Chaka Fattah

Mr. FATTAH

Mr. FATTAH. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I would like to, first of all, join with my colleague from Texas in urging the House to favorably consider H.R. 3810. This is one of the many of the naming bills that we will consider today, but it is singularly important to the sponsor of this bill and has been cosponsored by the entire New Jersey delegation. I would like to rise in favorable support of this bill and ask for its consideration before the House. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. FATTAH

Mr. FATTAH. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, let me also rise in support of H.R. 2623. The House would have to take note that the only reason that this bill is before us, and one of the greatest pleasures that I have had as ranking member of this Subcommittee on Postal Service, is that I have the opportunity to work so closely with my colleague, the gentleman from the great State of Mississippi (Mr. Taylor) who introduced and sponsored this legislation. Mr. Speaker, I yield whatever time he would need to the gentleman from Mississippi (Mr. Taylor) for him to articulate to the House his reasons for offering this legislation.

Mr. FATTAH

Mr. FATTAH. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the requisite number of words. I strongly urge my colleagues to favorably support the amendment being offered by the gentleman from West Virginia (Mr. Mollohan), the ranking member, and also my colleague the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Fox). In our Nation, where we guarantee those who have been alleged to have committed the most atrocious criminal acts the right to counsel, for this Congress to do anything less than our absolute best to provide legal services to Americans who cannot afford it I think would be shrinking from our responsibilities. So I rise in support of this amendment. I would ask that my colleagues look at the fine tradition of Legal Services, understand how it has made a positive impact on the life chances of literally millions of Americans in terms of their pursuit of all of those things that we hold dear as a society. I hope that this House would find it within their collective resolve to overwhelmingly support this amendment.

