Stephanie Jones

Mrs. JONES of Ohio

Mrs. JONES of Ohio. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to increased funding for `abstinence-only' programs under the Labor-HHS-Education Appropriations bill. Ideology, not science, has been driving America's response to the devastating problem of teen pregnancy and STD/HIV infection. Funding for restrictive abstinence-only programs are dramatically increasing. All told, abstinence-only programs have received over half a billion dollars in federal funds since 1997, and the Bush administration requested an unprecedented increase to $273 million in fiscal year 2005. This huge investment of taxpayer funds in abstinence-only programs conflict with scientific and medical research: abstinence-only programs have never been proven effective and may result in riskier behavior by teenagers. Responsible sex education programs, on the other hand, have demonstrated positive results such as delayed initiation of sex, reduced frequency of sex, and increased contraceptive use. Ideologically driven groups, not scientific or public health organizations, have pushed the proliferation of abstinence-only programs. In fact, current scientific research fails to show that abstinence-only programs are effective. In 2001, the National Campaign to Prevent Teen Pregnancy found no credible studies of abstinence-only programs showing any significant impact on participants' initiation of or frequency of sex. By denying adolescents complete information and by censoring teachers, abstinence-only programs endanger our youth. Abstinence-only programs can harm teens by putting them at risk of pregnancy and STDs. Abstinence-only programs fail to provide information about contraception beyond failure rates, and, in some cases, provide misinformation. Without complete and accurate information, some teens therefore may forgo contraceptive use, jeopardizing their reproductive health. The lack of responsible sex education puts teens at risk of pregnancy and STDs, including HIV. One study that compared an abstinence-only program with a more comprehensive ``safer-sex'' program found that ``only the safer-sex intervention significantly reduced unprotected sexual intercourse.'' The recent explosion of federal funds for abstinence-only programs has negatively influenced schools. Almost one-third of secondary school principals surveyed reported that the federal abstinence-only funding influenced their school's sex education curriculum. Current research indicates that more comprehensive sex education programs that discuss both abstinence and contraception have positive effects. In 2001, the National Campaign to Prevent Teen Pregnancy concluded that sex and HIV education programs that discuss both abstinence and contraception delay the onset of sex, reduce the frequency of sex, and increase contraceptive use. Moreover, their review of studies dispelled many of the myths attached to responsible sex education programs. In particular, the study showed that sexuality and HIV education programs that include discussion of condoms and contraception: do not hasten the onset of sexual intercourse; do not increase the frequency of sexual intercourse; and do not increase the number of sexual partners. The National Academy of Sciences' Institute of Medicine concluded that sex education and condom availability programs in schools do not increase sexual activity among teenagers. Teaching our children about abstinence is a critical part of a well- rounded and effective sex education program. But abstinence by itself is not sufficient. Young people deserve complete and accurate information about their reproductive health, including abstinence, pregnancy prevention, and STD/HIV prevention. Only when teens have reliable information about their reproductive health can they make informed and appropriate decisions. Given the high stakes facing teens, the fact that almost half of all teens aged 15 to 19 years old in the United States have had sex, and the absence of research showing that abstinence-only programs are effective, ``Just Say No'' efforts are misleading at best, and dangerous at worst. Congress should enact policies that effectively and responsibly address the current crisis in adolescent reproductive health. Federal funds should be directed at responsible sex education programs that provide teen with the information and skills they need to protect themselves and that have demonstrated positive results. Mr. Chairman, I rise to reiterate my opposition to increased funding for `abstinence-only' programs under the Labor-HHS-Education Appropriations bill and the blatant assault on a woman's right to choose.

Mrs. JONES of Ohio

Mrs. JONES of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, yesterday, I was unavoidably detained and missed rollcall votes Nos. 422 and 423. Had I been present for the votes, I would have voted ``Aye'' for both measures to name The General William Cary Lee Post Office Building, and to name The Harvey and Bernice Jones Post Office Building, respectively. I ask unanimous consent that my vote statement appear in the appropriate place in the Congressional Record behind the day's recorded votes.

Mrs. JONES of Ohio

Mrs. JONES of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, I also recognize the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Ryan) from the Youngstown area. He has come to Congress, and he has not missed a beat; and I am so proud and pleased he is doing such a wonderful job. Tonight I am going to focus on gas prices because gas prices have significantly affected Ohioans. I rise to express my disdain that gasoline prices have increased dramatically, exceeding $2 per gallon, and reached record levels in May 2004. Although recent decisions by OPEC are expected to have some impact on gas prices, the Energy Information Administration has indicated that gasoline price levels are still expected to remain high by historical standards. These high gasoline prices have significant impacts on family budgets and on the economy as a whole. We were talking about the middle-class squeeze; I am going to talk about middle-class and lower-class squeeze. Who can expect that they are going to have to pay $2 a gallon for gas? Last night in Cleveland at a gas station right around the corner from my house, a guy walked up to the window and said $40 worth of gas. Increased expenditures for gasoline reduce families' discretionary income and can result in inflation in the price of consumer goods. On May 17, 2004, the Federal Reserve Chairman, Alan Greenspan, indicated that the dramatic increase in oil and gas prices is ``an economic event that can significantly affect the long-term path of the U.S. economy.'' A recent report by the staff of the Committee on Government Reform of the House of Representatives found that increased cost of gasoline prices can force motorists in Ohio to pay $483 million more for gasoline in the summer driving season than they did last summer. The increased cost will be approximately $62 million in the Cleveland area alone. For the average family in Ohio, the increasing gasoline prices can increase fuel costs by $125 between Memorial Day and Labor Day. In recent months, gasoline prices have increased rapidly in Ohio and in the Columbus area. On July 6, 2004, the average price for a gallon of gasoline in Ohio was $1.81. Compared to 1 year ago, that represents a 35-cent-per-gallon increase. Prices have increased by a similar amount in metro areas throughout the State. On July 6, 2004, average gasoline prices were $1.82 in the Cleveland area, an increase of 32 cents a gallon compared to prices 1 year ago. In 2004, drivers in Ohio will purchase approximately 5.5 billion gallons of gasoline, an estimated 460 million gallons per month. Assuming that the prices remain at the statewide average of 35 cent per gallon average higher this summer than in 2003, increased gasoline prices could cost Ohio drivers an additional $161 million monthly. Over the 3-month summer driving season from Memorial Day through Labor Day, the total increased cost for drivers in Ohio would be $483 million. An estimated 12 percent of all gasoline used in Ohio is used in the Cleveland area. That means that Cleveland drivers purchase approximately 57 million gallons of gasoline monthly. Assuming gasoline prices in the region remain 36 cents per gallon higher this summer than last year, increased gasoline prices will cost Cleveland drivers almost $21 million monthly. For the 3-month summer driving season from Memorial Day through Labor Day, the increased cost for Cleveland drivers would be approximately $62 million. There are 7.7 million registered drivers in Ohio. On a per-driver basis, the increased gasoline prices will cost the average driver in Ohio $60 over the summer months. An average two-car family in Ohio will spend an additional $125 for gasoline during the summer driving season, and the list goes on. I am here to say that under this administration, we have not seen any efforts to decrease the cost of gasoline, which continues to put a pinch on our families.

