Jim Ryun

Mr. RYUN of Kansas

Mr. RYUN of Kansas. Mr. Chairman, I am pleased to yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Smith), the chairman of the Committee on Veterans' Affairs.

Mr. RYUN of Kansas. Mr. Chairman, I am pleased to yield 30 seconds to the gentleman from the great State of Florida (Mr. Weldon).

Mr. RYUN of Kansas. Mr. Chairman, how much time do I have remaining?

Mr. RYUN of Kansas. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Pennsylvania (Ms. Hart).

Mr. RYUN of Kansas. Mr. Chairman, how much time do I have remaining?

Mr. RYUN of Kansas. Mr. Chairman, I yield 45 seconds to the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Pitts).

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

Mr. RYUN of Kansas

Mr. RYUN of Kansas. Mr. Speaker, unfortunately, I missed three votes in the House of Representatives on May 17, 2004 due to my attendance at events marking the 50th anniversary of the Brown vs. Board of Education decision. Had I been in attendance I would have made the following votes: Vote on Passage of H. Con. Res. 420--Recognizing National Transportation Week. Had I been in attendance, I would have voted ``yea.'' Vote on Passage of H. Con. Res. 423--Authorizing Capitol Grounds for the Dedication of WWII Memorial. Had I been in attendance, I would have voted ``yea.'' Vote on Passage of H. Con. Res. 403--Condemning the Sudan for civilian attacks in the Darfur region. Had I been in attendance, I would have voted ``yea.''

Mr. RYUN of Kansas

Mr. RYUN of Kansas. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for the time. Mr. Speaker, I rise to honor the 50th anniversary of the Supreme Court decision of Brown v. Board of Education, the landmark case that desegregated schools in America. This Monday, May 17, 2004, I will be pleased to welcome people from across this Nation to my district for a celebration of this anniversary. On Monday, we will look back over 50 years of work to bring equality to America, specifically to our public education system. May 17 will also mark the culmination of an effort I began 3 years ago to honor the 50th anniversary of Brown v. the Board. In the 107th Congress, I was privileged to author legislation to establish a Federal commission tasked with educating the public about this decision. With the help of my colleagues in Congress, the commission became a reality and has played a vital role in planning for next week's anniversary. Recently, I was also pleased to draft language calling on Congress to honor the anniversary of Brown v. Board. I am grateful that the resolution we consider today accomplishes this goal, and I am pleased to lend it my support. I would like to thank the Brown Foundation, located in Topeka, Kansas, for its leadership in helping America remember its struggle for equality. I want to specifically thank Cheryl Brown Henderson for her undying dedication to this issue. Cheryl's assistance has been invaluable, and I am grateful for her contributions. President Bush's presence in Topeka on Monday will lend national significance to this occasion and also indicates his ongoing commitment to the ideals embodied in Brown v. Board. I am grateful for the President's support, and I look forward to welcoming him to Kansas. Finally, I encourage all Americans to take this opportunity to rededicate themselves to the ideals set forth in our Constitution that all men are created equal; that they are endowed by our Creator with certain unalienable rights; that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for the opportunity to highlight this monumental anniversary on the floor. I thank the chairman for his work, and I urge my colleagues to lend their support to this measure.

Mr. RYUN of Kansas

Mr. RYUN of Kansas. Mr. Speaker, next Monday, May 17, 2004, marks the 50th anniversary of the Supreme Court's decision in Brown versus the Board of Education. On this historic day, the Supreme Court issued a definitive interpretation of the 14th amendment to the Constitution, stating that the discriminatory nature of racial segregation is a violation of the 14th amendment. Although 50 years have come and gone, this decision continues to have a profound effect upon our society. It has permanently altered the conventional social structure in traditionally segregated areas and has outlawed discrimination. Although the celebration next Monday bears the name of Reverend Oliver Brown, it will be a celebration of all those who fought to rid our society of the practice of separate and unequal public schooling. I would like to thank the Members of Congress who voted for the legislation which established the commission to commemorate the 50th anniversary of this historic decision, and I would also like to thank especially Cheryl Brown Henderson, the granddaughter of plaintiff Oliver Brown, along with the members of the Brown Commission, for the work in making this celebration a reality. I am grateful for the small part I played. I encourage our colleagues to join us in celebration on this day.

