Dick Gephardt

Mr. GEPHARDT

Mr. GEPHARDT. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to discuss H.R. 5218, Matt's Health Insurance Plan Act of 2004, which I introduced last month. This bill has a very personal meaning to me, and I believe it is integral to solving America's health care crisis. Today in this country, over 40 million Americans live without health coverage. These Americans are people just like you and me. Citizens who work full-time jobs where no health care is offered. Parents who work two and three part-time jobs just to feed their children and provide a safe place to live. Entire families where values like hard work and responsibility mean something, but where no member of that family can find full-time work with full benefits in a struggling economy. Americans who don't have health coverage too often don't have access to health care. In a day and age when morals dominate the political landscape of this country, how can we remain indifferent to the millions of Americans who can't receive the care they need? This is the biggest moral problem our country has. It's time we fixed it. Let me tell you why this is so important to me. Three decades ago, when I was an attorney in St. Louis, my two year old son Matt was diagnosed with what they said was terminal cancer. My wife Jane and I were told he probably wouldn't last six weeks. In the end, we were among the most fortunate in more ways than one. My law firm had a health plan, and it was the only way we could afford the new and experimental therapies. That insurance plan, the talented doctors and nurses, and the grace of God saved Matt's life. But I remember the nights we spent in the hospital waiting room talking to the parents of another patient--a child with severe cancer from a family who couldn't afford health insurance. Those parents didn't know what to do. All they could do was pray. As long as I live, I will never forget the terror in their eyes. In this country, it should never be this way. Matt's Plan, named after my son, is my vision for how we can cover everyone in America with health insurance--with no new bureaucracy and no nationalized plan. This is more than just a health care plan. It's also an economic stimulus plan designed to create jobs and get this economy moving again. The plan is essentially this: we pass a law requiring every employer to provide access to quality coverage, with employer tax credits covering most of the cost. Today, an employer can take a tax deduction that would cover about 30 percent of the cost of health insurance. But that deduction is effectively worthless when a company is struggling and losing money in this economy. There are also far too many employers who fail to provide health insurance because the tax deduction doesn't come close to covering the cost of the insurance premiums. As a result, millions of families are left without health insurance. My plan would change that. Employers who don't currently offer health insurance would be required to offer a quality health plan, and they'd receive a refundable tax credit equaling 60 percent of the full cost of the premium. A tax credit they'd pass through completely to their employees in the form of health insurance. Employers would only be responsible for 60 percent of the full cost of the premium and would not be required to contribute to the cost of health coverage beyond the nominal administrative cost of providing health insurance coverage. Employees would not be required to pay more than 40 percent of the premium cost. And for those employers who currently do offer health insurance, my plan replaces the existing tax deduction with a 60 percent refundable tax credit--a tax credit on the employer's share of the premium, which puts more money directly into the business that has been doing the right thing. `Refundable' means the employer will receive the credit, regardless of whether they're making a profit. This health care plan leaves no American on their own. The 60 percent tax credit would apply to part-time employees. It would apply to retiree health benefits paid by former employers. It would apply to the self-employed. And state and local governments would receive federal assistance equal to 60 percent of their health care costs. My plan would allow individuals between the ages of 55 and 64 to buy into Medicare coverage at no cost to the federal government. It would subsidize 65 percent of the cost of COBRA health insurance for the unemployed. It would subsidize low-wage workers who are below or near the poverty line who can't afford their share of the premium. And it would modify the SCRIP Program for uninsured low income children, expanding it to include their parents, and expanding efforts to find those families who qualify. Under my plan, employers who already offer health insurance would see an immediate reduction in their overhead. The economic stimulus would result in billions of dollars in increased wages and benefits, more money in the pockets of the average family, and more jobs. And the result of adding millions of Americans to the ranks of the insured means more preventive care, far fewer trips to the emergency room, and lower health care costs for everyone. Mr. Speaker, I have introduced this bill so that Matt's Plan will become part of the public record on the health care debate. I hope that as Congress continues to deal with the health care problem in America, someone will reintroduce this bill and develop this plan further. To me, this plan is a bold, innovative idea that can work--an idea that can bridge a canyon of fear and illness and cover everyone in America with health insurance, and jump start the economy at the same time. It's morally right and economically sensible. Healthy workers are productive workers. And healthy families make for a stronger America.

Mr. GEPHARDT

Mr. GEPHARDT. Mr. Speaker, I found out something I did not know about Charlie today. I found out from our leader that he is a San Francisco Giants fan. If I had known that, I would not have come today. On a more serious note, I have had some time lately to do some things that I usually have not had time to do, so I have been watching on television the early part of the proceedings here in the House, and I hear these rules being explained. I have tried to put myself in the shoes of an average citizen, and I think it is gobbledygook, and I do not understand what they are talking about. But that really is the magic of this place. As the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Hoyer) said earlier, I am fond of saying that politics is a substitute for violence. It really is. And the only thing that allows us to resolve our differences peacefully is that we have a process. We have rules. We have laws. We have parliamentary procedure. And that process is what makes this place work and makes democracy work in our country. The keeper of those rules has been our subject today, Charles Johnson. He has done it, in my view, as well as it can be done. He has always been fair. No one questions his judgment or his enunciation of the precedents of the House, whether it comes down in your favor or it does not. He is a professional. No one ever doubts his knowledge or his dedication to knowledge about the process. Finally, his character, his human character, has been impressive to everybody who has come in contact with him. Whether a Member, staff, people visiting, everyone knows that this is a man of great character. I guess the best story I can tell to kind of sum up my feelings about Charlie is that we had a common friend, someone that I went to Northwestern University with and was one of my best friends there, wound up at the University of Virginia Law School and became a friend of Charlie's. So we, in that common friendship, got somewhat of a personal relationship; and we, unfortunately, saw our friend die of cancer some years back. But even with that personal relationship I had with Charlie, I never, ever felt that in anything he did while I was leader or in anything I have done here was anything other than fair. Never prejudiced. Never giving in to human relationships. Always calling it the way he saw it and making judgments on the process, which is at the heart of our democratic experiment, fairly and with honesty and good character. Charlie, we truly will miss you. We welcome the successor, who is going to do a great job; and we wish you the greatest time in retirement that anybody could ever have. Thank you.

Mr. GEPHARDT

Mr. GEPHARDT. Mr. Chairman, Congress today will vote on an issue of great importance to the Nation. This week, Congress will vote on the President's request for $86.7 billion in supplemental spending to fund ongoing military operations in Iraq and Afghanistan, as well as the reconstruction effort in Iraq. Like many, I have grave concerns about this administration's failure to forward a plan on the reconstruction of Iraq that will lead to Iraqi self-rule, lessen the financial burden of the reconstruction effort on American taxpayers, and successfully conclude our military efforts in that nation. And I believe this failure has unnecessarily put our troops in harm's way and made our nation less secure. Yet while I have significant reservations about this administration's prosecution of the aftermath of the war in Iraq, I will support this request because I believe supporting our troops in the field and providing them with the necessary resources to successfully complete their mission is the right thing to do. While some may attempt to characterize my support for the supplemental legislation as an endorsement of the Administration's failed policy, nothing could be farther from the truth. I met with President Bush and congressional leaders following the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001. I told him that we would have to trust each other and put politics aside if we hoped to successfully address the new threats confronting our Nation. My paramount objective has always been to keep our people safe, and that objective has motivated my every action without fail since September 11. To that end, I worked with the President in an honest, good-faith effort last year to develop legislation that would provide a responsible policy framework to address the threat posed by Saddam Hussein's leadership of Iraq. At my insistence, this legislation included provisions that: Called on President Bush to work with our allies and others through the UN to build a consensus for action; demanded that the President's actions against Iraq not undermine our nation's broader efforts to prevent terrorism; and required the President to develop a plan to promote stability and democracy in post- war Iraq. Congress adopted this legislation with wide majorities in both the House and the Senate, and President Bush signed it into law. Unfortunately, he subsequently failed to implement any of these guidelines, which I believed were necessary to ensure the success of our effort. In my view, it is undeniable that this failure has led to the situation we find ourselves in today in Iraq and across the globe. First, by not working with other nations and building a broad international consensus, America is now much more isolated. Even our closest allies are reluctant to join a U.S.-led peacekeeping force in Iraq and contribute the necessary resources to the reconstruction effort. This administration's posture has also made it extremely difficult to obtain support for a meaningful United Nations role in Iraq, needlessly delaying tangible support that is critical to reducing the burden on the U.S. with respect to the restoration of Iraq's civil authorities and provision of ongoing humanitarian assistance. In addition, without broader international support, our goal to turn authority back to the Iraqi people and their new democratic institutions will take much longer to accomplish. Our goal must be the tangible support of our allies in the form of a meaningful financial contributions and additional troops on the ground, not just their unanimous consent on a piece of paper at the U.N. Security Council. Second, in many ways we are now more vulnerable to terrorist threats, especially our troops in Iraq who are subject to attack on a daily basis. Saddam Hussein has assumed a role similar to that of Osama bin Laden, encouraging terrorism against the United States by disgruntled Iraqis and other extremists. Furthermore, the President's continued articulation of the so-called ``preemption doctrine'' and his lack of a coherent diplomatic strategy has inspired other nations not to stop their pursuit of dangerous materials, but to accelerate their efforts in order to avoid being ``preempted.'' North Korea--which today appears to be ramping up for full-scale production of nuclear weapons--is a very troubling case in point. Third, with a unique opportunity to help the Iraqi people establish a stable, democratic government and society--and serve as a model in a critical area of the world--the President failed to plan ahead for many predictable post-war challenges. As a result, today we are spending more time--and money--trying to protect our troops and prevent chaos than we are helping the Iraqi people build democratic and fee-market institutions that will provide a foundation for long-term stability. Let me make one thing clear to our president: I believe Congress will support our troops and the Iraq reconstruction effort by approving the supplemental request currently under consideration, and I will cast my vote reluctantly in favor. It is my hope that he will take this opportunity to come to terms with the significant challenges before us and reorient his policies accordingly. In my view, failure is not an option in Iraq, we must see this hard work through with the support of the international community and the Iraqi people. I only ask that the President use this supplemental funding in a manner that ensure our men and women in uniform can come home soon, having completed a mission that we all can be proud of. Mr. SERRANO, Mr. Chairman, I rise to express my intention to vote against the Iraq supplemental. This is a vote that can only be explained if taken in the context of an earlier vote--my vote last year against the war with Iraq. At the time of that earlier vote, the administration was arguing that we had to invade Iraq because of the imminent threat posed by Iraq's weapons of mass destruction. The situation was so desperate that we couldn't wait for the weapons inspectors to finish their work or for the diplomacy to gain the support of the international community. Our President argued that action needed to be taken preemptively and quickly. Now, with the passage of time, and with the issuance of subsequent reports, it has become more and more unlikely that those threatening weapons of mass destruction existed. So now the administration is engaging in revisionist history as to why we went to war in the first place. Today, Congress is again facing a vote on Iraq. This time the vote is on whether or not to continue funding for our misguided policy in Iraq. Again the administration is arguing that we don't have a choice--we must quickly and immediately pass this important war spending bill. Again, the patriotism of those who oppose this effort is being questioned. I think it is time for us to pause. Our troops stationed in Iraq are brave but suffering. They are experiencing hardships that are the direct result of this flawed policy. It is time for Congress to challenge the administration's policy with respect to Iraq. My vote today is a vote of protest. I was opposed to the war and I am opposed to funding the results of this unjustified war. I do not believe that when the needs of our own country are so great, we should be asked to fund this war spending bill. When I look around the South Bronx, I see man wants. I see housing, education and health requirements that have been put on hold by this administration, because it claims it does not have the resources. If we don't fund this war spending, we could change so much in the South Bronx. I want may constituents' tax dollars spent to make positive changes that can impact the lives of many. Since I voted against this war, I do not believe I now have an obligation to fund the results of a unjustified action that I so strongly opposed. Some might say we have a responsibility--and we do have a responsibility, to end this funding. We should no longer pretend that what we did in Iraq was right. It is time to stop this charade. If I were to support this war spending, it would serve to legitimize the war against Iraq. The war was fought based on intelligence manipulated for political ends and with a total disregard for international conventions, coalitions, and public opinion. We need to revise our foreign policy with respect to Iraq. We need to work cooperatively with the international community and truly listen to their concerns. We can no longer afford the cost or lost of life that is accompanying our unilateral approach to Iraq. The only way to end this terrible loss of life in Iraq is to end the funding, and so as an appropriator, I must vote my conscience and vote against supporting this war spending bill.

