Melissa Hart

Ms. HART

Ms. HART. Mr. Speaker, I would like to wish the membership of the Organization of Chinese Americans a healthy and happy New Year for the year 4702, the year of the Monkey. The New Year is a time for reflection and thanksgiving for the joys of life and loved ones and I am thankful for the richness that this organization brings to my region. Chinese Americans have made great contributions to Western Pennsylvania and to our Nation as a whole and I am very honored for this opportunity to wish them the best year yet in 4702. I encourage my colleagues in the House of Representatives to join with me in wishing the members of the Organization of Chinese Americans a very happy and prosperous New Year.

Ms. HART

Ms. HART. Mr. Speaker, I also thank the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Sensenbrenner), the gentleman from Louisiana (Mr. Tauzin), the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Dingell), and the general public, really, for helping us move this bill forward. I am pleased we were able to work out a deal on this legislation. It has taken some time, but the product is well worth it. The American public has been flooded with millions of pieces of unsolicited e-mail every day. This legislation will help us provide the teeth in the law to stop this. But it is the content of certain e-mails, particularly e-mails containing sexually explicit material which is especially problematic. I compliment the gentlewoman from New Mexico (Mrs. Wilson) for working together with us on language that is similar to the Pennsylvania law that I sponsored to help label and help us rid our computers of these sexually explicit e-mails. I am pleased this was put into the bill. We want our children to use the Internet and e-mail, but many parents fear what the children may see. Parents are stuck in the middle. They want their kids to use the educational tool of the Internet, they want them to be very capable of utilizing it, and it will help them in their schoolwork on one hand, but on the other when my Senator was sitting behind one of his children, in fact, he said to me, I could not believe what came up on the screen. It is important for us to make sure that we control it but we allow freedom of speech. I compliment my colleagues. I look forward to a spam-free e-mail.

Ms. HART

Ms. HART. Mr. Speaker, on rollcall No. 606 I was unavoidably detained. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yes.''

Ms. HART

Ms. HART. Mr. Speaker, I thank the chairman for yielding me time. I rise in support of this legislation. People across the country, including 100,000 women watching Lifetime Television, have signed a petition supporting the bill. My constituents, law enforcement, have supported this bill. There are a number of reasons. Nearly 12 years ago, a high school girl from the Pittsburgh area was raped and murdered shortly after she arrived in Fort Lauderdale for a vacation. For 12 years, that crime went unsolved. The family of that young girl was left not only with the loss of a daughter and sister, but also with the void of not knowing who committed the crime. Finally, a detective in Florida was able to match the DNA evidence to that of a convicted murderer on death row in Arkansas, and the mystery was solved. That Fort Lauderdale officer said of matching the DNA evidence, ``It is basically getting that needle in the haystack and making the haystack smaller.'' This is what H.R. 3214 accomplishes. It makes the haystack smaller. DNA evidence is not just effective in murder cases, it is an extremely valuable tool in sexual assault cases. A year ago, a man kidnapped and raped two women near Pittsburgh, but they could not identify him because the crimes occurred in the dark. As our district attorney noted, but for the work of the police and the coroner's division of laboratories, the man would never have been apprehended. Instead, because of DNA evidence, his crimes earned him a sentence of over 200 years in prison. While these are all positive cases, unfortunately, there is a backlog of DNA samples. Experts have determined that DNA evidence from over 180,000 rape crime scenes have been collected and never analyzed. Imagine those families, wondering, waiting and worrying. In addition, many labs do not have the technology to analyze these samples. The funding in this bill will provide grants to local governments to eliminate that backlog, improve technology used to collect and analyze that DNA evidence, and catch those criminals. Ultimately, this funding will help not only solve crimes, but it will make our communities safer. In addition, the bill will improve the accuracy of our judicial system for those who believe they may have been wrongfully convicted. Despite criticisms of opponents of this bill, it will not open the floodgates of litigation by prisoners claiming innocence. It will not remove the State's responsibility for prosecution. It will help them to accomplish their purpose, and that is our job here.

