Chet Edwards

Mr. EDWARDS

Mr. EDWARDS. Mr. Chairman, my colleague from California may not like what Democrats are saying about the Republican budget, so let us listen to what others are saying about that budget. Unconscionable, that is what four veterans organizations called the Republican budget. Callous, that is how the American Legion, Disabled American Veterans and Veterans of Foreign Wars describe the Republican budget. Perhaps Edward Heath, Sr., the national commander of the Disabled American Veterans, said it best when he said this: ``Mr. Speaker, this budget dishonors the service of millions of service- connected disabled veterans, including combat-disabled veterans. Is there no honor left in the hallowed halls of our government?'' Well said, Commander Heath. In just a few minutes we are going to be voting to support our troops. I must say, Mr. Chairman, to my Republican colleagues, what an odd way to support our troops when we are also going to be voting tonight, at least they are going to be voting, to cut veterans' benefits and services by $28 billion. I would say that our veterans and our troops would appreciate it more if we supported them with our deeds, not our words, and that is why I am going to support the Spratt substitute, because the American Legion said it is a better approach. Not only does it not cut veterans' benefits, it keeps our commitments to veterans. It invests in our children's future rather than borrowing from it. The Spratt budget, the Democratic budget, creates jobs, not deficits, for as far as the eye can see. We should vote for the Spratt budget. We should listen to the voice of the veteran leaders of America and say no to the callous budget of the Republican Party.

Mr. EDWARDS

Mr. EDWARDS. Mr. Speaker, I am saddened and deeply disappointed that this divisive, partisan budget bill is being brought up on a day when we Americans should be coming together to show support for our soldiers and troops, servicemen and women in Iraq. Young Americans are fighting for our country even as we speak. They are in harm's way and deserve our full attention and support today. Instead the Republican House leadership has us debating a partisan bill that cuts taxes for the wealthiest Americans who sit safely here at home and astonishingly pays for those tax cuts by cutting benefits to war-wounded veterans. To do so at any time would be wrong. To do so during the first 4 hours of our war in Iraq is shameful. Is the altar of dividend tax cuts so sacred to our House Republican leadership that it is even willing to cut veterans' benefits by over $28 billion on the day our future veterans are risking their lives for our country? Tax cuts for the wealthy, paid for by benefit cuts to veterans, is this the new Republican model for the long time-honored American tradition of shared sacrifice in time of war? Mr. Speaker, I hope my colleagues will pay attention to the words of the national commander of the Disabled American Veterans, the honored and distinguished Edward R. Heath, Senior. This is what he said just 3 days ago in his letter to the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Hastert), the Speaker of the House. ``Has Congress no shame? Is there no honor left in the hallowed halls of our government, that you choose to dishonor the sacrifices of our Nation's heroes and rob our programs, health care and disability compensation to pay for tax cuts for the wealthy?'' Mr. Heath also went on to say that, Mr. Speaker, this budget dishonors the service of millions of service-connected disabled veterans, including combat-disabled veterans, and seriously erodes the Nation's commitment to care for its defenders. ``I urge you,'' Commander Heath said to the Speaker, ``to reconsider the inequitable and ill-advised course proposed in the committee's partisan budget proposal.'' I believe, Mr. Speaker, the sentiments expressed by the national commander of the Disabled American Veterans reflects the values of Americans everywhere. I understand that in this budget last night or so they made a fig leaf change so that now they are only cutting veterans' benefits by $28 billion rather than $30 billion. I think Mr. Heath and our veterans all across this land of ours will recognize that as nothing but a political fig leaf, and that fig leaf will not work. We ought to be supporting our veterans and servicemen and women today, not cutting their benefits in a divisive debate.

