Virginia Foxx

Ms. FOXX

Ms. FOXX. Mr. Speaker, today I ask my colleagues to join me in congratulating Dell for beginning construction last week on a new $100 million assembly plant in the Fifth District of North Carolina. The 527,000 square foot facility set to open in Forsyth County this fall will be Dell's largest plant in the world. It will bring jobs to 700 people in its first year and employ up to 1,500 people within 5 years. Most of these jobs are expected to be new and most of them will go to local residents. The plant will join Dell's two other American manufacturing operations in Texas and Tennessee and produce Dell's OptiPlex and Dimension desktop computers. Dell, which was named Fortune Magazine's ``Most Admired Company'' for 2004, will be a tremendous asset to the Fifth District. Its presence will attract other businesses and suppliers that will add millions of dollars to the local tax base and bring thousands of new jobs to the region. I would like to thank the local leaders in Forsyth and surrounding counties for working so hard to make this possible. I am proud of the success in manufacturing coming from the Fifth District and look forward to many prosperous years at Dell.

Ms. FOXX

Ms. FOXX. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the Scott amendment, which seeks to strike important protections for religious organizations included in the bill. I am frankly appalled at the scale of the rhetoric being presented by the minority party on this issue. We know that many religious organizations in our hometowns and across America provide invaluable job training services in our communities. We must help religious organizations, whether they be churches, synagogues, or mosques, maintain their integrity while continuing to provide these vital services to those in need. This debate is about whether a religious organization should have the ability to select employees who share common values and sense of purpose. This is not saying that they will not hire people of other religions but we will not force them to do so. This is a vital criterion for all organizations, especially religious ones. A secular group, such as Planned Parenthood or the Sierra Club, that receives government money, is currently free to hire based on their ideology and mission but still use Federal funds in accordance with the terms of the program. How can we allow this for groups such as these and not allow it for groups that are religious by nature? Others who oppose these hiring protections for religious organizations talk about discrimination. The only discrimination that would take place here is if we do not include these protections. Without them we would be discriminating against religious organizations just because they are religious. Religious organizations should be allowed to apply for the same amount of government money for services they provide that nonreligious organizations do. If we deny them these protections, many of them would have to compromise their missions or not apply at all for assistance in implementing these services. The real question here should be, do we want to be telling religious organizations whom they can hire and cannot hire? No. Nowhere in the Civil Rights Act of 1964 does it state that a faith-based organization loses its rights if it accepts Federal funds. Our Nation was founded by those fleeing religious persecution and seeking religious freedom. For us to forget that and to place restrictions of this sort on our churches is contrary to the very foundation of this great Nation. I implore each and every one of my colleagues to take a long hard work at what message we would be sending to oppressed people across the globe if we do not include these important protections for religious organizations. If we approve this amendment, we could be seriously damaging the integrity and mission of these faith-based institutions that only seek to serve our communities. I urge the Members to oppose this amendment and support these important protections for religious organizations that want to provide job training services to our communities.

