Mark Foley

Mr. FOLEY

Mr. FOLEY. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that when the House adjourns today, it adjourn to meet at 12:30 p.m. on Monday next for morning hour debates.

Mr. FOLEY

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

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

Mr. FOLEY

Mr. FOLEY. Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the conversation today, and it is interesting that we are talking about giving estate tax relief for American families yet my colleagues on the other side of the aisle are changing the subject to campaign finance reform. It is interesting today that DNC, the Democratic National Committee, begins airing soft money ads for Al Gore, but nonetheless we are still talking, as the majority party, about giving tax relief to families. The premise was launched today about the rich getting a benefit under the bill. Well, let me tell my colleagues that the estates did not just materialize. The people who have created the businesses and the wealth in America paid excise taxes, paid property taxes, paid sales taxes, paid income taxes. And the wealthy that my colleagues are speaking of with such affection know how to avoid estate taxes. They buy high- dollar denomination insurance policies. But the small family business cannot afford them because they are paying ever larger taxes. I understand there is a substitute being offered by the minority. And it is interesting, they have had 40 years to eliminate seniors earning test, they have had 40 years to do something about estate relief tax, they have had 40 years to change the Tax Code. But know we are here today to try to rectify what is an egregious violation of hard work and equity on the American taxpayer. Let us remember, my colleagues, that small businesses grew through hard work, entrepreneuralism, and strength of families; and, lo and behold, when the person who created the business and prayed to God that all that hard work would some day benefit their children, in steps the Government, their new partner. They were not there to assist them through the growing formative years. But, lo and behold, they are here today to take out not only their fair share but an excessive share. Then we hear the hew and the cry from the other side about the diminution of revenue to the States. Well, let us cry for that today. Because the families who work their entire life have their businesses decimated, destroyed, subdivided, and sold off in pieces at auction to pay the Government's need for revenue. They are addicted to cash in the States and the Federal Treasury. We should do something today for the American families. I always learned growing up, my parents told me to work hard, strive for success, reach for excellence, build equity, make a life for yourself, be independent. Under the assumption today, we are passing a bill that furthers that independence and creates self-worth and dignity. Under their approach, let me take it out of their pocket. I do not care how hard they work. It is my money, and I will spend their money as I see fit. My colleagues, let us focus on estate taxes. Let us focus on families. We will deal with 527 corporations. But let us not change the subject. Pull the ads on the air by the DNC, and then we will talk about 527s.

Mr. FOLEY

Mr. FOLEY. Mr. Speaker, I, too, join today in urging Congress to, not only debate the Hate Crimes Prevention Act, but pass it. We should no longer in America tolerate racial hatred, bigotry, crimes against persons because of their sexual orientation. We are America. We are a proud country. But, regrettably, deaths like James Byrd, which occurred 2 years ago today, still occur in America, the death of Matthew Shepard, the death of so many others based on their color, their race, their ethnicity, or their orientation. Shamefully, America witnesses once again every day another dimension of killing in this country. But only if Congress speaks loudly against violence and specifically against violence perpetrated because of hate will we only cleanse our souls and urge our Nation to move forward in a better, more positive spirit. So I urge my leaders to consider bringing the Hate Crimes Prevention Act to the floor so that we can debate this in the well, in this Chamber, and pass it on behalf of all Americans.

Mr. FOLEY

Mr. FOLEY. Mr. Speaker, on rollcall No. 235 had I been present, I would have voted ``yes.''

Mr. FOLEY

Mr. FOLEY. Mr. Speaker, I thank the chairman for his eloquence in the debate. I am quite shocked at the Democrats not supporting their President today or their Vice President in his trade policy. In the twilight of his administration, I would think the party would rally behind the President and support him. As chairman of the House Entertainment Industry Caucus, this is a good bill for videos, for movies, and for music sales. As co-chair of the Travel and Tourism Caucus, we can expect more travel in both directions because of this bill. And as a representative of Florida's vital citrus industry, we finally have our enjoyable and nutritious product making its way to China, and more will be on its way thanks to this bill. Relative to the comments of the gentleman from Pennsylvania about Taiwan, if, in fact, China attacks Taiwan, the President can put in a trade sanction against the Chinese. There is protection in law to prevent those types of occurrences. But, please, I admonish the people on the other side of the aisle to support their President in the final months of his administration; support the Vice President, as he tries to succeed President Clinton, and do what is right for international policy, human rights for the Chinese, more business for all in China, and more business for United States companies.

