Barbara Lee

Ms. LEE

Ms. LEE. Mr. Speaker, I rise in celebration of the 25th Anniversary of the Black Cowboys Parade held every year in Oakland, California since 1974. The parade commemorates the contributions made by African Americans and other ethnic groups to the development of the American West. African Americans, primarily from Louisiana, Texas and Arkansas, poured into California to build ships during World War II. These states were all ``horse country'' where African Americans had raised and trained horses. Northern California could therefore easily support the concept of a Black Cowboys parade. Some of the original organizers and riders were Lonnie Scoggins, Booker Emery, and Mr. Wright (now in his nineties). Other cities in Oklahoma and Texas have parades celebrating Black horsemen and horsewomen, but the City of Oakland has hosted the longest continuously staged celebration. Blacks were cowboys before they were freed from slavery. Before California even became a state, they worked on cattle ranches in southern California. At the height of the cattle driving days, it is estimated that a fourth of all cowboys were black. The Buffalo Soldiers were proud and capable men who got the toughest and longest assignments while serving on the frontier. Although they have since been criticized for fighting Indians, these largely illiterate men were recruited starting in 1866 immediately after the end of the Civil War. By 1898, they were a disciplined fighting force who saved Theodore Roosevelt on San Juan Hill in Cuba during the Spanish American War. This parade rights the portrayal of African Americans from history and media presentations by restoring the pride of black manhood. Northern California and Bay Area horsemen and horsewomen show that blacks can ride today as well and that this history is alive. This is also important to Mexican Americans, Chinese Americans and Native American as children of every background can reclaim their history and have pride in their special contribution to the settlement of the West. This 25 year tradition of the Black Cowboys Parade is one of the ongoing and visible efforts to restore pride in young blacks and other youngsters. We salute the work of organizations such as the Northern California Black Horsemen Association, the Black Cowboys Association and Wildcat Canyon Ranch Youth Program for their ongoing programs to educate and honor the legacy of the black cowboy today.

Ms. LEE

Ms. LEE. Mr. Chairman, I want to thank my colleague for yielding time to me, and for his commitment to health care for all Americans. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of H.R. 2723, which will provide protection for patients in managed care plans. Patients should not have to face obstruction when they seek basic health care, and they should have the right to sue HMOs when careless or questionable decisions are made. Patients should not have to agonize with obtaining proper medical care while they struggle with their health problems. During these periods of life, times should be less stressful, rather than more burdensome. This bipartisan bill allows patients to appeal their grievances when they are denied basic health care. It is wrong that millions of Americans and their families are still denied these simple rights, and continue to be denied for so long now. It is about time that medical decisions be made by the patient and his or her physician, rather than account executives or insurance bureaucrats. In my home State of California, our Governor, Governor Davis, just signed legislation to enact historic health care reform within the State. These laws offer similar proposals to H.R. 2723 in allowing dissatisfied patients the right to appeal and seek redress from HMOs. California patients now have many more protections than the rest of the country. Patients across the Nation, however, should also have these protections. We must not limit access to health insurance, but we should put the health of all Americans before the interests of special interests. Let us vote for H.R. 2723, and put people first when it comes to life or death decisions.

Ms. LEE

Ms. LEE. Mr. Speaker, I rise this afternoon to speak about the disturbing situation in Colombia and the kidnapping and murder of three U.S. citizens, Terence Freitas, Ingrid Washinawatok and Lahe'ena'e Gay. As a long-standing advocate for human rights and nonviolence, the conflict and violence in Colombia is incredibly alarming to me. Terence Freitas, an activist and student at the University of California- Berkeley, was a constituent of mine. Ingrid, Lahe'ena'e and Terence were traveling in Colombia as guests of the U'wa, a traditional indigenous community that is nonviolently fighting to protect their land from United States and Colombian petroleum developers. Last week, along with other members of the House International Relations Committee, I had the opportunity to meet with Colombian President Pastrana. We learned a great deal about his new $7.5 billion plan for ``peace'', economic redevelopment, and counter-drug efforts. It is my understanding that the Clinton administration is expected to ask Congress to fund $1.5 billion of the plan, and that the administration's proposal may call for over half of the funds to support equipment and training for the Colombian police and military. I am very concerned about this inititive. At more than $500 million annually, this would nearly double the amount that our Nation provided to Colombia's security forces in 1999. Some of you may have seen the poignant letter of May 22 written by the mother of Terence Freitas to the editor of the Washington Post. In the letter, Ms. Freitas writes that she has ``watched in disbelief that some have used the murder of her son . . . and his two companions to justify an increase in military aid to Colombian armed forces.'' Ms. Freitas writes that she is distressed that the ideals that her son ``lived and died for--nonviolence, indigenous sovereignty and justice'' have been diminished by those who support militarization in Colombia. I am a cosponsor of this resolution because I believe that those responsible for the murders of Terence, Lahe'ena'e, and Ingrid need to be arrested and brought to trial. At the same time, as we speak out deploring their murders today on the House floor, I also believe that it is crucial to address our Nation's future policy toward Colombia. Any plan, with a focus on increased funding for training the Colombian police and military, is dangerously narrow and counterproductive. In order to truly advance the peace process in Colombia and create stability for all communities in the country, we must attack the root causes for drug trade and violence of the FARC. This requires a more comprehensive policy approach to fund the elements of President Pastrana's plan that support economic development, human rights and an end corruption in the justice system in Colombia. I challenge all of us to examine the proposal of the Colombia Government with this perspective. Ms. Freitas explains that Terence ``clearly understood that the U.S. military and training assistance to Colombia would bring more violence from all sides. She leaves us with the following message, which I would like to convey to all of my colleagues: ``If our Congressional Representatives hear any `wake-up call' following the execution of my son, I urge it to be this: Remember your high standards of justice and peace by refusing to further U.S. military aid to Colombia. Doing the hard work of peace takes a lot more guts than empowering more men with guns.'' Statement of Congresswoman Sheila Jackson-Lee Condemn Colombian Killings (H. Res .181) October 4, 1999

