Mike Ross

Mr. ROSS

Mr. ROSS. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Pallone) for yielding. And I thank my colleague from Texas (Mr. Sandlin) for his comments and very thoughtful remarks this evening on behalf of America's seniors. I have got to tell my colleagues that it is a frustrating time for me because, as was mentioned, my wife and I own a small-town family pharmacy. She is a pharmacist. And I have seen so many seniors walk through the doors of our pharmacy who either could not afford their medicine or could not afford to take it properly. And living in a small town, Prescott, Arkansas, population 3,400, I know a week or two later that senior is 16 miles down the road in Hope, Arkansas, in the hospital having a leg amputated, running up a $20,000, $30,000, $40,000, $50,000 Medicare bill for other complications simply because they could not afford their medicine or could not afford to take it properly. So I ran for Congress. I ran for Congress to try and modernize Medicare to include medicine for our seniors. And I knew it was pretty partisan in Washington, but I thought if there was an issue that would not be a Democrat issue or a Republican issue but, rather, a seniors issue, this would be it. But I got to town and learned it is a big drug manufacturers' issue. This is not a seniors bill we are going to be voting on this week. This is a bill written by the big drug manufacturers to benefit the big drug manufacturers. I am sick and tired of all this partisan bickering. I am sick and tired of Democrats being locked out, committee members being locked out of the room where they are writing this bill. If they get the drug manufacturers up out of the chairs at the table, they would have room for Members of Congress that have been elected like everyone else who had been appointed to that committee to address this issue. That is wrong and it is shameful, and it is a disgrace to our democracy. There are several problems with this bill. There are really a lot of problems with it. Let me just list a few of them for my colleagues, if I may. If anyone has any doubt in their mind whether or not this bill was written by the big drug manufacturers, believe me, their fingerprints are all over it. The Republican leadership actually had the nerve to put language in this bill that says the Federal Government shall be prohibited, prohibited, from negotiating with the big drug manufacturers to bring down the high cost of medicine. That is in the bill. And they call it a seniors' bill. The second problem is the privatization aspect. Let me tell you why the big drug manufacturers want to see this Medicare prescription drug benefit privatized. You hear how drugs are cheaper, less expensive, less costly in other countries. It is true. I did a study about a year ago where we compared the price paid by seniors in Arkansas's 4th Congressional District on the five most commonly used brand-name drugs with the price paid by seniors on those same drugs in seven other countries. And what we found was startling. Seniors in my congressional district back home in Arkansas pay on average 110 percent more, 110 percent more than seniors pay on average in those other countries. Now, why is that? Because America is the only industrialized nation in the world where people go without health insurance. In these other countries everybody has health insurance and in these other countries their governments tell the big drug manufacturers if you want your drug in our country, you are going to give us a discount. And they do. Well, the drug manufacturers know that if we have 40 million seniors all under one plan in America, then we too as a government will demand those kinds of discounts and rebates to help offset the cost of the program. Thus the reasoning for creating and privatizing a Medicare prescription drug benefit. Our parents, our grandparents are literally going to have hundreds of insurance companies knocking on their door, calling them on the phone, sending them mail all trying to sell them exactly the same policy because they want to spread those 40 million people every which way they can so no one will have the buying power to demand those discounts from the drug manufacturers. This bill does nothing to bring down the high cost of prescription drugs. In fact, no insurance company has come forward to say they will offer a prescription drug plan for seniors. And that is why in this bill, the Republicans have put a $12 slush fund, $12 billion, they are just going to give to private insurance companies that will agree to offer a prescription drug benefit for seniors. There is a reason Medicare was created 38 years ago. Insurance is about spreading the risk. And the reality is with seniors there is no risk to spread. Seniors spend a lot of money on health care to either stay healthy or to get well. Privatizing Medicare will not work. If they get away with this, Social Security will be next. Finally, the benefit itself. Number one is, as my colleague from Texas (Mr. Sandlin) said so eloquently, the benefit does not even start until 2006. Folks, any time there is a plan offered up that does not kick in until after the next election, you ought to be leery of it. This plan does not even kick in until 2006. And when it does, this is what everyone get, and when I explain what they get, they are going to have a clear understanding of why they want to make sure it does not kick in until after the next election: There is a premium of about $35 a month, although they cannot tell you for sure what it will be, but they think somewhere around $35 a month. That is $420 a year. Then there is a deductible of $275 a year. Then from $275 worth of prescription drugs each year that a senior meets up to $2,200, the senior pays 25 percent and Medicare pays 75 percent. That part actually sounds pretty decent. So the senior is out $481.25 on that part. But listen to this: once the senior has spent $2,200 on prescription drugs in a year, and as a small-town pharmacy owner I can tell you for a lot of seniors that only takes about 3 or 4 or 5 months, once a senior spends $2,200, all the way up to $5,044, the senior is back paying the full cost of the prescription on their own. Medicare pays nothing. But, guess what? Medicare continues to bill you the $35-a-month premium. That is $2,844 out of seniors' pockets.

