Barbara Lee

Ms. LEE

Ms. LEE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I will close for our side with just these few comments. I want to thank the gentleman from California (Mr. Farr) for his comments and for his really deep and abiding commitment to the Peace Corps. I will say that I have had the privilege since I guess about 1980 to travel and meet with Peace Corps volunteers throughout the world. What I have witnessed in terms of their level of commitment, their level of understanding of their work and their real commitment not only to their region or their community or their village where they are working but really to the entire world is really phenomenal; and I want to support the gentleman from California (Mr. Farr) in his position and his comment that we need to fully fund the Peace Corps at the levels that the administration has requested. Having said that, let me just say how important this measure is today. Those Peace Corps volunteers who are out there, as I said earlier, representing our country, they are really our best ambassadors; and, minimally, we should provide for every bit of security and safety that they need, everything that they need to make their job not only rewarding but safe so that they can return and really share their experiences with those who have not had the opportunity to volunteer abroad and help develop even an expanded and larger Peace Corps force. Let me thank everyone for their support of this bill for ensuring that it is a bipartisan bill. Mr. Speaker, we have no further requests for time, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Ms. LEE

Ms. LEE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in opposition to this rule, which silenced all three of my amendments. My first amendment called for the creation of an international commission, with Iraqi, U.S., and U.N. participation, to monitor prison conditions in Iraq. The Geneva Convention is neither quaint nor obsolete, and this amendment would have ensured compliance and help to restore badly damaged U.S. credibility. My second amendment would have created a database of those who have been detained. My third amendment prohibited the use of U.S. funds in the overthrow of democratically elected governments. Given the allegations of this government's involvement in the overthrow of President Aristide in Haiti, this amendment would have restored confidence in the protection of democracy. Once again debate was stifled on many critical issues. The Republican majority continues to abuse its power. Oppose this rule.

Ms. LEE

Ms. LEE. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentlewoman for her leadership on this issue. This commonsense amendment would simply allow military women and their dependents that are stationed overseas to exercise the same rights as women in this country, the right to comprehensive family planning, including access to a safe, legal abortion. It is important to point out that this amendment would not allow one cent of taxpayer money to fund these procedures. It simply allows women to use their own money, mind you, their own money to pay for this procedure in an overseas military facility. It makes no sense that we have asked these soldiers to serve our country, and yet we cannot serve them with basic, comprehensive health care. Let us reject this administration's ongoing, politically motivated war on women; and let us start by adopting this important, commonsense amendment. Let us stop discriminating against women in the military. I urge a ``yes'' vote.

Ms. LEE. Mr. Chairman, let me thank the gentleman from my home city of El Paso, Texas, for yielding me this time and for his commitment to our young men and women in uniform. My father served many, many years at Fort Bliss, Texas. I rise today to discuss the three amendments that I would have offered had the Republican leadership allowed genuine debate on our Nation's defense policy. Of course, instead we heard earlier a rule was crafted which silenced probably over 95 amendments. Let me talk about my three amendments for a minute. The first amendment which I offered called for the creation of an international commission to monitor prison conditions in Iraq. This commission would be made up of representatives from the Iraqi Government and Iraqi civil society, the International Red Cross, the International Red Crescent, the United Nations, the United States and Coalition Armed Forces. Contrary to what the President's lawyers apparently think, the Geneva Conventions is neither quaint nor is it obsolete. This amendment would have ensured compliance to help restore badly damaged United States credibility. We have all seen the pictures. The whole world has seen the pictures. We need to take action to correct the situation and to convince the Iraqi people and the world that we are abiding by international law. My second amendment would have created a database of those who have been detained. Family members should not have to wonder if their loved ones have simply disappeared. We have learned that over 70 percent of the detainees probably are individuals who should not be detained. We cannot condone the policy and practice of holding ghost prisoners who just vanish into United States custody. This is simply wrong. But this amendment also was rejected. Finally, my third amendment prohibited the use of United States funds in the overthrow of democratically elected governments. That is a simple democratic principle that I thought we held. Given the allegations of this government's involvement in the overthrow of President Aristide's government in Haiti, this amendment would have restored confidence in the protection of democracy. It was born out of the Bush administration's alleged involvement in the recent coup in Haiti. First of all, this is a similar amendment that was instituted under Representative Edward Boland, who prohibited the Reagan administration from using money to fund the Nicaraguan contras. It is shocking and totally shameful that we even need an amendment saying that our government is not in the business of overthrowing its democratically elected counterparts throughout the world; but history, including our very recent history, teaches us that we do. This amendment also was rejected, along with many others offered by my colleagues. Some would have called for an exit strategy from Iraq; others would have reined in the uncontrolled and unmonitored use of private contractors, and that would have prevented the escalation, of course, of the arms race. These are, again, some other amendments that would have been allowed had we been allowed to debate them. I say that the Republican majority continues to abuse its power.

Ms. LEE

Ms. LEE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in regards to H.R. 4061, the Assistance for Orphans and Vulnerable Children Act of 2004, which passed the House International Relations Committee by unanimous consent on March 31. On May 5 the International Relations Committee filed House Report 108-479. Because House rules prohibit the addition of cosponsors to a bill once the committee report has been filed, I am not able to formally add three Members of Congress as cosponsors of this legislation. I ask that the Record show that Mr. Calvert of California, Mr. Bachus of Alabama, and Mr. Gerlach of Pennsylvania are in support of my bill and should be considered by this body as cosponsors a of H.R. 4061.

Ms. LEE

Ms. LEE. Mr. Speaker, this is an enormously important day in the lives of African Americans and in the history of this country. Brown vs. Board of Education, almost without question, is the most important Supreme Court case of the twentieth century. With Brown, the Court threw out decades of doctrine and centuries of racist practice in this country in their conclusion that ``Separate educational facilities are inherently unequal.'' By making this just assertion, they forced this nation to begin to live up to its own promises and its own ideals. In the words of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., Brown represented a ``joyous daybreak to end the long night of enforced segregation.'' Brown was a transforming moment in the life of this country. Sadly, it was not immediately transformative, nor is the metamorphosis complete, even today. It took years--even decades in many cities and states--for the mandate of the Court to be carried out. In many places, it was met with fervent political opposition and violent resistance. In Virginia, for instance, the Governor closed the public school system rather than allow it to be integrated. And in 1957, National Guard troops had to be sent in to guard school children in Little Rock, Arkansas when they tried to begin their studies at Central High School. In the years after Brown, many, heroic people risked and sometimes lost their lives in the fight to desegregate schools, universities, stores and lunch counters, the workplace. And they risked their well- being in the fight to ensure that they enjoyed that fundamental American right of being able to vote. But in the end, the forces of racism did not prevail because of the Thurgood Marshalls of the world, the Medger Evers, the Rosa Parks, the Fannie Lou Hamers, the Martin Luther King Jrs, and the Malcolm X's. They ensured that this nation would live up to its own promises, the guarantees that were laid out in Brown. The Civil Rights Act of 1964, for instance, came about because brave men and women demanded it through bus boycotts and sit-ins and marches on Washington and a thousand other battles. The Voting Rights Act of 1965 came about because people like Fannie Lou Hamer dared to fight to register to vote, dared to form the Mississippi Freedom Democratic Party, dared to take on the Democratic Party and the establishment, and dared to win. The Civil Rights Act of 1968, which established the principles of fair access to housing, came about because African Americans demanded the full rights of citizenship and because they knew that housing is a human right. Unfortunately, there are some people in Washington today who still need to recognize that fact. Thanks to their efforts, Brown became the reality of the nation, not just the law of the land. Today, on this 50th anniversary, Brown is still the law of the land, but it is no longer a national reality. Legal walls of segregation have been replaced in many areas by de facto separation by neighborhood and community. Our schools are becoming less integrated by the year, and in too many cases, integration has vanished entirely from some schools. Across the country, efforts have been made--some of which have been successful, unfortunately--to undo the affirmative action programs, whose goal has been to create the fully diverse and integrated justice that the Supreme Court envisioned. In my home state of California, an African American, Ward Connerly, led the Proposition 209 initiative in 1996, which eliminated affirmative action programs for women and people of color run by state or local governments in the areas of public employment, contracting, and education. As chair of the California Black Legislature at the time, I fought against it, as did many, many Californians of all races. In what was a giant setback for Brown and racial equality, Proposition 209 passed, and in one fell swoop, it wiped out a very significant program that was intended to level an extremely uneven playing field. The results have been devastating. African American and Latino enrollments at far too many of our state's universities are in serious decline. As a recent story in the San Francisco Chronicle indicated, African American admissions at UC-Berkeley, which is in my district, are down 29 percent this year. In this year's freshman class, fewer than two and a half percent of the students accepted were African American. Two and a half percent. And compounding this serious injustice, Governor Schwarzenegger is cutting the budget for the outreach efforts of our universities. These numbers are an embarrassment. They are an embarrassment for our students, ourselves, and for the promise of Brown. These shameful statistics have profound economic, political, and cultural meaning. Do these bleak numbers that I have cited mean that Brown v Board of Education failed? No, but it means that our revolution is not over yet. It means that our revolution is still incomplete. On this 50th anniversary of this enormous Supreme Court victory, we must rededicate ourselves to carry out that opinion whose words rang out clear as a bell when Earl Warren, the former California governor and Oakland resident, read them, ``Separate educational facilities are inherently unequal.'' We can not--we will not--let the victories that were won so hard 50 years ago by Thurgood Marshall, Linda Brown, and so many others be reversed. Tonight we celebrate that moment, and we rededicate ourselves to ensuring that justice thrives in this country.