Ms. LEE

Ms. LEE. I thank the gentleman for yielding. I just want to thank you once again for your leadership and your commitment to education to all of our children in this country and also for conducting this special order. Mr. Speaker, I rise to talk about our national concerns about education. It is heartening to know that most people in this country want our budget surplus spent sensibly on preserving Social Security and securing our future by educating our children. Think about it. Rather than getting an insignificant tax cut, which is what the majority of taxpayers would have received with the Republican tax bill that President Clinton just vetoed, they would rather have this money spent on improving our schools. I am very heartened by this. The American people have spoken. They want our educational system improved. We recognize that as a result of over two decades of neglecting our schools, especially in communities of color and low-income communities, that they are in deplorable conditions. We know that solving these educational problems is not only having enough money, but that the money be spent to support programs that have clear objectives, that have curriculums that are suitable for a highly technical and competitive society, that have capable administrators and well-trained and well-paid teachers, that have basic support staff, like nurses, counselors, attendance clerks, and school secretaries that can call parents. The schools must have up-to-date textbooks, adequate laboratories, and computer technology, and that the physical structure, the schoolhouse, be decent, clean, and safe. Yes, provide an environment that is conducive to study and learning. Schools must be safe havens for our children, free from drugs and weapons. What I have described is a basic educational package that is centered around the school. The American public school is one of the most powerful engines for uplift in this country. We know that a strong educational system provides systems with the necessary background and training to survive in and to lead in this world. One significant aspect, however, of a successful school system is that it is also a powerful crime prevention tool. We know that education is the best form of crime prevention. A California-based think tank recently released a study showing that crime prevention is the most cost effective way of making sure that we do not build prisons. Of all crime prevention methods, education is the most cost effective, not to mention that our children deserve to benefit from a good education rather than to be set up for a lifetime in and out of jail. Yet, rather than invest in education, some would have us funnel more money into prisons to fuel the prison construction industry, putting money into constructing new prisons and building new juvenile detention facilities, as if we are to prepare for the inevitable incarceration of our children. This is wrong. In fact, the lack of investment in education actually contributes to the rise in incarceration rates. Nineteen percent of adult inmates are completely illiterate, and 40 percent are functionally illiterate. Nationwide, over 70 percent of all people entering State correctional facilities have not completed high school. In our juvenile justice system, youth at a median age of 15 read, on average, at the same level as most 9 year olds. So it is imperative that we begin to refocus on education and prevention instead of constructing prisons. With children attending classes in trailers, being subjected to unheated and sometimes unsafe buildings or packed together 35 in a classroom, it is no wonder that too many students are not learning and receiving sound healthy starts that they need to succeed in a competitive, fast-paced working world. My continued experience of working with the youth in my district gives me real hope in the knowledge that students have the vitality, knowledge, and intellect; and they have the wish to learn and succeed and to be good citizens in a healthy, supportive society. They have the will and the ambition to achieve. Let me give you an example. At the beginning of this month, 2,000 students from different communities in my district coalesced to celebrate a ``Week of Unity: One Land, One People.'' These students are members of the Youth Together Project, a multiracial violence prevention and social justice project which operates in each of five schools to unite students of all races to promote unity and peace on school campuses. To achieve their goal, they have drafted teachers, parents, and community leaders as allies in their effort. I am so proud that the students of Youth Together understand that Native Americans, African- Americans, Latinos, Asian Pacific Americans and Whites, all members of our rainbow culture, can work together for peace and justice in our schools and communities. The children, the youth, will do their part, as will the local communities. It is now up to us in the Federal Government to step up to the plate. We must support the President's initiative to reduce class size by placing 100,000 extra teachers in our classroom. We must support our Democratic education agenda by supporting the School Modernization Initiative bill, H.R. 1660, and provide our children with essential counseling at critical times of their education by supporting H.R. 2567, which will bring counselors to the schools. Our teachers need to be freed up to do what they do best, and that is to teach. The children are doing their part, our teachers are doing their part, now we must do our part.

Ms. LEE

Ms. LEE. Mr. Chairman, today in this chamber we rise yet another time to protect a women's right to choose. As one of 37 pro-choice women in the Congress, this is an issue for which we must stand and speak time and time again. Anti-choice Republicans continue to take every possible opportunity to raise legislation aimed at undermining a woman's right to choose. Since the beginning of the 104th Congress, the House has taken over 100 votes on family planning and choice--a phenomenal number. From the move to override President Clinton's veto of the partial birth abortion ban, to the so-called ``Child Custody Protection Act,'' to requiring parental consent to access Title X services, the ``Unborn Victims of Violence Act'' that we address today is yet another example. I deplore acts of violence against women, and stand as the strongest of advocates against domestic violence and domestic abuse; however while this legislation purports to protect pregnant women, the reality is that it undermines a woman's right to choose. The bill would criminalize death or injury that occurs at any stage of development, from conception to birth. H.R. 2436 would recognize the fetus as a person, with the same legal standing as the woman's--a status long sought by the conservative movement to attack the Supreme Courts' ruling in Roe v Wade. In order to protect women from violence, this Congress should be passing H.R. 357, the Violence Against Women Act of 1999. In order to ensure healthy pregnancies for both mothers and babies, this Congress should be passing legislation to increase access to prenatal care. In order to support healthly children, this Congress should be passing legislation to support and strengthen WIC nutrition and food stamp programs. But instead we are debating yet another piece of anti-choice legislation. I urge my colleagues to recognize this bill for what it is: a misguided initiative, dangerous and harmful to women's rights. I urge a ``no'' vote on H.R. 2436.

Ms. LEE

Ms. LEE. Mr. Speaker, I rise this evening to speak about the initiatives of the Congressional Black Caucus in the fight against the HIV and AIDS epidemic. I first want to thank the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Waters) and the gentlewoman from the Virgin Islands (Mrs. Christensen) for their leadership in this effort. This epidemic is killing our community in unprecedented, terrifying numbers. Within our own country among African Americans and among Africans on the continent of Africa, the disproportionate infection rates of people of African descent are staggering. In my district, which includes Oakland, California, the AIDS case rate for African Americans is five times that of whites. While the county has experienced a decline in the number of AIDS cases since 1994, African-American diagnoses have risen by 20 percent. I wish that I could say that these frightening and disproportionate statistics are rare in our Nation, but unfortunately they are pervasive. We know that across our country, African Americans have the highest death rate from AIDS and chronic illnesses, higher than all other minority communities combined. African Americans who account for 13 percent of our Nation's population account for 56 percent of all newly reported HIV cases and 68 percent of new cases among adolescents. What we have seen over the past several years has been the emergence of a crisis, and the failure on the part of our government to target resources where the disease is the greatest void has really compromised our ability to work effectively to decrease the number of HIV infections, to create strong prevention programs and to provide adequate services and care. We are now thankful, though, that the current funding is significantly higher. However, it remains grossly inadequate. Last year, under the bold leadership of the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Waters), the Congressional Black Caucus mobilized to call upon Secretary Donna Shalala to declare a state of emergency for HIV/AIDS in the African-American community. It is with determination that we as a caucus have taken the lead on this issue. And with pride I can also say that on a local level in my area, Alameda County has declared a public health emergency on HIV and AIDS in the African- American community, the first jurisdiction in the Nation to do so. This week, the Congressional Black Caucus has taken the next step to put forth a $340 million emergency public health initiative on HIV and AIDS which will be distributed proportionately among African Americans and other communities of color. The plan is the next, necessary step to allow the continuation of initiatives within HHS and NIH and CDC that were created from fiscal year 1999 funding and to address new emergency needs. The Black Caucus has also been focused to bring to bear the resources so that African Americans also experience a decline in, and eventual end to, the HIV infection. Furthermore, let me just mention how it is disproportionately devastating countries in the developing world, most drastically on the continent of Africa. UNAIDS reports that of the 33.4 million people living with HIV/AIDS in the world, 22.5 million, or 67 percent, are in sub-Saharan Africa; 7.8 million are children who have been orphaned with their parents who have died of AIDS. It is anticipated that this number will reach 40 million orphans by the year 2010. That is why I, along with 47 cosponsors, have introduced H.R. 2765, a bill to provide assistance for HIV/AIDS research, education, treatment and prevention in Africa. Mr. Speaker, I ask my colleagues to recognize the demoralizing reality of HIV and AIDS, both in this country and throughout the world. We must not falsely and dangerously assume that because new combinations of therapies have improved the quality of life and extended the survival of some with HIV that the HIV/AIDS epidemic is now under control. The battle is far from over. I urge support for the Congressional Black Caucus' emergency public health initiative to combat this epidemic domestically and I urge support for the AIDS Marshall Plan to combat in a substantial way the AIDS epidemic globally.

