John Peterson

Mr. PETERSON of Pennsylvania

Mr. PETERSON of Pennsylvania. Mr. Chairman, if the gentleman would continue to yield, when we authorize, we never can guarantee that it is going to be appropriated. It is a two-part process. I am a member of the Committee on Appropriations; and as a member of the HHS subcommittee, I intend to do my best to make this a reality, hopefully with the gentleman's help.

Mr. PETERSON of Pennsylvania. If the gentleman would continue to yield, yes, I have; but I think I am in a little better position in this situation. I know the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Regula) is very sensitive to this issue. We are not on the authorizing, but we are making a source of funding available to increase by this amount of money. That is our goal, and we are going to do our very best to make it happen.

Mr. PETERSON of Pennsylvania. Mr. Chairman, I yield such time as she may consume to the gentlewoman from Pennsylvania (Ms. Hart). (Ms. HART asked and was given permission to revise and extend her remarks.)

Mr. PETERSON of Pennsylvania. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Montana (Mr. Rehberg).

Mr. PETERSON of Pennsylvania. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I will conclude by sharing that this amendment is important to the parts of this country who have huge heating costs and cooling costs, to help those that are less fortunate than most of us, those that a big piece of their income goes to heat and cool their homes; and this takes a part of the bonuses and puts it in that fund. It has been argued that we do not appropriate, but we do not appropriate anything as an authorizer. I happen to be an appropriator too, and I intend to do my very best. I will promise the gentleman from Massachusetts that I will do my very best to make sure this gets in the pipeline. But I want to conclude with the following: The real problem of LIHEAP will only quadruple if we do not bring energy supplies available to this country. If we do not increase oil supplies, energy prices will spike. If we do not increase gas supplies, home heating and manufacturing costs will go out of sight. If we look at the charts, if we look at the graphs, our gas supplies are the lowest in this country they have ever been. Our prices at the moment are prices they do not want to fill with because it is over $5 a 1,000. We have an energy crunch in this country. We have a shortage of both gas and oil. We can import oil from unstable parts of the world, but we do not have the ability to do that with gas, and if we do not bring supplies out of places like ANWR and every place we can, if we do not open up lots of parts of this country that are locked up, I am going to tell my colleagues, people are not going to be able to afford to heat their homes, businesses are not going to be able to run efficiently and be competitive, and our economy will be in the tank. We must pass a comprehensive energy bill.

Mr. PETERSON of Pennsylvania

Mr. PETERSON of Pennsylvania. Mr. Speaker, what we need for the sake of our economy is we need reliable supplies of all energies, and we need to prevent spikes. The spikes from 2 years ago started us back into a recession. The spikes this winter are going to slow down our economy further. The one energy that is the greatest concern right now is natural gas. Many years ago in the last administration there was a decision made that coal was out and gas was in for electric generation. I personally am not a big fan of gas for electric generation. We used it for peaking power because I believe it has been the main source of home heating, commercial, and the main source for our industry, and it should be the main source for bus fleets and truck fleets in our city areas where we need clean air. The easiest conversion away from petroleum is natural gas for our transportation fleet. In my view, that would be a better use. But what has happened in this country in just a few years, natural gas, not generally used for power generation for making electricity, now the gas being used in this country, 13 percent of the gas is for power generation; 14 percent of the gas fuels all of commercial in this country. So power generation has caught up with commercial in a 5 or 6- year period, and every day they are hooking up new power generation plants, and the rig counts in this country to produce the gas are not there. It is interesting, and I have a map here. I wish I had a blow-up of it. The dark blue on the map is where the energy is locked up.

Mr. PETERSON of Pennsylvania. Around the Great Lakes, this Congress voted not to allow slant drilling under the Great Lakes, yet we are buying gas and oil from Canada who is drilling under our Great Lakes and selling us the product. It does not make much sense. But if natural gas is the new fuel for electricity and we want to keep it reasonable for home heating and we want to keep it reasonable for commerce and reasonable for our manufacturing and industries, we have got to have a greater supply of it. We cannot import natural gas. A lot of people think we import natural gas from Mexico. Actually we buy some from them, but we sell more than we buy, so we are actually an exporter to Mexico. We do buy considerable natural gas from Canada, but about 86 percent of our natural gas that we use in this country comes from America, and our source and supply is dwindling because we as a Congress have locked most of those spots up, and some that are not on there, saying we cannot drill there.

