Sander Levin

Mr. LEVIN

Mr. LEVIN. Mr. Speaker, I am proud to be a cosponsor of the 50/50 enrollment composition rule waiver for the Wellness Plan. I am well aware that the Health Care Financing Administration strongly supports congressional approval of this waiver at this time, given the now certainty that comprehensive legislation to address the 50/50 rule will not materialize in this Congress. The Wellness Plan is firmly positioned to become a full Medicare risk contractor in the Detroit area and beyond once this waiver is achieved. It is the prototype for the type of HMO into which HCFA hopes Medicare beneficiaries will enroll. I urge the leadership to work in a bipartisan fashion to ensure its enactment in this Congress.

Mr. LEVIN

Mr. LEVIN. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in celebration of the 75th anniversary of the incorporation of the city of Royal Oak, MI. Royal Oak is a city with a rich past, a dynamic present, and a bright future. The first surveys of the area were made in 1818 by Horatio Ball, who marked a line oak tree with his initial. The following year, Lewis Cass, Territorial Governor of Michigan, was sent to obtain a treaty and purchase a tract of land embodying the Saginaw Bay region. En route to a meeting with the Indians under the full moon of September 1819, Governor Cass stopped for lunch. Resting under the shelter of Horatio Ball's oak tree, he was reminded of the story of Prince Charles II who took shelter in a great oak tree after his forces were defeated in the Battle of Worcester in 1651. Charles eventually reached safety, later became king, and the majestic sheltering oak tree became known as the Royal Oak. From that story, Royal Oak, MI, got its name. The land at that time was swampy, disease-ridden, and considered uninhabitable. But settlers came, chiefly from western New York. Royal Oak Township was laid out in 1832; the first settlement centered at Chase's Corners, the present intersection of Crooks and Thirteen Mile Road. Orson Starr, who arrived in 1831, was the township's first manufacturer and later a nationally known maker of animal bells. Sherman Stevens, an enterprising young men, arrived in the area in 1835. In 1836, anticipating the completion of the Detroit and Pontiac Railroad, Stevens laid out an unincorporated village in what is now downtown Royal Oak. The first business enterprise, a sawmill, made oak rails for the railroad. The extension and completion of this route fostered growth in the area and caused the center of commercial activity to shift southeast from Chase's Corners to the area now known as Main and Fourth Streets. Churches and schools were established. During the Civil War, the town was known to have hotels and daily mail service. The village of Royal Oak was incorporated by an act of the Michigan Legislature in 1891. The population at that time was less tan 500. Subsequent prosperity saw property annexations and continued gains in population. In November 1921, citizens adopted a charter providing for a commission form of government and Royal Oak, a village of just over 6,000 people, became a city. Today, Royal Oak is a reinvigorated city. The population peaked in 1970; while the population has diminished somewhat since its peak, the city is achieving new heights. Royal Oak has always been a desirable community in which to live and work, anchored by excellent public schools and a community college, thriving religious congregations, and many service and philanthropic organizations. In recent years, it has become a model of redevelopment. Under the leadership of city government officials and community leaders, the downtown has experienced a resurgence and is now one of Metropolitan Detroit's prime destinations for dining, shopping, and night life. My wife, Vicki, and I have the privilege for a second time of calling Royal Oak home. We established our first home together on Rochester Road and lived there from 1957-59. After moving across Woodward Avenue to Berkley, Royal Oak remained our nearby downtown for nearly two decades. We have been Saturday morning regulars at the Farmers' Market since 1957. Our kids played youth hockey in Royal Oak, and we spend countless hours with the other families at the ice arena near Normandy and Crooks. Many of the flourishing businesses started small and we have known the owners and watched their growth. And so, Mr. Speaker, I join with my fellow citizens in celebrating the Diamond Jubilee of the city of Royal Oak and look forward to its continued success and well-being.

