, I think he protests too much on his lack of involvement here. The chairman should step aside. The Washington Post said it best. To do any less would cast doubt on the integrity of this House and its ability to conduct a fair investigation.

Ms. DeLAURO

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Speaker, these are tough times for many Americans as they struggle to make ends meet while balancing the challenges of work and family. Families rightly seek greater flexibility and paycheck protection to meet their obligations at home and on the job. Unfortunately, the Republican comp time bill makes life harder, not easier, for these families. The bill, more accurately named the Paycheck Reduction Act, fails to ensure that employees can use comp time when they need it. Worse, it could take valuable overtime pay out of employees' pockets. In recent years 80 percent of working families have seen their wages fall behind or just keep pace with inflation. Families have responded by working harder. More mothers are working than ever because their families need the money. Two-thirds of mothers worked in 1993 as opposed to just over a quarter in 1960. Today many working men and women depend on overtime wages to pay the bills each month. One-fourth of all full-time workers spent 49 or more hours a week on the job in 1990, and half of these workers put in 60 or more hours per week. Mr. Speaker, families depend on overtime wages. Giving employees greater flexibility is a must in these hectic times. But the Republican bill is not the answer. If we want to give workers greater flexibility, let us start with a proven winner, the Family and Medical Leave Act. Since President Clinton signed that law in 1993, family and medical leave has helped 12 million Americans take off the time that they need for the birth of a child or to care for a sick family member. The act's unpaid leave has given workers flexibility with virtually no negative effects on employers, according to a bipartisan commission on leave. Broadening the scope of this bill would allow workers to meet their commitments without jeopardizing their overtime wages. Let us expand family and medical leave. That is the sensible path toward greater flexibility in the workplace. But the Republican leadership refuses to consider such a commonsense approach to help American workers. For that reason I urge my colleagues to defeat the previous question so that we can bring true workplace flexibility legislation to the floor in the form of an expanded Family and Medical Leave Act.

Ms. DeLAURO

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Speaker, last week the other body voted 99 to 0 to conduct a fair and a thorough investigation of all improper 1996 campaign fundraising activities. We should follow their example. Today's front page story in the Washington Post may be an indication of why my colleagues on the other side of the aisle have thus far refused to allow an investigation into 1996 Republican fundraising activities. This is also further proof that our current campaign finance laws are not doing their jobs. Our campaign finance system is broken and we need to fix it. Two things are abundantly clear. First, this House must make campaign finance reform a top priority for this session of Congress; and second, any House investigation into inappropriate fundraising activities must include a thorough examination of Democratic and Republican fundraising practices. To do any less would cast doubt on the integrity of this House and the process.

Ms. DeLAURO

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Chairman, these are tough times for many Americans as they struggle to make ends meet while balancing the challenges of work and a family. Families rightly seek greater flexibility and paycheck protection to meet their obligations at home and on the job. Unfortunately, the Republican comp time bill makes it harder rather than easier for these families. The Republican bill fails to ensure that employees can use the comp time when they need it, when they need to go to that soccer game, when they need to spend time with their youngsters. Worse, it could take valuable overtime pay out of an employee's pocket. It does not guarantee that employees would not be forced to take comp time instead of overtime pay. It does not guarantee that comp time would be offered to all employees and without any strings attached. And it does not guarantee that employees' comp time would be credited for the purposes of pension or Social Security. We need to have strong protections for workers who depend on overtime pay. Two-thirds of those who earned overtime pay in 1994 had a total annual family income of less than $40,000 a year and had an average wage of $10 per hour or less. That is why we need the serious protections that are provided by the Miller substitute amendment. The Miller substitute ensures that employees would choose if and whether to take the comp time rather than overtime pay so that employees would not be forced to give up overtime dollars. It protects employees vulnerable to overtime abuses. And it ensures, if comp time is offered, that all employees would be given the same terms so that extra hours are not given only to those who are willing to take comp time. There are a number of amendments considered today, but the Miller substitute can fix the fundamental problems of the Republican comp time bill. I urge my colleagues to vote for the Miller substitute and against the Republican paycheck reduction act.

