John Conyers

Mr. CONYERS

Mr. CONYERS. I thank the gentleman.

Mr. CONYERS

Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Speaker, 1 month ago, I introduced legislation repealing baseball's antitrust exemption. The bill was designated H.R. 21, in honor of Curt Flood's number when he played for the St. Louis Cardinals. In an ear when the terms hero and courage are used all too frequently, Curt Flood stands out as the genuine article, a true inspiration to all Americans who care about economic and social equality. I am attaching a letter from President Clinton and several articles written which describe his career and reiterate these very points. Most of us are well aware of the courage Curt Flood displayed when he refused to accept being traded to the Philadelphia Phillies. His letter to then Commissioner Kuhn cut directly to the core of the issue: After 12 years in the Major Leagues, I do not feel that I am a piece of property to be bought and sold irrespective of my wishes. I believe that any system which produces that result violates my basic rights as a citizen and is inconsistent with the laws of the United States and the several states. Although Curt Flood lost his legal battle challenging baseball's antitrust exemption, the public recognized the moral validity of his arguments--he was not a piece of property. His case paved the way for free agency in all professional sports. A national poll taken in the wake of Flood v. Kuhn showed that fans opposed the reserve clause, which bound players to teams for life, by an 8 to 1 margin. And while thousands of athletes have subsequently benefited from free agency, Curt Flood paid a heavy price for his decision to take on the baseball owners. The 3-time all-star and 7-time gold glove award winner played only 13 more games before being forced out of baseball. Less well known is the fortitude Curt Flood displayed in fighting racial intolerance. At the same time Jackie Robinson was breaking the color barrier with the Brooklyn Dodgers, Curt Flood was facing the Jim Crow laws as the sole black man playing for the High Point, NC Hi-Toms. He alone was barred from gas station rest rooms. Only Curt Flood was forced to eat at the kitchen door while his teammates were served in the dining room. And when he played a doubleheader, he experienced only greater humiliation. As he explained to Ken Burns: After the end of the first game you take off your uniform and you throw it into a big pile. . . . [But the clubhouse manager] sent my uniform to the colored cleaners which was probably 20 minutes away and there I sat while all the other guys were on the field. [The crowd has] really been giving me hell all day long, and now I'm sitting there stark naked waiting for my uniform to come back from the cleaners and the other guys were out on the field. So finally they get my uniform back and I walk out on the field . . . boy you'd think that I had just burned the American Flag. Curt Flood's talents and goodwill extended well beyond baseball. He ran a foundation to benefit inner-city youngsters. An accomplished painter, his portrait of Martin Luther King hangs today in Corretta King's living room. In the end, we will remember Curt Flood for having the courage to tell America what should have been plain and obvious all along. Discrimination is wrong. People--even athletes--are not property. Baseball is a business and should be subject to the competition laws. A few days before Curt Flood died, I wrote him, suggesting that if the legislation I introduced in his honor was to pass into law, he should come to the White House signing ceremony. That can't happen now, but I know his indomitable spirit will be with us as we continue his fight for equality and fairness. I know all Members--and indeed all professional athletes--join me in mourning this courageous man. The White House, Washington, DC, January 24, 1997. Mrs. Curt Flood, 4139 Cloverdale Ave., Los Angeles, CA. Dear Mrs. Flood: Hillary and I were saddened to learn of your husband's death, and we extend our deepest sympathy. Curt Flood was a man of extraordinary ability, courage, and conviction. His achievements on the field were matched only by the strength of his character. While there are no words to ease the pain of your loss, I hope you can take comfort in the knowledge that Curt will be remembered by so many Americans as one of baseball's finest players and a lasting influence on the sport he loved so much. We hope that the loving concern and support of your family and friends will sustain you during this difficult time. You are in our thoughts and prayers. Sincerely, Bill Clinton.

