Sue Myrick

Mrs. MYRICK

Mrs. MYRICK. That is very true.

Mrs. MYRICK. I am glad to yield to the gentleman from Arizona.

Mrs. MYRICK. If the gentleman would yield for just a moment, I wanted to make a point too. There is another option we really have not discussed tonight and that is something that was asked of me a lot in my district when people would come up and say, ``What is going to happen?'' And we would tell about the choices and they would say, ``Why can I just not stay in the plan that my employer had for me? It was a good plan and I liked it a lot better.'' That is going to be another option that we hadn't talked about; the option that they can stay as they are if they want to.

Mrs. MYRICK. I yield to the gentleman from Indiana. MR. McINTOSH. Mr. Speaker, I want to say I appreciate my colleague's putting together the opportunity tonight to share with the American citizens what we are hearing about Medicare. I wanted to share a report from Indiana about what citizens in my district have been saying. I held 12 town meetings in August, and four more meetings just last weekend with a special Medicare advisory task force dedicated to developing ideas to preserve and protect and improve Medicare. I wanted to let people know, probably the greatest worry that constituents in my district have was preserving Medicare. They are worried that if we do not act soon, it will not be available for 33 million Americans, and it will go bankrupt within the next 7 years. I wanted to get their ideas on how we could fix that very serious problem. I told my constituents I would forward these ideas to my colleagues here in the House of Representatives, and to the Speaker, the gentleman from Georgia [Mr. Gingrich], as we considered legislation in Congress to preserve, protect, and improve Medicare. The following is what some of the Hoosiers in my district told me we should consider as we look for ways to improve the current Medicare system and ensure that we keep our compact with senior citizens to be able to provide them the quality health care in the world. First, do not play politics. They do not want us to play around with this legislation. They do not like the fact that the President and members of the minority party are willing to do nothing in order to score political points, and they commend our effort to step up to the plate and address this very serious problem. Second, they want us to tell the truth. A lot of them were very nervous about cuts in Medicare, and they were seeing on the nightly news that we are cutting Medicare. They asked me, ``What are you going to do about this?'' I showed them a chart similar to the one that we have here tonight and pointed out to them that the truth is Medicare is actually going to be increasing under our plan. It is going up from $4,800 per beneficiary this year to over $6,700 per beneficiary in the year 2002. People were pleased that we were being honest about this. We pointed up, that is not as fast as some people want it to grow in Washington and they are calling it a cut because we did not increase it as fast as they wanted to, but they were relieved to see that Republicans were committed to increasing spending in Medicare so that we can provide good quality health care. And then the No. 1 issue that senior citizens asked us to address was to reform the system so that they could eliminate the fraud and abuse that is driving up the cost, and the No. 2 issue was to provide them more choices, so that they could take advantage of a lot of the new benefits in the health care system and be able to choose for themselves what type of health care they wanted, what type of coverage they wanted to get, and how they wanted to have their relationship with their doctors structured. I want to close my report from Indiana by saying that I was very pleased with the input I got from citizens all over the district and pleased that they were willing to spend the time to help us craft legislation that will allow us to increase spending on Medicare, preserve and protect the system for senior citizens in the future, and I think they will be thankful that this Congress did not play politics with a very serious issue and stepped up to the plate to do what is right for all Americans. Every senior had a personal example of fraud in his Medicare billing, including one in Milroy who was billed $5 for one aspirin, or another in Columbus who would take a taxi to the hospital instead of a bus because Medicare would not reimburse travel for the less expensive bus. Constituents in Pendleton said they were told by hospital officials not to worry about what was on their bills. ``Don't worry,'' one hospital official said. ``You're not paying for this--Medicare is.'' Excessive paperwork required by Medicare also was mentioned at every Town Meeting. One constituent from Alexandria suggested paperwork could be reduced by introducing competition. She suggested private-sector firms could be used to process claims, with those that process claims the fastest receiving a bonus. A man in Pendleton suggested a flat tax-like form to reduce Medicare paperwork. Seniors told me they should be allowed to purchase their own insurance, and that competition would reduce fraud and overall costs. One woman in Cambridge City said her daughter's HMO provided greater coverage, such as for eyeglasses and dental services, than Medicare does. ``Competition is good,'' she said. ``Let me decide the kind of insurance that's best for me.'' A woman in Elwood said people should be held responsible for their own bad health habits. For example, she said, smokers should pay more for Medicare than nonsmokers, giving Americans an incentive to live healthy and reduce overall health costs. One witness, in Muncie said that he welcomed choices but wanted to make sure we had ``Truth in Health Care,'' each choice lays out cost and coverage. Finally, Mr. Speaker, a man in Union City said seniors who work full- time past the age of 65 should have the option of remaining on their private insurance plans. Mr. Speaker, I was heartened to learn that Hoosiers recognize the need for immediate action to save Medicare. But more than that, they want to ensure that we learn from the problems in the current system as we work to preserve, protect and strengthen Medicare while also offering seniors more health care choices. Mr. Speaker, Indiana seniors are paying attention to this issue. They understand that something must be done. They expect us to act. They know we are listening, and I insist that we act boldly, responsibly, and without delay. I see my colleague from Oklahoma has risen. Would you like to join us in reporting on what you are hearing from your part of the country?

