Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 2030, the legislation to designate a Post Office in Hawaii for Patsy Mink. I know I am not alone in support of honoring our dear friend and former colleague, Congresswoman Patsy Mink.

Mr. Speaker, Patsy Mink fought tirelessly during her career for improved education. Ms. Mink's coalition-building ability for progressive legislation continued during her tenure in Congress. She introduced the first comprehensive Early Childhood Education Act and authored the Women's Educational Equity Act. Patsy was knowledgeable and courageous and she was committed to people. I am certainly proud to have had the opportunity to serve with her and learn from her example. I miss her, and the people of Hawaii miss her, and her colleagues fondly remember her commitment and devotion to public service.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 2030, legislation to designate a post office in Hawaii as the Pasty Mink Post Office Building. I know I am not alone in support of honoring our dear friend and former colleague, Congresswoman Patsy Mink.

Throughout her career, Patsy Mink was a trailblazer among Asian- American women. Born in Maui in December of 1928, she was encouraged to excel in the world of academia. Her life was a continuous breaking down of barriers: the first woman to be elected to the Territorial House, the first Asian-American woman to practice law in Hawaii, and the first woman of color elected to Congress.

Mr. Speaker, there was no hurdle our dear friend Patsy could not overcome. After obtaining her law degree from the University of Chicago in 1951, she decided to open her own law practice when no one was willing to hire her. During this time, getting a job in the legal field for women was very difficult. She seamlessly combined her work, marriage, and life as a new mother.

In 1965, Patsy Mink was elected to Congress and began the first of six consecutive terms in the House of Representatives.

Mr. Speaker, Patsy fought tirelessly during her career for improved education. Mink's coalition-building ability for progressive legislation continued during her tenure in Congress. She introduced the first comprehensive Early Childhood Education Act and authored the Women's Educational Equity Act.

Patsy Mink was a trailblazer and fighter for her constituents in Hawaii, as well as the rest of the nation. She was a solid supporter of the Congressional Black Caucus and for that I am grateful. As a disciplined and focused advocate for the voiceless, she will be forever etched in our hearts and commitment to this body.

Patsy was a knowledgeable, courageous women--committed to people. I am certainly proud to have had the opportunity to serve with her and learn from her example. I will miss her, and the people of Hawaii will miss her and her colleagues will fondly remember her commitment, determination, and devotion to public service.

Mr. Speaker, I rise to pay tribute to former Texas State Representative, Irma Rangel, who passed away after a long battle with cancer on March 18, 2003, at the age of 71.

Throughout her career, Irma Rangel was a trailblazer among Mexican- American women. Born in Kingsville, TX, in 1931, Irma was a pioneer advocating for women, minorities, and the poor, ensuring a voice for those who might otherwise remain voiceless. Continuing on her path of breaking down barriers, Irma became one of the first Hispanic female law clerks for Federal District Judge Adrian Spears.

In 1976, after 14 years of teaching in Texas and graduated from St. Mary's Law School, Irma became the first Mexican American woman to serve in the Texas House of Representatives.

Mr. Speaker, this great leader spent much of her time in the Texas state house fighting for equal opportunity in education. In her fourth term, Irma joined the House Higher Education Committee, focusing on higher education because it was not guaranteed by the Texas Constitution. She once said her proudest moment was passing legislation in 2001, to establish a pharmacy school at Texas A&M University- Kingsville. In 1997, after the controversial Hopwood decision, the case that struck down affirmative action in college admission at the University of Texas, Irma passed legislation to allow all students in the top 10 percent of their high school graduating

class automatic admission to any of the State's colleges or universities.

Mr. Speaker, Irma fought tirelessly to the end of her life for improved education. Despite her illness, she waited an hour and a half to testify before a House Appropriations Committee hearing over proposed funding cuts for South Texas universities and community colleges.

