Mark Foley

Mr. FOLEY

Mr. FOLEY. Mr. Speaker, I am delighted to come to the microphone today. I have been traveling the State of Florida for the past several months meeting with editorial boards trying to enlist their support on an issue that I consider vitally important to veterans in my State and veterans throughout the country. Veterans have fought for our country. Now they are forced to fight for their health care. 1.6 plus million veterans now live in the great State of Florida. Regrettably, with the State with the second largest population of veterans, we have one benefits claims center, in St. Petersburg. The average backlog of cases for veterans processing their claims is anywhere from 170 days to 275 days. As I tell my veterans in the community who are desperate to find answers to their claims, ``The answers you get may not be the ones you want. I cannot guarantee you the answer satisfies your claim. They may reject your claim.'' But, by God, we owe them an answer. We owe them, yes, you are approved for benefits or, no, you are not so they can at least go on to the appeals process. My good friend the gentleman from California (Mr. Hunter) will be addressing the Congress in a moment on military issues. I am chagrined that people who are brought to this fight to help us take down totalitarian regimes, to protect and provide freedom for our allies, who have fought wars like World War I, in fact, I have a veteran of World War I who lives in my community, 98 years old, Mr. Ross, veterans of World War II, Korea, Desert Storm, Vietnam and others are made to wait in line and wait for months to get answers to very simple questions. I am thrilled the gentleman from New York (Mr. Walsh) and his committee on the supplemental just passed included at the request of myself and many, many Members of Congress an additional $19 million for veterans benefit administration for unexpected claims processing costs. We should not have considered them unexpected claims processing costs because we should have known that this backlog existed. We have talked about it for months. We have pleaded with the past administration. I am delighted Secretary Principi has been actively involved in this issue. Mr. Bush, when he campaigned for President and now as our Commander in Chief, spoke eloquently about the need to make certain that our fighting forces were well provided for and that we made troop readiness and troop morale a keystone of this administration. I applaud him for that and I certainly applaud Mr. Principi for his dogged pursuit of revising and providing leadership at the VA. I know he has answered many of my phone calls and letters personally by telling me that he will be in the forefront of the fight to make certain that the efficiencies that we have long sought will finally come to bear. The military has often told me that they are having a difficult time in recruiting people to serve in the armed services of our country. It may be that the veterans who have served before are telling them that it is not all what it is cracked up to be. I think if we decide to emphasize the need to provide these expedited claims processes, we would find more veterans thrilled with the idea that their government is standing by them, as they stood by us. Maybe you would find young recruits thinking about engaging in military service, when they asked a veteran, that they would get that gold-plated assurance that, yes, the government did stand by me after I had served and made my life better. So I thank the gentlemen and gentlewomen who have participated in increasing the supplemental by this $19 million. I urge us to do more. I urge us to do a lot more, because, again, if we are to be the kind of Nation that leads others to prosperity and peace abroad, if we are to be the Nation that holds the ideals of that flag behind the Speaker's rostrum to the high standards we would expect, if we are that Congress that believes that that flag deserves protection from desecration, that we ought to make certain that this Congress is the one that expedites the appeals process and the claims process for those valiant men and women who have risked their lives to make America strong and secure. We should do nothing less, and we must do much more.

Mr. FOLEY

Mr. FOLEY. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Hastings) and, of course, the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Wolf) and the gentleman from New York (Mr. Serrano) for their participation today. When people think of Palm Beach County, they immediately think of polo fields in Palm Beach and Worth Avenue; but the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Hastings) and I well know that the people living in the Glades area are struggling. Lake Okeechobee, the largest lake on the Eastern Seaboard, is in fact experiencing its worst drought in memory. We are not just talking about Pahokee. We are talking about Okeechobee, Buckhead Ridge, Canal Point, Clewiston, Moore Haven, Harlem, Lakeport, Belle Glade, all people who derive the livelihood and the ability to feed their families from this precious resource, Lake Okeechobee and its tributaries. I salute the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Hastings) for coming to the floor today and making this dramatic point of how much we need help. Governor Jeb Bush, as he mentioned, has sent a letter urging our colleagues to join with us in this very important pledge to help these small communities around the lake. Again I thank both the gentleman from New York (Mr. Serrano) and the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Wolf) for their attention to this. And, of course, I commend the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Hastings) for bringing this to Congress' immediate attention.

Mr. FOLEY

Mr. FOLEY. Mr. Speaker, on rollcall No. 224, I was inadvertently detained. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yea.''

Mr. FOLEY

Mr. FOLEY. Mr. Speaker, I offer a resolution (H. Res. 184), and I ask unanimous consent for its immediate consideration.