Mr. EDWARDS

Mr. EDWARDS. Mr. Speaker, let me just begin by saying if the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Spratt) would like to finish any additional comments, I appreciate his focus tonight on this budget. Mr. Speaker, we are on the eve of a war in Iraq. We are at a time when we should be coming together as a Nation, and yet I am disappointed to say that this budget that may be on the floor of the House on the very day perhaps that we go to war is a divisive, partisan budget. I would hope the leadership of the House would choose to delay the consideration of this bill for many reasons, not the least of which is it will divide this House when we should be linking arms to support our troops, support the Commander in Chief in our war against Iraq. This budget has many shortcomings that have been discussed in the last hour, but I would like to say that I think it is an unfair budget, as well as an irresponsible budget. It proposes the largest deficit in the history of the United States. Let me repeat: It proposes the largest deficit in the history of the United States. In doing so, it asks tremendous sacrifices from some American citizens, including combat-injured, disabled veterans whose compensation and pension checks could be reduced significantly, while, on the other hand, providing lavish tax breaks to some of the wealthiest among us in this country. It seems to me that that budget flies in the face of the principle of shared sacrifice. I am not here tonight or any night, Mr. Speaker, to attack those who have worked hard, been successful financially, created businesses and jobs, but I would say once America goes to war, it is not fair to ask for sacrifices from our men and women in uniform who are putting their lives on the line in the days ahead to ask for sacrifices from combat- injured World War II, Korean, and Vietnam and Desert Storm veterans and then turn around and say to a constituent in my district that it is okay for a person to make a million dollars a year in dividend income while sitting comfortably in security in their own home in central Texas and not have to pay one dime in taxes on that million dollars of income. It is not right having the administration propose a billion-and-a- half-dollars cut in military construction appropriations that helps provide housing and day care and quality-of-life programs for our servicemen and women and the families who sacrifice so many times as much as those who wear our Nation's uniform. It is not right to put a burden on hard-working, average-income and low-income families through cuts in education commitments; through dramatic cuts in Medicaid funding, which provides health care for low-income children; through cuts in Medicare, which is important for rural and urban hospitals to provide quality care and Medicare, the program that is so valuable and so necessary to so many senior citizens on fixed incomes. This is not a budget worthy of support in this House. We should respect the fact that our Nation is about to send its sons and daughters into combat. I will support our Commander in Chief in that effort because I believe we do need to work together to send a clear message to Saddam Hussein and to our soldiers, our servicemen and women in the Iraqi theater that we are behind them, but we do not do that this week by passing a bill that underfunds some military programs such as housing and quality-of-life programs, underfunds Medicare and Medicaid, asks for sacrifice from farmers, senior citizens and young people trying to make a better life for themselves through a college education, while at the same time providing massive tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans who benefit from the sacrifices of average working folks who make up the heart and soul of our military forces. Mr. Speaker, I urge the leadership of this House to consider pulling down this divisive, partisan budget bill. Let us come back together, put together a bill we can all be proud to support, and, in doing so, keep America unified, keep this Congress unified, and let our servicemen and women know that we are behind them.

Mr. EDWARDS

Mr. EDWARDS. Mr. Speaker, I am deeply disappointed that the Republican House leadership refused last night to even let this House consider my amendment, a reasonable amendment, to exclude the $250,000 caps only in cases where someone is guilty of gross negligence. I support cracking down on frivolous lawsuits and I even favor punishing attorneys who file them. But under the guise of stopping frivolous lawsuits, it is wrong for the Republican leadership to protect those guilty of gross negligence even when the consequence is the loss of a child. Jeanella Aranda was a 1-year-old baby. Last August Jeanella died needlessly in Dallas, Texas, because the transplant liver team did not check the fact that the father's liver and blood type were not compatible. Had they checked they have would have found out little Jeanella's mother could have donated part of her liver and Jeanella would most likely be alive today. Mr. Speaker, I hope every Member of this House will ask his or herself this question before voting on this awful unfair rule: Had Jeanella Aranda been your child, would you think it would be fair for politicians in Washington to decide how to hold responsible those involved in her death?

Mr. EDWARDS

Mr. EDWARDS. Mr. Speaker, I will be brief because no words can adequately express the debt of gratitude we owe our servicemen and women and their families for the sacrifices they make on behalf of our country. But I do want to commend the gentleman from California (Mr. Hunter) and the gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Skelton) for sponsoring this important resolution showing our deep respect for our servicemen and women. I would add one footnote. I hope we will show them our respect with our deeds and not just with our words and vote on this resolution. I am still bothered by the fact that the budget proposal suggests a cut in Impact Aid military education funding to the children of moms and dads who, as we speak, from my district and others, are being deployed over to the Iraqi theater. With the leadership of these two great supporters of our military families and others on both sides of the aisle, I hope we will support them with this vote today and with our dollars and with our votes on actions that support their quality of life.

Mr. EDWARDS

Mr. EDWARDS. Mr. Speaker, on February 27, 2003, Congress passed H.R. 534 that would ban human cloning. I oppose human cloning, but it appears that I inadvertently voted against the legislation banning such cloning when my intention was to support the ban. Last year, I voted for a bill to prohibit cloning and my position has not changed. I support a prohibition on human cloning. Our society has not even begun to evaluate the moral, ethical and medical implications of petri dish factory lines creating genetically identical humans. There is something sacred about the fact that every human being is unique. I cannot support the technology that would ultimately allow people to create exact genetic duplicates of themselves, because I believe that once the technology is available, it would just be a matter of time before someone succumbed to the temptation of, in effect, trying to recreate himself. We can continue to make enormous progress in medical research without opening the Pandora's box of creating embryos and babies with the identical genetic makeup of other human beings. A human cloning ban will not prohibit stem cell research, which holds the promise of solving major diseases such as Alzheimer's without artificially creating exact genetic duplicates of other humans. Just because researchers can do something does not mean society should allow it. Researchers can create biological and chemical weapons in laboratories, but civilized society has agreed that it is best to prohibit such activities. The profound implications of creating human genetic duplicates, in my opinion, warrant a prohibition on such technology.

