Nick Smith

Mr. SMITH of Michigan

Mr. SMITH of Michigan. Mr. Speaker, I rise on behalf of all of us in the United States House of Representatives to pay tribute to several individuals who have contributed significantly to the operation and success of the 108th Congress of the United States. I take this opportunity to especially recognize and thank the members of my personal staff for their outstanding work and dedication in serving the constituents of the Seventh Congressional District of Michigan. I want to commend their exemplary service in helping citizens, especially when the federal government bureaucracy was bogged down or hadn't addressed the real needs of the people. I praise my staff for their efforts to analyze and develop legislation that will make our country stronger and better in the future. The individuals I pay tribute to today are: Keith Brown, Jennifer Burg, Dan Byers, Mary Christ, Soren Dayton, David Finger, Alan Knapp, Ruth Mayday, Greg Moore, Ammani Nagesh, Jared Page, David Rawson, Lindy Salem, Peter Saling, Kurt Schmautz, Ed Sharkey, Heather Smith, Priscilla Smith, Lee VanWychen, and Wendy Wieringa, and Gary Wolfram. I applaud my staff's commitment to serving the people of this great nation and I extend my heartfelt thanks to them for their insight and hard work. It is individuals such as these that make members of Congress successful, enabling us to perform and serve in the best possible manner. On behalf of the United States Congress, I wish each of them the very best and every success in all their future endeavors.

Mr. SMITH of Michigan

Mr. SMITH of Michigan. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor John and Julia Komai of Jackson, Michigan. Born in Liberia, both John and Julia have dedicated their lives to improving the plight of Liberians and restoring peace and democracy to Liberia. John first came to the United States in the 1950's to attend Spring Arbor High School and later Spring Arbor College. He completed degrees at Greenville College in Greenville, Illinois; Chicago State University in Chicago, Ill; McCormick Theological Seminary in Chicago, Illinois; and Loyola University Graduate School of Education. An ordained Presbyterian Minister, Dr. Komai was Pastor-at-Large and Supervisor of Missions for the Community Presbyterian Church in Libera, as well as Founder and President of Jobai International Development Corporation to support mission development. In 1984, Dr. Komai was appointed to the Ministry of Education, and served as the Director of the World Bank and African Development Bank education projects for the Republic of Liberia. Born in Zlehtown, Liberia, June 7, 1947, Julia grew up there and in Monrovia. A strident and outspoken believer in the dignity of all people, she was jailed as a political prisoner in 1979 for speaking out against human rights abuses committed by then-President William Tolbert. She was freed in 1980 when Samuel Doe came to power. Julia served as the Assistant Director of the African Unity Conference Center from 1982 to 1990. She and John fled Liberia during the coup-de-etat of 1989, walking 300 miles to reach Sierra Leone, surviving on grass and sleeping wherever they could. Julia passed away suddenly on November 23, 2004 in an automobile accident. She will be forever remembered for her generous spirit and enthusiasm for life. In the face of hardships most Americans cannot begin to imagine, she persevered. Hers is a story of hope and boundless optimism, of dedication to ideals greater than herself. She loved her native land and hoped to return there someday. I am proud to join the many friends and admirers of John and Julia Komai in recognizing their dedication to the restoration of peace and democracy to their homeland of Liberia. I extend my condolences to Julia's family and friends. May she rest in peace, and may her memory live on in those whose lives she touched.

Mr. SMITH of Michigan

Mr. SMITH of Michigan. I rise today to honor the 2004 Chelsea Area Citizen of the Year, Mr. Jack Merkel. A lifelong resident of Chelsea, Jack Merkel has dedicated his life to the betterment of his community. Mr. Merkel is a respected business owner, community leader, husband, father, and grandfather. He has served on countless boards and commissions throughout his life, including the Chelsea Village Council, Mayor of Chelsea, Chelsea Community Hospital, Silver Maples of Chelsea, Chelsea Area Chamber of Commerce, Chelsea City Charter Commission, and is an active member of St. Mary's Catholic Church. A distinguished businessman, Jack and his brother, Bob, owned and operated Merkel's Furniture, a Chelsea landmark, for 46 years. Mr. Merkel was the leader of the Chelsea Cityhood initiative. Over 12 years, he provided tireless leadership, focus, and support to the project, which culminated in a City Charter first approved by the State of Michigan and approved by the residents of Chelsea in March of 2004. On behalf of the Congress of the United States of America, I am proud to honor Mr. Jack Merkel for his commitment to family and community, and his dedication to improving his hometown. We commend him for his selfless service to others, and honor his contributions to his community.