Ms. LEE

Ms. LEE. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the requisite number of words. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of the amendment offered by the gentlewoman from Connecticut (Mrs. Johnson) to authorize $280 million in fiscal 2000 and $285 million in fiscal 2001 for a program that would provide grants to children's hospitals to train pediatricians. On behalf of the Children's Hospital in Oakland, California, my district, I want to thank the gentlewoman from Connecticut (Mrs. Johnson) and the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Brown) for this amendment. This authorization is needed because freestanding children's hospitals are disadvantaged under the current Federal Graduate Medical Education funding for children's teaching hospitals. Freestanding children's hospitals receive an average of less than one-half percent of what other teaching facilities receive in Federal Graduate Medical Education funding. Now, in Oakland, California, in my district, Children's Hospital, a freestanding hospital, has 205 licensed beds. It is a regional trauma center and is an independent teaching hospital. It is a hospital that when my children were children played a very important role in the healthy development of my kids. It continues to be an exemplary medical facility and a very supportive environment for children and their families. Now, because the hospital only treats children and not the elderly, it receives almost no graduate medical payments from Medicare, the one stable source of Graduate Medical Education support. At Children's Hospital in Oakland, California, senior clinicians and scientists work with young doctors in pediatrics and pediatric specialities. It is these interns and residents who will become the pediatricians and scientists of tomorrow and who will bring us the miracles of the 21st century, a cure for cancer, new therapies, and other great possibilities. We need an equitable playing field in the price competitive health-care marketplace. Medicare has become the only reliable source of significant support for Graduate Medical Education in teaching hospitals. Because children's teaching hospitals care for children, they receive less than .5 percent of the Medicare Graduate Medical Education support provided to other teaching hospitals. The current mechanism for Graduate Medical Education financing does not equitably recognize the contribution of these hospitals. So we must invest in children's health. Independent children's teaching hospitals are less than 1 percent of all hospitals but train nearly 30 percent of all pediatricians and nearly half of all pediatric specialists. A strong academic program is critical to all facets of children's hospitals' missions. They care for the sickest and the poorest children, training the next generation of caregivers for children and research in order to improve children's health care. They are in the community, responding to the health care needs of our children and supporting their families. So this amendment has broad bipartisan support. I urge my colleagues to support this amendment; and once again, I want to thank the gentlewoman from Connecticut (Mrs. Johnson) and the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Brown) for their support and commitment to children in our country.

Ms. LEE. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word. I want to thank my colleague from Massachusetts for offering this amendment, and I rise in strong support of the Tierney amendment to authorize studies or methods to improve access to health services. While serving in the California legislature, I had the opportunity to work on similar legislation. I am proud to say that the bill was passed by the California legislature and is now before the governor for his signature. This Nation, as well as my home State of California, really needs the study, and also the California study, because of the profound failures of the present system. By now we have had 5 years of experience of depending on the private sector for the delivery of our health care, 5 years of knowing intimately that a market-driven health care system leaves more and more people frustrated, angry, and sick. I also carried managed care bills while I was in the California legislature. I authored many of them. And I want to say that people are becoming increasingly more disappointed with the outcome of these managed care approaches. They are frustrated because medical decisions about operations, about how long to be hospitalized, about which illnesses are to be treated and by whom, crucial medical decisions are being made each and every day, each and every moment by accountants and executives of managed care companies who earn fortunes by denying medical care to their subscribers. The statistics on what CEOs are making are staggering and should make us really squirm in shame. These are profits at the expense of our right to live or our right to be as healthy as we can be. Now, simultaneously, we have had 5 years of a market-driven health care system which leaves more and more Americans uninsured. At last count we were at about 45 million, increasing at the rate of 1 million uninsured people a year. Are these health care companies with their immense profits working to raise our knowledge and our standards of health care? Are they helping us to understand that an ounce of prevention is really worth a pound of cure? Sadly, it appears not. What has the industry done in these 5 years? Are they controlling health care costs? Sadly, again, it appears not. Health care premiums are once again rising. For example, the health care industry has spent millions successfully lobbying so far to defeat the Patients' Bill of Rights. Health insurance companies have had the gall recently to propose $60 billion in new Federal programs to subsidize insurance for 28 out of the 45 million uninsured Americans. The current efforts to expand Medicare to cover prescription drugs, which, of course, I support, is now motivating, however, the health insurance industry to compete with the pharmaceutical companies by insisting that the uninsured should come before those needing prescription drugs. So to pit one group of Americans against those who need health care versus another group who needs health care to me is just basically wrong. Mr. Chairman, I am convinced that as long as profits provide the driving force in the health care industry, we will fall way short of providing health care, affordable and accessible health care, for all. For instance, recent studies show that for-profit hospitals drive up Medicare costs in general as a group. In another study, for-profit health plans perform worse than nonprofits in providing preventive health care. One study concluded that if all American women were enrolled in for-profit HMOs instead of nonprofits, over 5,900 more women would die from breast cancer each year due to lower rates of mammography. This Nation spends more money per person on health care than any other industrialized country. Yet, in 1997, Newsweek reported that current figures for longevity projections for the year 2050 for African-Americans will be less than the longevity of all other ethnic groups. Could that be because our health care dollars are not going for health care for all based on an equitable basis but going into the ever deeper and ever hungrier pockets of the top echelons of those health care insurance companies? Georgetown University Medical Center reported this February that their study together with Rand Corporation and the University of Pennsylvania indicated that African-Americans and women with chest pain would be referred for cardiac catheretization at 60 percent of those of whites and men. This disparity was most dramatic for black women, where odds of being referred were 40 percent of those of white men. This is really a shame. We need to get out of the competition by profit-making companies for our meager health dollars. We need to know that other ways are possible. For instance, we do need to know how much a single-payer system costs. We do need to know how much provision of universal health care without profits for insurance companies would cost. We need this information provided in the Tierney amendment. I urge my colleagues to support the amendment.