Mr. EDWARDS

Mr. EDWARDS. Mr. Speaker, if the gentleman will yield further, I appreciate the gentleman pointing out those facts. I would also point out on this chart that the Bush administration's total tax agenda, including tax cuts already enacted plus proposed tax cuts, total in impact, if you count that increased debt tax, the interest we have to pay when we borrow money, it is over $4.3 trillion. Even by Washington, D.C., standards it seems to me a trillion here and a trillion there really is a significant amount of money. I find it astounding that we are cutting taxes for some of the wealthiest people in America, and at the same time, telling soldiers at Fort Hood in central Texas, right next to the Crawford ranch, you have to go off and fight for our country, but by the way, as they are getting on the plane, give them a note, we are going to cut your children's education fund. We hear a lot of talk, and I will finish with this, about values in Washington, D.C., and family values. But I think we in public office should be judged not by rhetoric, but by our record and by the priorities we set in the Federal budget. There is something wrong with the values of an administration that would propose cutting impact military education funds not to pay for a war against Iraq, but to pay for the tax dividend for the other constituent of mine who said he made $1 million in dividend income last year, and because this administration does not want him to pay one dime in taxes, will get a $335,000 tax cut. Would the gentleman care to comment about the values of those priorities?

Mr. EDWARDS. We could have a $400-plus billion deficit. I did calculate it. I think the maximum Pell Grant for a young, bright high school senior from a low income family, wanting to improve his or her life and career with a college education, they get about $4,000 a year. If you assume 4 percent interest on the $300 billion deficit this year alone, that means my children's generation, my little boy's generation, will pay $12 billion a year, that is B as in boy, $12 billion a year in tax for the rest of their lives until the day they die simply to pay the interest on this year's proposed deficit. That amount of money, if we had a more fiscally prudent budget without some of these tax cuts that I think are irresponsible, that would allow us to have 3 million young Americans receive a $4,000 Pell Grant. Something is wrong with these values and something is wrong with this budget.

Mr. EDWARDS. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the gentleman from South Carolina for leading the fight for fiscal responsibility in Congress. Mr. Speaker, just 2 years ago the Bush administration promised my then-3 and 5-year-old sons that by the time they graduated from high school, America would have no national debt. A lot can happen in 2 years. Now, under the fiscal policies of this administration, my now-5 and 7-year-old sons are told that before they finish elementary school this administration will add $1 trillion to $3 trillion in addition to the total $6 trillion national debt that we presently have. To average Americans, what does the national debt really mean? $6 trillion, $5 trillion, what does it matter? Let me talk about the difference. It is said there is one tax in America that cannot be repealed. It is called the debt tax. It is the interest on the national debt. Last year alone, over $320 billion was paid in interest on the total national debt of America. That is $320 billion that taxpayers have to be responsible for now and in the future just to pay the interest on the national debt. The fact is that not only does the debt tax hurt us by having to pay additional taxes to the Federal Government to pay interest on the debt, but every business is burdened with the debt tax. When you have a deficit, once the economy gets back on its feet, you are going to drive up interest rates. Every homeowner pays part of the debt tax because they have to pay higher interest on the mortgages on their homes. Every consumer that borrows and uses a credit card will have higher taxes in effect because of the Bush administration increase in the national debt. Now, once in awhile, Mr. Speaker, an idea comes along in Washington, D.C. that is so incredibly unfair that, frankly, it is hard to even believe anyone would propose it seriously. Let me talk about a specific provision of the most recent Bush budget. This week and in the weeks ahead there will be 12,500 brave men and women, Army soldiers from my district, from Fort Hood, that will be deploying for the Iraqi theater. Within weeks or months they could well be fighting to defend the interests of this country, perhaps even giving their lives for our country. I found it astounding that the same administration which has ordered these brave men and women, mothers and dads, to go off to potential combat in Iraq, has the gall to suggest that we should be cutting their children's education funds at the same time they are getting on the airplane to defend our country thousands of miles away. It is hard to believe that it is even true, but it is true. Look at the Bush budget. They are cutting the vital Impact Aid Military Education program at the very time they are asking our sons and daughters, mothers and dads, to go off and defend our country in the Middle East and Southwest Asia. In fact, the two school districts surrounding Fort Hood, the Coppers Cove and Killeen districts around Fort Hood in my district in central Texas, will lose under the Bush administration proposal $21 million in impact aid this year because of the proposed cuts in that program. What is compassionately conservative about that? What is fair about that? The truth is, nothing is compassionate about that; nothing is fair about that. Mr. Speaker, we ask our servicemen and women to make incredible sacrifices for our country, and it is immoral for us to be cutting their children's education funds even as they go to potentially fight for our country. I hope the American people will be as outraged about not only the largest deficit in the history of America proposed in this budget, but will be just as outraged by the unfairness to our servicemen and women all across America by cutting their children's education programs while they are going off to war. Mr. Speaker, there are many things we could talk about in this budget, but one of the things I would like to ask the distinguished ranking member about is, I have heard in recent days from Republican colleagues that the Bush administration tax cuts, both those already enacted and those proposed, really are not a significant part of the reason we now have this year proposed the largest deficit in the history of America. I would like to ask my colleague, the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Spratt), if that is true. Have these proposed taxes and enacted tax cuts really had a minimal effect on the fact we are in such a deep deficit hole now?

