Chaka Fattah

Mr. FATTAH

Mr. FATTAH. Mr. Speaker, on the occasion of the 100th birthday of the great American opera singer, Marian Anderson, Carnegie Hall will resound with a tribute in her honor. On Thursday, February 27, 1997, Robert Shaw will conduct the orchestra of St. Luke's and the Morgan State University choir in the Marian Anderson 100th Birthday Tribute. The program will feature a range of music from operatic arias to spirituals reflecting the broad artistic reach of Ms. Anderson's repertoire. Celebrated guests, friend, and family will gather to remember this amazing woman with song, photographs, letters, and personal reminiscences. From her first performance at Carnegie Hall in 1920 until her last in 1989, Ms. Anderson performed over 50 times on the Carnegie Hall stage--more than any other venue in her career. Born to Anna and John Anderson on February 27, 1897, in Philadelphia, PA, Marian Anderson became an internationally renowned contralto and an aspiring symbol to all who strive to achieve against tremendous odds. Ms. Anderson began her singing career like so many African-Americans, by singing in the church choir of Union Baptist Church where funds were raised to help pay for her voice lessons. In 1925, she won first prize at a contest held by the New York Philharmonic at Lewisohn Stadium. In 1930, she toured Europe, winning from Toscanini the tribute, ``the voice that comes once in a 100 years.'' In 1939, Ms. Anderson became the center of national attention when the Daughters of the American Revolution [DAR], barred her from singing at Constitution Hall in Washington, DC and the subsequent refusal of the Washington, DC School Board to grant her use of Central High School's auditorium. Resulting publicity and DAR's public snub of Ms. Anderson, led the First Lady, Eleanor Roosevelt to resign from DAR and Secretary of the Interior Harold L. Ickes to invite Ms. Anderson to sing at the Lincoln Memorial on Easter Sunday, April 9, 1939, which she did, to a huge crowd of supporters. In 1955, Ms. Anderson became the first African-American artist to perform at the Metropolitan Opera and was named as a delegate to the General Assembly of the United Nations by President Eisenhower. She earned many distinctions during her lifetime which included more than 24 honorary degrees from various colleges and universities, medals from the Governments of Sweden, Finland, and Japan, America's 1986 National Medal of Arts and the first recipient of the Presidential Medal of Freedom. It is fitting, Mr. Speaker that we pause to create an official record in the annals of Congress in honor of this great American.

Mr. FATTAH

Mr. FATTAH. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I want to just finally state that, notwithstanding his great service to our country, both in the armed services and here in the Congress and the Texas Legislature, I think that our colleague would want us to know that in all likelihood as it is for all of the rest of us that his greatest personal achievement is his family and his children. I think that they have a legacy that he has left them that they can be proud of through his personal courage and commitment and dedication. He has been a shining example of what is possible from that beautiful city in Texas, San Antonio. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. FATTAH. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes and 15 seconds to the gentleman from Texas [Mr. Doggett], a colleague who started his service in the Congress in the same class that I did, who has distinguished himself as a supreme court judge in Texas and now is a member of the House Committee on the Judiciary.

Mr. FATTAH. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentlewoman from California [Ms. Harman].

Mr. FATTAH. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I rise also in support of House Resolution 499. This is a moment in which the House has an opportunity to show its respect for a fallen comrad. This is a gentleman whose work here in the Congress and his life sets an example for us all. And it has been offered by two of his colleagues from Texas, both Congressman Ortiz and Congressman Bonilla, and we want to on this side suggest that this is a truly bipartisan effort to recognize the accomplishments of a great American. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. FATTAH. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, Frank's legacy is one for which we should all be thankful. This is a person at a young age, not completing high school, who served his country with great courage, went on then to get an undergraduate degree, a law degree from Berkeley. Then one of the things that I shared with Frank was the experience of studying at the Kennedy School of Government at Harvard. So his legacy of educational excellence is a role model for all of the young people of San Antonio and throughout the Nation. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to my colleague, the gentleman from Texas [Mr. Green].

Mr. FATTAH. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, on behalf of the minority I also thank the chairman for the expedited procedures with which this bill comes to us for consideration. I also appreciate Frank's tremendous contribution with regards to expanding the GI bill so veterans could participate in earning teaching certificates through the alternative State certification process. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to my colleague, the gentleman from the great State of California [Mr. Becerra].

