Jo Ann Emerson

Mrs. EMERSON

Mrs. EMERSON. Madam Speaker, I want to join with the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. McGovern), my good friend, to talk about the global food for our education bill, and also to thank the gentleman for doing such a tremendous job in leading the charge forward on this particular legislation that I think is so very, very important for all of the children in the world who have no means to get a nutritional meal, and also because of the importance that it will mean for our farmers in America who are now suffering from the fourth year of low commodity prices, whose revenues will probably decrease in the neighborhood of about $4 billion this year. This legislation, quite frankly, is a win-win for the American farmer, and it is a win-win for children all over the world who desperately need food assistance and who need an education. Madam Speaker, I am particularly excited and motivated by the vision of former Senator and now Ambassador George McGovern and former Senator Bob Dole who really led the charge early in this fight against hunger, back many years ago when they were both serving in the Senate. It is also a very important issue for members of my family, because my late husband Bill was so very instrumental in bringing the issue of hunger, both domestically and internationally, into the Congress and worked so closely with his friend, the late Mickey Leland, as well as the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Hall) and the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Wolf). I know that we all share a common desire to try to help as many people as we can all over the world, and I am particularly hopeful that we will be successful in passing this legislation as a stand-alone, but if not, hopefully it will be part of the next farm bill as it is written. I cannot think of anything that is more important for us to do as a country. I think Senator McGovern probably said it best when he said we had a moral responsibility as a country with our rich and valuable natural resources and our abundant and very safe food supply to help people who cannot help themselves. And I say to the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. McGovern), that the gentleman has done a magnificent job in getting our colleagues to be very excited about this, to be enthusiastic, and I am so very pleased also that the United States Senate is participating as well with their bill. Madam Speaker, let me say that from an agricultural standpoint, there are many, many benefits for the United States economy for international food assistance. We have done this for many, many years as a country. I am very hopeful that this will be a policy that we perpetuate, that we are able to get the rest of the world involved in, but, most importantly, this kind of foreign assistance. U.S. food aid helps alleviate poverty. It promotes economic growth to the recipient countries, and this is very, very important, because as incomes in developing countries rise, then we know that consumption patterns change, and we also know that food and other imports of U.S. goods and services increase. In fact, back in 1996, 9 of the top 10 agricultural importers of U.S. products were food aid recipients. While we are shipping food aid abroad, it is important for people to understand that most of the money stays in the United States. The domestic beneficiaries of U.S. food aid exports include our agricultural producers and suppliers, our processors, our millers, edible oil refiners, packaging, manufacturing, rail and motor transportation lines; I could go on and on and on. Most every State in the country does benefit from food aid exports, in spite of the fact that most people would not knowingly think that they were agricultural States. I think that we must do everything possible to help the world's hungry children. When my late husband Bill came back from a trip in the Sudan, when he came back from various trips to Ethiopia and other countries, it was a very, very sad experience. He would hold dying children in his arms, children who were 12 years old and 13 years old, who were about the size of a 3-year-old or 4-year-old, who did not weigh anything, who had no opportunity to go to school. Mr. Speaker, I just want to say in closing, then, that I hope that more people will help all of us help children all over the world, as well as the American farmer.

Mrs. EMERSON

Mrs. EMERSON. Mr. Speaker, to me, this is an issue concerning human life where the pro-life and pro-choice arguments do not apply. When there is an act of violence against a pregnant woman, we need to remember that more than one life is affected by this violent act. An attack against a pregnant woman is an attack against her unborn child and I believe that the law needs to reflect that. I am pleased to offer my support for the Unborn Victims of Violence Act and commend my colleague, Representative Lindsey Graham for his dedication and the action he has taken to protect and promote the life of the living--born or unborn. This legislation is similar to the legislation from my home state of Missouri where, as the law states, ``The killing of an ``unborn child'' at any stage of pre-natal development is involuntary manslaughter or first degree murder. (Mo. Ann. Stat. 1.205, 565.024, 565.020 (Vernon Supp. 1999), State v. Knapp, 843 S.W.2d 345 (Mo. 1992), State v. Holcomb, 956 S.W.2d 286 (Mo. App. W.D. 1997)).'' We make it clear back home that life is sacred and today's legislation makes it clear across the nation. If a criminal assaults a pregnant woman and her unborn child, and injures or kills the unborn child, common sense recognizes that the criminal has harmed two victims--the mother and the child. But current federal law does not reflect this common sense recognition. Federal law (including military law) considers that such an assailant has harmed only one victim. Even if the aggressor has purposefully killed an unborn child who has been named and whose birth is eagerly anticipated, he has thereby not committed a crime under federal law, beyond the crime of the assault on the mother. The Unborn Victims of Violence Act would correct this conspicuous gap in federal law. The bill would establish that if an unborn child is injured or killed during the commission of an already-defined federal crime of violence, then the assailant may be charged with a second offense on behalf of the second victim, the unborn child. You know, there are many out there who would rather not talk about these issues, but the fact of the matter is that it is time for us to take a look at where we have a consensus--similar to the consensus we have reached regarding partial-birth abortion. In turn, we use that consensus to work toward an end where common sense and understanding prevail while we reach out and educate each other about areas of disagreement. I believe that this, too, is one of those issues. Mr. Speaker, Missouri is known as the Show-Me-State. At home, we show our respect for human life by protecting the unborn. I am proud to be a co-sponsor of this life saving legislation and I am hopeful that today, Congress will show its respect for life and do the same.

