Richard Neal

Mr. NEAL

Mr. NEAL. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to introduce the Naismith Memorial Basketball Hall of Fame Commemorative Coin Act, a bill that would have the U.S. Treasury mint coins in recognition of the Hall of Fame's 60th anniversary. These unique dome-shaped coins that would come at no expense to the taxpayers is the ideal symbol for the first and only museum that honors the sport on all levels around the world. In my hometown of Springfield, Massachusetts in 1891, a young physical education teacher by the name of James Naismith introduced this simple game to his class that he called, ``basket ball.'' Since then, the world of sports has never been the same. The Naismith Memorial Basketball Hall of Fame was founded in his honor in 1959, even though all they had was a couple of displays at Springfield College. The Hall of Fame has since grown into one of the most impressive structures on the Springfield skyline, where more than 6 million visitors a year get to see hundreds of thousands of items of memorabilia spanning the past hundred years. More than 300 people have been enshrined at the Hall of Fame since its inception. Some of the great players of all time such as Michael Jordan, Larry Bird, and Wilt Chamberlain, along with some of the legendary coaches like Pat Summit and John Wooden will forever be immortalized for their contribution to this sport. As importantly, the Hall of Fame has always been an advocate for good sportsmanship and promoting respect on and off the court. Mr. Speaker, what began as a simple game in a gym has transformed into a worldwide sensation that attracts millions of spectators every night. It is for this reason that I ask that the Naismith Memorial Basketball Hall of Fame receive this great recognition and I ask my colleagues to support this bill.

Mr. NEAL

Mr. NEAL. Mr. Speaker, I want to take this opportunity to recognize St. Mary's School in Lee, Massachusetts on their 130th anniversary. Since its inception, the hard work of the teachers and students has made St. Mary's School a model of success in the region. In the mid-1880s, Jane Sedgwick, a member of a wealthy family in Stockbridge, Massachusetts, wanted to open a parochial school in Western Massachusetts after a massive influx of Irish immigrants into the area. After 25 years of work and determination, Pope Leo XIII finally gave Jane his personal blessing to building the school that would be affiliated with St. Mary's Church in Lee. Five years later, the school was built and they welcomed nuns from St. Joseph's of Chambery, France to teach students grades 1 through 8. For 72 years, the old school located on Academy Street served the parish of St. Mary's until a boom in the population of Lee following World War II. The pastor at St. Mary's Church at the time, Father Jeremiah Murphy, labored tirelessly to get the funds needed to ensure they could build a big enough building for all the students. In 1957, all of Father Murphy's dreams came together and a new school was constructed just up the road from where the old school stood. Since then, the current building has added new wings to the building to accommodate a library and computer labs to better educate their students. Today, St. Mary's School has all the new forms of technology to help a new generation of students get excited about learning. Mr. Speaker, for the past 130 years, St. Mary's School's curriculum may have changed, but their ideals and their high educational standards have always remained the same. With small class sizes, teachers are able to give important individual attention to ensure every student can excel. The school's motto, ``Education with a Plus,'' speaks volumes to their dedication to math and the sciences, as well as the moral teachings that comes along with a Catholic education. I want to commend all the teachers and staff of St. Mary's School on all the success they have had over the past century in shaping the young minds of Berkshire County. I wish them all the best with their future endeavors.

Mr. NEAL

Mr. NEAL. Mr. Speaker, 62 times we have now voted to repeal the Affordable Care Act. Let me contrast what we are about to do in the next few minutes with the manner in which Democrats handled the Medicare part D prescription drug benefit. We voted against it. We opposed it. We became the majority, and we improved it. That is the reality of legislating. We closed the doughnut hole. We took a very difficult piece of legislation--largely resisted on their side as well--and became the majority and asked: How can we singularly improve this legislation so that it has broad appeal for the American people? Today, people take it for granted. They just accept the idea that the prescription drug bill works for all members of the American family. Instead, this is the 62nd time of repealing this for the purpose of political messaging, with no alternative ever provided--not once. I hope the media members will use the contrast that I have just outlined about the prescription drug legislation in Medicare part D with what the Republicans are doing, once again today, with no hope other than that of trying to win political points in messaging.

Mr. NEAL

Mr. NEAL. First, Mr. Speaker, I want to call attention to the efforts that have been made by Congresswoman Kuster and Congressman Guinta. When Congresswoman Kuster approached me on this issue, I was all too happy to join in. I think that the perseverance that she has offered in the early days on this is, I think, a challenge for all of us across New England, because what has happened across New England now is gripping in terms of the attention that this issue has drawn. But I want to call attention specifically to a very important case in which there is an individual whom I had a chance to witness his testimony. At the same time, I intend to quote liberally from the Springfield Republican, which is the paper of record for western Massachusetts. I want to call attention tonight to a former Ludlow, Massachusetts, police lieutenant, Thomas Foye. Lieutenant Foye had a strong upbringing with supportive parents, a college education, a good marriage, three children, and a long career as a lieutenant in the Ludlow Police Department. The 50-year-old was a longtime head of the detective bureau and even served on an FBI task force. He arrested many drug addicts and responded frequently to overdoses. He was at the scene of many drug- related suicides. He warned schoolchildren about the dangers of drugs. He was even an official who had been elected to the Ludlow School Committee. That was, however, until he got addicted to OxyContin pills following shoulder surgery. Two surgeries and more pain medication prescriptions later, Lieutenant Foye found himself admitting that he was addicted. After trying to quit on his own multiple times and suffering sickening withdrawals, he turned to his doctor for help. The same doctor who had originally prescribed him OxyContin now prescribed him more pills to both wean him off the painkillers and to put an end to his sickness. When none of that worked, Foye admits that he broke the law and began to acquire pills illegally, taking them straight from his police department's own evidence room. When he was arrested in his office at the Ludlow Police Department in 2013, he was charged with tampering with substances, two counts of possession of a class B substance-- cocaine and OxyContin--and two counts of larceny of a drug. Subsequently, he was sentenced to 2 years in jail. He said that it was not fear, dread, or panic that he felt when the investigation finally came to a head; rather, he felt relief. He now would be able to get help. He talks about the police officer who stayed with him in the detox facility following his arrest. ``Some day I want to be that guy,'' he said. ``There needs to be some dignity in drug addiction treatment.'' Lieutenant Foye was lucky in the sense that he survived his addiction and is telling his story to help others. Those who have not survived, including eight people this weekend in my congressional district in a very small geographic area, died from a lethal string of heroin that was identified as the Hollywood brand. The Opioid Overdose Reduction Act of 2015 would exempt from civil liability emergency administration of opioid overdose-reversing drugs, like naloxone, by people who prescribe or are prescribed them. Senator Markey has offered the same legislation down the hallway in the United States Senate. When an opioid overdose occurs, administration of an opioid-reversal drug is necessary to prevent death, but it must occur within a certain window of time before the chance of survival is lost. This is a time of quick action, not deliberations or a potential lawsuit. Every day, 120 people die as a result of drug overdoses fueled by prescription painkillers, and another 6,748 are treated in emergency rooms for the misuse or abuse of illegal drugs. According to The Washington Post, ``overdosing is now the leading cause of accidental death in the United States, accounting for more deaths than traffic fatalities or gun homicides and suicides. Fatal overdoses from opiate medications such as oxycodone, hydrocodone, and methadone have quadrupled since 1999, accounting for an estimated 16,651 deaths in 2010.'' It is time to bring a face to those affected by addiction and stop the epidemic in communities across this country. I want to close as I started with a note of congratulations to Ms. Kuster and to Mr. Guinta for calling attention to what is really happening across New England now. We need to be mindful of the lives that are being destroyed and the families that are succumbing to this torture over long, long periods of time trying to treat those who are addicted and to make sure they get adequate help.

