Ernie Fletcher

Mr. FLETCHER

Mr. FLETCHER. Mr. Speaker, it is my honor to recognize an outstanding educator in the Central Kentucky educational community. For twenty-nine years, Carrie Newton has been a tireless advocate for learning, especially in the area of literacy, who has inspired countless young students just beginning their academic careers. A fourth grade teacher at Lansdown Elementary School, Ms. Newton demonstrates all the qualities of an exceptional educator. Ms. Newton has recently been named Elementary School Teacher of the Year for Fayette County. Carrie Newton has worked hard to ensure that elementary school students develop a first-rate academic foundation that will lead them to realize their full potential in their future endeavors. I join our community in recognizing an outstanding teacher who has contributed years of dedicated teaching at Lansdown Elementary. Ms. Newton is the kind of teacher that every parent and child wishes for-- an educator who knows how to engage her students and motivate them to learn. It is a pleasure to recognize Ms. Newton on the House floor today for her superior work in education which has earned her the Teacher of the Year Award.

Mr. FLETCHER

Mr. FLETCHER. Mr. Speaker, today I acknowledge an outstanding educator in the Central Kentucky community. Mr. Hobert Hurt has dedicated twenty-six years to teaching technology at Leestown Math, Science, and Technology Middle School. Known as one of the founders of the math, science, and technology magnet program, Mr. Hurt has touched and improved the lives of so many throughout his years of dedicated service to our community. Recently, Mr. Hurt was honored as Middle School Teacher of the Year for Fayette County. It is obvious that Mr. Hurt has worked hard to produce a positive change. His goal to ensure that middle school students have the opportunity to develop and hone their technological skills has been realized, as countless students are equipped to handle our increasingly technological society by attending the school he helped to develop. It is a pleasure to recognize Hobert Hurt on the House floor today for his superior work in the field of education. As Middle School Teacher of the Year, our community salutes Mr. Hurt for his many years of dedicated teaching.

Mr. FLETCHER

Mr. FLETCHER. Mr. Speaker, I am honored to recognize an outstanding educator in the Central Kentucky community. As a mathematics teacher at Tates Creek High School, Rebecca Wood has inspired countless students to succeed through her patience and dedication. Recently, Ms. Wood was named High School Teacher of the Year for Fayette County. Rebecca Wood has worked hard to equip her students with the math skills they will need for both daily living and higher education. For the past twenty-five years, Ms. Wood has been a leader throughout the educational community. She has served with the local and national Councils of Math Teachers and is continually working to remain on the cutting edge of math education. Today, I join our community in recognizing an outstanding teacher who has given years of dedicated teaching to the youth of Central Kentucky. It is a pleasure to recognize Ms. Wood on the House floor today for her superior work in education which has earned her the Teacher of the Year Award.

Mr. FLETCHER

Mr. FLETCHER. Mr. Speaker, it is my honor to recognize the Ravenna Church of the Nazarene during its 50th Anniversary celebration. This quaint church, nestled in Central Kentucky, has served the community and its members in many different ways over the past 50 years--now they come together to reflect on the many memories and years of fellowship. Located on Main Street in Ravenna, Kentucky, the Church of the Nazarene holds services in the same building that was dedicated in November of 1956. Now, 50 years later, the Church still stands on a strong foundation, rich with faith and a strong desire to serve its congregation and the surrounding community. It's an active congregation, with weekly services and children's groups. Each year, the congregation comes together for the annual homecoming, where stories are shared and many past years are revisited with joy. It is a pleasure to recognize the Ravenna Church of the Nazarene on the House floor today, during its 50th Anniversary celebration. I wish this church and its members the very best for many, many years to come.

