Sander Levin

Mr. LEVIN

Mr. LEVIN. Mr. Speaker, I just wanted to say to my friend from Florida that we discussed this in the Committee on Ways and Means and it was clear that the staff of the majority discussed this and helped initiate this. Maybe discussed it with the administration. We are waiting for the evidence. But there was not the full discussion with the minority. There was no discussion with us. And maybe this is part of what was described in the Washington Post, an effort by the Republicans to politicize this issue instead of coming together. So I urge we move ahead with this bill but look at the bad provisions in conference.

Mr. LEVIN

Mr. LEVIN. Mr. Speaker, as a proud alumnus of the University of Chicago, I rise today to welcome Dr. Hugo F. Sonnenschein, President of the University of Chicago, to Washington, D.C. and the U.S. Capitol on Thursday, May 21, 1998 in recognition of his substantial contribution to American education and to the general welfare of the United States as leader of that esteemed institution. On Thursday, May 21, President Sonnenschein will pay a rare visit to the University of Chicago alumni in the Greater Washington, D.C. area, to bring them news of developments at the University, and learn of developments among alumni in the Nation's capital. Dr. Sonnenschein has served American higher education with extraordinary distinction, as researcher, teacher, and administrator. Before becoming the 11th President of the University of Chicago in 1993, Dr. Sonnenschein (A.B., University of Rochester, 1961; Ph.D., Purdue University, 1964) served as Provost, Princeton University, 1991 to 1993; Dean, School of Arts and Sciences, University of Pennsylvania, 1988 to 1991; and as a respected scholar of microeconomics. Mr. Speaker, President Sonnenschein's visit to the Nation's capital is particularly significant. There are some four thousand graduates of the University of Chicago who enrich the political, educational, scientific, cultural, legal and business life of Greater Washington, D.C. The university educates all manner of leaders, and in the Nation's capital alone has produced distinguished Members of this great Congress, dedicated managers and administrators in the Executive Branch, and effective judges in the Federal Courts. In addition, the University of Chicago takes special pride in its reputation as a teacher of teachers. A great number of its graduates are educators improving the lives of students at all levels of the American educational system and all over the world. Mr. Speaker, since its founding in 1892, the University has been uniquely devoted to the creation of knowledge, and the research of its scholars in the humanities, social sciences, biological sciences, and natural sciences has made innumerable contributions both to our national life and to international progress. The University's Washington, D.C.-area alumni look forward to greeting President Sonnenschein on May 21 to make friends, exchange ideas, and express their appreciation for his outstanding service to that esteemed educational institution. For these reasons, Mr. Speaker, it is an honor and a privilege to ask my colleagues in this great Congress to join me in recognizing University of Chicago President Hugo F. Sonnenschein on his visit to the Nation's capital.

Mr. LEVIN

Mr. LEVIN. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize the American Arab and Jewish Friends of Metropolitan Detroit as they hold their 12th Annual Awards and Scholarship Dinner on Sunday, May 17, 1998 and honor two distinguished leaders from each community. ``The Friends'' organization was established in 1981 to promote greater understanding and friendship between these two communities involving issues in Metropolitan Detroit. This annual dinner reflects their mission statement as it raises funds for college scholarships for Arab and Jewish high school seniors. The scholarship recipients are the winners of an essay contest emphasizing ``The Ties That Bind'' Americans of Arab, Chaldean, and Jewish backgrounds. This year ``The Friends'' will honor two outstanding individuals who have sought to promote greater understanding between Arabs and Jews. They are both influential community activists who have been successful because of their intelligence, hard work, persistence, and a deep commitment to and caring for their community. Dr. Haifa Fakhouri is the President and CEO of the Arab-American and Chaldean Council, the nation's largest community-based human service agency serving the Arabic and Chaldean speaking populations of southeast Michigan. Under her leadership, the Council grew from a single office in downtown Detroit to an agency of 28 outreach centers in the tri-county area. She has also served as a Special Advisor to the United Nation's on women's issues in the Arab World and as a delegate to the International Women's Conference in Mexico. Her work has been recognized through several awards including the Wayne State University Headliner Award and the Governor's Leadership Award. Ms. Florine Mark is the President and CEO of The WW Group, Inc., the nation's largest franchise of Weight Watchers International. She started the company and has been the CEO for over 30 years during which the company has grown to approximately 70,000 members. She also serves as the Chair of the Detroit Branch of the Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago and serves on the boards of numerous community organizations including the American Red Cross, the Detroit Renaissance Board, and Hospice of Southeastern Michigan. Her work has been recognized through several awards including the National Association of Women Business Owners and the Michigan Entrepreneur of the Year Award. Mr. Speaker, it is my pleasure to pay tribute to these outstanding leaders and friends and to an organization which plays an important role in reminding all of us that we share a common goal of peace and security in the Middle East and community activism at home.

