Stephanie Jones

Mrs. JONES of Ohio

Mrs. JONES of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the gentleman from California (Mr. Stark) for his leadership on this issue and for yielding me time. Mr. Speaker, today I rise to express my opposition to the trade agreements before the House today. My concerns regarding these agreements cover many issues such as their lack of strong labor and environmental enforcement language, the intrusion of immigration policy into the realm of trade policy, and the fact that these agreements are a step backwards from the standards set by the Jordan Free Trade Agreement and are being used and touted as the model for future agreements. First, however, I would like to address the effect these agreements will have on our trade deficit and how they will harm American workers. As the gentleman from California (Mr. Stark) has already said, our Nation's unemployment rate is now at 6.4 percent, the highest rate in more than 9 years. Many of these jobs were lost in the manufacturing sector, just under 100,000 in Ohio alone. It seems that many perceive the solution to this crisis is to implement trade agreements that depart from the standards set by the U.S.-Jordan Free Trade Agreement, returning instead to what most would concede is the weak model accomplished by NAFTA. I anticipate that the most likely traded item these agreements will facilitate will only be more U.S. jobs. Like NAFTA, the Chile/Singapore agreements will cause shifts in production from the U.S. that will further engorge the already bloated trade deficit and lead to the loss of more U.S. jobs. At this time, I have been working in the City of Cleveland trying to save steel jobs in the City of Cleveland with my colleague who I share Cleveland with in terms of representation.

Mrs. JONES of Ohio

Mrs. JONES of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, I was not in the room when the interaction occurred between the gentleman from California (Mr. Stark) and other Members of Congress, but I was in the library when the police came in and said that Democrats were causing a disturbance, and the police were required to come. This is the second time I have been on the floor of the House and been required to do something that is distasteful for me as a Member of Congress. The first was with the Committee on Standards of Conduct, and the second is with the chairman of my committee. Members know I have been a judge. When a judge hosts a courtroom, he or she sets the standard. The chairman must set the standard in a committee room. We are talking about an interaction that went on this day, but I came from the Committee on Financial Services where I had a chairman who allowed members of the committee to speak and did not cause members to react to his response. If Members check the transcript of our hearings, every time someone says something, the chairman has a response for whatever witness it is. Mr. Speaker, I have respect for the chairman. I find it hard to stand here today, but the reality is that he called the police on his colleagues, and no one can take a thing away from that.

Mrs. JONES of Ohio

Mrs. JONES of Ohio. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding the time to me. I think it should be clear so that people do not get confused that the rulings with regard to this particular legislation are rulings of lower courts, district courts in the Federal court. The highest court, which is the ninth circuit, is the court that has upheld the roadless rule, and so we need to pay attention to that in terms of discussing what courts have done. The other thing, I find it interesting that my colleagues on the Republican side of the aisle want to point to judges when the judges' decisions are on their side, and then they want to beat up on judges when the judges' decisions are on the other side. I have had the fortunate opportunity to visit the Tongass Forest. I have had the fortunate opportunity to discuss this issue with a number of people in the area. One of the things that we do not seem to want to talk about is the impact that clear-cutting has on the caves beneath these beautiful mountains out there and the impact that it has on the environment. We are not talking about keeping people out of the forests. In fact, we want to allow people to be in the forests. The thing that we are, in fact, saying as we debate this issue this evening is that if we allowed them in the forest, what is the purpose and how can we best environmentally keep the forest sound. I know there are a lot of other people who want to be heard.

Mrs. JONES of Ohio

Mrs. JONES of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, as of February this year, I too serve on the Committee on Ways and Means; and I am so happy to have the opportunity to sit there, and tonight I rise in support of the motion to instruct conferees to take action on the child tax credit by this Friday, as my colleague from Connecticut (Ms. DeLauro) has urged. I heard the chairman of the Committee on Ways and Means say, have it happen by Friday, how could that be? Contemplate that almost every piece of significant legislation that has come before this Congress in the last few months gets to the Democratic Party on the morning that the legislation is debated, hundreds of pages. We are required to go through hundreds of pages. Surely this Congress could go forward and take care of this issue by Friday. The other thing that was so amazing to me was the discussion about politics. Give me a break. The politics of everything we have done in the last few months looms large. The reason we dealt with the prescription drug benefit before July 4 was because the President instructed them to do that, and it was political because he needed to have that done. The reason we dealt with a tax cut was on the President's instruction, and it was political because he needed to pay back all the people who supported his campaign. The reason that the children, in this instance, were left out was political because there was only $400 million set aside for the tax cut; and the poor, the poor folks in this country were put aside in the name of the rich in this country. It is just a shame that we would have to sit here and talk about an issue and call the most important issue for many working families in this country rhetoric and that this motion has no significance; but the motion was significant enough to bring the chairman of the Committee on Ways and Means, the motion was significant enough to bring the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Portman), who has a relationship with the President, the motion was significant enough to bring the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Weller) down here to debate against us. It is significant and they know it, and that is why they are down here on the floor debating us. I say that it would be wonderful if on July 26 when those checks went out that the checks would go out to families who need it the most. In my State, the State of Ohio, 147,000 people have lost their jobs since 2001. Surely those working folks would like to be able to say I paid income tax in 2001 and 2002, give me a job, I would pay income tax. Unfortunately, as a result of the proposed 2001 tax cut that did not boost the economy, 147,000 people in the State of Ohio have lost their jobs. I could go on and on about this issue, but I have colleagues here in the audience who would like to say something about the issue. Give me a break. It is political, it is political, but we are being political on behalf of working folks. I seek opportunity to yield back my time to give some other Members of this House an opportunity to be heard on the issue. Before I do that, let me say one more thing. It is significant that many of the minority children in this country will not be given an opportunity to get dollars, 2.4 million African American children, 4.1 million Latino children. Overall, it is almost one in six children that will not get a benefit because this Republican Party has delayed, delayed, delayed.