Ms. FOXX

Ms. FOXX. Mr. Speaker, the gentlewoman from Tennessee (Mrs. Blackburn) is so eloquent in her words about freedom and the economy and what makes this country great. We have the healthiest economy in the world, and I want to build on the things that my colleagues have said. The reason we have the healthiest economy in the world is because we are the freest people in the world. I agree with what the President has been saying. If we want to see a good world, we want to see people have all of the rights and privileges, we are going to see freedom throughout the world and we are going to see growing economies. As again the gentlewoman from Tennessee (Mrs. Blackburn) said, job creation was up in 48 of the 50 States last year, and unemployment was down in all regions. I want to talk a little bit about the Job Training Improvement Act which is going to be voted on here tomorrow. The Committee on Education and the Workforce has passed it out of our committee after a great deal of debate. H.R. 27 is called Strengthening America's Job Training System. It builds on the significant reforms made in the bipartisan Workforce Investment Act improvements that were enacted in 1998. While those reforms have provided workers with resources and tools necessary to rejoin the workforce or retrain for better jobs, there were still areas of inefficiency and duplication that were remaining. What H.R. 27 is going to do, among other things, is eliminate duplication and waste. It consolidates three adult job training programs into one consolidated adult funding stream to streamline program administration and reduce inefficiency at the State and local level. This change will enable more job seekers to be served with no reduction in services. Last week we talked a lot about inefficiency and waste, and this is another one of the ways that we are going to do that. We are going to ensure our one-stop delivery system is demand driven. We are going to remove barriers to job training. The bill eliminates arbitrary provisions of current law that prevent someone from accessing training immediately if appropriate to meet his or her employment goals. State and local areas will have the flexibility to tailor services to meet individual needs, and that is so important to us as we drive down the decisionmaking to the local level. The bill is also going to protect the rights of faith-based groups to help train and retrain workers. The bill protects the rights of faith- based groups willing to participate in the Nation's job training system. The landmark 1964 Civil Rights Act makes clear that faith-based groups have the right to hire workers on a religious basis, and that such hiring practices do not constitute discrimination. Former President Clinton signed a number of major laws upholding this right. We are going to strengthen partnerships between businesses and job-training service providers. We are going to improve adult education and enhance vocational rehabilitation. The bill includes a number of provisions designed to strengthen the 1973 Rehabilitation Act in a continuing effort to help individuals with disabilities become employable and achieve full integration. I want to make a comment about a wonderfully significant thing that happened in the Fifth Congressional District last week related to increasing jobs, and that was that Dell manufacturing broke ground for a $100 million plant in Forsythe County. That plant is Dell's largest anywhere, 527,000 square feet. They are going to hire 700 people in the first year. Workers are going to assemble two of Dell's desktop models, the Dimension and the OptiPlex, in the new plant. The jobs there are going to pay an average of $27,000. We are about 2 weeks away from the start of a process where people can express interest in being hired for the first 200-250 jobs, then Dell will hire another 500 people. Most of these will be people from the Fifth Congressional District. We are so excited to have Dell manufacturing in Forsythe County. Again, I think this is an indication that the policies of this President and the policies of this Congress are working in terms of reducing taxes and making our South a very good place to bring new jobs.

Ms. FOXX

Ms. FOXX. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Conaway). One of the wonderful things about having these programs and allowing different people to speak is that we get lots of different perspectives, and I think the Representative from Texas has brought us the perspective of a CPA, and I think that is an excellent perspective. We need more people with the kind of background that he has. I want to say that I think we are extraordinarily fortunate to help us in putting a focus on this issue of waste, fraud, and abuse that we have the President having set the tone for us. He said in his State of the Union address a couple of weeks ago, the principle here is clear: taxpayer dollars must be spent wisely or not at all. I think that that is absolutely the attitude that all of us must have at all levels of government, but particularly at the Federal Government level. We all have to remember that we are in the business of spending other people's money, and we have to be as careful with that as we are with spending our own money, even more so. We have to really work at making sure that the dollars are spent wisely; and, again, as my esteemed colleague said, we do not want waste, we do not want fraud, we do not want abuse because where Federal dollars are being spent on programs, we want them to go for much-needed services. I want to, Mr. Speaker, yield to the gentleman from Louisiana (Mr. Jindal), my esteemed colleague who is here to add his perspective on this issue.

Ms. FOXX. Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for his comments. As I said earlier, one of the nice things about having these events is that we get different perspectives from different legislators and from different parts of the country. I think that Republicans feel very, very strongly about what the President has said, that we must spend taxpayers' dollars wisely or not at all. I have asked the pages to put these charts up here again, and we will do it right at the end of this hour once more, so that we can make sure people know that there is a place they can write, there is a place they can call to report abuse, fraud and inefficiency, and that we will look into those. I think Republicans are very much committed to this principle. But, unfortunately, we are having to overcome an attitude that has been in existence for a long time in this country relative to the spending of Federal dollars. The other day in a meeting of the Committee on Education and the Workforce, I was struck by a comment that one of my Democratic colleagues made. As a freshman, I had decided I was not going to make very many comments. But this comment just struck such a nerve with me that I had to speak up. He said that we were not spending enough money on counseling for people who were out of work in New York City and that he wanted us to spend $750 million more on a program. He called that a paltry sum of money. Paltry means a very, very small amount. Insignificant. As I said, I had not intended to say anything, but that struck such a nerve with me, because I know that the American people think that $750 million is not a paltry sum of money. As one of our predecessors in the Senate said some time ago, ``A million here, a million there, and pretty soon you're talking about real money.'' So we have to adopt the attitude that even a dollar is real money. And when we have people who speak in a committee and say that $750 million is a paltry sum of money, their way of thinking is quite different from mine and I think from the majority of the Republicans in this House, and I am glad to report that. I know that we have some other Members that are going to speak on this issue, and I want to recognize another colleague, who has a very famous name, the gentleman from the great State of Kentucky (Mr. Davis), to offer his comments at this time.

