Alcee Hastings

Mr. HASTINGS of Florida

Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. Mr. Chairman, I rise today to offer an amendment to the Intelligence Authorization bill on behalf of myself and the following members who are immediate cosponsors of the Select Committee on Intelligence: The gentlewoman from California (Ms. Harman), the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Reyes), the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Eshoo), the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Ruppersberger), and the gentleman from Iowa (Mr. Boswell). I would also like to thank the chairman of the committee, my good friend, the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Goss), for his previously stated support for this amendment. Further, I would be remiss if I did not recognize the efforts of former member Louis Stokes and now departed and former member Julian Dixon; our present minority leader of the Democratic Caucus, the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Pelosi), and the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Bishop), and I had forgotten about Tim Roemer, who also was very instrumental in this particular arena as a former member, and others on both sides of the aisle that have been interested in this issue. Mr. Chairman, this amendment directs the Director of Central Intelligence to establish a pilot program to improve the recruitment, hiring, and retention of ethnic and cultural minorities throughout the Intelligence Community. Leaders in the Intelligence Community have, for a number of years, expressed the view that diversity within their population can pay dividends with respect to cultural understanding and especially language capabilities. And, for an equal number of years, the Select Committee on Intelligence has urged them to improve their efforts of hiring, promoting, and retaining individuals from diverse backgrounds. While we noted in our report to accompany H.R. 2417 that progress has been made and, indeed, it has been, especially in the more recent years just passed, we also noted a lack of progress with respect to hiring, promotion, and retention of women and minorities under the current plan. The Secretary of Defense has stated that, ``The current personnel system is not flexible enough to confront the dangers of the 21st century.'' The amendment we offer today addresses one of the many concerns raised by the Secretary and proposes a potential solution. It directs the DCI to develop a pilot program to achieve the goals for increased diversity amongst the Intelligence Community staff. This amendment requires that the Director use methods such as advertising in foreign language newspapers or conducting site visits to high schools, and I would even encourage middle schools as we look toward the future, because it is interesting that in those areas I feel we find many of our grandchildren and little children know a lot about computers that a lot of us older hands do not know about; and colleges as well, with a high percentage of students from diverse backgrounds as two or more recruitment methods. It also requires an annual report from the Director to assess the effectiveness of this project in meeting his goals. If the horrors of 9/11 taught us anything, it is that the biggest threat to our democratic ideals and cultural beliefs comes from those who do not share our ideals and beliefs. The war on terrorism has focused even greater attention on the Intelligence Community as they have collectively faced these and many other challenges with commendable determination. It will take time, innovation, and a long-term strategy to ensure that the Intelligence Community remains capable of both understanding and responding to the threats of the 21st century. I believe that this amendment will help the Intelligence Community meet the goals they have set for themselves and challenges in the decades to come. I urge my colleagues to support this noncontroversial amendment.

Mr. HASTINGS of Florida

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

Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Harman), the ranking member.

Mr. HASTINGS of Florida

Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of this resolution, which commemorates and honors the lives of Medgar Evers and Myrlie Evers-Williams. These two outstanding Americans dedicated their lives to the struggle for civil rights, and Medgar Evers paid the ultimate price with his life. What makes Medgar and Myrlie even more remarkable is that they sought to change the situation, instead of letting the situation overcome them, they tried to overcome it. The struggles that Medgar and Myrlie witnessed and endured as they attempted to integrate African-Americans into larger society are struggles that all minorities can identify and empathize with. As someone that has experienced racism, I empathize with Medgar and Myrlie's struggle, as do many Americans black, white and all colors in between. Against extraordinary odds, they both received post-secondary educations in a racial climate that was filled with tension, and challenged a system that said that blacks were not good enough, not equal but, actually inferior to their white counterparts. Medgar Evers, with his wife by his side, led the charge for civil rights in Mississippi for African-Americans. After the United States Supreme Court determined that segregation was unconstitutional, Medgar was the first African-American to apply to the University of Mississippi Law School but he was denied. This denial did not deter Medgar and Myrlie from their pursuit of justice and equality. In 1954, Medgar accepted a position with the NAACP as their Mississippi Field Secretary and made Myrlie his secretary. Together they aggressively attacked the racist societal barriers that continued to oppress African-Americans. They worked tirelessly to empower African-Americans by registering them to vote. They also organized rallies, built the NAACP's membership, and traveled around the country to educate the public, despite numerous threats. Even though it's the 21st century, we have an obligation to remember and acknowledge the people who dedicated themselves to the fight for civil rights in our past. We owe them a debt of gratitude and a commitment to continue their efforts.

