Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, I was absent on Monday July 17, 2006 due to unavoidable circumstances in my Congressional District. Had I been present, I would have voted: ``yea'' to H.R. 3085--To amend the National Trails System Act to update the feasibility and suitability study originally prepared for the Trail of Tears National Historic Trail and provide for the inclusion of new trail segments, land components, and campgrounds associated with that trail, and for other purposes; ``yea'' to H.R. 3496--National Capital Transportation Amendments Act of 2005 and ``yea'' to H.R. 3729--Federal Judiciary Emergency Tolling Act of 2005.

Mr. Speaker, the Voting Rights Act is just one great step forward toward the movement of our Nation toward a more perfect Union. This is a creation of Lyndon Johnson, a politician, a President of unparalleled practical genius, who fashioned this to bring to the table those people who had serious grievances.

We gave the world constitutional democracy. It is a great leap forward for civilization. We can continue to lead civilization by improving on this model.

Half the democracies of the world, by the way, right now, do have provisions in their constitutions for representation of minorities. We have spent $9 billion, at least $9 billion, some of you can correct me if it is more, $9 billion in Kosovo, and Kosovo is still struggling under a mandate to provide a constitution which guarantees representation to the minority Serbs. Albanians are the majority there now, and the Serbs need to be represented.

In Iran, they have a provision which allows for the representation of Armenians and Jews. In Burundi, the Tutsi minority is guaranteed 40 percent of the seats in parliament. Across the world, these provisions are made because they are practical provisions. They bring people to the table and involve them in the process.

The only way we are going to solve the problem in Iraq is to make certain we have something similar to a Voting Rights Act to guarantee representation for all the minorities in Iraq.

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the gentlelady for yielding. I am here to speak on the rule, because I know that there will be a great deal of pressure to fill up the agenda for speakers on the bill itself.

I am here to record what I call a fury footnote, F-U-R-Y. I am furious at the kind of Neanderthal, backward, primitive thinking reflected in the bill in one statement. There is one section of the bill which says, ``National Defense Education Act, $10 million.'' Ten million dollars, and they call it a National Defense Education Act; $10 million for scholarships for science and engineering students.

Here is a report that recently came out. I don't know whether it went to all of the offices of all of the Members of Congress. Maybe because I am on the Education and Workforce Committee, I got five copies. It is called ``Rising Above the Gathering Storm.''

The report is published by the National Academy of Sciences, the National Academy of Engineering and the Institute of Medicine.

The impetus for this book, the oversight for this book, the push for this book came from our own STEM Caucus, Senate and House Members together pushing to get a realistic evaluation of where we are in terms of education for engineering and science in order to keep our economic advantage in the world and remain leaders, and that means leaders also in the area of the military as well.

The National Defense Education Act was one of the first efforts of that kind put forth by the government in 1957 and 1958 as a result of the reaction to Sputnik. Some of you are not old enough to remember Sputnik. When the Russians put Sputnik up, it said they had a rocket capability which frightened us, because that rocket capability that you had to have to go into the upper atmosphere was enough, of course, for an intercontinental ballistic missile also. So we got busy, and the National Defense Education Act followed that.

The National Defense Education Act in 1958 dollars was given about half a billion dollars, $500 million. It did not limit itself to a few scholarships to science and engineering students. It provided money for laboratories in high schools, money for libraries, purchase of science books. It went right across the board, in 1958, when we were really not into large amounts of expenditures for domestic programs.

What flowed from the National Defense Education Act was later on the Elementary and Secondary Education Act and the Higher Education Assistance Act which took its place, but still there is a deficit.

The deficit was indicated when I first came to Congress by a report called ``A Nation at Risk.'' A Nation at Risk was commissioned by President Ronald Reagan. ``A Nation at Risk'' made the same recommendations being made now all these years later in this ``Rising Above the Gathering Storm.''

The fact that there are people in the Defense Department who see $10 million as being significant, that there are people on the Appropriations Committee, the fact that we have that kind of backward, Neanderthal, primitive thinking about education and its role in our military defense is appalling.

I suppose I should not be furious and angry, I should be weeping that such a great Nation with such great minds would place education on such a low level.

We need to go across the board, and we need to appropriate billions for a new National Defense Education Act or

a National Homeland Security Mobilization Act, which reaches beyond just the military and understands that in addition to scientists, we need some people who know how to interpret the Arabic language. We need some people who know how to interpret other Middle Eastern languages, we need people who understand cultures that we are at war with.

Mr. Speaker, I think we ought to pause and take a hard look at our conception of what it means to defend our country in terms of education.

Mr. Speaker, power sharing and the Voting Rights Act will be on the agenda tomorrow. The United States Voting Rights Act, launched and guided by President Lyndon Johnson, was a front line cutting-edge innovation in constitutional democratic government. The turmoil and conflict of the civil rights struggle was brought to a high level, successful, peaceful conclusion with the passage of the Voting Rights Act.