Mr. FOLEY

Mr. FOLEY. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that the business in order under the Calendar Wednesday rule be dispensed with on Wednesday, July 11, 2001.

Mr. FOLEY

Mr. FOLEY. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on the Judiciary have until midnight on Friday, July 6 to file the reports to accompany H.R. 2215 and H.R. 2137.

Mr. FOLEY

Mr. FOLEY. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that, notwithstanding any adjournment of the House until Tuesday, July 10, 2001, the Speaker, Majority Leader, and Minority Leader be authorized to accept resignations and to make appointments authorized by law or by the House.

Mr. FOLEY

Mr. FOLEY. Mr. Speaker, I congratulate the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Hastings), having been appointed to the prestigious and important Committee on Rules. Florida is proud of his service in the Congress, and we are proud that 3 of 13 Members who serve on the Committee on Rules are from Florida, two Republicans, the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Goss) and the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Diaz-Balart). And now the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Hastings) joins the Committee on Rules, and my great State is going to benefit by the gentleman's leadership. Let me also commend this bill of the Subcommittee on Energy and Water. The gentleman from Florida (Mr. Hastings) clearly laid out some of the very important projects that are occurring in our mutual districts, such as Port St. Lucie, the inlet maintenance project, some shoreline protection that will occur throughout our counties; but I also want to call attention to an amendment that will be offered by one of our colleagues that will seek to reduce the Federal allocations towards beach renourishment. I believe that has been made in order. What that basically says is that we will reduce the Federal share of beach renourishment projects in places like Florida. The gentleman from Florida (Mr. Hastings) and I clearly want to underscore the need for Federal involvement, and we also want to give a little education here, because some people assume that these beach renourishment projects are folly, that they are a waste of tax dollars, that they are something that the local jurisdictions should do, and we need not concern ourselves with these issues in Congress. As the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Hastings) and I know, many of the areas where the most severe beach erosion is occurring are just south of inlets that were designed and constructed by the Corps of Engineers for some commerce at times, and some were national security issues. So in Palm Beach County, for instance, at the south end of our inlet, we are constantly vigilant because of shoreline that is eroding because of that unnatural cut that occurred. Mr. Speaker, therein lies the nexus by which we ask and continue to urge Congress to fund these shoreline protection agreements. They are vital to tourism. We are parochial in our approach, and we are concerned about tourism; but it has more to do with ecological factors, such as nesting turtles, reef renourishments. All of these are impacted by a degradation of our beaches. Mr. Speaker, we stand opposing an amendment that will be offered later, although supporting the fine work in this bill. There are some phenomenal projects that I will call Members' attention to again, whether it is the Department of Energy or other related accounts, the President's initiative on energy conservation, or on strategically positioning ourselves to be more self-reliant on energy needs. Mr. Speaker, the gentleman from Alabama (Mr. Callahan) has done a masterful job of meeting not only the needs of 50 States, but also the concerns of Members. Mr. Speaker, as a Member from the Florida delegation, I want to apologize to the gentleman from Alabama (Mr. Callahan) because we were unaware during debate last week on a very contentious issue that the gentleman was out of the Capitol with the President attending some business with the President of the United States in Alabama. We would not have excluded him from debate, so we apologize for that slight. We meant no disrespect. As a delegation, we are absolutely opposed to the drilling question, but never would we have done it as an attempted embarrassment of the fine chairman and the fine job he has done. Mr. Speaker, I want to commend the rule. I urge Members to support its adoption, the underlying bill; and again, I would ask my colleagues to pay special attention to an amendment that would cut the government's responsibility on shoreline protection and urge the defeat of that same amendment.

Mr. FOLEY

Mr. FOLEY. Mr. Speaker, while California experiences blackouts, and respirating equipment that is needed for those critically ill goes silent, Gray Davis is hyperventilating and pointing fingers at Washington. Let us review the Democratic energy policy over the last 8 years under the past administration. Let me see: Hazel O'Leary, Secretary of Energy, goes to the Taj Mahal and spends $1 million of taxpayer money to beautify it before she arrives. Let me see: Bill Richardson, while on his watch, loses our Nation's energy secrets, and we become vulnerable to outside influences. During the last campaign, when energy prices were skyrocketing, the Clinton White House's brilliant idea was to reduce and use the oil from the strategic reserves. Sound bite politics from their side, sensitive politics from ours. We are working on the energy needs of America. We are seeking a plan that will revolutionize the way we are dependent on oil. We are looking at a conservation model. We are looking at new technology. We are coming up with answers, not rhetoric. I admonish the Democrats to start participating and stop finger- pointing. And Gray Davis could lead the parade by stop spending $30,000 of taxpayer money a month for political consultants and start working with energy consultants to save his State.

