Carolyn Kilpatrick

Ms. KILPATRICK

Ms. KILPATRICK. Mr. Speaker, due to a death in my family, I was unable to record my vote on several measures. Had I been present, I would have voted ``aye'' on Roll Call Number 521; ``nay'' on Roll Call Number 522; ``nay'' on Roll Call Number 523; ``nay'' on Roll Call Number 530; and ``aye'' on Roll Call Number 531. I appreciate the kindness of the Speaker in approving my earlier leaves of absence

Ms. KILPATRICK

Ms. KILPATRICK. Mr. Speaker, due to a death in my family, I was unable to record my vote on several measures. Had I been present, I would have voted ``aye'' on rollcall No. 521; ``nay'' on rollcall No. 522; and ``nay'' on rollcall No. 523.

Ms. KILPATRICK

Ms. KILPATRICK. Mr. Speaker, due to a death in my family, I was unable to record my vote on several measures. Had I been present, I would have voted ``aye'' on final passage of H. Res. 494, Commending the Loyalty of the U.S. Citizens of Guam; ``aye'' on final passage of S. 1364, Federal Reports Elimination Act; ``aye'' on final passage of H.R. 4756, Ensuring that the U.S. is Prepared for the Year 2000 Computer Problem; and ``aye'' on final passage of S. 1754, Health Professions Education Partnerships Act. I appreciate being granted a leave of absence, and thank the Speaker for having my remarks appear at the appropriate place in the Congressional Record.

Ms. KILPATRICK

Ms. KILPATRICK. Mr. Speaker, I thank the ranking member for giving me this full 20 seconds to address the American people. It is unfair, it is unconstitutional, and it is unfortunate that we are here today. The highest office in this country, not protecting the Constitution, we ought to be ashamed of ourselves.

Mrs. KILPATRICK

Mrs. KILPATRICK. Mr. Speaker, today I rise to express my trepidation over the potentially ominous precedent that the impending impeachment proceeding may lay out for the annals of our nation's history. In expressing my concern, I cannot ignore the history which has placed this important resolution before this august body. My unease arises because it seems that after years of investigating White Watergate, Travelgate, Filegate and other events, the linchpin of the Independent Counsel's case are charges of perjury which emanate from a private lawsuit funded predominantly by the most conservative, political enemies of the President. While there is no question that the President's conduct was reprehensible, I take great pause in the facts which have compelled the leader of the free world before the American corpus and bared him virtually raw. I take great pause in what this means to the office of the President and, for that matter, any other leader in American society who chooses public policy contradictory to powerful opponents. While many here today speak to the ``rule of law'' they neglect another American ideal which frames the rule of law. A bulwark of the American psyche is our embrace of the principle of fairness. It is the spirit of fairness that gave birth to the bedrock principle of American jurisprudence that the punishment must be proportional to the offense. It is with these principles in mind, that I suggest to my dear colleagues, that as we vote today in the people's house, and as this process moves forward, we must use all due deliberation to ensure fairness, and that any punishment meted out fit closely with the President's transgressions. Now the nation and we here in Congress must turn our attention to whether or not to proceed with an impeachment inquiry. And more importantly, we must focus on how we should proceed with an impeachment inquiry. In reviewing the proposals before Congress today, I state my support for the Democratic Amendment. The Democratic Amendment is focused, fair, expeditious and deliberate. By requiring the consideration of a constitutional standard for impeachment, and a fair comparison of the allegations in the context of the well deliberated standard, the Democratic Amendment will allow the Congress to resolve this terrible blight on our nation's history expeditiously and decisively. The Democratic Amendment sets forth clear goals both for the scope and length of this investigation so as to prevent the further agony of dragging the country through a long and intrusive fishing expedition. It is my fervent belief that the inappropriate actions of President Clinton do not rise to the standard of high crimes, treason, bribery or misdemeanors envisioned by the Framers of the Constitution. It is my sworn duty to protect the Presidency, and not the President. As such, it is my conclusion and the conclusion of most reasonable American citizens, that the last two elections must not be usurped by Congress. I cannot support a broad-based, infinite inquiry on the alleged actions of the President. In summation, I will not support the further abuse of taxpayer dollars. I will not support a potentially unending fishing expedition based on facts that are no longer under dispute. I will not support this blatant pillage of the rights of all Americans. I will not support the Republican resolution to begin an impeachment inquiry upon our President. It is time for Members of Congress to stand up and protect our Constitution and reject this onerous precedent.

