Louise Slaughter

Ms. SLAUGHTER

Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay special tribute to a distinguished company located in New York's 28th Congressional District: Trident Precision Manufacturing Inc. President Clinton and Commerce Secretary Mickey Kantor honored Trident on December 6, 1996, by awarding it the 1996 Malcolm Baldrige National Quality Award for Small Business. The Baldrige Award, which highlights customer satisfaction, workforce empowerment, and increased productivity, is given annually to companies that symbolize America's commitment to excellence. No company could be more deserving of this award than Trident Precision Manufacturing. Trident manufactures precision sheet metal components, electro- mechanical assemblies, and custom products. It has grown from a 3 person operation at its founding in 1979 to an employer of 167 people at its facility in Webster, NY today. Between 1991 and 1995, Trident's employees submitted more than 5,000 process-improvement recommendations--and Trident's management implemented 97 percent of those ideas. It is a testament to Trident's workers and management that over that 5-year period, Trident made significant gains in productivity, efficiency, customer satisfaction, sales, and profitability. Sales per employee jumped 29 percent, time spent on rework decreased nearly 90 percent, and customer complaints fell by 80 percent. Defect rates have fallen so consistently that Trident now offers a full guarantee against defects in its custom products. In 1995, Trident's five major customers rated the quality of Trident's products at 99.8 percent or better. The company has never lost a customer to a competitor. I am delighted that President Clinton and Commerce Secretary Kantor chose to recognize Trident for its strong record of quality and its excellent business performance. This award was a result of Trident's exceptional commitment, not only to the company's bottom line, but to its employees and customers. Trident's efforts to train and reward its workers are to be particularly commended. Since 1989, Trident has invested an average of 4.4 percent of its payroll on training and education. This is a remarkable investment for a small company, and two to three times above the average for all U.S. industry. Trident represents the very best in American business: putting its customers first, trusting its employees, building quality into products and services, and being responsible corporate citizens. I am proud of Trident's success, its achievement, and of the contribution it makes to our community. Congratulations to everyone at Trident who shares in this honor.

Ms. SLAUGHTER

Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to announce the introduction of comprehensive legislation to prevent genetic discrimination in health insurance, an issue vital to the health of all Americans. Scientists are making astounding advances almost daily in decoding the secrets of our genes, especially through the contributions of the Human Genome Project. Genes have already been identified for cystic fibrosis, prostate cancer, multiple sclerosis, Huntington's disease, and many other conditions. As chair of the Women's Health Task Force of the Congressional Caucus on Women's Issues, I closely followed reports last year that increased funding for breast cancer research had resulted in the discovery of the BRCA1 gene linked to breast cancer. This knowledge has tremendous potential for improving the ways we identify, treat, and hopefully cure disorders. At the same time, there is also the very real possibility that this information could be used to discriminate against individuals. No American should have to worry that their genes--which they did not choose, and over which they have no control--will be used against them. My legislation would prohibit health insurers from using genetic information to deny, refuse to renew, cancel, or change the terms and conditions of coverage. It would prevent insurance companies from requesting or requiring genetic tests, and would require written informed consent before an insurer may disclose genetic information to a third party. These protections are absolutely critical, because genetic discrimination is already occurring. Numerous individual cases have been reported in the press. In addition, polls and studies demonstrate clearly how much the American people fear genetic discrimination by health insurers. This anxiety is so strong that many people are foregoing genetic testing--even when they have a clear family history of genetic illness and a positive test could lead them to take advantage of effective preventive medicine. This is a human tragedy Congress can and must prevent. In the 104th congress, I introduced similar legislation which garnered 76 cosponsors and was endorsed by a wide range of health and consumer groups, including: Alzheimer's Association, American Academy of Pediatrics, American Cancer Society, American Heart Association, American Medical Women's Association, American Nursing Association, American Public Health Association, Center for Patient Advocacy, Council for Responsible Genetics, Foundation on Economic Trends, and March of Dimes. Leadership Conference of National Jewish Women's Organizations, which includes: American Jewish Congress, Amit Women, B'nai B'rith, Emunah Women of America, Hadassah, Jewish Labor Committee, Jewish War Veterans, Jewish Women International, Na'amat USA, National Council of Jewish Women, Inc., National Jewish Community Relations Advisory Council, Union of American Hebrew Congregations, Women's American ORT, United Synagogue of Conservative Judaism; and National Association of Black Women Attorneys, National Breast Cancer Coalition, National Osteoporosis Foundation, National Ovarian Cancer Coalition, National Women's Health Network, National Women's Law Center, Women's Bar Association, and Women's Legal Defense Fund. I am hopeful that the 105th Congress will build upon the foundation established by the Kassebaum-Kennedy health reform bill. With this new legislation, it is my goal to ensure that no American woman will have to worry that if she takes a genetic test for the BRCA1 or BRCA2 breast cancer gene, she will lose her insurance coverage; or, that if she develops breast cancer, she will be denied coverage for treatment because her genetic predisposition will be considered a ``pre-existing condition.'' Congress has the power to protect all Americans from genetic discrimination in health insurance. We should do so quickly and decisively by passing the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination in Health Insurance Act.

