Gary Miller

Mr. GARY MILLER of California

Mr. GARY MILLER of California. Mr. Speaker, today I note with great sadness the passing of Mr. George Whitney, one of the great community leaders of Upland, California. Mr. Whitney unselfishly dedicated his life to improve the lives of others. He was a founding trustee of Pitzer College of the Claremont Colleges. He served Good Samaritan Hospital, the California Historical Society, the Southwest Museum, and the I.N. and Susanna H. Van Nuys Foundation. He also served as president of the Friends of the Huntington Library and the Zamorano Club. An Upland pioneer, Mr. Whitney moved to the city as a toddler in 1916 and lived there until his passing in January. During that time, the San Gabriel Valley experiencing an unprecedented amount of growth. From 1951 until 1963, Mr. Whitney headed the Upland Planning Commission that was responsible for designing the city's master plan. Because of his commitment to integrating the city's rich heritage with ample open space, Upland has maintained its rural atmosphere nestled at the base of the San Gabriel Mountains. Mr. Speaker, Mr. Whitney inspired his children, his peers and all who knew him. With his passing, our community has lost a mentor, a great leader and a friend. God bless him and his family.

Mr. GARY MILLER of California

Mr. GARY MILLER of California. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 910, the ``San Gabriel Basin Water Quality Initiative.'' The San Gabriel Basin supplies drinking water for almost one and a half million people in Southern California. It is a valuable natural asset whose management is vital for all who depend on it. H.R. 910 encourages the input of local industry and businesses, community and environmental leaders and government officials from the local, state and federal levels. Instead of costly litigation to punish or shield from liability, H.R. 910 provides incentives for these groups to participate in clean up and management efforts for ground water and water sources affecting the San Gabriel Water Basin. One of the greatest obstacles to ground water clean up is the economic cost incurred by private industry and the controlling government authorities. This bill addresses this problem by authorizing funding for technology research that will allow for more cost-effective clean up. Beyond this effort, it also provides for technology development that will help maintain cleaner groundwater systems. As our population continues to grow, it is important that we protect our groundwater resources against pollution. H.R. 910 provides $25 million dollars in research funding to study ways to prevent future groundwater contamination in areas, like the San Gabriel Basin, which supply drinking water. Through this research private industry and government agencies will have better resources to devise water management plans for future development. I believe that this bill provides us with a model for future clean up efforts around the country. It maintains the groups already involved in the clean up while empowering those who have vested interests in this clean up effort. I would like to thank the Chairman of the Rules Committee for his efforts in constructing this legislation, and urge Members of this House to support H.R. 910.

Mr. GARY MILLER of California

Mr. GARY MILLER of California. Mr. Chairman, there has been a lot of debate today. Our budget clearly protects 100 percent of the Social Security surplus. Our budget strengthens Medicare and prescription drugs. I am going to save retiring the debt to last because I think that is an important issue here. Our budget promotes tax fairness, our budget restores America's defense where it should be, and our budget strengthens and supports education. The reason we are here today with our debt is because the Democrats controlled this Congress from 1962 to 1994, and every dollar they took in, they spent $1.20. Since Republicans took over Congress, since 1994, for every new dollar we took in, we only spent 50 cents. But that is not the main issue today. I rise to draw attention as to why we should not pass this amendment, and that is because this amendment puts the Federal budget on auto pilot again. We need to reform government; we need to get rid of the waste. Let me show my colleagues one agency we could attack to get rid of much of the waste, and that is HUD. HUD is losing taxpayer dollars in huge amounts by keeping large inventories of foreclosed FHA houses. Just let me list a few of the statistics that we have. The Federal Housing Administration, FHA mortgage insurance paid out almost 77,000 claims, or $6 billion, in 1998. There is no reform for that. That cost is passed on to consumers in higher premiums. In 1997, single-family homes stayed in Federal inventory on an average of 5.4 months; in 1998 it was 6.6 months; and in 1996, they had 25,000 single- family homes in inventory; and in 1998 it increased to 40,000; and in 1999, it was 50,000. The HUD single-family inventory was valued at $1.9 billion in 1996, and it increased in value to $3.3 billion in 1998. Fifteen percent of HUD inventory properties are held longer than 12 months. The industry average out there has about 3 months in inventory for 12 months. In 1996, the average loss for property was $28,000. In 1998, the average loss had increased to $31,700. The average loss in 1999 was $32,470. If we multiply 50,000 properties in inventory by an average loss of $32,470, it is $1.6 billion. This is a bad proposal. Let us take government off auto pilot. Let us give people their money back. Let us give people tax cuts. Let us not say that we are going to take the money that belongs to taxpayers and we are going to continue to invest it in programs that do not work. Let us change the Federal Government, and the best way to change the Federal Government is get the money out of Washington. We can do it two ways. Are we going to continue to have government on auto pilot, or are we going to give hard-working people their money back to do what they think they should do with it? This is a bad proposal. The focus on paying down debt by 2012 compared to our proposal, paying it down by 2013 only changes the focus from the issue of putting government on auto pilot. We need to take it off auto pilot, we need to reform government, we need to get the waste and abuse out of government.

