Butch Otter

Mr. OTTER

Mr. OTTER. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Madam Speaker, this concludes the formal remarks that we have for this tribute and this dedication. I should like to thank the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Davis) for his kind remarks. He truly did bring Mr. Hagan's life to life on this floor, and this tribute for Mr. Hagan is most appropriate.

Mr. OTTER

Mr. OTTER. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to a great American, Dave Walker, who today will be laid to rest in Arlington Cemetery. Captain Dave Walker served his country on the sea, in the sky, and among the stars. Captain Walker graduated from the United States Naval academy in 1966, completed his flight training, and became an F-4 Phantom Pilot. He led many combat missions over Vietnam. After returning from Vietnam, Dave became a test pilot and helped the Navy transition from the F-4 to the F-14 Tomcat that is still flown today. During his naval career, he was awarded the Distinguished Flying Cross, six Air Medals, and the Vietnamese Cross of Gallantry, among others. In 1978 Dave was selected by NASA for astronaut training and graduated in 1979. He served in many important support roles, including chase plane pilot for STS-1, and mission support leader for STS-5 and 6. Dave first went into space aboard the Space Shuttle discovery during Mission STS 51-A in 1984--the first salvage operation completed in space. Dave Walker returned to space in 1989 as commander of STS-30 aboard the Space Shuttle Atlantis. Dave and his crew again contributed to scientific knowledge by launching the Magellan space probe to Venus. He also commanded the Space Shuttles Discovery and Endeavour on important missions in recent years. After leaving NASA in 1996 Dave Walker entered the private sector, and he and his wife purchased a home in McCall. Dave quickly advanced as President of the Idaho Aviation Assocaiton and the Idaho Aviation Foundation, and worked tirelessly to promote and protect the aviation community. He was particularly interested in working to reopen Cascade Reservoir Air Strip, one of the most beautiful fields in Idaho. Sadly, Dave will never get the chance to fly into Cascade Reservoir airstrip again. He was diagnosed with cancer in March and passed away on April 23rd. He is survived by his wife Paige, his children Michael and Mathieson, and a grateful nation. Heroes are buried in Arlington Cemetery, but heroes like Dave Walker will live on in the lives of the people he fought to protect in Vietnam, the knowledge he contributed to space technology and aviation, and the friendships he made in Idaho.

Mr. OTTER

Mr. OTTER. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding time to me. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in strong support of the Armey-Boehner- DeLay amendment to H.R. 1, the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001. But before I speak about this amendment, I want to commend President Bush for keeping another of his promises by making education reform a top priority in his administration. I also want to thank the gentleman from Ohio (Chairman Boehner) for his hard work on House Resolution 1 in keeping education a priority in this 107th Congress. In addition, I want to thank those members of the Committee on Education and the Workforce for their hard work. Many of the provisions of H.R. 1 are good, particularly those that would increase flexibility for the State and local school districts, the families, the parents; reduce the Federal bureaucracy; encourage and improve teacher quality; and ensure that the basic math, science, and literacy tests are adequately funded. H.R. 1 would also allow parents the option of transferring their children out of public schools that refuse to improve failing performances and to other public schools within the same district, a measure I support. However, decisions as important as educating our youth should not be restricted only to public schools. Lower-income American families concerned about the quality and safety of their children in public schools should not be left behind. Just as many families who can afford it, they should be allowed to send their children to schools of their choice, whether it be public, private, or religious. National opinion polls show that the vast majority of Americans support private school choice. The Army-Boehner-DeLay amendment would do just that, if a school fails to make adequate yearly progress for 3 years in a row.

