Rahm Emanuel

Mr. EMANUEL

Mr. EMANUEL. Madam Speaker. I rise today in support of H.R. 1412, the Higher Education Relief Opportunities for Students Act. This is timely, essential legislation which ensures that those brave men and women who make enormous sacrifices for our nation do not forfeit their right to an affordable and accessible education. Members of the armed forces often spend considerable time away from their families, stall other career and educational goals, and, most significantly, expose themselves to the risk of serious injury or death. These individuals and their families deserve our greatest respect, and certainly deserve the assurance that they will not be unfairly penalized for their time spent in military service. The promise of higher education, and the availability of federal financial assistance to make this opportunity a reality, represent key components of the American experience. It is only right that we ensure access to higher education for those who work to protect the values and privileges that we enjoy as Americans. I applaud Congressman Kline and the other Members of the Committee on Education and Workforce for introducing this critical legislation and bringing it to the floor today. It is a symbol of support for the brave men and women involved in Operation Iraqi Freedom and for all of those who selflessly devote their lives to protecting our nation and our freedom.

Mr. EMANUEL

Mr. EMANUEL. Mr. Speaker, today is Great Lakes Day on Capitol Hill. This annual event provides Great Lakes policymakers and opinion leaders with an opportunity to report on the current and future state of the Lakes. Holding one-fifth of the planet's fresh surface water, the Great Lakes are the source of drinking water for 28 million Americans, including 2.8 million Chicagoans. Today it is my sad duty to inform the Members of this body who are not already aware, that the Great Lakes are in grave danger. Thirty years after passage of the Clean Water Act, water quality has improved, yet the Lakes remain unhealthy and there is clear and convincing evidence that the ecosystem is deteriorating. In the past few years, state and local authorities have issued more than 1,500 fish consumption advisories. In 2001, bacteria from sewage overflows led to a record 599 beach closings. In Chicago, my home, there have been 152 beach closings since 1994. Mr. Speaker, the Great Lakes, the largest freshwater system on Earth, are clearly in danger. In the mid-1990s, the Everglades, the source of freshwater for much of the state of Florida, faced a similar crisis. Congress responded with an $8 billion plan to restore the Everglades. I ask this body, are the Great Lakes, one of our nation's most valued national treasures, not worthy of a similar effort? I know they are. This spring I will introduce legislation to create a Great Lakes Trust Fund. My bill will fund the Administration's ``Great Lakes Strategy 2002.'' Additionally, it would establish a dedicated funding source for Lakes restoration and revitalization. My proposal would also create an advisory board consisting of the governors of the eight Great Lakes states, representatives of the Federal Government, and members of the scientific and business communities. Further, the advisory panel would be tasked with developing a comprehensive Lakes management plan, a biennial report to Congress. Mr. Speaker, the United States is blessed with tremendous resources. The Great Lakes undoubtedly rank among the most treasured of these resources, but if this body allows them to deteriorate further--if we can no longer drink the water, and no longer swim at our beaches--we will have failed the people of this nation. I refuse to let this happen. My plan will begin to heal the damage done by years of neglect. I urge my colleagues to support me in this important national endeavor and I strongly encourage them to cosponsor my bill.

Mr. EMANUEL

Mr. EMANUEL. Mr. Speaker, believe it or not, Von Steuben Metropolitan Science Center's basketball team has a chance at the state title. Now, that might not mean much to many of my colleagues, but for those of us who live on the North Side of Chicago, Von Steuben's appearance in the Elite Eight, their first since 1938, is a big deal. Von Steuben's season did not begin that well. In fact, they lost four of their first five games, but the Panthers rebounded. On Monday, March 17, 2003, they convincingly defeated Brother Rice 65-56 to secure the Class AA supersectional. Every student should be proud of Von Steuben, and not only because of their success on the basketball court, but because Von Steuben is truly a great school. There are many different types of Chicago Public Schools. Von Steuben is a ``science center,'' meaning it has stronger math and science curriculums than most of Chicago's public schools. It is this demanding and stimulating college preparatory curriculum, combined with the school's diverse student body, innovative teaching methods and state-of-the-art technological equipment which set it apart. I'm proud to represent Von Steuben and honored to congratulate its basketball team. Mr. Speaker, tomorrow the Panthers of Von Steuben will play Peoria Central. I wish Von Steuben the very best of luck and know that regardless of the outcome, the residents of Chicago and the Albany Park Neighborhood are proud of their accomplishments.