Mrs. EMERSON

Mrs. EMERSON. Mr. Speaker, I am going to, if I could, address my comments to my good friend the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Lewis). I want to thank him from the bottom of my heart and that of my husband for allowing us to go with him and all of our colleagues and others to this most incredible experience in Alabama. I cannot relate to the gentleman from Georgia how extraordinary it felt to meet with and see him and Bernard Lafayette and Reverend Shuttlesworth and Bob Zelner, all of you and others who were such vital and vibrant parts of the civil rights movement in their youth. I can see him very easily back then now after that weekend. Perhaps he does not just have quite as much hair, but he has that same spirit and that same belief. It was extraordinary to be able to hear and exchange stories and tales from what I think is probably the most dramatic movement in the 20th century. There are two or three things that I learned and that had a significant impact on me beyond the visits that we made to the significant landmarks over the weekend. One thing that I learned that I did not realize before was what is the importance of the interwoven relationship of the gentleman's sectarian and political views, his and others', with deeply held religious views and beliefs, and how it all interrelated, and they used those beliefs in God and their beliefs in the righteousness of their cause to overcome incredibly overwhelming odds. That was a very important thing that I learned and something that I think carries forward and should carry forward always. I also learned how important the weekend was in providing an opportunity, as I mentioned in church on the Sunday we were there, for reflection and repentance. While I was raised in a different part of the country and am of a different race and perhaps somewhat of a different cultural background and, quite frankly, was too young at the time, in spite of that, I regret sincerely that I did not have an opportunity to play a more active role in what was the defining moment of the 20th century. But they gave us the opportunity to feel what it was like as best I could. I think the bottom line is, and one which I hope every single person who was with us got from this wonderful experience, was that through the reflection, through repentance, through all of that is the recognition, I think, that comes, and it is what we are all working for, and that is reconciliation. The gentleman from Georgia and so many others provided me the inspiration to work toward that goal. I could never thank him enough for giving me that opportunity.

Mrs. EMERSON

Mrs. EMERSON. Mr. Speaker, Vince Lombardi once said, ``Leadership rests not only upon ability, not only upon capacity; having the capacity to lead is not enough. The leader must be willing to use it. His leadership is then based on truth and character. There must be truth in the purpose and will power in the character.'' While Vince Lombardi coached football, the same thoughts regarding his life and leadership can be applied to Coach Gene Bess of Three Rivers Community College. As a coach for Three Rivers, Gene has had amazing career that has spanned three decades. During that time, he has proven that a true leader leads not simply with words, but through example. Without a doubt, Gene Bess has lived his life--on and off the court--as an example of what many of us strive to achieve in life. Now, Gene stands on the threshold of a remarkable accomplishment. This month, Gene will set a record that only few in coaching have reached when he secures his 880th win as the coach of the Three Rivers Community College Men's Basketball Team. No longer will he be exactly like the 212 other coaches in the National JC Athletic Association Division I. Sure, like those coaches and the others who influence the lives of their players day in and day out, he will place a whistle around his neck, don a pair of athletic shoes, and stand on the sidelines coaching and cheering his players on to victory. But unlike those coaches, his hard work, determination, and dedication to being a positive influence in the lives of his players, has placed him in a special class that is set aside for coaches like John Wooden, Mike Krzyzewski, Dean Smith and Mizzou's own Norm Stewart. The leadership and dedication that Gene Bess demonstrates on the court does not end at the final buzzer. Instead, it translates into his personal and public life. He has been married for nearly 40 years and is a deacon at First Baptist Church of Poplar Bluff where he has attended Sunday Service in service to God for 30 years. He still lives on his same street--Sunset Avenue--that he has jogged nearly every morning for more than two decades. And most of all, he has an unwavering code that he lives by which reflects his common sense, nose to the grindstone attitude. As Tony Jimenez noted in the Juco Report, ``Basketball is not number one in his life, in or out of the season, he puts faith first, family second, and the game third. '' In a society where it oftentimes seems so difficult to find heroes, I am honored and privileged to have a man who exemplified the character of a leader, right here in our own community. Gene Bess is that type of a man. He is a man of purpose who has a way of understanding that people, when working together--on the court, in their church or in their community--can have a positive and memorable impact on the lives of each and everyone they meet throughout the journey of life. As the same article by Tony Jimenez mentions, Gene Bess has a reputation for winning that is build on a foundation of leadership, truth, and respect for all those who work with him. Jimenez stated, ``What has bode well for Bess' reputation is his unwillingness to bend to give certain issues when it comes to his team and the players. He doesn't swear. He doesn't just talk about an open door policy, the players know that his door is always open. He treats his players with the respect all coaches talk about, but not all of them follow through on. He carries himself with the aura of a major college coach, but he is just as a accessible, honest and down to earth as, well, a juco coach in a small town in Missouri.'' It's often been said that success is not measured by great wealth or material treasures. Instead, success is measured on the person you are, the life you live, and how your life influences the lives of others. If that is true, and I believe that it is, then we are all richer for knowing Gene Bess. Mr. Speaker, on this very special occasion, I ask that all of my colleagues join me in congratulating Coach Bess and the Three Rivers Raiders on this milestone and wish them every happiness for the future. Thank you.

