John McHugh

Mr. McHUGH

Mr. McHUGH. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Weldon). As I mentioned earlier, the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Weldon) was owed the thanks, I think, of this entire body for taking the initiative in bringing this bill to the floor here tonight. I commend him for that.

Mr. McHUGH. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks on H.R. 5309.

Mr. McHUGH. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I have had the honor of speaking on dozens of these initiatives over the past year, and each one has been an honor, and each designee, I think, brings a special quality and a special attribute before us that we can all admire. This first bill, the Ronald Reagan Post Office, obviously seeks to honor an individual that presents a challenge in that regard. It would be impossible, certainly, for me to fully describe, even adequately describe, the contributions, the remarkable life that this man brought and even to this day offers to each and every one of us as an example of the American way, from his time overcoming what I think most people would fairly describe as a challenging family background, to become the first graduate of college in his family, through his remarkable contributions to sports fans across this country and his days as a sports broadcaster, to his very illustrative and, I think, very entertaining time in the movie industry, and thereafter, of course, in his remarkable contributions in the public sector as the Governor and as the President of the United States. I think I would simply say that, even at this moment in his lifetime, Ronald Reagan is a story that we can all learn from and we can all build upon. As our President, he came into office at a time of some disillusionment, a time when I think many Americans were questioning, not just themselves, but the role of this great country. He gave us hope and he gave us confidence in ourselves and in this Nation once more. The power of his words, the power of his leadership were felt virtually every day in which he resided in the White House. It would be impossible as well to describe in detail the achievements that he put forward, the crushing of Communism, the tearing down of the Berlin Wall, and so much more. I think for my part in this, Mr. Speaker, I would simply say that, in 1994, after several years of riding and traveling in silence, at that time, former President Reagan, who was known as a great communicator, wrote a handwritten letter informing this Nation that he had the early stages of Alzheimer's disease. Perhaps the essence of President Reagan's life is captured in his own words. I would simply read them to my colleagues: ``In this land of dreams fulfilled, where greater dreams may be imagined, nothing is impossible. No victory is beyond our reach. No glory will ever be too great. The world's hopes rest with America's future. Our work will pale before the greatness of American champions in the 21st century.'' Those lines written by the Great Communicator himself, I think, encapsulizes so very well the dream that he helped us to rediscover. I want to thank the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Weldon), who worked with the entire Florida delegation in bringing their cosponsorship to this naming. I would add as a final word a conversation that I had with the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Weldon) just prior to coming to the floor about why he chose and decided to pursue a naming of a postal facility in the State of Florida. He said to me, ``There are going to be a lot of children in the years ahead that will look on that building and ask the question, who is Ronald Reagan? And I want them to know who this great American was.'' I cannot think of a better reason or a better tribute to honor this great man. Our congratulations, of course, go to him and our support and best wishes to his family, particularly his lovely wife, Nancy. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. McHUGH

Mr. McHUGH. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Pitts), the sponsor of the House version of this bill, and who, as I mentioned, we are indebted to for his work in honoring one of our former colleagues, Bob Walker.