Mr. EMANUEL

Mr. EMANUEL. Mr. Speaker, the United States is at war. We have one Armed Forces, one Commander in Chief, one Nation. There are questions to be asked about how we came to this moment, about the diplomacy, about the relationships with our allies, about the shifting rationales we have been offered for war. These are serious issues. They should and will be debated here by historians and scholars in the months and years ahead. Today is not a time for that debate. There are hundreds and thousands of young men and women in harm's way, my neighbors and yours. Our attention should be focused on those young men and women, the success of their mission, and their safe return. I had the fortunate experience of serving in the White House. I know firsthand what a solitary and difficult decision it is for a President to send our Armed Forces into harm's way. I well remember some Members of this body, in the midst of conflict, attacking the President, the Commander in Chief, even as he worked day and night to complete a mission to bring our servicemen and women home safely. It was wrong then. It would be wrong now. I for one will not do that to our President, to our Commander in Chief. I want him to succeed. We should all want him to succeed. So long as our troops are engaged, we should suspend the debate over how and why, focus on the mission, unite as a country in prayer and resolve, hope for a speedy resolution of this war, with a minimum of loss. God bless America.

Mr. EMANUEL

Mr. EMANUEL. Mr. Chairman, this budget resolution is a failed economic plan. Fourteen months ago, this body passed a tax cut worth $1 trillion, a little over $1 trillion; and the net result has been 2.5 million Americans without work, 4 million Americans without health insurance, nearly $1 trillion worth of corporate assets have been foreclosed on, and 2 million more Americans have left the middle class for poverty. That is the net economic result and the economic effect felt by America's families. In this budget resolution, Members of this body will be asked to vote for only 5,000 new units for affordable housing here in America. Yet, 3 weeks from now, 4 weeks from now in the reconstruction budget for Iraq, we will provide 20,000 units in Iraq. This budget calls for no new spending for health care for the uninsured who work full-time in America, yet the Iraqi reconstruction will call for $13 million, half the population of Iraq, to have basic health care, 100 percent maternity coverage; yet we cut Medicare and Medicaid in this budget resolution. In the area of education, the Iraqi reconstruction calls for 25,000 new schools to be rebuilt, yet we zero out 40 programs here in America. I will support and work towards the reconstruction and funding for the reconstruction of Iraq because it is the right thing to do after this war when it is over, and we will win it successfully. But I want that same commitment, that same emphasis for here at home. Iraq matters; Illinois matters and the people there. We need an economic plan that invests in America, our education, our health care, and puts our fiscal house back in order. That is what the proposal from my good colleague, the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Spratt), has, is an economic plan that is balanced. It seizes the future by investing in the right areas of health care, education, and the environment, puts our fiscal house back in order so we can meet the needs of our retirement and our plans for the future. What we are about to do today is the wrong choice for America's future. We will be asked in the next 3 weeks to do right by what we need to do in Iraq. Let us be balanced in our approach.

