Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, I thank my friend for yielding me this time.

My colleagues, how does one get on the agenda of the United States House of Representatives? If you are in the financial industry and you are interested in changing the rules for giving pension advice, you can get on the agenda. If you are one of a plethora of special interests that is interested in changing the Internal Revenue Code, you can get on the agenda. But if you are one of the millions of people suffering unemployment in this country and you want this House to take up the question of whether your unemployment benefits ought to be extended, you cannot seem to get on the agenda.

Now, I know that there are people who believe that some of the people who are on unemployment are not trying hard to find a job, and I am sure there are some for whom that description is accurate; but I know this is true: for every three Americans looking for a job today, there is one job. One. And there are hundreds of thousands of people who at the end of this month are going to lose their ability to pay their bills because they are one of the two people who cannot get that one job out of every three people who is unemployed.

It is the business of this country, and it should be the business of this House, to debate whether or not an extension of unemployment benefits is justifiable for those people. I feel strongly that it is. I know there are Members who believe that it is not. I respect their views. The majority ought to respect our right to bring to this floor, before this House and before this country, the question as to whether those benefits ought to be extended.

In many households, Mr. Speaker, this is not some theoretical debate. It is a question of whether you will be able to pay your rent on the first of June, whether you will be able to pay your other bills on the first of June. Let us do the people's business. Let us put on the agenda of this House the question of whether to extend unemployment benefits.

Oppose the previous question.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from California for yielding me this time. I rise in strong opposition to the bill that is on the floor.

There have been two trends taking place in American life in recent months and years. The first is an outbreak of conflict of interest in the financial world of America. A few days ago, the attorney general of New York State, together with other law enforcement officials, announced a global settlement against a large number of investment firms because those firms were rather routinely giving advice that was conflicted and, therefore, not in the best interests of investors. The common practice was that the investment banking side of the firm was out hawking certain securities and trying to sell certain deals. And then the advice side of the firm was telling the retail clients of the firm to buy into those very same deals. It became obvious that the advice being given by these financial houses was not in the best interests of the investor; it was in the best interests of the financial house.

It was a scandal that has rocked Wall Street to its foundations. It has caused some significant problems in the market. It caused this Congress to take significant steps in the Sarbanes-Oxley legislation of last year. It was an unwelcome intrusion into the marketplace of American finance.

The second trend is that more and more Americans have become their own board of trustees for their own pension fund. Twenty-five years ago, the way most people's pensions were is that they worked for an employer, the employer put money into a pension fund, there was a board of directors or board of trustees for that pension fund that invested the money, and, when you retired, every month you got a check based upon how much money you were entitled to under that plan.

In recent years many employers have shifted to self-directed accounts. Commonly these are known as 401(k)s, where instead of the employer deciding how the money is invested, the constituent, the individual, decides how the money is invested, and, in effect, our constituents become their own board of trustees for their own pension plans. There is today $1.8 trillion of American pension money invested in these 401(k)s.

Now, one would think that when we have a trend of tremendous conflict of interest problems in the financial industry and a huge jump in the number of pension dollars in self-directed accounts that the House would be about the business of trying to find ways to assure that we eliminated any possibility for conflict of interest when people give advice to pensioners and workers as to how to invest their pension funds. In fact, since 1974, that has been

the law. It is illegal under present law for a conflicted adviser to give advice.

The bill before the House today lifts that prohibition and makes it legal. In other words, what the attorney general of New York and the securities agencies of the Federal Government labored so hard to make unlawful in the rest of the economy, the House is now trying to make lawful with respect to people's pension funds.

Common sense tells us we want to go in the other direction. We want to reduce or eliminate conflicts of interest in investment advice. This bill authorizes and legalizes those conflicts of interest. It makes no sense. If one liked the Enron scandal, one will love what will happen if conflicted, unfettered investment advice visits the $1.8 trillion of America's pensions held in these funds.

Mr. Speaker, this bill should be rejected, and the Democratic substitute that we will debate later should be adopted.

Mr. Speaker, as the designee of the ranking member, I offer an amendment in the nature of a substitute.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 2 minutes.

I would urge our colleagues to support this well-reasoned and well- thought-out Democratic substitute. It differs in many ways, and it is an improvement in many ways from the underlying bill. I would like to highlight a few of those improvements, first in the area of investment advice.

This substitute does provide for investment advice for workers and pensioners, but it clearly favors independent investment advice. It provides that workers and pensioners will receive advice from qualified individuals who do not have an interest in the outcome of the advice that they are giving.

Second, this substitute, unlike the underlying bill, deals with the problem of cash balance plans. Cash balance plans, which I believe have been improperly used in many cases, have become a nightmare for pensioners, where people who thought that they had a guaranteed income at a set level for the rest of their lives have confronted the nightmare scenario where they, in fact, have much less, sometimes as much as 50 percent less than they thought they had in their pensions.