Mr. FOLEY

Mr. FOLEY. Mr. Speaker, May 28 will mark the end of a long and distinguished broadcasting career for an icon of south Florida television. Since 1967, Jim Brosemer has been a familiar face delivering the news to the people I represent. After 17 years as an anchor in Miami at WTVJ, Jim spent the last 7 years in a variety of capacities at WPTV channel 5, the NBC affiliate in west Palm Beach. While his regular appearances in front of the camera are coming to an end, he will now share the same skills that won him four local Emmy awards behind the camera as a teacher helping to educate the next generation of journalists. As Jim begins his new duties in teaching and as the government and media liaison for college of communications at Lynn University joins another icon of broadcasting, Irving R. Levine, at their Boca Raton campus, I join the communities of south Florida in wishing Jim Brosemer well, wishing him success, and thanking him for his years of community service to Palm Beach County and all of south Florida.

Mr. FOLEY

Mr. FOLEY. Mr. Chairman, on rollcall No. 174, I was inadvertently detained. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yes.''

Mr. FOLEY

Mr. FOLEY. Mr. Chairman, sometimes I am not certain around here whether we are making progress or not, but we certainly are working on a very, very important issue. The other side, the minority, at times criticizes us for not working enough. Yet, today we are being accused of rushing legislation to the floor. I disagree with that viewpoint. I think we are all aware of the Internet and its importance to the country. I think if we look at the record, Republicans have, in fact, been stalwart leaders in trying to bring the Nation as a whole into the Internet economy. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of H.R. 3709, the Internet Nondiscrimination Act. The Internet is the engine that has fueled this massive expansion in our Nation's economy. This is the ``Internet Age'' and America is leading the way in innovation and development of this vital sector of our economy. This bill is important because it tells the government: ``Keep your hands off the Internet.'' All too often we have seen the Federal Government stifle innovation and new technologies through heavy taxation and overburdensome regulation. We could cite the Justice Department's heavy hand in the Microsoft case, which is obviously causing serious tremors on Wall Street and is causing millions of Americans to lose a substantial part of their retirement savings because the equity values have been driven down because of the fear that innovation and technology improvements to society will be challenged by this Justice Department. This bill will prevent States and localities from imposing access charges to the Internet. Many in this Chamber have received calls and letters from our constituents urging us not to tax the access to the Internet. This is in response to those thousands of e-mails and letters we have received from our constituents. Allowing every taxing authority across the country to tax access to the Internet is the quickest way to destroy it, and certainly that is something that no one here wants. I am concerned, however, about the effects this bill will have on the ability of States to collect sales tax revenue. My State of Florida is heavily dependent on sales tax receipts, as it does not have a State income tax. And I congratulate our State for not having an income tax. Mr. Chairman, please understand, I do not favor taxes, sales or otherwise, that discriminate against the Internet. I supported the 1998 Internet Tax Freedom Act because I felt it was important at the time to give the Internet some room to grow absent the heavy hand of government. However, today we are facing a situation where businesses in my district and all across America are being discriminated against. If a person can evade sales taxes by making a purchase on-line, the small business on the street corner that sells that same product will, in fact, suffer. The Internet is now thriving, and it is unfair to continue an unlevel playing field which gives Internet companies an advantage over the ``brick-and-mortar'' corner stores all across America. It is my hope that we can reach a compromise on this particular issue; however, I support the main intent of this bill, which is preventing the taxation of Internet access. Mr. Chairman, I congratulate the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Chairman Gekas) for his leadership.

