Eliot Engel

Mr. ENGEL

Mr. ENGEL. Mr. Speaker, I thank my friend from Illinois for yielding time, as well as my friend from Connecticut. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of S. 1591, legislation I have worked on with our Senator, Senator Schumer, to name the United States Postal Service facility at 48 South Broadway in Nyack, New York, in my district, after three heroes: Nyack Police Officers Edward O'Grady and Waverly Brown, and Brinks Guard Peter Paige. I am proud to have introduced H.R. 3167, the House version of this bill, that has the support of the entire 29-member New York State delegation in the House. It is a true testament to those three brave men who helped prevent the deaths of countless others 22 years ago today when an armed gang attempted to rob a Brinks armored truck in the middle of the day at a crowded mall with no regard for the lives that would fall in their wake. The naming of this Federal building will serve as a living memorial to these fine men who made the ultimate sacrifice while serving their community. Mr. Speaker, there are few events that rock a community such as this. To this day, the people of Rockland County can recount the events of October 20, 1981, as if it were yesterday. This wonderful, tranquil community was awakened by the stark gunfire of a gang of heavily armed murderers and thieves who struck at the heart of the community, the Nanuet Mall, where children and families shop, eat, and spend time throughout the year. This brazen act forever changed Rockland County and the families of those gunned down. It is reassuring to know that Peter Paige, Edward O'Grady, and Waverly Brown did not die in vain. After this horrific incident, Rockland County implemented new training measures and policies that have saved the lives of many officers over the last 22 years. In addition to better coordination with State and Federal agencies, the Rockland County Police Department also began rigorous new training programs designed to deal with these types of crises. These new policies undoubtedly enhanced the Rockland PD's response to September 11 and the subsequent war on terror. Also, every year on October 20, and as we are speaking now this is happening at this moment, the community gathers at a park on the Hudson River dedicated to their memory to honor their lives and their heroism. Today, the loved ones of these fine men are there remembering their son, their father, their friend. I am honored and humbled to inform them that the House of Representatives is recognizing them as well, and that the memory will be forever imprinted on Rockland County and, indeed, on our entire Nation. This honor comes at a difficult time for the families of the victims as a participant in the robbery, Kathy Boudin, was recently paroled. Although she has regained her freedom, the lives of Edward O'Grady, Waverly Brown, and Peter Paige can never be replaced and the wounds their families and friends and the community still feel can never be healed. So, again, this is a fitting tribute to the memory of those lost and the lives of those still with us who grieved for their loved ones. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank both the chairman of the Committee on Government Reform, the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Tom Davis), and the ranking member, the gentleman from California (Mr. Waxman), for moving this legislation quickly through the committee and to the floor so it can be considered today, the exact anniversary of that tragic day. I also want to thank the majority leader, the gentleman from Texas (Mr. DeLay), for his help and cooperation in facilitating this process, and the minority leader, the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Pelosi), for her support today. In addition, today would not be possible without the tireless work of our Senator, Chuck Schumer, and the entire New York delegation, who have come together as New Yorkers do in a time of need and have unanimously supported this legislation.

Mr. ENGEL. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of S. 1591, legislation I am working on together with Senator Schumer, to name the United States Postal Service facility at 48 South Broadway in Nyack after three heroes, Nyack Police Officers Edward O'Grady and Waverly Brown, and Brinks Guard Peter Paige. I am proud to have introduced H.R. 3167, the House version of this bill that has the support of the entire New York delegation. It is a true testament to these brave men who helped prevent the deaths of countless others 22 years ago when an armed gang attempted to rob a Brinks Armored Truck in the middle of the day at a crowded mall with no regard for the lives that would fall in their wake. The naming of this federal building will serve as a living memorial to these fine men who made the ultimate sacrifice while serving their community. Mr. Speaker, there are few events that rock a community such as this. To this day, the people of Rockland County can recount the events of October 20, 1981, as if it were yesterday. This wonderful, tranquil community was awakened by the stark gunfire of a gang of heavily armed murderers and thieves who struck at the heart of the community, the Nanuet Mall, where children and families, shop, eat, and spend time throughout the year. This brazen act forever changed Rockland County and the families of those gunned down. It is reassuring to know that Peter Paige, Edward O'Grady, and Waverly Brown did not die in vain. After this horrific incident, Rockland County implemented new training measures and policies that have saved the lives of many officers over the last 22 years. In addition to better coordination with state and federal agencies, the Rockland County Police Departments also began rigorous new training programs designed to deal with these types of crisis. These new policies undoubtedly enhanced the Rockland PD's response to September 11th and the subsequent war on terror. Also, every year on October 20th, the community gathers at a park on the Hudson River dedicated to their memory to honor their lives and their heroism. Today, the loved ones of these fine men are there--remembering their son, their father, their friend. I am honored and humbled to inform them that the House of Representatives is recognizing them as well, and that their memory will be forever imprinted on Rockland County, and our entire Nation. This honor comes at a difficult time for the families of the victims as a participant in the robbery, Kathy Boudin, was recently paroled. Although she has regained her freedom, the lives of Edward O'Grady, Waverly Brown, and Peter Paige can never be replaced and the wounds their families and friends still feel can never be healed. So again, this is a fitting tribute to the memory of those lost and the lives of those still with us who grieve for their loved ones. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank both Chairman Tom Davis and Ranking Member Henry Waxman for moving this legislation quickly through the Committee and to the floor so it could be considered today on the anniversary of that tragic day. I also want to thank Majority Leader Tom DeLay for his help and cooperation in facilitating this process and Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi for her support. In addition, today would not be possible without the tireless work of Senator Chuck Schumer, and the entire New York delegation who have come together as New Yorkers do in a time of need and have unanimously supported this legislation.