Ms. DeLAURO

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank my colleagues for taking up this special order tonight, and I am sorry I was not here for the first part of the dialog, but I think in what I have been listening to, the issue of the 1996 elections, I think it was clear that the 1996 elections prove that there is too much money in politics. What does it mean when you say that? It means that there is too much influence for special interests, not enough representation for people who work hard every single day and who want government to represent their views and their needs, and government is not in a sense an abstract concept. Government means that they want the people who they have elected to represent them, to make sure that their views are put forward. I wanted to join with you tonight just simply to say that I want to call on the leadership of this House to take action to reform our campaign finance system. Again I am sorry that the 1996 elections were record breaking in what I view as the wrong way. The final tallies reported in the Washington Post show that the campaign was the most expensive ever with an estimated cost of $2.7 billion. If we were to adjust for inflation, spending on campaigns tripled during the past 20 years, and what they reinforced was that we need less money in our political system. Now if you take a look at the leadership of the House, Speaker Gingrich thinks that we should have more money in the political system. The majority leader of the House believes that there should be more money in the system. The majority whip believes that there should be more money in the system. The former head of the Republican National Committee believes that there ought to be more money. Now I am not making that up. Those are statements that are on the record. So, in fact, there is a philosophical difference in terms of the Republican leadership wanting more money in the process, and a Democratic position in the House has been to see limitations put on the amount of money spent in the process. The Washington Post further showed that 8 in 10 Americans agree that the money has too much influence on who wins elections. When you take a look at what the preponderance of views are amongst the Republican leadership, you can see that there is that tie on why we see a refusal, if you will, to bring campaign finance reform to a vote, and I have to believe it is a sincerely held view that they do not think that there is a problem with the role that money plays in the American political system. I think that the American public believes differently from that, as I am sure that you have talked about and our colleague from Hawaii is talking about, but I think it is so real to the American public that there is too much money in the system. I think it has been reflected in their staying away from the polls in their, if you will, disappointment and potentially even their disgust with government. They have little faith in government. You know, in terms of staying away from the polls, we have had less than half of those eligible to vote voted last November. One 50-year-old woman in the article who said she might expect to live to age 80 said, ``I will be dead in the ground long before anything changes.'' It is a sad day if her words accurately reflect our perceived ability to tackle the challenge of campaign finance reform. I think we have a wonderful opportunity here, and that opportunity is to restore faith in the Government, in the Congress. But in order to do that we have to prove that we are serious about reforming campaign finance and that we have to do that now. Waiting would push campaign finance reform efforts closer to the next election season and likely doom campaign finance efforts as happened in past Congresses. I was pleased that the President, in his State of the Union message, talked about a realistic challenge for the Congress, and that is to pass campaign finance reform by the Fourth of July. Lest their be any confusion about what we are talking about here tonight, I would just say very forthrightly that we do have investigations underway and if there was any wrongdoing, then in fact wrongdoing should be punished. No one is suggesting that that is not the case. I think very honestly, and investigations will go on, but what we need to do is to--we know that the system needs to be reformed. So let us have the opportunity to debate the number of initiatives that already on both sides of the aisle have been brought to the table, including the Meehan-Shays bill and the Senate Feingold--the Feingold- McCain bill. Our colleague from California, Sam Farr has a good working piece of legislation. There have been two constitutional amendments that have been introduced or that you put a limitation on the amount of money that is spent to contravene a Supreme Court decision a number of years ago. So that we have opportunities here to have a debate, and a number of people have talked about, you know, different pieces which can be debated so that in fact we can come to some consensus on both sides of the aisle about how we ought to be raising money for campaigns in the future. I think if we can use the goal post of July 4, it is a decent period of time in which to have the debate, and it is also symbolically, I think, very important in terms of it being Independence Day in that we, in fact, you know, wrest the control of our campaigns from the special interests and return it back to the people. And I would urge the House leadership to move to campaign finance reform by that time, and we can start working now at this effort. I was proud to join my Democratic colleagues. The women, Democratic women of the House, today had a press conference to talk about this issue to have a full debate, which I am sure my colleague from Hawaii talked about. I understand that Members of the freshman class on both sides of the aisle, a bipartisan effort is underway to talk about how we can move this forward. I am a cosponsor of our colleague Sam Farr's bill. I think there have been some good suggestions about the broadcasters and issuing free time, especially in light of what is going on with the sale of the spectrum in which the broadcasters are going to reap, you know, myriad of benefits. Therefore, in fact, they could talk about free air-time to candidates. I think there are some good measures is essentially what I am saying, and I know my colleague from New Jersey feels the same about this. And let us take this opportunity to take some of these good measures to develop consensus on this issue and move forward to meaningful campaign finance reform. I think it would do so much for our ability to go to the American public and say, ``We're responding to what you are talking about with your disgust and with your lack of faith.'' Let us do this, and let us talk and then allow them to believe us when we talk about wanting to ensure, making sure that 10 million kids in this country have health insurance, which they now do not have, and that we are serious about doing something about their ability to be able to send their kids to school and so forth. I think it would go a long way in restoring faith in what we do in this body. So, as my colleague has also called for, I join him in calling for the passage of campaign finance reform as soon as possible. But first and foremost let us have the debate and the hearings that are necessary in order that we can pass campaign finance reform, and I thank you for calling this special order.