Mr. JONES of Ohio

Mr. JONES of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, I raise in support of Hard Start as we know it. Rather than dismantling Head Start, I call on the leadership of both parties to make Head Start bipartisan as it has been for 38 years, to keep the current Federal-to-local structure of Head Start intact rather than supporting any measures to shift oversight to any number of states, to maintain and improve upon current Federal performance standards and oversight--to ensure high quality and the array of comprehensive services offered by Head Start, to provide for further improvements including higher teacher qualifications, matched with provisions for funding teacher training and higher salaries, and to move towards fully funding Head Start, beginning with at least a $1 billion increase for FY 2004. All the Head Start programs in Ohio say that if the States inherit control of the program, it is likely the current comprehensive focus for Head Start will be lost. This change could eliminate critical services, such as promoting children's social and emotional well-being in addition to their academic skills, health and dental screenings and treatment, mental health services, parent-education programs and social services. They say that: families who are currently receiving help but have income above 150 percent of poverty will lose their assistance the next time their eligibility is predetermined. The changes also include an increase in parent fees, which will increase the amount families pay by an average of $50. They say that the rates for family childcare providers will be lowered from the 75th percentile of the market rate to the 60th percentile, making it difficult for those providers to serve families receiving assistance. The shame of it all is that the most eligible children are denied childcare assistance. Nationally, only 1 out of 7 children eligible for childcare assistance under Federal law receives help. States have long waiting lists for children help. (At the end of 2002, one-third of the states continued to put low-income working families on waiting lists.) In Ohio 38,081 children are enrolled in the Federal program and 18,173 in the State program. Ohio has 837 centers. This does not count home-based services; these are actual centers. Of these, 229 are only federally funded, 109 are only State funded, and the other 499 are mixed--both State and Federal funds. Cuts in Ohio will mean that 18,500 children will lose their child care assistance by September to help the State save $268 million. On April 1, the State will decrease income eligibility from 185 percent of the Federal poverty level ($27,787 for a family of three) to 150 percent ($22,530 for a family of three). Support Head Start as we know it. Fully fund this successful program!

Mrs. JONES of Ohio

Mrs. JONES of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, Anthony J. Celebrezze Jr., one of the great leaders in the history of the Great State of Ohio, departed this life at the age of 61. A true servant of the people, Anthony was a stalwart of both Cleveland and Ohio politics. At the age of 34 Anthony was elected to Cleveland's 25th District Senate seat. In 1978, he was elected Secretary of State at age 38. He would remain in that position until 1983. From 1983 to 1991, he served as the Ohio Attorney General. In 1990, Anthony ran against George Voinovich for Governor of the state of Ohio. Despite his loss, he remained active politically and throughout the community. Anthony went on to join the law firm of Kegler, Brown, Hill & Ritter. He recently was a consultant for Diebold Inc., promoting electronic voting machines. Anthony had a love of life. He had a passion for racing cars and spent much of his time attending racecar events. I had the pleasure of getting to know Tony while he was running for Governor of Ohio and I was running for the Ohio Supreme Court. He has been a constant supporter of me during my career in politics. While we mourn his loss, let us remember all that he did for Ohio and his deep and undying love for its people and keep his legacy alive through our deeds and actions. On behalf of the Congress of the United States and the citizens of the 11th Congressional District of Ohio; I would like to offer my sincere condolences to the entire family and friends of Anthony J. Celebrezze, Jr.

Mrs. JONES of Ohio

Mrs. JONES of Ohio. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in opposition to H.R. 2660, Department of Labor, Health and Human Services, and Education, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act for Fiscal Year 2004. Overall, the Republican Labor/HHS/Education bill under-funds the landmark No Child Left Behind Act by $8 billion, and provides the smallest percentage increase in education funds in eight years. To improve education, we must improve teacher training. But while the Republicans promise $300 million in the ``Ready to Teach Act,'' they have yet to fulfill their earlier promise to fund the teacher quality grants created in the No Child Left Behind Act. To improve education, we must raise student achievement in all core subjects and improve early education opportunities. While the Republicans promise $17,500 in college loan forgiveness for math, science and special education teachers in the ``Teacher Recruitment and Retention Act,'' they refuse to provide the same incentives to teachers in other core subject areas such as social studies and Head Start. To improve education, we must demand results. But the Republican Labor/HHS/Education appropriations bill falls way short in special education funding promised under the IDEA (Individuals with Disabilities Education Act) reauthorization bill passed earlier this year. While the IDEA reauthorization bill and the Republican budget resolution promised an increase of $2.2 billion, the Republican Labor/ HHS/Education appropriations bill provides only $1 billion--a 55 percent shortfall. To improve education, we must demand results. But the Republican Labor/HHS/Education appropriations bill falls $334 million short of the $1 billion in Title I funds promised in the GOP budget resolution to school districts to help meet the challenge of the new requirements in the No Child Left Behind Act. To improve education, we must provide after school programs. But the Republican Labor/HHS appropriations bill falls $750 million short of the $1.75 billion for after school centers promised in the No Child Left Behind Act. To improve education, we must expand early childhood education programs. But the Republican Head Start reauthorization bill would end the high quality federal standards and comprehensive services that have made Head Start the premiere early education program for American toddlers. To improve education, we must have education performance standards for early childhood education. But the Republican Head Start reauthorization bill would actually weaken standards for early childhood education programs. To improve education, we must involve parents. But the Republic Head Start reauthorization bill would allow states to end the parental involvement that makes the program so helpful to disadvantaged children. Two months ago, the Majority passed a conference report for the FY 04 Budget Resolution that promised to provide a $3 billion increase over the previous year for the Department of Education. This bill falls far short of that commitment, and provides only a $2.3 billion (or 4.3%) increase--the smallest dollar increase for education in four years and the smallest percentage increase in 8 years. Included in programs proposed for flat-level funding are Pell Grants, Supplemental Educational Opportunity Grants (SEOG), Federal Work Study, Perkins Loans, Leveraged Educational Assistance Program (LEAP, the state partnership program), and Graduate Education. Even though none of the programs were cut in this tight budget year, there is room for concern and disappointment. Earlier promises to increase the Pell Grant maximum (currently $4,050) are just one example of where the bill falls short. Providing lower income students with access to college is critically important, especially in a year when Ohio and many other states are cutting appropriations for higher education. Federal-sponsored loans, a repayable debt for students and parents, represent another 40% of the average financial aid package. Less than 8% of financial aid is provided by federal grants. Roughly an equal amount comes from State grant programs. Compared to the administration's request, the bill appropriates $271 million less for student financial aid. For Pell Grants the bill appropriates $12.3 billion, which is $885 million (8%) more than the current level, but $465 million (4%) less than the administration's request. The bill maintains the maximum Pell Grant award at its current level of $4,050. For Work Study this bill appropriates $1.0 billion, which is equal to the current level but $7 million less than the administration's request. The Pell, SEOG, and Perkins Loan programs are especially critical for lower income families to make college accessible and affordable. Congress must do more to assure that they are not left behind. National polls indicate that 72% of Americans believe that student aid should be the highest priority of Congress. The current bill does not reflect this priority. I received a letter today on behalf of the President of John Carroll University, Rev. Ed Glynn of the 11th Congressional District of Ohio that stated: I write to urge Congresswoman Tubbs Jones to vote against the Labor, HHS, Education Appropriations bill for FY 2004 when it reaches the House floor, possibly as early as this Thursday, July 10. . . . John Carroll University provides about 45% of the financial aid that goes to our students each year. This share is typical among private institutions. . . . Please vote ``no'' on the bill and thereby register your position that more funds be appropriated for student aid. I rise today to reiterate my opposition to H.R. 2660, Department of Labor, Health and Human Services, and Education, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act for Fiscal Year 2004.

