Eliot Engel

Mr. ENGEL

Mr. ENGEL. Mr. Speaker, in light of yet another suicide bombing in Israel yesterday, I think it is incumbent that all of us reflect on the targeting of innocent civilians in a reign of terror carried out by the Palestinian Authority and other organizations under its control. We can no longer, if we ever could, stand idly by and allow these suicide bombings targeting innocent civilians to take place time and time and time again, and every time say that Mr. Arafat has to do more to prevent terrorism, Mr. Arafat has to show that he can step up to the plate and combat terrorism. At what point do we simply say enough is enough and move beyond Mr. Arafat? I think that point has come and gone a long time ago. President Bush is supposedly going to make a statement within the next few days talking about a so-called ``provisional'' Palestinian state. I would say to the President and to my colleagues and to everyone concerned that there ought to be no declaration of any kind of Palestinian state, provisional or otherwise, as long as Palestinians continue their reign of terror against innocent civilians. In a civilized world, supposedly, there should be no talk of rewarding terror with a state, provisional or otherwise. When President Bush several months ago said to the world, you are either with us or you are with the terrorists, that was very clear. Black and white, no shades of gray. And, if it applies to us, it should apply to Israel and every other nation on this Earth. If we are justified, and we are, going halfway around the world to destroy the Taliban in Afghanistan because of terrorist attacks upon our Nation, and let me say as a New Yorker and as someone who works in Washington, no one feels the pain of those attacks more than I do, if we are going halfway around the world to root out terrorism in Afghanistan, then Israel should be allowed to do the same thing in her own backyard. Mr. Arafat has shown that he is a terrorist, that he has never grown out of being a terrorist, that he always has been a terrorist, and he will continue to be a terrorist. Therefore, I think that this country should not talk with him, should not recognize him, should not discuss anything with him; and we ought to tell the Palestinians, come back and talk to us when you get some responsible leadership. Come back and talk to us when there are reforms in your leadership. Come back and talk to us when you have a leadership that does not use terror against innocent civilians as a negotiating tool. This is something that cannot be tolerated. I do not want to hear about grievances on both sides or perceived hurts. It is never an excuse for terrorism against innocent civilians. As to this notion put forward in some of the Palestinians corridors that if only Israel would withdraw, everything would be wonderful, there would not be a problem, and peace would reign supreme, the fact of the matter is that 21 months ago Israel agreed to withdraw. There was a plan that was being negotiated which would have given the Palestinians a state of their own, on 100 percent of Gaza and 97 percent of the West Bank, with billions of dollars of aid, a state of their own, the end of the occupation. Israel said yes, the United States said yes, the Palestinians said no. Yasser Arafat rejected it and walked away, did not come forth with a counterproposal, did not stay and negotiate a proposal that might be better for him. He said no, and unleashed the intifada, unleashed terrorism and unleashed violence. That ought not to be rewarded. I would hope that we would make it very clear again that the time has come to say good-bye to Mr. Arafat. It is not a matter of whether he can control the terrorism, whether he wants to do so. He is the terrorist. Three-quarters of the terrorist attacks against Israel during the past 21 months have come from organizations that he controls. The al-Aksa Brigade, the al-Aksa so-called Martyr's Brigades, which our State Department has declared as a terrorist organization, is under Mr. Arafat's control. They have taken credit for the bombings. Tanzeen, 4/17, the Fata Umbrella Group. They have been responsible for three-quarters of the bombings. So it is time for us to say good-bye to Mr. Arafat. It is time to tell the Palestinians, no state, unless you have responsibility, unless you show responsible leadership; and it is time for the United States to continue to stand shoulder to shoulder with the people of Israel in fighting the terrorism around the world.

Mr. ENGEL

Mr. ENGEL. Mr. Speaker, I thank my friend for yielding me time. Mr. Speaker, let us call this bill for what it is. Unfortunately, it is another Republican raid on Social Security and Medicare. This bill will raid the Social Security and Medicare trust funds at the exact moment the baby-boomers begin to retire. When increased interest on the debt is factored in, this bill will cost nearly three-quarters of a trillion dollars in the decade after 2012, at the same time when Social Security must absorb a huge increase in retirees. In the year 2012 alone, this bill will cost $56 billion, and the cost just keeps growing from there. This bill begins at the very top and takes a decade to bring relief to small businesses and family farms at the bottom. Most of the benefits of estate tax repeal go to the wealthiest 1 percent of people, a number that is now running at 23,000 estates per year. While this bill repeals the estate tax for the wealthiest first, it provides no immediate relief for small family-owned estates, which are the ones most in need. This bill is really a disaster. People need to pay their fair share. We need not to take care of the wealthiest people, we need to take care of the people with the family farms and others. We ought not to be raiding Social Security and Medicare. I oppose the rule and I oppose the bill.

Mr. ENGEL

Mr. ENGEL. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of the resolution, in support of Israel, our best ally, with whom we have shared values; freedom of the press, freedom of speech. Israel is an outpost of western democracy in a sea of dictatorships and tyrants. If we, rightfully so, can go halfway around the world to combat terror in Afghanistan, surely Israel should be allowed to do the same in her own back yard. For those who say the timing is wrong, the timing is right. Arafat has to know now that we will not allow him to use terror as a negotiating tool. The terror that has come out with the suicide bombers, three-quarters of those are affiliated with Arafat's Fateh group. We have to be consistent in the fight of against terrorism. No double standard. Because if we have a double standard, it undermines our fight against terrorism, and there is no moral equivalency between terrorism and self-defense. People who say we should be more balanced, why is the rest of the world not balanced? The Arabs will understand and will make peace when they know that our bond with Israel is unshakable. And this resolution goes a long way in solidifying that bond. We must vote ``yes.'' Vote against terror, vote ``yes'' on the resolution.

Mr. ENGEL

Mr. ENGEL. Mr. Speaker, for every American, September 11th, 2001 means one thing. It is a day that we, as a Nation, suffered as we had never before. As I watched the events of the day unfold from my home in the Bronx, like most, I thought of my family and their safety. Some others though, had thoughts of only one thing--how can I help. Hundreds of firefighters, police officers, and emergency medical personnel and, yes, construction workers, went running to what was left of the Twin Towers to try and save lives. We should all feel proud of the many men and women who went to Ground Zero, such as the Iron Workers. In fact, it was Iron Workers who had one of the toughest jobs. These men and women were charged with sifting through that nightmare and they did so with great dignity and compassion for those who lost their lives and their families. As I have watched this amazing transformation, I have swelled with pride, for I have a special place in my heart for these men and women who are Iron Workers, because so was my father. Today, I have the honor of recognizing two great trade union leaders, Ed Walsh and Robert Ledwith, Both of these men have dedicated their lives to their families, their communities, and their unions. Just last month, Ed Walsh became the President of the Iron Workers District Council of Greater New York and Vicinity. Ed Walsh started his career with the Iron Workers in 1968 working as an apprentice for three years. He became a journeyman Ironworker union member in 1971. Through three decades he moved up the ranks until becoming the Business Manager of Local 40 in 1995. In March 2002, Ed was appointed as General Organizer for the International and became President of the Iron Workers District Council of Greater New York and Vicinity, an affiliate of the International Association of Bridge, Structural, Ornamental and Reinforcing Iron Workers. Ed resides in Mamaroneck, New York with his wife Kathy. He has two sons, Christopher and Kevin. Kevin has decided to follow his father's footsteps and is currently an apprentice with Iron Workers Local 40. Ed Walsh comes from a union tradition. His father and brothers John and Bob are union ironworkers, his brother Jim is a retired union carpenter, and his brother is a retired New York City Police Officer. Bob Ledwith serves as Business Manager and Financial Secretary- Treasurer of the Metallic Lathers Union and Reinforcing Iron Workers Local 46. Bob Ledwith was elected as Business Agent for the Metallic Lathers Union and Reinforcing Iron Workers Local 46 in June 1981. He was elected Business Manager and Financial Secretary-Treasurer in 1999 and continues to serve in that capacity today. Through the haze and the numbness caused by September 11th, something was shining through. The American Spirit. The men and women of the Iron Workers are the embodiment of that Spirit. It gave us all a sense of hope and a sense of pride.