Mr. ENGEL

Mr. ENGEL. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank my friend, the gentleman from California (Mr. Lantos), for yielding me this time and for his kind words. Mr. Speaker, I rise to speak in favor of H.R. 1828, the Syria Accountability and Lebanese Sovereignty Restoration Act of 2003. As the lead sponsor of the bill, I am very appreciative that this bipartisan bill, which I wrote in my office and introduced more than a year and a half ago, is today coming to the floor. I am pleased to have worked on this bill with our lead Republican sponsor, the chair of the Subcommittee on the Middle East, the gentlewoman from Florida (Ms. Ros- Lehtinen), and it has been a delight to work with her on this bill. Mr. Speaker, since the war in Iraq, it has become plain to ordinary Americans, Members of Congress across party lines, and officials in the administration what has been plain to me for many years, that Syria is among the most dangerous, destabilizing countries in the Middle East. In 1979, our U.S. State Department put forth a list of countries which support terrorism. Syria was a charter member of that list. She has been on that list unabated for 24 years; and yet she is currently the only country on this list with which we have normal diplomatic relations. I have never understood that, and it is time to tell Syria that the game is over. As President Bush said on June 24, 2002, ``Syria must choose the right side in the war on terror by closing terrorist camps and expelling terrorist organizations.'' In fact, terrorist groups that have thrived under Syrian protection have taken hundreds of American lives. In 1983, Hezbollah killed 241 U.S. Marines in a terrorist attack near Beirut and killed more in the bombing of the U.S. embassy annex the following year. Syria also plays host to a number of terrorist groups in its capital, Damascus, and terrorist camps throughout Syria and Syrian-occupied Lebanon. In fact, the leader of the Palestine Islamic Jihad, which just murdered 21 innocent people in a homicide bombing in the Israeli city of Haifa, lives in Damascus. Israel was correct and justified in its recent attack on the Palestine-Islamic Jihad training camp in Syria. The threat of collusion between terrorist groups and the Government of Syria must be addressed directly, especially because of Syria's arsenal of weapons of mass destruction. Under Secretary of State John Bolton testified last month before the Subcommittee on the Middle East that ``since the 1970s, Syria has pursued what is now one of the most advanced Arab state chemical weapons capabilities and is continuing to develop an offensive biological weapons capability.'' For a country with Syria's history with weapons of mass destruction, this is a cause for serious concern. Even with all this damming evidence about the threat that Damascus poses some have suggested that we should not hold Syria accountable. The reasons they give have varied, but the most common is that Syria has somewhat helped the U.S. in our war on terror. Absolutely nonsense. Syria is both the arsonist and the fireman. She continues to help terrorism and then throws us crumbs and says look, I am putting it out. That shell game has got to stop. Syria is two-faced, throwing the few small bones of information to American sources while continuing to aid the most violent terrorist groups in the Middle East. This is not an acceptable deal in the post- September 11 world. Under this bill, unless Syria meets four key criteria, it will face several sanctions, both economic and commercial and military. First and foremost, Syria must end its support for terrorism. It must close the offices and end the operations of the Palestinian terror groups and stop the supplies to Hezbollah. And it must come into full compliance with Security Council Resolution 1373 which directs all countries to fight terror. Secondly, Syria must withdraw its armed forces from Lebanon. Nothing would do more for peace and the promotion of democracy in the Middle East than a free and sovereign Lebanon. The U.N. long ago certified Israel's withdrawal, but the Syrian military occupation remains. It is time to let the Lebanese run Lebanon. Thirdly, Syria must halt development and procurement of weapons of mass destruction and ballistic missiles. The Syrian force of hundreds of Scud missiles topped with unconventional warheads poses a serious danger to the Middle East. Finally, Syria must take immediate steps to stop guerrillas from traveling to Syria to Iraq to attack and kill American troops. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to inform you that this bipartisan legislation has gathered 297 cosponsors in the House including a majority of Democrats and Republicans, and the bill received an overwhelming 33 to 2 vote in the Committee on International Relations. The Senate version of our bill tells a similar story with 76 cosponsors led by Senators Boxer and Santorum. Finally, I would like to thank the chairman and the ranking member of the Committee on International Relations, the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Hyde) and the gentleman from California (Mr. Lantos), for moving the bill forward and for their support, as I mentioned before. I also thank the chair of the subcommittee, the gentlewoman from Florida (Ms. Ros-Lehtinen) for her hard work, and all 297 Members of the House who have cosponsored this important bill. I want to thank the gentleman from Texas (Mr. DeLay), the majority leader, for moving the bill forward quickly on the House floor, and the minority leader, the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Pelosi), the minority whip, the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Hoyer), and the majority whip, the gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Blunt), for their cosponsorship of the bill. I urge the House to pass this important legislation and send a clear message to Syria to end its destabilizing policies. I am also grateful that the administration recently lifted its opposition to the bill, and President Bush has indicated that he will sign this bill. Again, in the war against terrorism this is a good place to continue. I urge my colleagues to support this bill.

Mr. ENGEL

Mr. ENGEL. Mr. Speaker, I thank my friend for yielding me time. As a member of the Committee on Energy and Commerce and as a cosponsor of this bill, I really want to thank the judge. We ought to have more court rulings like this, because I have never seen one that brings this Congress closer together the whole year. This has often been a contentious Congress that clashes on issues. Here everyone agrees. I want to thank the judge for making us all love each other. We do it because 50 million Americans have signed up to not be bothered by telemarketers. That is a phenomenal amount of people in a very short time. So if there was ever an issue on which everyone agrees, this is the issue. Everyone has been bothered at the dinner table with these annoying calls. This morning as I was leaving to come here to the Capitol, the phone rang. I picked it up, and there it was, another telemarketer asking kind of sneaky questions, intrusive questions, trying to get you to give them some information in a very sneaky way. People are just fed up with it. There are no first amendment rights here. All of the things that have been said about why this law should be blocked are ridiculous. Again, in all my years in Congress, I have hardly ever seen anything with which everyone agrees. So, again, I want to thank the judge for bringing us together. I rise in strong support of the legislation, and as a cosponsor, I commend the chairman of our committee, the gentleman from Louisiana (Mr. Tauzin), and the ranking member, the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Dingell). That is why this is such a great committee; we all agree on so many important things.

Mr. ENGEL

Mr. ENGEL. Mr. Speaker, I, like many of my colleagues here this morning, rise to talk about September 11 and what it means to all of us as Americans, what it means to me as a New Yorker in particular, and the fact that these brave people that lost their lives, more than 3,000 of them, our lives will never again be the same. America lost its innocence that day, and we have been thinking ever since about how we can best respond to ensure that we can prevent these ugly acts of terrorism against our country. Mr. Speaker, terrorism is everyone's enemy and a civilized world needs to ban together to fight terrorism. Here in America, we have had September 11; but 6,000 miles away, the brave people of Israel every day have to cope with ongoing acts of terror. The other day two horrific suicide bombings killed nearly 20 people, and 2 weeks ago, when I was in Israel, a bus bombing killed 22 people, including 5 Americans, 3 of my constituents. When I go back to New York every week and look at the New York skyline and do not see the World Trade Center, I feel our city is not yet whole and something is missing. It has been 2 years since September 11, 2001, but I feel like I have aged 20 years since then. In my office is a two-page spread from the New York Times. It has pictures of the 300-plus firefighters who died that day in New York. Most of the pictures are of young men who are the same age as my daughter. One of them is the picture of a friend's son, Christian Regenhard. When I look at the faces of these brave people, I have often thought what can I, as a Congressman, do to ensure this never happens again, and I think we need to make sure that the funding is there so our first responders can respond, and we need to make sure that the brave people who protect us have all the resources they need. We need to also make sure that the people who lost their lives that day are never forgotten. In a few minutes, the gentleman from New York (Mr. King) and I are going to talk about the True American Heroes Act of 2003. The bill posthumously awards Congressional Gold Medals to government workers and others who responded to the attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon and who perished, and to people aboard United Airlines Flight 93. We owe it to ourselves and our families and our countrymen to ensure this never happens again.

