Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of H.R. 2237, the legislation offered by Mr. McGovern that would provide for the redeployment of United States Armed Forces and defense contractors from Iraq.

H.R. 2237 would significantly reduce the U.S. military presence in Iraq over a 9-month period. It requires that the Department of Defense begin redeployment of armed forces and military contractors no later than 90 days after the date of enactment, allowing the Department the time necessary to plan, prepare and execute the process of drawing down troops. The redeployment would be completed within 6 months, at which point further funding for an increased presence in Iraq would be prohibited.

H.R. 2237 respects the decision-making powers of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and U.S. military commanders in the field. It specifically leaves decisions about where U.S. troops should be redeployed in the hands of the Pentagon. Troops drawn down from Iraq may be redeployed to neighboring countries, to Afghanistan, to other U.S. bases abroad, or back to the United States in support of homeland security and other national needs.

This legislation also recognizes and respects Iraqi sovereignty by ensuring that the present conflict will not provide for the establishment of permanent American military bases in Iraq. H.R. 2237 provides for the orderly transfer of bases and facilities constructed or occupied by the U.S. military to Iraqi control. Nothing in this bill precludes the United States from negotiating base rights or shared use in the future, as is our practice with other sovereign nations.

H.R. 2237 provides strong support for the Iraqi people by continuing assistance for social, political and diplomatic reconstruction. Additionally, aid is permitted, at the request of the Iraqi government, for assistance or equipment to the Iraqi Security Forces or multinational forces providing security or training in Iraq. U.S. military forces would be authorized to remain in Iraq to complete the training and equipping of Iraqi security forces, pursue foreign terrorist networks operating inside Iraq, and provide protection to U.S. citizens and embassy and diplomatic personnel.

Recent news reports indicate that two days ago, a majority of Iraqi parliamentarians signed a petition calling on the United States to establish a timeline for our military to withdraw from their country. Poll after poll indicates that a large majority of Iraqis believe the large-scale presence of U.S. military forces inside Iraq is fueling, rather than abating, both the Iraqi insurgency and an increasing presence of foreign jihadists. Reducing our footprint in Iraq provides that country, its neighbors, and the international community with a new opportunity and a new environment in which to pursue reconciliation and a political solution to the violence currently devastating Iraqi society.

I applaud Speaker Pelosi for allowing this bill to come to the floor, and join with members of the Out of Iraq and Progressive Caucuses in supporting it.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H.R. 2206, the U.S. Troops Readiness, Veterans' Care, Katrina Recovery, and Iraq Accountability Appropriations Act of 2007. The revised Iraq Accountability Act supports our troops while holding President Bush and the Iraqi Government accountable.

After vetoing the April supplemental bill that was supported by a majority of the American people, President Bush is once more asking for a blank check to continue his escalation of our military involvement in Iraq. Once again, the President has chosen confrontation over cooperation by threatening to veto the bill we are considering today. After a meeting during which lawmakers from his own party told him he had lost the confidence of the American people, the President issued a statement claiming to support ``benchmarks'' for progress in Iraq. But, unlike congressional Republicans, the President will not support consequences for failure to meet those benchmarks. It should be obvious to all that benchmarks without consequences are nothing but meaningless window dressing.

This Congress will not provide the President the blank check that he has requested. In last November's election, the American people demanded a new direction in Iraq, and we will continue to fight to responsibly wind down this war. Our revised bill will fully fund the troops, honor our commitment to veterans, hold the Iraqi Government accountable, and continue to press the President to change course and stop the bloodshed in Iraq. It also provides funding for urgent domestic needs that are emergencies in their own right and appropriate to include in this emergency supplemental legislation. These include a minimum wage/small business tax relief package, $6.8 billion for Hurricane Katrina recovery, $3.5 billion more

than the President's request, $400 million for the Low Income Heating Assistance Program, LIHEAP, and $396 million for the State Children's Health Insurance Program, S-CHIP.

I voted earlier today in favor of Congressman McGovern's bill providing for the redeployment of United States Armed Forces and American defense contractors from Iraq. That measure was defeated, but attracted far more support than many observers had predicted, indicating a growing momentum inside Congress for redeployment. I remain confident that as the tragedy in Iraq wears on, even more Members of Congress will join in demanding withdrawal of our troops from Iraq and prohibiting the further use of funds to continue President Bush's war. In the meantime, however, I will join with my colleagues in the Democratic Caucus to send the President a supplemental funding bill that demands accountability and guarantees further congressional consideration of war funding in just a few short months.