Mr. FATTAH

Mr. FATTAH. Mr. Speaker, I am submitting for the record a recent speech given by the Honorable Marjorie O. Rendell, Judge of the U.S. District Court of Appeals, on the occasion of the recent commencement at Peirce College, in my Congressional district. Peirce College Commencement Address by the Honorable Marjorie O. Rendell This is not my first graduation address, so I was not surprised when Dr. Lendo made an appointment to discuss with me the attributes of the school and the class that I should be aware of. He started by saying, ``We're not your normal college,'' and twenty minutes later, I had the picture. This is not your normal college. I have no intention of talking about you going out into the world. You are the world. I will not liken your school environment to a cocoon because you have all clearly left that developmental stage long ago. I was quite taken by Dr. Lendo's description of the class and realized how distinctly different my address would have to be from a ``traditional'' commencement speech. My mind started working overtime, and I awoke at 6:00 a.m. the next morning with the wheels a-turning (My horoscope that day, I later discovered, said that I would be a steamroller. We've all had days like that--and some not quite like that.) In any event--and this is the truth,--three songs from my past came to mind, songs that set the tone and frame the content of what I want to impart today. I will take Dr. Lendo's description as gospel, and assume that most of the graduates have ``been there, done that''. In that we have a common ground (You don't get to age fifty without having ``been there'', and having ``done that.') So allow me to share with you some thoughts about how wonderful you should feel about your arrival at this moment with many accomplishments and experiences tucked in your pockets and finally, the diploma in hand. The first song is a children's song, ``The Bear Went Over the Mountain.'' It goes like this: The bear . . . and whaddya think he saw; he saw another mountain, he saw another mountain. . . You do not know until you get to the top of that mountain what you will see. Now, I take issue with the bear seeing only another mountain ahead of him. I think the look back down the mountain is rather nice. In fact I tell mothers struggling with career and kids and the fun that entails, that these times are tough, but, believe it or not, they're really great to look back upon. It's fun to look back upon juggling the sick child, the busy husband, the demanding client, the needy parent, the barking dog--all needing you at once. Tough going up the mountain, for sure, but much easier to look back down. I find that life is a mountain, with two sides. The first part, the trip up, is largely trial and error, while at the top, you stop, take a breath, appreciate your accomplishment, and start down, with the rest being somewhat easier due to what you've learned. Being at the top is fun . . . and many of you are there today. Now, the bear did see other mountains ahead, so the trip down may not be the end of it, but I urge you to stop and enjoy, take pride not only in the fact that you arrived, but on how you got there. All the trials and tribulations, the trailblazing and exploration of uncharted territory that Dr. Lendo spoke of, the ``going it aloneness'' of what you did, these should bring a rush, a sense of satisfaction and accomplishment. Bask in it today, for tomorrow there's, as they say, the rest of the journey! The second phrase is from a popular song ``I can see clearly now''. I can see clearly now the rain is gone I can see all obstacles in my way Gone are the dark clouds that had me blind* It's gonna be a bright, bright sunshiny day *[Here is that rainbow I've been praying for] Wait a minute. This guy's as bad as the bear. He sees the obstacles clearly and it's going to be a bright day? What's his problem? Well, again, seeing your problems clearly, as compared to not being able to see them at all, or having a less than clear picture of what lies ahead is not all that bad. All of us have our struggles, whether financial, health, family issues, frustrations, and setbacks. Education, pride and confidence enable us to deal with them. The knowledge that comes from what you have learned in the classroom and in life helps you deal with what you must confront. I have always liked the passage from the Bible, ``When I was child, I spoke as a child, I understood as a child, I thought as a child; but when I became a man I put away childish things. For now we see as in a mirror, dimly, but then I shall know just as I also am known'' Your life experiences and your education give you the kind of self-knowledge that is rewarding and satisfying in and of itself. When I was interviewed for the position of judge, someone asked me, ``What in your background has prepared you to sit in judgment on others and make solitary decisions that will affect people's lives?'' It was a very good question. My response was: First, I have raised a child; Second, I have experienced political campaigns which, truth be told, prepares you to single-handedly withstand World War III; and Third, I have been a female bankruptcy lawyer, in a profession in which females, let alone female bankruptcy attorneys, have not always been, shall we say, welcomed. In any event, I interpreted the question as, ``What has formed your insides'', and those were my thoughts. As Dr. Lendo has spoken of today, we've got some well-developed insides here today. I don't need to tell you that the things you confront that are burdensome are nonetheless opportunities; you know that. I don't need to tell you that your families are proud of you today, that's already part of you. Take some satisfaction in what has formed your insides, because today it's written all over your face. Another memorable question (and I know you're waiting for the third song, which I'll get to) was posed to me by the mother of one of Jesse's friends. We had taken the boys on a short ski trip--husbands not invited--and were preparing dinner. We were talking about family, kids, work and juggling--what else--and she asked me, ``What sustains you?'' I was taken aback; I'd never really thought about being sustained, let alone what did it. I thought a minute and replied, ``love of those around me''. When it comes right down to it, the love and support of those around us provides the sustenance for us to go on and do what we do. The point of sharing these two questions and answers is that the self-knowledge--the seeing clearly, even of obstacles, that you are capping off with your diploma today is a reward in itself. Obstacles seen through the rainbow of the light of knowledge are manageable. Take a few minutes over the next week and ask your self these questions--what has formed you, and what sustains you?--and you will take great pride I am sure in your answers, and appreciate even more this great day. Now for the third song. I actually sang this at a fundraiser for Bill Gray. It was at the Franklin Institute. The acoustics were bad, and everyone kept talking during the speeches. No one could hear the speakers, who were praising Bill for his years in Congress, as he was retiring to head the United Negro College Fund. So I decided to sing, and I sang ``Oh, the Lord Is''. I thanked Bill for using the tools God had given him to benefit us all. But I thought of doing this because this song is my joyful tune. It gives glory, yet has humility in it. It says that all we need, Lord, is the tools, just give us the tools and we'll do the rest. We'll do the hard work, sweat the sweat, take the time, apply the creativity, nurture, plant, prune, water, and cause the tree to grow. Give us the brains, the brawn, the fortitude, the courage, the hope, and we'll do the rest. And, when I would leave a college exam on which I had guessed right as to what was going to be asked, I thanked God for the tools. And after a fairly short and very successful childbirth, I thanked God for the tools. Well, today, I do hope you, too will take the time, to look around at all you have accomplished, at the people who have sustained and supported you, at the year you have put into doing all the things that wear you down and yet build you up, and give thanks for the tools.

