Jerry Kleczka

Mr. KLECZKA

Mr. KLECZKA. Mr. Speaker, as we have just seen following Hurricane Isabel, some vendors charged residents exorbitant rates for essential goods and services following the storm. A recent Washington Post article reports that in one instance, a tree-cutting firm wanted $17,000 to remove five trees that had already fallen to the ground. The same article refers to gasoline being sold for over $3 a gallon and bottles of water sold for $5 apiece. While most merchants are honorable and help their neighbors by providing at a reasonable cost the products or services during a crisis, others seek to take advantage of these people in their time of need. Today I am introducing the Permanently Inhibit Gougers (P.I.G.) Act that would prohibit vendors from increasing prices on goods and services widely needed during a declared disaster. Specifically, prices could not be increased by more than 10 percent in excess of the average price of a product over the last 90 days. This restriction would apply for the seven days before a foreseeable event and for the 90 days following a disaster. Increases in excess of 10% would be branded an unfair or deceptive business practice under the Federal Trade Commission Act. Reasonable exceptions would be made for vendors allowing them to raise their prices proportionally when their cost of doing business or acquiring wholesale goods increases during a crisis. Additionally, violators would be subject to a civil penalty of up to $250,000. People who are the victims of price gouging would be able to sue the purveyor for damages up to three times the amount they overpaid. Congress must act to prevent unscrupulous vendors from taking advantage of consumers during an emergency. We need to make it clear that such despicable behavior, which is as shameless as looting, will be punished severely in order to ensure that our constituents are not gouged at the worst possible time. I urge my colleagues to send gougers a strong message by signing on as cosponsors of this legislation.

Mr. KLECZKA

Mr. KLECZKA. Mr. Speaker, I always thought that charitable giving came from the heart and not through tax breaks in the Federal Tax Code. I come to the floor today to oppose this bill and I feel somewhat like the skunk at the picnic, but I think it is time that this Congress act more responsibly. Let me give my colleagues a little background as to where we are as far as the Federal deficit. This administration took over and inherited a $236 billion surplus. In 4 short years, they have turned it into a deficit, and the Congressional Budget Office indicates that deficit will be $580 billion. Yes, there has been a downturn in the economy, but more importantly over the last few years, this Congress has given almost $3 trillion in tax cuts. If these cuts were affordable, one would say fine. But they are not, my friends. For every tax cut we give today, it goes on the deficit and your kids and your grandkids are going to pay for it. Not us, your kids and grandkids will. So here we have a bill that costs $13 billion and it is geared to enhance charitable giving. What a noble purpose. If the economy was different, if the fiscal picture for the country was different, I probably would be supporting the bill, also. But, my friends, the plain, simple fact is, it is nice but we cannot afford it. My constituents would like to go and buy a new car and a new refrigerator, and those things are nice, but they cannot afford it, so they do not do it. But this Congress just cannot stop giving away money. Let us look at the bill itself. In the bill, we double the corporate charitable giving deduction. Currently corporations can give away and take a tax credit for 10 percent of their gross income. This bill doubles it. Are the corporations so overtaxed? A lot of them are running offshore to escape all taxation. In 1996, corporate taxes made up 12 percent of all the revenue the Federal Government takes in. In 2002, that shrunk to 8 percent. So do not tell me corporations are in need of another tax break. Their liability is drastically being reduced. And to tell me that if we do not double their charitable giving to 20 percent, instead of 10, they are not going to give the excess food to the food pantry, they are going to throw it in the dumpster, that is nonsense. Another provision in the bill tells nonitemizers, those people who do the short form, that they can, after giving individually $500, take a $250 above-the-line credit. That seems well and good. However, the standard deduction that filer gets already includes a portion for charitable giving. So if we want to increase it, let us increase the standard deduction. But know full well 80 to 90 percent of those filers are going to claim the $250 credit and that is why we do not trust them because that provision is only good for 2 years. They are going to have a little study. But we do not have enough auditors to audit that and I suspect that almost all the filers will take that credit. Mr. Speaker, it is a great bill, but the fact of the matter is the taxpayers cannot afford this bill. And as I look at the various portions of it, even including the lumber company giveaway, those might be nice in better times. Another portion of the bill decreases the taxes for charitable foundations in half. That costs some $2.8 billion. Today charitable corporations pay 2 percent Federal tax on their income. That is not a heck of a lot. Boy, I wish my constituents only paid 2 percent. But we feel so generous today, we are going to cut that in half to 1 percent. And that $2.8 billion goes smack on to the deficit. One other item I think we should mention, I indicated that the Federal deficit is slated by the Congressional Budget Office to be $580 billion. That is without the $87 billion the President has asked for the war in Iraq. That goes right on it. That means the deficit is going to be over $650 billion.

Mr. KLECZKA. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.