Mr. OTTER

Mr. OTTER. Madam Speaker, I rise today to express my strong support for H.R. 1831, the Small Business Liability Protection Act. As an original co-sponsor of this bill, I believe it is vital that we pass this legislation and help end the fear of so many small businessmen and women that they will be held liable for unlimited toxic cleanup costs that are not their fault. Under current law, any contribution of hazardous material to a Superfund site makes any contributor wholly liable for the costs of cleanup. H.R. 1831 is an important and necessary improvement to Superfund, because it will exempt small businesses and non-profits that only contributed to Superfund sites a nominal amount of hazardous material. It will also exempt those who only contributed regular household waste to these sites. This reform will provide certainty and protection for small business that seek to start new enterprises and will provide incentives for businesses to take responsibility for mildly contaminated areas at the lowest possible cleanup cost. While I strongly support H.R. 1831, I believe that we need to move quickly to pass even more substantive and comprehensive Superfund reform. In my own district, the Bunker Hill Superfund site in Kellogg, Idaho is a prime example of how hazardous waste cleanup can transform into open-ended federal government control of a community and its economy. I hope that the members who vote for H.R. 1831 will work with me to make additional needed Superfund reforms. Final approval for listing a Superfund site should be given to the governor of the state concerned after local input. States should have the opportunity to draw up their own cleanup plans before the federal government becomes involved. I wish to thank Chairman Young and Chairman Tauzin for bringing this important legislation to the floor today. I urge my colleagues to protect small business from government run amok and vote for H.R. 1831.

Mr. OTTER

Mr. OTTER. Mr. Chairman, I rise today to voice my reasons for voting against final passage of H.R. 1646, the Foreign Relations Authorization Act. I wish for my colleagues and constituents to know the reasons for my action. There were many good provisions in H.R. 1646 that I am glad were in the final bill that the House passed. I support the sale of Kidd class destroyers to Taiwan. I support the call for moving the United States Embassy in Israel to the capital of Israel, Jerusalem. I also voted for several amendments that made H.R. 1646 a better bill. I joined my colleagues in voting for Mr. Delay's amendment to protect United States servicemen from the clutches of the United Nation's new international Criminal Court. America's service men and women serve our nation under our Constitution, not international bureaucrats under a foreign flag. I am pleased that this House voted to pass the amendment of the distinguished gentleman from California, Mr. Lantos, prohibiting United States military aid to Lebanon until they step up their efforts to stop terrorist attacks against Israel. I am particularly pleased that the Hyde Amendment restoring the Mexico City policy was added to the final bill. Despite these improvements, I could not vote for final passage of this bill for two reasons. The first reason is the failure of this House to pass the amendment of my friend and colleague from Colorado, Mr. Tancredo. I cannot support a bill that authorizes $118 million for rejoining the United Nations Education, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO). UNESCO is a profoundly anti-western, anti- American organization. President Ronald Reagan was correct in withdrawing the United States from this group, and I will not vote to send my constituents' tax dollars to an unelected intelligentsia who hate this country. The second reason I voted against this bill is because of language urging United States acceptance of the Kyoto treaty on the environment. There is no way I could vote for this bill with the language intact. This provision is unsound constitutionally and economically. The Kyoto language is unsound constitutionally because the other body has refused to ratify this treaty. The Constitution specifically reserves the treaty ratification power to the Senate. This house has no place urging the President to enforce a treaty that our country is not bound by. We have very strict laws restricting air and water pollution. If the House of Representative thinks these laws aren't strict enough, which I do not believe, then the House should pass a bill changing those laws. International negotiations are not the way the Founding Fathers intended for our environmental laws to be changed. More importantly, Mr. Chairman, the Kyoto treaty is monumentally flawed. If ratified it would require the United States and other developed countries to reduce their emission of so-called ``greenhouse gasses'' at least 7% below 1990 levels by 2010. At the same time developing countries, such as China, Brazil, and India, were exempted from the greenhouse requirements. If implemented, the Kyoto treaty would have driven manufacturing industries entirely out of the United States. The United States already has strict Clean Air laws. Requiring a 7% decline in emissions for every industry would impose enormous costs on manufacturers and has not been scientifically proven to prevent global warming. If given the opportunity to choose between a country with these strict laws and a nation that was not bound to reduce emissions, I am of no doubt as to which country that firm will move to. In addition to driving industry off-shore, full implementation of the Kyoto treaty would require increases in gasoline and electricity prices of up to 50%, and an estimated job loss of 2.4 million, according to one study. Mr. Chairman, the Clinton Administration did not sign a treaty at Kyoto, they signed a death sentence for the American economy. President Bush sensibly announced on March 28 that the United States would not take steps to implement the Kyoto treaty. I could not join this House in urging our President to destroy the American economy, and voted against H.R. 1646.

