Elijah Cummings

Mr. CUMMINGS

Mr. CUMMINGS. Madam Speaker, in this country we have made a commitment to fulfill the promise that all students will receive a high quality education. As part of this commitment, assessments mandated under the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 (NCLB) require, among other things, that all students will have access to classrooms led by highly qualified teachers. In its implementation of the law, the Department of Education has made good on this promise, holding students that have traditionally been allowed to slip through the cracks, such as students with disabilities, to a high standard. Students with disabilities, under NCLB and the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), are increasingly being integrated into general education classrooms. We have seen great progress from this practice. By holding students with disabilities to the same high standards that we hold general education students, we encourage them to achieve at higher levels. As with all students, students with disabilities respond well to being challenged. Unfortunately, too many children with disabilities are underserved in general education classrooms because general education teachers often are not trained to meet their needs. As more of these children enter general education classrooms, it is critical that curricula be adapted to suit them. General education teachers and personnel must be equipped to collaborate with special education teachers to ensure that these students receive the best available education. That is why I am reintroducing the ``Teacher Training Expansion Act,'' legislation that is designed to support training programs for teaching students with disabilities. Specifically, this legislation would authorize the Secretary of Education to give preference, in the distribution of certain grants under IDEA, to local educational agencies and certain public or private nonprofit organizations that provide such training. Under current law, institutions of higher education are already granted this preferential status in the distribution of these grants. However, I firmly believe that most also make eligible the local educational agencies and public or private nonprofit organizations that are at the forefront of training teachers who work with disabled students. Madam Speaker, by supporting this legislation we will help our teachers gain the skills they need to work effectively with disabled students in general education classrooms and help make good on our promise to provide a quality education to all students. In conclusion, let us be vigilant in leveling the playing field for our disabled and special needs communities in any way that we can. The Teacher Training Expansion Act would help in furthering this goal and I urge my colleagues to cosponsor it.

Mr. CUMMINGS

Mr. CUMMINGS. Madam Speaker, I rise in support of the Clean Energy Act of 2007, H.R. 6. This bill, like all of the bills brought to the floor by the Democratic leadership under the Six for '06 package has the same effect, to try to level the proverbial playing field so that every American family has a fighting chance. This bill takes a huge step in the right direction by repealing $14 billion in subsidies given to Big Oil companies and paid for by American taxpayers. It also addresses a future that we know is coming-- a future where fossil fuels will be in far less plentiful supply--and sets the stage for investing those profits in clean, renewable and alternative energy technologies and sources. This bill closes tax loopholes for oil companies, rolls back tax breaks for geological and geophysical expenditures and repeals five royalty relief provisions from the 2005 Republican energy bill. In fact, this bill will require companies that have been reaping billions in profits and providing record golden parachute packages to departing CEOs while the average American family has seen an overall decline in income, to pay royalties in order to qualify for new federal leases for drilling. The goal of this bill is energy independence for our country that will allow our foreign policy decisions to be based more on what's good for our citizens and not just what's good for our gas tanks. I applaud the Democratic leadership for bringing this legislation to the floor and I applaud this Congress for successfully passing six critical pieces of legislation that affect the everyday lives of all Americans.

Mr. CUMMINGS

Mr. CUMMINGS. Madam Speaker, I rise in support of the ``College Student Relief Act of 2007,'' H.R. 5. Every opportunity I get, I tell young people about the benefits of a college education. I use my own experience as an example of the opportunities that higher education can afford. I have a bachelor's degree from Howard University and a law degree from the University of Maryland and I am convinced that, without those degrees, I would not be standing before you today. The statistics support this assertion. The poverty rate for college graduates is about one-third that of high school graduates and individuals with college degrees are less likely to be unemployed. Further, women with bachelor's degrees earn 70 percent more than those with high school diplomas, and for men the difference is 63 percent. Regrettably, a college education is becoming increasingly inaccessible in this country. A recent assessment by The Education Trust entitled, ``Engines of Inequality: Diminishing Equity in the Nation's Premier Public Universities,'' finds that public institutions are no longer the engines of upward social mobility that they once were. To the contrary, these institutions are pursuing increased selectivity over expanded opportunity--targeting wealthier students to improve rankings in college guides. Some argue that the system is now a meritocracy, but this is by no means the case. The highest achieving students from high-income families are nearly four times more likely to attend a highly selective university than the highest achievers from low-income families. Our nation's low-income and middle-class students are being pushed out of premier colleges and universities simply because they cannot afford to attend. Tuition and fees have risen by 35 percent in the past five years, and the typical student now graduates with $17,500 of debt. The Congressional Advisory Committee on Student Financial Assistance predicts that rising costs will prevent at least 4.4 million high school graduates from attending college over the next decade. This trend affects not only individual students, but our nation as a whole. By 2020, the U.S. is expected to experience a shortage of nearly 12 million college-educated workers, losing its competitive edge in the global marketplace. That is why I stand before you today to express my strong support for this bill, which would cut student loan interest rates in half over five years--giving 5.5 million students a much needed break in the cost of college. In my home state of Maryland alone, 48,484 students would get a break. We must do all that we can to provide every American with access to a college education. I want to thank Mr. Miller and the Democratic leadership for introducing this vitally important legislation and bringing us one step closer to achieving that goal.