Ms. LEE

Ms. LEE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in regards to H.R. 4061, the Assistance for Orphans and Vulnerable Children Act of 2004, which passed the House International Relations Committee by unanimous consent on March 31th. Last week the International Relations Committee filed House Report 108-479. Because House rules prohibit the addition of additional co-sponsors to a bill once the committee report has been filed, I am not able to formally add another Member of Congress as a co-sponsor of this legislation. I ask that the record show that Ms. Granger of Texas is in support of my bill and should be considered by this body as a co-sponsor of H.R. 4061.

Ms. LEE

Ms. LEE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in regards to H.R. 4061, the Assistance for Orphans and Vulnerable Children Act of 2004, which passed the House International Relations Committee by unanimous consent on March 31st. Last week the International Relations Committee filed House Report 108-479. Because House rules prohibit the addition of additional co-sponsors to a bill once the committee report has been filed, I am not able to formally add another Member of Congress as a co-sponsor of this legislation. I ask that the record show that Mr. Terry of Nebraska is in support of my bill and should be considered by this body as a co-sponsor of H.R. 4061.

Ms. LEE

Ms. LEE. Mr. Speaker, I rise to express my outrage and disappointment over the crisis in Iraq. I must start by condemning, in the strongest possible terms, the brutal decapitation of Nicholas Berg. The act was unconscionable, and I join all of my colleagues in sending my deepest sympathies to his family and loved ones. What kind of climate allows for such unbelievable, gruesome acts? What kind of climate are we creating with the abuses at Abu Ghraib? Secretary Rumsfeld has dismissed the Geneva Convention. That sends the wrong message. That message clearly, however, stuck. The horrifying photographs of the abuses in Abu Ghraib are symptoms of a much larger failure of leadership. Earlier this week, President Bush said that Secretary Rumsfeld is doing a superb job. Of course, that is the same President who communicated that the mission in Iraq was accomplished over 12 months and 500 American lives ago. Nothing is superb about this situation, and little has been accomplished. The buck stops with the Commander in Chief, and so does the responsibility for the disaster we now face.

Ms. LEE

Ms. LEE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in regards to H.R. 4061, the Assistance for Orphans and Vulnerable Children Act of 2004, which passed the House International Relations Committee by unanimous consent on March 31. Last week the International Relations Committee filed House Report 108-479. Because House rules prohibit the addition of additional cosponsors to a bill once the committee report has been filed, I am not able to formally add six Members of Congress as cosponsors of this legislation. I ask that the record show that Mr. Olver of Massachusetts, Mr. Weldon of Pennsylvania, Mr. Gillmor of Ohio, Ms. Hart of Pennsylvania, Mr. Holt of New Jersey, and Mr. Crowley of New York are in support of my bill and should be considered by this body as cosponsors of H.R. 4061.

Ms. LEE

Ms. LEE. Mr. Speaker, first let me just say tonight that I also rise to celebrate Asian Pacific American Heritage Month, which commemorates the significant contributions of Asian Pacific Americans throughout our country's history. I would just like to take a moment and especially thank the gentleman from California (Mr. Honda), the leader of our Asian Pacific American Caucus, for organizing this Special Order this evening and also for the gentleman's consistent leadership on so many issues which affect not only the Asian Pacific American community, but the entire country and the entire world. I thank the gentleman for his leadership and for making sure that we stay on point. Let me say tonight that I, too, honor the memory and the legacy of a very good friend, a great woman who left this Earth much, much too soon, the first woman of color to serve in the House of Representatives, our great sister, Congresswoman Patsy Takemoto Mink. She made such an impact in this body, and tonight as we celebrate Asian Pacific American Heritage Month, I want to just remind us of Patsy's great legacy. Also, I would like to recognize the contributions of Asian Pacific Americans in my district, the 9th Congressional District of California, the East Bay of Northern California, and really commend everyone for their dedicated service and vision in making life better for those in our community and our Nation. Asian Americans and Pacific Islanders have long played a crucial role in the life and the history of the East Bay. The region's identity has been profoundly shaped by its place on the Pacific Rim. However, today Asian Pacific Americans still face a wide variety of challenges, including access to educational opportunities and community resources. I specifically want to talk about three great organizations in my own district that are working to strip down the language and educational barriers that isolate far too many Asian Americans and Pacific Islanders today. They are the Asian Immigrant Women Advocates, Oakland Asian Students Educational Services, and Asian Health Services. First, the Asian Immigrant Women Advocates has been providing resources to low-income Asian immigrant women workers for over 20 years. They work with women workers employed in the garment industry, in hotels, in restaurants, and other low-wage industries in the Bay Area. Every day they stimulate positive change and empower disenfranchised women through education, leadership development, and collective action so they can fight for dignity and justice in their working place and for enhanced and more rational, fairer, and more equitable living conditions. Secondly, the Oakland Asian Students Educational Services motivates youth who have limited access to maximize their potential through education and social support. OASES provides personalized academic support and enrichment programs for youth from the first grade through their high school graduations. Through OASES, students take technology classes to gain computer skills and are tutored in areas such as math, science and, social studies. Recent young immigrants who face linguistic and social barriers in their schools can also receive language support. With so many social, educational, and economic challenges, health and access to quality care is also a major concern. Now the four leading causes of death among Asian Americans and Pacific Islander women are cancer, heart disease, stroke, and unintentional injuries. That is why the work of the third organization that I would like to highlight tonight, the East Bay Consortium of Health Care Centers, their work is critical, especially as being part of the Asian Health Services. Asian Health Services is a comprehensive community health center that provides medical care, health education, insurance counseling, and client advocacy to the underserved Asian and Pacific Islander population in Alameda County. Serving the community since 1974, they now provide medical services to 15,000 patients annually. Their staff of 150, which includes 18 doctors and physician assistants and 23 nurses, is bilingual in nine languages. In addition to providing high- quality health care, AHS is home to the Language and Cultural Access program, a medical interpretation and translation service, and Community Voices for Immigrant Health, a health policy development program. As Members may know, recent immigrants face many obstacles today. Organizations like these help their clients to conquer these barriers. I want to salute them tonight for their achievements and congratulate them for a job well done and a job that continues to soar on behalf of our community. In addition, as part of Asian Pacific American Heritage Month, I believe that it is also very important to celebrate the accomplishments of prominent Asian American leaders in our community. Let me just recognize Oakland City Council members Jean Quan and Henry Chang and Danny Wan. Also our supervisor, Alice Lai Bitker and one of the most powerful persons in the California legislature, our majority leader Wilma Chan. They work daily to enhance the quality of life for Asian Americans and Pacific Islanders, also for our entire community, the States and the entire Nation. For this, I am deeply grateful. Finally, I want to recognize a hero for many of us, someone who has profoundly affected the lives of all Americans, Professor Ronald Takaki. Professor Takaki is a foremost thinker in the field of multicultural education and ethnic studies. He has been a professor in Asian American studies at the University of California Berkeley for more than 30 years. His research and teaching have shed light on the vast contributions that Asian Americans have made to the history, to the culture, and to the achievements of our country. Professor Takaki believes that the study of multiculturalism results in a more accurate understanding of who we are as Americans. The grandson of Japanese immigrants to Hawaii, Professor Takaki cites the moral vision of Martin Luther King, Jr. and the civil rights movement as the stimulus for his study of race in America. Since then, much of the core curriculum in ethnic studies has grown from his own wide- ranging original research. In 1984, he was a founder of Berkeley's Ph.D. program in ethnic studies, the first of its kind in America. Professor Takaki is retiring this year from the University of California Berkeley and tonight I want to honor him for his vast contributions to bettering our society and in championing diversity and minority rights in our country. Mr. Speaker, tonight in conclusion, as a proud member of the Congressional Asian Pacific American Caucus, I am pleased to join the gentleman from California tonight. I want to thank him again for organizing this Special Order. As we commemorate and as we celebrate the crucial role that Asian Americans and Pacific Islanders have played and continue to play in the development of this Nation, we must also recognize at the same time the unique needs and challenges of the 13.1 million Asian Pacific Americans in the United States and work towards supporting efforts to improve their future. I again thank the gentleman for his leadership and his friendship.

