Sam Johnson

Mr. SAM JOHNSON of Texas

Mr. SAM JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I am glad the gentleman challenged that statement, because we are hearing a lot of rhetoric here that does not track. I continually hear from my constituents that we need to rein in runaway Federal spending. Do you know what? They are right. More government spending does not necessarily make our economy better. When we are at war, and we are, this is the exact time when we should be reducing spending, cutting taxes and getting the economy back on track. When a family sits down to manage their monthly budget, they have to prioritize what is best for them at that time in their lives, and they usually make a list of needs and wants. A need is not the same thing as a want. For a family, a need is a roof over their head or food on the table. A want could be dinner out at a restaurant or a movie. So you fund first things first. Then whatever is left over at the end lets you fund the wants. You cannot just spend, spend, spend and hope you have enough to cover the tab. The same needs to be done with the Federal budget. During these difficult times, when we are at war, when we need to spur the economy, we must differentiate between the needs and wants. We cannot just spend, spend, spend. Our first need is to protect our country, so that means we fully fund defense. While this budget does not devote a full 4 percent of gross domestic product to the national security as I would prefer, it does meet the President's request for homeland security funding. I will tell you something: This Toomey budget funds defense higher than domestic spending for the first time in many years. I think, because of our situation, we need it. Our Constitution requires us to provide for a common defense. Let us not shirk that responsibility. Another priority is to help the economy rebound. It is a proven fact that when people can keep more of their own money, the economy grows. That is why we lower taxes. When entrepreneurs have more money, they can use that capital to hire more employees, buy more equipment or expand their business. This economy could use a turnaround, and letting people keep more of their own money will help our economy grow. Frankly, I am a bit disappointed in the Republican Study Committee budget because it does not do more to rein in Federal spending. However, I think most would agree, this is a good compromise for this time. Look, this budget makes tough choices; but that is why we are elected, to make tough choices. The good people of my district sent me here because they wanted a smarter, more efficient government, and the Republican Study Committee budget is a step in the right direction; increasing defense, lowering taxes and reining in runaway government spending. It is the right thing to do.

Mr. SAM JOHNSON of Texas

Mr. SAM JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Speaker, this is for our military, and thank goodness we have got it for them all the way through. Last spring a constituent of mine, Paul Miesse, was researching college savings plans, including the State education plans. His son Kyle, in Junior ROTC, would like to someday apply to the Naval Academy, as well as other schools. Currently 529 State plans and Coverdell Education Savings Accounts allow people to save for college, and those savings remain untaxed if spent on education costs. It is a responsible thing for parents to save for their children's education, but if the student is smart enough or athletic enough to get a scholarship, then the parents can get their money back from the 529 plan or Coverdell plan penalty free. However, because of an oversight, which is rectified in this bill, military academies do not qualify for that penalty-free rebate of their savings. I think that when hard-working, patriotic young Americans are rewarded with an appointment to a service academy, we ought not turn around and impose a 10 percent penalty on their parents who diligently saved for their children's education. We should provide the same penalty-free withdrawals for the Zoomie, the Plebe, the Middy or the Cadet as we provide to those who play sports, earn an academic scholarship or pay for school through ROTC. This change we are making today will ensure that students who attend our U.S. military academies get the same treatment under college savings plans as their peers. Given that each of us is eligible to make appointments to the United States service academies, I think all of us in Congress have a direct interest in making sure we solve this problem. In fact, there are 50 students in the Third District, my district, at all of the academies at any given time. I want to thank constituents Paul, Jeanette and Kyle Miesse of Plano, Texas, who brought this issue to my attention. I think our forefathers envisioned that it is people like the Miesses of Texas who really make a difference, and it is our servicemen overseas and in this country who defend this freedom, and that is who we are trying to protect. I urge support of this bill.

Mr. SAM JOHNSON of Texas

Mr. SAM JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Speaker, all eyes are on Iraq. Saddam has failed to provide credible evidence to back his bogus claims that he completely disarmed. Saddam will not tell us about his 26,000 liters of anthrax; 38,000 liters of dangerous toxins; or 500 tons of sarin gas, mustard gas and VX nerve agents. Enough to kill millions of people. Saddam repeatedly declares he does not have any chemical or biological weapons. Yet he just released them to his men for use against our troops. And he has not disclosed his mobile biological weapons labs or more than 30,000 munitions, including missiles capable of delivering chemical agents. President Bush said, ``Responding to enemies only after they have struck first is not self-defense. It is suicide.'' I urge America and this Congress to support our President and our troops. This war is for our freedom and the freedom of the world.

