Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, somebody asked me the other day how do you strengthen the economy, and I said to them that you strengthen it by putting additional money into the hands and the pockets of those at the economic bottom. If they get an additional dollar or two, what are they going to do with it? They are going to buy milk, Cream of Wheat, oatmeal, pay the utility bill, maybe some gasoline for an automobile, if they still have one. They will put it right back into the economy.

That is why, Mr. Speaker, we need a livable wage. Money to the economy is like blood to the body. If too much of it is on one side, you will have a stroke. Our economy has a stroke because too much of the money is in the hands of too few people. We need a livable wage.

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

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to join with the chairman of the Government Reform Committee, Chairman Davis, in consideration of H.R. 5060, which calls for the creation of a new searchable database of all Federal grants to be made publicly available on the Internet.

I have always had serious concerns about any decision to bring a bill to the floor without the opportunity for hearings or other committee consideration, but I have been very pleased with Majority Whip Blunt and Chairman Davis' willingness to work together over the past week to address problems with the bill and to make revisions.

As revised, the bill will require the Office of Management and Budget to develop a database that would be useful to individuals and organizations researching Federal grant funding. The database will provide a complete record of Federal grant funding, including information about grantees and the purpose and requirements of each grant. The requirement that the database be fully searchable and available for download is also most important.

As Members of Congress, we have a responsibility to increase public understanding of Federal spending and public access to information about how taxpayer dollars are spent. Currently the public has access to a data system, the Federal Assistance Award Data System, that provides limited information about domestic grants, but this system is unwieldy and difficult to use. Under this bill public oversight of Federal spending will increase.

The bill is a step in the right direction, but it is missing a key component that is essential to public oversight. I had hoped that the legislation we are considering today would have required that information on Federal contracts be included in the database or in a similar separate database of Federal contracts. As Federal contract spending increases, there is a vital need for the public to be able to track and understand this spending.

As with the Federal Assistance Award Data System for grants, there is a publicly available database of contracts, the Federal Procurement Data System, but it, too, is plagued with problems. This data system is often incomplete, and, like the grant data system, is unwieldy and difficult to use. Currently it is virtually impossible for the public to accurately track Federal contract spending.

I understand that Chairman Davis has agreed to work on improving the FPDS with Ranking Member Waxman and others in order to make Federal contract information freely and easily accessible to the public. I, quite frankly, look forward to this collaboration, and I hope that when the new database of Federal grants is made available on a Web site for the public to search and download at no charge, there will also be a new FPDS system or other new contracts database made available that is just as accessible and usable as the new grants database that we are dealing with.

I want to again commend the chairman of the Committee on Government Reform and Oversight and its ranking member, Mr. Waxman, for the tremendous leadership that they both provide in a very bipartisan way. I think that is one of the reasons that you see us down here so often with bills that have come through that committee ready for passage on the floor.

Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the gentleman for yielding.

Mr. Speaker, I have been told that you can measure the greatness of a society by how well it treats its young, how well it treats its old, and how well it treats those who have difficulty caring for themselves. So I rise in strong support of this bill, which reauthorizes the Older Americans Act.

At the outset, I want to commend and thank Chairman McKeon; Ranking Member Miller; Subcommittee Chairman Tiberi; and the subcommittee ranking member and my colleague from Texas, Mr. Hinojosa, for an excellent bipartisan bill. I also want to extend my sincerest appreciation to the staff persons on both the majority and on the minority sides.

Mr. Speaker, I have a Seniors and Eldercare Task Force composed of a wonderful group of experts who advise me on key issues regarding seniors in my district back in the great city of Chicago. This act advances many areas of concern to my district. Foremost, it expands access of younger grandparents to the National Family Caregiver Support Program, and it encourages States to adopt Kinship Navigator programs for relative caregivers. My district has over 10,000 grandparent-headed households. So the bill aids these caregivers with services that help in their caregiving responsibilities. Further, the bill promotes community-based services via self-directed models of care. This bill will reduce instances of abuse and neglect and improve data collection on the subject, building on the ideas promoted by my colleague from Illinois, Mr. Emanuel.

