Elijah Cummings

Mr. CUMMINGS

Mr. CUMMINGS. Mr. Speaker, in keeping with the overall theme of Men's Health Week, which we commemorate each year during the week leading up to Father's Day, I rise to introduce House Resolution 863, which is intended to bring to our collective attention to the need to develop better tools for ourselves, our fathers, husbands, brothers and friends in the fight against prostate cancer. Prostate cancer is the second most common cancer in the United States. It is also the second leading cause of cancer-related deaths in men, claiming around 27,000 lives in 2005 alone, according to the National Prostate Cancer Coalition. According to the National Cancer Institute, in 2005 our Nation likely saw more than 230,000 new cases of prostate cancer, meaning that some 2 million American men are living with prostate cancer at this time. Statistics tell us that prostate cancer will strike one in six men. We also know that African American men suffer disproportionately from prostate cancer, with an incidence rate 60 percent higher than white males and with mortality rates double that of white males. African American men also are 2.5 times more likely to die from the disease than white men. To put this into perspective, consider this: as the time ticks by during Men's Health Week, every 2-3 minutes sees a new case of prostate cancer and every 18 minutes we lose another American to the disease. Faced with these statistics, we need to start getting serious about our diagnostic and treatment options. We must acknowledge that the state of prostate cancer care is decades behind what it should be. We need more accurate technology, more reliable weapons in the fight against prostate cancer--tools like digital imaging. It is alarming that a disease that strikes so many receives such antiquated care. And our men are suffering for it. The current screening methods of digital rectal exams and PSA blood tests are our best tools available--but they are not enough. There are many important groups that are working tirelessly in the critical effort to get more men to undergo screening as part of their annual physical exams, and I commend them for their work. Other groups have succeeded in focusing the attention of policymakers on the need to devote resources to developing better drugs for men who have been diagnosed with prostate cancer. I am pleased to know that progress is occurring on that front as well. However, I recently learned from a study funded by the National Cancer Institute, that PSA blood screening tests, the most common form of testing for prostate cancer, result in both false positives and false negatives. I am advised that this study found that as many as 15 percent of men with normal PSA levels still have prostate cancer. Even with an abnormal level, many men whose doctors recommend biopsies find out that they do not actually have cancer, meaning that the procedure was only necessary because there is no accessible and affordable imaging alternative at this time. According to the National Cancer Institute, which has published interim results of a large scale clinical trial involving prostate cancer, results of the baseline round of prostate cancer screening in the trial show about 14 percent of men had either a positive PSA test or a positive DRE test. Of those men, about 12 percent were diagnosed with prostate cancer within 12 months, the majority with early stage disease. From these results, one can infer that if 12 percent of the men with positive tests using current detection methods did end up with prostate cancer the 88 percent who did not receive such a diagnosis might have been able to avoid having to deal with invasive biopsies and surgery to the extent that such procedures followed their initial positive test. The PSA test is apparently the best tool we have in the diagnostic field. Men need to continue to get tested, even with the chance that the results may be misleading at times. Although not every American has a prostate and not every American man will get prostate cancer, this disease affects all of us. It might be your family member, a favorite coworker, a beloved entertainer and or retired athlete, even an elected official you admire, but somehow, we all seem to be touched by this disease--much like breast cancer affects all Americans in one way or another. Americans should care about the fight against prostate cancer not only for health reasons, but because the false indicators from today's detection methods can create enormous emotional and psychological strain on American men and their families and generate substantial costs for our already overburdened medical system. With the ever-increasing costs of health care, both private and public providers need to get behind the call for more cost-effective and results-oriented technologies in the battle against prostate cancer. Our Resolution calls for an increased focus on developing advanced imaging technologies that could not only detect prostate cancer, but could help a physician determine what type of prostate cancer it is, and what treatment options were required, without once invading the patient's body. With imaging technologies, pinpointing treatment then becomes possible, allowing for minimal invasion of the patient and minimal discomfort, complications or costs. Right now in my Congressional District, Johns Hopkins University researchers are working on improving the early detection of prostate cancer, when it is most curable. I am advised that their research involves novel prostate imaging approaches that might be able to demonstrate the location of abnormal lesions so that a biopsy can be directed, not performed blindly. In addition, I understand that Johns Hopkins researchers are studying the spread of this cancer, to determine which prostate cancers are more aggressive and progressive than others, and how to tailor the treatment to the particular progression of that cancer. This helps physicians determine when treatments are effective and should be continued, and when they should be stopped when they lose efficacy. Johns Hopkins researchers are engaged in this battle against prostate cancer, and are doing their part through innovative research, hard work and dedication. We in Congress can do our part by encouraging the same level of cooperation that breast cancer initiatives spurred in the last decade of the 20th century. We need to increase our investment in the search for new diagnostic and treatment tools for prostate cancer, like creating the equivalent to digital breast imaging for the prostate. Both prostate cancer and breast cancer are ruthless diseases and cause not just physical damage but also psychological injury to their victims. The difference in imaging technologies, I believe, reflects the fact that women have over the years courageously demanded that medical science develop better treatment for themselves and their sisters-in-arms in the fight against breast cancer, while men have hunkered down, gritted their teeth, and failed for the most part to fight for more advanced prostate cancer detection and treatment. Prostate cancer has no such voice. Most men don't organize walks. Most men don't rally around pink ribbons and educate the public like women have over the past several years. We have much to learn from the women in our lives. While there are some very commendable patient advocacy organizations that are focused on prostate cancer which are doing an excellent job of getting the word out about this disease and its effects, there are thousands of men, suffering in silence or in a state of ignorance, afraid that diagnosis will lead to possible side effects, including impotence and incontinence. This is a disease that often strikes at the very heart of masculinity and men do not like to talk about it. We cannot afford to put our masculinity over our health, our pride over our future. American men need our help, especially African American men. They need a chorus of voices demanding better prostate cancer care, and they need it now. Men's Health Week is an opportunity for us to start this groundswell. This is an issue we can all get behind. We all have fathers, brothers, uncles, and friends. Many of us have been personally touched by prostate cancer. It is our voices that need to rise in support of those suffering in silence. Let us start now, and carry this message on through National Prostate Cancer Awareness Month in September and beyond. As Members of the House of Representatives, we can take advantage of our position to raise public awareness of the need for discourse and detection regarding prostate cancer. With this Resolution, we want to show that we will not lie down, we will not be silenced, and we will not stop until prostate cancer is a concern of the past. We must demand the advances in technology and treatment now, to protect the lives and future of America's sons. Lastly, I want thank my colleagues Congressman Burton and Congresswoman Christensen for joining me as the sponsors of this important resolution, as well as Representatives Clyburn, Payne, Cardin, Wynn, Waters, Meeks, Kilpatrick, Millender-McDonald, E. B. Johnson, Lewis (GA), Jefferson, Towns, Norton, Conyers, Meek, John Carter and Capps who joined us.

