Rahm Emanuel

Mr. EMANUEL

Mr. EMANUEL. Mr. Speaker, I applaud the Justice Department's decision to launch an investigation into whether or not the political pressure played a role in their decision to only seek a fraction of the possible penalty against the tobacco industry. The U.S. Government won its case against Big Tobacco; but rather than seeking the maximum penalty of $130 billion, the government suddenly decided to ask for only $10 billion. Funny enough, that was equal to the amount of the taxpayer bail-out of the industry last year approved by this Congress. The stunning reversal shocked everyone, including Philip Morris' lawyer, who said the company was very surprised. Nobody seems to know how the decision was made. Some are saying that it had something to do with the $40 million tobacco companies have given to the Republican Party since 1990. Or that it could have something to do with the $170,000 they gave to President Bush last year. But that would be cynical. After all, what does $40 million really get you nowadays? Mr. Speaker, Americans want their justice unfiltered. Maybe we will even be able to get to the bottom of this Keystone Kops situation.

Mr. EMANUEL

Mr. EMANUEL. Mr. Speaker, in discussing the collapse of his retirement plan and pension plan, United Airlines pilot Klaus Meyer said, ``I call it legalized crime. I lost almost all my United stock value in the bankruptcy, and another part of the retirement I was promised is gone. And now my Social Security is at risk. Where does it all end?'' Mr. Meyer's statement is a stark reminder of what is at stake as we continue to debate the future of Social Security. The sad fact is that for many Americans retirements are less, not more, secure and any debate about Social Security should be about how to secure its future rather than make it more risky. In fact, the head of the GAO announced that the President's plan would in fact exacerbate the financial stability of Social Security, rather than strengthen it. The whole task is to do two things: strengthen Social Security for future generations and help Americans save for their retirement. Make no mistake, Social Security and the debate about retirement is key to the future of Americans' retirements. For United Airlines employees, and the steel industry that came before the airline industry, and probably the auto industry that will come after them, Social Security is the linchpin of their retirement security. Our task before us is how to strengthen both aspects as Americans plan to retire and save for their retirement. As John Pinto, another United States airline employee put it, ``Social Security is the cornerstone of my retirement.'' That is our task here. Every American is asked to plan for their retirement with personal savings, employment-based savings, and Social Security. Those are the three legs to the stool of any retirement plan and any retirement security. The privatization of Social Security would exacerbate the stability that Social Security has created for millions of Americans as they plan for their retirement. Benefits for United Airlines employees would be cut up to 40 percent, retirement benefits that they have put money away for, they have saved for, they have done everything that we as a country advocate that they do; 120,000 employees have now been cut up to 40 percent. As I always say, go ask a United Airlines employee what they think of Social Security. They are glad that it is there and they can count on it. It is the linchpin, it is the foundation for all of their retirement security. Two-thirds of seniors and 40 percent of widows rely on Social Security as their entire retirement plan. It may come as a shock to some, but the American people like the security that comes with Social Security. A few weeks ago, the President said, ``Those who obstruct reform, no matter what party they are in, will pay a political price.'' Ironically, it is the President's insistence on privatization of Social Security that is slowing the reform and progress we could have in our retirement security. He is, in fact, the reason we are not making progress. Privatization has become the poison pill to progress when we discuss retirement security for Americans. We need to broaden the debate on privatization of Social Security into a discussion on retirement security. I proposed a series of ideas, Republicans have proposed a series of ideas, Democrats have ideas. If we put away privatization, we can make progress. I would like to remind everybody that in 1983, when we had the commission that developed and planned for the future of Social Security and gave it security for 75 years, President Ronald Reagan took privatization off the table, and you secured Social Security for 75 years. If you take privatization off the table today, you can secure Social Security for another 75 years, and we can make progress on 401(k)s, employer-based retirement, defined benefit pensions, as well as personal savings. We can do it all. But as long as privatization is on the table, it will become the stumbling block to progress, and the President's insistence is stopping the progress we can make. Here are the four ideas I have introduced, separate pieces of legislation: Automatic enrollment to 401(k)s. Rather than the pressure being on an employee to line up and sign up for a 401(k), have them automatically enroll, and the pressure is, if you do not want to participate, the onus of responsibility is on you to get out, not in. RR Donnelley, a big corporation in Chicago, Fortune 500, set up automatic enrollment. Participation went up to 92 percent of employees, and the participation rate increased dramatically among basically support staff and others who do not have a retirement plan. Also, you would have the automatic step-up so as you were there longer, your pay went up, the participation in your plan increases. Direct deposits from your tax refunds into your savings plan. About 100 million Americans get a refund on their tax return. The average tax return is $2,000. When you fill out the 1040, you can decide, do I want $1,000, $750, $2,000 to go to my retirement plan? That is the one day we should organize for retirement security rather than just for consumption. And if you have direct deposit, more Americans would participate. Third, there is the fully refundable credit for people earning $60,000 or less. The government would match 50 percent on every dollar. Lastly, we have 16 various different vehicles for retirement savings. You could, in fact, unify that to one single, universal pension and get rid of all of the paperwork that comes with 16 different versions of savings. Those are just four ideas, but when it comes to retirement security, let us remove privatization from the discussion, secure Social Security and, therefore, secure for Americans and generations to come retirement security and the dignity that comes with Social Security and with retirement.