Mr. PETERSON of Pennsylvania. Mr. Speaker, in my district there are a number of caverns that are used to store gas for the New England area and the northeast. There are huge salt caverns that we pump the gas into in the summertime. The underground gas reserves in America are the lowest they have ever been historically. The concern is that with the amount of gas that we are using ongoing now to generate electricity, there is not going to be enough to fill them this summer. Last September we had the biggest, the largest amount of gas we ever had in this country. By late November, we had those reserves almost all used because we had an early winter and a cold winter all up and down the East Coast, and so we used more gas than usual. The problem is right now the average gas price is somewhere between 5 and 5.50 a thousand. We were used to in this country $2 and $3 gas. It was $3 during the peak season in the winter, $2 in the summer when they would fill the reserves. We are now looking at filling reserves at $5 gas if we had it to put there, or $6 gas. When we raise the cost of doing business that much, double energy prices and more than double for large businesses that use a lot of gas, we will put them out of business.

Mr. PETERSON of Pennsylvania. It was at 19 at one point.

Mr. PETERSON of Pennsylvania. No, the reserves I am speaking about are the caverns where we store storage gas. Not reserves. There are a lot of reserves in this country, but a lot of them are under those orange areas where we cannot drill.

Mr. PETERSON of Pennsylvania. Mr. Speaker, I think it is very vital that we pass an energy bill in this Congress and pass one that is meaningful. We must continue to improve efficiency and conservation of our energy use. I think in electricity we need to veer away from natural gas and go back to clean coal and nuclear for the interim, because if we continue to use natural gas as we are, we are going to threaten home heating. Gas should be saved for affordable home heating, commercial, industrial, and should be used for mass transit in our cities, which would help clean air there. Oil should be replaced in transportation as quick as we can, whether it is hydrogen fuel cells, the new cars that use multi-fuels or whatever, because we only have 2.5 percent of the world's oil and basically our transportation is funded with oil, and we do not have a long term source of oil. We need reliable supplies of all energy sources to prevent the price spikes. Why do I say that? Every time we have energy spikes in our country, we have a downturn in our economy and millions of Americans lose their jobs. Seventy percent of our economy is commerce, and when you take money out of home heating budgets, if home heating prices double, when transportation prices for driving our cars spike at the same time, all of that spending comes out of commerce. People do not go and shop, people do not go and spend money, because they have already paid it to their energy sources. It is vital for the business future of this country, for the home heating efficiency of this country, for an economy that is reliable, we need reliable supplies of all kinds of energy. It will not be easy. We are going to have to do a lot of things differently than we are today. We will have to change a lot of our priorities. It is vital to the future of this country. If there is one thing in my view that threatens the economic future of America, it is the lack of reliable, affordable energy prices that our businesses and our homes and people can use to fuel their homes and our businesses. Without that, our economy will be very difficult.

Mr. PETERSON of Pennsylvania. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding. I come from Pennsylvania where the first oil well was drilled. I live 5 miles from Drake's well. When we discovered oil in Pennsylvania, it changed the world. The whole industrial world as we know it today came about when oil became one of our energy sources. Since then, many energy sources have been added. What do we need? Do we need ANWR, you bet. Do we need to open a lot of the west and other parts of this country that are locked up to oil and gas drilling, you bet. I am going to try to explain why. When we look at the consumption figures for the world, 39 percent of the energy used in the world is oil. And of our oil, 60 percent of that comes from unstable, unfriendly countries. That is certainly not a good position for a country like the United States to be in. Mr. Speaker, 23 percent of our energy in the world comes from natural gas, and 23 percent of the energy that fuels the world comes from coal. Now when we add those three items together, that means 85 percent of the energy consumed in the world is fossil fuel. That is an alarming figure when we think about it. Eight percent of the energy consumed in the world is nuclear. Now we are up to 93 percent of our energy. That leaves 7 percent renewables. I support renewables every way we can support them. We need to do more hydro, we need to do more wood and biomass, ethanol, and wind solar. But when we look at the figures a little further, hydro is 3.2 percent so now we are at 96.2 percent of the world's energy. And when we add wood and biomass, we are now at 99.4 percent of the energy in the world. I have been in so many hearings where people say if we would just stop holding back wind and solar, they would solve our problems. Wind and solar collectively is 6-10ths of 1 percent of the energy of the world. Am I for wind and solar, you bet. A company in my district has just developed some technical engineering that will help wind be far more efficient because it will automatically position the wind turbines so they face the wind properly. As the wind changes, they change. It adds to their efficiency. I am very proud of them for that. But the problem with wind is that it is only really available in a few parts of the world. Often those areas are far from transmission lines, and the wind only blows 38 percent of the time. The rest of the time we have to have a redundant source to take the place of the wind that is not blowing.

