Kenny Hulshof

Mr. HULSHOF

Mr. HULSHOF. Our colleague from Arkansas further pointed out that this family in the portrait that he had, that they paid the payroll taxes and certainly paid taxes toward Medicare and somehow that that ennobled the family to receive these income tax credits. But the fact is that paying Medicare taxes and paying the payroll taxes entitles that family to reap the benefits of Medicare down the road or to reap the benefits of Social Security. So the fact that that family is paying those payroll taxes and Medicare taxes, those benefits will come and inure to that family at the appropriate time. But because we have limited resources and tax relief, we are trying to give tax relief to those Americans who most need it.

Mr. HULSHOF. Mr. Speaker, the letters that you have with you and I think probably each of us have received from our individual constituencies typical letters of that; this is America, the backbone of our economy, small business, family farms who are crying out for relief. I had a unique experience today, running out of the office for our last vote and I bumped into a very nice woman, not a constituent but from Indiana, who had come 600 miles simply because we were getting ready to vote on this tax package tomorrow. She hand-delivered to me a letter. She is hand-delivering letters to almost all the Representatives and Senators here in Washington. And she visited with me a little bit about her plight. She retired as a court reporter to take care of her mother who needed some care, retired from her business and then her mother unfortunately passed away, I think in September of 1996, and then suddenly she had to face the reality of coughing up additional moneys to pay this heavy tax burden, this very punitive tax. The letter that she gave me, and I would love to read it, but in the interest of time, I see my friend from Montana here as well, this sentence sums up everything when it comes to the Federal death tax. Quote, the time has come when death should not be a taxable event. Amen. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from Montana [Mr. Hill].

Mr. HULSHOF. I especially appreciate the comment the gentleman made earlier because again waiting for the special order to begin, barrage after barrage from our friends on the other side, particularly our Democratic colleague from Arkansas who talked about the earned income tax credit and how it was that the family that he mentioned, he had a nice portrait, a beautiful portrait of this family that was struggling, but yet who bore no tax liability because the earned income tax credit eliminated any tax liability. In other words, that family in Arkansas did not have to pay taxes to the Federal Government. And because we do have limited resources, this targeted tax relief is going to those people that have tax burdens. I think the gentleman pointed that out a few moments ago.

Mr. HULSHOF. I think the gentleman has enunciated very eloquently what it is we stand for and why it is that we sought office and what we are doing to accomplish the goals that many of us stood for and campaigned on. It is especially poignant, I think, when we look just a couple of years ago when we had a President who, with the liberals in control of this body, passed a tax hike. There was a discussion about ever-expanding government bureaucracy, universal health care, and then suddenly the stark contrast, that we are returning power to the people, getting it out of this city and giving it back to the Main Streets and the local chambers of commerce and civic clubs all across this great land. I agree with the gentleman that this Fourth of July will certainly be a day to celebrate.

Mr. HULSHOF. Mr. Speaker, reclaiming my time, I thank the gentleman from Texas [Mr. Brady], and especially for his remarks and his work here in this body. As we were awaiting this special order, I know there were at least half a dozen colleagues on the other side of the aisle who, again, were trying to turn this whole debate into class warfare. The facts are simple. Mark Twain, his birth place is Hannibal, MO, which is in my district, I think Mark Twain once said that ``There are lies. There are damn lies. And then there are statistics.'' Rather than just give some vague percentages with bar charts, what I have got here, Mr. Speaker, is not on a percentage but the actual amount of money, of tax relief that is going back to certain income classes. As my colleagues can see, if we will consider for those under $20,000 up to $75,000, clearly almost $90 billion in tax relief; 76 percent of this tax relief package is going to those who make less than $75,000 of annual income. In fact, if you want to take a look at the amount of relief going to those under $20,000, over $5.5 billion. And those at the upper end of over $200,000 adjusted gross income get $1.4 billion. Clearly, we are trying to focus and target the relief to those on the lower end of the scale. Now our friends on the other side talk about how it is that we are helping the wealthy. Well, it happens that part of this package is a capital gains relief targeted specifically to lower-income people. For instance, those that are in the 15-percent income tax bracket will see capital gains cut down to 10 percent. This will help 5 million Americans. Two million Americans are senior citizens, like Don and Carnetta in my district. Don worked for 30 years for Wal-Mart and accumulated stock over the 30 years he worked for Wal- Mart; and he cannot afford to pay right now, under current law, the tax hit he is going to get if he sold those capital assets. We are giving him and his wife some relief, and they are not wealthy by any stretch of the imagination. We have a $500-per-child tax credit. Heritage Foundation ran the numbers on this, and it happens that in the Ninth District of Missouri alone there are 89,493 children whose parents are going to benefit with this phased-in $500-per-child tax credit, nearly 90,000 kids whose parents are going to get to keep more of their money. That is almost $40 million that is going to stay in the Ninth District, that is going to stay in the pockets of those constituent parents that are trying to do best for their kids. How is that, I ask anybody, how is that, by allowing that relief to go to those whose incomes are under $75,000, how is that a tax break for the wealthy? I submit to my colleagues it is not. I am happy to yield to the gentleman from South Dakota [Mr. Thune].