Ms. LEE

Ms. LEE. Mr. Speaker, I rise to recognize The Kristi Yamaguchi Always Dream Foundation, which is headquartered in Oakland, CA, on its September 18, 1999 presentation of an ice skating extravaganza, ``The Golden Moment.'' This presentation will serve as a fundraiser for the Foundation in support of its efforts to help in the fight against breast cancer. Kristi Yamaguchi created the Always Dream Foundation to inspire and embrace the hopes and dreams of children and help them fulfill their dreams. Since its incorporation in 1996, The Always Dream Foundation has provided substantive support to organizations that have a positive influence on children. The Foundation's motto, ``Always Dream,'' has served as the personal inspiration for Kristi Yamaguchi for many years, and has served as a constant reminder to dream big and never lose sight of her goals. Her dreams and accomplishments have been fulfilled as a direct result of her family's nurturing and love. The Kristi Yamaguchi Always Dream Foundation and Mervyn's California are presenting ``A Golden Moment'' figure skating concert on ice, accompanied live in- concert by the Oakland East Bay Symphony. This unique performance will be dedicated to helping make strides to overcome breast cancer. I commend The Kristi Yamaguchi Always Dream Foundation for its diligence and perseverance in garnering the resources necessary to enrich and uplift the lives of the youth of this nation and the world. It has been through the Foundation's perseverance that it has garnered the resources necessary to support the struggle to overcome the ravages of breast cancer. I wish to extend to The Kristi Yamaguchi Always Dream Foundation, its staff, donors, and volunteers sincere best wishes for success as they present ``A Golden Moment'' ice skating extravaganza to the citizens of Oakland and Alameda County.

Ms. LEE

Ms. LEE. Mr. Speaker, I rise to join my colleague today in strong support for implementing legislation to substantially reduce the exorbitant prices of prescription drugs for Medicare beneficiaries. Our current Medicare program drastically fails to offer protection against the costs of most outpatient prescription drugs. H.R. 664, the Prescription Drug Fairness for Seniors Act of 1999 aims to create an affordable prescription drug benefit program that will expand the accessibility and autonomy of all Medicare patients. This bill will protect Medicare beneficiaries from discriminatory pricing by drug manufacturers and make prescription drugs available to Medicare beneficiaries at substantially reduced prices. Currently, Medicare offers a very limited prescription drug benefit plan for the 39 million aged and disabled persons obtaining its services. Many of these beneficiaries have to supplement their Medicare health insurance program with private or public health insurance in order to cover the astronomical costs not met by Medicare. Unfortunately, most of these plans offer very little drug cost coverage, if any at all. Therefore, Medicare patients across the United States are forced to pay over half of their total drug expenses out-of- pocket as compared to 34 percent paid by the population as a whole. Due to these burdensome circumstances, patients are forced to spend more of their limited resources on drugs which hampers access to adequate medication needed to successfully treat conditions for many of these individuals. In 1995, we found that persons with supplementary prescription drug coverage used 20.3 prescriptions per year compared to 15.3 for those individuals lacking supplementary coverage. The patients without supplementary coverage were forced to compromise their health because they could not afford to pay for the additional drugs that they needed. The quality and life of these individuals continue to deteriorate while we continued to limit their access to basic health necessities. H.R. 664 will tackle this problem by allowing our patients to purchase prescription drugs at a lower price. Why should our patients have to continually compromise their health by being forced to decide which prescription drugs to buy and which drugs not to take, simply because of budgetary caps that limit their access to treat the health problems they struggle with? These patients cannot afford to pay these burdensome costs. We must work together to expand Medicare by making it more competitive, efficient, and accessible to the demanding needs of our patients. By investing directly in Medicare, we choose to invest in the lives, health, and future of our patients. By denying them access to affordable prescription drugs, we deny these individuals the right to a healthy life which continues to deteriorate their well-being and quality of life. The House Committee on Government Reform conducted several studies identifying the price differential for commonly used drugs by senior citizens on Medicare and those with insurance plans. These surveys found that drug manufacturers engage in widespread price discrimination, forcing senior citizens and other individual purchasers to pay substantially more for prescription drugs than favored customers, such as large HMO's, insurance companies and the Federal Government. According to these reports, older Americans pay exorbitant prices for commonly used drugs for high blood pressure, ulcers, heart problems, and other serious conditions. The report reveals that the price differential between favored customers and senior citizens for the cholesterol drug Zocor is 213 percent; while favored customers-- corporate, governmental, and institutional customers--pay $34.80 for the drug, senior citizens in the 9th Congressional District may pay an average of $109.00 for the same medication. The study reports similar findings for four other drugs investigated in the study: Norvase (high blood pressure): $59.71 for favored customers and $129.19 for seniors; Prilosec (ulcers): $59.10 for favored customers and $127.30 for seniors; Procardia XL (heart problems): $68.35 for favored customers and $142.21 for seniors; and Zoloft (depression): $115.70 for favored customers and $235.09 for seniors. If Medicare is not paying for these drugs, then the patient is left to pay out of pocket. Numerous patients are forced to gamble with their health when they cannot afford to pay for the drugs needed to treat their conditions. Every day, these patients have to live with the fear of having to encounter major medical problems because they were denied access to prescription drugs they could not afford to pay out of their pocket. Often times, senior citizens must choose between buying food or medicine. This is wrong. Reports studying comparisons in prescription drug prices in the United States, Canada, and Mexico reveal that United States individuals pay much more for prescription drugs than our neighboring countries. In 1991, the General Accounting Office (GAO) revealed that prescription drugs in the United States were priced at 34 percent higher than the same pharmaceutical drugs in Canada. Studies administered on comparisons between the United States and Mexico also reveal that drug prices in Mexico are considerably lower than in the United States. In both Canada and Mexico, the government is one of the largest payers for prescription drugs which gives them significant power to establish prices as well as influence what drugs they will pay for. Many Medicare patients have significant health care needs. They are forced to survive on very limited resources. They are entitled to medical treatments at affordable prices. H.R. 664 will benefit millions of patients each year. This bill will address many of the problems relating to prescription drugs and work to ensure that patients have adequate access to their basic health needs. Let's stop gambling with the lives of Medicare patients and support this plan to strengthen and modernize Medicare by finally making prescription drugs available to Medicare beneficiaries at substantially reduced prices. It is a matter of life or death

Ms. LEE

Ms. LEE. Mr. Speaker, youth violence has plagued our inner cities for years. Legislators, community activists, parents, and teachers have all called for a comprehensive solution. Homicide is the leading cause of death among black males age 15 to 24. Unfortunately, now gun violence is now happening everywhere. We must pass gun safety legislation now. Access to guns by children and criminals should end. Let us remember all children who have been killed by gunfire. I call to the attention of my colleagues those who have been killed since the Columbine tragedy: Pablo Vega, age 18, killed by gunfire on May 4, 1999, Detroit, Michigan; Ernest Troche, age 17, killed by gunfire on May 8, 1999, Bridgeport, Connecticut; Salvador Galioto, Jr., age 13, killed by gunfire on May 9, 1999, Milwaukee, Wisconsin; Tyquan Miller, age 9, killed by gunfire on May 16, 1999, Richmond, Virginia; Brad Crouse, age 15, killed by gunfire on May 19, 1999, Hillsboro, Wisconsin; Edward Belton, age 18, killed by gunfire on May 21, 1999, St. Louisiana, Missouri; George Camacho, age 14, killed by gunfire on May 22, 1999, San Bernardino, California.

