Rahm Emanuel

Mr. EMANUEL

Mr. EMANUEL. As the gentleman probably remembers, last year when we voted on our budget for the United States, they projected a deficit at that point of a little north of $300 billion. Then they brought up the investment of $87 billion in Iraq after the fact, so it was not included in the budget, because it would have made the deficit look far worse. So this year we are going to vote on a budget that has a $500 billion-plus deficit, nearly half a trillion dollars, and then we will get the request for the war in Iraq, an additional $50 billion put on. It is basically playing real quick with the hands.

Mr. EMANUEL. If I may, we have voted in this Congress on $160 billion of investment in the war in Iraq and Afghanistan and the rebuilding of those countries, healthcare, housing, jobs, roads, bridges. As the gentleman wanted to remind me of a point in that debate less than a year ago, at that point, Secretary Powell said the $168 billion is a down payment, that they would need an additional $50 billion, which they will probably seek, just for that exceeding the $200 billion in Iraq, which we will never see, or, when I say ``we,'' the U.S. taxpayers will never, ever see. That is $200 billion. One can argue whether we are better off or not in Iraq, with Saddam Hussein having been deposed from Iraq, but the taxpayers will never see that investment back. Those are all dollars we are being told on a series of fronts, when we do not have the resources here at home. My purpose here, before we mark up this budget, and spend the next 3 or 2 months discussing the budget is to draw the parallel between what we are investing in Iraq. On housing, we have 7,000 units of housing planned for Iraq, yet only 5,000 for the United States. We have a water irrigation system, well over $800 million for a new irrigation system in Iraq, for water treatment; in America, in the President's budget, a $500 million cut in water and sewer treatment facilities here in the United States. That goes on and on.

Mr. EMANUEL. No.

Mr. EMANUEL. The administration came out and said it would be wrong to do it as loans. We needed, because of the international community, to make it a U.S. taxpayer-funded $87 billion investment.

Mr. EMANUEL. The $87 billion?

Mr. EMANUEL. Mr. Speaker, in 2 days, the House Committee on the Budget will introduce and start to mark up a budget for the United States. This budget is being drafted by the majority, reflective of the President's budget submitted in early February. I thought it would be an opportune time to discuss and go over the review of this budget and the economic policies that have resulted from the President's past budgets here at home, with also the type of priorities that have been claimed for the people of Iraq, and compare, in my view, the tale of two budgets. What we have here, which I think would be a rude awakening for the American people, is what has resulted here at home for the people of the United States and their jobs, their healthcare, their education, their housing, versus what we are doing in Iraq. If you really go through it, what you really have is the tale of two budgets, of two economic programs. I think the American people would be surprised to find out that of the $87 billion we voted on last year for the funding of the war in Iraq and Afghanistan and for rebuilding the communities of Iraq and Afghanistan, that is more than the combined investment in the United States in the areas of education, job training and employment, the money in one shot for Iraq. Remember, that does not count the $70 billion we spent on the first stage of the war with Iraq. The $87 billion spent in Iraq and Afghanistan for the war part, as well as for the rebuilding of their healthcare system, their job training, their physical infrastructure, roads and bridges and water system and water treatment, that is more than the entire combined investment in the United States for education, job training and employment services. To me, the reason we have a $3 trillion debt, additional debt on the books, nearly 3 million Americans have lost their jobs, as well as 43 million Americans without health insurance, 2 million more Americans who have gone from the middle-class to poverty, and nearly $1 trillion worth of bankruptcies, both corporate and individual, is we do not have an economic policy and focus coming from the administration.

Mr. EMANUEL. Let me add one other thing. Ensuring a nation of healthy children. This is the last point on our health care chart; 4.3 million Iraqi children have been immunized, yet the maternal and child health care block grant has been frozen. Prenatal care in Iraq and food provisions for 240,000 pregnant women, full funding. Yet we have cut WIC here and frozen it and frozen the Healthy Start program. 100 percent of prenatal and infancy needs of all Iraqi citizens, and yet we have frozen, which means a cut of care in the pediatric graduate medical education and Title 10 family planning here in the United States. Now, why is it that 4.3 million Iraqi children need to be immunized. I assume that is a good idea. Any thoughts?

Mr. EMANUEL

Mr. EMANUEL. Mr. Speaker, as the world celebrates International Women's Day today, I am proud to rise with Representatives Burton of Indiana, Andrews, Cardoza, Chandler, English, Frost, Hoyer, McCarthy of Missouri, Miller of Florida, and Sandlin to introduce the Juvenile Protection from Sex Slavery Trafficking Act of 2004. Today, we recognize the female struggle for equality, justice, peace, and development in the political and economic process. The legislation we introduce today represents a step toward achieving those goals. This bill takes an important step toward increasing penalties against individuals convicted of trafficking predominantly girls who are bought and sold as sex slaves. This bill treats kingpins of such trafficking networks just like drug kingpins responsible for the destruction of the futures and lives of our children. The bill allows for capital punishment of kingpins who organize and operate child sex trafficking networks in the United States. These kingpins who engage in the most contemptible behavior often lure underage victims through befriending their families, many of whom reside in the poorest developing countries, and prey on their hopes for a better life. In an effort to kidnap their victims, kingpins convince parents that their children will be taught a useful trade, or they falsely promise marriage to daughters who are ultimately forced into prostitution. These broken promises often result in ruined lives and considerable suffering for the victim and the families. Mr. Speaker, in response to this despicable behavior, the Juvenile Protection from Sex Slavery Trafficking Act of 2004 makes available the strongest possible punishment against perpetrators of these inhumane crimes against defenseless children. I strongly encourage my colleagues to support this legislation as a powerful step to protect the world's children from this despicable crime.