Mr. FOLEY

Mr. FOLEY. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the gentleman for yielding me this time, and I strongly support passage of H.R. 4386. Breast cancer is a disease that can strike almost anyone, no matter how young or how healthy, no matter how rich or how poor. One of my friends was recently diagnosed with breast cancer. When she got her diagnosis, she was able to get the best care money could buy. She was soon on a plane to Sloan-Kettering to be treated by one of the foremost cancer doctors in the country. Once there, she received quick treatment and top quality reconstructive surgery. Then she was able to return to the comfort of her own home for a long recovery. Tricia was also fortunate that she had a loving and supportive family to help her cope with this disease. Even though she was fortunate enough to have these benefits, she has still suffered great emotional and physical pain from the breast cancer, painful surgery, the sickness of chemotherapy, the loss of hair, and the terrible uncertainty of whether the cancer would spread or be eliminated completely. I think of someone in Tricia's situation, and then I try to imagine what breast or cervical cancer would mean to someone with no health insurance, no good medical care, and no support network. These women not only face the fear of having this disease, they must also cope with the costs associated with their medical treatment, they have to worry about how to pay for their treatment, about whether they will be fired from their job, if their recovery period is too long, and about who will take care of their children while they recover. These fears also lead to denial and to a delay in diagnosis and treatment. This delay is one of the leading factors in breast and cervical cancer morbidity and mortality. The passage of this bill will help eliminate these fears and give uninsured women the hope and help that they need to get treated quickly and, God willing, to get back their lives. Saving someone's life should not be determined by how much money or health insurance someone has. Let us give those who do not have wealth or good insurance the same chance at life the rest of us enjoy.

Mr. FOLEY

Mr. FOLEY. Mr. Speaker, I first applaud the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Crane) for his fine leadership on many of the trade issues our committee considers. As a Floridian, I want to underscore the importance of trade with our Caribbean Basin neighbors and also trade with Africa. I applaud it when Members of this Congress can come together in a reasonable fashion to talk about the economic realities and opportunities that are presented through these bills. I think this is the hallmark of this Congress where we can come together and discuss with some differences, yet support for the underlying measure. This will enhance trade with Africa, which is vitally important. We also have to underscore, while we are talking about Africa, some of the most serious considerations relative to AIDS that are afflicting that region. I have worked with our former colleague, Mr. Dellums, on that issue; and I will continue to do so. But one way that we can help in Africa today is inspiring and working towards increased trade with that region. So I again thank the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Crane), the chairman of the Subcommittee on Trade of the Committee on Ways and Means, for his leadership on this issue, and I urge Members to vote affirmatively for the package today.

Mr. FOLEY

Mr. FOLEY. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Goss), a member of the Committee on Rules, the champion of the Everglades, for giving me the opportunity to once again to speak under another rule, to talk about an issue again critical to the State of Florida and again dealing with the importance of water. And if anyone has traveled to Florida, whether it be the Keys or to Okeechobee County or to Palatka or Jacksonville or the Panhandle, they recognize with some 45 million annual visitors a year and a population in excess of 14 million people we clearly have water on our mind. It is everywhere. It is bountiful. It is plentiful, but it is diminishing. Obviously, it is not all available for consumption. We are surrounded by both the Gulf and the Atlanta Ocean which is, of course, saltwater incapable of being used for nourishment or thirst-quenching, unless it has been desalinated and that, of course, is an expensive proposal. I want to first thank the gentleman from New York (Mr. Boehlert) and the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Shuster) and others who have allowed this bill to come to the floor today, and I want to thank my colleagues, the gentlewoman from Florida (Mrs. Thurman), the gentlewoman from Florida (Mrs. Fowler), the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Mica), and the gentlewoman from Florida (Ms. Brown) for their hard work on H.R. 1106. Many States, especially my home State of Florida, currently face a water supply crisis. Our populations continue to grow but our water levels continue to decrease. If nothing is done, it is estimated that water demand will exceed supply as early as 2020. Congress must act now before this problem escalates to that dangerous level leading to potential economic and environmental crises. I will stop there for just a moment to recognize the actions on the floor of the legislature in unanimously passing the bill provided to them by Governor Jeb Bush regarding the Florida Everglades which, of course, is a key part and component of the long-term solutions of saving Florida and obviously providing an abundant supply of water. That bill provides $123 million over the course of the next several years in order to accomplish environmental restoration. That is critical to be acknowledged on the floor today because we will ultimately take up the restudy bill, which is a bill that has been strongly championed by the Florida delegation in order to get money necessary to complete the important replumbing of the Florida Everglades and surrounding environments. Congress has recognized a similar problem before in Western States and in the United States territories. A limited number of State governments are now eligible for funding to develop alternative water resources through the Bureau of Reclamation. We need to answer the call of high-population growth States such as Florida now with a comparable plan. Florida has taken aggressive steps through conservation and identification of alternative water sources. Unfortunately, these steps are clearly not enough. High-population growth States need action by Congress now to prevent disastrous consequences later. So I urge my colleagues both to vote for the rule and vote for the underlying legislation, H.R. 1106, the Alternative Water Resources Act of 1999.

