Walter Jones

Mr. JONES of North Carolina

Mr. JONES of North Carolina. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the requisite number of words. To the gentleman from New Mexico (Mr. Skeen), the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Young), the gentleman from Washington (Mr. Dicks), and the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Obey) I want to say thank you for the leadership that you provide. The reason I came down tonight, and to my friend, the gentleman from Washington (Mr. Nethercutt), is simply because I am extremely concerned about the next generation's future, quite frankly. I have been coming to the floor for the last 3 weeks. I have written to Secretary O'Neill and to the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Burton), because in the report from the Secretary of Treasury, Secretary O'Neill, the ``2001 Financial Report of the United States Government,'' they acknowledge in this report that we have lost $17.3 billion of the American people's money. I would hope somebody in this House, both Democrat and Republican, would join me in asking Mr. O'Neill where is $17.3 billion of the American people's money. Certainly I must say to my good friend, the gentleman from Maine (Mr. Allen), who is a good friend, that certainly many of my colleagues did not realize this, and I want to be very honest about it, I did not either until the July 4 break listening to a talk show host in Raleigh, North Carolina, reading a New York Post article and chastising the American Government and the Congress and the Secretary of the Treasury for reporting that we had lost $17.3 billion. So I came down here tonight to speak on behalf of this amendment simply because I am concerned about the next generation's future. We all hope that we do the right things when we are here on the floor of the House voting. But I really think about the way we are going with increased spending. And I was a former Democrat, by the way, who joined the Republican Party in 1993 because I believed that my party, quite frankly, would do the best job of holding down the growth of government. That has not happened yet, and I am somewhat surprised and disappointed. But as we continue to expand the Federal Government and the spending of the Federal Government, what we are doing to the next generation is that by the year 2012 or 2015 we are going to be asking the next generation and those who are working that we need to increase their Federal taxes by 20 to 25 percent, 20 to 25 percent. To everybody on this floor tonight, staff as well as Members, you know what you are paying in taxes. Think about the working people of this country who are making $30,000, $40,000 a year, maybe $50,000 trying to raise their children and take care of their family. Think about their taxes. That is what we do when we increase the spending of the Federal Government. Mr. Chairman, I must say that, again, there is a whole lot in this bill that I do like and I do support. But, again, when we expand the spending over what was requested, then that is when we have sincerely, I think, an obligation to the American people. Yes, we pay our taxes. We all work hard. I am always back home in my district, when I go into a school, I praise every Member of the United States House of Representatives, liberal or conservative; and I praise the staff, and I talk about how hard they work and how they do what they think is right for the American people. I believe that sincerely. But I will say that if we, in a bipartisan way, do not work to hold down the growth of government, then when our grandchildren, when many of us, not George and Tom, but when many of us are in our 70s and 80s, we will have our children who are trying to raise our grandchildren say to us, how in the world could you serve in the Congress and we are having to pay 35 and 40 percent in taxes? This is just the beginning of the appropriation process; and, Mr. Chairman, I will yield to you because I did support you on the military issues, but let me say to you that all of us are guilty, including myself, of not doing a better job of holding down the growth of this Federal Government. And I hope that we will work together, and whether we agree on every issue, we can work together to do a better job.

Mr. JONES of North Carolina. I yield to the gentleman from Florida.

Mr. JONES of North Carolina. Mr. Chairman, reclaiming my time, and since the chairman asked the question of the gentleman from Nebraska (Mr. Terry), if I might, the one thing about the farm bill is it was consistent with the budget resolution. This is not.

Mr. JONES of North Carolina. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word. Mr. Chairman, to my friend from Mississippi (Mr. Taylor), and he is my friend, I concur with you 110 percent; and there are many on this side of the aisle that do concur with you. I also want to say something else. I came in 1995 to my first year in the United States Congress, and I am proud to be a foot soldier here in the United States House, and I consider myself a foot soldier. There are a number of us on both sides of the aisle who are foot soldiers, who believe and hope that the majority of the time we are doing what is right for American people. I mention that because recently my friend from Mississippi, who is in the back of the Chamber, kept us here until like 2 or 3 in the morning making motions; and because he believed so strongly in what he was doing, I never was offended. Some Members on both sides of the aisle, I heard grumbling; but quite frankly, I did not because I thought that the gentleman was doing what he was elected to do if he believed what he was doing. I know the gentleman well enough to know that he believed in what he was doing. I want to say that tonight because we have Members on our side of the aisle and certainly those on the Democratic aisle that feel very passionately about these issues tonight. I want to mention, again, I did the first time I spoke 30, 40 minutes ago, that I have been on the floor once a week with a chart that I would hope some of the Members here tonight and those that will be in their offices would join me in a letter that I wrote to Secretary O'Neill. Now, we have been talking about billions of dollars here and billions of dollars there and millions of dollars here. Let me just read to you who might not be familiar with this. In the ``2001 Financial Report of the United States Government,'' which came out in March of this year, in March of this year, the report provides minimal data and information regarding these unreconciled transactions. Not only is the Federal Government missing $17.3 billion, but there is no reason given for this loss. Now, that is in the report to the American people. I know that makes the taxpayers of this country feel real good about their tax money. Now, I know this is not part of this interior bill or this debate, but I wanted to have this opportunity to say to my colleagues on both sides of the aisle, we should be demanding that the Secretary of the Treasury come forward and explain where $17.3 billion has been lost by this Federal Government. I am just as upset as anybody about the fact that WorldCom and Enron and the corporate executives cheated and committed fraud to those investors, but what I want to say to my colleagues, the taxpayers do not have a choice. They have to pay their taxes. I am not defending those who created the fraud because those people made investments, which we all do, most of us do from time to time, but the fact that the taxpayers of this country cannot get an explanation as to why in the 2001 report we have lost $17.3 billion. So as this debate continues tonight or tomorrow or both days, it is, and we do agree, I agree with the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Frank) a while ago in what he was saying. We have got to make decisions. We cannot cut taxes and expand government at the same time. That is the problem in my State of North Carolina. They are $2 billion in debt today, and I do not know how my State of North Carolina is going to work out of this problem in the next 3 years, but part of that problem is when they did cut the taxes, they expanded the governmental programs, and it caught up with them. I just want for my children and grandchildren and my colleagues' children and grandchildren that they are not going to have to be paying a tax on the Federal taxes that they owe this government of 35 and 40 percent over what we are paying today. In my opinion, that would be the economic downfall of this country.