I am also happy that the bill emphasizes the importance of mental health in many ways, drawing on the spirit of the Positive Aging Act, sponsored by Mr. Kennedy. And I want to commend Mr. Ehlers for his efforts to make sure that the mental health component of this legislation is strong.

Mr. Speaker, Hubert Humphrey once said that the moral test of government is how it treats those in the dawn of life, the children, and those who are in the twilight of life, the elderly. The Senior Independence Act of 2006 ensures that our senior citizens would have a greater opportunity for a happy, meaningful, and productive life. I commend the Education and the Workforce Committee for a tremendous piece of legislation.

Mr. Speaker, I want to join with my colleagues in thanking Congressmen Barton and Dingell for introducing H. Con. Res. 426, which recognizes the 100th anniversary of the passage of the Food and Drug Act. I also want to thank the gentleman from Texas for yielding.

I rise in support of this resolution. First of all, Chicago had a great deal to do with the development of the Food and Drug Act because of the book that Upton Sinclair wrote, ``The Jungle,'' and the vast stockyards and meat packing plants that were in Chicago, running amok and running afoul at that time.

But I most directly want to associate my comments with those of the gentleman from New York (Mr. Hinchey), who just spoke, because I too believe that we must, in fact, have enough distance between the Food and Drug Administration and any kinds of political considerations.

I have had the opportunity in the last few weeks to meet and hear and be in the presence of Dr. Andrew C. von Eschenbach, the new acting director, and I must tell you that I have been tremendously impressed with his vision, with the articulation of a mission for the Food and Drug Administration, and with the assurances that he continues to give that science-based evidence will be his approach.

So I am optimistic about what the Food and Drug Administration is going to continue to do in the future, and we are going to find ourselves pleasantly pleased, I believe, under the leadership of Dr. von Eschenbach.

So I thank the gentleman again from Texas for yielding.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of the reauthorization of the community health centers for a number of reasons.

First of all, more than probably anything else, community health centers are the reason that I am a Member of Congress. My public work began at a community health center, the Martin Luther King Center in Chicago, then the Miles Square Center in Chicago. I became a member of the association when we organized it, ultimately became chairman of the legislative committee. The current president of the association, Tom Van Coverden, was my staff person when I was chairman of the legislative committee. I became its speaker of the house and eventually became president of the National Association of Community Health Centers. And so I used to be one of those people who would run around here knocking on Members' doors asking them to appropriate money and to support community health center programs.

Community health centers are the best thing that has happened to ambulatory health care since Medicare and Medicaid for large numbers of poor people throughout the country. I commend them. I have been in centers all over the country, and they do outstanding jobs.

They are also the main economic engine in many communities, the biggest employer. People get a chance to work who have never had a job before. I know individuals who are nurses and physicians who came to work in community health centers as aides, as orderlies, who are now professionals. It is

really the best thing that I have ever encountered in health care.

My district, this is the one time that I envy the members of Commerce and Energy because I also have 26 hospitals in my congressional district, probably more than any other district in the country, five medical schools, and so health is a big part of what goes on where I live on a daily basis.

I commend the committee for an outstanding piece of legislation, the great work that it does. And, yes, they are going to have their convention in Chicago in August of this year, and we look forward to hosting them at that time.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 5574, the Children's Hospital GME Support Reauthorization Act of 2006. In FY2002, 59 children's hospitals received payments totaling $276 million. These hospitals provide specialized health care for infants, children and adolescents. Most have a wide variety of pediatric specialists to care for all types of medical problems.

The Children's Hospital GME Support Reauthorization Act is of importance to me as it affects many citizens of my congressional district. My district contains 26 hospitals and many are children's hospitals. In Chicago, Advocate Lutheran General Children's Hospital recently opened the world's first Ambient Experience pediatric radiology suite. The project seeks to make children more comfortable potentially reducing the need for sedation and repeat examinations. Federal funding has helped hospitals such as Advocate Lutheran General Children's Hospital the ability to take care of the sick children of Chicago.

Our society must continue to recognize the needs of children. Urie Bronfenbrenner, the co-founder of the national Head Start program, once said, ``no society can long sustain itself unless its members have learned the sensitivities, motivations and skills involved in assisting and caring for other human beings.'' I am pleased that we are continuing to understand the needs of children in our society and that we are continuing to make progress with this issue.