Mr. CUMMINGS

Mr. CUMMINGS. Madam Speaker, I rise today to reintroduce the ``Servitude and Emancipation Archival Research Clearing House, SEARCH, Act of 2007,'' a companion to Senator Mary Landrieu's bill of the same name, which would establish a national database of historic records of servitude and emancipation in the United States to assist African Americans in researching their genealogy. Madam Speaker, for most Americans, researching their genealogical history involves searching through municipal birth, death, and marriage records--most of which have been properly archived as public historical documents. However, African Americans in the United States face a unique challenge when conducting genealogical research. Due to slavery and discrimination, African Americans were denied many of the benefits of citizenship that produce traceable documentation such as voter registration, property ownership, business ownership, and school attendance. As a result, instead of looking up wills, land deeds, birth and death certificates, and other traditional genealogical research documents, African Americans must often try to identify the names of former slave owners, hoping that the owners kept records of pertinent information, such as births and deaths. Unfortunately, current records of emancipation and slavery are frequently inaccessible, poorly catalogued, and inadequately preserved from decay. Although some States and localities have undertaken efforts to collect these documents with varying degrees of success, there is no national effort to preserve these important pieces of public and personal history or to make them readily and easily accessible to all Americans. While entities such as Howard University and the Schomburg Center for Research in Black Culture Library have extensive African American archives, the SEARCH Act would create a centralized database of these historic records. This database would be administered by the Archivist of the United States as part of the National Archives. The SEARCH Act would also authorize $5 million for the National Historical Publications and Records Commission to establish the national database, as well as $5 million in grants for States and academic institutions to preserve local records of servitude and emancipation. I believe that this legislation will be a vital step in resurrecting the rich history of African Americans and the vital role that they played in building America. This legislation is not only a means by which African Americans can trace their lineage, but also a means by which our Nation can preserve historically comprehensive and accurate information for generations yet unborn. Author Maya Angelou once said that ``No man can know where he is going unless he knows exactly where he has been and exactly how he arrived at his present place.'' Let there be no mistake, Madam Speaker, the SEARCH Act will provide African Americans an opportunity to forge a crucial nexus between the past and the present. Just as important, it will give our Nation an opportunity to continue to correct the unintended consequences of the past. This Monday marks the anniversary of the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.'s birthday, and the day that we as a nation celebrate his legacy. In honor of Dr. King and the contributions he has made, and on behalf of the many African Americans throughout the United States, I urge my colleagues to cosponsor the SEARCH Act. Join me in ending the horrible legacies of slavery and discrimination by giving African Americans a real chance to understand who they are and from whence they came.

Mr. CUMMINGS

Mr. CUMMINGS. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of the Bipartisan Medicare Prescription Drug Price Negotiation Act of 2007, H.R. 4. H.R. 4, despite the protestations to the opposite, does not require price controls, does not hamper research and development, does not require the Secretary of HHS to adopt the pricing structure of the Veterans Affairs system and does not require a national formulary. What H.R 4 does require is for the Secretary of HHS to leverage the power of our 43 million Medicare beneficiaries to negotiate with pharmaceutical companies to get the best possible drug prices for our seniors and disabled under Medicare Part D. There are still some of my colleagues who say this legislation is not necessary, but the facts indicate otherwise. Manufacturer prices for brand-name drugs rose 6.3 percent in the 12 months ending June 2006, more than one and one-half times the 3.8 percent rate of general inflation over the same period. In 2006 alone, this increase translated to an additional $283 for the typical American senior--an increase many can ill-afford. We know that these prices are only likely to further increase and we need to repeal this prohibition now to help our seniors and disabled. I urge my colleagues to support this critical legislation.

Mr. CUMMINGS

Mr. CUMMINGS. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to say to our President that the people have spoken and they have spoken quite loudly. Just the other night I ran into the family of Sergeant Kendall Waters-Bey, who was one of the first military folks who died in the war. He is from my district. His family just said one thing. ``Ask the President what his plan is, his true plan for getting us out of there. Ask why is he being so stubborn. Ask how many have to die, like our relative died, and we still don't fully understand why.'' The President presented us with some statements last night, but we have heard them before. The American people have been patient, and they have simply run out of patience. So we must continue to loudly speak into the President's ear that the people do not want this war. They want to get our folks out of Iraq. Three thousand have already been killed, and others are being harmed every day.

Mr. CUMMINGS

Mr. CUMMINGS. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of H.R. 3 and of the promise that it offers to the literally millions of Americans battling terrible illnesses and the effects of devastating injuries for which we currently have no cures and few effective treatments. I approach stem cell research with deep respect for the significant ethical concerns that it raises, and I strongly believe we must never lose our diligent focus on ensuring that these research techniques are not abused for immoral ends. H.R. 3 will guarantee the highest ethical standards will be applied to stem cell research and will allow only embryos that would otherwise be destroyed to be used for research purposes. Critically, H.R. 3 will also fulfill our duty to recognize the sanctity of human life by supporting the research that may one day yield the cures and treatments that could help so many in our nation who are being robbed of their sacred lives by disease. I urge the passage of H.R. 3 and strongly urge the President to reconsider his past veto and let this bill of compassion become law.

Mr. CUMMINGS

Mr. CUMMINGS. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of the Fair Minimum Wage Act of 2007 because Americans desperately need a raise. Currently, millions of Americans go to work every day but still cannot afford to make ends meet. Sadly, children are at the losing end of this equation. Seven million families cannot afford to adequately provide for their children because they are working for poverty wages. With this bill, we can begin to turn that trend around. Working families are the true beneficiaries of this legislation. Nearly 80 percent of affected workers are adults, and 46 percent of affected families rely solely on the earnings of minimum wage workers. Mr. Speaker, nearly 15 million Americans will likely benefit from this bill, millions of them children whose parents are losing quite a bit of money as we speak. I want to thank Speaker Pelosi, Representative Miller, and my friend, Steny Hoyer, for their tireless work on this issue.

Mr. CUMMINGS

Mr. CUMMINGS. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of H.R. 1. I am deeply disappointed that it has taken more than 5 years since the terrible events of September 11, 2001, to implement the recommendations of the 9/11 Commission. However, by making legislation implementing these recommendations the first measure brought to the floor, our Democratic leadership has affirmed what will be our unwavering commitment to homeland security throughout the 110th Congress. I am also deeply heartened that this bill would exceed the 9/11 Commission's recommendations by finally requiring the examination of all shipping containers bound for the U.S. Only a small percentage of the 11 million containers delivered during the more than 62,000 port calls made annually at U.S. ports is physically inspected upon arrival. It is therefore critical that all possible measures be taken to interdict containers that could pose a threat to our Nation's security before they ever set sail for our shores. I urge the passage of H.R. 1 and I commend Speaker Pelosi, Leader Hoyer, and Chairman Thompson for their dedication to port security.