This substitute contains a very simple provision that empowers each employee to choose between conversion of his or her pension to a cash balance plan or retention of his or her pension in its more traditional form. This bill puts a stop to the secret transactions involving executive pension compensation and pension provisions. This substitute also requires that in collective bargaining negotiations, that companies be candid and comprehensive in their disclosures to bargaining units with whom they are negotiating.

Very recently in the problems regarding American Airlines, we saw the situation where unions received significant misrepresentations as to the financial provisions of their employers and agreed to massive cutbacks in their compensation packages based upon those misrepresentations. This substitute would outlaw such a provision.

In summary, the substitute addresses the underlying problems and causes of the Enron scandal. I would urge its adoption.

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

Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the distinguished gentleman from California (Mr. George Miller), the author of the substitute.

(Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Vermont (Mr. Sanders), who is the author of a key provision of the substitute regarding the prevention of the abuse of cash balance plans.

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

Mr. Speaker, may I inquire how much time we have left on our side.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 30 seconds to the gentleman from Vermont (Mr. Sanders).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Solis), who speaks with passion and conviction for people struggling to get ahead around our country.

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

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Oregon (Mr. Blumenauer).

Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the

gentleman from California (Mr. George Miller), the author of the substitute.

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

Mr. Speaker, I would urge our colleagues to vote in favor of the Miller substitute. If there is one asset that should be sacrosanct, if there is one asset that should be solid as a rock, it is our pensions. Prior to 1974, there were numerous problems with pensions as corrupt or incompetent boards of trustees mismanaged workers' funds.

Twenty-nine years ago this Congress did something about that by passing the ERISA law. Since then, scandals and misappropriation of pension funds have been few and far between. They have been rare, and pensions have been largely safe.

But there is a new kind of pension. It is a self-directed pension account, commonly called a 401(k). The problem with the 401(k) has admittedly been that workers who do not have sound advice have sometimes made unsound decisions and lost their money.

There is no dispute that there is a need to provide solid and sound investment advice, but there is a strong dispute about how to do so. The substitute provides for advice; but frankly, it favors independent advice so the advice given is not given from the point of view of self- interest. The substitute provides a remedy.

When someone entrusted with fiduciary responsibility under the ERISA law does wrong by the pensioner or by the worker, there are consequences. My friend from Texas a few minutes ago said that there would be an expansion of remedies under ERISA. He is absolutely correct, because as the workers at Enron can tell us, the remedies that the present law contains do not do them very much good at all when they see their future security evaporate in the new pension scandals of our time.

The Miller substitute provides for sound investment advice, it ceases the practice of fraudulent misrepresentation during collective bargaining, it stops secret pension deals on behalf of highly compensated employees and executives, and it provides for meaningful remedies for those who have been wronged. It stops the abuse of cash balance plans and makes sure that every American pensioner is made whole. It is a realistic and meaningful response to the scandals of the last 24 to 36 months.

Mr. Speaker, I would urge all of my colleagues to vote ``yes'' in favor of the Miller substitute.

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

Mr. Speaker, I object to the vote on the ground that a quorum is not present and make the point of order that a quorum is not present.

Mr. Speaker, I would first like to take this opportunity to thank the Subcommittee on Foreign Operations, Export Financing and Related Programs Appropriations for providing $218 million for Basic Education programs last year and for protecting and expanding the Child Survival and Health Fund. Their leadership on these highly successful and cost-effective programs has been outstanding.

I would also like to thank one of my constituents, Phyllis Alroy, who is a member of RESULTS, a national group dedicated to ending hunger and poverty worldwide. She and RESULTS have been champions in bringing these important initiatives to my attention. I applaud their efforts and encourage all to follow in their courageous footsteps.

In the world today, one in five people must survive on less than their local equivalent of $1 per day. Nearly half the world's population survives on less than $2 per day. Approximately 113 million primary school--age children are not in school--more than the total number of primary-age children in school in the United States, Europe, and other more developed countries. In the least developed countries, 40 percent of children who enroll in primary school do not complete five years, the minimum required for basic literacy. Nearly 11 million children under the age of five die annually in the world mostly from preventable diseases and malnutrition.

One-third of the world's population, many of them parents, are infected with the bacteria that causes tuberculosis, a disease that kills 2 million people per year. As HIV infection rates rise around the world, not only in those countries already hardest hit by the virus but soon in ``second-wave'' countries identified by the National Intelligence Council (India, Russia, Nigeria, Ethiopia, and China), TB rates are expected to rise rapidly.

