Sheila Jackson Lee

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I know there was hard work amongst the appropriators and what they had to work with, but I rise with a great deal of disappointment because poverty has, in fact, increased. Just look at the number of homeless persons across America and the 44 million uninsured. And I would have hoped the Olver amendment could have been passed to allow for additional funds to go into Hope 6 because Hope 6 rebuilds distressed public housing and changes it into mixed housing for those individuals who are without housing. Right now in my district, there is an application in one of the most distressed areas for a youth bill. Does anyone understand that youth bill puts inner city youngsters, rural youngsters to work building homes in their communities? What is going to happen to brownfields in our respective areas, rural and inner city areas where we are not cleaning up horribly poisoned areas that could, in fact, contribute to the economy? In the month of May, the unemployment among African Americans went through the roof. There are no jobs being created. And then, of course, the community development block grant was saved but those dollars are needed, even more dollars are needed to enhance development in our cities and in our rural areas. It is a shame on America when we do not stand up for our inter city, our Amtrak, our rail system, light rail and rail. And I would have hoped we would have added more than $25 million for air traffic controllers because America's skyways are overcrowded and air traffic employees are needed to be retrained as well as additional employees are needed. We could have done more if we had cut into that over excessive tax cut for millionaires and billionaires. We could have provided an environmentally safe America with providing dollars for brownfields, a youth bill to ensure that youngsters who are at-risk can help build their community; more dollars for community develop; more dollars for Hope 6. Yes, poverty is raging in America. There are people without jobs, but more importantly there are people living earning under $8,000 which is extreme poverty. They do not have housing and it is difficult to house them. This bill needed to do more. I hope my colleagues will go back to the drawing board. I ask my colleagues to consider the necessary enhancement of funding in the bill to help the most vulnerable.

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Chairman, if the gentlewoman from New York would continue to yield, that is the clarity that I was trying to secure.

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Chairman, will the gentlewoman yield?

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I thank the distinguished gentlewoman very much for yielding. Mr. Chairman, if I might engage the distinguished gentleman from Arizona, I think the amendment can be interpreted in the way the gentleman has offered, but I think it can be interpreted in the way I have offered it. The problem is as we visited, first of all I want to thank Chad for what it has offered to the refugees and, of course, refugee resettlement efforts with the United Nations, where Chad is hosting the United Nations and welcoming them for the many refugee camps that are there. But there is a terrible economic burden on Chad as well, and this is simply language that suggests that we are monitoring or ensuring that our funds are being used to, in fact, provide for those refugees who are in fear of their lives. Now, I would be happy if the gentleman would work with me to include this in report language, so that we would have at least that protection from what might happen or what might be thought of or what might cause, if you will, some sort of pressure to return those refugees because of the economic imbalance. When we were there, though Chad was very hospitable, and all of us have gone to Chad and gone through Chad to go to Sudan, but if, for example, the financial burden became so extensive, then there might be some pressure, Mr. Chairman. So I would hope that we find common ground to realize that it is a concern. I would not have brought it to the floor if it was not. I think it is an important point to make, that we understand the brutality that these refugees have experienced, and because they have experienced such devastation, we want to cross the T's and dot the I's. So that was the explanation I wanted to make. If I can work to get a commitment on precise report language, which I think answers the concern, then I think that that is a way of addressing a definitive concern that I saw, and I think it is real, and I think my interpretation clarifies that it is not in any way undermining the funding for the U.N. Refugee Resettlement Program, but it is to make clear that even if there is an economic burden on the host country; in this instance, Chad, and again, I repeat, I thank them for their hospitality to these refugees. They should be, as we have supported their efforts, but there would not be that intent to resettle these refugees beyond the time of them wanting to go back, or for those who do not want to go back.

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Chairman, let me try to understand the gentleman. I guess we differ whether it is overbroad, but I am welcoming of the gentleman's generous offer, in understanding that he would work with me on report language that helps us not have forced repatriation back to Sudan.