H.R. 2206 fully funds the troops over the next 2 to 3 months, ensuring that they have everything they need to conduct their mission. The bill also includes additional funding for the troops not requested by the President, including increased funding for military health care and Mine Resistant Ambush Protected, MRAP, vehicles in Iraq. It includes funds to improve military readiness as well as $1.8 billion to meet our veterans' health care needs.

The bill would fence off $52.8 billion of the $95.5 billion provided to the Defense Department until it is released by subsequent legislation. It requires the President to submit a report to Congress by July 13 of this year regarding the success of the Iraqi Government in meeting key security and political benchmarks. Within 7 legislative days of receipt of the report, Congress would have the opportunity to evaluate the situation in Iraq and vote on whether or not to continue to fund the war. Expedited procedures are included in the bill to guarantee that this vote will take place in both the House and Senate by the end of July.

I would have preferred not to be taking this vote today, but the President has brought us to this point with his stubborn refusal to accept the will of the American people. I will continue to support any Iraq-related legislation that holds the President's feet to the fire. The inferno raging in Iraq is one of his own making, and he should be forced to feel the heat.

Madam. Speaker, I rise today in recognition of a man who may be little known to the Nation, but one who is a treasure to the City of Detroit. Elisha Z. Gray, born on May 1, 1917 in Arlington, TN, right outside of Memphis, celebrated his 90th birthday last week.

At the age of 18, Mr. Gray left Arlington in search of a new life in bustling Detroit. For the next 9 years, he worked on the automobile assembly lines of the famous Packard Plant on East Grand Boulevard. On many occasions during those years, he served as a butcher in Detroit's historic Eastern Market.

It was not until 1944 when Elisha received his barbers' license from Michigan Barber College, that he evolved into his true calling. Since black subjects were not allowed at his school, his first opportunity to cut a black man's hair came in 1945 when he opened the Family Barber Shop on the corner of Hazelett and Milford. In fact, I remember my father John Conyers, Sr. being one of his loyal customers when we lived around the corner from his shop on Colfax.

The Family Barber attracted some of Detroit's most powerful and influential citizens, most of whom came from the west side of Detroit. Mr. Gray not only served his more distinguished clientele, but he was equally inviting to his everyday customers from the neighborhood. The Family Barber was the centerpiece that allowed the two worlds to intersect. His shop was also used as a training ground for other young black African-American barbers who would have their first experience cutting hair for blacks. In addition, he sponsored various athletic teams which enabled the neighborhood youth to get involved in constructive recreational activities, and encouraged them to stay off the streets and out of trouble.

I was sad to hear that Elisha sold the Family Barber in 1972, but it came as no surprise that he was already pursuing a new venture. Soon, he became a real estate agent, then a broker and soon after, he established E.Z. Gray & Sons Realtors on Puritan in Detroit. Although he has long retired from the real estate

business, he still continues to work in the field even today.

He has been instrumental in inspiring and encouraging youth, and especially the young men of Detroit to follow their dreams and overcome life's challenges. He is still engaged in a lifelong passion of getting all citizens registered and voting in all elections, both local and national.

Elisha Gray is married to Mrs. Labada Elizabeth Gray with whom he celebrated 65 years of marriage with on May 5, 2007. They have three children, seven grandchildren, and seven great-grandchildren. He also currently serves as Chair of the Deacon Board at the Northwest Church of God in Detroit.

So, Madam Speaker, I am deeply honored to celebrate the 90th birthday of a friend, a brother, and a living Detroit legend, Mr. Elisha Z. Gray.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H.R. 890, The Student Loan Sunshine Act of 2007. Over the last few decades the costs of a postsecondary education in our country has increased exponentially. Now, more than ever our nation's students and families are relying on student loans to help pay for a college degree and yet, thanks in large part to the investigative reporting New York Times, we now know that egregious conflicts of interest and corrupt practices among lenders, schools, and public officials are undermining the student loan programs on which millions of borrowers depend. This is unacceptable, and I am pleased that the Education and Labor Chairman George Miller has decided to address this situation so promptly.

The Student Loan Sunshine Act cleans up the student loan industry and ensures that students and families will encounter a more trust-worthy student aid system in the future by requiring institutions and lenders to adopt strict codes of conduct that adhere to specific guidelines, banning all gifts, participation on advisory boards, and revenue- sharing agreements between lenders and schools, mandating institutions disclose all relationships with lenders, only allowing ``preferred lender lists'' on campuses with strict assurances that the list was created with the students' best interest in mind, ensuring that students have access to all lenders of their choice (including those not on the preferred lender lists), prohibiting staffing of school financial aid offices.