Ms. SLAUGHTER

Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, today I rise to pay special tribute to the life and legacy of Mr. Howard Wilson Coles, a pioneering African- American journalist, who for 62 years resided in New York's 28th Congressional District. Mr. Coles' life came to a peaceful end on December 10, 1996, at 93 years of age. Upon completion of his formal education, Mr. Coles returned from New York City to Rochester, NY, in 1934 to become the founder and publisher of the Frederick Douglass Voice, known at this time as Rochester's only Negro newspaper. This newspaper, for 62 years, has been dedicated to showcasing the issues, challenges, and accomplishments of Rochester's African-American population. Howard Wilson Coles shall long be remembered, not only for his journalistic talents, but also for his tireless efforts and extraordinary skills in the area of civil rights. He was as well, an author, broadcast journalist, and formerly served as president of Rochester's NAACP. I take great pride in having known Mr. Coles, and in knowing his family; several of whom have followed in his giant footsteps as journalists. A true freedom fighter is now at rest. He will be sorely missed by his family, his numerous friends, and a community that he enhanced.

Ms. SLAUGHTER

Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, today I reintroduce the Protection from Sexual Predators Act. Like many of you, I am tired of picking up the morning paper and reading about the latest serial rapist to be caught, only to see printed a laundry list of his previous convictions for sexual assault. Our constituents deserve to be protected from the country's worst repeat sexual predators. The Protection from Sexual Predators Act passed the House last year by a vote of 411 to 4, and allows Federal prosecution of rapes and serious sexual assaults committed by repeat offenders. The measure requires that repeat offenders convicted under this section be automatically sentenced to life in prison without parole. In other words, two strikes, and you're in--for life. It's time we got tougher on the most violent, repeat sexual offenders. These habitual sex offenders are a different kind of criminal--their recidivism rates are incredibly high, and they are known to strike again and again. Often these serial criminals will venture from one State to another, and if they are caught, they seldom receive the harshest penalties under the current law. When my bill is passed into law, violent sexual predators such as John Suggs of New York City will not be free to rape again, and the Supreme Court will not need to deliberate whether to release lifelong child molesters back into society as in the case Kansas v. Kendricks, currently pending before the Supreme Court. This measure will make our streets and neighborhoods safer, for children, the elderly, and the women of this country. My bill will require courts to hand down tougher sentences, ridding our communities and neighborhoods of the most brutal offenders who prey upon the most vulnerable in our society.

Ms. SLAUGHTER

Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, in this past election season, spending levels for Federal elections shattered all previous records, for an estimated total of $1.6 billion. Given the vast sums of money required to run for office, wealthy individuals have a significant advantage over ordinary citizen candidates. That is hardly representative government. The cost of running for political office in America has simply become too high, and I am determined that we find a better way. On election night, I vowed to redouble my efforts to clean up our out-of-control campaign finance system. Today I am reintroducing the Fairness in Political Advertising Act, which would both reduce the cost of elections and level the playing field by requiring broadcast stations to make free political advertising time available to candidates, as a condition of those stations renewing their licenses. And because so many voters have expressed dismay over negative advertising, my bill would also require that the programming consist of unedited segments in which the candidate speaks directly into the camera. In this way, candidates would be directly accountable for any statements made. My first responsibility in this Congress is to see that the people of New York's 28th Congressional District, as well as our Nation, experience fair and clean campaigns in the years to come. The Fairness in Political Advertising Act would go a long way toward reducing the influence of money on our elections. I urge Congress to enact it now.