Mr. CONYERS

Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Speaker, this is a sad day for the House of Representatives and for the American people. For the first time in history, our body will be voting to punish the Speaker of the House. How we as a body act to punish Mr. Gingrich will send a message to the American public. It will say whether we are able to monitor our own institution; it will say whether we prefer party loyalty to truth and integrity; it will say whether Mr. Gingrich is the Member best suited to represent our institution. The punishment contained in House Resolution 31 is inadequate. The punishment neither reflects the seriousness of the misdeeds admitted to by Mr. Gingrich nor Mr. Gingrich's history of abuse of the rules of the House. Make no mistake about the gravity of the charges against Gingrich. Certain Members of the majority have attempted to portray Mr. Gingrich's misleading statements as oversight, and they have attempted to portray the tax law he violated as arcane. Do not let these statements mislead the entire body. Speaker Gingrich has admitted to all of the violations alleged by the subcommittee. He acknowledged that ``in my name and over my signature, inaccurate, incomplete, and unreliable statements were given to the committee'' and that ``he brought down on the people's House a controversy which could weaken the faith people have in their Government.'' The special prosecutor has make it clear that he believes that Mr. Gingrich intentionally misled the ethics counsel. The special prosecutor and the ethics committee also made it clear that Mr. Gingrich violated the agreement that forbid him to conduct a media strategy to minimize, or spin, the findings of the Ethics Committee. And after review of the committee's report, it seems very likely that Mr. Gingrich has violated tax law. And Gingrich did not violate arcane tax law, but rather the very basic premise that you cannot use tax- exempt funds for political purposes. He used tax-exempt funds to help build a political machine. And it is clear that this is not the end of Mr. Gingrich's ethical and legal troubles. The committee will make available to the IRS all relevant documents produced during the subcommittee's inquiry and establish a liaison with the IRS. The Department of Justice may further investigate the actions of Mr. Gingrich. We have no idea what these, or other investigations, find. But, it does not matter. Because what we already know is enough for us to say, enough is enough, let us show the American public that will have the strength and integrity to punish our Members. And a slap on the wrist of Mr. Gingrich that allows him to retain the Speaker's gavel, does not show our strength or integrity. Further, this is not the first time that Mr. Gingrich has been found to have violated House rules. The Speaker has already been cited six times for his disregard of the House rules. It has become very clear that Mr. Gingrich has shown a willful disregard for our rules. In fact, Mr. James Cole has found that ``over a number of years and in a number of situations * * * Mr. Gingrich showed a disregard and lack of respect for the standards of conduct that applied to his activities.'' This willful ``disregard and lack of respect for the standards of conduct'' make it clear that the punishment of reprimand does not reflect the seriousness of Mr. Gingrich's multiple offenses. Comparable offenses historically have met with more severe punishment. In 1979, the House voted to censure a representative for diverting staff salaries for personal use and in 1980, the House censured another representative of financial misconduct. Mr. Gingrich diverted tax exempt funds for political purposes and then attempted over several years to cover his tracks by misleading the committee. Certainly, these actions are deserving of at least a censure. Unfortunately Mr. Speaker, Mr. Gingrich's actions have weakened the American public's faith in their Government. I find it unconscionable that my colleagues in the majority, after hearing Mr. Gingrich's admission, would vote to reinstate him as Speaker of the House. Are they saying that Mr. Gingrich is the best person among their ranks to lead their party and to lead the House of Representatives? Mr. Gingrich himself has said that Ethics Committee investigations of a Speaker must ``meet a higher standard of public accountability'' than those involving other Members of the House. By voting for this resolution, will we really be meeting that higher standard? I urge my colleagues on the other side of the aisle to reconsider keeping Mr. Gingrich as Speaker. Although the majority's rules may allow him to remain Speaker, the ethical lapses of Mr. Gingrich demand that he step aside. As the January 21, 1997, Atlanta Journal- Constitution has stated, ``Mr. Gingrich will dishonor the House every time he picks up the Speaker's gavel.'' The New York Times also urges Mr. Gingrich to step aside: ``That finding [of James Cole], and the considerable evidence that backs it up, make it clear that Mr. Gingrich has no business serving as Speaker. His ego got him into this mess, and that same ego is now driving him to compound the damage.'' As William Carlos Williams noted, ``Leadership passes into empire; empire begets insolence; insolence brings ruin.'' It is time for the majority to do the right thing.

Mr. CONYERS

Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Speaker, the Protecting American Workers Act of 1997 will reform the current temporary employment immigration H-1B program and eliminate abuses by employers which hurt American workers. A recent audit by the Department of Labor's inspector general found that the programs which allow entry to thousands of temporary and permanent foreign workers fail to adequately protect the jobs, wages, and working condition of U.S. workers. For far too long, employment based immigration has been used to displace American workers, instead of filling temporary employment shortages. My legislation will permit the Department of Labor to administer an employment based immigration program that serves the temporary needs of employers while at the same time protecting the American worker. The bill will amend the H-1B skilled temporary visa program as follows: No-Layoff provision to the H-1B program (Section 2(a)(2))-- Under this section of the bill an employer will have to attest that an American worker was not laid off or otherwise displaced and replaced with H-1B nonimmigrant foreign workers within 6-months prior to filing or 90 days following the application and within 90 days before or after the filing of a petition based on that application. Requirement to Recruit in the U.S. Labor Market (Section 2(a)(3)--Each petitioning employer will have to attest that it had attempted to recruit a U.S. worker, offering at least 100 percent of the actual wage or 100 percent of the prevailing wage, whichever is greater, paid by the employer for such workers, as well as the same benefits and additional compensation provided to similarly-employed workers by the employer. Special rules for Dependent employers (Section 2(b))--A petitioning employer who is dependent on H-1B workers (4 or more H-1B employees in a workforce of less than 41 workers or at least 10 percent of employees if at least 41 workers): a. would have to take ``timely, significant, and effective steps'' to recruit and retain sufficient U.S. workers to remove as quickly as reasonably possible the dependence on H- 1B foreign workers. b. would be required to pay an annual fee (based on the H- 1B's annual compensation) in order to employ an H-1B worker-- 5% in the first year; 7.5% in the second, and 10% in the third. Fees will be paid into private industry--specific funds that would use the money solely to finance training or education programs for U.S. workers to reduce the industry's dependency on foreign workers. Increased penalties (Section 2(c)--Penalties are increased for false H-1B employer attestations. Job contractors obligations (Section 2(a)(5))--Petitioning employers who are job contractors (as defined by the Department of Labor), would be required to make the same attestations as would the direct employers. Peirod of admission reduced (Section 2(d)(2))--The maximum stay under an H-1B visa is reduced to 3 years, instead of the existing 6 years. Residence abroad requirement (Section 2(e))--H-1B workers required to have a residence abroad that they have no intention of abandoning. For many years the hardworking American worker has been forced to compete with underpriced foreign workers. The current H-1B program allows this unfair competition to occur even on our own soil. I urge the expeditious adoption of this measure during the 105th Congress.

