Tom Petri

Mr. PETRI

Mr. PETRI. Mr. Speaker, I continue to reserve my time.

Mr. PETRI

Mr. PETRI. Mr. Speaker, it is an honor to speak in support of H.R. 1760, a bill to designate a post office in Madison, Wisconsin, as the Robert M. La Follette, Sr. Post Office Building. Fighting Bob La Follette was a strong progressive Republican voice for the people in the late 19th and early 20th century. During his political career as a district attorney, and especially as a Congressman, Governor and Senator, Bob La Follette fought to improve the lot of farmers, workers, children and women, and battled against corruption in politics. As Governor of Wisconsin, he proposed and implemented the Wisconsin Idea, a philosophy that public leadership, in combination with academic expertise, will improve the performance of government. This philosophy was the driving force in the progressive movement, and here in Washington led to the creation of, among other things, the Congressional Research Service. Bob La Follette believed that the government should be more directly in the hands of the people. Therefore, he pursued policies, such as the establishment of direct primary nomination. Under his leadership, Wisconsin became one of the first States to adopt child labor laws and pass a women's suffrage amendment. As a Congressman and Senator, he brought his progressive Republican politics to the national stage by playing a major role in bringing about the direct election of Senators and spearheading an investigation into the Teapot Dome scandal. And you can imagine how popular he was when elected to the United States Senate and stood up and asked for a roll call vote over and over and over again, for the first time in a generation putting his colleagues on the record as to whether they were voting for or against railroad legislation and a variety of other things. And the public record, combined with direct election of Senators, revolutionized the United States Senate and American politics from the Mississippi west in our country, in particular. Bob La Follette was the kind of American that all of us, regardless of party, can be proud of. Accordingly, I urge support of H.R. 1760.

Mr. PETRI

Mr. PETRI. Mr. Speaker, today I am introducing the Retirement Security Act of 2005. This bill addresses the financing problems facing the Social Security Trust Fund through the creation of Personal Social Security Investment Accounts for each newborn child. This plan would establish a mechanism for reducing the long term fiscal pressures facing Social Security without changing the current benefit structure or diverting payroll taxes from the Trust Fund. My bill seeks to use the benefits of the private market to place Social Security on a sound financial footing, as do a number of other reform plans. But more than that, I seek to maximize the magic of compound interest by opening savings accounts for future retirees as soon as they are born. Under the Retirement Security Act, the Federal government would create a personal investment account for each newborn American child with an initial government contribution of $1,000. The account would be invested in any of the funds available to Federal employees through the Thrift Savings Plan, and earnings would accrue tax free. Account holders, or the parents of minor account holders, would be free to make additional pre-tax contributions to these accounts and enjoy the opportunity to invest in these safe and well- managed investment accounts. At retirement, each retiree would qualify for the same Social Security benefit as earned under the current Social Security system. Benefits would be paid first from each worker's personal account, and payments from the Trust Fund would begin only after the balance of the personal account had been depleted. Those who take advantage of the opportunity to make additional contributions may well find their balance in excess of the amount needed to fund their Social Security benefits, and these funds would belong to the individual investor. My bill provides a variety of options, including lump sum distributions and the purchase of life annuities with level or inflation-adjusted monthly payments for disposition of the surplus balance. An initial contribution of $1,000 invested today that grows at the average combined rate of return of the five Thrift Savings Plan investment options would grow to an inflation adjusted balance of $58,000 by retirement at age 67. For purposes of comparison, this amount would be enough to purchase an annuity with a monthly payment equal to 46 percent of the today's average Social Security retirement benefit. A single matching payment of $1,000 by a parent on the occasion of their child's birth would endow an account which would produce almost 100 percent of the average benefit and, perhaps just as important, give that child the gift of a lifelong savings vehicle which offers the potential of greater financial security in retirement than can be provided by Social Security alone. Clearly, the focus of my legislation is long-term. Social Security's fiscal problems will begin to pinch long before children born today are ready to retire. By now, we're all familiar with the projections provided in the annual report of the Social Security Board of Trustees. The Trustees have forecast that our current Social Security surpluses will turn to deficits by 2017 and that the bonds collecting in the Social Security Trust Fund will be fully redeemed by 2041. At that time, it's anticipated that payroll taxes will be sufficient only to pay 74 percent of expected retirement benefits. Though my legislation would make no other changes to Social Security, when combined with other reasonable reform ideas, it can provide a component of a comprehensive solution to Social Security's long and shorter-term financial problems. We've reached an important moment in the life of the Social Security program. It's obvious that we need to bring more money into the system to keep the promises we've made and to allow us to continue to offer some measure of retirement security. Personal investment accounts are one way to bolster the system, yet they have become the object of too much criticism and much disinformation. Many of our constituents have become concerned that the diversion of payroll tax revenue into personal accounts of today's workers will threaten the benefits of current retirees. A campaign is being waged which fosters these fears and may prevent the adoption of even those personal accounts which have no impact on the Social Security Trust Fund. My bill provides the opportunity for Congress to demonstrate that it can implement a system of personal accounts without diverting payroll taxes and that will build retirement savings for future generations without enriching stock brokers or introducing unacceptable investment risk to American workers. As the success of these personal accounts become apparent, growing numbers of Americans will have greater confidence in this avenue of reform, presenting opportunities to expand the use of personal accounts. The time has come for us to take this important step forward, and I encourage my colleagues to support this bill.

