Ron Lewis

Mr. LEWIS of Kentucky

Mr. LEWIS of Kentucky. Madam Speaker, I rise today to mourn the death of President Ronald Reagan and to pass along the thoughts and prayers of the people of the Second District of Kentucky to the Reagan family. So much of President Reagan's life was dedicated to public service. From the summer shores of his Illinois hometown to the silver screens of Hollywood, to Sacramento, Washington, D.C., and his final heroic battle with Alzheimer's disease, President Reagan's vision and confident leadership continues to inspire national spirit, improving quality of life in the United States and extending freedom and democracy across the globe. During his inaugural address in 1981, President Reagan remarked, ``We are too great a Nation to limit ourselves to a small dream.'' His dream, family, work, neighborhood, peace, and freedom embodied the hopes of millions of Americans, shepherding the Nation into economic recovery and renewed national pride while demonstrating an uncompromising moral leadership abroad that brought communism to its knees. He was a man whose love for his country stirred the spirit of his countrymen to a new age of patriotism and pride in America. His keen understanding of right and wrong, good and evil provided the leadership needed to defeat an Evil Empire. His was an exemplary life, uniquely American, and worthy of the love and admiration of so many men and women across the world. May he rest in peace.

Mr. LEWIS of Kentucky

Mr. LEWIS of Kentucky. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to a remarkable individual from my home state of Kentucky. Betty Jane Gorin- Smith has been a longtime volunteer and leading voice in the historic preservation efforts of the Heartland Civil War Trails Project. This extraordinary endeavor is only a footnote to her many years of service in the Taylor County community, as a distinguished teacher, author, and historian. Mrs. Gorin-Smith taught U.S. and world history in local schools for more than two decades. She has also taught at Campbellsville University and Lindsey Wilson College. Her academic and civic awards are numerous. She has written numerous published articles and is presently completing a book on the life of Civil War General John Hunt Morgan. In addition to her work with the Heartland Civil War Trails Commission, Mrs. Smith is recognized as a primary leader of the preservation effort at the Tebbs Bend Civil War battlefield. I would like to recognize Mrs. Gorin-Smith, before the entire U.S. House of Representatives, for her exemplary citizenship and community engagement. Her efforts, past and present, make her an outstanding American, worthy of our collective respect and honor. On the occasion of the Civil War Trails Commission ribbon cutting, I publicly endorse Betty Jane Gorin-Smith as Historian Laureate for the Heartland Region of Kentucky.

Mr. LEWIS of Kentucky

Mr. LEWIS of Kentucky. Mr. Speaker, I was absent from the House on Thursday, May 6th, due to an unavoidable commitment. Had I been present, I would have voted the following way; rollcall vote 147, H. Res. 628, providing for consideration of the resolution (H. Res. 627) ``yea''; rollcall vote 148, H.R. 2443, the Coast Guard and Maritime Transportation Act of 2003 ``yea''; and rollcall vote 149, H. Res. 402, expressing the sense of the House of Representatives regarding the urgent need for freedom, democratic reform, and international monitoring of elections, human rights, and religious liberty in the Lao People's Democratic Republic ``yea.'' On rollcall vote 150, H. Res. 627, deploring the abuse of persons in the United States custody in Iraq, regardless of the circumstances of their detention, urging the Secretary of the Army to bring to swift justice any member of the Armed Forces who has violated the Uniform Code of Military Justice, expressing the deep appreciation of the Nation to the courageous and honorable members of the Armed Forces who have selflessly served, or are currently serving, in Operation Iraqi Freedom, and for other purposes ``yea.'' On rollcall vote 151, H. Con. Res. 326, expressing the sense of Congress regarding the arbitrary detention of Dr. Wang Bingzhang by the Government of the People's Republic of China and urging his immediate release ``yea''; and rollcall vote 152, H. Res. 398, expressing the concern of Congress over Iran's development of the means to produce nuclear weapons ``yea.''