Mrs. JONES of Ohio

Mrs. JONES of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize a citizen who exemplified the spirit of self-reliance and a concern for others that we can all learn from. Mrs. Odell Kinney was a pillar of society, particularly among her community in Cleveland, OH. Mrs. Kinney gained a well-founded reputation for taking in children of the neighborhood and dedicating her time to the development of her community for over 30 years. She made a lifelong commitment to raising 18 children who loved and admired her dearly. She was also a daycare provider for over 20 years. Her dedication to children has inspired the Odell Kinney Scholarship Fund. The goal of the Odell Kinney Scholarship Fund is to award an annual scholarship in the amount of $1000 to a deserving student. Among her abundant contributions to society, Mrs. Kinney was a member of the PTA, a persistent entrepreneur, an active member of the Lee/ Harvard Ward Club and served as President of her street club for 10 years. She provided food baskets to the needy on an ongoing basis, served as a church missionary and a Bible school teacher. There are hundreds of individuals, if not thousands whose lives Mrs. Kinney touched in a beautiful way. They will never be the same again: ``They don't make 'em like Odell anymore,'' said Mr. Simmons, a childhood friend. ``She had a beautiful spirit,'' said business partner, Brenda McCants. ``She was at the top of her game, committed and dedicated to the community and came from a great generation of black women,'' said Cleveland Councilman Joe Jones. The biggest commitment she made was the love of God and God's children. In essence, Mrs. Odell Kinney had a heart as big as Texas. The lingering effects of her good work will last forever.

Mrs. JONES of Ohio

Mrs. JONES of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, I will begin with a quote. ``Seniors face a confusing hodgepodge of co-payments and deductibles in Medicare. The system is irrational and difficult to navigate. Simplifying and modernizing cost sharing will make coverage easier to understand and will strengthen the Medicare program over the long term. I believe we can better design both Medicare and Medigap so that seniors and people with disabilities get the most of the health care dollars they spent.'' That is a quote from a Republican colleague. But let me report from Howard Brown, 77 years old, from Cleveland, Ohio. He complained about the complexity of the program that will involve choosing a plan, tracking out-of-pocket expenses, and knowing when the coverage kicks in, lapses and then resumes in severe cases, all according to a sliding scale of benefit. Mr. Brown said, ``I am too old to try to figure all this out. Make it simple. Make it plain so I can understand it.'' The people in the United States, the seniors who are on Medicare, they want a defined benefit giving them an entitlement and a guarantee. They want it to be affordable with reasonable premiums and deductibles. They want it to be designed to significantly reduce the price of their prescriptions, and they want a meaningful Medicare prescription drug bill that provides absolutely no gaps and no separate privatized ambulance. But we have not heard any Republican get up tonight and define what the gap is. They have not explained to seniors across this country that there will be a gap in coverage, and it will not be Medicare improved for prescription drugs. Truly, 35 years ago we did not think about prescriptions as being part of Medicare; but it is, in fact, a part of Medicare today, and our seniors do not want to wait till 2006 and then find out that after paying premiums all year that they do not get any coverage in this gap of coverage. Explain the gap Mr. and Mrs. Republican on the Republican side. What about the new preventive? Every new beneficiary gets an opportunity, but what about the old folks? It is like Mrs. Ruby Bogus from Cleveland, Ohio, said. She was annoyed that the program would not begin until 2006, and do my colleagues know what she told her friends. Well, girls, I guess we will just have to live a little bit longer to get a prescription drug benefit.

Mrs. JONES of Ohio

Mrs. JONES of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to bring recognition to Margaret Butcher, in celebration of her 90th birthday on July 25. Mrs. Butcher has been a resident of the Glenville area of Cleveland for over 50 years. The Butcher family has been a faithful member of St. James AME church for most of that time. She and her husband, Aljah Langston Butcher, raised five children, two of whom still reside in the Cleveland area. After having her 5th child, she went back to Kent State University and obtained a Bachelor's Degree in teaching. She received her Master's from Case Western University. During her Cleveland residency, Mrs. Butcher has held jobs with the IRS, a small boat factory and a church-based school. She taught with Cleveland City schools for approximately 30 years. Currently, she tutors young students. Margaret has volunteered for several community activities over the years, most notably, the creation of a neighborhood oral history that was eventually transcribed and placed in the Western Reserve Historical Museum. Mrs. Butcher resides at 12800 Fairhill Rd in Shaker Heights, OH. A reception is tentatively scheduled in her honor, Saturday, July 26. Margaret Butcher was my good neighbor, but more than that, she is my good friend. It is truly an honor to know her and it gives me great pleasure, Mr. Speaker, to celebrate her today.