I would like to especially thank my colleague and fellow Texan Ruben Hinojosa for leading a special order in honor of Irma Rangel. Irma Rangel was a trailblazer and champion of Texas. Irma was not just a leader in Texas politics but also inspiration to all of us in the Texas delegation. I am certainly proud to have had an opportunity to serve with her and learn from her example. Irma was absolutely delightful, which made our working relationship so wonderful. I will miss her bubbly and cheerful spirit. The people of Texas and her constituents in Kingsville will miss her and her colleagues will fondly remember her courage, determination, humility, and devotion to public service.

Mr. Speaker, the real ``shock and awe'' is what's happening to American workers.

The House of Representatives passed an extension of unemployment insurance benefits on January 27th for almost 3 million unemployed American workers. At that time I stated that the legislation is, albeit a small one, step in the right direction. However, I was supportive of a much stronger unemployment compensation extension, one that would have provided benefits to an additional 1 million American workers whose benefits have expired.

Specifically, on December 28th, 800,000 Americans lost their extended unemployment benefits. The Temporary Extended Unemployment Compensation (TEUC) program ended on December 28th because the President and House Republicans rejected Democratic pleas to extend the TEUC program with a compromise bill that the Senate had passed unanimously.

I was in full support of the House Democrats' comprehensive unemployment benefits bill introduced by Representative Rangel. This bill would have reestablished and expanded the Federal extended unemployment benefits program. Most importantly, it would have guaranteed all jobless workers at least 26 weeks of extended benefits.

Unfortunately, the House GOP leadership refused to allow a vote on this Democratic bill. Instead, they only allowed members to vote on their bill, which provides an extension of only 13 weeks of extended unemployment benefits, with no extension to workers whose benefits have already expired.

Mr. Speaker, the Dallas-For Worth's 100 biggest employers shave eliminated about 41,000 jobs in the last two years, according to the Dallas Morning News' Annual Top 100 Employers ranking. The big employers have been hit especially hard because they include a high proportion of technology and telecom companies. More than a third of the region's total job losses at employers of all sizes were in technology, according to one estimate. And the long-suffering industry has shown no signs of rebounding .

To make matters worse, my District's biggest local employer, AMR Corp., parent company of American Airlines Inc., expects to shed thousands more jobs in coming months in an effort to keep the company solvent. The airline cut 3,000 jobs in the last year and this month began notifying 7,100 unionized workers that their jobs would be cut under the new concessionary contracts approved by the unions. Dallas- based Greyhound Lines Inc., the nation's largest operator of passenger buses and number 78 on this year's list, lost

about 200 employees. And the cuts may not be over.

In the last three years alone, of the 105,000 jobs lost in the Dallas area, 30,000 to 40,000 were probably in information technology. And it's taking longer than ever for those unemployed workers to find new jobs.

Such figures stand in sharp contrast to February 2001, when unemployment in Dallas was 4.2 percent. In unemployment figures released recently, the nation's jobless rate had reached 6 percent, matching December's eight-year high. More than 500,000 Americans have lost their jobs in the last three months alone.

Mr. Speaker, we will need to provide meaningful assistance to workers by passing health care relief for those who have lost their coverage along with their jobs. This Congress should stay here, extend unemployment benefits for at least an additional 13 weeks, and tackle the serious problem of how we are going to put America back to work. These are the kinds of real benefits that we owe American families.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to be heard out of order for 5 minutes.

Mr. Speaker, I stand here to praise the actions last week of 50-plus Texas House Democrats, including the representatives from my county, Representative Roberto Alonzo, Yvonne Davis, Terri Hodge, Jesse Jones, Steve Wollens, and from the adjoining county of Tarrant, Lon Burnan, and my classmates of the class of 1972, Senfronia Thompson and Pete Laney.

While I have not named the other courageous Democrats, I thank them all for their commitment to justice and integrity. No game playing, no playing both sides, the Texans took a stand. They stood against an unnecessary and unprecedented procedure which was an insult to Texas voters. They stood against the destruction of our current process which protects the voting rights of Texas citizens, and they stood against a special interest legislative agenda which placed politics before issues that are critical to Texas families such as school finance and the State budget and insurance crisis.

As I reflect upon the actions of the Texas House Democrats, I am disturbed by the reaction of their Republican counterparts in securing involvement in the Department of Homeland Security and its resources in this political matter.

