Rahm Emanuel

Mr. EMANUEL

Mr. EMANUEL. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to take my Special Order at this time.

Mr. EMANUEL

Mr. EMANUEL. Mr. Speaker, last Sunday, May 1, marked the 2-year anniversary of President Bush's speech abroad the USS Lincoln, the ``mission accomplished'' speech. So what have we accomplished in the last 2 years? Saddam Hussein's regime has fallen. Yet today we find ourselves mired in an endless occupation. This past January witnessed a successful election, yet progress on developing a functioning government has been slow at best. The terror and the insurgency remain as strong as ever and seems to be growing at certain points. Explosions killed more than 100 people last week alone. The economy is stalled, the civil society is unable to come together, and millions of Iraqis remain without regular electrical services and basic services from their government. The brave men and women of the United States Armed Forces continue to fight a very vigorous fight, but the battle has taken its toll. We have lost 1,600 fellow citizens in the last 2 years, 2\1/2\ years, and more than 12,000 have been wounded. The strain has been so great that recruiters cannot meet their enlistment goals. Through the first 5 months of fiscal year 2005, the Army is short of their recruitment goal by 15 percent. The Pentagon now says that they are stretched so thin it would be difficult for the military to meet other obligations should they need to do so. Mr. Speaker, Operation Iraqi Freedom was a war of choice. And as President Kennedy once said, to govern is to choose. One can only hope that the war in Iraq was the right choice. This week we will appropriate an additional $81 billion, bringing the total cost of the war in dollar sense, to $300 billion: $300 billion, 1,600 American lives, 12,000 citizens wounded. And yet the insurgency continues and the war goes on. The $300 billion we have added to the structural deficit is on top of a $2 trillion new debt created since President Bush originally took office in 2001. And what have we done while we have added $300 billion to Iraq? Every President when they have taken the battle and taken the war, has thought about how to build America post that war. President Lincoln finished the transcontinental railroad, the land grant colleges. Roosevelt not only had the Great Depression that he dealt with for the Great Society, and rather the New Deal. He also thought after the war of a GI bill. Universal health care with Harry S Truman. Eisenhower talked of the interstate highway. President Kennedy in the middle of his days of Vietnam thought of putting a man on the Moon. What do we think about at the end of the Iraq war, as we think maybe we will see a point on the horizon? We cut Medicaid by $10 billion. We eliminate vocational training. We eliminate the COPS program that puts 100,000 cops on the American streets. Every President and every Congress thought about America after the war, thought about what it could do, how do we build that future; not only what we did overseas, but what are we going to do for Americans here at home. We, unlike our predecessors, do not think of a vision in the future. We have thought about how to limit America's horizon and not think forward. This President made an attempt once to talk about putting a space ship on Mars, but we cancelled that. We have cancelled our review of the stem cells. We are not investing in America's future like we are investing in Iraq's future. $300 billion in Iraq. Sixteen hundred American lives. Twelve thousand wounded. $10 billion cut from our health care programs. Vocational training programs eliminated. Is this the tradition when Roosevelt thought of the GI bill after World War II, President Kennedy in the early days of Vietnam thought of a man on the Moon? Lincoln, in the days of the Civil War thought of reconstruction, the land grant colleges, and the transatlantic railroad system. This is not in the tradition of America to think less of our future than the one we are building overseas. We can do better than we are thinking of today. And all of the while that we are not investing in America and we are investing in Iraq, and we have put ourselves in line in Iraq, and everything of America is on the line there, North Korea has crossed the red zone, and now has the ability of nuclear capability. A senior military strategist testified in the Senate last week that North Korea can mount a nuclear weapon on their missiles. While we have been bogged down in Iraq, Iran is developing their capability. The fact is, if there is one area where the United States should be acting unilaterally, it is North Korea; the one place we should be acting in coalition is Iraq. We got it mixed up. But it is high time we invest in America and stop thinking less about our future and stop putting our dollars like we have in Iraq, start putting them here in America and follow the tradition that Presidents Lincoln and Kennedy and Johnson and Roosevelt did by thinking about the future for America.

Mr. EMANUEL

Mr. EMANUEL. Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank my colleague from South Carolina for yielding me this time. I rise in opposition to this economic blueprint which, for 3 years in a row, adds over $400 billion each year to the Nation's deficit, running a structural, basically putting in place structural deficits that added up to $2 trillion in over 4 years to our Nation's debt. All the while that we have added $2 trillion to the Nation's debt, we have taken every penny out of the Social Security surplus; $700 billion in 4 years. We have not left a single dime in there. Every penny we have taken out of Social Security. And while we have taken that $700 billion out of the Social Security surplus and have run up $2 trillion to the Nation's economy, to the debt, we have lost 2.7 million manufacturing jobs in 4 years; 43 million Americans are now without health care; and incomes are falling behind, in the last few years, behind inflation. That is the economic record of this budget; and rather than change directions, rather than launching in a new way to help Americans, what are we doing? The same old same old that will get the same results. The one thing that will always be said about this economic blueprint and this economic strategy is that we will forever be in your debt, and that will be the record of this economic strategy. That is what you will leave us. So while you produce a $2.7 trillion budget, you did not even meet the President's request for college assistance and Pell grants for $5.4 billion. You cut $10 billion from health care. And your economic strategy has left people without jobs, without health care, without the ability to pay for higher education, and their incomes are falling.