Mr. McHUGH. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. As we just heard the Clerk read, Mr. Speaker, this bill does designate the facility of the United States Postal Service at 431 George Street, Millersville, Pennsylvania, as the Robert S. Walker Post Office, and we owe our thanks to the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Pitts), who introduced an identical bill, H.R. 5418, into the House on October 6. That bill is indeed cosponsored by all the Members of the House delegation from the great State of Pennsylvania. Many of us certainly know Bob Walker well and know him personally and served with him. Bob represented the people of Millersville and the people of the 16th District of Pennsylvania for 20 years before he did decide to retire from the House. Simply put, Bob became a member of the Republican leadership during his years here in Washington, and he was known, for a very good reason, as a master strategist, tactician, and an expert on the parliamentary process. He was the floor manager, the chairman of the Republican leadership, and chief deputy minority whip simply because of these great strengths. For more than a decade, Bob was a major player in all those decisions made by the House Republican leadership. After the party gained the majority in the House, Bob became the chairman of the House Committee on Science, and the vice chairman of the Committee on the Budget. The National Aeronautics and Space Administration, NASA, awarded him its highest honor, the Distinguished Service Medal, in 1966, for his leadership in advancing the Nation's space program, particularly commercial space endeavors. And I think it is very important to note that he was the first sitting House Member in the history of this country to receive that award. Though Bob retired from the House, he does to this day remain a strategist and continues his interest and participation in the area of public policy, particularly in science and space and technology. To this day he serves on the boards of trustees of the Aerospace Corporation, the United States Capitol Historical Society, and the United States Space Foundation, among many, many other activities. It is always an honor to have the opportunity to participate in one of these namings; but, Mr. Speaker, I would add that in this case the opportunity to participate in extending to a former colleague, and to many of us still a friend and someone in whom we hold the highest respect and admiration, it is a particular honor. Again, I want to thank the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Pitts) for his efforts, and I urge our colleagues to support this bill. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. McHUGH

Mr. McHUGH. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 4400) to designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 1601-1 Main Street in Jacksonville, Florida, as the ``Eddie Mae Steward Post Office Building,'' as amended.

Mr. McHUGH

Mr. McHUGH. Mr. Speaker, if the gentleman from Oregon will continue to yield, I want to thank the gentlewoman from Ohio for bringing this designation to our attention. We have had the opportunity on this House floor to name facilities on behalf of many distinguished Americans, and clearly, this particular individual meets that high standard. I think it is important to note that Mr. D'Amico spent a lifetime in service to his community, a lifetime in service to his country, beginning in his service in World War II in the United States Army, moving on as a diligent worker in the Office of Price Stabilization, and later as an auditor for the Air Force. But clearly through all of his years, he most distinguished himself during his distinguished service in the South Euclid City Council, and as I am told, later became not just the mayor of South Euclid in 1972, but indeed, the first full full-time mayor in 1976. Reading the materials presented by the gentlewoman on his behalf, I can say without fear of qualification that he accomplished much during his tenure there. He established an office on the aging, a paramedic program, established the 911 emergency program, and pushed for a community center. He later served as president of the county Mayors' Association, chairman and treasurer of the regional income tax authority, and so much more. Clearly, Mr. Speaker, we have in this individual someone who understood the sense and the value of community, and did not just recognize it in his own heart but went out and gave of himself to contribute back. It is with a great deal of pleasure that I, as the chairman of the subcommittee, give my full endorsement to this. I am pleased that we are able to take it up this afternoon in this fashion. I commend the gentlewoman for her actions.

Mr. McHUGH. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. McHUGH. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Government Reform be discharged from further consideration of the bill (H.R. 4853) to redesignate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 1568 South Glen Road in South Euclid, Ohio, as the ``Arnold C. D'Amico Station,'' and ask for its immediate consideration by the House.

Mr. McHUGH. Mr. Speaker, I offer an amendment in the nature of a substitute.

Mr. McHUGH. Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the gentleman yielding to me. Mr. Speaker, I will try to be very brief for an explanation to the House. The bill before us was introduced by our colleague, the gentlewoman from Ohio (Mrs. Jones) on July 13 of this year, and was amended by the Committee on Government Reform on October 5. The amendment very simply changes the word ``Glen'' to ``Green'', as determined after review by the United States Postal Service. As the Clerk has read, it does redesignate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 1568 South Green Road in South Euclid, Ohio, now known as the South Euclid Station, to afterwards be designated as the Arnold C. D'Amico station. As is the practice of the Committee on Government Reform, the entire delegation in this House from the State of Ohio has cosponsored this legislation.

Mr. McHUGH

Mr. McHUGH. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks on H.R. 4853.

