Elijah Cummings

Mr. CUMMINGS

Mr. CUMMINGS. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this time, and I take this moment to support the amendment. I think it is a very good amendment. Our dealings in the subcommittee with HIDTA is that HIDTA allows for all of our law enforcement agencies to come together to address the issue of drugs. And certainly where there is a problem, we want to make sure that law enforcement is there. I have often said that we cannot deal with drugs just from a law enforcement standpoint, but we have to couple that with effective treatment and try to prevent folks from even going on drugs. But the fact is I think it is a good amendment and it makes our bill a better one. I think that what the gentleman has done through the amendment has brought something to the attention of the committee and certainly sort of shined a little light on so that perhaps we can more effectively deal with those problems in those tribal areas.

Mr. CUMMINGS. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent to claim the time in opposition, although I am not opposed to the amendment.

Mr. CUMMINGS. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume, and I do support this amendment. Let me go back for a minute, though. I agree with Mr. Souder in that I think it is unfortunate that we have to come to the floor of the House to ask ONDCP to consult with law enforcement. There is a thin blue line. We have our officers come in and ask us for all kinds of things in our subcommittee. And I always say that these are the people who are on the front lines. They are the ones who so often have to burst into houses when they do not know what is behind that door. They are the ones who leave home so often in the morning not knowing whether they are going to return to their families. They are the ones, for example in HIDTA, who sit down with the locals and the State folk and the Federal folk and come up with all kinds of strategies. They know what they need to do the job. I have often heard the President say that when it comes to the war in Iraq, he wants to make sure he gets advice from the people that are on the ground. These are the folk that are on the ground. But if I had my say about this amendment, I would expand it not only to our law enforcement folk but also to those people who day after day work, for example, in the drug-free communities effort, citizens who are working hard every day sacrificing their time and their resources to make their communities better. Hopefully, this will send a message, a very strong message to the drug czar. What has happened is we have found ourselves, and I can understand our committee's frustration, because we get policies coming down from the White House which seem contrary to the very things that the people who are on the ground say that they need and the way they would like to see us proceed. Then we have to then change the White House policy so as to fit what is the reality on the ground. There just has to be a better way. Again, one of the things we are concerned about, and I have said it many times, I think Republicans and Democrats can agree on one major thing, and that is that we want the people's tax dollars to be spent effectively and efficiently. And when the HIDTA folks came in and said to us, person after person, HIDTA after HIDTA, that they could not understand why it was that they were being shifted to the Justice Department and part of their budget was being taken away, I never got the impression for one second that it was just about a turf war or it was about just being petty in any way. But I got the impression because they deal with this every day, they wanted to make sure that they had the tools and had the atmosphere and what they do, they could most effectively and efficiently do their job. So like I said, it is unfortunate that we have to come to this point to basically mandate that consultation take place. But so often in our society we have a tendency to talk about each other and not talk to each other. I think perhaps, just perhaps by forcing folks to come together and at least talk, we will be able to address these problems more effectively so we do not have to go through this process over and over and over again. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. CUMMINGS. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself the balance of my time. Mr. Chairman, I want to go back to this amendment for just a second. When I think about the entire process here and our subcommittee, we realized that there are experts in the area of narcotics, and we bring them before us all the time to seek their advice. In seeking their advice, we learn a lot. One of the things that we also realize is that this world of drugs is ever-changing from day to day, from hour to hour. We also realized, as we moved throughout the country, that there are various law enforcement methods that may be effective against one drug versus another. I think we have a situation here when we talk about the drug czar consulting with, and that is ONDCP consulting with law enforcement, there is a certain level of respect that many of these officers have said that they simply desire, respect for what they do every day. I think a lot of times when they come to us and they come shaking their heads, one of the things that I know our subcommittee worries about is their morale when they are out there putting their lives on the line. And I have talked to these officers. I know Mr. Souder has. They will say to us, we are doing the best we can with what we have got. They say in most instances, we do not have enough; but if you are going to take away some of the tools that we do have, it is going to become even more difficult for us to do our job. Basically, what they are asking for is simply to be consulted, somebody to sit down and say, How is it going in Idaho or Baltimore, or, How is it going in California? And we have learned so much from these HIDTAs because they have an opportunity to work on all levels of government. So they can bring things I would think to the drug czar's office that the drug czar may not be aware of. That is why I am so supportive of this amendment; but I have to say, I do feel it is very unfortunate that we have to go through this process. I would hope that perhaps by doing this it will open those doors of communication so that these great men and women who courageously put their lives on the line and who have taken a phenomenal amount of time and energy to learn law enforcement, to understand it, to understand how the drug trade works, to understand the methods of combating folks who want to violate our drug laws, that we would have the benefit, that the drug czar would have the benefit of their knowledge and expertise so when we have legislation, we can have it from the very, very best. I must tell you that I do believe that we have some of the best law enforcement in the entire country. But again as I have said to Mr. Souder, I wish that it went beyond just law enforcement, because I think if we are going to address the whole issue of drugs in consultation with the drug czar, it must also be with all of those people who are out there dealing in the area of prevention, dealing in the area of interdiction, addressing our children, dealing with methamphetamines and so on. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. CUMMINGS. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. CUMMINGS. Mr. Speaker, I demand a recorded vote.

Mr. CUMMINGS

Mr. CUMMINGS. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to speak about port security and the sale of firms operating terminals at U.S. ports. The proposed sale of the P&O firm--which manages terminal operations at major East Coast ports, including the Port of Baltimore--to a company controlled by the government of Dubai has made many aware for the first time that major seaports in the U.S. are operated by firms controlled by foreign interests, including foreign governments. We have long known that we have not closed gaps in physical security at our ports. Only approximately 5 percent of the nearly 9 million containers coming into our nation are physically inspected. These gaps exist in part because we have simply not prioritized port 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. However, the proposed sale of P&O now makes us aware that not only have we overlooked physical security, we have failed to develop the systems necessary to manage the unique security issues that the increasingly global nature of port management raises. Most U.S. ports are owned by public or quasi-public authorities. These authorities frequently lease their terminal spaces to operating companies. P&O is one such operating company--and a quick review of U.S. port facilities reveals that like P&O, many terminal operating companies active in the United States are either foreign-owned or are subsidiaries of foreign entities. In some case, these firms not only manage ports around the world, they also run the shipping lines that travel between these ports. These kinds of relationships may be very good for business, but our government is not comprehensively assessing what threats these relationships could pose to our national security. The Coast Guard analyzed the P&O deal because this deal was subjected to the scrutiny of the Committee on Foreign Investments in the United States. Under normal circumstances, no federal entity comprehensively assesses terminal operating agreements for their security implications. Each U.S. port is responsible for developing a facility security plan, which the Coast Guard approves. Amazingly, the Coast Guard does not regularly review terminal operating agreements as part of its assessment of a port's security plan. I believe that Congress should, at the very least, examine whether the Coast Guard should be required to review terminal operating arrangements as part of their review of port facility security plans. In the absence of such assessments, we do not really know whether firms managing our ports have ownership or business relations that could create a security threat. Our transportation networks are truly global and all aspects of transportation businesses have significant foreign involvement. If our government has yet to take stock of these complex business arrangements and of the threats they pose to our transportation security, what other gaps exist and what incidents more threatening than a proposed sale will reveal them? Finally, Mr. Speaker, while we have been conducting a national dialogue over recent weeks about the extent of foreign involvement that should be allowed in the operation of our ports, ports are just one of the many pieces of sensitive infrastructure in this nation which have not been adequately secured. As we continue to examine our national security policies, we must examine whether our current laws on foreign ownership and operating arrangements pertaining to our nation's infrastructure are in the best interests of our national security. The American people well understand that the protection of our nation should not be subject to the seemingly relentless advancement of trade at all costs.