Ms. FOXX. Let me respond to the gentleman from Massachusetts. The Republicans have worked very hard always at reducing waste, fraud, and abuse at all levels of government. I will give you an example of something that I did. I have only been here for about 6 weeks, but I can tell you that I am already working on looking for ways to reduce spending in the Federal Government, and I can assure you that all Members of the freshmen class are doing that. As people point out to us over and over and over again, one of the great things about having new people come into government is that you bring in new ideas and fresh ideas and that you work at trying to get these accomplished. I think that our colleagues who came before us and especially as they have been in charge have shown ways to cut spending and they have done that. We have reduced the Federal deficit last year. We have not cut spending because there has been so much demand for spending. We have a war to fight. The money that is being spent on the war is appropriately being spent, but we are having to overcome 40 years of profligate spending, and we are working very hard to reduce again the waste and inefficiencies in government. I can assure you that there will be no let-up. As I said, I think that the President has set the tone for this and I think that you are going to see, particularly in this session of Congress, us working hard at making sure that we live up to what the President has said, that we are not going to spend a dime or a dollar of the taxpayers' money unless we can spend it wisely. Let me give you an example of something that I was able to accomplish and how I challenged my colleagues in the State of North Carolina on my last speech that I made in the North Carolina Senate. I had been contacted by a family and this is a Democratically controlled State, by the way, both at the gubernatorial level and at the legislative level. This family contacted me and said this lady's husband who had retired from the Department of Transportation had passed away. The month he passed away, they got his check. They notified the retirement system. They said, go ahead and cash the check and we will make sure that we show her as the beneficiary. She did not get a check the next month. She did not get a check the next month. She did not get a check the next month. She inquired as to why. Well, she needed to fill out a form. She filled out a form and sent it in, did not get her check, contacted the people, they said, well, you filled out the form wrong, you have to fill it out another way. They called me on a Sunday afternoon. On a Monday morning, I contacted the retirement system and I said, I want to know why this lady has gone for 4 months and not been able to get her check. They said, we will look into it, and we will get back in touch with you. So by Friday, they got back in touch with me and they said, she will be getting her check at the end of this month. I said, you know, that is not good enough. It is not good enough that you are solving this one problem for this person. What I want to know is, why is the system broken? Tell me what is wrong with your system that would allow this to happen. They promised they would look into it. About 3 weeks later, I had a visit from the head of the retirement system. Actually, he wrote me a letter and then came by to see me and he said, I am so glad that you brought this to my attention. I did not know this, but we have a system whereby three different people had to approve this lady filling out a new form. This is a system already set. She is due the money. She is not asking for something she is not due. She is the inheritor of her husband's retirement. So she is due the money. But in that system there, in the State government, controlled by the Democrats, they had three different people who had to approve something that did not need to be approved at all. By my bringing this to his attention, he changed the system to show that it would not have to be done that way. I challenged my colleagues in the North Carolina Senate, anytime that someone came to them and complained, to follow the complaint to its source and to make sure that if there was a systemic problem that they changed the system. And I said to them, if all 50 of you once a year could go to the source of the problem and change the system, we pretty soon would be cutting out lots of useless positions, because we cut out, in effect, two positions or the handling by two people of that paperwork. So what we have to be doing is going into every single system and making sure that we go to the heart of the matter and we solve the problems at the heart of the matter. That, I think, is the way we are going to do that. And I think that you are going to see a renewed effort in this session of the Congress to go to the heart of the matter and make sure that we are solving the waste, fraud, and abuse. We are encouraging citizens to get in touch with us, let us know where there is waste, where there is fraud, where there is abuse, and we ourselves, and I would challenge you and every other Member of the Congress to do the same thing. If you have a constituent who has run into a problem with the Federal Government because they did not get something taken care of at the right time, let us look at that and see where there is waste in systems. But if you have somebody who tells you that there is waste and fraud, let us go to the heart of that matter and prosecute those people for doing things that are wrong, whether it is on the part of a citizen or whether it is on the part of a Federal official. I think that that is something we all have to do. We take an oath to uphold the Constitution, and I think a part of that is to do everything that we can to promote the principles that we were elected to promote and that is a part of our responsibility.