Mr. LEVIN

Mr. LEVIN. Mr. Speaker, this year is the Centennial of automobile production in America. At a gala held on June 22, 1996, the Mayor of Detroit, Dennis Archer, spoke eloquently about the impact of the automotive industry, of the role of management and labor in its development, and of the place it carved out for Detroit in this Nation's and the global economy. It is my pleasure to insert his prepared remarks in the Congressional Record. American Automobile Centennial Gala, Saturday, June 22, 1996 Thank you very much, distinguished head table guests, ladies and gentleman. I want to thank Keith Crain, who shortly after I became mayor, came by the office and said, ``In about two years, we're going to be celebrating 100 magnificent years of the automobile, and I think we ought to do something about it.'' I said, ``Keith, you're absolutely right. Thanks for being my next dollar-a-year guy. Would you please take charge of it, and by the way, I want you to work with my point person, Maud Lyon, who is the city's director of the Historical Museum.'' Keith, you and Maud came together with everybody to make this happen. It wasn't just you that could create this beautiful room with all of these magnificent people who are here, but the sponsors--those of you who gave and contributed generously, and to the committee, I want to say thank you very much. Second, I am pleased to bring a message from a friend that I was with earlier today in Cleveland Ohio, as the United States Conference of Mayors was meeting. He writes: ``I am delighted to join my fellow Americans in observing June 16-23 as National American Automobile Centennial Week. More than any other invention in the past century, the automobile has shaped and defined America. Even as it has helped our nation to grow, the car has brought people closer together, advancing commerce and communication, and connecting our cities, suburbs and small towns on an intricate web of highways and roads. In the 100 years since the production of the first motor wagons, the automobile industry has become a source of pride for Americans and an inspiration for entrepreneurs around the globe. ``The car is now an inseparable part of our culture. Our poets, our songwriters speak of the joys of the open road. And for millions of us, the automobile embodies America's freedoms of mobility and expression. This week offers us a special opportunity to honor the pioneers of automotive engineering and the automotive workers who helped build this remarkable industry and make the American dream of a better life come true. ``As we celebrate the remarkable automotive achievements of our past, let us salute, as well, the work of the engineers who are developing the next generation of vehicles--the cars we will be driving in the 21st century. These dreamers and doers are continuing a legacy of progress: innovation, employment and competitiveness that have marked America's automobile industry since its birth 100 years ago. ``Best wishes to all for a wonderful Centennial Celebration and a memorial week.''--President Bill Clinton. Next, and finally, I would like to ask Robert J. Eaton, Chief Executive Officer, Chrysler Corporation; Carolyn Forrest, Vice President, International Union, UAW; John F. Smith, Jr., Chairman, CEO & President, General Motors Corporation; and Alex Trotman, Chairman and CEO, Ford Motor Company, if you would join me here at the podium. The United States automobile industry celebrates its 100th anniversary this year, and it is only fitting that Detroit, the world's motor capital, serves as a national headquarters for this historic event. From June 16-23, Detroit will showcase one of the largest gatherings of antique and classic automobiles ever, along with the most spectacular automotive parade in a half century. As the birthplace of the global automobile industry, Detroit acknowledges its legacy as a city that profoundly shaped the American lifestyle and changed the culture of the 20th century. Appropriately nicknamed ``The Motor City,'' Detroit sparked a century-long love affair with the automobile. Detroit is also home to three of the largest employers in southeast Michigan. Ford Motor Company, Chrysler Corporation, General Motors Corporation, and the UAW. This celebration is a tribute to the inventors, engineers, entrepreneurs and the workers who made the auto industry great. The strength of our society relies, in part, on the advances made in technology. From innovations in manufacturing to design and development of alternative fuels, the auto industry has enriched the lives of all Americans and made our fine city's name synonymous with automobiles. As communities across the United States throughout 1996 are uniting to celebrate this milestone in our nation's history, I salute the American Automobile Centennial Commission along with its four sponsors, Chrysler, Ford, General Motors, and the UAW for its efforts to create a year-long commemoration of this special occasion. The metropolitan Detroit area marks this historic anniversary with exhibits and displays, celebrity appearances and ceremonies. Therefore, I Dennis Archer, Mayor of the City of Detroit, issue this proclamation in celebration of the 100th anniversary of the United States automobile industry. I urge all residents to embrace and celebrate this vital part of Detroit's history.

