Ron Kind

Mr. KIND

Mr. KIND. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in honor of Women's History Month. In 1987, Congress passed a resolution designating the month of March as Women's History Month and a time to honor, ``American women of every race, class and ethnic background [who] have made historic contributions to the growth and strength of our Nation in countless recorded and unrecorded ways.'' For 2005, the theme of Women's History Month is ``Women Change America.'' In celebration of this month, I would like to focus on two women from Wisconsin's history and honor their contributions to society. First, I would like to recognize Cordelia Julia Grace Wales. Wisconsin resident Julia Grace Wales made her mark in Wisconsin as a peace activist, scholar, an English instructor at University of Wisconsin-Madison, and a dedicated Christian. In 1914, in light of WWI, Wales decided to write her famous Wisconsin peace plan, a plan that she believed would end WWI. Wales made a genuine contribution to women's history in Wisconsin and America's tradition of peace movements. Born in Portage, Wisconsin, Margery Latimer was a social movement activist and an accomplished novelist. Latimer became well-known in the literary world after writing three highly acclaimed novels dealing greatly with the romanticism era. She once said, ``There's only one possession that's worth having and that is the capacity to feel that life is a privilege and that each person in it is unique and will never appear again.'' The third woman I would like to honor is Zona Gale. Also born in Portage, Wisconsin, Zona Gale was a great novelist and short-story writer. Gale's biggest success was her novel, Miss Lulu Bett. This novel was adapted as a play in 1920 and was awarded the Pulitzer Prize for Drama in 1921. As an activist for women's rights and the creation of the Wisconsin Equal Rights Law, prohibiting the discrimination of women, many of Gale's feminist politics were expressed in her novels and then plays. Zona Gale passed away in 1938 in Portage, Wisconsin, but her voice will live on through her novels and efforts for women's rights in Wisconsin and around the country. These three women, along with so many others, inspired hope and possibility not only in Wisconsin, but across the United States. Whether in art or literature, activism or teaching, they deserve our remembrance, not only during the month of March, but throughout the rest of the year as well.

Mr. KIND

Mr. KIND. Mr. Chairman, we are here today in this Chamber to consider a fantasy budget. It is ludicrous for the House leadership to move forward with this budget debate by ignoring the issues of the day merely to lock in huge tax cuts and offer damaging spending cuts to health care, education, veterans' services and much more. We need a better plan. The Democratic alternative that I support would reinstate the pay-as-you-go rule and balance the budget by 2012, just as the Baby Boomers begin their massive retirement, while maintaining significant support for our national defense, veterans programs, education, and health care, which will help grow our economy and create jobs. I do commend the President for recognizing the importance of the Milk Income Loss Compensation (MLLC) Program as a safety net for America's dairy farmers and including an extension of the program in the Administration's proposed budget. The Republican budget, however, recklessly zeros out this important program, placing struggling family farmers across this nation in peril. We know that the budget has not included the long-term cost of Iraq, which already cost the country $275 billion, the estimated $5 trillion in the next 20 years for privatizing Social Security, and the full costs of the tax cuts. in fact, it does not even include a full ten- year budget report. The report lacks detail and leaves many programs vulnerable to steep cuts. I would expect a complete and full report in a document as important as the United States Budget. As the campaign in Iraq continues, our thoughts and prayers go out to the young men and women in uniform as well as to their families. May they complete their mission quickly and decisively so they can return home soon and safe. Our veterans are returning home as we speak. These are the fine men and women who fought to help bring democracy to Iraq. The budget plan calls for cuts in veterans' health care benefits and reduces medical personal by more than 3,000, along with cutting $9 million from other areas in the already overstretched VA. While the budget cuts to veterans' programs, Medicaid grants, and other important programs represent a very small amount of the overall budget, they will make a large difference to the families who depend on them. The projected budget deficit of $427 billion for FY06 is revolting. Perhaps the worst aspect of this budget is that it is not paid for. This is the classic recipe for exploding budget deficits as far as the eye can see; it's the height of fiscal irresponsibility occurring at exactly the wrong moment during our Nation's history when 80 million Americans, the so-called baby boomers, are rapidly approaching retirement. This is a demographic time bomb ready to explode. That is why the Republican budget proposal, in effect, constitutes taxation without representation because it will be our children and our grandchildren who will be asked to pay for this fiscal mess. I couldn't think of doing anything more unfair to them. The children are our future, and we owe it to them to give them a stable foundation. As the father of two little boys, I did not come to this Congress to leave a legacy of debt for them or future generations to climb out of. Our Democratic alternative, however, anticipates this demographic time bomb by achieving balance, while offering an economic stimulus plan now that is fair, quick, and responsible. It supports our troops, but it also supports our nation's veterans, our seniors, and our children's education programs. So I urge my colleagues to support the Democratic substitute. I would call on the leadership in the House to pull their budget resolution so that we can have an honest debate with honest figures, factoring in a realistic cost of the Iraq operation.