Mr. LEWIS of Kentucky

Mr. LEWIS of Kentucky. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay long overdue public tribute to a remarkable individual from my home state of Kentucky. Kenny Tabb, Hardin County Court Clerk and longtime community leader in Elizabethtown, KY, was nominated 46 years ago for a Young American Bravery National Medal following his rescue of an 11-year-old boy drowning in a swimming pool. Mr. Tabb never received word concerning the status of the 1958 award or appropriate recognition for his heroism. On a summer day in 1958, Tabb, then 13, encountered a young mother screaming for help beside a hotel swimming pool. The woman's 11-year- old son, who could not swim, was struggling in the eight foot deep water, twice sinking below water. A young Kenny Tabb instinctively jumped into the pool, fully clothed, saving the boy from a near drowning. On August 27, 1958, Representative Frank Chelf recommended to Attorney General William Rogers that a Young American Medal for Bravery be awarded to Kenny Tabb. The nomination was sent to a committee composed of F.B.I. Director J. Edgar Hoover, the Attorney General and the Solicitor General. President Dwight Eisenhower later awarded two youth medals to earlier nominees and no Federal recognition was made to honor Tabb for his valor. Kenny Tabb demonstrated unusual courage and a selfless instinct to help others on that summer day in the prime of his youth. His action in saving a young life was an early indication of his character, qualities that have made him a brilliant public servant in the 46 years that have followed. Prior to his present post as clerk, Mr. Tabb served as Magistrate on the Hardin County Fiscal Court, as Assistant Principal at East Hardin High School and Principal at Sonora Elementary. Today, I would like to correct a four-decade old administrative oversight and finally recognize Mr. Tabb, before the entire U.S. House of Representatives, for his childhood heroism and for his dutiful service to the Elizabethtown, KY, community in the years since. His efforts, then and now, make him an outstanding American, worthy of our collective respect and honor.

Mr. LEWIS of Kentucky

Mr. LEWIS of Kentucky. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize the Warren Central Raiders for winning this year's Kentucky Men's High School Basketball Championship. The hours of extra practice under the leadership of Head Coach Tim Riley brought this impressive distinction to Warren County. I want my colleagues in the House of Representatives to know of the pride that I have in representing these students and their families. Everyone knows about Kentucky's love of basketball and the commitment many make every season to win. The Raiders remarkable 29-7 record reflects the great winning tradition of Kentucky basketball. I would like to commend the Raiders for their team work and determination. Third time's the charm!

Mr. LEWIS of Kentucky

Mr. LEWIS of Kentucky. Madam Speaker, I would like to take this opportunity to speak about judicial activism, a grave and growing problem in our current national discourse that is threatening our democratic principles, eroding the consent of the governed, and radically altering the social fabric of our American society. It should be of little surprise that the impetus of this debate, and the modest solutions I intend to set forth, stem from the November ruling by the Massachusetts Supreme Court to allow same-sex marriages and the subsequent rulings on the constitutionality of the Defense of Marriage Act that have followed. I am a strong supporter of numerous legislative measures currently being considered by this Congress, aiming to define marriage as an exclusive union between one man and one woman. However, I believe a more comprehensive solution is necessary to address the broader, troubling trend toward judicial activism, a development with definitive implications beyond just the issue of marriage. America's judicial branch has become increasingly overreaching and disconnected from the values of everyday Americans, many of whom I represent in the Second District of Kentucky. The recent actions taken by courts in Massachusetts and elsewhere are demonstrative of a single branch of government taking upon itself the singular ability to legislate. I believe these actions usurp the will of the governed, circumvent representative government by allowing tribunals of a select few, not elected or otherwise politically responsible, to conclusively rule on issues that are radically reshaping the societal traditions of our great Nation. Clearly, this issue is one about power, not in the raw political sense but in terms of the allocation of government authority between each branch of government, specifically between Congress and the Judiciary, in a federal system that relies on checks and balances to protect our liberty. This is a debate that has been taking place since our founding. At no point is the tension between Congress and the courts greater than in the realm of constitutional interpretation. The Constitution does not expressly provide for judicial review. Instead, the right of judicial review is a practice with origins from the bench itself, established in 1803 when Chief Justice John Marshall ruled, ``It is emphatically the province and duty of the Judicial Branch to say what the law is.'' The Marbury v. Madison case decision provides an extraordinary recognition of judicial power in a constitutional form of government. The exercise of such broad authority, expanded over time through political tradition, clearly has a growing adverse effect on the relationship between coequal arms of our national government. As judicial power expands, congressional power contracts. This is especially true when the power to interpret the Constitution rests in the hands of activist judges anxious to find the latest ``right'' hiding between the lines of our founding document. Our Founding Fathers created three separate branches of government, each with equal checks and balances on the other. Our founders also ensured that each branch, including Congress, play a role in constitutional interpretation, requiring officials in each branch to take an oath to support and defend the Constitution. The framers did not give authority to one branch over the other. Certainly each branch has its separate functions, but debating, defending, and upholding the tenets of the Constitution involve the decision and duties of each branch. As a Congress, we must change our thinking and reaffirm our authority to interpret constitutional issues in concert with, and independent from, the courts. The framers of the Constitution were advocates of serious debate who believed that the deliberation of the political process should always be open to the people. If the courts continue their dramatic move toward self-proclaimed interpretive power, I believe Congress, as the people's branch of representative government, should take steps to ensure equal balance and authority to check the final results. I am introducing legislation today to address these serious, pressing issues in a direct and forceful manner. The bill that I have authored, if enacted, will allow Congress, by a two-thirds majority of each House, to reverse a judgment of the Supreme Court. This additional check may only be enforced on rulings concerning the constitutionality of an act of Congress following the enactment of this bill. In his first Inaugural Address, Abraham Lincoln warned, ``The candid citizen must confess that if the policy of the government upon vital questions affecting the whole people is to irrevocably fixed by decisions of the Supreme Court, the instant they are made, the people will have ceased to be their own rulers, having practically resigned their government into the hands of that eminent tribunal.'' It is my hope that the people and the courts will see my position and recognize the serious problems arising from this growing imbalance of constitutional authority. I urge my colleagues from both sides of the aisle to redress judicial activism, protect the equal dignity of this governing body, and preserve the majority will of the governed by supporting this legislation.