Mr. NEAL

Mr. NEAL. Mr. Speaker, the Church Plan Clarification Act addresses several unintended consequences resulting from the application of general tax and pension regulations to the unique structures of church pension plans. Churches and synagogues established some of the first pension plans in the country, several dating back to the 18th century, and they are designed to ensure that our clergy and laystaff have adequate resources during their retirement years. Church plans are often structured to reflect the ecclesiastical teachings of their denomination. The resulting diversity of plan structures, coupled with the complexity of the legal and regulatory framework that applies to church plans, has led to the need for this legislation. The bill would correct several technical issues that are critical to the functioning and operation of church plans and the retirement benefits they provide. While the corrections contained in PATH Act would be of tremendous help to church plans, I want to make clear that the bill does not affect the definition of ``church plan'' under the Internal Revenue Code or Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974, ERISA. In particular, no inference is intended by this legislation regarding the statutory requirements a pension plan must meet to be considered or treated as a ``church plan'' under IRC section 414(e) of the Internal Revenue Code and section 3(33) of ERISA, and the bill has no bearing on the interpretation of those sections. Rather, the Church Plan Clarification Act is simply about fixing the rules that govern how church plans operate and serve their participants.

Mr. NEAL

Mr. NEAL. Mr. Speaker, the bill we have before us today is the universal legislator's dilemma: the possible versus the perfect. I rise in support of this legislation today. I stand with President Obama in support of this legislation today. I rise to prevent 18 million Americans, including 8 million children, from falling deeper into poverty. I rise to ensure that, during this special time of the year, nonprofits will continue their important work to improve the lives of millions of Americans through charitable activity. I rise to unleash billions of dollars in economic development to rebuild, to rehab, and to refurbish our neighborhoods and our communities. I rise to incentivize American innovation and the millions of jobs that it creates. At this bill's core is a modest progrowth jobs bill, one that, given the current headwinds of our economy, is sorely needed. I have spent the better part of my career in Congress as a champion of the earned income tax credit and expanding it, as a champion of the child tax credit and expanding it, as a champion of the low-income housing tax credit and expanding it and the expansion of the New Markets Tax Credit Program, which my DNA clearly is on. Taken together, these credits will go a long way to toward improving the lives of millions of Americans across the country in our typically overlooked communities. This is not the easiest way to accomplish an end. We should be very critical of ourselves now for the backup manner in which we do these undertakings--voting on 12 legislative appropriations bills tomorrow wrapped into 1; tax policy that is done in this shape and manner. I will also say something else that we need to remind ourselves of: the breakdown of the committee structure in Congress. What has happened to the procedures that we all use to vet controversial legislation? Amendments could be offered and people could speak their minds. Today we are taking up issues that should have been vetted over the course of the last 3 years. I offer a gentle rebuke to my colleagues on the other side. Chairman Camp had the backbone to put out a decent piece of legislation. It didn't mean we were going to embrace it or endorse it, but it was a courageous act, and it was his own side that shot it down. In Cambridge, Massachusetts, Kendall Square has the highest concentration of research and development today in the world. Making the R&D tax credit permanent is going to enhance that opportunity. I have worked on the R&D credit and pushed for a more aggressive, predictable R&D credit through my entire years in this Congress. This is not perfect, what we are doing today. It is far from it. But it represents a compromise or, as The New York Times called it, an acceptable compromise that is necessary to move the country forward. Mr. Speaker, I urge its adoption.

Mr. NEAL

Mr. NEAL. Mr. Speaker, I would like to take this opportunity to recognize the 100th year anniversary of the Dante Club in West Springfield, Massachusetts. The Dante Club has served as a place for Italians to embrace their culture, celebrate their history, and promote athleticism. Today, the Dante Club has over 900 members, a competitive racquetball league, and hosts widely attended social and cultural events throughout the year. On November 7, 1915, a group of Italian men gathered in Springfield with the goal of creating a club promoting ``culture, good fellowship, athletics, and good American citizenship.'' They named the club after Dante Alighieri, a highly acclaimed Italian poet and constructor of the Italian language. The Dante Club originally only accepted Italian members and sons of Italians, but later eased its membership restrictions, allowing men of other ethnic groups married to Italian women. In 1935, the Dante Women's Club division was formed, and in 1963 the Club's constitution was amended, allowing non-Italians to become members. The Dante Club purchased its first site in 1924 in West Springfield. Thirty years later, the Club received notice that its property would be taken away in order to construct the Route 5 highway, so the members purchased the old Memorial School Building in West Springfield. This remains its current home today. The Club has had numerous improvements since its founding, and now includes a kitchen, banquet hall, and health center with racquetball courts. The Dante Club hosts a successful racquetball league, which runs from September to May of every year and includes six divisions with over 100 players. The health center was opened in 1970, and has trained several notable athletes, including the Michigan State hockey coach Amo Bessone, and Gene Grazia, 1960 U.S. Hockey Team Olympic Gold Medalist. Mr. Speaker, the Dante Club's founders have succeeded in organizing a center in America to preserve and celebrate Italian culture and values, while fostering friendships and promoting athleticism and community. I wish the Dante Cub the best in its future endeavors, and look forward to watching it prosper for years to come.