Mr. RYUN of Kansas

Mr. RYUN of Kansas. Mr. Speaker, today I rise to commemorate the accomplishments of Sir Roger Bannister. Roger Bannister is best known as the man who ran the miracle mile. He was the first man in recorded history to break the four-minute mile barrier. Until the time of his accomplishment, virtually no one thought it possible that a man could run that fast. But, it was through his athletic ability and technical knowhow that Roger Bannister persevered to run the miracle mile. Bannister attended Oxford University to study medicine. His spare time was devoted to the track and he soon became an accomplished middle distance runner. Despite the naysayers, Bannister believed that with perseverance he could run faster than anyone before him. He used his knowledge as a physician and painstakingly researched the mechanical aspects of running to develop scientific training methods to aid him. In 1954, his hard work, discipline, and determination finally paid off as he sprinted to the finish line, in a time of three minutes fifty-nine point four seconds. That day, his name was forever written not only into record books, but into sporting folklore as well. It was Dr. Bannister's dedication to excellence that paved the way for countless other athletes, including myself, to stretch themselves to new levels of achievement. In later years Bannister concentrated on medicine, and became a consultant neurologist. He continued to run to keep fit right up until 1975, when he broke his ankle in a motoring accident. Today marks the 50th anniversary of his historic run. I hope this day can serve as a testament to young people everywhere that with perseverance and discipline, they too can achieve goals others never dreamed possible.

Mr. RYUN of Kansas

Mr. RYUN of Kansas. Mr. Speaker, in 2001 and again in 2003, this body passed legislation that eliminated the marriage tax penalty, saving families an average of $1,400. Unfortunately, unless we act to permanently eliminate the marriage penalty, married couples will face tax increases starting next year. We should not discourage marriages by making couples sign on to a higher tax bill with their marriage certificate. There is no good reason to raise taxes on married couples. In the midst of a strong economic recovery, imposing higher taxes on married couples will only create financial hardship for millions of Americans and stifle a growing economy. If we examine the consequences of the marriage penalty on the American family, we will not have to think twice about permanently repealing this particular act. If we do not act, we will send in my district nearly 62,000 families a higher bill on January 1. Instead, let us tell them that we have finally put an end to the marriage tax penalty. I urge my colleagues to vote for this bill.

Mr. RYUN of Kansas

Mr. RYUN of Kansas. Mr. Speaker, on rollcall No. 136 I was unavoidably detained. Had I been present, I would have voted ``no.''

