Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, in March, we celebrated Women's History Month. We remembered those who have contributed to our progress, we recognized those who are changing our communities today, and we rededicated ourselves to improving the lives of women.

Women want what men want: a fair opportunity to succeed, a safe and prosperous America, good paying jobs, better access to health care, and the best possible education for our children. Women want a secure retirement, the freedom to make the most of our lives and to make our own choices, and the chance to shape the future of our Nation.

Yet in terms of policies to assist women, we are lagging behind. Half of those currently living in poverty are single mothers. More than 3.8 million women are looking for work. Women are still paid only 80 cents to a man's dollar. And the Republican controlled Congress and the Bush administration continue to wage an assault on our reproductive rights, believing they can make better choices than women and their doctors.

To open doors of opportunity for women, I am proud to support policies in Congress that promote equality such as the FAIRNESS Act, which protects workers from discrimination on the basis of race, age, disability, or gender. I have long been a strong supporter of legislation to demand equal pay for equal work. My colleagues and I support legislation to increase the minimum wage to help single mothers and working poor women provide adequately for themselves and their families.

In every field, we must and will be equal partners in determining the future. Women represent more than half the population and are among the most knowledgeable and important thinkers in every field of policy, from science to education to health care to national security.

Women in government have made great gains but still face continued challenges. When I was first elected to Congress in 1987, there were only 16 women in the entire House of Representatives and only 2 in the Senate. Today, there are 62 women in the House and 13 in the Senate.

However, of the nearly 12,000 Members who have served in Congress throughout history, only 209--less than 2 percent--have been women. From 1916, when Jeanette Rankin of Montana became the first woman elected to Congress, until I was elected Democratic Whip in 2001, no woman had ever served in the top Congressional leadership.

In March, it was my privilege as House Democratic Leader to honor three magnificent women: journalist Mary McGrory, the late Congresswoman Mary T. Norton and civil rights leader Dr. Dorothy Height.

On March 2, I hosted a reception for Mary McGrory, the pioneering reporter for the Washington Star and Washington Post who has delighted so many readers and inspired so many women. For more than 50 years, she has walked the halls of Congress, interviewing Members, covering Congressional proceedings, and providing a voice for progressive issues. First, as a reporter for the Washington Star and then with the Washington Post, she earned a reputation for her brilliant reporting and her ability to get to the heart of any debate. She also earned a Pulitzer Prize--the first to a woman for commentary--for her coverage of Watergate.

On March 18, several women Members gathered in my office to unveil a portrait of the late Congresswoman Mary Norton of New Jersey, who in 1924 became the first Democratic woman elected to the House. She was the first person in modern times to chair three major committees. A solid supporter of President Franklin Delano Roosevelt's New Deal, her finest hour may have been passage of the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938, while Chair

of the House Labor Committee. She was instrumental in raising the minimum wage from 40 cents to 75 cents per hour.

In a marvelous ceremony in the Rotunda of the Capitol on March 24, Dr. Dorothy Height received the Congressional Gold Medal, the most distinguished award bestowed by the U.S. Congress. The struggle for equality in America in the 20th century--for civil rights, for women's rights, for voting rights, for human rights--is the story of Dr. Height's life. At age 92, she remains a beacon to her own generation and generations to follow. Countless young people have been inspired by her idealism, strengthened by her courage, and guided by her faith. She has empowered these young people to make a difference by her own passion for justice.

It is a great honor to be the first woman to lead a party in the House of Representatives. When I was first elected to that position, we made history. Now we are making progress. As we celebrate the achievements of women throughout history and work toward progress of our own, we are inspired by the words of Eleanor Roosevelt: ``It's up to the women!''

Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman from South Carolina for yielding me this time and for his tremendous leadership in presenting to this House of Representatives, to this Congress, a budget that is values-based and that is fiscally sound. I join my colleague in commending the members of his committee and his staff for helping to put together this very, very important proposal to this House.

I also want to thank the members of the Black Caucus and Progressive Caucus for their very, very smart work that they did to bring a values- based budget to the floor, and the members of the Blue Dog Caucus for what they have done. Their tremendous leadership on fiscal soundness is something that is important to this Congress, important to our caucus, and important to our country. Thank you to the Blue Dogs for infusing fiscal soundness back into the Congress of the United States. It seems to be a priority of our colleagues on the other side of the aisle, who had been known as deficit hawks, but have become endangered species when it comes to that fact.

Mr. Chairman, this budget that we are talking about today should be a statement of our national values. Every year we say this on the floor. It should be a statement of our coming together to build a budget, a blueprint for the future on how we prepare a better future for our children by way of their education and access to health care, how it grows the economy to create jobs, how it protects our environment and, of course, provides for our national defense. And, today, that includes homeland security. But for the fourth time in 4 years, the Republicans in Congress and President Bush, indeed, have sought to pass a budget that is nothing less than an assault on our national values.

The American people expect and deserve, and the Democrats have proposed, a budget that reflects the urgent priorities of Americans' everyday needs. Good jobs, better access to health care, the best possible education for their children, a safe and clean environment, and a secure America. Instead, because of distorted Republican priorities and their reckless economic policies, we are considering a Republican budget here today that will have serious consequences for the American people. Instead of a blueprint of positive initiatives for the future, it is a blueprint for disaster.

The Republican economic record of the past 3 years is as shameful as it is clear. In 3 years, Republican economic policies have lost nearly 3 million jobs and added more than $3 trillion to the national debt. The gentleman from South Carolina has very eloquently and in a very detailed way talked about what has happened from surplus in the Clinton years to deficit in the

Bush years. Unbelievably, this budget continues that misguided course. It does not grow the economy.

The distinguished chairman of the Committee on the Budget talked about growth. It does not grow the economy to create jobs here at home or, in fact, to stop jobs from going overseas. It is a historic budget in that it has the largest budget deficit in history, $521 billion in this year alone. It fails to put our fiscal house in order by failing to reach balance.

And what is the impact of this budget deficit, in addition to mortgaging our children's future?

The National Association for Business Economics said that the main threat to the economy, the main threats to the economy are the soaring budget deficits and the sluggish job market, and the UCLA Andersen Forecast said job growth will not match labor force growth this year because new hiring will be constrained, because of weaker consumer spending and bulging government deficits. This lack of job growth and this deficit are related. Instead of being a statement of our values, as I have said before, this Republican budget is reckless and the consequences are severe.

But you be the judge.

On education, do you consider it a statement of your values to give tax cuts to people making over $1 million a year and cutting over $9 billion from No Child Left Behind? Is that a statement of our values in this Congress?

On health care, this budget takes away more than $1 billion from States' Children's Health Insurance Programs, from the SCHIP program over $1 billion, and cuts $2.2 billion from Medicare. Is it a statement of our values to give tax cuts, bigger tax cuts to people making over $1 million a year and increasing the number of uninsured in America with these cuts to more than 1.6 million in this year alone? I do not think so.

Is it a statement of your values to leave our veterans behind? And the military, the promises to leave no soldier behind on the battlefield, and when they come home we just leave our veterans behind?

So this is not enough to talk with sacrifice and valor and patriotism of our military and our veterans. We must not fail to meet their needs. So is it a statement of your values to give tax cuts to people making over $1 million a year and cutting $1.6 billion from veterans services, as this budget does?

The gentleman from South Carolina's (Mr. Spratt) budget does not do that. It rearranges the spending on defense in the budget to meet the needs of the veterans and the needs of their survivors. I thank the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Spratt) for his values-based budget.