Mrs. MYRICK. That is exactly right.

Mrs. MYRICK

Mrs. MYRICK. Mr. Speaker, I recently noticed that for rollcall vote No. 598, I am on record as having voted ``nay.'' When I cast may vote on this amendment, I voted ``aye'' and, due to an error with the electronic voting system, I was incorrectly recorded as having voted ``nay.'' My votes both in the Science Committee and on the House floor, on the issue of Federal funding for the space station, have been consistent. At a time when we are tightening our belts in order to balance the Federal budget, I cannot support funding for this project. Therefore, I would like to ask unanimous consent that my correct intentions--a vote of ``aye''--be placed in the permanent record immediately following rollcall vote No. 598.

Mrs. MYRICK

Mrs. MYRICK. Mr. Speaker, the Medicare trustees board, which includes three of President Clinton's Cabinet secretaries, has issued a report in which they state that Medicare ``continues to be severely out of financial balance and is projected to be exhausted in seven years.'' Mr. Speaker, President Clinton's board says that Medicare is going broke. And the Republicans say, let us save Medicare. It is that simple. Yet, daily, Members of this House mislead the American people regarding Medicare. It is a disgrace. Mr. Speaker, every American needs a copy of this report so they can read it, and then they will know the truth. They can get the report by simply calling 202-225-3121 and asking for their Representative.

Mrs. MYRICK

Mrs. MYRICK. Mr. Speaker, 30 years ago Sunday, President Johnson signed Medicare into law. There are 37 million Americans who depend upon Medicare, including my own mom and my in-laws. According to a recent report by the Medicare trustees, the Medicare trust fund starts going bankrupt in 1996. The new congressional majority is committed to preserving, protecting, and strengthening Medicare. We need to take the best ideas from the private sector because they do a much better job at health care than the government- run system. We should also explore other options like medical savings accounts. We need to root out the fraud and the abuse that cheats the beneficiaries out of their money. It drains the reserves of the Medicare trust fund. Finally, we need to keep partisan politics out of the discussion of Medicare. We need to put aside our differences and all of us work together to provide the strengthening of Medicare.

Mrs. MYRICK

Mrs. MYRICK. Mr. Speaker, on June 21, 1995, during consideration of H.R. 1854, the Legislative Branch Appropriations Act for fiscal year 1996, I am on record as having voted ``nay'' on rollcall vote No. 402, offered by Representative Michael Castle. This amendment addressed funds for Members' official mail expenses, reducing them by $4.6 million. The Castle amendment was offered as a substitute to Representative Mark Neumann's amendment, which would have reduced Members' representational allowances by $9.3 million. I felt Representative Neumann's amendment was a more fiscally responsible proposal, as it offered a greater reduction in funding--and did not focus solely on Members' official mail expenses. I, therefore, voted against the Castle substitute, and intended to vote in favor of the Neumann amendment when it was brought up for a rollcall vote. Unfortunately, a recorded vote was not allowed on Representative Neumann's amendment, due to a technical parliamentary procedure and the Chair failed the amendment by a voice vote. Therefore, I would like to state for the record, Mr. Speaker, that had a recorded vote been called for the Neumann amendment--reducing funds in the legislative appropriations bill for Members' representational allowances by $9.3 million--I would have voted ``aye.''

