Jesse Jackson

Mr. JACKSON of Illinois

Mr. JACKSON of Illinois. Madam Speaker, I rise today to honor the life of Ms. Nailah Oliani Franklin, an extraordinary young woman who was raised in the 2nd Congressional District of Illinois. On September 19, 2007, hundreds of people began the search for Nailah Franklin after she did not show up for a meeting at work. Unfortunately, the search concluded 9 days later on September 27, 2007, when police discovered her body in a wooded area in Calumet City, Illinois. Her disappearance captured the heart of many in the Chicagoland region and others across the country. During the week she was missing, a grassroots campaign led her story into the national media. More than 2,000 people filled the sanctuary and vestibules of Trinity United Church of Christ on Chicago's South Side to help celebrate her life. ``Even today Nailah is bringing people together,'' stated family member Marina Franklin. Nailah Franklin was a gift from God, whose life was cut too short. We will all relish in the impact she left on her family, friends and all that came in contact with her spirit, elegance, courage and strength. Nailah was born on April 12, 1979, to Maria and Lee Franklin, in Highland Park, Illinois. Her name which means ``one who succeeds'' is a testament to the life she lived. Her confidence and intelligence earned good grades at Homewood--Floosmor High School, where she ran track and was on the Voyager newspaper staff. In 1997, Nailah graduated from Homewood--Floosmor High School and enrolled at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, my law school alma mater. She remained active in many activities during college. She wrote for the Daily Illini student newspaper, co-hosted a jazz and neo-soul music show on the student run WBML FM, tutored local high school students and assisted with football recruiting. She received her bachelor's degree in advertising in 2001. She then returned to Chicago and began working for advertising giant Leo Burnett. Later, she joined Eli Lily & Co. in 2006 as a pharmaceutical sales representative. Her family described her as a force to be reckoned with. A presence. Someone who wasn't afraid to speak her mind, try new things and set the bar high for herself and those around her. ``She was strong, resilient, vivacious, opinionated and above all, fashionable. A `girlie-girl,' she loved her family and friends, fashion, spa visits, music and anything and everything related to Oprah. She was exceptional without being ruthless,'' her family noted. She was a music lover with tastes running the gamet from jazz to house to neo-soul to old school R&B. She loved to watch Grey's Anatomy and she had to find out what songs had been used during each episode so she could put them on her iPod. Nailah will most be remembered as a successful professional, doting aunt, loving daughter, sister, niece and friend--a woman of extraordinary grace and resilience whose spirit blessed all who knew her. Her family has established the Nailah O. Franklin Memorial Fund at the Chicago Community Trust. The fund will make grants to prevent violence and guide young people's educational and social development. I pay tribute to this beautiful life lost.

Mr. JACKSON of Illinois

Mr. JACKSON of Illinois. The State Department was negligent in not responding to concerns raised about the danger and exposure of the U.S. Embassy in Nairobi to a vehicle bomb attack. The U.S. intelligence community had been surveilling several al Qaeda associates in Nairobi for 2 years, yet that information was not shared with the diplomats bidding on assignments in Nairobi, Kenya. Prior to the attack, then- U.S. Ambassador Prudence Bushnell warned the State Department about the vulnerability of the Nairobi Embassy and requested more security. Members of al Qaeda were convicted of the bombing in New York Federal District Court in 2001. Government witnesses at the trial testified that intelligence and security reports from several different sources had confirmed the presence of an al Qaeda cell in Nairobi and the likelihood that the location of the embassy exposed the employees to an attack given the proximity of the street, but the State Department failed to act on these intelligence reports. The Accountability Review Board, established to examine the facts and circumstances surrounding the embassy bombings, found that the bombings were the result of a ``collective failure of several administrations and Congresses over the past decade to invest adequate efforts and resources to reduce the vulnerability of U.S. diplomatic missions around the world to terrorist attacks.'' Like the families of those killed on 9/11, the families compensated in H.R. 2828 also suffer a similar heartache and pain from an al Qaeda attack on U.S. soil. Several of the victims' children still suffer from serious emotional problems. However, unlike quick action taken by Congress and the executive branch to respond to the needs of families of 9/11, these families have waited more than 9 years without any meaningful compensation. Former Secretary of State Albright has stated publicly that her administration failed to help the families because the attacks happened thousands of miles away and because the Department failed to respond to the pre-attack intelligence report of the serious threat of the al Qaeda organization in Nairobi and Dar es Salaam. Mr. Speaker, this bill is the very least that a grateful Nation can do. I would like to thank Republican Whip Roy Blunt and his staff member, Brian Diffel, for working with us on this bill. I would also like to thank CBC Chairwoman Kilpatrick and her staff member, James Williams; Dan Burton and his staff member, Brian Fauls, as well as the committee staff of Chairman Lantos, Chairman Payne and Ranking Member Ros- Lehtinen for all the work they did on this bill. I want to recognize the work of Karen Williams, counsel for the Nairobi Embassy families, and especially Consul General Bartley's daughter, Edith, who has brought this issue to the attention of the Congress and has worked tirelessly to get us to where we are today. Mr. Speaker, present with us today in the House are members of the Bartley family, members of Ms. Kavaler's family, and members of the Kirk family. And I understand that it's not appropriate or within House rules to acknowledge specifically their location in the House Chamber, but they are here today on this momentous occasion. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for the time. I urge an ``aye'' vote on H.R. 2828.

