Doug Ose

Mr. OSE

Mr. OSE. Mr. Speaker, I think it would be appropriate if I were to reserve the balance of my time and allow the senior member, the gentleman from Sacramento, to speak. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. OSE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H. Res. 363. This resolution honors the recently departed Mayor Joe Serna, a good friend of many of us in this chamber. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. OSE. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks on H. Res. 363.

Mr. OSE. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and agree to the resolution (H. Res. 363) recognizing and honoring Sacramento, California, Mayor Joe Serna, Jr., and expressing the condolences of the House of Representatives to his family and the people of Sacramento on his death.

Mr. OSE

Mr. OSE. Mr. Speaker, I rise again today to highlight the President's submittal to the House on strengthening Social Security, the Medicare Act of 1999. I will caution again all the Members here, and those who are not, that they need to read this plan because this plan, in fact, does request and require a 2\1/2\ percent reduction in discretionary outlays. This is not Republicans; this is the President of the United States who is suggesting this. Now I would just like to remind everyone that we are having a dickens of a time negotiating a 1 percent reduction in discretionary outlays, and the President is suggesting that his plan to save Social Security is based on a 2\1/2\ percent reduction in discretionary outlays. I urge Members to read this plan. The numbers do not add up. The numbers do not add up, Mr. Speaker. Please read the plan. Roll-Call Votes on the Passage of the Original 1935 Social Security Act congressional research service--library of congress In response to numerous requests for information on the Senate and House roll-call votes on the original 1935 Social Security Act (H.R. 7260/P.L. 74-271), we have compiled this packet. The Social Security Act was signed into law by President Franklin D. Roosevelt on August 14, 1935. The following roll-call votes were taken on the measure: House--April 19, 1935: Yeas: 372 (288 Democrat; 77 Republican; 7 Independent); Nays: 33 (13 Democrat; 18 Republican; 2 Independent); Answering Present: 2 (2 Republican); Not Voting: 25 (18 Democrat; 6 Republican; 1 Independent). Senate--June 19, 1935: Yeas: 77 (60 Democrat; 15 Republican; 2 Independent); Nays: 6 (1 Democrat; 5 Republican); Not Voting: 12 (8 Democrat; 4 Republican). In 1935, there were only 48 states, since Alaska and Hawaii were not admitted to the Union until 1958 and 1959, respectively. So, the Senate had 96 seats in 1935, according to Stephen G. Christianson's Facts About the Congress [New York, H.W. Wilson, 1996], 339). Also, ``[t]he current House size of 435 Members . . . was established in 1911,'' according to CRS Report 95-971, House of Representatives: Setting the Size at 435, by David C. Huckabee. Thus, 95 of the eligible 96 Senators and 432 of the eligible 435 Representatives participated in the bill's roll-call votes. The roll-call vote charts following this page, which are organized by chamber, are arranged alphabetically by last names, then, where necessary, by first names. Party and state information is provided for all Members, and district information is also given for each Representative. The original House and Senate roll-call votes can be found on p. 6069-70 and p. 9650, respectively, in the 1935 edition of the Congressional Record. Copies of bound volumes of the Record may be available for use at the nearest federal depository library. Addresses of the closest depository libraries can often be obtained: through a local library; from the office of Depository Services of the U.S. Government Printing Office, (202) 512-1119; or at the following Internet address: [http://www.access.gpo.gov/su_docs/dpos/ adpos003.html]. Information Research Division.

