Duke Cunningham

Mr. CUNNINGHAM

Mr. CUNNINGHAM. Mr. Speaker, we would never know it was an election year on the House floor, would we? I am joking, of course. It is sickening, the partisan attacks that go back and forth on this floor. Unfortunately, we are just a few weeks out from an election. My colleagues on the other side will say, well, it is the mean Republican leadership; they are the ones that will not allow us to pass appropriations bills. All those other guys are okay; it is just the leadership. Casting aspersions and a dark cloud on the leadership damages the party for an election. The House has passed appropriations bills, and my colleagues will say, ``They don't need the Senate to act for us to pass our appropriations bills.'' On the floor, the rules state that I cannot talk about what the Senate has done and the reasons for it, so I will not do that. I will not violate those rules. So what I will do, let us just say the House of Commons in England, let us say the House of Lords in England, and let us say the House of Commons passes a budget and they look at fiscal responsibility across the board so that we do not go out into debt and that we can get back to a balanced budget and the things that we hold dear. But let us say the House of Lords does not pass a budget and they know that the House does not want to pass their appropriations bills, the House of Commons, because they can attach any number above ours. Not ours, of course, in England because that would be against the rule, Mr. Speaker, if I spoke if this was the House. But let us just say that they would speak against the House of Commons with any budget number and say, ``Look at that mean House of Commons. They're cutting education. They're cutting veterans bills. They're cutting prescription drugs.'' Let us just say, for instance, the House of Commons put $340 billion to a prescription drug plan and the House of Lords put $1.3 trillion. The House of Lords would go out and tell all the seniors, ``Look at those mean Republicans.'' Well, excuse me, I do not know if they are called Republicans. Let us say ``the House of Commons folks. Look how mean they are. They're going to hurt you, seniors.'' And let us say that if they had a bill on education and labor, that they put $278 billion more in the House of Lords than the House of Commons and they say, ``Look, those mean rascals are cutting.'' But why will they not do their budget? Because the House of Commons will not play the game prior to an election and pass bills that the House of Lords knows will never get done, but for political reasons they want to do it. But I would never, of course, attach the House of Lords to the Senate of the United States, Mr. Speaker, because that would be against the rules. There was a bill, or a headline, Washington Post and Washington Times last week assigned and said, Congress Votes a Continuing Resolution Not to Shut Down the Government. You can spin it any way you want. You can try and blame the Republicans for shutting down the government or not doing their job, but we are not going to go home and not do our job just like the House of Commons would not in England. If you want to vote ``no'' on this rule and continuing resolution, you can spin it any way you want, but you are voting to shut down the government. We are not going to play that game either, Mr. Speaker. If my colleagues on the other side, whether you be the House, or the House of Lords, you ought to get after the Senate. We passed in this House, with 118 Democrat votes, a bill giving confidence in the stock market to help the economy. We passed that in the House. The Senate has not acted. I, Mr. Speaker, would question anyone that would hold up a homeland security bill because they wanted their union brothers to fill those jobs. To me, that is unpatriotic.

Mr. CUNNINGHAM

Mr. CUNNINGHAM. Mr. Speaker, my friend and colleague, the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Murtha), just told me to cut it off. So instead of 3 minutes, I will take a minute or 30 seconds. But I was going to spend the time talking about the chairman, the gentleman from California (Mr. Lewis), and the ranking member, the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Murtha). He still wants me to cut my time. Mr. Speaker, I wanted to say there is no better committee to serve on. One does not know Republican from Democrat on that committee. They are there to help the men and women in this armed services, and I am very, very proud to serve on that committee and with the men and the women that serve and with the staff. God bless them.

Mr. CUNNINGHAM

Mr. CUNNINGHAM. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of this resolution. Remember the movie ``Born on the 4th of July'' with Ron Kovic? Remember Agent Orange, Desert Syndrome. These are folks that fought for our country. Some of them died, some of them came back with afflictions and they need this resolution. It is important. I would hope every Republican and every Democrat comes together on this particular bill, and I laud my colleagues who are supporting the bill.

