Marcy Kaptur

Ms. KAPTUR

Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Speaker, I come to the well this evening to discuss a very important trade dispute that is going on between the United States and Japan, a negotiation that has now dragged on through three different Presidents relating to the major portion of the trade deficit between the United States and Japan, the automotive industry and the automotive parts industry. I rise this evening to let the American people know that these negotiations have hit an impasse and today we met with the ambassador of the United States, our Trade Ambassador, Mr. Kantor, and were informed that the administration intends to, for the first time, the first administration in over a decade, intends to impose trade sanctions on the Nation of Japan in order to help pry open Japan's market not just to goods from the United States but hopefully as a result of our success there if it can occur to the goods of other nations as well. I think that the Clinton administration should be commended for bringing us to this point. We rise this evening also to say to them, hang tough. As they do this and try to pry open that market which if it were open and we actually had trade equity with Japan in automotive, we literally could construct in this country an additional 100 plants each employing over 5,000 people. That is how bad the differential has become between our two nations. The other point I would like to raise before calling on my very capable colleague from the State of Ohio, Mr. Brown, is to say that we hope that as these sanctions are imposed that the major auto manufacturers of this country and the major automotive parts manufacturers of this Nation will not raise prices but will use the power that the people of the United States are giving them through these negotiations to continue to gain market share in this country and to begin to gain additional market share in Japan. We wish the Clinton administration well as the President returns from Russia. We want him to be successful not just in the sanctions but hopefully in the case that will be placed before the World Trade Organization in Geneva. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from Ohio [Mr. Brown].

Ms. KAPTUR

Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Speaker, I agree with my colleagues who were on the floor here of the absolute necessity of the United States balancing its budget and putting our financial house in order. But this afternoon, I want to talk to you about a different deficit, the trade deficit, and a piece of legislation I am introducing today, the Professional Trade Service Corps Act, which is essential to America correcting that deficit as well. U.S. trade policy for the last two decades under both Democratic and Republican Presidents has been a major net loser for our Nation, its businesses and our workers. While some individual corporations and certain shareholders have benefited, overall the productive wealth of America has been diminished, as ballooning trade deficits have fueled the movement of our dollars offshore, as our citizens bought more and more imported goods coming into this country rather than our exports being sold abroad. Trade deficits represent a serious decapitalization of this country, with more and more of our people's money moving abroad to pay for the goods they are buying from foreign importers, while foreign capital pours into this country. The economic accounts tell the story. In 1980, our country was a net lender to the world, as foreign interests owed us more than $400 billion. Today, however, the United States owes foreign creditors nearly $800 billion. We are now a net debtor nation. As foreign imports, including many from U.S.-based firms that have escaped offshore, surge into our country, jobs that should have been created here, good-paying jobs, are now being located elsewhere in the world. Furthermore, the value of our dollar continues its decade-long decline as U.S. dollars flood into the international market to pay for the goods that we are buying from other places. Last year our country racked up yet another record deficit with the world in merchandise trade of over $166 billion. For January of this year, the United States set a monthly record deficit of $12 billion more in just 1 month, and keep in mind $1 billion of debt in trade translates into 23,000 lost jobs in this country. These deficits represent real lost jobs, stagnant wages, and decreased living standards as your dollar buys less in this country. You might be watching the trade talks that are going on with Japan right now. Last year we had over $66 billion in trade deficit with Japan, more of their goods coming in here than our goods being able to get into that market, because in fact it is a closed market, and if you just look at the automotive segment of that deficit, which represents half of our deficit with Japan, if we could solve that problem we could build in this country 100 factories, each employing over 5,000 workers, 100 factories, each employing over 5,000 workers, if we only solved half the trade problem that we have with Japan. In short, these deficits hurt every American in our communities, and that is why today I am introducing the Professional Trade Service Corps bill to upgrade U.S. trade negotiating functions through creation of a specialized tenured body of trained professional trade negotiators for this country. The Corps' mission would be to conduct U.S. trade negotiations and streamline the trade functions of this Government. The Professional Trade Service Corps incorporates a three-tier strategy to address the need for more skilled and committed U.S. trade negotiators. First the proposal would accomplish that goal by creating an elite professional body of American negotiators to address the issues of short tenure and the revolving door among our trade negotiators. The average trade negotiators for our country stay in their position 2 years. The average negotiator for Japan stays in his position 30 years, speaks several languages, and has worked in various countries around the world. Our bill would also establish a Trade Services Institute to train our current and future U.S. trade negotiators in the practices, culture, and customs of our trade competitors. Then finally the bill restricts Trade Service Corps officials as well as other senior members of the executive and legislative branches from representing or advising foreign interests immediately after leaving Government service. U.S. trade negotiators serve on the front lines of today's battle to win market share in the increasingly competitive international marketplace. To win, our country must have highly trained, professional, tenured, and committed trade negotiators with integrity at the table negotiating the best terms for America's workers and America's businesses. I ask my colleagues to please join me in cosponsoring the Professional Trade Service Corps Act. Put this country on an equal footing at the international bargaining tables that control our destiny in terms of jobs and development in this country.