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Chairman, I thank the ranking member and the chairman. I want to acknowledge the work that the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Kolbe) has done and the gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. Lowey) has done on the Darfur crisis as relates to the refugees; and I hope that maybe as we discuss this matter, I can work with the distinguished gentleman and the distinguished gentlewoman on conference language that responds to my concern. We originally had this amendment include the words ``not against their will.'' The reason, Mr. Chairman, is that in the time that I spent in Chad with the refugees that have been resettled in Chad, I saw that the crisis in Darfur and the surrounding border areas between Sudan and Chad still exist. We have made great strides in providing resources to the region; but as I traveled to Chad and met with the leadership of Chad, they talked about the enormous challenges that they are presently having with their refugees and the refugees from Sudan and the need for resources. At the same time as I talked one on one to the refugees that were there, they expressed to me that the brutality was still going on. Of course, in Chad we find that there is a lack of sufficient water, adequate medical supplies, and, of course, the possibility that the Janjaweed will come across the border and raid them at will. But at the same time, these refugees were frightened about the possibility of being returned to Sudan because the Government of Chad may be overwhelmed with the resources needed to protect them. I believe, of course, that we can help provide the resources to Chad needed to protect those refugees, and the United Nations refugee resettlement effort was very much in force and very much an effective tool. But as we know, the genocidal regime in Sudan has left 2.5 million people displaced and at least 380,000 people dead in Darfur. We also know that there is a continuing number of refugees that have come across the border. Due to increasing violence, 15,000 innocent civilians continue to die each month. Genocide cannot continue on our watch. The United States must move forward towards an effective action against this terrible crime. We are gratified that this Congress voted on a genocide initiative and declared that genocide was occurring. The United Nations, of course, has had a more difficult time dealing with that question. But we know that genocide has occurred. We know that these refugees are fleeing for a very important reason. The United Nations Secretary General has described the situation in Darfur as ``a little short of hell on Earth,'' and expert John Prendergast calls it ``Rwanda in slow motion.'' Under cover of a decade-long civil war that has claimed 2 million Sudanese lives, the government-backed Janjaweed continues their campaign to wipe out communities of African tribal farmers who live in the region. I understand that there have been changes in the Sudanese Government. In Chad, I met with the Sudanese ambassador. I have met with the Sudanese ambassador, to the dismay of many here in the United States, trying to find common ground. I want to applaud the work of the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Payne) and the Committee on International Relations and the Committee on Appropriations Subcommittee on Foreign Operations, Export Financing, and Related Programs, that has looked at this question and has fought it with great, great perseverance. The gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Jackson) provided additional dollars. But I want to make sure that any Darfurian refugee that is in Chad is not forced to leave for any economic reason. Of course, we need more dollars to help Chad, more support of the United Nations Commissioner on Human Rights and Refugees. But we also need to ensure that resources here by this appropriation do not force anyone to go back to a place where they do not want to go. Some refugees may want to go back. When I met with them one on one, they talked about their cattle being destroyed, they talked about there being no place for them, their villages had been destroyed. We looked and spoke with the African Union at the aerial footage that would show how large villages had been destroyed, so there is not much for them to return to. I want to be able to say that we are working at all ends, the declaration of genocide, the negotiations with Sudan to stop the violence and stop the devastating destruction of these individuals in Sudan and stop the fleeing from Sudan. But now that we are in the predicament that we are in, which is 380,000, up to 400,000 and growing, refugees in Chad, we want to make sure that there is no fear, no, if you will, requirement, no demand, no shuttling. Refugees who do not want to go back, they should not have to go. Let me say this as well: if you speak to the women and the children that I had a chance to speak to, I can only say that tears would come to your eyes, the raping, the brutalization, the fear, the apprehension. I would ask my colleagues to consider an amendment that simply wants to give to those who are in fear of their lives the opportunity not to return if they desire not to return. Mr. Chairman, the amendment proposes to preclude the use of funds made available in this act to force repatriation of Darfurian refugees from the Republic of Chad back to Darfur, Sudan against their will. This act could be deemed authorized under Section 12 of the Sudan Peace Act as an effort to assist the African Union in its peacekeeping efforts; however, it could prove detrimental or deadly for many Darfurians. I traveled to the Republic of Chad last April and saw the devastation and suffering first-hand by the Sudanese refugees. They lack sufficient water, adequate medical supplies, and protection from Janjaweed militia who raid them at will. As many of you know, the genocidal regime in Sudan has left 2.5 million people displaced and at least 380,000 people dead in the Darfur. Due to increasing violence, 15,000 innocent civilians continue to die each month. Genocide cannot continue on our watch; the United States must move toward effective action against this most terrible crime. The United Nations Secretary General has described the situation in Darfur as ``little short of hell on earth.'' Expert John Prendergast calls it ``Rwanda in slow motion.'' Under cover of a decade-long civil war that has claimed 2 million Sudanese lives, government backed Janjaweed continue their campaign to wipe out communities of African tribal farmers who live in the region. The government-backed Janjaweed are razing villages, systematically raping women and young girls, abducting children, poisoning water supplies, and destroying sources of food. Unlike the recent tsunamis in Southeast Asia, the situation in Darfur is manmade and therefore can be addressed. In my visit to the region, I had the opportunity to meet with Lt. General Ansu of the African Union, which is the single peacekeeping force supported by the United Nations. During the meeting, the general noted that there is nothing they can do pursuant to the current mandate. As a result, I recently co-signed a letter, along with other Congressional Black Caucus members, to the President of Nigeria, Mr. Obasanjo, asking him to use his influence as chairman of the African Union to change the mandate of the AU in Sudan. Additionally, I am also a co-sponsor of H.R. 1424, ``The Darfur Genocide Accountability Act of 2005.'' H.R. 1424, among other things, also calls for changing the mandate of the AU. While these are positive steps towards ending the genocide, they are clearly not enough. In addition to my visit with Lt. General Ansu, I also had the opportunity to visit refugee camps and spoke with many of the refugees regarding what they have seen. According to them, many of the women and young girls have been raped, and many of the men have been violently murdered. Furthermore, water and food supplies have been completely destroyed making it impossible for many to survive. The time has come for the United States to take a substantive role in curtailing this situation. I ask that my colleagues support the Jackson-Lee amendment.

