Bob Etheridge

Mr. ETHERIDGE

Mr. ETHERIDGE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to inform my colleagues of an important constituency in the Second Congressional District of North Carolina: the growing Latino population. Three years ago, I formed the Second Congressional District Latino Advisory Committee to reach out to North Carolina's Latino community and provide responsive representation to the needs and concerns of this rapidly expanding community. North Carolina has undergone tremendous demographic changes over the past decade, and the Latino population is the fastest growing group in our state. During my service in the U.S. House, I have worked hard to serve the needs and represent the interests of all the people of the Second District. I established this committee to reach out to some of our newest residents, to open up lines of communication, and forge strong bonds among all groups of people. Mr. Speaker, the Latino Advisory Committee, small upon its inception, has grown to over 70 members today. Among those who have joined the Committee are the Honorable Carolina Zaragoza-Flores, the Consulate General of the Mexican Consulate in Raleigh, North Carolina, and Ms. Maribell Diaz, the Executive Director of the Hispanic Task Force of Lee County, North Carolina. I am pleased that the members of the Hispanic Advisory Committee represent a crosssection of our state's diverse Latino population. I rely on their insight and knowledge to advise me on issues important to their community. For instance, during our last meeting held on August 23, 2001, members of the Second Congressional District Latino Advisory Committee raised a number of diverse concerns. Mr. Speaker, prior to the terrorist attacks of September 11, immigration and amnesty proposals were hot topics in Washington, and the Bush Administration was contemplating major changes in U.S. immigration policy. Latino Advisory Committee members expressed concerns that any immigration and amnesty proposal should address a number of key points: family reunification, earned access to legalization, border safety and protection, an enhanced temporary worker program, and fairness for immigrants and legal residents. However, as we all know, the terrorist attacks put immigration liberalization proposals on the backburner. It is my hope that the Congress will not forget the plight of America's immigrant families, who still need our help. Latino Advisory Committee members also raised concerns about extension of the Section 245(i) Visa Program. Mr. Speaker, the Section 245(i) Visa Program allows illegal immigrants to apply for permanent residency while remaining in the country. Our members expressed serious concerns that the expiration of the Section 245(i) Visa Program would unnecessarily rip immigrant families apart. I believe that Congress must answer the call for fairness and justice in our immigration laws and extend the Section 245(i) Visa Program. Immigration has played a critical role in America's history, and immigrants have been essential to the development of our economy and our society. I was disappointed that conferees to the Fiscal Year 2002 Commerce-Justice-State Appropriations bill elected to omit a Senate provision that would have permanently extended this worthy program. It is my sincere hope that Congress will extend the Section 245(i) Visa Program soon. Mr. Speaker, the next meeting of the Second Congressional District Latino Advisory Committee will be held on February 20. 1 look forward to another lively discussion with our members about ways in which I can better serve them in the U.S. House. I extend my sincere gratitude to each member of the Latino Advisory Committee for their participation in this group. The most important job I have as a Congressman is to be the voice of the people. In the Second District we have many different voices and more than one language, and contributions of our Latino Community help bring us all together as one unifying chorus. I encourage each of my colleagues to consider establishing similar committees in their own districts.

Mr. ETHERIDGE

Mr. ETHERIDGE. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in support of meaningful campaign finance reform. I strongly support serious reform of the campaign finance system. We must eliminate the corrupting influence of special interest money from our political system and restore the faith of the American people in our public institutions. Neither party can claim total innocence of Washington misdeeds, and I believe the people of North Carolina sent me to Congress to work in a bipartisan manner to serve the public interest. That is what I try to do every day as a United States Representative. At the beginning of the105th Congress, my freshman class agreed that we would work on a bipartisan basis to reform the way that campaigns for public office are funded in this country. Since then 5 years have passed and we have yet to see any campaign finance reform signed into law. Today we have a chance to pass legislation sponsored by Representatives Shays and Meehan that is almost identical to Senate- passed legislation sponsored by Senators McCain and Feingold. If we are able to pass this legislation without too much change we can send this legislation directly to President Bush who has promised to sign it. I sincerely regret that the Republican Leadership is working to alter, weaken and undermine the responsible campaign finance reform legislation sponsored by my colleagues Representatives Shays and Meehan in order to send it to a Conference where it is sure to die yet again. The people of this country are discouraged by this type of cynical behavior from this Congress and will not be fooled by this attempt to bury campaign finance reform legislation. Mr. Chairman, the American people deserve a campaign election system with integrity. I sincerely hope that meaningful campaign finance reform will be signed into law before the end of the 107th Congress. Mr. STARK Mr. Chairman, I rise today in strong support of H.R. 2356, the Shays-Meehan Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act of 2001. Campaign Finance reform is long overdue and I am very pleased, after such a long struggle with those who oppose reform, to see this bill on the floor today. Money has become far too important to our campaigns and reform is certainly necessary. In my opinion, we should do away with our private campaign financing system altogether and publicly fund political campaigns. This would level the playing field so that anyone could participate in the political process. Though the Shays-Meehan bill doesn't go that far, it certainly makes dramatic improvements. This bill has several important provisions to improve our campaign finance laws: it bans soft money from national parties; it reins in campaign advertisements which claim to be ``issue advocacy'' ads; it enhances disclosure of political expenses; and it provides the Federal Election Commission with stronger tools to enforce campaign finance laws. By passing this bill today, we as leaders can finally recognize what the American public has known for years: there is too much money in politics. In the last election, the average winning House candidate raised $919,649 toward his or her election. The average winning Senate candidate raised $7,345,468. With this much money in politics, it is virtually impossible for elected officials to remain unaffected by the disproportionate influence of those who wield tremendous wealth. If only we were raising these millions of dollars to provide health insurance for our nation's children. Now that would be a worthy expenditure of funds. If our government is truly to remain ``of, by and for the people,'' then we must ensure that the people, not corporate donors, are responsible for electing their leaders. The Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act of 2001 will go a long way toward ensuring this goal. I will vote for this very important bill and I urge my colleagues to do the same.

Mr. ETHERIDGE

Mr. ETHERIDGE. Mr. Speaker, today I rise to honor the life of Mr. Everette Suitt, of Harnett County, who died on January 2, 2002. In his passing, Harnett County lost one of its most indefatigable champions. Born in Granville County, Mr. Suitt graduated from Boone Trail High School in Harnett County in 1950, served in the Army during the Korean War, and came home to become Boone Trail area's most outstanding community leader. Mr. Suitt was a 30-year member of the Boone Trail Advisory Board, was a member of the first Board of Directors of the Boone Trail Emergency Services, and was president of the Western Harnett High School Boosters Club from 1977 to 1995. He was a founding member of the Calvary Baptist Church and was a leading tobacco farmer and lifelong Democrat. Mr. Suitt is survived by his wife of 48 years, Ernestine O'Quinn Suitt, two daughters, Teresa S. Cummings of Mamers, and Carla S. Obiol and husband, his brother, John, of Raleigh; a sister, Lila Allen of Lillington and grandchildren, Allison and David Cummings, and their father, Lewis, all of Lillington, and Alexandra Obiol of Raleigh: and a brother-in-law, Harold Edwards of Rocky Mount. It was my honor to be asked to offer the following eulogy at the funeral of this good man: Everett Suitt was my friend, as he was yours. As we gather here today, I hope we can suppress as best we can our sadness at the loss of a good husband, father, grandfather, and community leader and instead concentrate on the celebration of Everette's life and contributions. They are many, and this community and this county are a better place because this good man lived among us. It has been said that God expects only this of each of us- that we take the world into which we are born and strive to make it a better place in which to live. Everette Suitt certainly did so and did so successfully. Everette loved life and enjoyed it as few of us are privileged to do. He smiled often and laughed long. He had a personality that made us want to be around him, to talk with him, to laugh with him. He was often the sunshine drawing us through dreary days. I knew Everette for more than 30 years; I don't remember a single time when he was not trying to help me do the right thing for our county and our state. He was one of the men who served as an inspiration to me. I often sought his counsel. Everette Suitt loved his wife, his two daughters, his grandchildren, and the grandchild on the way who sadly will never know him except through the memories of others. Everette was a family man in the most pure sense of the word. He loved sports, particularly the teams of Duke University and the New York Yankees. He loved his community: the old Boone Trail High School and, later, Western Harnett High School. And he loved all the students who passed through that school year after year. Can anyone imagine being president of the Western Harnett Boosters Club for two or three years? Everette did that job for 18 years and loved every minute of it. He loved his church and his community. He loved the Democratic Party. And he served all three with loyalty, with dedication, with humility, and with faith in God. While this is a sad day for all of us, it would be wise of us to remember the words of the great artist, Leonardo da Vinci, who said on the death of a friend: ``As a well-spent day brings happy sleep, so a life well used brings a happy death.'' Certainly, Everette Suitt's life was well used. We are saddened at the loss of this good man. As the poet John Donne has reminded us: ``* * * any man's death diminishes me, because I am involved in mankind. Therefore, never send to know for whom the bell tolls. It tolls for thee.'' Today, the bell tolls for us as Everette goes to his heavenly home. But I would predict that Heaven today is a happier place than it was a few days ago. That Everette is rushing around greeting those who have gone on before and renewing acquaintances. That his happy smile has already endeared him to the Community of Angels. That he is already volunteering to take on whatever job God feels needs doing to improve the community. And even to suggest a few tasks himself. Goodbye, Good Friend. Amen.