Mr. LEVIN

Mr. LEVIN. Mr. Speaker, on June 22, 1996, there was a celebration which was held in Detroit to mark the 100th anniversary of the automobile. And what a celebration it was. There was a parade with hundreds of cars that reflected the development of automotive production--from the 13 identical vehicles produced by the Duryea Bros. in Springfield, MA, and in June of the same year, the miraculous machine that Henry Ford drove amidst the horse and buggies in Detroit. There followed a centennial gala. Thousands from all walks of life connected with the modern American automobile gathered to take note of the revolutionary impact of the automobile on daily life, its key role in the American economy, and its growth into a global industry. The guiding spirit of the centennial, Keith Crain, presided over the gala's program. His remarks set the tone for the entire evening. They should be widely read, so it is my pleasure to place in the Congressional Record the speech given that evening by Keith Crain, chairman of the board of trustees of the American Automobile Centennial Commission and vice chairman of Crain Communications, Inc. Introductory Remarks at the American Automobile Centennial Dinner (By Keith Crain) Good evening, it's my very pleasant duty to welcome you to Detroit, and this gala dinner, honoring 100 years of the American automobile industry. As so many of you know, automobile production was bred, but not born, in Detroit. The Duryea Brothers manufactured 13 identical motor-wagons in 1896, according that honor to Springfield, Massachusetts. But it was also in June of that same year, at a site within walking distance of this Cobo Center that Henry Ford first drove what he called a quadri-cycle around the horse and buggy streets of this city and Detroit and the motor car became forever linked in history, and in the collective consciousness of people all around the world. Tonight we celebrate the American automobile, and the heroic accomplishments of an industry whose business became the business of the century, the business of America. We celebrate not only the history and lore of that amazing industry this evening, but a victory of ideas, of national will, of genius and muscle, of sweat, and blood, a victory of men and women and organizations and corporations who bent the way of living of an entire planet, in much the same way they bent the steel, that they molded into the vehicles of the world's dreams. It was my friend and publisher, Leon Mandel, who said, ``It is important to understand how important the automobile has been to our development as a country, whether we like the way we developed or not.'' I think I speak for those of us in this room tonight, and for millions and millions more around a country connected by highways from coast to coast, in saying that we very much like the way America has developed over the past 100 years, and we thank the American automobile industry for giving us mobility and freedom and speed, and for making wheels the pivotal symbol of the 20th century. The names of those responsible for this watershed accomplishment in the social evolution of mankind, are forever inscribed in the hearts of auto lovers. To list but a few is to risk omitting so many, but listen to the history, and the magic, those names inspire, Henry and Edsel Ford and the Duryea Brothers, Billy Durant, Walter Chrysler, Randson E. Olds, Maxim, Pope, Nash, Leland, the Dodge Brothers, Packard, Marmon, Studebaker, Willys, Thomas, Jeffery, Pierce, Stanley, Flanders, Chapin, Kettering, Sloan, Earl, Reuther. We salute these pioneers, and so many of their fellows-- past and present--in our centennial observation tonight. And among them, the name Walter Reuther. For it cannot be forgotten, that the American automobile industry was forged not just by celebrated men with revered names, but built vehicle by vehicle, on the muscle and strength, the will and, yes, the courage, of those that toiled in their shops. It has been a wonderful business, developed by and nurtured by engineering geniuses, great designers, marketing powerhouses, manufacturing marvels and financial wizards. That this business, our business, still exists and thrives today, is testimony to the greatness of the American idea, and testimony to the contributions of all those--known and unknown--that have sustained it for these 100 years. In honoring this most American of enterprises, we must also take time this evening, to welcome and acknowledge our friends from overseas who join us here at the Cobo Center in this great celebration. There can be no question, that the global competition of the past quarter century, has been the most positive development in recent auto history. The buying public, the customer and the vehicles they purchase, have been the beneficiaries of this competition, and that is the ideal. It harkens back to the rivalries, and the pioneering spirit, of the original days of motor car production. Who knows--were it not for this international influence, we might all still be driving 1950 Studebakers. So we also salute America's newest manufacturers, and we thank them for their contributions to this century of growth, and for joining us tonight. And finally, on a local note, we hope you out-of-towners will forgive us some parochial pride this evening in crowing about our motor capital of the world, this arsenal of democracy, this Detroit. Yes, it might have been Cleveland, it could have been Flint or Auburn, but to our town's everlasting credit and fame, it was Detroit. And so we welcome you to a celebration that is both international and local at once, this 100th anniversary of the industry that has shaped America, and all of our lives. We thank those whose efforts over the decades have made this evening possible, those who have gone before us, and those who sustain this wonderful and world-changing business today. And we thank you in attendance, for joining us tonight in our centennial salute to the epic history, of the American automobile.