Mr. ROSS. We have primarily tonight talked about the Medicare prescription drug benefit, or the lack of it, under the Republican prescription drug plan, but this 1,100-page bill, which they have not even allowed us to see yet, has other provisions in it that I think are worth noting, two primarily. One is that it increases part B deductibles for seniors in 2005, and then they will be indexed to grow based on part B expenditures for each year thereafter. They are going to increase part B deductibles. That is nothing more than a tax on sick seniors. Secondly, a lot of seniors rely on oxygen to stay alive in their home and hospitals beds, and they are getting those things now through a local supplier. They have the freedom to choose. This is going to be put out for competitive bidding. Competitive bidding. That means that if your oxygen machine breaks or you have an ice storm, and you have to have a portable tank, and your supplier may be someone that lives 5 or 6 hours away, that is a serious issue. This bill has a lot more problems than simply the lack of a prescription drug benefit. But I will close, Mr. Speaker, by simply saying this: If seniors cannot afford the first $2,200 worth of medicine, tell me how they are going to afford the next $2,844? Because that is the gap. From $2,200 to $5,044 they are stuck paying the monthly premium of around $35, but they get no help at all. They are footing the bill entirely on their own. And that is wrong.

Mr. ROSS. Number 1, the discount is not being paid by the drug manufacturer, which is 87 percent of the cost to the manufacturer. The discount is being paid by your family pharmacy in amounts of 50 cents to $3. More importantly, and I do not think this has ever been raised on the floor of this House, but this bill preempts State laws that regulate discount cards. About half the States in America, because these cards are so fly-by-night and so fraudulent and have ripped off so many seniors, because they find out the benefit they are getting from it is less than what they charge per month for the card, that most States in America now have regulations to monitor and control these so-called discount prescription drug cards. This bill preempts those State laws. There will be no regulation of these discount card companies. Max Richtman is the head of the National Committee to Preserve Social Security and Medicare. I want to say they are a bipartisan group. They are not. They are nonpartisan, and they are nonprofit. That is the Nation's second largest senior advocacy group, and I think he put it pretty well. He said, Have you ever heard of Medicare fraud? This Republican prescription drug bill, it is Medicare fraud. It is nothing more than a false hope and a false promise for our seniors. This is America, and we can do better than this by our seniors, by our greatest generation.

Mr. ROSS. Mr. Speaker, Members of Congress pay 25 percent of the cost of the medicine, at least under the health plan that I am on and most of us are on. There are several options to choose from, and anyone with private health insurance, and again we have got 43.6 million people without health insurance in this country. Ten million of them unfortunately are children, but most people fortunate enough to have health insurance pay roughly 20 to 25 percent of the cost of the medicine. So in the first $5,044, Members of Congress pay $1,261, but the Republican national leadership wants our mothers and grandmothers and fathers and grandfathers to pay $4,020.25 out of the first $5,044, and that is a benefit that does not even kick in until 2006. I will give them this. Starting in April of 2004, they are going to give our seniors a prescription drug discount card. You stay up late enough tonight and watch cable TV. They will be advertised on TV. You can buy them, and any discount that is realized from that card comes directly from your family pharmacy and not from the big drug manufacturer. Again, they are not going to the root of the cause. Eighty-seven percent of the costs of medicine comes from the big drug manufacturer. This discount card does not discount any of the money paid by the big drug manufacturer, and so the savings amounts to 50 cents to $3. They did a study on this. This literally amounts to 50 cents to $3. So you take a senior that is on six prescriptions a month and a $500 drug bill, let us say it is $3 per prescription. That is an $18 savings. How in the world is that going to help seniors choose between the light bill, rent, or groceries?

Mr. ROSS. Absolutely, good point, and I appreciate the gentleman from New Jersey pointing that out. The bottom line is, and you need a CPA to figure this thing out, but when you take all the numbers I just presented and add them up, and the bottom line, all this talk on the floor of the House of Representatives, the vote that is going to occur is going to boil down to this, that in 2006 seniors are going to get a prescription drug plan written by the big drug manufacturers that requires seniors to pay out of their own pocket $4,020.25 out of the first $5,044. Let me repeat that. Seniors under this plan, which does not even start until 2006, are going to pay $4,020.25 out of the first $5,044. Contrast that to Members of Congress, the health insurance plan we have, and quite frankly, the health insurance plan that most people who are fortunate to have health insurance in America now is very similar. Members of Congress pay $1,261 on the first $5,044, with their insurance plan picking up the difference. So the Republican leadership thinks that they should only pay $1,261 on the first $5,044, but they want seniors, they want our mothers and grandmothers, to pay $4,020.25 on the first $5,044.

Mr. ROSS

Mr. ROSS. Mr. Speaker, I move that the House do now adjourn.

Mr. ROSS

Mr. ROSS. Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Obey) for yielding me time. I rise in support of the motion to instruct, to instruct the conferees that we accept in this agriculture appropriations bill the same language that has already been passed on the House floor as it deals with reimportation, and let me tell you why. In June of last year, I did a study where we compared the price paid by seniors in Arkansas' Fourth Congressional District with the price paid by seniors in six other countries. And we found that the price paid by seniors in the Fourth Congressional District of Arkansas is 110 percent more on average than the price paid by seniors in places like Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, and the U.K. Let me give you a couple of examples. Prevacid, 30 milligrams. In our congressional district it costs $128 a month. The average foreign price, $55 a month. Celebrex, 200 milligrams. In my congressional district, $81 a month. The average foreign price, $35 a month. Prilosec, in my district $129 a month. The average foreign price, $56 a month; and the list goes on and on and on. The drug manufacturers wrote this so-called Medicare prescription drug bill, which is not for our seniors. It is a windfall for the big drug manufacturers, and now we see their fingerprints all over this bill today to go to conference on the ag appropriations bill. Velma from my district writes and says she takes seven prescriptions a month. It costs her $560, and she is trying to get by and live on $604 a month. Mary from my district says she takes four prescriptions a month that cost her $401.88, and she is trying to get by on $586 a month. I rise in support of the motion to instruct on behalf of the seniors of America so we can take on the big drug manufacturers and the Republican leadership and finally bring down the high cost of prescription drugs for our seniors. This is America, and we can do better than this by our seniors.

