John Lewis

Mr. LEWIS of Georgia

Mr. LEWIS of Georgia. Madam Speaker, I yield myself 4\1/2\ minutes. From the outset, Madam Speaker, I want to make it clear that this piece of legislation that we are considering tonight never was voted out of the subcommittee or the full committee of the Committee on Ways and Means of the House. There was only a hearing in the Subcommittee on Oversight. Madam Speaker, the sponsor of this bill will have us believe that they are merely protecting free speech, but do not be fooled. This legislation has one purpose and one purpose only, to allow our houses of worship to become vehicles for partisan political activity. As someone who stood alongside Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., and the other great leaders of the civil rights movement of the 1960s, I can tell my colleagues that they would be dismayed by this legislation. During the civil rights movement, we fought to end legal segregation and break down barriers to political participation. The church was the heart and soul of our efforts because ministers had the moral authority and respect to stand against immoral and indefensible laws, bad laws, bad customs, bad tradition. Ministers who led the civil rights movement did not select political candidates and operate our churches like political action committees. Although their churches and leaders faced violence and hatred for their efforts to protect human rights and human dignity, they were free and even protected by the Constitution to speak out on these issues. At no time did we envision or even contemplate the need for our houses of worship to become partisan pulpits. Make no mistake, partisan politics has its place. President John F. Kennedy once said that both major parties today serve the national interest, but when party and officeholder differ as to how the national interest is to be served, we must place first the responsibility we owe not to our party or even to our constituents, but to our individual consciences. Madam Speaker, in this matter we owe our allegiance to our individual consciences, and we owe it to those ministers and the other religious leaders and churches and institutions who speak out on the issues to protect them. Our religious organizations should continue to be places that ministers, priests and rabbis, and imams give moral and spiritual guidance. We should not allow them to be transformed into institutions that tell their members and their parishioners how to vote. If this legislation is allowed to stand or pass, we can have a minister, a priest, a rabbi or a mosque coming in the pulpit saying vote against so and so, or God told me vote against so and so, taking up offerings in the church, in the synagogue, in the temple, in the mosque, tax-exempt organizations. Finally, Madam Speaker, if my colleagues think that ministers and religious leaders are muzzled politically and are clamoring for this legislation, look at the list of more than 200 mainstream churches and religious organizations who are opposed to this bill: the African Methodist Episcopal Church, the American Baptist Church, the American Jewish Congress, the Islamic Supreme Council, Evangelical Lutherans, Presbyterians, Buddhists, Quakers, and the list goes on and on. We cannot allow supporters of this measure, however well-intended they may be, to influence us to recklessly discard the time-tested system we now have in place or substitute it with a dangerous experiment in mixing religion with partisan politics. This bill before us tonight, Madam Speaker, threatens not only our quest for meaningful campaign finance reform, but threatens the very integrity and independence of our churches and others houses of worship. Any time the wall of separation between church and State is breached, religious liberty is threatened. The wall between church and state must be solid. It has guided us for 220 years. It must not be breached for any reason. I urge my colleagues to protect our tradition of religious liberty and vote against this bill. Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. LEWIS of Georgia. Madam Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from New York (Mr. Houghton), chairperson of the Subcommittee on Oversight of the Committee on Ways and Means.

Mr. LEWIS of Georgia. Madam Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the honorable gentleman from Texas (Mr. Edwards), my friend and colleague.

Mr. LEWIS of Georgia. Madam Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Connecticut (Mr. Shays), my friend and colleague.

Mr. LEWIS of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, there is not one thing in the present code that would prohibit ministers, religious leaders, rabbis, any church organization from speaking out on the great issues of our time. Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Scott).

Mr. LEWIS of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, in closing, let me just relate that a leading supporter of this piece of legislation, a minister, is sending out fund-raising literature, seeking tax-deductible contributions to support the church's efforts in lobbying the Congress to pass H.R. 2357. What this minister really wants and gets under the bill is the ability to use unreported, unlimited charitable contributions to defeat or elect someone in Congress or some place else. Is this what we want happening in November, on November 5, or some other time? Of course not. Churches, synagogues, temples, and mosques are houses of worship. Let us keep them that way and not let politics get in the way. Let us keep a separation of church and State. Keep that wall solid and strong. If churches, synagogues, mosques and temples want to go out and raise money and have their leaders preaching from the pulpit, then they should form another organization or group. I ask Members to vote against this legislation. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. LEWIS of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.