Mr. CUMMINGS. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of H.R. 1. I am deeply disappointed that it has taken more than 5 years since the terrible events of September 11, 2001, to implement the recommendations of the 9/11 Commission. However, by making legislation implementing these recommendations the first measure brought to the floor, our Democratic leadership has affirmed what will be our unwavering commitment to homeland security throughout the 110th Congress. I am also deeply heartened that this bill would exceed the 9/11 Commission's recommendations by finally requiring the examination of all shipping containers bound for the United States. Only a small percentage of the 11 million containers delivered during the more than 62,000 port calls made annually at U.S. ports is physically inspected upon arrival. It is therefore critical that all possible measures be taken to interdict containers that could pose a threat to our Nation's security before they ever set sail for our shores. I urge the passage of H.R. 1 and I commend Speaker Pelosi, Leader Hoyer, and Chairman Thompson for their dedication to port security. I look forward to working with our distinguished Chair, Mr. Oberstar and the leadership to strengthen the security of every facet of our Nation's transportation network.

Mr. CUMMINGS

Mr. CUMMINGS. Madam Speaker, today, I am pleased to introduce legislation to establish a cooperative research program for hazardous materials transportation capable of meeting our Nation's urgent need for applied research that examines hazardous materials transportation from a comprehensive, multi-modal perspective. During the 109th Congress, I introduced similar legislation and, although it failed to pass as introduced, provisions from that bill were included in the most recent federal transportation authorization, SAFETEA-LU. Those provisions provided a total of $1.25 million in federal funding per year from fiscal year 2006 through fiscal year 2009 to support the conduct of multi-modal studies of hazardous materials transportation. While the first of these 9 studies are now being planned for implementation and will cover such topics as technologies to improve safety and security and methods for improving the utility of data collected from hazardous materials incidents, I believe it is crucial that we create a permanent research program for hazardous materials transportation. Madam Speaker, it is estimated that one million hazardous materials shipments move through thousands of local communities across the United States every single day--usually without the knowledge of residents or even of local officials. Between 1994 and 2003, unintentional releases of hazardous materials resulted in 210 fatalities and more than 3,400 injuries. Unfortunately, it is our tendency to focus on mitigating the risks that these shipments pose only after an accident occurs. In 2001, such an accident occurred in my district in Baltimore when a train derailed in a tunnel, puncturing a tank car and releasing a hazardous material that subsequently ignited. This incident in the heart of Baltimore demonstrated to me and to my constituents in the most dramatic possible way the risks of hazardous materials transportation. Having seen first-hand these risks, I will never forget them--and it is for this reason that I am again introducing legislation to create a permanent hazardous materials cooperative research program. Under our Nation's current regime for regulating the shipment of hazardous materials, more than a dozen federal agencies--as well as literally thousands of state and local agencies--regulate some aspect of hazardous materials transportation. While each of these entities is critical and necessary to ensuring the safety of hazardous materials transportation, each entity is typically looking at hazardous materials from the perspective of a single mode, a single type of material, or a single travel route. What we now lack is a comprehensive, multi-modal perspective that can examine risks and develop mitigation strategies that are applicable across modes, material types, and travel routes. To fill this gap, the legislation I am introducing today will bring together representatives of federal agencies, private sector shippers and carriers, and state and local governments in a formal program to study cross-cutting topics in hazardous materials transportation that are not adequately addressed by existing mode-specific research programs. The study program will be particularly focused on completing research projects that yield practical results immediately applicable to transportation issues. Without the ability to adequately research and respond to issues in hazardous materials transportation that are multi-modal in scope and national in application, our ability to make informed legislative, regulatory, and operational decisions regarding hazardous materials transportation is unacceptably limited. Therefore, I urge you to join with me in supporting the formulation of a cooperative research program for hazardous materials transportation by co-sponsoring this critical legislation.

Mr. CUMMINGS

Mr. CUMMINGS. Madam Speaker, may I inquire as to how much time we have.

Mr. CUMMINGS. Madam Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Davis), a member of our subcommittee who has worked tirelessly on this issue and has just been a real champion.