Mr. CUMMINGS

Mr. CUMMINGS. Mr. Speaker, As an original cosponsor of H. Con. Res. 422, I rise in support of this important resolution expressing the support of Congress for the goals and ideals of the Vigil for Lost Promise Day. More than 26,000 lives may be lost to the effects of drug abuse this year. This tragic impact is felt in communities across this great nation. Sadly many of these deaths occur among our young people. One thing we know about drugs is that they do not discriminate and they do not engage in favoritism--not on the basis of race, color, gender, class, geographic location, or age. Drugs have the same impact on everyone who succumbs to their influence. Moreover, the pain felt by the tragic loss of a loved one to drug overdose or to the deadly effects of chronic drug abuse is universal. The sense of loss, bewilderment, and often shame are known to parents, children, spouses, loved ones and friends of the victims of drug abuse and addiction from all walks of life. These emotions can be especially acute when the victim is a young person who will never have the opportunity to express his or her potential, to live out the promise of a full and productive life. Envisioned by eight families who have personally suffered the loss of a loved one because of drugs, the Vigil for Lost Promise will serve as a remembrance for those who are gone, and to illuminate the pervasive and dangerous effects of drug use. The ultimate objective of these eight families is to help ensure that other families will not have to endure the same kind of loss. The U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration, the National Institute on Drug Abuse and the Partnership for a Drug Free America have joined the families in support of this effort to raise awareness about the terrible toll that drugs take not just on families and friends but on society as a whole. I join my colleagues in saluting these organizations, each of which plays a vital role in our national control strategy, as well as the courageous families and other participants who will attend this important event, which will occur this Thursday, June 8th, at DEA's headquarters in Arlington, Virginia. Mr. Speaker, as we have observed over the past few years, the meth epidemic has awakened much of America to the rampant devastation that drugs can cause to entire communities. This kind of devastation has long been known to urban centers like my own city of Baltimore--cities that have suffered through successive epidemics of heroin, cocaine and crack. As a result of the meth epidemic, I believe there is a heightened awareness around the country and in this House that drugs don't just impair and kill individual drug users; they tear apart families and neighborhoods. I am hopeful that Thursday's Vigil will bring about even broader recognition of the fact that this problem affects all Americans and that it requires a strong national commitment to drug prevention, drug treatment, combined with concerted efforts to keep drugs off of our streets and out of the hands of our nation's young people. Sadly, over the past six years, we have seen this Administration shift funding away from prevention, treatment, and state and local law enforcement in favor of supply reduction efforts beyond our borders. This strategy has resulted in no discernible impact on the availability of drugs on the street, and the number of lives lost to drugs like cocaine, crack, heroin and meth continues to climb. Mr. Speaker, Congress faces difficult choices and the national preoccupation with preventing potential terror attacks is justified by the lingering shock and damage of the 9-11 attacks. Still, we cannot afford to ignore a drug problem that claims more than two thousand American lives each month. If we lack the political will or resources to make a truly substantial investment in prevention and, most important of all, to make drug treatment accessible to all who seek it, at least let us take other steps to ensure that drug abuse claims as few American lives as possible. There are steps the government can take to avoid preventable deaths from drug overdose and abuse, as well as from the spread of deadly communicable diseases, including HIV/AIDS and hepatitis, among intravenous drug users. If we are serious about the goal of saving lives, then let us work together to: Provide funding to states to establish overdose prevention programs; Ensure that first responders and law enforcement (including correctional workers) are trained to respond to drug overdoses and save lives; Increase the availability of naloxone (``nal-OX-own'')--a short- acting drug that can reverse the effects of a heroin overdose--to first responders, law enforcement, needle exchange programs, drug treatment centers, and other public health facilities; And, finally, allow federal funds to be used to support needle and syringe exchange programs, which have been proven in scientific study after scientific study to reduce HIV transmission without increasing drug use. All of these are steps that, if implemented, would save lives, preserve human potential, and reduce the suffering of families and communities across America. By decrying the terrible impact of drugs and yet failing to take prudent action to avoid preventable drug-related deaths, Congress and the Administration risk sending a mixed message to parents who have lost a child to drugs or who stand to lose a child to drug abuse if we don't do our part. So, as we commemorate the lives of those whose promise has been extinguished by drugs, let us be equally mindful of those who are still with us--but whose lives are in danger and hang perilously in the balance. Let us commit to helping them to avoid the terrible fate of having their promise needlessly lost and being mourned by those who love and care for them. Mr. Speaker, I want to close by thanking Mr. Davis and Mr. Souder for bringing this resolution before us and by again saluting everyone who has worked to make the Vigil for Lost Promise come to fruition. I urge all of my colleagues to support the resolution and, more importantly, to support policies and initiatives that will minimize the number of lives lost to drug abuse from this day forward.

Mr. CUMMINGS

Mr. CUMMINGS. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to oppose the pending termination on May 31, 2006 of the FEMA housing assistance for survivors of Hurricane Katrina. FEMA was required to submit a plan for developing transitional and eventually permanent housing for those who lost their homes in Katrina by January 6 of this year--but this plan still has not been submitted. Now, without itself having figured out how best to provide housing to those left homeless by the hurricane, FEMA is poised to leave some 55,000 families--many with very young, or very old, or even very sick members--without any viable option for finding or affording housing and with few remaining options for seeking Federal assistance except on a very short-term basis. Mr. Speaker, shortly after Katrina devastated New Orleans, the President pledged that our Nation would help that city and its citizens rebuild their lives. Not only has the President failed to honor that pledge, but the administration is now willing even to force those who lost everything out of the temporary housing provided to them in the wake of the storm. This is shameful. Is this how we should treat our brethren who have suffered and lost so much? I urge my colleagues not to let FEMA fail, once again, those who have been failed by the government at every turn of this natural disaster. I urge my colleagues to join me in urging the administration to extend the FEMA temporary housing deadline.

Mr. CUMMINGS

Mr. CUMMINGS. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize the impact of juvenile diabetes on America's youth. Typically diagnosed during childhood and adolescent years, juvenile diabetes, also referred to as Type I diabetes, currently affects more than 3 million Americans and more then 13,000 children are diagnosed each year. Juvenile diabetes is an autoimmune disease which attacks and annihilates the insulin producing cells in the pancreas. Since insulin aids in breaking down glucose, when the insulin producing cells are destroyed, glucose accumulates in the blood and can lead to multiple health problems, including blindness, heart failure, nerve damage, limb amputations, and kidney failure. As a result of this chronic illness, individuals with juvenile diabetes must endure a lifetime of maintaining their glucose levels through daily insulin injections, blood glucose monitoring, and a healthy diet. Sadly, although insulin aids in prolonging the life of a diabetic, it cannot prevent the complications associated with the disease. Even worse, is the fact that a cure for diabetes has yet to be discovered. Mr. Speaker, I recently had the opportunity to speak with a family from my district, the Frinks, whose young daughter is afflicted with juvenile diabetes. Based on the wealth of knowledge she possessed about her condition and her ability to convey it so lucidly, I must admit that she left a lasting impression on me. During our conversation, she revealed the extent of how different the life of a young diabetic is in comparison with non-diabetics. For instance, unlike other children, she must constantly check her glucose levels and give herself lifesaving insulin when necessary. She also revealed the critical impact her diet and other regular ``child'' activities played in her life. Unfortunately, it is reported that many Type I diabetics are susceptible to ridicule by their peers due to an overall lack of knowledge about the disease or because they are ``different''. By the end of our conversation, I was in awe. Not only did this young girl exemplify maturity well beyond her years, she also exhibited an unbelievable amount of courage in living with this often debilitating disease. Mr. Speaker, recent studies have shown that compared with non- diabetic youth, juvenile diabetics are more conscientious about healthy living, nutritional requirements, and responsibility based on their lifestyles. This was definitely true with this young lady--she was a fount of knowledge about wellness and prevention--at age seven! That is why I was so amazed--and applauded her courageousness. Mr. Speaker, the life of this remarkable young woman represents the life experiences of many young people coping with juvenile diabetes. Because of her story and millions like hers, we must continue to work more diligently toward finding and funding a cure for the disease. I want to applaud an organization that has been fighting on behalf of these children. Since its inception in 1970, the Juvenile Diabetes Research Foundation International has raised over $900 million for diabetes research. I commend its efforts and will continue to support it in its commitment to finding a cure for the disease. But we must do more for a disease that has become almost epidemic for children and adults. Twenty million Americans suffer from diabetes, which is the leading cause of kidney failure, adult blindness, non- traumatic amputations, heart attacks and stroke. In fact, every 30 seconds a new case of diabetes is diagnosed and over 1.3 million Americans are newly-diagnosed each year. But for those of my colleagues who make decisions by the numbers, I offer these grim statistics. Diabetes costs this country $132 billion per year, almost five times the entire National Institutes of Health $28.5 billion budget. This disease also accounts for 30% of every Medicare dollar. The Diabetes Research Working Group mandated by Congress called for $1.6 billion in funding for NIH diabetes research, but actual funding hovers around $1 billion. Accordingly, I support a 5% increase in the FY 2007 budget for NIH funding for juvenile diabetes research so that we may all reap the benefits of diabetes research. Needless to say, we must dedicate more resources to fighting this disease--for the children and adults who suffer today and the millions who will suffer tomorrow. I believe that with sufficient funding of research initiatives, we come closer to finding a cure, and at the very least lessen the suffering. I urge my colleagues to do the same. Mr. Speaker, one other area I would like to discuss is the longer survivability and quality of life of all diabetics. Due to technological advancements, insulin injections have come a long way since the needle and syringe method. In fact, in the early 1990's, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved an insulin pump, which delivers insulin to the blood stream in small intervals throughout the day through a tiny needle stuck under the skin on the left side of the abdomen. Insulin pumps have been proven to aid in stabilizing glucose control and reduce episodes of hypoglycemia. Recently, continuous glucose meters have been developed to provide diabetics instantaneous access to testing blood glucose levels. Recent studies have proven that individuals who utilize continuous glucose meters spend more time in the normal glucose range compared with patients using conventional finger stick blood glucose methods. Presently, medical researchers are working on fusing these two devices to create an artificial pancreas that would regulate glucose levels in the body of someone with diabetes by continuously measuring the level of glucose and dispensing doses based on those measurements. Again, if developed, this device would contribute in augmenting the quality of life for Type I and Type II diabetics. Mr. Speaker, these life-altering inventions only come through research. That is why, again, I support the 5% increase in NIH funding for the FY 07 budget and I encourage my colleagues to join me in this effort. America's youth is our future and it is up to us to invest in their health and education in order to cultivate steadfast leaders of tomorrow--rich in knowledge, morals, and wellness.