Mr. JONES of North Carolina

Mr. JONES of North Carolina. Mr. Speaker, first, I would like to say I join my colleagues on both sides of the aisle in my concerns about the corporate scandals that are taking place throughout this country and certainly the investors who have lost so much money. I resent very much the corporate leadership and how they have misled and manipulated the investors, and I hope that there will be a severe price to pay for this action. However, Mr. Speaker, I wanted to come back to the floor tonight to talk about my concerns about the government in their report, which was the ``2001 Financial Report of the United States Government.'' On page 110, we can see from the chart that they acknowledge in this report that the taxpayers or the government has lost $17.3 billion of the taxpayers' money. My biggest concern is because the taxpayers do not have a choice, they have to pay their taxes at the end of the year, and those us of in Congress, I think we have a responsibility to make sure that the monies of our taxpayers are certainly being protected so there is not a report like the ``2001 Financial Report of the United States Government,'' that said we have misplaced or lost or cannot reconcile transactions that total $17.3 billion. Mr. Speaker, I actually wrote to Secretary O'Neill on June 6 asking him to please respond to my letter asking questions as to where in the world could this $17.3 billion have gone. I certainly think that the taxpayers of this country have a right to know. Certainly they are required to pay taxes, so they are investors in this government; and we have a responsibility to make certain that we can account for their monies. In addition, there was the GAO testimony that was released on April 9, 2002. This was an appearance before the Subcommittee on Government Efficiency, Financial Management and Intergovernmental Relations. I want to read one statement from David Walker, Comptroller General of the United States. He said, ``As in the four previous fiscal years, we were unable to express an opinion on the consolidated financial statements because of certain material weaknesses in internal control and accounting and reporting issues. These conditions prevented us from being able to provide the Congress and the American citizens an opinion as to whether the consolidated financial statements are fairly stated in conformity with the U.S. generally accepted accounting principles.'' Mr. Speaker, when I read that information to the House and to the American people, we certainly have our responsibility as elected officials to make certain that the people that have the privilege to work for the taxpayers of this country make sure that we spend their money wisely. I am almost embarrassed to be here on the floor to say to the American people and to my colleagues on the floor of the House that in this 2001 report we have acknowledged that we have lost $17.3 billion of the taxpayers' money. Mr. Speaker, I am going to close by saying in addition to Secretary O'Neill, I have written a letter to Chairman Dan Burton asking that he hold a hearing and let us see if we cannot find out where the taxpayers' $17.3 billion has gone. We owe them an explanation. As we look into the corporate scandals, let us also look at the accounting system of the United States Government so that we can explain to the taxpayers of this country where their money is going.

Mr. JONES of North Carolina

Mr. JONES of North Carolina. Mr. Chairman, as I stand before you today, homeowners of my district in Eastern North Carolina are making preparations for another hurricane season along the coast. Unfortunately, many of my constituents have yet to fully recover from effects of seasons past. The United States has a significant hurricane problem. More than 60 percent of our population live in coastal states, and every year these citizens must rely on the most accurate information at their disposal as they take the measures necessary to remain safe. Mr. Chairman, when most people think of the dangers of hurricanes, high winds and storm surges come to mind. However, more people have died from inland flooding over the past 30 years than any other cause. While high winds are a major source of damage, their impacts are often localized to immediate coastal areas. On the contrary, inland flooding threatens communities hundreds of miles from the coast, as powerful rains fall from these huge tropical air masses. My constituents know all too well the perils of inland flooding. In 1999, Hurricane Floyd brought torrential rains and record flooding to Eastern North Carolina. As riverbanks and dams gave way, townspeople were lucky to find safety before their homes and businesses were washed away. Of the 56 people who lost their lives in this storm, 50 of them drowned due to inland flooding. Mr. Chairman, even more heartbreaking is the fact that these deaths could have been prevented. That is why I stand before you today to voice my full support for H.R. 2486, the Inland Flood Forecasting and Warning System Act, introduced by my colleague from North Carolina, Bob Etheridge. This bill will give the National Weather Service, emergency officials, and meteorologists the tools necessary to moderate the dangers of tropical cyclones and inland flooding. More importantly it saves lives. Mr. Chairman, each year citizens along coastal areas do their part to protect families and communities from the effects of hurricanes, now it's time for Congress to do ours.

Mr. JONES of North Carolina

Mr. JONES of North Carolina. Mr. Speaker, I would like to take my time that I am allotted tonight to talk a little bit about the loss of $17.3 billion. On June 6 of this year I wrote a letter to the Secretary of the Treasury, and the reason that I wrote this letter is because I had been back in North Carolina during the break and I was listening to a talk show and they were quoting from the New York Post, and I want to read the first two paragraphs of this article. It says, May 28, 2002, Washington complains about deceptive corporate accounting, but the government last year misplaced an incredible $17.3 billion because of shoddy bookkeeping or worse. Again, the article says, Let me put that into numbers so that you can fully appreciate the amount. It is $17.3 billion, the price of a few dozen urban renewal projects, a nice size fleet of warships or about half the tax cut that everyone made such a fuss about last year. In addition, the London Times also wrote an article on the fact that we in this Nation, that our accounting system for this government, that we have lost or misplaced $17.3 billion. I share with my colleagues on both sides of the political aisle my frustration and disgust with what happened with Enron and also with WorldCom, but I do want to make the point, Mr. Speaker, that as sad as that is, and it is terribly sad, that the investors had a choice to make an investment. The taxpayers do not have a choice. They are mandated by law to pay their taxes. So, therefore, we collect their taxes and yet in the year 2001, we have, and this is the term used, unreconciled transactions in the amount of $17.3 billion. So this is about my third or fourth week of coming to the floor, and I actually on June 6, I wrote Secretary O'Neill a letter, and I am just going to read two paragraphs. I said, The report provides minimal data and information regarding these unreconciled transactions. Not only is the Federal Government missing $17.3 billion but there is no reason given for this loss. While I appreciate the Department of Treasury's statement, the identification and accurate reporting of these unreconciled transactions is a priority. The fact remains, the public nor the Congress has the information on how this loss occurred, what agencies were responsible for this unreconciled transactional; would these transactions eventually be reconciled; if so, what is the time line for this reconciliation; what agency or agencies will be responsible for the reconciliation; will this reconciliation be available to the public when completed. Mr. Speaker, the reason I am down here on the floor, I realize the Secretary is a very busy man, but I did write this letter on June 6 of this year, and I have not received a response. I am going to give the Secretary the benefit of the doubt, that like many of us here in the Congress, we have wonderful assistants that sometimes get the mail and they go through the letters before we see them. So I am going to give him the benefit of the doubt. I did write on June 27 a letter to the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Burton), and I have asked that the oversight committee hold a hearing on this issue of where we have misplaced the $17.3 billion. Again, Mr. Speaker, I will continue to come to the floor. Next week, I will have a chart that I will hold up before me as I speak, reminding the American people that we in Congress, on both sides of the political aisle, want to find out where that $17.3 billion of the taxpayers' money has gone, and if it has been misspent or misplaced, somebody needs to answer for it.

