John Mica

Mr. MICA

Mr. MICA. Mr. Speaker, most people believe that they are covered for long-term care by their health care plans, disability insurance, or by Medicare. Unfortunately, many learn the hard way--when they or a family member needs care--that they are not adequately covered and must pay for long-term care on their own. By 2030, the average annual cost of a nursing home stay will increased from $40,000 today to more than $97,000 (in 1997 dollars). Long-term care insurance provides protection from these catastrophic financial risks and reduces reliance on Medicaid. As one of the Nation's largest employers it is appropriate that the Federal Government offer long-term care insurance as a benefit to Federal employees. An amazing 86% of Federal employees have expressed interest in long-term care insurance in response to survey questionnaires. Today I will introduce the ``Civil Service Long-Term Care Insurance Benefit Act'' that establishes a program through which Federal employees and annuitants may obtain group or individual long-term care insurance for themselves, their spouses, and any other eligible relative. This benefit option would be available by January, 2000. This bill will make long-term care insurance affordable to the Federal community through competition and choice.

Mr. MICA

Mr. MICA. Mr. Chairman, this is not a complex issue. This is an issue about the very basis of our representative form of government. You do not have to have a Harvard degree to understand what the Constitution says. Article I, Section 2, says the actual enumeration shall be made. The 14th Amendment says counting the whole number of persons in each State. I defy anyone to come and show me where the Constitution, this is the Constitution, where it says we conduct polling, we conduct statistical sampling, we conduct statistical methods. We are spending $4 billion to conduct the census to determine our representative form of government and who comes here and represents the people, the very foundation of our democracy. The very least we can do is count each and every individual. Two thousand years ago, citing Luke 2, Verses 1 through 7, in those days Caesar Augustus published a decree ordaining a census of the world, and then they counted, 2,000 years ago, every person. Today we can do at least the very same for representative government.

Mr. MICA

Mr. MICA. Mr. Speaker, It is my pleasure to congratulate the City of Lake Mary, Florida on its twenty fifth anniversary of incorporation. The City of Lake Mary began in the 1800's as two settlements on the shore of the lake for which it is named. The area was originally know as Bent's Station, named after a man who lived there and planted several large orange groves. Later, a minister, J. F. Sundell, moved to the area with the lake's namesake, his wife Mary. The first seeds of the city that now prospers there were planted in Seminole County, whose history dates back to the Seminole Indian wars in the 1800's. The town was built between Sanford and Orlando along the route of a narrow gauge railroad. While Lake Mary's beginnings date back to the 19th century it was officially incorporated as a city on August 7, 1973. In 1923 the first Lake Mary Chamber of Commerce was established. By the 1960's the area was being surrounded by new developments. To establish its distinct personality as a community the Chamber of Commerce successfully passed a referendum establishing the City of Lake Mary in 1973. Today the City has grown beyond its original scope as a citrus and agriculture community to become the corporate home for some of America's largest companies. Lake Mary has preserved much of the natural beauty that intermingles with handsome residential neighborhoods of the City even in the midst of growth. I am extremely pleased to watch Lake Mary blossom as it provides an outstanding locale for people to live, work and retire. Lake Mary is a great example of an American community with citizens, municipal leaders and local businessmen and women coming together over the years to make their city outstanding in every respect. It is my distinct honor to represent such a model community as the City of Lake Mary. Congratulations Lake Mary on your first twenty five years!

Mr. MICA

Mr. MICA. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the requisite number of words. Mr. Chairman, there has been a great deal of comment from the other side on this issue, and I think it is only fair that I yield to the gentleman from California (Mr. Riggs) so that he may respond.