Mr. EDWARDS. Mr. Speaker, that is a good point. If the gentleman will let me ask one last question, and then I will defer to other members that want to speak on the largest deficit in the history of America, there are a lot of Americans that believe that this largest proposed deficit in America's 200-plus-year history is because, my gosh, we are going to have to pay for the war against Iraq. Could the gentleman tell me and the American people factually, is the $300 billion deficit proposed for this 1 year alone related to that?

Mr. EDWARDS

Mr. EDWARDS. Mr. Speaker, a citizen of China Spring, Texas, a Central Texas community in my 11th Congressional District was recently honored with the Carnegie Medal for risking his life to save the life of another. On July 12, 2001, Curtis R. Patterson, a customer service technician with Southwestern Bell Telephone and a member of the Communications Workers of America, Local 6225 of Waco, was on his way home from work when he came upon an automobile accident. A car driven by Margaret Ratliff had left the road and struck a wooden utility pole. The collision brought down power lines at the front of her car and fire broke out around the car from the sparks. When Mr. Patterson arrived at the scene, Ms. Ratliff was trapped in her car. Patterson donned protective gloves and went to the passenger side of Ms. Ratliff's car, even as flames were spreading underneath it. Entering the car, he cut the seatbelt that was holding Ms. Ratliff in the car and pulled her across the console and passenger seat to safety. Within minutes, the flames engulfed Ms. Ratliff's car and completely consumed it. Ms. Ratliff was treated for third degree burns on her left arm, but recovered. She owes her life to Curtis Patterson. This last December, Patterson was 1 of 22 individuals from throughout the United States and Canada to be recognized by the Carnegie Hero Fund Commission. Mr. Speaker, I ask the Members of the House of Representatives to join me in congratulating Curtis Patterson of China Spring on the receipt of the Carnegie Medal, and honoring him for his lifesaving act. He is an authentic Texas hero and we are indeed proud of him.

Mr. EDWARDS

Mr. EDWARDS. Mr. Speaker, as a parent of two small children, I have been told that children pay more attention to what their parents do than what we say. Tonight, I hope the American people will use that commonsense principle in judging Congress. It is not what we say in our speeches that counts so much, but far more important to the American people is what we do. What has this Congress, what has this House done today? Basically, the Republican leadership has denied the minority an opportunity to present an amendment that would have added $275 million desperately needed in veterans health care. These particular dollars were focused to try to help those veterans who have such critical health care problems that they need specialist care. This $275 million was designed so that veterans who fought for our country so valiantly, so patriotically would not have to wait 6 months for a heart specialist or for some sort of very, very important care. I would imagine Republicans and Democrats alike on Veterans Day back home go make that speech, that it is wrong for veterans to have to wait 6 months to get the care that they have earned and even fought for, even been wounded to earn. Yet when we have a chance to do something about it, the Committee on Rules, not through the leadership of either the chairmen or the subcommittee chairmen, who are valiant supporters of veterans health care, but through the actions of the Republican leadership in the House, despite all of our great words on Veterans Day and Memorial Day, all our respect for veterans, when we could do something about it tonight, when we could have helped veterans, what are our actions? We are prevented from even having a vote on helping to improve veterans health care in that desperately needed way. The Republican leadership does not hurt the Democrats when they deny us the right to such a vote, denying Republicans and Democrats the right to that vote. They hurt veterans. These are men and women who fought for this country, men and women who have been willing to die for this country. So I wish the Republican leadership would reconsider its ill-founded rule that denies not us but veterans the right to get better health care. Let the American people and let veterans know what we parents of small children know: it is what we do that counts, not what we say that counts.