Mrs. JONES of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, I heard on the news that a Saudi person, a representative said in fact they do this every time a Presidential year comes up, nearer to the Presidential election, they reduce the cost of gasoline in an effort to support the President. I want to remind Members of one more thing. I heard candidate Bush, then-candidate, now President Bush, say if Bill Clinton wanted to reduce the cost of gasoline in the United States, all he would have to do was pick up the phone, call the OPEC leaders and say, turn on the spigot. My statement to President Bush is practice what you preach. Pick up the phone, call the OPEC leaders, and tell them to turn on the spigots. It is a much more complicated process than that. He knows it, but now he is not willing to step up and do what he said back when he was a candidate. I want to again thank the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Strickland) for his leadership. I thank the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Ryan) for the opportunity to be a colleague of his.

Mrs. JONES of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman. The gentleman talks about an area in his district which is near and dear to my heart. My grandfather lived in Portsmouth, Ohio, and raised nine children in Portsmouth, and I still have cousins and relatives there.

Mrs. JONES of Ohio

Mrs. JONES of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, public distrust. That is the main reason why we urgently need fundamental tax reform. More and more Americans distrust the current tax system because they perceive it as unfair. Are they wrong? No. Lower and middle class Americans bear a disproportionate tax burden. Small businesses bear a great compliance burden. That is unfair. Does fairness in our tax system matter? Yes, it matters because tax collection depends on voluntary compliance. And in a democracy like ours, people contribute private resources to provide the public goods and services we deem appropriate as a community, including helping those not able fend for themselves. In America, paying taxes embodies a civic relationship of mutual responsibility, and people's obligation to pay them is as legitimate as any other public duty. So, I am glad that we are beginning this discussion of comprehensive tax reform--an issue that will only become more important for us in Congress. Let me offer the following five points to consider as we discuss this important issue: First, fundamental tax reform is a necessity. The current tax system is complicated, inefficient, and unfair. Its unpopularity is warranted, and that is a problem because that breeds distrust. The tax code must be simplified in order to eliminate wasted time and money spent on compliance. For example, the average taxpayer with a self-employed status has the greatest compliance burden in terms of tax preparation--59 hours. Furthermore, the complexity of the tax code is evident by the fact that small businesses overpaid their taxes by $18 billion in 2000 and 2001 because of return errors, according to a GAO report. Small businesses unfairly bear the burden of the tax code's complexity simply because they do not have the financial resources to hire sophisticated tax advisors. Second, simplification can occur only with fundamental tax reform. This is clear after decades of incrementalism. We know that tax reform cannot be done in a piecemeal fashion. The current tax system is flawed at its root. Hard-working, middle-income class people bear the largest burden in our current tax system. Third, fundamental tax reform must focus on the tax base. Our tax base is derived from total income. However, this is complicated by the bewildering array of adjustments, deductions, credits, omissions, and mismeasurements. This undermines the fairness of our tax system. Therefore, fundamental tax reform must focus on the issue of the tax base in order to achieve equity, efficiency, simplicity, and accountability. Fourth, the tax code must encourage entrepreneurship. Small businesses provide our economy's foundation. They need a tax system that frees resources for investment and ensures affordable capital. We must support small businesses, which make up the backbone of our economy. Fifth, fundamental tax reform is possible. Tax reform is not an easy task. However, the American public demands it. They see our tax system as unfair, and they are right. As it was in the mid-1980s, the time is ripe to begin taking serious steps towards achieving fundamental tax reform. We must listen to our constituents and be up to task to implementing a fair tax system.

Mrs. JONES of Ohio

Mrs. JONES of Ohio. Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to take my Special Order at this time.

Mrs. JONES of Ohio

Mrs. JONES of Ohio. Madam Speaker, I rise today in honor of one of my constituents who gave the ultimate sacrifice for this country, Private First Class Samuel Bowen. Private Bowen was killed in action yesterday in Iraq. He was a member of the 112th Engineer Battalion of Brookpark. Private Bowen was a resident of the city of Cleveland, a husband, and a father of three children. Just last month Private Bowen saved the life of a fellow soldier during a rocket attack in Baghdad. I would like to read a portion of an article from today's Cleveland Plain Dealer that includes a quote from the soldier whose life Private Bowen saved. It reads: ``I cannot believe he was under attack twice in 3 weeks,'' said Ron Eaton, who was rescued by Bowen's heroism June 16 north of Baghdad. Another quote: ``I just wish that I would have been there for him like he was there for me.'' ``He took care of me before he took care of himself, Eaton said. And he said, ``As soon as I got out of surgery, he called me. He told me that he needed to talk with me because I was his battle buddy, and he needed to hear my voice. I can't believe how hard this is.'' Private Bowen is the third soldier lost to the war in Iraq from my congressional district. It has been over a year since we declared major combat operations over in Iraq, yet our young people continue to die in this conflict. My heart aches for all of the families who have lost loved ones during this war. I have been a vocal opponent of the war in Iraq, as many of my colleagues are aware. I have also been vocal in my support of the military troops over in the Middle East and across the world as well. I pause today in remembrance of this brave young man, Private Samuel Bowen, who gave his life for our country. May the Lord bless and keep his family during this trying time. I would ask that my colleagues join me in a moment of silence for Private First Class Samuel Bowen. I do not pretend to be a great student of the Bible, yet my Sunday school lessons remain cemented in my head. All of those lessons talked about the importance of prayer, and some of them discussed how to pray; that a prayer can be general and that a prayer can be specific. My specific prayer is focused on all of the servicemen and women still serving in Iraq. I pray for their safe return and that the family of each young military men and women be comforted by their faith in God, a mighty God who will never let us down. There is a passage in the Bible that reads: ``Put on the whole armor of God, that you may be able to stand against the wiles of the devil. For we are not contending against flesh and blood, but against the principalities, against the powers, against the world rulers of this present darkness, against the spiritual hosts of wickedness in the heavenly places. Therefore take the whole armor of God that you may be able to withstand in the evil day, and having done all, to stand. Stand therefore, having girded your loins with truth, and having put on the breastplate of righteousness, and having shod your feet with the equipment of the gospel of peace; besides all these, taking the shield of faith, with which you can quench all the flaming darts of the evil one.''