Mrs. EMERSON

Mrs. EMERSON. Mr. Speaker, today I introduce a constitutional amendment for the protection of our nation's flag. The flag is a revered symbol of America's great tradition of liberty and democratic government, and it ought to be protected from acts of desecration that diminish us all. As you know, there have been several attempts to outlaw by statute the desecration of the flag. Both Congress and state legislatures have passed such measures in recent years, only to be overruled later by decisions of the Supreme Court. It is clear that nothing short of an amendment to the Constitution will ensure that Old Glory has the complete and unqualified protection of the law. The most common objection to this kind of amendment is that it unduly infringes on the freedom of speech. However, this objection disregards the fact that our freedoms are not practiced beyond the bounds of common sense and reason. As is often the case, there are reasonable exceptions to the freedom of speech, such as libel, obscenity, trademarks, and the like. Desecration of the flag is this kind of act, something that goes well beyond the legitimate exercising of a right. It is a wholly disgraceful and unacceptable form of behavior, an affront to the proud heritage and tradition of America. Make no mistake, this constitutional amendment should be at the very top of the agenda of this Congress. We owe it to every citizen of this country, and particularly to those brave men and women who have stood in harm's way so that the flag and what it stands for might endure. I urge this body to take a strong stand for what is right and ensure the protection of our flag.

Mrs. EMERSON

Mrs. EMERSON. Mr. Speaker, I am here today to introduce the Military Retiree Health Care Task Force Act of 2001. This legislation will establish a Task Force that will look into all of the health care promises and representations made to members of the Uniformed Services by Department of Defense personnel and Department literature. The Task Force will submit a comprehensive report to Congress which will contain a detailed statement of its findings and conclusions. This report will include legislative remedies to correct the great injustices that have occurred to those men and women who served their country in good faith. Let us not forget why we are blessed with freedom and democracy in this country. The sacrifices made by those who served in the military are something that must never be overlooked. Promises were made to those who served in the Uniformed Services. They were told that their health care would be taken care of for life if they served a minimum of twenty years of active federal service. Well, those military retirees served their time and expected the government to hold up its end of the bargain. They are now realizing that these were nothing more than empty promises. Those who served in the military did not let their country down in its time of need and we should not let military retirees down in theirs. It's time military retirees get what was promised to them and that's why I am introducing this legislation.

Mrs. EMERSON

Mrs. EMERSON. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to introduce a constitutional amendment to ensure that students can choose to pray in school. Regrettably, the notion of the separation of church and state has been widely misrepresented in recent years, and the government has strayed far from the vision of America as established by the Founding Fathers. Our Founding Fathers had the foresight and wisdom to understand that a government cannot secure the freedom of religion if at the same time it favors one religion over another through official actions. Their philosophy was one of even-handed treatment of the different faiths practiced in America, a philosophy that was at the very core of what their new nation was to be about. Somehow, this philosophy is often interpreted today to mean that religion has no place at all in public life, no matter what its form. President Reagan summarized the situation well when he remarked, ``The First Amendment of the Constitution was not written to protect the people of this country from religious values; it was written to protect religious values from government tyranny.'' And this is what voluntary school prayer is about, making sure that prayer, regardless of its denomination, is protected. There can be little doubt that no student should be forced to pray in a certain fashion or be forced to pray at all. At the same time, a student should not be prohibited from praying, just because he/she is attending a public school. This straightforward principle is lost on the liberal courts and high-minded bureaucrats who have systematically eroded the right to voluntary school prayer, and it is now necessary to correct the situation through a constitutional amendment. I urge my colleagues to support my amendment and make a strong statement in support of the freedom of religion.

Mrs. EMERSON

Mrs. EMERSON. Mr. Speaker, this afternoon I fulfill the pledge I made to the citizens of southern Missouri to introduce and work tirelessly to pass an amendment to the Constitution of the United States, that requires a balanced Federal budget. Over the course of the past several decades, fiscal irresponsibility has produced a Federal debt that is fast approaching $5 trillion. That's trillion, with a `t,' Mr. Speaker. A debt of $5 trillion is a mind-boggling figure, but it can be placed in a much clearer perspective. A child born today immediately inherits nearly $20,000 of debt, owed directly to Uncle Sam. The same is true for every American. The era of continuing annual budget deficits must end, and it is clear that the only way to restore conservative fiscal values to the Nation's budget is to pass the balanced budget amendment to the Constitution. The stakes in this debate could not be more important. The fiscal future of the United States hinges on the ability of Congress and the President to make the difficult choices required to balance the Federal budget. It's more than debating trillion dollar figures. It's about making our economy stronger and providing every working American family with a better chance to make ends meet. A balanced budget will strengthen every sector of our economy with lower interest rates that will help families stretch each paycheck further. Home mortgages, automobiles, and a better education will become more affordable to every working family, making the American Dream closer to reality for all. Mr. Speaker, I am committed to working with my colleagues in the new Congress to see that the balanced budget constitutional amendment is passed and sent to the States for ratification. A constitutional amendment is certainly no substitute for direct action on the part of the Congress. However, we have seen time and time again instances where those who object to conservative fiscal responsibility find convenient excuses to deny the American people a balanced budget. An unbreakable enforcement mechanism is clearly needed to ensure that those who would continue to spend our children's future further into debt are not able to do so. I also want to make plain that the Social Security trust fund has no place in this debate. The independent trust fund is a sacred trust between generations and must never be used to balance the budget or hide the true size of the deficit. Commonsense conservatives in Congress and the American people are committed to balancing the budget. I look forward to working throughout this session with all of my colleagues and the White House to pass the balanced budget constitutional amendment on a bipartisan basis. The obligations we owe to hard working American families, their children, and our Nation's future generations deserve nothing less than decisive action to preserve our future by balancing the budget. A constitutional amendment will ensure this outcome.