Ms. LEE

Ms. LEE. Mr. Speaker, I rise before you today to honor the Sun- Reporter, one of this country's most respected African American newspapers, on the occasion of their 60th anniversary. The Sun-Reporter serves as an indispensable voice for the African American community in the San Francisco Bay Area and across the Nation. The Sun-Reporter was founded in 1944 at a time when African Americans were relocating to the Bay Area in large numbers to work in the wartime shipyards. Founded by Thomas C. Fleming, a brilliant journalist, the paper originated as The Reporter, but soon merged with the Sun-Reporter, a paper acquired in a poker game by Dr. Carlton B. Goodlett, Fleming's longtime friend and a significant drum major for justice. Thus, the Sun-Reporter was born, with Goodlett as the paper's Editor and Publisher, Dr. Dan Collins as Co-Publisher, and Fleming as Managing Editor. In 1951, Dr. Goodlett became the sole publisher. Under the leadership of Dr. Goodlett and Mr. Fleming, the Sun- Reporter became a vital source of news and an editorial voice for the Bay Area's African American community. Over time, it developed a reputation as one of this country's preeminent African American newspapers. The paper has taken strong editorial stands against racism, segregation, war, and the unequal treatment of African Americans and other groups that have experienced systemic prejudice and discrimination. It has actively fought for civil rights, fair employment and housing law, and global peace. The paper has taken courageous positions on a wide range of issues. It relentlessly challenged school segregation; it denounced Senator Joseph McCarthy's assault on civil liberties in the days of the cold war; and, as a result of its publicity, the Sun-Reporter was largely responsible for bringing Paul Robeson to San Francisco for a concert at the Third Baptist Church when he was barred from appearing in all other venues. The Sun-Reporter has been a focal point for the African-American community in the Bay Area. It has been host to visits from many luminaries, including Malcolm X, Muhammad Ali, Dick Gregory, and numerous civil rights activists. Many young and talented journalists who got their start at the Sun- Reporter have gone on to successful careers in journalism, including Lance Gilmore, Edith Austin, Belva Davis, Valerie Coleman, and many more. In 1997, Amelia Ashley-Ward succeeded Dr. Goodlett as the paper's Publisher. Ms. Ashley-Ward, an award-winning journalist and photojournalist, has continually raised the Sun-Reporters' standard of excellence, and it remains an important and valued source of news and editorials for the Bay Area's African American community. I take great pride in honoring the Sun-Reporter today for its excellence in journalism and for its unyielding pursuit of equality and justice for African Americans everywhere. We are grateful to have such a fine newspaper in the Bay Area, and look forward to many more years of success.

Ms. LEE

Ms. LEE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in regards to H.R. 4061, the Assistance for Orphans and Vulnerable Children Act of 2004, which passed the House International Relations Committee by unanimous consent on March 31st. Last night the International Relations Committee filed House Report 108-479. Because House rules prohibit the addition of additional co-sponsors to a bill once the committee report has been filed, I was not able to formally add seven Members of Congress as co-sponsors of this legislation. I ask that the Record show that Mr. Inslee of Washington, Mr. Souder of Indiana, Mr. Osborne of Nebraska, Mr. Davis of Illinois, Ms. Majette of Georgia, Mr. Udall of New Mexico, and Mr. Hunter of California are in support of my bill and should be considered by this body as cosponsors of H.R. 4061.

Ms. LEE

Ms. LEE. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. McGovern) for yielding me time. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong opposition to this rule. This resolution condemns abuse, but presents glaring and unacceptable omissions. The boiler plate language offers no apology, does nothing to ease the international tensions, and calls on the Department of Defense, quite frankly, to investigate itself. The resolution is insufficient on all three grounds. We need a full- scale bipartisan congressional investigation into these charges and their devastating international consequences and also the role of private contractors in this war. I hope that these horrible human rights abuses are not just the tip of an iceberg. Tens of thousands of American troops are serving with great courage. These outrages do not typify their behavior; but they do, they do endanger their lives. As for those accused and others, I quite frankly worry about our young men and women in uniform who are being dehumanized. These young men and women are being dehumanized. They are being dehumanized by the policies of the Bush administration and a war that allows them to cross this threshold. Finally, Mr. Speaker, this resolution presents really a very false portrait of Iraq, one that is safe and secure and prosperous. I urge Members to vote against this rule. This really is not about a handful of photographs. It is about the failures of leadership at the very highest levels.