While these statistics are staggering, there is some good news: Three million more children a year now survive beyond their fifth birthday than in 1990. More than 60 countries have achieved a one-third reduction in their infant and under-5 child death rates. The world has come very close to eradicating polio, and is poised to do so by 2005. Also, in 2000, the United States and 188 other countries committed to the Millennium Development Goals and pledged to reduce severe poverty by half by 2015 and meet a set of accompanying goals, including halting and reversing the spread of HIV/AIDS and TB, reducing deaths of children under five by two-thirds, and ensuring universal primary education.

These goals are achievable, but only if we act now. The United States must lead in the global effort to save and improve children's lives, by expanding funding for the simple and effective treatments that we know work.

We must protect and expand funding for Child Survival programs. Half of all children who die in developing countries fall prey to just four conditions: pneumonia, diarrheal diseases, malaria and measles, combined with malnutrition. Each of these conditions can be treated or prevented--and other critical child health needs can be met as well-- for precious little money. A few cents can provide a child with a vitamin A capsule a few times a year to prevent blindness and death. Five days worth of antibiotics to cure pneumonia cost just 25 cents. A packet of Oral Re-hydration salts to prevent fatal dehydration from diarrheal disease costs just 33 cents. I have asked the Foreign Operations Appropriations Committee to expand funding for Child Survival in your 2004 Foreign Operations Bill by $150 million.

Other low-cost solutions can positively impact children's lives by helping their families. Two million people die each year from tuberculosis, and 8 million people become sick with the disease. TB is the leading killer of people with HIV/AIDS. TB primarily strikes adults during their productive, child-rearing years. Those who become ill often lose months of work. Sometimes, TB patients' children must leave school to work or care for their sick parent. Globally, $750 million per year could bring TB under control. I have asked the Foreign Operations Appropriations Committee to protect the bilateral TB control programs, and ensure that the funding is appropriately used as effectively as possible for direct, on-the-ground interventions and treatment.

Another important tool for fighting TB is the Global Fund to fight AIDS, TB and malaria (GFATM). Malaria kills nearly 1 million people each year, most of them children. AIDS has orphaned 13 million children already and, at current rates, there will be 40 million AIDS orphans by 2020.

The GFATM is an accountable multilateral mechanism capable of ensuring that drugs and treatment are efficiently disseminated to where they are needed on the ground. The GFATM is a public-private partnership, independent from the United Nations and other international bodies and working as a complement to existing bilateral international health efforts. I have asked the Foreign Operations Appropriations Committee to provide $1 billion in 2004 to this program, and ensure that it reaches as many countries as possible.

In addition to these programs, you have my support to expand funding for Basic Education programs in 2004 to $350 million (from all accounts), and to provide not less than $120 million for UNICEF, and $200 million for micro-enterprise programs, with at least half of that amount going to programs that target the very poor.

Again I would like to thank the Subcommittee for its outstanding leadership in saving and improving children's lives around the world by expanding funding for these critical health interventions.

Mr. Speaker, I rise before you today to offer my sincere congratulations to the Republic of Cyprus, as they recently became 1 of 10 new member states in the European Union (EU).

On April 16, 2003, President Tassos Papadopoulos signed the EU Accession Treaty, and the Republic of Cyprus officially became a part of the European Union. This will undoubtedly prove to be a momentous day for the people of Cyprus, as membership in the EU will provide security, prosperity, and increased activity in international affairs for both the Cypriot government and the citizens it represents. As Cyprus begins this new chapter in its history, I am confident that it will continue to serve as a model for economic and political progress, and the blossoming relationship between the Cypriot and U.S. governments will continue to flourish.

Of great note during this joyous occasion is the fact that the Greek- Cypriots who recently became a part of the EU have not forgotten about their Turkish counterparts who still toil under the illegitimate rule of Rauf Denktash. Just days after the EU accession, Greek Prime Minister Costas Simitis discussed details of a Greek-Cypriot plan to ease economic hardships in Turkish occupied northern Cyprus. Also, Cypriot President Tassos Papadopoulos has made it clear that negotiations for a reunified Cyprus will continue, and

that the recent EU accession of the southern portion of the island will not have any adverse effects on progress in this area. As President Papadopoulos stated at the signing ceremony:

I regret that the artificial walls of division and the line

of separation that was imposed by force prevent our Turkish

Cypriot compatriots from proceeding with us, within the

framework of a reunited Cyprus, on the way to Europe .... I

reiterate, from this forum as well, at this historic moment

of the signing of the Treaty, my firm commitment to exert

every effort to achieve a peaceful, workable and viable

solution to the Cyprus problem.

Mr. Speaker and fellow Members of Congress, I ask that you please join me in congratulating the government and people of the Republic of Cyprus on their recent accession into the European Union. In addition, I ask that the United States Congress continue to offer encouragement and support to both Greek and Turkish Cypriots as negotiations for a reunified island continue.