Mr. LEVIN

Mr. LEVIN. Mr. Speaker, the status quo is gone. The current system does not meet the American values of work, opportunity, responsibility, and family. We have been wrestling for a long time with what should replace it. The key always has been the linkage of welfare to work, within a definite time structure, and with sensitivity to the children of the parent who needs to break out of a cycle of dependency, for her/his good, for the child's and for the taxpayer. The challenge has been to find a new balance, that combines State flexibility with national interest. The first two bills vetoed by the President failed to address effectively work and dealt insensitively with children. If the AFDC entitlement was going to be replaced by a block grant-- which was already beginning to happen through Federal waivers--after the vetoes we successfully pressured the Republican majority to make substantial improvements in day care, health care, benefits for severely disabled children and to retain the basic structure of foster care, food stamps and the school lunch program. In a word, this is a different bill than those vetoed by the President. The bill before us is at its very weakest in two areas essentially unrelated to AFDC--food stamps and legal immigrants. Reform was needed in these areas, but surely not punishment nor a mere search for dollars, as was true of the majority's approach. The question is whether the defects in those areas should sink changes in our broken welfare system. On balance, I believe it is better to proceed today with reforms in the welfare system, with a commitment to return on a near tomorrow to the defects in this bill. I hope in the next session there will be a Congress willing to address these legitimate concerns with President Clinton.

Mr. LEVIN

Mr. LEVIN. Mr. Speaker, I rise today as one of the original sponsors of this resolution to voice my strong support for House Concurrent Resolution 155 which expresses the sense of Congress on the situation in Kosova. In 1989, Belgrade unilaterally revoked the autonomous status of Kosova. Albanians in Kosova, who make up over 90 percent of the population, subsequently voted for Kosavar independence in 1991. Since that time, Serb security officials have waged a campaign of repression that has included widespread torture, beatings, killings, and harassment of Albanians throughout Kosova. Over half of the more than 250,000 Albanians in the work force have been fired from their jobs and even more have fled the region rather than face certain persecution. While the administration has taken an active role, including opening of USIA office in Prishtina, more needs to be done. The administration needs to appoint a special envoy to Kosova to help resolve the crisis. Furthermore, the United States along with our European allies must condition the lifting of sanctions against Serbia with clear and concrete progress on the matter of Kosova. By appointing a full time envoy and linking the lifting of sanctions on Serbia with the restoration of the full spectrum of human and political rights to the people of Kosova, the United States can help to broker a peaceful and lasting resolution to the matter. To not to do so, would be to invite the situation to escalate into a new, even wider conflict in the Balkans. Thereby ending our best chance for peace in the Balkan region. The resolution presents an effective policy for accomplishing these goals. I urge my colleagues to vote ``yes'' on the resolution and send a clear statement in support of the rights of the people of Kosova.