Mrs. EMERSON

Mrs. EMERSON. Mr. Speaker, today I introduce the Notch Baby Act of 2001, which would create a new alternative transition computation formula for Social Security benefits for those seniors born between 1917 and 1926. These seniors, who are generally referred to as ``Notch Babies,'' have been receiving lower monthly Social Security benefits than seniors born the years just prior to or after this ten year period. There are those who dispute the existence of a Notch problem. However, take into consideration the following example presented in a 1994 report by the Commission on Social Security Notch issue. There are two workers who retired at the same age with the same average career earnings. One was born on December 31, 1916 and the other was born on January 2, 1917. Both retired in 1982 at the age of 65. The retiree born 1917 received $110 a month less in Social Security benefits than did the retiree born just two weeks before in 1916. Also take into consideration that there are currently more than 6 million seniors in our Nation who are faced with this painfully obvious inequity in the Social Security benefit computation formula. By phasing in an improved benefit formula over five years, the Notch Baby Act of 2001 will restore fairness and equity in the Social Security benefit computation formula for the Notch Babies. For once and for all this legislation would put to rest the Notch issue, and it would put an end to the constant barrage of mailings and fundraising attempts, which target our Nation's seniors in the name of Notch reform. Our seniors deserve fairness and equality in the Social Security system. They deserve an end to the repeated Congressional stalling on this issue. I urge my colleagues in the House to discuss this issue with the seniors in their districts, and to join me in ensuring that the Notch issue is addressed in the 107th Congress.

Mrs. EMERSON

Mrs. EMERSON. Mr. Speaker, today I introduce a constitutional amendment for the protection of the right to life. Tragically, this most basic human right has been disregarded, set aside, abused, spurned, and sometimes altogether forgotten. Even more tragically, the United States Government has been a willing partner in this affair, and the sad consequence is the sacrifice of something far more important than just principle. One of the things that sets America apart from the rest of the world is the fact that in this country, everyone is equal before the law. Regardless of race, religion, or background, each person has fundamental rights that are guaranteed by the law. However, we too often overlook the rights of perhaps the most vulnerable among us--the unborn. When abortion is legal and available on demand, then where are the rights of the unborn? When abortion is sanctioned and sometimes paid for by the government, then how do we measure the degree to which life has been cheapened? When an innocent life is taken before its time, then how can one say that this is justice in America? My amendment would establish beyond a doubt the fundamental right to life. Congress has an obligation to do what it has failed to do for so long, fully protect the unborn. I urge this body to move forward with this legislation to put an end to a most terrible injustice.

Mrs. EMERSON

Mrs. EMERSON. Mr. Speaker, today I am again introducing legislation to assist the over 6 million senior citizens who have been negatively impacted by the Social Security Amendments of 1977. Seniors born between the years of 1917 and 1926--the Notch Babies--have received lower Social Security monthly payments than those seniors born shortly before or after this ten year period. My legislation, the Notch Baby Health Care Relief Act, will offset the reduction in Social Security benefits by providing a tax credit for Medicare Part B premiums. The approach taken in this bill is different than taken by my Notch Baby Act of 2001 or in any other Notch bill that has been introduced. This legislation is particularly noteworthy because it was suggested to me by one of my constituents--adjust Medicare Part B premiums for senior citizens born between the years 1917 and 1926, their spouses and their widows or widowers. The bill also eliminates the Medicare Part B premium late enrollment penalty for these individuals. As health care expenses can take up a large portion of a senior's retirement income, this tax credit can go a long way to both correct the inequity caused by the Notch and to help seniors meet their health care needs. I urge my colleagues to review the Notch Baby Health Care Relief Act, to discuss this legislation with the seniors in their districts, and to join me in cosponsoring this important legislation.

