Sander Levin

Mr. LEVIN

Mr. LEVIN. Mr. Speaker, part of the October assault of the Republicans on Medicare is on Medicare fraud and abuse. Last night, they put into the bill, last night, five or six pages. I want my colleagues to know it is a smoke screen. Mr. Speaker, the conduct that is covered in this bill is already covered under Federal law. They are weakening Federal law. The inspector general says, ``Crippling.'' Justice Department says, ``Seriously undercutting.'' They cannot cover up this assault on our battle against fraud and abuse in Medicare. Mr. Speaker, to my colleagues on the other side of the aisle I say, Shame on you.

Mr. LEVIN

Mr. LEVIN. Mr. Speaker, on October 29, 1995, the city of Oak Park, MI, marks the end of its 50th anniversary celebration. Since its incorporation 50 years ago, Oak Park's recent immigrants and long-time residents have helped transform it from semirural origins into a thriving community that is a good place to live, to work, and to raise families. With the strong support of the Oak Park business community and the tireless efforts of city staff and volunteers, Oak Park has celebrated this milestone with fireworks, public safety programs, beautification projects, an international festival, recreation programs, and musical shows by nationally known performing artists. The year-long celebration comes to an end October 29, with the annual dinner that honors more than 200 volunteers who serve on Oak Park's many boards and commissions. It is my pleasure to share in the celebration and best wishes for continued success and prosperity for the city of Oak Park, MI.

Mr. LEVIN

Mr. LEVIN. Mr. Speaker, from October 23-29, 1995, the city of Clawson, MI, will again hold a red ribbon celebration in its continuing effort to eliminate the illegal use of drugs in schools, homes, and places of work. This year's theme, ``Be Healthy and Drug Free,'' has been imprinted on the red ribbons which will be worn by adults and children as a symbol of their personal commitment to remaining drug free. At the end of the week. Clawson participants in the celebration will sign their ribbons and send them to Congress. I am honored to be the intended recipient of the Clawson ribbons again this year. The red ribbon celebration encourages the community to address drugs as a serious societal problem and especially to reinforce Clawson youth with the knowledge that their peers are drug free. The campaign, therefore, combats the pressure on school children to experiment with drugs, and demonstrates that illegal drug use is not tolerated by our society. Mr. Speaker, I applaud the action of the city of Clawson to reduce illegal drug use in schools and in the workplace, and lend my full support to the red ribbon celebration.

