Debbie Stabenow

Ms. STABENOW

Ms. STABENOW. If I might give just an example.

Ms. STABENOW. Well, they certainly will feel that even more under this particular proposal, and right at a time when we have just passed a series of tax cuts, $95 billion in tax cuts. We have been able to focus more cuts on education. The ability for people to be able to go to school, all of those things would be gone. In Michigan when I was a State senator, I sponsored the State's largest property tax cut. I am not interested in seeing this shift back and seeing property taxes go back up in the State of Michigan or in any State. And so we are talking about those taxes that the average person pays. It is very easy for a wealthy individual to pick and choose what extra things they are going to buy, but the average person who is buying the house, sending the kids to school, needing to buy the clothes, the food, the car and so on, most of our income goes back out again in purchasing things, and that is why we see that shift that has been talked about onto middle-income and lower-income people, because we do not have as much discretionary income with which to decide whether or not to purchase items. Most of what we bring in, we are turning around and we are purchasing something with it.

Ms. STABENOW. And on top of that. I would just indicate that one of the things we have heard over and over again from the other side of the aisle is that we are going to eliminate the IRS under this proposal. We will eliminate the IRS as we know it. In the bill it transfers all the powers of the IRS to a new Sales Tax Bureau. So the name is gone, but the powers are still there. So then we have to talk about reforming a sales tax bill. I mean what we need to be doing is talking about ways to reform the system for taxpayers, not just playing around with the name, and that is what this does. It changes the name, and then it drops down and requires every businessperson now and every person that has never collected sales tax, like a doctor, like attorneys, accountants, anyone in any kind of business on their own that is providing service, a plumber, electrician, and so on, they now become a tax collector and have to report that to the government. So this is certainly anti-small business.

Ms. STABENOW. And I would add, I know that the small business community is extremely concerned about that issue. Today we have been debating various issues related to small business, paperwork reduction, and so on, but the reality is that every small business, professional or retailer or manufacturer, will now become a tax collector for that sales tax. And on top of that, the National Retail Federation, and I would quote, based on the last session's bill, this bill was put in last session, it has been put in in the same form this session. So last session when this bill was in front of us, in front of the Congress, the National Retail Federation said between 1990 and 1994 the retail industry created 708,000 new jobs. A study by Nathan Associates shows that a national sales tax would destroy 200,000 retail jobs over a similar period. Adding these jobs lost with the 708,000 that will not be created, we could result in a net impact of almost 1 million fewer jobs. This is the National Retail Federation talking about small business loss because there will be fewer people buying at Christmastime. What are the headlines we always read? What are the retail sales, the concern of retailers that people be purchasing? This cuts down on purchasing, it eliminates jobs. So this is a job killer on top of everything else.

Ms. STABENOW. The other part that I might add that also adds on top of that, my city of Lansing will pay, for instance, 30 percent more for a police car. But this proposal also counts the wages of public employees as taxable, as value in terms of the sales tax. So the police officer in that car will pay 30 percent more on top of their wages. Either the local unit will pay it, or they will have a new income tax essentially on the wage of that police officer, that firefighter, that school teacher, because it taxes wages of government employees. So we are going to see the taxes go up for people who serve us in local communities at the same time local units will have to pay 30 percent more to provide the service.

Ms. STABENOW. It is really crazy. Another thing that we found today in analyzing this bill is that it also eliminates the funding for the highway trust fund. Now, this is particularly crazy, because we are in the process right now of passing a very important bill, one that we fought for hard in Michigan to be able to increase our fair share. We have not in Michigan over the years received our fair share, and we worked very hard to do that. But in the middle of this, it eliminates a wide variety of excise taxes and trust fund taxes, one being the highway trust fund. So in so many ways, this particular bill makes no sense. It eliminates those taxes, it raises taxes on seniors, middle-income people. I do not know where we get the dollars then for the highway trust fund; I think that is an important question to ask.