Mr. EDWARDS

Mr. EDWARDS. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the motion to recommit and in opposition to the Republican deficit tax. Mr. Speaker, if the House Republican leadership continues forward with its fiscally irresponsible tax policies, it will be responsible for passing the largest tax increase in American history--the deficit tax. The deficit tax is real. It is permanent. It is a tax on small businesses and families all across America. In fact, on a per capita basis, the deficit tax cost each American citizen over $1000 last year. Very simply, as the $6 trillion national debt is increased, it increases the interest payments on that debt, which must be paid by taxing hardworking American families. As bad as the deficit tax is, there's even another burden resulting from increasing the national debt. It is called higher interest rates on loans for homes, cars, credit cards and small business. When the economy gets back on its feet, borrowing hundreds of billions of dollars to finance a huge national deficit will drive up interest rates, in effect, a tax increase on families and businesses. We all know that this measure tonight to address the pay-go rules was necessary for this year and next in order to prevent major cuts in entitlement programs such as Medicare and veterans benefits. However, by opposing the Moore motion to recommit, the Republican leadership in this House is throwing out fiscal discipline rules for several years after that. I will vote for this measure, because we cannot allow Medicare and veterans benefits to be slashed, but the Republican leadership, by forcing an up or down vote on suspending pay-go rules for the next four to five years, is leading this House down the path of higher national debt, higher annual deficits, and, yes, a deficit tax on our families and our children for the rest of their lives. House Republicans may brag about tax cuts at election time, but they should be honest in telling our families and children that they are imposing a permanent deficit tax that will take dollars out of their paychecks for generations to come. Instead of partisan budget bills, what this Congress should do for the good of our economy and the future of our children is to sit down on a bipartisan basis and make tough decisions on how to balance the federal budget. That would be the right thing to do.

Mr. EDWARDS. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. EDWARDS

Mr. EDWARDS. Mr. Speaker, on Sunday, October 27th, the congregation and community of Woodway, Texas honored Reverend D. Michael Toby for twenty-five years of dedicated service as Pastor of the First Baptist Church of Woodway. Reverend Toby graduated from the Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary in 1974, where he won the H.C. Brown Jr. Award as the seminary's outstanding preaching student. On October 30, 1977, Reverend Toby joined the First Baptist Church of Woodway. Under his ministry, the church membership has grown to nearly four thousand people, requiring a new campus and larger facilities in 1990. Under Reverend Toby's leadership, education programs in the church have been greatly expanded, winning First Baptist Woodway the ``Fastest Growing Sunday School Award'' three times between 1996 and 2000. Ministries within the church have been enriched with the addition of youth and adult discipleship groups, outreach efforts, prayer warrior and prayer room ministries, ministries for seniors, singles and college students, a church school, Bible Drill, Awana, Mother's Day Out, Young Women's Fellowship, Angel Tree, all age choirs and a Vacation Bible school that serves over 850 children each summer. Reverend Toby has led his church in mission efforts both at home and abroad. In 1988, the First Baptist Midway became a Key Church in the Mission Texas campaign, supporting the creation of churches like Brazos Meadows and West Robinson Baptist Church in Waco. Reverend Toby additionally encouraged members to lead mission trips to Russia, China, Africa, Mexico, the Philippines, Morocco, Turkey and other countries. Because of the financial commitment to these and other ministries, the church has been honored as one of the top 100 churches in the Baptist General Convention of Texas in Cooperative Program giving. During his ministry, Reverend Toby continued his education and his role in public service. Presently, he is a candidate for the Doctorate of Ministry degree from the Golden Gate Baptist Seminary. He has served on the executive board of the Baptist General Convention of Texas, and its human welfare board and public relations advisory committee. Within the community, Reverend Toby has served on the boards of Central Texas Good Will Industries and Special Wish, as president of the Rotary Service Club of Waco and as moderator and executive board member of the Waco Baptist Association. I ask all of my colleagues to join me in honoring and celebrating the leadership and commitment of Reverend D. Michael Toby, and congratulating Reverend Toby and his wife Jackie on 25 years of dedication to the spiritual life and health of the community of Woodway and to Central Texas.

Mr. EDWARDS

Mr. EDWARDS. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor Richard E. Scott for his dedication to providing health care to citizens of Central Texas. On October 31, 2002, Richard retired as President and CEO of Hillcrest Health System after forty years of service. Richard has served Hillcrest in a number of ways during his career, beginning in 1962 as a Registration Clerk and Cashier, and working his way up to President in 1992. At each stage in his career, Richard worked tirelessly to diversify and update the services of Hillcrest. Under his leadership, Hillcrest has invested in needed medical technologies such as MRI and CT services and has expanded important hospice, community clinic and social programs. Richard has found special meaning in his calling as a healthcare professional and has been active in his commitment to local health care. His dedication has led him to leadership positions in important medical associations such as the American Cancer Society Advisory Board, the Arthritis Foundation Advisory Committee, the board of FirstCare HMO and the Waco Family Practice Foundation. Richard's lifelong enthusiasm for providing quality healthcare is matched only by his devotion to his community. He is a real friend to all who meet him and is known for his integrity, fairness and honesty. In addition to serving as president of the Dr. Pepper Museum and Education Foundation, chairman of the board of the Waco Business League and Member of the board of directors of the Waco Chamber of Commerce, Richard is a Deacon of First Baptist Waco and was Deacon Chairman at Highland Baptist Church. He is a member of several groups active in community involvement, such as the Rotary Club of Waco, the United Way of McLennan County, Waco ISD Partnership in Education, Waco Conference of Christians and Jews and the Waco Big 12 Steering Committee. Because of his efforts in healthcare and in his community, Richard has been recognized with numerous honors including the United Way Volunteer of the Year Award, the American Red Cross CEO of the Year Award, the Trinity University Healthcare Alumni Association Leonard A. Duce Award, Honorary Patron Chairman of the Cattle Baron's Ball, the Masonic Grand Lodge of Texas Community Builder Award and the Public Relations Society of America Silver Bridge Award. Outside of his career, Mr. Scott enjoys spending time with his wife Carol, their two children and seven grandchildren. I ask all of my colleagues to join me in honoring the life and accomplishments of Richard E. Scott. The people of my District are better off today because of his commitment to health care and community service.