Mrs. JONES of Ohio

Mrs. JONES of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, on Saturday, June 14, 2003, at the NAACP Freedom Fund Dinner in Cleveland, OH, Camille Fields, the daughter of Helen and Darryl Fields and the granddaughter of Mary and George Forbes, President of the Cleveland Chapter of the NAACP, delivered the following address: ``Imagine 250 years ago: you must get up at 5:00 a.m. to go to the fields and farm. After farming, you go home at about 7 or 8:00 p.m. Can't imagine it? Well this was the normal life of an African-American slave during the antebellum period. Day in and day out, African- Americans worked harder than anyone of us will probably ever know. Enslaved in the slave trade, black slaves brought to the Americas spent their days working, picking cotton, farming and cooking for their white masters. Despite their everlasting work and the building of America, African-Americans were never paid the dues that they were owed. Payments or reparations should be given to African-American slave descendants for that painful period in history that some people want to forget, but should always remember. ``Reparations are payments to repair or right the wrongs of past injustices. African-Americans are owed reparations because of the work and pain that they had to endure during and after slavery. Reparations have been around since emancipation. A form of reparations was the idea of 40 acres and a mule. This was the idea that all slaves would receive 40 acres and mule after slavery to get them started for their own lives. Slavery and its benefactor, the white masters hurt black Americans. To this day, black Americans are living the legacy of slavery. In slavery, if blacks were to refuse to work or proceed to run away, they were punished. The form of punishment was almost always beatings or being whipped. Slavery was a horrible time for the black race, there were 250 years of pain and labor with no compensation for it and that is not fair. Slavery was, `America's Black Holocaust.' Because of the effect slavery has brought on to African-Americans, blacks deserve to be compensated. After all, everyone else has. ``In 1987, people began to hear the word reparations a lot, but the discussion was not directed towards benefiting African-Americans. Instead, the United States government passed a law to conduct a national apology to Japanese-Americans and to pay them $20,000 apiece for their internment during World War II. The Japanese-Americans are not the only ones who received reparations. Last year, European insurance companies were allowing Holocaust survivors to apply for reparations; $275 million are being split up into accounts. Of this, 100 million will be for expenses and other 175 million will be available for Holocaust survivors and charities. This agreement will be fully enforced at the end of next year. Seven-thousand, eight-hundred forty-four people have made claims for Holocaust reparations in Germany and 18,200 people have made claims in other European countries. Israel Singer, the chairman of the World Jewish Congress stated, `this is a great victory for justice. This is part of a massive effort at restitution that is very late, but fortunately not too late for hundreds of thousands of Holocaust survivors still alive, many of whom are in great need.' Jewish and Japanese people have been compensated for the past injustices done against their religion and race, so many African-Americans are raising the question, `Why haven't I been compensated for slavery?' So as a result many African-Americans go to court. ``Reparations Activist Deadria Farmer-Paellman has been the spokesperson for African-Americans who are suing various corporations for their part in slavery. She files lawsuits against companies and as Paellman states, `These are corporations that benefited from stealing people, from stealing labor, from forced breeding, from torture, from committing numerous horrendous acts and there's no reason why they should be able to hold onto assets they acquired through such horrendous acts.' ``In one lawsuit, Aetna Insurance Company is being held accountable for the act of insuring white masters, if their slaves ran away. They have apologized for insuring masters with money for their slaves. In 1998, Imari Obadele and two other people filed a claim that slavery was worse than Japanese internment and blacks should be paid. Their claim was turned down. The judge ruled against them, Chief Judge Lawrence Baskir of the U.S. Court of Federal Claims wrote `make no mistake, the plaintiffs have made a powerful case for redress that could form the basis of future legislation providing for reparations for slavery.' In the late 1990s, President Clinton played with the idea of reparations and an apology, but he rejected it. ``Every year, the government does nothing to help out and further the idea of reparations, but one city is making a change toward the better. Last year on October 2, 2002, history was made in Chicago. The Chicago Council passed a law called the Slavery Era Insurance Disclosure. This law was the first one of its kind for a well known city. With the law, before they do business with the city, companies will have to disclose their ties with slavery. This law could affect anyone's company who can trace their ties back to slavery. Here in Cleveland, NAACP president George Forbes wants to have that same law passed here. His proposal wasn't asking for money, but as he states, `We're not advocating reparations, we just want to discuss it. We want to take it out of the emotional context and show how slavery goes into all corners of Cleveland life.' Many people are advocating and pushing the need for reparations, because so many people need them. ``Some people might raise the question, `is black poverty the legacy of slavery?' Well it is. After slavery, African-Americans had to start their lives from scratch and they were poor and uneducated. So the cycle continues from one generation to another. The poverty rate is higher for African-Americans than for other minorities. The rate has stayed the same since the last census. Twenty-two point seven percent of African-Americans are living in poverty. While the poverty rate for whites is 7.8 percent. Black people still suffer from economic, political and social falls from slavery. Martin J. Katz, author of The Economics of Discrimination says, `Whites will be allowed to retain an advantage, which they did not earn and blacks will continue to lag behind as a result of acts which, although they may not be amenable to documentation, no one denies were performed in contempt of individuality. Racism has made race relevant to productivity. Treating race as if it were irrelevant will not help to make it any less relevant.' Slavery's everlasting mark is black poverty, so therefore, because of slavery and its dent on society, African-Americans deserve reparations. ``The saying `let bygones be bygones' is often referred to the subject of reparations and slavery. The excuses include `it ended 140 years ago before any of us were born,' or `There's nothing I can do about it; my family never owned slaves.' But did people say that in 1987 when the government had to pay Japanese Americans? Would anyone say, `I was never really there when the Japanese were interned, so why should I have to pay them.' I believe the answer would be no. And no one has actually taken the heat for slavery. No one has even acknowledged the aftermath, even today. Some people just don't know how to go about giving reparations. Some ideas were to setup a trust fund that would be used for economic and educational resources. Whites benefited from slavery while at the same time, blacks didn't. In a recent poll conducted by blackvoices.com, 75.4 percent believed that reparations should be given to African-Americans. ``Reparations are a growing movement in today's society. The government should pay African-Americans the money that they are owed. Even though millions of dollars will not make up for the past injustices of America, reparations is a start toward the better. African-Americans went through hell 250 years ago. America needs to understand that. Reparations should be an obligation to America, not a privilege for African-Americans.'' Camille is a student at Hawken school. She prepared this presentation for her chapel talk.