Mr. CUMMINGS

Mr. CUMMINGS. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in opposition to the FY 07 Republican Budget Resolution, H. Con. Res. 376 and the Rule currently under consideration. Mr. Chairman, the Republican FY07 Budget sets a record--not for balancing the budget, not for lowering the deficit, or for reducing our reliance on foreign debt--but for exceeding the callousness evident in President Bush's FY07 Budget for American families. Mr. Chairman, the Republican budget is devoid of direction, balance and compassion. It slashes by $2.2 billion K-12 programs, school improvement funds, job training, Community Services Block grants, and the Social Services Block grants. This budget cuts veterans health care and the homeland security function; eliminates the Hope VI program; fails to adequately fund public health programs; slashes environmental and conservation funding; cuts programs that help feed low-income elderly, mothers and children; cuts housing assistance for the elderly and disabled; and cuts or flat-funds 18 of the 19 institutes at the National Institutes of Health. On the mandatory spending side, it includes reconciled spending cuts for Medicare, Medicaid and the Pension Benefit Guarantee Corporation. All of these cuts come at a time when the economy is floundering. They come at time when most Americans are trying to make ends meet--to take care of themselves, their children and their parents--all while being squeezed by flat wages, high gas prices and declining incomes. Yes, these cuts deeply hurt the least and most vulnerable of Americans, but in fact, they hurt nearly all American families. The sad truth is that all of these cuts are the sacrificial lamb for funding tax cuts for the wealthiest 1 percent of Americans. In fact, while the national debt is rising and deficits are mounting, this Republican Budget funds another shameless $228 billion in tax over the next five years. Meanwhile, since President Bush has been in office, 6 million more Americans lack health insurance, 1.4 million more children live in poverty, 1.2 million more are unemployed and long-term unemployment is two times larger at 1.4 million. The impact of these numbers intensifies by almost double in minority communities. The CBC Alternative Budget offers a real budget for all Americans. It would balance the budget, restore pay-as-you-go budget principles, and in fact generate a surplus by 2011. It would restore funding to critical programs, not by creating deficits, but by rescinding the tax cuts for those making over $200,000, eliminating the corporate tax incentives for off-shoring jobs, closing corporate loopholes; and reducing ballistic missile defense spending--all while getting rid of waste, fraud and abuse. I urge my colleagues to support the CBC and Spratt Alternative Budgets--to vote to return to fiscal discipline and responsibility--to vote to focus our spending priorities on all Americans.

Mr. CUMMINGS. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in opposition to the FY 07 Republican Budget Resolution, H. Con. Res. 376, and in support of the Congressional Black Caucus Budget Substitute. Mr. Chairman, the Republican Budget sets a record--not for balancing the budget, lowering the deficit, or reducing our reliance on foreign debt--but for exceeding the callousness evident in President Bush's Budget for America. This ``compromise'' is devoid of direction, balance and compassion. It slashes K-12 programs, job training, Community Development and Social Services Block grants. It cuts veterans health care, the homeland security function; mandatory student loan spending and programs that help feed low-income elderly, mothers and children. The sad truth is that all of these cuts are the sacrificial lamb for tax cuts for the wealthiest 1 percent of Americans. While many Americans are struggling under mounting debt and our country faces record deficits, this Budget funds another shameless $228 billion in tax cuts over 5 years. The CBC Alternative Budget offers a real budget for all Americans. It would balance the budget, restore pay-as-you-go principles and restore funding to critical programs; not by creating deficits, but by rescinding the tax cuts for those making over $200,000, eliminating corporate tax incentives and closing corporate loopholes--all while eliminating waste, fraud and abuse. I urge my colleagues to support the CBC Alternative Budget, which represents a return to fiscal discipline and responsibility and focuses our spending priorities on ALL Americans.

Mr. CUMMINGS

Mr. CUMMINGS. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor the life and work of Ethiopian Poet Laureate Tsegaye Gabre-Medhin who passed away on February 25, 2006 at the age of 69 in his New York home. Mr. Tsegaye Gabre-Medhin left behind a legacy of poetry and literary works that continue to inspire generations. Tsegaye was born in 1936 in the town of Boda during the Italian invasion of Ethiopia. As a youth, he showed great promise as a writer. In elementary school he wrote and produced ``King Dionysus and the Two Brothers,'' a play that was attended by Emperor Haile Selassie. Tsegaye grew to become one of his country's most prominent literary figures and an international voice for African culture and peace. A prolific writer, he created more than 30 plays and numerous poems. Many in Ethiopia have claimed him to be that nation's ``Shakespeare''. For Tsegaye, poetry and theater were paths to inspiring hearts and condemning violence. After completing secondary education in Ethiopia, he attended Blackstone School of Law in Chicago where he graduated in 1959. But, theater, not law, was his lifelong calling. In 1959 and 1960, he studied experimental drama at the Royal Court Theater in London and the Comedie-Francaise in Paris. Tsegaye revolutionized theater with his portrayals of the poor and the forgotten, war, imperialism, human failings, and courage. While his work delighted the public, 18 of his 33 plays were banned by one government or another. He put into words what many could not say. Tsegaye's poem, ``The Day's Hunger Consumed,'' voiced an Ethiopian public's outrage at the news of famine raging in the north. From 1961-1971, he was artistic director of the Ethiopian National Theater. In 1964, ``Oda Oak Oracle,'' a play written in English about Ethiopian country life and lore was produced around the world thrilling audiences in Africa, Great Britain and the U.S. In 1971, Tsegaye was awarded a fellowship to the University of Dakar to study African cultural antiquities. That research led to a Fulbright Scholarship which enabled him to tour the U.S. lecturing on Ethiopian art and literature. During the 1970s, he helped found the department of theater at Addis Ababa University. He also worked as an Oxford University Press editor and in 1975 served as Vice Minister of Culture and Sports. Tsegaye's contributions to art and history are recognized worldwide. In 1966, he was awarded Ethiopia's highest literary honor--the Haile Selassie Prize for Amharic Literature. Other awards include the Gold Mercury Ad Personam Award in 1982; Fulbright Senior Scholar Resident Fellowship Award at Columbia University in 1985; Human Rights Watch Free Expression Award in New York in 1994. In 1997, the Congress of World Poets and the United Poets Laureate International conveyed on him the title of Poet Laureate. The Norwegian Author's Union, along with the Royal Norwegian Ministry of Cultural Affairs, conferred its Annual Freedom of Expression Prize on Tsegaye in 2005. Poet Laureate Tsegaye held membership in many distinguished organizations, including the African Writer's Union and the African Researcher's Union. While Tsegaye received many honors, one of his most prized was when the African Union selected one of his poems for its anthem. In the poem, Tsegaye wrote, ``Let us make Africa the tree of life.'' Ailing health forced Tsegaye to leave his beloved Ethiopia in 1998 to move to New York for medical treatment that was not available in Ethiopia. Undeterred by illness, weakened eyesight, and an exhausting regimen of medical procedures, he continued to educate and inspire through his art, his unwavering social consciousness, and his sense of purpose and humanity. Through his literature, Tsegaye's pride in Ethiopia and love for Africa will live with us forever. I close with one of Tsegaye's more famous quotations, ``I crave for knowledge. I envy tolerant, peaceful folks. I am frightened by ignorance. I loathe violence.''--Tsegaye Gabre-Medhin

