Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, I rise to pay tribute to a revolutionary African-American leader, Malcolm X, who would have turned 79 today, May 19, 2004. Malcolm X is recognized in my community and several others as a hero. His contributions towards racial and social equality will never be forgotten, thus his legacy still exists today.

Malcolm X's life was cut short when his influence as a political leader was reaching its pinnacle. Although his ability to leave a clear institutional legacy was thwarted, his influence was and continues to be wide reaching. Malcolm's religious and social transformation is something to be recognized and emulated.

Malcolm X played a pivotal role in American and African-American history. He helped shape the course of the Civil Rights Movement and the path for equal social justice. Let

us never forget the positive legacy Malcolm X left behind. On this day, May 19, 2004 let us all wish Malcolm X a Happy 79th Birthday.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor Dr. Yosef A.A. Ben- Jochannan: professor, author, and educator of black history to troubled children. I would like to ask the members of the House to join in paying respect to an outstanding intellectual.

Educated in Puerto Rico, Cuba, and Spain, ``Dr. Ben'' as he is affectionately called, is a true scholar, earning doctoral degrees in Cultural Anthropology and Moorish History. He is not only a historian but also a trained lawyer, engineer, and Egyptologist. Dr. Ben has been devoted to the exploration of ancient African civilizations and the emphasis of Egypt's importance towards the understanding of religion and African history. He moved to Harlem in 1942 and later began teaching troubled children at Harlem Prep about black history. He has also served as a professor in Cornell University's African Studies and Research Center. Since 1941 Dr. Ben has visited Egypt twice a year and hosted more than 30 educational tours of Egypt focusing on the roots of ancient Nile civilizations and religions. At 85 years old, he has published 42 books, one being the world renowned ``The Black Man of the Nile and His Family''.

Dr. Ben's scholarly work in the illumination of Africa's role in present ``Western'' religions has broken new ground for historians. His exceptional educating and tours have inspired many. His work in Harlem has especially touched me and it is with great admiration that I and other Members of Congress shall look upon this brave innovator of African historiography.

Mr. Speaker, the humanitarian crisis in Sudan must not be overshadowed by current world events. We must address the ethnic cleansing and refugee situation with urgency, not just with words but with action. There is a moral obligation to pressure the Sudanese government to end the atrocities in western Sudan and ensure adequate humanitarian aid reaches the refugees in Chad. As the world remembers the 10th anniversary of the genocide in Rwanda, we cannot allow this to happen again.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Skelton) for the time.

This is a very difficult time for me because I find it difficult to rise in opposition of this resolution, and the reason I do it is because there just does not seem to be enough outrage involved in what is being said.

We should not have to apologize for brave men and women. We should not have to apologize for what the executive branch or the Congress has or has not done. We should not be put in this position.

Several months ago, I called for the resignation of the Secretary of Defense because I thought, as a major architect of this war, that he was fighting this war with other people's children, and when he said that he did not know whether or not we were winning or losing the war, when he said that he did not know whether we were creating more terrorists than we were killing, when he said we did not have any plan to end the war, that it was a slog, I thought, as a former combat veteran, is this the leadership that we can expect from the Secretary of Defense? I thought that America and the military deserve better than that and he should resign.

Now the information that we receive is that a climate has been created where a handful of people have committed these atrocities against human kind in an atmosphere where all of the people that are in Iraq have been demonized where it appears to American people and certainly to our military that the people in Iraq are responsible for 9/11 and causing us pain, that the Secretary of Defense did have information months ago about these atrocities; and that he kept it from the President, he kept it from the Congress and he kept it from the American people. I think that this rises to the point that it is a high crime and misdemeanor if he disappointed the President, kept information from the Congress and kept this information from the American people.

I think America and the world wants us to show the outrage, not by rhetoric, but by taking action, and if the President does not fire the Secretary, if he does not resign, I think it is the responsibility of this Congress to file articles of impeachment and force him to leave office. Then the whole world would know, not just our military, not just Americans but the whole world what we stand for.

If people can say ``mission completed'' when it looks like there is victory and we see atrocities like this and it happens on someone's watch, if they do not have the dignity to say I am sorry and move on, then we have the responsibility under our Constitution to remove these people from office.

He kept the information away from this Congress. We have the responsibility of oversight. I am preparing articles of impeachment today.

Mr. Speaker, I rise to acknowledge Cinco de Mayo, an important day in the Mexican community. In recent years the holiday of Cinco de Mayo or The Fifth Of May has gained much popularity in American culture. However, it is not, as many people believe a celebration of Mexican Independence. Mexico's actual Independence Day is September 16. Cinco de Mayo memorializes the Mexican army's triumph over the French at The Battle of Puebla in 1862. Cinco de Mayo pays homage to an ill prepared militia of about 4,500 overcoming what appeared to be the insurmountable well outfitted French army of 6,500 soldiers. This victory was a glorious moment in Mexican history, thus Cinco de Mayo is remembered.