Mr. EMANUEL

Mr. EMANUEL. Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for yielding to me. Mr. Speaker, this Republican budget resolution is a failed economic plan that proposes $1 trillion in tax cuts in search of an economic purpose. This budget follows President Bush's $1.3 trillion tax cut 14 months ago to get this economy moving and produce jobs. That was the argument behind the original tax cut. The net result is 2.5 million Americans today are without work who had work prior to that tax cut, and there are 4 million more Americans without health care who prior to that tax cut had health care, 2 million more Americans who have moved from the middle class to poverty prior to that tax cut, and $1 trillion worth of corporate assets have been foreclosed on and hit Chapter 11. That has been the net effect of this tax cut. Now, what are we about to do? We are about to put our foot on the accelerator 14 months later for another $1 trillion plus tax cut that will have the same effect of lost jobs, lost health care, lost corporations and family dreams, and more and more Americans moving from middle class to poverty. We need to move the trend the other way. We need an economic plan, not just a tax cut. While we consider this budget, we as a Nation, as one Nation, as one country, are moving closer to war. We also have a plan now for that war and for after that war to rebuild Iraq; in the range of $100 billion they are talking about rebuilding Iraq. The administration's postwar request would build more housing, more schools, and go further in providing health care for pregnant woman in Iraq than this budget provides Americans. The Wall Street journal wrote on Monday that the postwar reconstruction of Iraq is ambitious in scope and speed. I want to read some of the juxtapositions that are playing here, so as Members on the other side think about their vote, it just does not get glossed over by one fix or two in what we here in this Chamber call the manager's amendment. Let me read under health care. Medicaid provides insurance coverage for over one-third of the live births nationally here in this country, yet Medicaid is scheduled for a $95 billion cut. In Iraq after the war, maternity care will be guaranteed for 100 percent of the population. The U.S. budget we are about to vote on does not provide a single dollar of health insurance for the uninsured in this country, where we have 42 million Americans who work full time without health care. In Iraq after the war, 13 million people, half the population, will be guaranteed health care coverage. Under education, the U.S. budget cuts Head Start for 28,000 children, cuts education spending by 8 percent, zeroes out 40 new programs, like technology, like Star Schools. In Iraq, there will be guaranteed books and supplies and 100 percent enrollment for 4 million schoolchildren in Iraq, with U.S. dollars. Teacher quality programs in America are cut by $9.3 billion, more than 10 percent, and 25,000 schools in Iraq will be rebuilt and renovated at standard level of quality. Housing, we only have in this budget enough dollars for 5,000 new affordable housing units; yet in Iraq the plan is for 20,000 new units of housing. The Army Corps of Engineers is scheduled for a 10 percent cut in this country; yet our plan for Iraq calls for total reconstruction of the Umm Qasr port so it is fully opened for cargo traffic. That is the plan for Iraq. That is also the plan for America. Under Transportation, highway funding in America is cut by $6 billion over the next 10 years. In Iraq 3,000 miles of new roads will be rebuilt. Now, after that juxtaposition, I am not against the reconstruction budget for Iraq. If you want to build democracy, that should be the commitment of our country. The plan for Iraq is robust. The plan for America must be robust. The plan for Iraq has been thought through in an economic strategy. The plan for America must have the same strategy, the same care for its health care, for its pregnant women. The same care for its schools. The same care for its housing. The same care for its infrastructure. This budget that we are going to vote on leaves too many Americans behind. Because of the impact of the 2001 tax cut, 2.5 million Americans without jobs, 4 more million Americans without health care, a trillion corporate assets foreclosed on, and 2 more million Americans who have gone from middle class to poverty. One could be cynical enough to think that what I just read about Iraq versus America could be distilled down to 30 seconds. I want Members to think about this before they vote on this budget. Just papering over the differences on Medicare will not erase the differences between America and Iraq when it comes to our investment in education, health care, housing, our infrastructure. We need a robust plan for America. And this budget falls woefully short as it pertains to our future, our families' future and their children. Now, I am committed to working, if we win this war, which we will win this war, to the reconstruction of Iraq. I want the same emphasis, the same desire, the same dreams, the same hopes that our President talks passionately about for Iraq for here at home. Because we cannot guarantee 100 percent of pregnant women in Iraq with basic health care for their pregnancy and yet cut $95 billion of Medicaid where one out of every three Americans get their health care as it relates to their child birth. We cannot cut 40 programs, zero them out, Head Start schools, technology schools, teacher quality, and yet guarantee 25,000 new schools will be built in Iraq. We cannot talk about 25,000 new housing in Iraq and yet only provide the funding for 5,000 new affordable housing in America. That is not a dream for America. That is foreclosing on America's dream. And I know there are good people with good values on the other side who think hard about what they are doing, and I want them to think hard about the vote that they are going to cast on that budget because they have to go back home and explain how Iraq got moved to the front and their families, their neighbors got moved back. That is not right. We can do better. It need not be a Democrat-Republican issue. Let us make America first not only around the world but here at home.