Mr. EMANUEL

Mr. EMANUEL. Mr. Speaker, what is known around here as business as usual would make a Chicago alderman blush. In Chicago we have a pretty high standard. If we look at today's Washington Post and New York Times editorial page, they talk about the relationship between two lobbyists and the Republican majority. Roll Call's headline: ``Revolving Door Snags Hill Aide: Staffer Negotiated Lobby Contract While on House Payroll.'' The pharmaceutical industry was working the halls, working on the pharmaceutical prescription drug legislation. The energy lobbyist got an energy bill. Let me do a case in point. Four Indian tribes paid $45 million in 3 years to buy access. Mr. Speaker, there are good people on both sides of the House with good values. It is unfortunate the conduct of a few brings shame on this institution. The Speaker's gavel is intended to open the People's House, not to close the Auction House.

Mr. EMANUEL

Mr. EMANUEL. Mr. Speaker, President Bush has decided to make credibility an election year issue. Yesterday the Vice President announced if the Democratic policies had been pursued over the last 2 or 3 years, we would not have had the kind of job growth that this economy experienced. Really? What a fascinating take. In the last 3 years, $3 trillion have been added to the Nation's debt and 3 million Americans have lost their jobs. And they want to make credibility an issue. Since 5 months when he announced the creation of a manufacturing czar, which has not been appointed, 250,000 additional manufacturing jobs have been lost. And they want to make credibility an issue. They have an economic report that says outsourcing is good for American workers. And they want to make credibility an issue. It is a fascinating take on the economy. Today we have a jobless economy with a wage recession in America. In fact, flipping hamburgers is now a manufacturing job in America. And they want to make credibility an issue. Mr. Speaker, the President and the Vice President think everything is just fine in America. What we need is a new direction to put American workers, American families and their values at the center of our agenda and for somebody to wake up every morning thinking about their jobs, their children and their future.

Mr. EMANUEL

Mr. EMANUEL. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to remember a respected journalist and good friend, Steve Neal. Steve was a strong and intelligent voice in Illinois politics for over two decades as a writer for the Chicago Sun-Times and the Chicago Tribune. We lost that voice when he died on February 17th at the age of 54. Politics was fun to Steve. He enjoyed the game more than anyone I ever met. He enjoyed taking a story and finding an angle that had not yet been reported on. And, I for one can tell you that he knew how to praise as well as criticize. But, Steve was always willing to look at an issue or a person and give you his honest opinion. I will always remember Steve as the toastmaster of the greatest political discussions in Chicago, hosted over a great plate of food at Gene and Georgetti. It was at these Friday lunches, where scholars, historians, and elected officials of all backgrounds discussed everything from our thoughts on an upcoming election, to a discussion of a new book on philosophy. Steve's table did not discriminate along party lines and neither did his column. His weekly analysis addressed all sides of the political spectrum and every level of government with the same uncompromising objectivity and directness. Steve was born and raised in Oregon. He began his career covering sports for local papers, and after earning a graduate degree in journalism at Columbia University he moved to Chicago to work as a general assignment reporter for the Chicago Tribune. After six months, he was sent to Washington, DC to cover politics at the national level. Many journalists come to this town and never look back, but when the Tribune offered him a chance to return to his adopted home to write a column covering local politics, he took the opportunity and Chicago has benefited from his insight ever since. The column was always about politics, but the focus could easily be the American Revolution one day, ward level conflicts the next. The late Senator Paul Simon noted that he was one of only a few political writers with a sense of history. He knew the history behind each office, and was even more familiar with each office holder. He always looked for the story behind the story, and his writing reflected this sense of perspective. He also wrote several history books, on topics including Wendell Wilkie, Harry Truman and Dwight Eisenhower. He recently finished writing a book called Happy Days are Here Again, about the early days of the Franklin Roosevelt administration. Among his last columns was an assertion that James Madison was the most important founding father, and he provided the facts to back it up. Another column provided a historical perspective on the current Presidential primaries by citing specific details about the campaigns of Adlai Stevenson and Thomas Dewey. You always learned something more than his opinion when you read his column. You learned about our city, our state, and our country. Mr. Speaker, my thoughts are with Steve's wife, his two daughters, and the rest of his family today, and I ask my colleagues to join me in honoring the memory of this important and talented journalist.