Mr. ENGEL

Mr. ENGEL. Mr. Speaker, I thank my friend for yielding time to me, and I thank the gentleman from New Jersey. I rise to offer my strong support for H.R. 1538, the True American Heroes Act of 2003. I also rise to thank the gentleman from New York (Mr. King) and the gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. Maloney) for their leadership on this bill and also my colleague and friend from the Committee on Energy and Commerce, the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Stearns), who has been a stalwart ally in this effort. Finally, I want to thank the House majority and minority leadership for agreeing to bringing this bill up under unanimous consent and today on September 11. It is very fitting that we do this on September 11. Today is the second anniversary of the greatest attack on America since our Republic was founded. Since that day, Americans have stood together, united as we never have before. Thus, it is fitting and appropriate that the House takes up this legislation. It provides the heroes of that day with a Congressional Gold Medal. It awards these medals to government workers and others who responded to the attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon and perished and to the people aboard United Airlines Flight 93 who helped resist the hijackers and caused the plane to crash. This bill is combined with a bill that I had that we had a majority of Members of this House cosponsoring which requires the Secretary of the Treasury to mint coins in commemoration of the spirit of America, recognizing the tragic events of September 11, 2001. I am delighted that we have combined these two bills into one really very special bill. Mr. Speaker, on September 12, 2001, after coming down to Washington from New York, I was in New York City on September 11, I spoke on the House floor. I would like very much to read what I said that day, September 12, one day after the terrible attacks in 2001, because it is the way I feel now, and I think it is the way so many of us feel. ``Mr. Speaker, I am going to speak from the heart. I have had a very tough couple of days. I think America lost our innocence yesterday, and I just kept thinking that perhaps this was a bad dream and we would somehow wake up and it would not be true, but we all know it is. ``Mr. Speaker, I am a New Yorker, born and bred. I love our city. I was in New York when this tragedy occurred. I often say to my children when we come back to New York, look at the skyline, look at the World Trade Center. It is so invigorating. It makes me feel so wonderful just to be in this city, the city I love, the city in which I was born. ``Mr. Speaker, we New Yorkers are a tough breed; but I have to tell my colleagues, Mr. Speaker, this morning at 7 a.m. when I went over the George Washington Bridge to come back down here to Washington and I took a look at the New York skyline and saw the Twin Towers were not there and in its place I saw the smoke and the fire, I really lost it. I really lost it. ``Mr. Speaker, as much as I have lost it because I do not see the towers there, it pales by comparison when I think of the victims, the men, women and children who lost their lives; the firemen, the policemen who came there to save people's lives and lost their lives. ``People who go to work, like millions of people in this great country, go to work to earn a living to support their families, they go to work and they are killed by lunatics. We have some questions to be asked, Mr. Speaker. We have to ask why our intelligence failed us, why our security failed us. Congress has to get to the bottom of this and ask these questions. Congress will find out. Let me say to the terrorists and those people in the streets that we saw, the Palestinians and others who were dancing in the streets with glee, let me say to them and Osama Bin Laden and the Taliban and all the people that support terrorism, you have awakened a sleeping giant. The United States will not rest until we root out every one of you, until we root out the terror and the terrorist cells. We are going to rally around our President, as we always have, with bipartisanship. We are all one America. God bless this wonderful Nation. God bless America.'' Mr. Speaker, I hope that the vote on this bill today will be unanimous, because 2 years later, we in this Congress are just as resolute as we were 2 years ago to destroy the scourge of terrorism and to honor the brave men, women and children who lost their lives and to the people who responded who gave their lives so that others may live.

Mr. ENGEL

Mr. ENGEL. Mr. Speaker, I rise to call to the attention of the House of Representatives an article by Girma Asmerom, Ambassador of Eritrea to the United States. His article celebrates July 4th, American Independence Day, and discusses the challenges of the young independent nation of Eritrea. Highlighting Eritrea's developing democratic system and successful campaign to stamp out corruption, Ambassador Asmerom states that his people seek ``trade and investment, not handouts from our partners and taxpayers.'' I thank Ambassador Asmerom for his kind words during July, the month we celebrate America's independence, and wish the people of Eritrea well in the days ahead. I submit the article by Ambassador Asmerom into the Record at this point. [From the Metro Herald, July 4, 2003] A Tale of Two Independence Days (By Girma Asmerom) When Americans celebrate their Independence Day on July 4, they commemorate 227 years of struggle to create a free and prosperous society. The fruits of that struggle are here around us, to observe and to enjoy. America did not emerge from British colonial rule fully formed as a complete, liberal, democratic state. The outcome of the American Revolution was not a foregone conclusion on July 4, 1776, and even after the peace treaty with Britain was signed in 1783, it was unclear whether the 13 colonies along the eastern seaboard would continue to exist in harmony. The American Constitution (1789) and the Bill of Rights (1791) laid the foundations for a free society. But bumps along the road were sure to come, and they did. The Alien and Sedition Acts of 1798 threatened the freedoms guaranteed by the First Amendment (freedoms not fully clarified through the judicial process until after World War I!). The War of 1812 threatened a loss of independence through invasion by the former colonial power, Great Britain. And although the Declaration of Independence clearly stated that ``all men are created equal,'' slavery did not end until the U.S. Civil War was fought and half a million Americans died in it. Every American, no doubt, can relate a favorite story from American history that shows how, through trial and error, the United States has evolved--through blood, sweat, toil, and tears, as Winston Churchill put it in another context--making Independence Day celebrations that much more precious. Imagine, then, what it must be like to live in a country that has been independent of foreign domination for only a few years--to be precise, twelve years. That is what it is like for my country, Eritrea. After successive colonization by Turkey (1557-1865), Egypt (1865- 1884), Italy (1890-1941), Britain (1942-1952), and Ethiopia (1952-1991), we commemorated 12 years of independence just a few weeks ago, on May 24. Tor three relentless decades, the Eritrean people fought for independence against Ethiopian occupation and incredible odds without any assistance from governments or outside forces. We achieved self-determination through a U.S.- supervised referendum in 1993. We are developing a democratic system in keeping with the values of our people and with their full support. We have indeed taken measures to protect our national security, as is our right--indeed, our obligation to our people. We are proud of the achievements of our country over a little more than a decade. In that time, Eritrea has challenged the scourge of developing countries, government corruption, which is, admittedly, endemic in much of Africa. I am happy to report that the U.S. Department of State pointed out in 1998: ``Corruption is not a significant barrier or hindrance to investment or trade in Eritrea.'' The distinguished Canadian journalist, Peter Worthington, added: ``. . . while [Eritrea is] the world's newest independent state (1993) and one of Africa's poorest countries, it's also the safest, least corrupt, most self-reliant.'' Like the countries of Central and Eastern Europe, Eritrea has spent the past dozen years emerging from the strangulation of Soviet-backed Ethiopian occupation. Like the United States in its formative years, six years after its independence, under the pretext of border conflict, Eritrea suffered invasion by its former colonial overlord (Ethiopia), leading to the death of 120,000 Ethiopians and 19,000 Eritreans, as well as displacement of countless families. This war also brought massive economic destruction to both countries. One of our major challenges is the current unprecedented famine. This is a temporary situation brought about as a consequence of a complete failure of rains last year, in addition to the dislocation resulting from Ethiopia's invasion. To overcome these circumstances, the Government of Eritrea and its people, with the assistance of the international community, are exerting relentless efforts. More can be done, of course, but we are doing the best we can with limited resources. Success will come. We have as our model Eritrea's achievements in public health. The U.S. Agency for International Development notes: ``Despite Eritrea's rank as one of the poorest countries in the world, it ranks 31st in healthy life expectancy.'' Eritrea has one of Africa's lowest rates of HIV/AIDS infection, only 2 to 2.5 percent; it has eradicated polio; and in 2002, it reduced malaria in children under five by half. Eritreans, dedicated to their tested vision, as a matter of policy refuse to look for foreign economic assistance to bring economic development. We seek trade and investment, not handouts from our partners and taxpayers. Eritrean-Americans living in communities across the United States are natural lines of communication between our two countries and peoples, encouraging further engagement and future U.S.-Eritrean commercial ties. Americans have much to celebrate on the Fourth of July. We Eritreans take this opportunity to salute and congratulate the American people on their Independence Day.

