Eliot Engel

Mr. ENGEL

Mr. ENGEL. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me time. Mr. Speaker, what is going on this evening is really a cruel hoax on the American people. I would like to say to the Republican leadership, what are you afraid of? Why can we not have an open debate and real campaign finance law? Today's Roll Call has it right. It says, ``Angry Gingrich scheduled doomed reform votes.'' It says, ``Angry Gingrich scheduled doomed reform votes,'' and it says that ``Gingrich scheduled four reform votes under the suspension calendar, requiring a virtually impossible two- thirds majority to pass.'' The fact is the Republican leadership does not want campaign finance reform, so they will not give us real reform. Of all these bills, the anti-union bill is the worst bill. It is nothing more than a cheap political trick to try to punish labor unions for supporting Democratic candidates. It is a sham, and it ought to be exposed for what it is. The fact of the matter is that we need to have a discharge petition signed so that this Congress can vote on McCain-Feingold and Shays- Meehan and have a real debate on campaign finance reform. Let the majority of this Congress prevail. Let us have an up or down vote on campaign finance reform, not the sham being perpetrated this evening.

Mr. ENGEL

Mr. ENGEL. Mr. Speaker, I was necessarily absent during rollcall votes 76, 77, and 78. If present, I would have voted ``no'' on rollcall vote 76, ``aye'' on rollcall vote 77, and ``no'' on rollcall vote 78.

Mr. ENGEL

Mr. ENGEL. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me the time. Mr. Speaker, let us call this bill for what it is. It is shameful union-bashing. That is what it is. At least our Republican colleagues are consistent about being anti-worker, anti-union, anti-middle class persons. This amends the National Labor Relations Act to permit employers to refuse to hire a person who seeks employment in a nonunion firm to organize the workers into a union. This is an anti-union bill. It is a bill to restrict workers from organizing, make no mistake about it. It makes it much more difficult to organize workers for better pay benefits, punishes workers for their affiliations with organizations outside of the workplace, and infringes on their right to free speech. The President is going to veto this bill in its present form. The bill absolutely should be defeated. It is an absolute disgrace. It overturns the unanimous 1995 Supreme Court decision that said ``Employees or job applicants attempting to organize a workplace have the same employment protections as any other employee or applicant.'' This, again, is shameful union bashing. This body should reject it, and I urge its defeat.

Mr. ENGEL

Mr. ENGEL. Mr. Speaker, I thank my friend from Indiana, the ranking member of the committee, for yielding to me. Mr. Speaker, I rise to oppose the bill. Undoubtedly, there are some good things in the bill, and I really wish that I could vote for the bill. But this bill is mixing apples with oranges. The Mexico City language, the whole controversy over abortion, does not belong in this bill. It sullies the bill and takes away from the bill. As far as I am concerned, it is really improperly in the bill. It is an embarrassment that our country is the biggest deadbeat in the world of the United Nations. For the United Nations to function, we say that we are the leaders of the world, and we are the leaders of the world. We want to have influence on the world. We want to have influence. We encourage countries to turn to free market economies. We encourage countries to turn to democracy. Then what do we do? We do not pay our U.N. dues. So we owe a billion dollars. Then when we want to try to attempt to pay our dues, we attach it to abortion language and Mexico City language and other language to placate the lobby, the pro-life lobby. But, in reality, it does not make any sense to put it in this bill. If we want to build an international coalition against Saddam Hussein, if we want to build a coalition to march forward into democracy, then we really should not act irresponsibly. I believe this bill is acting irresponsibly by mixing apples with oranges and putting this abortion language in the bill. We all know the President is going to veto this bill in its present form. So we know, in essence, this is a game and a charade. I do not know why we have to play again. We played this game last year, it was an embarrassment to the world, and we are playing it again this year. I think the language pertaining to abortion ought to be struck out, and we ought to pass a bill that can go, pass a bill that will make us proud, pass a bill and act like the leaders of the world which we are. I cannot for the life of me understand why we continue to play these games. I do not doubt the sincerity of anybody on the other side, or of anybody else, but I think we ought not mix apples with oranges. This bill should be defeated.

Mr. ENGEL

Mr. ENGEL. Mr. Speaker, just yesterday I returned from the Balkans along with the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Moran) and the gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. Kelly). We had hoped to go into a region called Kosovo to monitor elections that were being held this past Sunday by the Albanians in the region of Kosovo who make up 90 percent, 2 million people, 90 percent of Kosovo, but have no political, economic or human rights whatsoever. I have been to Kosovo a number of times, and I can tell my colleagues the people, they are truly a people under oppression. We have witnessed during the past few weeks, Mr. Speaker, the wanton killings of men, women and children by the Serbian police forces going into villages and slaughtering people. It reminds us of what happened in Bosnia early on. If the West, particularly the United States, does not take strong action early on, we will wind up with another Bosnia in Kosovo. Kosovo again are people, Albanians, 90 percent ethnic Albanians, they have no rights, they have no political rights, they have no economic rights, unemployment is high, they cannot teach in the Albanian language. They are constantly oppressed, harassed, beaten and murdered. This Sunday they conducted their own elections. The Albanian leadership conducted their elections. Dr. Ibrahim Rugova was reelected as the president. They elected a parliament. This parliament and Dr. Rugova had been elected 6 years ago but the parliament had never been allowed to meet under threat of jail or exile. We had hoped to go there, but we were stopped at the border. First, we were denied visas here in Washington and then we were denied visas when we flew to Macedonia; in Skopje we could not get visas. We went to the border and we were stopped by the Serbian guards, who told us we could not get in. It is unprecedented that three Members of this Congress would be barred from visiting another country. This is the first time that I have been barred and the first time I have heard of Members of Congress being barred. But again it shows the arrogance of the leadership of the Serbian government, particularly President Milosevic, who has done the kind of atrocities in Europe that makes one remember the Nazi era, with the ethnic cleansing and the genocide being perpetrated first on the Bosnian Muslims, now on the Albanians, a constant pattern of harassment and killings and intimidation of the Albanians. The people of Kosovo I believe have the right to self-determination, the same self-determination we would want for ourselves or for all free peoples around the world. They have the absolute right to determine their destiny. They have the absolute right to determine their political future if they want to be an independent republic. I personally, this Congressman support them, and if they want to do whatever they want to do as a free people, they have the right to do so. The United States must very strongly stand with them. This House last week passed a resolution sponsored by the gentleman from New York (Mr. Gilman) and myself and lots of other people calling on the Serbs to end their oppression, condemning the Serbian oppression against the Albanian majority in Kosovo. The contact group is meeting tomorrow. Under the able leadership of Ambassador Gelbard and Secretary of State Albright they will be pushing for further sanctions on the Serbian regime. They have to understand that the people of Kosovo need to be free, the people of Kosovo will not tolerate and the people of the world will not tolerate the wanton slaughter of innocent men, women and children. They went into villages and just killed people. This is unheard of. We will not stand by and allow genocide and ethnic cleansing to continue. The gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. Kelly), the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Moran) and myself all took very, very strong stands. It was outrageous that we were not allowed to go into the border. We can only say that the Serbian leader must be hiding something because he does not want us to know the truth. To add insult to injury, while we were not allowed to go to the border, Mr. Milosevic's forces jailed six Americans on trumped-up phony charges, jailed them and put them in prison. Thankfully, those prisoners were finally released yesterday after our State Department intervened, after the three of us made very strong statements urging their release, and they are here in Washington and we are going to meet them in a little while to have dinner with them, and tomorrow morning we are calling a press conference to let the world know what we saw and the brutality that Milosevic is putting onto the Albanian people. We are going to have these Americans who were imprisoned against their will join us at the press conference. I would like to now yield to either one of my colleagues if they would like to comment. We are going to spend the next 15 minutes talking and comparing notes and letting the American people know precisely what is happening.

