Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, Members of the House, once again it is a wonderful day to be here in the House and share not only with my colleagues, but with American people, the issues that are facing not only our economy but our children's future.

I guess I would have to start, since this is budget time and as we are here on the floor simultaneously, the Committee on the Budget is meeting to try to work out this $2.4 trillion budget

that the President has sent here to the Hill. I must say to my colleagues that it is important on behalf of Americans, on behalf of working Americans, and on behalf of individuals that are unemployed in our country, that we make the right decisions not only for the future but for today.

I can tell you that I am very, very concerned about the direction we are going in right now of Members just following this White House with what they send us. We are trying to do the same thing with what they send us, as we just rubber stamp it and send it through. We cannot allow that to happen.

Under this budget, the reason we are in trouble today is it relates to just under 3 million jobs that have been lost and Americans out of work as we speak today. It is important for us to remember that we still have a health care plan that we have to put forth not only for Americans, but also to allow small businesses to be able to provide a health care plan for Americans who do not have it.

I will tell you right now for those that do have it, in many cases, their contribution is so high and it is continuing to grow, it is just really getting out of hand. But being a creature of the State legislature, where I used to be for some 8 years in the State of Florida, I cannot help but stand here on behalf of State legislators throughout the country, Democrats and Republicans, Independents and non-party, members of the legislatures throughout this country need representation here in the U.S. House of Representatives. And also local government, non-partisan local government members, partisan local government members need a voice here in the Capital and, not only a voice, but they need action.

I will tell you I came to the floor this afternoon just to share a few things with my colleagues so that they do not think that this is just a Kendrick-Meek report. And there are a few Meeks out there that are a little disgruntled as it relates to the President's budget that falls short of a good vision for our country.

Let me just make a case in point. I could not help this morning when I knocked the dew off the paper here in the Capital city, I could not help but find that the National Association of State Legislatures, that I was a member of for 8 years, is a bipartisan group. That is, legislators come together to make sure that States are not left behind and that they are able to put forth the best government possible for their particular State.

And I could not help but see this article that is on the Federal page of the Washington Post today, and it says, ``President's Unfunded Mandates Criticized. Group says that States face huge bills.''

Now, I want to make sure that the American people understand what I am talking about. When the President says that he wants to make his tax cuts permanent, he speaks very passionately about making tax cuts permanent on behalf of the most wealthy Americans. Now, I think we can all be under the umbrella as it relates to middle-class tax cuts, as it relates to child credit, as it relates to tax cuts that are helping small businesses. But when you start looking at the big tax cut for the wealthiest Americans, I do mean the individuals who are not knocking on the doors saying I need a tax cut, we are giving it to them. And we are giving it to them at the detriment of our education system.

This points out Leaving No Child Behind as an unfunded mandate to States. I think it is very, very important for us to remember that it is okay to talk about standards because that is free. We can hand standards down to State governments and they can hand standards down to local school boards that will then impose them on children. Nothing wrong with that under a plan that is going to work.

But that makes that very problematic for hard-working teachers and for students that are trying to achieve this goal and for legislators that are trying to put together a budget because States that do not have the luxury that we have here in Washington, D.C. where we will just put it on the charge card. We will forestall it off to another generation or this generation to pay it later because we want to be the ice cream and cake Congress, or ice cream and cake administration.

At a time of war and at a time that we are looking at the deficit that is, I must say, $520 billion in change, that is going to continue to happen or continue to roll out unless we stop this President now as it relates to his budget and do not make these tax cuts permanent.

Let me take an excerpt, Mr. Speaker, from this article today in the Washington Post. ``The President's budget next year will increase the burdens to States $34 billion, according to the report made public in a news conference at the National Council of State Legislators in their winter leadership meeting in Washington, D.C., accusing the Federal Government of cost shifting.

That is not just something that they are saying. It is for real. Accusing the Federal Government of cost shifting. Utah House Speaker Stevens, who is a Republican, I must add, president of the National Council of State Legislators said, ``We have seen increases in practice of these recent years, and we are concerned that this is going to get worse.''

Let me tell you, ladies and gentlemen, there is no way in the world that State governments that are facing a $78 billion deficit across the country are going to close that gap if we are thinking about the wealthiest Americans. We cannot shore up the Social Security trust fund and making sure that we are able to provide Social Security, the promise that we made to so many Americans, if we make these tax cuts permanent.

Now, the President is saying that the tax cuts are going to help the economy. Well, I beg to differ. Because right now we are looking at a job loss of 3 million jobs, just under 3 million jobs. And he would have to go north of that number to even be able to show an increase. So since the Great Depression, no president like this one under his watch has actually seen this kind of job loss.

And I think it is important that we take very close note to what this situation is, not only to us as Americans, adult Americans, but to our children. People talk about our children's children. I think it is also important that this article talks about we like to pass things that sound good.

We want to pass clearer skies. I doubt if there will be funding. We have already passed the Leave No Child Behind, which States are now saying that the Federal government, as it recommends, the Federal commitments, we have done just that, we have left children behind.

We like to talk about the war on terror. I must say the effort on terror because wars are very costly, and I think it is very, very important that we remember, and especially as it relates to my colleagues who were just on the floor commending the President and the justification on behalf of the whole Iraq experience, let me just say this, it is important that we support our troops. Our troops are going to do what they are told to do. Rightfully so. The Commander-in-Chief is the leader. But I will tell you that as Americans, we have to pay very close attention to what one may do to take the attention off of the real agenda.

And I will tell you time after time again, if you watch the President as he moves throughout the country and has press conferences and things of that nature, we talk about standards. He talks about standards. He talks about the fact that he is compassionate towards seniors and veterans and all of the soft music that may be in the background as it relates to his speeches; but I will tell you in the real world that is not the case. We are leaving the troops's children and their parents and their loved ones that are over there with sand in their teeth in Iraq or Afghanistan or in Haiti behind.

It is important that we have remember and we look at the fine print here. We have veterans that are waiting 3 months to get a prescription filled through the VA. Now, I do not fault the good people who are trying to work with what they have at the VA. But I wish that the President and I wish that this Congress would move forth in this budget to make sure that the VA can cut that in half.

Concurrent receipt. I am so glad that my colleagues on the Democratic side had enough gumption to be able to pull a bill up to this floor to allow a veteran that is disabled, so they do not have a veterans tax, of taxing them while they

are disabled and a veteran at the same time. This leadership is important.

I want to make sure that the American people do not feel that this is some sort of partisan argument against the President. I will tell you individuals will have their opportunity to stand in judgment of this administration in the coming months. But I will tell you this as Members of Congress, it is very important that articles like this where you have Republican members of the State legislature saying that we are shifting the cost to them, and when we cut the Federal commitment, which when we give this huge tax cut that has already been given to the most wealthy Americans, that there will be no money to respond to the States.

Now, how this works in the real world when you have $78 billion in deficit throughout the country, then what do the States do? Do they raise taxes? Nine times out of ten, they do not. They increase fees. Your driver's license costs a little bit more. For individuals that are in coastal States, registration for your boat may go up a little bit more. For individuals that buy hunting licenses throughout this country, sportsmen, they pay more for their hunting license because the wildlife officers or the wildlife commission, their budget is going to be cut. So when that happens, what happens to the counties, our counties? They were just up here. Well, the cities were up here and I am going to get to them in a minute.

Our counties were just up here recently. And they were so very, very concerned. They are thinking that help is on the way, and that they are going to get some sort of relief. They look to the States for relief. The States are not going to give them the dollars that they used to give them rightfully. So what they should do so they can put forth the function to be able to make sure their residents, taxpaying Americans, are able to have some level of government services, or some level of police services or fire services, or homeland preparedness.

That is not going to happen. You make these tax cuts permanent for the most wealthy Americans, this country is going to continue to see what this speaker said, the president of the Senate of Utah said, that we are concerned it is going to get worse.

So basically, if we do not listen to the chairman of the National Conference of State Legislators make his arguments, it is almost like this Congress, Mr. Speaker, taking out a carton of milk and taking a smell of it and saying, wow, it is spoiled. Let me put it back in the refrigerator. Maybe it will be fresh tomorrow. We do know that is not going to happen.

I feel so bad for my colleagues that are ``deficit hawks.'' It must be very difficult to come up with an argument of where we can kind of cut this deficit in half. How can you do it when you have got a President that is willing to say, let us make sure that we make the tax cuts permanent and the more taxes you pay, the more money you should get. That may sound good in a speech, but in reality, you have Americans receiving on average somewhere maybe 50, $300 in rebate, and then you have millionaires receiving thousands, hundreds of thousands of dollars so that they can go on and do the things that they do, and it does not help the economy whatsoever.

Job growth. Let us just talk about that for a minute, because it is important since we have themed this special order to talk about States, talk about counties, talk about local governments, talk about school boards, about how the devolution of taxes will end up affecting every American's life. Let us talk about that for a minute.

The President said, hang in there. He was talking to some workers the other day. Just hang in there a little longer. It will be okay. It is going to work itself out. I must beg to differ with the President, because I feel this is the sour milk scenario once again. Let us put it back in the refrigerator. Maybe it will be fresh tomorrow. We know it will not be. The evidence is not there to justify the economic backing of what the President may feel as it relates to giving more tax cuts.

My colleague, the gentleman from Texas (Mr. DeLay), on the other side of the aisle, the Republican leader, last year he said there is nothing better the government can do, I am paraphrasing, than at a time of war than to give tax cuts.

Cake and ice cream.

We can not do that. We are supposed to be the responsible ones. Members of Congress who know better should do better. And unless we stop marching in lockstep, I must say on the Democratic side that is not the case, but on the Republican side, there seems to be a sense of pride that we need to just kind of hide behind this administration saying that it is okay. But it is not okay. For us to get to the top of where we were, I must adjust 3\1/2\ years ago looking at surpluses, now we have the largest deficit in the history of the country.

How did we get here in such a short time? Let us just give the tax cuts to the most wealthy individuals. Just put it this way, 56 percent of the tax cuts under the Bush plan is to the most wealthy Americans.

Now, I am not standing here saying I do not like individuals who are able to do the things they do, but these are the wealthiest of the wealthy. And it is very, very important for those of us that are here and have the power to do so, bring about the kinds of change that this country deserves.

Now, let me just say as it relates to the jobs, the 3 million jobs lost, the administration has changed the forecast 3 times. Well, we are going to be here by this day. No, I am sorry. We will be here by this day. No, we will be here by this day, just to try to get some sort of goal that could be met. And it is just not adding up, and I will tell you that it is very, very important that we remember that as Members of Congress, that we stand on behalf of what is right for the country, not just because administration and the Vice President comes here and he gets over here in the side room and the next thing you know, you have Members on the other aisle walking back in feeling very beat down and, well, I guess I got to go here and be with the home team.