Ms. SLAUGHTER

Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I rise to pay tribute to the Fairport Fire Department Marching Band, which celebrated its 25th anniversary on January 4, 1997. Over the past 25 years, this group of talented musicians has spread its reputation across New York State. The band regularly participates in the St. Patrick's Day Parade in Syracuse, NY, and the ``Christmas In July'' Parade in Clayton, NY. It has received numerous prizes and honors, including winning the State championship 5 of the past 7 years. The band also has had the honor of displaying its musical talent to Vice President Al Gore. In addition to parading and competing, the players perform numerous concerts throughout the Rochester area. The Rochester community benefits immeasurably from the contributions of this dedicated and talented group of people. I extend my congratulations to them as they celebrate 25 years of making music.

Ms. SLAUGHTER

Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay special tribute to two distinguished citizens of New York's 28th District, Olindo and Filomena Di Francesco. Mr. and Mrs. Di Francesco own a small business in my district, Olindo's Food Service. For the past 10 years, they have held an annual dinner dance to benefit Camp Good Days and Special Times, Inc., a camp for children with cancer. As a result, they have successfully raised over $250,000 over the past decade to help send children with cancer to camp, to renovate camp buildings, and construct a pool for the camp's recreational facility. As they prepare once again for their annual benefit, we honor Mr. and Mrs. Di Francesco for their exceptional hard work and generosity, and commend them for their extraordinary efforts over the past 10 years on behalf of children with cancer and their families.

Ms. SLAUGHTER

Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I am here today to commend a remarkable young lady at Thomas Middle School in my district. Her name is Janet Wells. In an effort to increase awareness about community clean-up efforts, Janet contacted surrounding school districts to organize a picture drawing campaign for Members of Congress. She thought maybe a picture or two might get the attention of Washington. Little did she know how her efforts would pay off. Over 800 drawings, envelope after envelope of pictures by children imagining the world 50 years from now arrived in her mailbox. Janet shared these drawings with my staff and me. Animals and clouds in vibrant colors, in crayon, ink or wax, should be a not so gentle reminder that the decisions we in the Congress make today, whether they concern air or water quality, emissions or brownfields, profoundly shape the world Janet and her classmates will inherit. Thank you, Janet. And yes, you make a difference. It's a delight to know we live in the same community.

Ms. SLAUGHTER

Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, everything about this debate is heartbreaking. It is heartbreaking the misinformation that has been disseminated. The thing that hurts me most hurt me back in the days before abortion was legal for women. And that is that women have no rights or abilities to choose. They are not bright enough. They are not nurturing enough. They do not have enough sense. It is only up to men in suits and ties to tell them what is good for them and how to think. Imagine a scene in a doctor's office where a doctor, a woman, her husband, awaiting a baby, desperately excited about it. The doctor says, I have bad news for you. Something seriously has gone wrong and we need to discuss our options. Now, they have some options. If this Congress has its ways, they will not. I remember as I grew up, young girls, knew that their future at the point of giving birth, if there was to be a choice between their lives or the baby would die. I remember kids, when I was growing up, who had no mother. She had died in childbirth. The woman who would have been my mother-in-law died in childbirth. My husband had a very difficult time ever finding out anything about her. No one wanted to talk about her. Before I gave birth to my first child, I worried terribly about that. I wondered, if my husband would be married again, would he marry a woman, as my father-in-law had, someone who would never discuss who I was or what I meant. Now, fewer women die in childbirth. There are options. How in the world can we make these kinds of decisions? It is the height of hypocrisy for Congress to decide. These babies that are aborted are desperately wanted. If they were not wanted, if the woman did not want this baby, she would have had the abortion early. There would have been no question about it. After waiting this long, carrying that child, you may believe me that child is wanted. The tragedy of a woman who said she could feel life and learned later that this was only seizures because the baby's brain was outside its body, the tragedy of a woman whose fetus had no lungs and yet people on radio programs said to her, why could you not give it the chance to live. How could it live? Can we please be sensible here and determine that American men and women really want what is best for their families. If we talk family values and family love, we have to say that families have some right to make some choices without an infallible Congress interfering.

Ms. SLAUGHTER

Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, the United States suffered a terrible loss with the recent bombing in Centennial Park in Atlanta. We lost our innocence and our faith it will never happen here. It is becoming increasingly probable that black or smokeless powder was involved in the construction of this deadly pipe bomb. I have introduced legislation during the last two Congresses that would help identify the perpetrators of this act. The Bombing Prevention Act, H.R. 43, would avert future deaths, save lives, and prevent families and our Nation as a whole from going through the anguish that terrorism leaves in its wake. Specifically, my bill would require every person who purchases explosives including more than five pounds of black or smokeless powder to hold a Federal permit. They would have to provide their name and address to the vendor, and indicate the purpose of the explosives purchase. This information would be invaluable to law enforcement officials investigating terrorism. Under current law, any purchase of less than 50 pounds of black powder is exempt from Federal oversight. This is crazy--50 pounds can unleash dreadful destruction. It would be a crime in itself if this Congress were to adjourn on Friday and go home without addressing this issue that has terrified every American from sea to shining sea.

