Carolyn Kilpatrick

Ms. KILPATRICK

Ms. KILPATRICK. Reclaiming my time, Mr. Chairman, I have been told and it has been reaffirmed by the gentleman from New York that this resolution will be scheduled for Monday afternoon. Mr. Chairman, I withdraw my reservation of objection.

Ms. KILPATRICK

Ms. KILPATRICK. Mr. Speaker, I come today as a member of the Committee on House Oversight who, for 9 months, has been looking into scheduling special meetings for the investigation of the gentlewoman from California [Ms. Sanchez]. I come to Members today to ask that the integrity of the House be maintained, that we bring up today the Menendez resolution, and that we put this 9-month investigation to rest. It is imperative, Mr. Speaker, and I call on the gentleman from California [Mr. Thomas], the chairman of our Committee on House Oversight, who has scheduled a meeting next Wednesday to discuss the Sanchez investigation, come to a close. The results show that the gentlewoman from California won the election favorably. It is very unfortunate that a former colleague would come on this floor and insult the integrity of this House. I urge the Speaker and Members of the Congress, bring up the Menendez resolution today. Do not table it. Let us get on with the business of the American people.

Ms. KILPATRICK

Ms. KILPATRICK. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself as much time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I listened carefully to the gentleman from Ohio [Mr. Ney] and concur with his resolution. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. KILPATRICK. Mr. Speaker, I have no further requests for time, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Ms. KILPATRICK. Mr. Speaker, I yield as much time as he may consume to the distinguished gentleman from California [Mr. Capps].

Ms. KILPATRICK

Ms. KILPATRICK. Mr. Speaker, I would like to formally announce the passing of our former colleague, Congressman George William Crockett, Jr., who passed on Sunday, September 7, 1997, here in the Washington, DC, area. Congressman Crockett was born in Jacksonville, FL. He earned his law degree from the University of Michigan and, in 1943, was appointed by President Roosevelt as the first African-American lawyer to serve in the U.S. housing department. In 1986, after being elected in 1981 and serving 10 years, Congressman Crockett authored the Mandela freedom resolution. He was an outstanding jurist, husband, father, and grandfather. It is my honor and privilege, Mr. Speaker, to ask that when the House of Representatives adjourn tonight, that we do so in honor of Judge Crockett. There will be a private memorial funeral for the family this evening here in the Washington, DC. On Saturday at noon in the city of Detroit at 11 a.m. at Hartford Memorial Baptist Church, the final resting and memorial service will be held for Congressman Crockett.

Ms. KILPATRICK

Ms. KILPATRICK. Mr. Speaker, I rise to pay tribute to Congressman George W. Crockett who recently passed. Congressman Crockett was a fighter for justice, a student of the Constitution who believed that the Constitution should apply to all of America's people. We honor you, Judge Crockett. I want you to know from the bottom of my heart, as my Congressman and for the people who are now in the 15th Congressional District, we will carry your spirit, we will continue the fight, and we too believe that the Constitution of the United States is for all of its citizens. Rest assured that your memory will live, that your spirit will instill in us the power to continue, the power to fight, and the power that the Constitution really is for the people, by the people. May you rest in peace.

Ms. KILPATRICK

Ms. KILPATRICK. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the gentlewoman from California, Ms. Loretta Sanchez, duly elected to the 46th District in California 10 months ago, certified by the Republican Secretary of State 10 months ago. It is important that we bring this to a close. The Committee on House Oversight has been hearing in special session all the evidence. It is now, Mr. Speaker, that we call for a close. The gentlewoman from California won over a 900 vote plurality and has been duly elected. Let us bring this to a close, let the gentlewoman serve her people in that district and get down to the work of the American people.