Ms. STABENOW

Ms. STABENOW. Mr. Chairman, I rise with my colleagues and friends to oppose this amendment. This amendment is anti-small business. When I chaired the Michigan Small Business Committee in the House, we heard over and over again the concerns of small businesses about coming particularly into the field of transportation and competing with the large firms. The majority of small businesses today are being opened by women and minority firms. This gives the opportunity not for a guarantee, not for a quota, but for the opportunity to get started in a multibillion-dollar business. This is a transportation package that will provide jobs and billions of dollars in contracts. What we are asking, what the committee reported out was the opportunity to make sure that small and disadvantaged businesses have the opportunity to get started in this business. We are talking about those who do not have a long track record and relationships over years and years being able to be given a chance as a small business to get that first contract so then they can go on to get the second and the third and get bigger and bigger. I urge a no vote on this amendment. It is anti-small business.

Ms. STABENOW

Ms. STABENOW. Mr. Chairman, I am a member of the House Committee on Agriculture, and I realize the hard work that has gone into this legislation. But I must, despite my great respect for the chair and the ranking member and the hard work they put in, I must rise today to oppose this bill. For many of the reasons that my colleagues have indicated, it is fundamentally flawed. We have three wonderful national forests in Michigan. Yes, there are management issues that need to be addressed, but they can be addressed. They need to be addressed in ways that do not include the fundamental process under this bill. What we have here is a Forest Preservation and Recovery Act that authorizes money-making activities that could actually hurt the forests. Underneath all of today's discussion about forest health, land management, scientific panels of experts, and environmental stewardship is actually a money-generating provision that harbors the potential to do great harm to our forests. As has been indicated, the basis of the bill is a provision that permits commercial timber sales. The philosophical assumption in the bill is that it is okay to cut down trees to save trees; and I believe that that is wrong. In addition, by establishing an off-budget source of money, the incentives are even greater for the USDA and the Forest Service to seek revenue that is free of the appropriations process. I believe the management of our most endangered forest should be subject to the oversight of Congress, not an off-site revolving fund. So as long as the bill contains this provision where we are saying that, in order to preserve and protect, we must cut down, this is not the kind of provision that makes sense. It does not make sense for Michigan forests. It does not make sense for the country. With this provision in it, I cannot support the bill, and I would urge my colleagues to vote no.

Ms. STABENOW

Ms. STABENOW. If I might, just to add to what really is the burden under these proposals, not only would we lose the home mortgage deduction but on top of the price, and to continue with the charts, if we are looking at a $155,000 house, not only would the GOP price be $201,000, but under the sales tax proposal, this also taxes the insurance premium you pay every month, it taxes the electric bill that you have in your house, it taxes all services. I wanted to add that on top of what you have talked about, which is so important, in health care and so important as it relates to manufactured goods and so on, we are talking about every time we do something. So not only for the blood pressure medicine or the arthritis medicine, it is going to the doctor that will add 30 percent. We are now going to make doctors sales tax collectors, 30 percent. They have to now collect it. We will be creating a whole new group of tax collectors, shifting the burden on to small businesspeople and professionals. We will see a wide range of services that will now be taxed. If you go to the barber shop, add 30 percent, if you go to the dry cleaner, add 30 percent, if you come home to your house, not only is your house payment up 30 percent but again everything related to your home is up 30 percent. We are talking about a use tax literally on everything. Let me mention a couple of other things that I think are very critical to this. As we look at higher education, we have all worked very hard to provide tax breaks so that more people can go to college, more people can go back to school, get job training. Tuition and fees are exempt from the retail sales tax, but room and board is not. My daughter starts school at Michigan State University next fall. She will live in the dorm. Under this proposal, I would be paying 30 percent more for her dorm room, 30 percent more for her books, 30 percent more for her food. If she lived off campus, 30 percent more for her rent. So we are not just talking about goods, we are talking about literally everything that we do. Let me add something else, because there are several other things, very interesting, in this proposal. This proposal eliminates a number of different taxes. It eliminates all of the excise taxes on alcohol and tobacco, right at a time when we are saying that we ought to be doing more to discourage, particularly children, from smoking.