Cinco de Mayo's increased popularity is apparent in the innumerable celebrations along the U.S.-Mexico border and in parts of the U.S. that have a high population of people with a Mexican heritage. In these areas the holiday is a celebration of Mexican culture, of food, music, beverage and customs unique to Mexico. This date provides me with a welcome opportunity to recognize and appreciate the contributions being made by the growing Mexican-American communities across the United States. We in New York City and in my community are benefiting from the dynamic presence of this vibrant culture.

It is important that on this day of remembrance that we do not let the message of triumph in the face of adversity be overridden by festivals, food, and music. Let us never forget the great contributions that Mexican-Americans have made and continue to make to our nation. Their presence is apparent in politics, arts, athletics, entertainment, military excellence, science, culinary arts, and embedded in the American language.

On this important day we must recognize that the Mexican-American contribution to our nation is similar to the many other immigrant groups that came to our great nation with the same hopes of self- betterment and the pursuit of the American Dream. On Thanksgiving we commemorate the Pilgrims and Native Americans overcoming the harshness of winter and settlement into the New World, which speaks to the overcoming the seemingly insuperable.

Cinco de Mayo symbolizes the power of faith in the face of adversity. It is rooted in our nation's history that in order to achieve greatness we must find the power within ourselves and never give up. If we are able to work hard and never lose faith then the sky is the limit. It is this exact belief that Cinco de Mayo truly embodies. Thus, this date has yet to receive the official recognition that it deserves. I sincerely hope and believe that one day Cinco de Mayo will be a designated national holiday.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to call upon our nation to share the sacrifice imposed upon us by our war on terrorism. I have introduced a bill to reinstitute the draft for young Americans between the ages of 18 and 26 and national civilian service for all those not needed in the military.

Since I have submitted this bill in January 2003, my conviction that we need a draft has risen on an almost daily basis. In March 2003 the administration decided to take the nation to war against Iraq for doubtful reasons. I do not think that members of this administration and Congress would have been so willing to launch a war if they had known that their own children might have to fight it.

Fact is, that we are currently a nation in which the poor fight our wars while the affluent stay at home. The majority of our brave servicemen and women come either from poor rural areas or poverty- shaken inner-city neighborhoods. About thirty-five percent of our soldiers are minorities. These young people enlist in the military mainly for financial and educational opportunities.

I believe that the burdens of war should not be shouldered solely by the poor segments of our society, but must be fairly shared by all racial and economic groups. I am pleased to see that during the last couple of months the support for a reintroduction of the draft has risen substantially among the American people. As our casualties in Iraq increase daily and exhausted soldiers are kept in Iraq under stop loss orders, the debate about shared sacrifice is gaining ground.

I submit to the Congressional Record an article by journalist and Vietnam War Veteran William Broyles Jr. which was published in the New York Times on May 4, 2004. Mr. Broyles' article is one of the strongest pieces favoring the draft that I have read so far and it fully reflects my own opinion on this subject.

[From the New York Times, May 4, 2004]

A War for Us, Fought by Them

(By William Broyles Jr.)

WILSON, Wyo.--The longest love affair of my life began with

a shotgun marriage. It was the height of the Vietnam War and

my student deferment had run out. Desperate not to endanger

myself or to interrupt my personal plans, I wanted to avoid

military service altogether. I didn't have the

resourcefulness of Bill Clinton, so I couldn't figure out how

to dodge the draft. I tried to escape into the National

Guard, where I would be guaranteed not to be sent to war, but

I lacked the connections of George W. Bush, so I couldn't

slip ahead of the long waiting list. My attitude was the same

as Dick Cheney's: I was special, I had ``other priorities.''

Let other people do it.

When my draft notice came in 1968, I was relieved in a way.

Although I had deep doubts about the war, I had become

troubled about how I had angled to avoid military service. My

classmates from high school were in the war; my classmates

from college were not--exactly the dynamic that exists today.

But instead of reporting for service in the Army, on a whim I

joined the Marine Corps, the last place on earth I thought I

belonged.

My sacrifice turned out to be minimal. I survived a year as

an infantry lieutenant in Vietnam. I was not wounded; nor did

I struggle for years with post-traumatic stress disorder. A

long bout of survivor guilt was the price I paid. Others

suffered far more, particularly those who had to serve after

the war had lost all sense of purpose for the men fighting

it. I like to think that in spite of my being so unwilling at

first, I did some small service to my country and to that

enduring love of mine, the United States Marine Corps.

