Patrick Kennedy

Mr. KENNEDY of Rhode Island

Mr. KENNEDY of Rhode Island. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to oppose H.R. 4134 on behalf of a generation of children who will be left to twist in the wind because they have been denied an elementary education. I agree that measures should be taken to discourage and prevent undocumented individuals from entering our country. I will not support, however, any meanspirited, punitive attempts to secure our borders that will devastate numbers of children because of the sins of their parents. Are we as a body going to reduce ourselves to mistreating little children because we are angry that their parents have not complied with our laws? The obvious recourse would be to punish their parents or proactively prevent them from immigrating here unlawfully. What good will it do to ban their children from attending public school? In the long run, it is the children of American citizens that will also be punished, because they will be forced to deal with the tragedy of a population of uneducated immigrants. It sickens me to think of the discrimination that will inevitably result as parents will be forced to prove that there children are indeed legal. Unfortunately, those children who look foreign will be forced to prove that they are, in fact, Americans. Be assured that the children whose ancestors are Irish, or British or Dutch or French won't be asked to prove their legality--they can easily pass as American. Since the Civil Rights Act of 1964 was implemented, we have made enormous strides in our quest for an egalitarian society. This bill will only take us back to a dark period in our Nation--one in which those who looked different from the majority were treated as second- class citizens. What good will it do us to leave a generation of children--most of whom were born here and are American citizens--uneducated, unskilled, and downright hopeless? In an era when we are intent on reducing crime, cutting Government spending and helping American families strive for a better living standard, relegating thousands of children to a lifetime of virtual poverty as a consequence of their lack of education is morally reprehensible, politically irresponsible and fiscally imprudent. Need I remind my colleagues of the numbers of organizations, including every major law enforcement organization in the United States are opposed to this measure. They recognize that putting thousands of kids on the streets will not decrease illegal immigration but only promote crime, gangs and drugs and place enormous strains on the cities and countries that will be forced to deal with these problems. I ask my colleagues, Will you feed, clothe, house and offer work to this generation of uneducated adults? Certainly my colleagues on the other side of the aisle have not fully ingested the ramifications of this potentially devastating legislation. I urge my colleagues to vote against H.R. 4134.

Mr. KENNEDY of Rhode Island

Mr. KENNEDY of Rhode Island. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize Capt. Richard (Rick) T.P. Woolard, one of the last Vietnam era officers of the U.S. Navy's Sea, Air, Land [SEAL] teams. Captain Woolard will retire in October after 30 years of outstanding service to our Nation. He is known throughout the military not only as a consummate warrior, but as a strategic thinker whose contributions will have a lasting impact as the U.S. military enters the 21st century. Captain Woolard began his Navy career as an ensign in 1966. Following graduation from underwater demolition training he served as a platoon commander with Underwater Demolition Team 21 where he conducted his first deployment to the Caribbean. Upon graduation from U.S. Army Ranger School in 1968, Captain Woolard was assigned as a platoon commander with SEAL Team Two. From 1968 to 1970 he made two deployments to the Republic of Vietnam where he led over 145 combat missions. For his courageous and distinguished actions he received the Silver Star and three Bronze Star medals. While Captain Woolard was repeatedly recognized for his courageous leadership and success in inflicting numerous casualties upon enemy forces, he was also recognized for his humanity. During an operation in April 1970, while taking incoming enemy rocket fire, he acted with complete disregard for his own safety, plunging into the waters of the Song Ong Doc River to rescue Vietnamese civilians caught in the crossfire of a Viet Cong ambush of his platoon. His actions saved the lives of three women and children. After his second deployment to Vietnam, Captain Woolard served as the training officer at the Naval Amphibious School, Little Creek, passing on his combat knowledge to underwater demolition/SEAL trainees. Following a tour with the Bureau of Naval Personnel in Washington, DC Captain Woolard was assigned as an exchange officer with the Special Boat Service Royal Marines. His accomplishments while assigned there are recounted by members of this elite unit to this day. Upon his return to the United States in 1977, Captain Woolard served as the executive officer of Underwater Demolition Team 21. He then completed the Command and Staff Course at the Naval War College in 1979 and served in a Naval Special Warfare staff assignment. From 1982 to 1984 Captain Woolard commanded SEAL Team Two. Following an assignment with U.S. Forces Caribbean, Captain Woolard embarked on three more command tours. In 1987, he commanded the Navy's antiterrorist security coordination team. He then commanded SEAL Team Six, the premier combat unit within Naval Special Warfare, followed by command of the Naval Special Warfare Development Group. In 1990 Captain Woolard became the Director for Combatting Terrorism, Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Special Operations and Low Intensity Conflict where he was recognized for his strategic vision in the formulation of counter terrorism policy. Throughout his career, Captain Woolard has set the standard for achievement amongst Navy SEALS. His contributions both on and off the battlefield have contributed immensely to the accomplishments of our Nation's elite maritime special operations force. The legacy of his leadership and foresight will carry on well into the next century as special operations forces meet the challenges of the battlefield of the 21st century. I bid Captain Woolard, his wife Sandra, his daughter Jennifer and his son John Paul fair winds and following seas.