Mr. FOLEY

Mr. FOLEY. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Diaz- Balart), a member of the Committee on Rules, for his leadership as well. He is from South Florida and has undertaken to represent that community and the entirety of the State and the Nation in a very competent fashion. I first want to thank the chairman and also thank especially our colleague from Florida (Mr. Deutsch) who has spearheaded this legislation which is vital, obviously, to the Florida Keys and to thank, as well, the gentleman from New York (Mr. Boehlert), the chairman of the committee, for endeavoring to bring this bill to the floor. Mr. Speaker, we have heard quite a bit today about the importance of this bill and the positive impact it will have on the delicate marine ecosystem of the Florida Keys. I appreciate the comments made by the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Goss) and urge people to please make their vacation plans to visit this pristine, wonderful part of Florida. I know they will not be disappointed. As my colleague clearly stated, those who have been there fully understand the magnitude and magnificence not only of the region but of the necessity for the bill. The Federal Government has recognized the importance of this system by naming it the National Marine Sanctuary. But it currently is in jeopardy. For too long, inadequate storm water management systems and wastewater treatment systems have allowed pollutants to mar this national treasure. I might also add, we have a similar experience around Lake Okeechobee because of septic tanks and other things that were causing and are causing the degradation of the environment. While we are here today to talk about the Keys, I also want to call to the attention of Members of Congress other waterways and other water bodies which would clearly have a significance and could actually use the model that the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Deutsch) has established today to help deal with other areas and other consequences. But what impact will this problem have if left unchecked on the rest of us? Over 2 million people visit this beautiful area each year. But because of the inadequate infrastructure, what was once clear and beautiful water is now discolored. Beaches are often closed and public health officials warn against swimming near the shores. This poses a public health threat and a threat to the livelihood of many of the Keys' full-time residents. The Florida Keys marine ecosystem is intrinsically linked with the Greater South Florida ecosystem, including our national park, the Florida Everglades. In devoting resources towards the restoration of this important ecosystem, we must ensure that a coordinated effort is undertaken so that the best environmental and fiscal outcome can be achieved for all concerned. We have agreed that there is a problem by establishing the Water Quality Protection Program Steering Committee. This committee has proposed, as directed by the Congress, a comprehensive program to ensure water quality and protection embodied in this resolution, H.R. 673. The State of Florida and the Monroe County Commission have demonstrated their commitment to this solution. Let us pass this legislation and demonstrate the commitment of this Congress to preserving the beauty of the Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary for all Americans.

