Bob Etheridge

Mr. ETHERIDGE

Mr. ETHERIDGE. Mr. Speaker, pursuant to clause 1, rule I, I demand a vote on agreeing to the Speaker's approval of the Journal.

Mr. ETHERIDGE. Mr. Speaker, I object to the vote on the ground that a quorum is not present and make the point of order that a quorum is not present.

Mr. ETHERIDGE

Mr. ETHERIDGE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support and admiration of my hometown team, the Carolina Hurricanes, who, after just 5 years in North Carolina, made it to the Stanley Cup finals this year. The Hurricanes represented North Carolina well. They fought hard, they played fair, and they never gave up. Their strength and determination showed the true mettle that champions are made of. Even though our 'Canes could not bring the cup home this year, they took the city of Raleigh, the area and really the whole State on a very exciting ride. The entire region has been swept up in the fervor of the quest for the cup and the sport of hockey. Raleigh, North Carolina, long known for basketball, is now most definitely a hockey town. Just last week, over 6,000 people turned out to say ``thank you'' to the team and welcome them back home. The 'Canes' rise to the top of the hockey elite has also given the world a glimpse of what those of us from North Carolina have known for a long time. Raleigh is one of the most vibrant and exciting cities in the world, and the whole Triangle region is a wealth of innovative technology, business and industry. I am proud to represent North Carolina and proud of the Carolina Hurricanes.

Mr. ETHERIDGE

Mr. ETHERIDGE. Mr. Speaker, today I rise to pay tribute to one of North Carolina's favorite sons, Colonel Wiley Edwin ``Bud'' Andrews, upon his retirement from the North Carolina National Guard. Theodore Roosevelt, our nation's 25th President and a member of the National Guard, once said: It is not the critic who counts . . . The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred by dust; sweat and blood; who strives valiantly . . . who knows the great enthusiasm, the great devotions who spends himself in a worthy cause; who . . . knows in the end the triumph of higher achievement. For thirty-two years and five months Colonel Andrews has actually been in that arena, Mr. Speaker, as he has served in our nation's military. As a member of the National Guard, Colonel Andrews has participated in a number of important emergency response efforts and has helped spread and foster democracy through his work in the former Soviet Republic of Moldova. Since he joined the National Guard at the age of 20, Colonel Andrews has become a decorated and experienced guard member. He began his military career as a Medical Platoon Leader and quickly rose through the ranks to be a Finance Maintenance Battalion Commander and finally serving as Deputy Commander of the United States Property and Fiscal Office. Indeed, Colonel Andrews has served his state and nation with distinction and devotion through two deployments to South Korea and by negotiating the Memorandum of Understanding with Moldova. In addition to his many awards and accomplishments, he is also a graduate of the prestigious U.S. Army War College. Now, at the close of his military career, Colonel Andrews is truly an example of ``the triumph of higher achievement.'' In his retirement, Colonel Andrews will not step out of the arena of which President Roosevelt so eloquently spoke. Bud is, and will continue to be, an integral part of Johnston County and the town of Smithfield where he lives. After rising to the rank of Eagle Scout and his graduation from Campbell University, Bud became President of the Capital City Jaycees in Raleigh. In Johnston County, Bud became a State Vice President for Community Affairs of the North Carolina Jaycees and a Jaycee International Senator. Bud has further served his community as President of the Johnston County Young Democrats, the Downtown Smithfield Development corporation, and the Greater Smithfield-Selma Chamber of Commerce. Bud has also had a successful career as a Vice President and Commercial Banker for the First Bank and Trust Company. Currently, he is serving as Chairman of the Johnston County Tourism Authority. Clearly, Bud's ``great enthusiasm'' for community service has yielded great results for Johnston County and the town of Smithfield. Mr. Speaker, the National Guard is one of the most respected and reliable military forces in the world, and Colonel Bud Andrews has been a vital part of the North Carolina Guard's success. On behalf of a grateful state, and nation, I thank him for his selfless service to his country, and wish him all the best in his future endeavors. May God's strength, peace, and joy be with him always.

Mr. ETHERIDGE

Mr. ETHERIDGE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to voice my reluctant opposition to H.R. 2143. Mr. Speaker, I own a small farm and at one time was a small business owner. Therefore, I am fully aware of how estate taxes make it harder for parents to leave a legacy to their children, whether it is in the form of money, land, or a business. Throughout my service in Congress, I have been a strong supporter of estate tax relief for family farmers and small business owners. The first bill I introduced as a Member of Congress was a bill to raise the inheritance tax exemption from $600,000 to $1.5 million and indexed it to inflation for the first time. When a similar provision was included in the Taxpayer Relief Act of 1997, I introduced another proposal to provide further estate tax relief for those who inherit family owned farms and small businesses, by providing an estate tax exemption of $4 million. Last year, I even voted for H.R. 8, the Death Tax Elimination Act of 2001, to repeal the estate tax entirely by 2010. When I supported H.R. 8, our country was expecting continuing budget surpluses for years to come. However, the unfortunate reality of our situation is that we have witnessed--in just one year--the most dramatic fiscal reversal in the history of our nation. Last year's projected budget surpluses have disappeared, and our nation is now drowning in red ink with ever-growing budget deficits and increasing federal debt. Certainly, the severe economic downturn and the cowardly terrorist attack our nation experienced contributed to our country's dire fiscal position. However, the primary culprit is the risky, irresponsible tax scheme the Republican Congress enacted last year; the same plan that provided for only a one-year repeal of the estate tax. According to the Administration's own budget figures, that tax scheme is responsible for the nearly two trillion dollars in new debt the country faces within the next 10 years. As my record shows, I support providing estate tax relief, but not at the expense of our senior citizens who benefit from Social Security and Medicare. The only way to pay for this bill before us is by taking more money out of the Social Security and Medicare Trust Funds and replacing it with more IOUs. Making the repeal permanent at this time will compound the fiscal mistakes Congress made last year and make it nearly impossible for us to ensure that Social Security and Medicare will still be available when the baby boom generation retires. In addition, instead of truly eliminating the inheritance tax, the bill imposes new capital gains taxes and record-keeping requirements on individuals acquiring inherited property. This bill requires the increased value of estates to be tracked over time so that capital gains taxes can be paid. This will place enormous capital gains taxes and record-keeping burdens on the heirs of estates that may be decades old. We need is to come together and chart a new path toward fiscal responsibility. That is why I am supporting the Democratic substitute authored by Rep. Pomeroy. This substitute provides an estate tax exemption of $3 million for individuals and $6 million for couples beginning January 1, 2003. This plan will exempt 99.7% of estates from the estate tax and cost less than half than a full repeal. In addition, the substitute repeals the Republican capital gains provisions that impose new burdens upon heirs. Working together, we can move toward balanced budgets and away from bigger budget deficits; pay down the national debt; save Social Security and Medicare funds for older Americans and not for other purposes; maintain America's leadership in science and technology; invest in education, health care and other initiatives that enable people to make the most of their lives; and provide for a permanent estate tax repeal. Passing H.R. 2143 at this time is inconsistent with these goals and fiscal responsibility; therefore, I oppose the bill and will wait for the day that fiscal sanity returns to Congress.

