Ed Whitfield

Mr. WHITFIELD

Mr. WHITFIELD. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to applaud America's local broadcast stations for a program they recently launched to assist the families of our men and women in uniform who are fighting the war on terrorism abroad. As of today, there are more than 140,000 active-duty and reserve personnel serving our great Nation in Iraq, Afghanistan, and around the world. I have the privilege of representing the soldiers stationed at Ft. Campbell, Kentucky assigned to the 101st Airborne Division, the 5th Special Forces Group, and the 160th Special Operations Aviation Regiment. The men and women of these premier Army units have been deployed for extensive periods of time, often with little or no break between deployments. For the families left behind, these extended separations can be trying not only emotionally, but financially as well. In many cases, the primary ``bread winner'' is the person sent overseas, leaving wives and children to cope with unexpected expenses. The National Association of Broadcasters and its 6,000 radio station and 1,000 television station members recently partnered with the Armed Forces Relief Trust (AFRT) to help raise funds for those families that are facing financial challenges. The AFRT solicits contributions and then disburses interest-free loans and grants to family members of deployed personnel who are in need. To support this effort, the broadcasters produced and are voluntarily airing Public Service Announcements, so that AFRT can assist even more families in need. The AFRT provides important services. They may provide assistance so a soldier can fly home to attend their father's funeral. The services may include a special reading program for a sailor's daughter. They may assist with special medical attention for a pilot's spouse, or college tuition for a Marine's child. Mr. Speaker, our fighting men and women and their families are sacrificing a great deal on our behalf. It is the duty of all Americans to provide comfort and assistance in any way they can. I extend a special thanks to the radio and television station owners who are calling attention to this important cause. They are providing an important public service and I commend them for their efforts.

Mr. WHITFIELD

Mr. WHITFIELD. Mr. Chairman, since September 11, 2001, the American people, in fact, people throughout the world have lived in particularly tumultuous times. As a result of that, our Nation finds itself in deficit spending for the first time in 4 years. There is no question that the American people are a compassionate and generous people and they want to help the people of Iraq. But we also have needs in America today, transportation needs, health care needs, educational needs. So at this time of deficit spending I want to commend the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Pence) for his commonsense and practical approach to solve the funding needs in Iraq. His amendment simply says that we will give 50 percent of the $20 billion, approximately, as a grant to the Iraqi people that would not need to be repaid. But the other 50 percent would be a loan, once the President of the United States, President Bush, determines and certifies to the Congress that a democratically- elected government in Iraq has been established. I want to commend the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Pence) for his amendment and urge Members to support it.

Mr. WHITFIELD

Mr. WHITFIELD. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor and pay tribute to Helen Agnew Davis of Allensville, Kentucky. Helen passed away on September 27, 2003 at the age of 76. Along with her family, I am pleased that Helen will now receive the national recognition that she deserves for her dedication to School Food Service in Kentucky. Helen Davis served the children of western Kentucky as the Food Service Director for the Todd County Public Schools. Helen was a member of the American School Food Service Association (ASFSA) and the Kentucky School Food Service Association (KSFSA). She joined those organizations in 1957 and I am told that she holds the record for continuous active membership in the KSFSA. As the 12th President of the FSFSA, long-time Chair of the KSFSA Public Policy and Legislative Committee, and Treasurer of the ASFSA, she truly was a leader in School Food Service. Helen was the Kentucky representative when ASFSA held its first Washington, D.C. ``Fly-in.'' In addition, she continued to lead the Kentucky delegation during the annual trek to D.C. for two decades. She was a teacher and mentor to anyone interested in learning the legislative process and she always taught the values of legislative activity and other civic duties. Her wisdom and insight born of experience and careful deliberation were highlighted in the KSFSA's 1988, Futures Seminar and the 1998, Strategic Planning Meeting. The results of those meetings helped KSFSA win the ASFSA President's Award of Excellence for three straight years. In the mid 1950's, Helen Davis signed on to feed the children of Todd County. Her direction, goals, priorities and challenges have been KSFSA's own. She encouraged all of us to remember why we are here and to always finish what we start. She did just that when she helped finish the new Todd County High School kitchen and cafeteria. Mr. Speaker, I am proud to bring the accomplishments and wonderful life of Helen Davis to the attention of the House.

Mr. WHITFIELD

Mr. WHITFIELD. Mr. Speaker, on September 4 my colleague Frank Pallone and I introduced the National All Schedules Prescription Electronic Reporting (NASPER) Act. This legislation would establish a national electronic data bank for practitioner monitoring of schedule II, III and IV controlled substances. Our Nation has been fighting a long battle against the scourge of drug abuse and its devastating effects upon our society. The lives that are ruined, the families that are destroyed, and the loss to societal productivity are almost impossible to comprehend. Unfortunately, one of the fastest growing areas of drug abuse is through the diversion of prescription drugs. This diversion can include such activities as ``doctor shopping'' where individuals go from doctor to doctor obtaining multiple prescriptions, or through the illegal sales of prescription drugs by doctors and pharmacists, or by prescription forgery. My own State of Kentucky has been hit particularly hard by the epidemic of oxycontin abuse. In a 2001 hearing before the House Appropriations Subcommittee on Commerce, Justice and State, Rod Maggard, a former police chief in Harzard, KY, testified on the effects of the oxycontin epidemic on our State. He told committee members how the drug had ``demoralized our community . . . it bankrupted spiritually, morally, and financially people all over our area.'' The Associated Press reported how Kentucky was experiencing a crime wave as addicts sought to obtain the drug oxycontin. Mr. Speaker, I believe that one of the most effective ways we can help prevent prescription drug abuse is by getting information to those who are on the front line in this battle--that is the doctors, themselves. Today, in most States when a patient walks into a doctor's office requesting prescription medication, that doctor has no way of knowing if he is the first physician that patient has seen or the fifth. He simply has to rely on the patient to be honest with him. Now obviously, if this patient is an addict or is trying to scam the doctor, the doctor is not going to be told the truth. And yet we expect this doctor to treat the patient and to be responsible in prescribing medication. The NASPER Act would take the guess work out of this situation. With a national electronic data bank, the doctor could simply access prescription information and determine what, if any, medication the patient should be given. The bill is consistent with the requirements of the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) and the patient would have to give his written consent before the doctor could access the data bank. Only the doctor or pharmacist who is currently treating the patient could request the information. Each request would have to be certified by the treating practitioner or pharmacist that the information is necessary for the purpose of providing medical or pharmaceutical treatment or to evaluate the need for such treatment for a bona fide current patient. It is also important to note that as the population in our country ages, there will be more and more people who visit multiple doctors for various treatments. The NASPER Act would help doctors coordinate the medication their patient is receiving from other practitioners so that the patient does not experience an adverse medication reaction. Currently 15 States have some type of Intrastate Prescription Drug Monitoring Program (PDMP). Two additional States are currently in the pilot stage of implementing such a program. A May 2002 General Accounting Office (GAO) study found that in States where a PDMP was in place, ``the presence of a PDMP helps a State reduce its illegal drug diversion . . .'' The same report also states that ``the existence of a PDMP within a State, however, appears to increase drug diversion activities in contiguous non-PDMP States. When States begin to monitor drugs, drug diversion activities tend to spill across boundaries to non-PDMP States.'' In other words, those who want to scam the system know that they will have a difficult time doing so within a particular State, so they just move the problem across State lines. The State of Kentucky has one of the most effective PDMPs in the Nation. However, there are a number of reports that show drug diversion problems, particularly in the area of oxycontin abuse, have increased in the contiguous States of Tennessee, West Virginia, and Virginia due to the presence of Kentucky's PDMP. I believe the only way we can truly address this problem is by coordinating our efforts across State lines. The NASPER Act builds on the work that has already begun in the States. Under this legislation, individual States are permitted to set up their own PDMP to the exclusion of the Federal program created by the act, as long as the States submit the information required by the Secretary of Health and Human Services to the Federal data bank. However, the NASPER Act recognizes that if we are truly going to address this problem, we need a Federal role to ensure that the States will be able to share the information across State lines. An interstate system would allow doctors to get the information they need to better serve their patients. I would like to thank Chairman Tauzin and the staff of the Energy and Commerce Committee for their assistance on this issue. The chairman has been very attentive to concerns that I and others have raised and I look forward to continuing to work with him on this legislation. Mr. Speaker, advances in technology have revolutionized health care delivery in this Nation. Isn't it time that we used this technology to better serve our citizens in the area of prescription drugs? I would ask my colleagues to join me in supporting this important legislation.