Mr. EMANUEL

Mr. EMANUEL. Mr. Speaker, President Bush has announced that his campaign strategy will be to make credibility an issue. Just last night, the Vice President said that if the Democrats had been in charge for the last 2 or 3 years we would have endangered the job creation of the economy. Really? What a fascinating take, that Democrats would have endangered the job creation and the economy. Under this administration, $3 trillion has been added to the Nation's debt, and nearly 3 million American jobs have disappeared. And they want to make credibility an election year issue? In the ``Meet the Press'' interview, the President could have talked about his foreign policy accomplishments and his record, but what does he have to offer but an endless occupation. He could have chosen to talk about the economy and the jobs he created, but then he would have to point to the jobless economy and the wage recession Americans face. And this is a President and an administration that wants to make credibility an issue in this campaign? The administration announced 5 months ago, on Labor Day, that they were appointing a manufacturing czar. That position remains empty. There is not even a nominee. And they want to make credibility an issue? Interesting. Since that date, 250,000 Americans have lost their manufacturing jobs. And they want to make credibility an issue? After 5 months, there is not a single person to fill that job. Now, the President does not take advice from me, but as far as I can see David Kay is available. He did the weapons of mass destruction research. Maybe we can help him find where the 2.7 million American jobs have gone. And they had the gall to announce it under a banner of American jobs and American values. And they want to make credibility an issue? Every year the President submits a budget, and he has submitted time and again the elimination of the Manufacturing Extension Program, which helps small businesses, small manufacturers in this country. And he wants to make credibility an issue? Not only is the President not interested in the issue of jobs and job creation in the United States, his own economic report that he submitted the other day to Congress say that ``outsourcing of jobs is good for the American economy and good for the middle class,'' especially the middle class in India, not Indiana. And they want to make credibility an issue? In that report, they envisioned 2.7 million jobs being created in the United States. Then they had to walk away from it. And they want to make credibility an issue? They also in that report cited manufacturing would now be defined as flipping hamburgers. And, again, they would like to make credibility an issue. Since we have decided to make credibility an issue, I would like to say that not only does this administration have a big fiscal deficit; it has a huge credibility deficit. Let me give some other highlights of the issue of credibility. One month steel tariffs are on; the next month steel tariffs are off. There was $3.5 billion in new police funding, and yet the President's budget cuts $1 billion from the police funding. Prescription drugs one month cost $400 billion, the next month, with nothing changed, not a single benefit, we send a bill to the taxpayers for $550 billion. And they want to make credibility an issue. Now, I am not the one to give advice to this administration, or unsolicited advice; but if the President or this administration thinks we are going to cut Social Security to pay for tax cuts for the wealthy, I got a bridge over the Tigress they can buy. Let me say this: the only people that think that is a good economic plan are pioneers and rangers who think cuts in Social Security is what this economy needs so we can pay for tax cuts for the well-off. What we need is a President who wakes up every day and who rolls up his sleeves as he goes into the Oval Office and thinks about the American workers, their families, and their values, not somebody who, for a press headline, announces a manufacturing czar and 5 months later, 250,000 jobs later that have disappeared, has that position remaining unfilled. That is not an administration that every day sees the American family and its values at the center of what it does in the Oval Office. I only wish that they would spend as much time thinking about the American family, their values, their children, their jobs, their health care, their security, and their retirement security as the focus they give to those on K Street and the lobbyists in this town. On policy after policy this administration says one thing and they do another, and yet they have the gall to say credibility will be an issue. So to quote one Senator: If they would like credibility to be an issue this election year, Democrats say, bring it on.

Mr. EMANUEL

Mr. EMANUEL. Mr. Speaker, in addressing the Republican Governors Association fund-raiser on Monday evening, the President, in a much- touted speech, decided to question the Democratic front runner's credibility. This speech, it was touted, was to launch the President's reelection campaign; but it began with the theme of questioning the front runner of the Democratic Party's credibility. Let me just start off by saying it is a good thing that the White House is not made of glass. I think it is very interesting that the President decided that the credibility of our front runner was in question, when after only 3 years of governing, this is a President who has America stuck in a jobless economy and an endless occupation. Now, the President could have spoken about his foreign policy record, but all that offers is a growing and expensive prospect of endless occupation. He could have spoken of his leadership on the economy, but all he could point to is an economy that is not producing jobs. So the President decided that it was his right in a speech the other night to the Governors to lead off with a discussion of credibility. I think the credibility gap of the administration at this point is a good thing, given that his budget will widen the deficit gap. The deficit he has created will not be as lonely now that he has a credibility deficit that continues to grow. The President wants to question the consistency of our potential nominee's record, yet within 18 months he flip-flopped on steel tariffs. This is a President who wants to question credibility, yet in a book recently published by Paul O'Neill, his former Treasury Secretary, he questioned the legitimacy of a second tax cut he was going to propose because, he said, ``Haven't we done enough for the top end?'' Yet he went out there and accused Democrats of class warfare for asking the very same question he had asked, Had the first tax cut not done enough to take care of the top 1 percent? After 3 years, his economic record is $3 trillion added to the Nation's debt and 3 million Americans have lost their jobs, and yet he wants to run this election on credibility. He went to Ohio to talk about the importance of manufacturing jobs to the economy, given that 2 million manufacturing jobs have been lost in America since 2000. His budget, 3 years in a row, has cut the manufacturing extension program, which helps small manufacturing businesses compete in the world market. And he wants to talk about credibility? His economic report of last week praised outsourcing of jobs to India. This is a President who wants to talk about credibility? It was his economic report that cited 2.7 million new jobs would be created this year in the United States. In less than a week, before the ink was even dry, he needed to retract that, because the economy will not produce 2.7 million jobs. And this is an administration who wants to make credibility an issue? On the issue of foreign policy, regardless of what your position is on the war, we went to war on the notion of dealing with weapons of mass destruction, and now we have a report questioning whether weapons of mass destruction were ever in Iraq, which was the legitimacy and the principle of going to war. Yet this is an administration that would like to make credibility of our nominee the issue in this campaign. The President pledged in his recent budget $3.5 million in new money for police and firefighters to help communities here in the United States, but his budget cuts $1 billion for police and firefighters. But he would like to make credibility an issue. His plan to halve the deficit by 2009 is an ``accounting fiction'' to Goldman Sachs. But he would like credibility to be the issue. He said the Medicare bill would cost $400 billion. Within 3 weeks after the ink was dry, the report came out that it would cost $550 billion to taxpayers; $150 billion in errors in addition to the $400 billion for the prescription drug bill. And he would like to make credibility an issue? He promised to clean up the Great Lakes, but he cut water quality funds by $400 million. Yet he would like to make credibility an issue in this campaign? On policy after policy, this administration says one thing and does another to benefit its corporate and special interests. If we are going to make credibility an issue in this campaign, to quote one Senator, bring it on.