Mr. HULSHOF. Reclaiming my time, I appreciate the work of the gentleman on that home office deduction and the other tax measures that he visited about. Our friend, the gentleman from Texas [Mr. Brady], has been apparently waiting in the well. I will be happy to yield to him.

Mr. HULSHOF. Mr. Speaker, reclaiming my time, I am glad the gentleman from Montana [Mr. Hill] mentioned home office deduction. A couple months ago I was able to participate in a field hearing that was actually conducted by the gentleman from Missouri [Mr. Talent], who is the chairman of the Committee on Small Business. This was a field hearing in St. Charles, Missouri. We had testimony at that field hearing from four women just regarding the home office deduction and why it was so essential that we give them some help. Right now, the IRS takes a very dim view of those who take a deduction that have offices in their homes, and I think this tax package tomorrow will help those women or those families and just restore some fundamental fairness. For instance, if the gentleman had an office that he rented in his next door neighbor's home and he had a telephone line and fax machine and had some other things, and he paid rent in his next door neighbor's home for an office in that home, he could take that as a fully deductible expense. But if he had those same things in his home, the telephone line, the fax machine, he cannot in most instances take that deduction. Of course, many women who want to rejoin the work force, their families have grown or their kids are going to school, they like to have the flexibility to stay home and yet be able to rejoin the work force, or start businesses and run them from their homes. So I think this tax package is very friendly to those individuals, men and women, that seek to use their homes and put offices in their homes.

Mr. HULSHOF. Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the gentleman's comments. Certainly we tried to, in this package, not only help families, which we will have some time to visit with here in a minute, I see my friend from Texas is here as well. The farm community is getting much-needed relief in tomorrow's tax package. We talked about the AMT provisions. We fought very hard to make sure that the pro-ethanol tax incentives, they are intact in tomorrow's package. There will be no anti-ethanol provision. That was quite a battle we had in our Committee on Ways and Means. But fortunately, the package tomorrow that we have will not have any anti-ethanol provisions. I know we talked about the death taxes, which will help family farms. I was fortunate to have a farm co-op bill that will actually help the sale of processing facilities to farmer-owned co-ops, so that is in this tax package as well. So agriculture is getting some help in tomorrow's relief bill.

Mr. HULSHOF. Mr. Speaker, I appreciate my friend from Montana and his eloquent words, particularly with the AMT provision as it was penalizing farmers, the IRS, as you pointed out, changing rules in the middle of the game. I know that this actually occurred in a case up in Washington State where a farm family was audited. And because the IRS decided that if you defer your contract payments, in other words, when you take your grain to market and you get the check at the grain elevator, normally that is when income is derived according to the cash basis accounting system; that the IRS decided, no, not when you deliver your grain to market but when you enter into the contract in the preceding calendar year, that is when that deferred payment is subject to income.