Ms. STABENOW. In the last tax debate, when the original bill came to the floor, that was basically the Republican tax bill, we did not see an immediate increase in the exemption for the State tax for small businesses, family-owned businesses, and family-owned farms. It was a phased-in amount that you could exempt that was over 10 years. It really was not very much. I have been hearing, particularly from my family-owned farmers, and also family-owned businesses, about the need it be exempting more of that income when there is a death and be able to protect that income. We fought hard. I voted no on that original bill because it did not have that in it. We have worked very, very hard. When the final bill was written as a result of our initiatives, we have now exempted $1.3 million for family-owned farms, started this January, $1.3 million for family-owned farms or family-owned businesses. This is the amount of money you do not now have to pay taxes on in your estate. And this was a value that we had about family business and family-owned farms. We fought hard for it, and we were able to make the change. So we have been moving. We have been taking the proposals and making them better and working very, very, very hard to make sure that we are focusing on families, we are focusing on middle-income people, small businesses, and so on. I would mention one other thing that we are now working on, and that is, in working with the President in his new pension proposals for small business, I am very pleased to have introduced a bill that will give a tax credit over 3 years for small businesses that set up pension plans for their employees, another important use of the Tax Code in terms of tax relief. We have now 51 million people working hard every day for small businesses, working full time, no pension; 40 million of those in small businesses with less than 100 employees. So we now are working on an effort to allow that small business to write off the cost of setting up a pension plan so that those people working hard every day, who need that pension when they retire, will have the opportunity to do that.

Ms. STABENOW. If I might give just an example.

Ms. STABENOW

Ms. STABENOW. Mr. Speaker. I wish to recognize the service of a very special individual, Cantor Bruce Wetzler of Congregation Shaarey Zedek in East Lansing. After 39 years, Canton Wetzler will be retiring. Cantor Wetzler graduated from the Hebrew High School of Congregation Tikvoh Chadoshoh in New York City. He then attended Yeshivah University Cantorial Institute and the Jewish Theological Seminary, while studying music at both the New York School of Music and the Victor Stott Music Conservatory. Since 1959, Canton Wetzler had dedicated his life to Congregation Shaarey Zedeck by serving as musical leader, teacher, community spokesperson, and spiritual advisory to people of all ages. Most of all, through music, Cantor Wetzler has brought many people in East Lansing closer to God. Whether it is a weekly service or a personal experience like a wedding or a Bar or Bat Mizvah, Cantor Wetzler has offered his voice though song to many people through the years. With his guidance, families and individuals have gained a better understanding of loss and a better appreciation of joy. Cantor Wetzler is a leader in the greater Lansing community, but his special dedication to his Congregation and religious belief has been unparalleled. I wish him the very best in his future endeavors and I know he will relish the additional time with his wife Miriam, his two daughters, and his two grandchildren.

Ms. STABENOW

Ms. STABENOW. Mr. Speaker, I missed the vote on rollcall no. 46. On the motion to recommit with instructions for H.R. 1432, the African Growth and Opportunity Act; has I been present, I would have voted yes. (Mr. ARMEY asked and was given permission to speak out of order.) Legislative Program

Ms. STABENOW

Ms. STABENOW. Mr. Speaker, each year, during the month of February, our nation comes together to celebrate the history and culture of the African American community. During Black History Month, it is my honor to acknowledge an outstanding American, Dr. Eva Evans, and her leadership. Beginning as a child in the Detroit Public Schools, Dr. Evans has always shown a commitment to education. After receiving her Ph.D. in Administration and Higher Education at Michigan State University, Dr. Evans joined the Lansing public school system, where she worked her way from an elementary school teacher to Lansing's highly respected Deputy Superintendent for Instruction. Along with her professional commitment to Lansing, Dr. Evans is deeply involved in the community. With a roster of community service activities too long to list, she has served virtually every avenue on both the state and local level, from Chairperson of the Capital Area United Way Board of Directors, to Board of Directors of the Mid- Michigan America Red Cross, to Corporate Board of Directors of the United Negro College Fund. Currently, Dr. Evans is International President of Alpha Kappa Alpha Sorority, serving our nation's oldest Black Sorority, and continuing a tradition that has initiated more than 180,000 college educated African-American women since its founding in 1908. Black history month is a special time of year to recognize contribution and achievement, but also to recognize the importance of history. Dr. Evans's work has made a real difference within the many communities of Michigan and literally, around the world. Her achievements have become a part of our history and her service to her state and country is unparalleled. Though Dr. Evans has already been presented with many awards, such as the Diana Award for Outstanding Leadership in Education, and NAACP's Educator of the Year Award, I am proud to include Dr. Evans' great accomplishments in the 1998 Congressional Record during this important month. Dr. Evans is a role model for us all.