Mr. CUMMINGS

Mr. CUMMINGS. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to commemorate National Black HIV/AIDS Awareness Day, which occurred on February 7, 2006. In its sixth year of observation, the event promotes the mobilization of the black community in an effort to educate and increase community awareness and participation about HIV/AIDS. The event was created in February 2001 by the Community Capacity Building Coalition, a group of national non-profit organizations whose mission is to assist in creating HIV/AIDS prevention capacity building among community organizations in the black community. The coalition was funded and formulated by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's Division of HIV/AIDS Prevention. The annual event emphasizes the importance of testing, education, and awareness through a unified community construct. Additionally, the day is used to remember all those who are infected as well as those who have lost their battle with the disease since its onset in the United States in 1981. Mr. Speaker, National Black HIV/AIDS Awareness Day is a powerful combating mechanism. However, based on the current state of the disease in the African-American community as revealed by the following startling statistics and research, much more work needs to be done to halt the spread of this devastating disease. According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention: Although African-Americans comprise only 13 percent of the population, they account for 49 percent of all new AIDS cases in the nation. This is an alarming increase from the startling account of 25 percent of AIDS cases in 1985. Results from a large study of African-American homosexual and bisexual men in five studies found 46 percent of the men to be HIV positive and 67 percent of them unaware of their status. African-American women account for 67 percent of all newly diagnosed female AIDS cases. Although African-American youth comprise only 15 percent of U.S. teenagers, they accounted for 66 percent of new AIDS cases reported among teens in 2003. A similar picture is found among African-American children. Over a third of African Americans with HIV diagnoses (39 percent) were tested for HIV late in their illness and subsequently diagnosed with AIDS within one year of testing positive. Additionally, in a report recently released by the Maryland AIDS Administration, the Baltimore-Towson metropolitan area, which houses my district in its entirety, is classified as having ``the fifth highest AIDS case report rate of any major metropolitan area in the United States (32.8 cases per 100,000) . . . 2.2 times higher than the national average of 15.0 cases per 100,000.'' Within these reported cases, 89 percent are African-Americans, 62 percent are male and 65 percent are between the ages of 30-49. These statistics are mind boggling. However, one thing remains consistent and clear. If not mitigated, the disease will continue to wreak devastation. HIV/AIDS is a pandemic that belongs to each and everyone of us and we must address it societally and holistically. In his 2006 State of the Union address, President Bush did in fact acknowledge and address the state of HIV/AIDS in the African-American community. Specifically, he stated that, ``[a] hopeful society acts boldly to fight diseases like HIV/ AIDS, which can be prevented, and treated, and defeated . . . We will . . . lead a nationwide effort, working closely with African American churches and faith-based groups, to deliver rapid HIV tests to millions, end the stigma of AIDS, and come closer to the day when there are no new infections in America.'' Although a very promising and audacious statement, action speaks louder than words. With that said, I encourage this Congress post haste to reauthorize and fully fund the Ryan White CARE Act--and to strengthen it to ensure accountability and equitable access to treatment, prevention, and medical care for all affected. I urge this Administration to work in full concert of accomplishing this critical goal. I conclude with the words of the late and great first lady of the Civil Rights Movement, Coretta Scott King, who stated that ``AIDS is a global crisis, a national crisis, a local crisis and a human crisis . . . No matter where you live, AIDS is one of the most deadly killers of African Americans. And I think anyone who sincerely cares about the future of Black America had better be speaking out, calling for preventive measures and increased funding for research and treatment.''

Mr. CUMMINGS

Mr. CUMMINGS. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman very much for his leadership and for the leadership of Chairman Sensenbrenner, and to all who celebrate the 97th anniversary of the NAACP. Mr. Green earlier said that there were so many people who gave their lives, gave their blood, sweat and tears, and he mentioned Medgar Evers. But I just want to talk about another member of the NAACP, and his name was Harry Moore. He was a devoted husband, father, educator, and one of the first civil rights martyrs of our time. His tireless efforts and unselfish sacrifice in the name of social justice continues to inspire and empower Americans of all stripes, even now, over 50 years after his death. Harry Tyson Moore was born in Houston, Florida, on November 18, 1905. After his father's death, his mother sent her only son to live with his three aunts in Jacksonville, Florida. In the prosperous and intellectual community of Jacksonville, Mr. Moore cultivated his intelligence and excelled. After graduating from Florida Memorial College in 1925, he moved to Cocoa, Florida. He settled in Brevard County teaching fourth grade at the only African American elementary school in the area. While there, he went on to meet his future wife, Hariette Simms. In time, Mr. Moore became principal of the Titusville Colored School, which taught children from the fourth to ninth grade. In March 1928 and September 1930, the Moores welcomed two daughters into the world. With his family and professional life in place, Mr. Moore began an additional career in political activism. In 1934, Mr. Moore founded the Brevard County branch of the NAACP. In 1937, by working with the Black Florida State Teachers Association and NAACP attorney Thurgood Marshall, he was a catalyst towards the movement of equalizing salaries of black and white teachers. Although he lost the court battle, he would ultimately win the war. Make no mistake, his actions inspired many others, and ultimately Mr. Moore helped achieve pay parity among teachers of color with their white counterparts. I wish I had time to tell the entire story, but on one Christmas Eve Mr. Moore and his family were blown to pieces because of his work in the NAACP. So many people never hear the name Harry Moore, but he was another tireless fighter, lifting up the rights for all people, and he is one of the people who make it possible for the Congressional Black Caucus today to number some 43. I thank the NAACP on its 97th anniversary and I urge all Members to support this resolution.

Mr. CUMMINGS. Mr. Speaker, as our Nation recognizes and celebrates the 97th Anniversary of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, NAACP, I rise today to pay homage to the momentous contributions of the organization to our nation. In so doing, I would like to highlight the life and legacy of one of its most impressive, but relatively unknown leaders, Harry T. Moore. Harry T. Moore was one of the first civil rights martyrs of our time. A devoted husband, father, educator, his tireless efforts and unselfish sacrifice in the name of social justice continue to inspire and empower Americans of all stripes, even now, over 50 years after his death. Harry Tyson Moore was born in Houston, Florida on November 18, 1905. After his father's death his mother sent her only son to live with his three aunts in Jacksonville, Florida. In the prosperous and intellectual community of Jacksonville, Mr. Moore cultivated his intelligence and excelled. After graduating from Florida Memorial College in 1925, he moved to Cocoa, Florida. He settled in Brevard County teaching fourth grade at the only African-American elementary school in the area. While there, he went on to meet his future wife, Hariette Vyda Simms. In time, Mr. Moore became principal of the Titusville Colored School, which taught children from the fourth to ninth grade. In March 1928 and September 1930, the Moore's welcomed two daughters into the world. With his family and professional life in place, Mr. Moore began an additional career in political activism. In 1934, Mr. Moore founded the Brevard County NAACP chapter. In 1937, by working with the Black Florida State Teacher's Association and NAACP attorney Thurgood Marshall, he catalyzed a movement to equalize the salaries of Black and White teachers. Although he lost the court battle, he would ultimately win the war. Make no mistake, his actions inspired many others and ultimately, Mr. Moore helped achieve pay parity among teachers of color and their White counterparts. In 1941, he organized the Florida State Conference of the NAACP and worked as an executive secretary without compensation. His platform also broadened as he began to add his voice to issues such as Black voting disenfranchisement, segregated education, and later in 1943, lynchings and police brutality. He began to organize protests, and write and circulate letters voicing his concerns about the issues. He also organized the Progressive Voter's League and with his persistence and diligence, in 1948, helped over 116,000 Black voters register, which represented 31 percent of the African-American voting population in the Florida Democratic Party. In 1946, due to his role in the League, Mr. Moore and his wife were terminated from their jobs. Mr. Moore then took on a full-time paid position as an organizer for the NAACP. However, in 1949, over Mr. Moore's objection, the national NAACP office raised the dues from $1 to $2, causing a substantial amount of members to revoke their membership. This marked only the beginning of a strained relationship between Mr. Moore and the national NAACP office. During that same year, the landmark Groveland rape case occurred, in which four African-American men were falsely accused of raping a White woman. Although the men were brutally beaten and no evidence suggested that the woman was raped, one of the men was killed, one was given a life sentence, and the other two were sentenced to death. With Mr. Moore's assistance in conjunction with the legal counsel of the NAACP, the case went to the U.S. Supreme Court and the conviction for the two sentenced to death was overturned. However, Sheriff Willis McCall, a known White supremacist, shot the two men to death as he was driving them to their pre-trial hearing. Recognizing this tragic injustice, Mr. Moore vigorously advocated for the indictment of Sheriff McCall. Sadly, Mr. Moore never lived to see the outcome of his work in this case. On the eve of his 25th wedding anniversary and Christmas Day 1951, Mr. Moore and his wife were killed when a bomb placed underneath their bed in the floor detonated. Mr. Moore died in his mother's arms on the way to the hospital while Harriet died only nine days later. Following the Moores' murder, there was a public outcry in the African-American community. Despite massive amounts of mail sent to President Truman and the Florida Governor in protest and the many protests and memorials organized demanding justice, no arrests were made in relation to the horrendous crime. In no uncertain terms, Harry T. Moore led without permission, without acknowledgment, and without fear. What made his vision so tangible was the fact that he believed he could achieve what he set before himself. In a speech his daughter gave in 2002, she stated, ``Daddy started the movement. He had absolutely nobody but us, and yet he accomplished all of those things--the voting, the teacher salaries all of the lynchings that he investigated. That's a very important part of history.'' Mr. Speaker, Harry T. Moore's story is one of such importance as we celebrate the 97th anniversary of the NAACP and reflect on the success of its past and present leaders. Although the victories achieved by the organization are historic, it should be understood that ordinary people by the tens of thousands won our freedom. For 97 years, the multi-racial membership of the NAACP--ordinary people called to an extraordinary mission--have marched, demonstrated and lobbied for justice in a movement for peaceful change felt in every aspect of American life. That is why we must celebrate and praise the NAACP and recall these stories. For these stories are not only told to recall the achievements of African-American trailblazers, but to offer the next Harry T. Moore, W.E.B. Dubois, Ida Wells-Barnett, and Lena K. Lee the hope, promise, direction, and purpose needed to rise from the ordinary to achieve the extraordinary. I shall conclude with an excerpt of the heartfelt words written by Langston Hughes in memory of Harry T. Moore: In his heart is only love For all the human race, And all he wants is for every man To have his rightful place. And this he says, our Harry Moore, As from the grave he cries: No bomb can kill the dreams I hold For freedom never dies!