Mrs. JONES of Ohio

Mrs. JONES of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that the following statement appear in the appropriate place in the Congressional Record behind the votes for Wednesday, July 7, 2004: unfortunately, I was unavoidably detained. Had I been present for the recorded Roll Call votes number 326 through number 335, I would have voted in the following way: No. 326--H. Con. Res. 410--Motion to Suspend the Rules and Agree, as Amended Recognizing the 25th anniversary of the adoption of the Constitution of the Republic of the Marshall Islands. I would have voted ``yes.'' No. 327--H. Con. Res. 257--Motion to Suspend the Rules and Agree Expressing the sense of Congress that the President should posthumously award the Presidential Medal of Freedom to Harry W. Colmery. I would have voted ``yes.'' No. 328--On agreeing to the Manzullo, Velazquez, Serrano amendment to provide $79.1 million for the Small Business 7(a) loan program, the amount provided last year, to finance more than $13 billion in small business loans. I would have voted in favor of the amendment. No. 329--On agreeing to the Flake (Arizona) Amendment prohibiting use of funds to implement new restrictions on gift parcels and other items allowed for travellers to Cuba. I would have voted ``yes.'' No. 330--On agreeing to the Weiner Amendment increasing COPS funding by $107 million and offsets that funding by cutting funding for the Census. I would have voted ``yes.'' No. 331--On agreeing to the Hefley Amendment eliminating funding for the re-engineering design process for the 2010 short-form only Census. I would have voted ``no.'' No. 332--On agreeing to the Kucinich amendment on funding for the Commerce Department to expand the membership of the President's ``Manufacturing Council.'' I would have voted ``yes.'' No. 333--On agreeing to the Paul of Texas amendment No. 9. I would have voted ``no.'' No. 334--On agreeing to the Farr of California amendment prohibiting funds from being used to prevent states from implementing state lays authorizing the use of medical marijuana. I would have voted ``yes.'' No. 335--On agreeing to the Paul of Texas amendment No. 10. I would have voted ``no.''

Mrs. JONES of Ohio

Mrs. JONES of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, today I rise to honor Danny Cameron of Cleveland, Ohio. I want to thank Mr. Cameron for all he has done during his 36-year career with National City Bank to give quality service to the citizens of the 11th Congressional District. As President of the National City Development Corporation he served our community for the past 22, assisting customers make their dreams a reality. For too long, many deserving people were denied an opportunity to build businesses and futures because of the lack of availability of a helping hand. Danny has used his position with the Development Corporation to say ``yes'' rather than ``no,'' to offer hope rather than despair to the people of Greater Cleveland. I thank him for making our community a better place. I am very happy that he has reached this wonderful time, being young enough to retire and start a new life. I am sorry, however, that he and his wife, Dorothy, are leaving Cleveland for new beginnings in Georgia. On behalf of the citizens of the 11th Congressional District, Ohio, I extend our gratitude to Danny Cameron for his many years of service, not only as a banker but also as an involved community citizen. He has brightened many lives. On a personal note, I also want to thank him for his years of friendship and support. He has always been there for me. I wish Danny, Dottie and their family many years of health and happiness. May they fulfill many of their dreams and also find many new adventures. We'll miss you.

Mrs. JONES of Ohio

Mrs. JONES of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, today I rise to honor Chester Gray of Cleveland, Ohio. Chester Gray, born on April 1, 1912, in Cleveland, Ohio, was one of two sons born to Morgan J. Gray and Elandra Holt Gray. Morgan, a Pullman Porter, originally from London, Ontario, and Elandra, daughter of a Canadian Baptist minister, raised their sons in an ``upper poor'' but loving home. Throughout his life Chester valued advice he received from his mother, ``Be yourself, and be somebody.'' He also shared his parent's belief in the efficacy of education. After graduating from Cleveland's East High School, Chester wanted to attend Fisk University, however his father advised him to stay home. A friend took him to meet the Jesuits, and soon he was riding the streetcar to the college at West 30th Street. So began his lifetime association with his alma mater John Carroll University. Chester enjoyed sharing memories about John Carroll where he was one part of the trio of young black men who were the first men of color to attend the University. Chester, ``Chet'' had a life filled with many interests. As a youngster he ice skated with his buddies at the old Elysium or played sandlot football. At John Carroll he played the French Horn and was a member of the university's first marching band. ``Chet'' dreamed of attending medical school after earning his bachelor in Philosophy, however money was short so, he ventured in other directions: He worked at the Cedar Branch YMCA, volunteered at Karamu House, joined the National Youth Administration and before long arrived at the Ohio Bureau of Employment, a destination that was to direct his future as a prolific public servant and consummate community citizen. Chester Gray was a brave man. In 1965 he was the lone Black man who was part of a three-man team of officials who traveled into the heart of Klu Klux Klan territory in Birmingham, Alabama. Their mission was to end job discrimination in the local steel mill. The officials endured insults, threats and possible physical harm, but they got their job done. They told the employers they'd have to follow minority guidelines mandated by the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Thus began a new era in employment. Reflecting on his years and training at John Carroll University ``Chet'' gave evidence of his quick humor. Describing sitting through the daily Mass conducted in Latin he said, ``There was an equality of ignorance. None of us knew what the hell was going on.'' He also noted that the skills he learned in critical thinking and understanding people were tolls that served him throughout his life. Perhaps one of the most profound life lessons Chester carried away from John Carroll was ``The bedrock of the Jesuit philosophy of doing good for others. Do the best you can for yourself, but also do something to make life better.'' He spent his life practicing the philosophy and had Ninety-Two glorious years of taking small and giant steps to make life better for his community. Let the Work I've Done Speak for Me May the work I've done speak for me. When I'm resting in my grave, there is nothing that can be said. May the work I've done, speak for me. May the life I've lived speak for me. May the service I gave speak for me. When I've done the best I can, and my friends don't understand, may the service I gave speak for me. The works I've done seemed so small. Sometimes they seemed like nothing at all. But when I stand before my God. I want to hear Him say ``Well Done.'' May the work I've done speak for me. National Youth Administration, youth supervisor and state supervisor of recreation and community affairs Chief of Minority Group Services, Ohio Bureau of Employment Service American Red Cross, Military Welfare Branch Deputy director of operations, Ohio Civil Rights Commission Staff Director of Equal Employment Opportunity Program for Cleveland district contact management office of U.S. Air Force Director, U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission for Ohio Elected to John Carroll University board of trustees Consultant, Cleveland Board of Education Interim executive director for Cuyahoga Metropolitan Housing Authority Appointed to John Carroll University board of regents Inspiration and Consultant for ``Forever JCU'', the first ever alumni of color event Former Board member Fairhill Center for Aging Guest Lecturer: Michigan State University, Western Reserve University and numerous public and private organizations Member and Former Trustee, Mt. Zion Congregational Church Member of: Omega Psi Phi Fraternity Inc., Tau Boule of Sigma Pi Phi Fraternity and past President of Cleveland City Club ``Service is the rent we pay to be living. It is the very purpose of life and not something you do in your spare time'' --Marian Wright Edelman. Chester Gray was constantly described as ``a gentleman'', one of a vanishing breed of men who was elegant, articulate and cultured. But he was more, he was compassionate, a friend, a supporter and mentor. He had high standards and expectations. ``Chet'' or as he liked to refer to himself, ``The Silver Fox'', had a zest for living. Unaffected by the passage of time he was debonair, worldly, a man of great humor, twinkling eyes and a broad smile. He believed in finding positive solutions and believed in conciliation. Chester had a Forty-Seven year long love affair with his beloved Frances, who preceded him in death. They were blessed with one son, Chester, Jr. a resident of Philadelphia, Pa. Chester lived life to the fullest: golfing, traveling, dancing, cooking, reading, writing, practicing Tai Chi, sharing time with his wonderful world of diverse friends. He was indeed a ``Man for all Seasons''. We will miss him, but remember him with love.