We could hold up to the world a new refinement in democratic governance. That was in 1967. Today in 2006 we should take note of the fact that the Government of Norway has established a new frontline for democratic inclusiveness. Last January Norway passed a law mandating that 40 percent of the board members of all major corporations, private and public, must be women. This is a far-reaching and bold action; however, it reflects a mushrooming trend toward the goal of a fair and productive inclusiveness of all citizens in vital decision-making processes. Norway is at one extreme, but there is a great deal between Norway and our Voting Rights Act.

As we consider reauthorization of the Voting Rights Act, we should look beyond our borders. A serious examination of the struggle for democracy across the globe reveals that our American constitutional democracy is not the final realization of the most perfect governance structure that can be achieved. In fact, it may be that our American democracy is now being eclipsed by more a sophisticated set of mutations of constitutional democracy. Our way, born in 1776, may within a few decades appear to be a crude, outdated approach to the rule of law with justice for all.

As of this date, one-third of the world's democratic governments have some form of mandates or incentives for promoting ethnic minority or gender representation. Norway, with its 40 percent mandate for female board representation on private company boards, may be way out there ahead of other governments; nevertheless, many others recognize the need to move out beyond the slow processes of tradition and the prevailing power arrangements.

Denmark and Germany elect minorities in their respective countries into regional and national Parliaments. In Iran ethnic minorities such as Armenians and Jews have seats allocated for them in Parliament. The Pakistan Government has provided for special representation for minorities and women in Parliament. Burundi guarantees 40 percent of the Parliament and Cabinet positions to the Tutsi minority and half the positions in the army.

Advised by the United Nations, the Kosovo Parliament will be chosen by direct elections with special arrangements for Serb and other minority groups to be represented. Billions of United States dollars have been spent in Kosovo to achieve this outcome.

In Iraq the United States advisers are insisting on an all-inclusive government with the dominant majority Shiites sharing power with the minority groups such as the Sunnis and the Kurds.

Our Voting Rights Act, which we are about to renew and extend, is very much in harmony with an escalating international consensus which emphasizes the fact that power sharing promotes good government and peace. Shortsighted efforts to dilute the provisions of the Voting Rights Act must be defeated. This act goes as far as our Constitution will allow us in order to create opportunities for minority representation. However, beyond the law the time has come for each of the political parties to adopt platforms and positions which further enhance the highly desirable goal of power sharing. Beyond opportunity for minority representation, the Republican Party and the Democratic Party should assume positions and take actions to discourage and remove any roadblocks to the greatest possible amounts of power sharing at all levels of government.

There is bipartisan agreement that Kosovo, Rwanda, and Iraq must have power sharing. At home we can offer no less to our minorities. The Voting Rights Act is our successful weapon of mass construction, mass democratic construction. We must support the renewal of the Voting Rights Act.

Mr. Speaker, the fact that we have not had a minimum wage increase over such a long period of time, over $5.15 an hour, when we should be at $9 an hour, is reflective of the fact that our government, the decision-makers, this Congress, this administration are hostile towards poor people. We are hostile towards poor people. We have contempt for poor people.

I have reams of statistics here which show the validity of increasing the minimum wage and how we are holding people in poverty, but I don't want to address those statistics except to say just one blunt fact: minimum-wage employees, working 40 hours a week, 52 weeks a year, earn $10,000. That is $10,700 per year. That is $6,000 below the Federal poverty guidelines of $16,600 for a family of three. If you work 40 hours a week, 52 weeks a year, you come in at that level.

Now, we have, as a government and as an administration, we have had Alan Greenspan for ages, under Democratic administrations and Republican administrations, Alan Greenspan has come to Congress several times and testified he doesn't believe in a minimum wage. We shouldn't have a minimum wage. He's a disciple of Ayn Rand, who says government should not get involved in anything except defense. Only defense.

Roll out the troops to defend the rich. Roll out the troops to defend our property. What happens is that the people who are from the working families, those that we have most contempt for and refuse to adjust our economic society so that they have a way to earn a decent living, those are the people who go off to fight. And I have statistics that in war after war, World Ward I, World War II, the Korean War, the Vietnam War, the largest number of the casualties came out of the big cities of America, the slums, the people who were poorest, the working families. The same thing is true in Iraq.

Let the rich go first in times of war. They are the ones that have the most to defend. Ayn Rand and Greenspan feel we should do nothing to help to force our government to protect the welfare of the poor. But those poor are to go off and defend the wealthy. The New York Stock Exchange has the most to lose if the government were to collapse. If we didn't have soldiers fighting and protecting the Nation, the rich and those who have contempt for the poor would have the most to lose.

