Charlie Norwood

Mr. NORWOOD

Mr. NORWOOD. Once the benefits of the plan were denied, she would have been able to get to court immediately. Because her case was not just routine care, it bordered at least on urgent and perhaps emergency. So she could have gotten into court immediately.

Mr. NORWOOD. If the gentleman will yield further, I wanted to ask him a question, if I could, about the court remedy. One of the things I keep hearing is that under our bill, patients could not sue an HMO and under the Democratic bill they said you could sue an HMO. I believe that is incorrect information. Under our bill, you can sue HMOs, but, in fact, without our bill, you can sue HMOs.

Mr. NORWOOD. Does that not mean, then, many cases of patients who were in HMOs who had a claim that was being denied, many of those people would not have an external appeals process through their plan, do I have that right?

Mr. NORWOOD

Mr. NORWOOD. Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Fox).

Mr. NORWOOD. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H. Con. Res. 27 offered by my colleague, the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Fattah). H. Con. Res. 27 recognizes the unique contributions and importance of African- American music to American culture and calls on the people of the United States to study and celebrate our African-American music heritage. I commend my colleague, the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Fattah), for introducing this resolution. African Americans have had a profound influence on American music. In fact, in my hometown, Augusta, Georgia, we can lay claim to more than its great share of African-American musicians. Both the renowned opera and gospel singer, Jessye Norman and the godfather of soul himself, James Brown hail from the Augusta area. Finally, I would also like to point out that the resolution states that African-American musicians have not only influenced American music but also have had a profound impact on American culture. This influence can be seen in dance, language, fashion, and literature. This resolution rightly recognizes the contributions of African- American music and its larger effect in shaping much of the social and cultural and political fabric of our Nation. I urge my colleagues to vote in favor of it. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. NORWOOD. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks on H. Con. Res. 27.

Mr. NORWOOD. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and agree to the concurrent resolution (H. Con. Res. 27) recognizing the importance of African-American music to global culture and calling on the people of the United States to study, reflect on, and celebrate African- American music.

Mr. NORWOOD. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Let me just conclude by saying that our list may be a little short of the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Fattah), but we will put Ms. Norman up against anybody that wants to sing. I want to just simply urge Members of this body and my colleagues to vote for this resolution but maybe even more importantly, if they have never spent a Wednesday night or a Sunday night in an African-American church and listened to the fabulous gospel music, I urge them to do that. Mr. Speaker, I have no further requests for time, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. NORWOOD

Mr. NORWOOD. Mr. Speaker, this sounds a little crooked, but I will see if I can get it straight. Four years ago Republicans inherited a Congress run by liberals for 40 years. Now, during that time, our friends on the other side of the aisle passed some pretty cute environmental laws. Well, most of these laws make about as much sense as letting the fox guard the hen house. So what has happened? Federal entities like my friends at the Savannah District of the Corps of Engineers claim sovereign immunity so they do not have to comply with environmental laws. On the other hand, private industry just gets sued so groups like the Sierra Club can make ends meet. Pretty clever. I think it is time that my friends at the Corps of Engineers and all other Federal entities, for that matter, abide by the laws they set for you and me. Then instead of sneaking out the back door like they do now with this large loophole, they will realize how frivolous some of these laws actually are. Cosponsor H.R. 1194 and stay tuned.

Mr. NORWOOD

Mr. NORWOOD. Mr. Speaker, I am sure my colleagues can remember the unfortunate boating death that claimed the lives of a couple of Cleveland Indian players a few years ago. One of the contributing factors to their deaths were the guide wires that are used to keep docks in place. Guide wires are the only authorized method for keeping docks in place at Thurmond Lake in Georgia. Why? Because the Corps of Engineers' Savannah office said so. Spud polls, a much safer and more practical action because of their effectiveness at adjusting to the water fluctuations from Thurmond Dam's releases, are not politically correct. The only thing wrong with spud polls is that some tree-hugging bureaucrats do not like them. ``Do as I say, not as I do.'' That is the motto of the Corps' Savannah office. Mr. Speaker, I think it is time the Corps understood that they work for the people and not the other way around. It is also time for the Corps to start obeying Federal laws like the Clean Water Act before it bullies any more of my constituents for being out of compliance.

