Chaka Fattah

Mr. FATTAH

Mr. FATTAH. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. FATTAH. Reclaiming my time, Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman. For every reason I can think of, Mr. Chairman, this is an important thing to do. Mr. Chairman, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Davis).

Mr. FATTAH. Reclaiming my time, Mr. Chairman, let me in conclusion say that I share the sympathies that have been articulated by the gentleman from Illinois. I do, however, want to say that I think this technical assistance addition is important, and I want to thank the majority and the ranking member.

Mr. FATTAH

Mr. FATTAH. Mr. Chairman, I think that the most important work that our faith-based organizations could perhaps do on behalf of this Nation is to pray for the soul of our country. If we would come at this hour and block grant Head Start to States, it would appear that we have blocked out of our heads the historical circumstances in our States in terms of the way they treated the academic development of poor children. What State in our country will we put on the honor roll in terms of providing an adequate educational opportunity for poor children, where they insisted that these children get qualified teachers and decent classrooms? In 45 of our 50 States there has been litigation by thousands of our school districts about the inadequacy of the provision of public education. Why did the Federal Government get in the business of Head Start? Was it because States were rushing to help poor children get ready for school? Why did we get involved in school lunch programs and summer job programs, in title I? We have gotten involved because States have never sought to provide for poor children what they need to prepare for their future.

Mr. FATTAH

Mr. FATTAH. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman from the District of Columbia for yielding me this time. And let me thank my good friend, someone who has ably led this Congress in a number of different fashions, but with whom I have worked closely on the Committee on Government Reform for many years, the gentleman from Connecticut (Mr. Shays). Mr. Speaker, I appreciate this opportunity. Mr. Speaker, I have had the honor of knowing Bob Borski for many years. When I was just some 23, 24 years of age, being elected to the State House in 1982, he was exiting the same chair that I was going to sit in, because he was on his way to Washington, leaving the State House and coming to represent the great city of Philadelphia and our Commonwealth, the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania here in Washington. And so I rise in support of H.R. 2328. Congressman Borski served here for many, many terms representing, in particular, northeast Philadelphia; but his reach went far beyond that, for he rose to be one of the leading Members of this Congress on transportation issues. He worked to secure for Pennsylvania and for many other areas of our Nation the rightful resources that were necessary to improve and enhance our airports, particularly the Philadelphia International Airport, our ports, our waterways. Bob Borski worked tirelessly. He was, in my mind, the most effective Member of Congress on transportation issues that we have ever had from Philadelphia. He worked to expand I-95. We could go through a lot, but one of the things I appreciated about Bob Borski was the human qualities. He stepped aside, for instance, so that I could go after a seat on the Committee on Appropriations when he was the more senior Member from our city, but he felt that he was going to have a fairly short career at that point and he thought it better that I go forward.

Mr. FATTAH. Mr. Speaker, I just wanted to say that on not just the congressional delegation, Jack Murtha, his colleagues from Philadelphia, Bob Brady and the sponsor of this bill, Congressman Joe Hoeffel, that there are many others in our State. With the loss, that is, with the leaving from Congress of Congressmen Shuster and Borski now, our State has lost a great deal of seniority and knowledge and expertise in the transportation areas, but we nonetheless appreciate their service. And particularly in terms of Bob Borski, the Governor; the mayor of our city, John F. Street; for many local officials, Bob Borski was an experienced and practical and commonsense political leader. We really appreciated his service. We wish him well as he moves on into other aspects of his life. I am reminded when he had his going-away get-together here on the Hill, he had his family around him at the podium. It was symbolic, but it was really substantive. That is to say that Bob Borski did so much here in the Congress, did so much to help this country and help his home State, but at the end of the day and most importantly for him as he tried to make sure that I understood when he talked about my daughter, Cameron, that family has to be the most important issue for all of us. He was a good example of that.

Mr. FATTAH. I yield to the gentleman from Connecticut.