Mr. KIND

Mr. KIND. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this time. I have a great deal of respect for the chairman of the Committee on the Budget. He is a friend of mine. He has got a tough job, trying to bring forth a budget priority that reflects his caucus's wishes in that. But let us set the facts straight here. The Democratic alternative does a lot better when it comes to support of the education programs than our Republican counterpart. We also in our budget proposal reinstitute the pay-as-you-go rules so that if we are proposing a spending increase or a tax cut in one area, we are going to find an offset in the budget to pay for it. Their budget does not do it. Our budget is also out for 10 years that shows that we come to balance by 2012. Their budget is a 5-year proposal. And the reason they do not do it at 10 years is because their deficits explode in the second 5 years. But their budget has also hidden the true and real cuts that are occurring in their education programs, ones that affect real people, real students in real-life conditions and will not help improve the condition of education or access to higher education, which we desperately need in this country. Their budget proposal actually calls for eliminating $4.3 billion worth of education programs in the next fiscal year alone. They completely wipe out vocational education, the Federal commitment to that. They completely wipe out all the Federal education technology programs that exist. They wipe out the Safe and Drug-Free Schools Grant program. They also get rid of TRIO and GEAR UP, targeting low-income students who want to go on to post-secondary education opportunities. They wipe out Even Start Family Literacy programs. And their proposals also hurt students by raising fees for student loans for higher education, ending students' ability to consolidate those loans at a lower fixed rate interest, and not only eliminating the Perkins loan program, as the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Spratt) indicated, but also forcing colleges to repay prior Federal Perkins contributions. The Democratic alternative is better than that. We restore these funding cuts as well as $4.5 billion in the next fiscal year alone. Talk to any administrator, any teacher throughout the country wrestling with implementing the unfunded Federal mandate called No Child Left Behind, and they will say what these requirements are doing to their school districts with the lack of funding to back up those requirements. Talk to special education teachers, and they will say how the lack of education commitment at the Federal level, only 18.6 percent of the 40 percent cost share that we promised for special education funding is pitting student against student in our public classrooms throughout the country. We can do a better job. The Democratic alternative does do a better job, while staying true to fiscal discipline and fiscal responsibility by reinstituting the pay-as-you-go rules that worked very well in the 1990s and led us to 4 years of budget surpluses, while also maintaining a crucial investment in education programs. As a Member of the Committee on Education and the Workforce, I am heading to China in a couple of days in order to visit their colleges and universities. Guess what? China and India are making a major education investment in the future of their countries. They are graduating more engineering students than we are today. They are emphasizing the math and science and engineering programs while we are starting to cut back in these crucial education areas. Do people want a recipe for economic disaster? The Republican budget and their lack of commitment for education is a sure way of getting us there.

Mr. KIND. Mr. Chairman, I thank my friend from South Carolina for yielding me this time, and I also want to thank him and commend him for the leadership that he has shown during the course of the Budget Committee work and for the alternative Democratic substitute which we will talk about a little bit later today. Mr. Chairman, there are few moments during the legislative year here in Congress which really defines who we are as a Congress, who we are as a Nation and where we are going with our priorities. It is one of these moments today when we have a discussion about our budgets and the priorities that we place in the budget. For some reason, the Republican budget that we have before us only is budgeted for 5 years rather than the typical 10 years. I submit that one of the reasons I think they are doing a 5-year budget instead of a 10-year budget is because of the complete breakdown in fiscal responsibility and what the costs of their budget will entail and the explosion of budget deficits in the second 5 years that they do not want to talk about during the course of these next couple of days during the budget. We, on the other hand, will be presenting a Democratic alternative, one that does, I believe, reflect the values and the priorities that we share as Americans in this Nation. Our budget will reinstate the pay-as-you-go rules to instill budget discipline again in the decisions that we are making in these budgets. We achieve a balanced budget under our plan by 2012, just when the massive baby boom retirement wave really starts to hit, and we protect important investments, in defense, in veterans' programs, education and health care to keep America strong and to help us grow the economy and create jobs. By reinstating the pay-as-you-go rules, we will be in a better fiscal position to better preserve and protect the long-term solvency of the Social Security program. What this chart demonstrates next to me is the result of budget decisions over the last 14 to 15 years. This green line which shows an upward trend that resulted in 4 consecutive years of budget surpluses is Congress operating under pay-as-you-go rules. The red lines that show the plummeting of the surpluses into historically large budget deficits shows Congress without pay-as-you-go rules. What is hard to understand about reinstituting pay-as-you-go rules as part of budget discipline and decisions that we have to make to right the fiscal ship again? With pay-as-you-go rules, it gave us 4 years of budget surpluses, 2 in which the Congress was not raiding the Social Security Trust Fund and using that money for large tax cuts or other spending priorities and enabled us to start reducing the national debt which was an incredible economic dynamic at the end of the 1990s. This chart demonstrates the current raid on the Social Security Trust Fund under the Bush administration. Every dime in surplus that is being run in the Social Security account right now is being diverted, to help finance large cuts for the most wealthy or to help finance large new spending programs, a 30 percent increase in Federal spending over the last few years alone. That will continue throughout the duration when we are running surpluses in the Social Security Trust Fund under their budget proposal. What this has meant was increased borrowing cost, year after year after year having to raise the debt ceiling in order to finance the breakdown in fiscal discipline in this place. Why is this important today? It is important because we do not owe this debt to ourselves anymore. Ninety percent of the new debt that was purchased this last year alone is being purchased by foreign countries, Japan, the number one purchaser, soon to be surpassed by China as the number one holder of our debt. I do not believe, and Democrats do not believe, it is in our best long-term economic interest to be so dependent on foreign interests to be financing these deficits. The President has been out campaigning on a new Social Security plan lately. It is kind of tough to engage in a meaningful discussion since he has not offered a detailed proposal; but from what we understand, he is calling for massive new borrowing in order to set up these privatized accounts that he is fond of. In fact, Social Security runs a deficit of $3.7 trillion over the next 75 years. What the President is proposing to do is to borrow $5 trillion for these transition costs to set up private accounts over the first 20 years alone in order to fix a $3.7 trillion problem. And that is probably one of the reasons why he is having such a hard time selling his plan out in Middle America. People know intuitively with this massive new borrowing that it is going to hurt economic growth prospects for our Nation; it is going to jeopardize our children and grandchildren's future by leaving a large legacy of debt for them. That is why, once we can get past the whole idea of privatizing the Social Security system, we can try to get together as Americans and work on a bipartisan solution that will be fiscally responsible and that will keep the promise to future generations.