Mr. NEAL

Mr. NEAL. Mr. Speaker, I want to take this opportunity to recognize Mount Holyoke College and its accomplishments in international education. On November 17, Mount Holyoke College President Lynn Pasquerella accepted the 2015 Senator Paul Simon Award for excellence in international education at a ceremony in Washington, D.C. The week of November 16 marked the 16th anniversary of International Education Week. Mount Holyoke College, located in South Hadley, Massachusetts, was among five institutions selected to receive this prestigious honor from NAFSA: Association of International Educators. The designation is given to institutions that demonstrate significant progress in expanding the reach and fostering collaboration among students, faculty, and staff in the interest of internationalization. Twenty-five percent of Mount Holyoke students are international citizens and the college boasts a rich tradition of leadership in international education. Mount Holyoke was among the first institutions to send women abroad for scholarly study. Additionally, the McCulloch Center for Global Initiatives was established in 2004 to serve as a catalyst for comprehensive international education. According to Eva Paus, Carol Hoffmann Collins Director of the McCulloch Center for Global Initiatives and professor of economics, international education became a strategic priority at Mount Holyoke in 2003, following on a legacy of international engagement reaching back to the early days of the college's founding. The McCulloch Center, which Professor Paus helped found, brought greater cohesion and visibility to international education; and its many initiatives across Mount Holyoke have increased students' understanding of the global world and their engagement with other cultures. In classes and through off-campus experiences, students and faculty analyze questions from cross-disciplinary or cross-cultural perspectives, making connections between the local and the global, and harnessing classroom learning to solve concrete problems. The many forms of integrative and cross-cultural teaching and learning at Mount Holyoke and abroad support the college's goal of educating women to be the global leaders of tomorrow. Today, Mount Holyoke is committed to giving all students access to the life-changing experiences that learning abroad often provides. Over the past few years, it has funded nearly all students who apply for a Laurel Fellowship in support of study abroad. Additionally, a 2013 pledge to fund one summer internship or research experience for every student now makes it possible for all interested students to have an internship abroad. Mount Holyoke was joined in receiving the 2015 Simon Award for Comprehensive Internationalization by North Central College of Naperville, Illinois, the University of Delaware, the University of San Diego, and the University of Virginia. President Pasquerella participated in a panel discussion on internationalization in higher education with presidents of the other award-winning institutions to promote this vital pursuit. The award is named for noted Illinois Senator Paul Simon. Mr. Speaker, through courses, conferences, research, international internships, study abroad, collaborations with external partners, and the unique learning opportunities offered by international student and faculty diversity, Mount Holyoke College students acquire the skills they will need for citizenship and careers in today's global world. At a time when the ability to work across national borders is crucial to addressing global problems, I wish Mount Holyoke College and the McCulloch Center for Global Initiatives continued success in their future endeavors.

Mr. NEAL

Mr. NEAL. Will the gentleman yield?

Mr. NEAL. Mr. Speaker, we held the hearings. We went through it. We had the Chamber of Commerce in, the American Trucking Association, and we had organized labor in. We were set to go, and then we lost the institution and that was the end of the discussion about the Federal highway system.

Mr. NEAL. Mr. Speaker, we shouldn't be bragging about this legislation today, boasting about this legislation. Let me give you the perspective of 27 years here. This used to be the easiest legislation to pass in this institution. It created greater cost efficiencies. It created greater investment and, just as importantly, it put people to work immediately. There was no hearing held on the tax title portion of this bill. There was no operation or opportunity for Members to offer amendments in the Ways and Means Committee. Now, let me point out, for that 4-year period when we were in the majority, I held those hearings; and then after the loss of elections, during those 4 years, nothing ever came of it again. We have repeatedly urged the opportunity to talk about a genuine mechanism for financing the Federal highway system, our airports, our railroads; and the opportunity has not availed itself. To point something out here that I think is noteworthy as well, this financing is held together by bubble gum. How many times are we going to sell the oil in the Strategic Petroleum Reserve? Every time I turn around, it becomes the pay-for these days. Is there any oil left in there? That is how we are going to finance the Federal highway system? A reminder, what I heard earlier that in some States people only want to pay for services that they use, that was the revenue mechanism, the user fee, the gas tax that allowed people to pay for the services that they used; namely, driving along on the Federal highway system. Now, how is that for a complication? We are here today because we have not adequately addressed the Federal highway system's responsibility and that begins in this House of the Congress where all financing, according to our Constitution, is supposed to originate. If the Ways and Means Committee isn't taking it up, there is no opportunity for the House to take it up. Don't brag about this rule today. It is a bad rule, and we should vote it down and get on with financing the Federal highway system the way it is supposed to be financed.

Mr. NEAL

Mr. NEAL. Madam Speaker, today's effort is a moment of satisfaction but not delectation. This stands before us as a testament that Congress cannot be dictated to by a minority of the majority. This institution cannot work based upon the principle that a minority of the majority can dictate the outcome of legislative life. I am glad we are finding common ground and common purpose. It is similar to the Congress that I joined a lot of years ago. But rather than a moment of gloating, we should all take a look at what has happened to the process that once governed this institution. And my plea to the new Speaker of the House is going to be: Remember that the committee system is the vertebra of Congress. It is within the structure of the committee system that we find the way forward. And to Speaker Boehner, a good man and a good friend who leaves here in the next couple of days, congratulations, as well as to Leader Pelosi, Leader McConnell, and Leader Reid. But the sad commentary is this could never have happened if they didn't take it upon themselves to do the actual negotiation. The polarization in this institution would have prevented that. We cannot keep taking America to the financial precipice. We need some predictability, some confidence in building the economy. By embracing this proposal, we allow that opportunity to perhaps happen. We take default off the table. The full faith and credit of the United States will not be impugned. We will not allow the country to be hijacked by extremist views. I say to those here, that small number that want to dictate the outcome of what happens in this institution: Pay some attention to the skill and the art of legislating as opposed to just the talking points that lend themselves to the incendiary commentary that flows from this institution now. Work with both sides to try to find an outcome that the American people can look at as having accomplished with some pride. We look at this institution with great regard, and what has happened to it is a shameful exercise in allowing this rule that prevents us from moving forward because of the advances that are made by a minority of the majority.