Mrs. JONES of Ohio

Mrs. JONES of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, Hall of Famer Larry Doby, the first black baseball player in American League history, died last night at the age of 78 in his home in Montclair, New Jersey. Larry Doby was one of the Cleveland Indians finest centerfielders, a slugger with speed. He was with the Indians in one of their most successful eras, from 1947 to 1955 during which they won two league pennants and a World Series, besides finishing second to the New York Yankees four times. He hit a decisive home run as the Indians won their last World Series in 1948. He led the league in home runs and runs batted in when the Indians romped to the American League pennant in 1954, winning 111 games, the fourth most in baseball history. Larry survived and endured many racial insults after arriving in the majors only 3 months after the first black player, Jackie Robinson, of the old Brooklyn Dodgers. He never seemed to hold any grudges because of the torment. Doby is quoted as saying, ``Life is too short for that. People who judge others based on the color of their skin have more problems than I do.'' When he first stepped onto a major league field on July 3, 1947, amid a deluge of publicity, he was an uncertain, nervous 22-year-old. He knew that many fans and teammates resented his presence at Municipal Stadium. Doby batted only 32 times that first season and got five hits, a paltry .156 average. He stated, ``It was one of the toughest things I ever had to go through. I had never sat on the bench before and now all I could do was sit and watch.'' He had come up as a second baseman with the Newark Eagles of the Negro League where he was hitting .420. But he was not going to displace Joe Gordon, the team's cleanup hitter who had been the league's most valuable player as a member of the Yankees in 1942. Doby survived because of the support he received from his late wife Helyn; Indians owner Bill Veeck, who brought him to the majors; teammates Gordon and catcher Jim Hegan, and coach Bill McKechnie. They were the closest to him that first year. He also was friends with the late Arthur Grant, the father of one of my childhood friends, Laureen Grant Beach. On many occasions I had an opportunity to see him and enjoy time with his daughter Kristie. As a baseball pioneer, Doby also received encouragement from black celebrities of the era. Heavyweight boxing champion Joe Louis, singers Lena Horne, Ella Fitzgerald and Dinah Washington and musicians Duke Ellington and Count Basie were among those who contacted him. When centerfielder Thurman Tucker was injured in May, Indians manager Lou Boudreau moved Doby into his spot. He stayed there for 10 years, he recalled. ``The Cleveland fans were great. They never booed me, even when I made a mistake.'' Doby hit .301 with 14 homers as the Indians won the 1948 pennant. In the playoff game against Boston for the American League flag, he belted two doubles. His most famous homer came in the fourth game of the 1948 World Series at Municipal Stadium when he connected to give Steve Gromek a 2-1 victory and the Indians a three-games-to-one lead over the Boston Braves. After the game, Doby and Gromek were photographed hugging each other in jubilation. The picture is considered a civil rights milestone. It was the first widely publicized photo of two baseball players of different races embraced in victory. Doby led the Indians in hitting in the series with an average of .318. Players soon accepted him because of his ability. Doby, 6-1 and 180 pounds, quickly established himself as a first-rate player. In 1950 when he hit three homers in a game, batted .326 and drove in 102 runs, the Sporting News chose him as the best centerfielder in baseball, ahead of Joe DiMaggio and Duke Snider. He topped the league in homers, 32, and runs batted in, 124, in the pennant year of 1954 when the Indians won 111 and lost 43 games for a winning percentage of .721, a league record that still stands. The Indians traded him subsequently to Chicago on October 25, 1955. He then with the White Sox, had a rebound, he went to Baltimore in a six-player deal in 1958, and then in 1959 he was sent back to Cleveland to play. Doby was chosen for seven All-Star teams in his career. His lifetime stats show a .283 batting average and 253 home runs. Mr. Speaker, I would like to give credit to Bob Dolgan, the Plain Dealer reporter from whom I obtained a lot of this information. I hope that all my colleagues will join me in mourning the death of a baseball great, Larry Doby.

Mrs. JONES of Ohio

Mrs. JONES of Ohio. Madam Speaker, I rise today in opposition to H.R. 660. The bill will exempt those businesses that decide to form Association Health Plans from health insurance regulation of the various States. Thus, under the bill, these association health plans could operate in different States but would not be subject to the different health insurance regulations of those States. Instead, they would be subject to regulation by the Labor Department. This Bill would allow ``Cherry Picking.'' As the premiums rise, the employers will have the chance to pick who will receive the health care, which means, the employers will pick the youngest, and the healthiest for the plan so that it would not cost them as much. As a result, thousands of the sickest workers would end up losing coverage altogether. AHP will offer a very minimum benefits package that does not include cancer screening, mental health benefits, or autism coverage. CBO reports show that there are 41 million uninsured Americans and only 550,000 currently uninsured Americans would gain coverage and this number is less than one percent of the country's Americans uninsured. As health care cost rises, the problem of the uninsured shall only get worse. Ooh I get it!. Hurt small employers and make coverage unaffordable for all but the healthiest groups. According to the Congressional Budget Office. Two-thirds of the lower premiums realized through AHPs would come from risk selection, and most of the rest would come from eliminating benefits. Insured individuals switching from their current plan to an AHP would outnumber the newly insured 14-to-1. 20 million individuals would face additional rate increases under AHPs, and 10,000 of the sickest individuals would lose coverage entirely. The 80 percent of small business employees not participating in AHPs would almost uniformly see their premiums increase. Madam Speaker, Associated Health Plans will hurt Small Businesses and increase the ranks of the uninsured.

Mrs. JONES of Ohio

Mrs. JONES of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor Medgar Wiley Evers and Myrlie Evers-Williams. These two great Americans fought tirelessly for equality and justice. It is because of efforts such as theirs that I can stand before you today as the first African-American woman to serve in Congress from the State of Ohio. They knew the importance of voting and worked to mobilize African- Americans so that they would have the opportunity to exercise this right that so many had fought for. They organized civil rights rallies and boycotts of local businesses and schools to advocate for the underserved and under represented in this country. Though murdered in 1963, Medgar Evers' legacy lives on through his children and his widow, Myrlie Evers-Williams, who went on to establish the Women's Political Caucus and become the first woman chair of the NAACP Board of Directors. It is because of these reasons that I am so honored to stand here today in support of this resolution commending Medger Wiley Evers & Myrlie Evers-Williams. It is on their shoulders that I stand.

Mrs. JONES of Ohio

Mrs. JONES of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor Irving I. Stone, founder of American Greetings Corporation, whose generosity to his community and abroad is constantly remembered. Mr. Stone's involvement with the company started when he was a young boy. His father sold postcards from a horse and buggy. Immediately after graduating high school, he became a salesman. He made the largest sale of the company at age 19 to the management of Cleveland's Euclid Beach Park. In the 1930's, Stone convinced his father that the company should design and print its own cards. In order to implement this, he started the American Greetings Creative Department, one of the largest art studios in the country. Irving Stone continued to bring innovative ideas to the company and retailers, making the greeting card industry what it is today. More important than his accomplishments with his company was his commitment to his community by participating with many civic organizations: Chairman of the Board, Hebrew Academy of Cleveland; Member of the Board of Directors, Young Israel of Cleveland; Board Member, Cleveland Institute of Art and Bar Ilan University; Regional Board Member, Liberty Mutual Insurance; Founding Trustee for Life, Cleveland Jewish News. It is because of his commitment to the community and desire to see it move forward in the future that the Young Israel of Greater Cleveland will honor Mr. Stone by dedicating the Synagogue to him on June 22, 2003. Irving I. Stone was an outstanding man who will always be remembered for his outstanding good deeds to his community and beyond.