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Speaker, if the gentleman would yield, so am I.

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Speaker, I think most campaigns, and this is across the board, if we talk to anyone on both sides of the aisle about where the bulk of their money goes in a campaign, and it is to pay for the TV costs, for the broadcast costs. I was just looking at an article from the Hartford, CT, paper, which actually said what the broadcasters could do here in terms of what they are about to reap in profit from the sale here and the licenses is that they ought to give back something and take on some responsibility here in terms of the free air time. I think we ought to move in that direction, because the costs obviously vary in different parts of the country, but the fact of the matter is that we do run for reelection and we do have to raise money. But whenever we are listening to people, it is mostly because the volume of money that they are trying to raise has to do with trying to be on TV and to pay those costs. Even some of the solicitations from Members to folks that they want contributing to their campaigns, say such and such an amount of money will allow me to be on television so many times, so that that is where the bulk of the money is being spent. I think we need to take a very, very hard look at that and a look at the various proposals that are on the table with regard to that issue. I think what we have to do on this is do what similarly was done with regard to the minimum wage legislation in the last session of the Congress, and that is to use every opportunity that we can on this floor to raise the issue. Some Members were engaged in that effort last week. I suspect that they will continue to try to raise the issue. This has now been, what is it, January, February, March, and there have been letters. I do not know if it has been mentioned before, but a bipartisan list of Members sent a letter to the leadership asking that campaign finance reform be made a high priority, and so far we have seen nothing as an opportunity for us to move in this direction. So what we need to do is to utilize the opportunities that this institution offers to raise the issue continuously so in fact we can have some meaningful dialog on this issue.

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Speaker, if the gentleman would yield, that is the point. We did pass a bill in this House, and then when it went over to the Senate and the current Senator from Kentucky, who is still of the view that there is not enough money in politics, filibustered it and in the last session it was turned away. In a prior session when it was passed in this House, the then President George Bush vetoed the legislation. The fact is that we passed here spending limits. We need to limit the amount of money it takes to run for a congressional seat or a Senate seat. There are differences with regard to public financing. I support public financing, a voluntary, that is nobody should be coerced, or the other pieces, the ban on soft money which is in the Farr bill, which I support, a ban on soft money. These are all pieces, again, the constitutional pieces, the broadcasters you can deal with. We have to get to the point where we can have a good, hard debate on these issues, and a place in which they can unfold so that we can try to come to some consensus and viewpoint as to what we ought to pass. Without that debate, we are not going to see anything happen here. We are just going to go along and the public will be reconfirmed in their view that this body is not able to police itself or to look at ways in which the amount of money can be curtailed. There are a number of ways in which we can go after this goal. What there has to be is the willingness and the will, if you will, or the political will, to determine that we are going to pass meaningful campaign finance reform and that we are going to take it on.

Ms. DeLAURO

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Speaker, yesterday Speaker Gingrich stood in the well of the Chamber and he reiterated the 13 points of the Republican agenda. One of these priorities, balancing the Federal budget, is one both Democrats and Republicans share. But, Mr. Speaker, actions speak louder than words. We can all talk about the importance of balancing the budget, but it is only the Democrats who have put a balanced budget on the table. The Republicans have yet to offer a budget proposal of their own. Every day American families find a way to balance their own household budgets. They expect Congress to do the same. We cannot let down these families. We must find a way to balance the Federal budget. The Democrats have produced a balanced budget proposal. Now it is time for the Republicans to quit talking, to start acting. It is time for them to produce a budget proposal.