Mr. PETRI

Mr. PETRI. Mr. Chairman, I would just like to commend the gentleman for this amendment and for making the law clear about these courts. They have been an effective program. We support the amendment, and thank the gentleman for his contribution.

Mr. PETRI. Mr. Chairman, I just want to compliment the gentleman for being an alert legislator. Technology creates new possibilities for mischief as well as for good. The gentleman has spotted a problem, and we thank the gentleman for calling it to our attention. We support the amendment, and I believe it will be adopted without opposition.

Mr. PETRI. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Chairman, I think what we are seeing here is certainly a very well-meaning amendment designed to correct a problem in the State of New Jersey; but if it is adopted, what we will find is the law of unintended consequences coming into play. We have a Federal framework. The goal of that framework is to have competitive bidding and to end up getting the lowest qualified bid to save the taxpayer money and get the work done. Many of these projects cross State lines. Contractors work all over the United States. If we start allowing each State to come up with different bidding procedures and qualifications that contractors have to meet in order to participate in the bidding, it is inevitably going to add to paperwork and end up resulting in higher-cost construction across our country and less for the hard-earned tax dollars that are spent on transportation here in the United States. We are not arguing there may not be a problem in New Jersey. We are not arguing that it should be cleaned up. We are eager to work with the Members from New Jersey to try to have hearings or to promote investigations, do what we can to help clean up the situation in New Jersey, but not at the expense of weakening the system of competitive bidding nationwide that is designed to promote as efficient a procurement process as possible. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. PETRI. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.

Mr. PETRI. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. PETRI. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. PETRI

Mr. PETRI. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Coble), a valued member of our committee.

Mr. PETRI. Mr. Chairman, we reserve the balance of our time.

Mr. PETRI. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I would just observe that this is a work in progress. As my colleague knows, in the last Congress, the line was $256, now it is $283.9. So it is a work in progress. And it is a recommendation of the President's advisors, it is not directly from the President. He has expressed a number of times his interest in working with us to help have a robust and affordable infrastructure investment here in our country, because we owe it to our children and to our economy to do that. So I am hoping we can continue working on a tripartisan basis, as we have on our committee, but also with the administration and with the other body and their representatives as this process moves forward.

Mr. PETRI. Mr. Chairman, I reserve my time.

Mr. PETRI. I yield to the gentleman from Minnesota.

Mr. PETRI. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Nebraska (Mr. Osborne), a member of the committee.

Mr. PETRI. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from East Tennessee (Mr. Duncan), a valued senior member of our committee.

Mr. PETRI. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Kentucky (Mr. Rogers).

Mr. PETRI. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume just to urge all Members to vote for this bill when it reaches final passage.

Mr. PETRI. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. PETRI. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the Resident Commissioner of the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico (Mr. Fortuno) for 3 minutes.

Mr. PETRI. Mr. Chairman, I am pleased to yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Hayes).

Mr. PETRI. Mr. Chairman, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Shuster), a member of the committee.

Mr. PETRI. Mr. Chairman, I have met with the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Mario Diaz-Balart) and spoken with him several times on the issue of legislative language that would allow $100 million from the Florida Department of Transportation for the MIC to be used as part of the non- Federal match for other transit corridors. He has expressed his strong commitment to this language. I will be traveling to Miami soon to see the project firsthand. We will continue to work on this issue during conference. I look forward to the chance to visit Miami and better understand the project and the need for this language.

Mr. PETRI. Mr. Chairman, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Mario Diaz-Balart), a hardworking member of our committee.

Mr. PETRI. Mr. Chairman, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. Gary G. Miller), a valued member of the committee.