Mr. FOLEY

Mr. FOLEY. Mr. Speaker, in the past few weeks Governor Gray Davis has turned up the rhetorical heat while Californians have turned out their lights because of rolling blackouts expected to plague the State all summer long. The Governor has left no stone unturned in his campaign to point fingers in any direction. He has blamed the Federal Government. He has blamed electric utilities. He has blamed energy companies. He has even blamed President Bush. My God. He is the Energizer bunny of bankrupt ideas. President Bush recognizes that America faces serious energy shortages, so his administration is putting forward a comprehensive plan to protect consumers from fluctuating fuel costs using 21st- century technology to diversify our clean and affordable energy sources. But what does Gray Davis do? He hires spin doctors at $30,000 a month paid for by the taxpayers to explain why his State is suffering. I am sure Governor Davis realizes this is an inappropriate use of tax dollars, considering he is sitting on $26 million in campaign cash. This reminds me of another disaster, Mr. Governor, the Exxon Valdez. That is your administration.

Mr. FOLEY

Mr. FOLEY. Mr. Chairman, I want people to focus a little bit on the debate for a moment. It is very, very simple. We have heard people from other States, Texas, Louisiana, all say they are for oil drilling. You can have all you want. You can do it in your home State. You can do it off your shores. Florida is making a very simple and specific request, leave us out of your dialogue and leave us out of your drawings. We believe strongly in having a cohesive environmental policy. In fact, in the 1970s I worked in a Shell gas station, and I remember having people antagonized over the fact they could not fill their tanks; but since the 1970s we have done very little to have a comprehensive energy policy. But just suggesting that we start putting pipes in the ground is not a solution. A lot of people are paying attention and wanting to know when can we set the rigs. Florida is simply saying not in our backyard. We are delighted to say it and proud to say it. Democrats and Republicans in the delegation joined together trying to urge Congress to leave us out of this. Have it in Alabama. Have it in Louisiana. Go to Texas. Go to California, and even in Alaska if you want. Yes, it may be controversial, but the sovereign right of that State should be heard. Our sovereign right is expressing opposition, and I urge my colleagues to join us in this initiative.

Mr. FOLEY

Mr. FOLEY. Mr. Speaker, I am here to strongly support a bill introduced by my colleagues, the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Diaz- Balart) and the gentlewoman from Florida (Ms. Ros-Lehtinen), among others, that would allow us to provide health care coverage for legal immigrants of the United States. Let me be very specific. My colleague, the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Diaz-Balart), will speak a little more on this subject. What we have to make certain of is that everybody is provided good quality health care. Yesterday a report was issued that included the fact that if folic acid was administered to pregnant women early in their pregnancies, the likelihood of a healthy delivery and a healthy baby would result. The March of Dimes and others strongly support this initiative to make certain that we provide the health care for women early in their pregnancies and then after, once the baby has been delivered. Let us not be penny-wise and pound foolish. The money we think we are saving will evaporate in excess spending if a child is born with a disability, so let us make certain we strongly support this initiative. It is being supported by Senator Graham of Florida on the Senate side, and I know my colleague is going to talk about it in greater detail. I am thrilled and delighted to be part of this effort. Today is World Refugee Day, and I think this is a fitting tribute to this day, to make certain legal immigrants are covered.