Mr. KENNEDY of Rhode Island

Mr. KENNEDY of Rhode Island. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding. I love all the concern on this side of the aisle today for the divisiveness of this issue when it was just yesterday that this side of the aisle was not willing to make the distinction between legal residents and illegal aliens, such that they shut off 300,000 legal residents of this country from rights of their citizenship. Today, my colleagues on the other side are talking about the divisiveness of this issue. The reason they are talking about divisiveness is because this is a divisive issue. this bill plays directly to the politics of fear and prejudice for which this Congress has become so well-known. A politics of divide and conquer. Mr. Chairman, this is reminiscent of the Patrick Buchanan campaign to define which people are more American than the others. Or should I say which people are more white, are more white than other Americans? This is playing politics that the Republican Party knows very well: Create an enemy to solve all our country's anxieties and fears. We saw it begin with the gay bashing. Then it proceeded to the welfare bashing. Then the last 2 days we have seen it with the welfare bashing and the immigrant bashing when they knocked off all the legal residents who were taxpaying residents of my State who can go and fight in our wars and yet they are going to be denied the rights of their citizenship based upon the bill my Republican colleagues passed yesterday. If they do not like the way they look, if they do not like the way they sound, then they are not Americans. All I have to say to my colleagues is they should be careful with all these hot button issues that they are pushing because no one should wonder when the churches start burning in the South and the race riots start breaking out in Los Angeles where all these hot button issues have led us to, and that is fanning the flames of intolerance that this country cannot afford at this time.

Mr. KENNEDY of Rhode Island

Mr. KENNEDY of Rhode Island. Mr. Speaker, just hearing my colleague, the gentleman from Georgia, John Lewis, speak so passionately, I think should move anyone who listened to his speech. Over 30 years ago it was John Lewis who was fighting against States rights, States rights meaning justice dependent on geography. How you were treated depended on what State you lived in. And yet our Republican friends who are offering this welfare reform, as they call it, are willing to embrace States rights; what their block grant plan means is that again justice will depend on geography. In my State of Rhode Island, over 40,000 kids in poverty are going to be put at a disadvantage under the block grant system because when you take away the money that is entitled to kids based upon their poverty, you leave it to the whim of the States. I can tell you, each State is under pressure to lower the bar so that you can squeeze people even more. This is wrong. When Mr. Shaw and Mr. Archer say that dollars will not do it alone, I want to ask the Republicans, what are they going to substitute when a poor child needs food, what are they going to substitute for the money that they are supposed to be providing through these programs?

Mr. KENNEDY of Rhode Island

Mr. KENNEDY of Rhode Island. Mr. Speaker, it seems as though in the heat of the campaign season, some people just do not like to face the truth. The Republicans right now are running away from their record in the 104th Congress, a report where they are going after Medicare to fund tax breaks for the very rich. Just think about their budget. They ran on deficit reduction, but what did they do when they came here? They want to cut taxes $245 billion over 7 years. Better than half of that money goes to individuals and families earning over $100,000. What are they going to do to pay for this big tax cut? Well, they are going to cut $270 billion from the Medicare Program. What is that going to mean to senior citizens? It is going to mean out-of-pocket expenses that are going to grow for them. Mr. Speaker, Newt Gingrich said we are not going to kill it right away because that would not be politically popular. We are going to let it die on the vine. Now what do the Republicans want to do? They want to run away from their record of this statement. They want to say, cut off all advertising that tells the truth about what the Republicans intend to do with Medicare.

Mr. KENNEDY of Rhode Island

Mr. KENNEDY of Rhode Island. Mr. Speaker, I would like first to thank my colleagues from Florida and New York for their continued diligence in recognizing the illegal invasion and occupation of the Island of Cyprus. Their work in founding the Congressional Caucus on Hellenci Issues and commitment to initiating this special order provide an essential forum in speaking out against the atrocious crimes Cyprus has endured under the hands of Turkey, while honoring our close relationship with the nation of Greece and commitment to our constituents of Hellenic descent. In beginning their struggle for freedom from the Ottoman Empire in March 1821, the nation of Greece embarked on a fragile struggle to embody democratic ideals of their most famous philosopher, Plato envisioned. The Turkish invasion of Cyprus over two decades ago marks the return to an occupied state, a situation unprecedented since the 19th century and clearly unacceptable in the 20th. We can no longer remain silent on this issue. We must not ignore the injustice occurring in Cyprus. The reasoning behind Turkey's actions echo those used by the fathers of genocide in the past. And the situation warrants the attention we have always provided our closest allies. The famous philosophers of Greece provided our democratic nation with the ideas upon which it now stands, I hope we can return the gift in restoring those ideals to where they most belong. I join my colleagues in calling for peace and a prompt resolution of the current situation.

Mr. KENNEDY of Rhode Island

Mr. KENNEDY of Rhode Island. Madam Chairman, do you not love all this talk about how we are going to get money from these poor people to give money to other constituents who are more deserving? Yet this same Republican majority who is talking about cutting $53 billion from welfare has no problem giving a tax cut of $245 billion over 7 years, better than half of which goes to individuals and families with incomes of $100,000 or more. It seems to me that our Republican friends are against welfare for the poor but they have no problem with welfare for the rich. I do not want to hear my Republican colleagues talk about local control, because I worked in a State legislature and I know what block granting is all about. This mantra of States rights, let the States decides, let the States manage it, in my State of Rhode Island, that is a prescription for disaster. I will tell Members why. Because without the assistance that comes through entitlement programs, the money goes to the States. So the money goes to the State bureaucrats; it does not go to the women and children and the poor people who need the assistance. Once again under States rights, just as it stood 30 years ago, States rights means justice will depend on geography. If you are a poor person in Rhode Island, you will not be treated the same as if you are a poor person in a State like Tennessee, which has got a much better economy than we have in Rhode Island. Finally, my last point is that what this bill does to legal residents is shameful. To cut assistance to people who already pay taxes and in fact tax-paying, legal residents who do not enjoy many of the exemptions that regular citizens enjoy because they have not attained citizenship. They will be denied the same benefits as citizens. This to me represents no more than the same immigrant bashing that this majority has continued all 2 years it has been in the majority.

