Rodney Frelinghuysen

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of the rule and extending permanent normal trade relations with China. First, extending permanent normal trade relations with China is a win for fairness, Mr. Speaker. This agreement forces China to adhere to our rules-based trading system. Without an agreement, there are no rules, and we have no say whatsoever in how China conducts its business with the rest of the world. Secondly, it is a win for U.S. workers and businesses. China is an incredibly important emerging market with more than a billion consumers. America's world-class businesses, large and small, know that being shut out of China, especially as China opens its doors to the rest of the world, is a very big mistake. Thirdly, trade with China is a win for American values inside China. Through free and fair trade, America will not only export many products and services, but will deliver a good old-fashioned dose of our democratic values and free market values. These ideals are already percolating in China. Interestingly enough, today there are more Chinese shareholders in private companies in China than there are members of the communist party. Fourthly, international trade, whether with China or any other nation, means jobs to people in my State and our continued prosperity. Out of New Jersey's 4.1 million member workforce, almost 600,000 people Statewide, from Main Street to Fortune 500 companies, are employed because of exports-imports or foreign direct investment. Fifth, and finally, in the interest of world peace, it is absolutely a mistake to isolate China with the world's largest standing Army. America's democratic allies in Asia support China's entry into the World Trade Organization because they know that a constructive relationship with China means a stable Asia that offers the best chance for reducing the regional tensions along the Taiwan Strait and for avoiding a new arms race elsewhere in Asia. Mr. Speaker, PNTR in China is a win for American workers, farmers, and businesses of all sizes. It is a win for spreading American values.

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Mr. Chairman, American business men and women have eyed China for years, knowing that the sky is the limit when it comes to selling American made goods and services to the world's largest market. But Americans have found it difficult to trade with China since complete access to this vast market has been restricted. In today's global market, we can no longer afford any restrictions on trade with the world's largest population. We must engage China, and ensure that American companies and American workers have the tools to compete with other nations in Chinese markets. Remember, when America competes, we win. That's why I voted for a permanent trading relationship between the United States and China. In fact, over the past year I have taken an active role in promoting America's free trade with China. Specifically, in Washington, as a member of the House Leadership's China Trade Team, I have worked with House Rules Chairman David Dreier and my colleagues in support of extending permanent normal trade relations, PNTR, with China. Back at home, I have met with hundreds of people in New Jersey's business community to encourage them to organize and help spread the word about the benefits increased trade with China will bring home to the Garden State. In fact, Chairman Dreier and I assembled a group of New Jersey's business leaders in April to ``rally the troops,'' so to speak. Joined by the CEO of Honeywell, Michael Bonsignore, we articulated five main points that are deciding factors in my support of trade with China. First, extending permanent normal trading relations with China is a win for fairness--this agreement forces China to adhere to our rules- based trading system. Without an agreement, there are no rules, and we have no say whatsoever in how China conducts its business with the rest of the world. Second, it's a win for U.S. workers and businesses--China is an incredibly important emerging market with more than a billion consumers. America's world class businesses, large and small-- manufacturers, high tech/biotech companies, entertainers, farmers, financial institutions--know that being shut out of China, especially as China opens its doors to the rest of the world, is a very big mistake. Third, trade with China is a win for American values inside China-- through free and fair trade, America will not only export many products and services, but we will deliver a good old fashioned dose of our democratic values and free-market ideas. These ideals are already percolating in China --interestingly, today there are more Chinese shareholders in private companies in China than there are members of the Chinese Communist Party! Fourth, international trade, whether with China or any other nation, means jobs for New Jerseyans, and continued prosperity for our state. That's the bottom line. Out of New Jersey's 4.1 million-member workforce, almost 600,000 people statewide--from Main Street to Fortune 500 companies--are employed because of exports, imports and foreign direct investment. China ranked as New Jersey's 9th largest export destination in 1998, an increase from 13th in 1993. Our Garden State exported $668 million in merchandise to China in 1998, more than double what was exported five years earlier. With a formal trade agreement in place, imagine the potential as access to China's vast market is improved! Enormous opportunities exist for New Jersey's telecommunications, environmental technology, healthcare, agriculture and food processing industries. Fifth and finally, in the interests of world peace, it is absolutely a mistake to isolate China, a nation with the world's largest standing army, an estimated 2.6 million-member force. America's democratic allies in Asia support China's entry into the World Trade Organization because they know that a constructive relationship with China in a stable Asia offers the best chance for reducing regional tensions along the Taiwan Strait, and for avoiding a new arms race elsewhere in Asia. I am fully aware of the controversy surrounding my vote. Indeed, humanitarian and environmental issues remain important to me in our dealings with China. But I refuse to believe that if we walk away from China our national interests would be better served. In fact, I am positive to do so would deter from our ability, and our credibility, to push reform in China and around the globe. As General Colin Powell said, ``From every standpoint--from a strategic standpoint, from the standpoint of our national interests, from the standpoint of our trading interests and our economic interests--it serves all of our purposes to grant permanent normal trading relations with China.'' My vote ensures we give American workers the tools to compete with the world, and win. Moreover, by extending a permanent trading relationship with China, we ensure that China adheres to our rules in the global marketplace, and that along with our goods and services, we export American values and democratic ideals.

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from California (Mr. Dreier) for yielding, and I thank the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Norwood) for his assistance in allowing me to precede him.