Mr. LEVIN

Mr. LEVIN. Mr. Speaker, I congratulate the gentlewoman from Connecticut [Ms. DeLauro] for talking about this issue, and I would like to say a few words as a Member of the Committee on Ways and Means. Mr. Speaker, we worked on this issue. I was deeply disappointed with the product that came out of the committee: $270 billion in Medicare cuts in order to pay for a tax break, mostly for wealthy families, is bad enough, doubling the monthly premium for seniors in part B, the physician and other provider part of Medicare, is bad enough, especially when we take into account, for example, looking at Michigan, that 85 percent of the seniors in Michigan have an income annually of less than $25,000 and $15,000 is the annual income of 70 percent of the seniors. So doubling the premium is bad enough, Mr. Speaker, but the Republicans went further and they weakened the fraud and abuse provisions of Medicare. They weakened them. Mr. Speaker, I want to refer to a few documents. There are two sets of penalties involved: one is criminal, where there is intentional serious fraudulent action; and the other is monetary civil penalties, where the offense is less serious. Both of them are weakened. The criminal is weakened by adding a provision requiring that the significant [[Page H 10121]] purpose of the effort must have been inducing essentially fraudulent or other similar activity. On this, here is what the Justice Department says, Mr. Speaker. This is of the Republicans that is now in the bill that will be before us on Thursday. ``The proposed amendment will seriously undercut our anti- kickback enforcement efforts''. This is the Justice Department. The Republicans did not listen to them. Here is what the Inspector General of the Health and Human Services department says. ``These proposals would cripple the efforts of law enforcement agencies to control health care fraud and abuse in the Medicare program and to bring wrongdoers to justice''. Here is what the GAO says about the change in the Republican bill in the criminal statute. ``The effect could well be to make it easier to disguise the intent behind kickback arrangements or make disguises currently used more effective in evading prosecution''. In a word, Mr. Speaker, when it comes to criminal sanctions against fraud and abuse, the bill that will be before us on Thursday would make it much more difficult and would weaken our efforts. And, look, the HHS IG points out that the GAO estimates loss to Medicare from fraud and abuse at 10 percent of total Medicare expenditures, or about $18 billion. Why then, Mr. Speaker, are the Republicans weakening these provisions? There is also a weakening of the monetary provisions, the civil provisions, and, here again, there is no reason to do it. Here is what the GAO says. ``We agree with the Inspector General of HHS that this new definition of `should know', which essentially would require proof of reckless activity, would, as drafted, significantly curtail enforcement under the Medicare civil monetary penalty provisions''. Significantly curtail enforcement. Now, why is this being done? The Washington Times, October 4, the headline is GOP's Medicare plan takes hit for weakness in stopping fraud. Why are the Republicans doing this? It is terribly misguided. Searching for a reason, the Speaker, on October 12, said this. ``The speaker defended GOP moves to reduce penalties and enforcement efforts against Medicare fraud by saying it is more important to lock up murderers and rapists than dishonest doctors''. I think the answer is, Mr. Speaker, we can do both. We should, obviously, lock up everybody, everybody who is convicted of murder and rape. However, that is not an excuse to let dishonest providers off the hook. Mr. Speaker, I urge everybody to take a look at this. This Republican effort is terribly misguided.

Mr. LEVIN

Mr. LEVIN. Mr. Speaker, 1995 marks the 140th anniversary of what is believed to be the oldest standing home in Royal Oak, MI. On Sunday, October 8, the Woman's Historical Guild will celebrate this impressive anniversary. They will be joined by their friends from the Royal Oak History Society, the Royal Oak History Commission, and the Royal Oak Historical District Study Commission. Orson Starr first moved to Royal Oak, MI, with his wife Rhoda Gibbs Starr, and their son, John Almon Starr, in 1831. As Mr. Starr's manufacturing business prospered, the family moved from the original log home to a house which Mr. Starr, built with such extraordinary craftsmanship, it is still standing today. The house was originally built in Greek Revival architectural style. The style is still apparent to the home today and is more commonly known as ``Michigan Farmhouse'' style. Despite major changes in the 1900's, interested citizens have been successful in maintaining the home and preserving its history. The Woman's Historical Guild of Royal Oak is presently responsible for preservation of the interior of the home. Through the contributions of the Historical Guild, the city of Royal Oak, and individuals, this historic site is now open for all to see and learn from. My thanks to all those individuals and organizations involved in the preservation of Royal Oak history, and my congratulations and best wishes on this 150th year of the Orson Starr house.

Mr. LEVIN

Mr. LEVIN. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize Dulcie Rosenfeld, who on October 2, 1995 will receive a prestigious and high honor, the Fred M. Butzel Memorial Award for Distinguished Community Service. The Jewish Federation of Metropolitan Detroit is understandably pleased to present this award. Dulcie Rosenfeld embodies the concept of service to the community. Joining the roster of illustrious citizens who have received the Butzel Award, she follows in and has enriched the tradition which is signified by this award. Ms. Rosenfeld's work on behalf of her community embodies leadership, esteem, and commitment to improving life for all people. Mrs. Rosenfeld's accomplishments include, serving as a board member of the Jewish Home for the Aged, the Jewish Community Council, the Agency for Jewish Education, and Sinai Hospital Guild, just to name a few. She is also a past vice-president of the Jewish Federation, as well as a past member of the federation's board of governors for 22 years. Dulcie Rosenfeld also has served as vice president of the Detroit Historical Society and has been active with the Hilberry Theater at Wayne State University. Her outstanding initiative in the field of community service is apparent as she is the founding chairman of the advisory board of the Jewish information and referral service. She also founded the Greening of Detroit. I am confident that all involved in these organizations are indebted to Dulcie for her dedication and incomparable talent. The list of Dulcie Rosenfeld's accomplishments exemplify her wisdom, leadership, and talent. All of us share in the joy of her receipt of the Fred M. Butzel Memorial Award.