Mr. JACKSON of Illinois. I thank you, Chairman Payne, for the time. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of H.R. 2828, a bill to compensate relatives of U.S. citizens killed in the 1998 embassy bombings in Kenya and Tanzania. I introduced this bill with Republican Whip Roy Blunt, and it has solid bipartisan support, including 19 members of the Foreign Affairs Committee. On August 7, 1998, an al Qaeda truck bomb exploded at the American embassies in Dar es Salaam, Tanzania and in Nairobi, Kenya. The embassy bombing in Nairobi killed 12 Americans serving their government. The Americans killed in the embassy bombings were, and Mr. Blunt will now join me in calling their names, Sergeant Nathan Aliganga, United States Marine Corps; Consul General Julian Bartley; his son, Jay Bartley; Jean Rose Dalizu; Molly Huckaby Hardy; Staff Sergeant Kenneth Hobson II.

Mr. JACKSON of Illinois

Mr. JACKSON of Illinois. Let me rise in strong opposition to the gentleman from Texas's amendment, and I am hoping that the gentleman might engage me in a brief question. These grants assist in the development of essential community facilities in rural towns of up to 20,000 in population. We talked about them in great detail in a number of hearings on the Agricultural Appropriations Subcommittee, and witness after witness suggested that these Federal funds, in conjunction with local funds, made it possible for them to advance the idea of health conversations and broader conversations about fire stations and hospitals and purchasing ambulances and other critical community facilities. I was going to ask the gentleman if he wouldn't mind engaging in just a brief colloquy with me. A brief question: Does the gentleman support the President's budget? I yield to the gentleman from Texas.

Mr. JACKSON of Illinois. The gentleman does not support the President's budget. Well, that is important, because let us be clear that the gentleman's amendment is proposing $16.8 million more than the President is proposing in this program. The President has zeroed this program out. The committee sought to increase the number in this program. And if the gentleman's amendment returns it to the 2007 level, the 2007 level is $16.8 million more. I encourage you to vote against the Hensarling amendment and support the Community Facilities program.

Mr. JACKSON of Illinois. Thank you, Madam Chair. Let's put a face on this program. In Horseshoe Bend, Idaho, no company had invested in providing broadband delivery to the residents until a company called Bitsmart applied for a USDA Community Connect Grant. 770 people live in Horseshoe Bend, Idaho. Now, Bitsmart has established wireless Internet accessibility and availability, an integrated system connecting law enforcement, health care providers and school and government offices. The USDA Rural Development mission is to increase economic opportunity and improve the quality of life for rural residents. To level fund a program that connects rural Americans to the rest of our country would be a moral disgrace. We are under an obligation in this Congress to bring rural communities, where large corporations and medium-sized corporations do not invest in them, into the information age and make them part of our more perfect union. I encourage my colleagues to reject the Hensarling amendment.

Mr. JACKSON of Illinois. I was hoping the gentlelady from Connecticut would yield for just a brief question. Would the gentlelady care to share with the committee what the President's proposal was for this particular program in this particular budget?

Mr. JACKSON of Illinois. Mr. Speaker, I just want to stand in defense of the subcommittee and its work. We tried to be as responsive to members on this committee as possible, given that many members of the committee do not understand the specific details of every congressional district. But this is what Congressman Artur Davis had to say: ``Auburn University is seeking funding to continue research on endemic and emerging pathogens of catfish. Because the prevalence of catfish diseases constitutes $90-100 million in annual losses for catfish farmers, it is important to prevent these diseases to ensure a healthy national food supply and a successful economic development activity. This funding will allow Auburn University to conduct outreach to farmers and ensure that these vaccines make it into the field to protect the food supply of the American people. Earlier research from this project has already led to the commercialization of two vaccines that are now helping in the reduction of these disease losses.'' Mr. Chairman, I want to thank Mr. Rogers, and I also want to thank Congressman Artur Davis for looking out for the interests of this vital industry in their State. The committee did its work and honored their request. We should vote down the gentleman's amendment.