Mr. JONES of North Carolina

Mr. JONES of North Carolina. Mr. Speaker, I want to first thank the gentleman from California (Mr. Thomas) and the gentleman from New York (Mr. Rangel) and the gentleman from New York (Mr. Houghton) and the gentleman from New York (Mr. McNulty) for bringing this legislation forward. I think, after the celebration of our freedom last Thursday, that it is just and appropriate that we should bring this legislation forward. I actually got involved with H.R. 3973 2 or 3 months ago when I learned that the tax was on the death gratuity of our military; and I worked both sides of the political aisle. We had over 110 sponsors for that legislation, because all of us were surprised that there was still that tax on the death gratuity. So I want to compliment the chairman and the ranking member for bringing this legislation forward. I am pleased to say, as the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Johnson), who was a former POW, said, that we have so many wonderful men and women in uniform who serve this Nation and are willing to be called to give their life for America at any time; and to eliminate this death tax, death gratuity tax, on the family after they have lost a loved one is absolutely the right thing to do. It should be, as it is to my colleagues, unacceptable that this death gratuity tax is in the law now, but we are going to eliminate that with the passage of this legislation. In addition, I would like to thank the gentleman from New York (Mr. Houghton), the chairman of the subcommittee, and others, because I have also shared their concern about the fact that our military was left out of the Taxpayers Relief Act of 1997, when we allowed for the first sale of a home that the capital gains tax would not apply. So I am pleased, after 5 years, I say to my colleagues, that they are bringing this forward and bringing this relief to the men and women in uniform. The last point on that is that I did talk to Chairman Archer at the time, back in 1998, and he said that it was a mistake, that the military should have been included; so I am delighted with the efforts of my colleagues that we are moving this forward. Mr. Speaker, in closing, I would just like to say that I give my strong support and appreciation to the leadership for bringing this act to the floor of the House.

Mr. JONES of North Carolina

Mr. JONES of North Carolina. Mr. Speaker, I will not take the full hour that has been allotted to me. I will only take 5 or 6 minutes. I came to the floor of the House because 2 weeks ago I had been listening to a radio talk show host in North Carolina. It was actually Jerry Agar at WPTF in Raleigh. He was talking about the fact that he just could not believe a New York Post article that said that the Federal Government had lost $17.3 billion. I was just really outraged at the time. I took my car phone and called my office and I said, ``Please check this New York Post article. Let's verify what Mr. Agar was saying.'' Sure enough, what we found out, the New York Post, and not only the Post but also the London Times had both written articles to the fact that based on the Department of Treasury-released report, the 2001 financial report of the United States Government, the report, on page 110, revealed that the Federal Government has unreconciled transactions totaling $17.3 billion for fiscal year 2001. Mr. Speaker, I am one of many on both sides of the political aisle that just really thinks this is unacceptable and outrageous that the hard-working American people who pay their taxes and think that we are the public guardian of the American people's taxes, yet the government cannot account for $17.3 billion. On June 6, I wrote a letter to Secretary Paul O'Neill. The last paragraph says, ``Mr. Secretary, I believe someone must answer to the American people for this loss of tax dollars, and I look forward to your answer regarding these unreconciled transactions.'' I, quite frankly, hope that by the time we return after the July 4 break, which will be in about 1 week, or 8 days, and we are out for about 6 days, that when we come back, that I will have an answer from Secretary O'Neill as to where the taxpayers' money totaling $17.3 billion has gone. If not, then I intend to write the Budget chairman and also the oversight chairman on the Government Operations and ask them to please make an inquiry in behalf of the taxpayers of America. There are a multitude of reasons why I am alarmed by the fact that this has been lost, again primarily because it is the taxpayers' money. We all know that this is a tight budget year. We have a war on terrorism that is costing about $1.8 billion a month. We must fight that war and win that war for the American people, and certainly we must be very frugal and wise with the taxpayers' money, and certainly must account to the taxpayer every dollar and every dime that we spend. That is one reason that I am really pushing hard for the Secretary of Treasury to give me an answer to where this $17.3 billion has gone, because, quite frankly, we have an obligation to the taxpayer, and we have an obligation as Members of the House of Representatives to make sure that we can answer the questions of our constituents about a multitude of issues, and certainly as to where $17.3 billion has gone. I use for an example that I have put in a bill, H.R. 3973, that many of my colleagues, both Democrat and Republican, have signed this bill that would help ensure that when a military person is killed, whether it be accidental or it should be in wartime, that the Congress years ago decided that the family should get what is called a death gratuity. Initially it started off at about $3,000. In 1986, the Congress decided to add 3- to the 3-, which would make it 6-. But on the second $3,000, the bill was not sent to Ways and Means, so, therefore, there is a tax on the second 3- of the $6,000 death gratuity that is given to the family of a man or woman in the military. I am just incensed that there would be any tax on this death gratuity, so I have put a bill in, and again I have got very strong bipartisan support, to eliminate this tax so that when the family receives the death gratuity from the United States Government, there would be no tax to the family. I use that for an example because, Mr. Speaker, to eliminate this tax over a 10-year period would only cost $8 million, that is over 10 years, to make sure that the family of the military person that has been killed would not pay a tax on it. Then I come back to the fact that we have lost $17.3 billion. My point is to say that I intend to come to this floor at least once a week, and maybe more often than that, to say to Secretary O'Neill, we need as a Congress, not just Congressman Walter Jones, but we as a Congress, we need an answer so that we can say to our constituents who are paying these taxes that we want to know where $17.3 billion has gone. I have just a couple of more points, and then I will yield back my time. I am one of many, both Republican and Democrats, who work here very hard. We heard, the hour before my time, in talking about housing. There are just a lot of responsibilities that we do have to the taxpayers of this country to make sure that the government does operate in a very efficient manner, and where we can be of assistance to the people throughout this country, we certainly need to meet that obligation. Again, the May 2002 report from the Department of Treasury, 2001 financial report of the United States Government, anybody that might be listening tonight or anybody that would like to check can go on the Internet and look up that document, 2001 financial report of the United States Government, look on page 110. And I am going to repeat it again, the Federal Government has, and I quote, unreconciled transactions totaling $17.3 billion. Just a quick example. According to the London Times, $17.3 billion is enough to buy a fleet of B-2 bombers with spare change for fuel. $17.3 billion is the equivalent of two aircraft carriers and two air wings. We all know that if this money, if it had just been $200 that might have been lost by a company, the company president would have immediately called the CPA and said, ``Come in here and check the books of this company. I don't know where we have lost this money.'' Then if he could not find it, he might even call the local police and ask them to come in to help investigate. I want to say again that I am certain that Secretary O'Neill will answer my letter and give me an explanation so I can say to the taxpayers of the Third District of North Carolina as well as the taxpayers of America that we know where this $17.3 billion has gone. Mr. Speaker, again, I want to thank you for this time and just to say that I will promise the people of the Third District of North Carolina and the people of America that I will work with my colleagues on both sides of the political aisle and make sure that we get an explanation as to where the $17.3 billion has gone; that we appreciate the hard- working people of America, and we want to make sure that even though we have many contentious and heated debates, and that is the way it should be, this is a Republic, it is a democratic country, and we have a right to disagree, but when it really comes down to trying to protect the taxpayers' money, we work together in a bipartisan way. Therefore, if I have not gotten an answer when we come back after July 4, I will be asking the committees of jurisdiction to please request that Secretary O'Neill comes before the committee and explains where this $17.3 billion has gone. I conclude tonight, Mr. Speaker, because I have three military bases in my district, Camp Lejeune Marine Base, Cherry Point Marine Station and Seymore Johnson Air Force Base. I certainly want to close by asking God to please bless our men and women in uniform and their families. We are very fortunate to have the dedicated men and women in uniform as well as their families.