Mr. HULSHOF

Mr. HULSHOF. Mr. Speaker, as Members know, this is National Small Business Week. I want to take time out to recognize the thousands of men and women back home in Missouri's Ninth Congressional District who run and own small businesses. I cannot think of a more worthy group to honor. Small business, as is often said, is the backbone of our economy, accounting for 99.7 percent of the Nation's employers and for 47 percent of all sales in this country. In fact, in the 12 calendar months between December 1994 and December 1995, employment in small business-dominated industries increased 2.7 percent, creating 1.25 billion new jobs, or 75 percent of the total new jobs in the economy. There are many small businesses back in Missouri's Ninth Congressional District that deserve praise, but tonight I want to highlight one of them, the Twainland Cheesecake Co. and Cafe in Hannibal, MO, owned by Lynn Carr. Twainland Cheesecake Co. and Cafe employes 14 women in a cheesecake-making operation where they make 110 types of cheesecakes. I am sorry, Mr. Speaker, I have not brought samples for the House. But I would extend a personal invitation for Members to come to Hannibal, MO to try some of Ms. Carr's famous turtle cheesecake. Nonetheless, Lynn Carr is an American success story. At age 29, Lynn Carr could not read. In the mid-eighties, for a period of time Lynn Carr was homeless. Lynn Carr spent most of her adult life either on welfare or in low-paying jobs. She continued to believe in the American dream. She prayed for a better life. She kept in her heart a ray of hope, a sliver of self-esteem. Eventually Lynn learned how to read and earned a GED, the equivalent of a high school diploma. She got a loan, she put her talents to work, and the rest is history in the making. She started a cheesecake business in Hannibal, MO's historic downtown. This is a success story, Mr. Speaker, but there is more. Lynn Carr has decided to launch her own private welfare-to-work program, giving other women a chance to succeed just like she did. Using her words, she says, ``Such as I have been given, I want to give back to the community.'' Lynn knows that some people will never break out of the welfare cycle. ``But,'' she adds, ``then you have people who were like myself who are just down on their luck and need a hand up instead of a handout.'' She went on to say, ``If we could just save one or two families and change their lives for the better, then it is all worth it.'' To further give back to the community, Lynn Carr plans to open a larger factory employing up to 50 women. She wants to give jobs to unemployed and undereducated women living in poverty. She hopes to have a learning center and a day-care center on site. Women will enter the program by working in the day-care center, where they can learn parenting and nutritional skills. After several weeks, the women will then divide their time between the cheesecake factory and the learning center. In order to qualify for work, a woman would be required to get a GED certificate. While doing this, Lynn Carr hopes to inspire others with motivational programs. Mr. Speaker, motivation is not a problem once you get the chance to meet Lynn Carr. Lynn Carr is a living example of how an individual can lift themselves up one rung of the ladder at a time, become a successful business person, and then, to make the picture complete, invest in other individuals living in the community. Congratulations are in order for Lynn Carr and the thousands of other men and women who are responsible for the thriving small businesses in Missouri's Ninth Congressional District and across this great country.

Mr. HULSHOF

Mr. HULSHOF. Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the gentlewoman's comments. We sometimes do fall into the trap of talking about numbers, and certainly in the Kentucky legislature probably rarely did the gentlewoman even use the term ``billions of dollars'' and yet we toss those terms around here in Washington without really recognizing just what is involved when we are talking about these numerical values. I think the gentlewoman summed it up very well and put it in very human terms, especially having come from the strong family tradition that she has and we appreciate her work with this. The gentlewoman mentioned, Mr. Speaker, this bipartisanship. I think it is interesting to note that yesterday the newly elected Members on both sides of the aisle, freshmen, Republicans and Democrat freshmen, actually came together and we had a press event to announce our support for what had been hammered out in these negotiations by the administration as well as congressional leaders. Quite frankly, many of us, regardless of party, in the months leading up to November of 1996, we campaigned, Republicans and Democrats alike, campaigned on this single issue. In fact, I recall and I was reminded by my staff that shortly after the election as we were talking about what we were going to focus on in this Congress, this 105th Congress, I made the statement that if all we did in this Congress was to pass a plan that would balance the budget, that we could fold our tents and go home and we could declare this Congress a success. We have begun that step in that direction, and yesterday I think the strong support by not only the freshmen Republican Members but freshmen Democratic Members who joined us, joined us in this debate and joined us in this vote and in this effort, even as some more prominent Members of this body were making front page headlines, I think there is a difference between looking to the next election and then looking toward the next generation, and I believe we have focused on the next generation. I see my friend from Wisconsin, who actually was here a newly elected Member in the last Congress. I would yield to the gentleman. How is it that we have been able to move in the direction that we have from the last Congress, when we had the government shutting down, into a bipartisan plan that garnered 333 votes?