Ms. KILPATRICK

Ms. KILPATRICK. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Ohio [Mr. Hall] for allowing me the opportunity to speak. As a member of the House Committee on Government Reform and Oversight and a new Member of this Congress, as many Members and people of America may remember, on January 7 this Congress adopted budgets for the various committees of the Congress; and in that adoption, after some dismay, there was set aside a $7.9 million reserve fund, more commonly known as slush fund, that was supposed to be used for three purposes: high priority, emergencies, and extraordinary circumstances. On July 8, with less than 24-hour notice, as the rules require, the House Committee on Government Reform and Oversight was called together and a $1.4 million deduction from that slush fund was had for an investigation of the Labor and Education Department. As a member of the House Committee on Government Reform and Oversight, I felt then, as I do now, that the rules had not been followed, that we did not have proper notice, that we were again going to spend another $1 million of the American people's money on another investigation. Since 1996, over $10 million have been spent on investigations. Over the last 18 months, over $30 million has been spent on investigations. I rise to oppose the rule. I rise to defeat the previous question, because I believe the American people want us to have the input and the exchange. That is why they sent us here. I believe the American people want us to debate the issues. And, therefore, because the Gejdenson amendments were not adopted yesterday, it would allow that opportunity. That is why we put it on the table, why this $1.4 was deducted, why the slush fund initially was incorporated, and why today we have before us another investigation. The Labor Department is a fine department, and its employees do good work. It is unfortunate that we are here today to oppose the rule. It is unfortunate that we as elected representatives of the people cannot debate the question. Why? America, speak out. Do not let this Congress get away with again going after investigation and investigation. Let us get back to the people's work. Mr. Speaker, oppose the rule, oppose the previous question.

Ms. KILPATRICK

Ms. KILPATRICK. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the Foley- Bachus-Miller amendment to freeze the community development financial institutions [CDFI] fund at fiscal year 1997 levels, that was considered recently in debate on VA/HUD appropriation bill and support the level reported by the committee. The CDFI Program was established in 1994 at the request of President Clinton and received bipartisan support. Public money from the CDFI is leveraged with private capital to increase much needed investment in distressed urban and rural communities. The purpose of CDFI is to provide technical assistance, loans, and grants to institutions and programs such as micro-loan funds, venture capital funds, community development banks, and low income credit unions. These ventures are purely established for the purpose of serving underserved communities and populations and are filling the void left by traditional lenders in urban and rural communities. The Bank Enterprise Act, [BEA] which receives one-third of the funds appropriated to CDFI, rewards traditional financial institutions that serve the credit needs of distressed communities. The money from CDFI is used to create new jobs, promote small businesses, and build affordable housing. Congress authorized nearly $400 million for CDFI between fiscal year 1995 and fiscal year 1998. As part of the budget agreement, the President prevailed in increasing the authorization to $125 million for fiscal year 1998. CDFI and BEA have issued one round of awards. Out of 268 applicants requesting over $300 million last year, CDFI selected 31 community development organizations to receive $35 million. BEA awarded 38 banks and thrifts $13.1 million. The demand for increased funding is evident by the level of interest that has been displayed by the increase in applicants and it is apparent that there is a lack of capital in the communities these institutions serve. It has been alleged that the CDFI fund has no demonstrable record of success and raises questions about its practices in selecting grantees. After reviewing these allegations, the VA-HUD Appropriations Subcommittee and the full Appropriations Committee dismissed the charges. The subcommittee said in its report ``the Committee wholeheartedly endorses the goals of the program'' and voted to appropriate the full administration budget request. I would like to further expand on the merits of the CDFI program by citing an example from the district which I represent. The Shore Bank Corp. received $3 million from the CDFI program that were matched with $8 million of private funds. These funds will go toward a new effort for a comprehensive community development bank holding company with a strategic plan to revitalize a well defined investment area on the east side of Detroit. This presents a promising approach to achieve large- scale community revitalization in Detroit. The Detroit holding company, which is being established in stages, is designed to have three subsidiaries. One, a full service bank in the target area, is providing small business loans and housing loans to minority entrepreneurs and can leverage its equity many times over through deposits. The second a for-profit real estate development company, will initially focus on the development of 500 affordable houses to homeownership in a 30-square block area. The third, a nonprofit enterprise development affiliate, will have three functions-- small business assistance to strengthen small manufacturers in the region and businesses in the target area, creation of a labor force development strategy to link potential workers with employers' skill needs, and homebuyer training and prepurchase services for first time homebuyers. Mr. Chairman, these services are much needed in my district, and in fact I wish I could have more financial institutions in my district with the same objective and purpose. It has also been suggested that CDFI was making awards based on connections to the Clinton administration. In a letter to Secretary of the Treasury Robert Rubin, more than 220 CDFI's around the country said that recipients of the first round awards include ``some of the strongest CDFI's in the field'' and called the funds's evaluation process ``exhaustive, competitive, and careful, assessing the management strength, systems, and business planning of each applicant.'' Shore Bank has pioneered the field of community development finance, for over 25 years. Their work has attracted bipartisan national and international support. Mr. Chairman, I strongly urge all of my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to oppose the Foley-Bachus-Miller amendment.