Mr. KENNEDY of Rhode Island

Mr. KENNEDY of Rhode Island. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to urge my colleagues to join me in standing up for those who cannot stand up for themselves--our Nation's children. Much of this Congress has focused upon strengthening the American family. Family Values have been the centerpoint of much of the legislation that we have considered in these 2 years. Welfare reform should be the opportunity for us to truly demonstrate how much we value our children and our families. Today, as leaders, we can ensure that all children grow up with a roof over their heads, food to eat, and medical care should they become sick. Instead, we are faced with a mean-spirited proposal intent on punishing children for being poor. The GOP bill does not require work and encourage financial independence; instead it singles out children, the poor, the disabled, the elderly, and legal, taxpaying immigrants and punishes them for needing a helping hand. A recent GAO report expects that at least 1 million children to be forced to live in poverty should this bill pass. Yet we will continue to subsidize wealthy corporations, helping them to grow and prosper while our children will be starving and suffering. In an era when the richer are getting richer I find it unconscionable that we should support such legislation. In the last decade, the richest 1 percent increased their share of the Nation's wealth to 47.2 percent, while the bottom 90 percent saw their share of pie shrink to 22.7 percent. The Republican Party's panacea for our budget troubles is known as the block grant. The fact of the matter is, Mr. Speaker, that if you are a small State with a struggling economy, block grants are a death sentence. A block grant does not reward who does the most, it rewards those who do the least. States like Rhode Island will be left to battle for funds to offer the most meager care and services and the casualties will be those in need will be left to fighting over the scraps. Republican block grants replace and entitlement system with a lottery system. Our rights as American citizens will depend on whether we live in a State with a good economy and a low level of need. There is nothing subtle about what they are really doing when the talk about ``block grants'' in the same breath as ``States' Rights.'' And our answer should be no different than it has always been, and that is: Justice should not depend on geography. My State of Rhode Island boasts a myriad of immigrants who work hard every day, struggle to make ends meet and raise their families just like American citizens. And just like our citizens, they stumble upon hard times when a factory closes or the economy slows. By denying these individuals a helping hand in their time of need, simply because they are not American, we are rejecting the very principles this Nation was founded upon--equality, freedom, and opportunity. We are essentially demoting immigrants to second-class citizens by prohibiting them from accepting help from the system to which they contribute to every day. If we really believe in family values, then let us do a better job of valuing our families. Let us continue the Democratic fight for what families value: job opportunities, health care, child care, and housing for everyone--not just a select few.

Mr. KENNEDY of Rhode Island

Mr. KENNEDY of Rhode Island. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman from Vermont for yielding me the time. Mr. Chairman, this amendment is about simply fairness. It says that when taxpayers foot the bill for research, they should not have to pay again for it at the drug counter. We invest millions of dollars in pharmaceutical research. More than 40 percent of all U.S. health care research and development comes from the U.S. taxpayer. This amendment, the Sanders amendment, says that drugs developed with taxpayer dollars cannot be sold back to the taxpayers at excessive prices. Without a reasonable pricing clause, the taxpayers pay to develop the drug, only to get their pockets picked when they go to the pharmacy. In the 1990's, the drug industry was the Nation's most profitable, with an annual profit of 13.6 percent, more than triple the average of the Fortune 500 companies. So while the argument goes that they invest a great deal in R&D, there is plenty left over for them to give back to the taxpayer, and that is what this amendment calls for.

Mr. KENNEDY of Rhode Island

Mr. KENNEDY of Rhode Island. Mr. Chairman, this debate really is about a simple question, a question of equal rights. Marriage is a basic right. It is a basic human right. Love and commitment are essential pillars of marriage. They are qualities that do not discriminate on account of gender. It is not right for this Congress to step in and to intrude into the private relationships and the most personal decisions of our constituencies. Love and commitment can exist between a man and a woman and it can and does exist between men and between women. Proponents of this curiously titled bill say that we need legislation to protect the family. Nothing could be further from the truth. Families are not threatened when two adults who love each other make a lifelong commitment to one another. Families will not fall apart if gay men and women are allowed to marry, if they are allowed the same basic legal right to marry that is already enjoyed by heterosexuals. This is not about defending marriage. It is about finding an enemy. It is not about marital union. It is about disunion, about dividing one group of Americans against another. This bill is unconstitutional, this bill is unfair, and the spirit behind this bill further fans the flames of prejudice and bigotry that this 104th Congress has done a pretty good job at fanning thus far. I think it is a travesty that people would bring this bill out simply to polarize Americans even further. Instead of bringing love and commitment and worshiping that in our society, this bill sows the seeds of division and hatred amongst people. I think that is a very unfortunate thing.

