Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, I rise to offer a personal explanation. On June 23, 2003, I was absent from the Chamber as I attended my son's high school graduation. During that time, I was not present to vote on rollcall votes 297, 298, 299, and 300. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yea'' on rollcall votes 297-300.

Mr. Speaker, I rise on behalf of my 84-year-old mother and millions like her across this country. She worked her entire life in the factories of New Jersey. Today she has Alzheimer's and spends over half of her social security check on prescription drugs. If it was not for my sister and me, she would not be able to live with the dignity she deserves.

Now, this Republican package is wrapped in a label that says, ``I care,'' but when you open it up, it contains nothing more than an empty promise.

Under this Republican plan, which lacks the compassion promised by the President and expected from our doctors, millions of seniors who want to stay in traditional Medicare with their own doctor would essentially be forced into HMOs and left without the choices they deserve. This bill is the road towards privatizing Medicare.

Republicans just cannot help themselves. Once again, they have chosen corporate interests over human interests. America's seniors deserve our respect. They have worked too hard, sacrificed too much to be forced to choose between paying their rent, putting food on the table, and having access to life-enhancing drugs.

Support the Democratic substitute that has a real prescription drug provision under Medicare.

Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the requisite number of words.

Mr. Chairman, three quick points.

Number one is this says none of the funds, no funds will go to any municipality, any State entity, any governmental entity for any homeland security purpose if they have chosen in a totally legitimate way not to give information about someone's citizenship like mine or anyone else's because that is what the gentleman's amendment reads.

This is a coercive action against any State, municipal or other entity to say to that State, municipality or other entity, you must do a series of things, including giving information on a person's citizenship status, like my citizenship status, to the INS. So much for State rights, so much for the local municipalities know best. So much for all I have listened to for the last decade.

This is an unfunded mandate on all of those governmental entities making it an extension of what was the INS. That is what you really want to do.

Lastly, you can keep taking lessons in Spanish, but if this is your Hispanic outreach we want none of it. I urge a no vote.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor Lambda Theta Phi Fraternidad Latina for its continued advocacy and celebration of Latino culture. Lambda Theta Phi will be holding its 2003 National Brotherhood Conference on June 20-22nd at the Wyndham Hotel in Newark, NJ.

Founded in 1975 at Kean University in Union, NJ, Lambda Theta Phi has grown from 14 founding members to over 85 national chapters. It is the first and only nationally recognized Latino Greek letter fraternity in the United States.

For over 25 years, Lambda Theta Phi has played a leading role in building unity among Latinos and provided a critical support network as young Latinos pursue their academic and

professional careers. The work of the fraternity has truly embodied its principle of ``en la union esta la fuerza'' (in unity there is strength). Lambda Theta Phi has helped provide a number of Latinos with a strong sense of community and an extensive peer network as they graduate college and embark on their professional careers.

Lambda Theta Phi also continues to provide valuable service to the community through responsible political and social action. The diverse makeup of the fraternity places it in a unique position to promote cultural awareness and to provide positive role models for the Latino community. Lambda Theta Phi is known for its dedication to activities that benefit the community including citizenship and voter registration drives, disaster relief, and Hispanic college days, which provide an opportunity for Latino high school students to visit colleges.

As an honorary member of Lambda Theta Phi, it is my distinct pleasure to congratulate all the members of the fraternity and wish them the best as they continue to connect Latinos across the country and help to build unity among the next generation of Latino leaders.

Today I ask my colleagues to join me in honoring Lambda Theta Phi Fraternidad Latina for promoting unity among Latinos, and to congratulate all the members of the fraternity as they celebrate their 2003 National Brotherhood Conference.

Mr. Speaker, I regret that a family matter yesterday forced me to miss rollcall votes 276, 277, and 278. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yea'' on rollcall votes 276-278.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor the inspiring dedication of Jennifer Bernardes, a 13-year-old student whose compassion has had a wonderful effect on the life of her fellow New Jerseyan, Harry Ettlinger.

Ms. Bernardes was one of the first students in New Jersey to take part in the ``Adopt-a-Survivor'' program, which matches young students with Holocaust survivors. Sponsored by the Holocaust Council of the United Jewish Communities of Metro West in Whippany, NJ, this program provides an amazing opportunity for young students to develop lasting relationships with and learn from those who have survived or escaped the Holocaust.