Mr. CUNNINGHAM

Mr. CUNNINGHAM. Mr. Speaker, my colleagues and I and the other Members quite often get in very emotional debates, each believing in their position. I think that is the case with the subject that we are breaching now. I would hope to bring some light as far as to why my feelings are as strong as they are. New York, the Pentagon, Pennsylvania, over 3,000 men, women, and children dying, that is horrific and remains a bitter taste in all Americans' lives. But imagine New York, Chicago, or Los Angeles like Nagasaki or Hiroshima. Think of the pain and the agony that we would go through. Imagine millions of Americans dying with ebola, with smallpox, anthrax, or even nerve gas, which would render generations genetically with problems. Is it possible? Yes. Is it probable? Yes. As a member on the Committee on Intelligence, I would say it is highly probable if we wait and do nothing. Fact: In 1981, the Israelis destroyed a nuclear plant in Iraq ready to develop weapons-grade plutonium. In 1990, right in my hometown in San Diego, Iraqis were caught with nuclear triggers on their way to Iraq. Fact: In 2002, a small amount of weapons-grade plutonium was intercepted heading for Iraq. Fact: Saddam Hussein does have chemical and biological weapons, and even today he denies that. We know 100 percent that he has them, and he is working towards nuclear weapons. Saddam Hussein has been expanding the delivery systems, including pilotless aircraft. Guess what is in range of those pilotless aircraft: Turkey, Saudi Arabia, Israel, where thousands of Americans and other citizens of other nations reside. Saddam Hussein is dispersing, as we speak, and it is not just his capability with chemical and biological weapons, but he is dispersing those weapons of mass destruction to other terrorist groups. Saddam really does not care for al Qaeda, but they have a common goal, and that is to hurt the United States. It is a fact that Saddam pays $700 for a Palestinian that is wounded; and he pays $1,500 for a Palestinian that is wounded in a terrorist attack; and Saddam Hussein pays $25,000 to the family of someone that straps a bomb on themselves and blows up men, women, and children. Americans have been killed in Israel from suicide bombers. Mr. Speaker, my eyes tear even 30 years later from friends that I saw die in combat. This is no simple thing. My mother was rushed to a hospital when she learned that I was shot down. I know the horrors brought on the men and women that we will ask to go to war, but I also know the heartache and the pain of the families that are left behind. I would say to my colleagues, do we want to subject them to the horrors of war in our own country? That is why I have this resolve. I think it is highly probable that terrorists would act against the U.S. if we do not act; and I ask my colleagues, do not let it happen.

Mr. CUNNINGHAM. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. CUNNINGHAM. I thank the gentleman for yielding. Mr. Speaker, a few minutes ago I was unable to finish my discussion. I hate not being in control. But I would like to finish it at this time. Mr. Speaker, if you take every emotion you have ever felt, of love, anger, hate, it swells up in a person. If you can imagine what it is like to see a friend or friends go down in flames, and even more know how that is going to affect the families, this vote rips my heart out. But, yet, being on the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence and the Committee on Armed Services, I would tell my friends that disagree, I believe with every fiber in my heart that it is necessary to give the President the flexibility to stop not only terrorists but Saddam Hussein, because I believe that threat will reach the shores of the United States.