Ms. SLAUGHTER

Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I was unable to be present for rollcall votes 317 through 326 earlier this week. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yea'' or ``aye'' on rollcall votes 317, 319, 320, 324, 325, and 326 and ``nay'' or ``no'' on rollcall votes 318, 321, 322, and 323.

Ms. SLAUGHTER

Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Chairman, I rise today to offer an amendment designed to take steps toward putting an end to genetic discrimination in health insurance. With progress being made through the human genome project and other genetic research, we are making new discoveries at a startling pace about the genes associated with different disorders. Indeed, most geneticists say that with the exception of trauma, every disease of the body has a genetic component. Genes have been located already that are linked to breast cancer, to Alzheimer's disease, Parkinson's disease, basal cell carcinoma, to name just a few. Unfortunately, some insurance companies are already using these medical advances to deny health insurance to consumers. A woman carrying the BRCA01 breast cancer gene may find her insurer drops her coverage entirely or denies her coverage in the event that she develops breast cancer. In addition, some companies are discriminating against policyholders based on their blood relatives' genetic information. Children are being denied coverage for disorders that their parents develop. Mr. Chairman, we should put an end to this reprehensible practice. My amendment will provide additional resources in the Department of Labor's Pension Benefits and Welfare Administration, which is responsible for regulating ERISA plans. I am thoroughly committed to trying to make sure that the antidiscrimination legislation is passed by Congress and PBWA should be prepared to enforce this law when it is. Mr. Chairman, I urge my colleagues in the strongest possible terms to support this amendment as well as my genetic nondiscrimination bill, H.R. 2748. In conclusion, Mr. Chairman, I would like to thank the gentleman from Illinois, Chairman Porter. From the day I arrived in Washington, I have recognized in him a superb public servant, and, frankly, I consider him to be one of my best friends and one of the finest Members of Congress. I thank him for his consideration.

Ms. SLAUGHTER. I yield to the gentleman from Illinois.

Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.

Ms. SLAUGHTER

Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I was unable to be present for rollcall vote numbers 272 and 273, taken earlier today. Had I been present, I would have voted ``aye'' on both rollcall 272 and rollcall 273.

Ms. SLAUGHTER

Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in strong opposition to the Shadegg amendment. This amendment is representative of the continuous assault on the arts by my colleagues on the other side of the aisle. Frankly, I am amazed at my colleagues' attempts to rob our citizens of one of the most precious aspects of our society. The National Endowment for the Humanities is the single largest source of support for the humanities. While humanities activities in our Nation would still exist without the NEH, they would not longer be accessible to the entire country. They would in all likelihood be reserved only for the rich who could afford them. What would the constituents of our districts say when there is no NEH to support museums or libraries or to preserve historical documents; when there is no longer an NEH to teach generations to come about history, literature, and philosophy, about who we are as Americans? Last year, NEH was cut by a massive 36 percent. This required the NEH to reduce from 6 grant divisions to 3; from 31 grant programs to 9; and from 276 staff positions to 120. In addition, some grant programs were hurt more than others. The Research and Education Division--including teacher training programs and Presidential papers--was cut by 60 percent. Through the NEH, in fiscal year 1995, more than 2,600 high school and college teachers attended summer seminars and institutes. Over 400,000 students were taught by these teachers who had better mastery of the subject area, and greater enthusiasm for teaching after participating in this program. With fiscal year 1996 funds, NEH will only be able to support 1,400 teachers, reaching 220,000 students--almost half as many as before. Obviously these facts do not impress my colleagues as evidenced by their attempts to cut funding for the NEH even further. The NEH has long been attentive to the educational needs of our Nation's children. The public programming made available to children through NEH funding has been wonderful. Sadly, funding for the NEH's public programs have been cut by 40 percent, which means there will be fewer dollars available for children's programming. Mr. Chairman, I urge my colleagues to defeat this ill-conceived amendment.