Mr. FATTAH

Mr. FATTAH. Mr. Speaker, let me just say I thank the gentleman for yielding me a few minutes. I am concerned about the process that has brought this rule to the floor and the previous rule. I had offered an amendment that would have had the effect of gathering more data on what is a national crisis, one that the President of the United States himself in the State of the Union 2 years ago addressed when he said that he wanted to work towards a country in which every child had a qualified teacher in their classroom. We have seen study after study across this land in which African American, Latino, poor white youngsters in Appalachia and other communities are being put in a circumstance where every day they are in classrooms in which they are being taught by teachers who did not major or minor in the subjects that they are teaching. In fact, as a young, poor student in an inner city or in a poor rural area in Ohio, in Pennsylvania, you could go through your entire middle and high school years and never have a qualified math teacher or science teacher in your classroom. My amendment would have sought to gather more data to add to the already fairly convincing set of statistics on this matter. For some reason, without explanation, the Committee on Rules of this House has decided that that amendment should not be made in order; that this body should not even have an opportunity to vote to pursue one of President Bush's number one priorities, and a priority that should be, I think, first and foremost in all of our efforts if we want to improve education, because we cannot possibly expect a child to learn from someone who is teaching them a subject that they do not know. It is implausible to think that we would continue this dilemma across our country; that we would close our eyes to it, not want to have that information. And why this Committee on Rules would deny an opportunity for this amendment to be debated is without explanation. I think that it does a disservice to the House, to our democratic process. Moreover, and much more importantly, it does a disservice to future generations. We need that information so that as policymakers we can help shape education reform in a way that really is meaningful and makes sense. I am going to work, notwithstanding what the Committee on Rules has decided, to have this amendment considered in some other format, in some other way, so that at the end of the day, as a United States Congress, the most important lawmaking body in the country, we can begin to address this issue to make sure that there are, in fact, qualified teachers. Why would we have a child take a standardized test in every State in the Union and not have any concern about the standards that their teachers who have been instructing them have had to meet; or whether or not they have had a decent textbook, a reasonable opportunity to learn? I think this is not a partisan issue. There is no reason this amendment should have been ruled out of order. And I hope that the Committee on Rules in the future would give respect to the ideals that this is a democratic process and that all views should be heard, and then let the body work its will.

Mr. FATTAH

Mr. FATTAH. Mr. Speaker, I rise to suggest a caution flag as we rush towards this free lunch-approach to governmental fiscal policy. We cannot have a world-class military and defense, world-class health care, education, cities, and culture, and suggest that no one has to pay for it. And we talk about tax cuts today as if they are going to stimulate the economy tomorrow with some type of selective amnesia, because it was right here on this floor just 2 years ago that we passed the largest tax cut supposedly in the history of the country. And it did not stimulate our economy. Let us just take a look for a minute at where we are. We have moved from hundreds of billions of dollars of surpluses to now having hundreds of billions of dollars of deficits. We had millions of Americans who were working who are now unemployed; and, even today, the unemployment registration rate in our country has increased again. Consumer confidence is down. Housing starts are down. And every single indicator, in terms of economic health in our country, is troubling. We have heard from the Chair of the Federal Reserve Board, Alan Greenspan, suggesting that this tax cut is very problematic in both the short term and the long term. He cautions the Congress that our combination of both spending and tax cuts risks the fiscal health of this Nation. And the Republican majority, I am sure, wants to say, well, we just need to get spending under control, as if the country should forget that they are in the majority, that they control spending both in the House and in the Senate, and they control the signature from the executive at the White House. For so many years now we have been insisting on spending more on defense, we have been insisting on investing in a whole range of exotic weapons systems, and then we come to the floor and the majority offers us more and more tax cuts. The fiscal health of our country is in jeopardy. Future generations will have to pay. We should say to Americans, why do we not be mature, pay the bills as we go, rather than run the country into further deficit?