Mr. SAM JOHNSON of Texas

Mr. SAM JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased today to join Chairman John Boehner in the reintroduction of the Pension Security Act. Last year, the House acted quickly in the face of corporate scandals to protect American workers' pensions by passing the Pension Security Act. Unfortunately, the Senate did not consider this bill in the last Congress which makes reintroduction necessary. Pension protection remains a key priority for all of us, and with the new Congress, we have a real opportunity to send President Bush a comprehensive pension security bill he can sign into law. We should not have to wait for another corporate scandal before we empower workers with new protections that can help them enhance and protect their retirement security. We are committed to addressing the pension security of American workers. Workers must be fully protected and fully prepared with the tools they need to protect and enhance their retirement savings. The Pension Security Act gives millions of Americans new tools to help them better manage and expand their retirement savings. The Pension Security Act gives workers new freedom to diversify contributions of company stock three years after receiving it in their 401(k) accounts; expands worker access to high quality, professional investment advice; allows workers to purchase retirement planning services with pre-tax dollars; empowers workers to hold company insiders accountable for abuses; and gives workers better information about their pension plans. It also includes a number of provisions to make it easier for small businesses to start and maintain pension plans and would further protect rank-and-file employees by ensuring that statutory stock options will not be subject to payroll taxes. Last year, the Committee on Education and the Workforce and the Subcommittee on Employer-Employee Relations held a combined total of three hearings over four days to examine the collapse of Enron and to examine how to better protect pension participants. We heard testimony from Administration officials, pension experts, and rank-and-file employees. One theme that emerged from the testimony was that pension plan participants need more tools to effectively manage their retirements. Secretary of Labor Elaine Chao stated: ``Partnered with the proposed increased ability for workers to diversify out of employer stock, investment advice services will be more critical than ever.'' We also heard testimony from Tom Padgett, a former Enron employee. During a hearing, Chairman Boehner asked Mr. Padgett: ``Did you receive any information, or as I would describe it, investment education from your employers or others talking about the need to diversify your account?'' Padgett responded without hesitation: ``No sir.'' Enron, like most U.S. companies today, did not provide its rank-and- file workers with access to investment advice. The Pension Security Act would fix outdated federal laws to allow employers to provide their workers with high-quality, professional investment advice as an employee benefit while making advice providers personally liable for any advice not provided in the employee's best interest. Millions of employees who have seen their 401(k) balances dwindle might have been able to preserve their retirement savings if they'd had access to a qualified adviser who would have warned them in advance that they needed to diversify. I am concerned, as many of my colleagues are, about protecting workers and preparing them with the tools they need to protect and enhance their retirement savings. Congress made important steps forward last year with the Sarbanes-Oxley Act regarding corporate governance. That law incorporated two provisions from the original version of the Pension Security Act dealing with notice and trading during blackout periods. Congress also passed the Job Creation and Worker Assistance Act (P.L. 107-147) that expanded the interest rate ``window'' for valuation of current liabilities in defined benefit plans. Earlier in the 107th Congress, we also passed the Pension Security Act and the Retirement Security Advice Act with bipartisan support. We also passed the landmark reforms authored by my friend and colleague, Rob Portman, that gave workers more pension portability, faster vesting, and a host of other needed changes. These measures were a good start, but we need to do even more for American workers. I am proud that we are introducing the Pension Security Act as a bipartisan measure and I am hopeful that we can continue to work with our Democrat counterparts to reach consensus on the pension reforms I have just outlined. The nation's employer-based pension system is essential to the security of American workers. We should move quickly to finish the good work we began last Congress and restore confidence in our pension system. I urge my colleagues to join with me in helping America's workers by supporting the Pension Security Act.

