Karen McCarthy

Ms. McCARTHY of Missouri

Ms. McCARTHY of Missouri. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support for H.R. 13, legislation to reauthorize the Museum and Library Services Act. I want to thank my colleagues, Mr. Hoekstra, from Michigan, and Mr. Hinojosa, from Texas, for their efforts on behalf of our nation's museums and libraries. As a former teacher, I have witnessed firsthand the power of libraries. Libraries in my district and across the Nation offer citizens the tools they need to stay informed, keep in touch with people far and wide, and be an active part of this community and world. They are critical to our efforts to educate our citizens. In my own district, thanks to the help of thousands of volunteers and donors, the main branch of the Kansas City library will soon open a state of the art facility in the newly renovated First National Bank Building located in downtown Kansas City. When it opens in the spring of 2004, the new library will feature expanded community meeting spaces, 107 more networked public computers, and 110 network ports for public use. In addition to its historical preservation, what is especially exciting about this project is the amount of public-private collaboration that has gone into the process. And that is what this bill today is all about. The Institute for Museum and Library Services has been a model for collaboration between the Federal government and local communities and libraries. Since its inception in 1996, IMLS has provided more than $16.7 million to support library and museum activities in Missouri. The Kansas City Public Library has received considerable support, and the Nelson-Atkins Museum of Art has also benefited from IMLS funding. The Museum and Library Services Act has made a difference in libraries and communities all over America and this reauthorization will help us continue that legacy. Since this legislation was first passed in 1996, our nation has continued to lead the digital revolution. The Internet, e-mail, and wireless technologies have transformed the way we work and communicate. Unfortunately, many Americans are cut off from the jobs and economic benefits that these amazing technological advances offer. Libraries are an important part of our efforts to bridge this divide. They offer networked public computers, access to the Internet, and personalized assistance. Today's legislation will provide funding for local communities to improve and expand these efforts. Mr. Speaker, all of us agree that our libraries and museums are an integral part of our communities. Unfortunately, in these tough economic times, these vital community resources are often slated for funding cuts. The legislation we approve today offers a helping hand. I urge my colleagues to support this bill.

Ms. McCARTHY of Missouri

Ms. McCARTHY of Missouri. Mr. Speaker, on rollcall No. 458, the Toomey amendment, I was unavoidably detained. Had I been present, I would have voted ``nay.''

Mrs. McCARTHY of Missouri

Mrs. McCARTHY of Missouri. Mr. Speaker, on rollcall No. 459 I was unavoidably detained. Had I been present, I would have voted ``aye.''

Ms. McCARTHY of Missouri

Ms. McCARTHY of Missouri. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of the Democratic motion to provide adequate funding for AmeriCorps, one of our Nation's most important volunteer programs. I applaud President Bush for his support of community service. It is essential to provide volunteers with the means to do so. AmeriCorps has been a shining example of the difference volunteers can make in communities across the country. Because of AmeriCorps, more than 38,000 people of all ages and backgrounds are helping to solve problems and strengthen communities through 108 national service projects across Missouri. Serving with national and community nonprofit organizations, faith-based groups, schools, and local agencies, these individuals tutor and mentor children, coordinate after-school programs, build homes and community gardens, conduct neighborhood patrols, organize local homeland security efforts, respond to disasters, and recruit and manage volunteers, to name a few of their contributions. These programs reach thousands of children, many of whom will be left without mentorship opportunities and after school guidance if AmeriCorps is not fully funded. Mr. Speaker, I support the $100 million in additional funding for AmeriCorps, and it should be provided for in this bill. The National and Community Service announced in June that there would be cuts of 50 to 90 percent to State AmeriCorps budgets and corps member slots. This must be remedied so that AmeriCorps and its volunteers can continue their selfless contributions to our country.