The mission of the Department of Homeland Security is to prevent terrorist attacks within the United States, reduce America's vulnerability to terrorism, and minimize the damage and recover from attacks that do occur.

Further, the Department's mandate is to mobilize and focus the resources of the Federal Government to accomplish this mission. For 2003, the Homeland Security budget is $33.5 billion and the administration's fiscal year 2004 request is $36.2 billion at a 7.4 percent increase.

The budgetary line items for the agency include improving information analyses and infrastructure protection, preparing for and responding to national emergencies, securing the Nation's borders and transportation systems, improving immigration services, and advancing science and technology. There is no budgetary line item slated for tracking down State legislators who are not terrorists and not a threat to homeland security.

Consequently, the Texas Republicans and this administration must answer the following question: Were the citizens of this Nation served well in the use of resources by the Department of Homeland Security in a Texas political matter? I submit that the answer is no.

Again, I salute the Texas House Democrats for their courageous and principled action and urge the administration to guarantee that the Department of Homeland Security follows its mandate: namely, securing our homeland from terrorism, not State legislators.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in homage of Asian Pacific American Month to honor our nation's Asian Pacific American communiy. I am honored to share in the occasion of the 25th Anniversary of such a special month.

The beauty of our nation comes from the diversity of its colorful fabric, which includes the Asian Pacific American community. More than 12.5 million APAs make up one of the fastest growing segments of the United States population. I am certainly grateful for all of the countless contributions Asian Pacific Americans have made to our society.

Asian Pacific Americans have blazed trails in a myriad of professions including academics, science, business, music, technology, sports and, of course politics. Mr. Speaker, I would be remiss if I mentioned great Asian Pacific Americans and not mention my good friend former Representative Patsy Mink of Hawaii. Although she is no longer with us, her presence is still felt, here in the halls of Congress. Patsy was a knowledgeable, courageous woman--committed to people.

In April of 2002, with the help of my colleagues in the Congressional Asian Pacific, Black, and Hispanic caucuses, we established the Tri- Caucus, a collective caucus with the purpose of addressing issues of mutual concern. This group is dedicated to many issues that affect our diverse constituency. Specifically, the Tri-Caucus focuses on immigration, health care, education, and economic development issues. One year after the September 11th tragedy, the Tri-Caucus participated in the historic Commemorative Joint Session of Congress in New York City and held a Business Roundtable that assembled a host of leaders in the business community to explore economic development strategies. The Tri-Caucus also presented a joint statement on the affirmative action case at the University of Michigan.

Mr. Speaker, APAs have contributed to this nation since their first settlement was established in the bayous of Louisiana in 1763. In the midst of World War II, more than 12,000 Japanese Americans volunteered for an all-Japanese combat unit, many of them came from mainland concentration camps after President Franklin Roosevelt signed an Executive Order authorizing the forced relocation

and detention of 120,000 Japanese Americans, as well as Japanese Latin Americans. The Legendary 442nd Regimental Combat Team went down in history as one of our nation's most decorated military units. To date, there are more than 284,000 Asian American military veterans.

Mr. Speaker, in closing, I would like to encourage my colleagues in the House of Representatives and citizens around the nation to explore the rich culture, achievements and contributions of the Asian Pacific American community.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in honor of the 49th Anniversary of Brown vs. Board of Education decision, which declared segregation of public schools illegal. The case was sparked by Linda Brown, a black girl denied admission into a white elementary public school in Topeka, Kansas. The NAACP took up her case, along with similar ones in Kansas, South Carolina, Virginia, and Delaware. All five cases were argued together in December, 1952 by Thurgood Marshall.

I am proud to stand here today in honor of one of our country's pioneers in the history of civil rights. Before serving 24 years as the first African-American on the United States Supreme Court, Thurgood Marshall served as legal director of the NAACP. Marshall was once asked for a definition of ``equal'' by Justice Frankfurter. He responded, ``Equal means getting the same thing, at the same time, at the same place.''