Ms. DeLAURO

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Speaker, yesterday the Children's Defense Fund released its annual state of America's children. The news is heartbreaking; 1 out of every 7 American children are living today without health insurance; 1 out of every 7 kids. It is a national disgrace. The vast majority of these kids live in families where one or both of their parents work. Their folks work hard and they play by the rules, but they are caught in the middle, not poor enough to qualify for Medicaid, but unable to afford private health insurance for their families. It is time for the Republican leadership to focus on this problem. There are 10 million reasons why we must do this: For the 10 million children in this country who are living without health insurance. But we only need one, the fact that the American people are counting on us to make this world a better place for their families. We cannot have healthy families without healthy kids. We need to address this crisis, we need to move this issue on to the top of the legislative agenda.

Ms. DeLAURO

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to the previous question, and let me tell my colleagues why. As we rise today to take up another burning issue on the GOP agenda, the Paperwork Reduction Act, I ask my Republican colleagues to allow us to debate a more meaningful reduction of paper. Let us talk about how we reduce the amount of paper money that exists in political campaigns today. Our system of financing political campaigns is broken, and it is time for us to fix it. We may not all agree on the best way to fix the problem, but surely we can all agree on one thing, that there is too much paper money in political campaigns, it costs too much money to run for public office, we spend too much time raising money for our campaigns, and at the end of the day it takes our time away from the more important duties we are engaged in. I know it, my colleagues know it. Most importantly, the American people know it. Republicans in the House and Senate have asked for several million dollars to investigate campaign financing in the last election. Those investigations are important, and they should move forward, and they should not be used as an excuse to delay action on campaign finance reform. All the Democrats are asking is this: Give us an open, unrestricted debate on campaign finance reform by May 31, by Memorial Day. We can get money out of politics and pass meaningful campaign finance reform, but first we need an open and a fair debate. Only one person can schedule a vote on campaign finance reform, and that is the Speaker of this House. Mr. Speaker, it is time to stop wasting time. Let us schedule a vote on campaign finance reform. Congress surely could stand a little paperwork reduction, but let us reduce the amount of money in politics. Vote ``no'' on the previous question.

Ms. DeLAURO

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Speaker, yesterday the majority leader announced that the Congress will not consider a budget resolution until May, 3 months after the President submitted to this House a balanced budget plan. Yet today my colleagues on the other side of the aisle want to vote on a resolution to force the President to submit another balanced budget. They continue to criticize the President's plan, despite a letter from the director of the Congressional Budget Office asserting that the President's plan is truly a balanced budget. Where may I ask is a Republican plan to balance the budget? My colleagues on the other side of the aisle are too busy with partisan attacks to focus on actually submitting a budget proposal of their own. It is time for House Republicans to stop holding press conferences and to start crunching numbers. The only bill today reflecting the Republican budget priorities is a proposal by the majority leader of the Senate, and it is a tax bill. This legislation, according to Citizens for Tax Justice, would mostly benefit the wealthiest 5 percent of Americans. It sounds to me like the Republicans are up to their old tricks: Balancing the budget on the backs of working American families while cutting taxes for the rich. The American people deserve to see how the Republicans plan to pay for these large tax cuts. Let us work together on the issues that matter to the American people. We cannot afford to have another Government shutdown because the Republicans are too busy attacking the President to work on a balanced budget. It is time for us to work together on the issues that matter to the American people. We have seen the Democratic proposal to balance the budget. The American people deserve to see the Republican budget proposal.

