Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, I rise to acknowledge the life and achievements of Bishop Moses Taylor, one of New York City's foremost spiritual leaders. I am saddened to report to the members of this chamber that Bishop Taylor passed away on October l, 2004. He is survived by his loving family, his many friends and the congregations of the three ministries he founded in Long Island City and Astoria, Queens.

Bishop Taylor was a fixture of his community for more than 60 years. Bishop Taylor's ministry began in a small house on 12th Street in Long Island City, where he preached to a group of twelve followers; in the next few years, this ministry moved to a larger, permanent home across the street and became known as the Long Island City Gospel Tabernacle. It was during this time that Bishop Taylor began many of the community service initiatives for which his ministries would become widely known in the Queens community. Indeed, the two founding principles of the Bishop's ministries are ``to teach and preach the Word of God with simplicity and understanding'' and ``to undergird, strengthen and increase (the) community through programs, targeted activities for men, women, singles and families, combined with educational instruments that will address the whole need of man.''

Building on the success of the Gospel Tabernacle, Bishop Taylor went on to found the Astoria Outreach Ministries and the Center for Hope International in Long Island City, which is now led by his son, Pastor Mitchell G. Taylor. I am certain that Bishop Taylor was extremely proud to see his son follow in his footsteps and dedicate his life to enriching the lives of people in the Queens community.

The three ministries founded by Bishop Taylor have become invaluable parts of New York City's spiritual life. They are true reflections of the vibrant and generous Queens community that Moses Taylor so faithfully served.

Mr. Speaker, I request that my colleagues join me in honoring the late Bishop Moses Taylor, whose dedication to community service lives on thanks to the generosity of his many followers. With his passing, the community has lost one of its true heroes.

Mr. Speaker, I rise to pay tribute to Mim Kelber once again. When Mim passed away this summer, we lost a woman whose clear vision and verbal acumen helped change the world. A brilliant writer, Mim used her facility with words to inspire supporters of the feminist, labor and environmental movements, among others.

Mim became friends with Bella Abzug when they were still in high school, and they attended Hunter College together. At Hunter, Mim became editor of the Hunter Bulletin while Bella was elected president of the student body. From 1943 to 1955, Mim was national news editor and Washington Bureau Chief of Federated Press, a national syndicated labor news service. She covered the founding meeting of the United Nations in San Francisco, and the labor movement, as well as Congress and the White House. She was an editor/writer for Science and Medicine from 1958 to 1970, leaving that position after Bella was elected to Congress (1971-78).

Mim served as Bella's executive assistant and chief speechwriter, co- edited Bella's Congressional newsletter and was her policy adviser on women, foreign policy, urban affairs and civil liberties. Family life was always of paramount importance to Mim, and she insisted on working out of Bella's New York office, so she could remain in her Brooklyn apartment with her husband, Harry Kelber, a labor journalist and educator, and their two daughters.

In 1974, Mim chaired the Media Committee of the National Women's Political Caucus and directed a national media campaign, Win With Women, a major effort to elect more women to Congress. She was a policy consultant/writer for President Carter's National Advisory Committee for Women (1978-79) and co-authored the official report of the committee's Houston conference. She also co-authored Gender Gap: Bella Abzug's Guide to Political Power for American Women (1984); Women and Government: New Ways to Political Power (1994), and Women's Foreign Policy Directory (1988). In 1990 she co-founded Women's Environment and Development Organization with Bella, and remained involved with WEDO until her death. Mim leaves her beloved husband, Harry, two daughters, Karli and Laura, and five grandchildren.

Many people spoke movingly at a memorial service held for Mim on August 17, 2004, and I have already included some of their tributes in the Record. To honor Mim's memory, I am pleased to offer some additional statements given that day:

Robin Morgan: ``I wrote down a few thoughts, because I could almost hear Mim saying, ``Don't wing it,'' and adding, ``Quote me every chance you get.''

When Harry kindly asked me to say a few words today, the first thing I thought of was Mim's lifelong love affair with words. Others have noted--as history will--the many details of her early, continued, consistently principled life, starting with political engagement even as a young girl and intensifying across the decades: the social-justice and labor and civil rights and peace and feminist and environmental organizations she founded, cofounded, and participated in with never- lessening commitment--and always more than slightly ahead of the curve.

Of course, just as it was difficult to speak of Bella Abzug without speaking of Mim, so the reverse is true. They met in the 1930s: young girls in high school. As Mim herself wrote: ``Bella was class president and already a fearless leader, and I was shy and hung out in the library. She was an active young religious Zionist--I was an atheist marching in radical May Day parades.'' Later, they were both in the first class to enter tuition-free Hunter College's new Park Ave. building where--Mim's words again: ``Bella majored in political science and was president of the Student Council--I was a journalism major, news editor of the Hunter Bulletin--and still shy.'' Over their lifetimes, Mimi and Bella loomed as giants in virtually every progressive movement of the time and--with all due respect to their beloved husbands (Harry; and the late Martin)-- they were like a 20th- century version of a ``Boston marriage'': joined in political creativity and dedication, their relationship illuminated by laughter, trust, incredibly hard work, dauntingly long hours, the familiarity and ability to finish each others' sentences, HUGE fights, and makings-up. In sum, a lasting political and personal dynamic duo, an historic--and certainly odd--couple. It's no exaggeration to say that they were the Elizabeth Cady Stanton and Susan B. Anthony of our time. Personally, I never fully realized, just how challenging it had been for Mimi to write speeches or statements for Bella--for years--until I tried it for the first time myself. I just about killed myself, draft after draft, revision after revision. Finally, Bella approved the text. ``It's OK,'' she shrugged, ``but it sure ain't Mimi.''