Mr. EDWARDS

Mr. EDWARDS. Mr. Speaker, we live in a time when Americans change jobs as frequently as every five years. The kind of loyalty that used to be commonplace between employers and employees, when people more often than not spent their entire career with one organization, is rare today. That fact makes today's observance of Mr. Hollis Biddle's fifty years with the Waco Tribune-Herald indeed remarkable. The Waco Tribune-Herald is my hometown daily newspaper in Waco, Texas, a member of Cox newspapers and the largest publication in the 11th Congressional District. Following a high school class in journalism, Mr. Biddle, a native of Waco, began his career in 1952 as a copy boy with the morning newspaper, the News-Tribune, and the afternoon Times-Herald. He worked hard and won a Fentress Foundation Scholarship to Baylor University, where he majored in Journalism. Biddle worked as a reporter and went to school, earning a Bachelor's Degree in Journalism in 1958. Hollis Biddle worked his way into the Sports Department, eventually becoming Assistant Sports Editor. Traveling to small towns across Central Texas, he wrote about the teams, the bands, the cheerleaders. In Small Town Texas then and now, youth sports are a major source of pride for any community, and Hollis Biddle became very well known through his coverage. He wrote about high school and college football, baseball, basketball and any other athletic competition. He became best known, however, as an advocate and promoter for Little League Baseball. As the organization was just beginning to grow, his stories excited interest across Central Texas, from youngsters who wanted to play, from the parents and from community leaders who learned from Biddle's stories about the benefits of such healthy competition. Biddle worked to establish the state's Little League headquarters in Waco, and the Tribune-Herald was the official ``paper of record'' for Little League results for two decades. Grown men stop him on the street today to tell him, ``You took pictures of me playing Little League Baseball years ago and I still have that newspaper.'' Hollis finally gave up sports reporting, and is now an integral part of the Trib's Marketing Department. He is in charge of special newspaper sections and promotions, including weekly publication of the Baylor Insider in cooperation with the Baylor Foundation. For half a century today, Hollis Biddle has been involved in making the Waco Tribune-Herald a valuable daily record of area accomplishments. And, for half a century today, Hollis Biddle has been working to make Waco a better community. Mr. Speaker, I ask my colleagues in the House of Representatives to join me in honoring and celebrating Hollis Biddle's fifty years of service to his employer and to the people of Central Texas.

Mr. EDWARDS

Mr. EDWARDS. Mr. Speaker, I have listened to this discussion and wonder what the American people might be asking themselves about this inside-the-beltway discussion of budget resolutions, continuing resolutions, and deeming resolutions. Let me bring it back home to Americans in real terms. Because we have not done the one thing Congress has the responsibility to do each year, pass appropriation bills, the children of military families who might be put at risk in a war against Iraq, and I voted for that military authorization today, the children of military families, their schools, will not be getting the Impact Aid funding as they should be this November. The Fort Hood school district in my congressional district will be losing millions of dollars that they otherwise would have gotten in November. I am told Fort Leavenworth in Kansas might have a serious financial crisis in the next month or two because of Impact Aid funding not having been passed in the appropriation bill. What all this esoteric discussion means, the children of the military families, those families which we might be sending into combat in Iraq, are not going to get the education funding they deeply deserve; which is somewhat ironic on the same day that we just voted to authorize the use of military force in Iraq. Secondly, this means a lot in regard to highway spending and American jobs. A vote for this rule is a vote to cut highway spending by $4.1 billion. What does that mean? It means the loss of over 190,000 jobs in an economy which has already lost 2 million jobs. It means the loss of good-paying jobs from New York to California to Texas. It means we cannot repair the aging highway infrastructure in America at the rate that we were even doing last year, considering the fact that 21 percent of the bridges in the Federal highway system are substandard and many of those are unsafe. It means that the 4 days a year that Americans already spend in congestion away from their work, it means more pollution, more time away from their families and less efficient businesses. According to the Texas Transportation Institute, a loss of $75 billion a year because of congestion, extra fuel and lost time because of inadequate highways and inadequate transportation systems. So this is not an esoteric, inside-the-Beltway debate, it is a debate about jobs and cleaner air and more efficient businesses. Mr. Speaker, we have not met our responsibility. Because of the leadership in this House, we have not been allowed to do our one responsibility that we must do: pass appropriations bills. What I think has happened is a combination of a slow economy, the war against terrorism, and an irresponsibly large tax cut which has cut the budget so drastically that we cannot afford to fund the Leave No Child Behind education bill, and many Members want us to not vote on these until after the election. That is irresponsible. We should do our work. It is our responsibility.

