Nancy Johnson

Mrs. JOHNSON of Connecticut

Mrs. JOHNSON of Connecticut. I visited a seniors' center in Oakville, which is a part of Watertown in my district. A couple got up and said, ``Our income now is $18,000 a year. Our drug bills are $16,000 a year.'' This couple has used their IRA savings, they are working on everything else, and their drug costs will force them into poverty and into dependence on Medicaid. What good will that do us? Then the taxpayers will be picking up not only the cost of their medications but also the cost of their support. It was really sad to see the sorrow in their eyes of this sort of inevitable march toward poverty, just because they needed prescription drugs. This bill that we are addressing, the gentleman is right, it is voluntary; and it does help the neediest the most, because the neediest get their premiums paid and their copayments paid as well, and for that first $1,000 people will get an 80 percent subsidy and only have to pay 20 percent, and that is off a discounted price. This bill will drive costs down for seniors right off the bat almost 30 percent, and it will do it by just simply bringing the power of all the seniors of America to the bargaining table to bargain down those prices. They are the only group in the whole country that are not at the bargaining table. Every employer and employee is at the bargaining table, and they get a cut rate price. Only the seniors in our great country get no discounts on drugs, and this bill will put that discount in place right away while we are working on getting the subsidy in place in addition, which will take a little bit longer. So I will tell the gentleman, when you ask those questions of seniors, there is no doubt, there can be no doubt in your mind, that this is not a burden that seniors can bear; and it is particularly not a burden that elderly, the widowed, divorced, single elderly can bear, because their incomes are really on average $15,000 or less. So I thank the gentleman for bringing this to the attention of the American people tonight. It is such an important issue, it is the most important thing we could accomplish in this Congress, and I believe we are going to have an excellent bill that will keep doctors out there serving our seniors, that will give seniors the help they need to buy prescription drugs and manage chronic illness, and in general will make advances on every front in offering seniors higher-quality health care, prescription drug coverage, more choices of plans that are better suited to their needs. And because it is going to be such a good bill, I think the other body is going to have to move and the President will be able to sign a bill before we adjourn this session of Congress. That is my fondest hope. That is the only thing I am going to work for. If we all put as much effort in as the gentleman and I will, I know we are going to be able to accomplish this.

Mrs. JOHNSON of Connecticut. Well, it is very, very important, and it is ironic that all the seniors of America, 40 million, have not been at the bargaining table to use their volume power to drive prices down on something as expensive and as critical to their lives as prescription drugs. But there is another question I get asked a lot by my seniors, because a lot of seniors have some drug coverage provided by their former employers. They say to me, Will this drive my employer to drop his plan? I say to them that this is the only hope that your employer will keep his plan, because as prescription drugs get more and more expensive, the burden of retiree health plans on employers grows rapidly. Ultimately they begin to say, well, you will have to do a copayment, we will cut coverage here and there. That is a real threat to senior health. But if we do this prescription drug bill, then those employers will know that if your drug costs get over a certain amount, then the government will take the whole amount, and in fact below that will provide a generous subsidy for $2,000 worth. Then they will know they just have a small, what we call a ``donut hole'' to insure, and even in that hole seniors will get that deep discount of 25 to 30 percent. So employers will be encouraged to stay in the business of providing employee health plans for retired employees, rather than to leave it. Without this prescription drug bill, I fear employers will begin dropping their retiree health plans rapidly. So this is a real big plus for those who have employer-provided retiree health plans; and, boy, I will tell you, we cannot get this done soon enough.