Mrs. JONES of Ohio

Mrs. JONES of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that the following statement appear in the appropriate place in the Congressional Record behind the votes for Thursday, June 24, 2004: unfortunately, I was unavoidably detained. Had I been present for the recorded Rollcall votes Nos. 301-319, I would have voted in the following way: No. 301, H. Res. 685--Resolution offered by Mr. Obey of Wisconsin revising the concurrent resolution on the budget for FY 2005. I would have voted ``yes.'' No. 302, On ordering the previous question providing for consideration of the bill H.R. 4663. I would have voted ``no.'' No. 303, Rule providing for consideration of H.R. 4663--Pay-as-you-go Budget Enforcement bill. I would have voted ``no.'' No. 304, H. Res. 676--40th Anniversary of passage of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. I would have voted ``aye.'' No. 305, Brady/Turner Amendment to establish a Commission on Elimination of Federal Agencies. I would have voted ``no.'' No. 306, Chocola Amendment to replace the 20 budget functions with a one page budget that divides spending into 5 categories. I would have voted ``no.'' No. 307, Hastings/Castle amendment to eliminate the requirement to include 20 budget functions and replace it with 4 basic pieces of budget data. I would have voted ``no.'' No. 308, Hensarling #11 Amendment setting yearly caps on total entitlement spending. I would have voted ``no.'' No. 309, Hensarling #12 Amendment which would have provided for an automatic Continuing Resolution if spending bills are not passed by the beginning of the fiscal year. I would have voted ``no.'' No. 310, Kirk Amendment which would require the CBO to report by February 15 on spending priorities exceeding projections. I would have voted ``no.'' No. 311, The Ryan (WI)/Gutknecht amendment converting the concurrent resolution on the budget into a joint resolution. I would have voted ``no.'' No. 312, Ryan (WI)/Neugebauer on the lock box approach to budget savings. I would have voted ``no.'' No. 313, Ryan (WI)/Stenholm/Castle--an amendment providing for expedited rescissions. I would have voted ``no.'' No. 314, Spratt Substitute--To extend the PAYGO requirement through September 30, 2009. I would have voted ``yes.'' No. 315, Hensarling Substitute which sets yearly caps on total entitlement spending. I would have voted ``no.'' No. 316, Kirk Substitute--Caps spending on all entitlements other than Social Security, medicare and Railroad Retirement. I would have voted ``no.'' No. 317, Motion to Recommit--The Stenholm motion would restore the Pay-as-you-go law requiring both taxcuts and spending be paid for. I would have voted ``yes.'' No. 318, Final Passage of H.R. 4663--Pay-as-you-go Budget Enforcement bill. I would have voted ``no.'' No. 319, H. Res. 691--Congratulating the interim government of Iraq on its assumption of full responsibility and authority as a sovereign government. I would have voted ``yes.''

Mrs. JONES of Ohio

Mrs. JONES of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, I was not able to speak on the floor Wednesday, June 9, 2004, regarding the passing of former President Ronald Reagan. However, I would like to submit to the Record an article from Cleveland Plain Dealer written by local columnist Sam Fullwood on Tuesday, June 8, 2004. President Reagan: A Bad Leading Man I never liked Ronald Reagan. I didn't like him as a B- movie star in eyewash like ``Bedtime for Bonzo,'' a 1951 movie in which the future president of the United States was upstaged by a chimpanzee. I didn't respect him for turning away from President Franklin D. Roosevelt, whose New Deal policies helped lift Reagan's own family out of the depths of the Great Depression. He was a hypocrite who started out as a Democrat and proud union man but turned Republican after he became rich and famous in Hollywood by pretending to be a common man. But it was as president that I disliked Reagan most. Actually, the way he announced his decision to run ruined any chance of redemption. On Aug. 3, 1980, the former California governor went to Philadelphia, Miss. Of all the places in this great nation, Reagan chose the infamous town where the bodies of three murdered heroes of the civil rights movement--Michael Schwerner, Andrew Goodman and James Chaney--had been found in 1964. He never mentioned them or civil rights in his announcement speech. Instead, on that hot, summer day in Mississippi, he stole a line from Strom Thurmond's 1948 segregationist campaign. ``I believe in states' rights,'' Reagan said. I haven't been able to stomach him ever since. Of course, a great many people loved Reagan for his optimism and never-say-die confidence in this nation. I tip my hat to him for that. But judging from the accolades following news of Reagan's death, at 93, last weekend, many people only note the best about the 40th president. I remember the downside, too. Much of the bad that has happened in America's public life started with the Reagan Revolution. Racial polarization widened during his two terms in the White House. Reaganism let loose a sense of entitlement and lawlessness among corporate executives, spawning that famous line by actor Michael Douglas in his 1987 movie, ``Wall Street.'' Said Gordon Gekko, ``Greed is good.'' Before Reagan, the national GOP contained moderates and conservatives in equal measure. After his rise to power, the relatively liberal Rockefeller wing of the party was clipped, leaving only the red-meat conservatives and intolerant Christian fundamentalists. And that wasn't the worst of it. Reagan and his powerful allies poisoned the nation against government. Out of misguided populism, he threatened to starve the federal government out of existence. Such a notion was impossible. But it didn't prevent Reagan from overseeing record deficits, rampant unemployment, desperate homelessness and rising poverty. Meanwhile, he spent liberally on military hardware, which helped end the Cold War. Little is said about how he waged war on this nation's poor people. Reagan loved to tell stories, and he invented whoppers about ``welfare queens'' and ``people on welfare driving Cadillacs to cash food stamps.'' Reagan understood the power of an exaggerated metaphor. He used his movie-honed skills to inspire affluent Americans and to scapegoat poor ones. It was mostly smoke and mirrors, honed from a life and career lived in La-La Land. I am saddened by his passing, but I can't indulge in the fiction that he represented the best of our national character. He didn't. First and everlasting, Reagan was a bad actor.