Mr. NORWOOD

Mr. NORWOOD. Mr. Speaker, whatever happened to user-friendly bureaucrats, if there were any? Clear dangerous underbrush from the public area between your house and Thurmond Lake that resulted from a tornado 4 months ago and, boom, the Corps of Engineers revokes your dock permit for violating a shoreline management plan. Buy a new house on Lake Thurmond Georgia and fail to replant trees on public property that you never cut down in the first place and, boom, no lake shore use permit for you. Do as I say, not as I do. That ought to be the new motto for the Corps' Savannah office. For while they routinely violate the Clean Water Act without being penalized, they have no problem lowering the boom on individuals who are not in compliance with their mostly frivolous rules and regulations. But, Mr. Speaker, that will change. Cosponsor H.R. 1194, a bill to require Federal agencies to abide by the same environmental laws that they enforce on private citizens. Maybe the bureaucrats then will be a little more understanding.

Mr. NORWOOD

Mr. NORWOOD. Mr. Speaker, here we go again, a different constituent, but the same old shenanigans, the Savannah District of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. Jim Davis buys a house on Lake Thurman, so he can enjoy the beauty and recreational opportunity that this part of Georgia has to offer. That sounds easy enough, does it not? Yet, when the Corps gets involved, it is never easy, it is a pain in the neck. The Corps will not approve Dr. Davis's permit for lakeshore use until he replants trees within the underbrush area that was cut down some 25 years ago. It is not even his property, it is public property. That is fine, if Dr. Davis had been the one to cut down the trees, but he was not. He just bought the property. So the Corps, which obviously has nothing better to do than to harass my constituents, hassles a man who is simply trying to mind his own business and follow some commonsense rules. Mr. Speaker, it is time for the Corps to reform its bully mentality and its ludicrous shoreline management plan. If they cannot manage people, they cannot manage property.

Mr. NORWOOD

Mr. NORWOOD. Mr. Speaker, first, it was the IRS. Now, if we can believe it, it is the United States Army Corps of Engineers: You are guilty until you prove yourself innocent. When my constituent, Pamela Ham, thought the worst was over after surviving a deadly tornado on Lake Thurman last May, the Corps reared its ugly head. Even though 4 months passed since this tornado, the Corps, as managers of this lake and the surrounding lands, still had not cleaned up the public property between the lake and Mrs. Ham's house, so Mrs. Ham cleaned the property herself, with her hands. The Corps did not like this. They retaliated, Mr. Speaker, by revoking Mrs. Ham's dock permit. They didn't even ask for an explanation; they just lowered the boom, the big, heavy hand of big government, on my constituent. I am tired of the Corps of Engineers bullying my constituents along the Savannah River, and I am putting them on alert. Stay tuned.

Mr. NORWOOD

Mr. NORWOOD. Madam Chairman, we thank the chairman and, of course, we are delighted to see that. I want to point out that this is just the facts. This is just the facts, folks. We are going to get it right this particular time. I am really for reducing class size. That is important. But I am for each school district determining if they need to reduce their class size. Madam Chairman, I rise in strong support of H.R. 3248, the Dollars to the Classroom Act. Guaranteeing that 95 percent of Federal funds for elementary and secondary schools is spent directly in the classroom and not on the bureaucracy is common sense. A recent Department of Education study found that 15 percent of every Federal education dollar is eaten up by the Federal and State bureaucracy. I am sure they have got another study giving us another number. Everybody has got their studies. The bottom line is we want this money to go to the students and go to the classrooms where people at home can make the decision about what is best for their children. Having it eaten up by the Federal government, that should not be so. If we are going to spend Federal dollars and, remember, that is your dollars that you send up here for education and education programs, then we should make sure that these dollars support those people who actually teach our children. That is not the only reason why I support Dollars to the Classroom. Under this bill, the great State of Georgia will receive an additional $26 million for education. With this legislation, each classroom in the 10th District of Georgia, and I thank the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Goodling), will receive an average of 425 additional dollars. For a modest size, 20-classroom school at home, that can mean an additional $8,500. Madam Chairman, that is real money for our teachers and principals and students. Not only will this bill spend more Federal education dollars directly in the classroom, it gives our schools greater flexibility to receive money for any of the authorized uses for the existing 31 programs block-granted under the bill. Schools can choose to put a greater amount of moneys into priorities such as school safety or school reform or teacher improvement and technology if that is what that school determines it needs. Again, the key here is that with the Dollars to the Classroom Act, we let the schools decide what their priorities are. I plead with my colleagues, do not let the Department of Education confuse you. We are going to increase the number of dollars in this bill. I ask my colleagues to support H.R. 3248.