Mr. ROSS

Mr. ROSS. Mr. Speaker, after years of talk about the need to help our seniors with the high cost of prescription drugs, it appears that sometime this week, or perhaps this weekend, this Congress will be voting. They will be voting on a bill that is nothing more than a false hope and a false promise for America's seniors. In fact, Max Richmond, the head of the National Committee to Preserve Social Security and Medicare, a nonpartisan, not bipartisan, but a nonpartisan, nonprofit organization, has been quoted as saying, ``Have you ever heard of Medicare fraud? Well, this Republican prescription drug bill is Medicare fraud.'' Let me tell you why. As I see it, there are three major problems with the bill. Problem number one: the Republican leadership actually had the nerve to put language in the bill that says the Federal Government shall be prohibited from negotiating with the big drug manufacturers to bring down the high cost of medicine. That is in the bill. Then they call it a seniors bill. Problem number two is the prescription drug plan will be privatized. And what is worse than that is the rest of Medicare could very well be privatized by 2010 under this bill. Insurance is about spreading the risk. When our homeowners policy comes due, sure, we complain; but when you think about the fact that they will replace everything in our house and build us a new house if something happens, it is fairly reasonable, the premium we pay. And why is that? When is the last time you saw a home in your neighborhood burn down or get blown away? It does not happen very often. Insurance is about spreading the risk. Well, with seniors there is no risk to spread. Seniors require a lot of medicine and a lot of health care to either get well or to stay healthy. That is why we created Medicare 38 years ago. So why do the Republican leadership and the big drug manufacturers want to privatize the Medicare prescription drug benefit? Well, let me tell you why. You hear about how prescription drugs are less expensive in other countries. It is true. I did a survey about a year ago where I compared the price paid by seniors of the five most commonly used brand-name drugs in my district with seven other countries. And guess what we found: seniors in my district pay on average 110 percent more than seniors in these other countries. Now, why is that? Because America is the only industrialized Nation in the world where people go without health insurance; 43.6 million of them today, 10 million of them are children and the rest of them, for the most part, are people that are trying to do the right thing and work jobs, but they are working the jobs with no benefits. In other countries everybody has health care. And in other countries they tell the big drug manufacturers if you want your medicine, your brand in our country, you are going to give us a discount. And they do. And the drug manufacturers and the Republican leadership know good and well that if we have 40 million seniors under one plan in America, that we too will demand those kinds of discounts to help offset the cost of this program. So they want to privatize the plan and spread seniors out over about 100 plans and have 100 different insurance companies knocking on your door and calling and sending mail to your mother or dad or grandfather or grandmother all trying to sell them, what? Exactly the same plan. Privatization will not work. The third big problem with this is it is not really a meaningful benefit. Most people who are fortunate enough to have a private health insurance company, and every plan is a little different, but most people who are fortunate to have private health insurance, well, the first $3,500 worth of medicine they pay about $700 out of pocket. Under this Republican prescription drug plan, on the first $3,500 worth of medicine, seniors are going to get stuck with $2,600 of it. All this talk in Washington amounts to $900 worth of help on the first $3,500 worth of medicine. You see, it is going to have a $250 deductible. And during that time, you have got to pay the monthly premium, which they say may be $35; but they are not real sure what it will be, it could be more. And then after $250 up to $2,000, Medicare is going to pay 80 percent and you pay 20 percent. That sounds pretty good. But on a $100 prescription, once you get to the $250 mark and you are paying $20, what happens when you hit $2,000? All the way up to $3,500 you are back paying the full $100. Medicare pays nothing. But they still bill you monthly for this premium. This is Medicare fraud. It is wrong. This is America, and we can do better than that by our seniors.