Mr. PETERSON of Pennsylvania. The volume of wind turbines needed to supply a State like Pennsylvania would cover half of New England. The other part is that is not where the wind blows. In Pennsylvania they have found two places, up in the north central part of the State in my district and in the south central part of Pennsylvania. There are two areas where the wind is the best, and they have developed a wind farm at one and are talking about a wind farm at the other. Where the wind blows best in the far reaches of Texas where there are no transmission lines to get it out. With solar, there are only a few places in the country where solar is regular, and there is no solar power at night, and the few parts of the country that have the majority of the solar available are in places where there are no transmission lines. If we double wind and solar in a 5-year period, we would be 1.2 percent of the energy needs of the world.

Mr. PETERSON of Pennsylvania. That is correct. And if we do not up the drilling in this country, because we are only importing a small part from Canada, and then we import 4 or 5 percent of liquid natural gas, but we only have two places, one in Louisiana and I think one in New Jersey, where ships with liquid natural gas can come here. They liquefy it in other countries, bring it here and then put it back into gas form in the pipelines, and it is used, whether in our homes or commercially or business. So we do not really have the options of importing gas like we do oil. You have to have a pipeline, and the only place the potential is up through Canada to ANWR. Now, ANWR is a huge gas supply. The ANWR field has tremendous volumes, but it is going to cost a lot of money and it is going to take years to build a pipeline to get that gas down to us. But the problem we face in this country I do not think a lot of people are looking at. I have been watching it for 3 years as we started hooking up power generation plants. You can talk about an 18, 20, 24 inch high pressure gas line sucking gas out of our system. That heats a lot of homes. This year we had very high home heating prices. Next winter they are going to be much higher, because there is really no solution to the problem. Everybody all of a sudden is panicking because the gas supply is much lower than they ever anticipated, and since global warming sort of left us out this winter and we have cold weather in April in Washington, we are using gas at an unprecedented rate now, so they are still drawing out of the underground storage, and there is going to be nothing in storage, and if we fill, we are going to be filling at very high prices, which are now $5 to $6 dollars a thousand.