Mrs. JOHNSON of Connecticut

Mrs. JOHNSON of Connecticut. Mr. Speaker, I thank the chairman for yielding me time. Mr. Speaker, in my brief time, I want to direct myself to the requirements in this bill. First of all, the real work requirement is almost unchanged from current law. Under current law a person must work 20 hours a week. Under this bill they must work 24 hours a week. That is three 8-hour days. What is really changed in this bill is the opportunity requirement. And let us not miss this. In this bill you are required to plan how you are going to use the other 16 hours of the normal 40-hour workweek to create your own future. If you have substance abuse problems, part of that plan can be to deal with substance abuse. If you have mental health problems, part of that plan can be to deal with your mental health problems. If you have educational deficits, part of that plan can be to deal with your educational deficit. You have the whole 3 months, even a semester, to start out on your educational issues without any work requirement, even the 3 days a week, and, after that, you have Tuesdays and Thursdays, 2 days a week, to continue to pursue your degree. You do not have that under current law, and most low income working parents do not have that today. Only women coming off of welfare will have the opportunity, and that is why I call it the opportunity requirement, to plan for the additional 16 hours, working with the State, in such a way that they create for themselves the educational base from which they can develop their careers. I would point out that in this bill there are employment achievement bonuses. Those will go to States that create career paths for their people; that help people coming off welfare get into minimum wage jobs, but then help them move up through education and through performance and through good recommendations to higher paid jobs. So the vision in this bill for women is about hope and opportunity, planning one's own individual course of action, so that at the end of your time you not only will be in the workforce, but you will be earning a good living to support your child. Make no mistake about it: The other bill has no vision for women on welfare now and no vision for our future. The waiver provision in this bill is the only hope of us breaking out of both a committee structure and a series of funding streams that were set 50 years ago. Fifty years ago. How many times have we had hearings that said that? And what did the workforce investment bill do? It block granted job training money so people could benefit more. We need for States to integrate their systems so we treat people holistically. You have a problem; yes, you need a job, your children may need special assistance, you may need a special kind of food stamp help. We need to move States toward a more holistic approach, a more creative and visionary approach of how to help people in need in America.

Mrs. JOHNSON of Connecticut. Mr. Speaker, I want to make it absolutely clear that the opportunity bill is the underlying bill, and I strongly oppose this proposed substitute because it will truncate opportunity for women in our country and undercut the accomplishments in reducing poverty among children and helping women realize their potential that the current program has initiated.

Mrs. JOHNSON of Connecticut

Mrs. JOHNSON of Connecticut. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Georgia, but I would remind him in those days when speed mattered more than height, I was quite okay. Mr. Speaker, I rise with my colleagues from Connecticut to pay tribute to a truly great team. These young women have played now, four of them, for 4 years for UConn, and it is not just the top team that is so impressive, it is all the way down through the bench that this team is truly a model for all young women across the Nation. First of all, let me remind Members that on Sunday, March 31, they defeated Oklahoma University to win the NCAA tournament with a perfect record of 39 wins to zero losses. I would also like to offer special congratulations to the head coach, Geno Auriemma, who won his third national title, and all the players this season, including the departing seniors, who have had a most remarkable 4 years. Geno is a remarkable coach, and I think this team is, as his previous teams were, evidence not only of his skill and leadership, but their character and intelligence. I rise today because these young women are not just champions in the basketball world, as important as that is. They are not only skilled individual basketball players, but they are outstanding team players, and it is that that their coach, Geno, has taught them: How to work together, how to help the other guy, how to make sure that each brings out the very best in the rest of the team, because success is never the consequence of any one individual player's skill, as in life success is never the consequence of one individual human being's actions, but always of the teamwork and interaction among free, capable, and skilled people. But these young women are not just skilled athletes and great team members. They are, in fact, fine students. They do extremely well in their courses, and they are women of integrity and character. Their concern for one another, the way they treat one another, the respect for one another, their honesty, their integrity, and their moral character has been an inspiration to the young women of our State and across the Nation, as well as their skill and teamwork. I salute them here tonight on the floor of the House, and I join my colleagues from Connecticut and the people across our great State in saluting this women's basketball team for their enormous victory on Sunday, March 31.

Mrs. JOHNSON of Connecticut

Mrs. JOHNSON of Connecticut. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to acknowledge the achievements of Mr. Michael Burr of Thomaston, Connecticut. Mr. Burr has been selected by The Thomaston Rotary Club as its Distinguished Citizen of the Year for 2002. Mr. Speaker, as an airline pilot with American Airlines, Mr. Burr organized AAmericans United Flag Across America, a tribute to the victims of the September 11th terrorist attacks. Beginning on October 11th, at Boston's Logan Airport, airline employees ran 3,800 miles across the country, carrying an American flag. Their run followed the planned flight paths of American Airlines Flight 11 and United Airlines Flight 175. Nearly 4,000 runners took part in this remembrance. Proceeds from AAmericans United Flag Across America have gone toward charities helping victims and families of the September 11th attacks. Mr. Speaker, Michael Burr's tireless efforts on behalf of the AAmericans United Flag Across America were crucial to making this remarkable tribute and fund-raiser a reality. Michael Burr exemplifies the American ideals of freedom, democracy, tolerance and charity toward others. It is people like him who make our Nation the most peaceful and prosperous in the history of mankind. His dedication to honoring the memory of September 11th was extraordinary. I am proud to share a Congressional District with him, and thank him for his charitable works and efforts on behalf of the victims of September 11th.