Mr. CUNNINGHAM

Mr. CUNNINGHAM. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor Jean and Keith Kellogg II upon the California State University Board of Trustees' approval to name the California State University at San Marcos Library ``The Kellogg Library'' in September, 2002. For more than 50 years, the Kellogg family has been associated with the California State University, first at Pomona and more recently, at San Marcos. They beautifully express their belief in the value of education on a tile at Cal State San Marcos celebrating its first ten years. Keith Kellogg wrote for his tile: ``Education is a window of life, through which you find opportunity, success, and happiness.'' The Kelloggs have taken their love of beauty, learning, and industry, and transferred it to the faces of the students who will go on to find opportunity, success, and happiness, thanks to the generosity of this fine couple. Jean and Keith Kellogg II became interested in Cal State San Marcos early in its development with a $24,000 gift for discretionary uses in 1992. A year later, they initiated the Keith and Jean Kellogg Scholarship Fund, which now serves as a window of opportunity, success and happiness for many fine students entering Cal State San Marcos. Mrs. Kellogg takes an active interest in the selection of these scholars, and has held dinners with past recipients to see how they are progressing in their goals and successes. Mr. Kellogg, an avid golfer since playing as part of his college team, underwrote the establishment of the Cal State San Marcos golf team, and continues to enjoy learning how ``his'' teams are doing, competitively. Perhaps the most central window the Kelloggs have opened for the future of North San Diego County has been in their steady and critical support for its university's library. In 1997, Jean and Keith Kellogg made a gift of $1 million to begin architectural plans for the University Library. This early gift made it possible for the campus to qualify for state bond funding. The 1998 election in California included a bond issue for construction of the $48 million, 200,000 square foot building. This will be the signature building for the campus, standing five stories and anchoring the University's central pedestrian mall. The library will house up to 840,000 volumes and provide study areas for more than 1,500 students. Since then, the Kelloggs have made an additional gift of $500,000 to complete planning documents and ensure the construction of the library would proceed on schedule. In 2001, the Kelloggs donated another one million dollars to the university, of which $550,000 was used to fund the Reading Room and adjacent terraces. Construction for the Library broke ground in the spring of 2002 with both of the Kelloggs in attendance at the groundbreaking ceremony. Beyond the campus boundaries, the couple is part of the philanthropic and civic life of North San Diego County, where they make their home in Rancho Santa Fe. Although heir to the famous cereal maker, Mr. Kellogg made his own fortune in the paper products business. Mrs. Kellogg is a long time civic volunteer and friend of higher education. She is active in the Rancho Santa Fe Library Guild, and serves as a member of the Scripps Research Institute of Medicine and Science Foundation Board. The couple received the first President's Distinguished Service Awards at commencement in 1998--when they also received a standing ovation from the assembled students for their dedication in helping establish a permanent library at Cal State San Marcos. Universities are built by people. Given the centrality of the Library to the academic enterprise, and the centrality of the Kellogg's role in developing the campus, the approval by the Trustees to name it the Kellogg Library is a broad beam of inspiration through the windows these two people have opened to so many in the 51st congressional district.

Mr. CUNNINGHAM

Mr. CUNNINGHAM. Mr. Speaker, as a combat veteran from Vietnam, I and many other men and women still harbor ill feelings towards Jane Fonda and Tom Hayden, who gave the enemy comfort and gave them propaganda against the United States. Anyone, anyone who would travel to an enemy country and do the same thing should be chastised by this body and by this country.

Mr. CUNNINGHAM

Mr. CUNNINGHAM. Mr. Speaker, I am proud to rise today to recognize that three blue ribbon schools in my 51st Congressional District of California are being honored as National Blue Ribbon Schools for 2002. In alphabetical order, these schools are: La Costa Canyon High School, Encinitas, CA. The principal is Mr. Don Rizzi, and the superintendent of the San Dieguito Union High School District is Peggy Lynch. Madison Middle School, Oceanside, CA. The principal is Mrs. Theresa Ketchem-Grace, and the superintendent of the Vista Unified School District is Dave Cowles. Valley Middle School, Carlsbad, CA. The principal is Dr. Kim Marshall, and the superintendent of the Carlsbad Unified School District is Cheryl Ernst. The National Blue Ribbon Schools program evaluates schools based upon their effectiveness in meeting local, state and national educational goals. In 2002, 172 middle and secondary schools are being recognized as National Blue Ribbon Schools, including the three above in California's 51st Congressional District, and 30 in the State of California. Blue Ribbon status is awarded to schools that have strong leadership, clear vision and mission, excellent teaching and curriculum, policies and practices that keep the schools safe for learning, expanded involvement of families, evidence that the school helps all students achieve high standards, and a commitment to share best practices with other schools. I am immensely proud of the men and women whose outstanding and tireless work in the interest of better education has now been recognized through the National Blue Ribbon Schools program. This is particularly close to my heart, because, as a former teacher and coach, and as a father, one of my passions is improving education so that every American can have a fighting chance to achieve the American Dream. And while these three schools in my district have now been recognized as National Blue Ribbon Schools, the real winners are all of the children, parents, teachers, and citizens who have all been challenged through this recognition to successfully improve education in all of their local communities.