On homeland security, I was absolutely, and I am rarely surprised, rarely surprised around here, but it was really astonishing to hear the distinguished chairman talking about the homeland security funding in this budget. This budget cuts $850 million from the already meager proposal that President Bush made in his budget. It cuts President Bush's budget on homeland security. Is that a statement of our values?

I thank the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Spratt) for adding $5 billion over and above what the President had in his budget to reverse some of the cuts in police and fire funding that we need to protect our homeland.

Mr. Chairman, some people were talking about music and words, and we have the words and they have the music and all the rest. There is a song, ``America The Beautiful,'' and there is a sentence that I find haunting and inspiring as a Member of Congress. It says, ``O beautiful for patriots' dreams that sees beyond the years.''

That is what our responsibility is here. We are supposed to be here to see beyond the years, to prepare a better future for our children; and, indeed, it is our patriotic duty to have a budget that is balanced and not again mortgaging their future, indebting them for generations to come. And it is our patriotic duty to have a budget that reflects our values, that we educate our children; indeed, nothing does more to grow the economy than that. It is our patriotic duty to provide for our children, their education, their health care, the economic security of their families, including the pension security of their grandparents, a safe environment for them to live and a secure America. But this budget does not do that. It is not beautiful for patriots' dreams.

The gentleman from South Carolina's (Mr. Spratt) budget is.

Led by the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Spratt), House Democrats offered a budget today that spoke to the American people's aspirations for good jobs, better access to health care, the best possible education for our children. The gentleman from South Carolina's (Mr. Spratt) budget rose to meet the challenge of homeland security, to really meet that challenge. And the Spratt budget would not add one penny to the deficit. It is fiscally sound and patriotic.

Mr. Chairman, the budget that the Republicans have before us does not have a values base. It does not have fiscal soundness, and it should not have your support.

I urge a ``no'' vote on the Republican budget.

Mr. Speaker, I rise to pay final tribute to civil rights leader and community activist Harold Yee, who passed away on February 5th in San Francisco. Harold was an extraordinary leader and visionary who empowered San Francisco's Asian American community to dramatically expand and solidify its economic and political strength.

Born in China in 1932, Harold immigrated to the United States in 1939 where he grew up in East Los Angeles. He received his bachelor's degree in pomology from UC Davis in 1956, and his master's degree in economics from UC Berkeley in 1961. Beginning as a researcher for the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, Harold discovered his passion for community development, eventually leaving the FDA in 1971 to found ASIAN, Inc.

Through ASIAN, Inc., Harold strengthened the San Francisco Asian American community economically, socially and politically. ASIAN, Inc. helped launch many minority-owned small businesses in San Francisco, trained young professionals for the rigors of running their own businesses, and encouraged the development of trade associations. Harold leaves a rich legacy, including more than 100 non-profit organizations and agencies.

Harold was a fierce advocate for the civil rights and equality of Asian Pacific Americans. He founded the Chinese American Voter Education Committee to increase political awareness and participation. His contributions to the Asian American Community and to the City of San Francisco are immeasurable.

Harold's boundless energy and enthusiasm for life were contagious. He was a mentor and a friend to countless people, who greatly benefited from his wisdom, support and friendship. It is with sadness and appreciation that I extend my deepest sympathies to his wife, Wilma, his daughter, Catherine, and his son, Robert. To his family and friends, thank you for allowing him to give his time to the community he loved.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the distinguished gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Murtha), the ranking member on the Committee on Appropriations Subcommittee on Defense for yielding. I thank him and commend him for his extraordinary leadership and support of our troops. When the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Murtha) speaks, we listen. And that is why I will be joining him in opposition to this resolution this evening.

Mr. Speaker, before I enter into my reasons why, I want to call to the attention of our colleagues a section of the San Francisco Chronicle that was published this Sunday: ``Portraits of Sacrifice.'' It has the face, the name, and the date of sacrifice of the 556 members of the U.S. Armed Forces as of last Thursday who had lost their lives in Iraq since the war began almost a year ago. Of course, sadly, since last Thursday, indeed, since last Sunday, that number has grown.

Mr. Speaker, I will include for the Record these names and dates of sacrifice and home towns.

Mr. Speaker, I ask my colleagues to join me in a moment of silence to honor the memory, the sacrifice, and the patriotism of these brave American troops.

Mr. Speaker, every one of us who serves in this body supports our troops. There is no question about that. We appreciate their valor, their patriotism, again, the sacrifice that they are willing to make for our country. When I have had the privilege of visiting them before the initiation of hostilities with the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Murtha) last year in Qatar, Turkey, and Kuwait, we promised those troops that they would have whatever they needed, that regardless of what we were on the resolution of going into the war, once we went into the war, once the President made that decision, we were one team, one fight.

And that is why it is so sad that today with this resolution to support the troops that we cannot be one team, one fight. Why was it so difficult for the Republicans to reach across the aisle, say to our troops that we could have come together as one team, one fight, in support of our troops?

Mr. Speaker, it is sad to say that more than 415 of our troops have died, over 415 of the 560-some have died since the President declared in early May the end of major combat with a sign saying ``Mission Accomplished'' behind him.

Perhaps some of those deaths could have been avoided if our troops had the equipment and the actionable intelligence to protect them, the force protection that they needed. But they did not.

I visited Iraq with the gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Skelton), the senior Democrat on the Committee on Armed Services, and, similar to the visit with the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Murtha), the troops greeted him with great appreciation for his service to our country.

Again, we promised them the equipment that they needed. And it is only recently, maybe just this week, that the troops have the Kevlar in their lining, in their flak jackets that they need. It has taken that long. And it would not have happened without the gentleman from Pennsylvania's (Mr. Murtha) insistence when the $87 billion request came to the floor, the second request for Iraq, that did not have the request for that equipment in it.

We all agree that our military conducted itself with great excellence. It performed its duties in a way that is worthy of commendation. However, the civilian preparation was not so good. Do not take my word for it. Take the word of General Zinni, who said the level of sacrifice of our troops was not met with the level of preparation for post-war Iraq.

Over 400 of our troops have died in the post-war phase.

This resolution that we have before us today is interesting in what it lacks. It lacks the recognition of the challenge that we face in Iraq. It is clearly an indication that the Republicans are in severe denial about Iraq. They are in denial as to why we went into Iraq, they are in denial as to what the conditions are that exist in Iraq right now, and they are denying in this resolution what our troops and those who have served in Iraq need.

There is such inconsistency this day that I must spend my time on this floor to point it out. There is so much I want to say about this resolution and about statements that have been made in this debate. But what I want to focus on are some of the inconsistencies of the Republicans. Because

while we have been debating here what would be the best resolution, bringing us together, of course, we do not have that opportunity, while the Republicans are proposing this resolution on the floor, they are dishonoring the troops in the Committee on the Budget. They are dishonoring the troops in the Committee on the Budget.

The Bush budget shortchanges American veterans. When he tells our brave troops serving in Iraq and Afghanistan in the State of the Union address that he will, quote, ``give you the resources you need,'' but then does not budget for them, his credibility gap grows and so does my colleagues'.

This budget refuses to end the disabled veterans tax. It does not end the survivors' benefit tax. It proposes new increases in the cost of veterans health care. This is what is going on on Capitol Hill today while we have this meager resolution to support the troops on the floor. It fails to provide meaningful investments in veterans' health care. The list goes on and on.