Mr. MICA

Mr. MICA. Mr. Speaker, I want to take this opportunity to express my very deepest sympathy to the wives, the children, and the families of Officer Gibson and Officer Chestnut. Their tragic deaths have a very special significance to me as a Member of Congress. These men gave their lives to protect me, other Members, staff, and visitors to our Nation's Capital. I cannot think of any greater sacrifice than they gave. They gave up their lives to protect ours. With their deaths this Capitol building and this Congress will never be the same. As chairman of the Subcommittee on Civil Service of the Committee on Government Reform and Oversight, I commend these great civil servants who have given the ultimate sacrifice for their fellow men. They acted with courage, they acted unhesitantly, with devotion to their job and their duty. Together, we come this evening to honor the memory of Officers Chestnut and Gibson. I join my colleagues, their colleagues, our staff and the American people to say thank you to our fallen heroes. We also now have a new appreciation for all our civil servants and all of our Capitol Police Officers who put their lives at risk each day. To each and every one of these dedicated civil servants we say, thank you. Thank you for a job well done.

Mr. MICA

Mr. MICA. Mr. Speaker, the question before us is whether we want to pay more and get less or correct some of the problems we have experienced with managed care. It is true that the law and regulations have not kept up with changes in health care delivery. It is also true that increasing costs are depriving millions of Americans affordable health care. Unfortunately the Democrat plan will do three things we know will drive up costs. Their solution is more regulation, more bureaucracy, and more litigation. In hearings I conducted on the President's fancy titled ``Patients' Bill of Rights'' for Federal employees, every administration official testified that his similar Executive Order would impose more paperwork at high cost without any benefit in coverage. The Democrat plan proposes over 300 new mandates, thousands of new federal bureaucrats, and 59 new federal regulations. The CBO estimates the Democrat plan will increase costs 4 percent. Add to that cost of living and they escalate health care premiums 7 percent per year. The Democrat plan increases lawsuits which also increase health care costs. So what do you get? More costly regulation. More costly bureaucracy. More costly litigation. I submit that's not what the patient, consumer or doctor ordered.

Mr. MICA

Mr. MICA. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the Republican alternative and against the Democrat, more regulatory, bureaucratic, and more litigious approach.

Mr. MICA

Mr. MICA. Mr. Chairman, I consider myself one of the most conservative Members of this body, and my record as one of the fiscal conservatives is a matter of record. But let me tell my colleagues, regarding the arguments I have heard today, this is a question about whether or not we give any money to the arts. It is that basic; that simple. This government has always supported the arts. From Washington, from Thomas Jefferson, from Abraham Lincoln, we have always, as a Nation and its founding leaders and through every administration, supported the arts. Now, I admit that some mistakes have been made, and I have highlighted those mistakes. But it is not our responsibility or duty here to abolish Federal Government participation in the arts. With those mistakes that have been made, it is our responsibility to correct those mistakes. If we need tax credits, if we need to change the project basis, let us do that. But this is about funding our museums, this is about funding our symphonies. Mr. Chairman, I have never seen a child who has attended or heard a symphony or visited a museum who would not benefit from this effort to fund the arts.