Mr. CUNNINGHAM

Mr. CUNNINGHAM. Mr. Speaker, my colleagues on the other side would lead us to believe that Republicans are mean, that they do not care about education, that they do not care about a prescription bill, that they do not care about health care. They say, Oh, well, it's your leadership. You are okay. Like our leadership does not care about those issues. Our leadership and our Republican Members have children and families just like you do. We have grandparents and we have our mothers and our fathers to take a look at. I resent the implications of my colleagues on the other side. It is an election year. We are weeks away from an election. We watch every speaker on that side of the aisle come up with partisan attacks, either about education or health care or prescription drugs, tax breaks for the rich, which is a socialist mantra that they have taken on. We did put Social Security in a trust fund. For 40 years they used every dime out of the Social Security trust fund. But we are in a wartime, ladies and gentlemen. We are spending a lot of money. Alan Greenspan and the economists said that the tax relief that Republicans put through actually accounts for 1.5 percent of the 3 percent growth that we are having in our economy. Interest rates are low. Inflation is low. The one area that is lacking is the stock market. The Senate has not passed the security act that will protect those people, and they have not passed that bill. The House has. As for a patients' bill of rights, we passed prescription drugs. The other body has not. At least if they pass it, we could come to a conference on it. It has not happened. As for pension reform that was badmouthed by the gentleman from Maryland, 118 Democrats voted for it along with Republicans on pension reform. The other body has not acted upon that bill. I would tell my colleagues on the other side, your leadership did not vote for pension reform.

Mr. CUNNINGHAM

Mr. CUNNINGHAM. Mr. Speaker, I know the other side of the aisle talks that we have not passed any appropriations bills. The Senate, the other body, has only sent the House two bills. I am very careful, I am not going to bad mouth the Senate. I am just making a fact. They have only sent us two appropriations bills, Defense and MILCON which we are going to act upon. We have sent them 54 bills that the Senate has not acted upon. Some of those are critical. The marriage penalty is the issue, but some of these bills my colleagues talk about like workmen's comp corporate accountability, the energy bill that is critical for California, we have seen the brownouts and the blackouts that we had in the State of California. Look at the home land security bill. I do not think we ought to leave this body in the House until the Senate has acted on homeland security and leave America vulnerable. We should pass that particular bill but let us just say that since the other body has only sent us two bills, and I cannot talk about what the Senate is doing on the floor, let us take any other body out there, anybody, not the Senate, but let us just say that the House has a budget and this other body has not passed a budget. Let us say that we have acted in a fiscally responsible way, but yet whatever this other body is, it has no budget, on every bill that they just propose that they add $1 trillion for prescription drugs. They propose that we add $278 billion more in Labor HHS. They propose that we do all these things, knowing that there is no way that when we come to conference, we can do that without bankrupting the country. Yet that other body wants to beat up on Republicans because they will not do their appropriations bills and play the game of politics for the election. We are not going to play that game. We are going to pass the bills. We are going to do it responsibly. And we will pass a continuing resolution. I would tell my friends on the marriage penalty, it is wrong. We should give incentive for people getting married, not penalize them. It is not a tax break for the rich. If a person gets married, I want to tell my colleagues, to start off today in a household, my daughter is getting married this next summer. I can tell my colleagues, her husband is a teacher. She is going to be a librarian. They will not make a whole lot of money, and tax relief for getting married will help my daughter and her husband get along. Needless to say, we are going to have to help them get into that first house, and I think many of my colleagues have children for whom they do the same thing. So it is not a tax break for the rich. It is just wrong to penalize married couples, and let us make this permanent so that millions of Americans will receive the benefit of the marriage penalty. Announcement by the Speaker Pro Tempore

Mr. CUNNINGHAM. Mr. Speaker, first of all, I tell my colleague, I have got a daughter, not a son, and I have an adopted son, but I am speaking about my daughter. I would also, when you look at jobs lost in the State of California, Governor Davis frittered away billions of dollars, but now because of energy crisis Buck Knives is moving to Idaho, they save a half a million dollars a month. When my colleague wants to look at loss of jobs and lack of leadership of our governor, take a look at that and how it has affected every job in California. We have the highest workmen's comp of any of the States in the Nation in the State of California, but if we take a look, a lot of our businesses are leaving because of Gray Davis.