Mr. ENGEL

Mr. ENGEL. I thank the gentleman from Michigan for yielding to me. I was very privileged to also be part of the delegation which went with the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Lewis) to Alabama, to Birmingham, Montgomery and to Selma. It was as my colleagues have mentioned, a very, very moving experience. It was especially moving for me, Mr. Speaker. I represent a district, a very diverse district in New York which is about a third African-American, a third Hispanic and a third white. We know better than most people that people have to live together and people have to work together. I think there is nothing that better personifies that than the civil rights struggle. To my right is a picture of us in Montgomery, Alabama joining hands, locking hands and singing We Shall Overcome at the Southern Poverty Law Center. It was one of the very moving moments of the trip. Believe me, there were many, many moving moments at the trip, the feeling of working together and being together and joining in the struggle for civil rights together. Although people like the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Lewis), whom I refer to as a real American hero and the gentleman is a real American hero and it is an honor to be his colleague and to be in the House with him, the fact of the matter is we have come a long way in the United States in terms of race relations. But obviously we still have a long, long way to go. We can learn from the past. The past can help us learn and prepare for the future. To be down in Alabama at the 16th Street Baptist Church with those 4 little girls who were killed, one of those girls was my age when she was blown to bits. I remember it very, very vividly, hearing about it on the news. To be in the Dexter Avenue Baptist Church in Montgomery, where Dr. Martin Luther King was the minister, was really a feeling to behold. To go to Selma and to actually go over that bridge and to understand where history was made, on the highway past the spot where Viola Liuzzo was gunned down and to see all these other places that we read about, that we heard about, I was a little too young at the time to be able to make the trip down but I was old enough to understand what was happening. I remember the first time I ever went to the South in 1967 with two friends and saw the signs, the segregated signs, and could not believe that this was a part of America. I think what one of our colleagues said, which is the genius of John Lewis, is how can someone go through what he went through and emerge not only as a person who is not bitter but as a person who understands the necessity of trying to bring people together and who continues to do that more than any other person that I know. It was just an honor for me and also a tribute, I think, to the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Lewis) and also just to be a part of it, to understand what this means to the United States, the greatest country in the world, we are honored and we are privileged to serve in the United States Congress representing the greatest country in the world, but we learn again from our past. We know in the United States so many diverse people, coming together, living together, we are all Americans, we have different backgrounds. That is the genius and the greatness of our country, trying to bring people together, trying to accentuate the similarities in people rather than trying to accentuate our differences. That is what I try to do in my district in New York. I know the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Lewis) has been doing it for his entire life. I just want to say to my colleague from Georgia that it was an honor and a privilege being with him that weekend in Alabama. It is an honor and privilege serving with him. We need to all move forward and to continue to bring people in this great country together. The people who did this 33 years ago and 35 years ago and before that in the civil rights movement are truly the people who made this country better for all of us. Again, we still have a long way to go and we have to keep being resolute in saying that in this country we need to continue to have dialogue. I commend President Clinton for his dialogue on race. We need to learn from the past and we need to move forward for the future. I was honored and privileged to be part of the delegation. I look forward to a continuing dialogue in making race relations in our great country better and better and better.

