Eddie Johnson

Ms. EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON of Texas

Ms. EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to address the devastating impact that privatizing Social Security will have on women, especially African American Women. Social Security is particularly important to women, especially in my home state of Texas. Without these vital retirement benefits, 564,000 women in the Lone Star State would be classified as poor, according to a report released by the Center for Budget and Policy Priorities. Currently, Social Security benefits are progressive; that is, those with low wages receive a larger percentage of benefits relative to their earnings than higher income individuals do. This system of progressivity, combined with a cost-of-living adjustment that increases benefits every year, strengthens the safety net for those who are the most economically disadvantaged. Privatization flows from concerns that many people have about the future of Social Security. Some of those concerns are founded and some are not. We are all well aware that as the post-war baby boom generation ages, the number of retirees relative to the number of workers will increase. These are facts that cannot be changed. However, modest changes, implemented immediately, can give people time to plan for the future and would take us a long way toward resolving the issue. Privatizing social security is the most radial change, and it assumes that there is magic in diverting some portion of the current social security payroll tax into the private markets. Most privatization plans propose to strip a few percentage points off the Social Security payroll tax and divert them to private individual investment accounts. Most people happily focus on the vision of a few dollars a month growing into millions of dollar over time. Unfortunately, this is a dream and not reality, as we have witnessed in the current stock market. There are three very important things that should be considered when privatizing Social Security benefits. First, the huges cuts in benefits which would be required under the privatization plans, most as large a 60 percent cut in Social Security benefits. For people with large savings from other sources, that may not seem like much, but for most Americans, it would be a drastic reduction in the protections they have to come to rely on. Next, privatization would be a major change in who bears the risk of saving for retirement. Privatization would shift nearly all the risk to the individual. People who are unwise or unlucky in their investments would suffer. We saw many examples of this in recent stock market falls. Finally, privatization would increase the Federal deficit by more than a trillion dollars over the next ten years. Taking a mere two percent of payroll away from the Trust Fund could double or triple the size of the deficit. This effect is what some people trivialize as ``transition costs.'' I do not believe it is trivial, and given the other concerns which privatization raises, I think we should look long and hard before we leap in this direction. How do African-American women fare in privatization proposals currently floating around in Congress? Not good at all. Although Black women typically live longer lives, their lifetime earnings are usually much lower than their white counter-parts. Under privatization, this lower level would mean black women would be forced to live longer on a smaller amount of money. Hugh Price, President of the National Urban League and Julian Bond, Chair of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, wrote an editorial in the New York Times, on July 26, 2001 addressing African American women and social security. They found that guaranteed government assistance is essential to the African American community. While African Americans make up only 12 percent of the general population, they make up 17 percent of all Americans receiving Social Security benefits and 22 percent of all children's survivors benefits. However, the Administration has been unclear on how disability and survivor benefits would continue to be funded. A study by the National Urban League counters assertions made by the Administration that African Americans will benefit from private accounts bequeathed to their relatives. According to the study, the typical African American man dying in his thirties would only have enough in his private account to cover less than two percent of the survivor's benefits under current law. This also has a devastating impact on African American women as survivors. Members of Congress must be fiscally responsible when it comes to making decisions regarding Social Security. Fiscal responsibility entails looking at the whole picture and seeing the effect it may have on all individuals in society. I urge my colleagues to make this the inclusive America we continue to represent to the world and ensure that Social Security proposals give everyone some comfort in life!

Ms. EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON of Texas

Ms. EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to commemorate the career of one of Texas' most beloved and honored spiritual leaders, the Reverend Dr. Zan Wesley Holmes, Jr., who retires this month as Senior Pastor of St. Luke ``Community'' Methodist Church in Dallas. Reverend Holmes has been a friend and spiritual mentor to me--and to so many others in the world--throughout his decades of service to our community. This evening he is being honored for his extraordinary service with an Official Tribute orchestrated by the friends and family members he has touched over the years. Reverend Holmes is a man of unshakable faith, great wisdom, and bountiful kindness. He has been a pillar of the Dallas community for more than 45 years, working tirelessly to stabilize and mobilize our neighborhoods and improve the quality of life for all North Texans. By giving of himself so generously, he has helped to strengthen our families and our spiritual faith, promoted justice and equality, and helped create economic opportunities that has made Dallas a more diverse city to live. First and foremost, Reverend Holmes has been a spiritual beacon for the Dallas community. As a young man attending Huston-Tillotson College, he accepted his calling to the ministry and embarked on a path that has uplifted so many of us over the years. In 1956, Reverend Holmes moved to Dallas to attend Southern Methodist University's Perkins School of Theology. He became a professor in the same department in 1974, inspiring generations of ministers since that time. Throughout his pastoral career, Reverend Holmes has achieved many milestones. He helped found Hamilton Park United Methodist Church in Dallas. In 1968, Reverend Holmes rose to District Superintendent in the West Texas Conference of the United Methodist Conference when segregation called for a separate African-American governing body of the United Methodist Church. After the Methodist Conference integrated in 1970, Reverend Holmes' term as District Superintendent carried over into the unified conference and he proudly served on behalf of people of faith of all colors. Shortly thereafter, Reverend Holmes was appointed Minister of St. Luke Methodist Church in East Dallas. He came at a time when the church only had 50 members, and through his leadership, the congregation has grown to more than 5,000 members. He brought to St. Luke the desire to build a citywide congregation that embodied a strong commitment to community outreach. After his installation as pastor, the word ``Community'' was added to the church's name at his insistence. In keeping with this sense of community, Reverend Holmes has brought many of his seminary students to St. Luke for their pastoral internship, making it a training ground for many well-known pastors who preach around the world today. Beyond his work in the pulpit, Reverend Holmes has been a tireless leader in the fight for fairness and equality in the Dallas-Ft. Worth Metroplex. While becoming one of Dallas' true visionaries, his work has helped to strengthen the voices and representation of African- Americans, as well as Hispanic Americans in many sectors of our community. When I first considered running for the Texas House of Representatives in 1972, Reverend Holmes stood by my side and encouraged me. His wise counsel helped me to make the decision to run in that first election, which launched my 30-year legislative career. Throughout my career, I have been privileged to rely on Reverend Holmes for support and advice as well as for his friendship. He has also played a pivotal role in bringing up other Texas African- Americans into elected office, and has met the call to office himself. Reverend Holmes worked on the campaign for the first elected African- American Texas State Representative Joseph Lockridge. After Representative Lockridge was killed in an airplane crash, Reverend Holmes was asked to fill his unexpired term. Reverend Holmes then ran for election and served two full two-year terms as a Texas State Representative. As an elected official, Reverend Holmes fought to create single-member districts, which ensured that African American and Hispanic voters would have more representation. Many, many other African American political leaders have ascended to public service from his guidance and teaching. On any given day, hundreds of people in the Metroplex leave their homes to participate in programs spearheaded by Reverend Holmes. Believing that the church must be involved in the education of our youth, Reverend Zan Holmes and his late wife of 43 years, Dorothy, created the Zan W. Holmes, Jr. Scholarship Program, which has raised more than half a million dollars to help send deserving young people to college. At the end of each grading period, Reverend Holmes has reviewed the report cards of the children in his congregation. One by one, students have lined up outside his office to speak to Reverend Holmes about their grades and the challenges they are facing. These are the kind of personal touches that we have come to know from Reverend Holmes--and one of the great qualities we will dearly miss. Mr. Speaker, for all of these accomplishments, and for so many others that are too numerous to list here, I am proud to rise in honor of Reverend Dr. Zan Wesley Holmes, Jr. and to express my gratitude for his many years of selfless public service. He is truly a role model and leader in our global community, and though we will miss hearing his words of wisdom and faith coming from the pulpit each Sunday, we congratulate Reverend Holmes as he moves on to new spiritual journeys.