Mr. KENNEDY of Rhode Island

Mr. KENNEDY of Rhode Island. Mr. Speaker, a year ago I heard and heeded the arguments of those who claimed that by maintaining MFN we would have the leverage to force change in China. In light of what has transpired over the last year, I find it difficult to reconcile the benefits of MFN with China, with China's refusal to obey international law regarding the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction and its continued abuses of human rights. My hopes for change as a result of engagement through MFN were dashed. The record of China over the past year merits a strong and unequivocal message of protest from this body. On every issue that is central to United States-China relations we have witnessed a steady and serious deterioration over the past year. In the critical areas of human rights, weapons proliferation, trade, and military aggression we have seen retreat, not progress. I fully recognize the benefits of trade with China, and have held out the hope that by maintaining that relationship we could achieve progress in these critical areas. Therefore, I supported renewal of MFN last year. My hopes proved elusive, however, and the price of our forbearance has been an escalation in the threats to the security of the United States, both economic and strategic. I cannot stand by and watch China engage in practices that threaten the security of our Nation. If we are going to create a more secure place for the United States in the future, we must take the right actions today which will ensure that goal tomorrow. The greatest threat to the United States and world security is the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction. In the hands of rogue nations, in the hands of nations that support terrorism, in the arsenals of nations with simmering disputes that stand the risk of erupting any day, chemical and nuclear weapons are a threat, not just to the United States but to the world. In recent years, contrary to the promises made by the Chinese, China has increased both the quantity and the quality of its arms transfers. Not only has China transferred missile technology, but now China has transferred nuclear and chemical weapons technology to nonsafeguarded nations. Protests have produced promises, but what we have gotten in return for our indulgence and patience is continued defiance of international law. A record of broken promises is not strong enough to support renewal of MFN. The human rights abuses of China are almost too numerous to mention. Time and time again, we have been promised that reforms would be enacted. But once again, there was not progress this year. For these reasons, I cannot in good conscience support MFN renewal this year. I hope that in the future China reforms its practices, and demonstrates through meaningful, positive reforms its desire to join the international community. The door is open for a China that obeys treaties and respects the rule of law. There is no place for a China that behaves with the disrespect for international law which China has exhibited in the past year. There is a need to send a message to China when their behavior so endangers our national security. Therefore I will oppose MFN this year.

Mr. KENNEDY of Rhode Island

Mr. KENNEDY of Rhode Island. Mr. Chairman, this process is unfair. First of all, this legislation is authorizing legislation, and it is not going through the committee that authorizes this legislation. Second, what we are talking about here is a balanced approach between States rights and respect for the sovereignty of Indian nations. This legislation disrespects Indian nations with sovereign rights and you are setting up an unfair system that violates the whole nature of the U.S. Government with native American nations. So I ask Members to vote against the Istook amendment.

Mr. KENNEDY of Rhode Island

Mr. KENNEDY of Rhode Island. Mr. Chairman, I rise today as a supporter of IMET. This is a program which is right in the right time and in the right place, but IMET in Indonesia at this time represents the wrong place at the wrong time. Congress did the right thing in 1992, when at the urging of my predecessor from Rhode Island, Ron Machtley, we cut off IMET to Indonesia. When Congress did that, they sent a clear message to the dictatorship in Jakarta. They said: You need to stop the human rights abuses in East Timor; your record in East Timor does not merit your receiving IMET. Last year, unfortunately, Congress restored IMET to Indonesia. Since this time human rights abuses have continued and have gotten worse. Another year will just provide more encouragement for those carrying out these abusive practices. Since Indonesia brutally invaded East Timor 20 years ago, almost one- third of the population has been killed. One-third of the population has been killed. This could not have happened without the knowledge and participation of the military, the very military that we are going to reward if we pass this IMET in this bill and if we do not pass the Frank amendment. Mr. Chairman, the record of leadership in Indonesia is clear and unmistakable. After the Santa Cruz massacre, General Try Sutrisno, the commander of the Indonesian military at the time, and he is now currently the vice president of Indonesia, was quoted as saying that those who had gathered at the cemetery were disrupters who must be crushed. He said, and I quote, ``Delinquents like these have to be shot, and we will shoot them,'' he said. General Mantriri, the regional commander for East Timor, was quoted just after the Santa Cruz massacre as saying, quote unquote, that, ``The massacre was proper,'' and, I quote, ``We do not regret anything.'' These are the words of the military commanders that this U.S. Congress is about to lend assistance to. These very military commanders who are saying these things. These abuses continue. Just yesterday, just yesterday, there are reports that are yet to be confirmed that East Timorese youths were shot at by police forces in Baucau. They were protesting the destruction of the portrait of the Virgin Mary, and youths took to the streets. There are reports that house-to-house searches were conducted. My office has learned that Bishop Bello, who is recognized by all as the conscience of East Timor and is one of the most respected human rights leaders in the world and was one of the finalists for the Nobel Peace Prize last year, Bishop Bello was more upset than friends have said they have heard him in years. Mr. Chairman, I think we need to send a clear message to the leaders of Indonesia that we will not sit by and let these abuses continue. And I urge my colleagues to support the Frank amendment and send a clear message to Indonesia we are not going to sanction continued abuses of human rights.

Mr. KENNEDY of Rhode Island

Mr. KENNEDY of Rhode Island. Mr. Speaker, you do not really need a lot of empirical information to understand that insurance companies only make money off of healthy people, and that if they had a choice in this world of profit making, sick people cost them money. It is a given. It is common sense. So what we were able to do in this Kennedy-Kassebaum bill is get two things that kept insurance companies from blocking health insurance to all kinds of people, even people who needed health insurance: Preexisting condition and portability. There is agreement on it, and it is wonderful that even Republicans on the other side of the aisle agreed with this concept, that we needed to rein in the insurance companies on this issue. We have agreed to come this far. Why do we need to jeopardize something that has already been agreed on because we want to put in this medical savings account? We have agreed on all this. Now what do they want? The Republicans in the House want to add this medical savings account. Guess who supports this? Insurance companies. Guess why? Because, again, it allows them to only insure healthy people and block out health insurance for sick people that is going to cost them money. Just think about who is behind this, and I think you will be able to understand why you do not need any empirical evidence to know why medical savings accounts are going to be the killer of health care reform.