Mrs. EMERSON

Mrs. EMERSON. Mr. Speaker, today I am introducing legislation that will preserve drug price competition in the wholesale marketplace, prevent the destruction of thousands of small businesses across America and avoid a possible disruption in the national distribution of prescription drugs to nursing homes, doctors offices, rural clinics, veterinary practices and other pharmaceutical end users. As befitting such legislation, I am pleased to note that this bill has cosponsors from both political parties, a number of different committees and many different areas of the country. Our objective is to prevent and correct the unintended consequences to prescription drug wholesalers of a Final Rule on the Prescription Drug Marketing Act (PDMA) issued by the Food and Drug Administration in December 1999. This regulation will require all wholesalers who do not purchase drugs directly from a manufacturer to provide their customers with a complete and very detailed history of all prior sales of the products all the way back to the original manufacturer. Absent such sales history, it will be illegal for wholesalers to resell such drugs. But in a true ``Catch 22'' fashion, the regulation does not require either the manufacturer or the wholesaler who buys directly from the manufacturer to provide this sales history to the subsequent wholesaler. In addition, the wholesaler who does not purchase directly from a manufacturer has no practical way of obtaining all the FDA required information needed to legally resell Rx drugs. The result of this rule will be that most small wholesalers will be driven out of business. The FDA has estimated that there are about 4,000 such secondary wholesalers who are small businesses. The FDA's Final Rule will also upset the competitive balance between drug manufacturers on the one hand and wholesalers and retailers on the other by granting the manufacturers the right to designate which resellers are ``authorized'' and which are not, quite apart from whether the reseller buys directly from the manufacturer or not. The original intent of the PDMA was that wholesalers who purchase directly from manufacturers be authorized distributors, exempt from the requirement to provide the sales history information to their customers. However, the FDA's regulation has separated the designation of an authorized distributor from actual sales of product, and will allow manufacturers to charge higher prices to wholesalers in exchange for designating them as authorized distributors. Drug price competition will also be significantly reduced if thousands of secondary wholesalers are driven out of business. The result of the FDA's regulation will be that consumers and taxpayers will pay even higher prices for prescription drugs. Seems to me that the FDA is protecting the drug companies at the expense of the American public at a time when these companies must be encouraged to lower their outrageous prices so that our seniors and others in need can afford to pay for their medicine. Thus, while the Congress wrestles with difficult questions regarding drug pricing for seniors, expanded insurance coverage for prescription drugs and the like, the PDMA Rules is a drug pricing issue that is relatively uncomplicated, easy to solve and not expensive. The bill would make minor changes in existing language to correct the two problems described above. First, the bill would define an authorized distributor as a wholesaler who purchases directly from a manufacturer, making the definition self-implementing and removing the unfair advantage given to the manufacturer by the regulation. Second, the bill will add language to the statute which will greatly simplify the detailed sales history requirement for most wholesalers. If prescription drugs are first sold to or through an authorized distributor, subsequent unauthorized resellers will have to provide written certifications of this fact to their customers, but will not have to provide the very detailed and unobtainable sales history. For any product not first sold to or through an authorized distributor, a reseller would have to provide the detailed and complete sales history required by the FDA Rule. This would protect consumers against foreign counterfeits or any drugs which did not enter the national distribution system directly from the manufacturer, while eliminating a burdensome and expensive paperwork requirement on thousands of small businesses which has no real health or safety benefit in today's system of drug distribution. My cosponsors and I invite and encourage Members to add their names to this bill and look forward to its prompt enactment this year. Unless the FDA regulation is reopened and significantly modified by the agency, overturned in court or, as I hope, corrected by this bill, wholesalers will have to start selling off their existing inventories as early as May because the products will be unsalable when the regulation goes into effect in December 2001. This forced inventory liquidation will be accompanied by an absence of new orders by thousands of wholesalers, and the result could easily be disruptions in the supply of prescription drugs to many providers and end users. Let us then move quickly to fix this problem and save consumers, taxpayers and thousands of small business men and women across the land from higher drug prices, potential health problems due to supply interruptions and significant economic loss and unemployment.

Mrs. EMERSON

Mrs. EMERSON. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to offer my congratulations to Second Lieutenant Kevin R. White on the occasion of his graduation from Officers Training School. This is a considerable achievement, which I am proud to command to the attention of Congress. Lieutenant White is no stranger to hard work and high achievements. Before graduating from Officers Training School, as an enlisted man he worked toward no less than four different degrees. First he attended and graduated from Georgia Military College in 1989. He then went on to attend the Community College of the Air Force, where he received a degree in Metals Technology in 1991. After that he continued his education by graduating in 1996 from Wayland Baptist University with a B.S. in Occupations Education and graduating from La Verne University in 1999 with a Masters degree in Organizational Management. Throughout his career in the military and in academia, Lieutenant White received a number of awards and honors. He was awarded two Air Force Commendation Medals and one Air Force Achievement Medal. Lieutenant White was named the Third Equipment Maintenance Squadron, Noncommissioned Officer of the Year in 1997 and the Third Equipment Maintenance Squadron Noncommissioned Officer of the 4th quarter in 1997. While fulfilling his military duties, Lieutenant White also excelled in his studies, making the President's list at Wayland Baptist University in 1996. In addition to excelling in the Air Force and working toward a top notch education, Lieutenant White was busy fulfilling many military assignments overseas, such as completing a remote tour of Keflavik, Iceland from 1991 to 1992. Additionally, he spent over 9 years overseas in different countries, including Thailand, Iceland, Singapore, Japan, Norway, and Saudi Arabia. Lieutenant White also found time amidst his many responsibilities to volunteer to be a Big Brother while in Alaska. In fact, he received the Big Brother, Big Sister of the Year Award in 1997. Currently, Lieutenant White takes time out of his busy schedule to coach bowling for participants in the Special Olympics. Lieutenant White has served his community and his country with great distinction. I am honored to pay tribute to his achievements and to recognize his efforts to build a better, stronger America.