Ms. EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON of Texas

Ms. EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the requisite number of words. Mr. Chairman, I yield to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Woolsey).

Ms. EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON of Texas. I yield to the gentleman from Michigan.

Ms. EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of my colleague from Michigan's amendment. This amendment seeks to expand educational opportunities for working Americans in the sciences, mathematics, and engineering. NSF's Computer Science, Engineering, and Mathematics Scholarship (CSEMS) Program was established to support financially needy post- secondary students pursuing careers in the high-tech sector. The acute shortage of trained scientists and engineers in our country is well documented, and critical sectors of our economy find it necessary to import high-tech labor from other countries under the H-1 B visa program. NSF is doing a great deal to address the shortage of home-grown scientists and engineers, but currently, the CSEMS program is only eligible to full-time students. The expansion of the eligibility of the CSEMS program to include part-time students will have two important results. The first is that it addresses our nation's need for more scientists and engineers in key sectors of our economy. The second is that it provides talented, motivated, and economically needy students with the resources they need to improve their quality of life and fulfill their dreams.

Ms. EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in strong support of H.R. 4664, the National Science Foundation Authorization Act of 2002. I want to thank the gentleman from New York (Chairman Boehlert); the ranking member, the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Hall); and the gentleman from Michigan (Chairman Smith) for working with me and the rest of the committee in a bipartisan manner on this important piece of legislation that makes a strong statement about our commitment to invest in America's future. H.R. 4664 places the National Science Foundation on the path to double its budget in 5 years, which was the goal of H.R. 1472, the NSF authorization bill that I introduced last April 2001. I introduced H.R. 1472 because I strongly believed that investing in basic research, math and engineering research is essential to the future economic prosperity and global competitiveness of our country. Even after September 11, what we are depending on most now will be the kinds of technology that the research from the National Science Foundation has brought to the forefront. The National Science Foundation plays a leading role in educating our youth in math and sciences and training the scientists and engineers of tomorrow, and the agency is working to ensure that tomorrow's high-tech workers reflect a diversity of America. It is my sincere hope that my colleagues will recognize the importance of basic research to our Nation's future and will pass H.R. 4664. The National Science Foundation expends only 3.8 percent of the Federal research and development funds, yet this relatively small amount belies the importance of the agency to our country. The National Science Foundation provides 23 percent of the basic research funding at academic institutions. For specific research areas, the National Science Foundation's role at universities is even larger. It funds 36 percent of research in the physical sciences, 49 percent of research in the environmental sciences, 50 percent of research in engineering, 72 percent of research in mathematics, and 78 percent of research in computer science. So, clearly, the National Science Foundation plays a disproportionately important role in funding some of the most basic research areas that have implications far beyond their own academic area. To give an idea of the quality and importance of the NSF-funded research to our Nation, consider the fact that over 100 Nobel prizes have been awarded to scientists supported by the National Science Foundation research in the fields of physics, chemistry, physiology and medicine and economics. In nearly every field of science and engineering are examples of outstanding research supported by the National Science Foundation. This research leads to critical advances in the understanding of our world and in technology that improves our lives. For example, the National Science Foundation support at the National Center for Supercomputing Applications at the University of Illinois developed the first Internet browser that led to the explosive growth of the World Wide Web. The National Science Foundation-funded research in atmospheric chemistry identified the ozone depletion over the Antarctic, the ozone hole, as it has come to be known. NSF-funded research on mathematics and solid modeling led to the widespread use of computer-aided design and computer-aided manufacturing that has revolutionized industry and enhanced workplace productivity. These are but a few examples of the scientific breakthroughs that have been funded by the NSF in recent years, and this and other research supported by NSF ultimately strengthens our economy. The connection between research funding and the strength of the economy has been expounded by such diverse sources as former presidential science advisor Allen Bromley, Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan, former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich, and the Hart-Rudman Commission for National Security. Yet despite the importance of basic research to the future economic health and well-being of our country, NSF now must decline more than $1 billion worth of high quality research proposals each year. Why? Because NSF's budget is insufficient to meet the demands of our Nation's vibrant research sector. Mr. Chairman, while it is true that everyone must learn to live within their budget, and NSF has, it is a shame that top-notch proposals go unfunded for lack of resources. It is essential that our Nation's premier science research agency has the resources it needs to fund advances that could lead to the next World Wide Web or deciphering the genome of a critically important crop. Our generation has benefitted enormously from the investment of our parents and grandparents made in basic research decades ago, and we owe it to our children to see that they enjoy the same pace of technological advancement that we have enjoyed. It is critical that we invest in basic research today that will lead to better life tomorrow. These are but a few examples of the scientific breakthroughs that have been funded by NSF in recent years, and this and other research supported by the NSF ultimately strengthens our economy. The connection between research funding and the strength of the economy has been expounded by such diverse sources as former presidential science advisor Allen Bromley, Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan, former speaker of the House Newt Gingrich, and the Hart-Rudman Commission on National Security. Yet despite the importance of basic research to the future economic health and well-being of our country, NSF now must decline more than 1 billion dollar's worth of high quality research proposals each year. Why? Because NSF's budget is insufficient to meet the demands of our Nation's vibrant research sector. Mr. Chairman, while it is true that everyone must learn to live within their budget, and NSF has, it is a shame that top-notch proposals go unfunded for lack of resources. In addition to funding basic research at our Nation's laboratories, the National Science Foundation makes essential investments in training the scientists and engineers of tomorrow. NSF research awards and direct research fellowships help train over 24,000 graduate students each year, the future scientists and engineers essential to our high- tech economy. The bill before us today seeks to strengthen NSF's graduate research fellowships by funding more research grants and increasing the average grant size and duration. NSF programs also help to improve science education for all students and to prepare them for citizenship in a world increasingly dominated by technology. Today we continue to have manpower shortages in many high technology fields, and many industries rely on the labor and brain power of foreign nationals. The ideal way to alleviate the shortages is by ensuring that our Nation's children of all races and both genders receive the basic grounding in science and mathematics that will prepare them to pursue careers as scientists, engineers and technologists. Now, more than ever, we need to ensure that an adequate number of Americans choose careers in the sciences and engineering. We cannot allow inadequate funding to cripple NSF's efforts in this area. Mr. Chairman, over the past few months, there has been a great deal of debate about the appropriate level of funding for the National Science Foundation. Some have proposed essentially flat levels of funding, while others have proposed a small 8.8% increase for one fiscal year. These levels are simply not enough for an agency as highly regarded and as critical to the future well-being of our Nation as the National Science Foundation. I say that we must double the budget of NSF and invest in our Nation's future. H.R. 4664 was developed in a bipartisan fashion and enjoys the strong support of the Science Committee. I urge my colleagues to vote in favor of this legislation.