Mr. LEVIN

Mr. LEVIN. Mr. Speaker, one of the glaring shortcomings of this Congress is the utter lack of serious interest from the majority leadership in reforming the broken campaign finance system. Unfortunately, from the very beginning, the authors of this bill have clung to a series of concepts denounced by Common Cause as ``phony,'' by Public Citizen as ``fundamentally wrong,'' by business as ``pandering,'' by labor as ``a sellout'' and which are, by any sensible standard, perversely bizarre. The bill before us today is campaign finance deformed, not reformed. It offers reelection protection to those with the richest friends. It expands the ability of political elites to dominate elections with soft money. And it drives a stake into the heart of grassroots activism by turning elections over to those who would, under this bill, control assets far beyond what they currently do. That's what we're doing here today--voting on a bill carefully and skillfully constructed by those whose guiding principle is a desire to pump more money in politics. We should instead be imposing a tough new cap on contributions from political action committees and wealthy contributors. We should instead be eliminating the soft money loopholes and making it less costly for the airwaves to be used for political discourse. We should instead be promoting greater balance among candidates through a spending limit, especially in the absence of other methods. Should, and could--but we aren't. Instead, we're engaged in a determined exercise to block legitimate campaign finance reform. If you believe it's time to control spending, to reform soft money, and to reduce the influence special interests exert over elections, the best steps today along that path are to support the Farr substitute, and to defeat the campaign finance deformed bill offered by the majority leadership.

Mr. LEVIN

Mr. LEVIN. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of the Schaefer amendment. Pulling the plug on our Nation's investment in solar and renewable technology is shortsighted. The funding reductions contained in the bill threaten to undermine any hope the United States has for energy security. Renewable energy programs offer enormous benefits for a very small investment. I know something about this issue as a company in my district--United Solar Systems Corp. of Troy, MI--developed a solar cell that recently set a new world record for converting the Sun's energy into electricity. This efficiency record would not have been achieved without the assistance of the Federal Government. Most of us are familiar with the solar cells that power calculators and other consumer products. The new solar products developed by United Solar are a full four to five times more efficient. Not only are the new solar cells better at converting sunlight into usable electricity, they are also cheaper to make. Again, this is an example of progress that would not have been made without a public- private partnership. The progress we've made is proof that private industry and government can work together to develop technology that creates new jobs in the United States, increases our Nation's energy security, and protects the environment. At the same time, there is a large and growing world market for renewable energy and efficiency technologies. This market is worth hundreds of billions of dollars over the next decade. If our Nation does not help American companies to develop the technologies to capture this market, we will abandon the field to our international competitors. Japan and Germany invest far more in their nation's photovoltaic programs than we do. The bottom line is that new industries, jobs and wealth will go to the nations who succeed in developing and applying new technologies. If you want to let other countries win the technology race, then vote against the Schaefer amendment. Once again, I urge support for solar and renewable energy. Vote for the amendment.