Ms. DeLAURO

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Speaker, on April 1, 1997, John Kingston is retiring from the Connecticut State Board of Labor Relations. I am pleased to rise today to commend Jack on a great career in State service and an outstanding tenure with the Connecticut State Board of Labor Relations. For more than 25 years, Jack has served as agent to the board of labor relations. His hard work, strong leadership and commitment to excellence have left an indelible mark on the board of labor relations. Jack has seen a number of changes over the last quarter century. During Jack's tenure on the board, the Connecticut State Employee Relations Act was passed. Jack handled the first petitions filed by State employees in their efforts to organize. He also conducted elections for the 30,000 State employees under the new act. His experience in the area of State employee union negotiations is invaluable and his colleagues and coworkers rely on his encyclopedic knowledge of the labor board processes and procedures. Over the course of his career, Jack has become one of the most highly respected and admired people in the labor relations field. The fact that both advocates for both labor and management frequently call for his advice and counsel, speaks volumes about his reputation. Everyone who knows Jack seems to recall one thing in particular when asked about him and his career. They recall his integrity and sense of fairness. They also talk about Jack's commitment to settling disputes and bringing sides together. Under his leadership, the board has boasted an 87-percent settlement rate for the 1,000 cases they handle per year. I have been told that as word of Jack's retirement made its way through the State, everyone who heard asked ``What are we going to do without Jack?'' What is absolutely clear is Jack's commitment to doing his job well so that both labor and management come out ahead. I am proud to join the entire labor community in congratulating Jack as he retires. He has continually demonstrated his commitment to service. He should take great pride in this moment and enjoy a much deserved tribute. I know that he will continue to do great things in his retirement. I wish him many years of good health and happiness. He truly deserves it.

Ms. DeLAURO

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Speaker, during the time it takes me to give these remarks today, two American children will lose their health insurance. One minute, two children. Three thousand three hundred every day of the year added to the ranks of the uninsured. Children are losing their health insurance at twice the rate of adults. This is truly a national crisis. Last weekend in Hershey, PA, Members of the Congress from both sides of the aisle came together for a bipartisan retreat. We talked about the importance of working together and finding common ground on important issues that face American families. Surely we can all agree that there is no issue more important to our families than our children, for they are the future of this Nation. Let us pledge to work together, Democrats and Republicans, to see that every child in America has basic health care coverage. Let us come together and pledge to strengthen our families and to put the expansion of health care for children at the top of our legislative agenda.

Ms. DeLAURO

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Speaker, 30 years ago this country made a pact with our senior citizens. We promised our Nation's elderly that the Medicare Program would be there for them when they needed it most. Today the Medicare Program is one of our Nation's great success stories. Ninety- nine percent of our seniors have health care coverage in the United States today. Last year Democrats stood up for our Nation's seniors and successfully fought to protect and preserve the Medicare Program. But surely our children are every bit as sacred as our senior citizens, and yet every day in this country another 3,300 kids lose their health insurance. This is a national crisis. It is time for the Congress to focus on this problem because it is not going away. In fact, it is only getting worse. We need to stand up and fight for the health of our children just as we stood up and fought for the health of our seniors. We must act today and move the expansion of children's health care to the top of our legislative agenda.

Ms. DeLAURO

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Speaker, on October 20, 1996, the Connecticut Grand Lodge, Order Sons of Italy in America will honor Frank Grazioso as its Citizen of the Year. It is my great pleasure to rise today to honor Frank and all that he has contributed to the Italian-American community in New Haven. Frank epitomizes the values that are important to the Italian- American community. Together with his wife, Mary, he has raised two wonderful children. Frank and Mary, like so many families, have worked hard to make a home for their children. I know they must be very proud of their son, Henry, who is now a physician living in Philadelphia and their daughter, Claudia Anne, who is now a screenwriter in Los Angeles. In addition to family responsibilities, Frank and Mary, through her work as a school psychologist, have made remarkable efforts to reach out to countless others. A life-long resident of the city, Frank has truly made the people of New Haven his family. Citizen of the Year is a most appropriate honor for Frank because he is passionately involved in activities and events within the Italian- American community. Frank's work as Chair for the Columbus Day Celebration always comes to mind because he has given so much of his time, talents, and energy to planning this important day for Italian- Americans. He has also chaired the State of Connecticut Columbus 500th anniversary celebration. Frank has made the holiday a truly memorable one year after year. In addition to his work for the Columbus Day celebration, Frank has been involved with the National Italian American Foundation (NIAF) since 1977. During this time, he was elected to the board of directors and has served on the committee on by-laws and as regional vice president of New England. In keeping with his commitment to his roots in Italy, Frank has traveled there three times to represent the NIAF at meetings and receptions. Recently, he was elected general counsel and national officer. Nothing speaks to Frank's character more than his efforts to help victims of the 1991 earthquake in Italy. It was typical of Frank's dedication to maintaining a close connection to the people of Italy. Frank's definition of family clearly encompasses so much more than blood relatives. He was named Cavaliere in the Ordine Al Merito della Republica for his contributions. I am proud to join the Connecticut Grand Lodge in honoring Frank with the Citizen of the Year Award. Frank has served as a link between New Haven and Italy. His enthusiasm and hard work ensures that Italian spirit and culture continue to thrive in New Haven.