Well, the home team has gotten us into a 3 million job deficit, the largest deficit in the history of the country and climbing. We have State legislators that are saying, oh, my goodness, they are shifting the burden over to us. And this budget alone, the next year, increased burdens will be on the States on top of what I am telling you right now will be $34 billion. That is not change. That is real money.

What is going to happen to you American people that are working every day, that are taking care of your family every day, that are doing all the things that this country has asked you to do to make us strong? Your children, they go to school every day. They are trying to make their lives better every day. They have hopes of going to college one day. But what we are doing here and what this administration, what the Bush administration is putting on this country right now is very, very unfortunate, and I am sorry to say it, dangerous economically. And our democracy depends on a strong economy.

Now, I will tell you that when the States make their budgets, obviously, they have to look at cuts. Their commitment is going to cut to local government. That means that the feeding program in your local community is going to probably end up reaching the ax. Here in the Federal, in this budget, we cut the COPS program, putting community police officers in communities to what? Prevent crime. Not respond to it, but prevent it. That is cut. You think the States are going to be able to pick up that burden? Of course not.

Then you look at programs as it relates to your quality of life, parks and recreations, that builds character in our communities throughout America. What has going to happen there? Maybe the summer program may not be there for your child. It does not matter what community you live in. I am not talking about Chicago, even though that would be an issue. I am not talking about Los Angeles, even though that would be an issue. I am not talking about just Miami and just my district because the State commitment has been cut because the Federal commitment has been cut to be able to allow tax breaks, permanent, on behalf of the most wealthy Americans.

I am not just talking about those cities. I am talking about Youngstown, Ohio. I am talking about small cities like Ocala, Florida. I am talking about towns and villages that count on State dollars to be able to help make and

provide the good services on behalf of their constituents.

Let us talk about cities. Well, cities, they count on counties. They counts on State governments. They count on the Federal Government. The cities were up here last week, which was quite interesting, and I took the time to listen to their arguments. And I will tell you right now, the cities are very concerned about the direction that we have continued to head in. They want homeland dollars. We talk about homeland security here in Washington. Yes, it is a good thing. I am on the Select Committee on Homeland Security. Yes, that is a very important committee. We have an appropriations subcommittee on homeland security. But let me tell you where the front line security takes place. That is in our cities and that is in our counties and that is in our small towns. And I will tell you right now they are hurting and they are feeling the pinch.

Now, you may, in a speech made by the President or by some Members on the other side, defending the President's policies of 3 years, of not really a job growth. And then when you see a job growth, it is about that big. And then we start talking about trying to get McDonald's and Burger King to recategorize to make it manufacturing jobs to try to add on to say, okay, we have a nice little stack there now of jobs. Look what I have done.

This is so very, very important that we remember that we cannot allow this to happen, what the President has put forth in this budget of making these tax cuts permanent.

Now, I think it is important as we look at homeland security or homefront security. We have police departments right now that need equipment. We have already taken the COPS program and snatched that rug out from under them, the most positive and aggressive program of preventing crime in this country in a very long time. And because we have taken those dollars away, police chiefs and sheriffs are hurting. Right now they are responding to crime in many cases. They are not preventing it.

I will tell you right now, I guarantee you I do not even have to take a poll. I do not have to call CNN or MSNBC or any of the networks or the talking heads that are on 24 hours. And I guarantee you, walk up to any American and you can ask them this question: One, do you want to prevent crime or do you want crime to happen and be reported? And as we start looking at this bad trend of the Bush administration of fighting on behalf of the wealthiest Americans, that is going to continue to happen. Crime will go up. Police chiefs are going to have to work with what they have on behalf of providing the very safety that Americans deserve in big and large cities. So when we talk about tax cuts and act like it is really not anything that affects Americans, it does.

Let us talk about what is happening as relates to property taxes. Because of our efforts here, or lack thereof, to stop the Bush administration on this tax cut for the wealthiest Americans, we have a bad situation as it relates to being able to stop property taxes from going up when we talk about local commitment. What is happening as this devolution of taxation, as we continue to move down and putting these unfunded mandates on that the State legislatures are saying that we are, local communities have to raise taxes, property taxes of home- owning Americans.

Let me just share this with you. For me to stand here as a Member of Congress, I have never raised taxes on the American people. When I was in the State legislature I never raised taxes on Floridians. For us to be able to say in the county, well, we do not want to raise taxes, but I shared it with you earlier in my presentation that they come in the form of fees, of increasing fees, need a new tag or hunting license or fishing license, things of that nature, this is kind of invisible what happens in local governments. You all of the sudden see the rate of your property taxes go up because they have no choice.

This is the last area to pass the buck, city and county governments; and it is very unfortunate, very unfortunate that we put those local governments in that position. As we are up here in Washington speaking here on this floor, there are local governments right now scratching their heads, wondering how they are going to meet a budget, how are they going to be able to provide the services to Americans. So while we are putting $50, $200, $300 in a tax cut, they are taking $500, $600, $1,000 out of everyday Americans' pockets as it relates to property taxes because they do not have what we have.

I am going to tell you I am very disappointed as it relates to this. It is really bad to be a Member of the Congress and say you are a Member of the 108th Congress that oversaw the largest deficit in the history, not in recent years, in the history of this democracy of the Republic. I am so happy because I am glad that there is some sort of difference here as it relates to the budget and how Members feel.

We have a Republican and a Democratic side; and I will tell you, my colleagues on the Republican side, I feel for them because for them to try to figure out how they are going to make an argument and not offend the administration, I know that job is getting more difficult every day; and it is so very, very important we let the American people know how their local property taxes are being increased, how their local police services are being decreased. Not because local government is saying we want to cut community policing. We are saying it because we want to stand up on behalf of the wealthiest Americans.

I will tell you this. I am very proud of the Democratic side of this Congress that believes in middle-class tax cuts, but as it relates to these wealthiest Floridians, wealthiest Americans, that are celebrating, an administration that stands up on behalf of giving them big tax cuts towards the detriment of local government and Americans that are trying to work every day. So it is not adding up.

I continue to see article after article of failed attempts by this administration to try to get this economy moving in the right direction. That is creating jobs; that is not a jobless economy.

I will tell you, this one Member of Congress, along with several other Members on the Democratic side, we are very concerned. Not only concerned, we are willing to take action, if given the opportunity, to put this country in the right direction.

Let us look at this, this ``Deficit in Trade,'' New York Times today. It is not just me, a Kendrik Meek report. This is a report, a reputable newspaper here in this country, ``Deficit in Trade Tops $43 Billion.''

Let me just say this. We give the administration too much credit. We give them too much credit; and I will tell you, I think on the Republican side, it is time to start asking the tough questions. It is time to start taking some action or the American people will stand in judgment of all of us, and those that are willing to stand on behalf of the American people, everyday working Americans, not just the wealthiest Americans that are celebrating this tax cut and the President speaks so passionately about, you would assume he would talk about, he would go and say, well, on behalf of No Child Left Behind, we have to fully fund that. You would assume that this President would knock down the door to try to fight on behalf of dollars to be able to go to local governments and provide teachers with the things that they need to educate our children.

Better yet, we speak passionately about making sure that we make the tax cuts permanent, outsourcing jobs. Like I said, we cannot give the administration the credit or this Congress as some Members of this Congress as though they are the authority and they have a good track record. There is no good track record. If there was one, I would not be able to stand here on this House floor speaking to my colleagues, speaking to the American people in the way that I am speaking right now.

I can speak with great evidence and great backing of how States are concerned about the direction that we are going in. How we are cutting the Federal, I keep saying it, the Federal commitment to local governments and cutting the Federal commitment to the American people.

I will tell you, as we define in the coming months, with this being an election year, yes, people will do things that they ordinarily would not do; but I will tell you one thing that has been consistent. The fact that the President has said that these tax cuts to the

wealthiest Americans will help the economy has not happened. Three million jobs lost, that is a long way to go to say that you created something, and I will tell you this. It is very, very important, very, very important in this budget time that this Congress, not just my friends on the Democratic side, but my friends on the Republican side, it is time for some Members of this Congress to go see the wizard and get some courage on behalf of the American people who allowed us to be a part of this Congress.

Remember, Members of the 108th Congress here in this U.S. House and in the other body, history will reflect on the fact that we oversaw and the Republican-controlled Congress, I must add, oversaw the largest deficit in the history of this country that children will have to pay, that living Americans will have to pay for a very, very, very long time.

I cannot help but get off of this wealthiest Americans getting this tax cut that the President wants to make permanent. It just does not add up. With all the needs that we have, efforts against terrorism, efforts to be able to make sure that we provide or we talk about the terrorism, we talk about our troops, being able to have a good national defense, but how about those individuals that have served? How about those veterans? How about those individuals that wore the uniform? How about those members of the American Legion? How about those individuals that are out doing community service like the Shriners and others that are veterans in this country and they are being stepped upon?

They are being stepped upon because they are being devalued as it relates to the commitment that they should have from this White House. Yes, there are some Members of Congress that have now said, okay, Mr. President, I am sorry, I know you want to fight on behalf of the wealthiest Americans; but we have these veterans and they are in my district, and we are going to have to do something about it.

Republicans came together with some very courageous Democrats that put forth a bill. A Member from Florida put forth a bill, but could not get it up under a Republican-controlled Congress. Democrats came together to be able to provide that opportunity so that hopefully we can do some things about concurrent receipt, which is the tax on veterans.

Remember I said earlier about how we pass it on in fees and different things that may take place, like delays on being able to see an ophthalmologist at a VA center, having backlogs at VA centers continue to increase instead of decrease, if we are really honoring and standing towards the commitment of Americans that have allowed us to be able to celebrate the very freedom that we live under and breathe under today.

Police officers, I cannot help but have a level of compassion towards police officers that are out there making $30-something-thousand a year, carrying a weapon, protecting our communities, protecting our highways. I used to be a State trooper. I was a State trooper in Florida for 5 years. I know what it means not to have what you need to have to be able to provide the protection that you raised your right hand and said that you would do and put the other one on the Bible. I will tell you that it is important that we do not leave them behind.

So when we look at these efforts of this White House to send a $2.4 trillion budget to this Congress, that is making tax cuts permanent on behalf of the wealthiest Floridians, I mean wealthiest Americans and Floridians I must add, the wealthiest, not folks that are just kind of, you have a good job, you are making a family income of about $80,000 a year. We are not talking about that group. We are not talking about the individuals that are making a little bit over $100,000.

We are not talking about those individuals. We are not talking about those individuals that are making under $20,000 or $35,000 a year as a joint household income. We are talking about individuals that are making hundreds of thousands of dollars a year, and who are celebrating a great representative in the White House right now, and that is the President of the United States.

But do not take my word, just look at how it is presented. When the President starts talking about tax cuts, of course he does not say we need to make sure the wealthiest Americans receive the tax cuts. But it is somewhere in the message. When you look at how it is playing out, the majority of the money in his tax cuts go to the wealthiest Americans. So it is not like he is fighting on behalf of everyday working people and saying that we want to provide that tax cut for you.