Mr. ENGEL

Mr. ENGEL. Mr. Speaker, Al Agovino is a man who knows how to give of himself. He started, officially, in the Pacific Theater with Motor Torpedo Squadron 36 and was awarded five Battle Stars. Back home in the Bronx he has also been generous with his time and ability. At St. Benedict's Church he has been President of the Holy Name Society and Co-ordinator of the Church Ushers and of the Blood Bank. He has been Grand Knight of St. Luke's Council of the Knights of Columbus. He has served on the New York State Autism Advisory Council. He also serves on the Bronx Consumer Council. He has also served on the Bronx Developmental Disabilities Service Office Parent Association, on the Human Resources Administration Advisory Council, and on the New York State Commission on Quality Care for the Mentally Disabled Advisory Council. If that wasn't enough he has been a vital advocate for parents and for all people with developmental disabilities and their families. He has served on the Board of the Association for the Help of Retarded Children and in that capacity rarely missed a meeting in over twenty years. His presence has made AHRC a force in its field. More immediately, I rise today to speak of Mr. Agovino with some sadness, for he is retiring from the Board of Visitors Association after 25 years of constant and devoted service. The Board oversees conditions and the quality of life offered to patients in the State Psychiatric and Developmental Centers. While on the Board, to which he was named by the Governor and confirmed by the State Senate, he also served on many committees including Government Relations and Geriatric, and was also President of the New York State Association of Boards of Visitors. His leaving will leave a hole in our hearts and our abilities. Al and his wife Vera have been married for 55 years. They had six children who in turn gave them six grandchildren. I offer him my sincerest congratulations for all he has done, and it is a lot. I join with the countless others he knows and has helped in wishing the very best in all that he does. He has made the world a better place.

Mr. ENGEL

Mr. ENGEL. Mr. Speaker, the future of our country is indeed our children and a man being honored tonight, James E. Robinson, is someone who believes that helping them is the highest calling. James Robinson is a founder of the Martin Luther King, Jr. Youth Adults Club. In that capacity for the past 11 years he has worked with and inspired more than 500 young people. Mr. Robinson also served as the Head Coach for baseball and junior varsity basketball at the Alexander Hamilton High School in Elmsford while also serving as Assistant Varsity Basketball Coach there. He has also worked with the young people Mercy College while serving as Assistant Men's Basketball Coach. But his community service is not limited to coaching our youth. He has served on numerous committees including the United Way Youth Advisory Council, the Westchester Community College Advisory Council, the Annual Martin Luther King, Jr. Breakfast Committee, and the African American Men of Westchester where he is chair of the Youth Committee. Mr. Robinson is also co-founder and President of Fathers and Children Together (FACT), an organization of more than 70 fathers from nine different locales in Westchester. He lives in Greenburgh with his wife, Yolanda, and their three children, Nicole, 8, and twins Jasmine and James, Jr. 6. He is someone whose gifts will keep giving to the community for many generations. For every child he helps will certainly go one to help others of their own generation and the next. We can truly say that he has made his community a better place, and for this we are all grateful.

Mr. ENGEL

Mr. ENGEL. Mr. Speaker, to have a true community we must have a safe community. During the 1990s the rate of crime has been dropping to rates we haven't seen since the 1960s. For this we can thank the police officers of our communities who work hard and dangerous jobs so our lives will not be dangerous. One such police officer is Larry Brown of the White Plains Police Department. He graduated from White Plains High School, where he excelled at track and field. He attended Bradley University and then worked at what is now Westchester Medical Center. After a short stint as a Corrections Officer he joined the police department twenty years ago. Since then he has enjoyed a varied career in law enforcement working in the Detective Division, Records Division, and Warrants Division. He has done background checks and has assisted in recruitment for the Department. He currently works in the Patrol Division. He has also attended a number of training courses to better enable him to perform as a police officer. He has also received a number of citations and acknowledgments for his work. For the past four years he has served as President of the Westchester/Rockland Guardians and represents that worthy organization at national conferences. He is a member of the Union Baptist Church and the proud father of Komaphi, Shaahid, a sergeant in the U.S. Marine Corps, Allana, and Christina. For his good work and leadership in the law enforcement community, we all owe him our thanks and I am proud to be able to honor him in this small way.

Mr. ENGEL

Mr. ENGEL. Mr. Speaker, since he arrived in Mount Vernon from Charleston, South Carolina 30 years ago, Reginald Lafayette has held so many responsible positions in the City we can rightly ask; Could we have gotten along without him. He started in politics as a Democratic District Leader, a position he still holds. Some of the other positions he holds or has held are the Democratic Chairman of the City of Mount Vernon, member of the Westchester County Democratic Executive Committee, member of the Black Democrats of Westchester, former member of the United States Selective Service Board No. 104, former member of the Mount Vernon Postal Service Board, former Executive Vice President of the Mount Vernon Chapter of the N.A.A.C.P., former Treasurer of the Independent Citizen's League, former President of the Mount Vernon Lions Club, former member of the Board of Directors of the Westchester Opportunity Program, and former member of the Mount Vernon Day Care Center. He did all of this while working full time for Met Life for his first nine years in Mount Vernon. Besides all of the above, he served as Commissioner of Human Rights, as the City of Mount Vernon Deputy Controller for 14 years, and is a member of the Westchester County Board of Elections and the New York State Election Commissioner Association. He has worked hard to make his community a better place to live and he has succeeded admirably, I and many others in Mount Vernon have long admired his diligence and his ability to achieve results. We are all thankful that we have Reggie among us. I am thankful to know him and to be his friend.