Mr. CONYERS

Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Speaker, I wouldn't have thought it was necessary to introduce a bill prohibiting gun sellers from selling guns to obviously intoxicated individuals, but it is. as the law stands, you can't sell alcohol to someone who is clearly drunk because that person might hurt himself or others, but you can sell a drunk a dangerous firearm. Even without a law, common sense might dictate that you don't sell a gun to a drunk, but unfortunately, not everyone uses their common sense. Deborah Kitchen, a mother of five, was shot by her ex-boyfriend and left paralyzed from the neck down a mere half an hour after the man bought a $100 rifle at a K-Mart in Tampa, FL. The man had consumed a case of beer and nearly a fifth of whiskey before he bought the gun. He was so incapacitated at the time of the purchase that the store clerk had to fill out the Federal firearm registration form. Ms. Kitchen successfully sued K-Mart for negligence, but the retail chain has appealed, denying any liability. K-Mart doesn't think it did anything wrong in selling the drunk the gun that paralyzed Ms. Kitchen. If gun sellers cannot act responsibly on their own, it is up to us to force them to act responsibly. No one should sell a gun to a drunk, period. My bill would make it a Federal crime to sell a gun to a drunk in an effort to ensure that there won't be any more Deborah Kitchens in the future.

Mr. CONYERS

Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Speaker, African-Americans across the country are familiar with the offense of DWB, driving while black. There are virtually no African-American males--including Congressmen, actors, athletes, and office workers--who have not been stopped at one time or another for an alleged traffic violation, namely driving while black. Law enforcement representatives may admit to isolated instances of racially targeted police stops, but they deny that such harassment is routine. the numbers belie this argument. Although African-Americans make up only 14 percent of the population, they account for 72 percent of all routine traffic stops. This figure is too outrageous to be a mere coincidence. The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals reached a similar conclusion after considering the 1993 case of a Santa Monica police officer who was found to have violated the rights of two black men he stopped and arrested at gunpoint. The court found that the case was an example of how police routinely violate the constitutional rights of minorities, particularly black men, by stopping them without just cause. But lawsuits alone cannot solve this problem. Last November, the American Civil Liberties Union sought a fine for contempt of court against the Maryland State police, arguing that police are still conducting a disproportionate number of drug searches of cars driven by African-Americans almost 2 years after agreeing to stop as a result of a 1992 lawsuit. Despite the agreement, State police statistics show that 73 percent of cars stopped and searched on Interstate I-95 between Baltimore and Delaware since January 1995 were conducted on the cars of African- Americans despite the fact that only 14 percent of those driving along that stretch were black. Moreover, police found nothing in 70 percent of those searches. The evidence clearly shows that African-Americans are being routinely stopped by police simply because they are black. It is exactly this sort of unfair treatment that leads minorities to distrust the criminal justice system. If we expect everybody to abide by the rules, we must ensure that those rules are applied equally to everybody, regardless of race. In many ways, this sort of harassment is even more serious than police brutality. Not to minimize the problem of brutality, but these stops, this sort of harassment is more insidious. Almost every African- American man will be subject to this sort of unfair treatment at least once, if not many times. And no one hears about this, no one does anything about it. With brutality on the other hand, these days, incidents of brutality at least come to light. The culprits may not be punished for their acts, but it is getting harder for the police to brutalize minorities without any fear of reprisals. The same cannot be said for harassing traffic stops. Police can stop the cars of minorities with total impunity. In fact, the Supreme Court recently expanded police powers by holding that police need not inform individuals stopped that they have a right not to consent to a search of their vehicles. Thus it appears that the problem of police stops is only going to increase. For this reason, I am introducing the Traffic Stops Statistics Act. This bill will force police departments to keep track of the race and alleged traffic infractions of those they stop. It will also require them to note the rationale for any subsequent search and the contraband recovered in the course of that search. In this way, we will increase police awareness of the problem of targeting minorities for car searches and we can discover the extent of the problem and hopefully reduce the number of discriminatory traffic stops.

Mr. CONYERS

Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Speaker, today I am introducing the Bankruptcy Law Technical Corrections Act of 1997. This legislation provides a number of much-needed technical corrections and updates to our bankruptcy laws. Many of the changes identified in the bill are designed to remedy drafting errors in the Bankruptcy Reform Act of 1994, while others relate to provisions in the Bankruptcy Code which pre-date the 1994 changes. The legislation is based in part on a series of changes brought to Congress' attention by the nonpartisan National Bankruptcy Conference last Congress, many of which were incorporated into S. 1559, the Bankruptcy Technical Corrections Act of 1996. Among other things, the bill I am introducing today updates a number of definitions, clarifies that debtors' attorneys may be compensated out of the debtor's estate, clarifies the types of professional services which are eligible for administrative expense treatment, and provides that the 1994 amendments to section 525(c) apply only to bar discrimination concerning students loans and grants because of prior bankruptcies. The bill also specifies that in 1994, when Congress overruled the Deprizio line of cases, we intended the new law to apply to transfers of liens in property. In addition, the bill modifies section 365 of the Bankruptcy Code to, among other things, make it clear that subsection (b)(2)(D), providing an exception to the obligations which must be cured in order for the trustee to assume a lease, covers penalty rates as well as penalty provisions, thereby overruling In re Claremeont Acquisition Corp., 186 B.R. 977, 990 (C.D. Cal. 1995). The bill also clarifies and updates a number of matters relating to trustees. Among other things, the legislation clarifies the procedure for electing private trustees in chapter 11 cases, specifies that trustees may operate in a full range of professional capacities and retain brokers who work under a range of compensation arrangements, and eliminates the outdated trustee residency requirement in chapter 7 cases. Finally, the bill eliminates the construction of the Bankruptcy Code which prevented nonindividuals from bringing actions for violations of the automatic stay, and conforms the grace period for filing security interests under section 547 to 20 days--consistent with other provisions in the Bankruptcy Code. With a record million plus bankruptcy filings in 1996, it is essential that we act to smooth the operation of our insolvency laws. These technical changes will benefit both debtors and creditors, and it's my hope that Congress can quickly take up and pass this bill during the 105th Congress.