Mr. ETHERIDGE

Mr. ETHERIDGE. Madam Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman for yielding me this time. I thank the chairman and the ranking member of the Committee on Financial Services for approving this important piece of legislation and getting it to the floor this evening. Madam Speaker, the two previous bills really set the stage for this piece of legislation this evening because we really are talking about our heroes in this country. I am reminded as we start to talk about this legislation this evening, I remember when I presented General Shelton to the Members of Congress right after he was sworn in as chairman of the Joint Chiefs. He grew up in what was then my congressional district. North Carolina changed districts in 1998, and his parents now live in the district of the gentlewoman from North Carolina (Mrs. Clayton), but I said that evening that General Shelton and I came from areas so small that we would use the adjoining town to determine where we were from, we were from crossroads communities, but that has nothing to do with a man that has risen to the heights of General Shelton. Madam Speaker, as Members have heard, on October 1, U.S. Army General Henry H. ``Hugh'' Shelton retired as Joint Chiefs of Staff of the United States. General Shelton's retirement capped an extraordinary military career that brought him from the farm fields of eastern North Carolina to the jungles of Vietnam, to Desert Storm and the sands in the Middle East, to the top command of the most powerful military force on the face of the earth. This bipartisan bill will bestow a fitting tribute to this superior warrior and great American who served our Nation with distinction for 38 years. Henry H. Shelton was born in 1942 in a small, rural crossroads community of Speed, North Carolina. He earned a Bachelor of Science degree from North Carolina State University in my congressional district before going on to earn a Master of Science degree from Auburn University. Having joined ROTC, the Reserve Officer Training Corps, while in college, Hugh Shelton was commissioned as a Second Lieutenant in the infantry in 1963. General Shelton served two tours of duty in Vietnam, the first with the Fifth Special Forces Group, the second with the 173rd Airborne Brigade, before rising to command the 1st Brigade of the 82nd Airborne Division at Fort Bragg, North Carolina. After promotion to brigadier general, he served with the 101st Airborne Division during his 7-month deployment to Saudi Arabia for Operation Desert Shield and Desert Storm. He returned to Fort Bragg after the Persian Gulf War and commanded the legendary 82nd Airborne Division. He served as Commander- in-Chief of United States Special Forces Command prior to his two tours as Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. General Shelton's awards, decorations and medals are too numerous to list now, but I include them for the RECORD.

Mr. ETHERIDGE

Mr. ETHERIDGE. Mr. Speaker, I was unavoidably detained on H.R. 2657-- Rollcall 502. Had I been present I would have voted ``aye.''

Mr. ETHERIDGE

Mr. ETHERIDGE. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.

Mr. ETHERIDGE

Mr. ETHERIDGE. Mr. Speaker, I want to commend the conferees for a job well done. Mr. Speaker, I rise to speak about the conference report on H.R. 1, the Leave No Child Behind Act. I want to commend Ranking Democrat George Miller, Chairmen John Boehner and Congressmen Dale Kildee and Mike Castle for their leadership over the past many months on this most important issue. As the only Member of the United States Congress who has actually run a state school system, I have a unique perspective on federal support for public education. Perhaps the most important provisions of this legislation are those that are not contained in this conference report. There are no vouchers to siphon public dollars to private schools. There are no irresponsible block grants like those that have been proposed before in this Chamber. There is no effort to close the U.S. Education Department by the Republican Leadership. And there are no massive cuts to public education like those we have defeated time and again in this body. Those are very significant accomplishments, and I especially commend my Democratic colleagues for maintaining our party's historic commitment to quality public education for all children. As the former Superintendent of North Carolina's public schools, I know firsthand what it takes to achieve real results in academic improvement. It takes setting high standards and ensuring accountability. But most importantly, it takes a commitment to ensure that all of our children have quality educational opportunities to achieve the goal of ``no child left behind.'' Although this bill falls short of fulfilling our commitment to fund the federal mandate on special education, I am pleased that this conference report takes significant steps toward substantial improvement in education. The bill targets federal funds toward the neediest students to close the achievement gap between disadvantaged children and their more affluent peers and between minority and non- minority students. The conference report strengthens teacher training so that our school teachers are qualified to teach in their subject matter. It provides new resources for mentoring, training, salary enhancement and other improvements that give teachers the resources they need to do their very important jobs. For the first time in federal law, this bill will require that parents are clearly informed about the quality of their children's education. And it makes a significant new commitment to bilingual and immigrant education. I am disappointed that the conferees did not include the Wamp- Etheridge amendment to provide $50 million in dedicated funding for character education. The conference report instead includes character education in the Secretary's discretionary Fund for the Improvement of Education, and I call on the Secretary to fully fund character education, which we have pioneered in North Carolina to strengthen values-based lessons for our children. Finally, Mr. Speaker, this country faces several critical educational challenges beyond the scope of this legislation. First, we must take action to relieve the crisis of the lack of adequate school facilities in this country. In my district, our schools are bursting at the seams, and too many children are stuffed into overcrowded classrooms or second rate trailers. We must pass school construction legislation to help build new schools for our children. We must invest in science and math to ensure America's global economic leadership in the 21st century. We must increase aid for college so middle class families have the opportunity to achieve the American Dream. We have so many educational challenges ahead of us that we must treat this bill as the very beginning of our commitment to improving education and not the end of the process. In conclusion, this legislation will only work if we back up its requirements with the resources to get the job done. Tough reform without resources simply amounts to cruelty to our children. I understand that the appropriations bill nearing completion contains enhanced education resources for next year. We still must do much more to live up to the federal commitment under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), and I will be working during next year's reform of that statute to fulfill that commit. My biggest concern is that in the hears to come, especially when the full effects of this year's massive tax bill are felt, Congress will neglect to provide the necessary resources to fulfill the promises of H.R. 1. I will fight every step of the way to make sure that does not happen. Mr. Speaker, this bill represents a hopeful first step toward better schools for all children in America. I will vote to pass the conference report on H.R. 1, and I urge my colleagues to join me in doing so.