Mr. EMANUEL

Mr. EMANUEL. Mr. Speaker, a few weeks ago, this Congress approved an additional $82 billion for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. That is on top of the other $220 billion that we had appropriated, raising the total cost of this war to more than $300 billion. If that was not enough, this week we are about to approve another $45 billion as a bridge loan for the operations in Iraq, bringing the cost up to $350 billion. What have we gotten ourselves and what have we accomplished in the last 2 plus years and after nearly now $350 billion of American taxpayer money? We defeated Saddam Hussein's regime, but today we find ourselves mired in an endless occupation with the inability to find a way out of our occupation of Iraq. In fact, the generals there say we are years off from ever being able to extricate ourselves from Iraq. Operation Iraqi Freedom was a war of choice. As President Kennedy once said, ``To govern is to choose.'' One can only hope that the war in Iraq was the right choice. Every President in the middle of a war has thought and laid out a vision of America after that war, how to see of all the sacrifices that America made, how the benefits of the war would come home. President Lincoln thought of the land grant colleges and the transcontinental railroad system in the midst of a civil war. He saw a way of building America when it became clear we were going to win that war. President Roosevelt, the GI bill and universal health care; President Truman, the minimum wage, universal health care; President Eisenhower, on the heels of the beginning days of the Cold War as well as the closing days of the Korean War, the Interstate Highway System today. President Kennedy, in the midst of Vietnam and the early days of his administration of a cold war, envisioned a man on the moon and NASA, where America would dominate space and all the benefits that would come from that. President Johnson saw health care as his vision, Medicare and Medicaid. While we are fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan, while Americans have lost 1,700 of their fellow citizens, over 10,000 who have been wounded and cost us $350 billion of taxpayer-funded entities and a taxpayer- funded war, what is our vision? What has this President said? How does he see America down that horizon, that point out there on the horizon as you look forward? What are we going to build? What vision do we lay for the next generation for all the sacrifices Americans have made, not just in blood and in treasure, but for our sense of our country? As I said, President Lincoln saw an intercontinental railroad system. This President wants to eliminate Amtrak. President Eisenhower built highways. The highway system we have today was laid out by President Eisenhower. President Bush is threatening to veto the highway bill. President Kennedy saw a man on the Moon. The President has walked away from his vision of putting a man on Mars. President Roosevelt saw a GI bill for the troops to come home. Just this last week we cut or eliminated the opportunity for our National Guard and reservists to get health care. Every President during the midst of a war has had a vision of America after that war that was bigger, grander and worth all the sacrifice that said the benefits of that war, America's prestige, would come home in material benefits to America. That is why we have an intercontinental highway system. That is why we had a railroad system. That is why we had the land grant colleges. That is why we put a man on the Moon. We saw a vision, every President that led this country both through war and then through peace. It is at this time that this President needs to lay out a vision, and, let me tell you, it needs to be larger than a tax cut. That is not a vision. Somehow, do we have a universal broadband, so America leads again technologically? Would you see in the midst of a war a President who submits a budget that cuts the National Institutes of Health, a President who eliminates from the National Science Foundation $100 million from its budget, yet we placed 16th for the first time in computer sciences? That is not a vision of America that goes forward. That is a smaller, a reduced America, an America that does not see itself in the grand scheme of things. When President Bush ran for the nomination in 2000, he announced that he was against nation-building. You look sometimes at this budget, you look at what he has done, and who knew it was America he was talking about when it came to nation-building? It is time for this President to lay out a vision that says, with all the sacrifices, his vision for America, what we are going to do. We are going to build in the science, we are going to build in the medical field, we are going to provide universal health care. What is it? It has got to be more than a veto of a highway bill, and it has got to be more than the elimination of 60 vocational programs. It has got to be more than walking away from landing a man on Mars. It has got to be a vision that says the sacrifice was worthy of this country and its great commitment to democracy around the world.

Mr. EMANUEL

Mr. EMANUEL. Mr. Speaker, we have a tax system that is needlessly complicated and burdensome to the middle class. It is time for fundamental tax reform that reflects the values and the interests of all Americans, not the special interests. When President Bush announced his tax reform commission, he said his core principle was that it should not hurt government revenues. Democrats believe that the core principle of tax reform is that tax reform should help the middle class achieve their goals. Tax reform is about the middle class and economic growth, not about government revenue. In the last 4 years the Tax Code has been filled with special breaks for special interests. At the same time, the tax burdens have shifted from the wealthy to those who work, from dividend to wages. What should we do? Combine the five educational tax breaks to one tax break for higher education for $3,000 for everybody going to college; unify the various child credits and earned income tax credit to a single simplified tax family credit; simplify the 16 different versions of the Tax Code for savings to one universal 401(k) pension; and, finally, encourage homeownership. We should create a universal mortgage deduction for all taxpayers. Mr. Speaker, we need a tax system that reflects the American values and fosters the American Dream, not the current system written by and for the special interests.