Mr. OTTER

Mr. OTTER. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and agree to the resolution (H. Res. 116) commemorating the dedication and sacrifices of the men and women of the United States who were killed or disabled while serving as law enforcement officers, as amended.

Mr. OTTER. 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. 116, as amended.

Mr. OTTER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. (Mr. OTTER asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. OTTER. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to have the House consider H. Res. 116, legislation introduced by the gentleman from Colorado (Mr. Hefley), my colleague. This rule commemorates the dedication and the sacrifice of the men and women of the United States who were killed or disabled while serving as law enforcement officers. By adopting H. Res. 116, the House will express its belief that all peace officers slain in the line of duty should be honored and recognized. Further, Mr. Speaker, this resolution urges the President of the United States to issue a proclamation calling on all Americans to honor and recognize such officers with appropriate ceremonies and respect. Mr. Speaker, every day more than 700,000 law enforcement officers risk their lives and their safety to protect us. They patrol our most dangerous streets, and they deal with the most violent elements of our society. Increasingly, law enforcement officers are also called upon to preserve the right of our children to receive an education. They then pay a high price to defend all of our liberties. As the resolution states, Mr. Speaker, 1 in 9 peace officers are assaulted every year; 1 in 25 are injured; and, even more sadly, 1 in 4,400 are killed in the line of duty. In my own great State of Idaho, Mr. Speaker, we have lost 56 brave men and women in uniform who were protecting our families and our friends and our neighbors. These, all of them, are heroes and they have put their lives at risk, put their families in danger, and have done something remarkable that we do not see too often today: They put society's safety ahead of their own. Mr. Speaker, on June 17, 1988, Officer Linda Huff, an Idaho State Police Officer, was shot in the parking lot of her patrol station while walking to her car. The assailant fired 17 rounds from a high-powered hand weapon at point-blank range. She was able to return fire and injured her assailant before dying. The injuries Trooper Huff inflicted on her assailant led to his eventual arrest. More recently, on January 3 of 2001, two more peacekeeping Idahoans lost their lives while serving a search warrant. Corporals Anderson and Moulson were both wearing bulletproof vests when they were met with gunfire from the suspect inside the home. Sadly, not only are these men and women protecting us; in that process, they have become targets themselves by the criminals. Over 15,000 officers gather at our Nation's Capitol today to join with the families of these recently fallen comrades and recognize the supreme sacrifice that so many others have made in giving their last full measure. The courage and sacrifice displayed by our law enforcement officers is being honored by Congress through the establishment of the National Law Enforcement Museum. This museum will ensure the stories of heroism and sacrifice of these police officers are always remembered. Mr. Speaker, I encourage all Members to support this resolution to offer their votes, first, in appreciation to the fallen heroes, and, second, as a vote of confidence for those who still today serve. This House should make plain its appreciation for the critical and often unappreciated sacrifices these men and women make in preserving the peace. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. OTTER. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Colorado (Mr. Hefley).

Mr. OTTER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the remarks of the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Davis). Mr. Speaker, I commend the gentleman from Colorado (Mr. Hefley) for introducing this important piece of legislation and for his efforts to bring it to the floor and see it through its passage. I wanted to thank the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Burton), of the Committee on Government Reform, and the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Scarborough), chairman of the Subcommittee on Civil Service and Agency Organization, and the gentleman from California (Mr. Waxman) and the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Davis), ranking members, for working expeditiously for bringing this resolution to the floor. In closing, Mr. Speaker, let me just remind everyone that it is our law enforcement officers that provide for the construction of the community, provide for its safety. They are, indeed, community builders. It reminds me of a poem that I learned many years ago, and I should like to offer it in closing, Mr. Speaker. It goes like this: ``I saw a group of men in my hometown. I saw a group of men tearing a building down. With a heave and a hoe and a mighty yell, they swung a beam, and a side wall fell. And I said to the foreman, `Hey, are these men skilled, you know the kind that you'd hire if you wanted to build?' He said, `Why no indeed. To tear down a building, common labor is all I need. With common labor, I can tear down in a day or two what it took a builder 10 years to do.' So I thought to myself as I walked away, which of these roles am I going to play.'' Mr. Speaker, men and women in law enforcement and in uniform today that build our communities deserve the vote, and I urge the Members to provide their vote and their support.