Mr. ENGEL

Mr. ENGEL. Mr. Speaker, I rise to call attention of the House of Representatives an article in the Washington Post on July 10, 2003 entitled, ``The Big Shakedown on Russian Business.'' This article by Masha Lipman, editor of the Moscow Carnegie Center's Pro et Contra Journal, exposes a pattern of arrests and investigations of prominent business executives in Russia. Calling this behavior by Russian security agencies ``shakedown justice'', Masha Lipman makes a strong case that ``this mock justice compromises the credibility of the Russian President when he pledges that Russia is a lawful state.'' One of the key factors in the development of a nascent democracy, like Russia, is the rule of law, as it underpins all aspects of the society. If Russia, or any other country for that matter, is to attract investment or create an environment conducive to business growth, it must be clear that investments and entrepreneurial activity will be protected under a system governed fairly and equitably according to the law. The arrests and investigations described by Masha Lipman send precisely the wrong signals about Russian free-market economics, democracy, and the rule of law. Perceptions about a hostile business climate in Russia could have a chilling effect on foreign investment in Russia at a time when the country's economy is rapidly improving. I urge my colleagues to read this important article and join with me in urging the Russian government to take affirmative actions to support and uphold, and not to undermine, free market principles and democracy in Russia. I submit the article by Masha Lipman into the Record at this point. [From the Washington Post, July 10, 2003] The Big Shakedown on Russian Business (By Masha Lipman) Moscow.--Mikhail Khodorkovsky is an oil magnate and, by most accounts, Russia's wealthiest man. He is also having some difficulty with law enforcement. Late last week he was summoned to the chief prosecutor's office for interrogation regarding the activities of some of his associates. Of course, this kind of thing isn't unique to Russian business executives; Westerners have seen many important people led away in handcuffs over the years. But in the case of Khodorkovsky's associates and other prominent business executives here, it's not so much a matter of the rule of law as it is of what might be called shakedown justice. This mock justice compromises the credibility of the Russian president when he pledges that Russia is a lawful state. It is also detrimental to Russia's economic development. It threatens to stultify the country's efforts to attract badly needed foreign investment. Several cases have been opened recently against people associated with Khodorkovsky's big and successful oil company, Yukos. The allegations include embezzlement, fraud and murder. Two people are in jail, one of them being Platon Lebedev, a billionaire and a co-holder of Yukos's controlling stake. Yesterday the prosecutor's office was also reported to be examining an alleged case of tax evasion by Yukos. (Also yesterday, the U.S. Embassy in Moscow formally asked the Russian government to explain its investigation of Khodorkovsky, according to a senior U.S. diplomat.) Theories abound as to what may be behind the shakedown, or nayezd, as this action is being ' commonly referred to in the media and among professional analysts. Nobody among them believes that the case against Lebedev, or any of the other cases related to Yukos, is a purely legal matter. In attacking Khodorkovsky and his company, the prosecutor's office and the state security agency, the FSB, appear to be acting on orders from somebody with huge political clout. Khodorkovsky believes that Yukos was picked as a target because it's a world-class company and, especially after its recent proposed merger with another Russian oil giant, a tasty morsel attractive to a number of people in this country. Ultimately, Khodorkovsky claims, this is a struggle for power ``between different wings in the inner circle of Vladimir Vladimirovich Putin.'' He offers no details to back up this allegation, but there is no doubt that whoever is attacking him would have to be very highly placed. Early in his tenure as Russia's president, Putin announced as his guiding principle the ``dictatorship of the law.'' But at the same time, the prosecutor's office and the FSB were used by the Kremlin to attack Putin's nemesis, media tycoon Vladimir Gusinsky (for whose company, I should note here, I worked for a time). The campaign against Gusinsky and his associates lasted more than a year and included various intimidating actions: raids by masked security agents, searches, arrests and investigations. The cases mostly fell apart, but the tactics worked: Gusinsky was forced to leave Russia, and his media business was ruined. Similar methods were used against another business tycoon, Boris Berezovsky, who currently lives abroad. As a result, people who felt they weren't getting their fair share of the goodies saw the benefits of ``hiring'' law enforcers to improve their position against a competitor, or just to extort money. Igor Yurgens, vice president of the Russian Union of Industrialists and Entrepreneurs, a group of business tycoons, said in a recent interview that his organization gets ``dozens or hundreds'' of calls from provincial businessmen who complain of similar--if much more small-time--shakedowns. They tell stories of visitors calling on local businessmen and informing them that their businesses had not been properly registered some nine years before. The unfortunate entrepreneur then has a choice of paying the extortionists money or facing ``variants,'' which means, according to Yurgens, ``the use of law enforcement bodies with the purpose of redistributing property.'' In a similar fashion, Khodorkovsky's attackers may hope to rectify what they believe has been unfair distribution of the oil business or, for that matter, of political power. Khodorkovsky may still be able to defend himself and defeat his attackers. He claims the president feels no hostility toward him. Because Putin is sure to be reelected next year, Khodorkovsky said, the current struggle is about ``who's going to be in the second echelon of his team.'' If Khodorkovsky's guess is right and it is indeed a faction in the Kremlin--not the president himself--going after him, his connections, money, reputation and skilled advisers may be enough to repel the attack. But however this affair turns out, it will have little if anything to do with proper judicial procedure. The general understanding in Russia is that in cases such as this, the ultimate decision is made not in the courtroom but at the top level of the Kremlin. Certainly one would think that Putin would be concerned if indeed his top aides are using law enforcers to engage in self-seeking pursuit of power and wealth. But there is an even more important reason why he should worry about this sort of thing. Putin has for some time emphasized the need to lure foreign capital to Russia. He has not had much success. During his grand visit to Britain recently, the Russian president did his best to tout his country's ``favorable conditions for investors.'' The question is: How interested are foreign investors going to be when they see that even a world-class business cannot feel secure in Russia or expect to get justice in a court of law?