Mr. FOLEY

Mr. FOLEY. Mr. Speaker, over the last several weeks this Chamber, and, in fact, the President of the United States, has been under withering criticism from the Democratic Party over a few issues that are important to me and to our Nation. They have launched attacks first on oil drilling off the coast of Florida, a proposal that they say is the hallmark of the President's oil strategy. They have also taken great pains to describe the Kyoto Treaty as a very important tool in helping the issue of global warming, and they have criticized the President of the United States for his reluctance to agree to this treaty. Let me take up the first issue. Recently in Florida, the President came to the Florida Everglades, a very important national park, a very important part of Florida, one we in the Florida delegation are proud of and have been aggressively working to support. Two of our Senators arrived with the President on this very ambitious occasion of announcing his commitment to the Everglades. Their immediate attack after the press conference on the positive nature of the Everglades was to single the President out with withering criticism of his decision, they say, to drill for oil in the Gulf of Mexico, potentially destroying thousands of miles of pristine shoreline. Now interestingly enough, when I woke up this morning to The Palm Beach Post, my hometown newspaper, the headlines read, ``Democratic Control of Senate May Not Help Stop Florida Drilling. Democratic control of the U.S. Senate has turned out to be no windfall for Florida politicians trying to block oil and natural gas drilling off the State's shores. ``The change from Republican control made a drilling advocate, Senator Jeff Bingaman, chairman of the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee. Senator Bingaman is sponsoring a broad energy bill that would permit leasing 5.9 million acres for drilling in the Gulf of Mexico about 100 miles south of the Florida Panhandle.'' Well, let me suggest to the Democrats, since they seem to be preoccupied with blaming us, that they ought to look to the new chairman of their own committee for advocating this very same policy. We in Florida, in the congressional delegation, the Governor of our State, Jeb Bush, strongly oppose oil drilling off our coast; and we remain steadfast in opposition. But for the Democrats to attack the President as the only one advocating this position is wrong; it is false; and it should cease. Certainly they want to take advantage of a political opportunity to cast this President as an anti-environmentalist. And I say shame on you for that attack when one of your own members is the prime sponsor moving to, in fact, drill off the coast of Florida. Before you launch these attacks and these negative air attacks on TV buys and radio buys, look first in the mirror before aspersions are cast. The new Senate chairman, evidenced by his own bill, is interested in this proposal and wants to foist it on the people of Florida. The second issue I will present was in USA Today. It appeared in this morning's paper. ``Ex-Clinton Aides Admit Kyoto Treaty is Flawed.'' ``Economists from the Clinton White House now concede that complying with Kyoto's mandatory reductions in greenhouse gases would be difficult and more expensive to American consumers than they thought when they were in charge.'' President Bush said, ``America's unwillingness to embrace a flawed treaty should not be read by our friends and allies as any abdication of responsibility.'' First and foremost, when you look at the Kyoto Treaty, several of the largest polluters on the planet are not willing or able or interested in complying: China being the lead among them. Somehow we are attacking the President as he embarks on a European trip by suggesting he is allowing the world to become more polluted. To the contrary. Our President suggested that we look at a treaty that is not only verifiable, but is capable of causing some of these problems to subside and start creating a cleaner environment. These two issues indicated that we need a truth meter around this place because those who would charge our party with abandoning environmental concerns are doing so for political gain and expediency. They are so desperate to control both sides of the aisle, they are willing to lie their way through these processes and procedures in order to point the blame at one party and one President alone. I think this clearly indicates that, yes, politically popular as the Kyoto Treaty may be in some quarters, the most important job of the President of the United States is to make certain that we can do it and do it affordably. One of the things in the Kyoto Treaty it suggests is if another country cannot clean up their own act, that they will help pay for another nation to help clean up theirs, which means it transfers the responsibility of payments from one country to another to clean up global pollution. Mr. Speaker, I want to see cleaner air and cleaner water, and I want our Nation to participate. But I support the President as he endeavors to make it a reasonable, meaningful, comprehensive agreement that includes all parties. Let us not leave the table waiting and wanting with political sound bite and rhetoric. Let us make certain that we send a signal strongly and clearly to the administration that we want to support a treaty, but we do not want it to be one-sided and we do not want the consumers of the United States to foot the egregious bill that will be left because of these types of treaties.