Mr. OTTER. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

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

Mr. OTTER

Mr. OTTER. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this time. Mr. Speaker, nearly 50 years ago I raised my right hand and I said, ``I pledge my head to clearer thinking, my heart to greater loyalty, my hands to larger service, my health to better living, for my club, my community, my country, and my world.'' Mr. Speaker, some of my colleagues may argue that not all of that took as well as it might have, but I would argue for whatever benefit I did receive in taking that pledge, my life has been richly blessed and immensely improved by the process that goes on in 4-H. The pledge of my head stands for the clear thinking that is required to be a 4-H'er. Not only that, but the decision-making process and the collection of knowledge, knowledge that one will use throughout their life. In pledging greater loyalty from the heart, the 4-H'er promises to have greater loyalty to his fellow man and to his country, but also to himself and for those values that they themselves stand for. To pledge their hands to larger service, in this day and age it is certainly needed by every citizen of this country. Finally, to pledge their health, we all know the value of what good, healthy lifestyles can stand for in this country. Mr. Speaker, I would like to associate myself with the remarks of my colleague, the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Foley), who spoke before me, because he covered much of the material that I had intended to. I would like to point out, in the nearly 7 million participants, as mentioned by the gentlewoman from Hawaii (Mrs. Mink), some 597,000 are involved in citizenship civic education programs, nearly 1 million in community expressive arts programs, a half a million in consumer family science, 1.3 million in environment and science programs. In Idaho, Mr. Speaker, 32,643 members in 3,743 clubs with 4,200 adults participate in the volunteer and leadership programs for 4-H. Mr. Speaker, I join with my colleagues as a cosponsor in recognizing, as is long overdue, the 4-H Clubs of the United States of America that have stood for a long time for those words so aptly put by Chester Bernard when he said that ``to try and fail is at least to learn, but to fail to try is to suffer that estimable cost of what might have been.'' Mr. Speaker, 4-H knows what it is.

Mr. OTTER

Mr. OTTER. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that my name be removed as a cosponsor of H.R. 1467.

Mr. OTTER

Mr. OTTER. Mr. Speaker, this week is National County Government Week. Countless counties across the country are represented in Washington, D.C. to honor outstanding elected officials who do so much to serve their communities. As a former Lieutenant Governor of Idaho for fourteen years, I have had the privilege of working with many fine officials on the county level. One of those officials is Mr. Jack Buell. For the past twenty years, Jack has ably represented the citizens of Benewah County, Idaho as County Commissioner. He's a Democrat. But that isn't what distinguishes Jack. A lifelong Idahoan, Jack was born in St. Maries, Idaho. He married Eleanor, his wife of 39 years, raised a family and built a successful trucking business. Through the years, he has developed affiliations that have benefited the citizens of Idaho-- including, the Idaho Department of Transportation Advisory Board, the Idaho State Scaling Board, and the timber industry, in which he now serves as President of the Associated Logging Contractors, and as Chairman of the Idaho Forest Products Commission. In that last capacity, he has passionately led the timber industry at rallies throughout Idaho, Montana, and Washington with caravans of diesel trucks. And even those mighty achievements do not explain why I honor Jack Buell today. In 1996, during heavy flooding and cleanup efforts in St. Maries, Jack selflessly donated the use of virtually every piece of heavy equipment he owned to help move homes to safety, provide escape for trapped victims, and help rebuild the flood-ravaged community. That experience, and many others, resulted in his community and peers awarding him the Idaho Association of Counties Sidney Duncombe Award. Jack is a good friend, a solid family man and businessman, and he deserves my thanks, and thanks from fellow county officials--and Congress--for his service to communities and citizens in Idaho.