Mr. EMANUEL

Mr. EMANUEL. Madam Chairman, I thank my colleague from Connecticut for her great work. Madam Chairman, this year, just like last year and the year before, an amendment banning the use of funds to stop reimportation of prescription drugs has been added to this legislation. It does feel like Ground Hog Day around here. We all know the next part of the story. So if you are going to stay up late at night watching C-SPAN, just put it on TiVo. You do not have to stay up. Once again, after we pass it here, and we are going to stand and give our speeches, the conferees from both parties, both Chambers, are going to go to the conference, and in the dark of night this provision is going to be stripped from the bill that would help our senior citizens and our taxpayers get affordable drugs at affordable prices. The pharmaceutical companies will come in and do their bidding, and this Congress will turn around and heed their interests. After the American people have spoken clearly, this Congress last year when we voted for this overwhelmingly, just as recently as 2 weeks ago 221 bipartisan Members of Congress sent a letter to the Speaker asking for an up-or-down vote on this legislation. Here we have an attempt to make sure that the Congress and the voice of the American people is clear on the issue of funding for reimportation; and in the dark of night, mark my words, they will strip this out, as they did last year, as they did the year before, and Ground Hog Day will come to the United States Congress. Instead of using the money and the limited resources we have to help develop a system to allow for drug reimportation, the FDA has insisted on using their time and the precious resources of the American people to crack down on elderly Americans who purchase affordable prescription drugs from Canada, England, Ireland, and the rest of Europe because they cannot afford those medications here. The FDA has even seized the drugs purchased through the State- sponsored programs like the Illinois I-Save Rx program. As Senator Frist would say, all we are asking is for an up-or-down vote, and that is what we would like on reimportation. Let us listen to the American people, to the will of the bipartisan Members of Congress and allow a vote on this comprehensive prescription drug importation legislation this year. I would like to thank my colleague from Connecticut for her leadership on this. For the Members who want it to be clear, I would just hope the American people have an opportunity to watch what happens in the dark of night so we do not repeat Ground Hog Day around here.

Mr. EMANUEL

Mr. EMANUEL. Madam Speaker, today in the Committee on Ways and Means we are holding a hearing on tax reform. We have a tax system that is needlessly complicated, inequitable, and burdensome to the middle class. We need fundamental tax reform that reflects the values and the interests of our middle-class families, not the special interests. President Bush when he announced the commission said his core principle is that tax reform should not adversely affect government revenues. The democratic core principle of tax reform is it should not adversely affect the middle class, not the government. It is the middle class that is our taxpayer. In the last 4 years, the Tax Code has been filled with special breaks for special interests. At the same time, the tax burden has shifted from wealth to work, form passive dividends to daily wages. Madam Speaker, four objectives of tax reform: Take the five different educational tax breaks for college education and make it one $3,000 credit per child going to college. Second, simplify family credit. Take the earned income tax credit, the per child and the dependent care and go from 20 pages of code down to 12 questions. Third, on retirement, bring the 16 different versions of the Tax Code on savings down to a universal pension. Madam Speaker, these things would help the middle class eliminate burdensome paperwork and eliminate pages and pages of Tax Code and help the middle class achieve a middle-class dream.

Mr. EMANUEL

Mr. EMANUEL. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of H. Con. Res. 149, a bill recognizing the 57th Anniversary of the Independence of the State of Israel. Yom Ha'Atzmaut, Israel's Independence Day, marks a day when Theodor Herzl's prophetic words became reality: ``if you will it, it is no dream.'' The State of Israel was established as a sovereign and independent nation 57 years ago, and it continues to be a strong friend of the United States and a beacon of democracy in the Middle East. On May 14, 1948, Israel was officially established, and the United States was one of the first countries to recognize Israel, doing so within 11 minutes of its creation. Israel has come a long way since those initial minutes. The Israeli people have contributed greatly as scholars, innovators, educators, and more, and I am pleased to have this opportunity to recognize their accomplishments. Since the very beginning of its existence, Israel has been a vital ally of the United States, enjoying a strategic partnership based on shared democratic values, friendship, and respect. America and Israel shall remain close friends for years to come, particularly as Israel continues to seek peace with her neighbors. On the Jewish Calendar, Israel's Independence Day falls on the 5th of Iyar, corresponding this year with May 12, 2005. This day is a joyous time to reflect with pride on the work of the men and women who knew that one day the dream of the State of Israel would become a reality. Mr. Speaker, I join with my colleagues in extending warm congratulations and best wishes to the people of Israel as they celebrate this 57th year of Israel's independence. I wish them peace and prosperity in the years to come, kein yehi ratzon.

Mr. EMANUEL

Mr. EMANUEL. Madam Speaker, yesterday the President said, ``Those who obstruct reform, no matter what party they are, will pay a political price.'' Ironically, it is the President's insistence on privatization of Social Security that is slowing retirement reform. Privatization of Social Security has become the poison pill of progress. We need to broaden the debate on privatizing Social Security into a discussion of retirement security. Democrats have ideas and proposals; our Republican friends have ideas and their proposals. We are not all that far apart. But before we can move forward, the privatization of Social Security has brought progress to a standstill. Here are four ideas I have proposed: automatic enrollment in 401(k)s for all Americans; direct deposits of tax refunds into savings accounts; a government match of the first $2,000 you save, matching it for 50 percent; and the universal 401(k) to simplify and consolidate the 16 different savings vehicles that exist. Madam Speaker, make no mistake, this is the domestic issue of our time. We can choose to lead, or we can continue to debate the privatization plan the public has already rejected. Let us not allow the President to stand in the way of progress. The American people deserve a secure retirement.