Mr. McHUGH

Mr. McHUGH. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding to me. Mr. Speaker, I will try to be very brief, but I do think it is important to put out for the Record a few comments about this bill. It is a privilege. The Senate passed this legislation on October 6, and it was sponsored in the other body by the chairman of the Subcommittee on International Security Proliferation and Federal Services, the gentleman from Mississippi (Mr. Cochran), and cosponsored by all members of that subcommittee. I would also note, Mr. Speaker, that an exact similar provision was introduced in this body, in the House, by the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Fattah), the ranking member on the Subcommittee on Postal Service, a cosponsorship of which was also entered by many Members of this body. So although we are proposing tonight to adopt under unanimous consent the Senate bill, I want it very clearly noted that it in no way represents a lack of interest or activity in this House. Simply put, this is an extremely important piece of legislation to ensure the financial viability and survivability of nonprofit mailers, the kinds of nonprofit mailers that all of us have and enjoy in our communities, churches, charitable organizations, educational publications, and so many others. This is based on a very technical concern that arises out of a recent rate case for the United States Postal Service. Simply put, through the evolution of rates-setting for not-for-profit mailers who have historically enjoyed a somewhat lesser rate for mailings, for very good reasons, in my judgment, than, say, commercial mailers, this rate case produced some aberrations and some unusual circumstances that, if enacted and if allowed to go forward, would have had a very serious impact on the profitability of not-for-profits, also on the ability of those very important organizations to reach out to their membership to disseminate important information with respect to their activities, and, of course, to engage in fund-raising that is vital to their continued existence. This bill, the Senate bill, S. 2686, provides relief to the category of mail that provides for these kinds of materials, also for educational magazines, for students in kindergarten through high school. I think they are the type of publications even someone of my rather advanced years remembers from my days in grammar school and through high school and continue today in their importance in education purposes in our schools. This legislation provides that both nonprofit mailers and classroom publications receive the same treatment and thereby ensuring that future rate increases for both of these important mailers are predictable. I want to note that I certainly strongly support the recommendation in the report language attendant to the Senate bill that the rates coming out of this step would be monitored to evaluate the impact postal rates have on the general economic capability of these mailers to determine if there might not be some future and more fundamental resolution to the concerns of particularly classroom publishers. The postal service, in my view, and in the view of the language attendant thereto, must certainly work to help examine alternatives to ensure that those postal rates for the invaluable classroom periodicals and teachers' guides remain at a price that ensure their availability and affordability to all classrooms. It is also important to note, lastly, Mr. Speaker, that this bill contains a provision that would alleviate the potential impact deriving from the changes herein on regular rate payers, the folks that use the mails each and every day for their important business, for their correspondence in rate cases before the postal rate commission. Simply put, the provisions in the bill provide that the estimated reduction in postal revenue from nonprofit categories caused by this legislation on the new rate-making rules is to be treated as reasonably assignable costs of the postal service, and that simply means that those costs should be apportioned among all of the various classes of mail and types of postal services in accordance with the existing provisions as they are contained in the United States Code title 39. It is a very technical way of saying, Mr. Speaker, that this cost in providing assistance for not-for-profit and educational materials will not be exclusively borne by the folks out there buying the 33 cent stamp into the future. If we did not do this and if we did not take this step, Mr. Speaker, we would simply find that rates for nonprofits would have of necessity and under the pending rate case soar up to 35 percent and more in some cases. Obviously, as I mentioned earlier, that kind of increase would make the essential viability, the primary existence of these invaluable services, really bring it into question. Mr. Speaker, I think the Senate has done good work here. As I mentioned, because of the hard work of the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Fattah) and so many others in the House, we have an exact similar provision, and I think it is wholly appropriate that we through this process of unanimous consent accept the Senate language tonight. I thank the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Davis), a very valuable Member of the House Subcommittee on the Postal Service, for yielding to me. Mr. Speaker, it is my privilege to speak in support of S. 2686. The Senate passed this legislation on October 6. It is sponsored by the chairman of the Subcommittee on International Security, Proliferation, and Federal Services, and cosponsored by all members of that subcommittee. This is legislation is extremely important for the financial viability and survival of nonprofit mailers, such as churches, charitable organizations, education publications and others. It addresses technical problems in the setting orates for nonprofit mailers. Essentially, it locks in the current rate relationship between nonprofit and commercial rate mail. The