Mr. OTTER

Mr. OTTER. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H.J. Res. 41, the Tax Limitation Amendment to the United States Constitution. This legislation will protect the American people from runaway government spending and keep Uncle Sam out of America's pocketbook. This Amendment demonstrates the respect this Congress has for the states and taxpayers of the United States. Today, the United States taxpayer faces the highest tax burden ever. I am pleased to have joined a bi-partisan majority in passing President Bush's tax relief package a few weeks ago. But the measure we take up today in the House is a longer-term solution to keep our taxes in check. No longer will a determined, razor-thin majority be able to force through tax increases against the will of the people. In 1993 this country was subjected to massive tax increases that passed each House by a single vote. I believe that if Washington, D.C. really thinks a tax increase is necessary, we should be able to convince the representatives of \2/3\ of the states. We require a \2/3\ vote of Congress to change the constitution, we require a \2/3\ vote to overturn the President's veto, we require \2/3\ votes for many important votes. Shouldn't we recognize that to working Americans, how much Washington takes away is the most important issue of all? I am proud to vote for this amendment, and I will recommend its passage to the legislature of my home state of Idaho.

Mr. OTTER

Mr. OTTER. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to urge my colleagues to join me in voting for H.R. 8, the ``Death Tax Elimination Act of 2001.'' As a cosponsor of this bill, I fully support eliminating the death tax. This bill keeps our promise to pass death tax relief as part of President Bush's budget plan. The Death Tax Elimination Act of 2001 will eliminate the death tax over 10 years, without harming the surplus or raiding Social Security. In fact, the Heritage Foundation estimates that repealing the death tax will create 145,000 additional jobs in the 9 years after the tax is repealed. These employment gains will come, not just from the additional businesses that stay open because they don't have to be liquidated to pay tax, but also from the effect repealing the estate tax will have on keeping interest rates low. The death tax is an egregious and punitive part of our Tax Code for every American, but it is especially hurtful to rural areas. The death tax forces farmers to sell land that has been in their families since pioneer days, and forces small businessmen to sell the companies that are often the only providers of their service in a community. Often these services are then filled, not from within the same community, but from providers in cities literally hundreds of miles away. To make matters worse, the capital generated from these sales flows out of the rural communities into large city banks and markets. In short, every dime wrenched out of rural Idaho by the estate tax causes many dollars worth of suffering. I am glad that we will pass the death tax repeal today. It will provide a much needed stimulus for our economy, encourage family farming and small business formation, and restore much needed fairness to our Tax Code. I urge my colleagues to join me in voting for H.R. 8.

Mr. OTTER

Mr. OTTER. Mr. Speaker, today I introduced the ``Back Country Landing Strip Access Act.'' This bill, which was introduced in the last Congress by Chairman Hansen of the Resources Committee, will prohibit the federal government from closing airstrips on public lands without the consent of the state aviation authority. I am grateful to Chairman Hansen for letting me re-introduce this bill this year, and would like to thank him and the 23 other original co-sponsors of this bi-partisan bill. I would also like to thank my fellow Idahoan, Senator Crapo, for introducing this legislation in the other body. Last year, Idaho and the other western states were threatened by some of the largest firestorms in the history of this country, in which more than 7 million acres of forest lands burned. People around the nation watched transfixed as brave firefighters battled on the ground and in the sky to protect lives and property. Most of those watching may not have been aware that the firefighters on the ground in these wilderness areas were supplied from airstrips on public land. Or that the aerial firefighting efforts depended on back country airstrips as safe havens in the case of emergency. Had back country landing strips not existed, firefighting efforts would have been crippled. Incredibly, for eight years before the fires the federal government had sought to remove these airstrips. Amazingly, the Departments of Agriculture and Interior had removed numerous airstrips on public lands without even consulting with pilots, land users or state aviation authorities. This heavy handed land management by unelected federal bureaucrats has placed innumerable lives in danger. Imagine if you were a pilot and attempted a dead-stick landing onto an airstrip on your chart, only to find a grove of trees planted in your path. Or, if you evacuated a camper with a medical emergency, and the runway you need had been destroyed by government inaction, the results would be devastating. The Back Country Landing Strip Access Act is a common sense measure that will prevent the closure of landing strips, and will require public notice and state approval for any such proposal. When this bill was introduced in the last Congress, many federal officials complained that it would place an unreasonable burden upon land management agencies. But how is it unreasonable for the federal government to seek the permission of a state before closing a field that a local community depends upon? Why is it unreasonable for rural communities to fly in the supplies and equipment they need to survive in winter? Mr. Speaker, I know this bill will work if enacted because we in Idaho have been working with this system for years. When Congress established the Frank Church River of No Return Wilderness Area in 1980, a provision was added that prohibited the federal government from closing any airstrip in the wilderness without the express written concurrence of the State of Idaho. This provision has not ruined the wilderness area. To the contrary, it has allowed the elderly, the handicapped and children to enjoy wilderness areas they would otherwise be unable to reach. It has preserved the ability of outfitters to bring sportsmen to the heart of the wilderness with a minimum of disruption. In short, it is a model for what we seek to accomplish in this bill. This bill is a common sense measure to restore cooperation between federal and state governments. It does not force the reopening of closed airfields. It does not require the federal government to spend extra money to maintain back country strips. In fact, this bill authorizes the Departments of Agriculture and Interior to enter into cooperative agreements with local groups to maintain back country strips. America's public lands should not be allowed to become ``no-fly zones.'' I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting this vital legislation, and I am pleased to introduce it today.