As a tribute to Thurgood Marshall and his lifelong plight, the Congressional Black Caucus, Microsoft and the Thurgood Marshall Scholarship Fund recently announced the creation of the Thurgood Marshall Scholarship Fund Technology Initiative. This initiative will support technology, training for students at public Historically Black Colleges and Universities.

I am grateful to have contributed to the legacy of such a great American. As immediate past chair of the Congressional Black Caucus, I am pleased that the seed planted under my administration has now blossomed into a fruitful initiative.

Mr. Speaker, I would also like to thank all of my colleagues for being here today to commemorate this important event, so fundamental to our societal growth. I am here today because I believe that education must be our number one national priority. In my almost thirty years as a legislator, I have fought to ensure that education is at the forefront of the legislative agenda.

The President has promised to ``leave no child behind,'' unfortunately, the current administration is not getting the message. The President's budget falls $9.7 billion dollars short of the funding commitment made in No Child Left Behind to K-12 education and $5.3 billion dollars short of level provided in the Senate Appropriations bill for Fiscal Year 2004. How can we ask educators to meet high standards at the same time we hand them a budget that forces class size increases, cuts in academic programs, and teacher layoffs. Demanding more but paying less does not work.

In fact, President Bush proposes a second year of historically low federal investments in educations, with an increase of only 5.6 percent. This is contrast to the average increase of 13 percent over the past seven years. That doesn't even keep pace with inflation. The President's budget also cuts targeted funding for assistance for school dropouts and higher education programs.

Other programs barely survive the budget chopping block--resources for teacher training, educational technology, after-school programs, and safe and drug-free schools are frozen; while for the second year in a row he allocates no money for school modernization.

It is time we say, ``Enough is enough!'' We cannot afford to loose one more brilliant Black mind because the opportunity for a quality education was not available to him or her. Financial constraints should not hinder our youth from exploring knowledge and expanding their minds. We must make sure that the people we vote into office do not ignore our desire to educate our youth by selecting judicial nominees that rob us of equal access to education, just as it was robbed from us before Brown v. Board of Education. And we must educate the populace on legislation that threatens to take away our hardearned rights, rights that we should have never had to fight for in the first place, rights to receive equal and quality access and opportunity to education.

Education is not a luxury item that can be trimmed when more enticing budget items beckon. It is an essential element that should be our highest national priority. Now is the time to increase education spending.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to close by asking my colleagues in the House of Representatives to join me in extending my appreciation to the legacy of Justice Thurgood Marshall, the Brown family, and all of the unsung heroes who worked so tirelessly for equality and justice in America's public institutions of learning.

Mr. Chairman, the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) is a small agency charged with some big tasks. Besides investigating transportation accidents, conducting transportation safety studies, and issuing safety recommendations, they are also charged with aiding victim's families in aviation disasters and promoting transportation safety.

I believe this legislation will improve the effectiveness of the NTSB and its ability to investigate serious accidents. The tragic plane crash of Senator Wellstone has undoubtedly highlighted the importance of the legislation before us today. I would like to thank Chairman Young and my Ranking Member, Mr. Oberstar, who has poured his heart and soul into this issue, for their diligent work on this legislation.

Mr. Speaker, I stand this morning to praise the 51 members of the Texas House of Representatives and, most especially, those from Dallas County. Representative Roberto Alonzo, Representative Yvonne Davis, Representative Terri Hodge, Representative Jesse Jones, Representative Steve Wolens, and our neighbor, Representative Lon Burnam from Tarrant County. I cannot forget my original classmate from the class of 1972 in the Texas House, Representative Senfronia Thompson, and Representative Pete Laney. They stand for courage, commitment, integrity, and principle.

They will not be forgotten, because we know that they are the ones who stand by children, their education, and health care. They care about working families and all of our senior citizens.

Again, we thank them and we praise them for looking out for regular Texans.

Madam Speaker, I wish to thank my leadership and my distinguished colleagues that I am pleased to join this afternoon to praise the extraordinary individuals who contributed to the debris collection effort following the Space Shuttle Columbia accident.