Ms. KAPTUR

Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to Mr. Gerald E. Edwards of Delta, OH, in my district. Mr. Edwards is to be honored by his community as the 1995 Delta Citizen of the Year. The award is indeed a fitting one, as he embodies all of the best attributes of the term ``good citizen.'' In addition to the insurance agency that he manages and the six properties he owns and maintains, Mr. Edwards has always found the time to engage in a multitude of volunteer activities. Always one to take the lead, he is an excellent example of one who takes his civic responsibilities seriously. Committed to his community, Mr. Edwards has served as a long-time volunteer on the Delta fire/rescue squad, including his service as a past chief of the rescue squad. He is a past president of the Delta Chamber of Commerce and past president and past district governor of the Delta Rotary Club. Equally committed to his faith, he has served as an elder of the Delta Church of Christ. Currently, Mr. Edwards serves as the president of the Delta Family FOCUS [Friends of the Community United in Service] and as president of the Delta Library Board. Perhaps most telling of his giving nature and commitment to his community is Mr. Edwards' Thanksgiving tradition of inviting members of his community who are without a traditional Thanksgiving meal to join him and his family for theirs. This past Thanksgiving, the Edwards family baked 30 pies, peeled 50 pounds of potatoes, cooked 5 turkeys, and picked enough green beans and served enough homemade applesauce, rolls, and coffee to feed nearly 200 people in Delta, OH, who may not have been able to experience the American tradition of Thanksgiving. He is truly an inspiration to those who know him. Mr. Speaker, I know my colleagues join me in honoring a man whose sevice and responsibility to his community should serve as a reminder to us all of the limitless ability of one man or woman to improve and contribute to the lives in their community. Gerald Edwards of Delta, OH, represents in many ways the true meaning of citizenship. His contributions to the village of Delta have earned him a most deserved designation as its Citizen of the Year for 1995. I am honored to have this opportunity to recognize his selflessness and to represent him in the Congress of the United States.

Ms. KAPTUR

Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize an honor bestowed on a well-known Northwest Ohioan and friend, Mr. Art Edgerton. Along with four others, Art will be inducted this year into the National Association of Black Journalists Region VI Hall of Fame. Art began his broadcast career in 1958, and since then has worked regularly in local media. He currently serves as the director of public and corporate relations with a large Northwest Ohio radio station. Committed to promoting African-Americans and disabled people in journalism, Art is the current president of the Northwest Ohio Black Media Association. In this capacity, he has been outspoken in articulating the need for fairness in the field of journalism for both African Americans and people with disabilities. Among Art's many gifts is an exceptional musical talent. He studied at The Julliard School and the Philadelphia Conservatory of Music, and is a gifted pianist, organist, and percussionist. His talents are recognized far beyond Northwest Ohio, were he enjoys a loyal and enthusiastic following. Art Edgerton has been a quiet, commanding presence in Northwest Ohio for decades. His counsel is appreciated by many. He brings a unique perspective and uncompromising dedication to everything he does. Long recognized for his work, Art's previous citations include: Handicapped American of the Year 1967, Ohio Governors Super Hall of Fame 1970, Winner of the Baldwin Talent Search 1981, Distinguished Service Award from the Toledo Ophthalmologists and Optometrists 1990, and State Media Award from the State of Ohio Optometric Association 1990. The Northwest Ohio Black Media Association has established a scholarship in his honor. We in Northwest Ohio are very proud that Art Edgerton has been named to the National Association of Black Journalists Region VI Hall of Fame, for we believe that none deserves the accolade more than Art. As we congratulate him on this achievement we also offer a heartfelt thank you for his efforts, always conducted with courage, grace, and integrity. We are proud of him and for him.

Ms. KAPTUR

Ms. KAPTUR. I thank the gentleman for yielding me the time. Mr. Speaker, I would like to know whether if we vote for this, we assure ourselves that until the President certifies that without exception every requested document has been turned over to Congress, all further Mexican bailout funds through the ESF, the Federal Reserve Board or any other fund with which the United States is associated in the pipeline are halted.

Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding time to me. Mr. Speaker, I wish to bring to the Members' attention a title that is a part of this Defense supplemental bill, title IV, entitled ``The Mexican Debt Disclosure Act of 1995,'' a measure that was attached in the Senate and then agreed to by the conferees. Let me mention also, Mr. Speaker, that as the ranking member on our side has indicated, it has been very difficult to get the $3.1 billion identified in the overall defense supplemental bill to take care of costs for Haiti, for Bosnia, for Somalia. I might mention $3.1 billion. Title IV, which deals with Mexico, talks about $20 billion. Of course, that is money that has not been voted on by the Members of this body, because we have not been permitted a vote by our own leadership. We have been thwarted at every turn. Now we are faced with a vote on a defense supplemental that has a title that pushes us a little bit further toward getting some additional information from the Clinton administration. I have to say that it is a step in the right direction, but it is certainly not what we have been asking for in this body. A little recent history here. Members will remember that we were ruled against, those of us who wanted a clean vote on the question of whether we should be appropriating dollars to support the bailout in Mexico. The Speaker ruled against us. We were not allowed an open debate a few weeks ago. Then there was a vote in the Republican conference about a week ago, 2 to 1 against getting a vote here, a clean vote on the floor on the question of these credits and loan guarantees being extended to Mexico. Now the only item we were able to get passed was a resolution that had broad bipartisan support here, House Resolution 80, which we had to use a special procedure to disgorge it from committee and it essentially only asked the administration for information which was supposed to be here by March 15 and which is not here. Only parts of it are here. Now the cleanest measure that we could get on this floor is not this title sits at the desk there that would allow us a clean vote on the issue of how many dollars if any should be extended further to Mexico to help bail out that tragic situation down there. I want to point out to the Members, this title does exist in this bill. It is a serious title. Essentially what it says is that no money, loan credit guarantee or arrangement through the Exchange Stabilization Fund at the Treasury or the Federal Reserve can be extended unless the President of the United States has provided us with every single document that we have asked for in our resolution of inquiry. I can say based on the research we have done in our office, again this information was to have been here by March 15. There are big holes in what the administration has failed to tell us, including the conditions that were placed on the bailout by members of the investment community, the relationships to the Bank for International Settlement and the other international funds involved in this bailout, and private phone conversation notes between the Government of the United States and Mexico. I just have to say that this is another weak attempt to try to get some vote here in the Congress on a massive amount of money that is being extended by the people of the United States. Mr. Speaker, I have to say that it is not comfortable to be a Member of this body and not be allowed a full debate on a matter that is 7 times as large as the base dollar funding in this defense supplemental. This has been an insiders' deal from the beginning. I think that the Members should read the language of title IV carefully. We have a right to debate this amount of money going to another country. We are tied in knots over $3.1 billion of money that needs to be paid to restore the amount in our readiness accounts. Why is it so difficult to get a full debate in the Congress of the United States when we have a new form of back-door foreign assistance that has been allowed to Mexico setting an incredible precedent that we will have to account for later? I just have to say that this amendment that was added to this bill gets us to maybe second base but it does not get us the full and open debate and the kind of oversight that we need in this body on the amount of money that is now being extended to not just back up the Government of Mexico but the Mexican banking system. This is extremely serious. Title IV, an important step perhaps, gets us to second base, not the home run that we really need in order to gain proper oversight over this massive expenditure of our tax dollars.

Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Speaker, would the gentleman yield for three questions?

Ms. KAPTUR. I yield to the gentleman from Indiana.

Ms. KAPTUR. This leads to my second question. Then it is my understanding that under the legislation the President would not have to provide the documentation until the last day of the first month after which this legislation is passed, which would mean the end of May; is that correct? During which time billions more could flow out of that fund. Am I correct in my understanding?

Ms. KAPTUR. I would just ask the gentleman, is it the gentleman's understanding that in title IV that if passed it certifies that the President--

Ms. KAPTUR. If the gentleman would be kind enough to yield, I would just like to read into the Record the actual language in title IV which says that the reports will be provided beginning on the last day of the first month which begins after the date of enactment, which would be the end of May.

Ms. KAPTUR

Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Speaker, the Republican contract calls parts of today's tax bill the American dream. Well, I, too, have an American dream. My dream is that we pay off the debts of this century and not pass on $4.7 trillion of debt to the next generation. This Republican bill will cost our taxpayers up to $700 billion over the next 10 years. Under the Republican bill it is absolutely wrong that households earning $200,000 would receive an average tax cut of over $11,000 while those under $30,000 receive a hundred bucks. In fact, working families with two children with incomes of up to $16,000 would not get anything, while those with adjusted gross incomes of up to $250,000 would receive a $500 per child tax credit. This bill is a cruel dream machine. To make matters worse, huge corporations would no longer pay even the minimum tax. Vote for what is right. Do not wait for the next election. Vote ``no'' on this Republican bill.

Ms. KAPTUR

Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Speaker, is it any wonder that the citizens of the United States grow increasingly cynical about this Congress? Expediency and the next election will dominate this week's likely battle over the Republican proposed tax cuts and their impact on our worsening budget deficit. We have got a bidding war underway here to see who can flatter the most voters. Cutting spending, reducing the deficit and balancing the budget may not be popular with the hotshot pollsters who have got their eye on next year's elections but is it not time that we do what is right for America and for America's future? Keep this in mind. According to the Congressional Research Service, the United States budget has not been balanced since 1969. President Clinton in 1993 and 1994, to his credit, began to make a dent in this fiscal mess. Every Member here who supported him in that effort did what was right. The annual deficit was projected to be close to $300 billion a couple of years ago but has been brought down now to around $170 billion, still not perfect but a whole lot better. In fact, the deficit as a share of our total gross domestic product has been cut by more than half, from nearly 5 percent in 1992 to about 2.5 percent today. This level is lower than at any time since 1979, which means it is not so much of a drag on the economy. This marks the first time since Harry Truman was President that the deficit has gone down 3 years in a row. But overall, our Nation has accumulated an unpaid debt of over $4.7 trillion as of January of this year, over $3 trillion of that $4.7 trillion total, nearly three-quarter of it, during the 12 years of the so-called supply side economics. Last year alone as a result, taxpayers, us, we had to pay nearly $300 billion just in interest on the accumulated debt accounting for about 15 percent of total Federal spending. Of this $300 billion in interest that people are paying, $44 billion of it is being paid to foreign creditors we are borrowing from to finance our overspending. The interest we pay on the debt just this year is enough to pay the entire defense budget of the Nation for 1 year as well as all of the medical costs for our veterans and the entire cost of our college student loan program. So what does the Republican Contract on America intend to do about all of this? It intends to enact a tax cut that will make matters $700 billion worse over 10 years. After we have cut the deficit by $130 billion over the last 3 years, which is not small potatoes, we are now going to throw reason out the window and sop up all our progress. What is really sad about all of this is that interest rates in America are rising, 7 times in the last year, to offset our prior credit orgy. So even if a tax cut passed, the benefit to any family in America has been lost already by higher interest rates they are paying due to our Nation's accumulated debt and its draw on our credit markets. Is it not time for some courage and wisdom in this Congress? Is it not time to vote for what is right for the next generation, not the next election? Is it not time for statesmen and stateswomen to be elected here and send the election hucksters back home? It is time to vote for a balanced budget.