Mr. ENGEL

Mr. ENGEL. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Florida for yielding me this time. Mr. Speaker, I was very happy to play a major role in writing this legislation. I want to thank my colleague from New York, the distinguished chairman of the committee, for introducing this legislation along with me. We have reached a very important time in the region of Kosova. There are 2 million ethnic Albanians living there under Serb occupation and tyranny. We saw the extent of that tyranny, as the chairman mentioned, a couple of weeks ago when women, children and innocent people were just wantonly killed by Serbian police using helicopters and artillery. It was something that we ought not to see in the year 1998. It brought us back to the beginning of Bosnia and Bosnia, of course, is when the West did not object strongly enough and did not take strong measures early enough that we saw the tragedy in Bosnia with thousands upon thousands of people being killed in ethnic cleansing and genocide. We can see the same thing happening in Kosova if the world does not take a strong stand now. This resolution, H. Con. Res. 235, is an attempt by this Congress to take a strong stand because we know that if the situation is going to be resolved in Kosova, it can only be resolved with the United States taking a very, very strong stand. I have been to Kosova a number of times. I intend to go again either later this week or later sometime this year. I think it is very, very important that the United States stand up strongly for the rights of people for self-determination and freedom all over the world. As chairman of the Albanian Issues Caucus, we have been talking, I have been talking about Kosova for many, many years and saying that a flare up like this could make Bosnia almost seem like a tea party, regrettably, compared to what could happen in Kosova. When you have 2 million ethnic Albanians, 90 percent of the population with no economic rights, with no political rights, with no human rights, you are bound to have a flare up. And for too many years Milosevic, leader of Serbia, has refused to even discuss these things with the Albanians in Kosova. He summarily took away their autonomy back in 1998. Some people are now saying let's go back to autonomy. Why would the Albanians want to go back into a situation that failed 10 years ago, that was summarily stolen from them 10 years ago. In the old Yugoslavia you had counterbalances to the Serbs. You had the Croats and the Bosnians and the Macedonians, the Slovenians, and it was not so dominated by the Serbs. Today in Serbia or Yugoslavia it is so Serb-dominated they have not given any freedoms at all to the Albanian citizens. Why would the Albanians want to go back into this situation? So we have elections scheduled for later on this week. It is a little bit uncertain as to whether those elections will be held, but the people of Kosova must be allowed to express their desire in open and free elections. They must be allowed to elect their leaders and their parliament, which they did 6 years ago, and then they were not allowed to meet. So for 6 years there has not been any meeting of the Albanian parliament duly elected by the people of Kosova. This cannot continue. This must not continue. What this resolution does is it condemns Belgrade's brutal crackdown in Kosova; again, the killing of innocent men, women and children. It calls for the maintenance of the current sanctions against the Belgrade regime and consideration of restoring the interwall of sanctions. If Milosevic does not do what he is being asked to do, which is to give basic freedom to people, we ought to consider slapping new sanctions on them. This supports the elections process in Kosova and sending monitors, and it is very, very important that we have monitors. It demands the full implementation of the education agreement, including at the university level. Again, Albanians cannot teach in their language, they cannot go to schools. It is just impossible. I want to commend the Albanian students in Kosova. Their peaceful demonstrations have shown a tremendous level of maturity and must be supported by all freedom loving people around the world. This resolution also urges the U.N. Security Council to discuss Kosova, as well they should. This is a very, very important international incident and Kosova ought to be discussed by the Security Council. It calls for the return of the OSCE monitors, which were thrown away by Milosevic, who will not allow international monitoring. We need international monitoring on the ground if we are to prevent a tragedy in Kosova. It encourages the expansion of the USIA office. I was proud to go there 2 years ago, to Pristina, the capital, and cut the ribbon for the United States information office. We ought to expand that office to show that we as a Nation are engaged, that the Albanians there know there is a friend in the United States, that the Serbs and Belgrade understand that we have a presence there where the American flag is flying and we care very much about what happens on the ground. And the European Union has just recommitted to opening their office in Pristina. They should do it as soon as possible. In short, Mr. Speaker, what this resolution does, H. Con. Res. 235, is simply reinforce the goals which we hold dear as Americans; the right of self-determination, a condemnation of a brutal crackdown, and saying that the United States of America stands with the Albanian citizens of Kosovo because it is right to stand with them. It is right to say that they ought to have the freedoms. It is wrong for them to have no personal freedoms, to have 80 percent or more unemployment, to never have a chance to go to schools. This situation must end. And what the Congress is attempting to do here in a bipartisan fashion is to say no more brutal crackdowns. This must be condemned by the world, and we want to see the right of self-determination. I would go one step further. I would implement a no-fly zone and continue to do different things that we must have in order to show our solidarity with the people of Kosovo. But this resolution, I think, strikes the right balance at the right time, and I urge my colleagues to support the people of Kosovo who are crying out for our help. We can do this, my colleagues, by voting unanimously for H.Con.Res. 235.

Mr. ENGEL

Mr. ENGEL. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me the time. Mr. Speaker, I want to associate myself with the remarks of my good friend and the chairman of the subcommittee, the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Smith), who has been a tireless fighter for human rights all over the world; certainly in Ireland, but all over the world as well. I rise in support of House Concurrent Resolution 152. I think it is very fitting that we have this resolution today on St. Patrick's Day. I have been to Ireland and the north of Ireland a number of times. I have struggled, along with the people there and many of us in Congress for many years, to try to bring peace and justice to the beleaguered people in the north of Ireland. I think anyone who has visited some of the areas in Northern Ireland, particularly some of the Catholic neighborhoods, really gets a feeling of a people under occupation in Belfast and in Derry and some of the other places. But we can say, Mr. Speaker, that there is some hope. We can say that the atmosphere has improved, so that we hope that there will be an agreement between the parties in the talks led by Senator Mitchell. I think there are a number of reasons why there is improvement. I think the British government, the current British government under Prime Minister Blair, has gone a great deal of the way in stepping forward, making progress. I think that helps create a better atmosphere. But there is still a long, long way to go. This resolution, of course, rejects violence, as well we should; and a peace-loving people on both sides have to reject violence. Violence is not the way to act. But we also must understand that human rights must be protected. That is stated clearly in House Concurrent Resolution 152. We know in the north of Ireland the human rights of people, particularly of the Catholics in the north of Ireland, have not been respected. There has been unemployment, 70 and 80 percent in some areas. There have been a lack of human rights. As I mentioned before, when you go into some of those areas, the bog side in Derry and some of the places in West Belfast, you truly feel that it is a people under occupation. That is wrong. As the gentleman from New Jersey said, because Britain is our ally we have even more of an obligation to point out some of the shortcomings and some of the things that we wish would change. So the struggle for peace and justice in Ireland will continue. It has to continue with the United States' participation. That is one of the ways that we can make progress and move forward. I compliment President Clinton for making this a priority, and I compliment the job Senator Mitchell has done. There need to be a lot of steps taken. We need to have the emergency legislation repealed, and some of the other things taken. Also, we have an issue here in the United States. There were many, many Irish deportees that do not want to go back to the north of Ireland because they fear for their lives. We were able to get a stay on that. We want the Justice Department to make this stay permanent. It affects at least two of my constituents, and I have circulated letters and have 30 co-signers of the letter calling on the Justice Department not to send these deportees back. As you say, Mr. Speaker, I think House Concurrent Resolution 152 is the right resolution at the right time. We all pray for peace in the north of Ireland. We pray for peace and justice.