Ms. McCARTHY of Missouri

Ms. McCARTHY of Missouri. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor two great Missourians, Governor Warren E. Hearnes and his wife, State Representative Betty Cooper Hearnes on their birthdays. I salute the accomplishments of Governor Hearnes and Representative Hearnes. I worked alongside Betty in the General Assembly. In true fashion, she does not want to be recognized for her accomplishments, but I would be remiss not to mention her great contributions to our State as an elected official and First Lady. The Hearnes have shared significant roles in the State of Missouri, shaped and crafted sound public policy, and served as beacons of light for our citizens and our party. The Hearnes celebrate the same birthday and today marks Warren's 80th birthday and Betty's 76th birthday. I salute the remarkable longevity of their lives together and their lifelong commitment to public service. Warren Hearnes is renowned for his tenacity and principles as a public official. Governor Hearnes is a graduate from West Point Military Academy, as well as from the University of Missouri Columbia Law School. After serving in the U.S. Army during World War II, he was elected to the Missouri House of Representatives the following year, and later went on to serve as Secretary of State. He will long be remembered for his unwavering stance to promote state autonomy. Governor Hearnes' fight with the Johnson administration often made him disliked by the presidency but admired by his colleagues in the National Governors Conference throughout the sixties and seventies. During his time in office, the state legislature overwhelmingly approved and the people ratified a constitutional amendment to allow future Governors of Missouri to serve two consecutive four year terms. Thus, Governor Hearnes ran for and won a second term with the largest percentage of popular votes in Missouri history. In his second term he facilitated reforms to improve universities and colleges, ushered in massive road improvements, and supported the troops in Vietnam but questioned the administration's plan to pursue such a war. Following his term in office, he continued his public advocacy by spending sixteen years working as the Executive Director of the Southeast Missouri Legal Services, an agency to assist people with low incomes in dire need of legal counseling. Like her husband, Betty Hearnes is an amazing mentor and friend to everyone she meets. She was an excellent model and confidante during the seventies and eighties when the Missouri legislature had very few women in office. In 1979, Betty won the same Missouri House seat her husband held years prior. In addition, she served as Chairwoman of the Democratic State Committee, President of the Mississippi County Industrial Development Authority, as a major facilitator of the Warren E. Hearnes Museum, and a volunteer currently involved in countless civic and charity projects. Today Warren and Betty continue to spend time in Charleston, Missouri serving those most in need. Their endless generosity is an inspiration to us all. I congratulate Warren and Betty Hearnes on this meaningful occasion and shared birthday. I am grateful for their friendship and am honored to recognize them for their vast personal accomplishments and lifetime of public service.

Ms. McCARTHY of Missouri

Ms. McCARTHY of Missouri. Mr. Speaker, I believe the rule to H.R. 2210 will dismantle Head Start which, in these desperate economic times, should be strengthened, not weakened. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in opposition to the rule on the School Readiness Act, which would seriously jeopardize the Head Start early education program. For decades, Head Start has been a successful program dedicated to helping disadvantaged children receive the preparation they need to succeed in school and to lead better lives. This bill would leave our neediest children behind by shortchanging the Head Start program and putting its federal funding at risk in States that are mired in their own budget woes. In my district of Kansas City, MO, over 3,800 children are enrolled in Head Start programs and they depend on help from the Federal Government. Head Start is one of the oldest and most thoroughly studied early education programs in America. Studies find that children involved in Head Start programs are less likely to repeat a grade and to require special education services than disadvantaged children who are not lucky enough to experience Head Start. Furthermore, Head Start students are more likely to graduate high school and to attend college. This past Fall a young mother named Michelle enrolled her son, August, in a Head Start program in Kansas City. Her two older daughters had already successfully completed the program, but Michelle worried that her son's speech and physical disabilities would put him far behind his classmates when he started kindergarten. The Head Start Mental Health and Disability Consultant coordinated his efforts with the County Health Department and the North Kansas City School District to insure that Michelle's fears would not become a reality. An Individualized Education plan was put into place and August was enrolled in speech therapy classes. Today, all of Michelle's children are doing well academically and socially, and she stays involved in Head Start as a volunteer so that she can give back to the program that meant so much to her and her children. The measure before us (H.R. 2210) authorizes barely enough funds to even cover the cost of inflation, let alone expand Head Start programs. It will actually reduce the number of children in the program. It provides no resources for teacher training and will allow discrimination in hiring practices. But the part of this legislation that concerns me the most is that it puts Head Start money into the hands of States that will be able to use these block grant funds to defray their own deficits rather than expanding the program to reach students. Governor Holden of Missouri shares my concern that resources usually suffer when a federal program becomes a block grant. It is his fear, and mine, that federal mandates will be shifted to deficit wracked states such as mine, forcing them to do more with less money. Head Start works in Missouri, and it works all over the country. Let's put federal dollars into education programs such as Head Start that have been proven to make students ready for a successful school experience and a productive life. It's the best investment we can make for our Nation's future. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Ms. McCARTHY of Missouri