Mrs. JOHNSON of Connecticut

Mrs. JOHNSON of Connecticut. Mr. Speaker, I rise to pay tribute to the outstanding accomplishments of the University of Connecticut Women's Basketball Team, who on Sunday March 31st defeated the Oklahoma Sooners to win the NCAA tournament. They finished the season with a perfect record of 39-0. I would like to offer special congratulations to Head Coach Geno Auriemma who won his third national title, and to Seniors Sue Bird, Swin Cash, Asjha Jones, and Tamika Williams who have had a most remarkable four years. Mr. Speaker, these extraordinary young women do not need me to tell them that they are champions, or that their accomplishments are appreciated. Surely all the sold-out games, the sea of blue and white that filled the Alamo dome during the Final Four and the 150,000 fans who turned out for the team's victory parade made that clear. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to point out that although they are young adults themselves the outstanding achievements of the this team offers a fine example to our nation's young people. I applaud them for all of their achievements both on and off the court.

Mrs. JOHNSON of Connecticut

Mrs. JOHNSON of Connecticut. Mr. Speaker, I rise to pay tribute to the Central Connecticut State University (CCSU) men's basketball team for their accomplishment this season. The CCSU Blue Devils defeated Quinnipiac College by a score of 78-71 to win their conference, improve their record to 27 wins and 4 losses and more importantly secure an invitation to the NCAA tournament for the second time in 3 years. As the buzzer sounded the capacity crowd of 3,556 erupted in celebration of our hometown Blue Devils continuing their nation-leading winning streak to 19 games. Mr. Speaker, to watch the students storm the court, and to hear Head Coach Howie Dickenman, himself a CCSU graduate, say ``This was an event tonight, an event that the whole city rallied around'' is to understand what March Madness is all about. I am proud to be a resident of the city of New Britain, home of the 2002 Northeast Conference regular season and conference tournament champions. I hope my colleagues will join me in congratulating this exemplary group of student-athletes, their coaches, parents, classmates, and others who supported and cheered them on this season. Mr. Speaker, their exceptional play this season is an inspiration to all of us. Congratulations to the Blue Devils, and best of luck in the Big Dance. To steal a phrase from Dick Vitale and Bristol Connecticut's own ESPN, CCSU you are ``awesome with a capital A baby!''

Mrs. JOHNSON of Connecticut

Mrs. JOHNSON of Connecticut. Mr. Speaker, on the first of this year, a 5.4 percent across-the-board Medicare payment cut went into effect for doctors caring for seniors. Under the present payment system, further deep cuts are in store for the future. In some areas of the country doctors are no longer accepting new Medicare patients because payments no longer fairly recognize the changing health care needs of today's seniors nor the increasingly complex and difficult environment doctors must work under. With malpractice insurance skyrocketing, nursing costs rising, diagnostic and treatment options expanding rapidly, and paperwork burdens exploding, these cuts are unjustifiable and unfair! They result from an arbitrary formula that ignores the real costs of providing health care. According to the American Medical Association, Medicare payments to doctors have increased only 18.5 percent in the last 10 years, an average of 1.1 percent per year, which pales in comparison to the skyrocketing costs of providing health care. To now cut payment rates 5 percent for four years will, without question, force early retirements among physicians who are primarily serving our seniors, or force physicians to limit the number of Medicare patients they serve. More seriously, in the long run under- reimbursing our doctors in yet another public health care program will discourage the top quality students medicine has traditionally attracted and erode the world famous quality of American medicine. Today, I am introducing legislation that would implement the recommendations of the Medicare Payment Advisory Commission (MedPAC) and reform Medicare's doctor payment formula. The bill repeals the Sustainable Growth Rate (SGR) system that has resulted in unpredictable payment increases and cuts. If left in place, the present SGR system is projected to cut physician payments by more than 20 percent over the next several years. My bill increases payments to physicians by 2.5 percent in 2003 and ties future updates to an index similar to the Medicare Economic Index, making the system for adjusting physician payments similar to that for adjusting Medicare payments to other providers. While much work remains to be done to understand and manage the cost of this common-sense reform, rational payment rates are essential to maintaining the quality of Medicare. I am committed to providing physicians with a more stable, predictable, and fair payment formula. Absent such reform, we will shortchange our physicians and threaten both access to care and quality of care for our seniors.

