Ron Kind

Mr. KIND

Mr. KIND. Mr. Speaker, I offer an amendment in the nature of a substitute.

Mr. KIND

Mr. KIND. Mr. Speaker, my home State of Wisconsin has sensible medical malpractice laws that make the State attractive to doctors and safe for patients. The components of this successful law include a cap on non-economic damages of $442,000, which is indexed annually for inflation; a requirement that all providers carry malpractice insurance; and a victims' compensation fund. The victims' compensation fund is a unique entity that has served both patients and health care providers well. The fund operates by collecting contributions from Wisconsin health care providers and paying the victims once an award has been determined. The physicians are liable only for the first $1 million in an award. If the award exceeds $1 million, the compensation fund will pay the remainder of the award. For several years now, this system has served the State well. Like many of my colleagues, I believe that we need sensible malpractice reform, and were the bill before us today similar to Wisconsin's system, I would be proud to support it. Unfortunately, H.R. 4280 is vastly different from Wisconsin law and goes too far in defending negligence and not far enough in protecting patients. The legislation goes beyond medical malpractice law by including provisions regarding pharmaceutical and medical devices and completely exempts from liability medical device makers and distributors as well as pharmaceutical companies, as long as the product complies with FDA standards. These provisions would have no effect on medical malpractice insurance rates. Instead, they would leave victims with little recourse and render them unable to hold pharmaceutical companies and the makers of defective medical products accountable for faulty or unsafe products. Another problem with H.R. 4280 is that it overrides some State laws. While the bill would not override Wisconsin's own cap on non-economic damages, it would supersede our State laws regarding statute of limitations, attorney's fees, and the criteria for punitive damages. This bill is a one-size-fits-all solution that is not right for Wisconsin. The successful components of Wisconsin's medical malpractice laws could be the basis for a much better bill. Wisconsin law protects patients and keeps physicians in business. These laws are threatened, however, by the current proposal. Therefore, I oppose H.R. 4280 and ask my colleagues to defeat the bill, revisit the issue, and create a more sensible plan that will protect patients and help doctors.

Mr. KIND

Mr. KIND. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in celebration of our seniors. May is Older Americans Month, and I commend communities around the country for the special work they are doing to honor senior citizens. The theme of Older Americans Month for 2004 is ``Aging Well, Living Well.'' Every day I see examples of seniors in my district in western Wisconsin who are indeed aging and living well. Eighty-year-old constituents who continue to work every day stop by my office to discuss issues that impact their businesses; grandparents tell me about the hours they spend each week volunteering at The Boys and Girls Club or other sites; and seniors faithfully show up at town hall meetings, asking questions, sharing opinions, and demonstrating their knowledge of what goes on here in Washington. It is especially fitting to celebrate seniors this month as we prepare for the dedication of the World War II Memorial. More than perhaps any other event, World War II will long define the heroism, patriotism and strength of what is aptly called ``the greatest generation.'' Sixteen million Americans served in the armed forces during the war. Millions more served at home by growing victory gardens, collecting scrap metal, and taking factory jobs to support the troops overseas and keep the country running. Men who had never left their home states were shipped halfway around the world to serve in the Asian and Pacific theaters. And women who had never held jobs outside the home took work in factories, offices, and on faraway battlefields. Nearly sixty years after the conclusion of this war, the stories of these brave men and women remain moving. After serving and sacrificing on the war front and the home front, this generation then returned home to construct the interstate highway system, explore outer space, and see America through an unprecedented era of growth and improvement. Clearly, we can never adequately thank this generation for what they have done. No words can express how grateful we are for the milestones--surviving the Great Depression, winning World War II--or for those everyday struggles and sacrifices that go largely unrecorded. The seniors throughout our country--the retired schoolteachers, the millions of veterans, the farmers and all those who helped make our country great--deserve more thanks than we can give them. I am glad, though, that we have this month to recognize the generation that defined America in the 20th Century and continues to impact us all today.

Mr. KIND

Mr. KIND. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H. Con. Res. 409, which recognizes the 16 million Americans who served in the Armed Forces during World War II and the millions more who supported them at home. As the dedication of the National World War II Memorial and the 60th anniversary of D-Day approach, our country will rightfully be thinking of those Americans who bravely gave or risked their lives to a great cause. I remain in awe of this generation, of men who accepted the call to travel around the world to spend years fighting in the Asian and Pacific theaters, and of women who kept the country running by assuming jobs in factories, growing victory gardens, and serving overseas in the Women's Army Auxiliary Corps and other capacities. It has been my good fortune to spend some time with veterans and their families in my home district of western Wisconsin, and I always enjoy hearing their stories of wartime. In fact, it was the experience of listening to my uncle, a World War II veteran, that inspired me to introduce legislation creating the Veterans Oral History Project. Almost 4 years after becoming public law, the Veterans History Project at the Library of Congress has collected 16,000 stories and is working at a feverish pace to collect more everyday. This living legacy is testament to the millions of Americans who sacrificed so much during World War II. Now, almost 60 years after the end of the war, a monument has at last been built in our Nation's Capital that pays tribute to the generation that fought and won World War II. The monument, set in the middle of the National Mall between the Lincoln Memorial and Washington Monument, will remind all visitors to the city that World War II was the defining event of the 20th century and the seminal point for what is often and aptly called ``the Greatest Generation.''

