Jack Kingston

Mr. KINGSTON

Mr. KINGSTON. I yield to the gentleman from Ohio.

Mr. KINGSTON. Mr. Chairman, reclaiming the time, if a secretary is on merit pay, he or she will not get a salary increase. And if they do a good job and are entitled for discretionary bonus, we are talking about none. I believe that what we should do is deal with BATF in a broader picture. Let us not get mad at them for what happened in Waco and then do the same thing in a different way on them here. Let us be a little more above the fray of what you are saying is their own management style. Let us go in there and say, ``Cut the funding.''

Mr. KINGSTON

Mr. KINGSTON. Mr. Chairman, fellow Members of the House and Representatives representing grocery buyers, let me talk to you a little bit about what the previous speaker just said about our European counterparts spending 17 to 20 percent of their energy on groceries. In America we do not do that, and yet every time I pick up the Readers Digest, it seems that the way to balance the budget is always on the back of agriculture. Americans spend 11 percent of their income on farming. And what is the investment your government makes in order to make this possible? Look at this chart right here. We see what the Federal Government spends money on: Social Security, defense, Medicare, Medicaid, interest on the debt. Where is agriculture? Under 1 percent. That is what the farm programs are costing our taxpayers, and [[Page H 7246]] yet time and time again you hear, ``Cut the farm bill, cut the farm bill.'' Have we ever cut the farm bill? This is what we have reduced in discretionary agricultural spending since 1986, almost $26 billion, and today, 1995, we are at $10.6 billion. What other Federal Government program has dropped like that? Support the farm bill.

Mr. KINGSTON

Mr. KINGSTON. How often do businesses get audited?

Mr. KINGSTON. Is this an annual audit that is done every year?

Mr. KINGSTON. If the gentleman would yield, the gentleman knows on waste, fraud, and abuse, most of it probably--I am not sure what the breakdown is--actually Medicare legal, [[Page H 7161]] meaning if a person, and this happened in the district I represent, that a woman needed her stitches removed, an elderly woman on Medicare, and an ambulance--because the transportation was provided, an ambulance picked her up at her house and instead of taking her to a hospital in her town, took her to a hospital in another town, and instead of billing $200, billed about $1,200, and Medicare pays that. It is legal, and it is never argued, it is never checked, it is never questioned. And one of the things that we think would help protect and preserve Medicare is to crack down on those kinds of just absolutely wasteful practices that show that people running certain businesses want to take advantage of Medicare, have the ability, and we need to stop that.

Mr. KINGSTON. Yes.

Mr. KINGSTON. That is the plan I have heard that is out there, and that, we have laughed about this for a long time, and today there still has not been a plan offered to save or protect Medicare by the administration, even though it is the administration who reports it is going broke.

Mr. KINGSTON. If the gentleman will yield, we have a lot of things we are trying to resolve and address at once. But one of the things we are trying to do is deregulate businesses so that they can expand and create more jobs. We are also trying to get people who are able-bodied off of welfare so that they will go out in the workplace. In doing that, what we are going to do is increase revenues and then have that worker-to-retiree ratio go up. Because many, many years ago it was a 19-to-1 ratio, and the 3.3 is scary enough. We need to actually increase the number or workers to retirees, not just for practical purposes like in Medicare but to decrease the welfare rolls, decrease the rolls on public assistance in general, increase revenues, self- esteem, and make the world a better place so that everybody can enjoy the socioeconomic mainstream of America.

Mr. KINGSTON. One of the things that I think is very, very important, and the gentlewoman has certainly touched on it, is that with our senior citizens, more than options, they want certainty. We are going to provide for [[Page H 7162]] that certainty by strengthening and protecting Medicare from a financial standpoint. Then for the folks who want options, it is going to be out there if they want it. Then for health care in general, as the gentleman from Pennsylvania [Mr. Fox] said earlier, the Medicare inflation has been so atrocious compared to the private sector or the normal medical inflation, that we are going to work on health care reform in general, portability of coverage so that you can move if you are in a managed care plan from one to the other, if you are in the traditional fee-for-service insurance plan, you can move from that to another, if you want to have a medisave option where you are willing because of your economic bracket to take a higher deductible and pay more of the front-end cost on your own to reduce your premium but still have catastrophic coverage, you can do that. But the great effect of that is actually to help the marketplace become more competitive because people will start shopping around and seeing where they can get the best buy on a lot of health care services. There are a lot of exciting things that are going on out there, but it is all going to be built on a solid bedrock of certainty for our valued seniors who are on Medicare.