Mr. CUNNINGHAM

Mr. CUNNINGHAM. Mr. Speaker, 1 year ago, America watched with horror as the tragic events of September 11 unfolded here in New York City and in our Nation's capital. On that morning, already aghast at the attack on the Twin Towers, I looked out the window of my Capitol Hill Office and gasped in horror as I watched the black smoke billow out of the Pentagon and drift across the clear blue sky. Still stunned, I was quickly shuffled out of my office to safety. Today, as I reflect on the profound loss that our nation faced in midst of these horrific attacks, I am also heartened by the selfless acts of valor, community spirit, and national unity that have followed this tragedy. Despite the stresses that our nation has experienced, the ties that bind our diverse country together are stronger than ever. Immediately following, the terrorist attacks on America, President Bush called on all of us to volunteer to bring our country together and reestablish those local ties that often times are neglected. Americans responded. The resurgence of commitment to community can be found in our homes, our houses of worship, our schools, and our workplaces. From New York City to San Diego, citizens responded with soup kitchens, mentoring programs and charitable donations of goods and time. And the proud men and women of the U.S. military responded, allowing our country to take an aggressive lead in the War on Terrorism. I have heard many stories of outstanding individuals who have gone above and beyond this call to aid those in their community through extraordinary service and exemplary acts. While we reflect on the American spirit, it is also important to highlight the measures we have taken to prevent future attacks of this magnitude. The attacks on our Nation were motivated by intolerant and ignorant individuals seeking to forever change our way of life and destroy this great Nation. Much like Washington, Adams and Jefferson, we must seek to ensure that this country remains an example of democracy and freedom--we must be the Patriots of today. Since September 11, 2001, all levels and branches of government have cooperated to strengthen aviation and border security, stockpile more medicines to defend against bio-terrorism, improve information sharing among our intelligence agencies and deploy more resources and personnel to protect our critical infrastructure. At the same time, the changing nature of threats to our nation requires a new and reformed government structure to protect against enemies who can strike at any time with any number of weapons. As I write this column, no single government agency has homeland security as its primary mission. In fact, responsibilities for homeland security are dispersed among more than one hundred different government organizations. America needs a unified homeland security structure that will improve protection against today's threats and be flexible enough to help meet the unknown threats of the future. President Bush has proposed the most significant transformation of the U.S. government in over a half-century by consolidating the current confusing patchwork of government activities into a single department called the Department of Homeland Security. Changing threats require a new government structure to meet these threats. The Department of Homeland Security will have in one place all the resources needed to do what it takes to protect our country. The reorganization of America's homeland security infrastructure is crucial to overcoming the enormous threat we face today. The shocking and tragic events of September 11 reminded us of the frailty of life, but today's special session demonstrates our resilience and strength in the face of adversity. Thousands went to work on September 11 thinking about their jobs, their families, their friends--most likely not contemplating their own mortality. Yet in an instant, death and injury met them face to face. We must never forget those who perished, and we honor them again today. We owe it to their memory to ensure that we never face such a loss again. Regrouping as individuals and as a nation, we must continue rebuilding, and working to defeat the terrorists by growing even stronger as a nation.

Mr. CUNNINGHAM

Mr. CUNNINGHAM. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding time to me. Mr. Speaker, I would like to remind my colleagues that in 1994, with a Democrat-controlled House, they passed an education bill $3 billion below President Clinton's request. I have heard tonight, well, let us stop pointing fingers. That is all I have heard from the other side, every single speaker, pointing fingers. You know why? Well, the President took control of the issue of education. I have talked to Democrat pollsters; they are upset because the Democrat numbers are down on Education. This President has shown that he cares about education. He focuses on education. And education spending is not everything. I would like to submit this for the record. It is what Secretary Paige showed, the number of increases in education spending but yet test scores have baselined. The education plan is more than just spending. We have increased education dollars, but we have also given the State the flexibility to move those dollars around where parents and teachers can make those decisions. My colleagues on the other side want line items and every item increased so that they can mandate exactly what is done in the States, the paperwork increases, the mandates, the union bureaucracy. And the President said no, I want to give the States the flexibility where parents and teachers can make those decisions. They also demand accountability. And with the accountability he also gave the superintendents and the State legislatures the ability to move money around, not line item it and mandate it. A hundred thousand teachers? We need teachers, yes. But we also put money in for the quality of education and teachers. We have passed prescription drugs, and tax relief for working families. My colleagues only attack, oh, it is a tax break for the rich. Some of them have not found a tax they do not want to increase. In 1993 they increased tax on the middle class after they said they were going to reduce it. They taxed Social Security. They actually taxed gas. And, remember, there was even a retroactive tax in there and you cut veterans' COLAs. You cut military COLAs, if you want to talk about history. And I want to tell you, I would question somebody who used our military as White House waiters. I would question someone who would send our people into harm's way. I questioned a Republican President who sent our people over in Lebanon and let them sit there. But I sure question President Clinton on a lot of the things he did that in my estimation were not right. Why are they doing this? Well, it is an election year, Mr. Speaker. Have you ever heard the name of James Carville and his colleagues? We have got the ``Carville Report.'' What does he recommend to his Democrat pollsters? For the Democrats to stick close to the President on the war because if they do not, the numbers will go down. But they also requested that the Senate hold up bills, because in a bad economy they can hang on to the Senate. They also said we can pass things here like tax relief but to blast the Republicans on these issues. And I think you have heard every speaker over here do that. And it is just not the case. We have passed prescription drugs here. The Senate has not. We have passed homeland security. And I tell you, I would question somebody that holds up a homeland security bill insisting on union workers filling those billets instead of passing a homeland security bill. I think that is wrong. And I think it should be questioned. I heard about border patrol. The gentleman from California (Mr. Hunter) on this floor, when I first came, we fought to get more border patrol and we were turned down until we took the majority. And slowly in a bipartisan way in many cases, we got more border patrol to secure our borders. It is sad to watch the things that are going on tonight because as a group we have done so many things. This President is a caring President. I want to tell you, he has brought credibility, he has brought character to the White House that was not there before. Is it not nice to see a President who can actually look at his wife and say, I love you and mean it? The economy is growing. It is growing by 3 percent. Alan Greenspan said that the economy has grown by 1.5 percent because of tax relief for working families. My colleagues say it is just for the rich; it is an election year. Inflation is low. Interest is low. But yet there is not confidence in the market. The Senate has not passed the Employee Protection Act that would protect them from cases of Enron and WorldCom. We need to pass that bill, to bring that confidence up. And that has not been passed by the other body; and I think that is wrong. Point of Order