Ms. LEE

Ms. LEE. Mr. Speaker, let me first thank the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Brown) for organizing tonight's series of statements about the consequences of the Bush administration's tragic and terrible decisions. Now, last month, the President stated that he could not really think of a single particular mistake that he had made in office, though he conceded that he must have made some. Even worse, the President was either unable or unwilling to say what lessons he had learned from the process. Now, tonight some of us are here to talk about the administration's decisions because, quite frankly, ``mistake'' is far too soft a word. It almost makes it sound like an accident. We are also here to talk about the consequences and the lessons that the entire world is learning from this administration. Now, in the newspapers and on television in the past week we have all seen the horrifying pictures of American soldiers torturing, tormenting and humiliating Iraqi prisoners. We all know that this does not characterize the tens of thousands of brave men and women serving in Iraq, but we do note that it endangers their lives. These pictures are horrifying, both because of the callous disregard for human rights that they show by individual American soldiers but also for the far more fundamental failures at the highest levels of leadership, failures that began with an administration that led the Nation to war under false pretenses. The pictures are also horrifying for their consequences. What will happen to the next American soldiers or civilian captured? If we, the world's most powerful military country and greatest democracy, will not abide by the Geneva Convention and international law, then who will? What will happen to our already devastated international reputation? The Washington Post today reports that the State Department's Intelligence and Research Department is deeply concerned about a cascade of international criticism that could seriously affect our broader foreign goals. Leaked portions of a 53-page report by Major General Antonio Taguba completed in February conclude that there were numerous, numerous instances of ``sadistic, blatant and wanton criminal abuses at Abu Ghraib'' prison. I hope that this is not just the tip of the iceberg. Individuals involved have stated that they were encouraged by military intelligence to engage in this abuse. Now, as one who has a background in psychology and mental health, I worry for our young men and women in uniform who are being dehumanized, dehumanized by a war that allows them to cross this threshold. Now, many of the men and women and teenagers held in this prison, actually, the infamous prison which was known as a torture center for Saddam Hussein, they were picked up in random sweeps and at highway checkpoints. People were held for months on little or no evidence, with no charges, no change at appeal, and now, it seems, in addition to that potentially widespread injustice, they may have been abused or even tortured. The Department of Defense is investigating these charges, but he oversight quite frankly must be broader and the questions that are asked must be more sweeping. Congress absolutely has to exercise its oversight authority though a full scale investigation, a Congressional investigation. Part of this examination also has to look at private contractors, some of whom will are running these prisons and some of whom are allegedly involved in these terrible acts. Human Rights Watch and other organizations have widely asked about the role of private contractors who seem to be operating entirely outside the boundaries of authority in a complete legal vacuum. They are exempt from prosecution by Iraqi courts. They are beyond the military chain of command and its court- martial authority, and they are outside the range of the United States courts. This is one more consequence of turning over so much power and so much money to private contractors. This is one more example of a foreign policy and a military policy gone wrong. The United States has turned this prison especially, Abu Ghraib into a house of horrors. That failure is a metaphor for a foreign policy that has gone absolutely and tragically wrong. Our Nation is perceived in many circles as waging war on Islam. The pictures in the world's newspapers will only compound and confirm that perception. Those photographs build on an image of a Nation that ignores the United Nations, when it chooses to, of course, and turns to it when it gets in trouble. They add to a portrait of a country that preaches about human rights but fails to uphold them. The pictures are just one more piece of evidence that this administration led our Nation to war without really a plan for its aftermath. And that utter failure, as I said, ``mistake'' is far too soft a word. This policy has contributed to more than 500 American deaths since, mind you, since President Bush landed on that aircraft carrier and stood underneath that banner proclaiming ``Mission accomplished.'' Exactly what mission have we accomplished? We have not found any weapons of mass destruction, but we have seriously damaged our international credibility. We have not established any semblance of stability or safety in Iraq, although the deadline for the supposed Iraqi takeover of authority is just a month away. We have not promoted the cause of democracy in the Middle East or anywhere else, but we have undermined the rule of international law. We have not built a strong network of friends and allies to advance our joint goals, but we have squandered the enormous goodwill that the world stretched out to us in 2001. Ultimately, we have not made the world or ourselves safer. The policies of the Bush administration have made the world a far more dangerous place. Tomorrow, the State Department issues its annual report on U.S. efforts to support human rights and democracy across the globe. Just what is this report going to say about the Bush administration's failures in Iraq and its efforts to overthrow democracy in Haiti? Just what is this report going to say about the abuse of individuals and organizations?

Ms. LEE

Ms. LEE. Mr. Chairman, it would be morally irresponsible of us if we did not fight these battles and, hopefully, one day we will win the war.

Ms. LEE. Madam Speaker, let me thank the gentleman from Maryland (Chairman Cummings) for holding these weekly special orders, which provide us a forum to speak out on the most pressing issues facing our constituents, the African American community, and, indeed, our country. I would like to take this opportunity to commend the chairman for the outstanding address that he delivered yesterday at the National Press Club. In his eloquent and very thoughtful message, he outlined the Congressional Black Caucus' agenda and our priorities on both the domestic and foreign policy arenas. Part of his address was dedicated to the topic that is on the minds of millions of Americans today, and that is jobs and the economy. Madam Speaker, I rise tonight to discuss the same vital issue. We know that people are suffering under the Bush economy and we know that we must reverse the damage done and move forward to grow our economy and create real, good-paying jobs. We must also protect existing jobs here at home. Economic security should really be part of a major national security strategy. It should be a key component. How do we ensure domestic tranquility when so many Americans are jobless? I think most of us are familiar with Bush's less-than-rosy record on the economy, but I want to just start with some statistics about Bush's poor record on job creation in minority communities. As the gentleman from Maryland (Chairman Cummings) mentioned, the African American unemployment rate in March increased to an astounding 10.2 percent, while Hispanic unemployment rates remained persistent at 7.4 percent. These harsh and telling numbers came during the very same month, mind you, that the Bush administration was really bragging and boasting about an economic recovery. Excuse me? But I just have to ask, just who really is benefiting from our Nation's long overdue job creation efforts? I cannot tell you how many of my constituents have asked me that very same question. Another question I often hear is, what is President Bush's plan for creating the millions of jobs that he has lost, mind you, that he has lost on his watch? What is he doing to address the suffering which jobless individuals have endured during his 3 years in office? I hear former, and, yes, they are former manufacturing workers, talk about the decimation of their sector over the past 3 years. It is really hard to fathom the reality that since taking office, President Bush has lost about 3 million good-paying jobs. Under this administration our country has simply hemorrhaged manufacturing jobs, and given this administration's support for outsourcing jobs and shipping them overseas, the pain and the suffering from job loss will likely only worsen. We all know that manufacturing is extremely critical for the financial security of millions of families. Every manufacturing job creates at least four other jobs. It is also critical to our national security. Today, manufacturing is at a 53-year low. What a lost opportunity and what a sad record this administration has created. Does this President and this administration care about the decimation of an entire industry? Does this administration have a plan to really remedy this mess? And that is what it is, it is a mess, and it is creating havoc in the lives of millions of American families. And what about the Republican leadership in Congress? Can they explain the 2.8 million manufacturing jobs lost over the last 3 years? Yesterday the Republicans unveiled a proposal entitled ``Jobs for the 21st Century.'' Like many of their proposals, we know better than to be fooled by that name. The plan is really another classic Republican example of how rhetoric, rhetoric, mind you, trumps substance, and how the monied interest's agenda reigns supreme. We should be providing incentives to companies that create real jobs here at home, rather than sending them overseas. That is why we have launched a discharge petition to bring the bipartisan Crane-Rangel manufacturing bill to the floor. Our efforts to keep jobs here at home must also extend beyond our manufacturing sector, because not only are companies exporting our manufacturing jobs overseas, they are also exporting high-paying white- collar jobs overseas as well. According to a recent study by the Haas School of Business, 14 million white-collar service jobs representing 11 percent of the total United States workforce are in danger of being outsourced overseas. We should also consider legislation like the Defending American Jobs Act introduced by my colleague the gentleman from Vermont (Mr. Sanders). This legislation would prohibit companies that lay off a greater percentage of U.S. workers than they do overseas from receiving grants, loans or loan guarantees from the Federal Government. That just makes common sense. The Republican House leadership really should allow us to consider these types of proposals. Instead of short-term extensions to the transportation bill, we should really be voting on a strong highway bill that would create over 1.8 million jobs. The Republicans' reliance on these short-term extensions have cost America thousands of jobs already. And what about the Republican leadership's failure to extend Federal unemployment benefits for out-of-work Americans? That, to me, is just mean, it is unconscionable and it is wrong. In March, a record 354,000 Americans exhausted their State unemployment benefits, and the number of long-term unemployed Americans is rising, with nearly one in four jobless workers out of a job for 27 weeks or more. That is a long time. By the end of this month, 1.5 million Americans will have exhausted all of their benefits. So I think that the Republicans really should be ashamed of their ``compassion.'' This compassion is a compassion that I, quite frankly, do not understand. It does not extend to helping jobless workers feed their families or pay their utility bills until they can find a job. Even Federal Reserve Chairman Greenspan has expressed his support for extending unemployment benefits to long-term unemployed workers, saying that it would be, I think he said it would be a good idea because of the exceptionally high number of exhaustions. Chairman Greenspan has also admitted that he does not have all the answers when it comes to the economy. As a member of the House Committee on Financial Services, I have the opportunity to question the chairman on a regular basis, and in March I asked him, I said what do we tell our young people? And the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Cummings) I think said this very eloquently tonight as he reflected upon what he is going to talk about at these graduation speeches. I asked Chairman Greenspan, what do we tell our young people after they have gone to school, after they have played by the rules, after they have done everything we have told them to do to realize the American dream, what do we tell them when they cannot find a job? What do we tell them in terms of where are the jobs of the future? We have lost manufacturing jobs, the service industry is decimated, and now the high-tech industry will soon be gone. So what in the world do we tell our young people? Where are the jobs? Where are the jobs? We are trying to get our young people focused on how to stay off the streets, how to be productive citizens, how to engage in productive work, and yet there are no jobs out there for them. Chairman Greenspan's response was he just simply did not know. He did not have the answer. That is in essence what he said. And I must say that the answers, quite frankly, are not to be found in the policies of this Bush administration or this Republican-controlled House. We must answer these questions and take action to reverse the loss of jobs that we have seen under this Bush administration. Democrats have a plan to do exactly that. We have a plan to create jobs, to keep jobs on our shores, and to prevent the shipping of jobs overseas, a policy that the Bush administration has totally, mind you, totally embraced. So it is up to the American people now to wake up. November really cannot come fast enough. We must ensure that the tide is turned as we move together to create economic growth and good-paying jobs for all. So I thank the chairman again for the opportunity for the Congressional Black Caucus to talk to America to try to raise these issues with regard to how we see the deal going down, as it relates to the American people and the jobless rates and the job loss and the shambles that many people find their lives in.