Mr. WHITFIELD

Mr. WHITFIELD. Mr. Speaker, today represents the culmination of 4 to 5 years of Congress' efforts to provide a prescription drug benefit for senior citizens on Medicare. Two years ago, the House of Representatives passed a prescription drug benefit for senior citizens. Last year we did the same. The Senate did not do it the year before, nor did they do it last year; but this year both the House and the Senate will pass a prescription drug benefit. This is a meaningful plan. It is going to provide basically free medicines for any senior citizen on Medicare who is at 135 percent of the poverty level and below. The only thing they will be expected to pay is a small $2 copay for generic drugs and a small $5 copay for name-brand drugs. I have heard a lot of comments today about private insurance companies are going to be involved in administering this plan. I think it is important to recognize that today's Medicare plan uses private insurance companies to handle all of the reimbursement charges for Medicare. So we are not doing anything dramatically different in this bill than what is being done today. I would also say the fact that this bill would provide catastrophic coverage for seniors is going to be a tremendous benefit. It will give them the peace of mind to know that no matter how high their drug costs may be, at some point the Federal Government will pay for all of it, the taxpayers will pay for all of it. I would also say that this bill provides an important rural health benefit package that is going to benefit all of rural America. It also provides additional monies, important monies that are needed for disproportionate share hospitals. It will benefit every children's hospital in America today. All those hospitals that provide care for people on Medicaid will receive additional funds. I think this is an important bill, and I urge Members to vote for the previous question and to adopt this new prescription drug benefit for Medicare beneficiaries.

Mr. WHITFIELD

Mr. WHITFIELD. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me time. Mr. Speaker, tonight is the culmination of 4 or 5 years of debate of a prescription drug benefit for our senior citizens here in America. I hear a lot of the criticism and I have heard it all day today about private insurance companies being involved in this program that we are submitting tonight. Yet, I would remind those on the other side of the aisle that private insurance companies are involved in Medicare as it exists today and has been for some time because it is the private companies that are responsible for the reimbursement of our health care. So private companies are already very much involved in our Medicare system today. I would also say, what benefit are seniors going to get from this program? First of all, if they are 135 percent of the poverty level and below, and I can tell my colleagues, in my district that is about 60 percent of them, they are not going to have to pay anything. The government's going to pay their premium for them. The only thing that they will have to pay is a $2 small copay for a generic drug and a $5 copay for a name-brand drug. What is wrong with a program that provides free medicines for seniors who today cannot get them? I would also say that in addition to that tremendous benefit, and we provide catastrophic coverage for them as well, but in addition to that tremendous benefit, we have a rural health package in this bill that is going to help rural America, rural health providers. It is going to provide $27 billion over 10 years for our rural areas, and the disproportionate share payment for our rural hospitals, children's hospitals around the country, urban hospitals that treat our citizens on Medicaid, our hospitals over the next 10 years are going to get $3.8 billion for those who treat the neediest in our society. This is a program that we should all be supporting, and certainly we should not support the Democratic substitute.

Mr. WHITFIELD

Mr. WHITFIELD. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize a Kentucky landmark, Ferrell's Snappy Service in Hopkinsville, Kentucky. Ferrell's is one of the oldest, most successful small businesses in Kentucky. David Ferrell and his five elder brothers started their hamburger chain in 1930 in Owensboro, Kentucky. The business later expanded to Hopkinsville, Henderson, Madisonville and Cadiz, Kentucky. The Hopkinsville restaurant in the longest running of the chain, opening in 1936 when Franklin Roosevelt was President. Mrs. Cecil Ferrell still operates Ferrell's in Hopkinsville today. Countless customers including myself look forward to dropping by, having a burger, and visiting with Mrs. Ferrell who is always there to greet you with a smile and good conversation. Ferrell's Snappy Service has become an institution to its customers and Hopkinsville. After 67 years of service, perhaps one of the most beloved aspects of Ferrell's is how much it has not changed. Ferrell's is located in the same building in which it opened in downtown Hopkinsville. It offers the same menu of hamburgers, chili, pecan pie, potato chips, and cold colas. This has not gone unnoticed by its faithful customers. One customer who moved to Texas returned to Hopkinsville to purchase 200 Ferrell's hamburgers before she returned to the Lone Star State. People from around the world have enjoyed Ferrell's hamburgers including a delivery that was dropped off by a tourist for Prince Charles and Princess Dianna in London. Customers can enjoy a hamburger 24 hours a day, six days a week, and Mrs. Ferrell has often said Ferrell's has been a meeting place for folks through the years who work late shifts or who just want to get together. Ferrell's Snappy Service is a sound example of the importance and impact small businesses have on our economy. After 67 years of uninterrupted service, Ferrrell's has served countless people and provided a great product at a fair price. Those who have been employed there and those who have dined there know what an impact this small business has had on our economy. Mr. Speaker, I am proud to represent Mrs. Cecil Ferrell and her family in my congressional district. She and her late husband David have made a positive and long lasting impact on our community, and I am proud to bring their accomplishments to the attention of this House.