Mr. OSE

Mr. OSE. Madam Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this time, and I rise today in strong support of the County Schools Funding Revitalization Act. Back in my home district, I have heard firsthand the worries of educators about the lack of funding in their school districts. My good friend, Mr. Bob Douglas, the superintendent of schools in Tehama County, recently shared with me information about deteriorating conditions in Tehama's school system. And they are bad. Teachers have been laid off, causing increases in classroom size; some school bus services have been discontinued, leaving children stranded at the beginning or end of the day and parents forced to either delay going to work or to come home from work to take them home. Textbook budgets have been slashed, vocational training restricted, counseling programs reduced, and that single most valuable piece of our educational system, the library, has had its hours curtailed. Virtually every part of the school system in forest counties, like many of mine, have been affected by the reductions in this funding. And this is not restricted to Tehama County. I have also heard from folks in Butte, Colusa, and Glenn Counties. Parents and teachers who every day see the impact of reduced funding on our children have stressed to me the urgency of this matter. We spend a lot of time here throwing rhetoric back and forth across that center aisle. We argue about who is spending more on education and who is spending less. Well, my colleagues, now is the time to put our money where our mouth is. This bill will help level the playing field between children of rural counties and those who live in cities so that every child, regardless of where they live, has the opportunity to meet the expectations and expand the horizons that their parents hold so dear. This bill will help ensure that the local communities who have fallen on hard times in recent years have the funding to provide an adequate education for that most valuable resource, that one thing we all live and breathe for every day, that being for our children. My colleagues, we cannot let down our children from America's rural areas. We must continue to make education a priority. Please join me in voting ``yes'' on the County Schools Funding Revitalization Act.

Mr. OSE

Mr. OSE. Madam Speaker, I rise today again to make a point of the Social Security plan that the President has put forward. We have heard much in terms of the ballyhoo about the President's plan, of which I have a copy and which will be reviewed at the Committee on Ways and Means on Thursday. With great respect to my friends on the other side, I am curious whether or not they support the President's plan to save Social Security. Before they answer, be careful, because I will tell them, having read it and read it carefully, it requires a reduction in the discretionary outlays for appropriations. This is the leader on their side of the aisle saying we are going to cut appropriations. Given the situation we have today where we cannot even come to even a nominal reduction, how are we going to achieve that? Madam Speaker, the numbers do not add up with the President's Social Security plan. I urge each of my colleagues to read it very carefully. If we support it, we are supporting a reduction in discretionary appropriations of significant nature. Read it carefully. The President's plan does not add up.

Mr. OSE

Mr. OSE. Mr. Speaker, I have in my hand the budget submitted by the President of the United States in his State of the Union, and on page 366 it details the various outlays, receipts and surplus for the upcoming fiscal year and the ensuing four. However I also have in my hand the President's Social Security plan; and, lo and behold, the President's Social Security plan, delivered to the House with much ado and great fanfare, assumes a $50 billion reduction in discretionary spending for Fiscal Year 2000 as the predicate clause for this savings he is going to use to save Social Security. Fifty billion dollars. No suggestion of offsets. No suggestions of reality. No input from the Congress. Just a blanket $50 billion reduction in discretionary spending. I am confused, and apparently the President is, too.

Mr. OSE

Mr. OSE. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for giving me an opportunity to stand before the forum this morning and express my appreciation. For a number of days, I have been in the well seeking the President's plan on Social Security, and I have, for 29 days, been tracking the fact that, until yesterday afternoon, the President had not delivered a plan. While I am pleased to say that we have received a plan, it did just come in yesterday afternoon, it is a very lengthy plan, it is filled with many howevers, and whereases, and therefores, and thereases, and I am working my way through it. But I did want to stand and express my appreciation to the administration, Mr. Speaker, for having forwarded the plan and to say that we will be reviewing it. I hope it gets a fair hearing, and I am looking forward to the dialogue as to the adequacy of the plan. So with that, Mr. Speaker, this placard is no longer operative. Again, I thank the administration for finally forwarding their plan.

Mr. OSE

Mr. OSE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today, as I did last week and previous days, to again request that the administration deliver to the House its plan for Social Security. Now, I saw the report in the newspaper this weekend about the President's pending delivery; but, in fact, there is nothing here yet. We are now on day 299 from when I first got here, still looking for that plan. Mr. Speaker, we have reserved H.R. 1 for this purpose. We are still waiting. Talk is talk, and action is action. Now is the time for action. I ask that the administration finally deliver its plan for Social Security. The Nation awaits.

Mr. OSE

Mr. OSE. Mr. Speaker, did my colleagues know that Americans today are living longer and having fewer children? This means, in the end, fewer workers in the future to support each Social Security beneficiary. In 1960, there were 5.1 workers for every person on Social Security. Today that number stands at 3.4, and on our current pace, by the year 2030, that ratio will be down to 2.1. Let me repeat that. There will be two people supporting each Social Security beneficiary. Mr. Speaker, we need to reform our current Social Security system, and we need to reform it as soon as possible. It has now been 294 days and counting since the President promised to provide reforms to the Social Security plan. He has not delivered. As my good friends on the other side know, we cannot make up in volume what we lack in a plan. There is no plan. The President has not given us his machine. Mr. Speaker, I am asking the President, finally, show us your plan.