Ms. McCARTHY of Missouri. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of this amendment. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in support of the Slaughter-Shays-Dicks- Leach Amendment to increase funding for the National Endowment for the Arts (NEA) and National Endowment for the Humanities (NEH). These endowment programs are vital to supporting the creation, preservation and presentation of the arts and humanities in America. In my district of Kansas City, Missouri, NEA and NEH grants have brought partnership projects such as the Coterie Theater and the Friends of Alvin Ailey's AileyCamp that help provide collaborative artist and youth activities which have enriched the local economy and educational experiences of our children. Studies have demonstrated that reading and math scores improve with participation in arts education classes. A U.S. Department of Justice study found that arts education reduced student delinquency in San Antonio by 13 percent and increased the communications skills of students in Atlanta by 57 percent. Test Results from the College Board have shown that college bound students involved in the arts and humanities have higher overall SAT scores than other students. There is no excuse for funding for the NEA at a level that is 30 percent below the 1994 level. Adopting the amendment before us would increase funding by $10 million for NEA and $5 million for the NEH. This would bring NEA and NEH funding to the level that the House approved last year by a vote of 234-192, but was later stripped from the bill in conference. I urge my colleagues to support this amendment. Investment in the arts and humanities has proven to be an invaluable contribution to American economy and the future success of our children.

Ms. McCARTHY of Missouri. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the requisite number of words. (Ms. McCARTHY of Missouri asked and was given permission to revise and extend her remarks.)

Ms. McCARTHY of Missouri

Ms. McCARTHY of Missouri. Mr. Speaker, the Republican Medicare bill fails to provide seniors with meaningful prescription drug coverage and is an attempt to end Medicare as we know it. With their plan seniors will have no assurance from 1 year to the next on what plan will be available to them, what drugs will cost them nor what doctors will serve them. Under their plan many seniors will have to pay a premium without receiving any assistance with their drug costs. Seniors deserve affordable prescription drugs without gaps in coverage. Our seniors should not be forced to pay more to keep their choice of doctors. Not only would the plan before us limit or charge extra for choice, it would force seniors to go to a primary care physician before seeing a specialist. The Republicans have produced a plan that fails to make prescription drugs more affordable and, disturbingly, ends the Medicare system that has been an irreplaceable safety net to millions of people for the past four decades. Instead they are creating a plan that costs seniors a lot and gives them very little. Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to oppose H.R. 1, the so-called Medicare Prescription Drug and Modernization Act of 2003, and to support the Democratic motion to recommit which will preserve Medicare and provide our seniors with the affordable prescription drugs they need.

Ms. McCARTHY of Missouri

Ms. McCARTHY of Missouri. Mr. Chairman, I rise today to commend the collaborative efforts of my colleagues who serve on the Permanent Select Committee in crafting the FY2004 Intelligence Authorization, H.R. 2417. This measure encourages information sharing among agencies, which is critical to our Nation's ability to respond to threats to our homeland security. There are still important intelligence questions unresolved from our war in Iraq--questions that will, and should, face greater scrutiny in the coming months. This Intelligence Authorization provides added resources that will be used in securing the answers to those questions and we should support it. Mr Chairman, in closing, I want to commend the committee for giving us a bill that strengthens the Intelligence Community and provides new and better capabilities to fight the war on terrorism, and I urge my colleagues to support this measure.

Ms. McCARTHY of Missouri

Ms. McCARTHY of Missouri. Mr. Chairman, I want to commend both the majority and the minority members and the appropriations staff for their hard work on this first homeland security appropriations bill. I realize that this has been a formidable task. Never the less, I am concerned that we have not given enough debate to issues raised by our state and local government officials and our local first responders. For instance, fire fighters in Kansas City have told me that we must develop and fund an infrastructure to communicate effectively with agencies in the same community as well as surrounding communities during times of crisis. Moreover, our local public health officials must have the necessary resources to be adequately prepared to cope with emergencies, particularly bioterroist attacks. As the ranking member of the subcommittee on intelligence and counterterrorism of the select committee on homeland security, I question the Department of Homeland Security's ability to provide accurate and timely intelligence assessments, including bioterrorism threats to this country with the limited resources provided in H.R. 2555. I thank the chair for the opportunity to address these important issues, and hope that in conference the additional funds called for by the ranking member, Mr. Obey (the gentleman from Wisconsin) will be included. The American people deserve such protection. Our first responders deserve such resources to assure the protection of the people they serve.

Ms. McCARTHY of Missouri. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word. (Ms. McCARTHY of Missouri asked and was given permission to revise and extend her remarks.)