Mr. ROSS

Mr. ROSS. Mr. Speaker, today, I would like to acknowledge the life and legacy of former Arkansas Governor Sid McMath, a statesman, a leader, a veteran, and a true gentleman who passed away recently in Arkansas at the age of 91. 1 was honored to have known Governor McMath--a man who, in deed and action, distinguished himself as someone who changed Arkansas for the better. Governor McMath was a man dedicated to public service. Born in 1912, just outside of Magnolia, Arkansas, in Columbia County, Governor McMath knew he wanted to do great things from an early age. His life of service began in school with student council positions, which led him to be an organizer and the second president of Young Democrats of Arkansas from 1946 to 1947. In 1947, Governor McMath was elected as prosecuting attorney for Garland and Montgomery counties. Elected as our State's 34th Governor, Governor McMath worked from 1949 to 1953 to improve Arkansas. His leadership left us with an enhanced public education system, a new teaching hospital, improved welfare-assistance programs for elderly Arkansans, dams, and new highways and roads. During a time when African Americans struggled for civil rights, Governor McMath ensured equal facilities and educational opportunities for African Americans in Arkansas. He provided Arkansas' only historically black college, AM & N, now the University of Arkansas at Pine Bluff, with sufficient resources to become accredited by the North Central Association of Colleges and Schools. After serving two terms as Governor, Governor McMath built an impressive law practice as one of the State's leading attorneys. For more than five decades, Governor McMath became known as the ``people's lawyer,'' continuing to fight for the causes so important to him and to the people of our great state. His service went far beyond civilian life, Governor McMath also served in the United States Marine Corps in World War II. He served our Nation eagerly and rose to the rank of Major General before he retired. Arkansas will be forever grateful that such a visionary leader came along, at the time he did, to lead us into a new era. Those who had the honor to know Governor McMath would describe him as a great orator and one of the most intelligent and genuine people they had ever met; he was truly an asset to our State. While Governor Sid McMath may no longer be with us, his spirit and his legacy live on by the way he improved the quality of life for all Arkansans. I extend my deepest sympathies to his wife, Betty Dorth Russell McMath, sons Phillip, Sandy and Bruce; and daughters Patricia and Melissa, and all of his family and friends.

Mr. ROSS

Mr. ROSS. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to congratulate Brother Anselm Allen, of Subiaco, AR, for his exceptional volunteer service and lifetime of dedication as a weather observer. The National Weather Service is presenting Brother Allen with the esteemed John Campanius Holm Award. Since 1965, Brother Anselm has been collecting weather observations at the New Subiaco Abbey as the official Cooperative Weather Observer at Subiaco, AR. Established in 1897, the New Subiaco Abbey has provided weather data for well over 100 years, and received an award in 1997 for 100 years of service. Boasting the longest tenure of any observer at the New Subiaco Abbey, Brother Anselm was awarded the 40 Year Length of Service Award in August of 2001 by the National Weather Service. No stranger to awards, Brother Anselm is being presented with the John Campanius Holm Award. This award aims to single out terrific volunteer service as a weather observer and honor extraordinary dedication to the National Weather Service. In total, there are 11,000 weather observers in the United States, and only 25 people per year receive this high honor. Brother Anselm's daily weather reports are known for their precision and timeliness and are very much appreciated. Data collected by Brother Anselm is sent on a monthly basis to the National Climatic Data Center in Ashville, NC. The information is then published in NOAA's Climatological Data, where it becomes a permanent record of the world's weather. Additionally, Brother Anselm uses his amateur radio skills to deliver information to the National Weather Service when severe weather threatens the area. I am so pleased to have the opportunity to properly recognize Brother Anselm Allen before the United States Congress for his outstanding example of dedication and volunteer efforts to the National Weather Service. Please join me in congratulating Brother Anselm on his receipt of the John Campanius Holm Award.

Mr. ROSS

Mr. ROSS. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from South Carolina for his leadership as ranking member of the House Committee on the Budget, and I am here tonight joining my friend from South Carolina and the gentleman from Texas and others because I am concerned about our country and its future. Let me preface my remarks by saying that I am one of 37 members of the fiscally conservative Democratic Blue Dog coalition. I am as sick and tired of all the partisan bickering as anyone else. I do not look at an idea and look at whether it is just a Democratic idea or Republican idea. I look at it, is it a commonsense idea? If it is, then I support it. But when it comes to the budget and when it comes to the tax cut that was passed earlier this year, the Republican leadership and this administration are dead wrong. Do not take my word for it; look at the numbers. Under this administration, 3.2 million people have lost their jobs. We now have 9 million people out of work, unable to provide for their families. People have lost $.6 trillion in the stock market, and much of that is retirement savings for so many working families. There are 43.6 million people in America without health insurance. Ten million of them are children. Most of the rest of them work for a living. They are working the jobs with no benefits. Trade deficits have increased nearly $100 billion. We had a $5.6 trillion projected surplus when President Bush took office. That has become a $3.5 trillion projected deficit over the same period of time. In fact, we have the largest deficit ever in our Nation's history; 374 billion is what they want my colleagues to believe it is, but when we take Social Security out of it and not count Social Security, it is really a $535 billion deficit. Does it matter? Either way we cut it, it is the largest deficit ever in our Nation's history. The Republicans like to say the Democrats are the ones who spend the money. This is the first time in 50 years that the Republicans have controlled the White House, the House and the Senate; and they have given us the largest deficit ever in our Nation's history. The first bill I wrote as a Member of Congress was a bill to tell the politicians in Washington to keep their hands off the Social Security trust fund. The Republican leadership refused to give us a hearing or a vote on that bill, and now we know why. Because they were borrowing $374 billion from the Social Security trust fund to help fund this budget, the largest deficit ever in our Nation's history. Let us think back a moment from 1997 to 2001. We had a balanced budget. We were beginning to pay the debt down. Now we have a $7 trillion debt. This country is spending $1 billion a day, $1 billion a day simply paying interest on the national debt. How much is $1 billion? I put that number to a calculator and get a little E at the end. I will tell my colleagues how much $1 billion is. We could build 200 brand-new elementary schools every single day in America just for the interest we are paying on the national debt. Better yet, we could provide 1 million senior citizens on Medicare prescription drug coverage for a year just with the interest that we are paying in 1 day on the national debt, $1 billion a day in interest payments on this $7 trillion debt. We are not talking about principal payment; we are talking simply interest payments. What are we seeing from this administration? We are seeing cuts in education. It was President Bush who said his top priority was education reform in this No Child Left Behind business, and he is the one who told us how much it would take to implement this program. My colleagues know how it works in this body. If it had been my program and he was cutting it, that makes sense. We are talking about he cut his own program. Arkansas's cut, $87 million for next year. What does that say about our commitment to our children and their future? Veterans benefits are being cut left and right. What kind of message are we sending to the men and women in uniform serving us today in Iraq and Afghanistan and around the world when we are cutting the benefits for the veterans who came and served before them? These may be Republican priorities, but they are not American priorities. These may be Republican values, but these are not America's values. I believe it is time for us to get our fiscal house back in order, to restore common sense and fiscal discipline to our Nation's government. Finally, let me say that I raise these issues because I believe our priorities and values should be centered around our children ensuring they get the very best education possible, Head Start, after-school programs, providing our veterans with the help that they so desperately need. We need to be investing in infrastructure. That is how President Roosevelt got us out of the Depression, with the WPA program. I drove over bridges yesterday that were built as part of the WPA program. We are there folks. We are there. All 50 States collectively are faced with the largest shortfall they have seen since the Great Depression. We should be investing in our infrastructure, and we need to be investing in jobs. I raise these issues because my grandparents left this country better off than they found it for my parents, and my parents left this country better off than they found it for our generation, and I think we have got a duty and an obligation to leave this country a little better off than we found it for our children and grandchildren. I thank the gentleman from South Carolina for yielding.