Mr. FATTAH

Mr. FATTAH. Mr. Speaker, I, too, rise to comment on the life and legacy of our former colleague Lucien E. Blackwell, who served as a Congressman for the Second District, and prior to that served for two decades as a member of the city council of Philadelphia, where he served as a chairman of the finance committee and moved through the council all of the critical and major pieces of legislation that impacted the growth and development of the city of Philadelphia as we know it today. And even before that service, he served as an elected official in the State legislature in Pennsylvania. I remember almost three decades now ago when he led an effort with the late State representative David P. Richardson of Pennsylvania to clean up the conditions at our youth detention facility headquartered in our side of the State of the Youth Study Center on the parkway. He fought in the city council and passed the first major minority set- aside legislation once he found out that African American and women- owned businesses were getting less than 2 percent of the city procurement business, and created a program that opened a door for disadvantaged businesses to have an opportunity at the procurement in Philadelphia. As my colleague, the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Brady), has indicated, he started his public career, however, as a labor leader where he leveled the Longshoreman's Union in Philadelphia. And immediately prior to that he served our Nation in the Korean War conflict. He was a veteran of that conflict, and he won medals for his commitment and his service fighting with the Korean War veterans, and was a part of the effort to create an appropriate memorial for Korean veterans. So Lucien E. Blackwell, who died suddenly at the age of 71, as it is reported, leaves now his wife, who is a city councilwoman in Philadelphia and a major leader in our city, and a host of children and grandchildren, who are going to in their own way make a mark and live up to the legacy of Lucien Blackwell. And Philadelphians, Pennsylvanians, and all across this country people remember the passion of Lucien Blackwell, particularly his effort to be concerned about those who were considered in some quarters to be little people or outside of the mainstream of power. He fought with Maleek for ex-offenders. He fought to feed the homeless in Philadelphia, sometimes to the chagrin of the establishment. He fought to include labor fully in the discussions of economic development in our city, major building projects and every other respect. Lucien Blackwell should be remembered by this House as not just a former Member, but someone whose life of service honored the House by him being a Member here, and for all of his service to our country we should be grateful. And I would just like to say that for a lot of those people, the Linda Brickhouses, the Kentues at the grassroots political network, and all of the people he worked with, John Macklin on the disadvantaged business efforts, the minority business efforts, and the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Brady), who he worked with shoulder to shoulder developing the political machinery in our city, at least in terms of the Democratic Party, but he also reached across the aisle and worked quite well with our Republican colleagues to make our city what it is today. We are indebted. And I join my colleague from the First Congressional District in honoring his memory, his legacy, and I know that this House will find appropriate ways as we go forward to more formally recognize his service. I thank the Speaker for allowing us this time.

Mr. FATTAH

Mr. FATTAH. Mr. Speaker, I rise to make the point that it is not the assistance that we are providing, that this is assistance that the American public has paid for through their unemployment contributions to the fund. I just share the concerns of the gentleman from New York (Mr. Rangel), the ranking member.

Mr. FATTAH

Mr. FATTAH. Mr. Speaker, let me thank the managers of this bill for their work, not just here on the floor but more importantly in the conference committee. And also I add kudos to Senator Dodd, who has really worked hard with the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Ney) and the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Hoyer) and also to pay deference to the dean, the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Conyers). This is a good bill. It is not, as we now know, a perfect bill; but it is a bill that moves this process forward. Mr. Speaker, I served as a teller here in the House, and I had to record the results from the Florida election and the Presidential race in the year 2000. And we know that not only were there votes not counted by many in the State of Florida, but throughout this country there are holes in our democracy. And this bill is an attempt to respond to that. We have worked the will of the conference committee, merging ideas in the Senate and the House. There are things in this bill that I am sure your Senate colleagues would rather not be there and things we prefer not be a part of this bill, but there is a shared consensus of the conferees; and we would hope that it would receive an overwhelming favorable endorsement here in the House, and I think it will move our democracy toward a more perfect Union. Announcement by the Speaker Pro Tempore

Mr. FATTAH

Mr. FATTAH. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the Spratt amendment. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of the Spratt Substitute for the Use of Force Against Iraq Resolution. The Spratt substitute authorizes the use of U.S. armed forces to support any new U.N. Security Council resolution that mandates the elimination, by force if necessary, of all Iraqi weapons of mass destruction, long-range ballistic missiles, and the means of producing such weapons and missiles. The substitute also calls on the president to seek authorization from Congress in the absence of a U.N. Security Council resolution sufficient to eliminate by force, if necessary, all Iraqi weapons of mass destruction. If we go to war with Iraq, we must do so with the approval of the U.N. Security Council, and the general cooperation and support of the United Nations. We risk damaging the U.N. Security Council's legitimacy as an authoritative body in international law if the United States acts unilaterally. If the argument for involvement in Iraq is that we lead by example, then we signal to the rest of the world that it is okay to ignore the concerns voiced by the international community. This will only lead to further future conflict. If the United Nations is to impose sanctions, restore order, and be an effective international institution, it must have the respect and cooperation of the most powerful country in the world. Rather than initiating a war with Iraq, let's make an effort to achieve a just and lasting peace in the Middle East between Israel and the Palestinians.

