Floor Statements

Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.

Mr. Chairman, first of all I want to quote Secretary of Homeland Security Ridge from an Associated Press article yesterday. This is what he said:

``At the end of the day, ladies and gentlemen, if you take a look at the population, the density of population, the critical infrastructure and the threat, there's one city that no matter how you move those factors around or weigh those factors, there's one city at the top of the list and it's New York City.''

I want to associate myself with the gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. Maloney), the things that she said. We will have other people from the New York delegation speaking about this as well, because we feel very, very strongly about getting the money for homeland security for New York City which is obviously, as Secretary Ridge said, the number one threat.

In fiscal year 2003, we provided $2.9 billion for grants to State and local governments to help them prepare for and defend against terrorist attacks. $800 million, or about 30 percent of that, was directed to high-threat areas. The rest of the fund went out under a formula that is entirely unrelated to where the terror threat is. Under this bill, as it is currently drafted for the next fiscal year, the 70 percent that is not related to high-threat areas will increase to nearly 83 percent. I believe that that is wrong.

Just last week a plot was uncovered, as my colleague said, to blow up the Brooklyn Bridge. Our intelligence agencies continue to say that New York remains a top target for terrorists and common sense would tell anybody the same thing. New York has been hit twice by radical terrorists. Thousands have died. We continue to rebuild; but to better ensure our safety and the safety of the world's financial capital, we need to better spend Federal tax dollars. When New York is hit by attacks, all Americans are hurt. The economic impact is all over the country. People in Montana, Oklahoma and Oregon, it affects everyone in this country when New York is hit by attacks.

I also had intended to offer an amendment to move $500 million from the State grant program to the high-threat program. I will not do that because I understand that there are needs across the country for assistance. Thus, it is obvious that this bill is not adequate to our needs as a Nation. I hope that we can somehow get around to the fact that we desperately need more money for high-threat areas. I would hope that in the negotiations between us and the other body that we would rectify this.

Why is this bill underfunded in my opinion? The answer is simple math. We have cut our revenues by trillions of dollars to pay for tax cuts. There is a trade-off, I believe, tax cuts or security. We believe that security is more important. My friend from Wisconsin wants to add an amendment to limit the tax cut for millionaires to just over $83,000 this year instead of the $88,000 they are set to get. I do not think it is too much to ask that people who have benefited the most in this great Nation pay $4,000 more for the security of all of us.

Mr. Chairman, I again hope that when we have our negotiations, when we have our conferences that we will be able to put more money where it belongs to protect high-threat areas like New York City.

Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.

Mr. Chairman, I also want to talk about FEMA. FEMA is now under the jurisdiction of the Department of Homeland Security. FEMA and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission have a memorandum of understanding that FEMA is in charge of certifying offsite emergency evacuation plans of nuclear power plants. The process is still underway for the Indian Point plant in New York in Westchester County.

I originally was going to put forth an amendment which would prevent Federal funds from being spent by FEMA to certify any offsite emergency evacuation plans for nuclear power plants, but I will not offer this amendment. However, I feel it is critical that I speak about a matter of homeland security to my constituents and the 20 million people living near the Indian Point Nuclear Power Plant in New York.

While I am not against nuclear power, I believe it is in our Nation's vital interest to shut down the Indian Point Nuclear Power Plant in Buchanan, New York, right near my district of Bronx, Westchester, and Rockland Counties. Indian Point is located 35 miles north of midtown Manhattan. The planes that flew into the World Trade Center passed directly over the nuclear power plant and blueprints for American nuclear power plants were found in al Qaeda caves in Afghanistan.

The problems with Indian Point are not new. Indian Point is located in a densely populated area, in fact the most densely populated area in all of the United States. In fact, it is the nuclear power plant that is the closest to any densely populated metropolitan area of the United States, and it happens to be the major metropolitan area of the United States.

Approximately 20 million people are located within the 50-mile emergency planning zone. The road system in the area is woefully inadequate to meet the needs of those people living in the area making an evacuation in the event of an emergency at Indian Point impossible.