history of special rates for nonprofit mail rates dates back prior to the Postal Reorganization Act of 1970. They were known as ``preferred'' categories and included Nonprofit and Classroom Periodicals; Nonprofit Standard (A) Mail; Library and Educational Matter; and In-county Publications. These categories were entitled to reduced rates of postage under those postal laws, and the Postal Reorganization Act continued the preferred rates for these categories. After a certain period of time, these categories of mail were required to cover their attributable costs, but they were not required to cover any institutional costs, as required of other categories of mail. Congress made annual appropriations to reimburse the Postal Service for the ``revenue forgone'' reimbursement which was the difference between the revenue received from preferred mailers and the revenue that would have been received if the reduced rate provisions had not been enacted. However, in 1993, Congress enacted the Revenue Forgone Reform Act as a deficit reduction measure, ending the annual federal (taxpayer) subsidy for preferred rates of postage and providing for a more equitable apportionment of institutional cost among regular- and reduced-rate mailers. It was designed to gradually phase in the increases for reduced-rate mailers, ending in 1998. At the end of the process, the institutional cost for preferred rate was to equal half of the institutional cost of the comparable commercial rate, thereby ensuring that reduced-rate mailers continued to contribute to institutional costs. The application of this new formula had some problematic effects and there were significant rate swings because of underlying costs. The ``one-half mark up rule'' as it was known, made it difficult for the Postal Service and the Postal Rate Commission to alleviate the price effects of cost changes for reduced- rate mailers. If costs for a nonprofit subclass changed significantly, the rates also followed suit because the mark up could not be reduced to lessen the impact of the cost, as it available to prevent rate changes in commercial subclasses. Therefore, cost changes translated into rate changes. An aberration occurred for Nonprofit and Classroom Periodicals because the complexity of the rate structure and the low markup for commercial subclass could yield rates that were lower for a commercial publication than for a similar nonprofit publication. The provision enacted to help nonprofit mailers, the one-half mark up rule, made it difficult to create a remedy. S. 2686 provides relief to the category of mail that provides educational magazines for students in kindergarten though high school. Undoubtedly this type of publication is essential and important in classrooms. The legislation provides that nonprofit periodicals and classroom publications receive the same treatment. Therefore, it would ensure that future rate increases for both categories are predictable. I support the strong recommendation in the report language, which accompanied S. 2686, that the rates be monitored to evaluate the impact postal rates have on the economic capability of these mailers and to determine if there is a need for more fundamental resolution to the rate concerns of classroom publishers. Additionally, I agree that the Postal Service must examine alternatives to help ensure those postal rates for classroom periodicals and teacher guides remain at that price that ensures their availability and affordability to all classrooms. Discrepancies were found for Standard (B) publications. The classification for Library and Educational Matter overlaps with the classification known as Special Standard Mail. Both classifications contain books and sound recordings but Special Standard Mail does not require either the mailer or the recipient to be a library, educational institution, museum, herbarium, or nonprofit institution. The relatively small volumes in the Library and Educational matter category make it difficult to collect adequate ratemaking data. These problems are addressed in S. 2686 by locking in the current rate relationship between nonprofit and commercial rate mail. This is accomplished by setting Nonprofit Standard (A) rates to equal, as nearly as possible, 60% of the estimated average revenue per piece from the corresponding regular-rate subclass. Nonprofit and Classroom Periodicals would be set so that postage on each mailing would be, as nearly as practicable, 5% lower than the postage for a corresponding regular-rate mailing. But, this discount would not be available to the advertising portion of a mailing if it exceeded 10% of the publication. Library and Educational Material rates would be set so that the postage on each mailing would be, as nearly as possible 5% lower than the postage for a corresponding regular-rate mailing. Additionally, this legislation contains a provision to alleviate the impact of the changes on regular-rate payers in the postal rate case before the Postal Rate Commission. Under this provision, the estimated reduction in postal revenue from Nonprofit Standard (A) mail caused by the enactment of the new ratemaking rules is to be treated as a reasonably assignable cost of the Postal Service to be apportioned among the various classes of mail and types of postal service in accordance with existing provisions in title 39 of the United States Code. Should this legislation not be enacted we would find that rates for nonprofit mail would of necessity, under current law and under the pending R-2000-1 case before the Postal Rate Commission, soar up to 35% and more in some cases. These recommendations would cause some nonprofit rates to be higher than commercial rates in that category. The passing of S. 2686 would affect positively all those nonprofit and educational organizations that we all care about so deeply. It would bring relief to nonprofit mailers and would protect them from double- digit increases in postal rates. I urge all our colleagues to support this very important legislation.