Mr. WHITFIELD

Mr. WHITFIELD. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor the Double Springs Baptist Church in Waynesburg, Kentucky during its 200th anniversary. Located in the eastern part of Kentucky's First Congressional District, Double Springs Baptist's goal of advancing faith in Christ was established at the time of its founding. The Double Springs Baptist Church was organized in January, 1803 as a meeting house for people in southern Lincoln County, northern Pulaski County and eastern Casey County. From its humble beginnings, the church has been successful in serving the community and strengthening their faith through God. Throughout the past 200 years, Double Springs Baptist has grown to become a vital part of the local community. This rich heritage is being preserved through the training of new leaders and the creation of new ministries to care for the needs of people. The new millennium has brought the parishioners of Double Springs great spiritual and structural growth under the care and guidance of Pastor Brad King. Under Pastor King's leadership and with the continued dedication of its members, I am sure Double Springs Baptist will enjoy another 200 years of service to the Lord. Double Springs Baptist is truly a church from yesterday, as well as, a church for tomorrow. Mr. Speaker, in closing, I extend my warmest congratulations to the Double Springs Baptist Church on this special occasion. With their commitment to faith and service to their community, the staff and members of Double Springs Baptist Church are truly role models for us all. I call upon my colleagues to join me in applauding the church's 200 years of excellence. Thank you for your time and attention, Mr. Speaker. I appreciate the opportunity to speak here today.

Mr. WHITFIELD

Mr. WHITFIELD. Mr. Speaker, I rise in recognition of Owen's Delicatessen, an outstanding small business with a unique history in my hometown of Hopkinsville, Kentucky. Owen's is owned and operated by Ms. Francis Lynn Moss. It was founded in 1960 out of a record shop which became an electric shop owned by her parents, Annie Ruth Owen and Lynn Owen. Owen's began its unique food service by selling delicious prune cakes. These cakes became so popular, that Francis and her mother expanded their business into Owen's Delicatessen that specializes in freshly prepared foods and baked goods. Each day begins with the preparation of baked hams, turkeys, cakes, pies, and brownies. All food is prepared the day it is served, and for 33 years Owen's has met the demands of an ever expanding customer base. Francis prepares most of the food sold at Owen's and she has been fortunate to have a dedicated staff of employees who join her in the early hours of the day to make sure the food is ready for the noon time crowd. Owen's is best characterized by delicious food served with country charm in a home style environment. Customers dining at Owen's are seated at a kitchen table in a room filled with antiques collected by the Moss family throughout the years, some of which came from the Moss electric store. Mr. Speaker, Owen's Delicatessen is beloved by its faithful customers and all who walk through its doors. It is a shining example of the significance and economic impact a small business can have on a community. I am proud to bring the accomplishments of Francis Moss and her employees at Owen's Delicatessen to the attention of the House.

Mr. WHITFIELD

Mr. WHITFIELD. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to congratulate a young lady in my District, Ms. Kacey L. Reynolds of Calvert City, Kentucky. Ms. Reynolds is the Kentucky winner of the 2003 Veterans of Foreign Wars Voice of Democracy broadcast script writing contest. Ms. Reynolds's script, entitled ``Freedom's Obligation,'' has great meaning as our armed forces are in the process of liberating the Iraqi people and giving them the freedoms we enjoy everyday. At sixteen years old, Ms. Reynolds has a true understanding of what freedom means and what individuals must do to preserve it. I have attached a copy of Ms. Reynolds's script to be placed in the Record. I urge all my colleagues to read her inspiring thoughts on the true value of freedom. [From the 2002-2003 VFW Voice of Democracy Scholarship Contest] Freedom's Obligation (By Kacey Reynolds--Kentucky Winner) Our forefathers viewed freedom as a quest--a goal they lived, and gave, their lives fearlessly pursuing. Today, most of us view freedom as a privilege we deserve, a complimentary right owed to us, simply because we are American. But our liberty must never be taken for granted and we must never delude ourselves into believing freedom is free. Independence has always come at a price, and we have a responsibility to ensure that it continues so the heroic sacrifices made to secure it were not in vain. Freedom is a blessing and a responsibility and our obligation to it is threefold. Our first obligation to freedom is that of education. Thomas Jefferson once said, ``If a nation expects to be ignorant AND free, in a state of civilization, then it expects what never was and never will be.'' Ignorance is the first enemy of liberty. It is through education that we possess the freedom, not only to provide for ourselves, but to choose the manner in which we do so. It is through learning that we open our minds to new concepts and courageous ideals to better govern ourselves. It is through a knowledge of our history that we take pride in who we are and our rich heritage as Americans. Education provides opportunity--the opportunity to be self-sufficient, the opportunity to understand, the opportunity to be free. Our second obligation to freedom is that of obedience. America's government is ``of the people, by the people and for the people'', but our founding fathers knew that no people can be truly free if any individual person is allowed to violate the rights of others. Obedience to the law is essential for equality and security. If we expect our government to provide freedom for us, then we have a responsibility to respect each other. Crime is the second enemy of liberty. President Theodore Roosevelt said, ``No man is above the law and no man is below it. Nor do we ask any man's permission when we require him to obey it. Obedience is demanded as a right, not asked as a favor.'' Obedience by each individual provides freedom for all. Our third obligation to freedom is that of service, of giving back to our community, our government, and our country. We, as citizens of that freedom, hold a responsibility to dedicate our time, our resources, our passion, and, sometimes, even our lives for the greater good. It is in serving one another that we become united. If we fail to give of ourselves, then we fail the memory of those brave souls who went before us to sacrifice everything. Selfishness is the third enemy of liberty, but volunteering our service affords us the opportunity to give back what we receive. Only in this service can our country provide us with true freedom. Without education, how can we be free to govern ourselves? Without obedience to our laws, how can we ensure safety and security for all people? Without service, how can we expect others to fight and die for our freedom? We cannot. We must dauntlessly pursue education, bravely stand up for what is right through obedience and unselfishly give of ourselves through service so freedom can continue to flourish. This is our obligation. It is in being the ``home of the brave'' that makes us ``the land of the free''.