Mr. FATTAH

Mr. FATTAH. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, let me first of all thank the gentleman from New York (Mr. McHugh) who, throughout his service as chairman of this very important subcommittee, has extended every courtesy to those of us on the Democratic side of the aisle. I would like to thank the gentleman. I would also like to rise in support of H.R. 3808, offered by another of my colleagues, one who I serve on the Committee on Education and Workforce with, the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Upton). Mr. Speaker, I would like to say, obviously we fully support the naming of this postal facility on behalf of a former colleague who served for more than a decade and a half as a distinguished Member of the United States Congress, and especially since the gentleman served prior to that as a member of the State Senate in Michigan, and I, as a member of the State Senate in Pennsylvania, have a certain affection for people who come to the House from important roles in our State legislative bodies. I want to also recognize his contributions and service on the Committee on Appropriations. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. FATTAH

Mr. FATTAH. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I also join in support of H.R. 2799. The naming of this postal facility in Chicago is also quite important. One might wonder why the United States Congress would take time to go through the process of naming postal facilities after Americans. But I think, as the chairman has mentioned, there are people among us who have risen above the ordinary and achieved extraordinary accomplishments and achievements in their lives and, even beyond that, have made a contribution to the broader community and to the country as a whole. In this case, I refer to Reverend Milton Brunson for his work and the inspiration that he has brought through the gospel singing, and not only his recognition with a Grammy Award but his comforting of really millions of American families through their opportunity to listen to his work and his words in song. I would like to thank my colleague again, the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Davis), who has been quite persistent in making sure that this subcommittee appropriately recognizes people who have made these types of contributions in his community and has been eager to find the time within the House's schedule in which both the subcommittee and full committee and now the House could act on these bills. This is quite important to the people that he represents, and he has done a very good job in making sure that our committee understands its role in helping him achieve his purpose here in the House. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Davis), to give the House a full understanding of the importance of this legislation.

Mr. FATTAH. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank Denise Wilson from my staff and Neil Snyder for their work on these and other matters related to the Subcommittee on Postal Service, and also, again, to the majority staff. It is not yet perfect, but nonetheless, I think all would agree that we have the best Postal Service anywhere in the world, and we are working through the good efforts of our chairman and others to improve it even beyond its present status. I want to thank all of the staff for their efforts on these bills and others. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. FATTAH

Mr. FATTAH. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, let me again thank the chairman of the subcommittee for his cooperation in these matters. H.R. 2798 is a naming bill that should enjoy the unanimous support of this House, for it does in such a very real way represent the naming of a facility in honor of someone who has improved the life chances of so many through her work and through her actions as a community organizer. I want to use the time that I will exercise here really to thank the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Davis), my colleague, for bringing this matter to our attention; for it was through his extraordinary leadership and persistence that the House now today will consider this naming bill and the one that will follow. It is, as the chairman mentioned, quite easy sometimes for us to proceed along a course when we are naming a facility after someone who all of us know or whose work that we are all familiar with, but the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Davis), serving as the representative of the people of the Chicago and of the West Side, really worked tirelessly to have our committee act on this bill. Mr. Speaker, I yield whatever time that may be necessary to the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Davis) for him to express the importance of this legislation prior to the House's final action on it. (Mr. DAVIS of Illinois asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. FATTAH. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, it should be clear that, along with the rules and precedents set by our subcommittee, that this has been a piece of legislation that has been jointly cosponsored by all of the members of the Illinois delegation. Mr. Speaker, I have no further requests for time, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. FATTAH

Mr. FATTAH. Mr. Speaker, I have no further speakers, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. FATTAH. Mr. Speaker, I yield whatever time he may want to utilize to the gentleman from Washington (Mr. McDermott).