Mr. ENGEL

Mr. ENGEL. Mr. Speaker, the Carter G. Woodson Award of Mercy College has been given annually since 1986 to notable contributors to African American life and history. This year the awardee is Mary A. Gaines, the executive director of the Nepperhan Community Center. I am proud to consider her a good friend. Early in her life Mary knew she wanted to work with young people. She came to Yonkers from North Carolina and studied at Mercy College and Westchester Community College. Since 1968 she has served in various capacities in the Nepperhan Community Center, an organization serving a wide range of community needs. Indeed Mary has touched the lives of hundreds, if not thousands of young people in her time at the Community Center. During that same period of time the Nepperhan Community Center grew from a small, cramped facility to one occupying a renovated and spacious building. The youth programs have become much more solidly funded and the number of programs serving the community has grown to include the Adolescent Pregnancy Prevention Service Program, the Independent Living Skills/ Careers for Youth, the Youth Communications Network, Act for Youth, the Yonkers Success Training Academy, and the Drug Free Program, among many others. She has also served in other distinguished organizations such as the United Way of Yonkers, the Black Women's Political Caucus, the New York State Division for Youth Advisory Board, the Yonkers Community Development Agency Board, and many others. Needless to say she has received many awards for her good works. She attends the Mount Carmel Baptist Church, serving on its Missionary Society and Education Committee. She epitomizes the adage that if you want something done, ask a busy person to do it. She has worked for several generations of Yonkers youth, helping and guiding them with her knowledge and experience, and her love. If Yonkers is a better place, and it is, we can thank Mary Gaines, and those who share her dedication and devotion to making the lives of its people better. Congratulations Mary, I'm proud to know you and Yonkers is fortunate to have you.

Mr. ENGEL

Mr. ENGEL. Mr. Speaker, Social Security benefits have become, since their inception, a mainstay of America's elderly. The men and women who work in the Social Security Administration are responsible for seeing that our elderly and dependents get the benefits they have earned through a lifetime of work. One such man is Gerard Langlais, the Manager of the East Bronx District Office, who is now retiring so he can collect his Social Security benefits. And he has earned them. He joined the Social Security Administration in 1961 as a claim representative in Poughkeepsie. Three years later he was promoted to Field Representative and four years later promoted again to Operations Supervisor at the Flatbush District Office. In 1970 he became an Assistant District Manager, also in Brooklyn. Three years later he was promoted to his present position, where he has served honorably and well for the past 29 years. Mr. Langlais was born in Maine, graduated from Siena College, and served as a Seabee in the U.S. Navy for two years where he operated and designed construction equipment. He and his wife Toni live in Yonkers. Mr. Langlais has served the people of America in their government for 41 years. It is people like him who make our society work. I congratulate him and thank him for the diligence and dedication he has done, work that has made the lives of so many of our citizens better.

Mr. ENGEL

Mr. ENGEL. Mr. Speaker, before I begin my remarks, I just want to call attention to the fact that I have submitted into the Record paraphernalia about today's National Day of Silence. I also, before I begin, want to comment on some of the things that my colleague, the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Paul), mentioned, who seems to advocate a foreign policy for the United States of isolationism. I had thought that we were way beyond that. He sounds like the people pre- 1941 and pre-Pearl Harbor who were talking about isolationism, and as a result, the United States entered the war rather late, and we suffered through Pearl Harbor. After September 11, I would hardly think that anybody who is serious would advocate isolationism. We do not live in a vacuum. Today's world is closer than ever before, and I think as leaders of the free world we have a responsibility, and that responsibility means that we are engaged. I think that his comment about somehow the United States supports Israel because of domestic political pressure is absolutely ridiculous. The United States supports Israel because the U.S. and Israel have shared values, common values: democracy. Israel is the only democracy in the Middle East, and that has a major effect on support for Israel in this country from Christian clergy and all clergy and average citizens alike, because we share democratic values. I want to talk a little bit about the fight against terrorism and what is happening in the Middle East. The fight against terrorism I believe has to be consistent. If we go halfway around the world, rightfully so, to Afghanistan to root out terrorist cells, I believe that we have no business criticizing Israel for attempting to do the same thing in her own backyard. We need to be consistent. We went after the Taliban in Afghanistan, and again, rightfully so, because they were harboring terrorists. We went after them because they were harboring al-Qaeda. Well, in the Middle East, Yasser Arafat is not only harboring terrorists, he is the terrorist. He is akin to Osama bin Laden. Three-quarters of the terrorist attacks by the suicide bombers carried out in Israel in the past several months have been from groups directly under Yasser Arafat's control: the al-Aqsa Brigade, 4/17, Tanzime. They are all part of Fatah, the umbrella group that Yasser Arafat controls. So I would like to ask the question: If we do not negotiate with terrorists, why should we force the Israelis to do the same? President Bush put it quite right when he said: You are either with us or you are with the terrorists. Again, I think we have to be consistent. There is no timetable for our operation in Afghanistan. The President has said we will be there until we finish the job. I do not believe we should pressure Israel into any kind of artificial timetable until they can finish the job of uprooting terror in their own backyard. The media would try to portray Israel as somehow the villain and the Palestinians as somehow the victims, but I would say, who has been perpetrating the suicide bombings? There have been 73, and to date, unfortunately, a 74th incident of a suicide bombing in Israel since negotiations broke down 18 or 19 months ago. And believe me, if we allow the suicide bombers to continue to use terrorism as a negotiating tool and we do not eradicate it now, it is only a matter of time before it is going to come to our shores, because if it is effective in the Middle East, it will be effective all around the world. We cannot allow that to happen. I draw the analogy to the United States and Canada. If there were terrorists, hypothetically, coming down over the Canadian border wreaking havoc in the United States, blowing themselves up and taking innocent civilians with them, and we repeatedly, hypothetically, asked the Canadian government to apprehend these terrorists and the Canadian government refused to do so, would we not feel justified to take matters into our own hands and send our troops over that border to get and capture those terrorists? Of course we would. Israel has repeatedly, and the United States has repeatedly, called on Yasser Arafat to rein in the terrorists, to rein in terrorism, but he has not done so because he is the terrorist himself and uses terrorism as a negotiating tool. So, from my way of thinking, Israel is absolutely justified to go in and root out terrorist cells in the Palestinian territories, just the way we are justified in going to Afghanistan to root out terrorist cells. Ari Fleischer, who is President Bush's press secretary, said today that the President, that Bush does not trust Arafat. If we do not trust Arafat, why is Colin Powell going to meet with him? Why are we elevating this man's status as somehow being a legitimate leader? Let us remember history: Just 18 or 19 months ago in Camp David, the Israelis were willing to accept a plan which gave Arafat 97 percent of what he was asking for: a Palestinian state with billions of dollars of foreign aid, on 97 percent of the lands. He walked away from it. The Israelis accepted it. Arafat walked away from it and did not offer a counterproposal, but walked away from it and then unleashed the Intifada, with terrorism and suicide bombings. So I think it is very, very important to have a perspective here and to understand what is really happening. So I think the United States, again, ought to be consistent. We ought to fight terrorism here and around the world, and support those who are fighting terrorism in their own backyard.