Mr. EMANUEL

Mr. EMANUEL. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize the contributions of the Schuster Family to the prevention and treatment of kidney and urinary tract disease. On April 27th, the National Kidney Foundation of Massachusetts, Rhode Island, New Hampshire, and Vermont will host a dinner with President Bill Clinton in honor of Gerald and Elaine Schuster and their two sons Mark and Scott for their 35 years of tireless dedication to this important cause. In 1954, Dr. Joseph Murray performed the very first organ transplant in the world at the Brigham and Women's Hospital in Boston. That same year, the National Kidney Foundation of Massachusetts, which would later expand to include Rhode Island, New Hampshire, and Vermont, was founded. For more than half a century since then, the National Kidney Foundation and its affiliates have played a crucial role in the prevention and treatment of kidney and urinary tract disease. In particular, the Foundation provides patient services, funding for much- needed research, free early-screening services, public and professional education, and organ donation information. In addition, the Foundation helps further the prevention and treatment of kidney and urinary tract disease. The Schuster Family has long played a vital role in the success of the National Kidney Foundation. As President of the National Kidney Foundation of Massachusetts, Elaine Schuster successfully advocated for including organ donation check-off on Massachusetts' drivers licenses in 1968, a move which has saved countless lives by giving every citizen an opportunity to get involved in an easy and direct way. In 1978, the Schuster family felt the impact of their work firsthand, when Mark Schuster donated a kidney to save his brother Scott's life. Twenty-six years later, Scott Schuster is a successful businessman and Chairman of the very Foundation that helped to make his life-saving surgery possible. Mr. Speaker, I ask my colleagues to join me in recognizing the dedication of the Schuster Family, and the important, lifesaving work of the National Kidney Foundation.

Mr. EMANUEL

Mr. EMANUEL. Madam Speaker, it used to be said that what is good for GM is good for the country. Well, things are not so great for GM. What does that say about America? Their cars are not selling because they face skyrocketing health care costs that put them at a competitive disadvantage with Toyota and other companies. For every car GM produces, they actually spend more on health care than on steel. Yet it is not the United States Congress, the White House, seeking to help GM out of this problem. GM's knight in shining armor is Toyota. On Monday, Toyota's chairman said the Japanese auto maker was considering raising its prices in order to give American car makers some breathing room. Here is what former Governor John Engler from Michigan said of the GM crisis: We cannot, with the deficits we face today, step in and help this company get back on its feet. We are too deep in debt to save hundreds of thousands of jobs and help an American company compete and win. Today, we are facing a fiscal crisis that is stripping America of its ability to compete and win. The health care crisis facing General Motors is the same health care crisis facing the Federal Government and every American family, and yet we are in debt of nearly $8 trillion and unable to compete and win in today's economy.

Mr. EMANUEL

Mr. EMANUEL. Mr. Speaker, today on the front page of USA Today's business page, there was a headline, ``Pharmaceutical Industry Goes Furthest to Sway Congress.'' Last year the pharmaceutical industry spent $158 million, just last year, to lobby Members of the United States Congress and Senate. Now, I know you may be shocked to know that it may not have been in your interest, $158 million to lobby the Members of the United States Congress and Senate. Since 1998, in 6 years, they have spent three- quarters of a billion dollars lobbying, wining, dining Members of the United States Congress, taking them on golf trips, taking them on vacations, taking them to conferences, taking them out to meals, all to tell them about their industry. There are 1,300 pharmaceutical registered lobbyists. There are only 535 Members of the United States Congress and Senate. There are 2\1/2\ lobbyists for every Member. Three-quarters of a billion dollars in 6 years, $158 million last year alone, and 1,300 lobbyists working on behalf of the industry. About 475 of them, according to this article, are former Federal Government employees; 40 of them are former Members of Congress. It is the most influential and well-financed lobbying operation in Washington. Challenging the drug companies is always a costly undertaking, and, more often than not, it is a very difficult one and a losing one. But I want you to know what you are getting for your $158 million. Congress, when it passed a prescription drug bill last Congress, the 108th, we prevented the United States Government from negotiating prices like the Veterans Administration does, like Wal-Mart does, like Sam's Club does when they want to negotiate. When they want to deal with a supplier they negotiate best prices, not the United States Government. It explicitly prevents the United States Government from negotiating on behalf of Medicare for 43 million seniors for the lowest possible price. What does it say to our taxpayers? What does it say to our senior citizens? We are not going to do best business practices like Sam's Club, like Lowe's, like other people who negotiate price. We will send you out there and make you pay the highest price possible, which is why the United States taxpayers and senior citizens pay the highest pharmaceutical prices of any major industrialized country in the world. That is what you got for their $158 million. What else did we get for that $158 million that they spent lobbying Members of Congress? We got a bill that prevented the reimportation of pharmaceutical products from Canada and Europe so we could not get competition and choice in the marketing of prices. That is why people in Canada pay 50 percent cheaper prices than we do here in the United States. What else did that $158 million get? It does not allow generic medications to come to market to compete against name-priced drugs. Every principle of the free market, whether you negotiate prices based on Medicare, just like Sam's Club, whether you allow competition through the free market and allow people to buy their drugs in Canada and Europe and use competition for Lipitor and for other types of products, or whether you allow generics to come to the market in a speedier time to compete against the name brand, every principle in the free market was prevented. We have a captive market in this country. We pay the most expensive prices. And the irony of ironies is that the American taxpayer through the R&D, Research and Development tax credit, subsidizes the research for the products that we buy, and we pay top dollar. That is why somebody has to do something about the $158 million, the three-quarters of a billion dollars, in 6 years, spent on behalf of an industry that has got the best government they can get for their resources they spend; 1,300 lobbyists working for the pharmaceutical industry; 2\1/2\ lobbyists for every Member of Congress. When you are working on their legislation, if you work down the halls of Congress and you see a shadow, it is usually theirs, not yours. Three-quarters of a billion dollars in 6 years, $158 million last year alone. It is estimated that the United States Congress, when it passed the prescription drug bill last Congress, that it resulted in an additional $150 billion over 10 years to the industry's profits. They know what they are doing. They know what they are getting for their money. They know what they are getting for their meals, for their lobbying, for their trips; but it is time that this Congress spoke up on behalf of the American people, the people that elected us, both the taxpayers and the senior citizens, and get them the types of medications they need at prices they can afford, and stand up to the lobbyists from the pharmaceutical industry who are only representing their narrow interests and have lost sight of what we have to do to represent the American people.