Mr. OTTER

Mr. OTTER. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of H.R. 6, the ``Marriage Penalty and Family Tax Relief Act of 2001.'' With this important legislation today we are fulfilling our pledge to finally begin easing the tax burden on every American family. H.R. 6 will eliminate the marriage penalty and raise the child tax credit. This bill is an essential part of restoring fairness to our tax system and helping Idaho families. Many married couples today have to pay a tax penalty of more than $1,400 per year. For young people on limited incomes this is often an insurmountable barrier to marriage. The Marriage Penalty and Family Tax Relief Act will increase the deduction for a jointly filed return to twice the level of a single deduction. Millions of people who are considering marriage will no longer have to worry about paying the taxman on their wedding day. This bill also reaffirms our commitment to families with children. We will double the child tax credit from $500 to $1,000. America's children deserve to have their parent's income spent on their welfare, not stolen by the government and grudgingly returned. This bill will give the families of more than 79,000 children in Idaho's first district the money they need to meet the rising costs of raising a family in this country. The Marriage Penalty and Family Tax Relief Act is an important and needed first step. It will lift children out of poverty, encourage family formation, and stimulate our economy. I urge this house to send the surplus home to America's families, and pass H.R. 6. Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN, Mr. Speaker, today I rise in support of H.R. 6, the Marriage Penalty and Family Tax Relief Act of 2001. H.R. 6 will provide $399 billion in tax relief over the next 10 years for almost 50 million American taxpayers and their families. First, H.R. 6 will increase the standard deduction and expand the lowest 15 percent income tax bracket for married couples who file a joint tax return, increasing the current basic deduction from $7,350 to $8,800. And for families, H.R. 6 increases the child tax credit from $500 to $600 this year and will increase it to $1,000 over the next 5 years. The Marriage Penalty Tax is inherently unfair. The Federal Government should not force working couples, through an unfair, archaic Tax Code, to pay higher taxes simply because they choose to be married. And worse yet, the Marriage Penalty Tax impacts the second wage earner in a family the hardest, which in most cases, is usually a woman. This flaw in our Tax Code is wrong. By passing H.R. 6, Congress will right this wrong, once and for all. Mr. Speaker, I want the 72,000 married couples in my District alone to know that they will no longer be forced to pay more taxes. I can think of no more unfair and ridiculous part of the current Tax Code than the marriage tax penalty. And as I travel across New Jersey's 11th Congressional District, I am constantly reminded of the need for prompt tax relief. I hear it when I get my coffee and paper in the morning, at my local barbershop or at any one of my weekend town meetings or the pancake breakfasts I attend on Sunday mornings. Mr. Speaker, not only do Americans want tax relief, our economy needs one. Congress is off to a terrific start in providing the kind of tax relief that will help stimulate our economy. By passing H.R. 3, the Economic Growth and Tax Relief Act of 2001, on March 8, we acted to give Americans the first across-the-board income tax cut in two decades. So today, I urge my colleagues to build on our ongoing efforts to provide tax relief for all hard working Americans. Let's pass Marriage Penalty Tax relief for the millions of working couples who should not be penalized by the IRS just because they are married. And let's strengthen our families by making sure that parents receive a break from the IRS to help care for their children. It's difficult to make ends meet, especially when working to feed, clothe and educate a young family--let's double the child credit from $500 to $1,000 per child and make it easier for parents to provide for their children. Mr. Speaker, let's pass the Marriage Penalty and Family Tax Relief Act of 2001 and let's help strengthen both our families and our economy.