Mr. ENGEL

Mr. ENGEL. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. ENGEL. Mr. Chairman, I thank my friend from New York (Mr. Serrano) for yielding to me and at least giving me the opportunity to air my amendment and some of the grievances. As I said before, I have no desire to frustrate colleagues; but a lot of us here are very frustrated over the quick change that was made with the unanimous consent and our inability now even to ask to strike the last word. The gentleman from New York (Mr. Serrano) is one of my best friends. We have served together. We come from the same town. I just want to say that my frustration is that last night at 8 p.m. this bill had not been introduced. A copy was not available to start the process of review or drafting of amendments. This morning we had the text of the bill on line, but not the accompanying report. And now we have a unanimous consent to limit amendments to ones that were preprinted in the Record, which for Members not on Appropriations is impossible, unless it is a simple limitation or ``to strike'' amendment. I have an amendment which would move money from the National Telecommunication and Information Administration to the Public Telecommunication Facilities, Planning and Construction Program, which is called TFPC. Both of these are under the jurisdiction of the Subcommittee on Telecommunications and the Internet of the Committee on Energy and Commerce, on which I sit. As a courtesy to the authorizing committee members, I believe we should have an opportunity to review the bill and offer amendments. Even more troubling is that the Committee on Appropriations has provided $1.3 million more for NTIA than the President requested, while cutting PFTP by $40 million. My amendment would simply move $1,310,000 to the PFTP from the NTIA. And I think the whole House should have an opportunity to vote on what the priorities for funding in this bill are. I feel very strongly about public television. That is what my amendment would have done. I would like to have had the opportunity to be able to voice that and to have a vote. That is not going to happen; and in a desire for expediency, we have thwarted the democratic process. I share the frustration of my colleague from Vermont and other colleagues who do not have the opportunity. Again, as a member of the authorizing committee, the Committee on Energy and Commerce, I believe that what went on here was wrong and should not happen again. I thank the gentleman from New York (Mr. Serrano) for giving me the ability to voice these problems on the House floor, and I would hope that as we negotiate this bill and continue to negotiate with the other House and the bill comes back that we will increase money for public television, we will increase money for the PFTP. And I would hope that on both sides of the aisle they look at that and can find more money for the very worthwhile programs of public television. I thank my colleague.

Mr. ENGEL. Mr. Chairman, I absolutely agree with everything the gentleman from Vermont said. I support what he is trying to do about the PATRIOT Act. I do not very often get up to complain about procedure here, but I want to just express my frustration in being a member of the Committee on Energy and Commerce, the authorizing committee. I had an amendment that I was going to introduce. As of 8 p.m. last night, we did not see a bill, so there was no way we could draft the amendment. And then this morning, with the UC agreed to, it effectively cut out members of the Committee on Energy and Commerce that had a bill that deals with our committee that had an amendment. I just find it very, very frustrating that this UC was done, and had I been on the floor I would have objected.

Mr. ENGEL

Mr. ENGEL. I thank my friend for yielding me this time. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong opposition to this bill. This bill is a cruel hoax perpetrated on America's seniors. This bill is not about helping seniors. It is all about privatizing Medicare. This is not the Senate bill. This bill is a wolf in sheep's clothing. It purports to help seniors. All it does is create a goal that many people on the other side of the aisle have wanted for years, the privatization of Medicare. This bill drains the lifeblood out of the Medicare program and breaks the promise we made to seniors 38 years ago when Medicare was created. I wish this Congress could have come together for an historic moment that would finally provide seniors with the type of prescription drug coverage they need and deserve. Unfortunately, we are doing a disservice to our seniors by shortchanging them with a woefully inadequate drug benefit. Why is it inadequate? Let us face it, there is not enough money in this bill because my friends on the other side of the aisle have bankrupted this government with huge tax cuts, huge tax cuts to benefit the rich, huge tax cuts which make it impossible to help entitlement programs like Medicare. When the leaders over there said they wanted Medicare to wither on the vine, they were speaking the truth and that is what is happening today. With the enactment of this bill, Medicare is withering on the vine. When I came to Congress 15 years ago, my goal was to provide meaningful prescription drug benefits. My bill and others, 1045, would keep the promise of Medicare, which was created to prevent seniors from having their life savings ravaged by health care costs. Today we are considering no such thing. The legislation before us is not a promise kept to seniors, it is a promise kept to HMOs and insurance companies. This is not the Senate bill. The Senate bill was a starting point to improve upon. This bill bankrupts Medicare, privatizes it by the year 2010. American seniors will not have Medicare as they know it by 2010. Again, when you have tax cuts for the rich and you do it to help your rich friends and you want to strangle social programs and entitlement programs, you do not have an adequate bill. This bill should be rejected.

Mr. ENGEL

Mr. ENGEL. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of the resolution. Israel's fight against terrorism is our fight. As President Bush said, there are no good terrorists or bad terrorists, only bad terrorists. I very strongly support this resolution standing with the people of Israel.

Mr. ENGEL

Mr. ENGEL. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word. Mr. Chairman, I also want to talk about FEMA. FEMA is now under the jurisdiction of the Department of Homeland Security. FEMA and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission have a memorandum of understanding that FEMA is in charge of certifying offsite emergency evacuation plans of nuclear power plants. The process is still underway for the Indian Point plant in New York in Westchester County. I originally was going to put forth an amendment which would prevent Federal funds from being spent by FEMA to certify any offsite emergency evacuation plans for nuclear power plants, but I will not offer this amendment. However, I feel it is critical that I speak about a matter of homeland security to my constituents and the 20 million people living near the Indian Point Nuclear Power Plant in New York. While I am not against nuclear power, I believe it is in our Nation's vital interest to shut down the Indian Point Nuclear Power Plant in Buchanan, New York, right near my district of Bronx, Westchester, and Rockland Counties. Indian Point is located 35 miles north of midtown Manhattan. The planes that flew into the World Trade Center passed directly over the nuclear power plant and blueprints for American nuclear power plants were found in al Qaeda caves in Afghanistan. The problems with Indian Point are not new. Indian Point is located in a densely populated area, in fact the most densely populated area in all of the United States. In fact, it is the nuclear power plant that is the closest to any densely populated metropolitan area of the United States, and it happens to be the major metropolitan area of the United States. Approximately 20 million people are located within the 50-mile emergency planning zone. The road system in the area is woefully inadequate to meet the needs of those people living in the area making an evacuation in the event of an emergency at Indian Point impossible. No matter what the cause of radioactive release at Indian Point, terrorists or accidental, the result would be the same. The 20 million people living in the emergency planning zone would be in grave danger. Now the emergency evacuation plan that FEMA is now considering is fatally flawed and will not protect the public. An independent investigation of emergency preparedness at the plant conducted by former FEMA Director James Lee Witt and commissioned by Governor Pataki found that ``the current radiological response system and capabilities were not adequate to overcome their combined weight and protect the people from an unacceptable dose of radiation in the event of a release from Indian Point.'' Following the release of the report in early January of this year, Governor Pataki and the four county executives from both parties within the 10-mile emergency planning zone refused to certify the evacuation plans. The report concluded there was no way to improve the existing emergency plan to sufficiently meet the current security threat. If we are to truly protect the citizens of the tri-State area of New York, New Jersey and Connecticut, we must shut Indian Point down. Again, I want to say I am not anti-nuclear power, but I am against risking the lives of 20 million American people. FEMA, despite refusing to certify the emergency evacuation plans on February 21, saying it could not provide reasonable assurance that the public would be protected in the event of a radioactive release from the plant, has still not issued a final determination. As a result, Indian Point is still operating despite the fact that no Federal agency is protecting the safety and security of my constituents. We all know that if built today, Indian Point would never be sited anywhere near the New York Metropolitan Area. Furthermore, September 11 changed the equation. While I may not have been worried about the fact that a nuclear power plant was located in my backyard before September 11, now we all know it is a potential terrorist target. We should not allow a nuclear plant to continue to operate just simply because it exists. FEMA must be forced to take the post-9/11 world into account when it evaluates the offsite emergency evacuation plan. In that case, I cannot imagine how FEMA could then provide reasonable assurance that the public would be protected should something go wrong at the plant. I know the gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. Lowey) shares these sentiments. I think it is very important that we understand that the Indian Point Nuclear Power Plant should be shut down.