Mr. GARY MILLER of California

Mr. GARY MILLER of California. Mr. Chairman, I rise to speak in support of the House budget resolution. The American people need to know what we are really talking about here, $1.8 trillion of your money. The money does not belong to government. It is the money we took from you and you have asked us to spend wisely or allow you to keep it, in many cases. What we are talking about today and what the other side is arguing against is allowing you to keep a little of your hard-earned money. What we happen to think does not matter. It is what the American people happen to think and what they say. I would like to read part of a letter written to me by Mr. Todd Kolber of Upland, California. His dad was a physician; his dad was raised poor and worked his way through college. He specialized in chemotherapy to help people with cancer. His father passed away. He wrote me: ``I am the son and executor of the estate that he worked so hard saving for and didn't get to enjoy. Today I am going to have the pleasure of writing two checks totaling nearly $1 million divided between the State and Federal Government. This is the most revolting and disgusting thing that I have ever had to do. When the CPA told me how much money the death penalty imposed on my dad's estate, I literally almost threw up. I was sick to my stomach.'' Mr. Kolber closes with the following question: ``Can you write me back with even one good reason that validates the usurpation of $1 million that was left by my dad to my family?'' I cannot justify this tax of 50 percent on this family. I cannot justify this tax on any American citizen. For this reason I urge my colleagues to do what is right, the right thing for Mr. Kolber and his family and the right thing for you and the constituents of my district who will undoubtedly find themselves in the same situation at some time. I urge my colleagues to vote for the budget resolution that begins to dismantle this unfair tax that does nothing for grieving families. It is wrong. We need to change it. The debate here should be focusing on the fact that this is your money. It is not our money. We got this money because we took this money from you. We are saving Social Security. We are saving Medicare and Medicaid. It is time for you to save a little bit for your family. If you want to buy shoes or clothes or whatever you want to do, you should have your money to do that. Mr. Chairman, I include the following letter for the Record. Todd M. Kolber, Upland, CA, March 7, 2000. Representative Gary Miller, Diamond Bar, CA. Dear Representative Miller: Today marks the 1st day of the 9th month since my dad passed away. He was a physician specializing in chemotherapy treatments for cancer patients. He grew up in a very poor family in Brooklyn, New York, and he still managed to put himself through school and become a doctor, without the help of the government I might add. His plan was to retire this summer, after doing so much good for his patients and our community, and spend time sailing the 15 year old 27 foot sailboat he bought two weeks before he died. He paid untold sums of money in taxes throughout his lifetime while working to the age of 65, a requirement necessary to save enough money to retire at a financial level that a physician deserves. While paying 50% of his income in taxes to the government, money that might otherwise have been used to fund an early retirement, he died. I am his son and executor of the estate that he worked so hard saving for and didn't get to enjoy. Today I am going to have the pleasure of writing two checks totaling nearly one million dollars divided between the state and federal government. This is the most revolting and disgusting thing that I have ever had to do. When the CPA told me how much money the death penalty imposed on my dad's estate, I literally almost threw up. I was sick to my stomach. As a result of my dad's strong desire to save for his retirement the majority of his estate is in Individual Retirement Accounts and you know the tax consequences that creates when distributed to heirs, right? After all is said and done, the government will have taken over 50% of my dad's property and money. I adamantly believe that the government's only societal role is to protect the rights, lives, and property of the law abiding. Period. All socialized legislation beyond that is an unnecessary intrusion into my life and a waste of my money. The government already confiscates too much money through taxation by means of Income tax, Property tax, Capital Gains tax, Gasoline tax, Social Security tax, Medicare tax, Telephone tax, Hotel tax, Airline Ticket tax, Energy Tax, Entertainment tax and numerous other hidden Excise taxes that I continuously pay. Having stated that, and inasmuch as you are supposed to be representing me, can you write me back with even one good reason that validates the usurpation of one million dollars that was left by my dad, to my family? Sincerely, Todd M. Kolber.