Mr. WHITFIELD

Mr. WHITFIELD. Mr. Chairman, I am delighted that we are making such progress on this energy bill. Mr. Chairman, as part of the legislative activity that preceded the introduction on H.R. 6, the Committee of Energy and Commerce reported legislation which authorized $200 million per year for 9 years for clean coal projects at new and existing plants. The legislation was based, in part, on H.R. 1213, legislation that I introduced with my colleague and our friend the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Boucher). The Clean Coal Power Initiative, contained in both the Committee on Energy and Commerce bill and H.R. 6, is a vital and necessary part of the effort to provide cleaner and more efficient electricity from coal- fired power plants. However, this initiative must be complemented by tax incentives that will encourage the successful completion and operation of clean coal projects. As was noted during the preceding colloquy yesterday by the gentleman from California (Mr. Thomas) and the gentleman from Kentucky (Mr. Lewis), H.R. 6 does not contain such tax incentives. I would ask the chairman whether he would lend his support to the adoption of such incentives in conference with the Senate.

Mr. WHITFIELD. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. WHITFIELD. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman.

Mr. WHITFIELD

Mr. WHITFIELD. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding time to me. Mr. Chairman, this is indeed a sobering day as we sit on the floor and debate this important issue while our young men and women in the military are outside the city of Baghdad as we speak. It is my privilege to represent the 101st Airborne Division, which is present in Baghdad today. When I was first elected to Congress, the military leaders at Fort Campbell reiterated to me the importance of Turkey as a military ally. As a result of those discussions repeatedly over many occasions, I joined with others in the Congress, and we established the Congressional Caucus on Turkey and Turkish Americans a couple of years ago. With the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Wexler) and the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Rogers) I went to Turkey about 3 weeks ago. We met with not the Prime Minister, Mr. Erdogan, he subsequently became the Prime Minister; and we urged him to allow our troops to use Turkish soil to come into northern Iraq. The Parliament, even though they voted more to do it than they voted against it, they did not get the necessary votes, and they did not pass it. We were disappointed. I think it has been said repeatedly today, and everyone recognizes, we all agree, Turkey is a valuable military ally. But on another note, I would like to point out today that the real tension in the world today, I think all of us would agree, is between Christians and Muslims and the Jewish faith. Everywhere we look we see this tension. Turkey has been a perfect example of a Muslim country with a secular government that has good relationships with the United States, with democracies, with the State of Israel. It is the type of model that I think is vitally important for the long term. I think that is one of the reasons that we see that President Bush has requested this money. Therefore, I would urge the Members today to defeat this amendment.

Mr. WHITFIELD

Mr. WHITFIELD. Mr. Speaker, I would like to comment briefly on the flawed regulatory decision recently announced by the Federal Communications Commission. The FCC's approach can be deemed as borrowed from what the railroad industry refers to as trackage rights; that is, using another company's property. Under the FCC rules, competitors are able to pay a bare minimum to use the incumbent phone company's networks. The prices are set using a complicated formula devised by the FCC and administered by State commissions. It is Federal price controls at their worst. This approach has two negative effects. First, it discourages investment in the U.S. network by incumbent phone companies. Why would you invest if someone else is going to be able to use your property? Second, by deliberately underpricing network access, the FCC has discouraged investment in other networks by other firms. It hurts facilities-based competitors who cannot hope to match the FCC-mandated artificially low rates. Even Wall Street has expressed their dismay at this decision. Mr. Speaker, this country should be encouraging investment, not discouraging it. We should be creating jobs, not discouraging it. I hope that the FCC will correct this bad decision as soon as possible.

Mr. WHITFIELD

Mr. WHITFIELD. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize nominees for the Regional Academic All-Star Team from the Pennyroyal region in western Kentucky. The regional Academic All-Star program's purpose is to recognize top academic scholars and performers. Students from Caldwell, Christian, Trigg and Todd Counties of Kentucky were nominated based on their academic performance in seven disciplines: English, foreign language, journalism, mathematics, science, social studies and the creative and performing arts. The students are judged on their core academic score, the curriculum of the student, their grade point average, academic honors earned, unique accomplishments and achievements, extracurricular activities (both community based and school-related), employment history, and an autobiographical essay. Mr. Speaker, education is the foundation upon which we reach our human potential. Students in my District are developing their talents, furthering their education and pursuing their aspirations in life through programs like the Academic All-Star program. Encouragement and recognition develop confidence and achievement among young Americans-- the future leaders of our country. The following students have been nominated for their academic excellence: J. D. Quin, Princeton; Frank Armstrong, Hopkinsville; Rebekah Woodall, Cadiz; Josh Covington, Hopkinsville; Jason Musser, Elkton; Elizabeth Hostilo, Hopkinsville; Jordan Judy, Trenton; Dana Davis, Gracey; Ethan Thomasson, Cadiz; Lewis Jones, Princeton; James Yoakum, Hopkinsville; Sarah Phaup, Madisonville; Melinda Orten, Hopkinsville; Hannah Cummins, Fredonia; Rachel Jaggers, Cadiz; Kelsie Nabb, Guthrie. David Harper, Hopkinsville; Patrick Armstrong, Hopkinsville; Louis Clayton, Hopkinsville; Emmy Lou Kacer, Hopkinsville; Gwen Son, Princeton; Tavia Green, Hopkinsville; Kimberly Fennell, Cadiz; Craig Richardson, Hopkinsville; Jennifer Belcher, Hopkinsville; Jessica Mizwa, Elkton; Jonetta Tabor, Elkton; Jeremy Wells, Hopkinsville; Jackie Shiue, Hopkinsville; Emmy Lou Kacer, Hopkinsville; Stuart Cook, Cadiz; Jeffrey Kellow, Hopkinsville. Kevin Oliver, Princeton; Katharine Pettit, Lewisburg; Tanner Parrent, Hopkinsville; Ben Gray, Cadiz; Hunter Ray, Hopkinsville; Cayce East, Hopkinsville; Ashley Crick, Crofton; Cayce Higgins, Hopkinsville; Rose Heflin, Elkton Menyon; Cayce East, Hopkinsville; Brian Belva, Hopkinsville; Elizabeth Dearing, Princeton; Patience Manos, Cadiz; Angela Latimer, Hopkinsville. Mr. Speaker, these students embody the spirit, commitment and sacrifice that we all should strive for in our daily lives. I am proud to represent them in my District. I extend my thanks to these students for their efforts, and I am proud to bring their accomplishments to the attention of this House.

Mr. WHITFIELD

Mr. WHITFIELD. Mr. Speaker, on rollcall No. 76, I was unavoidably detained. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yea.''