Mrs. JONES of Ohio

Mrs. JONES of Ohio. As with anything, if you propose to resolve a situation, when you put the person in leadership, that gives credibility to the investigation, to the resolution. And clearly this government, this Secretary knew better than to put a low- level military person in charge of an investigation that would be so very, very important. And it goes back to what would be on your mind. How could you lead and not put in place the people who are needed to give credibility to a situation? I am just continually reminded as the gentleman talked about the United Nations and China and Kofi Annan being concerned about what the United States is doing, that again, what we do must be able to withstand the light of day, because we are set aside or set out as the country who is trying to move forward and permit or encourage democracy or freedom and trust around the world. And if we are not encouraging freedom and trust right here in our own Nation or in areas where we have control, then who is going to believe us? Who is going to be behind us? I am with you once again, gentlemen, that this country has to continue to show leadership. Mr. Speaker, the article I referred to previously is as follows: [From the Wall Street Journal, Jun. 18, 2004] Rumsfeld Defends Hiding Prisoner at CIA Urging (By Christopher Cooper) Washington.--Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld defended his decision to hold a prisoner incommunicado in Iraq last year, taking pains yesterday to separate the incident from the unfolding detainee abuse scandal involving U.S. soldiers. Mr. Rumsfeld said he made his decision to hold a suspected combatant out of the sight of international monitors when he was asked to do so last October by George Tenet, director of the Central Intelligence Agency. He suggested, without elaborating, that concealing detainees from Red Cross monitors is done from time to time, despite international conventions that forbid it. ``There are instances where that occurs,'' Mr. Rumsfeld said. But the secretary bristled at what he said was an attempt to link the decision he made in the case of the ``ghost detainee'' with the scandal at Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq, where a handful of low-ranking U.S. soldiers stand accused of abusing prisoners. ``The implication that's out there is the United States government is engaging in torture as a matter of policy, and that's not true,'' Mr. Rumsfeld said, adding he has seen no evidence that senior Pentagon officials were complicit in the abuse at Abu Ghraib or elsewhere. An Army general assigned to investigate abusers at Abu Gharaib prison, Antonio Taguba, criticized the military for housing what he called ``ghost detainees'' for the CIA, saying in a report that the practice was ``deceptive, contrary to Army Doctrine, and in violation of international law.'' Mr. Rumsfeld's comments to the press came a few hours after President Bush told reporters he remained confident in his appointee. Mr. Bush said he hadn't previously known about the detainee who was held incommunicado. ``I'm never disappointed in my secretary of defense,'' Mr. Bush said. ``He's doing a fabulous job and America's lucky to have him in the position he's in.'' But nearly every day for the past month the Bush administration has found itself on the defensive about treatment of detainees in Iraq or Afghanistan. In Afghanistan, the U.S. Army is investigating several suspicious detainee deaths. Yesterday, a federal grand jury indicted a CIA civilian contractor in one of the cases. David A. Passaro, described by a CIA spokesman as a retired Army special forces officer on contract to the agency, was charged with beating an Afghani to death with a flashlight last summer. The indictment said Mr. Passaro murdered a detainee who had turned himself in to military forces at Asadabad military base. Investigators have said they are looking into three prisoner deaths in Iraq and Afghanistan that may have come at the hands of CIA agents or their proxies. The CIA said Mr. Passaro's relationship with the agency was a short one. He signed a contract to work for the agency in December 2002 and arrived in Afghanistan in mid-May. The alleged murder occurred the following month. ``We take allegations of wrongdoing very seriously, and it's important to bear in mind that CIA immediately reported this allegation to the [CIA] inspector general,'' said spokesman Mark Mansfield. The case of the ghost detainee doesn't involve abuse allegations. CIA and Pentagon officials say the man was captured last June in northern Iraq and spirited out of the country by CIA operatives. When the Justice Department ruled several months later that the man shouldn't have been taken from Iraq, he was returned and placed in the custody of the U.S. Army. According to two U.S. officials, the CIA asked that the man be held without an identifying serial number because making his arrest public might hinder an ongoing operation. Because his case wasn't recorded in Pentagon prisoner files, however, U.S. officials acknowledged they lost track of him for a time. He resurfaced in May when senior Pentagon officials got wind of his case. Pentagon spokesman Bryan Whitman said the man will soon be issued an identifying number, and placed in the general prison population in Iraq if the CIA voices no objections. Let me say one more thing. I want to send out kudos to all the veterans across this country, those who are from World War II, from the Korean War. One of my favorite veterans is my father, Andrew Tubbs, who is now 84 years old. But to all the young people serving, the ones that I met when I went over to the United Arab Emirates and when I went to Turkey and when I went to all these places in the military and Kosovo, we are so very proud of you. The reason we are standing here on the floor this evening is not because we are ashamed of your conduct. We are standing on this floor this evening, not because we are patriotic, because we are all patriotic. We are standing on the floor of the House this evening to say to the world that the United States wants people in leadership who are going to set an example. We want people in leadership who are going to allow our troops to do what they need to, but not have the work of the troops diminished by the conduct of those in leadership. I thank the gentlemen for the opportunity to be heard.

Mrs. JONES of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank my colleagues, the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Meek) and the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Ryan), for inviting me to participate in this Special Order this evening. I am so proud of both of them. I am only 2 minutes older than either one of them, but I am very proud of the work and leadership that both of them are showing in the U.S. Congress. I always remind people that both of them remind me of my man child Mervin, who is very tall and very good looking, and 200-plus pounds, and I see Tim pulling his collar here. But I am so proud of the leadership that both of them are showing. So I suppose my colleagues want to know, what is a woman my age doing with these two young guys on the floor of the House talking about issues. I am just glad to be in the House with them and glad to be a part of the work that they are doing. As we are talking about this, first of all, let me express my sympathies to the Johnson family on behalf of my entire family and the people of the 11th Congressional District of Ohio. I can empathize with the wife of Mr. Johnson, having lost my husband only in October of last year. It reminds me of all of the terrible things that are going on across the United States of America. It reminds me also of the need for the United States to be aboveboard and the need for the United States to be able to do things that in 20 years will withstand the light of day. I am reminded of a meeting that I had at the Pentagon with some of my colleagues and Secretary Rumsfeld. This was around the time of military tribunals and the discussion: what are we going to do with military tribunals and how are they going to be handled? Those of my colleagues who do not know, prior to coming to Congress I was a Cuyahoga County prosecutor or DA and, prior to that I was a judge for 10 years. So I said to Secretary Rumsfeld, Mr. Secretary, I have concerns about military tribunals. What we need to make sure that we do in the course of these tribunals is to assure that the rules of evidence are complied with if, in fact, we are going to use people who have no experience in hearing law and in hearing cases. But if we are going to use people or judges who have had some experience, then the rules of evidence may not be so important. But what is important is that we have in place rules and regulations that will assure that a trial in Afghanistan or a trial in Iraq or a trial in the United States involving the same offenses will be treated commonly and that there will not be any disparity. But more importantly I said to him, Mr. Secretary, any of our activity needs to be able to withstand the light of day. And I was reminded of that today when I read this article in the Wall Street Journal saying that Rumsfeld defends hiding prisoners at CIA urging. And what it does is it adds another layer of distrust upon the United States and upon the United States military when he says in the article that he suggested, without elaborating, that often this is done. There are instances where it occurs that they hide prisoners from the Red Cross. The Red Cross in the international community is supposedly the organization that will come in and say to the world that we did not see any problems there and, therefore, you should not be concerned. Now, if the United States admits to hiding people from the Red Cross, that is another layer of concern or distrust that is put in place. So I would again encourage Secretary Rumsfeld to not engage in such conduct. In fact, I said not too long ago that Secretary Rumsfeld ought to do the United States a favor and do the President of the United States a favor and withdraw from his position. He should not wait for someone to put him out; he should be man enough to resign and step away from his conduct.