Mr. NEAL

Mr. NEAL. Mr. Speaker, I rise today with a heavy heart to speak about the passing of one of western Massachusetts' heroes, World War II veteran and survivor of the Pearl Harbor attack, Edward F. Borucki. Edward was born in Holyoke, Massachusetts to Polish immigrants and worked as a machinist apprentice until he decided to enlist in the Navy in 1940. After going through training in Newport, Rhode Island, he was shipped to the Pacific and assigned to the light cruiser, the USS Helena. He moved through the ranks to Yeoman Third Class aboard the vessel and worked in the forward engine room. On the morning of December 7, 1941, Edward was running to his station when the first torpedo hit the forward engine room and knocked him into a bulkhead. He was only thirty seconds from being in the section that was destroyed. He helped seal the section of the ship off and help in anyway he could. After the attack was over, Edward helped carry his wounded and dead shipmates up out of the section and to the hospital. After the USS Helena was transferred back to California for repairs, Edward was transferred to the USS Rockaway and then preceded to attend various training schools. In 1944, Edward married his late wife, Viola Mul of Southampton. A year later, he left the Navy with the rank of Chief Petty Officer. Edward was able to take advantage of the GI Bill to get a business degree at American International College in Springfield, MA and a Masters degree at Boston University. Starting in 1955, Edward taught at Chicopee High School and later Chicopee Comprehensive High School until he retired. Edward never forgot about his experiences in the war and the need to show appreciation to veterans. He was a fixture at a multitude of events honoring veterans around western Massachusetts. He worked for ten years as a veteran's agent in Southampton, helping veterans work through what services are available to them. In the early 2000s, Edward led an effort to get a bridge on Route 5 over the Manhan River dedicated to all those who lost their lives and the survivors of the Pearl Harbor attack. He commented during the campaign to express why the bridge should be named for the Pearl Harbor veterans, ``War is hell. We who were in it never want to see another again.'' Lawmakers in Massachusetts gladly listened to his request and in 2005, the Pearl Harbor Veterans Memorial Bridge. Mr. Speaker, Edward Borucki was a fine example of the men and women that put their lives on the line for our freedom against the threat of tyranny during the Second World War and who served their community selflessly afterward. I would like to extend my condolences to his family, including his seven sons, and let them know that the thoughts of a grateful nation are with them.

Mr. NEAL

Mr. NEAL. Mr. Speaker, I want to take this opportunity to recognize the First Church of Christ in Longmeadow, Massachusetts as they kick off a yearlong celebration for their 300th anniversary. The establishment of this Congregational church was pivotal in the founding of the town of Longmeadow in 1783 and the great community that flourishes to this day. The origins of the First Church of Christ come from the Pilgrims and Puritans of the Massachusetts Bay Colony fleeing England to escape religious persecution. After the settlement of Springfield, Massachusetts was founded in the 1630s on the banks of the Connecticut River, a group of families came together and created the neighborhood of ``longmeddowe,'' as it was called at the time. At the time, the only church they could go to was First Church in Springfield, miles away from their homes. There were also a series of attacks on the settlers by local Native American tribes. Due to the hazardous journey, the families of Longmeadow decided in 1713 that they should have the right to build their own church in the safety of their neighborhood. During that period, the Massachusetts General Court needed to grant approval to form a parish. After Longmeadow's fourth appeal to the Massachusetts' colonial General Court, they were granted permission to create their own congregation. Since the church was the center of not only religious life, but also political life, Longmeadow was set on the path to become their own town. The first meeting house was completed in March of 1716, where the town's Green is located today. Meetings and services were held there despite the walls taking 13 years to be plastered and without a stove or heating for 50 years. These meetings were a chance for people to have a voice in their community and local politics, a form of direct democracy that would be the cornerstone of American independence from the monarchy in Great Britain. Even today, Longmeadow elects selectmen, just as they did when the community was founded. The founders and parishioners of the First Church of Christ left a fine blueprint on how democracy at its most fundamental roots, can have a lasting effect on a community and on a nation. Mr. Speaker, The First Church of Christ still has much to offer to its parishioners and is still the cornerstone of Longmeadow even after the original meeting house has long been replaced. As they continue to celebrate their 300th anniversary year, I wish them all the best in their endeavors to preserve their rich history and community involvement that has been the legacy of the First Church of Christ.

Mr. NEAL

Mr. NEAL. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in honor of John F. Hegarty, in recognition of his outstanding contributions to the National Postal Mail Handlers Union (NPMHU) and the United States Postal Service (USPS). John retired on May 1, 2015 and has moved back to his beloved Western Massachusetts. The son of Charles and Ann Marie Hegarty, John was born on January 31, 1955 in Holyoke but grew up on Rupert Street in Springfield, before moving his family to Wilbraham, MA, where he currently resides. Mr. Speaker, John Hegarty attended Commerce High School. After graduation like many of his contemporaries he sought work. He worked at Titeflex in Springfield and started his union career as a steward (Teamsters Union) representing his fellow workers. John left Titeflex in 1985 when the USPS called and he started his Postal career. John was National President of the National Postal Mail Handlers Union from July 2002 to his retirement. He was re-elected to that position by acclamation of the delegates to the Union's National Conventions in 2004, 2008, and 2012. In this capacity, John is the chief spokesperson for the NPMHU in national bargaining with the USPS. For the ten years prior to becoming National President, John served as Administrative Vice President for the General Mail Facility/Bulk Mail Center in Springfield, Massachusetts. He then became President of Local 301 in New England, one of the largest local unions affiliated with the NPMHU, covering six states. In addition, beginning in 1996, he also served on the NPMHU National Executive Board of the NPHMU's parent union, the Laborers' International Union of North America (LIUNA). Mr. Speaker, John Hegarty is known for his generous spirit and kind heart. He has had the good fortune to be married to his wife, Constance, for thirty-three years. John and Connie are proud parents of two children, two grandchildren with a third on the way. Mr. Speaker, it is my distinct honor to join with John Hegarty's family, friends, and contemporaries to thank him for his extraordinary service to the National Postal Mail Handlers and the United States Postal Service.

