C. Ruppersberger

Mr. RUPPERSBERGER

Mr. RUPPERSBERGER. Mr. Speaker, I have introduced this legislation today to stop the Federal Detention facility from being built in Dundalk, Maryland. This past month the Office of Federal Detention Trustees (OFDT) in the Department of Justice solicited proposals for a new detention facility for the Baltimore-Washington region. One of the proposed sites was in Dundalk, Maryland. I was concerned that this office took action without consulting the community. OFDT solicited proposals without bringing the communities into the process. OFDT took action without the input of Federal, State, and local officials. This is wrong. The Dundalk community is undergoing revitalization efforts, and even proposing such a facility might have cooled businesses and new residential interest in this community. As the former Baltimore County Executive, my administration spent over $130 million to revitalize the area. It is very important to me that we help our older communities. It is important that we allow these communities that have generations of families living there to revitalize and attract new jobs and new businesses. Also, the eastern part of Baltimore County was hit hard by Hurricane Isabel. It has caused extensive damage and many of the residents and businesses are still struggling to get on their feet. Hurricane Isabel damage estimates for Maryland alone are valued at six million dollars. We must continue to work to help this area. The Maryland Congressional delegation has worked tirelessly to stop the detention center, and I remain committed to its defeat. We worked together to insert language into the FY' 04 Omnibus appropriations to stop this facility. I want to thank Senator Mikulski and Democratic Whip Steny Hoyer for all their efforts. We knew the actions of OFDT would do more harm to our community and we fought to stop it. This legislation takes an additional strengthening step to ensure that this facility and no new detention center or prison is built in my district. This legislation prohibits the OFDT from building or proposing any sites and it prohibits the Attorney General from building a detention center or prison in Dundalk. In the past few months this area has experienced major problems. They saw thousands of Marylanders lose their jobs with the restructuring at ISG. They saw severe damage from Hurricane Isabel. This prison would be one more concern for the community. It is important to allow this area to revitalize and to grow. I remain committed to fighting for Dundalk and for my fellow Marylanders.

Mr. RUPPERSBERGER

Mr. RUPPERSBERGER. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to a great American journalist, Michael J. Wellbrock. Michael J. Wellbrock has been a faithful employee of WBAL Radio in Baltimore for the past 21 years and just a few days ago he turned 40 years old. Michael J. Wellbrock has been instrumental in the long term success of WBAL Radio and served the past two decades as a producer, executive producer, and general allaround go-to guy and trouble shooter. Michael J. Wellbrock was the technical wizard whose expertise has enabled the station to pull-off many high-quality, award-winning broadcasts, including the visit of Pope John Paul II, the All-Star game, the Orioles trip to Cuba, the Preakness Stakes, and several national political conventions. Michael J. Wellbrock was the genius behind the re-design and re- building of studios at WBAL Radio and helping to bring the station into the 21st century. Michael J. Wellbrock has been the guiding force in the career development of many young, aspiring broadcasters. Michael J. Wellbrock has been the creative force behind many successful programs on WBAL Radio. Mr. Speaker, I ask my colleagues to join me in thanking Michael J. Wellbrock for his service and for his work on behalf of America's citizens and our nation.

Mr. RUPPERSBERGER

Mr. RUPPERSBERGER. Mr. Speaker, on November 20, 2003, I was attending the funeral of my long time friend and one of my dearest colleagues, Maryland State Delegate Howard P. Rawlings, chairman of the Maryland's House Appropriations Committee. Because of the services, I was unable to make rollcall vote 648. If I were present, on rollcall vote 648, I would have voted ``yea.''