Mr. WHITFIELD

Mr. WHITFIELD. Mr. Speaker, I rise to honor the late Mrs. Rosemary Pace of Hopkinsville, Kentucky. Mrs. Pace passed away on March 5, 2003. Mrs. Pace was a community leader and an outstanding citizen. Mrs. Pace was a native of Elmhurst, Illinois. She was born on November 14, 1914. Throughout her lifetime, she touched the lives of many with her civic involvement. She was a home economics teacher at Bethel College in Hopkinsville and taught at the Fort Campbell Independent Schools for 18 years. After retirement, Mrs. Pace continued to serve her community in many ways. She was a board member of the Senior Citizens Center, president and vice president of the Christian County Retired Teachers Association, president and vice president of the Christian County Chapter of the National Association of Retired Federal Employees, president of the Christian County Homemakers Association, secretary and treasurer of the Christian County Extension Council, board member of the Kentucky Farm Bureau, and a volunteer teacher at Holiday Elementary School. Mrs. Pace also organized and distributed food commodities for Pennyrile Allied Services. She served as president and vice president of the St. Elmo Homemakers, and she was president of the Hunting Creek Homemakers. These are only some of her many community service activities. Mrs. Pace was a strong believer in education. She founded the Family Career and Community Leaders (FHA) Rosemary M. Pace Region II Scholarship fund. She was a member of Delta Kappa Gamma Society, International. Mrs. Pace spent countless hours establishing and promoting the Farmers Market in Hopkinsville. She received numerous awards and honors for her outstanding volunteer work in the community and the state. She epitomized the word volunteer and her service to the community will always be held as an example to others. Mrs. Pace was known in the community for her trademark hats. Rarely was she seen in public without a beautiful red hat. She was a truly exceptional citizen. Mr. Speaker, I am proud to call attention to the selfless acts of Rosemary M. Pace for all her efforts on behalf of so many, and I am honored to bring her accomplishments to the attention of this House.

Mr. WHITFIELD

Mr. WHITFIELD. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor Mr. Larry Walston of Hopkinsville, KY, for his hard work and dedication on behalf of our Nation's veterans. Mr. Walston has worked tirelessly to document the service of veterans who were interred without proper ceremony or marker. In conjunction with officials from the Commonwealth of Kentucky, he has obtained the military service records of nearly 300 civil war veterans buried in Riverside Cemetery in Hopkinsville. These soldiers were interred without stones. The documentation he helped collect was used to order individual markers from the Department of Veterans Affairs. With the assistance of member of the Sons of the Confederate Veterans and others, these markers were then placed in the cemetery. Mr. Walston served our country as a member of the United States Navy and a veterans of the Vietnam War. He is a professor as Hopkinsville Community College and a member of the Sons of Confederate Veterans, Military Order of the Stars and Bars, Sons of Union Veterans of the Civil War, the Veterans of Foreign Wars and many other community service organizations. He is assisting in making application for military monuments to be certified under the Kentucky Military Heritage Act. Mr. Speaker, I am proud to represent Larry Walston in my district. I extend my thanks to him for all efforts on behalf of so many deserving veterans, and I am proud to bring his accomplishments to the attention of this House.

Mr. WHITFIELD

Mr. WHITFIELD. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor Mr. Richard P'Pool of Princeton, Kentucky for his hard work and dedication on behalf of our nation's veterans. Mr. P'Pool has spent countless hours and resources documenting and recognizing veterans who have been interred without proper ceremony or marker. When discovering a grave without a proper marker, Mr. P'Pool begins to research the veteran. It is necessary to fully document the service member's military career so that the Department of Veterans Affairs can provide a military marker for the grave. Mr. P'Pool helped apply for and received over 300 markers from the Department of Veterans Affairs at his own expense. This process requires hours of tedious and detailed research because the documentation required, including the muster rolls and the extracts from State files or land warrants, is not often not readily available. Whenever possible, Mr. P'Pool organizes a memorial ceremony to honor the veteran with the assistance of re-enactment soldiers from the 5th Tennessee Infantry Regiment, members of the Sons of Confederate Veterans and members of the United Daughters of the Confederacy. They have memorialized soldiers of the Civil War, Korean War and World War II. Mr. P'Pool served our country in the United States Army. He worked at the White House Communications Agency under Presidents Nixon, Ford and Carter from 1973 until 1977, and he is currently employed as a millwright in Calvert City, Kentucky in my Congressional District. He is a member of the Caldwell County Historical Society, the Sons of Confederate Veterans, the Kentucky Historical Society, the Kentucky Genealogical Society and the Friends of the National Park at Gettysburg. He is assisting in making application for military monuments to be certified under the Kentucky Military Heritage Act. Mr. Speaker, I am proud to call attention to the selfless acts of Richard P'Pool. I extend my thanks to him for all his efforts on behalf of so many deserving veterans, and I am honored to bring his accomplishments to the attention of this House.