Ms. DeLAURO

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Speaker, on Thursday, November 14, 1996 Columbus House will have its annual benefit. This year the benefit is entitled ``It's a Small World'' and is honoring two individuals who have given an extraordinary amount of themselves to the city of New Haven; Jean Handley and Timothy Shriver. Tim's work embodies the theme of this year's benefit which is bringing the global community to the city of New Haven. I had the pleasure of working with Tim last summer when the 1995 Summer Special Olympic Games were held in New Haven. The 1995 games were the most successful world games in the 27-year history of the Special Olympics and had the added benefit of spotlighting the best that New Haven had to offer. I want to thank Tim for his great efforts on that project. His work enabled the city to shine and draw the national attention it so richly deserves. This past June, Tim was elected president and chief executive officer of Special Olympics International. I know that Tim offers Special Olympics International the vision, enthusiasm, and commitment to lead the organization into the 21st century. Tim has spent most of his life working in education and promoting the development of children and this background makes him particularly well-suited for his new position. Tim is an educator who cares deeply about children and has made a commitment to improving their lives. He has been an administrator and teacher in the New Haven Public School System and, prior to working with the Special Olympics, Tim was the supervisor of the New Haven Public Schools' Social Development Project. The project was an initiative he began in 1987. Tim's expertise in the area of education, and the social and emotional development of children enable him to bring a distinct perspective to his work for the Special Olympics. Tim is devoted to the Special Olympics movement and has a keen understanding of the meaning, mission and spirit of the organization. At the heart of the Special Olympics is a belief that all athletes deserve a chance to push past their own limitations and to excel. The games gives these individuals an opportunity to explore their capabilities and to reach their potential. I know that under Tim's leadership, the Special Olympics will continue to flourish and to offer so many athletes an experience they will remember for a lifetime. I am proud to join Columbus House in honoring Tim Shriver. His work should serve as an example to us all that we can make an important difference in the lives of children with special needs. The Special Olympics also make us aware of the value, potential and uniqueness of every person.

Ms. DeLAURO

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Speaker, on Friday, October 25, 1996, Sage Services will celebrate its 25th anniversary. The organization serves people over the age of 55 with a number of different programs. I am delighted to rise today to honor Sage Services and to recognize the important work they are doing. The mission of Sage Services is twofold. The organization aims to enable older people to maintain their independence, to continue to develop their skills and abilities, and to help them feel that they are valued members of the community. In addition, Sage Services educates the community to value older people, to benefit from their contributions, and to understand and address the concerns and issues older people face. Sage Services provides a number of valuable job training and job placement programs. The organization is committed to keeping the skills older people possess up to date. For example, several computer training classes are offered which teach word processing, keyboarding and data base, and spread sheet skills. I can imagine that it gives participants a great deal of self-confidence and self-esteem to be able to keep up with the information age and the proliferation of computers. Sage Services also offers all sorts of job placement programs. Older people are hired by local businesses for everything from office work to repairs and maintenance work. I am so pleased to see local businesses working with the organization because older people have so much to offer. If we do not reach out to them we are losing a great resource. Their talents, abilities and experiences remain relevant to the job market and it is to our advantage to tap this resource. In addition to these great programs, Sage Services links older people with all sorts of services and assistance. I am impressed with the Sage Home Share Program which helps people remain in their homes by putting them in touch with someone who is in need of housing. Older people receive companionship and assistance and those sharing housing are able to find reasonably priced housing. I think this program goes to the heart of what Sage Services is all about; people helping each other. Sage Services keeps the idea that we are all family and we are all responsible for each other at the heart of everything it does. I am proud to have this opportunity to congratulate Sage Services and to recognize all those who work there or volunteer their time to helping others. They are truly making an incredible difference in the lives of so many people. Sage Services is a remarkable organization and I commend everyone involved for making it such a success and for ensuring that our older citizens remain active, independent, and that they are valued by the community.