Mr. LEWIS of Kentucky

Mr. LEWIS of Kentucky. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to express my support for H.R. 1997 and to oppose any substitute that would nullify its intent. H.R. 1997 protects unborn children whose mothers are physically assaulted or killed in the commission of a Federal crime. The majority of States currently recognize prenatal injury or death resulting from violence inflicted on the mother as a crime against two victims. H.R. 1997 allows the Federal Government to similarly recognize this dual crime when it occurs within their jurisdiction and prosecute accordingly. On January 7 of this year, 18-year-old Ashley Lyons and her unborn son, Landon, were murdered in Scott County, Kentucky. Carol Lyons, Ashley's mother and Landon's grandmother said, ``Nobody can tell me that there were not two victims. I placed Landon in his mother's arms, wrapped in a baby blanket that I had sewn for him, just before I kissed my daughter good-bye for the last time and closed the casket.'' Mr. Speaker, 3 weeks ago, the Kentucky State House correctly approved legislation to redress single victim prosecution. I urge my colleagues in this Federal body in the name of unborn victims like Landon Lyons to protect unborn victims of violence by voting in favor of this bill.

Mr. LEWIS of Kentucky

Mr. LEWIS of Kentucky. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor three French citizens who, in spite of prevailing politics, have graciously opened their communities and homes to visiting World War II veterans as part of a person-to-person outreach leading up to the 60th anniversary observance of the Normandy invasion. The 70th Infantry Division fought in the Alsace/Lorraine province of France for 86 consecutive days during World War II. The division successfully liberated 58 towns before culminating their combat by breaching the Siegfried Line at Saarbrucken, Germany. During the operation they suffered 835 killed in action, 2,713 wounded, and lost 397 soldiers as prisoners of war. An additional 54 of their number were classified as missing in action. Since the war, veterans of the division have returned many times, establishing lasting friendships among the people they helped to liberate. In return, the people of France have erected solemn monuments to their liberators and routinely decorate the graves of Americans buried in nearby military cemeteries. As preparations commence to observe the 60th anniversary of the June 6, 1944 invasion at Normandy, I would like to specifically recognize three individuals whose consistent hospitality is demonstrative of the goodwill that continues to be shared between many French citizens and the American veterans who fought for their liberation. Mr. Leon Dietsch, Mayor of Spicheren, has hosted numerous receptions during recent years to honor visiting Americans. Mr. Dietsch was particularly instrumental in establishing a memorial on Spicheren Heights, the site of one of the bloodiest battles in the history of the 70th Infantry Division. I also wish to honor Mr. Edwin Neis, curator of the Museum of History and Military at Freyming-Merlebach, France. The museum maintains numerous displays depicting American operations during the battle to liberate the area in World War II. Mr. Neis has gone to great efforts to honor American soldiers and make all American visitors feel welcome when they visit. Finally, I would like to pay tribute to the family of Thomas Kirsch of Spicheren. The Kirsch family has welcomed American veterans into their homes as guests, treating visitors to home cooked meals and rich cultural activities. Their friendship to visiting Americans contributes greatly to the fostering of good French/American relations. Mr. Speaker, in these times of global insecurities, it is refreshing to observe that, in spite of political and cultural differences, the people of the United States and France can still warmly reach out and embrace each other in friendship and respect.