Mr. ETHERIDGE

Mr. ETHERIDGE. I thank my colleague, the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Davis), and I would say to him that his comments here on the floor and the comments as Members speak and acknowledge great teachers that made a difference in their lives, honors those teachers in a very special way, and all of us could stand up and acknowledge those people who have made a difference. As the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Davis) mentioned about compensating teachers, it is important that we do a better job of it because they want their children to go to college. They want to own a home. They would like to have a nice car. And in some places in this country, they who are some of the more educated people in the communities cannot even send their children to the schools where the people who educate their children do. And that is not right in America and we have got to change that and we can do better. The number one security threat, though, to our schools is a lack of adequate infrastructure. Let me talk about that just for a minute. My colleague from Illinois (Mr. Davis) alluded to it a few moments ago talking about the communities that really have some of the resources and others who do not because in many of America's communities, school buildings are old and unfortunately because of the resources of those communities, they are neglected and falling apart and they do not have the kind of quality infrastructure that would make a difference. We send in children into buildings, and I have often said in my communities as I have moved around, and I think it is still true, that we have prisons in this country that we as members of this United States Congress helped build and pay for that are a whole lot nicer than the buildings we send our children to. That is wrong. It is not wrong that we have the prisons. It is wrong that we have better facilities for them than we do for our children. We have it within our power to do something about that, and I am going to talk about that more in a minute because we come on this floor and argue about issues and policies, and many of them are short term, built to get to the next election, but I am here to tell everyone this issue is far beyond the next election. This is about the next generation and the future of this country, and I think the American people are going to hold some folks accountable for not living up to this part of the bargain because the average school in this country is over 40 years old. If the average is 40, then one can imagine how old some of those buildings are. Some of them were built shortly after the turn of the century and some are approaching 100 years of age. The age is not the issue. The condition is what is the problem. Fifteen million American children currently attend what has been classified as substandard facilities. If these were prisons in the country or if they were jails, because of the codes we have in America, we close prisons and we close jails and we are forced to build them, but there is nothing that says we cannot send a child to a substandard facility, and children, in my opinion, are not as safe as they can be in substandard schools. And they certainly are inviting targets for would-be terrorists, either foreign or domestic, in some of these cases, and let me tell why, and I am going to use my congressional district, which I think is a very progressive district and I am sure other members would probably say the same thing, but certainly they are. Our State passed a $6.2 billion State bond issue in 1996 and the counties that I am getting ready to cite have raised revenue and built buildings every year, I know, for the last 10 or 12 years, and part of their challenge is they are growing so rapidly, they cannot keep up. The biggest challenge is school overcrowding, certainly in my congressional district, and I am sure it is true in a number of the others, and use of temporary trailers or substitutes for quality classrooms. Why is that an issue? There are several reasons. One is they are isolated from the rest of the building. In many cases they do not have shelters. They go out to the classrooms in the morning or the afternoon and it is raining or it is cold in the wintertime, they are losing instruction time. The teachers have children put a coat on to go to the bathroom or to go to the cafeteria or to the library. Members get the idea. It is just a challenge, and there are not many businesses in this country that allow their business to operate under those conditions, and yet we send our children to them and we say to the teachers we want them to send them back to us all A students, and if they do not, we are going to hold them accountable. I do not have any problem holding people accountable for the job they do. I think we ought to hold them accountable and we ought to have high standards, but we ought to have the gumption, as some of my friends would say, to put the quality facilities there to get the job done and put the resources there so they will have the tools to teach with. Mr. Speaker, in and around the Triangle region of the Raleigh area where I represent, our schools are literally bursting at the seams. Despite the best effort of local, as I have already said, and State officials, our school systems are finding themselves swamped by rapidly increasing enrollment forced on by growth. Many people have moved to the area to find good jobs because we have seen a lot of growth over the last several years, and they have had to put children in trailers. In my home county, as an example, Western Harnett High School now packs students and teachers into 22 trailers, 22. Multiply that by 25 to 28 students, and my colleagues get an idea of how many young people are outside the main building. They have to go somewhere else to go to bathroom. They have to go to the cafeteria, anywhere else they want to go, and in high school, remember, they change classes every hour if they are on a regular schedule. If they are on a block schedule, it may be every hour and a half or two hours. So there is a lot of movement and a lot of people outside the building. Think of the security challenges that a high school principal faces in those conditions. They just are not big enough to handle the load. These young people are really young adults, and they are in facilities that are not what they ought to be. Next year, school leaders on this campus, now it already has 22, are going to have to add six more because the community is growing so rapidly. Someone said, well, are they doing anything? They are getting ready to build a new high school, but the point is that is happening all across our States and many places in America. Among all the schools in Harnett County, we have 122 trailers. Next door in Johnston County, a county that I grew up in, the school leaders have been forced to employ 169 trailers. That is how fast they are growing, and they are building new schools every year. Four Oaks Elementary alone has 16 trailers. Three-fourths of the schools in Johnston County have at least one trailer, and the story is the same all across the district because it is growing so rapidly. Local and State leaders have stepped up to the plate and they have built new schools, but the enrollment growth is so rapid that many of these new schools are overcrowded the day they open. Across the State of North Carolina, we have more than 1,500 trailers today in use, and that number is growing, despite the best efforts of local governments and State government to put money in at a time when they are really feeling the pinch with the economic downturn. Overcrowded schools and trailers, they are not as safe as brick and mortar, we know that. I do not want to send anyone into a panic because their children attend school in a trailer, but any principal, if he is being honest, will tell someone that security is severely diminished by the use of trailers because they are outside the main building, they do not have the kind of control, and certainly they raise the risk of security around the building. As Congress thoroughly examines our Nation's security needs in the wake of September 11, we must not fail now because we did and we have spent money and we continue to do as we should have. We must not fail to provide assistance to get students out of trailers and into more safe and secure permanent buildings, and we can do it. Some of my colleagues say, well, Congress ought not to do it. Let me remind them. We spend money on a lot of stuff. We build schools overseas. We build prisons here at home. I just want somebody to tell me why we cannot build school buildings because there is a bill to do it. In our State and in our local areas, we have issued a record number of bonds to finance school construction in recent years. We did it when I was superintendent. Congress and the administration now can help provide the kind of leadership to deal with this pressing issue if they will only decide to do it across this country. At a similar time in our Nation's history where we were seeing tremendous growth and the challenge to our public schools, America faced unprecedented school age population growth with the onset of the baby boomers, and when did this happen? It really happened in the 1950s, after World War II, and at that time there was a Republican president who had been an American general that led us through World War II. He responded to the challenge with a proposal worth of $9 billion in current dollars for the Federal Government to assist with school construction. So I do not want my colleagues on either side of the aisle saying this Congress is unprecedented, and we spend money. This was a Republican president. It was not a Democratic president. He understood there was a need. It was not about party. It was about ideology. It was about building a future for America, and there are a lot of young men and women in this country who are today adults who went to school in these buildings that were paid for by the Federal Government. President Dwight David Eisenhower really was an American hero. That is why both parties tried to recruit him. The Republicans got him. He ran for president, but he was not afraid to provide the needed leadership on the domestic front. He understood it. Let me repeat it again. He understood that if we are going to be a strong Nation and we are going to be prepared for the future, we had to have a strong domestic economy, and on school construction, President Eisenhower said, ``Without impairing in any way the responsibilities of our States, localities, communities or families, the Federal Government can and should serve as an effective catalyst in dealing with this problem.'' The president was right then, and we now need that same kind of leadership once again. Here in the U.S. House, my colleagues and I are working to provide that same kind of leadership. We have endorsed H.R. 1076, the America's Better Classroom Act. This legislation will provide Federal tax credits to the holders of school construction bonds to help leverage precious resources at the local level. H.R. 1076 will help provide more than $22 billion in school construction bonds across this country, and this is a bipartisan piece of legislation. It is not partisan. It will work to build new school buildings, alleviate overcrowding, strengthen security and improve education in the United States of America. Mr. Speaker, my colleagues and I have worked for several years to pass a similar piece of legislation. We now have 226 cosponsors on this piece of legislation, and I implore the Republican leadership of this House tonight to allow this bill to come out