Mr. RYUN of Kansas

Mr. RYUN of Kansas. Mr. Chairman, the U.S. economy has shown truly amazing resilience after the many challenges of the last few years, including: a terrorist attack, war, corporate scandals and recession. In spite of these factors: real GDP growth was 8.2 percent in the 3rd quarter of 2003, the highest pace in two decades, housing starts are at the highest level in 20 years, mortgage rates are the lowest in over 30 years, and payroll employment has increased by 364,000 jobs in the past 6 months. This is good news for every American family. Economic growth is the key to prosperity for everyone. And the Republican budget is the plan that will ensure that these growth trends continue. One way this budget encourages sustained economic growth is by not raising taxes. Under the budget drafted by Chairman Nussle, there will be no reduction in the child tax credit, no increase in the marriage penalty, and no lowering of the income limit for the 10 percent tax bracket. Raising taxes, as the Democrats have proposed, would be a severe blow to the recovering economy and to young families. The Democrats believe that taxes should be raised to pay for more government spending. During the Budget Committee markup the Democrats proposed to increase spending by $28.6 billion next year, paid for by raising taxes by $28.9 billion next year. I ask my colleagues, why do we need more spending and higher taxes? Spending by the Federal Government has reached over $20,000 per household. I find that total staggering. I dare say that most families could do great good for their children with a fraction of that amount back in the family budget. Some people have blamed the deficit on the tax cuts. In reality, the downturn in the economy is the largest factor in erasing the surplus. And we must keep in mind that the projected surpluses as far as the eye could see were just on paper, they were never guaranteed. The good news is that the economy is recovering faster than expected, and that growth will be a significant factor in reducing future deficits. The key is for Congress to stay out of the way of economic growth. The runaway spending that followed the rosy surplus projections is the second largest contributing factor that has pushed us into deficit spending. Since 1997, spending has increased 3.6 percent faster than inflation and as revenue began dropping in 2000, spending continued to climb. Spending in time of war or national emergency is warranted, but now spending restraint is necessary or we will never return to a balanced budget. The Republican budget plan puts us on track to cut the deficit in half in 4 years. We must be faithful to a plan of fiscal responsibility or our children and grandchildren will inherit a debt they can't afford to pay. This budget blueprint holds the line on spending to keep the government from dragging down the economy. This does not mean that every program will be treated the same by the Appropriations Committee. It does mean that priorities will have to be set and hard choices will have to be made. Some worthy programs will receive a funding increase and other less effective or unproven programs may receive a cut. These decisions are up to the Appropriations Committee. The Budget Committee is simply setting the aggregate spending numbers. The nondefense, nonhomeland security discretionary number is frozen at last years funding level. This is a responsible decision when spending is driving us toward a deficit that could be nearly impossible to overcome. I believe the numbers in our budget will have the government operating as a wise steward of taxpayer dollars. Our constituents are demanding accountability for these dollars and this budget plan delivers. I urge your support for this budget.

Mr. RYUN of Kansas

Mr. RYUN of Kansas. Mr. Chairman, I want to thank the gentleman from Iowa for his hard work in putting together this very, very good budget. This budget includes initiatives to allow the Department of Defense to continue to recruit, train and retain the highest quality personnel in the world by including additional funding for military personnel pay and benefits. This additional amount helps protect the most important defense investment in the budget, our people who choose to stand in harm's way so that we might experience the freedoms that we so much expect. Since 2001, funding for military personnel has been increased by 59 percent. This is in striking contrast to the 1990s, which could be considered a decade of neglect. In the mid-1990s, an estimated 12,000 service personnel were receiving food stamps. But since 2001, basic pay alone has been increased by more than 21 percent. When benefits for food and housing are added, service members' take-home pay has been increased by almost 29 percent. In the mid-1990s, military personnel were expected to absorb, or pay out of pocket, 15 percent of their housing expenses. In this budget, out-of-pocket costs for service personnel are scheduled to drop to zero in fiscal year 2005. Additionally, the budget provides for full funding of health benefits for active duty troops, retirees and dependents. The Republican budget also sets aside $50 billion to pay for the cost of Iraq and Afghanistan operations in 2005. It is from these funds that we can accommodate additional wartime-related benefits like Tricare for uninsured reservists, the increase in imminent-danger pay that we legislated last year, and family separation allowances. In conclusion, this budget puts us on track to continue the work of the previous 3 years to reverse the neglect of the 1990s and support those who are supporting us with their daily sacrifices.

Mr. RYUN of Kansas

Mr. RYUN of Kansas. Madam Speaker, I rise as the sponsor of H.R. 3733, a bill to honor the memory of former southeast Kansas Congressman and favored son, Myron George. First of all, I want to thank the entire Kansas delegation for their cosponsorship and support of this bill. I also want to offer my thanks to the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Davis) and the gentleman from California (Mr. Waxman) for their efforts. This proposal has widespread support throughout the Altamont and surrounding communities. I have received letters of support from the Labette County Board of Commissioners, the mayor and city council members of Altamont, as well as the owner of the post office building. Born at the turn of the century, Congressman George grew up in Altamont, Kansas. He was a World War I veteran, stationed in Panama, and a newspaper publisher. George served as an officer of the local American Legion post, a member of the Disabled American Veterans, and a member of the local Methodist church. In 1939, Congressman George turned to official public life. For over 10 years, he served on the Kansas State Highway Commission, followed by 8 years in the U.S. House of Representatives. During his time in Congress, his first priority was to provide excellent constituent services. Legislatively, he is best remembered for his continued efforts on behalf of transportation issues. He worked with another great Kansan, President Eisenhower, to develop and implement the Federal Interstate Highway System. Congressman George also worked towards securing local funds for water projects. He helped establish an Army ROTC unit at Kansas State Teachers College, and he fought for continued operation of the Kansas Ordnance Plant in Parsons. In 1959, Congressman George returned to southeast Kansas where he lived until his death in 1972. Madam Speaker, renaming the Altamont Post Office in honor of Congressman George is a fitting reminder of his role and dedication to his community and to all Kansans. I urge my colleagues to support this measure.