Mr. GARY MILLER of California

Mr. GARY MILLER of California. Mr. Speaker, on Thursday, March 16, 2000 I had to return to my district in order to attend to personal business. During my absence, I missed roll call votes 53, 54, and 55. Had I been present, I would have voted ``no'' on Mr. Boehlert's substitute amendment to H.R. 2372. I would have voted ``no'' on the motion to recommit H.R. 2372 with instructions. I would have voted ``yes'' to pass H.R. 2373, the ``Private Property Rights Implementation Act of 2000''.

Mr. GARY MILLER of California

Mr. GARY MILLER of California. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.

Mr. GARY MILLER of California. Mr. Chairman, I am concerned over the recent rise in prices being paid for gasoline at the pump. Right now, my constituents are facing extremely high gas prices. I have received letters and e-mails from many of the people I represent informing me they have recently paid as high as $1.90 a gallon for the lowest grade of gasoline at the pump. Predictions from the Department of Energy have indicated that unleaded gasoline could get as high as $2.25 a gallon by June, at the same time my constituents will be taking their families on summer vacation. As we all know, the reason for the recent price spike is the result of OPEC deciding to decrease production to raise the price of oil. OPEC made this decision last March. We have been well aware of the possibility that a price increase would occur from that. But, because the Clinton administration lacks a definitive national energy policy; and according to the Energy Secretary Bill Richardson, the administration was caught napping, Americans were not shielded from this crisis. I am the first to admit there is no overnight solution to the problem. But I will be the first to say this problem would not have been as costly if President Clinton would have also shown leadership. Instead, the President jeopardized the economy and national security of this country. Now Congress is forced to act on this problem. My amendment to H.R. 3822 would require the Secretary of Energy to prepare a report for Congress on how we can strengthen the United States national security by increasing domestic oil production. The United States is the number one consumer of oil. Even if we increase domestic production, the United States will still rely on foreign oil. But we must diversify our sources of supply so we do not find ourselves in a compromising position should OPEC decide to decrease production again down the road. Moreover, by requiring the Secretary of Energy to report to Congress on how to increase domestic oil production, a blueprint can be provided for future administrations to avert this problem. In addition, future Congresses would not be in the position that we are currently in where Congress is forced to react to a crisis that arguably could have been foreseen and averted. Because the environment is very important and should not be neglected in the decision-making process, my amendment would also require the Secretary of Energy to work with the administrator of the EPA to determine how domestic oil production can be increased without harming the environment. Since President Clinton has taken office, America's dependency on foreign oil has almost doubled to 55 percent. Furthermore, President Clinton has reduced access to Federal lands in the western United States by nearly 60 percent. This is where nearly 67 percent of our onshore oil reserves are located. If Federal lands had been opened to exploration, we may never have been in this position we find ourselves in today. President Clinton has also been responsible for increasing regulations on U.S. oil refineries without consideration of the economic impact these regulations may have on their ability to produce oil. In many cases, independent refineries are forced to close up shop because of the burdensome regulation imposed on them. For every refinery that goes out of business, this is a decline in the domestic oil produced. Although I will withdraw this amendment, I will continue to push the administration to come up with a strategic national energy policy that can thwart another situation like this again and strengthen U.S. national security. I plan to offer this amendment again at a more appropriate time. I hope that my colleagues will support this amendment when I reintroduce it at a later time.