Mr. CUMMINGS. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Madam Speaker, I rise in strong support of H.R. 6344, as amended by the amendment of the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Souder). This bill to reauthorize the Office of National Drug Control Policy and related anti-drug programs is the product of a bipartisan and bicameral process that began more than 3 years ago in the Government Reform Subcommittee on Criminal Justice, Drug Policy and Human Resources, on which I serve as the ranking minority member. For nearly that period of time, the office has operated without legislative authorization. I want to again thank and congratulate Chairman Souder. He talked about my passion. I had an opportunity to see his when we visited his district. He has spent just a phenomenal amount of time on this legislation and spent a lot of time on this problem that we suffer from in this country, and I want to thank him for his leadership, and his very strong leadership at that. I also want to thank our full committee chairman, Tom Davis, and the Government Reform ranking member, Mr. Henry Waxman, for their strong leadership and cooperation in shaping a bill that we were able to report out of committee and pass on the House floor with strong bipartisan support. This legislation incorporates additions and modifications negotiated with the Senate Republicans and Democrats, most notably Senators Grassley, Hatch, Biden, Leahy, and Levin. At its core, the bill before us today is substantially the same as the legislation passed by the House on March 9. The bill reauthorizes the drug czar's office for 5 years and also reauthorizes several key anti-drug programs managed by ONDCP, including the National Youth Anti- Drug Media Campaign, the High Intensity Drug Trafficking Areas, or HIDTA program, and the Counterdrug Technology Assessment Center. In addition to authorizing funding for these programs, the bill contains provisions to strengthen them and make them more accountable. ONDCP, as the central coordinating body for drug control strategy in the White House, plays a vital role in shaping the Federal response to a national drug problem that claims more than 20,000 American lives each year. Through its formulation of the National Drug Control Strategy and its authority to certify the drug control budgets of agencies throughout the executive branch, ONDCP provides critical guidance and support to our efforts to address illegal drug abuse through programs in the areas of prevention, treatment, domestic law enforcement, interdiction, and international supply reduction efforts. We are taking an important step by reauthorizing the drug czar's office today. I am especially pleased that this bill preserves bipartisan agreements achieved through good faith negotiations during committee consideration of the bill, including a provision to ensure that funds for the National Youth Anti-Drug Media Campaign are not used to advocate for or against any candidate or legislative or regulatory measure. I am also pleased that we will finally pass the Dawson Family Community Protection Act which authorizes $7 million of HIDTA program funds to be devoted to supporting efforts to improve safety and facilitate cooperation with police and communities ravaged by drug violence. This provision memorializes the courageous efforts of Angela Dawson, a Baltimore City resident, who along with her husband and five children lost her life when a drug dealer fire-bombed the family's home in retaliation for Ms. Dawson's reporting of drug distribution activities in the immediate vicinity of her home. I might add that Ms. Dawson's home is within a mile of my home. HIDTA plays a vital role in combating drug trafficking in many areas of the country, and this provision will help to ensure that funds are available to address urgent threats to community safety due to drug violence. The amendments adopted by the other body augment and mainly improve upon the House-passed bill. This bill adds reauthorization of the Drug- Free Communities Support Program, one of the most popular and effective Federal drug prevention programs that we have. One other addition included in this bill also deserves particular mention. The provision proposed by Senator Levin would amend the Controlled Substances Act to increase from 30 to 100 the number of patients to whom a doctor can prescribe buprenorphine, an extremely effective drug for the use of opiate addiction. This important and welcome change will have a tremendous impact in places like my own city of Baltimore where opiate addiction is far too common and access to treatment is far too limited. The bill would immediately triple the capacity of physicians to prescribe this drug for patients with opiate addiction and should have a substantial impact. The substitute amendment implements two further changes negotiated with the Senate in recent days. The first would modify a provision in the House-passed bill calling for a study of mycoherbicides, requiring that any testing be conducted inside the United States. The second would restore a provision offered by Mr. Waxman that would require ONDCP to consult with the National Institutes of Health and the National Academy of Sciences when formulating policy on syringe exchange programs aimed at preventing HIV transmission among injection drug users. The provision calls for ONDCP to base any decisions on the scientific evidence regarding the efficacy of syringe exchange and its impact on drug use. Madam Speaker, the devastating impact of drugs on communities throughout this Nation is difficult to overstate. In some communities, drugs are a quiet, invisible, disruptive force. In others, as in the case of America's inner cities and rural communities afflicted by meth, it is impossible not to see, and it is impossible not to feel the pain. But no community is completely untouched or immune from this problem. I am confident that this bill will preserve and strengthen our Nation's most essential tools for fighting the good fight against drug abuse and related crime and social problems. I am also very pleased about the provisions with regard to accountability for drug treatment. Mr. Souder and I have agreed over and over again and done everything in our power to make sure that if there is going to be drug treatment, that that drug treatment be effective and efficient. We wanted to make sure that those who go into treatment came out better off than what they went in. One of the things that I have discovered as an elected official and talking to many addicts is they go into drug treatment, and they feel they have not been treated properly or that the treatment has not been effective. That makes them reluctant to go into treatment again if need be, and at the same time, many of them would not have gotten better. That is not to take away from the many, many great organizations that are doing a great job of treating drug-addicted folks, but we just want to make sure that when America's taxpayers' dollars are spent, that they are spent, again, in an effective and efficient manner, but we also want something else. We want to make sure that those people who find themselves in the clutches of drug addiction are able to depend upon treatment that can best help them. So I applaud my colleagues on both sides of the aisle and in both Houses for their cooperative efforts, and I again want to thank Mr. Souder for all the hard work. We have come now to what appears to be an end to a long journey, but I am hopeful that what we have done in this bill will affect generations yet unborn, for there are so many people that will never know what we were able to accomplish in this legislation, but they will be affected and they will be able to raise their families, hopefully get back to work, do the things that productive citizens do, and perhaps, just perhaps, another generation of folk who may have gone into drugs, we may have just prevented some of that. Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. CUMMINGS. I just want to say this, Madam Speaker. One of the things that we were concerned about was our HIDTA programs, High Intensity Drug Trafficking Areas. When we saw the budget, the budget basically cut substantially the funds for HIDTA, and we in our subcommittee and in our committee have seen the great work of the HIDTA throughout our country and we were determined to make sure that they stayed intact and continued to do the jobs that they have done so effectively. One of the good things about HIDTA is that they are able to bring together our Federal, our local, and our State law enforcement officers so they can work together. And, again, going back to our taxpayers' tax dollars, to use those dollars effectively and efficiently to fight drug violence and drug crimes, crimes related to drugs. But as I sat and listened to Congressman Davis and certainly to Mr. Souder, I could not help but be reminded of just about 4 months ago as I was standing in my district in a supermarket and a young man standing in front of me was talking to me saying he was looking for a job, and he pulled up his shirt and he showed me the barrel of a gun. And as he was standing there, he said, I am looking for a job because I simply do not want to continue to go around sticking up people to feed my drug habit. That thing really shook me up, because when you have got somebody possibly committing two or three robberies a day, as he told me, that says a lot. And I think that we fail sometimes to understand how deep this problem is and how it goes against the very safety of all of our residents, no matter where they may live. And if there is anything that I have learned from being on this subcommittee, it is that there are no boundaries. There really are no boundaries with regard to drug addiction and the problem of drugs. One of the things that I know Mr. Souder will agree with me, when we got so much interest from our friends in the Congress who are seeing just a terrible problem with methamphetamines, they have come forth and they have been very, very helpful in helping us to figure out how to address not only the problems of methamphetamines, but the problems associated with heroin, associated with crack cocaine, with cocaine, and so many other drugs. So I think that all of us have to understand that, no matter where we may live or who we may represent, that we all may have different problems but still we need to work together to address those problems in a way that is effective for all of us, because, again, we are trying to heal the Nation and heal those people who have again found themselves in the clutches of this horrible, horrible situation. Madam Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. CUMMINGS