Mr. EMANUEL

Mr. EMANUEL. Mr. Speaker, as people of many faiths around the world celebrate the historic election of Pope Benedict XVI, we look toward His Holiness for faith and inspiration in addressing today's challenges and opportunities for peace and progress. News of the Pontiff's election was greeted with great enthusiasm by many in the Fifth Congressional District of Illinois, home to St. Benedict Parish on Chicago's Northwest side. The dedicated parishioners of St. Benedict are delighted that the Pope has selected the name of their patron saint and thus feel a special connection to him. Since the sixth century, the Benedictine tradition reflected austerity and continuous pursuit of knowledge. These principles formed the cornerstone of Saint Benedict Parish, which was founded on the Northwest side of Chicago in 1902. The new parish was created to serve as an educational center for the area's burgeoning German Catholic population. Pope Benedict XVI, a longtime and learned university professor, has demonstrated a life-long commitment to excellence, wholly fitting the tradition of his namesake. The Fifth District is also home to many people who share German ancestry with Pope Benedict XVI, who was born in Marktl am Inn, Germany. The parishioners of St. Benedict, St. Alphonsus and others have reason to be proud of the first Pope of German ancestry in nearly a millennium. Pope Benedict XVI is endowed with great vision, intellect, and knowledge of the Church's rich history and tradition. He is further blessed by long service and loyalty to His Holiness, the late Pope John Paul II, whose divine wisdom and charisma set a shining example of leadership and guidance for all who follow him. Mr. Speaker, on behalf of the parishioners of St. Benedict, St. Alphonsus and indeed all of Chicago, I wish Pope Benedict XVI good health, longevity and success as the Bishop of Rome and leader of the Roman Catholic Church.

Mr. EMANUEL

Mr. EMANUEL. Mr. Speaker, I was not present in the chamber last night to cast my vote on rollcalls 115 through 123. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yes'' on all nine of those rollcalls.

Mr. EMANUEL

Mr. EMANUEL. Mr. Chairman, there is a simple test this energy bill should pass. Is big oil going to see their largess before the American people see relief at the pump? The answer's yes, and that's exactly what's wrong with this legislation. It isn't a bill written for the benefit of the American people, but by high-priced lobbyists for the benefit of their high-priced clients. The Energy Department says this bill doesn't lower gas prices. In fact, it could actually raise gas prices by 3 to 5 cents per gallon according to the Department's independent budget analysis. Even President Bush said this bill subsidizes the oil and gas companies and that he would have written it differently. The energy bill is supposed to provide this nation with a comprehensive energy policy, but what's written here is an $8 billion give-away to big oil. Mr. Chairman, yesterday the President said, ``I wish I could simply wave a magic wand and lower gas prices tomorrow.'' Well, Mr. President, I wish that I could wave a magic wand and get your administration and this Congress out of the pockets of big oil companies. Then maybe we could begin the people's work.

Mr. EMANUEL

Mr. EMANUEL. Mr. Speaker, earlier this week the President said he would have written a different energy bill without the $8 billion in giveaways for the oil and gas companies. ``The President has made his views known, in terms of any incentives in the legislation, that oil and gas companies don't need any incentives when the price of oil is where it is right now.'' That is the President of the United States commenting on the legislation we are going to have before us. Imagine if we spent those $8 billion of taxpayer money on developing new energy-efficient cars or new types of cars that would make America free. We have got to get rid of the old politics of special interest politics, writing legislation for special interests who give resources to campaigns, and start building a stronger America. In addition to giving the big oil companies $8 billion of taxpayer money, imagine the oil rigs along the shores of Chicago, Pittsburgh, Buffalo, western Michigan. It is an unwelcome thought for 30 million Americans who get their daily drinking water from the Great Lakes. Drilling is currently banned on the Great Lakes, but this bill would change the law from today's outright ban. Last night, the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Stupak), the gentlewoman from Illinois (Ms. Schakowsky), the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Ehlers), the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Kirk), the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Green), the gentleman from New York (Mr. McHugh), the gentlewoman from New York (Ms. Slaughter) and I offered a bipartisan amendment to permanently extend the ban on drilling in the Great Lakes. Consequently, this bill places the Great Lakes directly in harm's way. Imagine those oil rigs. Now imagine an oil spill closing the beaches and endangering drinking water.

Mr. EMANUEL

Mr. EMANUEL. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to speak out of order for 5 minutes. THE SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from Illinois?