Mr. EMANUEL

Mr. EMANUEL. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank my good friend from South Carolina for yielding. Mr. Speaker, I rise to speak about this Republican budget resolution. It is a budget that is a failed economic plan. It proposes $1 trillion in tax cuts, and these are tax cuts in search of an economic purpose. Fourteen months ago, President Bush proposed a $1.3 trillion tax cut to get this economy moving, to produce jobs. Two and one-half million Americans are without work since that tax cut, four million more Americans are without health cut since that tax cut, $1 trillion worth of corporate assets have foreclosed since that tax cut, and 2 million more Americans have moved from the middle class into poverty. That has been the economic impact and economic effect of that tax cut. Now we are offering another tax cut to have exactly the same type of economic impact. It has been a job killer, and also been leveling to the economy. We are about to vote on a budget in the next few days or weeks. The administration is also simultaneously proposing one of the largest rebuildings of another nation to the tune of about $90 billion request for fighting the war and for rebuilding Iraq. The administration's postwar request would build more housing, rebuild more schools, and go further in providing health care for pregnant women in Iraq than the administration budget does for America's children and America's families. The Wall Street Journal just as recently as the other day wrote on the postwar plans for Iraq being directed by the new Office of Reconstruction and Humanitarian Assistance in the Pentagon are striking in their scope and intended speed. The administration's plan to rehabilitate the Iraqi school system, for example, envisions the U.S. military forces to secure parts of Iraq and obtain the payroll lists and assess teachers' salaries for all of Iraqi schools, according to a 10-page USAID contract proposal. The contract, officials say, could total $100 million, will cover the cost of five pilot programs for accelerated learning to be launched within 3 months and then rolled out nationwide within 10 months, nationwide being Iraq. Only one-third of the Iraqi children are now enrolled in secondary school, but within a year the contractor will have all children in Iraq back in school. Their plan also envisions books and other necessary supplies to 4.1 million Iraqi schoolchildren, while 25,000 schools would have all they need to function at a standard level of quality. They will rebuild 25,000 schools in Iraq. I am not against, if we have to go to war, a reconstruction budget for Iraq, but as I just listed to you what they are planning for the schools and the schoolchildren of Iraq, I want you to note that this administration's budget calls for eliminating 40 specific educational programs here at home. The Star Schools, the Better Quality Teachers Schools, technology for our schools, rural education would be eliminated. Yet we are now talking about rebuilding 25,000 schools in Iraq; 4.1 million children in Iraq would get the basic school supplies. For the record, I think Illinois' children matter as well as Iraq's children. Again, I want to stress that I believe that Iraq should have a reconstruction budget. I just believe America should also have its reconstruction and rebuilding budget. Take a look at what the Wall Street Journal says about health care. In health care, there will be a 100 percent guarantee to the population for maternity care. Yet Medicaid will get a $95 billion cut here at home. Today Medicaid provides for one-third of the live births nationally, basic maternity care in this country. We will be proposing a $95 billion cut in Medicaid, and yet 100 percent coverage of maternity care for Iraqi women. We have 42 million Americans who work full time without health insurance. The budget proposed by the Republican Congress, not a single new dollar to cover the uninsured, which is a cancer on our health care system, yet in a recent article in the Wall Street Journal, 13 million Iraqis will be guaranteed basic health care. What is the plan for the 42 million Americans that work full time without health insurance? Zip, nothing, nada. Nothing for them. Also in the Wall Street Journal they state a reconstruction plan will have referral hospitals functioning in 21 cities in Iraq, yet America's hospitals in our cities are facing their worst financial crisis in the last 20 years. The Women, Infants and Children Program, which provides basic health care and prenatal care, is in for a 20 percent cut. Higher education in America, again on education, the budget underfunds Pell grants by more than $500 million, while college costs have gone up. In housing, recently in the Committee on Financial Services, Secretary of Housing and Urban Development Martinez said that the entire budget for the administration proposes 5,000 new housing units here in America, yet, as the Wall Street Journal notes, there is a bid for 20,000 new homes to be built in Iraq. America, 5,000 new affordable housing units; Iraq, 20,000 new homes. The LIHEAP proposal for heating for our poor, our elderly, is in for a 20 percent cut, yet we have a proposal on the books for 10 new power plants to be rebuilt in Iraq, and electricity will be restored to 75 percent of its pre-1991 level in Iraq. The Army Corps of Engineers is having a cut here in America. Yet in the rebuilding plan for Iraq, it calls for the complete reconstruction of the Umm Qasr Port so that it is fully open to cargo traffic. Yet the Corps of Engineers, which is essential to America's security, America's economic growth, it produces jobs for our economy, moves goods and services, they are open for a cut. Transportation. We will offer help to Iraq to build 3,000 miles of major roads and highways, yet the highway funding in America is cut $6 billion over the next 10 years as proposed by the administration's budget. Now, as I said to my good colleague from South Carolina, as I asked for this time, I am not in the business of giving my good friends on the other side political advice; but as they plan to look at this budget and vote on this budget, I want them to know that for the American people, their vote on the resolution of the reconstruction of Iraq will also be weighed equally as their vote for this budget. And in this budget our proposals to eliminate 40 education programs that are essential to our children's future and to our families' future, houses, they will not be cut; but only 5,000 new affordable units, compared to 20,000 in Iraq. My colleagues know that some people could take this down and make it understandable to Americans in a 30-second commercial. I want them to think hard about what they are about to vote on as it relates to America, and again I want to stress my view that I am not against a reconstruction budget for Iraq. I just believe America deserves equal and, as well, the same sense of intensity and the same sense of interest. As I started off, I talked about the economic impact that we find ourselves in here at home. But as this budget talks about areas of housing, health care, reconstruction for the health care system, the schools, the infrastructure for the housing area, it is a very robust, thorough plan for Iraq. Yet we underfund in each of these areas' basic needs here for America's families, America's economic future, our jobs, our health care, our retirement. We need the same type of reconstruction, the same type of commitment, the same type of energy, the same type of focus that is being focused on the reconstruction plan for Iraq. So I would just like my colleagues on the other side to think real hard about this budget, to think real hard about the priorities that are laid out in this budget. Because the impact of the first economic plan has been 2\1/2\ million Americans without work, 4 more million Americans who have joined the ranks of the uninsured who work full- time, $1 trillion worth of corporate assets that have been foreclosed on. That is the record. And to quote a good friend of mine, a great President, President Ronald Reagan: ``Facts are a stubborn thing.''