of the committee and come to the House floor. It is an urgent national problem, and it needs to be addressed. President Bush, who is doing a fine job on the war against terrorism and has shown leadership on other education issues, has unfortunately ignored the school construction crisis facing this country. Mr. Speaker, the American people deserve better. The American people deserve quality schools for their children. Their children are the most precious resource they have. Talk is cheap. It takes action and it takes responsibility, and the American people deserve the peace of mind that quality, secure schools will provide. I am proud to work with my Democratic colleagues, and yes, Republican colleagues who will join us, to support innovative solutions to this important issue. School construction is an important part of this agenda. In addition to school construction, there are a great many other educational issues that this Congress needs to address. Over the last several weeks, we have challenged several proposals, one that floated out of the administration, to change college students' loan rates. To their credit, they pulled it back after we raised the issue, that it would cost those students and their parents considerably more. I have had the great privilege to serve at the local level, the State level, and now at the national level. And it never fails that whenever budgets get tight, some people insist on putting education on the chopping block. That is distressful because that truly is our future. But I know too well that you cannot strengthen education on the cheap. Also, it would be less than honest if I did not acknowledge that there are areas that we need to pay attention to. Where there are areas that need to have trimming and cutting back, we should do that. Everyone should acknowledge that; and we should not allow anyone, I do not care who they are, what position they hold, or where they are, to misspend public education money for our children and misrepresent the funding sources that they would be using. Because I happen to believe that when you cut education, you pay a heavy price. I grew up in a rural farm community; and I always say that when you cut education, it is as dumb as eating your seed corn. Because you always save the best corn to plant the next year. Some people in this town may not understand that reference, but back home, folks understand that eating your seed corn is not a smart idea if you hope to have a crop next year. And the same is true with our children. It is sort of an old cliche, but it is so true when we talk about our children, that they are our future. I expect if you ask most parents, they would, if they were open and honest, and most of them are, they would say to us that they could get along with a whole lot less than they do, if they had to. Because we all really, I think it is true of me and my wife, most of us want things better for our children. And that is why we work hard, because we want to make sure they are successful and they have the opportunity for a bright future. That is why the budget resolution that the majority pushed through this body a couple of months ago now contained many, I think, very misguided proposals and misplaced priorities that I think were wrong for this country. And education was caught in that crossfire. The Republican leadership's budget resolution cut $90 million in education funds from President Bush's own proposal that was just recently enacted, the No Child Left Behind Act. If you are going to have a program and you are going to ask people to live by high standards, and I think we need to have that, if we are going to ask them to do the kind of assessment to know where children are and help them get better, we have to give them the tools to get the job done, especially at a time when we are seeing almost 40 States, I think over 40 States in this country, facing budget crisis. If we do not live up to our part of the bargain, they are probably going to figure out right quick that we did not really mean it. Because they are not going to do it, and then we will be worse off than we were when we started. And I think that budget was misguided. The budget resolution also cut Pell grants for colleges, cut safe and drug-free schools by $200 million, improving teacher quality by $105 million, education technology by $134 million, and also eliminated 28 important educational efforts, such as dropout prevention, rural education, an area that is really hurting because of the disparate resources there, civics education, and numerous technology and training programs. It is important that we live up to our commitment at this level. Because if we do not, even though the Federal Government only puts in, depending on the local jurisdiction, 6 to 7 percent, and in North Carolina it is probably no more than about 7 percent of the total budget because the bulk of it is State and local, that is an important piece of money because it sends a powerful signal. It says that this is a priority at the national level; we really do believe in what you are doing, and here is how we want to help those who have fallen behind. Historically, Federal monies have been to help those who had needs in specific areas, by and large children with special needs, which we really are not meeting that obligation. We originally said we were going to pay a substantial amount more than we are now paying. We are paying 20 percent, and we should be paying more like 60 that we committed to. But these kinds of shortsighted cuts are wrong for our children, and they really are wrong for my home State and I think for the other States who are struggling to meet the needs and who really want to make a difference in children's lives. I just hope that as this session moves on, and we are now getting into moving into the appropriations process of the budget, which will be coming up in the next several weeks, that we will correct some of these problems; that we will put the resources in that are needed so that teachers can teach and they will have the resources to meet their needs. Because if we do not put in the resources that we need and we put the mandates in for the things we want them to do, and then we threaten to hold back other monies if they do not live up to that obligation, what we do, the people we hurt the most are not the wealthy school systems in this country. They may be getting few of the resources on a percentage basis to the budget than a lot of others, but the ones who are really getting hurt are the children, in most cases, who are the most vulnerable, those in the poorest school systems, the children with special needs who get some of the money. All those areas that are on the edge are the very youngsters that we are going to need to help. So I think sometimes we do not really understand when we pull the cord and not put the resources in place. Mr. Speaker, it has been my experience in the few years I have been here that we put together a lot of words, and talk is awful cheap. But at a time when we spend a lot of time back and forth about appropriations and budgets and so on, a lot of stuff gets lost in the sound and fury of the debate. But at the end of the day it really is about budget and spending choices that we have to make that really defines the kinds of priorities that we ought to have, and they really express our values as a Congress and as a people. I trust that in the next several weeks that we will show that we really do value education, because we know that lifetime learning is the key to the American dream for every family, middle class, wealthy, and those who are struggling to get into the middle class. As I said earlier, in today's global economy, America's international competitiveness is absolutely dependent on our people's ability to perform knowledge-based jobs that produce the best products and services in the world. And if we are going to continue to compete, we had better be about making sure the next generation of Americans in this new economy of this Information Age can be able to earn based on what they have learned. And it is so true. It is as true today as it was last year; but it will be more so over the next 10, 20, 30, 40, 50 years. And so we have been trying to get Congress to give higher priority to strengthening our public schools, really our neighborhood schools; and by doing that they will demonstrate how much we value the education of our children and how much we care about the communities we live in. It is irresponsible, in my opinion, to talk about how much we value education and how much we care about the future and about our children when we come to this floor and squander the opportunity to make a difference and not put the resources in place to help our children be successful. In conclusion, Mr. Speaker, let me say that both our immediate and our long-term security needs depend on our investment in education. It is as critical today as it has ever been in the history of this country. You have heard others talk earlier about a number of things, but it is about looking at the future and how do we, as Members today, help those teachers in the classroom and the administrators teach our children to make decisions for tomorrow. We cannot allow children to be continually placed at risk by being condemned to less than quality facilities, and that same thing would be true for curriculum and instruction. That means we have to put the resources in where we can. We cannot put them all in. We will never have enough, I realize that. But it has to be a partnership, and a true partnership with State, locals, and, yes, with the private sector to make sure that teachers get the skilled training they need and the ongoing training. Too many times we say to these professionals, you are professionals, we believe in you; and yet, when they walk out of the classroom and they need to get their certificates renewed or upgraded, they have to take it out of their own meager salaries to pay for it. We do not do that in any other profession I am aware of that pays that kind of wage in this country, but we do it to teachers. And that is wrong. We can do better, and we ought to be doing better. I think America is looking to Congress to provide leadership on these urgent national priorities, and I trust that not only my Democratic colleagues but my Republican colleagues will also join me. I certainly can say to you that I stand ready to help deliver on that because I think it is critical to the future of this country. We will not get many more opportunities. Even though these are challenging times and resources are tight, if we spend them wisely, we can have a very bright tomorrow. Our children will inherit a better country, and our democracy will be safe and secure. I really believe that an educated citizenry is important to maintaining a democracy. We have seen it around the world. When we do not have quality education, we are in trouble. I will close with this, Mr. Speaker. If we want to look at Afghanistan as a place, the first thing they did was shut down the schools. Of course, the first thing they did was oppress the women and then they shut down the schools. But the truth is if you poison the minds of young people and do not give them an opportunity, your future is pretty grim. We are not going to let that happen in America. We are going to work together to make it better. We have the chance, we have limited resources, but we can target them, we can build better schools, we can help those teachers in the classrooms who are telling children about the better world they will have. Someone has said if you want a better world, tell a child, they will build it.