Mrs. McCARTHY of Missouri

Mrs. McCARTHY of Missouri. Mr. Speaker, it is with great pride and respect that I rise today to honor Miss Lucile Bluford, editor and publisher of The Call newspaper in Kansas City, Missouri. Miss Bluford passed away Friday, June 13. She had been an employee of The Call for 71 years and editor/publisher since 1955. She would have been 92 years young this July 1. Miss Bluford, as she was known by everyone, was a trail blazer and pioneer for civil rights and equality for African-Americans. She fought both personally and professionally to end segregation and advance opportunities for our community. Through her fight to access graduate journalism school for herself and other minorities and her leadership in the civil rights and journalism communities, Miss Bluford left an enduring mark in her advocacy for equality. Miss Bluford graduated from the University of Kansas School of Journalism in 1932 and joined The Call shortly thereafter as a reporter. In 1938, she filed a mandamus suit against the University of Missouri Graduate School of Journalism for being denied admittance because of her color. Miss Bluford wrote and fought for racial and social justice ever since. She reported about the plight of those unfortunate enough to help themselves, the poor and disenfranchised. Miss Bluford had an effect on making our community and nation better aware of the inequalities existing. Miss Bluford had the ear of those who were wealthy and those who were not, and conversed with the common citizen or those of stature. I met with Lucile many times and I always treasured her company and conversation. I invariably would leave with a much more valuable insight on the issues of the day as well as the rich history she lived--especially her struggles in the civil rights movement. Miss Bluford's leadership and accomplishments have been recognized on numerous occasions, including receiving the Medal for Distinguished Service in Journalism from the University of Missouri. Last fall she was honored by the Greater Kansas City Chamber of Commerce as ``Kansas Citian of the Year for 2002.'' Awards she received throughout her career include the Distinguished Service Award from the national NAACP, an Honorary Doctorate degree from Lincoln University in Jefferson City, Missouri, the Southern Christian Leadership Conference (SCLC) Martin Luther King Award, University of Missouri Distinguished Service Medal of Honor, and the Recognition Award for Unsurpassed and Dedicated Service to the Community by the Northwest Missouri Division of the African Methodist and Episcopal Church. One of the honors she cherished most was the University of Kansas establishment of the Lucile H. Bluford Scholarship Fund for students interested in studying journalism. This lasting legacy to Miss Bluford will provide future generations with the opportunity to fulfill their dream of journalism. Miss Bluford has been recognized for her service to our community and nation. She had served as a juror Pulitzer Prize for Journalism, was a member of the National Board of Directors of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP), and had been selected to make a trip to Israel in 1972 with a group of American newspaper editors. Miss Bluford served on the Governor's Committee for ``Jobs for Missourians,'' was a board member and Secretary of the Missouri Commission of Human Rights from 1957 to 1969, and served on the Governor's Task Force on the role of Private Higher Education in Missouri. She served on local boards of United Way, NAACP, Kansas City Council on Crime Prevention, Kansas City Cancer Society, Kansas City Area Hospital Association, Model Cities Day Care Corporation, Legal Aid and Defender Society, and the University of Missouri at Kansas City Cockefair Chair Board of Directors. As publisher and editor of The Call newspaper, she elevated the awareness of the African-American community in relation to its role in the broader majority society. Miss Bluford was a dedicated journalist from her humble beginnings as a reporter to the position of publisher and editor--she never forgot her roots. I fondly remember how she would dutifully take notes on her reporter's pad with her ever present red pen. As a role model and a journalist, I remember Miss Bluford for her fairness and unassuming manner. She was never one to seek out the spotlight or glory. She spoke her mind to the powerful and stood by her beliefs without hesitation. Miss Bluford has been an inspiration to me. Her dedication and commitment to public service served as an example to all of us who work to make our community better. Mr. Speaker, please join me in honoring her for her service to our community and the nation. Miss Bluford can never be replaced, but her ideals and principals will remain as a fundamental foundation for our community. My thoughts and prayers go out to her family members, co-workers, and friends. All of our lives are richer for having known Miss Lucile H. Bluford.

Ms. McCARTHY of Missouri

Ms. McCARTHY of Missouri. Mr. Speaker, the issue today is fixing a mistake of the last round of tax cuts: the inherent bias of the Child Tax Credit. Although the Child Tax Credit was a great victory for the families of America, it was not perfect. It created an inequality between the poor and rich by excluding 6 million members of the working class from the tax breaks. Recognizing this error, the Senate, with support of the President, passed a bill correcting this inequality. This bill extends the tax breaks to those 6 million previously left out, while also providing an effective way of paying for the breaks. It solves the problem facing us while also being fiscally responsible. By accepting the Senate's bill, the House could get the legislation quickly on the President's desk, expediting financial aid to those who most need it. If only it was that easy. Instead of moving to accept this legislation, the House Leadership has seized this opportunity to further their cause of additional tax relief for the wealthy. They have taken this bill and manipulated it into a tax cut with an $82 billion price tag, which will further contribute to the exponential rise of our nation's debt. Additionally, in a rarely used political maneuver, they have attached this bill to a vote upon the rule governing consideration, not the measure itself. I urge this House to stop these political games, defeat the rule and address equity in the Child Tax Credit by passing the measure agreed to by the Senate and President Bush.