Mr. SMITH of Michigan

Mr. SMITH of Michigan. Mr. Speaker, football is a great American tradition. In Michigan, this tradition is personified by the Lumen Christi Titans, who on November 27, 2004, won their 7th State Championship Title at the Pontiac Silverdome in Pontiac, Michigan. I rise today to honor the 2004 Lumen Christi Titans: Tyler Aldridge, Josh Badall, Alex Belfey, Eddie Bellers, Michael Berkemeier, Andrew Biskupski, Mike Blair, Blake Brannick, Patrick Brogan, Corey Burris, Mike Calderone, B.J. Carter, Conor Coffman, Daniel Coolbaugh, Blake Davis, Trevor Elinski, Eric Ewing, Andy Flippo, Ken Gallant, Golden Gibson, Ben Gier, John Gurriero, Evan Hagan, Andy Horning, Luke Jarzynka, Corey Johnson, Kyle Johnstone, Doug Karasek, Guy Kennedy, Brent Kuntz, Stephen Kutyna, Ryan LaMarre, Mark Lathers, Marty Lozier, Nick Lefere, Dan Lusty, Nick Maes, Joe Marcantel, Trevor Markovich; Sean Miller, Tyler Moran, Josh McCormick, Ben Neville, Tony Panici, Michael Patchak, Brad Polnasek, Ken Powers, Marc Powers, Ryan Powers, Joe Putra, John Riley, Phil Riley, Kent Richardson, Sean Richardson, Michael Risner, Jon Ryan, Jeremy Sauter, Brent Schaefer, Corey Skinner, Abram Soper, Alex Soper, Kyle Strong, Kelly Thompson, Sean Thompson, Brandon Vinson, Derek Walker, Mark Warfield, Chris Weeks, Matt Weeks, Terrell Willis, Terrence Willis, Jeff Wojtusik; Managers Coley Crowley and Christopher Gaddy, Trainer Todd Sparks and Assistant Trainer Sarah Duffey. These fine young men were coached by Head Coach Herb Brogan, and Assistant Coaches Mike Armeli, Sean Brogan, Ken Dillon, Ted Cole, Dick Corser, Dan Crowley, Jason Idziak, Pete Lefere, Joff Marcantel, Matt Reesor, Frank Slaby, Tim Sullivan, Jerry Sykes, Mike Tash, and Joe Williams. Led by Team Captains Doug Karasek, Luke Jarzynka, and B.J. Carter, these 72 young men worked diligently throughout the season to achieve this laudable goal. Despite a difficult start to the season, the Titans continued to work as a team and won 9 consecutive games to win the title. The Titans have been Division V State champs four of the last five years, and have won three of those titles with no points scored against them. The Titans are the only team in Michigan that has won more than six State titles without losing a single State championship title game. This honor is also a testament to the parents, students, and community who have supported and influenced this team and this program throughout the years. I am proud to join with their many admirers, friends and fans in extending my highest praise and congratulations to the 2004 Lumen Christi Titans for their outstanding football season.

Mr. SMITH of Michigan

Mr. SMITH of Michigan. Mr. Speaker, it is with sadness that I rise today in honor of Dr. Henry (Harry) Moniba, former Vice President of Liberia. Dr. Moniba died suddenly on November 23, 2004, as a result of an automobile accident. He was born in Liberia on October 22, 1937. Dr. Moniba earned a Bachelor of Science degree in Secondary Education in 1964, a Masters degree in Secondary Education from SUNY, participated in a post-Masters program in International Relations and European Studies at NYU, and as a Fulbright Scholar, earned a Ph.D. in International Relations and African Studies at Michigan State University. He began his professional career as an educator. A strong believer in the power of a good education, Dr. Moniba once stated: ``If you think education is expensive, then, try ignorance''. He served in various capacities in the education field, from classroom teacher to Director of Research at the Ministry of Education in Monrovia, Liberia. Dr. Moniba had a long and distinguished career in public service. He served as First Secretary and Consul for the Embassy of Liberia in Washington, D.C., and Ottawa, Canada from 1976-1980; from 1981-1984, he served as Assistant Minister of Foreign Affairs for European Affairs, Liberia; he was the Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary of the Republic of Liberia, to the Court of St. James in London, England, the Vatican, and the Sovereign Military Order Malta, in Rome from 1981- 1984. In 1984, he was appointed Vice President of the Interim National Assembly Government of Liberia, and in 1985, elected to the office of Vice President of Liberia. In 1994, he was awarded the Human Rights Award from the Liberian Human Rights Chapter. Dr. Moniba loved his country, and worked tirelessly to establish peace and prosperity for Liberia. He understood well the true role of a politician in a democratic society, and said: ``The objective of the good politician cannot, therefore, be the acquisition of power for its own sake or at and cost. What he wants is a healthy political environment in which he and his fellow citinens can lead a fulfilling life.'' At the time of his death, Dr. Moniba was one of the leading candidates for the 2005 Liberian presidential eption. I join his family and his many admirers throughout the world in mourning his passing. May his tireless commitment to his homeland and the advancement of peace and democracy in Liberia stand as a timeless memorial to him. May God bless him and his family, and may he rest in peace.

Mr. SMITH of Michigan

Mr. SMITH of Michigan. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on H.R. 2760.

Mr. SMITH of Michigan

Mr. SMITH of Michigan. Mr. Speaker, I offer an amendment in the nature of a substitute.

Mr. SMITH of Michigan. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on International Relations be discharged from further consideration of the bill (H.R. 2760) to limit United States assistance for Ethiopia and Eritrea if those countries are not in compliance with the terms and conditions of agreements entered into by the two countries to end hostilities and provide for a demarcation of the border between the two countries, and for other purposes, and ask for its immediate consideration in the House.

Mr. SMITH of Michigan

Mr. SMITH of Michigan. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.

Mr. SMITH of Michigan. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on International Relations be discharged from further consideration of the Senate bill (S. 2292) to require a report on acts of anti-Semitism around the world, and ask for its immediate consideration in the House.

Mr. SMITH of Michigan

Mr. SMITH of Michigan. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on H.R. 2608.