Mr. ETHERIDGE. Mr. Speaker, I want to take this time, and I will be joined by some of my colleagues a little later, I hope, to talk on this special order on the floor this evening about a very important issue facing this country today, maybe one of the key issues. Everyone talks about my issue is more important, or that issue is more important. But the truth is, when we are talking about the future of America, that issue is education, because that is the one issue that not only helps us this week, this year, next year, but really secures our future when we are headed into the 21st century and the challenges we face. This group of young people in our schools today will determine the kind of future we are going to have. So many times I get perplexed when I have my colleagues come to this floor, and I really sense, number one, that they have not visited a school recently; or if they have been to a school, that they did not go into the classrooms; and if they went into a classroom, they probably did not pay attention to what they were seeing or listening to from the teacher, or they were not looking into the eyes of some of the very bright children who were in those classrooms struggling to learn in conditions, in many cases, that Members of this body would not want to be in every day. They are overcrowded, and in the summertime they are hot, and in the wintertime they may be cold. Or they are in a trailer outside, and if it is raining, they walk through the rain to get to the classroom, or walk through any kind of inclement weather. First, this evening, let me talk about some very positive things, some good things that are happening in our public schools. As this hour goes on, I will talk about more of them. Let me first talk about some schools in my district, something I know about, and in North Carolina. I had the occasion over the last couple of weeks, and I make an effort to visit schools about every week, but I went to a school down in part of my district, Anderson Creek Elementary, and visited with the principal, Ms. Cobb, and an awful lot of the teachers and students. They have a program where they encourage children to read. It is really a kindergarten through about fourth grade reading program. Some of the schools I am going to mention actually do it in the higher grades. She got those young people so excited about reading by giving them certificates and tee shirts, and getting the parents involved through kindergarten, that those youngsters in that school, and there are about roughly 700 elementary school students, over 545 of them read at least 100 books. They had read a total of over 155,000 books this year; probably more than that by now. When we talk about good things, those are the kinds of things that make a difference. Because if a youngster learns to read and they learn to do math and they learn to communicate, that will make a difference. They will be successful students. I went to North Harnett Elementary the same day, where the leading reader in that school had read 410 books. It is amazing to me that a youngster would read 410 books and still do his or her homework. At Anderson Creek, they had one student who read 545 books. The children in that school had read a substantial number. It is sort of contagious. These are good things happening in Harnett County. Lafayette Elementary, the same thing. They went in, had an assembly, and they honored the students. Their program was titled Reading Around the World, where they actually put flags of nations around the world about which the youngsters had read. They got involved. They had tee shirts and they got certificates, and they honored top readers. These are the things we do not hear a lot about, but we always hear people critical of those people who are giving so much time in the classroom who really are creative, innovative, and thinking about how do we make things better for children. Then I went to Cleveland Elementary School, a school in the community I grew up in. The same kind of thing: a very caring principal and assistant principal, with an awful lot of hard-working, focused teachers. They were doing the program not only in reading, but in a number of other areas, and they were giving out certificates. Children were really and truly getting ready to build a strong foundation for the future, things we were not doing 10 or 20 years ago. I went over to East Clayton Elementary School over near Clayton, and the same kind of thing: a very focused principal providing great leadership, and teachers who were caring, creative, and making a difference. I only mention these schools because they are representative not only of just schools in my congressional district or in my State of North Carolina, but I happen to think they are representative of teachers and students and principals and administrators all across this country. Do we have problems? Sure. Do we need to improve? Absolutely. But they are about making a difference. This is the way we improve it. I have learned a long time ago that if we want to improve education, we lay out a plan, we work with the people, and we give them encouragement. It is awful easy to be critical. It is a lot like a little poem I use many times, and I think my colleagues would benefit from that, because it reminds me of being an architect. It takes a long time to go to school to be an architect. It takes a number of years. But the last time I checked, if we want to hire somebody to tear a building down, we can put them in a machine and put a ball at the end of a chain and we can knock it down pretty quick. ``I watched them tear a building down, A gang of men in a busy town. With a ho heave ho and a lusty yell, They swung a beam and a side wall fell. I asked the foreman, are these men skilled, The kind you would hire if you had to build? He smiled and said, `No, indeed, Common labor is all I need, For I can wreck in a day or two What people have taken years to do.' And I thought to myself as I went my way, Which of these roles have I tried to play? Have I been a builder who builds with care, Carefully measuring the world by the rule or a square, Or have I been content to roam the town, Content with the business of tearing down?'' Too many times we have people who unfortunately are willing to tear down, but are not willing to help be architects. We not only need architects to build buildings, we need architects in our classrooms. We have them in teachers; we need more. Yes, we need resources to help train them better, because the needs for our teachers are changing every day. I think that is the key issue in education, is that we give encouragement where it is needed. Certainly, we give counsel when it is not working out. If we have people who are not doing the job, then we need to take appropriate action, like we would do in any other area. But we ought to acknowledge when our teachers and our administrators and people who work with our children every day are doing a good job. Let me just share with Members, if I may, before I get to some prepared remarks, I read an article recently that I want to just read some pieces out of. It is by Gerald Bracey, and it was in The Washington Post. I think it is right on target when we are talking about education. It says, ``Why do we scapegoat the schools?'' I could not help but think, there is a lot of truth in this. I think I know a little bit about this. I said to my colleagues when they came here, I served as State superintendent of schools of North Carolina for 8 years. That is an elective office in North Carolina, like the governor and some others. There is one thing I learned. We may not know all the answers of what to do, but I know some of the things that do not work. Sometimes that is worth an awful lot. Gerald Bracey made this point: ``There is no pleasing some people, even when they get what they want. So why do we keep listening to them? For more than 20 years now, people have been bashing our schools.'' He goes all the way back to the time when the Russians put up the Sputnik, and we got all carried away in this country and said our math and science programs are in shambles, our schools are failing us, our schools need to be fixed, so we put together a program. Lo and behold, with President Kennedy's focus and commitment, and yes, this Congress, the House and Senate put in resources behind it, and I emphasize, resources, and translated, that is money behind it, we put a man on the moon before the end of the decade. But Bracey goes on to say, we didn't say to the public schools, you are no longer in crisis, you have done a good job. You make this happen. Then all of a sudden, we walked along, and they did not get credit for what they had done. We stayed quiet. All of a sudden, after that happened, he said that there was no declaration that the crisis in education was over, and the question was raised, do pigs fly? Translated, that is that we did not give them the credit; it was assumed they had to do it. He goes on to talk about, again, he says, ``I don't mean to suggest, of course, that America's public schools are perfect. The dreary state of some urban and poor rural school systems is well documented.'' I would agree with that. He said, ``But I have been following the anguish over our competitive capabilities since the '83 report, and I've noticed the same pattern. In the early nineties, as the economy tanked and the recession set in, many variations of `Lousy schools are producing a lousy work force and it is killing us in the global market' could be heard, but those slackards somehow managed to turn things around. By early 1994, many publications featured banner headlines about the recovery that later became the longest sustained period of economic growth in the Nation's history. And then, `The American economy, back on top,' was the way that The New York Times summed up the turnaround in February of 1994.'' Well, did the public schools have anything to do with that? Were the people that were employed in those businesses all of a sudden better 2 years later than they were 2 years before? Did we give them any credit for that happening? No. They continued to be hammered. He goes on to say, ``Looking at a number of the different rankings of schools and school reports, the United States looked particularly bad in one DEF category: the difference in quality between rich and poor schools. We finished 42nd lower than any other developed nation, which is shameful for a rich nation.'' So if 26 nations had better schools, how did we wind up being number 2 in competitive ranking of all the nations in the world? The DEF used dozens of variables in many sectors, and the United States ranks well across the board. One important consideration is the brain drain factor. Our scientists and engineers stay here, earning us a top ranking in that category. Other nations of the world who send young people to the United States to be educated, and certainly we have received or we have been the beneficiary of that for a number of years, they come here and many of them stay in the United States, and they make their contributions here. We as a society and as a people have been beneficiaries of their coming to America and getting their educations here. It has made a difference. I only share this because I think this article is a good article for me to segue into the comments I want to make this evening, because I think there are some good things. There are a lot of good things about our public schools. I think the American public cares very deeply about our public schools. We have roughly 53 million young people in this country in the public schools of America. Depending on what State one is in, that may range from roughly 93 or 94 percent in North Carolina to where some States, maybe a little lower, we probably have 95 instead of 94, and some States less because they have more parochial schools. The bottom line is, the bulk of the students in this country are in the public school sector, and historically they have gotten a good education. The challenge we face today in the 21st century is a much different challenge than we faced 50 or even 100 years ago, or even 25 years ago, for that matter. The world is a different place. We are technology- driven, by and large. We want every child to be able to make it. We do not have the luxury that we had 30 or 40 years ago where we could educate the top 20 percent, the rest of them could get a job on the production line. Those jobs in industry, wherever it may be, or even on the farm, for that matter, wherever they work, are really tied to technology. Many of the jobs around this country and increasingly around the globe are tied to technology; and that is why we need our young people better educated today than ever in the history. And that is why we look to the public schools and we are challenging them. Parents are, rightly so, looking at their community. That is why when you see survey after survey, if you look at the rankings, and I have had occasion to follow them for a number of years now, by and large parents tend to rate the schools that their children attend fairly high. They usually get a B or higher for the schools their children attend. And if you look at schools, in general, they tend to get a much lower ranking. Why is that so? I think the reason is that parents and the people in that community are familiar with those schools where their children go. They know the teachers. They know what happens in that school, so they get a much higher ranking. They do not know about all these other schools. What they hear about these schools is general information that is shared, be it accurate or inaccurate, so they tend to process it. If they tell them schools are bad and they hear public officials continue to say it, they will say, My school is good. I think it has a lot to do with the same kind of ranking with Members in this body. They say Congress in general, we really do not have that high of numbers; but if you ask about a Member that represents in a district, he is a pretty good guy or lady. I know him. They represent us well. I think that is reflected in that as well. Let me move now to some of the issues I want to talk about, and I am joined now by some of my colleagues, and I will call on them in just a minute, the gentleman from Chicago, Illinois (Mr. Davis), who really has been a tremendous leader in education in this body. But I would like to begin tonight by talking about why education is such an urgent national issue, and it really is. Since September 11 we have all been heavily focused on the issues regarding our national security, and I think that is appropriate, and on homeland security specifically. And that focus is completely appropriate as we have become aware of threats to our security in this new era of terrorist attacks. I mean, if we pick up a newspaper, we read a magazine, we turn on the TV, it is in front of us. So it is appropriate we deal with it. But we make a huge mistake, I think, if we fail to recognize and act on the reality that increasing the investment in education is imperative but it is absolutely critical to our Nation's security. It is as important, maybe more important, but it is equally as important as protecting our borders, both in the immediate sense and in the long term. You know, it is a lot like a child developing. It is awful hard for a child to develop healthy if we do not feed them the proper food. And if you give them food to develop the bodies, we have to give them the right education and opportunities to develop their minds, to be a well- rounded person. In the 21st century, America's economic growth and prosperity depend more and more on a knowledge-based economy and on the skills of our people. And we have seen that over the last many years. Working Americans are beginning to understand that their level of earning is tied directly to their level of learning. Let me repeat that again. Their level of earning is directly tied to their level of learning. And it will be more so in the 21st century. And we really do not think about it; a lot of us as adults think of learning as academic being in the classroom. Let me remind my colleagues that all of us learn every day in the people we come in contact with, the interactions, the bulletins we read, whatever we do. It is things that we pick up. And it really perplexes me when I hear people talk about, and sometimes they do not think before they speak sometimes, they talk about how a student made little of this and a little of that. I used to go to civic clubs. I specifically remember one Rotary Club, and I will not call the name of where it was because somebody might be watching from that town. We had an eighth grade exit math exam for our students in North Carolina. I thought, I will have some fun. So I carried that math exam with me to the civic club. I will not even call the name of it. I handed it out. I said, I have read in this local paper how this exit exam is not even an eighth grade level. So I passed it out to the people who had come to lunch. Now, I was not so dumb as to not carry the answer sheet with me. I carried it with me. So I watched their faces as they were working on it. Finally as we got near the end of the meeting I said, if anybody wants to raise their hand and give me the answer, and I would read the question. And I could tell by looking at their face some of them had not done too good on getting their answers right. The point is we have some of the brightest young people in our public schools today we have ever had. But our challenge today in this body as we develop policy and across this country is to make sure that every child gets that opportunity, and we are trying. I want to talk about it as the evening goes on about the bill of No Child Left Behind and why it is important that, if we are going to do legislation, we have to put the resources behind it. An educated populace is also critical to the survival of a free people and the sustaining of our democracy. Our Nation's experiment with self-governance can only endure if our people know and understand their stake in its success. And I will talk more later about the long- term challenges we face in education, but I want to now talk about the immediate challenges we face in America's schools. And I think before I do that, though, I want to talk about some infrastructure needs; but before I do, let me turn to my colleague from Chicago, Illinois (Mr. Davis), who has been a champion for education in this body. But he has really been a fighter for young people since he has been here. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman.