Mr. RYUN of Kansas

Mr. RYUN of Kansas. Mr. Speaker, after being brutally beaten and losing her unborn child in the process, Tracy Marciniak was told that her attackers would not be held accountable for her child's death. Under current Federal law, the only crime committed was assault. There was no acknowledgment for a grieving mother. When Laci Peterson was found, she was not alone. The small body of her son Conner was with her. Laci's parents not only lost their daughter, but their grandson as well. Logic tells us that two bodies means that murder should be charged for two victims. Thankfully, 29 States, including California, have enacted unborn victims laws to adequately punish the perpetrators of these heinous crimes. Because of this, the killer of Laci and Conner Peterson will not go unaccounted for for two murders. It is time for the United States Congress to protect unborn victims of Federal crimes. It our responsibility to recognize the killing of a pregnant woman as an act that ends two lives and assign punishment accordingly. The Unborn Victims of Violence Act would not only provide long overdue protection to unborn victims, but also help ensure justice and closure for the families. I urge Members to join me in seeking justice for women and their unborn children and the families they leave behind. I urge members to vote for the Unborn Victims of Violence Act.

Mr. RYUN of Kansas

Mr. RYUN of Kansas. Mr. Speaker, unfortunately, I missed four votes in the House of Representatives on January 28, 2004. Had I been in attendance I would have made the following votes: Vote on the Baldwin of Wisconsin Substitute Amendment to S. 1920, the Farmer Bankruptcy bill. Had I been in attendance, I would have voted ``no.'' Vote on the Motion to Recommit with Instructions on S. 1920, the Farmer Bankruptcy bill. Had I been in attendance, I would have voted ``no.'' Vote on Passage of S. 1920, the Farmer Bankruptcy bill. Had I been in attendance, I would have voted ``yea.'' Vote on the Motion to Instruction Conferees on S. 1920, the Farmer Bankruptcy bill. Had I been in attendance, I would have voted ``no.'' Unfortunately, I missed three votes in the House of Representatives on February 3, 2004. Had I been in attendance I would have made the following votes: Vote on the Motion to Suspend the Rules and Agree to H. Res. 507, a Resolution expressing the profound sorrow of the House of Representatives on the anniversary of the accident that cost the crew of the Space Shuttle Columbia their lives, and extending heartfelt sympathy to their families. Had I been in attendance, I would have voted ``yea.'' Vote on the Motion to Suspend the Rules and Agree to H. Res. 157, a Resolution expressing the sense of the House of Representatives regarding several individuals who are being held as prisoners of conscience by the Chinese Government for their involvement in efforts to end the Chinese occupation of Tibet. Had I been in attendance, I would have voted ``yea.'' Vote on the Motion to Suspend the Rules and Pass H.J. Res. 84, a Resolution recognizing the 93rd birthday of Ronald Reagan. Had I been in attendance, I would have voted ``yea.''