Mr. ENGEL

Mr. ENGEL. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to commend the efforts of thousands of students across the United States today. These students are participating in the National Day of Silence that calls attention to the treatment that lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender students encounter each and every day. In my home state of New York there are 167 schools participating. Since 1999, the Gay, Lesbian Straight Education Network has conducted surveys to document the experiences of LGBT students in high schools across our nation. In the 2001 survey, over 900 LGBT students were surveyed in 48 states and the District of Columbia. What they found should send a shiver up the spine of every member of the House of Representatives. The sad fact is that LGBT students face taunting, harassment, and physical violence. 85% of these students reported hearing homophobic remarks, such as ``faggot'' or ``dyke.'' 24% reported hearing such remarks from faculty or school staff, 65% reported being sexually harassed. And most disheartening, 42% were physically harassed because of their sexual orientation. Our children go to school for one reason! To learn! As a former educator, I can guarantee you that if a student is worried about being harassed or beaten up, he or she is not paying attention in class--he or she is not learning. We have an obligation to make sure that our schools are safe. Anything else is a failure on our part as a Congress and as a society. The students participating in today's National Day of Silence deserve our strong support. They are taking a stand for themselves, their families, and their friends. Schools, such as the Horace Mann School and Yonkers Middle High School, are leading the way in teaching our children to respect each other, to appreciate differences, and to ensure that all our children have the opportunity for a safe and fruitful education. National Day of Silence is sponsored by the Gay, Lesbian, Straight Education Network and the United States Student Association. I want to congratulate these organizations and the hundreds of schools and thousands of students for a job well done.

Mr. ENGEL

Mr. ENGEL. Mr. Speaker, as we speak here today, Vice President Cheney and General Zinni are both in the Middle East trying to help in the peace efforts. I think it is very important, though, to put things in perspective as the fights and the clashing between the Palestinians and the Israelis continue. For a number of months now, many months, there has been the question of what is Arafat doing to stop terrorism and can Arafat actually stop terrorism? Is he able to do it and does he want to do it? I would like to call the attention of my colleagues to an article last week that appeared in USA Today, and it is right here, blown up, and it says, ``Terrorist says orders come from Arafat. Al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigade leader says group is integral to Palestinian chief's Fatah.'' I think it has been very, very clear that not only is Yasir Arafat not the solution to stopping terrorism in the Middle East, he is the problem. He is the one that is sanctioning the terror in the Middle East. Three-quarters of the terrorist attacks directed against innocent Israeli civilians in the past several months all come from organizations to which Arafat is the leader, the Al-Aqsa Brigade, Fatah Tanzim, these are all groups under the control of Yasir Arafat. So it is not simply a matter of can he control terrorism and will he control it, it is simply a matter of he is the terrorist. He has never changed. Some people can change and grow, but he has never changed. Terrorism is used as a negotiating tool, and it is something that countries cannot tolerate. It does not matter what one feels about the Israeli response. It does not matter what one feels about how terror is being fought. President Bush put it best. He said, you are either with the terrorists or you are with us. We launched a campaign in Afghanistan to root out terrorist cells not because the Government of Afghanistan, the Taliban, as abhorrent as they are, were doing the terrorist attacks, but the Taliban were aiding and abetting al Qaeda, which was carrying out the terrorist attacks. Now, if we go to Afghanistan, and rightfully so, and I support everything President Bush has done and everything our brave men and women are doing over there, but if it is right for us to fight terrorism against innocent civilians, and as a New Yorker we all know the pain of the World Trade Center, and as someone who works in Washington, we all know the pain of what happened at the Pentagon, but if we have the right to fight terrorists on the other side of the world, surely Israel has the right to fight terrorism right in their own back yard. Repeatedly, Arafat has been asked to curb terrorism. And again not only is he not doing it, according to this article, which is very accurate, he is directing the terrorist attacks. Now, I am glad Vice President Cheney has not met with Arafat. He is in the Middle East now and he said he would meet with Arafat under one condition, that the Palestinians need to embrace the Tenet plan. And what does the Tenet plan say? It simply says, stop the violence as a first step to negotiations. But the Palestinians, under Arafat, do not want to stop the violence; they want to use it as a negotiating tool. This has been a constant with them. Violence and terrorism against innocent civilians cannot be used as a negotiating tool, and it is never acceptable no matter what the grievances are. Blowing yourself up and taking 15 people with you, killing innocent kids at pizza shops and discotheques is not acceptable. And if it is not acceptable in New York or in Washington or Virginia, it is not acceptable in Tel Aviv or Jerusalem either. It is not acceptable anywhere in the world. So I think it is very, very important that we look and see what is happening in the Middle East, who is carrying out these terror attacks against innocent civilians. Now, I hope that when Vice President Cheney is going around to the capitals to try to line up U.S. support for whatever we wind up doing in Iraq, I think it is important that he is doing that, but I, frankly, do not think the security of innocent civilians in Israel should be sacrificed. And if the people in the Arab capitals are saying, well, you know, this Palestinian-Israeli question is a problem and we cannot get Arab support for any incursion in Iraq unless that ends, Israel should not be used as a sacrifice because we want Arab support for Iraq. Let us say the way it is. Arafat is the terrorist, he is the problem, he is not the solution.