Mr. KLECZKA

Mr. KLECZKA. Mr. Speaker, the AIDS pandemic threatens stability, future economic growth and development throughout the world, particularly in Africa. Yet, nurses are an underutilized resource in HIV prevention and the care of those in Africa who suffer from AIDS. Marquette University's College of Nursing and the U.S. Agency for International Development recognize the important and unique role nurses and primary health care workers can play in this effort. They have collaborated to enhance nursing skills in the treatment and prevention of HIV/AIDS in Kenya. I wish to enter into the Congressional Record an article that appeared in the Summer 2003 issue of Marquette Magazine, which highlights positive impact Marquette University has made in training Kenyan health care workers to treat Kenyans infected with HIV/AIDS. Helping Hands Marquette program puts nurses on the front line of the war on HIV/AIDS in Kenya (By Kristen M. Scheuing) In 1997, Sister Genovefa Maashao appealed to then-dean of Marquette's College of Nursing, Dr. Madeline Wake (now university provost), for help in dealing with the AIDS epidemic that was consuming her native Kenya. At Wake's invitation, Sister Genovefa came to Marquette to receive instruction in HIV/AIDS prevention and patient care. When she returned to her hometown of Voi, she was the only HIV/AIDS- trained health-care professional in a community of some 300,000 people, 20-40 percent of which were presumed to be infected. Astounded by the numbers and inspired by a recent presidential declaration of war on HIV/AIDS in this country, the College of Nursing felt compelled to join Sister Genovefa's mission to harness the epidemic in Kenya. Under the direction of Karen Ivantic-Doucette, Nurs '79 and '95, clinical assistant professor of nursing, and Margaret Murphy, clinical associate professor of nursing, a revolutionary 4-year program was designed that would put the skill and knowledge in the hands of those who actually administer the majority of care in Kenya: nurses and non- physician health-care workers, not doctors. In collaboration with the U.S. Agency for International Development, the program will create a self-sustaining supply of caregivers trained in HIV/AIDS care and prevention in Kenya. The project was lauded at a January 2003 press conference by President George W. Bush, who cited the Marquette program as an example of how faith-based organizations can be successful partners with government agencies in the fight against HIV/AIDS. As part of the first phase of the program, 12 nurses were recruited from various Kenyan governmental, health-care and educational institutions and brought to Marquette last spring for five weeks of intensive training. The nurses returned to Kenya to train other caregivers who will, in turn, train others. After four years more than 300 health workers will have been trained, directly enhancing the health-care infrastructure for more than 10,000 people. Of the estimated 60 million people living with HIV/AIDS worldwide, nearly 80 percent are in Africa. The program aims to re-establish human dignity to those infected with the virus through the initiative of nurses.

Mr. KLECZKA

Mr. KLECZKA. Mr. Speaker, the proponents of the Chile and Singapore trade agreements are correct. The bills before us today will lead to increased jobs and increased exports. Unfortunately, those increases will take place in Chile and Singapore and not in the United States. Since the first contraction of the United States gross domestic product in March, 2001, our trade deficit has risen by 31 percent. During the same period we have lost over 2.4 manufacturing jobs. Congress should be considering measures to grow the economy and create jobs instead of agreements before us today that are just one more step down the road of growing trade deficits and lost employment. These bills represent a significant step backwards from the progress made on the Jordan Free Trade Agreement and even a step backwards from the bill authorizing fast track. Passage of these agreements will set a horrible precedent for future trade negotiations and will be an omen for even more U.S. job losses. The devil is in the details: The Chile and Singapore Free Trade Agreements contain only one workers' rights provision protected by a dispute settlement procedure, and this is that a country enforce its own labor laws. However, the bills do not commit Chile or Singapore to even have any labor laws or to ensure that their labor laws meet any international standards. These agreements also create a totally new visa category for the temporary entry of professionals into this country, even if there is no shortage of workers in the United States. These visas are temporary in name only because the bill provides that they are renewable indefinitely. It is absurd to allow new sources of low-wage labor into this country when we are not facing a labor shortage, quite the contrary, but are facing the highest unemployment rate in 9 years. The Singapore Free Trade Agreement also is a large loophole that allows goods made in other countries to be treated as made in Singapore and imported into our country duty free if they simply pass through Singapore's ports. This practice will allow goods made all over the world to escape U.S. duties. Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to reject both of these trade agreements. The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Quinn.) The Chair would inform the speakers that the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Crane) has 28\1/2\ minutes remaining, the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Levin) has 8 minutes remaining and the gentleman from California (Mr. Stark) has 8 minutes remaining.

Mr. KLECZKA

Mr. KLECZKA. Mr. Speaker, the gentleman from Colorado (Mr. McInnis) took the floor to relate what happened. And although I was not in the room, I did speak to the Democrat that was in the room. The comments of the gentleman from California (Mr. Stark) were preceded by the words, ``shut up.'' And that was by the gentleman from Colorado (Mr. McInnis), inciting the gentleman from California (Mr. Stark) to respond. Now, that sort of slipped his memory when he talked to us before. So, now, here is the scenario. Here is a man in excess of 70 years old threatening a man 30 years his junior, and the chairman was afraid that the 30-year-old junior was going to get beat up. Hello. Mr. Speaker, since your election, you have conducted this House with total honor. You have made all of us proud to be Members of Congress. But it is one thing to defend one of your own, but it is surely another to do so less than honorably, in fact, dishonorably and dishonestly. The fact of the matter is the police, who have a lot of things to do around here protecting the Americans, were called because of a disturbance against Democrats. I was in the room when the police came. Two officers came to clear us out because we were causing a disturbance. So do not go lying about what happened. It is an embarrassment enough, and this could be resolved by the chairman in question apologizing to all of us, and the issue would be done with.

Mr. KLECZKA. Mr. Speaker, would the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Shaw) care to share with the House your view on a Member of the Committee on Ways and Means calling the Capitol Police on other duly elected Members of Congress? That is one of the----

Mr. KLECZKA. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. KLECZKA

Mr. KLECZKA. Mr. Speaker, on Saturday, September 6, 2003 the Milwaukee Turners will celebrate their 150th anniversary of providing the community with leadership in the fields of physical fitness, social justice and cultural preservation. German revolutionary and patriot Frederick Ludwig Jahn founded the Turners in Germany in 1811. The original purpose of the Turners was to overthrow Napoleon who had conquered Prussia and to work toward a unified Germany. The Turners became powerful enough to start a revolution to make Germany a republic. The effort was defeated and 600,000 Germans were exiled. German immigrants who came to America in 1848, as a result of the events in Europe, were called 48'ers. The first Turner Society in the United States was founded in Cincinnati, Ohio in 1848. The 48'ers established athletic, social and cultural societies throughout the United States. At the turn of the century there were hundreds of active societies. Today there are only sixty-five Turner societies that remain. Milwaukee was once known as the ``German Athens of America'' because of the notable artistic, political and civic culture of the city. The Milwaukee Turners was a central part of this community. The Milwaukee Turners received its charter from the Wisconsin State Legislature in 1855. The Turner motto is ``Sound Mind in a Sound Body''. The philosophy of the organization is a holistic approach to the development of human potential through the harmonious integration of both intellectual and physical aspects of the individual. Over the years the Milwaukee Turners have actively opposed all forms of oppression and supported women's suffrage. The Turners also promoted the concept of including physical education as part of the public schools curriculum. The Turners Society in Milwaukee continues to support the original ideals and offers physical activities for people of all ages. Today, in an age of growing concern for the physical health of Americans and the lack of physical exercise, the Milwaukee Turners is ahead of the curve and is continuing to provide a vital service to the community through their outstanding physical fitness programs. I salute Milwaukee Turners efforts in improving the health of our citizens and congratulate the Milwaukee Turners on celebrating a proud history of supporting social justice, freedom and physical and mental well being for 150 years. I wish to extend my best wishes for continued success in the years to come.