Mr. GARY MILLER of California. Mr. Chairman, I withdraw my amendment.

Mr. GARY MILLER of California

Mr. GARY MILLER of California. Mr. Chairman, the argument made by my distinguished colleague was eloquent. However, it has nothing to do with what is before us today. Great words were used. Decisions are results that we do not agree with, as if we are challenging what local government says. States' rights, local control, corporate constituents, as if we are up here just trying to benefit large corporations who own property. When a dispute is ripe, before it can go to Federal court, property rights challenges belong at the State and local level. We are going to elevate property rights above all other rights. My distinguished colleague needs to realize that 90 percent of all of the development programs that are presented to government are not from large corporations, not the Irvine Company, Ted Turner, or Kaufman & Broad, they are from small property owners who have a few investors. The problem is, most of the lawsuits are not against municipalities by the property owners, the lawsuits are against municipalities by no- growth groups trying to overturn local decisions, and that is what we are trying to deal with. A property owner goes before a city council, a board of supervisors, whatever the local agency might be, and they ask for a reasonable decision on their property rights and what they can do with their property, and they are given that by local government. In essence, they have said, you can move forward with your project because we have given it due consideration. Then a lawsuit is imposed against the city or municipality to stop that by a no-growth group. The city at that point says to the property owner, it is up to you to defend the lawsuit. And then they have to go to superior court to do that. A decision is rendered, and then it goes to the appellate court to make a decision. That decision is rendered, and then it has to go to Federal court. Understand that these people are not the large corporations defending this lawsuit, these are small property owners who are trying to benefit from that property. Many of these individuals have received their property through inheritance, it has been in the family for years, or they buy a small piece of property with a few investors and they try to earn a profit on that property. What happens is, by the time they get through the approval process, it is likely they are going to be in a recession to begin with, but undoubtedly, by the time they get through the legal process, they will be in a recession and, at that point, they will have already lost their investors. What we are saying is, private property owners should have their day in court. They should not spend thousands and thousands of dollars going through a local process, only to have to go to court to be told by their attorney, understand, this is a process you are going to have to go to. If we win in superior court, it is going to be a challenge in the appellate court. When we win in the appellate court, we are going to go to Federal court. Individual property owners, as a rule, do not have the money to go through this process. What we are doing is placing the burden on people who do not have the resources to defend themselves. Yet, my colleagues on the other side of the aisle will continually try to placate us with the comment that we need to provide housing for people of low income, when the system is designed to go against those people. We are not saying that we want to overturn local control. We are not saying we want to overturn State control. We are saying that when local agencies have made a decision, whether it be a good decision or a bad decision, if the property owners feel they have been unfairly treated and their property rights have been taken from them, they should not have to spend years in State court, years in appellate court, only to be forced to go to Federal court. If we look at the majority of the lawsuits, it is not from the property owner against the municipality or city, it is from some outside no-growth group against the city for the decision they made. In California specifically, they are continually being sued for some sequel violation that might not be real at all, yet they are forced into court to prove that the lawsuit against them was not factually based. They are either then taken on a writ of mandamus in other States or in California, and they are saying you violated some zoning, some building or some procedural act on the level of the city and they are forced to go to court to defend it. That is ridiculous. The gentleman's argument is offensive to small property owners that this is just rich corporations or the argument that it is going to take control away from local government. That is not where the lawsuits are occurring, and the gentleman needs to check that out. Friend to friend, the gentleman is wrong. The lawsuits are from outside agencies against cities, based on the decision they made entitling a property owner to use their property. We are saying, that should not be allowed. That is wrong. The assumption that all of these property owners are huge corporations, check it out. Ninety percent are small people who have small pieces of property or farms and they want to use those farms. Now, some people in the Midwest will say, well, we are watching people use their farms today for development, and that is true. The problem is every time a farm is developed, people moved in who opposed the other farmers from using their property.