So I want the moral issue here to come forward, and let us look at it in the face and let the American people out there ask their Congressman, ask their President, Why do you want to hold people in a state of near chattel slavery? Why are you looking at the rest of the world and saying, well, they have low wages and China is way down there and we have to compete with China. If you compete with China, you end up having prisoners, prisoners manufacturing goods, and prisoners will be the basic labor force. We don't want to go in that direction.

In America, everybody should have a chance to share in the prosperity that is possible here. Certainly those men and women who go off to fight our wars and who are very much a part of our society deserve to be recognized and protected and regulated, their economic lives, regulated in a way which gives them a chance to make it. All they want is a chance to survive and prosper like all other Americans. A minimum wage increase will allow us to do that.

Mr. Speaker, I am a member of the Out of Iraq Caucus, and I agree with most of what has been said.

I support the Murtha proposal for an immediate and orderly redeployment. There is one subject I would like to raise which has not been discussed very much here, however, and that is the role of the American oil barons who have contributed greatly to the colossal mess of the war in Iraq.

Our troops today are as good as they were when they were labeled the greatest generation and defeated Hitler. But in Iraq, today's counterparts of Eisenhower, Patton, Bradley, the Colin Powells, the John Murthas, they were not allowed to take charge. Lust for control of the oil made the oil barons push everyone capable of carrying out a reasonable destruction of Saddam Hussein aside. This administration encouraged the oil barons to overrule the military professionals.

Lust for oil is still the problem. Seldom discussed in America, but very much on the minds of the people of Iraq. We cannot succeed as long as the ordinary Iraqi people see us as oil thieves responsible for the terror and their day-to-day misery.

We went into Iraq fighting fanatics, fighting Saddam Hussein and his oligarchy of brutal, decadent killers. No great crowds greeted our troops with flowers. But there is good reason to believe that the masses of citizens were hoping for some real improvements. But we guarded only the oil wells, while the water systems and the electricity grids collapsed.

As the people observed our preoccupation with oil, the insurgency began to grow. The leadership of the oil barons could not run a country, and they could not manage an occupation.

Oil revenues must be addressed in order to regain the confidence of the Iraqi masses. We need a transparent, open, full discussion of what are the arrangements that have been proposed, what is being proposed or what contracts are already in place.

Chevron, BP, Exxon, they are there. Contracts have been written. Is there a committee in this House or a subcommittee that knows what kinds of contracts have been written? What will the Iraqi people have left after these contracts are executed? They were executed before the government was in place.

Oil is the greatest resource that Iraq has, of course. They are number four among the nations of the world. To what degree is Halliburton going to control the revenues as their payment for reconstruction of some of the oil wells? To what degree are the foreign oil companies going to control revenue because of their arrangements for the pipelines and the shipping and retail outlets? What is going to happen to the oil? These are the questions that the Iraqi people are asking. Everybody in every section of the country wants to know how are the oil revenues going to be distributed? If I live in a province where there is no oil, will my area benefit?

These questions need to be answered honestly. Congress must seize the initiative from the American oil barons and demand justice for the Iraqi citizens. The oil belongs to them.

We must win their trust and separate the masses of the Iraqi people from the fanatical murderers. Follow the logic of the Murtha resolution. Give the people control of their oil revenues and get out of Iraq. We can do that when we have the trust of the Iraqi people.

When the Iraqi people have their own revenues, they can equip their own police forces. They can take charge of their government in a competent way. They don't need us, and they will be less likely to join hands with the insurgents and protect the fanatical murderers that have now found greater receptivity in the population than ever before.

Get out of the Iraq. Give the people control of their oil revenues.

Mr. Speaker, the war in Iraq is a monster storm. It is a social tsunami battering the positive components of our potentially great society. The billions of dollars being poured into this war could solve dozens of major catastrophic problems that are facing our Nation.

Recently, a new report was released, authored partially by our own Science Committee, which said that we have a dangerously inadequate education system. When I came to Congress in 1983, Ronald Reagan was saying the same thing. He had a commission which came out with a report that said, our Nation is at risk. We still have not done anything of great substance to deal with the problems that were highlighted. We still have not appropriated the money to build laboratories in public schools, junior high schools and high schools. We still don't have adequate libraries. We still don't have the money which pays salaries which would produce the science teachers that are necessary.

We have a crisis in health care. Forty million people are not covered at all and there are many others who are inadequately covered. We have falling standards of living with gross inequities. The assets that reflect wealth among black Americans total less than $20,000 per family. $120,000 per family for white Americans. Both standards are falling, not climbing.

I am a member of the Out of Iraq Caucus. I welcome the opportunity tomorrow to begin a debate which would at least allow us to discuss in an open forum the problems we are facing. Any discussion is important because this is such an important problem. We have employment problems that are mushrooming, we have all kinds of things that should be discussed, and now is the time for all Americans to come forward and make their contribution toward a solution known.