To my profound surprise, the Marines did a far greater

service to me. In 3 years I learned more about standards,

commitment and yes, life, than I did in 6 years of

university. I also learned that I had had no idea of my own

limits: when I was exhausted after humping up and down jungle

mountains in 100-degree heat with a 75-pound pack, terrified

out of my mind, wanting only to quit, convinced I couldn't

take another step, I found that in fact I could keep going

for miles. And my life was put in the hands of young men I

would otherwise never have met, by and large high-school

dropouts, who turned out to be among the finest people I have

ever known.

I am now the father of a young man who has far more

character than I ever had. I joined the Marines because I had

to; he signed up after college because he felt he ought to.

He volunteered for an elite unit and has served in both

Afghanistan and Iraq. When I see images of Americans in the

war zones, I think of my son and his friends, many of whom I

have come to know and deeply respect. When I opened this

newspaper yesterday and read the front-page headline, ``9

G.I.'s Killed,'' I didn't think in abstractions. I thought

very personally.

The problem is, I don't see the images of or read about any

of the young men and women who, as Dick Cheney and I did,

have ``other priorities.'' There are no immediate family

members of any of the prime civilian planners of this war

serving in it--beginning with President Bush and extending

deep into the Defense Department. Only one of the 535

members of Congress, Senator Tim Johnson of South Dakota,

has a child in the war--and only half a dozen others have

sons and daughters in the military.

The memorial service yesterday for Pat Tillman, the

football star killed in Afghanistan, further points out this

contrast. He remains the only professional athlete of any

sport who left his privileged life during this war and turned

in his play uniform for a real one. With few exceptions, the

only men and women in military service are the profoundly

patriotic or the economically needy.

It was not always so. In other wars, the men and women in

charge made sure their family members led the way. Since 9/

11, the war on terrorism has often been compared to the

generational challenge of Pearl Harbor; but Franklin D.

Roosevelt's sons all enlisted soon after that attack. Both of

Lyndon B. Johnson's sons-in-law served in Vietnam.

This is less a matter of politics than privilege. The

Democratic elites have not responded more nobly than have the

Republican; it's just that the Democrats' hypocrisy is less

acute. Our president's own family illustrates the loss of the

sense of responsibility that once went with privilege. In

three generations the Bushes have gone from war hero in World

War II, to war evader in Vietnam, to none of the extended

family showing up in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Pat Tillman didn't want to be singled out for having done

what other patriotic Americans his age should have done. The

problem is, they aren't doing it. In spite of the president's

insistence that our very civilization is at stake, the

privileged aren't flocking to the flag. The war is being

fought by Other

People's Children. The war is impersonal for the very people

to whom it should be most personal.

If the children of the nation's elites were facing enemy

fire without body armor, riding through gantlets of bombs in

unarmored Humvees, fighting desperately in an increasingly

hostile environment because of arrogant and incompetent

civilian leadership, then those problems might well find

faster solutions.

The men and women on active duty today--and their

companions in the National Guard and the reserves--have seen

their willingness, and that of their families, to make

sacrifices for their country stretched thin and finally

abused. Thousands of soldiers promised a 1-year tour of duty

have seen that promise turned into a lie. When Eric Shinseki,

then the Army chief of staff, told the president that winning

the war and peace in Iraq would take hundreds of thousands

more troops, Mr. Bush ended his career. As a result of this

and other ill-advised decisions, the war is in danger of

being lost, and my beloved military is being run into the

ground.

This abuse of the voluntary military cannot continue. How

to ensure adequate troop levels, with a diversity of

backgrounds? How to require the privileged to shoulder their

fair share? In other words, how to get today's equivalents of

Bill Clinton, George W. Bush, Dick Cheney--and me--into the

military, where their talents could strengthen and revive our

fighting forces?

The only solution is to bring back the draft. Not since the

19th century has America fought a war that lasted longer than

a week with an all-volunteer army; we can't do it now. It is

simply not built for a protracted major conflict. The

arguments against the draft--that a voluntary army is of

higher quality, that the elites will still find a way to

evade service--are bogus. In World War II we used a draft

army to fight the Germans and Japanese--two of the most

powerful military machines in history--and we won. The

problems in the military toward the end of Vietnam were not

caused by the draft; they were the result of young Americans

being sent to fight and die in a war that had become a

disaster.

One of the few good legacies of Vietnam is that after years

of abuses we finally learned how to run the draft fairly. A

strictly impartial lottery, with no deferments, can ensure

that the draft intake matches military needs. Chance, not

connections or clever manipulation, would determine who

serves.