Mr. OSE

Mr. OSE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to essentially commend the leadership of this House and the administration for getting together and agreeing that Social Security needs to be saved. But the time for talk is done. The time for action has arrived. The problem that we face is that we have yet to receive a single piece of evidence as to what the administration's plan for saving Social Security is. We have gone from January 6, the day I arrived here, now 293 days without any evidence whatsoever from the administration as to what their plan is for saving Social Security. Mr. Speaker, it is unfortunate but true. Facts are facts. There is no plan yet put forward by the administration to save Social Security. Talk is cheap. The time for action is now. Every day older, the further behind we get. Mr. Speaker, I ask the President to put his plan forward.

Mr. OSE

Mr. OSE. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and agree to the resolution (H. Res. 279) congratulating Henry ``Hank'' Aaron on the 25th anniversary of breaking the Major League Baseball career home run record established by Babe Ruth and recognizing him as one of the greatest baseball players of all time, as amended.

Mr. OSE. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks on House Resolution 279.

Mr. OSE. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Chambliss) control the time.

Mr. OSE

Mr. OSE. Mr. Speaker, I recently rose in support of the Thompson amendment calling for a comprehensive study of telemedicine as a method of delivering timely, quality health care, particularly in rural districts like mine. Today, I wish to discuss a vital component of telemedicine, and that is the Internet, but not the Internet of old and not the Internet of the ``worldwide wait.'' No, Mr. Speaker, I refer to an Internet built on a foundation of high-speed technologies that will enable transmission of vast amounts of data in real-time. Physicians will then have the ability to transmit medical images to radiologists anywhere in the country for interpretation. Patients will have the option of remaining home and having their daily readings checked without traveling all the way to the doctor's office, often a substantial distance from home. These are but two examples of telemedicine's promise. Congress should take the steps necessary to ensure that these technologies are developed and deployed swiftly. Our constituents deserve nothing less.

Mr. OSE

Mr. OSE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to inquire when are we going to get H.R. 1 delivered to this House? When I arrived here in January, one of the things we did out of respect for the administration was reserve H.R. 1 for the President's plan on Social Security. It is now the middle of October, and the President's plan is still absent. When can we expect the delivery of H.R. 1 from the administration?

Mr. OSE

Mr. OSE. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the amendment by my good friend, the gentleman from California (Mr. Thompson). Mr. Chairman, I have this past week spent much time in my district visiting the various facilities that serve the medical needs of the people who live in the Third District, and I will say firsthand, up front and personal, that this system works. I have been in the hospital in Colusa, a small city of around 5,500 in my district, where we actually communicated as I was standing there with people at the University of California at Davis Medical Center talking about issues affecting a patient. Telemedicine works. It helps the people in my district, and the thing that is so critical here, the thing that actually makes a difference, that we should support here if for no other reason is that telemedicine is an effective, efficient, beneficial way to bring medical assistance to the people who live in our rural areas throughout this country. I have seen it work. I want to say that. I have seen it work in my district. There is a camera. There is a screen. There are people on the other end, and it is just like talking from here to the Chair. The amendment of the gentleman is well thought out. The fact that we can get some additional greater information to allow us to make reasoned, rational decisions regarding telemedicine merits our support. I thank the chairman for considering it.

Mr. OSE. I yield to the gentleman from Florida.

Mr. OSE

Mr. OSE. Mr. Chairman, I was inadvertently detained and was therefore not present to vote today for rollcall No. 430. Had I been present, I would have voted ``no.'' Parliamentary Inquiry

Mr. OSE

Mr. OSE. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Government Reform be discharged from further consideration of the resolution (H. Res. 293), expressing the sense of the House of Representatives in support of ``National Historically Black Colleges and Universities Week,'' and ask for its immediate consideration in the House.