Mr. KLECZKA

Mr. KLECZKA. Mr. Speaker, today I am introducing legislation that would allow more Hmong refugees who served in conjunction with American soldiers during the Vietnam War to apply for citizenship with special consideration of their service to our country. Between 1961 and 1975 Hmong soldiers gathered intelligence, conducted reconnaissance, and undertook other dangerous missions in support of American troops. Tens of thousands of Hmong died during the war and over 100,000 were forced to flee to refugee camps. In 2000, under the leadership of the late Rep. Bruce Vento, Congress approved the Hmong Veterans' Naturalization Act, which provided an exemption from the English language requirement and special consideration on the civics test for those Hmong veterans and their spouses. Later that year, similar legislation was enacted granting the same benefits to widows of Hmong veterans. Approximately 5,000 Hmong currently living in America took advantage of the Hmong Veteran's Naturalization Act and proudly became citizens. However, many veterans and their spouses missed the May 26, 2003 deadline and are now unable to apply for citizenship with the eased requirements. My legislation would extend that deadline by an additional 18 months in order to give every deserving veteran or surviving widow a chance to apply for citizenship. Remembering the sacrifices that these brave men and women made while rescuing downed American pilots, serving in guerilla units, and in other operations in support of U.S. troops, we owe it to them to provide every opportunity to become American citizens. I urge my colleagues to cosponsor this legislation.

Mr. KLECZKA

Mr. KLECZKA. Mr. Speaker, let me thank the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Dingell) for yielding time and also to recognize the gentleman from Louisiana (Mr. Tauzin), the chairman of the committee, for expediting this resolution through the Committee on Energy and Commerce. Mr. Speaker, the resolution before the House today recognizes the 100th anniversary of the Harley-Davidson Motor Company. In 1903, four men, William Harley and brothers Arthur, Walter and William Davidson, completed work on their first motorcycle in a small shed in Milwaukee, Wisconsin. The company founded that day has gone on to produce the world's finest and most popular motorbikes. Today, Harley-Davidson has 8,168 employees throughout the country, with nearly 4,000 working in Wisconsin. What started as a small business at the beginning of the last century soon developed into the largest motorcycle producer in the country. Harleys can be seen at nearly every turn in recent American history. During World War I, Harley-Davidson supplied most of the 20,000 motorcycles used by the Armed Forces. The day after the armistice was signed, Corporal Roy Holtz of Chippewa Falls, Wisconsin, was the first American to enter Germany. He was riding a Harley-Davidson. During World War II, Harley-Davidson suspended production of its civilian motorcycles. The company produced some 90,000 motorcycles for U.S. soldiers and was awarded four Army-Navy ``E'' Awards for excellence during wartime and for their wartime production. In 1953, Harley-Davidson became the sole U.S. motorcycle manufacturer, a distinction it would hold for the next 46 years. During this time, Harley produced some of its most innovative designs. The first Sportster was offered, which premiered a 55-cubic inch overhead valve engine. Also the Super Glide and the Super Glide II were introduced with a rubber-isolated, 5-speed powertrain and welded stamp frame. Additionally, the Ultra Classic Electra Glide debuted. This motorcycle became the first Harley to include sequential port electronic fuel injection. To celebrate its 100th anniversary, Harley-Davidson has planned a 3- day gala beginning on August 28 in Milwaukee, Wisconsin. It will include exhibits on design and manufacturing of the Harleys, music, fireworks and ceremonies on Lake Michigan, and a parade of 100,000 Harleys through downtown Milwaukee. Leading up to the festivities will be events in every corner of the country. Harley-Davidson is a remarkable corporation that demonstrates American ingenuity, dedication, and workmanship. I urge my colleagues to join me in honoring Harley-Davidson for the jobs they create, the quality of the products they manufacture, and their lasting contributions to motorcycling in this country and around the world.

Mr. KLECZKA

Mr. KLECZKA. Mr. Speaker, if the Republicans love Medicare so much, why did they not put this drug benefit in the Medicare program like the hospitalization program and a physician program? Unless that is called tough love. Because under the bill, seniors, grandma and grandpa have to go out and buy a policy outside of Medicare. Mr. Speaker, there has been a lot of talk about if we pass this motion we are going to bankrupt the program. There is a lot of talk about this is the vision for Medicare. Well, let me remind my colleagues that this bill passed by a vote of 215 to 214, one slim vote. In fact, the rollcall was held open for almost an hour so the Republican leadership could twist some arms around here, make some promises, and finally get the bill to pass. What we are asking today is to change two sections of this 700-page bill. Two years ago, we had a hearing on this bill before the Committee on Ways and Means, and before the hearing were some insurance association people and we asked them point-blank, do you think your members are going to sell a drug-only policy to the seniors of the country? And they said, are you nuts? Before we get the premium in the bank from the policy, the senior who just bought the policy will have filed three claims. There is no way it is going to work. So what we are asking for today is for a fallback position. If you are so sure it is going to work, the fallback position will never be in effect. But if, in fact, you are wrong, what we are saying then is, then let us have the Medicare program provide grandma the drug benefit. But that is not what is going on here. We are told that grandma should go and get a private HMO. I come from Milwaukee, Wisconsin. We have four companies selling those HMOs. The last one is going bankrupt and will be out of business shortly. In fact, over 2.5 million seniors in this country were kicked out of their HMO policies. It is a failed experiment. This Republican bill starts the experiment again, even though we know it does not work.