Ms. HART

Ms. HART. Mr. Speaker, I am privileged to have the opportunity to pay tribute to a leading Insurance Provider that serves Western Pennsylvania. October 24, 2003 marks the 100th anniversary of Travelers Property Casualty, a leading provider of a broad range of insurance products. Travelers Property Casualty, located in Pittsburgh since 1903, currently employs more than 225 individuals. Travelers provides a wide range of insurance products including workers compensation, integrated disability, property, liability specialty lines and broiler and machinery. The company is the third largest commercial lines insurer and has been rated the second largest writer of homeowners and auto insurance through independent agents. I applaud Travelers Property Casualty for their long-standing dedication to serving the people of Western Pennsylvania and all of their insurance needs. I ask all of my colleagues in the House of Representatives to join me in honoring this successful business for their 100 years of service.

Ms. HART

Ms. HART. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman from Arizona for giving me the opportunity to state my position on this issue. In fact, it is the position of a large number of people in the United States. I have heard positive reinforcement from my constituency. I stand in support of the supplemental and opposed to the amendment. $67 billion for our troops, $19 billion for reconstruction should be a grant. This is simply the right thing for us to do. This Congress voted to support the President and our military action in Iraq. The United States does as it usually does and took the lead in freeing the Iraqi people from a tyrannical dictator, and we have succeeded. The job is not complete. We cannot say we did half the job that we decided to do and then ask someone else to pay us to finish the job. We removed Iraq from the list of countries supporting terrorism. We are currently in a struggle to rebuild that country, to help the good people of Iraq to take back their country. Our military, together with our State Department, together with dedicated Iraqis are working together to defeat the remnants of Hussein's regime and to move toward a better future. Already, schools have opened, businesses are opening. People are going back to their lives. They have a hopeful future. They are making great progress. Last Saturday in Butler County, Pennsylvania, I was the speaker at a dinner. I spoke of this issue. I spoke of the controversy that we have regarding whether or not that $19 billion should be a loan. I explained that it is our responsibility as we have taken the lead, and we here in Congress are leaders. It is our responsibility to talk to our constituents, to discuss with them why we went in, how we have succeeded and what we need to do to finish the job. This $19 billion is what we need to do that. I knew that the talk shows and some of my colleagues were opposed to this. Yet, I stood in front of this group and asked them what they thought. They support this. This is the right thing to do. Sure they are concerned, but their feedback was positive. This is an investment in peace. This is an investment in the defeat of terror. This is an investment in the independence of a too-long terrorized nation and a very strong and proud people. And it is an investment in the return of our troops, and that is key. This is part of the whole project. If we offer this only as a loan, then we are failing our own military. I stand here in support of the grant. We should help Iraq to rebuild as we have in history, as the United States has chosen to be involved and support freedom. We need to stand strong and support the grant for the rebuilding of Iraq.