And the severe blow was that the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Edwards), the ranking member on the Subcommittee on Military Construction, offered a resolution to add $1.3 billion for veterans' health. And that was defeated along party lines. That would have been a way to honor our troops. Yes, indeed, it would have.

When I say that this resolution is in denial about why we went into the war, of course it mentions nothing about weapons of mass destruction, but it does mention that Saddam Hussein drained the Arab marsh, causing an ecological disaster. Did my colleagues realize that that was the reason that we went to war, the same folks who have rolled back 30 years of bipartisan environmental progress are declaring a cause of war, the draining of the marsh in Iraq? It was a terrible environmental disaster.

Nobody spoke about it at the time, but there is another swamp that must be drained and that is right here in Washington, DC, the swamp of special interest money, the swamp that says special interest money calls for giving tax cuts to people making over $1 million, not having $1 million, making over $1 million a year, give them that tax cut but do not provide for our troops and do not provide for our veterans. At the same time, we are giving money to Halliburton, who is ripping off the taxpayer while feeding the troops with overcharges.

Yes, there is a swamp that needs to be drained. It is right here in Washington, DC, and that would not be an environmental disaster.

Mr. Speaker, we did have an opportunity and we requested of the Committee on Rules that we be able to present a Democratic resolution. In fact, we had hoped it would be a bipartisan resolution, and it drew upon the expertise of so many; the leadership, the patriotism, the intellect, the integrity of so many of our Members.

The gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Murtha) and the gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Skelton), of course, called for us immediately to offer our condolences to the families of those who were killed in Iraq. That would have been a valuable addition to this resolution. It insisted that we give the troops the body armor, all of them, and the armored vehicles they need to keep them safe. Some of that has come to fruition because of the gentleman from Pennsylvania's (Mr. Murtha) work. Much of it is still not accomplished.

Under the gentlewoman from California's (Ms. Harman) leadership, we had in our resolution to immediately remedy the deficiencies in the intelligence on which our troops rely. Force protection saves lives. As a 10-year member of the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, I value that. It should be part of what we are advancing.

The gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Murtha) insisted that we honestly account for the cost of ongoing military operations in Iraq.

The gentleman from California (Mr. Lantos) insisted that we assemble a true international coalition to accomplish our mission.

The gentleman from Texas (Mr. Edwards) and the gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Skelton) demanded that we eliminate disparities in pay between our active duty military and the National Guard and reservists. We had that opportunity today, but you rejected it.

The gentleman from Texas (Mr. Edwards) again insisted that we provide for the health care and benefits our wounded servicemen and -women earned for when they come home.

Why could we not have come to the floor with a bipartisan resolution? Why could we not have been one team, one fight? I do not understand it. We all take our responsibility to provide for the common defense very, very seriously. The clear and present danger facing our country is terrorism. Our military and our Intelligence Community serve our country well. They protect us with their lives. We must support them with our actions, as well as our words.

Our military, we pledged to leave no soldier behind on the battlefield. We must leave no soldier or any veteran behind in our budget. Only then will we honor them in a manner worthy of their sacrifice.

The material I referred to previously I will insert in the Record at this point.

Name, Age, Branch, Hometown, State

Jay Thomas Aubin, 36, Marine Corps, Waterville, ME.

Ryan Anthony Beaupre, 30, Marine Corps, Bloomington, IL.

Therrel S. Childers, 30, Marine Corps, Harrison, MS.

Jose Gutierrez, 22, Marine Corps, Los Angeles, CA.

Brian Matthew Kennedy, 25, Marine Corps, Houston, TX.

Kendall Damon Waters-Bey, 29, Marine Corps, Baltimore, MD.

Thomas Mullen Adams, 27, Navy, La Mesa, CA.

Nicholas M. Hodson, 22, Marine Corps, Smithville, MO.

Eric James Orlowski, 25, Marine Corps, Buffalo, NY.

Christopher Scott Seifert, 27, Army, Morrisville, PA.

Brandon S. Tobler, 19, Army, Portland, OR.

Jamaal R. Addison, 22, Army, Roswell, GA.

Edward J. Anguiano, 24, Army, Brownsville, TX.

Michael E. Bitz, 31, Marine Corps, Oxnard, CA.

Brian Rory Buesing, 20, Marine Corps, Cedar Key, FL.

George E. Buggs, 31, Army, Barnwell, SC.

Tamario D. Burkett, 21, Marine Corps, Buffalo, NY.

Kemaphoom A. Chanawongse, 22, Marine Corps, Waterford, CT.

Donald J. Cline Jr., 21, Marine Corps, Sparks, NV.

Robert J. Dowdy, 38, Army, Cleveland, OH.

Ruben Estrella-Soto, 18, Army, El Paso, TX.

David K. Fribley, 26, Marine Corps, Cape Coral, FL.

Jose A. Garibay, 21, Marine Corps, Costa Mesa, CA.

Jonathan L. Gifford, 30, Marine Corps, Macon, IL.

Jorge A. Gonzalez, 20, Marine Corps, El Monte, CA.

Nolen R. Hutchings, 19, Marine Corps, Boiling Springs, SC.

Howard Johnson II, 21, Army, Mobile, AL.

Phillip A. Jordan, 42, Marine Corps, Brazoria, TX.

James M. Kiehl, 22, Army, Comfort, TX.

Johnny V. Mata, 35, Army, Amarillo, TX.

Patrick R. Nixon, 21, Marine Corps, Nashville, TN.

Lori Ann Piestewa, 23, Army, Tuba, AZ.

Frederick E. Pokorney Jr., 31, Marine Corps, Tonopah, NV.

Brendon C. Reiss, 23, Marine Corps, Casper, WY.

Randal Kent Rosacker, 21, Marine Corps, San Diego, CA.

Brandon U. Sloan, 19, Army, Warrensville Heights, OH.

Thomas J. Slocum, 22, Marine Corps, Thornton, CO.

Donald R. Walters, 33, Army, Kansas City, MO.

Michael J. Williams, 31, Marine Corps, Yuma, AZ.

Thomas A. Blair, 24, Marine Corps, Broken Arrow, OK.

Evan T. James, 20, Marine Corps, LaHarpe, IL.

Braedley S. Korthaus, 28, Marine Corps, Scott, IA.

Gregory P. Sanders, 19, Army, Hobart, IN.

Francisco A. Martinez Flores, 21, Marine Corps, Los

Angeles, CA.

Donald C. May Jr., 31, Marine Corps, Richmond, VA.

Patrick T. O'Day, 20, Marine Corps, Santa Rosa, CA.

Gregory Stone, 40, Air Force, Boise, ID.

Michael Vann Johnson Jr., 25, Navy, Little Rock, AR.

Kevin G. Nave, 36, Marine Corps, Union Lake, MI.

Joseph Menusa, 33, Marine Corps, San Jose, CA.

Jesus A. Suarez Del Solar, 20, Marine Corps, Escondido, CA.

Fernando Padilla-Ramirez, 26, Marine Corps, San Luis, AZ.

Robert M. Rodriguez, 21, Marine Corps, Queens, NY.

Roderic A. Solomon, 32, Army, Fayetteville, NC.

James W. Cawley, 41, Marine Corps, Roy, UT.

Michael E. Curtin, 23, Army, Howell, NJ.

Diego F. Rincon, 19, Army, Conyers, GA.

Michael Russell Creighton Weldon, 20, Army, Palm Bay, FL.

William W. White, 24, Marine Corps, Brooklyn, NY.

Eugene Williams, 24, Army, Highland, NY.

Aaron J. Contreras, 31, Marine Corps, Sherwood, OR.