Mr. KIND

Mr. KIND. Mr. Speaker, the acts of abuse against Iraqi prisoners by American service members are abhorrent and sad. This is not behavior reflective of American values; it is not behavior that helps our cause, and it is not behavior that will be tolerated. Thorough investigations need to root out those responsible, directly and indirectly, for this unlawful conduct no matter how high up the chain of command it goes. Those responsible must be held accountable for their actions. Congress needs to be highly involved in investigating the actions of abuse at Abu Ghraib prison and the conditions and circumstances that led to these abuses. Reports show that the military was well aware of the situation and conducting its own investigations for months prior to the release of the photos at Abu Ghraib now circulating through the world media. The failure of the Administration to keep Congress informed of the extent and seriousness of prisoner abuse, and the photos documenting it, is unacceptable. Further, Congress must address and investigate the role of private security forces in Iraq. These forces, which constitute the second largest army in Iraq and account for over 40 percent of all contracting costs in Iraq, are outside the U.S. chain of command. The ability to hold these individuals accountable for their actions under law is questionable. We must not lose focus, however, that the over 300,000 U.S. military personnel who have served and are serving in Iraq are doing an honorable job under difficult and dangerous conditions. While the Department of Defense investigation into the actions and conduct of the abuses at Abu Ghraib list a number of officers and enlisted personnel who failed to perform their duties as required, it also notes a number of officers and enlisted personnel who acted honorably and reported abuses up the chain of command. When I visited Iraq in October, 2003, I met with many honorable troops, including soldiers from western Wisconsin, who were performing their mission with outstanding commitment and professionalism. The abuses at Abu Ghraib serve only to cloud the accomplishments and sacrifices of our troops and put honorable U.S. service members in greater danger. Mr. Speaker, perception matters when trying to execute our foreign policy and especially a military mission. We are dangerously losing the hearts and minds of the Iraqi people and the rest of the Arab world, and the abuses at the Abu Ghraib prison serve only to exacerbate this unfortunate reality. We must reinforce to the international community through our words and our actions that the United States is committed to helping the Iraqi people prosper in a free society.

Mr. KIND

Mr. KIND. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H. Res. 605, which recognizes the importance of increasing awareness of autism, advocates increased research, and pays tribute to those who care for individuals with autism. More prevalent than Down syndrome, childhood cancer, and childhood diabetes combined, autism is a developmental disorder that is affecting a growing number of Americans. Studies show that one of every 250 babies born today will develop some form or autism. Individuals with autism face a wide array of biomedical and neurological difficulties, all of which result in a compromised immune system. The physical toll on children with autism is enormous, and the physical, emotional, and financial burden that parents of autistic children face is great. I have enormous respect for the parents, friends, and families of autistic children who sacrifice so much in order to care for their children. Residents in my home state of Wisconsin are fortunate to have access to intensive in-home therapy with certified providers, and I applaud universities such as the University of Wisconsin-Eau Claire, which is making great progress with its autism intervention program that trains students in autism behavior analysis and therapy. I believe we have a responsibility to aid colleges and universities that are doing such important work. I am also proud to be a member of the Congressional Coalition for Autism Research and Education, which seeks to educate members on the realities of autism and work to increase federal funding for autism research and services. I have been fortunate during my years in Congress to meet with many parents of autistic children who continue to amaze me with the selfless work they do each day. Recently, I was able to spend some time at Willow River Elementary School in Hudson, Wisconsin, which has one of the highest rates of autistic children in the state. It was a pleasure to spend time with special education teachers who work so diligently with their students. The morning was a reminder of both the problems and promise autistic children have. Mr. Speaker, we must work to better the situations of the children and families who live with autism on a daily basis. I commend Mr. Tierney and Mr. Burton for offering this important resolution and am pleased to be an original cosponsor. I urge my colleagues to support this resolution.