Ms. HART

Ms. HART. Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank my chairman, the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Oxley); my subcommittee chairman, the gentleman from Alabama (Mr. Bachus); my colleague, the gentleman from Tennessee (Mr. Ford) and fellow sponsor of this legislation in the House; as well as the ranking member, the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Frank), for working together so well to get this legislation completed. Check Clearing for the 21st Century or, as we call it, Check 21, holds the promise of a much more efficient check collection system by removing legal barriers to full utilization of new technology. It is very simple. It is a win for consumers; it is a win for the financial services industry. It will empower banks to help prevent fraud and empower consumers with more control over their accounts. It also empowers them with more efficiency in availability of their funds. Thanks also to the staff who worked very well with the Senate regarding the conference committee during the period of time we needed to iron out a few issues with the Senate. I also want to thank the chairman in the Senate, Senator Shelby, for working together with us so well. Basically, our current legal framework has not kept up with technological advances. It has constrained the efforts of many banks to use innovations like digital check imaging, to improve check processing efficiency, providing improved services to customers, and substantial reductions in transportation and other check processing costs. It is important to implement these new technologies that are made in the field of payments to provide customers with those benefits I mentioned earlier, expedited access to capital and credit while ensuring, at the same time, they are more protected from fraud. The legislation permits banks, credit unions, and all financial institutions to truncate checks. That allows them to process and clear these checks electronically, without moving the paper check through the clearinghouses and having them flown across the country. The bill allows us to use something called a substitute check. And if you look at what a substitute check looks like, it might look awfully familiar to you. It actually looks just like a check. That substitute check contains all of the information that is on a check. In fact, that check will not be a substitute check unless it contains all of that information. It permits banks then to move this information just as it would move a canceled check; but, obviously, it will be much more efficient because planes do not have to fly the substitute checks across the country. This substitute check would be the legal equivalent of the original check. It would include all the information, as I said, contained in the original check, the imaging on the front, the imaging on the back, including the signature, and then especially the machine-readable numbers that are normally at the bottom of your check. They can be processed just like original checks. The bank would not need to invest in any new technology or otherwise change its current check processing system unless it chooses to do so. As was mentioned earlier, consumers will benefit in multiple ways. But the most important, I believe, is the efficiency of the system. Consumer protections are important as well. Consumers can keep that canceled check in their own records. It will also be kept at easy access in the financial institution, the same check. You do not have to chase down one canceled check. So this is a win, really, for everyone involved. I am pleased to have been the sponsor of the bill in the House. I am pleased to have worked with everyone as part of this process. As we learned during the time where all the planes were grounded after September 11, it was very important for us to move forward because our financial system was pretty much stopped in its tracks when planes could not fly these canceled checks around the country. It is important for us to move forward. I am pleased we have the technology, and I am pleased that this Congress has recognized our responsibility to make this system much more efficient.

Ms. HART

Ms. HART. Mr. Speaker, I am honored to have the opportunity to pay tribute to one of America's premier communities on the occasion of its 150th anniversary. I am proud to serve as Sewickley's Representative in the U.S. House and wish its citizens the best on this important milestone in its history. Sewickley, rich in both history and tradition, was chosen by many area leaders as a desirable place to live and boasts fine architecture and landscapes. I ask all of my colleagues in the House of Representatives to join me in congratulating one of the nation's finest communities on its 150th birthday.

Ms. HART

Ms. HART. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Wisconsin for the opportunity to rise in support of this conference report. No fewer than 77 percent of the general public supports a ban on this horrible procedure known as partial-birth abortion. 77 percent. No fewer than 25 States have passed laws banning this procedure. Since 1995, this House has passed a ban on this procedure in every session, the 104th, the 105th, the 106th, the 107th; and now the 108th Congresses support this ban. Our opponents tell us that this law would be unconstitutional. It is clear that the committee has addressed the concerns of the Stenberg court. It is clear that this is a gruesome procedure which should never be allowed in a civilized society. Today is the day we will finally complete our task. We are going to vote on the side of civilization and compassion. I wonder where we would be headed if we would continue to be a society that allowed this type of gruesome procedure, but fortunately today we are going to win, and a lot of innocent babies are going to win. A lot of innocent women are going to win. We are getting the point across and certainly have gotten it across to the general public that partial-birth abortion crosses the line. Partial-birth abortion nears infanticide, as former Senator and the late Daniel Patrick Moynihan had stated. I am proud to be a supporter of this bill. I am proud that this House has passed it consecutively and patiently redrawn it to make sure that it comports with the Constitution. I urge my colleagues to support this conference report. I commend the chairman of the Subcommittee on the Constitution and the chairman of the Committee on the Judiciary for supporting this. I urge a positive vote on the conference report.

Ms. HART

Ms. HART. Mr. Speaker, I am honored to have the opportunity to pay tribute to an outstanding health care facility located in the district I represent in the U.S. House of Representatives. 2003 marks the 40th anniversary of McGuire Memorial, an outstanding provider of care for the multiply handicapped. McGuire was founded in 1962 by the Catholic Diocese of Pittsburgh through a proposal by the Felician Sisters. I have personally visited McGuire and, as such, am familiar with the level of care and compassion that this remarkable facility offers its patients. I was inspired by my visit to McGuire and am pleased at the growth that the facility has experienced over the years. I ask my colleagues in the House of Representatives to join me in wishing continued success to McGuire Memorial on the celebration of its 40th Anniversary.

