Bill Thomas

Mr. THOMAS

Mr. THOMAS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 30 seconds. Mr. Speaker, the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Brown) should know, and perhaps he does not, that in the language of the Medicare provisions that were passed last week included was language requested by the Health Care Financing Administration and the Clinton administration, which we agreed with, which we think is appropriate. The language says any dollars contained in this bill as an increase to Medicare+Choice programs must, must go to the beneficiaries in lowered premiums or increased benefits. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Kentucky (Mr. Whitfield), a member of the Committee on Commerce and someone extremely interested in this issue.

Mr. THOMAS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 30 seconds. Mr. Speaker, I would tell the gentlewoman that a letter from the American Hospital Association said, ``We are urging Members to vote in favor of this legislation and we recommend that the President not veto this legislation,'' along with 48 other organizations, many of them providers. I am a bit perplexed by the gentlewoman's $34 billion number going to Medicare+Choice programs, since the Congressional Budget Office score of H.R. 5543 says the total spending over the 5-year period is $31.5 billion. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Hayworth), a member of the committee.

Mr. THOMAS. Mr. Speaker, it is my pleasure to yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from Louisiana (Mr. Tauzin), a senior member of the Committee on Commerce.

Mr. THOMAS. Mr. Speaker, it is now my very great pleasure to yield 3 minutes and 10 seconds to the gentlewoman from Connecticut (Mrs. Johnson), a member of the Committee on Ways and Means.

Mr. THOMAS. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from New Mexico (Mrs. Wilson), a member of the Committee on Commerce, who can tell my colleagues the real impact of this bill.

Mr. THOMAS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time. Mr. Speaker, I think we need to understand that the motion to instruct really ought to be, as the gentlewoman from New Mexico (Mrs. Wilson) said, to instruct the President to sign the bill. It is time to stop the politics. This is a bill that not only funds the providers, the hospitals, the home health care skilled nursing, but it creates a biannual test for Pap smears. It screens glaucoma. It screens colonoscopy. It eliminates the time on Medicare benefits for immunosuppressive drugs. It puts limits on prescription drug charges so seniors are not bilked by unscrupulous providers. Yes, and it tells the plans that if we provide them with money, that money must go to beneficiaries. This motion to instruct is all politics, and the President's failure to sign the bill is all politics. Let us end the politics. Vote no on this motion to instruct and tell the President to sign the bill. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. THOMAS. Mr. Speaker, it is my pleasure now to yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Kingston).

Mr. THOMAS

Mr. THOMAS. My understanding is that if in fact we have agreed to accept it, and there is a plea for nonpartisanship on the other side, that the nonpartisan vote would be a voice vote. But that if somebody calls for a recorded vote, that clearly could be indicated to be a partisan vote.

Mr. THOMAS. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. THOMAS

Mr. THOMAS. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Florida, one, for taking this time to honor our colleague and our leader on the Committee on Ways and Means, the chairman, the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Archer). I came to the House in 1978 and moved to the Committee on Ways and Means in 1983. My predecessor from my district in Bakersfield was a Congressman by the name of Bill Ketchum, who was a member of the Committee on Ways and Means during his tenure in Congress. I already knew Bill Archer by reputation through Bill Ketchum before I came to Congress. Bill Archer has provided an extremely important institutional link to an earlier period of this body when there was a different tone, a different civility and, more importantly, a different approach to work product. The thing that I will remember most about Bill Archer is that oftentimes we know a person as an individual and a person as a Member, and the way in which they conduct their business as a Member and the way in which they deal with various other personal aspects as a person are often different. I do not know of anyone else who follows a course in which his professional action is paralleled by his personal action. Any time I have been in a closed room with the gentleman from Texas, and we have had to reconcile a difference, the reconciliation takes the course of what is the right policy; what is the appropriate action, not what is in it for me, this is necessary for my constituents. It served him well as a compass, but it has not always provided a smooth road. Because oftentimes he stood in the way of someone wanting to get something from a personal or a district point of view, and sometimes that individual's discretion was clouded by the desire to obtain a particular end and what that gentleman was going to do to comity, to the Tax Code, and to policy by doing it. This institution has been well served by Bill Archer many, many times behind closed doors when his resolute determination to do what is right has prevailed. Sometimes when one winds up being in the majority, and obviously I served with Bill Archer in the minority for almost 16 years, and I think we get to know a person more when they are not able to do something, and the way in which they conduct themselves when they cannot do it, than when they are in a position of authority and they are able to do it. The civil manner in which Bill Archer presented his arguments, the determination, the preparation, is once again a model that all of us can remember and would be a model for all of us to adhere to. When he became chairman, and Republicans became the majority, he carried that over to the conduct on the full committee. Those of us who are returning, and we have a very high level of confidence that we will be returning to a Republican majority House and majority control of the Committee on Ways and Means, though Bill Archer will not be with us physically, he will always be with us in spirit because there will come a time behind closed doors when we have a difficult choice to make, and the response should be, and will be, well, what would Bill Archer do. I hope that will be our guiding philosophy even when Bill Archer will no longer be in the room. We wish him well, Mr. Speaker. We look forward to the enjoyment and the time he will have to spend with Sharon and the family, but that time will be taken away from his colleagues and the leadership he has provided us. He will be sorely missed by those of us who served with him as individuals; he will be much more sorely missed by this institution in terms of the way he conducted his public responsibilities. I thank the gentleman from Florida once again for taking this opportunity for us to remember the real meaning of Bill Archer. Do as Bill Archer would do.