Mr. EMANUEL

Mr. EMANUEL. Mr. Speaker, as an original cosponsor of H.R. 810, the Stem Cell Research Enhancement Act of 2005, I rise in strong support of this legislation. H.R. 810 is essential legislation that will expand opportunities for scientists to treat spinal cord injuries, multiple sclerosis, Parkinson's disease, Alzheimer's disease, diabetes, and other devastating diseases. There are ethical concerns over the use of embryonic stem cells in research, and we should not treat stem cells as just another laboratory product. We must strongly prohibit unethical practices, such as human cloning. And we should not allow embryos to be bought and sold. But it is important to recognize that, as part of the process of in vitro fertilization, many embryos are created that are never used and are slated to be destroyed. With the stringent moral safeguards established by this legislation, including the required written consent of the donors, I believe we should permit the use of stem cells from these embryos. The use of embryos for research that would otherwise be destroyed strikes a responsible balance between the ethical and medical values associated with stem cell research. The current state of stem cell research suggests that there is significant progress to be made if we move forward in this area. Leading scientists have testified that adult stem cells and umbilical cord stem cells do not share the ability of embryonic stem cells to replicate all other cells in the human body. If we don't invest in stem cell research, millions of Americans with some of the most debilitating diseases will not be able to avail themselves of the treatments or cures that might result. In addition, if we fail to invest federal resources in embryonic stem cell research, the U.S. will lose its competitive advantage in this essential area of science. The limited federal support for stem cell research is just one area of science in which the U.S. is falling behind. Last year China produced 160,000 more engineers than we did. Nearly 40 percent of U.S. jobs in science or technology requiring a Ph.D. are now filled by people born abroad--that's up from 25 percent in 1990. We now rank below 13 other countries--including Japan, Germany, and South Korea--in the percentage of 24-year-olds with a college degree in a science or engineering field--that's down from third in the world 25 years ago. Mr. Speaker, this legislation will help the U.S. to move forward on our moral imperative to perform stem cell research in an ethically responsible way. I urge all of my colleagues to support it.

Mr. EMANUEL

Mr. EMANUEL. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of H. Res. 266, Supporting the Goals and Ideals of Peace Officers Memorial Day. Police officers make extraordinary sacrifices in fulfilling their mission to serve and protect, and I am pleased to join my colleagues in saying thank you to Peace Officers Memorial Day. I am privileged to know many fine police officers including my Uncle Les, a dedicated and long time officer with the Chicago Police Department. The heroism of our nation's police officers can be seen both in their responses to emergencies and in their everyday work serving our neighborhoods. In Chicago, the fine work done by the police department has reduced crime in almost every category in the past year, bringing serious crimes to a 13 year low and homicides to a historic 38 year low. Police departments across the country continue to play an important role in building and maintaining stable, safe communities. The Chicago Police Department assists with community policing programs and plays an important role in youth counseling and recreation programs to help at- risk teenagers reach their full potential as contributing members of society. In 2004, 153 peace officers nationwide gave their lives in the protection of our families and communities. The death of any police officer is a tragedy and a loss felt deeply in our communities. I join with my colleagues in honoring the memory and sacrifices of these heroes, and I applaud the continued service of law enforcement officers and all public safety workers who face danger every day while protecting our streets, our schools, and our communities. Mr. Speaker, we have a responsibility to support our nation's law enforcement officers and supply them with the tools and resources they need to ensure their safety and ours. I am proud to join my colleagues today in honoring the contributions of our nation's peace officers, and I ask that my colleagues join me in working to provide sufficient support to the 87,000 heroes who make up our nation's local law enforcement community.

Mr. EMANUEL

Mr. EMANUEL. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in proud recognition of Lincoln Park High School, recently selected by Newsweek Magazine as one of America's best high schools. Lincoln Park High School, formerly named Robert A. Waller High School, has served the students and families of Chicago's North Side for over 100 years. Lincoln Park High School provides its students with exciting opportunities for academic, athletic and artistic growth, while instilling values that will serve its students throughout their lives. The students at Lincoln Park High School have established an impressive record of academic achievement. Eighty-seven percent ofthe school's 2004 graduates enrolled in a college or university. Lincoln Park High School currently has 8 National Merit Semi-Finalists in 2005, and has had more National Merit Semi-Finalists over the last 15 years than all other Chicago Public Schools combined. Students at Lincoln Park High School enjoy the support of strong parent and alumni associations which take an active role in over 60 extra curricular activities and clubs. Community partnerships with institutions such as Children's Memorial Hospital, Charlie Trotter's Restaurant and the Lincoln Park Zoo also provide learning opportunities outside of the classroom in a wide range of disciplines. These activities and experiences teach students the importance of academic achievement while also providing a balanced perspective on life that promotes responsibility, justice and social service. Mr. Speaker, Lincoln Park High School is a shining example of public education at its best. I am proud of the students, faculty and families of Lincoln Park High School and I wish them continued success in the coming years.

Mr. EMANUEL

Mr. EMANUEL. Mr. Speaker, for millions of Americans their retirement has become less, not more, secure. Part of the problem is that we are not saving enough. Half of all Americans do not participate in employer-sponsored retirement plans, and for 28 million households they have no retirement plans outside of Social Security. A savings crisis in America, combined with privatizing Social Security, is a recipe for disaster. As the collapse of the United Airlines pension demonstrates, Social Security is a key to retirement security for many Americans. We must preserve Social Security while we encourage Americans to save more for their retirement. Here are four ideas: Automatic enrollment in 401(k)'s for all Americans; direct deposit of their tax refunds into their savings plans; government match for the first $2,000 they save, matching it by 50 percent; and universal 401(k)'s to simplify and consolidate the 16 different tax savings plans on the tax rolls. Mr. Speaker, a saving crisis faces America, but we can do something about it. We should act now to encourage more Americans to save for their retirement while strengthening Social Security, not privatizing it.