Common sense is welcome. It might shed a lot of light on some of the problems and offer some real solutions. Scientific expertise is welcomed. Mother wit. We need the fresh visions of the young and we need the seasoned wisdom of the elders. Everything we can do is needed in order to solve these problems. Let every question be set forth. Let every possible solution be stated. We Americans are faced with a problem which is far more complex than the inner workings of a nuclear bomb, I assure you. The present explorations of the vast universe by astrophysicists are not as challenging as the need for a meaningful solution to this war blunder in Iraq.

There are many possible questions and solutions that I would urge should be placed on the agenda for discussion. However, I want to focus on just two of them tonight. One is the distribution of oil revenues. The other is the arrangements for the sharing of power among the majority Shiites and the minorities, mainly the Sunnis and the Kurds.

Oil revenues. We need a transparent, open, full discussion of what are the arrangements that have been proposed, or are being proposed, or are already in place for the distribution of the oil revenues from the oil in the ground in Iraq. Oil is their greatest resource. They have one of the greatest resources in the world. They are number three or number four among the nations producing oil. Yet there is very little discussion about what we are doing. To what degree is Halliburton going to control the revenues as their payment for the reconstruction that they have done of some of the oil wells? To what degree are the oil companies going to control revenue because of their arrangements for the pipelines and the shipping and the retail outlets in various countries? What is going to happen to the oil? These are questions that are being asked by the people of Iraq, I assure you. These are questions that are stumbling blocks, I assure you, in the completion of a government. Everybody in every section of the country wants to know how the oil revenues are going to be distributed. If I live in a province where there is no oil, will my area benefit? These things need to be dealt with.

Sharing power relates closely to this. We need to let them know they all share power. Regardless of whether they are Sunnis or Kurds or some other minority, the majority Shiites need to share power in some way.

We have a problem with sharing power across the world. There are many nations now struggling with this problem, so we should bring to bear all of our possible solutions and try to help resolve the problems in Iraq. We need the most creative approaches possible for power sharing which gives all Iraqis a stake in their new democracy. Ending the war in Iraq, ending the massive death and injuries, ending the waste of billions of dollars must be our number one agenda. These problems must be solved. We must pass and implement the Murtha resolution now. We must bring the troops home now.

Mr. Speaker, 33 underground coal miners have already been killed on the job so far this year, starting with the Sago mine disaster right after New Year's day. We do these fallen mineworkers as well as their surviving family members and friends a serious disservice by limiting debate on this bill to 40 minutes and barring any strengthening amendments. These hard-working men, their families and wider communities of friends and neighbors deserve far better treatment on the floor of the U.S. House. Unless we take legislative action that would prevent future mine disasters like those that occurred at Sago, Aracoma Alma, Darby and elsewhere this year, we are hoping rhetoric will mask our failure to deliver significant protections to hard- working mineworkers Nation-wide.

At the Sago mine disaster, a methane gas explosion killed one mineworker and trapped 12 others. It took 40 hours for rescuers to reach those trapped underground and by the time they did, 11 miners had died of carbon monoxide poisoning. The sole survivor at Sago, Randal McCloy, has since reported that at least four of the air-packs designed to provide an hour's worth of breathable air to the miners malfunctioned. Moreover, the Sago miners lacked one-way text messaging and tracking devices--devices that are currently used in mines throughout Australia, Chile, China and South Africa. Those devices would have saved lives at Sago.

To make certain that the Sago tragedy is never repeated in this country, I support wholeheartedly three simple amendments to this bill as proposed by Representative Miller. They would equire:

At least 48 hours of emergency air for each mineworker;

Finalized plans within 15 months for adding lifesaving communications and tracking equipment; and

Federal MSHA regularly conducted random field tests of airpacks, self contained self rescuers, to ensure they are in working order.

In closing, Mr. Speaker, I wish to close with the question posed by the AFL-CIO about these three amendments in their letter to Congress on mine safety: ``Frankly, we do not understand why anybody would oppose such common sense measures.''

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that I assume the time of Mr. Pallone of New Jersey.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the Speaker for recognizing me at the time shortly after my colleague Lynn Woolsey has spoken, because I rise to salute Lynn Woolsey as a great point of inspiration to her colleagues and for all Americans who are fighting to end the deadly, wasteful war in Iraq.

I rise at this particular time because yesterday was Primary Day in California, and Congresswoman Woolsey had a challenge. I do not think that challenge was unrelated to her position on the war in Iraq. I think the challenge was a frontal attack on the majority of Americans who now disapprove of this administration's actions in Iraq. I think that the candidacy of the opposition was a not-very-subtle attempt to intimidate the leading spokesperson of the peace movement. I think it was a blatant effort to send a message.

Congresswoman Woolsey is supported, fortunately, by the constituents in her district. Everybody knows that. Congresswoman Woolsey has been here for 14 years. She has a great record in areas ranging from child care to policies related to the war in Iraq.