Michael V. Lalush, 23, Marine Corps, Troutville, VA.

Brian D. McGinnis, 23, Marine Corps, St. George, DE.

William A. Jeffries, 39, Army, Evansville, IN.

Brandon J. Rowe, 20, Army, Roscoe, IL.

Jacob L. Butler, 24, Army, Wellsville, KS.

Joseph B. Maglione, 22, Marine Corps, Landsdale, PA.

James F. Adamouski, 29, Army, Springfield, VA.

Brian E. Anderson, 26, Marine Corps, Durham, NC.

Mathew G. Boule, 22, Army, Dracut, MS.

George A. Fernandez, 36, Army, El Paso, TX.

Christian D. Gurtner, 19, Marine Corps, Ohio City, OH.

Erik A. Halvorsen, 40, Army, Bennington, VT.

Scott Jamar, 32, Army, Granbury, TX.

Michael F. Pedersen, 26, Army, Flint, MI.

Eric A. Smith, 41, Army, n/a, CA.

Nathan D. White, 30, Navy, Mesa, AZ.

Chad E. Bales, 21, Marine Corps, Coahoma, TX.

Wilbert Davis, 40, Army, Hinesville, GA.

Mark A. Evnin, 21, Marine Corps, Burlington, VT.

Edward J. Korn, 31, Army, Savannah, GA.

Nino D. Livaudais, 23, Army, Ogden, UT.

Ryan P. Long, 21, Army, Seaford, DE.

Donald S. Oaks Jr., 20, Army, Erie, PA.

Randall S. Rehn, 36, Army, Longmont, CO.

Russell B. Rippetoe, 27, Army, Arvada, CO.

Todd J. Robbins, 33, Army, Pentwater, MI.

Tristan N. Aitken, 31, Army, State College, PA.

Wilfred D. Bellard, 20, Army, Lake Charles, LA.

Daniel Francis J. Cunningham, 33, Army, Lewiston, ME.

Travis A. Ford, 30, Marine Corps, Ogallala, NE.

Bernard G. Gooden, 22, Marine Corps, Mt. Vernon, NY.

Devon D. Jones, 19, Army, San Diego, CA.

Brian M. McPhillips, 25 Marine Corps, Pembroke, MA.

Duane R. Rios, 25, Marine Corps, Hammond, IN.

Benjamin W. Sammis, 29, Marine Corps, Rehobeth, MA.

Erik H. Silva, 22, Marine Corps, Chula Vista, CA.

Paul R. Smith, 33, Army, Tampa, FL.

Stevon A. Booker, 34, Army, Apollo, PA.

Larry K. Brown, 22, Army, Jackson, MS.

Edward Smith, 38, Marine Corps, Chicago, IL.

Gregory P. Huxley, Jr., 19, Army, Forestport, NY.

Kelley S. Prewitt, 24, Army, Birmingham, AL.

Andrew Julian Aviles, 18, Marine Corps, Palm Beach, FL.

Eric B. Das, 30, Air Force, Amarillo, TX.

Lincoln D. Hollinsaid, 27, Army, Malden, IL.

Jeffery J. Kaylor, 24, Army, Clifton, VA.

Jesus Martin Antonio Medellin, 21, Marine Corps, Fort

Worth, TX.

Anthony S. Miller, 19, Army, San Antonio, TX.

George A. Mitchell, 35, Army, Rawlings, MD.

William R. Watkins III, 37, Air Force Danville, VA.

Henry L. Brown, 22, Army, Natchez, MS.

Juuan Guadulupe Garza Jr., 20, Marine Corps, Temperance,

Mr. Speaker, the distinguished gentleman, Chairman of the

Committee on Armed Services, is respected by all of us here. I thank him for his service to our country.

Would the gentleman inform the Members of this body when all of the troops had the body armor? As of when?

I yield to the gentleman from California.

Starting this anniversary?

As of when? As of when?

As of when? As of when?

But when did every troop have it? As of when?

The gentleman knows that they only had it as a matter of weeks, and they would not have had it without the gentleman from Pennsylvania's (Mr. Murtha) help.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of House Resolution 56 recognizing the significance of February 19, 1942, the day that President Franklin Roosevelt signed Executive Order 9066, which led to the internment of 120,000 Japanese Americans and residents of Japanese descent and the deprivation of rights of German Americans and Italian Americans.

The Resolution supports the goals of the Japanese American, German American, and Italian American communities in recognizing a national day of remembrance to increase public awareness of the restrictions and internment of individuals during World War II.

I am proud to join my colleague Representative Mike Honda, who spent his early childhood in an internment camp, in cosponsoring this Resolution. I appreciate his leadership and diligence in bringing this Resolution.

The West Coast of our country was particularly affected by the forced relocations and unjust internment of thousands of American citizens and residents of Japanese descent during World War II. The failure of our political and judicial system to prevent this injustice still reverberates strongly across our nation.

Only belatedly did this Nation acknowledge and apologize for the bigotry and injustice spurred by Executive Order 9066. The ``Civil Liberties Act of 1988'' was enacted to formally acknowledge and apologize for fundamental violations of the basic civil liberties and constitutional rights of these individuals of Japanese ancestry.'' In 2000, President Clinton signed the ``Wartime Violation of Italian Americans Civil Liberties Act,'' which formally acknowledged civil liberties violations against Italian Americans.

It is imperative that our generation and future generations recall the deprivations suffered by the Japanese American, German American and Italian American communities during World War II. The date of February 19, 1942 must serve as a constant reminder that we must never again violate individual rights on the basis of national origin.

The Resolution reaffirms the importance of February 19th, which is recognized as a National Day of Remembrance each year by the Japanese American community. The Japanese American community and its supporters across the Nation have worked hard to educate the public about the internment.

The lessons of that dark chapter in our history are especially relevant today. As we protect and defend the American people against terrorism, we must protect and defend the Constitution and the civil liberties that define our democracy.

I commend the House of Representatives for considering this Resolution. I urge its passage.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to express my sadness on the tragic early death of Susan Eaton, a wonderful woman who had recently become a noted professor at Harvard University's Kennedy School, but had also spent many years as an effective advocate for the rights of workers, particularly low-paid workers, throughout this country. Susan died of complications from leukemia on December 30, at the age of 46. Susan was also the wife of another remarkable person--my friend, Marshall Ganz--who worked with Cesar Chavez 39 years ago to help create the United

Farm Workers union and who has continued doing pathbreaking organizing work over the last 39 years, as well as also becoming a Kennedy School professor.

I would like to submit for the Record an obituary of Susan Eaton, which appeared in the Harvard Gazette.

Teacher, Researcher Advocate--A Whole Life

Esteemed Kennedy School faculty member Susan C. Eaton died

Dec. 30 of complications from leukemia. She was 46.

Eaton was a tireless advocate for the rights of workers,

both as a union organizer and in her teaching and research at

the Kennedy School. Her husband and fellow faculty member

Marshall Ganz expressed it well: ``She was a deeply committed

person, a person who walked the walk. She translated her

values into action in her teaching, in her research, and in

her public life.''

Eaton, an assistant professor of public policy, completed

her Ph.D. in industrial relations and organizational studies

at the Sloan School of Management at the Massachusetts

Institute of Technology. She received her master's degree in

public administration from the Kennedy School. Her research

focused on challenges faced by low-wage workers, particularly

women providing health care, and the role of work

organizations, including unions, in addressing these

challenges. Last summer, Eaton received a Robert Woods

Johnson Award to study the links between quality of work and

quality of care in the nursing home industry. Eaton's

writings focused on work-family issues, women's roles in

union leadership, union-management relations, and the role of

management in the quality of nursing home care. She was

editor of the online Civil Practices Network and contributed

to several other industry journals and publications.