Ms. LEE

Ms. LEE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to add my voice to the chorus of support for my colleague, Rush Holt's, Voter Confidence and Increased Accessibility Act of 2003, H.R. 2239. As a proud co-sponsor of this important piece of legislation, I believe very strongly that we need to ensure a voter-verifiable paper audit trail for direct recording electronic voting machines, or touch screen machines as they are commonly called, in order to ensure the validity of the election process. The modernization of voting equipment and the switch to computers encouraged by the Help America Vote Act of 2002 has generated considerable concern among my constituents that the voting process may be subject to manipulation from unknown sources. These concerns have been magnified by the complexities involved in maintaining the integrity of computer systems, training poll workers in proper setup, operation, and troubleshooting, and educating the public on the proper operation of these touch screen machines. Listening to these concerns and understanding the importance of earning the public's trust in these new systems in order to carry out a fair election in California, last year our Secretary of State, Kevin Shelley, convened an Ad Hoc Touch Screen Task Force to provide recommendations on the best ways to address these issues. Based on the discussions and recommendations that grew out of this task force, the Secretary of State concluded last November that a voter verified paper audit trail should be required on all touch screen voting machines used in California. Beginning on July 1, 2005, the Secretary of State will require all local jurisdictions purchasing new touch screen machines to ensure that they contain a voter verified paper audit trail system that is fully accessible to all voters, including those living with disabilities and those for whom English is a second language. Local jurisdictions that are currently using touch screen machines without the voter verified paper feature will have until July 1, 2006 to retrofit or replace them. While these actions are certainly a step in the right direction, like Mr. Holt, I believe we must accelerate our efforts to ensure that each and every touch screen system employs voter verified paper technology as soon as possible, and at the very least by the election in November. I think the experience in my own district in Alameda County during the California primary on March 2nd, is proof enough of why the integrity and operation of these touch screen systems must be improved. Even before the vote took place on March 2nd, we knew that Alameda County would have problems, as the Secretary of State informed us on February 13th that our machines did not meet State certification due to last minute adjustments sought by the vendor to correct several perceived flaws in the system. But because the notice from the Secretary of State's office came so close to the election, the County felt that it had to conduct the election with the existing touch screen system, even with the modifications sought by the vendor because without these machines, as the Alameda County Registrar indicated in a letter dated February 16th to the Secretary, ``there will be thousands of people unable to vote.'' On February 23rd, following a similar appeal by San Diego County, which utilized the same machines, and a subsequent test of the modified system, the Secretary of State's office provided administrative approval for one-time limited use of these devices for the March primary. The fact that the voting machines' vendor sought modifications to its product at such a late stage just prior to the primary, and the position that this vendor placed both the Secretary of State's office, and our local registrar in Alameda County is indicative of the evolving nature of touch screen systems, and provides even further proof of the necessity of a voter verified paper audit to backup the electronic systems. Of course, that was not the end of the problem with these devices in my district. Having conditionally approved the touch screen devices for use on primary day, the Secretary of State's office strongly recommend to both Alameda and San Diego Counties, that an appropriate backup voting system should be put in place in the case of a failure in the electronic devices. And, sure enough, fail, was just what these devices did. Due to a number of technical issues involving the battery system of the machines and because of incorrect or insufficient trouble-shooting information provided to poll workers by the vendor, many of the touch screen systems in Alameda County did not operate properly when polling places opened on March 2nd. Thankfully the Alameda County Registrar had followed the Secretary of State's advice and provided paper provisional ballots in case the touch screen systems had failed. So, many voters who went to their polling places voted with paper ballots until the County was able to identify and correct the technical issues surrounding the touch screen systems. However in some cases, polling places ran out of these paper provisional ballots before the electronic devices were fixed, and as a result some voters were unable to cast a ballot unless they were able to return later in the day. In addition despite the initial problems with the touch screen systems that were overcome, several of these devices also failed for other reasons during the course of the day, further undermining their reliability. I won't even get into the problems that San Diego County experienced with these touch screen machines but let me say this. Despite all the problems that we experienced with the touch screen systems on March 2nd, without the existence of a voter verified paper audit trail, we still do not know if any of these touch screen machines failed to properly mark and tabulate each individuals vote once they were finally put into use. That is why the Voter Confidence and Increased Accessibility Act of 2003 makes sense. I applaud my colleague for introducing it, and I urge this body to pass this bill so we can ensure that the public has confidence in our election process no matter the kind of system that is in place.

Ms. LEE

Ms. LEE. Mr. Speaker, I join my colleagues in recognition of one of the great tragedies of the 20th Century, the Armenian Genocide. The Armenian Genocide occurred between 1915 and 1916. On April 24, 1915, it began when Armenian leaders were rounded up, deported and murdered. One and a half million Armenians were murdered and hundreds of thousands of others displaced and deported. Today, we must reflect on those whose lives were taken as a result of the Genocide. Many political leaders, scholars, and professional organizations are becoming proactive in making sure everyone acknowledges and remembers this devastating event to the Armenian population. This genocide is another significant example of the injustice, torture, pain, and death that grows out of intolerance, cruelty, and hatred. There are still a great number of survivors of the genocide in America and many of their children and grandchildren reside throughout the country. On this day we join them in remembering and acknowledging the heinous act that victimized their families. If we let such atrocities be forgotten, then we are in danger of letting them be repeated.