Mr. EMANUEL

Mr. EMANUEL. Mr. Speaker, in addressing the Republican Governors Association fund-raiser last night, the President, in a much-touted speech, decided to unveil his reelection strategy. He pointedly accused the current front-runner for the Democratic nomination of having a record of flip-flopping, waffling and temporizing. Since the State of the Union and since Meet the Press, I have been waiting for this President to offer a vision and an agenda for this country. His strategy has got America stuck in an endless occupation and a jobless economy. I thought last night we were going to hear a strategy of how to move forward, yet the President of the United States, after 3 years of governing, has decided his strategy is to tear down his opponent rather than to offer America a vision of tomorrow and what we can do to build something tomorrow. I thought it was very ironic for a President of the United States, who has a growing credibility gap, where people question the validity and the very truthfulness of his words, to begin to question the consistency of the front-runner for the nomination of the Democratic Party. I thought it was very interesting because, if I am not mistaken, this was the President of the United States who has flip-flopped on steel tariffs. That has been this President's record. He flip-flopped within 18 months of having imposed the tariff. This is a President who, although promoting tax cuts for the very wealthy, called them a middle-class tax cut. We now find out, in Paul O'Neill's book and Ron Suskind's book, the President of the United States knew that his tax cut went to the top end. He went into a meeting, said, ``Haven't we done enough for the top end?'' And yet he went out and sold his tax cuts as something else and then accused Democrats of class warfare for asking the very same question he had asked. And he wants to accuse the Democratic nominee, or near nominee, of being a flip-flopper? He has a very interesting economic strategy. He is trying to wage three wars with three tax cuts and tell us the deficit is a result of something else; spending on veterans, police, education, and health care. Ever since his tax cuts for $3 trillion, America has added $521 billion to the deficit, 3 million Americans have lost their jobs, 5 million additional Americans are without health care, and over $1 trillion worth of corporate assets have been foreclosed on. His economic report has now told us that the middle class of India, where they are outsourcing jobs, is the primary concern of the President's economic report rather than the shrinking middle class in Indiana. This is a President who then walked away from that. In Ohio, he said manufacturing was his top priority, yet year after year his budget cuts the manufacturing extension program which helps small businesses. This is a President of the United States who on foreign policy took the Nation, regardless of whether you are for or against it, to war based on weapons of mass destruction, yet we have now found out in two State of the Union Addresses that he raises threats that are not true; in the State of the Union to the United States, where the world was listening. The President's credibility gap is stretched even wider by his budget that is filled with flip-flops and inconsistencies. He has pledged $3.5 million in new money for police and firefighters, yet his budget cuts $1 billion out of existing grants to local police and firefighters. He told us the budget deficit would be manageable, but his plan to halve it by the year 2009 is an accounting fiction. Even Goldman Sachs and the IMF have blamed the Government of the United States for being a danger to the world economy, let alone employment growth here in the United States. The President told conservatives of his own party that Medicare would cost only $400 billion. Within 2 months, the bill was for $537 billion. He promised to clean up the Great Lakes on one hand, so he increased the funding for $35 million, but with the other hand he cut the State Revolving Fund for water cleanup by $400 million. And this is an administration that wants to challenge people on the word of credibility, on their flip-flops and waffling? The only thing this White House never waffles on is when you are a special interest and you need a special favor. They have been quite consistent if you are a pharmaceutical company, you are a polluter, or you are an insurance company or an HMO. So when this President says he wants to campaign on somebody's credibility and on their consistency, I as one Democrat welcome that, because we have 3 years of a record. This President has done a phenomenal job of getting America stuck in a jobless recovery and an endless occupation in Iraq. This is an election about America's future, not offering the status quo that has put America in the position it is. So if credibility is a question we are going to have in this campaign, let us bring it on.

Mr. EMANUEL

Mr. EMANUEL. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor a friend, colleague and leader of Chicago's business community, John A. Canning, Jr. On February l, 2004, Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan made an exemplary choice when he appointed John A. Canning, Jr. as a Director of the Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago. John A. Canning, Jr. is Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of Madison Dearborn Partners. Based in Chicago, Madison Dearborn Partners is one of the largest and most experienced private equity investment firms in the United States. Prior to co-founding Madison Dearborn Partners, John spent 24 years with First Chicago Corporation, most recently as Executive Vice President of The First National Bank of Chicago and President of First Chicago Venture Capital. Mr. Canning has more than a quarter century of experience in private equity investing. John's service to Chicago's business community is matched only by his commitment to Chicago's philanthropic community. He currently serves on the Boards of Directors of Jefferson Smurfit Group plc, Norfolk Tides Baseball Club, LaSalle National Bank, Northwestern Memorial Hospital, and Children's Inner City Educational Fund. In addition, John lends his vast experience to the Boards of Trustees of The Big Shoulders Fund, The Chicago Community Trust, Denison University, Dublin City University Educational Trust, The Field Museum, and Northwestern University. A common thread among John's contributions and the goals of these organizations is their shared dedication to community service. Mr. Speaker, on the eve of his first board meeting, I want to wish John Canning continued success as he puts his vast knowledge and wide- ranging expertise to work for the American people. The citizens of Chicago and indeed the country are fortunate to have him at the Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago.