Ms. McCARTHY of Missouri

Ms. McCARTHY of Missouri. Mr. Speaker, it is an honor for me to acknowledge our guest chaplain today, the Right Reverend John Clark Buchanan. What a joy it was to hear his voice once again, inspiring me and others to do good work. John Clark Buchanan is the retired Episcopal bishop of West Missouri, having served our area from 1989 to 2000. He has a diverse background, having been a lawyer in private practice and in the insurance industry prior to his ordained ministry. Bishop Buchanan currently serves as a parliamentarian for the House of Bishops of the Episcopal Church. We in western Missouri are very grateful for the 11 years he served us. He created the most successful Bishop Spencer Place, a moderately priced retirement center for our elderly. He also, in his 11 years, established stable financial funding for the church, and also did extensive planning for new churches in the area outside of greater Kansas City. Key among his reforms and his instrumental efforts were, of course, reaching out and creating and establishing Hispanic missions. Bishop Buchanan lives in Charleston, South Carolina, with his wife Peggy. They have two daughters and two grandchildren. I thank him for taking his time to come and deliver this thoughtful prayer with us this morning.

Ms. McCARTHY of Missouri

Ms. McCARTHY of Missouri. Mr. Speaker, our economy is on the ropes, with unemployment rising, investments eroding, and families feeling increasingly insecure about their futures. We have serious problems. But they will not be solved by wrong remedies. I will vote against this bill tonight for two reasons: First, it is bad tax policy and questionable politics. And second, it is reckless and irresponsible fiscal policy, and we can't afford it. Basic principles of tax policy include certainty and fairness. This bill isn't certain. It undermines rational tax planning or responsible budgeting. It shoehorns a size ten tax cut into a size three budget. That may be impressive acrobatics, with enough twists and turns to rival a pretzel. But it's bad policy, as even the sponsors candidly acknowledge. To fit under the budget caps, the bill has more sunsets than a Florida vacation: now you see the tax break; now you don't. Here for two years; gone tomorrow. Every provision but one in the bill expires between 2004 and 2008, sinking beneath the horizon. Taxpayers are confused now by our Tax Code. This adds complexity. Indeed, it's complexity on stilts. How can taxpayers plan with disappearing provisions? They can't. That's an antigrowth policy. One thing is certain, however. The bill invites tax shelters. It's a bonanza for them. The Senate's curb on tax shelter abuses by corporations vanished in the conference. And loophole hunters will surely shift income from wages to capital gains when possible to take advantage of lower rates. Nor is the bill fair. Look at the numbers. Over half of the tax cuts go to the wealthiest five percent of taxpayers. Almost two-thirds goes to the top 10 percent. But the bottom 60 percent of taxpayers get only 8 percent of the tax cuts, averaging less than $100 a year over the next 4 years. An Urban-Brookings Institution Tax Policy Center analysis shows that 36 percent of all U.S. households would receive no tax cut at all in 2003 under the conference bill, and 53 percent of households would receive a tax cut of $100 or less. For households in the middle of the income spectrum--the middle fifth of households--the average tax cut in 2003 would be $217. But taxpayers with incomes about $1 million a year would average over $90,000. That's not fair. Someone once said that you need to set a banquet table for the rich to get a few crumbs for the poor. This isn't even a few crumbs. The child credit increases from $600 to $1,000 in the bill. But the refundable part of the child tax credit, targeted to working families with incomes between $10,000 and $30,000, isn't accelerated. Twelve million low-income children and their families--one of every six children in the Nation--were dropped by the conferees. Fair? Here's what the Center for Budget and Policy Priorities said: ``The final agreement is, in fact, tilted against lower-income working families with children. The conference agreement accelerates all of the child tax credit and marriage penalty relief provisions of the 2001 tax-cut legislation that benefit middle- and upper-income families, while failing to accelerate either of the child tax credit and marriage penalty relief provisions enacted in 2001 that are targeted on low- and moderate-income working families. The consequence is that low-income working families--the very group most likely to spend rather than save any tax-cut dollars they receive--are largely left out of the legislation.'' There was also case to be made for eliminating the double taxation of dividends--also good tax policy, if we could afford it. But this bill skipped that, too. So it is bad tax policy, lacking fairness or certainty, and missing the reforms and balance so essential to good legislation. And I will vote against this bill also because it's irresponsible fiscal policy. I think America knows we're borrowing money to pay for this, that it deepens our budget deficit, that it risks our future. And the polls reflect that. So America understands. But our citizens may not realize how reckless this tax cut really is. President Bush proposed a $726 billion tax cut over 10 years. We couldn't afford that since our surpluses have evaporated. But this bill will cost far, far more. It's a Trojan Horse of hidden costs. This bill is advertised as costing $350 billion, less than half of Mr. Bush's cuts. But if the bill's provisions, except the Alternative Minimum Tax brief relief, are extended, as all observers seem to expect, the cost through 2013 will be $807 billion to $1.06 trillion. And we clearly can't afford that--deficits as far as the eye can see, as we hand the bill to our children and grandchildren. Mr. Speaker, the goals originally set for this bill are noble, and needed: jobs, growth, tax relief. Unfortunately, the result in this conference bill fall short. There are measures we could have passed that would have provided the right balance and the right help. But this isn't one of them. Instead, it is the height of fiscal folly. And so, Mr. Speaker, this bill is bad tax policy, bad fiscal policy, unfair, and unwise. It helps those who don't need help. It hurts those who do. And we can't afford it. I urge my colleagues to vote no on H.R. 2.