Mr. LEWIS of Kentucky

Mr. LEWIS of Kentucky. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to celebrate the 50th anniversary of the first batch of whisky being barreled at the Maker's Mark Distillery in Loretto, Kentucky. As you may be aware, bourbon whisky is ``America's native spirit.'' It was recognized by a 1964 Act of Congress as a ``Distinctive product of the United States.'' This designation has brought prestige and respect to this fine whisky. However, over the years, the Maker's Mark brand has brought even more. Maker's Mark was created in 1953 by Bill Samuels, Sr. Dissatisfied with the traditional taste of bourbon, he forsook his family's generations-old bourbon recipe and created a new one. By substituting red winter wheat for the typical bourbon flavoring grain of rye, he created a bourbon that was gentler on the palate, yet remained full-flavored. This not only created a whisky with a surprisingly smooth finish, it created a whole new class of bourbon: premium bourbon. Today, every other premium bourbon on the market owes its existence to that first batch of Maker's Mark that went into the barrel in 1954. Maker's Mark is still handcrafted every step of the way at the same distillery, which is the world's oldest working bourbon distillery in continuous operation and has been designated a National Historic Landmark. Each bottle is hand-dipped in its distinctive signature red sealing wax, symbolizing the brand's handcrafted nature. No wonder it has become the top-selling bourbon in the state of Kentucky, the number one call brand bourbon in New York City, and one of the few brands of bourbon that continues to grow in a declining product category. Maker's Mark has brought tremendous economic benefits to the State of Kentucky, not only by providing a steady source of employment for Kentucky residents, but also through regular contributions to local and national charities. Maker's Mark also is a key destination on the Bourbon Heritage Trail, which brings thousands of visitors to our State annually. While the Maker's Mark folks are committed to making fine bourbon, they're also passionate about helping to ensure that their product is enjoyed responsibly. That's why they and other distillers have joined forces to invest millions of dollars in the Century Council, a national not-for-profit group dedicated to reducing drunk driving and underage drinking. For all of these accomplishments, the men and women at Maker's Mark deserve our utmost respect and our heartfelt congratulations.

Mr. LEWIS of Kentucky

Mr. LEWIS of Kentucky. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor President Ronald Reagan on the occasion of his 93rd birthday and to pass along the thoughts and prayers of the people of the Second District of Kentucky to the President and Mrs. Reagan on this special day. President Reagan has dedicated much of his life to public service. From the summer shores of his Illinois hometown, to the silver screens of Hollywood, to Sacramento, Washington, D.C., and now to his historic and heroic battle with Alzheimer's disease, Ronald Reagan's vision and competent leadership continues to inspire national spirit, improve quality of life in the United States and extend freedom and democracy across the globe. During his inaugural address in 1981, President Reagan remarked, ``We are too great a Nation to limit ourselves to a small dream.'' His dream of family, work, neighborhood, peace and freedom embodied the hopes of millions of Americans, shepherding the Nation into economic recovery and renewed national pride, while demonstrating an uncompromising moral leadership abroad that brought communism to its knees. His is an exemplary life, uniquely American and worthy of the love and admiration of so many men and women across the world. Happy birthday, Mr. President.