Mrs. JONES of Ohio

Mrs. JONES of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank my ranking member and my chairman the gentleman from New York (Mr. Rangel) for his leadership. I rise against H.R. 4520, and in Ohio it is truly the place where we know about a loss of jobs. Since President Bush took office, in the City of Cleveland alone we have lost 60,000 jobs. In the State of Ohio we have lost more than 200,000 jobs, many of them manufacturing jobs and many of them service workers jobs, and that was why in the Committee on Ways and Means I offered an amendment and subsequently withdrew it that would have provided benefits to service sector workers that have lost their jobs due to international trade. The irony is that my amendment was ruled nongermane. H.R. 4520 is overloaded with special interest measures, but my amendment which would have dealt with service workers who are left out of the process was denied an opportunity, but more importantly, if H.R. 4520 is such a good bill, why not allow the Democrats to offer a bill so that our colleagues would have an option? I know they keep saying it was not a substitute, but this is a semantical argument that it is not a substitute. The Democrats had a bill that would have allowed us to do many of the things that are offered in H.R. 4520 but made them permanent. I smile as I stand here and say this this morning to all the people of America, do not be fooled. Do not get fooled. Do not be fooled. This is not a jobs bill. Tell the Republican leadership you want a J-O-B. You want a J-O-B, not benefits for other corporations.

Mrs. JONES of Ohio

Mrs. JONES of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, it is so wonderful to be on the floor of the House again with my colleagues as we talk about the issues that are impacting our State. Right now in the Committee on Ways and Means we are marking up FSC-ETI bill, which has to do with giving corporations who take jobs over to foreign countries greater tax benefits. Since I am the only Democratic Ohio member on the Committee on Ways and Means, I want to get back over there, because I have a piece of legislation where I am offering an amendment that if the tax provisions provide benefits for manufacturing workers who lost their jobs, we ought to be able to provide benefits to service workers who lost their jobs, because in Ohio it appears we have lost some 133,000 service worker jobs since this administration took over. I rise with my colleagues as a supporter, a voice for the middle- class and a voice for the lower-class people in our country who make up the backbone of our country, those Americans who since George Bush took office are finding themselves overlooked, under-appreciated and kicked to the curb. I could go on with my statement, but what I am going to do is submit my statement for the record, because I know Ohio is in good hands with the three of you on the floor of the House to talk about what is going on in Ohio. I need to go back over to the Committee on Ways and Means and make sure the voice of Ohio workers is heard in that hearing. If we get done before the hour is up, I will be back to engage in a conversation with each and every one of you. You know if unemployment is high in the majority communities in Ohio, in the minority communities it is even higher. I just got some statistics saying in the City of East Cleveland, the unemployment rate is 12.7 percent, 12.7 percent. We need to be a loud voice on behalf of the workers of Ohio. Let me say to my colleagues here, the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Brown), I have been calling him ``senior.'' He does not like to be called senior colleague, but my colleague with greater seniority than me, and my colleague the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Strickland), with greater seniority than me. At least I am more senior to somebody, my colleague with less seniority than me, the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Ryan). Keep it up, brothers. I am glad to be here with you. Mr. Speaker, I rise today as a voice for the middle class. Those Americans who make up the working class, the backbone of this country. Those Americans, who since President Bush took office are finding themselves overlooked, underappreciated and kicked to the curb. My home state of Ohio, has seen the worst of this economy. Since President Bush took office the state of Ohio has lost 214,500 jobs. Of those lost jobs, 167,800 of them were manufacturing jobs; 1,300 of those lost just recently in April. My colleagues across the aisle would argue that the economy is improving; however, the Republicans have much to do to erase the job deficit that they have created through their tax cuts for the wealthy. The growing industry that the Republicans have been talking about is significantly weaker than the shrinking industry. In Ohio there is a -29 percent wage differences between industries gaining jobs and the industries losing jobs. Additionally, the health insurance coverage for the growing industries is only 53.1 percent compared to 70.2 percent of the shrinking industries--a difference of 17.1 percent. The economic outlook is even worse for many living in my district. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics and the Ohio Dept. of Job and Family Services, the unemployment rate in Cuyahoga County is at 6.5 percent with over 43,500 workers unemployed. The cities of Cleveland and East Cleveland have been hit the hardest with Cleveland's unemployment rate at 12.2 percent with 25,000 unemployed workers and East Cleveland with a 14 percent unemployment rate and 2,346 workers unemployed. This economy has had a disproportionate affect on minorities in this country, particularly African Americans. According to the U.S. Courts, Administrative Office's Bankruptcy Statistics, 1,625,208 households filed for bankruptcy in 2003, a 33 percent increase from 2000. That is nearly 1 bankruptcy every 19 seconds. For minorities the statistics are even worse. According to an article by Elizabeth Warren and Amelia Warren Tyagi, entitled the Two Income Trap, 2003, African Americans and Hispanics are much more likely to go bankrupt. Hispanic homeowners are nearly three times more likely than white homeowners to file for bankruptcy, and black homeowners are nearly six times more likely than white homeowners. African Americans are also twice as likely to lose their homes due to foreclosures, often falling victim to the unscrupulous practices of predatory lenders. Additionally, African Americans have higher levels of debt. The typical African American families had debt of 30 percent of their assets, while the debt of typical white families was 11 percent of their assets. Homeownership and credit are not the only place where the minorities of this country are feeling the economic squeeze. It is affecting their education where they are seeing an increase in tuition of $1,207 at 4- year public universities. It is affecting their health care, where here in the United States the total family premium for health insurance has increased by $2,630 to $9,068. Even child care costs have increased by $2,050. A Census study showed that African Americans and Hispanics spend more on child care than whites. The average black family spends 10.4 percent of household income on childcare, and the average Hispanic family spends 10.7 percent, compared with 8.1 percent for white families. This along with skyrocketing gas prices and the outsourcing of Americans jobs, our middle class citizenry is suffering. It is time for us to provide real legislation and initiative to strengthen middle class Americans. Democrats have a plan to jump-start our economy through tax breaks to encourage businesses to keep jobs here in America, invest in our small- and medium-sized businesses and work to secure universal access to college and expand job training. The American people deserve better than what they are receiving from this administration and we move forward to address the needs of the American people.