Ms. KILPATRICK

Ms. KILPATRICK. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the requisite number of words. Mr. Chairman, I support all the previous speakers and all that they have said as it relates to this fine piece of legislation. I want to first commend the gentleman from Pennsylvania [Mr. Goodling], the chairman, as well as the gentleman from Missouri [Mr. Clay], our ranking member, for all their hard work over the years to work on and retain the Perkins Act which has helped several million women across this country. I am a former teacher in the public school system in the Detroit public schools. I taught business classes and vocational classes. I saw the peak as young women and men gained the skill necessary to compete in America's job market. I know the importance of vocational education and the skills that it requires and offers to young people to move and matriculate as they become parents. Most of my colleagues know that this is the 25th year of title 9. Title 9 was instituted in 1972 and this year we celebrate the 25th anniversary of title 9. In title 9's experience, millions of women and men, particularly women, have shared across this country in higher education experiences as a result of the title 9 experiences, and many of them in their vocational education training. As has been already said, vocational education has increased employment opportunities. Vocational education has also increased wage earning for millions of Americans. It has reduced AFDC caseloads across America and has had millions of dollars in savings. This is not a time to cut back. We must mandate States that they continue in their support of vocational education training. I come from the State of Michigan. I served in that legislature for several years. I served on the education committee there and know of the commitment after the enactment of the vocational education ruling, after the Perkins Act mandated the 10 percent, that many children were able, through the mandate from the Federal Government, to participate in vocational education programs to prepare them for the world of work. I commend the gentlewoman from Hawaii [Mrs. Mink] and the other sponsors for bringing this amendment forward. We have got to keep the commitment to the States. The 10 percent is just a minuscule amount. I wish we could increase that amount, but to eliminate it totally is unfortunate. This amendment asks that we retain the level of funding for 1997 and beyond, that that level of funding not decrease. Mr. Chairman, I hope we support the Mink amendment.

Ms. KILPATRICK. I yield to the gentlewoman from the District of Columbia.

Ms. KILPATRICK

Ms. KILPATRICK. Mr. Speaker, well, here we go again. Last week, in the Committee on House Oversight, of which I am a member, with less than a 24-hour notice, which is an abuse of the rules, I find out when I walk in that the House Republicans had decided to spend $1.4 million to investigate the Labor Department, America's hard-working men and women and how they work for their companies. There has been over $10 million spent this year on investigations by Republicans. Unfortunately, these same leaders in our Congress have cut Medicaid, Medicare, nutrition services, and we can go on and on. Mr. Speaker, I am a Member of this Congress because I want to work for good jobs and opportunity for young people. I want to stop the witch hunts. And when we can use an abusive slush fund, set aside for just that, to investigate, to the tune just this Congress in this 6 months $10 million, I think the people ought to be outraged. Let us get to the work of the people.

Ms. KILPATRICK

Ms. KILPATRICK. Mr. Speaker, in 1993, when President Clinton took over, the deficit was over $250 billion. In 1993, with the President and all the Democrats in the Congress, not one single Republican voted on a deficit reduction plan. Today that deficit is $45 billion. The deficit is indeed coming down. This Congress voted for an $85 billion tax cut. That tax cut goes only to people who are working and who pay taxes. That is the Democratic plan. The question is, who will get those tax cuts? We believe that middle-income Americans ought to get those tax cuts; that they ought to receive deductions for education for their children, that they ought to receive child tax credits. The Democratic plan says that. Do not be confused. The facts are simple. Who should get the tax cuts? Democrats and the President believe those tax cuts ought to go to middle-income people for deductions for their children's education and for child tax credits. Check the facts. Members should know what they have before them. We believe that $5 billion ought to go to hard- working Americans and yes, people must work to get the tax credit.

Ms. KILPATRICK

Ms. KILPATRICK. Mr. Speaker, because I was unavoidably detained in the 15th Congressional District of Michigan, I was not present at rollcall vote numbers 225, 226, and 227. Had I been present for these votes, I would have voted ``aye'' for all of these rollcall votes.

Ms. KILPATRICK

Ms. KILPATRICK. Mr. Chairman, did I understand the gentleman to say that over 1.3 million children in Michigan will not be able to take advantage of this child credit?