Mr. ETHERIDGE

Mr. ETHERIDGE. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentlewoman for yielding me this time and Chairman Boehlert and Ranking Member Hall and the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Smith) and the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Eddie Bernice Johnson) for their efforts in getting this bill. I am proud to be a cosponsor as well. I rise in strong support of H.R. 4664, Investing in America's Future Act. This legislation, that will increase the funding for the National Science Foundation, is critical and it is probably more critical at this time than anyone can imagine. I believe that maintaining our Nation's global scientific and economic leadership provides the best justification for funding basic research, and that is really what we are talking about here. I also believe that a solid academic foundation in math and science education is critical to our success as a Nation in the 21st century. As the lead source of Federal funding for basic research at colleges and universities, NSF supports research and educational programs that are crucial to technological advances in the private sector and for training our next generation of scientists and engineers. NSF funds cutting-edge research in science and technology that is critical in the United States. The research funded by the foundation has played a pivotal role in raising the standards of living in the United States as well as around the world. As we have already heard from others, with a very small portion of Federal spending, the National Science Foundation has had a powerful impact on national science and engineering. Every dollar invested in this agency returns manifold in its worth in economic growth. For example, over 25 percent of the Federal support for academic institutions for basic research is provided through the National Science Foundation and almost 50 percent of the funding for nonmedical research at universities is provided through the National Science Foundation. NSF also provides 46 percent of the basic research in engineering performed at colleges and universities and also helps train more than 25,000 graduate students each year. I am pleased with the accomplishments that NSF has made in research and education initiatives, and I strongly support the doubling of NSF's budget by the proposed increase of 15 percent over the next 3 years in pursuit of this effort. As the former superintendent of schools of my home State of North Carolina, I have worked for many years to improve science and mathematics education in our schools. We need better science and mathematics education in the K-12 classrooms if we are going to have it in university students. Quality instruction is the key to helping students learn in these critical fields. At a time when we are trying to improve the quality and quantity of science and mathematics in America, appropriate investments in NSF is critical to enabling our students to compete in today's knowledge-based economy. This increase in NSF budget will help ensure that improving science and mathematics education remains a national priority. I urge the vote and signature by the President.

Mr. ETHERIDGE

Mr. ETHERIDGE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to congratulate Mr. Patrick J. Devlin, Sr. of my staff and his wife Helen on the birth of their second child, Master Michael Henry Devlin. Michael was born early in the morning on Monday, May 20, 2002. He weighed 7 pounds and 6 ounces. Faye joins me in wishing Pat, Helen and their first son Patrick great happiness upon this new addition to their family. I know that the gentleman from Kentucky Mr. Lewis joins me in celebrating Michael's birth as Helen serves on his staff. As the father of three, I know the joy and pride that Pat and Helen feel at this special time. And I know that Patrick is excited to have a brother with whom he can play. Children remind us of the incredible miracle of life and they keep us young-at-heart. Everyday, they show us a new way to view the world. Indeed, they are one of the most important reasons why we serve in this body, Mr. Speaker. I welcome Michael into the world, and wish Pat, Helen, and Patrick all the best as they bring Michael into their family.

Mr. ETHERIDGE

Mr. ETHERIDGE. Mr. Chairman, we are approaching Memorial Day, and I think most of us would like to get home. I certainly have plans for the weekend, wanting to be home with my family and friends and with those that we are going to honor who have given so much to this country. But today, as many of my colleagues before me, I rise to support and thank our men and women in uniform who are serving our country and protecting our freedoms and our opportunity to come to this floor, all around the globe. Like my colleagues, I strongly support a robust military, as do all Americans, I think, and certainly in this House on both sides of the aisle, but I am shocked that I have heard Members come to this floor and allude to someone on either side of the aisle who is not supportive of our military. We could correct that very quickly. We have a bill before us. All we have to do is take the things out that should not be in it, that are not tied to our military, and the bill would have passed last evening. I represent an awful lot of folks who either are stationed or have loved ones at Fort Bragg and Pope Air Force Base or some who have served there and, Mr. Chairman, I support the President and the war on terrorism. I have been here for every vote, and I support a balanced budget. I came in 1997 and I want my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to understand, I was one who voted to make that last step to balance the budget. I came to this Congress to help do that, and I understand these are difficult times. So that people will understand, I also served as chairman of the Committee on Appropriations in my State legislature for 4 years, and so I understand what it is to slip something in a bill, but we do it in the light of day so people can see it and know what we are doing. We do not go to a closed room after we have had an open debate by all the parties in the committees, and then bring it to the floor. That is not right. That is not fair to the American people. It is not fair to the American people. I represent as many people on this floor as any Member on either side of the aisle, and yet because I do not serve on the Committee on Appropriations or the Committee on Rules I cannot make an amendment to this bill and present the issues that my people send me to Washington to defend and represent, and that is wrong. That is wrong in the people's House. It is absolutely wrong. The reality is that we want to pass this piece of legislation. We want to fight terrorism. We want to get Osama bin Laden and the al Qaeda and all those agents of terror around the world. We are still here today, not because we disagree with the bill that is before us to get the job done on terrorism and support our men and women around the world. It is because of things that were put in that bill by the leadership. The reality is that the leadership has chosen to make this political and controversial. We can have a vote on the debt ceiling later. I do not know where I would be on that. I might vote for it, because I want the government to keep going on, to pay our bills, but it is wrong to hide it. It is wrong to say to my mother and her Social Security check and all those who are paying it, well, you might have to take a cut later because we are going to spend the money for something else. It is wrong, wrong for the American people to be put in this position. My colleagues devised this scheme. I did not know it could be done, but I guess I should learn something new every day, and I have learned something. Raising the debt limit through procedural tricks, I think, has serious implications for this Nation, not to mention it has dangerous consequences for my children and my grandchildren I hope I will have. It is wrong. I have been to this floor arguing on education issues because I believe in them and I have worked through my whole career to tell children to tell the truth, to do the right thing, to be honest. I hope they are not watching this debate today. I would be ashamed if they saw what is happening. We ought to be willing to put it on the table. Mr. Chairman, we can do better and we should. Mr. Chairman, I rise in full support of our men and women in uniform whom are serving our country and protecting our freedom all over the globe today. Like my Democratic colleagues, I support a strong and robust military ``we are all Americans.'' Many of the folks I represent work or have loved ones who are stationed at Fort Bragg. And Mr. Chairman, I support the President in the war on terrorism. I served in the U.S. Army during Vietnam. Today, we are considering an emergency supplement appropriations bill that will help us continue our fight against Osama bin Laden and al- Qaida and other agents of terror. I have no doubt that this emergency supplemental would pass with a strong bipartisan majority if it were a clean bill. But, the reality is that the Republican majority loaded this bill down with provisions so controversial they won't have to debate them in the light of day. The Republican majority has devised a scheme for raising the debt limit without the consent of this House. What's more, this Republican scheme to raise the debt limit without debate or a vote places a unfair burden on the shoulders of or children. Our children and our grandchildren will be responsible for cleaning up the mess that the Republican majority is making today. That is not the American way, Mr. Chairman. Raising the debt limit means that we must pay more money in interest of our national debt. That means we will not have the resources necessary to provide a comprehensive prescription drug benefit to our seniors, or build new schools for our children. Just a year ago, we stood on this floor and tried to decide what to do with our national surplus. We had a surplus, and the Republican majority squandered it. And now they come to this floor and are playing politics with our united war on terrorism, the retirement security of our seniors, and the future of our children. Mr. Chairman, we need a responsible, honest, and balanced budget. One that meets our obligations today so our children are not left with the tab. I believe that when you hold a public office you hold a public trust. Part of that trust means respecting the institution that is this House. We should have an open debate on the debt limit and all the other issues that the majority tacked on this bill, at another time. The resolve on this side of the aisle is strong, and we'll stand up for what we know is right. The troops overseas, our seniors, and our children deserve no less. Raising the debt limit through procedural tricks has serious implications for our Nation, not to mention dangerous consequences for our seniors and our children. Raising the debt limit means giving the government a credit card with a higher spending limit. It means that we will be spending more money from the Social Security and Medicare trust fund to pay for government initiatives. Mr. Chairman, those funds are supposed to be off limits. They represent a promise that we made long ago with our seniors that they would not have to live out their golden years in poverty. By raising the debt limit we risk their futures and the retirement security of our working families.