I want to congratulate her on a stunning, decisive victory. There was never any doubt of her winning, but she swept the field, I think with almost a two-to-one vote.

The voters sent a message to all those who would challenge her and try to silence her that they care about what is happening in the world, they care about what is happening in Iraq. They are the majority, just as right now the majority of the people in America are against the war in Iraq. Her wide margin reaffirms support for her positions.

No one has spoken more passionately and consistently against the war on this floor than Lynn Woolsey. I think she has a record of floor speeches, 5-minute speeches. About 149 5-minute speeches have been made against the war in Iraq.

The bold move of the war supporters to go after her, to get newspapers to call her a radical and clamor for a more moderate voice, all of these things did not happen by accident. I think it was a plot. In her 14 years, Lynn Woolsey has earned the right not to be challenged. She has a unique point of view based on her unique set of experiences. I serve with her on the Education Committee. There is much to be discussed about Iraq and the war in Iraq, and not enough time is ever allowed to do it. I think she has chosen the only avenue possible.

We have not discussed very important matters, like the oil contracts. What is happening with the plan to dispense the oil in Iraq after the U.S. leaves? Nobody ever talks about that. How much of the oil revenue will flow to American corporations for technical assistance and rebuilding versus to the Iraqi people?

Underlying the problem of getting the settlement, the question is never discussed. Power sharing is discussed. Getting the government set up is discussed.

Senator Biden was ridiculed for saying you ought to take Iraq and split it up into three parts, one for Sunnis, one for the Shiites and one for the Kurds. I do not think that general proposal is all he meant, but power sharing is a major issue. Why can't we discuss power sharing. We have the Voting Rights Act here in America, one of the best examples of power sharing in the world.

Other nations are looking at us and trying to find out how do you have a minority represented when the majority is a very different group. How can you get the minority to the table? There are ways to do that, and power-sharing ought to be discussed openly. Maybe they need a Voting Rights Act in Iraq. That could be put on the table as part of the solution to guarantee to the Sunnis and that Kurds that despite the Shiites being in the majority, they will always have a place at the table.

As far as orderly withdrawal of the troops, I think Congressman Murtha, an expert if there ever was one, a man who knows the military very well, has proposed a very conservative but effective way to draw down the troops. Nobody knows better than Congressman Murtha what is happening in that war. He goes frequently to visit the wounded at Walter Reed Hospital and at the Naval Hospital. He knows the dilemma of the men on the ground, the troops there. He knows and that is why he spoke out so forcefully about the situation in Haditha. He knows that under

pressure, people will break. The best Marines and the best Army people and the best Navy people will break under pressure in a war that they think is useless.

We might have had the favor of the Iraqi people when we went in there, we might have had some flag waving and had some people that appreciated us, but we took away their electricity, we took away their water, and we took away their safety so there is a lot to be discussed and we should all value Lynn Woolsey for the fact that she comes frequently to discuss Iraq on this floor and does a great service for the Iraq people, as well as for the Members of this House.

Mr. Speaker, I was absent on Monday, May 22, 2006, due to unavoidable circumstances in my congressional district. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yea'' to S. 1235--The Veteran's Benefits Improvement Act of 2005 and ``yea'' to H.R. 3858--The Pets Evacuation and Transportation Standards Act of 2005.

Mr. Chairman, the CBC budget continues to clearly support education and job training as its number one priority. Over a 5-year period, $80 billion in increased funding is recommended.

Everybody in Washington talks about the dangerous deficiencies in American education when compared with other industrialized nations and China. Twenty-three years ago when I came here, ``A Nation At Risk'' was the report commissioned by President Reagan, and it said all the same things about how deficient our education system was. Several recent studies also indicate these same kinds of deficiencies in math and science and other areas. Oprah Winfrey and Bill and Melinda Gates have taken this alarm to a mass audience.

The whining and complaining about education goes on and on here in Washington, but nobody wants to appropriate any money except the CBC.

Mr. Speaker, the future prosperity and security of our Nation is clearly dependent on our human resources, our brain power; and that brain power, large parts of it are in our inner cities' communities, and they need more funding for education. I urge all Members to vote for this CBC budget as the budget that deals with the priority of education.

Mr. Speaker, the African slave trade stands out in the annals of world history as one of the greatest crimes ever committed against humanity. It is important that we institutionalize every possible reminder of this horrible chapter in our civilization.

I want to take this opportunity to commend the French Republic and the work of Madame Christiane Taubira for setting May 10th as an annual national day in France to remember its role in slavery and the slave trade.

On the afternoon of the 23rd of May 1848, Africans and their New World descendants enslaved by France were set free. That was 45 years after the Louisiana Purchase of 1803, when France sold most of its territory in the Americas to the fledgling USA, and 15 years before President Abraham Lincoln's Emancipation Proclamation of 1863.