Mr. WHITFIELD

Mr. WHITFIELD. Madam Speaker, as the 108th Congress begins, all of us recognize that we face many serious issues, both on the domestic front and on the international front. On the domestic front, obviously health care will be a key issue that we must work with, as well as others. But in order to do that, we must, first, focus on strengthening the economy of our country. Nothing is more important than that at this time. Recently, I had the opportunity to read a speech given by Mr. Fred Smith, the chairman and chief executive officer of Federal Express. I would remind everyone that he started a company, and, with his associates, from scratch built a Fortune 500 company, operating today in 211 countries. It employs over 200,000 people and produced revenues in excess of $21 billion last year. In this speech, he sets out what he believes are necessary steps to be taken to jump-start a stalled economy. I just want to touch on a few of the things that he points out. First of all, he refers on page 6 to how he agrees with the legendary economist of the early 19th century, Jean-Baptiste Say, who said essentially that supply creates demand. Simply put, the technological and process innovations by scores of inventors, engineers, scientists and entrepreneurs that have marked the history of the industrialized world lie at the heart of economic prosperity. Then he goes on and talks about why that has not occurred in recent years, why we have not had that type of action, and he talks about how innovations and inventions do continue to pour out of the labs and the R&D centers, but he says that business is not investing because of increased risk. He says that the risk today is unprecedented in modern times. He goes through and he talks about the problems in our legal system, for example, and how on the asbestos claims alone it has cost industry over $54 billion. Then he talks about the necessary steps that must be taken to shorten tax depreciation regimes, reduce capital gains, and to remove the double taxation of dividends. I want to place this speech in the Record because I think it is an important speech that sets out very clearly and succinctly steps that must be taken if we are going to strengthen our economy, expand our economy and to create more jobs. Jumpstarting a Stalled Economy U.S. Chamber of Commerce, Washington, DC, November 13, 2002 Thanks very much for the kind introduction and for inviting me to speak to the Board of the Chamber of Commerce. I am a big fan of the Chamber and the outstanding work being done by Tom Donohue. He and his team have made the Chamber once again a significant voice for business in the Washington political debates. We at FedEx very much appreciate Tom's leadership, energy, and commitment as well as the work of the Chamber on many issues of great importance to us. I am concerned, as I'm sure most of you are, about the state of the U.S. economy. Following the dotcom and telcom meltdown, our economy has simply not gained enough traction to improve the American standard of living and to continue producing the capital stock necessary for the prosperity of future generations. Sometimes I think I am the Forrest Gump of the American economic scene over the last 30 years. Like him, I've seen it all and many times have been in the middle of the fray, economically speaking. I founded and ran a small company, and today am CEO of that same company, which has grown to be one of the world's largest--operating in 211 countries, employing over 200,000 people and producing $21 billion in total revenues last fiscal year. I've also had the pleasure of serving on five other New York Stock Exchange boards. And I participate in several organizations that serve the needs of large businesses such as the Business Roundtable, the Business Council, and various transport industry associations. It is important to recall that the last 1960's also saw the bursting of a technological bubble that had put at risk the fundamental principles of venture capital investing. After FedEx went public in the late 1970s, the welcome profits we produced for our venture capital investors helped reinvigorate that important sector of the financial markets. In early 80s, given the significant success of FedEx as a start-up and its importance to the venture capital industry, I, alone with the National Venture Capital Association and the American Electronics Association, worked hard to lower the capital gains tax by testifying before Congress on several occasions. And, in fact, Congress did lower the capital gains tax rate in 1983 from 28% to 20%. That same year, capital gains tax revenues increased by 45%. More important, tax revenues continued to grow every year thereafter through 1986. Then, in 1987, the capital gains tax rate was taken back up to 28%. Capital gains tax revenues fell in that year and three of the following four years. Now many of my views about the American economy have also been influenced by some 30 years' involvement with various administrations and Congress. In this regard, FedEx was a leader in efforts to deregulate transpiration in the United States (and more recently on a global basis), and we are constantly involved with various governmental issues. Due to this experience, I believe I have a reasonable understanding of the political processes that now greatly influence virtually all economic activity today. Because of this, I know that any business tax proposal must meet the test of the ``politically possible'' regarding near-term tax receipts. On the business front, I have watched with great interest the cyclical changes in the economy and the give-and-take between the so-called ``symbol economy'' of Wall Street and the financial markets, and the ``real economy'' of hard assets and industrial corporate operations. Clearly, in the late 1990's, the symbol economy was the great driver of economic activity as opposed to the real economy. As a result, the fantastic valuations given various companies by the financial markets led all to often to excesses and in some cases criminal activities. The bursting of the bubble was an inevitable consequence. But perhaps the most important lesson I have learned watching the economic froth over the years is that the modern economy is extremely complex. Since the beginning of the Industrial Age, great economists have argued that ``chicken- or-egg'' question--Is it supply that drives economic growth or is it demand? For decades, Keynesians have debated the disciples of the so-called Austrian school. Its progeny, ``the Chicago boys,'' have had a remarkable influence over many economic decisions here and abroad. A recent cover of The Economist plotted business cycles since the beginning of the Industrial Revolution. Remarkably, it showed that the extremes of these historical highs and lows have steadily decreased over time. Clearly, the advent of the Federal Reserve System and its international counterparts, and the influence of the great monetarists like Milton Friedman have helped domesticate if not fully tame the economic beast. In addition, one would certainly have to mention the Kennedy tax cutters and the Reagan ``supply-siders'' in any pantheon of key economic architects of the late 20th century. We have lived through ``stagflation'' in the 1970's, the ``greed is good'' LBO mania of the 1980's, and of course the incredible bubble of the late 1990's--an event perhaps matched only by the 1920s stock market crash brought on by that decade's ``irrational exuberance'' (to borrow a famous recent quote). During this 30-year time period, there have been many societal and governmental changes that have helped improve economic performance. Of particular importance to FedEx was the series of deregulatory changes that freed up transportation and logistics industries. These began in 1977 with air cargo deregulation and concluded in 1994 with federal pre-emption of the last vestiges of state regulation. As a direct result of these new laws, total logistics costs, meaning the interest expense of carrying inventory, warehousing costs, and transportation, have declined from a little over 16% of GDP in 1980 to about 10% today. This remarkable improvement in national productivity has made dramatic improvements in the national well-being. Equally important, transport deregulation permitted significant business innovations such as the now legendary Wal-Mart just-in-time distribution system, the Dell made-to- order computer revolution, and FedEx itself. Government has also helped economic growth by funding a significant amount of research and development that led to such innovations as the Internet, communications satellites, swept-wing jet aircraft, and many others. Private capital subsequently invested to exploit these government-funded innovations has spawned significant economic growth. Finally, both Democratic and Republican administrations since World War II have been committed to opening global markets so that today over 25% of all U.S. economic activity is related to imports and exports. Increased trade has been an enormous overall boon to U.S. GDP, particularly since 1970, when trade was only 10% of the economy. Having observed all these various economic phenomena over the years, and having studied the various macro-economic theories to the extent this poor brain can absorb them, I have come to agree with that legendary economist of the early 19th century, Jean-Baptiste Say. He said, essentially, that ``supply creates demand.'' Simply put, the technological and process innovations by scores of inventors, engineers, scientists and entrepreneurs that have marked the history of the industrialized world lie at the heart of economic prosperity. I believe economic theorists and politicians greatly underestimate the importance of the ``animal spirits'' as John Maynard Keynes called entrepreneurial endeavor. Moreover, I also believe economists are often too concerned about the investment rates in historical or mature businesses which, as all economic theories agree, move constantly towards commoditization, absent innovation and change. A good example of Say's law is the RF key chain in my pocket. A decade ago I simply did not know that I needed this tiny device that allows me to lock and unlock my car from a distance. More recent versions allow me to remotely turn the lights on or off and even open the trunk. This invention has been an incremental but important convenience for millions of people and has, on occasion, even saved lives. The idea sprang from the mind of an inventor, and some entrepreneur inside or outside of a corporation championed its production. The rest is history. This invention came from scientific innovation in fields seemingly unrelated to the traditional automobile--radio frequencies and miniature batteries. And the final product created its own demand, just as Say predicted some two centuries ago. Naturally, all of us can think of scores of products or processes that have improved our well-being, enhanced productivity, and created economic activity and wealth. The Lipitor I take for my heart is a Godsend; Satellite weather imaging technology has improved all sorts of human activities; and The plethora of entertainment options today can satisfy virtually any