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of extending permanent normal trade relations with China and to talk for a few minutes about how this agreement will benefit my State, New Jersey and, of course, the Nation. Mr. Speaker, international trade, whether with China or any other Nation, means jobs for New Jersians and the continued prosperity for our State. That is the bottom line. Out of New Jersey's 4.1 million member workforce, about 600,000 people Statewide from Main Street to Fortune 500 companies are employed because of exports, imports, and direct foreign investment. Currently, China ranked as New Jersey's ninth largest export destination in 1998, an increase from 13 in 1993. Our Garden State has exported $668 million in merchandise to China in 1998, more than double what was exported 5 years earlier. Mr. Speaker, for many months now I have been actively spreading the positive word about the benefits trade with China will bring to my home State of New Jersey. I found many companies that are being just as active in educating their own employees, customers, and the public about the benefits to their business and to our national economy that permanent trade with China brings about. I congratulate these firms, particularly American International Group based in Madison, New Jersey. In Livingston, New Jersey, AIG, for example, has devoted a public policy Web site for AIG employees to learn more about the importance of trade with China. They should be commended. Mr. Speaker, I have also written many of the large and small businesses in my congressional district to get their reaction to the need for permanent trading relations with China, and I would like to report back on what some of these companies are saying about PNTR and why it is important to them. Bill Donnelly, President of the Morris County Chamber of Commerce said, and I quote, ``This, meaning trade with China, is about more than just a transfer of products. It is a transfer of values,'' end of quotation. Tommy Thomsen, president and CEO of the shipping giant Maersk, based in Madison, said, and I quote, ``Our experience is that artificial trade barriers hurt all shipping companies, from the largest global carrier to the smallest niche player. Our own business and that of the U.S. exporters have excelled when companies are allowed unencumbered access and are given a chance to compete. American exporters have and will respond with ingenuity, with creative ideas and technology to make them competitive,'' end of quotations. Armand J. Visioli, President of Automatic Switch Company in Florham Park, New Jersey, believes, and I quote, ``The failure to provide PNTR for China would mean our global competitors would enjoy significant advantages in the China market while American companies and farmers would see no change to the status quo.'' End of quotations. The New Jersey State Chamber of Commerce, quote, ``Recognizes the importance of economic engagement with China in order to not only enjoy the vastly improved trading relations with an emerging economy but also to position itself for continuing input on human rights conditions as well.'' End of quotation. The New Jersey Farm Bureau said, and I quote, ``Expanding agricultural trade opportunities is a solid weapon to combat the low commodity prices plaguing farmers and driving down the domestic farm economy.'' End of quotation. Joe Gonzalez, Jr., President of the New Jersey Business and Industry Association, said to me in a letter, ``Annual reviews of China's trade status over the past 20 years have had a negative impact on the United States-China relations by restricting opportunities for U.S. workers to compete in the global market. U.S. exports to China currently support hundreds of thousands of jobs and the Chinese market represents the most important growth market for American agriculture. U.S. firms need to be part of China's development to remain competitive and to encourage private market development.'' End of quotations. The governor of my State, Christine Todd Whitman, has urged support for PNTR and said, ``Because international trade and investments are integral to New Jersey's economic vitality, the outcome of debate of whether to extend PNTR to China will have unquestionable ramifications for New Jersey. We anticipate substantial export growth for both goods and services from New Jersey in the Chinese market. Continued export growth in the region will lead to increased business for our ports as well.'' End of quotations. Richard Swift, chairman and president and CEO of the Foster Wheeler Corporation in Clinton, New Jersey, said, ``Foster Wheeler Corporation is one of the largest exporters of power generation equipment to China. One typical Foster Wheeler boiler export adds $10 million to $12 million to New Jersey's economy each year. These expenditures support 1,200 jobs at our New Jersey-based suppliers, many of which are small- and medium-sized businesses.'' End of quotations. Mr. Speaker, as we are aware, New Jersey is a medicine cabinet of the Nation, home to the world's major pharmaceutical companies, providing both the medicines and research that save lives around the globe. Jack Stafford, chairman, president and CEO of American Home Products in Madison, had this to say about the China agreement, and I quote, ``The United States is the world's leader in pharmaceutical innovation, reflecting our long-standing support for a business environment that rewards competitive strength and scientific research, medical innovation and biotechnology. The United States' pharmaceutical industry first entered China 20 years ago. Today there are 19 major research-based pharmaceutical companies in China. These leading U.S. companies have about $750 million in annual sales and 12 percent of its $6.1 billion Chinese market.'' ``The market is growing nearly 10 percent annually. U.S. research pharmaceutical companies have helped introduce innovative world class medicines greatly improving the lives of millions of Chinese patients. ``American home products investment in the Chinese market is significant, and the opportunity for growth for our company and our industry is tremendous. ``As with all foreign direct investments of U.S.-based multinational companies, this creates more jobs in our U.S.-based operations and greater resources to invest in research and development for new medication for the U.S. market and around the world.'' Michael Bonsignore, CEO of Honeywell in Morristown, New Jersey, who has been a true leader through his work at Honeywell and as chairman of the U.S.-China Business Council said, ``Beyond the commercial benefits that will come from this agreement, China's accession to the World Trade Organization constitutes a very positive development in the overall U.S.-China bilateral relationship. It will enhance the stability of the overall relationship by reinforcing the mutual interests and benefits. And, as the World Trade Organization is based on rule of law, China's commitment to adopt the terms of this vital multilateral organization is a powerful signal of China's desire to operate as a full member of the global community.'' Richard McGinn, chairman and CEO of Lucent Technologies in Murray Hill, also wrote me and said the following, ``China represents the largest single emerging market opportunity for telecommunications products and services'' that we produce ``in the world. Today, less than 10 percent of the 1.2 billion people in China have telephone service, and one person in 400 has access to the Internet. It is estimated that China will account for 20 percent of the global telecommunications market by the year 2010. ``Lucent's success in China means continued investment in research and development, and increased production here in the United States. It is very clear that Lucent Technologies, its employees, customers and shareholders have a tremendous stake in making sure that our company is afforded the same trading rights with China as our foreign competitors. The only viable way'', he says, ``to guarantee this is through the granting of permanent normal trade relations with China.'' Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to vote in support of this agreement and in support of America's continued economic prosperity and our Nation's continued democratic influence on global affairs.