Mr. CUMMINGS

Mr. CUMMINGS. Mr. Speaker, as our Nation celebrates Black History Month, I rise today to pay homage to the life and legacy of Harry T. Moore, a devoted husband, father, educator, and one of the first civil rights martyrs of our time. His tireless efforts and unselfish sacrifice in the name of social justice continues to inspire and empower Americans of all stripes, even now, over fifty years after his death. Harry Tyson Moore was born in Houston, Florida on November 18, 1905. After his father's death his mother sent her only son to live with his three aunts in Jacksonville, Florida. In the prosperous and intellectual community of Jacksonville, Mr. Moore cultivated his intelligence and excelled. After graduating from Florida Memorial College in 1925, he moved to Cocoa, Florida. He settled in Brevard County teaching fourth grade at the only African-American elementary school in the area. While there, he went on to meet his future wife, Hariette Vyda Simms. In time, Mr. Moore became principal of the Titusville Colored School, which taught children from the fourth to ninth grade. In March 1928 and September 1930, the Moore's welcomed two daughters into the world. With his family and professional life in place, Mr. Moore began an additional career in political activism. In 1934, Mr. Moore founded the Brevard County NAACP chapter. In 1937, by working with the Black Florida State Teacher's Association and NAACP attorney Thurgood Marshall, he catalyzed a movement to equalize the salaries of Black and White teachers. Although he lost the court battle, he would ultimately win the war. Make no mistake, his actions inspired many others and ultimately, Mr. Moore helped achieve pay parity among teachers of color and their White counterparts. In 1941, he organized the Florida State Conference of the NAACP and worked as an executive secretary without compensation. His platform also broadened as he began to add his voice to issues such as Black voting disenfranchisement, segregated education, and later in 1943, lynchings and police brutality. He began to organize protests, and write and circulate letters voicing his concerns about the issues. He also organized the Progressive Voter's League and with his persistence and diligence, in 1948, helped over 116,000 Black voters register, which represented 31 percent of the African-American voting population in the Florida Democratic Party. In 1946, due to his role in the League, Mr. Moore and his wife were terminated from their jobs. Mr. Moore then took on a full-time paid position as an organizer for the NAACP. However, in 1949, over Mr. Moore's objection, the national NAACP office raised the dues from $1 to $2, causing a substantial amount of members to revoke their membership. This marked only the beginning of a strained relationship between Mr. Moore and the national NAACP office. During that same year, the landmark Groveland rape case occurred, in which four African-American men were falsely accused of raping a White woman. Although the men were brutally beaten and no evidence suggested that the woman was raped, one of the men was killed, one was given a life sentence, and the other two were sentenced to death. With Mr. Moore's assistance in conjunction with the legal counsel of the NAACP, the case went to the U.S. Supreme Court and the conviction for the two sentenced to death was overturned. However, Sheriff Willis McCall, a known White supremacist, shot the two men to death as he was driving them to their pre-trial hearing. Recognizing this tragic injustice, Mr. Moore vigorously advocated for the indictment of Sheriff McCall. Sadly, Mr. Moore never lived to see the outcome of his work in this case. On the eve of his 25th wedding anniversary and Christmas Day 1951, Mr. Moore and his wife were killed when a bomb placed underneath their bed in the floor detonated. Mr. Moore died in his mother's arms on the way to the hospital while Harriet died only nine days later. Following the Moores' murder, there was a public outcry in the African-American community. Despite massive amounts of mail sent to President Truman and the Florida Governor in protest and the many protests and memorials organized demanding justice, no arrests were made in relation to the horrendous crime. In no uncertain terms, Harry T. Moore led without permission, without acknowledgement, and without fear. What made his vision so tangible was the fact that he believed he could achieve what he set before himself. In a speech his daughter gave in 2002, she stated, ``Daddy started the movement. He had absolutely nobody but us, and yet he accomplished all of those things--the voting, the teacher salaries all of the lynchings that he investigated. That's a very important part of history.'' Mr. Speaker, Harry T. Moore's story is one of such importance as we celebrate Black History Month and reflect on the success of past and present leaders. For these stories are not only told to recall the achievements of African-American trailblazers, but to offer the next Harry T. Moore the hope, promise, direction, and purpose needed to rise from the ordinary to achieve the extraordinary. I shall conclude with an excerpt of the heartfelt words written by Langston Hughes in memory of Harry T. Moore: In his heart is only love For all the human race, And all he wants is for every man To have his rightful place. And this he says, our Harry Moore, As from the grave he cries: No bomb can kill the dreams I hold For freedom never dies!

Mr. CUMMINGS

Mr. CUMMINGS. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to the life of Hattie McDaniel, a woman of firsts, whose career as an acclaimed singer and actress on film, television, and radio inspired and illuminated the lives of many. Her dynamic career afforded her the opportunity to break barriers in the entertainment industry, which allowed her to inevitably create a path for other gifted and aspiring African-Americans in the arts to travel. Ms. McDaniel was born on June 10, 1895 in Wichita, KS, to Henry McDaniel, a Baptist minister and freed slave and Susan Holbert, a spiritual singer. She was raised in Denver, CO, and was the 13th child of the family. Realizing her talents at an early age, her father put her in the family performance troupe he organized and managed. Her experience aided her in winning a medal in dramatic art at age 15. However, in 1910, she dropped out of school and gained employment as a band vocalist with Professor George Morrison's Negro Orchestra. She toured the country and in 1915 became the first African-American to sing on network radio in the United States. Ms. McDaniel worked in minstrel vaudeville shows until the Depression. During this time, she moved to Milwaukee and worked as a domestic. In 1930, while working as a bathroom attendant, her vocal abilities were discovered by the club manager. Subsequently, she landed a job in the club singing for a year and never looked back. In 1931, Ms. McDaniel moved to Hollywood in pursuit of a film career, a time in which many African-Americans were solely portrayed as domestics and servants. These roles were often deemed to be stereotypical and insulting in the African-American community. However, Ms. McDaniel did not share this belief, and instead of turning her back on the roles, she worked against the stereotype from within the system. As a result, she was able to build a remarkable three-decade career comprised of over 300 movies, and was able to accomplish what many others would still consider unattainable. She was praised for many of her roles including the role of Queenie in Show Boat in 1936; however, her most memorable role and greatest achievement was through her portrayal of Mammy in Gone with the Wind in 1939. Similar to the characters she played in other movies, she portrayed Mammy as a humble, submissive, and trusted servant that also possessed an assertive and chastising attitude. Her subservient yet stem demeanor gained her immense respect both on and off the camera. In fact, her clever and brilliant performance in Gone with the Wind led her to becoming the first African-American Best Supporting Actress nominee and winner at the 1940 Academy Awards. She became the first African- American guest to be invited to the ceremony and was also the first and last recipient of the prestigious honor for 25 years. Unfortunately, Ms. McDaniel's accomplishments were not revered by everyone. Although heavily criticized by African-Americans, some whites were equally condemnatory. Many blacks protested at the movie premiere describing Mammy as a symbolic reminder of slavery. In fact, Ms. McDaniel had to make the painful decision not to attend the Gone with the Wind premiere in Atlanta because of the highly charged racist climate in the South at that time. In response to critics of her career, she simply stated, ``it's better to get $7,000 a week for playing a servant than $7 a week for being one.'' In fact, as her career progressed, Ms. McDaniel was able to broaden her career and shift into playing more dramatic, less stereotypical roles which encapsulated the depth of her talents. Ms. McDaniel was also an advocate for racial equity and integration. When Whites tried to block her from moving into her Los Angeles home, she rallied her Black neighbors and they took the case to the Supreme Court and won. Additionally, she served as the chair of the African- American sector of the Hollywood Victory Committee, which provided entertainment for segregated black soldiers. She also organized fundraisers for African-American youth education. In 1947, she was cast as a regular in The Beulah Show radio show. In 1951, The Beulah Show expanded to the small screen. Unfortunately, Ms. McDaniel appeared in only three episodes before she lost her battle with breast cancer and died in 1952. Her dying wish was to be buried in the Hollywood Cemetery on Santa Monica Boulevard but because of her race, the owner at the time refused. However, in 1999, the new owner overturned the decision and asked that her remains be transferred to the cemetery. The family did not want to disturb her remains and respectfully declined. Nevertheless, the cemetery was dedicated to honoring her wish and as a result erected a cenotaph memorial on the lawn overlooking the lake in her memory. Ms. McDaniel was a resilient, gifted, and witty figure in American history and her accomplishments are merely the testimonies of her diligence. She has two stars on the Hollywood Walk of Fame--one for her contributions to radio and one for her motion pictures contributions. One of Hattie McDaniel's favorite and most famous sayings was, ``Humble is the way.'' Although she had an admirable career, she had to travel an arduous path to attain it. However, through her humility and determination, she was able to carve her rightful place in American history. That is why I introduced legislation in the 108th Congress seeking to have her image memorialized on a postage stamp. As a result, on January 26, 2006, the Postal Service did indeed select to honor this great woman by making her the 29th image to appear on the Black Heritage commemorative stamp series. I also congratulate fellow Marylander, Ms. Ethel Kessler of Bethesda, for designing the stunning image on the stamp. Mr. Speaker, though her spirit is gone with the wind, her legacy will always resonate through her artistic works and thus will continue to live on forever.