Mrs. EMERSON

Mrs. EMERSON. Mr. Speaker, it is with great honor and humility that I submit this tribute into the Congressional Record about a true patriot and hero--Corporal Mason O. Yarbrough, United States Marine Corps, of Sikeston, Missouri. Corporal Yarbrough was part of an elite unit, the 2nd Marine Raider Battalion. This unit, under the command of Lieutenant Colonel Evans. F. Carlson during World War II was known as ``Carlson's Raiders.'' As part of the baby boom generation, I owe a great deal of debt and gratitude to this brave warrior because it was his service and sacrifice that allowed all of us to grow up in a free society. The year 1942 found our nation in grave danger, threatened by both Germany and Japan. Colonel Carlson and his Raiders undertook the second offensive operation of the war against Japan in August of 1942. After extensive training in weapons, hand-to-hand combat and the use of rubber boats, C and D companies of the Marine Raiders were sent to Midway Island. At Midway, they helped the Navy turn back a massive Japanese attack from June 3 through 6, 1942 in what would become the turning point of the Pacific War. A and B companies of Carlson's Raiders, including Yarbrough of B company were earmarked by Adm. Chester Nimitz for an attack August 17, 1942 on Makin in the Gilbert Islands about 1,000 miles northeast of Guadalcanal. Their mission was to destroy the island's small Japanese seaplane base and its garrison, gain intelligence on the area and perhaps more importantly divert Japanese attention and troops from Guadalcanal and Tulagi in the Solomon Islands. There, U.S. troops had landed 10 days earlier to begin the major offensive of the Pacific War. The Japanese were pouring reinforcements into Guadalcanal and Nimitz was looking to a diversionary hit-and-run raid on Makin to ease the pressure. The force of 220 Raiders arrived off Makin in the predawn hours of August 17. They had been ferried from Pearl Harbor aboard the submarines Nautilus and Argonaut, which had stripped and reconfigured their torpedo compartments to make room for the marines. Unlike other units, this group did not have the luxury of naval gunfire support of Naval and Army Air Corps cover. On August 17, 1942 (August 16 local time) fierce fighting ensued and Corporal Yarbrough on his twenty-first birthday was fatally struck down by enemy fire. On August 18, as survivors of ``Carlson's Raiders'' withdrew from the island to rendezvous with the waiting submarines, arrangements were made with a local village chief to bury the bodies of the fallen men. Now, fifty-eight long years after Corporal Yarbrough's heroic action, his remains have been recovered. The Yarbrough family, together with the citizens of Sikeston, Missouri will bid him farewell with a service and burial on December 15, 2000. At 2:19 p.m. on that date, a moment of silence will be observed to honor all nineteen Marine Raiders whose remains were recovered from the Makin mission. This honor will also be extended to the nine Marine Raiders of the Makin raid whose remains are yet to be repatriated, as well as all the MIAs and KIAs from our great nation's wars.

Mrs. EMERSON

Mrs. EMERSON. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of section 1012 of the Launching Our Communities Access to Local Television Act of 2000, title X of the Commerce, Justice, and State, the Judiciary and related agencies appropriations conference report. Section 1012 provides for independent testing of terrestrial technologies in the 12 GHz band. My support for this section is conditioned on the understanding that this provision will not add any delay to any current FCC proceeding. The Satellite Home Viewer's Improvement Act (``SHVIA''), which we passed a year ago, required the FCC to act on applications to provide local television service in unserved and underserved areas. We gave the FCC one year to make its determinations regarding these applications, which at that time had already been pending before the FCC for nearly one year. I am highly aware of the need for local television and broadband services that can be provided by new terrestrial wireless technologies. The deadline for FCC action under SHVIA is fast approaching and I expect the FCC to act on the applications by November 29, 2000 as required. The residents of my rural district have waited too long for service that matches that which is available in our nation's more populated area.

Mrs. EMERSON

Mrs. EMERSON. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of Section 1012 of the Launching Our Communities Access to Local Television Act of 2000, Title X of the Commerce, Justice, and State, the Judiciary and related agencies appropriations conference report. Section 1012 provides for independent testing of terrestrial technologies in the 12 GHz band. My support for this section is conditioned on the understanding that this provision will not add any delay to any current FCC proceeding. The Satellite Home Viewer's Improvement Act (``SHVIA''), which we passed a year ago, required the FCC to act on applications to provide local television service in unserved and underserved areas. We gave the FCC one year to make its determinations regarding these applications, which at that time had already been pending before the FCC for nearly one year. I am highly aware of the need for local television and broadband services that can be provided by new terrestrial wireless technologies. The deadline for FCC action under SHVIA is fast approaching and I expect the FCC to act on the applications by November 29, 2000 as required. The residents of my rural district have waited too long for service that matches that which is available in our nation's more populated areas.