Mr. FATTAH. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from American Samoa, [Mr. Faleomavaega], another colleague who has joined us and has asked for a few minutes to also make some comments on behalf of our colleague. (Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. FATTAH

Mr. FATTAH. Mr. Speaker, I request that you please record my vote for final passage of H.R. 123, during the markup of the Language of Government Act on Wednesday, July 24, 1996. I was unavoidably detained at a prior commitment, and when I returned, the final vote had been taken. Had I been present, I would have voted ``no'' on final passage.

Mr. FATTAH

Mr. FATTAH. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to the rule. This rule and this bill, this conference committee, is built on the biggest lie that has ever been told to the American people, and that is that we are spending too much as a country to help poor people. There is no calculation that any legitimate analysis of a Federal budget would tell us that we spent $5 trillion on the war on poverty. It is all made up out of whole cloth. It includes items like the Pell grants and all kinds of other programs, and education. The AFDC payments are about a little more than one penny out of every dollar that this Government spends to help poor children. We have gotten everybody convinced that we are spending just too much money on poor people, and now we have convinced them that Speaker Gingrich and the Republican majority are coming to help these poor children, that this is just a major effort to really help poor children, and cutting $60 billion is just the best way to help them find their way to the American dream. This rule, this conference committee, the Washington Post in its editorial today said it was a bad idea. They said it was a defining moment of where this country was headed. And there will be Members who will come to the floor today, because they want to be reelected and will vote for it, but out into the future there will be days that they will truly regret that they did not have the courage to stand up and oppose this hideous proposal.

Mr. FATTAH

Mr. FATTAH. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to the Goodling amendments in its total form. I think even though the House should be commended for the action that we have taken in the majority to raise the minimum wage, the Goodling amendments would show us how quickly we can slip backward. I do not believe we should be making those people who are employed and part of their compensation is in tips, requiring that the totality of what would, in effect, be this increase in the minimum wage, would have to come out of tips that they earned through the generosity of their customers. I come from a city that has been claiming to be the most generous in the Nation. However, I would not want anyone to have to be dependent upon the tips of those whom they serve to be the principal basis for their increase in the minimum wage. I think it is wrong, and I think it is a step in the wrong direction. I also think that when we look at the broad base of this exemption for small businesses, that I agree with my colleague, the gentleman from Connecticut [Mr. Shays], that it is just too broad.

Mr. FATTAH

Mr. FATTAH. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of a budget for the United States of America, for it is not the Congressional Black Caucus' budget, it is a budget offered by the Congressional Black Caucus on behalf of those constituents that we represent, who know all too well that the biggest deficit that we have in this country is not the trade deficit or the budget deficit, but the human capital deficit; the fact that we want to see future Colin Powells have an opportunity to get an education, to be able to grow up in decent neighborhoods and have affordable housing. This is a budget that we would recommend to our colleagues to truly consider in light of the need to not only have a budget that is fiscally balanced, but that is morally correct and that is focused on this Nation's needs to develop future generations. Mr. Chairman, I would like to commend the leadership of the Congressional Black Caucus and the Progressive Caucus for offering this alternative here on the floor. I would hope that my colleagues would be able to see past their partisan and perhaps parochial concerns and see the needs of an entire Nation, striving to create a more perfect union. Mr. Chairman, this is an opportunity for us to put behind us generations of neglect for many families in our country. I hope that we support this bill.

Mr. FATTAH

Mr. FATTAH. Mr. Speaker, this debate about the minimum wage is about honoring work. But this issue about procedural gimmickry is about honoring one's word. The new majority has insisted that they would not bottle up bills that had popular support by using procedural gimmicks. But here we have a situation where the majority does not represent the majority. That is, everyone knows and everyone has asserted that if there were a vote on the minimum wage, it would pass. So, since the majority of the Members of the Congress would vote to raise the minimum wage, the Republican majority, not showing much maturity in this matter, has decided to use procedural gimmicks to stand in the way of allowing the Members of Congress, Democrats and Republicans, to have a clean, honest vote on raising the minimum wage. Now, the people of our country deserve better from the majority. That is, if my colleagues are against the minimum wage, then they should vote against it, speak to the Members of the Congress on their point of view. But they should not hide behind procedural gimmicks to avoid us having a vote. It does not speak well of the majority, and this notion that somehow we can wait until another day suggests a certain passivity about the plight of working people in this country that does not speak well of the intent of the majority Members on this side of the aisle. I would encourage all of us to vote ``no'' on the previous question so that we can vote ``yes'' on raising the minimum wage, and I would encourage my colleagues on the Republic side of the aisle to win or lose, but to stand up and have the courage of their convictions on the issue of the minimum wage rather than hide behind some procedural gimmick that disrespects and dishonors the suggestion that this is indeed the people's House.