Mr. ROSS

Mr. ROSS. Mr. Speaker, October is National Breast Cancer Awareness month, and as this month comes to an end, it is important for us to reflect upon the progress we have made toward defeating this illness. An increased awareness of the steps necessary to defeat breast cancer, including mammography screenings, has led to early detection and higher survival rates. However, we still have a long way to go. This year nearly 40,000 women will die of breast cancer, and over 211,000 new cases will be diagnosed. Unfortunately, many of these cases will be diagnosed, and deaths will occur, in communities where access to advanced medicine is limited. Congress's commitment to increasing the funding for cancer prevention and early detection is helping us battle this disease. Today we can be proud of the advancements we have made. But we must continue our commitment to defeating breast cancer by raising the public's awareness, expanding health care screenings to include all women, and continuing to fund the research necessary to fight this disease.

Mr. ROSS

Mr. ROSS. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to congratulate an exceptional artist from Arkansas's Fourth Congressional District, Ms. Dortha Scott of Mount Ida. Out of more than 9,300 entries, Ms. Scott's outstanding sketch has been selected to be used by the U.S. Mint for the Arkansas Quarter. The U.S. Mint will produce the Quarter for 10 weeks, and between 650-750 million quarters will be put into circulation across the United States. Our Quarter incorporates several elements that truly reflect Arkansas. This is a coin that helps everyone in our nation understand why Arkansas is so proudly called ``The Natural State.'' The background of the Quarter represents the abundance of natural resources that our state encompasses. Elements of the Quarter, including a mallard duck soaring above the water with trees in the background, symbolizes Arkansas's reputation as one of the most popular states in the country for hunting and fishing, and as a state with a high-abundance of forest land. The rice on the left side of the Quarter signifies the important role rice and other agricultural crops play in Arkansas's economy, as agriculture has historically been a way of life for so many working families. Arkansas leads the country in rice production. The centerpiece of the Quarter is a diamond, representing the Crater of Diamonds State Park near Murfreesboro. The Crater of Diamonds State Park is not only home to the largest diamond ever to be unearthed in the United States, but is also the eighth largest diamond deposit in the world, and the only diamond mine in the world where the public can search for diamonds. The Crater of Diamonds State Park is a leading source for Arkansas pride and tourism. I am honored that the Arkansas Quarter is one that truly showcases the state and all it has to offer. I hope that everyone will take time to reflect upon Arkansas's treasures and history, and join us in celebrating our new state coin. I am so pleased to have the opportunity to properly recognize Ms. Dortha Scott before the United States Congress for her beautiful artwork that truly depicts our great state, which will be viewed by millions of Americans as they earn and spend the Arkansas Quarter.

Mr. ROSS

Mr. ROSS. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor and congratulate an outstanding Arkansan, and native of the Fourth Congressional District, whose dedication to historic preservation and to our National Park system is beyond extraordinary. Parker Westbrook is a recipient of the Gold Star Award, which is one of the most prestigious awards the President's Advisory Council on Historic Preservation bestows to its members. I am also here to honor Mr. Westbrook for his active involvement as a member of the advisory board for the National Park System. Through his selfless, unyielding service to both organizations, Parker played a major role in protecting our Nation's resources, and preserving our precious national landmarks. For the past 8 years, Parker has spent countless hours serving on both of these prestigious boards. His dedication went well beyond mere membership; he never missed a meeting for either organization. Throughout his life, Parker has sought to better his community and his country by preserving our country's heritage for future generations. He is a role model to all Americans who strive for exceptional public service. I congratulate him on his recent accomplishment, and I wish him the best in what I know will be many more years of selfless service to our country.