Ms. KILPATRICK

Ms. KILPATRICK. Mr. Speaker, today I rise in support of the most successful program this country has ever seen: our Social Security fund. Started in 1934 by President Franklin Delano Roosevelt, this has become the most successful program. It now stands to be threatened. Over all these many years, the Social Security Trust Fund has had a surplus that has been used by our general fund to fund very vital services in our country. For the first time, September 30th, in a long time, in a decade, we will see a surplus in our budget. The Social Security Trust Fund is at risk. The surplus is really the surplus that is needed for the Social Security Trust Fund, to make sure that it is available into the 21st century. Let us save the surplus, which is the surplus that must be used to secure the Social Security fund. Save the Social Security Trust Fund, save the surplus. Hold it and make our future promising.

Ms. KILPATRICK

Ms. KILPATRICK. Mr. Speaker, due to personal business, I was unable to record my vote on several measures. Had I been present, I would have voted ``aye'' on S. 2206, the Community Opportunities, Accountability, Training and Educational Services Act of 1998; ``aye'' on H. Con. Res. 304, Regarding the Culpability of Slobodan Milosevic for War Crimes; ``aye'' on H. Con. Res. 254, Calling on the Government of Cuba to Extradite Several Convicted Felons; and ``aye'' on H. Con. Res. 185, Expressing the Sense of the Congress on the Occasion of the 50th Anniversary of the Signing of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

Ms. KILPATRICK

Ms. KILPATRICK. Mr. Speaker, twenty months ago, Members of the 105th Congress took our collective oaths of office. In that oath, we have sworn to uphold and defend the Constitution of the United States. As such, it is not our option, but our obligation to the American people to deliberate the issues and information that are presented before us in hearings, Committee mark-ups, or during floor debate, and weigh them in an unbiased and clear fashion before voting on the issue of the day. Our votes on items both mundane and vital must come in a context of what is best for our respective constituencies and our nation. Today, Congress voted to release the Referral from the Office of the Independent Counsel. Like my colleagues, I soberly await its arrival to my office. I promise my constituents, the residents of the great State of Michigan, and the citizens of our country, that I will read, analyze, and review this report, like all of the bills and reports that come before me, with great care. While it would be sheer folly of me to arrive at any conclusion before I have had the opportunity to review the record from the Independent Counsel and its rebuttal by the Executive Branch, I would like to use this opportunity to make one thing clear: our Constitution demands that we provide a fair and non- partisan venue for the consideration of impeachment. Regrettably, the resolution that was voted on today did not provide that consideration. It is my sincere hope, wish and desire that from this point onward, Congress acts in a way in which the founding fathers not just desired, but decreed. Our President has made a mistake; he has admitted as much himself. Our President has apologized to our country; the Congress, his family, and the other affected individuals and groups in this sad matter; he reiterated that just this morning. In the maelstrom of events of the past few days, it is sometimes difficult to remember or recall exactly what the President has done for our country. For example: Our President has boosted the economy of our nation. During President Clinton's term in office, more jobs have been created, unemployment has hit all-time lows, the stock market has spiraled to unprecedented highs, and the budget has been balanced. In Detroit, President Clinton was key in ensuring the establishment of the Empowerment Zone, and in sending millions of federal funds that will provide for decent housing for senior citizens, better roads and safer bridges to drive on, and improved access to health care for all. Our President has helped to make our streets safer. Under President Clinton, the City of Detroit has received a significant increase in police officers patrolling the beat and dedicated to community-based policing. Under President Clinton, the Brady Law has kept handguns out of over 20,000 potential felons. Under President Clinton, the stronger assault weapons ban has saved innumerable lives and made the City of Detroit and our nation a safer place to live. Our President has begun to provide investment in Africa. President Clinton was the first President in a generation to visit the land of all of our birth, Africa. He stood in the dome of the site where perhaps my ancestors were taken in chains to the United States. President Clinton has fostered and used the strength of his office to ensure that Congress and private industry include Africa on its list of international development and investment. In closing, let me repeat that I do not condone the actions to which the President has admitted. While we all strive for perfection and purity, there is not a single soul who is perfect, clean or untarnished. The President has apologized for the errors of his ways. While I understand that impeachment is second only to declaring war in Constitutional importance, Congress still has work to do. We have not solved the problem of those senior citizens, unemployed persons or the poor who go to the hospital and cannot afford health insurance. We have not solved the problem of those persons who have mental illness and wander our nation's streets. We have not solved the problem of our crumbling and deteriorating elementary, secondary and high schools. We have not solved the problem of our frayed social safety net. It is important that Congress seriously weigh and analyze this referral, but not neglect the people's business. We have tough decisions to make; the consideration of this referral should not, and must not, push the concerns of our senior citizens, working families, and the poor aside.