Mr. FATTAH

Mr. FATTAH. Mr. Speaker, Bishop Ozro T. Jones, Jr. is to receive the 1995 Poor Richard Club Gold Medal at a formal dinner in his honor on May 10, 1996. Bishop Jones is the second African-American to receive this award. The first was Pennsylvania Supreme Court Chief Justice Robert N.C. Nix, Jr. Other gold medal awardees have included: Thacher Longstreth, Edward J. Piszek [Mrs. Paul's Foods], Sam McKeel [Philadelphia Inquirer], Lee Iacocca, Gen. Dwight D. Eisenhower, Gen. Douglas MacArthur, Bob Hope, Walt Disney, Claire Booth Luce, Rogers & Hammerstein, and many others. Bishop Jones preached his first sermon at 14, was ordained by his father, Bishop Ozro T. Jones, Sr. at 16, was a missionary to Africa [Liberia] and associate minister in Monrovia in 1949. Bishop Jones received a doctor of sacred theology [STD] degree from Temple University. He is a board member of the American Bible Society. He was elected as a member of the board of regents or Oral Roberts University in 1990. He currently serves as pastor, Holy Temple Church of God in Christ in West Philadelphia. He is a general board member and presiding Bishop, Church of God In Christ, Commonwealth of Pennsylvania jurisdiction. Bishop Jones is also a member of the Poor Richard Club. The Poor Richard Club is reportedly America's oldest club of advertising, communication, and business professionals. It was founded on March 15, 1906. In 1926, the Poor Richard Club conceived the idea of a Benjamin Franklin Memorial Building. In just 2 weeks, the club raised $5,000,000 for the project. On May 15, 1934, the memorial building was officially opened. That building is now called the Franklin Institute. The club has international members in Belgium, England, Bermuda, Haiti, South Africa, and Spain, and reciprocal clubs in London, Barcelona, Milan, and Czechoslovakia. In 1987 the club presented the International Medal to Bermuda Premier John Swan. In 1992, the second International Medal was presented to Chinese dissident and astrophysicist Fang Liz Hi. We congratulate Bishop Jones on being included in the most illustrious group, and we look forward to his continued involvement in, and service to the city of Philadelphia.

Mr. FATTAH

Mr. FATTAH. Madam Speaker, I rise to suggest that, first of all, these atrocious cases that are pointed out as the rule are really the exception, and that if there had been a hearing, then we would know that we should not take this action. I rise in support of the Young-Miller amendment, and I think that in respect to our responsibilities to respect the sovereignty of the Indian nations and their relationships with our Government, that we should tread lightly as we go forward here. And even though they may be well-intentioned, the proponents of this effort may be well- intentioned, it is misguided, at best. Madam Speaker, I would hope that the Members of this House would honor our responsibility and oath to the Constitution and respect the agreements and the laws of our country as relates to our relationships with the sovereign Native American nations.

Mr. FATTAH

Mr. FATTAH. Mr. Speaker, Mrs. Marilyn Krantz of Philadelphia, in response to the assassination of Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin, was moved to pen the following poem entitled ``And the Dove of Peace Wept, Too.'' Feelings * * * shared by countless many, Amidst the shock and grief, In prayers and prose and poetry Expressing horror and disbelief That Israel's leader, Yitzhak Rabin Had so mercilessly been slain-- And by one of his countrymen Whose deed marked the return of Cain! With the word ``Peace'' still on his lips And his heart filled with hope anew This Great man fell, and tears did flow, And the Dove of Peace wept, too. Reaching beyond Israel's boundaries, This was a loss to all the world, Leaders gathered from near and far To join as mournful words unfurled For this man who'd struggled to ensure The survival of one small nation And worked tirelessly to bring peace In the Mideast--a great revelation! Soldier, statesman, family man. In his wisdom, he'd come to see That war was no solution And killing brings no victory. May his memory be for a blessing, Others will carry his ideas through; This was promised amidst the tears, And the Dove of Peace wept, too. Yitzhak Rabin is with us yet: He lives in every believing heart That peace must and will be achieved, And each dawn offers a new start.