Mr. LEWIS of Georgia

Mr. LEWIS of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I rise to salute a distinguished citizen, Paul L. Brady, of the Fifth Congressional District of Georgia as he celebrates a special day in his life, his 75th birthday. Paul L. Brady, a native of Flint, Michigan, received his early education in the Flint public schools. After graduating from high school, he enlisted in the U.S. Navy. Following military service, he attended the University of Michigan and University of Kansas, majoring in psychology. Judge Brady's interest in the law was prompted by his personal involvement in what became the landmark case of Brown v. The Board of Education of Topeka, Kansas. He attended law school at Washburn University, Topeka, where he received his Juris Doctor Degree. He did further study at the Lawyer's Institute, Chicago, Illinois; the Center for Administrative Justice, George Washington University; and graduate work at Georgetown Law Center, Washington, DC. His legal experience included twelve years of private practice in Chicago, Illinois, an adjudicator for the Social Security Administration, a Supervisory Trial Attorney for the Federal Power Commission (receiving this commission's highest award for efficiency in 1971), and a Hearing Examiner with the Department of Health, Education and Welfare. In 1972, he was appointed a Federal Administrative Law Judge and became the first African American to be so named. After serving 25 years on the bench, Judge Brady retired. During the last 6 years of his tenure, he presided as Chief Judge of the Atlanta Regional office. In his honor, a Library-Conference Room has been designated the Brady Conference Room in the Sam Nunn Federal Office Building. Judge Brady is a member of the Judicial Council of the National Bar Association, the Federal Administrative Law Judges' Conference and the Federal Bar Association. He has also served as a faculty coordinator for a course on Administrative Law Procedure at the National Judicial College, Reno, Nevada. In addition to being a member of several State Bars, he is also admitted to practice before the Supreme Court of the United States. A life member of the NAACP, he has received numerous awards and honors for community involvement, the highlight of which was national recognition for organizing government lawyers in a Volunteer Neighborhood Legal Services Program in Washington, DC. In 1992, Flint Central High School selected Judge Brady as one of its initial honorees in the Alumni Hall of Fame. In 1997 he was inducted into the National Bar Association's Hall of Fame. He is the author of ``A Certain Blindness,'' a book that chronicles his family's history and is a prototype of other African-American families' quest for the ``promise of America.'' Judge Brady is the father of two children: Paul L. Brady, Jr., of Los Angeles, Dr. Laura Brady Sullivan and son-in-law Dr. Paul Sullivan, Southlake, Texas and grandson Paul Sullivan, Jr. He lives in Atlanta with his wife, Xernona, a television executive.

Mr. LEWIS of Georgia

Mr. LEWIS of Georgia. Mr. Chairman, it is impossible for me to support this legislation. It is not constitutional, it is not just, and it is not fair. This bill would strip hundreds and thousands of Federal employees of their labor protections. It would deprive hundreds of millions of American citizens of their civil liberties and fundamental rights. This bill is nothing less than a power grab by our President and this administration. It would be the largest consolidation of power in recent American history. By denying our citizens their basic rights, but giving this administration overwhelming power, this bill would effectively declare Marshall law. It would violate the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. Even the name--``Homeland Security'' conjures images of Banana Republics where individuals rights are a mere afterthought. This is America. Our government does not deny our citizens fundamental rights in the name of homeland security. We are greater than that. We are better than that. As Thomas Jefferson said, ``the price of freedom is eternal vigilance.'' My Colleagues, let us heed the warning of the author of our Bill of Rights. It is time to be vigilant. Now is the time to stand up for all of our citizens. Now is the time to do what is right. Do not deny our people their fundamental rights. Vote ``no'' on this ill-conceived bill.

