Kendrick Meek

Mr. MEEK of Florida

Mr. MEEK of Florida. Madam Speaker, I just want to say that it is an honor again to address the House and the American people, also. I am sharing this hour today with the gentlewoman from Florida (Ms. Wasserman Schultz), also. It is a pleasure to be here on the floor with her one more time.

Mr. MEEK of Florida. Madam Speaker, if I may take just a moment to talk about a friend of ours and a pillar in Florida. Mr. Bill Lehman, Congressman William Lehman went on to glory today. He served our country well. He was blessed to be here for some 91 years. He passed away with his family by his side. He served in the 17th Congressional District, Madam Speaker, from the time of 1973 to 1992 with great distinction. He was one of the longest serving, if not the longest serving, chairmen of the Transportation Subcommittee of the Committee on Appropriations and did good works while he was here. A quiet man but a man that enjoyed to have a good time, and we will appropriately honor him with an hour here on the floor, designated by the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Pelosi), Democratic leader, at a later date, with reflections of friends that served with him in the Congress and also those Members who knew him well. And we send our prayers and appreciation to his family for allowing him to serve this great government of ours and play his role in democracy as the annals will reflect. Madam Speaker, I yield to the gentlewoman from Florida (Ms. Wasserman Schultz).

Mr. MEEK of Florida. Madam Speaker, I appreciate the opportunity. Not only I, but former Congresswoman Carrie Meek, the three of us had an opportunity to take a picture together. Congressman Lehman, in 1972, in the newly created 17th Congressional District, he ran for it. As the gentlewoman knows, he served in local government also and ran for that seat and won. So we are the only three that have served in the 17th Congressional District, and that was a good time. We have an opportunity to celebrate not only his life, but we will have an opportunity to celebrate his spirit for years to come. And I know that he is there with his good friend, Dante Fascell, and they are talking about old times when they used to run this House.

Mr. MEEK of Florida. Madam Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman for her comments; and like I said, we will honor him appropriately on this great House floor. Madam Speaker, I just want to once again thank the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Pelosi) for allowing us to represent the minority side here tonight and also to all of the leadership on the Democratic side. And being a Member of the House, it is always a great honor and privilege to come to the floor. So many Members before us have had this opportunity. The 30-something Working Group that was created, and we have to talk about this every time because we have to make sure that Members understand that we are here to come to this floor to share good information and to make sure the American people know exactly what we are doing for them and also in some instances what we are doing to them, and I think it is very important that we remember that. We have been talking a lot about Social Security lately, but tonight we are going to talk about the deficit. And I want to once again commend those groups that are out there on the Social Security front, before we get into the budget, that have been out there working very hard. The President today made some comments from the White House. One thing that he did say, and I am glad that he has decided to come with the American people, was that privatization of Social Security will not resolve the Social Security issue. Some may say crisis; I say issue because Social Security is going to be solvent for the next 47 years, providing 100 percent of the benefits to the American people as they enjoy today, the 48 million Americans who celebrate benefits from Social Security, including survivor benefits that individuals that are receiving from those individuals that have passed on and have left something for their children. Social Security will not end tomorrow. So I said we are going to be here on the budget. But it is interesting, when we start talking about the budget, that none of the philosophy or principles, because there is no plan, is not reflected in the budget. So we will talk about that a little bit more. But I want to just say that Democrats believe that for every issue that is facing our Nation, it is our responsibility to ensure the policies that we pursue are consistent with the values that we cherish. These guiding principles are particularly crucial when it comes to our children and the future generations. The Bush administration budget and the Republican leadership budget fall short of protecting or investing in our children, in our young people. It is fiscally reckless, adding trillions to the deficit over the next 10 years, but we teach our children to save and be fiscally responsible. It is morally irresponsible to slash health care programs that are for young people and seniors, I must add, in my opinion. Education and youth development programs that provide our children opportunities to achieve the American Dream are crucial. In Proverbs it tells us to ``train up a child in the way he should go and when he is old, he will not depart from it.'' I think that it is important that we hold that as a value and cherish that here in this House. If the lessons to our children and young people are reflected in the House Republican budget, then we have failed them and ourselves and the future of the democracy. We have only about 20 more minutes to talk, but we are going to share some of the values of the Democratic budget versus the Republican budget. And I must say there are some individuals that are well intended on the majority side, I must add; but they are being overwhelmed by individuals who are willing to fight for others and not fight for all. So I think it is important that we share the facts here tonight. And I would love to here some of the gentlewoman's opening comments, and hopefully we can get into some of these charts we have so that we can share with the American people what is happening here in this House.