Mr. EMANUEL

Mr. EMANUEL. Mr. Speaker, last week the President of the United States introduced a budget with a $520 billion deficit. If we look across the spectrum, not only does this budget have a fiscal deficit of historic highs of $521 billion, the budget has a credibility deficit, blaming 9/11 and corporate scandals for the creation of this deficit. In fact, the Bush administration is continually facing a growing credibility problem not just in fiscal terms but also in policy terms at home and also overseas. America's word must be respected abroad as well as here, but the administration's word is coming under question. If we take it from issue to issue, whether it is on the deficit, and we are running a record-high deficit, and the President wants to claim to be a fiscally responsible President, but not once in any of his budgets has he introduced a budget that is either balanced or gets to a road to balance. Not once. In November, this House debated a $400 billion prescription drug bill, and yet we learn that all along the administration knew it cost $550 billion. That is for a program that we debated and understood to be $400 billion, and not the $400 billion, not even the $500 billion, is paid for, driving the American taxpayer as well as our seniors further into debt. The other day they talked about the importance of manufacturing jobs, yet they cut the manufacturing extension program which has helped small- and medium-sized manufacturers compete in the world market and add jobs. The other day, a senior adviser to the President for economic policy announced that outsourcing of jobs was a good thing for the economy. Mr. Speaker, the outsourcing of American jobs are a good thing for the Indian economy, not the American economy. Any administration who has a top economic adviser who believes outsourcing of jobs is a good thing is an administration with a record that has lost three million jobs in 3 years. Whether it is on the budget that is out of whack with our values and our principles and our priorities, and as Goldman Sachs and the international monetary funds have announced, it is not even a credible budget. There is not a cent or direction in how we are going to reduce this deficit. This President, from day one when he came into office, had a surplus north of $100 billion. In his last budget before his reelection, he submits a deficit of $521 billion. In the area of jobs, three million Americans since he has been President have lost their jobs. They fake an interest in offering a manufacturing extension program and then call for its election or cuts by two-thirds. Take the funding of police. They have advocated the importance of helping police and firefighters, talked about funding them, and in the President's budget a billion dollars was cut from the police and over $500 million from helping our firefighters. If we take it from area to area, from section to section, this administration says one thing and then does another. The budget is a blueprint and a document representing the values, principles and priorities of the administration as well as for the United States. I cannot think of a worse example, to have a policy in which we are presented a budget with a $521 billion deficit, record numbers for the country. They are numbers that in my view put us at grave economic risk. We are now beholden to the Chinese and Japanese to continue to buy our securities where, God forbid, at any moment if we need their support they hold our economic security and determine our economic future, which puts us in a terribly vulnerable position. Across the board on any number of subjects, we can watch how this administration continues both here at home to have its word questioned and also overseas has its word questioned. When a President of the United States has a credibility gap like that, it is not only endangering in my view his administration but our own economic security as Americans. We can see from the value of the dollar and the way it is falling people's judgment about the importance of our word and credibility. On the issue of weapons of mass destruction in the recent report, that, too, is another example, and a glaring example, where the word of this administration now will be questioned rather than heeded. In closing, as written in Time magazine, ``Any of those challenges may have been manageable. The problem was that each news cycle brought a new question about the President's judgment and candor, which Democrats lost no time exploiting. Fiscal conservatives had been howling for months about a budget that seemed totally out of control.''

Mr. EMANUEL

Mr. EMANUEL. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of the proclamation to commemorate the 200th anniversary of Constantino Brumidi's birth. Often referred to as the Michelangelo of the Capitol, Constantino Brumidi's frescoes decorate the Capitol Rotunda, House Chamber, committee rooms, and corridors of the Capitol with their incorporation of classical artistic traditions and patriotic American themes. Born in Italy in 1805, Constantino Brumidi studied at the Italian Academy of Arts and demonstrated his talent for fresco painting at a young age, painting several Roman palaces and working three years in the Vatican. He immigrated to America in 1852 at the age of forty-seven and settled in New York City. The artist later took on other important works such as the frescoes in St. Stephen's Church and an allegorical depiction of the Holy Trinity in a Mexico City cathedral. It was upon his return from Mexico that Constantino Brumidi stopped in Washington and visited the Capitol where he was excited about the opportunity to decorate its interiors. Constantino Brumidi was hired by Captain Montgomery Meigs and his first art work in the Capitol was in the House Committee on Agriculture's room. Because his art garnered such favorable attention, he was awarded more commissions and eventually became a Government painter. While Brumidi created scores of frescoes depicting allegories and scenes from American history, perhaps his most important work was ``The Apotheosis of George Washington'' which appears in the Rotunda of the Capitol dome and depicts Washington's ascension to heaven. Today, no visit to the Capitol is complete without viewing this incredible work. Although immigrating to America later in life, he drew from his Italian artistic experience and blended it with the history of his new country. The artist took great pride in his new home, even signing one fresco, ``C. Brumidi Artist Citizen of the U.S.'' Mr. Speaker, on behalf of my district's more than 62,000 constituents of Italian descent, I am proud to join this body in celebrating Constantino Brumidi's lasting contributions to our country as the 200th anniversary of his birth approaches.

Mr. EMANUEL

Mr. EMANUEL. Mr. Speaker, I rise to congratulate John M. McCann of Chicago on receiving the Dr. Robert Hamilton Special Service Award in recognition of his years of excellence and dedication to the DePaul University Athletic Department. John McCann is being honored for his years of service to DePaul University as sports information director. From 1958 to 1973, John was the man responsible for the promotion of DePaul athletics, years that produced some of the most exciting times in Blue Demons history. A lifelong Chicagoan, John was raised on the city's west side, attending St. Philip's School. During World War II, John was in the U.S. Navy, stationed on the USS Case. Upon his return from the war, John enrolled at DePaul University, beginning a relationship that would last a lifetime. After graduating from DePaul in 1950, John began his career in education, first working as a teacher at DePaul Academy. He later joined the ranks of teachers and administrators in the Chicago public schools, eventually becoming the principal of Lakeview's Louis J. Agassiz Elementary School, a position he retired from in 1984. But John's true passion was always with DePaul athletics. As sports information director, John oversaw the publicity and media coverage of dominant years in Blue Demons basketball, including the great teams of the 1960s that starred Howie Carl and Billy Haig. John was an integral part of the DePaul basketball family that was led by the legendary Coach Ray Meyer and his longtime assistant, the late Frank McGrath. To John and his wife, Cay, family has always been a priority. Their son Kevin has followed in his footsteps as an educator, rising to his current position as principal of Jamieson School in Lincoln Park. John is most proud, though, that Kevin and his two siblings, Mary and John, all attended his beloved alma mater, DePaul. Mr. Speaker, I join with the people of Chicago and the members of the DePaul family in recognizing the great honor being bestowed upon John McCann and wish him continued happiness in the future.