Mr. HASTINGS of Florida

Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, before I yield, I will just respond to my friend from Pennsylvania, who is an extremely thoughtful Member of this body, when he cites the fact that Democrats want to spend. Let me isolate that on the child tax credit: Democrats did want to spend the $3.5 billion that the United States Senate wanted to spend, and each nickel of it was offset. Toward that end, I would urge that that kind of spending redounds to all of our benefit. Mr. Speaker, I am privileged to yield 3 minutes to my good friend, the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Davis).

Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I object to the vote on the ground that a quorum is not present and make the point of order that a quorum is not present.

Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Before I yield to the gentlewoman from California, I would like to respond to my good friend and colleague by indicating that the President's remarks were to pass the Senate bill, and what we did last week was force a conference which is going to delay the tax cuts for the 12 million persons about whom I spoke earlier. That is a reality, and, to my way of thinking, that is, in some respects, uncaring. It certainly is not compassionate. Everybody that is wealthy, including those of us here in Congress, will get our tax benefits, but many of the persons about whom I speak, including some in the military, will not receive a dime this year by virtue of the actions that we took last week. Mr. Speaker, I am privileged to yield 5 minutes to my friend, the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Woolsey), who has been a leader in the fight for protecting children.

Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, when it comes to taking care of children, I just wonder, and pardon me for asking, what $1.1 trillion in the original tax cut during the President's administration and the $350 billion that we passed recently, in addition to the tack-on to the child tax credit, they ran it up to $82 billion, I wonder what those funds could possibly have done for the children of America? I, for one, would have preferred to spend it on them, rather than on rich people. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield to 2\1/2\ minutes to my friend, the gentlewoman from Connecticut (Ms. DeLauro), a continuing fighter and champion for children.

Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I thank the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Sessions), my friend, for yielding me this time. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of this rule and the underlying conference report for the Keeping Children and Families Safe Act. My colleagues know that the rules for conference reports in the House are typically closed, and today's rule is reflective of the longstanding tradition in the House to bring conference reports to the floor in a similar fashion. Mr. Speaker, every time a child is abused or neglected, the whole human race suffers. With that sobering thought in mind, I support the Keeping Children and Families Safe Act. I support this conference report, because most States are facing severe budget deficits, and this is the only Federal legislation that targets child abuse and neglect. I support this conference report because States are dependent on Federal money to meet the increasing demand for community child abuse prevention programs. But realize this legislation does not begin to solve the overwhelming financial problems that the States are currently experiencing. In fact, critics of this bill including the director of the National Child Abuse Coalition say that there is a $2.5 billion spending gap between the amount currently allocated towards prevention and protection and the amount required to handle this problem effectively. The statistics on child abuse and neglect in this country are heart- wrenching. The Department of Health and Human Services estimated that in 2001, 903,000 children in this country were victims of abuse or neglect. This figure represents an 11 percent increase from the previous year, and many child advocates say the stress of a bad economy and unemployment could be two reasons for the increase. This bill includes funding for training and preventative programs for social workers and families and encourages partnerships between State child protective services and community organizations. It also requires foster parents and adoptive parents to undergo criminal background checks and mandates that States expand child abuse services to children born with drug-related problems. Child abuse and neglect is everyone's problem and it affects us both morally and financially. The cost of training and preventative programs will be offset later when children who might have been burdens on society grow into upstanding citizens. From a financial perspective, the costs of child abuse and neglect to our society as a whole are staggering. Studies have documented the link between abuse and neglect in childhood with medical, emotional, psychological and behavioral disorders in adulthood. Those who are abused as children are more likely to suffer from depression, alcoholism, and drug abuse. The abused are also more likely to become juvenile delinquents and are 29 percent more likely to become criminals. Using that estimate, 36,000 of the children who were victims of abuse or neglect in 2001 can or may become criminals. I certainly hope that the work we are doing in this conference report will help curb this number and help those who need it. However, if we are going to come to the floor today and talk about child abuse and neglect, we will be remiss to not talk about the child neglect that occurred last week in this very Chamber when Republicans in this body refused to extend the child tax credit to more than 12 million children living in low-income families without attaching a significant cost to the bill that would have provided for those 12 million children. Frankly, it baffles me how the rhetoric of Republicans in this body rarely meet the reality of their policies. The All-American Tax Relief Act, which passed this House last week was filled with tax cuts that benefit the more well off in our society more than six times as much as they do the needy. The bill was another tax cut to the wealthy that further drives our country into debt and deficit spending, and it lacked even the slightest bit of fiscal responsibility. In truth, the child tax credit failed to provide relief to more than 12 million children who are growing up in low-income families. In truth, families making between $10,500 and $26,625 were excluded from this tax relief, including 1 million children of U.S. Armed Forces personnel. Perhaps when Republicans talk about all Americans, they are really talking about all Americans in the upper tax brackets. Mr. Speaker, Health and Human Services Secretary Tommy Thompson noted, ``A Nation as compassionate as ours should ensure that no child is a victim of abuse or neglect. The number of children that are being abused and neglected in this country is an unacceptable daily tragedy.'' Indeed, Secretary Thompson is correct. But while this body helps communities fight child abuse and neglect throughout the country, we ought to first fight it right here in the House of Representatives. That we do not, Mr. Speaker, is an unacceptable daily tragedy. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I ask Members to vote no on the previous question, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, at the close of this matter, I will urge that Members pay attention to a request on the previous question, and I will urge Members to vote ``no'' on the previous question. If the previous question is defeated, I will offer an amendment to the rule, and my amendment will provide that as soon as the House passes the conference report, it will take from the Speaker's table and immediately consider the Senate-passed version of H.R. 1307, the Armed Forces Tax Fairness Act. My amendment will also add to H.R. 1307 the text of H.R. 1308, as passed by the Senate, which restores the refundable child tax credit that was removed from the Republican tax bill passed last month. This will allow the House to combine these two Senate-passed bills and immediately send them back to the Senate and then, hopefully, on to the President's desk for his signature. If this happens, we can begin helping America's lower- and modest-income families right away, and we can give tax relief to those members of the military who are bravely fighting for this Nation as we speak. Is it not about time we started giving tax breaks to those Americans who really need it? And is it not about time we put an end to legislation that has no chance of becoming law? Last week, the President said he would sign H.R. 1308, as it was passed by the Senate, and restore the refundable tax credit to those families making between $10,000 and $26,000. H.R. 1308, as amended by the Senate, will provide immediate tax relief to America's hard- working, but struggling, families by extending the child tax credit to 6.5 million low-income working families and nearly 12 million additional children. This measure will provide help to the families of 8 million children whose parents serve in the military or are veterans. It will also help families of soldiers in combat in Iraq and Afghanistan by extending the child tax credit to many of them. Mr. Speaker, H.R. 1307 will also help our brave men and women serving in the military. It will help with travel costs for those called up for the National Guard and Reserves, and it will provide benefits for the families of the Columbia astronauts. Vote ``no'' on the previous question so we can combine and then consider these two important tax relief bills as they passed in the Senate and rush them back to the Senate. Let us not let tax relief for these two important and deserving segments of our society wither on the vine. Mr. Speaker, I urge a ``no'' vote on the previous question so we can consider tax relief that can actually become law and really help those most in need of tax relief. I want to emphasize that a ``no'' vote will not prevent the House from considering the conference report for this very important legislation, the Keeping Children and Families Safe Act. It will allow us to consider the Senate-passed versions of the refundable child tax credit and the Armed Forces Tax Fairness Act, in addition to this important conference. However, a yes vote will stop us from voting on this package of true tax relief for lower income Americans. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the amendment be printed in the Record immediately before the vote on the previous question.

Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased to yield 2\1/ 2\ minutes to the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Emanuel), my good friend who has been a continuing champion for children in this body and in his previous life before coming here.