Mrs. MYRICK

Mrs. MYRICK. Mr. Speaker, Tuesday, June 13, 1995, and Wednesday morning, June 14, 1995, I was granted a leave of absence due to illness in my family. I therefore missed the following rollcall votes: On Tuesday, rollcall No. 370--had I been present, I would have voted ``yea;'' rollcall No. 369--had I been present, I would have voted ``yea;'' rollcall No. 368--had I been present, I would have voted ``yea;'' rollcall No. 367--had I been present, I would have voted ``yea.'' On Wednesday, rollcall No. 373--had I been present, I would have voted ``nay;'' rollcall No. 372--had I been present, I would have voted ``yea;'' and rollcall No. 371--had I been present, I would have voted ``nay.''

Mrs. MYRICK

Mrs. MYRICK. Mr. Chairman, I stand today as a strong supporter of the military and of our national defense. I have a brother and a father who are retired military. I also will support final passage of the bill. But I am a member of the Committee on the Budget, and as such have spent the last few months working on the budget and cutting spending, et cetera. I have a question on one of the amendments today relative to two particular requests that I understand were not requested by the military, by the Navy, in the appropriations bill. One of them is $6 million for a foundry renovation and modernization in a shipyard which had been closed by the Base Closing Commission and, as I said, was not requested. The other is $10.4 million earmarked for a physical fitness center in another shipyard that already has a physical fitness center. So, since the Navy did not request this, my question, very simply, is: I would like to ask that this amendment be supported for eliminating these two projects.

Mrs. MYRICK

Mrs. MYRICK. Mr. Chairman, we hear a lot about what is wrong with this budget, and I would like to talk a little bit about what is right with this budget. Mr. Chairman, we feel that we have a moral responsibility to leave this world better than when we found it, and part of this is taking on that responsibility for our children's future and looking at what we are going to leave them. In putting together this budget, it was not just quickly put together. There is much thought that has gone into this. It has gone by line by line and program by program, agency by agency, and said is it necessary? Is there a better way to do it? Is it worth spending our children's future? I came here because of 6 grandchildren. In addition, I look after a 92-year-old elderly lady who has no family who is in a nursing home. So I am very familiar with what people are going through. We are handling that in our own family right now. But we are doing a lot of things that are necessary in my district, and people are telling me it is necessary, we want you to do it. And I want to talk a little bit about some of the things the changes that need to be done. We are cutting foreign aid by $29 billion and eliminating a lot of wasteful programs. We are keeping our promise not to touch Social Security. There are not going to be any changes in Social Security coming up. We are block granting job training, because there are 163 different job training programs right now. It is very confusing. They do not all work. So we are finding how all this can work together and saying let us take the duplication out and really make it reach the people who need the job training. We are eliminating some departments, Education, Commerce, and Energy, because there is a lot of wasteful bureaucratic structure there. There are over 71 duplicative programs in commerce throughout Government. That is ridiculous. It is a waste of money. We also are terminating and privatizing 284 programs, 13 agencies, and 69 commissions. Sure, there are good changes, but it is a better way to spend our tax dollars. Privatizing is the way to go. We are privatizing General Services, Public Broadcasting, other things that can carry their weight only the open market, and looking for a better way to deliver the services. We are stopping a lot of the Federal subsidies to business and industries, things they do not need Government help on. They do it themselves. So the bottom line is, we are looking at this responsibly. We care about what is going to happen. We care about where our children and our grandchildren are going to end up. And we want to make Government work better, and let the people at home make their decisions and let them keep the money in their own pocket. They can spend it better than the Federal Government can.

Mrs. MYRICK

Mrs. MYRICK. Mr. Speaker, as we debate tax relief this week--I would like Members to consider the message of this poem--sent to me by a constitute: Tax his cow, tax his goat Tax his pants, tax his coat, Tax his crops, tax his work, Tax his tie, tax his shirt, Tax his chew, tax his smoke; Teach him taxes are no joke. Tax his oil, tax his gas, Tax his notes, tax his cash; Tax him good and let him know-- After taxes he has no dough. If he hollers, tax him more Tax him 'til he's good and sore. Tax his coffin, tax his grave, Tax the sod in which he lays. Put these words upon his tomb; ``Taxes drove me to my doom.'' And after he's gone he can't relax; They'll still be after inheritance tax!