Mr. CUMMINGS. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor the brave warriors who have enlisted in the fight against narco-terrorism. Some, like Edna McAbier of Baltimore, have narrowly escaped death. Others, like Carnell and Angela Dawson and their five beautiful children, were not so lucky. The front page of the Tuesday, September 19, 2006 edition of the Baltimore Sun tells the story of Ms. McAbier, a tireless community activist who made it her personal mission to fight back drug trafficking in her neighborhood of Harwood. For her efforts, her car was keyed, her tires were slashed, bricks were thrown through her windows, and finally--18 months ago--her house was firebombed. Ms. McAbier survived the attack, but only to be exiled from the neighborhood she loved enough to try to save. Sadly, stories like hers are not unprecedented in Baltimore. This October marks the 4-year anniversary of one of the most terrible tragedies I have witnessed in my lifetime. Mrs. Dawson, like Ms. McAbier, was a warrior for her community. She fought to get drug dealers off her street, and away from her five young children. She paid for her efforts with her life. Drug dealers one night filled the Dawson family home with gasoline, and set it up in flames. All five children and their mother died in the attack. Mr. Dawson, who sustained burns over 85 percent of his body, died a week later. When I sat at the Dawson family funeral 4 years ago, looking at those five small caskets and one big casket, I thought to myself: How did we get here? I have lived my whole life in inner city Baltimore. I have seen the innocent little girls who used to play hopscotch on my block grow up to sell their bodies for drugs. I have seen brilliant little boys with endless potential head off to jail instead of college. The disease of drugs plagues every facet of our community, robbing children of their childhood, and denying decent people the opportunity to thrive. It is a pervasive disease that reaches far beyond our inner cities, tormenting the lives of people in communities across our Nation. Mr. Speaker, I am as committed to the global war on terrorism as any member of this body, and I commend our brave warriors who risk their lives every day so that we might be safer. But don't be fooled: Terrorism lives here at home as well. Warriors like Mrs. Dawson and Ms. McAbier have fought for our freedom with their livelihoods and their lives. Just as we honor our soldiers in Iraq by providing them with the most sophisticated defense technology on the market, we must honor our domestic warriors by providing law enforcement officials with the best tools available to protect them. That is why I introduced the ``Dawson Family Community Protection Act'' (H.R. 812) and the ``Witness Security and Protection Act'' (H.R. 908). The ``Dawson Family Community Protection Act,'' which would provide protections to neighborhood activists, passed the House in March as part of the ``Office of National Drug Control Policy Reauthorization Act'' (H.R. 2829). I want to thank my colleagues in the House for their support of this vital initiative and I urge our colleagues in the Senate to follow suit by passing the ONDCP reauthorization. The ``Witness Security and Protection Act'' would provide much-needed federal funds to state-run witness protection programs. I implore my colleagues, in honor of Ms. McAbier, the Dawson family, and the countless others who have suffered and continue to suffer from the violent fallout of the drug trade and the ravages of drug abuse, to support the ``Witness Security and Protection Act,'' H.R. 908.

Mr. CUMMINGS

Mr. CUMMINGS. Mr. Speaker, it is a pleasure for me to join my colleagues today in recognizing the vital contribution historically Black colleges and universities make to our Nation. I am especially pleased for the opportunity to honor these great institutions, which have given the African American community so much for so many years. HBCUs have been in existence for more than a century, fulfilling the hopes and dreams of many African Americans who might not have otherwise had the opportunity to achieve the dream of higher education. And they are still relevant and necessary today. As President Clinton once said, ``Historically Black colleges and universities continue to play a vital role by adding to the diversity and caliber of the Nation's higher education system. Furthermore, these institutions remind all Americans of our obligations to uphold the principles of justice and equality enshrined in our Constitution.'' While comprising less than 3 percent of all American colleges and universities, HBCUs educate nearly 85 percent of African-American college graduates in the United States. I am among them. As a Phi Beta Kappa graduate of Howard University, and the proud father of another Howard University graduate, I know firsthand the opportunities these great institutions provide. In 2004, HBCUs turned out 131,241 African-American graduates with 4- year bachelors degrees. That represents the highest number of degrees awarded to African Americans in this Nation's history--more than double the amount awarded in 1990. In the 7th District of Maryland, which I represent, Baltimore's Morgan State University now ranks 8th nationally in the number of baccalaureate degrees earned by African Americans. And these institutions are not just providing opportunities to their students. Across the length and breath of America, the more than 100 HBCUs are having a positive impact upon the communities in which they are located--and upon the Nation as a whole. Coppin State University, also in my District, is demonstrating its crucial role in the community by its ``adoption'' of nearby Rosemont Elementary School; and by the Nursing Center that offers affordable health care to the children and adults in its vicinity. Mr. Speaker, we must continue to support these vitally important institutions of higher learning. I applaud the President for his proclamation acclaiming the contributions that HBCUs are making to all of America--and I urge him to work with my colleagues in Congress to match those words with the funding that these institutions so desperately need. Our historically Black colleges and universities are remarkably adept at accomplishing a lot with a little, but they need more public support. Just look at the HBCUs hit by Hurricane Katrina that continued providing class sessions in what can be termed less than ideal circumstances. I applaud their resiliency. As we continue to celebrate HBCU week, let us not forget the social interest in keeping them vital and thriving. Each year, HBCUs produce the leaders of tomorrow: writers, musicians, actors, activists, business leaders, lawyers, doctors--and Members of Congress. Let's honor these great American institutions by supporting our Nation's HBCUs both in rhetoric and in practice--by providing sufficient funding for their continued existence.