Mr. ENGEL

Mr. ENGEL. Mr. Speaker, I rise to express my opposition to certification of Serbia to receive U.S. assistance. Belgrade has not met the conditions included in the law by Senator Mitch McConnell and does not deserve to be certified by President Bush. As my colleagues are aware, certification must take place by March 31, 2002. Until Serbia releases all of the Albanian prisoners under its control, stops funding parallel institutions in Bosnia and Kosova, protects minority rights and the rule of law, and fully cooperates with the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia, it should not be certified to receive assistance from the United States. While I look forward to the day when Belgrade is a constructive and cooperative player in the Balkans, the President must apply the standards Congress has laid down in law and deny certification. In support of this position I include a letter from Richard Lukaj, Chairman of the Board of the National Albanian American Council, in the Congressional Record. March 17, 2002. Dear Senator/Representative: On March 31, 2002, the United States Congress will consider Serbia's eligibility for continued U.S. donor assistance. The National Albanian American Council would like to share with you some of its concerns, as well as point out Serbia's failure to fulfill any of the conditions posed by Congress last year. According to Congress's decision, financial assistance to Serbia will continue after March 31, 2002 only if the President has made the determination and certification that Serbia is: Cooperating with the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia including access for investigators, the provision of documents, and the surrender and transfer of indictees or assistance in their apprehension; Taking steps to implement policies which reflect a respect for minority rights and the rule of law, including the release of political prisoners from Serbian jails and prisons, and Taking steps that are consistent with the Dayton Accords to end Serbian financial, political, security and other support which has served to maintain separate Republika Srpska institutions. A quick overview of these conditions indicates that Serbia and the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (FRY) have failed to comply with any of them, and moreover, they have engaged in additional actions that run counter to Congress' intent and the administration's efforts to bring peace and stability to the region. Cooperation with the International Criminal Tribunal The trial of former Yugoslav dictator Slobodan Milosevic at the ICTY raised the hopes of many in the Balkans that the victims of war crimes will finally see justice being served. However, while the new Serbian government extradited Milosevic to The Hague at the last moment in a clear attempt to get financial support, it is doing disappointingly little to cooperate with the ICTY in the arrest of other indicted war criminals. Just last month, the Tribunal's Chief Prosecutor, Carla Del Ponte, labeled Yugoslav president Vojislav Kostunica as the ``chief obstacle'' to cooperation and denounced his direct complicity in the efforts to protect Ratko Mladic, the Bosnian Serb general wanted by ICTY for masterminding and executing some of the most heinous crimes against humanity during the Bosnian war. Recently, the Serbian Prime Minister Zoran Djindjic emphatically stated that his government would make no efforts whatsoever to apprehend Mladic. In addition, four other Milosevic associates wanted for war crimes committed in Kosova remain free men and actively engage in high governmental or military positions. One of the indicted war criminals, Milan Milutinovic, maintains his post as president of Serbia, while Dragoljub Ojdanic, the fomer Chief of Staff of the Yugoslav Army, continues to hold a high ranking post within the Yugoslav Army. On March 9th, Kostunica's party, a key member of the ruling alliance, refused to endorse a draft law on cooperation with the UN Hague Tribunal. Moreover, both Kostunica and Djindjic, rather than seizing the opportunity presented by Milosevic's trial to initiate a debate within Serbia on the issue of war crimes, have instead made statements denouncing the Tribunal as the ``last hole on the flute,'' thus seriously undermining its legitimacy and credibility in the eyes of the Serbian public. These and additional facts are mentioned in the recently published human rights report by the U.S. Department of State. The report forthrightly notes that ``[w]ith the exception of the transfer of Slobodan Milosevic and a few other war criminals, the Government's cooperation with the Yugoslav War Crimes Tribunal (ICTY) decreased significantly during the year. [. . .] [A]t year's end, several indictees remained at liberty, and, in at least one case, still in an official position in Serbia.'' The report further states that the FRY government ``has been uncooperative in requests for documents regarding crimes committed by Serbs against other ethnic groups, and in arranging interviews with official and nongovernmental witnesses.'' Clearly, the post-Milosevic governments of Serbia and Yugoslavia are failing utterly in keeping their international commitments for cooperating with the ICTY. The Secretary of State should use the upcoming March 31 cut-off date for U.S. assistance to the FRY government to press for full cooperation by the FRY government with the ICTY. The administration, too, should signal to Belgrade and beyond that it values international justice, and overcome perceptions that it does not fully support the tribunal's work. Release of Albanian Political Prisoners from Jails and Prisons and the Rule of Law Despite Congress' unequivocal language and the pressure from the international community, Serbia continues to hold hostage 157 Kosovar Albanian prisoners, rounded up and transported to Serbia during the withdrawal of Serb forces from Kosova in 1999. These prisoners were tried in artificially created courts, tortured brutally, and forced to make false confessions under extreme duress. While President Kostunica frequently claims his respect for the rule of law, he has too easily overlooked many of the legal discrepancies involved in the cases of the Albanian prisoners. To date, Mr. Kostunica has overturned just two cases and this only after direct intervention by leading political figures of the international community. The recently published human rights report by the U.S. Department of State also has indicated Serbia's failure to adequately address the issue of these prisoners, alongside a host of other problems in its treatment of minority populations. We could not agree more with what Senator Helms stated in the floor debate last year: ``Each day Belgrade keeps people like Albin Kurti, Isljam Taci, Berisa Petrit, and Sulejman Bitici [Albanian political prisoners] locked behind bars is another day that Belgrade has continued the horrors and injustice of the Milosevic regime. And this is totally unacceptable.'' The United States Congress, as well as the international community, should condemn any attempt by the Serb and FRY authorities to continue to use these Albanian prisoners as hostages, should resist the temptation to equate them with ordinary convicted criminals, and should ask for their immediate and unconditional release. Furthermore, the reality of today's Serbia and FRY is very far from our country's notions of the rule of law. Aside rampant corruption and organized crime, the government and the justice system in Serbia and FRY not only are failing to bring about any resemblance of rule of law and justice in their country, but are engaged in systematic efforts to obstruct justice by destroying all evidence pertaining to war crimes issues. In the words of Natasa Kandic, a leading Serb Human Rights activist, even ``judges, prosecutors and police chiefs are destroying any remaining papers that might implicate them [for war crimes in Kosova], forging documents, and testing the strength of the wall of silence.'' For example, despite the concern expressed by Senator McConnell last year, the investigation into the murder of the three American brothers of Albanian descent from New York, cold bloodedly killed after the war and whose remains were found in a mass grave in Serbia, had not started as late as February 4, 2002 according to Ms. Kandic. Ironically, even Vojislav Sesclj, leader of the nationalist Serbian Radical Party has recently accused police generals Sreten Lukic and Goran Radosvljevic of ``initiating, organizing, transporting, and burying bodies of Kosovar Albanians in locations near Belgrade'' and accused the ``authorities for keeping quiet about it!'' Over 800 hundred bodies of Albanians found in mass graves in Serbia are under the supervision of the head of the Serb police since April, 2001. There has been no effort to return these bodies to the families in Kosova. As Ms. Kandic so poignantly writes `` [N]o more questions are asked in Serbia about mass graves, the people whose remains are buried in them, their names, how they died, who gave the orders, who carried them out, and who covered up the evidence.'' Instead, Serbia's own Milosevic is cheered by the public and politicians as a star in a basketball game. EndinG Serbian financial, political, security and other support for the maintenance of separate or parallel institutions in Bosnia as well as Kosova Although this letter is not focused on Serbia's or FRY's relations with Bosnia and Herzegovina, it is relevant to mention that instead of taking steps towards complying with this condition, Serbia and the FRY have been very obstructionist to the Dayton Peace Accords in a variety of ways. The FRY has never ratified the Accords and continues to finance the entire Republika Srpska Army (VRS) and security forces. Furthermore, VRS command and control structures tie directly into Yugoslav Army structures, violating Annex 1-A of the Dayton Peace Accords. On top of violating Dayton Peace Accords, Serbia and the FRY are in clear violation of the United Nations Security Council Resolution 1244. Belgrade continues to finance and maintain illegal parallel administrative, police, and security structures in Kosova. Paradoxically, a large quantity of the funds that supports these illegal parallel structures is drawn from international aid and potentially from assistance that is given by the United States. According to Deputy Premier Nebojsa Covic, Serbia has on its payroll as many as 29,800 people who illegally operate inside Kosova. The most visible example are the so called ``bridge- watchers'' in the town of Mitrovica who, in an all too clear attempt to partition this territory from the rest of Kosova, violently prevent the free movement of the Albanian population into their own homes as well as do not allow the Government of Kosova and the UNMIK representatives to establish and assert their authority in the northern part of the town. Covic himself has admitted that these troops operate under Belgrade's control and with Belgrade's direct financial support. Other actions or inactions that present a threat to the regional stability In addition to the failure to fulfill the conditions posed by the U.S. Congress, Belgrade continues to present a threat to the regional stability by refusing to take responsibility for the carnage and suffering its predecessors instigated in this last decade but instead choosing to continue fuel nationalistic and hate propaganda to their constituents, as well as by embarking in a foreign policy agenda that is a prelude of further destabilization. As it is clearly stated in a recent report by a well known international think tank (attached herein), in Serbia, the parliament, media, and even its religious institutions frequently serve as a setting and an instrument for the most blatant and prejudiced hate speeches particularly against Albanians, Jews, and other minority groups. While Yugoslav officials led by President Kostunica himself have firmly discouraged any efforts to openly and honestly face the past and tell the Serbian public the truth for the events of this past decade, Serbia's leaders, including Serbian Premier Zoran Djindjic and Deputy Premier Nebojsa Covic, have been all too willing to continue to refer to all Albanians as ``terrorists,'' just as Milosevic is doing in the Hague, in a clear attempt to exploit to their political advantage our country's tragedy of September 11 and raise discontent among America's politicians and public towards Albanians. This at a time when it is widely known, and recently confirmed by a Gallup poll, that together with Israel, Albanians are after September 11, as well as before, among the strongest supporters of the United States in the world, second only to the American people. Furthermore, Belgrade has set sail in a foreign policy agenda that is a prelude of further regional destabilization. There are clear indications that Belgrade and Skopje are forging anti-Albanian alliances with anti-Western character. For example, despite the efforts of the United States and the international community to discourage the selling of weapons to Skopje, according to Macedonian sources, Belgrade is the second biggest supplier of military aid after Ukraine. It is noteworthy that while the military structures of Albanians in Kosova, FYROM, and Southern Serbia have kept their promises and have demilitarized beyond the extent required by the international community, while the U.S. is contemplating a reduction of the U.S. forces in the region and has suggested the same for the military structures of the Republic of Albania, all of Albanian's neighbors are continuously beefing up their military arsenal, dangerously shifting the military balances in the area. Most importantly, in a clear provocation to the Kosovar Albanians and to the authority of the United Nations, last year Belgrade and Skopje signed an agreement that attempts to change Kosova's borders and gives away 2500 hectares (close to 6000 acres) of Kosova's land to FYROM. This move has been widely rejected by the Kosovar Albanian political leaders as well as the population at large. This agreement should not be endorsed or supported by the United States Congress and Administration as it creates the dangerous precedent of giving Belgrade the authority to give away Kosova's territory in complete disregard of the United Nations mandate over Kosova as well as against the will of Kosova's citizens. These actions do not contribute to peace and stability. On the contrary, they are designed to stir up tensions, provoke the Albanian population, and then present them as the source of instability in the region and thus justify FRY's actions and inactions and thereby divert attention from problems within the FRY and originating in Belgrade. Conclusion The failure of Serbia and FRY to fully cooperate with ICTY, the refusal to release the Albanian prisoners, its continued maintenance and support of illegal parallel structures inside Kosova, the unwillingness of Belgrade to openly face and denounce the calamity its predecessors have caused, the continued tolerance and active support for hate speech and similar mentality, the highly destabilizing and provocative actions in relation to its neighbors, all confirm that Belgrade continues to be a source of future tension and instability in the region and as such, it should not be rewarded by the United States Congress and the international community. Upon the fall of the Milosevic regime, Yugoslavia was readmitted to the United Nations and the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe. While in our opinion, such reinstatement was done hastily and without full guarantees of cooperation and compliance, Belgrade's further reintegration and the financial aid it receives from the United States and the rest of the world should be conditional upon at least the following: In relation with cooperation with ICTY the FRY should: (1) Transfer all indictees to The Hague, including those on active political or military duty as well as the retired officials. (2) Provide ICTY access to all relevant archives and documents. (3) Clearly and visibly change its policy of public denigration and dismissive attitude towards the ICTY and its legitimacy. (4) Provide information and assistance in tracing Milosevic's and other criminals'funds be them in Serbia or in illegal bank accounts in Greece or elsewhere. (5) Provide information on the discovery of other known mass graves located in Serbia. In relation with Kosova the FRY should: (1) Release all the remaining Kosovar Albanian prisoners. (2) Stop financing, training, and operating parallel security forces and counterintelligence personnel as well as parallel civilian administrative structures. (3) Support (and not hinder) the Kosovar Government and UNMIK efforts to assert their authority in the north of Kosova. (4) Stop all efforts to depict Albanians as ``terrorists'' but rather publicly admit their wrongdoing as an important good will effort towards reconciliation. (5) Retum to their families the bodies of the Albanians found in mass graves. In relation with its neighbors the FRY must demonstrate its commitment to regional peace and stability by: (1) Not hindering international community's efforts to sustain peace in FYROM. (2) Discontinuing to funnel and sell weapons to FYROM in a clear disregard of international community's will and policy (3) by bringing to an end its efforts to stir up tensions in the region by forging dubious alliances and signing and attempting to enforce provocative agreements. As the U.S. Administration and Congress assist the FRY in the quest for normalization, it must face--and act on--the reality that the FRY still causes significant regional instability and is not in compliance with the conditions established under the impeding March 31, 2002 deadline. No matter what actions the Yugoslav or Serbian government takes out of pragmatism in these remaining few weeks, we urge our government to insist on a clear and clean break of the current Yugoslav and Serb government from the policies and practices of its predecessor. It should do so by refusing to certify Serbia's eligibility for further U.S. assistance, by not extending the Most Favorite Nation status to FRY, and by insisting that all the above-listed conditions are fulfilled before FRY's efforts for further integration in the international community are endorsed. We as Albanian-Americans are looking forward to the time when Serbia will become a constructive player that contributes to the peaceful and harmonious development of Southeastern Europe. However, until that time comes, our Congress and the international community must avoid the temptation to bend the rules for Belgrade and must hold FRY to the same high standards that have been rightly required of other countries in the area. On behalf of the National Albanian American Council, Richard Lukaj, Chairman, Board of Trustees.