Mr. LEVIN

Mr. LEVIN. Mr. Speaker, on Tuesday, October 10, Eldon J. Thompson will be presented the 1995 Troy Distinguished Citizen Award by Leadership Troy of Troy, MI. Through his professional career and civic work, Mr. Thompson has exhibited an enduring commitment to ensuring that the city of Troy continues as an exceptional place to live, work and raise families. Despite facing extraordinary challenges as president of SOC Credit Union, Mr. Thompson has generously shared his time and talents with the community. He serves on the Troy Planning Commission and the Troy Downtown Development Authority. He is actively involved with Troy's [[Page E 1855]] younger generations; Mr. Thompson serves as director of the Boys and Girls Club of Troy. His interest in the economic vitality of his community is exemplified by his service as a board member of the Troy Chamber of Commerce, the Troy Futures Economic Vitality Task Force, on which he serves as co-chair, and the and the Oakland County Business Roundtable. His innovative leadership techniques, his many talents, and his tireless efforts on behalf of Troy make Eldon Thompson an outstanding choice for this prestigious award. I commend him on his success, and express my appreciation for his commitment to our community.

Mr. LEVIN

Mr. LEVIN. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the requisite number of words. Mr. Chairman, I have been listening to this discussion, and I just want to comment about the reality on the ground. Labor management relations are changing in this country. If you go to virtually any plant in the district I represent, you see that. I think there are more auto-related plants in my district than perhaps any other in the country. When you go into these plants, you see a partnership. You see management and labor which has moved away from an adversarial relationship into teamwork. You do not need to change the present law for management and labor to act differently than was generally true 40 or 50 years ago, even 30 years ago, when there was a much more adversarial relationship. The word team means that in reality on the shop floor.

Mr. LEVIN. Mr. Chairman, reclaiming my time, I think the gentleman is using the nonsmoking as a smoke screen. The gentleman really is. It is too bad that the gentleman's side is taking one piece of Dunlop and leaving the rest of it. It is a disservice. It is another example, I think, of your extremism. There is no need to do this. We ought to try to work within the spirit of the Dunlop Commission. The gentleman is polarizing, and I do not know why he is doing it. I do not think you are going to get this through the Senate, and if it were to happen, it would not be signed. Why is the gentleman bringing it up? I am not on the committee that has jurisdiction, but I urge that the gentleman from Wisconsin [Mr. Gunderson] go back to the drawing board, and that you sit down, instead of in a polarized way, Republican against Democrat, you try to sit down and talk about what is good for amicable relations between management and labor, what is good on the work floor of Ford and Chrysler and GM. You go there and ask them. And there is not a single person, I think, of the plant managers who would say what you are doing is a good idea. They say work together, instead of adversarially. You are trying to tilt this balance. You are using the 21st century as an excuse to undo the work that happened in and the progress that was made in the 20th century. Mr. Chairman, I urge that we reject the gentleman's proposal.

Mr. LEVIN. Mr. Chairman, reclaiming my time, I will say, because when you look at the environment, the entire context of that case and what was involved there, it was far more than a discussion of smoking. That is what that case is about. That was not the role of the employer in that case. That case was decided under conservative administrations. What they said was they wanted to make sure that the thrust of 8(a)(2) remained, and that was that employers did not set up nor actively participate in the creation of employee organizations. Now, that is what the essence of that case was about. You are taking that case and trying to exaggerate it and twist it out of shape. That is what you are doing. You are using it as a smoke screen in order to make much more basic changes. Now, what disturbs me is, look, the Dunlop Commission worked on this for months and months and months. They had representatives of management and labor on it. They are unanimously opposed to what you are doing, as I understand it.