Mr. CONYERS

Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Speaker, this bill addresses the problem of the proliferation of cheaply made, easily concealed weapons. This is particularly critical in dealing with our juvenile crime problem. The Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention reports that most juveniles who purchase guns obtain them from informal sources for less than $100. This bill would put an end to the proliferation of these cheap and dangerous guns by requiring States to set up criteria for guns to be sold within that State's borders. The criteria to be considered would include concealability, safety, quality, and utility for legitimate activities. Any State that chooses not to participate in the program would simply lose some of its Byrne grant money for crime problems. In addition, in an effort to prevent the numerous accidental deaths of children every year, this bill would require gun manufacturers to install magazine safeties in every gun so that adults can be sure that they have not accidentally left a bullet in the chamber of a gun, even when the magazine is not in the gun. Because cheap and poorly made handguns are dangerous--and even more dangerous in the hands of the serious juvenile offenders who have easy access to them, and because we need to make certain that guns include all possible safety precautions--I urge my colleagues to join me in sponsoring this legislation.

Mr. CONYERS

Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Speaker, today I am introducing a new bill that will amend the independent counsel law to reform many of the current law's clear blemishes. Although this bill is not intended to embarrass or target the Whitewater independent counsel Ken Starr, the need for serious revisions to the independent counsel law has become clear to me after observing the abuses taking place in the Whitewater case. Whatever your view of Whitewater, you may be surprised to learn that the investigation of Whitewater has already cost more money and involved more FBI agents than the investigation of the World Trade Center bombing. No matter how serious you think Whitewater may be, there is absolutely no comparison between a land deal that occurred over 17 years ago and a terrorist conspiracy to blow up a major American landmark and office building, killing many people, injuring scores of others, reeking havoc and mayhem on the entire city of New York, and causing millions of dollars in damages. The office of the independent counsel has run amok. It is time that we stopped allowing independent counsels to run off on their own with no accountability to run up bills running into the millions of dollars with little to no benefit for the American people. The prosecution of Whitewater has also brought up many ethical matters--beginning with the initial appointment process. My bill will require all ex parte communications relating to the appointment of an independent counsel by the judges who appoint the counsel to be memorialized. The appointment of Ken Star has also flagged several other ethical issues that should be considered before the appointment of any future counsels. Are lawyers who have previously represented people with interests adverse to the target of the investigation truly able to be independent? Ken Starr represented Paula Jones, the woman who is suing the President for sexual harassment, and the Bradley Foundation, a conservative organization known for its vitriolic coverage of Whitewater. Such prior representation raises, to my mind, at the very least, the appearance of a conflict. In addition, while pursuing the Whitewater matter, Judge Starr has remained affiliated with the law firm of Kirkland & Ellis where he pulls down over a million dollars a year. Do we want an independent counsel who will investigate the matter and do his or her job as quickly as possible without distractions or do we want someone who fits the investigation in around other commitments so as not to diminish his high salary? Mr. Starr's continued affiliation with his firm raises other troubling ethical questions--should an independent counsel be in the position of questioning individuals who are in turn questioning his own law firm about their prior activities--in this case the Resolution Trust Corporation? It seems to me that the special court should at least consider such conflicts when appointing an independent counsel and my bill will require the court to consider such issues. As important as these ethical questions are, an even greater problem is that these questions distract us from the main issue--the Whitewater investigation itself. In recent months you have not been able to read a single article about Whitewater before bumping into a discussion of Ken Starr's ethical jungle. Because the office of the independent counsel is so important and so high profile, those appointed to the position should not have even the appearance of conflicts. My bill would require a court appointing an independent counsel to look at the potential counsel's past and present conflicts and to consider whether the counsel should work on the investigation full time. I also want to note my grave disappointment over the politicization of efforts to revise the independent counsel law. Last February, the Crime Subcommittee held a hearing on this matter and there appeared to be widespread bipartisan agreement that the statute is in need of revisions. I hope that Chairman Hyde will consider this bill, and in the spirit of bipartisanship that was exhibited during the independent counsel hearing, schedule a markup as quickly as possible. Conyers' Independent Counsel Law--Section by Section