Mr. GEPHARDT

Mr. GEPHARDT. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor Marie S. Nowak, a woman who devoted her entire life to helping others through her civic and community activities. Marie passed away on January 15, 2003, and St. Louis will sorely miss her enormous energy and dedication to community service. For almost 40 years, Marie was an educator and administrator in the St. Louis Public Schools, retiring in 1988. She was a past president of the St. Louis District of the Missouri State Teachers Association, and received their ``Leader of the Year'' award in 1985. Marie was a former delegate to the Governor's Conference on Education and a former member of the White House Conference on Education. Marie's political and charitable interests were broad and deep. She was past president of the Metropolitan St. Louis Women's Political Caucus and an active member of the League of Women Voters. She served on the board of Grace Hill Settlement House and was vice-president of the board of Heritage House Corporation. She was also a determined advocate for women's rights. At the time of her death, Marie's work on behalf of the elderly consumed much of her time. She has served as chairwoman of the American Association of Retired Persons' state legislative committee, was State Coordinator for VOTE, and received the AARP ``Volunteer of the Year'' award in 2000. In 2001, Governor Bob Holden appointed her to the Missouri Board of Senior Services. In addition, Marie was a member of my Senior Advisory Council, meeting regularly with me and speaking eloquently on behalf of our senior citizens. All of us extend our sympathy to her family, and especially to her children, Pauline Richards and James Nowak. Marie Nowak's gracious demeanor and generosity of spirit, her dedication to others and her good common sense, have left a legacy that St. Louisans will long remember.

Mr. GEPHARDT

Mr. GEPHARDT. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to John D. Graham, a great business leader in St. Louis, and a pioneer in the communications industry. Over the years, I have been proud to see what was once a small St. Louis public relations firm grow to become what is now a widely respected international powerhouse--Fleishman-Hillard. One of the key reasons that this company has become a worldwide leader in the communications industry is the leadership provided by John Graham, its Chairman and CEO. Recently, that leadership earned John some well-deserved recognition. John received one of my state's greatest honors, the Missouri Honor Medal for Distinguished Service in Journalism. He joins an impressive list of past recipients, which includes Winston Churchill, Walter Cronkite, Gordon Parks, George Gallup, and Tom Brokaw. In presenting the award, it was noted that John has not only built Fleishman-Hillard into one of the largest agencies in the world, but that he has consistently sought to improve the ethics, integrity, and quality in the practice of his profession. John has always understood the responsibility that comes with communicating with the public, and his emphasis on professional, honest representation has made his company the gold standard for public relations firms. There is no one more deserving of the Missouri Honor Medal for Distinguished Service in Journalism than John Graham. He will continue to do great things for both Fleishman-Hillard and the St. Louis community. I am proud to call him a friend, and salute his efforts.

Mr. GEPHARDT

Mr. GEPHARDT. Mr. Speaker, before September 11, 2001, our country's leaders from the Executive Branch to the Congress were actively engaged in exploring a fundamental re-crafting and rewriting of our immigration policies. Due to the horrific events of September 11, 2001, that agenda had to be delayed as our country struggled to find ways to ensure our security, while still respecting the civil rights and essential dignity of the immigrants within our country. Since September 11, Congress has taken important steps to secure our borders and enhance our nation's security against the terrorist threat. The sound policy rationales that were propelling us to re-craft our immigration laws before September 11 continue to exist today and are even more urgent. To the core values of family unity, fundamental fairness and economic opportunity that we articulated in the Democratic Statement of Principles on Immigration a year ago, we now add a pressing concern--the need to bring the undocumented population out of the shadows and into the light of greater accountability so that they too can aid in effectively securing our great nation. The need for comprehensive immigration reform has not abated, and our resolve to move forward in this effort remains. Earned Legalization And Family Unification Today, Democrats are introducing legislation that will take the first step toward comprehensive immigration reform that will recognize immigrants who have been working and contributing to this country while also increasing our security. Our earned legalization legislation will ensure that hard-working, tax-paying immigrants will be able to adjust their status and live legally if they have resided in the United States for at least five years, have a work history of at least two years and are able to pass a background check. Our legislation will benefit both America and an immigrant population that has embraced the American Dream. It will streamline the enforcement of our immigration laws and allow us to shift important enforcement resources to tracking down those who have come to the US to do us harm. Reducing the number of undocumented immigrants in the US will enable us to better focus on individuals who pose a real terrorist threat. At the same time, our legislation rewards work by ensuring that qualifying immigrants can move on with their lives free of the fear that one day they or members of their family may be sent away from their adopted country forever. Our legislation will also speed the reunification of families, so that our immigration system will not force families to choose between long years of separation and undocumented immigration. We value family- based immigration because it solidifies important family ties and creates stronger communities. Yet, our current immigration system puts extreme stress on families, forcing them to wait many years before they can be reunited. We believe it is not in the best interest of our communities to force such long separations. We must recognize, however, that this is but a first step, and that much more remains to be done. There has been much debate about the need for new and expanded temporary worker programs. Even as we debate the merits of legalizing the hard-working population already in the United States, we acknowledge that a comprehensive immigration policy debate must address future flows of immigrants and their impact on the US labor force. Indeed, President Fox of Mexico continues to press the Bush Administration for movement in this area. We must consider reasonable policy options for regulating, limiting and controlling this future flow of immigrants in a way consistent with our nation's highest values. As Presidents Bush and Fox resume bilateral migration discussions, and we encourage their efforts, we note that immigrants come from many different countries which highlights the importance of having broad and expansive discussions of the myriad issues presented by immigration trends. As the discussion continues, it is vital that the issues we set forth below are thoughtfully and effectively addressed and are key elements to any future legislative or administrative efforts. Adjusted Status For Workers Currently In The United States And Towards Regularizing The Status Of Future Immigrants Consistent with our original Democratic Statement of Principles on Immigration, we recognize that to achieve the comprehensive immigration reform that we outlined, the status adjustment of undocumented immigrants currently residing in the United States who do not otherwise qualify for our earned legalization proposal must be addressed. We should find a way to place these undocumented workers and their families on the same path to legalization as those who qualify for our earned legalization proposal. In addition, we must seek to regularize the flow of immigrants who cross our border. By seeking regularization, a legal mechanism could be provided for recent arrivals to the US to work while not undermining the wages, benefits standards and legal protections of US workers and local labor markets. Such an effort should include the following essential elements: (1) a thorough and accurate methodology for determining the need for foreign workers and the application of the most reliable labor market tests; (2) accurate wage determinations based on relevant wage information, union contracts and benefits and the development of new formulas that reflect industry standards; (3) equitable labor protections for foreign and US workers, including the right to organize--foreign temporary workers should not be used to undermine union organizing efforts; and (4) the Department of Labor must be given the necessary enforcement resources and procedures to ensure full compliance and temporary foreign workers must be provided a private right of action to ensure full compliance. As we move forward in the development of any new efforts, we also recognize the necessity of avoiding the failures of past guest-worker programs. We must ensure that existing visa programs are reformed to function properly and as intended, and we must direct the necessary resources to training for US workers and better link such training to available jobs. Conclusion We enter this debate recognizing that immigration reform can be a complex issue; indeed, previous immigration reforms have failed to meet the high standards that we establish for ourselves in this debate. For precisely this reason, we intend to lead a comprehensive immigration reform debate that unflinchingly addresses the difficult questions that are critical to any serious policy discussion. We look forward to the challenges ahead and to reshaping our immigration policy to strengthen America's control over its borders and to reflect the American values of hard work and family.

Mr. GEPHARDT

Mr. GEPHARDT. Mr. Speaker, this House has precious little time left in this session. Today we finished important business on Iraq. We worked across the aisle with Republican colleagues to come up with that resolution. We could use that same type of framework to get more of the Nation's business done if the Republican leadership would put aside their my-way-or-the-highway attitude and reach across the aisle to work out a bipartisan economic plan for our country. We should not be passing 7-day CRs when the Republican leadership has no plan to actually complete the Nation's business when people are looking to us for leadership. I will vote against this continuing resolution. Since we returned from our August recess, we have done nothing, practically nothing of substance aside from the Iraq resolution. We have had nothing on the schedule. We have spent all of our time, the people's time, on meaningless ``Non-Sense of the House'' resolutions urging the Senate to pass tax cuts for the wealthy beginning in 2011. Their resolutions have no legal force. Their so-called economic program would affect no one until 2011. What are people going to do between now and 2011? People are suffering today. They are receiving their 401(k) statements this week. The stock market is falling like a lead balloon. People are out of work, and they are giving up hope of finding new jobs. This economy is in the tank and some people have been put out of work through no fault of their own and many cannot find a new job. The Republican leadership has a failed economic plan that has contributed to the conditions that we are living with today. Republicans cannot even pass a budget to provide for the Nation's critical priorities. A responsible House right now would be addressing the people's serious concerns that they face in their day-to-day lives. In the few remaining days, this Congress should extend unemployment benefits for people who are still trying to find work in a struggling economy, pass a real pension bill that helps secure people's retirement savings against future Enrons, close the loophole that allows corporations to incorporate overseas to avoid paying taxes. We could pass a good generic drug reform bill that will help lower the cost of prescription medicine now, and we could finish our legislation for education, health care, worker programs so that we can make good on our commitment to actually leave no child behind, and we could provide adequate resources to ensure excellent health care for our Nation's seniors and provide our workers with adequate help to weather these rough times. If Republicans continue to duck their responsibilities, there will be serious consequences in people's lives. Their inability to act will lead to cuts in education, homeland defense, medical care for veterans, and the National Institutes of Health; and the chairman of the Committee on Appropriations has made this plain. I think the inaction today is unacceptable. As we did earlier today, we need to come together on a bipartisan plan of action to solve our serious economic problems and address the most important problems people are facing right now. Let us not leave here before we address that agenda. Let us not have a 7-day continuing resolution. Let us have a 1- or a 2-day continuing resolution. Let us stay here and do the people's work. We will not win the war against terrorism if the economy of this country is imploding around our ears. We will only beat terrorism if we have a strong economy with good jobs and good wages for the American people.

