E 1092 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — Extensions of Remarks May 22, 1995

Clean Water Act decisions with the clear intent

of the Federal Power Act. I urge the adoption

of the amendment.

SAM MEYERS—A POINT-OF-LIGHT

FOR ALL AMERICANS

f

HON. MAJOR R. OWENS OF NEW YORK

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

Monday, May 22, 1995

Mr. OWENS. Mr. Speaker, I rise to salute,

local 259 UAW Union President Sam Meyers

whose life represents a Point-of-Light for all

Americans. Brooklyn and the 11th Congressional District are particularly grateful to Sam

Meyers for his early and visionary sponsorship

of the Brooklyn Coalition for Community

Empowerment.

For over 50 years, Sam Meyers has carried

the UAW vision of social justice and militant

trade unionism in his union and political life.

He began his journey in the trade union

movement in 1940 as a sheet metal worker at

Brewster Aircraft and as a member of UAW,

local 365. Soon after, he was elected shop

steward, a position he held until 1943 when he

joined the Army Air Corps. The Air Corps later

assigned him to an orientation team whose

purpose was to educate the troops about the

U.S. war effort to destroy fascism.

In 1958 Sam led the successful fight to oust

a leadership that had become too far removed

from the membership, and to bring his brand

of militant and democratic trade unionism to

local 259.

From the time of his election as president of

local 259 in 1958 to the present, Brother Meyers’ passionate vision, leadership and tough

bargaining have won strong membership support and involvement. Surrounded by a committed staff that mirrored the Rainbow Coalition, a strong, diverse, and well educated shop

steward system was developed. The creative

use of strikes, family and community support

and solidarity picket lines helped win for local

259 members higher wages, generous welfare

and pension benefits, security for their families, a nationally recognized mental health and

occupational safety program, and dignity as industrial workers.

Sam led aggressive organizing campaigns,

not only among the auto dealers, local 259’s

primary jurisdiction, but among low-wage factory workers who were predominantly women.

Long before it became Government policy, the

union under its president’s leadership pursued

affirmative action programs to bring people of

color and women into union leadership.

Local 259 has been a recognized force in:

the civil rights movement, the fight for affirmative action, the continuing struggle against racism; launching the careers and election of progressive forces to public office, including Congress members MAJOR OWENS, CHARLES RANGEL, former Governor Mario Cuomo and

former Mayor David Dinkins, and challenging

reactionary leadership and regressive social

policies promoted in Congress and from the

offices of New York’s Governor and the mayor

of the city of New York; The struggle for full

employment, a guaranteed annual income,

anti-scab and labor reform legislation, universal single payer health care, decent and affordable housing, and rigorously enforced occupational safety and health standards.

Sam served on the board of advocates for

Children of New York, and helped to train parents and community activists in adapting union

grievance procedures as a model for school

based child advocacy. He initiated the first

worksite child advocacy training program for

parent members.

He brought the union into a partnership with

the NYS Division for Youth and Advocates for

Children to create an auto mechanic training

program for youths released from DFY facilities.

In the late 1960’s Sam was a cofounder of

the New York Labor Committee Against the

War in Vietnam, and challenged those in high

labor positions on their support for the war.

In the early 1970’s Brother Meyers helped

bring national attention through congressional

hearings to the impact of plant closings and

runaway shops, as part of corporate America’s

wanton disregard of its workers at home and

abroad.

There followed over two decades of the

union’s commitment to international labor solidarity. Local 259 championed the forces of liberation and democracy in South Africa, Chile,

El Salvador, Nicaragua, and Haiti. Scores of

labor leaders fighting against oppression

throughout the globe have found safe haven,

support, and solidarity at Local 259 UAW.

Sam has treasured being an active member

of the International UAW. Steeped in the UAW

tradition, the union under Brother Meyers’

leadership linked members’ struggles in Local

259 shops and factories to the struggle for social justice and human rights everywhere.

In recognition of Sam’s contributions to the

UAW, he was appointed and served on the

Commission for the Future of the UAW, meeting with regional representatives throughout

the country.

At a recent UAW convention, Sam was selected to nominate Owen Bieber for president.

Sam’s proudest legacy is the next generation of social visionaries and militant trade

unionists whom he has trained and nurtured to

assume the leadership of this great UAW

local.

Sam Meyers represents a magnificent Pointof-Light and serves as an inspiring role model

for all Americans.