Mr. NORWOOD

Mr. NORWOOD. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to offer legislation that will help create thousands of jobs for low skilled laborers across this country. This legislation will allow a class of construction workers called ``helpers'' to work on federal construction projects. ``Helpers'' are construction workers with little or no previous training who perform lower skill tasks to assist higher skilled workers. These are good first jobs for young or inexperienced workers-- just the kind of workers we are attempting to encourage to work with welfare reform. Now you would think that the government would do what it could to encourage work for these folks. At the very least you would hope that the government would not put any obstacle in the way of these folks finding good work. Well as I have learned in my 4 years up here you and I might hope this but it is probably unwise to rely on the government to do this. And sure enough the Department of Labor has put some obstacles in the way of ``helpers'' who would like to work on federal construction projects. The Department refuses to recognize these workers as a legitimate and ``prevailing'' job classification under the Davis-Bacon law. This prevents many ``helpers'' from obtaining jobs on federal construction projects. Today I am introducing legislation which will recognize ``helpers'' under the Davis-Bacon law and thereby allow them to work on federal construction projects. I urge my colleagues to join me as cosponsors of this legislation. Let us remove this obstacle to jobs. Let us expand the Davis-Bacon Act in order to create jobs for our lower skilled workers.

Mr. NORWOOD

Mr. NORWOOD. Mr. Speaker, today it is my pleasure to introduce the ``Domestic Kaolin Competitiveness Act of 1998.'' This legislation will revise the Merchant Marine Act of 1920 (The Jones Act) to ensure that laws meant to protect U.S. shipbuilding jobs will not hurt U.S. kaolin jobs. Currently, the Jones Act requires all shipping between U.S. ports to be conducted exclusively by American built, owned, and crewed vessels. However, it does not apply to import/export shipments. My legislation specifically targets the domestic shipping of kaolin, a fine clay found primarily in middle Georgia. Kaolin is used in a variety of industrial applications, such as producing the glossy finish on magazines, as well as the manufacture of porcelain products. Currently, there are no American barges available that are suitable for shipping kaolin. Accordingly, Georgia clay producers are forced to use more expensive truck and rail transportation to supply American manufacturing customers, giving Brazilian kaolin producers a price edge in delivered costs. Mr. Speaker, when it is less expensive to transport kaolin from Brazil to Maine than it is from Georgia to Maine, something is not right. This legislation would allow kaolin producers to request a waiver of the Jones Act, but only if there are no available American barges to transport the clay. In other words, if there are American barges available, clay producers would still be required to use them in order to ship by water, regardless of the price. Mr. Speaker, this is a prime example of allowing federal regulations to strangle domestic industries, while granting de factor waivers to foreign competitors. It is also a case in point of the need for Congress to review past legislation to determine if it is still accomplishing the goals it was originally intended to accomplish. Mr. Speaker, I look forward to working with my colleagues to ensure that the kaolin industry is put on equal footing and can compete fairly with its foreign competitors.

Mr. NORWOOD

Mr. NORWOOD. Mr. Speaker, there has been a lot of talk and even legislation lately concerning the encouragement of Americans to become volunteers in their communities. I would like to point out to my colleagues that millions of Americans have not waited for the Federal Government to call for volunteerism, they have been doing just that for decades. And nowhere can be found a better example than that of Kenneth Allen, of Dublin, Georgia. Kenneth became a member of the Boy Scouts of Dublin in January 1976, as Assistant Scoutmaster of Troop 66. He served in that capacity until 1988, when he became head Scoutmaster. For ten years, from 1988 until this year, Kenneth faithfully served the young men of Troop 66, producing 76 Eagle Scouts. Kenneth earned the Silver Beaver Award in 1988; the District Merit Award in 1991 and 1996; the Scoutmaster Award in 1986, 1989, 1990, and 1994; the Troop Advancement Award in 1990 and 1997, and the Cliff Moye Award in 1988. This year, Kenneth Allen finally retired from active service with the Boy Scouts. In honor of his years of dedication, the Troop Advancement Award has been renamed the Kenneth D. Allen, Senior Advancement Award, and will be awarded annually to a scout leader in the Central Georgia Council of the Boy Scouts of America. I'm proud to know Kenneth. He has proven himself as a credit to the Dublin community and a positive role model for hundreds of young men who have passed through Troop 66 over the 22 years he has given to that organization. I know his wife Claudia, daughter Sharon, and son Kenneth, Junior are also proud of Kenneth's achievements, although I'm sure they are also glad to have a little more time with Dad now that he has retired. Mr. Speaker, if we look for examples of volunteerism to serve as a model for what we need more of as a nation, we need look no further than Kenneth D. Allen, Senior, of Dublin, Georgia.