Ms. HART

Ms. HART. Mr. Speaker, I am honored to have the opportunity to pay tribute to a pioneer in the emergency medical services field which serves Pennsylvania's Fourth Congressional District. September 26, 2003 marks the 25th anniversary of Lifeflight, a service providing emergency helicopter and critical care ground transportation services for critically ill and injured patients. Lifeflight has been awarded some of its industry's most sought-after awards. This year it was named EMS Provider of the Year by the Pennsylvania Emergency Health Services Council. Over the past two years, members of Lifeflight's flight crew have received Pennsylvania Pre-Hospital RN of the Year Awards. Furthermore, in 1999, Lifeflight's medical director was named Pennsylvania Medical Director of the Year. The times we live in pose never-before-conceived-of threats to our citizens. It is reassuring to know that my constituents are served by this award-winning team of first-responders who are committed to their patients and their community. I ask all of my colleagues in the House of Representatives to join me in thanking the brave men and women of Lifeflight for their dedication, their ability to work under pressure, and their effectiveness in carrying out their critical mission.

Ms. HART

Ms. HART. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the FACT Act, the Fair and Accurate Credit Transactions Act. Fortunately, today we appear to have bipartisan support of the Act, and it is for a clear reason, our credit system in the United States is the envy of the world. Our uniform national standards have helped to make the United States a world leader, and have continued to spur on our economy, even in times that have been difficult in the last year or so. The bill makes these national standards that have been in effect permanent. This is important to ensure continuity in our credit system, and also to maintain continued access to the best credit markets in the world. This is especially important because two-thirds of our economy depends very heavily on consumer spending. Consumers will not spend without access to credit, and to get access to credit, consumers and lenders need consistent, uniform standards for credit reports. Broader access is the result. National and worldwide access is also the result. According to the Federal Reserve Board, in fact, since the Fair Credit Reporting Act was enacted, the overall percentage of families with general purpose credit cards increased from 16 to 73 percent and the largest increase was among lower-income families. Homeownership levels have also grown approximately 10 percent, again with low income and minority families receiving the largest gains. According to some estimates, these improvements have saved consumers nearly $100 billion annually. Many of my colleagues have mentioned the benefits also regarding fighting identity theft. This bill allows each consumer to get a copy of their credit report annually, and that will help to avoid a lot of the problems we have been having with ID theft and use of credit by those not authorized. It helps the consumer to identify charges that are not theirs, it helps to identify and clear them from the credit report keeping the consumers' credit clear. Every year a consumer would have access to a free copy of that credit report, see their credit scores which help them understand whether they are going to be able to get access to a mortgage or new credit. Finally, I ask my colleagues to support this Act because it will create continuity, it will continue the dynamic American system, and it will help us keep access to safe credit and flexibility for the American consumer.

Ms. HART

Ms. HART. Mr. Speaker, on September 13th, an outstanding institution in the congressional district I represent in the House of Representatives will celebrate a remarkable landmark. The Carnegie Free Library of Beaver Falls, PA, will hold its 100th anniversary celebration on that date. I am honored to pay tribute to this library that has provided knowledge and enjoyment to citizens both young and old in the Beaver area for a century. I ask my colleagues in the House of Representatives to join me in wishing the Carnegie Free Library of Beaver Falls a happy one hundredth birthday and to thank all of those who have served in its important mission to provide reference, knowledge, and entertainment to the Beaver Falls community over the past one hundred years.