Mr. Ettlinger, a World War II veteran who escaped the Holocaust, was the adoptee of Jennifer Bernardes, an eighth-grade student at Oliver Street School in Newark, NJ. As a participant in this program, Jennifer agreed to learn about Mr. Ettlinger's experiences, and to tell his story in 2045, the 100th anniversary of the liberation of the Nazi death camps.

Jennifer Bernardes has demonstrated a strong commitment to learn about Mr. Ettlinger's experiences and met with him several times over the course of a year to hear his first-hand accounts. Recently, Jennifer spoke at Newark's Municipal Holocaust Commemoration sponsored by Mayor Sharpe James. She has also taken part in talks at the Jewish Community Campus in Whippany, NJ, and Oliver Street School, and has spoken with other school groups about participating in the program. Jennifer's dedication has taught her about humanity's darkest hour, and, in learning Mr. Ettlinger's story, she has inspired others to participate in this invaluable program.

Jennifer's commitment has gone beyond what the ``Adopt-a-Survivor'' program hopes to accomplish. Earlier this year, Jennifer helped reunite Mr. Ettlinger with Hanne Hirsch, a childhood neighbor and schoolmate from his hometown of Karlsruhe, Germany, who he had not been able to locate after the Holocaust. On a visit to the Holocaust Museum in Washington, DC, Jennifer and a fellow student noticed Mrs. Hirsch's story at an exhibit, and after successfully tracking her down, Mr. Ettlinger was reunited with Mrs. Hirsch after 64 years.

Today, I ask my colleagues to join me in honoring Jennifer Bernardes for her devotion and enthusiasm, and for her commitment to keeping alive the personal histories of Holocaust survivors. It is through the dedication of America's youth that we can ensure that these important stories are never forgotten.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong opposition to this unfair and undemocratic rule and proposal.

Only in Washington would the Republican tax cuts just signed into law by the President come at the expense of working families.

Only in Washington would Republicans borrow money to pay for that Republican tax package while failing to include child care tax credits for the working families whose very children will be forced to pay for the Republicans' fiscal irresponsibility.

Only in Washington would the Republican tax package leave one in five children of active duty U.S. military families out from benefiting from the increased tax credit while their parents are off risking their lives in Iraq, Afghanistan, or elsewhere for their Nation.

Only in Washington would Republicans then propose an $82 billion tax bill, adding another $100 billion to the national debt to fix a $3.5 billion problem.

If we repeal every sunset in their tax bill, which is what we are beginning to do here, we will have $400 billion in annual deficits. That is not what we want to do to the very children we are trying to help in this bill.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor Monsignor Edward J. Hajduk for his years of service to St. Henry's Church and the people of Bayonne, Newark, and Elizabeth. Monsignor Hajduk celebrated the 50th Anniversary of his ordination to the priesthood on Sunday, June 1 at St. Henry's Church in Bayonne, New Jersey.

Monsignor Hajduk has led a long life of commitment and service to congregations throughout Bayonne, Newark, and Elizabeth area. Ordained on May 30, 1953, Monsignor Hajduk first served at the Sacred Heart Church in Lyndhurst, New Jersey, where he was a parochial vicar for sixteen years. During his time at Sacred Heart, Monsignor Hajduk was the assistant director and moderator of the Catholic Youth Organization of Bergen County, a teacher at the Immaculate Conception High School, and a professor of Theology at Felician College.

In 1969, Monsignor Hajduk was appointed by Archbishop Boland to serve as the youth director of the Archdiocese of Newark, where he worked until 1971. The Monsignor then served as administrator of St. James Church in Newark, where he played a vital role in reorganizing the parish. In 1979, Monsignor Hajduk was named chaplain to Pope John Paul II and given the title of Reverend Monsignor. In 1984, Monsignor Hajduk became a pastor at St. Hedwig's Church in Elizabeth, where he served for twelve years. During his service at St. Hedwig's, Monsignor Hajduk undertook the task of renovating the interior of the church. The Monsignor was elected dean of the Elizabeth Deanery, and asked by Archbishop McCarrick to lead a city-wide study of the future of the church in Elizabeth.