Mr. SMITH of Michigan

Mr. SMITH of Michigan. Mr. Speaker, H.R. 2608 authorizes two important interagency programs to coordinate the federal government's efforts to mitigate the loss of life and property from earthquakes and windstorms. I'd like to thank Congressman Neugebauer for all of his hard work and effort as the author and driving force behind the National Windstorm Impact Reduction Program. I'd also like to thank Congressman Lofgren for helping me craft the National Earthquake Hazards Reduction Program reauthorization and shepherding it through the legislative process. Damaging earthquakes are inevitable, however infrequent they may be. Total annualized damages from earthquakes in the United States are estimated to be about $4.4 billion in direct financial losses. The 1994 Northridge earthquake in California (magnitude 6.7) was the most costly in U.S. history, causing over $40 billion in damages. Further, all or parts of 39 states are within zones where the probability of an earthquake occurring is great. Recent research indicates that areas in the eastern and central United States are at greater risk of earthquake occurrence than earlier evidence indicated. The threat from earthquakes is constant and far reaching. Indeed, earthquakes are clearly not just a state or regional problem, but a nationwide problem, demanding nationwide mitigation. Accordingly, the federal government mitigates earthquakes through the comprehensive National Earthquake Hazards Reduction Program, also known as ``NEHRP''. Over the past week, significant earthquake events in California and Washington have garnered our attention and concern. NEHRP-supported monitoring equipment managed by the U.S. Geological Survey and the national Science Foundation have resulted in an unprecedented harvest of data from both the Mr. St. Helens volcanic activity as well as the 6.0 Parkfield Earthquake on the San Andreas Fault. This information will undoubtedly lead to important advances in our understanding of earthquakes, and ultimately in our ability to prepare for and respond to them. But much room for improvement still exists. Our vulnerability to earthquakes continues to increase. Widespread developments still occurs unabated in areas of high seismic risk. Despite the existence of new knowledge and tools produced by the program, development, adoption, and enforcement of pertinent building codes have been incremental and slower than expected. The private sector has not had adequate incentives, and state and local governments have generally not had adequate budgets, to adopt NEHRP innovations. It is clear that NEHRP needs to be strengthened. Several aspects of program leadership and coordination continue to be an ongoing problem. Knowledge and awareness of these needs within the Office of Management and Budget, relevant appropriators--and even to some degree NEHRP agencies--has been too low. Many outside of the small community of earthquake interests are unaware that this coordinated effort even exists. These factors are addressed in the legislation before us today. U.S. House of Representatives, Committee on Science, Washington, DC, October 8, 2004. Hon. Don Young, Chairman, Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, House of Representatives, Washington, DC. Dear Mr. Chairman: I appreciate your support for the Senate amendment to H.R. 2608, the National Earthquake Hazards Reduction Program Reauthorization Act of 2004. As your letter indicates, the Senate amendment includes provisions from both the House version of H.R. 2608 and H.R. 3980, the National Windstorm Impact Reduction Act of 2004. I agree that by permitting this bill to be brought before the House and not objecting to its passage by unanimous consent, the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure does not waive its jurisdiction over certain provisions of H.R. 2608, as amended by the Senate. Thank you for your consideration regarding this matter. Sincerely, Sherwood L. Boehlert, Chairman. U.S. House of Representatives, Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, Washington, DC, October 8, 2004. Hon. Sherwood Boehlert, Chairman, Committee on Science, House of Representatives, Washington, DC. Dear Chairman Boehlert: I understand that H.R. 2608, the National Earthquake Reduction Program Reauthorization Act of 2004 has just passed the Senate and incorporates provisions contained in H.R. 3980, the National Windstorm Impact Reduction Act of 2004. I note that in Title I of H.R. 2608, as amended by the Senate, the Director of the Federal Emergency Management Agency is directed to: ``operate a program of grants and assistance which would enable States to develop preparedness and response plans, prepare inventories and conduct seismic safety inspections of critical structures and lifelines, update building and zoning codes and ordinances to enhance seismic safety, increase earthquake awareness and education, and encourage the development of multi-State groups for such purposes.'' As you know, both of these measures contain provisions within the jurisdiction of the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee. I recognize your desire to bring these important matters before the House in an expeditious manner and I, therefore, do not object to passing them by unanimous consent. By agreeing to this, however, the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure does not waive its jurisdiction over H.R. 2608, as amended by the Senate. I would appreciate it if you would place a copy of this letter and your response in the Congressional Record when the bill is considered on the House Floor. I would also like to incorporate into this letter, by reference, the letter included in the Record when the House of Representatives considered H.R. 3980 on July 7th and 8th, 2004. Thank you for your cooperation in this matter. Sincerely, Don Young, Chairman.

Mr. SMITH of Michigan. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to take from the Speaker's table the bill (H.R. 2608) to reauthorize the National Earthquake Hazards Reduction Program, and for other purposes, with a Senate amendment thereto, and concur in the Senate amendment.

Mr. SMITH of Michigan

Mr. SMITH of Michigan. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on H.R. 5245.

Mr. SMITH of Michigan

Mr. SMITH of Michigan. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Science be discharged from further consideration of the bill (H.R. 5245) to extend the liability indemnification regime for the commercial space transportation industry, and ask for its immediate consideration in the House.