I talked earlier about the legislatures and how they are feeling the pinch and how they are passing that pinch on to local government. But police officers need equipment, and not only for homeland security but they need equipment to be able to provide safety in our local communities.

Now, let us talk for a minute about health care. I mentioned that at the top of my presentation here today before this Congress. There is no health care plan, and there will not be any money for a health care plan if we make tax cuts permanent on behalf of the wealthiest Americans. Do not think it will fall out of the sky. It will not happen. We cannot have cake and ice cream and meet a commitment that we should make to the American people.

Yet we are able to provide a health care plan that we here in this Congress celebrate. We have a health care plan that is just really something else. But I do not think my constituents sent me up here saying to me, well, we are so delighted and we love you so much that we want to give you health care that we cannot even have or afford. I do not think that was their message.

What I am saying to my colleagues on the other side of the aisle is that this is important. And to those who are either listening to me right now in their offices or have even made it back home, since we have finished business this week, think about it over the weekend, about what you have to do on behalf of those individuals at the airport when you get off that plane; think about that ticket agent that is there; think about that individual that is sitting there in that airport who is a development representative on behalf of a small shoe company who needs health care and cannot afford it. Think about those individuals when we start standing in judgment of this budget.

If we allow the wealthiest Americans to receive a tax cut over good health care on behalf of every day working Americans, some that are traveling by car, some that are traveling by plane, some that are trying to make ends meet, it is really a travesty and a shame. We cannot give this Bush administration the rubber stamp and continue to allow them to move forth on failed economic policies that are going to drive this country down, not up. Much more has happened to the American worker than for the American worker, and we have to pay very close attention to that. Let us not just watch the show, let us be a part of the show and make it better on behalf of the American worker.

I would say now that the decisions that are coming out of this White House on the economic front are a shame, and individuals should be embarrassed. People should be fired. We should be able to bring in a new team of strategists and advisers. But I do take comfort in the fact that this is 2004, and in a few months Americans, will be able to make the kind of decision they need to make.

I guarantee that when you do not have health care and you have to go to an emergency room for that health care, or when you are a veteran and you have to go to a Veterans Hospital to get some sort of assistance and you are waiting 3 months to see the ophthalmologist or the cardiologist, or whatever the case may be, that is not a partisan issue. That is an issue of leadership. So whether you are a Democrat, an Independent, or a Republican, whatever the case may be, there is a lot of blame to go around.

We will not be blamed on the Democratic side. I guarantee you we will not be jumping up and down on making these tax cuts permanent on behalf of the wealthiest Americans. I am just so glad that God has allowed me to have enough breath in my body to come here and put this on the Record and to let Americans know that we should not allow the wealthiest Americans these tax cuts. And I am not hating on them,

I am hating on the leadership of this country as it relates to the President of the United States that keeps selling to the American people that this is a good thing. I just do not know how it is.

And I will say this right now. We need to stand up on behalf of those individuals working every day and that have to stay healthy to be able to provide health care and some sort of way of life on behalf of their families, men and women, some two-parent households, some one-parent households, and with their price of health care continuing to rise, and the price of health care continuing to rise for small businesses, then we are standing up with the President for the wealthiest Americans.

I am sorry if someone is disappointed because I am here speaking on behalf of everyday Americans. The people that work in the Federal Government do not have the kind of health care they need to have, and we need to fight on their behalf. We need to say no to the President as relates to providing tax cuts to the wealthiest Americans. I am going to keep saying it, and I think that Members of this Congress should keep saying it.

I am trying to make the job easier on behalf of my friends on the Republican side that want to say it but cannot say it. And the reason why they cannot say it is that they will fall out of step with the administration. I have seen it. It has been all over the papers, the kind of pressure that this administration put on good Members of Congress who are trying to make good decisions on behalf of their constituents. It is well documented. This is not the Kendrick-Meek Report, this is the report of the reality of what is going on in this Capital city.

We should not stand by and allow this to happen, and I do mean those of us who are carrying 108th Congress voting cards. We should not allow this President to continue to make decisions and give him credit where credit is not deserved, based on the report of this administration and the fact they have not been able to create positive job creation since the President has been President. Just short of 3 million jobs.

Some say we are on our way up. Well, three million is a long way to go. Try to tell that to an individual whose unemployment has ran out and they cannot find a job. Meanwhile, we have a President who thinks and who is talking about, oh, it is good to send jobs overseas.

So while we are here fighting, and the majority, I must add, I am hoping that we can get them to really think the way they want to think and act the way they want to act and saying no to the President of the United States; that we will not allow this to happen. Because the Social Security Trust Fund will never be resolved and it will be going down into deficits.

We believe in community policing, we believe in providing health care for those that have worn the uniform and who are entitled to the respect they should receive, many of whom have lost limbs and have diseases that they cannot shake because they fought on behalf of this country. They should not be waiting 3 to 6 months to try to see a doctor or to try to get some sort of specialty treatment at a VA Hospital.

The VA hospitals should not be closing, but they are closing, because we are about to take away their money. It is already happening, only we are going to make it permanent. So where is the money going to come from? The President is going to walk around and say we have cut taxes, we have made them permanent. Well, that sounds good. Taxes have been cut. But the reality of it is that the majority of Americans are not the ones that are receiving this, 54 percent of the dollars in that tax cut. And it is little increments as relates to every day working Americans, but huge tax cuts, in the hundreds and tens of thousands, to the wealthiest Americans, who will receive and continue to receive as far as the eye can see.

But we are here talking about where are we going to be able to provide affordable health care, talking about why we cannot stop property taxes going up. If there is a local school or bond question on the ballot in your State's primary, or a question on the ballot as relates to a local election, it is not because the school board failed you, it is not because the county government failed you, it is not because of the school boards that are operated by the city, it is not because the city has failed you, it is not because the State has failed you. It is because the President of the United States thought it was important to make sure that we provide a tax cut, and to make it permanent, I must add, on behalf of the wealthiest Americans.

As I close, I just want to say that, and this is important, that these tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans have nothing to do with the effort against terrorism. It has nothing to do with it. Nothing patriotic about giving tax cuts to the wealthiest Americans. I did not see a millionaire or a billionaire coming to my office saying, Congressman, I sure need you to fight on my behalf. I want you to make these tax cuts permanent.

You know the reason why they are not coming to my office saying that? Because they cannot look at me straight in the eye, nor can they look at the American people straight in the eye and say that. But this President, and you need to check it for yourself, this President goes flying around, burning all kinds of Federal jet fuel, talking about it is important that we make it permanent. He leans on the podium carrying on and looking and winking and all that kind of stuff, and that is good for the television, but in reality, he is telling us to forget about a health care plan because there is not one. We can forget about a good Medicare prescription drug plan, because there will not be one. There is not enough money to be able to do it.

And I do not even want to start about what this Congress was told and about what happened afterwards. Millions of dollars underforecast as relates to the plan that was passed. I do not even want to get into that. That is another entire special order. But as far as community policing, we can begin to look to our local communities not preventing crime but reporting crime. We had those days. We want to get away from those days, but I think those day will come back.

Veterans. Veterans. Oh, my goodness, I am so glad this is an election year and that they are getting some level or maybe a small response that is just starting from this Bush administration because of the pressure and the reality of what they have to live under, not being able to receive the kind of health care that they need and waiting in lines.

Mr. Speaker, I close by saying this: I go back to the Washington Post today. State government leaders. The Utah Speaker of the House, Mr. Stevens, said that ``we have seen an increase in that practice in recent years and we are concerned this is going to get worse.'' That is what the evidence shows. That is what will continue to happen if this House allows this President to make these tax cuts permanent on behalf of the wealthiest Americans.

State governments, brace yourself. Local communities, brace yourself. Property owners, brace yourself. Hunters and sportsmen alike, and sportswomen, brace yourself. Brace yourself because you will be paying the price because we want to fight on behalf of the few. We want to make sure individuals that live in gated communities and who burn a full tank of gas getting to their front door get their tax cut.

On behalf of the Democratic side, and on behalf of some Republicans that are thinking in their mind that they want to be able to say something, not only say something but want to vote against some of this stuff that the President is putting down, I am asking this Congress does not continue to follow this President down a track of continuing not only to outsource jobs, but continuing to put this country in economic jeopardy.

I have a problem with us knocking on the bank of China saying we need money to pay down money on the largest deficit under our watch. Something is fundamentally wrong with that. And you can talk about Democrat-Republican, but the reality is there was a surplus until President Bush took the White House, then all of a sudden we have record deficits. We have red lines that are running deep you can lose consciousness.

I think it is important, my colleagues, as we take this recess over the weekend that we come clean with the American people about what is to come. I hope and pray on behalf of veterans that we do better by them.

I pray on behalf of children, who are trying to rise up to the standards that have been set by this administration without the resources in this budget that will be able to respond to the needs of every day teachers and administrators that are working to be able to make sure that they can provide an environment and also be able to put forth an education system that is going to help our children learn, outside of just having test centers and having rhetoric out there, these one-liners talking about how we have raised standards.

I hope and I pray that Members of Congress stand on behalf, and especially on the majority party, because on the Democratic side I know where we stand, but I am hoping and praying that someone, some Member stands up and gets other Members on the Republican side to say no to the President of the United States; I do not care if it is an election year or not, Mr. President, you will not make tax cuts permanent on behalf of the wealthiest Americans. And not just because we do not want you to, but because the Republic depends on the very resources you are willing to give away to individuals who do not even need it, and which will provide for health care, for Social Security, for a prescription drug plan that actually is a plan on behalf of the American people and that will drive costs down, and which will also make sure that we have police officers in our communities that are going to prevent crime and not report it.

Mr. Speaker, it is a pleasure to address the House and the American people this evening.

Last night, Mr. Speaker, we were on the floor talking about the recent events in Haiti that has also involved not only our military but our international community, not only as it relates to humanitarian efforts but to the safety of the Haitian people. I just left the Committee on International Relations, the Subcommittee on the Western Hemisphere where we had witnesses, the Assistant Secretary of the Bureau of Western Hemisphere Affairs from the U.S. State Department, Mr. Roger Noriega; and also the Honorable Arthur Dewey, Assistant Secretary of Population, Refugee and Migration of the United States State Department; also other representatives from the State Department. Mr. Speaker, it was quite disturbing hearing some of the testimony that was given to us there on that committee. I am thankful that the chairman, the gentleman from North Carolina, allowed other Members that were concerned about not only the plight of Haiti but also the U.S. involvement in Haiti. I think the events that took place last Saturday evening and early Sunday morning has a lot to do with how we move forward from this point on. Many of us in this Congress feel very strongly about the U.S. involvement in Haiti from this point on, on how safe will it be in Haiti? How safe will it be for the Haitian people? How many months will our U.S. Coast Guard be visually off the coast of Haiti? What kind of commitment will the United States make to Haiti? And also what kind of commitment will the international community put forth as it relates to Haiti?