Mr. THOMAS

Mr. THOMAS. Mr. Speaker, we are here today with a Presidential veto threat, and I am here to address that provision in the Medicare and Medicaid area, because in the President's message, he said, as several of my Democratic colleagues have said, that the bill fails to attach accountability provisions to the health maintenance organizations. I am sorry to tell my friends who made that statement that they are simply flat-out wrong. I hope they did not do it for political purposes. I hope they did it because they were either uninformed or misinformed. On page 143 in the bill, on lines 17 and 18, the language contained therein is the language supplied to us by the administration in terms of their request for accountability. Now, it seems strange with all of the arguments that there has not been much discussion between the administration and those of us that are charged with the responsibility as the majority to work with the minority, which we did in the Committee on Ways and Means subcommittee, by unanimously passing out the provision. It says, any of the dollars in this bill sent to Medicare HMOs can only be used to reduce premiums, cost-sharing, enhance the benefits of the beneficiaries, or utilize the stabilization fund. Every dollar that is added must be converted to benefits for individuals. The President also says that there are other health care providers that are shorted by the basis of the HMO provisions. Let us remember that this is supposed to be not always for providers, it is supposed to be for beneficiaries. It is supposed to be for people in trouble. Organizations surrounding that have all written us letters. More than four dozen associations have said, we like what you are doing, we support what you are doing, we hope Members vote for it, we hope the President does not veto it. Organizations such as the American Cancer Society, the American Dietetic Association, Juvenile Justice Foundation, the National Kidney Foundation, the National Multiple Sclerosis Society, these are the people that are urging us to vote for the bill. They want us to vote for the bill. The President's veto threat says that other providers have been shorted because so much money has been given to the Medicare HMOs. Then why in the world is the Long Term Hospital Association endorsing this, urging members to vote for it? Why is the Federation of American Hospitals, the National Association of Childrens Hospitals, the National Association of Long Term Hospitals, the National Association of Psychiatric Health Hospitals, the National Association of Urban Critical Access Hospitals, and the one usually held up, the American Hospital Association, says in a letter dated today, and I quote, American Hospital Association says, ``We are urging Members to vote in favor of this legislation and have recommended that the President not veto the legislation.'' The other providers say, vote for the bill and pass it. The associations that are going to benefit, the American Red Cross and others, say vote for it and pass it. Mr. Speaker, I am just curious as to who these unnamed folks are that somehow are being benefited in here. Believe me, this is good legislation. Follow these people. Vote for it, pass it, and the President should not veto it.