If this war is truly worth fighting, then the burdens of

doing so should fall on all Americans. If you support this

war, but assume that Pat Tillman and Other People's Children

should fight it, then you are worse than a hypocrite. If it's

not worth your family fighting it, then it's not worth it,

period. The draft is the truest test of public support for

the administration's handling of the war, which is perhaps

why the administration is so dead set against bringing it

back.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Speaker, let me join in with the gentleman from Pennsylvania in trying to work to eliminate this burden that has been placed on people that it was never intended to penalize. But, Mr. Speaker, before we can work together on this issue, the issue has to come before our committee. Is that not a novel idea, a tax bill coming before the Committee on Ways and Means?

Why is it that we yield our authority, our jurisdiction to the Committee on Rules? Is this not something that should not be a partisan issue? Is this bill, this AMT, not adversely affecting Democrats and Republicans and liberals and conservatives? Why do we have to, in the middle of the night, shift this over to the Committee on Rules and then come to the House floor and say we want to spend $167 billion to go into debt but we only want to do it for 1 year? That is truly unfair.

Why do you give away tax relief for the marriage penalty and then take it back away with the alternative minimum tax? Why do we have this sloppy way to develop a Tax Code that is so complicated that it takes hours for people to try to get the benefits that we say we are giving to them?

So what I am saying to my friend from Pennsylvania, please do not tell us how you have got to struggle to make this permanent. Tell us how we can get the jurisdiction back in the Committee on Ways and Means.

It would be wonderful if you were saying that we were going to schedule hearings on this so witnesses can come forward. And while you are doing that, would you please tell the American people whether they are providing this tax relief at the expense of the debt that they are giving their children and grandchildren.

Would it not be good to know how you intend to pay for this? Where do we get the $17 billion? Do we take it away from DOD as we fight in Iraq? Do we take it away from homeland security or do we borrow it so the Chinese can buy our debt?

I do not know. I am 74 so it may not be my problem, but it may be the problem of our children and our grandchildren, as we give relief, which we should give on a permanent basis in one hand, and then we take it back from our children and our grandchildren. This is no place to legislate this complex legislation.

I just hope that no matter what happens at the end of this year, that somebody has the guts to say that tax legislation should come from the Committee on Ways and Means and not the distinguished Committee on Rules.

Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that the gentleman from Washington (Mr. McDermott) be allowed to control the remainder of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I offer an amendment in the nature of a substitute.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Speaker, first let me thank the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Weller) for his persistence in trying to bring tax relief to working people and married people who need it. Again, I would like to thank him for the courtesy which he extended to me at the Committee on Rules which allowed this substitute to be in order.

I would like to say at the outset that I do hope that Members of this Congress would feel the ever growing jurisdiction of the Committee on Rules as we find very important and complex bills, especially tax bills, bypassing the Committee on Ways and Means and coming to this floor.

If the Committee on Ways and Means had allowed the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Weller) to have brought this amendment which he has championed over the years to the Committee on Ways and Means, perhaps he would see that Republicans do not have the only way in which to perfect a bill. Perhaps he would have seen that we would have followed his lead in providing for the standard deductions in and making certain that we would not have this so-called marriage penalties. But we would have perfected it so that the earned income tax credit, which is so important for low income people, would have gone into effect immediately so that they would have been able to enjoy the same benefits that their fellow taxpayers, albeit in the upper income tax brackets, would have enjoyed.

Since last seeing this bill, I will have to admit that they have improved it so that in 4 or 5 years these low income people would receive some benefits, but

if we had had a chance to work together in committee with amendments and, more importantly, with discussions, we would have been able to fix this so that the low income people and the middle income people would enjoy the benefits of the earned income tax credit.

Another thing which is far more serious is that they give with one hand under the Weller bill, but by doing this and providing the benefits, they kick the taxpayer up into another income category where the monster of the alternative minimum tax grabs them and takes back that money.

It would seem to me that if the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Weller) and I were working together, what he would want to do, at least for this bill, recognizing the close to $1 trillion it would cost to eliminate the alternative minimum tax altogether, that we would have said, as we say in the substitute, that for purposes of this bill none of the benefits received under this bill will be denied because of the alternative minimum tax bill that would take it away.

Lastly, let me say this: Is this the time for us to be talking about going further in debt?

The billions of dollars that the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Weller) says Democrats would ask us to pay is not billions of dollars in increase. It would just make certain that the benefits during time of war of those people who God has blessed with receiving incomes of over $1 million will say, hold it, it is a time of war, it is a time of sacrifice; if anybody deserves a tax cut, let it be the people that the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Weller) has championed, let it be the married people who struggle every day, let it be not only the middle income people but the lower income people and not the people that receive over a million bucks.