Mr. CUMMINGS

Mr. CUMMINGS. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to urge my colleagues to support the Minority Entrepreneurship & Innovation Pilot Program of 2006, a bill that I am introducing as a companion to S. 2586, sponsored by Senator John Kerry. This bill is designed to address our nation's growing economic disparities through the promotion of business development and entrepreneurship in minority communities. Economic indicators show that today, the average income for African Americans is just 62 percent that of whites. More than 40 years after the last of the Jim Crow laws was repealed by the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the economic value of blacks is still nearly three-fifths that of whites--a statistic that clearly indicates that the vestiges of slavery are enduring. This race-based ``wealth gap'' is simply unacceptable. And African Americans are not the only minority group suffering from this disparity. The average incomes of Native Americans and Latinos are similarly unbalanced, with those communities earning 65 and 74 percent of the income of whites respectively. But the news is not all bad. The National Urban League, in its 2006 ``State of Black America Report,'' indicated that there may be a silver lining to this cloud. The prevalence of black-owned businesses has been on the upswing, revealing a difference of 2.5 to 1 (White Businesses to African-American Businesses), as compared with 3 to 1 a few years ago. As many of my colleagues know, minority-owned businesses provide real opportunity for individuals, families and communities. By supporting their growth, we can begin to reverse the increasing ``wealth gap'' for good, leading to greater economic independence for minorities. This result will multiply itself and in the process lay the foundation for closing other socio-economic gaps--gaps that have created an environment for persistent economic failure in many of these communities. That is why I am introducing the Minority Entrepreneurship and Innovation Pilot Program of 2006. This legislation would establish a $24 million, two-year pilot program to promote small business development in colleges and universities that serve African American, Native American and Latino communities. Through $1 million grants, the institutions would provide students in highly-skilled fields such as engineering, manufacturing and science with the tools they need to start their own businesses. The bill would also allow institutions to establish Small Business Development Centers to provide counseling, capacity building and niche market development services. A great legacy of the American Dream has been the opportunity for ordinary citizens to improve their livelihoods by starting their own business. The Minority Entrepreneurship and Innovation Pilot Program of 2006 would give minority communities a chance to share in this attainable dream. I want to thank the original cosponsors who have joined with me in introducing this important bill, Representatives Bennie Thompson, Grace Napolitano, Sanford Bishop, Albert Wynn, Debbie Wasserman Schultz, Bobby Scott, Major Owens, Benjamin Cardin, Al Green, Gregory Meeks, Bobby Rush, Juanita Millender-McDonald, Raul Grijalva, John Conyers, G.K. Butterfield, Allen Boyd, Mike Ross, Danny Davis, Stephanie Tubbs Jones, Linda Sanchez, Eleanor Holmes Norton, Carolyn Kilpatrick, Joe Baca, David Scott, Albert Wynn, Chris Van Hollen, Hilda Solis, Donald Payne, Barbara Lee, C.A. Dutch Ruppersberger, Sam Farr and James Clyburn. I ask the rest of my colleagues to please join us in helping to reverse the ``wealth gap'' by supporting this legislation.

Mr. CUMMINGS

Mr. CUMMINGS. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize Ellicott City and Columbia, Maryland located in beautiful Howard County which is part of my district, the 7th District of Maryland, for placing 4th on Money Magazine's ``Best Places to Live'' 2006 list. This list recognizes what we in Maryland have known for years: that Ellicott City and Columbia provide the best of both worlds--an economy in which parents and children can thrive and a quality of life that allows them to enjoy the fruits of their labor. Located in the corridor between Baltimore, Maryland, and Washington, DC, the area that became known as Ellicott City was a tobacco outpost until the Ellicott brothers turned it into the flour-milling capital of the 1700s. Two centuries later, Columbia grew from the vision of developer Jim Rouse, who created the town as an alternative to the epidemic of boring suburbs. Only 5 miles apart and now called home by 160,000 Marylanders, these two towns provide an active and charming downtown, a major music venue, a 30,000 square foot arts center, an impressive mall, and over 4,500 acres of park space. The Money Magazine recognition stands as a testament to the fine administration of the county and local governments and to the residents' long-standing commitment to active community involvement--working together to ensure the highest quality of life. Mr. Speaker, Ellicott City and Columbia are not just great places to play and enjoy life, they are also excellent places to work and attend school. About one-third of these residents work at local businesses, at one of the national corporations headquartered there, or at the Howard County General Hospital, a member of Johns Hopkins Medicine. Many others make the commute to nearby Baltimore, or Washington, DC. In addition, Howard County's public schools, from kindergarten through community college, are constantly ranked among the best in the State and boast test scores 50 percent above average. Parents know that their children are receiving the best education possible, due to the hard work and dedication of the employees of the Howard County Public School System led by Superintendent Dr. Sydney L. Cousin, who has served the school system for almost 20 years in an exemplary manner. With its top schools, great jobs, low crime rates, variety of recreational activities, and acres of open space, it is no surprise that Columbia and Ellicott City beat 741 other communities to place fourth on Money Magazine's Best Places to Live 2006 list. I applaud Howard County Executive James N. Robey for his nearly four decades of service to Howard County, as well as the citizens of Columbia and Ellicott City for making this area truly one of the best places to live in America--for it is the people who make our communities great. Mr. Speaker, I commend the other 2006 Best Places winners, and I remind my colleagues to work with me to ensure that our policies support and facilitate the creation of livable communities for all Americans. Again, I congratulate Columbia and Ellicott City, located in my district in Howard County, Maryland, on receipt of this prestigious recognition.