Mr. CUNNINGHAM. Mr. Speaker, they have not passed the bill that should be in order. They have not passed the bill. Point of Order

Mr. CUNNINGHAM. I do not believe I have done that, Mr. Speaker. But I will tell you, an energy bill is critical. The Senate has not passed that bill. An economic stimulus package is critical which helps us in education. The Senate has not passed that bill. The Senate according to the Carville memo did not pass its budget, not mine. Why? Because they can offer a trillion dollars in a prescription drugs program. MR. OBEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Pelosi), the distinguished whip.

Mr. CUNNINGHAM. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. CUNNINGHAM. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding. I would tell my friend from Wisconsin, if I was fighting in combat, I would want to fight against the best MiG driver there is; and as a political opponent and a friend, I think we have fought against one of the best MiG drivers here on the floor tonight, and I salute the gentleman. I would just like to answer, and I do not think they will be controversial, two questions real quick. The gentleman from Texas (Mr. Edwards) asked how can we increase the debt. If you inherit a debt that is $5 trillion and you nearly spend $1 billion a day on just the interest of the debt, it grows. You can pay down $490 billion; but if it grows over the years, over $1 billion a day, it is going to get bigger. The other thing I would say is to my friend, the gentleman from California (Mr. George Miller), whom I am very proud of as a colleague in California, who worked on the education bill, but I would ask him to take a look at what Governor Gray Davis is doing to education in California where every single district is being cut millions of dollars because of the energy crisis that was mismanaged.

Mr. CUNNINGHAM

Mr. CUNNINGHAM. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize Jim Amos for his contributions to the San Diego community. Jim retired this month as President and CEO of Mail Boxes Etc., Inc., which is headquartered in my district. Jim's professional accomplishments are indeed laudable. What I want to recognize today, however, is the mark Jim has left on San Diego through his commitment to philanthropy. In 1998, Jim founded the MBE We Deliver Dreams Foundation, a non- profit organization committed to improving the lives of children who are victims of abuse, neglect, poverty, violence or illness. The MBE Foundation has grown rapidly since its founding, and in that time has delivered numerous dreams to children throughout the world. I am particularly grateful for the Foundation's Community Care Fund; a separate fund dedicated to making dreams come true for San Diego youth. Jim may be departing the San Diego community, but he is leaving an indelible impression upon it, and for that I thank him. I urge my colleagues to join me in recognizing Jim's commitment to charity and his success with the MBE Foundation, both of which serve as examples to us all.