Mr. KLECZKA

Mr. KLECZKA. Mr. Speaker, on Friday, August 22, 2003, The Community Journal will celebrate its 27th Anniversary. On this occasion, the newspaper will salute Ernestine O'Bee as an outstanding citizen in Milwaukee's African American community. Mrs. O'Bee is the proprietor of the Northwest Funeral Chapel, and has served in a professional capacity in her field since 1952. She is an astute businesswoman in her role as funeral director and is compassionate and caring to all she serves. In addition to her professional achievements, Ernestine O'Bee is a lady of elegance and eloquence. She has led an exemplary life and has been a model of generosity and graciousness for everyone whose life she has touched. As a pillar of the African American community, Ernestine O'Bee has been active in civic affairs and supportive of many organizations and individuals in her quest to improve the quality of life for the entire Milwaukee community. She has served many organizations including the Salvation Army, YWCA, YMCA, the House of Peace, Zonta Club and her sorority, Wisconsin Funeral Directors Association. Over the years, Mrs. O'Bee has sponsored over one hundred students in scholarships, some from birth through college. She is a substantial contributor to the Dr. Terence N. Thomas Memorial Scholarship Fund, which recently graduated five students including one post graduate student from Tulane University. I wish to honor and thank Ernestine O'Bee for the countless gifts and contributions that she has made to strengthen, support and enrich the community. I appreciate her efforts and join in celebrating her life- long achievements. Congratulations, Mrs. Ernestine O'Bee!

Mr. KLECZKA

Mr. KLECZKA. Mr. Speaker, let me thank the gentleman from California for yielding me this time. Mr. Speaker, I really do not know where to start, to start answering some of the critics and the proponents of this legislation. This bill started out about a week ago or so in the Committee on Ways and Means, which I serve on, and the cost was $14 billion. Then the day the bill came up, the cost rose to $72 billion. And then last night the cost went to $173 billion. Mr. Speaker, let us pass this bill quickly, because I am afraid it is going to continue to grow. But that does not make it a good bill. What is going on here, my friends, is this is the demise of the employer-sponsored health care system in this country. The employers do not like it. They want to get out of it. Members of the committee, including the chairman, have indicated that their desire is to dismantle the employer-based health care system. This bill does it. How does it do it? It gives the employer an option. It says, Mr. and Mrs. Employee, we are changing your health policy. I am going to give you one starting next month that will provide for a $2,000 deduction on your health care costs. Start saving, because the Congress passed a bill where you can save and then you pay the first $2,000. It sounds fine in principle, but here is the problem, my friends. Working families in this country have to first of all pay the mortgage so they do not lose the home, pay for the car so he can get to work, feed the kids and clothe them and send them to school, and then this Congress has already told you that the past generation has been irresponsible, they did not plan for their future and you better. So put money away for your retirement in an IRA and a 401(k). And you say, yes, because Social Security probably will not be enough, I will do that. Then this Congress said, college education is going up, mom and dad, start saving for your kids' education. And so you say, yeah, I will put a couple of thousand away a year for Johnny's and Sally's education. Now we are saying to you, after all this, we have got another one, start saving for your health care. Then you say, Mr. Republican Congressman, I am out of money. I do not make that much. I do not have any more disposable income. And so when your employer changes your health plan and you do not put the $2,000 or $4,000 away when you get sick, you are out of luck. That is what is going on here. Make no mistake about it.

Mr. KLECZKA

Mr. KLECZKA. Mr. Speaker, I worked for an insurance company before I was elected to the legislature. So with that as an opening, Mr. Speaker, let me say to the body that in my view this is the beginning of the end of the Medicare program. For 38 years Medicare has provided seniors with quality health care, a defined benefit, and whether one lived in California, Alaska, Maine, or Florida, the premium was the same, they knew what the benefit was, and they knew what the services were, and it has worked. So there are those in this House who say there has been a change in the way we deliver medicine today, and that is called drug therapy. Let us add that coverage to the Medicare program and we can use the purchasing power of the Federal Government to get the best deal on drugs for in excess of 40 million people. And there are those on the other side of the aisle who say no, we do not want to do that, and the reason is because that is going to cut into the drug profits of their friends, the drug companies. But know full well, Mr. Speaker, we do it for the VA and it works and it works well. So instead of doing a benefit connected to the Medicare program, what we are doing is we are going to send our seniors out to the private insurance market, we are going to tell them go shop for a drug-only policy. The policy that is being offered in this bill has one big problem, and that is once one spends $2,000 on drugs in any one year coverage stops until their expenditures total $4,900. Know full well during that period they are paying 100 percent of their drug cost. Their premiums go on. They are paying premiums and getting no benefit. There is something wrong with that system, and that is why this bill is very bad in that respect. The other problem with the bill is we had this program for a couple years now called Medicare+Choice, and we are going to show those seniors that the private market who did not want them 35 years ago wants them now. They are holding their arms open. We want the seniors because we know they have a lot of drug costs and a lot of health care costs. So the Committee on Ways and Means and this Congress go along with this Medicare+Choice. What it is, is a private insurance company selling policies to seniors. Milwaukee, where I come from, has four of these companies and they were peddling these policies and offering the sun and the moon and all of a sudden bingo, three of them go belly up, the seniors have to scurry to get back into some type of Medicare program, and today we have one left. One left. And the reimbursement for that one Medicare+Choice program is 110 percent of the Medicare rate. So clearly, we are not saving a heck of a lot of money with that Medicare choice plan. Well, it is a failed experiment, Mr. Speaker. So what are we doing in this bill? We are changing the name. We are going to call it Medicare Advantage, and it is supposed to look and smell better; but, my friends, it is the same thing that has failed in the past. It will fail again. Mr. Speaker, I urge a ``no'' vote on this legislation.