Mr. Speaker, for the past 64 years the Javits-Wagner- O'Day (JWOD) Program has empowered Americans who are blind or severely disabled by providing them with a diverse set of employment opportunities. Today 38,000 disabled Americans are realizing their potential by working in their local communities across the country under this program. These Americans are proud to provide federal and military customers with a wide array of SKILCRAFT and other JWOD products and services. The JWOD Program prides itself on delivering high quality products and services at a competitive price in the most convenient way possible.

Some of the product categories offered by the JWOD program include office supplies, military specific, safety, maintenance, repair, medical-surgical, janitorial-sanitation, and customization. The services that are provided to the federal and military customer include but aren't limited to call center and switchboard operation, military base and federal office building supply centers, CD-Rom duplication- replication, data entry, document imaging and grounds care.

I rise today in support of the Javits-Wagner-O'Day Program and the opportunities it provides for an underemployed population of hard working Americans. Furthermore, I urge my colleagues to purchase SKILCRAFT and

JWOD products from the House-Senate Stationary stores not only because of their quality and value, but also because of the socioeconomic benefits that can come from supporting the program. By purchasing these products and using these services we are enabling more disabled Americans to have the opportunity to become taxpayers. Today in Runnemede, New Jersey, 34 blind Americans are employed under the JWOD Program and are producing high quality items or services for us, the federal customer.

The JWOD Program is administered by the Presidentially-appointed Committee for Purchase From People Who Are Blind or Severely Disabled, with much assistance from National Industries for the Blind (NIB) and NISH, which serves people with a wide range of disabilities. More than 650 local nonprofit agencies associated with NIB and NISH employ people who are blind or disabled to produce the quality products and offer the services authorized for sale to the federal government under the JWOD Program.

The JWOD Program is a great illustration of a successful partnership that has the ability to continuously grow with the changing procurement environment within the federal government.

The Javits-Wagner-O'Day Program works for America.

Mr. Speaker, for the past 64 years the Javits-Wagner- O'Day (JWOD) Program has empowered Americans who are blind or severely disabled by providing them with a diverse set of employment opportunities. Today 38,000 disabled Americans are realizing their potential by working in their local communities across the country under this program. These Americans are proud to provide federal and military customers with a wide array of SKILCRAFT and other JWOD products and services. The JWOD Program prides itself on delivering high quality products and services at a competitive price in the most convenient way possible.

Some of the product categories offered by the JWOD program include office supplies, military specific, safety, maintenance, repair, medical-surgical, janitorial-sanitation, and customization. The services that are provided to the federal and military customer include but aren't limited to call center and switchboard operation, military base and federal office building supply centers, CD-Rom duplication- replication, data entry, document imaging and grounds care.

I rise today in support of the Javits-Wagner-O'Day Program and the opportunities it provides for an underemployed population of hard working Americans. Furthermore, I urge my colleagues to purchase SKILCRAFT and JWOD products from the House-Senate Stationary stores not only because of their quality and value, but also because of the socioeconomic benefits that can come from supporting the program. By purchasing these products and using these services we are enabling more disabled Americans to have the opportunity to become taxpayers. Today in Runnemede, New Jersey, X blind Americans are employed under the JWOD Program and are producing X items or services for us, the federal customer.

The JWOD Program is administered by the Presidentially-appointed Committee For Purchase From People Who Are Blind or Severely Disabled, with much assistance from National Industries for the Blind (NIB) and NISH, which serves people with a wide range of disabilities. More than 650 local nonprofit agencies associated with NIB and NISH employ people who are blind or disabled to produce the quality products and offer the services authorized for sale to the federal government under the JWOD Program.

The JWOD Program is a great illustration of a successful partnership that has the ability to continuously grow with the changing procurement environment within the federal government.

The Javits-Wagner O'Day Program works for America.

Mr. Speaker, I was unavoidably detained for the three votes on March 31, 2003. I was attending a rally for the safe return of Sgt. James Riley of Pennsauken, NJ, a mechanic in the Army's 507th Maintenance Company who was among five soldiers captured in southern Iraq on March 23.

Had I been present, I would have voted in favor of H.R. 1166 and H. Con. Res. 58, and I would have voted against H.R. 1463.

Mr. Speaker, I thank my friend from California for yielding and for organizing this chance for us to come to the floor and speak tonight.

Once a year in my district a group of people gather in the middle of a dusty field and they line up trucks and tents on either side of the field, and over the course of a weekend veterans from all over our area come to this field to receive counseling, health care services, clean clothes, a shower, a meal. This is called a Veterans Stand Down. Most of the veterans who come to the stand down are homeless or living on the street, battered by a mental illness.

Once a month in my district and in districts across the country, veterans look at the calendar as it heads toward the end of the month, and they look at their checkbook and they see nothing left in their checking account because the meager pensions and benefits that we pay veterans have run out before the end of the month.