Ms. HART

Ms. HART. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the requisite number of words. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to this amendment and in support of the $10 million that is being appropriated to the D.C. public schools. The reason that this money is being given to the system is so that we can improve the system. School choice has been shown to improve an opportunity for a child. Each child who has been suffering through the terrible school system of Washington, D.C., is really imprisoned in that District. This money will give these children an opportunity to learn, and I believe that is what schools are for. Unfortunately, the D.C. public schools have been in crisis, and it is unfair to force children who live in D.C. to be subjected to a terrible education or a lack of an education. Statistics show that a very high percentage of students drop out. They also show that the D.C. schools are ranked lower than every other State in reading or every State in reading and math scores. Students score on the average of 220 points below the national average on the SATs. Seventy-six percent of D.C.'s fourth graders perform below grade level in math and only 10 percent read proficiently by the fourth grade. These problems persist, despite spending more than nearly every school District in the Nation, at least $11,000 per pupil. It was stated earlier that we were promoting parochial self-interest if we promote school choice in D.C. If parochial self-interest is parents wanting their children to get a real education, then I am all for that, and this is what this will do. It will allow these parents to find a better way to educate their children. If their child is currently in the D.C. schools, their opportunities are really not limitless the way they should be. School choice offers them more opportunity. It will also offer the children who stay in the public schools more opportunity, and it really is dismaying to me that the opponents of school choice do not see this. Problems in many inner city school districts, such as D.C., are caused largely because of overcrowding too many children in a classroom. For example, school choice will take a number of children out of the public school system. This is true. They will go to schools that are now empty or at least in need of more students. That will allow smaller classes in the D.C. schools. It will encourage the D.C. schools to improve, in fact give them more opportunity to do so, with fewer students and the same amount of money. So it will relieve overcrowding in the D.C. public schools. It will help the children because the children will have an opportunity to go to a school where they will learn, where they will feel safe in many cases where they may not now. It is unfair for us, and I think completely irresponsible for us, to waste the learning year of the children who happen to be in these schools now and say, well, we are going to fix the public schools, but if it takes 6 to 12 years to fix them, what happens to those children who are still in the public schools? Nothing good. We need to give them an opportunity to learn now, elsewhere if that is where they need to go, in a place that is more suitable for their education, while we work on and fix the D.C. public schools. I support this appropriation. I support school choice for D.C., and I hope that we will oppose this amendment.

Ms. HART

Ms. HART. Mr. Speaker, on September 12th, I will have the honor of paying tribute to some of my district's most vital heroes in a ceremony commemorating Medic Rescue's 25 years of service. The professionals of Medic Rescue, based in Bridgewater, PA provided life-sustaining medical services and emergency transport to more than 40,000 citizens in my district last year. In addition to commending their commitment to service, the staff of Medic Rescue should also be praised for their efforts, through various community service programs, to reach out to children, seniors, and the disabled. The times we live in pose never-before-conceived-of threats to our citizens. It is reassuring to know that my constituents can benefit from this enduring team of first-responders who have a commitment to their patients and their community. I ask all of my colleagues in the House of Representatives to join me in thanking these brave men and women for their professionalism, their ability to work under pressure, and their effectiveness in carrying out their critical mission.

Ms. HART

Ms. HART. Mr. Speaker, today it is my honor to commend the 50th anniversary of the American Political Science Association's Congressional Fellowship Program. This program provides academic political scientists, journalists, and members of the executive branch invaluable learning experiences about how Congress works from the inside. In turn, the fellows bring their unique professional expertise and fresh perspectives to Congressional offices. When I first arrived in Congress back in 2001, an APSA fellow, Amy Black, worked in my office and helped me research and write legislation. Amy's work was a great benefit to our office, and her time in my office gave her new insights for her teaching and academic research. I hope other Members will avail themselves of this excellent opportunity to benefit from the many ways APSA fellows can contribute to their offices. I congratulate APSA for the past half a century of providing an innovative learning experience, and look forward to many more decades of this important cooperative effort.

Ms. HART

Ms. HART. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to have my name removed as a cosponsor of H.R. 1472.

Ms. HART

Ms. HART. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of a Medicare reform that will actually help our seniors. The Republican House, along with the Senate, have worked on plans that will help provide prescription drug coverage to seniors. I have spent the last year in my district in western Pennsylvania in different forums with groups telling me what they need. What we know in Pennsylvania is that prescription drug assistance is necessary. We have been giving it to low-income seniors for years. However, middle income seniors, those who one would think are fairly well off, are finding it very difficult to pay for these prescription drugs. What I learned is those forums is we need to help them. Our plan does this. It makes sure that catastrophic expenses for prescription drugs are going to be covered for these senior citizens. We also improve Medicare, making sure that it provides proper access to home health care, so that families can stay together in their later years. Mr. Speaker, our goal is to make sure that the quality of life for our seniors is better, that they can have access to prescription drugs which they can pay for. That is our goal. That is what we are going to give in our plan.