Mr. RUPPERSBERGER

Mr. RUPPERSBERGER. A rookie with a bad wing, Mr. Speaker. First, I thank the chairman for accepting this report, and I thank the ranking member also for yielding me this time. I rise in support of the motion to instruct conferees to insist upon section 344 of the House-passed bill requesting an intelligence lessons learned report on Iraq and strongly support asking for this report to be submitted to Congress as soon as possible. I was a former Baltimore County executive of one of the larger counties in the country, and I know well the challenges, the exhilarations, and the pains of leading large organizations. Usually, one does not have time to get beyond the crisis that is filling one's inbox. But every so often, especially after a major milestone, a critical part of leadership of an organization is making sure you are asking your people to look back at their failures and successes with the benefit of hindsight to see what has worked well and what can be done better. It is all part of this experience of improving what you do for the next time around so that you are doing the best you possibly can for your constituents and taxpayers. It is even more important to do so when the lessons you learn about the past can directly help your work today. This is absolutely the case in our work to win the peace in Iraq. I know that our intelligence community had some great successes in Operation Iraqi Freedom. I have no doubt that there were some serious problems. Leadership is about taking on the responsibility to examine what has worked well and what can be done better and making sure those lessons are learned and implemented. The message here is a bipartisan one, and it is a simple one. Let us not waste any more time. Let us turn talk into action. Let us turn yesterday's problems into tomorrow's solutions. The purpose of this motion is to put behind us debates about who is right and who is wrong and move on to the next step of fixing problems. It is too important for the national security of this country and for our troops protecting this Nation in Iraq and around the world.

Mr. RUPPERSBERGER

Mr. RUPPERSBERGER. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 1588 the Defense Authorization Conference Report. While this conference report has some deficiencies it also has a number of positive points that I support. Inititally when this Defense Authorization was drafted compromises were reached that would allow the DoD to have flexibility and at the same time providing labor protections. Unfortunately, the conference report language has been redrafted and allows DoD to wipe away these protections. It is unfortunate that civilian defense employees are not receiving the same protections. I would hope that we can work to ensure workers rights at the Pentagon. These men and women serve our country and are also fighting to protect our freedoms. While this conference report has begun to address the issue of concurrent receipts for veterans it does not fully solve the problem. We need to make sure all veterans receive this benefit. It takes a step in the right direction, but it does not fully solve the problem. This conference report also calls on the Secretary of Defense to submit to the House Intelligence Committee a report on the preparation for and conduct of our military operations under Operation Iraqi Freedom. I am thankful that the F-22A Raptor received additional funding. The Raptor is the new front line jet fighter for our Air Force. This aircraft will give us complete air superiority. I am proud to say that we build this radar system in my district. The Authorization also contains additional funding for the Shadow 200 Unmanned Aerial Vehicle. This vehicle which is again built in my district played a vital role in Iraq in providing our troops with an aerial view of the battlefield to give our troops a tactical advantage. Because of the success of this vehicle the National Guard is now interested in the unit and has requested funding for it. I am happy to say an amendment I inserted into the Defense Authorization has been accepted and will be a part of this authorization. My Amendment calls for employee surveys of leadership and management performance. This survey will help to promote efficiency and allow for the recognition of achievement and increase best practices in an agency. It is important that we allow employees to take ownership of where they work and to make them part of the team. Again, I rise in support of this conference report.

Mr. RUPPERSBERGER

Mr. RUPPERSBERGER. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to a great American, Lt. Col. Robert Hagen. Col. Hagen is a career Army officer with 24 years of service. He has served in the Guard, Reserves and Active Duty--and he is currently a Reservist on his 16th tour in 7 years. Col. Hagen was in Saudi Arabia for a temporary tour of duty during the September 11 attacks on the base just outside of Riyadh and he was responsible for keeping the soldiers on the base informed. I'm sure all Americans abroad at that time--particularly those in uniform--would have preferred being closer to home and protecting those on the home front in harm's way. This was especially true for soldiers like Col. Hagen who knew many working at the Pentagon and lost six friends that fateful day. But through that terrible time in our Nation's history, so many like Col. Hagen remained abroad, steadfast in protecting American democratic principles throughout the world. Col. Hagen returned to Washington in December 2001 on assignment to the Pentagon as deputy chief of Army Communications in the office of the chief of Public Affairs. In this position, Col. Hagen oversaw the public affairs duties at Baltimore-Washington International Airport for troops returning from Iraq and Afghanistan on the Rest & Recuperation program. It was in this capacity that I had the great fortune to first meet the Colonel. Always calm and assured speaking simultaneously into a cell phone, making decisions, answering questions and enthusiastically welcoming troops home as they disembark from planes, Col. Hagen has been an incredible force at BWI during this historic R&R program that brought troops stateside for the first time in DoD history. Always committed to doing what is best for the soldiers, I am grateful to Col. Hagen for his work and his efforts each day. I am also grateful for his support for Operation Hero Miles, a program coordinated through my office to correct a great injustice. For soldiers coming home on R&R and facing the incredibly unfair financial burden of paying for last minute flights home from BWI, Operation Hero Miles collects frequent flier miles to give soldiers in need free tickets home. Col. Hagen was on board with this program from the start and helped us to understand what was needed to make it work. Again, this is just another example of his commitment to do what is best for the soldiers. Col. Hagen's last day on this Washington assignment is November 14, 2003 and then he will begin home for his 29th cross-country drive back to the west coast. As he does so, I wish to thank him for his dedication to this Nation and to the service men and women who so bravely protect it. I thank his wife Sharon Hagen for her support when Col. Hagen's work took him so far away from home so often. Mr. Speaker, I ask my colleagues to join me in thanking Col. Hagen for his service and for his work on behalf of America's service men and women and our Nation.