Mr. GARY MILLER of California

Mr. GARY MILLER of California. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of House Resolution 1000. Like many Members of this House, each Friday I board an airplane and travel to my district. My expectations for this weekly commute are similar to my constituents who regularly travel for business. I want to take off in a timely manner and be assured that all safety features are working accordingly. This bill will help to create this peace of mind for all travelers. First of all, safety equipment such as windshear detection apparatus, runway incursion prevention devices and enhanced vision technologies will be eligible for airport improvement funding. This type of comprehensive approach to airline safety is crucial for both improved safety and better spending practices. Last year, $15 million was appropriated to purchase new approach lighting systems for airports whose systems were 20 years old and older. However, no money was appropriated for the installation of these lighting systems. As a result, we have airports which need these runway lights, but will be forced to continue to wait for them until funds can be appropriated. In addition to serving on the Aviation Subcommittee of the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, I also am a member of the House Science Committee. On behalf of Science Committee Chairman Sensenbrenner and Technology Subcommittee Chairwoman Morella, I wish to thank Chairman Shuster, Ranking Member Oberstar, Aviation Subcommittee Chairman Duncan and Ranking Member Lipinski, for their cooperation to incorporate many of the provisions of H.R. 1551, the Civil Aviation Research and Development Authorization Act of 1999 into Title IX of the Conference Report that we are considering today. Overall, Title IX authorizes $237 million in Fiscal Year 2001 and $249 million in FY 2002 for the projects and activities of the FAA's Research, Engineering and Development account. This represents an increase of roughly 35% over the FY2000 enacted level. Investing in aviation research and technology today is important to ensure that our aviation system meets the growing demands of the future, while enhancing safety. I also wish to point out that during the Science Committee's consideration of H.R. 1551 last spring, I successfully offered an amendment to direct the FAA to place a greater priority on the non- structural components of its current aging aircraft research and development portfolio. The non-structural components of aging aircraft include electrical wiring, hydraulic lines and certain other electro- mechanical systems. Of the funding for projects and activities that comprise FAA's aging aircraft research and development portfolio, less than ten percent is targeted to address non-structural issues. I am very pleased that today's Conference Report includes my amendment to H.R. 1551 and I wish to thank the House and Senate Conferees for their support of my efforts in this area.

Mr. GARY MILLER of California

Mr. GARY MILLER of California. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to a fine public servant, Kristine Elliot-Thalman, who will be retiring this month from her distinguished career at the City of Anaheim, California. As part of her service to the City, especially for the last 13 years, she has headed intergovernmental affairs matters involving local, state, and federal initiatives that are so important to Anaheim's vital needs. Mr. Speaker, I am especially honored to bring Kris Thalman to the attention of the U.S. House of Representatives, because on the very same day as her retirement, she is having a birthday as well and congratulations are doubly in order. My colleagues in Congress, many of whom have had the pleasure to know and work with Kris through the years, wish her Godspeed in whatever endeavors she may choose in the future.

Mr. GARY MILLER of California

Mr. GARY MILLER of California. Mr. Speaker, this bill is about cleaning up neighborhoods and helping people afford housing. It would increase the State authority for the low-income housing tax credit from $1.25 per person to $1.65 per person, and it will index that cap to inflation. What does that mean to people in your district and mine struggling to afford housing? Here are some statistics: the current credit on caps is $1.25 per person. It has not been changed since 1986, which means that while housing is currently affordable and the buying power of taxpayers has been decreased by almost 50 percent, it is not what it used to be. Mr. Speaker, 12 million Americans who are eligible for this program are not benefiting, which means that they are paying a very high portion of their income for rent or they are living in substandard housing. Also, this legislation helps distressed areas by creating renewal communities with pro-growth tax initiatives to create jobs, encourage personal savings, and clean up neighborhoods on former industrial sites so new businesses can grow. Some people have said this tax cut is for the rich, but obviously that is not true. The truth is that those who argue against this kind of a tax cut are simply against any kind of a tax cut. They are terrified about letting any money get away from the Government because they honestly believe government is a solution to all of our problems. Mr. Speaker, I urge all of my colleagues to support this bill that will help people improve their communities and afford housing.