Mrs. JOHNSON of Connecticut

Mrs. JOHNSON of Connecticut. Mr. Chairman, there are many reasons to support H.R. 1542 and many reasons that it will benefit my state of Connecticut. However, among the most compelling are how it will help education, especially education for women who work in the home. These important benefits were discussed in a June, 2001 letter from the U.S. Distance Learning Association. The USDLA firmly believes that universal access to broadband technology in our schools, our homes, and at work is critical to the realization of enhanced distance learning services. According to a recent study released by the Web-based Education Commission ``the promise of widely available, high quality web-based education is made possible by technological and communications trends that could lead to important educational applications over the next two to three years.'' H.R. 1542 can help us realize this promise by increasing the competition and choice of broadband service providers and by eliminating market disincentives to investments in the broadband deployment. By accomplishing this, we will be able to sustain the growth and prosperity of distance learning programs which are developing at a rapid pace. Not only would H.R. 1542 enhance distance learning opportunities for students, it would also set the stage for improved telemedicine and job training services. These two broadband applications cannot be under estimated in today's social and economic climate which increasingly depends on access to broadband technology. Mr. Chairman, bringing high speed broadband communications into millions of new homes will open windows of opportunity now closed to many women, among them stay-at-home moms, the disabled, and seniors, who wish for educational opportunities but who have few choices today. As this exciting technology spreads, costs will go down and the availability of these services will increase, bringing with them the promise of distance learning for all who choose it. This bill is also a boost to small businesses across the country. In my Congressional District, DSL is currently available to 17,500 businesses--and 130,000 in Connecticut. The passage of Tauzin-Dingell will guarantee its availability to 7,000 more businesses, more than 100 schools and dozens of libraries. In the 6th District of Connecticut it will add high speed Internet access to 2,526 businesses with 18,867 employees, 231 doctors offices, 3 hospitals, 50 schools and 17 libraries. It has the strong support of local chambers of commerce, including the Northwest Connecticut Chamber of Commerce, which represents the most rural parts of my district. Mr. Chairman, H.R. 1542 will rationalize the regulation of broadband, not end it. The benefits that this technology promises for Americans who desire more educational opportunities, and for businesses which want to grow is unprecedented. I rise in strong support of this legislation.

Mrs. JOHNSON of Connecticut

Mrs. JOHNSON of Connecticut. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me time. First of all, I do not understand why my colleagues think going home having extended unemployment 13 weeks is help. Why is it not better to go home and have extended unemployment 13 weeks, put in an automatic trigger so unemployed people cannot be held hostage by the other body if the recession lasts? Why is it not better to go home and provide health benefits for those who are unemployed? The first time in our entire history that we have ever said to the unemployed that health security is just as important as income security when you are unemployed. Why is it that Members think, and I have had Members say to me, well, the New York aid, we will do that later. Do they not understand the other body is not capable of doing it later? They would have done it if they could have done it. Why did they not add it into the extension? It is very important. What about the extenders? My colleagues have all voted for extenders many times. Do Members not care that the welfare-to-work tax credit is going to expire? Do Members not care that the work-opportunities tax credit that helps people coming off of welfare, to get employed, to stay employed, prisoners coming out of prison to get employed and stay employed, are Members not thinking that consistent predictable tax policy protects jobs, reduces the number of unemployed? The provisions in this bill, I could go on and on. Why, after September 11, do we not want to change the carry-back of losses when we see losses all across the country in certain sector of the economy? Do Members not have any sense of fairness and responsibility? Does not the other body? Why did they send us this? Are they not thinking about people's lives? Do they not care? Do they not care about unemployment compensation, about health benefits for the unemployed, about jobs for the people coming off of welfare? Get your minds focused. The other body is not capable of action. The only thing they will ever act on is on the extension of unemployment benefits, and it is our job to put in there the essential things, help for New York, certain extenders. When we look at the tax provision, extension of mental health parity. After all we have talked about mental health benefits? Listen, needless to say, I am heated up. I can only say do not hide behind the alternative minimum tax. We do not even repeal it. What we do to fix it will help individuals as well as businesses. I know the politics of Enron and the politics of alternative minimum tax. I also know every company that pays those taxes pays them when they are in a downturn and gets them back when they are in an upturn. We know that there is not one new dollar of Federal revenue either lost or gained. So do not distort that issue and hide behind it when the unemployeds' well-being is at stake, when women coming off of welfare will lose their jobs because that tax credit is gone. I urge Members to think, put on this unemployment comp provision, exactly what we need, so that we can do that in conference and Members can help us in conference. But we cannot let the Senate say compassion and caring is just 13 weeks long. Announcement by the Speaker Pro Tempore

Mrs. JOHNSON of Connecticut

Mrs. JOHNSON of Connecticut. Mr. Chairman, on rollcall No. 20 I inadvertently voted ``aye.'' I would like the Record to show that I meant to vote ``no.''