So what I am suggesting is this. Let us take the theme that the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Weller) has championed, albeit his couple have changed dramatically since he first brought this up, but that just shows that we have to respond more speedily to decent legislation, and let us take the substitute that has been perfected and say this. If the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Weller) and the majority wants to make certain that we expand the 15 percent tax bracket and we increase the standard deduction, count us in. If the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Weller) really wants the earned income tax credit to lock into place for all people when this becomes effective and not wait 4 years, we support the substitute and we support the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Weller).

If the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Weller) wants to make certain that once the benefits are received by these married people, the monster of the AMT that we refuse to touch, not because we believe it is good legislation but because we just do not want to go into debt another trillion dollars, let us say when we get the courage to deal with the deficit we will do it, but for purposes of this bill and the people who look like or suffer the pain of the portrait of the people we see on the floor every year, we will make certain that the benefits will not be harmed by the AMT.

I think this is the time for us and the generations to follow to be careful how further we go into deficit. We do not know how much the war is going to cost, but we do know how much this bill would cost, and this bill does not increase taxes. It rearranges the benefits so that the people making less than $1 million would say, thank you, Mr. Weller; thank you, Mr. Rangel; thank you for bringing Democrats and Republicans together to do the right thing. We tried to do this in the substitute. We hope we can get my colleagues' support.

Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

I hope that the constant question that would remain on the floor is that the substitute does not increase the deficit by one penny and that the Republican bill increases the deficit by $104 billion. That is the difference.

Mr. Speaker, I yield the balance of my time to the gentleman from California (Mr. Becerra), a distinguished member of the Committee on Ways and Means, for the purposes of control.

Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding, because I misunderstood him. If his final argument is that my intent is just as honest as that of the underlying sponsor of this legislation, then I apologize to the gentleman for misunderstanding what he was saying.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor the people of Israel who celebrate their Independence Day today in accordance with the Hebrew calendar. Fifty-six years ago, on May 14 1948, the Jewish people proclaimed the establishment of their own state and Israel was born. After hundreds of years of diaspora and persecution and three years after the full terrors of the holocaust were disclosed to the world, the Jewish people were finally able to return to the land of their biblical roots.

The Israeli and the American people have had a special relationship ever since 1948. President Harry S Truman was the first head of state to recognize the new country. He had always seen the extraordinary connection of the American people and the Jewish population in the Middle East. In his memoirs he stressed that both the Americans and the Jews in the Near East were pioneers who turned unexploited lands into powerful engines of growth. Under the hard working hands and the sweat of the Jewish people, the bleak desert started to bloom and within years of its existence the state of Israel became an economical developed country which attracted immigrants from all over the world.

Even before the state of Israel was established, President Truman foresaw that the Jewish state would be a stable democracy with values similar to those of the United States. Truman admired Israel's first President Chaim Weizmann as a great statesman and the relationship of these two men was one of mutual understanding and respect. These sentiments are still dominant between Americans and Israelis today.

Israel has had to fight against external foes from the very beginning of its existence. With great bravery, the Israeli people have been defending their country for 56 years and have lost more than 21,700 soldiers and thousands of civilians in this struggle. Yesterday, the Israeli people observed a special annual day of remembrance for the victims of this fight. I want to express my sympathy to the people of Israel for their human losses in the past and in the present. The American people are deeply concerned about the ongoing conflict between the Palestinians and the Israelis and hope that these two people will soon find a way to live together in peace.

I wish the Israeli people a peaceful and cheerful Independence Day. They have every reason to be proud of their country.

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased today to pay tribute to an outstanding humanitarian organization, the National Ethnic Coalition of Organizations. NECO, as it is better known, celebrates its 20th anniversary this year.

NECO's mandate is simple but powerful, universal in scope and humanitarian in purpose. It seeks to preserve ethnic diversity, promote equality and tolerance, combat injustice and bring about harmony and unity among all peoples.

Since its founding in 1984 this multi-ethnic coalition has taken leadership in the promotion of diversity and has sponsored programs, activities and educational initiatives designed to break through the walls of ethnic misunderstanding and ignorance.

I am especially pleased and proud in this tribute to acknowledge the inspirational leadership and tireless work of NECO's Chairman and a good friend, William Denis Fugazy. Bill has been the leader of NECO throughout these 20 years and in that role has become one of our nation's most respected humanitarian leaders and a dedicated visionary, who constantly works to promote brotherhood and respect between all citizens.