Once a day in my district and in districts around this country, veterans call health clinics and health care facilities and hear that the waiting list for an appointment is a month, 3 months, 6 months, 7 months to see a doctor that they were promised they would be able to see when they agreed to serve their country.

A few months ago, this Congress debated the use of force in Iraq. I am one who as a matter of deep personal conviction feels that the use of force in Iraq was justified and I voted ``yes.'' I feel equal conviction tonight of a sense of shame that my country is disregarding the needs of men and women who served our country in the past and who serve it today.

Governing is choosing. And this body has already made a choice, which it is not too late to reverse, about honoring the men and women who have worn the uniform of this country. Veterans benefits and services are already insufficient to meet the needs of the veterans of this country. They are not good enough today to do what needs to be done. But just to restore this level of services for the next 10 years, we would need $28 billion more than the majority has provided in the budget that it rammed through this Chamber just a few days ago. So we are going to do $28 billion less in health care, in education, in disability benefits, in counseling, in housing, in burial benefits; $28 billion dollars less than we are doing right now over the course of the next 10 years.

Now, there are only four ways that we can deal with this problem. The first way we can say is, that is just too bad. That is the way it is going to be. And despite all of the ceremonies they will attend at home, despite all of the speeches they will make this Memorial Day, that is the position that a majority of this House took when it voted to cut veterans benefits by $28 billion.

The second choice we could take is to find the $28 billion somewhere else, cut waste, fraud and abuse and come up with the money. Well, it was the majority's budget resolution that could have found that $28 billion in waste, fraud and abuse. I remember the Committee on the Budget chairman came to the floor and stacked up reports from the General Accounting Office that purported to show waste, fraud and abuse and expressed his frustration that we were not cutting that. With all due respect, he was expressing frustration with himself because they wrote the resolution and they wrote the budget that could have cut $28 billion from somewhere else in the budget other than in veterans benefits, and they chose not to do.

The third way to restore these cuts is to borrow the money from our children, which is what the majority chooses to do when it has a higher priority. That is the way they propose to pay for the war in Iraq. I support the effort in Iraq. I voted for it. I certainly support paying for it, but I do not think we should borrow the money from our children to pay for it. I do not think that is a very justifiable response; but when it comes to higher priorities for the majority, that is what they do.

And the fourth way to pay for restoring these benefits is to choose veterans benefits over tax cuts. We are here tonight to say no vets cuts for tax cuts. No cuts in veterans services that are used to finance yet another drain on the Federal Treasury so the favored supporters of the majority can enjoy yet another tax break at the expense of the rest of the budget.

President Kennedy said, governing is choosing. Every Member of this House has a choice to make when it comes to veterans services. You can choose to let this $28 billion in cuts stay in the budget and explain to your constituents why the American Legion, why the Disabled American Veterans, why veterans groups around this country oppose that budget. My colleagues can make that choice. Or my colleagues can choose to identify some other area in the budget that could be cut to pay for this. But it is a little late for that because the budget has already been passed. The third choice is to advocate borrowing more money to cover these benefits, which I think is an irresponsible fiscal position. Or just a few more on the majority side could join the 215 of us who voted to choose veterans benefits over tax cuts, who resolved to say we do not want veterans cuts to pay for tax cuts; and we believe that is the right choice.

So when we all go home, Mr. Speaker, to the American Legion and the VFW for the Memorial Day services this year and tell the veterans how much we appreciate what they have done, I would say to you that with all due respect talk is cheap. And the $28 billion in cuts that are in the majority's budget are an affront and an insult to the people who have worn the uniform of this country. It is not too late to reverse this mistake.

The right thing to do is to repeal a part of the President's tax cut, to choose veterans benefits over this endless stream of worship at the idolatrous alter of tax cuts the majority seems to be engaged in.

So the next time there is a Veterans Stand Down in my district, I want to see doctors and nurses and counselors and therapists there to help the vets. And I want to see the pensions increased and broadened and enriched so veterans can make it to the end of the month and pay their bills. And I want to see the 90-day waiting list cut back to 9 days or 9 hours by hiring more nurses and clinicians and doctors at VA health care facilities across this country.

Governing is choosing. We choose not simply to honor the veterans of this country with our hollow words, a false honor indeed. We choose to honor the veterans of this country with our actions and our votes and to fulfill the promises we have made to them.

I would urge the majority, redress this wrong that you have committed in your budget. Fix this budget. Restore these veterans cuts and take it out of the tax cut you so unwisely passed.

Mr. Speaker. I rise before you today to condemn the recent acts of the Turkish-Cypriot leadership. Only two weeks after denying their citizens the right to conduct a referendum vote on acceptance of the UN plan for reunification of the island, the illegitimate Turkish-Cypriot government has once again denied the will of its constituency.