Mr. CONYERS

Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Speaker, today I am introducing the ``Baseball Fans and Communities Protection Act of 1997.'' It is time that Congress finally steps up to the plate and ends baseball's antitrust exemption which was at the root of the debilitating strike of 1994-95. Professional baseball is the only industry in the United States that is exempt from the antitrust laws without being subject to alternative regulatory supervision. This circumstance resulted from an erroneous 1922 Supreme Court decision holding that baseball did not involve ``interstate commerce'' and was therefore beyond the reach of the antitrust laws. Congress has failed to overturn this decision despite subsequent court decisions holding that the other professional sports were fully subject to the antitrust laws. There may have been a time when baseball's unique treatment was a source of pride and distinction for the many loyal fans who loved our national pastime. But with baseball suffering more work stoppages over the last 25 years than all of the other professional sports combined-- including the 1994-95 strike which ended the possibility of a World Series for the first time in 90 years and deprived our cities of thousands of jobs and millions of dollars in tax revenues--we can no longer afford to treat professional baseball in a manner enjoyed by no other professional sport. The bill I am introducing today is based on a legislation approved by the Senate Judiciary Committee last Congress and is similar to legislation adopted by the House Judiciary Committee during the 103d Congress partially repealing the antitrust exemption. Because concerns have previously been raised that by repealing the antitrust exemption we could somehow be disrupting the operation of the minor leagues, or professional baseball's ability to limit franchise relocation or jointly negotiate network broadcasting arrangements, the legislation carefully eliminates these matters from the scope of the new antitrust coverage. After advocating repeal of the exemption for many years, I believe the time is finally ripe for enactment of this legislation. In the past some legislators had objected to legislating in this area because of their hesitancy to take any action which could impact the ongoing labor dispute. But because the owners and players have recently agreed to enter into a new collective bargaining agreement, this objection no longer exists. In addition, the baseball owners have agreed to work with the players to seek a partial repeal of the antitrust exemption as part of their new labor accord. Their memorandum of understanding provides, ``[t]he clubs and the [Major League Baseball Players Association] will jointly request and cooperate in lobbying the Congress to pass a law clarifying that Major League baseball players are covered under the antitrust laws (i.e., that major league players will have the same rights under the antitrust laws as do other professional athletes, e.g., football and basketball players), along with a provision which makes it clear that passage of the bill does not change the application of the antitrust laws in any other context or with respect to any other person or entity.'' I have asked that the bill be introduced as H.R. 21, in honor of the courageous center fielder, Curt Flood. Mr. Flood, one of the greatest players of his time, risked his career when he challenged baseball's reserve clause after he was traded from the St. Louis Cardinals to the Philadelphia Phillies. Although the Supreme Court rejected Flood's challenge in 1972, we all owe a debt of gratitude for his willingness to challenge the baseball oligarchy. Professional baseball is now a more than $2 billion annual business and the time has long since passed when it could be contended that baseball did not constitute ``interstate commerce.'' There is bipartisan support in both the House and Senate for taking action on this issue, and I look forward to Congress finally repealing the longstanding anomaly of baseball's antitrust exemption.

Mr. CONYERS

Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to our distinguished colleague, Patricia Schroeder. Pat is retiring at the end of this term after a remarkable 24-year career in the House of Representatives. She began her career in Denver as a lawyer and women's rights activist. She brought an activist's passion and commitment to the Congress where she has fought for the rights of women, children, families, and all Americans for nearly a quarter of a century. Pat has been a friend and colleague and she will be sorely missed. Pat has left an indelible mark on the Congress which has allowed all women who have followed her to enter with greater equality and respect. She is the most senior woman Member of the House and one of the original founders of the Congressional Caucus for Women's Issues. She cochaired the caucus from 1979 until 1995. She has been called an icon of the women's movement and has even been named to the National Women's Hall of Fame. One of her own personal favorite claims to fame, however, is that Oliver North has labeled her as one of the country's 25 most dangerous politicians. Pat has authored and overseen the passage of some of the most important legislation affecting the lives of all Americans. Such legislation includes several which I am honored to have cosponsored: the Violence Against Women Act, the Economic Equity Act, the Breast and Cervical Cancer Mortality Prevention Act, and the National Child Protection Act. Pat was also one of the original cosponsors of the landmark Family and Medical Leave Act. I have been particularly honored to work with Pat on the Judiciary Committee. Together we have worked to stem the tide of Republican assaults against the rights of the American public. Pat has brought her profound knowledge of the law and policy to her work as the ranking Democrat on the Subcommittee on Courts and Intellectual Property and as a member of the Subcommittee on the Constitution. She has used her position on the Judiciary Committee to fight for the passage of the equal rights amendment, to expand the access of women to quality health care and reproductive services, to combat employment discrimination, and to protect intellectual property rights here and abroad. She is a wise and formidable associate and I will greatly miss her working at my side. Pat has also paved the way for women in the Congress by opening the door to the once male bastion of military defense. Pat has been a strong and sometimes lone progressive voice on national security issues since taking office. She joined the National Security Committee in 1973 as an antiwar activist and has provided votes of reason ever since against such measures as Reagan's Strategic Defense Initiative, the B-2 bomber, the MX missile and other nuclear weapons systems. She has been a proponent of nuclear test ban laws, defense burdensharing, and the base closings of 1989. In 1991, Pat led the inquiry into the now infamous Tailhook Scandal which resulted in the resignation of Navy Secretary H. Lawrence Garrett. Her long struggle to see women soldiers in combat roles came to fruition when the Pentagon announced that women aviators were allowed to fly combat missions for the first time in 1993. Pat's wit and quick tongue have changed the nature of political dialog in America. Her nickname for Ronald Reagan, the Teflon President, has become infamous. She is leaving the House with this same passion and vigor. In the past few weeks she has strongly defended the record of progressives in Congress, she has fought vigorously against the attempt to override President Clinton's veto of the partial birth abortion ban, and she has introduced a package of new legislation on safe motherhood. Pat's wit, intellect, dedication, and passion for what is right will be greatly missed in the Judiciary Committee, the Democratic Party, the House of Representatives, and the Congress as a whole. I have greatly enjoyed working with her for these past 24 years and I wish her luck in all her future endeavors.