Mr. MEEK of Florida. Well, reclaiming my time, I am so glad that the gentlewoman pointed that out, because I think it is important that the Members pay very close attention to what is happening. I think not only do we have the constitutional responsibility, but we have the responsibility to the people that elected us in our districts to make sure we are not followers, but leaders in this process. I can tell you I take no pleasure, Madam Speaker, to be a part of a Congress that oversees the highest deficit in this history of the Republic. I must say at no other time in this country's history we have had the deficit that we have right now in, and it is very unfortunate that this is going to be passed on to not only my children and grandchildren, but definitely those that are yet unborn. The gentlewoman from Florida (Ms. Wasserman Schultz) and I are both parents. In many instances our children are going to be okay because of who we are and why we are here. But I can tell you that my constituents, and I know your constituents, did not say, well, I want to send you all to Congress so you can have better health care than I have, so that your children will have better opportunities than my children have. They sent us here to make sure we do not hand their children a bad deal. Because the goal of any parent or grandparent is to make sure that their children and grandchildren have a better opportunity than what they had. I have a chart here that I want to share with the Members. As you can see, this is what has happened as relates to the backsliding here into the deficit ditch. This deficit went from a surplus, I must add, during the Clinton years when he started, and this House I must add, balanced the budget without one Republican vote, I must add, balanced the budget, and we were into surplus, some $263 billion in the surplus. Now we have found ourselves in a downward spiral since this administration and this emboldened Republican majority here in this House has taken us to some $4 trillion projected deficit. I think it is important that we understand that this is real money, these are just not numbers, and it is taking our children even further down. I have another chart here, and I am going to talk rather quickly because I know we have to move on here. This is what is going on as relates to the interest payments on the deficit, on the debt, and I think that it is only getting worse. As you can see here, in the 2004 budget, money that is being spent, we are spending more money on paying down the debt, and this number here is actually in the billions, I must add, some $150 billion in the 2004 budget. But better yet, here in education we are spending less than we are spending on taking down the debt. Also as you start looking at the environment here in purple, we are spending far less than we are spending in paying off the debt because of irresponsible spending. And if you go further over, our veterans, our patriots, so many of us talk about them. I am on the Committee on Armed Services, we have a lot of chest beating going on in that committee about who loves the troops and who does not love the troops, and who loves veterans and who does not love veterans, and folks start talking about the tattoos on their chest that they love the troops and all of this. But I can tell you one thing as it relates to our spending in the 2004 budget, it does not reflect our values. I was talking about Proverbs a little bit more, but I will come back to that a little later. I think it is important for us to also look at the amounts spent by 2010 if we continue onto this track. This big red mountain here is not education, it is not the environment, it is not transportation, it is not spending money on our veterans, making sure that we hold up our end of the deal that we said we would provide to them if they serve our country. No, it is the debt. It is the Federal debt as the way we see it now and the way it will be seen up until 2010. I think it is also important for you to see education and where it stands as it relates to the debt and environment and veterans and so on.

Mr. MEEK of Florida. I can tell the gentlewoman that tomorrow on this floor Members will not only vote on the Republican budget but will also vote on the Democratic budget that we have put forth, and I must say that our budget will balance out in the next 10 years. There has been so much cake and ice cream given out in the last 4 years and from the majority side. I want us to confuse Members and start talking about the President. The President proposed the budget of course, but we come up with our own budget. And I can tell you if you think the President's budget is bad, you need to look at the majority- side budget. I can tell you some of my friends are Republicans and I can tell you this, here in the House, some of them are fiscal conservatives but they do not want to make a career decision as it relates to their position in this House to vote against their very own budget. I will also tell you this, if one is a fiscal conservative there is no way in the world they can vote for that budget. I am very proud of the work that the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Spratt) and others have done on the budget. In our Democratic budget we have given $1.6 billion more than the Republican budget for veterans health care and also for other programs for 2006, and $17 billion more over the next 5 years. The Democratic budget also reversed the $798 million cut to veteran affairs which helped veterans and their families. I must also share, not only with the Members, 77 percent of the troops that are in Iraq and Afghanistan are under the age of 30 years old. These young people should be paid the attention that the Congress should reflect their future and their families' future, and I think that is important. I do not want to get too far away because I want to make sure people truly understand this because I know there are about 100 charts in this Chamber. I can tell you for every chart we have, we not only have the source, this is from the Treasury International Capital System from the House Committee on the Budget, the Democratic staff. This is what foreign countries like China and others, what they pay for our debt. We go to them. We ask them for money. They buy our bonds and they pay our debt. Now we are 44 percent indebted to foreign countries. And you can see how it has risen since the majority party has been emboldened by having the President in the White House. First it was 30 percent in 2000. In 2001 it was 30 percent. In 2002 it was 34 percent. In 2003, 37 percent; and 2004, 44 percent and climbing. There is no decline. There is no effort to bring a decline now.