Mr. KINGSTON. I think that is a good point, because in this debate, I know there are a lot of people on one side of the aisle who do not want to admit that Medicare is in trouble, but let us just say that the responsible approach is to say the Clinton trustees have said Medicare is going broke. Now, what are we as Members of Congress going to do about it, not as members of the Democrat or the Republican Party but as Members of Congress, what are we going to do about it? Then you have a choice in here. Are you going to work for Medicare or are you going to work for mediscare? I think there are people who have decided it is more politically expedient----

Mr. KINGSTON. I think we should put that on the easel so people can see it. I think it is very important that people know that 435 Members of Congress can take the choice. Are they going to work for Medicare or are they going to work for mediscare? One is political and one is responsible.

Mr. KINGSTON. Will the gentleman yield?

Mr. KINGSTON. Does the gentleman have the Democrat plan, the Gephardt plan, or the Daschle plan or the Clinton plan?

Mr. KINGSTON. If the gentleman would yield just before you do that, auditing exactly what, or generally what?

Mr. KINGSTON. Not necessary any more, is it?

Mr. KINGSTON. So perhaps we can get somebody from the Washington, DC City Council to come show the House how to take care of the books.

Mr. KINGSTON. Well, if the gentleman will yield, Price Waterhouse also does the audit for Washington, DC. Did they say that this was comparable?

Mr. KINGSTON. If the gentleman will yield, was this done on an inventory and on a cash basis? Because my question that I am leading to is, did we count the number of personal computers? Did we count the papers? Is there inventory missing? And is there cash missing? Is the cash done on an accrual basis, is it done on a cash basis, or could the auditors even tell one way or the other? Because what I am really hearing is, they gave up and they said, this is just too much of a mess.

Mr. KINGSTON

Mr. KINGSTON. Reserving the right to object, Mr. Speaker, would the gentlewoman tell us how many other unanimous consent orders there may be tonight?

Mr. KINGSTON. Mr. Speaker, will the gentlewoman be the last one?

Mr. KINGSTON. Mr. Speaker, I object unless we can get a commitment that this will be the last one, simply because we have the first hour. We would be happy to yield some time in the spirit of dialog, but inasmuch as this is an orchestrated attempt, I do not know that we need to continue.

Mr. KINGSTON. Mr. Speaker, I withdraw my reservation of objection.

Mr. KINGSTON

Mr. KINGSTON. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the requisite number of words. Mr. Chairman, I rarely am on the opposite side of issues with my friend the gentleman from Arkansas [Mr. Tim Hutchinson]. He is a great budget watchdog, a super friend of the taxpayers, but this time I find myself going against him. And yet I can say this, that you can vote against the Hutchinson amendment and still be a friend of the taxpayers, because as the committee has reported this bill, it still is in the 602(b) allocation which will move us to a balanced budget. This bill is a bill that is a cut and a reduction bill. Indeed, this program alone has been reduced by 50 percent. I heard the gentleman from California speaking up on the peanuts. Let me tell you about farm programs and why people from the agriculture communities should listen to this. What we are doing on the Committee on Agriculture is we are saying to our farmer friends, change status quo. Your farm subsidy may be a good investment, there may be a reason for it, but we need to change status quo. The Committee on Agriculture is responding that way. Well, these folks are doing the same way with historic preservation. They have taken a 50 percent cut, and they have come up with their own plan to reform themselves. In addition to that, keep in mind this is not a frivolous program. They have a statutory obligation under the National Historic Preservation Act. They are doing things which the Federal Government has mandated by law. If we do not like that law, we should change it. We cannot do that on an appropriations bill. Keep in mind this: the previous speaker said we are forgetting our national heritage. One thing we are not doing though is forgetting our tourism. Tourism in 30 states is the top first, second, or third highest industry, the big top three economic industries there are. In my district, Savannah, Georgia, one of the leading tourism centers of Georgia, people come because it is the largest historic preservation community or landmark community in the country. Brunswick, Georgia, has come a long way in the last five years because of the Main Street program These are economic investments. They are not things that are just preserving a building just because it is nice or aesthetically pleasing. This group works closely when a new building is proposed in an historic area. When there is a renovation that is going to take place in an historic area, where there is economic changes or growth in an historic area, they work with the community, with the local officials, with the planning boards, and so forth. This group is important to your community. I would say this: I reluctantly hate to oppose the gentleman from Arkansas [Mr. Hutchinson], but you can oppose the Hutchinson amendment and still support a balanced budget, because the bill, as reported, does that.

Mr. KINGSTON. Mr. Chairman, 50 percent is a very significant cut.