THE REPUBLICANS’ BUDGET HAS

GOT IT WRONG

f

HON. MARCY KAPTUR OF OHIO

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

Monday, May 22, 1995

Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Speaker, the Republican

budget proposal can be summarized as

gouging Medicare recipients, nursing home

patients, and college students to fund over

$300 billion in tax breaks for the privileged few

and to increase defense spending. This is not

the formula to achieve a balanced budget.

What it does is squeeze our middle class to

reward those at the high end.

In billions

Medicare benefit cuts ........................ 288.4

Medicaid benefit cuts ........................ 186.5

Total cuts ....................................... 475.0

Transferred to:

Tax cuts ............................................. 353.0

Defense increase ................................ 76.3

Unnecessary new spending .............. 429.3

Over one-third of the cuts in the Republican

budget come from sacrifices that will be forced

on our senior citizens in the form of reduced

Medicare benefits and nursing home care. But

their budget does nothing to actually reduce

the cost of health care in our country. Why not

rein in the insurance companies, the doctors,

the pharmaceutical companies rather than

take it from our seniors? Anyone who has

studied the Federal budget over the years

knows that the most important factor driving

our budget deficit has been increased health

cots.

I favor balancing the budget. I have voted

for a balanced budget. I fight everyday to cut

wasteful spending. The Republicans want to

balance the budget on the backs of our grandmothers to turn over nearly $350 billion in tax

breaks to the rich and powerful. Instead, why

not get rid of the ‘‘Benedict Arnold’’ tax break

that allows a U.S. citizen who has made his

millions here to renounce his citizenship and

take his millions to some Caribbean island tax

free. To balance the budget, health services

are being cut for those who are most in need

of our attention: seniors on Medicare, nursing

home residents, disabled veterans.

MEDICARE

The best way to look at the effects of the

budget proposal on Medicare recipients is to

look at per capita benefits under the program.

Republicans argue that there are no cuts in

Medicare and that spending increases over

the 7 years of their budget. This is a half-truth.

Their budget falls far short of keeping benefit

levels where they are today. Their future projections do not offset health insurance inflation, rising costs of services, and the 3.5 million more Americans who will reach 65 in the

next 7 years. Under their plan even the current level of Medicare benefits will not be

maintained into the future. Seniors will end up

$3,000 short. This translates into cuts in services, rising out-of-pocket expenses, and higher

deductibles and copyaments for every senior

in this Nation—no matter how in need they

are.

Medicare population increases: 37.0 million—1996; 40.5 million—2002.

Year

Money required to

maintain

current

services

(billions)

Money proposed in

Republican

budget (billions)

Medicare

short-fall

(billions)

Additional

cost shifted

to seniors

each year

1995 .................. 179.0 179.0 0.0 $0.00

1996 .................. 196.0 168.0 28.0 744.00

1997 .................. 217.0 180.5 36.5 955.00

1998 .................. 238.0 191.7 46.3 1196.00

1999 .................. 262.0 206.1 55.9 1426.00

2000 .................. 286.0 215.4 70.6 1773.00

2001 .................. 319.5 218.3 101.2 2523.00

2002 .................. 353.8 229.0 124.8 3081.00

The Republican budget will ration health

care for millions of seniors while other Americans who are better off will not face health

care rationing, but they will continue to pay

ever higher prices for health care services because the fundamental challenge of health inflation is not solved.

For every senior, this $3081-reduction over

current benefits means the average American

senior has to make it up, either by increased

out-of-pocket payments, reductions in covered

services, limitation of physician choice, or reductions in already limited physician or hospital reimbursements.

In regard to Medicaid, the Republican budget cuts Medicaid by $187 billion over the 7

years and shifts the burden of caring for the
May 22, 1995 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — Extensions of Remarks E 1093

long-term chronically ill from the Federal Government to the States.

Ohio’s Medicaid budget is $5.1 billion in

1995. Nursing home benefits account for $1.9

billion of that budget or 37 percent. The State

estimates that Medicaid spending will increase

at 8–9 percent a year. If the State has to absorb that increase, it will jeopardize OhioCare.

OhioCare is a health care reform plan which

would put all current low-income recipients on

Medicaid into managed care plans and use

the savings to expand Medicaid coverage to

working poor families, thereby reducing overall

health care costs. In Ohio we are trying to get

health care costs under control. The Republican budget does nothing about them, and it

may very well sabotage Ohio’s efforts.