Ms. KILPATRICK

Ms. KILPATRICK. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to preserve the sanctity of this institution, to preserve the sanctity of the Constitution, and for the rights of all American people, yes, including the President of the United States. The resolution before us is unfair. Unfortunately, we give time for all criminals, and the President is not a criminal, has not been convicted, he has committed his error and I do not condone it. He was wrong. It is for this body, those 435 of us elected by the people of these United States, to determine whether we shall preserve the Constitution and the rights of all of its people. It has been mentioned that we are now sitting as a grand jury, and, as my friend from Maryland said, no grand jury would leak any information publicly on any case, and we know that as we have watched our government work, and it has been a good government. Why do we now sacrifice our government, when our President of these United States, elected by his people, who has done a good job for its people, and not allow him to view the report, as we release the report on the Internet? The rule does not allow that he, the President of these United States, would see that report. And I beg to differ with the Chair of the Committee on Rules, the White House has not seen this report. They have asked us to give them the opportunity, merely 24 hours, 48 hours, that they can see it, and, yes, release it to all the American people. Mr. Speaker, I think it is a shame. We have done it before. We, the Members of this Congress, have ten days if we are charged before the public is released or the chamber is released the findings. I think it is despicable. We must not relegate our responsibility and our duty. Let us preserve the Constitution. Let us vote down this rule.

Ms. KILPATRICK

Ms. KILPATRICK. Madam Chairman, due to official business in the 15th Congressional District of Michigan, I was unable to record my vote on several measures. Had I been present, I would have voted ``aye'' on H.R. 3743, the Iran Nuclear Proliferation Prevention Act of 1998; ``aye'' on S.J. Res. 54, a Joint Resolution Condemning Iraq; and ``aye'' on passage of the Shays-Meehan amendment to H.R. 2183, the Campaign Finance Reform Bill.

Ms. KILPATRICK

Ms. KILPATRICK. Mr. Speaker, today I rise to pay honor and tribute to Dr. Clarence S. Livingood. He was a prominent physician who began in the Dermatology Department at Henry Ford Hospital; a physician to the Detroit Tigers and, Mr. Speaker, father to our Sergeant at Arms, Wilson Livingood. Dr. Livingood was a man before his time. He wrote the manual for the U.S. Army. He led in the dermatology life and history as it materialized and grew in our country. Dr. Livingood was a man of honor. He was a leader and a worker and a righteous man as he led and was a department director at Henry Ford Hospital. Dr. Livingood leaves a wonderful family, our dear Sergeant at Arms. We should also honor Dr. Wilson Livingood as he lost his father just recently in the last few days and stood here with us as we went through our terrible tragedy, as he lost his colleagues and our protectors in these last few days. Dr. Clarence Livingood will be remembered for his hard work, his dedication and his service to the people of America. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to a special person, physician, and constituent, Dr. Clarence S. Livingood. Dr. Livingood passed away on July 27, 1998 after a battle with leukemia at his home in Gross Pointe, Michigan. Dr. Livingood was one of the most distinguished and respected physicians in our country, and set standards for training and care for patients who need care in the area of dermatology. The largest organ of the human body is the skin; Dr. Livingood helped to ensure the accurate diagnosis, treatment and cure of many of the afflictions of our body's first line of defense. Dr. Livingood was born in Elverson, Pennsylvania, and graduated from Ursinus College in 1932. He began his career in medicine at the University of Pennsylvania's School of Medicine, completing his residency in dermatology at the Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania. Dr. Livingood later served his country in the U.S. Army as part of the Army's Medical Corps, where he co-wrote the Manual of Dermatology. This book is still used by both military and civilian physicians as a guide for the diagnosis and treatment of skin diseases. Dr. Livingood was widely honored for his skill as a dermatologist. He was elected as Director of the American Board of Dermatology in 1962 and served as the Executive Director of the American Board of Dermatology for more than 20 years. He was Chair and Professor of the Department of Dermatology at Jefferson Medical College Hospital from 1948-1949, Chairman and Professor of the Department of Dermatology at the University of Texas in Galveston from 1949-1953, and established the Department of Dermatology at Henry Ford Hospital in Detroit, Michigan in 1953, serving as its Chairman until 1976, when he became Chairman Emeritus. Some of the many honors bestowed upon Dr. Livingood include being the only dermatologist to receive the highest honor from the American Medical Association--``The Distinguished Service Award,'' and also received the Gold Medal from the American Academy of Dermatology. He also received World Series rings for serving as the doctor to the Detroit Tigers. Predeceased by his wife, Louise, Dr. Livingood is survived by his five children, Bill (Mari Louise); Louise (William) Furbush, Susan Elizabeth (John) Cotton; Clarence (Nancy); and eleven grand children and two great grand children. I would be remiss if I did not mention that Dr. Livingood is the father to the Sergeant at Arms of the House of Representatives, Bill Livingood, who continued his excellent service to the protection of Members of Congress, dignitaries and visitors to the People's House despite the tragedy that befell two of his colleagues on July 24, 1998. Funeral services will be held in Christ Episcopal Church in Grosse Point on Saturday, August 1, 1998. The Livingood Family asks that in lieu of flowers, contributions may be made to the Edward A. Krull Chair of Dermatologic Surgery, Office of Philanthropy, One Ford Place, Detroit, Michigan. My personal prayers for peace and love go to the Livingood family. Your father served the people of the 15th Congressional District, the State of Michigan, and our country well. May he rest in peace. Amen.