Madame Christiane Taubira is a member of the French parliament, representing her native Guiana in South America. She is also an economist. On May 10th, 2001 Madame Taubira successfully proposed French legislation that thereafter declared slavery a crime against humanity, making France the first country in the world to make this declaration.

Madame Taubira's work in France complements the work of Professor Gwendolyn Midlo Hall here in the United States. Not only is Dr. Hall a distinguished historian, she is also a New Orleans, Louisiana native.

Hurricane Katrina's devastation in the Gulf Coast region has given an urgency and importance to the work of both Professor Hall and Madame Taubira.

Our active understanding and appreciation of the French and American culture and history of New Orleans and Louisiana, as part of the Gulf Coast, will help the people of the region as they restore and rebuild their community over the coming months, years and decades. We cannot honor a unique community and its people without honoring its history that has grown over four centuries from both French and American roots.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to claim the Special Order time of the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Brown).

Mr. Speaker, Roger Toussaint, the president of Local 100 of the Transport Workers Union, is in jail in New York City tonight. Toussaint's crime is that he took a stand against New York Governor Pataki's sneak attack on public employee pension benefits. When the Governor's puppet appointees on the New York Metropolitan Transport Authority Board had already reached agreement on all other items during labor contract negotiations, the Governor ordered that a cut in pension benefits be added as a new demand. Although it was a cut proposed for the future employees, Roger Toussaint said, ``No. I will not be a party to an agreement that sells out the unborn.''

Roger Toussaint would not allow the Governor to set a precedent for all future State, city, county, and later on it would spill over to Federal employees, and they would have shoved in their face at the bargaining table this precedent of having cut public employee pension benefits. A domino effect would roll right across the entire Nation, and no public employee pension benefits would be safe. ``Strike'' was the rallying cry at that moment, and that rallying cry deserves the support of all working families across the Nation.

The private sector, the corporate butchers, have been carving up private employee pension benefit funds for some years now. Indeed, those of us who serve on the Education and Workforce Committee know that there is an impending pension bankruptcy crisis which may produce shock waves similar to the savings and loan scandal. Private pension benefits for workers we know are endangered, but we have all assumed repeatedly that pensions for public employees are safe, they are secure.

Roger Toussaint's confrontation with the Metropolitan Transit Authority dramatically exposes the fact that public employee pension benefits are also

in danger. Governors, mayors, and legislative bodies can carve up pension benefits even faster than the private sector if working families and their representatives do not remain vigilant and stand up against these attempts.

Ten days in jail they have ordered for Roger Toussaint. Two and a half million dollars they have fined the TW Local 100 organization. Dues check-off privileges have been taken away. The Governor and his MTA puppet board are trying to destroy the union that stood up and exposed the plot to swindle the workers out of their pension benefits. They want to destroy Roger Toussaint, the labor rebel. They want to smother the union rebellion.

Roger Toussaint should not remain an unsung hero. Now is the time for all working families to come to the aid of an heroic labor leader. Listen to the final words of Roger Toussaint at the door of the jail: ``I stand here today because a judge has found me guilty of contempt of court. The truth of the matter is I have nothing but contempt for a system that gives employers free rein to abuse workers.''

Now is the time for all labor organizations across the country to come to the aid of TW and Roger Toussaint in New York.

Mr. Speaker, on Friday, April 7, 2006, the University of Alabama School of Library and Information Studies and the University Libraries will conduct a Library Services Act 50th Anniversary Program honoring Congressman Carl Elliott and Senator Lister Hill, two great legislators who were the first great federal advocates for the Library Services and the National Defense Education Acts. As the only Librarian who has ever served in the Congress I was honored to be invited to speak at this commemoration; however, the scheduled vote on the budget prevented me from attending. The following are a portion of

the remarks I prepared for that landmark occasion:

In his 2001 inaugural address President Bush left us with one profound image: the specter of an ``Angel in the Whirlwind'' guiding the fate of our nation. Democracy in America has survived and expanded despite the numerous whirlwinds and storms. At several critical periods our ship of state could have been blown off course and been wrecked on the rocks. Always in the past, the churning American political process has produced the leadership capable of conquering crises and opening new vistas.

Representative Carl Elliott and Senator Lister Hill were two leaders who opened new vistas. In the story of the making of America we can find many angels emerging from the whirlwind. Many of our greatest angels are unsung, unknown beyond a small circle. But the abundance of angels, ordinary and everywhere, has created the most fantastic nation on the face of the earth. Not from royal bloodlines or from pampered privileged classes but from the cradles in the tenements, from log cabins and shotgun shacks. Every citizen, all Americans are potential angels called by the voice of Thomas Jefferson to come forward and add your contribution to the ongoing miracle of America. Because we loudly assume that all persons are created equal we automatically break the chains of doubt and set our imaginations and spirits soaring to achieve at higher and higher levels, and to create new institutions.