Mr. FATTAH

Mr. FATTAH. Mr. Speaker, I do not rise as normally when Members ask for an opportunity to revise their remarks and extend them. I would like my remarks to be recorded as I speak them. In this case, because I think that what we need to focus on is the simplest assertion of the truth. We have a Republican majority that is trying to sell something that no one is buying. The American public has rejected, almost 2 to 1, their budget proposal for this Nation. They offer us on one hand a budget that would cut education, Head Start, Pell Grant opportunities for youngsters to go to college, increase the cost of student loans, and cut teacher training programs. In every poll that has been done, the American public indicates that they do not agree with this budget. They are trying to sell a budget to the President of the United States, and he has vetoed it. He has said that he will not add his signature, he will not join in a conspiracy to rob this great country of ours from developing its fullest potential. He will not join in attempts to cut millions of young people in terms of their needs, in terms of health care and Medicaid, to further burden senior citizens and their families when they are in need of nursing home care. So, because the Nation and the President have rejected their budget product, they have folded their hands and are now stuck in the same position they started out in, refusing to compromise, refusing to move toward some shared consensus about what direction our budget priorities should be as a country. The U.S. Constitution is clear, and that is that laws have to be passed by the House and the Senate and signed by the President. I am not proud of the fact that I have been a Member of the least productive Congress in the history of our country in terms of actually passing legislation that moves on to the upper Chamber, or the other body, depending on how you like to phrase it, and then on to the President for his signature. What we have here is a group of people who are now in the majority that seems to lack the maturity to be productive participants in shaping the course of public policy in our land. So, because their budget product has been rejected by the American people, they have decided to hold hostage 75 percent of the U.S. Government domestic programs. So we come now on the eve of a holiday season, and many of my colleagues have pleaded for sympathy for Federal workers. I really would hope that we would understand their plight, but I think it is even more a compelling case to feel sympathy for the misguided priorities of the Republican majority. This is a defining moment I believe in this Congress. This shows clearly that they do not have what it takes in terms of being able to govern the people's house, to be responsible and reasonable in their actions. So I would ask that as we reflect upon this moment in time, that we would think clearly about the opportunities that the new year will bring; for the American public to think anew about what type of person they would like to have in the U.S. Congress; to think anew about how we can further develop a more perfect union; to think anew about our responsibilities, as so eloquently outlined in the Declaration of Independence and the U.S. Constitution, in the preamble where it says to promote the general welfare, being our essential priority. We have a lot to be thankful for in this land, and one of the things we have to be thankful for is that there is an election for Congress every 2 years, and that we will arrive at a point in which the American public will hold the trump card, and they will have an opportunity to make choices about what kind of country we really want to be and what kind of Nation we really want to move toward. I would challenge each of us as we continue our work in this body to try to be more reasonable, to try to accommodate the differences of opinion that truly exist in terms of how to move our country forward, but always to be prepared, even in a moment in which we lack some degree of comfort, to stand firm for what we believe in, to stand up for our principles, and for the democratic majority and for a President who has struggled to try to reason with an unreasonable majority of the Congress. I think we owe President Clinton a great degree of gratitude for his leadership for our Nation in our hour of need.

Mr. FATTAH

Mr. FATTAH. Mr. Speaker, first of all I would like to associate myself with the remarks of the gentleman from Rhode Island [Mr. Kennedy]. Then I would like to get to this point at hand. There is no veteran in this country who has exhibited bravery and courage on behalf of our Nation who did that to protect or to defend themselves. They did that to protect and defend this country and the people who live here, the women and children and senior citizens of our land who are being victimized by this budget impasse and by this Government shutdown. So to come to the floor and say we want to honor the veterans by allowing their checks to go out, we should honor their bravery and their courage by putting this Nation's budget back in order and allowing the government to operate so that the children of these veterans, the parents and grandparents of these veterans, so that the communities that these veterans live in, can be the kind of Nation that may of them fought and gave so much for.