Mr. ETHERIDGE. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word. (Mr. ETHERIDGE asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. ETHERIDGE

Mr. ETHERIDGE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in opposition to H.R. 4737, the Republican welfare reform reauthorization bill and in support of the Democratic substitute. The landmark welfare reform law enacted in 1996 put people to work and reduced the number of those who depend on public assistance. Congress should build on that success in further reforming welfare today. A good welfare bill must have three components to replace welfare with work successfully. It must provide States with sufficient resources to administer welfare initiatives. It must give recipients access to education and job training. And finally, a good welfare bill must address the most difficult obstacle to getting and keeping a good job, childcare. Regrettably, H.R. 4737 fails to meet these requirements on all accounts. I strongly support putting people to work to help them obtain self- sufficiency. Unfortunately, while the Republican bill requires more work hours, H.R. 4737 does not provide additional funding to the States to help them implement these additional work requirements. According to the Congressional Budget Office, it will cost $8-11 billion to comply with these new provisions. North Carolina alone would have to spend $222 million in order to meet the requirements of the new welfare reform bill. North Carolina, like many States, is in the midst of a severe budget crunch. Mr. Speaker, where will North Carolina find the funds to carry out this unfunded mandate? Welfare reform should not limit a person's opportunity to succeed and care for their families. But that's what the Republican bill does. Under the Republican welfare bill education initiatives that allow welfare recipients to take community college classes or obtain their GED are eliminated. That's unacceptable. As the former Superintendent of North Carolina's public schools, I understand how important education is to finding and keeping a good job in the 21st Century. Education, indeed life-long education, is the key to a successful future. Many of the folks who remain on the welfare rolls today are the least prepared to enter the workforce. We must provide them with the tools they need to lift themselves and their families out of poverty. The Republican bill also requires parents to work ten more hours per week, yet it does not provide enough resources for childcare. Finding quality childcare is one of the most daunting challenges with which welfare recipients must contend. Good childcare helps young children develop and keeps older children in positive, productive environments. It keeps children off the streets while their parents are at work. This is common sense. If you require folks to spend more time working, you must give them an avenue for caring for their children. In my State, we have over 25,000 children on the State's childcare waiting list. North Carolina's sons and daughters require funding for childcare. Unfortunately, H.R. 4737 falls to provide adequate childcare funding. I support the Democratic substitute to H.R. 4737. Our plan also requires more work hours, but our plan provides States with the necessary resources to make these welfare initiatives work. It allows States to count education and job training as a work related activity, so welfare recipients prepare to get good jobs and permanently leave the welfare rolls. And this plan invests significant resources for childcare. Mr. Speaker, I grew up in rural, eastern North Carolina. I know what it means to be poor, and I understand first hand the value of hard work. Welfare reform should help lift families out of poverty to become self-sufficient. H.R. 4737 will not work. It is reform for politics sake and a bad bill for North Carolina and those across the nation who need help the most. I urge my colleagues to oppose H.R. 4737 and support the Democratic substitute.

Mr. ETHERIDGE

Mr. ETHERIDGE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of Social Security. Social Security is our Nation's most successful domestic initiative. It has lifted millions of Americans out of poverty. Social Security represents a solemn promise to our seniors that says if you work hard and play by the rules you will not be forced in your golden years into poverty, and no one has a right to break that promise. The Republican leadership plans to privatize Social Security and replace its guarantee with a risky gamble. This privatization plan jeopardizes the requirement security of our seniors and our working families. Now the Republican leadership is trying to change the subject and duck the word ``privatization.'' The American people will not be fooled by this trick. This House must put aside partisan tricks and the privatization plan, and I call on my colleagues to join me in opposing privatization and work to protect Social Security and the promise to America's seniors.

Mr. ETHERIDGE

Mr. ETHERIDGE. Mr. Speaker, I rise to honor the life of Lenore D. Tuck of Buies Creek, North Carolina, who died April 7, 2002. In her passing, North Carolina has lost one of its most outstanding citizens and I have lost a friend. As I began collecting my thoughts about Lenore and what she has meant to my family, and me, I realized how good God has been to me. He has seen fit, in His infinite wisdom, to place me on the same highway of life with some of the most talented, energetic, dedicated, noble human beings it was possible for Him to create. Then He made them my friends. Such a friend was Lenore Tuck. My wife Faye and I are doubly blessed by Lenore's life. Lenore was Faye's teacher at Campbell University and her inspiration. Lenore became her lifelong friend. Lenore was small of stature. But she was larger than life in the work she did, the friends she made, the causes she served, the good works she left scattered over Harnett County and North Carolina. She met every task with a smile as broad as the ocean; she fairly jumped with excitement when new work was laid before her. She was a devoted Democrat, the kind of person any candidate for office has to love. Once she is committed to you, there was no turning back, and she never dreamed you would not be successful. She had a way of making you believe in yourself. I have been in Congress now for more than five years. Until recently, Lenore has served in my Lillington office that entire five years. She brought to the job the same efficiency that was characteristic of her. Every telephone call was important; every constituent request necessitated action. We celebrate a great life lived to the fullest and of great consequence to our community and us. Her passing forces us to ponder the great issues of life and death as we say goodbye to our friend, Lenore. It has always seemed to me that when God puts us on this Earth, it is with the silent admonition that we work to leave the world better than we found it. Certainly, Lenore did so. Both in her home in the Philippines and in her adopted home in North Carolina. She was an uncommon woman who did uncommonly good work. And we were lucky that she walked among us. A native of the Philippines, Lenore came to the United States in 1953 as a Tandang Sora Scholar. She received a degree in Home Economics from Radford College and a master's degree in nutrition from the University of Tennessee. Later she earned a master's degree in public health from the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. She taught home economics at Campbell University from 1965 until her retirement in 1996. When she was honored by the Raleigh newspaper. News & Observer as ``Tar Heel of the Week'' in November of 1979, she explained the philosophy that guided her active participation in her adopted community. ``It is very important to be a part of the community. I love Buies Creek and would never leave . . . If there is something here that needs to be done, I feel obligated to do it. And if I do it, I'm sure going to try to do it right.'' The people of Buies Creek would agree with me that Lenore always did it right. Nearly every existing organization benefiting the community had her support. Where there were unmet needs her organizing skill for meeting those needs was invaluable. In every area of her life, she made strong contributions. She was active in professional organizations: The American Dietetic Association, American Home Economics Association, American Association of University Professors and American Association of University Women. As a registered dietitian, she served as consultant to area hospitals and nursing homes. She helped organize and secure funding for the Harnett County Women, Infant and Children nutrition program. Her interest in children extended past nutrition. She was a Girl Scout troop leader and a Boy Scout den mother. She was a PTA member and president. As a charter member of Memorial Baptist Church, she provided the skills for establishing and organizing the Stokes Day Care Center, which has provided pre-school and after-school care for hundreds of children. She continued to serve the Center until her death. Her public health concerns included the lack of adequate water and sewer facilities in the county. She helped establish the Buies Creek Sewer District and later served on the Northeast Metro Water District Board. She was also on the organizing board of the Harnett County Habitat for Humanity. She served as president of the Dunn-Erwin Rotary Club, conducting their foreign exchange program and leading an exchange group back to her homeland in 1993. She was honored as a Paul Harris Fellow and was Rotarian of the Year in 1993. Also a member and past president of the Coats Kiwanis Club, she was honored as a George F. Hixson Fellow in 1999. Always interested in promoting and recognizing the work of women, Lenore was the county coordinator for the N.C. United for ERA. A devoted Democrat, she was a member and officer of the county and state Democratic Women. Last year she received the state Democratic Women's Star Award. Her political activism began long before she came to the United States. She grew up during the Japanese occupation of her homeland, where she became a patriot and resistance member. Later she was a member of CONDA, a YMCA-sponsored Congress to promote post-World War II understanding among students in the Asian countries. She served as president of the Congress, which is credited with the election of Romoan Magsaysay as President of the Philippines. Mr. Speaker, I marvel that any single human being could have been as active in so many agencies, organizations, and associations. Or that any single individual could have accomplished so much. Moreover, Lenore's accomplishments include being a mother to Dr. Paul D. Tuck, mother-in-law to Sarah Tuck, sister to Julia Borromero, as well as six brothers, and grandmother to Ryan, Hunter, Alden, and Karson Tuck. All of whom will truly miss her. I know that Lenore would not want us to be sad. I know that she would caution us that life is for the living, that day will follow the darkest of nights, and that we should leave this place with our spirits high, our hopes redeemed. I believe, based on what I knew about her, the life she lived, the successes she enjoyed, the way she loved life, she would want to say to us: ``Be happy, my friends. I went willingly into that long night.'' Heaven is a happier place since Lenore arrived. Lenore is rushing around greeting those who have gone before. She is already planning projects that, even in Heaven, need doing. She is seeking out children she can help, and planning her flower garden for this spring. Indeed, in this case, as the Bible tells us: ``O Death, where is thy sting? O Grave, where is thy victory?'' Amen.

Mr. ETHERIDGE

Mr. ETHERIDGE. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman.

Mr. ETHERIDGE. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this time, and I rise today to urge my colleagues to support the conference report and support the rule for the Farm Security and Rural Investment Act crafted by the chairman and ranking member and those on the committee who did, I think, an excellent job in balancing the needs for agriculture. The previous failure of the Freedom to Farm bill failed to live up to its promise of an adequate safety net for American farmers and, consequently, year after year Congress was asked to step in and provide billions of dollars. While this bill is not perfect, it goes a long way in meeting the needs. I will not go into the details, others will talk about that as we go on, but I am pleased this conference report does many of these things. While there is much to like in this report, North Carolina growers can be especially pleased that it reaches out and does many of the things they need. However, we have to understand that compromise is the cornerstone of successful legislation, and no bill is perfect by everyone's standards. Mr. Speaker, before I yield the floor, I would like to engage the chairman of the Subcommittee on Specialty Crops and Foreign Agriculture Programs, the gentleman from Alabama (Mr. Everett), in a colloquy. Traveling through North Carolina, the number 1 topic of discussion in tobacco communities is the growing support for reform in the current Federal tobacco quota system. Tobacco farmers want to eliminate quotas so they can grow their crops without paying rent to quota holders, thereby cutting the costs and making their product more competitive in the world market. Quota holders are willing to support such reform provided they are adequately and fairly compensated for the quotas they now own. Several different approaches for revamping the program have been introduced, one by the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. McIntyre), the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Burr), and the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Hill). There is another plan being drafted by the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Goode), the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Boucher), and many others will have one in. All have strengths and weaknesses. Now that the work of the Committee on Agriculture on the farm bill is completed, can we expect the committee to turn its attention to the crop left behind, the tobacco program?