Ms. KAPTUR

Ms. KAPTUR. I thank the gentleman for yielding. I would just like to endorse his proposal to the membership to sign House Discharge Petition 2, the Stockman-Sanders discharge petition. There is a bill ready to come to the floor supported by a large number of Members on both sides of the aisle, and I want to commend the gentleman from California for bringing the importance of this to the American people as well as the membership. As one of the signers of that discharge petition, I know that it is the only alternative we have left to get a full debate in this House on Executive action that has gone beyond the bounds of precedent.

Ms. KAPTUR

Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor the birthdate of a genuine American hero, Cesar Chavez, which is on Friday, March 31. It is hard to summarize the accomplishments and impact of those citizens whose work not only changes the nature of the world in which they lived--but extends beyond their natural lives into the lives of those who will only know them by their legacy. Just as every African-American citizen feels the impact of Martin Luther King Jr.'s legacy in their lives, every Hispanic citizen, especially those who work the farms, fruit orchards and vegetable fields of America, will feel the impact of the life of Cesar Chavez. Before Cesar, America's migrant workers had few rights. He became their voice and the force that fought for basic human liberties and labor rights. When Cesar died he left a legacy to be emulated by future generations and the lessons learned will resonate for years to come. A legacy that will make migrant workers a full partner in the agricultural industry, and bring them to full membership in our society with all the benefits that full membership implies. Ever so slowly, migrant workers are entering into the mainstream of our society and into a status for which they have long aspired and is Whether it be by increasing education, work and training opportunities; continuing the fight to grain a liveable wage, benefits, and working conditions; or guaranteeing their access to full citizenship and the right to have their grievance addressed by whether legal means available. As we move forward as a community towards ensuring equal opportunity, equal protections and equal membership for all peoples in our society, let us remember the contributions of one of the greatest teachers on the means and importance of this pursuit--Cesar Chavez.

Ms. KAPTUR

Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Speaker, I would ask today whether you would like to fly with an experienced pilot or an inexperienced pilot? Or would you like to go to an experienced dentist or an inexperienced dentist? Today, I rise in opposition to all the proposals that will be debated here for term limits on Members of this body as a direct undermining of our Constitution. There are many days here when I know I am the only voice the people in my district have here in the Congress of the United States, and I know that I am better, I am smarter, I am more experienced than I was when first elected. I think it is important to say for the record that the problem of politics in Washington isn't the number of years that people are elected. It is the amount of money that is being put into campaigns, trying to influence people's views when they get elected here. Campaign financing reform is not in the contract. It is one of the important missing elements in the contract. It does not matter if you serve here for 6 years or 60 years. If we do not limit and control the money that is controling this political process, term limits won't matter. For you say in whose interest is it to have term limits? In whose interest is to have juvenile representation here, to have constant upheaval where Members do not even know one another on the floor? There has been a two-thirds change in this Chamber just in the last 6 years. In whose interest is it to have this place in constant upheaval? We have had turnover. People have been thrown out of office. But, for one, I do not want to give up John Glenn in the Senate. Who knows more about the defense of this Nation? Or Ralph Regula of Ohio on trade or Sam Nunn and Jack Murtha on defense? Or even though I do not agree with these gentleman, John Chafee in the Senate and Bill Archer in this House on tax and budget policy? Or Pat Leahy on agriculture or Nicky Rahall on mining or Alan Simpson with that acrid sense of humor that sometimes keeps us in balance here or Olympia Snowe in the Senate or Lee Hamilton or Dale Bumpers or Ron Dellums or veterans? I, for one, do not want to undermine the Constitution. I, for one, want a blend of experience and people who cannot be bought in this Chamber. I do not support term limits. It undermines the Constitution, and we ought to stand up for what is right for the American people and once and for all put a limit on campaign spending.