Lister Hill refused to let his regional origins interfere with his national visions. Carl Elliott did not allow a lack of wealth and high- class status to limit his spirit and ambition. Both men focused intensely and accomplished missions that place them among the legions of great American angels.

Just as school systems for the masses never existed before they emerged in America, so it was with public libraries. Yes, from the time of ancient Egypt, Greece and Rome there were libraries, but always they were the closely guarded property of the rich and available only to the elite. From the embryo implanted by Benjamin Franklin to the urban facilities provided by the generosity of Andrew Carnegie to the legislation of enduring federal support for libraries the American angels were in motion.

To achieve the imprimatur of federal sponsorship was a life sustaining development for modem public libraries. Only a fellow legislator can imagine what Representative Elliott had to overcome to realize his dream. Politicians seldom dwell on systems and long-term goals that benefit citizens beyond their political district. Elliott was ridiculed as a man who was tinkering with the impossible. He was strongly advised to do what every other lawmaker was attempting. To get reelected and be celebrated back home, he was told to get himself an appropriation to build a bridge. Get something concrete to show off that could be dedicated with a ribbon cutting and marching bands. If Elliott had accepted that practical but mundane proposition, oh what a devastating gap there would have been in the progress of library service in America. Carl had to be the pitcher in the House of Representatives and Lister had to be the catcher in the Senate in order for the game of public library expansion to go forward.

Across the nation we can now boast of magnificent public libraries and library systems. The DNA of Elliott and Hill goes marching on. Other great library nurturing angels like Eileen Cooke of the ALA Washington Office boldly forged ahead in their spirit and played a major role in the legislation and administration of the E-Rate providing widespread utilization of computers and the Internet in libraries. A whole new dimension exciting the young and the old has been added to the information and education mission of public libraries.

As a philosophical descendant of Elliott and Hill; and a more immediate child of the LSCA I arrived in Congress determined to raise the profile of libraries of all kinds to a level where they could never be forgotten and neglected again. Certainly I have been frustrated that the higher Federal appropriations have not been gained which I think libraries deserve in order to relieve some of the funding burden on State and local governments. But basically I will be leaving the Congress after 24 years contented that most of my concerns have been fulfilled. There are now many legislative advocates for libraries and they exist in both parties, Republican and Democratic. In politics that pinnacle of bipartisan support is the ultimate goal. The fight is no longer for recognition and survival as a national priority. The fight is for growth and the expansion which will provide opportunities for libraries to meet the new emerging challenges of education located away from campuses and outside of classrooms.

Our libraries are indispensable institutions. President Clinton has described America as an indispensable nation. Carl Elliott and Lister Hill were indispensable great angels for this indispensable nation. Out of the limelight, with no headlines to encourage them they remained steadfast in their unglamorous mission. As early as 1919, the American Library Association was seeking federal support for libraries. But not until 1936 was there a small breakthrough which established the Library Services Division within the Office of Education. Through side doors such as the Tennessee Valley Authority and the WPA more federal support was garnered. But not until 1956 was the great breakthrough achieved; the Library Services Act was passed and later expanded in 1960. In the history of the House and the Senate there are few records of such longevity and perseverance in the unselfish pursuit of uplifting legislation.

The rock-solid basic principle pioneered by Carl Elliott and Lister Hill is the proposition that wealth, financial well being, should not be the deciding factor in determining who has access to information and knowledge. Elliott and Hill understood that the growth and development of the State and region economy were inextricably interwoven with the intellectual growth and development of ordinary residents of the State and region. While public libraries were only a small part of the overall education effort they were the institutions with the greatest cost-benefits ratio. Huge opportunities were provided for large numbers of persons on the roads to upward mobility at the lowest possible costs. Oh, yes the investment in libraries and education pays great dividends.

Long before the military leaders could comprehend it, Elliott and Hill understood that an educated populace was our nation's greatest asset for national security. From what was often labeled as an abstract dream of universal literacy reflected in their concern for rural libraries these two giant angels of American progress leaped to the hard-nosed preparations for a space age national defense system. The massive feats of science and engineering needed to develop the laser, satellites, spacecraft and rockets were made possible as a result of the initiatives of the National Defense Education Act. There is a clear connection between the vision and labor of Elliott and Hill and this nation's landing of a man on the moon.

America, not by accident, is the richest, most powerful nation that the world has ever known. In comparison the great Roman Empire was merely a village. America is great because the unsung heroes, the invisible angels are always at work carrying out the details that make our democracy a success.

There will be in America no aristocracy of the well informed. Know- how shall never be a rare or scarce commodity. The government shall encourage all persons to pursue their fullest development. Beyond universal access to information, libraries will provide assistance with knowledge creation and utilization. In the appreciation and the application of wisdom librarians will continue to play a vital role.