Prior to entering academia, Eaton worked for 12 years as a

union negotiator, trainer, and manager for the Service

Employees International Union (SEIU), AFL-CIO, and CLC.

She joined the Kennedy School faculty in 2000 and became a

highly regarded teacher, whose human resources course,

``Leading and Managing People Well,'' received

consistently high marks, exemplifying the leadership model

she tried to teach.

``Susan brought a heightened awareness of others to our

community in her breadth of research and passionate

dedication,'' said Kennedy School Dean Joseph S. Nye Jr.

``She was a person who cared--about social justice, about her

work, about her students, about her colleagues. While

comfortable with the abstractions of social justice, she

applied her concerns every day in the way she treated each of

us as individuals.''

Kennedy School Associate Academic Dean and Director of the

School's Weiner Center for Social Policy Julie Boatright

Wilson reflected on the loss of a colleague and a friend.

``Susan was a vibrant presence on the fourth floor of the

Taubman building,'' said Wilson. ``She had time for all of

us, was interested in what everyone was thinking about and

working on, and had advice and ideas and wisdom she willingly

shared. Even more than what Susan did for us is what she did

for the low-wage employees she had spent her life working

with and working for. Everything about Susan's activities--

her scholarship, her teaching, her day-to-day interactions--

exhibited her commitment to improving the lives of those who

provide the services we all need but for which we seem

remarkably unwilling to pay a decent wage.''

Eaton's teaching earned her enormous respect from students

while her research brought attention to the issues that

touched her heart. ``She demonstrated that nursing homes and

hospitals could both do better by their workers and improve

the quality of care simply with better management practices.

Much of her work spoke to the dignity that both caregivers

and patients seek and deserve. This readily generalizable

lesson seems so terribly important in this increasingly

marketized era,'' said David Ellwood, Scott M. Black

Professor of Political Economy at the Kennedy School.

Eaton was co-winner of the 1996 Margaret Clark award of the

Institute of Gerontology for the paper ``Beyond Unloving

Care: Linking Nursing Home Quality and Working Conditions.''

Her other recent writings included: ``Career as Life Path''

in ``Career Frontiers: New Conceptions of Working Lives,''

edited by Maury Peiperl et al. (Oxford University Press,

2000); ``Work and Life Strategies of Professionals in

Biotechnology Firms,'' Annals of the American Academy of

Science, March 1999; and ``Pennsylvania's Nursing Homes:

Promoting Quality Care and Quality Jobs,'' Keystone Research

Center, April 1997.

In addition to Ganz, Eaton is survived by her father,

William J. of Washington, D.C.; her mother, Marilynn, of

Alexandria, Va.; and her sister Sally Misare of Castle Rock,

Colo.

Mr. Speaker, congratulations to the League of United Latin American Citizens on 75 years of outstanding service. Your work has improved the lives of millions of Hispanic Americans and has benefited our entire country.

Seventy-five years ago, the founders of the League of United Latin American Citizens, better known as LULAC, joined together to establish an organization that would become the largest, oldest and most successful Hispanic civil rights and service organization in the United States. Since its inception on February 17, 1919, in Corpus Christi, Texas, LULAC has championed the cause of Hispanic Americans in education, employment, economic development and civil rights.

LULAC has developed a comprehensive set of nationwide programs fostering educational attainment, job training, housing, scholarships, citizenship, and voter registration. Its members throughout the Nation have developed a tremendous track record advancing the prosperity and civil rights of the Hispanic population of the United States. LULAC's legislative platform promotes humanitarian relief for immigrants, increased educational opportunities for our youth, and equal treatment for all Hispanics in the United States and its territories, including the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico.

This year the League of United Latin American Citizens will celebrate 75 years of community service to increase educational opportunities and improve the quality of life for Hispanic Americans. I am proud to join my colleagues in the Congressional Hispanic Caucus, the LULAC membership, and Americans across the country in commending LULAC on 75 years of service and the great contributions LULAC has made to our country.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of House Resolution 157, which urges the Chinese Government to release all prisoners held for exercising their fundamental rights to freedom of expression, belief, or association.

Thank you, Congressman Tom Udall for taking the lead in introducing this resolution and for all of your efforts for the people of Tibet. I am proud to be a co-sponsor.

The Chinese Government continues to impose severely repressive measures against any display of support for an independent Tibet. We know the facts. The State Department's Annual Country Report on Human Rights states ``. . . [Chinese] authorities continued to commit serious human rights abuses, including instances of torture, arbitrary arrest, detention without public trial, and lengthy detention of Tibetan nationalists for peacefully expressing their political or religious views.''

We know that more than 1 million Tibetans have died under the Chinese occupation. More than 6,000 monasteries and irreplaceable jewels of Tibetan culture have been destroyed. Tibetans are routinely imprisoned and tortured for non-violently expressing their views. Beatings, prolonged exposure to extreme heat and cold, electroshock, sleep and food deprivation and forced labor are among the techniques used to torture Tibetan political prisoners.

Since China's 1988 ratification of the United Nations Convention Against Torture, more than 70 Tibetans have died as a direct result of torture and inhumane treatment in Chinese prisons in Tibet. Hundreds of Tibetans are currently in prison for peaceful expressions of political or religious belief. I would like to mention a few of these brave individuals.

phuntsog nyidron

Phuntsog Nyidron is a nun from outside Lhasa. She has been in prison for 16 years. On October 14, 1989, she participated in a peaceful demonstration to protest China's occupation of Tibet. During the arrest, she and other nuns were subjected to beatings with iron rods, kicks, and punches. She is now the longest serving female Tibetan political prisoner. She is reportedly in poor health and is suffering from a respiratory ailment and severe internal problems.

the drapchi 14: ``singing nuns''

While in a Chinese prison for political crimes in 1993, Phuntsog Nyidron and 13 other nuns secretly recorded songs proclaiming their love for their Tibetan homeland and their families. On the tape, each nun states her name and dedicates a song to her family and supporters.

The tapes were smuggled out of the prison and the recordings were circulated inside Tibet and around the world. These young women became known as the Drapchi 14 and the Singing Nuns.

tibetan refugees sent back to tibet

I am also concerned about Tibetan refugees sent back to China by the Government of Nepal. Last May, in close coordination with the Chinese Embassy, Nepal deported 18 Tibetan refugees who were seeking safe transit through Nepal. This violates the long-standing agreement that Nepal will turn over refugees to UNHCR to facilitate safe transit to the Tibetan exile community in India.

For many years, Nepal has worked cooperatively with UNHCR. They have earned a strong reputation for their humanitarian approached to Tibetan refugees. I am disturbed by the Government of Nepal's recent actions in violation of international and humanitarian norms. The prison conditions awaiting repatriated Tibetans are harsh. From first hand reports we have learned about the torture and maltreatment of the 18 Tibetans deported by Nepal. Unfortunately, the deportation of Tibetan refugees continues.

On January 9, Radio Free Asia reported on that 21 refugees were deported by Nepalese border security. On January 15, we have learned that three Tibetan refugees were handed over to Chinese border police by Nepalese officials.