Mr. MICA

Mr. MICA. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I come before the House this afternoon to present the Federal Retirement Coverage Corrections Act. This legislation is critically important to thousands of our Federal employees. This is a piece of legislation that has very strong bipartisan support. Both Republicans and Democrat members of our Subcommittee on Civil Service of the Committee on Government Reform and Oversight are original cosponsors of this bill. I want to take first a moment, Mr. Speaker, to thank the distinguished ranking member of the Subcommittee on Civil Service, the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Cummings), for his leadership on this issue. He and I have worked very closely on this bill, and I appreciate the hard work that he has put forth. I also want to commend the work of both the majority and minority staff on this issue. I know the gentleman from Maryland is truly personally dedicated to bringing real relief to victims of these errors and the victims who testified before our Subcommittee on Civil Service. I also commend the distinguished gentlewoman from Maryland (Mrs. Morella). The gentlewoman has always been a forceful advocate for our Federal employees, and on this issue that is no exception. She has been a true leader and champion. The Federal civil service employees who were misclassified, and their families, have benefitted greatly from her strong determination and her leadership in trying to right these wrongs. I also want to take this opportunity to thank the distinguished chairman and ranking member of the Committee on Government Reform and Oversight, the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Burton) and the gentleman from California (Mr. Waxman), for their support. Likewise, I appreciate the cooperation of the chairman and ranking member of the Committee on Ways and Means, the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Archer) and the gentleman from New York (Mr. Rangel). Staffs of the Committee on Ways and Means and the Joint Committee on Taxation provided invaluable guidance on tax and Social Security issues involved in crafting this legislation. Mr. Speaker, let me take a few minutes to explain why it is so important for the House to pass this bill today. An estimated 18,000 Federal employees have been placed in the wrong retirement system because Federal agencies, quite frankly, made mistakes. Federal agencies fouled up. The vast majority of these errors involved assignments to the Civil Service Retirement System, CSRS, or the Federal Employees Retirement System, generally known as FERS. But other agency blunders wrongly excluded some employees from both retirement systems. Still others were included in retirement when they did not qualify at all. When these errors are discovered, and I say are discovered because not all of them have been discovered, current law requires agencies to move them into the right retirement system. These corrections are especially harmful to employees who are moved from Civil Service Retirement, the old system, into FERS, the new system. Unlike the Civil Service Retirement System, which is the stand-alone system, the new system, FERS, consists of three components: the FERS basic annuity, Social Security, and the Thrift Savings Plan, or TSP. Without adequate Thrift Savings Plan accounts, employees will not have adequate retirement income, but current corrective procedures do not make the victim's TSP account whole. As a result, unless Congress acts, many victims of these errors will receive much less when they retire than they were really entitled to. H.R. 3249 provides a comprehensive solution to all of these errors. Although its details are complicated, it rests on a few basic, simple, straightforward principles. This bill recognizes that most victims of these agency errors had a legal right to participate in one of the Federal retirement systems. Therefore, each of these victims should have an opportunity to elect to participate in that system. They also have a right to receive approximately the same retirement benefits they could have earned if the agency had not erred. But the bill also recognizes that these victims have relied on the benefits promised under the system to which they were assigned. Accordingly, victims are generally given a choice to remain in the system in which they were mistakenly placed. Mr. Speaker, every victim should have a realistic opportunity to the retirement correction that best addresses their unfortunate circumstance. Therefore, this legislation provides fair, make-whole relief. The importance of this make-whole relief cannot be overemphasized. Without it, the choices offered by this bill would be nothing but a cruel hoax for many of our Federal employees. Lower-income employees, and those who have been in the wrong system for a lengthy period, would be especially hard hit. Let me cite an example described by the American Foreign Service Association. For about 10 years a foreign service officer was erroneously enrolled in the wrong system. When the error was discovered, he was switched to the right system. He was also told that he would have to contribute $65,000 to $75,000 to catch up on his Thrift Savings Plan account. In addition to that retroactive contribution, he would also have to make current contributions to the TSP. Mr. Speaker, few Federal employees could afford to meet such a burden. That is why this bill's make-whole relief is absolutely imperative. Mr. Speaker, this legislation also protects the integrity of Social Security trust funds and prevents employees from incurring unfair tax burdens because these agency errors are corrected. This has been, as I said, a joint effort, a bipartisan effort, to correct a wrong that was done to our Federal employees and Federal workers. This is, indeed, an effort to correct that situation, and this corrective legislation deserves the support of every Member of the House. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. MICA. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 5 minutes to the distinguished gentlewoman from Maryland [Mrs. Morella], a leader in our Subcommittee on Civil Service.

Mr. MICA. 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. 3249, as amended, the bill under consideration.