Mr. KENNEDY of Rhode Island

Mr. KENNEDY of Rhode Island. Mr. Speaker, today is celebrated throughout the world as the Dia de Portugal. Every year on June 10, people of Portuguese descent around the world honor their heritage on Dia de Portugal (``Day of Portugal''). This is a time for all friends of Portugal to pause and consider the many achievements of that great nation over the centuries and to celebrate the cultural traditions, practices, and customs of Portugal. June 10 is the date of birth of Portugal's greatest poet, Luis de Camoens, who lived from 1524 to 1580. He is the author of the Portuguese national epic, ``The Lusiads,'' published in 1572. In this grand poem, Camoens did for the Portuguese language what Chaucer did for English and what Dante did for Italian. As well, he gave eloquent expression to the deepest and highest aspirations of the Portuguese people. Millions of Americans are proud of their Portuguese heritage, and millions more are enriched by living in neighborhoods and communities which are defined by the dynamic presence of Portuguese-Americans. My State of Rhode Island has one of the largest Portuguese-American populations in our country. The ties between Rhode Island and Portugal go back to the very origins of our State, and the contributions made by the Portuguese can be seen every day. Portuguese explorers dared to cross the oceans in search of new frontiers, and thanks to that courage, our Nation is enriched by traditions brought by the sons and daughters of Portugal. Whether it was from Dighton Rock in 1502, the Touro Synagogue in 1658, or by whaling ships in the 1830's, the Portuguese undoubtedly were among the very first immigrants to settle on our shores. Unfortunately, anti-immigrant fervor brought Portuguese immigration down to a trickle after 1921. But there was an exception made in 1958, when President Eisenhower signed legislation introduced by then-Senator John F. Kennedy that allowed families affected by the volcanic eruption in the Azores to come to America. In 1965, President Johnson fulfilled President Kennedy's dream and signed legislation lifting the discriminatory Quota Act. Once again, New England could open its arms to the Portuguese. Lifting the quota allowed many families to reunite, and bring together many generations. At a time when the family is under great strain, and too often breaking under that strain, the example of family unity set by the Portuguese is a profound lesson for all of us. Everywhere Rhode Islanders turn, the Portuguese presence is seen. It is seen in the dozens of social clubs throughout our State. It is felt in the excitement of the Feshta and the dignity of the religious procession. It is represented here today by community leaders who are from all walks of life. This contribution is felt in many other States and hundreds of communities across this Nation. Portugal is a close and valued ally. Trade between our two nations is active and will surely grow. The recently completed Agreement on Cooperation and Defense provides for continued access to the Lajes Air Base in the Azores, as well as cooperation in nonmilitary matters. This base was critical to supporting our troops in Operation Desert Storm and Operation Restore Hope in Somalia. Portugal's economy is making tremendous progress, and soon the world will see the growth that has taken place in recent years. In 1998, Portugal will host the World Expo. The topic for Expo 1998 is: ``The Oceans: A Heritage for Our Future.'' Expo 1998 will provide an ideal opportunity for Portugal to showcase its thriving industry while at the same time celebrating its uniquely rich heritage in ocean exploration. I am pleased that the United States will be participating in this event, and I congratulate the House for having earlier voted in favor of this participation. Today is a day for us to celebrate the contributions made to the United States by the Portuguese community. It is a time for us to celebrate the ties between the United States and Portugal. This is a relationship with a great history, and promising future.

Mr. KENNEDY of Rhode Island

Mr. KENNEDY of Rhode Island. Mr. Speaker, I am asking my colleagues today to pause and honor the dedicated service given by the men and women in the Armed Forces. We all know that this is a dangerous and demanding task. In times of peace it is often easy, too easy, to lose sight of these facts. For my constituents the cold reality of these truths was recently brought home when Lt. Col. Allen Oliver, a native of Bristol, RI, was killed in a helicopter crash in Columbus, GA on March 1, 1996. Colonel Oliver was a second generation Marine. He learned the call of duty and honor of service from his father, Edward Oliver, a distinguished veteran of World War II. Lieutenant Colonel Oliver was an intelligent, hard working, man who could have pursued any career path he wanted. He chose to serve his nation. Allen Oliver grew up in Bristol, RI, a small town where everyone is a neighbor. Allen was respected and liked by all who knew him. Whether it was helping to shovel the sidewalk of a friend in need, serving as an alter boy, or delivering papers, Allen Oliver was there. The outlines of his adult career were taking shape in those early activities. As he grew older, Allen knew the path he wanted to take and sought admission to the service academies. While he did not get in, he continued to pursue a career in the military by enrolling in the ROTC at the University of Salt Lake, UT. He graduated with a 4.0 average and joined the Marines as a second lieutenant. The next stop for Allen was the Marine Corps flight school in Pensacola, FL from which he graduated in 1977 as a first lieutenant. Service in the corps took Allen Oliver all over the Nation where he touched many lives. After the tragic news of Colonel Oliver's death was made public, his father was warmed by the outpouring of calls from people all across America who had known his son. This is Lieutenant Colonel Oliver's legacy. The loss of life, especially of one so young and vital, is never easy. Words do little to capture the spirit of the person or express the depth of our loss. But I know that we can all learn something from the life and service of Lieutenant Colonel Oliver. Our thoughts are with the Oliver family at this difficult time. The loss they have sustained can never be measured, but I hope they can draw comfort from the fact the many fine memories of time spent with Allen. I hope my colleagues will reflect upon the life of this man and draw strength and inspiration from the example set by Lieutenant Colonel Oliver. This is the most fitting tribute we can pay to him and to his family.

Mr. KENNEDY of Rhode Island

Mr. KENNEDY of Rhode Island. Madam Speaker, the American Indian nations, to a nation, are opposed to this bill in its current form if we do not support the Young-Miller amendment to strike section 3. To a nation. This, to me, represents a shameful day if this Congress continues the shameful pattern of ignoring and stepping on the rights of native Americans in this country. Madam Speaker, there is a reason why this bill did not come in the current form that it is in from committee, because the Committee on Resources, who has jurisdiction over this issue, decided that we need to make sure that we consult with native American nations on what is their sovereign issue when it comes to this issue. Ladies and gentlemen of the House, please support the Young-Miller amendment.