Mr. PETERSON of Pennsylvania

Mr. PETERSON of Pennsylvania. Mr. Speaker, it is great to join my friends from the West. I come from western Pennsylvania where the energy crisis started. I live 5 miles from Drake's Well, the first oil well ever drilled. The question is, do we need an energy policy? In my view, it is the number one need of this country. There is no issue that makes this country more fragile economically or in our defense than availability of energy. Why do we need to have a policy? We need a policy that will provide us with ample sources of all types of energy. There is no silver bullet in the energy issue. Every time we have an energy spike in this country, we then have a downturn in the economy because of the cost that takes out of our economy. I want to share with my colleagues some numbers that are a little surprising. These are world numbers. We all think that we are just days away from new energy sources that are going to replace fossil fuels. Currently in the world, we consume 39 percent, which is oil, 23 percent of energy that is natural gas, and 23 percent that is coal. Now, when we add those three together, that is 85 percent of our energy is fossil fuel. We have 8 percent nuclear and 7 percent renewable. Now, renewables are the ones we all hope and support and hope will be the supply of the future. But let us look at those numbers. Hydro is almost half of that 7 percent, or 3.22 percent. Wood is .0266 percent, or just under 3 percent. Wood waste is about a half a percent. When we add wind and solar together, we have just over a half a percent of the energy consumed in this country. Yet, we have a lot of people who keep talking like if we would just stop holding back wind and solar. Folks, nobody is holding back wind and solar. When the wind does not blow, we have to have a redundant source. When the sun does not shine, we have to have a redundant source. And it only blows about 38 percent of the time in the areas where wind power works. So those are not as quick a solution as many people would like to think. Now, transportation is where we use our oil. Thirty-nine percent of our energy is oil, and the vast majority of that is an oil-based economy: our transportation system. We have a little bit of ethanol which is growing, and we have a little bit of natural gas in there. Sixty percent of the oil we purchase will soon come from foreign countries, unstable parts of the world. Hydrogen fuel cells, I applaud the President. I have been supporting hydrogen for all of my 6 years in Congress. Hybrid cars is another one that has hope. But they are a long ways from solving the energy problems in this country. If we quickly look at natural gas, which is 23 percent of our energy, that is home heating, commercial, industrial, and mass transit. Eighty- five percent of that is produced in this country and creates wealth from the ground to the source of use. Many of our best fields, though, in this country, and we were really putting a lot of horses on natural gas because we have added it to electric generation, are locked up. Most of the west coast shoreline is locked up, most of the east coast shoreline is locked up. Under the Great Lakes where we drilled down, do not even drill down through the lakes is locked up. Canada drills under the lakes and sells gas to us, and many of our best fields in the Midwest and all around Florida are locked up. Electric generation is today 52 percent coal, 20 percent nuclear, 60 percent natural gas, 7 percent hydro, and 3 percent oil. So the electric that we supply in this country has basically, in recent years, all the new electric plants have been natural gas. Now, I have never been a fan of that, because we have always kind of held natural gas back for home heating, for commercial and for industrial. And we found this winter what has happened. Now that we are hooking up these big generating plants, we had natural gas prices just a month or two ago that reached $9 and $10 a thousand, which is devastating to those who depend on it for home heating. We should be using natural gas for mass transit and short-term transportation, in my view, not for future electric generation. I will conclude my comments with the following: every downturn in our economy has been preceded by high energy prices. Home heating and transportation, when those two costs spike, it comes right out of the family budget. Seventy percent of our economy is from commerce, and that is the same family budget. When we have energy spikes for driving our cars and for heating our homes, it will hurt our economy every time. We must have an energy policy so that we have ample energy supply in this country.

Mr. PETERSON of Pennsylvania. Mr. Speaker, there is not ample wells being drilled in this country to continue to hook up power plants to be produced by natural gas, from all of the experts I have talked to.

Mr. PETERSON of Pennsylvania. But so much of those best gas fields are locked up.

Mr. PETERSON of Pennsylvania. Mr. Speaker, we only can import gas from Mexico and Canada. We can import it from ships, but we only have two ports that can take liquefied natural gas, so we are really limited. We are dependent on what we can drill.