Mr. SMITH of Michigan

Mr. SMITH of Michigan. Mr. Speaker, I thank the chairman for yielding me this time, and I thank the ranking member, the staff, and the rest of the members for doing a good job on this bill. I am an outside member because my Subcommittee on Research on the Committee on Science overseas the U.S. Fire Administration, and this legislation reauthorizes the Fire Grant program. By the end of this year, we will have 25,000 fire grants awarded in the United States, and I understand that every congressional district will have had a grant to a fire department in their district or operating for their district. Volunteers in the United States cover most of the fire protection for areas of the United States. One concern in this fire grant bill reauthorization was that the Senate rejected an offer by the House to encourage volunteers. Let me tell you what happened. In the language in our House bill we had a bipartisan provision that said you cannot discriminate against full-time firefighters volunteering when they go back to their home districts. We were told that the IAFF opposed and that it would be thrown out and the Senate conferees would rather have no fire grant program than have that language in the bill. So sadly for volunteers that language is not in the bill. But everybody should understand that volunteer firefighters are incredibly selfless, putting their lives at risk for usually no reward greater than the knowledge that they are making their community a safer place. Many career firefighters actually get their start as volunteers, only joining the paid department after they have attained a basic level of training and experience. The fire grant program is an excellent program. Volunteers in the United States add enormously to our first- line home protection and volunteerism should be encouraged. Passage of this legislation will extend the Assistance to Firefighters Grant Program through 2009. The fire grant program was started 5 years ago in this bill. It has dramatically improved public safety in this country. Through fiscal year 2003, nearly 17,000 fire departments have received assistance to purchase vital equipment, vehicles, and training, and it is estimated that an additional 8,000 will receive grants this year. The fire grant program is extremely effective for our homeland defense. Grants are distributed based on the recommendations of panels of nonbiased firefighters, who rank grant applications based on merit. The funding goes straight to the departments that need it most without being held up by political considerations, complex formulas or bureaucratic red tape. Unfortunately, the reauthorization will do nothing to protect career firefighters from being discriminated against for volunteering during off-duty hours. Many career firefighters who volunteer in their home communities when they aren't at work are actually harassed for doing so. In some career fire departments, volunteering can even be grounds for termination. The House bill to reauthorize the fire grant program, H.R. 4107, included important language prohibiting a fire department that receives grant funds from discriminating against, or prohibiting its members from engaging in volunteer activities during off-duty hours. A provision was unanimously supported by the bipartisan leaders of the House Congressional Fire Services Caucus. Unfortunately, we ran into a brick wall when we got to conference. The Senate conferees were prepared to forgo reauthorizing the fire grant program altogether if the volunteer nondiscrimination language was included. Their position didn't even budge when we offered to compromise by simply calling for a study on the issue. Volunteer fire departments are vital in protecting small communities, especially in rural areas like my hometown of Addison, Michigan. Volunteer firefighters are incredibly selfless, putting their lives at risk for no reward greater than the knowledge that they are making their community a safer place to live. Many career firefighters actually get their start as volunteers, only joining a paid department after they have attained a basic level of training and experience. It is unfair that any volunteer would be told that he or she must choose between a job and volunteering to protecting their friends and neighbors. They should be able to provide their invaluable skills, knowledge and expertise to their hometown departments without harassment and retribution from employers. Eliminating volunteer firefighters would compromise safety in thousands of communities across the country like my own that simply do not have the resources to maintain anything but a volunteer or combination fire department. And yet a provision that would have protected these noble public servants was unacceptable to our counterparts on the other side of the Capitol. What compelling argument was it that convinced them to risk reauthorizing the fire grant program? How did they become so intractable as to be willing to turn their backs on a program that they have a strong history of supporting, even over a study? The International Association of Fire Fighters, IAFF, established the position that the Senate conferees ended up adopting. The IAFF opposed passage of H.R. 4107 because of the volunteer nondiscrimination provision. This isn't surprising seeing as their own constitution prohibits members from volunteering. I think they figure that if you get rid of all the volunteers, municipalities will be forced to hire new full time union members. Maybe this makes sense to union lobbyists in Washington, but it doesn't seem fair to the thousands of career firefighters that choose to volunteer out of a sense of civic duty, and it reflects poorly on the Senate conferees who sided with the IAFF over rank and file firefighters and the interests of public safety. Announcement by the Speaker Pro Tempore

Mr. SMITH of Michigan

Mr. SMITH of Michigan. Mr. Speaker, looking forward to 2005, there are few more important issues for government than overspending and overpromising. Unless we get spending under control, government will lose the ability to do much of anything else except manage our indebtedness. Already we pay nearly $300 billion a year, approaching 12 percent of our total expenditures for interest on the debt. That is $300 billion a year on interest. And interest rates are going up, our debt is going up, and that cost is rising very rapidly. This fight will influence the kind of lives that our kids have. Why do we not pay attention to the problems of the insolvency of Social Security and Medicare? Why do we not look at the problems that this kind of overpromising and overspending are going to have on the economy of the United States? The challenge facing Congress will be to restore our reputation for fiscal restraint. The Federal Government is now running the largest budget deficit in our history, which is estimated to be $574 billion for the fiscal year that just ended September 30, and we will soon have to increase the $7.384 trillion statutory debt limit in order to accommodate this borrowing, which our children and our grandchildren are ultimately going to have to assume the responsibility for. I cannot think of harsher words than maybe unconscionable, maybe too interested in our political futures to do what is necessary to deal with these tough problems. This overexpenditure, the debt, is only a small part of the total problem. Overpromising is the larger issue, and that deals with the chart I have before us tonight, and that is this massive unfunded liability. The deficit and debt, unfortunately, are only the beginning of our financial problems. These figures come from Dr. Tom Savings, who is a professor of economics at Texas A&M and also a trustee for both Social Security and Medicare. He has calculated that the total unfunded liabilities for the three programs of Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security are now $73.5 trillion. That means to accommodate our promises we are going to have to come up with $73 billion, put it in our savings account, and that is going to draw interest, at least to accommodate inflation, to keep the promises. There is no way we can do this. We are headed for a reality of the financial sky is falling on the United States Congress. The issues of changing the programs have been demagogued so that Republicans can accuse Democrats when they suggest any change, and Democrats can accuse the Republicans of ruining Social Security and Medicare. In conclusion, let me briefly run down through the unfunded liabilities of the different parts. Medicare part A, which is mostly the hospitals, is a $21.8 trillion unfunded liability, the amount you would have to put in an account today. Medicare part B, $23 trillion. That is mostly doctors. Medicare part D, the new prescription drug program, adds to the unfunded liability $16.6 trillion. Social Security is running at about $12 trillion. We have got to deal with these problems. Maybe next year, after the election, whichever President is elected, we will have the guts, we will have the intestinal fortitude to move ahead in trying to solve and make changes to these programs so that we can continue what we have promised the American people. They are important programs. There is going to be dramatic changes. The longer we wait, the more drastic the changes will have to be. That was the conclusion of the bipartisan task force on Social Security that I chaired. The challenge is great for this body, the Senate, and the White House; and I ask, Mr. Speaker, that the electorate of this Nation ask those candidates running for office, for the Congress, for the Senate, for the Presidency what they are going to do about these huge problems facing our kids and our grandkids.