Mr. ENGEL. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word. Mr. Chairman, first of all I want to quote Secretary of Homeland Security Ridge from an Associated Press article yesterday. This is what he said: ``At the end of the day, ladies and gentlemen, if you take a look at the population, the density of population, the critical infrastructure and the threat, there's one city that no matter how you move those factors around or weigh those factors, there's one city at the top of the list and it's New York City.'' I want to associate myself with the gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. Maloney), the things that she said. We will have other people from the New York delegation speaking about this as well, because we feel very, very strongly about getting the money for homeland security for New York City which is obviously, as Secretary Ridge said, the number one threat. In fiscal year 2003, we provided $2.9 billion for grants to State and local governments to help them prepare for and defend against terrorist attacks. $800 million, or about 30 percent of that, was directed to high-threat areas. The rest of the fund went out under a formula that is entirely unrelated to where the terror threat is. Under this bill, as it is currently drafted for the next fiscal year, the 70 percent that is not related to high-threat areas will increase to nearly 83 percent. I believe that that is wrong. Just last week a plot was uncovered, as my colleague said, to blow up the Brooklyn Bridge. Our intelligence agencies continue to say that New York remains a top target for terrorists and common sense would tell anybody the same thing. New York has been hit twice by radical terrorists. Thousands have died. We continue to rebuild; but to better ensure our safety and the safety of the world's financial capital, we need to better spend Federal tax dollars. When New York is hit by attacks, all Americans are hurt. The economic impact is all over the country. People in Montana, Oklahoma and Oregon, it affects everyone in this country when New York is hit by attacks. I also had intended to offer an amendment to move $500 million from the State grant program to the high-threat program. I will not do that because I understand that there are needs across the country for assistance. Thus, it is obvious that this bill is not adequate to our needs as a Nation. I hope that we can somehow get around to the fact that we desperately need more money for high-threat areas. I would hope that in the negotiations between us and the other body that we would rectify this. Why is this bill underfunded in my opinion? The answer is simple math. We have cut our revenues by trillions of dollars to pay for tax cuts. There is a trade-off, I believe, tax cuts or security. We believe that security is more important. My friend from Wisconsin wants to add an amendment to limit the tax cut for millionaires to just over $83,000 this year instead of the $88,000 they are set to get. I do not think it is too much to ask that people who have benefited the most in this great Nation pay $4,000 more for the security of all of us. Mr. Chairman, I again hope that when we have our negotiations, when we have our conferences that we will be able to put more money where it belongs to protect high-threat areas like New York City.

Mr. ENGEL

Mr. ENGEL. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H. Con. Res. 209, which commends the signing of the U.S. Adriatic Charter. As the author of H. Con. Res. 209, I am honored that the House is now considering this important resolution. On May 2, 2003, the U.S. Adriatic Charter was signed in Tirana, Albania by Secretary of State Colin Powell and the Foreign Ministers of Albania, Croatia, and the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia. As Secretary Colin Powell noted when he signed the document, it is remarkable that the agreement was signed in Albania, a country once known only for its isolation and distance from Western principles. Today, Tirana is a capital filled with energy as it continues its opening to Europe. Macedonia and Croatia have seen similar changes. As NATO has expanded through other countries of Europe, several former Yugoslav nations in South Central Europe were excluded. They just were not ready for membership. Today, three of those nations, Albania, Croatia, and Macedonia are now moving to make the needed changes and reforms so that they can join the North Atlantic structures. The U.S. Adriatic Charter embodies a commitment by Alabania, Croatia, and Macedonia to the values and principles of NATO and a declaration of their intent to join NATO as soon as they meet Alliance standards. I strongly support their efforts to advance toward NATO membership and having Secretary Powell sign the Charter puts the United States firmly in support of their efforts to join NATO when they are ready. By passing this resolution today, Congress will add its voice, by ``urg[ing] NATO to invite Albania, Croatia, and Macedonia to join NATO as soon as these countries demonstrate the ability to assume the responsibilities of NATO membership.'' H. Con. Res. 209 also welcomes and supports the aspirations of Albania, Croatia, and Macedonia to join the European Union at the earliest opportunity and recognizes that the three countries are making important strides to bring their economic, military, and political institutions into conformance with the standards of NATO and other Euro-Atlantic institutions. Finally, our resolution also commends Secretary Powell for his strong personal support of the resolution, as demonstrated by his travel to the region to sign the document. Mr. Speaker, as the sponsor of H. Con. Res. 209, I think this is an appropriate forum to publicly thank Albania, for sending 75 commandos to Iraq to fight along side our troops. It is my hope that Albania, one of only three European countries to send ground troops to fight in the war, would be high on Defense Department's list when it considers the realignment of and new bases for American forces around the world. Finally, I would like to thank the chairman of the Europe Subcommittee, Mr. Bereuter, and his staff for their cooperation and support as we drafted this resolution, H. Con. Res. 209. I would also like to thank the ranking member of the subcommittee, Mr. Wexler, for his support. Again, I strongly support H. Con. Res. 209 and urge my colleagues to support its passage. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to include in the portion of the Congressional Record containing the debate on H. Con. Res. 209, regarding the U.S. Adriatic Charter, letters from John Kraljic, President of the National Federation of Croatian Americans, His Excellency Nikola Dimitrov, Ambassador of the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, and Martin Vulaj, Executive Director of the National Albanian American Council. Embassy of the Ambassador Republic of Macedonia, Washington, DC, June 12, 2003. Hon. Representative Eliot E. Engel, House of Representatives, Washington, DC. Dear Mr. Engel: Allow me to express my sincere gratitude for your initiative in adopting the resolution H. Con. Res. 209 by the Committee on Foreign Relations of the House of the Representatives regarding the signing of the United States- Adriatic Charter, charter of partnership among the United States, Albania, Croatia, and Macedonia. Let me assure you one more time that Macedonia, along with Albania and Croatia is strongly committed to the values and principles of the NATO and is willing to joining the Alliance at the earliest possible time. My country already contributes to European security and to the peace and security of southeast Europe through peaceful resolution of the conflicts and regional cooperation. Macedonia strongly supports the endeavors of the Government of the United States to bring security, stability and democracy in Iraq and Afghanistan. My Government has sent troops to Iraq as part of the coalition forces to contribute the success of the operation Iraqi Freedom, and to Afghanistan. Dear Mr. Engel, I look forward for future opportunity to exchange our views, and thank you again for your support to my country. Sincerely, Nikola Dimitrov.