Mr. LEVIN

Mr. LEVIN. Mr. Speaker, the basic foundations of welfare reform have been clear for some time: moving people on welfare into productive work with time limits and State flexibility, protecting the child who will be a main beneficiary of breaking the cycle of dependency. While I have believed that there was a mainstream cutting across the parties to build a new structure on these foundations, and I have been actively engaged along these very lines, early Republican bills veered sharply in an opposite direction and as a result the President vetoed them. In direct response, the majority moved and there have been some significant improvements in the proposed legislation, moving from no specific provision for health care and woefully inadequate day care to assurance of health and day care as parents move off of welfare to work, better ensuring that States who meet their responsibilities and maintain their effort, not simply substituting Federal dollars for their own, canceling the punitive program cuts for severely handicapped children, restoring the safety net for foster care and child nutrition and creating a structure, though still very inadequate, to protect people who want to work from the ravages of a major recession. The bipartisan Tanner-Castle bill, which I actively supported, and several amendments in the Senate point to several key areas where there is a serious need for further change, especially those relating to the protection of health and welfare of children who are legally in this country, and to really achieving what is most needed for the parent on welfare, for their benefit, for the child and for the taxpayer; that is, work. This motion instructs the conferees to do everything possible to achieve the stated objectives on a bipartisan basis. The conference can be an important step forward on a bipartisan basis toward welfare reform or a backward step on a partisan one leading to further gridlock. This Nation badly needs and wants the former. We must strive to achieve it.

Mr. LEVIN

Mr. LEVIN. Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the distinguished gentlemen from Florida, Mr. Bilirakis, for organizing this special order in commemoration of a very sad day in history. I refer to the anniversary of the 22-year occupation of the island of Cyprus by Turkey. In 1974, Turkey shocked the world and invaded Cyprus. As a result of this invasion, 200,000 Cypriots have been made refugees and over 1,619 people, including 5 Americans, were missing without explanation until just recently. In March, Turkish-Cypriot leader Rauf Danktash admitted in a televised interview that those missing since the invasion were slaughtered. After 22 years and numerous attempts to resolve the matter by the United Nations, the United States, and other countries, 37 percent of the island is still illegally occupied by 35,000 Turkish troops and over 80,000 transplanted ``colonists'' from Turkey--almost outnumbering the original Turkish Cypriots. During this time, the Turkish Cypriots have engaged in an effort to cleanse the cultural heritage of the occupied territory. The names of villages and towns have been given Turkish names and Greek churches have been looted, desecrated, or converted to mosques or, in some instances, stables. In addition, the two portions of the country are divided by barbed wire fence known as the ``Green Line.'' For years, negotiations to end the stalemate and resolve the issues between the two countries have been stonewalled by the Turkish-Cypriot leadership who refuse to negotiate in good faith. This fact has only been compounded by the steady escalation of aggression by Turkey against Greece and Cyprus over the past year. During this time, Turkey has initiated a number of very serious provocations including the January attempt to annex Imia, an island in the Aegean which is internationally recognized as Greek territory. In addition, overflights of Greek territories by Turkish combat aircraft has escalated from an average of 21 per year from 1988-1992, to an incredibly provocative 852 per year. On Cyprus last month, Turkish soldiers shot an unarmed Greek teenager and then prevented U.N. peacekeepers from rescuing the boy by firing upon them. Finally, in a direct violation of agreements between the United States and Turkey on the use of American made and leased equipment, the Turkish Government has begun using U.S.-made military equipment in their campaign of intimidation. In January of this year, Turkish Armed Forces landed nearly 100 American-made tanks on occupied Cyprus. The United States cannot continue to let this egregious behavior to go on without a strong response. I am pleased by the President's decision to send special envoy, Richard Beattie to Cyprus to help bring an end to the island's partition. This the first attempt in nearly 5 years undertaken by the United States to mediate the dispute. It is my hope this endeavor will be more fruitful than the last and finally bring an end to this terrible incident. In the meantime, the United States needs to take a firm stand against these provocations and urge the Turkish Government to cease its acts of aggression against its neighbor and to agree to resolve the issue of Cyprus. If the situation is not dissolved soon, we stand the very real chance of an even larger conflict in south central Europe and the possibility of it rekindling the flames of war throughout the Balkans.

Mr. LEVIN

Mr. LEVIN. That is simply not true.

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

Mr. LEVIN. I have read it.

Mr. LEVIN. Madam Chairman, compliance is not an increase.