Mr. OSE. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. OSE. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding. The purpose of this bill is to recognize the 105 historically black colleges across this country that have served not only the interests of the black community, but this country, in providing a sound and fruitful education for people of color over the past many years in this country. We want to make sure that we recognize those institutions during this particular week known as National Historically Black Colleges and Universities Week, and the purpose of this resolution is to memorialize that.

Mr. OSE. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the resolution strongly. I want to commend the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Clyburn) and the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Cummings) for this resolution in support of national historically black colleges and universities. I do not believe I can match the eloquence of Ms. Bethune in her recitation of her early days, but three things have struck me this evening of particular importance, and I wanted to reinforce them. Ms. Bethune said ``something from nothing.'' What more telling comment about the story of America than something from nothing. How apt to this evening to have that shared with us, the story of the founding of Bethune-Cookman. The gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Clyburn) talked earlier about the promise of this great Nation and that the promise of this great Nation is available for all, needs to be available for all. In the initial comments tonight of the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Cummings), he hit on what that promise is. I think the first words out of his mouth were ``education is the key.'' It remains the key. It is the key in my family. It is the key in his. It is the key in every family across this country. Get the education. Use one's mind. Use one's talents, whatever they may be, to make something from nothing. I am sitting here getting fired up over this, frankly. Before we wrap up, one of the speakers spoke of the contributions of these 105 historically black colleges. I went and I checked, I did a little research as to how it affects this particular body. I went through the list of sponsors of the resolution, my curiosity being: I wonder how many of them went to these black colleges. I just want to put that in the Record how this forum, how this body benefits from the past efforts and future efforts of these colleges and universities. The gentlewoman from California (Ms. Waters) has an honorary degree from a number of these universities: Bishop State, Central State, Howard, Morgan State, Spelman College. There are others here. The gentleman from Florida (Mr. Hastings) graduated from Fisk University. The gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Lewis) graduated from Fisk University. The gentlewoman from Florida (Ms. Brown), the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Hastings), the gentlewoman from Florida (Mrs. Meek) have degrees from Florida A&M University. The gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Cummings) has a degree from Howard. The gentleman from Alabama (Mr. Hilliard), the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Hastings), the gentlewoman from Florida (Mrs. Meek), the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Wynn) and again the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Waters) have degrees from Howard. The gentleman from Mississippi (Mr. Thompson) has a degree from Jackson State University. The gentlewoman from South Carolina (Mrs. Clayton), she has a degree from Johnson C. Smith University. The gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Bishop), the gentleman from Alabama (Mr. Hilliard), and the gentleman from New York (Mr. Owens) have degrees from Morehouse College. The gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Jackson), the gentleman from New York (Mr. Towns), and the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Waters) have degrees from North Carolina A&T State University. The gentlewoman from California (Ms. Lee) serves on the board of trustees for Oakwood College. The gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Clyburn) has a degree from South Carolina State University. The gentleman from Louisiana (Mr. Jefferson) has a degree from Southern University A&M College. The gentlewoman from California (Ms. Waters), as I said, has a degree from Spelman. The father-in-law of the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Lee) has a degree from Texas Southern University. This is what America is all about, people taking their education and giving back. We have to go no further than the walls of this forum to find the positive benefit. I thank the gentleman and his colleague for bringing this resolution forward. Something from nothing, we ought to put that on the face of this building, because it is so apt.

Mr. OSE

Mr. OSE. Mr. Speaker, I stood in the back of the chamber here listening to the debate, and it is somewhat perplexing. I am trying to figure out what it is the gentlemen and the gentlewomen on the other side object to. Is it the reduction in the rates on ordinary income? Is it the provision for the deductibility of health insurance? Is it the credits given for adoptions for special needs children? Are they objecting to these things? Is it the provision allowing for increased savings for the education of our children and grandchildren? Is it the marriage tax penalty relief that the Democrats object to? Is it the increase in the private savings that is so greatly encouraged by the revisions to the IRA and other retirement programs? Is it the fact that the President wants to save 62 percent of the Social Security revenue, and we want to save 100 percent? Exactly what is it the other side objects to here? If it is, in fact, an objective of the other side to defeat this bill, then they should vote against it. They should just tell the people of America that they are in opposition to all these things. I encourage my colleagues to do so.