Mr. KLECZKA

Mr. KLECZKA. Mr. Speaker, there is no doubt in any of our minds of this country's strong support for the State of Israel. We have shown that time and time again. But as my colleague, the gentleman from California just indicated, neither side is totally innocent of all of the violence that has occurred over the years. But as I look at and read this resolution, I think the question all of us have to answer, the only question that we have to answer is: Will passing this resolution further the peace process? And the answer is clearly no. A reading of the resolution will find it lacking in one major regard and that is, there is no endorsement in this resolution of the Roadmap, the Roadmap which President Bush has worked so hard to promote to both sides; the Roadmap which was a subject of the Aqaba summit. Yes, there has been a flare-up in the hostilities since the summit. But now the House comes with a resolution which is one-sided. And again, I ask: will this resolution enhance the peace process? And I say to my colleagues, the answer is no. Only yesterday, the Palestinian Authority agreed to a 3-month truce from any further hostilities. Many of us will say, 3 months! We want it permanent. How about 6 months? Mr. Speaker, how about taking some progress when we can get it? If this 3-month truce moves along the peace process, let us take it. And then fight for another 3 months, and another 3 months. It has to be done in small steps. Our offices just received communications from two pro-peace Jewish groups. The first group was Americans For Peace Now, a premier Jewish organization working to enhance Israel's security through the peace process, and the second group that is questioning the wisdom of this resolution is the Israel Policy Forum, which supports American efforts at resolving the conflict between Israel and its Arab neighbors. So I say to my colleagues, let us all answer the question together when the vote comes, and that is will a vote for this resolution enhance the Roadmap, and will it further peace in the region? And again, the conclusion I draw is that the answer is no.

Mr. KLECZKA

Mr. KLECZKA. Mr. Speaker, today I am introducing legislation that would recognize the 100th anniversary of one of America's greatest corporations and a treasure of Milwaukee, Wisconsin--the Harley- Davidson Motor Company. 100 years ago this August in the Davidson family backyard at 38th Street and Highland Boulevard, William Harley and the Davidson brothers, Arthur, Walter, and William, finished work on their first motorcycle. Shortly afterwards the Harley-Davidson Motor Company was built on the site of the company's current world headquarters in Milwaukee. Over the next 100 years Harley-Davidson has gone on to outstanding success, releasing innovative and unique designs that have become so easily recognizable on roads worldwide. Harleys are known as the preeminent motorcycle both in this country and around the world and have become a staple of the U.S. Armed Services as well as police and fire departments throughout the country. Harley-Davidson will be celebrating its 100th birthday this August in its hometown of Milwaukee, Wisconsin. This three-day event will include festivities on Lake Michigan, a never-before-seen exhibit of sketches, videos, clay models, and mock-up motorcycles demonstrating various stages of the design used process by Harley-Davidson's Styling and Engineering departments, as well as a parade of 10,000 Harleys through downtown Milwaukee. The national celebration will have events leading up to the grand celebration in cities across America including Las Vegas, Nashville, Indianapolis, and Dearborn. I want to invite all Harley-Davidson enthusiasts, young and old, to come out and take part in this once in a lifetime event. I urge my colleagues to join me in honoring this great American company by cosponsoring this resolution.