Mr. MICA. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time. Mr. Speaker, first I want to take a moment to also thank again the gentlewoman from Maryland (Mrs. Morella) for her leadership on this issue and several members of our subcommittee who are not with us this afternoon who also provided leadership, the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Pappas) and the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Sessions), who also supported and help craft this legislation. Mr. Speaker, as we conclude our debate here this afternoon and presentation, H.R. 3249 will bring long overdue relief to the thousands of victims who have been misclassified because of Federal agency errors. Many of these errors have festered for more than 10 years and the procedures for correction available under current law do more harm than good. These errors in current procedures have really had devastating effects on individuals in our Federal employ, both financially and emotionally. It is imperative that Congress act now. As time goes by, the cost of making employees' thrift savings accounts whole actually increases and the burden for the Federal Government increases. So does the human toll taken by these agency errors. H.R. 3249 is a fair bill. It provides each affected employee with a real choice. Employees may elect to change their retirement enrollment or employees may ratify the agency errors by choosing to remain in the system in which they are mistakenly enrolled. The make-whole relief that guarantees freedom of choice, even for those with low incomes, is adapted from an IRS review procedure. Surely, our Federal employees and retirees deserve no less than what the IRS has prescribed as a remedy for employees who are so aggrieved or abused in the private sector. Mr. Speaker, H.R. 3249 is supported by many organizations. It is supported by the Senior Executive Association, the National Federation of Federal Employees, the American Foreign Service Association, the National Association of Letter Carriers, the National Association of Postmasters of the United States, and the Federal Managers Association. All Members should join with the hundreds of thousands of employees of these organizations with our Federal employees and retirees and support this long overdue reform. I urge their support this afternoon for H.R. 3249. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. MICA. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 3249) to provide for the rectification of certain retirement coverage errors affecting Federal employees, and for other purposes, as amended.

Mr. MICA

Mr. MICA. Mr. Speaker, I would like to take this opportunity to express my deepest thanks to all the firefighters who fought tirelessly for weeks against the recent wildfires in Florida. This summer has been a trying time for the people of Florida. The citizens of my State have witnessed record high temperatures and a desert-like climate. A lack of rain over the past several months has caused the rural areas of Florida to become so dry that they are ignited into blazing infernos with the slightest hint of flame. The country watched on television and read in the newspapers for weeks how my State burned at the mercy of these devastating fires. Seminole and Volusia Counties, two of the counties in my District, were hit hard. Businesses were lost, homes were destroyed, and natural areas annihilated. But the destruction in my District was no different than the destruction throughout the rest of the State. Florida cried out with a plea of ``Please help.'' And people from across this Nation called out resoundingly--``We're on our way''. And they came. They came from Georgia and Alaska. They came from North Carolina and Alabama. They came from 47 States in the Union. Out of the devastation of these fires came the tremendous courage and help of thousands of Americans who worked valiantly throughout this tragedy. In total approximately 7,000 firefighters risked their own lives to save the lives and homes of the people of Florida. Fortunately out of 170 injuries that these firefighters suffered only one was serious. Greg Born, from Alabama, suffered the worst injuries of the firefighting effort. While in the field he was struck by a falling tree. The weight of the tree broke his arm and fractured his neck. He is still in a cast and neck brace. To Greg and all the other brave souls that fought the wildfires in Florida I say thank you, and if your States are ever in need you can call on us. We'll be there. To the citizens of my district who opened their homes, their helping hands, and their hearts I say ``thank you''!

Mr. MICA

Mr. MICA. Mr. Chairman, on rollcall No. 296, the Leach and Lazio amendment to H.R. 4194, I was unavoidly detained. Had I been present, I would have voted ``Yes.''