Ms. EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON of Texas

Ms. EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I rise today to decry Republican efforts to use parliamentary gimmickry to sneak through a way to raise our Nation's debt ceiling. We all know that the only reason that we are even discussing this increase to the Nation's debt is that the Republican economic plan has failed us. So now, the Republicans are refusing to face the music about the consequences of their trillion-dollar tax cut for the wealthy. The Majority doesn't seem to want to be held accountable--so they are trying to bury this debt increase in our Nation's military supplemental spending bill. In other words, the Majority wants to run up this Nation's debt to even greater heights without an open debate, and without an up-and-down vote on this issue. Mr. Chairman, this is an outrage! Now I can't say that I blame my Republican colleagues for wanting to avoid this issue. In January 2001, the Congressional Budget Office was projecting that our Nation's debt ceiling of $5.95 trillion would last for the next six years or more. Unfortunately, the Republican's economic plan--and its tax cut for the wealthy--put us right back in an era of deficits. So here we are, forced to borrow money to make our Nation's ends meet, and forced to raise the Nation's debt limit again. However, since my colleagues in the Republican party are trying to avoid discussing what increasing the debt limit will actually mean for America, I'm here to point out the consequences that this vote will have on our Nation's Social Security program. We have already squandered all of our surpluses, which means that all of the funds from this debt limit increase will come directly from the Social Security and Medicare trust funds. The future of our Nation's most successful social program is in the balance, and we must let the American people know that the Republican leadership has put forth plans that could jeopardize the very system that so many Americans rely on. We all know that Social Security is a critical safety net for our Nation's seniors. In my home state of Texas, one out of every ten residents depends on Social Security to provide vital income for themselves and their families. Nationwide, two-thirds of our seniors-- women and men--count Social Security benefits as the majority of their income. We all know that it is women who have the greatest benefit from Social Security. We generally live longer, make less, and have smaller pensions than men do. These benefits are particularly important to women in Texas. Without these vital retirement benefits, 564,000 women in the Lone Star State would fall below the poverty line. For African American and Hispanic women especially, this program is more than just retirement insurance. Women of color disproportionately rely on this system for its disability and widow benefits. Social Security is also a critical safety net that protects African American children. For all these reasons, I want to make sure that everyone knows just how much is at stake for our community when we talk about keeping Social Security strong. Right now, there are proposals before the Congress to alter the structure of Social Security. Yet, no one in the Republican leadership seems to be willing to talk about these plans. Sound familiar? No one on the other side of the aisle wants to talk about raising our Nation's debt, either. Well, we Democrats are not going to let Republicans keep our Nation in the dark about this. We know that we must protect and strengthen Social Security. We know that America can be strong militarily without becoming weak economically. And we know that the American public deserves open debate on the financial future of our Nation.

Ms. EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON of Texas

Ms. EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the Rangel Amendment to H.R. 3129, the Customs Border Security Act of 2001. As a Member of Congress, and as an African American, I cannot tolerate the practice of stopping and searching American citizens for no reason other than their race. As I studied H.R. 3129 that is what I feared would happen. As I thought about this issue, I realized that the words that went to the core of this issue had been written over two centuries ago, and could be found within one of the documents sitting on my desk--The Constitution of the United States. For the Constitution's Preamble states: ``We, the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect Union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.'' Let me repeat the key phrases that are critical to this issue: ``We, the people of the United States . . . establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, do ordain and establish this Constitution.'' The attitude demonstrated by too many law enforcement officers must change from inaccurately resuming the guilt of people of color. This is the least that our Constitution requires of them. H.R. 3129 is bad for America's citizens. However, the Rangel Amendment addresses the core concern of Customs: that Customs inspectors are not personally liable for monetary damages in civil suits involving personal searches; the amendment also ensures that there is recourse for potential abuses of civil rights by providing recourse against the U.S. government. Section 141 of the bill provides immunity to a Customs officer conducting a search of a person or property provided he or she was acting in ``good faith.'' The term ``good faith'' is not defined in the bill. An officer could engage in blatantly discriminatory conduct, but if he in ``good faith'' believes that he was justified in doing so, he could not be held liable. Customs officers are already entitled to qualified immunity that protects them from unwarranted claims related to illegal and unconstitutional searches. This bill would expand immunity so as to make it nearly impossible for a person seeking redress for an unconstitutional search. No law enforcement official is entitled to this broad grant of immunity and the Customs Office, which has a documented history of racial profiling, should not be an exception to the qualified immunity standard. Given that Congress has recently expanded the police powers of government officials, it should not at the same time cut back on the mechanisms in existing law that are designed to ensure police powers are not abused. It is our duty to breathe life into the words that protect every American Citizen, no matter the color of their skin. We must remember Dr. Martin Luther King's words: ``Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere.'' I urge my colleagues to vote against H.R. 3129 and support the Rangel Amendment.