No matter what the cause of radioactive release at Indian Point, terrorists or accidental, the result would be the same. The 20 million people living in the emergency planning zone would be in grave danger. Now the emergency evacuation plan that FEMA is now considering is fatally flawed and will not protect the public. An independent investigation of emergency preparedness at the plant conducted by former FEMA Director James Lee Witt and commissioned by Governor Pataki found that ``the current radiological response system and capabilities were not adequate to overcome their combined weight and protect the people from an unacceptable dose of radiation in the event of a release from Indian Point.''

Following the release of the report in early January of this year, Governor Pataki and the four county executives from both parties within the 10-mile emergency planning zone refused to certify the evacuation plans. The report concluded there was no way to improve the existing emergency plan to sufficiently meet the current security threat.

If we are to truly protect the citizens of the tri-State area of New York, New Jersey and Connecticut, we must shut Indian Point down. Again, I want to say I am not anti-nuclear power, but I am against risking the lives of 20 million American people.

FEMA, despite refusing to certify the emergency evacuation plans on February 21, saying it could not provide reasonable assurance that the public would be protected in the event of a radioactive release from the plant, has still not issued a final determination. As a result, Indian Point is still operating despite the fact that no Federal agency is protecting the safety and security of my constituents.

We all know that if built today, Indian Point would never be sited anywhere near the New York Metropolitan Area. Furthermore, September 11 changed the equation. While I may not have been worried about the fact that a nuclear power plant was located in my backyard before September 11, now we all know it is a potential terrorist target. We should not allow a nuclear plant to continue to operate just simply because it exists. FEMA must be forced to take the post-9/11 world into account when it evaluates the offsite emergency evacuation plan.

In that case, I cannot imagine how FEMA could then provide reasonable assurance that the public would be protected should something go wrong at the plant. I know the gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. Lowey) shares these sentiments. I think it is very important that we understand that the Indian Point Nuclear Power Plant should be shut down.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H. Con. Res. 209, which commends the signing of the U.S. Adriatic Charter. As the author of H. Con. Res. 209, I am honored that the House is now considering this important resolution.

On May 2, 2003, the U.S. Adriatic Charter was signed in Tirana, Albania by Secretary of State Colin Powell and the Foreign Ministers of Albania, Croatia, and the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia. As Secretary Colin Powell noted when he signed the document, it is remarkable that the agreement was signed in Albania, a country once known only for its isolation and distance from Western principles. Today, Tirana is a capital filled with energy as it continues its opening to Europe. Macedonia and Croatia have seen similar changes.

As NATO has expanded through other countries of Europe, several former Yugoslav nations in South Central Europe were excluded. They just were not ready for membership. Today, three of those nations, Albania, Croatia, and Macedonia are now moving to make the needed changes and reforms so that they can join the North Atlantic structures.

The U.S. Adriatic Charter embodies a commitment by Alabania, Croatia, and Macedonia to the values and principles of NATO and a declaration of their intent to join NATO as soon as they meet Alliance standards. I strongly support their efforts to advance toward NATO membership and having Secretary Powell sign the Charter puts the United States firmly in support of their efforts to join NATO when they are ready.

By passing this resolution today, Congress will add its voice, by ``urg[ing] NATO to invite Albania, Croatia, and Macedonia to join NATO as soon as these countries demonstrate the ability to assume the responsibilities of NATO membership.''

H. Con. Res. 209 also welcomes and supports the aspirations of Albania, Croatia, and Macedonia to join the European Union at the earliest opportunity and recognizes that the three countries are making important strides to bring their economic, military, and political institutions into conformance with the standards of NATO and other Euro-Atlantic institutions. Finally, our resolution also commends Secretary Powell for his strong personal support of the resolution, as demonstrated by his travel to the region to sign the document.

Mr. Speaker, as the sponsor of H. Con. Res. 209, I think this is an appropriate forum to publicly thank Albania, for sending 75 commandos to Iraq to fight along side our troops. It is my hope that Albania, one of only three European countries to send ground troops to fight in the war, would be high on Defense Department's list when it considers the realignment of and new bases for American forces around the world.

