Chaka Fattah

Mr. FATTAH

Mr. FATTAH. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Let me join with the gentleman from New York in support of this measure. I think it is appropriate and fitting that this House take notice of the fine work of our colleague in this manner. I want to congratulate the gentleman from Illinois [Mr. Hyde], the chairman of the Committee on the Judiciary, for offering this legislation. Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. FATTAH

Mr. FATTAH. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Madam Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 2129. The sponsor of this bill, the gentleman from the great State of Ohio [Mr. Traficant], has been very enthusiastic in making sure the committee acted expeditiously on this piece of legislation. But I think it is appropriate because the colleague whose service we recognize in the naming of this postal facility is someone who, in many ways, the gentleman from Ohio seemingly has some bond with because of their support for similar causes. Madam Speaker, the naming bill that is in front of us is a bill that hopefully will enjoy broad-based support. Madam Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Ohio [Mr. Traficant].

Mr. FATTAH. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Madam Speaker, I would just say that the gentleman from Ohio [Mr. Traficant], in the conclusion of his remarks said that he hoped that the House would hear his words. There is not a day that he has spoken before the House that all of America has not heard his words. So we thank the gentleman for authoring this legislation, and we would hope that it would receive unanimous support.

Mr. FATTAH

Mr. FATTAH. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Madam Speaker, this is, as the gentleman from New York [Mr. McHugh] has stated, someone who has literally given his life through an act of courage to save his fellow comrades. For this young man, David Champagne, this is an honor that is obviously something that we would like to bestow, but it does not even begin to represent what should be the appreciation for his act of great courage. I want to join with my colleague, the gentleman from Rhode Island [Mr. Weygand]. The gentleman from New York [Mr. McHugh] said that the cosponsor requirement had been met because the entire delegation from the State had signed on to this naming bill. I want to join with fully 50 percent of the Rhode Island House delegation and support this piece of legislation. It is very worthy. This gentleman, Corporal Champagne, has been already awarded the Medal of Honor, but I think this is something that people in the community of Rhode Island will have as a living memory of his act of courage. Madam Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Rhode Island [Mr. Weygand].

Mr. FATTAH. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. We, in support of this bill, not only recognize the courageous act of Corporal Champagne, but in some important way symbolize our thanks to thousands and thousands of Americans who have given their lives in defense of this Nation or on behalf of our Government, either in the armed service or in law enforcement, in any number of ways. So I think it is very appropriate that this House recognize an individual, but in doing that, hopefully send a signal to the Nation that we appreciate the acts of so many individuals that have helped us move forward. Madam 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 thank the gentleman from New York [Mr. McHugh]. It has been a real pleasure to work with him on these bills and any number of activities that we have had to deal with over the course of this session thus far. I really do appreciate the level of cooperation and the spirit of bipartisanship. That is talked a lot around here, but in actuality is practiced by the gentleman from New York, and I want to publicly thank him for his efforts as we have worked together in these matters. Madam Speaker, I would like to thank my staff, Denise Wilson and also Neal Snyder, for their work on these bills and other matters related to postal affairs. Madam Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. FATTAH

Mr. FATTAH. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this time. I would like to first compliment the work of the task force, in particular the efforts of the gentleman from Maryland and also the gentleman from Louisiana for their leadership in this regard. I think that today we have in front of us a work of a bipartisan task force made up of Members who have done an excellent job in trying to set a set of rules forward in which this House could have and conduct an appropriate peer review process, and so I rise in support of it. I think that it is of note, even though it has been mentioned, I will mention it again, the due process additions and changes that have been made that further provide to Members of the House, I think, appropriate due process. The bifurcation of the investigative and judgmental phases of the work, I think, is also an important addition. As we grapple with the amendments that are to follow, I do not want us to lose the point that the task force's work is work that should and could and, hopefully, will be able to stand on its own merit and that this Committee on Standards of Official Conduct will have an opportunity anew in this Congress to try to set an appropriate and, hopefully, reasoned and measured approach to looking at what are fairly difficult issues from time to time.

Mr. FATTAH

Mr. FATTAH. Mr. Chairman, I rise as the ranking minority Member on Postal Service in support of the point of order, and would hope that the Chair would concur that clause 2 of rule XXI would be in play as relates to this amendment, and that it should be struck because it attempts to add legislative language to an appropriations bill.