Nor were speeches all Mim penned, with and for Bella--but also on her own. Books. Articles. Manifestos. Reports. Position papers. Drafts of legislation. Journalism and analysis and rousing rhetoric. Always intelligent, well-crafted, powerful. ``Power,'' Mim once wrote to me, ``is a word for which women should never apologize.'' It was one of many words she loved, in a life passionately dedicated to ideas and the language for expressing them. My only regret is that the world's sufferings and her resolve to alleviate them left too little time for her to write all the novels that shy girl in the library had dreamed of writing.

Because her passion was not confined to politics, Mim was one of two or three American political activists I have ever known to read serious literature--even poetry, even contemporary poetry--for pure pleasure. We sometimes snuck away for a quiet coffee at various conferences, and could be seen whispering secretly, almost guiltily, in corners. Were we discussing conference takeovers, purges, devious amendments? No. We were talking about Milton and Donne and Seamus Heaney; about Kafka, Mann, the Brontes, Mary Shelley, Aphra Behn, Hawthorne, Wolfe, Twain, Faulkner--and especially and always, Mim's greatest favorite, Jane Austen. That taste for understatement was reflected in Mim's own sharp wit--which was sometimes so dry it could pucker. She could get depressed, yes, and be bitter, too--at the state of the world, at stupidity, cruelty, cupidity, violence, hypocrisy, and at, as she growled once, ``A bit too much so-called pragmatic compromise.'' But her anger and even, at times, despair was rooted in a brilliant grasp of history, and a too-rare capacity for irony. This surfaced again during the one of the last conversations I had with her, when she was in the hospital. We were talking by phone about the framers of the Constitution, and I made a passing reference to the familiar quote of Abigail Adams to her husband John, to ``remember the ladies.'' Then, out of nowhere--or, rather, out of pain, fragility, and that fading memory we're all prone to--Mim sighed, ``Yeah, but,'' then suddenly snapped back with John Adams' far-too-little known response to Abigail's plea: ``Depend upon it we know better than to repeal our masculine systems.''

In a culture cheapened by relentless commercial cheer and prone to instant, superficial fixes and fake spiritual grace, her acerbic intellect was bracing in its integrity. Even when discouraged, though, she never stopped pushing boundaries throughout her rich, full, consistently principled life. Perhaps because she had already been a fierce, uncompromising atheist when so young, she knew early on that there was no need to hope for any better heaven--and no need to fear any worse hells--than what life itself offers. So she deliberately faced into it and lived it utterly, in all its bleakness and all its glory. About this Mim was never shy.

She leaves a trail of light behind her, for us to read by and see our way by, in her political legacy, and in her cherished, well crafted words.

Our deep gratitude to Harry, their daughters, and the rest of her family, for having shared Mim Kelber with us--and with history.''

Blanche Wissen Cook: ``Modest and too often anonymous, Mim Kelber had the best ideas, wrote the best speeches, the most searching essays, the most valuable political analyses.

Mentor and guide, I learned something important from Mim every time we spoke on the phone, every time we were together. Brilliant and precise, she was a great journalist, a splendid organizer, a peerless leader, a caring, considerate teacher, a warm and generous friend.

Perhaps best known publicly as Bella Abzug's partner during and after the congressional years, she was for most of us the person to consult with on the most difficult questions of political strategy on war and peace, women and policy.

One depended on Mim, who never asked anything for herself. Wise, discerning, informed, Mim was above all a great writer and editor. She turned the most difficult issues into the clearest arguments, the most vivid paragraphs.

She did not (so far as I know) finish her book, Women and War, but Harry, her devoted husband, beloved ally and champion, also our guide, gave us the gift of her publications, The Bella Abzug Reader, and also her novel, A Pride of Women.

We will miss her every day, and have forever the legacy of her bold vision, her steadfast commitment to goodness, justice, environmental sanity, and complete respect and love for the people she loved, all the people of earth.

June Zeitlin: ``I had the good fortune to work with Mim over a period of almost 30 years--first, as a young lawyer working in Bella's Congressional office in Washington. We would always send our statements up to New York for Mim to look at--I didn't know her well then but I knew the work better be up to her high standards!

Inside the Carter Administration, I watched Bella and Mim and others transform the National Commission on the Observance of International Women's Year into a radical force for change. We still cherish its publications, which Mim not only wrote but infused with such far ranging ideas, we could go back to them today.

Their active involvement in international women's year activities and the nascent global women's movement led Bella and Mim to focus more of their attention on both US foreign policy and global policy in general. Seeing that it was mostly men who were making foreign policy and the policies that even at that time weren't working so well (at least if you were female or happened to be poor), they formed the Women's Foreign Policy Council to show the news media and foreign policy community that there were many women with expertise to draw on as well.

Mim and Bella saw the 1990s and particularly the Earth Summit at Rio as an opportunity to bring women--with their unique and diverse experiences, perspectives and voices to the critical issues of war and peace, environmental degradation, social and economic justice and of course women's rights. Together, they founded a new organization--the Women's Environment and Development Organization--WEDO and We Do!

This is not an organization about the environment in the traditional sense. To Bella and Mim, it was the planet! And their goal was a peaceful and healthy planet and human rights for all. Joining with amazing women leaders from around the world--Wangari Mathai, Peggy Antrobus, Vandana Shiva, Chief Bisi Ogunleye, Thais Coral and many others, they brought 1500 women from 83 countries to Miami in 1991 for the World Women's Congress for a Healthy Planet. There, the participants formulated and adopted the Women's Action Agenda, a comprehensive global vision that articulated women's leadership and empowerment as catalysts for change.