Ms. EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON of Texas

Ms. EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Speaker since the historic overhaul of this country's welfare system in 1996, we have witnessed dramatic changes in how this nation treats our poor children and families. While welfare rolls have dropped by more than 50 percent, many families have lost Food stamp benefits and Medicaid despite continued eligibility. In addition, numerous low-income families remain below the poverty line despite employment. One of the most important issues Congress must address when considering reauthorization of the 1996 Welfare Reform Act is how race and ethnicity factor in why some welfare recipients have failed to obtain gainful and lasting employment. Research has shown that minorities face significantly more discrimination in the services they receive from welfare agencies as well as in the treatment they receive on the job. Numerous studies have documented cases of racial disparities in Welfare Reform, and I believe they are worth mentioning. A recent Chicago Urban League study found that while more than 50 percent of white recipients were referred to education programs, less than 20 percent of African Americans were referred to the same programs. A statewide study of welfare recipients in Virginia by Professor Susan Gooden of Virginia Tech found that although African American program participants were, on average, better educated than whites, zero African Americans were directed to education programs to fulfill their requirements. At the same time, 41 percent of whites were steered to education programs. The study also found that African Americans were also less likely to receive discretionary support such as transportation assistance, less likely to be placed in jobs by the state employment agency, and more likely to be subjected to drug and background tests, than white recipients. A Gooden Employer study (1999) found that whites were more likely to have longer interviews than blacks (25 min v. 11 min), less likely to have a negative relationship with their supervisor (29 percent v. 64 percent), and less likely to undergo pre-employment testing (24 percent v. 45 percent). Cruel and Usual, an Applied Research Center survey of more than 1,500 welfare recipients in 13 states, found that discriminatory treatment on the basis of gender, race, language, and national origin was a common experience. Forty-eight percent of African American women and 56 percent of Native American women who received job training were sent to demeaning ``Dress for Success'' classes, compared with only 24 percent of white women. At the same time that people of color are being marginalized by our welfare system, (according to an Applied Research Center study) African Americans and other minorities are disproportionately affected by our current recession: After September 11, the increase in unemployment rates for African Americans and Latinos was more than double that for whites. Unemployment among African Americans soared to 11.2 percent in April of this year and rose to 7.9 percent for Hispanics. African Americans has reached its highest point in 8 years, while Latino unemployment is its highest in 5. In New York City, where unemployment has skyrocketed since the events of September 11, the New York Times reported in February that African American workers accounted for only 27 percent of those collecting unemployment insurance benefits, even though they account for about 37 percent of the jobless. For Latinos, the Pew Hispanic Center reports that out of 1.26 million unemployed Latinos in December 2001, only 40 percent are likely to be receiving unemployment benefits, leaving some 756,000 unable to access the benefits to support their families. Let me be clear: efforts to improve our economy are not reaching people of color. African Americans are losing their jobs at nearly twice the national average. Latino unemployment hovers near 5 year high. These numbers are an outrage and are unacceptable. But, they don't even tell the whole story. While these workers are losing their jobs and their families are suffering, the Bush Administration is proposing cutbacks in job training programs and reductions in education funding that would help put people in a better position to earn a living wage. Here we are poised to reauthorize welfare reform with Members on both sides of the aisle calling for an increase in the number of hours recipients must work to stay eligible for transitional assistance. I hope that these new unemployment numbers indicating that more Americans are getting laid off will force Members to rethink their positions. How can we look these people in the eye and tell them to work longer hours when there aren't even jobs available to them? In 1996, we handed the administration of the welfare programs over to states. And who know better than the states that have been administering the TANF programs what will and what won't work? The National Governors Association (NGA) is very concerned about how the Republican plan takes away the state's flexibility in administering TANF programs. In April of this year the National Governors Association (NGA) and the American Public Human Services Association (APHSA) conducted a joint survey of Governors and state TANF administrators to assess the impact proposed changes to the work requirements would have on current state welfare reform initiatives. This study found that: ``As states work with families on a more individualized basis, many states are finding that a combination of activities on a limited basis, such as work, job training, education, and substance abuse treatment, leads to the greatest success for some individuals. Governors believe the federal government should recognize the success of these tailored approaches to addressing an individual's needs by providing states greater discretion in defining appropriate work activities.'' Also in the NGA report, ``States expressed concerns over the impact of level funding of the TANF block grant; citing inflation having reduced the purchasing power of the block grant, making it unlikely that the block grant will keep pace with the rising costs of services, such as case management, employment and training, transportation and child care.'' The majority of states (33) responding cited concerns about meeting the proposed work requirements in rural areas where the economy is often lagging and employment opportunities are limited. The State of Illinois responded, ``A 70 percent participation rate with a 40 hour a week requirement will probably require two things. First, creation of a number of make work activities or greater use of current ones, whether or not warranted, just to fill the requirement. Second, a near total abandonment of allowing any client that is able to work at all to participate in such things as GED programs or post-secondary education.'' Once we force States to send all these people to work in 40-hour workweek jobs that don't exist, what are we going to do with their children? Childcare is expensive! The states recognize this. In the NGA report, States were asked to estimate the annual increase in child care costs associated with the proposal to require 70 percent participation in activities totaling 40-hours per week. Of the 32 states responding to the question, 30 states indicated that the costs would increase and two states indicated that there would be no additional costs associated with the proposal. But the Republican plan doesn't even begin to meet this enormous expense--The CBO estimates the increased mandatory work hours imposed on states by the Republican plan will increase child care cost an additional $3.8 billion--almost 4 times as much as the Republican plan provides! In fact, my state of Texas alone would have an estimate of over 36,000 children on childcare waiting list. For these reasons, I have introduced legislation that addresses racial inequalities and mistreatment of minorities in welfare program. While we are providing states the flexibility and funding they need to empower welfare recipients and address important issues like access to child care, education, and job training. The key provisions of this legislation include ensuring equal access by expanding education and training opportunities, strengthening fair treatment and anti- discrimination protections and encouraging racial equality. I believe we should all agree that welfare reform measures should not punish racial and ethnic minorities attempting to better themselves. Every American must be provided with the opportunity and the obligation to be a productive member of society. As we continue to debate welfare authorization, we must make certain that racial and ethnic discrimination are not vehicles used to hinder access to the road from poverty. I urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on the Republican bill.