Mr. FATTAH. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word. Mr. Chairman, the Global Package Link provision, authored by Representative Northrup, (R-KY) would prohibit the United States Postal Service (USPS) from expanding its Global Package Link international parcel service for one year, while a Government Accounting Office (GAO) report is completed on the issue of international mail. The GPL, an ``electronic Customs preparatory system'' was developed by the USPS in direct response to its customers demands. It allows our nation's largest and leading retailers such as Lands' End, Neiman Marcus, J.C. Penny, L.L. Bean and others to deliver merchandise to their catalog customers in the United Kingdom, Canada, and Japan. These and many other companies support and rely upon the Postal Service to send their products via the GPL service. By way of legitimately responding to a postal matter under the jurisdiction of the Subcommittee on the Postal Service, the Subcommittee in July asked the GAO to investigate charges that the GPL service enjoys any unfair advantages over shipments by private carriers. We expect to have a report on this matter early next year. The Blair Corporation, a large mail-order company located in my State of Pennsylvania provided some very thoughtful comments on the Northrup provisions. Thoughtful, because unlike the numerous mail-order firms currently using the Postal Service's GPL service, it is not a current user. The President of Blair Corporation states: ``We cannot believe that our Congress would stop a valuable international delivery service, which has become very important to expanding the exports of U.S. direct mail companies, and could become the means by which our company and others like it are able to enter the international market, without even a hearing before the appropriate Committees of Congress, which understand postal operations and their importance to the direct mail industry. This attempt to prevent the Postal Service from operating as any other business would, when so many in the Congress as well as the business community have pleaded with the Postal Service to become more businesslike and more efficient, is ironic. Global Postal Link and other Postal Service innovations are a serious response by the Postal Service to those pleas. This amendment will wipe out an important Postal Service effort to become more businesslike and will represent a serious blow to many mail order companies and damage this country's export efforts. We urge you to reject this effort to end-run the authorizing committees and vote ``yes'' to strip the ``Northrup'' Amendment from H.R. 2378.'' In conclusion, the Northrup provision is framed as a limitation on funds, but contains legislative language. It does not belong on an appropriation bill. This is a violation of House Rules.

Mr. FATTAH

Mr. FATTAH. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for his comments, and I ask unanimous consent to withdraw the amendment in respect of the point of order of the gentleman from Illinois.

Mr. FATTAH. Mr. Chairman, I want first to congratulate the chairman, the gentleman from Illinois [Mr. Porter], and the ranking member, the gentleman from Wisconsin [Mr. Obey], on the fine work they have done on this very important piece of legislation. The amendment that I bring to the floor today is one in which we would require States to equalize their investment in public education within their State boundaries. We have seen sweeping the country now legislation and court orders in States really addressing this issue. In my home State of Pennsylvania, we have school districts in our rural communities where we are spending $3,500 a year per student, and we have other school districts where we are spending $16,000 a year per student. In Ohio, the Ohio Supreme Court has just ruled on the financing system in that State in which they spend $4,000 in the lower spending districts and $12,000 in the higher spending districts. We have seen all across the land, from Kentucky to Wyoming to New Jersey, this issue being raised. I wanted to raise it on the floor today because I think it is essential relative to our push for educational excellence in this country. Now, we know that money is not everything, but I think it is safe to assert that money matters. And if we are going to spend twice and three and four times the amount on one child's education in one school district that we spend on another, and we are going to, as a Federal Government, put our stamp of approval on these State financing systems, then I think it is extraordinarily unfair for us to come up with standardized tests and act as if each of these children has been given an equal opportunity and an adequate investment in terms of pursuing their educational potential. A point of order has been raised against this amendment, and I will withdraw it, but I do think that it is something that the Congress has sought to address in the past. In the Improving American School Act out of the 103d Congress, there was an effort to create an approach to support States who wanted to create a more equitable financing system. I think that we should search for ways in which we could try to create a more fairer playing field for all of these school districts that are within these various State boundaries. The State court system does seem to be addressing this matter, but I would let my colleagues know that in all of these court cases it seems to take 10 or 15 years before these cases can move their way through the courts to some resolution. And in almost all cases, the courts have found these State financing systems unconstitutional. I would hope that we here in the Congress could find some way, and I seek to do that through this amendment, to help encourage States to create a more level playing field for all children and families in their States in terms of public education.

Mr. FATTAH. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.