Mrs. JOHNSON of Connecticut

Mrs. JOHNSON of Connecticut. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor the students and faculty at Canton Junior/Senior High School in Connecticut's Sixth Congressional District for their beautifully touching remembrance program held in honor of the victims of the September 11th terrorist attacks. The students took the initiative to plan and run the entire program, in which stories, poems and songs were shared, honoring those who so unexpectedly and tragically lost their lives. They also created a chain of 6,000 circles, which was looped around the auditorium, to provide a dramatic reminder of the number of people who were thought to have died on that terrible day. The chain captured both the enormity of the tragedy and the value of each individual life. But ever optimistic, the chain, as one student eloquently said, was a reminder that after the attacks, ``the great chain of America--the chain that links every single citizen of our country--strengthened ten thousand fold.'' That vital and heartfelt presentation captured the spirit of America's journey as we watched the unfolding events in horror and disbelief and then as we grieved with great sorrow at the lives and dreams shattered by evil. Despite the anger and hatred that has touched all our hearts, these students demonstrated the power of love for others. It is that power that will make our free and caring country able to defeat the hatred of those whose poverty made them easy prey for the preachers of death and destruction. I commend the students of Canton Junior/Senior High for expressing in words and actions the thoughts and feelings of Americans everywhere. Memorial Service (Patriotic Paper by Lauren Schwartzman) September 11th. Do you feel what I feel when you hear that date? Can you feel the death in that date? The tears cried by three hundred million eyes for six thousand people. People whose lives were so brutally, so cruelly cut short that day. We are crying for those dreams shattered and lost, dreams of life that will never be fulfilled. Can you feel the hatred in that date? The awful, black hate these terrorists must feel toward us to have done such unbelievable things. Can you feel the shock in that date? The shock of a fact we have ignored for so long. That fact that maybe we are taking the safety of America for granted. That maybe taking it for granted has left it not so safe anymore. The shock that made every American's heart skip several beats, the shock that branded a look of sadness on our faces. Traces of that helpless look still linger, and it will be a long, long time before they completely fade away. Can you feel the anger in that date? The acid fire that was lit in our hearts the moment we knew the names of those inhuman people who attacked our country. The same fire that kindles our attacks on these terrorists now. This fire will also take a long time to turn to cold ashes. But can you also feel that other little bit I feel in that date? Can you feel in that date the great chain of America, the chain that links every single citizen of our country, strengthen ten thousand fold? Can you feel that? Through all of the death and tears and hate and shock, can you feel that bit of unity and hope shining through? That light that embodies America better than any two buildings ever could. An untouchable flame that cannot be doused by hate or death or any mere person! For I look at America as a candle. Some people call it the fabric, or the foundation, but I call it the candle. A candle built by the courage of Americans, expanded by the courage of Americans, protected by the courage of Americans, made free by the courage of Americans, and now we must do whatever it takes to protect that freedom. We must keep the flame that was lit so long ago burning bright and true. For if we keep on pouring our heart and soul into our songs, prayers, and actions, then there is nothing and no one that can ever douse the flame. As One Whole (By Robin Engelke, Grade 8, Canton Junior High School) As one whole, we share one soul. We all pray and hope, As a nation we cope. Tragedies don't always bring bad, Look back to the one's we've already had. ``Always for the best.'' I say All I can think about is that day. The one where the towers fell, That day felt as if we went to hell. As one whole, the tragedy was a form of defeat, but not for America we hadn't been beat. As everyone fumbled to find a loved one In New York City there was no sun. No sun to shine or gleam or burn, Those fires did burn, but who did this to us will take their turn. As one whole, we share one soul

Mrs. JOHNSON of Connecticut

Mrs. JOHNSON of Connecticut. Here it is. When they go and apply for the unemployment compensation benefits, it says in the bill they certify they are unemployed with the Social Security number.