Ms. KAPTUR

Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased this evening to rise to discuss the issue of welfare reform and jobs and perhaps looking at it at a different perspective than some of my colleagues who have stood today. It is amazing what people do not say on this issue, and I think far too many Members of this body are looking through the wrong end of the telescope on opportunity. There is no question that America's families and America's welfare families often fail to remain whole because America's job-producing machine is failing. In my own home district of northwest Ohio, half the people, I repeat, half the people on welfare are working people. Half the men, half the women are not unwilling to work. They work everyday. Some work two and three jobs. But they still remain on welfare. Half the people on welfare in my home district are there for one reason only, and that is to receive the health benefit. Half cannot receive a health benefit through their private sector employment and so they fall on to the welfare rolls as the only hope to receive health insurance. About 15 percent of the people on welfare in my home region are blind or disabled or elderly, and the remaining 30 percent, adults and children, are really what most of this discussion has been focused on. And we are all for moving able-bodied people into the work force, but I want to concentrate on the half of the welfare rolls that nobody talks about, and those are the people who are out there hustling everyday, and they do not earn enough to buy the basic necessities. And I have found it rather ironic that, as the House has labored through this welfare reform discussion, it has been interesting to read the newspaper headlines today. In the Washington Post, the lead story, U.S. trade gap soared in January, economists warn of weaker dollar, and the economic growth of this country over the next year dropping a full percentage point because of difficulties we face in our trade and economic policies. The Wall Street Journal, major story today, United States trade deficit widened in January to a record $12 billion as peso woes and the problems with NAFTA and the Mexico bailout have a terrible impact inside our own economy. And for every billion dollars of country. And nobody in Washington really cares. Another article, ``Dollar Declines Still Further on News of Trade Gap,'' and it talks in the New York Times, ``United States Trade Deficit Soars to Record, Mexico Worsens Problem.'' Today the value of the U.S. dollar dropped again on international markets, and today it was also reported that our Nation's trade imbalance in January dropped 68 percent, got 68 percent worse, the largest ever in a single month in the history of this Nation, another 20,000 jobs, times 20,000, times 20,000, $12 billion of additional deficit, more lost jobs in this country in sectors that the newspapers tell us are very clear in telecommunications, another 30,000 jobs will be lost, in electrical machinery, in office computing machines, the places where we would like to put people who still remain on welfare and are not working, into good jobs, will not be there. The numbers are telling us this. We know that the wages and buying power of our people have not gone up for 20 years, and we know that thousands and thousands of jobs are being eliminated across this country at companies like Boeing, which is going to lay off another 7,000 workers, and companies like Fisher Price in New York who just announced several hundred more workers out, but do you think anybody here in Washington really hears or understands what is going on? And there is a major continental economic crisis here in North America that nobody is really talking about in this Chamber caused by NAFTA that is already causing market instability and is going to have far reaching economic consequences for our Nation and for Mexico, lower wages, higher interest rates, a worsening trade situation for our Nation with more lost sales and jobs and a deluge of cheap Mexican imports coming into our market. Five billion dollars from our Treasury has already gone down to Mexico, and another 15 billion scheduled as soon as it can be drawn down. Does the Contract on America say anything about America's economic plight? No. Does it say anything about what I have just discussed? No. The blame is all put on welfare recipients, the majority of whom work in my district. What a shame.

Ms. KAPTUR

Ms. KAPTUR. I want to thank Congressman Sanders for your refreshing point of view and as the only independent Member of the House of Representatives for the extra effort that you put into trying to look behind the curtain and see what is really going on in important programs like the welfare program which is so much in need of reform. today was it absolutely linked work with welfare reform, and it provided mechanisms to move people into at least reading the want ads, having job conferences, trying to get the skills right away, the minute that the bill went into effect under the Republican version that I guess we will vote on on Friday. You don't even have to read the want ads for two years. So I like the tight linkage in the measure that we considered earlier today. But you mentioned women in the work force. And, of course, there are a lot of women and children on welfare in our country today. And there was a new Brookings Institution study of women who were in their 20's who had received welfare at some point during the late 1970's and 1980's, and what was very interesting about that study was that it showed they did leave welfare. Two-thirds of the people do. But the women earned a median wage of about $5.20 an hour. That is too little to pull a family of three above the poverty line even with full- time work. And low wages are the reason that two-thirds of those who leave welfare return within 3 years for some period of time, usually to get their footing again, and then they go back out there. I meet these women in my own district, working in bakeries, working in laundromats, working in restaurants. By the way, nonunion restaurants, where they are not guaranteed of health benefits. But a lot of them fall back on to welfare. They don't want to be there. I am sure there are loafers on every program, and we have problems with family structure in this country, but let us recognize that for many people and half of the people in my district on welfare work. What a terrible, terrible indictment of this society that people who go out there, 40, 50, 60 hours a week, are on welfare. The system isn't working for them. In fact, the numbers show that a person who works 40 hours a week, 50 weeks per year at the current $4.25 minimum earns only $8,500 a year, not really enough to support a family. If the gentleman would just indulge me one extra minute here. I was thinking as I was driving through my city the other day about my mother's life. And she doesn't get C-SPAN. She doesn't get cable. So she can't hear me tonight. But how her life really differed from those of the women who are growing up in the neighborhoods that she lived in that she grew up as a child. And the big difference is that the jobs that were there that she could walk to, because no family was more poor than my mother's family poor, Champion Sparkplug is no longer in Toledo. Chase Bank, that was right up the street where my aunt worked, closed its door, moved offshore. The glove factory that my cousin worked at isn't there anymore. Dana Corporation moved 3,500 jobs to Mexico and out of our city. Bostwick Brown. Durwick Corporation. Swift and Armour. All the bicycle manufacturing capacity of the country was moved to Taiwan. When you think about what has happened to people, it isn't easy for them to find good-paying jobs.

Ms. KAPTUR. Yes, about six Caucasian men made this decision for 250 million people. And we effectively, the other 432 Members of this body, had nothing to say about it, and it is amazing to me how few people are even raising their voices. And yet $5 billion is out the door, another $15 billion is ready to go, and who knows how much more, because three banks in Mexico collapsed a week and a half ago. They are having difficulty refinancing their tesobono offerings, and yet our Government could find $20 billion basically to give to Mexico so she could pay her Wall Street creditors, the speculators who are earning 66 percent interest on bonds that they had bought. They should have eaten their losses, as they ate their earnings over the last 5 years. But they have a special call at the Treasury of the people of the United States, and yet the people from my district, 25,000 of them who got their heating assistance cut, they had no special call in Washington. No Washington miracle happened for them. For those millions of kids that will not get a summer job, there was no Washington miracle for them.