Mr. HASTINGS of Florida

Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I rise to introduce a resolution, which calls on the government of Iran to comply with its NPT obligations, sign the AIEA Model Additional Protocol, and halt support for terrorism. Also, it asks President Bush and the international community to renew their commitment to the war against terrorism, and impede the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction. The proliferation of nuclear weapons anywhere in the world poses a serious threat to international peace and security. The knowledge, non- nuclear materials, and components needed for the production of nuclear weapons are already accessible worldwide. The main technical barrier is obtaining the nuclear material. Therefore, to prevent any further proliferation of nuclear weapons, we must work to prevent the propagation of nuclear materials. The director of the International Atomic Energy Agency (AIEA) has recently announced that Iran has built a plant to enrich uranium--a key component of advanced nuclear weapons. This deeply worries me, because U.S. intelligence sources indicate that Iran could develop as many as 50 nuclear weapons from this facility. Mr. Speaker, members of this chamber have not yet given adequate attention to the dangers of a nuclear Iran. Iran's nuclear intentions are a cause of fear. It is unclear whether Iran, by pursuing a sophisticated and advanced nuclear program, has chosen to break from the NPT treaty now; but it is obvious that it has positioned itself to do so within a very short time if it ever decides to. Iran is the most active state sponsor of terrorism, and continues to provide material support to Hizballah, Hamas, and Islamic Jihad--all recognized terrorist groups. The country's construction of nuclear facilities coupled with its known ties to terrorist groups constitutes a threat to global peace and security. Nuclear materials that could be used to develop nuclear weapons must not fall into the hands of terrorists or state sponsors of terrorism-- like Iran. Preventing Iran from developing nuclear weapons capabilities must remain a foreign policy and homeland security priority. There are many difficulties, but also opportunities, on the road towards nuclear non-proliferation. For the last few decades a number of diplomatic and political strategies have been pursued. Let me empathetically opine that we need to redouble these efforts. If we are to achieve a non-nuclear Iran, we must commit to a thoughtful strategy of dialogue.

Mr. HASTINGS of Florida

Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong opposition to H.R. 1308, the ``Only If you Make Enough Money'' All American Tax Relief Act of 2003. In the Federalist Papers, Alexander Hamilton writes, ``I know that powerful individuals, in this and in other States, are enemies to a general government in every possible shape.'' Perhaps Hamilton had the current Republican Caucus in mind when he issued this warning more than 225 years ago. Clearly, the bill that this body is considering today is an example of power, ignorance, and plain and simple greed. When the President signed into law the most recent tax cut, he signed a flawed bill. It was flawed when it first passed the House and it was flawed when the Conference Report was approved. Honestly, Mr. Speaker, I'm not surprised. As in so many other instances, during the still of the night--when the majority of Americans had already gone to bed-- House Republicans cut a deal with Senate Republicans and rushed to complete a tax cut requested by an over zealous President. As America has had a chance to sift through the most recent tax cut, it has become clear that the Republican Majority passed a bill which neglects more than 12 million children who are growing up in low-income families and the ability for their parents to benefit from the expansion of the child tax credit. Even worse, when provided with an opportunity to fix what is wrong with the initial bill--in a non- controversial manner and at a relatively inexpensive cost--the Republican Majority has proven that it is more interested in scoring political points with the rich at the expense of America's children. Now, I'd like to give the Majority the benefit of the doubt and believe that the exclusion of families making between $10,500 and $26,625 was a simple oversight. However, after examining the bill that the House is considering today, as well as the reluctance at which the Majority is bringing it to the floor, it is increasingly clear that the ``oversight'' Republicans made in the most recent tax bill was anything but an oversight. Instead, it was a concerted effort to avoid extending the credit to all families, rich and poor, to save offset room for an international business tax bill that the Majority Leader and Chairman of the Ways and Means Committee have each indicated is a priority. Well, Mr. Speaker, I can think of no greater priority than helping America's children and neediest families. This bill does little of the sort. The Majority may try and sell this bill to the American public as one that helps those who need it most, but the truth remains that the bill is filled with tax cuts that benefit the wealthy more than six times as much as they do the needy. This is a tax cut that further drives our country into debt and deficit spending, and it lacks even the slightest bit of fiscal responsibility. Mr. Speaker, I've often been referred to as a ``tax and spend liberal.'' Well, I'm liberal and I'm proud of it. Frankly, I don't mind spending our tax dollars on government programs that, one, help people, and two, can be paid for through honest fiscal policy and, to the extent possible, balanced budgets. On the contrary, perhaps it might be best to describe the Majority as a bunch of ``cut and charge conservatives.'' The key difference between them and us is that Democrats pay up front for the government programs we support, whereas Republicans pay for their priorities on credit cards and leave the debt for future Democratic Majorities to pay off. This bill further runs up America's charge account for generations to come. I urge my colleagues to reject this bill and join America's children and call on the Republican Majority to bring the Senate passed child tax credit bill to the floor for its immediate consideration.