Mr. ENGEL

Mr. ENGEL. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of H.R. 856. To me this is a question of equity and fairness. There are nearly 4 million Puerto Ricans who are American citizens who are denied the right to self-determination. This bill simply starts a process. It is nothing more, nothing less. We will be able to find out from this process what Puerto Ricans want. We can then respond to that process. This is only fair. The people of Puerto Rico did not ask to be a part of this country 100 years ago, remember. They became a part by the Spanish-American War, and as was pointed out, they have been loyal citizens. They have the same right to self-determination as all Americans do. Mr. Chairman, I represent a district in the Bronx, in Westchester County in New York. We have many, many Puerto Ricans living there and the people are positively excited about the fact that their brethren on Puerto Rico will have the opportunity to have this dialogue. As my colleague from Hawaii said, the people of Alaska and Hawaii went through much the same thing. Much of the arguments that were raised against them coming into the Union are being raised now. We do not favor any one thing. We want the process to start. The people of Puerto Rico deserve nothing less.

Mr. ENGEL

Mr. ENGEL. Mr. Speaker, just yesterday there was a brutal crackdown in a region called Kosova, which is home to more than 2,000 ethnic Albanians who live under the oppression of Serb tyranny. The Serbian police came in and summarily started beating and killing ethnic Albanians, more than 20 of whom were murdered in cold blood. The region of Kosova, which is 90 percent Albanian, I have been there a number of times as chairman of the Albanian Interest Caucus of this House. The people there are truly a people living under oppression. They have no political rights. They have no human rights. They have no economic rights. Unemployment is unbelievable. Day after day after day turns into months; and year after year, there is no improvement on the ground. The United States cannot, Mr. Speaker, stand idly by and allow Serbian President Milosevic and his henchmen to brutally kill people for no reason. This oppression must stop, and the United States is the only country that has the power to stop it. I have been calling for a number of years for the appointment of a special envoy from the United States to the region of Kosova. Only if the United States gets involved with the appointment of a special envoy do I believe that progress will be made on the ground in Kosova. This would be very similar to what we have attempted to do in Ireland with Senator Mitchell. And we ought to forthwith appoint a special envoy. My resolution, H.Con.Res. 205, calls for the appointment of a special envoy and calls for sanctions, strong sanctions to be continued on Serbia until there is improvement in the economic and political and human freedoms in Kosova. Just last week, Mr. Speaker, our government loosened some of the sanctions imposed on Serbia. It sent the wrong message at the wrong time, and I am sure unwittingly contributed to Mr. Milosevic and his henchmen thinking that they can brutally crack down on the Albanians in Kosova. It is time now to reimpose those sanctions that we removed just last week. It is time to have new sanctions. It is time to make sure that the outer wall of sanctions is in place, continues to be in place and continues to be expanded, because Serbia cannot practice this kind of oppression and think they can get away with it. Now in 3 weeks the Albanians in Kosova are scheduled to hold elections. And, again, Mr. Speaker, there is no coincidence that these crackdowns came 3 weeks before the Albanian elections are to be held. This is clearly a blatant attempt to intimidate the Albanians, to try to prevent them from exercising the political freedoms that all of us say that we hold dear. I have often said that the people of Kosova, 90 percent of whom are ethnic Albanians, have the same right to self-determination that all peoples of the world have; no more, but certainly no less. And they have a right to determine their political future, they have a right to determine their economic future, they have a right to determine all of their future, and they do not have the right to be people under occupation, oppressively, brutally occupied and beaten by the Serb authorities. This is not simply an internal problem in Serbia; this is a human rights problem. The autonomous region of Kosova, in my opinion and the opinion of anybody who likes freedom, has to understand that this region, the people living in the region, should be the sole determining factor in terms of their political future. They should decide their own political future. Now, both President Bush and President Clinton had issued a Christmas warning saying that the United States would draw the line and would not stand idly by with a brutal crackdown in Kosova. My big fear is that this is the start of a crackdown, and we know what Serb nationalism can do. We saw what it did in Bosnia. Bosnia could seem like a tea party compared to what could happen in Kosova if the world community and the United States and the European nations do not get involved right now. With 2 million ethnic Albanians, some people would like nothing better to do than to drive a million of them over the border into Albania, and perhaps massacre another million. We cannot stand idly by and allow this to happen. Only the United States, again, has the power and clout to say to Milosevic and his henchmen, we will not allow you to brutally oppress the people of Kosova, the ethnic Albanians in Kosova. They are entitled to all kinds of rights and freedoms that we treasure here in the United States. What kind of life is it for people that have no hope of getting employed? What hope is it of people, what kind of life can they expect, if there are no political freedoms, if they cannot get a job, if they cannot teach in the Albanian language, if the schools are oppressed? There have been peaceful demonstrations going on and going on, and these people have been clubbed and beaten brutally. We cannot allow this to happen. We cannot send a message and say that because things are a little better in Bosnia, now is the time to forget about Kosova. Mr. Speaker, we must reimpose the sanctions, we must have a special envoy, and we must unequivocally call for freedom for the Albanian people in Kosova.

