The Congressional Record is a unique source of public documentation. It started in 1873, documenting nearly all the major and minor policies being discussed and debated.
“PERSONAL EXPLANATION” mentioning the U.S. Dept of Labor was published in the Extensions of Remarks section on pages E333-E334 on March 12, 2001.
The publication is reproduced in full below:
PERSONAL EXPLANATION
______
HON. RONNIE SHOWS
of mississippi
in the house of representatives
Monday, March 12, 2001
Mr. SHOWS. Mr. Speaker, my family experienced a tragedy last week that forced me to miss a series of important votes from March 6 through March 8 last week. Due to the death of my mother-in-law on March 6 in Mississippi, I was with my family and was unable to cast recorded votes on rollcalls 26 through 45.
On rollcall 26, I would have voted ``yea'' on the Motion to Suspend the Rules and Pass H.R. 724, a bill to Authorize Appropriations to Carry Out Part B of Title I of the Energy Policy and Conservation Act, relating to the Strategic Petroleum Reserve.
On rollcall 27, I would have voted ``yea'' on the Motion to Suspend the Rules and Pass H.R. 727, a bill to Amend the Consumer Product Safety Act to Provide that Low-Speed Electric Bicycles are Consumer Products Subject to Such Act.
On rollcall 28, I would have voted ``yea'' on Approving the Journal.
On rollcall 29, I would have voted ``nay'' on Agreeing to H. Res. 79, a bill providing for consideration of S.J. Res. 6, Providing for Congressional Disapproval of the Rule Relating to Ergonomics.
On rollcall 30, I would have voted ``yea'' on the Motion to Suspend the Rules and Agree to H. Con. Res. 31, a bill expressing the sense of the Congress regarding the importance of organ, tissue, bone marrow, and blood donation and supporting National Donor Day.
On rollcall 31, I would have voted ``yea'' on the Motion to Suspend the Rules and Pass, as Amended, H.R. 624, the Organ Donation Improvement Act.
On rollcall 32, I would have voted ``yea'' on the Motion to Suspend the Rules and Agree to H. Con. Res. 47, a bill Honoring the 21 members of the National Guard who were killed in the crash of a National Guard aircraft on March 3, 2001, in south-central Georgia.
On rollcall 33, I would have voted ``yea'' on Passage of S.J. Res. 6, a bill Providing for Congressional Disapproval of the Rule Submitted by the Department of Labor Under Chapter 8 of Title 5, United States Code, Relating to Ergonomics.
On rollcall 34, I would have voted ``nay'' on on Approving the Journal.
On rollcall 35, I would have voted ``aye'' on the Motion to Adjourn.
On rollcall 36, I would have voted ``yea'' on the Motion to Adjourn.
On rollcall 37, I would have voted ``no'' on Ordering the Previous Question on H. Res. 83, a bill Providing for consideration of H.R. 3, the Economic Growth and Tax Relief Act of 2001.
On rollcall 38, I would have voted ``no'' to Table the Motion to Reconsider H. Res. 83.
On rollcall 39, I would have voted ``no'' on Agreeing to H. Res. 83.
On rollcall 40, I would have voted ``no'' to Table the Motion to Reconsider H. Res. 83.
On rollcall 41, I would have voted ``aye'' on the Motion to Adjourn.
On rollcall 42, I would have voted ``yea'' on the Rangel Substitute to H.R. 3.
On rollcall 43, I would have voted ``yea'' to Table the Motion to Reconsider H.R. 3.
On rollcall 44, I would have voted ``aye'' on the Motion to Recommit H.R. 3 with instructions.
On rollcall 45, I would have voted ``yea'' on Passage of H.R. 3, the Economic Growth and Tax Relief Act of 2001.
Mr. Speaker, for me a ``yea'' vote on rollcall 33, to pass S.J. Res. 6, was a difficult decision. I supported S.J. Res. 6 because, although I firmly believe an ergonomics regulation is necessary, I am troubled by overly broad scope of the regulation that was promulgated late last year, and by the potential costs incurred by businesses required to implement this unfunded mandate against the private sector.
In recent years, my district has experienced the exodus of thousands of jobs, Mr. Speaker, largely because our trade policies have encouraged businesses to take advantage of lower wages and weaker worker protection and environmental laws across our borders. I fear that imposing this particular ergonomics regulation would have encouraged the loss of even more jobs at home.
At the same time, the process used to bring S.J. Res. 6 to the House floor disappointed me. It was rushed with no House hearings and little opportunity for debate. This process gave me little time to solicit the opinions of my constituents in Mississippi. That is why I would have voted against the rule governing consideration of the Joint Resolution.
Nonetheless, I believe we need an ergonomics regulation that provides reasonable protections for our workforce. The Secretary of Labor has indicated her willingness to promulgate a new regulation and I urge her to initiate the process immediately.
We need the business and labor communities to work together to craft worker safety regulations that do not place unfair burdens on businesses to comply. If an ergonomics regulation is implemented in the future, I will introduce legislation providing tax credits to help businesses offset the cost of compliance. This would be a fair approach, one that provides reasonable worker protections without forcing businesses to choose between implementing ergonomics regulations or shutting down and relocating across our border.
Mr. Speaker, on rollcall 45 I would have voted ``yea'' in favor of H.R. 3, President Bush's measure to reduce income tax rates, because currently we pay more in taxes than at any time since World War II. Taxes consume a staggering 38 percent of the gross income of the average family. Most families pay more in taxes than for food, housing, and clothing combined. This is wrong. Ending estate and marriage penalty taxes will be voted on soon and I will vote to end them both just like I did last year.
But honestly, Mr. Speaker, the income tax cut in H.R. 3 was a good tax cut but it was not perfect. Middle America, working Americans and Mississippians should receive more of a refund than this tax cut provides. The nation's wealthiest should not get a full loaf while the rest of us get only crumbs. But, cutting taxes in Washington is next to impossible. Once a revenue stream is flowing into the federal government, it's hard to reduce the flow. Cutting taxes for hard working Mississippians has been one of my priorities since taking office. We cannot afford to miss this chance to provide tax cuts for our families. More money in our pockets, not that of the federal government, is best for America.
I have other priorities that are essential for our nation's future, too. Paying off the National Debt, restoring the promise of health care for our military retirees, standing with our family farmers, building a stronger military, providing prescription drug help for our seniors, protecting Social Security and Medicare, and making stronger schools for our children, deserve our attention and support. The debate in Washington has been about our ability to provide a huge tax cut and accomplish all these other goals. Can we have our cake and eat it too? The president says we can. I hope he's right.
Cutting taxes is the right thing to do. Our priorities must be about building strong families and communities. This income tax cut bill now heads to the U.S. Senate. I am confident the Senate will consider all of our priorities, address the need to provide solid relief for middle America, and implement mechanisms to protect us--the taxpayers--from a return to deficit spending. The bill will then return to the House. We will once again have the opportunity to do the right thing. I am determined that we will.
____________________