Mr. PETERSON of Pennsylvania

Mr. PETERSON of Pennsylvania. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman for yielding me this time. Mr. Speaker, I am delighted to join the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Markey) and the gentlewoman from Michigan (Mrs. Miller) today on this resolution establishing a national Visiting Nurse Associations Week. As we were growing up, doctors visited homes and nurses visited homes. Today it is seldom that a doctor visits a home unless it is a personal friend; but the visiting nurses just keep right on trucking. Serving communities around the country for over 120 years, congressional recognizing and gratitude for these nonprofit health agencies is long overdue. The nearly 500 VNAs across the country collectively provide home and community-based services to over 4 million Americans each year. Founded in the 1890s, VNAs have continuously served as charitable providers in their local communities, creating a safety net for the poorest and most chronically ill and functionally disabled individuals. VNAs serve the majority of Medicaid home health beneficiaries and represent nearly one-half of all nonprofit home health agencies in the United States. On average, Medicare and Medicaid represent approximately 82 percent of VNAs' revenue, and this percentage is even greater in rural areas such as my rural congressional district. Mr. Speaker, this fact is significant because rural America has always been shortchanged in the Medicare payment system. My rural providers are asked to provide the same level of care with less Federal dollars, even though wage rates have largely equalized between rural and urban areas due to the current workforce shortage. The Medicare home health reimbursement was slashed by 15 percent last October, and the 10 percent rural add-on is set to expire this April. Home health providers, including VNAs, are being crippled by these cuts and I will continue to fight as co-chairman of the Home Health Working Group to resist them. In the meantime, I am pleased to introduce this resolution with my colleague from Massachusetts to demonstrate our continued support for these under-recognized heroes. In a country struggling with staggering health care costs, the Visiting Nurse Association continually and successfully works to achieve its mission of cost-effective and compassionate home and community-based health care to individuals, regardless of the individuals' condition or ability to pay for those services. They are a leading provider of mass immunizations in the Medicare program and constitute over 50 percent of all Medicaid home health admissions. The association relies heavily upon volunteer nurses and reinvests any budget surplus into charity care, adult day care centers, wellness clinics, Meals-on-Wheels, and immunization programs. This resolution will establish an annual National Visiting Nurse Associations Week in order to increase public awareness of the charity- based organization. They unquestionably deserve recognizing for their noble services; and by establishing this resolution, Congress would support the continuation of their mission. I want to particularly mention, too, Ruth Ann Nerlich, who has been a part of VNA in Venango County as long as I have been aware. When I served in the State legislature, she was the go-to person State-wide. She was the person that best understood and best sold the message of home health care delivered by the VNA. And also Betsy Roberts of Elk County, who for decades has been a leader in providing home health care. I want to conclude my comments with when the Balanced Budget Act was passed, there were problems in this country, mainly with for-profit home health care agencies which were really taking advantage of the system. Unfortunately, Congress, at that time, squeezed the system equally, and the Visiting Nurse Associations, scattered around much of this country, were not fat and wasteful. They raised millions of dollars to give free care to those who could not pay. They were made up of boards of local people, in health care and out of health care, who cared about and helped deliver the services that they provided. So when the Balanced Budget Act cut them and squeezed them about 30 percent, it squeezed some of them out of business. Some of the VNAs in my district today, the only reason they stayed in business, they borrowed money to continue providing those services. They have debt to service today. Mr. Speaker, it is vital that this 15 percent cut is taken away, and it is vital that the 10 percent add-on that was proven was needed for home health care is continued on past April. With that, I am proud to recognize these individuals and the invaluable contributions of our VNAs by cosponsoring this legislation, and urge the support of my colleagues.

Mr. PETERSON of Pennsylvania

Mr. PETERSON of Pennsylvania. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this time. Mr. Rogers is someone that all Pennsylvanians were so proud of. Our hearts are sad today because of his leaving us, but he left behind a heritage that we are all so proud of and will always remember in such a wonderful fashion. I think in Pennsylvania, in western Pennsylvania, if you are traveling around today, at the Eat'n Park restaurants on their lighted signs, they say it all: ``Fred Rogers, we miss you.'' He studied childhood development at the University of Pittsburgh. Then he went on to be an ordained Presbyterian minister. His landmark show, ``Mr. Rogers' Neighborhood,'' inspired, taught and encouraged children, families and adults since its first nationwide broadcast on February 19, 1968, with messages of love, peace and comfort. Mr. Rogers created over 200 of his own songs for his show, which always began in a comfortable family living room as he changed into his trademark cardigan sweater and sneakers, to encourage the healthy emotional growth of children and their families through imagination and friendship. He encouraged millions of children across the world to love themselves and their neighbors and to deal with complex emotional issues in a safe and reassuring way. On July 9, 2002, in recognition of the contributions of Mr. Rogers, President George W. Bush presented him with the Presidential Medal of Freedom at a White House ceremony and said, ``Fred Rogers has proven that television can soothe the soul, nurture the spirit and teach the very young.'' We all know that does not happen on television every day on many programs, but it did on his. The final show of ``Mr. Rogers' Neighborhood'' aired in August 2001 after completing 33 television seasons and nearly 1,000 episodes. He was always called on whenever we faced a crisis in this country that would put fear in the hearts of children, September 11 the most recent. But he had a calmness and a kindness and a love that changed the atmosphere in any room he entered. Yes, as the Eat'n Park signs say today: ``Fred Rogers, we miss you.''