Mr. LEWIS of Georgia

Mr. LEWIS of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I come to the floor tonight dismayed, disillusioned and disappointed. What is happening in corporate America? What has become of our corporate leaders? This is a simple issue of right and wrong, good and evil, how fraud, lying and cheating have become part of our corporate culture. We must ask ourselves, How did this happen? What gave birth to this period of corporate greed and scandal? It all started with the corporate crusade against big government. Big government was making big business file too many reports. Big government was spending too much time making sure that big business was following the law, so big business asked their friends in Congress to do something about it. Thanks to Republican attacks against big government, these CEOs and board of directors are acting with little, if any, government regulation. They have been lying to investors, lying to workers, and lying to the Federal Government. And they have been getting away with it. While corporate America has been making out like bandits, hard- working men and women are losing their jobs, their retirement, and losing their children's college funds. The majority party in the White House has created a climate in which Enron, WorldCom, and Tyco could happen. Instead of having the SEC look over corporate books, Republicans have had the SEC look the other way. My colleagues, so shall thee sow, so shall thee reap. But this travesty is not just about Global Crossing, WorldCom, Enron, Martha Stewart, Tyco, and Merck. In fact, it is not just about the world of business. It is bigger than that. Look at the Republican environmental record. Look at their record on worker safety. Our Interior Department is fighting tooth and nail to drill for oil and dig for coal on our pristine public lands. The EPA is leading the fight for more air pollution. OSHA is making fewer and fewer trips to the workplace. And the SEC has been leading the fight to let business just go about its business. Time and time again, Republicans have declared that the only regulation is self-regulation or no regulation. Even today, President Bush declared that we must ``depend on the conscience of American business leaders.'' Republicans have left the fox in charge of the chicken coop; and now they are shocked, they are absolutely shocked to find a fat fox and an empty chicken coop. Mr. President, actions speak louder than words. Today's moral indignation rings as falsely as an Enron accounting report. Today, President Bush told the American people that he wanted to hire 100 new staffers at the SEC to make corporations obey the law. President Bush did not tell the American people that just last year he proposed getting rid of 57 SEC workers. This is what the Republicans were doing before the American people started paying attention. This is what the Republicans were doing when no one was watching. We do not need strong words and empty promises. We need strong regulation and strict enforcement. It is time to get tough on crime, all crime, and not just the folks who cannot afford to make a campaign contribution. When someone gets caught dealing a thousand dollars' worth of drugs, they lock you up, lock you away, and take almost everything you own. We need the same standards for CEOs who steal millions of dollars from their companies. We need the same standards for corporate leaders who lie, cheat and steal from their employees and their shareholders. Mr. Speaker, it is time to get serious about corporate crime. It is time to put some teeth back into securities laws and some power back into the SEC. Do not just talk the talk; walk the walk. Pass the laws. Protect the folks who are being dumped on and ripped off. We owe our people no less. It is our mission, our mandate, and our moral obligation, our moral responsibility.

Mr. LEWIS of Georgia

Mr. LEWIS of Georgia. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume to close. Mr. Chairman, at the outset, Mr. Chairman, I would like to ask a question: Do we know what a terrorist looks like? Did we know on April 19, 1995, that a man would get in a Ryder truck and drive it into the Federal Building in Oklahoma? Did we know just a few short days ago that a young college student, the age of 21, would put pipe bombs in mailboxes in several Midwestern and Western States? Mr. Chairman, I must tell you I rise in strong opposition to the Customs Border Security Act of 2001, H.R. 3129. This bill threatens to violate and weaken the civil rights of innocent passengers by granting Customs officers immunity from lawsuits involving personal searches. H.R. 3129 would increase the chances of racial profiling and illegal searches. This bill will also violate personal privacy by expanding the power of the Customs Service to search mail leaving the United States without a warrant. While I, like many, appreciate the attempts made by the Customs Service to address its poor record of racial profiling of passengers, now is not the time to grant Customs officers immunity from lawsuits. Civil lawsuits against government officials and agencies are an important deterrent to racial profiling and unconstitutional and unlawful searches. As public officials, Customs agents already have qualified immunity, which is more than adequate to protect them if acting within the scope of their official authority. Without the possibility of a lawsuit, individuals who have been treated in an unconstitutional manner by a government agency would have no redress, and the government agents would have less incentive to comply with the Constitution. Mr. Chairman, I urge my colleagues to protect the civil rights of innocent passengers and oppose this bill. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. LEWIS of Georgia. Mr. Chairman, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Scott).

Mr. LEWIS of Georgia. Mr. Chairman, I yield 4 minutes to the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson-Lee). (Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas asked and was given permission to revise and extend her remarks.)

Mr. LEWIS of Georgia. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Florida (Mrs. Meek).

Mr. LEWIS of Georgia. Mr. Chairman, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. Becerra).

Mr. LEWIS of Georgia. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Hinojosa).