Ms. KILPATRICK. Mr. Chairman, for those reasons we need to support this tax plan. The Democratic plan takes care of more American families, it offers more opportunities for America's children, and it offers the tax cuts to those families who need the tax cuts, hardworking families who pay taxes. So I thank the gentleman from California for yielding, and I hope and encourage my colleagues to vote for the Democratic plan, the tax plan that does offer tax cuts to America's working families. The Republican tax bill would deny tax credits for another 4 million lower middle income children. Forty percent--2 out of every 5 children--would be ineligible for the credit because their family's incomes are not high enough. The total number of children denied this credit because their families do not make enough money would be 28 million. The Republican's highly touted $500 tax credit that is nonrefundable allegedly gives tax relief to families. While corporations will reap a $22 billion windfall in this bill, 28 million children would get nothing. The Republican tax bill denies tax credits to working families. For example, a family of four with two children with no child care expenses would not receive any credit unless its income exceeded $24,385. Moreover, if the family had child care expenses, it could earn as much as $27,180 and fail to qualify for the credit. Also, families that have more than two children, or have high mortgage or health care costs and itemize their deductions, could make close to $30,000 and still not qualify for the credit. The Democratic tax bill has real child credit tax credits. The Democratic bill does not compute a family's child care tax credit after the earned income tax credit [EITC] is figured. This is a significant difference--millions of lower- to middle-income families owe income tax before EITC is calculated, but have little or no income tax obligation remaining after EITC is calculated. Under the Democratic bill, these families would be covered. The Republican tax bill's largest tax cuts--capital gains, Individual Retirement Accounts, estate, and corporate taxes--provide most of their benefits to the rich. The richest 1 percent get more of the overall tax break than the bottom 60 percent combined. According to the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, the Joint Tax Committee's distribution tables do not reflect any of the benefits that taxpayers would receive from these four provisions. The Democratic tax bill makes the benefits in these four areas, especially for working people, fair. It provides 71 percent of the tax breaks to families earning $100,000 or less. It provides a capital gains tax cut, an estate tax cut, and tax cuts for small businesses, family farms, and homeowners. The only way that you are eligible for these tax breaks is if you work and pay taxes.

Ms. KILPATRICK. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?

Ms. KILPATRICK. Mr. Chairman, the Republican tax bill would deny tax credits for another 4 million lower middle-income children. Forty percent--two out of every five children--would be ineligible for the credit because their family's incomes are not high enough. The total number of children denied this credit because their families do not make enough money would be 28 million. The Republican's highly touted $500 tax credit that is nonrefundable allegedly gives tax relief to families. While corporations will reap a $22 billion windfall in this bill, 28 million children would get nothing. The Republican tax bill denies tax credits to working families. For example, a family of four with two children with no child care expenses would not receive any credit unless its income exceeded $24,385. Moreover, if the family had child care expenses, it could earn as much as $27,180 and fail to qualify for the credit. Also, families that have more than two children, or have high mortgage or health care costs and itemize their deductions, could make close to $30,000 and still not qualify for the credit. The Democratic tax bill has real child care tax credits. The Democratic bill does not compute a family's child care tax credit after the earned income tax credit [EITC] is figured. This is a significant difference--millions of lower- to middle-income families owe income tax before EITC is calculated, but have little or no income tax obligation remaining after EITC is calculated. Under the Democratic bill, these families would be covered. The Republican tax bill's largest tax cuts--capital gains, individual retirement accounts, estate, and corporate taxes--provide most of their benefits to the rich. The richest 1 percent get more of the overall tax break than the bottom 60 percent combined. According to the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, the Joint Tax Committee's distribution tables do not reflect any of the benefits that taxpayers would receive from these four provisions. The Democratic tax bill makes the benefits in these four areas, especially for working people, fair. It provides 71 percent of the tax breaks to families earning $100,000 or less. It provides a capital gains tax cut, an estate tax cut, and tax cuts for small businesses, family farms, and homeowners. The only way that you are eligible for these tax breaks is if you work and pay taxes.

Ms. KILPATRICK. Mr. Chairman, did I further understand the gentleman to say that only 1 percent of Americans, the wealthy Americans, will be able to take advantage, and that 60 percent of the bottom rung of Americans will not take advantage of this?

Ms. KILPATRICK. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?

Ms. KILPATRICK

Ms. KILPATRICK. Mr. Speaker, we want a tax cut. The Congress has voted for 85 billion dollars' worth of tax cuts over the next few years. What Democrats say is we want that tax cut for America's families who most need it. We believe that those middle-income families who work hard to raise their children, who want them to go to college, need that assistance. We want the bulk of Americans to have the benefit of this Tax Code. The Democratic plan gives us that advantage. Mr. Speaker, the Republican plan speaks to the wealthiest 5 percent of American citizens who have benefited from America's greatness. The Democratic plan provides for children in America to receive that higher education for families in America who work every day to receive the support that they need. Support the Democratic tax plan. Let us work with our colleagues to make sure that our plan reaches those Americans who need it most.