Mr. LEVIN

Mr. LEVIN. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize the achievements of Michael Berry as he receives the 1998 Ellis Island Medal of Honor on Saturday, May 9, 1998. The National Ethnic Coalition, the largest ethnic and heritage organization in the United States, presents these medals each year to recognize exceptional humanitarian efforts and outstanding contributions to our country. In Michael Berry they have found an individual who truly exemplifies the spirit of this award. Mr. Berry has devoted his life to the welfare of the Arab American community, both in America and abroad. While Mr. Berry has often been described as the ``elder Statesman of the Arabic Community'' he has always shunned such titles, believing instead that his work should speak for itself. Having witnessed the efforts of Michael Berry for three decades, I know it would require volumes to capture the depth and intensity of the great work and magnificent contributions of his service. And, more importantly, I know there is no final chapter because his work is ongoing. The achievements of Michael Berry in the legal, civic, social, humanitarian and public service fields are spread across his home community of Dearborn, the metro-Detroit area, the State of Michigan, the United States, and of course the international community. Michael Berry served his community through the Dearborn United Community Services, the Southeast Dearborn Civic Association, the Wayne County Citizens Committee on Juvenile Delinquency, the Executive Board of the March of Dimes, and St. Jude's Hospital for which he received the Danny Thomas Award for furthering the goals of the Hospital. He served as a member and Chairman of the Board of the Wayne County Road Commission for over 15 years. This service was recognized when the International Terminal at Metro Detroit Airport was named the Michael Berry International Terminal. Michael Berry served his state on the Michigan Committee for Racial and Ethnic Minority Equality and on the Michigan Supreme Court's Task Force for ethnic and racial discrimination in the courts. He served his nation as a member of the American Task Force for Lebanon. He was selected by the United States Information Service as an exemplary first generation Lebanese American in published materials circulated overseas and he was sponsored by the U.S. Department of State Bureau of Education and Cultural Affairs to participate in a speaking tour of the Near East in 1966. Michael Berry served the Arab American community at home and abroad. He served as the first ever Muslim co-chairperson of the Greater Detroit Conference of Christians, Jews and Muslims when ``Muslims'' was added to this generations-old organization. He was President for over twenty years of the Cedars of Lebanon Bar Association, now known as the Arab American Bar Association. Michael Berry has been cited many times for his humanitarian efforts. He and other Lebanese-American leaders were instrumental in sending $1.6 million worth of medical supplies and equipment to three supply- drained hospitals in Lebanon in 1992. He was the first co-chairman of the United American Lebanese Association and was awarded the National Order of Cedar of Lebanon by the Lebanese Government on October 21, 1993. Mr. Speaker, it is with high admiration that I rise today to salute the achievements of a wonderful friend and world citizen as he receives this most prestigious award.