Mr. RYUN of Kansas

Mr. RYUN of Kansas. Mr. Chairman, some of my colleagues on the other side of the aisle would like to strip religious organizations of a fundamental first amendment right that has been guaranteed to them by decades of civil rights law--a right that has been upheld by both the Congress and the U.S. Supreme Court. George Washington in a letter to the Annual Meeting of Quakers held in 1789 said this: ``The liberty enjoyed by the people of these states of worshiping Almighty God agreeably to their conscience, is not only among the choicest of their blessings, but also of their rights.'' As noted in a recent study by The Heritage Foundation entitled Churches, Charity, and Children: ``It is not hard to understand why religious organizations would hire only those with similar religious values. It is impossible to safeguard an organization's mission-- religious or secular--without staff and volunteers who embody it.'' Our Nation was founded on the premise of religious freedom. It is what makes our Nation great. Religious organizations are founded on deeply held convictions. It is these convictions that have created these organizations. It is these convictions that make these organizations so successful. It is these convictions that give these organizations life. And today, if we as a Congress do not combat this attempt to destroy these convictions, we will be destroying a part of the very foundation of what and who we are as a Nation.

Mr. RYUN of Kansas

Mr. RYUN of Kansas. Mr. Speaker, unfortunately, I missed four votes in the House of Representatives on November 17, 2003. Had I been in attendance I would have made the following votes: Passage of S.J. Res. 22, Recognizing the Agricultural Research Service of the Department of Agriculture for 50 years of outstanding service to the Nation through agricultural research. Had I been in attendance, I would have voted ``yea.'' Passage of S.J. Res. 18, Commending the Inspectors General for their efforts to prevent and detect waste, fraud, abuse, and mismanagement, and to promote economy, efficiency, and effectiveness in the Federal Government during the past 25 years. Had I been in attendance, I would have voted ``yea.'' Passage of H. Con. Res. 299, Honoring Mr. Sargent Shriver for his dedication and service to the United States of America, for his service in the United States Navy, and for his lifetime of work as an ambassador for the poor and powerless citizens of the United States of America, and for other purposes. Had I been in attendance, I would have voted ``yea.'' On the Motion regarding the Hour of Meeting. Had I been in attendance, I would have voted ``yea.''

Mr. RYUN of Kansas

Mr. RYUN of Kansas. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the Iraqi supplemental spending request. I strongly believe that both portions of the supplemental request are necessary. We have won the war in Iraq, now we must win the peace. The investment we make in Iraq today will help to ensure our safety and security against terrorism here at home in the future. We cannot leave the job of reconstruction unfinished in Iraq and leave open the very real possibility that another dictator or a terrorist regime will take over Iraq by winning the hearts and minds of the Iraqi people. As a strong fiscal conservative, my first instinct was to provide the $21 billion for reconstruction as a loan--not a grant as requested. However, after a great deal of thought and research, I believe that the loan proposal is not the right approach. With a debt of $350-$600 billion, the likelihood that Iraq could pay off another loan is remote at best. It is important that America takes the lead and convinces Iraq's largest creditors, Russia, France and Germany, to forgive Iraq's burdensome debt. We must therefore not be hypocritical and contribute an additional financial burden. Additionally, the $21 billion in reconstruction funding is just a portion of the $50-$75 billion overall cost of Iraqi reconstruction. Clearly, Iraqi oil revenues will be used to fund reconstruction and ongoing government operations in Iraq. Now that the United Nations has passed a resolution that will pave the way for greater international involvement, the remaining funds will hopefully come from international contributions. If the United States provided its reconstruction portion as a loan, we would find it very difficult to convince the rest of the world to contribute. Although the $87 billion price tag is indeed a great sum of money, it is important to put the cost in perspective. The total Iraqi war is going to cost about 0.5 percent of our Gross Domestic Product (GDP), while the Vietnam War cost 12 percent and World War II cost 130% of GDP. This supplemental spending request will give our troops the tools and support they need to further secure Iraq from the foreign terrorists trying to disrupt our reconstruction efforts while giving the Iraqi people a hope for a free and democratic country for years to come.

Mr. RYUN of Kansas

Mr. RYUN of Kansas. Mr. Speaker, unfortunately, I missed four votes in the House of Representatives on October 7, 2003. Had I been in attendance I would have made the following votes: Passage of H. Con. Res. 274, Commending the National Endowment for Democracy. Had I been in attendance, I would have voted ``yea.'' Vote on the Bishop (NY) Motion to Instruct on H.R. 1, Medicare Prescription Drug and Modernization Act of 2003. Had I been in attendance, I would have voted ``no.'' Vote on the Flake Motion to Instruct on H.R. 1, Medicare Prescription Drug and Modernization Act of 2003. Had I been in attendance, I would have voted ``yea.''