Mr. CUMMINGS

Mr. CUMMINGS. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the resolution and to call for an extension of the May 15th deadline to allow our Nation's seniors more time to enroll in the Medicare Part D Prescription Drug program. While I support the resolution sponsored by Representative Nancy Johnson, I believe that seniors need more than just encouragement to enroll in Medicare Part D. They need time--time to figure out their myriad of choices under this new benefit. Mr. Speaker, seniors do not need an extension of the arbitrary May 15th deadline because they don't know the deadline is fast approaching. They need time because the benefit is so complicated. They need time because the prescription drug benefit is not a direct add-on to Medicare centrally administered through CMS--which is what seniors and Democrats wanted, but a labyrinth of private companies, premiums, deductibles, co-payments, formularies, and pharmacy access that varies widely from plan to plan. In fact, in most states, beneficiaries have a choice of more than 36 drug plans. They need time because the Medicare Modernization Act passed in the wee hours of the morning by the slimmest of margins in the 108th Congress, protects the interests of big pharmaceutical companies at the expense of our seniors by not allowing the Secretary of HHS to negotiate the best price for lifesaving drugs for our seniors. They need time because they have to figure out how much their choice will cost them and whether or not they're in or out of the doughnut hole. They need time because a recent GAG Report indicates that 60 percent of callers to the CMS regarding this benefit were given inadequate and incomplete information. They need time because they face a maze of options provided by private insurance and pharmaceutical companies, entities which stand to reap great profit windfall that were placed in the bill by those who received enormous benefit from these industries. Mr. Speaker, private companies wanted to be in this business, but they didn't want to risk losing any money. So the law was specifically designed to maximize profits and ensure the participation of many private plans. That is why the choice of providers is plentiful, collective bargaining power is non-existent, and the confusion to seniors is so great. It is truly by design. Assuring that seniors have access to a high-quality and affordable prescription drug plan has been a top priority for me and my Democratic colleagues. When seniors tell me that they must cut their pills in half or skip meals just to pay for the medicines they need, it breaks my heart. The injustice of this incenses me. So despite its flaws, this benefit may provide relief to some seniors. That is why I have been holding town halls in my district to provide information to hundreds of seniors about this benefit since sign-up began. That is how I know first-hand that even months later that the plethora of plans is confusing and the various components of the benefit are still not clear to many. I am convinced that there is a better way. That is why I am a cosponsor of the Medicare Prescription Drug Savings and Choices Act, H.R. 752 introduced by Representative Berry and H.R. 5263, recently introduced by Representative Donna Christensen. These bills would extend the enrollment period and provide immediate fixes to the Medicare Part D benefit. However, the will to make these changes for the benefit of our seniors by the Republican leaders in the House and Administration does not exist. Given this fact, while the federal legislation that authorized these plans is far from perfect, until a more comprehensive and more affordable prescription drug plan becomes available, I urge seniors to research your options. Seniors who do not already have prescription drug coverage should consider enrolling in a Medicare Part D plan of their choice before the May 15, 2006 deadline. Seniors who already have prescription drug coverage should check with their existing plan and consider whether a change in insurance is in their best interest before May 15, 2006. The May 15 deadline is less than one week away. There could be serious consequences for seniors if you delay, resulting in an unfair 7 percent lifetime premium penalty. The consequences of not making a choice are dire, so I urge seniors to make a choice before May 15, 2006 about Medicare Part D. Mr. Speaker, our Nation's seniors deserve comprehensive and affordable prescription drug coverage through the Medicare benefit. Making this a reality should be our goal for the future. In the meantime, let's extend the deadline and fix the flaws of the Medicare Part D program for our seniors. They deserve no less.

Mr. CUMMINGS

Mr. CUMMINGS. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to commemorate the 200th anniversary of America's first cathedral, the historic and beautiful Baltimore Basilica. Officially known as the Basilica of the National Shrine of the Assumption of the Blessed Virgin Mary, this magnificent cathedral, built from 1806 to 1821, stands as a symbol of the beginning of the Catholic Church in America, and the religious freedoms embodied in our Constitution. For over a century until the Revolutionary War, Catholics in America were a devoted but persecuted minority. After the Constitution was adopted, the Catholic Church embarked on the construction of a cathedral to celebrate their faith and their new-found right to worship freely. Under the guidance of the future first archbishop of America, John Carroll, a hill above the Baltimore Inner Harbor was selected in 1806 as the site for the cathedral. After hearing about the proposed church, Benjamin Harry Latrobe volunteered his services as chief architect. Latrobe, the architect of the United States Capitol, is considered the father of American architecture and is responsible for what is now considered one of the world's most impressive buildings of the 19th century. In addition to its structural magnificence, the cathedral has fulfilled its place as one of the most historically significant churches in the world. Two-thirds of all American Catholic dioceses can claim their roots at the Baltimore Basilica, and three Plenary Councils guiding the Catholic Church's role in the expanding United States were held within its walls. The Basilica continued to embrace progressive ideals throughout the years by, for example, including the first order of African-American nuns in its convent. As we do today, the Baltimore Basilica has been honored on many occasions for its greatness. In 1937, Pope Pius XI raised the cathedral to the rank of a Minor Basilica. In 1972 it was declared a National Landmark and then in 1993 a National Shrine. The Basilica has also been greatly honored by the visits of His Holiness Pope John Paul II in 1995 and Mother Teresa of Calcutta in 1996. Mr. Speaker, for the past two centuries, the Baltimore Basilica has stood as a beacon of hope and religious freedom. An architectural masterpiece built by two great visionaries, the Basilica continues to be ``a shining citadel'' of faith and hope for Maryland and the United States.