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Chairman, with that kind of offer and the understanding that the amendment was drafted to ensure that we did not have the forcing of refugees to return, I will look forward to working with the gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. Lowey) and the gentleman from Arizona (Chairman Kolbe) to have language in conference on this matter. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent to withdraw my amendment.

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I have worked on this issue for a long time, and I hope to be able to withdraw this amendment and engage the chairman in a colloquy. I think all of us are reminded of the terrible wars in Liberia, Sierra Leone, and Rwanda. And, in addition to the enormity of the loss of life, one of the most troubling and very sad aspects was the use of child soldiers. In fact, even now, there are programs on the continent of Africa to restore the childhood to these children, children who had guns instead of soccer balls or basketballs or baseballs; children who had guns instead of sitting in classrooms and learning about science and math and the study of the stars. So, it is unfortunate that even today, in 2005, we find the fact that child soldiers are still utilized. They are utilized in places like Burma, in the Republic of the Congo, and other places where wars arise. I would think in this day and time of terrorism, we know that child soldiers are being used as terrorists around the world. On June 18, 2002, the U.S. Senate gave unanimous consent to U.S. ratification of the Child Soldiers Protocol which was the optional protocol to the convention on the rights of children on the involvement of children in armed conflict. This decision meant that the United States would not put anyone under the age of 18 in combat, nor would we approve or sanction any such activity. However, despite that fact, there are many nations throughout the world that sign and ratify the protocol. The problem of children being put into combat situations is still prevalent in many regions of the world. Despite gains in awareness and better understanding of practical policies that can help reduce the use of children in war, the practice persists; and globally the number of child soldiers, about 300,000, is believed to remain fairly constant. In some continued armed conflicts, child recruitment increased alarmingly. And I have cited some of the countries where they are being used to fight wars, boys and girls, which is enormously tragic. They have even been used as laborers and sexual slaves. We know that the governments of Burma, Burundi, the DRC, Liberia, and Sudan and other governments have used children to fight wars. Burma's National Army alone includes an estimated 70,000 child soldiers, which is nearly one quarter of the world's total and routinely sends children as young as 12 into battle against armed ethnic opposition groups. Mr. Chairman, I would hope that this Congress would go on record in some manner. Even as this amendment may be subject to a point of order, I believe it was worthy of our discussion that we oppose the use of children as soldiers. We have certainly opposed violent conflicts around the world and we wish to promote peace; but we will do everything we can to ensure that our children of the world, the ones who can be leaders for peace if given half the chance, if given the chance to live in a free and open society where they can be children and learn to be the best that they can be, I would hope that these children would not be put to the test of fighting in battles. Mr. Chairman, I rise today to support my Amendment to this Foreign Operations Appropriation bill, which states that none of the funds made available in this Act under the heading ``INTERNATIONAL MILITARY EDUCATION AND TRAINING'' or ``FOREIGN MILITARY FINANCING PROGRAM'' may be used in contravention of the child soldiers protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the Child. The nations known to use child soldiers do not deserve military assistance from our nation. On June 18, 2002 the U.S. Senate gave unanimous consent to U.S. ratification of the child soldiers protocol, which was the optional protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the Child on the involvement of children in armed conflict. This decision meant that the United States would not put anyone under the age of eighteen in combat. However, despite that fact that many nations throughout the world signed and ratified the protocol, the problem of children being put into combat situations is still prevalent in many regions of the world. Despite gains in awareness and better understanding of practical policies that can help reduce the use of children in war, the practice persists and globally, the number of child soldiers--about 300,000--is believed to have remained fairly constant. In some continuing armed conflicts, child recruitment increased alarmingly. In Northern Uganda, abduction rates reached record levels in late 2002 and 2003 as over 8,000 boys and girls were forced by the Lord's Resistance Army to become soldiers, laborers, and sexual slaves. In the neighboring Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC), where all parties to the armed conflict recruit and use children, some as young as seven, the forced recruitment of children increased so dramatically in late 2002 and early 2003 that observers described the fighting forces as ``armies of children.'' However, it is not just non-governmental armed opposition groups who continue to use children to fight wars. Governments including those in Burma, Burundi, the DRC, Liberia, Sudan, and Ugandan have continued to recruit and use children in armed conflict. Burma's national army alone includes an estimated 70,000 child soldiers, which is nearly one- quarter of the world's total and routinely sends children as young as twelve into battle against armed ethnic opposition groups. Both Uganda and the DRC have ratified the optional protocol, but flout their obligations by using child soldiers. The Ugandan People's Defense Force has recruited children who escaped or were captured from the rebel Lord's Resistance Army, and has trained and deployed children recruited into local defense units. The government of DRC maintains children in its ranks despite a 2000 presidential decree calling for the demobilization of child soldiers. While none of these nations are specifically targeted to receive any military assistance in this Appropriation, it is important that this amendment is passed so that a message against the use of child soldiers is sent throughout the world. Regardless of how unlikely it is that such funding may ever take place, we as a nation can not allow even the slightest possibility that taxpayer money may go to pay for military assistance to other nations who continue to use child soldiers. It is also important to note that these military assistance funds do not cover any humanitarian assistance, only funds under the International Military Education and Training and Foreign Military Financing Programs. It's a travesty that here in America we talk of holding our children above all else, but around the world children are being used as tools for war. I urge support for the Jackson-Lee Amendment to prohibit military assistance to nations that continue to use child soldiers. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Chairman, if I might, to the gentleman, I would simply say I would like to work with the Chair and the ranking member. Again, I would like to call on your good graces to look at language during conference and work with you and have the language that is appropriate and of course acceptable to all of us and acceptable to the Chair and the ranking member. I do think that silence on child soldiers is not helpful because there is continued recruitment, and so I would like to withdraw the amendment. I would like to yield to the gentleman, just to say can we work together on it.