Ms. KAPTUR. Maybe we could work out a deal for our senior citizens who just got cut off their heating assistance. Maybe we could give them an equal tax cut where they could get a credit just like those companies got that contributed $50,000, did you say, a plate? But we will turn it into a new form of tax credit and refund their winter heating assistance to them in the same why. I wonder if Speaker Gingrich would help us amend the tax code in order to help all those seniors across this country who some from northern climates that are going to have a very difficult time paying their bills? It seems to me what is fair is fair. And I do not support that form of back door campaign financing, but I would think we might use the same measure for people who are truly in need.

Ms. KAPTUR. I wanted to add a comment there on student loans. In the State of Ohio, we literally, in the last month and a half, have had students arrested. I have not seen this in a couple generations. Arrested in our capital city of Columbus, concerned about the fact that what you said, Congressman Sanders, that the cost of their loans would be going up even more than they have already gone up, that they would have to be paying interest on their borrowings immediately. And we know that even now most of the students that graduate, graduate in huge debt. And when they graduate, what kind of a job can they go to? A lot of them are going into jobs that are $14,000-a-year jobs, and they are shocked even with a college degree at how little they earn. I know I have talked to people from Congressman Field's State, women who work on those shrimp, in those shrimp operations where they are doing I do not know how many hundreds of those things an hour, they all get carpal tunnel syndrome by the time they are in their mid 30s, and they are making about 3 bucks an hour. Now, those are working people and yet they do not earn a living wage, so whether you are a college graduate in this country, loaded up with debt and the contract says we are going to load you up with more debt and more interest or whether you are working in a shrimping operation in Louisiana or in a dry cleaners shop in Toledo, HO, you can't earn a living wage even if you work 40 hours a week.

Ms. KAPTUR. I am glad you asked that question Congressman Sanders, because it is just another one of those Washington miracles that happens without a vote of Congress. As hard as we tried to get the Speaker of this House to bring a bill on the floor to allow us to stop disbursements of additional dollars to Mexico, he would not bring up that bill, because he was a partner to the decisions that were made by the Clinton administration.