Mr. CUMMINGS

Mr. CUMMINGS. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to commemorate Cover the Uninsured Week. Since its inception in 2003, the week held from May 1-May 7, recognizes the plight of one of the greatest threats to our Nation--46 million Americans who lack health insurance coverage. This important initiative is led by former Presidents Gerald Ford and Jimmy Carter. During the week, community-based events are organized throughout the Nation to heighten public awareness about the importance of making health care coverage a civil right and a priority on our public policy agenda. Over the past three years, the week of events has included health fairs, seminars for small businesses, as well as faith- based, college and university activities. Mr. Speaker, 46 million Americans--which equates to 15 percent of the population--are living without any form of health insurance coverage. As a Nation that embodies democracy and spreads its principles of equality throughout the world, we should be shocked by this astounding figure. The statistics regarding the uninsured are equally shocking: Proportionately, Hispanics and African-Americans have been hit the hardest by our failure to provide health care for all. At least 60 percent of Hispanic Americans, more than 43 percent of African Americans, and 23 percent of Caucasians are among the uninsured. More than one in four uninsured adults (or 26.6 percent) have less than a high school education. Only 9 percent of people in families with income over $50,000 per year are uninsured, compared to 40.8 percent of people with family income below $5,000. A national survey conducted in 2003 found that almost six in 10 uninsured adults (59 percent) have been without health insurance for two years or more. In the state of Maryland, approximately 810,000 people, 14.6 percent of the total population, lack health insurance coverage. Mr. Speaker, these statistics illustrate something very concrete and clear: the human consequences of having tens of millions of Americans uninsured are appalling. Necessary medical treatment is being delayed too long or altogether, and the Americans are dying unnecessarily. Apart from this fact, the employment-based health insurance system, which provides health insurance for almost two-thirds of the non- elderly population, is also broken. The reasons are complex, but this much is clear. Too many Americans are working at low-paid or part-time jobs that do not provide health Insurance coverage. Insurance costs are increasing--and those employers who do offer coverage are attempting to shift more and more of those costs onto their employees. We also know that those areas of our economy in which any job growth is occurring are about 10 percent less likely to provide health care coverage than those in which the number of available jobs is shrinking. Mr. Speaker, based on all of these facts, the time to change our Nation's healthcare equation is upon us. There has to be a better way to ensure universal, high quality care. I am convinced that there is no human right more fundamental than the preservation of life. Wealth should not be a pre-condition to world class health care in a nation that truly values all of its people. With that said, I have joined Michigan Congressman John Conyers and many others in proposing the United States National Health Insurance Act (H.R. 676). This proposal would create a nation-wide, single-payer health care system that is publicly financed but provides private care. It would include expanding and improving the existing Medicare program to cover Americans of all ages. Under the plan, Americans would retain (or regain) the right to choose their own doctors. Other health care professionals and all medically necessary services would be covered. There would also be neither co-pays nor deductibles. Today, I encourage my colleagues to work with us in advancing the vision of universal health care for the following three reasons: We must not allow the sick and dying Americans in our communities to be marginalized. We must make common cause with all of the Americans to provide the care that they need at a cost that they can afford. We must be clear in our assertion that health care is a fundamental human right whatever may be the color of a person's skin. Now is the time to create a health care system that truly serves ALL Americans and now is the time for America to transform our human right to health care into a civil right guaranteed--and funded--by federal law. I urge my colleagues to cosponsor H.R. 676.

Mr. CUMMINGS

Mr. CUMMINGS. Mr. Chairman, as a co-sponsor of H.R. 4954, I rise today to express my support for the security improvements that this measure would require. In particular, this bill would require the Department of Homeland Security to develop a strategic plan to resume trade in the event of some type of terrorist attack that disrupted international shipping to the United States. In addition to providing for national planning, this measure would also strengthen the Coast Guard's oversight of port facility security plans by requiring the Coast Guard to verify the effectiveness of each port's plan at least twice each year. Further, this measure would significantly increase funding for the federal grants that ports use to meet federal requirements for physical security on terminals, including perimeter security. Since 9/11, more than $20 billion in federal funding has been directed to aviation security while just over $630 million has been directed to port security. I am therefore pleased that H.R. 4954 would also increase the funding for port security grants by $200 million per year. Unfortunately, despite the improvements it would make, H.R. 4954 does not do all that could or should be done at this point to increase security at our ports. The recent discussion over the proposed sale of a terminal operating firm working at several U.S. ports--including the Port of Baltimore--to a firm owned by the government of Dubai has raised awareness across our nation of the inadequacy of our current regime for inspecting cargo-- particularly containerized cargo. At the present time, our nation physically inspects only 5% of the nearly 11 million containers that come into our nation each year. This means that more than 10,400,000 containers enter the U.S. without having been physically inspected--and without any physical proof that the contents of the container are truly those described on the container's manifest. The motion to recommit that will be offered by my Democratic colleagues would require that all containers destined for the U.S. be scanned before they are loaded on a ship--and that they be sealed in a way that would immediately show if the container had been tampered with prior to its arrival in the United States. The adoption of this motion to recommit would immeasurably enhance the underlying bill--and would close one of the most significant gaps in our homeland security regime that we have continued to leave open since 9/11. I therefore urge my colleagues to adopt the Democratic motion to recommit to ensure that H.R. 4954 will truly make our ports SAFE.

Mr. CUMMINGS

Mr. CUMMINGS. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor the 100th Anniversary of the Dubois Circle. In its 100th year, this organization's legacy of empowerment for women and African Americans continues to serve as a reminder that even a few devoted individuals can contribute to the fulfillment of America's promise of equity, justice, and freedom. In 1905, William Edward Burghardt Dubois, known to many as W.E.B. Dubois, organized a meeting at the Lyric Theatre in Baltimore, Maryland, of 29 African American ministers, educators, and other professionals to form an organization known as the Niagara Movement--an organization founded to address the social, political, and economic injustices faced by African Americans. The Niagara Movement continued until 1910, when it became the foundation for the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP). It was in this climate that the Dubois Circle came into being. A group of African American women in Baltimore, Maryland, were specially selected by Dr. Garnet Waller, a founder of the Niagara Movement, to serve on a special auxiliary committee as hostesses for a meeting. On January 6, 1906, this special committee of talented young women grew to become a stand alone African American women's organization named the Dubois Circle. Not only did the name honor the revered writer and activist W.E.B. Dubois, but it also served as a declaration of the ideals and purpose for which the group was founded. At a time when women did not yet enjoy the full benefits of citizenship such as the right to vote, this group of trailblazing women would not be relegated to the sidelines of civic engagement. They met frequently to discuss local, national, and global issues and how they could affect them. To carry out a wide range of programs that covered topics from race to business, the members themselves often served as researchers, reporters, editors, and commentators. Throughout its history, the Dubois Circle has remained focused on addressing racial problems in our society. This commitment has demanded its involvement in issues tied to education, the media, mental health, and youth delinquency. The Circle has achieved many impressive successes on these fronts. For instance, in 1949, the Circle sent a letter to the Maryland Governor and Commissioner of Higher Education urging the University of Maryland system to open its graduate departments to African Americans. Because of these efforts and the sacrifice and commitment of countless others, the University of Maryland system ultimately implemented a policy of integration that extended to all levels of the institution. To achieve these goals and others, the Dubois Circle associated itself with various distinguished women's groups, and in the 1980s officially became a life member of the NAACP. The NAACP recognized then, as we do today, the importance of the Dubois Circle in both the African American and women's communities in Maryland and throughout the nation. Mr. Speaker, the Dubois Circle was born 100 years ago to help cleanse the stain of discrimination from our national character and it continues to be relevant to that worthwhile effort even today. The Dubois Circle teaches us that if we draw on the strength within--and add to that strength a committed spirit--we can accomplish no less than greatness.