Mr. EMANUEL

Mr. EMANUEL. Madam Speaker, as we continue debating the future of Social Security, it is important to remember for more Americans they cannot save enough for their retirement. In fact, over half of all Americans do not participate in employer- sponsored retirement plans, and for 28 million households in America they have no other retirement security outside of Social Security. For America's families retirements are less, not more secure. United Airline employees last week learned that painful lesson. For that reason it is crucial that we strengthen, not weaken, Social Security, as well as enable more Americans to save for their retirement. Specifically, step one, we should encourage companies to automatically enroll their employees in their 401(k) plans. At R.R. Donnelley, a Chicago company, auto enrollment dramatically increased 401(k) participation when they did automatic participation, up to 92 percent. Second, we should make the Saver's Credit fully refundable and permanent. A recent H&R Block study shows, when offered a matching contribution, Americans save more. Third, we should allow taxpayers to directly deposit their tax refund into a savings account. And, fourth, finally, we should create universal 401(k)s for all Americans to consolidate the different savings plans that exist.

Mr. EMANUEL

Mr. EMANUEL. Mr. Speaker, this week we are considering legislation to fund the Department of Homeland Security. These are necessary, important pieces of legislation, two bills we are taking up, that will help protect our homeland from terrorist threats and make the type of investments we need to make in areas of our airports, ports, roads, chemical facilities and nuclear facilities. Overall the homeland security bill funding will increase by 4 percent. But while we are focused on defending ourselves from terrorists here in the United States and fighting terrorists in Iraq, one has to wonder whether we are not missing some other threats that are looming on the horizon that America must protect themselves. Friday in the New York Times, Tom Friedman mentioned that the University of Illinois recently tied for 17th place in the world finals of a major computer competition. That is the university that also helped develop the Internet. Seventeenth was the best of any U.S. university and the worst we have done in 29 years of the competition. Who was number one? Shanghai, China. Second place and third place were won, respectively, by Moscow State University and St. Petersburg Institute of Fine Mechanics and Optics. The last time an American university won the competition was 1997. I do not think I have to remind anyone here that the modern computer and the field of computer science was invented here in the United States, and yet the best we can do is 17th. But it is not just in computers and the computer competition that America's place in the world has fallen. Last year, the Chinese produced 160,000 more engineers than we did. Nearly 40 percent of all the U.S. jobs in a science or technology field that require a Ph.D. are filled by foreigners, up from 25 percent in just 15 years. We now rank below 13 other countries, including Japan, South Korea and Germany, in the percentage of 24-year-olds with a college degree in science and engineering. That is down from third place just 25 years ago. And according to the National Science Teachers Association, just 26 percent of recent high school graduates scored high enough on their ACT science test to have a good chance of completing a first-year college science course. I say all this because it is about the foundation and this competition and this area that is going to lay the groundwork for whether America keeps its economic and competitive edge with the rest of the world. What would you think if that was the type of threat that you saw coming to the United States? What type of preparation would you do? We know what we are doing on homeland security. We created a new department. We are increasing its funding. What do we do as it relates to this type of falling down and declining percentages of Americans leading in the area of science and technology? The recent budget we passed here cuts basic research by 13 percent. It cuts applied research by 15 percent. Investments in research facilities and equipment are cut by 68 percent. We have to rely on Russians to service the International Space Station because we are cutting basic research funding at NASA by 7 percent. We are cutting the funding for the Department of Education. State grants for innovative education programs were cut by $100 million. Funding for the improvement of postsecondary education was gutted by $140 million. These are not the type of priorities that understand the threat to the United States economic future and the type of global economy and global competition this country is facing. We are living on past times and on borrowed time in the area of science and technology, but that is not how the Chinese, Indians, Japanese, Germans and others across Europe are facing this competition. America did well in 17th place. It can do better. The way it does better is it makes the type of investments in our universities. It allows the people in our high schools and in our colleges to understand the priorities. Unfortunately the budget we voted on did not reflect America's future and investment in its future. What it says is that as we deal with the terrorist threat of homeland security and increasing the funding by 4 percent, increasing our defense budget, making cuts in basic research and basic funding, and I did not add into that area, in the National Institutes of Health for the first time in over 15 years that budget was held without an increase, which basically means a cut. These are not the type of investments of a major economy, the leader in the global economy, that builds and plans for the future. These are the cuts of an economy and an administration that does not see its vision for America's future as bright and as strong as the past and it is clearly not putting its money toward that investment. It is high time that we understand that as we take up these two pieces of legislation this week on homeland security, we understand there are other threats to the United States, ones that are looming on the horizon and coming to shore, and that is in the area of technology and competing against the Chinese and the Indians and we are not having a budget that reflects the types of investments we need to do.