Mr. FLETCHER

Mr. FLETCHER. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this time. It is a busy time of the year, but this past Sunday I was able to spend some time with a new grandson, born July 22. His name is Joshua. And that is really what this is about up here. Joshua does not understand partisan politics. He does not understand a lot of the games that may go on here. He certainly does not understand why the minority on the other side is blocking some legislation that would give him a bright future and pay down the publicly held debt instead of handing him a mortgage of $20,000. It would allow him, as he is growing up, to save more, or his parents to save more to be able to afford a home in the future. And he certainly does not understand the attitude of some people that believe it is the government's money instead of the people's money. But one day he will appreciate what we are doing here today, because this is really about Joshua and who Joshua represents: All the children across this Nation. The future. And not only the debt that they have that we have given them, or has been given to them due to 40 years of minority rule when the debt was increased, but also the opportunity to save and to be all that he can be.

Mr. FLETCHER

Mr. FLETCHER. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Arkansas (Mr. Hutchinson) for yielding me this time, and I certainly thank the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Scott) for his support of this. I also want to thank the gentleman from Florida (Mr. McCollum) for all the work that he has done on this and the Subcommittee on Crime and the staff there that has done a lot of work on this. As it stands right now, we have had a program similar to this instituted; it has been through the appropriations. We have never had it fully authorized. We passed a bill similar to this or it was passed in Congress before I was here, at least on the House but never on the Senate side. So we are hoping very much that we can get this bill fully authorized, fully passed to authorize this program with the appropriate changes that have been made here. First of all, it allocates $2 billion a year for the fiscal years 2001 through 2005. We also understand as far as the improvements, they have already been mentioned, these as far as providing block grants back to local law enforcement agencies, it ensures that those communities, those poor communities that are not able to meet that match requirement previously will not be precluded from getting these block grants because of a waiver that we have instituted. I know this is going to be particularly helpful for our State of Kentucky. We have several communities that may need certain items for safety or police officers or other crime prevention programs, and yet they may not be able to meet that 10 percent match sometimes. So in those hardship cases, they are able to receive this grant which previously was unavailable to them. We are glad that that change was able to be instituted. Why have we had so much emphasis on crime? I am glad to say that over the last 8 years we have seen a decrease in crime in this country, but if we look back as early as 1960, from 1960 or 1964 up to 1991, 1992, we had a 600 percent increase in crime in this country, a tremendous increase in crime. Seventy to 80 percent of all families were affected by crime, many types of crimes. Certainly it has affected our region. I reference an article we had recently in Lexington, Kentucky, where we have particular needs. I think it points out the diversity of communities and the diverse needs communities have where it says the crime in Lexington increased in 1999 and that probably happened in other communities around the country. We can see from the diversity of problems that we have across the Nation that a plan that implements just a one-size-fits-all is not best for particular communities. I think, clearly, the Federal Government certainly has a role; but the best crime prevention needs to come locally where they understand the particular problems that they have. That is what makes this program so effective and really so popular among law enforcement agencies and other institutions that work to prevent and reduce crime. In Kentucky, we have already received $4.2 million in grants from this program. Almost $1 million has gone to our State police in Kentucky. Over half a million has gone to my district alone. In these we have used funds to hire police and to pay overtime. We have used the funds to purchase other law enforcement equipment and increased the technology that allows them to more effectively prevent and detect crimes. And we have used it to establish crime prevention programs that otherwise would not be able to be afforded or be available for the communities. So it is very important. I am certainly pleased that we have a tremendous amount of bipartisan support on this bill, the approach to reduce crime by ensuring that we provide flexibility to local law enforcement agencies and organizations and that we understand that we can bring certainly the priority of crime prevention from the Federal level but many of the decisions need to be made at the local level to ensure that we do effectively fight crime, reduce crime in this country, and make this a safer Nation for all people. I encourage everyone to vote for this bill.