Mr. SAM JOHNSON of Texas

Mr. SAM JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I believe our welfare plan has worked. It has been shown to work, and the corrections that are in this plan make it work better. It is no surprise to the people of the Third Congressional District of Texas that because of the excellent services provided by the North Central Texas workforce, many leave welfare behind. One example is a woman I will call Alice who found help through the Choices program in Allen. A single mother of two children, Alice went to the workforce center in Allen 5 months pregnant. She had never held a steady job. Having worked a month as a receptionist and 3 months as a waitress, she decided she needed a job to support her and her children. The Choices program provided her with child care assistance and transportation assistance to seek employment. She worked with the employment services staff, and in time she found a job as a warehouse manager in Plano making $8.50 an hour. The job did not last because the company went broke and she lost it. That did not stop her. Within 2 weeks of losing her job, she found another working as a receptionist in Plano making $12.50 an hour. Her employment counselor reports that Alice always showed determination and motivation to become self-sufficient so she can support her family. She still works full time and has even taken on a part-time job as a Mary Kay distributor. In December, she sent a Christmas card to the people of the North Central Texas Workforce Center in Allen thanking them for their help. She is a shining example of the positive things that happen when people move from welfare to work. This welfare bill helps them immensely. Let us pass it today.

Mr. SAM JOHNSON of Texas

Mr. SAM JOHNSON of Texas. Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman so much, and all our colleagues; but you know, this is not about me. This is about our American fighting men that keep America free, the guys and gals the world over. And they are all over the world right now, defending freedom not just for the United States of America but for the world. I have been a member of the U.S.-Russia Commission on POWs and MIAs now for almost 10 years. We are trying to find out what happened to our missing in action, to those who did not return home from World War II, Korea, the Cold War, Vietnam and Iraq, if we have one there. So we have not given up on anyone, and I think that is what America stands for. It stands behind its military. We will go to extreme measures to make sure we recover our people and/or find out what happened to them. We are still pursuing that effort. There are as many as 70,000 from World War II that are missing in action, some 8,000 from Korea, some 1,800 from Vietnam, and maybe one from Iraq. So this Nation is the greatest Nation in the world, and I and my colleagues who fought for it would say that, even though we were POWs, if we were required to go fight for this Nation again for the freedoms we enjoy, we would do it in a New York minute. So I thank all my colleagues for recognizing the POWs and for recognizing our servicemen and women around the world and all the great things they do for us, and many thanks as well for helping me in this House of Representatives to make this a better Nation for all of us to live in. We are free and independent, one Nation under God. God bless you all. Thank you for today.

Mr. SAM JOHNSON of Texas

Mr. SAM JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I stand here today in full support of giving the President the tools he needs to protect the lives of Americans at home and around the world. The United States and United Nations have tried sanctions. We have tried inspections, we have tried no-fly zones, we have tried treaties, peace talks and 16 different Security Council resolutions. Saddam has violated every agreement. Anyone who holds hope after 11 years of Saddam Hussein's outright rebellion against the world must be the eternal optimist. Saddam Hussein has no intention of allowing inspections inside his palaces or weapons facilities. Saddam Hussein has no intention of allowing his scientists and families to be questioned outside of Iraq as President Bush has asked for; and Saddam Hussein has no intention of giving our government or the family of Scott Spiecher, the downed American pilot, any information on their son's whereabouts. Saddam is a blood-thirsty madman who cannot be left to his own devices. If left alone, Saddam Hussein will continue to build biological and chemical weapons and obtain a nuclear capability. Last night, the President told us that Saddam is now building unmanned vehicles and airplanes to disperse those weapons almost anywhere. As a representative of the people of the State of Texas, I cannot sit back and allow Saddam Hussein more time to plot the demise of the United States and our allies. As one of the few Members of Congress to fight in combat and the only Member held captive as a POW in Vietnam, I know we cannot fight a war from the Congress of the United States and win. Our President, with the passage of this authority, can and will deliver. Let us learn from our Vietnam experience and ensure that President Bush has all the tools he needs to protect freedom in America and in the world. A resolution without restriction must be passed. Our future is at stake.