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Chairman, let me thank the chairman and let me ask and thank the chairman for his reservation of point of order. But let me thank him for entering into a discussion on this matter and allowing me to discuss it and bringing it to the attention of my colleagues. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent to withdraw the amendment.

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I was unavoidably detained and did not vote on the Deal amendment during consideration of H.R. 3057. Had I been present, I would have voted no.

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, whenever we approach this microphone in this institution, we do it with the greatest of respect. I respect my colleague who just spoke of the great duty and service given to America by the men and women on the front lines all over the world, but in this instance, particularly in Iraq and Afghanistan. This weekend I had the opportunity to see another fine example of servicemen and women, soldiers and sailors, working together at Guantanamo. But as we respect and appreciate their service, I have also had the opportunity to engage in conversation with these brave young men and women, Reservists, National Guard, and the one thing they understand is that what they are fighting for is freedom, and they are fighting for the availability and the opportunity for there to be public disagreement, dissent. That is the basis of our Constitution. That is why we love America. So I rise today to simply raise questions; to applaud the improvement that has occurred in Guantanamo, but also to suggest that there needs to be transparency, there needs to be an understanding that there was a before and now an after. We need to be able to investigate thoroughly allegations of inappropriate behavior, abuse, by those in the FBI, the media and non-governmental agencies, to be able to clear the stain that might be on those who are working hard now. A bipartisan commission could investigate by way of talking to the detainees; understand fully what the military tribunals mean and how they operate; whether or not detainees have a right to counsel; why they are being held indefinitely; why there are no charges; why there has not been a prosecution and a conviction; and to emphasize the Rasul case, which talks about access to the courts through habeas corpus proceedings. Again, what I said very clearly is progress has been made, and I applaud that progress. But progress will be greatly made if we have an understanding through a bipartisan process of what Guantanamo means, and ultimately to prosecute the bad and horrific terrorists, for none of us want to see terrorists released. But for those who are able to return home, to be detained at home, to be held at home, to be kept off the battlefield so that those in Guantanamo do not pose a threat to our soldiers on the battlefield and to be held against them if they happen to be caught by the enemy. I ask for a simple point that freedom means airing, freedom means the opportunity to ask questions and to get answers. I say that again tonight, as we heard the President speak to the American people. First, I applaud the fact that the President has come to the American people; it is something that I have asked for time and time again. But, Mr. Speaker, let me simply say this: we need a success strategy in order to be able to have our troops come home. It is not a cut-and-run strategy, and I resent the interpretation that those of us who have asked for a success strategy that will bring dignity and respect to our troops and freedom to the Iraqi people are in any way cutting and running. The strategies that the President offered tonight do not lead us on that pathway. The relating of the war in Iraq to the 9/11 tragedy, the horrific terrorist act, does not comport, if you will. We are fighting a War on Terror. We need all of our allies to help us fight it. We need the Iraqis, we need the Jordanians, we need the Saudi Arabians, we need all of them. But this ongoing conflict and war in Iraq with our soldiers entrenched where the Iraqi people and the Iraqi government has not reached out to diversify their government to include the Sunnis, to make sure that they are fighting collectively against the bad elements in a unified force, that is what is keeping us from peace. Embedding our soldiers and Iraqi forces is a good military strategy, but it is not a political end to this war. And, yes, we are looking for the writing of a Constitution, the voting on a Constitution, but we need a success strategy, a time that we can look toward for our troops to be able to come home. It would be well to give military strategies that include training our national Iraqi forces, which I agree with, and I offered an amendment on the Floor of the House, working with conferees on the Defense Appropriation, to ensure that that occurs. I support the Skelton-Harman bill that talks about reinforcing the Iraqi forces, but that is not a success strategy. Again, there is no fear to being able to talk about the time of our troops coming home, acknowledging the brave stand that they have taken and the success that they have had in initially toppling Saddam Hussein. I disagreed with this war from the beginning because I believed that it was not a constitutional war because Congress had not declared war. But I am prepared to work with the President now, to work with our colleagues in order to develop a success strategy that comes with honor and dignity. What we had tonight leaves us empty because, in fact, I would hope that we could believe that the insurgency would go down. But we cannot expect that, in the backdrop of Secretary Rumsfeld clearly saying that the insurgents would be active for 12 years, and tonight we did not hear any solution to the violence of the insurgents. I believe that with the presence of military forces with the United States there, the insurgents will continue to rise. I look forward to working with my colleagues to bring peace to this crisis in Iraq. We cannot do it without an effective success strategy for our troops and for America.