Mr. FLETCHER

Mr. FLETCHER. Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman for all of his work. I have had the privilege of serving now almost 2 years on the Committee on the Budget with the gentleman from California (Mr. Herger) and I know he has been a champion of making sure that we lock up Social Security and Medicare and not spending a penny of Social Security or Medicare on other Government programs, on more and bigger Government, which had been going on here in Washington before I arrived, at least for 40 years, where they had taken money from the Social Security trust fund and money from Medicare and spent it on more and bigger government. Now, with fiscal discipline, we have been able to have a surplus. Yes, there is a real debate as to what do we do with this surplus. I think we need to put an emphasis on debt reduction. I am certainly glad to have the support of the gentleman from Washington (Mr. McDermott) and the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Stenholm) for this debt reduction. This is the third bill that I have been privileged to bring to the floor to reduce the debt. And I thank them for the votes and certainly hope that they do vote and support it today. We do have some differences on tax fairness. I think we should eliminate taxes that are unfair on married couples. That is just not the right kind of family values this institution should establish in this country. And double taxing and causing someone to go to the undertaker and the IRS in the same month are not the kind of values that this institution should espouse. So, yes, we have substantial differences on how we should spend not our money but the people's money; and that is what we are talking about here today. Now, what we are doing in this bill clearly is taking and doing something new that has not been done before; and that is appropriating money to a debt reduction account, $240 billion. Now, some naysayers may say, well, this will occur anyway. But, in fact, it does not occur that way. Now when we go to the end of the year to debate how this money is spent, we have $240 billion, and I am very hopeful the other body, the Senate, will take this up. And taking up this legislation, then if we are going to increase spending on more and bigger government, we are actually going to have to take this money now from this account and we are going to have to at least flush out the folks that want to spend more money and make it very clear that they are taking that money from future generations. That is what this is about. Do we want to live within our means like every family does when they are around the kitchen table and decide to balance their checkbooks or do we want to say, no, I am going to spend more, maybe please some constituents that we want or whatever, but I am going to do more and more and build bigger government and I am going to mortgage it on the backs of the future generation? That must stop. I am thankful that we are able to stop that at this time, we are able to pay down that debt, $240 billion, hopefully eliminate it by 2012. And, yes, I do think we can give some tax refunds to folks to go make tax more fair. And these two are not mutually exclusive. We can do both. In the Blue Dog budget, they had a tax relief plan and some of the reasons we did not support that is I think CBO ended up scoring that as a tax increase. There is some question about that. So I think we have some honest debate. But what does this bill mean to the average person? First off, every child that is born owes $20,000 now in debt. Every taxpayer pays a dime out of every dollar just to pay the interest on it. What this means is that we are going to eventually eliminate that. We would like to reduce that debt on future generations. We would like to tear up their mortgage and pay it off. We would like to make sure we can increase revenues by reducing the debt that we owe and the interest on that publicly held debt. It means it will keep the economy going, more people will be able to afford a home, interest rates will be lower, people will be able to afford more on their children's education, and they might even be able to take a family vacation that they have not been able to take for a while. This means that we keep the economy going, hopefully, in the direction it is going, a booming economy, so that we can provide more. So what this means is that it is for the future generations. It would eliminate, eventually, that $20,000 debt that every child owes. Every newborn that comes into this country receives that $20,000 debt, and we are working on eliminating that. Again, I say it is very clear, what are our priorities? Do we want more and bigger government? Well the Clinton/Gore administration, over 2 years, presented budgets that did what? Increased taxes, $82 billion 1 year and $45 billion the next or thereabouts. That is the difference in priorities. We believe it is not the Government's money, it is the people's money.

Mr. FLETCHER

Mr. FLETCHER. Mr. Speaker, It is my honor to recognize today the outstanding achievement of Joel Pett for being awarded the 2000 Pulitzer Prize in Editorial Cartooning. Since 1984, Joel has served in the capacity of Editorial Cartoonist with the Lexington Herald Leader and has produced cartoons on local and national government. Since that day in 1984--Pett's outstanding and talented work has appeared in many newspapers and magazines around America. This is why it is not surprising that he was recognized with such a prestigious national award. With keen wit and acute perception, he has been able to highlight subtle perspectives that demand a more careful examination by the public. By presenting difficult topics in a comical way, Joel Pett is able to touch upon the core issues within the daily life of politics and government. His distinction as the recipient of the 2000 Pulitzer Prize for Editorial Cartooning is one that highlights his creativity, inventiveness and intellect. Joel is a talented professional journalist who is dedicated to his work that he presents to readers throughout the year. I know that the Lexington Herald Leader, Lexington community and Commonwealth, of Kentucky are all proud of his outstanding achievement. It is a pleasure to recognize Joel Pett, on the House floor today, for his superior work in political cartoons that has earned him the 2000 Pulitzer Prize in Editorial Cartooning.

