May 10, 1995 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—HOUSE H 4679

protectionist. Our markets are wide

open, but so should theirs be.

However, I have one admonition. As

we put tariffs on certain Japanese

products in an effort to force their

markets open, our own manufacturers

ought not to take advantage by raising

their own prices. We need to have a

united front here in America, and no

one group, not the automobile owners

or anyone else, should take advantage

of that.

As long as they do not raise their

prices, market share for them will increase, the Japanese will feel the heat,

and maybe for the first time in a long

time, free trade will be on both sides of

the Pacific Ocean.

DESPITE THE RHETORIC, A CUT IN

MEDICARE IS STILL A CUT

f(Mr. GENE GREEN of Texas asked

and was given permission to address

the House for 1 minute and to revise

and extend his remarks.)

Mr. GENE GREEN of Texas. Mr.

Speaker, the Republican majority is almost a month late in meeting the statutory deadline for passing a House

budget resolution, but finally they’ve

decided to prepare a budget that is

even uglier than we thought. If the Republican majority wanted to balance

the budget, they could do that today if

we cut Medicare, Social Security, and

COLA’s, but no, their budget is going

to cut it 5 or 7 years from now. Medicare faces cuts in excess of $256 billion.

It is true. Despite the public outcry

not to cut Social Security or Medicare,

Republicans are united in a plan that

will directly cut Medicare to pay for a

tax cut. They also intend to cut the

COLA for Social Security recipients by

readjusting the formula. The worst

part is that Republicans are telling us

they are not cutting, they are simply

slowing the growth.

They can call it what they want, but

if someone is 65 in 1998 and they do not

have Medicare, that is a cut. This bill

is a cut for that person who is now 62

and needs Medicare 3 years from now,

so it is a cut. I do not think we need to

play with words. I think the Republican majority needs to be honest with

the American people: that in order to

balance the budget and pay for tax cuts

for the rich they stand united in their

effort to cut Medicare.

MEDICARE: FIX IT OR LOSE IT

THE BOTTOM LINE WITH

f(Mr. SAXTON asked and was given

permission to address the House for 1

minute and to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. SAXTON. Mr. Speaker, for the

last decade I have represented a district that has as many senior citizens

in it as any other district save one or

two in the country. I think it is totally

unfair to our older Americans to pretend there is no problem with Medicare

and try to say that the Republican

Party is out to make cuts in Medicare

to give the rich people a tax cut. It is

simply not true.

Under our plan, Medicare increases

from $4,700 a participant to over $6,000.

As a matter of fact, it is $6,300 per participant. That is not a cut.

The bottom line with Medicare is,

and their party needs to figure this

out, fix it or lose it, because the President himself says it will be bankrupt in

7 years.

MEDICARE CUTS PROPOSED BY

REPUBLICANS WILL RESULT IN

fFEWER SERVICES TO AMERICANS

(Mr. PALLONE asked and was given

permission to address the House for 1

minute and to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Speaker, let me

point out that the Republicans are

talking about saving and improving

Medicare by cutting it. We just cannot

believe that. If we talk about cuts to

Medicare as well as Medicaid, it is

going to have a direct impact on senior

citizens, in the case of Medicare, and a

direct impact on poor people with regard to Medicaid.

There are only certain choices that

exist when Medicare is cut. First of all,

we will have higher copayments. Seniors will have to pay more money out

of their own pocket, or they will have

increased deductibles before they get

benefits. Again, they will have to pay

out of their own pocket.

The other option is that the reimbursement rate to hospitals or doctors

will go down. That means a lot of doctors or even hospitals will not accept

Medicare patients. A lot of seniors in

New Jersey now know they cannot find

doctors who will accept Medicare or

even Medicaid.

The other option is that the hospitals

simply reduce the quality of services,

or do not provide the services that they

normally do because they are not getting the money through a reduced reimbursement rate. There is a direct impact on hospitals, on the provisions of

how medical care and health care is

provided to senior citizens. There is no

way around that if we make the cuts

that are being proposed by the Republicans.

CLEAN WATER LEGISLATION WILL

HARM AMERICA’S WETLANDS,

fSTORMWATER PERMITTING

PROCESS, AND COASTAL WATERS

(Mr. BOEHLERT asked and was given

permission to address the House for 1

minute and to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. BOEHLERT. Mr. Speaker, today

the House of Representatives will take

up the most serious public health environmental legislation considered yet in

this historic 104th Congress. The proponents of the measure have labeled it

good environmental legislation. That is

a violation of the truth in advertising

law.

The fact of the matter is the legislation we will consider today would decimate our Nation’s wetlands, would end

the stormwater permitting process,

would do serious damage to our coastal

waters.

We have worked, those of us identified with the Saxton-Boehlert alternative, with the National Governors

Association, with the Coastal States

Organization, with public health

groups, with environmental organizations all over the country, to say that

we can be responsible in dealing with

clean water in America.

Those who are concerned about this

subject are urged to call their elected

representatives to let them know that

they want clean water, and the time

for meaningful action is now.

COMMUNICATION FROM THE

CHAIRMAN OF THE DEMOCRATIC

fCAUCUS

The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr.

WICKER) laid before the House the following communications from the Honorable VIC FAZIO, chairman of the

Democratic Caucus:

DEMOCRATIC CAUCUS,

U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES,

Washington, DC, May 10, 1995.

Hon. NEWT GINGRICH,

Speaker, U.S. House of Representatives, Washington, DC.

DEAR MR. SPEAKER: This is to inform you

that Representative Nathan Deal is no

longer a member of the Democratic Caucus.

Sincerely,

VIC FAZIO,

f Chairman.

VACATING ELECTION OF MEMBER

TO CERTAIN STANDING COMMITTEES OF THE HOUSE

The SPEAKER pro tempore laid before the House the following communications from the Honorable NEWT

GINGRICH, Speaker of the House of Representatives:

THE SPEAKER,

U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES,

Washington, DC, May 10, 1995.

Hon. DON YOUNG,

Chairman, Committee on Resources, U.S. House

of Representatives, Washington, DC.

DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: This is to advise you

that Representative Nathan Deal’s election

to the Committee on Resources has been

automatically vacated pursuant to clause

6(b) of rule X, effective today.

Sincerely,

NEWT GINGRICH.

THE SPEAKER,

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES,

Washington, DC, May 10, 1995.

Hon. BUD SHUSTER,

Chairman, Committee on Transportation and

Infrastructure, U.S. House of Representatives, Washington, DC.

DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: This is to advise you

that Representative Nathan Deal’s election

to the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure has been automatically vacated