We expect Nepal to adhere with its own written policy and turn over all Tibetan refugees to UNHCR. Today we are sending a clear message to the Government of Nepal--the U.S. Government is watching your actions closely.

conclusion

The survival of the Tibetan identity is an issue of urgent U.S. and international concern. I am proud to stand with my colleagues today to demand that the Chinese Government immediately release all prisoners of conscience in China and Tibet. As we honor the brave and heroic prisoners of conscience, we must heed the guidance of His Holiness the Dalai Lama. He is a constant reminder that the crisis in Tibet is a challenge to the conscience of the world. Unless we are prepared to confront the Chinese Government on the issue of Tibet, we cannot be consistent when we talk about human rights in any other place in the world. We have not forgotten the people of Tibet in their struggle. We must and will continue our efforts.

Mr. Speaker, I want to join our distinguished colleague, the gentleman from California (Mr. Farr), in paying tribute to Ruth Vreeland. I thank him, as one who admired her on behalf of so many who learned from her over the years, for my colleague's magnificent tribute to her, which I know he has not finished. I will not take a lot of time because I know he needs the time to put the full tribute into the Record.

As one who worked with her for over 25 years in the California Democratic Party, I know of her love of country. She was a true patriot. She loved our country. She loved its people. She loved its natural environment. She loved our civil liberties. She was a model citizen.

My daughter Christine, I know, would want to join with me, who worked with her on the platform committee, in expressing our sympathies to her family in saying that we will remember her with great affection, admiration, and respect.

I thank the distinguished gentleman from California (Mr. Farr) and thank him for his leadership in presenting the very, very excellent credentials of Ms. Vreeland to our colleagues.

Mr. Speaker, it is my privilege to represent a vibrant and strong Asian American and Pacific Islander community that is a historic part of San Francisco's world-renowned diversity, and I rise today to recognize the celebration of the Lunar New Year, the most cherished Chinese festival.

The Lunar New Year marks the beginning of a new season and is a time of renewed hope. It is considered a time to sweep away misfortune and to welcome the New Year with hopes of good luck, prosperity, and excellent health.

The Lunar New Year celebration begins on the new moon of the first day of each year and ends on the full moon 15 days later. Family is a major focus of the Lunar New Year celebration, and participants pay great respect to their ancestors who laid the foundations for the well- being of their families. The Lantern Festival, which concludes the celebration with a parade of brilliant lanterns, the music of drums, and a dragon dance performed by youth, is especially beautiful.

By the Chinese calendar, this is the year 4,701, the Year of the Monkey. The Monkey represents the inventor and innovator and symbolizes growth and development. In many ways, the Monkey epitomizes the entrepreneurial spirit of my district in San Francisco and our ability to overcome great challenges.

The U.S. Postal Service recently issued its Year of the Monkey Stamp, the final in its spectacular Lunar New Year commemorative stamp series. It has been a great pleasure to celebrate the 12 years of the Chinese Zodiac with the stamps designed by artist Clarence Lee, and I am proud to display these beautiful images on the walls of my office. Thank you to the Organization of Chinese Americans, to the U.S. Postal Service, and to the leaders of San Francisco's Chinese American Community for your hard work to make this wonderful series a reality.

By percentage, Asian Americans and Pacific Islanders are the country's fastest growing ethnic group, and the community is a dynamic part of our nation. The Lunar New Year is a wonderful opportunity to recognize the immeasurable contributions of Asian American and Pacific Islanders to all aspects of American life, including the arts, education, sports, medicine, religion, and politics. It is my pleasure to join with so many of my constituents and with Asian American and Pacific Islanders across the country to celebrate the Lunar New Year.

Mr. Speaker, it is with great sadness that I rise to pay tribute to former Congressman Skeen of New Mexico, who passed away this week after a long battle with Parkinson's disease. Joe was a good friend and a dedicated public servant, and we will miss him terribly.

Joe Skeen was a gentleman in the finest sense of the word. He treated everyone with respect and offered his friendship to all. The entire Congress would agree that Joe's character was of the highest quality. He had a wonderful sense of humor.

Joe was a man of his district. Born and raised in New Mexico, he understood and worked for rural America. A sheep and cattle rancher, he understood the needs of his district--including schools, utilities, health care, and the many other particular requirements of a rural area--and he always fought to meet those needs. His attention to his district is just part of why his constituents made him the longest- serving Member of the House of Representatives from New Mexico.

It was my good fortune to serve with Joe on the Appropriations Committee, where he served as the Chairman of the Subcommittee on Interior. It was on the Appropriations Committee that I learned how special he was. Throughout the often difficult process of writing and passing Appropriations bills, Joe was always known for his fairness and civility. He listened to his colleagues and tried to respond to their needs.

Since his retirement last year, we have missed Joe in the Congress. He always put his country ahead of party and desired accomplishments for the American people most of all. He cared about the House of Representatives as an institution and about bipartisanship as a noble part of our work here. He elevated the character of the House of Representatives, and we are so grateful for his service here.

Our thoughts and prayers are with his wife, Mary, and their two children, Elisa and Mikell. I hope it is a comfort to them that so many people share their loss and are praying for them at this sad time.

Mr. Speaker, ``A nation reveals itself not only by [the individuals] it produces, but also by [those] it honors, [those] it remembers.''

President John F. Kennedy spoke these words 40 years ago, less than a month before he was tragically killed in Dallas. On the 40th anniversary of that sad month, which lives so vividly in our memory, America honors and remembers President Kennedy. In doing so, we reveal once more the nation he imagined and the country we might yet become.

Like a generation of Americans, I carry with me strong memories of President Kennedy. As a college student standing on the grounds of the Capitol on a freezing cold January day, I listened to President Kennedy's enduring challenge now known the world over: ``And so, my fellow Americans: ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country.''

And I have always remembered the less well-known--but equally important--line that followed: ``My fellow citizens of the world: ask not what America will do for you, but what together we can do for the freedom of mankind.''

Those of us who lived through those awful November days 40 years ago will always remember the shock and never forget the sadness.

Yet on this anniversary we recall not how President Kennedy died, but rather, how he lived; not just the tragedy of a single day, but the triumphs of one thousand days--of a presidency and a President that guides us still.

The first American President born of the 20th Century, President Kennedy embodied the hopes, the optimism, the vigor and the vitality of a new generation of Americans. Inspired by his call to cross a New Frontier, America began a bold journey that would take us to the moon. Young, idealistic Americans entered public service and joined the Peace Corps. Courageous African-Americans became Freedom Riders, challenging the evils of segregation and leading to the greatest demonstration for justice in American history--the 1963 March on Washington.

A veteran of World War II, President Kennedy knew that in those dangerous days of the Cold War, military strength was essential, yet ``war need not be inevitable.'' Through the crisis over Berlin and 13 days in October 1962, his resolve averted the unthinkable. And through it all he knew something we must never forget--America stands strongest when it stands with friends and allies.

Yet this Cold Warrior also knew that true and lasting peace demands the elimination of the fury of despair and instability that plagues too much of the world. President Kennedy's vision of a future where ``the weak are safe and the strong are just'' inspired those young Peace Corps volunteers to build a better world--combating poverty, illiteracy, disease and hunger.

A man of deep faith, President Kennedy knew that ``here on earth God's work must truly be our own.'' And so this man of privilege challenged the nation to reject private comfort for the public interest to fight for higher wages for workers, housing and medical care for the poor, dignity and security for the elderly. And although he did not live to see the day, his vision of a more just America would come closer with the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

Ever since his death, Americans have wondered--how might the days and years that followed have been different had he lived? Perhaps the more important questions might be--have we lived up to the challenge he issued so long ago? Have we kept alive the spirit and high purpose that he kindled? Have we achieved the national greatness that he imagined?