Mr. NORWOOD

Mr. NORWOOD. I thank the gentleman from New York for yielding me the time. Madam Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Hoekstra).

Mr. NORWOOD. Madam Speaker, reclaiming my time, I rise in strong support of H. Res. 507. I would say to my friend from California when it comes to being abused perhaps that we ought to be concerned a minute or two about the taxpayers of this country that have been abused to the tune of $20 million. Maybe we ought to be concerned about the members of the Teamsters Union that have been abused to the point where their treasury reduced from $155 million down to less than $1 million. There are all kind of things and people we ought to be concerned about in their abuse and our point of view in the oversight committee and our job in the oversight committee is to find out what went wrong in these illegal elections. The Committee on Education and the Workforce needs deposition authority because the Carey administration at the Teamsters is stonewalling our investigation. It is just sort of that simple. Now, that is an unfortunate situation, but Congress has a duty, a constitutional duty to investigate a union that tramples its members' rights and flouts the very laws we have passed in this body. Our investigation has been going on for almost a year now. We are starting to get the picture of how this union has been run. Frankly, Madam Speaker, it is not very pretty. The most recent development, of course, is that the president of the Teamsters, Ron Carey, has been barred from the union for life as has his former government affairs director William Hamilton. That is not fiction. In an election that cost the American taxpayers almost $20 million, Carey took his members' dues to pay for his reelection campaign. Clearly he was more interested in keeping his job than protecting the rank-and-file Teamster. The record of evidence compiled by the subcommittee thus far indicates that the Carey administration also may have manipulated the union's pension funds. That is serious stuff. Notice I said ``may have.'' We need to know for sure whether we are right or wrong. And may have made political contributions with their members' dues, which is very illegal. Obviously we need to interview all of the Teamsters employees and contractors involved in these matters to find out the extent of these problems and do our duty. Do the people running the Teamsters Union now, who were elected in a sham election, want us to get to the bottom of this? No. No, unfortunately not. They will not allow us to interview their employees, their accountants or their actuaries about the financial shenanigans that did go on. What are they trying to hide? I will say this about the unelected people in charge of the Teamsters today. They do have a lot of gall. Not only do they refuse to let this Congress do its job by performing an oversight investigation, but they turn around and say, ``You've got to pay for the next election.'' They will not let Congress find out how the election went wrong, but they will come to us and demand that we kick in another $10 million so they can have another election. I for one frankly have had enough of this, of the Carey administration's stonewalling. We need to pass this resolution today so that Congress can find out what they are trying to hide from. Union officials that misuse the hard-earned dues money of their members should not be allowed to thumb their nose at this Congress.

Mr. NORWOOD

Mr. NORWOOD. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the requisite number of words. Mr. Chairman, I yield to the gentleman from California (Mr. Riggs).

Mr. NORWOOD

Mr. NORWOOD. Mr. Speaker, let us try to get this straight. The Federal law known as ERISA is what preempts State laws. It is not this bill; it is the ERISA law that preempts State laws.

Mr. NORWOOD. Mr. Speaker, it seems to me that it has been years in my life till we get to this day. I have wanted this to happen a long time. I am saddened deeply by what I hear and see happening in this room today. I had hoped that all of us would recognize the importance of protecting human beings' lives, the importance of correcting the malfunctioned ERISA laws of 1974 and could come together and actually offer good patient protections that the people of this country so deserve. But I hear over and over again demagoguery, politicization, misrepresentation, total untruths, just simply getting it wrong and not telling it right, and I am saddened by that. The Dingell-Ganske bill has good patient protections in it. I do not question that. I know that it does. It is imperfect, however. The Republican bill has excellent patient protections in it, though it, too, is also imperfect. I want to speak to my friend from Texas who says, oh, all of a sudden the Democrats have realized we need to protect patients. We bring this up today because we are Democrats. I would remind my friend from Texas that you are the same group that tried to put everybody in the country in managed care 4 years ago, with no thought to any particular patient protections. I have for at least two terms of Congress as a Republican tried to protect patients, and I am delighted that you have joined with us at this late date. Mr. Speaker, I have spent the last year and a half calling for support to end the ERISA preemption of State medical malpractice law. I pled with the President to add ERISA liability to his advisory committee report in November 1997. He did not. I requested that the President call for ERISA liability reform in his State of the Union address in January of 1998. He did not. I argued day after day with the Republican Working Group to add ERISA liability reform to this bill. They would not. There is a reason for that. It is a big enough reason that we can end up this year with no law, no patient protections over this subject. As much as I am for it, I am for a law this year that will get as many patient protections as we possibly can meet. The task force met me more than halfway with a new proposal that I frankly like very much. It is about liability and it is about suing an HMO. If I could only have one of the two liability provisions, I believe today that I would take our own. I ask you to stop this politicization of this bill and let us work together and pass patient protections.