Mr. ENGEL

Mr. ENGEL. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Green) for yielding me time. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of this amendment. I strongly support the underlying bill, but we can always make improvements to legislation. Again, this is an example of the proponents of the bill trying to be fair with the legislation, trying to have balanced legislation. That may not be legislation that everyone agrees with 100 percent, but on balance it is good and it is fair and that is what this amendment is trying to do. Last year we not only installed a new President but a new Chair of the FCC. Michael Powell immediately impressed me when he said violators of telecommunications law, that he wanted the authority to hit them hard and hit them fast. We have that opportunity with this amendment to do just that. Why should we? The fact is that with any regulation when a fine is imposed it should be that it acts as a deterrent. But the present fines for violation of telecommunications law are low enough that paying them has been described as simply the cost of doing business. This amendment changes that. This amendment will increase the fines by a factor of ten. A $120,000-per-day fine is increased to $1 million per day. The $1.2 million cap for a violation is raised to $10 million for a violation. And for repeat offenders, the new higher limits are double. This will also expand the time in which the FCC has to bring an enforcement action against a violator from 1 to 2 years. Often we on the Subcommittee on Telecommunications and the Internet have been told that 1 year is just insufficient time for the FCC to properly investigate a potential violation. Again, this is an attempt to make this legislation balanced. It is why all my colleagues should support the underlying Tauzin-Dingell bill, and I urge my colleagues to support this amendment.