Ms. STABENOW

Ms. STABENOW. Mr. Speaker, ``It is my honor to congratulate Albert Nedoff, Jr., who after nearly twenty-four years of service at the Drug Enforcement Administration has been appointed the Associate Director of the Chicago High Intensity Drug Trafficking Area Task Force. ``With this new position, Albert will work under the leadership of the U.S. Drug Czar, Gen. Barry McCaffrey. ``Albert is a national leader in the area of drug enforcement, who has spent more than eight years in Detroit's DEA office. During his tenure, he was instrumental in several high-profile cases, including the dismantling of the Chambers Family's control of Detroit's crack cocaine market and the case that resulted in the arrest and conviction of Toni Cato Riggs, the widow of Gulf War Veteran Anthony Riggs. ``The 1990 murder of Anthony Riggs drew national attention when he was gunned down in the streets of Detroit, just one day after returning home from the war. Four years after Anthony Riggs' murder, a task force of undercover drug agents and police officers, under the supervision of Albert Nedoff, videotaped a confession by Toni Cato Riggs regarding her involvement in her husband's murder, resulting in a first-degree murder conviction. ``I am pleased that after nearly forty years of city and federal government service, Albert Nedoff has chosen to continue serving our country in the area of law enforcement. Though he will be missed in the Michigan area, it is reassuring to know that he will still be fighting to rid our nation's streets of drugs. I wish him well in his new position and wish his family the very best in the future.''

Ms. STABENOW

Ms. STABENOW. Mr. Speaker, I rise today as an advocate for the vital services home health care provides to many of our nation's citizens and their families--people whose voices are not always heard on Capitol Hill. We all recall the stories from the news last year of the bad actors who abused the Medicare system and provided inadequate care to their patients. Unfortunately, the reprehensible actions of a few home health care businesses lead to dramatic changes in the Balanced Budget Act that will impact the quality of care of all individuals whose doctors and families have decided that home care is the necessary course of action. Although it is critical to curb abuse, we must be careful that we do not inadvertently cause harm to the small businesses who have always provided and who will continue to provide quality care to many people in our communities. I am very concerned that as of today, home care providers will no longer be reimbursed if they visit a patient solely to draw blood. Section 4615 of the Balanced Budget Act states that this is a non-vital service to provide to homebound patients. What about the blind diabetic who needs a blood sugar reading? What about the cancer patient or AIDS patient who is confined to a bed and whose continued treatment relies on blood tests? This provision of the Balanced Budget Act must be reversed or at least modified to allow the needs of the patient to determine the need for this health care service. As of today I am a co- sponsor of the Venipuncture Fairness Act, H.R. 2912, sponsored by my colleague, Nick Rahall. H.R. 2912 will reinstate payment under Medicare for home health visits made to provide the important service of drawing blood. I urge my colleagues to immediately join the Venipuncture Fairness Act as co-sponsors and to work to ensure swift passage of the bill so that homebound patients do not suffer a life-threatening gap in care. Other efforts are underway in Congress to reverse decisions made in the Balanced Budget Act that inadvertently cause harm to the home care providers. This Wednesday I will join Congressman Jim McGovern as an original co-sponsor of a bill to protect effective home health care agencies from last year's cutbacks. The bill will delay the implementation of the interim payment system for home health services and provide for a later base year for the purpose of calculating new payment rates. It is our hope that the bill will allow continuation of quality home health services in communities throughout the country. Another obstacle stands in the way of home health care companies staying in business. The Balanced Budget Act provisions regarding surety bonds is being misread by the Health Care Financing Administration. It is reasonable to ask home health care businesses to secure a surety bond at an affordable cost. The Balanced Budget Act set that cost at $50,000 or 15% of an agency's previous year's Medicare revenues. It was assumed that a $50,000 surety bond would be too expensive for some agencies, hence the provision for 15% of revenues was included to ease the burden on smaller operations. I have now discovered that the Health Care Financing Administration is requiring all home health care providers to get a surety bond for 15% of the previous year's revenues. For some companies, this could be as high as half a million dollars, a far cry from the original $50,000 Congress intended. I will be circulating a letter to send to the Health Care Financing Administration urging them to implement this provision of the Balanced Budget Act according to the original intent of Congress. I urge my colleagues to sign the letter and send a strong message to the Health Care Financing Administration. Home health care is a critical part of the health care system for thousands of Americans. Citizens, who would otherwise be required to be in nursing homes, are able to live independently or with family members because of the support services provided by home health care professionals. It is critical that our policies make sense for the thousands of qualified and dedicated home care agencies in America while we focus our energies on those who abuse the system and waste taxpayer dollars. I urge my colleagues to join with me in taking appropriate actions to meet both important goals. Thank you.