Ms. McCARTHY of Missouri

Ms. McCARTHY of Missouri. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the Democratic Jobs and Economic Growth Plan and in opposition to the Republican tax cut. The Democratic package is fair, fast acting, and fiscally responsible, while the Republican plan is not fiscally responsible nor will it stimulate the economy. Unfortunately, debate has once again been stifled and we will not even have the opportunity to vote on the Democratic package which provides real tax relief to more Americans at no cost to the Federal Treasury over 10 years. By continuing down the path of irresponsible tax cuts that add to deficits and increase long term costs, the Republican plan will do nothing to stimulate the economy. Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan has said that by increasing the budget deficit through tax cuts, as the majority party is attempting to do today, Congress will ``induce a rise in long- term interest rates . . . significantly undercutting the benefits that would be achieved from the tax cuts.'' I am a long time supporter of lower capital gains taxes, but the bill before us takes an irresponsible approach. I am proud to be an original cosponsor of H.R. 44, the Investment Tax Incentive Act. This bill would take a responsible and stimulative approach to cutting the capital gains tax by creating a 2 year investment window allowing investors to lock in lower rates on capital gains by purchasing new assets now. The higher cost of the Republican tax plan before us today does not result in increased economic stimulus because $115 billion of the $297 billion from the capital gains portion will go to the 184,000 households who make more than $1 million annually. This results in an investment tax cut of $625,000 per millionaire household over 10 years. Accelerating income tax rates as lucrative as the dividend tax proposal, so that it returns funds to only a few Americans without putting money in the hands of the middle class, who will spend the money. According to the Urban Institute, the average American household will receive $217 per year in tax relief, which will do little if anything to spark economic growth. On May 2, a Goldman Sachs Economics Analyst said ``the dividend tax exclusion looks especially ineffective as a stimulative measure, providing only 8 cents on the dollar.'' Let's not drive future generations further into debt with irresponsible and ineffective financial policy. The Democratic growth package offers $44 billion in aid to prevent sales and property tax increases and education cuts. If these cuts continue at the state level, economic growth will continue to slow, regardless of what Congress does. For less than 20 percent of the cost of the Republican dividend tax cut, we would give states $50 billion to prevent sales and property tax increases and education cuts during these difficult economic times. Rather than act responsibly, the Republicans have again turned to failed tax cuts policies which have resulted in the loss of 2.7 million jobs since January 2001. History has demonstrated that the failed tax policies of 1981 revisited in the tax policy before us today will result in the same dire consequences for working men and woman in America. To avoid raising taxes, the Missouri House and Senate agreed Wednesday to cut elementary and secondary education fundings by $200 million, which will result in fewer teachers, larger class sizes, and other adverse conditions. As a former Missouri State Representative, I know firsthand the difficulties that the states are facing today having experienced similar budget shortfalls in the 1980's when the economy was soft and impacted by the Regan era tax cuts. Also, a former teacher, it breaks my heart to see critically needed investments removed from educating our children. Instead of the House passing tax cuts that create larger deficits, we should create policies which invest in children, not borrow from them. The Democratic package focuses on job creation and helping all Americans, not just millionaires. The plan expands the 10 percent income tax bracket, giving each working American a tax cut. In addition, the package immediately increases the child tax credit to $800 per child and eases the marriage penalty. I strongly support these two provisions alone for their immediate benefits to working men and women. For businesses, the plan encourages investment and creates jobs by increasing small business expensing and accelerating depreciation for all businesses. These provisions will help business invest today when the economy needs it most. The package also provides 6 months of extended unemployment benefits and broadens coverage to include low wage earners and part time workers. Economy.com cites this as the top way to stimulate the economy, injecting $1.72 into the economy for each federal dollar spent. Best of all, the Democratic package is fiscally responsible, and it is 100 percent offset by freezing top income tax brackets at today's rates and closing offshore tax shelters. I urge my colleagues to oppose the reckless tax plan and vote on a plan which will offer real tax relief for all Americans without breaking the budget. Our future generations must not be forced to pay for our actions today.