Ms. FOXX. Mr. Speaker, I appreciate his pointing that out again. That obviously was something that I was trying very hard to point out, was the fact that we are trying to improve the systems, improve the processes. And I want to thank the gentleman from Kentucky for pointing out the fact that most of the employees of the Federal Government, indeed the States and local governments, are very dedicated people who want very much to do their jobs well, and that sometimes what we need to do is lead them in the direction of doing things better than we have been doing them. I know very often we lapse into a way of doing something that may not be the best way of doing it and it just continues that way because nobody has suggested doing it differently. I think one of the great things that we could do in this Congress and in future Congresses is to go to our employees and ask them to make suggestions on ways that we could save money in the Federal Government and make it operate more efficiently, and I thank the gentleman from Kentucky for reminding me that that is something that we obviously ought to be talking about. We not only want the citizens of this country to help us figure out ways to make the government operate more efficiently and effectively, but there is nobody better qualified to do that than the great employees that we have, because they are there on the front line every day and they understand what needs to be done and how we could do things differently. So I think that if we do have employees who could make suggestions on how we could do this better that we should do it. I want to point out again that we have places that people can write and call to let us know how they think that we can do things better, especially in the area of waste, fraud, and abuse, and I hope that they will take note of these places and be in touch with us.

Ms. FOXX. I yield to the gentleman from Massachusetts.

Ms. FOXX. Mr. Speaker, I rise with my colleagues today to highlight the important role this Congress must play in rooting out waste, fraud and abuse in government spending. The Federal Government currently spends over $69,000 every second of every day. That astonishing figure is simply too high. This Congress must become a better steward of the taxpayers' dollars and we must do it now. Our constituents deserve to send less of their hard-earned dollars to Washington and have more of their money to spend on their families, businesses and dreams. They meticulously budget their dollars at their kitchen tables and we owe it to them to do the same here in Washington. Mr. Speaker, in order to do this, we must crack down on waste, fraud and abuse in government spending. We are going to have others of our party speak. And now I would like to yield the floor to my esteemed colleague, the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Conaway).