Mr. JACKSON of Illinois

Mr. JACKSON of Illinois. Mr. Chairman, let me first begin by congratulating the hardest-working Member of the Congress, Chairwoman Rosa DeLauro, for this outstanding bill. Mr. Chairman, as a new member of the Appropriations Agriculture Subcommittee, I rise to voice my strong support for H.R. 3161, the Agriculture, Rural Development, Food and Drug Administration, and Related Agencies appropriations bill. Again, I want to congratulate Chairwoman DeLauro and the subcommittee staff for the product here before us today. I also want to thank Ranking Member Kingston of the minority subcommittee staff for working with us to produce this product. Over the past 8 months, I have learned a lot about agriculture policy. When asked why I serve on this subcommittee, considering my largely urban and suburban district, I quickly respond by saying this bill touches the lives of 647,000 residents of the Second District of Illinois. We all eat, we all want safe food, and we all want safe medicines. With the recent passage of the Farm, Nutrition, and Bioenergy Act of 2007, our Nation's agriculture policy and spending reflects our growing investments not only in rural development and commodity programs but in nutrition, conservation, and renewable energy. We want to continue to support our farmers as well as feed the hungry, protect our Nation's food supply, and invest in research. One out of five Americans at some point in time in their lives will participate in at least one domestic food assistance program. Our nutrition programs serve as the first line of defense against combating hunger by helping low-income families purchase food. This bill illustrates Congress's commitment to protecting our country's most vulnerable populations. It accomplishes the following: It increases the Food Stamp Program by $1.7 billion and creates a $3 billion contingency reserve, which helps feed over 26 million people annually. It restores the President's proposed cuts to the Commodity Supplemental Food Program and expands the program that serves over 485,000 people monthly by adding five new States. It appropriates $5.6 billion to the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children and restores State grants to help administer the program. It supports the expansion of the simplified summer school food program that provides up to two meals a day to children under the age of 18 during the summer. This bill also addresses a wide variety of needs, ranging from increased grants and loans for rural communities to fully funding the USDA's Food Safety and Inspection Service. The increases in this bill are sensible, they are prudent, they reflect our priorities, reinforcing our commitment to feed the hungry, to house the needy, and to protect us all. I recommend that my colleagues vote against any amendments cutting these vital programs, and I strongly urge them to vote for this bill.

Mr. JACKSON of Illinois. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.

Mr. JACKSON of Illinois. Mr. Chairman, I want to be clear. The gentlewoman may not be aware of it, but we have accepted this amendment. The majority has accepted Mr. Gingrey's first amendment for $50,000. The gentlewoman said that $50,000 is very important to her constituents. The majority has heard it. Therefore, we accept the amendment. I think we can dispose of this amendment and move forward. Mr. Chairman, I yield to the gentlewoman from Connecticut (Ms. DeLauro), the chairwoman of the subcommittee.

Mr. JACKSON of Illinois. Mr. Chairman, reclaiming my time. The gentlewoman's constituents should be very proud that we have accepted the amendment. The $50,000 that is so important to her constituents, to all Americans, has been accepted. We can dispose of this and move forward. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. JACKSON of Illinois

Mr. JACKSON of Illinois. Madam Chairman, will the gentleman yield for a question? Is the gentleman aware that we've accepted the amendment?

Mr. JACKSON of Illinois. Madam Chairman, I have a parliamentary inquiry.

Mr. JACKSON of Illinois. Madam Chairman, is there a particular parliamentary vehicle that, once an amendment has been accepted by the majority, that the amendment can then be disposed of? I don't know what the point is here. We've accepted the amendment. It's been asked. It's been answered. We accept it. We want to add it to the bill. We're prepared to move forward. We've accepted the amendment.

Mr. JACKSON of Illinois. I thank the Chair.

Mr. JACKSON of Illinois. Point of order, Madam Chairman.

Mr. JACKSON of Illinois. Madam Chair, as I understand previous rulings from the Chair, that the gentleman must confine his remarks to the matter at hand, the Agriculture appropriations bill, and not the SCHIP bill, which will come before the Congress later this week.

Mr. JACKSON of Illinois. Parliamentary inquiry, Madam Chairman.

Mr. JACKSON of Illinois. Point of order. Madam Chairman, the gentlelady is engaged in irrelevant debate.

Mr. JACKSON of Illinois. Madam Chairman, the gentlewoman is engaged in irrelevant debate.

Mr. JACKSON of Illinois. Madam Chairman, I would like a ruling on my point of order.

Mr. JACKSON of Illinois. Point of order.

Mr. JACKSON of Illinois. Madam Chairman, the majority has accepted the McHenry amendment and the minority continues to engage in irrelevant debate.

Mr. JACKSON of Illinois. Point of order.