Mrs. MYRICK

Mrs. MYRICK. Mr. Speaker, in my home State of North Carolina, stock car racing is a huge event. In stock car racing the car driver has a pit crew. These are the guys who work on the engine, fill it up with gas, and keep the car running. When a driver pulls into the pits to have his crew work on the car, the crew only has a few seconds to do their job. They change the tires, fill it up, clean the windshield, and then they get out. Mr. Speaker, the American public elected us to be their pit crew. The 1994 elections attempted to put America back on the right track. Hard working Americans are driving this country, but they have chosen us to come up here, do a job and get out. I am a proud sponsor of House Joint Resolution 76, the Hilleary amendment which would impose a maximum 12-year limit on the terms of House and Senate Members. However, this amendment would also respect term limits already established by 22 States nationwide, most of which are stricter. Mr. Speaker, like many other freshman Republicans, I have also signed on to Mr. Inglis' 6-year term limit amendment on House Members. I have purposefully signed on to more than one amendment to help ensure that term limits pass this House. Mr. Speaker, let us put America back on the right track and pass term limits.

Mrs. MYRICK

Mrs. MYRICK. Mr. Chairman, our Founding Fathers established this body on the ideal of a citizen legislature. Their goal was to maintain the free flow of ideas through a steady rotation of individuals who saw public service, as just that, a service to the public--not a career. We have a chance to uphold the wishes of our Founding Fathers this evening by passing a term limits amendment. In addition we have a chance to pass an amendment that would not only respect the wishes of our Founding Fathers but would also respect the spirit of the Contract With America, by recognizing States rights. The amendment is the Hilleary-freshman amendment. Mr. Chairman, the contract reads: ``House Republicans respect the rights of the States and respect the rights of citizens to limit the terms of their elected officials.'' The Hilleary amendment sets a maximum 12-year limit on the terms of both House and Senate Members. However, it respects the limits, even stricter limits, already established by 22 States nationwide. Mr. Chairman, whether it be the amendment offered by Mr. Hilleary, Mr. Inglis, or Mr. McCollum, I will support final passage. In 22 States, term limits have been initiated by citizens and have passed, on average 2 to 1; 80 percent of Americans support term limits, and I am one of them. I urge all my colleagues--on both sides of the aisle--to join with the American people. The public has spoken. We must pass term limits tonight.

Mrs. MYRICK

Mrs. MYRICK. Yes.

Mrs. MYRICK. We are talking about, what you are talking about, the only thing that has been cut is the increases that were requested that are not being increases in the same point.

Mrs. MYRICK. Yes, I will yield.

Mrs. MYRICK. Mr. Speaker, if you watched TV lately, read a magazine or a newspaper, surely you have seen photographs of Democrats surrounding themselves with children and claiming that Republicans are out to cut school lunches and be cruel and mean to little kids. Mr. Speaker, the policy of this historic Chamber should be set based on the fact they are not on photo ops that make one party look like they love children more than the other. The American people are smarter than that, and I know they can see through it. Between 1962 and 1992 welfare spending increased by over 900 percent, while the poverty rate only dropped less than 5 percent, and illegitimacy has increased over 400 percent. I ask you, is that progress? My mom always told me you do not get something for nothing. But in this case, after spending $5 trillion, we have got just that. Nothing. I do not understand, why are the Democrats defending a system that has literally enslaved its recipients into a cycle of dependency? If Democrats feel so strongly about welfare reform, why did they not do something about it during the 40 years they controlled this House? The Republicans are talking heat right now, but it is because we are picking up the mess left behind by the failed welfare state. But that is OK. It takes leadership to make hard choices. The current welfare system should be arrested for entrapment, because it traps its recipients in a web of dependency. Listen to the following facts: There are 5 million families with 9.6 million children on AFDC right now, and more than one-half of those families remain on AFDC for more than 10 years. Of the 5 million families receiving that help, only 20,000 people work, and children born out of wedlock have three times greater chance of being on welfare when they grow up. You know, we are hearing a lot of talk right now about Head Start and WIC also. Well, not one penny is being withheld from Head Start, and as for WIC, this rescissions bill merely recouped $25 million out of the $125 million the programs was unable to spend in the previous fiscal year. Our bill does not take a single person off the WIC rolls and leaves in place the $260 million increase for the program in fiscal 1995. And the School Nutrition Block Grant Program actually grows at a 4.5 percent rate. Over 5 years that is $1 billion more than is currently being spent. As a former mayor, I spent a lot of time with programs to help people get out of the dependency cycle and learn to help themselves. My experience has taught me that people want their self-respect and their dignity restored, and the current system does not do that. In fact, it works against that goal. I trust the American people can see through the smoke screens and deception that we have heard here tonight from the other side. Mr. Speaker, I am finished.