Mr. EDWARDS

Mr. EDWARDS. Mr. Speaker, today I rise not as a Democrat, but as an American who shares the belief with President Bush that, once and for all, the time has come to end the threat of Saddam Hussein and his weapons of mass destruction. For that reason, I intend to support the authorization of military force against Iraq, even as I hope and pray for peace. Saddam Hussein has been responsible for the murder and deaths of hundreds of thousands of men, women, and children. How many more people, how many more innocent victims must die at his hands before the world finally says enough is enough? Saddam Hussein has built chemical and biological weapons. He has pursued the ultimate weapon of terror, a nuclear bomb. How many more weapons of mass destruction must he build before the world finally says enough is enough? There comes a time when a tyrant's repeated disdain for the rules of civilized society makes it necessary for society to protect itself. I say that time is now. Some of my colleagues in Congress say, in good faith, let us continue to try diplomacy with Saddam Hussein, and I respect their right to that view. Eleven years ago, I too had hoped diplomacy would have worked, in that case to stop Saddam Hussein from his unprovoked aggression against his neighbor, Kuwait. The Arab League tried diplomacy and failed. The European Community tried diplomacy and failed. The United Nations tried diplomacy and failed. And for 11 long years since, the world community, acting through the United Nations, has tried to use diplomacy to convince Saddam Hussein to destroy his weapons of mass destruction. Once again, the world community and diplomacy have failed. Is that failure the fault of the United States, the United Nations? Absolutely not. The fault lies squarely with one person and one person alone, Saddam Hussein. He is the guilty one, not us. The reality is that Saddam Hussein is a terrorist of historic proportions who has gassed his own citizens and killed his own neighbors. Now with his weapons of mass destruction he is a genuine threat to his declared enemy, the United States. Nothing, absolutely nothing Saddam Hussein has done since his invasion of Kuwait would suggest that his disrespect for the rules of civilized society has changed one iota. If anything, that disrespect has grown as he has arrogantly ignored U.N. resolution after resolution, year after year. Do I hope for peace without war? Fervently so. Because I represent 40,000 soldiers in my district who may be sent off to that war, and I represent their families. Yet, sadly, 11 years of his actions suggest Saddam Hussein has no respect for the principles of diplomacy and peace. The responsibility to only use war as a last resort does not negate the profound obligation of the President and Congress to protect American citizens from weapons of mass destruction. The United States as the one superpower in the world has an abiding responsibility to ensure that the terrorist attacks of September 11 do not become a prelude for biological, chemical or nuclear terrorism either here or anywhere in the world. I respect President Bush, as I do his father, for standing up to the menace of Saddam Hussein. I applaud the President's recent challenge to the United Nations. The interest of our Nation and all nations will be served if the U.N. enforces its resolutions against Saddam Hussein and Iraq. But if the U.N. does not take decisive action, the threat posed by Saddam Hussein and Iraq does not go away. Tigers do not change their stripes, and Saddam Hussein has not changed his. Not in 11 years, and not now. He was a brutal dictator, a dangerous dictator over 11 years ago; and he is a brutal, dangerous dictator today. The reality is diplomacy has failed and delay could be dangerous. The time to act is now.

Mr. EDWARDS

Mr. EDWARDS. That would be fine.

Mr. EDWARDS. Mr. Speaker, in the spirit of honest discussion on an issue that was so important that Mr. Madison and Mr. Jefferson debated it for 10 years in the Virginia Legislature, I am wondering if it would be within the rules of the House for me to now ask for unanimous consent to have 3 minutes of discussion with the author of the bill so I can clarify what the direct impact of this bill would be. If I do have that parliamentary right, I would like to make that unanimous- consent request.

Mr. EDWARDS. Mr. Speaker, I have a parliamentary inquiry.