Women's Action Agenda was a direct challenge from the world's women to government officials, the UN, and the World Bank to shape the official Rio platform and subsequent global policy documents. To lobby for this comprehensive agenda, WEDO established the Women's Caucus, bringing together women from North and South, East and West, in a systematic and participatory mechanism for bringing women's experiences and voices into UN processes. The results were extraordinary--a whole chapter devoted to gender equality and, for the first time, formal recognition of women's central role in achieving sustainable development.

By the time I joined WEDO in the fall of 1999, more than a year after Bella's death, the burden and responsibility for ensuring the ongoing work of the organization had fallen to a very committed core of the Board of Directors and the staff--all of whom were guided on a day to day basis by Mim. But Mim was already experiencing severe hearing loss and other physical ailments. And the world, too, had changed--despite her great and steadfast faith in the United Nations, she kept saying-- ''We have so many words on paper--we don't need any more words--we need actions!'' But she herself was unable to join in the ``actions'' which left her deeply frustrated and sometimes discouraged.

Yet Mim was a giant--we have all drawn inspiration from her lifetime commitment to activism and her prodigious work. We have lost several of our giants in recent years--Bella, Patsy Mink, earlier this year Millie Jeffries, and now Mim. As she wrote in her novel, ``Goddess help me!'' But these were women and Mim was a woman ``who would never give up and never give in.'' We at WEDO will continue their work and their fight-- and make it our fight--and we are committed to never give up and never give in until we have achieved a peaceful and healthy planet with human rights for all.''

Mr. Speaker, I ask my colleagues to join me in celebrating the life of Mim Kelber, a remarkable woman whose words will continue to inspire future generations.

Mr. Speaker, today, I join in a bipartisan way, with my colleague Representative Christopher Shays from Connecticut, Representative John Dingell, the distinguished Dean of the House, and my friends and colleagues Representatives Ed Case, Max Sandlin, and Dennis Cardoza to introduce a bill that addresses the serious security threats that are impacting our Nation. According to the recommendations of the 9/11 Commission, Congress must reorganize to provide more effective oversight of our Nation's intelligence and homeland security efforts. This bill effectively deals with the problems by doing the following things:

1. Creates a permanent standing Committee on Homeland Security-- [According to the 9/11 Commission, leaders of the Department of Homeland Security now appear before 88 committees and subcommittee of Congress. This is ``perhaps the single largest obstacle impeding the department's successful development.'' Currently, the Committee on Homeland Security is simply a Select Committee];

2. Creates a permanent standing Committee on Intelligence--[According to the 9/11 Commission, Congressional oversight for intelligence and counterterrorism is ``dysfunctional'' and the Intelligence Committee is simply a Select Committee];

3. Creates a 14th Appropriations Subcommittee on Intelligence-- [According to the 9/11 Commission, the Intelligence Committee should have authorizing and appropriating authority].

Last week during markup of H.R. 10 in six committees, members and committees alike were uncertain of their jurisdiction over various parts of the bill. In fact, no single committee had overarching jurisdiction, so there was no mechanism to address the bill in its entirety. This proposed rules change will fix this problem. We cannot rely solely on the Executive Branch to solve our problems. We must not shirk our responsibilities as elected officials, and instead do everything in our power to prevent another tragedy from occurring. For these reasons, I am proud to introduce this important resolution.

Mr. Speaker, today I am re-introducing legislation that is intended to help solve the shortage of available, affordable child care facilities. In my congressional district in New York City, more than half of all women with pre-school children are in the workforce and the need for child care is enormous. This is not a local problem but one that is national in nature.

The ``Children's Development Commission Act'' or ``Kiddie Mac,'' will address this problem by authorizing HUD to issue guarantees to lenders who are willing to lend money to build or rehabilitate child care facilities. It also

creates the Children's Development Commission which will certify the loans and create federal child care standards. Kiddie Mac will also give ``micro-loans'' to facilities which need to make the necessary changes to come up to licensing standards, as well as provide them with lower cost fire and liability insurance. Through some of the premiums paid by the lenders, a non-profit foundation will be formed which would focus on research on child care and development, as well as create educational materials to guide potential providers through the certification process.

It is late in the session but I urge my colleagues to consider the proposal and join me in enacting it this year or in a future Congress.

Mr. Speaker, I offer a motion to recommit.

I am, Mr. Speaker, in its current form.

Mr. Speaker, this is a very simple motion to recommit. It replaces the House language with the language that passed the Senate on an overwhelming vote of 96 to 2.

Parliamentary Inquiry

Yes, there is.

Yes. It is at the desk.

Mr. Speaker, this motion to recommit replaces the House language with the language that passed the Senate in an overwhelming vote of 96 to 2.

As we have debated the merits of H.R. 10, it has become clear that the bill is fundamentally flawed, and it will certainly take a conference to work out major differences. We do not need to take that path.

After the attacks of September 11, Congress created a bipartisan commission to examine the causes of the attack and make recommendations for reform. This commission put aside partisan differences to make 41 unanimous recommendations for making our country safer. The other body acted, largely in a bipartisan manner, and the bipartisan 9/11 Commission Caucus in the House has been working with the 9/11 families and the commission since the recommendations were released.

Our job should be to enact these recommendations. The only question we should ask is what can we do to make America safer, and the only answer is to enact the recommendations of the 9/11 Commission.