On February 1, 2003, our great Nation was shocked to learn that the Space Shuttle Columbia and its crew of seven heroic astronauts were lost in a tragic accident. And although the explosion of the Space Shuttle Columbia sprinkled debris over much of Southwestern America, a large portion of that debris was scattered over a large portion of my home State of Texas.

This resolution honors the personnel from FEMA, the Federal Emergency Management Agency, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration, NASA, and the United States Forest Service, the Environmental Protection Agency, and other agencies assisting in the recovery of the Columbia debris. In addition, they were assisted by many, many volunteer citizens giving their time and effort to help in this investigation of national importance.

We wish to especially recognize the citizens of east Texas as they offered their wholehearted support, both physical and emotional, to the debris search teams. Their combined efforts resulted in the collection of more than 20,000 pieces of debris, far more than was originally thought possible, providing accident investigators with vital evidence that will assist in determining the cause of the accident.

Let it be known that these selfless individuals and their actions are very much appreciated. Their contributions to collection aided in continuation of the investigation and further space exploration.

I pledge to do what I can to help our space program recover from this terrible setback so that these important endeavors can flourish in the future. And as a senior member of the Committee on Science, I will work closely with my House colleagues to assist NASA and Harold Gehman, Jr., who leads the special investigation commission.

Madam Speaker, I will end by simply saying that the best way to show our appreciation for these heroes is to continue this research and be a visionary

for our future, because we know that without vision, people perish.

Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of this bill and feel that it is really our next step for scientific discovery, and I want to thank our chairman and ranking member for the open and bipartisan manner in which this committee operates.

We do have potential for enormous consequences, and most of the real breakthrough research has come under the leadership of this committee throughout the last 2 or 3 decades. This bill could cause a great deal of brightness for the future in terms of studying the small particles and determining how it might lead us to another breakthrough.

I do value the public input, and I will be offering an amendment later, but I feel that the public should have some way to have some involvement. More and more we have more people getting involved in the public debate, asking questions and attempting to clarify what is going on, and often good scientific procedures interrupt it because we have an uninformed public and people who feel they have been left out; and because of that, I feel very strongly that we should have some type of offering for the general public to have input, to listen to the witnesses when there is a hearing, so that they can feel a part of this.

This is going to be publicly financed, and we are hoping that this would eliminate some of the suspicion and paranoia that often comes from very honest and interested people simply because they do not know what is going on.

I think that it would add a valuable asset to this legislation. I am going to support it whether or not the amendment is adopted, but I do feel that that is the one thing we have left out, that it can be of great value to this legislation and, more importantly, to the process of this research.

The area from which I have come will be a leader in some of this research, and I am from a pretty highly educated, involved community that will be asking these questions, and we have a lot of demonstrators that will be marching to find out what is going on. I think we can eliminate much of this with a simple amendment that allows for some type of public input as we move along into this new area of broadening of the activity in this new area of nanotechnology.

I thank the leadership of the committee and the Members for working so closely together.

Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.

Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the amendment that I have for H.R. 766. It has to do with adding under the auspices of the National Science Foundation a citizens advisory committee. There is nothing sinister about my desire to do this. I want to do this because I feel that more and more citizen input is demanded by citizens. This research will be paid for by citizens. And to have someone to sit and listen and get an understanding simply creates a more positive attitude throughout society, I feel, with the research.

This is going to be research that people do not understand very well. Even the researchers will not understand it too well until they start to do the research. It could provide revolutionary advances in health care and dramatically increase our life-span. But people need to know this. They need to know that this is not going to be perhaps research on stem cells or whatever, so

that the fears can be allayed, the anxieties can be eliminated because of this. This powerful and pervasive technology, while promising great benefits, has its downsides.

While I support the bill, I do have that one concern, that the views of the general public who will bear the brunt of the consequences, both good and bad, have no input in the planning and execution of the research program and no input as to asking questions and getting answers as the research goes on. As I indicated, taxpayers are paying for the development of this technology and they have a right to have a voice in this research agenda.