Mr. FATTAH

Mr. FATTAH. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize the importance of National Rehabilitation Week, as well as congratulating the accomplishments of the Rehabilitation Unit at Roxborough Memorial Hospital. Each year, thousands of rehabilitation providers and health and human services agencies join together during the third week in September to celebrate the powers of rehabilitation and share the message that through rehabilitation there is hope, achievement, and success. To answer the need to educate people throughout the United States, Allied Services healthcare system first celebrated National Rehabilitation Week in 1976. What began as a small scale local awareness campaign 26 years ago has steadily grown in scope over the years. The Rehabilitation Unit at Roxborough Memorial Hospital is dedicated to serving the rehabilitative needs of the Roxborough community. Rehabilitative therapy allows many victims of injury and illness to achieve independence and improved quality of life. Individuals with disabilities have found hope, spirit, and dignity through the service of rehabilitation medicine. Mr. Speaker, I commend the Rehabilitation Unit at Roxborough Memorial Hospital for their tireless dedication to help patients work to regain strength, confidence, and daily living skills after a disabling injury or illness.

Mr. FATTAH

Mr. FATTAH. I rise today to mark an historic milestone on the road to the elimination of a devastating disease of the developing world, lymphatic filariasis. The global eradication of a disease has been accomplished only once in history, with the elimination of naturally occurring smallpox. Public health officials are eager to replicate that success. Yet despite the huge advances in our understanding of diseases and their mechanisms, international experts believe that there are still very few major diseases that can be deemed eradicable by existing technology. The World Health Organization (WHO) is currently targeting seven diseases or disorders for elimination or eradication. They are: Guinea worm (dracunculiasis), polio, leprosy, neonatal tetanus, Chagas disease, iodine deficiency disorders, and lymphatic filariasis. Today, I rise to focus on the parasitic disease lymphatic filariasis, or LF. LF is an ancient scourge that has disabled and disfigured people for thousands of years. Transmitted by mosquitoes, LF is caused by thread- like worms that infect the human lymphatic system, leading to permanent damage to the lymphatic and renal systems. LF gives rise to a condition known as elephantiasis which leads to the development of grotesque, chronic swelling of the legs, genitals and breasts, leading to lifelong social and physical disabilities. LF is mostly found in the tropical developing world, where it further exacerbates poverty by physically incapacitating people during what should be the most productive years of their lives. Lost productivity caused by the disease costs billions of dollars across the world each year. LF also puts a tremendous strain on healthcare systems in the developing world. In addition to its economic impact, LF inflicts heavy psycho-social consequences on the individuals who are affected. LF affects around 120 million people, with more than one billion people at risk of infection. In 1998, the WHO and the pharmaceutical company GlaxoSmithKline (GSK) announced a worldwide collaboration to fight LF. This partnership has now become a global alliance of 35 private and public institutions along with the Ministries of Health in LF endemic countries, all committed to eliminating lymphatic filariasis. GlaxoSmithKline has its US headquarters in my district in Philadelphia, and over 6,000 Pennsylvanians work for GSK in the search for cures and treatments to disease. GSK makes an anti-parasitic drug called albendazole that is useful in the fight against LF. GSK has committed to donating as many tablets as needed to eliminate lymphatic filariasis. The World Health Organization estimates that GSK will donate up to six billion doses of albendazole before the program is complete, making the GSK albendazole donation program the largest pharmaceutical donation in history. Today, I am proud to announce that GlaxoSmithKline has produced the one hundred-millionth donated tablet of albendazole for the Lymphatic Filariasis Elimination Program. This is a milestone achievement in a long road, and I commend GlaxoSmithKline for its commitment to world health. Whether it's in improving access to needed health services, providing affordable vaccines and HIV treatments, or dedicating resources to worthy projects in Pennsylvania, GlaxoSmithKline has shown time and time again its dedication to improving lives locally and globally. I commend GlaxoSmithKline for its success to date in the Lymphatic Filariasis Elimination Program, and I wish GSK, the World Health Organization and the rest of their partners every success in the completion of their task.

Mr. FATTAH

Mr. FATTAH. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to have my name removed as a cosponsor of H.R. 4600.

Mr. FATTAH

Mr. FATTAH. Mr. Chairman, I was very supportive of the supplemental appropriations bill as we worked our will in committee under the quite able leadership of our chairman and ranking member. I am, however, somewhat concerned about the rule and the self-executing nature of the various amendments to this, particularly the one related to the debt ceiling and the like. I just want my colleagues on the Committee on Appropriations to know that I think the original work of the committee as reported represented, I think, an appropriate response to a number of issues facing the country at this time, and I was particularly pleased with the work that was done to help the District of Columbia meet some of the needs that have been associated with September 11 in terms of police overtime and the like. I just want to thank the chairman and the ranking member for their work on those important matters. As we conclude our work, I would hope that in the future we would not have these types of add-ons. But it is part of the process, unfortunately, and we will have to work our will here on the floor. But the committee deserves, I think, appropriate thanks from the House for the original work that was done.