Mr. SAM JOHNSON of Texas

Mr. SAM JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I am here today to call for an end to huge interest-free loans to the government. That is why I have a plan that would fix a portion of the alternative minimum tax problem for those who purchased incentive stock options from their employer. H.R. 5398 would allow taxpayers to apply their prepaid ISO taxes under AMT against up to half of their regular income tax liability. Mr. Speaker, many taxpayers have prepaid thousands of dollars of taxes with little ability to use those accumulated credits. In essence, people are floating the government a huge interest-free loan. It is just plain wrong, and it must stop. My bill fixes that so families who have put second mortgages on their homes, cashed out retirement savings, sold assets, and struggled to work out payment plans with the IRS can get their money back and get on with their lives. It is the least we can do for America.

Mr. SAM JOHNSON of Texas

Mr. SAM JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I would also like to point out that the gentleman keeps talking about deficits. I recall when I first got into this Congress they were huge, and it was a Democrat controlled Congress at that time. Right now, I believe we are at war. We are spending money on defending this United States, the freedoms that we represent and the freedom all over the world. We are working to put in place a homeland defense. I will tell my colleagues right now, if it costs money to protect America and protect our freedoms, I do not think any of us should stop it.

Mr. SAM JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I did not know we were going to come in here and try to get into a political debate. As I recall from the Committee on Education and the Workforce, we did not do any cutting; we consolidated. I do not think we have taken one red cent out of the Social Security trust fund, and we do not intend to. I think that it is important for the people to know that they can count on the future, that they can put their money into a savings account and count on it to be there for their kids to go to school, if that is what they desire to use it for. Mr. Speaker, it is an honor for me to be here today to solve a problem brought to my attention by a constituent. Great ideas do not always start from inside the Beltway or from pundits or strategists. They come from good Americans back home, like my friends Paul and Jeanette Miesse of Plano. Their son, Kyle, attends Jasper High School where he is in the tenth grade and participates in ROTC. Kyle is considering applying to the Naval Academy. I want to help them make that a reality. Kyle's dad researched the 529 Education Savings Account. As you know, 529 savings plans, run by the States, allow parents and others to put money aside for college to grow tax free, and, as long as the money is spent on education, the money is spent tax free. These tax incentives are an important way to encourage savings for higher education. Current law provides penalty-free refunds from 529 plans for certain situations, such as when the student receives a scholarship. The problem with this is the definition of the word ``scholarship.'' It excludes appointments to the United States service academies, such as West Point, Annapolis, or my favorite, the Air Force Academy. Under the Tax Code, these appointments are considered commissions in the military and so are different from scholarships. Hard-working students and athletes across America are rewarded with scholarships to colleges and universities. Congress recognized the hard work of these young people when we permitted their parents to receive penalty-free rebates of their contributions to 529 plans. In addition to academic and athletic scholarships, the IRS and Treasury have told us if a student earns an ROTC scholarship, their plan can make penalty- free rebates. It is only the United States military academy students who are not eligible for this benefit. Serving this country is a noble profession. Congress ought to encourage, not discourage, young people to join our armed forces, especially today, and the clarification we are making today will ensure that all students who attend our United States military academies get the same treatment under 529 plans as their peers. Given that each Congressman is eligible to make appointments to the United States service academies, I think all of us in Congress have a direct interest in making sure we solve the problem. On average I nominate about 40 students from the Third District of Texas to the service academies. I think when hard-working, patriotic young Americans are rewarded with an appointment to a service academy, we should not turn around and impose a 10 percent penalty on their parents who saved for their children's education. We should provide the same penalty-free withdrawals for the plebe, the middy and the cadet as we provide to those who play sports, earn an academic scholarship or pay for school through ROTC. Again, I want to thank my constituents, Paul, Jeanette and Kyle Miesse of Plano, who brought this issue to my attention. To my knowledge, at no time during the consideration of this legislation did we consider the issue of appointments to the service academies. I believe the omission was simply an oversight, and I encourage the passage of this bill that will permanently extend the education tax breaks included in the tax law we enacted last year. I do not see how anybody can vote against helping parents send their kids to school and help make it permanent. I want to thank the chairman for including in this bill that clarification. It is people like this in our own districts that make a difference.