Ms. KAPTUR

Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in support of work and education as fundamental to real welfare reform--endorse the Deal substitute--and oppose H.R. 4. Unlike H.R. 4, the Deal substitute provides meaningful work opportunities immediately by moving individuals off of welfare and into work. The Deal substitute requires that a job search begin immediately. H.R. 4 does not even require people to read the want ads. We all agree the current welfare system simply does not work. The current system does not result in the very values we wish to encourage--work, family and responsibility--that are the underpinning of a productive society. For welfare reform to work, the American people first must have job opportunities that pay enough for them to be self-supporting. Half the people on welfare in my community work, but at wages too low to afford the basic necessities. Half of our welfare caseload remains on welfare just to get the health benefit that their private sector job does not provide. If we are to be successful, our goal must be rooted in a strong economy that produces good-paying jobs. We must require parents to assume responsibility for themselves and their families. Any reform effort must move people toward literacy and skills advancement to get them off welfare and ultimately into jobs that pay a living wage. There's something wrong with an economy that produces more rent-a- workers than factory jobs. Welfare must be structured as a system that offers a helping hand in time of need, while also providing the path to self-sufficiency and personal responsibility. States should be given the flexibility to make the system work for them, but in turn we must demand that job-readiness and living wage jobs are the end result. Job training, child care, transportation, and education can go a long way in moving people off the rolls. It will be the States responsibility to address these needs. We must make sure that uniform standards apply to all States. Furthermore, it will be the recipients responsibility to use these services to move off welfare rolls into real jobs. In February, I brought together community leaders in my District for a forum on welfare reform. I brought together welfare recipients with elected officials, human service workers with human service directors. Together we came to a consensus on what is truly needed to reform welfare and in my judgment the Deal proposal comes closest to those recommendations. northwest ohio recommendations I would like to outline for my colleagues the recommendations made by my community on welfare reform. To be successful, welfare reform must begin on the frontlines with recipients and case workers who know what works and what does not, on an individualized basis. We must emphasize individualized contracts with a local case manager who is allowed to work with a family on its specific needs regarding work, education, skills training opportunities and building whole families. The current system perpetuates people being on service programs, not getting them off. We must focus our attention on incentives to help the working poor and working families move up and out of poverty. Case managers should be professional social workers trained in strength-based assessments, not needs-based assessment. We must change our focus from providing overly bureaucratic eligibility determinations to one of partnership and coordination of services. This can be done by using an Individualized Family Service Plan, in which the family picks its strengths and weaknesses, goals and objectives, and the case manager finds the services in the community to meet those needs. This approach empowers the family and gives them the tools to get off and stay off welfare. intergovernmental responsibilities federal standards At a minimum, the Federal Government should provide a national framework which outlines the categorical eligibility criteria and minimum benefits standards to ensure that the poorest citizens receive equitable treatment. Local agencies should not have to devote precious time to determining and redetermining eligibility of recipients and administering the programs. Initial determination of eligibility should be a federal responsibility set up like local Social Security offices. Local governments could then devote their efforts toward training and work activities, and employment and related supportive services such as child care. The Federal Government should establish a person's eligibility like Social Security does, and develop and monitor performance standards so that States programs can be measured. Federal standards are critical. When the Federal Government has failed to do so in the past, what resulted was the ``Mississippi Syndrome''--great inequity among States. Without Federal standards and performance measures, States will not comply, as has been demonstrated historically. Federal regulations on confidentiality prohibit local agencies--Head Start, welfare offices, WIC, Department of Agriculture, PCI--from sharing necessary information about clients. Since same populations, the Federal Government should permit cross referencing at the local level. State Partnership, Simplification and Local Empowerment Federal block grants to the States must not permit States to forgo their fair contribution to alleviating poverty. States must be encouraged to ``earn'' Federal payments. Flexibility is essential. What happens if there is not enough money in a given year to finish that year? People would be completely cut off until the next year. States must be allowed to carry over funds and not be penalized for good management of money. Human service regulations in my home State of Ohio are some of the most complicated in the Nation. The application is 37 pages long. We should not assume that if the Federal Government cashes programs out to the States, the system in Ohio or any other State will be streamlined. The Federal Government must force States to streamline regulations. It should further be required that, as a condition of receiving Federal funds, States be required to sign contractual arrangements with the local human service administering agency that places each on an equal plane. Counties, or any other local administering entity, should be given equal status with the State government to administer programs through contractual arrangements. simplification The ideal system should encourage a team approach with a case manager--as opposed to a caseworker--determining what services are needed for a specific family, then bringing together a team at a location which is easily accessible and user friendly. Computer linkage at the local level is needed to ensure the success of a team approach. Interagency contracts must be established within each case management situation to avoid limits between agencies because of confidentiality requirements, and these contracts must be filtered down to the staff level. A common intake form should be designed by the Federal Government, along with similar eligibility criteria for all human service programs: Medicaid, AFDC, food stamps. Definition of eligibility relative to poverty guidelines varies across Federal programs; it should be simplified and made the same for all of them. Local welfare personnel complain they spend incredible hours of time--an average of 2 hours per client--ascertaining a client's eligibility. They are required to answer over 700 different questions about that client. education, training and health insurance Two areas of policy that must be a part of Federal welfare reform are education and job training. Fifty thousand adults in northwest Ohio are illiterate, many of them on welfare. I am sure many other Districts across our Nation face the same situation. Welfare reform must address this problem. Skills training and education must be incorporated into welfare reform. The Federal Government must assure educational institutions--such as some proprietary schools--will not rip off clients and deprive them of their futures. Vocational and proprietary schools must be held to uniform accreditation standards. Further, they must be required to give labor market statistics about each of their courses of study on a regular basis. For example, northwest Ohio has a glut of nurses, yet schools continually market nursing as an excellent field with plenty of job opportunities available. Half of welfare recipients in northwest Ohio remain on the program to receive health insurance, therefore, welfare must be reformed to offer people health insurance in private sector entry level jobs. Perhaps there could be a partnership formed at the local level between potential employers, human service agencies, and clients. For example, perhaps Federal health insurance such as Medicaid could be used to transition citizens for a period into private sector employment. Any person receiving welfare should be able to keep health insurance coverage after employment at least until his or her wages rise above the poverty level. If States receive incentives for performance, they will address health insurance. other recommendations Emphasis must be placed on paternity orders, with identification of absent fathers being key to the receipt of benefits. The IRS should be the primary collector of child support payments. Stronger, swifter, and more certain sanctions for failure to cooperate in the order establishment are needed. Any proposed work plan must include a provision for at least minimal child support payments. The reporting of nonsupport should be rewarded. Workers currently have no incentive to follow up on leads provided by custodial parent, so they don't do anything. ssi We should anticipate the trend toward increased SSI benefits when work is made mandatory. SSI benefits to drug and alcohol dependent persons, many of whom are mentally ill, should, therefore, not be cut off automatically; rather, cases should be assessed individually and funds should be channeled to local substance abuse treatment agencies to work with the client in his or her interest. keep families together Low-income families must be allowed to remain together without being penalized monetarily. Accounts of mothers and fathers are currently separate and based on eligible work quarters. Families should be treated as families. developmental programming Mandatory classes in budgeting, parenting, and nutrition, and registration of children in Head Start or other quality preschool programs should be required of recipients. food stamps The Food Stamp Program where possible should be cashed out and the money used for regular benefits, health insurance, or education associated with moving people off the program. We must accord people respect enough to assume they will spend the cash on food, after giving them nutrition counseling and education. utility Assistance plans--like PIP--must be reformed. They leave the recipient with a debt which must be paid before utilities can be turned on in one's name at another residence. housing Finally, incentives should be provided for people to leave public housing. If one has no income, one pays no rent. The safety of knowing one can always stay even if not paying anything prevents people from trying to get out of the system.

Ms. KAPTUR

Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize the longtime contributions the Rojek family has made in my district. Fran and Ray Rojek founded Rojek's Catering over 40 years ago in North Toledo. My family and I, along with many generations, have enjoyed Rojek's famous coffee cakes and other Polish specialties. It is a tradition that will be greatly missed as they close their doors. When the Rojeks began their business in the mid 1950s, the catering business involved lugging heavy trays and dishes of food into homes and facilities that didn't have kitchens to accommodate serving large groups of guests. Currently, most catering businesses own their own halls, and serve to groups at these halls. The Rojeks' energy and spirit have been an inspiration to those who utilized their quality service for their special events. With a staff of 7 full-time employees and another 25 on-call employees, it was not uncommon to cater a complete wedding dinner for 500 guests. I know my colleagues join me in saluting one of America's most industrious families, as they cater to themselves by taking time to enjoy their golden years. I am honored to have this opportunity to recognize the Rojek family's efforts as they move on to retirement.