Mr. LEVIN. Mr. Chairman, reclaiming my time, the basis for it there was there was an intervention by management far more into the workplace than simply being a partner.

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

Mr. LEVIN. Reclaiming my time, I fully understand that was a discussion. They thought that you should take the developing reality within the workplace and have the law encompass that. What the gentleman is doing is taking one piece of it, and you are excluding the rest of it. I just wanted to tell you, as I understand it, and the gentleman has to face this, that the commission unanimously opposes what the gentleman is doing.

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

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

Mr. LEVIN. Mr. Chairman, reclaiming my time the gentleman made my point. What they did was to come up with what they thought was a balanced comprehensive approach. The gentleman is picking one piece of this. They have stated, as I understand it, they are opposed to this bill. They are. It is contrary to what they were striving to do. Instead of the gentleman trying to promote more of this teamwork, what the gentleman is going to do is to promote more conflict. What the gentleman is trying to do is to allow employers essentially to move in more easily to make it more difficult for labor organizations to essentially organize workers. I think that is a sad mistake.

Mr. LEVIN. Mr. Chairman, the minority report says that the members of the commission, including three former Secretaries of Labor, several scholars, the chief officer of Xerox, and a representative of the small business community, unanimously oppose enactment of this bill. I would like to see any different statement from Dr. Dunlop. My guess is you cannot get that.

Mr. LEVIN. I tried to reach Dr. Dunlop this morning and he was not there. That is my understanding. I will get a statement from them as to what they think about what the gentleman is doing. What disturbs me is I think what the gentleman is doing in the name of teamwork, the gentleman is polarizing. That is exactly what the gentleman is doing. He is taking a burgeoning and I think a constructive development in our society, and that is a less adversarial relationship on the workshop, and is bringing up this idea in the most adversarial way, the most polarizing way. It is absolutely contrary to the spirit of the Dunlop Commission.

Mr. LEVIN

Mr. LEVIN. Mr. Speaker, 50 years ago a young Army lieutenant returned home from World War II. During the preceding 5 years, he served his country with distinction. This young lieutenant is a constituent of mine. He is also one of my dearest friends. His name is Abe Sacks. On October 7, 1995, 1st Lt. Abraham Sacks will finally receive his World War II medals--half a century after his return home from war. Surrounded by his family and friends, Abe will receive the European African Middle Eastern Medal with Silver Star, the American Campaign Medal, the American Defense Service Medal, the Army of Occupation Medal with Germany, the Good Conduct Medal, and the World War II Victory Medal. Abraham Sacks served in the U.S. Army from 1941 to 1946. In 1942, he was commissioned second lieutenant and subsequently served overseas in campaigns in Africa, Italy, France, and Germany. I met Abe 30 years ago. During this time, he has been a devoted husband, the father of two beautiful children, Andrew and Laura, and an active volunteer at his synagogue and in the community. Fifty years is a long time to wait for medals that were awarded but never received. As late as these medals are in being presented, this day might never have come if it had not been for Abe's wife, Bea. Earlier this year, while rummaging through Abe's army chest, Bea came across some old papers that said he was entitled to receive these medals. When Bea asked him where his medals were, Abe replied, ``Who has time for medals? All I wanted to do was stay alive and keep my men alive.'' The time has finally come for medals and recognition for achievement and dedicated service. I join Abe's family, friends, and the entire Nation in expressing congratulations for a job well done.

Mr. LEVIN

Mr. LEVIN. Mr. Speaker, 1995 marks the 150th anniversary of what is believed to be the oldest standing home in Royal Oak, MI. On Sunday, October 8, the Women's Historical Guild will celebrate this impressive anniversary. Orson Starr first moved to Royal Oak, MI, with his wife Rhoda Gibbs Starr, and their son, John Almon Starr, in 1831. As Mr. Starr's manufacturing business prospered, the family moved from the original log home to a house which Mr. Starr built with such extraordinary craftsmanship, it is still standing today. The house was originally built in Greek revival architectural style. The style is still apparent to the home today and is more commonly known as Michigan Farmhouse style. Despite major changes in the 1900's, interested citizens have been successful in maintaining the home and preserving its history. The Woman's Historical Guild of Royal Oak is presently responsible for preservation of the interior of the home. Through the contributions of the historical guild, the City of Royal Oak, and individuals, this historic site is now open for all to see and learn from. My thanks to all those involved in the preservation of this historic sight, and my congratulations and best wishes on this 150th year of the Orson Starr house.