Mr. KIND

Mr. KIND. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in support of the Emergency Supplemental Appropriations Act for Defense, the Global War on Terror, and Tsunami Relief, 2005. I have had the opportunity to visit Iraq twice over the last 2 years and visit with our military women and men and survey the operations of the U.S. reconstruction mission in Iraq. Never have I been more proud to be an American than when I visited our troops and observed them in the line of duty. My trips reconfirmed that we must give our troops the tools and resources they need to carry out their mission safely and effectively so they can return home soon. For this reason I am supporting the administration's supplemental request for $81 billion. Specifically, I would like to highlight the good work of the 128th Infantry Division out of western Wisconsin, and the 1158th Transportation Company out of Tomah, Black River Falls, and Beliot. The 128th is on their first tour of duty in Iraq and is performing well, despite several equipment shortages and setbacks the unit has dealt with. The 1158th is on their second tour of duty, and is also performing above and beyond their mission. I am extraordinarily proud of their service to our country. I am especially proud of young men like Andrew Carter. Today I had the opportunity to visit Andrew, a member of the 128th, at Walter Reed Hospital. He was recently injured in Iraq riding in a Humvee that was hit by an RPG. There is a good chance he would have been killed if it hadn't been for vehicle armor that was added to the Humvee. This supplemental appropriates more funding to continue to armor humvees, so that we can continue to save lives. One of the first things Andrew said to me was that he wants to heal quickly so he can get back to Iraq and serve with his unit. His resolve is a good reminder of the dedication of our men and women in uniform and why we need to renew our commitment to soldiers like Andrew. While I do not endorse all of the supplemental's provisions, in the absence of a funding alternative, I support the need to provide for our troops. But we do need to start budgeting and paying for their obligations, such as the need for a new embassy in Iraq, instead of passing so-called ``emergency'' supplementals and leaving a legacy of debt for our children to inherit. As our military effort continues, I and other members of Congress will work to ensure that our service men and women have all the resources necessary to fulfill their mission. Again, my thoughts and prayers are with those serving our country, as well as their families. America is firmly behind our troops and we're all hoping to see them home safe, secure, and soon. May God continue to bless these United States of America.

Mr. KIND

Mr. KIND. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for bringing forth this amendment, with myself and the gentlewoman from North Carolina (Mrs. Myrick). With all due respect to the previous speaker, this is not about debating the merits of the necessity or the needs for a new embassy in Baghdad. Having traveled to Baghdad twice, certainly there is a strong case that can be made that we do need to be moving forth on a new embassy, but this is how we are going to pay for that new embassy, getting back to regular order and procedure around here, and how we are going to afford the cost of this new embassy rather than just going into deficit spending. This amendment speaks to a larger issue. The last time I was in Iraq, which was last fall, I noticed one thing, we are dropping a lot of concrete in Iraq today, which is an indication that we are going to be there for a very, very long time. And year after year coming forward with more multibillion supplemental spending requests, all deficit financing, is not a sustainable policy. We need to get back to regular procedure and regular order around here, and what better place than to start on a nonemergency creation, the siting of a new embassy to get it to the appropriate committee for proper oversight and hearings of deliberation, and then finding the appropriate offsets to pay for this. I am going to support the supplemental today, as I have past supplementals. I believe our troops need to get all of the tools and resources to do their job safely and effectively. They have been doing a terrific job under very dangerous circumstances, including our State Department personnel, who are working in the current embassy within the Green Zone in Baghdad which is also at times a free-fire zone. But at some point we as a Chamber and as a body need to get back to the regular process of starting to anticipate these costs, starting to appropriate it and budget for it so we do not leave a huge legacy of debt for future Congresses and for our children and grandchildren to inherit. That is what this amendment speaks to. I want to especially commend a couple of units serving us so well from western Wisconsin, the 128th Infantry Guard as well as the 1158th Transportation Unit. In fact, earlier this morning I got up and ran over to Walter Reed Hospital to visit with some of our troops, including Specialist Andrew Carter from the 128th who almost had his foot blown off due to an RPG that was fired at him during one of his passing patrols. Just last week we lost another member from western Wisconsin who was shot down in the line of duty, Staff Sergeant Andrew Bossert. He will be buried in Wisconsin this Thursday. I am sure Members will join me in sending our thoughts and prayers to his family, his parents, but especially to his wife Olya who lives in Wisconsin. What we need to start considering at some point is whether or not the ongoing operations in Iraq and Afghanistan should be paid for as part of the normal budgeting process. These are no longer surprises and no longer emergencies. We know we are there. We know what the mission is going to entail and the costs we are facing. I think this is a good place to start by having this embassy go through the regular process where we can find offsets and an ability to pay for it.

Mr. KIND

Mr. KIND. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of H.R. 3, the Transportation Equity Act. I want to acknowledge the work of the Transportation Committee on this complex bill and especially thank my friend and colleague from Wisconsin, Mr. Petri, for his leadership on the legislation; the Wisconsin delegation is lucky to have such a strong advocate for our citizens. We all know that transportation bills are jobs bills, and now is certainly the time that we need more jobs throughout the country. I consistently hear from constituents who are searching for work; who have sent out dozens of resumes and updated their skills but remain unemployed. Each billion dollars spent on highway funding creates not only safer and better roads: it also creates an estimated 47,500 new jobs. An investment in highway funding is an investment for steady work for those in Wisconsin and around the nation. Furthermore, I am pleased that the bill recognizes the importance of funding crucial highways and bridges in Wisconsin's Third Congressional District. Specifically, the inclusion of funding for the Stillwater Bridge, which connects Houlton, Wisconsin, and Stillwater, Minnesota, is great news for those of us who have been working on this project for years. The bridge is only one example of an important project that will provide the nation with safer roads, shorter commutes, and better jobs. Finally, I would like to recognize the important conservation provisions that are retained in H.R. 3. These provisions include funding for refuge road maintenance, recreational trails and forest roads, as well as funding to facilitate fish passage. It also includes new money for signs to identify hunting and fishing areas accessible to the public. One of the most important provisions is authorization to facilitate a study to help reduce the growing number of highway accidents involving wildlife. I urge my colleagues to support the bill.