Unfortunately, H.R. 10 does not do this. There are 41 recommendations made by the 9/11 Commission. H.R. 10 fully implements only 11 of the 41 recommendations.

At the Presidential debates last week, President Bush and Senator Kerry were asked what was the greatest threat facing the Nation. They gave the same answer: nuclear proliferation.

Yet, incredibly, H.R. 10 does not implement the 9/11 Commission's recommendations for stopping nuclear proliferation; and the bill falls short in other key areas, such as border security, aviation security, and emergency response.

It is not hard to see what is going on. Some say that the real goal of the Republican leadership is to pass a bill that cannot be reconciled with the Senate bill before the election. The Republican leadership knows that after the elections, when the political pressure is off, the prospects for reform will vanish.

This is our moment. We need to act now. We have this window of opportunity and we must take it; and that is exactly what this motion to recommit does. It is the same language that passed the Senate 96 to 2. Every single Republican Senator voted for the bill and virtually every single Democratic Senator. The motion implements all of the recommendations of the 9/11 Commission, and it includes no poison pills.

If we pass this motion, there will be no difference between the House and the Senate language. This legislation can go right to the President's desk for signature. We can be in the Rose Garden tomorrow for a signing ceremony.

If there are other provisions that the House wants to enact, they will have every opportunity they want to put them on separate pieces of legislation before this House.

This past week, our offices have all been visited by the 9/11 families. The 9/11 families have been through a terrible ordeal, but they have turned their grief into action and their personal tragedy into public service. More than 3 years after 9/11, it is time to honor their commitment to ensuring that other American families never have to walk in their shoes.

This motion to recommit is our best hope for a solution right now. All we have to do is vote ``yes'' and vote to make our Nation safer. Vote to support the motion to recommit.

Mr. Speaker, I yield the remaining time to my distinguished colleague, the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Harman).

Mr. Speaker, I demand a recorded vote.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this time, and I congratulate him on his fine service in this body on the Committee on Rules and in so many other areas.

I rise in support of this rule, but also to speak in strong support of the National Defense Authorization Act which will be before this body later on tonight. I am also pleased, and I thank the chairman and ranking member, that an amendment that I offered to the House version of this bill has been included in the conference report.

My amendment directs the Secretary of Defense to eliminate the backlog in rape and sexual assault evidence collection kits, reduce the processing time of those kits, and provide an adequate supply of the kits at all domestic and overseas U.S. military installations and military academies. The provisions in this legislation also direct the Secretary to ensure that personnel are trained in the use of these kits.

This marks the second time this week that the House has passed legislation recognizing the importance of DNA evidence. It is better than a fingerprint. DNA never forgets and can never be intimidated.

I am glad to see that the military will be addressing this issue, and I hope that civilian victims and survivors of rape will soon get similar justice with the passage of the comprehensive DNA legislation that has been bottled up in the other body.

I would like particularly to thank the gentleman from California (Chairman Hunter) and the gentleman from Missouri (Ranking Member Skelton) for their leadership, and I urge my colleagues to support the underlying bill.

I will say that my DNA collection bill grew out of the scandal, really, in the military of rapes at military academies and in Iraq and Afghanistan. The bipartisan Women's Conference and Caucus here in Congress held hearings, meetings, and issued a report. As one of the victims said, the best thing you can do is just convict the rapist. DNA evidence will help us to protect the innocent and protect women from rape in the future and place rapists behind bars.

Announcement by the Speaker Pro Tempore

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 5011, a bill to correct abusive practices in the sale of financial products to our military.

This bill was strongly supported by myself and all my colleagues on the Financial Services Committee because it provides a necessary correction to a real problem.

Over the past several years, we have seen the growth of unprincipled sales practices pushing marginal financial products, blatantly unsuitable for military personnel.

These contractual plans impose staggering fees and draconian early termination penalties.

They are so undesirable that they are not sold in the civilian market, where the force of normal competition has driven them out.

All the more shame that certain brokers used privileged on-base access to military personnel to force this product on servicemen facing combat.

Our nation's military personnel deserve the best possible financial advice about all the options available to them, with complete and accurate information, clearly presented.

At the very least, they shouldn't be subjected to unscrupulous sales practices or offered financial products that no civilian would choose and that are not suitable for any investor. We should have banned these products and practices years ago; it is high time to do so now.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of this rule.

9/11 Commission Chairman Thomas Kean is quoted today calling the bill the other body passed 96-2 a dream. If the other body's bill is a dream, I guess H.R. 10 is his nightmare.

There are many of us with grave concerns with the underlying bill, H.R. 10. Analysis of the bill shows it only implements 10 of the 41 recommendations, while tacking on an additional 50. In due time we will have a chance to debate this.

More importantly, the Rules Committee has also made in order a substitute amendment. While the name has changed, it is the same exact substance of the Shays/Maloney substitute. This will allow us the opportunity to have a fair debate. An opportunity to pass a clean bill with bipartisan support.

I will note that the Rules Committee did miss an opportunity to make this truly a bipartisan effort and I remind everyone that the American people do not want a partisan debate on their security. Both parties need to work together and pass this substitute.

This is what the 9/11 Commission and the 9/11 Family Steering Committee has been fighting for.

Over the last weeks they have been unwavering in their support for a fair debate and have fought for an up or down vote on clean legislation.

Today they have scored another improbable victory.

They were told by the House leadership--the same people that fought the creation and extension of the 9/11 commission--that the House would never have this opportunity. The families and commission refused to listen and once again fought for change.