Mr. JONES of North Carolina

Mr. JONES of North Carolina. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to introduce a common sense piece of legislation to help our military retirees. As my colleagues know, service members and their families will move many times in a typical military career. These permanent changes of station or PCS often involve considerable additional expense, including the loss of rental deposits, connecting and disconnecting utilities, and wear and tear on household goods. To help defray these additional costs, Congress in 1955 adopted the payment of a special allowance--a dislocation allowance. This was done to recognize that duty station changes and resultant household relocations are due to the personnel management decisions of the armed forces and not the individual service members. This amount was increased in 1986 and again in recent years. This is an important benefit for our military members. However, as important as this benefit is, there is a category of service members who are not eligible to receive the dislocation allowance--the military retiree. This is despite the fact a vast number are subject to the same expenses as their active duty counterpart. In August 2000, the Marine Corps Sergeant Major Symposium recommended the payment of dislocation allowances to retiring members, who in the opinion of the Sergeants Major, bear the same financial consequences on relocating as those still on active service. Military retirees must often seek employment not knowing what opportunities exist in the civilian world, where those opportunities are located, what the pay will be, or what possibilities are available for spousal employment. Retirees are sometimes faced with the prospective employers who offer less wages knowing they are in receipt of retirement pay, and falsely believing that retirees don't need the same salary as civilians for the same position. Additionally, the military retiree will have to meet the same financial demands for mortgages, insurance, taxes, and food on a smaller income. For those reasons, I am introducing the Military Retiree Dislocation Assistance Act. This legislation would help ease the transition into retirement by amending 37 USC Sec. 407 to authorize the payment of a dislocation allowance to all members of the armed forces retiring or transferring to an inactive duty status such as the Fleet Reserve or Fleet Marine Reserve. The vast majority of these retirees have given our Nation over 20 years of dedicated service. They have helped protect the very freedoms we all hold dear. Rather than simply pushing them out the door upon retirement, we should reward their service by providing modest assistance for their final change of station move. That is exactly what Military Retiree Dislocation Assistance Act does.