Ms. EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON of Texas

Ms. EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON of Texas. No.

Ms. EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of H.R. 2051, the Regional Plant Genome and Gene Research Expression Act. H.R. 2051 has been a collaborative effort between me and the chairman of the Subcommittee on Science, the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Smith). I also thank the gentleman from New York (Chairman Boehlert), and the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Hall), the ranking member, for their leadership in bringing this important piece of legislation to the floor. This legislation was developed last fall because I believe we are only just beginning to unlock the potential of agricultural biotechnology. We have witnessed some of the benefits genetically improved crops have brought to American farmers, and it is time that farmers around the world are also able to enjoy the benefits of agricultural biotechnology. H.R. 2051 establishes a competitive, merit-reviewed grant program under the National Science Foundation to award grants to eligible entities to conduct basic research on crops that can be grown in the developing world. The research supported by these grants will help scientists discover innovative solutions to some of the developing world's most intractable problems, such as hunger, malnutrition, and disease. Last September, the House Subcommittee on Research held a hearing on the two bills that became H.R. 2051 as considered here today. The witnesses testified on the importance of Federal funding for basic research on developing world crops and indicated that this legislation fills an important funding gap in our current research environment. The witnesses also were enthusiastic about the partnership aspect of this legislation because collaborative research projects between the U.S. and developing world scientists will help develop the scientific capacity of developing nations as well as expand partnership opportunities for U.S. scientists. The potential of basic research on developing world crops is enormous, and scientists have already produced some encouraging results. Many of us are familiar with a newly developed strain of golden rice that was developed by plant scientists to have increased Vitamin A and iron content. Golden rice was developed because Vitamin A deficiency causes more than 1 million childhood deaths each year and is the single most prevalent cause of blindness among children in developing countries. Golden rice is only the beginning of the potential benefits of biotechnology for the developing world. Biotechnology can help develop crop varieties that are resistant to insects, viruses, that can be grown in drought-stricken lands with only minimal amounts of water, that have improved nutritional content, and that vaccinate against life-threatening illnesses. Dr. Norman Borlaug, a distinguished professor at Texas A&M University, father of the Green Revolution, and recipient of the 1970 Nobel Peace Prize, stated in yesterday's Wall Street Journal that ``Africa desperately needs the simple, effective, high-yield farming systems that have made the First World's food supply safe and secure.'' The technology developed through agricultural biotechnology and encapsulated in a seed is such a system. Biotechnology will not solve all of the developing world's problems, but it does have an important role to play in increasing food security and food self-sufficiency in the developing world. Improving agriculture in the developing world often ranks low on the list of our Nation's priorities. Yet I can think of few things that are more important to our Nation's security and future prosperity than fostering stable, productive economies throughout the world. Such global stability will not take place as long as hunger, malnutrition, and disease ravage the majority of the world's population. Fortunately, we are at a time and a place where we can take positive steps to improve the lives of people around the world, and I believe H.R. 2051 makes a small, but important, contribution to this struggle. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Smith) for working with me in a collaborative, bipartisan effort on this bill. I urge Members to vote in favor of the legislation. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I thank the gentleman from Ohio for his comments and would like to respond. I believe he misunderstands this bill. The thrust of this bill is one of basic research at universities. The bill seeks to address the deficiency in basic genomic research on crops that can be grown in the developing world. More importantly, the bill seeks to create strong partnerships with developing world institutions from the very beginning. In order to be eligible for funds under section 4 of this bill, research institutions are required to partner with their colleagues in developing countries. This partnership will not only help strengthen the scientific capacity of developing countries but will ensure that the basic research that is performed focuses on what developing countries perceive their own needs to be. Additionally, the bill allows for research on the impact of plant biotechnology on the social, political and environmental conditions in countries in the developing world. This provision will allow researchers to investigate many of the claims that my colleague from Ohio raises. This bill does not force farmers in developing countries to adopt fancy technologies. It does not force the importation of genetically altered foods outside the country. On the contrary, it seeks to encourage the adoption of the very simple technology of a better seed that was developed in conjunction with scientists from the developing world. All of us here recognize that world hunger is an enormously complex problem with no simple solution. This bill does not pretend to hold the answer. What this bill does is provide the means for scientists in the United States and in developing countries to work together to contribute to the much larger solution to the very serious problem of hunger, malnutrition and disease in the developing world. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. The gentleman from Ohio just gave all the reasons why this bill should pass. This is a bill on research where it can establish partnerships. The grants can only go to universities and nonprofits. Profit businesses can join the partnership, the consortium, but no money flows in that direction. The paper the gentleman read prior to that last statement is 3 years old. With research, that changes. This bill only speaks to research and who can be a part of the partnership, of the consortium. It is not public dollars flowing to profit organizations. It is what we will hear more of in the future, public-private-type partnerships. No public dollar flows to a profit organization. The dollars go to the universities, and that is where the research takes place; and it includes persons from the developing countries to be a part of the research. Mr. Speaker, I would urge passage of this legislation. It is good legislation intended to do a good job.

Ms. EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time. Mr. Speaker, one more time let me say that the gentleman from Ohio has made the case for this bill. This bill speaks to research partnerships, including developing-nation participation. There is nothing in this bill that requires any kind of deportation to these developing nations. It provides a way by which they can be part of research that will provide them foods that will probably help with immunizations, extra vitamins, but only after the research is done with the involvement of scientists from the developing countries. Mr. Speaker, I would urge the passage of the bill. I think that the opponent has misunderstood the bill.

Ms. EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON of Texas

Ms. EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I intend to vote ``yes'' on H. Res. 392. Although I have grave concerns that passing this resolution will further inflame tensions in the Middle East, I am voting for the resolution in part to dispel any notion that I am anti- Israel or that I am not sensitive to Israel's right to self-defense. I strongly support Israel, but I also strongly support efforts to bring about peace in the region, which will allow the Israeli and Palestinian people to live together side by side without having to endure an endless cycle of violence. In the past, the House has passed similar resolutions that I believe have been counterproductive to the peace process. I fear that we are doing that again. Our own Secretary of State and National Security Advisor have expressed reservations with moving forward with this resolution because of the delicacy of the situation in the Middle East. I agree with them. We should not be bringing up this resolution at this time. That is why I intend to vote ``no'' on the rule governing debate over H. Res. 392.