Mr. GEPHARDT

Mr. GEPHARDT. Mr. Speaker, 26 years ago, I was fortunate to be elected by my constituents to serve in this House, and I represent today the district in which I was born. I am proud that the people of my district trust me to try to represent them every day. It is an honor that I feel every day that I walk into this building, that I am carrying the hopes and wishes of over a half a million people in Missouri, and I know today is a moment of sacred responsibility. We come into this building hundreds of times during the year to cast very important votes, but on days like today, when we consider how we will protect our Nation, our people, the districts we come from and represent, these are the days when we must look deep inside and make sure that what we are doing is right. Our gravest responsibility as legislators is authorizing the President to use military force. Part of the majesty of our democracy is that we do not entrust this power to one human being, the President, but we share it with a co-equal branch of this government; and in a democracy, the decision to put American lives on the line or perhaps go to war is ultimately a decision of the American people through their elected representatives. No one wants to go to war. No one wants to put our young men and women in harm's way, and I know we hope that our actions today will avert war. But our decision is not so simple, because we must weigh the dangers of sending our young people into hostilities against the threat presented by Iraq to our citizens' safety. Every Member of Congress must make their own decision on the level of the threat posed by Iraq and what to do to respond to that threat. I have said many times to my colleagues that each Member should be guided by his or her conscience, free from others trying to politicize the issue or questioning others' motives. This is an issue of life and death, and the preoccupation by some to ascribe political motives to the conclusion of each of us demeans all of us and what we are here to do. Let me say to my colleagues and my constituents in Missouri why I have decided to vote for this resolution. First, September 11 has made all the difference. The events of that tragic day jolted us to the enduring reality that terrorists not only seek to attack our interests abroad but also to strike us here at home. We have clear evidence now that they even desire to use weapons of mass destruction against us. Before 9/11, we experienced the terrorist attacks on Khobar Towers, the USS Cole, on two embassies in Africa, but we did not believe it would happen here. On 9/11, it did happen here; and it can happen again. September 11 was the ultimate wake-up call. We must now do everything in our power to prevent further terrorist attacks and ensure that an attack with a weapon of mass destruction cannot happen. The consequences of such an attack are unimaginable. We spent 50 years in a Cold War and trillions of dollars deterring a weapon of mass destruction attack on the United States by another country. Now we must prevent such an attack by terrorists who, unlike our previous adversaries, are willing to die. In these new circumstances, deterrence well may not work. With these new dangers, prevention must work. If my colleagues worry about terrorists getting weapons of mass destruction or their components from countries, the first candidate we must worry about is Iraq. The 12-year history of the U.N. effort to disarm Iraq convinces me that Iraq is a problem that must be dealt with diplomatically if we can, militarily if we must. I did not come to this view overnight. It has, instead, evolved over time, as we have learned the facts about the Iraqi regime with clarity. As you know, I opposed the use of force against Iran in 1991 in favor of giving sanctions more time to work. Others supported force, but thought that by dislodging Iraq from Kuwait we would neutralize the threat. In hindsight, both of these assessments were wrong. In 1991, no one knew the extent to which Saddam Hussein would sacrifice the needs of his people in order to sustain his hold on power, deceive the international community in order to preserve his weapons of mass destruction programs, or take hostile actions against U.S. interests in the region. Saddam Hussein's track record is too compelling to ignore, and we know that he continues to develop weapons of mass destruction, including nuclear devices; and he may soon have the ability to use nuclear weapons against other nations. I believe we have an obligation to protect the United States by preventing him from getting these weapons and either using them himself or passing them or their components on to terrorists who share his destructive intent. As I stated in a speech in June, I believe we must confront the threat posed by the current Iraqi regime directly. But given the stakes involved, and the potential risks to our security and the region, we must proceed carefully and deliberately. That is why I felt it was essential to engage in negotiations in order to craft an effective and responsible authorization for the use of force, if necessary, so we can defend our Nation and enforce U.N. resolutions pertaining to Iraq. At the insistence of many of us, the resolution includes a provision urging President Bush to continue his efforts to get the U.N. to effectively enforce its own resolutions against Iraq. I have told the President directly, on numerous occasions, that in my view, and in the view of a lot of us, he must do everything he possibly can to achieve our objectives with the support of the United Nations. His speech to the U.N. on September 12 was an excellent beginning to this effort. Exhausting all efforts at the U.N. is essential. But let us remember why. We started the U.N. over 50 years ago. We remain the greatest advocate of the rule of law, both domestically and internationally. We must do everything we can to get the U.N. to succeed. It is in our own self-interest to do that. In 1945, Harry Truman told the Senate that the creation of the U.N. constituted, in his words, an expression of national necessity. He said the U.N. points down the only road to enduring peace. He said let us not hesitate to start down that road, with God's help, and with firm resolve that we can and will reach our goal: peace and security for all Americans. Completely bypassing the U.N. would set a dangerous precedent that would undoubtedly be used by other countries in the future to our and the world's detriment. It is too high a price to pay. I am glad the President said in his speech Monday that diplomacy is the first choice for resolving this matter. This resolution also limits the scope and duration of the President's authority to use force. It requires Presidential determinations before our Armed Forces may be used against Iraq, including assurances to Congress that he has pursued all diplomatic means to address this threat and that any military action will not undermine our ongoing efforts against terrorism. Finally, the bill provides for regular consultation with and reporting to Congress on the administration's diplomatic and military efforts and, of great importance to all Americans, the planning for assistance, reconstruction, and regional stabilization efforts in a postconflict Iraq. The efforts we must undertake in a postconflict Iraq could be the most enduring challenge we face in this entire endeavor, which is another reason for doing everything humanly possible to work through the U.N. to reach our goals. Now a word on what this resolution, in my view, is not. In my view, it is not an endorsement or an acceptance of the President's new policy of preemption. Iraq is unique, and this resolution is a unique response. A full discussion of the President's new preemption policy must come at another time. But the acceptance of such a momentous change in policy must not be inferred from the language of this resolution. It is also important to say that, thus far, the President's predominant response to 9-11 has been the use of military power. Obviously, self-defense requires the use of effective military force. But the exercise of military power is not a foreign policy. It is one means of implementing foreign policy. In the post-9-11 world, we must motivate and inform our citizens about how we construct a foreign policy that promotes universal values, improves living standards, increases freedom in all countries and, ultimately, prevents thousands and thousands of young people across this world from deciding to become terrorists. We will never defeat terrorism by dealing with its symptoms. We must get to its root causes. In anticipation of the serious debate and vote that we have finally reached today, I have had many conversations with my colleagues and friends in this body, friends and colleagues that I respect deeply. I know for many of you this resolution is not what you want, and it is true for Democrats and some Republicans. And in some ways it is true for me. Many of my colleagues have had compelling arguments and important differences with this language. These differences do not diminish my respect or my trust for my colleagues as the true representatives of the people in this great Nation. I believe, as a whole, the resolution incorporates the key notion that we want to give diplomacy the best possible opportunity to resolve this conflict, but we are prepared to take further steps, if necessary, to protect our Nation. I have heard in this debate some Members say they love America. I love America. I think every Member of this body loves America. That is not the issue. The issue is how to best protect America, and I believe this resolution does that. I want to say a final word to those watching beyond our borders. To our friends around the world, I say thank you for standing with us in our time of trial. Your support strengthens the bonds of friendship between our people and the people of the world. To our enemies, who watch this democratic debate and wonder if America speaks with one voice, I say have no doubt. We are united as a people in defending ourselves and we debate the best means for doing that. Do not mistake our resolve. Do not underestimate our determination. Do not misunderstand that we stand here today not as arguing Republicans and Democrats but as Americans, using the sacred right of free speech and thought and freedom to determine our collective course. Finally, I thank God for those who have gone before us and used their freedom wisely, for those who have died to protect it and have created a stronger Nation and a better world because of their bravery. I pray that we may act today as wisely and courageously as those who have gone before. God bless this House. God bless America. Mr. Speaker, as a co-author of H.J. Res. 114, I would like to take this opportunity to address certain elements of the joint resolution in order to clarify their intent. As I stated in a speech I delivered in June, I believe we must confront the threat posed by the current Iraqi regime directly. But given the stakes involved and the potential risks to our security and the region, we must proceed carefully and deliberately. That's why I felt it was essential to engage in negotiations in order to craft an effective and responsible authorization for the use of force if necessary--so we can defend our nation and enforce U.N. resolutions pertaining to Iraq. At the insistence of many of us, the resolution includes provisions urging President Bush to continue his efforts to get the U.N. to effectively enforce its resolution against Iraq. I have told the President directly, on numerous occasions, that in my view of a lot of us, he must do everything he possibly can to achieve our objectives with the support of the United Nations. His speech to the U.N. on September 12 was an excellent beginning to this effort. Exhausting all efforts at the U.N. is essential. Completely bypassing the U.N. would set a dangerous precedent that would undoubtedly be used by other countries in the future to our and the world's detriment. That is too high a price to pay. I am glad the President said in his speech Monday that diplomacy is the first choice for resolving this critical matter. This resolution also limits the scope and duration of the President's authority to use force, unlike the Administrations original proposal. The resolution and its accompanying report define the threat posed by Iraq as consisting primarily of its weapons of mass destruction programs and its support for international terrorism. They also note that we should continue to press for Iraqi compliance with all outstanding U.N. resolutions, but suggest that we only contemplate using force to implement those that are relevant to our nation's security. As for the duration of this authorization, this resolution confines it to the continuing threat posed by Iraq; that is, its current and ongoing weapons programs and support for terrorists. We do not want Congress to provide this or subsequent Presidents with open-ended authority to use force against any future threats that Iraq might pose to the United States that are not related to its current weapons of mass destruction programs and support for international terrorism. The President would need to seek a new authorization from Congress to respond to any such future threats. Third, this resolution requires important presidential determinations to Congress before our Armed Forces are used against Iraq. These include assurances by the President that he has pursued all diplomatic and other peaceful means to address the continuing threat posed by Iraq, and that any military action against Iraq will not undermine our ongoing efforts against terrorism. These determinations ensure that the Executive Branch remains accountable to Congress if it resorts to military force, and stays focused on the broader war on terrorism that must remain of highest priority. Finally, the bill provides for regular consultation with and reporting to Congress on the Administration's diplomatic and military efforts and, of great importance to all Americans, on the planning for assistance, reconstruction and regional stabilization efforts in a post-conflict Iraq. The efforts we must undertake in a post-conflict Iraq could be the most enduring challenge we face in this entire endeavor, which is another reason for doing everything humanly possible to work through the U.N. to reach our goals.