Ms. DeLAURO

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Speaker: On November 16, 1996, coach Carmen Cozza will coach his final home football game at Yale University against the Princeton Tigers. This day will be proclaimed Carm Cozza's Day in recognition of the contributions he has made to Yale University and the game of football. I am very pleased to rise today to honor Carm and to recognize his great coaching accomplishments. Carm has followed in the footsteps of another great coach and player. Walter Camp is both the father and founder of American football and was the first Yale University football coach. Carm has the impressive distinction of surpassing Walter Camp's win total at Yale in 1976. Carm's record speaks for itself. Under his leadership, the Yale Bulldogs won the Ivy League in 1967-69, 1974, 1976-77, 1979-81, and 1989. Indeed his achievements have brought him some well-deserved recognition. He was named the winner of the 1995 George C. Carens Award by the New England Football Writers Association for his outstanding contributions to New England football. He also won the 1992 Distinguished American Award by the Walter Camp Football Foundation. Carm has distinguished himself by becoming the coach with the most wins in Ivy League history. However, all of Carm's wins do not say as much about him as the wonderful feelings and memories his former players and colleagues have for him. Everyone who has known or worked with Carm remarks about his integrity, his class, and his respect for and love of the game. What is most indicative of Carm's tenure are the things that he is most proud of. Carm boasts that 99 percent of his players have graduated and he likes to claim that he is the best premed, prelaw coach in the country. He truly cares about his players and is as proud of their academic achievements as he is of their athletic accomplishments. Carm imparts a reverence for the game, a sense of discipline, and the meaning of sportsmanship to all the players he works with. These are his legacies to the Yale University football team. I am proud to join Carm's family, his wife Jean, his colleagues and his past and present players in saluting a lifetime of great coaching. Carm's vision, leadership, and enormous talent are his parting gifts to Yale and to the game of football. Yale has been truly blessed during his time there with a coach who cares deeply for the game and all those who play it. I wish Carm and enjoyable retirement and the very best during his final games at Yale. He will be greatly missed.

Ms. DeLAURO

Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Speaker, on Tuesday, November 26, 1996, the Atwater Senior Center will be celebrating its 31st anniversary with an open house, dedication of a health clinic and a luncheon. The new health clinic will be dedicated in honor of the previous director of Atwater, Anna Walsh-Cusano. I am delighted to rise today to congratulate Atwater on this special anniversary and to honor the memory of my friend, Anna Walsh-Cusano. Anna Walsh-Cusano was the first director of the Atwater Senior Center. An integral part of the Fair Haven community, Atwater has meant a great deal to a countless number of elderly citizens. Anna's family likes to remember that the center meant everything to her. She truly put her heart and soul into running Atwater. After her husband, Fred, died in 1973, Anna spent almost as much time at the center as she did at her home. She became so involved in the lives of residents and she was so dear to them that they came to call her by the affectionate nickname of ``Nonnie.'' Anna clearly understood the need for elderly citizens to have a place to gather for recreation and social events. Senior centers like Atwater provide people with creative outlets and an opportunity to have fun with others. With activities like day and overnight trips, parties, live entertainment and line-dancing and ceramics classes, there is always plenty to do at Atwater. Seniors are an integral part our community and Atwater ensures that they remain active and involved. As Atwater celebrates its 31st anniversary, it also celebrates the beginning of a unique partnership with the Hospital of St. Raphael. After 2 years of renovations, including a new roof and improvements on a number of rooms, Atwater is unveiling a joint venture with the hospital, the St. Raphael's Health Screening Clinic. The health center will focus on preventive care for seniors. I am very excited about this venture because the combination of these two facilities under one roof will provide seniors with better access to the care they need to stay healthy. I am very pleased to recognize the 31st anniversary of the Atwater Senior Center. I know Atwater, with the new health center, will continue to provide important services to seniors. I applaud the present director, Norma Rodriguez-Reyes, and all the staff who work so hard every day to make Atwater the special place it is. They should all be very proud on this anniversary.