Mr. HULSHOF. I see, Mr. Speaker, our time is just about to elapse. House Concurrent Resolution 84 will never become a household phrase, does not fall trippingly off the tongue, but that is the resolution that passed early this morning, about 3:30 this morning, by a 333 vote to 99 margin. This is a plan that will balance our Federal budget. It is going to restore economic freedom and opportunities for all Americans. To sum up what we have talked about, Mr. Speaker, this agreement saves and protects Medicare for the next decade which insures that older Americans will continue to have access to quality health care. Family farms and family businesses will finally have relief from the very punitive Federal inheritance tax. The forthcoming budget also calls for a reduction on the tax and savings and investment, otherwise known as capital gains which will create additional economic growth as we have discussed. There will be education initiatives for families who are wanting to put kids through school, additional funds available for Pell grants and moneys, much needed moneys, some $9 billion more for roads, for bridges and for infrastructure. Those are additional moneys, $8 billion over and above what the administration requested. This is a win-win budget. You know there was a lot of passionate debate, and I am honored the debate went well into the evening last night and early this morning. In fact this morning I have been answering some questions today because there were several substitute amendments and some have asked me why did you not support this version or that substitute amendment or that particular one; why did you support this one? And it was difficult for me to describe a day that happened a couple of weeks ago where we had had a very contentious day in this House, it had really been a tough day, debate had really become somewhat partisan, and I choose, Mr. Speaker, rather than going through the tunnel and walking through the maze back to my office over in Longworth, I decided on that day to walk out the front door out into the sunshine. It was a beautiful spring day; the clouds, not a cloud in the sky, a beautiful crisp day here in Washington, DC, and as I burst out the front doors of this House out into the sunshine, at the bottom of the steps of this Capitol there were about 35 or 40 high school students all dressed in their school colors, and their choir director facing them, and they were singing a four part harmony medley of patriotic songs. And in that instance, in that instant moment, suddenly the divisive debate melted away, and I thought of that moment, Mr. Speaker, last night, as we left the Chamber about 3:30 in the morning, because what we accomplished here last night was for those students and students and men and women all across this country just like them. This is truly a historic day for them and for all Americans.

Mr. HULSHOF. Mr. Speaker, I think this is a point worth visiting about. You know, the economic pundits, some of the political pundits have really in the last weeks, you know, have had a heyday with poking holes in and pointing out some parts, perhaps, of the agreement that they do not choose to support. Some economists talk about or mention the fact that our economy, granted, has been very strong for a period of time but that it is living on borrowed time, that if you look back in history that surely there is, you know, perhaps a downturn ahead. But I think the gentleman is dead on with this point, that looking back at history, whether it is a modest cut in the capital gains tax rate, and we do not know what that is going to be or how extensive that is going to be, but I know even through the campaign and even beyond since being sworn in as a Member of this body people back in the Ninth Congressional District of Missouri have talked about holding on to capital assets. I have got a good friend, a gentleman who is in his mid sixties who worked a lifetime, his career, for Wal-Mart and accumulated through that company stock that he now cannot dispose of because he cannot take the hit that the capital gains tax rate would put on him and his family because they are really at a time their kids are grown and they are out of a house. But they are really trying to make it through retirement and trying to plan efficiently, and he by no means considers himself to be a wealthy American, and yet when you listen to these, you know, the pundits; you know they talk about tax breaks for the wealthy and this demagoguery, and I think the gentleman has a good point, and I yield back to him.

Mr. HULSHOF. I appreciate the gentleman's words. I think very eloquently stated. I yield to the gentleman from Colorado.