Mr. MEEK of Florida. What is the name?

Mr. MEEK of Florida. That is very interesting because I heard some folks in here talking about borrowing and spending and blaming us. There is more spending that is going on, but it has not just been about the war. It has been about irresponsible policy-making here. I want to say we want to thank those that contact us via e-mail. We receive quite a bit of e-mail from not only the American people, but also even within this Capitol complex. If you want to e-mail us at 30somethingdems@mail.house.gov, we would appreciate it. If you want to learn more not only about Social Security but about the Democratic budget, you can go on to Democraticleader.house.gov/ 30something. But you can go on the Democratic leader's Web site and get what we are doing here and what we are proposing. I think it is also important for us to talk about. One may say, why are you all talking about what the Republican budget, what they are doing to the American people? The reason why we are talking about it is because we are not in the majority. We fought all day on this floor, 5 hours of amendments, 5 hours of debate to fight on behalf of the everyday worker and retired American in this country. And if we were in the majority, it would be totally different. Those numbers I gave on veterans, the veterans would have what they need. The true budget balancing will happen in 10 years. We have made Social Security, the issue of privatization, we can tell the President to stop spending the taxpayers' money and burning Federal jet fuel, because it is not going to happen. So until we are able to get the majority, then we will not be able to do some of the things we are doing; but we will fight to the bitter end to make sure that we protect American people and their values.

Mr. MEEK of Florida. Does the gentlewoman have something else to talk about?

Mr. MEEK of Florida

Mr. MEEK of Florida. Mr. Speaker, once again it is a pleasure to address the House. Also, I want to thank our Democratic leader, the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Pelosi), for allowing us to have this time. Week after week, as you know, the 30-something Working Group comes to the floor on issues that are facing Americans, not only young Americans but all Americans, since we are a country that has very strong family values and that believes in making sure that the next generation has better opportunities than the generation before them. We come to the floor to not only share information but to share good information, information that can be shared with others. We also let not only Members of this House, but Members of the other body know where we got the information from: real accounts, not just fiction. I know some Members come to the floor well intended to share good information, but it is questionable as to where it came from. We are going to talk a lot about Social Security during this 30- something hour, and we are also going to address and commend some of the groups that are out there fighting the good fight, sharing with young Americans about many of the issues that are facing them. It is important that we do so, so that they will be able to make accurate decisions and will be able to speak to their Members of Congress about what they should do as it relates to Social Security. This afternoon, Mr. Speaker, I am again honored to have my colleague, the gentlewoman from Florida (Ms. Wasserman Schultz), who I have had the opportunity to serve with over the last 10 years in the Florida legislature and now here in Congress. Our colleague, the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Ryan), is not here with us, and I will give him a hard time about that; but he had to leave, and so being from Florida, it is certainly appropriate for us to be here with so many Social Security recipients in our State. And even those individuals that are living in other parts of the country will no doubt eventually make it to Florida and become our constituents one day. Mr. Speaker, it is an honor to yield to my colleague at this time.

Mr. MEEK of Florida. Mr. Speaker, that is so very, very important; and I thank the gentlewoman for explaining what we are doing. Some Members that were sick this week might have thought we have a new uniform or something, that we all have to wear the same colors. Mr. Speaker, I want to not only thank the Members for listening to our 30-something hour; but we also want to share in closing, especially here on the Democratic side, that we want to strengthen Social Security without slashing benefits that Americans have earned. Private accounts make the Social Security challenge worse. They force massive benefit cuts and increase the national debt. Once the President stops insisting on privatization accounts, we can work together on making sure that we keep the promise to Social Security recipients and future recipients. I also want to add that Social Security is an American success story that safeguards Americans' independence and economic security when they get older. Also, Social Security faces a long-term challenge, but not a crisis. A challenge, but not a crisis. I want to make sure that I put emphasis on that. Americans have earned their Social Security benefits, and it would violate their trust and penalize Americans who have paid into Social Security all of their lives to go to private accounts. Here on this side of the aisle, Democrats will preserve the Social Security promise that we made long ago. Mr. Speaker, I also want to once again, before I close, commend not only my colleagues in Florida on the other side of the aisle who are not with the philosophy of some Members of the majority and the President as it relates to this Social Security scheme of privatization. I want to commend all of my Democratic colleagues for standing in solidarity in making sure that Social Security is promised for future generations and the present generation. Mr. Speaker, it is always an honor to come to the floor and address the Members of this House.