Mr. ETHERIDGE

Mr. ETHERIDGE. Mr.. Speaker, I rise today to speak about H.R. 3005, the Trade Promotion Authority Act. The vote on this bill has been a very difficult decision for me. My home county and my hometown have been hit hard in recent months by layoffs and closures of textile manufacturing plants. In many of these towns, several generations of families have worked at these textile plants, and when the plants closed our way of life was shaken and our hometown identities were forever changed. I hurt for each and every worker who has lost a textile job and for each and every family that faces economic uncertainty as a result of these layoffs. We must provide them generous assistance to meet their short-term needs. We must provide them the education and training to equip them with the skills to fill 21st century jobs. And we must pass policies for economic growth that will create those employment opportunities. But, Mr. Speaker, the fact is that defeating Trade Promotion authority will not bring back a single textile job that we've lost. Defeating Trade Promotion Authority instead will wave a white flag of surrender to our economic competitors around the world and will mean fewer jobs to replace the ones we've lost. The workers in my home state have proven that we can compete and win in the world economic arena. Last year, my state's export sales totaled $15 billion, a 10.3 percent increase in one year. In the seven-year period between 1993 and 2000, North Carolina's exports grew by 88 percent. Those exports fueled tremendous economic growth, created unprecedented employment opportunities and placed North Carolina at the forefront of America's global economic leadership. In the latest available data, North Carolina depends on manufactured exports for 285,600 jobs. That is the seventh highest total in the United States. 6,869 companies--including 5,609 small and medium-sized businesses--export from North Carolina. The number of companies exporting from North Carolina rose 79 percent between 1992 and 1998. Our state is truly export-dependent, and we need Trade Promotion Authority to break down barriers to overseas markets so that our technology, agriculture, manufacturing and other sectors can expand on our progress in international competition. If we fail to gain access to these markets, it is a guaranteed fact that our overseas economic competitors will exploit that opportunity and deal a huge blow to our global economic leadership. Every $1 billion in exports creates 20,000 jobs here in America, and a successful multilateral trade agreement could reasonably result in expanding exports by $200 billion a year producing 4 million new jobs here in America. And jobs supported by exports pay significantly higher wages than jobs that only support domestic markets. Clearly, expanding exports is the key to expanding prosperity for American workers, and Trade Promotion Authority is the key to expanding exports. It is important to note that this bill is not itself a trade agreement. It simply provides the President the authority past Presidents, both Democrats and Republicans, have traditionally enjoyed to negotiate with our trading partners to obtain the best deal possible for America's economy. I want the President to know that I intend to hold his feet to the fire to make sure he looks out for the best interests of my constituents in those negotiations. And I want the committees of jurisdiction to exercise their Congressional oversight role vigilantly. I certainly reserve the right to oppose any trade deal that is not in the best interests of North Carolina, and I will not hesitate to exercise that right. I have voted against trade deals in the past. In short, I'm going to be watching these negotiations like a hawk. Finally, Mr. Speaker, I am compelled by the fact that we are a nation at war. All Americans are united behind the President as he and our nation's military seek to rid the world of the terrorist threat. Although I may disagree with the President on some of his domestic policies, this is a matter of major international importance. In conclusion, I will vote ``yes'' on H.R. 3005, and I urge my colleagues to join me in doing so.

Mr. ETHERIDGE

Mr. ETHERIDGE. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the gentleman for putting this Special Order together this evening, and I join my colleagues in rising to honor the brave men and women who perished on September 11. Mr. Speaker, we know full well that on that fateful morning, which really was a beautiful morning here in this country, a very clear day, America was visited by evil unlike any time in the history of this country. The victims came from all walks of life and from every racial and national background. They simply were lost because they were doing their job on that morning. We saw a lot of heroes that day. People we sort of take for granted, firemen, police officers, emergency management people and EMS employees, a lot of folks that we see every day and we forget how much they contribute to our society. But today I want to talk about the memory of one of those people who lost his life because he was doing the job that he was trained to do. He was among the men and women whom we lost on September 11, Lieutenant Commander Eric Cranford. He was a graduate and active alumnus of North Carolina State University, and was from my congressional district. He lost his life during the attack on the Pentagon. He was a Navy rescue pilot. Lieutenant Commander Cranford knew danger. He knew sacrifice, and it is said that courage could have been his middle name. If Eric had not been in the Pentagon on that fateful morning, or if his side of the building had not been hit, you can bet he would have sacrificed his own safety and risked his own life to rescue others, because that is what he had done before. Why? Because that was his job. I rise this evening to pay my respect to him and his wife, Emily, and to their entire family. Unfortunately, Lieutenant Commander Eric Cranford was not alone that evening. As we know, thousands of other American citizens perished when those four commercial planes were turned into missiles and aimed at buildings that define our Nation and symbolize our freedom and the values that all of us hold true and dear. These attacks result in the loss of life on a scale unparalleled in America since the Civil War. The victims of these senseless acts were our mothers and fathers, our sons and daughters, our brothers and sisters, our friends and yes, our neighbors and loved ones. Mr. Speaker, I rise this evening with a heavy heart. We are at war, as we all know right now. A war Eric Cranford and those who lost their lives at the Pentagon would have been ready to fight if they had been called upon. Today we face one of the greatest challenges to our freedoms since World War II. The terrorists who committed these terrible acts on completely innocent men, women and children are not just criminals, they are mortal enemies of the United States of America and of freedom-loving people around the world. But these cowards will not hide forever, and we will pursue them and the international community will bring them to justice so that those who perished on September 11 lives will not be in vain. We will show the world that any enemy who chooses to test our resolve and the allies of America will face a similar fate. We will win this war because we cannot afford to fail, and we will win this war for Eric Cranford and the thousands who lost their lives on September 11, and we will win it for Eric's wife, Emily, and for the countless thousands who were left behind to mourn. We will win it because we are a good and a just Nation, and because evil must not be allowed to flourish anywhere in the free world. We will show these cowards that their efforts to terrorize us will not succeed. But as we turn our thoughts toward the conflict in Afghanistan and the global war against terrorism, let us never forget the casualties this war has already produced. Mr. Speaker, let us honor the memory of Lieutenant Commander Eric Cranford and every victim of this senseless attack. I thank my colleagues for having this Special Order.

Mr. ETHERIDGE

Mr. ETHERIDGE. If the gentleman will yield to one other point, and he brought it to my attention when making his last point. The Federal Government, or any government entity for that matter, but by and large the Federal Government because they can go into the equity market and get any amount of money they need to get by just driving the rates up, and of course that happened and was happening in the 1980s and into the early 1990s. And of course what that did is crowd out private opportunities to get in unless they are willing to pay higher and higher interest rates. And we have seen lower interest rates in the 1990s with tremendous economic growth that literally most of the economists did not understand originally because of what was happening. But one other point on the proposed tax bill, and I really call it a tax bill because of what it was on the alternative minimum tax and others that went all the way back to 1985. My State of North Carolina, and 24 other States, find themselves this year in tough economic times because of the downturn. They are facing tough budget situations.

Mr. ETHERIDGE. New Jersey as well, and most States. But in that package, quietly hidden, when you repeal some of the pieces they wanted to repeal in it, my State gets hit with something like $170 million or $180 million the first year, almost $200 million dollars, when the General Assembly has been in the longest session in history struggling with one of the biggest deficits, almost a billion dollars in the State budget, struggling with how to work that balance of making major cuts without cutting all the services, and ultimately, in the end, struggling with how they would balance cuts with additional revenues to get there. And that kind of hit would tip them right back over the edge again and we would see major cuts in education and other vital services. I do not think anyone intentionally did it; I believe they just do not understand. We have to do a better job so they will understand it and will not make those kinds of mistakes. Because not only will we be in trouble at the Federal level, but I think we stand on the verge of pushing a lot of States into deep trouble. I trust my colleagues in the majority will understand that and back away from that kind of mistake because I think we are getting ready to run right over the cliff.