Mr. CUMMINGS

Mr. CUMMINGS. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to Mrs. Coretta Scott King, a true hero, who departed this earth on January 30, 2006, due to stroke complications. Although usually referred to as the widower of the incomparable Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., the work she did after his death secured her place as one of the greatest leaders, voices, and phenomenal women in American history. Mr. Speaker, Mrs. King was born on April 27, 1927 in Marion, Alabama to Obadiah and Bernice Scott. Her parents farmed on land they had owned since the Civil War. At an early age, she witnessed the racial inequities that occurred in the Deep South; however, she recalled, ``my mother always told me that I was going to go to college, even if she didn't have but one dress to put on''. Through her mother's teachings coupled with her deeply spiritual roots in the Christian Baptist faith, Coretta persevered and graduated as the valedictorian of Lincoln High School in 1945. Blessed with both vocal and musical instrument gifts, she pursued and received her B.A. on a scholarship in music and education from Antioch College in 1951. In 1953, she furthered her education and earned a graduate degree in voice and music education from the New England Conservatory of Music in Boston. While attending school, she met a young Martin Luther King, Jr., who was pursuing his doctorate in theology at Boston University. Although hesitant about the courtship in the beginning, through prayer and confirmation from God, Mrs. King married Dr. King on June 18, 1953. The couple relocated to Montgomery, Alabama and Dr. King began work in the ministry and the Civil Rights Movement. After this relocation, there lives became almost immediately tumultuous. In fact, the first boycott occurred 2 weeks after their first child was born in 1955, and in 1956 their house was bombed. But this was no ordinary couple--the Kings went on to build a family of four children--all while helping to build the civil rights platform for a nation. People talk about Dr. King's dream, but he wasn't the only one who had the dream. She bought into his dream, and he bought into hers, too. Mrs. King admits ``when I say I was married to the cause, I was married to my husband whom I loved, I learned to love, it wasn't love at first sight--but I also became married to the cause. It was my cause, and that's the way I felt about it. So when my husband was no longer there. . . ., I prayed that God would give me the direction for my life. . . .'' Mr. Speaker, it is clear that God answered her prayers. They were partners in the freedom movement and it is my belief that they shared the same spirit. She ran the race with him, holding the baton with him, and when he had to let go, she kept running and was able to cultivate the dream they shared. This notion was evident in the way she transformed her grief into an aspiration to eradicate social injustice and achieve equality for all. When Dr. King was assassinated prior to a planned march, four days after his death, she traveled to Memphis and led a march of 50,000 people. She worked diligently and tirelessly--traveling worldwide, giving speeches, organizing marches and sit-ins, receiving awards on her late husband's behalf, leading peace delegations, and developing and performing in Freedom Concerts, where she incorporated her artistic gifts in song and poetry to narrate stories of the Civil Rights Movement. In 1969, she founded the Martin Luther King, Jr. Center for Non- Violent Social Change in Atlanta as a memoriam to her husband. She served as the founder, president, and CEO for 27 years. The organization provides an extraordinary history of the Civil Rights movement while offering interpretations of Dr. King's philosophies to over 1 million visitors each year. In 1986, through her endless efforts, the Federal Government established a national holiday on her husband's birthday to commemorate his achievements. Mrs. King also authored 3 books, earned 60 honorary degrees, and also served in dozens of organizations. She was an untiring nonviolent warrior whose work created a lasting effect--of raising the level of civil rights consciousness and civility around the globe. I remember asking her after a lecture she delivered in Baltimore what one lesson would she like for us to extrapolate from her life. She replied ``the thing to always remember is that the baton is handed from one generation to another. You've just got to make sure, first of all, to grab it and then don't drop it.'' What we must do now is make sure her efforts, spirit and commitment live on in us. Mrs. King was an icon and a paragon of excellence. It was no coincidence that she died in her sleep--for she exited this world in the way that she physically dreamed it--with everlasting peace and love for all of humanity. God Bless Coretta Scott King. My deepest condolences to her family.

Mr. CUMMINGS

Mr. CUMMINGS. Mr. Speaker, I was just listening to the last speaker, and I just wanted to bring something to the attention of the House. In Maryland, we had a situation where we had Maryland General Hospital, which is in my district, as a matter of fact, within 6 blocks of my house, and one of the things that we discovered was that the hospital was providing tests whereby personnel in the hospital knew that these HIV and hepatitis tests, the results were the wrong results. In other words, there was some faulty machinery. There was some problem within the lab itself. And when the whistleblower went to blow the whistle, the whistleblower was fired. Government does have a role in this. The government must have a role. Almost, not almost, every single person in this country at some point is subjected to some type of medical test. As a matter of fact, we in the State of Maryland, it was of such significance that we got the College of American Pathologists to revise their entire program so as to protect whistleblowers, to make sure that if there was retaliation against a whistleblower, that that clinical lab could lose its accreditation. They also are spending $9 million over the next 2 years to revamp their whole process, because here is the College of American Pathologists who oversees some 6,000 clinical labs all around the world, and they realized that it was important that they give proper results and protect whistleblowers, have a better system. But I can tell you the thing that pushed them to do that was government intervention. So I understand this particular piece of legislation. I think it makes sense. I wish we had a little bit more time to consider it. The fact is, I am not going to stand in the way of it, but I refuse to accept an argument that says that government has no role in this, because, again, the American public must, must, have confidence in medical tests, must be able to rely on them. When we are talking about such subjects as medical malpractice, Mr. Speaker, if someone has the wrong results on a test, my God, it may result in all kinds of very unfortunate circumstances and expenses and pain and suffering to a family.

Mr. CUMMINGS

Mr. CUMMINGS. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to introduce the Kendell Frederick Citizenship Assistance Act of 2005, legislation honoring one of America's fallen heroes who was killed by a roadside bomb in Iraq. Army Reserve Specialist Kendell Frederick's life may have been spared had he not made a fateful trip to provide his fingerprints for his citizenship application. This bill would lessen the burden non-citizens serving in the U.S. military encounter while attempting to navigate a naturalization process that is all too often fraught with inefficiency and indifference. Amidst car bombs and insurgent attacks, Specialist Frederick of Randallstown, Maryland, had a dual struggle of fighting the enemy in Iraq and the requirements for U.S. citizenship. All the while, his mother endured both the stress of having a child in a combat zone and the frustration of trying to assist her son meet the bureaucratic demands of naturalization. Eventually, only one obstacle remained in Specialist Frederick's path-providing the Bureau of Citizenship and Immigration Services with his fingerprints. Although the U.S. Military already had a copy, Specialist Frederick was required to travel through the battlefields of Iraq in order to provide a duplicate. Tragically, he did not survive this final journey and was awarded his citizenship posthumously. Last month, Kendell Frederick achieved in death in a matter of minutes what he had so long fought to obtain in life, his U.S. citizenship. Tragically, he never enjoyed the privileges of U.S. citizenship--he would never cast a vote to determine those who govern, nor would he ever know the comfort of being fully embraced as an American by the very Nation he defended to his last breathe. Fortunately, today we have an opportunity to honor the ultimate sacrifice of Specialist Frederick by doing what is right for the approximately 40,000 non-citizens who are serving on active duty in the U.S. military, including 3,200 brave men and women who are serving in Afghanistan and Iraq. In 2002, President Bush signed an executive order that provides immediate eligibility for naturalization to active-duty members of the U.S. military during a period of military hostility, bypassing the waiting period that otherwise would apply to them. This was an important step--but we owe our brave soldiers more. In clear and plain terms, those who are prepared to sacrifice and die for this country deserve a more efficient, common sense naturalization process that bestows to them the admiration and benefits of American citizenship befitting their service. For these reasons, Senator Barbara Mikulski and I have sponsored the Kendell Frederick Citizenship Assistance Act of 2005. Our proposed legislation would require that the Secretary of Homeland Security use the fingerprints provided by soldiers at the time they enlist in the Armed Forces to satisfy the fingerprinting requirements associated with their applications for citizenship. New soldiers would be notified in writing about how to obtain citizenship; and the Secretary of Homeland Security would be required to update the appropriate application, guidebook, and Web site maintained by the Department of Homeland Security within 30 days of a change to law or regulation regarding the naturalization process. Moreover, our bill would establish the position of Citizenship Advocate at each military entry processing station to provide information on the naturalization process to members of the armed forces. Finally, we would also require the Government Accountability Office, GAO, to study the implementation of this act, including an evaluation of how technology may be used to improve the efficiency of the naturalization process for members of the armed forces. The GAO would then report to Congress its findings and recommendations. Our bill emphasizes common sense over bureaucratic thinking and clarity over confusion, to establish a naturalization process that is more soldier-friendly and efficient. Given the life-or-death battles soldiers like Specialist Kendell Frederick routinely face on foreign soil; let us never forget they need not battle red tape here at home. Support our troops by supporting this legislation.