Mr. CUMMINGS

Mr. CUMMINGS. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of H.R. 9--bipartisan legislation to reauthorize the Voting Rights Act of 1965, and in opposition to the King amendment. Fannie Lou Hamer, Rosa Parks, and Coretta Scott King--together with thousands of other Americans--fought tirelessly to vanquish discrimination and exclusion. I recall their sacrifice for my colleagues, along with the observation of Dr. King during his 1957 Prayer Pilgrimage to Washington: ``All types of conniving methods are still being used to prevent the Negroes from becoming registered voters,'' Dr. King declared. ``The denial of this sacred right is a tragic betrayal of the highest mandates of our democratic tradition.'' Unfortunately, our nation still needs the protections that the VRA provides--I cite the states of Georgia, Ohio, and Florida as recent examples that represent the betrayal to which Dr. King refers. Mr. Chairman, the four amendments approved by the Rules Committee are poison pills for the VRA. All four diminish the right to vote, are constitutionally unsound and violate the intent of the act. This amendment is no exception. I urge my colleagues to vote to reauthorize the VRA--without the poison pill amendments.

Mr. CUMMINGS. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of H.R. 9--bipartisan legislation that will extend and strengthen the Voting Rights Act of 1965. Fannie Lou Hamer, Rosa Parks, and Coretta Scott King--together with thousands of other Americans--fought tirelessly to vanquish discrimination and exclusion. Forty years ago, millions of Americans were excluded from our democratic process. In many States, voters were required to pass impractical literacy tests or pay hefty poll taxes. It was to carry the American democratic journey beyond these failings that Black citizens and civil rights workers risked unemployment, violence and death. I recall their sacrifice for this House, along with the observation of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. during his 1957 Prayer Pilgrimage to Washington. ``All types of conniving methods are still being used to prevent the Negroes from becoming registered voters,'' Dr. King declared. ``The denial of this sacred right is a tragic betrayal of the highest mandates of our democratic tradition.'' Eight years later, during the Selma voting rights marches, televised pictures of a vicious ``Bloody Sunday'' attack on unarmed Americans touched the conscience of this Nation--leading directly to enactment of the Voting Rights Act of 1965. Mr. Chairman, this landmark legislation, often called the most important civil rights law of all, is still important in our own time. From my own life experience, I can attest that we have come a long way toward universal justice in this country, but we are not there yet. I note that a Federal court recently upheld a Voting Rights Act challenge to a proposed Georgia requirement that would require every voter to present a government photo ID before voting--a requirement, the court held, that would disproportionately burden minority voters. And in the Texas redistricting cases that the Supreme Court just decided, the Court held that Texas District 23 violates the Voting Rights Act by making it more difficult for Latino-Americans to elect representatives of their own choosing. In communities like my own throughout the country, the Voting Rights Act is the very foundation of our faith that America is moving forward toward the day when ``liberty and justice for all'' will truly prevail. Americans of our own time--minority and majority Americans alike-- need the continued guidance that the Voting Rights Act provides. We have come a long way, but more needs to be done. The four amendments approved by the Rules Committee are poison pills for this bill and the sponsors know this. Any plan or scheme--by purpose or effect--that would diminish the right to vote is un-American and violative of the act. With this renewal of the Voting Rights Act, we have the opportunity to live up to Dr. King's vision of a better, more unified country. ``Give us the ballot,'' Dr. King declared during that 1957 Prayer Pilgrimage to Washington, ``and we will . . . fill our legislative halls with men of good will and send to the sacred halls of Congress men who will not sign a southern manifesto because of their devotion to the manifesto of justice.'' Mr. Chairman, we can be those noble people whom Dr. King prophesied, the people who reaffirm and strengthen that truly American manifesto of justice that reads: ``The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any state on account of race, color, or previous condition of servitude.'' These are inspiring and powerful words, Mr. Chairman. Our duty is clear. Vote to reauthorize VRA without the gutting amendments.

Mr. CUMMINGS

Mr. CUMMINGS. Mr. Speaker, the terrible events of 9/11 brought intense scrutiny to security on our nation's aviation system and led Congress to enact significant measures to strengthen security both on airplanes and throughout airports. However, this same level of scrutiny has simply not been extended to the other transportation modes in our nation, particularly railroads and public transit systems. Even though transit and rail systems throughout the world have been the targets of deadly terror attacks, including the London subway system a year ago this month and the rail system in Bombay, India, just yesterday, the Bush Administration seems guilty of the same lack of anticipatory thinking that plagued our approach to aviation security prior to 9/11. In fact, as has happened so often in our nation's history, public voices calling attention to the inadequate security provided for railroads and public transit appear to be warning of a problem in plain sight that is essentially being ignored by officials whose basic plan is apparently to hope that nothing happens. In July of last year, the Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security articulated the Bush Administration's general indifference to security on transit systems when he announced that our nation's public transit systems should expect to bear most of the costs of funding security improvements themselves. At that time, the Secretary dismissed the idea that a terror strike on a transit system could produce ``catastrophic consequences'' by saying ``a bomb in a subway car may kill 30 people.'' Under pressure, Secretary Chertoff backed away from his statement. However, the Bush Administration appears to have continued its policy of essentially leaving to public transit systems and to railroads much of the financial burden associated with providing any security enhancements on these systems. Thus, in fiscal year 2006, the federal government appropriated just $150 million in security grants to be divided among transit intercity passenger rail, and freight rail systems. This is the same amount provided in fiscal year 2005. In fact, federal grants for transit and railroad security since 9/11 have totaled just over $550 million. By comparison, the Congressional Research Service reports that the federal government has spent nearly $20 billion on aviation security since September 11, 2001. As evidenced by this funding disparity, national focus has been almost exclusively on aviation security despite the fact that almost 7 times more people use public transportation on a daily basis than fly on airplanes. Perhaps not surprisingly given the lack of focus, the inadequacy of federal funding has been accompanied by repeated failures on the part of the Department of Homeland Security to develop comprehensive risk assessments and mode-specific security plans as documented by several GAO studies and now by a study written by the Democratic Members of the Committee on Homeland Security. I strongly support the Rail and Public Transportation Security Act of 2006, H.R. 5714, as well as other measures that would strength rail and transit security in our Nation. It is simply incomprehensible to me that Congress has not yet considered and passed these measures that would close gaping holes in our transit security system and significantly increase funding for security grant programs. Mr. Speaker, while it will not be possible to protect our transit and rail systems from every possible terror threat, we are not yet doing all that we can to make these systems as safe as possible. Our failure to anticipate the unthinkable before 9/11 led to the tragic death of 3,000 innocent Americans. It is past time that we act to secure our public transit and rail systems before another unthinkable act leads to the deaths of more innocent Americans.