Mr. RUPPERSBERGER

Mr. RUPPERSBERGER. Mr. Speaker, today I am introducing legislation to designate the postal facility in Aberdeen, Maryland as the Ripken Post Office Building in honor of the Ripken family and their contributions to this great city in the Maryland 2nd Congressional District. It is difficult to think of baseball and not think of the Ripken name. The accomplishments of Cal Ripken, Jr. are literally the stuff legends are made of. He appears throughout the record books after 21 seasons with the Baltimore Orioles--as one of only seven players in baseball history to have 400 home runs and 3,000 hits. Of course, few in my home state of Maryland or this nation will ever forget his Iron Man record or the number 2131--signifying when Cal Ripken, Jr. broke Lou Gehrig's record for consecutive games played. Cal ended his own streak in 1998 after playing 2,632 games consecutively. Bill Ripken had a 12 year major league baseball career as a second baseman with incredible successes including a .9927 fielding percentage in 1992--the best of any major league second baseman that season. In the spring of 2002, Bill Ripken was honored for his career accomplishments with an induction into the Maryland Sports Hall of Fame. Those achievements alone are certainly deserving of admiration and acclamation, but there is so much more to the Ripken family philosophy and that is why this designation is for the Ripken family as a whole. Starting with Cal Ripken, Sr. and his wife Vi, the work ethic both Cal Jr. and his brother Bill exhibited throughout their professional careers can be attributed to this Ripken philosophy of hard work, dedication, sincerity of effort, and commitment. Even more, the Ripken Way embodies the memory of Cal Ripken, Sr. and his pure belief in the joy and craft of baseball. For 37 years, Cal Ripken, Sr. played, coached and managed in the Baltimore Orioles organization. He was responsible for developing a method of teaching that shaped the Orioles' minor league system and became known as ``The Ripken Way.'' That way has become the centerpiece of the Cal Ripken Sr. Foundation and its state-of-the-art baseball academy. This is a family with a history of giving back to the community--both the communities of Baltimore and Aberdeen. Through the Baltimore Reads/ Ripken Learning Center to the creation of the Cal Ripken Baseball and the Cal Ripken, Sr. Foundation, the Ripkens continue to give of themselves in very tangible ways. The Aberdeen Complex has brought minor league baseball, jobs and prestige to the Aberdeen community. Both Cal and Bill Ripken are actively involved in youth camps, coaches clinics, tournaments and, of course, The Cal Ripken World Series. In a world when sport and commercialism is so often intertwined, the Ripken family--the individuals and the family as a whole--serve as incredible role models for what baseball means to this nation and what it was meant to be. These are real sports heroes and truly admirable people. Mr. Speaker I am honored to introduce this legislation on behalf of this incredible family from my home state and I urge my colleagues to vote for this bill.