Mr. GEPHARDT

Mr. GEPHARDT. Mr. Speaker, I rise to urge a free and fair debate on this floor about the future of Social Security before the November elections occur. Here we are in October, nearing what will become the end of the 107th Congress, and we have yet to have a real debate about what perhaps is the most important issue facing the American people. We have a Republican leadership that wants to adjourn without debating one of the most serious concerns that people have about their own retirement. We have spent our time renaming post offices, we have done very well at that, and passing non-sense of the House resolutions, but we have had no time, not a moment, to debate the Republican plan to privatize Social Security and cut Social Security benefits. The Republican strategy is clear. It is deception. The Republican leadership from the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Hastert) to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Armey) to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. DeLay) all are on record in strong support of privatization. They support cutting benefits and taking funds that should be secure and putting them into risky stock market accounts. I think it is vital that we have this debate before the November elections and not afterwards when it will probably be too late. We are not talking about an academic exercise here. We are not talking about theories or philosophies. We are talking about people's lives and what happens to them every day of every month. We are talking about the President's proposals and the biggest changes this program would ever see; and we are talking about a sea change, a fundamental sea change in the way the program works. Make no mistake about it, Republicans have a plan to privatize Social Security, cut benefits and weaken the foundation of this retirement system. In 2000, President Bush argued that privatization of Social Security would create a better, improved retirement future for the baby boomers and beyond. In 2001, the President's Social Security commission proposed three plans that I have on this chart, and each plan ultimately requires a cut in benefits. Now, the Republican Party has developed phony ads to make it look like they are for preserving the long-time health of Social Security when it is simply false. As the Wall Street Journal recently reported, President Bush's media strategist produced these ads which peddle the falsehood that privatization of Social Security is the solution to people's retirement fears. If my colleagues did not think that was bad enough, it gets worse. A coalition of right wing organizations has a new pledge card that it is urging Republican candidates to sign in order to give them cover on the issue of privatizing Social Security. The organization is called SocialSecurityChoice.Org. The campaign is funded by a variety of Republican interest groups that support privatization, and Republicans who take the pledge make the promise to ``support allowing younger workers the option to voluntarily place a portion of their Social Security taxes in personal retirement accounts.'' On Capitol Hill, Republicans want to avoid a real debate that involves their schemes to privatize and cut Social Security benefits. In fact, Republicans have been running away from this issue as fast as they can. Karl Rove is assuring Republican lawmakers that after the election is done in 2003, then the White House will finally begin its drive to privatize Social Security. The gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Tom Davis), head of the Republican Campaign Committee, recently said on the radio that Social Security privatization ``will probably come up in the next Congress'' but not in this Congress. Michael Tanner of the CATO Institute predicted that, if the Republicans retain the House, the President intends to make a push in the spring and they will get a vote in the House; and one Republican pollster presentation advised his clients, do not use the word ``privatize'' when talking about Social Security on the campaign trail. Get a new word, he said. Maybe personalize, maybe traumatize, I do not know what the right word is; but it sure is not privatization. None of this should come as a surprise to anybody who has ever followed this issue. In recent months, the stock market has fallen like a lead balloon. The market is at its worst September since the Great Depression, the worst third quarter since 1987, and is at its lowest level in 5 years. If my colleagues look at this chart, the market has lost $4.5 trillion in value since January 2001, and on the next chart my colleagues will see if the President's plan had been in place at that time, today's retirees would have lost $2,016 in benefits as compared to those who retired in December of 2000. That is the impact of turning Social Security over to the stock market. It is not a surprise that Republicans have devoted themselves to the evisceration of the greatest retirement protection plan ever created. The Republican Party has always sought to weaken and get rid of Social Security. In 1935, they opposed its creation. In 1964, they wanted to make it voluntary; and in 1994, the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Armey) appeared on national TV, and he said, ``I never would have created Social Security.'' The gentleman from Texas (Mr. Armey) also called Social Security a bad retirement, and he said it was a rotten trick on the American people. He continued, ``I think we're going to have to bite the bullet on Social Security and phase it out over a period of time.'' Republicans adopted the same approach to Medicare. Newt Gingrich said, ``We cannot just get rid of it. We have got to let it wither on the vine.'' Their ideological alliance flies in the face of cold hard facts. It represents a defeat for the majority of the American people that oppose the privatization of Social Security. My colleagues better believe, if the Republicans take the House and retake the Senate, President Bush will privatize Social Security before we can blink our eyes. Democrats created Social Security in 1935, and we will fight to protect it in 2002 and beyond. In our view, since its creation more than 65 years ago, no other program in the history of this country has provided such dignity and respect for our senior citizens, no matter what their income, no matter what their background. Thanks to Social Security, people have lived their lives free from fear. Social Security has put food on people's tables and shelter over their heads. Look at this chart. It is the most important source of income for middle-income senior citizens. It has helped millions of people avoid poverty. Sixty-four percent of income from middle-income seniors comes from Social Security. For 67 years, it has been there for the people when they have needed it. For countless seniors, surviving spouses and children and Americans with disabilities that fought our wars, sustained our economy and built our Nation, it has meant the difference between life and death. Social Security is based on a contract, an intergenerational contract and a commitment that today's generations have a duty to honor and uphold. We have a responsibility to simply keep our word by protecting the terms of this agreement. Our responsibility calls for making sensible decisions that invest in Social Security and make it stronger, not weaker, in the decades ahead. Our responsibility calls for ensuring our children and grandchildren will reap its rewards; and our values call for building Social Security up, not tearing it down, to satisfy long-held ideological convictions. Social Security is already under attack due to the Republican economic agenda. We had a golden opportunity 2 years ago to shore up Social Security. Two years ago we could have passed tax cuts to promote long-term economic growth while paying down America's debt and investing in Social Security for Americans nationwide. The Republicans rejected our approach. They had a better plan. Their economic plan invaded Social Security, broke repeated promises to secure the surplus, and if my colleagues look at this chart, diverted almost $2 trillion to pay for the wrong-headed Republican tax cut for the wealthiest Americans. They literally took money out of the Social Security trust fund in order to give a tax break that primarily helped people at way, way, way, way up at the top. The Republican slogan, unlike the slogan we had a few years back, seems to be ``Save Social Security last, not first.'' After voting seven times with Democrats to guard the lockbox, the Republican leadership in the House failed to keep their word, and they have failed to lead; and the lockbox is broken on the floor. We will lead. Since Republicans have failed to put Social Security on the floor, we have mounted a discharge petition to bring up the three plans from the President's commission, all for privatization, so we can have a full and free debate in the highest tradition of democratic governance. In this discharge, we include a resolution of disapproval. This is more than a debate. It is a way for the House to vote up or down on the Republican plan, as well as the congressional plan of the Republicans to privatize Social Security. I think it is essential. I am concerned that people are going to go in the voting booths and elect candidates next month who say, oh, I am going to guarantee Social Security benefits and then turn around the day after the election and cut them in some scheme of privatization. This is the most cynical, political act that I have seen in my time in Congress, to say to the American public, oh, we are going to protect it and then the day after the election run to the floor to privatize it and cut the benefits that they have said they are going to protect. I urge my colleagues, sign this petition. Let us have a meaningful Social Security discussion before we go to our districts for the fall election. Put the fake pledge cards away. Abandon the empty Republican promises and secret plans. Tell the pollsters to keep their new words to themselves. Let us conduct a free and fair debate in the open, in the sunshine, in the public about the consequences that will be caused by the privatization of Social Security. Let us rise up in the highest tradition of this body and debate the future of this most important program. Let us save Social Security first and today.

Mr. GEPHARDT

Mr. GEPHARDT. Mr. Speaker, Patsy Mink was my friend and my colleague and I am deeply saddened by her death. Patsy fought hard every day for the values and ideals that make our nation great. She worked to ensure access to good public schools for every American child. She stood out as a leading voice for women's rights, civil rights and labor unions devoted to raising living standards and providing opportunities to all Americans. And Patsy Mink never lost her passion for righting the economic and social injustices in Hawaii and across America. Patsy Mink blazed a trail unlike few members in the history of the House. She was the first Asian American woman admitted to the Hawaii bar, the first Asian American woman elected to the state legislature and the first woman of color to win national office in 1964. She knew first-hand the sting of discrimination as a young Asian-American woman growing up in Hawaii, and she had the ability to use her experience to lift up the hopes and dreams of other human beings. I will always admire her willpower, courage and faith in her country and in her fellow Americans. Through sheer force of her personality, Patsy breathed life into the values and ideals enshrined in our Constitution. While she had many legislative accomplishments, her leadership on Title IX deserves special recognition for opening doors to women's achievements in athletics and beyond. As a woman of color advocating for economic and social justice as a leader of America, Patsy Mink demonstrated that one person, fighting for what's right, respecting every person, can make a difference in the lives of her fellow citizens. I will miss her progressive voice and aggressive leadership on issues important to the American people. I hope and pray that this House will dedicate itself to working in her extraordinary spirit in the important days and months ahead.