Ms. KILPATRICK

Ms. KILPATRICK. Mr. Speaker, on Friday, July 24, 1998, a Congress, a City, a Nation was shaken to its very foundation. The people's house, the U.S. Capitol Building, was violated when two of Capitol Hill's finest were killed in the line of duty: Officer Jacob J. Chestnut and Special Agent John Gibson. The ultimate and supreme sacrifices of these officers prevented the deaths of untold other constituents, citizens, and colleagues. Not only do we owe the memory of these men and their families our thanks, but we owe them our eternal gratitude. We must ensure that their memory will live on forever. As a Member of the House Oversight committee, my colleagues and I have the duty to ensure that Congress remain accessible to all, and safe to ensure the democratic and timely debate of issues of the day. In our Committee rooms and offices, sometimes it is easy to forget the very difficult duty and burden that we place on the police officers of Capitol Hill everyday. Indeed, it is up to the officers of the Capitol Hill Police Department to carry out the orders and directions of the House Oversight Committee. These officers must allow our citizens to exercise their First Amendment right to freedom of speech, while ensuring that no ill will or harm befalls any individual person. The Capitol Hill Police Department has been doing a very difficult task extremely well for over 150 years. As a matter of fact, it is very easy to take for granted the safety and security of our Capitol, as many of my colleagues and I do everyday. As a result of the recent horror and tragedy, it is important that we remember that the U.S. Capitol belongs to all who love democracy, freedom and justice. I am sure that the House Oversight Committee will begin in all due haste to review the security and safety of the U.S. Capitol and its environs, keeping in mind the openness and freedom that separates the United States of America from all other nations in the world. Let us keep the families of Officer Chestnut and Special Agent Gibson in our prayers. While I did not know Officer Chestnut and Special Agent Gibson personally, I do know of the fine work of many, many other of the other officers of the U.S. Capitol Police. The Bible says that no woman or man has a greater love than to lay down her or his life for their friends. The Bible also orders us to love our neighbor as ourselves. In the wake of this senseless loss, it is my desire and hope that all of us, Members of Congress and citizens alike, learn to care for our fellow human beings in the manner in which Officer Chestnut and Special Agent Gibson loved not only their jobs, but their families, their fellow officers, and their country. My prayers, as well as the prayers of the 15th Congressional District of Michigan, are with the families of these two fine men. You have made a difference in Congress: May they rest in peace.