Mr. EDWARDS. Madam Speaker, from the time I was a small child my parents taught me that our church was a sacred house of worship, a spiritual place where people of faith could meet, honor God and thank Him for our many blessings. Now as a father, it is my hope that my two young sons will have the same sense of reverence for our church and all houses of worship. Based on those values, it is my opinion that this bill demeans religion and demeans houses of worship by converting them into political campaign organizations. According to the bill itself, its purpose is ``to permit churches and other houses of worship to engage in political campaigns.'' Madam Speaker, this bill would go so far as to even allow churches to endorse political candidates and to contribute church funds to political campaigns. If I had a malicious intent to import divisiveness into our churches, I could find no better way to do it than to pass this ill-conceived bill into law. That is why this is not just a bad bill, it is a dangerous bill. Think about life under this bill. Our churches, synagogues, and mosques could cut back on their spiritual worship time so they could hear from their campaign committee. Then rather than taking time to praise God, our congregations could entertain divisive partisan political debates as to which local, county, State, and Federal candidates to endorse each year. Active political partisans in each house of worship could then fight over candidates and whether one or the other is truly the faithful one. Perhaps church committees could have religious litmus tests for candidates, thus thrusting aside the spirit of article 6 of our Constitution which prohibits religious tests for positions of public trust. After acrimonious endorsement debates for dozens of candidates, then our houses of worship could each year determine which mission fund or program for the poor could be scrapped on the alter of political contributions. Madam Speaker, it is no surprise that so many religious organizations are opposing this bill, and I hope the national press and American people wake up to the quiet, but dangerous, effort, well intentioned or not, in this Congress that would basically interject government and politics into our churches and into our personal faith. For example, with charitable choice legislation pending in Congress, an administration could dole out literally billions of dollars directly to preferred houses of worship; and then with the Jones bill, those same houses of worship could endorse in the next election the administration that has just given them those tax dollars, thus obliterating the wall of separation between church and State. If I had planned a lifetime to undermine religious liberty and tolerance in America and to demean houses of worship, I could not have ever devised a more effective plan than to combine charitable choice legislation with this bill. Thankfully through the wisdom of Mr. Madison and Mr. Jefferson, the first amendment places religion on a pedestal far above the reach of politics and politicians. To drag religion down from that lofty pedestal of protection into the quagmire of political endorsements is to demean religion, not protect it; and Madam Speaker, for any bill that deals with the fundamental constitutional principles of church and State to be brought to this House floor under a suspension calendar late at night with only a handful of Members present is a disservice to this House and to the profound importance of religious liberty. Whether one agrees or disagrees with my position on this bill, I would remind all of us that religious liberty is a gift of God and that for over 200 years our Bill of Rights has protected that divine gift for all our citizens and that any congressional action that treats the fundamental issue of church and State and religious liberty with less than the greatest of careful deliberation puts at risk America's historic legacy of religious freedom and tolerance.

Mr. EDWARDS

Mr. EDWARDS. Mr. Speaker, the citizens of McLennan County, Texas are celebrating today, September 26, 2002, the 100th Anniversary of the McLennan County Courthouse, located in my hometown of Waco. On April 28, 1900, at the turn of the last century, the needs of a growing Central Texas population demanded a new courthouse and jail. To pay for a structure, bonds were approved by the voters, and construction of the Courthouse began with the purchase of land on the corner of North 5th and Washington St. In December 1900, a contract for construction of the Courthouse was awarded, and in June 1901, the cornerstone was laid. Less than a year later, in 1902, the project was completed. Today, the McLennan County Courthouse is a Texas Historical Landmark and is listed on the National Register of Historic Places. With its classic Renaissance Revival design, it is widely recognized as one of the most beautiful public buildings still in use. Recent additions to the Courthouse include a series of paintings celebrating the rich history of Waco and McLennan County. Atop the building stands Themis, the Greek personification of Justice, Justitia, her Roman counterpart, and Liberty, the torchbearer, representing the importance of justice and the law to the citizens of McLennan County for the past hundred years. Although much has changed in that hundred years, the McLennan County Courthouse continues to provide integral services to the community, and stands as an important monument to the long tradition of the rule of law in Central Texas. Mr. Speaker, I ask the Members of the House of Representatives to join me in celebrating, with the City of Waco, Texas and its surrounding communities, the 100th Anniversary of the McLennan County Courthouse.

Mr. EDWARDS

Mr. EDWARDS. Mr. Speaker, while American servicemen and women are fighting the war against terrorism in Afghanistan tonight, and preparing for possible war against Iraq, it seems to me that the House could at least extend its present 3-day work week in order to keep from undermining the education of military schoolchildren. By not passing our education appropriation bill and by relying on this continuing resolution, this bill will basically prevent hundreds of millions of Federal dollars from going in November to public schools that have large numbers of military schoolchildren in them. How can the House leadership explain to soldiers fighting 7 days a week in Afghanistan that the House cannot pass an education appropriations bill important to their children's education because that might just require Members of Congress to work more than 3 days a week? If the top Republican leadership has time to campaign in my district in Texas this weekend, then surely they can find time to schedule more than a 3-day work week in the House so that we can pass an education appropriations bill that is vital to thousands of Army parents in my district. We have an obligation, Democrat and Republican alike in this House, to pass appropriation bills. That is our responsibility, Mr. Speaker, even if it requires more than a 3-day work week. We owe it to our military children and to their parents who sacrifice so much for our Nation to put this continuing resolution aside, get back to work, and pass an education appropriation bill.