Who benefits from the $353 billion in tax

breaks assumed in this budget? Fifty-one percent of these breaks go to people who earn

over $100,000 annually. The most wealthy 1

percent of Americans will get a tax cut of more

than $20,000. The poorest 20 percent of

Americans will get an average tax cut of $36.

Let’s look at some of these.

Eliminating the alternative minimum tax by

1999 will cost $16.9 billion—for the first 5

years. The alternative minimum tax requires

profitable corporations including many foreign

corporations operating in the United States to

pay a minimum amount of corporate income

tax even if under normal tax rules they can

write off all their profits.

Before the 1986 tax reform, highly profitable

corporations were able to eliminate their tax liability through various tax loopholes. A 1986

survey found that 130 of America’s largest and

most profitable corporations managed to pay

absolutely nothing in Federal income taxes at

least 1 year between 1981 and 1985. Fortytwo of these companies paid no taxes at all

for all those years. Congress, in 1986, decided

that made no sense and established the alternative minimum tax so that profitable corporations doing business in the United States had

to pay something, if only a minimal amount, in

taxes to our country.

The Republican plan includes a $500 tax

credit for children for families with incomes as

high as $250,000. A responsible proposal to

limit this credit to families making under

$95,000 was rejected earlier this year.

Mr. Speaker, over $300 billion in tax breaks

in the face of huge budget deficits Americans

must pay are irresponsible. Tax breaks that

overwhelmingly favor the richest corporations

and individuals are wrong. I cannot support

them.

We must get on track to a balanced budget

first before we consider tax cuts.

The Republican budget changes the cost of

living calculation for Social Security benefits,

in effect lowering the cost of living by 0.6 percent. This will reduce the average Social Security benefit by an estimated $240 a month

by 2002. Their budget commits us to tax cuts

for the wealthy while cutting essential income

for seniors. I can’t countenance that.

The Republican budget would make student

loan recipients pay interest on their loan while

attending school. This will increase the average student’s indebtedness by $3,400. Over

the life of the loan the student would pay an

extra $41 a month, $5,000 in all. The cut

would amount to $18.7 billion over 7 years.

How can anyone justify making it more difficult

to get a higher education in our country as we

enter a new century which will be characterized by increased international economic competition? I ask you, are the Japanese or the

Germans making it harder for their children to

get the education they need?

Mr. Speaker, I cannot support this Republican budget proposal. It’s anti-family at its

core. It is ironic that some Members of Congress, who earn over $130,000 a year, may

think that a budget which gives a $20,000 tax

break to the richest 1 percent of Americans

and pays for it by reducing health benefits for

our grandmother is good for the country. I

don’t and I won’t vote for it.

TRIBUTE TO MR. JOHN L.

fCRAWFORD

HON. JOSE ́ E. SERRANO OF NEW YORK

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

Monday, May 22, 1995

Mr. SERRANO. Mr. Speaker, on Friday,

May 19, 1995, a group of dedicated public

school educators gathered in my congressional district to pay tribute to one of their distinguished colleagues, John L. Crawford.

Mr. Crawford has been the principal of Intermediate School 183 since it opened its doors

in the South Bronx in 1974 and has earned

the distinction of being the longest serving intermediate school principal in Community

School District Seven. He has been a dedicated and innovative school leader, bringing

many new programs to his school and the district at large. Mr. Crawford developed the first

magnet school program in the district, the Paul

Robeson Magnet School for Medical Careers

and Health Professions, and implemented an

comprehensive after-school program which

then served as a model for New York City

youth board school based programs throughout the city. Because of his leadership and in

recognition of his contributions, Mr. Crawford

was asked by the chancellor to serve on two

special advisory committees: the City-Wide

Mainstreaming Committee on Special Education and the Committee on Articulation.

Mr. Crawford’s contributions to the community beyond his school are equally impressive.

He currently serves as the Council of Supervisors and Administrators Community School

District Seven chairman and in 1991, he

served as the assistant to the superintendent

supervising district activities and programs. He

is the deserving recipient of numerous awards

and recognitions.

I am proud to count Mr. Crawford among

my friends. On behalf of the residents of my

district—in particular the many students and

school professionals whose lives he has so

significantly touched—I thank Mr. Crawford for

his years of service.

Mr. Speaker, I ask my colleagues to join me

in conveying our best wishes and deep gratitude to the principal of I.S. 183, Mr. John L.

Crawford.