Mr. OTTER

Mr. OTTER. Mr. Speaker, I would like to take a moment to recognize five outstanding Idaho women who are positive role models for young girls in the Gem State. Maria Berain, Sandra Bruce, Susan Eastlake, Marjorie Findlay, and Sam Sandmire portray a lifestyle to which young girls can look for inspiration. In a time of constant change and difficulties for our youth today, statistical evidence and observations show girls have a lack of everyday role models to look to. These women are leaders that all young people can look to and learn from. They were recently recognized by the Girl Scouts of Silver Sage Council as Women of Today and Tomorrow. Each of them excels in their individual careers and positively impacts their communities. Maria Berain is a mentor with the Boise State University College Assistance Migrant Program. She supports Hispanic women to pursue their college education by counseling them on study habits and course selection. Sandra Bruce is president and CEO of Saint Alphonsus Regional Medical Center. In addition to guiding the hospital in growth and success she engages in civic organizations including Boise Public Schools Education Foundation and Boise Metro Chamber of Commerce. Susan Eastlake is the founder of the Southeast Neighborhood Association and an Ada County highway District commissioner. She also has worked on the Simplot Sports Complex and on behalf of the Les Bois Soccer Tournament. Marjorie Findlay was chosen to be the first woman senior warden of St. Michael's Cathedral. She is a two-term president of the Idaho Botanical Garden. Her many cultural and educational contributions include fund-raising for the Discovery Center and chairing UNICEF drives. Sam Sandmire is the head gymnastics coach at Boise State University and part-owner of the Bronco Elite Arts and Athletics Club. She was voted conference Coach of the Year of 2000 and is recognized as an advocate for women in competitive sports. Mr. Speaker, as you can see, these women have accomplished great things and are examples of hard work, character, and leadership. I congratulate them and am delighted to have them reaching out to share their values with today's youth. They are true assets to Idaho and the nation.

Mr. OTTER

Mr. OTTER. Mr. Chairman, I rise today to support the Republican Study Committee budget alternative. The leadership budget puts in place the framework for enacting the President's budget and tax cut plan. It is a good budget, not just for the taxpaying American, but for the parents and children of America's taxpayers. This budget will eliminate $2.3 trillion of the national debt by 2001, freeing our descendants from the crushing weight of debt. It gives tax relief to every taxpayer, and immediate tax cuts for the lowest bracket. It increases the educational IRA contribution limit from $500 to $5000, enabling families to save, not just for college, but for primary and secondary schools as well. Perhaps most importantly, this budget will eliminate the death tax. No longer will the grieving children of farmers and small businessmen have to sell their inheritance to pay off the taxman. The leadership budget is a good bill. But in the last few weeks we have begun to see signs that our prosperity may be in jeopardy. The strain of paying for a huge surplus is beginning to drag on our economy. That is why I am voting for the Republican Study Committee alternative budget. It does everything the leadership budget does, but adds larger and more immediate tax relief. Additional tax cuts are needed now to help our economy. Just as an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure, larger tax relief now will generate economic growth that will save us untold amounts later. The RSC alternative will give us $600 million more in tax relief over the next 10 years, from $1.6 trillion in the leadership budget to $2.2 million. By making more of these tax cuts retroactive, it will help taxpayers now. Thousands of people in Idaho and around the nation are delaying home ownership, college educations and starting their own businesses because they don't know when they will see the money they sent to Washington. We need people working, not worrying. Sending the surplus home will release a flood of inward investment that will improve the life of every American. Passing the RSC budget alternative will have a tremendous impact on the financial markets and consumer confidence. It will declare to America and the world that the 107th Congress is serious about maintaining the economy. It will encourage investors and businessmen to bet on American prosperity. I urge my colleagues to join me in voting for the RSC budget and empowering the American economy. Send the surplus home, and vote for the Republican Study Committee alternative.