Mr. THOMAS

Mr. THOMAS. Mr. Speaker, on November 14th the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics (AIAA) will award Air Force Research Laboratory Rocket Site facilities at Edwards Air Force Base a historic aerospace site designation. The AIAA is absolutely right: the Research Lab truly is one of the nation's most important aerospace facilities and it does have a rich history of service to the nation. The significance of the role the Air Force Research Laboratory has played in our defense and conquest of space is illustrated by the other places the AIAA will name historic sites this year. The AIAA is naming Tranquility Base on the Moon, where Americans first touched down, as an historic site. Similarly, they are honoring Dutch Flats Airport, where Lindbergh tested the Spirit of St. Louis, the original Aerojet Engineering Company plant in Pasadena and the Massachusetts farm where Dr. Robert Goddard tested the first liquid propellant rocket in 1926, as historic sites. Including the Research Laboratory in this group shows the value knowledgeable people place on the Air Force Research Laboratory's over 50 years of research, testing and development. A brief review of the work that has been done and is being done at the Research Laboratory makes it easy to understand why the AIAA regards the Research Laboratory as important. Nearly every U.S. rocket system used today uses technology based on the Air Force Research Laboratory's work. The laboratory has tested and developed rocket propulsion technologies for defense and space systems. The Saturn rockets that powered America's Apollo flights were tested there. There are unique facilities for continuously testing space satellite propulsion thrusters for up to 7 hours and immense rocket stands that are still valuable research and testing tools. In fact, Research Laboratory personnel are now working on new technologies in coordination with industry and other government agencies through the Integrated High Payoff Rocket Propulsion Technology program. For over half a century, a quiet, dedicated group of people have joined together on a remote part of Edwards Air Force Base to pioneer the concepts that have made modern space flight and defense technologies possible. AIAA's recognition is one we should all agree with and one in which Air Force Research Laboratory personnel past and present can take just pride.

Mr. THOMAS

Mr. THOMAS. Mr. Speaker, it is interesting the way people deal with history around here. For more than 40 years this party was the majority. As recently as 1993 they owned the government. They had the House; they had the Senate. They had the Presidency and yet they have the gall to stand up and say what we should be doing about children in schools. They owned the place. What did they do when they were here? I will tell you. In 1992 and in 1993, this House was in scandal and when the Republican majority took over we said we want a third party audit. It took us 5 years, no question about it. This House now gets a clean audit from the third party private sector. Do you know why we have a surplus? It is very simple. In 1993, they held the House, they held the Senate and they held the Presidency. They passed the largest tax increase in history, and then the American people in November of 1994 voted Republicans for the first time in half a century a majority in the House. And guess what? We did not spend it. Now, if you want to know where the surplus came from, they raised taxes; and we did not spend it. That is how we got the surplus. So if you listen to these people telling you all of the things that need to be corrected, with our small majority we passed a prescription drug provision; we are moving forward on Medicare reforms. And we are making changes while they are complaining about things they never ever did when they were in the majority.

Mr. THOMAS

Mr. THOMAS. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Regula), the author of this piece of legislation on the House side.

Mr. THOMAS. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the Senate bill (S. 3201) to rename the National Museum of American Art.

Mr. THOMAS

Mr. THOMAS. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the Senate bill (S. 2498) to authorize the Smithsonian Institution to plan, design, construct, and equip laboratory, administrative, and support space to house base operations for the Smithsonian Astrophysical Observatory Submillimeter Array located on Mauna Kea at Hilo, Hawaii.

Mr. THOMAS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. In 1989, the Smithsonian, as part of its various programs, began an astrophysical observatory located on the island of Hawaii on the volcano Mauna Kea. There are a number of other observatories located there as well. This bill is to provide funds, as was indicated, to design, construct and equip laboratory and administrative support space. This space had been given free by other institutions, but they now require the utilization of that space, and this bill will provide, over the fiscal years 2001 and 2002, sufficient money to provide the support facilities for the astrophysical observatory. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. THOMAS. Mr. Speaker, I have no further requests for time, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. THOMAS

Mr. THOMAS. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 5410) to establish revolving funds for the operation of certain programs and activities of the Library of Congress, and for other purposes, as amended.

Mr. THOMAS. Mr. Speaker, I have no further requests for time, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. THOMAS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume just to note that I did thank the gentleman from Virginia for his assistance, and I will gladly and laudatorily praise him for his assistance, but he will have to work to get additional facilities. The one that we have is an excellent one and it is going to serve the Nation well in preserving the very volatile audio and video treasures of this country.

Mr. THOMAS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. H.R. 5410 is a bill to allow the Library of Congress to create three revolving funds so that the monies garnered from various activities could be retained by the library to be reinvested in those areas. One of the revolving funds is a gift shop fund, the other is a Federal library and information network program for products and services yielded under that structure. I would tell the gentleman from Virginia that, because of the recent locating of the audio-video conservation center in Culpeper, Virginia, a major acquisition for the Library of Congress in a facility designed for other purposes but perfect for protecting films and audio, that any funds derived from audio-video duplicating will be allowed to be placed in a revolving fund based upon this legislation. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. THOMAS

Mr. THOMAS. 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. 5410, the bill just passed.

Mr. THOMAS

Mr. THOMAS. 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 S. 2498, the Senate bill just passed.

Mr. THOMAS

Mr. THOMAS. 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 S. 3201, the Senate bill just passed.