Mr. NEAL

Mr. NEAL. Mr. Speaker, in reference to the point that my friend, Sheriff Reichert, just made, I would note the irony of his advocacy on behalf of a plan. I guess, after 35 short-term extensions, we haven't been able to find the time to develop a plan. You need years out to develop a plan. Just weeks ago, in this very Chamber, our friends on the other side made a full-throttled argument about America remaining competitive in the world, and that is why we needed the Trans-Pacific Partnership. Let me think about this for a moment. We want America to be competitive in the world, and we simultaneously allow America's infrastructure to crumble as we speak. Do you know what is going to get Congress to move, sadly enough? That catastrophe that awaits us somewhere across this country. The European Union has a highway system that, in many instances, is the envy of the world; the Chinese are developing high-speed rail that is the envy of the world, and we are doing the 35th short-term extension on a highway bill. Let me relate to our friends on the other side, as you travel across the Federal highway system, there is this great sign everywhere. It says the Dwight D. Eisenhower Federal highway system because a Republican President had the foresight and vision in the aftermath of World War II to develop a first-class Federal highway system. You know what else he had? He had two great allies in the Congress: Lyndon Johnson, the majority leader in the Senate; and Sam Rayburn, who was the Speaker of this House--who helped sponsor legislation that gave us a system that was the envy of the world. Mr. Speaker, 35 times we are not going to talk about extending the highway bill because we don't have time to develop a plan.

Mr. NEAL

Mr. NEAL. Mr. Speaker, I would like to take this opportunity to introduce an article entitled ``The Bostonian astronomer who dreamed of Pluto'' that was published in the Boston Globe on July 12, 2015. Written by Ted Widmer, this article reviews the life and accomplishments of Percival Lowell, the Boston astronomer that had a tremendous impact on the discovery of Pluto. As the New Horizons spacecraft sped past that distant planet this morning, this article stands as a tribute to ensure we do not forget Percival Lowell's part in this great human achievement of innovation and exploration. The Bostonian Astronomer Who Dreamed of Pluto (By Ted Widmer, The Boston Globe) This Tuesday, July 14, at 7:49:57 a.m. EDT, the New Horizons spacecraft will rendezvous with Pluto at a point in space nearly 3 billion miles from Earth. It's been a long strange trip. New Horizons launched nearly a decade ago, on Jan. 19, 2006. It received a gravity boost from Jupiter in 2007, and has been cruising at more than 30,000 miles per hour ever since. It won't even slow down as it passes by the planet at the end of the solar system, but it will gather data and take photos as it screams silently by. By 7:49:58, the moment will have passed, and New Horizons will be seeking new adventures in the Kuiper Belt. For New Englanders, there are a couple reasons to feel proud of the fly-by. The mission is the first in the ``New Frontiers'' series, named after President Kennedy. And Pluto is something of a local concern. Though Pluto was formally discovered by a Kansan named Clyde Tombaugh in 1930, he was spurred to look where he did because of calculations made years earlier by a Bostonian astronomer, Percival Lowell. Lowell was born in 1855, near the State House--the epicenter of ``the Hub of the Solar System,'' as Oliver Wendell Holmes famously called the city. More than most, Lowell helped Boston live up to that claim, with his relentless research into the heavens. The astronomical symbol for Pluto, a P and L mashed together, is a tribute to him. And by laying out instructions for where to look for the celestial object he called ``Planet X,'' Lowell was like the owner of a shoveled-out parking spot, leaving a battered lawn chair as a space-saver, to mark his territory forever. How Boston is that? Lowell was an unlikely astronomical pioneer. He grew up privileged, one of a brood that included Harvard's future president, A. Lawrence Lowell, and the poet Amy Lowell (whom he called ``Big Fat Baby''). He could have coasted, the way so many wealthy Americans did in the smug years that followed the Civil War. But three deep passions seized him, and helped him to achieve escape velocity--enough to leave Boston's gravity forever. The first of these was Japan. In 1883, after a brief period managing family investments, he set sail for what he called ``the morning land,'' in search of spiritual enlightenment. Americans had begun to appreciate Japanese design at the 1876 Centennial Exposition in Philadelphia, so fresh and direct in contrast to the grandiloquent statements of the Gilded Age. A small wavelet of Bostonians traveled there, or even established residence, including William Sturgis Bigelow (who gave 40,000 Japanese artifacts to the MFA), Isabella Stewart Gardner, Edward Sylvester Morse, and Ernest Fenollosa. Lowell happily joined this expatriate tide, which fit perfectly his desire to declare independence from the Hub. He lived in Japan for 10 years, and wrote prolifically about Shintoism and other aspects of a culture that he found un-Bostonian in every way--except for its ancestor worship. At the same time, Boston helped him immensely, by distributing his esoteric musings through well-trusted outlets like The Atlantic. His writings inspired other Japanophiles, and they helped Lowell gain the confidence to explore other worlds. These he was beginning to glimpse, by climbing Japanese mountains, where it was understood that spiritual understanding came more quickly. The Buddhists revere what they call ``celestial'' enlightenment. Typically, Lowell found it in his own way, by searching the skies for unusual objects. In 1893, he began to devote intense study to the planet Mars, the second of his three obsessions. Learning that Mars would be approaching close to Earth the next year, he dropped everything and began to prepare. He purchased land on an elevated plateau near Flagstaff, Ariz., brought two large telescopes, and for the next 23 years devoted his attention to the place he named Mars Hill. It became a kind of transcendental-astronomical paradise for him, and he delivered philosophical musings, like, ``To stand a mile and a half nearer the stars is not to stand immune.'' Lowell's principal thesis--that Mars contained a network of canals, and was likely inhabited--was more imaginative than scientific. But despite Lowell's failure to find signs of extraterrestrial life, his years of close observation yielded much valuable data, and helped people see our planetary neighbor in new ways. The science fiction industry was not slow to follow his lead, and tales of Martian invaders have never failed to sell. He built an important establishment in Arizona, the Lowell Observatory. And once again, he fell in love with an exotic land--this time, the Southwest, where he wandered happily, collecting plant specimens by day, and stars by night. Lowell's third passion took him even further afield. Earlier in life, as a young man recently graduated from Harvard, he had tired of Boston's predictability, and written, with the studied weariness of the young, that he was considering ``migrating to another planet or ceasing to exist.'' In 1905, he began an obsessive search for a new planet, beyond Neptune, the legendary ``Planet X.'' He predicted where it might be found, and even photographed it in 1915, although he was not aware that he had. He died a year later, but it would have delighted this otherworldly thinker to know that his research lived on and provided a road map to the sky-gazers who followed in his wake. In 1930, when Pluto was finally pinpointed, there was universal excitement. Walt Disney named Mickey Mouse's dog after the discovery. The element plutonium was also named after Pluto. There were now nine planets--a number that felt right. It seemed as if Lowell had found final vindication, after all those years chasing Japanese ghosts and Martian canals. But year by year, as scientists got to know Pluto better, they liked it less, finding it smaller than expected, icy, and dubious in other ways, including its orbit and its relationship with neighboring objects. In 2006, 101 years after Lowell began his search for it, Pluto suffered the ultimate indignity when it was downgraded to a ``dwarf planet.'' The fleeting fly-by this Tuesday may help restore luster to the object formerly known as Planet X. But more than likely, we will have to look elsewhere for Lowell's vindication. Fortunately, it's not too hard to find. In June, scientists began to get excited again about the possibility of life on Mars, and research is coming into the Martian subsoil. A different monument to Lowell exists right here, in Cambridge's Mount Auburn Cemetery. He is not buried there, that would be too predictable (his actual grave is at Mars Hill, in Arizona). But a piece of petrified rock, left by his instruction, gives his grave's real location, and testifies to the enduring individuality of a Bostonian who wanted to be present, but not too present. Percival Lowell always encountered the world on his own terms.