First of all, I would have to go back. We spoke last night about Mr. Philippe, who has announced himself as the leader of Haiti, the head of the rebel force, using Secretary Noriega's description of him as a thug, that has now taken control of Haiti. He was in Port-au-Prince yesterday, he had a meeting, he talked about him being in charge of Haiti. He said he really looks up to the United States, that he reveres our President, and rightfully so, he should revere our President, because if it was not for a visit by officials from the State Department that will go unnamed at the home of President Aristide and giving him an ultimatum to either leave or be killed, that simple, that he had to make the decision right then and there. Reports say that he made that decision. That decision empowered Mr. Philippe, a known individual not only to Haitians but also a known individual that has carried out terror in Haiti in the past, a 36-year-old young man that is now on the streets of Haiti who has announced that he is going to arrest the prime minister of Haiti. I say that as a backdrop of talking about troop safety.

I think it is important to note in the early 1990s when U.S. troops went into Haiti to not only kick General Cedras out who took Haiti by a coup but to also provide a level of safety to try to build onto democracy, that not one soldier lost his or her life. No one even choked on popcorn. It was that smooth of an operation. I commend Senator Nunn at that time, I commend Mr. Powell at that time, now Secretary Powell, and also the leadership of William Jefferson Clinton.

But now we have a situation that is in question. Some people may say, why are you so concerned? Okay, President Aristide said he felt like he was kidnapped. Some people say, well, he wasn't kidnapped, that's not true. Who's right? Who's wrong? That is not the issue. The issue is that for us to provide the kind of forward progress that we are going to need in Haiti to make sure that Haiti is able to move forth in a democratic way, for us to continue to have the international community willing to be a part of democracy-building in the Caribbean as it relates to other Caribbean islands surrounding Haiti, then we can no longer move forth with a Saturday night policy ultimatum.

This should have not happened, ladies and gentlemen. Mr. Speaker, I must say that it brings into question the very safety of troops and also it brings into question good elections in the future. If Haitians that were pro-Aristide and within the party that he was the head of know and feel that the United States played a strong role in his departure by force, and taken from Mr. Noriega's quote, I might add, that he just gave in responding to the gentleman from New York (Mr. Rangel) in the committee just a couple of hours ago, the gentleman from New York asked him: Mr. Noriega, is it true that President Aristide was told that he needed to sign a resignation letter before he boarded the plane?

Mr. Noriega responded: It was important to make sure that we have a positive process to a political resolution.

The gentleman from New York asked him again: Is it true that he was asked to sign a resignation letter before he boarded the plane? That answer was: Yes.

And then after that, to give Secretary Noriega some credit, he said that to make sure that we can resolve a good political resolution.

Mr. Speaker, if someone showed up to my house on a Saturday night and shared with me that either I needed to leave with them or I would be killed and my family, I would leave. If they were to ask me, listen, sign your mortgage or your deed over to your property because we are not going to take you unless you do that, I would sign it.

We met with the Secretary-General of the U.N., several Members of this Congress, on Monday. This brings into question, was this an exit of a leader who wanted to leave of his own free will and saying that, hey, come get me, I already have my resignation letter ready and I'm willing to sign it, I want to thank you, America, for helping me and helping my family leave this island? Or was this a resignation under duress? We do not know if the 33rd coup d'etat took place on Saturday night or it was just a misunderstanding.

I must say, I am no fan, and I have said this time after time, Mr. Speaker, of President Aristide. I represent Miami. I represent south Florida. But what I am a fan of is democracy. When these knee-jerk policy decisions are made on a Saturday night, it puts forth a bad light on the United States of America as it relates to how we deal with democracies in South America or in the Americas. This is so very, very important. We are sending the signal to individuals that will arm themselves, known to be outlaws, have been a part of terror groups in the past of Haiti to arm themselves and take cities, if we like it or not. Some may argue, well, the 2000 elections as it relates to Haiti was wrong and it was

flawed. I would say that he was recognized and given credentials by the Ambassador of the U.S., President Aristide was. He was recognized by the United Nations as the President of Haiti. So to even talk about the 2000 elections, and I think that we should not even go there as it relates to our own personal situations. And one thing that I do honor. Never once that I have denounced or said that President Bush is not my President. He is my President. Until November, until we all get a chance to be able to cast our ballots as Americans on how we feel, he will be the President until that point. If he is reelected, he will be reelected. That is just something that we have to live with. But what is important as we move forth from this point and making sure that we stop the violence is that we play with a level hand. Guy Philippe is an individual that has said, once again, that he will arrest the prime minister. The prime minister of Haiti's house has been burned down to the ground. It has been looted and burned down to the ground. He has been living in his office protected by U.S. Marines. Can he leave that office? No. I do not think that that is a safe situation.

I have one other thing before I yield to my colleague here. Secretary Dewey said that there has been over 900 Haitians rescued. The Secretary-General of the U.N. had brought a question to the United States policy as it relates to individuals trying to flee Haiti of fear of persecution. Persecution means that if you return, you are fearful of your life or your family's life, women and children. We have repatriated over 900 Haitians even though the road is littered of bloated bodies that the rebel forces left in the path on their way to Port-au-Prince, never once stopped by the United States of America, never once stopped by the international community but kept marching on. It is that same rebel force that did not agree to any of the diplomatic or political solutions we tried to bring about to bring a peaceful resolution to what was going on in Haiti. Nine hundred were repatriated. The Secretary reported since Aristide has left the island only three have been caught and repatriated. Let me just say this. After the 900 that were brought into the Port-au-Prince dock and sent off to the streets because they were leaving from the south end of the island, not from Port-au-Prince, which is like over 100 miles away, they are walking through a populated area where rebel forces and other folks can see them and their families. Some of them are government workers, some of them are individuals that were pro-Aristide or they never would have left the island in the first place. They were not leaving because of President Aristide. They were leaving because of the violence and the violence and the persecution that they were going to receive. So I would not even try to leave if I knew I was going to go through Port-au-Prince and everyone was going to see me and know exactly where I am. They are now in hiding in Haiti.

I think it is important, ladies and gentlemen, that we look at what we are doing and how we are doing it and if we want to see a peaceful resolution in Haiti, it is important that we put forth policy not on slogan but based on making sure that our troops and humanitarian supporters are safe. So it is very, very important that we understand that as this U.S. Congress.

Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from Michigan, the ranking member of the Committee on the Judiciary.

Mr. Speaker, from what I understand, I have no firsthand accounts, that they are in a Central African country, that they have French and U.S. guards that are protecting them, including their own private security that President Aristide has had over the last couple of years. So from what I understand, his life is not in jeopardy, and I am glad that the gentleman has brought that up because there are many people not only in the United States but many of my constituents that feel otherwise, and we try to find out that kind of good information and share it with them that all is well so that we can hopefully see some sort of smooth political process in the future.

Mr. Speaker, I think that is important too. I just

want to make sure that I clarify that, from what I understand from the gentleman from New York (Mr. Rangel), that he spoke with President Aristide this evening or earlier, and he did share that he had French, U.S., and personal security individuals; and he is on a French base in this particular country. Hopefully, that security holds up over time and justifiably so.

Going back to what I was mentioning a little earlier, and I know that the gentleman from New York (Mr. Meeks) has joined us now for this discussion, but the very safety and how President Aristide was removed speaks to the future security of Haiti. And the gentleman from Michigan is a member of the Committee on the Judiciary. I know that he is fully aware of the temporary protected status that all of us have been fighting for so that we do not put Haitians that are in the U.S. into harm's way just like we have done for other countries that had similar turmoil, be it political or natural disaster. I think it is important that we note that when people are saying why are we worried about how President Aristide left, I am more worried, Mr. Speaker, about the safety of the Haitian people, also worried about our troops that are in Haiti protecting not only U.S. properties but also looking at the issue as it relates to the safety of humanitarian workers; and I think the way that the administration moved on a Saturday night/early Sunday morning with this whole resignation thing or he cannot get on a plane fuels more chaos on the ground in Haiti.

Mr. Speaker, I yield back to the gentleman, as the ranking member of the Committee on the Judiciary, to speak to that.

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the gentleman for coming down and his being willing to stay and be a part of this discussion.

I know the gentleman from New York (Mr. Meeks) left the Committee on International Relations to come here and join us here tonight.

Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from New York (Mr. Meeks).

If I could reclaim my time from the gentleman from New York (Mr. Meeks), I just wanted to make a quick point. I share with Secretary Noriega and others, you would have individuals in the White House saying that, well, I hope that Members of Congress would watch what they say, because they are putting troops' lives and State Department civilian workers' lives at stake.

I must beg to differ, because we did not make the Saturday night visit. We did not bring about the kind of swiftness that our country brought about. We did not allow rebels, I am going to use Mr. Noriega's term, ``thugs and criminals,'' to go through Haiti, taking over cities, burning police departments, pulling pro-Aristide supporters out and executing them in front of their homes. We did not do that as

Members of the Congress. And as it relates to the executive branch, the administration, they did not stop it. All they did was put out a little press release and say ``we condemn the actions of this group. Stop doing what you are doing.''

Not only did we go to the negotiating table, and I commend Mr. Noriega for going over there, I commend the President for saying we are sending the diplomatic corps over there. President Aristide sat down and said, ``Fine, I agree with you. Let us share power.''

The opposition party said no. ``Okay. We will give you a deadline of 5 o'clock.'' Still no. The following day, still no. Then we just kind of walked away.

But then it became a point to where that in this democracy, the biggest democracy on the face of the Earth, the United States of America, went in and told the President of Haiti, as wrong as he may be on several issues, ``You have two choices: One, we can have a plane here to save the lives of you and your family, or you will be killed. And, by the way, if you want the plane, you have to sign this letter resigning as president of the country that you were elected to serve.''

I would say to the gentleman from New York (Mr. Meeks) and the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Conyers), I hate to keep going back to that point, because I think that is going to be the cornerstone of how we move forth in Haiti.

Now, you listen to Mr. Noriega, you listen to the President, they start saying, ``Well, you know, we are restoring order and peace.'' But that is not what the Washington Post is saying. That is not what the New York Times is saying. That is not what the Miami Herald is saying. That is not what the Associated Press is saying. That is not what CNN is saying. That is not what MSNBC and any other news organizations are saying.

What they are saying is Mr. Guy Philippe is the leader of the army and he is in charge, and he will say, President Alexandre of the Supreme Court, I will yield to him, but at the same time it is him riding through the streets with armed bandits.

Mr. Chairman, I want to thank you for reading that, and I will tell you how important CARICOM is to the economy here in the United States. We have what we call the Free Trade of the Americas, and they are a part of the whole hemisphere and economy and everything. We need the Caribbean with us.