Mrs. JONES of Ohio

Mrs. JONES of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor Amistad America and the Freedom Schooner Amistad as it makes its first voyage to Cleveland, Ohio. The schooner, under the leadership of Captain William Pinkney, is a wooden re-creation of the 19th century Spanish cargo ship, La Amistad. It serves as a maritime ambassador for racial reconciliation and human rights education and fosters cooperation and unity among people of diverse backgrounds. Since its launch, the Amistad has touched the lives of thousands of people. The Freedom Schooner Amistad was conceived, built and launched to celebrate the legacy of The Amistad Incident of 1839. Fifty-three Africans, who were illegally kidnapped from West Africa and sold into the transatlantic slave trade, staged a revolt against injustice and embarked on a quest for freedom. Their human-rights struggle culminated in a case in which former President John Quincy Adams successfully argued before the United States Supreme Court on behalf of the captives. In 1841, the 35 surviving Africans returned to Africa. I was privileged to attend the opening of the Amistad in Connecticut in 2000. Due to illness, Rev. Allison Phillips, pastor emeritus of Mt. Zion Congregational Church, was not able to attend the event. This year, Rev. Phillips has the pleasure of welcoming the schooner to the city of Cleveland. In 2003, the Amistad makes its first Great Lakes Tour after touring ports along the East Coast and Gulf of Mexico. The docking of the schooner in Cleveland presents a rare opportunity for the public to gain new perspectives on racial justice and freedom. The schooner will offer a wonderful historic and educational experience for the residents of Cleveland and of North East Ohio. I would especially like to thank Key Bank and the United Church of Christ for their diligent work in bringing the Freedom Schooner Amistad to Cleveland.

Mrs. JONES of Ohio

Mrs. JONES of Ohio. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding me time. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to H.R. 1115. It is another series in ill-advised attempts to institute broad tort reform measures by this body. Class actions are often the only way in which small but meritorious claims can find redress, and, as such, they are an essential tool for enforcing civil rights, public health, environmental and consumer rights and laws. It is very important, because my colleague disparages the integrity of elected State court judges. As a former State court judge, I speak for all of my colleagues to say that we are as qualified as those appointed by Presidents to the Federal bench. I would also say that it is very important that if you look at the campaign funds of the people who are supporting this legislation, I guarantee you the organizations that do not want class actions are funding their campaigns. I do not have enough time to say much more, except to say to all of you, vote against this legislation. It is not good for the consumer. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in opposition to H.R. 1115, another in a series of ill-advised attempts to institute broad tort reform measures by this body. Class action lawsuits play an important role in our Nation's civil justice system, serving the dual objectives of practicality and fairness. Class actions are often the only way in which the small, but meritorious claims can find redress, and, as such, they are an essential tool for enforcing civil rights, public health, environmental and consumer rights and laws. The bill before us seeks to remove this tool and impair consumers' access to justice. Further, it disregards longstanding principals of federalism and would stress an already overburdened Federal judiciary. There is no statistical evidence of a State class action ``crisis'' as proponents of this bill claim. In fact, there is empirical evidence to the contrary. For the past several years, the RAND Institute for Civil Justice has been studying class action settlements, only to find that given the small dollar amount of individuals' losses, it was ``highly unlikely that any individual claiming such losses would find legal representation without incurring significant personal expense.'' This study also found that class actions often resulted in changes to a companies business practices and that ``class counsel's fees were a modest share of the negotiated settlements.'' Overall, it concluded that its survey ``contradicts the view that damage class actions invariably produce little for class members and that class action attorneys routinely garner the lion's share of settlements.'' There is also no basis for the unfounded premise that big companies cannot get a fair trial in State courts--claims that are promulgated by sensationalist rhetoric surrounding a mere fraction of the class action suits that are introduced. Where the infrequent abuse has occurred, it is important to note that it is not an endemic feature of State judiciaries as proponents of this legislation would have us believe--in fact, many Federal class acitons have expeirenced the same outcomes that attract criticism at the state level. My colleague disparges the integrity of elected State court judges. As a former judge I protest--if the campaign coffers of those supporting this legislation were reviewed--I venture a guess then--the contributors are supportive of this legislation. But there is an overwhelming amount of evidence pointing to the fact that this bill would make it harder--if not impossible--to bring cases against major corporations in an era of increasing consumer and shareholder vulnerability. Legitimate lawsuits could be thrown out or stalled if defendants are given the right to move just about any class action case from States to a crowded Federal court docket. Since the mid-1990s, the Federal civil dockets have been severely backlogged. From 1993 to 2002, U.S. district court civil filings climbed by nearly 37,000 cases (16 percent). And according to the U.S. Judicial Conference, the Federal courts are short by 150 judges. This legislation would not only further overburden the schedules of Federal judges, but would put them in the difficult position of interpreting a host of State law issues that don't belong in Federal courts in the first place. This would result not only in extended delays in obtaining benefits for class members, but also increase delays for individual plaintiffs in other cases. And since Federal judges are required to provide speedy trials to criminal defendants, it is likely that class action suits would end up at the end of the long Federal docket line, giving corporate offenders more time to ``shred'' documents or dump stock shares. There is no doubt that State courts are institutionally better suited to handle class actions than Federal courts. State courts' civil dockets typically experience smaller caseloads than their Federal counterparts, not to mention greater experience with State civil laws. State courts are also more prepared to decide controversial issues of State law than Federal courts. Without State court interpretations, States' bodies of law will not develop solutions to new problems, or guide future conduct of businesses. It is also important to remember that State courts are held to the very same standards of due process as their Federal counterparts. If State judges fail to perform their duties appropriately, States have adequate mechanisms for reprimanding them. And let us not forget that State judiciaries are capable of self-regulation. Where real problems with the certification process have occurred, the offending States have responded with reforms aimed at improvement. In Alabama, the often- cited ``swamp justice'' State according to the proponents of this legislation--both the legislature and the judiciary have been acting to tighten class action procedure in response to accusations for ``drive- by'' certifications. If the foundation of our democracy relies on the strength and preservation of federalism and deference to State's rights, how can we support legislation that has as its backbone the notion that State judiciaries are not as competent as Federal courts? Just ask the substantial number of Federal judges who have served on State judiciaries if they are ``better judges'' now that they operate on a Federal court level. I doubt any of them will respond that they are more neutral, or less biased, as a result of their Federal appointment. Put simply, neither the State nor Federal judiciaries are seeking class action reform because they are quite confident in their own competence. Indeed, Chief Justice Rehnquist and the Judicial Conference of the United States are opposed to this legislation for reasons beyond ``unduly burdened'' Federal courts and disturbing States' jurisdiction over in-State class actions--they are opposed because at its heart it questions the principles that our Nation's courts are the backbone of a fair and unbiased justice system. Class actions play an important role in our civil justice system. We need to refrain from targeting the few class-action infractions at the expense of many citizens' right to their day in court. We also need to refrain from altering the delicate balance between State and Federal judiciaries established by the drafters of the Constitution and carefully engineered by their contemporaries. Let us heed the advice of our most senior authority on this matter, Chief Justice Rehnquist, that ``Congress should commit itself to conserving the Federal courts as a distinctive judicial forum of limited jurisdiction in our system of federalism.'' This legislation is nothing more than a technically unsupportable effort to enact institutional advantages for large corporations in all class actions. Instead of promoting fairness and efficiency, H.R. 1115 simply gives tobacco companies, Enrons, Worldcoms, HMO's and polluters the power to choose the legal forum they believe will benefit them most. A vote against the bill will send the reassuring message to our State and Federal judiciaries that their judgment and integrity is recognized by Congress. As a former judge, and now as a Member of this body, I urge my colleagues to vote against this bill.