Ms. LEE

Ms. LEE. Mr. Speaker, I rise before you today to speak in favor of equal employment opportunities for our veterans. Today, we are in a time of economic growth that our nation has not seen in more than thirty years. With each day that passes, our citizens are reaping the benefits of this growth, but our economic recovery has not benefitted everyone equally. Most Americans agree that every human being has basic rights, including the rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. The key to having these basic rights is economic opportunity. This includes the opportunity to have a good job that pays a livable wage. Equal employment opportunity is when an employer treats its job applicants without regard to their race, color, religion, sex, national origin, disability, sexual orientation or veteran status. If economic opportunity is the key to ensuring life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, how do we ensure economic opportunity regardless of veteran status? The U.S. Department of Labor's Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs, the California Department of Veterans Affairs and the Employment Development Department, along with many other local and state agencies, are committed to ensuring that U.S. veterans gain access to equal employment opportunities and affirmative action programs. A symposium to discuss these opportunities will take place today in San Francisco, California. The topics of this symposium will include federal requirements for employment solicitations, veteran preference in Federal and State employment vs. obligations as a Federal contractor, vocational rehabilitation and/or state rehabilitation, and service-connected disabilities vs. disabilities covered under the Americans with Disabilities Act and the Rehabilitation Act. I am confident that the outcome of the topics discussed at this symposium will open economic and employment opportunities for our veterans like never before, so that they too can fully participate in our nation's economic growth.

Ms. LEE

Ms. LEE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay special tribute to the students of the Ninth Congressional District as they return to their classrooms for the 1999-2000 school year. In particular, I wish to highlight a group of students who are working diligently to ensure peace and harmony in our schools. Throughout the week of September 7 through 13, 1999, students from Berkeley, Castlemont, Fremont, Richmond, and Skyline High Schools, celebrated a ``Week of Unity: One Land, One People.'' These students are members of the Youth Together Project, a multiracial violence prevention and social justice project which operates in each of the five high schools. The event is an attempt by Youth Together students and their allies--students, teachers, parents, and community leaders-- to unite students of all races together to promote unity and peace on their school campuses. It is a concept of unity, reconnecting us to our ancestors and homelands, reminding us that we are all native/tribal people struggling in an urban environment. It is based upon the creation belief held by our Native American foremothers and fathers that we are all descendants of one land and one people. The theme for this year's event was eloquently taken from a quote by Dr. Martin Luther King, ``True peace is not merely the absence of tension: it is the presence of justice.'' Some of the many activities and initiatives held during the ``Week of Unity'' included: The Castlemont Unity Mural, honoring 17 Americans who have come to represent the struggle for recognition and inclusion in the ideal of a united community. The ``Commitment To Peace Banner'' which involved students and adults asking all students to sign a banner committing themselves to peaceful conflict resolution. In addition, a mentoring program has been proposed that would connect seniors and juniors with incoming ninth graders to help promote a safe and comfortable transition for new students. The students hope to establish the ``Week of Unity: One Land, One People'' as an annual event at each of their campuses. The main objectives of the event are to prevent outbreaks of violence and to set a positive tone that will determine the environment for the rest of the school year. By taking leadership and ownership of their schools, students are demonstrating through action the vision of a united community based upon principles of respect, justice and peace. These and many other initiatives stand as incontrovertible evidence that the young people of Oakland, Berkeley, and Richmond have a clear understanding of the multicultural issues that exist in their communities and are not afraid to stand up and take the lead in combating problems where they exist. In closing, Mr. Speaker, I would just like to say how proud I am that the students of Youth Together understand that Native Americans, African Americans, Latinos, Asian Pacific Islanders and whites must come together to work for peace and justice in our schools and communities. In addition, I believe that the work being done by students in my district proves to the world that our young people are for real in seeking peace and justice and are living and working each and every day the dream of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.

Ms. LEE

Ms. LEE. Mr. Speaker, we, Representatives Barbara Lee and Stephanie Tubbs Jones, note that this week, the 29th Congressional Black Caucus Annual Legislative Confference will be taking place in Washington, D.C. An Issue Forum on Credit Unions is being held on September 16, 1999 to expand on the critical knowledge that ``Credit Unions Bring Power and Wealth to the Community''. The impetus for, and the success of this Forum is largely the work of Ms. Carole Kennerly, Director of the Cooperative Center Federal Credit Union, and the team that she brought together to develop this issue forum. Mr. Speaker, I want to acknowledge the work done, and congratulate the members, employees, staff, board of directors and committee volunteers of the Cooperative Center Federal Credit Union (CCFCU) for its initiative in proposing and holding the Credit Union Issue Forum on September 16, 1999 and for bringing it to the attention of the 29th annual legislative conference of the Congressional Black Caucus in Washington, D.C. Special appreciation is expressed to these individuals: National Chairperson: Carole Kennerly, CCD, Director, Cooperative Center Federal Credit Union. Coordinators: IfeTayo, T.L. Bonner-Payne, Supervisory Committee, Cooperative Center, FCU. Shirley A. Sheffield, Member, Cooperative Center Federal Credit Union. Kim Medley, Member, Cooperative Center Federal Credit Union. Joseph Villa, Former President/CEO, Allen Temple Baptist Church Federal Credit Union. Barry Kane, V.P., Central Region Branches, Governmental Affairs, Patelco Credit Union. Chris Kerecman, V.P., Federal Governmental Affairs, California Credit Union League. Odessa J. Woods-Mathews, member, Social Security Administration Federal Credit. Dr. Gwendolyn Nurse-Wright, Paragon Federal Credit Union, Englewood Cliff, N.J. Rosemary George, Communication Specialist, National Credit Union Administration. Patricia Brownell, V.P., Credit Union Development, National Credit Union Foundation. N. Sharifah Ibsan, graphic artist.

Ms. LEE

Ms. LEE. Mr. Speaker, I rise to speak in support of Shays-Meehan. This is one of the most important bills that this House will consider and I hope pass. The Nation is watching today. Individuals as well as the faith community, the League of Women Voters, Common Cause, and a host of others in my district and nationwide are committed to good, honest government, government where ordinary citizens could have a chance, through their participation in the political process, to have a voice and not be drowned out by the millions of dollars now available for only the rich. We have had laws since 1907 and 1947 that forbid soft money from flowing into campaigns. However, the loopholes have been great and we need to close them. The Shays-Meehan bill closes the loopholes by blocking the present flow of unlimited soft money and unregulated contributions to the political parties. Shays-Meehan, our bipartisan bill, also blocks last-minute campaign ads that masquerade as issue ads. The Nation is watching. Our constituents are watching. It is time to pass the Shays-Meehan bill.