Prime minister Patterson of Jamaica put forth a great effort as a neighbor to Haiti of wanting to see a resolution, a peaceful resolution. It was the Bush administration that rode in on the backs of CARICOM saying that we are going to use the CARICOM agreement. That is what the Secretary of State Noriega went down to Haiti to negotiate. Prime minister P.J. Patterson went to the Security Council on Friday of last week saying we must immediately go into Haiti to secure the situation so that we can resolve the CARICOM agreement, which was the political solution.

To his shock and dismay Saturday evening came about, and I will tell you there is no secret, there have been press accounts, that basically President Aristide was told the following: ``One, get on the plane and leave and save the lives of you and your family; or die.''

Now, this is the bicentennial, as the gentleman from New York (Mr. Meeks) knows, of Haiti, 200 years. On this 200th anniversary, or bicentennial, history is going to reflect that the United States played a hand in what possibly could have been the 33rd coup d'etat of Haiti.

I personally did not want our contribution to be that, especially since Haiti made it possible for us to make the Louisiana Purchase by taking out and beating down Napoleon, who was trying to run the whole world. Haiti went to Savannah to help us gain our independence against the British.

We got all upset with France over Iraq, talking about they do not appreciate our contributions of the past. I will say that the way we are going about it, I will not even say ``we,'' because I do not think this Congress would have even moved in this way, if we had the prerogative to have some say in this, in the way the administration moved.

So, Mr. Chairman, I am glad you put that into the Record of the Congress, so Americans will have an opportunity to reflect back on this moment to know that there were Members who were willing to bring this issue to the floor to let them know that history should not repeat itself.

I have two points and a question for the chairman. Two points: Number one, President Aristide was recognized not only by the U.S. Ambassador, I want to recap, as the duly elected President of Haiti, but also recognized by the United Nations and the international community as being the President of Haiti. So when we hear these arguments about a questionable election, I do not say history speaks to that as it relates to our diplomatic ties with Haiti.

Mr. Ranking Member, whom I refer to as ``chairman'' constantly, the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Conyers), I have a question for you: Let us just play ``what if.'' Let us just reflect back, because I was not in the Congress when William Jefferson Clinton was the President of the United States of America.

If there was a Saturday night visit by the Clinton administration to a democratically elected leader, what kind of Congressional hearings would be taking place right now on the Hill? I just want the gentleman to share that. I want the Record to reflect that, because I remember being a member of the State legislature a number of hearings for less.

I yield to the gentleman from Michigan.

Mr. Chairman, I just want to say that it is important that we try not in our democracy to revisit the kind of action as I understand it has taken place over the last 84 hours. While we are speaking into the record, I want to commend not only the Secretary of the U.N. for his forward progress and concern and in appointing a special envoy to deal with this situation in Haiti. But it is going to be upon this Congress to be able to respond in the way that we should. We cannot have it both ways. We cannot say, Haitians, you stay in Haiti and then on the other hand clog up assistance. We cannot say, because it is all wrapped around Haitians leaving, that is the real issue. Haitians, stay in Haiti. Deal with your own issues, but we will hold up the assistance. I say that again because that is what has happened in the past, Mr. Speaker.

I appreciate the gentleman's work as chairman of the working group as it relates to Haiti and its issues. But the gentleman from New York (Mr. Meeks) and I celebrate representing a large Haitian American population, and I must say that it is important that we do the right thing in Haiti.

Number one, to make sure our troops are not over there for the rest of their lives. Because if we follow the Bush policy that has been followed in Iraq, we do not know when the clock will run out on that. We do not know how long our troops will be there. If you let some of us tell it, we think we are in charge in Iraq. And every day on the news it is different.

So when I look at this administration, it is a say-one-thing-and-do- another administration. And I hope that the American people are paying very close attention. If you care about Haiti or not, you have to care about the moves that we are making that are going to define the very future of our children's and grandchildren's lives based on the knee- jerk decisions that are being made on a Saturday night.

If the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Conyers) could yield while I call my mother so she can watch. Both of the gentlemen are saying these wonderful things about me. Go ahead.

Let me just say this, there is a footprint of drug activity in the Caribbean. So that means that you have well- financed individuals that have guns that have now been green-lighted by this administration, that it is okay. And if I were the prime minister of any country in that area, I would be very concerned.

You would assume that the U.S. would help put a stop to this kind of thing. This is the vacation capital of the Caribbean. They are not used to worrying about coups and all these little different things. But if they watch very slowly over a 4-week period, drug dealers, known criminals, thugs going through Haiti and if you notice as they are starting to progress, they are getting body armor, helmets, fully automatic AR-15s, M-16s.

They say they came from the Dominican Republic. Also, there was a question about the U.S. selling arms to the Dominican Republic, some of those same arms that ended up in Haiti.

So I am not a man with conspiracy theory here. And take it from my good friend, the gentleman from New York (Mr. Rangel), this is not the Kendrick Meek Report. This is factual. So we have a lot to be worried about. And like I am saying to Americans, what this administration is doing as it relates to putting our armed services and making the job harder, we could have had peacekeeping troops in there. We could have stopped the violence, and we could have come up with a peaceful solution.

He is in my district.

As we close, Mr. Speaker, and I want to thank the Members of the House and the Democratic leader for allowing us to have this moment to address not only Members of the House, but the American people and that we think long and hard about the decisions that the President is making. We think we should not automatically give instant credibility to Saturday-night decisions.

I am pretty sure there is a strong argument to justify the reason why we went in and we told President Aristide what we told him when we told him. I am pretty sure that there is a strong argument when we said you have to sign this letter of resignation not once, but twice, before you board the plane to save your own life. I am pretty sure there is an argument. But I will tell you as we look on the annals of history of this country and how we treat democracies, like it or not, there has to be a better way. For us to make sure that we assure the safety of those peacekeeping troops that are there, some that are Americans, some that are do-gooders at the United Nations, we need to make sure that we do not put them in harm's way.

Mr. Speaker, I pray and I hope that we do not have any harm come to any of the peacekeepers that are there. I pray and hope that the killings stop on both sides of the ball as it relates to Haitian people.

Mr. Speaker, with that I will close. I am proud to be a Member of the U.S. House of Representatives, and I hope in the future that we can change some of the mistakes that have been made in the last 84 hours.

Madam Speaker, I want to thank the chairman for holding this special order on Haiti tonight. I believe all through the week and next week and the week after that and the month after that that we will continue to raise the issue of the policy decision that the Bush administration has put forth as it relates to Haiti. I must say that it is sad today in this democracy that we celebrate that we are now in the position and seen by the world community as being a country to decide who will lead in a democracy and who will leave a democracy.

Madam Speaker, I just wanted to come down here for a minute. This is the front page of the Washington Post. Mr. Guy Philippe, the rebel leader who went through Haiti, taking cities over and left about 70 people dead in the path of that. Here is the cover of the New York Times. This is Mr. Philippe again, with two armed individuals with AK- 47 fully automatic weapons, going through the streets of Port-au- Prince. Mr. Philippe called a meeting today and he said if police chiefs throughout Haiti and also the prime minister, if they did not show up, that he would place them under arrest. He has declared himself as the leader of the Haitian army. He said that he respects democracy and that he would respect the wishes of the now president, who was the supreme court justice, if he asked him to lay his weapons down.

Madam Speaker, I am no great cheerleader, I must add, of President Aristide or the opposition forces, but I am a cheerleader for democracy, and I will tell the Members, regardless of what anyone may say or what they feel, representing south Florida where we have several Haitian Americans, I must add that it is a disappointing day on behalf of democracy. The fact that the President of the United States, along with the Secretary of State, along with Mr. Noriega, who is Assistant Secretary of State, made the singular decision to go visit President Aristide on a Saturday night to give him two options: One, board a plane to save his life or, two, die. I do not consider that an easy and nonpersuasive discussion. I will take that as a very persuasive discussion if someone, just any American, just think about it, if military forces came to one's house representing the United States of America and said they have two options, one, leave with us and live, two, die, we will not stop them from killing them.

Madam Speaker, we have a lot of distinguished Members that are ready to address the House here tonight, but I want to say regardless of how one may feel toward Haiti, the administration, as far as I am concerned, the Bush administration had something personally against President Aristide. It was personal. This was not, well, he is not a great guy, he is not this, that, and the other. Guy Philippe is a murderer. He is a murderer and a thug and still carrying out thuggery on the streets of Haiti. He is willing to arrest the prime minister? He is going to arrest any police chief who did not show up at a meeting, and he is parading around the streets with armed individuals? This does not look like security for Haiti. What this looks like is more difficulty for Haiti. And he says he is interested in politics; so, Madam Speaker, I will say to the other Members the next leader of Haiti is going to be the person with the biggest guns and the most guns and who are willing to do what they have to do. I will tell the Members also as it relates to U.S. forces on the ground, what the Bush administration did on that Saturday night, Sunday morning have endangered the lives of American troops that are there that are trying to restore peace and security there, and international force troops, the President himself has placed their lives in jeopardy. As a member of the Committee on Armed Services, I am very upset about that. We do not go and do this kind of Saturday night visit giving people an ultimatum.

Madam Speaker, I look forward to the hearings that will be hopefully held in the coming days here in this Congress because if we allow this to happen as a U.S. Congress, we are in for a rude awakening from the international community about our integrity as it relates to democracy. I thank the chairman so very much.

Madam Speaker, that answer is yes. I just want to say that the President and the Department of Homeland Security can grant temporary protective status as they have done in similar situations in Nicaragua and other places where they had disruption and danger on the streets. But, Madam Speaker, I must say the repatriating of 900-plus individuals seeking safety and refuge and to get a true asylum hearing of being returned back to Haiti, 12 executions, 12, took place on Monday. These are pro-Aristide supporters. Twelve individuals died execution style. So I am going to tell the Members right now that our country, and I will not even say our country, I would say our leadership has placed us in that position. So, once again, we have other Members here. We will be hitting the floor in the coming days and coming hours. It is important that we have leadership in this House that is willing to schedule congressional hearings immediately based on the actions of the executive branch on a Saturday evening to go to a democratically elected president's home and tell him either he gets on a plane or he loses his life.

I am glad to be here to not only address the House but also the American people. I think what is so very, very important and proud to be a Member of the U.S. Congress on this day, of making sure that we do the right thing under the circumstances. Right now, Mr. Speaker, we have not only one but two carriers with Haitians that are being interdicted by the U.S. Coast Guard right now. I do not think that there needs to be a mountain of evidence to even show that there are individuals in Haiti that are being persecuted as we speak, that are losing their lives, that are being beaten for either being for the pro-government or anti-government forces that are there. And then you have innocent individuals that are in the middle of all of this gunfire and violence that is taking place, children, women, people, young men, older men that are there just trying to be citizens of a country. A democracy as shaky as it may be, it is still a democracy.