Mr. McHUGH. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to take from the Speaker's table the Senate bill (S. 2686) to amend chapter 36 of title 39, United States Code, to modify rates relating to reduced rate mail matter, and for other purposes, and ask for its immediate consideration in the House.

Mr. McHUGH

Mr. McHUGH. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on S. 2686.

Mr. McHUGH

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

Mr. McHUGH

Mr. McHUGH. Mr. Speaker, I y8ield back the balance of my time.

Mr. McHUGH. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I have no further requests for time but let me just state for the Record what many of us understand, but I think it is an important note, that was very legitimately raised by the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Visclosky) who has worked tirelessly on this beginning in 1998, the adoption of the Senate bill today is merely a parliamentary procedure that in no way reflects his lack of concern and, indeed, I would suggest that without his hard work and without his ensuring that indeed the Committee on Government Reform has considered his bill and, to my recollection, unanimously endorsed it, we may not be here today. So I want to pay a final compliment to him and to his diligence and a word of thanks again for his bringing to us a very worthy individual. With that, Mr. Speaker, I urge all of our colleagues to join us in support of this initiative.

Mr. McHUGH. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, we have before us S. 1295 introduced by the distinguished senator from Indiana, Senator Lugar, on June 6, 1999. The legislation passed the Senate on November 19, 1999 and was received in the House soon thereafter. Mr. Speaker, the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Visclosky) introduced identical legislation, H.R. 2358, on June 24 of 1999 and, pursuant to the policy on the Committee on Government Reform, the entire House delegation of the State of Indiana cosponsored H.R. 2358, and the committee passed the bill. Both of these bills has been noted to designate the United States Post Office located at 3813 Main Street in East Chicago, Indiana as the Lance Corporal Harold Gomez Post Office. Mr. Speaker, we have had the opportunity and, indeed, the honor to do a number of these bills in this session as in previous years, and it is always truly a pleasure. I want to begin by extending my compliments both to Senator Lugar and to the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Visclosky) for their efforts in bringing this worthy nominee to our attention. One of the true joys of having the opportunity to handle these kinds of proposals, Mr. Speaker, is that it provides us with the opportunity to honor the widest possible range of United States citizens and to, in that fashion, recognize their achievements, and they are the kinds of achievements that really do span the entire horizon of contributions to country, contributions to community, and all worthy points in between. Mr. Speaker, today, we have in Corporal Gomez just such an example. The corporal was a fire team leader in a rifle company of the Third Marine Division when in 1967, he was killed by a land mine explosion in South Vietnam. He was the first citizen from Northwest Indiana to die of casualties in that war. Corporal Gomez received numerous awards, including the Purple Heart, the Combat Action Ribbon, the Presidential Unit Citation, the National Defense Service Medal, the Vietnam Service Medal, RVN, Military Merit Medal, RVN Gallantry Cross Medal, the Vietnam Campaign Medal and the Rifle Sharp Shooters Badge. Corporal Gomez was posthumously awarded the Silver Star Medal for his courageous leadership and heroism. As these medals so eloquently attest, Mr. Speaker, Corporal Gomez was truly a hero. He was a man who put the needs and the safety of his troops, of his fellow servicepeople before himself; and through him, we have again underscored the history of this Nation, a Nation founded upon the principle that in the pursuit of life and liberty and happiness, there is no cost too great, no price too high, that citizens like Corporal Gomez are willingly to extend it, even when that means the loss of their life. That kind of lesson can never be restated too often, I would suggest respectfully, Mr. Speaker. Certainly, his heroism, his example was felt far and wide. And in his hometown, I think it is important to note that after his death, Central High School in East Chicago, the place from which Corporal Gomez had graduated, named and dedicated the library to him and the American GI Forum of the United States chartered the Harold Gomez Chapters in East Chicago. I am proud, Mr. Speaker, to join with Senator Lugar, the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Visclosky), with the entire House delegation from that great State, and in working with, as always, the minority on the Subcommittee on Postal Service, particularly the gentleman from Philadelphia, Pennsylvania (Mr. Fattah), the ranking member, in ensuring that these kinds of worthy initiatives are brought quickly to this floor. Mr. Speaker, just one final word of urging that all of our colleagues join us in supporting of this bill. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. McHUGH. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks on S. 1295.