Mr. JONES of North Carolina

Mr. JONES of North Carolina. Mr. Speaker, during the Memorial Day break, I happened to be listening to a talk show out of Raleigh, North Carolina called WPTF and the host is Jerry Agar. When Mr. Agar said that the New York Post had reported that the national government, the Federal Government had lost $17.3 billion, it kind of got my attention. So by phone, because I was in my car, I called my staff and I said, please get me a copy of the New York Post. I cannot believe what Jerry Agar was saying, even though I have been on his show and I think he is a very, very credible talk show host. Sure enough, we got a copy of the New York Post and the article says, ``Washington complains about deceptive corporate accounting, but the government last year misplaced an incredible $17.3 billion because of shoddy bookkeeping, or worse.'' Then, to add to that embarrassment that we cannot keep our books straight here in Washington, D.C., the London Times, May 29, has an article that says, ``As accounting errors go, it is a whopper. The U.S. Treasury has admitted that it has `lost' $17.3 billion,'' and they equate that in pounds to $11.7 billion, ``because of shoddy bookkeeping, enough to buy a fleet of 8 B-2 stealth bombers and still have change for jet fuel.'' Mr. Speaker, I would like to submit these two articles and also a letter that I have sent to Secretary Paul O'Neill. Let me go a little bit further. In March, 2002, the Department of the Treasury released the 2001 financial report of the United States Government. This report included some shocking revelations about Federal Government expenditures. Specifically, on page 110 of this report, it is revealed that the Federal Government has unreconciled transactions totaling $17.3 billion from the year 2001. Put simply, the Federal Government cannot account for billions of taxpayers' dollars that Americans paid in one fiscal year. Mr. Speaker, as a Member of Congress, and my colleagues, I am sure, feel the same and, more importantly, as taxpayers, I am frankly offended by these facts. With the war on terrorism costing about $1.8 billion per month, this is not the time to be misplacing taxpayers' dollars. As I stated earlier, and I want to state again, the London Times said $17.3 billion is enough to buy a fleet of B-2 bombers with spare change for fuel. Mr. Speaker, $17.3 billion is the equivalent of two aircraft carriers and two air wings. If a company in the private sector managed its books in a similar fashion, someone would definitely be going to jail. Last week, as I said earlier, I requested Secretary of the Treasury Paul O'Neill to account for these unreconciled transactions. Mr. Speaker, the American taxpayers look to us to be the leaders who protect and spend their money wisely, and I think we have a responsibility and an obligation to the taxpayers of this country to explain to them how we lost $17.3 billion. It is unacceptable, and I am sure my colleagues on both sides of the political aisle will feel the way I do. We would expect an explanation to the fact that we have misplaced and lost $17.3 billion of the taxpayers' money. So, Mr. Speaker, I am going to close with that. But again, I do want to submit the two articles from the London Times, the New York Post, and my letter to Secretary O'Neill, and I do expect Secretary O'Neill to respond with some type of explanation. If I do not get a letter in the proper length of time, I intend to notify the committee of jurisdiction and ask that they hold a hearing on how we as a national government have lost $17.3 billion of the taxpayers' money. The American people work hard for their money and they have a right for an accountability by this government. [From the New York Post, May 28, 2002] Billions Lost by Feds (By John Crudele) May 28, 2002.--Washington complains about deceptive corporate accounting. But the government last year misplaced an incredible $17.3 billion because of shoddy bookkeeping, or worse. Let me put that into numbers so you can fully appreciate the amount. It's $17,300,000,000--the price of a few dozen urban renewal projects, a nice size fleet of warships or about have the tax cut that everyone made such a fuss about last summer. Disappeared. Gone. Nowhere to be found. In fact, the government's accounting was so atrocious that the General Accounting Office--another Washington agency--refused to give an opinion about the honesty of the government's books. Did someone steal all that money? The government doesn't know. Was it simply misplaced? Dunno. Misspent? Your guess is as good as anyone's. There's a certain bit of irony, of course, that Congress is raking companies like Enron, Arthur Andersen and others over the hot coals for falsified books when D.C.'s own records are pathetically inadequate. As I mentioned in this column a couple of weeks ago, the government made an incredible admission a little while back in something called the 2001 Financial Report of the United States Government. In that report, Treasury Secretary Paul O'Neill revealed that when the government uses the same accounting method that corporations are required to use, the federal deficit in 2001 was $515 billion. Last fall the government said the budget had a surplus of $127 billion. Ah, yes, the good old days! The huge deficit is mainly, the government says, the result of health benefits to military retirees. That's a cost the government conveniently forgot to include in its old accounting method, which had more to do with winning votes than providing a true financial picture of the country. Anf that $515 billion doesn't include all costs, especially Social Security. But we'll leave that alone because I don't want to depress anyone--especially myself. I also said in that earlier column that the information on the deficit wasn't easy to find. O'Neill's letter was buried on the Treasury Department's Web site and the press release put out by the agency didn't mention the $515 billion until paragraph 5. (Treasury says all the press in Washington got a copy of the report and that it was adequately disclosed. It also said an undersecretary of Treasury had reported the numbers to a congressional subcommittee.) Well, I sent my scavengers back into that Financial Report of the U.S. for another look and that's when we discovered the unaccounted for $17.4 billion. Follow me on this and I'll lead you to the still missing treasure. Go to www.USTreas.gov, click on Treasury Bureau on the left, then click on ``financial management services.'' If you've made it this far click on ``Financial Report of the U.S. Government'' for 2001 and download it. Now find page 49. Look at the line that says ``Unreconciled transactions affecting the change in net position.'' The figure in the 2001 column next to that is $17.3 billion. What that means is that when the accountants tried to balanced the government's books they came up $17.4 billion short. Note 16 on Page 110 sort of explains. That footnote says that the accountants had to pencil in $17.4 billion that didn't exist (or was missing) in order to achieve a balanced government ledger. The footnote adds that the mistake could simply be bad government record keeping or ``improper recording of intragovernmental transactions by agencies.'' Poor record keeping! Isn't that a gem. I spoke with some of the folks at the General Accounting Office who audited the government's report. They were puzzled by the discrepancy and wouldn't sign off on the government's accounting because of that and other things. ``The left and the right side didn't equate,'' said one GAO auditor. When such a thing happens in the private sector, People go to jail. And a company's stock would fall by about 99 percent if its auditor didn't trust the books--just ask the felons-to-be down at Enron. It is good that Washington must now adopt a corporate-like method of accounting for where it spends taxpayers' money. But it would be even better if there were some recourse to the sort of sloppiness, arrogance or criminality that allows the government to come up $17.4 billion short of balancing its books. At the very least, maybe some corporate exec--as he's being hauled off to jail for accounting fraud--will hold aloft page 49 of the government's financial statement and foot note 16 and demand equal treatment.

Mr. JONES of North Carolina

Mr. JONES of North Carolina. Mr. Speaker, there is a saying that only in America can an individual be given a certificate at birth, a license at marriage, and a bill at death. Americans should not have to visit the undertaker and the IRS on the same day. Unfortunately, small businesses and family farms, like those in eastern North Carolina, are particularly vulnerable to the death tax. At the time of their death, Americans are taxed on the value of their property, often at rates as high as 55 percent. Mr. Speaker, this places a tremendous burden on families who are already grieving the loss of a loved one. While small businesses and family farms are typically rich in assets, they often do not have the liquid resources to settle this size of bill with the Federal Government. Too often, they are forced to sell some or all of their land or business, which often serves as their family's livelihood. Over the years, the death tax has devastated family-owned businesses throughout our Nation's towns and cities. Today, less than half of family businesses are able to survive the death of a founder. What could be more un-American? Under current law, 70 percent of family businesses do not survive the second generation and 87 percent do not make it to the third generation. The death tax discourages savings and investment, and punishes those Americans who work hard throughout their lives to pass on something to their children. Mr. Speaker, the estate tax does not serve as a significant source of revenue for the Federal Government. The Treasury Department reported that in 1998, the estate and gift tax raised only $24.6 billion, which amounts to only 1.3 percent of total Federal revenues. In addition, economic studies conducted by former Secretary of the Treasury Lawrence Summers show that for every dollar in transfer taxes taken at death, $33 in capital formation is lost from the economy. Despite its little value to the government, the death tax undermines the idea that hard work and fiscal responsibility will be rewarded. Thankfully, this Congress provided a phase-out of the estate tax beginning in 2002 by eliminating the 5 percent surtax and the rates in excess of 50 percent and increases the exemption to $1 million. Today, we need to take steps to ensure this phase-out is permanent and does not sunset in 2011. If H.R. 2143 is not signed into law, the death tax will reappear, almost overnight on New Year's Eve, 2011. Mr. Speaker, this Congress has done an admirable job of guaranteeing tax relief for every working American. Let's pass this bill now and finish the job we started when we took back the people's House in 1995.