Mr. LEVIN

Mr. LEVIN. Mr. Speaker, I rise today, along with my colleague Sam Johnson, to introduce legislation that would make it easier for medical schools, teaching hospitals, and not-for-profit hospitals in the United States to conduct potentially life-saving medical research. The enactment of the Medical Innovation Tax Credit would provide an important incentive for companies to fund more clinical research at these institutions. This bill would establish an incremental, 20 percent tax credit in a new section of the Internal Revenue code for companies that conduct clinical testing research activities at U.S. medical schools and teaching hospitals. To get the tax credit, companies would undertake clinical testing activities at defined academic institutions: medical schools, teaching hospitals owned by, or affiliated with, an institution of higher education, and charitable research hospitals designated as cancer centers by the National Cancer Institute of the National Institute of Health. No tax credit would be available for clinical research activity conducted outside the U.S. This proposal comes at a time of substantive upheaval and transformation in our nation's health care system. As we all know, our medical schools and teaching hospitals are the backbone of innovation in American medicine. They are the places where scientific discovery intersects with patient care and medical and health professions training. But today these institutions are facing significant financial challenges due to fundamental changes in the health care system. Whereas medical schools and teaching hospitals used to be able to fund some research from excess patient care revenues, in the new competitive environment these institutions can no longer command higher prices from insurers simply because they fulfill the unique and critical missions of research and education. Additional private sector investment in our Nation's research and development is needed so medical schools and teaching hospitals can continue to fulfill their social missions. I am concerned that while the clinical research market is booming, medical schools and teaching hospitals are losing market share for clinical testing research activities. The Medical Innovation Tax Credit would provide some assistance to these institutions, but would also stimulate them to continue improving their efficiency in operating the clinical research enterprise. And since the tax credit is narrowly tailored, its potential cost to the government is relatively small. We need some way to help these institutions that is market-based and incentive driven. This proposal presents a creative way to encourage companies to conduct more clinical trials in the United States. It will arrest the declining share of trials conducted at these institutions and help alleviate some of the financial pressures they are experiencing. The Medical Innovation Tax Credit will provide needed resources for medical schools and teaching hospitals to maintain the robust research base necessary for high quality health-oriented education. Finally, it will strengthen the intellectual partnership between the private sector and medical schools and teaching hospitals to help ensure America's continued world leadership in research and innovation. I am proud to introduce this legislation and urge my colleagues to support a measure that will benefit all Americans.

Mr. LEVIN

Mr. LEVIN. Mr. Speaker, last year Congress approved a conference report on a bi-partisan basis that prohibited the use of federal funds for any needle exchange programs until the Secretary of Health and Human Services determines that based on scientific evidence these programs are effective in preventing the spread of HIV and do not encourage the use of illegal drugs. The Secretary has not decided to continue the ban on federal funding, and leave it to state and local units to finance needle exchange programs, which the scientific review requested by the Secretary found useful in saving lives without increasing drug use if part of a comprehensive anti-drug program. I support the administration's decision. As the Administration has stated regarding this matter, it ``. . . concurs in the longstanding position of the Congress that the Secretary of Health and Human Services should have the authority to determine the scientific and public health merit of needle exchange programs as they affect rates of HIV transmission and injection drug use. The Administration believes, as Congress has to this point, that the top public health leadership of the federal government remains the appropriate place for this determination, and that the decision on which HIV prevention strategies to use should rest with State and local officials.'' The bill before us would try to make this ban permanent, regardless of what might be scientific findings at a future date and regardless of the experience in and results from programs now underway in a substantial number of communities.

Mr. LEVIN

Mr. LEVIN. I have been listening to the debate, Mr. Speaker, with interest. And it is clear that we have to move ahead with Social Security. In a sense, the horse is already out of the barn. This bill calls for a national dialogue, and that is already started. The President and the Vice President started it on a bipartisan basis. There has been a very effective meeting already, and others are being held under the auspices of a foundation. So that dialogue is under way. No one should think that it has not started. But I will vote for this bill because it will keep the conversation going. For those of us who have been working so hard these years to secure Social Security, I do not think we need to have another vote that says we care. That is so clear. Maybe some want that vote and will join them. But for those of us who have been fighting all these years to make sure Social Security is secure, we say, whatever needs to be fixed, fix it. Do not break the system. Look to the future, but do not forget what is true today and what has been true in the past. And what is true today is that the Social Security system is essentially the economic foundation for a majority of the people who are retired, as has been discussed. But I think this has to be very much remembered. In this country, close to 70 percent of seniors have incomes of less than $25,000 a year, and 46 percent have incomes of less than $15,000. In Michigan, that figure is even higher. One estimate is that 85 percent have incomes of $25,000 or less, and 70 percent have incomes of $15,000 or less. So they are asking us, look to the future, but do not ruin the present. Those of us who work for fiscal responsibility should be proud of that. We have a surplus. If it had not been for our vote, there would not be this. This surplus would not exist, though, without the inflow from Social Security. And the lesson from those two points is this: Now we have time to fix Social Security for the long term because of the surplus, but let us use those funds because the surplus is in large measure because of Social Security, so use it for that purpose. And any other programs, whether they are tax cuts or other programs, should not be financed out of this surplus. Save and ensure Social Security first. So let us move ahead. I am in favor of flexibility, of looking at new alternatives, at looking at new ways to finance the retirement of people. As we do it, let us remember our sacred obligation. We have an obligation for the future. We also have an obligation to those who are paying in that we not undermine Social Security as they near retirement.