We need to pass this legislation here and now to send a message to all stock holders that Congress and the American public will not abide abusive lending practices and that we are entitled to transparency in student loan programs.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of ``H.R. 1684, the Department of Homeland Security Authorization Act of 2008.'' One of our greatest responsibilities is the protection and security of our citizens and they deserve a vigorous and accountable homeland security policy. H.R. 1684 will now provide just such a policy that will allow us to address the weaknesses that were apparent in the administration's previous attempts at providing Homeland Security.

This legislation, which was developed through bipartisan support, is a proactive step in making our country a much safer place to live, work and play. The bill authorizes $39.8 billion for the Department of Homeland Security for Fiscal Year 2008--which is $2.1 billion more than President Bush requested in his budget and funds many much needed programs to keep America safe.

The bill restores funding to the State Homeland Security Grant Program, which supports first responders in their mission to prevent, prepare for and respond to acts of terrorism. This bill also restores the President's 55-percent cut in firefighter assistance grants and restores the elimination of the Local Law Enforcement Terrorism Prevention Program. H.R. 1684 will also provide funding for vital first responder programs and provide resources for a number of other critical homeland security activities that were reduced in the President's budget.

The Department of Homeland Security has been faced with management and oversight

issues since its inception. A July 27, 2006 article by the Washington Post stated that, ``The multibillion-dollar surge in Federal contracting to bolster the Nation's domestic defenses in the wake of the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks has been marred by extensive waste and misspent funds, according to a new bipartisan congressional report.'' This bill will help to refocus and provide the necessary training and resources to help the Agency achieve its goals and address mismanagement issues. H.R. 1684 will require the Department of Homeland Security to consider past performance of a firm before deciding whether to award a new contract. As a part of a contract bid, each firm seeking the contract must submit information regarding its past performance of Federal, State, local, and private sector contracts.

I am committed to ensuring that we are prepared to protect our families, our homes, and our Nation against any and all terrorist threats. So, I am honored to support this legislation.

Mr. Chairman, I rise today in support of H.R. 1429, The Improving Head Start Act of 2007. As a key initiative in President Johnson's ``Great Society,'' Head Start has been one of our Nation's most important educational programs. Since its creation in 1965, Head Start has served more than 20 million children and has focused and redefined its approach to assisting disadvantaged children in their social, physical and educational growth.

As one of two remaining Members of the House who helped pass the original Head Start bill, I am pleased that after 4 years of deadlock between the House and Senate this program finally will be reauthorized. Democrats are once again showing the American public that Congress is back at work addressing our Nation's critical domestic needs.

Americans know what a huge difference early childhood education can make in a child's development; they understand that early childhood education needs to be a national priority. Evidence of this can be seen in the congressionally-mandated Impact Study that found that after less than one school year, Head Start narrowed the achievement gap by 45 percent in pre-reading and by 28 percent in pre-writing. The long-term impact of these programs is also clearly demonstrated in the high percentage of low-income children who participated in Head Start and were subsequently more likely to be developmentally on par with their peers in kindergarten, to behave well in class, succeed in school and ultimately to graduate.

By passing H.R. 1429 today, we will also increase classroom and teacher quality and make use of the latest science to strengthen Head Start. The new teacher qualifications in the Improving Head Start Act require that 50 percent of Head Start teachers nationwide have a minimum of a baccalaureate degree in early childhood education or a related field by 2013. It also directs the majority of new funds in the bill to program improvement activities, including significant new funds to increase teacher salaries. Furthermore, this reauthorization will require that all Head Start programs use research-based practices to support the growth of children's pre-literacy and vocabulary skills and improve professional development and classroom practices to better support children's cognitive, social and emotional development.

Our Nation has long recognized that education should be a universal right to all, regardless of race, religion or socioeconomic status. I am pleased to stand with Chairman Miller, Subcommittee Chairman Kildee and Subcommittee Ranking Member Castle in improving America's education system by voting for H.R. 1429.

Mr. Speaker, pursuant to House Resolution 364, I call up the bill (H.R. 1592) to provide Federal assistance to States, local jurisdictions, and Indian tribes to prosecute hate crimes, and for other purposes, and ask for its immediate consideration.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks on

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

Mr. Speaker, the hate crimes bill, H.R. 1592, will provide assistance to State and local enforcement agencies and amend Federal law to facilitate the investigation and prosecution of violent, bias-motivated crimes.

Last Congress, this legislation passed with a bipartisan vote, and it also passed in the 108th Congress and the 106th Congress. So we have the same bill before us that we had in the 109th Congress.