Mr. MEEK of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I know that we are wearing something similar here. Can the gentlewoman tell us a little bit about what we are promoting here?

Mr. MEEK of Florida. Mr. Speaker, reclaiming my time, I thank the gentlewoman. The more we can talk about Social Security and what is being presently given to Americans, like survivor and disability benefits, I am glad that the gentlewoman really talked about that, because a 20-year-old, it is a three out of ten chance they have of dying or becoming disabled before retirement age. That is important. That is why I say this is an American issue, Mr. Speaker, and not just a small issue. I have an issue of dealing with one generation or another. We will not pit generations against each other, not on this Floor. The reason this bill has not come to the Floor yet or a plan has not been placed on the table yet or Members are not falling over each other on the majority side saying ``let's do something, let's do something,'' is because if they bring a privatization account to this floor or to the other body, that I believe many of them will be making a career decision, because I believe the American people will say, I do not believe because the President and some Members of the majority side said we have to do this because the ball is rolling, because we started the ball rolling by saying that Social Security is going to come to an end tomorrow, we have to finish rolling the ball. Well, let me tell you, Social Security is not prescription drugs. Social Security is not other plans that the administration has put out there. Social Security is in our communities, in our neighborhoods, a part of our values as a country, a part of family values, knowing that if a parent will pass on, knowing their children will not be left with nothing. They know this, because they have Social Security. I want to just commend some of the groups, and I want the Members to know, that are in the fight of sharing good information out there with the American people. I want to thank the Center for American Progress. I want to also thank the NEA; A. Phillip Randolph Institute; the Alliance of Retired Americans; the American Association of University Women; also the African American Episcopal Church; also the American Baptist Churches of USA; the AFL-CIO; the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now. We want to thank the Campaign for American's Future; also The Center For Budget and Policy Priorities; the Center For Economic Policy and Research; the Children's Defense Fund; the Coalition of Black Trade Unions; the Coalition of Human Needs; College Democrats of America; Congressional Black Caucus Foundation; Consortium of Citizens with Disabilities; the Economic Policy Institute; the Labor Council for Latin American Advancement; also the League of Rural Voters; The League of United Latin American Citizens; and The Links, Inc. Also, we would like to thank the NAACP and several other organizations. We also need to point out the great job that Rock the Vote is doing. They are out there sharing good information. They have a Web site, www.rockthevote.com; and I think it is important that Americans spend time, and I want to commend those groups, those that were mentioned and those that were not mentioned, for the hard work that they are doing out there in holding up the flag and making sure that people understand exactly what is at stake here, making sure that they are out there. They may not be, I say to the gentlewoman, they may not be on the evening news; they may not be at the top of the hour on any of these cable networks that are out there, but they are out there. And they are making sure that we hold this Congress honest in saying that, no, you will not give us the one-two step, you will not fake right, go left, you will not do that. So that is the reason why we do not have a bill. That is the reason why the President has not put forth a plan, because the American people are so educated on this issue and will continue to be educated on this issue.

Mr. MEEK of Florida. Explain survivor benefits, if you will, to make sure everyone understands.

Mr. MEEK of Florida. Because there is no plan. I am sorry.

Mr. MEEK of Florida. Mr. Speaker, under his philosophy.