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to commemorate the 240th Anniversary of the founding of the Township of Bernards, County of Somerset, New Jersey. Allow me to recount the history of the town. Its earliest inhabitants were the Lenape Indians. It was the Chief of the Lenape, named Nowenoik, who in 1717, sold the first 3,000 acres of the land which would become Bernards Township to an agent of King George I of England for $50. William Penn also purchased some of the land in this area later that same year. In 1733 the name Basking Ridge first appeared in the ecclesiastic records of the Presbyterian Church and is recorded as being derived from the fact that the ``wild animals of the adjacent lowlands were accustomed to bask in the warm sun of this beautiful ridge.'' In 1760 King George II of England created Bernardston Township by charter. This was in honor of Sir Francis Bernard, provincial governor of New Jersey from 1758-1760, who created the first Indian Reservation at Brotherton, New Jersey at the close of the French and Indian Wars. During the American Revolution, Bernardston provided over 100 soldiers to the war effort. It was in the Widow's White Tavern at the corner of Colonial Drive and South Finley Avenue that General Charles Lee, second in command only to General George Washington, was captured by British Troops. Years later, during the Civil War, Bernards Township was a production center for Union uniforms and for axles and wagons in its hub and spokes factory. Bernards Township has continued to be a location for significant events into the 20th century. The Basking Ridge village green was the site for a speech given by Woodrow Wilson just before the first World War. Bernards Township is now home to the headquarters of the American Telephone and Telegraph Company, the Bonnie Brae Educational Center, Lord Stirling School, Hooper Holmes, Ingersoll Rand, Fellowship Deaconry, and the United States Golf Association. Mr. Speaker, for the past 240 years, Bernards Township has played a significant role in creating the cultural fabric of our state and nation's history and will most certainly continue to do so in the years to come. Mr. Speaker, I ask you and my colleagues to congratulate the citizens of the Township of Bernards on this special anniversary year.

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Mr. Speaker, American business men and women have eyed China for years, knowing that the sky is the limit when it comes to selling American-made goods and services to the world's largest market. But Americans have found it difficult to trade with China since complete access to this vast market has been vastly restricted. In today's global marketplace, we can no longer afford any restrictions on trade with the world's largest population. We must engage China to ensure that American companies and American workers have the tools to compete with other nations now already in these markets. Remember, when America competes, we win. Over the past year, Mr. Speaker, I have worked with the gentleman from California (Mr. Dreier), chairman of the Committee on Rules, and a number of colleagues in support of extending permanent normal trading relations with China. Back home in New Jersey, I have met with hundreds of people from the business community to encourage them to organize and help spread the word about the benefits of increased trade with China that will bring benefits to the Garden State, and I would like to discuss for a few minutes a few of these items. First, extending permanent normal trade relations with China is a win for fairness. This agreement forces China to adhere to our rules-based trading system. Without an agreement, there are no rules and we have no say whatsoever in how China conducts its business with the rest of the world. Secondly, it is a win for U.S. workers and businesses, Mr. Speaker. China is an incredibly important emerging market with more than a billion consumers. Thirdly, trade with China is a win for American values inside China. Through free and fair trade, America will not only export many products and services, but we will deliver a good old-fashioned dose of our democratic values and free market ideas. Fourthly, international trade whether it be with China or any other Nation means jobs for my State of New Jersey, and that is the bottom line, continued prosperity for all of us. Out of New Jersey's 4.1 million member workforce, almost 600,000 people statewide from main street to Fortune 500 companies are employed because of exports, imports and foreign direct investment. Currently, China ranked as New Jersey's ninth largest export destination in 1998, an increase from 13th in 1993. Our Garden State has exported $668 million in merchandise to China in 1998, more than double what was exported 5 years earlier. With a formal trade agreement in practice, imagine the potential as access to China's vast markets is improved. Enormous opportunities exist for our State's telecommunications, our environmental technology, our health care industry, our agriculture and food processing industries. Fifth and finally, in the interest of world peace, it is absolutely a mistake to isolate China, a nation with the world's largest standing army, an estimated 2.6 million member force. America's democratic allies in Asia support China's entry into the World Trade Organization because they know that a constructive relationship with China and a stable Asia offers the best chance for reducing regional tensions along the Taiwan Strait and for avoiding a new arms race elsewhere in Asia and throughout the world. As I work to pass PNTR for China, I am fully aware of the controversies surrounding this vote. Indeed, humanitarian and environmental issues remain important to me in our dealings with China, but I refuse to believe that if we walk away from China our national interest would be better served. In fact, I am positive to do so would greatly deter from our ability and our credibility to push reform in China and around the globe. Mr. Speaker, as General Colin Powell has said, and I quote, from every standpoint, from a strategic standpoint, from the standpoint of our national interest, from the standpoint of our trading interest and our economic interest, it serves all of our purposes to grant China this status.

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to rise today as a cosponsor and in support of H.R. 4055, the IDEA Full Funding Act of 2000 and to thank the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Goodling) and his committee for their historic leadership on this special education issue, which is so vital. Every year, we in Congress talk about the importance of fully funding the Federal Government's share of the Individuals with Disabilities Act, and this bill finally does it, this bipartisan bill. When the Federal Government neglects its share of IDEA, the State and local governments are forced to pick up the tab. In my State of New Jersey alone, full funding of IDEA would mean an additional $300 million more per year from the Federal Government, money that local governments could spend to hire new teachers, improve school facilities, or reduce local property taxes. After 25 years of underfunding IDEA, we are considering legislation which will finally authorize the money needed to finally meet the Federal Government's obligation to this critical program for our children. H.R. 4055 authorizes enough funding to fully fund IDEA by the fiscal year 2010, and it deserves our full support.

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to once again participate in the annual remembrance of the Armenian genocide. This year marks the 85th Anniversary of that terrible tragedy, which claimed the lives of over 1.5 million Armenians between 1915 and 1923. The Armenian Genocide started in 1915, when the Turkish government rounded up and killed Armenian soldiers. Then, on April 24, 1915, the government turned its attention to slaughtering Armenian intellectuals. They were killed because of their ethnicity, the first group in the 20th Century killed not for what they did, but for who they were. By the time the bloodshed of the genocide ended, the victims included the aged, women and children who had been forced from their homes and marched to relocation camps, beaten and brutalized along the way. In addition to the 1.5 million dead, over 500,000 Armenians were driven from their homeland. It is important that we make the time, every year, to remember the victims of the Armenian genocide. We hope that, by remembering the bloodshed and atrocities committed against the Armenians, we can prevent this kind of tragedy from repeating itself. Unfortunately, history continues to prove us wrong. So, Mr. Speaker, as we begin this new century, we must not forget the horrors of the past one. It is important to continue to talk about the Armenian genocide. We must keep alive the memory of those who lost their lives during the eight years of bloodshed in Armenia. We must educate other nations who have not recognized that the Armenian genocide occurred. Above all, we must remain vigilant. Mr. Speaker, I commend Armenian-Americans--the survivors and their descendants--who continue to educate the world about the tragedy of the Armenian Genocide and make valuable contributions to our shared American culture. Because of their efforts, the world will not be allowed to forget the memory of the victims of the first 20th Century holocaust.