Mr. CUNNINGHAM

Mr. CUNNINGHAM. Mr. Speaker, in 1993, we took up the welfare reform bill. Many on the other side fought the welfare reform bill, but I want my colleagues to know that the events that took place and the successes of welfare, I had a meeting with over 100 men and women that had been previously welfare recipients in San Diego. Every single one of them lauded the bipartisan support of that welfare bill. I had a doctor who came to my office and said that a lad with a 14-, a 13-, and a 12-year-old girl. The-14-year-old had two children. The 13-year-old had a child. The 12-year-old, the mother wanted to know what was wrong because her 12-year-old could not have a child. We changed those kinds of things and bettered it for children. What we are asking is for the other body to take up the welfare reform bill that has helped millions of low income Americans and pass the welfare bill on the Senate side. We will be taking up a resolution this week, and we hope that both sides of the aisle will help to help the people that need it the most.

Mr. CUNNINGHAM

Mr. CUNNINGHAM. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the resolution. Most of my life I have been in education. I was a teacher and a coach, both in high school and in college. I have seen what a good education can do. For my parents, who never missed a single event either athletic or academic that my brother and I went to, so the responsiveness of the families is critical. The President, to have a President that focuses on education and leaving no child behind. I fully believe that if a child qualifies to go to college, there should be no child whether it is a historically black college or any group, that should be left behind. Because the consequences are a devilment themselves. I have a friend in San Diego, Bishop McKinney. He has actually come back and testified. He runs a program for African-American students. These children are at-risk students. If someone did not pick up the gauntlet and did not take care of these children, they would get left behind. Bishop McKinney has a private school that depends on private contributions. But I want to tell you that over 90 percent of those children, men and women, qualify to go to college. So Bishop McKinney, the Jaime Escalantes that say, hey, we can teach children are heros. It is not just the college itself that is important, it is the whole effort. It is the funding that my colleague mentioned a moment ago. Since 1998, we have increased education by 40 percent in this body, mostly in a bipartisan way. I want to thank the gentleman from California (Mr. George Miller) and the chairman for working out the agreements that we have had recently. It is some of the most bipartisan legislation that we have had. But it also takes dedicated teachers at a lower level, not just 100,000 teachers but 100,000 qualified teachers that work with the children every single day. Those dedicated teachers should be paid more. They hold in their hands the lives not just of our children but society itself, because if that child is left behind, where are they going to end up? What is the prognosis? If you take a child in the inner city that drops out or is denied an education, they are going to end up statistically involved in crime or drugs or worse. Of that group, there is a lot of abuse, both child and spousal abuse. So it is the whole package, not just the university. You can have a university, but if you do not train the children early on and afterwards, then you have problems. It is also on the other end of it, also. I have got a friend, Dr. Rafi, who is one of the preeminent computer scientists in the world. His books are in every college and university in the United States and many of those overseas. But when he graduated from college, his background and knowledge were not accepted within the workplace because he was a minority. He said, I'm not going to complain. I'm not going to take their devilment. I am going to prove to them that my worth is more than just the color of my skin. He took over and ran the department after a year and a half. Now his books are spread throughout. If you do not understand computer science, you can read one of his books. It is at a very elementary level of understanding, but yet it is for college students. So it is not just the funding. It is not just the parents. It is not just the Jaime Escalantes or the Bishop McKinneys and the college itself, but it is the follow-on throughout. That is why this resolution is so important. We cannot stop short of just recognizing the university, but the whole package.

Mr. CUNNINGHAM

Mr. CUNNINGHAM. Mr. Speaker, a year ago today our nation was attacked by terrorists intent on destroying the most enduring symbols of our success and our way of life. On this solemn occasion, the anniversary of those horrific attacks, I rise in strong support of the resolution recognizing September 11 as a national day of remembrance. On this day, we mourn the loss of thousands of innocent lives, we honor the selfless acts of those who came to the victims' aid, and we pay tribute to those who willingly put their lives on the line to stop the terrorists from wreaking further destruction on our land. 9-11 will forever be remembered as one of the darkest days in our nation's history. Today the horror of that event is still fresh, and the pain is still raw. And just as it is today, it will always be one for sadness and reflection. But the response it inspired in our nation was uplifting. As we shudder at the recognition of devastation on this day, we can also take heart in the greatness and strength it inspired. Time will ease our sorrow, and we will continue to prosper as a nation. But we must never forget the lesson we were forced to relearn on September 11, 2001: there are those who are threatened by our strength, our freedoms and our way of life, and they want to destroy our nation. We must remain united in our commitment to pursue those who threaten us, to ensure our way of life and to uphold the hope of freedom around the globe.