Mr. CUMMINGS

Mr. CUMMINGS. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman for yielding. I stand in support of this legislation, but I do want to emphasize something that is very important, and I think Ms. Jackson-Lee alluded to it just a moment ago. In my district in Baltimore, we have one Johns Hopkins, we have the University of Maryland, we have a small black college called Coppin State. Coppin State University has a nursing school, and most of its applicants come from the inner city of Baltimore, in our region. These are kids that have worked very hard to get through school and have done very well. But for every one applicant that we admit into Coppin, five are not able to come. These are people who are qualified. It is incredible to me that young people who work hard, play by the rules, give it everything they have got, and then they get to the point of being able to go to college, they cannot go to Coppin's nursing school because of two main things: one, faculty, a lack of faculty; and, second, a lack of space. And it is so incredibly sad when I think about their standing on the sidelines of life and not being able to pursue goals that are their life dreams. In some kind of way we have got to turn this around. I mean, it is wonderful to do what we have to do to go across the shores, but what about the young people in our country? What about them? What about the ones who simply want to grow up to help other people? What about the ones who have to defer their dreams? What about the ones who have to arrest their dreams and not be able to pursue them? We spend just a phenomenal amount of time talking about No Child Left Behind, talking about educating our children, using our State and local and Federal funds to educate them, and then when they get to the point where they are qualified to go to nursing school, there are not enough resources for them. The other thing I might add is that Coppin State has like a 99 percent passage on the State exam, 99 percent. So what that means is definitely we have five not going to nursing school, one going, and, again, those folks being left on the sidelines. So I hope that the committee will continue to work on this because I want these young people to fulfill their dreams.

Mr. CUMMINGS

Mr. CUMMINGS. Mr. Speaker, despite the crafty language in this resolution, there is no connection between 9/11 and Saddam Hussein. The Global War on Terror and the War in Iraq are not synonymous. The President has admitted this, yet the Republican Party in this House continues to support his failed policies in Iraq under the guise of fighting terror--consistently providing billions of off-budget funding, allowing waste, fraud and abuse to go unchecked and failing to exercise even the semblance of oversight. So, instead of debating solutions for Iraq today, we are discussing a non-binding resolution that is equally as short-sighted and devoid of direction as President Bush's Iraq policy. We all have unwavering pride for our troops. The quagmire that Iraq has become is not the fault of the troops who have performed superbly-- it is the failure of the President to plan for a transition to peace. That is why I support the Murtha resolution. It would provide a plan for peace, redeploy our troops and allow us to bring them home as soon as practicable. Let's stop the carnage. Our presence in Iraq makes stability impossible. By remaining in Iraq, we make both Iraqi and American soil less secure. Let's bring our troops home.

Mr. CUMMINGS

Mr. CUMMINGS. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to House Resolution 861. As Americans of good conscience, we can find some comfort in the fact that Saddam Hussein is on trial for his crimes and that the Iraqi people have formed a representative government. Yet, as we, the elected Representatives of the American people, engage in this discussion more than 3 years after President Bush declared ``mission accomplished'': 2,500 brave young Americans have died, over 18,300 have been injured, and more than 10,000 Iraqis have suffered a similar fate. Our national treasury continues to be squandered--to date by over $300 billion, with over $9 billion of reconstruction funds squandered with no accounting. And no believable argument has been advanced that our continued military presence in Iraq will make the American people more secure against the very real threats that we face in the Global War on Terror. Tragically, this House is now debating a non-binding resolution that is as short-sighted and devoid of direction as the President's policy in Iraq, that purposely confuses the Global War on Terror with the war in Iraq. And despite the crafty and artful wording of the resolution-- these two efforts are not synonymous. There is no connection between 9/ 11 and Saddam Hussein nor Saddam Hussein and Osama Bin Laden. The President has admitted this, yet the Republican Party in the House continues to support his failed policies in Iraq under the guise of fighting terror--consistently providing billions of off-budget funding, allowing waste, fraud and abuse to go unchecked and failing to exercise even the semblance of oversight. Upon close reading, the Resolution contains three different kinds of declarations. Some are irrelevant--because everyone believes them to be true. Some are cynical--because they contain assertions that no one can reasonably believe. And some are illusory--because they assert objectives that, based upon the ``facts on the ground in Iraq'' we cannot reasonably expect to achieve in the foreseeable future. The American people and especially the American troops deserve better than this. We all have unwavering pride for our troops--they are performing superbly. The quagmire that Iraq has become is not the fault of the troops--it is the failure of the President to plan for a transition to the peace. As a member of the Out-of-Iraq Caucus, I have co-sponsored and continue to support Representative Murtha's solution, House Joint Resolution 73. It makes it clear to the Iraqi people that our Nation renounces any claim to permanent bases in their country. It declares that we will bring our troops home at the earliest practicable date. And it provides a plan for peace. Saddam Hussein is no longer the ruler of Iraq. A reasonably democratic constitution has been ratified. A democratic government has been elected. Now, the Iraqi people must forge their own future. Forging their own future is what 80 percent of Iraqis want--allowing them to do so would represent true freedom and democracy for Iraqis. Now, this Congress is duty-bound to heed the reasoned assessments of American military commanders that we make both Iraqi and American soil less secure by our continued military presence there. In fact, sadly, our continued occupation has in fact increased the number of terrorist operatives in Iraq. Mr. Speaker, with this result it is time to rethink our ``help'' to the Iraqi people. The Iraqi people should continue to receive our continued assistance as they rebuild their country, without our military occupation. We should help them defend their borders against terrorist infiltration--if the need arises. But, it is time for a change. Let's stop the carnage. It is time to bring our troops home.