Mr. LEVIN

Mr. LEVIN. Mr. Speaker, the biggest Medicare cut in history, $270 billion, and the smallest possible number of hearings, one, and even in that hearing the deck is being loaded. The majority is picking a dozen or so witnesses and letting the minority pick a handful. What are they trying to hide? The biggest premium increase in Medicare history doubling part B in 7 years, and a lot of people cannot afford this. In Michigan 85 percent of the seniors have income under $25,000 and 70 percent under $15,000. A constituent wrote this to me: Please do not let these cuts to Medicare pass. It really would be very devastating for us. Please, please fight this for us. That is what we Democrats are doing. We are determined to win this battle that is aimed right at the heart of seniors.

Mr. LEVIN

Mr. LEVIN. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize Richard M. Kelley, chairman of the board of directors of Catholic Social Services of Wayne County. Dick Kelley has served as chairman of the board since 1993, as vice chair from 1991 to 1993, and during that time, also served on many board committees. Dick Kelley's outstanding service and commitment to his community is exemplified by his volunteer work with not only Catholic Social Services of Wayne County, but also the Detroit Area Council of the Boy Scouts of America, of which he serves as vice president, Oakland Family Services, and Life Directions. As a University of Detroit graduate, Dick Kelley has dedicated himself to Metro-Detroit. I commend him for his many years of tireless and selfless work on behalf of all people. The community shares its admiration for Dick Kelley with his wife Cecelia and his two children, Kristen and Rick. My sincerest best wishes for Richard Kelley, and gratitude for his years of service to the community.

Mr. LEVIN

Mr. LEVIN. Mr. Speaker, I just want to say in terms of the schedule for next week, I have now read this document, an outline released by the House leadership. I would say to the gentleman from Florida [Mr. Gibbons], it is worse than a blank piece of paper. It says little, and what it says is often untrue. For example, it says that there is no change in copayments that is strictly false. Copayments under current law would go up to $61. This plan, apparently, at least from what we have read in the paper, would push this up to $90 or $100 a month over the present $46 in the year 2002. I simply want to say as to the schedule next week, it is disgraceful. In the Committee on Ways and Means, they have planned one day of hearings, as the gentleman from Florida [Mr. Gibbons] has said. We were promised a plan today. We do not have it. I think it is partly you do not want us to have it until the last minute, and it is also because not only is the devil in the details, but they are having a devilish time with the details. So I am glad the gentleman from Michigan [Mr. Bonior] asked for the schedule for next week. I just want to say this is a schedule totally inadequate for the mammoth radical changes that have been proposed in general by the majority, the details of which are being held back or scrambled with or both. Here it is Thursday, and we still do not have them.