Mr. FOLEY

Mr. FOLEY. Madam Speaker, I, of course, am delighted to be here today, and I do take a special interest in each and every one of you. You never know when you may run for President in the United States, so I may need some help in a lot of different districts. I am just kidding and I would ask that be stricken from the record, because that may appear in my hometown paper as a rather ambitious statement from this gentleman from West Palm Beach, Florida. And having been through the last election, I simply do not want to repeat it, nor cause any more controversy for Palm Beach County. Kristin, as I walked up, she had tears in her eyes, as many of you do, boys and girls alike, because this is both an exciting day in your life and I am certain a sad one. You came here, and as other classes do, frightened, nervous, excited, scared, confused, bewildered, and yet motivated that you have been selected to be the best and brightest of your hometowns. Throughout the year, you have had to take some kidding, some grilling, some jokes, and I will not get into it. You all know who have been the subject of my inquiry. I did not know they made boots that size. How much hair gel have you used today, Robert? Ryan was the other one. I did not recognize that color hair when you left here on Friday. I will leave that name off. I did not know you wore an earring. Does your dad know, or mom? No, not really. Those little things that you did while you were away from home for the year are really incidental to what you have learned and accomplished. You persevered, I am certain, lonely to leave your friends, but knowing you have been given a special chance to serve your country. I always know when a former page is writing me because they oftentimes do not put a return address on the front of the envelope. They merely sign their name largely on the left-hand margin as Members of Congress appear on the right. That is their franking privilege that they hope will be used in the future. Some of you are, in fact, ambitious and want to serve in politics, as the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Kolbe) said. Some of you are already using House stationery. Christopher, thank you for your note and invitation to the graduation. He signed it ``future colleague,'' Christopher Sprowls from Florida. I am certain Mr. Trandahl, as our fine Clerk, will not get to see that particular note so we cannot charge you with a violation of House rules. But a lot of you get a kick out of the pins and the perks and the privileges. One of our earlier speakers before the page program began complained a bit about the confusion in the last night of the tax deliberation. Kind of interesting. I do not think I remember seeing any Members around here at 3:00 in the morning, but I do remember quite a few pages. Aaron, I think, was sleeping in one of the phone booths, as I recall, vigorously pursuing the academic excellence that they have all achieved. I said ``Aaron, is it comfortable in there?'' I have never tried to sleep in the booth. I make light because I have to, because otherwise I would cry, too. I have to make these little jokes and little digs at you all because, in my heart, I know it is a sad day because I know you leave us and a new class will come and will repeat the cycle of the page life. At the same time, you never do forget, particularly for me when I first arrived in 1994, those that were in that class that still correspond and still keep in touch. I have celebrated their graduation from college. I have celebrated their life as they started their occupations, some yet continuing in college, going to law school and other things. I hope I will be able to get to see the Speaker since Robby is no longer at the desk letting me in as he used to so frequently. ``Yes, he is in there, Mr. Foley. You can go in now.'' Thank you, Rob. I always appreciated those courtesies, bud. But to all of you, congratulations. Congratulations. Obviously I think you are going to miss Ms. Sampson. You are going to miss Mrs. Ivester. You are clearly going to miss Mr. Harroun and Mr. Oliver. I know so many times those beaming faces when those four individuals, and there are others, teachers included, would confront you with one of your latest creative comments or ideas of how to better run the page program of the House. I know that I speak for the entirety of the House of Representatives that your service here is important. I know at times you felt like runners merely sent to do errands, but you really are a tremendous part of the life on Capitol Hill. I know Peg is back there in the corner, and she was crying earlier. I witnessed that. In fact, I got a report from Gay in the front, she said I think Ms. Sampson is crying. So you have got all these friends back here behind you. I know I am not supposed to gesture, but I have to suggest, and I know Jeff Trandahl was with us and is still, the Clerk of the court who has to supervise and maintain operations and good guidance over you. But God bless you. Good luck. Work hard. Go home and be, not only representatives of this Congress now, but also representatives to inspire in your friends that there is a better way to serve this Nation, that serving in Congress and a free democracy is a joy, a privilege and a pleasure. I thank you for taking time away from your homes, your families, your loved ones, your boyfriends, girlfriends and classmates to be part of this wonderful, miraculous challenge of being a page. Willy, good luck. God bless you all. Take care. Thank you.

Mr. FOLEY

Mr. FOLEY. Mr. Speaker, I offer a resolution (H. Res. 158) and I ask unanimous consent for its immediate consideration in the House.