Mr. CUMMINGS

Mr. CUMMINGS. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the gentleman for yielding me this time, and I want to thank our chairman and the ranking member of the full committee. I certainly want to thank the chairman of the subcommittee and Mr. Davis, our ranking member, and the gentleman from Utah. I rise today, Mr. Speaker, to urge my colleagues to support H.R. 4107, legislation I introduced to honor a great woman, Lena K. Lee. H.R. 4107 would designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at Druid Station in Baltimore, Maryland, the Maryland State Delegate Lena K. Lee Post Office Building. It is very interesting to note, Mr. Speaker, that this post office is actually located within about three blocks from where Delegate Lena K. Lee lives. As an individual whose intellect, generous spirit, and rare devotion aided her in making momentous contributions to the great State of Maryland, the Honorable Lena K. Lee is worthy of this exceptional distinction. Born a coal miner's daughter, Delegate Lee rose to prominence as a master legislator, teacher, union leader, and a lawyer by blazing a trail of distinguished public service. She received her B.S. degree from Morgan State College in 1939, and her master's degree from New York University in 1947. Before entering the political arena, Delegate Lee served as a teacher, and a very good one at that, and a elementary school principal in the Baltimore City public school system. In 1952, she became the third woman to receive her law degree from the University of Maryland Law School. In 1967, Delegate Lee went on to serve her community on a much larger scale when she began a 15-year term as the first African American female lawyer in the House of Delegates. During her tenure, she dedicated her energy and talents towards eradicating social inequalities and advocating for women's rights. Mr. Speaker, Delegate Lee, like the great Rosa Parks, was an individual who demonstrated the power of one. She was a champion of justice and a dynamic legislator who used her skills to selflessly better the world around her. Among her many accomplishments, she succeeded in assisting Morgan State College achieve university status and in saving the Orchard Street Church, a site of the Underground Railroad, from destruction. It is also interesting to note that that same building now is used to house the Baltimore branch of the Urban League. She also successfully fought for the construction of a new Provident Hospital, now called Liberty Medical Center, and the creation of no-fault divorce in the State of Maryland. As one of the founders of the Women Legislators of Maryland and the Maryland Legislative Black Caucus, Delegate Lee further displayed her resolve to lead and not follow. Because of her tireless efforts, she has been the recipient of numerous honors, including the Presidential Citation from the National Association For Equal Opportunity in Higher Education, as well as membership in the Maryland Women's Hall of Fame, a very, very high honor. Though Delegate Lee is now in the winter years of her life at age 99, her legacy will live on in the lives of those she has touched. She cleared the path to opportunities previously inaccessible to many bright and talented African Americans. On a more personal note, in the summer of 1982, I received a call from this woman, known only to me by her reputation. Delegate Lee said something that would change the course of my life. She said, ``I'm going to retire from the House of Delegates. I'm looking for someone to take my place. I'm looking for a female lawyer, so that we will still have one in the House.'' And then she went on to say that I have decided to choose you. She said, ``I know you're a lawyer and I know you're not a female, but'' in her words, ``you will do.'' In the days that followed, although she was not feeling very well physically, Delegate Lee walked door to door with me, introducing me to voters and helping to raise campaign funds. The first 1982 campaign for the Maryland House of Delegates was not an easy one, and I often expressed my doubts to Delegate Lee. The question is not whether opportunities will come in life, she often said. The question is whether you are prepared to take advantage of them; and I think that you are prepared. While her eloquent words resonated in my heart, the way she lived her life was her most compelling lesson. In no uncertain terms, Delegate Lena K. Lee was my first and my very best teacher in public life, and for that I will go to my grave being grateful. Mr. Speaker, the postal facility named in honor of this distinguished lady will serve to signify to the citizens of Maryland and of this great country and generations yet unborn that the leadership and noteworthy achievements of even one committed citizen can enrich and empower our communities and indeed our Nation. I urge my colleagues to join me in offering their support to this important legislation.

Mr. CUMMINGS

Mr. CUMMINGS. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to the Budget Reconciliation Bill, H.R. 4241, reported on a partisan basis by the House Committee on the Budget. My colleagues have already highlighted many of the harsh cuts that would be made in this bill. These include, but are not limited to, cuts in Medicaid spending of nearly $12 billion, cuts in the student loan program of more than $14 billion, $840 million in cuts in the food stamp programs, $4.9 billion in cuts to the State child support enforcement programs, $577 million in cuts to the foster care program and $470 million in cuts to the Federal housing rehab program. Let's be very clear on this point. These cuts will do nothing to reduce our growing deficit and, despite what many Republicans have tried to claim, they will not offset the costs we will rightly incur to recover from the catastrophic devastation of Hurricanes Katrina and Rita. In fact, while cutting almost $50 billion in much needed social programs for the most needy, the bill ``reconciles'' another $70 billion in tax cuts for the absolute least needy--adding another $16-20 billion to the Federal deficit. So I ask, what sense does this heartless bill make? While I am glad the manager's amendment tries to soften the blow to the vulnerable by making sure that children who currently receive school lunches will not be cut off, as well as by making other small vote garnering changes to the Medicaid and food stamp programs, these are small pluses that do very little to outweigh the many minuses of this bill. Mr. Speaker, to achieve this deficit increase, the budget reconciliation bill before us today would cut precisely those programs that help the poor, the sick, the weak, and the young so that the wealthiest among us can receive additional tax cuts. Let me review for a moment what the tax cuts already enacted have done to our Nation. According to the Urban Institute-Brookings Institution Tax Policy Center, as a result of the tax cuts implemented by the administration and by the Republican leadership in Congress to date, households with incomes exceeding $1 million can expect to receive tax cuts this year that will average $103,000. According to the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, after adjusting for inflation, the after-tax income of the 1 percent of tax filers with the highest incomes rose by nearly $49,000 in 2003 while the lowest 75 percent of tax filers saw their incomes decrease in 2002. Not surprisingly, as income disparity has grown, the poverty rate in this Nation has increased from 11.7 percent in 2001 to 12.7 percent in 2004, and there are now more than 37 million Americans living in poverty in this Nation, including 13 million children. Further, according to the U.S. Department of Agriculture, last year there were more than 38 million individuals living in households that at some point during the year were food ``insecure,'' meaning that they were unable to afford to buy enough food to feed themselves. On September 16, President Bush traveled to New Orleans to announce a bold and ambitious plan to rebuild the gulf coast region following the hurricanes. During his speech, the President acknowledged that poverty and indifference had left so many of our fellow Americans vulnerable to the hurricanes in the gulf region. Unfortunately, the budget reconciliation bill before us illustrates in the starkest possible terms that as the storm and its revelations about our society begin to fade from the front pages to the back pages, the Republican leadership of this House has chosen to repudiate the President's commitment to address poverty. Rather than embrace the President's call for action, the Republican leaders of this House have put forward a bill that will continue policies of neglect and indifference in service to what they see as the greater good: continued tax cuts for the wealthiest in this Nation. The budget reconciliation act before us presents a stark choice for all Members of the House of Representatives--between supporting tax cuts for the wealthiest among us or opposing reductions in our already thin social safety net. I urge my colleagues to make the moral choice today. Budgets reflect the moral compass of a nation. This budget reconciliation package is devoid of humanity and compassion and would take our Nation far off course of helping its neediest citizens. I urge my colleagues to stand with the children, the elderly, and the vulnerable of our Nation by voting against this reconciliation act. If its passage occurs, I implore the conferees to be compassionate and fair and to restore and maintain the social safety net for our neediest citizens.