Mr. McHUGH. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the Senate bill (S. 1295) to designate the United States Post Office located at 3813 Main Street in East Chicago, Indiana, as the ``Lance Corporal Harold Gomez Post Office.''

Mr. McHUGH

Mr. McHUGH. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman from Illinois (Mrs. Biggert) for yielding the time to me. Mr. Speaker, I want to begin by expressing my appreciation to her for being here for filling in so capably in my absence, and we certainly want to thank her for the very eloquent job she did in speaking about this very deserving individual. Mr. Speaker, I also wanted to rise and express my appreciation to the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Cummings) for bringing this bill to our attention, for bringing this man and his wonderful life to our attention. This is a rare honor. It is one that we try to protect and we try to preserve in a way that when it is extended, it is bestowed upon those individuals who in their lives have made a difference and who have by example helped us all to learn a little bit more about our lives and our proper perspective and role in those lives. I think Mr. Dewberry, as was so very thoroughly and eloquently expressed by the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Cummings), has lived that life; that kind of example, starting with his service to his country during World War II and spanning decades and decades of service to his neighbors, to his community, to his county and State, not just in an official capacity, but in those kinds of organizations and those kinds of efforts we heard about just a few moments ago. I think most significantly in this kind of an endeavor, we find the primary good of someone's existence in one of the comments the gentleman made in speaking about their father, how a son says he, or it certainly could have been a daughter, she learned to do the right thing, to be a good citizen. It is those kinds of perhaps less publicized but so very important ways that this country becomes a better place. Again, I want to thank the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Cummings) for bringing us such a deserving individual, and I certainly want to add my words of encouragement to all of our colleagues here on both sides of the aisle in urging their acceptance and vote in favor of this very, very worthy designation, and also a final word of appreciation, again, to the gentlewoman from Illinois (Mrs. Biggert).