Mr. CUMMINGS

Mr. CUMMINGS. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to commemorate National Minority Health Month. Celebrated during the month of April, the month highlights the importance of improving minority health through focusing on initiatives to eradicate health disparities. The month was created by the National Minority Health Foundation in response to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Healthy People 2010 Initiative. Through the Foundation's efforts, and those of Representative Donna Christensen, Congress passed the resolution in 2001 during the 107th Congress. Recognizing the disproportionate impact communities of color are burdened with pertaining to equitable access to health care resources, quality and outcomes, the month aims to eliminate health disparities through several mechanisms. These mechanisms focus on cultivating public and private partnerships among health care providers through enhancing social marketing, research, and legislative concerns as well as strengthening career training of professional health care providers to promote cultural competency. Mr. Speaker, this is not a new issue for our Nation. In fact, in 1914, the state of African-American health was so dire that Booker T. Washington established National Negro Health Week (NNHW) in 1915. Additionally, in 1921, when the NNHW committee wanted to expand to reach a wider audience, the U.S. Surgeon General assisted them and together they published the Negro Health Week Bulletin. In the same vein as these events, National Minority Health Month also serves as a reminder of how much work needs to be done to eliminate health and healthcare inequities. Although public health data dismisses overt prejudice within the health care profession, in reality what many minorities face is a less offensive, but equally deadly force. Borrowing a term often used by President Bush (in another context): We are confronting ``the soft bigotry of low expectations.'' Mr. Speaker, there is much research that supports the need for focusing on eliminating health disparities. In 2004, Dr. David Satcher, now Director of the National Center for Primary Care at Morehouse College, and Professor Stephen Woolfe, Director of Research at Virginia Commonwealth University's Department of Family Medicine, released mortality data that their research team had gleaned from the National Center for Health Statistics. During the 1990s, they concluded, more than 886,000 deaths could have been prevented if African Americans had received the same health care as White Americans. Equally shocking are the findings released in the 2002 Institute of Medicine report--''Unequal Treatment: Confronting Racial and Ethnic Health Disparities'', which concluded with great authority that Americans of color receive lower-quality health care than Caucasians. It further explains that African-Americans receive inferior medical care--compared to the majority population--even when the patients' incomes and insurance plans are the same. Most shocking is that these disparities contribute to our higher death rates from heart disease, cancer, diabetes, HIV/AIDS and other life- endangering conditions. Mr. Speaker, the disparities are real and frightening. In fact, of the 46 million uninsured Americans, at least 60 percent of Hispanic Americans and more than 43 percent of African Americans are uninsured. Further, while African-Americans comprise only 12.3 percent of the population, we account for half of all of the newly diagnosed HIV/AIDS infections. Statistics also indicate that non-Hispanic whites have a higher 5-year cancer survival rate than minority populations. For this reason, I also would like to recognize National Minority Cancer Awareness Week which is an important effort held during the week of April 16-22. During the week, education is used as the weapon to empower the nation about the shocking disparities that are found within the population of individuals suffering from cancer. Mr. Speaker, through these statistics, coupled with both the Satcher- Woolfe and the Institute of Medicine's 2002 indictments of our nation's health care system, it is safe to say that health and healthcare disparities are not only factual, but they also have an overwhelming negative impact on minority populations. That is why dedication to keeping the harsh reality of health care disparities in the public spotlight is essential. For it is should be mission of this Congress to raise the expectations of this society--it should also be our mission to assure that all Americans receive the health care they deserve. If we are to bring about this change--if we are to substantially improve the health and life expectancy of all Americans, we must first fully appreciate the enormity of the challenge that we are confronting. We must also fundamentally change the way that this nation addresses our public health challenges. In fact, too many Americans of every race are dying before their time. Mr. Speaker, we still have a difficult road to travel before universal health care is recognized as a basic civil right in this country. I have been working on these health care problems for quite a while now, and I am convinced that the acceptance of universal health care as a fundamental civil right will aid us in ending the debilitating health care system that is crumbling before us. In my mind, both sides of the aisle can provide part of the answer to this very big issue hampering our nation.

Mr. CUMMINGS

Mr. CUMMINGS. Mr. Speaker, I rise to offer my full support of legislation that Congressman Tom Lantos, Congressman Tom Davis, and I have crafted entitled the Preservation of Records of Servitude, Emancipation, and Post-Civil War Reconstruction Act (H.R. 5216). This legislation would preserve and make more accessible important pieces of personal and American history. By and large, Americans of non-African descent who research their genealogical history search through municipal birth, death, and marriage records. To the benefit of all Americans many of these records have been properly archived as public historical documents. However, African-Americans in the United States confront a unique challenge when conducting genealogical research due to the vestiges of slavery and discrimination. Accordingly, African-Americans were denied many of the benefits of citizenship that generate traceable documentation such as voter registration, property ownership, business ownership, and school attendance. As a result, traditional genealogical research documents can at times be of limited value to African-Americans. Fortunately, slavery, emancipation, and post-Civil War reconstruction records have proven themselves to offer a wealth of useful genealogical information that African-Americans can utilize to better understand their history. Unfortunately, there is no comprehensive national effort to preserve these important pieces of history or to make them easily accessible to all Americans. In the absence of congressional action, these records will remain inaccessible, poorly catalogued, and subject to the deteriorating affects of decay. The Preservation of Records of Servitude, Emancipation, and Post- Civil War Reconstruction Act would address this troubling situation. Specifically, our bill would require the establishment of an electronically searchable national database in the National Archives to preserve records of servitude, emancipation, and post-Civil War reconstruction. It would also provide grants to State and local entities to establish similar local databases. The records that would be preserved and made more accessible include the Southern Claims Commission Records, Records of the Freedmen's Bureau, Slave Impressments Records, Slave Payroll Records, and Slave Manifests. This legislation would also authorize a total of $10 million to establish this national database and provide grants to states, academic institutions, and genealogical associations. Recognizing that we can ill afford to allow these irreplaceable stories to be lost to the withering decay of time, our bill takes meaningful steps to resurrect the rich history of African-Americans. Not only will it allow a means by which African-Americans can trace their lineage, but also as a means by which we can preserve historically comprehensive and accurate information about our collective history as a nation. As Author Maya Angelou once said, ``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.'' On behalf of all Americans, join us in forging that essential nexus between the past and the present by cosponsoring this bi-partisan legislation.

Mr. CUMMINGS

Mr. CUMMINGS. Mr. Chairman, I rise to join my Democratic colleagues on the Joint Economic Committee in condemning the Republican leadership fiscal year 2007 budget before us today. Since President Bush took office our Nation has experienced the greatest average annual decline in household income during any administration since 1960. Not surprisingly, more Americans live in poverty and more lack health insurance now than when Mr. Bush took office. The economic choices our Nation has made have fallen particularly hard on African Americans. According to the United States Census Bureau in 2004, households headed by African Americans had the lowest median income of any racial group. Poverty among African Americans reached nearly 25 percent, while nearly 20 percent of African Americans lacked health insurance. The United States Department of Labor reports that the unemployment rate among African Americans has risen 13 percent since President Bush took office, and stood at more than 9 percent in December 2005, which is more than twice the unemployment rate among white Americans. Confronted with this situation, in which the potential of an entire generation of African Americans could be lost to rising poverty and joblessness, the House has presented us with a budget resolution that would cut $447 million from the amount needed just to maintain the current level of services provided to assist primarily low wage workers and vulnerable families, such as housing assistance for people with disabilities and the elderly, food programs that help low income elderly and mothers and children, job training programs that help the unemployed, and child care assistance. Confronted with this situation in which 13 million American children live in poverty, including 9 million African American children, the House has presented us with a budget that will result in several hundred thousand low income working women and their children losing their health coverage through a failure to fill a funding shortfall in the States' Children Health Insurance Program. The House has presented a budget resolution that would add $348 billion in fiscal year 2007 to our ballooning deficit to extend tax cuts totaling $228 billion that will continue to go primarily to the wealthy. In fact, according to the Tax Policy Center, during the years 2007 through 2016, 29 percent of the tax cuts that have been enacted in the individual income tax, the estate tax and the Alternative Minimum Tax since 2001, will go to the top 1 percent of earners while the bottom 60 percent of households will receive just 14 percent of tax cuts. Mr. Chairman, the budget before us is simply unconscionable and the financial policies it continues are unsustainable. I urge my colleagues to recognize our true priorities lay with our people and placing our country on a sound economic footing. I therefore urge my colleagues to join with me in rejecting this budget.