Mr. EMANUEL

Mr. EMANUEL. Mr. Speaker, today I rise to recognize one of Chicago's finest educators. Carol Kolberg has served the Archdiocese of Chicago for more than 32 years and has been principal of St. Bartholomew Montessori, an elementary school on the Northwest side, for the past thirteen years. Under her leadership St. Bartholomew has blossomed and today is recognized as one of the best elementary schools in the city. A lifelong educator, Ms. Kolberg was one of twelve principals in the United States selected by the National Catholic Education Association to receive the 2003 Dr. Robert J. Kealy Distinguished Principal Award. This prestigious honor is presented annually to an elementary school principal. In order to qualify an individual must first be nominated by their archdiocese. Once nominated, the Association selects the recipients based on their experience, community service, leadership, and educational philosophy. Carol Kolberg's credentials are outstanding in each of these areas and I am proud to recognize her. Mr. Speaker, I would also like to take this time to thank Ms. Kolberg for her service to Chicago. Across this country educators are being held to more stringent standards for preparing students. Carol Kolberg is a shining example of an educator, among many, who has devoted her life to school children. For 32 years Ms. Kolberg has selflessly given her best so that our children can learn and advance through life. I am proud to represent Ms. Kolberg and the other educators who serve the students of the 5th Congresional District.

Mr. EMANUEL

Mr. EMANUEL. I thank my colleague from Missouri for yielding me this time. Mr. Speaker, one of the first acts I did as a Congressman was to expedite the citizenship of a young man, Mano Catchatoorian, who is in the 416th Engineer Command, so he could ship out with his unit to Kuwait on February 24. I cannot think of a better thing than an individual who wanted to become a citizen and move out with his unit so he can join our forces but, most importantly, to be part of his Nation. I want us all to think about what we are doing today, because we are supporting our troops, we are supporting their families, and we are supporting our communities that will be missing the Little League coaches, the folks who work at the boys clubs, the girls clubs, the Boy Scouts. This is an appropriate thing, because Mano, before he left, he called me the next day, thanked me for what we did to expedite his citizenship. He said to me, ``just do me one favor. Don't forget us.'' I cannot think of a more just act than what we are doing today, regardless of our party, regardless of where we come from, not to forget them. Although we will vote in this resolution to support our troops, later on tonight I would like us all to put them and their families in our prayers.

Mr. EMANUEL

Mr. EMANUEL. Mr. Speaker, in the coming weeks I intend to introduce a bill to create the simplified family credit, real tax relief for working families with children. My proposal would help grow the economy, simplify the IRS code by merging an array of tax benefits, the earned income tax credit with approximately 4.3 million families eligible Americans, including 1.7 families with children, who, today, do not get, because of the complexity of the code, the child tax credit, the additional child credit, and the dependent exemption into a single credit, thereby shrinking well over 2,000 pages of the IRS Tax Code down to 12 easy questions. This would also go a long way toward significantly reducing the marriage penalty, rewarding work and making the Tax Code more child friendly. Regardless of what political party we come from, we should all agree that these goals and that the Tax Code ought to reflect these values. Despite the prospect of a war with Iraq, a stubborn recession, 2 million more unemployed Americans, urgent health care needs for the additional 4 million American that are without health care, we insist on debating a tax cut for the wealthiest in this country rather than focusing on those who need it most. A simplified credit in contrast is less, and far more responsive to the needs of working families.

Mr. EMANUEL

Mr. EMANUEL. Mr. Speaker, what we have decided is we just do not have the same sense of urgency. And let me add one other point that I lost in here is that today there was a story, I think in the Wall Street Journal again, that States have borrowed more money this year than at any time in the last 50 years for the States, greater I think in times by a magnitude of 3 in borrowing more money, and again they are making cuts again at the same time, the most severe cuts in the areas of health care and education; and we are basically mandating they have to meet certain obligations, not giving them the assistance and resources they need to meet those obligations. What are those obligations? They are in the area of health care where we have a health care crisis; 42 million Americans who work full time without healthcare. We do not have an agenda or plan to help them meet that obligation. We have not had a raise in the Federal level in the Pell grant to help people go to college. In over 4 years, the tuitions on average are going up 9, 10 percent this year. So we have put not only a burden on our States and our Governors, our State legislatures, to fund requirements that we pass here, most importantly we are putting demands and further burdens on middle-class, hard-working families who are trying to raise their kids right, with the right sense of values and get on to college so that they can succeed in life, and yet we are not giving them the resources they need. And that is why I brought up this point about both the Pell grant or public universities and the choices we make. We make choices. We have said that Turkey in that effort over there is more important. We have given Turkey now, in one year, twice the money we have given in Pell grants in this country to help middle-class and lower-middle-class children go to college. If we took the same type of resources, we could make free two thirds of public university education to kids. These are American children. We have a commitment to do right when we win this war, if we are going to go to war. I want our troops to succeed, but we have an obligation over here, and the truth is if we had a balanced deal we would not have to make a choice. These are not either/or choices.