Mr. ROSS

Mr. ROSS. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to the late Johnny Cash, one of our most well known singer/songwriters who was born in a little-known town in my district named Kingsland. Kingsland, Arkansas is a little town of 449 residents that lies just west of the Mississippi Delta, the fertile ground out of which grows our nation's finest food and fiber. Out of this land also grows much hardship--it is sparsely populated by farmers whose fortune is subject to the whims of nature. It gave birth to the blues, and to Johnny Cash. Cash was born in the wake of the Great Depression, the fourth of five children in a cotton farming family. He picked cotton with his hands, sang hymns at the Central Baptist Church, and sought higher ground at Pine Bluff when the great flood of 1937 sent the Mississippi's waters spilling into his family's cotton fields in Dyess, covering them with the black Mississippi mud that the next year produced the best cotton crop they'd ever seen--hardship and glory wrapped up in a busted levee that soaked his livelihood and sealed his fate as the champion of the downtrodden. Johnny Cash's music transcended genres and generations to touch us all with stories of struggle--sometimes ending in triumph, but usually ending in trouble. His adventurous ballads and lamenting dirges could bring us down to the darkest depths of life at the same time his spirituals lifted us up to heaven. He was bold. He was bad. He was brave. He made his peace with man and with God through his songs. He sang of outlaws and heroes, cowboys and killers, soldiers and lovers, and even a boy named Sue. He was country, folk, and rock and roll. Johnny Cash didn't sing to simply earn a living, he sang because he had much to tell. From his life we learn to face adversity with wit and integrity, to fight back when pushed down, to hold duty and honor sacred, and to love and forgive. We lost one of our national treasures this month, but the legacy and the legend of the Man in Black will live on in the gift he gave us all.

Mr. ROSS

Mr. ROSS. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me time and for offering up this motion to instruct conferees on the Medicare prescription drug bill. Mr. Speaker, let me tell you that, as the owner of a small-town family pharmacy, one of the things that I see way too often is seniors who walk through the doors of our pharmacy who cannot afford their medicine or who cannot afford to take it properly. I live in a small town, a town that lost its hospital back in 1995. Our folks now go 16 miles down the road to the hospital in Hope, Arkansas. Living in a small town, I see so many seniors that end up 16 miles down the road in the hospital running up a $25,000 or $50,000 Medicare bill, or requiring $250,000 worth of kidney dialysis, or having a $50,000 leg amputation, simply because they cannot afford their medicine or cannot afford to take it properly. This is America, and we can do better than that by our seniors, America's greatest generation. There has been a lot of talk in Washington about trying to help our seniors with the high cost of prescription drugs, but that is all we have seen and that is all we have gotten, has been a lot of talk. When I came to Congress in 2001, I thought if there was one issue that would not be partisan, that would not divide us, but, rather, would be a senior issue, this is not about Democrats or Republicans, or at least it ought not be, it ought to be about our seniors, and I thought if there was one issue that could bring us together, it would be to do right by our seniors. But, instead, what we have had offered up by the Republican leadership is a false hope and a false promise, nothing more than Medicare fraud for our seniors. There are several problems with this so-called Medicare prescription drug bill. Number one, the fund that they want to cut funding for to fund the prescription drug coverage for our seniors, the Republicans want to cut funding to rural hospitals to the tune of $12 billion. We have lost 470 rural hospitals in America in the last 25 years. As I mentioned earlier, we lost the hospital in my hometown of Prescott, Arkansas, in 1995, and I can tell you that is something I do not wish on anyone. It is wrong to try and fund this Medicare prescription drug benefit by shutting down rural hospitals. Another problem with the bill is this bill is supposed to be about helping our seniors. The problem is, it is not a seniors' bill, it is a bill that has been written by the big drug manufacturers. The drug manufacturers have more lobbyists in Washington, D.C., than we have Members of Congress in the House and Senate combined, and their fingerprints are all over this bill. The Republican leadership had the nerve to put language in this bill that says that the Federal Government shall be prohibited from negotiating with the big drug manufacturers to bring down the high cost of medicine. That is in the bill. Another problem with the bill is privatizing the Medicare prescription drug benefit. There is a very good reason why they want to do this. You hear about how drugs are cheaper in other countries. They are. It is because America is the only industrialized nation in the world where people go without health insurance. That does not happen anywhere else in the industrialized world. There 41 million people in America without health insurance today; 8.5 million are children. Who are the rest of them? It is not the folks that do not want to work. If you do not want to work, you get on welfare and you get Medicaid. We are talking about the people that are trying to do right and stay off welfare, that are working the jobs with no benefits. But in other countries that does not happen. In other countries the government says to the big drug companies, you give us a discount if you want your drug in our country, and they do. I did a survey, Mr. Speaker, about a year ago, where I compared the price paid by seniors in my Congressional District in Arkansas on the five most commonly used brand name drugs with the price paid by seniors in seven other countries. Guess what? Seniors in my district in Arkansas pay, on average, 110 percent more than seniors pay in these seven other countries. So the drug manufacturers want to privatize this, because they know if we have 40 million seniors under one plan, we, too, will demand these kinds of discounts and rebates to help offset the costs of the program. So they want to privatize it and have 100 different insurance companies knocking on your momma's door, calling her on the phone, sending her mail, all trying to sell her exactly the same policy. Finally, the biggest problem with the bill is the benefit itself. There is all this talk in Washington about helping our seniors with the high cost of prescription drugs. What does the plan do? Well, from day one you have got to pay at least a $35 monthly premium, although no one can tell us exactly how much it will be. Then you will have a $250 deductible. Then from $250 to $2,000, Medicare will kick in at 80 percent of the cost of its medicine. That part sounds pretty good. But when you get to $2,000, you have got to continue to pay the $35 monthly premium. But, guess what? The senior is back being forced to foot the entire bill from $2,000 up to $3,500. Pay the premium, but get no help. If seniors cannot afford the first $2,000 worth of medicine, tell me, how in the world they are going to afford the next $1,500? When you do the math on this, here is what it comes out to. All this talk boils down to this. On the first $3,500 worth of medicine that seniors need each year, Medicare is going to help them with $900 of it. Seniors are still going to get stuck trying to pay $2,600 of the first $3,500 worth of medicine. When you take the formula, and you almost need a CPA to figure it out, and you factor in the premium, that is what it amounts to. Tell me this, $900 worth of help on a $3,500 drug bill, I do not know about where you come from, but I can tell you, where I come from, that is not going to help my struggling seniors to choose between their medicine and their groceries and their rent and their light bill. I am not going to rest until seniors can walk into the pharmacy of their choice, pull out their Medicare card and be treated like they are when they go to the doctor and to the hospital. I will continue to fight, and that is exactly what we are doing in this motion to instruct conferees on the Medicare prescription drug bill. I am going to continue to fight until we get a plan that is voluntary, but guaranteed, and made available to all seniors who have no help today, while protecting those seniors who have help. I want to make sure that this bill that passes this Congress will not shut down another rural hospital.