Mr. ENGEL

Mr. ENGEL. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Dingell), the dean of the House, for yielding me the time. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of the Tauzin-Dingell bill. Mr. Chairman, to paraphrase Charles Dickens, this is a tale of two cities, the cable and telephone industry. Ten years ago, these two industries had little to do with each other; but today, they are, thanks to technology, they are providing the exact same product, high- speed Internet access. One would think thus that when the government imposed regulations it would do so in the same manner, but that is the crux of this tale of two industries. One, the cable industry, provides these services unfettered by regulation, the way it should be, and I support this. The other, the telephone industry, is heavily regulated. We have a responsibility to ensure fairness in our regulations. Luckily, there will be great benefits realized as a result of this legislation. It is estimated that $100 billion will be spent upgrading the telephone networks. There is an enormous amount of labor involved in this task; and as a result, the AFL-CIO and the Communication Workers of America have endorsed this legislation. Small businesses will also benefit. The cost of a T-1 line can be as much as $1,500 per month. For a small business that is simply not an option, but a DSL line is about $50 per month. Certainly that is affordable for most small businesses, and that will allow them to finally join the e-commerce revolution. There will also be enormous benefits to bridging the digital divide. Our modern society is dependent upon information. The Internet is the greatest source of information ever created. Again, I urge a ``yes'' vote on this bill. It will bridge the digital divide and allow this kind of service to be for all Americans.

Mr. ENGEL

Mr. ENGEL. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this time. I oppose the amendment, and I urge all my colleagues to vote against it. I oppose all these poison pill amendments because they are simply designed to kill the bill. The American people demand campaign finance reform. They will not stand for the killing of this bill. This bill needs to pass as is so the Senate can pass it and we can avoid a conference which will solely be called to kill it. The American people are outraged at Enron. That is the impetus for many people switching over and supporting the bill. I have been here a good number of years now. It is very rare that we have a discharge petition, with a majority of Members of the House forcing a bill to come to the House floor. I am sorry it had to happen that way, but it happened that way because a majority of Members of this House want to see campaign finance reform and a majority of the American people want to see campaign finance reform. Mr. Chairman, we know there is too much money involved in these elections, and we know that soft money is probably the most egregious form. We need to pass this bill, and we need to kill all of the poison pill amendments. I urge a ``no'' vote on the amendment.

Mr. ENGEL

Mr. ENGEL. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in order to honor William (Bill) Hevert on the occasion of his retirement after 28 years of dedicated service to Bessemer Trust Ltd. Born in the Bronx on September 22, 1943, Bill graduated from Dewitt Clinton High School in June 1961. After graduating with a BA from City College of New York-Baruch School in 1965, Bill took a job with the Internal Revenue Service (IRS). In 1966 he joined the Medical Services Corps at Fort Meade in Laurel, Maryland where he received the Army Commendation Medal for service through January 1968 as a First Lieutenant. After finishing his service in the U.S. Armed Forces, Bill went back to the IRS for two years before he joined SD Leidersforf as an accountant. After two years at SD Leidersforf, Bill joined Bessemer. For most of his life, Bill lived in the Bronx where he was respected and admired by the community around him. His dedication has touched many others, including former President George H. W. Bush and the former First Lady Barbara Bush, who had the pleasure of working with Bill in the preparation of their own tax returns. Lewis Goldstein, a friend of Bill for over forty years, fondly recalls the many holiday celebrations they shared and the many trips to places such as Palisades Amusement Park and the Bronx Zoo. He also recalls many summers spent at Rockaway where Bill and his family rented a bungalow for many years. After retiring from Bessemer, Bill plans on spending time in New York as well as Florida. He also plans on traveling extensively with his partner, Larry Bartelsen, who is also retiring. Bill and Larry hope to use their new free time to enjoy the things they love, including the New York Philharmonic, the Metropolitan and New York City Operas, theater and dining out. I would like to congratulate both Bill and Larry and wish them all the best in their retirement.

Mr. ENGEL

Mr. ENGEL. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this time, and I rise to engage in a colloquy with the chairman of the Committee on Education and the Workforce. I support the bill, I think the bill does what it says, and I appreciate all the hard work the chairman and ranking member have put into this bill. But I am extremely upset about one single provision that only affects New York City and Hawaii. The provision known as the County Provision divides New York City as no other Federal law does. New York City is one unique local education agency; yet this provision mandates that the city be treated as five separate LEAs when it comes to title I funding. The provision, which was added in 1994 to the ESEA, allows for Staten Island to receive almost 150 percent more in title I funds than the city-wide average. In fiscal year 2001, Staten Island received $1,718 for a title I student, whereas Brooklyn receive $811 and the Bronx, which I represent, receives only $552 per title I student. This provision undermines the very premise of the bill. We tried to eliminate this provision. We thought we had a compromise, but we did not quite reach it. Overall I support this bill. It ensures that all teachers are qualified to teach in their subject matter, supports teachers by giving them the resources they need to do their jobs, targets federal aid for bilingual and immigrant education to those students who need it the most, and expands after-school programs. A compromise that was reached by the conferees from New York would have held Staten Island harmless, keeping it at $1718 for the life of this authorization while allowing the per pupil allocations in the other boroughs to creep up, was rejected. I am extremely upset that while the title of this bill is ``No Child Left Behind'' the poor children in the Bronx will continue to be left behind. I would like to thank the Chairman, the gentleman from New York, Mr. Owens, and Senator Clinton for all of the work they have done to right this wrong. I look forward to working with them in the future to put an end to the County Provision. I would say to the chairman that this county provision needs to be revisited, and I would like his comments on it because I know he has publicly said they were going to make this more equitable.

Mr. ENGEL

Mr. ENGEL. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to the bill. The TPA bill does not require countries to implement any meaningful standards on labor rights. The bill simply requires that a country enforce its existing laws--however weak they may be. The TPA bill does not contain any meaningful protections for the environment. The bill does nothing to prevent countries from lowering their environmental standards to gain unfair trade advantages. The TPA bill is gross abdication of Congress' power. Congress may vote on a disapproval resolution, but only to certify that the Administration has ``failed to consult'' with Congress. Furthermore, unlike current Jackson-Vanik disapproval resolutions on trade, no floor vote is even allowed unless the disapproval resolution is first approved by the Ways and Means and Finance Committees--thereby bottling up the resolution in committee. The U.S. has now officially entered an economic recession, and millions of workers are suffering. Neither the Administration nor the Republican-controlled House has made any attempt to help unemployed workers find new jobs, get unemployment benefits, or maintain health coverage. Yet, here we stand again on the floor of the House--presented with legislation that helps huge companies at the expense of American workers. This bill is bad for America. Defeat this bill and let's get to work on helping American workers and the American economy.