Mr. ENGEL

Mr. ENGEL. Mr. Speaker, I want to spend the next few minutes talking about Iraq. In 1991, I voted for President Bush's program, Operation Desert Storm. I was one of a minority of Democrats at that time to do so because I felt then and feel very strongly now that we need to have a bipartisan foreign policy; that once the President, whomever the President is, makes a decision, it is incumbent upon all of us to rally around the President's decision and to support our troops who may be in harm's way. That is why, Mr. Speaker, I have been particularly chagrined to listen to the remarks of some of the critics of the President's policy in Iraq, the Senate Majority Leader and others, who have spoken out and said that this agreement, which the Clinton administration supports and which I support, have said it is not a good one. I think it is very, very important that we rally around our President and that we support this agreement. Is this a perfect agreement? Of course not. Are there some ambiguities in this agreement? Of course there are. But as Secretary of State Albright said the other day, let us try to work out these ambiguities. Let us place the onus on Saddam Hussein. Let us test this agreement. We are testing it by keeping our forces in the region. We are testing it by making sure that American power and American might remains there to force Saddam Hussein to comply. The main thing now is to get the inspectors into the presidential palaces and the other sites to make sure that we have adequate inspection on the ground. This new agreement puts the onus on Saddam Hussein. If he violates it, we will have the support of many of the other nations who might have been reluctant to support our undertaking if we had started with a bombing campaign. This puts the onus squarely on Saddam and says to Saddam that the international community, the United Nations, is unified in demanding that he comply with United Nations' resolutions and with this latest agreement. Rather than tearing down Kofi Annan, I would praise him for having the courage to go to Baghdad and trying to broker an agreement. I am not annoyed that Saddam Hussein is claiming victory, as the Senate majority leader seems to be. Saddam Hussein claimed victory after Operation Desert Storm, when we know that his forces were decimated. I could not care less what Saddam Hussein says. The proof will be in the pudding. If indeed this gives the international community unfettered access to Saddam Hussein's presidential palaces and other sites, then this agreement will be successful. If it does not and if Saddam Hussein is devious, as we know he can very well be, and continues to hide things and we need to go in and do a bombing campaign, then President Clinton says that is what we will do. Rather than this being a lose-lose situation, I think it is a win-win situation. This is not the time for U.N. bashing. Let us encourage the U.N. to pass a resolution in the Security Council adopting this agreement and putting in penalties if Saddam Hussein violates the agreement. The critics of administration policy, I am sorry to say, would criticize the President for whatever he did. If we had a bombing campaign, they would criticize the President to say there will be civilian casualties, as we know inevitably there would be, or American casualties, as we know inevitably there would be. When the President was talking about a bombing campaign, these same critics were saying that the President had not told the American people what our objectives are, that he had not defined the objectives. If the President said, as he did say, the objectives would be to allow unfettered inspection of these sites and that is why we were bombing, the critics then said, ``That's not enough. The objective should be the removal of Saddam Hussein.'' Well, we know the removal of Saddam Hussein, and I would like to see it as much as anybody else, would involve ground troops and would involve lots of casualties. If the President did that, the critics would say, ``Well, the ground troops will mean American casualties.'' So whatever the President does, and I quite frankly think he has handled the situation very, very well, these same critics would criticize. This is not the time for criticism. There has been an agreement. Let us try this agreement. If this agreement does not work, we can go back to a policy of a bombing campaign to force Saddam Hussein to allow unfettered inspections. Rather than criticize the President, I commend President Clinton. I think he has handled this situation marvelously. I think he has acted like a real statesman and acted like the American people expect him to act. I daresay that is why his approval rating is hovering around 70 percent, because people think that the President has acted boldly, not only in Iraq but all the other things he has done to put this country on the right track. Mr. Speaker, I say it is time to go back to the traditional bipartisan policy of rallying around the President, rallying around our troops and, once the President has made a decision, to support that decision for the good of the American people.

Mr. ENGEL

Mr. ENGEL. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Stokes) for having this special order. Mr. Speaker, I rise to commemorate Black History Month. Although I have only a few minutes to honor hundreds of years of struggles and achievements of black Americans, I must share my feelings of how much the African American community has added to our country. In 1782, Thomas Jefferson, a slave holder himself declared that ``the whole commerce between master and slave is a perpetual exercise of the most boisterous passions, the most unremitting despotism on one part, and degrading submission on the other.'' A Founding Father to whom our Nation looked for moral guidance, his hypocrisy only underscored the terror our Nation was inflicting on generations of African Americans at that time. Yet, even with slavery placing in bondage hundreds of thousands of Africans, some black Americans had already begun to make their mark. For instance, 200 years ago, in 1798, James Forten, Sr., established the first major black-owned sail-making shop in Philadelphia, achieving a net worth of more than $100,000, a massive sum at the time. Forten went on to become a leader of the abolitionist movement and the organizer of the Antislavery Society in 1833. The heights of Forten's achievements only remind us what our country lost due to the depths of slavery and subsequent years of oppression. This country at one time erected every conceivable legal, societal and cultural roadblock to prevent African Americans from getting an education, wealth and power from our society. As we commemorate Black History Month, the people of the United States must recognize what injustices were perpetrated through the years. We must recognize that our society still suffers the results of the oppression of African Americans. It has only been within the last half century that our country has made real progress to guaranteeing to black Americans the basic civil rights that other citizens have for so long taken for granted. Within that time, America has only begun to see the tip of the iceberg, the tremendous potential of this community. It is only during this period that we have come to realize the dream of the Reverend Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., that ``Children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the contents of their character.'' As a Jewish American, Mr. Speaker, I believe I share a sense of understanding with African Americans. Not only do our two communities face a history filled with severe cruelty and discrimination, but we also fought together for decades to overcome bigotry in this country. When I commemorate Black History Month, I am reminded of a civil rights movement where Jewish Americans and black Americans stood shoulder to shoulder to fight racial prejudice. Today black Americans, more and more, are represented in leadership positions in our society, from black members of the President's Cabinet, to educators, athletes, scientists and members of the clergy, African Americans of today have begun to take their rightful positions in the United States, and our country as a whole has benefitted. As we celebrate Black History Month, we must never forget the injustices inflicted upon African Americans through the years. We honor those who suffered by recalling the circumstances through which they lived. At the same time, we must recognize that our Nation has finally begun to unlock the great untapped potential of the black community. It is my hope that when we celebrate Black History Month in the future, circumstances facing black Americans will continue to improve, and that someday we will achieve true freedom and equality for all citizens of this great Nation. If we recognize what happened in the past, it will help us to build a better future for all of our citizens. I very much feel very close to Black History Month, having been born in the month of February, and I think it is very, very important that all of us in the Congress pause and reflect, because until, as we say, all of our citizens are free, all of us are not really totally free. So I thank my colleague from Ohio (Mr. Stokes) for this commemoration, and I think it is very, very fitting that this Congress commemorate Black History Month.