Mr. SMITH of Michigan

Mr. SMITH of Michigan. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to proceed with my 5 minutes at this time.

Mr. SMITH of Michigan

Mr. SMITH of Michigan. Mr. Speaker, the reason we are here is to make clear to the world that we are not going to have military conscription right now for active military duty. I introduced a bill last year, H.R. 3598, because I think we need to seriously discuss the understanding of the military of a greater number of our population. I think we need to look at volunteerism in this country; and with terrorism threatening us for the immediate future, there is a need for that education, that training, maybe even basic military training, but not combat service.

Mr. SMITH of Michigan

Mr. SMITH of Michigan. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to congratulate Northwest Community School District in Jackson, Michigan as it celebrates fifty years of educational excellence in the Jackson community. Our current superintendent, Dennis Desmarais, as well as the other administrators, teachers, support personnel, and the 25,000 residents and parents of the school district should all be proud of the lasting contribution they have made in shaping the lives of the young people in the Jackson area. Northwest School District is one of Jackson County's largest school districts, and was established in 1954 when nineteen tiny districts consolidated to become Northwest Rural Agricultural Schools. By the time R. Willard Kidder became superintendent in 1955, more than 1100 students were enrolled in the district, and were transported to 23 buildings on nine buses. The next year, the school's student council chose the Mounties as the district's mascot, a name which was taken from the Royal Canadian Mounted Police, symbolizing fairness, devotion, duty, and exemplary service. It was also at this time that red and black were adopted as the official school colors. Mr. Kidder took over as Northwest's superintendent in 1956 when the original superintendent, Dr. Warran Randall, accepted a position in Hudson. Under Kidder's leadership, the school grew, the Northwest Junior-Senior High School, now R.W. Kidder Middle School, opened for students in grades five through nine in 1956. Enrollment continued to grow, and peaked at 4,200 when Mr. Kidder retired in 1972. In 1960, Flora List Elementary School opened for 700 students in kindergarten through sixth grade, and three years later, Parnall Elementary School opened on Lansing Avenue to accommodate another 900 students. In 1966, Mr. Kidder hired Mr. Joe Koziol to teach driver's education, and Mr. Koziol continued to serve the district for nearly four more decades as assistant principal in the 1970's and then as the district's superintendent from 1998 till 2002. On behalf of the United States Congress, it is with great pleasure that I rise today to extend our highest praise and congratulations to the Northwest School District for its awards and academic honors as it marks the 50th anniversary of its founding.

Mr. SMITH of Michigan

Mr. SMITH of Michigan. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor the achievements of a good friend. Mr. Gregory Moore of Emmett Township, Michigan, was recently elected the Chairman of the Calhoun County, Michigan Board of Commissioners. A Western Michigan University alumnus and graduate fellow of the prestigious Michigan Political Leadership Program, Greg has accomplished many good deeds with his extensive local, civic and political involvement. For 14 years, he worked in the Radiology Department in the Battle Creek Health System. He also co-owned and operated a small recycling business in Calhoun County. Greg is currently serving his third term on the Calhoun County Board of Commissioners and his 10th year as a member of the Emmett Township Planning Commission. He is a former neighborhood council president and George Award honoree for outstanding service to the community. Greg currently serves on a number of local boards and committees including: Character Unlimited, International Festival of Lights, Battle Creek Area International Relations Committee and the Substance Abuse Council of Greater Battle Creek, just to name a few. He has also been a Congressional District Director for five years. He has been married for 15 years to his wonderful wife, Becky. Mr. Speaker, I am proud to call Greg Moore a great American.

Mr. SMITH of Michigan

Mr. SMITH of Michigan. Mr. Speaker, I move that the House do now adjourn.