Ms. STABENOW

Ms. STABENOW. Mr. Speaker, today I introduced the Safe Food Action Plan Act, a bill that will set a national priority for food safety by focusing on prevention and rapid response. The Safe Food Action Plan has been built upon the four pillars of research, consumer education, technology transfer programs, and a federal Rapid Response Team. I am proud of our Nation's reputation for providing its citizens with the safest food supply in the world. The high standard set by our country is the product of the combined efforts of our agricultural community, researchers and scientists, processors, consumer educators, the business community, state and local governments, and federal regulators. The Safe Food Action Plan recognizes that it is only through this kind of teamwork, from farm to table, that we can continue to guarantee families the food they feed their children is safe. I am pleased to introduce a bill that represents not only the direction I think this country needs, to guarantee the safety of its food, but the plan the experts believe should be pursued. While drafting the Safe Food Action Plan, I enlisted the help of the food safety community and created the Food Safety Advisory Committee. Membership of the Advisory Committee included scientists and researchers, educators, producers, processors, public health officials, and technology companies. I am especially grateful to the National Food Safety and Toxicology Center at Michigan State University, and its director, Dr. Robert Hollingworth, for hosting the Advisory Committee meetings. One change identified by the Advisory Committee as being critical for food safety, is the ability for the Secretary of Agriculture to promote multi-disciplinary and integrated research. The science of food safety is a complex pursuit and research institutions need to work together to solve life-threatening problems. The Safe Food Action Plan encourages this type of integrated research at USDA. The Safe Food Action Plan redirects existing resources at the Department of Agriculture to focus on initiatives that focus on food safety. I was surprised to discover that food safety is not already listed as a priority for such programs as the Fund for Rural America, nor is it listed as a priority for research and consumer education programs funded through Research, Education, and Extension. The Safe Food Action Plan closes the gaps and makes food safety an important component of these programs. Technology is an important weapon in the war against pathogens. The Safe Food Action Plan amends the Cooperative Research and Development program at USDA (CRADA) to include food safety technology as a priority. In the CRADA program, USDA conducts high risk research that might not be undertaken by private industry but which is needed for the public good. Once the technology is developed, the USDA enters into partnerships with business to bring the ground-breaking research to the market. A wonderful example of cutting-edge food safety technology is the rapid E. coli test developed by the Neogen company, located in my district in Lansing, Michigan. By highlighting food safety as a priority, the Safe Food Action Plan guarantees that the latest and best technology will be available for our nation in defense of public health. While most of the Safe Food Action Plan focuses on prevention, we all understand that food emergencies may still happen and the government must be prepared. The Safe Food Action Plan creates a federal Rapid Response Team that will be ready to strike when public health is in danger. Rather than adding a layer of bureaucracy, the Safe Food Action Plan focuses existing resources within the federal government toward the combined efforts of the Rapid Response Team. Using the Federal Emergency Management Agency as a model, the Safe Food Action Plan instructs the Secretary of Agriculture to integrate his emergency response plan with the efforts of other agencies in developing the Food Safety Rapid Response Team. Finally, Mr. Speaker, I would like to take this opportunity to make a technical clarification. After submitting a very similar bill last week, I discovered that the name of my bill was almost identical to one introduced last year by my colleague, Vic Fazio. Out of courtesy to my colleague and to avoid confusion regarding our bills I am reintroducing my bill with its official short title today. In future debates and deliberations, please refer to my bill by its new title, the Safe Food Action Plan.