Ms. McCARTHY of Missouri

Ms. McCARTHY of Missouri. Mr. Speaker, during rollcall vote No. 83, I was unavoidably detained. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yea.''

Ms. McCARTHY of Missouri

Ms. McCARTHY of Missouri. Mr. Speaker, during rollcall vote No. 82, I was unavoidably detained. Had I been present, I would have voted ``nay.''

Ms. McCARTHY of Missouri

Ms. McCARTHY of Missouri. Mr. Speaker I rise in opposition to H.R. 5 and in favor of the motion to recommit. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in opposition to H.R. 5, a measure which restricts the rights of legitimately injured patients harmed by medical malpractice, restricts the rights of doctors in favor of insurance companies and does nothing to curtail frivolous law suits nor restrains insurance rates. In addition to trampling on patient rights, this bill tramples on state's rights. H.R. 5 takes the constitutional concept of federalism to the extreme by severely limiting the traditional rights of plaintiffs seeking damages, a matter that should not be decided by Congress because it proposes tort reforms that are traditionally, and possibly constitutionally, areas to be decided by state legislatures and state courts. Twenty-five states including Missouri cap non-economic damages to victims. The average Missouri award is $81,000 well below the $250,000 cap presented in H.R. 5, as well as Missouri state law. Twenty states courts have ruled that caps on damages are unconstitutional. H.R. 5 enacts a statute of limitations which 18 state courts have ruled unconstitutional. It is inappropriate for Congress to limit the rights of individuals when state courts have ruled that their rights are protected under state constitutions. Missourians Jay and Sue Stratman have a son, Daniel Lee Stratman, who is only 11 years old. In July of 1996 Daniel was checked into the hospital for ``minor'' outpatient hernia repair surgery. Daniel was set to be released that same evening. Daniel was not released until November 8 of that year and nothing has been the same for either Daniel or his family. Daniel is permanently disabled due to severe brain damage, which was a result of multiple repeated anesthetic errors during the supposedly routine surgery for inguinal hernia repair. As a result of the medical errors, Daniel has suffered profound neurological damage including severe cognitive deficits, a decreased level of awareness, diminished bowel and bladder control, and severe gross and fine motor skill injury. He is cortically blind due to the lack of oxygen and perfusion to his brain during surgery. His comprehension level and communication capability have been severely diminished. Daniel requires 24-hour vigilance and this will be true for all of his remaining 70-year life expectancy. The cap in H.R. 5 unjustly penalizes those individuals without income, like Daniel. Others that fall into that category include: stay- at-home moms and the elderly. When a stay-at-home mom dies, or a child dies, or a senior citizen suffers irreparable harm, there is no economic loss because it is impossible to prove damages from loss of income. By capping punitive damages, H.R. 5 limits protection for injured patients like Daniel. Instead the bill before us protects HMOs and big insurance companies from legal responsibility. HMOs and big health insurers, who are also big campaign contributors, should not receive special treatment under the law. Further, H.R. 5 does nothing to reduce insurance premiums for doctors--the very thing Congress needs to address. Currently, medical malpractice insurance rates are rising because insurance companies are squeezing doctors to make up for investment losses over the last few years, investment loses most citizens have also experienced. Instead of penalizing doctors, hospitals and patients Congress should make major reforms to the insurance industry. I support the Conyers-Dingell motion to recommit because it rightly focuses on giving Americans quality healthcare and weeding out frivolous lawsuits while maintaining the rights of patients with legitimate claims, and respect for the humanitarian doctor's perform. I urge my colleagues to oppose H.R. 5 and support the motion to recommit to include patient's rights and state's rights.