NECO's most distinct program is familiar to many of you and to the general public. Each year since 1986, NECO has awarded the Ellis Island Medal of Honor. It honors Americans of various ethnic origins for their outstanding contributions to this country. It is an award that has been bestowed on all American Presidents since 1986 as well as Nobel Prize winners, leaders in entertainment, business and science and a number of members of Congress on a bi-partisan basis. I was proud

in 2001 to cosponsor a resolution which passed the House and Senate to recognize the Ellis Island Medal of Honor.

Beyond the Ellis Island Medals, NECO has provided leadership in a wide range of humanitarian and national civic work. This includes raising more than $1 million to renovate and refurbish the Immigrant Wall of Honor on Ellis Island, a wall which contains the names of more than 200,000 immigrants to the United States who first aimed to begin the American dream on Ellis Island.

One of the best-known of NECO's programs is the Forum Children's Foundation. This project involves sponsoring children from various third world nations who are in need of urgent medical assistance to come to the United States and receive this care. To date more than 30 children have been provided with surgeries and related care that could be characterized as either life saving or life changing in nature. The Foundation assumes the responsibility for the costs associated with the care and the transportation necessary to receive it. In this endeavor they have made a genuine difference in the lives of not only the children but their families as well.

NECO in its history has been deeply involved as an advocate to combat the rising local, state, and national problem of hate crimes. It began in response to one of the most heinous of all hate crimes that was committed against James Byrd in Texas. NECO in addition to helping the Byrd family with the funeral costs, also established two scholarships a year in conjunction with the James Byrd Jr. Foundation for Racial Healing. NECO has worked closely with the sponsors of comprehensive hate crime prevention legislation in both the House and the Senate working to educate and inform the Congress about the need to prevent hate crimes by providing law enforcement with adequate resources and responsibility. Today in our nation we average nearly 25 hate crimes a day and it is obvious that we must do more to combat the problem.

NECO is constant in its efforts to combat negative ethnic and racial stereotyping. This has included work with the Family Exchange Peace Program. This program brings thousands of school children and their families together to raise awareness about the diverse racial and ethnic heritage of New York City as well as to encourage racial, ethnic and cultural harmony.

NECO also is responsible for one of the most important Italian American organizations, the Coalition of Italo-American Associations. The Coalition representing 143 organizations around the nation with a membership of some 1.5 million works in conjunction with NECO on the key mission to fight discrimination including negative media stereotyping, and to spotlight the contributions which Italian Americans make and continue to make to America.

NECO also is responsible for the Forum Club, a leading business organization in New York City, which sponsors monthly high-level programs with prominent speakers from government, media and business.

Over the past 20 years NECO has distinguished itself in many humanitarian programs and initiatives. It has stayed true to its mission to promote the strength of diversity and to promote understanding and harmony. Its positive mission and message is challenged so often by some harsh realities of modern society such as hate crimes and discrimination, yet NECO's strength of character and sense of commitment has been unwavering.

It is a special honor for me to recognize NECO and its great work these past twenty years. I salute NECO's leadership including its Board of Directors, staff and volunteers and most especially their Chairman, Bill Fugazy. NECO is an outstanding model of an organization which does so well by doing such good.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of this bill, but I do so with a very, very heavy heart because what my dear friend, the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Shaw), has pointed out is the inequities that exist in this war and the lack of sacrifice being shared by so many Americans.

It is for that reason why I think that we have to take a look at the draft. We have to make certain that when we talk about bringing them on and we are not going to cut and run, that we are not just talking about people like these reservists that we are trying to help today, people who the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Shaw) pointed out cannot make their rent payment, families who are actually receiving charitable allocations of food.

I saw a family left behind as their husband and father was in Iraq standing in line receiving food and clothing because they cannot afford it because of the reduction in salary that the reservists suffer as a result of performing their heroic duty. They suffer loss of income, many of them do not get their decent jobs back, their families have lost health benefits, and what are we suggesting we do today? What are we suggesting that we do today? We are suggesting that these low-income people that are being placed in harm's way, that when they dip into their individual retirement funds, when they are forced to jeopardize their retirement because of their service to their country, that we do not compensate them for this dramatic economic loss, we do not say, hey, we know how many private citizens are going there getting 10 times your salary, we know what their health benefits are, we know what their death benefits are, we know what their compensation really is, we are not saying that we are going to adjust that. No, what we are saying is if they are forced to go into their family's retirement fund, they can dip into it as deep as they want, jeopardize the future fiscal support of their family, and we will not make them pay a penalty.

Well, I hope Members vote aye. I hope this passes by voice vote so we will not have to explain this big patriotic thing that we have done for our fighting reservists and National Guardsmen.

Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Let us move forward and take this small first step, but let us listen to other steps that we can take to really show the depth of our appreciation of the sacrifice that our men and women in the National Guard and the Reserves are making.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from North Dakota (Mr. Pomeroy), a member of the Committee on Ways and Means.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Oregon (Ms. Hooley).

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

I would ask the gentleman from Florida might he extend that bipartisan to join with me in asking that the conference meets. Without a meeting there is no agreement.

I yield to the gentleman from Florida.

Mr. Speaker, when the Senate does call, I hope that the minority be notified where the conference is being held, that we would be allowed to participate.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Levin), a member of the Committee on Ways and Means.

(Mr. LEVIN asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. Lantos), the senior Democrat on the Committee on International Relations, and one of the most eloquent voices that we have in this body.

Madam Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Sandlin).

Madam Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Maine (Mr. Michaud), a member of the Committee on Veterans' Affairs.

Madam Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Strickland), a member of the Committee on Veterans' Affairs.

Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Madam Speaker, let me take this opportunity to disagree in the most friendly way with the gentleman from Florida. This is the time for us to show our support for our Reservists and National Guard. This is the time for us to give you on the other side of the aisle an opportunity to show what package you would want to present so that we in a bipartisan way can present this.

It is no profile in courage for us to say you are now able to borrow money from your pension funds and have it penalty-free, penalty-free, penalty-free. Eighty-eight of the 704 people killed in action are Reservists and National Guard. Their families know that we have about 25,000 civilians over there that really get better benefits than they are getting.

So we are only using this as a vehicle to offer you the opportunity to join in a bipartisan way with a package that should sweep the patriotism of this House and to really say we are not remembering you in our prayers, but we are remembering you in the pocketbook where these people are suffering.

Madam Speaker, I yield one minute to the distinguished gentleman from California (Mr. George Miller)

(Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Madam Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Tennessee (Mr. Tanner), a member of the Committee on Ways and Means

(Mr. TANNER asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Madam Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, because I am concerned about the feelings of the gentleman from Florida, and not believing that we can move forward on this in a bipartisan way, I am going to make an offer that I do not believe that he can refuse, and that is we have agreed that this would be a very small step in doing what we as Americans, we as Members of Congress would want to do.

We Democrats have a lot of ideas. We have a committee that is working on how we can best support our troops, National Guard, reservists and active. If his office would work with my office with the ideas that they have, maybe we can come together with a meaningful, a real meaningful, support bill to show how much we appreciate the extraordinary commitment that these men and women are making.

And so perhaps once a week I will come to the floor and call upon my friend, the gentleman from Florida, cannot we collectively do something so that we are not criticizing the minimum we do, but we be supporting the maximum that fiscally we can.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to celebrate Cesar Chavez's birthday. I would like to ask the members of the House to join in paying respect to a man who brought awareness of labor injustices perpetrated upon migrant workers to national light. Cesar Chavez worked tirelessly to improve the lives of America's farm workers by securing their rights to recognize and bargain collectively for fair working conditions. Chavez grew up in the fruit and vegetable fields and knew what it meant to work them from dawn to dusk. He knew the injustices that faced labor workers on a daily basis, and knew there had to be a change.

From those fields, Chavez rose to the head of the United Farm Workers of America, UFW, instilling in the UFW the principals of non-violence practiced by Gandhi and Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. When the UFW began striking in the 1960s, to protest the treatment of farm workers, the strikers took a pledge of non-violence, determined not to detract from the message of improved labor conditions. Chavez led a successful 5- year strike-boycott. Through this boycott, Chavez was able to forge a national support coalition of unions, church groups, students, minorities, and consumers. By the end of the boycott everyone knew the chant that unified all groups, ``Si se puede!''--yes we can. It was a chant of encouragement, pride and dignity.

Throughout his lifetime Mr. Chavez continued to speak out and helped communities to mobilize by assisting them with voter registration drives and insisting that minority communities had just as much a right to have equitable access to educational opportunities.

My constituents of the 15th Congressional District join millions of Americans in celebrating and recognizing Chavez's legacy on today his 70th birthday. This celebration should not be limited to today, it should continue and we, as members of Congress should ensure that in today's world, the rights of workers are still protected.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor Ann Sunstein Kheel who died in New York City on December 28 at the age of 88. Ms. Kheel was a woman as close to a saint as I have ever known. She dedicated her whole life to the fight for social and racial justice. Born in Pittsburgh in 1915, she went to Cornell University where she earned a degree

in General Studies in 1936. She lived in New York City ever since.