Ms. EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON of Texas

Ms. EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Speaker, let me express my appreciation for those who have helped to work on this resolution, because it is one that hopefully will start the ball rolling in getting some corrective action taken. I stand before my colleagues today as a former health care professional to share really disturbing news. Sadly, in the year 2002, decades after the end of legal segregation, inequality based on race and ethnicity exists within our health care system. African Americans are 30 percent more likely to die of heart disease and cancer than Anglo Americans. Hispanics are more likely to be diagnosed with a chronic disease or a condition such as a heart attack, diabetes, or cancer than Anglo Americans. Infant mortality rates are more than twice as high for African Americans than Anglo Americans. In 2000, 47 percent of all HIV/AIDS cases reported in the U.S. were among African Americans and 21 percent among Hispanics. Unfortunately, the bad news gets worse. Despite this glaring data revealing the health disparities between minorities and white Americans, the National Academy of Sciences tells us that minorities lag behind white Americans on nearly every measure of health care and treatment and are dying at higher rates. Minorities are less likely to be given appropriate cardiac medication or to undergo bypass surgery to treat a cardiovascular disease. Minorities are less likely to be placed on a waiting list for kidney transplants or to receive kidney dialysis or transplants. My father was one of those. Minorities with HIV infection are less likely to receive antiretroviral therapy and other state-of-the-art treatments which could forestall the onset of AIDS. And minorities are less likely to receive appropriate cancer diagnostic tests and treatment. There is really more bad news. Significantly, these disparities in treatment exist even when insurance status, income, age, and severity of conditions in minorities and whites are the same. The good news is that we can address this problem by educating the public and the medical community about these disparities and take action to reduce them. House Concurrent Resolution 388 is a step in the right direction. I agree with the gentleman, the chairman of the committee, it should not be a campaign issue. It is a serious issue that must be addressed. It would establish a National Minority Health and Health Disparities Month and calls for the government, private and nonprofit sectors, and the medical community to promote educational efforts, perform research, and conduct health care programs so that we may end health care disparities. I urge my colleagues to support this resolution and work toward the elimination of racial and ethnic disparities in health care so that we can have some good news to share in the future.

Ms. EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON of Texas

Ms. EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I rise to commemorate the passing of a great American, a mentor and a friend, Mr. Francisco ``Pancho'' Medrano. The nation has lost a legendary civil rights pioneer with the death of Mr. Medrano, who dedicated his life to eradicating prejudice and intolerance in this country and fought mightily for fairness and equality for America's working men and women. Mr. Medrano rose to great heights from humble beginnings, defying discrimination at every turn along the way. He was a native to Dallas, born in 1920 to Mexican immigrants who taught their young son the value of hard work as they headed northward to Michigan each year as migrant laborers. When Mr. Medrano was able to return to Dallas, he came back to a community that refused to let him swim in a public swimming pool or watch an evening movie in the park because he was Hispanic. At the age of 16, he was told by a school principal he was ``too poor'' to attend public schools, so he went to work at a rock quarry for 25 cents an hour. Soon after, he became one of only a handful of minority workers on the line as an aircraft jig builder, where he often had to do a two- person job by himself because no one would work with a Mexican- American. And, while at the aerospace plant, he fought prejudice-- literally--as a champion prizefighter who used his notoriety to integrate sporting events in Dallas. Mr. Medrano had an illustrious five-decade career as a union organizer and civil rights representative with the United Auto Workers. During his tenure with the UAW, he became a national leader. He marched alongside Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. during the civil rights movement, fought for fair labor standards on the farms of Texas and California with Cesar Chavez, worked tirelessly to advance workers' rights in the automobile industry, and spent decades promoting civic activism in the Dallas area. Yet, for as much as he achieved in his life, Mr. Medrano never forgot the inequities of his childhood. He fought for the rights of all workers to peaceably demonstrate, broke racial membership barriers in labor unions, worked to defeat the poll tax and fostered civic participation in the minority community. His keen sense of justice caused him to work on behalf of African-Americans with as much fervor as he worked on behalf of Mexican-Americans, and his inspirational legacy is a challenge to all of us to continue to fight for social and economic justice for people of all races. Mr. Medrano shared with me a fervent belief in the importance of voting rights and civic participation, and it is important that we strive to emulate the work that he has done in this area. Just last week, though he was desperately ill with the cancer that ultimately took his life, Mr. Medrano went to the polls and cast his ballot in the Texas Democratic Senate runoff election. He fought to get Dallas residents of all races and backgrounds more involved in the political process, and he provided support to people like me who dared to cross the color lines of Texas politics. Pancho Medrano offered his support and counsel when I decided to run for the Texas House of Representatives in 1972, he stood by my side when I ran for Texas Senate in 1986, and he was a tremendous friend to me when I made my run for Congress a decade ago. I couldn't have come this far without him. Mr. Speaker, when we think about Pancho Medrano, we think about justice, courage and civic activism. His work to end discrimination and prejudice has had a profound and lasting effect on the lives of millions of Americans, and we will miss him dearly. His death on Thursday, April 4th, at the age of 81 is a great loss for the city of Dallas, and a great loss for the nation.