Mr. GARY MILLER of California

Mr. GARY MILLER of California. Mr. Speaker, on Wednesday, March 8, 2000 votes were held while I was in route to the Capitol, as were other members, therefore, I missed roll call votes 29, 30, and 31. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yes'' on the passage of H.R. 1827, the ``Government Waste Corrections Act.'' Had I been present, I would have voted ``yes'' to suspend the rules and pass the H.R. 2952 redesignate the facility of the U.S. Postal Service in Greenville, South Carolina as the Keith D. Oglesby Station. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yes'' to suspend the rules and pass, as amended H.R. 3018 to designate the U.S. Postal Office in Charleston, South Carolina as the Marybelle H. Howe Post Office.

Mr. GARY MILLER of California

Mr. GARY MILLER of California. Mr. Speaker, on Tuesday, February 29, 2000 I had to delay my return to the Capitol in order to attend to personal business in my district. During my absence, I missed rollcall vote 26. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yes'' on the motion to suspend the rules and pass the Indian Tribal Economic Development and Contract Encouragement Act (S. 613).

Mr. GARY MILLER of California

Mr. GARY MILLER of California. Mr. Speaker, I am very honored to rise before you today to acknowledge the achievements and contributions of Mr. Jeffrey Fuller, President of the Montclair, California Chamber of Commerce. Under his leadership, the Chamber has succeeded in expanding its role in the promotion of local businesses, public policy and community involvement. During Mr. Fuller's tenure, the Montclair Chamber of Commerce has expanded its membership by 20 percent, increased cash reserves for future expansion and upgraded its computer system to better serve local businesses and residents. At the same time, he reinstated the Chamber's involvement with the State of the City address and organized the first annual Montclair Safety Fair and Business Expo. Mr. Fuller has tirelessly fought to preserve the spirit of the American dream. I appreciate his work and wish him well in his future endeavors.

Mr. GARY MILLER of California

Mr. GARY MILLER of California. Mr. Speaker, I would like to take this opportunity to inform my fellow colleagues that H.R. 3189, the Joseph Ileto Post Office in Chino Hills, California, has the support of the California congressional delegation. Today, I am submitting the names of 19 California Members who recently agreed to support my legislation which will name the soon-to- completed U.S. Post Office in Chino Hills, CA after Mr. Joseph Ileto. These 19 names will be added to the 33 Members of the California delegation who support passage of the Joseph Ileto Post Office. H.R. 3189 passed the House of Representatives on November 8, 1999 by voice vote and currently awaits action in the U.S. Senate. You may remember that Mr. Ileto, a resident of Chino Hills, was the postal employee who was murdered on August 10, 1999 by Buford Furrow, the gunman who shot and wounded five children and employees at the North Valley Jewish Community Center (in suburban Los Angeles). At the time of H.R. 3189's passage, I was listed as the only sponsor of the bill. The Postal Subcommittee of the House Government Reform Committee allowed me to introduce H.R. 3189 with the understanding that I would need to seek additional support within the California delegation. Even though my California colleagues will not be listed as cosponsors of H.R. 3189, they have graciously agreed to be listed as supporters. Therefore, Mr. Speaker, please add the following 19 Members as supporters of H.R. 3189: Representative Wally Herger, Representative Doug Ose, Representative Lynn Woolsey, Representative George Miller, Representative Barbara Lee, Representative Ellen Tauscher, Representative Richard Pombo, Representative Tom Campbell, Representative Zoe Lofgren, Representative Gary Condit, Representative George Radanovich, Representative Calvin Dooley, Representative Bill Thomas, Representative Xavier Becerra, Representative Lucille Royal-Allard, Representative Grace Napolitano, Representative Steve Kuykendall, Representative Joe Baca, and Representative Ron Packard.