Mr. ENGEL

Mr. ENGEL. Mr. Speaker, reserving the right to object, I do not intend to object, but I would like to speak from the well so I can stand here with a picture of Lou Gehrig of the New York Yankees. Today is the 100th birthday of Lou Gehrig, and I am proud to rise today in favor of my resolution H. Res. 78 which celebrates Lou Gehrig's 100th birthday. Lou Gehrig was born on June 19, 1903, 100 years ago today. He lived a storied life which ended tragically at the hands of a disease that still carries his name, Lou Gehrig's Disease, known as Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis or ALS. It is a devastating condition and a testament to Lou Gehrig's courage in the face of this horrible affliction. In my own family, my grandmother, my father's mother, also died of the same disease and literally thousands upon thousands of Americans are suffering with this ALS disease. Today there are celebrations in New York in honor of Lou Gehrig, most notably at Yankee Stadium in the Bronx, where I am from, this afternoon. The ALS Association is remembering Lou Gehrig; today is Lou Gehrig Day at Yankee Stadium, the Iron Horse, that was his nickname, and is raising greater awareness about the disease. The ALS Association is committed to greater awareness about those suffering with ALS and the sacrifices of their loved ones who require the intense care these patients require. Approximately 30,000 individuals in the United States are afflicted with ALS with about 5,000 new cases appearing each year. ALS destroys the lives of its victims and their families, leaving patients unable to walk, eat or even talk. The life expectancy of an individual with ALS is only 3 to 5 years from the time of diagnosis. I have had many sufferers of ALS come into my office very courageously to talk about this affliction. There is no known cure or cause for ALS. Research has given birth to new aggressive treatments for the symptoms of ALS that can extend the lives of patients. Recent advances in ALS research have produced promising leads into neurodegenerative diseases, and it is imperative that this important work continues. Furthermore, the sequencing of the Human Genome holds great promise in the search for cures for many diseases, including ALS. My resolution honors Lou Gehrig and the contributions his legacy has made in the fight against this terrible disease. It also recognizes the efforts of the ALS Association in raising awareness, pursuing research, and providing support for ALS patients and their families. ALS patients exhibit incredible courage in their fight against this disease, and this resolution commends them for that and affirms the support of Congress for continued research into better treatments and a cure for ALS. Mr. Speaker, perhaps there was no greater act of courage than when Lou Gehrig gave his farewell speech before the Yankee faithful at Yankee Stadium who were not ready to let him go. I want to read that famous speech into the Record. We all know it, where he said he considered himself the luckiest man on the face of the earth. He said: ``Fans, for the past two weeks you have been reading about the bad break I got. Yet today, I consider myself the luckiest man on the face of the earth. I have been in ballparks for 17 years and have never received anything but kindness and encouragement from you fans. ``Look at these grand men. Which of you wouldn't consider it the highlight of his career just to associate with them for even one day? Sure I'm lucky. Who wouldn't consider it an honor to have known Jacob Ruppert? Also, the builder of baseball's greatest empire, Ed Barrow? To have spent six years with that wonderful little fellow, Miller Huggins? Then to have spent the next nine years with that outstanding leader, that smart student of psychology, the best manager in baseball today, Joe McCarthy. ``Sure I'm lucky. When the New York Giants, a team you would give your right arm to beat, and vice versa, sends you gifts, that's something. When everybody down to the groundkeepers and those boys in white coats remember you with trophies, that's something. When you have a wonderful mother-in-law who takes sides with you in squabbles with her own daughter, that's something. When you have a father and a mother who work all their lives so you can have an education and build your body, it's a blessing. When you have a wife who has been a tower of strength and shown more courage than you dreamed existed, that's the finest I know. So I close in saying that I may have had a tough break, but I have an awful lot to live for.'' Now, Mr. Speaker, I will close by saying that we must do all we can to find a cure for a disease that still ravages the lives of its victims. I am proud that our colleagues in the House of Representatives are honoring a true hero in Lou Gehrig and affirming its commitment to overcoming the scourge of ALS for Lou Gehrig and every person who has fought this terrible disease.

Mr. ENGEL. Further reserving the right to object, Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from Nebraska.

Mr. ENGEL. Mr. Speaker, I withdraw my reservation of objection.

Mr. ENGEL

Mr. ENGEL. Mr. Speaker, we celebrate the 150th anniversary of Mount Vernon, which officially started as a village in 1853 made up from five farms, but grew into perhaps the most densely populated city in the State of New York. It started as a fulfillment of that most typical of American dreams: home ownership. John Stevens, a merchant tailor from New York City, formed the Industrial Home Association to become the Village of Mount Vernon. When the IHA membership reached 1,000 dues payers, 1,017 to be exact, they bought the land of five farms consisting of some 369 acres at about $205 dollars an acre. Originally a part of the Town of Eastchester, the Village of Mount Vernon grew over the next four decades and in 1892 was chartered under the laws of the State of New York as an incorporated city. It grew by welcoming Baptists, Methodists, Dutch Reformed, and Catholic groups, as well as any others willing to settle there and contribute to the community. It has become a thriving community growing and flourishing in the shadow of New York City. John Stevens helped to initiate the dream that Mount Vernon has become and one that will continue to develop and prosper through the industry and vision of the people who inhabit this charming and wonderful city.

Mr. ENGEL

Mr. ENGEL. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor a woman who believes that every child, regardless of color, creed, economic status, or disability has the inherent right to receive a quality education. And it is because of this deeply held personal belief that Myra Kelly has dedicated her life to a career serving the children of her community. A lifelong New Yorker, Myra began her career as a teacher in Community School District 9. While there, she taught general elementary school, junior high school math and elementary special education. Myra then proceeded to spend the next 30 years of her professional career in the New York Department of Education. In this capacity, she acted as a school Psychologist in District 10 and was the Supervisor of Psychologists for District 11. While Myra has excelled in each of her professional positions and given of herself freely to every student, the most rewarding experience of her career was her work with children with severe emotional disabilities. Myra's dedication to education was also evident in her own life. And like all good teachers, she practiced what she preached. Ms. Kelly's academic credentials are truly impressive. She received both a Bachelors and a Masters degree from Lehman College, her Professional Diploma from the City College of New York, and a School District Administrator's credential from the College of New Rochelle. Except for her dissertation she has also completed all of her work for a Doctorate in the Learning, Language, and Literacy program at Fordham University. I hope that new teachers and school psychologists are inspired by Myra's dedication to her chosen career. The New York Department of Education will sorely miss her. I would like to join the New York Department of Education, her family and friends in thanking Myra for her years of service and wishing her congratulations on the occasion of her retirement.