Ms. KILPATRICK

Ms. KILPATRICK. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong, unequivocal and clear support of H.R. 3605, the Democratic Patient Protection Act, and oppose H.R. 4250, the Republican Politician Protection Act. The Republican Politician Protection Act provides too few patient protections, undermines existing state consumer protections, has not had a single hearing or mark-up, and contains unnecessary and irrelevant provisions. It is time that we, the Congress, stopped playing games with the health care of our constituents and get down to the real business of providing both doctors and patients with the protections that they need and deserve. I recently had a meeting with the Michigan State Medical Society, an organization made up of doctors in the State of Michigan, and they wholeheartedly endorse the Democratic Patient Protection Act, among more than 50 consumer protection, labor union, and health care organizations. Let me take a minute to explain to you three key differences between the Democratic Patient Protection Act and the Republican Politician Protection Act: The Republican Politician Protection Act allows medical insurance companies to give your confidential medical records to another agency-- another insurance company, mortgage company, credit bureau, pharmacy, or health care bureaucrat--without your consent. This means that anyone--a person applying for a mortgage, someone looking to peer through your medical history before you start a job, a person looking for negative health information against a potential candidate for Congress--could have access to your medical records. The Democratic Patient Protection Act protects the confidentiality of your medical records. No one would be allowed to review or transfer your records without your express and written consent. The Politician Protection Act usurps and supersedes state consumer protections. Mr. Speaker, before I was elected to this august body, I served for 18 years as a state legislator in the great State of Michigan. I abhorred and detested those rules, laws and regulations that superseded our rules, laws and regulations that were democratically arrived at and after many hearings, debate, and votes. Ostensibly, the Republican Party is one of respecting the rights of states to make the best decisions for themselves--or has posited themselves as such. The Republican Politician Protection Act would not allow states to decide for themselves the best consumer protections for their citizens. The Democratic Patient Protection Act does not usurp state law. The Republican Politician Protection Act does not allow patients to sue their health insurance plans for wrongdoing. The Republican Politician protection act allows persons to sue for fiduciary damages, but not for pain and suffering or punitive damages. What does this mean? Well, it means that if your doctor in a managed care plan recommends that you have an additional mammogram, but the plan refuses to pay for it and the patient dies as a result, the family could sue for the cost of the mammogram. The Democratic Patient Protection Act will ensure that patients can sue for compensatory and punitive damages, and let a jury--the same juries who register to vote and send us to Congress-- decide the merits of these issues. Adoption of the Democratic Patient Protection Act would be only a first step toward solving our health care crisis. We still need to address the more than 4 million families, women, children and adults over the past decade who do not have any health insurance. Guess who is footing the bill when these uninsured women, children and adults show up at the hospitals of our nation? That's right, you and I. Access to quality health care, before catastrophic diseases attack, has been proven to prolong the length and quality of life of Americans. The challenge of serving those persons who do not have access to health care is one of the many unfinished tasks facing us as a Congress and as a nation as we consider the reform of our health care system. If you think that you don't know someone who is medically underserved, think again. The usual person who is defined as ``medically underserved'' is poor, elderly, has no health care, and does not have access to primary care physicians. In our land of plenty, over 43 million people are medically underserved, and only 24 percent of those persons are served through community health centers. What happens to more than three quarters of these people who do not have access to health care is simply this: immunizations are not given, and babies fall ill to preventable diseases; elderly citizens do not get their high blood pressure or diabetes cared for, and end up in the hospital, or women do not get a life-saving mammogram. Not having any health care, in our land of plenty, is almost criminal. Taxpayers want, and need, long-range solutions to the challenge of access to affordable, quality health care. Taxpayers deserve an investment of resources and commitment to the goal of health care for all. It is the job and duty of Congress to address this issue now. The doors of health care must remain open to protect the public health, prevent disease, improve our quality of life and save scarce taxpayer dollars. Congress can, and must, improve access to health care for all. The Democratic Patient Protection Act is a strong, aggressive step toward the much needed reform of our health insurance system, but it is only a first step. I urge all of my colleagues to reject the Republican Politician Protection Act and vote for the Democratic Patient Protection Act.