Mr. FOLEY

Mr. FOLEY. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from California (Mr. Dreier) for the opportunity to speak today. For a moment, let me be the boy I was, born in Newton, Massachusetts. Coming to this Congress, I always follow things that happen in Florida and Massachusetts, and none was more exciting for me than having conversations with Joe Moakley. Joe and I would spend frequent July Fourths together in Chatham. We would have wonderful times. We would break out in song and Joe would tell stories, and like many people have reflected on, Joe would be the life of party, but not try to be the center of the party. I was over on the side of the Chamber where Joe sat 2 weeks ago. I saw Joe, and he was sitting in his chair. I said, ``Joe, we will see you in 6 weeks. We are going to have our July Fourth kickoff. You will have to lead us in song again.'' He said to me matter-of-factly, ``Mark, I won't make it this year. You are going to have to do the duties yourself.'' It knocked the wind out of my sails, because he looked so evidently healthy and content as he sat there. Even knowing he was sick, he never burdened us with his pain or his anguish. Many times on this floor, Members complain about the time they spend here and the schedule being so frenetic, and not ever being able to plan their days. I would sometimes pass Joe and I would say, ``This place is a mess, isn't it, Joe?'' And he said, ``Hey, Mark, I have no place to be. Evelyn is waiting for me in heaven. This is great. I am fortunate the people in South Boston gave me the chance to rise to a position where I could help my neighbors.'' Some of the Members have commented today about how brutal this process can be. We needed only to spend a moment with Joe Moakley to know that there was hope for all of us; that if we looked into his eyes and into his heart and recognized how gifted we are to serve the people we represent, that rather than rhetoric, we should apply ourselves to the principal Golden Rule of helping and serving. Joe had a unique quality about him. It is hard to quantify in words, even though my colleagues have done such a wonderful job in doing it. South Boston, many people probably do not realize, has had its share of tough times, but Joe always, there again, put the best face on his community and talked about how neighbors help neighbors. In reading the press accounts over the weekend, we realize that there was a living patron saint of a community. God has a unique way of blessing people with unique talents. He blessed Joe with the tenacity to stick up for the underdog. He gave him the ability to tolerate some of the excesses of Members who serve here. He gave us a chance to look in the mirror at times and reflect that we are here only by both the grace of God and the best wishes of our constituents. I tell freshmen Members when they come to this process to recognize a few points: one, that we are only here and invited to the parties because of the title that precedes our names. When our time in office is over, we will be quickly forgotten, so we should not take ourselves too seriously. Joe never did. He never did. Yet, being the congressman from the district he represented was his joy in life. I know we have had some late nights, and I know the gentleman from California (Mr. Dreier) and others have had some real heated debate with Mr. Moakley. But the thing that came away from all of these contests is that we can disagree without being disagreeable. If Joe Moakley were here today, he would laugh and tell us to sit down and stop all this babble because we are taking far too much time of the House's business on celebrating him. But I believe in my heart that as we proceed to pass this resolution unanimously commending him for service, we also know deep in our hearts that Boston, South Boston, that all of the cities not only contained within Joe's congressional district but the entirety of Massachusetts and of our Nation thank Joe Moakley for his service. The one thing I would always do, though, and it was funny, when we would spend this time in Massachusetts, I would avoid long durations of conversations with Joe simply because I have settled in Florida now for 44 of my 47 years on this Earth. If I stayed with Joe too long, I would start talking about things with my accent, because he would see me on the floor or in parties and he would say, ``Hey, Mark, how are you, kid? How are you doing? Hey, I love your car. I saw your car. It is a good-looking car, kid.'' If I would stay too long, I would get that Massachusetts accent back. So I salute Joe. I thank God I got a chance early in Congress to get to know him early on in my term, and to be able to witness what I believe is a legend of this process. His guidance to many of us in this process is appreciated, and I know if we can try and emulate his style, if we take a moment to appreciate his gentle touch, and if we would all refrain, when we are here at the well and when we have a chance to blurt our words over the airwaves, that we pause just a minute and think of the Moakley rule; pause just a minute before we say something inappropriate or hurtful; pause just a minute and say, how would Joe approach this situation? It is always fun to win, but it is better to win with honor. Joe knew how to do that with great style. So let us institute the Moakley rule from now on as a tribute to our colleague, our hero, and our friend, Joe Moakley, and think before we speak; and if we have to speak in loud tones, do it civilly, responsibly, and with respect for this great institution.

Mr. FOLEY

Mr. FOLEY. Mr. Speaker, I am proud to join today with my colleague Sander Levin to again introduce the Medicare Wellness Act. This legislation makes common sense reforms to the Medicare program to help ensure that our seniors are living longer, healthier lives. The focus of the Medicare program since its inception in 1965 has been on sickness--once people are ill, the Medicare program steps in to treat that illness. But medical technology and treatment options have come a long way since 1965. Sadly, the Medicare program has not kept pace with those advances. The new focus of Medicare should be on wellness. We can, and should, prevent seniors from getting sick, and promote good health. This focus not only has health benefits, but is also fiscally responsible. Hospitalization is one of the most expensive benefits provided under the Medicare program, and often, hospitalization is the only option. However, if the Medicare program can be reformed to help prevent instances of hospitalization we will not only have healthier seniors, but we will utilize Medicare's resources in the most effective way. The Medicare Wellness Act of 2001 not only increases screening and preventive services, based on the recommendations of the National Preventive Services Task Force, but includes mechanisms that will help promote healthy lifestyles, disease prevention, and encourage a change in personal health habits. Congress began adding these needed benefits in 1997's Balanced Budget Act by adding four initial preventive benefits. We have since added to those benefits, and improved many of them. As we discuss adding other new benefits, such as a prescription drug plan, to Medicare, we cannot do so without facing the fundamental need for reform of the program. Incorporating these common sense benefits is a necessary component of any true reform package. I would urge my colleagues to support this measure, and look forward to its inclusion in any Medicare reform legislation considered by the Congress this year.