Mr. ETHERIDGE. He is a lot like a lot of our farmers. They are staying in business, but they are living off their equity. He has his limousine service and his equipment is depreciating. But if he does not make a profit, pretty soon he will not be able to pay his employees and his equipment will wear out. We had a meeting in my district, and my colleague, the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Price), joined me several weeks ago. I remember distinctly we had two unemployed workers with us, really nice ladies. One of them worked for Midway Airlines. As a result of September 11, they had to shut down. We hope they will get back up, but she lost her job immediately. She had two small children. And she says, I want to go to work. She said, I need to work; I need the insurance. She had worked for something like 6 or 8 years for the company, and all she was asking was an opportunity to work. She was not asking for anything else. She said, I cannot make it with my two children; I cannot buy insurance. That is why it is so important to have it funded at a level when I am unemployed so at least I can cover my children. Another lady had worked for a textile firm 33 years, and she lost her job. She said you cannot imagine how you feel when you back up to the door and load up everything you have worked with for over 30 years in the back of that truck and carry it home with you and you do not have a job. She was not old enough, obviously, to retire on Social Security. Seems, as I remember, she was in her late 50s. Had worked all her life. Just delightful people who want to work. And I think that is an obligation that we have, to help build that bridge for those people who really do want to get back in the workforce, who want to participate in this economy, want to help America grow. And that is how we build the wall against terrorism at home, by helping strengthen our economy and giving people a chance to participate in one of the great economic successes in the world. It really is the American worker, it is the person who is at the door of the business, it is the person who helps clean the offices, it is the person who works on the production line, who works in the service station, any number of places, wherever they may be. They are really the heart and soul of the economy in this country. And we in this body, in my opinion, not only have a responsibility but we have a moral obligation to help them out.

Mr. ETHERIDGE. Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague, the gentleman from New Jersey, for yielding to me. I also appreciate his leadership on this very important issue, because it really is important. Mr. Speaker, we talk about a lot of things here in this people's House, but today the American people face a war on terrorism, not only here at home and around the world, but we also face an economic recession here at home, as my good friend, the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Pallone), has so eloquently talked about. It has now been verified by the economists who do these things. I think the American people have come together like I have never seen them in my lifetime since September 11. I know in my district, I have always thought it to be a fairly patriotic place, and I think they are; but I have seen more American flags flying as I travel across North Carolina than ever in history, certainly, over the past 10 weeks. In Congress, we need to do our part to help people address the economic problems that they now face. I think that is what we are talking about tonight. We face probably one of the greatest challenges when we talk about the issue of terrorism as a result of September 11 that I think we have faced probably since World War II, and we saw evil in this country unlike we have ever seen it before. The economy was already slowing down, as many know. That did not help it at all. That attack, I think, really pushed us on the brink of and into a recession. Many sectors of our economy have been affected adversely by that attack. In October, as an example, the unemployment rate jumped a half a percentage point, to 5.4 percent. That is a 5-year high. I have not seen the latest numbers, but that was the biggest monthly increase in 20 years. So this year we have seen the economy go from having a surplus to something we are not sure what we are going to have as it relates to our budget when we end this year. Last month, the U.S. manufacturing activity plunged to the lowest level in more than a decade, and it is clear that we are hurting across the board. No sector of our economy is immune from this economic slowdown, and my district has been hit particularly hard. Not only does it have a lot of high tech in it, it has a lot of farming interests; as a result of that, a lot of manufacturing and textiles and furniture. We have just seen people lose their jobs by the hundreds and by the thousands. Today I call on this Congress to come together and pass an economic stimulus package that gets people back to work. It will get our economy rolling again, and it will impact people, the people that work, the people that are unemployed, the people that need to buy groceries, people that need to buy clothes for their children and medicine. And a package that passes should strengthen the economy by investing in America's workers and small businesses and not by passing massive tax breaks for wealthy corporations. They may need a tax break, but they do not need to be first in line. They have already been first in line once. They do not need to line up again. I have got people in my district who have been unemployed and their benefits are running out and it is now moving toward Christmas-time. The thing we ought to be doing is what we did in our Democratic package by extending unemployment benefits for those who do not have a job. Help them across these tough times so they can find a job. Let me make sure that all my colleagues understand, and I think they agree with me, or most of them do at this point, that we support the President 100 percent in his battle against terrorism. Because it is all of our battle. It is a battle that we have to win. And he needs our support, and he has it. And I think all Americans, Democrats, Republicans, Independents, Liberals and Conservatives, are together on this behind our Commander-in-Chief on this effort against terrorism. But on the economy, that is a different matter. Because I believe the House Republican leadership was absolutely wrong to ram through this House a special interest tax break and calling it a stimulus package. It really was not a stimulus package. It did not help the people that need help. That is how you stimulate the economy. You help people that will spend money. It is amazing to me in January and February and every time since then we have said to the American consumer, get out and spend money. Buy things at Christmas. It is kind of hard to buy things if you do not have any money, and you cannot borrow it if you do not have a job. That is basic economics. The American people do not need assurances that these tax cuts will get the economy back on its feet. What they really need is a job. I have got people in my district who want to work. They just want a place to go to work. They want to provide for their families and keep their homes in order, pay their bills. They do not need pats on the back and rhetoric about the strength and spirit of the American worker. They need a job. That is all they want, a place to work. I say to my colleagues, praise does not pay the bills, and you cannot cash encouragement. We need a package that will produce real results for those affected by this economic downturn. That is how we are going to shorten the cycle and get this economy going again. Congress must take effective action of passing legislation that will help our economy grow and create jobs. You do that by helping the people who work. We can start by funding some common-sense ideas. They are very simple, and there have been a number of editorials in some of the major papers in the country. We have got ready to go construction projects. We are going to spend the money over the next several years. Why not speed them up and put thousands of people to work? We could build airports and do airport security, things we need to do for terrorism, put the security in place faster, put people to work. There is a lot of infrastructure that needs to be put in place. We have got thousands of children across this country, thousands in my home State. We could be spending some of the money on school construction. That would put a lot of people to work and improve the quality of education, and it would say to our communities what is most important to them is that we are planning for the future and not looking to the past. Because we have a lot of communities, my community, the gentleman's, everybody in this body that is seeing any kind of growth that is facing this job problem, and I certainly have fought for school construction. I know my colleague, the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Pallone), has. He has talked about it many times. I remember when I was State superintendent, I fought the issue, and I am still doing it. I have seen more school principals talk to me as I have been in schools, and I go about every week. They tell me how vulnerable they feel they are on security with children outside in trailers separated from the main building. When it rains, they get wet. When it is cold, they have to put on a jacket to go inside to the bathroom, the library, et cetera. We could do something about it. Why not do something like that? In my State alone there are over 5,600 trailers in use. That is an increase of 16.4 percent in just the last 5 years. Now, granted we are a fast-growing State, as many others are, but we also have some very poor States. A full 10 percent of the students in North Carolina go to school in a trailer. I would not make that point if we were not doing our part. But we have counties that pass bond issues, large bond issues. I know of one county that just passed one by 70-some percent, the second bond issue they have passed in less than 5 years, and they still cannot catch up because they are growing so fast. Rather than give huge tax breaks to huge corporations, I think the stimulus package ought to focus on putting people back to work, getting children out of trailers and back in classrooms and in secure areas where they ought to be. We have a bipartisan school construction bill in this House committee with more than enough Members on it to pass it. Why cannot we get it to the floor? The leadership knows it will pass. They just will not let it come to the floor to pass. The American people need to know that the majority of the Members of this United States House will pass it, if we can get the leadership to put it on the calendar. They will not put it on the calendar. That is the kind of economic stimulus we need. It not only provides jobs but it will provide opportunities in the future, and it will make a difference in America by funding these kinds of worthy projects like these and others. Like we say in North Carolina, we can kill two birds with one stone. We can improve education, security at airports, bridges, roads, a multitude of other things that are out there that we are going to do, but we have to jump-start the economy and put people back to work. These are high-paying, high-quality jobs that will return tax dollars not only to the Federal Treasury but to local and State treasuries and improve the quality of life across this country. I also believe that an economic stimulus package should address the needs, as I said earlier, of these people who have lost their jobs through nothing they have done wrong. They have gone to work every day. They have put in a good day's work. They come home. They contribute in the community. They are members of booster clubs, PTAs, and they go to their churches and fire departments and rescue squads. And not only have they lost their jobs, but, as a result of it, they have lost their health insurance and the children have lost health insurance. Why is that so important? Because when that happens they do not get the physicals. They do not get the health insurance. Some of them may not even be able to get the emergency care they need. And if they do get it they go to the emergency room, and all of us pay if they cannot afford to pay. A great number of people who have lost their insurance, they lost it when they were laid off. In some cases, it was extended for a period of time. Others lost it as soon as they were laid off. The recovery bill that the House, the Democratic piece of it that we put forward that obviously did not pass because we did not have the votes, would cover health insurance costs for a portion of those workers and pay a piece of it when they went back to work. The one that did pass, that the majority passed through, would cover very few. It just will not get the job done. I think one of the scariest things that can happen to a young family is to have children or have a health care problem and know that if they get sick you have no assurance of any kind of quality health care and, in some cases, no health care because they do not have the insurance in case of an emergency. And I can state, having been superintendent of schools for the State of North Carolina, one can tell very quickly those children who come from homes who could not have health care benefits because they will not have the kind of quality care they need, and we see the results in the classroom. Many of these families, as I said, have small children. They certainly need that help. It is clear to me that we can and should and must do that, and I trust that the other body will send us a stimulus package with some of those pieces in it that is fair to all of those people in this country. I also believe we should increase the level, as I said earlier, of unemployment benefits for those who have lost their jobs, because it has not been increased since the 1980s. And certainly the cost of living has gone up, the cost of buying food. Probably the only thing we have seen go down lately is gasoline prices, and they will probably go back up. But the truth is, if one is unemployed and does not have the resources, one really does need something of a crutch to get to the next job until the economy turns around, and this will help. Since the last recession, which is now almost a decade ago at the beginning of the 1990s, unemployment benefits have not kept up with the cost of living. And there are a lot of folks who are recognizing that now, who find themselves for the first time, in some cases, in their career, unemployed, without the resources to meet basic needs. As a result, workers are hit awful hard when they lose their jobs, especially those who have not been there before and may not have saved the money to meet even the basic needs. People simply cannot survive off unemployment benefits these days. Unemployment insurance never was meant to take care of all of the needs. It was meant to take care of basics while a person was looking and getting back to work when jobs are available. And I believe that is an essential component of any economic package. It ought to have it in there. It ought to be a part of it, and we ought to get that done. We are now almost to Christmas. We have been here all year, all year, and it still is not done. We have a long agenda of things yet to be done. And there is another piece that we ought to deal with, and I trust any kind of final package that passes will be in it, is if we are going to have tax rebates, we ought to extend it to those who did not get it last time. And I am convinced those folks who, incidentally, who paid taxes, they pay them in in FICA and other taxes, they just did not pay enough in to meet the threshold to get the 300 or 600. But they will spend every penny of that money on those kind of necessary benefits, not a new car, but things like food and clothing and the utility bills, things they really need money for. That is how you stimulate the economy. When you get money, you spend it. You do not stash it away. They will put it back in those luxury items that all of us think about, as I said, in food, clothing, medicine, heat and shelter. That is the kind of stimulus package we need that will make a difference. A number of experts such as former Treasury Secretary Robert Rubin and even Chairman Greenspan have said, any kind of package we pass ought to be for the short term. It ought not be long term. It ought to be no more than 18 months at the most, 2 years at the outside. Simply because if you add it in longer than that, what do you do? You build inflation into the system. The last thing we need at a time when we really are trying to jump-start an economy, we are not trying to run it over the cliff. That is the difference. You just want to give it a jump-start. I think it is very simple that Congress has the power and in my view has a major obligation. This is something we could and should do to take these actions on behalf of the American people. Because it is not just the people who are unemployed that are hurting. They are just hurting a whole lot more than others. There are a lot of small business people who are hurting, also. And, yes, large corporations, many of them are, too, because they are not moving goods at the level they were. You do it when you have the unemployment level for the majority of people working, and we need to help get it back together. I think the House Republican leadership has a real choice, and I trust they will take the right road. They can lead, follow or get out of the way and let somebody else provide the leadership to get the job done. It is so important now at a time when I think the economy is where it can move forward and move very quickly if we did the right things. But if we do the wrong things, if we do the wrong things, and I pray we do not, we could find ourselves facing the same kind of problems that we faced in the early 1990s, 1991, 1992, with huge deficits as far as the eye could see, and it took almost 10 years to turn it into a surplus. There are those who are now saying we could very well be facing deficits all over again, and I think the leadership in this body needs to make sure we pass us a stimulus package that is responsible, that is focused, that is short term, that gets people back to work but does not break the bank. It has to be paid for. It has to be paid for, and I think it should. And it is important that we help those who did not get help last time. This should be a stimulus package, not another tax package.