Mr. RUPPERSBERGER

Mr. RUPPERSBERGER. Mr. Speaker, today I am introducing a bill to direct the Secretary of Veterans Affairs to establish a national cemetery for veterans in Baltimore, Maryland, metropolitan area. We need little reminder today of the courage and sacrifice of our service men and women. Whether protecting us in past World Wars, in North Korea, Vietnam, or the Persian Gulf, or fighting today in the deserts of Iraq and Afghanistan, our military has rarely questioned their mission to protect the freedoms and liberties we American citizens enjoy every day. In exchange for their service, we promised to take care of our veterans in life and in death. This bill addresses the most basic of those promises for our veterans of yesterday, today and tomorrow. Maryland has a long-standing tradition of military service and sacrifice dating back to the Revolutionary War--when the Old Line Soldiers were considered General Washington's favorite after saving the Continental Army from destruction as only the Marylanders were left standing. This historical tie was reinforced when the Secretary of the Navy established the Naval Academy in Annapolis, Maryland in 1845--a testament to Maryland's contribution to the future service of our nation. That tradition continues today with bases in Ft. Meade, Aberdeen, Ft. Detrick, and Andrews Air Force Base, just to name a few. Maryland is home to over 45,000 active, reserve and guard service men and women, as well as their families. And there are over half a million civilian veterans residing in the State of Maryland. Yet there is no longer federal or national cemetery space for first interments--for veterans who wish to have a casket burial. While there is state cemetery space, I stand here today on behalf of the veterans I represent, on behalf of their families, and on behalf of the veterans throughout my home state of Maryland to ask my colleagues to keep the national promise to all veterans. At the very least, we should offer choices to veterans between national and state cemetery burials. Families should not be forced to travel great distances to visit their loved ones. There are approximately 27 million veterans in the United Sites today--10 percent of our national population. And Roll Call on September 29, 2003, said that we are losing 1,500 veterans a day. It is for these brave veterans that I introduce this bill and ask my colleagues for swift passage.

Mr. RUPPERSBERGER

Mr. RUPPERSBERGER. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman for yielding to me. Mr. Speaker, this issue goes beyond politics. I sincerely respect and honor the active and retired members of our Armed Forces, as well as their families. I believe they deserve the respect of all Americans, and that respect should be demonstrated through words and actions. The concurrent receipts issue was new to me when I first took Federal office. Learning about a policy that is tantamount to taxing veterans for being disabled infuriates me, and ending it simply makes sense. That is why I chose to cosponsor H.R. 303 and look forward to its passage in the House. I am obviously not the only Member of this Chamber to feel this way. H.R. 303 has 366 cosponsors which is about as bipartisan as legislation can get these days. The idea of ending this disability tax appears to make sense to a supermajority, and we should have passed it months ago. Here we are again, in yet another Congress, with concurrent receipts locked up in committee since January of this year, a full nine months ago. Our actions are not matching our words. Veterans' groups and individuals across the country and in my home district, the 2nd Congressional District of Maryland, have told me that passing H.R. 303 is one of their top priorities. They want it sooner rather than later, and frankly, they deserve it. We seem to understand this on this side of the aisle, but we do not have the power to report it out of committee. We do not have the power to bring it to the floor, and we do not have the majority to pass it, but with 366 cosponsors, that should not matter. So my Democratic colleague from Georgia filed a motion to discharge the bill to bring it to the floor. The entire Democratic Caucus has signed that petition, and as of today, two Republicans have signed on. Could someone please explain to me 366 cosponsors and only 203 signatures to discharge? What is going on? I have heard that the majority leadership in the House and Senate are considering offering some version of concurrent receipts in the Department of Defense authorization. Some would prefer to wait for that option. I ask them, how much longer must we make our veterans wait when the language the veterans support, the bill they want, has already been introduced, has already been referred to committee and is ready for a vote and that is H.R. 303? The veterans' disability tax or concurrent receipts, whatever one likes to call it, has been a partisan football in the political game for a while now. I cannot comment on that, I am a freshman, and this is my first try for the end zone on this bill. Whether Democrats or Republicans win or lose in this game, the veterans do need our help. Our citizens, who served and sacrificed for freedom we enjoy every day, deserve better. If the majority leadership is serious about that issue, then let us just bring H.R. 303 to the floor and vote on it. They control the agenda, and they can bring it to the floor today, right now. Are words of respect enough? Should we not show the veterans how much we truly do respect them and their action and their sacrifices, including their families? Our side of the aisle has. We have done everything within our power. We have cosponsored the bill. We have signed the discharge petition. We have come to the floor today to speak on behalf of this bill, and we have vowed to vote for it when it reaches the floor. Our actions have matched our words. We challenge our colleagues on the other side of the aisle to do the same.