Mr. KLECZKA

Mr. KLECZKA. Mr. Speaker, the previous gentleman who spoke indicated that the estate tax is immoral. Do Members know what is more immoral? Giving this tax relief to the wealthiest individuals in this country and passing it on through national debt to our children and our grandchildren. The action we take today, which will cost over $800 billion in the next 10 years after fully effective, will be put on the national debt of the country to be paid back by our kids and grandkids. Boy, are we generous. Mr. Speaker, the only good thing about today's bill to repeal the estate tax for the billionaires of this country is that it is dead in the Senate, so all of the talk and debate today and the vote we will have later is for naught because the Senate is going to kill it. That is the good news. But let us see what we have done in this House and Congress over the last couple of years. Last week we provided a tax cut of some $82 billion. The country is broke. We have a $400 billion deficit this year. The kids are going to pay that because that is part of the debt now. A month before that we passed another tax bill. This one totaled $350 billion, of which the wealthiest Americans would get about $92,000. The average taxpayer in my district would get about $400. We had no money for that one either. The real problem with that bill is once we total it up, that costs $1 trillion but that is a secret, so do not say anything. Quiet. Now 2001 we passed another tax bill. How much did that one cost? That one cost $1.3 trillion. Again, the surplus is gone. The country is broke. We have a deficit. What the heck are we doing around here? When is this idiocy going to stop? Today the estate tax has an exemption of $2 million. It covers everyone in my district. Well, we are going to have an option later today which would raise that to $7 million and that would take care of 99 percent of all small businesses and farmers in this country. But that is not good enough. That is not good enough for the Republicans because that is not who they are trying to help. The people they are trying to help are the Hallmark Card people and the Mars candy bar people, who over the last couple of years have spent millions of dollars hiring lobbyists in D.C. and giving campaign contributions, and today they want their due. Mr. Speaker, I include for the Record a Washington Post article of this morning by Jonathan Weisman entitled, ``Estate Tax Compromise Sought.'' What we are doing today is sheer nonsense. Let me say to my Republican colleagues, we have already voted on this proposition three times; and under the campaign finance law if we vote for an item three times and it does not pass, you are still entitled to the campaign contribution, okay. So Members are still going to get the money from Hallmark and the campaign contributions from the Mars candy bar people; but for God's sake, save the taxpayers of this country. [From the Washington Post, June 18, 2003] Estate Tax Compromise Sought House Set to Pass Repeal, but Supporters Know Senate Votes Aren't There (By Jonathan Weisman) When a coalition of wealthy families, small-business groups and farm interests won temporary repeal of the estate tax two years ago, they immediately resumed their campaign for permanent repeal. Now, even as the House is expected to vote today for just that, some in the alliance have second thoughts. It's not that they have backed off their vehement opposition to the tax on large inheritances. Rather, as the Federal budget deficit grows and their patriarchs and matriarchs age, they are losing faith that permanent repeal will ever happen and are considering compromises that were unthinkable two years ago. The House is expected to vote today to permanently repeal the estate tax after 2010, when it is set to expire after being in effect for only one year. But no one expects the Senate to pass the bill, leading some proponents to believe that the vote and the distant temporary repeal date are more political gamesmanship than a serious legislative attack on the tax. So some of the affluent families who have bankrolled the repeal movement are exploring estate tax changes short of repeal that could be implemented sooner. ``There is some real concern that 2010 is not soon enough,'' said a lobbyist working on the issue, referring to the deficit and the uncomfortable fact that some affluent benefactors may not live until 2010. Grover Connell of privately held Connell Co., for example, is 85. The matriarchs and patriarch of the Hallmark greeting-card fortune are in their seventies. For more than a decade, the coalition has rejected overtures for compromise and declared it will accept nothing short of ``death tax'' repeal. The simplicity of their demand, the strength of the small- business coalition and the money of the families financing the effort combined to turn an obscure tax affecting very few Americans into a powerful rallying point, especially for Republicans. The movement culminated in 2001 with the 10-year, $1.35 trillion tax cut, which repeals the estate tax in 2010. But the tax is to return in 2011 when the entire tax cut expires. For the past two years, the repeal coalition has tried, and failed, to gather the 60 Senate votes needed to make the repeal permanent. One lobbyist working on the estate tax said the appeal of the issue may have ``plateaued.'' And just as the surging Federal budget deficit is beginning to shake up the Bush administration's plans for more tax cuts, it is starting to change the politics of estate tax repeal. Repeal supporters worry that the growing deficit will make it more difficult to eliminate the tax, particularly by 2010, when the vanguard of the baby boom will retire. The Treasury Department said repeal of the estate tax in 2011 through 2013 would cost the government $115 billion in revenue. In 2014 through 2023, repeal would cost about $820 billion, according to the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities. ``The principal issue is the growing federal budget deficit,'' said William Gates Sr., father of the Microsoft Corp. founder, who opposes repeal of the estate tax. ``You can't run a $400 billion deficit year after year and go around repealing taxes at the same time.'' Even if Bush is reelected in 2004, a new president, who could be far less friendly to repeal, will be elected in 2008. And the broad appeal of the anti-estate-tax movement that caught fire in the 1990s may be dissipating simply because people are not feeling so rich anymore, one lobbyist said. Even at the height of the stock market boom, the estate tax affected very few families because estates worth up to a certain amount are exempt. That amount is currently $1 million for a single person or as much as $2 million for a couple. In 2000, the most recent year for which statistics are available, more than 2.4 million adults died in the United States, but only about 52,000 left taxable estates. The strength of the repeal movement always came from people's fear that their estates would be hit with a huge tax bill. If that fear dissipates in a sluggish economy, so will the movement, lobbyists said. ``I think some of [coalition members] are coming around to `Let's get a common-sense solution that can work now instead of just talking about this for eons,' '' said Sen. Blanche Lincoln (D-Ark.), a past repeal supporter who is floating a less expensive alternative. With all those factors in mind, some of the biggest names in the estate tax coalition are looking to compromise. The candy-making Mars family of McLean gave more than $1 million to lobbying powerhouse Patton Boggs LLP last year, in part to explore ``estate and gift tax reform,'' according to lobbying disclosure forms. Koch Industries Inc., a family-run energy, ranching and finance conglomerate, paid Hogan & Hartson LLP $40,000 last year, while spending $500.000 on in-house lobbying on the estate tax. The Connell Co. hired Washington Council Ernst & Young for $120,000 to lobby for ``estate and income tax relief,'' while Hallmark Cards Inc. spent $60,000 to hire Capitol Tax Partners LLP. Stephen Moore, a conservative tax-cutting activist with the Club for Growth, and Mark A. Bloomfield, president of the business-backed American Council for Capital Formation, proposed taxing estates at the current capital gains rate of 15 percent. Taxable estates are subject to a 49 percent tax. ``There are Republicans who want this debate to last forever, keep the [campaign] money flowing in, keep the Democrats off guard,'' Moore said. ``Mark Bloomfield and I have been on crusade to get this done, to break the logjam.'' If that proposal cannot be passed, another lobbyist suggested taxing inheritances at income tax rates, which are at most 35 percent. A stream of lobbyists has passed through Lincoln's office to discuss her proposal to immediately repeal the estate tax for family-owned businesses and farms. The public faces of the repeal movement remain resolute. ``We are 100 percent united behind permanent repeal in 2010,'' said Patricia Soldano, a Southern California financial planner who, in 1992, helped launch the repeal movement with funding from the Mars family and the Gallo wine heirs, among others. Dena Battle, the National Federation of Independent Business's lobbyist on the issue, conceded that the budget deficit ``certainly changes the dynamics of the debate.'' ``But,'' she said, ``you're talking about something that takes place 10 years from now. There's no way we can know what the economy is going to look like then. That's not an excuse to vote against this.'' There is little doubt that the House will vote today to repeal the tax, but lobbyists said they will look closely at the tally. If past repeal supporters--especially Democrats-- vote against it this time, the fledgling movement toward compromise will pick up steam quickly, a lobbyist for one of the rich families predicted. Announcement by the Speaker Pro Tempore