Mr. LEVIN

Mr. LEVIN. Mr. Speaker, this bill does not spend $18 billion, it will not cost $150 to the taxpayers. What will cost the American taxpayer is chaos in Asia. The IMF has made mistakes, but more often than not, it led to liberalization of trade. Look at Poland, Estonia, Uganda and Egypt. Globalization is changing. For the first time, we have a bill that says an international institution has to pay attention to labor market conditions and the environment. Vote for this instruction.

Mr. LEVIN

Mr. LEVIN. Mr. Speaker, today, I join voices with my colleagues in Congress and Armenians all over the world as we commemorate the 83d anniversary of the Armenian Genocide. Between 1894 and 1923, approximately two million Armenians were massacred, persecuted, or exiled by the Ottoman Empire. Today, fewer than 80,000 declared Armenians remain in Turkey. The Eastern provinces, the Armenian heartland, are virtually without Armenians. The years since the Armenian Genocide have magnified its tragedy, not diminished it. It is true for the hundreds of thousands who lost their lives as well as their families for whom the void can never be filled. It also has been true for all the world. The Holocaust of the 1930's and 1940's has been followed by a number of genocides in the last three decades. The failure of the Turkish government to acknowledge the sinful acts of its predecessors sent the wrong message to the rulers of Cambodia, Rwanda and Bosnia. The failure of countries of the world to take prompt notice of these modern atrocities should remind all of us of the failure of other nations to promptly acknowledge the massacre of Armenians in the Ottoman Empire. In a word, it is the duty of all Armenians to join Armenian-Americans in remembering the Armenian genocide. We have been fighting this battle for formal acknowledgement by the Turkish government for many years. We must not give in until the battle is won.

Mr. LEVIN

Mr. LEVIN. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of H.R. 2400, the Building Efficient Surface Transportation and Equity Act. I do so because it is imperative that Congress rectify the longstanding shortfall in transportation funds received by Michigan. For as long as I've served in the House and longer, my state of Michigan has been a donor state. Along with other donor states, Michigan has received far less than our fair share of transportation funding, averaging just 85 cents for every dollar we send to the federal government. Over the last 15 months, I have worked with the Michigan Delegation, Chairman Shuster, Representative Oberstar and others to address this longstanding injustice. I believe the bill before us today represents the only available vehicle to bring about a fairer deal for donor states like Michigan. Under this bill, Michigan's annual highway funding would rise to $872.3 million a year. That's an increase of $358 million a year over what Michigan received under the 1991 ISTEA law. The basic formula remains inequitable; Michigan would remain a donor state, but at least this legislation is a step in the right direction. At the same time, I want to reiterate my chagrin over the failure of the Majority in the House to put together a budget resolution which would make clear how this bill would fit into the overall budget. Where is the Majority's budget resolution? Simply put, this process puts the cart before the horse. This bill is silent on the issue of spending offsets to pay for the increased funding of transportation needs. We cannot just pave over the commitment we made last year to live within the framework of a balanced budget. When 214 of us voted last year to support the Shuster/Oberstar amendment, we were saying: Yes, we need to spend more on infrastructure. Yes, more money has to be made available to donor states. The difference is that we were willing to pay for it. The Republican Leadership in the House is abdicating fiscal responsibility by continuing to delay a vote on the budget resolution. Unless the House Leadership intends to completely abandon fiscal discipline, sooner or later--and the sooner the better--we're going to have to come up with the budget offsets to pay for increased transportation spending. I regret we have not done so before today. My vote today in support of the transportation bill is a vote to continue the process of addressing the longstanding inequities of the current highway funding formulas. The next step is for this bill to go to conference with the Senate. I want to make it clear that my vote on the final conference report will depend on two factors. First, fair treatment for donor states like Michigan. I will not support any bill that does not address the longstanding funding inequities borne by Michigan and other donor states. Second, my vote on the conference report will depend on concrete actions by the conferees and the Budget Committee to bring this bill into line with last year's balanced budget agreement, including appropriate, sound offsets.