Mr. LEVIN

Mr. LEVIN. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to House Joint Resolution 102, to disapprove the recommendations of the Defense Base Closure and Realignment Commission. It is with great reluctance that I oppose the resolution of disapproval. I do so despite the fact that the Commission accepted a flawed Army recommendation to close the Detroit Arsenal Tank Plant in my district. In my judgment, the Army mishandled this matter. All other issues aside, the most fundamental shortcoming of the Army's recommendation is the lack of a credible estimate of the cost of closing the tank plant. [[Page H 8703]] The Army's original claim was that closing the tank plant would result in a one-time cost of only $1.4 million. When I asked the Army how it arrived at this figure, the Army told me the estimate was based on a standard formula that sets building closing costs at $1.25 per square foot. A buck and a quarter per square foot isn't going to do the job. Unlike most Army installations, the Detroit Tank Plant is an industrial facility that has been manufacturing tanks for nearly 50 years. I sincerely doubt $1.4 million will be enough to close the facility and move the work to other locations. During her site visit to the tank plant last April, Commissioner Steele heard a broad range of testimony from myself and others that raised serious problems with the Army's original closing cost estimate. After hearing the evidence, Commissioner Steele asked the Army to prepare a revised cost estimate by mid-May. The Army never presented a revised cost estimate. The Army's Tank Automotive and Armaments Command [TACOM] in Warren, MI, requested and received detailed closing cost data from the contractor at the plant. Using this data, TACOM prepared a revised closing cost estimate. At the 11th hour, I was informed that the Army rejected the new cost study and decided to stick with its original estimate of $1.4 million. While the Army was unwilling to accept new cost data from the people who actually run the plant, my office received reports that the true closing costs, as calculated by the contractor at the plant and TACOM, are at least 25 times higher than the Army's original calculations. It is being increasingly suggested that the Army desires to transfer the tank plant's work from the private sector to the Government-run Rock Island Arsenal in Illinois. This would be contrary to OMB circular No. A-76, which states that it is the official policy of United States that ``the Government should not compete with its citizens.'' It also would be contrary to the recent recommendations of the Commission on Roles and Missions of the Armed Forces. These jobs should remain in the private sector and in Michigan. So why am I opposing the resolution to disapprove the base closure list? I do so for the simple reason that the Nation cannot afford to spend billions of dollars ever year for unneeded defense installations around the country. At the end of the day, the independent base closure process is the only means we have to close unneeded military facilities. The base closure process is painful. The process sometimes results in the wrong military facilities being closed, as the closure of the Detroit Arsenal Tank Plant demonstrates. The one virtue of the base closure process is that it is unbiased and immune from politics. At the end of the day, it's about as fair a process as we're going to get. I did everything I could to save the tank plant; however, I largely agree with the balance of the Base Closure Commissions recommendations to close or realign 103 other bases and military facilities. Closing these bases is expected to save more than $19 billion over 20 years. I will therefore oppose the resolution of disapproval.

Mr. LEVIN

Mr. LEVIN. Mr. Speaker, on Friday, September 8 a 25th Commemorative Tribute will be held in honor of Walter Reuther. Marking the tragic death of Walter and Mae Reuther in 1970, it will honor their lives and their service to others. In life, Walter Reuther was larger than life, a giant of a figure. In death, he left a legacy that has outlived him, and a strong group of legatees to carry on his work. His legacy includes a number of seeming ironies: Considered by some in the business world to be an enemy, time more and more revealed him as a key figure in helping to preserve, indeed strengthen American capitalism; often in the middle of a number of historic adversarial clashes with management, his Union has led the way toward a more collaborative relationship between management and labor, and sometimes accused of class warfare, Walter Reuther, his brothers Roy and Vic and their colleagues helped create in America the largest middle class in the world. These contrasts were actually a reflection of consistent threads running throughout the life of Walter Reuther: a strong dedication to democracy and a deep distaste for intolerance; a belief in the dignity of work and of the individual who labored. His strength of personality reinforced, rather than undermined, his belief in pluralism. His love for his Union, the UAW, was so powerful that it only motivated him to address its imperfections. I saw his influence first-hand initially as a youngster helping to earn some money for college working in a factory one summer. Walter Reuther's spirit of brotherhood and sisterhood helped create among the rank and file in the plant an atmosphere of people working together, instead of against each other. The plant--hot and dirty--was hardly a haven but it provided a welcome respite from the outside atmosphere in a city often torn by social and racial divisions. Remembering Walter Reuther is important in part in helping us to remember first principles. He was visionary, and that meant that he could see far enough ahead to discern when there was a need for change in order to be faithful to basic principles, and in order to be effective in carrying them out. When history has a truly ample period of time to look back fully to discern the evolution of democracy in America in the 20th century, I have no doubt that Walter Reuther will loom very large. It is only true to ourselves, as people who share his faith in democracy, that we take some time in 1995 to remember him, whom we grievously lost 25 years ago in 1970.