Mr. FATTAH. Mr. Speaker, utilizing whatever time I may consume, let me, first of all, join in support of H.R. 3630, which would name an appropriate facility in New Mexico after our former colleague. As someone who serves on the House Ethics Committee and also had an opportunity to serve with Congressman Schiff on the Committee on Government Reform and Oversight, I would like to offer my personal condolences to his wife of some 29 years and also for the rest of his immediate and extended family. His service, not only in this Congress as one of some 12,000 or so Americans who have served in this body but in the Armed Forces and as someone who is deeply committed to a whole host of principles, it was the 1998 American Almanac of American Politics in which it said that he was a person who followed what was right, irrespective of the politics of the moment. I think that that best exemplifies the colleague that we all knew and understood to be someone who we could respect for his independence here in the House. Mr. Speaker, I would like to join in the favorable consideration and hopefully unanimous consideration of this naming bill after someone who has not only served but served this institution with dignity. We have the finest postal service in the world, and we want to also take a minute to utilize the opportunity to name some of these facilities after some of the finest people that we know. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. FATTAH

Mr. FATTAH. Mr. Speaker, let me thank the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Borski), the senior congressman from our city, for yielding. I also would like to welcome and add in part to this introduction of Robert Brady to the United States Congress. This body is made up of Members who come here from all walks of life and who have a desire to serve the public. Bob Brady is going to fit in extraordinarily well, because he has walked through all of the shoes of the lives of millions of people in the southeastern area of Philadelphia region. He has worked with people to help constructively engage them in the political process. He is someone I have known for at least 2 decades now who has worked with me and worked with others in Philadelphia to help us as we strive to serve in public life. I want to welcome him, acknowledge his family who I know very, very well, his wife and his mother and others who are here. But I just wanted to say to my friend, welcome to the United States Congress.

Mr. FATTAH

Mr. FATTAH. Mr. Chairman, let me thank the gentleman for yielding. And let me also concur that there are, I am sure, well-meaning people on both sides of this debate. But I think that this amendment would move this country in the wrong direction. Harvard University was founded for the sons of landowners, white male landowners, and sons of the clergy. And when we look at the circumstances of higher education in this country and we know that the greatest predictor whether a kid would go to college is the education of one's parents, and then we already have heard the history of how certain groups have been excluded, then we know by mere fact that therefore others would be in a deficit position in order to go forward and matriculate at a higher education institution. We know that income is a secondary factor, and we know where minority groups fall in the income distribution scale in this country. We also know that the third factor is the K-to-12 education. And everywhere we look in this country, we will see that minority students are in underfunded public education systems that disproportionately put them in a situation where they cannot compete adequately in some of these standardized tests. So if we look at those three factors that on their face are nonracial in their characteristics, they have in fact an impact. The other thing that is important is that the Riggs amendment, my colleague from the Committee on Education and the Workforce, his amendment would allow a university like Penn State, where I served on the board of trustees, or Temple University, to admit, as many do now, foreign students based on preferences and all kinds of other considerations, giving them points in the admissions process, giving them headway over and above native- born American students who come from groups of Americans who have been left out of the picture. Now, here in this Capitol, we have some 300 pictures, artistic pieces, renderings about our history. Not one picture is of an African American or a Hispanic American, a Latino. Is the kind of America we want to paint where we lock other people out? Do we want to return to the day when in law school and medical school it is all males and no females? What does that suggest for this country as we would go forward into the 21st century?