Ms. KAPTUR

Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in opposition to this bill, and in support of Citizens like Annie Coleman of my district who will turn 73 on April 30. This bill pulls the rug out from under her. Let me tell you her story. Annie lives on Oakwood Avenue in Toledo, OH, and worked all her life for Superior Laundry. She saved to own her own home and raised four children. She took care of a dying mother and husband after her retirement. She now survives by picking up odd jobs, at age 72, because her Social Security checks of $640 a month are simply not enough to make ends meet. She pays nearly $200 a month for health insurance and prescriptions. Her heating bills are $180 a month and she receives $117 a month in winter heating assistance and emergency heating assistance in the winter. Even with this helping hand, she is left with $90 a week on which to live. Without it, she must make a choice between food and heat. No one who has lived through below zero Midwestern winters should be forced to make that choice. The bill before us will eliminate the winter heating assistance [LIHEAP] Program. It will hurt Annie and 25,000 other citizens in northwest Ohio; it will hurt over 2 million elderly citizens across America. I cannot support a bill which puts the most vulnerable people in our society at risk. Over the past 2 days we have engaged in a major debate on the worthy goal of balancing our budget by cutting $17.3 billion. Reducing the deficit and balancing the budget is a must and I have worked hard and continue to work hard to achieve that. But this is not the way to do it. As we try to plug the red ink dike, the holes in the dike of our increasing debt, this $17.3 billion exercise is fruitless because at the same time there are billions of dollars flowing out the other side of the dike that are not under consideration and we are told are completely off the table. Why not get rid of tax breaks for corporate welfare? We hear a lot about welfare for ordinary citizens. What about corporate welfare? Why not eliminate the tax breaks that give $5 billion for pharmaceutical companies to leave the United States and manufacture offshore; why not eliminate $30 billion worth of transfer pricing that rewards all these foreign corporations operating in the United States that do not pay a dime of taxes; why not auction off the rights to manufacture the space station and exact continuing royalties that will result in $40 billion in savings? This rescission bill before us today makes none of these cuts. The bill before us today is irresponsible fiscal policy. No one should swallow the line that this bill will really result in deficit reduction. While it hurts our seniors and cuts out the summer jobs for our teenage sons and daughters, it also bankrolls the money for a future tax cut for America's wealthiest citizens. Thus, not only is the money being cut from our children and seniors, but it then is shifted to pay for capital gains and other tax cuts for the wealthiest among us as well as disaster relief largely for one State, California, which has the resources to pay for its own costs. In fact, the Governor of California has announced he wants to cut taxes in his State by $7 billion while asking the Federal Government to pick up $5 billion in disaster assistance. The cuts in this bill will severely impact my community. I am especially worried about the impact of these cuts on the elderly and children. Over my strong objections, the summer jobs for teenagers will be eliminated by this bill, which will eliminate nearly 2,000 jobs over 2 years in my district. In fact, 20 percent of the entire savings in this bill--$33 billion in all--comes from cuts in the various programs to move teenagers into the world of work. The rescission package completely eliminates summer jobs which employs about 600,000 young people nationwide. Youth, job training, Job Corps, and school-to-work accounted for $500 million in cuts. In my district, 1,683 youth enrolled in the program and participated in jobs that were not make work jobs last summer. They worked at community centers and nonprofits throughout the community. The cut jeopardizes several innovative programs. The city of Toledo used summer youths to remove graffiti. The Arts Commission of Greater Toledo provided them with the opportunity to prepare public artwork, and learn skills at the same time. The Community Development Center--Spencer Township--uses summer youth to run a nutrition program to make up for school lunches that disadvantaged children do not get in the summer. The Red Cross and Catholic Club run recreation/day camp programs so that younger children have some place constructive to go during the summer months. In addition, hundreds of other youth work at area nonprofit communities performing vital maintenance, upkeep and support functions that would go undone if not for summer youth workers. winter heating assistance [liheap] This bill will eliminate heating assistance to help pay for gas and utility bills for over 13,700 seniors and a total of 25,000 low income families in my district. This includes 12,531 seniors in Lucas County, 521 seniors in Wood County, 383 seniors in Ottawa County, and 266 seniors in Fulton County. Nationwide, 2 million elderly households are helped each year through LIHEAP. The rescission package would completely eliminate the program. This cut will force low-income elderly to choose between heat and medicine or heat and food. No one in our Nation should be forced to make this choice. public broadcasting Quality educational programming at our public television stations WBGU and WGTE will also be affected by cuts of over 30 percent in funding that will accelerate over the next 3 years. With the increase of violence and degrading television programs, CPB continues to fund marvelous children's educational and entertaining programs such as ``Sesame Street,'' ``Reading Rainbow,'' and ``Square One TV.'' Educating children, especially preschoolers is one of the most important goals of public television and where public television performs best. medigap insurance scams The rescission package cuts in half Federal assistance to help senior citizens in all income groups being victimized by so-called Medigap insurance scams. Literally billions are spent by seniors each year on health insurance and while much of it is needed, it is estimated that a major portion of the total is either duplicative or coverage that seniors already have or is written in a way as to provide most seniors with very little added coverage. During committee consideration, we attempted to meet deficit targets using cuts in programs that did not adversely affect children and the elderly. We tried to convert disaster assistance to California from grants to loan guarantees in order to minimize the budget impact and reprogram dollars to people's needs. We must not put the most vulnerable people in our society at risk, to provide disaster assistance to States who can afford to pay for their own problems or to provide a tax cut for the wealthiest in our Nation. This bill is wrong-headed and deserves rejection.