Mr. EMANUEL. Right.

Mr. EMANUEL. Mr. Speaker, no. But I am thinking of recommending to the Governors Association that they hire the person who was negotiating for Turkey and maybe he could do them a good job. So there is no indication of that. In fact, what has happened is if the gentleman will read the Wall Street Journal report out of the meeting that the President had with the Governors, in fact he told them there will be no more assistance in that area. And mind you, this is not a partisan issue. It is the worst fiscal condition of all 50 States since World War II.

Mr. EMANUEL. Correct.

Mr. EMANUEL. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from North Carolina for yielding. Mr. Speaker, President Kennedy once said, ``To govern is to choose.'' I think it is very interesting, in the very week that the President was telling the Governors that we had no more money for their health care, Medicaid plans, their education, college, every State is raising tuition on middle-class families who are affording college and higher ed, the Leave No Child Behind. The very week that the President of the United States said to our Governors, I am sorry, there is not another penny for them, is the very week that we upped and sweetened our bid to Turkey; so we have now given Turkey $24 billion. I want to meet the person that was negotiating for Turkey. They have done themselves a wonderful job. We finally got ourselves a job plan and economic growth package. The problem is it is for Turkey, not for the United States. And we have done ourselves, I think, a world of damage here. And I believe personally that we need a northern front in our fight if we are going to war in Iraq and I do not think we should spare anything to save our lives; so clearly having a northern front in this war is going to be important. But I want my colleagues to think about the fact that in the very week that we told our Governors and, most importantly, the citizens of our States that there would not be another penny for higher ed, there would not be another penny in assistance on health care, that we could not fully fund the Leave No Child Behind on the education program, is the very week that we sweetened our offer to the nation of Turkey. To all the police departments that need money for fire, for all the cities that need assistance for police departments and fire for training on terrorism, I want them to now know Istanbul has their money. So I have come to the conclusion that maybe our States need to apply to Turkey for foreign aid. They have our money. When it comes to making sure that all our police departments and fire departments are fully trained for dealing with terrorism, they do not have the resources to deal with that. We do not have all the money that they need. They are not going to get all the training they need to deal with terrorism. And when we have an act here at home, which everybody knows that this war will instigate as further terrorism here in the United States, our police and fire departments do not have all the resources they need to act on that. I want my colleagues to think about the choices here, because as I have said early on, that President Kennedy once said there are choices. The amount of money that we have now guaranteed for Turkey, $24 billion, is twice the money we spend on Pell grants. We spend $11 to $12 billion a year. It is twice the money for Pell grants. The loan guarantees for Turkey, the same amount of money that we have now given Turkey, we could make two thirds of the existing tuition free at public universities. These are choices we are making. So as we make this assistance, as we tell our Governors we do not have money for them and there is not another penny for them and yet we tell Turkey here is another $2 billion, the same week we did that, I would like the left hand of the administration to meet the right hand of the administration, because somebody has not got a clear plan; and we are giving money away to Turkey while we are telling our own people here at home we do not have enough money for them. How did we get there? I have a chart here that shows the last 50 years of fiscal and economic management by Presidents. It goes back to the second term under Truman, and it goes through all the Presidents and tells how they did in managing the economy. And our present President, our President, has the most anemic economic growth of any President in the last 50 years. And since we are in the mood of quoting former Presidents, Ronald Reagan once said, ``Facts are a stubborn thing.'' And since the 2000 election, we have lost 2\1/2\ million jobs in this economy; 925,000 manufacturing jobs in the years 2001, 2002; 4 more million Americans are without health insurance; nearly a trillion dollars' worth of corporate assets have been foreclosed on, and 2 million more Americans have left the middle class for poverty. Facts are a stubborn thing. That is the record of this present President and the economic management at this time. And what has he chosen to do and what has the administration chosen to do? Having argued for a tax cut 14 months ago to get the economy moving, the net result has been the worst anemic growth of any President in 50 years: More people unemployed, more people without health insurance, more businesses closed, and more people joining the ranks of poverty. He has decided to put his foot on the accelerator and pushed further for more tax cuts. He is the only President in history, in a time of war, who has decided to have tax cuts. So we will ask our men and women to sacrifice, that those in the wealthiest corridors of our country will not be sacrificing and joining the rest of us as we do sacrifice. This is the wrong way to economic management. We can have a bipartisan approach that puts our fiscal house in order, invests in our future, and defends our interests overseas. As a person and individual Member of this Chamber who does support in some capacity military action, I think the notion of the last 2 weeks in Turkey where it was let us make a deal, unfortunately Turkey has walked away with the resources that our kids need, our police departments need, and our doctors and nurses need to provide health care.