Mr. FATTAH

Mr. FATTAH. Mr. Chairman, let me first thank the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Goodling) and the gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Clay), and also the gentleman from California (Mr. McKeon) and the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Kildee) for the excellent work product that has been produced. I too rise in support of favorable consideration of H.R. 6. I, however, want to add to what has been said by others about an important part of this bill which is the High Hopes program, the fact that not only has it been embraced by the Clinton administration, but this is a proposal that has been bipartisan since its inception. That is, it has enjoyed the support of Members on both sides of this aisle, both in the committee and in the full House. I want the record to fully reflect that this is a bipartisan initiative. I would also like to thank the staff who have worked so hard on this product, for Sally Stroup and also David Evans for their hard work. There are millions of American families who are going to benefit not just by the initiative that I referenced, but throughout this bill there are programs and projects that will appropriately intersect with the interests and aspirations of American families for their next generations to receive the highest possible opportunities to reach their academic potential. Finally, I want to say that I think it says a great deal about the 105th Congress, at the same time that when we make it clear to young people that there are consequences when they act inappropriately, we are now through the High Hopes 21st century initiative making it clear when they do the right thing that there will be rewards and that we indeed expect of them the highest in terms of their achievements. Many of us will not be around in the next century when these sixth graders are going to college, but today we are not thinking about the next election, we are thinking about the next generation.

Mr. FATTAH

Mr. FATTAH. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to remove my name as a cosponsor to H.R. 2500, the Responsible Borrower Protection Act.