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, the Supreme Court acted today, but if any of us want to know what real religious freedom and religious liberty is all about, I rise today to pay tribute to the Reverend Billy Graham. Though many have said that the series of evangelistic sermons this past weekend in New York may be his last, he is a symbol of what America stands for and appreciates in freedom of religion. He spoke to all people. I understand that in the early 1960s when it was not appropriate, he invited Dr. Martin Luther King to open one of his evangelistic meetings. He came to Nashville, Tennessee when it was not popular to do so. In his audience of thousands and thousands over the weekend, we saw the faces of America, many colors, many different persons, many economic conditions. They came to hear the gospel said in an open and free society. He pushes no agenda. He does not ask for the Ten Commandments to be placed in any place; but, he says, if you believe, then you should accept. That is what true religious freedom and liberty are all about. That is why I am glad to be an American and believe in the first amendment. I salute the Reverend Billy Graham, a great American and a great patriot.

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of H. Res. 608 which recognizes the 9th anniversary of the terrorist bombing of the Khobar Towers United States military housing compound near Dhahran, Saudi Arabia. On the evening of June 25th, 1996, a truck bomb exploded in Dhahran, Saudi Arabia. This terrorist attack killed 19 servicemen of the U.S. Air Force and wounded 300 other Americans. The bomb tore away an entire wall of a high-rise apartment building, part of the Khobar Towers complex housing U.S. Air Force men and women assigned to nearby Dhahran Air Base. Although their mission was to patrol the skies of southern Iraq and prevent Iraqi planes from threatening the peace of the Middle East, this terrorist attack was a painful demonstration and reminder of the risks Americans in uniform are faced with every day around the world. Therefore, it is our duty to recognize the service and sacrifice of these men and women and to extend that duty upon our fellow Americans. We ask that all Americans pause and pay tribute to those 19 brave airmen and airwomen who have given their lives so that others throughout the world may live in a free and democratic society. Together, as Americans, we offer our continued sympathies to the families affected by this tragedy. We know that because their loved ones could never be replaced; we will never forget the values they so valiantly died for, nor will we stop until those who are responsible for such a heinous act are brought to justice. Furthermore, it is our responsibility to assure our servicemen and women that wherever in the world they are--we, the Members of Congress, will make them, the defenders of liberty and justice, our highest priority.

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to be here today to be in support of the Little Rock Central High School Desegregation 50th Anniversary Commemorative Coin Act. I would like to thank my colleague, Congressman Vic Snyder, for introducing this important piece of legislation. In 1957, Little Rock Central High School was the site of the first major national test for the implementation of the U.S. Supreme Court's Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka decision and became the international symbol of the end of racially segregated public schools. The desegregation of Little Rock Central High by nine African American students was influential to the Civil Rights Movement, and recognized by Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. as such a significant event in the struggle for civil rights that in May 1958, he attended the graduation of the first African American from Little Rock Central High School. Moreover, it changed American history by providing an example on which to build greater equality, and ultimately a better America. H.R. 358, the Little Rock Central High School Desegregation 50th Anniversary Commemorative Coin Act, will bring national and international attention to the lasting legacy of this important event by creating a commemorative coin for 2007, in recognition of the 50th anniversary of the desegregation of Little Rock Central High School. I am proud to be here today to support this bill and I urge my colleagues to do the same.

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I rise today as an original cosponsor to H. Con. Res. 71, which expresses the sense of Congress that there should be the institution of a Caribbean-American Heritage Month. Persons of Caribbean descent played a fundamental role in the establishment of our Nation--these same Diasporic communities continue to contribute to the well being of the United States today. Beginning with the emigration of indentured servants from the Caribbean to Jamestown, Virginia in 1619--through the slave trade the following three centuries, it is not surprising to find people of Caribbean heritage in every State of the Union. It is upon these first individual's works and merits that a large part of this country was built. Although the countries of the Caribbean faced obstacles of slavery and colonialism, their struggles for independence prevailed. This racially, culturally, and religiously diverse region of the world contributes greatly to the economy of our own Nation. While the Caribbean is a vital supplier to the sugarcane, coffee, cocoa, gold, tobacco, and banana industries, their contributions exceed monetary value. There have been many influential Caribbean-Americans in the history of the United States, including: Colin Powell, the first African- American Secretary of State. Shirley Chisolm, the first African- American Congresswoman and first African-American woman candidate for President. Sidney Poitier, the first African-American actor to receive the Academy Award for the best actor in a leading role. Harry Belafonte, a musician, actor, and activist. Claude McKay, a poet of the Harlem Renaissance. Celia Cruz, world renowned queen of Salsa music. Roberto Clemente, the first Latino inducted into the baseball hall of fame; and Al Roker, meteorologist and television personality. From this short list, we see that Caribbean-Americans shared not only their culture, and expertise in education, fine arts, business, literature, jounalism, politics, and science, but the people of the Caribbean region also share the hopes and aspirations of the people of the Unites States for peace and prosperity throughout the world. Given their contributions to our Nation, it would only be appropriate of the people of the United Sates to observe the month of June with fitting ceremonies, activities, and celebrations. It is on these grounds that I request that Congress honor the establishment of Caribbean-American Heritage Month.