Mrs. JOHNSON of Connecticut. Let me finish, I will get the page in a minute. It says it right there. Announcement by the Speaker pro tempore

Mrs. JOHNSON of Connecticut. Mr. Speaker, we cannot put lipstick on a paper and call it a lady, but we can put $25 billion additional dollars on the table and help people who are unemployed. A total of $37.2 billion does make a difference in unemployment benefits, in health care subsidies, absolutely. And in addition to this money, there is $4.6 billion for States to manage Medicaid costs or to put it into CHIP and open up CHIP for people who need affordable coverage. So not only is there $4.6 billion in addition to the $32 billion, but there is $4 billion additional money for States to either use for training expansion or other health care needs. They could use it for community health centers so more people could be covered through that avenue. There are all kinds of ways we can make certain that everyone is covered. And remember, under the Democrat alternative offered by the other body, the only people who got health insurance, the only people, now listen to this, if you represent a rural area. The only people under the other bill who got any health care subsidies were people who worked for employers who were covered by COBRA. That means if you had less than 20 employees, your guys did not get any help with health insurance, not any, zero. How could my colleagues hold out that their bill offered unemployment compensation and health insurance to those laid off as a result of this recession when, in fact, anyone who worked for an employer with less than 20 employees got zero, zero, zero, zero. That is wrong. It is not truthful. We do provide subsidies for everyone. If I work for a small employer, he has health insurance, I get laid off, I get 60 percent of the premium costs. If I work for a small employer, as many people do in my district, I pay 50 percent of my premiums while I am working. I get laid off, the government pays 60 percent of the premiums. If I work for a small employer who does not provide health insurance, I buy my own health insurance, I get laid off, I get 60 percent. Everyone, everyone gets unemployment compensation, 13 additional weeks, and flexible money to increase benefits if that is what the State needs, and everyone under this bill gets health insurance subsidies, 60 percent of premiums. Do not let politics prevent people from getting the help they need during this recession, complicated by the terrorist attack of September 11. Put rhetoric aside. Give people real help.

Mrs. JOHNSON of Connecticut. Mr. Speaker, let me just set the record straight. Your bill does not pay people's COBRA benefits. It pays a percent of the COBRA premium, and through our bill we would pay a percent of the COBRA premium, and all of the rhetoric on the floor about how people could not afford their portion is just as big a problem in your bill as in ours. So do not get out there and say we pay the COBRA benefits.

Mrs. JOHNSON of Connecticut. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding time to me. Mr. Speaker, I did not use the 75 percent versus the 60 percent in the gentleman's bill, because in the gentleman's bill, he allows only 75 percent.

Mrs. JOHNSON of Connecticut. There are two questions here. First of all, let me answer the subsidy one. We provide 60 percent subsidy of the premiums, and we let people buy that plan that CRS has.

Mrs. JOHNSON of Connecticut. Mr. Speaker, if the gentleman will read page 93 to 108, he will find that a person who is noticed goes to the unemployment office and gets unemployment compensation and certification that he is eligible for unemployment compensation. He then gives that certification that his employer gave and is charged only 40 percent of the premium. The rest is collected from the employer from the Department of the Treasury. It is very simple. Now, when there is $13 billion out there, does the gentleman think insurance companies are not going to make it real easy to pay these premiums? Of course they are. But back to this premium thing, remember, the gentleman provides a 75 percent premium and it is only for the most expensive plans. Seventy- five percent of the most expensive plans, the COBRA plans, which are usually $400 a week, is less of a subsidy than 60 percent of the average premium according to the Congressional Research Service of $200 a month. So ours is actually more generous than the gentleman's.

Mrs. JOHNSON of Connecticut

Mrs. JOHNSON of Connecticut. Mr. Speaker, if the gentleman from California (Mr. Royce) will yield, I know the gentleman's time is about to expire, but I did want to say that it is imperative that this House acts and, hopefully, the Senate follows as well, to make this recession short and shallow, as the gentlewoman from New Mexico said, but also to help the unemployed. What is really excellent about this new stimulus bill is that for the first time, it provides assistance in purchasing health insurance for the unemployed. America has never done that before. This is a first. Only this bill offers the same assistance to everyone. If one works for an employer who provided what is called COBRA benefits, one can use their 50 percent benefit, or their 60 percent benefit now, for COBRA benefits. But most people work for small employers and small employers are not covered by COBRA, so if one works for a small employer and is laid off, the old bill and the bill of the other party will not help them. This will give them a 60 percent premium subsidy, whether they buy their own health insurance, whether their employee is COBRA-covered or not. Everyone will be treated the same. All unemployed will get help, with health insurance benefits as well as extended unemployment benefits. I thank the gentleman for yielding his precious time.