taste in leisure activities. Clearly, the fundamental driving forces of our economy are continued invention and innovation, exploited by capital investment. After all, the fundamental difference between well-paid FedEx drivers and pilots versus a third-world person moving commodities slowly over a dirt road is the investment in the airplane and the truck; in the ATC system and the highway; and in the education and training afforded our employees. Today U.S. business is not investing at a level necessary to create adequate GDP growth, despite the fact that interest rates are lower than they have been in years. Innovations and inventions continue to pour out of the labs and R&D centers, as reflected by the increasing number of patent applications. What then is the problem? Why are we not investing more robustly? In my opinion, the issue can be summed up in two words--increased risk. About 3,000 companies make 70% plus of all capital investments in our economy. The leaders of these companies today perceive a level of risk unprecedented in modern times. Our legal system has become a minefield for those who aspire to develop something new or unproven. All economic activity today is subject to after-the-fact scrutiny that may ascribe completely different motives and beliefs than were originally intended. The development of the class-action lawsuit, itself a process innovation, has clearly wobbled our of control. So has the ability of juries to assign appropriate damages and ``punishments.'' Now, I have good friends who are plaintiff attorneys. They tell me outrageous awards and abuses of the legal process are the exception rather than the rule. But unfortunately (perhaps because of profile media coverage of the extreme cases) that is not the perception in boardrooms across America. And I am not speaking about the new regulations required by Sarbanes-Oxley or the New York Stock Exchange. I am confident these new requirements are of little concern to the vast majority of honestly run businesses in this country. A bit more bureaucracy will be created and more money spent on various control activities. But if this makes our public business activities more transparent and improves the confidence level of the investing public, they are welcome changes. The litigation landscape in the United States, however, has now become a significant drag on economic activity and particularly the all-important activity of invention, innovation and investment required to produce economic wealth. For example, asbestos-related suits alone have cost businesses more than $54 billion and now threaten companies representing 85% of the economy. (from 11-5-02 WSJ article by George Melloan) Our litigation system simply MUST be reformed if we are to regain appropriate levels of these core economic activities. And I applaud Tom Donohue, the Chamber of Commerce and the Bush administration for making the reform of the U.S. litigation system a top legislative priority. In a related vein, the Congress must also solve the issue of terrorism insurance. The U.S. air transportation industry simply could not function today were it not for Congress having passed emergency legislation to provide terrorism insurance through the Department of Transportation. This temporary fix must be made permanent not just for transportation, but for all industries. We live in an age when shadowy enemies can strike innocent targets in a variety of devious ways. The commercial insurance marketplace simply cannot provide affordable and adequate coverage necessary to sustain an appropriate level of economic activity without Federal government's willingness to be the ``insurer of last resort'' or to cap private liabilities for acts of war. In addition to the fear of litigation and the lack of adequate insurance against terrorist attacks, businesses today face an equally unprecedented array of new risks due to rapidly changing markets, international competition, and accelerated technological change. Let me give an example from the aviation industry. Airlines that invested in domestic wide-body aircraft in the early 1970's found that the market fundamentally changed in the 80s. Why? Because passengers preferred smaller aircraft flying more frequent flights. Thus, the original book depreciation estimates of 20-25 years for the wide bodies were wildly out of step with reality. The same thing has happened in industry after industry, as rapidly changing markets, new technologies, or new competitors with revolutionary business models have appeared. The concept of depreciation was developed as an accounting discipline to reflect the expected useful life of a capital asset. Yet, over the years, tax depreciation schedules and book depreciation schedules have diverged, and they have each become a less accurate reflection of reality. In fact, most of the time, companies that make capital investments simply cannot accurately predict the economic life of the asset being acquired. With FedEx having invested over $20 billion over the last 10 years, I am keenly aware of the role tax policies have on investment decisions. In my opinion, the most important stimulus for increased capital investment would be simpler, shorter tax depreciation regimes applied to capital in this country. To this end, I suggest moving to a simple, three-category tax depreciation system as follows: First, a one-year depreciation schedule for all high-technology investments and low-value software purchases; Next, a three-year depreciation schedule (perhaps 40%, 30%, and 30%) for all equipment and major software purchases or developments; and Third, a five- year tax depreciation schedule, 20% per year, for buildings. I would also recommend that the book life of any asset be restricted to no longer than five times the tax life. For instances, an aircraft with a tax life of three years would be limited to a book life of 15 years. All too often, I have seen managements reluctant to invest in new, improved equipment because of the impact to the reported P&L of a premature write-off of already obsolete equipment. I believe the second change that's needed to re-ignite our economy is to reward patient equity investment through a graduated reduction of capital gains taxes over the years the investment is held. Lowering the capital gains tax, preferably to zero over several years, would allow the resumption of the all important start-up and mezzanine financing of new businesses. Such a tax schedule would unlock shares of stock long-held by a company founder, a circumstance that applies to me, by the way. I am confident that the release of such stock would be a net plus to the Treasury and the markets. A new capital gains tax schedule of the current 20% for securities held for one year, then dropping 5% a year to zero after a five-year holding period, would be a real stimulus to our equity markets for companies of all sizes. Such a capital gains regime would dampen the speculative churning of securities that was a big factor in the late 1990s bubble. Lastly, the phase-out of the double taxation of dividends would restore the balance between the ``symbol'' economy and the ``real'' economy. Companies that need to make investments would have the option of doing so with equity capital versus debt. Dividends, like interest, would be fully deductible at the corporate level. The same impulses that drove the excesses of the 1980's LBO mania occur now on a smaller scale in American boardrooms everyday. The decision to invest or not is often made and financed based on the deductibility of interest and the punitive taxation of dividends. Having dividends and equity treated the same as interest and debt respectively would offer business managers an alternative model for economic growth. Investors claims on cash flows would be a powerful discipline to invest in only the most productive and wealth-creating projects for society. If you objectively review the various fads and cycles of the last 30 years, you will see that the unintended consequences of our business tax structure in terms of depreciation schedules, capital gains taxes, and dividends taxation are at the heart of many of our economic cycles and disappointments. While there are many excellent ideas as to how to reform the business tax system, the vast majority are politically infeasible. Valued-added taxes, and so forth all founder on the revenue stream requirements of the U.S. Treasury or the vested interests of powerful political lobbies. The advantage of the three changes I have suggested is that they will increase federal tax revenues in short order. In the case of depreciation acceleration, I am confident that tax receipts would grow almost immediately due to the rapid increase in transactions and additional economic growth. With respect to a graduated capital gains tax, as I mentioned earlier, figures show that tax revenues rose in the years of, and following the 1983 introduction of the 20% capital gins rate, and fell again when the rate was taken back up to 28% in 1987. A similar phenomenon occurred after the rate was again reduced to 20% in 1997. In fact, according to the CBO, the actual tax revenue increases for the years 1997 through 1999 exceeded initial projected revenues gains by 40 to 50%. We can expect the same kind of impact from a graduated capital gains tax rate. I believe this is true in the case of the deductibility of dividends as well, although there are conflicting studies as to the timing of the overall benefit. In any case, the reform of dividend taxation could be phased in over several years to lessen the immediate reduction in federal taxes. The new ability of members of Congress to request a dynamic scoring of the effects of tax policy proposals should be able to demonstrate the positive effects of these tax reforms or reforms similar to them. Most people today are surprised to learn that in fiscal '01, business income taxes only produced about $170 billion or 8.5% of total federal revenues of slightly over $2 trillion that year. The vast majority of U.S. tax revenues come from personal income taxes and FICA taxes. This split in revenues reflects the transition over many years to a wealthy, consumer-driven economy, nourished by substantial private investment. The relatively low percentage of federal revenue coming from the current corporate tax system means that such fundamental business tax reform as I've suggested is, in fact, possible, In other words, such a stimulus package for business investment has great upside and manageable downside risks in terms of increasing the near- term deficit. In conclusion, we must reinvigorate business investment. This engine of future prosperity must now be re-tuned if we are to achieve adequate levels of economic growth and improved productivity to meet the income aspirations and needs of our citizenry. To these ends, the five reforms I've outlined should be the centerpiece of an immediate economic stimulus initiative by the President and Congress. I'm confident our political leaders have the best interests of the future generations in mind. Being an optimist, I think we can muster the will to get this done. The alternative is so grave that I cannot contemplate our not doing so. Thank you so very much for your kind attention.