Mr. KENNEDY of Rhode Island

Mr. KENNEDY of Rhode Island. Mr. Speaker, one of the most profound calls to action ever written emerged from the Holocaust. Martin Niemuller expressed so well the guilty anguish of silence: First they came for the Socialists, and I did not speak out because I was not a socialist. Then they came for the trade unionists, and I did not speak out because I was not a trade unionist. Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak because I was not a Jew. Then they came for me and there was no one left to speak for me. This quote is telling because it can be said as much for the Armenian genocide as the Jewish Holocaust. In fact, it has not been lost on historians of this century that the failure to recognize the Armenian genocide for what it was made it easier, not harder, for evil men like Hitler to believe they could do the same. Today we in Congress are solemnly observing the tragedy of the Armenian genocide. By observing this event we honor the bravery and courage of those who survived and we honor the memory of those who perished. By observing this event we take a small step toward ensuring that such horrors will never occur again. I am honored today to rise on behalf of Rhode Island's Armenian community--a vital and dynamic group that has made an incalculable contribution to the life of my State. During my years in the Rhode Island General Assembly I joined my colleagues in consistently passing resolutions commemorating the Armenian genocide. Additionally, we passed a resolution that condemned the removal of a photograph from the Ellis Island Museum which depicted horrors visited upon Armenians. Rhode Island was the first State in the Nation to issue such a resolution. We can not erase the past by hiding it. We can not make today better by ignoring yesterday. While history may not be pleasant, it is grossly irresponsible to refuse to face the past and all the truths it contains. This photo was restored and visitors were allowed to see the past and learn from history. As has often been remarked, those who forget the past are condemned to repeat it. Because of that ever-present risk we must all work to always remember and never forget the genocide, to cherish and preserve the Armenian culture, and to continue to fight for human rights and peace in this region. Not until all Armenians are safe and secure, protected from harm and threat, will our work be done. Not until that day will our cause be won. Not until that day can we rest.

Mr. KENNEDY of Rhode Island

Mr. KENNEDY of Rhode Island. Mr. Speaker, I rise today with the proud honor of announcing that Amy Cournoyer of the First District in Rhode Island is our State's winner for the Voice of Democracy broadcast scriptwriting contest. This past year, more than 116,000 secondary school students participated in the contest competing for 54 national scholarships. The contest theme this year was ``Answering America's Call''. In Amy's script she discusses that the time has come for a new generation of leadership to cope with new problems and new opportunities. She explains how the elders are called on to pass on the wisdom that they have gained through experience to youth so that they will attain greater knowledge. This sharing of ideas between adults and adolescents brings about the virtue of understanding. In sum, if we want to truly answer America's call and create a better country, we must better ourselves. Mr. Speaker, I extend to Ms. Cournoyer my heartfelt congratulations and ask that Ms. Cournoyer's winning script be inserted into the Congressional Record. Finally, I also want to thank Amy for helping us to recognize today's youth and all that they have to offer to our country and its future. ``Answering America's Call'' 1995-96 vfw voice of democracy scholarship program, rhode island winner: amy cournoyer, post 2274, ashton, rhode island America is not simply ``calling'' each one of us. It is yearning, urging, and persistently imploring. Its concerns echo in the halls of schools across the country. After all, youth is the essence of this country, for it is the collaboration of new ideas that have maintained America's longevity. If I may borrow a quote from John F. Kennedy, ``It is time for a new generation of leadership, to scope with new problems and new opportunities. For there is a new world to be won.'' Retracting America's history, it is evident that the very passion and integrity of youth and rebirth of ideas have had a positive impact on society. After all, the very foundation of our country is the Constitution which was created by people with this undying thirst for reform. Events such as the Boston Tea Party, the Civil Rights Movement, Space Exploration, and other advances in technology were all made possible thanks to youthful minds. So, as a contemporary society we must have the wisdom to heed that very call. The call for youth of all ages to express themselves. The elders are called to pass on the wisdom that they have gained through experience to the youth so that they will attain greater knowledge. Moreover, this sharing of ideas between adults and adolescents brings about the third and most important virtue, understanding. For it is through understanding one another that things can be accomplished. America is a tune. It must be sung together. Arguing with or belittling others are only obstructions in our quest for knowledge, wisdom, and understanding. America is calling each person, young and old, black and white, Catholic or Jewish, to break away from their old, cemented ways, and return to the simple, innocent, and unbigoted ways of youth. I am not advocating a break in tradition, nor am I depicting a society of fools. I am simply suggesting that if we sing our tune in harmony, combining our individual talents to create a beautiful melody, then we are truly answering each others' call, which is indeed America's call--a microcosm of the macrocosm. We all contribute to the future of the world. Understanding is a building block for nonviolence. Martin Luther King professed that ``Nonviolence is the answer to the crucial political and moral questions of our time, the need for man to overcome oppression and violence without resorting to oppression and violence.'' Man must evolve for all human conflict a method which rejects aggression and retaliation. The foundation of such a method is love. ``So do not ask for whom the bell tolls; it tolls for thee.'' Everyone talks about a better world, a better place. But, actions speak much louder than words. In order to truly answer America's call we must begin with ourselves. Then we will radiate like sunbeams on the community. Adults, listen to the call of the youth, they have a lot to give. And youth, listen to your elders, they have much wisdom to offer also. In conclusion, I am yearning, urging, and persistently imploring that we heed each other's call. Whether it be doing volunteer work, becoming a politician and working for the betterment of our democratic system, becoming a research scientist and working for a cure for such deadly diseases as cancer and AIDS, or simply giving a friendly smile and treating each other with dignity and respect. Everything is a microcosm of the macrocosm. So if we want to truly answer America's call and create a better country, we must better ourselves. Then, and only then, are we truly answering America's call.