Mr. HULSHOF. Mr. Speaker, I think the gentleman makes an excellent point that oftentimes these taxes are in the form of fees that are actually hidden in some forms. I had a radio townhall meeting that was focused on Tax Day. We were just talking about all different types of tax issues. A gentleman made a point, he said, I am puzzled because I hear you in Washington talking on the floor of the House and in other ways that we are paying more in taxes than we do for food, clothing, and shelter combined. He had just figured out his individual income tax form. He said, ``I'm only paying 21 percent. I don't understand how it is that you can make this claim.'' The point was as we tried to explain to him was that many of these taxes are actually hidden and we do not write out a check as we do to Uncle Sam on April 15. For instance, this morning many of us who grabbed our first cup of coffee, we paid a tax. When we drove to work this morning, we paid a gas tax. Of course, we pay income taxes on our salaries. For those of us fortunate enough to pursue the American dream and to be able to own a home, we are going to pay property tax, not to mention the payroll taxes and workers compensation taxes and fees and then, as the gentleman mentioned earlier, when we die, there is the Government with its hand out wanting a death tax. That is the large picture of all of these different fees and taxes that the Government has very cleverly put on us as a burden and how it is that we end up paying this burden that we are trying to provide relief for. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from South Dakota who was also debating very vigorously well into the morning.

Mr. HULSHOF. Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the gentleman joining us on this day as we continue to wrap up and talk about what I think is probably going to be looked back upon as one of the most important positive steps that we have made, certainly in this Congress. I think the gentleman from Georgia [Mr. Kingston] makes a good point. I am privileged to serve on the Committee on Ways and Means, which, among other areas of jurisdiction, tax relief is one of the things that we will be dealing with. And I was engaged in a dialog with a Member on the other side, another member of the Committee on Ways and Means, who was talking about how much that a certain item was going to cost Washington in revenue. And my response, perhaps because as a wide-eyed new Member, but my response was, well, Washington's loss is the American family's gain. I think that this plan does include much needed relief, as the gentleman has pointed out.

Mr. HULSHOF. Well, just as Mr. Armstrong uttered those words that are etched in history, ``one small step for man and one giant leap for mankind,'' I am hopeful that what we accomplished early this morning as far as this bipartisan agreement will be at least a step toward another historic milestone. I would be happy to yield to the gentleman from Georgia [Mr. Kingston].

Mr. HULSHOF. If the gentleman would yield, I think the point is significant that 1969 was an amazing year. That was the year that the Mets won the series. It was the year that Neil Armstrong first walked on the surface of the Moon. And it was the last time that the Federal Government passed on to the American people a balanced budget.

Mr. HULSHOF. If the gentleman from Wisconsin [Mr. Neumann] would yield, before returning here to the Nation's Capital, as we had this debate yesterday, I had the privilege to stop by one of the schools in my district, Ashland School, and I spoke with a ninth grade class. It was their Government class. We were talking about issues, and I was really trying to put it in terms that they could understand. They were asking what are we going to be addressing this week. I told them I thought it was going to be quite historic because I believe we were going to pass a budget resolution with a lot of support from the other side as well as from our side that would finally get us on the path that unfortunately we had gotten off of in the past couple of decades and trying to boil that down in terms that they could understand. These were 14- and 15-year-olds and some 16-year-olds not yet old enough to vote but some of them starting to get their cars. So we started to put it in real terms. I mentioned to them that, if we took the Federal debt, this big number, and if we divided it up by every man, every woman, every child, every ninth-grader across this country, that each one would owe us or have to pay somewhere in the neighborhood of about $20,000. And suddenly their eyes popped wide open because we started talking about some of the things that they could actually purchase, or some of them that were beginning to work and trying to get some money to purchase a car that suddenly this was a very real figure to them. So they wanted me to come here and say fix this problem. I think the gentleman from Wisconsin [Mr. Neumann] has talked about, I think, the plan to do that. I see that my friend, the gentleman from Colorado [Mr. Bob Schaffer] is here, who also has been a tireless worker in this effort. I would be happy to yield to my colleague.