Mr. FATTAH

Mr. FATTAH. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the requisite number of words. Mr. Chairman, I rise to speak on behalf of the Roemer-Riggs amendment, to join my colleagues from the Committee on Education and the Workforce. They seek to put an additional impetus behind this charter school movement. I think it is important. I come as someone who fully supports free, public, quality education in our country, and I do not think there is anything inconsistent in that in the support of charter schools. They will be and have been, as they have been established throughout the country, public institutions focused on funding through experimentation, and a particular focus on some of the key answers to questions that still challenge the public education system. In my school district in Philadelphia, the largest in the State of Pennsylvania, our board of education has just approved the application for a number of charters, many of which will be set up in my district, and I am very, very hopeful that not only will it benefit the students who will attend those charter schools, but that there will be lessons learned from them that will be applicable throughout the system. We need to continue this. As this country goes forward to perfect our Union, nothing has been more important in the American experiment than a free, public, quality education for all of our citizens. So even as those who come to point at some of the difficult and remaining challenges and find some reason to complain about our circumstances in public education, I believe that there is still hope, and I think part of that hope is the charter school effort. It includes in it still a commitment for a public process, public schooling, and one in which, at least for the charters in Pennsylvania, that the application and enrollment processes are ones in which we can see that there will be a fair opportunity for every young person who wants to participate and be part of those institutions. I want to thank the gentleman from Indiana [Mr. Roemer] and his cosponsor, and I would hope this House would favorably support and endorse this amendment. It is unfortunate that we have to move some money from another very worthy program. That is part of a larger debate about what our commitment in this Nation really ought to be in terms of education. But I am hopeful, even as we take this step, that the technology and literacy program will still have, as has been mentioned by the gentleman from Pennsylvania [Mr. Peterson], a colleague of mine, adequate resources and an appropriate increase as we go into the next fiscal year.

Mr. FATTAH

Mr. FATTAH. Mr. Speaker, today I rise in honor of the 10th anniversary of a program that has made a dramatic difference in the lives of students in Philadelphia and two other cities, and that has helped our Nation focus attention on better ways to promote success for inner-city students. In June 1987, a trustee of the University of Pennsylvania, George Weiss and his former wife Diane, made an announcement at the Belmont Elementary School that changed the lives of 112 West Philadelphia students and launched a program that has become a national model for intervention in urban schools. Say Yes to Education began with a promise by the Weisses to pay complete costs for college or postsecondary training. However, they knew that more would be needed to ensure that the students would be prepared to take advantage of their promise. The Say Yes to Education Foundation was formed under the educational leadership of Dr. Norman Newberg, its executive director and Randall Sims, its senior project coordinator. The program provided counseling, tutoring, mentoring, and summer programs to enrich the cultural and intellectual lives of the student. Perhaps even more important was the personal involvement of the Weisses and the Say Yes staff in encouraging the students. On more than one occasion, George Weiss himself knocked on doors to personally urge students to reject negative influences and take education seriously. It's this kind of dedication that makes the Say Yes program a national example of true educational reform. Under Dr. Newberg's leadership, Say Yes is organized as a four-way partnership between sponsors, a college or university, the students and their families, and the public schools. The relationship with a college or university adds a significant dimension to the program because of the vast human and institutional resources which are available to be used in support of student progress. The university connection helps to spread information and ideas to other educators about what works. The program has grown to include over 300 students, including a class from the Harrity Elementary School in Philadelphia and students in Hartford, CT, and Cambridge, MA. To date 67 of the original Say Yes students have graduated from high school, with 19 matriculating at 4- year colleges and 21 at 2-year colleges. This number far exceeds the expectations of educational experts for students from similar economic backgrounds. The stories of these students, dubbed the Belmont 112 by the Philadelphia Inquirer in periodic articles about the program, have touched the lives of many Philadelphians and inspired other sponsors to reach out to urban students. It is because the success of programs like Say Yes to Education, that I introduced the 21st Century Scholar Act, H.R. 777. This act would notify elementary school students at the poorest public schools in the country that they would be eligible for the maximum Federal Pell grant award if they complete their high school education and gain admission into a postsecondary institution. In addition, my legislation would make available tutoring and mentoring services to these students through the existing Federal TRIO programs. The 21st Century Scholars Act implements the efforts of successful private early intervention programs, such as Say Yes to Education, on a national scale. To mark the 10th anniversary of the Say Yes to Education Program, a reunion of student participants and sponsors will take place in Philadelphia on July 26, 1997. I am pleased to honor the original Belmont Say Yes to Education students by entering their names into the Congressional Record: Allen Alexander; Eric Alexander; Tanyell Alick; Dana Baynes; Jerell Baynes; Majovie Billups-Bland; Maurice Boone; Christopher Bradford; Mitchell Bronson; Shermika Brown; Walter Brown; Damion Caldwell; Tabitha Casper; Sekou Clark; David Cox-Sims; Kimberly Creamer; Zengo Daigre; Zeno Daigre; Jahleel Daniels. James Davis; Solomon Davis; Troy Davis; William Dorsey; Frank Duckett; Craig Dunston; Anita Edwards; Micah Ellison; Jalina Evans; Mark Ferguson; Vedia Fisher; Tolanda Fortune; Craig Freeman; Gregg Freeman; Joelena Fuller; Lamont Goings; Ayenna Gomez; Yasmeen Grantham; Steven Guilford; Antoinette Harper; Mack Harvey; Mildrianne Hatten; Jerwayne Haywood; Kenneth Hilliard; Charles Hollerway; Micah Holliday; Jermaine Horton; Nicole Huff; Carol Jackson; Eugene Jackson; Tamika Jackson; Carmen James; Aronda Jenkins; James Johnson; Ravenel Johnson; Crystal Jones; Chantel Jones-Akers; Marvette Leatherberry; Sherlina Leatherberry; Christopher Lee; Latasha Lighty; Nickia Little; Genise Mace; Cedric Mallory; Richard Matthews. Percy McKitthen; Charles Miles; Dellshon Miller; Sonny Miller; Vanessa Mitchell; Jarmaine Olliviere; William Payne; Ronald Pierce; Aaron Pitt; Shaheed Purnell; Joanne Randall; Nicole Randall; Kemeika Richardson; Rodana Robinson; Juanita Rollerson; Quentin Ross; Katrina Scruggs; Edwin Seals; Marc Seymour; Michael Shenoster; Harold Shields, Jr.; Orion Sistrunk; Tanisha Smalls; Cornell Smith; Jumar Smith; Larry Smith; Rodney Sowell; Janine Spruill; Dorothy Stewart; Jeremy Summers; Iva Supplee-Tate; Bradley Torrence; Horace Torrence; Montara Tyler; Kenya Walker; Shantee Washington; Bryant Webster; Pauline White; Kelly Whitehead; Eric Whitney; Bill Wilcox; David Williams; Paul Williams; Tamika Williams; Tashieka Williams; Theresa Williams; Marvin Wilson; Christopher Wood. I hope that all Members will take time to learn more about this important program and its successes as our Nation moves forward in its effort to revitalize education for all students.