Mr. LEVIN

Mr. LEVIN. Mr. Speaker, tonight's process is such a sham. It brings shame on its perpetrators. They use the argument about free speech when it comes to campaign reform, but they thwart free speech right on this floor. Public cynicism is already too high. They are only going to increase it. There is already too much money in politics. They are going to bring in more. They talk about coercion, even though they know every union member who wants out in terms of use of his or her money has the right to exercise that. I want to say one thing to each and every one of them, those of us who live with the present system should be the ones who take the lead in reforming it. Instead, the Republicans have finally brought a set of proposals here precisely because they know they will fail. They will fail. And you, Mr. Speaker, and company, will have failed the American people.

Mr. LEVIN

Mr. LEVIN. Mr. Speaker, I rise to day to join in the celebration of uniquely talented and dedicated citizen of Michigan, Aldo Vagnozzi. He has had an unusually long and distinguished career in journalism. For about one-half of a century, his beat has been the lives and interest of working families of Michigan. With the AFL-CIO in Michigan, he has dedicated himself to providing hundreds of thousands of Michigan workers with information about key aspects of their labors and the broader issues that affect the well-being of their families. While he served as editor, he was indeed a working journalist reflecting his personal concerns about working families reading his reports and comments. He became a model in Michigan and beyond. His strong beliefs were combined with modesty, a sense of goodwill and respect for the beliefs of others. They helped propel him into elective office with support from people of a wide array of political ideologies and backgrounds. As the first directly elected Mayor of his home city of suburban Farmington Hills, Michigan, he as helped build and strengthen that fast-growing community. Also Vagnozzi can leave his position as editor of the Detroit Labor News with a sense of major accomplishment and pride. Like so many others, I have been privileged to know him and his family over several decades and join all who gather to pay tribute to him on April 1 in wishing him the best of luck in the years ahead.

Mr. LEVIN

Mr. LEVIN. I yield to the gentleman from Illinois.

Mr. LEVIN. But the prima facie case, reading from their own language, the burden is placed on the NLRB. Now what is going to happen here is, my colleagues are bringing about a chilling effect on the right of people to organize. They are letting an employer guess intent and then make somebody prove that that employer is wrong. That is wrong. Already the deck is tilted in favor of the employer under the NLRA, as it has been interpreted in terms of captive audience provisions in terms of the right of people to express themselves on the floor of the shop. They cannot do that. And now they want to go one step further and try to chill the traditional American right to associate, to organize. They are wrong.

Mr. LEVIN. Mr. Chairman, I hope the gentleman from Illinois will listen, because his effort to make this Title I benign is very misguided. I want to tell him specifically why he is wrong. By the way, this has nothing to do only with small employers. Title I affects all employers. So do not wrap small employers around Title I, and do not say it applies only to paid union organizers. This applies to any employee, any prospective employee, any person. And here is what it says. The person comes up, wants a job. This gives the right to the employer to read or try to guess his or her intent. And then if the employer decides what the primary purpose is, it is very clear from their own majority report who has the burden of proof, it is the NLRB, where a charge has been filed that has to show as part of its prima facie case that the employer was wrong.

Mr. LEVIN

Mr. LEVIN. Mr. Speaker, the American tradition has been to organize all kinds of groups everywhere in this country. The National Labor Relations Act was intended to encourage people to organize on the job. This is a bill to discourage people from organizing. What it says is that an employer can discriminate if the primary purpose of a person was furthering other employment or agency status. 50 percent of their intent is not to work for the employer. In that case, there is no protection. Who is going to interpret this, and under what circumstances? If someone is fired, it is up to the NLRB to present a prima facie case showing that the employee applicant on whose behalf the charge of discrimination has been filed is not a person who has sought employment with such a primary purpose. This is going to discourage organization. That is its purpose. There is reference in the report of the majority to paid union organizers. This applies to anybody, anybody at all, anybody who is seeking employment. It also refers in the majority report to the fact that in some cases an employee may disrupt projects or disrupt the workplace. Look, in those cases the employer has the absolute right to discharge somebody if they disrupt a project or if they disrupt the workplace. The real tip-off is right here on page 6. It says ``These agents,'' and it does not have to be an agent, it says here that they often attempt to persuade bona fide employees to sign cards supporting the union. The purpose here is to try to discourage people from signing union cards. Look, this is a deep disappointment to anybody who believes in the right of people to organize. This is class warfare. I have heard a lot of the Members of the majority talk on the floor about class warfare. That is what they are engaging in here, class warfare against working families, blue collar families, and increasingly, white collar families. They should never have brought this to the floor. It will never pass, if it does the House, the Senate and be signed by the President. I do not know whose interest Members are trying to serve. It is not the interests of typical American working families.