Mr. SAM JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. SAM JOHNSON of Texas

Mr. SAM JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Chairman, let us set the record straight. The Secretary, based on current facts, says that they are unable to make these deadlines without us giving them a billion dollars more. I know the contract is with Boeing- Siemens. I have talked to those people. They can do it by the end of the year, but only to have the machines by the end of the year. That does not mean they are in the airports. I am concerned that, worst-case scenario, the Transportation Security Agency is going to be unable to train personnel and install necessary equipment to meet this deadline. Under the best-case scenario, I am concerned that TSA will meet the deadline but only by implementing an ineffective and outrageously expensive temporary solution. Either way, the safety of our air travelers and the security of our system will benefit from giving TSA flexibility to focus on a long-term, permanent solution and not a quick fix. Unfortunately, only 75 percent of our airports are going to be able to make that December 31 deadline. These are the smaller airports that are going to rely on the ETD for their long-term solution. They are going to be using primarily small machines. It is no longer feasible to meet the December 31 deadline for larger airports, especially like my hometown DFW. Since they submitted their plan in March, they still have yet to hear back from the TSA to find out if they have been approved and are on the right track. For larger airports like DFW, it is impossible for them to be ready by the end of the year. Have we not provided enough bureaucracy? It is ridiculous that opponents to this commonsense measure would rather have airports miss the deadline altogether. This is not a one-size-fits-all solution.

Mr. SAM JOHNSON of Texas

Mr. SAM JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Boehner), the chairman of the Committee on Education and the Workforce.

Mr. SAM JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I would like to claim the time in opposition.

Mr. SAM JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I rise in opposition to the amendment offered by the gentleman from Vermont (Mr. Sanders) and I rise as chairman of the Subcommittee on Employer/Employee Relations which has jurisdiction over ERISA, and a member of the Committee on Education and the Workforce with jurisdiction over age discrimination issues. I am also a member of the Committee on Ways and Means which also has jurisdiction on pension issues. Despite some assertion made recently by the gentleman from Vermont (Mr. Sanders) as ranking member of the Subcommittee on International Monetary Policy and Trade, he has no jurisdiction over any pension issues. Congress should be in the business of encouraging, not discouraging, employer-sponsored pension plans. Currently less than half of the Americans who work in the private sector are covered by a retirement plan. The reason for this anemic number is that we have so overregulated these plans that many employers simply decide not to offer this important employee benefit. The decline in the defined benefit pension plans has been particularly shocking. Earlier this year the Committee on Ways and Means held a hearing on defined benefit pension plans and we heard testimony on the decline of these plans that provide retirees guaranteed income for life. The number of defined benefit pension plans peaked in 1985 at 114,000 plans. In 2001 the number of these plans had fallen to 35,000, a staggering decline of almost 70 percent. The reason for this drop is that these plans were wrapped in so much red tape that employers chose to stop offering this benefit to their employees. One type of defined benefit pension plan that provides some glimmer of hope that we will not see these plans become extinct is cash balance pension plans. The accrued benefits in these plans are guaranteed not to be reduced, a deal that many of us wish we could find for our shrinking 401(k) and TSP balances. I think that it is important that we maintain the employer's ability to do these things. The employer makes contributions and the employer bears the risk of market reductions, not the employee. Finally, the United States Government insures cash balance plans through the Pension Benefit Guarantee Corporation in the event that the employer goes bankrupt. These traits are enough of an incentive to businesses that some have begun to offer cash balance defined benefit plans. However, the Sanders amendment would put an end to businesses implementing new cash balance plans. The amendment would prohibit any new guidance being issued by Treasury or the IRS regarding cash balance plans. The sponsors of this amendment claim that it is meant only to prevent the IRS from changing its position on a notice and to prevent them from violating age discrimination law. In reality the amendment attempts to establish new pension rules and is fully within the jurisdiction of the House Committee on Education and the Workforce and the House Committee on Ways and Means. The Department of Treasury is now in the process of issuing new cash balance regulations, some of which we mandated in a bill last year that passed with overwhelming support. Yet this amendment would undercut those regulations. This is not a shoot-from-the-hip type of an issue. It needs to go through a committee of jurisdiction and I urge a no vote on this amendment. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. SAM JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. The complexity of cash balance plans has been the subject of study of both the Clinton and Bush administrations, and there is no Federal agency in any administration that found that cash balance plans discriminate on the basis of age. By its own admission, the Internal Revenue Service is trying to clarify some of the ambiguities under its own notice 96-8. The passage of this amendment, in our view, would prevent the IRS from modifying 96-8, a circumstance which could cause significant harm to many workers. So I would say that this amendment simply bars the administration, which started under Clinton and now continues under Bush, from trying to fix some of the problems that occur with our pension system. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. SAM JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Chairman, how much time remains?