Mr. FLETCHER

Mr. FLETCHER. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Linder) for yielding me the time. Mr. Speaker, I have a parliamentary inquiry.

Mr. FLETCHER. Mr. Speaker, if the previous question on the rule is defeated, would it be in order for a Member to offer an amendment to the rule?

Mr. FLETCHER. Mr. Speaker, as I continue, I plan on leading the fight against the previous question. I want to inform my colleagues that I intend to oppose the previous question and encourage them to do so. If it is defeated, I intend to offer an amendment to rescind the Member COLA.

Mr. FLETCHER. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Linder) for yielding me this time. Mr. Speaker, I rise to express my opposition to the rule on the Treasury Postal appropriations bill because it does not make in order an amendment to disallow the cost of living adjustment for Members of Congress. It is my intention to ask my colleagues to defeat the previous question on this rule so that we will have an opportunity to amend the rule and make this amendment in order. The pay raise, I believe, is inappropriate at this time and unnecessary. A 2.7 percent pay increase would increase the salaries of Members by almost $4,000. The total price tag to American taxpayers is $2.1 million. Now where I come from, the average salary for a family in my district is about $25,000, and this $2.1 million in the pay increase that would occur here is a lot of money to the folks back in Kentucky. Now we have come a long way in Washington over the last few years, balancing the budget, preserving Social Security and Medicare and reducing the debt; and yet I believe there is still a lot more that can be done. With a balanced budget and surpluses as far as the eye can see, I believe we must focus on strengthening America, paying down the debt, and giving more money back to the American worker. I've worked closely with the folks in the 6th District to accomplish a great deal these past two short years. That's because I came to Washington to fight for their needs, concerns, and issues, not for another pay raise. I find it very disturbing when we just had a vote on eliminating the marriage penalty tax, when I see 155 Democrat Members who voted against giving families, married couples, a $1,400 average tax reduction a year and yet those same individuals will probably vote to increase the COLA and give themselves a $4,000-a-year increase in pay. I find that very disturbing. That is the reason I am rising, Mr. Speaker, to oppose the previous question; would ask my colleagues to vote against the previous question, and I want them to understand that a vote against the previous question is a vote to rescind the COLA and to allow an amendment to be in order.

Mr. FLETCHER. 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. FLETCHER

Mr. FLETCHER. Mr. Speaker, point of order.

Mr. FLETCHER. Mr. Speaker, point of order. My understanding of the rules on the floor is that we are to address the Speaker, not the people back home, and yet he directly addressed them.

Mr. FLETCHER. Mr. Speaker, I recall a few weeks ago when the minority was talking when we brought up the initial bill to establish this debt reduction account in the Department of Treasury and I remember one thing they said, and that was that if we were serious, then why would we only do it for 1 year? We are serious. We are doing it for fiscal year 2001. My hope, my belief is that we will continue to do this for the future. We have a $3.5 trillion publicly held debt. That is mind boggling. We must continue on this historic path to pay down the publicly held debt. We have an opportunity today to actually appropriate and pay down the publicly held debt by another $25 billion. Just a few weeks ago we voted to pay it down by $16 billion. Today the Congressional Budget Office reported that the sun is shining ever brighter on America, that we have a greater surplus. We have voted to set aside Social Security with a lockbox. We voted to set aside Medicare with a lockbox. Now we are setting debt reduction as a priority so that at the end of the year, if we are looking at the surplus, we have to decide truly are we going to take this money from this debt reduction account and spend it on more and bigger government, as has been done by the minority for years and years, or are we truly going to remove the shackle of debt from our children, are we going to reduce that debt, the debt that every family in America and every future generation will have to pay. This will allow us to set our priorities at the end of the year, yes, and to discipline ourselves, as the gentleman said, to make sure that we pay down the debt, that we reduce this mind boggling debt. That is why we must seize this opportunity. It is like my bill that was passed last month. This bill will continue that historical precedent of paying down the debt by appropriating to this account in the Department of Treasury. It is the moral equivalent of burning a mortgage or cutting up a credit card when it is no longer needed or when it has been paid off. It is removing the shackles of debt from our children. And we owe it to our children and our grandchildren. It is simple. It is common sense and it is the right thing to do. In Kentucky we sing a song, ``the sun shines bright on my old Kentucky home.'' And let me say, fiscally, the sun is truly shining bright on America; and we need to continue to repair this roof while the sun is shining. Let us continue this work. Let us ensure that America is a land of hope, of prosperity and economic bounty. Mr. Speaker, I encourage support of House Resolution 4866.