Mr. EMANUEL

Mr. EMANUEL. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in opposition to H.R. 4, the Personal Responsibility, Work, and Family Promotion Act of 2003, and in support of the Democratic substitute amendment. For twenty years, a complicit agreement regarding welfare existed between conservatives and liberals in this country. Conservatives refused to devote more money to the program, and liberals refused to demand anything of recipients. We lost two generations of Americans to this failed system of dependency. I am a long-time believer in welfare reform. I worked in the White House and with the Congress to help enact the welfare reform legislation of 1996--and I was proud to be a part of the strong, bipartisan reform that legislation created. I applaud my colleagues in the House on both sides of the aisle who helped to pass what has been a landmark of successful reform. The 1996 reforms broke from the past with a new approach that grounded the welfare system in the values of work and responsibility. It was a bold and daring experiment that worked. Instead of simply handing needy families a check, we created new opportunities for families on welfare. By providing access to education and training, we helped welfare recipients to get better and more lucrative jobs. Recognizing recipients' need to care for their young children, we helped them to get child care, and allowed mothers of young children modified work requirements. Realizing that many low- paying jobs do not provide health insurance, we instituted transitional medical assistance for families coming off welfare. Since enactment of the 1996 reforms, enrollment has plunged more than 50 percent. The percentage of welfare recipients who work has increased five-fold over the past decade, and states now spend more on work support than on cash benefits. Thanks in large part to welfare reform, 8 million people left poverty in the 90s, teen pregnancy dropped by more than 20 percent, and child support collections doubled. We are moving in the right direction because we were true to our common values. The most important thing we've accomplished with welfare reform has been to connect a generation of children with the culture of work. Most of us grew up watching our parents go to work. We internalized the value of work and now are passing these values onto our own children. Today, millions of children who would otherwise have grown up in a home where work was alien, now are being raised in a home where they are learning the routine of work. In my state of Illinois, caseloads dropped 74.9 percent between 1996 and 2001, and, despite the recession, continued to fall an additional 23.7 percent in 2002. Many credit our strong success in caseload reduction to the state's innovative use of the flexibility in the original legislation, allowing Illinois to provide appropriate support for families making the transition from welfare to work. The proposed reauthorization will have a particularly disastrous effect on states like Illinois that have taken advantage of family support provisions to make notable progress. By removing the support system that has allowed many to get off and stay off welfare, this legislation is likely to create major setbacks in the progress of reform. The Democratic substitute amendment builds on the success of the 1996 reforms. It retains the strong work incentives that not only help individuals go back to work, but provide then with greater job security by helping them become better educated, and train for better jobs. It recognizes the importance of giving mothers with young children the flexibility to take care of their children. It eliminates the current exclusion of legal immigrants from the system. The Republican legislation represents a return to the failed ideologies of the past. It is not realistic to count the number of new hours of work mandated by this bill, and call reform a success. In voting for this legislation, you are voting against education and training to help current welfare recipients get out of dead-end jobs. You are voting for standards that will create hardships for working mothers, and add thousands to waiting lists for child care. You are voting to continue to exclude legal immigrants from participating in a program that would help them to contribute to this country rather than being simply a drain on the system. In fact, I find the title of this legislation ironic: The Personal Responsibility, Work, and Family Promotion Act in fact stifles personal responsibility, discourages work, and creates hardship for families. Inherent in the concept of personal responsibility is making the choice to work towards self-improvement. By mandating more hours of work while limiting the training and education options are available to workers, this bill removes all incentive for personal responsibility. Promoting work is not as simple as increasing work hours. There are likely to be countless individuals who, because they do not have the time, health, or child care resources to work forty hours each week, or simply cannot find a job where they are permitted to work forty hours, will choose instead not to work at all. If this legislation aims to promote work, it must do so by making work more realistic for workers and their families, not by imposing mandates that make working more difficult. Lastly, the legislation creates untold hardship for families. By increasing mandated work hours, while eliminating the current accommodation for women with young children, the bill will vastly increase the need for child care, without providing resources to the states to pay for it. Beyond this, the fact that the legislation limits opportunities for education and vocational training will keep many individuals in dead-end, low-paying jobs, with limited possibility to create better opportunities for their families. Creating bipartisan compromise on welfare reform is never easy. It took us three tries to find a bill that worked in 1996. However, in this time of economic hardship for our nation, and our states in particular, it is even more essential that the Congress works in a bipartisan fashion to forge compromise on a welfare reform reauthorization that works. Welfare reform succeeded in 1996 when we stopped making it a political issue, and devoted our selves to passing meaningful legislation. I have no illusions about what is going to happen today. However, I am disappointed that this Congress has chosen to take an enormous step backwards, prioritizing politics over pragmatism on an issue on which we have allowed good principles to rule in the past. I know that there are good people on both sides of the aisle, with good values, who have seen reforms we created improve the lives of people back home. To those in this Congress with whom I worked in 1996, let us not walk away from that we have accomplished. We have a mutual obligation not to let bad politics undo our good work. I am confident that there will be no shortage of politics and partisan fights this session--about their tax cut, the deficit, Medicare reform, prescription drugs. To give up on proven success on welfare reform to engage in another unnecessary partisan fight is wrong. Welfare reform is about demanding responsibility, encouraging work, and making work pay. Over the past six years, we as a nation--and millions of individuals--have benefited from our willingness to move beyond the old politics. This legislation represents a return to the failed politics and policies of the past. It is not compassionate nor is it conservative. It does a disservice to millions of families who have moved from welfare to work, and to the millions still struggling to do so. And it does wrong by our value as Americans.