Ms. KILPATRICK

Ms. KILPATRICK. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman from California (Mr. Lewis) for allowing us to pay homage to our colleague. It is important that I come on the floor today, Mr. Stokes, to say to you, when I think of Lou Stokes, I think of bravery, of selflessness, of honesty, of character, of fight. A distinguished gentleman, a legislator extraordinaire and a man of principle and strength. It is important, Lou, that as you have heard and sat through this hour and a half that you know as you leave here, though you physically will leave here, what you have taught each of us in your integrity and strength will live. As someone said before me, this body will be a better body because Lou Stokes put 30 years here. I watched you as I served in the Michigan legislature for 18 years. You certainly for me provided the insight and the intelligence that I needed to be a strong legislator, to speak up and to speak out, and to really represent those who sent us here. Mr. Chairman, I want you to know as I know your son Chuck and as he serves in our Detroit community, both he and Trudy, that we see Lou Stokes in them, that in them and as we grow our children, all that we would want is that they too represent the intelligent and serve their God. Mr. Stokes, I am here to tell you that your son in Detroit does just that. And that as you leave this body, Mr. Stokes, health care, our veterans, our housing and those things that you fought for for nearly 30 years, we will continue the battle. So go on, Mr. Chairman. Your wife deserves it, and certainly your grandchildren deserve it. And from the bottom of my heart, just know that as a new legislator to this body, I will carry the Lou Stokes spirit as I serve. God bless you.

Ms. KILPATRICK

Ms. KILPATRICK. Mr. Speaker, due to events in the 15th Congressional District of Michigan, I was unavoidably detained for several House roll-call votes. Had I been present, I would have voted ``aye'' on final passage of H.R. 3874, the Child Nutrition and WIC Reauthorization Act; H. Con. Res. 208, Sense of the Congress Resolution Regarding Access to Affordable Housing; H. Res. 392, Relating to the Importance of Japanese American Relations; and H. Con. Res. 301, Regarding the Commitment of the United States to Taiwan.

Ms. KILPATRICK

Ms. KILPATRICK. Mr. Chairman, I thank the ranking member for yielding to me, and I wish to say to him that we appreciate his leadership in the committee and we are going to miss him. What will we do with regard to public housing in this country; shelter for the poorest? It is unfortunate that this Congress is taking a step backwards. Not a single line in this amendment will provide funding for new housing for the poorest of Americans. There is not a single line in this legislation that will provide for demolition of unsafe housing in this legislation. What it will do, though, is to put more than 3 million people, the poorest of Americans, into the streets and into homelessness. Someone mentioned earlier, is it really working? Should we have a new program? Yes, we should have a new program. But what has happened with public housing is under the 12 years of a Republican Presidency in this country there was a disinvestment in public housing. And over the last 10 years in this country over 600 tons of drugs have come into America and, at the same time, our people have not been employed. Can we fix it? Yes, we can. Vote ``no'' on this amendment.

Ms. KILPATRICK

Ms. KILPATRICK. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this time. Mr. Speaker, I want to first commend the gentleman from California (Mr. Lewis), as well as our ranking member, the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Stokes), for the work they have done in a bipartisan effort on a very good VA-HUD bill that I had intended to vote for. It is unfortunate that the Committee on Rules now saw fit to put H.R. 2, our housing bill, into the HUD bill. I am a member of Committee on Banking and Financial Services, where H.R. 2 came out of. It is very controversial. The Senate passed it last year, as well as us, in the early part of the year. They have not been able to come to a conclusion, although they have been negotiating. It is a tough bill that should be debated on its own. The process that the Committee on Rules used to put H.R. 2, the housing bill, into VA-HUD is unfortunate. It is unfortunate because it circumvents the process. There has been a lot of work and effort put into the bill. It is a very important bill and has many things that need to be worked out. I urge my colleagues to oppose the rule. Let us support the chairman and our ranking member in their efforts. VA-HUD should go on its own merits. H.R. 2 should be debated. Let us oppose this rule.

Ms. KILPATRICK

Ms. KILPATRICK. Mr. Speaker, I am proud to be a Democrat. Today, Democrats in the House and the Senate will join the President and announce our Patient Protection Act. Health care is something that every American should have. Our bill and our plan, unlike the other side's, protects every American, and it protects the doctor-patient relationships that Americans want to have with their doctor. It says that the professional will determine the length of stay and the type of procedure, and not the insurance company or the accountant. Today is a glorious day for American citizens. The Democratic Health Protection Act. Watch us as we pass it through this Congress. We are serious. We know you need it, and we will be there for you.

Ms. KILPATRICK

Ms. KILPATRICK. Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to have my name removed as a cosponsor of H.R. 219.

Ms. KILPATRICK

Ms. KILPATRICK. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the requisite number of words. Mr. Chairman, I yield to the gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. Maloney).