Mr. HULSHOF. Mr. Speaker, the newly elected Republican Members of this body have faithfully and dutifully come to the floor each week to talk about positive solutions to some of the Nation's problems. We have done this since February and we have talked about ideas to renew American communities, ways to reignite the era of big citizenship, even as we dismantle the era of big government. We have talked about ways that the Federal Government can be a partner rather than a parent. I think that the gentleman from Wisconsin, we would be happy to make him an honorary Member of the freshman class for this special order, but what we want to focus on is exactly what the gentleman from Wisconsin began with. It is true, Mr. Speaker, that some of us here in this Chamber are a bit bleary eyed from a lengthy day, and I see staff rolling their eyes, I think they share in that feeling, but what I want to do is make an announcement. The American people, Mr. Speaker, have gotten their money's worth. They got their money's worth first of all yesterday, in that we focused as a body on I think the single most important issue facing this country. We had a debate that began yesterday that went well past midnight. It was a debate that remained focused on the issues at hand. It was a professional debate, one that much civility surrounded that debate. We debated well into the early morning hours and for those individuals across the country, unfortunately, who will invariably find fault or choose to find fault with this institution, I think the American people got their money's worth yesterday and it was a testament to the positives of this great institution. But far more important than that, Mr. Speaker, the American people got their money's worth in a substantive way. They got their money's worth in this bipartisan agreement in which 333 individual Members from across this great land resoundingly endorsed. This bipartisan agreement is going to help restore economic freedom and opportunities for all Americans. That is what we would like to focus on for the remainder of this special order. I am joined by some of my colleagues, and I would be happy to yield to my friend from Kentucky, [Mrs. Northup].

Mr. HULSHOF

Mr. HULSHOF. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor a group of great and honorable Americans. On Monday, April 28, the Veterans of Foreign Wars Post 280 in Columbia, Missouri, will pay tribute to the 53d anniversary of the World War II Exercise Tiger operation, in which more than 750 Americans made the ultimate sacrifice. Few Americans are aware of the circumstances surrounding the Exercise Tiger operation. What began as a top-secret military operation ended in a horrible moment frozen in time. In December 1943, the U.S. Army began conducting a number of training exercises in preparation for the Normandy invasion. These exercises concentrated on a long stretch of beach at Slapton Sands in Devon, England. This unspoiled beach of coarse gravel greatly resembled Omaha Beach, and it consequently made for an ideal simulation of what would be the D-day invasion. Soldiers engaging in these maneuvers were under constant threat of attack, however, due to the many German E-boats patrolling the English Channel. One such exercise was utilized to prepare United States and British forces and was given the code name Exercise Tiger. These training exercises were conducted from April 22 to 30, 1944. The troops and equipment who participated in this maneuver embarked on the same ships and for the most part from the same ports from which they would later leave for France. In the early morning hours of April 28, 1944, the convoy was maneuvering in Lyme Bay. Eight landing ship tanks and their lone British escort were en route to the landing area. Suddenly, in the pitch black night, nine German Navy E-boats patrolling the English Channel struck quickly and without warning. The presence of enemy boats was discovered only when the U.S.S. LST-507 was torpedoed. The ship burst into flames and survivors abandoned ship. Minutes later, the LST- 531 was torpedoed and sank in 6 minutes. As the convoy returned fire, the U.S.S. LST-289 was also torpedoed, but was able to reach port. The surprise German attack did not, however, stop Exercise Tiger. Landing operations resumed the next day, on April 29, 1944. This is a credit to the tenacity and determination of the soldiers and sailors involved in Exercise Tiger. The D-day invasion of Normandy occurred as planned. However, casualty information and the details surrounding Exercise Tiger were not released until after the Normandy invasion in an attempt to keep the Germans from learning about the impending attack. I believe, Mr. Speaker, it is time we recognize these brave men. Of the 4,000 man force, nearly a quarter were missing or dead. Official Department of Defense records confirm 749 dead, at least 441 Army and 198 Navy casualties, although facts suggest the numbers could be greater. Mr. Speaker, it is finally time that we acknowledge the indispensable role that members of Exercise Tiger played in preparing for the D-day invasion and in making it a success. To that end, I am proud to acknowledge VFW Post 280 as the first organization in the State of Missouri to commemorate the men of the historic battle of Exercise Tiger. After 53 years these great Americans deserve to be properly honored by those who have benefited so much from their sacrifices. Congressional Resolution Recognizing the Heroic Efforts and Sacrifices of the American Servicemen Who Took Part in Exercise Tiger and their Contributions Toward the Success of the Historic D-Day Invasion During World War II Whereas the D-Day invasion of Normandy on June 6, 1944, was one of the most heroic battles of World War II and a critical turning point leading to Allied victory; Whereas during the Exercise Tiger training mission for D- Day, members of the operation were exposed to great danger by carrying out this treacherous exercise in the English Channel during a period of increased German torpedo boat patrols; Whereas on April 28, 1944, soldiers and sailors of the Exercise Tiger mission were unexpectedly attacked by 9 German Torpedo boats off the coast of Slapton Sands, England; Whereas 749 American soldiers were killed in the attack; Whereas the heroic efforts of these soldiers have not been sufficiently recognized in American history; Whereas the United States Congress has not provided adequate recognition to sailors and soldiers who participated in Exercise Tiger; and Whereas April 28, 1997 will be the 53rd anniversary of the tragedy of Exercise Tiger: Now, therefore, be it Resolved, that the American Servicemen who took part in Exercise Tiger be recognized for their contributions towards the success of the historic D-Day invasion during World War II, preserving the virtues of freedom and democracy.