Ms. EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON of Texas

Ms. EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I urge members of this body who care about the health and safety of the public to support the Amendment I offer today with my colleagues Mr. Delahunt and Mr. Nadler. This amendment will require a judge to look at the facts and determine whether the plaintiff's interest in privacy outweigh the public's need and right to know. Often plaintiffs who find themselves in difficult circumstances will agree to seal documents in order to obtain a settlement. These plaintiffs and their attorneys are looking out for their own interests. This is understandable. When faced with the prospect of not obtaining a settlement or going along with the defendant's demands to seal the documents and forever keep them secret, few people will jeopardize their own recovery. And that is why the interests of justice demand that a judge review these agreements. The parties involved in the suit are consumed with pursuing their own interests. Only a judge is required to keep the public interests in mind and to look down the road and determine what effect secrecy will have on future litigants. Florida, Texas and Washington all have rules prohibiting secrecy in cases involving defective products. And several states, including California and Illinois, through their court rules require that a judge review any secrecy deal. Mr. Speaker, the public needs this protection and this body should not refuse to provide ordinary people with the means to pursue justice in the courts of this land. Let me just outline a few instances in which these secret agreements have endangered the public health and safety: My colleagues have discussed the Firestone Tire case in which plaintiffs in over 50 cases all over the country were required to agree to secret settlements before the problems with these tires finally came to light. We have all heard of the injuries that resulted from people unwittingly continuing to drive on these defective tires. In 1999 alone, about 300 asbestos lawsuits were settled for $200 million in Cook County Illinois. That deal kept secret not only the dangers uncovered but also the exact number of plaintiffs, their injuries and the amount received by each. In 2000, BP Amoco reached an out of court deal with one former employee and the estates of four others, settling lawsuits that claimed the five developed brain tumors as a result of working at Amoco's Naperville research center. The company insisted that the amount it paid be kept secret. But two of the settlements were revealed when a Judge insisted that wrongful death benefits be made public. Mr. Chairman, we must follow the lead of Texas and several other states. We must assure that the secrecy which has become so fashionable lately not overtake our judicial system and deny justice to ordinary people who have been harmed by the negligence of others or defectively made products. I urge my colleagues to support this amendment.

Ms. EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON of Texas

Ms. EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON of Texas. Madam Speaker, it is my honor to begin the Congressional Black Caucus 2002 Black History Month Special Order. The theme of this year's national African American History Month is ``The Color Line Revisited: Is racism dead?'' More than 100 years ago, in 1900, the great scholar, W.E.B. DuBois, addressed a pan-African conference in London where he said, ``The problem of the 20th century is the problem of the color line.'' It is now the 21st century and a major problem for this Nation is still the color line, but I believe that the color line is shifting, and shifting toward a better future. Certainly as a nation we could not have watched Vonetta Flowers become the first African American woman ever to win a gold medal in the Winter Olympics, ironically during Black History Month, without acknowledging that the color line is shifting. Certainly when we look at the progress among black-elected officials, we know the color line is shifting. In 1964, there were just three African Americans in Congress and 300 black-elected officials nationally. Today, those numbers have swelled to 9,000 black-elected officials nationwide and 39 Members in Congress, 38 being members of the Congressional Black Caucus. Yes, the color line is shifting; but the problem is still here. In our lifetime, in my lifetime, I have seen Nazism fall, Communism fall, Fascism fall, but why not racism? In our lifetime, we must cling to the belief that we as a united people will celebrate the death of racism. American-styled racism, loosely defined, is the belief that one race is superior to another. Upon this principle, slavery, Jim Crowism, lynching, economic exploitation, and many other forms of oppression were engraved in law and tradition. Can we now say racism is dead when 51 percent of African American children are living in poverty, while the civil rights movement fought for the right to vote in the sixties; and now in the new millennium we must fight to ensure that votes are counted, particularly in black areas? For example, one in 11 ballots in the predominantly black voting precincts in Florida were tossed out, according to a New York Times analysis of the Sunshine State's black vote. Racial profiling is alive. About 73 percent of motorists stopped and searched on a major New Jersey highway in 1999 were African Americans, even though African Americans made up less than 18 percent of the traffic violators. Disparities in sentencing and in incarceration have grown. African American men comprise 50 percent of the U.S. prison population, despite representing just 6 percent of the U.S. population. Reparations were refused to the survivors of the 1921 race riots in Tulsa, Oklahoma. The legislature refused this remedy, even though whites destroyed an African American community, killing 300 residents and destroying businesses and homes. But they are just a few examples, just a few. There are so many more. Moreover, when we witness the fights against affirmative action as a tool against African Americans achieving equality in employment and education, we can only conclude that much more must be done to bury racism. When we review even now that land has been taken from African Americans, that they have had to pay more for life insurance policies, we know that racism is not dead. But in my closing, the words of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., speaking in Nashville, Tennessee, on December 27, 1962, are appropriate: ``The problem of race and color prejudice remains America's greatest moral dilemma. How we deal with this crucial situation will determine our moral health as individuals, our political health as a Nation, and our prestige as a leader of the free world. The hour is late, the clock of destiny is ticking out. We must act now before it is too late.'' I know the Speaker joins me in recognizing the tremendous achievements that African Americans are making to this Nation. When I get on an elevator to come up each day, I know that it was an African American who invented the elevator. Even turning on a light or stopping at a street light, we know that we have been part of it. Standing in this building, we know that African Americans as slave workers built this great Capitol of the Nation. Madam Speaker, I yield to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Lee) to moderate the rest of the Special Order.

Ms. EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON of Texas. Madam Speaker, I would like to yield back my time and request that time be yielded to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Lee).

Ms. EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON of Texas

Ms. EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I am in opposition to H.R. 1542. This legislation extends the power of the Bell monopolies which the Telecommunications Act of 1996 sought to curb. I am particularly concerned about the negative effects this legislation will have on small businesses in my district if the bill passes. In the past couple of years, a number of Competitive Local Exchange Carriers have begun to provide high-speed data access in my district. If Tauzin- Dingle passes, these small carriers will be priced out of the market and hundreds of small businesses will lost a competitive choice in their data provider. This bill does nothing to lower data service rates, and it is bad policy. I urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on final passage of H.R. 1542. Services will not be cheaper for consumers. Presently it cost me $20 more per month in Texas than I pay in Virginia for the same services.

Ms. EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON of Texas

Ms. EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of National Black HIV/AIDS Awareness Day, which will take place on February 7, 2002. While significant progress has been made in the diagnosis and treatment of HIV and AIDS, the underlying reality is that the HIV epidemic in our country is far from over and disproportionately affects African-Americans. African-Americans comprise 12 percent of the U.S. population yet 47 percent of all new AIDS cases in 2000 were among African-Americans. Among women, an astonishing 63 percent of new AIDS cases were African-American, and three-fourths of these women acquired HIV through heterosexual sex. The National Institute for Allergy and Infections Diseases reports that AIDS is now the fifth leading cause of death in the United States among people aged 25 to 44, and is the leading cause of death for black men in this age group. Among black women in this age group, HIV ranks third. We will not have a truly effective arsenal against HIV/AIDS until we have an effective vaccine, improved education and prevention campaigns, and increased access to retroviral treatments. But before these come to pass, we must attack the most serious obstacles to overcoming the HIV/ AIDS epidemic in the African-American community: denial and delusion. It is only when patients accept the possibility that they or their partner may be infected with HIV that health care workers can consider treatment options; it is only when African-Americans accept that their community is also at risk that education and prevention campaigns will be effective. Mr. Speaker, these disturbing statistics demonstrate that while we may have won some battles against HIV/AIDS, the war is far from over. Programs aimed at education and prevention must be expanded, and treatment options must be available to all Americans. It is my hope that National Black HIV/AIDS Awareness Day will draw attention to the effects of this terrible disease on the African-American community and remove some of the stigma associated with the disease.