Mr. ENGEL

Mr. ENGEL. Mr. Speaker, I rise to call attention to a growing problem in Turkey. Although it is a member of NATO and a democracy, Turkey is currently experiencing a growth of government-connected crime. Indeed, a recent official report has found that former Prime Minister Tansu Ciller's administration conspired with a broad range of criminal organizations to eliminate political enemies of the Turkish government domestically and abroad. I commend the following editorial, ''The Turkish Underworld``, published in the New York Times on January 30, 1998, to my colleagues for a fuller explanation of this serious dilemma. I ask unanimous consent that the text of the article be printed at this point in the Congressional Record. [From the New York Times, Jan. 30, 1998] The Turkish Underworld Turkey's secular leaders like to talk about the subversive activities of Islamic politicians and Kurdish separatists, but the gravest threat to democratic order in Turkey in recent years seems to have come from the secular leadership itself. An official investigation has found that between 1993 and 1996 the Government of Prime Minister Tansu Ciller connived with drug gangs, gambling moguls and right-wing hit men to assassinate enemies at home and abroad and sponsor a failed coup attempt in nearby Azerbaijan. The current Prime Minister, Mesut Yilmaz, has properly expressed outrage at these abuses and promises further inquiries into possible misconduct during the Ciller era. But the problem was not limited to Ms. Ciller's term, and Mr. Yilmaz must not restrict further inquiries to protect government agencies and officials. His recent declaration that he opposes probing into areas that would ''harm the state`` sounds like a transparent pretext for circumscribing further investigation. The initial investigation was spurred by the 1996 crash of a car carrying, among others, a senior police official, a drug smuggler wanted on murder charges and a pro-government Kurdish militia leader. These unlikely companions were traveling together, investigators found, because police and intelligence agencies, under government orders, were contracting with criminal gangs to murder real and imagined political opponents. The targets included Kurdish rebels, suspected Armenian terrorists and those believed to be their financial supporters. The report also found that the Ciller Government had aided a failed plot to overthrow the Azerbaijani President, Heydar Aliyev, in hopes his removal would protect drug smuggling routes through Azerbaijan. The investigators looked mainly at the Ciller period, but also found that links between government security agencies, right-wing death squads and criminal gangs went back much earlier, at least to the time of a 1980 military coup that was followed by a period of severe repression. These earlier links should now be explored more closely, including the period in the early 1990's when Mr. Yilmaz previously served as Prime Minister. Further investigation is also needed into possible connections between the armed forces and death-squad-style killings in Kurdish areas. The collusion between the Government and the underworld that has now been exposed must be eradicated and never repeated.

Mr. ENGEL

Mr. ENGEL. Well, it is actually the gentleman from New York.

Mr. ENGEL. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the majority whip for yielding me this time, and it just shows that Ron Dellums is appreciated all the way from California to New York, across the country and then back. One of the nice things about serving in this body, and this is my 10th year in this body, is when you first come to Congress you meet people who are giants, you meet people you have read about, you meet people you have seen and that you really did not know. And the thought that you, as an elected Member of Congress, as a new Member, are a colleague of somebody whom you have heard about and read about and seen is really something to behold. I felt that way when I first came to Congress, and I still feel that way with regard to Ron Dellums. And I would never have forgiven myself if I had not come to the floor this evening to say just a few words in tribute to Ron, because you can never say enough to really capture the whole image of the man. I think of all the people I have served with in Congress, there is nobody kinder, there is nobody greater, there is nobody who cares more about this country. There is nobody who is a better friend than Ron Dellums. We have broken bread many times together at lunch and had many, many great talks. At first Ron Dellums came to my attention when he was leading the protests against the Vietnam war. And a lot of us at that time felt as he did, but he seemed to capture everything and knew just exactly what to say. And in the course of the 10 years I have served with Ron, I have never known anyone to have more integrity, more concern for this country, more love for this country, more love for the people with whom he served in the House of Representatives. We are really going to miss Ron. It's very nice, Ron, to be able to hear people say all these nice things about you while you are still alive. It is really, really nice. But I think you can see from the heart both sides of the aisle, people who would call themselves liberals and conservatives and moderates and everything in between, are all saying the exact same things. And at a time in Congress when many people do not agree with many other people, we all agree about one thing, and that is that Ron Dellums is a class act. Thank you, my friend. I am going to miss you, and I hope you will keep in touch. But you have served this country well, you have served your friends well, and class act is really the word. And I want to thank the majority whip for granting me the time.

Mr. ENGEL

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

Mr. ENGEL. I want to thank my colleague from New Jersey for giving us this opportunity and my colleague from Connecticut. You are both so right. When we talk about health care, it strikes me there is no Democratic health care or Republican health care. There is an American health care, and all Americans of all political stripes, of all persuasions, of all races and creeds and colors and regions of the country are all concerned about their health care. When I speak to my constituents, I know that health care is right up there in terms of things that people are very much concerned about. My mother, her name is Seroy Engel, she lives in Tamarac, Florida. She is actually in the hospital now as we speak. She is my best advisor in terms of health care and Medicare and she tells me, what are people to do? People in this country, senior citizens who have worked hard all their lives, played by the rules, are retired and they do not have adequate health coverage. Medicare does not pay for prescription drugs. People have to decide whether they are going to eat or take their pills. Sometimes they eat half as much as they should eat and only take half as many pills as they need to take for medical reasons because they simply cannot afford it. What is happening is that we are not doing the job. The government is not doing the job. I want to really take my hat off to the President of the United States because I think that last night he made some very bold statements about health care. Several years ago when he put forth his program for health care reform, I supported that program. I am a supporter of the single payer plan as well because I believe that we need to cover every American in this country, that it is a national scandal that 40 million Americans have no health coverage whatsoever. Of those 40 million Americans, people do not realize, 20 percent of them are working people. It is not people who are unemployed. It is working people that do not have health care coverage. To me that is a national disgrace. We could do better in 1998, as we approach the 21st century in this country. I want to commend President Clinton for raising the issue of health care. When his health care plan was shot down for a few years, no one wanted to touch health care with a 10-foot pole. But now we understand that we have to do it. I am just so proud of the Democrats here in the House because we are grabbing the bull by the horns and we are saying to the American people, we think health care is a priority. We talked about managed care reform. We are listening to our constituents. Our colleague, the gentlewoman from Connecticut, is so right. Many of these decisions should be made by medical doctors based on what is best for the patient, not what is best for the private dollar, the almighty dollar or the bottom line. We understand that people are in business to make money, but if you are providing health care, the bottom line, the most important thing is the health care of that patient. That is really what it should be. So I think that we have a lot of problems to tackle in terms of health care. We participated in a forum several weeks ago about the President's proposed expansion of Medicare. It was very interesting because yesterday when the President mentioned it during the State of the Union and said he was for expanding Medicare for people who are 62 to 65 or people who are over 55 who have lost their jobs and that these people would pay their own premiums so it would cost the government nothing, the Democrats stood up and applauded. I was really very surprised that on the other side of the aisle the Republicans did not applaud. They just sat there as if they were in opposition to his program. I have to tell you, when I speak to my constituents, they all think it is marvelous because people who are 62 and have no coverage, they are at great risk. And people who have lost their jobs at 55, they are at great risk. And the Medicare program, we know we have to improve it. And we know we have to get at waste, fraud and abuse. But we do know that before there was a Medicare program, the vast majority of senior citizens in this country had inadequate or no health care coverage whatsoever. And since Medicare they do have health care coverage. Some of it is inadequate, but at least it is coverage. If we can extend that and at no cost to the government or even a minimal cost to the government, it is not so terrible. If it is a minimal cost to the government, I am all for it. I think the American people are all for it. I think the Democratic Party has shown that it is on the side of the people, the Democrats in this House, by coming out very forthrightly in support of it. So when we talk about the whole issue in this Congress, and I hope we will, talk about managed care reform, talk about Medicare expansion, talk about giving health care to 40 million Americans that do not have it, I think we ought to be proud to tackle these issues because health care affects everybody, and everybody is concerned with health care. And so I want to really just commend my colleague for raising the issue, and the President yesterday again brought it to the fore. I think it is something the American people care about and want to talk about. I think hand in hand the other issue that the President mentioned which I think goes hand and glove with health care is Social Security, because as people get older, they care about Social Security and they care about health care. I think the President saying that if there is any kind of surplus that every dollar of surplus would go to shore up the Social Security system, I think 90 percent at least of Americans would agree with that. So I look forward to working in this Congress to shore up the Social Security system, if there is a surplus, and if there is not a surplus we know we need to shore it up anyway and to work on improving health care in this country. We have the greatest system in the world in terms of health care, but we know along the way there are still some problems. I believe that a country that can do so much, as we can do, ought to very basically provide decent health care for all of our citizens. I look forward to working with the White House and with the President and with the Democrats in Congress, and hopefully the Republicans will come along and work with us in a bipartisan fashion so that we can provide the kind of health care to all Americans that all Americans know we need.