Mr. FATTAH

Mr. FATTAH. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize a truly remarkable man, a person who genuinely exemplifies what it means to be a teacher, mentor, and scholar. Mr. Bernard C. Watson, a longtime educational and civic leader in Philadelphia, will be this year's recipient of the Philadelphia Award for 2001. The award, which will be presented June 11, honors a resident of the Philadelphia region who does the most to ``advance the best and largest interest of the community.'' The award is complimented with a cash prize of $25,000. Prior recipients of this distinguished award include people such as Sister Mary Scullion, co-founder of Project H.O.M.E., former Mayor Edward Rendell, former City Council President and current mayor John Street, and Rev. Leon Sullivan, a social activist, and educator responsible for leading international efforts to promote nonviolent social and economic change. Originally from Gary, Indiana, Mr. Watson quickly rose to prominence by becoming a deputy superintendent to Philadelphia public schools in 1967. He was also president of the William Penn Foundation, vice president for academic affairs at Temple University, and vice president of the Pennsylvania Council of the Arts. Considered an expert in his field, Mr. Watson was appointed to a number of educational advisory councils by three different U.S. presidents. He also authored several books, including a memoir, ``Colored, Negro, Black: Chasing the American Dream.'' Chairman of the Philadelphia Award Trustees, William J. Marrazzo, indicated Mr. Watson was selected from dozens of highly qualified nominees. Chairman Marrazzo commented that Mr. Watson ``has been a tireless fighter of ignorance and injustice, a determined advocate for educational excellence, and an energetic supporter of the arts. He is truly one of Philadelphia's treasures.'' Mr. Speaker, I couldn't agree more with the Chairman's comments. Mr. Watson's selflessness is evidenced in his words and actions. Educating others, Mr. Watson recently reflected, is the most rewarding aspect of his work. Mr. Watson commented, ``Education is how you give people control of their lives. It is a way of giving someone the notion of what you can be as a human being.''

Mr. FATTAH

Mr. FATTAH. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from the great State of Texas (Mr. Edwards).

Mr. FATTAH. Mr. Chairman, I yield 45 seconds to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Bentsen).

Mr. FATTAH. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. First of all, I know at least for myself I would rather be home with my wife on Valentine's Day, but we are here and in order to clean out the creek, we have to get the hogs out of the water first. What we need to focus in on here, we have heard from the gentleman from Connecticut (Mr. Shays). He is against this amendment. We have heard from the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Meehan). He is against it. The people who are the promoters of campaign finance here in the House are against this amendment and those people who have spent every amount of energy and intellect on trying to stop and derail this bill, they are for this amendment. So, now we should not need, as the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Kingston) said when he opened this debate, to bring a great deal of intellectual curiosity of this. The co- sponsors of the bill are against the amendment. They said it did not show up last night. It was in in July. Either when that information was offered, the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Weldon) who was arguing that point, still said, well, I am going to vote for it anyway. Do not let the facts get in your way. Let us try nonetheless if we can to honor our two colleagues who have worked so hard to bring us to this moment, and let us take their word for what it is they are trying to accomplish. Those of us who support Shays-Meehan, let us vote against this amendment.

Mr. FATTAH. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute and 15 seconds to the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Hoyer).

Mr. FATTAH. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. FATTAH. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from the Commonwealth of Massachusetts (Mr. Meehan), one of the prime sponsors.

Mr. FATTAH. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Chairman, let me rise in opposition to this amendment. For I guess 10 times tonight or today we have been confronted with any manner of amendment seeking to derail the opportunity for this House to join our colleagues in the Senate and to give this President, who committed himself to be a reformer with results, an opportunity to put his signature on a campaign finance reform bill. We have had people come at this issue from every different conceivable direction. Now we have this final attempt. I am sure my colleague and my friend would not be willing to amend his amendment to have both parties accede ownership of any properties ever built with soft money, any television stations, any other facilities. This notion that somehow during this transition period the majority would prefer that this money be spent on campaigns attacking its members rather than to be put towards refurbishing a party headquarters; this bill allows either party to take the extra soft money, not spend it on campaigns, but to invest it in infrastructure as we move to ban it completely. It is not dissimilar to other transitions and other reform measures that we have dealt with in the past. So, Mr. Chairman, let us enjoy another what will be failed attempt to derail this House from meeting its date with destiny, and that is we will pass Shays-Meehan, and we will do it tonight. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.