Born and raised in Bayonne, Monsignor Hajduk returned to Bayonne in 1992 to serve

as pastor of St. Henry's Church, where he is currently serving his second term. At St. Henry's, Monsignor Hajduk has helped restore and renovate the interior of the church and upgrade some if its facilities. Under his leadership, the Religious and Youth Center at the Church has grown substantially, and now serves over 500 students.

Monsignor Hajduk continues to be an active member of the Bayonne community. He is currently a member of the Bayonne Faith Based Initiative Advisory Board, serves on the board of directors of the Bayonne Mental Health Center, is active in the Bayonne Interfaith Council, and was a representative to the Bayonne Census in 2000.

Today I ask my colleagues to join me in honoring Monsignor Edward J. Hajduk for his exceptional service and dedication to the people of New Jersey.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor Larry Barulli, recipient of the Lance Corporal Stanley J. Kopcinski Memorial Award. The Bayonne Detachment #191, Marine Corps League honored Mr. Barulli on May 26, 2003, at the VFW hall in Bayonne, New Jersey.

Mr. Barulli served with the United States Army from 1950 until 1952, and was stationed with the ``C'' Company 79th Engineers Battalion in Korea from September 1951 until September 1952. For the past seven years, Larry Barulli has been an active member of the Korean War Veterans Association of Hudson County 38th Parallel Chapter. He is currently a member of the Korean War Veterans Association of Hudson County, the Catholic War Veterans Assumption Post 1612, and the American Legion--Mackenzie Post 165.

Mr. Barulli played a critical role in establishing a monument in memory of the 126 Hudson County residents who gave their lives in the Korean War. The monument, which sits at the end of Washington Street in Jersey City, memorializes 126 men from twelve Hudson County communities who lost their lives during the Korean War. As the war often referred to as the ``Forgotten War,'' Mr. Barulli has helped ensure that the memory of these men will live on forever.

The Lance Corporal Stanley J. Kopcinski Award is given out each year by the Bayonne Detachment of the Marine Corps League in memory of Stanley J. Kopcinski, the first Marine from Bayonne killed in the Vietnam War. Lance Corporal Kopcinski was well revered by his fellow Marines and was voted ``most likely to receive the Medal of Honor.'' The award is presented to those who follow in the spirit of Lance Corporal Kopcinski's dedication and service.

A graduate of Bayonne High School, Mr. Barulli is now retired from Barulli's Deli Grocery, which he owned and ran with his father until 1980. Larry Barulli and his wife Elizabeth Ann Siwek Barulli will celebrate their 40th Wedding Anniversary in December, 2003.

Today, I ask my colleagues to join me in honoring Larry Barulli and congratulating him on receiving a well-deserved award. His continued service to the veterans of Bayonne and to the people of Hudson County is an inspiration for us all.

On the gentleman's very point, I want to thank our colleague for convening this opportunity to talk about a very important issue. I would like to ask both of the gentlemen, you sat, as I did here, during the State of the Union speech. You heard the President, as I did, say that one of the concerns is that Iraq sought to buy uranium in Africa. And that was included in the President's State of the Union speech, one of many compelling reasons why supposedly we had to be alarmed about Iraq and Saddam Hussein. And yet we read in today's Washington Post that the National Security Advisor, Condoleezza Rice conceded that that was an inaccurate claim. And yet here before the entire body of Congress and the American people, we were told that one of the compelling reasons, why do you buy uranium? You buy uranium for nuclear devices. Iraq is something that we need to be concerned about.

And my question to both of my colleagues is, does this not go to the fundamental issue that if the President's preemption doctrine, not that many of us agree with that as a doctrine that should be followed by the United States, but this doctrine of preemption which basically says we cannot wait for the risk to rise to a level that is a threat to the national security of the United States, we have to go in there in any country and preempt that threat, that even if one is to ascribe themselves to that view, that it is based upon the ability of the United States too gather accurate intelligence and make honest assessments? Does that not go to that very purpose of that doctrine?

When we see the revelations that seem to be coming forth like Condoleezza Rice saying, yes, that statement that the President made before Congress and the whole Nation about uranium purchases in Africa being false, that those begin to raise concerns. How do we begin to have any credibility in any such preemption doctrine when the fundamental underpinnings seem to be at question, which is what I think the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Delahunt) is saying.