Mr. FATTAH

Mr. FATTAH. Mr. Speaker, at a Town Meeting I convened in Philadelphia on March 10, the Mayor, Edward Rendell made the following remarks which I commend to my colleagues. Mayor Rendell: Good morning. Congressman. Good morning, members of the Panel. Let me just start out by saying that there is no issue as important to the future of the City as workforce development. We are a City that has currently 66,000 families on AFDC. We are a City that will face an enormously difficult problem because as those families begin to phase off of welfare, it will be required by the Welfare Reform Act of 1996 to have jobs or lose any support whatsoever beginning in March of '99 and going through the year 2000. We will find that with what is essentially a labor surplus market, we will not be able to accommodate, in my judgment, somewhere between 35 and 40,000 of those families. So by the year 2000, we will have in Philadelphia, a situation that hasn't occurred, in my judgment, since the Great Depression. It will not just be in Philadelphia. It will be Detroit. It will be in Newark, Baltimore, even cities like Seattle that are considered to be cities that are economically viable and not labor surplus markets. The U.S. Conference of Mayors did a press conference and a report based on a survey in 17 cities and each city reported, in differing degrees, the same problem that I'm going to address. And it is a shocking problem that nobody is paying any attention to. I don't say nobody because you are all here, but very few people are paying any attention to it in Washington, D.C. When I had the press conference, myself and Mayor Archer had this press conference on how we viewed welfare reform and where it was going. Only CNN showed up. About a month and-a-half later, I was in Washington at the U.S. Conference of Mayors, and myself and four other mayors were chosen to speak after our visit to the White House, and I noted that the CBA Network had 33 camera crews in Washington that week all covering various aspects of the Monica Lewinsky problem. To me, one of the greatest problems we have as a nation is that we can't get our news media to concentrate on serious issues that affect the bread and butter and really not only the quality of life but the very lives and survival of people themselves. Now, let me tell you how I get to the 35 to 40,000 range. We believe the normal evident flow for the private sector, and the normal entry an coming off welfare, will cause 10,000 of that 66,000 to come off the rolls before the year 2000 is done. Additionally, as you know, Congressman, myself, Mayor Archer, and Mayor Rice of Seattle were an integral part of persuading both the Administration and the Congress to appropriate additional dollars for a jobs bill for welfare recipients. As you will recall, you appropriated $3.1 billion to be administered over a two-year period. And that was certainly positive news, but one of the things that I want to recommend to you again is that you go back an tell your colleagues that that is not nearly enough money to do this job correctly, and that if we really care about welfare reform and putting former recipients of welfare on the work rolls, that we have to spend more than $3 billion. I would reference in 1996, the Congressional Budget Office did a study which said that the Welfare Reform Act of 1996 was $12 billion short in the necessary funds to adequately transition people from welfare to work. Unfortunately, no one listened at that time. The President said he would try to cure those defects afterwards and in part, he did with his $3.1 billion jobs bill, but my experience leads me to believe that the $12 billion estimate made by the CBO in the summer of 1996 is probably 50 percent less than is needed. I think if we are really serious about welfare reform, if we were really serious about ending welfare as we know it, we have to spend money. If you look at the individual states that have had the most success in workforce development and transitioning people from welfare to work and doing all the things that are necessary components of that, training, job skills, literacy in many cases, adequate child care, transportation, addressing all of the needs, those states spent actually more money in the first several years of their reform effort than they did in their traditional welfare systems. They spent the money up front so that down the road, they would spend less money because people would be successfully transitioned from welfare to work. So I think we will find that the money that's been appropriated by Congress at the President's request is far too little. For example, in the next month, we will release our plans for using that federal money. That federal money, with the state match, and the state did in fact give us the necessary match, that will make somewhere between $51 and $55 million available for the next two years in Philadelphia. We are going to release our plans on how we are going to spend that money but the bottom line is that if we are successful, if we reach our goals, that will give 15,000 people the type of employment necessary, either full-term employment, 40 hours a week plus, or the 20-hour a week employment that's necessary to keep them receiving benefits at the same time. So if you take our 15, the 10 that will come from the normal evident flow, we're down somewhere in the high 30's, 35, 38 thousand families, heads of households with children, will not find jobs in Philadelphia. And I don't know what is going to happen to those individuals. You have to realize that that's not a surprising outcome because we are truly a labor surplus area. As you know, Congressman, Philadelphia was losing jobs at a debilitating rate. For the last nine years, we averaged a loss of 10,000 jobs a year from Philadelphia. Over a course of 11 years, we lost over 100,000 jobs from our job base. It is only in the last year and three-quarters we've now had seven-quarters straight of job gain, but those job gains are modest probably cumulatively less than 4,000, less than 4,000. While it is true