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Shuster) for yielding me this time; and the gentleman from New York (Mr. Sweeney) for his leadership; the gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Oberstar) for his leadership. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of H.R. 2328, a bill to reauthorize the Clean Lakes program. This program recognizes the beauty and value of our lakes and the need to protect and restore these wonderful resources. It is high time we reauthorize and fund the Clean Lakes program. As we know, the Clean Lakes program was established in 1972 as part of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act, commonly referred to as the Clean Water Act. The authorization expired in 1990, and the program has not been funded since 1995 when the EPA stopped requesting money to run it. While the EPA may have stopped requesting money for clean lakes, I have not, since New Jersey has many lakes that need attention and immediate attention. As a member of the Subcommittee on VA, HUD and Independent Agencies, I have consistently supported a separate appropriation for the section 314 program. Perhaps with the passage of this bill, a clean lakes earmark will now be possible at the appropriations level. As we know, section 319 deals with watershed restoration issues. Section 314 deals with lake monitoring and protection and management issues. Although related, these two issues are different and should not have to compete for limited dollars. Mr. Chairman, we have had a sad experience in New Jersey where the lumping together of section 314 and section 319 simply has not worked. This bill would move us towards correcting that problem, and I strongly support it.

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to remove my name as a cosponsor of H.R. 4011.

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Mr. Speaker, I am proud to rise today as a cosponsor of H.J. Res. 86, which recognizes and honors the 50th Anniversary of the Korean War. It is high time that we stand up and recognize the veterans who fought in this ``Forgotten War,'' both in the Korean Theater and on the homefront. These men and women have no ``Saving Private Ryan'' to stand as a testament to their heroism or to record their contribution to our security and our freedom. They have no spokesman on the national level to bring attention to their attention to their sacrifices, like Senators Dole and McCain have done for World War II and Vietnam. They are, however, no less deserving of our thanks and our gratitude. As it reads on the side of the Korean War Memorial, ``Freedom is not free.'' And no one knows that better than the men and women called upon to serve after the Communist forces invaded South Korea early on the morning on June 25, 1950. In the shadow of a great war and a clear-cut victory, at the start of a period of amazing prosperity at home, America's sons and daughters went to serve half a world away. They ``answered a call to defend a country they never knew and a people they never met.'' They did so bravely, under adverse conditions, in a conflict that lasted far longer than most people predicted. Over 19,000 Americans were killed in action in Korea. Nearly 800 of those who died in the war called New Jersey home, including over 30 from Morris County. Countless more of New Jersey's sons and daughters were among the nearly 1.5 million who served in the Korean Theater during the war, and millions more who served on the homefront. There is one veteran who returned to New Jersey that I want to take a moment to honor named Joe Klapper. Joe was a tank commander during the war, and took part in the battle on Heartbreak Ridge. Joe was awarded the Purple Heart, Combat Infantry Badge and the Legion of Honor as a result of his service in Korea, and was fortunate to return home from the war to start a family. Joe was a ``veterans veteran,'' who worked tirelessly on behalf of his colleagues from Korea, and those who served during other wars as well. Sadly, Joe passed away last September. Had Joe been with us today, he would have been pleased to know that he and his fellow Korean War Veterans were finally getting some of the recognition they so bravely earned, and so rightly deserve. But we must not let today be the only day we honor Joe and those who served with him in the war. I commend the many veterans in my home state of New Jersey who are pushing ahead plans to construct a memorial to our Korean War Veterans. In fact, next week, on March 14, veterans from across the state will gather in Atlantic City for the groundbreaking of this memorial. It may seem odd to place a monument to our nation's warriors on the busy, bustling Atlantic City boardwalk, but perhaps this central, well-travelled location will provide my state's forgotten heroes with some well-deserved, if belated, recognition. I urge all my colleagues today to support H.J. Res. 86 and honor the legacy of the aging warriors who answered our nation's call to serve in Korea. These are the men and women who, as Korean War veteran and former FBI Director William Sessions ably noted, ``suffered greatly and by their heroism in a thousand forgotten battles they added a luster to the codes we hold most dear: ``duty, honor, country, fidelity, bravery, integrity.''

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Mr. Speaker, the second session of the 106th Congress has been off to a quick start passing landmark legislation that directly impacts millions of Americans and improves our quality of life. First, we repealed the Marriage Penalty Tax, and today, we will ensure that older men and women still in the workforce will be able to keep more of their hard-earned money without losing important Social Security benefits. Mr. Speaker, as you are well aware, the golden years for many older men and women in America involve all types of activities. More and more, older Americans are sharing their lifelong experience in business and industry with a new generation of Americans in the workplace. Benefiting from tremendous advances in health care and increasing life expectancy rates, our older people--the generation of men and women who carried our nation through World War II, and beyond--continue to contribute to the economic well being of our state and nation. While some older men and women are working because they need the paycheck to put food on the table, others keep working simply because they like what they do and see no reason to stop doing it just because they have reached their sixty-fifth birthday. Right now, the tax code penalizes older Americans who choose to keep working. Over 800,000 seniors today lose part or all of their Social Security benefits because of the Social Security ``earnings limit.'' Almost 37,000 older men and women in New Jersey alone are hit by this unfair penalty. The present limit cuts or entirely eliminates Social Security benefits for working older men and women whose yearly incomes exceed a certain amount. In 2000, working Americans between the ages of 65-69 will lose $1 in Social Security benefits for every $3 in earnings over the limit. The Social Security earnings limit was created during the Great Depression when jobs were scarce. It was designed to encourage older workers to leave the workforce to free up jobs for younger workers. What may have been good policy during the worst economic downturn in American history is bad policy today during one of the best economic cycles with more challenges and opportunities for everyone. Our economy is booming and unemployment is at a record low. These working older men and women are an important part of that success. They should be encouraged to remain a vital part of the work force rather than be penalized for their labors. In addition, people today are living longer and healthier lives. Soon, millions of baby boomers will reach retirement age. If these people wish to remain productive members of the workforce long past their sixty-fifth birthday, their experiences, industry, and productiveness should be rewarded. The Social Security earnings limit penalty is wrong, unfair, and should be scrapped. With the President in agreement, and my colleagues on both sides of the aisle in full support, let's pass ``The Senior Citizens Freedom to Work Act'' (H.R. 5), after so many years of inaction.