Mr. FLETCHER

Mr. FLETCHER. Mr. Speaker, today I recognize the accomplishments of Mrs. Emma Tibbs from Lexington, Kentucky. She is currently serving her second year term as President of the Fayette County Neighborhood Council, an umbrella organization of neighborhood associations in the county. Mrs. Tibbs was awarded the Daily Points of Light Award for her initiative in taking this group and turning it into a positive community force. This award speaks very strongly about both her character and dedication. We are all proud that the recipient of such a prestigious award has come from the 6th district of Kentucky. Mrs. Tibbs's acts of generosity and community action have set a standard of excellence in service to which people of all ages should aspire. Congratulations to you Mrs. Tibbs and thank you for your commitment to community service.

Mr. FLETCHER

Mr. FLETCHER. Mr. Speaker, it's an honor to speak today on behalf of two women from Lexington, KY, who have been named Small Business People of the Year. Jacqueline Y. Smith and Deborah L. Dyor, have within a decade successfully turned their drug-research company, Central Kentucky Research Associates into a million-dollar company. These two women began their company in 1991 with a mere $50 and by 1999 had netted sales of $1.6 million. It's an honor for me to recognize the determination and commitment these two Central Kentuckians have exhibited over the past 10 years. Their company conducts the tests required before the U.S. Food and Drug Administration approves new drugs or approves new uses for drugs already on the market. The sacrifices of these two women have been enormous, as they resigned positions and ventured out to begin Central Kentucky Research Associates. Their efforts are most worthy of the Small Business People of the Year Award. Small businesses are the backbone of a community and epitomize the entrepreneurial spirit that has long existed in our country. The hard work of small businesses owners, such as these two women, have allowed many generations of Americans to achieve the successes and rewards our nation offers to all its citizens. I salute Jacqueline Smith and Deborah Dyor for their dedication and drive, which has and will continue to benefit not only the people of Kentucky, but all of America.

Mr. FLETCHER

Mr. FLETCHER. Mr. Speaker, it's an honor to speak today on behalf of Dr. Oran Little who is stepping down from his position at The University of Kentucky as the Dean of Agriculture. For twelve years Oran Little, has been not only the Dean of Agriculture at the University of Kentucky but also the Director of the Kentucky Agricultural Experiment Station, the Director of the Kentucky Cooperative Extension Service and a Professor of Animal Science. For Dean Little's commitment to education and his many years of service, I salute him. Oran Little is a leader in the Lexington community and his dedication to the youth of the University of Kentucky will never be forgotten by the many people he has touched over the years. I commend Dean Little and thank him for his outstanding service to Fayette County. During his tenure, the University of Kentucky's academic, research, and extension programs have provided invaluable services to the Commonwealth of Kentucky and have gained substantially in national and international recognition. Dean Little's determination to constantly improve the University of Kentucky's facilities has led to many new competitive research and technology capabilities which will eventually result in new opportunities for crop diversification, as well as new science based information on agricultural techniques. I thank you Oran Little for helping to mold and develop the University of Kentucky's Agriculture Department into what it is today.