Mr. CONYERS

Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to my friend and highly distinguished colleague, Congresswoman Cardiss Collins of Illinois' Seventh Congressional District. As the longest serving African-American female in Congress, she has been a true inspiration and mentor to those who have followed in her footsteps. Her legacy, including her tenure as chair of the Subcommittees on Commerce, Consumer Protection, and Competitiveness and Government Activities and Transportation, as well as the Congressional Black Caucus, are part of a permanent record that will ensure the importance of her 23 years in the House of Representatives. Public service has become an important part of Cardiss' life. She honorably stepped in to fill her late husband's, the Honorable George W. Collins, seat when asked and has served faithfully since. Congresswoman Collins has truly represented her district throughout the years. Her skillful leadership during her 11 terms will be missed by many. I would like to take this opportunity to remember some of the important achievements attributed to Representative Collins. She has consistently devoted her energy to improving health care for women and minorities. Cardiss spent several years during this decade promoting the research of breast cancer. She sponsored legislation that expanded Medicare coverage for mammography screenings and Medicaid coverage for Pap smears to detect cervical and uterine cancers. Collins has also continuously authored a resolution that designates October as National Breast Cancer Awareness Month. Her concern for women extends beyond health care. She pressured colleges to follow the requirements of title IX of the Education Amendments Act of 1972 when she chaired the Subcommittee on Commerce, Consumer Protection, and Competitiveness. The result has been a dramatic increase in the participation of women in sports, as evidenced by the number of American women participants this year in the Centennial Olympic Games in Atlanta. Cardiss has been especially concerned about the fate of our country's children. She is responsible for increasing the funding and research into minority health issues and establishing the National Institutes of Health's Office on Minority Health. Representative Collins was the force behind the Child Abuse Prevention Act, which resulted in the training of teachers in child abuse prevention. Additionally, Cardiss increased child safety by enacting legislation that requires warning labels on toys with small parts and standards for bicycle helmets. Cardiss has also focused her energy on increasing diversity in advertising. The lack of a presence of African-Americans sparked her to introduce several bills to strike more of a balance throughout this medium. She worked tirelessly to ensure that privately owned firms and the Federal Government did not discriminate against minority owned agencies. The Congressional Black Caucus is the strong organization it is today, due, in part, to the leadership Representative Collins showed when she chaired the Caucus. She also chaired the Congressional Black Caucus Foundation for two terms, beginning in 1994. She was an important member to both bodies, and they miss her contributions. I will miss Cardiss' intelligence and insight which she has shared throughout the years we spent in Congress. I know she will spend many fulfilling years with her son and granddaughter. I am honored to have served with her and I wish her continued success and happiness.

Mr. CONYERS

Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to the 761st Black Panther Tank Battalion. These World War II veterans were the first of three African-American tank battalions to go into combat. These men fought with courage and honor; we should remember them as the heroes that they are. The 761st Tank Battalion trained at Camp Hood, TX. Gen. George Patton, Jr., commander of the Third Army, requested their service in World War II, as the general ordered only the best troops for his division. ``Come out Fighting'', the 761st's motto, was certainly appropriate. The Black Panther Tank Battalion participated in four allied campaigns through six European countries. The Battle of the Bulge was among the many battles in which they fought. The 761st Tank Battalion fought for 183 consecutive days during World War II when most tank battalions only fought for 10 to 15 days at a time. Let us remember these unsung heroes. In 1978, the 761st Tank Battalion received the Presidential Unit Citation. However, it took 33 years for the veterans to achieve this award. I was privileged to assist the battalion in gaining this important recognition. On August 23, 1996, Fort Hood, TX broke ground for the 761st Tank Battalion Monument. Ms. Beverly Taylor worked for several years to make this memorial a reality. History books have traditionally overlooked African-American veterans' contributions to the wars in which the United States participated. The 761st Tank Battalion Monument is a positive step towards the acknowledgment that these veterans deserve. The Nation has benefitted greatly from the efforts made by these champions, the likeness of which many people do not even know. We must continue to work to make sure that the 761st Black Panther Tank achieves their rightful place in American history.

Mr. CONYERS

Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize and support Marian McPartland's ``Piano Jazz,'' a brilliant and entertaining radio series, as well as one of the Nation's finest vehicles for jazz preservation, promotion, and education. This series is produced by the South Carolina Educational Radio Network and has been the recipient of many major awards for broadcasting excellence, including the Peabody, Gabriel, Armstrong, Ohio State, and several New York International Radio Festival Awards. The series has also been honored with an ASCAP Deems Taylor Award and captured a Jazz Times poll. A measure of ``Piano Jazz' '' value is that both the Library of Congress and the Rogers & Hammerstein Archive of Recorded Sound of the New York Public Library at Lincoln Center are preserving complete collections of the series. This is a remarkable achievement for one of the first station-based, locally produced public radio programs to air across America. The program's host is herself an outstanding practitioner of jazz art and a well-honed musical intelligence. Ms. McPartland conducts the series with a warm collegiality that is both informative of the genres being explored and loving of the artists being featured. This style has made the series extremely listener friendly and popular. ``Piano Jazz'' rises to the difficult standard of appealing to both the aficionado and to the novice. ``Piano Jazz'' is National Public Radio [NPR] longest running music series and airs on over 250 NPR member stations nationwide. In its 17 years, the program has been a showcase for many important performances by legendary and established artists, including Ahmad Jamal, Billy Taylor, Teddy Wilson, Mary Lou Williams, John Lewis, Oscar Peterson, Stanley Cowell, George Cables, Bobby Short, Cecil Taylor, and Bill Evans. The stylistic range of the series has been truly nonpartisan, if you will, reflecting the great diversity of modern jazz piano. The series has also introduced many up-and-coming artists to a wider audience, including Kenny Drew, Jr., Geri Allen, Benny Green, and Kenny Werner. This is one of the more laudable services provided by ``Piano Jazz'' for its audiences. Newly emerging artists need every opportunity to share their ideas and work. Marian McPartland has been both wise and considerate in balancing her programming by presenting both well- established artists and those on the rise. South Carolina Public Radio is to be congratulated for developing, launching, and maintaining ``Piano Jazz.'' It is my fervent hope that this well-conceived and award-winning show continues to garner the public support it needs to serve its broad and varied audience. I ask my colleagues to join me in honoring Marian McPartland, Henry Cauthen, president and founder of the South Carolina Education Network, and Shari Hutchinson, the program's producer.