Mr. SAM JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from New York (Mr. Houghton), a member of the Committee on Ways and Means.

Mr. SAM JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. SAM JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Chairman, both the Department of Labor and the Treasury Department are trying to examine the regulations and their effect on cash balance plans. The recent DOL Inspector General's report indicates there is confusion on the part of employers as to the rules to be applied to distributions from cash balance plans. The two Departments need time to develop rules that are both understandable to employers and not harmful to workers' benefits under these plans. Congress must not impede the normal regulatory process of the agencies by removing the flexibility they presently enjoy to craft rules in the pension area. The Congress should be trying to encourage the growth of employer-sponsored pension plans; and passage of the Sanders amendment will have a chilling effect on cash balance plans. The Federal Government should promote policies that will encourage employers, particularly small businesses, to sponsor pension plans. As the baby boomers age, we need increased pension plan coverage. Passage of this amendment will impede that growth. I recommend a vote against this amendment.

Mr. SAM JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from North Dakota (Mr. Pomeroy), a member of the Committee on Ways and Means.

Mr. SAM JOHNSON of Texas

Mr. SAM JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Speaker, it is an honor for me today to be able to honor an American war hero, First Lieutenant James Flowers, Jr. He enlisted as a private in the Texas National Guard in 1930, and from there worked his way up the military ladder and on July 10, 1944, Flowers was a platoon leader when he volunteered his four tanks to help an infantry battalion encircled by Germans. His unit encountered enemy fire, and from there Flowers endured what can only be described as hell on earth. While 1 minute cannot do his sacrifices justice, please know this man embodies duty, honor, and country. First, his right foot was blown away by enemy fire. While waiting for relief, he lost his left leg below the knee. After two nights of desperately needing medical attention and lying severely injured, Americans finally came to the rescue. Nominated for the Medal of Honor, he was awarded four medals for his bravery and valor. While some would be hardened and angry after this unspeakable kind of tragedy, Flowers persevered. After being discharged, he attended SMU and began working in the prosthetics department of the VA. He moved to the Dallas VA where he established the first prosthetics treatment center in the Nation. Flowers has given so much to this country in his area of expertise. He exemplifies our greatest generation. God bless him and God bless our servicemen and women around the world.

Mr. SAM JOHNSON of Texas

Mr. SAM JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me time. Mr. Speaker, it is a great honor to be here today in support of improving the quality of life for the men and women of our military and their loved ones with this Armed Forces Tax Fairness Act. Let me begin by saying how extremely proud I am of the men and women who serve in our military, as well as their families. No matter where I go, I have the absolute rapt attention from everyone when I talk about members of our Armed Services and the great job they are doing today. I hope that our troops know that all across the Nation, citizens are proud of our troops and that Americans are grateful for the sacrifices that they and their families make for the defense of our Nation. The bill we debate here today will put some muscle behind our statements of appreciation. While one could never, ever, put a price on life, as a very small token of respect and condolences, the military provides a death benefit for survivors called a death gratuity after the loss of a loved one. This money can be used to fly family members to a funeral or pay for memorial service expenses. Unfortunately, in the last decade a large portion of that money has gone back to the Federal Government. The death gratuity was increased from $3,000 to $6,000 during the Persian Gulf War, but our Tax Code failed to keep up with the military changes. As a result, only half of that $6,000 is tax-free today. During times of war and times of peace, every military family prays for the safety of their loved ones. A visit by a military chaplain bearing bad news one day is only compounded by the horror of the tax man soon after. Taxing the loved ones' loss is one of the most inappropriate, irresponsible and immoral forms of taxation. Today's action will change that. This exclusion would be effective for those who died in the Pentagon, have fought for freedom in Afghanistan, and any service member killed while defending this country on September 11 or since that tragic day. Mr. Speaker, I remember when my wife talked about the chaplain coming up to her front door just when I was missing in action. Those families who have suffered, suffered through the death of a loved one killed in action by terrorism, should not have to give one nickel more to Uncle Sam. The other important change being made concerns housing of military families. The act would provide a reasonable accommodation to members of the military so they, too, can benefit from the current $500,000 exclusion from capital gains on the sale of a home. To get this exclusion, a family must live in a home for at least 2 of the previous 5 years. This is generally reasonable, but for those serving in the military, such a requirement is out of their control when their orders ship them to any of the four corners of the earth. I know firsthand about being transferred. As a 29-year veteran of the Air Force, my wife Shirley and our three kids and I moved 17 times. It is a reality of military life. It is fair for the Tax Code to hold them harmless for the time when they are not living in their own homes because of military orders. Do not worry. Service members will not be able to become real estate moguls by buying property all over the country and getting this benefit. It is only relevant for one property per family. Today's action is one more way Congress can say ``thank you'' to our brave military men and women, as well as their families. I hope the Senate follows suit for the families and for freedom, and sends this bill to the President soon.