My amendment goes to the heart of this problem. It provides for small panels of ordinary citizens to be assembled to examine important societal issues about nanotechnology. Panelists would be selected across the socioeconomic spectrum, ordinary, practical Americans. These citizen panels would hear expert testimony from those doing the research, listen to arguments about the applications and consequences presented by all sides and develop an agenda of major public issues to address. These John Q. Public panels will provide agencies carrying out the nanotechnology R&D program and the broader public of the common ground among the cross-section of Americans on the goals and directions of this R&D program.

The bill does provide support for experts to address the societal and ethical concerns of nanotechnology. However, that is the problem when only the experts are involved. These are the same type of experts that did not provide effective guidance on how to address societal and ethical concerns on genetically modified foods, and now we still have a question about whether or not they are safe to eat, human stem cell research and cloning. As a witness pointed out during a hearing on nanotechnology, social and ethical expert panels frequently become captive to the technology they are supposed to be providing oversight on. I believe that there is evidence that expert panels are not by themselves sufficient to address broad public concerns. That is why my amendment explicitly calls for citizen panels.

Members may ask, why is this important? Just think about the public backlash and debate on genetically modified organisms, think Frankenfoods, human stem cell research, and cloning to name a few. When the public was asked to accept the results of these technologies and asked simple, commonsensical questions, the research community said trust us, the fatalists said the world would come to an end, and no one really required the science community to sit down with the public and discuss the benefits and possible costs of these technologies. As a result, the full potential of these technologies have not been realized. Citizen panels promise to avoid this logjam by allowing the public's voice to be heard during the development period of the technology, not after it is introduced.

Today I ask my colleagues to support this amendment to put in place a proven approach to help increase public understanding of nanotechnology and provide an avenue for ordinary Americans to influence the direction of this R&D initiative.

Mr. Chairman, will the gentlewoman yield?

Mr. Chairman, I have heard a couple of times that the amendment was opposed because the administration did not want it. Could you tell me the objection of the administration? How did they find little old me with this little old amendment to object to it?

If the gentlewoman will continue to yield, there was other language that had been attempted as substitute language. Would the gentleman accept that as an amendment? I have it prepared to submit it.

Mr. Chairman, I have a question to ask the chairman of the committee. Since there is objection to the details of this citizens panel, there was a suggestion after much dialogue with the chairman and staff to recommend a more watered-down version of it. I would rather have the watered-down version than to not have a citizens panel because I think it is just going to prevent a great deal of turmoil later. I do not know how long it will take us to convince people that genetically modified foods are safe; but I think that if the education had started right along with the research, we would not be dealing with that problem.

Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent to withdraw the amendment and wait for the details to be worked out.

Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.

Mr. Chairman, this substitute amendment which I am offering now does essentially the same thing except that it is very voluntary; and if that is acceptable to the Chair and to the majority, then I will accept this amendment. So I would move its adoption.

I yield to the gentleman from New York.

Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman.

Madam Speaker, it is an honor and privilege to make this statement on behalf of legislation I sponsored honoring a great Texan and American.

H.R. 1740 designates a post office located at 1502 East Kiest Boulevard in Dallas, Texas, as the Ceasar A.W. Clark Post Office. H.R. 1740 enjoys the support and co-sponsorship of the entire Texas delegation.

Madam Speaker, during his 50 year tenure of the Good Street Baptist Church, Reverend Ceasar A.W. Clark has provided a wealth of services to thousands of Dallas residents. Leading by example is how Rev. Clark became a pillar of the Dallas community. As an early pioneer in the civil rights movement, Rev. Clark was responsible for the first visit to Dallas by Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. Following that 1958 visit, Rev. Clark continued to work to end segregation in Dallas.

I rise to honor Rev. Ceasar Clark, a nationally renown member of the clergy, humanitarian, and respected leader Ebony magazine has twice named one of the fifteen ``Outstanding Black Preachers in America''. Under his leadership at Good Street Baptist Church, the church has progressively grown by establishing two day care centers, a free legal clinic and a federally assisted complex for the elderly. Of particular note in the 1950's, a time when credit was expensive and loansharks took advantage of people, Rev. Clark organized to create a church credit union.Today, the Good Street Baptist Church has more than $1.2 million in assets and serves nearly 1,500 members and their families.