Mr. CUMMINGS

Mr. CUMMINGS. Mr. Speaker, when our new Attorney General, Alberto Gonzales, pledged earlier this year that enforcement of our civil rights laws would be one of his priorities, we all wished him well in fulfilling that commitment. When leaders here in Washington--Democrats and Republicans alike-- have expressed support for extension of the 1965 Voting Rights Act, our hopes for a better and more just society have been encouraged. When this Nation rose as one and bowed our heads in respect for the life of Ms. Rosa Parks, the ``Mother of Civil Rights in America,'' we also were re-dedicating ourselves to the ideals of equality, opportunity and civility that are the foundation of American society. I remind the House of these promising, non-partisan expressions of our Nation's shared values, Mr. Speaker, for a very important reason. Last Sunday, the Washington Post published a news article that outlined some deeply disturbing assertions about the operation of the Department of Justice's Civil Rights Division. The article entitled Civil Rights Focus Shift Roils Staff at Justice, written by Mr. Dan Eggen, reported that nearly 20 percent of the Civil Rights Division's non-political attorneys resigned or retired during fiscal year 2005. We also learned that significant disagreements exist between career civil rights attorneys within the Department and administration appointees about the priority that should be given to the enforcement of our civil rights laws. These policy disagreements--at the core of many resignations--have included the Department's decisions to approve redistricting plans in Mississippi and Texas, as well as the controversial decision to approve a new Georgia statute that would require voters to present government- issued photo identification cards at the polls. In October, Judge Harold Murphy of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia granted an injunction last month to lawyers for Common Cause of Georgia, the ACLU, the NAACP and other groups who have challenged the Georgia photo identification statute under the 1965 Voting Rights Act. Judge Murphy ruled that the petitioners have shown a substantial likelihood that they will ultimately prevail in establishing that it ``unduly burdens the right to vote'' and ``constitutes a poll tax.'' Recently, a three-judge appellate panel, made up of one Democratic and two Republican appointees, confirmed this reasoning by upholding the lower court's injunction. Why, we must ask, does the policy leadership of our Department of Justice not agree? Consider, also, this revealing fact. The Department of Justice's own statistics confirm that prosecutions for the racial and gender discrimination crimes traditionally handled by the Civil Rights Division have declined by 40 percent over the past 5 years. The Department has vigorously disputed both the significance of the policy disagreements within its Civil Rights Division and the exodus of so many career attorneys. However, the facts indicate that Attorney General Gonzales faces some very real obstacles to his promise about renewed civil rights priority. Mr. Speaker, we know from history that the legitimacy of any government rests upon the fairness of its laws and willingness to vigorously uphold the rule of law. We cannot overlook patterns of systematic neglect within the agency entrusted to enforce our laws. These failures threaten our most fundamental legal guarantees. That is why we must not be hesitant to seek the answers to the hard questions, the questions that the people we represent are asking. Why have civil rights cases declined so precipitously in recent years? Why have career attorneys in the Civil Rights Division been reassigned to other duties? Why are so many career lawyers leaving the Department of Justice? What must Congress do to better support America's chief law enforcement officer in fulfilling his commitment to make enforcement of our civil rights laws a priority? Mr. Speaker, let the discord within the Department of Justice serve as a bellwether to all Americans who believe in the principles of civil rights. A renewed vigor and more certain direction are desperately needed in the enforcement of civil rights. We must remain vigilant. We must move forward with a sense of urgency. If America is to serve as the beacon of democracy for the rest of the world, it is the imperative that we enforce justice, equality and the rule of law within our own country.

Mr. CUMMINGS

Mr. CUMMINGS. Mr. Speaker, when Mrs. Rosa Parks, ``mother of the civil rights movement'' died last Monday at the age of 92, she left America an inspiring legacy--a vision that can transform this country if we have the wisdom and courage to grasp it as our own. December 1 will mark the 50th anniversary of that bus ride in Montgomery when Rosa Parks refused to give up her seat to a white man, as then required by the laws of segregation. ``I felt that I had a right to be treated as any other passenger,'' Mrs. Parks recalled in 1992. ``We had endured that kind of treatment too long.'' Rosa Parks was jailed and fined for defying the Jim Crow laws--a principled act of human dignity and determination that sounded an alarm that carried far beyond her home of Montgomery, Alabama. Rosa Parks' action was the genesis of the Civil Rights Movement. Without Rosa Parks' heroic act of principle, there would have been no Montgomery bus boycott in 1955. A minister named the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., may not have been thrust upon the national stage. Mr. Speaker, Mrs. Parks, one woman--one demure, diminutive and determined woman altered American history. It is important that we all remember that one person can make a difference during the difficult and dangerous times that we now must face and overcome. President Clinton affirmed the truth of this proposition when he presented Rosa Parks with the Presidential Medal of Freedom in 1996. The Congress concurred in 1999, when I was proud to join my colleagues in awarding her the Congressional Gold Medal--America's highest civilian honor. Mr. Speaker, these honors were well-deserved. Yet, a desire for public acclaim was not the foremost objective in Rosa Parks' mind. ``I am leaving this legacy to all of you,'' she declared during a 1988 celebration in her honor, ``. . . to bring peace, justice, equality, love and a fulfillment of what our lives should be.'' ``Without vision, the people will perish,'' she continued, quoting Scripture, ``and without courage and inspiration, dreams will die--the dreams of freedom and peace. `` Rosa Parks was pleading with us to stand up for what is right when we are faced with the challenges to our shared humanity that, all too often, confront us in our daily lives. To win these struggles, it is readily apparent that we first must address the issue of the continuing disparities that plague our national progress. Consider the findings of the National Urban League's ``State of Black America for 2005,'' the annual report that so graphically contrasts the health, education and general welfare of African Americans in relationship to the majority Caucasian population of this country. Fifty years after Rosa Parks boarded that Montgomery bus, African Americans still are twice as likely to die before our time--reflecting the unequal treatment that African Americans receive from this nation's disparate system of health care. African American unemployment rates remain twice those of White Americans. Our average net worth is ten times less, and our rate of home ownership (a critical component of wealth creation in this country) still lags far behind. Inexperienced teachers are twice as likely to be teaching our children in minority schools. We need not belabor the connection between these harsh facts of everyday life for Americans of color and the reality that our voting rights continue to be disproportionately attacked and denied. For any nation that proclaims ``liberty and justice for all,'' there is something fundamentally wrong with these pictures. Mr. Speaker, if we are to advance Rosa Parks' vision of justice, equality and opportunity, we must remain vigilant in creating a color- blind level playing field for all Americans. That would be America's way of keeping alive the legacy of the great Rosa Lee Parks. I thank my friend and Mrs. Parks' friend, Rep. John Conyers, for leading this effort to honor this exceptional American heroine. I extend my sincerest condolences to her family and loved ones.

Mr. CUMMINGS

Mr. CUMMINGS. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H. Res. 485, legislation commemorating Red Ribbon Week. The week was created to pay homage to Agent Enrique Camarena, a man who dedicated his career to and sacrificed his life for the war against illegal drugs. Throughout his career as a Drug Enforcement Administration agent, Agent Camarena worked on the front lines of the drug war. His courage and dedication were admirable. In 1985, while working undercover in Mexico, Special Agent Camarena was brutally kidnapped, tortured, and murdered by drug dealers at the age of 37. Although his death was tragic, it served as a catalyst for the entire Nation to unite and formulate constructive ways to combat illegal drugs. Congressman Duncan Hunter and Henry Lozano, a friend of Camarena's in his hometown of Calexico, CA, originally launched Camarena Clubs. Hundreds of club members pledged to lead drug-free lives to honor the sacrifices made by Camarena and other brave Americans. These coalitions began to wear red badges of satin, red ribbons, as a symbol of Camarena's memory. The Red Ribbon Week campaign emerged from the efforts of these coalitions. Eventually, news about the week spread and soon transformed Red Ribbon Week into one of the largest drug prevention and education events in the country. Today, Red Ribbon Week is nationally recognized and celebrated, helping to preserve Special Agent Camarena's memory and to further the cause for which he gave his life. The Red Ribbon Campaign also became a symbol of support for the DEA's efforts to reduce demand for drugs through prevention and education programs. During the last week of October of each year, over 80 million Americans participate by wearing red ribbons symbolizing a public stand against illegal drugs. Wearing a red ribbon pays homage not only to Special Agent Camarena, but to all men and women who have made the ultimate sacrifice in support of our Nation's struggle against drug trafficking and abuse. Mr. Speaker, America's youth are the focus of the event, and activities during Red Ribbon Week are planned to encourage adoption of a firm stance against drug usage. The Week also serves an equally important role as a day of remembrance of every American that has ever been a victim of drug-related violence. Now in its 20th year, Red Ribbon Week has accomplished remarkable things. However, it is now our responsibility to build upon this foundation in an effort to mitigate substance abuse in America. According to the National Survey on Drug Use and Health, in 2004, approximately 19.1 million Americans over the age of 12 were illicit drug users. This number reflects 7.9 percent of the total population and 10.6 percent of our youth population. This statistic is especially alarming with the emergence of club drugs like ecstasy and the alarming rise of crystal methamphetamine use. We must act now to ensure that more attention and education is provided to America's youth about the dangers of drugs and their deleterious effects. Mr. Speaker, I believe drug treatment is key. Bringing it closer to home, my district has at least 60,000 crack cocaine and heroin addicts. In fact, according to the Office of National Drug Control Policy, Baltimore City continues to have one of the most severe heroin problems and one of the highest drug-related homicide rates in the entire nation. In 2004, 34,076 people received treatment in my district. I believe emphasis on prevention, education and treatment amalgamated in Red Ribbon Week has the ability to make a substantial impact in the anti-drug movement. In fact, a recent study has shown that each dollar invested in prevention totals a savings of 10 dollars in treatment. For this reason, we should continue to push forward in this battle and never give up on the hope that one day, we can win this war. That is why I urge my colleagues to support H. Res. 485. I applaud my dear friend, Representative Mark Souder, Chairman of the Government Reform Criminal Justice, Drug Policy and Human Resources Subcommittee, of which I am the Ranking Member for sponsoring this resolution. It is my hope that increased awareness of Red Ribbon Week will aid our nation in achieving a drug-free America. May the legacy of Special Agent Camarena live on and may the message of Red Ribbon Week resound in the hearts of all Americans.