We recently met with the President, just today, and I am glad that members of this caucus and Members of this United States Congress shared with the President the importance, the fact that we are America and that we wear the breastplate of righteousness as it relates to standing and fighting for democracies. If we support or we are

against President Aristide, that is not the issue here. The issue is that a democracy is being overthrown by a gun as we stand idly by and make tough talk about Haitians leaving Haiti. To not do anything about the killing and the fighting that is going on right now in Haiti and in the same breath say Haitians stay in Haiti, don't take to the sea, it does not work toward logic to a diplomatic solution or a political solution of what is taking place now in Haiti.

I have said it before, and I will say it again tonight, our policy should not be driven on how many Haitians are face down in Haiti on the ground or are floating face down in the waters around Haiti and the United States. I will tell you that it is not healthy for our hemisphere; it is not healthy for our policy of making sure that we put forth democracies in the Caribbean and in this hemisphere, and it works against logic. So I urge the President, though we urged him earlier today, let individuals that are carrying guns know in Haiti, as they are getting more and more equipped as the hours go by.

Just a week and a half ago, there were 1960-style rifles that these rebels, thugs, whatever we want to call them or they identify themselves as, 1960-style rifles that can shoot maybe three or four bullets. Now they are almost up to par with U.S. troops. They are wearing full body armor, armored helmets, AR-15s, M-16s, American made, I must add, carrying a magazine of bullets of 40 to 50 rounds, banana clips, radio capabilities; and they are holding press conferences. If we expect for the people of Haiti, a human being, to keep their family in that kind of environment, thinking that they are just going to suck it up and take the bullets, then we are in for a rude awakening.

I want to talk about U.S. taxpayers. If we play defense of having our Coast Guard out there waiting in a 5-mile radius from each other, planes flying over to detect boats and things of that nature, all those resources focused on Haiti, what is happening to some of the other countries where we know we have a footprint of terrorism in the Caribbean? It is not Haiti, but I think it is important that we understand that and take that under heavy consideration.

I know that the American people are compassionate people. And if we are in Iraq justifying our presence of being there, of saying that we stand for democracy and we stand for the lives of the Iraqi people, then definitely 650 miles off the coast of the continental United States, we should stand for a democracy if we had an international force there to be able to stop the violence and start diplomatic talks.

I want to thank the gentleman for allowing me to address the House tonight. I know that we have to continue to follow this situation, but I would also like to add before I close that the Haitians that are on boats now, we have to remember international law and our own laws, if they can prove persecution, if they fear persecution, if returning back to Haiti, what the President said earlier today cannot stand. It is almost like we are sending them back to be murdered. So it is important that we set up the opportunity for them to receive the due process that they deserve. If we agree or not with illegal immigration, it is important that we ask other countries to do the same, that we do things by the book and by the law.

That is correct; and, Mr. Speaker, it is the highest concentration of Haitians in the United States. And I will tell the gentleman this: the Haitian people have been so involved in this country's history. They fought with us for our independence, and they are major, major contributors to not only our economy. We have a positive trade relationship with Haiti, and they create many U.S. jobs. Because of that positive relationship that is very important, Mr. Speaker, whichever side that people may fall on this issue, we cannot allow democracies to be taken over by gun and violence, and that is the bottom line.

Mr. Speaker, that is 110 percent right. We have to look at the stage the way it is set. I think it is important for us to understand the U.S. has asked U.S. citizens and mission workers to leave Haiti for their own safety. The French have advised their own citizens, which is justified. Canadians have done the same and other representatives from other countries that are there.

There are a number of U.S. citizens still in Haiti. That is still something for us to take into account. Because 97 percent of social services in Haiti, including schools and educating the children, are by missions. They are privatized. I mean, it is not like the government has the ability to be able to put forth an education system. So when that breaks down, that means that the elderly are not receiving the care that they have received before in the past. Children are not receiving the kind of care that they need, prenatal care for women that are pregnant, some of the very things that are there. The AIDS and HIV work that this country is invested in, should invest more but has invested in, is all going to go for naught and having to rebuild all of that if we do not stop the violence.

We have people that are pro-Aristide and that are against Aristide; but one thing they have in common, Mr. Speaker, is that we must, yesterday, stop the violence. They know that has to happen. And unless we stop that from happening, we are not going to be able to come up with a diplomatic or political solution to this situation.

So, Mr. Speaker, I think that Members of this Congress should continue to press on, and I am glad that we met with the President and Secretary Powell and also Dr. Rice, National Security Adviser; and the President's Chief of Staff, Mr. Andy Card. We have taken it to the highest levels that it can be taken to in this country and in the international community. Very little has to be done by us to prevent drowning of Haitians and Haitians face down in the streets of Haiti and very little, very little of a presence and leadership.

Yes, sir.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the chairman.

Mr. Speaker, I rise to pay tribute to one of Miami's youngest community leaders, 11-year-old Sara Berlin, a 6th grader from Jacobson Sinai Academy Bergman Upper School in Miami. On Friday, February 13, 2004, Sara was honored by community leaders and organizers of ``Do The Right Thing of Miami, Inc.'', a program under the auspices of the City of Miami Police Department.

Although I have not had the opportunity to meet Sara yet, I feel as though I know her after reading her book about the agonizing plight of Haitian children. I do reserve the utmost respect for her recent and compassionate work.

It is my understanding that Sara was genuinely inspired to write her book after researching the plight of Haitian children and learning about my bill which would allow alien children to be transferred from the Department of Homeland Security to the Office of Refugee Resettlement within 72 hours of apprehension, and to be released from custody and placed into the community with a qualified relative or caretaker within 15 days of such apprehension. I am delighted to know that Sara included me in her book.

Indeed, Mr. Speaker, our quest for simple justice and fairness for newly-arrived Haitians evokes the storied stance of our Nation as the defender of due process and human rights, particularly when the beneficiaries of our action are helpless children.

I am so grateful that Ms. Sara Berlin, a magnificent advocate in her own right, has added her own brave words to ours. We are strengthened yet again by her timely voice to the cause that calls attention to the cruel disenfranchisement of Haitians and their children.

Sarah writes,

Everyone should help kids. They shouldn't be locked up.

Everyone should donate or do something to help out. It is

really not fair. Kids should be able to live freely.

With her book on Haiti and specifically Haitian children, we are inspired by a greater appreciation of their struggles. I am moved by the inspiring description written about Sara's work of compassion thus: ``I'm proud that Sara has taken an interest in helping others. The feelings she expressed, and the desire to help, are genuine and spontaneous.''

I join our community in honoring Sara and her parents, classmates and teachers as they come together at the city of Miami Police Department. It is without a doubt that we will long remember this wonderful day as Sara inspires those of us who continue to care for the voiceless children of the world. We are comforted by her words in articulating their struggles to be free and living in a democratic country like ours.

Indeed, I am privileged to have been encouraged and inspired by her work, and I thank her for giving me the honor of representing her in the U.S. Congress.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to urge the Bush administration to move forward in providing the kind of security that we need in Haiti right now. On average, every day in Haiti, 15 to 16 Haitian nationals are losing their lives due to rebel forces and anti- Aristide forces.

I will tell my colleagues right now that the violence will continue to escalate. The rebels are getting more and more arms. They are getting body armor, they are getting helmets, they are getting all of the things that they need to continue to carry on the nightmare in Haiti.

I want to say to the U.S. citizens here tonight, standing by will not make things better in Haiti. Being from Florida and being from Miami, Florida, there is going to be a number of individuals coming to our shores if we do not stand in and intervene now. It is important that the U.S. moves forth with France and Canada, who are willing to bring about peace in Haiti, so that we can have diplomatic talks with the opposition forces.

The reason why there was not an agreement today at 5 o'clock is because there is no agreement to be made. The rebels cannot be controlled by opposition parties right now, and it is important that this administration acts now before military action will be paramount.

I want to thank the gentlewoman from California for her comments earlier about what this budget is doing to America versus for America. I think it is important in our democracy to be able to outline not only the pitfalls but where we can play offense, moving forward, moving this country forward.

As I speak about moving our country forward, it is important that we have a budget that is going to reflect our qualities and our values here in the United States. When I see a budget such as the President has sent here to the Hill, I cannot help but question the priorities of the administration versus the priorities of families that are living here in the United States, those that are working and those that are looking for work.

I must say that being a past creature of State government, I think it is important that we understand when the Federal commitment is cut, then the State commitment has to be cut. And when the State commitment is cut, then the local government commitment to communities and families is cut also. When I am talking about local government, I am not just talking about your counties or your parishes or just a city, I am talking about school boards. We call it devolution of taxation here in Washington, D.C. We cut it here, and they raise it there. Property taxes have gone up throughout this country, in all communities, not because local governments are saying that we like to raise revenue locally; they are doing it because the Federal Government is no longer supporting and helping and assisting local communities in vital programs that put forth the quality of life in America that we enjoy.

I just want to share a few figures. I am going to speak briefly tonight. States are currently facing their worst fiscal crisis in decades, with 41 States facing a cumulative budget gap of $48 billion for 2004 alone. States are facing budget deficits of approximately $40 billion for States in fiscal year 2005 and nearly $200 billion. How are they going to make up that gap? They are going to make up that gap by raising tuition on students and working families, individuals that are going to community colleges trying to better themselves, prepare themselves as it relates to having an educated and prepared workforce which makes this country strong; also as it relates to making sure that we do not spend billions and millions of dollars in incarcerating individuals since we cut the COPS program.

I was so glad to hear my colleague speak of the cuts that are in the COPS program. Not only am I a member of the Committee on Armed Services, as was mentioned earlier, but also the Select Committee on Homeland Security. I think it is very, very important that we protect the homeland, and I know it is important that we defend our country. But at the same time I must say that we are going to fall short in having young people who may make youthful indiscretions due to the fact that its government and its local community failed them by making sure that we have vital direction programs to be able to build the kind of integrity and the kind of culture that we would like to build here and continue to maintain here in the United States.

Let us talk just for a moment about local governments. Being a past State trooper, I have a great appreciation for what police chiefs are trying to do in this country, and sheriffs, all of them. I believe that all sheriffs and all police chiefs genuinely would like to see a community that works towards harmony and also works towards making sure that they do not have to carry out the act of having to arrest individuals in a given community. If we continue to follow the track of this budget that has been sent by this administration to the Congress, and I am speaking to my colleagues here because we have to really man up and woman up and go see the wizard not only to get courage but also to get heart and making sure that we stand up on behalf of those individuals who cannot stand for themselves. We see a rural housing and economic development program that is cut by $25 million, and we also at the same time see dropout programs that are also cut. We also have a HOPE VI revitalization for severely stressed public housing that is cut by $149 million. Someone may say, well, we have to cut spending; but, ladies and gentlemen, we are not cutting spending. We are going further into spending, away from what we may say are mom and apple-pie issues here in the United States.