Mr. CUMMINGS

Mr. CUMMINGS. I want to thank the gentleman for yielding, and I want to thank Mr. Baird for this resolution, which I strongly support. As the ranking member of the Drug Subcommittee of the Government Reform Committee, I have traveled, along with Congressman Souder, throughout this entire country, and we have had an opportunity to go to many, many places that are usually rural in nature, and we have seen the effects of methamphetamine use. We have heard drug court judges, we have listened to foster care parents, we have listened to wonderful people like the lady that was just mentioned who have seen their children go through being addicted to methamphetamine. While I am from an urban area, if I were to close my eyes and if we were to substitute the name of this drug for crack cocaine or cocaine, a lot of the same types of stories I have been hearing for many, many years in the 7th Congressional District of Maryland are the stories Mr. Souder and I heard all over urban areas throughout our country. Drugs are a major damaging element in our society. I have seen so many families destroyed. And by the way, it is not just the person who uses the drug but their families are affected, their communities are affected and their children are affected. So often the property values go down in a neighborhood because of the use. Methamphetamines fall right in that category. Methamphetamines are easy to produce. As a matter of fact, you can find the ingredients and how to do it and make them on the Internet, and that is one of the things that is so frightening about this. When I think about some of the addicts that live in my district, they often have a hard time getting ahold of the crack cocaine or getting ahold of the cocaine. When I think about methamphetamines, however, it seems as if this is one of the things that folks could do and find it might be a little easier and a little bit cheaper to get to. That is one of the many reasons why we have to stand up and we have to do things like Representative Baird has suggested in this legislation. We have to make sure that parents are aware, that coaches, and that people in our communities are aware, neighbors and friends are aware so that perhaps we can prevent some of this. As we traveled throughout the United States in our subcommittee, we had people come and testify and show us pictures of how they looked before using methamphetamines. And when we would see them, sometimes maybe a year later after using them, maybe 7 months later, they looked like a ghost of themselves. As one young man said to me, and I shall never forget it as long as I live, it is embedded in the DNA of every cell in my brain, he said, when I went out there to simply get a high, I went and I got high over and over again. I would stay up for days. Stay up for days. And he said, I got high. Man, I thought I was on cloud nine. He said, then there came a time when I tried to get off and it was very difficult to do it. He said, but I finally licked it. But he said, then I looked at myself in the mirror and I said, self, will you forgive me? And he said self said back to him, yeah, I forgive you. And then he said something that is embedded in the DNA of every cell of my brain. He said but my body wouldn't forgive me. My body that now looked about 10 or 15 years older with all kinds of sores all over his body. So we must continue this fight. It is a very important fight. It is a fight for the soul of America. So often what happens is that people look at the drug war, if you want to call it that, the efforts to stop drugs, as a negative issue. But let me tell you something, there are too many lives that are being robbed every day, too much potential. When we think about our children and we think about people who are living a wonderful family life and doing well, the one thing that can suck the blood out of them, suck the life out of them and their communities is drugs. So I applaud Mr. Baird and all of our colleagues who have made this methamphetamine war effort their effort. For I have often said that our children are the living messages we send to a future we will never see. But the fact is, if we do not address this issue now with prevention, intervention, and treatment, they will never see that future either. And so I would hope that all of the Members of this great House will vote in favor of this legislation and that when methamphetamine week comes around that we will not just think of the rural areas and what is going on there with methamphetamines, but we will think about all our efforts dealing with drugs, all kinds of drugs, and remind ourselves that we are determined to make sure that this element, that this negative element, that this poison of death does not invade our communities. And if it does, that we will stand up and fight with everything we have got, as if our lives depended on it, because they do.

Mr. CUMMINGS

Mr. CUMMINGS. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to commemorate Women's History Month. Since 1987, the month of March has been designated to give special prominence to the women who have made lasting contributions to our society. Over the last two centuries, the achievements made by women have been nothing short of phenomenal. During this month, we have an opportunity to recognize Rosa Parks for revolutionizing a successful movement that forced racial integration in America through her refusal to give up her seat to a white man on a public bus. Additionally, we must acknowledge Coretta Scott King, the first Lady of the Civil Rights movement and widower of the incomparable Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., who transformed her grief into an aspiration to eradicate social injustice and achieve equality for all. We must also remember Hattie McDaniel, whose dynamic career as an acclaimed singer and actress on film, television, and radio led her to become the first African-American to win the Best Supporting Actress Academy Award in 1940. This great achievement also resulted in her becoming the 29th image to appear on the Black Heritage commemorative stamp series in January 2006. Mr. Speaker, what makes these icons so extraordinary is that many of their actions, and sacrifices have not only added to the richness and depth of American history, but made the present better for the world. Yet, even as we remember the famous women who have made history by traveling in space, like Mae Jemison and Sally K. Ride, or curing disease, like Marie Curie and Mary Eliza Mahoney or leading revolutions like Sojourner Truth or Alice Paul, we should also be mindful of those who have devoted their lives to the people of their communities, never seeking the spotlight of history. Maryland Delegate Lena K. Lee, a master legislator, teacher, union leader, and a lawyer blazed a trail of distinguished public service and is one such extraordinary woman. In 1967, Delegate Lena K. Lee began a 15-year term as the first African American female lawyer in the Maryland House of Delegates. During her tenure, she dedicated her energy and talents towards eradicating social inequalities and advocating for women's rights. Her life exemplified excellence and I am proud to say that The Lena K. Lee Post Office bill was signed into law on March 20, 2006 and a postal office in my district has officially been renamed after her. In addition, several days ago, when I learned that Weptanomah Carter, the daughter, wife and mother of prominent ministers from my district, had died, I was reminded, once again, of just how much one determined woman can accomplish. The spotlight of public acclaim did not fall upon Weptanomah Carter, but her achievements--as teacher, theologian, author and community- builder will forever forge a place in our hearts. Throughout her marriage to Dr. Harold A. Carter, Sr., a friend and teacher of mine, the Carters worked together, and became a powerful team. In 1965, they brought an uplifting Gospel to the people of Baltimore--a message both spiritual and social that spoke to the hearts of people in our community. Under their care, New Shiloh Baptist Church would grow into the 5,000-member choir for God that it has become today--a House of God that also is a social powerhouse for the betterment of its community. Trained as an educator, she was also the driving force that created the Carter Children's Center. There, young people born into a neighborhood that others too often overlook, could receive food and clothing for their bodies, tutoring for their minds and a kind word that would uplift their souls. This manifestation of Mrs. Carter's love for the children in my District was her most compelling testament. The church was at the center of Weptanomah Carter's life and she valued the importance of rebuilding individuals--one soul at a time. Yet, through four decades of service to the congregation and community she loved alongside her husband, she never ceased being her own woman. This, I think, is why she and all of the other historic women are such compelling role models for the young women of today. Their lives teach all of us an important lesson--that we can achieve heights well beyond our initial expectations when we have the courage and determination to follow our true calling in life. This is how--through service to others--that these inspiring women earned their own, honored place in history. For their calling became a chronicle of devotion--to God, to their families and to America. I thank them and all of America's women, especially my dear Mother, who are the backbone of our nation and create their own untold histories every day.