Mr. KIND

Mr. KIND. Mr. Speaker, I strongly support providing relief to middle- income Americans from an encroaching Alternative Minimum Tax (AMT). Without action this year to extend the current AMT exemption levels passed in 2003, millions of Americans will feel the AMT crunch in 2005. While the AMT was enacted in 1969 to prevent high-income earners from using loopholes in the tax code to avoid paying their fair share, the AMT is increasingly becoming an unfair tax burden on millions of middle-income Americans. Because of factors including inflation and income tax reductions, the complex calculations used by individuals and couples to determine if they must pay any AMT have adjusted and now unfairly punish middle-income families, particularly those with children in high-tax states. For the third year in a row, the Internal Revenue Service's Taxpayer Advocate Service's Report to Congress lists AMT encroachment as the most serious problem encountered by taxpayers. The AMT now impacts more than 2.4 million Americans. Unless reformed, the AMT will impact 12.4 million in 2005 and more than 30 million Americans in 2010. On top of that, even more taxpayers will be forced to perform intense computations to determine if AMT applies to them. While the majority of the 2003 tax proposal that passed the House was fiscally irresponsible and designed to benefit only the wealthiest of Americans, its provision providing increased AMT exemptions in 2003 and 2004 had bipartisan agreement. However, while everyone seems to agree that the AMT needs to be reformed, the President's budget for fiscal year 2005 again covered up the full cost of fixing the AMT--estimated by the CBO at over $500 billion--by proposing another one-year extension. A comprehensive, bipartisan proposal is long overdue to address the problems of the AMT, and it is important that Congress account for this necessary reform in its budget resolutions. As we reform the AMT to provide relief to middle-income Americans, we need to act in a fiscally responsible manner. It is unfair to Americans today, and especially the next generation, to delude ourselves by thinking the record budget deficits facing our nation, estimated by the White House at over $500 billion this year alone, will simply go away. As a member of the House Budget Committee, I supported a budget resolution that allows for extending AMT relief while still reducing the deficit. This approach requires tough choices, prioritization, and a bipartisan commitment to helping working families. With the House- Senate conference committee still negotiating the budget resolution for fiscal year 2005, I remain hopeful that we will be able to provide Americans continued tax relief today without raising the debt burden on our children's generation. The substitute offered today by Representative Neal is a more responsible bill that will provide relief to more than 10 million families while not increasing the budget deficit. By closing corporate tax shelters, the Neal substitute provides a responsible offset to benefit more American families without burdening our children with added debt that they will have to pay off. Further the Neal substitute unambiguously and completely exempts married couples with incomes under $250,000 from the AMT. This is a superior approach, helps more Americans, and ensures most middle income taxpayers will not have to worry about the AMT. Mr. Chairman, it is important that we act today to ensure average income Americans will not unfairly face the alternative minimum tax in 2005. However, I believe we can and must provide this relief in a fiscally responsible manner that will not burden future generations of Americans. Just as it was true last week when we passed legislation permanently repealing the marriage penalty tax, our work is far from over in helping working families face the challenges of today's economy. We must come together in a bipartisan manner to craft a fiscally responsible budget resolution.

Mr. KIND

Mr. KIND. Mr. Speaker, I thank my friend from California for yielding me this time and for his leadership on this issue, and I thank my colleague from Indiana for offering this resolution of which I am a proud cosponsor. Mr. Speaker, I hope the body tomorrow when it comes up for consideration will adopt this resolution. This is a very serious matter in regard to some of the practices and the abuses I feel that are currently taking place in Laos. The resolution is very simple, expressing the sense of the House regarding the urgent need for freedom and democratic reform and international monitoring of elections, human rights and religious liberty in the Lao People's Democratic Republic. The United States owes a debt of gratitude to the Hmong veterans and their families who served as loyal and dedicated allies during the so- called secret war in southeast Asia and the Vietnam conflict, a war that many Hmong members participated in on the side of U.S. soldiers in the jungles of southeast Asia. Between 20,000 and 30,000 Hmong lost their lives during this time and more than 100,000 Hmong were forced to either flee or live in refugee camps after the U.S. pullout in southeast Asia. Through their sacrifices, many American lives were saved, and our Nation must remain committed to recognizing their service. Today, approximately 170,000 Hmong currently reside in the United States, including 35,000 in my home State of Wisconsin. Many of these Hmong Americans have family members still in Laos facing constant allegations of harassment, imprisonment, even kidnapping and killing of ethnic Hmong by Lao authorities. These have been brought to my attention, and these allegations have been raised in many different forums. Due to modern technology, many of these reports are coming out of Laos almost simultaneously when they are occurring through the advent of cell phones documenting the abuse and some of the atrocities being committed there. I believe it is time for this Congress and the administration to support international observance teams to go into Laos to observe firsthand the conditions that are occurring there. We need the support from our administration and from the Congress, I think, to put pressure on the government there to accept these international teams of observers. The Lao Government has one of the most egregious human rights records in the world. The State Department's own country report on human rights practices in Laos makes clear the lack of respect for human rights demonstrated by the Lao Government. Finally, Mr. Speaker, there are many Hmong families still in Wisconsin and throughout the country who are very concerned in regards to the conditions of their own families or relatives or friends who are still in Laos. They come to Washington from time to time. These are a proud people, many of whom have now achieved their U.S. citizenship. They are productive members of our society. Their children are in our schools, growing up to get an American education and be productive citizens in the country. But their ties back to Laos still remain very strong, and it runs very deep. I think this body, this United States Congress, owes it to them, our friends and allies and in many instances our neighbors and citizens in our own community, to take these allegations seriously, to increase the pressure on the Lao Government to allow inspections, to allow the investigation to go forward within that country so we can document and definitively determine what the situation is inside that border. I encourage my colleagues to support the resolution. I thank my colleagues for bringing it forward this evening.