Ms. KILPATRICK. If I could make just one point, Mr. Chairman, I am one of those who heard much of the testimony and am looking forward to the vote. It is unfortunate that we are making a mockery of the process. We have a vehicle before us. We hope that we will pass and vote on it soon.

Ms. KILPATRICK

Ms. KILPATRICK. Mr. Speaker, I thank my ranking member and distinguished chairperson of the Congressional Black Caucus for yielding me this time. Mr. Speaker, I want to add my support and congratulations for this Congress being keen enough to honor one of the finest gentlemen in our world today, Mr. Nelson Mandela, with a Congressional Gold Medal. As has been said already, he served over 30 years in one of the most horrible prisons in the world. He saw many of his fellow men and freedom fighters assassinated and die during that time. Nelson Mandela is certainly a role model for all of us to follow. Freedom, dignity and strength for all of us. I, too, worked on the sanctions bill in Michigan as we served in the Michigan legislature and am happy that the sanctions movement in this country made it possible not only for President Mandela to be free but to give all who suffer inhumanity a reason to live. Mr. Speaker, let us pass with pride and dignity the Congressional Gold Medal for President Nelson Mandela. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in reverence, honor, and true respect not only for this legislation, but for the ideals and goals of President Nelson Mandela. A Congressional Gold Medal is woefully inadequate for the faith in God, the dedication to freedom, and the willingness to work with his former oppressors for the good of the world that is manifest in the person of President Mandela. Every person who has ever dedicated her or his life to human rights needs to look no further than to President Mandela as a penultimate example of service to humankind. As we move toward a new millennium, it is stunning to remember that President Mandela spent most of the last 50 years in prison at Robben Island, underground evading the South African police, or was fighting the various injustice and oppression that was apartheid. Before President Mandela was sentenced to life in prison at Robben Island, his statement from the dock in the Rivonia Trial ends with these words: I have fought against white domination, and I have fought against black domination. I have cherished the ideal of a democratic and free society in which all persons live together in harmony and with equal opportunities. It is an ideal which I hope to live for and to achieve. But if needs be, it is an ideal for which I am prepared to die. For 27 years, President Mandela was at Robben Island Prison, a maximum security prison on a small island off the coast near Cape Town, South Africa; at Pollsmoor Prison in Cape Town and in December 1988 he was moved to the Victor Verster Prison near Paarl from where he was eventually released. President Mandela repeatedly and flatly rejected various offers made by his jailers for release upon his acceptance of second-class citizenship for him and his people. As President Mandela often said, ``prisoners cannot enter into contracts. Only free men can negotiate.'' His refusal to negotiate on anything less than an equal basis forged the fight for President Mandela, his wife Winnie, and his people in Africa and throughout the world. Freedom rung on February 11, 1990 when President Mandela was released from active captivity. Mind you, I said ``active captivity,'' as the spirit of President Mandela was never held captive. In 1991, at the first national conference of the African National Conference (ANC) held inside South Africa after being banned for decades, Nelson Mandela was elected President of the ANC while his lifelong friend and colleague, Oliver Tambo, became National Chairperson of the ANC. This day was fought for through the numerous protests and dedication of many organizations and individuals, specifically my colleagues of the Congressional Black Caucus, who continually and tirelessly put pressure upon Congress to adopt legislation that would ban trade and commerce with the then-oppressive government of South Africa. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. once said that ``the true measure of a man is not where he stands during times of comfort and convenience, but where he stands during time of crisis and controversy.'' By Dr. King's words, President Mandela has set a standard that all Members of Congress should at least strive to attain. President Mandela, despite being chased like an animal in the streets of South Africa, beaten like a dead horse during inhuman and inhumane captivity over a quarter of a century, and being considered a banned person in the spoken and written word, never wavered in his devotion to democracy, equality and understanding. Despite terrible provocation, he has never answered racism with racism or hate with hate. His life continues to be an inspiration, in South Africa and throughout the world, to all who are oppressed and deprived, to all who are opposed to oppression and deprivation. In a life that is the veritable symbol of the triumph of the human Nelson Mandela accepted the 1993 Nobel Peace Price on behalf of all South Africans who suffered and sacrificed so much to bring peace to the land of all of our mothers and fathers. It is my hope that when we award this Congressional Gold medal, we remember why we were elected to Congress in the first place: to concern ourselves not with the next election, but for making our country and our world better for the next generation. President Mandela demands nothing less from all of us-- Democrat or Republican, Christian, Jewish, or Muslim, black or white. President Mandela has taught us the lesson of principles. It is time for Congress to collectively follow our teacher's courageous and superb guidance.