Finally, I would like to thank the chairman of the Europe Subcommittee, Mr. Bereuter, and his staff for their cooperation and support as we drafted this resolution, H. Con. Res. 209. I would also like to thank the ranking member of the subcommittee, Mr. Wexler, for his support.

Again, I strongly support H. Con. Res. 209 and urge my colleagues to support its passage.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to include in the portion of the Congressional Record containing the debate on H. Con. Res. 209, regarding the U.S. Adriatic Charter, letters from John Kraljic, President of the National Federation of Croatian Americans, His Excellency Nikola Dimitrov, Ambassador of the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, and Martin Vulaj, Executive Director of the National Albanian American Council.

Embassy of the

Ambassador Republic of Macedonia,

Washington, DC, June 12, 2003.

Hon. Representative Eliot E. Engel,

House of Representatives, Washington, DC.

Dear Mr. Engel: Allow me to express my sincere gratitude

for your initiative in adopting the resolution H. Con. Res.

209 by the Committee on Foreign Relations of the House of the

Representatives regarding the signing of the United States-

Adriatic Charter, charter of partnership among the United

States, Albania, Croatia, and Macedonia.

Let me assure you one more time that Macedonia, along with

Albania and Croatia is strongly committed to the values and

principles of the NATO and is willing to joining the Alliance

at the earliest possible time.

My country already contributes to European security and to

the peace and security of southeast Europe through peaceful

resolution of the conflicts and regional cooperation.

Macedonia strongly supports the endeavors of the Government

of the United States to bring security, stability and

democracy in Iraq and Afghanistan. My Government has sent

troops to Iraq as part of the coalition forces to contribute

the success of the operation Iraqi Freedom, and to

Afghanistan.

Dear Mr. Engel, I look forward for future opportunity to

exchange our views, and thank you again for your support to

my country.

Sincerely,

Nikola Dimitrov.

Offered By: Mr. Engel

Amendment No. 4: In title II, in the item ``OFFICE FOR

DOMESTIC PREPAREDNESS--Domestic Preparedness''--

(1) in paragraph (1), after the dollar amount insert

``(reduced by $500,000,000)''; and

(2) in paragraph (4), after the dollar amount insert

``(increased by $500,000,000)''.

Offered By: Mr. Engel

Amendment No. 5: At the end of the bill (before the short

title), insert the following:

Mr. Speaker, reserving the right to object, I do not intend to object, but I would like to speak from the well so I can stand here with a picture of Lou Gehrig of the New York Yankees.

Today is the 100th birthday of Lou Gehrig, and I am proud to rise today in favor of my resolution H. Res. 78 which celebrates Lou Gehrig's 100th birthday.

Lou Gehrig was born on June 19, 1903, 100 years ago today. He lived a storied life which ended tragically at the hands of a disease that still carries his name, Lou Gehrig's Disease, known as Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis or ALS. It is a devastating condition and a testament to Lou Gehrig's courage in the face of this horrible affliction.

In my own family, my grandmother, my father's mother, also died of the same disease and literally thousands upon thousands of Americans are suffering with this ALS disease.

Today there are celebrations in New York in honor of Lou Gehrig, most notably at Yankee Stadium in the Bronx, where I am from, this afternoon. The ALS Association is remembering Lou Gehrig; today is Lou Gehrig Day at Yankee Stadium, the Iron Horse, that was his nickname, and is raising greater awareness about the disease. The ALS Association is committed to greater awareness about those suffering with ALS and the sacrifices of their loved ones who require the intense care these patients require.

Approximately 30,000 individuals in the United States are afflicted with ALS with about 5,000 new cases appearing each year. ALS destroys the lives of its victims and their families, leaving patients unable to walk, eat or even talk.

The life expectancy of an individual with ALS is only 3 to 5 years from the time of diagnosis. I have had many sufferers of ALS come into my office very courageously to talk about this affliction.

There is no known cure or cause for ALS. Research has given birth to new aggressive treatments for the symptoms of ALS that can extend the lives of patients. Recent advances in ALS research have produced promising leads into neurodegenerative diseases, and it is imperative that this important work continues. Furthermore, the sequencing of the Human Genome holds great promise in the search for cures for many diseases, including ALS.