Mr. MICA

Mr. MICA. Mr. Speaker, I come to the floor tonight as a Member of the House Committee on Government Reform and Oversight in an effort to shed some light on what we have been doing. The Committee on Government Reform and Oversight is one of the most important committees of Congress. When I came to Congress in 1993, I selected that committee because it is really one of the most important responsibilities in Congress. Our committee really dates back to 1808 when the Founding Fathers began to see the creation of more and more of a Federal bureaucracy and Federal agencies. They did not really trust the appropriators, and they did not trust the legislators who created programs or those who funded the programs. They set up a separate investigative panel. This goes back to 1808, and that is the genesis of the committee on which I serve, the Committee on Government Reform and Oversight. It is an important committee in Congress because it is vital to our system. There are many other systems that are similar to the American system but not that have all the checks and balances that the Founding Fathers have put together. One of our most important responsibilities is to conduct investigations. If you go out and talk to the general public, my colleagues and many people say, well, we are investigating too much, or there is too much cost to investigations; and that really is not the case in our system. That is part of our system and part of the process. The current Committee on Government Reform and Oversight is also known as the Burton Committee. It has been very difficult to serve on that committee and do an effective job. The gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Burton), myself, and other members of the committee are sent here in the stead of the public and the citizens to conduct their business, to look at investigating the agencies and activities at the Federal level. We have tried to take that on with a certain responsibility and fairness; and it has been, indeed, a very difficult task, even up to today. Since February, we have been asking for a grant of immunity for four witnesses. We go first to the Department of Justice. This is in our campaign investigation of the foreign money that came into the 1996 campaigns. But we went first to the Department of Justice and requested that we could depose and have these witnesses testify and grant immunity that, back in February, we were granted. Ever since then, Mr. Speaker, we have seen delay. We have seen one tactic to obstruct this investigation after another. Very frustrating. Back after, again, DOJ gave us permission in February and March, the first vote was to deny granting immunity by the Democrats on April 23, a second vote on May 13. Finally, today, on the eve of the President going to China have we obtained permission and consent to get a grant of immunity to hear these witnesses to conduct the investigation. I am concerned about the process, the delay, and obstruction to date. It is a serious matter for the Congress because they have managed now to obstruct this investigation, our responsibility under the Constitution, and what the people sent us here for until this date. This is the last week this House will be in session before we go on recess. We come back in mid July, and we will be here for approximately 3 weeks. So the plan to obstruct, the plan to delay, the plan to subvert the very process that our Founding Fathers has put together has, indeed, succeeded; and it is unfair, because the American people have a right to know. The very system that has been abused in this campaign finance process, the very system that set up this investigation and review and this cleansing that takes place through a committee like the Committee on Government Reform and Oversight has, in fact, been obstructed in its responsibility. Then we have charges that we have been too broad in our responsibilities, in our investigation. We did not create Filegate. We had to investigate it. We did not create Travelgate. We had to investigate it. We did not create this fiasco with campaign financing. We have been charged to investigate it. We have never in the history of this republic that I am aware of had seven independent counsels. The list goes on and on. Mr. Speaker, I am disappointed in what has taken place in an important area of congressional responsibility.

Mr. MICA

Mr. MICA. Mr. Speaker, I am here this morning with three empty chairs, and I would like to talk about the President's visit to China. Not since Genghis Kahn led hordes of warriors across the Asian plains has China been invaded by a larger political entourage than President Clinton leads this week. Accompanying him, at taxpayer expense, will be hordes of aides, staff, military, press, and spinmasters. It is reported that more than 1,200 individuals will accompany the President, and fleets of jumbo jets will transport scores of personnel and equipment across the Pacific. More than six limousines and dozens of vehicles will be shipped to China to add comfort and security for the President's entourage. But what will not be a part of the President's China visit, Mr. Speaker, are three journalists, three U.S. journalists. I have them symbolized by these three empty chairs up here at the well this morning. Three empty chairs. Three journalists from Radio Free Asia will not be going to China. There will be three empty seats. Three journalists from Radio Free China will have had their visas denied and revoked by Chinese officials just within the last few hours. It is an outrage on the eve of our President's visit that legitimate journalists covering this visit will be barred from reporting this event for Radio Free China. There will be three empty seats. As this headline today declares, ``Beijing pulls visas of three U.S. reporters,'' we see these three empty seats that signify those journalists who will not be covering this event. As someone who has advocated a free trade policy towards China in an effort to secure a more free and open China and a free press for the Chinese, I and many others, again, have been betrayed. If these reporters were allowed to go, they would certainly cover a lavish banquet at the Great Hall. What they would not report, if they could attend, would be the unjust imprisonment of Chinese, such as teacher Lee Hi; and that is reported in today's Washington Post. I commend that to my colleagues. Lee Hi, a 44-year-old former teacher at a Chinese medical college is serving a 9-year sentence in Beijing's prison. His crime: assembling a list of people jailed for taking part in pro-democracy demonstrations in Tiananmen Square in 1989 from the Beijing area alone. He documented more than 700 in prison. And 158 of those, mostly workers rather than students, received sentences of more than 9 years and are presumed still held. While President Clinton and the Chinese President dine on a sumptuous meal, Lee Hi and others will rot in Chinese prisons. Mr. Speaker, without a free press and without freedom for political dissidents, we have, in fact, empty chairs, and we have, in fact, an empty policy towards freedom of dissent in China.