Mr. KENNEDY of Rhode Island

Mr. KENNEDY of Rhode Island. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to this bill. I do so with deep regret because I would have hoped that this Congress could do something meaningful to respond to the dangerous threat of terrorism. Americans need to be safe here and abroad, and if we are to fight this new threat to our security, we need new tools in the battle. But when it comes to the fight against terrorism, this bill does too little. Sadly this legislation does not confine itself to the fight against terrorism, and it is here where the bill goes too far. Sacrificing our Constitution and the integrity of our judicial system is too high a price to pay for an antiterrorism bill that, sadly, does not do enough. The right of every American to a fair hearing in court will be severely undermined by this legislation. No punishment should be dispensed in a manner that violates an individual's right to a fair hearing. This bill jeopardizes that right, not just for those on death row, but also for those who face other punishments. This bill increases the risk that innocent persons would be held in prison in violation of the Constitution--and possibly even executed-- because the bill imposes unreasonably short time limits for filing a claim of habeas corpus relief, limits almost all petitioners to only one round of Federal review, and requires petitioners to meet clear and convincing burden of proof standard in order to get relief. This is not right and I will not support such a move. The bill leaves out provisions which would have: added terrorism crimes to the list of those for which wiretaps can be approved, included terrorism crimes under RICO statutes, and have permitted our law enforcement agencies to draw upon the expertise to address the threat of chemical or biological weapons of mass destruction. When we need to give law enforcement officials new powers to investigate these new threats, we fail to produce. As well, this bill caves in to the demands of the gun lobby when it comes to confronting the threat posed by cop killer bullets. I have joined many of my colleagues in calling for a ban on these bullets which have only one purpose--piercing body armor. We could not achieve this victory this year, but hoped that a study of this ammunition would alert the public to the need for action. But now even this study has been disarmed. Rather than study the bullets that can pierce armor and kill law enforcement officers, this bill dances around the subject to the tune called by the NRA. We face a serious threat from terrorism. We need to respond in a meaningful and comprehensive way. Unfortunately this bill is not up to the task at hand. It makes too many compromises on the fundamental issues and threatens the rights of all Americans to a fair hearing in our judicial system. This is not the way to fight terrorism and that is why I will vote against the measure before us.

Mr. KENNEDY of Rhode Island. Mr. Speaker, the notion that the gentleman from Georgia [Mr. Barr], as he was saying, represented the interests of law enforcement here in this bill, that they were adequately represented when it was his amendment and his work that has allowed for a study of cop killer bullets to me is utter hypocrisy. That is all.

Mr. KENNEDY of Rhode Island

Mr. KENNEDY of Rhode Island. Mr. Speaker, I am proud to join my colleagues in celebrating the efforts of communities across the country in fighting teen pregnancy. At a time when we are constantly bombarded with dismal statistics on teenage births, it is particularly important to recognize those individuals who have stopped talking about teen pregnancy prevention and have committed to action. The Latino Peer Council in my State of Rhode Island is a shining example of this commitment to action. Together, these young men and women are reaching out to the students who will follow in their footsteps in striving for better, brighter futures. The Latino Peer Council was initiated in the summer of 1994 as the State was facing the highest teen birthrate in the Northeast. With teenage pregnancies particularly prevalent within the Latino- and African-American communities in Rhode Island, the Latino Council was developed to focus upon the specific needs of Hispanic families. The council is comprised of eight high school students who are trained by community educators to inform and educate their peers, teachers, and parents on teenage pregnancy, sexually transmitted diseases, AIDS, safe sex, birth control, relationships and abstinence. Using humorous skits and lively discussions, the peer educators have effectively touched their fellow youths in the community. Through their leadership, they set an example not only to Latino teenagers but all young adults from every ethnic and racial background. At the same time, these students are cultivating leadership skills that will carry them throughout school, their careers and their lives. The Peer Educators build their confidence and develop a strong sense of self while engaging in public speaking and community education. The Latino Peer Council is effective because of its innovative approach to tackling unplanned pregnancy. Shunning antique methods of teaching sexual health and awareness, the council presents teens as competent, responsible, intelligent leaders that share similar experiences with those whom they are educating. Teens are communicating with other teens about the issues and concerns that they face growing up in today's world. In this Congress we have heard a lot about ``personal responsibility.'' I am proud to recognize today a group of teenagers talking, educating and taking responsibility not only for themselves, but for an entire generation. Efforts like those of the peer educators are essential to building bridges between youngsters and adults that will ensure that the next generation is successful both personally and professionally. Keeping the lines of communication open between teens and adults is crucial to effective pregnancy prevention and family planning. If adults and teens can share, communicate and most importantly, understand one another, half of the battle has been won. I am proud of the Latino Peer Council for rising to the occasion. I urge other communities to start listening to their young people and working with them to put an end to teen pregnancy. I would also like to salute the teen pregnancy prevention initiatives of Thundermist Health Clinic in Woonsocket, RI. Services like the Health Hut that provides family planning services to pre-teens at Woonsocket Middle School to the Mentoring Program that coaches and guides young mothers not to repeat their mistakes, are strengthening families and the greater community. I want to thank the gentlewoman from North Carolina for highlighting this important issue and for providing us the opportunity to focus on the strengths of our youngsters--an area that receives too little attention.