Mr. EMANUEL

Mr. EMANUEL. Mr. Speaker, at the President's second inaugural, last January, he said, ``A few Americans have accepted the hardest duties in this cause, the dangerous and necessary work of fighting our enemies. We will always honor their names and their sacrifice.'' The other day I introduced a bill called the Welcome Home GI Bill, to recognize the returning veterans of Iraq's and Afghanistan's theaters of war, to give them the type of compensation that they have deserved. Now, a little history. We all know about the GI Bill. The fact is that the GI Bill was passed approximately 11 months before the end of World War II, signed by the President of the United States. Even before the war was concluded, the GIs from that war knew what the GI Bill was going to be. And it helped them on health care and education and buying a home. It helped them put themselves on the road to their civilian life, but also put America back on the road coming home from that war. And the truth is that every Congress, every Congress, at the end of hostilities has had a package of compensation for its veterans. Going back to the War of Independence, disabled veterans received a pension. There has not been a military engagement that the United States Congress, as the voice of the American people, has not designed a package for its returning vets; and it is high time that the 109th Congress follow the great tradition of every Congress before and begin to think what we will do for the vets returning from Iraq and Afghanistan. Two weeks ago I met the Marine Corps 2nd Battalion 21st Regiment. I had seen them off 7 months earlier, and greeted them at Rosemont Horizon Arena in the Chicago suburbs, and saw those families. And one father said to me in a very poignant way, that this reception was a lot different from the reception he received about 35 years ago when he came home. Now, what I have done in this package, which we have put together now with 15 sponsors, and the Veterans of Foreign Wars, the Illinois Chapter has endorsed and supported, is three parts: education, health care and housing. In the area of education, today, full benefits would be around $36,000 in 3 years under the Montgomery GI educational benefits, and you would have to pay $1,800 to get that $35,000. The Welcome Home GI Bill is 75,000 over 4 years, and you do not have to pay $1,800 to get that educational benefit because, in the view of the legislation, your service is your contribution. You do not have to pay $1,800 to receive an educational benefit, whether that is for college, 4 years of education, whether it is for job training, whether it is for postgraduate work, that benefit you earned by your service. Second, if when you come back, your place of employment does not provide health care; or if because you went off to war, when you came back your health care was canceled, you and your family will get 5 years of TRICARE health care, the gold standard and the gold-plated health care that you are provided on active duty. Today, vets get, if obviously if they are hurt or are in poverty, they get the veterans health care system. We are going to provide them the TRICARE system that they get as if they were active duty, for them and their families. Third, we provide today a mortgage insurance for a home. The hardest part of getting a home is actually the down payment. It would be a $5,000 contribution towards the down payment on their home. TRICARE health care for 5 years if your employment does not provide it or you lost it for you and your family, $75,000 for 4 years of education to pursue job training and education and you do not have to contribute $1,800 to get that. Your service provided that. And, lastly, $5,000 for a down payment on a home. That is in my view the minimum of what we can do for the returning veterans of Iraq and Afghanistan is provide them that sense of compensation. It is a welcome home for the GIs. Every Congress has done it in the past. Lastly and more importantly, today we have a disparity between the benefits between National Guard and Reserve and regular enlistees. We eliminate that disparity between Reserve and active duty because you saw the same experience in Iraq and Afghanistan. So Reserve and National Guard get the same benefits as the regular enlistees have received. It eliminates that discrimination. As I always say, we do not owe our veterans a favor, we just have to repay one. The Welcome Home GI Bill has now received the support of the Illinois chapter of the VFW. I look forward to the support of others. We will be submitting the bill next week.

Mr. EMANUEL

Mr. EMANUEL. Mr. Speaker, this past Saturday at All State Arena in Chicago, it was my honor to participate in welcoming home some of America's most recent heroes--the brave men and women of the 2nd Battalion, 24th Marine Regiment--to their families, friends and a deeply grateful nation. Following a seven-month tour in Iraq, it was a privilege to join in thanking these intrepid Marines for their service and sacrifice to our Nation. They served at the center of one of the most unstable and dangerous regions in Iraq known as the ``Triangle of Death.'' The unit compiled an impressive service record, including the capture of more than 600 insurgents, and secured the delivery of life-saving medicine and humanitarian supplies. Those who observed that this particular unit never appeared to sleep while seemingly defending every position in the area understood why these Marines are known as the ``Mad Ghosts.'' The reunion I attended at All State Arena was filled nearly to capacity with proud Illinoisans awaiting their loved ones. Welcoming them home, however, was incomplete as thirteen Marines of the 2nd Battalion did not return to their families. This void is a solemn reminder of the unit's sacrifice to fight for democracy in Iraq. I look forward to the day when all of the men and women of our Armed Forces return home to the same kind of warm reception that the 2nd Battalion received this past Saturday. Until that day, we will continue to commit our complete and unwavering support to our troops as they continue fighting for liberty and to preserve today's fragile democracy in Iraq. We will keep them in our thoughts and prayers and continue working to bring them home to their families. Mr. Speaker, on behalf of the Fifth Congressional District of Illinois, I thank each of the Marines we just welcomed home for their valor and service, and I remind my colleagues that the freedoms we hold dear depend on the courage and honor of U.S. troops like those who follow the example set by the Mad Ghosts of the 2nd Battalion, 24th Marine Regiment.

Mr. EMANUEL

Mr. EMANUEL. Mr. Speaker, I rise to oppose this legislation. After 4 years of record deficits and $2 trillion in new debt, one would think that the Republican majority would have a better understanding of what bankruptcy is. They are lucky this law does not apply to their actions in the last 4 years. Instead, we have a bill that promotes one bankruptcy code for the wealthy and another for the middle class. Case in point: The bill preserves the ``Millionaires Loophole,'' used by the wealthy to hide up to $1 million from creditors and courts into offshore accounts known as asset protection. Everyone should be subject to the same law and the same standards, not one set of rules for the wealthy and one for middle-class families. If one can afford a high- priced lawyer to set up an asset protection trust, they are a lot better off in bankruptcy than a middle-class family struggling to pay off large hospital bills. More than half of all bankruptcies result from catastrophic medical bills. Mr. Speaker, rather than deal with the health care crisis or making college affordable, this legislation protects wealthy deadbeats from the same standard imposed upon every middle-class American. We should have one rule, one standard in the law of bankruptcy law that applies to every American regardless of income and regardless of wealth or position.