Mr. ROSS

Mr. ROSS. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to help commemorate an event in our Nation's history that we can all join together in celebrating. With the stroke of a pen in 1803, President Jefferson doubled America in size, making us one of the largest Nations in the world. The Louisiana Purchase comprised more than 600 million acres at less than 3 cents an acre in what today is the greater part of 13 states between the Mississippi River and the Rocky Mountains. Arkansas was one of those states--the third state formed after Louisiana and Missouri. Two hundred years later, Arkansas continues to prove itself a valuable asset to our Nation. Our state has contributed much to our great country--our agriculture and other industries feed our Nation and fuel our economy; our State's natural beauty is an endless source of enjoyment for families and visitors. Arkansas has supplied our Nation with food and fiber, entertainers, and even a president. The 828,000 square mile west of the Mississippi River is some of the most beautiful and bountiful land in our country. If only $15 million could go that far today! I invite my colleagues and our Nation to join me in celebrating one of the single most noteworthy events in our Nation's history--the Louisiana Purchase. This year as we celebrate the bicentennial, I hope that you will visit Arkansas and any of the other states that were purchased for so little, and that now prove to be priceless.

Mr. ROSS

Mr. ROSS. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to thank an outstanding and dedicated constituent of mine who is retiring after a lifetime of caring for our nation's most beautiful places. Roger Giddings is a 42-year veteran of federal service who began his career in 1960 as a seasonal park ranger for Glacier National Park in Montana and Everglades National Park in Florida. Giddings landed his first permanent National Parks Service assignment as a supervisory park guide at Carlsbad Caverns National Park in New Mexico. He has worked at Colonial National Historic Park in Virginia, Natchez Trace Parkway in Mississippi, the NPS Headquarters in Washington, DC, and Grand Canyon National Park in Arizona before becoming superintendent of Hot Springs National Park in Arkansas in 1981. His work in Arkansas has resulted in preservation and restoration of our national treasure, our bathhouses. In the late 1980's he helped to establish the Friends of Fordyce group that worked to get the Fordyce Bathhouse rehabilitated into the Park's Visitor Center. For this effort, the National Trust for Historic Preservation awarded the park it's highest honor, the Historic Preservation Honor Award. Giddings's greatest challenge was to save and restore the unique and historic Bathhouse Row in Hot Springs, where an essential stabilization project is already underway. When he arrived at Hot Springs National Park, he set to work not only to revitalize the bathhouses, but all of downtown Hot Springs as well. The results of his efforts can be seen by all who come to visit, and his work has ensured that many more will visit Hot Springs National Park in the future. On behalf of all who have visited, enjoyed, and shared the beauty of our National Parks, I want to thank Roger Giddings for his persistent efforts not only at Hot Springs National Park, but also at some of the most amazing places in our great nation.

Mr. ROSS

Mr. ROSS. Mr. Speaker, it has been 860 days since President Bush and the Republican party embarked on their economic plan for our country. During that time, the national debt has increased by $1,167,994,451,600.72. According to the Web site for the Bureau of the Public Debt at the U.S. Department of Treasury, yesterday at 4:30 p.m. eastern daylight time the Nation's outstanding debt was $6,808,319,837,959.49. Furthermore, in fiscal year 2003, interest on our national debt or the debt tax, D-E-B-T tax, is $304,978,878,641.11. That is through August 31. Mr. Speaker, we must stop deficit spending and pay this debt down.