Indeed this is an honor for Rev. Clark, who has served as a Vice President of the National Baptist Association of Texas. He has been a source of spiritual inspiration for some of Dallas' oldest African- American families and many of our political and civil leaders. While sharing knowledge with residents and cultivating their humility, he is still dedicated to his congregation and to his daily work at Good Street Baptist.

The designation of this post office acknowledges Rev. Clark's outstanding contributions as pastor at Good Street Baptist Church for more than five decades.

Born in 1914 in Louisiana, Rev. Clark was subjected to a ``Jim Crow'' south, a time nearly all African-Americans were not allowed an equal opportunity to receive a quality education. Determined to not let adversity remain a barrier, Rev. Clerk studied independently and gained admission into Bishop College. Rev. Clark graduated from there in 1946.

Rev. Clark is known throughout the state of Texas as a remarkable pastor and dedicated leader, who views the community as extended

family. I can think of no one more deserving of this honor.

Madam Speaker, I wish to congratulate Rev. Clark on the designation of this post office and for his many years of service and dedication to the Good Street Baptist Church and citizens of Dallas.

His achievements are an inspiration to us all.

Madam Speaker, I rise in strong support of the Obey motion to instruct Conferees.

Eighteen months ago terrorists used American aircraft to attack this Nation. As a consequence of those attacks, this Congress decided that aviation security should be paid for by the Federal Government because aviation security is national security.

Now is the time for us to re-enforce that commitment by reimbursing the airlines for security fees that they have already paid and by providing unemployment aid to hundreds of thousands of the industry's workers nationwide.

Aid to the Airlines in this Supplemental is necessary to stem the tremendous costs of September 11th that are continuing to be imposed on the airlines and their hard-working employees, and the even greater costs and revenue losses that are likely as the war with Iraq continues.

No other industry since 9/11 has taken on special ``security'' fees as the airline industry has.

With forecasts of 70,000 layoffs occurring due to the war in Iraq, and the likelihood of further airline bankruptcies, it is crucial that we address this emerging crisis in which airline workers have suffered unprecedented job loss and economic uncertainty. Without a strong and vibrant airline network, we will not be able to rebuild this nation so that the men and women in our military who left their jobs in the airline industry have jobs to come home to.

To not include funding for the airlines in this bill will do nothing but assure massive layoffs and furloughs.

The airlines lost $5 billion in the first Gulf War, and they will likely lose at least $10 to $12 billion in this current war.

National security is the responsibility of the entire nation, and as we engage in what will be a lengthy war with Iraq, disproportionate costs should not be imposed on an industry that happened to be the means of a terrorist attack.

I urge my colleagues to address the ongoing plight of the aviation industry during this time of war by supporting this motion to instruct.

Mr. Chairman, I rise today in favor of the Wu amendment. this is a simple, noncontroversial amendment that requires the Secretary of Energy to make a biennial report to Congress on DOE labs' EEO practices.

Why is such a requirement needed? This amendment's reporting requirements mirror the April 2002 GAO report's recommendations and I believe it would help safeguard our national security and help maintain America's scientific edge.

A Department of Energy internal survey demonstrates the sentiments of many minorities at the department. According to the survey, many minorities feel there are racial problems in this department.

In fact 80 percent of African Americans, 62 percent of Hispanic Americans, 26 percent of Caucasians, and 74 percent of Asian Pacific Americans working at DOE labs agreed that there is racial profiling at the labs.

Whether these are real or perceived sentiments, it is problematic that such a high percentage of lab employees have concerns about their work environment. Should this trend continue, the labs would cease to be an attractive workplace for American scientists. As a nation, we cannot afford to lose our best asset, our human resources.