Mr. NEAL

Mr. NEAL. Mr. Speaker, I rise this morning to mark the occasion of the New Horizons spacecraft reaching Pluto. New Horizons launched on January 19, 2006, and since 2007, has been traveling steadily at 30,000 miles per hour. This morning, at approximately 7:49:57 a.m., the New Horizons spacecraft rendezvoused with Pluto, three billion miles away from Earth. Having just passed Pluto this morning, New Horizons will continue on in the Kuiper belt. Standing here as the spacecraft just passed Pluto, I take great pride in noting that a Massachusetts astronomer helped in the discovery of its existence. While Clyde Tombaugh formally discovered Pluto, it was Boston astronomer Percival Lowell's calculations that led the way. The P and the L that make the astronomical symbol for Pluto serve as a testament to Lowell's part in the discovery of this small planet. Lowell's contribution to astronomy also stands today with the establishment of the Lowell Observatory located in Flagstaff, Arizona. Percival Lowell inspired countless generations with his advocacy of astronomy, and more than 80,000 visitors each year go through the doors of the observatory. I am certainly proud to have known Lowell's descendants, the Putnam family, for years; and I admire their continued advocacy of the Lowell Observatory. New Horizons is the first in the ``New Frontiers'' series, inspired by another son of Massachusetts, President John Kennedy, who said about the need to explore space: ``We set sail on this new sea because there is a new knowledge to be gained, new rights to be won, and they must be won and used for the progress of all people.'' President Kennedy's support of our Nation's first space program set us on course for hope and optimism for our future. New Horizons' accomplishment this morning, along with other initiatives such as the International Space Station, which I am very proud to say that I supported and recall that in this institution, the space station survived by one vote at a precarious time in our history. It serves today as a strong reminder of the continued importance of space exploration and the very smart people that are drawn to this initiative. I also want to close by saying that I would hope that we might remind ourselves of the optimism of the Kennedy years and the space exploration program which Kennedy highlighted and helped to inaugurate but which he never got to see many of the benefits of, a sentiment that all Members of Congress should grasp, and that is that the candidate who offers the best sense of optimism for the future is generally the candidate that prevails. During the course of a campaign when one makes arguments on behalf of a particular initiative, we are also to understand that it is part of forming a government. So optimism becomes infectious in our political system when embraced properly. I hope today, as we celebrate this remarkable achievement of New Horizons and just the thought that that spacecraft travels at 30,000 miles per hour and the fact, at 3 billion miles from Earth, America's science, achievement, and initiative have once again prevailed in this world, that we will continue to support these space initiatives and embrace the notion and the role that science plays in our lives. Thank you Percival Lowell, and thank you President John Kennedy.

Mr. NEAL

Mr. NEAL. Mr. Speaker, I have a motion to recommit at the desk.

Mr. NEAL. I am opposed to the bill in its current form.