Mr. GARY MILLER of California

Mr. GARY MILLER of California. Mr. Speaker, I rise to commend United Parcel Service (UPS) for earning Forbes Magazine's 1999 Company of the Year Award. UPS is an integral part of our nation's economy with 331,000 employees, 610 aircraft, and 157,000 ground vehicles, all used to deliver three billion parcels and documents each year. As Internet business continues to grow, UPS will become an even more important engine of economic development. One of the critical aspects of UPS's success is happy employees. UPS has an employee retention rate of over 90 percent, and tenures typically span decades. Many of the UPS executives worked their way up from driver or loader jobs. The UPS center in Ontario, California is a big part of the success of UPS, and I want to acknowledge their important contribution to commerce. As the Congressman for Ontario, I know firsthand that the hardworking UPS employees in Ontario deserve recognition for their commitment to excellence. UPS, a quality company that takes care of its customers and employees, is poised to deliver our nation into a high tech economy. Once again, I congratulate UPS on earning the distinction of Forbes Magazine 1999 Company of the Year.

Mr. GARY MILLER of California

Mr. GARY MILLER of California. Mr. Speaker, I rise to commend Gabe Fondario for going above and beyond the call of duty in making the City of Montclair a better place to live. Mr. Fondario was selected as the Montclair Fire Department's Employee of the Year based on his dedication to work and his close working relationship with local apartment owners. He has worked very hard to make the City of Montclair a better place for apartment owners to live. On his own initiative, Mr. Fondario started Citizens Against Unwanted Trash in Our Neighborhoods (CAUTION) program. Through CAUTION, Mr. Fondario brings community members together and organizes neighborhood cleanups in neglected apartment areas. These cleanups have had outstanding participation from apartment owners and tenants, and the results have been remarkable. I commend Mr. Fondario for his sense of civic responsibility and for his hard work for the people of the City of Montclair.

Mr. GARY MILLER of California

Mr. GARY MILLER of California. Mr. Speaker, I rise to commend Steve Jackson for his hard work and dedication which have earned him the honor of Firefighter of the Year for the City of Montclair. Mr. Jackson was selected as Firefighter of the Year based on his dedication and perserverence in completing a very difficult paramedic certification program. The Montclair Fire Department does not currently have a paramedic program so Mr. Jackson completed his training during his personal time off using educational grant money. The certification required six months and a minimum of 1,032 hours to complete. As a member of the Montclair Fire Department's Emergency Medical Service (EMS) Committee, Mr. Jackson is now trying to bring a paramedic training program to Montclair. I commend Mr. Jackson for his desire to improve himself and be excellent in his work.

Mr. GARY MILLER of California

Mr. GARY MILLER of California. Mr. Speaker, I rise to commend Mr. Mel Woods for his work to improve mental health services for Californians. Mr. Woods worked tirelessly to promote legislation to improve access to medication that treats schizophrenia. As a result of his work, Californians suffering from schizophrenia have access to medications that help them live happy and productive lives, without fear of debilitating side effects. With the retirement of Mr. Woods, California has lost a strong advocate for Mental Health care. We commend Mr. Woods for his effort, and wish him a rewarding retirement.

Mr. GARY MILLER of California

Mr. GARY MILLER of California. Mr. Speaker, the following is a list of my colleagues who requested to be cosponsors of H.R. 3189: Representative John Doolittle, Representative Robert Matsui, Representative Tom Lantos, Representative Anna Eshoo, Representative Sam Farr, Representative Lois Capps, Representative Elton Gallegly, Representative Brad Sherman, Representative Buck McKeon, Representative Howard Berman, Representative David Dreier, Representative Henry Waxman, Representative Matthew Martinez, Representative Julian Dixon, Representative Maxine Waters, Representative Juanita Millender- McDonald, Representative Steve Horn, Representative Jerry Lewis, Representative Ken Calvert, Representative Mary Bono, Representative Dana Rohrabacher, Representative Loretta Sanchez, Representative Chris Cox, Representative Ron Packard, Representative Brian Bilbray, Representative Bob Filner, Representative Duke Cunningham, and Representative Duncan Hunter.