The vision and foresight of Carl Elliott and Lister Hill have been validated by time. Their concerns have become more relevant as we plunge further into the age of information. In America information will never become the weapon of elite dictatorships. Information, knowledge and the records of wisdom must be permanently supplied to the citizens. In many forms this library mission must carry on to maintain the land of the free, home of the brave, and the nation of the most thoroughly informed who are capable of that continuing oversight and vigilance necessary to guarantee that our great democracy will long endure.

Mr. Speaker, on April 1, 2006 there will be a march with world significance in the battered city of New Orleans. Thousands of marchers from all over the Nation will assemble to force a laser beam of conscience to focus on the horror of ethnic cleansing now underway in that region. While it is true that Hurricane Katrina was an act of God and the collapse of the levees was an accident resulting from years of Federal underfunding, incompetence and local corruption, some have charged, and I agree, that the present blunders and stagnation in the recovery and rebuilding operation is the result of an ``ethnic cleansing mindset.'' The plot you will find nowhere on paper or in any set of email messages; however, there is an understanding within a powerful ``government-real estate complex'' that African Americans who have been displaced by the ravages of Katrina should not be encouraged to return. This unwritten plot begins in the White House where chief political strategists have pinpointed the obvious fact that without the Black voters of New Orleans, Louisiana will become a permanent Republican ``red'' state.

The April 1st march is designed to confront this bold ethnic cleansing by planned neglect and abandonment. The march will also dramatically highlight the overarching racist mindset that nurtures the ethnic cleansing process. On several different occasions, during the early flooding in New Orleans armed law enforcement officers blocked the paths of fleeing Black evacuees and forced them back toward the murderous flood waters.

Waving and firing their shotguns uniformed officers of the law blocked evacuees attempting to escape the floods by crossing the Crescent City Connection Bridge. High-level elected officials later condoned this behavior by their police. These inhumane, unspeakable actions combined with the present planned ineptitude related to the rebuilding of the 9th ward and the refusal of support for evacuees who wish to return, have generated numerous angry voices, especially among the youth, in New Orleans and across the Nation. In the language of RAP poems, I have tried to translate and convey the message of three of these angry voices:

Angry Voice One: Nazis on the Bridges

Armed Nazis

On steel bridges

Blocked paths to

The highest driest ridges.

Each uniformed gangster

Had an official gun

Black fathers forced

To watch their

Flood soaked children run.

They drew a hard line

Between Black and White blood--

They drove the mothers

Back into the flood.

Nazi viruses

Never die

They don't even fade away,

When times are dry

They hide in bunkers

Hunkered down for a stormy day.

On the bridges

Satan in command

Devils rules the land

On the bridges

Judgment day

Blacks get back

Stay out of the way

Die out of sight

The waters will cover you

In the endless wet night.

Run to requisition

The tightest Nuremberg noposes

These Katrina crimes

Are war criminal abuses.

Angry Voice Two: They Are Coming for Our Homes

Wake up Black people

They're coming for our homes!

Monster Katrina

Has many national clones.

Wake up Black people

With confusion and neglect

They now wash us away

They hijack our property

For a tourist development day,

Donald Trump and Disney Ducks

Will have their powerful say;

People chocolate people

Your're not welcomed to stay

Our schools churches graveyards

Have all been hauled away.

Wake up Black people

They're coming for our homes!

Monster Katrina

Has many national clones.

Urban blight declassified

Diversity agenda mystified

Inner cities reoccupied

Suburban flight

Has suddenly died

City planners cried

Eminent domain

Brings savage pain

Ethnic cleansing

Income rinsing

Brokers bulldoze us out

Urban surfs

Have no financial clout

Wake up Black people!

Weak tribes will rot

Extinct among the stones

Monster Katrina

Has many national clones.

Wake up Black people!

They're coming for our homes.

Angry Voice Three: Blacks Need More Guns

Now hear this!

Soldiers in Iraq

Come home now

To kill racist snakes

Crawling on our backs

More guns are needed by Blacks.

To fight our way

Across blocked bridges

Blacks need more guns!

Never again

Will they drive us

Weeping back into the flood,

Next time before we drown

We'll spill lots of blood.

Blacks need more guns!

They halted all Blacks

Who came their way

They hoarded the flood

For their next rainy day.

To get gestapos off our back

Black soldiers in Iraq

Come home now

Blacks need more guns!

Soldiers come home

Storm the bridges

Nazis fire down

From high dry ridges.

No well regulated

Militias from the slums

Are here to march against

Official heartless bums.

Desperate Blacks are mandated

Now to bear arms

Shed the luxury

Of non-violent charms.

The NRA

Can save our day

The second amendment

Is the great American way.

Blacks need more guns!

It's us oh Lord

Black victims

Standing in the need of prayer.

If not the NRA Lord

Tell us who else is there?

The NRA

Is our salvation

Whom shall we fear?

When the next flood rises

On television

You will not be entertained

by even one tiny tear.

The second amendment

Is our road to rescue

Whom shall we fear?

Blacks need more guns!