Mr. ENGEL. I wanted to again raise the issue of the President's proposal for expanding Medicare, because I think that that is really one of the new proposals that we are going to really have to deal with in this Congress. And I really think that the American people really are interested in it and I think are overwhelmingly in support of it. And I would hope that it does not get buried in the general discussion of health care. Again, and my colleague was with us when we had the hearings, we had three witnesses all in the category of the 62 to 64 range, age range, and they pointed out that they are the most vulnerable in terms of having no health coverage whatsoever. These are all, again, working people. There is nothing that aggravates me more, because I represent a working class, a middle class district in New York, of people who have worked hard all their lives, who have played by the rules, who are not looking for handouts, who do not want anything to which they are not entitled, who suddenly find themselves in need, after playing by the rules all their lives, and we say to them, sorry, we cannot help you. That is wrong. And the people who fit into that category, between 62 and 64 and 65, ought to be helped. And people who are 55 and older, who are retired or laid off or unemployed, ought to be helped as well. You know, there are many, many people who retire after age 55 and their companies promise them that their health care coverage will continue once their retire. And then they retire and suddenly find out that the company revokes it or something happens, and the President's proposal would extend this COBRA coverage which would allow these people to again buy in with their own resources and to have a continuation of the health coverage that they had when they were working. Who could object to that? Especially if we can find innovative ways and people can pay the premiums so the cost to the government would be minimal. It would seem to me like apple pie and motherhood. It should be something that everybody supports. It is very disheartening to see that the same forces who opposed Medicare in the 1960s are the same ones who are now saying, no, no, we cannot expand it, we should not expand it, let it wither on the vine, or whatever the speeches are. Everybody should be embracing this Medicare expansion because it is good for people and it is good for America. And, after all, we are 435 of us here, Democrats and Republicans, we were all elected to do what is good for America. And I can think of nothing better that is good for America than to try to expand health care coverage to average people who have worked hard all their lives, who have played by the rules, who do not look for handouts, just look for fairness and equity. And I want to again say how proud I am of the Democrats in the House of Representatives for putting forward these proposals and the President of the United States for putting forward these proposals and for us to say we are going to make this health care coverage, these health care proposals our number one priority in this Congress, and let the American people decide what they want and let the American people see who is really acting in their interests. So, again, I am proud to stand with the Democrats in this House to say that we will not stop until we expand coverage for Americans, until we make sure that Americans get adequate health coverage and we make sure that decisions are made based on what is best for the patient, not what is best for the bottom line or the profit or the almighty dollar. We, again, understand people need to make profits, but the bottom line is health care for the sick, health care for all Americans, quality care. That is the most important thing.

Mr. ENGEL. Let me say also, I think we could probably cut back on waste, fraud and abuse in the Medicare system and find the money to finance what the gentleman just described.

Mr. ENGEL. Mr. Speaker, I just want to say that the gentlewoman from Connecticut (Ms. DeLauro) is so right that this is not an issue that people think about when they are 62. All of us down the line are thinking about it right now, and so many millions and millions of Americans are thinking about health care. It goes back to what I said when I opened my remarks, that health care is something that affects all Americans and it is really up there on the lists of concerns of people. The hearing we attended, if my colleagues remember those three people that were between 62 and 65, they all said that they could not afford to buy health coverage, that they desperately need it but they simply could not afford to buy it. If we could expand the Medicare program and allow them to buy in at a reasonable cost that they could afford, I mean, are we not then doing something meaningful for people's lives? Again, average Americans, middle-class people who work hard all their lives, play by the rules, something happens and they get a little older and they suddenly find themselves abandoned. So the gentlewoman from Connecticut is so right. I think we in Congress have to show that we are listening to our constituents, to the people out there in America, that in Washington, inside the Beltway, there are all kinds of things that come into play and there is politics and there is rumor mongering and everything else. The American people are not interested in that. The American people are interested in what is Congress, what is the President, what is Government in Washington doing to affect their lives, to help them in their lives. Again, I can think of nothing more that we can do to help the average American than to expand health care coverage and to make sure that every American has decent, quality health care; and that is what I think we ought to do in this Congress.