Ms. HART

Ms. HART. Mr. Speaker, today I have the honor of saluting a dedicated leader from Pittsburgh, PA who has spent the past year doing some remarkable work to help people living with diabetes. Michael A. Weiss has had a long, successful and diverse career benefiting numerous community and charitable organizations, and it all started following his graduation from our alma mater, Washington and Jefferson College in Washington, PA. He graduated with honors from W&J in 1970, and went on to earn his law degree from Vanderbilt University in 1973. He currently serves as a leader of my former law firm, the DKW Law Group's Corporate Practice in downtown Pittsburgh. Mike was a mentor to me, and the perfect professional. He is the kind of attorney who takes good cases, returns calls and gives good advice to avoid litigation. Today, however, I want to pay tribute to his service outside his profession, and on an issue very special to Mike, my family and countless others. For the past year, Mike Weiss has served as Chairman of the National Board of Directors at the American Diabetes Association. The ADA is the nation's leading nonprofit health organization providing diabetes research, information and advocacy. The mission of the organization is to prevent and cure diabetes and to improve the lives of all people affected by diabetes. It has had many successes, making living with diabetes less constraining and providing info on healthier lifestyles, possibly preventing the onset of Type II. Within his role as Chairman, Mike Weiss has spearheaded the expansion of the ADA's advocacy programs. He is responsible for broadening the reach of ADA and increasing its partnerships with other groups and associations working towards the same goals. For his work with the ADA, Mike Weiss will be awarded the 2003 Charles Best Award for Outstanding Contributions and Service to the Cause of Diabetes. I wish Mike continued success with the organization and his other generous work, and I commend him on his superior service to his neighbors, community and all those who work toward an end of diabetes.

Ms. HART

Ms. HART. Mr. Chairman, I thank the chairman of the Committee on the Judiciary, the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Sensenbrenner), for his work on this issue. I am a lawyer. I am for class action reform. These lawsuits continue to victimize the victims. Even The Washington Post, as the gentleman from Texas referred to, said the clients get token payments: 33-cent checks, boxes of Cheerios. In one case, the clients even ended up having to pay. The lawyers get enormous fees. This is not justice; it is an extortion racket that only Congress can fix. That is why we are here today. We are here to fix it. The intent of the class action system is to facilitate large groups who have similar harm caused to them to efficiently recover damages. Recover damages. That is appropriate damages, not 33-cent checks. We are here to change that so that appropriate damages will be recovered. How are we going to do that? We are going to change the system. We are going to make sure that not one small court in one State makes a decision for an entire Nation of victims. We are going to put it in the Federal court where it should be. Recent studies of the class action system show there is a 1,315 percent increase in class action suits filed in State courts. Listen closely: 1,315 percent increase in class action suits filed in State courts. Why? Because some of those State courts have been very friendly to that small group of trial lawyers who take on these suits and get 33 cents for their clients and large, million-dollar settlements for themselves. Here is another number: those attorneys who search for local friendly courts like Madison County, Illinois. Madison County, Illinois, has seen a 1,850 percent increase in class action filings that certify their classes and they will rubber-stamp these ridiculous, useless settlements. This abuse has three larger consequences. First, as I said, the plaintiffs are denied real relief, and we have heard many examples, while the attorneys pocket huge rewards. It is time for us to take responsibility and make sure that clients get proper settlements. Support this reform.