Mr. KENNEDY of Rhode Island

Mr. KENNEDY of Rhode Island. Mr. Speaker, I want to commend the chairman for writing this resolution, along with the gentleman from California [Mr. Lantos], and the only Holocaust survivor in this Congress, for yielding me this time. Mr. Speaker, as Congressman Lantos said, who would have thought it necessary to affirm that the Holocaust has happened? Who would have thought it was necessary to affirm what was the worst crime against humanity the world has ever seen? Tragically, it is necessary. As we all know, the historical record of the Holocaust faces challenges on many fronts. These must be fought in every instance. Revisionism and denial threaten more than just the understanding of an unfathomable event. They threaten the future as well, for the energy which animates the Holocaust denier and the revisionist is the same hatred which propelled the Holocaust into being in the first place. Today, one of the most offensive challenges to the historical record of the Holocaust is set to take place in Croatia, where President Franjo Tudjman has announced plans to rebury the remains of the Croatian fascists, the Yastashi regime, that was in complicity with Hitler and the Nazis. He has announced a plan to rebury these SS officers, if you will, alongside the remains of the victims of the Holocaust in the death camp Yasenovech, which is also in Croatia. This proposal is a moral affront to those who suffered the Holocaust, and it sends a dangerous message. No, it sends a lie to future generations about what happened at the death camp Yasenovech. It muddles the history. Here, on what should be sacred ground, perpetrators of the Holocaust and victims of the Holocaust would now be lying side-by-side for an eternity. For those who endured a living hell, this is the ultimate injustice. President Tudjman and other Holocaust revisionists should not derive false comfort from a deliberate distortion of their past. His proposal, in the words of Dr. Walter Reich, head of the Holocaust Memorial Museum here in Washington, DC, is ``nothing more than an attempt to rewrite history with a shovel.'' This should not be allowed to happen. I know this House will speak out strongly on this issue, as will the Senate when it comes to the floor. I want to commend my colleagues, when it comes to this resolution, for including this proposal in today's Yom HASHOAH recognition. As well, I want to commend the Holocaust Museum for the support they have offered in this fight and for the invaluable education they provide to thousands who visit the Holocaust Memorial Museum in Washington, DC every day. The mission of this museum has never been more important, and it is something that everyone should visit if they have not visited already.

Mr. KENNEDY of Rhode Island

Mr. KENNEDY of Rhode Island. Mr. Speaker, I would like to take this opportunity to pause with my fellow colleagues to remember our friend Ron Brown. As many have already said, Ron Brown was an exceptional person with a deep love for his family, friends, and country. Today, I would like to honor his memory by celebrating some of his achievements as Secretary of Commerce. Our record in international trade will ultimately define the future prosperity of our Nation. The ability of our work force to meet the new challenges of the global economy and compete for high-skill high-wage jobs of tomorrow will be critical. No one understood these principles more than Ron Brown As Commerce Secretary, Ron Brown expanded our international role by reaching out to countries all over the globe, and by strengthening the foundations of our domestic economy. His work to improve our trade balance, increase overseas opportunities, and create domestic jobs helped to prepare the United States for the next century. In my State of Rhode Island he genuinely made a difference. Last summer, Secretary Brown visited with me in my office to discuss the many programs at Bryant College that focused on improving our State's economy by investing our resources in international business. We talked about Bryant's existing initiatives like the Rhode Island Export Assistance Center and their innovative International Trade Data Network [ITDN]. The purpose of ITDN was to help create and distribute practical information and data that will enable businesses to effectively and realistically target their export efforts to actual opportunities. For Rhode Island, the programs at Bryant were a way to reduce the effects of defense downsizing and struggling economy. Secretary Brown saw the impacts that international trade could have on local economies and later visited Rhode Island twice to see Bryant College and various other initiatives first hand. He took the time to investigate our latest ideas and offer the support of this Department. Truly, Ron Brown led by example. In the end, Ron Brown died as he lived: a dedicated patriot who selfessly give his all for friends and country. As a nation we are forced to continue without him, but his time with us all will be remembered as a time of progress, learning, and achievement.

Mr. KENNEDY of Rhode Island

Mr. KENNEDY of Rhode Island. Mr. Speaker, I would like to concur with my colleague from Massachusetts [Mr. Frank], in that this bill should not be on the Suspension Calendar as it relates to the inclusion of an enhancement for Indonesia for the same reasons my colleagues just spoke. Indonesia has proven itself to be someone with no respect and regard for the human rights of the East Timorese in the application of their Government in East Timor. They have systematically used their Government to oppose the East Timorese. They have terrorized, brutalized, they have killed demonstrators in broad daylight in front of international cameras. They will go to no end to show that they are not worthy of the recognition that this enhancement gives them. The whole idea of the enhancement is to say, ``Well, we will work with you.'' But understand, we will work to support democratic efforts. But if there are no democratic efforts being undertaken, it is a little presumptuous for us to think that simply by our recognition of East Timor through this enhanced IMET that we are going to replace what is not there. That is the problem with enhanced IMET. My former colleague, Congressman Ron Machtly, was successful in revoking IMET. It was a good thing that this Congress recognized it. Nothing has changed. Indonesia still oppresses these Timorese, and that is why this is not the time for us to be renewing IMET. That is why, Mr. Chairman, as the gentleman can obviously tell, there are people like myself, the gentlewoman from California [Ms. Pelosi], the gentlewoman from New York [Mrs. Lowey], and others, the gentleman from Massachusetts [Mr. Frank], who know this is not an issue where we should be debating it on a Suspension Calendar. We have no problem debating this as a bill on the floor itself, and that is the way it should come before us. Mr. Speaker, this bill contains provisions, as the gentleman from New York said, which we all support. I would be the first to commend the gentleman from New York [Mr. Gilman] for the inclusion of the hydrographic vessel that goes to Portugal. But that is the proper role for a suspension bill. The IMET is not. So while I support that endeavor that the gentleman has put into the bill, this I have to object to.