Mr. EMANUEL

Mr. EMANUEL. Mr. Speaker, I am proud to rise in recognition of the fiftieth anniversary of the first inauguration of the late Richard J. Daley, former mayor of Chicago and one of America's all-time greatest mayors. His legacy was honored at a symposium last week at the University of Illinois at Chicago, UIC, followed by a gala reception and benefit for that fine school. This event, attended by the mayor's family, friends and many other Chicagoans was addressed by public servants and members of the media who knew and worked with the mayor. Remembered as a man of strong conviction and dedication to his family, faith and the city, Mayor Daley left an indelible mark as Chicago's longest-serving chief executive. As many participants made clear at the symposium, evidence of Mayor Daley's stamp on Chicago can be seen clearly today. From its vibrant downtown to its freeways and mass transit to O'Hare International Airport, Mayor Daley forever transformed Chicago into the ``city that works.'' He appreciated the importance of the city's great cultural institutions and core businesses, building strong partnerships that have enabled Chicago to avoid the pitfalls affecting many other industrial cities. His visionary founding of UIC as an urban college for the children of immigrants and working families was perhaps his greatest achievement, making it a most appropriate place for the Daley Library, Archives and student scholarships in the name of the late mayor and his beloved wife, Eleanor. Through times of great social upheaval and racial tension, the mayor never wavered from his vision of politics and government as ``a people business.'' He maintained his commitment to public education and economic opportunity for all people, working closely with national leaders like Presidents John F. Kennedy and Lyndon Johnson toward these goals, which passage of the landmark Civil Rights and Voting Rights laws. In return for his dedicated service and in recognition of his great love for Chicago, its residents elected and re-elected him an unprecedented six times. Still, Mayor Daley made the time to be a loving husband and devoted father to seven children. His eldest son, Richard M. Daley, has succeeded him as mayor, and has built his own legacy as a great leader and urban visionary. Together, the two Mayor Daleys have provided the city of Chicago with outstanding leadership and direction and along with the entire Daley family have shown a sense of commitment to public service that is inspiring. I am proud that, 50 years after the first Mayor Daley's inauguration, Chicago is among the world's greatest and most vibrant cities. May it remain so for many years to come.

Mr. EMANUEL

Mr. EMANUEL. Mr. Speaker, this week, the Senate finally passed the latest of the Iraq war supplemental funding. The $82 billion package brings the war's total cost to date, both in Iraq and Afghanistan, to $300 billion. This month will be the 2-year anniversary of the President's speech on the U.S.S. Lincoln announcing, ``mission accomplished.'' So what has ``mission accomplished'' and $300 billion got us so far? We have defeated Saddam Hussein's regime, yet we find ourselves marred in an endless occupation. This past January, we witnessed a successful election in Iraq, yet progress on developing a functioning government has been slow at best. Terrorism and insurgency are as strong as ever and continue to be escalating at certain times. Today, we saw that in a very serious way with more than 79 Iraqis killed in a terrorist act. Over the weekend, we lost again a number of our fellow citizens, bringing the total of U.S. soldiers killed to nearly 1,600 and 12,000 wounded. The economy in Iraq is stalled. The civil society cannot form a consensus, and millions of Iraqis remain without the basic services and functions of a civil society and government. Our brave men and women are fulfilling their obligation and their duty to the United States Armed Forces and continue to fight valiantly, but the battle has taken its toll. As I said, nearly 1,600 fellow citizens have been killed. These are brothers and sisters, sons and daughters, mothers and fathers, aunts and uncles and Little League coaches and members of churches and other parts of their community who will no longer be with us. And more than 12,000 soldiers have been wounded. The strain is so great that recruiters for the Armed Forces cannot meet their enlistment goals. Last month, the Army alone missed its recruitment goal by 42 percent. The Pentagon now says they are stretched so thin, it would be difficult for the Armed Forces 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 this choice is the right choice. In fact, while we have been fighting in Iraq, North Korea multiple times over the last 2 years has crossed red lines that have existed through Democratic and Republican administrations and has flaunted those goals. While we have been tied down in Iraq, North Korea's situation has gotten far worse. Mr. Speaker, every other President in the history of the United States, when this Nation has gone to war, has thought about America after the war: how to build an America on the shoulders of that military victory so that victory overseas is also a victory here at home; how to build a stronger America for tomorrow. Abraham Lincoln during the Civil War not only envisioned reconstruction but he envisioned a transcontinental railroad, envisioned land-grant colleges. President Roosevelt lead the Nation through the Great Depression in World War II, and he then in the closing days thought of a GI Bill and, 11 months before the close of the war, signed a GI Bill into law, allowing millions to buy a home and receive a college education. President Eisenhower, in the days of the Korean War, envisioned an interstate highway system. President Kennedy, during the struggles of the Cold War and Vietnam, envisioned a man on the moon and saw that America could envision something greater. Every President in every Congress throughout our history during the days of a war has thought about how to bring that victory home and mean a victory for the American people, not just a military victory. So what do we have in these days of the war in Iraq and Afghanistan? President Eisenhower envisioned an interstate highway system; we have a President who is talking about vetoing our highway bill. President Roosevelt thought of a GI bill, thought how to build America after the war. This President has eliminated and canceled vocational training programs and cut Pell grants, as well as President Johnson, during the days of the Vietnam signed into law the Medicaid legislation. This President's budget cuts $10 billion from Medicaid. All this because we are sagged down having added in the last 4\1/2\ years a little over $2 trillion to the Nation's debt. Our dreams for America are limited now, and literally weighed down by a Nation, by a debt that has been accumulated over the years that we cannot see an America with not only an interstate highway system, but we should have a broadband system for all of America to move it electronically forward into the future. It is the debt that is weighing us down and this, unlike in past military victories, this country has not seen the victory overseas to bring it home and make sure that all of America is also victorious.