Ms. HART

Ms. HART. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of H.R. 1474. A lot of people are not familiar with the legislation. We have been calling it ``check truncation.'' The official title is Check Clearing for the 21st Century Act. Our truncated name is Check 21. This legislation holds the promise of a more efficient check collection system by removing legal barriers to the full utilization of new technologies. It is a win for consumers. It is a win for the financial services industry. It will empower banks to help prevent fraud. It will empower consumers to have more control over their accounts and more efficiency in the transfer of their funds. Our current check system's legal framework has not kept up with technological advances and has constrained the efforts of many banks to use innovations like digital check imaging to improve check processing efficiency, providing improved service to customers and substantial reductions in transportation and other check processing costs. This digital check imaging looks like a check. It simply is a copy that is transferable digitally, transferable more quickly, than a paper check. It also can be copied and utilized just like a canceled check. It is important to implement the technological advances made in the field of payment systems so that we provide customers with expedited access to capital, to credit, yet they will be ensured that they are protected from fraud. This legislation permits banks, credit unions and other financial institutions to truncate checks, just simply not have to transport that canceled check. It allows them to process and clear checks electronically, without moving those paper checks to clearinghouses and returning the original cancelled checks to customers. The problem with the current system is that over and over these checks are processed, and it takes a lot of time. It requires physical delivery of the check from the institution of deposit through an intermediary, such as clearinghouses or the Federal Reserve Bank, to the bank of the customer who wrote the check before it can be paid. Each step of this inefficient process relies on the physical transportation of that check, resulting in billions of checks being driven or flown across the country every day. The problem with this legal framework was highlighted in the days following the September 11 attacks when the Nation's planes were grounded, and the flow of checks transported by air came to a complete stop. During that time, the Federal Reserve's daily check float grew from its normal few hundred million dollars to over $47 billion. Under current law, banks, credit unions, and other financial institutions are unable to truncate checks. They are only able to truncate checks if they have special arrangements with other institutions that are part of the transaction. There are over 15,000 banks, thrifts, and credit unions, and they are all negotiating separate agreements among themselves, so it is impossible to follow and keep in touch with all of those, even for the most diligent financial institution. The way this bill would work, a Pennsylvania bank would no longer have to ship a check drawn on a California bank all the way across the country in order for it to clear, for it to be processed, and for the actual payment of the check. This is done by creating a new negotiable instrument called a substitute check. Again, the substitute check would permit banks to truncate the original check; and it would process the information electronically, immediately, and print and deliver the substitute checks to banks and bank customers. So the customer who wishes to retain that record, such as a canceled check, would have something that looks just like it. This shows exactly what that substitute check looks like. It looks familiar, does it not? It is just an identical copy of a canceled check. This is the legal equivalent of the original check under our legislation. It would include all the information contained on the original check and the image of the front and back of the original check, as well as the machine-readable numbers which appear on the bottom of the check. And because the substitute check can be processed just like an original check, a bank would not need to invest in any new technology or otherwise change its current check processing operation, unless the bank chooses to update its technology. Consumers benefit, and this is the most important part of the legislation. Customers maintain the same protections that they have with this law as they have with their original check. Reducing processing costs will result in efficiency gains and expedited services for customers. Accessing images of checks will take a fraction of the time that it currently takes to access microfilm or the physical archives or the canceled check itself. Customers will no longer have to wait for a copy of the check to be obtained from a central processing facility or the microfilm library. Institutions that have already implemented this check imaging technology offer their customers a wide variety of ways to access these images, including in person at branches as they would today, or through the mail but also over the Internet and in image statements and advanced ATMs. So, for the customer, this is just a wonderful boost. Customers will also benefit from the availability of check imaging to help combat fraud and the problems associated with bad checks. The ability to access check images on the Internet helps consumers to quickly and conveniently verify their transactions. They can identify potential errors. They can detect fraudulent transactions sooner, rather than waiting until the end of the month when they receive their traditional statement. Identifying errors and potential fraud as soon as possible helps everyone. It helps the banks minimize customer inconvenience and cost. It helps control potential losses. It helps give law enforcement an advantage in tracking down the perpetrators of fraud. Promoting this image technology can help speed processing and encourage banks to provide new and improved products and services to consumers. Financial institutions will be able to establish branches or ATMs in remote locations to further service their customers, provide more cost-effective service, provide customers with later deposit and cut-off times, and provide printed copies of checks deposited at ATMs on ATM receipts. Such changes could result in a check being credited a day earlier and interest accruing a day earlier on interest-bearing accounts. Obviously, that will make customers quite happy. In conclusion, this is a win-win for everyone. It is a win for the industry, but it is especially a win for consumers. I encourage my colleagues to support H.R. 1474 and significantly increase the efficiency of the Nation's check clearing process.