Mr. FOLEY

Mr. FOLEY. Mr. Speaker, I am delighted to be here at 7:30 in the morning on a Saturday passing a bill that will help Americans. We have heard a lot of conversation this morning about deficits on the other side of the aisle, and they probably know a lot about them because they created them through their 40-year rule. They talk about Social Security and restoring it. Well, the other side borrowed from Social Security for generations to pay for ongoing government spending. Yes, we had deficits, and I have heard the blame cast on Ronald Reagan. However, the majority party at that time was Democrats who had to bring to the floor the bills that the President offered to the American public. Bills do not just become law because the President says so. The exercise over the last couple of weeks demonstrates that the President can merely recommend to Congress. But I am delighted to see that the Senate, some Democrats, some Democrats seeking reelection, are, in fact, supporting this package, because it is a balanced approach. Mr. Speaker, we can talk about dead of night, deals cut in the midnight hours, but we are here on a Saturday on a Memorial Day weekend to ensure that the American public recognizes that we are looking out for their interests. Yes, we can increase education funding, as we did on this House Floor last week, and the bill passed in a bipartisan fashion. Yes, we can increase national security; and we can increase money being spent on the environment, as we are doing in Florida on the Everglades. Yes, we can shore up Social Security, and we can restore the fiscal health of Medicare. And we can do that all within the confines of the budget and the tax package being voted on here on the floor today. What we need to recognize, though, and we have said it many times on this House floor is that the money we are talking about, in fact, belongs to the people not on the House floor, but the people watching us speak this morning, the American taxpayers who work every week and on Fridays they come home and hope they can enjoy time with their families. But no, they often have to work one and two and three jobs to make ends meet and pay taxes well past April. In fact, into May we are paying taxes: excise taxes, unemployment taxes, property taxes, State taxes, sales taxes, income taxes. You name it, it is taxed. Today we are here to give just a little bit of a break over 11 years to the American consumer, over 11 years. One would think the conversation today would indicate we are throwing it out in buckets this morning. Mr. Speaker, this is a balanced approach. This is a good approach. This provides some real return to the American public. Money back this year, lump sum, to single taxpayers, single parents, married taxpayers. So let us salute this final agreement made by some great Members of this body, both here and on the other side of the aisle; and let us salute the American public, because they have been waiting a long time for some relief.

Mr. FOLEY

Mr. FOLEY. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to a man who is equally famous for his many contributions to the music industry as he is for his dedication to public service. I speak of course, of industry legend Clive Davis. From Radio and Records Magazine's ``Most Influential Record Executive of the Past twenty Years'' and multiple Grammy Award winner to the Congress of Racial Equality's ``Martin Luther King, Jr. Humanitarian of the Year,'' Clive Davis' gifts to American culture are great. He has personally helped launch the careers of some of our country's most cherished artists including Janis Joplin, Billy Joel, Bruce Springsteen, Whitney Houston, Barry Manilow, Carlos Santana, Herbie Hancock and Pink Floyd just to name a few. The only person ever to receive the T.J. Martell Foundation's ``Humanitarian of the Year'' award twice, Clive Davis is also committed to helping his fellow man. He's given much of himself and his money to support HIV/AIDS research. Mr. Speaker, please let the Record reflect this Congress' appreciation for his efforts.

Mr. FOLEY

Mr. FOLEY. I object.

Mr. FOLEY. Mr. Chairman, reserving the right to object.

Mr. FOLEY. I do, but I would like to hear the pending request from the gentlewoman.