Mr. HULSHOF

Mr. HULSHOF. Mr. Speaker, I always appreciate the gentleman from Colorado gracing us with his presence. I did not see any photographs tonight. I was waiting for the family portraits.

Mr. HULSHOF. Mr. Speaker, the gentleman mentioned a good point. He started talking about statistics and what unfortunately we had to look forward to. In fact, I know that some who say that crime is not that much of a problem and that the statistics say that violent crime is going down, and they talk about government programs having worked, and yet why is it that none of us at least who work in this city, why do we not feel safe when we walk down the street? You mentioned another good point about the violent nature of the offenses being committed by younger and younger offenders. I have had a chance, again in my career as a prosecutor, I have had occasion in the last couple of years to visit with some of the older criminals in the prisons who are actually serving substantial sentences and visiting with them about why they are there and trying to find some solutions. One of the things that rang out was that these men and some women with extensive criminal resumes were most fearful of the youthful offenders who were just now being sentenced that they were having to be incarcerated with, that these were the ones that had a callous disregard for the difference between right and wrong. It was just extraordinary to hear these very grizzled criminals that expressed some concern and fear about the youthful offenders that they were having to share cells with. I know, as the gentleman has worked on the subcommittee, in the old days in, 1950's and 1960's, when our juvenile laws were first crafted and created across the country, a truancy was the most violent or aberrant behavior that we had to deal with. Now rape and murders and assaults and all other types of violent offenses. I know in the State of Missouri we have been very proactive, that we have held accountable those youthful offenders that commit adult crimes and holding them accountable as adults, while at the same time, as I hear folks argue on the other side of it, we are not throwing away the key on youthful offenders, but there are ways to reach out to those that have not had discipline in their lives, like boot camps or institutional type settings that provide them training and skills that they have not had. You mentioned some of these volunteer organizations. I think the list goes on and on, things like even scouting, Boy Scouts and Girl Scouts or 4-H, Big Brothers and Big Sisters, which provide adult mentors for adolescents. I think this is a problem that really hopefully the American people realize is not a governmental problem with governmental solutions but really does require all of us to take a little bit of a load and some of the responsibility. I thank the gentleman. I see my good friend from Kansas, my neighboring State, is also now in the well. I yield to the gentleman from Kansas [Mr. Snowbarger].

Mr. HULSHOF. I appreciate that. I notice the gentleman is wearing a particular pin on his lapel. Would he mind sharing with us what that signifies?

Mr. HULSHOF. If I could prevail upon the gentleman a little further, I appreciate his comments, and I know before joining this body that he was a leader in the Kansas legislature for a number of years. What did the State of Kansas do either on crime victim legislation or perhaps dealing with juvenile offenders.