Mr. Speaker, I think the gentleman's point is well taken. As a matter of fact, one of the things that I was additionally concerned about, and the gentleman did mention the Internet and how anybody who just did a casual search would see that this foreign minister had not been in office in a decade, and yet we rely upon it as fact by which we act and we do not even do a rudimentary study to find out whether that document had legitimacy.

It is interesting to note that one of our allies in this regard seems to have the same problem in this regard. There is an article that appeared in The New York Times that talks about how the top aide to Prime Minister Blair wrote to the head of Britain's Intelligence Service earlier this spring conceding that the government's presentation of a report on Iraqi arms was mishandled. And the report which is entitled, ``Iraq, Its Infrastructure of Concealment, Deception and Intimidation,'' was used as part of the reason to pursue an invasion of Iraq and Saddam Hussein. And it is now referred to in the British news media as the dodgy dossier because of evidence that part of it was down loaded from the Internet, completed with typographical errors from an American student's thesis that relied on 12-year-old public information. And it is now being reviewed by two parliamentary committees in Great Britain because it raises doubts about its central claim that Iraq's chemical and biological weapons were in such a state of readiness that they could be launched within 45 minutes, within 45 minutes.

That type of information is incredibly frightening when that is the basis under which we would deploy American troops, put at harm American soldiers.

There is no question, I think we would all agree, that Saddam Hussein was a dictator, was a bad actor, happy to see him leave from the world stage; but the question is, what invokes the policy of preemption, the use of U.S. forces and power abroad, under what basis? That is why so many of us who asked questions at the time and say, well, what is the foundation, what is the clear and present danger to the U.S., what is the imminent threat, have real concerns now as I think we see this intelligence information suggesting that there was not necessarily a clear and present danger, any imminent threat to the United States.

I think it puts us in a serious doubt with the international community when the next situation arises. I do not know what my colleague thinks about it.

Mr. Speaker, I think the questioning was a precursor, as mine was, when Secretary Powell appeared before the committee before that, and I asked the Secretary how long, how many lives will we lose, how long will we be there, how much will it cost, and are we nation building?

And I know that my colleagues have listened certainly for the decade that I have been here, listened to our colleagues on the other side of the aisle talk about how they abhorred the concept of nation-building when we were in Bosnia and other places, stopping real atrocities that were taking place, and hearing we are into nation-building.

And yet as the gentleman was trying to elicit from the witness before our Committee on International Relations, which we both sit on, we have no real planning. There was Jay Gardner, who was designated as the head of the Office of Reconstruction and Humanitarian Assistance. Here we have the Department of Defense doing nation-building, something that we consistently heard our colleagues on the other side of the aisle rail against, and he in essence was on the job a full 3 weeks, and after all of that preparation that supposedly took place for him to be there, we get rid of him in 3 weeks. He was going to develop a national assembly of Iraqis, and that did not work. And then his State Department successor, Ambassador Bremer, thought that perhaps seven opposition groups might be able to work effectively as an interim government. That was soon abandoned.

Now we are talking about a so-called advisory council of 20 or 25 Iraqis, but this latest plan of an advisory council seems to minimize, not increase, the participation of Iraqis in the process for months, if not longer.

So here we are in this preemption doctrine for which we now have serious questions about the underpinnings under which we committed massive force because it was alleged at the time that there was a clear and present danger to the United States. We are told by the administration, well, you have to have a lot more time; and yet we did not want to give any more time to U.N. weapons inspectors, but we are asked to give enormous amounts of time here. And we have the full roam of the country uninhibited. And then we supposedly were prepared for the post-Saddam era, and we seem not to be able to put that together, or I am not sure what our intent is.

We do not seem to know where Saddam Hussein is. We also do not seem to know where Osama bin Laden is, and that is a whole other issue in terms of Afghanistan and what happened. And so you have the confluence of all of these issues.