They told us they want us to work in a bipartisan way.

I thank them for always keeping this House on task and I hope, with today's substitute, we can do just that.

By allowing a substitute, this House will have the opportunity to vote up or down legislation that takes provisions from both the Collins/Lieberman and the McCain/Lieberman bills.

This is the same legislation, H.R. 5223, Congressman Shays and I have introduced in the House and both have the support of our bipartisan 9/ 11 Commission Caucus.

This substitute takes Title One of the Collins/Lieberman Bill which creates a National Intelligence Director and a National Center for Counter Terrorism. For Titles two through nine, it uses the language of the McCain/Lieberman bill.

This combination would allow the House to debate a bill similar to the bill that passed the other body 96-2, a bill that enacts the provisions of the 9/11 Commission without any add-ons. This is a bill we could have on the President's desk before we leave town.

I ask Members to support this rule, but I urge them to support the substitute.

This is the option the 9/11 Families and the 9/11 Commission have fought for. It would be a shame if this House does not take this opportunity to work together and pass this substitute.

The American people want this Congress to work in a bipartisan way to enact the 9/11 Commission's recommendations. Today we will have that opportunity by supporting the substitute.

Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the substitute.

Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this time and for his outstanding leadership in so many areas, especially health. We really appreciate it.

Mr. Chairman, reform for our Nation's security and intelligence is now the sole responsibility of the House of Representatives. The other body, both sides of the aisle, unanimously, almost with complete and total support, passed the strongest intelligence reform in our Nation's history, with a vote of 96 to 2.

The Collins-Lieberman bill is before the House today in the form of a bipartisan substitute, the Menendez substitute. It will make our country safer by creating a strong national intelligence director with full personnel and budgetary authority and a National counterterrorism Center that will share intelligence.

Regrettably, the House leadership bill has no such authority. Last week, the 9/11 Commission chairman, Governor Kean said, ``If the National Intelligence Director does not have budgetary authority, you might as well not do anything.''

If we pass today the Collins-Lieberman-Menendez bill out of the House, we can get it to the President's desk for his signature before we adjourn. The bipartisan 9/11 Commission members support the substitute. The White House has lined up behind it. So has the 9/11 family members, the steering committee, as well as editorial boards across this Nation. The only lone wolf muddying the process with extraneous, unrelated, controversial provisions is the House Republican leadership.

The Commission made 41 recommendations. Of these, the House Republican leaders fully implemented only 11. This is the exact opposite of what the Commission recommended. They recommended a package. Instead of implementing the key Commission recommendations, the House Republican leaders added over 50 extraneous provisions that are not mentioned anywhere in the 9/11 Commission report. Even the President has asked the House leadership to strip these provisions out of the bill.

Mr. Chairman, I will place in the Record a letter from the White House in support of Collins-Lieberman, a Washington Times article, and an L.A. Times article that speaks to the administration's support for Collins-Lieberman and against the many add-ons that have been loaded on to the Republican bill. Some of the 50 extra provisions are innocuous, but many are controversial poison pills that will only sidetrack and delay the legislation.

The truth of the matter is that if the Republicans really cared about these extra provisions, they could have passed it 3 years ago or added it on later. Yesterday, Chairman Kean said that the Senate bill is a giant step forward and the right vehicle for our recommendations. He called the bill that passed out of the Senate that is before us today a dream, and if this is the dream, then I say that the House leadership bill is an absolute nightmare that will only delay and hurt the process and will make it harder for us to make this country safer and enact a law that implements the 41 recommendations of the 9/11 Commission.

The White House,

Washington, October 1, 2004.

To the Editors of the Washington Post: Yesterday's

Washington Post inaccurately reported that the Bush

Administration supports a provision in the House intelligence

reform bill that would permit the deportation of certain

foreign nationals to countries where they are likely to be

tortured.

The President did not propose and does not support this

provision. He has made clear that the United States stands

against and will not tolerate torture, and that the United

States remains committed to complying with its obligations

under the Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman

or Degrading Treatment or Punishment. Consistent with that

treaty, the United States does not expel, return or extradite

individuals to other countries where the United States

believes it is likely they will be tortured.

As the President has said, torture is wrong no matter where

it occurs, and the United States will continue to lead the

fight to eliminate it everywhere.

Sincerely,

Alberto R. Gonzales,

Counsel to the President.

Mr. Chairman, as I have said, I oppose H.R. 10. But I have to give the Financial Services Committee this: They didn't add anything affirmatively harmful to this bill. Indeed, several of these provisions are things that this body has passed before and I support, such as providing the SEC with increased emergency authority, or authorizing Treasury to produce secure currency for other countries.

Indeed, one provision of the bill builds on recent legislation I cosponsored. I worked with Rep. Kelly to pass an appropriation of $25 million in funding for FinCEN to make key technological improvements in FinCEN systems. This bill authorizes no-year funding for that purpose, and that is commendable.

Other provisions are unobjectionable, such as making technical corrections to money laundering statutes, or requiring Treasury to prepare an annual Money Laundering Strategy. These are things we should have done some time ago.

My bigger concern in this Committee is with what we have not done as we come to the end of this session. There is financial services legislation we should be passing--but the majority has failed to give this body a chance to vote on it.

The Financial Services Committee voted out legislation extending the Terrorism Risk Insurance Act--but the leadership has failed to bring this to the floor. This is critical to the district I represent. We were attacked on 9/11 and we cannot rebuild and remake our commercial district without terrorism insurance. Together with many of my colleagues I have signed a letter asking that TRIA be brought to the floor and I hope that can still happen.