Mrs. MYRICK

Mrs. MYRICK. Mr. Speaker, funding for the nutrition programs under the GOP plan is greater in each of the next 5 years than under the current system, a 4.5 percent increase each year or $19 billion 795 million, which is $588 million more than would be provided under the current system. Mr. Speaker, our needy children will not be left behind. All program dollars in family nutrition block grants are required to go to individuals below 185 percent of the poverty level. With increased funding, less bureaucracy and less paperwork, Mr. Speaker, States can provide more services to more people. Eighty percent of the family block grant must be used to provide food assistance to pregnant, postpartum and breast-feeding women, and infants and children who are found to be a nutritional risk. This program helps children because it meets the needs of low-income children, pregnant mothers, provides meals and supplements to children, and child care, and allows for the operation of a summer food program to meet the needs of children when they are not in school, but in day care centers, Head Start, summer camp and homeless shelters. Mr. Speaker, these changes will benefit our children positively over the next few years.

Mrs. MYRICK

Mrs. MYRICK. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that my name be deleted as a cosponsor of that joint resolution, House Joint Resolution 2.

Mrs. MYRICK

Mrs. MYRICK. Mr. Speaker, mean spirited and callous and heartless. These are the terms the Democrats use to describe the welfare proposals moving through the House currently. As a former mayor of Charlotte who has seen firsthand the damage done by the welfare system over the years, I prefer the words responsibility, freedom, and compassion. Responsibility to be allowed to work and freedom to get off of welfare, compassion, caring, helping. We had programs in our city that were innovative and they allowed people to take pride in themselves once again. We can do that through the proposals being offered by the Republican system that is currently underway now. Self-sufficiency is the key, not dependency.

Mrs. MYRICK

Mrs. MYRICK. Mr. Speaker, I would like to remind my colleagues that hearings begin today in subcommittee on the most fundamental congressional reform issue we will face this session--term limits. As these hearings begin, I ask my colleagues to join team 290--a bipartisan group of Members of Congress committed to passing a term limits amendment in the 104th Congress. We are gathering commitments to support final passage of a term limits amendment this session. Please join us by signing the team 290 board in the Speaker's lobby today. If you can't join today, the board will be up from 9 to 5:30 daily. Please join team 290 and show your commitment to true congressional reform through term limits.

Mrs. MYRICK

Mrs. MYRICK. Mr. Speaker, as mayor of the booming city of Charlotte, NC, I experienced, firsthand, the absurdity of unfunded mandates. We were forced to curtail services that our constituents had already paid taxes to support, in order to avoid being taxed twice for the same things. American taxpayers are paying over 50 percent of every dollar they earn in taxes. They view unfunded Federal mandates as Government inefficiency and double taxation. We must pass H.R. 5--if for no other reason than because the American taxpayers demand it.

Mrs. MYRICK

Mrs. MYRICK. Mr. Speaker, on November 8, America's voters sent us to Washington to change the way the Federal Government does business. They made it very clear that the tax-and-spend mentality and business as usual must end. The people are aware of the ever-increasing national debt of $4.5 trillion and the need for a balanced budget amendment. They are also aware that too many here in Congress, do not comprehend the need, nor acknowledge the people's insistence, for it to be done. Americans balance their own budgets. They demand the same of their Government. The people are burdened by paying over half of their income in taxes. So they fully understand the need for a vote by three-fifths of the Congress before taxes can be raised. When the U.S. Congress enacts, and 38 States ratify, a balanced budget amendment, it will ensure that the Federal Government does not spend more than it takes in. It will be a first step toward achieving the changes that the voters have demanded, and it will contribute to the reweaving of the fabric of America for future generations.