Mr. ENGEL

Mr. ENGEL. Mr. Speaker, this year, the good parishioners of the Mount Vernon Heights Congregational Church celebrate the church's 100th anniversary. The history of the church is actually longer when we remember that it was in 1892 that its meetings began in the Garden Avenue School. The church became fully organized in 1896 with the Rev. F.B. Kellogg named pastor of the new church. By the following year the congregation had grown so large that it moved to a barn on Bedford Avenue and, on July 4th of that year, the new church was dedicated. By 1910 the church has become self-supporting and in 1916 construction on the current building was started. The church, a New England colonial design reflecting a post Civil War spirit of unity and self determination, was completed by 1922. Subsequently a sanctuary was added as well as tower chime. The Mount Vernon Heights Congregational Church has always practiced community activism as well as charitable works and community projects, such as its youth seminars and elderly centers. The Church also is part of the annual pulpit exchanges in which ministers from 19 churches deliver sermons at sister churches. The Church is justly proud of its fellowship of many denominations and its ministers of many differing ethnic and social backgrounds. The Rev. Maximilian Bernard Surjadinata, pastor since 1988, was born in Indonesia. I warmly congratulate the Mount Vernon Heights Congregational Church on its centenary and for its wonderful accomplishments in those hundred years.

Mr. ENGEL

Mr. ENGEL. Mr. Speaker, Congregation Beth Simchat Torah is New York City's only, and the world's largest, gay and lesbian synagogue, and on February 7th is celebrating its 25th anniversary. This remarkable congregation started with barely enough for a minyan (ten people) in a borrowed room at a neighborhood Episcopal Church. The Kiddush cup, some candles and challah used in the ceremony were carried to the services in a shopping bag. The congregation grew by word of mouth and small ads in the local weekly newspaper. Slowly, at first, the number of congregants grew so that it was large enough to have to move to another church in the neighborhood for the High Holy Days. By 1975 it was clear that they needed still more space so a large loft was rented and the congregation moved into it that year. The following year it got its first Torah on ``permanent loan'' from a Bronx congregation. In 1977 Congregation Beth Simchat Torah hosted the Second International Conference on Lesbian and Gay Jews and that year a second Torah was acquired. Talmud and Hebrew classes were expanded and over the next few years the High Holy Day crowds approached a 1,000. By 1992 Rabbi Sharon Kleinbaum was hired and more than 2,200 people attended Yom Kippur services. This dynamic congregation has served its community with distinction. With Rabbi Kleinbaum, it looks forward to greater community involvement, future growth and a continuance of its traditional/ creative liturgy.

Mr. ENGEL

Mr. ENGEL. Mr. Speaker, Rabbi Avi Weiss and the Hebrew Institute of Riverdale this year celebrate 25 years of passion and outreach within the Jewish community. Rabbi Weiss has traveled far and wide to support the cause of Judaism, most famously for his work at Auschwitz where he persuaded an order of nuns to move their convent from the gates of that infamous death camp. He went to Buenos Aires in 1994 to comfort the families of the victims of a bomb attack on a synagogue. There he met with Argentine President Carlos Menem and was invited to a Cabinet meeting to discuss security concerns. And it was at his urging that the International Relations Committee of the House of Representatives conducted hearings on the bombing when the official investigation lagged. Rabbi Weiss was named Rabbi of the Year by the New York Board of Rabbis for outstanding service to the rabbinate. He also pioneered outreach programs at the Hebrew Institute of Riverdale including free High Holy Day Services, a free Passover Seder and programs to reach the mentally and physically handicapped as well as elderly shutins. It is the only synagogue in the country which is barrier free. The Hebrew Institute of Riverdale reaches 4,000 families embracing Jews of all commitments. Rabbi Weiss is a great personal friend and I congratulate him and the Center for their great work over these 25 years.

Mr. ENGEL

Mr. ENGEL. Mr. Speaker, a community thrives and prospers because of the people who live in it and contribute to it. The depth of how people feel about their neighborhoods tells us how much they love their community. John Hyland is a man who has brought much to his community and to the people who live in it. His contributions are measured in what he has given to the area as a whole and to what he has given to his own special niche. He has been a member of St. John's Parish in the Kingsbridge section of the Bronx, worshipping there and attending its elementary school. He attended Samuel Gompers High School, also in the Bronx, and served his country in the Army for three years. He returned to his community and in 1970 became a member of the New York City Auxiliary Police. In 1973 he was elected president of the Auxiliary Police Benevolent Association, serving in that capacity since. But he is being honored now for the wonderful work he has done as a member of the Ancient Order of Hibernians. He was elected president of the Daniel J. Quilty Division #7 in 1994 and reelected as president three times since. Now, to the regret of his comrades in Division #7, he is moving to the Bronx County Board of the AOH as its newly elected president. He seems to be elected president of every organization he joins. John Hyland has given much to those around him. I am honored to join his friends in praising him for all that he has done for us, as individuals and as a community.

Mr. ENGEL

Mr. ENGEL. Mr. Speaker, as we all know, all levels of government are large and it can be complicated for a citizen to find his or her way. Often the initial contract sets the tone for how that citizen sees government--as helpful or aloof and uncaring. For many citizens calling Westchester County Government that initial contact was the cheerful and helpful voice of Mary Maxwell, a telephone operator whose friendly demeanor assured the caller that they were entering friendly territory. She worked initially at Grasslands Hospital in Valhalla after which she moved to the medical unit at White Plains. Subsequently she worked in Yonkers and Mount Vernon before returning to White Plains. She was universally recognized with the title of ``friendly and happy person'' by the many who worked with her and were greeted by her when they called. Mary Maxwell lives in Yonkers where she has been active for many years at the Community Memorial Baptist Church. Mary Maxwell is that person who puts a human face on a large organization; one who is friendly and helpful to complete strangers for the 35 years she was a telephone operator. Working in a medical organization often means having to deal with people in their sorrow and despair. She has done it and done it well. She is known as a ``mother to many'' for her empathy and friendship and those people are gathering to wish her well in her retirement. I want to join with them in celebrating all the good and kind work that Mary Maxwell has done for all of us.