Mr. NEAL. Mr. Speaker, I am opposed to this bill in its current form, and I want to remind my colleagues that this will not kill the bill, nor will it send it back to committee. If adopted, the bill will proceed immediately to final passage as amended. Well, we are 6 months into the new Congress; and what do we hear from the majority? It is more of the same, more of the same assurances: Trust us on tax reform; it is on the way. First, it was: Do not introduce tax bills. Trust us, tax reform is on the way. Then it was: If we make some extenders permanent, trust us, tax reform is just around the corner. The new refrain is: If we want to fix the highway trust fund, let's do tax reform at the same time. Mind you, we have just voted to extend the highway trust fund for the 33rd time, and in December, we will most likely vote to extend the R&D tax credit on another short-term basis. Let's stop playing these games. By the way, when my friend from Texas talked about Democrats extending the deficits, did he forget that Bill Clinton left us with four straight balanced budgets, and in 8 years, they wrecked the trajectory of those balanced budget with $2.3 trillion of tax cuts? That is the reality. When I heard him say the Democrats ran up the deficits, I guess they forgot there was a President George W. Bush in between. What do we do here? We do the estate tax repeal. That takes care of 5,400 families in America. How universal is that? If we weren't doing the estate tax bill--repealing it, by the way--then what we could have done was perhaps extend and agree upon a robust R&D tax credit, which you all know I support. How about, for 6, 7, 8, 9, or 10 years, put it in line and let private investment build around it? If you are from Massachusetts, obviously, you are for a more robust R&D tax credit. Who in Massachusetts could be against that? World class universities, hospitals, businesses, incubators--we produce some of the highest and best tech advancements in the world. Kendall Square in Cambridge has the highest concentration of R&D in the whole world. We know this credit is vital to keeping America at the innovation forefront, and we know that the start-and-stop nature of this credit has put a damper on the willingness of firms to invest because they don't know if the credit is going to be gone tomorrow. Now, a chance to point something out that I think bears noting, as a percent of gross domestic product, research and development now is the lowest it has been in decades. Why is that? Because of the rejection of science on my Republican friend's side, private sector R&D is way down. The encouragement in the Tax Code is simply to buy smaller companies, merge, and take advantage of the innovation they have done. There is the opportunity here to build something around the R&D that we should be taking advantage of here today, but we are not doing that because of the notion of having rejected this science. The fickle nature of Congress toward this credit is attributable to one fact: we have not reformed the Tax Code since 1986. Now, Congressman Brady wasn't even born the last time that we did tax reform 30-some odd years ago. He was but a wish in a couple's eye. That is how dated this argument is. He said: Why can't we agree on some things here? There are some things we can agree upon: Barack Obama was not born in Kenya; secondly, and just importantly, there is no imminent invasion of Texas that is being planned; And third, very simply, the tax cuts don't pay for themselves. They have to score some place. We are taking up the time today debating this extender--or extenders--when we should be talking about tax reform that works for the middle class, a tax reform that does not reward investment; instead, we are doing this hodgepodge effort on tax extenders that really make no sense. Guess what, come December, we are going to be right back here on this floor tackling the R&D credit for another year or two. Now, before they say to me, Mr. Neal, you are wrong, I certainly have been right in the last two cycles about what happened as to where we ended up with tax extenders. The President has already said he would veto a permanent R&D at this point, and I understand the whole nature of why we need to do talking points. I would submit this to my friend, Mr. Brady, and he is my friend, and we work together on many pieces of legislation. Why don't we commit ourselves to building an R&D tax credit for 10 years, so it can be built into the investment code of the American entrepreneur, so they know precisely what is going to be out there, instead of taking this tactic today that is never going to see the light of day as we go forward? This Congress could have been spending its time today talking about income disparity, downward pressure on wages, robotics, and what is putting the American worker behind the curve of opportunity; but, no, we can't do that. We spend our time instead on these sorts of arguments. I hope that we can send this back to committee and come up with something that we can all live with. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. NEAL. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.

Mr. NEAL

Mr. NEAL. Mr. Speaker, I want to take this opportunity to recognize Normand Drapeau for being awarded the chevalier (knighthood) of the French Legion of Honor by the French Government for his courageous actions while serving in the United States Navy during World War II. Normand was born on May 1, 1925 in Holyoke, Massachusetts into a large Catholic family as the oldest boy of twelve children. He attended the Immaculate Conception School for his primary education as well as spent a year at LaSalette Seminary in New Hampshire before ultimately deciding to work as a butcher at his family's business, Drapeau's Market. In 1942 on Holy Thursday when he was only seventeen, Normand enlisted in the United States Navy and was shipped off to boot camp the next day on Good Friday. After he completed amphibious training in Little Creek, Virginia and Fort Pierce, Florida, he was sent off to Dartmouth, England in preparation for the invasion of France. However, Normand did not have to wait until D-Day to see some action. On April 27, 1944, German gunboats attacked Normand's flotilla while they were on an exercise in the English Channel. One of the blasts threw Normand into the channel but he was not seriously injured. A month later, when General Eisenhower postponed the invasion of Normandy due to poor weather conditions, Normand's Landing Craft Mechanized (LCM) flotilla decided to embark across the 120-mile channel when their tow got cancelled. Once the flotilla reached Omaha Beach, Normand faced the brutal fighting and harsh reality that the beach is infamous for in order to liberate France. Normand was slightly injured during the battle but was able to be treated on the battlefield. On June 16, 1944, Normand was hit by a landmine and was seriously wounded. This led to a difficult and dangerous journey back to the United States. He was put on a Landing Ship Tank (LST) to be brought back to a hospital in England. While on board, the ship was hit by a German torpedo and was disabled, forcing it to be towed back to England. Once in the hospital in England receiving treatment, he still had to deal with a series of German attacks. The hospital was hit by German V1 and V2 rockets, causing severe damage to the building. Normand was then moved to Scotland to await a cargo plane to take him back to the U.S. His original plane was overbooked, forcing him to fly to Newfoundland first. This last minute change ended up saving Normand's life because his original plane was shot down. He eventually got back to the United States and was treated at a naval hospital. Normand was discharged from the Navy in June 1945 and received two Purple Hearts for being wounded on the battlefield. Mr. Speaker, Normand Drapeau is the epitome for our quiet American heroes. This very humble man does not seek any recognition or special attention for his bravery. He simply wanted to serve his country and to defend the enduring cause for freedom around the world. As the French government awards Normand with one of its highest honors, I want to take a moment to thank Normand on behalf of the United States House of Representatives and the American people for his service to our nation and congratulate him on receiving this prestigious honor.