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Mr. Speaker, it is time we give 25 million married Americans a break--a tax break, that is. Under our current tax code, working, married couples are pushed into a higher tax bracket than single working Americans. And worse yet, the Marriage Penalty Tax impacts the second wage earner in a family-- usually a woman--so, she is taxed at a much higher rate just because she is married! Is this fair? Of course not, and that's why Congress must try yet again to repeal the Marriage Penalty Tax, an unfair tax burden on 25 million American families. Mr. Speaker, this is sensible tax relief for the middle class, and a $1400 tax cut for these hardworking Americans will be put to good use. Indeed, $1400 in the pockets of millions of married couples can be used on important family obligations like tuition for college, a home computer, renovating a kitchen and paying family bills, or investing for retirement security. Mr. Speaker, 818,116 married couples in my home state of new Jersey would benefit directly if we repeal the Marriage Penalty Tax--72,605 in my District alone, New Jersey's Eleventh. Each one of them deserve relief from the Marriage Penalty Tax and New Jersey's married couples deserve to know that they are paying only their fair share to Uncle Sam--nothing more. Let's repeal the Marriage Penalty Tax and restore fairness to our tax code for America's married couples. And let's get this Marriage Penalty Tax revenue, unfairly collected by the Federal government, out of the hands of Washington bureaucrats and into the pockets of America's married couples where it rightfully belongs.

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to discuss a bill I introduced, H.R. 3560, the Online Privacy Protection Act of 2000. This bill would protect Internet consumers by ensuring they are informed when a website operator is collecting personal information about them, and further providing a process for consumers to ``opt out'' of allowing companies to use their personal information for marketing and other purposes. We all know the Internet is one of the most exciting and explosive developments of our time. In fact, many people have called the advent of the Internet the second Industrial Revolution. With the explosion of E-commerce in America and around the world, people are buying everything from food to stocks over the Internet. To allow this exciting sector of our economy to reach its true potential, I believe we must ensure that consumers privacy is not neglected in the process. There is absolutely no question that the Internet is one of the most valuable and fastest growing forces in our economy. Along with the Internet and so many other advances in technologies, it is easier than ever before to collect information and data and send it around the world with a simple click of a mouse. As a result of the growth of the Internet and the ease with which website operators have the ability to collect information, it is important that all the players in the Internet industry take proactive steps to protect their consumers. If this is done effectively by the industry itself, perhaps legislation will not be needed. While the Internet grows at a breathtaking pace, so do consumer concerns about their privacy online. I have heard from many of my constituents in writing, by e-mail, by telephone and at town hall meetings on this issue. Quite frankly, they are shocked by the reports about information being collected about them without their knowledge, let alone the frightening reports that much of the information that is collected is not secure. We do not want consumers to lose confidence in the Internet. Consumers should have the opportunity to know what information is collected about them, how it is collected and for what purposes. Net surfers want and deserve assurance that personal information that is provided at a website is not misused. That is what H.R. 3560 would do without curtailing the exciting growth and potential of the Internet.

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H.R. 1180, the conference report on the Ticket to Work and Work Incentives Improvement Act. This bill will provide a true ``Ticket-to-Work'' for disabled individuals by bringing them back into the workforce while still providing them with a safety net of government services that are needed to help make the transition. It is an important first step toward addressing the disincentives which exist in current law that discourage disabled individuals from working. According to a Washington Post article published earlier this year, 6.6 million working-age Americans receive disability checks from the Federal Government every month. All too often, these individuals are unable to return to the workforce. Among the barriers they face upon returning to work is they risk the loss of important federal benefits such as Medicare health care coverage. Under this legislation, individuals would be eligible for up to four and a half additional years of Medicare benefits. While I would have preferred to have individuals eligible for Medicare for an additional six years, I believe this is a positive step forward and that further steps should be taken in the future. In addition, this bill provides a voucher that individuals can exchange for rehabilitation, employment or other necessary services with their provider of choice. The Ticket to Work bill will change the Social Security Administration's disability programs for the better. As Tony Young of the United Cerebral Palsy Association said in his testimony before the Ways and means Committee in March, these programs, ``are transformed from a safety net into a trampoline; not only catching people with disabilities as they fall out of work, but also giving them a boost back into work as they are ready.'' I urge my colleagues to support this legislation, which is an important step toward helping individuals with disabilities be independent, and to become a vital part of the workforce.

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Mr. Speaker, yesterday I was unavoidably detained during rollcall votes 505-508. Had I been present I would have voted ``yes'' on rollcall vote 505, 506, 507, and 508. I would ask that the Record reflect these votes.

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to introduce a bill to prohibit telephone marketing companies, when making solicitation calls, from using any method to block or circumvent a recipient's caller identification service. The Know Your Caller Act of 1999 will provide much needed consumer protection for telephone subscribers who also pay for caller identification services. I urge my colleagues to join me in cosponsoring this bill. At all times of the day, but especially after work, during dinner, inevitably the telephone rings and our activities are interrupted to answer the telephone to hear an unsolicited telemarketer trying to sell you some product. You may politely explain you are not interested and ask the person to please identify on whose behalf they are soliciting so you can request to be placed on their do-not-call list and the next thing you know the person hangs up the telephone and you are unable to identify which company has invaded the sanctity of your home. To combat and filter out these ``nuisance calls'' and tactics people pay a monthly fee to subscribe to a caller identification service. It is a disgrace that some companies can block a subscriber's caller identification service. I have received many letters from my constituents who have subscribed to a caller identification service and they are outraged that telephone solicitors can deliberately block their service. Let me quote one of my constituents ``I have been receiving numerous telephone calls from unidentified numbers. I have caller identification service on my private telephone line, but the calling numbers are not displayed. I think it is intolerable and it constitutes a flagrant violation of my rights. I pay for a telephone line and caller identification service to avoid the hassles of telemarketing solicitations, but I do not feel I am getting my money's worth.'' Mr. Speaker, in closing, this legislation would provide much needed consumer protection from telemarketing solicitors who block caller identification devices. People with a caller identification service should be able to identify telephone solicitors and have the ability to telephone them back to request to be put on their do-not call list. This bill would require telephone solicitors to display their name and a working telephone number on caller identification devices and prohibit the use of any method to block or alter such a display.