Mr. JONES of North Carolina

Mr. JONES of North Carolina. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to introduce the Nursing Home Resident Safety Assurance Act, legislation to require background checks on indirect care personnel in our nation's nursing homes. Currently, there are 17,000 nursing homes in the United States where approximately 1.5 million of our nation's seniors reside. A 1999 study conducted by the House Government Reform Committee analyzed two years of state inspection and complaint investigation reports of nursing homes and revealed that abuse of nursing home residents is a widespread, serious problem. Specifically, over 30 percent of nursing homes in the United States, or 5,283 facilities, were cited for an abuse violation between January 1, 1999 and January 1, 2001. During the two-year period of the report, these nursing homes were cited for 8,972 violations. The most frequent violations were failure to properly investigate and report allegations of resident abuse or failure to ensure that nursing home staff had no record of abusing, neglecting or mistreating residents. For this reason, Congress must take additional action to protect seniors receiving care in our nation's nursing homes. My legislation, the Nursing Home Resident Safety Assurance Act is an important step towards achieving that goal. The bill would amend Public Law 105-277, which currently requires federal criminal background checks on direct care personnel to also allow background checks on indirect care personnel such as maintenance workers, janitors and dietary staff. These individuals have direct access to seniors in nursing homes without completing the screening procedures that direct care personnel, such as physical therapists and licensed nurse practitioners are required to have. The current loophole in the law puts our society's most vulnerable members, the elderly and disabled in circumstances rife with opportunities for abuse and exploitation. The state of North Carolina recognized this potential for abuse and the state legislature passed legislation requiring criminal background checks for both direct and indirect care nursing home personnel who have not lived in North Carolina for 5 years. Public Law 105-277 hinders this background check process by preventing the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) from releasing background information on indirect care personnel. Amending this law to require criminal background checks on all nursing home personnel would send a message that Congress is serious about protecting the welfare of our Nation's seniors. Please join me in supporting the Nursing Home Resident Safety Assurance Act, common sense legislation to protect our nation's most vulnerable citizens.

Mr. JONES of North Carolina

Mr. JONES of North Carolina. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to take this opportunity to honor my friend, Colonel James DeLony, Commander of the Wilmington District, United States Army Corps of Engineers. After almost 30 years of honorable, distinguished and loyal service to his country, Colonel DeLony has decided to move forward and accept new challenges as the Director of Public Utilities for Collier County, Florida. Collier County is not only getting an accomplished engineer but more importantly a true American patriot. During his three-year tour in North Carolina, Colonel DeLony was more than just my District Commander, he became a dear friend and confidant of mine. It was not uncommon for us to talk by phone several times a week on things other than civil works projects and water infrastructure needs. When I review Colonel DeLony's laundry list of achievements from the last three years, my heart swells with pride. Working together as a team, Colonel DeLony, the Wilmington District, the citizens of North Carolina and members of Congress were successful in providing for numerous beach nourishment projects, port operations and maintenance, environmental restoration projects, navigation projects, and flood control projects. The Army Corps of Engineers is one of the few government agencies that provides tangible benefits for the American public. Without the Corps, America's water infrastructure would be non-existent and civil works projects would grind to a halt. It seems every year, Congress needlessly debates the role of the Army Corps of Engineers. There are many in Congress who want to rein-in the Corps. I believe these people would change their minds if they had a District Commander like Colonel DeLony. Because of people like Colonel DeLony, I for one think it would be wise to un-leash to Corps and provide them the necessary resources to continue their civil works improvements throughout the nation. Mr. Speaker, Colonel DeLony has dedicated his life to the defense and security of this nation. It is with a great deal of pride and respect that I bring his career to the attention of this House of Representatives. Colonel DeLony has earned the thanks of a grateful nation for all of his hard work and on behalf of Eastern North Carolina. I thank you for a job well done and wish the very best for you and your family.

Mr. JONES of North Carolina

Mr. JONES of North Carolina. Mr. Speaker, it is my honor to stand before you and my colleagues today as I talk to you about a man who, in accordance with his great service to our nation, will receive two honors that have been years in coming. In 1940, Mr. Thomas Craigg enlisted in the Marine Corps. When War broke out in 1941, Private First Class Thomas Craigg was on the Philippine Island of Luzon and Marines were under Army command distributed along the Bataan Peninsula. On the morning of February 24, 1942, ``the Commanding Officer of Charlie Battery, mounted a patrol of 75 Marines and Sailors to investigate an enemy Japanese force. The patrol encountered an enemy, which was far superior in number and well equipped troops with heavy machine guns and supporting mortars. The Commanding Officer dispatched a runner to the nearest antiaircraft battery for reinforcements with instructions for the gun captain to report to the commanding officer's position on the bluff overlooking Lapiay Point. Private First Class Craigg arrived with his 13-man squad and engaged two enemy gun emplacements, which had the main body pinned down and were dropping mortar and howitzer rounds among the patrol. With complete disregard for his personal safety, Private First Class Craigg repeatedly exposed himself to enemy fire providing clear and concise guidance to his squad and effectively eliminated one gun position. He laid down covering fire, which enabled the patrol to disengage from the main enemy force and withdraw to another position.'' Following Private First Class Craigg's heroic actions, his Commanding Officer informed him that he was going to officially recommend him for the Silver Star Medal. Unfortunately, Mr. Craigg's Commanding Officer was killed in action before this recommendation could be made. Thankfully, Mr. Speaker, while Mr. Craigg's Commanding Officer could no longer retell the story of his courageous actions that Day in 1942, others never forgot what he did, and as a result, I am proud to say that on March 30th, Mr. Craigg will be awarded the Silver Star Medal for ``extraordinary heroism in the face of extreme danger.'' Amazingly enough Mr. Speaker, Mr. Craigg's story does not end here. Shortly after this battle, Private First Class Craigg would be captured by Japanese forces on the Bataan Peninsula only to escape a short time later and make his way via boat to the island of Corregidor where he would engage the enemy in battle once again. After 28 days of further fighting however, the Marines and Sailors on Corregidor were ordered to surrender and they were taken back to Bataan where Private First Class Craigg would survive the infamous Bataan death march. Mr. Craigg was eventually sent on a brutal trip to Japan where he would spend more than two years working in coal mines while enduring severe starvation and beatings. As a result of the beatings he received, Mr. Craigg will also be receiving his third award of the Purple Heart on March 30th. Despite his traumatic experience as a prisoner of war, Mr. Craigg returned to the ranks and participated in the historic American invasion at Inchon, Korea with the 7th Marine Regiment. In October of 1963, Mr. Craigg retired from the United States Marines Corps with the rank of Gunnery Sergeant. After his retirement, Mr. Craigg's passion for the armed service did not wane. He became very involved in his local chapter of the Disabled American Veterans and from 1981-1983 served as State Commander. Though born in Arkansas, Mr. Craigg made the wise decision of marrying a North Carolinian, the late Anne Toler. The Craigg family also includes 5 children: Beverly, Joan, David, Carroll Wayne and Thomas III. Mr. Craigg now resides in Jacksonville, which is also fittingly the home of Marine Corps Base Camp Lejeune. There are few words to aptly praise the courage, sacrifice, and heart it takes to serve his country the way Mr. Craigg did during his twenty- two years in the United States Marine Corps. As an American, I am deeply grateful for the sacrifices made all those years ago. As a man, I am awed by Mr. Craigg's dedication to his community, his country, and, of course, his family. And as a United States Congressman, I am humbled by the privilege of being allowed the opportunity to share the accomplishments of Gunnery Sergeant Thomas A. Craigg, Jr. We salute you, Mr. Craigg. Your most recent awards have been a long time in coming, but it is well deserved. God Bless you!