Mr. ETHERIDGE. The gentleman's point is well taken, because the equity markets are based on the stock market. They understand these things. There is a reason why the long-term rates, and I really believe this, and the people who follow it will say this, there is a reason why they are not coming down. They see what is happening right here in Washington, and if the out years of the revenue of the Federal Government, the taxes, start to drop off, and expenditures of the dollars we have going, at some point we will cross that and the Federal Government will be back to borrowing money and it will drive the rates back up. That is why it is so important that we do smart things. Smart things. We can do a combination of probably all of it. I always tell folks, and I know some of my colleagues chuckle when they hear me say this, but I grew up on a farm in eastern North Carolina, and I always remember something people used to say, and that is ``Pigs get fed, hogs get slaughtered.'' And when you decide to get too much, you get in trouble. If we have a mix of helping, as we talked about earlier, helping those who have lost their jobs and giving some money for unemployment benefits and health benefits, and then we help business a little bit, then all of a sudden the whole economy comes up together. But if we weight it too much to one piece, then it tilts over. And we have been through that in the past, as my colleague pointed out earlier. We recognized in the early 1990s that it had to change and we changed that. And then what did we see? We saw people moving into jobs and working that had not worked in a long time. We had the lowest unemployment we have had in as long as I can remember in this country. Virtually full employment.

Mr. ETHERIDGE. Mr. Speaker, I think it would be inappropriate not to make this point tonight. There is a finite amount of money. The gentleman has said it, and the editorial has said it, and I mentioned it earlier. That is why it has to be paid for. If it is not paid for, and people should not misunderstand this, that money is coming out of the Social Security Trust Fund if it is not paid. The people who will be paying for that disproportionately are the lowest wage earners in the country because they are the people that pay into that system and they are depending on that. All of us are depending on it for our Social Security money down the road. If we take it out now, we know we are going to have needs down the road. We know we are going to have problems, and that cannot happen. It is one thing to have one group over here with a panel talking about saving it and putting the money in the stock market and the other to spend it in this House. That would be horrible. That would be horrible to the American people. We should not do it. Whatever we do, we should pay for it.