Mr. KLECZKA

Mr. KLECZKA. Mr. Speaker, today I am reintroducing the Medicare Substitute Adult Day Care Services Act. This important bill would provide new rehabilitative care choices for Medicare beneficiaries while simultaneously assisting family caregivers with the difficulties in caring for a homebound family member. Specifically, this bill would update the Medicare home health benefit by allowing beneficiaries the option of substituting some, or all, of their Medicare home health services for care in an adult day care center (ADC). The ADC would be paid the same rate that would have been paid for the service had it been delivered in the patient's home. In addition, the ADC would be required, with that one payment, to provide a full day of care to the patient at no additional cost to the Medicare program. That care would include the home health benefit as well as transportation, meals, medication management, and a program of supervised activities. The ADC is able to provide these extra services at the same payment rate as home health care because there are inherent cost savings in the adult day care setting. In the home care arena, a skilled nurse, a physical therapist, or other home health provider must travel from home to home providing services to one patient per site. There are significant transportation and time costs associated with this method of care. In an adult day facility, the patients are brought to the providers, who see a larger number of patients in a shorter period of time. I would like to point out that the bill would not expand the Medicare home health benefit. It does not make any new people eligible for the home health benefit nor would it expand the definition of what qualifies for reimbursement by Medicare for home health services. To be eligible for this new option, a patient would still need to qualify for Medicare home health benefits just like they do today. They would need to be homebound and have certification from a doctor for skilled therapy in the home. The Medicare Substitute Adult Day Care Services Act simply recognizes that adult day care facilities can provide the same health services with the added benefits of social interaction, activities and meals. They also offer a therapeutic environment, in which a group of trained professionals can treat, monitor and support Medicare beneficiaries who would otherwise be monitored at home by a single caregiver. Not only does ADC aid in the rehabilitation of the patient, it provides a tremendous benefit to the family caregiver. Many frail beneficiaries cannot be left alone; therefore, caregivers are unable to have a respite or maintain employment. If senior citizens could utilize ADC services, they would receive supervised care for an entire day and the caregiver would have the opportunity to work outside the home and/ or leave the house for longer periods of time. Adult day care centers offer high-quality, safe, and often preferable alternatives to senior citizens who face complete confinement in the home. I urge my colleagues to cosponsor and support this important legislation.

Mr. KLECZKA

Mr. KLECZKA. Mr. Speaker, on Saturday, June 28, 2003, the Polish Falcons of America Nest 725 of Milwaukee will celebrate its 87h Anniversary as well as its role in hosting the 2003 PFA District II Meet and Convention. The Polish Falcons of America came together in 1887 as an outgrowth of a similar organization in Poland. A fraternal benefit society and physical fitness organization, the group has pursued the goal of a ``sound mind in a sound body'' for all of its members. This saying in Polish, ``Wzdrowym ciele zdrowy duch,'' is the organization's maxim. After the founding of the first nest in Chicago, Illinois, the PFA quickly expanded, and by 1894 the organization included twelve Nests. Because of the growing popularity of these local Nests, leaders established the Alliance of Polish Turners of the United States of America. In 1916 a group of Polish-Americans in Milwaukee organized Nest 725. Young men and women in the organization participated in district rallies, forming drilling teams and a group choir and band. More recently, Nest 725 has participated in District and National Gymnastic Meets and Dance competitions, winning national awards in 1984, 1986, 1988, 1992, and 1994. It continues to hold physical fitness and polish dance classes. Leaders showcase members' abilities in meets and performances at Nursing Homes and schools. As an exemplary community association, Nest 725 has given generously over the years to many charitable and patriotic causes including the American Red Cross, Diabetes Foundation, March of Dimes, and Polish Army Veterans. The group has also sent donations overseas to those in need in Poland. Through their contributions to the Polish community, Polish Falcons of America Nest 725 has positively impacted youth throughout the Milwaukee area. It is with great pleasure that I congratulate Nest 725 on its long and prosperous 87 year history, and wish the group the best of luck in the years to come.

Mr. KLECZKA

Mr. KLECZKA. Mr. Speaker, last week the Senate passed legislation to restore to children of low-income working families the tax relief that was--at the last minute--removed from the tax cut signed into law last month. This new Senate bill's cost of 9.7 billion dollars is fully offset and is waiting at the desk right here, right now for our action. We could pass the bill today and send it to the President for his signature tomorrow. However, my House Republican colleagues couldn't resist taking this important non-controversial bill--which passed the other body by a vote of 94-2--and weighing it down with more deficit growing tax cuts. The package before us today is almost 9 times larger than the Senate bill and every nickel of its 82 billion dollar price tag will be put onto our National Debt and repaid by our children and grandchildren. The Congressional Budget Office reported earlier this week that the tax cut signed into law last month, coupled with increasing defense spending, will send the federal budget deficit above $400 billion this year. If House Republicans were serious about giving child tax credit relief they would have paid for their bill. And, knowing that the Senate is fiscally responsible--they know this product won't pass. This is a cute way to appear to be for ``something'' while knowingly killing it. Let's be honest--most poor working folks don't vote for your guys so you're punishing their children today. Shame on you. I urge my colleagues to reject this bill and to send a message to the 94 members of the other body that we are with them.