Mr. ENGEL

Mr. ENGEL. Mr. Speaker, today another suicide bombing happened in Israel. Sixteen innocent people were murdered and more than 150 were injured. The terrorist group Hamas took credit for it and the cycle of violence continues. Mr. Speaker, homicide bombers, suicide bombers cannot be tolerated. Israel, as any other nation, must do everything it can to go after terrorists, to root out terrorism. As President Bush said, there are no good terrorists, there are only bad; and every nation has an obligation to protect its citizens and go after the terrorists. That is why it was so disheartening to hear President Bush say Israel's attempted attack on one of the biggest Hamas terrorists, Mr. Rantisi was not helpful. I do not know whether a nation ought to think about what is helpful or not when they are trying to protect their citizens. We in the United States went halfway around the world to destroy the Taliban in Afghanistan not because the Taliban committed crimes against us, but because the Taliban harbored al Qaeda, which committed heinous acts against us. If we are justified, and we are, in going halfway around the world to destroy terrorists, surely Israel is justified to do the same in her own backyard. After all, it was President Bush who said Osama bin Laden wanted dead or alive, and it was President Bush who talked about Saddam Hussein and his connections with terrorists. We went into Iraq and overthrew Saddam Hussein. Certainly Israel should be encouraged to go after terrorists, not discouraged to go after terrorists; and we should not set a double standard for Israel, we should set the same standard as we would set for ourselves. Last week there was an agreement to try to proceed on a so-called road map for peace in the Middle East, and all parties agreed that the Palestinian prime minister, the Israeli prime minister and President Bush all talked about going along the path to peace. During that time the prime minister of Israel has dismantled some of the settlements, has talked about having peace with the Palestinians. And what was the response on the Palestinian side? The three terrorist organizations, Hamas, the Palestinian Islamic Jihad, which is part of Arafat's Fattah network, and Hezbollah, all got together and took credit for the assassination of five Israeli soldiers. That was the Palestinian terrorists' answer to peace. The Palestinian prime minister, Machmoud Abbas, who said he would try to persuade the terrorists to have a cease-fire was not able to persuade them at all. In fact, they rejected his calls for a cease-fire. Machmoud Abbas, the Palestinian prime minister, then said he would not use force to try to get the terrorists to stop, he would only try to persuade them. I would say if Mr. Abbas, the Palestinian prime minister, is not going to attempt to use force to stop terrorists from committing terrorist acts, then Israel has the right to take matters into her own hands and to use force to stop terrorists from committing these heinous acts. After all, since Mr. Rantisi is one of the leaders of Hamas which kills innocent men, women, and children civilians, why should Mr. Rantisi think he is somehow immune to some kind of attacks on his life? It is very important that Israel, the United States, and all peace- loving countries in the world go after terrorism. And when nations go after terrorism, other nations should help them, not say that it is unhelpful for peace. Let us talk about the road map which everyone seems to be so ecstatic about. The road map will only work if and when the Palestinians decide if and when they are going to put an end to terror and not use terror as a negotiating tool, and the road map should be performance-based, not time-based. In other words, the Palestinians have to perform. They have to stop terrorism before they get their state. If they do not stop terrorism, they do not get their state. They should not merrily march along to statehood in 2004 and 2005 unless they end terrorism. Mr. Speaker, I think Israel should be commended for going after terrorists. I think all nations should do the same.

Mr. ENGEL

Mr. ENGEL. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor a woman who believes that public education is the foundation of a prosperous and democratic society. Michele Miller always wanted to be a teacher. As a student at Spring Valley Senior High School, Michele was a member of Future Teachers of America. Graduating from the State University of New York at Albany, she attended Hunter College for a masters degree in education with a concentration in social studies. A lifelong New Yorker, Michele has spent her entire career teaching the students of Pearl River, New York. She has spent 33 years teaching social studies at the Pearl River School District's Middle School and High School. Michele began as a student teacher in Pearl River when Lyndon Johnson was the President of the United States in the fall of 1968. She will end her career this month, eight Presidents later and after providing thousands of her students with the knowledge and appreciation of the democratic values that underpin our great country. Michele is the epitome of a great teacher. Although she's known throughout Pearl River as one of the toughest teachers around, she's also known for being caring, compassionate, and funny. She thrives on being in the classroom, the students have always kept her youthful in both appearance and in personality. Moreover, she constantly learns from her students and hopes that they leave the classroom every day knowing a bit more about the world. I hope that new teachers are inspired by Michele's dedication to teaching. She will be sorely missed by the Pearl River School District. I would like to join the Pearl River community, her family and friends in thanking Michele for her years of service and wishing her congratulations on the occasion of her retirement.

Mr. ENGEL

Mr. ENGEL. Mr. Speaker, again two stories in the paper say it all. The Washington Post says three successive tax cuts pushed by President Bush will leave middle-income taxpayers paying a greater share of all Federal taxes by the end of the decade, according to new analyses of the Bush administration's tax policies. As critics of the tax cuts in 2001, 2002, and 2003 have noted, the very wealthiest Americans, those earning $337,000 or more per year, will be the greatest beneficiaries of the changes in the Nation's tax laws. Also, we read in the New York Times today that the House will not consider a Democratic measure to provide an increased tax credit to 6.5 million low-income families who did not receive it in the new tax law. So the policies of the Republican majority here are becoming increasingly clear. They are fiscally irresponsible, the borrow-and- spend Republican majority. Let us see what they have done with the tax cuts: Helped the rich, hurt the middle class and poor, and stuck our children and grandchildren with the bill. Deficits as far as the eye can see. ``Let's enjoy the tax cuts now because our children and our grandchildren will be paying the bill.'' This is morally unconscionable and should be changed.

Mr. ENGEL

Mr. ENGEL. Mr. Speaker, we have seen many Democrats here speaking out of a sense of frustration. The bill we voted on today is a bill of tremendous importance, and yet all we had was one hour to debate this bill. Many of us that wanted to come down and participate in the debate could not even get one minute's time to debate this bill because the Republicans kept a closed rule, which said there will be one hour of debate, 30 minutes for each side, and no substitute allowed. I did a little calculation. There are 435 Members of the House of Representatives in this country, and if every one of us wanted to speak on this bill with only one minute total time, that would leave each of us a grand total of eight seconds each to speak on a bill worth billions and billions and trillions of dollars. Surely our Founding Fathers are rolling in their graves when they see how the Republican majority has turned this House into an undemocratic institution where the people who are elected by the people cannot even have the ability to speak their minds. We are fighting for democracy in Iraq, but we will not allow democracy on the floor of the United States House of Representatives. For shame. The average American is not stupid. In fact, the average American is very smart. The average American knows that when he or she has a budget they must live within their budget. They make a certain amount of money. They take home that money. They have to pay their bills with that money, and they know that they cannot week in and week out spend more than they take in. A person can do it for a while. They can charge everything on their credit card for a while. They can keep paying minimums on their credit card for a while, but sooner or later the bubble is going to burst. That is what we are doing here in the United States Congress. My Republican friends talk a good game about balancing the budget and a balanced budget amendment, and by the way, the balanced budget amendment passed here in the House several years ago, failed by one vote in the Senate, and the Republicans, despite having the majority in both Houses, have not brought it up again. The fact of the matter is that when Bill Clinton left office we had a surplus of $200 billion per year, and now in two short years we have a deficit of $400 billion per year, and these tax cuts, mainly for the wealthy, will dig us deeper and deeper and deeper in a hole. We are leaving our children and our grandchildren with a legacy of debt. We are having an orgy now of tax cuts and saying to our future generations, you pay the bill. We are going to walk away. We are going to do things that are easy. Everyone likes a tax cut. Of course, a majority of people favor the tax cuts. Everyone wants more money in their pockets, but what are we doing to our children and our grandchildren and the fiscal responsibility of this country? The Republican leadership, the Republican majority here wants to do this, in my estimation, deliberately. The ancillary benefits, giving their rich friends a tax cut, is only an ancillary benefit. They want to starve this government and make it impossible for there to be any kind of program, entitlement programs like Social Security or Medicare or Medicaid or education, for our children. They do not want it so a balanced budget goes out the window. Deficits and deficits. Let us take a quote from the gentleman from Texas (Mr. DeLay), the current majority leader. This is what he said in 1995, ``By the year 2002, we can have a Federal Government with a balanced budget or we can continue down the present path toward total fiscal catastrophe.'' That was in 1995. I ask the majority leader and the people on the other side of the aisle, what was true in 1995 is certainly true in 2003. We cannot continue to run these deficits. We cannot continue to have this kind of fiscal irresponsibility. The borrow and spend Republicans cannot continue to lead this country down a path of fiscal irresponsibility. It is a disgrace that we now have to take to the floor of the House after the bill has been voted on because we could not get the time to talk before.