Mr. GARY G. MILLER of California

Mr. GARY G. MILLER of California. Mr. Speaker, there are few jobs in the federal government for which public gratitude is a less common response than for those who are tasked with collecting our taxes. Not only must these public servants enforce our ever-burgeoning, byzantine Internal Revenue Code, they are expected to do so in a manner that is professional, responsive and fair to all. During the past year, I have been witness to the performance of the Internal Revenue Service's (IRS) Taxpayer Advocate Office in Laguna Niguel, California, headed by Ms. Connie Adams. This office, which services the 41st Congressional District and the surrounding region, is responsible for resolving difficult, complicated tax disputes between taxpayers and the IRS, and doing so in a manner that stresses, to the utmost, service and fairness to the American taxpayer. It gives me great pleasure to commend the IRS Laguna Niguel Taxpayer Advocate Office for meeting this difficult challenge during the past year. In handling over thirty complicated tax disputes which I received from constituents in my congressional district, the Laguna Niguel Taxpayer Advocate Office performed its duties expeditously, with due diligence, and attention to detail. I would especially like to express my appreciation to the staff members at the Laguna Niguel Taxpayer Advocate Office, including Ms. Maryanne McGoldrick, Ms. Deborah Mata, Ms. Mary Haven, Ms. Katie Williams and Ms. Kim Alfrey for their responsiveness and consummate professionalism in performing their duties. The preliminary evidence in my congressional district is that the IRS has responded with conviction to the reform requirements mandated by the 105th Congress. There are certainly other agencies in the federal government which would do well to learn from the laudatory example set by the Laguna Niguel Taxpayer Advocate Office. Again, my hat is off to these fine public servants for a job well done.

Mr. GARY MILLER of California

Mr. GARY MILLER of California. Mr. Speaker, on Monday, November 8, I was inadvertently detained and unable to vote on the following measures: Rollcall No. 574, recognizing the generous contribution made by each living person who has donated a kidney to save a life; Rollcall No. 575, amending the Ethics in Government Act of 1978 to reauthorize funding for the Office of Government Ethics; and Rollcall No. 576, recognizing and honoring Payne Steward and expressing the condolences of the House of Representatives to his family on his death and to the families of those who died with him. Had I been present, I would have voted ``aye'' on rollcall Nos. 574, 575, and 576.

Mr. GARY MILLER of California

Mr. GARY MILLER of California. Mr. Speaker, is there any reason or wonder that the American people are confused? I wish, prior to us being allowed to come here and talk to the American people, that we had to raise our hand and say, I swear to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help me God. All we have heard today and past days is the Republicans are spending Social Security monies. But actions speak louder than words. My friends on the other side of the aisle continue to vote no on appropriations bills. The President continues to veto appropriations bills. Why? Because we are not spending enough money that has to come from Social Security Trust Fund. Why do we not do what we say we are trying to do? Let us not spend the money which we do not want to spend. We use great words like let us invest. We are not appropriating enough resources. What they are saying is we are not spending enough Social Security money. We are saying, let us not spend Social Security money. Let us keep our promise to the American people. Let us stop being disingenuous. When one hears people come before one and say something, watch what they do. When they accuse Republicans of spending Social Security money, watch how they vote.

Mr. GARY MILLER of California

Mr. GARY MILLER of California. Madam Speaker, I rise in strong support for the Financial Literacy Training Act. This resolution encourages State and local educational agencies to incorporate personal financial management curricula into their educational program system. Prior to being in politics, I was in the development industry for about 30 years. The old statement that it is easier to earn money than it is to keep it is a true statement and this goes a long way to basically giving young people the financial training that they need. When you get money, what do you do with it? It is like giving a young person $10. What does a young person do with it? Do they have any concept of what they should do with their finances, any concept of where that money should be placed, or should the money just be spent? We need to teach our young people how to invest money and what to do with money once they earn it. In the building industry, we watch many, many builders go broke because they succeeded in a given project and they failed in the future because they did not understand financial planning, did not understand what they should do in the future. The best way to resolve this is to be involved with the young people, to give them the financial training and financial literacy that they need when they are young. I would like to commend the gentleman from California (Mr. Dreier), he represents a neighboring district in California, for his hard work and effort in drafting this important piece of legislation. If we are going to invest anywhere, let us invest in our children. If we are going to invest in our children, let us teach them how to invest the assets that they acquire, teach them how to invest in their future and plan for their future.