Mr. KIND

Mr. KIND. Mr. Speaker, as a member of the House Education and Workforce Committee, as well as co-chair of National Charter School Week, I strongly support the H. Res. 600, legislation honoring the fifth annual National Charter Schools Week. Public schools are America's commitment to providing a high quality education for every child. I am dedicated to ensuring that all children have the opportunity to receive a quality education regardless of what public school they attend. This includes charter schools, which are models of successful education reform and one of the fastest growing education innovations working to improve our public education. As a National Co-Chair of Charter Schools Week, I would like to take a minute to celebrate the first decade of Charter Schools in the United States. Traditionally, charter schools are independent public schools, designed and operated by educators, parents, community members and others. Since the first charter school began operation in 1992 in St. Paul, Minnesota, the number of charter schools has grown to nearly 3,000 serving 750,000 students around the country in 37 states, the District of Columbia, and the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico. Charter schools have consistently been at the forefront of my priority list, and I am pleased that Wisconsin has 137 exceptional charter schools. In my congressional district alone, we have over 24 charter schools presently and that number grows each year. I have consistently advocated for increased funding for charter schools and supported the Charter School Facilities Financing Demonstration Program during consideration of the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) of 2001. Mr. Speaker, I recognize that charter schools give parents options when determining the best public school in which to enroll their children. Thus, we must ensure that all our students reach their highest academic potential, which may require attending a charter school that provides a model better suited towards an individual student's needs.

Mr. KIND

Mr. KIND. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of making permanent the marriage penalty tax relief Congress passed in 2003. I believe that we should eliminate the tax penalty that some married couples incur because, simply, it is the right thing to do. The marriage penalty stems from provisions in the Tax Code that impact married couples filing joint tax returns differently than if they filed separate tax returns. In 2001, the marriage penalty hit around 47 percent of married tax filers from all income brackets. Without action, tax relief from the marriage penalty would lapse next year as required under the 2003 tax cut package. While the majority of the 2003 tax proposal that passed the House was fiscally irresponsible and designed to benefit only the wealthiest of Americans, its provision providing couples complete relief from the marriage penalty in 2003 and 2004 had bipartisan agreement. The legislation before us today and the substitute offered by Congressman Rangel will permanently extend relief from the marriage penalty. Every week I am back in Wisconsin talking to my constituents about the challenges they are facing in today's economy. With rising costs for college tuition, health care, and other necessities, we need to act today to ensure that working families are not going to be faced with a marriage penalty tax in 2005. I also believe, however, that we must work to make sure these tax cuts are paid for so that we do not increase the budget deficit. It is unfair to Americans today, and especially the next generation, to delude ourselves by thinking the record budget deficits facing our Nation, estimated by the White House at over $500 billion this year alone, will simply go away. As a member of the House Budget Committee, I supported a budget resolution that allows for extending marriage penalty tax relief while still reducing the deficit. This approach requires tough choices, prioritization, and a bipartisan commitment to helping working families. With the House-Senate conference committee still negotiating the budget resolution for fiscal year 2005, I remain hopeful that we will be able to provide married couples continued tax relief today without raising the debt burden on our children's generation. The substitute offered today by Representative Rangel is a more responsible bill that will permanently repeal the marriage penalty tax for millions of Americans while not increasing the budget deficit. By providing a responsible offset to pay for this tax cut, we can benefit all married tax filers without burdening our children with added debt that they will have to pay off. In addition, the Rangel substitute will benefit 13 million more Americans by accounting for the alternative minimum tax. The AMT will deny many married couples the tax relief intended under this bill because they fall under a complex set of AMT tax provisions. Mr. Speaker, extending relief from the marriage penalty now will help millions of working families that otherwise would face a tax increase in 2005. I believe we can and must provide this relief in a fiscally responsible manner that will not burden future generations of Americans. Our work is far from over in helping working families face the challenges of today's economy, and we must come together in a bipartisan manner to craft a fiscally responsible budget resolution.

Mr. KIND

Mr. KIND. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in commemoration of the 34th anniversary of Earth Day. Started in 1970 by Wisconsin's own Senator Gaylord Nelson, this annual celebration marks the birth of the modern environmental movement. For much of the 20th century, people accepted pollution as the inevitable price of progress. That began to change in the early 1960s. In 1970, when Senator Nelson saw that few U.S. leaders were paying attention to public concern about the environment, he announced a series of teach-ins across the country to be held on April 22. That year, 20 million people participated in the first Earth Day. Soon after, the Congress passed and President Nixon signed a series of unprecedented laws creating the Environmental Protection Agency, establishing national limits for air and water pollutants, and requiring environmental impact assessments before federally funded projects could begin. Sadly, the current administration seems to be doing all it can to reverse decades of bipartisan progress on the environment at the behest of large special interests. Landmark legislation that has successfully protected the public health such as the Clean Air Act, Clean Water Act, and the Safe Drinking Water Act are under assault. It would appear that Senator Nelson's visionary efforts to build a grassroots movement to demonstrate the public's insistence on a clean and healthy environment for themselves and future generations, is needed as much today as it was 34 years ago. And, in fact, Earth Day continues to be an event that unites people concerned about their environment, and who strive to protect it for our children's future. Last year, hundreds of millions of people in more than 180 countries around the world came together to celebrate the progress that has been made over the past 33 years. Today, the vast majority of Americans do not believe that pollution is a necessary price for our progress, and want clean air, clean water and pristine public lands for their children. People want their government to improve, rather than undermine our country's public health and environmental protections. Instead of taking steps backwards, I urge the President to engage in the bipartisan work needed to build on a positive environmental agenda that Senator Gaylord Nelson envisioned when he started Earth Day.