Forty years later, President Kennedy challenges us still. As we remember his death, let us rededicate ourselves--as a people, as a nation--to the principles and vision that defined his life. On this somber anniversary, there can be no higher tribute.

Mr. Speaker, I rise to pay tribute to the memory of two of San Francisco's great and most beloved heroes.

A quarter century ago, on November 27, 1978, two of San Francisco's best and brightest were assassinated in a dark week for our city.

Still reeling from the Jonestown Massacre only days before--the worst mass murder-suicide in American history and the murder of Bay Area Congressman Leo Ryan--San Francisco was dealt a catastrophic blow.

Politically and personally it was a horrific tragedy. San Francisco lost two great progressive leaders, two champions of human rights.

George Moscone, our beloved Mayor, was a hero of the poor and the working class. A native San Franciscan, civil rights leader, State Assemblyman, State Senator, and Mayor, he devoted his life to serve his City of San Francisco, and his State of California. The devoted husband of Gina Moscone and father of four beautiful children, Jennifer, Rebecca, Jonathan and Christopher, he was taken from us in the prime of his life.

Harvey Milk, originally from New York, was a local merchant, the owner of a camera shop. As a member of the San Francisco Board of Supervisors, he was the first openly gay elected official in California, and only the second in the nation. He was a neighborhood leader and a passionate advocate for seniors and all minorities.

Both men were exuberant, expansive, compassionate, and enormously popular political leaders. They were visionaries.

George Moscone and Harvey Milk instigated a historic transformation of San Francisco political life, pioneering an open, participatory government, accessible to all, especially those who never before had been included. For the first time neighborhood and ethnic community activists, and openly gay men and lesbians were appointed to positions of power and authority. The number of women in leadership positions expanded dramatically. No longer were public policy decisions the exclusive province of the wealthy and powerful.

George and Harvey transformed the political and social culture of San Francisco for all time. They were beacons of hope to people who had felt alienated from and neglected by City Hall. They incubated a new generation of talented public servants, who have gone on to secure San Francisco's position today as a national model of enlightenment and progressive values.

The twenty-fifth anniversary of the tragic events of November 27, 1978 gives San Franciscans an opportunity to reflect on the unique contributions George Moscone and Harvey Milk made to bettering the lives of us all. These extraordinary men continue to inspire us as we strive for a society that provides unlimited and equal opportunities for all our diverse citizens.

We never will forget George Moscone and Harvey Milk. We are grateful for their lives, and we honor their immeasurable contributions to our city, our state and our nation.

Mr. Speaker, I was very pleased to be present at the grand re-opening of the San Francisco Conservatory of Flowers. The Conservatory is considered by many to be the jewel of Golden Gate Park and the City of San Francisco. It is a monument to biodiversity, renewal, and beauty.

Congratulations to all those who joined forces in the fight to restore our Conservatory: John Murray, President of San Francisco Recreation & Parks Commission; Scott Medbury, Director of the Conservatory; Rebecca Green, President of Friends of Recreation & Parks; and Elizabeth Goldstein, General Manager of Recreation & Parks. Thank you for your vision and your leadership. The people of San Francisco, future generations of San Franciscans and visitors alike, owe you a great debt of gratitude.

I would like to take this opportunity to commend Richard Goldman, one of San Francisco's most generous citizens. His support of our City and our environment is immeasurable. His tremendous contribution to the Conservatory in honor of his late wife, Rhoda, led the way. Many other extremely generous families followed; the Madeleine Haas Russell family and the Fisher, Friend and Taube families. These families have graciously supported so many of San Francisco's treasures for decades.

This grand undertaking could never have been realized without the leadership of our Mayor, Willie Brown. This is yet another project marked by excellence, effectiveness, and success. It is fitting that this extensive project was completed under his watchful eye. Mayor Brown raised the visibility of the project to a national level and used his unique abilities to develop private public partnerships.

An army of volunteers worked non-stop since the devastating windstorm of 1995 to make this day happen. The 124 year old conservatory was thought to have sustained irreparable damage. Of the $25 million needed for this massive rehabilitation, $15 million came from individual donations. The prospect of the Conservatory's imminent destruction was unthinkable to the people of San Francisco. They had the wisdom to know that its beauty could never be rivaled or replicated. They were stubborn and unrelenting in their demand that we preserve this architectural masterpiece. Because of their labor of love, we once again can view the exquisite beauty outside and experience the lush splendor within. Their talent, commitment and dedication to this magnificent project honors our patron saint, St. Francis, honors nature, and honors God's creation.

Today we can once more enjoy the stunning high altitude orchids, the giant cycads, and the rest of the 1,500 species of plants from over 50 countries. In addition to the tropical paradise that we all remember, there are new displays to inspire visitors to appreciate and conserve our planet's extraordinary biodiversity.

San Francisco is proud to be the home of the oldest glass and wood conservatory in the

United States. It is a place of exquisite and intoxicating beauty. It is a spiritual place. We are all very fortunate to be able to enjoy its magic again.

Mr. Speaker, I rise to a question of privilege of the House and submit a resolution which is at the desk.

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

Mr. Speaker, for more than 200 years, and 200 years ago, the Founding Fathers designed this House of Representatives to serve as the people's House. In the Federalist Papers, James Madison wrote that it is essential to liberty that this House have an intimate sympathy with the people. In the century since, this body has earned its status as the greatest legislative body in the world. Yet perhaps never before have the actions of this body fallen so far short of both the ideals envisioned by the Founders and the sympathies of the people as during last month's vote on the Medicare prescription drug conference report, a vote that will surely be remembered as one of the lowest moments in the history of this august institution.

The American people expected a fair and open airing of issues affecting 40 million older Americans on Medicare, our mothers, our fathers, grandmothers, and grandfathers. Yet Republicans locked House Democrats out of the conference negotiations and, in doing so, locked out the 130 million Americans we represent.

This is a diverse country, but the Democratic Caucus is the only diverse caucus. By shutting out the Democrats, they deny the conference negotiators of the benefit of the thinking of the representatives of the African American community, Hispanic community, the Asian Pacific American community, the whole philosophical diversity within our caucus from the Blue Dogs to the New Dogs to our Progressive Democrats.

The American people expected genuine debate. Yet, Republicans limited floor discussion on the one of the most dramatic changes to Medicare in its history to a mere 2 hours, 2 hours. And this behavior is not limited and confined to the vote on Medicare.

For some reason, and I think it should be obvious what it is, the Republicans insist on having votes that are of great import to the American people, but where they are clearly on the wrong side of the issue, have these votes taken in the middle of the night.

On a Friday in March at 2:54 a.m., the House cut veterans benefits by three votes. At 2:39 a.m. on a Friday in April, House Republicans slashed education and health care by five votes. At 1:56 a.m. on a Friday in May, the House passed the ``leave no millionaire behind'' tax cut bill by a handful of votes. And at 3:30 a.m. on a Friday in June, the House GOP passed the Medicare privatization and prescription drug bill by one vote. At 12:57 a.m. on a Friday in July, the House passed a Head Start bill by one single vote. And that Head Start bill was to undermine and unravel a very successful Head Start initiative. And then after returning from a summer recess, at 12:12 a.m. on a Friday in October, the House voted $87 billion for Iraq, an issue the Democrats and Republicans were on both sides of the issue. So were the American people. They deserve to hear the debate in the light of day.