My resolution honors Lou Gehrig and the contributions his legacy has made in the fight against this terrible disease. It also recognizes the efforts of the ALS Association in raising awareness, pursuing research, and providing support for ALS patients and their families. ALS patients exhibit incredible courage in their fight against this disease, and this resolution commends them for that and affirms the support of Congress for continued research into better treatments and a cure for

Further reserving the right to object, Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from Nebraska.

Mr. Speaker, I withdraw my reservation of objection.

Mr. Speaker, we celebrate the 150th anniversary of Mount Vernon, which officially started as a village in 1853 made up from five farms, but grew into perhaps the most densely populated city in the State of New York.

It started as a fulfillment of that most typical of American dreams: home ownership. John Stevens, a merchant tailor from New York City, formed the Industrial Home Association to become the Village of Mount Vernon. When the IHA membership reached 1,000 dues payers, 1,017 to be exact, they bought the land of five farms consisting of some 369 acres at about $205 dollars an acre.

Originally a part of the Town of Eastchester, the Village of Mount Vernon grew over the next four decades and in 1892 was chartered under the laws of the State of New York as an incorporated city.

It grew by welcoming Baptists, Methodists, Dutch Reformed, and Catholic groups, as well as any others willing to settle there and contribute to the community. It has become a thriving community growing and flourishing in the shadow of New York City.

John Stevens helped to initiate the dream that Mount Vernon has become and one that will continue to develop and prosper through the industry and vision of the people who inhabit this charming and wonderful city.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor a woman who believes that every child, regardless of color, creed, economic status, or disability has the inherent right to receive a quality education. And it is because of this deeply held personal belief that Myra Kelly has dedicated her life to a career serving the children of her community.

A lifelong New Yorker, Myra began her career as a teacher in Community School District 9. While there, she taught general elementary school, junior high school math and elementary special education. Myra then proceeded to spend the next 30 years of her professional career in the New York Department of Education. In this capacity, she acted as a school Psychologist in District 10 and was the Supervisor of Psychologists for District 11. While

Myra has excelled in each of her professional positions and given of herself freely to every student, the most rewarding experience of her career was her work with children with severe emotional disabilities.

Myra's dedication to education was also evident in her own life. And like all good teachers, she practiced what she preached. Ms. Kelly's academic credentials are truly impressive. She received both a Bachelors and a Masters degree from Lehman College, her Professional Diploma from the City College of New York, and a School District Administrator's credential from the College of New Rochelle. Except for her dissertation she has also completed all of her work for a Doctorate in the Learning, Language, and Literacy program at Fordham University.

I hope that new teachers and school psychologists are inspired by Myra's dedication to her chosen career. The New York Department of Education will sorely miss her.

I would like to join the New York Department of Education, her family and friends in thanking Myra for her years of service and wishing her congratulations on the occasion of her retirement.

Mr. Speaker, today another suicide bombing happened in Israel. Sixteen innocent people were murdered and more than 150 were injured. The terrorist group Hamas took credit for it and the cycle of violence continues.

Mr. Speaker, homicide bombers, suicide bombers cannot be tolerated. Israel, as any other nation, must do everything it can to go after terrorists, to root out terrorism. As President Bush said, there are no good terrorists, there are only bad; and every nation has an obligation to protect its citizens and go after the terrorists.

That is why it was so disheartening to hear President Bush say Israel's attempted attack on one of the biggest Hamas terrorists, Mr. Rantisi was not helpful. I do not know whether a nation ought to think about what is helpful or not when they are trying to protect their citizens.

We in the United States went halfway around the world to destroy the Taliban in Afghanistan not because the Taliban committed crimes against us, but because the Taliban harbored al Qaeda, which committed heinous acts against us. If we are justified, and we are, in going halfway around the world to destroy terrorists, surely Israel is justified to do the same in her own backyard. After all, it was President Bush who said Osama bin Laden wanted dead or alive, and it was President Bush who talked about Saddam Hussein and his connections with terrorists. We went into Iraq and overthrew Saddam Hussein. Certainly Israel should be encouraged to go after terrorists, not discouraged to go after terrorists; and we should not set a double standard for Israel, we should set the same standard as we would set for ourselves.