Mr. EMANUEL

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

Mr. EMANUEL

Mr. EMANUEL. Madam Speaker, I rise today in strong support of H. Res. 142, honoring Rotary International on the occasion of the organization's one hundred year anniversary. I am proud to note that the Rotary Club was founded in 1905 by Paul P. Harris in my hometown of Chicago, Illinois. Over the past century, the Rotary Club has grown into one of the largest nonprofit organizations in the world. Rotary's Membership includes 1.2 million professional and business leaders who belong to 31,000 clubs in over 165 countries. These members adhere to the Rotary's motto, ``Service Above Self,'' through community service projects, high moral conduct, and promotion of international good will. In 1985, Rotary International launched PolioPlus, an effort to immunize the children of the world against Polio. Rotary's efforts in conjunction with the WHO, CDC and UNICEF have nearly eradicated the disease, reducing worldwide incidence from 350,000 cases in 1988 to 1,266 cases in 2004. By the end of 2005, PolioPlus will have donated over $500 million to this remarkable effort. Since its inception in 1947, the Rotary Foundation has awarded over $1.1 billion in humanitarian and educational grants, focusing on international humanitarian service programs and educational and cultural exchanges. The scholarship program established by Rotary International is the largest privately-funded source of international scholarships in the world. Through this program, 8,000 secondary school students have studied abroad, 35,000 students have participated in the Rotary Ambassadorial Scholars program, and 46,000 young professionals have explored careers in other countries. Next month, over 37,000 members representing 150 countries will attend the 2005 Centennial Rotary International Convention in Chicago as apart of the greatest celebration in Rotary's history. On behalf of the people of Chicago, I would like to welcome these members to the birthplace of their organization. Madam Speaker, I congratulate Rotary International and all of its members worldwide for their impressive accomplishments over the past one hundred years in the areas of community service, Polio eradication and international exchange. I look forward to another hundred years of commendable service to the country and the world.

Mr. EMANUEL

Mr. EMANUEL. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to commemorate Yom Hashoah, Holocaust Martyrs' and Heroes' Remembrance Day. This year, the 60th anniversary of the end of World War II, serves as a solemn reminder of the tragic events that resulted in the murder of six million Jews and millions of other men and women. Today, we honor their memory and sacrifice. Yom Hashoah is a sad day, but it also has a message of hope. It evokes memories of the lows of humanity and what can happen when the world turns its back to oppression. It reminds us of the suffering of millions who endured the evils of discrimination and racism. The entire world was impacted by the terrible events of World War II. We remember and honor the many individuals and their loved ones who suffered simply because of their religion or ethnicity. This occasion is also a time for hope because we honor the memory of the past by passing down the lessons we have learned to future generations so that such tragic history will never repeat itself. Today, many events are taking place around the world to remind us of the events that took place during World War II and to unite all people together against racism, bigotry and hate. The Days of Remembrance Ceremony was held in the Rotunda of our Nation's Capitol, a fitting place to spread the message of justice and freedom and to remember the heroes who gave their lives in the fight for freedom and democracy only 60 years ago. I am proud to stand here today to honor the memory of the victims in hope that the world will never again witness these atrocities. Mr. Speaker, this is an important day for all mankind to stand together against racism, hate and intolerance and I urge all my colleagues to take a moment to reflect and remember.

Mr. EMANUEL

Mr. EMANUEL. Mr. Speaker, today we are given a stark reminder of what is at stake in this debate about Social Security. Yesterday, United Airlines unloaded their pension plan for their 100,000-plus employees onto the taxpayer, resulting in benefits being cut up to 40 percent. Now, go ask those United Airlines' employees what they think of Social Security as part of their retirement. Earlier this year, US Airways unloaded their pension plan on the taxpayers, cutting benefits up to 50 percent. Go ask those U.S. Airways' employees what they think of Social Security. It may come as a shock to some, but the American people like the security that comes with Social Security. That is what this debate is about. For United Airlines' employees, U.S. Airways' employees, the steel industry before them and probably the auto industry coming next, Social Security is the linchpin to their retirement security. They reject the idea of doing to Social Security what just happened to their private plan, where they put their personal and employer-based savings. It is now on the roulette table, and benefits are being cut by 40 percent. The fact is, that is what this debate is, for two-thirds of seniors and 40 percent of widows rely on Social Security as their only retirement. Mr. Speaker, this debate is more than about the solvency of Social Security; it is about retirement security for every American.