Mr. LEVIN. Madam Chairman, I yield myself 10 seconds. To the gentleman from Florida [Mr. Shaw], what we force Republicans to take out in the EITC change relating to rates, Democrats do not put back in period. That is a fib. Madam Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from California [Mr. Becerra]. (Mr. BECERRA asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. LEVIN. Madam Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the distinguished gentlewoman from New York [Mrs. Maloney]. (Mrs. MALONEY asked and was given permission to revise and extend her remarks.)

Mr. LEVIN. Madam Chairman, the Republican bill is weak on work. It does not provide the resources, according to CBO. I want to say something, though, to my friend, the gentleman from Florida [Mr. Shaw], on the tax subject. Look, we forced you to drop your tax increases on the working poor. They were in your bill and you know it. We forced them out. Every bit of the EIT change in Castle-Tanner relates to compliance.

Mr. LEVIN. Madam Chairman, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. LEVIN. Madam Chairman, I take my time back. The gentleman is 100 percent wrong. You had a phasing down of the amount of money people could earn and still be eligible for the EITC. You had changes in terms of calculation of Social Security and its impact on EITC. We do not change the substance of the EITC law as it affects the working poor. We forced you not to do that, so do not use that sham argument. We say there should be compliance. We say the law should be followed. That is where all of our money is, and it is disgraceful that you do not have it in, and that you for months and months wanted to hit the working poor. Shame on you for using that argument.

Mr. LEVIN. Madam Chairman, I want to tell the gentleman from Ohio I fully share, and indeed I have worked hard for the concept, off of welfare and into work, with time limits. But this amendment goes far beyond it. Take the State of Michigan in the early 1980's. We had unemployment rising for 3 years in a row. We had about 115,000 more people on food stamps. In the Detroit metropolitan area, unemployment did not hit the 10 percent mark at any point. So what about people, able bodied, who have been working all their lives, who are thrown out on the streets because there is no work? They had been on food stamps for 3 months 10 years earlier. What the gentleman is saying to those people: Starve. Oh, Members say all they have to do is get a job through workfare. Is there a workfare program in Michigan for 50,000 people or 100,000 people thrown out of work in a recession? Of course there is not. I believe unequivocally people on welfare, able bodied, get to work with the adequate support protections in Castle-Tanner. What I do not say is to the hard-working person, with or without kids, if you cannot find a job, if you are working hard, looking hard to find one, we are going to say you starve, because 10 years ago you were on food stamps for 3 months. Yes, Madam Chairman, I think this shows the difference between the two bills. They just insist on thinking tough means mean. I think tough means getting people off of welfare to work, but not hurting the hard- working person who hits hard times. Vote against this amendment. It has been considered in the Senate before and rejected, across the board, on a bipartisan basis. This violates the spirit of getting tough on work but not being mean to kids or mean to anybody else.

Mr. LEVIN

Mr. LEVIN. Mr. Speaker, welfare reform is essential. It is about getting people off welfare into work and helping, not hurting, the child; in a word, tough on work, protective of children. That is the American value. When this process started last year, the Republican proposals were weak on work, tough on kids, not providing any additional resources to States to help move welfare recipients into work, causing people to go without health care if they went to work, providing no or inadequate day care for children, hitting severely handicapped kids, and raising taxes on low- to moderate-income working families. The Republicans have moved away in some areas from extreme or inadequate positions, but they have considerably further to go. Castle- Tanner is much stronger on work and providing resources to the States to get people to work, in requiring States to use Federal moneys for welfare to work, not for other purposes, and in making sure that if a recession hits, people who want to work or kids who are innocent bystanders do not get hurt. Taking food from kids is not welfare reform, whether the parent is a citizen or other legal resident. The Republican bill does far too much of this. Tanner-Castle is more protective of children. Tanner-Castle has been the only bipartisan effort in the House. We need more, not less of such effort. The only way to achieve more is to vote for Tanner-Castle and against the Republican bill. That is the best hope that in the end welfare reform will be what it must be, not a political football but an instrument to break the cycle of dependency for the sake of parents, surely of their children, and for taxpayers who foot the bill.