Mrs. JOHNSON of Connecticut

Mrs. JOHNSON of Connecticut. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of the Veterans Benefits Act of 2001, specifically a provision in the legislation that ensures all veterans will be eligible for a government-furnished grave marker. I would like to thank the Chairman for his hard work and commitment to our Nation's veterans and I appreciate the willingness of the Chairman and the committee to include my veterans marker provision in the conference report. I would also like to thank the Chairman for accommodating my request in the Joint Explanatory Statement to encourage the Secretary of Veterans Affairs to consider pre-existing requests for markers. This legislation is essential to our veterans' futures, ensuring that their acts of heroism will be recognized beyond their lifetimes. This legislation remedies a glaring discrepancy in the law, ensuring that every veteran, regardless of whether their grave is privately marked, will be eligible for a government grave marker upon their death. Every single veteran deserves to be permanently recognized for their contribution to our nation. Every veterans family deserves solace in knowing their loved one will continue to receive the recognition they deserve. Mr. Speaker, I extend the heartfelt thanks from the veterans in my district.

Mrs. JOHNSON of Connecticut

Mrs. JOHNSON of Connecticut. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize Megan Smith, an outstanding young citizen from my home town of New Britain, Connecticut. Megan is an excellent student, exceptional athlete and is highly esteemed by her peers for her positive attitude, considerate nature and high standards. For possessing these characteristics, Megan has been given the great honor of being selected as a 2002 Winter Olympics Torch Runner for my district. Her accomplishments speak for themselves. Megan is ranked in the top five percent of her class, and deftly balances this commitment to her studies with an equally strong commitment to her athletics. She is a top player on her school's volleyball and basketball teams, and has already been accepted to Quinnipiac University in Hamden, Connecticut, on a full basketball scholarship beginning next fall. Despite her rigorous schedule, Megan devotes many hours to performing community service work. She divides her time between Gaffney School's special education preschool program; St. Francis Middle School's basketball activities; and at tryouts and practices for the Connecticut Starters 10 National Team. Because of Megan's leadership, scholarship, character and service to her community, she was inducted into New Britain High School's Chapter of the National Honor Society and also was designated the female recipient of the Wendy's High School Heisman Scholar Athlete Award. I cannot think of a better person to represent the Sixth Congressional District during the Olympic Torch run. Megan is an exemplary young woman whose giving heart and extraordinary talents will bring her much success. I salute Megan Smith for her invaluable contributions to her school and to her community. Congratulations.

Mrs. JOHNSON of Connecticut

Mrs. JOHNSON of Connecticut. Mr. Speaker, our security interests are global. Our economic interests are global. As we stand here today, since 1990, the European community has negotiated 27 free trade agreements. Do Members understand that every one of those free trade agreements socks in European products, European standards? Their electrical outlets are different than ours. They get into that market, they get their goods in and our goods are out. We act here on this more as if there are not negotiations that are going to go forward. They are going to go forward. The issue is, will America lead or will America follow. Are we going to allow jobs to be created in America, or are we going to let them go to Europe? Watch this standards issue. Soon to enter the EU is Croatia. They are about to pass a bill that bans biotech materials. What will that do to agricultural exports from America? Do we not want a President at that table demanding science-based standards? This is about trade of American products to grow our economy and create jobs. I urge support. Mr. Speaker, as our security interests are global, so are our economic interests. If we want to create new jobs and protect existing jobs at home, we must open new markets to American products abroad. Since traditional trading authority expired in 1994, we have lost customers to other countries because they can now sell their goods without high tariffs simply because they have been at the negotiating table and have made trade agreements that shut us out. Of the 130 existing free trade agreements, America is a party to only 2--with Israel and the NAFTA countries. Since 1990, the EU has completed negotiations on 27 free trade agreements and is currently negotiating 15 more. The United States has missed out on dozens of opportunities to create economic pacts with other nations that want to buy goods made by American workers. We are now not only losing markets and customers, one by one, but are losing our position as a leader at the table that shapes the international trading system. By not being there, we allow Europe to set standards that work against American products, slowing U.S. economic growth now and for decades ahead. According to the USDA's Foreign Agricultural Service, Croatia, a country that aspires to future EU membership, currently plans to go further than the EU on biotech Croatia has a draft law in process that would institute an outright ban on any products containing biotech materials. So we simply must have our President at the table to insist on science-based standards to protect and open markets to American products. TPA is essential for our nation to remain prosperous, and passage will have a great impact on the workers I represent. Connecticut's economy is very export-dependent. Last year, Connecticut's export sales of merchandise totaled $13.2 billion, supporting more than 180,000 jobs. Viewed on a per capita basis, Connecticut ranks 6th nationally, with export sales of $3,860 for every state resident. 85 percent of our exporters were small and medium-sized businesses. Export-related jobs tend to be good, high-paying jobs. Wages of workers in jobs supported by exports are 13 to 18 percent higher than the national average. Export-related jobs are also more secure, as exporting plants are 9 percent less likely to shut down than comparable non-exporting plants. Trade agreements do work: Total exports from Connecticut to NAFTA countries (Mexico and Canada) in 1999 were 44 percent higher than 1993, before NAFTA. They are also good for consumers and are equivalent to tax cuts, as trade agreements reduce tariffs and provide lower-priced goods. The average American family of four could see an annual income gain of nearly $2500 from a global reduction in tariffs and trade barriers--the objective of negotiations. TPA is good for workers, and good for consumers alike. Furthermore, world trade negotiations are going to proceed. The only issue is will America lead--or follow. At the very moment when our President has provided strong and able leadership, diplomatic skill and sound judgement to unite the world against terrorism and create a more peaceful future, why would we not empower him to provide the same leadership to the economic discussions on which our prosperity and the economic growth of the nation depends? I urge my colleagues to support passage of this needed legislation.