Ms. LEE

Ms. LEE. Mr. Speaker, as a cosponsor of this legislation and one who has strongly supported and will continue to support disarmament and peace initiatives throughout the world, I rise in strong support of H.R. 1883. It is my belief that this legislation will move us one step closer to nonproliferation of weapons of mass destruction in the Middle East and throughout the world by taking actions to stop foreign companies from exporting goods, services, and technology that can make a material contribution to Iran's weapons of mass destruction programs. I believe we must take any and all actions to stop the spread of weapons of mass destruction in the Middle East and throughout the world. The statistics of weapons of mass destruction are terrifying, to say the least. In terms of nuclear weapons, for example, we know that over 36,000 nuclear warheads exist between the nuclear powers. I have just returned from a visit to Israel with several of my colleagues. The security concerns of the entire region are great, but so are the prospects for peace. This bill, the Iran Nonproliferation Act, moves us toward both, peace and security. Foreign companies, just as any company, are in the business of making profits. Exporting goods, services, and technology that contribute to Iran's weapons of mass destruction program allows billions of dollars to be made to create a more hostile region and a more hostile world. This bill is a serious effort to tailor sanctions to foreign companies that are the true wrongdoers. As we move into the next millenium, we need to work with Russia, our friend in the Middle East, and those who are not our friends to find ways to create security and a lasting peace for our children. Selling technology that would destroy the world certainly takes us in the wrong direction. I thank the gentleman from New York (Mr. Gilman) of the Committee on International Relations, and the ranking member, the gentleman from Connecticut (Mr. Gejdenson), for moving forward with this legislation in a bipartisan manner. I join and urge my colleagues to support H.R. 1883.

Ms. LEE

Ms. LEE. Mr. Speaker, I want to call to your attention a grave housing situation in my congressional district the 9th of California and all across the Nation. Funding for renewals of the Shelter Plus Care Programs is in a state of crisis, and unfortunately, the fiscal year 2000 Veterans, Housing and Independent Agencies bill does not address this critical funding situation. By the way of background, the City of Berkeley, which I represent, administers a HUD-supported Shelter Plus Care Program which currently provides permanent, supportive housing to 145 households, involving 105 formerly homeless individuals and 40 formerly homeless families. All of the individuals and families served by this program are disabled, either by severe mental illness (34 percent), chronic substance abuse (23 percent), dually diagnosed (both severe mental illness and chronic substance abuse) and/or by AIDS/HIV-related diseases (5 percent). The Shelter Plus Care Program has been key in moving these individuals and families from chronic homelessness to self-sufficiency. All of the City of Berkeley's Shelter Plus Care participants are now living in private market housing with a range of needed support services (mental health, primary health care and social services). The current lack of available McKinney Act funding to renew the City of Berkeley's existing Shelter Plus Care Program threatens these households that have made such significant strides with displacement to homelessness. This result is both unnecessary and potentially a major impact to the more costly emergency and safety net systems of care in the Berkeley and Oakland community. Let me tell you abut two individuals who are currently participants in the City of Berkeley Shelter Plus Care Program. Killian is a 54-year-old male veteran who served in the United States Air Force from 1963-67. In the fall of 1989 he was hospitalized in the VA Hospital with severe symptoms of mental illness; he has been seriously disabled and homeless since then. Three years ago, the Shelter Plus Care Program provided him with housing and needed mental health services in the Berkeley community. Killian has achieved a level of stability in terms of both his housing and mental health issues since entering the Program. In his words, ``without the Shelter Plus Care Program, I would have been unable to survive.'' Glenda is a single mother in recovery who until recently was homeless in Berkeley with her young son. She has been diagnosed with clinical depression, ADD and bulimia. Since entering the Shelter Plus Care Program, she participates in regular case management counseling as well as receiving needed medical follow-up for her health conditions. In her words, ``I know that without Shelter Plus Care I would still be on drugs, homeless or dead and my son not with his mother like God intended him to be. Without the services that Shelter Plus Care requires, I would never be where I am today. In September I start school. I need Shelter Plus Care to continue to progress in my life and future.'' The positive impact that Shelter Plus Care housing has had on people could be repeated in any other city in the U.S., because it is such a vital and successful program. Mr. Speaker, I hope we can work together in conference to make the expiring Shelter Plus Care projects eligible for renewals from the Section 8 program rather than the current year McKinney appropriation. I also ask that Section 8 be provided with adequate funding to incorporate this request.

Ms. LEE

Ms. LEE. Mr. Speaker, I rise to recognize the significance of the establishment of the Community Bank of the Bay in the East Bay of San Francisco in the 9th Congressional District of California. Community Bank of the Bay came into existence three years ago, today, through the vision of its founding Board of Directors and many community supporters. Community Bank of the Bay is to be recognized for several reasons: it is the first formally chartered community development bank in the State of California, and was the third such Bank in the United States. Community Bank of the Bay was also the first bank to be authorized as a Community Development Financial Institution (CDFI) by both the United States Treasury Department and the State of California. Community Bank of the Bay is also to be recognized, and valued because it is committed to being an equal lending bank as well as an equal employment opportunity institution. Through my constituents, I have learned that the bank, and Mr. McDaniel, the President and Chief Executive Officer, take a personal interest in reaching out to ethnic minority borrowers, of both business and multi-family loans, who have been denied loans by larger banks. The bank goes to the prospective borrower, rather than sitting in marble halls waiting to intimidate a novice entrepreneur. Over 70% of the Bank's borrowers are located in Oakland. Over 60% of the Bank's small business loans are to entrepreneurs who have never borrowed from a bank before. The Bank has developed a highly successful lending program with no losses to date and focuses on helping its customers succeed. It pleases me that good service to the community is recognized by the community in terms of patronage: today, the Community Bank of the Bay has grown to $34 million in assets with over $28 million in deposits. The primary focus for the Bank lending remains small businesses, non- profits and multi-family housing providers in low-to-moderate income census tracts. Mr. Speaker, I am very proud of the vision and the performance of this wonderful bank which serves an underserved community, and yet waxes strong; grows in assets and deposits, meets its payroll and sinks its ever-stronger and deeper roots into a grateful community. On behalf of my constituents, I want to congratulate the Community Bank of the Bay on its third anniversary and look forward to celebrating many more.