Mr. EMANUEL

Mr. EMANUEL. Mr. Speaker, I rise today as a proud cosponsor and in strong support of H.R. 1385, which extends the authorization of a special postage stamp to benefit breast cancer research. Since its introduction in July 1998, the Breast Cancer Stamp has provided the American people with a way to directly support breast cancer research. The stamp carries a seven cent surcharge, which goes directly to the life-saving research efforts of the National Cancer Institute and the Department of Defense Breast Cancer Research Program. The American people have demonstrated that they care about this research by purchasing over 430 million stamps. That's a direct, voluntary contribution of over $30 million to this cause, one stamp at a time. The American public has opened their hearts to women everywhere by acknowledging that breast cancer is a disease which can affect all of our families. Indeed, more than 2 million women in the United States have been diagnosed and treated for breast cancer. One in eight women will develop breast cancer during her lifetime, and 40,000 American women will die from the disease this year. Breast cancer is an issue that we should all care about, particularly since women from every State, of every ethnic and economic background are diagnosed and treated for the disease every year. In my home State of Illinois, researchers estimate that over 10,000 women will develop breast cancer during the coming year. Their lives depend on early detection and early, effective treatment. When Americans send letters and cards using the Breast Cancer Stamp, they aren't just showing that they've contributed to the cause of research. They are reminding their friends and loved ones about the importance of self examination and mammograms. They are promoting vigilance, awareness, and involvement in the fight against breast cancer. They are showing that increased awareness makes a considerable difference for every woman diagnosed with breast cancer. The American people have shown they recognize the necessity of investment in breast cancer research through their continued purchase of these stamps, and I urge my colleagues to support the reauthorization of this program. I also remind my colleagues that there is still work to be done. Along with this bill, I am proud to have cosponsored six other breast cancer related bills which currently await further action in this Congress. Among them are proposals to provide funding and authorization for the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences to expand research on environmental and age-related factors in breast cancer prevalence, authorization of additional funding to the National Institute of Health for early detection and prevention programs, and legislation to require private health insurance plans to provide coverage for minimum hospital stays for major breast cancer-related surgery. I ask my colleagues to honor the spirit of the millions of citizens who made the Breast Cancer Stamp a success, by pledging your support to these potentially life-saving measures still awaiting action. Mr. Speaker, I commend the gentleman from California for introducing this important legislation, and I ask my colleagues to support the passage of H.R. 1385.

Mr. EMANUEL

Mr. EMANUEL. Mr. Speaker, last week we learned the administration's budget projects a $521 billion deficit. What we also have learned, based on that budget, is that not only are they running a budget deficit, or a fiscal deficit; they are also running a credibility deficit. It is impossible to wage three wars with three tax cuts and expect a different result. They have, time and again, whether we are dealing with the issue of weapons of mass destruction, the benefits of their tax cut, or with the issue of Medicare, on point after point, they are running a credibility deficit. The other day, Time Magazine ran a cover story about the growing credibility gap for the President of the United States. It is all because of the actions he has taken. Let us take the issue of Medicare. We debated here whether we were going to charge the taxpayers $400 billion for a prescription drug benefit; and before a single benefit has been issued, which is questionable, but before a single benefit has been issued to a single senior citizen, the taxpayers were charged another $150 billion, and the administration knew all about it all along. We did nothing to bring down the price of prescription drugs, which are going up next year 15 percent and are going up the following year another 15 percent. Yet they knew all along, while we were debating a prescription drug benefit that will not be seen by a single senior citizen for another 2 years, they knew the bill was actually $550 billion. That is what our seniors and our taxpayers are going to be charged, and we did nothing to drive down or bring down the prices, which will continue to go up. That was the beginning of a credibility deficit. Now, the President has submitted a budget with a $500 billion to $520 billion deficit that his administration calls ``manageable,'' ``within acceptable range.'' Yet the International Monetary Fund said it is the single largest drag on the economy. Goldman Sachs, the respected firm of Goldman Sachs where the President's Director of the Office of Management and Budget comes from, referred to the budget that the President submitted as ``not credible'' and ``an accounting fiction.'' And we learned recently in Ron Suskind's book on ``The Price of Loyalty'' that the President of the United States knew all along the reason for the deficit. Mitch Daniels said, Mr. President, if you pass this tax cut, you are going to have deficits for the entire first and second terms of your administration. Yet now he wants to blame it on 9- 11. He wants to blame it on an inherited recession, which was not a recession, and he wants to blame it on corporate scandals. Yet he was told by his own Director of the Office of Management and Budget that the reason for deficits are his tax cuts, which have nothing to do with economic recovery. But the President of the United States had the wisdom to ask, appropriately: Have we not done enough for the top rate? Have we not taken care of the very wealthy yet? He knew that his economic program and his first tax cut had taken care of the wealthy, but he went along and decided to once again repeat a tax cut to the very wealthy in this country at the expense of middle- class families who are seeing no increases in assistance in college education, who are seeing no increases in health care, 33 million Americans who work and who have no health care. And he knew that that tax cut was going to take care of the wealthy and drive us into a deficit. Yet he went along and tried to pass it for something it was not, and then accused every Democrat who raised the same question the President of the United States raised as waging class warfare. The President of the United States went along with a tax cut that was skewed to the wealthiest. On the issue of weapons of mass destruction, the issue is not whether Saddam Hussein was developing weapons of mass destruction. The issue was whether he was an imminent threat, and we were told he was an imminent threat. Now we learn, after having derided and belittled the United Nations, that the President of the United States went out on TV and said one thing, knowing the facts to be something else. That is why this President now has with the American people, for the first time in his Presidency, when he had the benefit of the doubt from what happened to this country, to all Americans after 9-11, he has a growing credibility deficit. If we listen to what he says and we see what he does, the two things are not the same, from tax cuts to the deficit to Medicare, to weapons of mass destruction. Let us take the issue of the weapons of mass destruction. We will have to have the countries of the world be on our side when we face North Korea and our word must be important. Then, and let me read one last thing and I will finish, as Time Magazine reported, ``Any of those challenges might have been manageable alone. The problem was that each news cycle brought a new question about Bush's judgment and candor, which Democrats lost no time exploiting. Fiscal conservatives have been howling for months about a budget that seemed totally out of control.'' Mr. President, this country now is facing a credibility gap, not only around the world, but your administration is, because of its words and its actions.