The point really is that it is the congressional responsibility for oversight that we have on behalf of all of the American people to raise the questions and get the answers that ultimately lead us to make the right choices in the future, informed choices, based upon real substantive information, not perceived or possibly manipulated information, and to be understanding that we have got to be prepared. We won the war; we salute the men and women who did not ask whether this was the right conflict or not but just responded to the Nation's call. I visited one of our bases and the young men and women there told me, Congressman, we don't ask whether this is right or wrong, we don't pick the time, the place or the conflict, we just respond. We salute them for that. But before we send those young men and women, sons and daughters of Americans of this country, we should know that we are sending them on the right information, that we have a plan not only to win the war but then to achieve the peace and to make sure that the seeds that we seek to sow in terms of democracy take place. Those are some of our concerns I think in this process.

I think there are a variety of things. I am sure some of our colleagues have some ideas as well. But fundamentally you have to get Iraqi civil society back engaged. You have to create the wherewithal to show that not only were we liberators, hopefully, but at the end of the day that we have also come to help really create a better society and to assist Iraqis to be able to do that. That comes with, first of all, at least having the functioning entities of civil society be able to take place, as you suggested, some of those institutions. As our colleagues suggested, to get some of the basic fundamental services that Iraqis would expect from a liberating force to take place and to begin to act. So, clean water, running sewerage systems, the opportunity for electricity to be present, the return to schools of children, the opportunity for hospitals to

be able to take care of the sick. The rudimentary elements of a civil society start there. And then to engage civil society within Iraq to begin to perform some of their own functions and to also ask the beginnings of Iraq's natural resources to go for the purposes of helping Iraq rebuild itself. I think the American people have the right to know how long are we going to continue to be there? How many more lives will we lose? How much will it cost? And, as I always listen to our colleagues here in the House and in committee, what is our exit strategy? What is our exit strategy?

No, we do not hear about exit strategies or nation building anymore.

Very briefly, I appreciate the gentleman's engaging in the dialogue, and I hope we will continue it in the future. I think we owe America's young men and women who went into harm's way, that before we call upon them again for a preemptive strike, that we are doing so based upon sound information, that we are based on intelligence that is honest, truthful and transparent, that we ultimately have a plan not only to win the war but to win the peace, because we are losing soldiers every day. It is not as well publicized, but we are losing soldiers every day. We deserve, before we send the finest to answer the Nation's call, and that is where the congressional responsibility takes place, in asking these questions, in getting answers and being able to prepare for the future.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the Armed Forces Naturalization Act, and I hope that it will give rise to some other opportunities that have been discussed here in terms of those who serve our country and their families.

I remember during the 107th Congress when a Republican colleague of ours referred to legal permanent residents as enemies of the State on this very floor during campaign finance reform debate. Thousands of these enemies of the State, as they were referred to, are serving in our Armed Forces. They fight for our country, they shed blood for the country, and in some cases, they die for this country. They are also protecting our airports, our seaports, and our borders. They risk their lives daily in Afghanistan, Iraq, and other places around the world to protect us here at home.

These members of the so-called green-card military, the more than 37,000 noncitizen legal immigrants currently serving in America's Armed Forces, have been fighting, and in some cases dying, for their adopted country. In fact, a noncitizen, Lance Corporal Jose Gutierrez of Guatemala was the first U.S. casualty in the war with Iraq,

and at least seven other noncitizen soldiers also made the ultimate sacrifice in Iraq.

So this legislation rectifies a variety of barriers faced by U.S. servicemen and women seeking to become citizens of the country that they serve and that they risk their lives for. I hope we will not only pass this, but it will give rise to other opportunities.

Mr. Speaker, the Republican tax plan is nothing more than voodoo economics. Only in Washington would Republicans tell average American families that raising their national debt is a way to solve this economy's malaise. Raising their debt.

This is not a $350 billion tax package; it is a $1 trillion tax package, because no one believes that it will be ultimately eliminated once it is enacted. And that $1 trillion tax package is a job killer, not a job creator. Ask the 2 million-plus jobs we have already lost under the original Bush tax plan.

And, yes, it has a child tax credit; but then, before you know it, it is taken away and eliminated. But guess what is not eliminated? The accelerated reductions in the top income tax. They are forever. Child tax credit: here today, gone tomorrow. Top tax relief: there forever. That is class warfare.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor the Hispanic Organization of Students in Technology (HOST), the student chapter of the Society of Hispanic Professional Engineers (SHPE) at the New Jersey Institute of Technology (NJIT). They were honored for their outstanding achievements at the HOST/SHPE Gala Banquet on April 30, 2003.