Mr. ETHERIDGE

Mr. ETHERIDGE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor Lt. Commander Eric Cranford, who lost his life in service to our nation on September 11th. A Navy rescue pilot, Lt. Commander Cranford knew danger, he knew sacrifice--and courage could have been his middle name. If Eric had not been in the Pentagon that fateful morning, or if his side of the building had not been hit, you can bet he would have sacrificed his own safety, risking his own life to rescue others. He had done it before. It was his job. And we pay our respects to him, his wife Emily Cozort Cranford and his entire family. I want to personally salute my friend and Emily's Uncle Jack Cozort who led efforts to establish a scholarship at North Carolina State University, Eric and Emily's alma mater, for Burke County students in Eric's name. Earlier this week, our nation observed Veterans Day in remembrance and in gratitude of the many men and women like Lt. Commander Cranford have served our nation so bravely in the United States military. Veterans have always represented what is best about our great nation, From the American Revolution's Minutemen to today's soldiers, sailors, airmen, and marines, American men and women have dedicated themselves to the preservation of liberty and democracy throughout the history of our country. Those in uniform--past and present--are the defenders of the American values that have made our nation strong and kept us free. I commend each and every one of them for their brave service to America. This Veterans Day, we gathered with heavy hearts and troubled minds. We are at war. It is a war Eric Cranford and those who lost their lives at the Pentagon on September 11th would have been ready to fight. Today, we face the greatest challenge to our freedom since World War II. September 11 will forever be remembered as a day that evil visited our great nation as never before. Four commercial planes were transformed into missiles and aimed at buildings that define our nation, and symbolize our freedom and values. These attacks resulted in a loss of life on a scale not seen in our country since the Civil War. The terrorists who committed these terrible acts on completely innocent men, women and children are not just criminals. They are mortal enemies of the United States of America. But these cowards cannot hide forever. We must pursue them to the ends of the earth to ensure that international terrorists can never again threaten innocent Americans. Once again, we have called on our men and women in uniform to defend those values we hold so dear. President Bush has said that this campaign will not be simple, it will not be quick, and it will not be without casualties. But we will show the world that any enemy who chooses to test the resolve of the United States and its allies will face the collective might of our military. I have full confidence in our Commander in Chief and our armed forces. We will win this war because we cannot afford to fail. We will win this war for Eric Cranford and the thousands who lost their lives on September 11. We will win it for Emily, and those who were left behind to mourn. We will win it because we are a good and just nation and because evil must not be allowed to flourish anywhere in this world. We must show these cowards that their efforts to terrorize us will not succeed. As we pray for those fighting to avenge the terrible events of September 11, let us not forget those who came before them. Their great strength and sacrifice during the conflicts of the Twentieth Century moved heaven and earth, and showed the world that the American warrior is the most potent force on the face of the earth. Millions of men and women served bravely in the first and second World Wars, the Korean Conflict, the jungles of Vietnam, and the sands of Desert Storm. But many who served did not come home. They came from every walk of life. They were our friends, neighbors, mothers, fathers, sons, daughters, sisters and brothers. They were ordinary and extraordinary all at once, and all Americans should honor their sacrifices. Freedom is not free. But freedom is worth fighting for. On Veterans Day, and every day, let us salute Lt. Commander Cranford and all our nation's veterans. May God Bless America, now and forever.

Mr. ETHERIDGE

Mr. ETHERIDGE. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the Conference Agreement on H.R. 2500, the Fiscal Year 2002 Commerce, Justice, State Appropriations bill. In the wake of the September 11 terrorist attacks, strengthening law enforcement at the federal level has never been more important. This conference agreement includes $2.5 billion for the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), a nine-percent increase over last year's funding level. Over $450 million of this total will be used for counterterrorism investigations, foreign counterintelligence activities, and other initiatives vital to our national security. I am also pleased that this agreement provides additional resources to help keep terrorists from entering our country. The conference agreement includes $5.6 billion for the Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS), $841 million more than last year's total. This funding increase will allow the INS to hire over 200 additional inspectors at airports to analyze traveler information in advance of plane arrivals to identify inadmissible aliens, drug traffickers and terrorists. The agreement also allocates $2.7 billion to help keep our borders safe and secure. This money will be used, in part, to hire 348 additional land border inspectors and 570 additional border patrol agents. The conference agreement to H.R. 2500 also includes $1.1 billion for the Justice Department's Community Oriented Policing Services (COPS) Program. I am especially pleased that conferees chose to include $300,000 from the COPS Technology Program, for an interconnect Module for Wake County, North Carolina. Mr. Speaker, within Wake County, almost 20 agencies have law enforcement and emergency management responsibilities. These agencies are not able to communicate with each other by radio because of incompatible equipment and varying bandwidths. In the event of a multi-jurisdictional catastrophe like the world witnessed on September 11, responding officers from different departments in Wake County would be unable to communicate with each other. I am pleased that the Interconnect Module technology will interface these different radio systems, allowing radio communication among all law enforcement and emergency management departments in Wake County and the surrounding areas. Mr. Speaker, in the aftermath of the terrorist attacks, it is vital that America's emergency responders be prepared to take quick action in the event of a catastrophe. This initiative will make a difference to enhance the safety and security of the people of North Carolina. Mr. Speaker, while I do believe this is a good agreement, I am disappointed that conferees elected to omit a Senate provision that would have permanently extended the Section 245(i) Visa Program. The Section 245(i) visa Program allows illegal immigrants to apply for permanent residency while remaining in the country. While the terrorist attacks have put immigration reform on the backburner, it should not prevent Congress from answering the call for fairness and justice in our immigration laws. Immigration has played critical role in America's history, and immigrants have made significant contributions to our economy and our society. It is my sincere hope that Congress will extend the Section 245(i) Visa Program before the end of this year. Mr. Speaker, our country is facing new challenges different than those any of us could have just imagined a few short months ago. But we must face these challenges head-on. The first responsibility of the federal government is to ensure the safety of our people, and I am pleased that this conference agreement will help law enforcement agencies across the country better protect our citizens and keep our people safe.

Mr. ETHERIDGE

Mr. ETHERIDGE. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Maine for yielding to me. I could not help but think that as we talk about this issue tonight how we got here. Our colleagues need to remember how we got here. Because I think it is important to also put it into perspective. We got here because we face one of the greatest challenges I think that we have faced as a Nation as a result of the September 11 attack, probably the greatest challenge we have faced since World War II. It will forever be a day when it was remembered when evil visited the shores of America unlike any time in the history of this country, when we lost more people in one day than probably any time since the Civil War, and even before that event, our economy was sort of teetering on the brink of a recession, certainly a slowdown, and that attack probably did push us to the edge. It really bothers me, and I want to reflect on that, that we are working so hard to collect to help support our troops overseas and work with the White House on these issues that our colleagues would take that opportunity and use that situation to turn in and fail to realize that this so-called stimulus package that they rammed through the House on a partisan vote, it is just the wrong way to go. It is the wrong way to go. It is really about, in the end, having spent a number of years in business and as a legislator before I came here and the superintendent of schools, I am always reminded that in the end, it is always about people. It is about people. In October, we saw the unemployment rate jump a half a point, to 5.4 percent, a 5-year high. It was the biggest monthly increase in over 20 years. Let me repeat that again. The biggest monthly increase in over 20 years. And what do we do? How do we respond to that? We do not respond to it by reaching out and helping those who are hurting so badly. We want to help those who are already doing okay. That is really not how we got to the best economy probably in our lifetime, and we are not going to get back there that same way. We know that no sector of the economy has been immune to this; but as the gentleman said, we had an opportunity to pass a very good stimulus package that would help get the economy going, help to get people working and get our economy moving again; and that is the kind of thing we need to have, not massive cuts for the wealthiest corporations who really would be happy to get it, I assume, and they would love to have it and the stockholders would be glad to have it. However, it is not going to help the kind of people I talked with today in Raleigh at a press conference. I talked to a lady who has been laid off who has two children who worked for Midway Airlines when they went bankrupt and shut down after September 11, and she is now unemployed and is now drawing unemployment. She said, I believe she told me she filled out something like 30-some applications in a bad economy, and she is still filling out applications. Another lady who has worked 33 years for the same company and she said, you know, you cannot imagine how bad it is to have to back up your truck to the place you worked for 33 years and they closed their doors, and all that you have worked for all your life is loaded into the back of a truck and you drive home. She said, my unemployment benefits run out January 1, and I do not know where I am going to work. She said, I am a proud person. I want to work. And I am still making applications, trying to get a job. That is what we ought to be about. We ought to be working together to get that done. That is how we stimulate the economy. Pass things that put people to work. Mr. Speaker, I think the House Republican leadership was absolutely wrong when they rammed through their special interest tax break and called it a stimulus package. It was not a stimulus package, and they know it. The American people do not need assurance that these tax cuts will get our economy back on its feet. They need jobs. I talked to people today who want a job. They just want to work. That is all they ask. They do not need pats on the back and rhetoric about the strength and spirit of the American worker. They need a job. That is all they want. Mr. Speaker, praise does not pay the bills, and you cannot cash encouragement. We need a package that will produce real results for those affected by the economic downturn. That is all they ask. They are just asking for a helping hand, a bridge, from now until the economy gets going. So how do we create those jobs? There are ways we can do it. The gentleman has laid out some of them tonight in a package of things we need to spend money for. They are appropriate. They are things we have in the pipeline. They are things we ought to be doing. The security of our airports. Construction projects that will help make America safer and productive. Sure, part of them are building roads that we are going to build any way, just speed them up. We could spend a little money building a few school buildings. Is it not amazing what that would do for America? It would improve education. It would say to our children that education really is the most important thing we want them to be about in their young lives, and it would put in place a lot of good- paying jobs in America. Mr. Speaker, there are things that we could be doing, working together, instead of playing the same old games that lead to nowhere, to help those special interest projects that are not going to pass. They are not going to pass Congress this year. So why are we still here, almost at Thanksgiving, not doing the work of the American people? I think the leadership has a responsibility, and I have always said, get out of the way or let somebody else do it, and it is time we get the job done for the American people. I yield back to the gentleman.