Mr. RUPPERSBERGER

Mr. RUPPERSBERGER. Mr. Speaker, as Congressman from Maryland's Second Congressional district home to Aberdeen and Fort Meade . . . I know what it means to represent our brave military men and women who continue to defend this nation abroad and here at home. Many who protect us do so with weapons . . . and many protect us in otherways. . . Fort Detrick is the premier military base for medical and biological research. The men and women that work at the Detrick have led the way in infectious disease and chemical warfare research. Detrick began as a chemical research facility housing the research branch of The Army Chemical Warfare Service. It is also the home to the Armed Forces Medical Intelligence Center (AFMIC). Detrick is also home to U.S. Army Medical Research Institute of Infectious Disease (USAMRIID). These state of the art laboratories are continuing to develop vaccines and treatments to defend against offensive bioweapons. USAMRIID also has a large staff dedicated to finding cures for cancer. I am proud that the United States has dedicated a military base to these problems and I am proud it is in the my home state of Maryland. It is imperative in this day of terrorism to be prepared for the new chemical and biological weapons. Today I am happy to honor the 60 years of research that Detrick has provided for the National Security of this Nation.

Mr. RUPPERSBERGER

Mr. RUPPERSBERGER. Mr. Speaker, on Tuesday, September 23, 2003, I was detained in Baltimore while assisting my constituents in dealing with the devastating damages from Hurricane Isabel. While estimates on the economic damages are not yet available, we do know that the hurricane damaged or destroyed 3,300 homes on the eastern shore of the Chesapeake Bay displacing thousands of Marylanders. It caused over 1.34 million Marylanders to lose power. All of Baltimore County's 70 marinas were destroyed, devastating a $225 million dollars a year industry. Thousands of businesses, including ISG's Bethlehem Steel plant, are flooded ruining their daily operations. Today, Department of Homeland Security Secretary Tom Ridge, Governor Robert Ehrlich, and I toured an area of Baltimore County that experienced extensive damage. After viewing the damage and I encouraged Secretary Ridge to expedite efforts to assist Maryland's Second Congressional district. It is important that the Federal, State and local governments work together. Hurricane Isabel devastated Maryland's Second Congressional District and I was there assisting my constituents in their discussions with the Federal Emergency Management Agency, the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, and the Small Business Administration to help re- establish their homes and businesses.

Mr. RUPPERSBERGER

Mr. RUPPERSBERGER. Mr. Chairman, I have interest in a company that does business with a financial institution that one way or another might be impacted by this legislation, so I have decided to vote present on H.R. 2622, the Fair & Accurate Credit Transactions Act and the accompanying amendments on September 10, 2003. This includes all roll call votes starting at #495 until the end of the consideration of this measure. It also includes any motion to recommit and final passage on H.R. 2622, the Fair & Accurate Credit Transaction Act. I do support the efforts of this legislation in combating identity theft and applaud authors of this measure.

Mr. RUPPERSBERGER

Mr. RUPPERSBERGER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 1 minute. The gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Hayworth) made a comment that I said that I was in favor of taxing combat pay. That is not what I said. I said when we look at the facts, a person in the military would do better by going forward with the child tax credit than not paying taxes on military combat pay. What I said was when we have our men and women risking their lives on behalf of us for our freedom and liberty, we should do both.

Mr. RUPPERSBERGER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 30 seconds to the gentleman from California (Mr. Honda).

Mr. RUPPERSBERGER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Just in response to the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Hayworth), let us crunch the numbers and get to the facts. The military families would do better with a child tax credit than no taxes on combat pay. But why are we here debating either one of them? If Members really cared about the military, men and women putting their lives on the line, we should be doing both. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. Honda).

Mr. RUPPERSBERGER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 6 minutes to the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Moran).

Mr. RUPPERSBERGER. Mr. Speaker, may I request the time remaining on both sides.

Mr. RUPPERSBERGER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself as much time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, just to respond to my friend, the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Hayworth), I think there has been some debate about refundability and about the tax credit that the Senate bill stops after 1 year. Both sides of the aisle I think have misinterpreted this to an extent based on some of the debates that I have heard. We already have a law in effect that the President signed. That law is automatic. And after this year the refundability automatically kicks in. That is what the law says. Those are the facts. So let us not confuse it. I heard the colloquy before we took the floor, an argument that the other side has been using. It is not going to stop. It kicks in automatically, and that is the law. And that is something that is important. That is fact. Secondly, if we are talking about fiscal accountability, again, the Senate bill has the set-offs. This bill does not. We are in a difficult time in this country right now. We need to be fiscally responsible. And I will say it once and I will say it again: I think it is extremely important that we work on both sides of the aisle as a team to get control of this economy and to do what is right. The Senate bill has the off-sets that are necessary for this child tax credit bill. This House version will cost us $80 billion. We cannot afford that. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes and 15 seconds to the gentleman from California (Mr. Cardoza).