The Hispanic Organization of Students in Technology/Society of Hispanic Professional Engineers represents a group of extremely talented and dedicated students, who, at a young age, have already shown amazing promise and success. Under the leadership of Student President Danial Calles, HOST/SHPE attained the second highest membership of a Society of Hispanic Professional Engineers student chapter nationwide and was responsible for the third-highest attendance to the 2002 Society of Hispanic Professional Engineers Eastern Technical Career Conference.

Moises Cordero, Daniel Nunez, and Randy Weston, three students who form the Web Site Competition Team, made new strides for New Jersey Institute of Technology and for aspiring students when they won first place for the first ever Web Site Competition at the 2002 Society of Hispanic Professional Engineers Eastern Technical Career Conference. Their success illustrates not only the strength of NJIT, but the drive and potential of these promising students.

Under the guidance of Carlomango Ontaneda, the SHPE chapter advisor at NJIT has helped to empower many promising students achieve their goals at NJIT and beyond. As Assistant Director for Recruitment at New Jersey Institute of Technology's Educational Opportunity Program, Mr. Ontaneda continues to demonstrate his commitment to increasing educational opportunities and helping students attain their dreams. He was recently the recipient of the Society of Hispanic Professional Engineers Eastern Technical Career Conference Higher Education Award.

Today, I ask my colleagues to join me in honoring the achievements of Mr. Ontaneda and the talented students of the Hispanic Organization of Students in Technology/Society of Hispanic Professional Engineers at New Jersey Institute of Technology. I applaud their dedication and their success, and wish them the best as they head towards an already bright future.

Mr. Speaker, what are Republicans afraid of? Are they afraid of the anger of millions of unemployed when they find out Republicans are passing yet another massive tax cut to the already well-off, while unemployment benefits for hard-hit families are about to run out? Are Republicans afraid of middle-class workers who do not know whether we are going to have another waive of corporate downsizing in this country that will put their jobs, their health care, and their kids' educations at risk?

What is clear is that Republicans are afraid of something because they will not even allow Democrats to offer our alternative plan. Republicans do not want an open debate because they do not want the American middle class to see that they are borrowing hundreds of billions of dollars tomorrow for the tax cuts they pay today.

America cannot be red, white, and broke and meet its challenges both at home and abroad. It is time for the Republicans to realize that a tax cut is not the answer to every problem. For 2\1/2\ years it has not worked; ask the 2 million jobs that are now gone. It is time to stop squandering the future of American families and start doing something about this economic mess.

Mr. Speaker, what are Republicans afraid of? Are they afraid of the anger of millions of unemployed when they found out Republicans are passing yet another massive tax cut while unemployment benefits for hard hit families are about to run out?

Are Republicans afraid of middle-class workers who do not know whether we are going to have yet another wave of corporate downsizing in this country that will put their jobs, their health care and their kids education at risk?

What is clear is that Republicans are afraid of something because they will not even allow Democrats to offer our alternative plan. We go halfway around the world to bring democracy to Iraq, and then they stifle democracy here. What a lesson to all those who we seek to spread the benefits of democracy to. They defile this bastion of democracy.

Republicans do not want an open debate because they do not want the American middle class to see what they are doing. They borrow hundreds of billions from tomorrow to pay for tax cuts today, geared to those who already have plenty of income. Republicans create a mountain of debt on this and the next generation of Americans, and they conduct class warfare when they sunset the minimal tax provisions they provide to average Americans in 3 years, but wealthy Americans, they let those provisions continue to ride for quite some time.

America simply cannot be red, white and broke and meet its challenges both at home and abroad in the years to come. It is time for Republicans to realize that their tax cut is not the answer to every problem. For 2\1/2\ years it has not worked; ask the 8.8 million Americans who are unemployed.

Let us stop squandering the future of American families and start doing something about the economic mess they have created; and if my colleagues will not, at least allow us to offer an alternative that will put millions of Americans back to work. Give us the opportunity for a vote. What are my colleagues hiding from? Let us show the rest of the world what democracy is really about.