In response to Rauf Denktash's refusal to allow a referendum vote, an opposition party in Northern Cyprus, the United Cyprus Party, planned to hold its own vote to explicitly demonstrate the desire of Turkish- Cypriots for a resolution to the Cyprus Question. Under the direction of Mr. Denktash, the Turkish-Cypriot police surrounded the village of Elia, and forcefully ensured that the vote could not take place. The General Secretary of the United Cyprus Party, Izzet lzcan, was arrested in the incident along with five trade unionists.

Mr. Speaker, I ask that the Members of the House of Representatives join me in condemning these acts which took place at the hands of the illegal Turkish-Cypriot regime. Mr. Denktash has already harmed the people he is supposed to represent by denying them the opportunity to unite with their Greek-Cypriot neighbors and join the European Union in April, and it is absolutely detestable to see him silencing the will of his citizens once again. I urge my fellow colleagues to continue offering their support to the people of Cyprus, and request that the United Nations persevere in their efforts to bring about a fair and agreeable resolution to the longstanding division of the Republic of Cyprus.

Mr. Speaker, I rise as one who supported very strongly the resolution to authorize the use of force in Iraq. I know many patriotic Americans vigorously disagree with that position. I hope out of that vigorous disagreement today will come the unifying voice of thanksgiving because I rise to say thank you to the young men and women, all of whom are volunteers, wearing the uniform of this country. Whether they are directly engaged in the war or not, we should thank you.

To those at home who have been left behind, who will ache with their hearts when they see the empty place at the dinner table, or the arms that cannot hold the young son or daughter, we should say thank you. And to all of the employees, civilian and otherwise, in the private sector who helped to equip, arm and train our forces, we should say thank you.

There is serious disagreement in our country as to which way to go, we all feel strongly, but let us feel even more strongly today in the unity of thanksgiving for those serving the sacrifice of our great country.

Mr. Speaker, at times of great stress, great patriots rise to the occasion. Tonight there are young Americans who are rising to the occasion as they traverse across the desert sands of Iraq, as they soar across the unfriendly skies of Iraq, as they serve on naval ships. Tonight their families have risen to the occasion, as they sadly note the empty place at the dinner table, the bedtime story not read to a young son or daughter, or as they stare at the photograph on the mantel piece and wish that he or she were at home with them.

I know that every Member who has spoken tonight is a great patriot. Every Member who has spoken on both sides loves their country. And I know that many feel a sincere sense of doubt about some of the words that are in tonight's resolution. I would implore every Member, though, to try to rise to the occasion and rise above the words and rise to a symbol of unity that says to every one of these young men and women that their interests are our prime interests. I would ask every Member to support this resolution.

Mr. Speaker, I rise before you today in memory of a very special woman, Sister Peg Hynes.

A friend remembers Sister Peg as ``an extraordinary, vibrant, and unforgettable person. With a constant smile she lit up every place she was in with her good nature and good humor. She represented everything good about humanity--an abundance of generosity, selflessness and an abiding love for people of all backgrounds and walks of life. The world is a sadder and emptier place without her.''

Margaret Mary ``Peg'' Hynes was born on June 7, 1933 in Philadelphia, PA, the second of five daughters of Nellie (Burke) and Tom Hynes, who had emigrated from Co. Galway, Ireland. Growing up in North Philadelphia, Peg graduated from St. Columba Elementary School, and John W. Hallahan Catholic Girls' High School, where she was an All- Catholic basketball player and a distinguished honor student.

Peg worked for three years before entering the Sisters of St. Joseph, a religious community in Chestnut Hill, PA in 1954. In the convent she was given the name Sister Francis de Sales. Peg received degrees from Chestnut Hill College and Boston College, then embarked on a 31-year career in education. She was a teacher or principal at various schools, including St. John's in Hillsdale, NJ, Epiphany in Plymouth Meeting, PA, as well as St. Stephen, St. Athanasius, Christ the King, and Norwood-Fontbonne Academy, all in Philadelphia. Her last teaching assignment was Holy Trinity in Washington, DC.

In 1986, Sister Peg Hynes became Executive Director of the Heart of Camden Housing Corporation, a non-profit organization. The Heart of Camden had been established in 1984 by Father Michael Doyle, pastor of Sacred Heart Church in South Camden, to rehabilitate abandoned homes and sell them at cost to poor families in the neighborhood. Camden is one of the poorest cities in the United States, and Father Doyle has described the Heart of Camden's work as ``the most difficult housing assignment in the country''.

In testimony before the New Jersey State Assembly in 1996, Sister Peg described her mission: ``We are attempting to make ours a stable neighborhood by making home ownership available to families who would never qualify for a conventional mortgage. We have a dream, not a dream merely to renovate houses, but to renovate humanity. The goal is to continue to expand our efforts until every ugly eyesore of abandonment in our area has a light in the windows and life within the walls.'' Under Sister Peg's leadership, the Heart of Camden has helped more than 125 families to achieve the dream of home ownership. She also enlarged the scope of the Heart of Camden to include a counseling center, a food distribution program, a medical clinic, a youth center, and a family resource center.