Mr. LEVIN

Mr. LEVIN. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of this resolution. There is no defense to the massacre of 80 ethnic Albanians in Kosovo, innocent men, women and children. There are not two sides to this story of murder. Ethnic cleansing is evil, pure and simple. This is not an internal affair of Serbia. This could spill over into other places. When I was co-chair of the Congressional Delegation that went to Belgrade a few years ago, we told Mr. Milosevic very clearly we would hold him responsible for his actions. This resolution does exactly that. I remember the faces of people in Sarajevo that war, conflict and death might be over. And now the Serbs have brought destruction and death to Kosovo. We raise our voices to say to the Serbian government, no more. This resolution should be passed unanimously by this body.

Mr. LEVIN

Mr. LEVIN. Madam Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished gentlewoman from California (Ms. Woolsey). (Ms. Woolsey asked and was given permission to revise and extend her remarks.)

Mr. LEVIN. Madam Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from North Dakota (Mr. Pomeroy).

Mr. LEVIN. Madam Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson-Lee). (Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas asked and was given permission to revise and extend her remarks.)

Mr. LEVIN. Madam Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the most distinguished gentlewoman from Connecticut (Mrs. Kennelly).

Mr. LEVIN. Madam Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Madam Chairman, I am proud to be cosponsor with the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Shaw), chairman of the committee, on this legislation. This Congress has been at this problem for a decade, and we are talking here about the children of America and children who are in great need. We made some progress in the last 10 years. Support orders have become more numerous and they have become more enforced. But it remains this today: About half of the children where there is a separation and a divorce in most cases do not have a support order. And in the half of the cases where they do, there is not in many of them full compliance with that order. Madam Chairman, this is an essential part of our effort to provide strength, support within the family where there is need. The gentleman from Florida and his staff have worked endlessly with our staff and with the administration, and I am proud to be a cosponsor of the Shaw- Levin bill on child support. Madam Chairman, I want to emphasize that I think this is a tough bill. The earlier legislation had penalties that essentially were never going to be implemented. And penalties that are so far off the chart that they will never happen are really not penalties. What the gentleman from Florida and I and others have done here is to replace penalties that were not enforceable with penalties that indeed, as the gentleman has said, are going to be implemented. The States that have not met the deadline are going to pay a realistic price, and the gentleman has outlined how they will be implemented, starting with 4 percent of the child support administrative funds. We do allow an alternative where States have counties which have developed elaborate systems and effective systems, those States where they can piece together a system so it is fully integrated as if it were a single system can ask HHS for a waiver. That authority is within HHS. And all States must be forewarned if they are going to ask for a waiver, they have to come up with a system that is going to be as efficient, as quick, as subject to complete implementation as if there were a single integrated system. We also provide in this bill for an incentive system that will truly work, based, as the gentleman from Florida said, on five elements: the degree of paternity establishment, the establishment of support orders, collections on those orders, collections on arrearages, and cost- effectiveness. So this is an important day for tens of thousands of kids of America. What we are doing here on a bipartisan basis is to say to them, the States shall meet their responsibility. We gave hundreds of millions of dollars from the Federal Treasury so the States would implement a system that was faithful to the children who were supposed to be protected. And now, within a reasonably short period of time, every support order is going to be, hopefully, implemented within a State and across State lines. So, again, I want to say to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Shaw) and to the staff, as well as to the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Camp) who is also on the committee, to all of my Democratic colleagues on Ways and Means, and to the staff and the administration, a job well done. We are going to be busy on the other side of the rotunda to see that this time what we pass will become law. Madam Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. LEVIN. Madam Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. Matsui), my colleague and friend who has worked hard on this issue.

Mr. LEVIN. Madam Chairman, I have no further requests for time, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. LEVIN. Madam Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Hoyer).