Mr. FLETCHER

Mr. FLETCHER. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding time to me. Mr. Speaker, I am very disappointed in the minority. They seem to want to obstruct this very important legislation and benefit for our seniors for political purposes. That is very disturbing. Let me tell the Members, this bipartisan bill we have will benefit 606,000 Kentuckians, people like Lois Hamilton from Stamping Ground, Kentucky, who makes $700 a month and has several hundred dollars of prescription drug costs. This will pay for her medication so she does not have to make a choice between food on the table and providing the medicine she needs to make sure she continues her health. Let me tell the Members about the partisan plan, I will call it. It sets up a plan where there is a single government-mandated plan. Let me talk about the Canadian plan for a minute. There, they cannot get the latest, even though it is approved by the FDA, they cannot get the latest medications for breast cancer, for metastatic ovarian cancer, metastatic colon cancer. That is because they have run a system under a mandated single plan. That is what the minority wants. Our plan offers a choice of plans, a voluntary plan that is affordable for everyone. I encourage my colleagues to support it.

Mr. FLETCHER

Mr. FLETCHER. Mr. Speaker, it is really with a great privilege that I get to stand here and introduce this legislation. I recall back just after I was first sworn in, we heard the President of the United States stand up and say he wanted to spend 38 percent of the Social Security. We met in the Committee on the Budget, and we were able to save 100 percent of the Social Security surplus. We continue to exercise fiscal discipline. Because of that, we have surpluses now and will have paid off the publicly held debt by about $300 billion over the last several years. This bill is about several things. One, it is about priorities, about setting our priorities. Are we going to spend money on more and bigger government? Let me say the minority and the President have offered continually budgets and amendments that would spend and spend and spend on more government programs, on larger government, not on paying down the debt or giving some relief to the American people. So this allows us to say, Look, we have a priority here, and our priorities are, yes, let's pay down the publicly held debt. Some have said it is not significant but, believe me, I had a young lady, a Girl Scout here last week that came up and we talked about this bill. She figured her family's debt and how many boxes of Girl Scout cookies she would have to sell to pay off her family's portion of the publicly held debt. She would have to sell 19,000 boxes of Girl Scout cookies for her to pay off her family's publicly held debt. That to me is significant to folks back home. To somebody who thinks $16 billion is insignificant and to historically appropriate that to an account in the Department of Treasury, it is just beyond my belief that anyone would believe that that is not significant. Lastly, this is historic. Why is it historic? Because it is the first time we have said, ``Let's appropriate money.'' We take it off the table. And if people who have been around Washington too long do not understand that, then it is clear they need to go back home and visit with their folks. This takes the money off the table and will allow us to pay down the debt.

Mr. FLETCHER. Mr. Speaker, let me address a few things. First of all, when it comes to the other side after years and years of running up deficits over $200 billion a year, I can think of no more amazing conversion than Paul on the road to Damascus. We certainly have seen a conversion from the other side now that all of a sudden they are the party of fiscal responsibility wanting to pay down the debt. So we certainly appreciate that conversion and hope that as these appropriation bills come up that we do not see some of their regular antics. As we close out this year, we have set aside this $16 billion, which is significant, very much different than any time before. The publicly held debt is not over $5 trillion, the debt limit is, the publicly held debt is $3.5 trillion. So let me correct that. Obviously, when you add up the debt we owe ourself and the other trust funds, Social Security, et cetera, it does exceed $5 trillion. But the publicly held debt is $3.5 trillion. We pay interest on that, about 11 cents of every dollar that comes in in revenues. That would increase our revenue, if we paid that down, which we plan on doing with the principle of this bill. By the year 2013, we will pay it down. By 2013, that will increase our revenues by about $180 billion a year. So I wanted to rebut these misstatements.