Mr. Speaker, children are one-third of our population and all of our future. If our American way of life fails the child, it fails us all. Today, we have the opportunity to ensure the best healthcare, research and treatment is provided for our children suffering with cancer. Our investment in children will benefit not only their future, but ours as well.

At present, 12,400 children have been diagnosed with cancer. Typically, cancer is the leading cause of death by disease in children under age 15. In 2005, cancer took the lives of 2,300 children. Our limited resources for childhood cancer have hindered the recruitment of investigators and physicians into the field of pediatric oncology. Not long ago, cancer was seen as a death sentence. But today we have hope as survival rates climb and new treatments are on the horizon.

Both public and private sector investments must be made to improve prevention, diagnosis, treatment, rehabilitation, post-treatment monitoring, and long term survival. We should provide incentives to encourage the development of drugs and therapies to treat pediatric cancers. Our American citizens deserve the best in healthcare and we must ensure that they get it.

Let us continue to work together to fight childhood cancer and pass this bill.

Mr. Speaker, it amazes me that we are still talking about raising the minimum wage. What we ought to be talking about is the creation of a livable wage for every person who is willing and able to work. Plus we all know that any increase in wages for those at the bottom will be plowed right back into the economy to help make it strong.

Let's do the sensible thing. Let's make livable wages a reality for all working Americans. Let's let people know that after 40 hours of work, they can pay the rent, buy adequate food, have decent shelter and go to the doctor when they are sick. Surely we can afford that much.

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

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to join in consideration of H. Res. 867, a bill honoring the life and accomplishments of James Cameron. I also want to commend the gentlewoman from Milwaukee, Wisconsin, for her introduction of this legislation and for the tremendous amount of work that she has done on it.

Mr. Speaker, on August 7, 1930, a famous photograph was taken in Marion, Indiana, depicting two young black men, recently lynched, hanging in a tree above the delighted faces of the mob that had just beaten and murdered them. Many of us have seen this picture and are horrified by the actions and era it represents. What is missing from this picture, however, is James Cameron, the sole survivor of this gruesome incident.

James Cameron had also been assaulted by the lynch mob that night. He was falsely accused of participating in the murder of a young white man. He survived his severe beating and attempted lynching, but was sentenced to 4 years in the State prison for accessory before the fact to manslaughter. Because of his personal experience, Cameron dedicated his life to promoting civil rights, racial peace, unity, and equality.

Cameron was instrumental in the establishment of several NAACP chapters in both Milwaukee and Indiana and served as the Indiana State Director of Civil Liberties. During his 8-year tenure, Cameron investigated over 25 incidents of civil rights infractions and faced many acts of violence and death threats for his work.

Although a great contributor to the civil rights movement, Cameron wanted to do even more, especially to give a voice to the thousands of people who lost their lives in the era of lynching.

In 1988, Cameron founded America's Black Holocaust Museum to document racial injustices suffered by people of African heritage. Cameron believed that never should we be allowed to forget or deny the horrors of the lynch mobs. In total, nearly 4,700 men and women were killed by lynch mobs in the 148 years when lynching was common practice in the United States. The museum is located in Milwaukee, Wisconsin, the city where Cameron relocated to after death threats forced him to leave his home in Indiana.

Last week, Mr. Cameron, the last surviving victim of lynch mob violence, died in Milwaukee. His commitment to civil rights and to those who died at the hands of lynch mobs is a testament to the human spirit and overcoming tragedies.

James Cameron most cherished a letter he received from the State of Indiana on February 3, 1993. The letter granted Mr. Cameron a pardon and public apology.

I urge my colleagues to recognize the life and work of James Cameron by passing this resolution.

Mr. Speaker, it is my pleasure to yield such time as she may consume to the gentlewoman from Wisconsin (Ms. Moore), who not only introduced this legislation, but who also represents the area where the holocaust museum is located. It has been my pleasure to visit that museum.

It is now my pleasure to yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from Texas who has spent much of her life working on behalf of civil rights and racial reconciliation, Representative Sheila Jackson-Lee.