Mr. WHITFIELD

Mr. WHITFIELD. Mr. Speaker, tonight we discuss giving the President the authority to use military force against Iraq. As the Congressman from the first district of Kentucky, I have the privilege of representing the fine men and women of Fort Campbell, Kentucky, home of the 101st Airborne, Air Assault Division, the 5th Special Forces Group, and the 160th Special Operations Aviation Regiment, better known as the Night Stalkers. These soldiers were among the first to engage the Taliban in Afghanistan and, unfortunately, the first to suffer casualties. If we go to war with Iraq, they will again be the tip of the spear thrusting at our enemies, and they will again, sadly, be among the first to suffer casualties. Hopefully, that will not occur. When I vote later this week, I may be putting my friends and neighbors on the frontline of combat. It is not a decision that any of us takes lightly. Therefore, after much deliberation, I have reluctantly concluded that Saddam Hussein has proven himself to be a threat that we cannot ignore. For 11 years Saddam Hussein has defied U.N. resolution after resolution, while continuing his drive to acquire weapons of mass destruction. For years, he hindered and toyed with U.N. weapons inspectors in defiance of the cease-fire that ended the Gulf War. He has consorted with terrorists who are willing and eager to target innocent civilians in their war of hatred against the civilized world. He controls biological and chemical weapons, and we know he is trying to develop nuclear capability as well. We are the world's only remaining superpower; yet a small band of terrorists were able to cause unprecedented death and destruction here in America. We cannot wait for another attack to take more American lives before finally deciding to act. Another dead American man, woman, or child, struck down in their home or workplace by terrorist violence, would be an indictment of this Congress's failure to act while we had the chance. I firmly believe that granting the President the authority he needs to continue to combat the menace of Saddam's regime is the best way to preserve peace, and I firmly believe that granting the President the authority he needs to combat the menace of Saddam's regime is the best way to help the Iraqi people. Our allies in the U.N., many of whom have explored reestablishing beneficial economic ties with Saddam Hussein's regime, are unlikely to take the necessary steps or approve our taking those steps to end Saddam's threat unless the U.S. leads the way. Since the President's speech to the United Nations, we have witnessed the rest of the civilized world awakening from its slumber and stealing itself for this necessary confrontation with Saddam Hussein. By uniting behind our President, we can send the world an indication of our resolve. If we show our allies that we consider the threat worth risking the lives of our soldiers, I believe our allies will support us in our endeavor. Mr. Speaker, my hometown newspaper recently noted that 60 million people died in World War II to teach the world that allowing tyranny to go unchecked was wrong. Let us not make that same mistake with Saddam Hussein.

Mr. WHITFIELD

Mr. WHITFIELD. Mr. Speaker, I rise to honor Ryals Farless for his quick response and valor in saving the life of Greg Scott on July 19, 2002. Ryals is the son of Joe and Billie Farless of Princeton, Kentucky. Ryals was on duty as a lifeguard at the City-County Park in Princeton, Kentucky when Greg Scott, also of Princeton, experienced a possible seizure and sank to the bottom of the pool. Ryals quickly responded by entering the water and brought Greg to the surface. Without his intervention and quick thinking, Greg Scott would not be with us today. Ryals is currently a Freshman at the University of Kentucky, having graduated from Caldwell County High School in May. He is pursuing a career in dentistry. While in high school, Ryals was a member of the soccer team, the National Honor Society and the Commonwealth Honors Academy. For the past several years, Ryals has been involved with the Caldwell County Relay for Life. Ryals is also an active member of Southside Baptist Church and participates in mission trips and youth programs. Mr. Speaker, Ryals embodies the spirit, commitment and sacrifice that we all should strive for in our daily lives. I am proud to represent him in my District. I extend my thanks to him for his efforts, and I am proud to bring his accomplishments to the attention of this House.

Mr. WHITFIELD

Mr. WHITFIELD. Mr. Speaker, I have been somewhat shocked, really, at the animosity expressed against our plan this evening. Medicare as it exists today uses private companies to administer the Medicare program. Under the Democratic plan, private companies will be used to administer their drug program, just as ours is. I was looking, and in Kentucky we have 615,000 citizens under Medicare. Under this plan, the plan that we will be voting on and passing tonight, 315,000, or 50 percent of them, will basically receive free prescription drugs with a very small copay of like $2 for generics and $5 for name-brand drugs. So how could we possibly oppose helping seniors with this kind of a meaningful program? We have heard a lot of discussion tonight about how horrible the drug companies are in America. I think they have the best research and development, and we are fortunate to live in a country where drugs are being discovered every day to cure serious diseases. Mr. Speaker, I urge the support and passage of this legislation.

Mr. WHITFIELD

Mr. WHITFIELD. If I may make an additional comment. You are exactly correct. We are being challenged, also, of trying to raid the Social Security trust fund to pay for this. I would point out that between 1936 when Social Security started and 1995, a period that was controlled by Democrats except for about 4 years, they spent over $800 billion from the Social Security trust fund; and no one raised questions about it, no one objected about it; and not until 1994 when the leadership of this House changed were we able to start reversing that. One other comment that I would make is that the U.S. Senate, I am sure of what they are going to do is they are going to put out a prescription drug plan that may be in the trillions of dollars, who knows what it will be, which is very easy for them because they did not pass a budget on their side of the aisle. And so they are not bound by any constraints whatsoever. So for them to criticize us about spending too much money and bankrupting Social Security, which is a false allegation, they do not even have a budget. And so they are going to send a plan over here that we know will be so expensive that we will not be able to adopt it. But this is a great starting point. You have provided great leadership on this issue since you have been in Congress. I want to commend you for that.