Last week there was an agreement to try to proceed on a so-called road map for peace in the Middle East, and all parties agreed that the Palestinian prime minister, the Israeli prime minister and President Bush all talked about going along the path to peace. During that time the prime minister of Israel has dismantled some of the settlements, has talked about having peace with the Palestinians. And what was the response on the Palestinian side? The three terrorist organizations, Hamas, the Palestinian Islamic Jihad, which is part of Arafat's Fattah network, and Hezbollah, all got together and took credit for the assassination of five Israeli soldiers. That was the Palestinian terrorists' answer to peace. The Palestinian prime minister, Machmoud Abbas, who said he would try to persuade the terrorists to have a cease-fire was not able to persuade them at all. In fact, they rejected his calls for a cease-fire. Machmoud Abbas, the Palestinian prime minister, then said he would not use force to try to get the terrorists to stop, he would only try to persuade them.

I would say if Mr. Abbas, the Palestinian prime minister, is not going to attempt to use force to stop terrorists from committing terrorist acts, then Israel has the right to take matters into her own hands and to use force to stop terrorists from committing these heinous acts. After all, since Mr. Rantisi is one of the leaders of Hamas which kills innocent men, women, and children civilians, why should Mr. Rantisi think he is somehow immune to some kind of attacks on his life?

It is very important that Israel, the United States, and all peace- loving countries in the world go after terrorism. And when nations go after terrorism, other nations should help them, not say that it is unhelpful for peace. Let us talk about the road map which everyone seems to be so ecstatic about. The road map will only work if and when the Palestinians decide if and when they are going to put an end to terror and not use terror as a negotiating tool, and the road map should be performance-based, not time-based. In other words, the Palestinians have to perform. They have to stop terrorism before they get their state. If they do not stop terrorism, they do not get their state. They should not merrily march along to statehood in 2004 and 2005 unless they end terrorism.

Mr. Speaker, I think Israel should be commended for going after terrorists. I think all nations should do the same.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor a woman who believes that public education is the foundation of a prosperous and democratic society. Michele Miller always wanted to be a teacher. As a student at Spring Valley Senior High School, Michele was a member of Future Teachers of America. Graduating from the State University of New York at Albany, she attended Hunter College for a masters degree in education with a concentration in social studies.

A lifelong New Yorker, Michele has spent her entire career teaching the students of Pearl River, New York. She has spent 33 years teaching social studies at the Pearl River School District's Middle School and High School. Michele began as a student teacher in Pearl River when Lyndon Johnson was the President of the United States in the fall of 1968. She will end her career this month, eight Presidents later and after providing thousands of her students with the knowledge and appreciation of the democratic values that underpin our great country.

Michele is the epitome of a great teacher. Although she's known throughout Pearl River as one of the toughest teachers around, she's also known for being caring, compassionate, and funny. She thrives on being in the classroom, the students have always kept her youthful in both appearance and in personality. Moreover, she constantly learns from her students and hopes that they leave the classroom every day knowing a bit more about the world.

I hope that new teachers are inspired by Michele's dedication to teaching. She will be sorely missed by the Pearl River School District.

I would like to join the Pearl River community, her family and friends in thanking Michele for her years of service and wishing her congratulations on the occasion of her retirement.

Mr. Speaker, again two stories in the paper say it all. The Washington Post says three successive tax cuts pushed by President Bush will leave middle-income taxpayers paying a greater share of all Federal taxes by the end of the decade, according to new analyses of the Bush administration's tax policies.

As critics of the tax cuts in 2001, 2002, and 2003 have noted, the very wealthiest Americans, those earning $337,000 or more per year, will be the greatest beneficiaries of the changes in the Nation's tax laws.

Also, we read in the New York Times today that the House will not consider a Democratic measure to provide an increased tax credit to 6.5 million low-income families who did not receive it in the new tax law. So the policies of the Republican majority here are becoming increasingly clear. They are fiscally irresponsible, the borrow-and- spend Republican majority.