Mrs. JONES of Ohio

Mrs. JONES of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, I rise to acknowledge the importance for Congress to address the concerns of a welfare reform bill. I support the 3-month extension to reauthorize the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families Block Grant Program through fiscal year 2003. I also ask the U.S. Senate to move on this important legislation. Mr. Speaker, more than 35 States have made cuts in programs funded with TANF and child care block grant funds. Most importantly, these cuts are in programs that promote the goals of welfare reform. These cuts reflect both the exhaustion of many States' surplus. Cuts are in welfare to work programs, cuts are in programs to help the most disadvantaged families, cuts are in transportation assistance, cuts are in basic cash assistance benefits, cuts are in teen pregnancy prevention programs, and cuts are in child care. My dear colleagues, let us come together--set aside our differences--and work to pass a bipartisan measure that will provide adequate aid to families with dependent children (AFDC) and critique the job opportunities and basic skills training (JOBS) programs. Mr. Speaker, our Governors have spoken out and printed on recycled paper critical funding and flexibility of the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families block grant, which must be preserved--without any set- asides. The program should be reauthorized to ensure that States are able to continue their current innovative efforts to assist low-income individuals and families. I ask that we work together to provide meaningful legislation that will lead our families to self sufficiency.

Mrs. JONES of Ohio

Mrs. JONES of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to extend my sincere congratulations and gratitude to the nurses who served in the United States military during World War II and the U.S. Cadet Nurse Corps who are alumni of the Frances Payne Bolton School of Nursing at Case Western Reserve University. These nurses were honored during their Reunion Celebration, which took place on May 17, 2003 at Severance Hall in Cleveland, Ohio. Representative Frances Payne Bolton acquired the congressional seat of her late husband, which she maintained from 1939-1969. As a Member of Congress, she led the effort to create the U.S. Cadet Nurse Corps which trained 125,000 nurses in 1,100 nursing schools from 1943 to 1948 to reduce the nursing shortage and improve health care in the military and throughout the entire nation. She was the very first Congresswoman to serve the state of Ohio. It is my pleasure to join with the Case Western Reserve University community and the citizens of the 11th Congressional District in honoring this group of nurses for their untiring service to this country.

Mrs. JONES of Ohio

Mrs. JONES of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, this afternoon I am so pleased to have an opportunity to join with my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to celebrate Congresswoman Patsy Mink. As a trial lawyer, I used to litigate equal employment opportunity cases. One of the cases I had involved a school system wherein the women coaches were claiming that they were not paid the same amount of money as male coaches for doing lots of work. I remember doing some research and learning about Patsy Mink. Little did I know that I would ever have the opportunity to serve in the House of Representatives with such a great woman. Patsy, I want you to know that I am keeping the faith and working on your behalf and working to keep your name in high regard. I hosted previously the NCAA women's volleyball championships in the city of Cleveland back in 1998; but I want you to know that in 2006, your girlfriend will be hosting the NCAA women's basketball finals in the city of Cleveland. I am going to do it in your name and in your support. Thank you, Patsy, for all you do.

Mrs. JONES of Ohio

Mrs. JONES of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, I would like to take this opportunity to join my colleagues from the Ways and Means Committee honoring Mr. Al Davis. As one of the two newest members on the committee in the 108th Congress, I was privileged to become acquainted with Al and appreciate his round the clock efforts to make sure the Democratic members of the committee and their staffs were kept abreast of the upcoming events and legislation we would be dealing with. And I do mean round the clock. Messages would come on my Blackberry pager at 11 o'clock at night, sometimes later. When major bills were getting ready to be discussed in a hearing or markup before the committee, the first memo that reached my hands in the morning would be the most recent information that Al had spent the previous night researching and compiling. To say that Al provided sage-like advice to the committee is an understatement. While my colleagues on the committee are extremely knowledgeable of the economic issues related to the Ways and Means' jurisdiction, rarely would they not yield to Al as he would offer greater insights into the complex issues we faced. I think I can speak for other members when I say that a common first response to questions we had for our staffs was ``Let me check with Al and see what he thinks.'' Al's tireless work ethic, attention to detail, and cunning sense of humor will be remembered by all his friends and colleagues, here on Capitol Hill and elsewhere. As I take these moments to remember Al, I also want to thank him for his steadfast commitment to the ideals of the committee.

Mrs. JONES of Ohio

Mrs. JONES of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in recognition of the Cuyahoga County Bar Association's 75th Anniversary Diamond Jubilee which will be held on Friday, June 20, 2003, in Cleveland, Ohio. The Cuyahoga County Bar Association has served the legal community and citizens of Cuyahoga County through research, advocacy, and education. Founded by 64 former members of the Cleveland Bar Association in 1928, it's mission is to ``advance to the highest standards of excellence for the legal profession, to enhance the professional competence of attorneys, to further the administration of justice, to preserve and protect the liberties and rights of the people, to inspire respect for the law and legal profession through the support of law-related and community services, and to promote an atmosphere of collegiality among members of the Bench and the Bar.'' On this great occasion, Thomas J. Escovar, a partner with the firm Steuer, Escovar, Berk & Brown Co., L.P.A., in Cleveland, OH, is being installed as the CCBA's President. The association's President-Elect is Justin Madden, a partner with the firm Spangenberg, Shibley & Liber in Cleveland. Diana Thimmig will be installed as the First Vice President and Laurence A. Turbow will serve as Second Vice President. Howard Besser will retain his position with CCBA as Secretary. Furthermore, I would like to congratulate the new members of the CCBA Board of Trustees for 2004; the Honorable Janet R. Burnside, Louis J. Carlozzi, Deanna L. DiPetta, Steven L. Gardner, John F. McCaffrey and Robert J. Vecchio. I would also like to congratulate the new members of the Trustee Class of 2005; David B. Gallup, the Honorable Diane J. Karpinski, Lenore Kleinman, Jacob A.H. Kronenberg, the Honorable David T. Matia, the Honorable John D. Sutula, Mary Jane Trapp and the Trustee Class of 2006; the Honorable John E. Corrigan, Michael M. Courtney, Janet L. Kronenberg, Ellen S. Mandell, Mary Ann Rini, Stanley E. Stein and Jeffrey L. Tasse. Finally, I would like to congratulate the new Presidential Board Appointments; the Honorable Ann Dyke, Lori Ann Luka and Barbara K. Roman. It gives me great pleasure, Mr. Speaker, to rise today to honor the Cuyahoga County Bar Association and to salute its new leadership.