Mrs. JONES of Ohio

Mrs. JONES of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, had I been present for the following: Rollcall vote 213, on Ordering the Previous Question, in providing for the consideration of the joint resolution H.J. Res. 83; Rollcall vote 214, on Agreeing to the Resolution in providing for consideration of the joint resolution H.J. Res. 83; Rollcall vote 215, on Ordering the Previous Question, in providing for the consideration of H.R. 444; Rollcall vote 216, on Agreeing to the Pryce (OH) Amendment to H.R. 444; Rollcall vote 217, on Agreeing to the Resolution providing for consideration of the bill H.R. 444; I would have voted ``nay'' on each measure. I ask unanimous consent that my statement be included in the Record immediately following the votes.

Mrs. JONES of Ohio

Mrs. JONES of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, had I been present for the following: Rollcall vote No. 212, H. Con. Res. 417, Honoring the Tuskegee Airmen and their contribution in creating an integrated United States Air Force, the world's foremost Air and Space Supremacy Force; Rollcall vote No. 211, H. Con. Res. 612, Recognizing and honoring the firefighters, police, public servants, civilians, and private businesses who responded to the devastating fire in Richmond, Virginia, on March 26, 2004; and Rollcall vote No. 210, Congratulating and saluting Focus: HOPE on the occasion of its 35th anniversary and for its remarkable commitment and contributions to Detroit, the State of Michigan, and the United States, I would have voted in the affirmative.

Mrs. JONES of Ohio

Mrs. JONES of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in honor of Mr. William B. Schatz, General Counsel of the Northeast Ohio Regional Sewer District (NEORSD), in Cleveland, Ohio. Mr. Schatz serves as the district's representative to the Association of Metropolitan Sewerage Agencies (AMSA). On May 24, 2004, the members of AMSA elected Mr. Schatz to be the president of the Association stemming from his exemplary commitment and dedication to a clean-water community. AMSA's mission is to effectively maintain a strong leadership role in the development and implementation of scientifically sound, cost- effective, and environmentally friendly policies for the protection of the health of the public and the environment. In May of 2004, AMSA celebrated 34 years of service to the clean-water community and the nation. Mr. Schatz has served with distinction at NEORSD from 1979 and for over 20 years has been a leader in the water quality arena working on many projects on behalf of the district and AMSA. His distinguished background includes service as the ad hoc legal advisor to the Ohio Association of Metropolitan Wastewater Agencies, as a member of the Advisory Board of the National Enforcement Training Institute, and as a member of EPA's Quality Review Committee on grant audits. Mr. Schatz has served in several capacities with AMSA, including chairing the Legal Affairs Committee, Water Infrastructure Funding Task Force, Joint AMSA-AMWA Insurance Committee, as well as serving on AMSA's Board of Directors. Mr. Schatz was instrumental in establishing NEORSD as a leading agency in the wastewater industry and in helping to guide its capital programs. Mr. Schatz has also had an influential voice in convincing Congress to fund the conversion of NEORSD's physical chemical Westerley Plant to a conventional biological process. Mr. Schatz has also played an important role in helping shape critical national policy issues on infrastructure funding, enforcement, and construction grant audit appeals. Cleveland, Ohio is honored to be the home to Mr. Schatz. It is no secret that he is a man who, day in and day out, goes above and beyond the call of duty. He is to be commended for his extraordinary efforts on behalf of the Northeast Ohio Regional Sewer District and on his election to lead the Association of Metropolitan Sewerage Agencies.

Mrs. JONES of Ohio

Mrs. JONES of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to celebrate the upcoming 50th anniversary of Brown v. Board of Education. It was 50 years ago that the Supreme Court unanimously decreed segregated public schools unconstitutional. The effects of that decision live on in myriad ways, and yet, in much of America, equality and integration remain ideals rather than realities. In 1954 the U.S. Supreme Court stated that separate is inherently unequal. The Court concluded, ``that in the field of public education, the doctrine of `separate but equal' has no place. Separate educational facilities are inherently unequal.'' The Court found that the evils of racial segregation affected students' motivation and retarded educational and mental development. Education is a right, not a privilege. The Court wrote: ``. . . it is doubtful that any child may reasonably be expected to succeed in life if he (or she) is denied the opportunity of an education. Such an opportunity, where the state has undertaken to provide it, is a right which must be made available to all on equal terms.'' In the 11th Congressional District of Ohio, Barbara Byrd-Bennett, CEO of the Cleveland Municipal School District continues this legacy Brown v. Board of Education, championing the rights of our young people and working to ensure that they are afforded the best education possible. Six years ago, in 1998, the Cleveland Municipal School District ranked last among Ohio school systems, and was placed in academic emergency status. Under the direction of Ms. Byrd-Bennett the Cleveland Municipal School District now stands as one of Ohio's ``most improved school districts.'' Under Ms. Byrd-Bennett's leadership academic successes are clear: Reading scores have increased by more than 30 percent; Children have breakfast and lunch at school at no cost, and over 93 percent are immunized; Graduation rates have increased by 10 percent and 74 percent of last year's graduates went on to college; Suspensions are down nearly 45 percent, expulsions are down 9 percent and assaults on students are down 13 percent; Fourth and 6th grade reading results were up 19 percent and 28 percent, respectively, in 1 academic year; and Only 22 percent of 4th grade students passed the State reading test in 1998 compared to 59 percent passed, in 2003, an increase of 37 percent from 5 years ago. Reading performance at the 6th grade has improved by 32 percent. I believe that education is the key to success. I am working on behalf of all the constituents of the 11th Congressional District in Ohio to make sure that public education remains the number one issue in America. I want for those who have a desire to go to college to be prepared and equipped with the tools necessary for success. While highlighting successes and recognizing achievements, we must also focus on current realities to further aid us in shaping national education priorities. According to the National Education Association: Poor and minority children risk doing poorly in school. Contributing factors include: rigorous curriculum, teacher preparation/experience/ attendance, class size, technology-assisted instruction, school safety, parent participation, student mobility, birth weight, lead poisoning, and nutrition; In 1994, 31 percent of black, 24 percent of Hispanic, and 35 percent of American Indian high school graduates took remedial courses, compared to 15 percent of whites and Asians; Few minorities have access to or are enrolled in Advanced Placement courses, Student achievement gap still wide; and Only 5 percent of African American 4th grade students and 4 percent of 8th grade students met national proficiency standards in 1996. In addition, under the Bush budget $9.4 billion less for education than was promised in the No Child Left Behind Act; this means that 2.4 million children will not get the help with reading and math they were promised. Under the Bush budget 56,000 teachers won't get trained and 1.3 million children won't get the after school programs they were promised. According to the National Education Association, the budget eliminates funds for 38 programs, including dropout prevention and gifted and talented education, and once again fails to increase Pell Grants for our Nation's poorest college students. Yet, incredibly, the President wants $50 million for a national experiment with school vouchers, which take away much needed resources from public schools, and trillions more in tax cuts continue to flow to the wealthy. According to Barbara Bowman, professor of early childhood education at the Erikson Institute, ``We're still quite a long way from a concerted national effort. What Brown did was make for a concerted national effort, but it required people to change. We haven't gotten that kind of centering of interest right now.'' America's public schools are dealing with a level of linguistic and cultural diversity unknown 50 years ago, when the Supreme Court outlawed school segregation in its Brown v. Board of Education decision of May 17, 1954. Today, public schools struggling to fulfill the spirit of the Brown decision, equal access to educational opportunity for all now we have a task made more complex and difficult by an ever-growing number of students who aren't even native English speakers. In this information-based economy, the stakes are increasingly high for those who don't get the education they need--potentially hundreds of thousands of dollars in earning power over the course of a lifetime, middle class vs. minimum wage. According to the National Center for Education Statistics, more than 3.7 million public school students were offered English language learner services in the 2001-2002 academic year. Segregated housing patterns make racially mixed schools a rarity. New York City schools, for example, have grown more segregated over the last decades. And with de facto segregation comes separate and unequal education. Cheryl Brown Henderson, one of the children who helped desegregate public schools, brought her message to Cleveland earlier this month. Brown says over the years she's watched schools become more integrated but feels we're not there yet. ``The country is far more inclusive than it has ever been and obviously we have some unfinished business to do because not all of our schools are functioning as they should be; not all our communities are as open and inviting as they should be.'' We have come a long way; however, we still have a long way to go. Today I rise to celebrate the anniversary of Brown v. Board of Education. I am proud to be an American. I saluted African Americans like Barbara Byrd-Bennett who believed in the fight for justice, believed in their dreams for equality and continue to pave the way for a better tomorrow.