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to commemorate the 125th Anniversary of the Budd Lake Union Chapel, County of Morris, NJ. Allow me to recount the history of the Chapel. Mrs. John Chipps started a Sunday school in the home of John Budd in 1871. That year seven teachers taught forty students. On August 14, 1872, Budd deeded land to the trustees to erect a chapel ``for the use of all Protestant denominations.'' Three years later, in 1875, the church was dedicated. From late 1875 to 1880, especially during the winter months, attendance was at times low, but the desire to serve the community and the spirit of the congregation carried them through the rougher times. By the mid-1900s, the congregation was growing, holding fairs and Christmas shows and purchasing a new organ for the Chapel. In 1954 and 1955, the Chapel was incorporated and the Board of Trustees announced that the Reverend Glenn C. Tompkins, would serve as the Chapel's first full-time minister. During the Reverend's tenure, the Chapel adopted a Constitution and bylaws, made structural improvements and was active in the surrounding community. The dedication of Faith Hall and addition to the original chapel took place on March 26, 1962. Throughout the 1960s, the Budd Lake Union Chapel served the community, both locally and globally. The Women's Guild raised funds to improve the physical structure of the buildings, and the Chapel supported missionaries around the world. Mr. Speaker, for the past 125 years, the Budd Lake Union Chapel has prospered enormously in order to unite the community and it will continue to do so for many years to come. Mr. Speaker, I ask you and my colleagues to congratulate the congregation of the Budd Lake Union Chapel on this special anniversary year.

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. I thank the gentleman for yielding me this time. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of the VA-HUD conference report. I commend the gentleman from New York, our chairman, and the gentleman from West Virginia, our ranking member, for all their hard work and the hard work of our staff. The gentleman from West Virginia and the gentleman from New York work well together, and I think the product that we have today is fully supportable. While I am supportive of many provisions of this bill, including critical dollars for housing, most especially for housing for people with disabilities and older Americans, I am especially supportive of additional money for basic scientific research, further space exploration and the additional dollars to protect our environment as well as address so many natural disasters. I specifically want to commend the chairman and ranking member for standing in support of more funding for veterans medical care. We as Members of Congress are united in a most bipartisan manner in this and other regards. I am pleased that this conference report contains a record $1.7 billion increase for veterans medical care added to the House bill. This additional funding will help countless veterans, many older, sicker, some nearly 100 percent dependent on the system for their health care and will mean increased access to service and improved quality of care. And, yes, we must as we pass these additional dollars reinvigorate our roles as committee members to assure that these dollars are well spent. I rise in support of the conference report.

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Mr. Speaker, more than 16 percent of the people of my home State of New Jersey don't have health insurance. The national figure is even more staggering--44 million uninsured in America, one in six Americans goes without health care coverage. Mr. Speaker, these numbers are a wake up call and today we are taking steps to respond to the needs of the uninsured. The Quality Care for the Uninsured Act (H.R. 2990) improves access, affordability and individual choice for the 44 million Americans who lack health care insurance. H.R. 2990 includes measures designed to ensure that the nation's health care system is accessible and affordable for all Americans. Highlights of the tax incentives found in H.R. 2990 are: 100 percent deduction for health insurance premiums--for the second time this year, we will send the President a bill that allows each and every American to deduct every penny they pay for health insurance premiums--hopefully he won't veto it the second time, 100 percent deduction of health and long-term care insurance costs for self- employed Americans, and 100 percent deduction for long-term care premiums for all Americans, relief for taxpayers caring for elderly family members at home, cafeteria benefit plans will now be permitted to include long-term insurance, expands medical savings accounts for more Americans to allow more of our families to save for emergency medical needs. Helping more Americans obtain health insurance is a top priority and this bill will do just that. I urge my colleagues to support H.R. 2990.

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman from Georgia for yielding me this time. Mr. Chairman, judging by the amount of time and money that some Washington lobbyists are spending on character assassinations and other ridiculous paraphernalia that we have received in our office in an attempt to defeat the Norwood-Ganske-Dingell bill, I am more certain than ever of supporting this bill. This bill deserves our bipartisan support. This bill is right on target. It puts patients first. That is what we are here for, for our constituents. I support the Norwood-Dingell-Ganske bill. Mr. Chairman, judging by the amount of time and money some Washington lobbyists have spent in recent weeks on character assassinations and other ridiculous paraphernalia in an attempt to defeat this bill, I am more certain than ever that voting for this bill is the right thing to do. The Norwood-Dingell-Ganske bill is the only legislation that puts patients--our constituents--first! We've all heard that question posed, ``is there a doctor in the House?'' when someone is in dire need of expert medical care. One always hopes that someone with some sort of medical training is nearby to assist. Well, Mr. Chairman, we must pose that question here today: Is there a doctor in the House? As my colleagues are already well aware, indeed there are physicians in our Congressional ranks--bona fide caregivers, medical experts, right here among us. Because we are in need--because the American public is in dire need of expert medical advice--we ought to listen to the professionals among us. Why is it that ``the doctors in this House'' support legislation with stronger patient protections? Because they have been on the front lines of this debate--they have been there to see the look in the eyes of a mother who discovers her health plan won't cover the next phase of her child's cancer therapy. They've been there when an insurance company accountant dictates to them what medical options are available and what essential information cannot be disclosed to their patients. Mr. Chairman, patients, men, women, and children and their families rely on doctors in life and death situations, a heavy responsibility. But that resonsiblity is even greater under our current managed care system as insurance companies burden doctors with making medical decisions that too often coincide with the company's business decisions. Mr. Chairman, our nation's doctors went to medical school because they were passionate about helping people. They could have gone to business school if they were interested in helping companies make a profit. And Mr. Chairman, Americans want to be assured that when they step into their doctor's office, they will be seen by a doctor, not an accountant! Realizing that managed care is here to stay, and that health maintenance organizations will always be in the business of making a profit as much as they are in the business of keeping patients healthy, we must not miss the opportunity to strengthen the system and make it more accountable. We must bring balance to the system--balance that ensues doctors are free to provide compassionate care to their patients, balance that ensures doctors are free to provide compassionate care to their patients, balance that ensures providers are protected, too, yet held acountable when a decision ultimately proves wrong, and balance that, most importantly, assures patients that they are the number one priority for their health care provides. We can do that by passing H.R. 2723, the Bipartisan Consensus Managed Care Improvement Act of 1999 of which I am a proud co-sponsor. The Bipartisan Consensus bill provides important choices for everyone--the most important being the passage of a law that provides for the best health care possible in the next century. The Bipartisan Consensus bill provides access, accountability and strong patient protections. It also: gives patients the ability to appeal a decision by their health plan; won't allow health plans to prevent doctors from informing their patients of all treatment options; gives female patients direct access to OB/GYN care and services, and children direct access to pediatricians; provides all patients with access to emergency services; and ensures that medical decision makers would be held responsible if someone suffers injury or dies as a direct result of that decision. With just these few simple provisions, this legislation would eliminate some of the most egregious and unfair abuses by some health insurers. Mr. Chairman, in the year or so since our last attempt to reform managed care, nothing has improved. In fact it has only gotten worse as we learned earlier this week of reports that said another one million people have joined the ranks of America's uninsured. This is a startling revelation considering our robust economy. If this bill is defeated, another year will go by, maybe more time, and we will start the 21st century having missed an opportunity to provide Americans with the right to control their own health care. Indeed, we are afforded a rare opportunity here to prove to an already cynical American public that when the United States Congress debates the bottom line in managed care reform, we refer to protecting people, not profits. Mr. Chairman, in closing, I remind some of my colleagues that no one political party owns this issue. All of us have heard from our constituents who tell us about their unhappy experiences with their health plans. I think it is the desire of every member to make health maintenance organizations more accountable--no one is interested in promoting more litigation; we simply support basic protections for all Americans. As the greatest nation in the world counts down the days until the start of a new--millennium--there is no better way to prepare for a strong, healthy America than by putting people in control of their health care. Let's pass the Bipartisan Consensus bill (H.R. 2723), and let's return medical decisions to doctors and their patients.