This legislation has attracted the support of over 211 civil rights organizations, educational institutions, religious organizations, civic groups; and importantly, virtually every major law enforcement organization in the country has endorsed the bill, including the International Association of Chiefs of Police, the National District Attorneys Association, the National Sheriffs Association, the Police Executive Research Forum and 26 State attorneys general.

Hate crimes are disturbingly prevalent and pose a significant threat to the full participation of all Americans in our democratic society. It just so happens that we documented 113,000 hate crimes by the Federal Bureau of Investigation, and in the year 2005, the most current data available, the FBI compiled reports on law enforcement agencies across the country, identifying 7,163 bias-motivated criminal incidents.

The fact of the matter that is known to law enforcement is that hate crime incidents are notoriously underreported; and so we come here today to take the civil rights laws that we have passed across the years to the last, final extent, to crimes of violence based on the hate of the individual, intended to intimidate the class or group that that individual comes from.

We have a strong bill. We have more supporters than ever in the Congress and in the national community, and we know that the current law limits Federal jurisdiction over hate crimes against individuals on the basis of race, religion, color or national origin, but only when the victim is targeted because he or she is engaged in a Federal protected activity, such as voting.

Further, the existing statutes do not permit Federal involvement in a range of cases where the crimes are motivated by bias against the victims' actual or perceived sexual orientation, gender, gender identity or disability.

This legislation, identical to the version approved in the 109th Congress, will strengthen existing Federal law in the same way that the Church Arson Prevention Act of 1996 helped Federal prosecutors combat church arson, by addressing the rigid jurisdictional requirements under Federal law and expand the jurisdiction to crimes motivated by bias against the victim's actual or perceived sexual orientation, gender, gender identity or disability.

This bill only applies to bias-motivated crimes of violence. It does not impinge on public speech or writing in any way. In fact, the measure improves two explicit first amendment free speech protections for the accused, and we want you to know that there are no first amendment disabilities about this measure in any way. As a personal advocate of the first amendment, I can assure you that that would be the last thing that would be allowed to be in this bill.

What we are saying now is that a vote for this bill is not a vote in favor of any particular sexual belief or characteristic. It is a vote, rather, to provide basic rights for and protection for individuals so that they are protected from assaults based on their sexual orientation.

But the majority of incidents reported on racially motivated crimes, 54 percent, are based on racially motivated crimes, 17 percent on religious bias, and 14 percent on sexual orientation bias.

The time has come for the Congress to finally deal with this whole subject

of hate crimes. It is a blot on our constitutional understanding of what democracy is all about, and it is so important that today we debate and pass finally the hate crimes law that has been here and approved in three different Congresses.

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

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 2 minutes to a distinguished member of the committee, Tammy Baldwin of Wisconsin.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 20 seconds.

First of all, I want to assure my friend Mr. Lungren, the former attorney general of California, that we have no opposition about dealing with the definition of which he complained.

I also take this opportunity to remind him that 26 State attorney generals, just like you were, approved this bill.

Now I turn to the chairman of the Subcommittee on Crime, Bobby Scott, and I yield him 2 minutes.

Mr. Speaker, I yield for a unanimous consent request to the gentleman from Connecticut (Mr. Shays).

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

Mr. Speaker, I now yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Kirk).

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased now to recognize the chairman of the Subcommittee on the Constitution, the gentleman from New York, Mr. Jerry Nadler, for 2 minutes.

I yield 1 minute now to a distinguished member of the Judiciary Committee, Mr. Ellison of Minnesota.

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased now to yield to a distinguished Member on the Judiciary Committee, Steve Cohen of Tennessee, for 1 minute.

Mr. Speaker, I'm pleased now to recognize the gentleman from Alabama, a distinguished member of the Judiciary Committee, Artur Davis for 1\1/2\ minutes.

Mr. Speaker, I'm pleased now to recognize the most distinguished civil rights leader that we have serving in the House of Representatives, the gentleman from Georgia, Mr. John Lewis. And I yield to him 1 minute.

Mr. Speaker, I'm pleased now to yield to the distinguished gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Clyburn) for 1 minute.

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

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 5 seconds to respond to my dear friend from California (Mr. Lungren).

The purpose of this hate crime bill is to supplement State and local actions. It is not to take over.

Mr. Speaker, I now yield to the gentleman from Georgia, Mr. Hank Johnson, member of the Judiciary Committee, 1 minute.

Mr. Speaker, I am delighted to yield 1 minute to the chairman of our caucus, Mr. Rahm Emanuel of Illinois.

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased now to yield 1 minute to a distinguished member of the Committee on the Judiciary from Houston, Texas, Ms. Sheila Jackson-Lee.

(Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas asked and was given permission to revise and extend her remarks.)

Mr. Speaker, I am proud to yield 1 minute to Jan Schakowsky of Illinois.

Mr. Speaker, I apologize to my colleagues. We have twice as many requests for time than we have the time.

Mr. Speaker, I now yield 30 seconds to the brilliant gentlelady from Oakland, California, Barbara Lee.

(Ms. LEE asked and was given permission to revise and extend her remarks.)

Mr. Speaker, I am honored to yield 1 minute to the majority leader, Mr. Hoyer.

Mr. Speaker, it is my honor now to recognize the Speaker of the House, Ms. Nancy Pelosi, for 1 minute.

Mr. Speaker, I yield now for a unanimous consent request to the gentleman from Ohio.

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

Mr. Speaker, I now yield 30 seconds to the gentleman from Oregon (Mr. Blumenauer).

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased now to yield 30 seconds to my dear friend from Maryland (Mr. Wynn).

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to recognize our brother from Missouri (Mr. Cleaver), himself a minister, for 30 seconds.

Mr. Speaker, I now recognize the gentleman from Rhode Island (Mr. Langevin) for 30 seconds.

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

Mr. Speaker, may I inquire as to how much time is remaining?

I am now pleased to recognize Lynn Woolsey of California for 30 seconds.

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to conclude our debate by yielding our remaining time to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Al Green).

Mr. Speaker, I would ask the distinguished gentleman from Texas, Mr. Smith, would he yield for a unanimous consent request that the bill be amended as follows: Page 12, line 5 after ``orientation'' insert ``status as a senior citizen who has attained the age of 65 years; status as a current or former member of the armed services.''

Would the gentleman yield for a unanimous consent request on that?

Mr. Speaker, would the gentleman from Texas, Mr. Smith, the proponent of the motion to recommit, yield for a unanimous consent request that the motion be amended by striking the word ``promptly'' and inserting the word ``forthwith?''

Mr. Speaker, I have a parliamentary inquiry.

Mr. Speaker, I notice that the motion being offered by the gentleman provides the bill be reported back to the House ``promptly'' rather than reported back ``forthwith.''

Is it true, as I believe to be the case, that the effect of the word ``promptly'' is that the House is not being asked to amend this bill, but to send it off the Floor and back to the Judiciary Committee?

Mr. Speaker, I do.

Mr. Speaker, I am not inclined to at this time.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong opposition to the motion to recommit, which would not operate as a simple amendment, but, listen to me, would instead send the bill back to the Committee on the Judiciary, in essence killing the bill for the remainder of the Congress.

The categories of individuals included in the amendment, seniors and members of the armed services, are entitled to protection under the law, and in point of fact they have protection under the law at both Federal and State levels. I note that it is already a Federal crime to kill or attempt to kill any member of the armed services under 18

Madam Chairman, I rise in strong support of H.R. 1868, The Technology Innovation and Manufacturing Stimulation Act of 2007. H.R. 1868 authorizes appropriations for scientific and technical research at the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) for fiscal years 2008, 2009, and 2010, strengthens and improves the Manufacturing Extension Partnership (MEP) initiative, and establishes the Technology Innovation Program (TIP) to assist U.S. businesses and institutions of higher education to accelerate development and application of challenging, high-risk technologies that promise widespread economic benefits.

H.R. 1868 authorizes $365 million for MEP, a highly successful program that helps small and medium domestic manufacturers compete more effectively in the international marketplace. The goal of MEP is not only to maintain current manufacturing jobs, but also to nurture growth in the manufacturing sector to create additional jobs for American workers. The bill provides for an 8 percent increase per year in MEP appropriations, which would double program funding in 10 years.

The Technology Innovation and Manufacturing Stimulation Act of 2007 also amends the National Institute of Standards and Technology Act to establish an MEP board. The current national MEP board is established by the Secretary of Commerce, and has been woefully neglected for 3 years, not meeting at all in 2005 and 2006. NIST recently reconstituted the board, but most members are now from academia, not industry. H.R. 1868 would establish the MEP advisory board in statute, rather than at the discretion of the Secretary of Commerce, and would require majority representation from industry.

My district and others across the country will benefit from funding research at National Institutes of Standards and Technology, strengthening the Manufacturing Extension Partnership, and establishing the Technology Innovation Program, and I am pleased to be able to support it.