Mr. EMANUEL

Mr. EMANUEL. Mr. Speaker, another major security breach involving the personal ID theft of 180,000 GM and MasterCard credit card holders should wake up Congress to deliver tough national standards for protecting Americans against ID theft. But this recent outbreak of 180,000 GM and MasterCard credit holders' ID is on the heels of Choice Point, Bank of America and Lexus-Nexus and shows there are too many fraud artists posing as individual businesses and too many individual consumers whose identity is now being stolen and used against them. According to the Privacy Rights Center, up to 10 million Americans are victims of ID theft each year. They have a right to be notified when their most sensitive health data is stolen. In response to this problem, there have been bipartisan solutions offered to address it. The gentlewoman from Illinois (Ms. Bean), the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Gutierrez), the gentlewoman from New York (Ms. Slaughter), and I have introduced the Notification of Risk to Personal Data Act as one piece of legislation. Our legislation requires consumers to be immediately notified when their personal data has been stolen or acquired by an unauthorized person and imposes tough new penalties on violators. Mr. Speaker, Americans want, need, and rightfully expect Congress to protect them from the prying eyes of identity thieves and give them back control of their Social Security numbers and personal health information.

Mr. EMANUEL

Mr. EMANUEL. Mr. Speaker, my colleague, the gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Gutknecht) was up here a moment ago talking about the price of pharmaceutical products and how they have been rising and increasing and ever going up, three, four times the rate of inflation. There was this report done by AARP the other day that was covered in USA Today and on the news about how pharmaceutical prices had in the last year gone up close to about three times the rate of inflation. The truth is, over the last 5 or 6 years pharmaceutical products have gone up somewhere close to four times, three times the rate of inflation. And every one of us know people in our district who go to get their prescriptions filled. They got them last month or they got them 2 months ago, same pills, same amount of dosage, nothing different, and the price is up 40 bucks. And there is nothing to explain how that went up $40. And senior citizens who are on a fixed income, families who are on a fixed income and they have a sick child cannot afford a health care cost that is rising close to three times or four times the rate of inflation. Now, last Congress, Democrats and Republicans came together, not because it was a Democratic idea or not because it was a Republican idea, because it was the right idea, to offer reimportation of pharmaceutical products, allowing people to go to Canada and go to Europe to buy pharmaceutical products that are 50 percent cheaper than they are here in the United States, or go to England, go to Ireland. All over Europe and Canada the same drugs that we find on our shelves at our local pharmacy are 50 or 40 percent or 60 percent, depending on what you want, cheaper than they are here. I have on my Web site in my congressional office a Costco in Chicago and a Costco in Toronto. And the same Costco, we compared the same pharmaceutical products most used by senior citizens for arthritis, blood pressure, other types of medications they need. And the Costco in Canada offers, on average, 52 percent savings for the same products that you could buy at Costco in Chicago. We are separated by a little over 200 miles. But they saved 50 percent on their needs of their medications, whether it is Lipitor or other type of products. And why? Because it is the only product in this country that is a closed market, forcing American consumers to pay a 50 percent premium for the products that their dollars spent paid for the research. We developed those drugs here in this country. We gave a tax credit to these companies to develop those pharmaceutical products, and we have the dubious honor to pay a 50 percent premium over Canada and Europe. So what has happened is that the American senior citizens, the American taxpayers, are subsidizing the poor, starving French and German and Swiss and Dutch. We have got to come to an end to this and allow people to have the access to the free market. We are going to negotiate and discuss China trade, other types of trade deals where everybody here is going to talk about free trade except for one product. What? Pharmaceutical products, the product on which the United States pays more than it does on television, more than it does on consumer electronics, more than it does on food, more than it does in other areas. Why? Because we have a closed market. What we are trying to do, Democrats and Republicans are trying to allow the principles of the free market to work, bringing competition and choice to bear. If you did that, then the American consumer and taxpayers would see a dramatic drop in their prices. And we are not being allowed to vote on that. Why? Because the pharmaceutical industry is giving you the best government they can buy. They have stopped us and the ability to bring that vote. If we did, we would pass that vote here. We would pass it in the Senate. But the American people are on to what is happening. They know that we need to deal with this because we cannot continue to subsidize the rest of the world, both on the research side and on the price side; and that is what is happening. We know it is safe because over a million seniors a year go over the border to Canada. We turn them into illegal drug runners. Go over the border to Canada and a billion dollars worth of trade and get their pharmaceutical products, and not one of them has ever gotten sick. But what we are talking about is bringing Canadian cattle that we know is tainted, some of it, with mad cow disease. Now that we allow in. Accessing pharmaceutical products in Canada, Lipitor, other drugs on the Canadian market that is 50 percent cheaper, that is against the law. That policy has been brought to you by the United States government. It is time to allow Democrats and Republicans to come together to bring common sense policies and the principles in government to work. Principles in business, businesses always allow competition. They find the cheapest price they can. We can get cheap prices and stop having the taxpayer subsidize too high a price. My colleague, the gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Gutknecht), and I have introduced this legislation. Other Democrats and Republicans are on it. And, again, it is not about politics. It is not about partisanship. In the last Congress, 88 Republicans and 153 Democrats came together, passed it, not once, not twice but three times. We will do it against this year.