Mr. KIND

Mr. KIND. Mr. Speaker, I rise to speak favorably on House Resolution 16, supporting the goals of National Manufacturing Week, congratulating manufacturers and their employees for their contributions to growth and innovation, and recognizing the challenges facing the manufacturing sector. The American manufacturing industry has been a key to our economic success in the past, and will continue to be a key to our economic success in the future. As a member of the Congressional Manufacturing Task Force, I have focused on how the federal government can most effectively help small and medium sized manufacturers compete and grow in western Wisconsin and throughout the country. Through good investments and smart practices, the federal government can better assist American companies and help our nation keep its economic edge. We need to invest in proven programs that help small and medium sized businesses, such as the Manufacturing Extension Partnership (MEP). The MEP provides our manufacturers with the tools to compete in a competitive marketplace. It increases our country's manufacturing productivity and competitiveness, resulting in expanded economic activity and an enhanced tax base. It aids in the creation and retention of well-paying manufacturing jobs for American workers, and it is vital to our nation's small manufacturers. That is why I have supported level funding of $109 million for the MEP in FY 2006. Mr. Speaker, I fully support House Resolution 16, supporting the goals of National Manufacturing Week, and I congratulate American manufacturers for their contributions to our economic success.

Mr. KIND

Mr. KIND. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to speak out of order for 5 minutes.

Mr. KIND

Mr. KIND. Mr. Speaker, 40 years ago yesterday on March 7, 1965, events in Selma, Alabama, became a seminal moment for the advancement of civil rights in our country. Last weekend, I had the privilege to join one of my heroes, the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Lewis), who was also one of the leaders of the nonviolent civil rights movement, to retrace his steps across the Edmund Pettus Bridge where America's long march to freedom met a roadblock of violent resistance. The day became known as Bloody Sunday. By 1965, the cause of equality and human dignity had already seen much progress and setbacks: the Supreme Court decision of Brown v. Board of Education, Rosa Parks's defiance on a bus in Montgomery, the breaking of a color barrier at Ole Miss, the historic March on Washington, the assassinations of Medgar Evers and President Kennedy, the bombing deaths of four little girls at the 16th Street Baptist Church in Birmingham, Alabama, the Mississippi freedom summer, the passage of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. But on this Bloody Sunday, about 600 people, young and old, put their lives on the line and met the unbridled force of racism for the most basic American right, the right to vote and be full participants in our democracy. The Alabama State Patrol was waiting for them at the other side of the Pettus Bridge and attacked them with clubs, tear gas, and dogs. The gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Lewis) was beaten so badly he believed he was going to die. The images were captured on TV. When the movie ``Judgment at Nuremberg'' was interrupted with the news, many people watching the movie first thought that it was a continuation of the movie depicting brutal Nazi oppression, until they realized that this was happening in America, right now. People's shock moved the political world. One week after Bloody Sunday, President Johnson spoke to the Nation. In inspiring words, he said: ``At times, history and fate meet in a single time and a single place to shape a turning point in man's unending search for freedom. So it was at Lexington and Concord. So it was a century ago at Appomattox. So it was last week in Selma. Their cause must be our cause.'' Two weeks after Bloody Sunday, Dr. Martin Luther King and the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Lewis) led 4,000 people across the Pettus Bridge on their 54-mile march to Montgomery. Six months later, President Johnson signed the Voting Rights Act, proclaiming that the right to vote is the most powerful instrument ever devised for breaking down injustice and destroying the terrible walls which imprison all people merely because they are different from each other. Soon the Voting Rights Act will be up again before Congress for reauthorization. We should do it sooner rather than later. We should make it permanent, rather than for short periods, so we do not have to revisit the issue and debate its provisions. Surely there is enough common interest and bipartisan support to accomplish this. Their cause 40 years ago this week still must be our cause to overcome today. For as long as the power of America's diversity is diminished by acts of discrimination and violence against people just because they are black, Hispanic, Asian, Jewish, Muslim or gay, we still must overcome. As long as the gap between rich and poor continues to spread in our Nation, with some and not all having access to health care, we still must overcome. As long as children of color are more likely to live in poverty, die sooner, and less likely to graduate high school and go on to college, we still must overcome. As President Bush stated during his recent trip to Europe: ``We cannot carry the message of freedom and the baggage of bigotry at the same time. All our nations must work to integrate minorities into the mainstream of society, and to teach the value of tolerance to each new generation.'' President Clinton pointed out 5 years ago at the Pettus Bridge that these challenges already have existing bridges waiting to be crossed. He said: ``These bridges stand on the strong foundations of our Constitution. They were built by our forebears through silent tears and weary years. They are waiting to take us to higher ground.'' But there is still much work to be done. In the words of Martin Luther King, Jr.: ``Human progress never rolls on the wheels of inevitability. It comes through the tireless efforts of people willing to be co-workers with God.'' We remember the event of 40 years ago this week not only to honor the courage, sacrifice and accomplishments by those like the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Lewis) and so many more, but also to rededicate ourselves to their unfinished work: the pursuit of justice, love, tolerance and human rights, in our country and throughout the world.