Mr. LEWIS of Kentucky

Mr. LEWIS of Kentucky. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay public tribute to three remarkable individuals from my home state of Kentucky. My brother-in law William Gambill, Kermit Nethercutt, and William Ott, all employees with the Ashland, Kentucky Water Department, were involved in a courageous rescue of a local woman during the heavy rains and flooding that occurred in my state last spring. On May 5, Mrs. Mary Newmark of Ashland became stuck in mud and waist- deep water while clearing a creek near her home. For a terrifying hour, with creek waters rapidly rising around her, nobody could hear her desperate pleas for help. Gratefully, her shouts were soon detected by three city employees working on a nearby water line. The three men responded immediately, frantically searching for Mrs. Newmark in the dense greenery surrounding the creek. Mrs. Newmark was finally able to end her ordeal by tossing a ball, that she'd earlier cleared from the swollen creek, into the air allowing the men to locate and assist her. The joint effort of Mr. Ott, Mr. Gambill, and Mr. Nethercutt demonstrates a selfless and admirable devotion to their community. Their quick action saved a young mother from what could have been a very serious injury. On behalf of the citizens of Ashland, I am honored to recognize William Ott, William Gambill, and Kermit Nethercutt for their Good Samaritan spirit before this chamber of Congress today. We are fortunate to have their service.

Mr. LEWIS of Kentucky

Mr. LEWIS of Kentucky. Mr. Chairman, I rise today to express my support for the President's supplemental request for operations in Iraq. Just over one year ago this body voted to authorize the use of military force to confront the grave and growing global threat posed by Saddam Hussein's Ba'athist regime. We convene one year later having achieved many successes toward that objective, but face new trials worthy of our continued sacrifice to protect the safety and security of the entire global community. I realize public opinion among Americans is fiercely divided when it comes to Iraq. Criticism is not a bad thing for our country during a time of war as long as it's constructive and does not undermine our ability to defeat the enemy. As it stands, opponents of the war and detractors of President Bush are too easily fortified by a mainstream press quick to underscore bad news and seemingly ambivalent toward the many positive developments occurring each day in Iraq. Several of my colleagues here in the 108th Congress have shared stories of the remarkable progress they have observed during recent trips to the Middle East. Electrical grids are being restored, public schools are open, the banking system is operating, thousands of reconstruction projects are underway and thousands more have already been completed. Most of all, the Iraqi people are free--and with the elimination of Saddam Hussein's rule--the world has taken a giant step in winning the war on terror. 87 Billion dollars is a massive sum. As a conservative, I'm a strong supporter of fiscal responsibility and accountability. But I believe this supplemental is a wise and necessary investment, critical to our continued efforts to secure peace and future prosperity for the Iraqi people. The President's request covers two major expenses--troop support and reconstruction. $67 billion alone will be directed to the operational costs of our military forces: providing for essential equipment and provisions necessary for the safety and strength of U.S. troops. What American could shrink back from that commitment? The remaining 20 billion dollars will undoubtedly be the source of much debate here today. Some believe that American dollars designated for reconstruction should come in the form of a grant. Others argue it should be made as a loan, payable once Iraq rehabilitates its commerce and economy. We should all agree that the United States cannot withdraw from a crippled Iraq and expect a stable government and economy to take hold. Reconstructing Iraq is a top priority for the Bush administration and should win the appropriate support of this Congress. By agreeing to this supplemental, the United States military will have the resources necessary to rebuild infrastructure and restore social order, creating a politically secure and economically sound Iraq. Accomplishing this goal is the most significant factor that will bring our troops home for good. During his address to a joint session of Congress last July, British Prime Minister Tony Blair concluded with a prophetic statement we should all consider as questions and challenges arise in the aftermath of war in Iraq; ``Destiny put us in this place in history, in this moment in time, and the task is ours to do. If our spirit is right and our courage strong, the world will be with us.'' I ask my colleagues to join me in acting in support of our President, our armed forces, the good people of Iraq, and the united freedom of all by voting in favor of this supplemental.