Mr. CONYERS

Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of this important, bipartisan legislation. The original Alternative Dispute Resolution Act [ADRA] was signed into law in 1990 in order to encourage the use of alternative dispute resolution techniques--such as mediation, arbitration, and negotiation--to resolve disputes involving Federal agencies. The authorization for this program expired in October 1995, and this legislation would permanently reauthorize the program. Although agencies can engage in ADR without authorizing legislation, the ADRA provided a governmentwide framework for ADR and its expiration has caused unnecessary disruption in the field. I favor innovative programs such as ADRA which can lower the costs of litigation without diminishing access to justice. This benefits both sides to the litigation equation--Government as well as business and private parties--and is the type of civil justice reform we can all support. In addition to permanently reauthorizing ADRA, H.R. 4194 makes several other changes to the law. It expands the range of cases which are subject to referral to ADR by eliminating exemptions for certain types of workplace grievances and discrimination cases, so long as the employee so consents. I believe the program has been sufficiently tested so that it can be used for these very sensitive cases. H.R. 4194 also makes the ADR procedure more user friendly by streamlining the acquisition process for neutrals. The bill also creates a limited exemption from the Freedom of Information Act [FOIA] for certain documents disclosed to an arbitrator or other neutral in the course of a dispute resolution proceeding. As with all other exemptions to FOIA, this new exemption is to be construed in the narrowest possible manner. For example, it is important to note that the parties are not permitted to use this exemption as a mere sham to exempt sensitive information from FOIA. Thus, as noted in the statement of managers on the predecessor legislation to this bill (H.R. 2977), litigants may not resort to ADR principally as a means of taking advantage of the new exemption--in such a case the new FOIA exemption should not be held to apply. There are few policies which are more important than openness in Government and release of Government documents to the people. Finally, I would like to note that this bill does not authorize an agency or any other employer to require its employees to submit to binding arbitration as a condition of employment or to relinquish any rights they may have under title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 or any other statute. The decision to engage in binding arbitration concerning such disputes must be voluntary by all parties. No one should be required to relinquish his or her statutory rights as a condition of obtaining employment with the Federal Government. Under no condition could I support this legislation if this were not the case. I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting this worthwhile, bipartisan legislation.

Mr. CONYERS

Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor my friend and distinguished colleagues Congressman Cleo Fields of Louisiana's Fourth Congressional District. When people talk about Congressman Fields, they often use the world ``youngest.'' He was the youngest State legislator in Louisiana history, he was the youngest member of the 103d Congress. However, Representative Fields' personal and professional accomplishments belie his age. His tremendous energy, coupled with his desire to help America's youth and its minorities, has ensured that Congressman Fields will leave behind an significant legacy. Cleo has always been a champion of the people. After receiving his juris doctorate from Southern University School of Law at the age of 24, he was elected to the Lousiana State Senate, becoming the youngest State senator in Louisiana history. While in office, he sponsored and passed legislation establishing Drug Free Zones near school campuses, and worked to create an Inner City Economic Development Program. He was a leader against illegal drug use and a champion of effective environmental protection initiatives. In the House of Representatives, Congressman Fields, has continued to work tirelessly to protect and promote the opportunities and rights of all Americans. As a member of the Small Business Committee, he has vigorously defended the Small Business Administration's Minority Business Development Program, helping to ensure that women and minority small business owners are able to succeed economically. As a member of the Banking Committee, he has staunchly fought for consumer protections. In the face of 104th Congress' attempt to rollback consumer protections, Representative Fields has fought to maintain the consumer protections contained in the Community Reinvestment Act, the Truth in Savings Act, and the Truth in Lending Act. Recognizing the importance of education and of our Nation's youth, Representative Fields organized the first-ever Education Caucus and currently serves as its House chairman. This bipartisan, bicameral, caucus has focused on the concerns of teachers, parents, and other organizations interested in improving education in our nation. Finally, I especially commend Congressman Fields for his work as the chair of the Congressional Black Caucus' Task Force on Church Burnings. We have worked side-by-side in response to this national crisis. Representative Fields was able to bring together government and business resouces with the congregations of burned churches to begin the process of rebulding. His work helped to not only rebuild churches, but also hope. Working to educate all Americans as to why the church burnings affected them; his service in this area cannot be overstated. I will miss Representative Fields' constant efforts to promote minority business development and to improve education in this country. I wish him the best of success in his future endeavors, and I feel honored to have served with him.