Ms. HART. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.

Ms. HART. Mr. Chairman, this amendment is actually very brief. It is one line. It is very simple; and it is, as far as I can tell, completely noncontroversial. The amendment simply adds another name to this legislation to the title of the bill. It will be, by this amendment, also referred to as the Check 21 Act. Everyone who has been familiar with this bill has commonly referred to it as Check-21, and this amendment simply brings clarity to that issue. I would urge my colleagues to support the amendment. Also, I would like to add to the thanks for the cooperation on a bipartisan basis for the bill itself as well. I would like to thank the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Oxley), the gentleman from Alabama (Mr. Bachus), the ranking member as well, and also my fellow sponsors, the gentleman from Tennessee (Mr. Ford) and the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Ferguson). Everyone's cooperated well and explained this issue; but those who have not been mentioned today, those in the private sector who will be affected by this legislation have also been extremely supportive and very cooperative in working out differences that they had during the process of moving this legislation forward, and I wish to recognize them as well. When we as the sponsors had asked them to sit down and iron some issues out, they did so and they did so very efficiently. Mr. Chairman, I simply offer my amendment and ask for its approval, very simply adding the name Check 21 Act.

Ms. HART

Ms. HART. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me the time. I am sitting through this debate because I am here to talk about the check truncation legislation which we are going to debate shortly. However, my life experience and history of working as a State senator in Pennsylvania and chairing the Committee on Taxation compels me to rise regarding some of the comments made by the other side. I believe that the general public knows what a tax credit is. However, it is clear to me that the other side of the aisle does not. One must pay taxes, income taxes, in order to receive a tax credit; and in fact, in our tax bill that we passed and fortunately was signed last week, there is an increase in the child tax credit. The general public has asked us for that, and it has been provided. Those hard-working parents who have been paying income taxes do receive credit, as the gentleman stated, and additional moneys for the raising of their children. Claims have been made that that is not the case, but that is just not true. A tax credit is only paid to those who pay income taxes, and that is exactly what we do. Also regarding that issue, it is very important for us to note also that since I have joined this body about 2\1/2\ years ago, the Republican majority has consistently exempted people who are very low income from paying income taxes. It is important to note that because that is clearly something also that those on the other side of the aisle either are not aware of or have ignored. Our goal has been to encourage families to keep working, even though they may just recently have left the welfare rolls, even though they may have had a difficulty with a layoff and have taken maybe a more entry-level-related job. Our goal is to make sure that those who work and work hard to support their families have a lower burden. The goal is to encourage them to keep working and be promoted and make more money and eventually become taxpayers. Once they become income tax payers, they then will qualify for things like tax credits because, like I said earlier, one must pay an income tax in order to earn a tax credit. That is the way it works. I would also like to note a couple of other things, and I represent a district that is very diverse economically and, unfortunately, has seen more unemployment in the last couple of months. Folks I talk to tell me this, they are very pleased that we have made a very good effort to extend the unemployment which is very important for those who respect working and are not receiving an income. Our Republican majority has done that several times. We have extended unemployment twice now. We intend to keep watching the economy, try to make it move forward as we have done with this tax bill, which will help employers hire more people and reduce the unemployment rolls. While those good people are still unemployed, we are trying to make sure that they have enough money, and it is extended in our unemployment extension so they continue to support their families until they can find that job. Finally, I just need to note that the partisan rancor in this body is getting a bit silly. It is disappointing to me as a person who has come to Washington with a lot of positive ideas. I am going to continue to work with those who want to work with us and not create kind of their own version of what passed into law. I am going to continue to work for a positive economy, for growth, for opportunity and for more employment because I know people across the United States need it.

Ms. HART

Ms. HART. Mr. Speaker, on rollcall No. 237 I was unavoidably detained. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yea.''