Mr. LEWIS of Kentucky

Mr. LEWIS of Kentucky. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman for yielding me this time. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to express my support for the conference report on the Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act of 2003. For nearly a decade, Congress has attempted to see this legislation become law, and I am pleased that we will again be affirming the message that partial-birth abortion is wrong. There is overwhelming support in the second district of Kentucky and across the Nation for a ban on partial-birth abortions. Eight versions of a partial-birth abortion ban have passed the House since the 104th Congress. This body also passed multiple overrides of Presidential vetoes on this issue during the Clinton administration. Throughout this time, we have seen numerous State legislatures take similar action and vote to end the savage practice of partial-birth abortions in their States. There is a clear and consistent mandate throughout the Nation: partial-birth abortion is wrong and must be prohibited by law. I realize that the issue of abortion is difficult and powerfully divisive for many Americans. There are well-intentioned, intelligent people on both sides of this debate who will continue to disagree. But I am deeply concerned about the value our society places on human life when we tolerate this practice, brutally denying a defenseless, unborn child its right to life. By condoning abortion, and especially the brutal practice and procedure of a partial-birth abortion, our greater human condition is significantly cheapened. I am pleased that so many of my colleagues are taking a stand and acting in support of this legislation. This conference report demonstrates the bicameral and often bipartisan commitment of lawmakers in the 108th Congress to protect the sanctity of human life by outlawing a procedure that devalues and violently terminates its potential. I am also encouraged knowing that at this time we have an administration that is willing to take positive action and sign this ban into law. The late Mother Teresa of Calcutta once said, ``The greatest destroyer of peace is abortion because if a mother can kill her own child, what is left for me to kill you and you to kill me? There is nothing between.'' It is time we act strongly and unmistakably and vote once again to preserve life and ban this gruesome, inhuman practice.

Mr. LEWIS of Kentucky

Mr. LEWIS of Kentucky. Mr. Speaker, I must say the gentleman's comments are very, very appropriate. I am taking a group of 16 Members over to Iraq this weekend to begin to try to lay the foundation for a better understanding of what is happening there by Americans; but to have this kind of outrageous presentation on the floor, which could very well tempt kooks in the world to do things that otherwise they would never think of doing, is absolutely not acceptable. And the House should react the same way the gentleman is reacting. I appreciate the chairman yielding me time.

Mr. LEWIS of Kentucky

Mr. LEWIS of Kentucky. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in strong support of enacting school choice programs. I watched and supported the development of this plan in the Government Reform Committee and I am very pleased it is before us today. There are numerous skeptics who claim that school choice plans lack accountability. I disagree with this notion. Each voucher will be held by a parent or guardian who will demand that their child is appropriately cared for and educated. Parents are the ultimate instruments of accountability. To say that vouchers lack accountability is an insult to parents. Last year the National Assessment of Educational Progress reported the results of thousands of children who took tests to find out how much they do and do not know. From these tests we have learned that over half of the 8th graders in the public school system in this city do not possess basic reading skills. A maximum voucher of $7,500 would allow children in low income homes to no longer be trapped in deficient schools. I would like to extend my praise to Mayor Williams, Chairmen Davis, Boehner, and Frelinghuysen for their determination to provide better schools even when it was not the most popular thing to do. Today, Mr. Chairman, I cast my vote for the young first grader a few blocks from here who will have the opportunity to excel because her parents had more options for her academic future.

Mr. LEWIS of Kentucky

Mr. LEWIS of Kentucky. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the requisite number of words. Mr. Chairman, I rise today to voice my support for the Petri-Olver amendment. I support this amendment because nearly every community in the Second Congressional District of Kentucky has benefited from enhancement program funding. During the August recess, I spoke with people who know the importance of this funding. Everything from streetscaping to structural rehabilitation to historic preservation has been helped due to the availability of these funds. By keeping the mandatory 10 percent set- aside, Kentuckians will see an enhanced quality of life and our Nation's heritage will stay alive for this and future generations.

Mr. LEWIS of Kentucky

Mr. LEWIS of Kentucky. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Hayworth).