Ms. KILPATRICK

Ms. KILPATRICK. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in strong and stringent opposition to the amendment offered by Congressman Tom DeLay of Texas. This amendment would modify our beloved Constitution to make it allow for the future enactment of mandatory spending limits in campaigns. The Supreme Court has found such limits unconstitutional. It would also give Congress and the state authority to define those expenditures deemed to influence elections, and to prohibit any regulation of the content of elections. As a member of the House Oversight Committee, I have heard the testimony of over 40 of our colleagues on the issue of campaign finance reform. The issue of a Constitutional Amendment regarding spending limits was not considered during these hearings. As a new Member of Congress, it is no wonder why the taxpayers of our country view us with such cynicism and spite when my colleagues offer amendments that they cannot or will not support themselves. This amendment is exhibit number one of such an example. It is time for Congress to stop wasting the people's money. It is time for us to get campaign finance reform under control. As I said in remarks that I made on the floor just last week, real campaign finance reform does three things: it bans soft money; it requires full disclosure of contributors, and it cleans up expenditures from special interest groups. We need to restore the faith of the American people in our system of government. We need to ensure the accountability of those who participate in and contribute to candidates. The Shays/Meehan bill does just that. In closing, I implore my colleagues to stop wasting time and the people's money. It is time for us to bring to a clean, up-or-down vote, the Shays/Meehan bill.

Ms. KILPATRICK

Ms. KILPATRICK. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in strong opposition to H.R. 3150, the Bankruptcy Reform Act of 1998. This legislation does nothing to address the aggressive marketing of credit cards, home equity loans, and other forms of credit to consumers. While we all support individual responsibility, this bill makes it even tougher for persons to eradicate their debts and get started on a new financial slate. First of all, I must inform my colleagues that, many, many years ago, I had to file for bankruptcy. For me, the debate on the floor today is no hypothetical, nor theoretical, exercise. Fortunately, I was able to repay my creditors and get back into excellent fiscal standing. But having to go through the wringer of bankruptcy has helped me better form an opinion on how we can better serve both debtors and creditors. H.R. 3150 is not that bill. Among other things, H.R. 3150 includes a means-test to determine whether a family can file for bankruptcy protection that eliminates debts and gives families a fresh, new financial start, commonly referred to as ``Chapter Seven,'' or whether the family must enter into a stringent repayment plan, referred to as ``Chapter 13.'' Most of our constituents who have to file for bankruptcy will have this fact listed on their credit report for at least seven years. Although a family may have their debts eliminated, for the next seven years it is difficult, if not impossible, to rent a car, rent a house or apartment, buy a business, or sometimes get a job. Having a bankruptcy filing listed on your credit report is tough to remove and tough to live with. During House Rules Committee consideration of this bill, I offered an amendment that was not made part of this debate. My amendment would have allowed consumers to keep those electronic entertainment items that were purchased three months before the filing of a bankruptcy, and has a value of $500.00 or less. Certainly, a person knows at least three months in advance of a bankruptcy filing that he or she is in severe financial straits. My amendment would have also allowed for the disposition to creditors of recently-purchased electronic entertainment goods that have a higher value. While my amendment did not recognize fax machines or personal computers into this equation, we certainly know the volatility of the prices of these electronic goods. A computer that was purchased a year ago for $3,000 is now worth less that half that. Along those same lines, computers purchased years ago are now worth less than $1,000, and in many instances, you cannot even give them away. My amendment sets a limit of $500 to be consistent with the rest of current bankruptcy law. Unfortunately, it was not accepted by the House Rules Committee. Bankruptcy is a very personal, dehumanizing, and emotionally draining experience. Despite the great strides that our economy, in general, has made with record unemployment and a stock market soaring into the stratosphere, bankruptcies are hitting all-time highs. It is important that we protect consumers and creditors. Unfortunately, the Bankruptcy Reform Act of 1998 does not protect consumers or creditors, and the wisdom of Congress should prevail in the defeat of this onerous bill.

Ms. KILPATRICK

Ms. KILPATRICK. Madam Chairman, I yield 10 minutes to the gentleman from Maine (Mr. Allen), one of the sponsors of the freshman bipartisan bill.