Mr. EMANUEL

Mr. EMANUEL. Mr. Speaker, I am proud to introduce the Flu Prevention Act of 2004 with my colleagues Mr. Shimkus, Ms. DeGette and Mr. Engel. This bill takes important steps to ensure that the widespread vaccine shortages of this flu season, which resulted in the deaths of 110 children will not occur in the future. The bill is an identical companion to bipartisan Senate legislation, introduced by Senators Bayh, Craig, Landrieu, and Durbin. This bill uses a multifaceted approach to ensure adequate flu vaccine supply and educate American families about the importance of the vaccine. It provides tax incentives for vaccine manufacturers to expand their production capacities. It also allows the Centers for Disease Control to share the financial risk of vaccine overproduction with vaccine manufacturers, so as to eliminate the current financial incentive to under-produce vaccine. Additionally, the Flu Prevention Act provides funding for and requires CDC to implement a protocol if the flu reaches epidemic or pandemic levels. It establishes a public awareness campaign to provide education and outreach efforts on the importance of receiving the vaccine, which populations should receive the vaccine, and vaccine safety. Mr. Speaker, I encourage my colleagues to support this legislation as a strong preventative measure to protect our nation's children from future flu outbreaks.

Mr. EMANUEL

Mr. EMANUEL. Mr. Speaker, last week we learned that after extensive debate we were told that the Medicare bill would cost $400 billion to the taxpayers. We learned that the real number, and known all along, was $540 billion. Not a single benefit has been accrued to a senior citizen. Not a single prescription drug or reduction in cost has been accrued to a senior citizen, and yet the taxpayers are being asked to foot the bill not for $400 billion but for $540 billion. In the last 2 months since this Congress passed the prescription drug bill, three things have happened. First, the taxpayers have been asked to pay an additional $140 billion. Second, Mr. Scully, who is over at Health and Human Services and negotiated this bill, got a huge lobbying contract and became a lobbyist. And in today's Wall Street Journal, there was an article about Delphi gets boost in new drug law where they are able to write off $500 million in costs for health care for their seniors and retirees, and yet not a single new benefit from the Medicare bill. So we have one individual becoming a lobbyist, the taxpayers getting an additional bill of $140 billion, and corporate America gets to write off more of their health care costs. Not necessarily a bad thing, but seniors have to wait until 2006 to see any benefit at all, if there is one, from this legislation. That to me is exactly what was wrong with this bill is that we have HMOs and pharmaceutical companies getting huge dollars and huge investments of taxpayer-paid benefits, and no money, no resources towards our senior citizens. This article talks about Delphi's benefit but Caterpillar, GM, Lucent Technologies, all with a number of their retirees who have health care plans as retirees, will now be able to accelerate the write-off on their bottom line. The Delphi article talks about them being able to accelerate a $500 million write-off, and yet no new benefit in prescription drug benefit has been delivered to a single senior citizen. I will say one thing. The pharmaceutical industry, the insurance industry, and other special interests have surely gotten their money's worth out of this Congress, and so I applaud them for their hard work. A number of my colleagues on the other side always talk about how they would like government to start emulating and working like a business. There was a bipartisan group that talked about how to make the government, and specifically prescription drugs, operate like a business, creating in Medicare a Sam's Club entity, 41 million seniors would be pulled together, the purchasing power of the seniors. We could save hundreds of billions of dollars by negotiating bulk prices, just like Sam's Club does, just like private insurers do. But the legislation that was passed in this Congress at the behest of the pharmaceutical industry prohibits Medicare from doing what private industry does, what Sam's Club does or private insurance companies do, what even the Veterans Administration does, negotiate on behalf of who they represent, using the leverage power of a quantity of people. In this case it would be 41 million seniors. Another way of reducing the price and delivering the prescription drugs would be allowing people to buy their drugs in Canada and Europe, again proving we pay 40 percent more here in the United States than anywhere else in the world. People are allowed to use competition in choice to buy their medications. We would have lower prices here in the United States, save our senior citizens dollars and our taxpayers dollars, but both attempts to get the government to operate like a business, to save money, to be more efficient, wring out synergies, has been prevented. I have found in the last 2 weeks one of the most incredible news on this legislation. First of all, I believe if we had known the true number and not been lied to or not told the truth or denied the access to the truth, and we had been told that the number was $540 billion, the legislation never would have passed. But that information was consciously, specifically denied access in the public debate, as has been in the past for cases where the administration has refused to share information. Now we know the true number, and the taxpayers are going to be asked to pay an additional $140 billion on top of the $400 billion, and we do not have the money to do it. Yet we are asking them to do it, and not a single benefit. Mr. Scully, nothing against that, has negotiated himself a wonderful contract to be a lobbyist on the prescription drug benefit, and companies like Delphi will now be eligible to accelerate and write down $500 million on their taxes, and yet not a single benefit has been given for seniors. Everybody sat here and talked about what we were doing for seniors, and this year the prices of prescription drugs will go up 15 percent. They are projected to go up another 15 to 18 percent the following year, and we have done nothing to affect the price. After this type of behavior in this Congress and the actions taken by this Congress, I am surprised that anybody wonders why people are cynical about politics. We have done a great job out of this institution, taking care of the special interests. Hopefully we will return and look at this legislation and once again think about how we can save our seniors money and our taxpayers.