Mr. KIND. Mr. Speaker, I thank my friend and colleague from Oregon for, first of all, taking time this evening for this Special Order to commemorate the 34th anniversary of Earth Day, and for the leadership he has shown on a variety of conservation and environmental measures that we have a chance to work on in the United States Congress. But I want to take a moment to pay a special tribute and give special thanks to a terrific statesman, a former Governor and former United States Senator from the great State of Wisconsin, the father of Earth Day, Senator Gaylord Nelson. It was his vision that led to the first Earth Day in our country over 34 years ago. During his maiden speech in the United States Senate, he came out with 11 specific proposals on policy changes that we needed to pursue as a Nation in order to enhance the protection and the quality of our environment and our natural resources. He was one of the first public officials that recognized that economic growth and development could go hand in hand with the protection of our natural resources and the protection of our environment; that they did not have to be mutually exclusive. But he also recognized that public opinion was way ahead of public officials in this area; that it was the policymakers that needed to catch up with where the American people were; and recognizing the value of doing a better job, of being the stewards of our lands and our water and our air that we breathe, the environment in which we raise our children; and it is to him we owe a debt of gratitude that can never be repaid. This is a person who today if you talked to him, and he is still very active in the environmental field, working at the Wilderness Society here in Washington, delivering countless speeches every year, traveling extensively throughout the United States and parts of the world, who would probably be a little surprised to realize that last year, during the 33rd anniversary of Earth Day, there were hundreds of millions of people in over 180 countries all joining together to celebrate Earth Day, something that he gave birth to. He is also someone that recognizes that there is still so much more work that needs to be done. He has been invaluable to me personally with the conversations that I have had, the privilege of going to him for advice, whether it is on work and how better to preserve and protect the Mississippi River Basin, what we can do to guard against the global warming phenomena, which generations, unfortunately, will have to wrestle with today, and the unfinished business he left when he left the United States Senate many years ago, which is our calling today. There was a very good biography written about Senator Gaylord Nelson by a very talented former journalist and writer in Wisconsin, Bill Christopherson, entitled The Man From Clear Lake. That is the small town in which Gaylord Nelson was born and raised in. It is in northwestern Wisconsin, and it is small-town America. It is not too far from my wife's small town of Cumberland, where she was born and raised. But Gaylord Nelson is living testimony to the idea that one person with a great idea can have a profound change in the direction of our Nation and of the world. It was that idea of what we needed to do in working together, those of us in decision-making positions, but also all of us as citizens of this planet of ours, what we can do working together to better preserve and protect the natural resources so we leave a better legacy for our children to inherit. I come from a State with a very proud legacy of giants, like Gaylord Nelson, like Bill Proxmire, like Fighting Bob LaFollette, that gave birth to the progressive tradition in this country. But there is no one who I have idolized with greater esteem or have greater admiration for than that man from the small town of Clear Lake, Wisconsin, Gaylord Nelson, and the idea that he gave the Nation and the world 34 years ago today in envisioning the need for Earth Day celebrations, and the constant reminder to us that there is so much that we need to do to protect our environment, especially during challenging days like today when, unfortunately, there is an administration in power that seems quick to roll back much of the progress and much of the achievement that has been made over the last few decades, rolling back provisions of the Clean Air and Clean Water Acts; releasing those 5 p.m. press releases from the Environmental Protection Agency on Friday afternoons when they think no one is paying attention or when people are starting their weekends or going to their Friday night dinners or whatever. But it is up to us to shed light on what is taking place, and it is up to us to try to foster the bipartisan atmosphere in which we have to work in order to make great strides in this area. So, again, I thank my colleague from Oregon for yielding me some time on this very special day and for the opportunity to pay tribute to a very special American, a great citizen, former Senator Gaylord Nelson.