I thank the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Brown) for this information.

It degrades our democracy when Democrats have no role in the legislation. This legislation affects millions of Americans. No role in the conference negotiations. No chance to offer amendments. No alternatives and limited debates or discussion. It degrades our democracy when secret negotiations, such as those on the energy legislation, rip up provisions supported by both Houses and insert new provisions approved by neither House.

Mr. Speaker, this is not the House our Founders envisioned. Such behavior is unfair. It is un-American, and it is unacceptable. It is not for this that our Founding Fathers sacrificed their lives, their liberty and their sacred honor, so that we could have government of the few, by the few, for the few, behind closed doors.

Why are the Republicans so afraid to subject their agenda to the normal rules of debate? Republicans are afraid of fair and open debate because they know that the American people reject their radical agenda. As President Kennedy said, ``A nation that is afraid to let its people judge the truth and falsehood in an open market, is a nation that is afraid of its people.''

So afraid of the people were they that, again, this went into the dark of night when we even took the first vote at 3 o'clock in the morning.

A member of the majority in the other body, that would be a Republican in the other party, warned recently, ``If you have to twist people's arms over and over to vote for you on issue after issue, then you would be wise to reevaluate your positions.''

Of course, Republicans have no intention of reevaluating their reckless positions. As one newspaper editorial observed recently, ``It appears the Republicans want to govern the Nation by themselves.''

A government of the few, by the few, for the few.

The ancient Greeks had a word for such audacity, hubris. Hubris, the wanton arrogance that leads to the violation of accepted rules of conduct.

In the tragedies of antiquity, mortals who defy the Gods in this manner were punished for their hubris. Indeed, if there were ever an argument for why Republicans must get their punishment at the polls and be defeated at the polls next year, we need only look to their unprecedented abuse of power and their neglect of the will of the people.

Mr. Speaker, Democrats will not stand by while our democracy is denigrated. We will not be silenced. We will not be rolled over. As we preach democracy to the rest of the world and we talk about in glowing terms about our own democracy, we must also speak about the power of example, the example we set in the conduct of our legislative business for the rest of the world.

The Republicans are not setting a good example of democracy for the rest of the world. Republicans must know we will fight this abuse in the committees. We will fight this abuse on the floor. We will fight it every day and every way we can. We will carry this fight all the way to election day. On that day, the American people will reject the Republican's special interest and their shameless abuse of power.

With all regard that I have for the distinguished colleagues on the other side of the aisle who appear to be at the microphones, and I know that the time will be led by the gentlewoman from Connecticut (Mrs. Johnson), why is not a member of this House leadership on the Republican side on the floor to respond to this privileged resolution about how the leadership has conducted its business?

We all have a great deal of respect for the Speaker of the House. The majority leader is a forceful personality. The two of those orchestrated what happened that night. We would like them to at least extend the courtesy to Members to be present on the floor as the leader of this party on this floor to respond to the people's need to know as to why, why the will of the majority is not respected here.

We will return the people's House to the American people, and we will once again make this the revered institution worthy of its status as the greatest legislative body in the world.

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

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

Mr. Speaker, since the distinguished chairman of the Committee on Rules is in the well, I just wish to mention one thing, because in my comments I read a litany of concerns about very important votes were won by a handful or fewer votes in the dark of night. One of these I did not mention was the rule on the FAA bill that came to the floor, and I would like to ask the gentleman if he is proud of the way the Committee on Rules conducted itself on the FAA bill where it burned the book on rule making in this House.

I yield to the gentleman from California.

Indeed, that rule was an abomination, and I am pleased that the gentleman recognizes that it was wrong.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from New York (Mr. Rangel), the distinguished ranking member on the Committee on Ways and Means.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume to note that it is interesting to hear Republican colleagues talk about how urgent this bill was to pass. Then why does it not become effective until 2006? Mr. Speaker, was it so urgent that the rumor had to be around there that they were offering $100,000 to Members to vote with them on the bill? Was it ever that urgent?

Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased to yield 7 minutes to the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Hoyer), our very distinguished whip, a champion for America's seniors, who fought, fought, fought for them on the floor of this House to defeat this Medicare bill. And defeat it he did, for 3 hours, until outside influences weighed in to reverse that outcome.

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

Mr. Speaker, if it is an election-year issue and the other side of the aisle is so proud of their work, why do they not make it effective now, just as they make their reckless tax cuts effective immediately and retroactively?

Mr. Speaker, the customs and traditions of this House have been violated, and there is no person in the leadership of this House to come here to defend the actions taken in this Chamber on November 22. I will say more about that in a moment.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Clyburn), the vice chairman of the House Democratic Caucus.

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

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

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 1 minute to the very distinguished gentleman from Washington (Mr. Inslee).

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

Mr. Speaker, the Republicans also run this Congress like the Republicans run Florida. They cannot accept the result of a vote.

With that, I am pleased to yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Emanuel).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the very distinguished gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Gutierrez).

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

It is clear that the conduct of the Medicare prescription drug bill is indefensible, and that is why not one member of the elected leadership of the majority could show his face on this floor today to defend that behavior. It is clear.

If we had so much time that night that we could wait, why could we not

have time to debate? We had asked the Committee on Rules for more time for debate. Were the Republicans afraid that the American people would find out with further debate that they have a prohibition in the bill from this government negotiating for lower prices for prescription drugs for our seniors? Were they afraid that they would find out if they make $13,470 a year that they pay $4,000 of their first $5,000 for prescription drug benefits, $4,000 of their first $5,000?

I brought this privileged resolution to the floor not because the Republicans had once again abused their power and once again had abused their customs and traditions of this House. I brought this privileged resolution to the House because there were newspaper publications of rumors of bribery, of $100,000 on the floor of this House to a Member of Congress and a threat to that Member of Congress that his son would never come to Congress unless he voted with the Republicans.

The public deserves answers to that question. We will not let this rest. The Republican leadership can run, but they cannot hide from that rumor of bribery taking place on this floor of the House. The Member himself has asserted that, but we could not come to the floor until we had a written documentation of that assertion. That assertion is now documented.

Mr. Speaker, much has been said about the President's signing this historic legislation today. This is not historic legislation. This is an historic missed opportunity to do what is right for America's seniors. It is historic in this respect: 40 years ago when the Democratic Congress and the Democratic President made Medicare the law of the land, only 13 Republicans voted for the Medicare bill. They had been waging war. The Republicans had been waging war on Medicare for 40 years. They had their opportunity to have a full airing of the debate that night so the public could hear what they were up to with their Trojan horse of a piece of legislation. They did not have time to debate. They could not honor our request for more time to discuss this very historic and important legislation. They did have time for bribery on the floor of the House of Representatives.

So, Mr. Speaker, this is an issue about how we conduct the people's business, how we set an example for the rest of the world. It is an example of how people are not accountable for their behavior on this floor by having business conducted here in a way that brings shame and dishonor to this House and not even coming to this floor to listen to the debate or to defend that conduct. This is a very historic day indeed because this is a day when the American people are finding out that the Republicans will go to any length to be the handmaidens of the pharmaceutical industry. They will go to any length to be beholden to the HMOs and the insurance industry, that the Republicans will go to any length to justify the wrong actions that they are taking. So convinced of the correctness of their position that they think that any action is justified. Let that not be the rule that applies to any of us on either side of the aisle.

So, Mr. Speaker, with that I urge my colleagues to support our privileged resolution.

Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Motion to Table Offered by Mrs. Johnson of Connecticut

Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.