Mr. PETERSON of Pennsylvania

Mr. PETERSON of Pennsylvania. Mr. Speaker, it is my honor to introduce to my colleagues a resolution establishing a National Visiting Nurse Associations Week. Serving communities around the country for over 120 years, congressional recognition and gratitude for these nonprofit home health agencies is long over due. Currently, they are composed of 500 different associations and care for over 4,000,000 patients each year, many of whom are chronically ill and unable to pay medical expenses. In a country crippled with staggering health care and medical costs, the Visiting Nurse Association continually and successfully works to achieve its mission of cost-effective and compassionate home and community-based health care to individuals regardless of the individuals' condition or ability to pay for services. They are a leading provider of mass immunizations in the Medicare program and constitute over 50 percent of all Medicaid home health admissions. The association relies heavily upon volunteer nurses and reinvests any budget surplus into charity care, adult day care centers, wellness clinics, Meals-on-Wheels, and immunization programs. This resolution would designate the second full week in February as National Visiting Nurse Associations Week in order to increase public awareness of the charity-based organization. They unquestionably deserve recognition for their noble services and by establishing this resolution Congress would support the continuation of their mission. I am proud to recognize these invaluable contributions of our VNA's by cosponsoring this legislation.

Mr. PETERSON of Pennsylvania

Mr. PETERSON of Pennsylvania. Mr. Speaker, it is my honor to introduce to my colleagues a resolution establishing a National Visiting Nurse Associations Week. Serving communities around the country for over 120 years, congressional recognition and gratitude for these nonprofit home health agencies is long over due. Currently, they are composed of 500 different associations and care for over 4,000,000 patients each year, many of whom are chronically ill and unable to pay medical expenses. In a country crippled with staggering health care and medical costs, the Visiting Nurse Association continually and successfully works to achieve its mission of cost-effective and compassionate home and community-based health care to individuals, regardless of the individuals' condition or ability to pay for services. They are a leading provider of mass immunizations in the Medicare program and constitute over 50 percent of all Medicaid home health admissions. The association relies heavily upon volunteer nurses and reinvests any budget surplus into charity care, adult day care centers, wellness clinics, Meals-on-Wheels, and immunization programs. This resolution would establish an annual National Visiting Nurse Associations Week in order to increase public awareness of the charity- based organization. They unquestionably deserve recognition for their noble services and by establishing this resolution Congress would support the continuation of their mission. I am proud to recognize these invaluable contributions of our VNAs by cosponsoring this legislation.

Mr. PETERSON of Pennsylvania

Mr. PETERSON of Pennsylvania. Mr. Speaker, one year ago, our Nation was attacked by terrorists who believed that by taking innocent life, they could destroy our spirit and tear down the principles, values, and freedoms that we hold dear. Despite our initial shock and horror on that fateful September morning, Americans from all walks of life proved the terrorists wrong by immediately joining hands to search for survivors, comfort those who lost loved ones, and bring about healing and renewal. There has never been a time when the world witnessed greater heroism, compassion, and unity. Under the leadership of President Bush, our Nation has made great strides to bring justice to those who perpetrated this evil and improve our Nation's defenses against future terrorist attacks. Our men and women in uniform responded valiantly, toppling the Taliban regime and bringing freedom to a Nation that had served for many years as a haven for terrorism and oppression. The effort to protect our Nation from terrorism is ongoing, and patience will be necessary as we work to establish a permanent Department of Homeland Security and thwart the continued efforts of those who seek to kill innocent Americans in order to advance their political agenda. Looking back over the past year, it is clear that the events of September 11th have strengthened our Nation and given us a greater appreciation for freedom. Americans have demonstrated that we are committed to working together to preserve our freedom so that we will continue to be a beacon of hope to freedom-loving people around the world.