Mr. KIND

Mr. KIND. Madam Speaker, I rise in support of this legislation, H.R. 1779, the Guardsmen and Reservists Financial Relief Act, which will allow members of the National Guard and military Reserve forces to make penalty free withdrawals from retirement accounts if they are called to active duty for an extended period of time. Our National Guard and reserve forces are playing a leading role in our operations abroad. Nationwide, over 325,000 members of the Guard and reserve have been called up to active duty since September 11, 2001. Serving in Iraq and elsewhere, these service members have fought side-by-side with their Active Duty counterparts in often difficult and dangerous conditions. Over the past year, I have had the opportunity to meet with many National Guard and Reserve members and families from Wisconsin who have been called up in support of operations Enduring Freedom in Afghanistan and Operation Iraqi Freedom in Iraq. Members of the 229th Engineer Company out of Prairie du Chien and Platteville, the 829th Engineer Detachment out of Richland Center, and the 652d Engineer Company out of Ellsworth all recently returned from yearlong deployments in Iraq. Their sacrifices, and those of their families, are greatly appreciated by Wisconsin residents. With many Guard and Reserve members taking large pay cuts when called to active duty, it is proper that Congress act to relieve this additional burden. The legislation before us today helps by allowing activated Guard and Reserve members to withdraw money from retirement accounts without penalty. While this legislation assists those Guard and Reserve members and families who need financial assistance to make ends meet, it is only a minor step. I, along with many other members of Congress, support additional tax relief for military families, pay increases for certain personnel, health care improvements, and reenlistment bonuses for members of the Reserve Component. Our military commitments in Iraq and throughout the world are not likely to diminish in the near future, and the Defense Department expects Guard and Reserve units to make up about 40 percent of our total force in Iraq by May 1, 2004. With this in mind, we need to do all we can to support the men and women of the Guard and Reserve who are called to active duty and their families. My thoughts and prayers are with those serving our country overseas, as well as their families. America is firmly behind our troops, and we are all hoping to see them home safe, secure and soon. May God continue to bless the United States of America.

Mr. KIND

Mr. KIND. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of H.R. 3550, 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 job bills, and now is certainly the time that we need more jobs throughout the country. Over 8 million Americans are looking for jobs, and last month only 21,000 new jobs were created, none of which was a private-sector job. 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, transit centers, 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. I urge my colleagues to support the bill. Sequential Votes Postponed In Committee of The Whole

Mr. KIND

Mr. KIND. Mr. Chairman, the President and majority party in Congress have presented budgets that continue down the path of fiscal recklessness and misplaced priorities. Their plan continues to fail working families, continues to fail seniors, continues to fail veterans, and continues to fail children by expanding already record deficits that will hamper economic growth and burden future generations. Perhaps most disturbing is that the majority has no plan to return the federal government's books to balance. While they claim that their budget plan will cut in half the current record deficits that their economic policies helped create, realistic projections, including pages in the President's own budget. show deficits as far as the eye can see under their plan. Their plan continues the downward fiscal spiral of our government at exactly the wrong moment in our nation's history when we have 80 million baby boomers rapidly approaching retirement age and starting to enter the Social Security and Medicare systems. Instead of the irresponsible budget before us, we should be trying to practice fiscal discipline to get the nation on sound fiscal footing in anticipation of that demographic time bomb going off and protect the monies in the Social Security and Medicare trust funds. This requires making tough choices on spending and revenue, and it requires us to move away from the status quo toward a new plan that helps working families, meets the security needs of our country, protects important programs here at home, and finds balance within a specified time frame. The alternative budget proposal offered by Mr. Spratt meets this challenge and sets a new course toward fiscal sanity. It includes more funding for programs important to people in western Wisconsin such as education, veterans' health care, environmental protection, and first responders. It fully funds our national defense, and provides necessary tax relief for working families. By reducing a portion of the individual tax cuts for those making over $500,000 yearly income, the Spratt alternative provides working families relief from the marriage penalty tax and extends the child tax credit. In addition, the Democratic alternative returns the federal budget to balance in eight years--something the Republican budget never does. It supports important budget enforcement measures that were present in the 1990's and kept government on track to record surpluses. The Republican leadership has continually refused to reinstate these important, common sense enforcement tools that simply require offsets for spending and revenue changes in law that would otherwise increase the budget deficit. These so-called ``pay-as-you-go'' provisions require government to pay its bills and stop the fiscal bleeding. Budgets are all about priorities. The alternative budget proposal I support makes education a priority by providing $51.4 billion more than the President's budget over 10 years, helping local school districts meet the requirements of No Child Left Behind and making college more affordable for all students. It makes veterans health care a priority by providing $6.6 billion more than the majority over five years, meeting the request of the Veterans' Affairs Committee and veterans' organizations. And it makes job creation and worker training a priority while proving tax relief for working families. Let us pass a sensible, fiscally responsible budget that protects important American values so that years from now, we can look back and say, yes, we had to make some tough decisions, but they were the right decisions under the right circumstances, and American families are the primary beneficiaries as a consequence. I urge my colleagues' support of the Democratic alternative.

Mr. KIND

Mr. KIND. Mr. Speaker, we had our own form of March madness last night, and I am here to gloat, I mean to report, that the Democratic Slamming Dunking Donkeys defeated the Fighting Elephants by a one point blowout margin. It came down to a last-minute shot by our rookie and MVP, the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Ryan), and it was all for a good cause, Gallaudet University, to raise funds for a wonderful university for the deaf and hearing impaired. Mr. Speaker, I want to commend my Republican counterparts under the leadership of the gentleman from Ohio (Coach Oxley). It was 1991 when the Democrats last won the game. The Republicans have learned to be very gracious winners, and now they are learning to be very gracious losers, and the Democrats appreciate that. There were, however, 7 seconds remaining in the game, and some of us feared the gentleman from Ohio (Coach Oxley) would figure out a way to keep the clock running for another 3 hours until he determined he agreed with the final outcome. Mr. Speaker, it was a lot of fun, and it was good to see in the midst of a heated budget debate we could come together for some fun and camaraderie, and raise money for a good cause.