that there has been some job growth in our suburban corridors, there are maybe 15 job growth centers that we've identified in the suburbs. They've added another 20,000 jobs into the mix. So we've created 25,000 new jobs. The problem is that in addition to the 38,000 families that are going to be unaccounted for that I mentioned, we have 45,000 displaced workers on the unemployment rolls here in Philadelphia. Those are the workers from the Navy yard. Those are the workers from Breyers. Those are the workers from the Meridian/CoreStates merger, soon to be the CoreStates/First Union merger. Those are workers with job skills and job experience. So our 38,000, or to be honest, our 66,000 are competing against those 45,000 who are better skilled, better trained, better experienced. Additionally, there are some 40,000, single males that are out there looking for jobs as a result of state changes in welfare. On top of that, each and every year, we have a new class of high school graduates that come into the job place. And the numbers don't add up. They don't add up in Philadelphia. They don't add up in Detroit. They don't add up in Atlanta. And they don't even add up in Seattle because when you put all those people into the mix looking for jobs, almost all of them were better educated, better trained, and have more work experience than the AFDC heads of households. You can see the problem we have created. I heard a little bit of your earlier panel and I know that it is easy in Washington to say that welfare reform is a success, that in the 13 or 14 months since welfare reform has been the law, we've knocked 15 percent of the people off the rolls. Well, of course as we know, a good hunk of that 15 percent are people who were smoked out who really didn't belong on the welfare rolls. Then my guess is the other half of that 15 percent were the cream of the crop, were people that were on the welfare rolls but had recent job experience who had some skills, who were totally and functionally literate. You go deep within the mix of our 66,000 heads of households here in Philadelphia and you will find people shockingly, and it's the reason why we all agreed that there had to be change, but shockingly who have never worked in their life, who don't have one day's worth of work experience. You will find people, when you go deep into the rolls, who are functionally illiterate. As we all know, the necessary job skills in the moderate economy simply won't accommodate those type of people. It used to be, not very long ago, ten years ago, you could be a cashier in most retail stores if you could learn to punch one button on the cash register and make change, but now, go into any retail store, small, or large, and you virtually have to run a mini computer to be a retail clerk, to be a cashier. The necessary job skills are changing so quickly that we are kidding ourselves to think that we can change a system that has been in existence for decades and that simply doesn't work to fit the needs of Welfare-to-Work. For example, let's take child care. We basically have a child care system that is 8:30 to 5:30 because that's been the needs of the working parents, 8:30 to 5:30. But if you look at the jobs wanted in the entry level or the type of jobs our welfare recipients can hold, many of them are for weekend and night work. And there's virtually no child care available in the evenings or weekends in Philadelphia. Now, let's talk for a second about these suburban growth centers. There are 15 of them and only two are near public transportation, traditional public transportation where someone from Philadelphia can take the subway down to Suburban Station and get on a commuter train and go out and wind up close enough that they can walk to the job centers. Thirteen of them are far enough away that you simply can't get there from here if you don't have a car. And of course, almost none of our current AFDC welfare recipients have vehicles. So not only are we going to spend a chunk of that $51 million creating van pools and things like that to get our people to suburban job centers, but I heard you, and I know this isn't the main thrust of this hearing, but to not re-enact ISTEA without significant funds in there for Welfare-to-Work transportation programs. As you know, Senator Specter and Senator Santorum have combined to put an amendment to the ISTEA reorganization bill in the Senate upping those dollars from $100 million that the Administration has put in their budget, to $250 million, and I would urge that is an absolutely essential step. If we're serious about what we're trying to do there, and in all due respect, this is not a reflection on Congressman Fattah or any of the Congressmen who are represented here, but if we're serious about trying to get people from welfare to work, we can't do it cheap. We have to spend money for transportation. We have to spend money for child care. We have to spend money for job training. And most of all, we have to spend money to help create jobs whether they be transitional jobs in the public sector whether they'll be subsidizing job growth in the private sector. Whatever it is, we have to touch every element of that, and we better do it fast. In sum, if we do all of our jobs well, we're going to fail to be able to place well over 50 percent of our current caseload of welfare recipients and that is a pattern that you are going to find is going to happen all over the country. It is a freight train coming down the tracks going to hit us right smack in the forehead. I would make two long-term recommendations, and I make them with the full knowledge that these may be difficult for you, Congressman, or the Congressmen represented here, may be difficult for us to get enacted, but number one, I would urge legislation to extend the deadline. I think the two-year deadline is just going to prove to be unworkable. We're not going to be ready to have job opportunities, child care, transportation to meet the needs of most of those AFDC families. So I would urge a year or two or three-year extension in the cutoff.