Mr. FOLEY

Mr. FOLEY. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me the time, and I stand in strong support of the resolution as a cosponsor and as a concerned citizen for the depravity of leaving a child in a public place to die. It is sad when we wake up in the morning and read another instance where a mother or parent has decided to leave their child and walk away from their responsibility. So I hope we will consider this as a strong measure of trying to identify just how many times it is occurring. The Department of Health and Human Services conducted a survey in 1998 and found 105 babies were found abandoned in public places in the United States, in which 33 were found dead. Sixty-five babies were abandoned in 1991, eight of which were found dead, which is not only alarming but it is frightening and sad that in a day and era when there are so many parents willing to adopt and in fact are going overseas to find children that these babies would be allowed to be placed in such an unsafe condition. But it also goes to the heart of another problem that we have to speak about, and that is unwanted and unplanned pregnancies, welfare dependencies. All of these are intertwined. We need to educate people about the consequences of unwanted and unplanned pregnancy. And, yes, I support Planned Parenthood because I think education is the only way we will stop some of these abuses and some of these problems. It is sad. Every life is precious. And I think both sides of the aisle agree, whether they are pro-choice or pro-life, that every life is viable and valuable and must be protected. This is a measure in which we can weigh how many are in fact being abandoned. But let us not just stop with the resolution. Let us start looking at education. Let us fundamentally change the way people look at children and childbearing and child raising. Let us make sure they recognize that responsibility. We all talk about laws and enactment of tougher penalties to get tough on criminals. Let us find a way to make certain those penalties include recognizing the responsibility every person bears, both male and female, when they conceive and bring a child into this world. And it does not just stop after the act of having fun. It means 9 months later they have to accept that responsibility. So I support this amendment and urge my colleagues its adoption.

Mr. FOLEY

Mr. FOLEY. Mr. Speaker, let me thank the gentleman from Michigan for yielding me this time. I have heard a lot this morning in 1-minutes on campaign finance reform and some tactics used in the Committee on Ways and Means in order to extract it. I did not hear anybody ask for the Vice President's e-mail records. I did not ask anybody to look at the memos from the Justice Department and the FBI about prior scandals in this administration. Lo and behold, the sad tragedy today is the Justice Department refused to investigate at the request of the FBI, and yet two nuns in the Buddhist order have been indicted. Two nuns have been indicted. Yet everyone else in the administration is let off scot-free. So my colleagues demand campaign finance reform today. I would urge them to ask Mr. Gore to submit his e-mail records. Let us look at Justice Freeh's memorandum of understanding to Mrs. Reno. Let us finally look at campaign finance reform as the laws apply today. But, no, let us create a smoke screen.

Mr. FOLEY

Mr. FOLEY. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding time to me. Mr. Speaker, first I want to applaud both the comments of the gentlewoman from Miami, Florida (Mrs. Meek), as well as the leadership of the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Shaw), who represents Dade, Broward and Palm Beach Counties, who has been working very closely with our Florida Secretary of State in establishing what we hope will be an economic opportunity, an outstanding viable trade mission, something that will not only produce and provide jobs for Floridians and people who live in the United States, but will also serve as a welcome station for countries around the hemisphere. Clearly New York is blessed to have the United Nations, where people from all over the world assemble to debate and discuss the merits of international treaties, trade, and other important things that they consider. We now have a chance, through this legislation, this resolution, to establish the permanent Secretariat in Miami. The United States has been negotiating with other countries in the Americas to establish free trade area of the Americas. As part of that, we agreed 2 years ago to create a permanent Secretariat to help further the FTAA. Miami, as was described by the gentlewoman from Florida (Mrs. Meek), is now the temporary home of the Secretariat. This bill would make permanent Miami as its home, and we believe strongly as members of the South Florida delegation that it ought to be here in Miami, in Florida. The State of Florida is now already the gateway to trade between North and South America, with much of this trade going through the Port of Miami. It is an international bilingual city that has long had roots in the Latin American culture, making it all the more equipped to be the center of trade of the Americas. Well over 700,000 Cuban Americans call Dade County home, and there are a multitude of other nationalities that equally call Miami their home now, Nicaraguans, Guatemalans, Haitians, all types of nationalities, which makes it even more fitting, and it makes it more equipped to be the center for trade for the Americas. We have a marvelous opportunity now to make a United States city the focal point for trade within the Americas, and Miami is clearly the best candidate. Again, I urge my colleagues to vote for this bill, and again, I want to personally commend the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Shaw), who is looking to bring what I believe will be one of the most vital opportunities to his Dade County in both the creation of jobs, in recognizing that the United States is for trade, it is for open trade, and will make a hospitable location for future deliberations.