Let us see what they have done with the tax cuts: Helped the rich, hurt the middle class and poor, and stuck our children and grandchildren with the bill. Deficits as far as the eye can see. ``Let's enjoy the tax cuts now because our children and our grandchildren will be paying the bill.'' This is morally unconscionable and should be changed.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to this outrageous rule and its outrageous tax cut. We are not even given time to debate this bill. We can have democracy in Iraq, but not here on the House floor.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today with mixed emotions. I am angered by the blatant disregard by the Republican majority for the rights of the minority to offer an alternative. On top of that, we have just 1 hour of debate on this bill that will reduce Federal revenues by at least $550 billion. Not only are the views of the minority members being squashed, but the American people are being denied the opportunity to hear a frank and open debate about the future direction of their country. There is democracy in Iraq now, but not on the floor of the U.S. House of Representatives.

I am also saddened. Saddened by the fact that my colleagues on the other side of the aisle, many of them good friends, have abandoned fiscal discipline. They have embraced tax cuts as a panacea for all our ills. They have made a conscious decision to enjoy their cake now and saddle our children, grandchildren and great-children with debt.

Oh how times have changed. In 1995, the Republican Majority Leader, Mr. Delay. said ``By the year 2002, we can have a Federal Government with a balanced budget or we can continue down the present path towards total fiscal catastrophe.'' I don't often agree with the gentleman from Texas, but on this point I am with him 100 percent.

Democrats have a fiscally sound bill that will provide immediate assistance to the 8 million unemployed Americans.

Democrats have a fiscally sound bill that will provide immediate assistance to States that are being overwhelmed by budget crises of their own.

Democrats have a fiscally sound bill that will provide immediate assistance to small businesses which are the job creators.

Democrats have a fiscally sound bill that will give the majority of Americans tax relief right now.

Republicans offer a plan that has been tried, tried, and tried again. Each and every time it has failed. Giving the wealthiest a tax cut does not spur economic activity. Wealthy people save the extra money. Middle class and low-income families spend the extra money. But, what we have before us today is a whopping permanent tax cut for the rich and a meager temporary tax cut for the rest of us.

Mr. Speaker, I also have some fear in my gut right now. I fear that we will leave many, many children behind because of this foolish tax cut policy. I fear that one again seniors will be forced to choose between paying their rent and buying prescription drugs so that Republicans can provide a boondoggle of tax cut to 1 percent of Americans. I fear that the bipartisan effort that led to a balanced budget and actual payments toward eliminating our national debt has been squandered in a frenzy of demagoguery.

I urge my colleagues on the other side of the aisle to stop. Take a breath. Think about what you are doing. Vote against the rule. Vote against this bill. Don't write out a bill, stuff it into an envelope and mark it to be paid by the next generation.

Mr. Speaker, we have seen many Democrats here speaking out of a sense of frustration. The bill we voted on today is a bill of tremendous importance, and yet all we had was one hour to debate this bill. Many of us that wanted to come down and participate in the debate could not even get one minute's time to debate this bill because the Republicans kept a closed rule, which said there will be one hour of debate, 30 minutes for each side, and no substitute allowed.

I did a little calculation. There are 435 Members of the House of Representatives in this country, and if every one of us wanted to speak on this bill with only one minute total time, that would leave each of us a grand total of eight seconds each to speak on a bill worth billions and billions and trillions of dollars. Surely our Founding Fathers are rolling in their graves when they

see how the Republican majority has turned this House into an undemocratic institution where the people who are elected by the people cannot even have the ability to speak their minds.

We are fighting for democracy in Iraq, but we will not allow democracy on the floor of the United States House of Representatives. For shame.

The average American is not stupid. In fact, the average American is very smart. The average American knows that when he or she has a budget they must live within their budget. They make a certain amount of money. They take home that money. They have to pay their bills with that money, and they know that they cannot week in and week out spend more than they take in. A person can do it for a while. They can charge everything on their credit card for a while. They can keep paying minimums on their credit card for a while, but sooner or later the bubble is going to burst. That is what we are doing here in the United States Congress.