Ms. FOXX. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman very much. I think that comments from the other two speakers are a perfect segue into our presenting some information on how individual citizens can report fraud and abuse to us. Both the Committee on the Budget and the Committee on Government Reform, on which I serve, have worked hard to try to identify fraud and abuse and inefficiencies, and I want to put up this information to show people that if you know of a situation where you know there is waste or abuse or fraud, that you will get in touch. You can get in touch, of course, with your own personal Representative or Senator, but you can also get in touch directly to the Committee on the Budget, wasteful spending, and there is an address here. The phone number may be a little bit hard to remember. It is (202) 226-9844. If you wanted to get in touch with me, and guarantee that something would be done or someone would follow up on it, my number is (202) 225-2071. This is an issue about which I feel very, very strongly and always follow up on. I have a letter here that I received recently that I have passed along to the people in the State of North Carolina because of the concern, and this is the kind of thing that we have to stop because all of us are paying for this. The letter says, I am a citizen of Greensboro, North Carolina, and something has come to my attention I just have to make you all aware of. I have been watching a case of Medicaid fraud for over a year now, and it has only gotten worse. I have called all kinds of fraud lines in North Carolina, and no one seems to care or know who to direct me to. So I have come to you. What I did was I passed this along to the appropriate people in North Carolina. I do not have answers on it yet, but this is an example of really egregious fraud, and I am sure there are lots of other examples, and my hope is that people watching us today will talk with their friends and let us know if there are other situations like these. There is this woman that is a certified nursing assistant that is supposed to be going into this home to give care to a 70-year-old woman. The CNA comes in for only 10 minutes, sometimes 30 minutes at the most, and goes to the ABC store for this woman and leaves. Sometimes she just goes inside and comes right back out. The woman works for an agency that knows she is doing this, because at one time there was a complaint by a family member. The problem is that the State of North Carolina is paying her for services rendered in the amount of 4 hours daily at $9 an hour. This has been going on for over a year and it has gotten even worse because, as of last year, the husband now is on Medicaid and he is now receiving these same services. Now the hours have doubled but the care has not changed. ``The CNA is not caring for the husband and wife, only going to the ABC store. Sometimes she takes him to the grocery store. They only call the CNA when they want to go to the ABC store. I think this is an expensive way for the taxpayers to have to pay for taxi services, because that is all she does. She comes out of the house, laughing, after being inside only 10 minutes. She is laughing all the way to the bank at our expense. ``Please look into this situation very carefully because there's a possibility that this CNA may have added another Medicaid person to her pay. The agency that she works for is very much aware of this but they have done nothing about it. She has brought in three cases, and one of them has dropped because of the attention it was bringing. ``This needs to be stopped and very soon. We've paid these people enough money for nothing. The couple that is receiving these services are in their right mind and know this is fraud because I have told them this and they continue to sign time sheets, false records.'' And then she goes on to give the names of the people receiving the services, and she also says that she has been threatened for doing this. She has also given the information to newspapers in Greensboro and Winston-Salem, but they have done nothing about it. ``It is so crazy for dollars to be wasted and every year taxes go up.'' So I want that individual to know that I have passed this along to the proper agencies in North Carolina and I am expecting them to look into the case and make sure that we stop this waste of money. Now, I want to go back to talking a little bit about what our committees are doing here in the Congress to deal with this. I commend the efforts of the gentleman from Iowa (Mr. Nussle), chairman of the Committee on the Budget, and the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Tom Davis), chairman of the Committee on Government Reform, for the commitment they have made to eliminating waste and reducing the budget. The gentleman from Iowa (Mr. Nussle), as chairman of the House Committee on the Budget, spearheaded the effort to eliminate waste, fraud and abuse during the last Congress and made great strides in identifying and eliminating such spending. He pledged to find and eliminate one penny out of every dollar. Now, that may not sound like a lot, but it soon adds up. His commitment to deficit reduction should be applauded, and this is one of the mechanisms that the Committee on the Budget came up with, is to establish this abuse line and abuse office so that people could report it and have something done with it. The gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Tom Davis), as chairman of the Committee on Government Reform, also reminds us that the answer to the deficit problem is not to merely cut off fingers and toes, but what the Federal Government has to do is trim the fat. We have to, just like our constituents have done, tighten our belts and control the amount of spending so that we can reduce and ultimately eliminate the deficit. We must eradicate duplicative programs and hold government agencies accountable for their spending practices. This is something I am very proud that Republicans are emphasizing more and more, and that is to hold the programs accountable. As I said earlier, the President has said that if we are going to spend a dollar, it has to be spent well. I want to talk a little more about some of the differences between the Democrats and the Republicans and their attitudes toward holding down spending, but I would like to recognize my colleague, another one of my colleagues from the State of Texas, for him to make some comments about this very important issue. Mr. Speaker, I now yield the floor to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Gohmert).