Mr. GEPHARDT

Mr. GEPHARDT. Mr. Speaker, I rise to urge the House Republican leadership to address people's serious economic concerns. Today we awoke to reports on the radio which said that the front pages of major newspapers were dominated by the failed performance of our stock market. Mr. Speaker, our Nation needs an economic plan that will address some of the challenges we face today, like restoring economic growth and opportunity. While the economy is crashing around us, the House Republican leadership continues to answer by passing more tax breaks for the wealthiest Americans and legislation that blames their failure to act on the other body. At a time of mounting economic pain, Republicans have ignored the people's priorities, from investor rights to Social Security, prescription drugs to education, to economic growth. The Census Bureau reported this week that in the last year, the number of people without health insurance rose by 1.4 million due to a faltering economy and the rise in unemployment. Republicans will pass this week another non-sense of the House resolution calling for tax cuts 9 years from now, in 2011. CNN reported this week that U.S. stocks, and I quote, looked to wrap up what might be the worst September since the Great Depression and had their worst third quarter since 1987. In a few days Americans will start receiving 401(k) statements showing another drop, a sharp drop, in their retirement savings. Senate Democrats will attempt to extend unemployment benefits today to 1.1 million people whose benefits have been exhausted, which is the right and responsible thing to do. Today is the first day of the new fiscal year, yet as a result of their failed economic program, the Republicans have been unable to carry out their most fundamental responsibility by passing necessary budget bills. So they will have to bring to the floor this week a second continuing resolution in as many weeks to keep the government simply operating. Their failed economic plan now threatens to cut back resources for the Securities and Exchange Commission, cut back on medical expenses for the Veterans Affairs Department, cut back education, and cut back on front-line resources for homeland defense. Last week I discussed on this floor this bankrupt economic agenda embraced by the House Republican leadership. Today let me discuss some basic facts about our Nation's economic future. In order to make progress for all Americans, we need to understand the results that the Democratic budget produced in 1993 versus the Republican economic plan that was passed in 2001. In 1993, the House of Representatives had an impassioned debate about America's economic future. Republicans predicted then that the Democratic economic plan to cut deficits and grow the economy would drive our economy into a ditch. If you look at this chart, Mr. Armey on August 5, 1993, said that ``this Democratic plan is not a recipe for new jobs. It is a recipe for disaster.'' On another chart, Mr. DeLay said that ``this plan has got to be the biggest rip-off in modern history.'' Finally, on another chart, Mr. Hastert predicted that ``the Democratic plan would add more than $2 trillion to the national debt.'' The House Republican leadership could not have been more wrong about that Democratic economic agenda to secure the future for all Americans. In the 2 years after Democrats enacted this plan, the unemployment rate dropped by almost 2 percent. Real incomes after inflation for average families increased by more than 10 percent. We created more than 8 million jobs. The poverty rate came down. The stock market shot up. The Federal budget deficit was reduced by $126 billion in just 2 years' time and became a surplus within 5 years. Our economic plan defeated the 1991 recession, and the lives of almost every American citizen were improved due in large part to this responsible economic agenda promoting opportunity in people's lives. Deficits came down; interest rates came down. The American people created a high-tech revolution that raised living standards and inspired hope in communities nationwide. Under the Democratic plan, the facts speak for themselves. People created opportunity for themselves, their families, and they created opportunity for their fellow Americans. For almost 8 years we had record economic prosperity due to responsible economic policies that Democrats enacted. Then, in the spring of 2001, the Republican economic plan passed the Republican House, the then-Republican Senate; and the Republican President signed it into law. But I would like to point to some other statements that were made at the time. The gentleman from Texas (Mr. DeLay), on this chart, on March 28, 2001, said that the President's budget will spur job creation. Again on the chart, the gentleman from Oklahoma (Mr. Watts) boasted that their budget not only provides tax relief, but secures jobs and grows the economy. But he said, we also fund our Nation's priorities and pay down the debt. Finally, the majority leader, the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Armey), said that the plan will promote economic growth, a strong economy, and new and better jobs for our workers. So the question now is, Where are we today? Did the predictions come true? Well, today, 18 months after these big and bold predictions, the Nation's economy and all of the economic indicators have headed south. The stock market has lost $4.5 trillion since President Bush took office. If we look at this chart, over 2 million people have lost their jobs since President Bush took office and the economic plan was passed. Income for American families in middle-income brackets has declined 2.2 percent since the Republicans took office and, last week, for the first time in 8 years, the poverty rate in our country went up again. Consumer confidence has dropped in each of the last 4 months and is at the lowest level since November 2001. The Federal budget, in just over a year, went from a $236 billion surplus to a $165 billion deficit. That is over a $300 billion swing, almost $400 billion. And if we look at this chart, turned record surpluses into deficits for the decade ahead. An amazing, unbelievable, incomprehensible change in our economic budget health. A wave of corporate scandals has eroded people's faith and trust in our Nation's free markets. As Ronald Brownstein wrote yesterday in the Los Angeles Times, he said, ``Almost all of the key measures of economic well-being for average families improved during Bill Clinton's 8 years in the White House and now, under the second President Bush, the trend lines are pointing down again.'' This is a Republican group that has been wrong, and I mean dead wrong, twice. They were wrong about the Democratic plan in 1993, and they were again wrong when they talked about their own plan more than a year ago. Today, they have an opportunity to sit down with Democrats and write a new economic plan in a bipartisan way that would create long-term economic growth and opportunity for all Americans. But to date, they refuse to reconsider any aspect of a plan that was passed long before September 11, 2001. In fact, what they are doing today is simply keeping on passing bills to make their failed economic plan permanent. I guess the byline here is if it is bad and not working, let us make it permanent. Let us rigidly, tenaciously hold on to what is not working, so that it can continue to not work. The sole passion of House Republicans has been to reward their wealthy political clientele for the next decade and beyond at the expense of every need of the American people. They are content wasting the people's time with ridiculous, nonbinding House resolutions when they have at least 20 major economic issues to address that might and would affect people's lives in a positive way. Where is the debate on the future of Social Security? Where is the minimum wage increase legislation? Where is education funding so that we really leave no child behind? Where is the real pension legislation so that we protect people's pensions against corporate misbehavior? Where is the real prescription drug legislation that will actually at least get the price down for people's prescriptions? Where is the health care and Medicare-buttressing legislation? Well, I will tell my colleagues where it all is. It is nowhere. They have nothing better to do. They cannot finish the budget. They have put nothing substantial on the floor since the August recess. We have been here 3 days a week doing nothing but renaming post offices. We are fiddling while America's economy implodes around the American people's ears. Mr. Speaker, I think it is time to wake up and address the most important problems that we face. Let us come together on a new budget for America, a new economic plan for America, and let us stop talking about meaningless nonsense resolutions about something that might or might not happen 10 years from now. The American people are living in today and tomorrow. They are not waiting for what might or might not happen 10 years from now. Let us stop the meaningless nonsense resolutions when we ought to be dealing with the American people's important problems today.

Mr. GEPHARDT

Mr. GEPHARDT. Mr. Speaker, I rise to urge the Republican leadership to address the unfinished business of the American people's agenda. The House has a lot of work to do and not a lot of time in which to do it. In America today millions of hard working families face challenges in their daily lives. Since January, 2001, our Nation's economy has deteriorated dramatically and this House has failed to provide real relief to the families who need it most. We have seen the most anemic period of economic growth since Dwight Eisenhower was President. In 18 months the stock market has lost $4.5 trillion in value. More than 2 million people have lost their jobs. A wave of corporate scandals has eroded people's fundamental faith in our Nation's free markets and scores of corporations have become bankrupt. Consumer confidence dropped in each of the last 4 months and is at the lowest level since November, 2001. Our Nation's retirement security system has also been undermined and in great difficulty. In 18 months Republican economic policies have taken $2 trillion from the Social Security Trust Fund. Baby boomers' retirement benefits have been jeopardized. In each of the last few years, prescription drug prices have soared more than 10 percent. Reliable prescription drug coverage eludes almost two-thirds of all Medicare recipients. On a daily basis, senior citizens face a choice between buying food, paying the rent, or buying their medicine. Senior citizens actually slice pills into halves because they cannot afford their full prescriptions. Faced with these challenges, the House Republican leadership has failed to address people's kitchen table concerns. In the last 18 months this leadership passed an agenda that satisfied the special interests, misled the American people, and dismissed the interest of America's hard working families. But for bipartisan action after the September 11 terrorist attacks, Republicans amassed a record of nonachievement in this 107th Congress and failed to make a difference, a real difference, in people's lives. On the economy Republicans have demonstrated a devotion to special interest-driven tax cuts. In 2001, in a mammoth tax cut giveaway, Republicans gave the lion's share of the breaks to those who least needed tax relief. The Republican economic plan turned record surpluses into deep deficits for the decade ahead. The only surplus that is left is after they have squandered most of the Social Security surplus. The Republican economic agenda rejected the fundamental values that in the 1990s propelled the longest economic expansion ever recorded: Opportunity, responsibility, and community. In a so-called stimulus bill, the Republican agenda even tried to give Enron a $254 million tax break. For the economic victims of the September 11 attacks, the Republican agenda blocked the extension of unemployment benefits legislation for 5 months. For people who had lost jobs in this Republican recession, the Republican agenda blocked the extension of health care benefits legislation. This ideological agenda has blocked a modest, very modest, minimum wage increase even though in the 5 years since the last increase the minimum wage's real value has fallen 11 percent. This agenda has done almost nothing positive for Americans. It has instead led to large layoffs, weakened America's manufacturing sector, and helped produce big losses in people's pensions, IRAs, and mutual funds across the board. Faced with this mounting tide of bad economic news, Republicans continue to support more special interest tax cuts for the wealthiest individuals. In April, in the middle of a recession, they voted to extend provisions in the spring 2001 tax cut bill that would not take effect until 2011. Think about it. As families face financial hardships, the Republican majority wasted valuable time trying to cut taxes for the wealthiest individuals starting 10 years from now, in 2011. In recent weeks they have wasted the House's time and people's money, passing the exact same tax cut all over again. Republicans sliced their 10-year enrichment plan for the wealthy into individual tax cut pieces in order to distract attention from the absence of a real agenda that would address America's real problems. The sole passion of House Republicans has been to reward their wealthy political clientele for the next decade and beyond at the expense of every other need of the American people. Republicans pass one press release after the next and abdicate their responsibility to lead America. They seek to create the illusion of real life legislative progress on America's real problems where none exists. Perhaps more telling about their inability to carry out their responsibility to govern is that to date not a single spending bill has been sent to the President, just one week before the new fiscal year begins. In fact, since the August recess, this House has failed to pass a single spending bill and it is the House that must originate this important budgetary legislation. Republicans are failing at this most basic task because their misguided economic plan is starving important investments we can and must make in our families' futures, especially in educating our children. Their budget plan would force 50,000 kids from after-school programs that keep children safe. Republicans will leave children trailing behind in America. In fact, because some Republican moderates understand cuts will have to be made, they have been unable to bring key bills to the floor and now their strategy appears to be delay, delay, delay until after the November elections to avoid voters' wrath. This week the House will have to pass the first of what will probably be several continuing resolutions to try to fund the Federal Government. Republicans are simply kicking the can down the road, looking ahead to a possible lame duck session to fix their budgetary problems while they continue to deny the consequences of this deeply misguided economic plan. A lame duck session deprives voters of the legislative information to make an informed decision, and by delaying key spending decisions, Republicans are depriving critical resources to public schools, hospitals, homeland security, among other priorities. The House should not adjourn before holding a full debate on all of these spending bills and priorities. People deserve common sense solutions to the challenges that confront them. That is why I hope Republicans will at least accept our offer to convene a bipartisan economic growth summit to put together a plan that will cut the budget deficits, bring back responsibility and discipline, and get us back on the path to long-term economic growth and opportunity. Even now as we consider a resolution to go to war, there is an unwillingness to reconsider Republican economic and budgetary decisions made more than 1 year ago, before September, 11, 2001. Furthermore, Democrats support a 21st century energy agenda that creates jobs, protects the environment, and expands the economic pie for all of us; education investments to create the most trained and most highly skilled work force on the planet; a minimum wage increase for hard- working families; and a second round of extended unemployment benefits because for over 1 million people their benefits have been exhausted, and by December, 1.5 million people will be in this position. Second, this House must have a free and fair debate about our Nation's Social Security future. Despite repeated promises to safeguard the surplus, the Republican leadership passed an economic plan that diverted $2 trillion from Social Security into other non-Social Security initiatives. Putting special interest tax cuts first, second, third, fourth, fifth, and sixth, Republicans broke our commitment to save Social Security first and jeopardized the baby boomers' Social Security benefits. Social Security is the greatest retirement security program ever conceived. Social Security puts food on people's table, shelter over people's head. It spells the difference between poverty and dignity in the lives of millions of senior citizens, surviving spouses, and people with disabilities. It represents the largest, most reliable income source for middle-income seniors. Republicans have at least five plans to privatize and cut Social Security benefits. These schemes make it clear: Either Republicans will have to cut benefits, divert trillions of dollars from other as yet unspecified programs, or they will have to do both things. According to one study, senior citizens, surviving spouses, and people with disabilities would see benefit cuts between 30 and 46 percent annually if the Republican privatization proposals get enacted. Therefore, I can think of few more crucial priorities than a full Social Security debate with a spotlight shining on Republican's privatization schemes. I am deeply disappointed that House Republicans seemingly do not want this debate and they do not want this vote. The Republican leadership is doing everything in its power to sweep Social Security under the carpet until after the November election. They understand just how unpopular the privatization agenda has become, especially since the near record drop in the stock market of the last months. The American people have a right to know the consequences that flow from this decision. They deserve a frank, honest discussion about all of the Republicans' Social Security privatization proposals. As elected leaders, it is our obligation and our responsibility to hold this discussion before the November elections so the people, the people, can decide Social Security's future. In addition, Republicans must complete the unfinished business of the American people's prescription drugs agenda. Right now they are trying to run out the clock on the crucial challenge of prescription drug prices. I have talked to hundreds of senior citizens who have urged the Congress to cut prescription drug prices down so hard-working families can afford them. In this Congress Republicans have failed these families while protecting the profits of the biggest drug makers that support their campaigns. In July Republicans passed a sham bill written by the prescription drug lobby. They refused even to let us vote on our Democratic alternative. They rejected a real Medicare prescription drug benefit rooted in the right values, a benefit available and affordable to all, and 100 percent available, reliable and guaranteed. The Republican bill represented a fraud and a farce. It was not worth the paper it was written on. It covered barely a fraction of America's senior citizens, put the benefit in the hands of private insurance companies, and took a dangerous first step toward privatizing Medicare. On a party-line vote, it passed the House. Days later I was in Missouri and I saw commercials underwritten by the pharmaceutical lobby. The spots praised Republican candidates for supporting the Republican prescription drug bill fraud. That bill secured the profit priorities of our Nation's drug makers over, and at the expense of, our Nation's senior citizens. It is the same special interest Republican story line on the issue of prescription drug prices. This summer the Senate, 78 to 21, passed a good, bipartisan bill that will close loopholes used by drug makers to stifle competition, keep prescription drug prices high, and maximize industry profits. This simple legislative step could cut prescription drug prices by about 60 percent. According to the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office, it would save consumers $60 billion in prescription drug prices each year. In the House, Democrats are circulating a petition to discharge the Senate-passed bill because Republicans also refuse to debate this. Not surprisingly, the pharmaceutical lobby is starting an advertising blitz attacking the Senate bill, scaring people with the canard that if this bill is enacted, somehow, magically, medical and pharmaceutical advances will come to a grinding halt. The drug companies continue to fund Republican campaigns as a reward for Republican actions and inactions on this high-priority agenda item. The special interests can afford to pay for this largess. Since January the big drug makers earned more than $37 billion in prescription drug sales. On this issue the special interests have seized and controlled the agenda. Before adjournment we must make this the people's House again. We must not let it be the pharmaceutical companies' subsidiary corporate interest. We should and we must vote in this Congress to try to lower prescription drug prices for all Americans. Preventing more corporate scandals and bringing corporate criminals to justice is the fourth piece of unfinished business here in the House. Again, the reality, the sad reality, is that special interests have guided the Republican response to the whole basket of corporate accountability issues. Under Republican leadership thousands of Americans have lost jobs due to corporate misbehavior. In recent months Arthur Andersen fired 7,000 employees, Global Crossing fired over 9,000 employees, WorldCom fired over 20,000, and Enron fired over 4,500. This is not part of a normal business cycle, to say the least. In recent months people's pensions lost $210 billion and State pensions lost $4 billion combined when WorldCom and Enron stock plummeted because their books had been cooked. In response to these awful mind-numbing developments, House Republicans passed watered-down special interest legislation to create the appearance of action when the truth was a failed Republican deregulatory agenda. Republicans blocked accounting industry reform for months until the pressure became so great they had no choice but capitulation. But they refused to impose stiff penalties on employers who mislead employees about the value of company stock. They failed to punish CEOs who run their companies into the ground. They blocked our efforts to eliminate tax breaks and Federal contracts that corporations still today receive by relocating overseas to avoid paying American taxes. In April Republicans passed a pension reform bill that failed to protect pensions from corporate abuse and indiscretions. One House Republican even acknowledged that the bill ``does little to protect people's pensions.'' It failed to give employees control over their nest eggs and retirement plans. It treated executive pensions better than employee pensions, maintaining two sets of rules. It offered employees no legal remedies when companies abused people's 401(k)s. I believe America has the greatest, most vibrant free enterprize system on the face of this planet. But for the sake of every consumer, every CEO, every employee and every investor, we must create one set of rules for all, reward hard work with fair play and ensure that corporate criminals pay the price. I will continue to stand on this floor and fight for comprehensive business, employees' and investors' bills of rights. Let us get it done today and restore people's faith after what has happened to their precious savings. Sadly, the Republican response to all these challenges is to ``run out the clock'' on the Congress, as one newspaper wrote over the weekend. I saw a headline just yesterday calling the Republican agenda an ``Avoidance Agenda.'' I quote Bob Novak: ``Apart from the war on terrorism, the Republican party,'' he says, ``flinches from standing for much of anything in the 2002 election.'' To retain their majority, Republican leaders have created a playbook that reveals the failed Republican agenda and mocks the priorities of their constituents. In recent weeks even with misguided bills, Republicans seem incapable of taking any action. Republicans pulled an education tax bill, pulled the bankruptcy conference report. Now they waste time and over $100,000 a day of the people's money, according to one calculation, passing press release bills, one more obvious than the next. The nonsense of the House resolutions, as I would like to call them, will make zero impact on people's actual lives. The same can be said of other well-meaning resolutions that represent the lion's share of the legislative agenda with House Republicans in the majority. In this session the House has passed at least 40 suspension bills to bestow names on post offices. Under Republican leadership this House has considered the following resolutions, among others: Supporting the Goals of the Year of the Rose; Honoring the Invention of Modern Air Conditioning; recognizing the Significant Contributions of Paul Ecke, Jr. to the Poinsettia Industry, and for other purposes; Ensuring Continuity for the Design of the 5-cent Coin, Establish the Coin Design Advisory Committee, and for other purposes. At the rate we are going nobody is going to have any coins to redesign if we do not get this economy straightened out. This House is becoming irrelevant because people's kitchen table priorities are not being addressed on a constructive and bipartisan basis. Instead of wasting time on empty, meaningless gestures and then voting to allow the President's plans to privatize Social Security to take effect; sheltering unpatriotic offshore corporate tax havens from paying their fair share of taxes; blocking campaign reform; passing the largest gift to the wealthy in the history of this Nation in the form of massive tax breaks, without even considering a new economic plan; passing a gift to Enron and other oil and gas interests through a dirty energy bill; delaying and bending to corporate interest in addressing the corporate scandals and protecting pensions; delaying and then undoing the strong air safety rules Congress enacted to safeguard the public in the aftermath of September 11, Republicans should have been working with Democrats to address the American people's unfinished and important business. The American people want us to raise the minimum wage, protect investor rights, enact job training, pass Medicare prescription drugs, cut prescription drug prices, and extend unemployment benefits. People also want us to reform our elections and voting apparatus to ensure that every vote counts and that what happened in 2000 and 2002 in Florida and elsewhere never ever happens again. People want us to enact a real Patients' Bill of Rights with teeth and effectiveness and not the sham Republican legislation that is languishing and waiting in going to conference. They want us to help school districts across America get class size down to 18 students in each classroom. They want us to pass school construction to promote safety in every public school, create a stable learning environment and meet the staggering backlog of unmet school construction needs. People want us to close the pay gap between men and women. They want us to overturn new White House rules and restore real medical privacy protections to every American patient. They want us to make polluters, not taxpayers, foot the cleanup bill and maintain the Super Fund program that cleans up toxic waste. They want us to enhance our hate crimes law and provide more resources to States and local jurisdictions to help investigate and prosecute these heinous crimes. They want us to reinstate worker safety protections to prevent repetitive stress injuries in the workplace, just to name a few. This agenda is worthy of the American people's highest dreams and hopes for their family. It is worthy of people's real concerns that are there on a day-to-day basis. It is incumbent upon us all to stop wasting time in this House, to stop being irrelevant to the people's real agenda, and to get about the business of the American people's domestic security agenda. Let us do it on a bipartisan basis, let us enact an agenda that creates opportunity for all to fulfill their potential and let us not adjourn before it is done. Let us get to work.