Mr. FATTAH

Mr. FATTAH. Mr. Speaker, good morning to my colleagues and good morning to America. It is clear now that we have a congressional majority that lacks the maturity to govern this Nation's budgetary processes. We have arrived again at an impasse in which the Congress has failed to pass a budget and the spending bills necessary in an acceptable enough form in which the President of the United States would sign them, which is the responsibility of the Congress. It is perhaps a good thing that the President is attempting to work with congressional leaders to help them figure through a shared approach to the budget, but it is the Congress' responsibility to pass a budget as outlined in the U.S. Constitution. We have arrived at a point today at which the seemingly clear set of circumstances lead us to believe that the House Republicans, Newt Gingrich and his colleagues, are the single stumbling block to us arriving at a budget agreement. We have the President, we have Senate Republicans and Senate Democrats who want to find a way to get the country back on the right track. House Democrats are prepared to work. But we have House Republicans who seem to in a childish way want to hold fast to their own particular viewpoint of how the budget ought to work out, a viewpoint that the American public has soundly rejected in every single poll that has been done over the last few months. They keep pushing something that no one else is buying. The American public says ``We don't want to cut education, we don't want to cut Medicaid, we do not want to see these programs eradicated. What we want to see is a more responsible approach that would lead us away from tax cuts, lead us away from increasing defense spending when it is not necessary, when it is well over what the Pentagon has even recommended.'' The American public has said no to the Republican budget, but yet Newt Gingrich and the House Republicans keep wanting to sell us something that no one is buying. That is why we have arrived again at this shutdown. Mr. Speaker, I would hope that as we face this new day here in the Congress, that some common sense would come to the majority, that they would stop acting in immature ways, because I think they really threaten their very majority in the ways they are acting now.

Mr. FATTAH

Mr. FATTAH. Mr. Speaker, I think, unfortunately, some with this obsession to embarrass the President are going to cause the House to embarrass itself. When the American troops land in Bosnia, there is going to be no doubt by those who face some 20,000 well-armed, well-trained American troops what American policy is. We only confuse ourselves by this action that we are engaged in this evening. Mr. Speaker, I would hope that we would support the resolution in front of us. It is difficult to understand the contradiction where we could stand and give a round of applause to the Prime Minister of Israel as he talked about taking risks for peace, and then given our own opportunity here this evening, we would muffle our message about what our role is in Bosnia. The President has taken the leadership. This Congress has refused to eliminate funds for those troops. Therefore, the result is that our troops are going to be there. They are there to enforce a peace and that peace is well worthy of the best of America's efforts.

Mr. FATTAH

Mr. FATTAH. Mr. Speaker, a defining moment for the new Republican majority, to have a balanced, a fiscally balanced budget that is morally bankrupt is not the result of the work that I think the good intentions, perhaps, they started out with. I rise to oppose the Budget Reconciliation Act.

Mr. FATTAH

Mr. FATTAH. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to the continuing resolution and in support of the motion of the gentleman from Wisconsin [Mr. Obey]. I think that all of us, particularly the new majority in the Congress, should try to think about our responsibility to this nation. First of all, this continuing resolution is not a continuing resolution. It is not going to become the law of the land. The President has said he is going to veto it, especially with the Istook amendment. It is not going to become the law. So we are going through motions again. The appropriation bills that we were blamed for by one of the previous speakers, that the liberal left were holding up, the truth is, the facts are that the Republicans have the majority. They should pass those bills, in that there is not a conference committee that is in the majority of Democrats' hands. You can move those bills over to the President so that we can move this process along. If you really want a continuing resolution, a clean one would in fact see the light of day and would be signed into law. Then the negotiations could move forward. I think that [[Page H 11901]] we are going through these motions but it should be clear to all of us, I think it is clear to people around this country, at least the ones who went to the polls yesterday, that they are not buying this story. I would hope that we would soon--and very soon--get to the point at hand.