Mr. KIND

Mr. KIND. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of H.R. 3873, the Child Nutritional Improvement and Integrity Act. As a member of the Education and the Workforce Committee, I am pleased with the process in which this bill moved through the Committee; it is a critical bill that will greatly benefit our nation's children as well as family farmers. Specifically, I am pleased that several provisions were included in the base bill, which I coauthored in previous legislation, H.R. 3250, the Child Nutrition Improvement Act of 2003, with Representatives Bennie Thompson, Gil Gutknecht, and tom Petri, that will combat the increasing problem of child obesity through increased child milk consumption by preventing commercial beverage companies from pressuring schools to remove milk vending machines. With 90 percent of teenage girls and 70 percent of teenage boys currently not getting enough calcium, it is imperative to provide increased availability of milk products in schools. This provision is necessary in light of recent stories about school districts being pressured to remove milk vending machines at a time when kids need milk more than ever. This amendment will ensure milk vending has a chance and that machines are not ripped out of schools; yet at the same time it does not force soda companies to sell milk. Wise choices can only be made when choice is provided and real milk vending is a logical part of a healthy school environment. Another provision included in the base bill, from H.R. 3250, will improve child nutrition by making it easier for schools to offer milk in a variety of flavors and fat contents to better meet students' varying tastes and needs, thereby increasing milk consumption by children. It is important to maintain milk's unique role in the reimbursable school milk programs. Since 1946, schools have offered milk with each school meal. The natural calcium found in milk plays a vital role in minimizing the risk of students developing calcium deficiency--which is already a serious problem, especially for our teenage girls, as I mentioned earlier. During Committee consideration, I also offered an amendment that would have augmented the reimbursement rate for school meals in schools implementing a plan to increase milk consumption. Under this amendment schools would have been allowed to use various measures to enhance milk products sold in schools. The National Dairy Council and the American School Food Service Association conducted a school milk pilot test to specifically measure the impact of an enhanced milk product on milk consumption and student attitudes towards milk in schools. The milk enhancements included: Plastic packaging and various sizes; a third flavor; improved storage and refrigeration; and better milk product merchandising. The results of this pilot were significant in that they showed milk sales increased 18 percent in all participating schools and milk consumption increased 28 percent in elementary schools. I withdrew this amendment, however, with the Chairman's agreement to continue working on it between now and conference. I hope we will be able to work out a compromise and include it in reauthorization. Numerous studies have proven how important milk is in young people's diets. A study published in 2002 in the Journal of the American Dietetic Association showed that teens who drink flavored milk drink fewer soft drinks and juice drinks, and have an overall better nutritional profile. Another study released recently found that children with the lowest intakes of dairy products gained much more body fat over an 8-year period and that a diet low in calcium may increase the levels of certain circulating hormones that in turn promote the storage of energy in fat cells. Additionally, H.R. 3873 includes legislation that I sponsored with Representative Upton, H.R. 2626, the Farm-to-Cafeteria Projects Act of 2003. This provision focuses on connecting local agriculture to schools in every State, through a competitive, one-time matching grant directly to local communities. This allows each locality to design a farm-to- cafeteria project tailored to specific farm and school community needs. Experience has shown that kids' food choices can be improved by connecting farms to the lunchroom. This program directly benefits the food and health needs of our Nation's children. At the same time, the program will help family farms, and provide markets and community support for agriculture. A final amendment I offered in Committee authorized a 3-year pilot project in elementary schools that links the school breakfast program with morning educational activities, similar to those authorized in the 21st Century Community Learning Centers. The goal is to increase participation by removing the stigma that accompanies the current school breakfast program. If the school breakfast program is perceived as an enrichment program that will benefit all students, it is suggested that more students will participate. Mr. Speaker, again, I am pleased to support this bill on the floor today and I look forward to continuing to working on it as we move towards conference. Our goal in the 21st century should be to ensure that every child receives proper nutrition needed to succeed in school. It is a simple fact: good nutrition is an educational tool that improves children's performances in school.