Mr. EMANUEL

Mr. EMANUEL. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of this bill to name this courthouse the Robert Matsui Courthouse. I cannot think of anything more fitting, as others have said, the notion of a courthouse where justice is weighed and issued for a person who had injustice done to him and never lost his sense of right and justice. It would have been easy for Bob to be angry, but he always sought fairness both personally and professionally. I think it is quite fitting and it has a sense of poetic justice that we are naming a courthouse for a gentleman who was not treated fairly at one time by his country, but who always sought fairness and justice and equality throughout his life. It is fitting to remember him this way, someone who will always be part of our family here; and I thank the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Matsui) for allowing us to be part of his family.

Mr. EMANUEL

Mr. EMANUEL. Madam Speaker, this country is dangerously close to a real biological crisis. Yesterday we learned an American company mailed a deadly avian flu strain to 37,000 laboratories in the United States and around the world as part of a routine test kit. The potential error is a reminder of the real danger of a flu pandemic and the millions of deaths it could cause. It also reminds us of the responsibility as a Congress and as a Nation to improve our ability to produce and distribute flu vaccine and to prepare for the pandemic. The Flu Protection Act, which Senator Bayh and I introduced, would help ensure that enough vaccine is produced each year, fund research to combat avian flu, and require the development of contingency plans in the case of a pandemic. The impending crisis must encourage this administration to take action now. Earlier this month, President Bush took an important step when he authorized a quarantine to stem the spread of avian flu. In a letter that Senator Bayh and I will send today to the White House, there are other steps the President can take without legislation. He can increase our vaccine stockpiles, help States and cities prepare for the crisis of a pandemic, and provide the incentives for vaccine manufacturers to increase their production. Madam Speaker, yesterday's announcement reminds us that the next flu pandemic is just around the corner, and the time to act is now. Congress and the President should not wait for this disaster to reach our shores before acting to protect this Nation.

Mr. EMANUEL

Mr. EMANUEL. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to H.R. 8, which continues, in my view, the policies by the majority of three tax cuts, in 4 years, with four straight record-breaking deficits that have added $2 trillion in 4 years to the Nation's debt. And here again the majority offers $850 billion of tax cuts to the wealthiest families in this country. When you get in a hole that is $2 trillion deep, rule one, stop digging. If you cannot figure that out, you cannot produce any more when it comes to economic growth for this country or jobs or resolving the health care crisis or the educational crisis we have in the country. My view is repeating the same mistake and expecting a different result is a sign that you have lost your bearings. This bill will do nothing to stimulate the economic growth or savings, which is what we should be focused on, rather than further shifting the tax burden from wealth to work. We could be debating and using this time on simplifying the code. Just 2 weeks ago there was a report out by the IRS and others showing that $350 billion a year goes unreported in taxes where people are not complying and cheating. We have a Tax Code that rewards and initiates a culture of cheating and penalizes those who abide by the rules. That is where we should be focusing, on simplifying the code and taking away the incentive to cheat, which is what we have today in our code. With all the economic challenges we are facing today in the area of health care, energy, education, eliminating the estate tax, fully eliminating, should be the last of our priorities. But the Republicans will soldier on and continue to fight until taxes are eliminated for the very last multimillionaire. Instead of helping the wealthy avoid taxes, we should be helping middle-class families save for their retirement. That is a true deficit we have in this country, a retirement and savings deficit. The savings rate is at its lowest level since the 1930s, lower than any other industrialized nation. Millions of families are financially unprepared for retirement. Given this reality, why are we debating the elimination of the estate tax instead of real tax reform and a savings agenda for the middle class. Are holding the interests of the wealthy and special interests above the hopes and dreams of the middle-class families the kind of values we want our Tax Code to reflect? As late former Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis once said, ``We can have democracy in this country or we can have great wealth concentrated in the hands of a few, but we cannot have both.'' Mr. Speaker, there is no doubt which one this bill will achieve.