My Republican friends talk a good game about balancing the budget and a balanced budget amendment, and by the way, the balanced budget amendment passed here in the House several years ago, failed by one vote in the Senate, and the Republicans, despite having the majority in both Houses, have not brought it up again.

The fact of the matter is that when Bill Clinton left office we had a surplus of $200 billion per year, and now in two short years we have a deficit of $400 billion per year, and these tax cuts, mainly for the wealthy, will dig us deeper and deeper and deeper in a hole.

We are leaving our children and our grandchildren with a legacy of debt. We are having an orgy now of tax cuts and saying to our future generations, you pay the bill. We are going to walk away. We are going to do things that are easy. Everyone likes a tax cut. Of course, a majority of people favor the tax cuts. Everyone wants more money in their pockets, but what are we doing to our children and our grandchildren and the fiscal responsibility of this country?

The Republican leadership, the Republican majority here wants to do this, in my estimation, deliberately. The ancillary benefits, giving their rich friends a tax cut, is only an ancillary benefit. They want to starve this government and make it impossible for there to be any kind of program, entitlement programs like Social Security or Medicare or Medicaid or education, for our children. They do not want it so a balanced budget goes out the window. Deficits and deficits.

Let us take a quote from the gentleman from Texas (Mr. DeLay), the current majority leader. This is what he said in 1995, ``By the year 2002, we can have a Federal Government with a balanced budget or we can continue down the present path toward total fiscal catastrophe.'' That was in 1995. I ask the majority leader and the people on the other side of the aisle, what was true in 1995 is certainly true in 2003. We cannot continue to run these deficits. We cannot continue to have this kind of fiscal irresponsibility. The borrow and spend Republicans cannot continue to lead this country down a path of fiscal irresponsibility.

It is a disgrace that we now have to take to the floor of the House after the bill has been voted on because we could not get the time to talk before.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to comment on telecommunications and the economy. The telecommunications industry, Mr. Speaker, is in a state of crisis. Telecom jobs continue to shrink and capital continues to flow away from the industry.

When given the opportunity to help lead the telecommunications industry back on the road to health and fitness, the Federal Communications Commission failed miserably. I completely agree with the Communication Workers of America that the FCC ``missed an opportunity to set out an effective national policy that would promote facilities- based competition in telecommunications.''

Instead, the FCC left in place rules that require carriers to lease their network, or pieces of it, to competitors for below-cost rates. This policy has had a disastrous effect on the industry. Over half a million telecom jobs have been lost and investors have lost billions of dollars. The industry is in crisis, and some of that crisis can be traced directly to bad policy at the FCC. It is clear to me that the FCC did not adopt the right rules to promote telecommunications investment.

I sincerely hope that the FCC fixes this mess, or Congress will have to fix it.

Mr. Chairman, I thank my friend for yielding time to me.

I want to congratulate the gentleman from California (Mr. Lantos) and the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Hyde) and the gentleman from Iowa (Mr. Leach) for their strong support and leadership on this bill. I particularly want to single out my colleague, the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Lee), who has led a good, long fight for so many years. This is truly something all of us can take pride in. The gentlewoman from California (Ms. Lee) has certainly led the way.

Mr. Chairman, this is a bipartisan, middle-of-the-road bill, a good bill. We should allow no ideological fights in this bill. This is not a fight about abortion; it is a fight about saving lives. The Uganda approach, which has abstinence and marital fidelity and condoms, and we have to have condoms if we are going to fight this battle, is a very well-balanced approach.

Let us look at AIDS. AIDS has killed over 20 million people since the epidemic began. Another 8,000 people die each day, with 68,000,000 deaths predicted by 2020 unless the world takes action. Experts say a strong global response could prevent nearly two-thirds of those new infections, saving tens of millions of lives.

What this bill does is respond to this crisis. It authorizes the bold initiative announced by President Bush. I want to say I was pleased to be in the White House 2 days ago with President Bush when he announced this initiative. This will provide $15 billion, including $10 billion in new money to fight HIV/AIDS in Africa and the Caribbean.

The proposed bill will help prevent 7 million new infections, provide care and support for 10 million HIV-infected individuals and AIDS orphans, and offer antiretroviral therapy for 2 million of those in need.