Mr. RUPPERSBERGER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself as much time as I may consume. First, the gentleman from Arizona has made some good points. His rhetoric is excellent. However, I would like to get into the facts again. To begin with, the 40 million people who are not covered do pay taxes. They pay property taxes. They pay payroll taxes, Social Security taxes, sales taxes. This is not a bill that is fair for all. Secondly, the issue on fiscal accountability. I never thought, as a Democrat, I would be here asking my colleagues in the other party, on the other side of the aisle, to be more fiscally responsible. If my colleagues look at the two bills, we cannot afford this bill. The Senate bill has a setoff. It makes sense. We have enough fiscal problems right now, but if they are serious about military fairness, which we all are, and we all agree that we are, the Senate bill is at the desk right now. Let us bring it up and let us vote on it. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. RUPPERSBERGER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I have not come to the floor today to carry someone else's torch in partisan battle. I am not here to fight a political battle just for the sake of fighting one. I am here because we need to get past the idea of Democrats versus Republicans and cut to the chase. I do not have to convince anyone here today that we need a child tax credit. That is not the battle. The battle is whose version of a child tax credit this Congress will send to the President for signature. And I am here to argue that the Senate version simply makes more sense. We are facing a troubled economy, rising unemployment numbers and an exploding deficit caused by tax cuts that is just not working. We are fighting a war on terrorism, a war in Afghanistan, and a war in Iraq. We have our servicemen and -women deployed throughout the world. We are trying to do everything and we need to focus on our priorities. One thing we need right now is a child tax credit for all families, including military and veteran families, including the families of manufacturing workers, farmers, teachers, steelworkers and restaurant workers. We need to include families who have not benefited from the tax cut plan because they did not get dividend or capital gains relief from this administration's tax cut, families who need this child tax credit now to pay for housing, clothing, food and health care. Now, I have been listening to arguments from all sides. Last night I heard some of my colleagues from the other side of the aisle say that the House's version of the child tax credit does provide for all families. But this is not what the bill says. The House version does not cover all families. My colleagues on the other side of the aisle said that their bill provides for military families. But the House version does not provide specific child tax credit relief for military families. Only the Senate version does this. And the House version is expensive. It will cost over $80 billion, which will only balloon the deficit, and we simply cannot afford that right now. We need to be more fiscally responsible. We need to find solutions that fix problems without creating new ones. And the Senate version of the child tax credit does this. It provides tax relief for all American families and it does it without adding to the deficit. It is fully offset and that is more fiscally responsible. The reality is we could not have an unlimited pot of money for everything that we want or need. We have to make choices among tough priorities, and that is our job. But the House passed a tax law in May that left 6.5 million hardworking taxpaying families without a child tax credit. And we need to fix that and we need to fix it now. There has been a lot of debate and rhetoric about the House and Senate versions of the tax credit bill. I think debate is healthy, but I think the rhetoric has been misleading. Let us get to the facts. My colleagues on the other side of the aisle say we already passed a tax credit bill. We did, but it is too expensive and the wrong bill. We need the Senate version. The Senate version focuses solely on giving the 6.5 million families the child tax credit relief they need. The Senate version fixes the problem created by the last tax cut without creating more problems. The Senate version expands the child tax credit and provides relief specifically for military families, and it does not cost more money. The House version will cost over $80 billion. This will only add to our exploding deficit, and it does nothing to help our economy. The House version is not fiscally responsible. The critical question here is which version of a child tax credit helps military families more. My colleagues on the other side of the aisle argued last night that their bill provides for military families. That is true. There are military benefits in the House version of the Child Tax Credit bill, but the House version does not include a specific child tax credit benefit for military families. Instead, the House leadership has taken provisions from a completely different bill and thrown them into this bill. Military fairness is something I will always fight for, but we need to tackle the child tax credit problem now. The House bill does not do this for military families. Remember, none of the provisions in the House version provides specific child tax credit relief for military families. Only the Senate version does that. Only the Senate version considers combat pay in the formula