Mr. ETHERIDGE. I yield to the gentleman from Alabama.

Mr. ETHERIDGE

Mr. ETHERIDGE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to congratulate Mr. Clark Ogilvie of my staff and his wife Ms. Deb Chan on the birth of their first child, Master Ian Chan Ogilvie. Ian was born on Tuesday, March 26, 2002 and weighed 7 pounds and 13 ounces. Faye joins me in wishing Clark and Deb great happiness during this very special time in their lives. As a father of three, I know the immeasurable pride and rewarding challenges that children bring into your life. Their innocence keeps you young-at-heart. Through their inquiring minds and wide-eyed wonder, they show you the world in a fresh, new way and change your perspective on life. A little miracle, a new baby holds all the potential of what human beings can achieve. I welcome young Ian into the world and wish Clark and Deb all the best as they raise him.

Mr. ETHERIDGE

Mr. ETHERIDGE. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong opposition to H.R. 586, the so-called Tax Relief Guarantee Act. Mr. Speaker, I have supported responsible, common sense tax relief for hardworking Americans in the past, and I will continue to do so. Unfortunately, this irresponsible legislation mortgages the fiscal future of America. The House Republican Leadership is proposing to make permanent the parts of the 2001 tax cuts that most benefit the wealthiest Americans while leaving behind millions of middle-income families and putting the future of Social Security in jeopardy. The cost of the first two years of this legislation is nearly $400 billion and the cost in the second ten years--when the baby boomers will be retiring and relying on their Social Security benefits--will exceed $4 trillion. If the tax cut is made permanent, every single penny of the cost over the coming decade will come out of the Social Security and Medicare trust funds. Mr. Speaker, the unfortunate reality of our situation is that we have witnessed--in just one year--the most dramatic fiscal reversal in the history of our nation. The projected surpluses are gone. Following eight straight years of fiscal responsibility, the Republican Leadership has decided to throw fiscal discipline out the window. Making the tax permanent will take our nation further down the road of fiscal denial. Mr. Speaker, making the tax cut permanent will hurt my home state of North Carolina. In North Carolina, we are already facing a $1 billion budget shortfall this year. If North Carolina adopts changes to make its tax law consistent with changes made by the Bush tax cut, it would cost the state $258 million next year. That money will have to be replaced by higher taxes or reduced services. Mr. Speaker, states all across the nation are facing the same budget crunch. It is clear that we can ill-afford to make the tax cut permanent when all of our home states are hurting so badly. Mr. Speaker, today's debate reminds me of a statement by my friend Gene Sperling, the former economic advisor to the President. Mr. Sperling said that the American Government these days reminds him of a family with 14-year old triplets who are all heading to Ivy League schools. The family will be fine for five or six years,but maybe in trouble down the road. But instead of saving their money for the future and paying down their debt, this family decides to buy a yacht and take a trip around the world. Making this tax cut permanent does the exact same thing with our nation's fiscal future. Mr. Speaker, let's not be the family that buys the yacht. Let's be the family that saves wisely to ensure our continued fiscal health. I urge my colleagues to join me in opposing H.R. 586.

Mr. ETHERIDGE

Mr. ETHERIDGE. Mr. Speaker, today I rise in commemoration of Smithfield, North Carolina. On April 23, 2002 Smithfield will celebrate its 225th Birthday. Smithfield is located in the heart of Johnston County in the 2nd Congressional District of North Carolina. Established on the banks of the Neuse River as the seat of Johnston County Government in 1777, it is one of the oldest towns in the United States. Though Smithfield is a town with just over 11,000 residents, the residents carry themselves with a pride representative of the entire state of North Carolina. It is a community that supports traditional family values, southern hospitality and that offers a high quality of life. Into this inviting environment has come a myriad of large and small businesses, drawn by a dedication to hard work. The pride of the community is shown in the excellence of its school system--in its facilities, educators and students. An example of this excellence is Johnston Community College housed in Smithfield. Smithfield is known worldwide for its ham and yams, and each year the town celebrates during the Ham & Yam Festival. The festival is held the first weekend in May each year, and features arts, crafts, commercial vendors, a carnival, dancing and youth activities. Smithfield's heritage is rich in Civil War and agricultural history. The strong work ethic and dedication of the people of Smithfield has made Johnston County the number two county in the nation in growing flue-cured tobacco. Not only does Smithfield raise great crops but also great individuals. Among Smithfield's finest is Actress Ava Gardner. Ava Gardner grew up near Smithfield and is buried in Sunset Memorial Park. Today she is honored in a local museum celebrating her Hollywood career with more than 100,000 items. Mr. Speaker in closing I will like to send my best wishes and gratitude to the people of Smithfield, North Carolina in wishing them a Very Happy Birthday! I know that our nation is stronger today because of their contributions.

Mr. ETHERIDGE

Mr. ETHERIDGE. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to H.R. 3762, the Pension Security Act and in support of the Miller Substitute. Today, we have an important opportunity to protect our working families and their retirement security from greedy, unscrupulous corporate wrongdoers. But, Mr. Speaker the Republican Leadership has wasted that opportunity. Earlier this year, the Ways and Means Committee passed a truly bipartisan pension reform bill. But, the Republican Majority chose to merge that bipartisan measure with a controversial bill passed by the Education and Workforce Committee. The product of that merger, H.R. 3762, does not protect employee pensions, fails to prevent future scandals like Enron, and opens a new loophole that jeopardizes employee savings. H.R. 3762 also establishes complicated diversification rules that do not allow workers substantial control over their retirement investments. Under the Miller Substitute employees would be able to diversify company-matched stock after three years of participation in a 401K plan. Under current law, employees are allowed to receive independent, comprehensive investment information as a part of their employee benefits package. H.R. 3762 would overturn current law, and allow employers to offer conflicted investment advice to their employees. Financial institutions should not be able to give an employee investment advice if the financial institution stands to profit from that advice. About 15,000 Enron employees lost their retirement savings because Ken Lay and other Enron executives assured their employees that Enron stock was a sound investment. Ken Lay and his cronies lined their pockets while they misled their employees with bad advice. The conflicted investment advice provisions in this bill would set workers up for another Enron. Mr. Speaker, we know all too well the corrupting power of greed. In contrast the Miller Substitute would offer employees honest, accurate, and timely investment information. It would prohibit pension plans from giving misleading information, require that workers receive regular benefit statements and are notified of plan lockdowns at least 30-days in advance. As more Americans turn to 401K and other retirement plans to help them prepare for their golden years, we must act to prevent future Enrons. The Republican Leadership had an opportunity to act in bipartisan manner to protect the retirement security of working families, but they chose not do so. H.R. 3762 fails to solve our pension law problems. In fact, the bill would actually create new ones. The Miller Substitute protects workers and their investments from greedy corporate entities, provides unbaised, independent investment advice, and gives employees control over their retirement savings. I urge my colleagues to oppose H.R. 3762 and to vote for the Miller Substitute.

Mr. ETHERIDGE

Mr. ETHERIDGE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to introduce legislation to suspend the duty imposed on an ingredient used to develop products used by North Carolina farmers. Glufosinate-ammonium is the active ingredient used in two key herbicides, Liberty and Rely. Liberty is used to control weeds, particularly by corn and soybean growers. Rely controls nutrient and water robbing weeds and grass that plague apple, grape and tree nut growers. Glufosinate-ammonium is the major cost component in the production of these herbicides, and the manufacturer of this ingredient will be suspending production for more than a year to retool its production facilities. Suspending the duty on this ingredient, currently assessed a tariff of 3.7%, will allow for increased importation of Glufosinate- ammonium so that production of these important herbicides will not be interrupted. I have been informed that there are no U.S. producers of Glufosinate- ammonium so the bill should receive approval by the U.S. International Trade Commission. I urge the Ways and Means Committee to act on my legislation when it considers the next miscellaneous tariff bill in the coming months.