Similarly, the Financial Services Committee voted out legislation revising the bankruptcy laws to provide an orderly unwinding of financial contracts. This legislation is strongly supported by the Treasury Department. But again, it's missing in action.

We must set better priorities. We should pass TRIA and netting in this Congress.

Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of the bipartisan substitute. This substitute is identical to the substitute that the gentleman from Connecticut (Mr. Shays) and I offered but was not made in order. This substitute is almost identical to the bill that passed the Senate yesterday with a strong vote of 96 to 2. All 51 Republicans voted yes to bringing overdue reform to our intelligence network.

Right after 9/11, this body came together and we worked together as Americans, not as partisans. We need to come together again tonight and pass the bipartisan 9/11 Commission substitute, a bill we could have on the President's desk tomorrow.

Unlike the underlying bill, this substitute adopts all of the recommendations and nothing else, and that is why the bipartisan substitute has the support of the 9/11 Commission, the 9/11 Family Steering Committee members, and editorial boards across this Nation. They have written in favor of the Collins-Lieberman bill, upon which the substitute is based, and against the House leadership's controversial bill, which is strikingly different from the 9/11 Commission report on many key points.

Mr. Chairman, the President of the United States agrees. Just tonight the White House released a statement on this bill, and they said, and I quote, ``the National Intelligence Director should have full budget authority.'' The substitute does give full budget authority. H.R. 10 does not.

The administration also strongly opposes the, and I quote ``overbroad expansion of expedited removal authorities.'' The administration has concerns with the overbroad alien identification standards proposed by the bill, and I quote, ``that are unrelated to security concerns.'' The administration strongly opposes section 3032, the so-called outsourcing of torture provision. And it goes on and on. They are opposed to Title V, inconsistent with President's constitutional authority.

In fact, H.R. 10 is so problematic that the White House ran out of room talking about provisions they did not like. They ended their letter by saying, and I quote, ``Finally, the administration has concerns with a number of other provisions in this bill.''

So, my colleagues, the choice is clear. Pass a bill that even makes the White House queasy, or pass the substitute that enacts the recommendations of the 9/11 Commission.

Mr. Chairman, the 9/11 families wrote, ``We believe the 9/11 substitute is the best choice for certain and quick legislation to make our country safe. We respectfully ask you to put politics aside and act in the best interest of America. Vote for the 9/11 substitute.''

And on a personal note, my city was attacked, and I urge my colleagues to support the bipartisan substitute. It will make our country safer.

Mr. Chairman, I would like to end with the full letter of the 9/11 victims' families, which I will submit for the Record, along with editorials in support of the bipartisan bill.

Newspapers across the country have editorialized in favor of the Senate's bipartisan legislation--and against the House Republican leadership's divisive approach, including the New York Times, the Washington Post, the Baltimore Sun, the Miami Herald, the Albuquerque Journal, Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, Orlando Sentinel, and the Rocky Mountain News.

Here are some selected quotes:

``House Republicans are already trying to turnt this week's debate into a pre-election brawl aimed more at scoring phony patriotic points than at passing meaningful laws. . . . Congress cannot escape its duty to finally repair the institutional failures that left the country so vulnerable before 9/11 and so wrong before the invasion of Iraq.''--NY Times, Sep. 27

``The House of Representatives' version of intelligence reform might be dismissed as an election-year stunt were it not so dangerous. . . .

``Playing politics with intelligence reform should not be worth the potential damage.''--Washington Post, Oct. 5

``House Speaker Dennis Hastert and Majority Leader Tom DeLay have been in no rush, yielding, it appears, to the status quo forces in Washington that stand to lose power and influence if sweeping changes are adopted.''--Baltimore Sun, Oct. 5

``Instead of focusing on the nuts and bolts of intelligence reform, legislators are debating wholly extraneous issues that will contribute little or nothing to making our country safer.''--Miami Herald, Oct. 4

``House Republicans should avoid hanging apple-related riders on legislation addressing oranges when it comes to implementing 9/11 Commission recommendations.''--Albuquerque Journal, Oct. 2

``Legislative sabotage such as this is hardly unusual in political Washington, and most of the time the damage is not intolerable. This time, however, it is.''--Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, Sep. 30

``The House proposal is a weak, partisan plan that perpetuates too much of the discredited status quo in intelligence--Orlando Sentinel

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor of the 44th Anniversary of the Republic of Cyprus. It was on October 1, 1960, that Cyprus became an independent republic after decades of British colonial rule.

I am very fortunate and privileged to represent Astoria, Queens--one of the largest and most vibrant communities of Greek and Cypriot Americans in this country. It is truly one of my greatest pleasures as a Member of Congress to participate in the life of this community, and the wonderful and vital Cypriot friends that I have come to know are one of its greatest rewards.

Since the last celebration of Cyprus Independence Day, Cyprus has experienced events of major historic importance. On May 1, Cyprus became a full-fledged member of the European Union along with nine other countries from Central and Eastern Europe.

Cyprus's accession to the EU is a historic achievement. As an EU member, Cyprus will represent European values and policies and, at the same time, will work toward even stronger transatlantic ties with the United States. This has been a long time in coming, and I believe that Cyprus will have much to contribute to the EU.

However, the commemoration of Cyprus' Independence Day this year, as in the past, is clouded by the fact that the Mediterranean island nation's territory continues to be illegally occupied by the Turkish military forces, in violation of UN Security Council resolutions. Unfortunately, the proposed UN reunification plan did not provide for a functional or durable solution to the island's division. Seventy-six percent of Greek Cypriot voters opposed it, citing concerns about security, property restitution, and the structure of the proposed government.