Mr. CUMMINGS

Mr. CUMMINGS. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to three fallen American soldiers who sacrificed their lives while serving our country. On October 14, 2005, while conducting convoy operations in the Al Taji area in Iraq, three Maryland Army National Guardsmen, 20-year-old Specialist Samuel M. Boswell, 23-year-old Specialist Bernard L. Ceo, and 36-year-old Sergeant Brian R. Connor, were tragically killed when their Humvee was accidentally hit and caught fire. Assigned to the 243rd Engineer Company based in my district of West Baltimore, these remarkable young men had only been stationed in Iraq since mid-August. They were the first Maryland National Guardsman to be killed while serving their country overseas since World War II. Words cannot express the sense of loss felt by the Maryland community when not one, but three of our own is taken from us in an instant. I offer my deepest condolences to the Boswell, Ceo, and Connor families during their difficult time. Although each of these brave soldiers took different paths to arrive in the Army, they all shared great intellect, vigor, and a true commitment to serve their country. These attributes coupled with their youth makes it even more difficult to accept each soldier's fate. We all must now face the burden of uncertainty--never knowing what the future would have held for them. Specialist Samuel Boswell of Elkridge, graduated from the technology magnet program at River Hill High School in Clarksville, Md. in 2003. He was a computer whiz with aspirations of receiving his college degree. However, as the violence in Iraq escalated, Spc. Boswell was compelled to volunteer his service and join the Army shortly after his high school graduation. On the day of his death, Spc. Boswell was on his way to meet his brother Michael, who was a civilian contract worker based in Baghdad. That reunion never took place. Specialist Bernard Ceo of Baltimore was raised in a military family. His ambition was to become a teacher. In fact, before joining the Army, he worked one-on- one with special needs students at the Kennedy Krieger High School Career and Technology Center in Baltimore. One of his colleagues at the school said that Spc. Ceo was a thoughtful, introspective young man who was an excellent employee, and would have made an outstanding teacher. Spc. Ceo joined the Army to help pay for college and alleviate financial strain on his family. Along with his professional goals, Spc. Ceo was also making plans to marry his longtime girlfriend, Dajae Overton. The two had been together for years, and Spc. Ceo even took on the responsibility of caring for her two children as if they were his own. This selfless act demonstrated that Spc. Ceo was a man of integrity and honor. Sergeant Brian Conner of Gwynn Oak was a single father of three daughters. Before joining the Army, he worked as a fireman for the Baltimore City Fire Department for 12 years. His sense of humor and clever banter were admired by all who knew him. His older brother, Paul said he was good at everything he did and that joining the Army was Sergeant Conner's mission. These tragic deaths and these mourning families are a personal reality that we, as a people, must have the humanity to confront. These deaths remind us that sacrifice is never truly ``shared.'' There is nothing that any of us can say that will return these brave young men to their families. We can only reach out to them--and to all who have lost loved ones in Iraq. We can only stand with these neighbors in their darkest hours--and offer whatever comfort and support that we can. As the families and loved ones of Samuel Boswell, Bernard Ceo and Brian Conner attempt to endure losses and suffering that no family should have to confront, we must all recommit ourselves to finding a way out of this conflict in Iraq. We must find a way to bring our troops home on a timetable that is consistent with our nation's commitments to the Iraqi people. By the end of this year, the Iraqis should have their constitution and government in operation. That is not the reason that we went to war--but, nevertheless, it would give some meaning to our soldiers' sacrifice. Equally important, the deaths that we mourn this week remind us that it is time for a clear and reasoned strategy to begin bringing our brave young people home. Then, perhaps, all of the families who have sacrificed so much because of the war in Iraq can begin to heal the wounds that they have been forced to endure.

Mr. CUMMINGS

Mr. CUMMINGS. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to support the reauthorization of the Qualified Individual (QI-1) program, which helps over 161,000 low-income elderly and disabled Medicare beneficiaries with incomes between 120 and 135 percent of poverty to pay their Medicare Part B premiums. This critical program expired on September 30, 2005. The Qualified Individual program saves eligible participants approximately $1,000 per year. We're talking about individuals who usually pay for most of their living expenses out of checks that range in amount from $1,097 to $1,464 per month. Just to emphasize, that equates to a meager $13,164 to $17,568 in total income per year. Needless to say, this assistance serves as a vital resource for a very vulnerable sector of our population. Mr. Speaker, both the House and the Senate have passed bills to reinstate the program. Today, I am happy to see that the Social Services Emergency Relief and Recovery Act of 2005, H.R. 3971, a bill designed primarily to provide relief to the Hurricane victims, includes an extension of the QI-1 program, an essential subsidy for some of our neediest Medicare beneficiaries. This program comes with a comparably meager $300 million price tag and the benefit it delivers is priceless. I urge my colleagues to support passage of this bill. In fact, Mr. Speaker, if Congress does not act soon on reauthorizing the QI program, in December of this year, over 161,000 beneficiaries will receive a Social Security check that is reduced by a whopping $234.60 for the month. That is why over thirty-five senior organizations, including the AARP, the Gray Panthers, Alliance for Retired Americans, National Caucus and Center on Black Aged, National Council on Aging and the United Jewish Communities to name a few, have contacted Members of Congress urging immediate action on reauthorizing this program. As many of my colleagues know, the Qualified Individual program has suffered from uncertain reauthorization and funding since it expired in 2002. Since its expiration, it has hobbled along on a series of Continuing Resolutions--falling on the mercies of our oft-hurried appropriations process. I firmly believe that this program is of utmost importance--that costs us so little when we consider its impact. We should reauthorize it with all due speed, not subject it to the hurricane relief tennis match between the House and Senate leadership. In the alternative, H.R. 3800, a bill introduced last month by Representatives Kucinich and LaTourette, of which I am a cosponsor, is a straightforward bipartisan bill to extend the Qualified Individual program for one year. I applaud these Members for their leadership on its introduction. If we cannot wrest the QI-1 program out of the political volley surrounding hurricane funding, I urge the House leadership to bring H.R. 3800 to the floor for immediate consideration and passage. We have the power to fix this and I urge my colleagues to reauthorize the QI-1 program now.