Mr. CUMMINGS

Mr. CUMMINGS. Mr. Chairman, I rise today to oppose the College Access and Opportunity Act of 2005, H.R. 609, and in support of the Democratic Substitute. Helping millions of Americans reach the fullness of their potential is the 40 year legacy of the Higher Education Act that we are called to honor in the reauthorization bill before us today. Unfortunately, H.R. 609 falls short of fully embracing this legacy, for it fails to ensure that those who wish to better themselves through a postsecondary education are able to realize that goal unrestrained by the shackles of financial disadvantage. Make no mistake, in today's global economy characterized by competition and transformation, a postsecondary education has never been so vital to so many. The Bureau of Labor Statistics recognized this when it concluded that a postsecondary education will be necessary for 42 percent of the jobs created in this decade. The U.S. Census Bureau acknowledged this fact when it reported that those with a bachelor's degree earn on average $1 million more over their lifetime than those with only a high school diploma. The fruits of a postsecondary education also frequently include improved access to high-quality healthcare, housing, childcare, and a host of other social benefits that typify the fulfillment of the American dream. With limited Federal resources, dramatic tuition increases, and our nation's continuing shift to a knowledge-based economy, the need to ensure that the programs authorized under the Higher Education Act are effective and efficient has never been greater. Unfortunately, the bill before us would be more aptly named the ``Missed College Opportunities Bill.'' To begin, H.R. 609 represents a wasted opportunity to deal with the $12 billion that was eviscerated in student aid programs under the recently passed reconciliation bill. At a time when we should be using the reauthorization of the HEA to right the wrongs of reconciliation by redirecting those funds to expand and strengthen grants and low-interest loans, H.R. 609 simply does too little, too well. More specifically, I am deeply troubled that H.R. 609 does not include a mandatory increase in the Pell Grant, the cornerstone program of federal financial aid. The maximum Pell Grant award for the last three years has been frozen at $4,050 and its purchasing power has withered away to cover just 30 percent of the average cost of attendance at a four-year public college. Yet H.R. 609 authorizes only a paltry increase of $200 in the Pell Grant. Moreover, the bill does not comprehensively lessen the college loan burden at a time when the average college graduate now owes $17,500. The bill also continues to encourage the waste of billions of tax payer funds by not encouraging the utilization of the Direct Loan program, which a large body of evidence has shown to be the more cost effective Federal loan program. Surprisingly, just months after the President acknowledged in his State of the Union address that we need to expand our commitment in the fields of math, science, and engineering to maintain our economic preeminence, H.R. 609 fails to address this National crisis in any comprehensive manner. The Democratic Substitute would correct these inadequacies, cutting in half interest rates on loans for low- and middle-income students most in need of help--from 6.8 percent to 3.4 percent--starting in July 2006. The Substitute also establishes a Predominantly Black Institution program; a graduate Hispanic Serving Institution program; and, provides additional assistance for tribal colleges. On balance, there are some features in the base bill that I support. I am encouraged by: (1) the inclusion of Coppin State University as a qualified graduate program, in my district; (2) the authorization of year-round Pell Grants; (3) the creation of new loan forgiveness provisions in areas of national need; and (4) the change in the needs analysis that permits early estimates to help students and families anticipate financial aid eligibility. But these changes are not enough to overcome the bill's shortcomings. Mr. Chairman, the measure of our commitment to postsecondary education is found not in the quality of our towering words, but by the quality of our actions that help needy students and families afford a first-rate higher education that is relevant in the 21th Century. By providing students in our Nation with such an education, we help save our children from the clutches of poverty, crime, drugs, and hopelessness, and we help safeguard our Nation's prosperity for generations yet unborn. If the Democratic substitute to H.R. 609 is not adopted, I encourage my colleagues to vote against H.R. 609 on final passage.

Mr. CUMMINGS

Mr. CUMMINGS. No. As as matter of fact, I support the amendment, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. CUMMINGS. Mr. Chairman, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from California (Mr. Waxman), the ranking member of the Committee on Government Reform.

Mr. CUMMINGS. Mr. Chairman, I claim the time in opposition.

Mr. CUMMINGS. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Chairman, as we stand here debating this important legislation before us today, illegal drug abuse, drug addiction, and drug-related violence are exacting an enormous toll on our society, destroying lives, tearing apart families and devastating entire communities. Nationwide, drug abuse will contribute to the loss of 50,000 lives, and more than 20,000 Americans will die as a direct consequence of illegal drug use this year alone. In addition to the human toll, illegal drug abuse results in billions of dollars in cost to our Nation in health care costs and lost economic productivity, placing an enormous burden on the American people, State and local governments, businesses and other institutions. This set of circumstances is simply intolerable in a compassionate Nation, and it is our duty as the people's representatives to formulate laws and policies to reduce the scope and severity of this problem. To be sure, America's drug problem is national in scope and has international dimensions. But its impact, first of all, is personal and local. In one way or another, every one of us and everyone we know is touched by this problem. Unfortunately, I see the tragedy of drug abuse and drug violence play out all too starkly in my own inner-city Baltimore neighborhood and in the communities of Baltimore and Howard counties that I represent. I have made a deliberate choice to continue to live where I do because I am determined to see our efforts here make a difference in my community for the benefit of the people I call my friends and neighbors and people like them across this great Nation. Mr. Chairman, no single event is more emblematic of the severe problems that inner-city Baltimoreans face than the horrific arson murder of Carmell and Angela Dawson and their five children in 2002. In the wee morning hours of October 16, 2002, a young drug dealer, upset with Angela Dawson's unrelenting efforts to report drug distribution activities occurring in front of her family's home, threw a fire bomb through the Dawsons' ground-floor window. The fire set the home ablaze, took seven lives, and sent a chilling message to the community: Don't snitch, don't cooperate with the police, and don't dare fight back. The legislation we are considering today is a vital component of our Federal commitment to fight back against illegal drugs by mounting a comprehensive, coordinated effort to combat all aspects of the drug problem through drug prevention, treatment, enforcement, interdiction and supply reduction. The Office of National Drug Control Policy, the drug czar's office, was created in 1988 and has been reauthorized twice, in 1993 and 1998. Its basic mandate is to coordinate and support the efforts of drug control agencies located in eight different Departments. H.R. 2829 would reauthorize the drug czar's office and three key programs administered by it: the High Intensity Drug Trafficking Areas program, HIDTA; the Counterdrug Technology Assessment Center, CTAC; and the National Youth Anti-Drug Media Campaign. HIDTA, CTAC, and the Media Campaign all play an important part in executing key aspects of the National Drug Control Strategy, and they deserve to be reauthorized. H.R. 2829 was ordered reported by the Government Reform, Energy and Commerce, and Judiciary committees by voice vote with the bipartisan support of committee members. I am confident that this bill will strengthen ONDCP, its component programs, and our national comprehensive anti-drug effort by providing for increased interagency communication and cooperation, enhanced program and contractor accountability, and continuous evaluation of anti-drug programs and initiatives. This will result in more effective collaboration and let the administration, Congress, and the American people know in objective terms what approaches are working and what needs to be improved or rethought. H.R. 2829 includes key bipartisan provisions that I strongly support, and most notably, the Dawson Family Community Protection Act. As amended by the manager's amendment adopted by the Judiciary Committee, this legislation, which I introduced with Chairman Souder in both the 108th and 109th Congresses, would annually provide at least $7 million in HIDTA funds to support neighborhood safety and community cooperation with police in areas severely affected by violent drug-trafficking activity. The Dawson provisions underscore the importance of the HIDTA program, which provides vital Federal funding to support uniquely flexible and effective collaboration between Federal, State, and local agencies. H.R. 2829 includes provisions to preserve and strengthen the HIDTA program in its current form and in its current location within ONDCP. This is in stark contrast to the administration's proposal, set forth in the President's fiscal year 2007 budget request, to reduce HIDTA funding and move HIDTA to the Department of Justice. H.R. 2829 reiterates Congress's intent that HIDTA should remain where it can be most effective. H.R. 2829 also includes provisions to ensure that programs to expand access to drug treatment are adequately supported in the Federal drug control budget and further requires ONDCP to develop comprehensive strategies to address the severe threats posed by South American heroin, Afghan heroin, and drug smuggling across the Southwest border. In addition, H.R. 2829 calls for a comprehensive strategy for sharing and coordinating counterdrug intelligence and provides for increased coordination of interdiction assets and efforts. With regard to the Media Campaign, the bill authorizes increased funding, recognizes pro bono advertising as the program's central component, provides for greater contractor accountability, requires testing and evaluation of ads before they appear on the air, and requires an independent evaluation of the campaign's impact on preventing and reducing illicit drug use by youth. All in all, I believe this legislation advances the bipartisan, and I do emphasize that, bipartisan goal of supporting a strong, comprehensive, and coherent Federal anti-drug effort. As the ranking minority member of the Government Reform's Subcommittee on Criminal Justice, Drug Policy and Human Resources, I want to express my deep appreciation for the bipartisan support of Government Reform Committee Chairman Tom Davis of Virginia; ranking member Henry Waxman; and Drug Policy Subcommittee Chairman Mark Souder. And I join them in strongly urging our colleagues to support this very important legislation. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. CUMMINGS. Mr. Chairman, I yield 4 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Pascrell), who has been a leader in our efforts to address this problem of drug addiction in our country and certainly throughout the world.

Mr. CUMMINGS. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Kucinich), who is a member of our committee and who has worked on this issue, and is also a former mayor and very familiar with the drug issue in our country and in our cities.

Mr. CUMMINGS. Mr. Chairman, I yield 13 minutes to my distinguished colleague from the great State of Texas (Ms. Jackson-Lee).