Ms. McCARTHY of Missouri

Ms. McCARTHY of Missouri. Mr. Speaker, today I rise in strong support of H.R. 1047, the Miscellaneous Trade & Technical Corrections Act. This bill contains a variety of provisions that temporarily suspend or reduce duties for certain imported products that are not produced domestically, streamline current customs laws, and make technical corrections to trade laws. The bill suspends the duty of several products which are not produced domestically. Most of the time, tariffs are in place to protect domestic industries from foreign competitors, which can often undercut prices because of cheap labor or lax environmental standards. This bill rightfully suspends and/or reduces the tariffs on imported ingredients to domestically produced products. The reduction of 12 tariffs relating to ingredients of pesticides produced by the Bayer Corporation in Kansas City, maintain jobs in my district. In addition, H.R. 1047 gives the President the authority to restore Normal Trade Relations to the former Yugoslavian Republics of Serbia and Montenegro when they are confirmed to cooperate with the International War Crimes Tribunal and the Dayton Peace Accords. Following Serb aggression in Bosnia and Croatia, NTR was withdrawn in 1992. I look forward to a day when Serbia and Montenegro can again become normal trading partners to the benefit of all countries. H.R. 1047 authorizes the Customs Service to work with Canada to increase security at vulnerable U.S. cross border bridges and tunnels by allowing U.S. Customs officials to be stationed on the Canadian side of the border to inspect vehicles. This preemptive approach will help stop smugglers before they enter our country. The bill makes several corrections to the Sub-Saharan Africa Free Trade Act of 2002. It clarifies that duty free treatment should be granted to apparel created from U.S. and regional components but formed in sub-Saharan African countries. This will provide a much needed boost to the economies of these nations. I commend the Chairman and Ranking Member of the Ways and Means Committee for their bipartisan approach to this bill. I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting H.R. 1047 to ease unnecessary Customs restrictions and improve the ability of domestic companies to produce goods for all of the world to enjoy.

Ms. McCARTHY of Missouri

Ms. McCARTHY of Missouri. Mr. Speaker, during rollcall vote No. 39, I was unavoidably detained. Had I been present, I would have voted ``no.''

Ms. McCARTHY of Missouri. Mr. Speaker, during rollcall vote No. 38, I was unavoidably detained. Had I been present, I would have voted ``aye.''

Ms. McCARTHY of Missouri. Mr. Chairman, during rollcall vote No. 37, I was unavoidably detained. Had I been present, I would have voted ``aye.''

Ms. McCARTHY of Missouri

Ms. McCARTHY of Missouri. Madam Speaker, today members of the House will approve H.R. 395, the Do-Not-Call Implementation Act. this measure is designed to return privacy to consumers, but more must be done to close loopholes and fully protect consumers from unwanted telemarketing phone calls to their home. My main interest in the implementation of a national Do Not Call registry is to ensure that such a list improves rather than diminishes the laws already in place in 27 states, including my State of Missouri. Missouri's Do Not Call list, which was implemented on July 1, 2001, gives consumers the ability to choose whether they would like to receive unsolicited telemarketers calls. 1,133,636 phone lines have registered with the Missouri Attorney General's office as of this February to avoid unsolicited phone calls, more than half of the households in the State. These results are representative of other states that have implemented a Do Not Call list. More than 90 percent of the reported ``violations'' of the state law are not illegal, which confuses consumers. This is due to freedom of speech which enables political, charitable, and government regulated businesses to make unsolicited phone calls. Financial services companies and phone companies are not regulated by the Missouri Attorney General, thus these entities can legally solicit anyone in Missouri by phone. These loopholes, as well as others permitting ``consultations'' but not sales, have allowed unsolicited calling to continue, even of those consumers who have registered on the state Do Not Call list. I urge the Federal Trade commission (FTC) and Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to follow the spirit of H.R. 395 and restrict calls by regulated industries such as credit card companies and phone companies which account for a majority of the telemarketing calls. In addition, the FTC and FCC must work to transfer state Do Not Call lists to the federal list so that consumers who have signed up locally will not have to do so nationally. Even though not explicitly stated in the bill, a rule to provide this convenience will enhance the effectiveness of this effort. FTC Chairman Timothy Muris told the Energy and Commerce Committee that the Federal Do Not Call list is to be funded by the telemarketers who must purchase an updated Federal Do Not Call list every three months, ensuring protection to consumers. The text of H.R. 395 does not explicitly state this, thus the measure leaves room for loopholes for specific telemarketers. I look forward to studying the required FTC & FCC reports to Congress ensuring that H.R. 395 successfully protects those who choose not to receive telemarketer calls. H.R. 395 should follow the original intent of state Do Not Call laws and use Federal jurisdiction to close loopholes that states cannot.