Ms. Kheel's goal was to make the American society ``inclusive rather than exclusive.'' It was her motto ``never to entertain except interracially'' and not to support organizations which were not integrated. She remained truthful to these ideas throughout her life. She served on the board of the New York Urban League for more than thirty years and initiated its Federick Douglass Awards Dinner in 1966. For 25 years she was the chairwoman of this event, which honors leaders in the private and public sectors who try to eliminate race barriers and promote opportunities for the disadvantaged.

In the 1960s Ms. Kheel sponsored the purchase of books for students attending the Frederick Douglass Junior High School in Harlem who had completed research on individuals who had had a significant impact on African-American or Puerto-American history. In 1963 and 1964 she was a delegate to the President's Committee on Equal Employment Opportunities and, from 1971 to 1986, she served as a trustee of the Schomburg Center for Research in Black Culture. The NAACP awarded her with the Unity Award in 1971.

Ms. Kheel was also deeply involved in campaigns for environmental justice. She served as chairwoman of the New York State Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation Commission from 1977 to 1986 and as trustee of the Rainforest Alliance. The promotion of better public education in New York City was another issue close to her heart.

Ms. Kheel ensured that her great contributions to the social life of New York City would not end with her death. In her last will, she asked her husband of 66 years, labor lawyer Theodore Kheel, to provide funding for charities. The Kheel family decided to create the Ann S. Kheel Charitable Trust and endowed it with $1 million. I am very honored that the Kheel family has asked me to chair this Trust which will provide funding for educational, civil rights and other organizations serving disadvantaged New York neighborhoods.

Ms. Kheel was an admirable woman and serves as a shining example in our society. Her death is a big loss for New York City, but she will always be remembered as a woman dedicated to achieving more social and racial equality in our society.

Parliamentary inquiry, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, could the brilliant Chair share with us the basis of his discretionary decision on this most important vote?

I know that, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, we will never challenge the Chair's discretion, because we appreciate the intelligence which he brings to this august body. So that is the reason why we should like to support the Chair if he could only share with us the basis of his decision.

Mr. Speaker, I think this one vote has answered my question. The Chair wanted just one more affirmative vote.

Messrs. DUNCAN, OSE, SMITH of Michigan and WHITFIELD changed their vote from ``yea'' to ``nay.''

Mr. OWENS changed his vote from ``nay'' to ``yea.''

So the motion was rejected.

The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.

A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to salute one of the major leaders of the Civil Rights Movement of the 1960's, Dr. Dorothy I. Height, as she celebrates her 92nd birthday. As an African-American teacher and social activist, Dr. Height has secured her place in American society as a true liberator of black America.

Born on March 24, 1912, in Richmond, Virginia, she was educated in the public school system in Rankin, Pennsylvania. Dr. Height established herself at a very early age as a student with exceptional oratorical skills. Those skills earned her a scholarship to New York University where she received her bachelor's and master's in 4 years.

Dr. Height began her career working as a caseworker with the New York City Welfare Department. At the age of 25 she became a volunteer with the National Council of Negro Women while working simultaneously with the National Young Women's Christian Association (YWCA). Dr. Height developed leadership-training activities for volunteers and staff, and developed programs to promote interracial education.

In 1957 Dr. Height was named President of the Council of Negro Women, a position she held until 1997. While serving as President she worked closely with Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., Roy Wilkins, Whitney Young, and A. Philip Randolph. She encouraged President Dwight D. Eisenhower to desegregate schools and President Lyndon B. Johnson to appoint African American women to positions in government.

As one of the major leaders of the Civil Rights Movement Dr. Height held many important positions such as being appointed as a consultant on African affairs to the secretary of state, and serving on the President's Committee on the Employment of the Handicapped.

Secretary of Health and Human Services Louis Sullivan recently appointed Dr. Height to the Advisory Council of the White House Initiative on Historically Black Colleges and Universities, and by President Bush to the National Advisory Council on Aging.

Dr. Height received a number of awards for her outstanding contributions, including: Woman of the Year from Ladies Home Journal (1974), induction into The National Women's Hall of Fame (1993), Springarn Medal from the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (1993), William L. Dawson Award for ``decades of public service to people of color and particularly women'' from the Congressional Black Caucus, Presidential Medal of Freedom by President Clinton, and holds honorary degrees from more than 20 universities, including Harvard, Howard, Princeton, and Tuskegee Institute.

At the height of nearly 70 years of service Dr. Height is the author of a new book: ``Open Wide The Freedom Gates: A Memoir.'' She continues to promote the importance of unity in black family life by organizing the Black Family Reunion Celebration, which continues to preserve the traditional values of the African-American family. Dr. Height is still active socially and professionally and serves as President Emeritus of the National Council of Negro Women (NCNW).