Mr. CONYERS

Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to our distinguished colleague, Harold Ford. Harold is retiring at the end of this term after a remarkable 22-year career in the House of Representatives. Harold has represented the city of Memphis since 1974, when he was elected to this body after serving 4 years in the Tennessee House. He was the first, and is the only, African-American elected to the Congress from Tennessee. Harold came to the House as one of the 47 democratic freshman elected following the infamous Watergate scandal, and worked diligently to bring integrity and honesty back to Washington. He was one of the first members of the Congressional Black Caucus, joining at a time when we numbered just a handful of members and before we earned the considerable influence that we have gained since then. While the boundaries of Harold's congressional district cover just the city of Memphis, Harold has represented all of America's big cities through his effectiveness on the powerful Ways and Means Committee. In 1993 during the budget debate, Harold advanced the empowerment zone proposal through the committee and the Congress, establishing six urban and three rural empowerment zones, worth $100 million each in Federal assistance. It is the most significant antipoverty initiative since the 1960's, and will help cities alleviate unemployment, spark economic growth, encourage more training and education, and end crime and drug abuse. This achievement is particularly significant to me; my hometown Detroit was named one of the urban zones December 1994. Harold's work on the Ways and Means Committee has also allowed him to dedicate his efforts to improving welfare. In fact, Harold was working on welfare reform before welfare reform was popular. In 1988, harold worked with then-Governor Bill Clinton to write the most important welfare reform bill to date, the Family Support Act of 1988. The bill was designed to increase opportunities and obligations for work, training and education among recipients of Aid to Families with Dependent Children [AFDC], and required States to start education, training, and work programs for mothers on AFDC. It included provisions for medical and child care for mothers moving from welfare to work and significantly strengthened child support enforcement laws. In 1993, Harold was successful in including the Family Preservation Act in the budget bill. This child welfare provision encourages States to create family support programs and programs to keep at-risk families together. It is the kind of welfare reform that we can be proud of. Mr. Speaker, this body will sorely miss Harold Ford's integrity, honesty, and diligence. I will miss him here, and in the Congressional Black Caucus, where we have spent more than two decades working together. I wish Harold the best of luck in his retirement, and know he will prosper next year in whatever vocation he may choose. general leave

Mr. CONYERS

Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Speaker, we are dealing with a bill that is so flawed, we will need a lot of speakers to make it clear why Members should not support the immigration conference report that is now before them. What we do to the environment is a crime. The National Environmental Protection Act is the Nation's founding charter for environmental protection, and this bill repeals that law, in effect, when it comes to border-related construction. That means when we are working on highways, roads, bridges, fences, that it is OK to ignore the environment. Do my colleagues really mean that? This conference report means that border construction can pollute our public waterways anyway, dirty our air, create hazardous point sources that can create dangerous runoffs, and generally ignore any adverse environmental impact of that construction. Do my colleagues really want that in a conference report? This is yet another Republican attack on the environment. If it pleases my colleagues on the Democratic side, I will offer a motion to recommit the conference report to correct these glaring wrongs. The next matter that my colleagues should carefully consider is the part that deals with the American workers. What we are doing here is giving us a conference report, and the lack of procedure has been amply dealt with, but what we are doing now is that we are being told to take it or leave it. I think that this amendment process, which we were completely shut out of, deserves a no vote on the conference, regardless of anything Members may like about it. It was the Republicans, I say to Chairman Hyde, that railed and railed about how unfair we were. It was the Speaker of the House, Newt Gingrich, that has railroaded every conference bill for the last year. We do not even come to conference and have a right to offer an amendment. The process alone deserves every Member of this House to reject this conference report on due process procedural grounds. And then what about the discriminatory aspects of this bill? Not only do we weaken illegal immigration but we say yes to more discrimination, because we now have onerous material that was not even in the bad bill I opposed in committee and on the floor. We now have included unilaterally provisions that tell employers that they may engage in practices of racial discrimination so long as it cannot be proved that they had intent to violate the law. Coming out of the Committee on the Judiciary, I think it is a very sad day for any legislation to come out doing this to the most sensitive problem in our society. Vote ``no'' on the conference report.

Mr. CONYERS

Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to this legislation granting States the option to deny public education to undocumented alien children. This provision is strongly opposed by the Fraternal Order of Police and the vast majority of law enforcement organizations because it will kick children out onto the streets, where they are likely to become victims of--or parties to--crime. As a matter of fact this bill represents yet another in a long series of Republican proposals which are weak on crime--from trying to repeal the assault weapons ban, to trying to repeal 100,000 cops on the beat, failing to ban cop-killer bullets, opposing extending the Brady bill to apply to domestic violence, and failing to get tough on terrorists by placing taggants in explosive materials or giving law enforcement the investigative tools they need. The Republicans have a miserable record on crime, and this bill would only make it worse by making our street more dangerous. It's an insult to this body that we are voting on this measure. If the House approves it, it will likely die in the Senate. Even if it doesn't, it faces certain Presidential veto. The only reason we are considering the bill is pure politics. Republicans are trying to inject this divisive issue into the Presidential election. Well in the closing days of this Congress we have far better things to do than spend our time on partisan political issues which are going nowhere. No matter how the Republicans try to repackage it, the bill will have the same dangerous consequences as the original proposal. This bill remains a mean-spirited attempt to punish children for the actions of their parents. Any money the States save from denying education benefits will be spent on the increased costs of crime. In addition to being bad policy, the bill is unconstitutional. When Texas and California adopted similar provisions they were held to be unconstitutional denials of equal protection. If we enact the same policy at the Federal level it's still going to be unconstitutional. This bill is tough on innocent children, and is just as bad as the provision we dropped from the conference which was opposed by Democrats and Republicans alike. I urge the Members to vote no.

Mr. CONYERS. It was your suggestion to remove it?

Mr. CONYERS. Is that the idea?

Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Speaker, reclaiming my time, in other words, you are blaming the President of the United States for Newt Gingrich's decision to remove it?

Mr. CONYERS. Well, the majority of my colleagues want me to do it, so I will do it.

Mr. CONYERS. Why was it taken out?

Mr. CONYERS. Stop, I do not yield any more. Because if you told them that we once used to reward people for breaking the law, then you have failed your obligation as a Federal lawmaker. I am not yielding to you, sir, because you are giving misinstruction on the Federal law to your relatives in your family. Now, they ought to check with the ranking member of the Committee on the Judiciary if they want to know what happen to people that break the law in America. Mr. Speaker, I will now yield to my distinguished friend, the subcommittee chairman on Judiciary, for 15 whole seconds.