Mr. Speaker, we have no further requests for time. But I, too, would simply like to commend again the gentlewoman from Wisconsin for her insight, for her passionate display of the relevance of the holocaust museum, but also the relevance of the life of a real pioneer and one who could teach in spite of his own personal tragedy.

Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I ask permission to speak out of order.

Mr. Speaker, I rise to express strong support for extension of the Voting Rights Act of 1965. The importance and necessity of the Voting Rights Act cannot be overemphasized. We have learned through experience what a difference the vote makes. In 1964, the year before President Johnson signed the act into law, there were only 300 African American elected officials in the entire country. Today there are more than 9,100 black elected officials, including 43 Members of Congress.

The most fundamental right of our democratic system of government is the right of citizens to participate in the political process. The 15th amendment ensures the right of every citizen, regardless of race, color, or previous condition of servitude, to vote and participate in the electoral process. However, as we have seen in previous elections, some local governments have actively and, in some instances, have aggressively attempted to disenfranchise African American and other minority voters.

This year, all who care about social justice and equal opportunity in America can share one overriding goal, and that is Congress needs to review the provisions of the Voting Rights Act which will ensure that our Nation's government has the opportunity to reflect the views, the values and, most importantly, the votes of the people it serves.

Of all the civil rights legislation that the Nation has enacted over the past four decades, the Voting Rights Act of 1965 is arguably the most important. Yes, every major piece of civil rights legislation has helped to eliminate injustices such as discrimination in education, employment and housing, but it is the Voting Rights Act that empowers Americans to take action against injustices by electing those who pledge to eliminate it and removing those who perpetuate it.

African Americans in the South were prevented from voting by a battery of tactics, poll taxes, literacy tests that were for blacks only, and the crudest forms of intimidation. From the Southwest to some urban areas in the Northeast and Midwest, Latinos were discouraged from voting in more subtle but just as effective techniques that exploited the vulnerabilities of low-income newcomers for whom English was a second language. Both groups were also the targets of districting designed to dilute the ability to elect officials of their own choosing, a fundamental freedom that all too many Americans take for granted.

And this is why it is so important that Congress renew all three provisions that are set to expire: section 5, which requires Federal approval for all proposed changes in voting or election procedures in areas with a history of discrimination; section 203, which requires some jurisdictions to provide assistance in other languages to voters who are not literate or fluent in English; and the portions of section 6-9 of the act which authorizes the Federal Government to send Federal election examiners and observers to certain jurisdictions covered by section 5 where there is evidence of attempts to intimidate minority voters at the polls.

Mr. Speaker, this act is scheduled to come before us in the next few days, and I am gratified to note that it has generated tremendous support on both sides of the aisle. And I am certain that American people all over the country look forward to its passage. I simply urge strong support.

Mr. Speaker, on October 10, 2002, this Congress voted to give the President of the United States broad powers to engage in a unilateral first strike war against Iraq without a clearly demonstrated and imminent threat of attack on the United States.

Our oath of office as Members of Congress, our constitutional charge, the mandate laid upon us by the people, does not permit us to delegate the responsibility of engaging the awesome military power of the United States.

Our oath of office does not permit us to delegate our responsibilities in placing our fighting men and women in the field of battle, and I commend each and every one of them for the sacrifices they are making for freedom-loving people throughout the world.

Our Constitution places the power to declare war squarely and solely in the Congress. This issue rises far above partisan politics.

President Lincoln put our congressional responsibility this way, when he said: ``We cannot escape history. We of this Congress and this administration will be remembered in spite of ourselves. No personal significance or insignificance can spare one or another of us. The fiery trial through which we pass will light us down in honor or dishonor to the last generation.''

I opposed that initial resolution, and I would later oppose because after all of the information I have seen, and after all I have heard, neither I nor a majority of the residents of my district, the 7th Congressional District of Illinois, are convinced that the war is our only, our best or was our most immediate option.

I was not convinced, and I am still not convinced, that the resolution would properly guide us to act cooperatively and legally through the United Nations with the agreement and the involvement of the international community. In fact, it led us to pursue risky, unilateral actions in defiance of international law and the United Nations Charter.