Ms. LEE

Ms. LEE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today, on Earth Day, to speak out in support of policies that protect our planet, promote energy security, and preserve human health. Unfortunately, in its 3 years in office, the Bush administration has launched an all-out assault on our environment in all three of these areas. Bush policies have weakened protections on air, water, and public lands, and these assaults pose a direct threat to public health now and in the future. The actions we take now to protect these vital resources and to reinvent our approach to energy will have enormous consequences for future generations. Global warming, perhaps the most catastrophic and far-reaching consequence of our current practices, will not wait; our efforts to tackle these problems can't wait either. We need to begin by preserving existing protections, from maintaining the well being of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge by continuing to ban drilling in this precious wilderness to maintaining the well being of our children by halting the disastrous Bush administration rollbacks of our clean air and water regulations. Our next step must be enforcement of existing laws and regulations. The Republican budget cuts environmental programs by $39 billion. At those levels, we cannot enforce existing public health safeguards. To make matters worse, the administration has abandoned the ``polluter pays'' principle: taxpayers, not the polluters themselves, will now be responsible for the costs of cleaning up toxic Superfund sites. And one in every four people in this country live within 4 miles of a major toxic waste site on the Superfund list. For people of color, these numbers are even worse and so are the consequences. Life expectancy itself is an environmental justice issue. In this country, life expectancy projections are shaped as much by race as by gender. These disparities follow a cradle to grave cycle: beginning with infant mortality, continuing with workplace hazards and increased exposure to pollution, and ending with disparate access to healthcare, diagnoses, and medical treatment. We see these forces clearly in diseases that strike most deeply into our cities and affect children most severely. Asthma rates among the urban poor are reaching alarming proportions. Death rates from asthma, and a host of other treatable diseases, are significantly higher among African Americans than any other ethnic group. Asthma rates in Oakland, in my district, are among the highest in the country. Children in West Oakland are seven times more likely to be hospitalized for asthma than children in the rest of California. On Earth Day, it is important that we recognize just what is at stake here: our air, our water, our lands, and our children's health. We need to stop the Bush administration's assault on existing protections, and we need to invest in new solutions, especially in the energy arena, that will increase our own security as well as protect the environment around us.

Ms. LEE

Ms. LEE. Mr. Speaker, let me thank the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Pallone) for his continuing leadership and his quest to pursue the truth. Our democracy is standing at a crossroads, and he is helping us move in the correct direction. Hopefully we are not too late. I also want to thank the distinguished chair of the Congressional Black Caucus, the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Cummings), for being a leader on this issue and on so many issues that we are confronted with here in our country and for continuing to try and every week now attempt to wake up America. And at this moment in time, our Nation is confronting a growing credibility gap from the highest reaches of power. So I am glad that my colleague continues to keep on this because there is no way we should rest until the gap between the administration's rhetoric and reality become closer together. I think people deserve to know the truth. Let me just first start by talking about the ongoing tragedy in Iraq. I would also like to talk about how this pattern of distortion about the most fundamental issues of war and peace is really reflected in other foreign and domestic policies also. This is a very consistent kind of trend that we are seeing. In Iraq, first of all, we have to begin by recognizing that the latest and ongoing tragedies really, once again, cause us to pause in terms of the terrible loss of life and in a conflict that is escalating every day out of control. So our thoughts and our prayers go out to all of those who have lost loved ones or who really anxiously now watch the news each night, each terrified night, actually, and worry about what they might hear. The chaos in Iraq today is a direct contradiction to the picture painted by the administration before and during this war. When it comes to Iraq, we see an enormous gap between the truth and the administration's message to the American people, the Congress, and the world. As the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, also our ranking member of the House Committee on Government Reform, the gentleman from California (Mr. Waxman) and many others have found, this credibility gap on Iraq emerges especially in terms of claims about weapons of mass destruction, claims about Iraqi connections to al Qaeda, and claims about how much the war would cost and how long it would take. For instance, on the weapons of mass destruction before the war, Vice President Cheney stated that we believe Saddam Hussein has, in fact, reconstituted nuclear weapons. Before the war President Bush said that Iraq was buying aluminum tubes and African uranium for nuclear weapons. Secretary of State Colin Powell said, and these are quotes mind you, that by conservative estimates, he said, Iraq today has a stockpile of between 100 and 500 tons of chemical weapons agent. Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld stated that Saddam Hussein has another, quote, ``large unaccounted for stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons and an active program to acquire and develop nuclear weapons.'' Now, all of these statements are frightening, and they present a portrait of an Iraqi Government that possessed enormous stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons and even nuclear weapons. Well, even the administration's chief weapons inspector David Kay said, ``We were almost all wrong.'' Well, the fact is there were many people who were not wrong, many countries who were not wrong, from Members of Congress who voted for my amendment that would have rejected the war and would have said the U.N. inspections process should move forward, that is the way we find and destroy weapons of mass destruction, to IAEA Director Mohammed el- Baradei who challenged the administration's interpretation. In fact, it has really become increasingly clear that there were voices inside the United States Intelligence Community who also raised questions. But their questions and voices were silenced, which, again, is a pattern that we have noticed with this administration. Their shades of gray were repainted in stark black and white. So it is not just that mistakes were made, I believe the choices, deliberate choices were made. Secondly, we have the issue of alleged Iraqi connections to al Qaeda. Nothing could frighten Americans more than this combination of Iraq with its supposed nuclear weapons and al Qaeda with its proven terrorist agenda. President Bush said that Iraq was the central front on the war on terror. The President also said ``You cannot distinguish between al Qaeda and Saddam.'' The administration could and should have been able to distinguish between al Qaeda and Iraq. And many argue that the war in Iraq has seriously, seriously undermined our efforts to bring al Qaeda to justice and to make our people and our country safe. In fact, it appears that because of the Bush administration's policies, terrorists are now consolidating forces. That is now. That did not happen 4 years ago. Finally, regarding credibility in Iraq, there is the question of how long the war would take and how much it would cost in terms of blood and our treasure. Before the war, Vice President Cheney predicted that the conflict would be measured in weeks, this is what he said, rather than months. Well, it has been over 56 weeks since the fighting started. Our casualties are still rising, and our troops are continually being told to expect longer and longer tours of duty. White House Budget Director Mitch Daniels predicted in April of 2003 that Iraq would be an affordable, he said, an affordable endeavor that will not require sustained aid. This is coming from the administration, the White House. When White House Economic Advisor Larry Lindsey dared to speak the truth and estimated that the war would cost between $100 and $200 billion a year. Remember, he got fired. If you downplay the cost of war in dollars and lives, then you deceive the American people, and that is what has happened. If we refuse to plan for postwar chaos, then you will be poorly prepared to deal with it, and our young men and women and other Iraqis and other international workers will die. In May of 2003, President Bush landed on that aircraft carrier under the banner of ``Mission Accomplished.'' Well, then, I ask why are American soldiers still dying, and why is it Iraq is still in chaos? Why does the Washington Post, I believe it was this morning, why does the Washington Post predict that the administration will come back right here, must come back to Congress, and will come back for money for the escalating war on top of the $166 billion already authorized, and also that is on top of the $420 billion defense budget? We see here there is really a growing and very clear credibility gap. Also this extends far beyond Iraq. Let us look at Haiti, for example, where the administration claimed it was defending democracy while, in fact, it was undermining that democracy and engaging in regime change by other means. That is why we need an independent mission to investigate just what was the role of the United States Government in the overthrow of the democratically elected Government of Haiti. That is also why we still need a truly independent commission to investigate the use and misuse of intelligence in the war in Iraq. And this same pattern of saying one thing and doing another really permeates the domestic agenda of this administration. The President said his tax cuts for the rich would create jobs, yet we have seen around 3 million jobs disappear in our country. He said the majority of those tax cuts would go to those at the bottom end of the spectrum. Instead the top 1 percent of earners reap over a third of tax benefits all by themselves. Of course, we know the President said we would have greater resources for education. What has happened to Leave No Child Behind: 9.4 billion- plus underfunded. Leave No Child Behind has been a shame and disgrace. I will conclude by saying that we need to also look at the credibility gap as it relates to another life-and-death issue and that is the HIV/AIDS pandemic. In 1998, the Congressional Black Caucus and the Clinton administration worked together to establish the Minority AIDS Initiative, but of course since President Bush came in, despite the growing trends of infection in the African American rate, which today accounts for 39 percent of AIDS cases, despite the fact that only 12 percent of our population is African American, once again he talks about increasing funding, but we cannot even seem to get the additional money not only for domestic AIDS programs but also for our international programs. It continues to be 600 million-plus underfunded. Let me conclude by saying that I believe this country is deeply divided today. Actually, it is more divided than when President Bush came in even though he said he would be a uniter, not a divider. I think we must once again communicate directly to the American people what we know and that is the fact that their tax dollars are going from misplaced priorities of waging war rather than securing peace, waging a PR campaign to try to instill in the American people these notions of facts that they want us to believe, they want people to believe, when really they are not fact. They are really distortions put mildly and, in fact, a way to boost the foundation and the debate and the rationale for waging war which, unfortunately, has cost the lives of hundreds of our young men and women. I thank the gentleman for once again giving us this opportunity to try to convey what we know to the American people. I want to thank the Congressional Black Caucus for continuing to be the conscience of the Congress and for pushing this information forward so hopefully we will be able to save our democracy and save our young men and women from more injuries and more deaths abroad.