Mr. ENGEL

Mr. ENGEL. I thank my colleague from California, the ranking member, for yielding me this time; and I also thank the chairman. I rise in very, very strong support of this resolution. I want to read a quote from President Bush right from his resolution, when he stated on September 20: ``Every Nation and every region now has a decision to make. Either you are with us or you are with the terrorists. From this day forward, any Nation that continues to harbor or support terrorism will be regarded by the United States as a hostile regime.'' Mr. Speaker, we are in Afghanistan going after the Taliban not because we think the Taliban plotted and planned the terrorist attacks on September 11, but because the Taliban harbored Osama bin Laden and al Qaeda, which planned these attacks. Well, if it is okay for the United States to knock off the Taliban because they did nothing to prevent terrorist acts and indeed harbored the terrorists, then Israel has the same right to go after Yasar Arafat because he has done nothing to stop terrorism. No one is saying he sits there and plans and plots the terrorist attacks, but he certainly does nothing to stop them. Either he cannot stop them, at which point what is the point in talking to him; or he refuses to stop them, which at the same point there is no sense talking to him. He has had time. My colleagues have mentioned where there were generous peace proposals, far beyond what any Israeli prime minister could have offered, and Yasar Arafat rejected the peace proposals of then Prime Minister Barak, and, worse than rejecting it, he walked away from the process. He did not make any counterproposal. He did not try to squeeze a few more concessions out of the Israelis. He walked away and he unleashed the intifada. As far as I am concerned, I am at my wits' end with Yasar Arafat, because he has not shown that he is a partner for peace. In order to be a partner for peace, it takes two to tango. As far as I am concerned right now, Israel is without a partner to negotiate peace. Now, Hamas, Islamic jihad, all the terrorists have had revolving-door justice from Mr. Arafat. He arrests them and lets them out the back door. The game is played time and time and time again. He will come here to Washington, and he will issue statements in English condemning terrorism. He does not issue those statements in Arabic. He does not call for peace with Israel in Arabic. He does not do anything to help the plight of his own people. In fact, Islamic jihad and Hamas represent at least as much a threat to him and his authority and his people as they do to Israel. We have to condemn terrorism with every force we have. And for the question before that was asked, what is in the best interest of the United States, the best interest of the United States is to go after terrorists wherever they rear their ugly head, in the United States, in Israel, or anywhere around the world. I wholeheartedly support this resolution and urge its passage.

Mr. ENGEL

Mr. ENGEL. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of the effort to provide the insurance industry a helping hand in the aftermath of the September 11th attacks. The insurance industry estimates that it will have approximately $60 billion in claims as a direct result of these events. And though the industry has the available capital to cover these claims now, payment on future claims are in grave doubt. In fact, many insurance companies are considering dropping this product altogether. The damage to our Nation's economy if that were to happen would be grievous. Construction companies and building owners would not be able to get adequate insurance, which in turn would prevent them from being able to get access to bonds to build and renovate their structures. Yet, what does the Majority bring to the floor today? Is it a bill that helps the insurance industry? Somewhat. What else does it do? The Republican majority is using this as a vehicle to advance one of its long held goals--tort reform. But, instead of having a full and just debate on tort reform, they are slipping provisions into a necessary and important bill. And what do they do with these provisions? They once again tell the American people that the majority party believes people with lots of money are more important that the average American. This bill prevents non-economic damages from being awarded. If someone loses a spouse in a terrorist attack, all one can expect is remuneration for lost wages. But what about the other losses--such as companionship, emotional support, and parenting? Sorry, the majority says, you are out of luck there. The insurance industry came to Congress with a sensible idea. It asked us to adopt a system similar to that of Britain by creating a terrorism reinsurance pool under which insurers voluntarily buy reinsurance coverage from the government, with pooled premiums being used to cover terrorism claims. Sounds pretty sensible to me. Instead, this bill creates a loan program--which might help, but certainly isn't the easiest or cleanest solution. If we can provide millions each year for the National Flood Insurance program, why can't we do the same for a terrorism reinsurance program. Finally, my colleagues, I would like to take this opportunity to mention one thing that has come to my attention regarding the clean up of ground zero. The construction companies doing the clean up and removal presently have no indemnity for their work. In fact, they are still working without a written contract. Their workers are being exposed to an extremely hazardous working environment. If we are to provide liability protections to the airline industry and the building owners, I urge my colleagues to move immediately to provide indemnity protections to the construction companies. If we don't, these companies are in danger of financial ruin and future incidents of terrorism will have a very different response from such companies. So, my colleagues, let's get serious about solving these problems. Vote no on this bill and support real reinsurance reform.

Mr. ENGEL

Mr. ENGEL. Mr. Speaker, I am disappointed today that we as a Congress are not debating any amendments relating to rebuilding New York. After the September 11th attacks, the NY delegation met with the President to discuss the city's needs for rebuilding. He promised then and there that our needs would be taken care of. Yet he's not living up to his promise. And we're letting him get away with it. At yesterday's press briefing, a reporter asked Ari Fleischer why the Administration was opposing any add-ons to the anti-terrorism bill. Fleischer's response was: Well, the Congress has entered into an agreement with the President, many weeks after September 11th, when people already understood the need to beef up on the domestic front, the need to provide more resources. And an agreement is an agreement is an agreement. Doesn't that statement apply to the agreement the President made regarding New York? Isn't an agreement an agreement an agreement? We must provide the funds New York needs to rebuild. We must remember this was not an attack on New York it was an attack on America. And we as Americans must help the City recover their costs directly related to the World Trade Center attacks. This rule does not allow an amendment to guarantee that New York receives at least the 20 billion that the President promised us, that the Congress voted for, and that the President signed into law. Therefore, I will vote against the rule and ask my colleagues to do the same.

Mr. ENGEL

Mr. ENGEL. Mr. Chairman, I thank my colleague from Westchester, which we share, and I thank the chairman and everyone else. Let us remember that the September 11 attacks were not attacks on New York, it was an attack on America, and we as Americans need to help New York City recover its costs directly connected to the World Trade Center attacks. I am a little bit bewildered to be here today to even be discussing this at all, because 2 days after September 11, I was part of a congressional delegation that met with President Bush at the White House, and the President unequivocally said to us the $20 billion is for New York, and the $20 billion is only the start, because $20 billion alone is not enough to repair all the damage that was done to New York. It was a floor, not a ceiling. And that money, the President told us, would be there. Now, I do not understand what the difficulty is. The money has been appropriated. It is a law. It has been passed. The money should be there. It should be a pot of money for New York to draw on, not something for New York to come back next year and ask for more, when there will be other regions of the country with needs. And to have to compete with those regions, that is not fair. When there are earthquakes and fires and floods, we all respond. We certainly need to respond to terrorism. And if the money is going to be there, why is it not there now, when this is the law that this Congress passed? Many, many people need our help. Four thousand people died. Special consideration needs to be given to hospitals and schools and businesses and our utilities. Verizon and ConEd, they need special help. They are precluded from getting money, and it is not fair to have them compete with everything else. They need to have a special waiver so they can get the $900 million that they are owed. Let us look at this amendment. This amendment provides unemployment insurance extension, emergency employment clearinghouse, workers' compensation, continuation of health care, COBRA, hospital costs, CDC safety screening program, NIH environmental assessment, disaster recovery programs, public television facilities, economic development, CDBG, FEMA. These are all things that New York needs. I implore my colleagues: We need the money now. This money was passed. It is not just a promise, it is a law. New York needs the help. Please help us now.

Mr. ENGEL

Mr. ENGEL. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the substitute for federalizing workers.