Mr. McHUGH

Mr. McHUGH. Mr. Speaker, it is with great pleasure that I rise today to pay tribute to Alan Emory, a veteran writer for the Watertown Daily Times who is battling pancreatic cancer. June 7 marked Alan's 51st year with the Times, 47 years of which he spent covering the Capital, earning him the title of Times Senior Washington correspondent. As a reporter, Alan has always held himself up to the highest standards of journalistic integrity. His readers have come to expect objective, accurate and intelligent reporting of events, both big and small. Alan's readers have also come to expect from him a thoughtful understanding of the issues and events that affect our everyday lives. Through his weekly Sunday column, Alan has touched the lives of many by relating his own experiences, which enlighten and inspire, motivate and comfort. One such experience is his battle with cancer. In his weekly column, he recounts this very personal ordeal with his usual candor, and never before have his sense of humor, his courage, and his humanity been more clearly demonstrated to all those who have come to know him personally and through his articles. This is not Alan's first brush with cancer. in 1991, he had been diagnosed and treated for prostate cancer. Experience, however, has not made the second time any easier. There were weeks of tests. There were unforeseen health complications that delayed surgery. There were innumerable pills to take, complicated doctors' orders to follow, and long trips back and forth to the hospital. Yet--through all this--Alan's spirit, optimism, and courage are undiminished. He is gracious and humble as ever and, in his weekly articles, he has thanked his friends, family, and his readers for their support and prayers. Alan's account of his battle with cancer offers hope to all those who find themselves in similar circumstances. Fighting a deadly disease can be a lonely experience, even with the support of loved ones. Alan's articles over the last several months have been important for another reason. They were among the first to bring public attention to the Health Care Financing Administration's proposed regulation to implement severe cutbacks on reimbursement costs to physicians for vital outpatient chemotherapy treatment for senior patients. The attention that Alan's articles brought to the issue, and the subsequent pressure that his readers brought to bear upon public officials, were crucial in bringing the Clinton administration to put off plans to reduce payments for cancer drugs. I joined with my colleagues in writing the Clinton administration objecting to the proposed cutbacks, which I felt would put Medicare beneficiaries with cancer unnecessarily at risk by denying adequate reimbursement for essential drug therapy. Thankfully, the Administration reconsidered its position and ultimately decided not to reduce payments to doctors. In sharing his experience, Alan not only shares his optimism and his spirit, he has helped prevent a potentially devastating regulation from coming into effect. Because of their significance in this regard, I ask that copies of Alan's stories, those on his own battle with cancer, as well as those on the Medicare cancer cutbacks, be printed in their entirety in the Record. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to a great journalist, and more importantly, a good friend, Alan Emory. He has touched the lives of thousands--many of whom will never get the opportunity to thank him for all he has done in the course of his career. From all of us, I say thank you, Alan. [From the Watertown Daily Times, July 2, 2000] Payment Change May Spell End Of Outpatient Chemotherapy (By Alan Emory) The Clinton Administration giveth and it taketh away. The president makes a big deal of wanting the federal Medicare program to cover the cost of many prescription drugs for senior citizens who cannot afford them. He has pressed Congress to pass legislation providing for that help. He says nothing, however, about a regulation issued by Health and Human Services Secretary Donna Shalala that runs flatly contrary to what he is asking from Congress. That rule, by the Health Care Finance Administration which would take effect Oct. 1 unless scrapped by her department or blocked by lawmakers--would effectively end vital outpatient chemotherapy treatment of senior cancer patients in the offices of oncologists and, perhaps later, in hospitals. It would be achieved by cutting back severely on reimbursement costs to physicians. In other words, at a time of huge budget surpluses likely over the next decade, the folks with green eyeshades and blue pencils would come out on top at the expense of patients. From all appearances, analyses by experts have found that by swallowing 5 percent of chemotherapy drug costs, oncologists and hospitals get a fair reimbursement. But the new HCFA regulation would increase that shortfall to as much as 13 percent, effectively pressuring physicians to discontinue their chemotherapy office procedures, dismiss nurses and send patients to long lines at hospitals, assuming the hospital can continue to treat them. There is a very good chance the hospitals might decide to close down their outpatient treatment services, too, in which case the patients would have no idea where to obtain their drugs. About 60 percent of chemotherapy is now delivered in doctors' offices, a more comfortable environment for patients and a setting where they and their doctors and nurses can have a satisfactory relationship. The compensation doctors receive would, on Oct. 1, be determined by an average wholesale price of the drugs set by a Justice Department ``red book'' for 20 drugs to treat cancer, and the pressure is on to lower that figure even more. Letters to Congress have stressed that oncologists deserve an increase above that price, not a reduction, and they point out that many hospitals and doctors cannot obtain the needed drugs at those prices. This is not the story of greedy drug manufacturers boosting prices to the point where some Americans travel to Canada to obtain medication at reasonable prices. It is not a story of doctors and hospitals pocketing huge markups. It is one about a reduction in compensation for doctors that may be cut even more to a point where the welfare of senior citizen cancer patients is endangered. Basically, some surveys find, chemotherapy administration is essentially a break-even proposition in hospitals. More losses could persuade them to shut down their outpatient cancer programs. This obviously is not Congress's intent in moving on prescription drugs, but lawmakers appear to have been influenced by the stories of profiteering on non-cancer drugs. It is highly likely, according to local medical groups, that many oncology offices will close down or reduce size and staff. The oncologists have a compelling argument. They cite the large cost of providing chemotherapy in a setting that is not adequately reimbursed under Medicare. Shutting down their operation would force patients to shift to hospitals, where costs would be greater and timely treatment imperiled. Furthermore, hospital bureaucracy is a far cry from the convenience and comfort involved in office chemotherapy. This does not contradict the need to strike a balance between providing adequate cancer care and controlling the cost of that care. However, substantial reduction in reimbursement cannot but damage quality care. Many government experts--though, apparently, not Ms. Shalala--understand oncologists do not receive adequate reimbursement for cancer drugs and administering chemotherapy. It is repugnant to force cancer patients into hospitals because Medicare rules threaten the financial viability of treatment in a doctor's office. The losers, says one medical organization, will be cancer patients who may lose access to quality cancer care in the setting that is most convenient and appropriate for them. Oncologists argue that Medicare's payment for chemotherapy administration ``is only a fraction of what is necessary to cover expenses.'' They cite requirements for specially trained nurses, special equipment and considerable time, entirely aside from the strong preference Medicare patients have for the office treatment. Sen. Daniel Patrick Moynihan, D-N.Y., as the ranking minority member of the Senate Finance Committee, which supervises Medicare, is in a position to help solve the problem. Either Congress or the White House can halt this devastating move on Medicare cancer treatment, but the Oct. 1 deadline is looming ever larger.