Mr. EMANUEL

Mr. EMANUEL. Mr. Speaker, I would like to pick up on a point the gentleman made of what we hear from our constituents. That is this notion that people are just trying to be honest and just trying to do something that is honest. The fact is we all know the sense of frustration that we are hearing from our constituents is that the Tax Code has created a culture that has rewarded cheating and penalizes those who play by the rules. That is what we have today, and that is a problem, that is a frustration that we hear from people. When we were on Easter recess, there was a report by the IRS showing that there goes about $350 billion of unreported income, which would wipe the deficit off by three-quarters of this country. People who are hiding income, playing games, not reporting it, forcing the middle class to pay an ever-increasing amount of money, they are basically cheating. We know it is going on. They think the $350 billion is a low number. It is getting worse as the tax code has gotten worse, and yet we are putting middle class families further behind on health care bills, college costs, trying to figure out how to save for their retirement and a tax burden and a tax code that does not do justice to what they are trying to do as parents and as a family. So we have a code that rewards cheating. It promotes a culture of cheating and a code that on the other end is the middle class family. It penalizes those who play by the rules and try to do the right thing by their family. Everybody has got something that they have proposed so I do not want to be outdone. I have also done something to that effect, but I not only have done it by legislation, I do it in my office. One little story. I run a tax assistance program clinic in my congressional office every Saturday. We have the big four accounting firms, the accountants from the banks. It is called a tax assistance program. It is run as an entity. We house it in my congressional office. We advertise about it. Every Saturday from 8:30 to 11:30, we actually help people fill out their taxes. We do it for two-and-a-half to three months a year. This last year we did about 1,132 taxes for individuals with families, returning on average $1,900 in earned income tax credit deductions, tax deductions they would not have gotten because nobody else would have filled it out. I say, if you can fill out the EITC tax code, you can go to graduate school. You do not need to do it. It is the most complicated form. By comparison, I want you to know, if you are a corporation and try to get the export-import loan agreement, it is 12 questions, but for the earned income tax credit, it is over 200 questions. We fill it out. We also do college assistance, and we have back in my district about $10 million in different deductions and credits that exist in the code they would not have gotten, and after three months in a row every Saturday 45 different families show up. We turn on average away 15 families because we cannot help do them, and we make them first in line the next Saturday. But we do that every Saturday for three months. We did our last one last Saturday. We run these clinics so we know firsthand how these go besides the one I do for myself. Second, I have introduced legislation called the simplified family credit. It takes the earned income tax credit, the per child deduction and the dependent care and takes 200 pages of the code and 2,000 additional pages down to 12 questions. It collapses all of those deductions that exist for families earning somewhere between $15,000 to $50,000 down to 12 questions. It would save a huge amount of money that ends up because of waste and abuse in the code because it is too complicated. There are estimates of about $6 billion dollars, and if you simplified it, not only would you save money, but for people who have chosen to work and do right by their children, you have a tax code that was on their side, not on the side of folks who are trying to get lawyers and accountants to try to figure out how to basically game the system. Any reform should understand that people are in the moderate income, $50,000 and less, should have a code that is simple for them to use. So I have introduced what I call the simplified family credit that takes those three credits, the earned income tax credit, the per child and the dependent care and puts it down to 12 questions. We run the clinic in my office to help families fill out their taxes and the tax forms, the 1040, and get them the type of deductions that we are talking about. I want to stress, every one of us, we have people hit by the AMT. People come around and it is going to be Friday, they are going to be all in downtown Chicago and the neighborhoods and around the State and around the country. Their heads will be shaking because they know this code was not designed with them or their families in mind. It was designed for those who can afford lawyers, accountants and lobbyists. Those are the people that are benefiting by this code, and this code does injustice to people who are trying to do right by their families. We need a code that not only understands the trials and the challenges of the middle class family but finally reflects what they are trying to do for their kids rather than what the lobbyists are trying to do for their interests. That is what we have to do when we reform this code is put it back on the working class and middle class families who are trying to do right for their families. I want to thank the gentleman for this time and organizing this, especially as Friday looms in people's eyes and they have to face literally around the kitchen table all those bills. It is not meant for nine hours of unpleasant time trying to fill that out. We can do better.

Mr. EMANUEL

Mr. EMANUEL. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor Thresholds Psychiatric Rehabilitation Centers on the occasion of their 20th Annual Golf and Tennis Benefit. I am proud to represent this distinguished organization and I hope that the Congress will join me in recognizing their outstanding contributions to the field of mental health rehabilitation. As one of the nation's largest non-profit providers of mental health and recovery services, Thresholds provides a critical service to members of the community that struggle with mental illness, as well as their families. Over 5,000 Chicago residents benefit yearly from the services provided by this impressive organization. Thresholds provides a comprehensive program of therapeutic support, case management, education, job training and placement, and housing. With 30 service locations and more than 75 housing developments in the Chicagoland area, Thresholds helps restore independence, dignity and respect to people with mental illness. Offering outreach programs, residential services, youth and adult education, and services for homeless, deaf and jailed patients, this valuable organization has established itself as one of the nations most successful and respected psychiatric recovery centers. I am also pleased to recognize Thresholds as an innovator and model in the field of mental health. Experts from Thresholds carry out research and regularly publish valuable research papers, and several mental heath centers around the world have replicated Thresholds' success. Thresholds and its extraordinary doctors and staff are regular recipients of awards in the mental health field. The 2004 Celebration Recovery Award was bestowed upon CEO Dr. Anthony Zipple's, and Dr. Jerry Dincin was awarded Honorable Mention for Lifetime Achievement by Eli Lilly's 2004 Reintegration Awards. These represent only a tiny fraction of the awards presented to Thresholds. Mr. Speaker, I am honored to have Thresholds Psychiatric Rehabilitation Centers in the Fifth District. I wish them the best at their 20th Annual Golf and Tennis Benefit, and I hope they continue their 45-year history of serving mentally ill patients and their families in the Chicago area for decades to come.

Mr. EMANUEL

Mr. EMANUEL. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in remembrance of His Holiness, Pope John Paul II. With his passing on April 2nd, the world lost one of the most influential and inspirational leaders of our time. He was a great leader, a man of peace, and a source of hope to millions across the globe. Pope John Paul II was born Karol Josef Wojtyla in Wadowice, Poland on May 18, 1920. He made history by becoming the first Slavic Pope and the first non-Italian Pope in more than 400 years. He traveled more than any other Pope in history, visiting over 130 countries and 900 Heads of State. The Pope's strong will and vision were instrumental in delivering hope and inspiration to people around the world. As a young man in an oppressed country, he courageously protected all people from oppression and tyranny. Under his reign, Pope John Paul II served as an important symbol that helped bring about the fall of communism throughout Europe. Particularly important for Poland, he was an outspoken advocate for human rights. His peaceful message of human rights and religious freedom resonated among Polish Catholics, ushering in Poland's peaceful revolution in their fight against communist rule. Pope John Paul II ministered to all people through his personal example of sacrifice and collaboration. He worked tirelessly to spread the message of compassion, courage, and sacrifice that inspired millions. Pope John Paul II brought together and forged dialogue between people of different faiths, promoting cooperation and peace. He was the first Pope to visit synagogues and mosques as well as areas of conflict, including the Holy Land. When the world most needed his eloquent voice, he inspired us. When the world needed his prayers, he prayed for us. When the world needed his guidance, he showed us the way. Mr. Speaker, he will forever be remembered as a tireless promoter of peace for all people and regions of the world.