Mr. PETERSON of Pennsylvania

Mr. PETERSON of Pennsylvania. Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman from New York for yielding time to me. Madam Speaker, I have been involved in legislative issues for 25 years at the State and in Congress. Most of the time, my number one issue has been health care. I chaired health at the State for 10 years. I believe this is the greatest health care crisis facing my State, Pennsylvania, and this country that we will see. Let me give a little Pennsylvania information. Pennsylvania hospital malpractice premiums in the last 12 months have increased an aggregate of 220 percent. One-third of the hospitals have increased over 300 percent. Forty percent of the hospitals in Pennsylvania have closed or curtailed services; number one, OB-GYN; number two, trauma, when people are the most seriously ill or traveling further and further; three, neurosurgery and other surgical specialties. Half of the hospitals in Pennsylvania cannot recruit a physician and are losing the physicians that they have. Fifty percent of teaching programs are finding out that almost all of their students are leaving Pennsylvania. Three-fourths of hospital physicians were denied coverage from an insurance company, and the only reason in Pennsylvania they have coverage is because we have a high-risk pool, at outrageous prices. Thirty-two rural hospitals in my district, the most rural part of Pennsylvania, had to form their own insurance company because no one would insure them. Eighteen additional hospitals in Pennsylvania are forming their own insurance company. These people have no idea where this is going to take them and what their long-term risks are. Hospital coverage alone for medical malpractice in Pennsylvania is in excess of one-half billion dollars and rising daily. That does not include physician costs, it does not include nursing homes and health agencies. That is over half a billion dollars that does not treat a patient. The worst part of the crisis is OB-GYNs and the poorest of American women are going to be denied; those who cannot travel long distances are going to be denied prenatal care, and we will pay for that decades ahead. Any struggling rural hospital that loses their surgeons or OB- GYNs will soon close. Let me tell my colleagues what they have not heard about this morning. The real opposition to this bill. It limits trial lawyers' rewards. That is what the opposition to this bill is about. But let us see if it is fair. Fifty percent of a $50,000 reward they can still get. That is pretty good pay; 33 1/3 percent of the next $50,000. So that is 42 percent on a $100,000 claim. I think that is pretty good pay. Twenty-five percent on the next half a million. So on a $600,000 claim, they get 28 percent reward. Pretty good pay. Fifteen percent on anything thereafter. So a million dollar reward, they will still make 23 percent that will not go to the victim. I think that is darn good pay. If we do not address this issue in this country, we are going to be doing the biggest disservice to those who need health care because it will not be available in rural areas, and they are not even a high-risk area. It will not be available in urban areas. I am told the Philadelphia sports teams are having to leave Philadelphia for orthopedic care. A tragedy. Let us fix it.

Mr. PETERSON of Pennsylvania

Mr. PETERSON of Pennsylvania. Mr. Speaker, I thank the chairman for yielding me this time, and I feel compelled to share a few words in this debate tonight. I have dealt with budgets all my life. For 26 years I operated a business and I had a budget. In the family I had a budget. For 19 years I was in State government and we passed a budget every year. For 10 years I was a State appropriator; so I was very involved in the State budget. It had taken me a while since my 6 years in Washington to figure out our process because it is a lot more complicated, and I have often wondered why it was so complicated. But we all know the basic principles, that the House has to pass a budget and the Senate has to pass a budget, and we have to bring that together. And the process that I have learned to understand is the budget first is the framework of how much money we should spend. The Senate figures out how much money, and then we reconcile that figure and then we are all working off of the same spending plan. We only argue about how we spend it. This is the first time that process has fallen apart. Our friends have not played in this process and so they have no rules of conduct, they have no limits on spending, so their proposals from the figures I have when you use the budget gimmicks of advance spending is up to close to $15 billion above the President's proposal. We have had the war on terrorism; we had the rebuilding of our defenses. We have a stellar record of spending in the last few years for education which increased education spending 132 percent. It seems to me it is the year that we both need to have a proposal that limits spending because we have a war to fight, we have our defenses to rebuild; and if we do not have some rules of spending, we will have deficits as long as we are around. The debate is about do we want to have deficits forever, or do we want to have deficits temporarily and get past deficit spending back to budgets that are surpluses? That is the big argument. If the other body plays by no rules and we have no way to reconcile how much money we are going to spend together, we can never reconcile our appropriation bills at the end of the process, in my view. That is pretty simple adding up the numbers. So we now have a process where we have rules, they have no rules. We have a limit on how much we will spend so we can get beyond deficit spending down the road. They have taken the rules away so they can spend for anything they want to spend no matter what it costs so it will sound good for the election. Their process is about electing people. It is not about having our budget process work so the American people can know that we have been a little cautious in our spending because we have a war to fight and so that we can bring realism back to our budget process in the future and we can get back to surpluses where this country needs to be. I rise tonight to say that it is time for these two bodies to reconcile their differences and get down to a budget process that has rules for both bodies. Announcement by the Speaker Pro Tempore