Mr. EMANUEL

Mr. EMANUEL. Mr. Speaker, I rise today with a heavy heart. Early this morning, the people of Chicago lost a great friend in John J. Sexton who passed away after a long and difficult illness. John Sexton was a man who lived life to its fullest, and the friends and family he had are a testament to the quality of his character and the type of man he was. John Sexton achieved his success in life through hard work and determination. He spent his life in public service and was dedicated to the people of Chicago, rising through the ranks with the City, from machinist, to foreman, to Assistant Superintendent of the Meter Division of the City's Water Department, and finally Superintendent of the Meter Division. His dedication to his job and the city he loved is an example of why Chicago is known as ``The City That Works.'' But, it was John's connection to and involvement in his community that John's friends will remember. John loved the northwest side of Chicago, his home for his entire life. John raised his family in the Hiawatha Park neighborhood where he was very active as president of the Hiawatha Boys Baseball Organization. As church life plays such an important role in the lives of so many Chicagoans, John was a member of several esteemed Northwest side parishes. He grew up in Presentation Parish, attended grammar school at St. Angela's and high school at St. Michael's. As an adult he was a member of St. Francis Borgia Parish. The Northwest side has produced some of Chicago's finest leaders, and John Sexton played an active part in the success of many of their careers. John's passion for politics began at 16, working as a precinct worker for former Alderman Thomas Casey. As a precinct captain in the mighty 36th Ward Regular Democratic Organization, John became a close confidant and friend to many elected officials, especially Alderman William J.P. Banks and State Senator James A. DeLeo. John's top priority was always his family, and the love and support they provided him was the most important thing in his life. For 31 years he was married to his wonderful wife, Rosetta. Their family also includes their daughter, Laurie Moran, and her husband Joseph, their son, John Jr., their daughter, Diana, and John's sister, Mary Kay Kuhter. Mr. Speaker, I join with the people of Chicago in mourning John Sexton, a man I was proud to call a friend. May God bless the Sexton family and the memory of a man who was truly loved by his friends, his community and his family.

Mr. EMANUEL

Mr. EMANUEL. Mr. Speaker, in today's number reporting a deficit $500 billion, a historic number, it goes to prove that we cannot fight three wars with three tax cuts, having now produced a record deficit in the economy. And what we need now is a balanced budget that is in balance with our priorities. Not all government spending is good, and not all tax cuts lead to the same economic benefit. We need a strategy and an agenda that brings our budget into balance with our priorities, where we can make sure that Americans can afford the education and the health care for their children that they need as well as make sure that we have the security and the investments in our defense that we need. And as we lay out our agenda and understand where we are as a country and the priorities, I think that today's deficit proves that while the economy is supposedly growing, the deficit should be going down, not going up. And the reason it is going up is because we neither have a strategy nor the priorities that are correct for this country and for the future of our country. So we must once again dedicate ourselves to the principle of bringing the budget into balance, in balance with our priorities.

Mr. EMANUEL

Mr. EMANUEL. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of H. Res. 492, a resolution honoring the contributions of Catholic schools and supporting the goals of Catholic Schools Week. The accomplishments of Catholic schools and their tremendous impact on students and communities throughout the nation is evident in the Fifth Congressional District of Illinois, where schools like St. Ferdinand Catholic Elementary, St. Patrick High School, and Notre Dame High School for Girls provide a quality education while instilling values that will serve their students throughout their lives. These schools provide strong academic curriculums and engender significant parental involvement. They not only teach students the importance of academic achievement, but also provide a balanced perspective on life that promotes responsibility, justice and social service. Catholic schools also promote ethnic and racial diversity. Increasing numbers of children in Catholic schools in my district come from our minority communities. Students in Catholic schools achieve exceptionally high graduation rates, with increasing numbers advancing to higher education and giving back to the community through volunteer service. It is also important to recognize that the Catholic school experience fosters more than just scholastic excellence. It provides spiritual guidance to students by encouraging fundamental ideals and an appreciation for family values, community service, and faith in their own lives. This, in turn, shapes Catholic school students into leaders of tomorrow. I want to take this opportunity to applaud the recent accomplishments of two teachers at a Catholic school in my district--Mother Theodore Guerin High School in River Grove, Illinois--who have been recognized for their outstanding service to their students and to their community. Sister Adelaide Ortegal received the Dr. Nathan Jones Special Achievement Award last October. This honor is awarded to educators for their outstanding work with African-American students. Sister Ortegal has taught Art for thirty years and is the sponsor of the African- American Club at Mother Guerin. I also want to recognize Mary Stephany, a social science teacher at Mother Guerin who has been chosen as an Ambassador to Chicago's Field Museum for 2003-2004. In this role, Ms. Stephany will be a liaison for her school, serve on education advisory committees to the museum, and mentor other teachers. I thank these two outstanding individuals as well as all of the dedicated Catholic school teachers in my district for their love of learning and their devotion to their students. Mr. Speaker, I support this important resolution and encourage Catholic schools in my district and across the United States to continue contributing to the development of strong moral, intellectual and social values in America's young people. I thank my colleague, Representative Vitter, for introducing this resolution, and I thank the National Catholic Educational Association and the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops for their sponsorship of Catholic Schools Week.