Mrs. EMERSON

Mrs. EMERSON. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of H.R. 782, reauthorization of the Older Americans Act (OAA). I'd like to commend Chairman Bill Goodling, Chairman Buck McKeon, Ranking Member Bill Clay, and all the Members of the Education and Workforce Committee for their hard work on this important bill. Mr. Speaker, after a lifetime of hard work, our retirement years should be the best years of our lives. All Americans should be able to look forward to their golden years as a time for new opportunities and to pursue new learning experiences--no matter what challenges aging may present. Most importantly, each of us should be able to enter into our retirement with the confidence and security that come with knowing that we will not be isolated or forgotten by our communities or government. One of the simplest ways to ensure that all of these goals are met is to reauthorize the Older Americans Act. Unlike funding from many other federal government programs that pay for long term care, OAA funds allow seniors to age with dignity and respect. By linking seniors with a variety of existing federal, state, and local home and community based services, seniors now have the ability to remain in their own homes and communities as they grow older. Some of these services include home-delivered and congregate meals, transportation, employment services, chore and personal care, legal assistance, elder abuse protections, nursing home ombudsman, senior employment, adult day care, senior centers, legal assistance and counseling as well as many other unique programs. Even more importantly, this broad array of services is available in just about every community in the nation. One of the most beneficial OAA programs in my district is the Senior Community Service Employment Program (SCSEP). This program is the nation's only employment and training program aimed exclusively at low- income older Americans. It serves over 90,000 low-income elderly persons every year, keeping them active and involved in their communities, not isolated at home. It provides them with the opportunity to make important contributions to their communities and to learn new skills, while enhancing their sense of dignity and self- esteem. I am very pleased that this bill allows groups like Greenthumb, just one group that helps to administer the SCESEP, to continue the wonderful job they've been doing in placing seniors in worthwhile employment positions. Greenthumb has been especially important to seniors in hard to reach areas--including rural areas like those in my district, and I am glad that H.R. 782 continues to support Greenthumb's important mission. Our nation's seniors have given a lifetime of service. Reauthorizing the Older Americans Act allows us to give back to the seniors who have made our country what it is today, and I urge all my colleagues to support this important legislation.

Mrs. EMERSON

Mrs. EMERSON. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the gentleman from Arkansas for his yielding to me. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Chairman Shuster) for the hard work and leadership the gentleman has provided on this important piece of legislation and ask, along with the gentleman from Arkansas (Mr. Berry), for the gentleman's consideration of including authorizing language for the Delta Regional Authority as WRDA 2000 moves towards a conference committee with the Senate. As the gentleman knows, the Mississippi Delta is home to remarkable history, culture and natural resources, and I am sure proud to represent the wonderful people of this region; however, our Delta communities have not shared in America's prospering economy of the last few years and have historically faced unique economic challenges.

Mrs. EMERSON. Mr. Speaker, the gentleman from Arkansas (Mr. Berry) has led a bipartisan effort to establish the Delta Regional Authority and refocus our efforts on promoting jobs and economic development in the region. His bipartisan proposal is contained in H.R. 2911 and is supported by 21 Republicans and Democrats in the region, including our colleagues, the gentleman from Arkansas (Mr. Dickey) and the gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Gephardt), among others. As WRDA 2000 continues through the legislative process, I hope the gentleman will consider including the urgently needed authorizing language for the Delta Regional Authority.

Mrs. EMERSON. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?

Mrs. EMERSON

Mrs. EMERSON. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize one of my constituents who passed away several years ago after a long, rich life. The community is still impacted by her wonderful example of patience and kindness. I salute Mrs. Roberta Rowe who, 26 years after her passing, will have a park in Sikeston, MO, rededicated to her for her inspirational life. Originally from Georgia, Mrs. Roberta Rowe came to Southeast Missouri with her five children, Mable, Alma, Eloise, Kathryn, and Carlton. She soon became involved in her community as the leader of the Rainbow 4-H Club where she held meetings, arranged educational projects for the members and accompanied the club to Lincoln University every year for the annual state conference. Mrs. Rowe was also an active member in Smith Chapel United Methodist Church throughout her life. She was a kindergarten teacher for the church, and often worked with the children in various activities. You could always find her cheerful spirit at a church function. Always involved with the Bootheel community, Mrs. Rowe traveled with the Community Choir for monthly choir concerts in the African American Churches of the region. Monthly she would go to Benton along with her Smith Chapel friends, Mrs. Rosie Johnson, Mrs. Flora Holt, and Ms. Edna to learn about effective homemaking techniques through the University of Missouri Extension Club. She served as a teen supervisor during the summer, teaching them about lawncare and lawnscaping. Although she did not complete high school herself, she pushed her children to pursue a strong education. Her twins, Carlton and Kathryn, completed college at Lincoln University, and the rest of her children spent time in college as well. Mrs. Rowe's dedication to her family, her church, her community and education should be an inspiration to us all. Those who followed her example learned that ``greatness comes from service.'' It is her greatness that is remembered in Sikeston, and by her family.