Mr. CUNNINGHAM

Mr. CUNNINGHAM. Mr. Speaker, on rollcall vote 343 concerning partial- birth abortion, I was detained. Had I been present, I would have voted ``aye.''

Mr. CUNNINGHAM

Mr. CUNNINGHAM. Mr. Speaker, it is an honor to serve on the Committee on Intelligence with Members on both sides of the House. I also sit on the Subcommittee on Defense of the Committee on Appropriations, two committees I think that work together in this House, together for national security and the best interests of the American people. That is why most of us came here, and we wish that all committees that we served on have that decorum to work in a single direction. It makes my heart soar like an eagle to serve on those kinds of committees and do the people's work. I think when we look at what the committee does, and the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Goss), the chairman of our committee, and I have seen chairmen and leaders that micromanage; he does not. He kind of gives you the reins and he says, go out there and do your thing and do it for the betterment of both sides of the aisle and the American people. He does not micromanage; he gives us that free rein and for that I thank the chairman. The committee staff, I want to tell my colleagues that each Member has a right to go to the committee staff and get these briefings. I would recommend that my colleagues do it; and these staff members, some are the James Bonds of the world. Some work in technology; some work in administration. But if my colleagues want a brief on any area, ask, and they will be delighted to give it. That is the kind of committee that we serve on. A good example is that if you are going to best determine what the needs of the future, whether it is in defense or whether it is our intelligence agencies, you need to be able to know for a fact what the current threat is. I see the gentleman from Washington (Mr. Dicks) and he looks to the B-2, because he knows what the future threat is, the F-22. So if we know what the threat is today through our intelligence agencies, then we know better what to plan. For example, why do we need a B-2 and its effectiveness with stealth? Why do we need the F-22? In my opinion, we ought to double the buy, because it is the only airplane in the system that can meet the threat of the SU-30 and the SU-37 and plus whatever they have now. If we shorten that buy in defense, as some are talking about in the White House, I think it is foolhardy. But the basis that we get in this committee in a bipartisan way to go forward with national security needs is laudatory. I would tell my colleagues that when people start going after defense, or they go after our intelligence services, most of us on the committee get very defensive. Because as a body, this body and the other body, in many cases we have not given our military or intelligence agencies the assets they need to do the job. In the last administration, we went on 149 deployments. That spread our military thin. We only had 22 percent re-enlistment, and people were stretched, and 25-year-old airplanes were stretched. The reason I bring it up is because every time we deployed, our intelligence agencies had to deploy also, and many of the systems that they had on the drawing board to give us SIGINT and ELINT and HUMINT information had to be scuttled because it went to pay for the war. This committee, in a bipartisan way, is attempting to rectify some of those things. We cannot make that up over the next 5 years. But the committee is doing the best they can, based on the testimony from our services. That is why it is such a neat deal to work on this committee. We are doing something very, very positive and something good for this country. Is the war on drugs dead? No. But we have problems there as well as with al Qaeda.

Mr. CUNNINGHAM

Mr. CUNNINGHAM. Mr. Speaker, I thank the chairman of the Committee on Appropriations for yielding me the time. This bill is critical to winning the war on terrorism, New York City repayment and recovery efforts, homeland security, replenishment munitions in which the gentleman from California's (Mr. Hunter) been trying to do for years, and support ongoing intelligence. While I support this emergency spending, a bill to fight the war on terrorism and aid continued recovery efforts, I must point out a section of this legislation that does not belong in this bill. It is legislation on an appropriations bill, and that is section 3002 regarding mail service to Alaska. Section 3002, the Rural Service Improvement Act of 2002, was never subject to any congressional hearings or other fact-finding events. We have got two opposing sides claiming problems on either side, and yet the chairman, a Republican, from the other body, refuses to even have a hearing on this issue. These provisions specifically target carriers that successfully and profitably transported mail for the Postal Service within the State of Alaska for many years. The Act's stated goal is to reduce costs which then actually it will increase costs from the Postal Service. Congressional approval of this legislation, without any hearings, that eliminates a single competitor from business and protects incumbent carriers from competition is wrong. Matter of fact, in my opinion, it is an abuse of power from a single Senator from the other body that is abusing his office by legislating someone out of business. announcement by the speaker pro tempore