Ms. LEE

Ms. LEE. Mr. Speaker, I rise to laud the success of Microenterprises Around the World and in the United States as incorporated in H.R. 413, The PRIME ACT In the last decade, microenterprise development has changed the way that we think about the alleviation of poverty. Before our encounter with microenterprise, far too many of us were mired in the belief of the intractability of poverty and the similar impression that the poor are little able to help themselves. With respect to small business and financial services especially, some allowed themselves to fall prey to the misconception that, with so many other concerns to which to tend, it certainly would not be possible for the poor to save or to appropriately access financial services, much less to start and run their own businesses. Thanks to the stunning successes of microenterprise around the world, these myths have been exploded. Today, millions of low-income people around the globe have taken a little bit of capital and used it as a springboard to transform their lives and those of their families. Women especially have used microenterprise to change their lives for the better. The lesson of all of this is that the poor, like everyone, have the desire to build and to grow, but that their access to the same services and advantages that many of us take for granted is extremely limited. Again, it is not a lack of desire, but a lack of access that has damaged the lives of low-income people around the world. When given the opportunity and similar access, the results are clear. Microenterprise has been a stunning success indeed. Armed with numerous success stories from around the world, we now have an opportunity to apply them at home as well. This spring the Banking Committee heard testimony from microentrepreneurs, from researchers, and from those working in the field. The message was simple and clear. Microenterprise can, and does, work in the United States as well. However, we also heard a clarion call for different services and support. Foremost among them was the deep conviction among those in the field of business training and providing technical assistance. Particularly for very low-income entrepreneurs, this training and technical assistance is the vital ingredient that can mean the difference between success and failure, between economic security and a fear of what the next day might bring, between food on the table for the children and another night of hunger. But the field of microenterprise needs our support. We also learned in the hearings that this money for critical business training and financial technical assistance is very difficult to come by. H.R. 413, the Program for Investment in Microentrepreneurs, would appropriate money to provide this assistance to those hard-working individuals who are most in need of it. This Congress is in a position to give the field a much-needed boost. And all indications are that there are many here in the House of Representatives who want very much to do this. But H.R. 413 is a modest bill and with so much work to do over the next month, I worry that it will get lost in the fray of all that remains to be done. And so I implore my colleagues today. Let us not allow modest, but absolutely important legislation like H.R. 413 be forgotten as we proceed in this Congress. Let us work together to pass H.R. 413 this year, and to provide immediate funding for it. This is an investment with returns, but only if we take the time to capitalize on it.

Ms. LEE

Ms. LEE. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word. Mr. Chairman, my constituents and I have been anxiously awaiting the VA-HUD appropriations to be presented to the entire House. We have been watching and have received some of the preliminary reports in the latest bill with dread. Just in my district alone, one of the highest housing cost areas in the country, we lose over $12 million and hundreds and hundreds of jobs. We are appalled with the proposed cuts, all of the proposed cuts. However, I want to focus very quickly now on what the bill does to our housing programs. As a member of the Subcommittee on Housing and Community Opportunities of the Committee on Banking and Financial Services, I am acutely aware of the enormous housing needs of this country and of my constituents and of the efforts made by our economy to respond to our national housing crisis. Housing costs in the San Francisco-Oakland Bay Area are particularly alarming. Housing costs are reaching astronomical heights and are becoming increasingly impossible for moderate wage earners to meet. The working poor and disabled are in greater jeopardy than ever. In this best of all economic times for some and the worst of times for many, why are the Republicans cutting the bare necessities for keeping the poorest of our working people working and those who absolutely cannot survive without help, why are we cutting their bare bones of housing and the economic opportunities to reach some level of self-sufficiency? Those who wave the flag of family values yet gut the basic safety net of families should really be exposed. These cuts do not create family stability. They create family dislocation and upheaval. I do not understand the level of meanness in this highest legislative body of the most powerful nation on Earth. These cuts are hypocritical and go against the very core of our creed of liberty and justice for all. We kick people off of welfare and tell them to be independent, yet we destroy the basic support system that they need for self-sufficiency. What do we suppose will be the outcome? A New York Times report from this weekend quoted a study. It showed and demonstrated that in the last 2 years the poorest 20 percent of these families lost an average of $577 a year, with incomes falling over $8,000. They had left welfare but had not made up the lost benefits with wages. The situation was worse for the poorest 10 percent, who lost an average of $814 a year. A clear majority of Americans also do not want tax cuts if it means ignoring our public school system, if it means ignoring reducing crime, protecting Social Security, Medicare, and about protecting our environment. I ask our colleagues to vote against this VA-HUD appropriations bill that provides no new housing support and which seriously underestimates the cost of housing renewal efforts in our country. I ask my colleagues to vote against this bill, which undercuts by $450 million the maintenance of present public housing stock. I ask my colleagues to vote against this bill which deletes and reduces homeless programs and funds by over $45 million. I ask my colleagues to vote against this bill because it cuts the Fair Housing program to reduce discrimination by $2.5 million and homeownership partner programs by $20 million. Racism is alive and well in America. We need to increase, not reduce, our efforts to eliminate discrimination from the face of this country. I remember the promises of a bipartisan approach earlier this session with the election of the new Speaker. But this is not a bipartisan bill. This is a bill that is meant to be confrontational and to move us to an ever-increasing crisis point. These proposed cuts are certain to create more homelessness and more hopelessness, which leads to despair. This is wrong. This is immoral in a land of plenty. There are too many unacceptable items in this bill, and I ask my colleagues to reject it.

Ms. LEE

Ms. LEE. Mr. Speaker, I vehemently oppose this Republican tax bill to give money to the richest from a phantom surplus. Our surplus comes from Social Security funds and cuts in essential programs in housing, community oriented policing, legal services, anti-discrimination, research, environmental protection, and a host of other programs essential to America's families. Let's look at the facts. Sixty percent of tax payers of middle income and below would receive less than 8% of the total tax cuts. Their average tax reduction would be only $138 a year. The top \1/10\th of taxpayers would receive 69% of the tax reductions and get an average annual tax cut of $7,600. Those making more than $300,000--would get an average annual tax reduction of more than $46,000 a year. Let's look at the other 85% of our people. Personal savings are at an all-time low and \1/3\ of the people have no assets at all. Another 20% have negligible assets. Almost half of all American children live in households with no financial assets. More than 10 million Americans don't even have a bank account. We are leaving too many behind. The rich have indicated they don't need the tax cut. Thank goodness they want a society with excellent schools, a skilled and healthy labor force, safe towns, all the things that the rest of us want. The Republican tax bill for the rich who don't want it is an awful bill and will be rejected by the people.

Ms. LEE

Ms. LEE. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to this rule. All of us claim to support human rights in faraway lands. This Republican appropriations bill demonstrates a disrespect for basic human rights for the least of these in our own country. And I say this because it does cut $5 million for homeless assistance, it cuts $50 million for renovation of severely distressed public housing, it cuts $250 million for Community Development Block Grants, and it cuts $1 billion from the President's request for assistance to landlords in exchange for affordable housing. Of course this is not a tax bill, but as we make these cuts, we must remember that, unfortunately, the Republicans did pass a major tax bill earlier that gives $731 million in capital gains tax cuts and $169 million in special interest tax breaks. It is mind-boggling that those who talk about family values resort to gutting our families' basic foundation. This is a human rights violation of the highest order. I ask for a ``no'' vote on the rule.