Mr. HASTINGS of Florida

Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Pallone), my good friend.

Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to my good friend, the gentleman from California (Mr. Baca). (Mr. BACA asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I object to the vote on the ground that a quorum is not present and make the point of order that a quorum is not present.

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

Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, first, let me thank the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Linder) for yielding me this time. The Unlawful Internet Gambling Funding Prohibition Act has the potential to eradicate illegal Internet gambling by disallowing merchants from accepting credit card, debit card, or other bank- sanctioned transactions as payment for online wagering. Mr. Speaker, because online gambling has grave societal consequences, I support this legislation that aims to eradicate it. As the ``crack cocaine'' of gambling, Internet betting often leads to severe personal and family hardships, including debt, bankruptcy, foreclosed mortgages, and divorce. Although I am pleased that three amendments were made in order, I find it especially disappointing and frustrating that the Pombo amendment will not be debated today. The gentleman from California (Mr. Pombo) presented an amendment that would have treated Indian tribes on a par with State governments. The interests of the Native American people, a community that has been disenfranchised for all of their history, should always be heard and, in this case, should have been debated. The price of Internet gambling can be measured best in terms of the human costs. As we debate the pros and cons of this act, the most important question we should be asking is, What does Internet gambling cost our children, and is this a price we are willing to pay? Mr. Speaker, we are debating a bill that has the potential to stop the gambling with our future, because Internet gambling hurts children. I have learned of one young man that racked up debts of $70,000 and was kicked out of his house because he was stealing from his family, and of another teen who blew his tuition and 3 days after his father repaid it, he withdrew from his courses, demanded a refund, and spent the refund on gambling. Stories like these are innumerable. The American Psychiatric Association is so concerned about the increase in youth gambling, primarily on the Internet, that it recently issued the following statement: ``In virtually all studies of the rates of gambling problems at various ages, high school and college-aged individuals show the highest problem areas.'' The APA says the increase in problems among young people can be attributed, in part, to the ease with which they can gamble on the Internet, where there are no enforceable restrictions on age. Mr. Speaker, this bill is intended to help reduce the extent of existing illegal Internet gambling in the United States; and I support it as it is presently constituted, with hopes of continuing revision. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to my good friend, the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Frank).

Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I am privileged to yield 3 minutes to my friend, the gentlewoman from Connecticut (Ms. DeLauro).

Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Louisiana (Mr. Alexander), a new Member, new in the sense that this is his first term; however, he has distinguished himself in many ways among freshmen and all of us.

Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. Mr. Speaker, would the Speaker inform us of how much time remains on each side?

Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Woolsey), my very good friend.

Mr. HASTINGS of Florida

Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of this bill, which designates a post office in Paia, Maui County, Hawaii as the Patsy Takemoto Mink Post Office Building. Patsy Mink served in the House of Representatives from 1964 to 1977 and again from 1990 to 2002. The world lost one of its greatest citizens, and I lost a good friend when she passed away on September 28, 2002. One of her greatest legislative accomplishments, she felt, was the passage of Title IX, which led to expanded opportunities for women and girls in athletics and academics. In the last decade of her political leadership, she was a tireless advocate on behalf of poor families, working to promote policies that addressed the realities of poverty. During the 107th Congress, she garnered substantial support for legislation to provide additional educational opportunities for the nation's welfare recipients. Patsy Mink also helped write environmental protection laws safeguarding land and water in communities affected by coal strip mining. It is certainly fitting that we acknowledge this outstanding woman's accomplishments by naming a post office in her honor, and I thank Representative Ed Case for his stewardship of this bill. Patsy Mink's life of public service spanned six decades, beginning in 1956 when she was elected to the Territorial House in Hawaii. In 1964 she was elected to the House of Representatives and was one of the early opponents of the Vietnam War. President Jimmy Carter appointed her as assistant secretary of state for oceans, international, environmental and scientific affairs from 1977 to 1978, and she served as the national president for Americans for Democratic Action (ADA) from 1978 to 1981. Following her tenure as ADA president, she returned to politics, serving on the Honolulu City Council, and in a 1990 special election, she regained her Congressional seat. Patsy Mink was an exemplary role model for women and minorities, and it is a pleasure and an honor to pay homage to a cherished colleague, who is no longer here, but certainly not forgotten.