Mr. FOLEY

Mr. FOLEY. Mr. Speaker, today I am introducing the Seniors Health Choice Preservation Act. This bill will protect Medicare Choice HMOs from additional payment cuts. Furthermore, the bill will assist Medicare HMOs that cover prescription drugs so that they can continue to provide this important benefit. I believe we have a commitment to America's seniors to provide dependable health care through the Medicare program. I strongly supported giving seniors more options and flexibility when I voted for the Medicare Choice in the Balanced Budget Act. Empowering consumers to choose their care is the best way to improve quality and affordability in the health care system. Unfortunately, more than 700,000 Medicare beneficiaries in the Medicare Choice HMOs nationwide will have had their coverage either disrupted or discontinued over the past 2 years. In some Congressional districts, like mine, many seniors were forced to return to Fee for Service Medicare because there were no other options in their area. Even in areas that still have Medicare HMOs, seniors have been hit hard with increased out-of-pocket costs and reduced benefits. Seniors in my district love their HMOs. They get things like prescription drug coverage, dental care, and eye glass exams. At a time when HMOs are getting a bad rap in a lot of places, we want to keep our HMOs in Florida. I urge my colleagues to cosponsor the Seniors Health Care Preservation Act.

Mr. FOLEY

Mr. FOLEY. Mr. Speaker, today, I am introducing the Seniors Health Choice Preservation Act. This bill will protect Medicare+Choice HMOs from additional payments cuts. Furthermore, the bill will assist Medicare HMO's that cover preservation drugs so that they can continue to provide this important benefit. I believe we have a commitment to America's seniors to provide dependable health care through the Medicare program. I strongly supported giving seniors more options and flexibility when I voted for Medicare+Choice in the Balanced Budget Act. Empowering consumers to choose their care is the best way to improve quality and affordability in the health care system. Unfortunately, more than 700,000 Medicare beneficiaries in Medicare+Choice HMOs nationwide have had their coverage either disrupted or discontinued over the past two years. In some congressional districts--like mine--many seniors were forced to return to fee-for-service Medicare because there were no other options in this area. Even in areas that still have Medicare HMOs, seniors have been hit with increased out-of-pocket costs and reduced benefits, Seniors in my district love their HMOs. They get things like prescription drug coverage, dental care, and eye exams and glasses. At a time when HMOs are getting a bad rap in a lot of places, we want to keep our HMOs in Florida. Unfortunately, the policies of the Health Care Financing Administration are making this very hard to do. They have taken some well-intentioned provisions in the Balanced Budget Act and twisted them in order to cut payments to the HMOs who need it most, forcing them to leave certain areas--like rural areas--where they can't cover their expenses. Even though we provided these HMOs with some relief last year, we need to build on this work to guarantee that current and future generations of Medicare beneficiaries have a strong health care system that offers them choices in how they receive care. I urge my colleagues to cosponsor the Seniors Health Choice Preservation Act in order to preserve their constituents health care choices and to prevent future crisis for seniors on Medicare.