Ms. LEE

Ms. LEE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today along with other women Members of Congress to honor the contributions and landmark efforts of women. As we look back on March, Women's History Month remains an important time to reflect on and commend women for their lifelong efforts to our country. Women have been the cornerstone of this country, so it is difficult for me to honor just one today, but after thought and reflection, I've decided to honor the life's work of a mentor and long time role model of mine, Ms. Betty Shabazz. Betty Shabazz epitomizes the strength, tenacity, confidence, compassion, and fidelity of a progressive Black woman. Early in my career, I met her on several occasions, and she gave great guidance on how to be proactive, detail specific and plan for the unexpected. As a young woman, Shabazz left Detroit to study at the Tuskegee Institute, the renowned historic black college in Alabama. She later went to New York, where she became a registered nurse. In New York, Shabazz was introduced to the Nation of Islam and its founder Elijah Muhammad. It was in 1956 that Betty X met Malcolm X, then a rising star in the Nation of Islam. Two years later they married, and within 5 years, they had four daughters. After breaking off from the Nation of Islam in 1964, Malcolm and Betty X adopted the Muslim surname Shabazz. In early 1965, Malcolm was gunned down while speaking at the Audubon Ballroom in Harlem. Betty Shabazz, pregnant with twins, was in the audience with their daughters when one of the greatest Civil Rights Leaders of our time was murdered. Betty raised their six daughters alone, returned to school, and in 1975 earned a doctorate in education from the University of Massachusetts. She went to work as an administrator at Medgar Evers College in Brooklyn while carrying out an effort to inform people around the world about civil and human rights and racial tolerance. In a sudden and tragic twist of fate, the world lost a great champion and voice. In June of 1997, Betty Shabazz passed away at 61 from third- degree burns that ravaged over 80 percent of her body. This was a tragic ending to an extraordinary life. For all of her honest criticism and constructive praise, I thank her and honor her. Betty Shabazz was a true womanist, activist, and leader. I owe here a great debt of gratitude and in the years to come will continue to work to preserve her memory.

Ms. LEE

Ms. LEE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today along with my colleague, Lois Capps, to honor the legacy of Rosemarie Harding, a mother, counselor, social worker, and teacher. On March 1, 2004, Rose departed at the age of 73, surrounded by loved ones who prayed and sang her passage to the other side. Rosemarie Florence Freeney Harding was born July 24, 1930 to Dock Freeney, Jr. and Ella Lee Harris Freeney. She was the youngest of nine siblings, a sweet and keenly intuitive child who was deeply loved. After graduating from high school, she spent two years at Chicago Teachers College. In 1955, Rose graduated from Goshen College in Indiana with a major in sociology. After completing her bachelor's degree, Rose returned to Chicago and worked as a social worker and teacher, during which time she served Bethel Mennonite Church as a lay counselor. In 1959 she met Vincent Harding at a church conference. Rosemarie and Vincent married in 1960 and moved to Atlanta, Georgia in 1961 as representatives of the Mennonite Central Committee. There, they opened up their home as the South's first interracial voluntary service center, Mennonite House. This was an important gathering place for Civil Rights activists, who found respite, hospitality, encouragement and stimulating dialogue. After her children were born, Rosemarie worked as a substitute teacher and helped found the city's first interracial preschool as well as the Martin Luther King, Jr. Community School, one of Atlanta's earliest independent black day schools. She also helped found the Guardians, an advocacy group dedicated to ensuring black parents a voice in the desegregation of Atlanta public schools. In 1974, Rosemarie and her family moved to Philadelphia where she continued her involvement in progressive political activism and helped raise several grandnieces and nephews. In 1978, she earned a masters degree in history and women's studies at Goddard College. Rosemarie also served in various volunteer capacities at the American Friends Service Committee and traveled to Brazil in 1980 to evaluate the organization's support for faith-based social justice initiatives. From 1979 to 1981 Rosemarie worked at the Pendle Hill Quaker Study, where she and her husband developed a series of courses on spirituality and social justice. When the couple moved to Denver in 1981, Rosemarie continued to co-teach these courses with Vincent at the Iliff School of Theology. Increasingly, the couple traveled throughout the U.S. and internationally, conducting workshops, giving lectures, and sharing insights with educators, activists, religious leaders, and others. After receiving a masters degree in social work, Rosemarie worked for the Family Crisis Center in Denver. She treated colleagues and clients with great respect and often found gentle and creative ways to resolve even the most intransigent conflicts. As the first member of her family to finish college, Rosemarie was a mentor and example to all of her nieces and nephews; always assisting and encouraging them. She helped with homework, shared her love for writing and reading, and provided opportunities for her younger relatives to travel and broaden their horizons. She was the mediator in the family--the one who, in the midst of tensions or arguments, could calm the storm. She didn't teach by dictate, but by example. She also loved to laugh and dance and was most happy when those around her were also enjoying themselves. She leaves many to mourn her death and to celebrate her life: Vincent, her husband of 43 years; Rachel, her daughter; Jonathan, her son; her adopted son, Geshe Thupten Kunsang; her sisters Alma Campbell, Mildred Dozier and Sue Verrett; her nieces and nephews Louis, Maxine, Frank, Robert, Lottie, Carmen, Thomas, Francetta, Nataleen, Eileen, Anita, Tommy, Donna, Jimmy, James, Jean, Gloria, Phillip, Rose, JoAnn, Harvey, Walter, Felicia and Claude; and a host of other dearly beloved relatives and friends. I take great pride in joining Rosemarie's family and colleagues to salute the extraordinary Rosemarie Harding. I want to thank her on behalf of the entire 9th Congressional District for her great heart and generous soul. She has been a friend who has shared her wisdom and has given me support.

Ms. LEE

Ms. LEE. Madam Speaker, may I respond?