Mr. LEWIS of Georgia

Mr. LEWIS of Georgia. Mr. Chairman, I want to thank my friend and my colleague, the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Obey), for yielding me this time. This evening, I rise in strong opposition to raising the debt limit. The Republicans are trying to sneak in a provision that increases the debt ceiling without a full, fair, open and honest debate. Apparently the other side, the majority party, are hiding something. What are they hiding? What is the great secret? The American people deserve to know that the funds for a debt limit increase will come directly from the Social Security trust fund. We need to protect Social Security and ensure that we meet our obligations today. Instead, the majority party, the Republicans, are stealing from the Social Security trust fund and increasing our national debt every chance they get. For the next 10 years, we will increase the debt by more than $300 billion. Something is wrong with that. This party, the Republicans, are mortgaging the future of our children. They are ripping away the safety for our Nation's seniors. Increasing the debt limit is like increasing the credit limit on your credit card. What does this do? It just puts you in a deeper and deeper hole. That is what the Republicans are doing. So do not be fooled. They are putting us in deeper debt and it is their obligation to get us out of it. We should not spend Social Security on anything other than Social Security. American families work hard to pay into a system that they should be able to count on when they retire. Social Security is a sacred trust, a sacred covenant between the American people and our government. We must never, never, ever take away the security out of Social Security. Let us keep our promise to the American people.

Mr. LEWIS of Georgia

Mr. LEWIS of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I rise against the majority party's proposal. I read someplace, ``What does it profit a great Nation to gain a whole world and lose her soul?'' This Republican proposal does not reflect the soul of America. It is out of step and it is out of tune. This proposal turns its back on the basic needs of our poor, our mothers, and our dependent children. No one, but no one, wants to be on welfare. People want to work. They want to pay their own way. They want training so they can secure a permanent living wage job. Yet this bill throws in the towel. It eliminates education and job training from the list of work opportunities. It does nothing to promote job stability or reduce poverty in our country. We can spend hundreds, thousands, billions of dollars on missiles, bombs, and even tax breaks for the wealthy individuals, but when it comes to providing a helping hand to our poor and our needy, Republicans want to pass the buck. When it comes to welfare of our citizens, we must cross every T and dot every I. Do we have the courage to put people who have been left out and left behind back on their feet? Do we have the courage to speak up and speak out for what is morally right? Where is our sense of what is fair? Where is our sense of what is right? My colleagues, please join me to vote against this reckless bill. We can do better. We must do better.

Mr. LEWIS of Georgia

Mr. LEWIS of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the rule and the resolution. This resolution expresses the solidarity of the Congress and the American people with Israel in its struggle against the forces of hatred and violence. It is both fitting and appropriate for us today to declare our support at a time when Israel has been subjected to repeated acts of terror. When 125 people in a small country die in one month, when a 17-year old girl cannot make a simple trip to the grocery store without fear of being blown up, or when 28 Jews at prayer during a Passover Seder are killed in cold blood by a suicide bomber, it is time for us to speak out and speak up. Israel is our most reliable friend in the Middle East. It is the only democracy, a beacon of hope, in a region of the world where the freedoms we all take for granted--freedom of speech, freedom of press, freedom of religion, freedom to challenge your government nonviolently without fear of retribution--simply do not exist. Israel is the only country in the Middle East that guarantees all these freedoms. Israel, like the United States and every other country, has a right and obligation to defend its citizens when under attack. One of the reasons I have always been so supportive of Israel is that even when it acts to defend itself, it also continues to reach out its hand in peace to its neighbors. This is a country, who against all odds, made peace with Egypt. It made peace with Jordan. It withdrew its forces voluntarily from Lebanon. And a year and a half ago, under the guidance of President Clinton, this same country offered a historic peace proposal to the Palestinians that many thought was too risky. Unfortunately, peace was rejected by Chairman Arafat and he chose to return to a path of violence and terror. The Congress stands here today to condemn and reject this path of violence led by the Palestinian leader. Instead, we must return to the path of peace. Israel must have a partner who is willing to say ``no'' to those who would use terror and violence. Chairman Arafat must take action against those Palestinians who would block the path to peace. There is no other choice. The time has come for Yasir Arafat to make a decision: will he write a page of history by pursuing the path to peace or will he be a mere footnote for leaving behind a trail of terror. Today we stand by Israel but we also stand for peace. As my friend and mentor, Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. observed just before his death: ``I see Israel, and never mind saying it, as one of the great outposts of democracy in the world and a marvelous example of what can be done, how desert land almost can be transformed into an oasis of brotherhood and democracy. Peace for Israel means security and that security must be a reality.''