Mr. KIND

Mr. KIND. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself the balance of my time. Mr. Chairman, what we have been doing here all day, and what we will resume doing tomorrow, is talking about the priorities of our Nation, the values that we hold dear; and that is the essence of budgeting, making tough decisions with the allocation of the limited resources that we do have available. And it is true that during times of budget deficits, those who typically suffer the most are those who are most in need and especially our children; and we are seeing that now with the Republican budget proposal before us where they are shortchanging crucial education programs, even though I would think that if we sit down and work through this in a bipartisan fashion, we could reach some common ground in regards to the priority of investing in the future, in education, in job-training programs. It is the only chance we really have to hold out the opportunity and the hope to the next generation that there will be a place for them in the 21st-century economy. But when they pass Federal mandates requiring certain things of local schools, it is fundamental fairness to require that they be given the tools and the resources to do it, and they are not. We are shortchanging No Child Left Behind. We are shortchanging special education. And that financial burden falls back on local property tax rolls. It affects the local school boards and the ability for them to be able to allocate the resources that they need to make sure that the children are succeeding in their classrooms. And I think it is a disservice that we are doing to the wonderful school districts that we have throughout the Nation, but especially to our children. If the majority wants to come and talk about fiscal responsibility, there would be wide bipartisan support on this side to embrace new budget tools that worked well in the 1990s, the pay-as-you-go rules that basically said that if we propose an increase in spending in one area or tax cuts, we have to find offsets to pay for it. They worked remarkably well in the 1990s: four consecutive years of deficit reduction, 4 years of budget surpluses. But they do not want to go there for obvious reasons, and unfortunately it is the next generation that will be paying a very high price due to the fiscal management of this Nation.

Mr. KIND. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Just a quick response to my good friend from Iowa. Just to be clear, the Democratic substitute is offering close to 10 billion more in additional funds over the next 5 years to fund No Child Left Behind and special education; over the next 10 years, $50 billion more than the President's baseline budget that he submitted in regards to education programs. Yet we still achieve balance, a balanced budget within 8 years, given the limitations that we face with these historically large budget deficits that we have the majority party to thank for. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3\1/2\ minutes to the distinguished gentlewoman from Oregon (Ms. Hooley), from the Committee on the Budget.

Mr. KIND

Mr. KIND. Mr. Chairman, in response to that, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. George Miller), the ranking member on the Committee on Education and the Workforce.

Mr. KIND. Mr. Chairman, I am obviously referring to the broken promise the President made in fully funding No Child Left Behind when he signed it into law. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Emanuel).

Mr. KIND. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 2 minutes, and thank the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Spratt) for yielding me this time. Mr. Chairman, unfortunately what we have before us today by the majority party is a status quo budget. It is a budget that continues the failed economic policies which have not been working for American families. It has been failing our seniors, failing working families, and certainly is failing our veterans. We have heard debate about that today. But most importantly, I believe, it is going to fail the future of our country, our children, by the underinvestment that is being made in crucial education programs, by not fully funding the No Child Left Behind law, by not reaching that guidepath to full funding of special education. It undercuts vocational and technical education programs, the Perkins loans, it underinvests in community colleges. We will pay a heavy price in the future if this underinvestment continues. As this chart demonstrates, Mr. Chairman, the history of the Republican Congress when it comes to living up to the promise of fully funding No Child Left Behind, over the last couple of fiscal years, they have fallen way short of the promise to fully fund. This has been the track record. Make no mistake, these are new Federal mandates, requirements on local school districts, requiring them to do certain things with our children; but they are not providing the resources and tools they need to succeed. Just a couple of weeks ago, we had Chairman Greenspan testify before the Committee on Education and the Workforce. In his opinion, he felt one of the most important priorities of investment we need to make in the Federal budget is in education and job training programs so that our children, our workers, are as competitive as they can be in this new global marketplace. This Republican budget falls short of that investment. The Democratic substitute that we will be offering tomorrow has substantial increases in investments in No Child Left Behind, special education, vocational education, Perkins loans and investment in our community colleges. There is a clear difference in the vision of the future of this Nation, where our priorities as a party lie, where our values are shared throughout the Nation. Unfortunately, this majority budget falls short of that. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. KIND

Mr. KIND. I thank my friend for yielding me the time. Mr. Chairman, just to wrap up this debate, I would love to have a national referendum asking the American people what economy they would more likely adopt today, the economy of the 1990s or the current economy that this majority party and the administration have given them because, to set the record straight, it was in the first Bush administration in 1990 when, in fact, some tax increases were had on the wealthiest Americans. And then the budget that passed in 1993 by just one vote had a slight increase on the wealthiest 1 percent in this Nation. With all the doom and gloom and procrastination and the prediction of recession and great depression, it led to 28 million new jobs being created in the 1990s, 4 consecutive years of deficit reduction followed by 4 consecutive years of budget surpluses, where the Social Security and Medicare trust fund was not even being touched. That is what is so disturbing about the vision that they offer in their budget today. It is a status quo budget based on a failed economic policy that is not working for working families in this country, and especially is not going to be working for the future of our Nation, our children and grandchildren with historically large budget deficits that are due to explode in future years. That is the only reason they are offering a 5-year budget resolution, to mask the true size of these budget deficits that occur in the second 5 years with the permanent extension of their tax cuts; and they have no plan to turn that around. Our party brings balance to the budget within 8 years. We believe balanced budgets are a good economic dynamic that does help job creation, and at the end of the day, that is the big difference between our plan and their plan.

Mr. KIND. Mr. Chairman, I would just like to ask my friend if he would confirm for me, it is my understanding that the largest purchaser of our government debt right now is Japan and that is followed shortly behind by China. Is it in our country's best long-term national interest to be so dependent on China to finance the national debt that is being accumulated by this great Nation?

Mr. KIND. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?