Ms. SLAUGHTER

Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I was pleased to read today that the New Jersey Legislature approved legislation to prohibit health insurance companies from discriminating against consumers based on their genetic information. This bill was passed unanimously, showing the broad, bipartisan consensus on the need for the legislation. On the Federal level, I have introduced comprehensive legislation to ban discrimination in health insurance. No one, Mr. Speaker, should be punished for simply having the genes they inherited. We are already hearing terrible stories about people denied coverage for genetic disorders because of preexisting conditions. Our understanding of genetics and the role they play in disease are progressing at breakneck speed, especially through programs like the Human Genome Project. We have identified genes associated with breast cancer, cystic fibrosis, Alzheimer's, and, most recently, skin cancer. Our lives must keep pace to protect consumers from the abuse of personal information and that protection should be nationwide. Therefore, I urge my colleagues to support H.R. 2847, cosponsored in the Senate by Senator Snowe of Maine.

Ms. SLAUGHTER

Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that my name be removed as a cosponsor of H.R. 2618.

Ms. SLAUGHTER

Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding time to me. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in opposition to the conference report on the fiscal year 1997 budget resolution. As a conferee, I am pleased that we were able to increase overall nondefense discretionary spending by $3.5 billion over the House-passed resolution. But, make no mistake about it: This budget contains the same lack of vision and assault on investment spending, that we saw in the fiscal year 1996 Budget proposal, which has been rejected by the President and the American public. In addition, this budget turns back the clock on deficit reduction. For the fourth straight year in a row, the deficit has declined. Let's not reverse this trend and act to increase the deficit by $60 billion in 2 years. The stakes are too high. The overall adjustment in domestic discretionary spending is an improvement. But, the budget before us today still assumes a sizable tax cut for the wealthy; deep reductions in Medicare and Medicaid and critical investment programs to off-set the tax cut; and a sizable increase in taxes for working individuals. The $3.5 billion offers some relief, but it should be pointed out that if this 6-year plan is adopted, the purchasing power of overall nondefense discretionary appropriations will be 24 percent below fiscal year 1996 levels. This will require deep cuts in education, environmental protections, biomedical research, nutritional assistance, and criminal justice. At a time when we should be enhancing our investment in these programs, we are acting to impose an overall reduction of 24 percent by the year 2002. While the agreement assumes tax cuts targeted to the affluent, it does not treat working families and individuals the same way. You can call the cuts in the earned income tax credit an adjustment, but this adjustment will result in approximately a $18.5 billion tax increase for working families and those individuals struggling to remain self sufficient. If we truly want real welfare reform that rewards work, we cannot reduce the size of the very tax credit which does reward work. This budget proposal is filled with these types of contradictions and inconsistencies. And that is why we should reject this conference report. We can balance the budget without implementing radical and unnecessary Medicare and Medicaid cuts and dismantling the core social responsibilities of the Federal Government. I beg my colleagues to vote ``no'' on this conference report and send a message that extreme policies will not work. We can do a better job.

Ms. SLAUGHTER

Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor Father Elmer William Joseph Heindl as he celebrates 60 years of ministry. Father Heindl is a remarkable man of faith who has devoted his entire life to the service of God and his parishioners. Father Heindl began his career as a priest in 1936. Shortly after he responded to the calling from God, he dutifully responded to the calling of our country by serving as an army chaplain in World War II to comfort and care for our troops. He came home after 7 years of service as the most decorated chaplain to serve in World War II. His dedication to veterans is exemplified by his continued service as chaplain to several veterans groups both in the Rochester area and across the country. Upon his return from World War II, Father Heindl served in a number of parishes in upstate New York until his retirement in 1980. Well into his retirement, Father Heindl remains active in the parish of Saint Charles Borromeo in Rochester, NY. He spends a great deal of time visiting with the children in Saint Charles Borromeo School. In 1994 Heindl House was dedicated on the Saint Charles property as the home for the Saint Charles preschool program and the site of the Saint Charles before school after school day care program. Father Heindl is to be commended for his selfless dedication to all of his parishioners throughout his 60 years of ministry. The Rochester community is proud of him and honored that he chooses to spend his time working in the Saint Charles Borromeo Church. I believe Father Heindl and his lifetime commitment to the spiritual fulfillment of others warrants the recognition of all of my colleagues as well.