Mr. ETHERIDGE

Mr. ETHERIDGE. Mr. Speaker, today I rise to pay tribute to the Girl Scouts of the United States of America. Earlier this month, the Girl Scouts celebrated their 90th Anniversary, and it is appropriate for us to take time to honor their contributions to our nation. The Girl Scouts were founded by Juliette Gordon Low on March 12, 1912 in Savannah, Georgia and were chartered by Congress on March 16, 1950. Today, the Girl Scouts boast 3.7 million members, 2.7 million of whom are daisies, brownies, junior scouts, cadets, and senior scouts. And they are supported by almost one million adult volunteers. The Girl Scouts is a truly worldwide organization partnering with the World Association of Girl Guides and Girl Scouts to create a family of ten million girls and adults in 140 countries. As the former State Superintendent of North Carolina's public schools, I understand how important the Girl Scouts are to the development of our young women. The Girl Scouts are working to encourage young women to pursue careers in science and technology through a number of innovative science and math education initiatives. These initiatives provide girls with mentors, role models, and the technological resources to prepare them to succeed in the 21st Century. Through Girl Scouts girls become strong women and good citizens. They participate in a number of activities that are designed to foster friendship, and build character. They learn leadership skills, teamwork, and core values that will guide them throughout their lives. These values are outlined in the Girl Scout Law: I will do my best to be honest and fair, friendly and helpful, considerate and caring, courageous and strong, and responsible for what I say and do, and to respect myself and others, respect authority, use resources wisely, make the world a better place, and be a sister to every Girl Scout. More than 50 million women in the U.S. have been Girl Scouts. Today these women are America's doctors, lawyers, teachers, and mothers. The lessons they learned in their childhood from their field trips and projects are still being applied today. Our nation is stronger today because of the Girl Scouts. I am proud to join my colleagues in saluting the Girl Scouts and look forward to what the next 90 years will bring.

Mr. ETHERIDGE

Mr. ETHERIDGE. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of H.R. 3090, the Job Creation and Worker Assistance Act. This bill, like the bill the Senate passed a few weeks ago, extends unemployment benefits for 13 weeks and provides temporary tax relief for businesses that will truly help stimulate our economy. H.R. 3090 represents the kind of temporary, immediate and affordable relief I advocated for months. Mr. Speaker, for months, the House Leadership has continued to bring up only sham tax bills instead of relief for unemployed workers. In fact, the worker relief package we are considering today could have been law months ago if House Republicans had not insisted on attaching controversial and ineffective tax breaks for special corporate interests to previous stimulus packages. While the relief contained in H.R. 3090 is a step in the right direction, we must not stand pat. As we approach the six-month anniversary of the terrible events of September 11, Congress must pass additional common sense legislation to jump-start our economy and put our people back to work. We must address the issue of health insurance for the unemployed. Mr. Speaker, providing health insurance for the unemployed and extending unemployment benefits must go hand in hand. And we should enact visionary policies to prompt long-term economic growth, prosperity and opportunity for all Americans willing to work hard to make the most of their God-given abilities. I am hopeful that Congress will address these important priorities in the coming months.

Mr. ETHERIDGE

Mr. ETHERIDGE. I thank my friend from Oklahoma for yielding and my other colleagues who have commented. It is easy for folks who have not been in this body over a period of time or who are not old enough to realize and remember some of our folks who have had it so tough. Those of us who understand history remember that Social Security is a retirement system that has really been a bedrock. It is really that foundation that a lot of the other retirement systems were built on. Whether a person has no other plan, whether they have a 401(k), a 201(k) or no K, we always start with Social Security. If you go to a retirement planner and they want to help you if you have money, they still want to start with looking at Social Security, because that is the foundation or bedrock. It has been that way since President Roosevelt signed it into law in 1935. It has been one of the most successful government initiatives, lifting millions of seniors and working families out of poverty in the 20th century. But there was a time before Social Security, I remember my history, when seniors suffered in abject poverty. Too many people could not afford the basic human needs of food and shelter, and even some died homeless on the streets, far more than we see today. The creation of Social Security is one of the landmark achievements, as I have said, of the 20th century. Together, we declared that seniors should not be forced to live in Third World poverty here in America. Together, this Congress, I was not here, but this Congress did it, a previous Congress. The House and Senate, along with the President, said that we are going to make a compact and we are going to make it with our seniors, seniors like my mother and my mother-in-law, that we are going to deal with generation to generation. The younger generation is going to help the older generation, and you are not going to be left in poverty. My mother-in-law lost her husband when she was, I think, a relatively young lady of 59. My dad lost his life early on. People forget the survivor benefit that the wives tap into. Yes, there is a disparity now in what women draw because they are not in the workforce as long, but there is that provision to make it available. You cannot buy it with any other insurance. Congress in my opinion does not have the right to break that contract. There is no question that Social Security is facing a serious challenge. The system has been deteriorating over recent years in terms of money available. But we made a lot of progress in the 1990s when we had a full economy, we had a growing budget, we had money available. It seems to me I remember last year that we were talking about having surpluses as far as the eye could see. What a difference a year makes. Now we are looking at deficits as far as the eye can see. But over the next few decades, we must act and we must act to make sure that it is secure, that it is safe. Otherwise, we will not be holding up our end of that compact. There are those, including the people who served on the President's commission, who feel that privatizing Social Security is the answer to this problem. I respectfully disagree. Last year, when the President appointed his commission on Social Security, that commission, I think, was stacked and stacked with members, every one, who wanted to privatize it. Now, if you want to privatize, that is one thing; but do not do it to the folks without letting the people involved be involved in it. There should have been on that commission beneficiaries. There should have been minorities on it, there should have been women, there should have been seniors. In the end, the commission offered only three flawed plans to privatize Social Security and failed to provide any kind of plan to restore the solvency of the system. In that regard, I cannot support any privatization plan that would jeopardize the retirement security of our seniors and working families, because for many families in America, that is the only security they have. The recent Enron scandal clearly demonstrates that we cannot allow the retirement security of our working Americans to become the victims of unrestrained corporate greed and mismanagement. Social Security was designed to be a safety net, a safety net, and a compact between generations, as I said earlier, not a privatized vehicle of massive wealth for some and massive poverty for others. Some would say, well, you know, look at what the stock market has done. Look at those who had 401(k)s last year and 201(k)s this year, and some of them may have zero(k)s if they have it in the wrong stock. That is just absolutely not what Social Security was meant to be; and there are many problems, in my opinion, with privatizing Social Security. First, if you take money out of the trust fund to put in private accounts, then you weaken the system. One of the plans offered by the President's commission would remove $1.5 trillion, that is with a T, from the trust fund over 10 years. Privatization also means benefit cuts. Another of the commission's plans would have reduced the benefits promised to future retirees by as much as 46 percent. Every privatization plan that I have seen thus far has what is called a ``clawback'' provision. That means in a privatized system beneficiaries will not receive both the full value of their private accounts and, along with that, their full Social Security benefit, so you lose something. That is not the commitment that was made. In addition, a system based upon individual accounts would also disproportionately hurt women because they would suffer from low account deposits and likely lose their spousal benefits, because, for a lot of women, that is how they step up to higher incomes. Minorities would be literally shortchanged because private accounts would erode the progressivity of the system. Finally, the transitional costs associated with privatization puts the system solvency and the retirement security of those who depend on it at risk at a much more rapid pace. The majority in this House now proposes to issue what are called certificates to Social Security recipients. I call them sham certificates. That reminds me last year they also sent out letters, the administration did, to folks and said you are going to get a tax cut, $300 or $600. I held a town hall meeting a little over a month after those letters went out and this lady came in and she was quite upset. She had been expecting that $600, she and her husband were. They did not tell her you had to pay so much in income taxes. They said you are going to get the check. She got $3 and some change. She lost her job and had to sell her car to keep her family together. This Congress has a responsibility not to play charades and sham games, not to be playing gotcha and ideology. We have a responsibility to do the people's business. People who draw a Social Security check do not want games being played. They want their check, they want their money, and they want that contract and commitment to be there. People count on their Social Security benefits too, and these certificates would only be worth no more than the paper they are written on, because if the other stuff is not worth anything, it is sort of like the locked box. You know, you can lock a box, but what happened to the locked box? It is about having the integrity to tell people the truth and then following through and doing it. We can find something better to do with the $10 million we are talking about using to send worthless certificates. Folks in my district learned the hard way to be skeptical when they are promised something that they know does not come through. I, like my other colleagues who have been on the floor this evening, am willing to work with anyone in good faith to strengthen the bedrock that is Social Security; but we really must put aside partisan gimmicks and ideological differences, like certificates that are not worth the paper they are written on, or privatization plans that only make Social Security budgetary problems worse. We really ought to have a major study, if we are really serious about doing what we ought to do for the people, and bring the people to the table. I was really disappointed last year that no one from this body was on the commission. If you are going to get something done, you ought to have Members of Congress involved who ultimately are going to have to be involved in the process. I urge all my colleagues in this House to get serious about Social Security reform if we are going to do it, because the time is here. I want to thank the gentleman from Oklahoma for putting together this Special Order this afternoon. This is an important issue. It is important not just to the people who are now drawing Social Security; it is important to a lot of folks who ultimately are going to be drawing it. But, more importantly, it is important to the young people who are paying into it. They have a right to know that we are going to keep that commitment and that contract that has been made over generations to them as they pay in. And it has to get beyond gimmicks, and who has got the best idea to play gotcha with or get ready for the next election. It is about good policy, not good politics. It is about doing what is right for our seniors, people like my mother and mother-in-law and their friends and others like them all across America who depend on Social Security every month. If the stock market is up, they get their check. If the stock market is down, they get their check. They do not worry about where the stock market is. They know that the United States Government stands four square behind the commitment it made, and we as Members of this Congress have that same solemn obligation that Members who have stood here before us had, and we cannot drop the ball now. I thank the gentleman for putting together this Special Order and allowing me a few minutes to participate in it.