Mr. CUMMINGS

Mr. CUMMINGS. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to introduce The Hurricane Disaster Mortgage Moratorium Act of 2005, which would provide a 6-month moratorium on mortgage payments owed by residential and commercial property owners who reside in the disaster areas of Hurricanes Katrina and Rita. This bill would provide a temporary refuge from payment for those individuals and entities who are unable to make their mortgage payment obligations. Mr. Speaker, as we know, the devastation wreaked by Hurricanes Katrina and Rita was of colossal proportion. The ensuing fallout of lost jobs, destroyed homes and shattered lives is equally devastating. Needless to say, the figures that have begun to be compiled in the aftermath of the storm are staggering. Analysts with the National Association of Realtors are projecting that at least 200,000 homes in the Gulf Coast region have been destroyed or will have to be demolished. The U.S. Department of Commerce has estimated that uninsured losses could easily exceed $100 billion. Sadly, up to a million Americans were displaced by the storms and many are still living in temporary shelters. The Department of Labor job figures released today show that unemployment is up to 5.1 percent for September, up from a 4.9 percent pre-Katrina and Rita level and much higher than the 4.0 percent level we experienced during the 1990s. According to the Joint Economic Committee Democratic staff, the unemployment rate would in fact be 9.0 percent if the figure included those who are marginally attached to the labor force and those who are forced to work part-time because of the weak economy. The Houston Chronicle on October 6, 2005 reported that as a result of Hurricanes Katrina and Rita, at least 363,000 people have lost their jobs. These dismal numbers are likely to remain constant in the short-term as our nation rebuilds this region. In fact, most of those unemployed as a result of Hurricanes Katrina and Rita are expected to be out of work at least 6-9 months and we should only anticipate the indicators to increase. As we know, just this week we heard Mayor Ray Nagin of New Orleans inform that he has to let go of 3,000 municipal employees because the City cannot afford to pay them. This unfortunate scenario will surely be repeated to some extent throughout the region as municipal and state coffers dwindle from depleted revenue bases. Whereas the number of job losses for the month of September is surprisingly only 35,000, the Department of Labor reported that last week, it received an additional 74,000 hurricane-related unemployment claims. In fact, nearly one in every five unemployed people--1.5 million Americans have been jobless for more than 26 weeks, the maximum number of weeks for receiving regular unemployment insurance benefits and the Hurricanes will only exacerbate these passive numbers. The CBO predicts that the Hurricanes could actually cut job growth by between 280,000 and 400,000 jobs. Although it may sound obvious, Americans who have lost everything in a hurricane, who are not working and have little prospects of working in the near future cannot afford to pay their mortgages. This bill would provide them with a reprieve from their mortgage payments. Also, as it does not mandate forgiveness of this debt, this bill reflects the shared burden that our Nation will have to shoulder temporarily during this time of rebuilding. Mr. Speaker, behind these figures are thousands of home and business owners whose entire livelihoods have been destroyed and who now face the prospect that the properties they have worked a lifetime to purchase could be taken from them when they fall behind in their mortgages. This bill provides a temporary sanctuary from payment and stops the clock for any default or foreclosure proceedings and negative credit reporting. Needless to say the economic effects of the Hurricanes are being felt in painful increments nationwide. However, for the Americans forced out of their homes by the Hurricanes, the economic effects are not coming in the form of a trickle, but a deluge. The Hurricane Disaster Mortgage Moratorium Act of 2005 will ensure that during the moratorium, those Gulf Coast residents who cannot afford to pay their mortgages will not lose their homes or suffer the negative attendant consequences from non-payment. Let's not make these Americans suffer needlessly by facing the prospect of losing their homes twice. I urge my colleagues to support this effort.

Mr. CUMMINGS

Mr. CUMMINGS. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay homage to John H. Johnson, who left this Earth on August 8, 2005 after a lengthy illness. I again extend my sincerest condolences to his family. For my colleagues who may not be familiar with his legacy, John H. Johnson was a publishing icon--a true legend--who exemplified the power of faith, perseverance and entrepreneurial spirit. He was an extraordinary businessman whose life was like a giant tree that had grown from a small seed--one step and one season at a time. His journey began on January 19, 1918, when he was born in Arkansas City, Arkansas. Although his father died in a sawmill accident when John was only eight years old, his mother worked diligently to move her family to Chicago and to give them a better life. As a result of his mother's sacrifice and his unwavering faith, his dreams knew no boundaries. Consequently, in 1936 during the era of Jim Crow, with the mere vision of formulating a national magazine geared toward the empowerment of African-Americans and a $500 loan from his mother, Johnson did what many would deem impossible. He formed the now successful Johnson Publishing Company, Inc., which later published two of the nation's top African-American magazines, Ebony and Jet. Not only have these magazines served as the beginning of prosperous careers for young journalists, but they also serve to highlight positive accomplishments and achievements in the African-American community often overlooked in the mainstream media. For Archbishop Desmond Tutu of South Africa, Ebony was the light that inspired him through the stormy days of apartheid. To Newsweek's contributing editor, Mr. Ellis Cose, the Chicago skyscraper that houses Mr. Johnson's company symbolizes just how high black entrepreneurship can reach. And for Members of the Congressional Black Caucus, both Jet and Ebony help us better serve our constituents by providing invaluable information on how our work in Washington affects their lives. In addition to his publishing empire, John Johnson's phenomenal entrepreneurial skills coupled with his tenacity led him to successfully venture into cosmetics, television production, as well as the fashion industry. Needless to say, Mr. Johnson realized almost 70 years ago, that entrepreneurship can provide a path to achievement and wealth for Americans willing to invest in their own vision and abilities. Besides his $500 million enterprise, some of his more well-known accolades include, appearing as the first African-American on the Forbes list of the 400 wealthiest Americans in 1982, receiving the Black Journalists' Lifetime Award in 1987 and the Wall Street Journal/ Dow Jones Entrepreneurial Excellence Award in 1993, as well as the Presidential Medal of Freedom from President Clinton in 1996, the highest honor the nation can bestow on a citizen. Furthermore, in 2003, the John H. Johnson School of Communications was established in his honor, while the John H. Johnson Delta Cultural and Entrepreneurial Learning Center in Arkansas City was dedicated to him in 2005. These are fitting honors to a man who dedicated his life to breaking barriers and to being a hallmark of excellence. Mr. Speaker, again it is both an honor and a privilege to stand before you to give tribute to a man who dedicated his life's work to ensuring that African-Americans were uplifted. As a result he helped to uplift our nation. I would like to close with a quote from his autobiography, Succeeding Against the Odds, ``I believe that the only failure is failing to try . . . and if my life has meaning . . . it is because millions of Americans, Black and White, have proved through me that the Dream is still alive and well and working in America.'' Mr. Speaker, John Johnson's life encapsulated the American dream--his works while on Earth ensure that the Dream remains an attainable reality. May he rest in peace.

Mr. CUMMINGS

Mr. CUMMINGS. Mr. Chairman, I rise today to oppose the Boustany amendment to the School Readiness Act of 2005 (H.R. 2123). This amendment would abolish long standing civil rights protections that ensure federally funded jobs in the Head Start program are not subject to discrimination. At a time when 37 million Americans endure the plight of poverty, Congress is tragically debating an amendment that would undermine a successful anti-poverty program. Head Start provides disadvantaged children with a genuine head start in life to outrun the clutches of limited opportunities. While H.R. 2123 is not a perfect bill, it positively maintains the successful federal-to-local structure of Head Start and wisely promotes ``smart accountability.'' Mr. Chairman, the Boustany amendment needlessly dismantles the bipartisan spirit of the underlying bill in an attempt to rectify a nonexistent problem. For decades, faith-based organizations that provide Head Start services have ably met the needs of children, while adhering to the law protecting their 198,000 teachers and 1.4 million volunteers from employment discrimination. The Boustany amendment would repeal those protections, allowing faith-based Head Start providers to establish a ``religious test'' to dictate personnel decisions for positions funded with federal tax dollars. In fact, the Boustany amendment could allow discrimination on practically any basis. Those whose race, gender, or lifestyle are not aligned with a particular interpretation of faith could be prohibited from federally funded employment under the guise of preserving religious expression. For instance, in deciding who gets hired and fired from Head Start, do we really want an individual's position on contraception or creationism to be equally as relevant as their professional qualifications? Head Start teachers should be judged not by faith, but by teaching ability. That is why hundreds of faith-based and civil rights organizations are leading the fight against this discriminatory amendment. The Boustany amendment is a poison pill that represents the worst of partisan politics. At a hearing held by the Government Reform Subcommittee on Criminal Justice, Drug Policy and Human Resources, of which I am the Ranking Member, David Kuo, former Deputy Director of the White House Office of Faith-Based and Community Initiatives, testified that: ``At the same time, many members of the president's own party expressed equal parts apathy and antipathy towards this agenda. Money for the poor? Why it will just get wasted, they said . . . all we really need to do is make sure that we have a huge political fight over religious charities right to hire and fire based on their own faith. That way Republicans will be seen as fighting for religion and Democrats will be seen as fighting against it. `It is a good fight to have,' I heard time and again. A good fight for partisanship perhaps, but less good for the poor.'' His words are telling of how some in this body are using religion to divide the nation and to enact federally subsidized discrimination. That is most unfortunate. As many of my colleagues have pointed out and I will repeat for emphasis--current law already supports the notion that faith-based organizations can use its own private funds to decide who it wants to hire on the basis of religion, they simply cannot discriminate in hiring with American taxpayers' dollars. Discrimination with federal dollars is the real issue, not faith-based organizations providing Head Start services. Faith-based organizations are and will continue to be critical partners in providing these services. Mr. Chairman, in this new century so rich with opportunities to right the wrongs of our past, let us embrace our democratic values and put the needs of our children ahead of partisan political interests. I encourage my colleagues to vote ``no'' on the Boustany amendment, and if passed, to vote ``no'' on final passage.