Mr. KIND

Mr. KIND. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to congratulate and honor the friends & family of the brave men and women of the 652nd Engineer Company. Their duty and sacrifice are appreciated by all Americans, and it is right that we pay recognition to them today for receiving the Department of Defense Reserve Family Readiness Award for 2004. This award is being presented to recognize the top unit from each Reserve component that demonstrated outstanding family readiness while maintaining superior mission readiness. This award is a great honor and our nation congratulates you. New challenges facing our nation demand increased vigilance on the part of our armed services. With these increased demands, the role of the National Guard and reserve forces is critical in providing the total force necessary to ensure our nation's security. Over the past year, I have had the opportunity to meet with many National Guard and reserve members from western Wisconsin who have been called to service in support of Operation Enduring Freedom in Afghanistan and Operation Iraqi Freedom. Over 2,200 members of the Wisconsin Air and Army National Guard are serving on active duty. The people of western Wisconsin are proud of their service and the service of all the men and women of our armed forces during this important time in our nation's history. In the past two years, I have visited Iraq twice and have seen first hand what a fantastic job our soldiers are doing to give the people of Iraq hope for a better future. Although the road ahead will be tough, I know the efforts of the 652nd contributed greatly to our ongoing mission in Iraq. In addition, over the past two years, I have had the opportunity to meet with many National Guard and Reserve members and families from western Wisconsin who have been called up in support of operations Enduring Freedom in Afghanistan and Operation Iraqi Freedom in Iraq. I had the special privilege of attending one of the 652nd Engineer Company's family support meetings. I know from first hand experience the quality of this family support group. I would like to especially recognize Cheryl Iverson, the family support coordinator for the 652nd. I know her hard work and sacrifices are greatly appreciated by the families and members of the 652nd. The American people and the Congress of the United States stand behind our armed service members and their families. As our military operations continue, I, and other members of Congress, will continue to work to ensure that our service men and women have all the resources necessary to do their job safely and effectively. The efforts of our service people do not come without sacrifice. A member of the 652nd, Private First Class Bert E. Hoyer, 23, of Ellsworth, died on March 10, 2004, in Baqubah, Iraq in support of Operation Iraqi Freedom. He paid the ultimate price to enhance our security and protect our liberties; he also gave the people of Iraq the greatest gift of all: their freedom. I want to extend my heartfelt sympathies to his family and friends. Young leaders like this exemplify all that is good and decent about America. Once again I would like to congratulate the families and friends of the 652nd on this prestigious award. America is firmly behind our troops, and we're all hoping to see them home safe, secure, and soon. May God bless our troops and their families during these deployments, and may God continue to bless the United States of America.

Mr. KIND

Mr. KIND. Mr. Speaker, if the gentleman will yield for a question, this is a little bit before my time, but correct me if I'm wrong; it was really a Democratic Congress, working with the first Bush administration, the current President's father, that first instituted the pay-as-you-go rules back in the 1992 budget; is that correct?

Mr. KIND. It was President Clinton in his first budget that he submitted during his first administration that asked for maintaining and continuing the pay-as-you-go rules that Democrats had to pass without one single Republican vote in the House of Representatives; is that right?

Mr. KIND. And, Mr. Speaker, not one Republican back then had supported the pay-as-you-go rules that required tough political decision-making, trade-offs, in essence, with the budget, which is something that the Democrats in Congress today are advocating in the alternative budget resolutions that were submitted, because it worked so well in the 1990s, the pay-as-you-go rules, which are very simple. If you are proposing a pay increase or a tax cut in one area, you have to find an offset in the budget to pay for it in order to maintain balance. And it led to the 4 years of budget surpluses, as the gentleman pointed out, 2 years of which the Social Security-Medicaid trust fund was not even being raided but, instead, we could use that money for important debt reduction, starting to pay off the national debt. I was here during that first Bush tax-cut debate we had a few years ago where the big concern, on the Republican side at least, was that we were going to pay off the national debt too fast, if you could believe those days, which never materialized. But now today, we are back into chronic budget deficits, and one of the fastest growing areas in the budget today is interest on the national debt. I see two major problems with the huge budget deficits today that are unprecedented and we did not face before. One is, who is owning that debt? Who is paying for our deficit financing? Right now, Japan is the number one purchaser of our government debt, soon to be surpassed by China. I do not believe it is in our country's long-term economic interests to be so dependent on foreign entities, let alone China, to be the number one purchaser of our debt in financing these deficits. The other big difference we have today is ever since those long-ago years when the pound sterling was a viable currency, we have never had a rival currency up against the dollar in the international marketplace. That is changing today with the strength of the euro in the European Union and in the common marketplace. Now, if these countries that are currently investing in buying our bonds decide to take their investment somewhere else, such as in the euro, which is gaining in strength, and the dollar, which is declining in value, we are going to get caught holding the bag in trying to finance these deficits, and that could be the perfect financial storm being created. So again, I think it is a reason why we need to work together in a bipartisan fashion and, at the very least, reach agreement in reinstituting something that worked in the 1990s, the pay-as-you-go rules. I commend the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Spratt), our Ranking Member on the Committee on the Budget, for the leadership and the honesty that he has shown in presenting the figures so that we can, at the very least, agree on the facts and the challenges that we are facing, and then coming up with some commonsense solutions that have a proven history of working in the past. I am going to continue to work with the gentleman and the rest of my colleagues here in trying to put together an honest and reasonable budget in order to get us back on that glidepath of fiscal discipline and fiscal responsibility again.