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Mr. Speaker, New Jersey suffered from some of the worst flooding in 200 years when Hurricane Floyd roared through Jew Jersey in September. Homes, corps, businesses and lives were destroyed. Floyd is gone, and the flood waters have receded, but many New Jerseyans continue to suffer its effects. Lives were completely disrupted, and they continue to be. Our words here on the House floor have little impact on their suffering, yet they are important because we must ensure that America remembers the havoc Floyd wreaked on New Jerseyans, and the people of coastal North Carolina as well. Furthermore, we must continue to monitor the Federal government's response to this disaster and make sure none of our residents is overlooked. I also want to take the opportunity to commend the countless men and women who contributed to relief efforts in New Jersey. Whether by wading into the waters to help rescue a stranded citizen, or by aiding with a contribution of time or money to help provide food and shelter for families, many of whom lost everything, New Jersey's volunteers have again demonstrated an admirable commitment to their fellow New Jerseyans, and to them I say, thank you. To the people of my own district, in Morris, Essex, Somerset, Sussex and Passaic Counties, and elsewhere, and to the people of Bound Brook and Manville, and throughout New Jersey who have lost both their belongings and their faith, let me assure you that Congress has not, and will not forget you.

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor the career of Brigadier General John P. Geis, who is retiring after 30 years of honorable service in the United States Army. On October 6, 1999, General Geis will be stepping down after one year as commander of the Army Armament Research, Development and Engineering Center (ARDEC) at Picatinny Arsenal in New Jersey. General Geis was born in Jonesboro, Arkansas on January 31, 1947, and later attended Arkansas State University. He completed the Reserve Officers Training Corps program there, and graduated as a Second Lieutenant in 1969 with a Bachelor of Science degree in Business Administration. He went on to earn a Master of Arts degree in Logistics Management from Central Michigan University, and received additional training through a number of advanced military courses, including the Army War College. General Geis developed his expertise in weapons systems as a result of his extensive involvement with the Army's research and development programs. Prior to his service as commander of TACOM-ARDEC, General Geis served as Commanding General of U.S. Army Simulation, Training and Instrumentation Command (Florida); Executive Office to the Assistant Secretary of the Army (Research, Development and Acquisition); Project Manager, Advanced Field Artillery System/Future Armored Resupply Vehicle; Project Manager, Future Armored Resupply Vehicle; Director for Program Integration, ASA (RDA); Chief, Logistics Plans and Operations, Combined Field Army, Korea; Commander, 27th Main Support Battalion, 1st Cavalry Division; Logistics Staff Officer, ODCSLOG, HQDA; and Chief, Weapons Systems Assessments, HQ Army Material Command. While serving as Picatinny Arsenal's commanding officer, General Geis has exercised calm and caring leadership to help move the base ahead in a time of downsizing, realignment and change. During General Geis' tenure at Picatinny, TACOM-ARDEC has received numerous awards for its work on the Army's weapons of the future, including the Crusader Self-Propelled Howitzer, the Lightweight 155 Towed Howitzer, the Objective Individual Combat Weapon (OICW), and the Precision Guided Mortar Munition (PGMM). Under General Geis' command, the awards bestowed upon Picatinny include the Army Communities of Excellence, Chief of Staff of Army Award; the New Jersey Quality Achievement Award; the U.S. Army R&D Organization of the Year; and the U.S. Army R&D Excellence Award. These awards acknowledge what I have long known, that the men and women working at Picatinny Arsenal are the recognized experts in munitions technology. Mr. Speaker, I again commend General Geis for his 30 years of service to his country. I wish him and his wife Lee all the best in the years to come as they embark on their new life in Virginia.