Mr. FATTAH

Mr. FATTAH. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to remove my name as a cosponsor to H.R. 1210.

Mr. FATTAH

Mr. FATTAH. Mr. Speaker, I think that what we have here is maybe not what it appears to be, because what I am getting concerned about now is that perhaps the gentleman from Indiana [Mr. Burton] is being used as some kind of fall guy. We know that he is over eager to investigate the Democrats and especially Bill Clinton. The majority gives him three times the amount of money, some $15 million, $17 million to investigate. They want to give him all of the rights individually to decide on who should be subpoenaed, who should be deposed, unprecedented powers. No one else on the committee will have to risk their career, put their career on the line to vote on behalf of subpoenaing anyone, no one will have to take responsibility for the actions in this investigation. So what I suggest is that our view here in the minority is that we need to have everyone share the responsibility, not just put the gentleman from Indiana [Mr. Burton] out in front of this, as if he is the only one conducting this train and the only one responsible for what is going to be in the final analysis something that defamed seriously the credibility and the integrity of this Congress and this committee.

Mr. FATTAH

Mr. FATTAH. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Indiana [Mr. Roemer].

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

Mr. FATTAH. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. As a relatively new Member of the Congress, I am pleased that I had an opportunity to serve with both of these gentlemen, if only for a brief few years. I am glad that they were not, as some now are, discussing this notion of term limits in the Congress. These two distinguished careers of over 30 years would not have been possible given the context in which the people of Indiana would not have been freely able to vote to continue to send them to the U.S. Congress so that they could represent that great State and to serve the entire country. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Indiana [Mr. Visclosky] to close for our side.

Mr. FATTAH. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Ohio [Mr. Traficant].

Mr. FATTAH. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I spent a lot of time today with people from the State of Indiana, and I have an appointment with the gentleman from Indiana [Mr. Burton], who just preceded me, at 5 p.m. But John Myers and his service, particularly on the committee that oversaw the work of the Postal Service in our country, through his work and in the work of others, we have the best Postal Service of any nation in the world. And it is actually quite fitting that we name a postal facility after him. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2\1/2\ minutes to the delegate from American Samoa. (Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA 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, H.R. 1058 seeks to recognize the contributions of another long-serving Member, John Myers, who retired last year after 30 years in the Congress. As a former ranking member of the old Committee on Post Office and Civil Service, this legislation naming a postal facility after him is especially fitting. I am pleased to support it and urge its favorable consideration by this House. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. FATTAH

Mr. FATTAH. Mr. Speaker, I yield back all remaining time.

Mr. FATTAH. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Indiana [Mr. Roemer], the last and final Member with remarks on this bill from our side of the aisle, whom I served with on the House Committee on Education and the Workforce, who has been very close to Congressman Jacobs.

Mr. FATTAH. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Virginia [Mr. Wise].