Sister Peg successfully battled breast cancer twice--in 1982 and in November 2000. Because of health problems, Sister Peg stepped down as Executive Director of the Heart of Camden in October, 2001, and became Development Director, raising funds for the work to be done.

Over the years Sister Peg received many awards and accolades for her work, including the World Habitat Day Award from the United Nations, and the Fannie Mae Award of Excellence. None of these awards pleased her more than the one she received from her Alma Mater, Hallahan High School. Since its opening in 1901, Hallahan has graduated more than 37,000 girls. To celebrate the school's 100th Anniversary, Hallahan established a Hall of Fame, and selected Sister Peg as one of its first inductees.

Sister Peg was proud of her Irish roots. She loved traditional Irish music and enthusiastically participated in ceili dancing. In 1997, she was chosen for the Ring of Honor by the Philadelphia St. Patrick's Day Committee, and proudly helped to lead the annual parade. An athlete in her youth, Peg was an avid sports fan, and enjoyed watching Philadelphia's college and professional basketball and football teams. Having grown up in the shadow of Connie Mack Stadium, however, Sister Peg had a particular fondness for the Philadelphia Phillies baseball team.

Sister Peg was killed in an automobile accident on December 21, 2002. Bishop Nicholas DiMarzio of the Diocese of Camden stated, ``Sister Peg's untimely and tragic death is an irreparable loss to the work of the church and the city of Camden. She was known for her work with the heart of Camden, but it was her own heart that she will be remembered for--a heart that made a place for Christ and all those she served in His name.''

Mr. Speaker, please join me in honoring the memory of Sister Peg Hynes. Her dedication

to assisting others was unparalleled, and she will be sorely missed.

Madam Speaker, I thank my friend, the gentleman from Florida, for his enduring leadership in this very important cause. I join him in his expression of dismay that this very hopeful effort has apparently been sidetracked, and I would hope this Congress could urge Mr. Denktash and his Turkish military sponsors to reconsider this decision.

Madam Speaker, I believe that the principal division between the enlightened view of the Greek Cypriots and the regressive view of Mr. Denktash is their willingness to let the people decide their own fate.

In the set of principles articulated by Kofi Annan and the United Nations, there were many concessions made by the Greek Cypriots. There were many difficult decisions that the Greek Cypriot government would have to endure. That regime, because it is democratic, was willing to put that question to the people in the Greek part of Cyprus.

On the other hand, Mr. Denktash and his Turkish military sponsors were unwilling to let the voice of the Turkish Cypriot people determine their own fate. They have raised their voices on the streets and expressed overwhelming popular sentiment for a lawful and humane reunification of Cyprus. It is a tragedy that the voices of the Turkish Cypriots have been silenced by the short-term decision by Mr. Denktash and by his Turkish military sponsors.

Madam Speaker, I join the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Bilirakis), who has led us for so many years in this effort in urging Mr. Denktash and the Turkish Government to let the people of the Turkish part of Cyprus speak. Let them act for peace; and I believe we will, in fact, achieve peace.

Mr. Speaker, I rise tonight to speak on a subject that is very much on the hearts and minds of the American people, especially in these last 18 to 20 months, and that is terrorism.

Terrorism is the deliberate use of violence against civilians for the purpose of achieving a political end. Terrorism is very much on the front page of our newspapers, but it is not new to America at all. Terrorism has historical consequences, it has human consequences, and we must make sure that it has future punitive consequences as well.

This week we commemorate a sad anniversary, the 30th anniversary of the terrorist slaughter of two leading diplomats of our Nation. Thirty years ago this week, a group of Palestinian-based terrorists burst into the Saudi Arabian Embassy in Khartoum, Sudan, and held captive a group of diplomats, including some Americans. Evidence would suggest that upon orders from the leader of what was then known as the Palestinian Liberation Organization, what is now known as the Palestinian Authority, Mr. Arafat, a decision was made by these terrorists to first torture and then execute two American diplomats.

According to a National Security Agency report at the time, the murders were carried out by members of the Palestinian terrorist group known as Black September. According to a CIA report at that time, Black September was a cover term for Mr. Arafat's Fattah movement, and the murders were carried out at his orders.

This has very human consequences. Two diplomats serving their country who were murdered 30 years ago need to be remembered.

Cleo Noel was a native of Oklahoma. He graduated from the University of Missouri, earned his masters degrees from the University of Missouri and Harvard; and he had a distinguished career in the State Department.