Ms. FOXX

Ms. FOXX. Mr. Chairman, I rise today to voice my strong support for the REAL ID Act, particularly its provisions calling for stronger standards for obtaining driver's licenses. Page 47 of the 9/11 Commission Report, ``Without freedom of movement, terrorists cannot plan, conduct surveillance, hold meetings, train for their mission or execute an attack.'' Others have argued that the proposal involves an unprecedented preemption of State authority regarding the issuance and production of driver's licenses. This is untrue. Let me be clear: We are not preempting State authority in this area. What we are doing is establishing minimum standards for Federal acceptance of such documents. This is consistent with actions taken by individual States. Today, Nevada and New Mexico do not accept as proof of identity a State-issued driver's license or identification card from States that do not meet their standards. The federalism issue is one of extreme importance, and that is exactly why the language has been crafted as it has. Driver's licenses have become the primary form of identification in the United States. They permit people to apply for other forms of identification, transfer funds to bank accounts, obtain access to Federal buildings, purchase firearms and board airplanes. The majority of the States have recognized the privilege that a license brings and have set high standards for obtaining them. However, 10 States, including my State of North Carolina, issue valid driver's licenses and identification cards without requiring proof of legal status. That is scary. According to the 9/11 Commission Report, these travel documents are just as important as weapons are to terrorists. The REAL ID Act would require that Federal agencies accept only driver's licenses and State-issued identification cards from States that prove the legal status of applicants. The bill would also require States to review the legality of existing license holders upon renewal or replacement. The bill does not seek to set State policy for who may or who may not drive a car. It aims to set rigorous standards for what may be used as a form of ID to a Federal official. As I have stated before, I am a strong advocate of States' rights. However, if certain States act irresponsibly and place the national security of the rest of the country at risk, then Congress must get involved. We must do what it takes to make America safe.

Ms. FOXX

Ms. FOXX. Mr. Speaker, I commend President Bush for proposing a fiscally responsible budget that will rein in Federal spending and protect our top priorities, such as national defense, homeland security, and job creation. While we may have some differences of opinion on a few of the details, I believe the President's budget is a good first step in the right direction. I am encouraged that he wants to hold Federal programs to a firm test of accountability and eliminate programs that no longer serve their intended purpose or perform a vital function. This action alone will save over $20 billion in 2006. The President's proposed budget will also save an additional $137 billion in spending during the next 10 years. I look forward to working with the President and Congress to craft a budget that will cut our Federal budget in half by 2009 and improve our economy.

Ms. FOXX

Ms. FOXX. Mr. Speaker, pursuant to House Concurrent Resolution 39, 109th Congress, I move that the House do now adjourn.

Ms. FOXX

Ms. FOXX. Mr. Speaker, I rise to discuss an issue of great importance to the citizens of the Fifth District of North Carolina. We are deeply concerned about the skyrocketing costs of medical malpractice insurance because it is limiting access to quality and affordable health care all over western North Carolina, but particularly in the rural portions. The escalating cost of health care is a major concern in the fifth district. Just 2 weeks ago, I held meetings with community leaders in all 12 counties in my district. The issue of the rising cost of medical insurance was raised at each and every meeting. After all, the American Medical Association has determined that North Carolina is one of 19 States in the country that is currently identified as a ``crisis'' State. Due to an onslaught of frivolous lawsuits, our physicians are being forced to pay exorbitant premiums on their liability insurance. The rates have risen so high that many family practitioners and OB-GYNs are being forced to retire early or simply go out of business. Doctors are refusing to deliver babies or perform surgery because they are afraid of being sued. That is especially a problem in our rural communities, where many doctors are sole practitioners. Just as alarming, our medical school enrollments are on the decline, which will limit the health care available to our future generations. Recently, I spent 2 days with medical professionals in my district. According to the experts in the medical community of Forsyth County, there was at least a 20 to 40 percent increase last year in medical malpractice insurance premiums. The biggest impact, again, was felt in the specialty fields like OB-GYN, emergency medicine and surgery. What is happening across North Carolina is that doctors are no longer going into specialized fields like obstetrics. This is short-changing the people of the Fifth District, because it is limiting access to the health care specialists they need. We must remember that this is an issue that affects everyone, not just doctors. In early 2003, with the backing of the Bush administration, the U.S. House of Representatives moved quickly to address medical liability reform by passing H.R. 5, the HEALTH Act, Help Efficient, Accessible, Low-Cost, Timely Health Care. Unfortunately, the U.S. Senate failed to pass this meaningful and important legislation. I look forward to the debate this year in the House. Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues in the House and Senate to address this health care crisis. We need to enact meaningful medical malpractice reform. My priority is that the citizens of Fifth District of North Carolina and all across the Nation have continued access to quality, affordable health care.