Cyprus and the United States have a great deal in common. We share a deep and abiding commitment to democracy, human rights, free markets, and the ideal and practice of equal justice under the law.

In fact, Cyprus was among the first nations to express its solidarity with the U.S. immediately following the September 11th terrorist attacks. Cyprus has taken many concrete and active steps to target the perpetrators, collaborators and financiers of terrorism. For example, Cyprus has endorsed and implemented all resolutions and decisions of the U.N. Security Council, the EU and other International Organizations pertaining to the fight against terrorism.

Unfortunately, Cyprus is not without its own difficult history. 37 percent of this nation is still occupied by a hostile foreign power, and it has been for 30 years. On July 20, 1974, Turkey invaded Cyprus, and to this day continues to maintain an estimated 35,000 heavily armed troops. Nearly 200,000 Greek Cypriots, who fell victim to a policy of ethnic cleansing, were forcibly evicted from their homes and became refugees in their own country.

Despite the hardships and trauma caused by the ongoing Turkish occupation, Cyprus has registered remarkable economic growth, and the people living in the Government-controlled areas enjoy one of the world's highest standards of living. Sadly, the people living in the occupied area continue to be mired in poverty.

Last year, the Turkish occupation regime partially lifted restrictions on freedom of movement across the artificial line of division created by Turkey's military occupation. Hundreds of thousands of Greek Cypriots and Turkish Cypriots have crossed the UN ceasefire line to visit their homes and properties or areas of their own country that were inaccessible to them for nearly 30 years. The peaceful and cooperative spirit in the person-to-person, family-to-family interactions between Greek Cypriots and Turkish Cypriots bodes well for the successful reunification of Cyprus.

In the times we are facing, it is clear that divisions among people create harmful, destructive environments. We must find a peaceful solution to the Cyprus problem. The relationship between Cyprus and the United States is strong and enduring, and we stand together celebrating democracy and freedom.

Mr. Speaker, I rise to join the Hellenic-Americans and Philhellenes in my district and throughout the country in celebrating ``OXI Day (No Day),'' which falls on the 28th of October. This year marks the 64th anniversary of a very important day in Hellenic history, the day on which brave Greek patriots said ``No'' to fascism, ``No'' to injustice, and ``No'' to slavery.

For those individuals who lived through that momentous period and their descendants, many of whom live in the 14th Congressional District of New York, ``OXI Day'' is more than a memory: It is the embodiment of Hellenism and its highest ideals.

On October 28, 1940, a terrifying sound went up throughout all Greek cities and towns, the sound of sirens and klaxons announcing the invasion of Greece by the Nazis. Walls that before had echoed only with the tolling of church bells now reverberated with the din of alarms.

At a time when Europe was descending into the inferno of another world war, the people of Greece did not panic. Men went calmly to their closets and retrieved their military uniforms and weapons. Women went about their necessary tasks, and the children assisted as they were able. With level-headed determination and steadfast resolve, the citizenry of Greece mobilized against the coming invaders and delivered their resounding ``No!'' to the Axis aggressors.

On OXI Day, the people of Greece chose the harder path, the path of resistance. If they had opened their gates to the invaders, much bloodshed and many deprivations might have been avoided. That brave generation of Hellenes, refused to submit to oppression, even at the cost of their homes, their land, and their lives. They chose to fight and even to die so that their children and the children of other nations might live in liberty. Theirs was an act of self-sacrifice that clearly proclaimed the humanitarian ideals of their Orthodox Christian faith and their ethnic heritage.

Demonstrating poise under pressure, the heroes of that period fought against tyranny and delayed the Axis onslaught in the Balkan Peninsula. The Greek nation which said ``OXI'' contributed to the eventual downfall of the Fascist powers in Europe.

This year the Hellenic community is celebrating another great moment in their history, having successfully hosted a magnificent and peaceful Olympics at a time when terrorism imperils every public gathering. The smallest nation to ever host the Olympics, Greeks once again showed that they always rise to the occasion.

Mr. Speaker, I ask my colleagues to join me in saluting the heroes of OXI Day. In their brave words and deeds we see all of the highest virtues of Hellenic heritage: Passion for justice, courage at a time of trial, unity in the midst of conflict, and willingness to sacrifice one's life for the good of others. On this day, we thank Greece for saying ``OXI.''

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me time and for his leadership on so many important issues before this body.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of the Justice for All Act, and I would like to commend the truly heroic leadership of the gentleman from Wisconsin (Chairman Sensenbrenner), the gentleman from Michigan (Ranking Member Conyers) and the efforts of many, the gentleman from New York (Mr. Nadler), the gentleman from New York (Mr. Weiner), the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. LaHood) and especially the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Delahunt) for his tireless work on the Innocence Protection Act and for my colleague, the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Green), who has worked selflessly on passing the Debbie Smith Act for many, many years.

This marks the second time this bill has passed this body this year, and I do not understand why both bodies cannot come together to pass the same legislation, which so many people support in a bipartisan manner, that will lock up the guilty and free the innocent. The longer we delay, the longer the victims of sexual assault and rape must wait to see their attackers put in prison.

This bill includes provisions to protect the rights of crime victims, as well as legislation, the Advancing Justice Through DNA Technology Act, which includes the Debbie Smith Act and the Innocence Protection Act; and the House overwhelmingly passed, last year, both of these to improve the use of DNA technology in prosecuting criminals.