Mr. LEWIS of Kentucky. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, there is a sense of fairness, as the gentleman just spoke of a minute ago. In this Nation, it is really a great privilege to live here and to have all of the blessings of freedom that we have and all the opportunity that we have. But along with that blessing and the wonderful aspects of what we have in this great country comes a certain responsibility. One of those responsibilities that we have is to pay an income tax. We have in our system a progressive income tax system where those who make a great amount or more money than someone else will pay a greater amount of taxes, and those that make less money pay less taxes, and those that reach a certain level in this country, they pay no income tax whatsoever. They may pay payroll taxes and other taxes. In order to offset those other taxes, there is the earned income tax credit that gives back to families that do not make enough to pay income taxes the money to offset the other taxes that they pay. Now it seems to me that we have tried in this country to be as fair as we possibly can to all those in whatever income level they may be. When I think about this situation, those that are paying taxes are providing for a lot of things that we all get an advantage for: defense, infrastructure, highways, education, health care, law enforcement, and I could go on and on. When we look at what people pay in taxes, what they actually pay in taxes according to their income, I think we have tried to be as fair as we possibly can. I think those that are receiving earned income tax credits to offset their other taxes is certainly something that I do not think our friends on the other side of the aisle remember or understand or want to even talk about. H.R. 1308, the All-American Tax Relief Act does a lot of wonderful things. It increases the child credit to $1,000 per eligible child through 2010, eliminates the marriage penalty in the child credit, celebrates the increase in refundable child credit, it provides tax relief and enhances tax fairness for members of the Armed Forces that my colleague mentioned a little while ago. It suspends the tax-exempt status of designated terrorist organizations, provides tax relief for astronauts who die in space missions. Actually, the motion to recommit will do damage to a lot of families. The Democrat's motion to instruct allows the child credit to drop from $1,000 to $700 after the 2004 election. As a result, millions of low- and middle-income families will receive a smaller child tax credit right after the elections. The House-passed bill ensures that the child credit remains at the $1,000 level throughout the decade. The Democrat's motion to instruct does not eliminate the marriage penalty in the child credit until 2010, and even then, it only does so for 1 year. Under the Democrat's motion, millions of children will be denied the child credit simply because their parents are married. The House-passed bill benefits middle-income families by eliminating the child credit immediately. The House-passed bill does not deny the child credit to military families. Military families include those who are deployed abroad who are already receiving a refundable child credit, and will continue to receive a refundable child credit under the House-passed bill. The Democrat's motion to instruct would only increase the refundable child credit for some military families by allowing them to take into account tax-free income when they compute their refundable credit. This motion to instruct, I think, is without merit. I ask my colleagues to vote ``no'' on the motion to instruct. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. LEWIS of Kentucky. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. LEWIS of Kentucky. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I would like to respond to the comments of the gentleman from California (Mr. George Miller). I certainly did not say that the working poor are not responsible. They are very responsible. I have been in that position. I have been among the working poor. I know how hard it is to make ends meet. But, I also was brought up in a family, my father a construction worker, a pipe fitter that was many times without a job, that a full day's work for a full day's pay; we accept things in our life that sometimes we do not like. We try to make ends meet many times when that is all we can do. Sometimes we cannot even make ends meet. I think we have provided in this country an opportunity for people that are working hard to receive an earned income tax credit to help them through the tough times. I am certainly someone who believes that we should help those that cannot help themselves that are in need. It is our responsibility to do that. I certainly appreciate our military for what they are doing. I appreciate all the efforts that are put forward in this country by all those who are willing to work and earn a full day's pay for a full day's work, and we should support them and their families every way we possibly can. But we also have to remember the liability. As I said, we have a progressive income tax system in this country. The liability, those who talk about the rich and how much tax relief they are going to get, well, how much are they paying in taxes? How much are those on the lower scale, how much are they paying in taxes? It is always how much refund are they going to get. Well, you have to pay income taxes to get a refund. If you do not pay taxes, we do provide an earned income tax credit. So we are helping. But this idea of class warfare, sure there are families out there working hard, they want to be rich.

Mr. LEWIS of Kentucky. I yield to the gentlewoman from Connecticut.

Mr. LEWIS of Kentucky. Mr. Speaker, reclaiming my time, Enron is being dealt with. No one appreciates what Enron did. It is a disaster for a lot of people, and they are being dealt with. It was really an embarrassment to our country that a corporation and the people that ran Enron acted the way they did, but that happens. That happens. Anyway, getting back to the subject, we are doing everything we possibly can to provide tax relief across the board, provide people that are not paying taxes as much help as we possibly can, and we will continue to do that. But this motion to instruct does more harm to helping families with children and receiving tax credit than it will do good. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. LEWIS of Kentucky. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. LEWIS of Kentucky. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. LEWIS of Kentucky. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.