Mr. MEEK of Florida. I can tell the gentlewoman, I was here in the 108th Congress. I know some of the things that have been said not only on this floor but also some of the information we have received from the administration, I think the American people have witnessed this information, too, for it to not be accurate, especially when it comes down to numbers. There are Members of the other body of this Congress, the other Chamber, they are concerned. They are not willing to take a gamble. They are not willing to throw the dice. It is not a crap game. This is Social Security. I want to be able to share not only with the Members but the people here in this Chamber that the rules that are set out by this House, Democrats, we are in the minority. We do not agenda the meetings, we cannot agenda the meetings, we cannot bring bills to the floor because we are not in control of the Rules Committee. The gentleman from New York (Mr. Rangel), our ranking member on Ways and Means, cannot call a Ways and Means Committee hearing to question the administration on the philosophy of privatization of Social Security since there is no plan. So I want to make sure that people understand, because there is desperation on the other side of the aisle for those that are participating with the administration in this game of a crisis of Social Security. And when you are in crisis, you start saying things that will sensationalize the situation. And the inaccurate information that is out there, and I am not using the generalization of saying the Republican Caucus, because there are some good Republicans. They are standing there. They are standing by their constituents. They are saying, no, this is not clear, I don't see how this benefits my constituents, young or old. With all due respect to the President, I am not saying that he is giving us wrong information; I am saying he is giving us inaccurate information. It is what you say. When you say words like ``bankrupt,'' that means no money. That means it is done. Listen, if the gentlewoman and I were the only Americans paying into the Social Security system, it would not be bankrupt. So I am just trying to break it down, because the President came in here and said, if you are over 55, you do not need to worry. Now, I am going to tell you, we are one America, and I do not know of any parent, and I am so glad that my mother and my father, God bless his soul, he has passed on now, they did not say, ``I am okay, son. You need to fend for yourself. I have mine, you get yours.'' That is not the American way. We will come to this Floor until the microphones no longer work as not only Democrats but some Republicans that are willing to stand up against this crisis philosophy that is wrong; 47 years of benefits not being cut, and even after 47 years, 80 percent of the benefits will be honored. So I commend them. I want to say to the gentlewoman that our leader, the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Pelosi), the Democratic Leader has been on the road. She is speaking to young people. She is speaking to students at the universities, talking about Social Security and why it is important and what we want to do and how we want to work with the majority side. I will tell you, when we work together, good things happen. I have been here. I have witnessed good things happening when people sit at the table. But it is very rare, I must add. And if given the opportunity to lead this House in the majority, our leadership will provide the right formula or will write the right prescription, if I could say that, to make sure that we work in a bipartisan way. We have some e-mails we have to read from last week. Also, I want to be able to share, the 30-something online town hall meeting will be tomorrow at noon. You can go to the 30-something website to find out the details. Democratic.leader.house.gov/30something. That is Democratic.leader.house.gov/30something. That is the site. At our website, you can also check out the Social Security time line that I shared with you. I want to make sure the Members have this information, Democrat or Republican, I want them to have it, because I want to be able to make sure that the facts are out there. Everything that we share here, it is not fiction. It is not Star Trek. It is actually factual. You will see the President's Social Security time line, of how long the majority side has been talking about private accounts, and this is one I guess of value or something, talking points on young people and Social Security. Also linked to the web page of the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Pelosi) Social Security and young people are clips from the past 30-something hours. We want to give people information, and we are so glad we are interactive, because we are hearing from people. I also would say, again, that is tomorrow at noon, the 30-something town hall meeting. We will be online to answer your questions, and the site is Democratic.leader.house.gov/30something.