Mr. NEAL

Mr. NEAL. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to introduce the Supporting Colorectal Examination and Education Now (SCREEN) Act of 2015. This legislation promotes access to critical colorectal screening procedures by removing barriers to one of the most effective preventive health screenings available. Simply put, colon cancer screening tests like colonoscopy save lives by detecting and preventing cancer, also reducing costs for individuals, their families, the Medicare program, and the health care system as a whole. The likelihood of developing colorectal cancer is greater than one in twenty; meaning that 133,000 Americans will be newly diagnosed this year. The American Cancer Society (ACS) estimates that 2,550 new cases of colorectal cancer will be diagnosed in my home state of Massachusetts this year and 930 Bay-Staters will die from this deadly disease. Among all cancers, colorectal cancer is the number two killer of Americans. This year alone, approximately 50,000 Americans will die from colorectal cancer. Despite these daunting statistics, I am encouraged by the opportunities for improvement as colorectal cancer is among the most preventable of all cancers. Unlike most other cancer screenings designed to detect cancer at an early stage, colorectal cancer screenings can actually prevent cancer from occurring in the first place. If found early through screening tests like colonoscopy, pre- cancerous growths called polyps can be removed, thus halting the progression to colorectal cancer. Therefore the way to beat this deadly disease is to ensure Medicare beneficiaries are screened regularly through a variety of detection methods, including colonoscopy. In fact, a recent study in the New England Journal of Medicine concluded that of the nearly 50,000 people expected to die of colorectal cancer this year, screening colonoscopy could save more than 50 percent of these deaths. The month of March was ``National Colorectal Cancer Awareness Month'' and, I think, an appropriate time to reflect on some of the strides we have made as a nation in confronting colorectal cancer. While it remains the second leading cause of cancer deaths among men and women combined, both the incidence and death rate have been steadily declining in recent years. This is a budding public health success story due to improvement in screening rates, demonstrating the power of preventive medicine. Yet there is much more to accomplish. The federal, state and local governments, as well as other stakeholders have come together and pledged their efforts to achieve the goal of 80 percent of eligible Americans screened by 2018. The screening rate for those in the target populations has increased nearly 10 percent over the past decade. In Massachusetts, we can boast one of the highest screening rates in the country at 75 percent. However, that still means that one out of every four eligible people is not getting screened. Furthermore, screening rates for recommended tests remain unacceptably low across the country, highlighting the need for public policies to help us achieve this collaborative national goal of 80 percent screened by 2018. In particular, the Medicare-age population, which is at the greatest risk for developing colorectal cancer, has screening rates far below this goal. CMS should be commended for implementing policies to increase screening utilization rates. However, Medicare beneficiaries make up two-thirds of all new cases of colon cancer, and the number is expected to increase by more than 50 percent by 2020. Accordingly, the SCREEN Act is designed to enhance Medicare beneficiaries' ability to access colorectal cancer screening by fixing coverage gaps and disincentives under the benefit. Medicare currently covers certain colon screening services, but Medicare beneficiaries are not appropriately using this benefit for various reasons, including out-of-pocket costs and fear of the procedure itself. Medicare waives cost-sharing for cancer screenings recommended by the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF), which assigns an ``A'' rating for colorectal cancer screening. However, if a doctor finds and removes a pre-cancerous polyp during a screening colonoscopy--the whole point of the procedure in the first place--Medicare no longer considers it a ``screening'' and the beneficiary is required to pay co-insurance. The SCREEN Act waives cost-sharing under this scenario, as well as the necessary follow-up colonoscopy upon a positive finding of other recommended colorectal cancer screening tests covered by Medicare. These changes will help achieve this ``80 percent by 2018'' goal and will ensure there are no financial barriers for Medicare beneficiaries across this screening continuum in colorectal cancer prevention. Relatedly, the SCREEN Act would stabilize Medicare reimbursement for screening tests for the next three years to encourage Medicare providers to participate in nationally recognized quality improvement registries and screening initiatives as we strive towards the ``2018 goal.'' This bill would ensure that the Medicare colorectal cancer screening benefit works for both patients and the physicians treating Medicare beneficiaries. Unfortunately, fear of the screening colonoscopy test itself undermines the goal of increasing colorectal cancer screening utilization rates. This fear has also undermined screening rates for another public health epidemic in Medicare, Hepatitis C. Medicare has concluded that our nation's veterans and baby boomers are most at risk for Hepatitis C. Baby boomers--who make up about 30 percent of the U.S. population--account for two-thirds of the people with Hepatitis C in the U.S. CMS also notes that roughly 85 to 90 percent of those infected with Hepatitis C are asymptomatic, meaning they have no outward signs of disease. The Centers for Disease Control (CDC) and USPSTF recommend age-based screening for both colorectal cancer and Hepatitis C, even if the Medicare beneficiary has no symptoms. Just like colorectal cancer screening, we must do more to increase screening for Hepatitis C. The SCREEN Act recognizes the critical role that doctors play in providing information, alleviating fears, and encouraging patients to ask questions, and thus establishes a demonstration project to allow Medicare beneficiaries the opportunity to discuss these screening procedures with the provider performing the procedure. Thus, allowing the Medicare beneficiary the option to be screened for Hepatitis C at the same time the beneficiary is undergoing a screening colonoscopy. One recent study has demonstrated that more patients will agree to get a Hepatitis C screening while they are undergoing a screening colonoscopy. In addition to raising awareness, now is the time to redouble our commitment to preventing and beating and preventing colorectal cancer. I therefore urge my colleagues to join me in supporting the SCREEN Act.

Mr. NEAL

Mr. NEAL. Mr. Speaker, I want to take this opportunity to recognize the 50th anniversary of the Job Corps Program. With Westover Job Corps Center in Chicopee, Massachusetts within my district, I would like to say a few words on the successes that Job Corps have had over their distinguished history. The Job Corps Program was created as a collaboration between the public and private sectors to help poor and unemployed young people gain the skills to enter the job market. Job Corps' educational model allows academic and vocational professionals to create self-paced work plans for their students. With their residential campuses, counselors, instructors, and advisors work with their students on a 24 hours a day, 7 days a week basis to develop the life skills, financial literacy, and responsible citizenship that students require for the future. 80 percent of all Job Corps graduates are able to find employment, move onto higher education, or serve their nation in the Armed Forces. Over their 50 year history, more than 3 million jobless and underemployed people have benefitted from the unique opportunity that Job Corps offers. Mr. Speaker, Job Corps remains a life-changing resource for thousands of at-risk, jobless, and disenfranchised youths around the country. I have personally seen the improvements that have been made to students' lives at Westover Job Corps Center over my tenure in Congress. I wish them continued success as they continue their great work in the future.