Mr. FATTAH

Mr. FATTAH. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, let me join with my colleague the gentleman from New York [Mr. McHugh], the distinguished chairman of the Subcommittee on Postal Service, in urging the House to favorably consider Senate bill 1378. This is a very important and very needed reauthorization of a practice that has already been, as my colleague has mentioned, implemented by many Members here in the House. The issue of missing children is something that is on the minds of parents throughout this Nation. And in my home city of Philadelphia, unfortunately, there have been several instances in which children have been missing for a long time. The Center for Missing and Exploited Children is a very important establishment, and this provision that allows both Members of the Senate and House to use frank mail in a way in which I am sure even those that have been the most enthusiastic critics of frank mail for this purpose is something that we all would support. Mr. Speaker, we do not have any further speakers on our side, so we would like to yield back the remainder of our time, assuming that the gentleman from New York [Mr. McHugh] is the last speaker on his side.

Mr. FATTAH

Mr. FATTAH. Mr. Speaker, let me thank the gentleman from New York [Mr. Rangel], ranking member of the Committee on Ways and Means, and also the gentleman from New York [Mr. Gilman] and the gentleman from Illinois [Mr. Crane]. This is a very, very important piece of legislation because it speaks to who we are as a country, what the nature of the contribution is that we are prepared to make to help build in this hemisphere the relationship that will be necessary. There has been a lot said here today. I wanted to rise in support of this bill. It is critically important that our neighbors in the Caribbean see that we are willing to work with their very fragile democratic circumstances, help to continue to build their economies. They are in a whole host of bilateral and hemispheric agreements with us relative to crime and safety, drug trafficking, money laundering that has been mentioned earlier. We have to make sure that these economies can lawfully participate in what has now been created as almost a market between Canada and Mexico and ourselves. We see the European Union being formed. We see our neighbors in the Pacific rim getting their act together. We do not want these small island nations just to fall by the wayside. I want to thank the gentleman from New York [Mr. Rangel] for his leadership on this and would hope that all of us would find it within ourselves to be supportive of this. The gentleman from Maryland [Mr. Cardin] said there would be some cost. He is correct. There will be some cost. There will be costs either way that we proceed. I think that what the gentleman from New York [Mr. Rangel] offers for us is an opportunity for us to do what is right. And, in the end, not only will there be some costs, but there will be some rewards for our Nation for standing by our friends who have been our traditional allies.

Mr. FATTAH

Mr. FATTAH. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Madam Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 2564 as introduced by my colleague, the gentleman from Pennsylvania [Mr. Holden], a Member with whom I have had the opportunity to serve and who has provided a great deal of leadership here in the House and on behalf of the citizens of Pennsylvania. Madam Speaker, this bill is appropriate. We sometimes joke about the Postal Service in our country. Let the record be clear that we have the finest Postal Service anywhere in the world, and partly because of people like the gentleman we honor with the naming of this postal facility in Pottsville, PA, because we have dedicated people who work very, very hard, almost 700,000 people who work for the United States Postal Service. And I think that among these bills, it is, indeed appropriate that we would take one and name it after someone who has labored to help make sure that our Nation has a Postal Service that is really second to none in the world. Madam Speaker, I am not surprised at all that the naming of a postal facility on behalf of someone who has worked for the Postal Service would come from my colleague, the gentleman from Pennsylvania [Mr. Holden], because the gentleman is someone that we all know who has seriously applied himself to understanding the interworkings of the Federal Government and how it interacts and is relevant in the lives of the people who we attempt to serve. Madam Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Pennsylvania [Mr. Holden], my colleague.

Mr. FATTAH

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

Mr. FATTAH

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

Mr. FATTAH. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 282, to name a post office in the State of New York after Mr. Garcia Rivera. He has two last names, and I guess we alternately have used both. But, nonetheless, it is a fitting tribute. Mr. Speaker, this is a gentleman who was the first Puerto Rican to be elected to the State assembly in the State of New York, a labor leader, someone committed to human rights, who helped to fight and support legislation to punish lynchings throughout our land, someone who in his own time and space has made a contribution. I join with my colleague, the gentleman from New York [Mr. Serrano], who has sponsored this bill, in support of this legislation. I would like just to add that in terms of the leadership that my colleague from the State of New York is providing in this Congress on so many important issues, he has helped inspire all of us on the committee to give due consideration to this measure. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. FATTAH

Mr. FATTAH. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Madam Speaker, let me again join with the chairman of the Committee on the Judiciary. I did take note while some of us were on break, he kept the home fires burning here in Washington and the committee was working. Madam Speaker, I want to again say that in terms of this bill, that we join on this side of the aisle in recognizing the achievements of our colleague, and want to see this post office in California named after him. I am happy he was able to serve for more than two decades in the House. As a newer Member of the Congress, I look forward to one day of having that type of lengthy service. I think it is very important to see that the experience a Member gains over those years comes to be admired by both sides of the aisle and comes to be appreciated, hopefully, throughout the country. Madam Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. FATTAH. Madam Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Ohio [Mr. Traficant].