Madam Speaker, I rise to join in this discussion to congratulate my colleague from New Jersey Don Payne and my dear friend who brought this to my attention only yesterday from California (Ms. Lee). I am so pleased to hear this discussion going on commemorating the 200th anniversary of the abolition of the transatlantic slave trade, but also the recognition of William Wilberforce, after whom the famous African American university, Wilberforce, was named, a distinguished member of the British House of Commons.

What we are discussing here is not just ancient history. It is not just a

recollection of why we have a 13th amendment to the Constitution prohibiting slavery. But we are talking about one of the great iniquities of our civilization. Slavery has always been a problem that we have dealt with across our centuries; but today and in countries all over the world, we are beginning to examine where it goes.

We heard the distinguished gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Smith) recite present problems. We have heard the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Lee) talk about things that lead us into conditions of such abject poverty that people are made vulnerable to the whole question of being subjugated and eventually so impoverished that they end up being oppressed or exploited.

We know that many are still being trapped in trying to leave one country to improve their economic conditions, and they end up under false pretences in a forced work circumstance. Frequently, it's prostitution for young women. And for this 110th Congress, with these resolutions, H. Res. 272 and H. Res. 158, are now beginning to deal with this subject, not only in the present circumstance but examining the roots and the origins of this obnoxious, inhumane, indescribably evil circumstance in which we find men, women and children still under such oppression today.

For that reason, I am proud to stand here as the chairman of the committee that has jurisdiction over our constitutional amendments and to join with the distinguished members of the Foreign Affairs Committee who recognize that after many unsuccessful attempts, the British Parliament finally abandoned and made slavery illegal, but finally, after a great deal of effort were able to stop it. It didn't stop because we passed a law. Slavery and second-class citizenship and the denial of the rights of Americans didn't stop because we passed the 13th amendment. It didn't even stop after we passed a series of Voting Rights Acts to enforce the 13th, 14th and 15th amendments.

So here we are today, again recommitting this Nation through the people's House to make certain that everyone understands how this came about, how the Atlantic slave trade was so evil and that its legacy lingers over this Nation today.

I congratulate all of the leaders of these two measures and in commemorating the legacy and remembering this great Parliamentarian from England, William Wilberforce. Many of our predecessors worked, as tirelessly as we do, through the last couple centuries to deliver on the simple promise of freedom; but guess what, it doesn't turn on us just keeping people free. A free people have to become educated. They have to work. They have to raise their family. We have to put this enormously important consideration into the context of what it means.

To be free is not free. To be free means that you can get educated to compete in a computerized technology. It means to be able to be healthy and to live and grow to make everyone have this wonderful opportunity. It was said so then to every man and woman and child the chance, the chance, the gold shining opportunity to become whatever they could in the course of one's life.

We celebrated the life yesterday of our dearest colleague Juanita Millender-McDonald as she was memorialized in Los Angeles. What a dynamic, unusual, amazing circumstance of a young girl from Alabama transporting herself to the first elected chairwoman of color of the House Administration Committee.

These are the kinds of opportunities that are open to us, to the 43 members of the Congressional Black Caucus, who all have equally poignant stories. We have an African American chairman who had to join the Army because he could not get a job. That is existing today.

It is in that spirit of looking back and yet confronting the realities that I am so proud to join my colleagues on both sides of the aisle who have made this an important day to remember, to reflect on and to plan how we move the condition and the plight of all 300 million of our citizens forward.

I thank the gentleman from New Jersey for yielding me this time.

Members of the House, I rise today to express my gratitude for having known and worked with Jack Valenti, who passed away last week after a lifetime that included serving as a pilot in the United States Army Air Corps, flying 51 combat missions as the pilot commander of a B-25 attack bomber, a man who was a senior aide in the Lyndon Baines Johnson White House, serving as the first special assistant to President Lyndon Johnson, and as president of the Motion Pictures Association of America.

In 2004, Mr. Valenti reflected on his extraordinary career when he said, ``I'm the luckiest guy in the world, because I spent my entire public working career in two of life's classic fascinations, politics and Hollywood. You can't beat that,'' he said.

Nothing about Jack Valenti was average. He started his adult life as an Army B-25 pilot in World War II, flying many combat missions over Italy. He returned from the war with numerous decorations, including the Distinguished Flying Cross and the Air Medal with four clusters representing additional awards.

After the war, while working full time, Jack Valenti earned a Bachelor of Arts from the University of Houston, and then went on to Boston where he earned a Master of Business Administration from Harvard University.

Known as one of the most influential lobbyists in Washington, he headed the Motion Picture Association for 38 years. During that time, I had the opportunity to work with him on a number of projects, including the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, which ensured protection for intellectual property in order to allow the rollout of digital technology. Mr. Valenti is also well known for creating the film rating system which assigned for the first time a rating to films. In other words, he created a system that would let them voluntarily categorize their films rather than requiring that we do it by legislation.