Mr. ROSS

Mr. ROSS. Mr. Speaker, I rise to voice my opposition to the pay increase that Members of Congress voted to grant themselves during the debate on the Treasury and Transportation spending bill. Every year, Congress votes on this pay raise, and every year that I have been a Member of this body, I have stood against it. It's simply not right for us to give ourselves more money when there are so many people waiting for an increase in the minimum wage. Many of my colleagues feel the same way about the Congressional pay raise, but unfortunately the House leadership did not allow us to vote for this specific item, because it was included within a broader spending bill. Voting against this bill would mean voting against billions of dollars for our roads and other worthwhile projects. Rather, we were forced to voice our opposition in the form of a procedural vote, and I did so. There are thousands of people in my district who hold minimum wage positions, people I was elected to serve. I would only be serving myself if I voted to raise my salary, and that is not why I'm here. I will continue to vote against congressional pay raises until the minimum wage is increased for working families.

Mr. ROSS

Mr. ROSS. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Maine for leading the motion to instruct on this very important issue this evening. As the owner of a small town family pharmacy back home in Prescott, Arkansas, my wife and I got tired of seeing seniors walk through the doors of our pharmacy who could not afford their medicine or could not afford to take it properly. That was a big reason why I decided to run for the United States Congress in 2000. The reason I am speaking to Members tonight from the Republican side of the aisle is this: I thought if there was ever an issue that would not be a Democratic issue or a Republican issue but rather a senior issue, this would be it. But instead, the Republican leadership has offered us nothing more than a false hope and a false promise for our seniors. There are three problems with the bill. Number one, the drug manufacturers wrote the bill, and if Members do not believe that, read the bill. The Republican leadership had the nerve to put language in the bill that says the Federal Government shall be prohibited from negotiating with the drug manufacturers to bring down the high cost of medicine, and we call this a senior's plan. Problem number two, we hear how prescription drugs are cheaper in other countries, they are. They are because the other countries tell the drug manufacturers if you want your drug in our country, you will give us a discount, and they do. The drug manufacturers know if we have 41 million seniors under one plan in America, we too will demand those kinds of discounts to help offset the cost of the program for our seniors. Problem number three, all of the talk for months about a prescription drug benefit for our seniors on the floor of this House boils down to this. When you do the math, on the first $3,500 worth of medicine that a senior needs every year, Medicare is going to pay for $900, leaving the senior to pay $2,600 of the first $3,500. Tell me if that is going to help seniors choose between buying their medicine, buying their food, paying their utility bill, and paying the rent bill. Of course it will not. This is Medicare fraud at its worse. I will not rest until seniors can walk into the pharmacy of their choice and pull out their Medicare card and be treated.

Mr. ROSS

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

Mr. ROSS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. If I might quickly address the gentleman from Arizona's remarks, I do not understand what the problem is. Why is he arguing against this when the House has already passed this motion to instruct? The President says he likes it. In fact, the President's press secretary, White House Press Secretary Ari Fleischer, quote, he the President wants to sign this legislation. Hopes that Congress will get it to him quickly. He believes that what the Senate has done is the right thing to do, a good thing to do, and he wants to sign it. President Bush's press secretary from June 9, 1 month ago or so. And the GOP Senators like it, 94 to 2. It was a bipartisan vote. To the other matter that he keeps bringing up, he tries to tell us that folks who earn $26,625 a year do not pay income taxes. Yes, they pay income taxes; and yes, they pay sales taxes and property taxes and gas taxes and the list of taxes goes on. Please tell me one time when the gas tax, the sales tax, the property tax has been cut. We are talking about people that are trying to do the right thing and stay off welfare and work in the jobs with no benefits. If you earn $80,000 a year and you have got three children at home, in about 2 weeks you are getting a check for $1,200. If you earn $26,000 a year and are a policeman, a fireman, a schoolteacher or serve in the United States military and you have got three children at home, guess what you are getting week after next? Zero. Not a dime. There is nothing fair about this. The President has said so and the Republicans in the Senate have said so. It is time for the Republican leadership in the House to step up to the plate, put partisanship aside, and do what is right by these 6.5 million working families. Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from Louisiana (Mr. Alexander), a member of the Democratic Blue Dog Coalition, a good conservative Democrat who I am proud to call my colleague.

Mr. ROSS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. If I could make just one quick point. The gentleman from Arizona likes to keep referring to his friends on the left. From where the Speaker stands tonight, we would actually be on the right. Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Sandlin), a fellow Blue Dog, a good member of the Blue Dog Coalition and someone that I think will help us and hopefully help the gentleman from Arizona understand why he needs to support this as his President has asked, our President has asked, and as the Senate voted 94 to 2 in a bipartisan way to pass.

Mr. ROSS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Might I just simply respond by saying this, that the gentleman from Arizona likes to talk about how while we want to provide a $1,000 child tax credit for those who earn less than $26,625 a year, he constantly reminds us that it falls back to $700 in 2004. Guess why? Because that is exactly what your bill does that passed, H.R. 2. It falls back to $700 in 2004, and we are here trying to help these working families who earn less than $26,625 a year. You are here fighting that. We know if we tried to extend it to do more than your bill does for all the wealthy folks, you would certainly fight it even more. So let us make sure that we do not confuse the facts here. We are simply trying to provide those who earn between $10,500 and $26,625, the same playing field, the same parity, the same tax cut that will be received by those who earn over $26,625 a year. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Utah (Mr. Matheson), a fellow Blue Dog member, a good conservative Democrat, someone who is here to speak on behalf of the 62,000 working families in Utah who have fallen through the cracks under this concocted plan by the Republican national leadership, someone who is here to try to make sense out of this for us.