Mr. JONES of Ohio

Mr. JONES of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of Small Businesses, and I am an advocate of Small Businesses providing quality health insurance to the men, and women, and the families of those who work for them. But, because I oppose H.R. 4281 that does not make me anti-Small Business, just like opposing the war in Iraq does not make one unpatriotic. What it makes me is an advocate for the truth and the facts. And the fact is that these association health plans would be exempt from almost all state consumer protection laws regarding benefits, premiums, and solvency. States are generally the primary regulators of health insurers, and assure appropriate access to health care, and protect against fraudulent marketing schemes. It is no wonder the National Governors Association, the National Conference of State Legislature, and Consumer Unions oppose this legislation. This initiative would allow Associated Health Plans to engage in the cherry picking of the healthiest population nationwide. In Ohio, AHPs would not be required to provide basic mammography screening, direct access to OB-GYN's, mental health services, alcoholism treatment, and vital primary health care. In addition to not providing particular types of services, there would be no limitation on how frequently AHPs could increase an employee's premium to continue coverage. AHPs could then also vary their rates for older or sicker members of their plans. Establishing association health plans will not significantly reduce the number of uninsured Americans. The Congressional Budget Office estimates that while 4.8 million Americans would join association health plans; only 330,000 of them would come form the ranks of those currently uninsured. The remaining 4.5 million would simply switch from an existing health plan to an association health plan. These plans would discriminate against older and sicker Americans, putting an extra burden on those who rely on health plans, and forcing the state to provide coverage for those who may not otherwise find an AHP. I believe governmental authority for regulating AHPs should be clearly specified. Absent this clarification, it is likely that no one will be regulating AHPs, or there will be conflicting regulation. When regulatory authority is unclear, consumers have no place to turn for redress. If is for these reasons that I support Small Business and oppose this bill.

Mrs. JONES of Ohio

Mrs. JONES of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, I rise this morning, after having listened to Washington Journal, wherein the head of the Medicare- Medicaid program said, seniors are now, in fact, in a program with this discount drug card where they can pool their resources and get lower prices for their drugs. If that is what we are doing with the discount drug card, why, in fact, did the legislation itself not allow the Secretary of Health and Human Services to seek best prices on prescription drugs for seniors? I say, as we talk about covering the uninsured this week, we ought to be covering our seniors. They ought to have a prescription drug benefit that gives them one card without all of this complication where they have to ruffle through cards, ruffle through the Internet when they do not even have access to be able to determine what is the best way for them to get their prescription drugs. Cover seniors. Give them the benefit they have worked for; give them the benefit they deserve.

Mrs. JONES of Ohio

Mrs. JONES of Ohio. First of all, I want to commend my colleague the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Brown) for his leadership on this issue. He has been right on top of all of this as long as I have been in Congress, and this is my sixth year in Congress, and I am just so proud to be a part of the delegation in which he is one of our more senior Members. That is no offense to you, talking about ``senior.'' But to the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Brown) and to the gentleman from Washington (Mr. Inslee) and to the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Strickland) and to the gentleman from Maine (Mr. Allen), this story is almost like the story our mothers used to read to us when we were growing up, The Emperor Has No Clothes. Remember this person came to the emperor's palace and said, ``Okay, emperor, I want to make you this finest robe out of this wool. The wool is so fine, you will not be able to see it. I am going to go to the barn and I am going to string it and so forth and so on and I am going to come back with this gorgeous robe.'' The emperor kept saying, ``I cannot see it, I cannot see it.'' He kept saying, ``But it is there. It is there. I am going to put it on you, and you are going to walk down the street of your community, and everybody is going to go, oh, what a beautiful robe you have on, emperor.'' Come to find out, the emperor walked down the street with no clothes on, naked, just with his underwear on. And that is what this bill is like. It is naked. It is saying to seniors, I am going to give you this great bill, you are going to get all these benefits. But it is like the bill has no clothes. It is a piece of paper with no benefit for senior citizens. It is a card that gives them nothing. It is a premium that they are given for a period of time, and they get nothing. The fact is, it is a misrepresentation, and it is just like that emperor walking down the street without any clothes. I just want to thank all my colleagues for their leadership on this issue.

Mrs. JONES of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, I will be short. Not only are we giving them this money up front. When the seniors finally do get a prescription drug benefit in 2006, we are going to be forcing the seniors to pay the premium every month into the plan and they will get no coverage when their drug costs are between $2,000 and $5,000, that doughnut hole we have been talking about. So these plans will get money while the seniors get no benefit on top of the billions of dollars we have already paid.