Mr. KIND. Mr. Speaker, if the gentleman will yield, I thank the gentleman for highlighting the huge budget shortfalls we are facing, but one other item that seems to be masked in the budget numbers on the previous chart, does that include the amount of money that is currently being borrowed from the Social Security and Medicare trust funds? Is that amount also reflected in those figures showing deficits?

Mr. KIND. If the gentleman will yield further, the current raid on both the Social Security and Medicare trust funds makes those budget deficit numbers much worse?

Mr. KIND

Mr. KIND. Mr. Speaker, I rise today on behalf of myself and Representatives Gilchrest, DeFazio, Farr, Walsh and our more than 30 fellow members of the bipartisan Congressional Organic Caucus, to offer our sincere congratulations to the Organic Trade Association on achieving their 20 year anniversary. Formed in 1985 by a handful of individuals determined to build a trusted identity for organic products, this original group blossomed into the nearly 1,500 member Organic Trade Association today. The Organic Trade Association, North America's only organization dedicated to representing the views of all segments of the organic industry, has become an important source of information about the challenges and successes of the organic industry to the Congressional Organic Caucus and the public. Mr. Speaker, millions of consumers are choosing organically grown food and fiber. Over the last decade, the consumer marketplace for organic products has risen exponentially. Moreover, thousands of family farmers have discovered the environmental and ecological benefits of organic farming methods and technologies. Working together, the Congressional Organic Caucus and the Organic Trade Association will continue to promote the importance of organic farming and organic products to both consumers and the overall health of our country's agriculture industry for the next 20 years and beyond.

Mr. KIND

Mr. KIND. Mr. Speaker, every now and then you encounter someone in public service who is a public servant in every sense of the word, who transcends petty partisan politics, who brings a depth of character and a depth of knowledge to surpassed by no person, someone who loves his country, works hard for the people he represents but loves his family even more. That person was Bob Matsui who we lost over the weekend. Bob was someone I grew to know and love. My first contact with Bob was a campaign check he sent to me in my first run for Congress in 1996. I had never met him before then but he must of saw something in me that motivated him to help me out a little during my first campaign when a lot of other people didn't think I could win. And when I came to Congress, I quickly got to know Bob and appreciate him. He was someone who made everyone feel special. He would solicit your opinions on the issue before us, even though his depth on the issues like tax policy, trade, social security and medicare, surpassed anything anyone else had. He cared for this institution and the process of democracy and he exuded boundless optimism about the future of our great country even though his first few months as a citizen of this country was spent in an internment camp in California shortly after the Japanese attacked Pearl Harbor. He later led the effort in Congress to right that gross injustice by having our government apologize for that action. In short, Bob Matsui was someone I respected, looked up to and tried to emulate here in Congress. You can't replace a Bob Matsui; he was rare and never fully appreciated to the extent he deserved. But we all can learn from Bob Matsui and take his legacy of compassion, justice and fairness and make it our legacy to the next generation. To his wife Doris, son, Brian, daughter-in-law, Amy, and granddaughter, Anna, may you surround yourself with family, friends and loved-ones during this difficult time and find comfort and understanding. Perhaps one day Anna will be old enough to read these testimonials to her grandfather and better appreciate how special he truly was. Please know that Bob was loved by many and will be missed by all. May God bless him and keep in his company.

Mr. KIND

Mr. KIND. Mr. Speaker, unfortunately, I had to fly back to Wisconsin for a military funeral and missed rollcall vote No. 7.

Mr. KIND

Mr. KIND. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of the conference report for H.R. 10, legislation to reform our country's intelligence agencies. I support this report so, as a country, we can move forward quickly to give the President a completed bill to sign. The security of the people of western Wisconsin is of an utmost priority, and I am supporting this measure to make changes necessary to protect our homeland. On September 11, 2001, our Nation was brutally attacked, and several thousand of our citizens were killed. Our country was shocked and dismayed, but we were far from defeated. The resolve of our Nation is strong, and we stood up to the challenge and struck back. After the attacks on that fateful day in September, many questions about our homeland security were raised. I supported and worked for a comprehensive Homeland Security bill that created the Homeland Security Department and cabinet level secretary. The creation of the Homeland Security Department was an important first step for our country to ensure the security of its citizens. But there remained many unanswered questions about our Nation's intelligence failures before September 11, which is why I supported the creation of the independent bipartisan 9/ 11 Commission. On July 22, 2004, the 9/11 Commission provided a full and complete report to Congress and the American public. I praise the Commission for its excellent work, leadership, patriotism, and service to our country. We owe it to the families of the victims of 9/11 and to the citizens of our country to use this report to make certain this type of attack never happens again; I fully support the unanimous and bipartisan recommendations of the 9/11 Commission. While I had several concerns with many of the provisions included H.R. 10, I decided to support passage of this legislation back in October. I supported H.R. 10 because when the safety of our country is at hand we need to be able to cross the aisle and work with our colleagues to protect our country. After passage, however, I was glad to see the conference committee move to more closely align the conference report with the 9/11 Commission's 41 recommendations and the Senate passed bill. Over the past several weeks, we have had several opportunities to pass this very important legislation, but the House leadership has been working towards passing the bill with the support of the majority. I support this conference report for several reasons. First and foremost, the families of the 9/11 victims and the 9/11 Commission supports this conference report and have worked hard to ensure the legislation improves the safety for our country. In addition, the conference report contains not only major reforms of the intelligence community, but significant measures to improve aviation and border security and emergency preparedness and response. This bill implements a substantial portion of the 9/11 Commission's recommendations; I am happy that the conference report includes a strong National Intelligence Director as well as the essential authorities necessary for the National Intelligence Director's success. It also creates a strong National Counterterrorism Center and an independent Privacy and Civil Liberties Board. The 9/11 report also addresses foreign policy and public diplomacy, something we cannot deal with in this legislation before us today. One of the most important chapters in the 9/11 Report was chapter 12, which offered a global strategy to work with the Arab and Muslim worlds. If we follow the recommendations in this chapter, and focus our energies on improving our economic and political ties to this part of the world, it will not only improve the image of the United States of America, but it will help reduce future terrorist attacks on our country. Once again, I would like to thank the members of 9/11 Commission for their patriotism and hard work to help safeguard our country. I would also like to recognize the tireless work that the families of the victims of 9/11 have put into creating the Commission on the attacks, and, secondly, that legislation was brought to the floor for deliberation. Finally, I would like to thank the conferees for all their hard work on this essential legislation. I encourage my colleagues join me in supporting this long-overdue, critical legislation. This legislation is a crucial step toward making our country safer from terrorism.