Mr. GEPHARDT

Mr. GEPHARDT. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that the gentleman from California (Mr. Lantos), the ranking member on the Committee on International Relations, be permitted to control the balance of my time and yield that time as he sees fit.

Mr. GEPHARDT. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I am honored to cosponsor this resolution with the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Armey) in the spirit of bipartisan unity on this difficult day for our wonderful and great Nation. We gather together today to remember the victims, honor our rescue workers, and cherish the values embraced by human beings across the globe. On this first anniversary of September 11, we recall the strength, the courage and the character of innocent people who lost their lives in this horrendous attack. To the families of September 11 victims, we say that we are with them as one. We honor the bravery they have demonstrated in the face of unspeakable suffering, and we honor the spirit of the American people, humanity at its best. Today, we recall that amid the chaos of September 11 our rescue workers gave the last full measure of devotion so others could live another day. Hundreds of people rushed into burning buildings to save others who they had never before even met. On one of our darkest days, they sent forth a defiant ray of hope, and words alone could never do justice to their sacrifice. Today, we also recognize this fundamental American truth: From the horror of September 11 has come incredible, unimaginable strength. Our Nation is still grieving, but make no mistake, we stand united. As I said Friday in New York at our joint session, in this great and faithful struggle, there are no Republicans, there are no Democrats; there are only Americans, and we will remain resolved with our President to defend all those who threaten the liberty, freedom and democracy that define our Nation. Today, as we pray for the victims' families, we also offer profound gratitude to the people who may well have saved our lives by fighting back on Flight 93. This resolution is crafted in their spirit, with them as our inspiration and as our guide. This resolution honors people like the man who went to Ground Zero after the attacks and started digging through the rubble, searching for survivors, because, he said, we are ``digging for freedom.'' It honors the woman whose legs were crushed by debris at the World Trade Center, who has been in the hospital every day for the past year. It honors the firefighters in New York who, ascending the stairs, calmly told civilians, ``Just keep going down, clear run. Keep going down, clear run.'' It honors the doctors at the Pentagon who, rolling in water to ward off the flames, saved countless servicemen and women because of their raw courage. It honors the ironworkers, the construction workers, the engineers and others who worked around the clock for months to clear the debris at Ground Zero. It honors all the workers at the Pentagon who worked day and night to meet the schedule of having the Pentagon back in perfect condition before the year anniversary of September 11. It honors our law enforcement personnel who are protecting our citizens on a daily basis here at home. It honors the members of our Armed Forces who have been fighting and are today fighting to defend our freedom and secure our Nation. And it honors people like those we had lunch with on Friday in New York who lost their spouses on September 11. In the face of the unthinkable, their courage, their simple courage to move to the future while they grieved about the past, was deeply moving and inspiring. They demonstrated a commitment to the values that all of us hold dear: Freedom, family, faith and friends. Let all these deeds in the past year, and more, stand as a lasting monument to the spirit of our great Nation. Today, we know that our most solemn obligation is to ensure that those who died on September 11 did not die in vain. In the days and weeks ahead, let us continue to work together with humility to protect our people, guard our freedoms, and report to the world that America will never be defeated. Let us move forward as one Nation, one people, for the sake of every single person who believes in freedom and believes in civilization and believes in humanity. Let me end with the words of an old hymn that I love so much. When we face the unexplainable, when we face evil, many of us turn to God. And, as we did one year ago, we ask again today for God's help. As the hymn says, ``And He will raise you up on eagles wings, bear you on the breath of dawn, make you to shine like the sun, and hold you in the palm of His hand.'' May God shed His grace on this great and wonderful country and all of our people.