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of this resolution urging the Government of the Republic of Albania to ensure that the parliamentary elections to be held on July 3, 2005, are conducted in accordance with international standards for free and fair elections. This is an important piece of legislation that will notify the people of Albania that the United States is dedicated to safe, free, and open democracy in Albania and the region. It will let the people of Albania know that we are at their side as they strive for a more free and open society. As the nation of Albania approaches its July 3rd parliamentary elections we must stand steadfast in our support of free, fair, and transparent elections. As a participating member of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe and a signatory of the 1990 Copenhagen Document containing specific commitments relating to the conduct of elections, Albania must maintain its commitment to these democratic ideals. Indeed, the Copenhagen Document, which encourages transparency, balance, and impartiality in the election process, is so sound that it has become the standard by which elections are judged. Although Albanian democracy has strengthened over the past several years, it has nonetheless failed to live up to the standards of the Copenhagen Document. Over the past 10 years, Albanian elections have not been as free, fair, and open as the Albanian people deserve. As nations around Europe and the world have made considerable strides towards democracy, meeting the standards in the Copenhagen Document for free and fair elections is absolutely essential to Albania's desired integration into Euro-Atlantic institutions, including membership in the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, NATO. Additionally, transparent democratic elections will inexorably lead to a more free and open society and government able to combat Albania's problems with organized crime. The Republic of Albania must demonstrate its willingness and preparedness to take the next steps towards strong and stable democracy. This can only be achieved when the people of Albania choose their own representatives in parliament in free and fair elections. The Albanian government, political parties, and politicians must conduct this election in adherence to the laws that regulate all free and fair elections; transparency, free press, and unfettered access to electoral procedures by international and domestic observers. I commend all the Albanian political parties for their commitment to adhere to campaign and election laws. If Albania is to become an active member of both the European and Euro-Atlantic community it must conduct elections that meet international standards. Failure to meet these requirements could have disastrous effects. Europe and the United States must play an active role in helping Albania move towards stable, transparent, and free democracy. This legislation will take a great step towards that goal.

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the proposals that seek to prohibit the use of funds in the bill to distribute the personal information of Medicare and Medicaid beneficiaries to private companies for marketing purposes. The Americans who receive Medicare and Medicaid benefits already suffer from ailments that debilitate and weaken them from a health standpoint. This legislation should not be permitted to debilitate them from a fiscal standpoint either. According to data, more people were covered by Medicare and Medicaid in 2003 than in 2002, while the percentage and number of people covered by their employers fell from 61.3 percent--175.3 million people--to 60.4 percent--174 million people. Mr. Chairman, this is a lot of people whose personal information could be jeopardized by the haphazard distribution to the marketing community. The situation with Choicepoint and others should provide more than adequate proof that information can be used to harm people and that it can be done rapidly. Allowing funds to facilitate the free dissemination of personal information by the Federal Government only exacerbates the vulnerable nature of personal information databases. The Medicaid and Medicare databases were not created for the purpose of business development; therefore, the information contained in these databases should be protected unless consent is obtained from the person described therein. For these reasons, Mr. Chairman, I support the gentleman's amendment.