His political career was by no means mundane, either. Before he went to the Motion Picture Association, he served as the first special assistant to President Johnson, and was in the motorcade on November 22, 1963 when President Kennedy was assassinated in Dallas. He then boarded Air Force One with President Johnson and was there for the famous picture of President Johnson being sworn in, and he became President Johnson's special assistant.

After a lifetime of achievement, while most people would be more than ready to retire, Jack Valenti turned his energy toward a cause he had been concerned about for many years, and began leading in the fight against HIV and AIDS. He became president of the nonprofit Friends of the Global Fight, whose main goal is to support the global fund to fight AIDS, tuberculosis, and malaria. Thankfully, we will all be able to read about Jack's enormous accomplishments and fascinating life, because he just finished his memoir before passing, which is entitled, ``This Time, This Place: My Life in War, the White House and Hollywood.'' It will soon be published.

While most people with this amount of influence may be too busy for many, Jack Valenti defied this stereotype by continuing to be both a mentor and friend to almost everyone with whom he came in contact. He kept his promises, promptly returned phone calls, and is described as generous, loyal, and honest by those who knew him. It is an understatement to that say Jack Valenti will be sorely missed.

Will the gentleman from North Carolina yield to me?

First of all, I wanted to congratulate the gentleman on the persistence and integrity with which he has followed this matter.

I have had this brought to my attention. I did have an opportunity to meet with some of the family, and I want to assure you that we are coordinating our activities with the Senate Judiciary Committee with those of my House Judiciary Committee; and I promise to keep you fully apprised as this matter moves forward.

I congratulate you, not just for what you have done for these two officers, but what you have done for law enforcement officers across this country. It's important that the kinds of concerns you have raised are known to all of our men and women who carry badges and weapons defending us, not just at borders, but in every State in the Union.

I thank you from the bottom of my heart.

Mr. Speaker, tonight I rise to remind the world that the 24th of April marks the 92nd anniversary of the Armenian Genocide, a systematic and deliberate campaign of the Ottoman Empire to exterminate an entire people. I also rise to reaffirm my support for the adoption of the Armenian Genocide Resolution, H. Res. 106. This legislation contains a long list of U.S. and international involvement against the Armenian Genocide of 1915.

Madam Speaker, I rise today in observation of Equal Pay Day, a day where we recognize that women and people of color continue to suffer the consequences of inequitable pay. This day symbolizes the time in the year which wages, especially paid to American women, catch up to the wages paid to men from the previous year.

Ever since the Equal Pay Act was signed into law in 1963, the wage gap between men and women has only been closing at a slow rate. Back then, women who worked full-time year-round made 59 cents on average for every dollar earned by men. Even today, women only earn 77 cents to the dollar, which means that the gap has narrowed by less than half a cent per year. In 2006, there were 70.2 million women aged 16 and over in the workforce, which made up 46 percent of all workers, and reflected a significant increase from only 18.4 million working women in 1950. Over a working lifetime, this wage disparity costs the average American woman and her family $700,000 to $2 million in lost wages, and thus impacting social Security benefits and pensions.

With the growing rate of women in the workforce, and more families reliant upon their paychecks for livelihood, the issue of equal pay is not simply a women's issue, but a family issue. The wage gap hurts everyone because it decreases a family's income that pays for their essential needs. When women earn more, the entire family benefits.

For these reasons Madam Speaker, I am in strong support of the Paycheck Fairness Act. I hope that this Congress will bring new light to this bill do what has not been done over the past 40 years. It will be through our bipartisan efforts that we eradicate the unfair treatment of women in the labor market, and help families gain the resources they need to ensure that their children have access to a better future in the 21st century.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of the conference report on H.R. 1591, the Supporting Our Troops and Veterans' Health Care Act.

This legislation will support our troops and veterans, hold the Bush Administration and Iraqi government accountable and begin withdrawing our troops from Iraq by October 2007 or sooner. It will also provide emergency funding for critical programs that have suffered from years of neglect.

This supplemental appropriations bill provides emergency funding for critical programs that have long been underfunded by the Republicans. It includes $650 million to correct the funding shortfall in the State Children's Health Insurance program so that hundreds of thousands of children will not lose their health care. It provides $6.9 billion for Gulf Coast hurricane relief and recovery. The bill also adds $400 million to LIHEAP (Low Income Heating Assistance), as well as providing $1.8 billion to remedy the unconscionable state of our military and veterans' health care systems. All of these issues are emergencies in their own right and rise to the level of inclusion in this emergency supplemental spending bill.