Mr. KLECZKA

Mr. KLECZKA. Mr. Speaker, on May 30th the House of Representatives lost one of its most brilliant and dedicated employees when Al Davis died of complications resulting from a traffic accident. We remember him today and offer our sincere condolences to his family, loved ones, and especially his long-time companion Mary Bielefeld. As my colleagues before me have attested, the facts and figures produced by Al Davis have provided an immeasurable benefit to the Democratic Members of the Ways and Means Committee--and often proved to be a thorn in the side of my friends across the aisle. What most of my colleagues don't know is that I was the beneficiary of Al's budgetary wisdom long before he came to Washington to work on the staff of the Ways and Means Committee or the House Budget Committee before that. In the late 1970s when I served as Chairman of the Wisconsin Legislature's Joint Committee on Finance Al was toiling away as an economist for the Wisconsin Department of Revenue. In his work for the Ways and Means Committee Al himself was often unseen and unheard by the public, but the information he produced was routinely cited in the media. Not only did Al author remarkably insightful memos and produce easy-to-understand charts for us to use in debate on the floor and in the Ways and Means Committee, he frequently briefed reporters and opinion leaders about the effects of arcane budget and tax matters before Congress. Even though Al routinely prepared Ranking Member Rangel and numerous other Members of Congress for television and radio interviews, I'm sure that his most proud achievement was coming up with the chart I used in my Spring 2001 newsletter to the constituents of Wisconsin's 4th District. Al Davis was a kind and public-spirited man whose good work in this institution will not soon be forgotten. He was an expert in his field and earned the respect of his colleagues through his thoughtful analysis and wise counsel. Al simply had an answer for every conceivable question. One of his greatest attributes was his skill at explaining how tax and budget proposals would affect the working families and average Americans that we represent. His dedication to his work was unmatched. He would often e-mail memos to staff late into the night so that Members of the Committee would prepared for debate first thing in the morning. The Ways and Means Committee and this Congress as a whole will be at a loss without his vast expertise. I am proud to stand with my colleagues in the House today to honor and recognize the career of our friend Al Davis. His integrity, character, and expertise in all matters related to the tax code and the federal budget will be sorely missed by this body.

Mr. KLECZKA

Mr. KLECZKA. Mr. Speaker, I wish to enter into the Congressional Record an article that appeared in the April 29, 2003 issue of The Hill. This piece, written by John Komacki details the career and legacy of my predecessor in Congress, U.S. Rep. Clem Zablocki. Clement Zablocki: The Original Democrat From the Reagan Era He is now all but forgotten unless you stop at the branch public library on the corner of 35th and Oklahoma Avenue, just across the street from Villa Roma Pizza and Oak Park Lanes on Milwaukee's South Side. Or you might know of him if you visit the Ambulatory Care Wing at the Polish-American Hospital in Krakow, Poland. Yet he left an important mark in U.S. foreign affairs that all presidents follow, in spirit if not approval. He was also a model for his party who predated the Sen. Henry ``Scoop'' Jackson (D-Wash.) pro-defense Democrats of the '70s and is again becoming fashionable in an age of terrorism and preemption. The first thing most people noticed about Rep. Clement J. Zablocki (D-Wis.) was how unnoticeable he was. With a dark, Thomas Dewey-like mustache, the short, squat, reticent man looked more like a church organist or a high school teacher than a congressman. He was, of course, both before being elected to the Wisconsin Senate in 1942. In 1948, he was elected to the U.S. House of Representatives, and he was re-elected by large majorities until his death in 1983. Zablocki became one of Wisconsin's most popular and endearing politicians. His Milwaukee district was the core of city's Catholic. Polish-American community, and he reflected the working-class patriotism and morality of the second- and third-generation Eastern European-immigrant community. As such, he valued hard work and was staunchly anti- Communist and religiously conservative. Yet his standing with liberal groups especially on economic matters and on important issues in foreign policy was generally higher than with conservative groups. It is, however, in foreign policy that Zablocki's legacy remains. Since his first term in Congress, Zablocki was a member of what was then called the Foreign Affairs Committee, not considered a prize committee assignment then--or now, for that matter. It remained his only major committee throughout his long tenure in the House. He became an expert on a broad range of international issues and, over time, was able to blend his pro-Western, Cold War perspectives with an understanding of the more liberal views of Democrats who joined the committee in the '60s. Even so, he was an advocate of American intervention in Vietnam as chairman of the Subcommittee on Asian and Pacific Affairs between 1959 and 1969. As escalation continued in Vietnam without appreciable results. Zablocki began to judiciously question the strategy and the information he and fellow committee members were receiving from the White House and the Defense Department. In the early '70s, he led the House effort to reassert congressional authority in foreign policy decision-making. By then, Zablocki was chairman of the Subcommittee on National Security Policy and Scientific Developments. He became floor manager of a 1971 resolution directing the president to consult with Congress before committing troops ``whenever feasible.'' A year, later he sponsored another resolution without the qualifier. The House passed both but the Senate took no action. In 1973, with President Nixon weakened from revelations of the Watergate scandal, the House and Senate passed the War Powers Resolution, restricting the executive warmaking power over Nixon's veto. Though preferring close scrutiny of most presidential actions, Zablocki still favored executive flexibility, especially in intelligence and security matters. He supported President Jimmy Carter's position on limiting congressional oversight of the CIA yet disagreed with Carter's emphasis on human rights as a determining factor in providing foreign aid. Zablocki became chairman of the full committee as Ronald Reagan became president in 1981. While Reagan stressed defense priorities in foreign assistance programs, Zablocki emphasized direct economic aid to the poorest regions. Eventually he provided a compromise on key issues that bolstered strategic concerns while building stronger economies abroad. Zablocki was also able to pass a rare two- year aid authorization package in 1981. Though supportive of Reagan's Caribbean Basin Initiative, Zablocki differed with Reagan on nuclear-proliferation policy. Later, when it became apparent that the administration was supporting Nicaraguan insurgents, which the House majority felt was ill-conceived, he co-wrote the amendment that cut off assistance to the Contras. Though better known today as the Boland Amendment, it was officially the Boland-Zablocki Amendment. The administration's surreptitious reaction to that led to the Iran-Contra scandal that roiled the Gipper. The unimposing, diminutive man from a working-class district tempered executive authority while increasing the prestige of both his committee and the House. He also provided a timeless lesson in how the opposition party may boldly assert itself in matters of foreign policy without sacrificing principle in matters of national security or compassion. The Reagan Democrats were named for voters such as his constituents, but they never left Clem Zablocki.

Mr. KLECZKA

Mr. KLECZKA. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. Cardoza).

Mr. KLECZKA. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Brown).