Ms. STABENOW

Ms. STABENOW. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to the Mason Bulldogs High School Soccer Team. Last weekend, the Bulldogs beat Petoskey High School, 2 to 1 in overtime, to capture the Division II State title. From the first touch of the ball to Cory Gilbert's overtime goal, the Bulldogs never gave up. They played with pride, they played for the tradition of their soccer program, but most of all, they played for the community of Mason. This overtime victory is a symbol, of the determination, teamwork, and resilience, the Bulldogs have shown all season. When critics said they were too young to compete throughout the State, the team simply stuck together, never gave up, and did their best. I am so proud of the effort of these young men. But beyond the trophy, the Bulldogs have shown great character and sportsmanship throughout the year and these are the true qualifications of a champion. The Mason community is very proud of their team and the example they have set for the future. In addition, what cannot go unnoticed is the example the whole community has shown the State of Michigan. Whether it be the attendance at the home games or the car-pools to the away games, the Mason community has shown great spirit and support. My congratulations go to the team, Mason High School, and the many fans, young and old.

Ms. STABENOW

Ms. STABENOW. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to a woman who exemplifies public service in every sense of the word--Virginia White. After serving for 25 years as clerk of Meridian Township, Virginia has decided to step down from office, leaving a legacy of trust, responsibility, and dedication. As clerk, her responsibilities for Meridian Township included director of elections, keeper of records, and voting member on the township's policy board. But Virginia was much more. Virginia gained admiration by always doing what was best for her community--she was, and will always be, an outstanding public servant. During her 25 years in office, it wasn't just what Virginia did, but how she did it. Each responsibility she held was completed with conviction, pride, and the deepest sense of integrity. One of her largest contributions has been her work in bringing more people into the political process. As president of the Michigan Association of Clerks, Virginia worked hard to modernize elections for the public and wrote a book on how to improve voting in the State of Michigan. In November 1995, Virginia was appointed to the Secretary of State's Election Advisory Committee, where she made a series of recommendations to curb duplicate voting and make voting rules more clear for voters. I have enjoyed working with Virginia on many occasions during the past 20 years. I particularly appreciated our joint efforts to organize a celebration for the Meridian Township Sesquicentennial. Virginia will always be a leader, not only in Meridian Township, but throughout Michigan. I thank her for her service and I wish her the very best in the future.

Ms. STABENOW

Ms. STABENOW. I thank the gentlewoman for yielding me this time. Mr. Speaker, I came to this House in January to get things done for my constituents. I have seen us when we worked together and respected the democratic process get positive things done. We have balanced the budget, we have provided tax relief, we have done positive work together. But we have done that respecting the democratic process and our rights to speak on behalf of our constituents. I also came here believing that I had a right as a Member to present privileged resolutions to this House. One of the resolutions under question is one that I introduced. I know that my constituents expect that I have the right to speak and to offer privileged resolutions and to have them debated with respect. What we have today is an effort to take away the democratic process. We have a proposal in this rule for martial law. I would suggest what we need instead is a Marshall plan, a plan that respects democracy, allows us to work together to solve these issues and move forward in a way that respects everyone's rights. Martial law does not work in a democracy. The Marshall plan worked in its time. I would suggest to Members, we would be better off working in that direction, rather than taking away the rights of those of us who came understanding that we had the full rights and privileges of every Member of this House to speak on behalf of our constituents. I strongly urge a ``no'' vote on the rule.