Mr. FOLEY

Mr. FOLEY. I object, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. FOLEY

Mr. FOLEY. Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the leadership of the gentleman from Florida on the floor today on this very issue. And I want to take a moment before I begin my prepared remarks to commend my colleague, the gentlewoman from Hawaii (Mrs. Mink), for her wonderful homecoming for members of the Navy who flew back and first landed in Hawaii on their return to the United States from China. We are particularly honored by the way the gentlewoman put the presentation together, and we are delighted that they are on American soil again. Mr. Speaker, I rise to speak on House Resolution 112, a resolution I introduced to recognize next year's 100th anniversary of the 4-H Youth Development Program, and commending the 4-H program for service to the youth of the world. The 4-H program has grown over the years to include 6.6 million children. These 5- to 21-year-olds have benefited tremendously from 4- H's wealth of diverse programs: from agriculture, career development, information technology, to general life skills. These programs are offered in both rural and urban areas of the world. The 4-H continues to make great contributions toward the development of well-rounded youth both in America and abroad. The program enables youth to have fun, meet new people, learn new life skills, build self- confidence, learn responsibility, and set and achieve goals. In fact, more than 45 million people worldwide are 4-H alumni, including my distinguished colleague, the gentleman from Idaho (Mr. Otter), who told me just moments ago he will celebrate his 50th year of swearing in as a member of the 4-H Club. The 4-H truly builds the leaders of tomorrow. In fact, their motto is ``To Make the Best Better.'' Our country benefits enormously from programs like 4-H. With the rising tide of teen suicide, drug use, and school violence, the 4-H gives our youth an avenue to excel and build self-esteem. One success story from a young 4-H'er in Georgia caught my eye. It is entitled, ``4-H Brought Me to Life.'' It goes on to say, ``I was not popular at all. I had just moved and I felt like an outcast. One day a lady came. She was with 4-H. I really did not do anything with 4-H that year except camp. I then said I'm going to have fun and make this year the best of my life. It has been 3 years since. I'm now in the 8th grade. I have friends all over Georgia. 4-H brought me to life.'' The gentlewoman from Hawaii mentioned several of the people who are former 4-H'ers that I think deserve notation, and I will read the list. And while I read the list, I will ask my colleagues to think with me, because I think one of the hallmarks of 4-H is that none of these people have been involved in any controversy. Seldom do we hear of a child that has been accused of a crime or another problem having 4-H on their resume. It obviously leads them on the right path, not the wrong path. Listen to some of these famous names: Glen Campbell, Johnny Carson, Johnny Cash, John Denver, Janie Fricke, Faith Hill, Holly Hunter, Martina McBride, Reba McIntyre, Dolly Parton, Charlie Price, Charley Pride, Roy Rogers, Ricky Skaggs, Sissy Spacek, Aaron Tippin, and even my favorite, Orville Redenbacher, who brings us such great popcorn. These are people that learned the basics of life from 4-H and why I am tremendously proud we are saluting them today on the House floor. Hopefully, it will not only give them the enthusiasm but the direction that not only do Members of Congress support them, but the Nation looks up to those in the 4-H movement, those that have brought the 4-H'ers to communities throughout our country. I want to pay special tribute, because 100 years does not come often in anyone's life, nor the legacy of any organization. I am joined by many, many of my colleagues who have become cosponsors of this movement and of this resolution, and they are noted in the Record. I would like to thank John Hildreth, my legislative specialist, who was working on this as well with us. Again, my salute to every hamlet in America, wherever there is a 4-H. And for children that may be listening, if you feel alone and you feel desperate, look to 4-H for leadership. Look to 4-H for guidance. Become a member of this great organization, and your life can turn around much like that of the girl from Georgia. I commend them to you, I commend them to your community, and I salute them.

Mr. FOLEY

Mr. FOLEY. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Weller) for yielding me the time. Mr. Speaker, I do not think I can be quite as erudite as our last speaker but I will attempt to at least engage in a fair debate on why this is an important bill. I am delighted actually that the other side of the aisle is actually talking tax relief. I remember being accused last year of being reckless with the budget of the United States when we had proposed somewhere in the nature of $600 billion of tax relief and, lo and behold, this year the Democratic substitute is well over $900 billion. So at least we are heading in the right direction. How anybody could stand on this floor and defend the current tax structure that is punitive to families is beyond me. Now I am single, and I certainly do not want to spread the tax burden on to single people after we pass this bill and I want to make certain we do not do that, but I would suggest that 51,000 families in my district are suffering a penalty under the marriage tax as it is structured. Twenty-five million couples in America pay an average of $1,400 more in taxes simply because they file as married couples. This bill provides relief and it provides important relief. Now, a lot of people are babbling around this place about the fact that the bills that we have passed are not front-loaded that they do not provide immediate relief. Well, I beg to differ. This bill provides immediate relief. This bill provides substantial relief and this bill finally clarifies what is an erroneous provision in the Tax Code. It is bipartisan. It was mentioned earlier today that 51 Democrats voted for our approach last year, and I believe it will even grow this year. It is pretty hard to go home to communities, to districts around America, to the 435 districts around this country, and suggest on a Sunday at church or a temple or synagogue that one believes in keeping this kind of onerous burden. I encourage those who feel so compelled that they can go to their communities this weekend and inform them of the fact that they chose not to relieve the burden on families. I am delighted that the Democrats offer a substitute because at least they recognize there is a problem. I do not support the approach. I support ours, but I am delighted that they are advancing a number of proposals. I heard once again on this floor that we are to be criticized because we did tax bills before budgets.