Mr. FLETCHER. Mr. Speaker, I am certainly very pleased to have bipartisan support and bipartisan rhetoric on this floor. Let me first correct a few things though. This does do something different than what is done. Right now, at this point, it is really contrary to popular convention. There is no Federal law that exists that requires surpluses at the end of the fiscal years to be used to reduce the debt. It is the stated practice of the Treasury. In reality, there is some cash the Treasury holds. Let me give an example. Despite the surplus of $124 billion in fiscal year 1999, the Treasury reduced publicly held debt by just $87 billion. Even when accounting for the seasonal variation, the Treasury will have a cash balance of about $60 billion if this rate continues over the next 2 years. What this piece of legislation does and what is historical about it is it will set a pattern for the next decade. It allows us, like we do every year when we are appropriating money, to have an account to which we can appropriate money for debt reduction, and certain instruction is given to the Department of Treasury to reduce the debt with that money in that account. Now, the Treasury has the responsibility to reduce it in a responsible and efficient way, so that the taxpayer's money is used most efficiently, so that we buy the most expensive bonds and redeem those so that we reduce the cost to the taxpayers as much as possible. This bill also reduces the publicly held debt limit and the total debt limit of government, the first time it has been done since 1916. This bill sets us on a pattern to totally eliminate the publicly held debt by the year 2013. I think that is a noble goal. That will increase our revenues tremendously as more money goes back out into the economy to continue the economy's growth. Yet in this last budget, they have talked about tax reductions versus this debt reduction bill. Let me remind you, the President offered a bill that increased spending and programs, that offered 83 new programs. This money was going to be spent, and if we do not take it off of the table right now, it will be spent here in Washington before the end of the year. This money is appropriated to a new debt reduction account in the Department of Treasury. That is historical. Every year we have this pattern by which when we go through appropriations we can set debt reduction as a priority and set aside that money into this debt reduction account. If the majority decides that they want to spend more on government, they have that option, or if they decide they want to make our taxes fair, which I think is important. We heard the minority talk about when we tried and did pass out of this House the marriage penalty tax, how they spoke about it being unfair and about how it was too much to give back to the American people, and it really points out the difference in philosophy here. Let me show you this check. Some have said it is insignificant. $16 billion. Look at the number of zeros on that. That is not an insignificant number that is going to be deposited in this debt reduction account to pay down the publicly held debt. Now, maybe some have been in Washington too long if they think that is an insignificant amount, and maybe some have been in Washington too long if they think if they do not take off the money it will be spent. But, believe me, I have only been here a year and a half, and I understand if you do not take it off the table, it will be spent. I am very proud of this legislation, and I want to thank the leadership, the chairman, the gentleman from Iowa (Mr. Nussle), the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Toomey), the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Kasich), and others that worked to write this legislation, and I encourage my colleagues to vote for it.

Mr. FLETCHER

Mr. FLETCHER. Mr. Chairman, on rollcall No. 259 I was inadvertently detained. Had I been present, I would have voted ``no''. Announcement by the Chairman pro tempore

Mr. FLETCHER

Mr. FLETCHER. Mr. Speaker, today I make a few comments regarding the law enforcement officers in the 6th Congressional District of Kentucky and across America who put their lives on the line to protect our homes, streets and overall safety. They are the men and women who dedicate each and every day of their life to ensure safety in our communities, schools and lives. It's only fitting that we reserve one week out of the year to recognize the heroic efforts of America's law enforcement officers. National Peace Officers Week provides every American man, woman and child with the unique opportunity to take a few moments out of their day to thank our peace officers for the countless hours they put in each and every week, protecting our lives and neighborhoods. Too often we hear stories of fallen officers who have put themselves in danger to protect their fellow citizens. We must never forget the sacrifice of our fallen law enforcement officers and their families. Specifically, I want to recognize a very important event that will be taking place in my District. Today, the Lexington-Fayette Urban County Police and surrounding community will come together to rededicate the Police Officer Memorial in downtown Lexington. This event will honor those law enforcement officers who served so bravely, falling in the line of duty--given the ultimate sacrifice to protect and serve. Unfortunately, I am unable to be back home for this important ceremony. However, I strongly believe it is only fitting that our communities take the time to honor those lives that were taken in the line of duty. May their memories be forever strong and never forgotten. I salute America's law enforcement officers for their dedicated service and willingness to do whatever it takes to keep America safe and free from crime, drugs and violence. It is the result of their work that allows each of us to enjoy a better quality of life.