Ms. STABENOW

Ms. STABENOW. Mr. Speaker, on January 7 of this year, I was honored to enter this body as an incoming Member with over 70 new Members on both sides of the aisle, including the gentlewoman from California [Ms. Sanchez]. A number of the incoming freshmen won by very small numbers of votes, many fewer votes than the number that Loretta Sanchez won by. Yet after one year and almost a half a million dollars of taxpayers' money being spent on an investigation, we have nothing to show for it of any concrete evidence, just a lot of hyperbole at this point. The question that I have for the other side of the aisle is that if, in fact, there are 1000 people who chose to vote who should not have voted in this election, they did not just vote for a Congresswoman or vote for the Congressman at that time. They voted for local officials. They voted for a State rep. They voted for a State Senator. They voted for local ballot initiatives. Why is it that the only question, the only challenge, the only investigation is on the only Hispanic woman sitting here, Ms. Sanchez? What about those other seats? What about challenging those other kinds of races? We do not hear anything about that. We hear only about harassment of a woman who is serving her district well. It is time to stop it.

Ms. STABENOW

Ms. STABENOW. Mr. Speaker, I rise very simply to indicate that this is not about choice, this is a bill about private school vouchers. This is an extension of a debate that we had in the Washington, D.C. budget earlier this year when the roofs are falling down in the D.C. schools and rather than fix the roof, the proposal was put forward to allow 2000 children out of 78,000 children to be able to leave the schools with private vouchers. We are committed to a strong public school system investing in technology for our children, making sure they can read and write, and that they are qualifying for the jobs of the future, every child, every neighborhood. This proposal allows a few children to take a disproportionate amount of dollars out of the public schools to allow for private school vouchers. It is the wrong way to go. I would very much like it if we took all of our energies together and focused them in the right direction, which is making sure every single child in America gets a quality education.

Ms. STABENOW

Ms. STABENOW. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that the form of the resolution appear in the Record at this point.

Ms. STABENOW. Mr. Speaker, pursuant to clause 2 of rule IX, I hereby give notice of my intention to offer a resolution which raises a question of the privileges of the House. The form of the resolution is as follows: Whereas, the Committee on House Oversight passed a resolution demanding the U.S. attorney to bring criminal charges against a private organization, despite the fact that it is beyond the power of Congress to compel compliance with subpoenas; and whereas the Committee on House Oversight should complete its review of this matter and bring this contest to an end; now therefore be it resolved that unless the Committee on House Oversight has sooner reported a recommendation for its final disposition, the contest in the 46th District of California is dismissed upon the expiration of November 7, 1997.

Ms. STABENOW

Ms. STABENOW. Mr. Speaker, I take just a moment this evening to join with my colleagues. It is an honor to serve in this body with my friends in the freshmen class. And it has been an honor to serve with Walter Capps. So much has been said about him, it is hard to know what to add, except to share a couple of personal experiences about Walter. He and I met through the television set. We were both featured on one of the stories near the end of the campaign about hot-contested races. I had the opportunity to hear about this wonderful man, this bright, wonderful author and professor in California. We both had similar opponents. When we got here at orientation, we were very quick to look each other up and, not knowing each other, gave each other a hug and said that we were glad that we had both made it. We went on to sit together on the Committee on Science. Walter sat next to me. He was all the things that everyone has said tonight in terms of his wit, his compassion, his intelligence, his caring. Sitting next to him on the committee, we had an opportunity to share some really important discussions about education, science and math education, the importance of investing in research, in science. It was clear to me that this was a man of incredible depth, as well as a man who was extremely caring and respectful of other people. He was always teasing me about my legislative director, who he said was wonderful and he wanted to steal her from me. And every time she came up to speak with me on the Science Committee, he would say, ``Is she treating you all right? And if she is not, just let me know.'' My staff loved to talk with Walter. I think when I heard about what happened on Tuesday, and I was with my legislative director, both of us felt like we had been hit in the stomach, we were so shocked, and had a very difficult time the rest of the evening as we went back to the office and had an opportunity to share with each other about the wonderful discussions and interactions with our friend, Walter Capps. To Lois and the family, our prayers are with you. You have had a wonderful opportunity to know our friend, Walter Capps, certainly much better than we have. But for me, for my staff, we want to let you know that we care deeply about your family and your loss and our prayers are with you.