Mr. FOLEY

Mr. FOLEY. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in response to an article that appeared in the Roll Call, the newspaper of Capitol Hill, Thursday, April 6, 2000. Let me read from the article written by Susan Crabtree. It is shocking and it is startling: ``With last year's violent protests against the World Trade Organization in Seattle still fresh in the public's mind, leaders are organizing for Act 2, a massive March on Washington set for Tuesday, designed to pressure Congress into rejecting a permanent normalized trade deal for China.'' Here is the quote that is startling, made by the minority whip, the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Bonior): ``Seattle was a great success. We hope we will see a repeat performance.'' Let me read to the Members the performance, for those who may have been napping during Seattle's excitement: ``Unrest even at the top during riots. Madeleine Albright was trapped and angry. Janet Reno was calling.'' ``The State Patrol Leaders Saw Trouble Brewing at Starbuck's. The Secret Service threatened to cancel the President's visit.'' The headlines from the Seattle Times, the success referred to by the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Bonior), the minority whip: ``Police Haul Hundreds to Jail. National Guard on Patrol. One Thousand Protestors Enter Restricted zones.'' There were fires, there was looting, there was physical harm, there was destruction of property, interruption of business. ``Seattle bill hits $9 million. Seattle taxpayers will be hit hard in the wallet for hosting the World Trade Organization.'' From CNN, ``Seattle authorities have placed an around-the-clock curfew on the area immediately surrounding the world trade conference. ``President Clinton arrives in a city that has been marred by broken glass, tear gas, and rubber bullets.'' ``The PBC found out how security forces are beefing up in anticipation of President Clinton's visit: Police douse crowds with pepper spray.'' Let me re-read for the Members the quote by the minority whip: ``Seattle was a great success. We hope we will see a repeat performance.'' I hope, I pray, that I am misreading the newspaper. I hope and pray that the performance that we are anticipating in the seat of our government, the Nation's capital, is not one designed to bring about disgraceful headlines about riot police, pepper spray, and destruction of personal property. I thought anarchy like that only existed in Third World nations, but if people disagree with a viewpoint on trade, if people disagree on human rights in China, their response is to riot in the streets and destroy property to get their viewpoint heard. I think it is regrettable when the minority whip would say in glowing terms that anything connected with Seattle was a success. I have had to endure for the past couple of months a conversation about our presidential candidate attending a university, and a peaceful conversation with students, and somehow he is linked now to a quote made by the founder of the university. Now we are going to hear for weeks and weeks about a peaceful meeting with students about a democracy and yet we are hearing again from the leader of the other side, or at least the minority whip, that somehow success is articulated by a total disaster. Seattle has yet to recover from the public embarrassment of that meeting, and I would hope that the leadership will at least look at their statements and amend the record and suggest that we can have a disagreement on trade, and I hope we will have a debate on it. The President of the United States has called for a debate. The President has called for a conversation on trade. The President, I think, has been very willing to discuss some of the problems regarding workers' rights and violation of child labor and things that I think we in Congress can accomplish and can provide as we discuss normalized trade relationships with China, but I also pray that some level-headed conversation occurs to those who would come to our Nation's capital and understand we are a people of law, we are a people of respect for democracy and that violence will not and should not and cannot be tolerated. So let us make certain that in this Nation that we love we do not repeat Seattle; that nobody refers to Seattle as a success; that if we have a grievance with the WTO that we not destroy our cities in the process and maim and injure people.

Mr. FOLEY. I yield to the gentlewoman from the District of Columbia.

Mr. FOLEY. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman from the District of Columbia (Ms. Norton) for joining me in that admonition to those who would come here to be peaceful, respect the rule of law and respect personal property.

Mr. FOLEY

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

Mr. FOLEY

Mr. FOLEY. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize a gentleman from southern Florida who devoted his life to public service. State Representative Edward Healey, a former opponent and a valued colleague passed away last Wednesday. Ed dedicated his professional and personal life to the people of Florida and as a state legislator he served as one of the most senior members in the history of the Florida House. His contributions to the lives of all Floridians will continue to pay dividends for generations to come. As he was fond of saying, ``A life of service is the only life worth living.'' Originally from New York, Ed was awarded the Purple Heart for his actions in northern France during the invasion of Normandy. He moved to Florida in 1957 and quickly became involved in public service. Never one to grandstand, Mr. Healey was a true statesman, following his convictions and transcending political wrangling. Long before ethics and campaign finance reform became buzz words in elections, Ed Healey was an advocate of good government. He worked to build the infrastructure of Florida through a solid knowledge of transportation issues and his work on the Joint Management Committee. He was known as one of the hardest working members in Tallahassee. He is the epitome of a gentleman. As a former opponent in state politics, I can say he was always a true gentleman and a fair competitor. Ed was a person that would reach out to people whether you agreed with his views or not and was as comfortable meeting with people in Dunkin Donuts as he was at the Breakers. He will be truly missed. Mr. Speaker, on behalf of the citizens of Florida, I would like to say thank you to Mr. Healey.