Mr. EMANUEL

Mr. EMANUEL. Mr. Speaker, in the past few months and days, a constant stream of headlines has opened the public's eye to the relationship between lawmakers and lobbyists and what goes on in this town and how we make our laws. Professional lobbyists have become a virtual ``back office'' for Congress and Congressmen, serve as travel agents, employment agencies and authors of legislation. In the past 6 years, lobbying expenditures have more than doubled to $3 billion annually, nearly twice as much as we spend on campaigns. That is what they spend trying to influence the type of legislation we have. Whether it is on pharmaceutical legislation, prescription drugs, whether it is on the tax legislation, whether it is on energy legislation, the amount spent by lobbyists has doubled trying to influence the Members of Congress. Yet while the number of professional lobbyists and their fees have increased, only one in five lobbyists required to register actually does. Of the 250 top lobbying firms, 210 have failed to file one or more of the necessary documents. The bottom line is that the special interests benefit from weak reporting, nonexistent oversight and toothless penalties while the credibility of the United States Congress, this entire institution and the Members who serve in it, suffers. We have had in the past debates about campaign finance reform and proper debates about the relationship between donors and congressional candidates. It is time now to have a debate and pass legislation about the relationship between professional lobbyists and Members of Congress. The last major lobbying reforms were over 10 years ago. It is time to update our laws to reflect the explosive growth and increasing influence of professional lobbyists on this institution, the people's House. For all those reasons, the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Meehan), the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Van Hollen) and I have introduced the Lobbying and Ethics Reform Act. Our bill creates a code of official conduct for Congress. This code of conduct would close the revolving door by requiring former Members and staff to wait 2 years before coming back to lobby the institution they had worked at prior. The bill also ends the practice of lobbyists serving as congressional travel agents by arranging lavish junkets for Members. Our bill would require congressional travel to conform to expense guidelines similar to those of other government employees, so it is actually the work that trip is intended to do and work on that trip rather than it becoming a lavish vacation and a working trip in name only. We also require lobbyists to disclose their past connections, previous Hill employers and financial activities on a public database. The Meehan-Emanuel bill increases the penalties for failing to comply with the Lobbying Disclosure Act. It also creates a bipartisan House task force to recommend ways to reinvigorate ethics oversight and enforcement. It would require the Government Accountability Office to report twice a year on the state of oversight and enforcement. Mr. Speaker, the gavel of this institution when it comes down should mark the opening of the people's House, not the auction house. Unless we reform the relationship between lobbyists and Members of Congress, we cannot restore the public's faith in the people's House. We are suffering from a systematic problem requiring an institutional solution. Legislation here that we produced in the last Congress, the pharmaceutical industry spent $154 million lobbying Members of Congress. When we were working on the reimportation legislation of pharmaceutical products, there were two lobbyists for every Member of Congress. The prescription drug bill was passed in a year in which lobbyists for the pharmaceutical industry was one of the biggest spenders on lobbying Members of Congress ended up resulting in an additional $150 billion of profits for the pharmaceutical industry over a 10-year period of time. Just the other day, we voted, this Congress, on an energy bill, a badly needed bill that did not deal with gas prices at the pump and yet gave tax credits, the public's tax money, to the wealthiest corporations who are making the biggest profits. Even the President acknowledged that it was wrong. Why? Because this institution is being lobbied by members that have the right to have their voices heard but not the right to have their voices literally drowning out the public's voice and individuals who vote for us. It is time for this institution and the Members of Congress of both parties to come together, change the way professional lobbyists relate to Members of Congress, how they relate to the institution, whether there is a revolving door that goes from here, you go to a place of employment and whether you have in fact the transparency and the disclosure that is required, because in truth this is the whole cloud that exists, exists over all the institution. It requires all of us to work on dealing with this. Mr. Speaker, we have a duty to ensure that the voices of the American people are not drowned out by the voices of the professional lobbyists working the halls of Congress. Only through lobbying reform can we restore the integrity of the Congress and retain the people's trust. We work on important issues here but not so important that it must literally push out the other voices. There is time and again, whether it is dealing with the pharmaceutical industry, the corporate tax bill, the energy bill, other pieces of legislation, you can mark literally the amount of money spent by the lobbying community and the type of legislation this institution passes. When that gavel goes down, it is intended to open the people's House, not the auction house.

Mr. EMANUEL

Mr. EMANUEL. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to take my special order at this time.

Mr. EMANUEL

Mr. EMANUEL. Mr. Speaker, a constant stream of headlines in recent weeks has opened the public's eye to the all too cozy relationship between lawmakers and professional lobbyists. Professional lobbyists have become a virtual ``back office'' for Congress, serving as travel agents, employment agencies and authors of legislation. We have had a debate on campaign finance reform that ultimately set the rules between donors and candidates. Now we need a similar debate and legislation on how to distance the People's House from the professional lobbyists on K Street. The gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Meehan), the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Van Hollen) and I have drafted the Lobbying and Ethics Reform Act. Our bill creates a code of official conduct for congressmen; closes the revolving door by requiring former Members and staff to wait 2 years after they leave Congress before lobbying the institution; ends the practice of lobbyists serving as congressional travel agents by arranging lavish junkets for Members; and requires lobbyists to disclose their past connections, previous Hill employment and financial activities on a public database. Mr. Speaker, when that gavel goes down, it should open the People's House, not the auction house for special interests. Only through lobbying reform can we restore the integrity of the Congress and regain the public's trust.

Mr. EMANUEL

Mr. EMANUEL. Mr. Speaker, I rise in recognition of the 75th Anniversary of St. Bellarmine Parish in Jefferson Park, Illinois. I am proud of the continuous support and inspiration this parish has provided to the people of Jefferson Park for the past 75 years, and I would like to thank the parishioners of St. Robert Bellarmine Parish for their dedicated service. St. Robert Bellarmine has served as an essential part of the surrounding community since 1930, when a group of dedicated parishioners joined with Father Gillespie to celebrate the parish's first Mass in the auditorium of Prussing Public School. Church and school buildings were constructed in 1931 to house the parish, and the church became an anchor for the community and a beacon of hope for its parishioners. Today, St. Robert Bellarmine continues to inspire the Jefferson Park community under the exceptional leadership of Father Michael Goergen. This parish provides a prime example of what can be accomplished when we work together for the common good. The 1,700 families that make up the parish create a welcoming and service-oriented community. Church activities such as the Stretch Program help needy members of the parish, adding to St. Robert Bellarmine's impressive history of donating time, talent, and resources to the community. The 390 students at St. Robert Bellarmine school receive an excellent and well rounded education, with the active participation of the Parents Association in extracurricular programs. Now as St. Robert Bellarmine Parish celebrates its 75th anniversary, I ask my colleagues to take a moment and recognize the importance of places like St. Robert Bellarmine in communities all across America. Mr. Speaker, I congratulate the parishioners of St. Robert Bellarmine on the first 75 years of their parish, and I wish them continued success and inspiration in serving their community in the coming years.

Mr. EMANUEL

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