Mrs. JOHNSON of Connecticut

Mrs. JOHNSON of Connecticut. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of this legislation and I am interested that so many of my colleagues are criticizing the process by which it came to the floor or criticizing the fact that it does not do enough. This is the first time in the history of this country that Congress has offered 2 years of stipend plus training costs to the unemployed. It is the first time. And those benefits are over and above the half- year of unemployment compensation benefits under current law. The Democrats were in control of this House for 40 years. Never ever did they offer this kind of benefit to people unemployed as a result of foreign competition and, in this case, we are extending these remarkable benefits to those who lost their jobs as a result of a terrorist action as well. Now, we need to lay our controversies aside and vote this through. This is an exceptional benefit for people who were unemployed as a result of foreign competition or as a result of the attack on September 11. Let me tell my colleagues what it means. Remember your own people in your own district. Unemployment compensation is a small amount of money, and the unemployed have to keep going out and proving that they are looking for a job. Under TAA we said, look, you have the right for retraining and you will not have to go out and look for a job during this period. We are going to pay their unemployment comp so they have a way to support their family and we are going to pay for their training. I have had people tell me in my district, as recently as 4 months ago, that, no, they were not looking for a job because under TAA, they had the right to go back to school. I just heard the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Bentsen) say that they were teaching English as a second language. Is not that an incredibly important thing for a person to be able to have the opportunity to learn if they want real career advancement? I have had many people, particularly women, tell me it is wonderful that I can go back and get my high school diploma. I can learn English as a second language and I am going to take this training, too, because in the period of time in which I can get training costs and a stipend, I can change my life. Often people, at least in my district, go from high school into the factories or from very minimal education into the factories, and I will tell my colleagues that for many of them, often their company losing its competitive position, resulting in their having the TAA benefits, has changed their lives. They do not have to take the next job if they can afford to live on unemployment comp, which they often can if the other spouse is working, and go back to school. The joy in their eyes, as they have the chance to learn English, as they have the chance to get a degree, as they can go to the community college, as they can go to a medical technology course to prepare for a career that will offer them a higher salary and a lifestyle they are going to be proud of and happy with. This is the first time ever in history that the United States Government has offered people 104 weeks of this benefit. I appreciate all the ancillary concerns of my colleagues, but do not let those ancillary concerns and the angers that are afoot in this body between this body and the other body prevent us from putting out there this kind of benefit that is going to help people at a level we have never been willing to help them before. Let me just add one thing about the September 11th victims, those unemployed as a result of the September 11 attack. It is very hard, to determine in law exactly who is unemployed as a result of foreign competition as to determine who is unemployed as a result of the New York attack. Our Department of Labor has been very generous in their definitions and I believe will continue to be very generous in making people eligible for these benefits. I have had a lot of experience with this in Connecticut. I represent a town that was all machine tools, bearings. Name the manufacturing facility and it used to be in my hometown, and I have been through this right up till recent years. The Department of Labor has been very open about it. They have been very generous about the definition, and people have benefited enormously, and I believe they will be the same kind of good helpmate in identifying who exactly the September 11 unemployed are. I urge support of this bill.