H.R. 1298 is only an authorization bill. We need to fight in the appropriations process for real resources to match the promises made in

Mr. Speaker, I wanted to take this opportunity to comment on some recent developments in the Middle East.

Yesterday President Bush, the United States, and others in the so- called ``quartet'' presented a roadmap for Middle East peace. There has been a lot of talk about the roadmap, a lot of euphoria about a new Palestinian leadership with Abu Mazen; but I wanted to take some time just to backstep a little bit and, in this rush to euphoria, talk about some very, very serious things.

Everyone wants peace in the Middle East, and everyone knows that ultimately the key to peace is having two states side by side, Israel as a Jewish state and a Palestinian state side by side with security. The question is how do we get there? Oslo, which many of us supported, ultimately was a failure; and in my opinion it was a failure because Yasser Arafat's feet were never held to the fire. There were promises. There was empty rhetoric. There was saying one thing in English that sounded good and quite another thing in Arabic to the Palestinians that did not talk about peace; and we looked the other way because we so much wanted peace between Israelis and Palestinians that we never made Arafat's actions live up to his speech.

We should not make the same mistake again. Yes, there is a new Palestinian prime minister named Abu Mazen; and, yes, there is a modicum of hope that Abu Mazen will be a moderate. But the fact of the matter is as long as there is terrorism in the Middle East, as long as there is no Palestinian crackdown on suicide bombers or on terrorism, as long as terrorism is still attempted to be used as a negotiating tool by the Palestinian side, there can never really be peace.

At the end of the Oslo process, there was a proposal put forth. The proposal was two states side by side and the Palestinians were offered 100 percent of Gaza, 97 percent of the West Bank, a state of their own, billions of dollars of international aid; and Yasser Arafat turned down the deal. Not only did he turn it down and not offer a counterproposal, but he unleashed the Intifada and thought he could use terrorism as a negotiating tool. If that happens again, the roadmap will go the way of Oslo, which is nowhere.

So what needs to happen here is there needs to be a crackdown on terror. There needs to be a real visible, sustained antiterrorism effort on the part of Abu Mazen and the Palestinians. It is no coincidence that three hours after the roadmap was announced there was another suicide bombing in Tel Aviv, which killed three innocent people and injured 40-some-odd other innocents. This cannot be left to stand. We have to judge Abu Mazen by seeing if he really cracks down on terrorism. That has to be first.

I believe that the roadmap should be performance based, not time based. A Palestinian state projection is in 2004 and then in 2005 the final status. That should happen only if the Palestinians live up to their agreements, which they had not done previously under Oslo. Once terrorism is stopped, then the Israelis can make the concessions that are also necessary in order to have a just and viable peace. But let me make it clear, there cannot be negotiations or Israeli concessions while terrorism is still being used as a negotiating tool.

Let me also talk a little bit about Syria. I am the author of the Syria Accountability and Lebanese Sovereignty Restoration Act of 2003, and we call to the Syrians to stop their support for international terror. Hezbollah, which is in Lebanon's south/Israel's northern border, is used as a proxy by Syria to continue its support of terrorism. Hezbollah is the group which bombed U.S. Marines in 1983 and killed more than 200 of our Marines in Beirut. Syria must stop its support for international terrorism. Syria is on the list of countries of our State Department which supports international terrorism. Syria has been on that State Department list since the inception of the list in 1979, and yet it is the only country with which we have normal diplomatic relations on that list. That makes no sense. So the Syria Accountability and Lebanese Sovereignty Restoration Act of 2003 calls on Syria to stop its support for terrorism, to end its occupation of Lebanon, and to end the continuation of its production of weapons of mass destruction.

We also know that Syria is harboring some of the Saddam Hussein crowd which has fled Iraq and is in Syria, and we also know that during the war in Iraq the Syrians allowed all kinds of armaments and weapons and night goggles and other things to pass through Syria into Iraq to be used against U.S. forces.

President Bush has gotten tough with Syria. Colin Powell is visiting Syria. We hope he tells the Syrians to stop their support of terrorism.