Mr. LEWIS of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the rule and the resolution. This resolution expresses the solidarity of the Congress and the American people with Israel in a struggle against the forces of hatred and violence. It is both fitting and appropriate for us today to declare our support at a time when Israel had been subjected to repeated acts of terror. Israel is our most reliable friend in the Middle East. It is our only democracy, a beacon of hope in the region of the world for the freedom we all take for granted. Freedom of speech, freedom of press, freedom of religion, freedom to challenge your government nonviolently without fear of retribution simply do not exist. Israel is the only country in the Middle East that guarantees all of these freedoms. The Congress stands here today to condemn and reject this paths of violence led by Chairman Arafat. Instead, we must return to the path of peace. Israel must have a partner who is willing to say no to those who will use terror and violence. Chairman Arafat must take action against those Palestinians who would block the path to peace.

Mr. LEWIS of Georgia

Mr. LEWIS of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this time.

Mr. LEWIS of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong opposition to H.R. 586. This tax cut bill is not the way to go. It does not provide real relief for all Americans. It is just plain, downright irresponsible. I ask my Republican colleagues to reconsider their priorities. Mr. Speaker, if we make the Republican tax cut permanent, we risk stealing, taking, really raiding the Social Security trust fund by more than $4 trillion. We risk gambling the future of the Medicare trust fund. We jeopardize funding for education and a prescription drug benefit for our seniors. This tax cut bill breaks the promise that we made to the American people to use their tax dollars wisely. A huge windfall for the wealthy, pocket change for working Americans. We should be taking care of the basic needs of all of our people, not rushing to pass a tax cut bill that puts us deeper and deeper in debt. Today we have a choice, a choice between a permanent tax cut bill that benefits a few, or Social Security and Medicare security that benefit all Americans. I urge my colleagues to make the right choice, the moral choice, the good choice. Vote against this bill.

Mr. LEWIS of Georgia. I yield to the gentleman from South Carolina.

Mr. LEWIS of Georgia

Mr. LEWIS of Georgia. Mr. Chairman, I want to thank my friend and colleague for yielding me this time. Mr. Chairman, the Republican budget is irresponsible, irrational, and just plain wrong. It is a sham, it is a shame, and it is a disgrace. The Republican budget buries us in a pile of debt and puts us in a much deeper financial hole; and it is the obligation of the Republicans, the majority party, to dig us out. The Republicans have destroyed the lock box and thrown away the key. Mr. Chairman, Social Security is a sacred trust, a covenant with the American people. It is a promise that should never, ever be broken. But the Republican budget spends $225 billion of the Social Security trust fund on other government programs. Social Security is a safety net for many Americans, allowing them to live with dignity. But the Republican budget takes away that safety net. Republicans are stealing the Social Security trust fund. The Republicans are taking the security out of Social Security. Mr. Chairman, I urge all of my colleagues tonight to vote for the people, vote for the old folks, vote for the disabled, and vote against the Republican budget.

Mr. LEWIS of Georgia

Mr. LEWIS of Georgia. Mr. Chairman, I want to thank my friend, the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Hoyer), for yielding me this time. This amendment is another poison pill. It is a phony issue. It has nothing but nothing to do with free speech or with civil rights. I know something about civil rights. I grew up at a time when I saw those signs that said ``white men,'' ``colored men,'' ``white women,'' ``colored women,'' ``white waiting,'' ``colored waiting.'' As a child, I tasted the bitter fruits of integration and racial discrimination, so I know something about civil rights. In 1960, when we were sitting in; in 1961, when we went on the freedom rides; in 1963, when we marched on Washington; in 1964, when we went to Mississippi during the Mississippi summer project; in 1965, when we marched from Selma to Montgomery, that was about civil rights. We did not have a Web site, a Web page. We did not have a fax machine. We did not have a cellular telephone. But we had our bodies. We had our feet. And we put our bodies on the line for civil rights. We did not have much money of any kind, hard or soft, but we had a dream that we could create an America, a truly interracial democracy, a beloved community. I say to my colleagues that we should be real. This is not about civil rights. This is not about free speech. This is about cleaning up our political process, opening it up and letting all the people come in. This is about campaign finance reform. That is what it is about. Do not be fooled tonight.