Mr. McHUGH

Mr. McHUGH. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks on this legislation.

Mr. McHUGH. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, one of the true privileges and frankly more enjoyable aspects of serving as the chairman of the Subcommittee on Postal Service is the opportunity that it provides I would hope all of us, but certainly, speaking on my own behalf, provides me to learn. I think I am rather typical in terms of the average American who has heard many times over in his or her life about such great athletes as Jesse Owens, and as one of the giants of baseball, we have heard of Jackie Robinson. But I must confess, until very recently, I was not as familiar with a second Robinson, a gentleman by the name of Matthew ``Mack'' Robinson. We have heard, of course, about the achievements of people such as those I have just mentioned. When we talk about Jackie Robinson, we talk about history. When we talk about ``Mack'' Robinson, we talk a bit less about history but a great deal about what made this country great, what made it special. That is simply through the contributions of people like ``Mack'' Robinson. I would say that when it comes to achievements of athleticism, ``Mack'' has to take a back seat to very few people. He was a participant, along with his younger brother, Jackie Robinson, and others with the 1936 Olympic team in that infamous event in Berlin. But beyond that, after returning home, he has achieved what I think is a very, very remarkable record of service to his community through his volunteer help and, perhaps even more importantly, through his character and through his leadership in leading the community of Pasadena from segregation to unification. As I have had the opportunity, as I mentioned, to learn about ``Mack'' Robinson, I have learned how he served his community, how he cared about his neighbors. He became involved not for power or glory, certainly not for money, but because he cared about others and wanted to make today better than yesterday and hopefully tomorrow better than today. That is the kind of life I believe we can all learn a great deal from. That is the kind of inspiration we can all draw a great deal from. The city of Pasadena just recently honored both ``Mack'' and Jackie Robinson by constructing a monument to them near City Hall. I think we owe our thanks to the gentleman from California (Mr. Rogan) for bringing us Mack's name as a fitting follow-on to that celebration and that honor in Pasadena by seeking to name the Matthew ``Mack'' Robinson Post Office Building. The gentleman from California (Mr. Rogan) I would say worked very hard to achieve what we have always strived for here, and that is bipartisanship in reaching out to his fellow delegates within the California delegation. We have tried to work with him to bring us to this floor today in a position to enact a piece of legislation that is a fitting tribute to a very, very fitting individual. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.