Mr. MEEK of Florida. Mr. Speaker, the Congressional Budget Office has given us a lot of good information for us to be able to share with the American people about what is actually happening with this debate. I also want to say that the President and some Members on the majority side bought into the philosophy to hit the road. I am glad they are joining us because over 80 percent of the Democratic Caucus has gone out and had town hall meetings not only in their districts but throughout the country. A little later on, I would like to talk about a town hall meeting that I am having. I will be in the Capitol tomorrow, and at noon, I will be online. I will give that information later. I will talk about how you can become a part of a town hall meeting and send questions in. We have received 20 questions already, and we have not even gotten online yet. The President said in Columbus, Ohio, today, This is a debt to the future generations of Americans, and unless we do something about it, we will not be able to pay for it without wrecking the economy. This is what he said in Ohio, and I am glad we have a savvy reporter from the Associated Press that understands the plan as we understand the plan here in Congress. Under this plan, retirees and workers 55 and over will receive current benefits without changes. Younger workers would get a lower guaranteed government benefit at retirement than current retirees will receive right now on the assumption that their personal account earnings would make up at least a part of the difference. Under the administration's philosophy, younger workers who decide against the private accounts would also face cuts of their guaranteed government benefit. Some Republicans have been skittish about the issue, fearing political backlash, and I will say congressional Democrats are virtually unanimous in opposition to this philosophy. I just want to say that as we start talking about cutting back on benefits, what the majority side is doing, they are saying even if you do not want to be a part of the private accounts, because you hear all this thing about options and choices, that even if you do not want to be a part of it, your benefits are going to be cut anyway. I do not understand it. Then some folks say, well, where is the Democratic plan? I would say, where is the majority side plan? There is no plan. There is not a piece of legislation. Nothing has been binding and sent to the Hill. Nothing at all. I want to show this chart to the Members because we need to make sure that we remind some individuals here about what has been going on with this debate on Social Security and private accounts. We have been time after time, and I say ``we,'' House Democrats and some good Republicans on the other side of the aisle, I just want to say again, there are some in the majority caucus that have taken a stand against the administration and the majority side in saying no. After the Medicare prescription drug issue, it is embarrassing. If you voted for the Medicare prescription drug plan, you are embarrassed. If you are a fiscal conservative, you have a bag over your head, because you are saying, I can't believe I voted for that. I can't believe that not only did I increase the debt, that we are knocking on the Bank of China to pay down on the debt, God forbid if they said, guess what, we don't want to buy any more of your bonds, we are in trouble. This is a time of war. This is a time when we are trying to protect the homeland. And as I see the administration out there running around, saying, I guess if we burn enough jet fuel and go around and talk to people, maybe they will start believing that there is a crisis. The crisis is the Federal debt. The crisis is the fact that 45 million Americans working, not those that are sitting at home cracking their toes saying the job situation looks sad, these individuals are going in every day to work, and they do not have health care. That is a crisis. A crisis is our men and women in Iraq and Afghanistan and in the horn of Africa that are fighting terrorism. That is a crisis. A crisis is these military families, especially for the Army, that have been deployed some 12, 15 months, and they are trying to make ends meet. That is a crisis. I think maybe, just maybe, and I am not here with hypotheticals, but I am just saying maybe this whole thing about Social Security private accounts may just be, I will run that way when the issues are this way. And I think, or I know, that the American people are a lot smarter than some people may think they are as it relates to having a grasp on this issue of Social Security. The reason why we do not have a bill and the reason why the President has not come up with a plan and the reason why the majority side has not proposed a plan, because the American people are not with privatization of Social Security. I know the gentlewoman wants to say something, but I just have to make this point because this is about fact, not fiction. I think it is important. I think we have an obligation as the Democratic 30-something Working Group empowered by our leadership to come to this floor to have an hour on this floor every week is not only an honor for us but an honor for every young American that is out there and also for every parent and grandparent that is saying that I want my children to have a better opportunity than what they have had. Let us talk about what the President is doing now. In 1978, he said he wanted to privatize Social Security, that he would like to see it happen. In 2000, during the campaign, then Governor Bush said that he wanted to privatize Social Security. Then when he became President Bush, he appointed a commission to develop a privatization plan for him. In December of 2001, that commission gave the President three options for privatization of Social Security. From December 2001 to 2004, the President and the administration and the majority side were silent on Social Security. For this to be a perceived crisis that the majority side is talking about and that the President is talking about, to be silent over all of that time and say nothing. In 2004, while running for reelection, the President again talked about private accounts and saying they are a solution for Social Security's long-term financial imbalance. Days after the 2004 election, the President said that he had political capital and wanted to use it to push privatization of Social Security through the Congress right away. In January of this year, press accounts claimed that the White House would have a privatization plan to Congress by late February. This is March now, or early March. I am going to tell the Members right now, I do not think that we are going to see one. In the budget that was submitted at the beginning of February, there was actually no reference to this crisis that the President speaks of in his budget. No reference. Meanwhile, we have the President flying all around the country, this is a crisis, they are using words like ``bankrupt,'' and nothing in the budget. I cannot understand that. It goes against what you should do in a crisis. And now the press is saying that they are not clear if the President is going to offer a plan. I know it took me a little while to say all of that, but I want to make sure when individuals in the majority side start to talk about, well, where is the Democratic plan, I will tell you, we have been waiting years for the Republican plan. Years. Our plan is already enshrined in Social Security. The reason why it is going to be solvent for another 47 years is not because the majority side, the Republican side, has said we love and we want Social Security for years and years to come. It is because Democrats demanded that Americans that did everything that we told them to do, work hard, support your country, raise your children and at the end of those years, you will receive your benefits, even if you pass away, 17 percent of the individuals that are receiving these benefits are young people that are receiving survivor benefits. And so this is not a gray and silver hair, this is not a silver hair-blue hair issue. This is an American issue.