DNA is accurate, it never forgets, it cannot be intimidated by a prosecutor; and we have to put this technology to use in convicting criminals and freeing the innocent.

In the 105th Congress, I offered legislation to provide funding to process the backlog of DNA evidence in rape cases. After holding a hearing, along with former Representative Steve Horn, with a courageous rape survivor, Debbie Smith, she recounted how in 1989 she was dragged from her kitchen and raped in her backyard while her husband was asleep upstairs. She lived in fear for years because the rapist said that he would come back and kill her. Then she finally learned after 6 years that, through DNA processing, they had found a cold hit identifying her assailant, who had been jailed 6 months after her assault for another crime, but for 6 long years she literally lived in agony.

It was because of Debbie Smith's story that I introduced the Debbie Smith Act, which would help combat the epidemic of violence against women in the United States, where a sexual assault occurs every 2 minutes.

We know that DNA processing techniques could serve as a conclusive proof in countless other rape cases, and many of us were outraged when we learned that there were hundreds of thousands of backlogged rape kits collecting dust across this country, but they did not have adequate support for the crime labs and adequate government funding to process them.

The bill would accomplish several critical objectives in Title II of the bill, the Debbie Smith Act, which includes providing funding to process the backlog of DNA evidence, setting national standards for DNA evidence collection, creating a national DNA file in the FBI for rapists and criminals who cross State lines, and providing grant money for a sexual assault forensic examiner program. The police tell us if they have the evidence from the same program, it almost always leads to a conviction. It also provides funding to train law enforcement authorities on the collection and handling of DNA evidence.

I want to say that the dismal reality in this country is that only 6 percent, according to the FBI, only 6 percent of women who have been raped will ever see their attacker spend a day in jail. Yet we know that each unprocessed DNA kit represents a life like Debbie Smith's, and it represents a rapist which the FBI tells us will attack, on the average, eight times. By processing this evidence, we may be able not only to convict rapists, but to prevent them from harming other men and women in our country.

So this is tremendously important legislation, and the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Delahunt) and the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Sensenbrenner) and the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. LaHood) have talked about other aspects of it. We should all join in passing it. I hope that every Member of this body will join in supporting this important effort.

May I add that Lifetime Television started a national petition in support of this bill. Many, many organizations, RAINN and others, have worked tirelessly with this body to pass it. We thank them, too.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in opposition to H.R. 163, the ``Universal National Service Act of 2003.'' This legislation is being brought to the Floor by the Majority without holding any hearings which would provide for the necessary debate an issue this magnitude requires.

There is no doubt that the military is currently overextended worldwide. National Guard members and Reservists have been sent overseas for extended missions, leaving their families behind. While we are eternally grateful to them and all the members of the U.S. military for their bravery, I am sad to say that when they return home, they will discover that this Administration has cut many critical veterans' benefits. The Department of Veterans Affairs and the health care system it oversees are not prepared for the numbers of new veterans who will need long-term care for their injuries. This Nation's veterans deserve nothing less than the benefits to which they are entitled.

I think we can all agree that a strong military is critical to our Nation's defense. However, I think that we can accomplish this goal by ensuring that those who are currently serving have the necessary equipment and resources to complete their missions and the benefits that they and their families deserve. If we need to increase the size of the military, there are ways to do it other than through a draft.

I hope that when we consider these issues in the future, the Majority will be more respectful of our service men and women.

Mr. Speaker, I rise to salute Mr. Sonny Hall, international president of the Transport Workers Union, on the occasion of his retirement. Sonny Hall is a trailblazing leader of the trade union movement who throughout his life has selflessly devoted himself in service to our Nation, his family, and the union members whom he has led so ably for generations.

As International President of the Transport Workers Union of America, Sonny Hall has represented more than 100,000 men and women employed in the Nation's transportation and allied industries. Prior to his election to this post at the Union's 19th Constitutional Convention in October 1993, he served as president of Transport Workers Union Local 100, the largest local union of TWU, representing nearly 38,000 members who operate the lifelines of New York City, its extensive network of subway trains and its public and private bus lines.

Over the course of his long and distinguished career, Mr. Hall served in virtually every union position, from shop steward all the way up to the very pinnacle of the labor movement. He was named president of Local 100 in May 1985 and subsequently elected to full 3-year terms in December 1985, 1988 and 1991. He first joined the Transport Workers Union in 1950 as a bus cleaner for the old Omnibus Corporation, and became a bus operator in 1957. In between, he served tours of duty in both the U.S. Marine Corps and the U.S. Army. Elected an international vice president at the Transport Workers Union's Seventeenth Constitutional Convention in September 1985, he was appointed executive vice president by the International Executive Council on January 9, 1989, acid was subsequently elected to that post for a 4-year term at the Union's 18th Constitutional Convention in October 1989.

Mr. Hall went on to be elected secretary treasurer to the AFL-CIO Transportation Trades Department in 1995, and was elected to the AFL- CIO's Executive Council at the Federation's convention in October 1995. Throughout his career, he always served both his fellow union members and the transit-riding public with courageous, calm, clear-headed and effective leadership.

Sonny Hall studied military and criminal law at the University of New Mexico, and graduated with a bachelor of arts degree from the Cornell University Labor College. He is the son of a retired New York City bus operator who served the riding public for three decades and was an early member of Transport Workers Union Local 100. Sonny Hall and his wife, Maureen, are proud parents of a son, Kevin Hall.

In recognition of his outstanding accomplishments, I ask my colleagues to join me in honoring Mr. Sonny Hall on the occasion of his retirement.