Mr. MICA

Mr. MICA. Regular order, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, how much time do I have remaining?

Mr. MICA. Mr. Chairman, reclaiming my time, I yield to the gentleman from Kentucky (Mr. Whitfield).

Mr. MICA. Mr. Chairman, I continue to yield to the gentleman from Texas.

Mr. MICA. Mr. Chairman, I move that the Committee do now rise.

Mr. MICA. Mr. Chairman, in conclusion, and I am sorry I do not have too much time, but I tried to point out and I serve on the committee, we looked at this, we have been there, we have done it. We see $263 million in soft money, another half a billion not even on that chart. We are not going to resolve this because you do not have the votes on either side, and 218 votes in this House beats the best argument. So people want the laws enforced, people want disclosure, and people want a ban on foreign money. Those are the things we can agree on. Those are the things that we brought out as a committee. The gentleman from California (Mr. Thomas) has done his best. I urge his amendment.

Mr. MICA. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the requisite number of words. Mr. Chairman, there is a movie that I enjoyed, it was called Groundhog Day. Some of my colleagues may have seen Groundhog Day. Maybe the Chairman saw it. I know they have theaters in Arkansas, Mr. Chairman. I am a member of the Committee on House Oversight. We have heard all of these arguments. The House of Representatives was set up, and fortunately we have the Committee of the Whole and here we are tonight as the Committee of the Whole and we are repeating all of those arguments. We had 40 Members and these Members are very well intended. I heard the gentleman from California (Mr. Doolittle), I heard the gentleman from Connecticut (Mr. Shays), I heard the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Meehan), I heard every one of the sponsors almost, or I read their testimony for their proposals. The problem is we have 435 experts. The gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Collins) was just here and showed his brochure of how he was offended and beaten up by soft money or union money. The problem we have here is this soft money, and we would love to ban it, I would love to ban it, we looked at this, the problem we have is we have $263 million here, but we heard the gentleman from Arizona who said that there was a half a billion dollars of union money that you could not even put on this chart in addition to that. And, Mr. Chairman, we are all going to be here again because we are not going to be able to solve this unless we can solve all of these problems. We do have an impediment. The impediment to soft money, and we have heard it, is the Constitution and the Bill of Rights, the first amendment, the free speech clause. We have been through this debate in committee, we are going to be through this debate again. Our committee tried and we did our best. We brought out four bills, one on disclosure, one banning soft money, one banning union money, and one banning very clearly foreign contributions. And unfortunately we are here again. So we will repeat on campaign finance reform Groundhog Day. We are going to hear all the arguments again. We are going to have the same votes again. It is just a prediction. It is going to be another Groundhog Day. Mr. Chairman, I yield to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. DeLay).

Mr. MICA. Mr. Chairman, how much time do I have remaining?

Mr. MICA

Mr. MICA. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this time. Mr. Speaker, let me just clear up a couple of points. First we have heard that this is a question about granting waivers and others have granted waivers. That may be the case. But never before in the history of the Republic have we had the question of the influence of foreign money into the process. That is one of the key issues here. Never before have our intelligence, our Department of Defense and our defense process and our national security been so threatened or questioned by allegations that have been made about intrusions into the system. Let me also say to the gentleman from California (Mr. Waxman) who spoke about 25 percent of the staff being given by the majority to the minority. When I came here in the first Congress, from 1993 to 1995, they gave us five investigative staffers for their 55 staffers. That is the record. That is the fact. As a matter of fact, the Burton committee has operated efficiently and at lower cost, assuming the responsibilities of two additional committees and done all their investigations in an administration that has been plagued with more scandals than any in the history of, again, the Republic. It is somewhat like it is the Republicans' fault that we have had Filegate, Travelgate, campaign contributions and now this very serious matter. They make it look like it is our fault. It is not, and the American people need to know the facts.