Mr. KIND

Mr. KIND. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of S. 2856. This important legislation clarifies Congress's intent in the last Farm bill--that administrative costs needed to implement voluntary conservation programs should flow from the Commodity Credit Corporation and not from the working lands programs themselves. It is crucial that we pass this bill today otherwise scarce conservation funds will once again be lost. Mr. Speaker, USDA has diverted more than $200 million from four working lands conservation programs. Specifically, USDA diverted precious funds from the Environmental Quality Incentives Program (EQIP), the Farmland and Ranchland Protection Program (FRPP), the Grasslands Reserve Program, and the Wildlife Habitat Incentives Program (WHIP) to pay for administrative costs. The 2002 Farm Bill clearly intended USDA to use mandatory funds from the Commodity Credit Corporation to pay for the administrative costs of two land retirement programs. The plain language of the statute and legislative history, including a critical colloquy, support this interpretation of the Farm Bill, and GAO concurred in a recent memo. But, government lawyers misinterpreted the 2002 Farm Bill and forced USDA to divert working lands funds. Despite the funds provided by the 2002 Farm Bill, most farmers and ranchers offering to restore wetlands and grasslands or offering to change the way they farm to improve air and water quality are still rejected when they seek USDA conservation assistance. For example, farmers and ranchers face $3 billion backlog when they seek financial assistance through the Environmental Quality Incentives Program to improve water quality or wildlife habitat. These long lines only grow longer when funds are diverted. By providing new funds for working lands programs like EQIP and WHIP in the 2002 Farm Bill, Congress provided needed resources to help farmers manage working lands to produce food and fiber and simultaneously enhance water quality and wildlife habitat. For example, EQIP helps share the cost of a broad range of land management practices that help the environment, including more efficient use of fertilizers and pesticides, and innovative technologies to store and reuse animal waste. Lastly, because 70 percent of the American landscape is private land, farming dramatically affects the health of America's rivers, lakes and bays and the fate of America's rare species. Most rare species depend upon private lands for the survival, and many will become extinct without help from private landowners. When farmers and ranchers take steps to help improve air and water quality or assist rare species, they can face new costs, new risks, or loss of income. Conservation programs help share these costs, underwrite these risks, or offset losses of income. Mr. Speaker, this is an important bill to America's hardworking farmers and ranchers and I urge my colleague's support.

Mr. KIND

Mr. KIND. Mr. Speaker, I am proud to have had the opportunity to serve with such an outstanding Member of Congress over the past eight years. I would like to congratulate him on his retirement from the United States House of Representatives at the close of the 108th Congress. Serving with him in Congress has been an honor, and I hope to maintain our friendship in the upcoming years. Since coming to Congress in 1997, I have had the pleasure to work with Cal on numerous issues in addition to building and growing the influence of the New Democrat Coalition (NDC). If there is one word that best represents Cal, it is integrity. Upon my arrival in Washington, DC, I immediately turned to him as both a mentor and a friend. As founder and co-chair of the NDC, he was always a respected voice on critical issues. The NDC, through Cal's leadership, transformed how the Democratic party worked in the late 1990s. Intent on modernizing both the Democratic party and the country, New Democrats support policies that expand economic growth and see that all Americans have the opportunity to benefit from that growth; ensure a fiscally responsible and efficient government; secure the homefront; and advance a robust foreign policy that includes trade, constructive U.S. leadership throughout the world, and a modern and strong military. As a testament of Cal's leadership, the Clinton Administration frequently sought allies in the NDC. The Clinton Administration turned to the NDC for the critical support of the coalition's major legislation initiatives such as welfare reform and trade with China. Cal is a fourth-generation farmer and partner in his family farm, growing cotton, alfalfa and walnuts at his farm in California's San Joaquin Valley. Through his tenure in the House, Cal has concentrated heavily on Agriculture issues. During the last farm bill, I served on the Agriculture Committee and was able to see firsthand how knowledgeable he is when it comes to farm policy. I look forward to working with him again on the next farm bill in his new role as the President and CEO of National Food Processors Association (NFPA). The NFPA is extraordinarily lucky to get one of the top leaders in food policy today. Cal, in addition to his other accomplishments, is a great student of the big issues facing our country today. As long as I have known him, he has always had a willingness to dive into new subject matters and learn them as quickly as possible. I want to thank Cal for his leadership and his friendship. I wish him the best of luck on his new endeavors.