Mr. EMANUEL

Mr. EMANUEL. Mr. Speaker, I am proud to rise today on behalf of the more than 4,000 of my constituents of Ukrainian descent in the Fifth Congressional District of Illinois on Chicago's northwest side. I am also pleased to join with my colleagues in the House to receive the recently inaugurated President of the Republic of Ukraine, His Excellency Viktor Yushchenko during his first official visit to the United States, in a joint session of Congress. I applaud President Yushchenko for his courage and vision and for his leadership in the ``Orange Revolution'' that peacefully brought freedom and democratic reforms to Ukraine late last year. The people of the Ukraine, and indeed all across the globe, were relieved when the President survived an assassination attempt that nearly claimed his life and subsequently persevered among tremendous resistance to the dramatic reforms he championed. My hometown of Chicago is home to more than 100,000 Ukrainian Americans who have been instrumental in helping advance the increasingly important alliance between our nations. The Ukraine's prosperity, independence and openness to the West are of vital economic, cultural and strategic importance to the global community. Mr. Speaker, I join with my colleagues and all Americans in congratulating President Yushchenko for his triumph. I wish him and the Ukraine continued prosperity and success in advancing the ideals of democracy and freedom in that nation.

Mr. EMANUEL

Mr. EMANUEL. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to congratulate Mr. Jin Lee for his recent appointment to the Northeastern Illinois University's Board of Trustees. Jin Lee has been an outstanding citizen of the Fifth Congressional District, and he will be a tremendous asset to Northeastern Illinois University as a member of its Board of Trustees. Prior to this appointment, Mr. Lee's distinguished career included management positions with Ace Young Company, Daewoo International America Corporation, and Lorenzo Import-Export Company. He was also the Executive Director of the Chicago Korean American Chamber of Commerce and remains a prominent member of the City of Chicago's Human Relations Task Force. In addition, he served on the Asian American Advisory Councils for both the Illinois Secretary of State and the Illinois State Treasurer. Since 1997, Jin Lee has also served as the director of business planning and development for the Albany Park Community Center. Hard work and determination were the hallmarks of Mr. Lee's early life. When he was 14 years old and without a working knowledge of English, he moved with his family to the United States from South Korea. He quickly mastered the language and subsequently earned a Bachelors degree from the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. Mr. Lee's reputation for hard work and determination are widely recognized and respected. He has received numerous honors and awards including Loyola University Chicago's' Leadership Certificate, the Illinois Secretary of State's Certificate of Application, and membership in the Asian American Hall of Fame. As he begins his 4-year term as a member of the Board of Trustees for Northeastern Illinois University, I am confident that Jin Lee will continue to serve the people of the Chicago area with steadfast dedication, just as he has proven in years past. Mr. Speaker, on behalf of the Fifth Congressional District of Illinois and indeed the entire city of Chicago, I thank Jin Lee for his many outstanding contributions to our community. I wish him continued success as he begins a new challenge and extend my heartfelt congratulations on his appointment to the Northeastern Illinois University Board of Trustees. I am proud to represent Mr. Lee and Northeastern Illinois University in the Fifth Congressional district and am confident both he and the university will find their partnership to be mutually productive and rewarding over the next four years and beyond.

Mr. EMANUEL

Mr. EMANUEL. Madam Speaker, I rise today in strong support of H. Res. 188, which honors our nation's firefighters for the lifesaving work they do every day to keep our families safe and secure. All too often we take for granted the heroic efforts of these dedicated public servants, and I am pleased to join my colleagues in taking a moment to say thank you. On Chicago's North Side, there is a large mural dedicated to the memory of fallen firefighters. It depicts several events where these brave men and women answered the call to rescue their fellow citizens. The events pictured range from the tragic 1958 fire at Our Lady of the Angels school in Chicago to the events of September 11th, 2001. In each of these emergencies, firefighters have selflessly risked their lives so that others may live. The words in the center of the mural say it all: ``First Ones In, Last Ones Out.'' On December 7th last year, a fire broke out in Chicago's LaSalle Bank Building, a landmark skyscraper built in 1934. As flames and heavy smoke poured out of the 29th floor windows, dozens of Chicago firefighters entered the building. These heroes showed exceptional professionalism and valor as they evacuated all 45 stories of the building and extinguished the fire. Of the 37 people injured in the fire, 22 were Chicago firefighters. As a direct result of their swift response and expertise, no lives were lost in one of the city's worst fires in recent memory. Chicago firefighters receive a great deal of attention when handling major events such as the LaSalle Bank fire, but perhaps their greatest achievement is in the quiet work of prevention, inspection and education. Fire-related fatalities in Chicago are at a 25-year low, thanks to improvements in building safety and community outreach efforts by local firehouses to schools, senior centers and neighborhood associations. Chicago's citizens are now better informed about how to prevent and handle emergency situations, and they view their local firehouse as an important and valuable resource in the neighborhood. Madam Speaker, I thank my colleagues calling up this important resolution today, and I look forward to working with them to provide America's firefighters with the support and resources they need to continue their heroic work.