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Mr. Chairman, to me, one of the privileges of being a Member of the House, is the ability to come here to Washington to do the people's work without losing that all-important connection with the people who sent us here. While we serve to make all of America a better place, our constituencies are still small enough that we can put our finger on the pulse of the needs and desires of the people back home. But a lot of those people back home, unfortunately, don't feel as connected to us as they really are, or should be. Like most Americans, our constituents believe that most Members of Congress are bound to special interests because of campaign contributions, large sums of money generated by corporations, labor unions and political action committees, and as an investigation of President Clinton's 1996 campaign fundraising has shown, even foreign nationals. For most of us, the belief of our constituents may in reality only be a perception, but the perception holds strong and affects all of us. It is high time we do something to erase this perception and implement the first campaign finance reforms America has seen since 1974. Americans need to be reassured that their elected leaders serve to represent their best interests, not the whims of some special interests. Our constituents must have absolute confidence in the fairness of our political process and loopholes in the current rules must be closed for good. We can restore credibility and faith in the political process by passing H.R. 417, the Shays-Meehan Bipartisan Campaign Finance Reform Act, of which I am proud to be an original cosponsor. H.R. 417 makes four major changes to our campaign financing system: H.R. 417 bans soft money: Shays-Meehan completely eliminates Federal soft money, as well as state soft money that influences a Federal election. H.R. 417 recognizes sham issue ads for what they really are: campaign ads. Under Shays-Meehan, within 60 days of an election only legal, ``hard'' dollars could be used for radio and TV ads that refer to a clearly identified Federal candidate run; furthermore, any communication, run at any time, that contains unambiguous and unmistakable support for or opposition to a clearly identified Federal candidate must be paid for with ``hard'' dollars. H.R. 417 improves Federal Election Commission (FEC) disclosure and enforcement. Shays-Meehan requires FEC reports to be filed electronically, and provides for Internet posting of this and other disclosure data. H.R. 417 establishes a Commission to study further reforms to our campaign finance system. In addition, Shays-Meehan reforms also clarifies that it is illegal to raise not only hard money--but soft money as well--from foreign nationals or to raise money on government property; expands the ban on unsolicited ``franked'' mass mailings from the current three months before a general election to six months; bans coordinated party contributions to candidates who spend more than $50,000 in personal funds on their own campaigns; establishes a clearinghouse of information within the FEC and strengthens FEC enforcement as well as the penalties for violating the foreign money ban. Shays-Meehan also clearly exempts educational voter guides. Mr. Chairman, today both of our political parties are guilty of working in a system that is more ``loophole than law.'' In the words of my friend, the gentleman from Connecticut who continues to be the driving force behind the reform move in the House, ``If we allow the status quo to continue, and stand by as . . . interest groups are shaken down by the political parties, the cherished ideals that bind our national identity--free elections; one person, one vote--become meaningless.'' Mr. Chairman, let us show all Americans that their one vote is not meaningless, and that their active involvement in our political process is more valuable to us than any dollar amount could ever be. As the New York Times concluded in its editorial yesterday, today ``the House faces a test of its Members' sincerity and of whether it is listening to the public instead of special interest donors.'' Who will we listen to, Mr. Chairman? To me, it's clear. I urge my colleagues to pass H.R. 417.

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word. Mr. Chairman, I am pleased to rise today along with the gentleman from New York (Mr. Hinchey), who has just spoken, to offer this amendment to suspend the Department of Veterans Affairs VERA formula. We are joined by the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Smith), the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Franks), the gentleman from New York (Mr. Gilman), the gentleman from New Hampshire (Mr. Bass), the gentleman from New York (Mr. Quinn), the gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. Kelly), and the gentlewoman from New Jersey (Mrs. Roukema) in offering this amendment today. This amendment is about fairness, about treating all veterans equally regardless of where they live. After all, these veterans, all veterans served our country together, not from any particular region or particular State. When VERA was implemented in April of 1997, without, I believe, adequate public discussion and education among veterans throughout the country, it began shifting funds away from some areas of the country such as the Northeast to other regions like the South and West. The VA claimed it was moving the money to where the veterans are. In the process, the VA left many of our veterans behind. Why should a veteran in one part of the country receive better services than a veteran in a different part of the country simply because of where they chose to live? VERA is destructive public policy. The program redirects money from areas where existing elderly populations, with increasing needs for care, to areas with developing veterans population that have similar needs. In the end, this program has done nothing more than pit veterans in one region of the country against veterans in other parts of the country. Let me tell my colleagues what VERA has meant for veterans in my congressional district. VERA has meant that security stations in the psychiatric ward in Lyons VA Medical Center are often empty or undermanned. VERA has meant fewer doctors and nurses working more overtime to care for patients at Lyons and East Orange Medical Centers. VERA has led to the closure of the Lyons emergency room and the severe cutback in services in pharmaceutical help. For the past 2 years, my area, VISN 3 in New York and New Jersey, has taken the biggest cuts under VERA. But New Jersey has the second oldest veterans population in the Nation after Florida. The veterans in my State are often older, sicker, and poorer than veterans that live elsewhere in the country. I know this from having visited these veterans time and time again at these hospitals. The Lyons VA Hospital treats over 250 aging vets in its nursing home, many of whom are confined to wheelchairs. Further, every bed in the Alzheimer's unit is filled. I have visited these patients and can say that each one of these men deserve a great deal of care and rightly so. Finally, Lyons has several inpatient units for treating posttraumatic stress disorder and other serious mental illnesses. This care is far more complex and far more expensive than outpatient treatment sought by many veterans in other parts of the country. But it is not just my area, VISN 3, that is treated unfairly under VERA. Last year, under the formula, seven Integrated Service Networks, or VISNs, lost money. Parts of Massachusetts, New York State, New Jersey, New York, Illinois, Michigan, Wisconsin, Colorado, Montana, Utah, Wyoming, parts of California and Nevada. Even with a record $1.7 billion increase for veterans medical care in this appropriations bill under discussion today, some VISNs, and the veterans who live there, will receive no additional funding while other regions will receive large funding increases. During our subcommittee's hearing in April, I asked Secretary West how much VISN 3 would receive if Congress increased the President's budget request by $1.5 billion. He could not answer me then. But in a written response, the VA admitted that for VISN 3 to break even in fiscal year 2000, we would have to increase the President's level by $2.4 billion. Further, according to the VA's own numbers, VISN 3 will lose $40 million in fiscal year 2000 even with the $1.7 billion increase. As a result of VERA, VISN 13, which includes Minnesota, North Dakota and South Dakota will lose over $8 million. While veterans in these States will be denied services and face restricted access to care, veterans in other parts of the country will benefit from the increased allocation, up to $129 million. Our amendment to suspend the implementation of VERA is on target because it will give Congress the time to evaluate the program's consequences on the quality of health care for all veterans. It is our duty and responsibility to fully explore the impact of VERA on veterans medical care and to ascertain the fairness of the formula and what distribution of funds under VERA actually means for patient care. VERA is not the answer to the VA's funding problems. As I stated earlier, all VERA has done since it was implemented has been to create regional battles for diminishing funds.