Mr. SMITH of Michigan

Mr. SMITH of Michigan. Mr. Speaker, I think it was in The Music Man where the seller of that musical equipment says, ``We have big trouble right here in River City.'' We have big troubles here in Washington, D.C., and in America, for a couple of reasons. The competition from other countries as they try to copy our techniques of production means that the competition is greater than it has ever been. Our future generations are going to be much more challenged than we have been. Actually, the baby boomers are a generation that is going to start retiring in the next 4 or 5 years; 73 million baby boomers will start retiring, probably the richest retirees that this country has ever had, probably the richest retirees this country will ever have. We have some challenges in Washington as politicians tend to solve more and more problems, saying, somehow it must be Washington's responsibility rather than the individual's responsibility to solve some of these problems. What we have done is ended up, for example, with a tax system where now, today, 50 percent of the adults in the United States only pay about 1 percent of the income tax. So, of course, there is a lot of that 50 percent who are suggesting that maybe government should solve more of their problems because they do not have a stake in it. The flat tax or the consumption tax, the sales tax are some suggestions that say, everybody has to have a stake in the way this country operates and the services that Federal Government provides. This first chart shows some of the problems of over-promising. What the economists with the green eye shades call unfunded liabilities means the amount of today's dollars that would have to be put in a savings account drawing interest that equals inflation and the time, value of money to come up with the dollars necessary to pay for these programs, over the next 75 years in this case. If we add up Medicare, part A Medicare; part B Medicare; part D, the drug program; and Social Security, it comes to $73.5 trillion, according to Dr. Saving, who is the trustee for both Social Security and Medicare, $73 trillion that would have to be put in a savings account today to earn the revenues in addition to the money coming in from the FICA tax, the payroll tax, to accommodate today's promises. A huge challenge for this government to try to develop the kind of discipline of stopping the overpromising and, for that matter, stopping the overspending. If we add the unfunded liabilities to the debt, the $7 trillion debt that we have today, added to the $73 trillion in unfunded liabilities, it means that it is almost insolvable without dramatic cuts in benefits or drastic increases in taxes. If we do not make some changes, what we see happening in other countries can very well happen in the United States. And that means, Mr. Speaker, take a guess, and I ask my audience to take a guess of what the payroll tax is in France to accommodate their senior population. It is over 50 percent. The payroll tax in Germany to accommodate their senior population has just gone over 40 percent. Of course, that makes them much less competitive. And I am just suggesting, Mr. Speaker, let us not let that happen in the United States by continuing the tendency, the political tendency, because the more we overpromise, traditionally the likelier we are to get a few more votes and get elected to Congress, and if the people that elect us to Congress want somebody there who is going to spend more, promise more, borrow more, tax more, then that is the kind of government we are going to end up having. Let me just briefly go through this chart of unfunded liabilities. Medicare part A, which is mostly to hospitals, is estimated to have an unfunded liability of $21.8 trillion. Medicare part B that doctors charge, mostly doctors, is $23.2 trillion. Medicare part D, the new prescription drug bill that we passed recently, adds another $16.6 trillion unfunded liability to the cost of Medicare. Social Security is just at 11.9, $12 trillion unfunded liability for Social Security. That is more than a quarter of a million dollars of unfunded liabilities for every man, woman, and child in America. How do we shout long enough, hard enough, aggressive enough to get the Congress to pay attention? I think probably the secret is that Americans have to start paying attention to what is happening in their United States Congress, what is happening in their State legislatures, what is happening with their counties as governments at all levels are called on to solve more and more of the problems of individuals. Let us take a look at the fact that we are going to have a strong economy. I mean, regardless of what we do and the solutions to Medicare and Social Security and stopping the overspending and trying to balance the budget, and, by the way, hopefully in the next several weeks we are going to take up the Balanced Budget Amendment that will add a little more pressure to us to stop our overspending, regardless of what we do, if we do not have a strong economy in America, we are not going to make it. We are going to start going downhill relative to other countries. The interest on the debt is now over $300 billion a year, and the interest rate is continuing to climb. In fact, we are still at a very low interest rate; but it is still using up 14 percent of the total Federal budget, and that is growing rapidly for two reasons: interest rates are going up and our propensity to overspend because people do not like taxes, borrowing is sort of putting off the tax increase for a later time, and usually what we are talking about is a later generation. So we continue to overpromise, overspend, and overborrow. And what that means is a tremendous obligation to future generations, not only coming up with the promises, overpromises, and the unfunded liabilities, but coming up with the additional amount of the budget that is sucked up paying the interest on their debt. I would suggest that if we are going to have a strong economy, we have got to change our tax system. Our tax system in the United States puts our businesses at a competitive disadvantage. It discourages savings and investment, and that is why I have introduced H.R. 3060, which is a flat tax that ends up taxing at the rate of 17 percent. After the deduction, it taxes at 17 percent across the board. So, number one, everybody has a stake. Number two, it puts our businesses in a more competitive position with other countries in terms of the selling of our product. Let me talk about our current Tax Code: 7,000 Tax Code changes have been made just since 1986, 74 percent increase in the tax rules since 1986, and they are growing every day. Taxpayers spend 6.1 billion hours, 6.1 billion hours, preparing their tax returns, 8 billion pages of returns every year, and it is becoming more complicated. So people, individuals, taxpayers, do not totally understand how the tax system works. I have heard young people say, Well, I am looking forward to tax day because government sends me a check. But the fact is they have been taking money away from them on every paycheck, and so the government owes them much more money than they are getting back. Government estimates of tax compliance costs reach $183 billion every year. Compliance costs approach 20 percent of the total income tax revenue. Extremely complicated, difficult, takes a lot of time. Businesses adjust their business decisions to lower their income tax often more than the commonsense, logical, market-based decisions they would otherwise make, which makes them more inefficient in terms of being competitive. I thought it would be fun to just review the total pages of Federal tax rules. As lobbyists and special interest groups come in to lobby Members of the House and Members of the Senate and lobby the White House, they are interested in having special provisions in our complicated tax system that are going to benefit their particular clients. And what this has resulted in is more and more complications, more and more rules, and more and more pages of tax returns