This report also analyzed pay level, promotions, and management composition by race and gender at three DOE facilities: Lawrence Livermore, Los Alamos, and Sandia National Laboratories. While the GAO did not prove or disprove actual discrimination, it found statistical differences in the way that minorities and women were paid, promoted, or rewarded over a 5-year period from 1995-2000. According to the report, salaries for minorities and women at these DOE facilities lagged behind the salaries for white males.

There were also discrepancies in the promotion rate of some minority groups, including a failure to promote any of the 300 Asian-American staff members at the Lawrence Livermore facility during a 2-year period. In addition, white males were found to hold a greater percentage of managerial and professional jobs, 64 percent, than their representation in the work force, about 54 percent.

The results of this report painted a disturbing picture of inconsistency in the way minorities and women are treated in certain personnel action in the national laboratories.

I have long held the belief that America's work force--at all levels and in all sectors--should reflect the faces of this Nation. This report reveals that we have much work to do to encourage diversity and equality at our Nation's weapons facilities, and I hope that, by taking a closer look at how we are treating women and people of color in the workplace, we have taken a step in the right direction. I am encouraged that DOE has pledged to address the discrepancies raised by this report, and we in Congress will continue to monitor their actions and hold them accountable.

That is why this amendment is so important. It is vital that mechanisms be put in place to hold laboratories accountable to their promises to the workplace environment for minorities. The reports provided by this amendment would aid the Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs at the U.S. Department of Labor and strengthen its oversight of DOE's hiring and recruitment practices. Without these safeguards, our national labs could become hotbeds that foster an atmosphere of pervasive mistrust and fear. And this is in no one's best interest.

Mr. Speaker, it is a great honor for me to pay

tribute to one of Dallas' truly outstanding citizens. As the Dallas Lawyers Auxiliary gathers tomorrow to give John Andrew Martin its 21st Justinian Award for his volunteer work, I would like to take a moment to reflect on the achievements of this exceptional individual.

Mr. Martin was born and raised in segregated Birmingham, Alabama. From 1962 to 1964, Mr. Martin was an attorney with the Civil Rights Division of the United States Department of Justice where he helped enforce the Voting Rights Act and other civil rights laws.

He has a broad legal practice which includes experience in hospital and health care law; administrative law; general business litigation, including appellate work.

Mr. Martin's administrative law experience spans more than 20 years, and includes particular experience in utility regulation. He has been involved in major rate cases, certification proceedings, and show cause hearings before the Public Utility Commission.

For over 20 years, he has served as general counsel to a tertiary care pediatric hospital and has had involvement in all aspects of its operation, including financing, Medicaid-Medicare issues, physician credentialing, medical malpractice insurance issues, equipment financing, and environmental issues, to name a few.

His litigation experience is equally broad and he is certified as a civil trial lawyer. This experience includes securities litigation, general business litigation, and condemnation and eminent domain proceedings and will contests. He appellate practice has occurred before the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit and in Texas Appellate Courts.

Throughout the years, Mr. Martin has served various civic boards including the YMCA of Metropolitan Dallas and the Children's Medical Center.

Mr. Speaker, significantly I want to honor Mr. Martin, for his courageous work in the U.S. vs. Cecil Price et al. The trial that followed was a milestone in the civil rights era. Thirty six years ago, a Justice Department team led by Attorney General John Doar and Mr. Martin prosecuted eighteen Klan conspirators, including the Sheriff and Deputy Sheriff of Philadelphia, Mississippi, for violating the civil rights of the three young civil rights workers: James Chaney, Michael Schwerner, and Andrew Goodman. Despite facing an all-white jury and a segregationist judge, the legal team which Mr. Martin was part of succeeded in winning the first convictions ever recorded in a civil rights case in Mississippi.

The film ``Mississippi Burning'' portrayed those outstanding Americans who have dedicated their lives to the defense of our civil rights. Mr. Martin and his colleagues participated in the Civil Rights Movement, understanding that there was a danger to their own lives.

Mr. Speaker, I ask my colleagues in the House of Representatives to join me in extending my appreciation to John Andrew Martin for over four decades of service to the people of Dallas, Texas and this nation. Congratulations, Mr. Martin and best wishes for future successes.