Mrs. EMERSON

Mrs. EMERSON. Mr. Speaker, today I congratulate a very special man, Dr. Murray Pritchard of West Plains, Missouri. Dr. Pritchard was recently named Outstanding VA Health Care Provider of the Year at the Veterans of Foreign Wars National Convention held in Las Vegas, Nevada. I am very pleased to honor the distinguished career of Dr. Pritchard and all the contributions he has made to veterans in Southeast Missouri. Dr. Pritchard served this country in the Army during World War II. He was captured in North Africa in February 1943, and spent two years in a prisoner of war camp in Germany. When Dr. Pritchard returned from the war, he went to medical school and became a doctor of osteopathy while also completing a masters degree in public health administration. After several years in private practice, our community was lucky to have him join the staff of the John J. Pershing VA Medical Center in Poplar Bluff in 1973. Dr. Pritchard worked in the outpatient department until he retired in 1985. But retirement didn't last very long. Soon Dr. Pritchard helped lead the innovative process of starting the VA Mobile Clinic program. Many veterans in rural America live 100 miles or more from the closest VA medical center. Traveling to see a doctor, to get a check up, or even to get necessary prescription drugs is a hardship to these men and women. But Dr. Pritchard and the folks at the Poplar Bluff VA wouldn't let distance stop them from giving top-notch care to veterans. If the vets couldn't go to the clinic, Dr. Pritchard made sure the hospital would come to them. On the road about 4 days a week, Dr. Pritchard and his wife make sure that no veteran is left without the necessary, quality health care they deserve and were promised. Dr. Pritchard not only serves the veterans of Southeast Missouri, but he also is concerned with the well being and health of all Americans. When Hurricane Andrew hit southern Florida, Dr. Pritchard headed up a team of health care professionals who took their mobile clinic to help treat the victims of the hurricane. His team helped ease the suffering of about 150 hurricane victims a day in Florida. And if that isn't enough, Dr. Pritchard has many other notable accomplishments such as: holding the post of past commander of the Missouri Association of Former POW's, serving as president of the Missouri Society of American College of General Practitioners in Osteopathic Medicine and Surgery, and as past president of the Association of Military Osteopathic Surgeons. Dr. Pritchard is a dedicated doctor, and a kind and generous human being who answers the call of service to his fellow man. Mr. Speaker, Dr. Murray Pritchard is more than worthy of receiving the honor of Outstanding VA Health Care Provider, and I hope that all of my colleagues will join me today in recognizing this truly remarkable man.

Mrs. EMERSON

Mrs. EMERSON. Mr. Speaker, I am going to address specifically the issue of drug reimportation. Let me say from the outset that I do not think that there is any colleague of mine who believes that reimportation is the only way that we bring lower-cost prescription medicine to our senior citizens. As a matter of fact, it is the first of two things that we must do in order to ensure that our seniors have access to lower-cost prices. This deals specifically with the price issue. Let me say that I am kind of surprised to hear some of my colleagues from the other side use the pharmaceutical industry's own words and agree with them because it was my understanding, it has been my understanding, that most of us did not agree with them at least with regard to the issue of reimportation. And so let me just say that this is something that we have to allow to work. I want to address specifically the issues that all of my colleagues on the other side raised, issues that we worked long and hard over for hundreds of hours, our staffs and us did, in a very bipartisan way. First of all, the issue of labeling specifically as the gentleman from California (Mr. Waxman), the gentleman from Vermont (Mr. Sanders) and others mentioned it. I will say at the beginning, the Senate passed the Jeffords bill by a wide majority in the Senate. The President said, ``Send me the Jeffords language.'' The labeling language in the Jeffords bill is identical word for word to that which is in our bill today. The President says, ``I urge you to send me the Senate legislation with full funding to let wholesalers and pharmacists bring affordable prescription drugs to neighborhoods where our seniors live.'' In addition to that, let me add that we included language in our conference report that allowed the Secretary to promulgate regulations that would serve as a means to facilitate the importation of such products, so this would allow the Secretary to head off any labeling concerns that would prevent the importation of drugs. Even yesterday, the Supreme Court refused to hear a case that SmithKline Beecham was bringing against a generic drug maker on the whole issue of labeling, and the lower court, the Second Circuit Court's language holds on that and says that the Food and Drug Administration has the discretion to make labeling possible and necessary. So that is a nonissue. I would like to then turn to the issue of contracts where my colleagues on the other side are saying that there is some sort of a loophole. Our language says that no manufacturer of a covered product may enter into a contract or agreement that includes a provision to prevent the sale or distribution of covered products imported pursuant to subsection whatever. When you look at the language that the gentleman from California (Mr. Waxman) provided, which we did have, I admit, in the original bill, there is nothing in his language, either, that actually deals with the issue of price. So by limiting the language to the definition that we had in the Waxman language, quite frankly the industry could find other ways around that language, and so this then becomes, too, a nonissue. For anybody to say that the pharmaceutical companies wrote this language, they know as well as I do that that simply is not true, specifically when we are dealing with the issue of contracting and other things. I also want to address the issue of sunsetting. All of the bipartisan, bicameral negotiators on this bill agreed to a 5-year sunset with the exception of one person. So to raise this as an issue to me is just simply demagoguery and it will not work. This bill will sunset 5 years after the regulations are put into place. And so I would just simply urge my colleagues to vote yes on the rule, pass this bill, remembering this is only the first step in giving our senior citizens low-cost prescription drugs.

Mrs. EMERSON

Mrs. EMERSON. Mr. Speaker, the judge said that they hold that the Hatch-Waxman amendments that already exist to the Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act require the labeling be used, be given by the drug manufacturer to the generic which means then, or to the reimporter in our particular case, and that it is not an infringement of copyright liability and, therefore, the drug company will have to provide the labeling under the discretion of the FDA. The FDA has broad discretion in this area and, therefore, all of that is covered in the language that exists in the bill that we are about to vote to pass.

Mrs. EMERSON. I yield to the gentleman from Minnesota.