Mr. LEVIN

Mr. LEVIN. Madam Chairman, let me respond briefly to a couple of points. First of all, on time limits. The time limits remain in Tanner-Castle. There are exceptions in both bills. They have a 20-percent exemption allowed to the States. Castle- Tanner has a similar provision. The question is whether the States should have the flexibility to use Federal funds for vouchers for kids because of the time limit. They say ``no.'' They say they are for flexibility, but if the States want to use Federal funds not for cash benefits but to help kids, they say ``no.'' Castle-Tanner is much better in that respect. EITC, I want to reiterate, we do not touch the rates. They tried to in their original bill. We scared them off it. We do not change the basic EITC. We get savings through compliance efforts, basically leaving the structure as it is, and it is so ironic they would come here after trying to take 15, 20 billion from EITC, from working families, and all of a sudden they are defending them.

Mr. LEVIN. All right, look. They agreed with us finally. All right, they can call it what they want. We hit them hard, and they finally said ``OK,'' as they did on a lot of other things where they were weak on work and hard on kids. They have moved our way. They simply have to come further. Now I want to talk about States getting people off welfare into work, which is so critical. CBO says, ``You do not have money to help States get people off welfare to work.'' That is the key. Now they say there is an authorization now. They have given this to the gentleman from Delaware [Mr. Castle]. The rumors are they will take it back in a conference. I hope those rumors are wrong. But I do not care, because it is only an authorization. What Tanner-Castle says is we are serious about welfare to work. We are tough on that and we are going to provide the States the moneys to do it. They provide zero, and CBO says they are between $9 and $12 billion short. If my colleagues want a bill that is tough on work, getting people off welfare to work, and does not hurt kids, Castle-Tanner is much closer to the mark, and they are further away. Vote for the Tanner- Castle bill. Vote for it, and then against the Republican bill. I hope the Tanner-Castle bill will pass. It is the only bipartisan effort so far. We need to keep that bipartisan spirit going. Vote for it.

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

Mr. LEVIN

Mr. LEVIN. Mr. Speaker, on Sunday, July 21, the American Italian Professional and Business Women's Club will celebrate its 40th anniversary. AMIT, as it is known, was established in 1956 by Maria Lalli and Maria Giuliano to further cultural, charitable, and social functions, with an emphasis on Italian culture whenever the opportunity arises. The club derives its membership from women who are of Italian descent or are married to a man of Italian descent. AMIT's list of beneficiaries includes a broad range of organizations around the world. Missions and health care institutions in Burma, India, and Detroit, MI, children and orphans in the United States and Italy, Italian earthquake and flood relief efforts, public television, symphony orchestras, and Orchestra Hall in Detroit, all have been assisted by their interest and generosity. A special focus of their support is those places which celebrate Italian culture: The Italian American Cultural and Community Center, the Italian Heritage Room at Wayne State University, and the Church of San Francisco. Social functions arranged around artistic and cultural presentations provide the funds for AMIT's charitable work. The club is proud to have presented lectures by the daughters of distinguished Italian scientists Guglielmo Marconi and Enrico Fermi. They have sponsored book and author luncheons featuring Italian-American authors or writers on Italian subjects, and have promoted events at the Detroit Institute of Arts when Italian artists were on special exhibition. Italian musicians, both established artists and prodigies, have been presented in recital. Now at the close of its fourth decade of activity, AMIT boasts several families with multiple generations of membership and leadership. The Giuliano-Baker family takes great pride in its four successive generations of women who have served the club as president, beginning with the first president and co-founder, Maria Giuliano. Mr. Speaker, I congratulate the American Italian Professional and Business Women's Club on achieving 40 years of outstanding service to the community, and I wish them many more years of successful endeavor. Our Nation's strength lies, in part, in groups such as AMIT whose members take their place in American life while fostering appreciation for the future of their homeland.