Mr. ETHERIDGE. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding. The gentleman has really touched on a very important point, because as we look at where we are today, where we want to get to tomorrow and next year and the year after for our children and hopefully our grandchildren, it really is important to be preparing and be making decisions that will not negatively affect our opportunity as a Nation and for those in business. What we do not want to do is build into any kind of economic stimulus package inflation. There is a reason why the long-term rates have not come down. All of this is in that. The gentleman touched on earlier the whole issue of health care, and I feel like I need to share that with my colleagues tonight, about the ladies I talked to today in Raleigh and the conference we had. They were talking about the need, and this economic stimulus package really ought to deal with these issues, people who have lost their jobs and lost their health care and have children and have families. This lady said today, she said, you know, as bad as it is losing a job and a paycheck, you cannot imagine how difficult it would be to wake up one morning and get a call from your employer and say, do not come to work today. You are no longer employed. So that is a shock enough, but all of a sudden when you realize your health care is gone with it. Now, you can buy into COBRA, but she shared with us the numbers today, and I do not remember the exact numbers, so I will not share those with my colleagues tonight; but what it amounted to is that her weekly unemployment checks over the month for her and her two children would have almost taken up every cent she got in unemployment to cover the cost for health care, with no money left to eat with and pay bills, et cetera. Any package we get ought to have opportunity for people to get from here to there and cover some benefits, pay down the cost so that they can be covered for them and their children. I mean, that is humane. Why would we not do that? Why would our colleagues not understand? When we send children to school and they leave in the morning, if an accident happens, they have no insurance, what are we doing to families? How can we say we are for families when we do not want to help children? That is what a stimulus package ought to be about. I do not understand it. I am sure the American people do not understand it either. We ought to take care of that. I yield back to the gentleman.

Mr. ETHERIDGE. Very briefly, and I thank the gentleman for this special order this evening, I think he is absolutely correct. As I look at the gentleman's chart and think of the choices, if we look at the vaccines and antibiotics we know we are going to need to face the challenges we face on bioterrorism, this is not a long-term commitment, this is a one-time thing. When we acquire it and get to that point, we will have it. We need to remember, too, that in addition to the commitments of those folks at home for jobs and opportunity, bridging the gap for the problems we face now, we also have that commitment to our seniors, that greatest generation the gentleman talked about, that paid in their Social Security dollars, and some others are paying in, that we were going to maintain that promise and commitment to them. There is not an endless supply of resources. This money will come out of those dollars. If we make it permanent, we will permanently impede our ability to meet the commitment to that greatest generation and others when they reach retirement age. That is bad public policy, it is wrong, and we have absolutely violated our commitment to them and to the commitments we made, as I said, last year and the year before that that we were not going to get into that money. We are in a crisis now, and people know we have to deal with immediate things. But these kinds of public policies are not in the best interests of this country, they are not in the best interests of our people, and they certainly are not in the best interests of the future, when we want to have economic activity at the levels we have seen before for our children and our grandchildren. I thank the gentleman because I think he is absolutely right. We can make good public policy. We can have a stimulus package that truly helps those who have a need and gets us back on the track to employment opportunities for the people who really need them.

Mr. ETHERIDGE. Mr. Speaker, I thank my friend, the gentleman from Maine, because he is absolutely right. On that point, there was another piece in the economic stimulus package that I think our colleagues need to remember. I remember what former Treasury Secretary Robert Rubin had to say about the stimulus package that passed, and what one of the alternatives we had in ours was that was so important, because in the previous package, they were left out. That was the low-income individuals who helped pay taxes but they did not get a rebate. In our package, that was in there as an alternative; I think it is appropriate. These were people, Mr. Speaker, that were left out in the original Bush tax plan, in the first rebate. These folks would put that money right back in the economy. Secretary Rubin has said and others have said that that is really where we ought to be putting it. Those folks would put it in the economy immediately, buying things and spending it on such ``luxury items'' as food, clothing, medicine, heat and shelter; things that help get the economy going. If we say it turns over six or seven times, that is really what we need. I got a telephone call this weekend, and will not share the lady's name. She is a very proud lady. She would not want her name shared. She has worked all of her life. She is probably in her early 80s now, or late 70s, I would say, or mid-70s, to be a little more accurate. But she was calling about prescription medicine, the issue the gentleman raised earlier. She said, ``You know, I would not want people to know, but I do not have the money to meet my medical bills each month and pay for my food and lodging. I just do not get enough money. When is Congress going to fulfill the promise that every politician made in the last election, Democrat and Republican? I remember the ads,'' she said. I agree with her. I remember the ads, too. I am not sure our colleagues on the other side remember those ads and those commitments they made. We now have a chance to do that in some way as part of this package. Promises made ought to be promises kept. I do not remember all these numbers the gentleman has shared that they had in their tax bill in TV ads during the last election. We may see them in the next election.

Mr. ETHERIDGE

Mr. ETHERIDGE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to take this opportunity to recognize a great partnership of the public school system and private sector in my congressional district in North Carolina, ``Bright Ideas.'' Bright Ideas is sponsored by North Carolina's 27 electric cooperatives. Each cooperative and their statewide association, the North Carolina Association of Electric Cooperatives, make grants directly to classroom teachers. Bright Ideas allows teachers with imagination and creativity to go the extra mile and, of course, students and the educational process are the ultimate beneficiaries. As a democratic nation, we enjoy and cherish unmatched rights and freedom. We are a land where individuals, regardless of background and circumstances of birth, can aspire to do great things. We need more ``Bright Ideas,'' not only in North Carolina but also throughout the nation. And we must make sure there is no pulling back, no reduction of support for our public schools as a result of the crises we face. It would be yet another tragedy if we somehow lost sight of our priorities and our public schools suffered. The Greek philosopher, Aristotle said 2500 years ago that, ``The fate of empires depends on the education of youth.'' As we work to ensure a secure future for our nation in light of unprecedented assaults on our way of life, it is important to remember this fact. During these uncertain times we must not lose sight of education as the foundation of our democratic and free society. We invest in our people by investing in our public education system. As we fight to preserve our way of life, public education--that solid rock upon which our society is built--absolutely must remain a top priority. And support must continue to come from both the public and private sectors. North Carolina's electric cooperatives are as committed to the public schools and to North Carolina's classroom teachers as they were in 1994 when they made their first Bright Ideas grant. Since then, the cooperatives have made almost $2.5 million in Bright Ideas grants to classroom teachers all across North Carolina to encourage creative instruction. This year alone they have budgeted almost $400,000 for grants. The North Carolina Association of Electric Cooperatives and the 27 local cooperatives are providing the funds. Bright Ideas projects are designed to spark the imagination of students through hands-on projects and to make learning experiences exciting, enjoyable and rewarding. In 2001, hundreds of North Carolina classrooms will become ``Bright Ideas Classrooms,'' and 70,000 students will have unique educational experiences that would not have been possible without this investment from the private sector. When I am asked, ``What can we do to help improve public school education?'' I often point to Bright Ideas as an example. This one program says a lot about the impact companies and organizations can have with a modest investment in our public schools and good teaching. Creative partnerships are desperately needed in most school systems to provide laboratory and telecommunications equipment, extra-classroom experiences, resources for athletic teams and bands who often receive little public funding, and grants for classrooms teachers, such as those North Carolina's electric cooperatives provide through ``Bright Ideas.'' Bright Ideas is not a one-size-fits-all grant program. It is unique because it begins in the classroom where teachers and students put their heads together and devise their own learning initiatives. Then the teacher asks the cooperatives to fund the project they have devised. Our President has urged us to not allow our lives to be further disrupted by the September 11 tragedies. I would add that while doing that we should make sure that our priorities remain firm. Former president Lyndon Johnson, who faced tremendous challenges during his administration, said, ``At the desk where I sit, I have learned one great truth. The answer for all our national problems--the answer for all the problems of the world--comes to a single word. The word is `education.' '' Continue to focus on improving public education. One great way to do that is to encourage public-private partnerships such as the Bright Ideas program in North Carolina that our electric cooperatives have initiated and, working closely with teachers, made so effective. America's future is bright, and one reason is Bright Ideas. I salute North Carolina's electric cooperatives for their continuing commitment to this program that enhances teaching in our public school classrooms, and I commend Bright Ideas.