As the American people are attempting to make sense of this complex situation, it is the duty of Congress to ask some hard questions.

What are we accomplishing by keeping our troops in immediate danger in Iraq? In my judgment, the answer is not much.

In my judgment, commitment to the peaceful solution of problems and conflict is an important part of what our democracy should stand for, and that does not necessitate or demand continuous military presence in Iraq.

I am a member of the Out of Iraq Caucus, and we need to prepare for an honorable way out. It is my profound hope that as we press forward, we will press forward towards the mark of a high calling; that we will take the high road; that we will take the road that leads to peace and not to war, the road to peace based on mutual security and international cooperation.

Let us walk the road to peace knowing that it is also the road to the rights we have defined in the United Nations Charter for all humankind. Let us walk the road to peace not because it is the easiest road or the smoothest road or the shortest road, but knowing that it is the right road for the American people.

Sometimes in the pursuit of noble and inescapable goals it takes more courage and more vision not to fight or to fight in a different way. We can fight by arming, training, and equipping the Iraqi military and civilian police forces to provide security and protection for the Iraqi people in their country. We can fight by providing clean water, food, and medicine to the Iraqis.

This is one of those times when we must take the road that leads to peace and not down the path to continuous destruction. Let us have the courage and the vision to find a permanent peace and security, to remove the presence of terrorism and not just drive it underground. Surely, if America has a destiny, it is a responsibility to lead the world to such peace.

This is a time of testing for all of us. Let us not fail this great test. Let us pursue peace, and not war.

Mr. Chairman, I want to thank the ranking member for yielding to me.

Mr. Chairman, I planned to offer an amendment to H.R. 5576 to limit the

use of funds within the act to prevent the contracting out of jobs of the postal police officers.

Based on a security assessment that predates either the anthrax attacks of 2001 or 9/11, the Postal Service is proceeding with an ill- conceived plan to decrease the number of professional law enforcement personnel at a number of postal facilities nationwide. In lieu of offering an amendment, the Chairman of Government Reform has agreed to write a joint letter to the Postmaster General outlining our concerns regarding the contracting out of the postal police officers.

Further, the letter will ask the Postal Service to base its security decisions on more recent assessments and to put on hold any plans for cuts or redeployments until updated threat assessments are complete.

Nearly 900 men and women serve as postal police officers. Postal police are fully trained, uniformed law enforcement personnel who have full arrest authority. They ensure a safe environment at postal facilities located in major metropolitan areas that are considered high risk. They are the first responders on the scene of any crime that occurs at postal facilities.

Since 9/11, the Federal Government has moved aggressively to replace contract security personnel with full-time Federal employees to appropriately address terrorist threats. Seeking to protect America from terrorist threats by keeping in-house highly trained law enforcement personnel is sound policy, especially given that the Postal Service is an attractive target for a terrorist attack and given the recent anthrax attacks it endured.

I feel strongly that contracting out the Postal Service police officers with private sector personnel with the training or arrest authority or ability to carry weapons puts constituents, including postal employees and patrons of postal facilities to move in the opposite direction as the war on terror continues.

In short, I believe that the Postal Service's plan is pennywise and pound foolish. I want to thank the ranking member of the Transportation Subcommittee for yielding me this time. I also want to thank the chairman of the Committee on Government Reform for his time and commitment to keeping the highest level of security at postal facilities and helping to ensure the safety and security of not only all of the postal facilities and its employees but the American public and its mail at large.

Amendment Offered by Mr. Hastings of Florida

Mr. Speaker, I want to commend the committee for bringing this item before us. I am often before this committee with a different issue that relates to the whole business of how do you help individuals reintegrate. But I rise to express strong support for this legislation because I remember the words of the songwriter who said that our children are the future. And given the fact that they are, we have a responsibility to do everything within our power and possibility to make sure that they can grow up safe and secure.

I want to also commend my colleagues and the chairman of one of my subcommittees, Mr. Porter from Nevada, for his work on this legislation. I strongly support it and urge its adoption.

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

Mr. Speaker, marriage rates are down, divorce is up, unemployment is high, and there are many other social and economic factors which have led to a reduction in the leadership of families by two adults. There are more single family homes and more and more absence of fathers from the lives of children.