Mr. KIND

Mr. KIND. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor a fellow Member and friend, Congressman Jerry Kleczka, and to congratulate him on his twenty years of outstanding service to those in Wisconsin's 4th Congressional District. Since the age of twenty-four, Mr. Kleczka has been active in the public service sector and has served in the House of Representatives since 1984. Mr. Kleczka has made a timeless effort to serve his constituents and has demonstrated his commitment to serve those in his local community by becoming a member of the Hispanic Chamber of Commerce, the Brady Street Area Association, and America's Black Holocaust Museum. Mr. Kleczka has illustrated his desire to meet the needs of his constituents by addressing a variety of issues while serving in the House of Representatives. The people of southeast Wisconsin were once faced with the severe problem of elderly abuse in public housing complexes. Recognizing the severity of this situation, Mr. Kleczka fought back with strong legislation resulting in Milwaukee becoming the first city in the nation to provide elderly-only public housing. Mr. Kleczka has demonstrated not only his desire to improve the health and well-being of elderly in unsafe living conditions, but he has also fought for measures to decrease health care costs and increase personal privacy for deserving Americans. Mr. Kleczka has also displayed his leadership capabilities by representing not just those in his district, but all citizens from Wisconsin by serving on the House Ways and Means Committee. This committee has allowed him to take an active role in the legislative process and effectively serve the people of Wisconsin. Mr. Kleczka has served in the House of Representatives in a respectful manner, and his creative insight for implementing new policy and unselfish dedication to serving others will be greatly missed but not forgotten. To the Wisconsin delegation, the retirement of Jerry Kleczka may feel like the Packers losing the leadership and dedication of their head coach Mike Sherman. It will be very difficult to follow in the footsteps of Mr. Kleczka; however, I am confident that my fellow Wisconsin members will follow the example Jerry Kleczka began twenty years ago. I want to thank Jerry for his leadership and his friendship. I wish him the best of luck on his new endeavors.

Mr. KIND

Mr. KIND. Mr. Speaker, I strongly oppose H.R. 4818, the omnibus appropriations bill for fiscal year 2005. This $388.4 billion catchall federal spending bill represents the skewed budget priorities under which the Republican House Leadership has been operating. It puts special interest priorities before the public trust and severely underfunds critical programs. H.R. 4818 is an exclamation point on a year-long spending spree by Congress at the expense of taxpayers and future generations. Taxpayers are picking up the tab on gratuitous government spending, while essential programs are shortchanged; the bill falls short of its commitment to the No Child Left Behind program by $9.4 billion, freezes the maximum Pell Grant for the second year in a row, and shortchanges funding for veterans' benefits and rural conservation initiatives. Additionally, the credibility of the legislative process was compromised, as appropriators of the majority party defied procedural methods to rework the bill exactly to their liking, not to mention the liking of the White House. Appropriators handily struck backroom deals to make the following changes: to exclude a measure to allow the reimportation of prescription drugs; to override a House-passed provision to protect overtime benefits to six million employees; and to change bicameral recommendations on federal outsourcing and travel and trade relations with Cuba. Also, it concerns me that just last week we had to raise the debt limit for the third time in the past several years to an astounding $8.2 trillion. Moreover, it worries me that we had to raise the debt limit because of irresponsible fiscal policy such as giving tax cuts to the Nation's millionaires while our country is fighting a war overseas and my home State of Wisconsin is hemorrhaging manufacturing jobs. The proponents of the fiscal year 2005 Omnibus have touted it as a package of real programs that benefit real people. This bill is an insult to the principles of this democratic body, and what I want to know is when the special interest spending spree will cease and real people will again be the priority. We need to start making decisions that will leave our children a better country to inherit. As the father of two little boys, I did not come to Congress to leave my sons a legacy of debt, hurt economic growth, and make this country more dependent on foreign nations, who are currently the largest holders of our debt. By 2014, American families will pay an additional $9,400 in interest on the national debt. That same year, the Social Security Trust Fund will be completely depleted if this Congress's reckless fiscal policies continue unchecked. Mr. Speaker, I strongly oppose the fiscal year 2005 omnibus bill. I cannot in good faith support such fiscal recklessness because there is no plan to restore fiscal responsibility in the future as we rapidly approach the Baby Boom generation's impending retirement. The American people deserve no less than a government that applies the same fiscal responsibility that any hard-working American family would in crafting a household budget.

Mr. KIND

Mr. KIND. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong opposition to the bill before us today. For the third time in as many years, we are debating raising the debt limit because of irresponsible government policy. Today, this House will vote on raising the debt limit by $800 billion, which will bring the debt ceiling to an astounding $8.2 trillion. It concerns me that we need to raise the debt limit because of irresponsible fiscal policy such as giving tax cuts to the nation's millionaires while our country is fighting a war overseas and my home state of Wisconsin is hemorrhaging manufacturing jobs. While I understand that it is sometimes inevitable that we must raise the debt limit, I believe that such a serious step should be taken in conjunction with pay-as-you go rules. I believe our country must return to the days of fiscal responsibility with a realistic, workable plan to put America back on a path to fiscal security. A first step towards that goal is to restore the pay-as-you-go requirements which left budget surpluses in the 1990s and enabled us to begin paying down the debt. We need to start making decisions that will leave our children a better country to inherit. As the father of two little boys, I did not come to Congress to leave my sons a legacy of debt, hurt economic growth, and make this country more dependent on foreign nations, who are currently the largest holders of our debt. By 2014, American families will pay an additional $9,400 in interest on the national debt. That same year, the Social Security Trust Fund will be completely depleted if this Congress' reckless fiscal policies continue unchecked. I am voting against such fiscal recklessness because there is no plan to restore fiscal responsibility in the future as we rapidly approach the Baby Boom generation's impending retirement. The American people deserve no less than a government that applies the same fiscal responsibility that any hard-working American family would in crafting a household budget. This Congress has failed to apply such fiscal responsibility; therefore, I urge all my colleagues to oppose this bill.