Mr. ETHERIDGE

Mr. ETHERIDGE. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the Democratic alternative to federalize our airport security. September 11, 2001 will forever be remembered as a day that evil visited our great nation as never before. Four hijacked airliners were transformed into missiles, slamming into the Pentagon and the World Trade Center. These attacks caused enormous and previously unthinkable loss of life. The Senate has approved the Aviation Security Act by a unanimous vote of 100-0. This bill calls for a federal force of 28,000 passenger and baggage screeners and armed security guards at key checkpoints throughout airports. The bipartisan Senate plan includes many measures the President supports, including more plainclothes sky marshals on commercial flights and strengthened cockpit doors. The Aviation Security Act, as passed by the Senate, represents precisely the kind of action Congress should take to respond to the September 11 attacks. Mr. Chairman, the primary responsibility of the federal government is to ensure the safety and security of the American people. Our recovery from the economic downturn is being hampered by the public's fears about aviation security. Improving security at our nation's airports will have positive benefits on all aspects of our economy. When people see the level of security at their local airport increase, they will no longer be aftaid to return to the sky, and our country can get back to normal. This Congress must act and act now to ensure the safety of the flying public and get our economy growing again. We must show these evil-doers that their efforts to terrorize us will not succeed. I will vote in favor of H.R. 3150, the Secure Transportation for America Act, because I believe that we must get this process moving, but the Senate-passed Aviation Security Act is the far superior bill. We must put politics aside and put the interests of the American people first. I am hopeful the House and Senate will come together in a bipartisan way to pass sound airplane security legislation and send it to the President to be signed into law as soon as possible.

Mr. ETHERIDGE

Mr. ETHERIDGE. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this time. Mr. Chairman, I support the Democratic substitute in the interest of the American people.

Mr. ETHERIDGE

Mr. ETHERIDGE. Mr. Speaker, I will not say a lot about the package that passed today. I think it stands for itself. Maybe it does not stand, it just sort of crawls up and falls over for what it was. But I do want to say before I start talking about homeland security and economic security, there is another issue that is coming. The leadership is holding that one up, too, and that is a piece dealing with school construction for children. That issue is still out there. Children are still coming to school. They will still need those buildings next year. We act as though that is not an issue. I think the leadership of this body, the Republican leadership, has got to decide, that is a part of homeland security as much as economic security and military defense; and we have got to deal with it. But tonight I want to talk about the issue of homeland and economic security, because September 11, as we have already said this evening, is going to be remembered forever as a day when evil in its worst sense visited our great Nation as never before; and we saw hijacked airliners that were transformed into missiles. They slammed into the Pentagon, into the World Trade Center, and one of them into the fields in western Pennsylvania. Most of us know that that one also probably was headed to Washington, D.C. causing enormous and potentially unthinkable loss of life and did to this Nation's psyche something that has never happened before in America. The impact of the attacks on our economy, which was already slowing down, had a significant impact and is now really just coming to light. Nationally, initial reports indicate that the airlines; and we have talked about them this evening, have lost at least $3 billion. Earlier this week, I was at Raleigh-Durham Airport, really in the district of the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Price), used to be in the edge of mine, visiting with colleagues there. I think people here need to know and check with their own airlines and see what happened as we look across America, because it is more than the airlines. Let me just give you a for-instance. Right after September 11, Raleigh-Durham, which is a major regional airport in this country, had a 50 percent drop in airline traffic. Midway Airlines, a major sited airport in Raleigh, shut down. The ripple effect had tremendous magnitudes in a widespread area. As an example, parking lots saw a 26 percent decline. You say, what is that? That is no big deal. Yes, it is. You have to pay off the bonds that people have bought and paid for, the money that they invested, they have to be paid off. Taxi drivers saw a decrease in passengers of 40 percent. That has a significant impact on their family and the ripple effect in the broader economy. Those are just a few examples of what is happening all across America. Let me get to the real point. I wanted to lay that out as the economic piece that can be multiplied many times, but beyond those specific numbers, there are vendors, retailers, travel agents, any number of people that saw a significant impact in their business. Some early figures from October look a little more promising, but we still have a significant problem in the travel interests. Yet the single most effective action that we can take to bolster airline security, as my colleagues have already shared and the gentleman has alluded to earlier, is that we need to restore the confidence of the American consumer, that, number one, airplanes are safe, that airport security is secure and safe for them to travel and all the baggage has been checked and we have a way to jump-start our economy. Most folks do not realize that the airline industry represents about 10 percent of the gross domestic product in this country; and if you take the ripple effect, it is even more. One month after the attacks, the United States Senate, as has already been indicated tonight, approved the Aviation Security Act by a vote of 100-0. I would ask my colleagues to look in the books and see how many times the Senate has voted 100-0 on any major piece of legislation. They will probably have to look a long time. That is an indication of their commitment, Democrats, Republicans, liberals and conservatives, moderates and whatever you want, they understand the issue, they get it. They understand that to get the airlines flying and filling those planes again, people have to feel comfortable and safe. Their bill calls for a Federal force of about 28,000 passenger and baggage screeners and armed security guards at checkpoints throughout the airports. It includes many of the measures that President Bush had proposed, including more plainclothes sky marshals on commercial flights and the strengthening of cockpit doors. The Airport Security Act represents precisely the type of action that Congress should be taking in the wake of the September 11 disaster. But the House leadership, the Republican leadership, has failed to take this action and bring it to the floor. I wonder why they will not bring it to the floor. Because they know it will pass. If you do not think it will pass, bring it to the floor and let us see. I will guarantee you it will pass. The American people know that. That failure must not stand. We have to get it on the floor. While security at our Nation's airports has improved some since September 11, there is no doubt that we have a long ways to go; and we all know that. Despite a major push to make air travel safer, airline passengers are subject to inconsistent levels of scrutiny from airport to airport and in some places from airline to airline within the same airport. Why is that so? Because the airlines are doing the security. I will not go through the details like my colleague from New Jersey did because he has laid it out very well and I do not think it needs to be repeated, but the traveling public has a right to expect when they buy a ticket that they have a 100 percent screening standard and consistency and it is 100 percent effective on every passenger, on every piece of luggage and everything that goes on that airline. The airline in turn would pick up the tab. They are doing it now. But dadburn it, it makes no sense to stammer and stutter and argue. We would not do it if we were running an athletic team, we do not do it in this building, and no business in their right mind would do it if it affects the bottom line. My Democratic colleagues in the House have introduced an airport security bill which would fully federalize baggage screening within 1 year. That ought to be a part of it. And every bag ought to be screened fully one way or another. We have the technology. Congress absolutely must pass this legislation without further delay. Six weeks since the September 11 tragedy is too long. Congress can act when they want to act. The leadership can bring any bill they want to bring to the floor. They have done it any number of times since I have been here without it even going through committee. I do not ascribe to that philosophy, but this is one that ought to be on the floor of the United States Congress. And we ought to pass it quickly so that people are not afraid to fly. They will get back in the planes and get the country's business going. We are approaching the holiday season, the biggest travel season of the year; and we ought to get it passed in the next few days. I call on the leadership on the Republican side to bring this bill to the floor. I thank my colleague for bringing this issue to the floor tonight. I thank him for allowing me time to speak.