Mr. NORWOOD. Mr. Speaker, as we close down this debate and come toward the end of what, for me, has been a long time coming, I want you to know I am not only saddened by the debate but I am exhilarated by this debate also because it is with great pleasure I see each side of the aisle trying to outdo the other on patient protections, and Lord knows that has been a long time coming. It is often asked of me why would a conservative Republican like myself, why would you be involved in something like this? Why would you want to deal with national standards? I think that is a reasonable question, and I think it is a fair question. The answer is pretty clear. What I want to do is take health care out of the ERISA laws that should never have been put in the ERISA laws, that never was about health care but always about your pension plans, but we cannot do that. But we cannot do that. The other option is to do nothing, and we all know that is wrong, and the other option then is to set some national standards, and that is where I am, and that is where we are in this debate today. We have today one of the reasons I might mention that I am involved in this is that we have today the best medical care, best trained physicians, best technology in the world, but it does no good to have any of that if we are denied our care. We all can agree, I believe, on that. I have been in Congress 3\1/2\ years. There is a lot I do not know, but I will tell my colleagues one thing I do know something about. I know something about treating patients. I have been doing that all of my adult life. In fact, I have been doing that longer than any of my colleagues have been in Congress, except maybe the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Dingell). Generally speaking, that is all I know, And I have in every sense since I have come to this town tried to say that there are serious problems out there that are occurring that we must address. Thank God we are. It is a contest of who is addressing them best, perhaps. Mr. Speaker, I remember seeing patients back when there really was a doctor-patient relationship, back when there was a free market, before the 1973 HMO Act, before the 1974 ERISA Act. Things are not better today for patients. Maybe our skills are better, maybe our technology is better, but people have been denied the benefits that are in their plan. I thank my colleagues for joining with us, I thank them for joining with us to try to address that, and we are going in the end to address that, I believe, in a very correct manner. One of the other reasons I have been so interested in this is that in 1994 I did not like Clinton care. Do my colleagues want to know why? Clinton care was a program to deny patients' choice of doctor and of hospital. It was a program that would deny them care and rationed care, and it was a program designed to use untrained and less trained people to take care of patients. Guess what? They won. That is exactly what we have today. The big difference is Mr. Clinton would have used Federal bureaucrats; today we use corporate bureaucrats. I promise my colleagues, a patient that has been denied care and their child has died does not care whether it was a corporate bureaucrat or whether it was a Federal bureaucrat. Mr. Speaker, we have before us today, I say to my colleagues, two bills, and we are debating actively on who has done the best job. These bills are fighting to see who can protect patients most. I think that is wonderful. Let me just simply close by saying that there are many things that are similar. There are many very good protections in the Republican bill, and I certainly do not oppose the liability part, except I am scared that it will kill the bill for this Congress and we will have no protections. Vote against the motion to recommit, vote for this bill, and work with us to make it all better.

Mr. NORWOOD

Mr. NORWOOD. Mr. Speaker, on July 21, 1998, I was unavoidably detained during the vote on the Johnson amendment (Roll No. 312) to H.R. 4193--FY 1999 Interior Appropriations Act to restore the National Endowment for the Arts (NEA) funding to its previous level of $98 million. Had I been in attendance, I would have voted ``No.''

Mr. NORWOOD

Mr. NORWOOD. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman very much for yielding time to me. I appreciate the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Neumann) giving me this few seconds to say that I hope he has seen a peanut plant since last year, because last year he had never seen one. Since then, since the gentleman has tried to give the children of Georgia powdered milk today, now they want us to buy Chinese peanuts. They are talking about 16,000 farmers in this country who are God- fearing, church-going, hard-working, taxpaying people and he needs to get off their backs and not be so greedy for the candy manufacturers. Mr. Chairman, if people like strawberries from Mexico, they are going to love Chinese peanuts.