As we start looking at our democracy and as we start looking at what we must do as Americans, and all of us have been elected to lead, doing common things uncommonly well in this country, of making sure that we do not hand a mandate to local governments to where they have to fulfill that mandate by raising taxes on everyday working Americans. Yes, we may receive a $400 check or a $300 check in the mail; but also on the other hand, out of our left pocket money is being pulled out, through property taxes, money is being pulled out on local referendums and bond referendums because the Federal commitment has been cut.

I just want to say, ladies and gentlemen, as we look at this deficit that has grown under this administration, as we look at our commitment as Americans of making sure that we stand up for our children's future, as we make sure that children that are born, newly born in a hospital as I speak now already owe the Federal Government $24,500, and dollars that are not in a deficit, and paying on a deficit that we are creating, that this administration is creating, then we are going to find ourselves in a very sad situation looking at the abuses of contracting and all of these things that are going on as relates to the war in Iraq.

I just want to say that it is important that we continue to share these bread-and-butter, literally, bread-and-butter issues with Americans about where this administration is falling short as it relates to providing the kind of leadership. It is just something fundamentally wrong, if you are a Democrat, Republican, independent, socialist, whatever you want to be a member of, the Green Party, you name it, for a President to speak passionately on making sure that we make tax cuts permanent on behalf of the wealthiest Americans and not speak passionately about making sure that we provide the necessary, not the funding that it deserves but the necessary funding to educate our children, to be able to provide a health care system that is going to make our country healthy and to be able to help local governments as it relates to their commitment of protecting the home front and our local communities. Because with the defensive budget that the President has sent to the Hill, it leaves very little room for us to play offense in solving and hopefully stopping some of the issues that are going to be far more expensive than it would be if we were able to prevent them.

I thank the gentlewoman so very much, and I want to commend my colleagues for coming to the floor and sharing with America about what is going on and what we are going to fight against to make sure that we maintain the America that we celebrate today.

I am so glad once again that the Congressional Black Caucus saw fit to share with all Americans what is happening to them versus for them, because we are here to make sure that good things happen in America and that we push programs that are putting people to work and that are making sure that our children are not left with a bill, that we are willing to eat steak and have a good time right now, so that we dismantle our future in America. We want to have it better for them than it was for us.

Mr. Speaker, with great pride--but with deep sorrow--I rise to pay my homage to one of Miami-Dade County's giant leaders, the late Mr. Jay W. Weiss. His untimely demise late Saturday night, January 31, 2004, has cast a veil of sadness over our community.

Indeed, as the business entrepreneur par excellence that he evoked, this extraordinary man easily communed with the pains and anguishes of ordinary people and transformed them into his very own by uplifting them into a timely rationale for creating appropriate solutions to them.

As Chairman of the Miami-Dade County Public Health Trust, he spearheaded the passage of the half-penny tax that now provides continuous support to Jackson Memorial Hospital, along with the funding of the Ryder Trauma Center and the University of Miami/Sylvester Comprehensive Cancer Center. These are but a few of the great initiatives his humanitarian spirit willed to come to fruition, and these programs now serve to lessen the burdens of various illnesses and enhance the quality of life for countless people in Miami-Dade County.

Though a highly private individual, he virtually consecrated his life to public service. In so doing he symbolized everything that is good and noble about the American spirit of idealism and optimism in serving our fellowmen.

Our community genuinely feels the loss of a truly decent and caring man who made it his personal business to reach out to the less fortunate among us. Dr. Bernard Fogel, former dean of the University of Miami Medical School, succinctly described Mr. Weiss as someone who believed and lived by the tenets of tzedekah, ``. . . the Jewish tradition of charity . . . that's what he was motivated by--doing the right thing because it's the right thing to do. ``

The numerous accolades with which government officials and various organizations have honored him buttress the unequivocal testimony of the utmost gratitude and respect he enjoyed from a grateful community. He truly epitomized the vision, resilience and compassion of a servant of God whose life served as an example of the great difference each one of us can make on behalf of our community's well-being once we hearken to the calling of our common stewardship over one another.

This is the legacy Mr. Jay W. Weiss bequeathed to us. Indeed, I am privileged to have seen and marveled at the magnificent works that emanated from his boundless heart and great faith. I now join our community in thanking God for letting him grace us with his noble presence during his earthly sojourn.

Mr. Speaker, President George Bush made his highest profile re-election pitch yet with his annual State of the Union speech. His aides said that President Bush planned to defend the war in Iraq unapologetically. He was likely also to talk ``at length'' about the Middle East and Afghanistan and assure Americans that their Government is winning the global war on terrorism.

Oddly, unlike last year, the President's aides had not described what the President would say about Iraq's Weapons of Mass Destruction--the chemical and nuclear weapons that President Bush so confidently and urgently assured us last year that Iraq was developing and stockpiling;

The weapons of mass destruction President Bush said threatened the very lives and homes of the American people;

The weapons of mass destruction that President Bush told us last year was the reason this Nation had to go to war.

But on Saturday in Iraq, a remote-controlled bomb, planted on an access road and made up of two 155 mm artillery rounds and other explosives, was detonated killing three fine U.S. soldiers, two Iraqi civil defense workers, and wounding two other American soldiers. The blast was so powerful that it flipped the 30-ton Bradley over and set it afire.

The number of U.S. service members who have died since the Iraq conflict began on March 20th reached 500 with that blast.

The 500th young American to die was from my district in Miami, Florida, Sergeant Edmond Randle, Jr.

Pentagon officials reported to me that Sgt. Randle of 2nd Battalion, 20th Field Artillery Regiment, 4th Infantry Division died with two others of his comrades in Taji, Iraq. He has joined 502 other Americans who have given their lives in defense of our country, and on behalf of its citizens.

I visited Karla Randle-West, Edmond's mother and Hattie Hightower, his grandmother, in Carol City, Florida where Edmond grew up. I prayed with them, and they told me a little about the son who would have turned 27 this coming Saturday. Like many of our courageous soldiers, he was pragmatic and ambitious, joining the Army 3 years ago to raise money in order to continue studying at Florida A&M University, my Alma Mater.

He was a pharmacy student in one of the most challenging programs in the Nation. His mother told me that he also played the trumpet in the Marching 100, one of the best marching bands in the world. He gave up his music scholarship to pursue a degree in Pharmacy and took a job in order to pay his tuition and expenses.

He found out that the Army would pay for college tuition if he joined and served for 4 years. He signed up, and though initially worried, embraced his deployment to Iraq as a means to help out his fellow man. His family described him as a caring and sympathetic person who often looked for ways to help out other people.

On Saturday, that was exactly what he was doing, helping people. He and his mates were conducting a surveillance sweep for roadside bombs north of Baghdad when the attack occurred. He died alongside a fellow Floridian, Private First Class Cody Orr, and a Texan, Specialist Larry Polley, Jr. They were all brave soldiers, soldiers who put themselves in harm's way to honor their commitment to the United States of America. They were soldiers who chased an often faceless enemy to protect men, women, and families they will never know. Unfortunately, they were among 503 Americans who gave the ultimate sacrifice while proudly defending the Red, White, and Blue.

Reaching that threshold underscores the dangers still facing U.S. forces in Iraq as President Bush's administration prepares to seek help from the United Nations in building a new Iraq, after shunning the world organization for months.

Sgt. Randle was to return home to his family in March, when another mother's son would likely replace him. As it is, his cousin is soon to be deployed himself. Certainly, it would make Sergeant Randle's death, the death of the other 502 soldiers; the wounds and injuries of 2,893 others, and the countless civilian casualties of no importance were we to pull out of Iraq without an established government with some form of democratic identity.

But, we should expend every energy, every diplomatic means, and every world resource to make the turn-over of power to the Iraqis happen as quickly as possible, so that we can bring our troops home. In the meantime, I would continue to hope that the supplemental appropriations given to the Pentagon last Fall would purchase the jammers that might have prevented the remote detonation of the bomb that killed Sgt. Randle.

Edmond Randle represented everything about the American soldier that we look up to--he was a talented musician, dedicated student, and much- loved son and grandchild. He was also a brave and honorable soldier in the United States Army. He will be missed by his family, his friends, and his fellow troops.

Mr. Speaker, I rise to pay tribute to one of Miami's unsung heroes, the late Johny Cesaire, also known popularly by my Haitian American constituency as P Jhony of Radio Pep La. His untimely demise due to cancer last Monday, January 16, 2004, leaves a deep void in our community.

Though I have had not the opportunity of bonding with him as did my mother, Congresswoman Carrie P. Meek, I do reserve the utmost respect and genuine admiration for his insatiable quest for simple justice and fairness for the less fortunate among us, particularly our newly- arrived Haitian refugees. Throughout his 10-year stint with Radio Pep La, he vividly put a true face and a brave voice on the struggle of Haitians across Florida and beyond by portraying their unjust and inhumane treatment on the part of government, along with its discriminatory immigration laws and provisions that, to this very day, continue to impact their lives negatively.

Mr. Cesaire was virtually the resilient and unyielding voice of the Haitian community that called to attention the cruel disenfranchisement of Haitians at almost every level of government. With his support the Haitian Refugee Immigration Fairness Act (HRIFA) came about in October of 1998 to bring longed-for hope and confidence to Haitians in South Florida and throughout the nation. Thanks to him, hundreds of Haitians and their families have been given a chance to seek the freedom and legalize their status in the United States.

Our community will be in mourning on Saturday, January 31, 2004 as his friends and admirers will come together at Holy Family Church to bury this seemingly ordinary man of God, who had done some great and extraordinary things during his earthly sojourn. I will certainly miss him for his undaunted leadership.

He talked and lived by the simple adage that the quest for personal achievement is not beyond the reach of those willing to dare the impossible on behalf of a people buffeted by so much discrimination and injustice.

This is the legacy that Johny Cesaire bequeathed to us, and it is with his nobility and compassion for the less fortunate that we will always remember him. I am greatly privileged to have been taught by him with this credo, and I thank him for giving me the honor of representing him in the U.S. Congress. I pray that God grant him Eternal Rest.

Mr. Speaker, I rise to honor a versatile and committed group of elected officials in Miami-Dade County who are members of the Florida Conference of Black State Legislators (FCBSL). On Thursday, January 29, 2004, they will be spearheading the 2004 Miami Regional Issues Conference, beginning with a town hall meeting on the ``High Stakes of the Florida Comprehensive Achievement Test (FCAT)'' to be held at Miami Edison Middle School.

Joining them are parents and community leaders, school administrators and teachers, as well as elected and appointed officials from Miami- Dade County and the State of Florida. This conference comes at an opportune time when there is a need to foster greater knowledge and involvement regarding government and politics among residents of our various neighborhoods.

In its most vivid history, the Florida Conference of Black State Legislators was incorporated in 1982 upon the election of nine prominent African Americans to the Florida House of Representatives. Indeed, the life of each of these legislators, and those that have followed, has become legendary and about as close to the impossible dream as I have witnessed.