that if one is going to understand the system, they have to hire an accountant that is going to spend full time almost on the tax policy. In 1913, we had very few rules and very few taxes. In 1945, we approached 10,000 pages. By 1984, we approached 30,000 pages. Now we have about 50,000 pages of Federal tax rules that go into detail explaining the laws that this Congress has passed often to benefit some particular interest group. Just briefly on the flat tax, the flat tax bill I have introduced starts at 19 percent for the first year and then drops to 14 percent the second year and thereon. It is a 17 percent flat rate after the deduction. The deduction is $36,600 for a family of four. So they do not pay any tax on the first $36,600 if they are a family of four; 25,000 if they are a couple. It ends the double taxation on savings, ends the double taxation on dividends and capital gains. That means there is going to be a greater incentive to invest and to save. And that is what makes our economy and our productivity grow: the savings investment is the seed corn of the research and development that develops the kind of research and technology that result in better products produced more efficiently. That is what is going to keep us competitive. Just as a footnote, I would urge every parent to encourage their kids to make a special effort in science and math. Science and math achievement in the United States is one of the lowest in the world, and probably as technology becomes more an integral part of how we develop more efficient ways to produce products and actually the development of those products, students that have a good background in science and math are going to be the ones that are going to find it most easy to get a good-paying job. I think I am down to the fact that it allows individuals to file their returns on a simple postcard form. I printed up that postcard form of what I see as the kind of tax form that is going to make taxpaying very simple and very easy. It increases confidence that everyone pays their fair share. The flat tax is pro-growth. It is pro-freedom. I think most people in America are sick and tired of the rhetoric that says, well, we are going to make some adjustments here and there. They would like to get rid of the IRS. They would like to have the kind of tax system that encourages them to work and to produce and to save and invest. Look, when we started this country, that is how our forefathers wrote the Constitution. They said in effect those that work hard, that study, that use that knowledge, that save and invest and try, end up better off than those that do not. Of course, what we have done in the last 30 or 40 years is we have tended to divide the wealth and take away from those that are successful and give it to those that are less successful. In so doing, we have taken away some of the incentive that has made this country great, and that is the rewards for achievement and the rewards for trying and saving and hard work. This is the flat tax postcard form. You put down your wages and your salary and your pensions. The personal allowance is $25,580 for married filing jointly, $12,790 for a single, $16,330 for a single head of household. Number of dependents on the next line. Line 4 is the personal allowance. Multiply $5,510 by each dependent. What you have left after you subtract those deductions from wages, salary and pension is what you pay your 17 percent tax on. If you paid ahead of time, you subtract the taxes that you have already paid and figure out what government now owes you or what you owe the government. We are having a lot of debate. Everybody agrees that we should change our complicated Tax Code because of its preferences that have been built in over the years to special interest lobbyists, because of its complication, and because it discourages effort and it discourages learning and it discourages savings. Should we have a flat tax or sales tax? On the flat tax or sales tax, let me suggest that they both have the same type of tax base and they accomplish the same kind of results as far as encouraging business expansion, good jobs, a fair way to tax. However, the tax base of a true national sales tax and a flat tax in the fashion of Dick Armey's or Steve Forbes' proposal will be the same. The tax base of a true national sales tax and a flat tax are going to be the same. In both cases, the tax is on consumption and not on investment, which is a superior tax for economic growth that is going to benefit our competitive position with other countries and certainly benefit the general public. The question then really is on which tax is going to be administratively most feasible, and the flat tax is the winner hands down. At least 20 years ago, two economists, Hall and Rabushka, laid out the case for the flat tax in detail. The second edition of their book on the flat tax in the mid-1990s is called The Flat Tax. In the book they make it clear why the tax base of a national sales tax and the flat tax are the same. What I am trying to point out, Mr. Speaker, is both the flat tax and the sales tax have the same tax base. They both accomplish the same goals. So now we are trying to decide which one is more possible to replace this complicated Tax Code that we have now. Let me give you a little intuition on why both of these taxes are essentially both the same. The tax base of a flat tax is income, but people only do two things with income. They either spend it or they save it. Since there is no tax on savings, this means the flat tax is on consumption. But this is the same as a sales tax. Let me try to be a little more technical. I started trying to work out an alternative to Michigan's sales tax as a flat tax when I was chairman of the senate finance committee back in Michigan. Under the national sales tax, business is taxed on its sales minus what it purchases from other firms minus what it pays on investment and capital. That is on the sales tax. On the flat tax, individuals pay taxes only on their wage income and not on the income from savings, such as interest or dividends. Business actually pays the taxes on savings, interest and dividend, because they are not allowed to deduct it. Businesses pays taxes on its sales minus what it buys from other firms minus investment in capital minus wages. Now, between the business income tax and the individual income tax, what is taxed then is sales minus what business buys from other firms minus what it pays on investment and capital. So the two tax bases are the same. Now, when it comes to administration, the flat tax is much simpler. The individual and business both fill out a short form and it is clear what is going to be taxed. Under the sales tax, lots of things will be difficult to determine. First, there is going to be political pressure, as there is in every State that has a sales tax, not to have that sales tax on such things as food and prescription drugs, not to tax medical services or dental costs. As was the case in Michigan and in most every other state that has a sales tax, we have done this. As this happens and you reduce what is going to be taxed on food, prescription drugs, health benefits, services, what that means is the tax rate for the sales tax is going to go up. For example, to raise the revenue that is equivalent to our 17 percent flat tax is going to require a sales tax that is much higher. In initial calculations it could be as high as a 28 percent sales tax. If it is a 28 percent sales tax, this is certainly going to lead to all sorts of incentives to hide sales, which will be easier to do than to hide income, and this will lead to an even higher sales tax. You can call them free riders or whatever you want. But I would suggest in the sales tax effort to get rid of the IRS, in its place what we are going to do is have a new Federal police force examining what is produced so we can determine how much production is being avoided on paying the sales tax. Where you tend to say that individuals consuming are paying the sales tax, what we have done in Michigan and most other