I have observed these trends for a number of years and, therefore, rise in strong support of H. Res. 318, a bill supporting responsible fatherhood, promoting marriage and encouraging greater involvement of fathers in the lives of their children, especially on Father's Day.

As we express our support for responsible fatherhood, we should not forget one key aspect of being a responsible father, regular financial contributions. Many low-income, noncustodial parents are barely able to support themselves, let alone their children. For example, as many as one-quarter of noncustodial fathers have incomes below the poverty line. Moreover, they generally experience multiple barriers to employment, including limited work experience, no high school diplomas, no college degrees, criminal histories, transportation restrictions and substance abuse, which really means that they have problems and need help with those problems.

The multiple barriers to employment coupled with child support enforcement rules that are ill-matched to meet the needs of low-income, noncustodial parents often present major disincentives to work or incentives to work in the informal or underground economy, making this population incredibly difficult to recruit and serve within existing fatherhood programs.

Given the widely understood and acknowledged benefits of an actively involved father in the lives of children, we would see that more children have self-control and are less likely to be found within the penal system. From research, we have observed that 63 percent of suicides, 71 percent of pregnant teens, and 90 percent of homeless runaway children are from homes without a father.

Children who develop relationships with their fathers are more likely to develop healthy adult relationships and to feel secure regarding who they are. A father's presence in a child's life is a powerful deterrent to delinquency.

We should work together to remove barriers from employment that affect noncustodial parents and in many instances prevent them from assuming a supportive role in the lives of their children, and we have to find ways to facilitate their involvement.

I have been pleased to work for the last several years with a noted attorney, Jeffrey Levin, who has written a book about father's rights and responsibilities, and every year before Father's Day we convene a full day of activities, seminars, discussions, programs that are designed to help fathers find the way to come back into or reconnect with their children.

I also want to commend the Governor of the State of Illinois, a former Member of this body, Governor Rod Blagojevich, for establishing a fatherhood council for the State and appointing Attorney Levin to be the chairman of that.

So we know that in addition to encouraging fathers to be involved that we need to do more than that. We need to facilitate involvement by promoting male involvement in Head Start and other early childhood education programs, by supporting Little League and other programs and encouraging fathers to be an integral part of those.

So I commend the gentleman for introducing this legislation, express strong support for it.

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

Mr. Speaker, I don't believe that I have any other requests for time.

Again, I simply want to commend Mr. Sullivan for his introduction of this legislation, and I believe that was probably one of his sons on the floor with him, and I can imagine how he feels, and that ought to be an example for other fathers throughout America and throughout the world to recognize the tremendous value of providing the kind of love, affection and involvement in the lives of children that they receive from responsible fathers.

Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Chairman, I rise today in support of the McGovern, Leach, Payne, Lofgren, McCollum Amendment that increases funding by $30 million for the U.S. Emergency Refugee & Migration Assistance Fund (ERMA). It will meet this additional expense by reducing funding for Plan Colombia by $30 million.

ERMA helps the United States respond rapidly to humanitarian disasters around the world. Unfortunately, as we have seen a number of humanitarian disasters recently such as the ongoing genocide in the Darfur region of the Sudan this funding is desperately needed. ERMA funds have been used to meet the needs of victims of the October 2005 earthquake in Pakistan, address the humanitarian crisis in the West Bank and Gaza, help stave off widespread starvation in drought-stricken Somalia, and aid refugee repatriation and reintegration in Burundi and the Democratic Republic of the Congo. A $30 million increase in ERMA funding will greatly assist some of the poorest and most vulnerable individuals in the world today--displaced refugees.

In contrast, we have spent nearly $5 billion since 2000 on coca eradication in the Andes. This year we will over $800 million on the Colombia government's coca eradication efforts with 80% of this funding going to the Colombian military. Despite this enormous outlay of money, coca cultivation in the Andes has only increased over the last six years. Furthermore, the Colombian government and military have the dubious distinction of having among the worst human rights records in the world.

I am proud to support the McGovern, Leach, Payne, Lofgren, McCollum Amendment and encourage a ``yes'' vote.