Mr. JONES of North Carolina

Mr. JONES of North Carolina. Mr. Speaker, today I speak in honor of an incredible man: A man who is believed to be our Nation's oldest veteran, a man who in 1918 joined the military so that he could serve our country during WWI, a man who worked from the time he was 8 years old, a man who has served his community well, and a man, who, above all else, has loved the Lord his God with all his heart, mind and soul. That man is Mr. Robert Hodges, of Stonewall, North Carolina. I am proud, honored and, quite frankly, privileged to speak in his honor today on the House floor. Mr. Hodges has led a remarkable life. Considering he has seen the turn of two centuries, recounting all of his milestones would take hours. Instead, I will attempt to highlight just a few of the high points in Mr. Hodges life. Mr. Hodges was born on June 18, 1891, in a small community called North Creek, just between Bath and Belhaven, North Carolina. His grandparents were slaves, and his mother, born into slavery, was later freed in New Bern, NC. At the age of 8, Mr. Hodges began working, just as his parents had done. In 1918, Mr. Hodges joined the United States Army where he proudly wore the uniform of heroes as he served in France with the 702 Stevedore Battalion. A lifelong Eastern North Carolinian, Mr. Hodges returned to Beaufort County after his discharge where he married Malinda Boyd. After moving to Pamlico County, Mr. Hodges worked his way from bookkeeper, to farm foreman, to landowner of a farm of his very own. He continued to work the land until his eyesight forced him to retire in the 1950's. His retirement, however, did not keep him from participating in his community. Mr. Hodges has remained a vital part of his hometown in Stonewall, North Carolina and his church home of Mt. Sinai Missionary Baptist Church. Church has been a part of Mr. Hodges' life since he was a young child. Growing up, young Robert used to walk 12 miles to church and back . . . barefoot. Some of you may ask, ``What is the secret to Mr. Hodges long and healthy life?'' Well, my friends, I must tell you I believe it is the scripture verse he has clung to for so many years. Mr. Hodges says he gives God the glory for his long life, claiming the 5th commandment as his own. The verse reads, ``Honor thy father and mother; that thy days may be long upon the land which the Lord thy God giveth thee.'' Mr. Hodges' life has certainly been very ``long upon the land.'' His very history, quite frankly, illustrates what it means to live a life pleasing to the Lord, and to in turn see His blessings. In closing, Mr. Speaker, let me say that Mr. Hodges joins so many of the men and women who served our Nation during wartime and asked so little in return. And today, those people who know him best are here to honor him, not only for his service to our great Nation but for the incredible impressions he has made on the lives of so many people as husband, father, grandfather, and a citizen of North Carolina. It is because of the dedication and heroic courage of men like Robert Hodges that we can enjoy the many freedoms of this great land. On behalf of a grateful Nation, please accept my deepest appreciation.

Mr. JONES of North Carolina

Mr. JONES of North Carolina. Mr. Speaker, in the aftermath of the September 11 terrorist attacks, many of our financial institutions have gone the extra mile to be of assistance to those affected by the incidents and their aftermath. I rise today to pay particular tribute to the CEOs and volunteer board members of North Carolina credit unions. Representatives of those credit unions, and of the North Carolina Credit Union League and CUNA, recently made the trip to Washington to visit my office not long after September 11. While they had thought of canceling the trip out of respect for the larger issues stemming from the tragedy, they instead came to offer their support to this Congress. They also pledged that their credit unions will remain committed to serving the changing financial needs of their members and the citizens of North Carolina during this period of economic uncertainty. For example, Mr. Speaker, the 3rd District of North Carolina is home to three major military bases--Camp Lejuene, Cherry Point Marine Corps Air Station, and Seymour Johnson Air Force Base--all of which are served by a credit union. These credit union employees help military personnel and their families with the money challenges that they face during these difficult times, and have committed to safeguarding the financial well being of our service men and women deployed overseas. For instance, the staff of First Flight Federal Credit Union in Havelock, NC, has been working with the base legal department at the Marine Corps Air Station at Cherry Point to ensure that family members have the appropriate authority to conduct financial transactions on behalf of the service member while they are deployed. Another example is the Seymour Johnson Federal Credit Union in Goldsboro, NC, which has established a call center hotline to provide support and answer questions from family members whose spouses have been deployed. Mr. Speaker, time does not permit me to list all the great things that these credit unions are doing to assist their members--both military and civilian during these difficult economic times. But their efforts deserve our praise and our thanks. I urge my colleagues to speak with the credit unions and other financial institutions in their own districts to learn about all the ways they are helping their customers during this time of need. Through the efforts these financial institutions, and others, we will not only weather this storm but we will be economically stronger for it.