Mr. MEEK of Florida. Mr. Speaker, taking from the words of the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Pelosi), we want to strengthen Social Security. We want to do it in a bipartisan way and without slashing benefits and making sure that we do not have private accounts that will make the Social Security challenge even worse. We will point that out as we move along. Once the President stops insisting on privatization of Social Security, we can have a real dialogue and move forward and make sure we can deal with the long-term challenges. I mentioned earlier about the 38 million Americans that are recipients, and the average benefit is $955. That is a lot of money to many Americans. This is not money that they just showed up and said, I have not worked and I want Social Security benefits. These are individuals who have worked every day of their lives, invested in Social Security and want to make sure that is the guaranteed American benefit that they are going to receive at the end of their working years, and rightfully so. What the private accounts are doing and what they should do is do what we did when President Reagan was president and Tip O'Neill was Speaker of this House. They got together on a bipartisan basis and came up with a solution for Social Security. That is what we are going to have to do. We cannot have an OK Corral with one at one end of the street and one at the other and then figure out who can say what the most, even if it is inaccurate, playing the political game, because Americans will lose in the long run. Let us talk a little bit, and I want to share a little bit about the credibility of inaccurate information. That is contradicting to say the credibility of inaccurate information, but it is important that Americans understand that if they are going to take something as fact, it is important that they have some sort of reference to go to because a lot of things have been said in this Chamber. I mentioned last week, dealing with the whole Medicare prescription drug debate, and I commend some of my colleagues on the other side of the aisle who stood against the powers that be and said no, I will not vote for this give-away to some of the strongest lobbyists in this town, that we are going to give them a gift and not be able to give a gift to seniors that we should give them. That we will not, I will not continue to borrow money on a high interest credit card, and I have to get my credit card going again because I had a blown-up copy of the Federal debt, that we are not going to do it. When we started dealing with the prescription drug issue, everyone was running around saying we needed to deal with prescription drugs. On the Democratic side we said, yes; finally, we can get together and do something on a bipartisan basis. During that debate, the administration said the prescription drug bill will cost $350 billion. That is without giving the government negotiating power with the pharmaceutical companies to bring the cost down, that is just having the pharmaceutical companies set the price. Then the administration shared with us that it would be $400 billion. That is a lot of money; okay. We were able to not only pass the bill, and many of us voted against it because we knew the numbers were not correct and we could not get price negotiations in to bring the cost of prescription drugs down for everyday Americans. Sure enough, after the debate, we received information that it would be $530 billion. That is a lot of money. I am talking about future generations and what they have to pay on the debt. Then a couple of weeks ago, the cost went up to $727 billion. I will tell Members that is very, very wrong as it relates to inaccurate information that we have received from not only the President but from the majority side. Before I move to the next point of accurate versus inaccurate, Social Security, Democrats have literally given flesh and blood for Social Security. This is something that we have fought for because we believe in not only the American worker but making sure that when we tell Americans that we are going to do something, that we are going to stand up to that responsibility. Private accounts are private accounts. They are private. It is privatization of Social Security, and it is not just the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Meek) and the gentlewoman from Florida (Ms. Wasserman Schultz) saying that there will be issues if we take this private account gamble, but there are others that have come out against what the President is talking, this philosophy which is not a plan which we will address later. The gentlewoman has a chart to explain further what we are talking about.

Mr. MEEK of Florida. Mr. Speaker, reclaiming my time, I am so excited to be here and to be able to share information, not only with our charts but about what is happening. This is about future generations, but it also is about the present Social Security recipients. Right now we have 48 million Americans receiving Social Security, and 48 percent of those individuals would be in poverty if they did not receive that Social Security benefit. This is serious business. This is not a numbers game. It is not an opportunity for this body or the majority side or the minority side or the President or what have you to give the American people the Potomac Two Step. We cannot allow that to happen. This is the very fiber of American values, as we value our older people and as we value our generations to come. If I can, Mr. Speaker, I want to take a few moments to talk about the reason why we have to be credible here on this floor. Now, once again, like I did last week, I want to commend not only the Democratic leadership, the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Pelosi); the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Hoyer); the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Menendez), chairman of the House Democratic Caucus; and Vice Chair of the caucus, the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Clyburn), for being so stalwart and being out there and willing to be the hood ornaments of righteousness on this issue. When you are a hood ornament, nine times out of ten, you are going to get some bugs in your teeth. I used to be a State trooper, so I know about hood ornaments. But for us to do Social Security, it needs to be a true bipartisan effort. Where does the rub come in? I think where the rub comes in here is the majority side is saying we have to have these private accounts. Even the President had to admit that private accounts will not resolve the Social Security issue. Social Security is not in the stage of crisis. Let me say that again, because we have folks who are flying around and burning jet fuel at taxpayers' expense, on C-SPAN more than the House is on C-SPAN, and the other body, talking about a crisis.