Mr. FOLEY

Mr. FOLEY. Mr. Speaker, for far too long, our health care system has been taking the wrong approach. The primary focus has been on treating people once they become sick rather than preventing their illness in the first place. I have often spoken out in favor of a greater focus on preventive health care. My home state of Florida has one of the largest senior populations in the country. Heart disease and cancer account for roughly 60% of deaths in the state each year, with strokes contributing significantly to the other 40%. It would be great if we could cut the incidence of heart disease and strokes in half by providing individuals with nutrition and smoking cessation counseling. More and more, health care providers and health insurance companies in the private sector are making periodic disease screening and lifestyle counseling available to their patients at no extra cost. In fact, they are encouraging their patients to take advantage of these services. Although we did pass several very important preventive benefits in the Balanced Budget Act of 1997, I would like to see the federal Medicare system play a greater role in promoting disease prevention and healthy lifestyles. I am pleased to join Congressman Levin in sponsoring the Medicare Wellness Act in the House to encourage this fundamental shift in Medicare policy. In addition to expanding disease screening and prevention services, this bill will also create mechanisms within the Department of Health and Human Services to increase awareness of factors that impact health and to encourage a change in personal health habits. Not only does preventive care create a healthier population with a higher quality of life, it also saves money. This is especially important for the Medicare system as we struggle to control its spending to maintain its solvency in the wake of rising health care costs. Even though expanding preventive benefits will cost money in the short term, the long term savings will be immense. Keeping people healthier will reduce the number of hospital admissions, operations, and drug prescriptions--three of Medicare's highest cost items. I am confident that with the combined efforts of Congressman Levin and myself--along with Senators Graham, Jeffords and Bingaman--the Medicare Wellness Act will be a significant part of any Medicare legislation that is considered this year. Medicare Wellness Act of 2000 Summary The Medicare Wellness Act represents a concerted effort to change the fundamental focus of the Medicare program. It would change the program from a sickness program to a wellness program, one that treats illness before it happens. Title I: Establishes the Healthy Seniors Promotion Program. This program will bring together all the agencies within the Department of Health and Human Services that address the medical, social and behavioral issues affecting the elderly and instruct them to conduct a series of studies that will increase knowledge about and utilization of prevention services among the elderly. Title II: Adds several new preventative screening and counseling benefits to the Medicare program, including: screening for hypertension, counseling for tobacco cessation (for those with a history of tobacco use), screening for glaucoma (for high-risk beneficiaries), counseling for hormone replacement therapy, screening for vision and hearing loss, nutrition therapy (for high risk beneficiaries), expanded screening and counseling for osteoporosis, and screening for cholesterol (for beneficiaries with a history of heart disease). Title III: Establishes a health risk appraisal and education program aimed at major behavioral risk factors such as diet, exercise, alcohol and tobacco use, and depression. This program will target both pre-65 individuals and current Medicare beneficiaries. The main goal of this program is to increase awareness among individuals of major risk factors that impact on health, to change personal health habits, improve health status, and save the Medicare program money. Titles IV and V: Authorize prevention demonstration projects and require the Institute of Medicine to conduct a study every five years to assess the scientific validity of the entire Medicare prevention benefits package. The study will be reviewed by Congress using a ``fast-track'' process which will force Congress out of the business of micro-managing the Medicare program. Title VI: Authorizes a demonstration project on depression screening. The results will be evaluated by the Institute of Medicine, which will make recommendations to Congress about whether to add this benefit to Medicare.