The other murdered diplomat was George Moore, a native of Ohio who graduated from the University of Southern California where he also earned a masters degree. Mr. Moore also had a distinguished career with the State Department, and in fact was the highest-ranking African American in the Foreign Service at the time of his murder.

Terrorism must have future punitive consequences. Our Nation has been awakened to this great threat. Very recently on the 20th of February of this year the Justice Department achieved a major victory in our war on terrorism when it issued indictments for eight members of a terrorist organization known as the Palestinian Islamic Jihad, a group responsible for the murder of at least 100 civilians.

But we must have a more systematic approach to be successful in finding and bringing to American justice those who commit these acts of terror. The murderers of Cleo Noel and George Moore have never faced American justice over these last 30 years for the terrorism that they committed.

In order to give us more opportunity, more authority, to wage this war on terrorism, I have introduced the Koby Mandell Act of 2003, named after an American citizen whose life was snuffed out while outside of our country in Israel.

The purpose of this legislation is to create within the Department of Justice a permanent unit that will aggressively seek out those who have committed acts of terror against American citizens, wherever they happen to be in the world, so that American citizens can enjoy the protection of our law enforcement system wherever they may travel, most particularly in cases where the host countries are unwilling or unable to properly administer justice to those who commit such acts of atrocity.

This was the case in the case of our two martyred diplomats. The Government of Sudan released them very shortly after their arrest. They were turned over to what was then called the Palestinian Liberation Organization, and nothing happened: no trial, no meaningful prosecution, no punishment. The word went out that the price of an American life, the price of a life of an American diplomat, was nothing.

We believe differently. We respect the value of every human life, of every person of every country. We understand our obligation and our responsibility to stand forward and protect the lives of the people who have entrusted us with the governance of this Nation.

In cases where other nations are unwilling to mete out justice, we must do so. I would urge my colleagues to enlist as cosponsors of this important legislation.

Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Woolsey), my friend, for her persistence on this issue and her leadership on this issue.

There is a national consensus in America that if people are able- bodied to stay on welfare, they should have to work and the goal should be to work to get off of welfare. But there is also a national understanding, or there should be, that we cannot have a law that says people have to go to work if there are not any jobs for them to get. Today in America there are about 8 million people without a job looking for work and about 2\1/2\ million unfilled jobs being advertised. It makes no sense to tell people they must get a job that is not there. There is a national consensus that people should be good parents at the same time they are good workers. This bill would require people

to hold down three full-time jobs if they want to really get out of poverty and advance their family: the job they have to hold down to stay off of welfare; the job they need to do to go to school on evenings or weekends or whatever time they can find to move out of poverty; and the job they need to do as a mom or a dad, which is their most important job. Requiring people to hold down three full-time jobs is a surefire recipe for more poverty and greater welfare rolls.

And finally I thought there was a national consensus that we are going to stop telling State governments and State taxpayers what they had to do with their money. This bill contains $10 billion of unfunded mandates for the States at the time when they can least afford it. This bill violates an underlying bipartisan consensus for welfare reform. The Cardin bill, which the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Woolsey) helped so actively to write, would instead carry out that bipartisan consensus. It deserves the support of every Member of this body.

Mr. Speaker, I thank my friend for yielding me the time and my friend from Georgia for helping bring this bill to the floor.

I congratulate the women of the University of Portland on their outstanding achievement of winning the NCAA Division I soccer championship, and their achievement gives us pause to look backward at the world that their mothers lived in and forward to the world in which their daughters will live.

The world in which the mothers of these outstanding champions lived frowned on the idea of young women playing sports. We did not fund it. We did not support it. We discouraged it in ways that not only failed to enrich the lives of little girls but failed to enrich the lives of their brothers and boy counterparts.

When the mothers of these women were in high school and college, athletic opportunities for young women were the exception, not the rule. That changed because title IX was enacted over 3 decades ago, because women of vision like the late Patsy Mink stood here and made sure that it was enacted.

We have not only the opportunity to congratulate the women of the University of Portland; we have the opportunity to protect this opportunity for

their daughters as well. Because here we are again, over 3 decades later, and the basic premises of title IX are being questioned by some in this body and in this country.

Make no mistake about it, Mr. Speaker, the obligation we have to our daughters is to make sure that the principle of title IX, which is equality of opportunity for men and women in sports, carries through into the future so that the daughters of these champions that we honor today will have equal or greater opportunities when compared to those shared by their mothers.

These women are an inspiration to girls and young women across the country. Last week, a 10-year-old soccer player competing in a winter indoor soccer league scored three goals in two games. She is an outstanding young woman. I hope that one day she will stand in the shoes of these outstanding champions from Oregon. Her name is Jacquelyn Andrews. She is my daughter.

So I say to Patsy Mink and I say to the women that we honor today, I thank them for the inspiration they have given the daughters of America. Let us live up to that inspiration and protect the legal principles of title IX.