Mr. MEEK of Florida

Mr. MEEK of Florida. Mr. Speaker, the United States maintains and has maintained for several decades extensive commercial and cultural relations with the people of Taiwan. In this context, I am concerned about China's proposed anti-secession law. I understand that the premise of this law is that China and Taiwan are now unified and that China has the right to punish anyone expressing separatist sentiments or engaging in separatist activities. A further concern is that this law provides justification for China to legally push for unification of Taiwan by force, which is the worst-case scenario. Consideration of this proposal is coming at a time when both China and Taiwan have taken conciliatory steps toward each other, including the initiation of holiday charter flights that begin in late January 2005, which are the first nonstop commercial air traffic across the Taiwan Straight in 55 years, and both China and Taiwan have signaled they might be willing to restart talks relating to the status of Taiwan. Understandably, the 23 million people of Taiwan are very upset over this proposed law, for they have lived under a full-fledged democracy and enjoyed the highest standards of freedom and human rights. In view of the importance of Taiwan to the United States, China and indeed, the entire international community, I urge Chinese leaders to exercise caution and wisdom and not adopt this confrontation and destabilizing approach to Taiwan. We do not seek any military confrontation in the Taiwan Strait, now or ever. The government of Taiwan has signaled that it stands ready to discuss and negotiate any issue with China. Clearly negotiation is the most desirable approach, and I urge both China and Taiwan to continue progress in this direction.

Mr. MEEK of Florida

Mr. MEEK of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I would like to take this opportunity to extend my congratulations to Bishop Victor T. Curry, D.D., Min, President and CEO, and to everyone at the New Birth Broadcasting Corporation as they celebrate their 10th year in radio. Celebratory events will begin with a community worship service at 7 p.m. on March 9th and will feature Pastor Jeffrey A. Johnson, Sr. of the Eastern Star Church of Indianapolis, Indiana. Since the purchase of AM 1490 WMBM, the landscape of gospel radio has changed dramatically. WMBM has received local as well as national recognition for its contribution to our local community, for it not only plays the best in gospel music, but it also provides its listeners with late-breaking news and inspirational, life-changing programming. WMBM, the first black-owned and operated station in South Florida, is one of the first radio stations to stream its broadcast via the internet. WMBM also publishes a quarterly nationally distributed magazine and an annual directory of black-owned and supported businesses. I want to extend my warmest congratulations to Bishop Curry and his staff for doing such an important job so well, and my best wishes for another outstanding decade in broadcasting.

Mr. MEEK of Florida

Mr. MEEK of Florida. That is not even the war. So we are saying, not the Democratic plan, that we know all and we know best. We are not even advocating that. It is the majority side in this House that is saying, oh, we can figure it out because we have the majority and we have stacked all the committees and we can get it through the committee and we can get it to the floor, and if we have to do a Medicare move again, keeping the voting board open for over an hour while we walk around here and put pressure on individuals that have already made a sound decision on how they are going to vote, then we are going to do everything we can as Democrats. I commend our leadership, need it be in the Committee on Ways and Means, need it be in the Committee on Financial Services, need it be our Democratic leader the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Pelosi), the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Hoyer), all the way to the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Menendez) and our Democratic Caucus, and also the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Clyburn) who is our Vice Chair, to let the American people know that this will not happen and that with the President and with the majority side, they are talking about theory, not a plan. And so our plan is to make sure that we do not make life worse for people under 55. Even the President said, if you are over 55, you don't have anything to worry about. This is the same President, with all due respect to my Commander in Chief, that said it would only be $350 billion for Medicare prescription drugs and now we are way up to $724 billion. I am not saying he is not telling the American people the truth, I am just saying that it is inaccurate information. And inaccurate information, when people feel that they have the power to do whatever they want to do, is wrong. That is why it is important that we take this time out and that is the reason I commend my Democratic colleagues that are here saying, no, having over 300 town hall meetings, and I commend my Republican colleagues, in the minority in the majority, that are saying, no, Mr. President, who I campaigned for, I am not with you on this one. So we want to make sure. That is the reason why we do not have a plan yet, because there is no real plan. I would much rather the President say ``thank you'' and just move on to another issue because we have a war that is going on right now. Until we are ready to work in a bipartisan way, we should not approach Social Security, until we sit down at the table and to be able to hear both sides and that we can move together. The gentleman from New York (Mr. Rangel) would be at the White House right now as ranking member of the Committee on Ways and Means if we were hammering out a real bipartisan plan. The gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Frank) would be at the White House right now as we speak hammering out a real bipartisan plan. Leader Pelosi, when she goes to meet and you know the American people at least once a week, they come together, majority and minority and the leaders come together at the White House, if she were included in that process of hammering out a Social Security plan, maybe, just maybe the American people will benefit. But that is not the case. I am going to yield to the gentlewoman from Florida, and I hope she will explain at least some of the charts that she has there to be able to share what we are getting ourselves into if we allow the majority side to carry us down, not a yellow brick road but some other color brick road in making Social Security solvent for years and years and years to come.

Mr. MEEK of Florida. Mr. Speaker, it is always a pleasure coming to the floor. We want to thank the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Pelosi), and we appreciate the opportunity to address the House.

Mr. MEEK of Florida

Mr. MEEK of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I move that the House do now adjourn.