Mr. JONES of North Carolina

Mr. JONES of North Carolina. Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this time. I want to say to my friend, the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Etheridge), one of my colleagues, that I fully support his H.R. 2751. Madam Speaker, I am from eastern North Carolina. I am from a small area in rural America. My county of Pitt County actually connects with the county where General Shelton was from, Edgecombe County, a little town called Speed. I think if I wanted to make my comment for the record tonight, which we all have talked about his outstanding military record, and it is outstanding, there is no question about it, but the fact is that Hugh Shelton came from rural America where they fully understand the values of family, church and patriotism and dedication to this great Nation known as the United States of America. General Shelton, quite frankly, takes great pride in the fact, and I am sure that the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Etheridge) mentioned this, that he is a graduate of NC State University, and he distinguished himself there as a student and also as he was in the ROTC program. As Chairman Gilman said, I have been on the Committee on Armed Services for 7 years, going on my eighth year now. Most of us on the Committee on Armed Services, both parties, we fully work together in a very bipartisan way for the good of our military. When you look at the leadership that General Shelton brought to the Armed Forces, in particular the Army, and then when he became Chairman of the Joint Chiefs, that he could be the leader to remind the Congress, quite frankly, that our men and women in uniform deserve the very best. He was a strong advocate for the men and women in uniform. As has been mentioned by the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Etheridge) and the gentleman from New York (Mr. Gilman), General Shelton fully understood the quality-of-life issues that many in this Nation take for granted when we talk about our military. We must do more. That is what General Shelton fought for, to make sure that the men and women in uniform had the very best housing and adequate housing possible. He also was one who led the fight here in the Congress when he appeared before the committees on pay increases, that our men and women in uniform need to have the very best pay possible, because these are the men and women when called upon that will give their life for this Nation, like they are doing now in Afghanistan and other parts of the world. I really cannot add a whole lot to what has been said already. General Shelton is very deserving of this award, should the Congress, which I am sure we will 100 percent, decide that he should be recognized in this way. I want to say to General Shelton and his family that he has been a great soldier for the United States of America, he has been a great leader of our military for the United States of America, and his service to this Nation will be long remembered. I would just like to say to General Shelton, thank you for your leadership in wartime; thank you for your leadership in peace. God bless General Shelton and his family and God bless America.

Mr. JONES of North Carolina

Mr. JONES of North Carolina. Amen.

Mr. JONES of North Carolina. Mr. Speaker, if the gentleman will yield for a moment, I really appreciate his comments. He has been out front on a number of issues that I think are really important to the foundation of this country. Mr. Speaker, sometimes I do not want to just make my comments about Reverend Barry Lynn or the lady with the PTA, but the children are America's future, and the children have to be given every opportunity. That is the reason I read the paper by the young lady, Ms. Ormand, Rose Ormand from my district, because these are young people. They are America's future leaders. She had those kinds of strong feelings about prayer, and I know that she is just an example of one of millions in this country that feel that they should have the opportunity to have that moment of prayer. So as I said, and then I will yield back, but I am looking forward to the debate next year on the Istook bill, and I know the gentleman from Georgia has been on that bill before. I look forward to joining him. I was very pleased, I would say to the gentleman from Georgia, when I looked at the vote and about 80-some Democrats voted for the resolution, for which I was pleased, and very pleased that the leader of the minority, the gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Gephardt) voted with us on that resolution, so I thought that was progress.

Mr. JONES of North Carolina. Absolutely, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. JONES of North Carolina. Mr. Speaker, they are going down, yes.

Mr. JONES of North Carolina. If the gentleman will yield, Mr. Speaker, the two issues the gentleman just mentioned, they were campaign promises by President Bush, as Candidate Bush for the Presidency. He talked about the fact that this country had never developed an energy program plan for America. As the gentleman made reference, we passed that in the House. That was one of the campaign promises by President George Bush. Secondly, the faith-based program has met with great excitement in my district in eastern North Carolina, because what Mr. Bush campaigned on was, let us take the assistance, take the service to where the people are, not Washington, D.C., but in Georgia, in North Carolina. Let us let those organizations within the community extend the hand of help. So I just wanted to mention that.

Mr. JONES of North Carolina. Mr. Speaker, if the gentleman will yield for another moment, I could not agree more. America's strength is its people; and the gentleman, Reverend Delaney that the gentleman just mentioned, obviously is a caring, compassionate man that understands the Bible, to help the brother who is in trouble. If anything, over the last 20 years, that is why we reformed welfare when we came in 1997. It was simply that the Federal Government does some things good, but a lot of things it does not do so well. So therefore, go back to the community and the people, as the gentleman said, they know the name of the person they are trying to help. That is how government can partnership with local communities and community leaders to do for those who need help.

Mr. JONES of North Carolina

Mr. JONES of North Carolina. Mr. Speaker, now as I begin my closing in the next couple of minutes, let me say to those groups that were opposed to the resolution that the gentleman from Oklahoma (Mr. Istook) will be offering legislation that will be binding, if it should pass, and I intend to support him. I know many Members on the floor tonight, including the Speaker pro tempore, as well as the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Kingston), who will be speaking shortly, will be supporting the gentleman from Oklahoma (Mr. Istook). Mr. Speaker, prior to 1962, we had prayer in this Nation. I think the children of this country, and since September 11, I think there have been more adults in the churches, the synagogues, the mosques, than there have been in a long, long time. Again, for these groups that are supposed to help educate our children like the National PTA, I was very disappointed that they would oppose a resolution that was only the sense of the Congress. When governors, when the President, when other leaders of State and local and national government are asking people to pray for America and to pray for our men and women in uniform, I just felt like I needed to come to the floor and say ``thank you'' to those who voted for this resolution on November 15. Again, it passed with 297, only 125 in opposition. They are the kind of messages, Mr. Speaker, in my opinion, we need to be sending to the American people, because every survey I have seen over the last 2 years, better than 70 percent of the American people, say they would like to see prayer returned to the school systems of America. So with that, Mr. Speaker, I know the gentleman from Georgia will be speaking shortly and I would like to help him if he would like for me to do so. Mr. Speaker, let me, if I might, stay on the floor and yield any remaining time I might have. I think I might have had an hour, is that correct?