Martin Frost

Mr. FROST

Mr. FROST. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to remove my name as cosponsor of H.R. 3262.

Mr. FROST

Mr. FROST. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. (Mr. FROST asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. FROST

Mr. FROST. Mr. Speaker, on Friday afternoon, July 24, 1998, tragedy struck the Nation's Capitol. A lone gunman burst through an entrance of the Capitol building, fatally wounding two Capitol Police officers who saved the lives of so many through their own bravery. Two of the finest members of our Capitol Hill family were shot and killed in the line of duty. Officer Chestnut and Special Agent Gibson gave their lives defending Congress and its visitors from a gunman who savagely discharged his weapon on anyone who stepped in his way. Officer Chestnut was the first to be shot as he vigilantly guarded his post. After the gunman shot and wounded a fleeing tourist, he crashed into Majority Whip DeLay's office, shooting and mortally wounding Special Agent Gibson. The actions of this man were reprehensible, but they were also the actions of a very disturbed person. Officers Gibson and Chestnut displayed a heroism and bravery which we should all be proud and thankful for as Americans and members of the Capitol Hill family. Officers Gibson and Chestnut gave their lives in order to save the lives of so many others who were in harm's way. My thoughts and prayers go out to both families as well as to the United States Capitol Police, as I am sure the past few days have been very trying times. It is a comforting feeling to know that we are all being guarded by such a competent, dedicated, and brave group of officers.

Mr. FROST

Mr. FROST. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Traficant).

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

Mr. FROST. Mr. Speaker, I yield the balance of my time to the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Hoyer). (Mr. HOYER asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. FROST. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Turner). (Mr. TURNER asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. FROST. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from North Carolina (Mrs. Clayton). (Mrs. CLAYTON asked and was given permission to revise and extend her remarks.)

Mr. FROST. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Cardin).

Mr. FROST. Mr. Speaker, I would inquire about the time remaining.

Mr. FROST. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Texas, (Ms. Eddie Bernice Johnson).

Mr. FROST. Mr. Speaker, I yield three minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Doggett).

Mr. FROST. Mr. Speaker, I yield two minutes to the gentlewoman from the Virgin Islands (Ms. Christian-Green).

Mr. FROST. Mr. Speaker, I yield three minutes to the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Pallone).

Mr. FROST. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Connecticut (Ms. DeLauro).

Mr. FROST. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Stupak).

Mr. FROST. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 30 seconds. Mr. Speaker, the gentleman from New York was bemoaning the fact that we could not bring this measure up under unanimous consent but, rather, that we would have an hour's debate on the rule. This may be the most important piece of legislation we will consider this year. Certainly it is reasonable to have an hour debate on the rule on this matter. The other side was so anxious to bring this up quickly early this morning and out of the line of fire without public attention. It is clearly appropriate to have an hour's debate on the rule. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Green). (Mr. GREEN asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. FROST. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, there is no doubt that the American public wants managed care reform. Today we have the opportunity to respond. At long last after months and months of denying that a problem exists, the Republican majority has agreed to let the House vote on a bill that seeks to provide a response to the concerns of millions of Americans. While what we have before us today is two bills, one written behind closed doors by the Republican leadership and supported by the insurance industry, there really is only one bill which meets the critical test of addressing the concerns of our constituents. That bill is a bipartisan proposal supported by doctors, nurses and consumers. Mr. Speaker, there are two bills before us today, but if we listen carefully to what our constituents have been saying, there is little doubt how we should vote. Only the bipartisan bill sponsored by the gentleman from Iowa (Mr. Ganske) and the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Dingell) really offers working families what they have been asking for. The bipartisan Ganske-Dingell Patients' Bill of Rights assures working families access to necessary medical care and will return health care decision-making to patients and their doctors. The bipartisan bill will give patients real remedies for real problems. The Ganske-Dingell Patients' Bill of Rights will reform a system that is badly in need of repair. My Republican colleagues will say today that the bipartisan bill is nothing more than big government. They will say the bipartisan bill is nothing more than a lawyers full employment act. Well, if that is the case, Mr. Speaker, why then is the Ganske-Dingell substitute supported by the American Medical Association, an organization not normally known to support big government or trial lawyers? Why then is it supported by the American Nurses Association, an organization representing those health care givers closest to the patient? Why then, Mr. Speaker, is it supported by consumer groups and opposed by insurance companies? The arguments my Republican colleagues will make against the Ganske-Dingell bill are just plain bogus and no one should be fooled. Ganske-Dingell offers real reform, not just election year posturing. That we are even able to consider and debate Ganske-Dingell today is testimony to the power of the call of the American people. For far too long, my Republican colleagues have denied that there is a problem, but the voices of working families who have been demanding that the Congress respond to their real concerns has been heard. In their efforts to deny the House the opportunity to respond to those concerns, the Republican leadership had us guessing until 12:30 a.m. this morning whether they were even going to give the bipartisan substitute a place at the table. I suspect that only after it became clear that the rule might not pass without the Ganske-Dingell amendment made in order that the Republican leadership relented and agreed to make the substitute in order. Mr. Speaker, every Member in this House needs to recognize that the bipartisan substitute offers American working families something more than election year rhetoric. Ganske-Dingell is a good bill and deserves the support of every Member of this body. To do less is to do disservice to our constituents. I urge Members to do the right thing and to support Ganske-Dingell. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. FROST. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson-Lee). (Ms. JACKSON-LEE asked and was given permission to revise and extend her remarks.)

Mr. FROST

Mr. FROST. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in recognition of the 150th anniversary of the Women's Rights Movement. In Seneca Falls, New York in the summer of 1848, the first convention of American women was held. It was there that the women of America officially began their struggle toward empowerment. On the 150th anniversary of the landmark Seneca Falls convention, the history of the United States is indelibly marked with the amazing accomplishments of its women. As Congress prepares to salute the women of our nation on this important anniversary, I would like to take this opportunity to celebrate 150 years of women's achievement. The Seneca Falls participants, led by women's rights pioneers Lucretia Mott and Elizabeth Cady Stanton, shared a hopeful vision of the future of women in America. The women came together to demand fair treatment in every aspect of American life. In their Declaration Sentiments, the Seneca Falls women offered a new vision of equality in America: ``We hold these truths to be self-evident: that all men and women are created equal.'' As women's leaders fought for equal property and voting rights, American women busily achieved in other areas. In 1872, Charlotte E. Ray became the first American woman to graduate law school. In 1916, Jeannette Rankin of Montana became the first woman elected to the Congress of the United States. In 1920, women celebrated a major victory as the 19th Amendment was signed into law, guaranteeing the women of America the right to vote. American women have displayed remarkable talent in almost every imaginable field of endeavor. Authors such as Louisa May Alcott, Harriet Beecher Stowe, and Toni Morrison have contributed great works to American literature. In 1932, Amelia Earhart became the first woman to fly solo across the Atlantic Ocean; fifty-two years later, Dr. Kathryn Sullivan became the first woman to walk in space. One hundred and fifty years after the Seneca Falls convention, we see just how far women have come in America. Today, Justice Sandra Day O'Connor and Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg both sit on the Supreme Court, and Secretary of State Madeline Albright is the first woman to hold that prestigious office. I salute those women, past and present, who fought and continue to fight to achieve their goals of freedom.

Mr. FROST

Mr. FROST. Mr. Speaker, I yield eight minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Doggett).

Mr. FROST. Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Hoyer).

Mr. FROST. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from West Virginia (Mr. Wise).

Mr. FROST. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Oregon (Mr. Blumenauer).

Mr. FROST

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