Mr. GEPHARDT

Mr. GEPHARDT. Mr. Vice President, Mr. Speaker, and my fellow colleagues of the United States Congress, today we speak of the unspeakable, we remember the unimaginable, and we reaffirm our utmost resolve to defend the birthright of this land and our gift outright to this world: Ideals of liberty and tolerance that will never die. Today, we say to the families who look to this September 11 and know that they will know the pain of their piercing loss all over again, we are with you as one, as the family of America. We pray that, for you, memory will bring hope as well as tears. We have faith that love out lasts life, and you prove it every day as you carry on the dream of a lost husband or a wife, for the child that was both of yours and, in the truest sense, always will be. We think of those last calls on cell phones from a doomed building or plane. Those last good-byes. Yet the life of a good person is like a wellspring that does not run dry. Nothing reminds us more powerfully of that than the rescuers of September 11, so many of them taken too, who rescued our national spirit and, amid the smoke and the darkness at noon, sent a flickering light that became a shining beacon for America. So we have wept together, we have prayed together, given to each other, and stood side by side since September 11 in common humanity and national purpose. The sorrow has been matched by strength. America is on a mission. Not retribution or revenge, not just to defeat terrorism, but to show once again that good can triumph over evil and freedom can overcome fanaticism, as we did in different forums in a global arena twice before in the past century. Some say that September 11, 2001, is another date that will live in infamy. Surely that is true, but it is also true that we have never known an assault like this, not just on our Armed Forces, but on our people. Not just on our buildings and our possessions, or even on the principles that we profess, but on the very foundation of this open, diverse, democratic society. We have grown accustomed, too accustomed, to war and slaughter in our world. But most always it was ``over there.'' One place it came before in the heartland was the homegrown terrorism that struck in Oklahoma City. Today, our caring and thoughts are there as well. And they are a half a world away with the young Americans who are on the front lines of freedom from fear. For all our differences, how remarkably one we are all today. From Ground Zero to a sacred field in Pennsylvania, to a shattered but now rebuilt wing of the Pentagon, and all across this broad land. On the fatal flights of September 11, courage and resistance knew no bounds of party or race or status. They included a young father, a conservative columnist, and a gay man. E Pluribus Unum. So while we discuss and debate the next decisions, on the fundamental issue let there be no doubt. In this great and faithful struggle there are no Republicans, there are no Democrats, there are only Americans. None of us, no matter how long we live or what else marks our time, will ever forget September 11. And all of us, in the name of those who were lost for a concept of liberty that must never be lost, and in the cause of civilization itself, are as determined as an earlier generation of Americans to gain the inevitable triumph, so help us God. (Applause.) Vice President CHENEY. The Chair now recognizes the Honorable Trent Lott, the Senator from Mississippi and the Republican Leader of the United States Senate. Senator LOTT. Mr. Vice President, Mr. Speaker, Members of the Congress, and distinguished guests, on behalf of the Senate and a united Congress, it is truly an honor to stand in this place in this city, New York City, today. We are here to remember and to continue to mourn those that lost their lives, those innocent men, women, and children that were killed in that horrible event, September 11, a year ago. We are here to show our continued appreciation for those that struggled so mightily to free and to save those that were trapped in the aftermath of the experience here in New York City and at the Pentagon. But we are also here to express our recommitment to the people of New York and Pennsylvania and Virginia that we are with you. We will continue our efforts to help you to rebuild physically and spiritually, and to recommit ourselves to do everything in our power to make sure that America is secure against this horrible event or anything like it ever happening again. Over the years, New York City has been called many things, from New Amsterdam to the Big Apple. Today, the Congress of the United States, Congressman Rangel, call it home. We are here, we are comfortable here. We are here to stand with the people in this city because it is symbolic of how we stand together all across America. We came here a year ago, the week after the infamous date. We expressed our commitment and we have been working every since to keep that commitment, and we will continue to do so. This is a special place, as has already been said, because the First Congress began the work here that we continue this day. The work of ordered liberty, preserving, expanding the freedoms that now, as then, are the inalienable right of every person. Two centuries ago, there were those who thought this was all nonsense. In their ignorance and arrogance, they called America a doomed folly. But history overtook them and their crowns and armies are part of the dustbin of history. There are those like them today who cannot see beyond the limits of their own hatred. It is so hard for us in America to even understand why there would be this hatred. They do not understand that in the unending struggle against tyranny, divine providence by whatever name we use is always on the side of freedom. When the First Congress was meeting here in New York in January, 1790, President Washington asked its Members for ``the cool and deliberate exertion of your patriotism, firmness and wisdom.'' As we face today's challenge to our country, we pledge to the people of New York just what we ask of them and all Americans: The cool and deliberate exertion of your patriotism, firmness, and wisdom. We have seen it in this city. We have seen it in America, and we are here to do our part in that effort. The duration of our present conflict and its eventual price may be in doubt, but there can be no doubt as to its outcome. From this city's day of horror, out of all the loss and sorrow, has come a strength. I have seen it all across America. A resolve. A determination which, from Manhattan, to Mississippi, now binds us together for the mighty work that lies ahead. Thank you very much. (Applause.) Vice President CHENEY. The Chair now recognizes the Honorable Tom Daschle, the Senator from South Dakota and Majority Leader of the United States Senate. Senator DASCHLE. Mr. Vice President, Mr. Speaker, distinguished visitors and my colleagues, the United States Congress has come here to commemorate a shattering experience. One that has transformed America. The poet Yeats, after a moment of violent upheaval in his own country, wrote: ``All is changed. Changed utterly. A terrible beauty is born.'' As we near the first anniversary of September 11 with profound sadness, our hearts ache for those who died and for their families and loved ones. At the same time, we are filled with an abiding sense of gratitude to the people who live and work in this great city, especially the courageous workers and rescuers, for the way they inspired and stunned a wounded Nation. In their countless acts of heroism and compassion, a terrible beauty was born. In an hour of horror and grief, they showed us how to go on. Here in New York, at the Pentagon, and in that lonely field in Pennsylvania, the wounds the terrorist inflicted were deep. But America's resolve was even deeper. Let history record that the terrorists failed. They sought to destroy America by attacking what they thought were our greatest strengths, but they did not understand the true strength of America is not steel, it is not concrete, it is our belief in the ideals enshrined in our Constitution and in our Bill of Rights. It is in our shared faith in liberty and our unwavering commitment to each other. So what happened on September 11 did not diminish our strength. It renewed it. We stand united today as proud citizens of the oldest and strongest democracy on earth. Our faith in that democracy and in our future is absolute and unshakable. Next Wednesday, September 11, an eternal flame will be lit in Battery Park. That flame will symbolize our determination never, ever to forget. We will never forget the heartbreaking loss. We will never forget the selfless heroism. We will never forget the terrible beauty that was born here one year ago. Thank you. (Applause.)

Mr. GEPHARDT

Mr. GEPHARDT. Mr. Speaker, August 29, 2002, was a sorrowful day for our community. St. Louis Police Officer Michael Barwick died that day when his police cruiser collided with another vehicle and caught fire. This fine young officer was performing his duty to protect and serve the citizens of St. Louis when the fatal crash occurred. Officer Barwick attained his lifelong dream of becoming a police officer just two years ago. He loved his work and was committed to helping people in trouble; this devotion was evident to all who knew and worked with him. He was 27 years old. Officer Barwick was not a police officer to become rich or to work easy hours. He worked long hours, in many dangerous situations, for a very modest salary. He joined the St. Louis Metropolitan Police Department out of a sense of duty to his community and his belief that he could make a difference. This belief was reflected in the way he conducted himself on and off the job. Mr. Speaker, all of us are affected by the loss of this good and decent man, and the entire St. Louis community grieves with his family. His bravery and dedication to others won't be soon forgotten, and we are grateful to have had him among us.

Mr. GEPHARDT

Mr. GEPHARDT. Mr. Speaker, I submit the attached document, which is the transcript of the corporate accountability hearing conducted by Members of the House of Representatives, for printing in the Congressional Record. Opening Statement by House Democratic Leader Hon. Richard A. Gephardt Mr. Gephardt. Thank you all for being here. If I could, I would like to make an opening statement, and then we will get to our first panel, with appreciation for all of our panelists for their time and effort to be here with us today for this important hearing. We are honored to have with us today some very talented and special guests, an all-star team of experts on the issue of corporate accountability and responsibility that has become one of the most important issues in our country. I think many of us are tired of the old left-right political debates because, to my mind, the issue before us is not about politics but about what's right for our country and how to restore people's trust and faith in our economic institutions. This is a discussion about enacting strong safeguards that will protect investors, protect consumers, and move every American forward with an agenda that gives everyone a chance to succeed. We need to apply our values to governing. Our values tell us that accountability and responsibility must be operating principles in our markets, especially for the corporations that form the bedrock of our capitalistic system. Sensible rules that enable our companies to function effectively will grow the economic pie for every American taxpayer and every American family. Too many times in the last 7 or 8 years the special interests and extremist voices that would like to get rid of almost all regulations have triumphed in the face of common sense and the sentiment of the majority of the American people. Too often these voices have had a real and, I would submit, destructive impact on our laws and our economic health. So today we are here to listen and to learn, not simply to what went wrong but, more importantly, to figure out how to make it right. Democrats in Congress have spent months seeking solutions to this crisis, and we are prepared to go to any part of this country to figure out what happened, why it happened, and the best way to fix the problem. This week, as you all know, the Senate unanimously passed-- and I'll say it again, unanimously passed, and that's a rare occasion--a crucial bill that would attack the current crisis of confidence. The Sarbanes bill would bring about structural changes in our auditing system, making sure that audits are objective and independent, while imposing stiff criminal penalties on bad actors and actresses. We in the House have been working for months to pass a strong initiative that would also protect people's pensions and restore investors' faith. We have offered a financial services bill, a criminal penalties bill, and an offshore tax havens bill as part of a much more comprehensive business Investors' and Employees' Bill of Rights. Unfortunately, the leadership in the House in the Republican Party--and, therefore, the leadership--has blocked these proposals. We have faith that these problems can still be fixed. We have the most ingenious entrepreneurs, the brightest minds leading our way to innovation. And we have the hardest working, most resilient, most resourceful people on the face of the Earth. And for that, we are all grateful. And today we pledge to continue to work together in order to do what's simply right for the people that we all represent. We thank our guests, and especially my brave colleagues in the Congress who every day speak up for the American people and who helped build this country into the greatest nation that's ever existed.

Mr. GEPHARDT

Mr. GEPHARDT. Mr. Speaker, earlier this evening I was unavoidably detained during the vote on House Concurrent Resolution 188, expressing the sense of Congress that the Government of the People's Republic of China should cease its persecution of Falun Gong practitioners. Had I been present for this vote, I would have voted ``aye.'' As enumerated repeatedly in U.S. Government and independent human rights reports, practitioners of Falun Gong have been subjected to numerous human rights abuses by the Chinese Government. These abuses have extended from intimidation and surveillance to torture and other cruel, inhumane, and degrading treatment against them and other prisoners of conscience. These practices must end. This resolution calls on the Chinese Government to release from detention all Falun Gong practitioners and put an end to the practices of torture and other cruel, inhumane, and degrading treatment against them. It also calls on the Chinese Government to abide by the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights by allowing Falun Gong practitioners to pursue their personal beliefs. Mr. Speaker, we must continue to remind the international community of the Chinese Government's systematic abuse of the human rights of Falun Gong practitioners and others, and to demand--in every possible forum--that the Chinese Government cease such activities. I therefore strongly support this resolution.