Mr. FATTAH

Mr. FATTAH. Mr. Chairman, I oppose this heinous attempt by the Republican majority to balance the budget at the expense of the Nation's elderly. This hysteria surrounding the mandate to balance the budget in 7 years is nothing short of a hoax being perpetrated on the American people to conceal the true Republican agenda. If the Republicans were so interested in balancing the Federal budget, would they be proposing a royalty holiday for major oil producers, many of whom are not even American companies? If the Republicans were truly interested in balancing the Federal budget, would they be proposing the elimination of the guaranteed minimum tax on corporations? Does it make sense to propose a $242 billion tax cut if your objective is to balance the budget? How many of the American people know that the debate over balancing the budget is being conducted in an environment where half the budget isn't even on the table? The result, Mr. Chairman, is that we have a program to revise Medicare which, like the entire Republican program, is regressive in the extreme. It gives special breaks to doctors; it increases premiums for people who can least afford it; it distorts medical financing systems, particularly of hospitals that serve the poor; it sets up dynamics that could lead to the concentration of the poorest and least healthy people in the most inadequate coverage. The Republicans have maintained that the premiums of the poorest elderly will continue to be paid, but this is just another deception. The very program which is responsible for paying these premiums is being eliminated under the Republican Medicaid reform package. [[Page E 2069]] Nothing could make the true Republican intent more clear than an analysis of their approach to Medicare reform. If they had been concerned about protecting the health options of the elderly, they would have pursued comprehensive health care reform. The Republican agenda has nothing to do with protecting Medicare, or with balancing the budget. It has to do with making good on campaign promises to corporations. It has to do with eliminating, on every conceivable front, our social obligation to invest in our people. It has to do with vitiating the very meaning of this democracy. It has to do with tearing at the fabric of our social institutions so that those at the bottom of heap, who can least fend for themselves--our children, our elderly, our poor--have no chance of improving the quality of their lives. It is about redistributing the resources of our country to those that already have plenty so that they can get more. H.R. 2425 is a bad bill. It does not address the broader issue of health care reform; it places unnecessary burdens on the elderly and the poor; it devastates medical training facilities, and is mainly a financial vehicle to balance the budget while reducing taxes for the affluent. We can do better for the elderly, we can do better for our future as a democratic society. I urge my colleagues to consider who we are to be become as a people before they vote on this measure, because it is that question that this bill puts to the test.

Mr. FATTAH

Mr. FATTAH. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the Democratic alternative and oppose the Republican plan.

Mr. FATTAH

Mr. FATTAH. Mr. Speaker, it is idiotic for us to have a disparity in these ratios for powder cocaine or crack. In fact, I would say to the gentleman from Florida [Mr. Shaw] and the gentleman from Florida [Mr. McCollum], one has to have powder cocaine in order to make crack cocaine. The reality is that the people who have the powder cocaine are directly responsible for the creation of the crack cocaine. So, if one wanted to root out the evil and punish it, one would create the disparity in the reverse. Now, what we have here is a situation where I think that most people in this country can recognize that on one hand we have most of the people arrested for crack happen to be white, but most of the people who are convicted and serving these mandatory minimums happen to be black. There is a problem right there. We have had a number of studies that show in every case the sentencing for crimes in our country is racially influenced and more severe. Every time the crime is the same, there is a differential in the sentencing. So, unfortunately it falls upon people in minority communities to bear the brunt of that. One does not have to recognize that. But I think that the American people can see the sheet being pulled away from what is a racist implementation of the criminal justice system in this country, and we shall reap what we sow. People who serve on juries are right not to feel comfortable with our criminal justice system, not to feel as though it is balanced. What do we create when we send a kid away or a young adult for 5 years in jail? Are we educating them while they are in jail? Are we giving them drug treatment while they are in jail? Are we doing anything for them? No. In fact, proposals from this side of the aisle want to make that 5 years the roughest 5 years of their life. Then I would suggest that we reap what we sow. They will return to these same communities, having learned nothing other than how to be hardened criminals when they were, in fact, just innocent victims of the allowance of our Government to allow these drugs to flow into these communities from the beginning. The coca leaf is not grown here. We do not see a lot of African-American young people from Philadelphia or Watts flying these fancy airplanes or speedboats across the ocean bringing this cocaine in here. To have a disparity in which we make crack more evil than powder cocaine, when one needs the powder to make the crack, is asinine.