which means that military families will receive larger tax credit relief. That is not rhetoric, that is fact. I have to ask my colleagues what message are we sending to military families. The tax cuts signed into law May 2003 cut major veterans programs, including health care and housing. These cuts will total $14.6 billion in benefits over the next 10 years. We have had proposed cuts to imminent danger and family separation pay, and I am very disturbed about this. While we were away on our August break the Department of Defense put out and attempted to cut combat pay and pay for our families that are separated. We have our American service people over in Iran and Iraq putting their lives on the line. We need to do whatever we can to support them, and for them to be over there protecting our freedom and liberty and to cut any of their combat pay or their military family separation pay is wrong. I have a letter, after hearing about this, that I sent to Secretary Rumsfeld, and I want this to be made a part of the record, asking him not to do this, that it is wrong, and I want to make this a part of the record, but to this date, I have received no response from Secretary Rumsfeld or the Department of Defense, but this is something we have to make sure we stay on top of. I will insert the letter that I referred to earlier at this point. Congress of the United States, House of Representatives, Washington, DC, August 14, 2003. Hon. Donald H. Rumsfeld, Secretary of Defense, The Pentagon, Washington, DC 20301. Dear Secretary Rumsfeld: I am very disturbed by recent press accounts of the Pentagon's attempt to decrease both imminent danger pay and family separation allowances. I am asking you for a quick response to my inquiry. We have over 148,000 troops in Iraq and 9,000 troops in Afghanistan, many military families rely on this pay to help make ends meet when their loved ones are away serving our country and fighting for our freedom. I was shocked to learn that as part of the Pentagon's interim budget request, there was a recommendation to return to the lower rates of special pay pending further inquiry by military experts. This sends the wrong message to our soldiers and their families. It says to them that the Pentagon does not care about their well being. It suggest that their efforts in Iraq and Afghanistan are no longer dangerous. In my view, we cannot let our soldiers and their families feel like we do not understand and appreciate what they are going through. Our troops face daily guerrilla attacks. They face unbearable temperature, and they have to deal with missing their families and loved ones. This is not the time to reduce their special duty pay. As Congress goes to conference on the Defense Appropriations bill, I hope that you will not proceed with the Pentagon's combat pay reduction recommendation and instead submit a request to Congress for additional funding so that we can honor our soldiers abroad and their families at home. I would also request that you support the Senate language that calls for making the increase in combat pay permanent. These men and women make a huge sacrifice and we need to make sure that they receive all the resources and compensation they need to ensure that their families are well supported. Thank you for your time and I look forward to a speedy response to our letter. Sincerely, C.A. Dutch Ruppersberger, Member of Congress. Why is this occurring? Because we do not have the money. The tax cut is not working, but we cannot take it out on our military families. We also had a $200 million cut to Impact Aid, denying military school children a decent education, again because we do not have the money. We need to reprioritize where we are putting our money, and after all these cuts, we are denying 200,000 low-income military personnel a child tax credit. That is wrong. What message do we want to send to our service men and women and their families? The House version does nothing to help military families specifically. Only the Senate version does this, and it does it without increasing the deficit. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. RUPPERSBERGER. I yield to the gentleman from Virginia.

Mr. RUPPERSBERGER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, this debate is healthy. That is what it is about in the United States Congress. We both have difference of opinions; but what we are here about today is trying to get the conference committee together so we can talk about these issues. We have already debated the merits of the bill and where we are, but now we need to come together. I would ask the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Hayworth), it has been 3 months since we have had this on the table, and the leadership in the House will not meet for a conference. It amazes me that we cannot get the conferees at least to take these issues we have discussed today and try to resolve them. The threat of partisan politics aside, this is an important issue to our country and to our military, and I would yield to the gentleman.

Mr. RUPPERSBERGER. I yield to the gentleman from Arizona.

Mr. RUPPERSBERGER. Mr. Speaker, reclaiming my time, I thank the gentleman for his comments and that he does not have the authority, but he is a very persuasive individual, a great orator, and I would hope that he uses his great expertise, with his new-found look, to help us in that regard. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Brown).

Mr. RUPPERSBERGER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Ryan).