Mrs. JONES of Ohio

Mrs. JONES of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding time to me. Mr. Speaker, the two bills that are being considered here today were great suspension bills that were on the Journal a couple of days ago. However, Democrats, in an effort to voice our concern about leaving behind millions of Americans who are low-income families, voted against those suspension bills. In fact, Mr. Speaker, to borrow a recent popular phrase, I am shocked and awed by the consummate arrogance, fiscal irresponsibility, and candid lack of compassion of the Republican lawmakers of this body. I have been on the floor many times in the past several months expressing my outrage at the unfairness and untimeliness of the various GOP tax plans, and once again I find myself at the podium in a state of disbelief about the efforts of the self-proclaimed ``compassionate conservative party'' to exclude some of the neediest families in our Nation from tax relief in the tax bill that was signed into law last week. In an administration that has claimed to want to leave no child behind, we are now realizing that, indeed, 12 million of them were left behind, and 521,000 in my State. In a time where special attention is being given to our brave men and women of our Armed Forces who served so well in Iraq, I think it is inappropriate to see how these last-minute shenanigans have actually left many of them out. The majority of our military members are in the pay grades of E5 and below. These are the sergeants, petty officers, lance corporals, specialists, and airmen, whose round-the-clock efforts made the military victory in Iraq swift and decisive. But an E5 with 6 years in service makes just $24,000. His family is left behind. Mr. Speaker, to borrow a recent popular phrase, I am shocked and awed by the consummate arrogance, fiscal irresponsibility, and candid lack of compassion of the Republican lawmakers of this body. I have been on this floor many times in the past several months expressing my outrage at the unfairness and untimeliness of the various GOP tax plans, and I again find myself at the podium in a state of disbelief about the self- proclaimed ``compassionate conservative' party's efforts to exclude some of the neediest families in our Nation from tax relief in the tax bill that was signed into law last week. In an administration that has claimed to want to ``Leave no Child Behind,'' we are to realizing that there will indeed be children left behind--12 million of them in fact; 527,000 in my State of Ohio. In a time where special attention is being given to our brave men and women of the Armed Forces who served so well in Iraq, I think it is appropriate to note how the last minute shenanigans of Republican lawmakers to strip out a provision of their tax bill that would have ensured that families making between $10,500 to $26,000 would get the full child tax credit other taxpayers get, will affect our military personnel. The majority of our military members are in the pay grades of E-5 and below. These are the sergeants, the petty officers, the lance corporals, specialists, and airmen whose round the clock efforts made the military victory in Iraq swift and decisive. But an E-5 with 6 years in the service makes just $24,000 in base pay per year. An E-2 just new to the military makes just $15,840 in base pay. And these are just some of the millions of family members who will suffer, and their children will suffer, their spouses will suffer, because of the back door wrangling by Republicans to give even more money to the wealthiest of American taxpayers. Mr. Rangel has introduced a fair and responsible alternative to address this injustice, but I am afraid it will be to little avail. Rather than focus on the important issues facing our Nation, the Republican leadership seems intent to focus on solutions in search of problems--such as this week's constitutional amendment to flag desecration. I haven't been made aware that flag desecration is a problem in this country--but every week when I return to my congressional district, I am made keenly aware that the economic health of our country is a problem. Unfortunately, ti seems to be a problem some Members of this body choose to ignore.

Mrs. JONES of Ohio

Mrs. JONES of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, today we stood here and we debated the amendment that would outlaw burning the flag and everybody stood on the floor or everybody, those on the Republican side of the aisle, stood on the floor and talked about liberty and justice for all as we pledged allegiance to the flag. Clearly, that liberty and justice for all applies sometimes and not at tax time. I have been fortunate to serve as a new member of the Committee on Ways and Means, and I sat through hearing after hearing after hearing about the tax cut; and in the hearings it was said that the tax cut would boost the economy. Several times we reminded the speakers that were speaking that the 2001 tax cut did not boost the economy, so what makes them think that another tax cut, again in 2003, will boost the economy? The real unfairness of the situation in some of those debates was the issue about dividend tax cuts as it impacted low-income housing tax credits, and we pushed them on this and we pushed them on this. Oh, I am not sure it is going to have an impact, but all of us understand that right now people are investing in urban communities because of the tax credit they will get, not because that they are such do-gooders. That brings us home to where we are right now, where we have families who make between $10,500 and $26,625, and they will not benefit from this tax cut. It is a shame. It is not justice for all, and we need to bring them out. We need to pull the sheet off this mess that we have here. We need to open the doors to daylight. We need to let the American people understand that the working folk that make between $10,500 and $26,000, that pay the same $2 for gasoline, that pay the same $2 for a loaf of bread, that pay the same $7 for a pound of meat, that pay all the same things that the millionaires pay, well, maybe the millionaires pay more because they can afford to get more exclusive- type things, but those people are not going to benefit from this tax cut. They are not going to be able to get that $400 and run out the door and buy their kids some new shoes or clothes, or buy more stuff or put some more food on the table. This tax cut, as it is presented, will not boost the economy, and surely it is not going to boost the lives of low-income American families, and they will pay.

Mrs. JONES of Ohio

Mrs. JONES of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, I thank the ranking member for yielding me time. When I was a little girl in elementary school and I learned the Pledge of Allegiance, I was so very proud. Even in my French class our French teacher taught us how to say the Pledge of Allegiance in French. As I stand here today, I know I can still remember those words. I am so pleased to hear so many talk about allegiance to the flag and to the Republic, and they drape themselves in the flag and talk about all these issues that are important to them; yet I have stood here on the floor of the House and listened to my colleagues pass legislation that denies liberty and justice for all in this country. I have seen us pass legislation that denies liberty and justice for all with regard to the child care credit. I have seen them deny liberty and justice for all for a whole lot of reasons. But what I say to you today is this debate is not about that piece of material up there, the flag that we all revel. This debate is merely about whether we are going to stand here and be divided, one side or the other, about whether or not people have a right to free expression and a right to free speech. And I stand with those who are entitled to free speech and a right to speak out on their own. I love the flag. All of us love the flag. But let us not fool anybody about why we are debating the issue. It would be great. I even heard someone talk about African American soldiers. My father was an African American soldier. He is 83 years old. He was denied his rights of liberty and justice because he had to serve in a segregated Army, and he talks to me about that all the time. So let us get real. Let us talk about the facts, and let us say the only reason we are up here debating this issue is because there are some who want to deny people the right of free expression and the right of free speech. So I stand here opposed to this resolution.