Mr. OTTER

Mr. OTTER. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in support of H.R. 327, the Small Business Paperwork Relief Act. The Office of Management and Budget estimates that small businesses spend 7.2 billion man-hours to fill out Federal Government paperwork. This means it takes an army of 3.5 million workers, working 8 hours a day, 260 days a year, to fill out the paperwork that the Federal Government requires. Think now, how many government employees it takes to read, file, store, analyze, and then answer this same paperwork. For the hard-working American people who own and operate small businesses, we must stop these regulations now; and by doing so, we create an opportunity for them to become more efficient, drive down costs, stimulate the economy, and let them spend more time of that 7.2 billion hours with their families and keeping their businesses competitive. It is the American consumer that buys the products from these companies that pays the bill. Mr. Chairman, once again I thank the gentleman from California for yielding me this time.

Mr. OTTER. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in support of H.R. 327, the ``Small Business Paperwork Relief Act.'' The Office of Management and Budget estimates that small businesses spend 7.2 billion man hours to fill out federal paperwork. This means it takes an army of 3.5 million workers, working 40 hours a week, 52 weeks a year, to fill out the paperwork the Federal Government requires. Think now, how many government employees it takes to read, file, store, analyze, and answer the same paper. And according to the Chamber of Commerce of the United States, this burden costs the American public $229 billion per year, and this does not take into account state and local requirements. For the hard-working Americans who own and operate small businesses we must ease these regulations. By doing so, we create an opportunity for them to become more efficient, drive costs down, stimulate the economy, and let them spend more of that 7.2 billion hours of paperwork with their family and keeping their business competitive. As most of my colleagues know, it costs money to comply with the regulations the federal government requires. According to the Small Business Administration it costs large firms $3,400 per employee to comply with federal regulations. However, it costs small businesses 50 percent more--an amazing $5,100 per employee. How can we sit here and continue to justify this burden on our friends and neighbors who are just trying to fill out mandated paperwork. Let me just tell you about redundant paperwork. In Idaho we have a small business, Land Mark Promotions, who every now and then ships items overseas. In order to compete internationally they are required to fill out a shipper export declaration, a certificate of origin, maintain a harmonized export number, and have four to five copies of of the invoice, I think we can do better than that and abolish the duplication process in these type of regulations. In a time where our economy is slowing down, let us free up small business so they can work on job training, innovations, and productivity. And if anyone can tell me how 7.2 billion hours of bureaucratic paperwork is productive, I have some ocean front property in Idaho. Mr. Chairman, let us get back to common sense, streamline the requirements for small business, get the monkey off the back of small business owners so they can help this economy grow, and support the ``Small Business Paperwork Relief Act.''

Mr. OTTER

Mr. OTTER. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to voice my strong support for H.R. 3, the ``Economic Growth and Tax Relief Act of 2001.'' This bill will ease the terrible yoke of federal taxation that is crushing the people of Idaho and the rest of the United States. I am proud of President Bush for proposing this bill, proud of our House leadership for bringing it to the floor so quickly, and proud to say that I will vote for it. This bill takes the common sense view that taxpayers deserve their money. The people of Idaho can better prioritize what to do with their hard earned money than bureaucrats in Washington, D.C. Passing this bill says that we trust the people in the states. We trust hardworking people. They are smart enough to make the money. Aren't they smart enough to spend it? By reducing the number of tax rates and the rate of taxation this bill will lower our record high tax burden. Right now America pays more of its GDP in taxes than it ever has in peacetime. Currently Americans are paying Uncle Sam more in taxes than they spend on food, clothing, housing, and energy costs combined. This legislation provides a fair, needed refund of tax overpayments to all Americans. It is a great first step. It is a first step, but not the only step. Farmers and small businessmen in my state are looking forward to repealing the estate tax. Without estate tax repeal the money we return to the American people today will only be stolen from their heirs. Our farmers and small businessmen are already suffering from drought, electricity shortages and record low commodity prices. The least we can do is say ``If you are successful, your children can inherit what you worked for.'' The people of Idaho are waiting for us to pass lower, fairer taxes to help them in their time of need. The people of America are waiting for us to pass lower, fairer taxes to get the economy moving again. Let's vote for the Economic Growth and Tax Relief Act and give the people what they want.