These preeminent leaders will spearhead this 2-day conference, which will cover crucial issues such as Affordable Access to Health Care, Juvenile and Criminal Justice, Telecommunications, Hip Hop and Politics, Front Porch Florida, and Florida's Pari Mutuels. The Florida Caucus leads a critical gathering of concerned citizens, as well as the virtues of responsible and competent public servants who aspire to expound their unwavering positions on equal educational opportunities for minorities, the controversial incongruence of the Florida Comprehensive Assessment Test (FCAT), along with their unconditional passion for justice, equal rights, and educational opportunity for all.

In a special manner, ever since I have known the members of the Miami Black Caucus delegation, these leaders have always been at the forefront of ensuring equal participation in the shared duties and responsibilities on the part of Miami-Dade County's citizenry.

At the same time, their forceful advocacy for adhering to the tenets of equal treatment under the law not only in the halls of academia, but also in every segment of our State government agencies has become legendary. In fact, countless others have been touched by their genuine commitment to public service, especially to minorities who could least fend for themselves.

The legislators forming the Miami Regional Issues Conference Committee truly exemplify a unique and responsive leadership whose courageous vision and wisdom appeal to the critical issues impacting our community and the entire State of Florida.

I would like to extend my personal invitation to all those interested in our State government to enable them to seize the opportunity to renew and enhance their commitment to our common well-being as we prepare to meet the many challenges of our times. I honor these distinguished colleagues and fellow public servants of mine.

Mr. Speaker, I rise to honor the late Eugene ``Whitey'' White, a legendary track star at Florida A&M University. It is indeed a sad day for the entire Florida A&M University family, particularly those involved with the Athletic Department. He will be laid to rest on Saturday, January 24, 2004 at Dade Memorial Park in his hometown of Miami, Florida.

His untimely demise this past Thursday, January 15, 2004, leaves a great void in our historic institution. He is survived by his beloved daughter La Donna, grandson Ryan Smith, sister Cora L. White, nephew Eugene Randall White, and the rest of his loving family.

Eugene White was born in Miami, Florida on December 24, 1937, the oldest of three children born to parents, Eugene and Corine White. He attended Phyllis Wheatley Elementary School and Booker T. Washington High School where he was a star athlete. He was a running back for his school's Tornadoes Football Team, and was a sprinter and relay team track member. Graduating with the Class of 1957, he was awarded a four- year scholarship to Florida A&M University where he excelled in sports, and became an acclaimed running back for the Rattlers Football Team. Upon graduation in 1962, he was drafted by the Miami Dolphins and later played for the Oakland Raiders. His illustrious football career continued as he played with the Canadian Football League.

Though he was merely a freshman, Mr. White's most salient feat in the annals of Track and Field competition was that then-Coach Pete Griffin marveled at his amazing speed by winning the 100-yard dash at the Florida A&M Relays in a record 9.4. As he went about garnering many more excellent records, he entered the South Carolina State Invitational Meet. He was clocked by six official timekeepers at an unprecedented 9.5 for the warm-up, and, before the official hundred run, Mr. White pulled a muscle. Despite this apparent debacle that would have incapacitated many an athlete, he was able to finish second, clocking in at 9.7.

White's magnificent contributions to the personal and professional growth of countless youth in his native Miami are well-known, as he was admired for his quiet spirit and loving demeanor, always exuding a great many gentlemanly virtues that endeared him to the community and to his church family. His records on the athletic field have become legendary, and they now emblazon the fond memories of countless FAMU alumni. Young men and women who came to admire his athletic prowess also found him to be a caring professional who personified an indomitable example of excellent discipline and genuine compassion for his fellowmen. His colleagues highly regarded him as a confidant and the epitome of utmost urbanity and gentlemanly behavior. Nowhere has this advocacy role played out succinctly in the lives of many youngsters than in the indelible mark he left on many students, who were inspired by him to excel both in their academic pursuits and athletic endeavors.

Indeed, our FAMU family is genuinely touched and comforted by the undaunted leadership, resilient example and personal warmth he exuded to those who came to know and admired him. This is the genuine legacy he bequeathed to those of us he left behind. In a special way, I am privileged to be a grateful alumnus of Florida A&M University, a great institution of learning graced bountifully by his remarkable contributions, both on and off campus.

Mr. Speaker, it is my pleasure to rise today in honor of Gwendolyn E. Boyd, the National President of Delta Sigma Theta Sorority, Inc. for her service and dedication as a community leader and volunteer. The members of the Miami Alumnae Chapter of Delta Sigma Theta Sorority, Inc. will gather with Ms. Boyd on January 31, 2004 for the 91st anniversary of the founding of this honored sisterhood.

Ms. Boyd, a hardworking and motivated woman, is an inspiration and role model to all. She received her B.S. degree in Mathematics with a double minor in Physics and Music from Alabama State University. She thereafter pursued her Masters of Science degree at Yale University. Today, she is an engineer and the Assistant for Development Programs at the Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics Laboratory.

Committed to her work, Ms. Boyd nonetheless remains compassionate to the numerous community service organizations with which she is actively involved. She is a member of Leadership Washington, an organization committed to improving the quality of life in the Greater Washington Region and is actively involved with the Children's Research Institute of Children's National Medical Center. She is the founding chair of the Board of Directors of the National Center for Non-Profit Strategic Planning and Community Leadership and also served as President of the Board of Directors of United Way of the National Capital Area. A dynamo of a public servant, she also actively participates with The Links, Inc., the NAACP, the National Council of Negro Women and many other organizations.

Unselfish in her endeavors, Ms. Boyd can be found motivating others through inspirational speeches and workshops around the country. She routinely gives lectures on positive growth and the development of youth; conducts career development seminars; and often provides words of wisdom at commencement speeches to our future leaders.

It is no surprise to me that Ms. Boyd has been acknowledged and honored for her service and commitment on many occasions and by various organizations. I know that all my colleagues join with me in honoring her today and wishing her every success in the future.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to bring to the attention of my colleagues, and to condemn in the strongest possible terms, a Rockstar Inc. video game entitled ``Grand Theft Auto: Vice City.'' This game has no place as an amusement in this country because it purports to make ``fun'' using racist and stereotyped images of Haitians and Cubans.

This despicable video game portrays Haitians as ugly criminals and lower forms of human life who must be obliterated once and for all. In order to win the game, the player--an ex-convict--is hired to recover stolen drug money on the streets of Miami. In his pursuit, he faces police officers and gangsters from Cuba and Haiti. Armed with a machete, knife, gun and baseball bat, the game urges players to ``kill the Haitians'' and ``kill the Cubans.''

What makes this matter even more offensive is that, by its immigration policies and pronouncements, the Bush Administration fosters a view of Haitian asylum seekers as potential terrorists rather than bona-fide refugees.

It is hard to see how such contemptible acts could be seen as ``fun,'' for this video game is scandalous and hateful and deeply offensive to Haitian and Cuban Americans and every decent American concerned about racism and violence in this country.

I ask this Congress and all people of goodwill to join me in condemning this hateful video game and to do everything possible to increase public knowledge of it and thereby to limit its acceptance in both domestic and foreign markets.

Mr. Speaker, I represent the largest Haitian constituency in the United States, and this video game is demeaning, demoralizing and deeply hurtful to hundreds of thousands of hard-working, law-abiding Haitian Americans and their families in South Florida and in this country. It does not take much to imagine the destructive impact that the repulsive images of this game would have on youngsters, whether they are Haitian-American, Cuban-American, or not.

This video game symbolizes the very lowest of our nation's values. It is deeply disturbing, not only that the manufacturer would seek to profit by the sales of this game, but that people would buy it. I urge all my colleagues, and every American, to take a firm stand against such commercial trash and to rededicate ourselves to the principles of freedom and liberty that such hatred cannot destroy.

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank my colleagues from Florida, Mr. Putnam and Mr. Shaw, for arranging this special order this evening.

Trade is a crucially important issue in Florida. With our great seaports and airports and our global position as the crossroads between North America and Central and South America and the Caribbean, Florida is well positioned to benefit from trade with our neighbors. However, in order for that trade to benefit Floridians, to create new jobs and new businesses and to promote the growth of existing enterprises, it must be conducted fairly.

One of Florida's signature industries is citrus. Citrus is Florida's second largest industry, responsible for generating over $9 billion for the economy and providing nearly 90,000 people with jobs. The industry also accounts for roughly $1 billion in revenue for the State and local governments. Not only is this industry responsible for giving jobs to tens of thousands of Floridians, it also helps to fund our public hospitals and schools, and our fire and police services.

But all is not well with Florida's citrus industry--primarily because of the impact of imports--and I urge the Bush administration to remember this fact when it considers requests to reduce or eliminate the current tariff on imported citrus juices during the Free Trade Area of the Americas negotiations this weekend or any other negotiations.

There are only two regions in the world that produce a substantial quantity of orange juice: Brazil and the United States. There are also only two regions of the world that consume substantial amounts of orange juice: the United States and the European Union. Brazil already has a virtual monopoly on the EU orange juice market, while Florida's growers sell their product almost entirely in the United States.

There is considerable evidence that the current tariff on imported juices encourages competition among producers and allows Florida's growers to compete on a level playing field. Florida's 12,000 growers, most of whom operate small family-owned operations, are the most efficient and environmentally responsible in the world. Without the tariff, however, Florida's growers cannot compete against the four dominant processors in Brazil, who take advantage of cheap labor and weak environmental laws at the expense of Florida's growers.

The industry also provides many environmental benefits to the State of Florida and its citizens. A collapse of the industry would lead, perhaps inevitably, to more development and more congestion--and also to more air and water pollution and toxins in the environment. I understand that a collapse of the citrus industry would also threaten over 150 different species with extinction.

Today, Florida's citrus industry is already suffering tremendously because of uncertainty over the future of the tariff. The price of citrus is declining. Growers are selling land because they know they will have no future if the tariff is reduced or eliminated. In addition, the huge processors in Brazil are taking steps to exploit any reduction in the tariff by acquiring more groves in Brazil to enable them to dramatically increase production and overwhelm the U.S. market. It would be hard for any industry to survive, and impossible to prosper, in this environment.

The industry cannot afford to wait 6 more months or a year for the Bush administration to make a decision. This is why I urge the Bush administration to state clearly this week its final decision on this matter--to put an end to this uncertainty that is so seriously harming Florida's citrus industry.

Mr. Speaker, Florida's citrus industry--unlike almost all other agricultural commodities--receives no U.S. subsidies. American taxpayer money does not subsidize this industry. The tariff is the industry's only lifeline.

Again, I urge the administration to consider the ramifications of reducing or eliminating the tariff, which would discourage greater competition and would enable Brazil to secure a global monopoly over the orange juice market.