Ms. KILPATRICK

Ms. KILPATRICK. Mr. Speaker, I first want to offer and ask the Nation to pray for Dr. Betty Shabazz who continues to be blessed and sick in a New York hospital. I also want to talk about the tax cuts that are before this House of Representatives and this Congress. We all want a tax cut. Democrats want a tax cut. We want the tax cuts to go to the people who most need it, those middle income people who work every day, who take care of their families, who want to send their children to school, and who make under $40,000 a year. We want a tax cut. We want it equitable. We want our children to be able to grow and to learn. So as this House addresses the tax situation and the cut that will be had by Americans around this country, let us not forget the families, the children, the people who work every day to take care of their children. Let them have the tax cut, those that make $40,000 and less.

Ms. KILPATRICK

Ms. KILPATRICK. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in tribute, honor, and dedication to the work and devotion of Dr. David Adamany, of Wayne State University. Wayne State University, located in the city of Detroit, MI, and in the 15th Congressional District, has produced many illustrious graduates serving our Nation in all aspects, large and small. Dr. Adamany will soon retire as president of Wayne State University. I wanted to take this opportunity to let my colleagues, the people of the great State of Michigan and the citizens of our country, to know of but a few of the stellar advances that Wayne State University have made under the skilled leadership of Dr. Adamany. Dr. Adamany has devoted 15 years of his life serving as president of Wayne State University--the longest serving president at Wayne State University. His retirement will be a significant loss to the university. Under Dr. Adamany's leadership, Wayne State University joined the ranks of the Carnegie Foundation's top rank of national research universities. At the same time, Wayne State University remained committed to promoting racial equality, ranking with nine historically black colleges and universities among the 10 institutions that award the largest number of bachelor's degrees to African-Americans. Such achievements were largely made possible by the dedication of President Adamany. He is a person of diverse talents, extraordinary intelligence, profound vision, and boundless energy for turning that vision into reality. That reality is embodied in Wayne State University--a university that has succeeded in providing quality education at an affordable price to women and men of every class, station, race, religion, nationality, age, and personal lifestyle who would otherwise have no such opportunity. This commitment to providing the greatest possible access to all individuals seeking higher learning has been driven by Dr. Adamany's deeply held belief in opportunity and democracy. In addition to his leadership in academic excellence, he has established Wayne State University as an important contributor to the economic revitalization of the city of Detroit and its residents. Indeed, with over $62 million in service programs and over $250 million in campus development, Dr. Adamany has led Wayne State University in pursuing policies that have served broader community interests as well as the university's own interests. It is my honor and privilege to congratulate Dr. David Adamany, president of Wayne State University, for his tremendous accomplishments and many years of dedicated service, both to Wayne State University and to the larger community. I wish him much good fortune in his future endeavors, and hope that Wayne State University may find a new president who can build upon the legacy that David Adamany leaves behind.

Ms. KILPATRICK

Ms. KILPATRICK. Mr. Chairman, I first want to thank our chairperson, the gentlewoman from California [Ms. Waters] for her fine leadership, as well as the gentleman from Mississippi [Mr. Thompson] as our lead budget person for the Congressional Black Caucus. I rise to support the alternative budget for the Congressional Black Caucus. Unlike the budget deal before us, it takes care of America's children and America's families. The Congressional Black Caucus budget balances it in 2001, just 4 short years from now, a year ahead of projections for the other budget. It has no tax increases and no tax cuts until the budget is balanced. The Congressional Black Caucus budget makes an investment in our cities and in our families. As was said before, it fully funds the WIC Program, fully funds Head Start, offers assistance for section 8 housing program, and chapter 1 for our children's education. Additionally, it provides for summer jobs for our youth who are most in need in America today. Infrastructure needs of our public school system. Unfortunately, in this current budget deal before us, there is no money for infrastructure for our schools, for our children's education. Unless we now invest in our children and provide for them the resources that they need to become competent, capable young men and women, America will not be successful as we move to the new millennium. The Congressional Black Caucus budget is the budget before us tonight that meets those needs. We must support it. We must vote for it, and we must take care of our families and children. As we move forward tonight and we will be here, we have been debating this, much of this, all night long and we will continue, let us not forget the least of these. We, the Members of the Congressional Black Caucus, know that this budget can be balanced and can be balanced in an even approach. It is not necessary to put stress on families who cannot afford it. It is not yet necessary to not invest in our children. This is the richest country in the world, the land of the free, the home of the brave. Let us act like it. Let us support the one budget that has the resources in it, that takes care of America's children.