Ms. LEE. Madam Speaker, I want to thank the gentleman for yielding to me and for continuing to speak the truth, and for making sure that our country understands the type of abuses that are taking place here in Washington, D.C. I believe that democracy is at a crossroads, and I think the gentleman has made that very clear tonight. So I want to thank the gentleman for his continuing to speak truth to power, as we say. Madam Speaker, let me also tonight thank the distinguished chair of the Congressional Black Caucus for his leadership on this and so many other issues as he continues to consistently attempt to wake up America. We are here tonight, Madam Speaker, to talk about the Bush administration's systematically deceiving the American people. This administration has spun a web of deception that really enshrouds the truth and hides, mind you, reality. Specifically, I want to talk about the administration's foreign policy and how it has based a doctrine of preemptive strikes on a foundation that is really built on falsehoods, lies, and distortions. But first let me just say it is especially telling and especially tragic that we are here tonight as we mourn nine new victims of this misguided war. Five soldiers and four contractors were killed today. Our thoughts and our prayers go out to their families and to all of those whose loved ones are still at risk. We mourn these latest deaths as we speak out against the deliberate decisions and the deceptions that took this country to war. This administration did not tell the truth to Congress, to the American people, and to the world about the causes, the costs, and the consequences of the war in Iraq. The deceit started, mind you, well before the war did, and that is no accident. The web of deception was woven in order to create a reason for the war. The administration told us time and time again that Iraq posed an immediate threat to the United States. In the President's State of the Union address, the Secretary of State's presentation to the United Nations, and in many other statements and speeches the administration told us that Iraq was developing nuclear weapons and it already had vast stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons. This was apparently all false. President Bush said that Saddam Hussein was buying aluminum tubes and African uranium for nuclear weapons. This was false. Vice President Cheney said we know, and this is a quote, ``We know he has been absolutely devoted to trying to acquire nuclear weapons, and we believe he has in fact reconstituted nuclear weapons.'' This was false. President Bush said, we gave them a chance to allow the inspectors in and they wouldn't let them in. This was false. As for the weapons of mass destruction, Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld said, we know where they are. This was false. The administration time and time again tied Saddam Hussein to the terrorist attacks of September 11, and this was downright false. These statements were, however, part of a larger pattern of distortion that included warping intelligence to fit the administration's vision of the world and then passing on that warped intelligence to the American people and to the world as a fact. The administration also, mind you, disguised the cost of the war, which of course taxpayers are paying for. When economic adviser Larry Lindsey said in 2002 that war in Iraq could cost between $100 billion and $200 billion, well, he was right; but you know what, he was fired. When asked about the possible consequences of the war, the administration presented a portrait of a country that would be uniformly grateful to its American invaders. This week's Nation says, and I quote, ``The idiotic and arrogant statements by Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld and others that policing Iraq would be a simple matter that could be quickly cleaned up by all those flowers they were going to throw.'' The many distortions, deceptions and omissions amounted to, as I was actually taught like many of us were taught as a child, lying. I was also taught that this is really wrong. This deception was clearly and deliberately escalated. The very impressive and thought-provoking report by the Carnegie Endowment For International Peace found a very dramatic shift in the fall of 2002 as the administration sought to rally support for its unnecessary war. Let me just read what the Carnegie Foundation indicates: Administration officials systematically misrepresented the threat from Iraq's WMD and ballistic missile programs, beyond the intelligence failures noted above by, one, treating nuclear, chemical, and biological weapons as a single WMD threat. The conflation of three distinct threats, very different in the danger they pose, distorted the cost-benefit analysis of the war. Secondly, insisting without evidence, yet treating as a given truth, that Saddam Hussein would give whatever WMD he possessed to terrorists. Thirdly, routinely dropping caveats, probabilities, and expressions of uncertainty present in intelligence assessments from public statements. Next, misrepresenting inspectors' findings in ways that turned threats from minor to dire. The Carnegie Endowment For International Peace is a world-renowned institution. I suggest that if Members have not read this report, they should read it because, in fact, it lays out the facts, the reality and what actually went down prior to this war. The gentleman from California (Mr. Waxman), ranking member of the Committee on Government Reform, has presented a comprehensive examination of the statements and misstatements by the President, the Vice President, the Secretary of State, the Secretary of Defense and the National Security Adviser. The gentleman from California has compiled a database of deception about alleged weapons of mass destruction, alleged ties to al Qaeda and the allegedly urgent threat to the United States posed by Iraq. That database shows just how far- reaching these distortions were, and they do not stop with Iraq, and they do not stop with foreign policy. But let me just read a couple of the gentleman from California's quotes which have been recorded in this document: One is from Vice President Dick Cheney. He said, ``We know he's got chemical and biological weapons.'' But, rather, the truth is the statement failed to acknowledge that the Defense Intelligence Agency's position was, ``There is no reliable information on whether Iraq is producing and stockpiling chemical weapons or where Iraq has--or will-- establish its chemical warfare agent production facilities.'' President Bush: ``We've also discovered through intelligence that Iraq has a growing fleet of manned and unmanned aerial vehicles that could be used to disperse chemical or biological weapons across broad areas. We are concerned that Iraq is exploring ways of using these UAVs for missions targeting the United States.'' The explanation of this tale is this was misleading because it claimed that Iraq's UAVs were intended and able to spread chemical or biological weapons, including over the United States, but this failed and the President failed to mention that the United States Government agency most knowledgeable about UAVs and their potential applications, the Air Force's National Air and Space Intelligence Center, had the following view: ``The U.S. Air Force does not agree that Iraq is developing UAVs primarily intended to be delivery platforms for chemical and biological agents.'' Another President Bush quote: ``We found the weapons of mass destruction. We found biological laboratories. You remember when Colin Powell stood up in front of the world, and he said, Iraq has got laboratories, mobile labs to build biological weapons. They're illegal. They're against the United Nations resolutions, and we've so far discovered two. And we'll find more weapons as time goes on. But for those who say we haven't found the banned manufacturing devices or banned weapons, they're wrong. We found them.'' What this really was, according to the Defense Intelligence Agency, was that these trailers which the President said were to produce biological weapons did not disclose the fact that the engineers at the DIA examined the trailers and concluded that they were most likely to produce hydrogen for artillery weather balloons. That is what the DIA concluded. We could go on and on tonight about this, but I think the public is beginning to get the picture. Let us look at Haiti for a minute where the administration claimed it was defending democracy while in fact it was conspiring to undermine and to overthrow the duly elected President of Haiti. That is why we need an independent commission to investigate the role of the administration in the overthrow of the Aristide government. That is also why we still need a truly independent commission to investigate the use and the misuse of intelligence in the war in Iraq. Of course, the same deceptions permeate our domestic policies as well. Look at the administration's track record on its domestic policies. Example. He said that his tax cuts for the rich would create jobs. Instead, we have seen 3 million jobs disappear in this country since President Bush took office. He said the vast majority of those tax cuts would go to those at the bottom end of the economic spectrum. Instead, the top 1 percent of earners reap over a third of the tax benefits by themselves. Only the top 1 percent. The President said that our schools will have greater resources to help meet the goals of Leave No Child Behind. But for the third year in a row the President's budget falls billions of dollars short of fully funding Leave No Child Behind. The deficit. The President says our budget will run a deficit that will be small and short-term, but the fact is that the 10-year deficit projection by the Congressional Budget Office, assuming extending the tax provisions, is $4.7 trillion. In just 2 years, there has been an almost $12 trillion swing in the deficit outlook. The $5.6 trillion 10- year surplus projected when the President took office has been replaced by deficits as far as the eye can see. For 2004, the President's budget proposes a record deficit of $521 billion, $146 billion more than the 2003 deficit, which was also a historic record. Yet the President said on January 7, 2003, ``Our budget will run a deficit that will be small and short-term.'' We have to really get our administration to begin to understand the value of telling the truth, because in both the domestic and foreign policies of this administration, this administration and the President has deceived the American people about their national security, their economy, their children's education and their future. We should be leading the world, not misleading it. That is exactly what we are doing. Finally, let me just say one of the biggest farces which the President said and indicated he wanted to do was to unite the country. I believe that this country is more divided tonight than ever. announcement by the speaker pro tempore