Mr. GEPHARDT

Mr. GEPHARDT. Mr. Speaker, it is regrettable that today the Republican leadership ignored an opportunity to resolve the issue of late-term abortion in an effective and constitutional way, moving forward yet again with a ban that does not include an exception to protect the health of the woman. The Supreme Court has spoken on this matter. Banning this procedure without such an exception is unconstitutional. Repeatedly on the Floor of this House an alternative that contains this crucial exception has been offered, and repeatedly I have voted for it. That a ban would be before us today without that exception can only mean that the Republican leadership wants a political issue more than an effective law. I would hope that any future consideration of this legislation would not suffer from such a flaw.

Mr. GEPHARDT

Mr. GEPHARDT. Mr. Chairman, I rise to urge Members to vote for the Slaughter-Dicks, amendment which will be offered later today. The arts are an integral part of our Nation's heritage and the arts represent the treasures of our Nation. They help children learn. Through arts education, millions of our children enter a world where they discover music, drama, dance, as well as the visual arts. And the arts are not only important for cultural enrichment in the education of our children. From coast to coast, the arts are economic engines in our Nation's communities. The arts contribute $134 billion a year to our economy, according to a recent study. And in my hometown of St. Louis, the arts contribute almost $500 million to the local economy and are a source of employment for thousands of people. If this amendment passes, funding for the arts and humanities would be increased by just $15 million. That is a modest increase, but the benefits are huge. I think it is time, once and for all, to end the assault on funding the arts that we have seen over the past years. I hope today we can cast a bipartisan decisive vote. I hope we will send a strong signal. I hope we will demonstrate that the Congress is committed to enriching our culture and strengthening our education in our economy. Jack Kennedy said in 1962 that one of the ``fascinating challenges of these days'' is ``to further the appreciation of culture among all the people, to increase respect for the creative individual, to widen participation by all the processes and fulfillment of art.'' Vote ``yes'' on this important amendment. Stand for the arts and stand for the future of our children and our families.

Mr. GEPHARDT

Mr. GEPHARDT. Mr. Speaker, I ask Members to vote ``yes'' on this motion to recommit and to vote ``no'' on the Republican plan. I guess I would like to start tonight's debate with a question: Why did you not allow us to have an alternative to this drug plan? A Democratic House gave Republicans an alternative in 1965 when we debated Medicare. We represent 49 percent of the American people. This is one of the most important issues that we will vote on in this Congress, yet we are not afforded the opportunity to have a clean vote on a clear alternative. Are you afraid? Do you think that too many of Republican Members would vote for our plan? This process tonight is not worthy of this House of Representatives. This is the people's House. Here the people must be heard. I am deeply disappointed that we were not afforded the opportunity for a clear alternative on this very, very important issue. This is an important issue to all the senior citizens of our country. The Greatest Generation that fought our wars, paid their taxes, raised their children, and made this country great, that Greatest Generation now is too often getting on buses and going to Canada or going to Mexico to get their prescription drugs at prices they can afford. They are making choices between food and taking their drugs. There are senior citizens tonight that are cutting their pills in half because they cannot afford to pay for a whole month's worth. And tonight, those people are only afforded a vote on a flawed, deficient, wrong plan. If we stack that plan up against what these people are asking for, it fails. It fails. In fact, I would say it is a fraud. I give you what Webster called a fraud: a deception, deliberately practiced to secure unfair or unlawful gain. A piece of trickery. A trick. The Republican plan has no set premium. They say it might be $35. We are told in States where they have done what the Republicans are doing it is $85. There is no defined benefit. Republicans are turning seniors over to the private insurance market. This is the same debate that we had in 1965. This is a replay of that debate. If this were 1965, we would not have dreamed of having a Medicare program without a prescription drug benefit. Prescription drugs are now the treatment for most maladies that people face. Why would we not just add this benefit to the Medicare program? Our plan that is in the motion to recommit is simple. It is Medicare: $100 deductible, $25 premium. The government pays 80 percent of the drug cost. The recipient pays 20 percent, and when they hit $2,000 out of pocket, the government picks it all up. This is what seniors are asking for. They are not asking to go into private insurance. They want a Medicare drug benefit, and they want all the seniors to be amassed to get leverage to get the price of prescription drugs down, down, down. In the end, I suspect many of you do not support Medicare. I suspect you still want to privatize it. Your plans for Social Security call for privatizing it. In 1965, Republicans predicted Medicare would lead to socialized medicine. One said, ``If we pass Medicare, one day we will be telling our children what it was like in America when people were free.'' Your majority leader has said Medicare is a program that I would have no part of in a free world. He said he deeply resented the fact that when he was 65 he would have to enroll in Medicare. So you have reverted to form. In the end, this Republican bill listens not to the people of this country. It listens to the pharmaceutical companies and to the insurance companies and is not good for the people's House of Representatives. It should not be passed. In closing, I would ask all of you to simply tonight think of the people you represent, people like my mother. She is 94 years old. She lives in St. Louis. Every time I go home, she asks me about what is going to happen with the cost of her drugs. She had a stroke about 5 years ago, and the doctor said she will probably never talk again; she will probably never be able to cook or to do household duties. She was able to get the drugs and she is back and she is talking. She is asking me every time I see her about what she is going to do about the cost of her drugs. She has glaucoma and she gets a little bitty bottle of drops that cost $100 a bottle and lasts for 2 weeks. She is lucky. She has got my brother and me, and we send her the money every month so that she can get her drugs. Think about the thousands of people in your district who are not as lucky as my mother. Think about them. Think about whether they can afford a premium more than $25. Think about whether they can put up with benefits ending in the middle of the year when they cannot get their needed drugs. Think about them when you are not getting the price of drugs down so that they can afford to buy the drugs. In 1965, this Congress took a historic step, and it passed the greatest program that this country has ever put together. It is the reason that people are living to 80 and 90 and 100 in this country with quality in their lives. We should honor that program tonight and expand it as it should have been many years ago. I am sure there were Members on that day or night in 1965 that voted against the Medicare program and regretted it through the rest of their career and their life. Do not regret your vote tonight. Stand for Medicare and stand for the American people that you represent.

Mr. GEPHARDT. I am in its current form, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. GEPHARDT. Mr. Speaker, I offer a motion to recommit.

Mr. GEPHARDT

Mr. GEPHARDT. Mr. Speaker, I rise to urge Members to vote for the motion to commit, which will be presented in a few moments, and if that motion to commit is not passed, I urge Members to vote against the bill. The power to budget and to pass economic plans carries with it the responsibility to, if it is necessary, raise debt ceilings to accommodate the budget, the economic plan that we are operating under. The economic plan we are operating under is one propounded by the President and the Republican majority in the House. That is their prerogative and that is their right. There was not real collaboration on that plan. There was no need for that collaboration. That also is their right. If that is the plan that is in place and that plan now leads to deficits and spending Social Security dollars against everything that we said together that we did not want to do because we passed the lockbox at least five times, then it seems to me it is incumbent upon the people who propose that plan to vote to increase the debt ceiling to accommodate the results that that plan has caused. I have said many times that I would vote tonight or anytime to raise the debt ceiling by $150 billion. I use that amount because I think it is sufficient to buy us a couple of more months' time to try to work out a bipartisan budget that will begin to move us back in the right direction, because I think that is what we ought to do. I have said to the President that we should have a negotiation, we should have a summit, we should have a meeting, a bipartisan meeting, to try to work out a new budget for our country. I know we cannot get everything we want, and I know that the other side cannot get everything they want; but we had a tragedy in this country on 9-11 that no one anticipated. My colleagues can bet that every family who lost somebody on 9-11 has had a budget conference around their dining room table to come up with a new budget, given the fact that many of them lost their breadwinner or winners on 9-11. Just as those families suffered tragedy on 9-11, the American families suffered a tragedy on 9-11; and as many of us argued when the budget was on the floor, we should take care of those contingencies if they happen. Well, if 9-11 is not a contingency that happened, I do not know what is. We are faced with a hole in security responsibilities. We are faced with fighting a war in many countries abroad. If that is not a new contingency, I do not know what is. As an American family, Democrats, Republican, Independents, whatever, we are all Americans tonight; and we ought to be sitting around a table in these next 2 months working out a new budget for America that does not lead us back into all these deficits and spending Social Security dollars that all of us together said we did not want to do. So in the name of common sense, I ask that we come together tonight. We could get 435 votes to pass $150 billion increase in the debt ceiling and move this country back into a budget that will be good for all Americans at war, fighting for our country, fighting against terrorism, and fighting for American values. I urge my friends on the other side of the aisle to vote for the motion to commit and let us get back to an American budget that is good for all the American people.

Mr. GEPHARDT

Mr. GEPHARDT. Mr. Speaker, I rise to urge Members to vote yes on the Matsui amendment. In our country today, we face a crisis of confidence in corporate responsibility and accountability. Last year we witnessed the biggest bankruptcy in history that caused devastating financial losses for thousands of innocent employees. A few weeks ago I heard from some of these employees when I met them in Houston. In a meeting filled with emotion, employees of Enron explained that their pensions had disappeared, their health coverage was gone, their careers had been destroyed. This week, I read our Nation's papers and magazine headlines with regard to the crisis of confidence in corporate accountability, headlines that all of us should find deeply disturbing. One of them said, Restoring Trust in Corporate America. That was Business Week. Another said, Corporate America, We Have a Crisis, in Fortune. Another was: ``Officials Got a Windfall Before Enron's Collapse.'' That was in The New York Times, which reported that about 100 executives and energy traders received more than $300 million in cash payments from the company in the year before the company's collapse. Make no mistake about it, this is not the behavior of all the corporations. In fact, I am happy to say that a majority, a great majority of corporations are law-abiding, responsible people serving their employees, their shareholders, and consumers effectively. But the United States Congress has a responsibility to enact safeguards that will ferret out the bad actors and actresses and hold those bad actors and actresses accountable. It is time for our House of Representatives to begin finally taking the steps to restore people's faith in the integrity of our corporations, the bedrock of our capitalistic system. We must set sound standards for the accounting industry. We need to protect people's pensions. Unfortunately, our friends on the other side of the aisle have failed to understand these needs. This year, despite all the scandal, despite all of the abuse, the Republican majority has blocked legislation that would have established these tough accounting industry standards, that would have imposed tough criminal penalties on corporate lawbreakers, that would have closed the unpatriotic Bermuda loophole to prevent corporations from going overseas to avoid paying taxes. Their continued opposition to sensible reforms, their continued allegiance to corporate special interests that have gone wrong strongly suggests that this majority is guilty of enabling corporate excesses that have done so much harm. Today, we, together, have an opportunity to follow the lead in restoring faith and trust in free markets. Today, our alternative to the Republican repeal of the sunset on pension provisions that passed last year seeks to make permanent almost all of the pension and IRA tax cuts. But unlike the Republican bill, our alternative seeks to close the loopholes that executives have used to give themselves sweetheart deals on their own pensions at employee expense. Our alternative prevents firms from deducting more than $1 million in executive compensation if it is obtained through manipulations of company pension funds. It enforces CEOs of companies that reincorporate overseas to avoid paying taxes to pay capital gains on their stock options, as other investors from Main Street are required to do. Earlier this year, Democrats sought to pass provisions attacking these problems. Republicans voted all of these measures down. So today we have another chance, a good chance, to do the right thing for capitalism, for well-run corporations, for Main Street Economic America. We have a responsibility to help restore confidence in our system and in our economy. So let us give investors, employees, and consumers the protections they deserve. Let us pass together the Democratic alternative, and let us meet our responsibility today and for the future of this great country.