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in support of the motion to recommit offered by Ranking Member Obey to increase funding for priority education, health care, human services and job training programs by $11.8 billion. In terms of education programs, the bill eliminates 24 education programs funded at $526 million in 2005. The largest of the terminated programs is Comprehensive School Reform. The bill also eliminates drop out prevention activities, parent assistance centers, arts education, K-12 foreign language instruction, Ready to Learn, Ready to Teach, and community technology centers. In addition, the bill cuts No Child Left Behind below the current level. Specifically, H.R. 3010 cuts the program by $806 million (3.3 percent). Next year, school districts must achieve increasingly rigorous NCLB academic standards, administer annual reading and math tests to 3rd through 8th graders, and meet new standards for highly- qualified teachers. Despite these facts, funding for the program will fall $13.2 billion below its FY06 authorization and cumulative shortfall since enactment of the program will exceed $40 billion under the bill. As it relates to health care issue, the bill continues to make cuts across the board which either eliminates important programs or at least cuts there funding in half. For example, the bill cuts rural health outreach grants from $39 million in FY05 to $11 million in FY06. These grants support rural hospitals, clinics, health departments and other providers to help improve primary health cares services in rural areas (including dental care, mental health treatment, and hospice care). H.R. 3010 also supports fewer healthy start grants. Specifically, the bill produces a $5 million (5 percent) cut in the Healthy Start initiative, which makes targeted grants to improve prenatal and infant care in areas with high infant mortality rates. This funding level will allow renewal or replacement of only about half the 12 Healthy Start grants up for re-competition in FY06. I would also like to take a moment to express my concerns with some of the many funding cuts for Title VII programs in this year's appropriations bill. While I am pleased to see that funding was provided for Minority Centers of Excellence ($12 million) and Scholarships for Disadvantage Students ($35 million), I am disappointed that Area Health Education Centers, Health Education and Training Centers, and Health Professions Training Programs were all zeroed out. These programs have been addressing the needs of medically underserved communities in Texas since 1991 by playing a key role in providing health services and health care professionals for our most vulnerable populations. In regards to job training, H.R. 3010 makes cuts to training, employment and unemployment services. Although the economy has not fully recovered from the last recession, and 7.6 million Americans unemployed in May 2005, the bill cuts $346 million (3.6 percent) from critical services to unemployed, displaced and incumbent workers. In light of the above stated cuts, I strongly support the amendment by Mr. Obey. Again, his amendment would increase funding for priority education, health care, human services and job training programs by $11.8 billion. These are very important programs and we must provide funding for them. I encourage my colleagues to support the Chairman's amendment.

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I thank the distinguished gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Kildee) a well-known champion for Native American rights. We all have Native Americans in our States, and we have gaming. But, Mr. Chairman, sovereignty is not inconsistent with decency and humanity and human rights. Sovereignty is not inconsistent with protecting underage workers and juveniles who are working. Sovereignty is not inconsistent with making sure that workers have a quality of life. And sovereignty is not inconsistent with international treaties which ensure that that happens in nations around the world. This is a bad promise on a bad premise. And what we need to do is to work with the committees of jurisdiction and solve the problem, not eliminate the rights. I would hope that my colleague would join me on finding an amendment to stop the abuse of lobbyists who take money from Native Americans and Indian tribes and reservations and not do a darn thing with it. I am offended by that. I will join the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Hayworth) anytime he wants to come to the floor to get rid of lobbyists who take money from unsuspecting Native Americans and their businesses. That should be a question of criminal violation, but this one is one that can be solved with good law and good negotiations. I ask my colleagues to vote ``no.'' Parliamentary Inquiry

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I thank the distinguished gentleman for yielding. I hope we can find an opportunity to find common agreement. Let me just say that my colleagues need to understand that the administration believes in this structured agreement, a totalization agreement, because they understand that when Americans are overseas working and getting benefits, that they would like those Americans to ensure that their benefits go with them. That is the same relationship we should have with Mexico, that when workers are here, their benefits gained here should follow them to Mexico. I would oppose any language that would deny that right. I think the question of whether or not they are documented or undocumented, the administration needs to make that determination. I do not know if my colleagues are going to thwart the administration's desire to find some common ground on immigration. If this language says that it is consistent with Federal law, then I hope that this Congress will work with the administration so that we will not be embarrassed internationally by denying nationals of another country their well-gained rights or benefits that they have gained working. We would not want that to happen to us. I will listen further to the debate. I raise a concern that they are denying those who are working their well-earned benefits. One thing we can stand for is you deserve your pension rights, you deserve your Social Security rights, you deserve your uninsurance rights, your health care rights, and it should not be taken away from you. Nevertheless, I hope my friends on the other side do not do that. If the language does not do that, I would say to my colleagues that if this is a good resolution, we certainly will join in with it.

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, we have been speaking about the tragedy in Iraq, the need for a plan, and we have formulated the Out of Iraq Caucus that really responds to the American people who have lost confidence in the reason why we went to war, some 50 to 60 percent. And even though we have heard from Secretary Rumsfeld on defending the status quo that the insurgent battle has been won, we know that the commanding general has said it is ongoing. But to add consternation to that, I share with my colleagues that funds for health care for veterans is $1 billion. We see here in the Washington Post the outrage of Senate Republicans, and I thank the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Edwards) for bringing it to our attention. We should not leave this place until we respond to the needs of returning veterans who now come home after fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan where we are $1 billion short for their care. What are we saying to those who are willing to sacrifice their lives on the front lines of Iraq and Afghanistan? When they come home with liver disease, when they come home with trauma, mental illness, we have no place for them to go.