Mr. RYUN of Kansas

Mr. RYUN of Kansas. Mr. Speaker, today I would like to call attention to the leading cause of death in the United States for people ages 6 to 25, traffic accidents all attention to an important step we can take to combat this disturbing trend. The roadways of this nation have become a remarkably dangerous and costly place. A few stunning statistics on roadway accidents clearly show just how dangerous and costly they have become. The number of fatalities from traffic crashes increased in 2002 to almost 43,000 deaths--a death every 13 minutes--a rate not seen since 1990. Overall, almost 3,000,000 people are injured every year in traffic crashes and the financial cost of these deaths and injuries, beyond the pain and suffering they cause to victims and their families, is over $230 billion per year. Most surprising of all, though, is that there are simple ways to improve the safety of our roads. Most traffic accidents can be prevented with common sense from drivers, such as wearing seatbelts, and cost-effective improvements to roadways. With these simple solutions in mind, I encourage my colleagues to cosponsor H.R. 388, expressing the sense that Congress and the President should establish ``Put the Brakes on Fatalities Day'' to encourage safer driving and safer roadways. ``Put the Brakes on Fatalities Day,'' which is widely recognized on October 10th, is already supported by 40 national engineering, highway, and safety organizations, and several states have already organized very successful ``Put the Brakes on Fatalities Day'' campaigns. Mr. Speaker, I ask you to imagine one single day with zero traffic fatalities; a day that would save well over 100 American lives. With just a few simple steps, we can make American roads safer, and we can help ``put the brakes on fatalities.''

Mr. RYUN of Kansas

Mr. RYUN of Kansas. Mr. Speaker, today I would like to pay tribute to Mother Teresa of Calcutta, foundress of the Missionaries of Charity, a woman of profound grace who on October 19th will be beatified by Pope John Paul II in Rome. Mother Teresa was an unlikely hero, to be sure-- exceptionally small, soft-spoken, and humble--but she remains a towering example of selfless devotion to others. Called, as she said, to ``follow Christ into the slums,'' she dedicated her life to the destitute and disabled in Calcutta--to minister to those who were dying alone. To them, she offered something without price: unconditional love that bridged the divides of culture, class, and religion. She expected nothing in return; instead, she acted in the hope that others might love the lonely. It is not surprising that a person with such a deep respect for human dignity also strongly defended the right to life. She was very clear about each individual's right to live, considering abortion ``the greatest destroyer of love and peace.'' She was especially critical of the United States' acceptance of abortion and questioned how we could ever expect peace in our nation when even mothers are allowed to end the lives of their preborn children. The lessons, then, of this remarkable life do not only apply to the poor and downtrodden in India. Mother Teresa's lessons apply to citizens of the most developed nations in the world. As she herself said, the worst tragedy is to be unloved, and the worst poverty is poverty of the heart. The best way we can honor her memory is to reach out to those who suffer in our midst and to follow her advice: to love until it hurts.

Mr. RYUN of Kansas

Mr. RYUN of Kansas. Mr. Speaker, the Oath of Allegiance has served as the gateway to American citizenship for over 200 years. When immigrants speak its forceful words, they pledge their unfettered allegiance to America, our Constitution, and our laws. This important symbol of American citizenship is not specified by law. However, it can be changed on the whim of a government agency. In fact, such a change was recently attempted and would have transformed an absolute commitment to our Constitution into a conditional statement, thereby weakening our citizenship. That is why I introduced H.R. 3191, which would establish the oath as Federal law. Mr. Speaker, throughout our history, our Nation has been strengthened by immigrants who came here to pursue the American dream. Establishing the oath as the law of the land would remind all Americans that pursuing that dream also requires a full-time commitment to citizenship. I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting this legislation to strengthen the meaning of our citizenship.