Mr. SAM JOHNSON of Texas

Mr. SAM JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Speaker, the pension legislation enacted last year needs to be permanent. That will help Americans plan and save for a more secure retirement. One year has barely passed since enactment, and our dear colleagues on the other side of the aisle are ready to regulate and strangulate pension plans. The people who oppose making these provisions permanent only want to play politics, and they are doing so to the detriment of the retirement system. Yesterday at the House Committee on Ways and Means, we held a hearing on defined benefit pension plans. We heard the testimony about the decline of these pension plans which provide retirees guaranteed income. The number of plans peaked in 1985 at 114,000. At that point, Congress began tinkering with the pension plans. Congress so loved defined benefit plans and made them so safe that by 2001 the number of plans dropped from 114,000 to 35,000, a decline of almost 70 percent. Congress has legislated pension plans to death. Last year by a vote of 407-24, we took some important steps to begin to roll back some of this red tape. What do the proponents of Big Government red tape want to do? Roll back these reforms. They cannot stand the fact that we took a hedge trimmer and began to cut away at the kudzu they had grown. They actually want to go back in time and put more regulations on these plans which have been pushed nearly to extinction. By trying to pick apart this bill today, opponents are asking to undermine the whole law and undermine confidence in the portability and vesting rules that we tried so hard to achieve. Those who oppose making these provisions of law permanent do not seem to understand that pension plans require stability. It is all just a game to them and for the people who originally required these provisions to sunset in the first place. What a shame. I want to see this law made permanent so all Americans can know their retirement is safe and secure.

Mr. SAM JOHNSON of Texas

Mr. SAM JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I hate to hear them talking about drugs this early in the morning, because the Republican plan will work. We believe in democracy and free enterprise, and that is how it is going to work. Mr. Speaker, we have good teachers and we have great teachers, and it is an honor to bring to my colleagues' attention distinguished teachers from the Third Congressional District of Texas. I am pleased to recognize these recipients of the Teacher of the Year Award, who enable our students to understand and learn from each other and strive to achieve their goals. Great teachers nurture our country's best hope for tomorrow: our children. Children may be a fraction of our society, but they are 100 percent of our future. The perseverance and dedication of our teachers challenge and shape students to dream, to work, to make those dreams come true. Unfortunately, educators work with little public thanks or appreciation, even though top-notch teachers are essential to a strong future. These dedicated educators in particular go beyond the call of duty and selflessly make our children and our country a better place. It is my distinct honor to present the teachers of the year from Garland, Texas, and Richardson, Texas: In Garland Independent School District, the teacher of the year is Carol Clark. In Richardson Independent School District, the teachers of the year are Betty Jackson and Kari Gilbertson. As the highest-ranking Texan on the Committee on Education and the Workforce, I know firsthand the importance of a quality education. However, it is outstanding teachers like these who strive for excellence. I thank these hometown heroes and excellent educators for all they do for Garland, for Richardson, for our children, for America, and for freedom. God bless them.