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. I rise today to address the safety and well-being of Ms. Mukhtar Mai in the nation of Pakistan. As the Co- Chair of the Congressional Pakistan Caucus I have been monitoring this situation closely. As a long-standing and active member of the Women's Caucus and the Human Rights Caucus I am greatly concerned about the well-being of this woman who has undergone tremendous suffering in her life. For those who do not know the story of Mukhtar Mai she was gang raped in 2002 by the order of a tribal council, allegedly as punishment for her brother's affair with a woman from a powerful rival clan in the remote town of Meerwala. Thirty-three-year-old Ms. Mai defied threats and local customs to testify against these suspects. In August of 2002 six men were sentenced to death. But this March, another court overturned five of these convictions and reduced the death sentence of the sixth to life in prison. Twelve men were then rearrested on the Prime Minister's orders based on community safety laws but were freed on June 10 since the law only allows them to be held for a limited time under these laws. Since that time it has been alleged that the Pakistani government has confiscated her passport and forbidden her from leaving Pakistan. It has come to my attention that efforts have been made by the Pakistani Government to insure the safety and well-being of Ms. Mai. I understand that since this horrific incident occurred in 2002 she has been provided with a security detail and legal assistance in accordance with their laws. However, the judiciary in Pakistan, as it is here in the United States, is independent of the executive branch of the government. The decision made by the court seems ill-considered and is not supported by the Executive branch. It seems that the government plans to have these accused rapists arrested and tried again, this time before the High Court of Pakistan in accordance with their laws. Representatives from the Government of Pakistan say that they have not in fact barred Ms. Mai from traveling where she pleases and that she has access to her passport at any time. State Department spokesman Adam Ereli stated on Wednesday that ``senior Pakistani officials, both here and in Islamabad'' had been contacted regarding Mukhtar Mai and that the State Department has ``been informed by the Government of Pakistan that, consistent with Ms. Mukhtar's wishes and at her request, the Government has her passport and that she is satisfied that she can have access to it whenever she wants.'' Moreover, they have ``received renewed assurances from the Pakistani authorities that she is free to travel whenever she so desires.'' Mr. Ereli went on to say that they have confirmed this with sources close to Ms. Mai. I have also been told that Ms. Mai has appeared on certain TV and satellite outlets and declared that she in fact has not been barred from leaving the country; however I have not personally seen such footage so I can not confirm its validity. The current Government of Pakistan has tried to rule by a vision of ``enlightened moderation,'' which is to say that the people of Pakistan must raise themselves up through individual achievement and socioeconomic emancipation. One issue which the present government has worked hard to improve is that of women's rights. Currently, there are 73 female members of the National Assembly which has 60 seats open only for women to ensure that they are represented on their legislative body. Similarly, 17 percent of seats in each of the four provincial assemblies have also been reserved for women. In addition, I spoke to the Pakistani Minister of Education a few months and he told me that the national plan for education on Pakistan places great emphasis on ensuring that their female population gets educated. In fact they are working to provide incentives to poorer families in Pakistan to send their girls to school instead of keeping them at home. These are all steps the Pakistani Government under President Musharraf says they are taking to advance the cause of women in Pakistan. However, there is much, much more work to be done in this area to ensure women's rights. The truth about Pakistan is that there is a great divide between more urban and more rural communities. Mukhtar Mai comes from a more remote area of Pakistan in which tribal law and customs are often held above the law of Pakistan. These tribal areas unfortunately often hold harsh views towards the rights of women. One of the great heroes of Pakistani independence was Fatima Jinnah who is considered the mother of Pakistan. She was the outspoken and strong- willed sister of Mohammed Ali Jinnah who is considered the founder of Pakistan. In fact, Pakistan had the first woman to head the government of an Islamic State when Benazir Bhutto was sworn in as Prime Minister of Pakistan in December of 1988. The truth remains that Pakistan must ensure the rights and safety of women throughout their nation regardless of tribal law and customs. However, we must also recognize that such large social change takes time and will not be solved easily. Regardless of the political or international ramifications of this issue let us not forget the pain that Mukhtar Mai has endured. But, while she was brutally victimized she did not allow herself to be a victim. After testifying against her attackers she took the money from that settlement along with many international donations to open a school in her small village. She understands that education is the way to end brutality and ignorance. She even went so far as to enroll the children of her attackers in the school because she will not allow herself to be a hateful person, she wants to bring goodness into the lives of others around her. The verdicts of her attackers being overturned were a great setback for her personally and the entire women's rights movement in Pakistan, but it certainly is not the end. This woman has gone through so much and done such great things that she will not give in. I applaud her, she is the face and voice of a movement that gains strength everyday, one that will not succumb. In tribute to her efforts I will continue to fight for the cause of women's rights and join with Mukhtar Mai and all the women of Pakistan to move forward towards justice and equality. Furthermore, I have always supported the message of women's rights whether it is here or abroad, whether I have to deliver it to an ally of our nation or one we consider an enemy. Additionally, I join with the women of the United States House of Representatives to unite around protecting women throughout the world and in Pakistan. Today, I believe that the nation of Pakistan must do more to ensure the rights of Pakistani women and I have confidence that they are working towards this end. I pray for Mukhtar Mai and all the women of Pakistan that they will get justice in their lives.