Mr. EMANUEL

Mr. EMANUEL. Mr. Chairman, I would like to thank the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Cardin) for yielding me time. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in opposition to H.R. 4 and in support of the substitute amendment. For 20 years an unwritten agreement regarding the old welfare system existed between conservatives and liberals. Conservatives refused to devote more money to the program. Liberals refused to demand anything of recipients. We have lost two generations of Americans to that failed system of dependency. I was proud to be part of the strong bipartisan welfare reform that the White House and the Congress enacted in 1996. The 1996 reforms were a bold experiment that broke from the past with a new approach that grounded the welfare system in the values of work and responsibility. Enrollment has plunged by more than 50 percent since 1996. Eight million people left poverty in the 1990s. Teen pregnancy dropped by more than 20 percent and child support collections doubled. We are moving in the right direction because we were true to our common values. The most important thing that we have accomplished with welfare reform has been to connect a generation of children to the culture of work. Most of us in this room grew up watching our parents go to work. We internalized the value of work, and now we are passing those values on to our own children. Today, millions of children who would otherwise have grown up in a home where work was an alien concept are being raised in a home where they are learning the routine of work. I know that there are good people on both sides of this aisle with good values who have seen reforms we created improve the lives of folks back home. To those in this Congress with whom I worked in 1996, let us not walk away from what we have accomplished. We have a future obligation not to let bad politics undo our good work. I am confident, I am extremely confident, there will be no shortage of partisan fights this session, tax cuts, the deficits, prescription drugs. To give up on proven success to engage in another unnecessary partisan fight is wrong. Mr. Chairman, welfare reform is about demanding responsibility and encouraging work. Over the past 6 years we as a Nation have benefited from our willingness to move beyond the old politics. This legislation represents a return to the failed policies of the past. It is not compassionate nor is it conservative. It undermines our common values as Americans.

Mr. EMANUEL

Mr. EMANUEL. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of H. Res. 26, a resolution honoring the contributions of Catholic schools. I am pleased to have voted for this bipartisan resolution when it was passed unanimously by the House of Representatives last night. The tremendous success of Catholic schools is evident around the country and particularly in the Fifth Congressional District of Illinois where outstanding scholastic progress has been achieved in schools like St. Ferdinand Catholic Elementary, St. Patrick High School, and Notre Dame High School for Girls. These schools provide strong academic curriculums and engender significant parental involvement. They not only teach students the importance of academic achievement, but also provide a balanced perspective on life that promotes responsibility, justice and social service. Catholic schools also promote ethnic and racial diversity. Increasing numbers of children in Catholic schools in my district come from our minority communities. We must also recognize that students in Catholic schools are achieving exceptionally high graduation rates with increasing numbers advancing to higher education and giving back to the community through volunteer service. It is also important to recognize that the Catholic school experience fosters more than just scholastic excellence. It provides spiritual guidance to students by encouraging fundamental ideals and an appreciation for family values, community service, and faith in their own lives. This, in turn, shapes Catholic school students into leaders of tomorrow. Mr. Speaker, I support this important resolution and encourage Catholic schools in my district and across the United States to continue contributing to the development of strong moral, intellectual and social values in America's young people.