The U.S. Troop Readiness, Veterans' Health and Iraq Accountability Act requires the Iraqi government to meet the security, political and economic benchmarks established by the President in his address of January 10th, including improvements in the performance of the Iraqi security forces, a greater commitment by the Iraqi government to national reconciliation, and reductions in the levels of sectarian violence in Iraq.

In the bill, the President must determine that substantial progress is being made on security, political, and reconstruction benchmarks by July 2007. If the President cannot certify progress, redeployment must start by July with a goal of being completed within 180 days. If the President can certify progress by July 2007, redeployment must begin by October 1, with goal of completion within 180 days.

The bill ensures that our troops have the tools and resources they need to do the job they have been asked to do. It prohibits the deployment of troops who are not full trained, equipped and protected according to current Department of Defense standards. The President can only deploy unprepared troops if he certifies, in writing, to Congress, that deploying those troops is in the national interest. He must make similar certifications to lengthen troop deployments beyond DoD standards or to send troops back into battle who have not had enough time between deployments. The bill also provides funding so the Veterans Administration can meet the obligations of a new

generation of veterans, particularly by ensuring that they will have the medical care they need.

I have been an outspoken opponent of military action against Iraq since the day the administration started beating the war drums. My preference would have been to vote for a stronger bill with a binding date certain for ending the war. I would have preferred not to include waivers to allow the President to send less than fully equipped and rested troops into battle. I have additional concerns about the section of the bill that allows an unspecified number of U.S. troops to remain in Iraq after the March 2008 deadline to train Iraqis and fight terrorism.

However, I support this legislation in spite of these deficiencies because I believe it is an affirmative step towards our ultimate goal of ending the war. This bill is not everything that I would have liked, but it represents a critical turning point. No longer will this body uncritically hand over billions of dollars for the President to wage an endless war. Congress has a Constitutional responsibility to provide accountability--a responsibility that was shirked for the first 6 years of the Bush presidency while Republicans controlled Congress. Today, we have followed through on that critical duty. We will send a bill to the President that would definitively change our course in Iraq. Mr. Bush should make the right decision and support our plan for change that is overwhelmingly endorsed by the American people. If he follows through on his veto threat, he will be the one who has failed to provide our troops and our veterans with the resources they need. He will be the one who has rejected his own benchmarks to measure success in Iraq. He will be the one responsible for the ongoing loss of American life in Iraq.

The President and most Congressional Republicans ask that we continue to fund this war with ``no strings attached.'' But the United States cannot afford an open-ended commitment to a war without end. It is the responsibility of this Congress to devise a means to end the U.S. combat role in Iraq so that we can reclaim our position of leadership in the world and direct our resources back towards urgent needs here at home. I believe that this bill moves us towards these goals in an effective and responsible way.

Madam Speaker, I rise today in honor of my close and dear friend Juanita Millender-McDonald, whom I have worked with and known for many, many years. I am deeply saddened by the news of her untimely passing, and I would like to extend my sincere condolences to the family, friends, and constituents of this distinguished Member of Congress.

She came to Congress in 1996 and quickly moved up the ranks among her peers. Her commitment to excellence led her to achieve a series of political firsts, including, becoming the first African American woman to chair the Committee on House Administration, the first African American woman to serve on the Carson City Council; the first to hold the position of Chairwoman for two powerful California State Assembly committees in her first term, and the first African American woman to give the national Democratic response to President Bush's weekly radio address. She spoke her mind and was not easily intimidated by political pressure, regardless of from where it came.

Furthermore, in the 110th Congress, in addition to her Chairwomanship, she served on eight full and sub-committees. One issue that the Congresswoman and I worked on closely together was the protection of one's fundamental and Constitutional right to vote. Our combined efforts on voting irregularities in Ohio ultimately led to the introduction of HR 4141 in 2005, which would amend the Help America Vote Act of 2002.

She believed that there are no more important responsibilities in the People's House of Representatives than ensuring that the ability to vote in free and fair elections is not compromised in any manner, which has not always been the case. She was a visionary, an advocate for justice for all Americans, and the embodiment of determination.

Millender-McDonald was a role model and incredibly dedicated to the empowerment of woman and youth as the Founder and Executive Director of the League of African-American Women, and the Founder of the Young Advocates, a political leadership-training program for African- Americans between the ages of 18 and 35.

It has been an honor and a pleasure to serve with a distinguished woman of strength, integrity, and dynamism. Not only will I miss her dearly, but she will also be missed by the many people that she has touched throughout her service in Congress.