states that charge a sales tax, to simplify it, we say well, you can add the tax if you want to, but who is responsible for the sales tax are the businesses that are selling the product. Let me just briefly show the difference in what an individual taxpayer ends up with that earns money and decides to save the money. First, under the current system, for example, let us say after you have your income, after you spend what you are going to spend, you are fortunate enough and diligent enough that you save $10,000, and then you end up paying 28 percent tax on the $7,200, now on $7,200, so what you have left, out of what you have saved and minus your tax, what you have left is $7,200. Let us say the interest rate, or your returns on investment are maybe around 6 percent; that means I think that that money would double in about 10 years. So after 10 years, that $7,200 that you have left after taxes doubles to $14,000. And then what do we do under the current system? We tax you on the interest rate you earned. So if you tax on the interest on the $7,200, as the money doubles, you end up having $12,384. With the flat tax that encourages savings because we do not tax savings, after expenses, you end up with $10,000, you pay the 17 percent, and that leaves you $8,300. In 10 years, it doubles to $16,600, but we do not have any tax on that increased earnings of the dividends or interest, so that leaves you with a net of $16,600. So the point that I am trying to make is you are much better off and it encourages savings and investment, which is key to the kind of discoveries that we can have for businesses to be more competitive in a world market. I think a problem with the sales tax is determining what is a final retail sale. In trying to change our sales tax in Michigan to take in some services, the overwhelming problem is what is the final retail sale that you charge a sales tax on? For example, say I am an accountant and I do your books, I am going to charge you a sales tax on it as the final user. But what if I am the same accountant, but I am doing the books for a local retail store, and that retail store is going to take the increased cost that they pay for that bookkeeper and add it to the price of their product; the sales tax is going on the price of their product, so you do not charge sales tax when you are an accountant doing work for a firm or a retailer that can pass that tax on in a product that is going to be taxed on the sales tax. It is complicated. It is complicated, figuring out what you are going to tax sales tax on. Because of the fact that the advocates of the fair tax and the sales tax suggest that we want to change the 16th Amendment to the Constitution, a political complication of talking this chamber into having a two-thirds vote that is going to change the Constitution, and then after that, you have to have three-quarters of the States agree to ratify what has been suggested as a constitutional change. Pretend for a moment that you are back in that State legislature, and here is the Federal Government saying, look, we want to change the system to get rid of the income tax and have a sales tax. We would sort of like you as the State to collect that money for us, for the Federal Government because, look, you are going to have a sales tax anyway in your State because you cannot copy the Federal income tax any more because we are going to have a sales tax, but we would also like you to collect the sales tax for the Federal Government, State legislatures and governor. We also are suggesting that you have this sales tax that we are going to pass into law and that it be on services and drugs, that it be on medical supplies. It is going to be a tough getting three-quarters of those States to ratify the Constitution with that kind of threat that they are going to have to be the instigators of that sales tax in their State. I think what is likely is that all of the problems of a sales tax, how it is going to be administered, what do you calculate as the final sale that is going to be taxed for the sales tax, and the complicated effort of convincing States that they have to be a part of this effort to now expand their sales tax and maybe even start collecting it for the Federal Government. A third problem has to do with purchases, for example, over the Internet. You might make purchases from another country over the Internet, and that is more and more available. How are these going to be taxed? What is likely is that they will not be and, thus, U.S. retailers will be at a disadvantage compared to foreign retailers. I think these are just a few of the problems in implementing a national retail sales tax. The fact that no State has successfully managed to put in place a true retail sales tax that captures all final goods and services should tell us that it will be very difficult to do at the national level also. Okay, back again, reviewing. Implementation, the flat tax is just going to be a bill passed by a majority and signed by the President. The sales tax, it is the bill, plus the constitutional amendment. The burden on States on the flat tax: none. On a sales tax, the States must collect the Federal taxes, often new ones on services; and for those States that do not have a sales tax, implementing that kind of a tax structure in those States. The burden on the taxpayer. We have seen the simple form for a flat tax. On the sales tax, there is no form for individuals, but it is going to end up with much more business monitoring to know how much is being produced to determine what is being avoided in the sales tax, and the risk of tax evasion. The risk of tax evasion with a flat tax is the same as the current tax system. But with a sales tax, the high tax on goods increases the incentives for invasion. It increases the incentives to trade with your neighbor instead of paying a very high sales tax that I have estimated will go to 28 percent, maybe even higher. In conclusion, let me just suggest that getting back to our predicament of over-spending, over-promising, the challenges that we face with medicare and Social Security, the challenges we face with paying our veterans' benefits, the challenges we face coming up with retirement benefits for Federal employees, means that we need to make the kind of changes in government that is going to help make sure that this country stays on the cutting edge of competition in the new challenging world market. And one of the tools that we can use to do this is getting rid of the IRS, getting rid of the complicated Tax Code that has preferences based on the strength of PACs and lobbyists that have influenced this and the other chamber and the White House over the last 50 years, and come up with a tax system that is going to be better for individuals, it is going to be better for the long-term competition that future generations are going to face.

Mr. SMITH of Michigan

Mr. SMITH of Michigan. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in honor of the birth and life of Madison Ainsley Knapp, born born September 10, 2004. She weighed 7.6 pounds and is 18\3/4\ inches. Madison was born to my Legislative Director Alan Knapp and his wife Jennifer Knapp. Madison was also welcomed into this world by grandparents Larry and Carol Knapp of St. Joseph, Michigan and Virginia McNees of Benton Harbor, Michigan. Madison is fortunate to be born to such a great family. We welcome Madison to the world with open arms and congratulate her parents and grandparents on the occasion of her birth.

Mr. SMITH of Michigan

Mr. SMITH of Michigan. Mr. Speaker, today I will vote against legislation that would create federally funded youth suicide early intervention, prevention, and treatment programs authorized at $82 million over three years. At a time when we have the largest deficit spending in history, I'm reluctant to start yet another federal program. Additionally, the states that are having problems, rather than the federal government, should be making the decisions of how much help and what kind of help should be initiated to reduce the problem of youth suicide.