Ms. SLAUGHTER

Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to send a warning to my colleagues who believe that Medicare and Medicaid reductions will not reduce the availability of affordable quality health care for millions of low-income children, senior citizens and the disabled. I would direct all of my colleagues to an article in the June 4 New York Times which illustrates the impact on private hospitals of Medicaid reductions and the explosion of managed care. The result is that many hospitals are in serious financial danger and will ultimately close. My warning to other Members is to think about their own districts and States. If hospitals in New York can close even before the full implementation of a $158 billion reduction in Medicare and a $72 billion reduction in Medicaid, what are the implications for the other States? New York has always taken pride in the level of investment in health care. Can other States make the same claim? I recognize the need to control Medicare and Medicaid spending, but the Republican budget proposal goes well beyond fiscal responsibility and will result in a reduction in health care services. We can help encourage greater efficiency in hospital operations, we can help encourage the lack of overutilization in hospitals and we can encourage savings, but New York hospitals closing should sound a warning bell to all Members of Congress.

Ms. SLAUGHTER

Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in strong support of the Skaggs amendment, and to express my continued concern about the relentless attacks the new majority continues to make on women. And this time their attack spreads to women and families across the globe. Once again, Mr. Chairman, we have before us a bill which will inhibit international organizations from providing needed family planning services. Not only does this bill potentially cut off funding for those organizations which provide these needed health services, but it limits population assistance funds to 65 percent of the total amount appropriated in fiscal year 1995. We must realize the unintended consequence of such action. Some Members of the majority who oppose a woman's constitutional right to choose are expanding the scope of their opposition to cover all family planning activities. In so doing, these harmful provisions only serve to increase the risk of unintended pregnancies, unplanned births, and unnecessary abortions. It simply doesn't make sense to inhibit the activities which are intended to prevent abortions. And this bill, by limiting population assistance and those who provide it, does just that. Mr. Chairman, I am gravely concerned about the language in this bill which will endanger the health of women around the world. I urge my colleagues to closely examine these provisions, consider the unintended consequences, and support the Skaggs amendment.

Ms. SLAUGHTER

Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, it is with pleasure that I call your attention to the retirement of the president of the Rochester Labor Council, AFL-CIO Ronald G. Pettengill. Ron is not only an esteemed labor leader and team player, he is also a wonderful friend, whose hard work and dedication will be greatly missed. Ron joined the United Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners in 1955, first as an apprentice, then as a journeyman carpenter, and later as a leader in Local 85. During his tenure the brotherhood's membership significantly grew and the joint apprenticeship program and journeyman training program greatly expanded. Ron has also served with distinction as the president of the Rochester Labor Council since 1985. He has worked tirelessly to increase the council's influence. Since he assumed the presidency, the council's membership has grown dramatically and now even has a full- time staff person to coordinate the council's activities. Ron's accomplishments take on even greater significance when viewed in the context of the current work environment. The labor movement must look to quality leaders, like Ron, to fight for worker protection and fair compensation. He has always stood by my side as we fought to promote the interests of our community's working men and women. Mr. Speaker, it is my pleasure to publicly commend the achievements of Ron Pettengill and to wish him a long and healthy retirement.

Ms. SLAUGHTER

Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding. We are still talking here today about the need to balance the budget, to reduce the burden on future generations. That is important, and I certainly concur with that belief. But I think it is very important too that we protect future generations and ensure that a good quality of life is going to be available to our grandchildren as was available to us. The Republican budget resolution does not adhere to this principle. The amendment before us now, which incorporates President Clinton's 6- year balanced budget plan, will continue to invest in our children. It will provide quality, affordable health care to our senior citizens and the disabled, provide tax incentives targeted to the middle class and stimulate further economic growth and development. The choice before us is simple: We either invest now in critical programs aimed at improving the quality and standard of living in the United States, programs like education, community development, biomedical research, national assistance, public safety, small business development, trade promotion, clean air and clean water, and so forth. Or we can refuse to meet the basic responsibilities of the Federal Government and turn our backs on the most vulnerable, the senior citizen, the children, the disabled, and the poor. I support investing in the future, and I will support the Sabo amendment. I urge my colleagues too, as well. I hope you would carefully review this proposal because many of the policy assumptions that were included in the budget have always enjoyed bipartisan support. The budget, as I stated before, it balanced. It includes real middle-class tax cuts without adding to the deficit or without using Medicare cuts to pay for tax cuts for the rich. It includes a proposal to give premium subsidies to individuals who lose their health insurance when they lose their jobs. It also assumes real increases in biomedical research, maintains a strong commitment to civilian research and development, increases our investment again in our children in education. It also calls for the restoration of tax fairness by targeting tax relief to the real middle class, and the amendment assumes the deduction for qualifying. This is most important. The deduction of $5,000 a year to educate and training expenses in 1996, 1997, and 1998 and in 1999 raises it to $10,000.

Ms. SLAUGHTER

Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Texas [Mr. Doggett].