Ms. EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON of Texas

Ms. EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I rise to commemorate the passing of a great American, Mr. Stanley Marcus. During his lifetime, Mr. Marcus pioneered advances in the retail clothing market, helped make the Neiman Marcus department store a Texas institution and made substantial contributions to the social and cultural life of North Texas. Mr. Marcus's father, aunt and uncle founded Neiman Marcus in downtown Dallas in 1907. Mr. Marcus graduated from Harvard University in 1925 and received a master's degree in business administration from Harvard's business school a year later. In 1926, at the age of 21, he took over as the company's secretary, treasurer and director. He went on to become executive vice president, president, chairman of the board, chief executive officer and chairman of the executive committee. Mr. Marcus retired from the company in 1975 with the title Chairman Emeritus. Stanley Marcus was part of the first generation to celebrate and to sell designer fashion in the United States. In the 1920s, Neiman Marcus was the first to offer personalized gift wrapping for customers and created the first weekly retail fashion show in the country. Neiman Marcus became the first retail apparel store outside New York to advertise in national fashion magazines. His merchandising genius became legendary. Stanley Marcus believed in elegance, equating it with a keen understanding of appropriateness. He transformed a modest downtown Dallas shop into a world-renowned synonym for quality. ``Vogue'' magazine in 1953 described the store as ``Texas with a French accent.'' One example of his marketing prowess was the introduction of exotic his and-her gifts in 1960, which turned the arrival of the Neiman Marcus Christmas catalog into a major news story each year. Today, Neiman Marcus has 32 stores nationwide, from Honolulu to Boston. While creating a retail empire was one of his greatest achievements, Mr. Marcus contributed to the lives of North Texans in other ways. He published books, wrote articles for the ``Dallas Morning News'', lectured, and founded the Stanley and Linda Marcus Foundation, which benefits endeavors of art and culture. He helped create the Dallas Opera and helped save the Dallas Symphony when it experienced financial difficulties. He was an art collector and connoisseur who defended the right of the Dallas Museum of Art to display controversial works. Even in his 90s, his civic devotion never flagged. Stanley Marcus is a recipient of Dallas's prestigious Linz Award, which is given for significant humanitarian and civic efforts. I have a special place in my heart for Stanley Marcus. When I first ran for the Texas House of Representatives in 1972, I was working at the Veteran's Hospital in Dallas. Under the Hatch Act, government employees could not seek elected office. Mr. Stanley provided me a job and critical moral support during my campaign, and this opportunity gave me the political beginning that ultimately brought me to Congress. Mr. Speaker, when we think about Neiman Marcus, we think about style, elegance, and a joie de vivre. Mr. Marcus epitomized these characteristics. His death on Tuesday, January 22, at the age of 96 is a great loss for the city of Dallas and the nation.

Ms. EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON

Ms. EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to express my deep concern regarding current United States policy towards Haiti. Haiti, a country slightly smaller than the state of Maryland, is about 475 miles off the coast of the United States. It is the poorest country in the Western Hemisphere. The life expectancy of the average Haitian is only 53 years, and this number is certain to decline as the HIV/AIDS epidemic in the country becomes even more severe. According to TUNAIDS, the United Nations agency responsible for addressing the HIV/ AIDS pandemic, more than 5% of the adult population is HIV-positive, and some sectors of the population have infection rates of over 50%. Haiti's infant mortality rate stands at 74 of every 1,000 births, and more than 1 in 4 children under the age of 5 are malnourished. Haiti ranks 152nd out of 174 on the United Nations Development Program's Human Development Index, below such countries as Bangladesh and Sudan. In previous years, the United States pursued a constructive relationship with Haiti. Between FY 95 and FY 99, the United States provided $884 million in critical development assistance funds to support agricultural development, democracy and governance, teacher training, health care, and many other programs. The United States also supported multilateral institutions that worked to improve the lives of ordinary Haitians. More recently, however, the United States has pursued a dangerously narrow policy towards Haiti and has used its veto power to prevent the disbursement of funds from multilateral institutions such as the World Bank and the Inter-American Development Bank (IDB). The board of directors of the IDB has already approved $146 million in social sector loans for Haiti, but because of United States policy, these funds have been blocked from improving the lives of 8 million Haitians. Among the blocked loans are $22 million to improve education, $23 million for health care, and $61 million for water and sanitation projects. Mr. Speaker, this policy must change. In order for the living standards and life chances of ordinary Haitians to improve, international development assistance is critical. The United States must change its current policy towards Haiti so that it may receive multilateral funds for pressing development needs. If we do not act now, the deplorable conditions in Haiti will lead to a further deterioration in living conditions, social unrest, and a possible refugee crisis that will certainly affect our shores.

Ms. EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON of Texas

Ms. EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I rise to pay tribute to Ms. Patricia Ireland. During her many years of service in the fight for equal rights, Ms. Ireland has been a tireless crusader for the fundamental principles of our democracy. She is a true America heroine. For ten years, Ms. Ireland served as the president of the National Organization for Women. She stood up for the rights of Anita Hill, she raised awareness of domestic abuse, and she fought against those who would regard women as second class citizens. Through it all, she developed a reputation for integrity and effective action. During the election controversy of 2000, she was a consistent champion of the right of Americans to have his or her vote counted. She has helped move NOW squarely into a role as a leading civil rights institution. Throughout her lifetime of service, Ms. Ireland has stood up to those in power and spoke up for those who would otherwise not have had a voice. Mr. Speaker, Ms. Ireland stepped down as President of NOW earlier this year. The country looks forward to her continued leadership, and is indebted to her for her service.