Ms. LEE

Ms. LEE. Mr. Speaker, today I rise to introduce legislation designed to focus both attention and resources on the global emergency of HIV/ AIDS, which is wreaking havoc in developing countries, most tragically in Sub-Saharan Africa. Throughout much of the First Session of the 106th Congress, much information has been disseminated and discussed about the HIV/AIDS crisis in Africa. While AIDS has afflicted Africa since the late 1980's, the latest increases in the HIV/AIDS infected population are staggering. The disease is quite literally obliterating entire communities and devastating the continent. The United Nations Children's Fund (UNICEF) 1999 Annual Report notes that of the 14 million people world wide who have died from AIDS, 11 million are from the nations in Sub-Saharan Africa. UNAIDS, the United Nations coordinating entity which tracks and combats HIV/AIDS, estimates that 22.5 million Sub-Saharan African adults and children are currently living with AIDS. Additionally, the HIV/AIDS virus is devastating southern Africa. In Zimbabwe, 1 out of every 5 adults is infected with HIV/AIDS, and an estimated 1,400 people die every week from AIDS. In South Africa, an estimated 3.6 million people are infected with the HIV/AIDS. A 1999 Census Bureau report states that the average life expectancy in Botswana, malawi, Swaziland, Zambia and Zimbabwe fell from approximately 65 years of age to 40 years of age. This represents the lowest life expectancy rates in the world and is largely due to the mortality rates from HIV/AIDS. In April, I had the opportunity to participate in a Presidential Delegation to Southern Africa to examine the growing crisis of African children orphaned by AIDS. These children now total 7.8 million and are estimated to reach 40 million by 2010. The 1999 annual report by the United Nations Children's Fund tells us, and I couldn't agree more, that ``the number of orphans, particularly in Africa, constitutes nothing less than an emergency, requiring an emergency response'' and that ``finding the resources needed to help stabilize the crisis and protect children is a priority that requires urgent action from the international community.'' Not only do we have a moral imperative to address this epidemic, but it is in our own best interest to do so. HIV/AIDS in Africa is more than a humanitarian crisis, it is an economic crisis, crippling Africa's workforce in many areas and creating even greater economic instability where poverty is ever-present. For example, companies such as Barclays Bank and British Petroleum are now hiring two employees for each skilled job, assuming that one will die from AIDS. The Southern African AIDS Information Dissemination Service estimates that over the next 20 years, AIDS will reduce by one-fourth the value of the economies of sub-Saharan African countries. We cannot create successful and sustainable economic partnerships with African nations unless we address, in a substantial manner, the HIV/AIDS epidemic. Additionally, HIV/AIDS poses serious national security concerns among the continent and globally. Perhaps the most stunning example is the 80 percent HIV infection rate of the military forces of Zimbabwe. Fledgling democratic nations, such as Nigeria, have yet to begin testing and educating their populations. Nigeria also has soldiers returning from peacekeeping operations in Liberia and Sierra Leone. If these soldiers are not tested and advised about the serious nature of their infections and educated about the risk they pose to others, we will be facing a whole new level of devastation from the epidemic. Mr. Speaker, I am convinced that the United States must take the lead in developing an immediate and sustained response to this crisis in Africa and globally. It is in our own national interest to aggressively attack the HIV/AIDS crisis in Africa, just we have with other diseases such as small pox and polio. Communicable diseases know no boundaries. As the world gets smaller, we have an obligation to eradicate HIV/AIDS from the face of the earth to protect the world family from its devastating effects. To date our response as a nation to this global epidemic has been sorely inadequate. For this reason, today I am introducing the AIDS Marshall Plan Fund for Africa Act (AMFPA). The AIDS Marshall Plan will assist African governments and non-governmental organizations to combat and control AIDS by providing grant funding for HIV/AIDS research, education, prevention and treatment. Specifically, this legislation creates the AMPFA Corporation that shall be a new United States government agency. The Corporation shall work in conjunction with the heads of appropriate federal agencies currently engaged in combating the spread of HIV/AIDS in Africa. The AMFPA Corporation shall be governed by a Board of Directors with the advice and guidance from an International Advisory Board made up of distinguished leaders with impeccable integrity and commitment to the health and well being of people throughout the world. The Corporation shall also consult with representatives from community-based African health, education and related organizations regarding the efficacy of providing grant funding in African countries. The Corporation shall also create a public-private partnership by soliciting funds from private companies and donor nations--especially the G8 countries--to contribute significant resources to its grant making activities. Mr. Speaker, I realize that accountability is a key issue in today's foreign assistance environment. Therefore, the Corporation shall create self-sufficiency requirements for grant recipients to ensure their programs become increasingly independent of AMFPA funding. Additionally, the Corporation shall create criteria for African governments to establish matching funds based upon ability to pay and to demonstrate a national commitment to combating HIV/AIDS by establishing, for example, a national HIV/AIDS council or agency. Additionally, Mr. Speaker, the administrative costs, or overhead associated with the AMPFA Corporation, are mandated to be no more than 8 percent of the Corporation's overall budget. The AMPFA Act authorizes the appropriation of $200 million for each of the fiscal years 2001 through 2005. Also, for each of the fiscal years 2002 through 2005, the Act authorizes an appropriation to fund an additional amount equal to 25 percent of the total funds contributed to the Corporation. Mr. Speaker, in a June 1999 lecture entitled ``The Global Challenges of AIDS'', United States Secretary General Kofi Annan stated that ``no company and no government can take on the challenge of AIDS alone. What is needed is a new approach to public health--combining all available resources, public an private, local and global''. It is my intent that the AIDS Marshall Plan for Africa serve as a replicable model for addressing this crisis globally. Already, this proposed legislation has received the support of over 40 Members of Congress and has caught the interest of the African diplomatic corps, African and African-American organizations, AIDS activists, and global health organizations that are interested in providing assistance to pass the legislation. In closing, Mr. Speaker, I am committed to seeing this legislation through to final passage and encourage my colleagues to review the legislation and to contact me or my staff with questions. This bill will support Africa in a substantive and meaningful manner.

Ms. LEE

Ms. LEE. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of the DeGette amendment, which would strike language banning the use of Federal funds for abortion services for women in Federal prisons. Women in prison have engaged in criminal activity. That is a fact. But through our judicial system we certainly need to seek appropriate responses to illegal actions, and that is what we do. Women in prison are being punished for the crimes that they committed. They are doing their time. However, this is a separate issue which we are addressing today. Today we discuss civil liberties and rights which are protected for all in America, and remain so, even when an individual is incarcerated. Abortion is a legal option for women in America. Since women in prison are completely dependent on the Federal Bureau of Prisons for all of their health care services, the ban on the use of Federal funds is a cruel policy that traps women by denying them all reproductive decision-making. The ban is unconstitutional because freedom of choice is a right that has been protected under our Constitution for 25 years. Furthermore, the great majority of women who enter our Federal prison system are impoverished and often isolated from family, friends, and resources. We are dealing with very complex histories that often tragically include drug abuse, homelessness, physical and sexual abuse. To deny basic reproductive choice would only make worse the crisis faced by the women and the Federal prison system. The ban on the use of Federal funds is a deliberate attack by the antichoice movement to ultimately derail all reproductive options. As we begin chipping away basic reproductive services for women, I ask my colleagues, what is next? Dental of OB/GYN examinations and mammograms for women inmates? Who is next? Women in the military, women who work for the government or all women who are ensured by the Federal Employees Health Benefits Plan. Limiting choice for incarcerated women puts other populations at great risk. This dangerous slippery slope erodes the right to choose little by little. It is my undying belief that freedom of access must be unconditionally kept intact. Therefore, I strongly urge my colleagues to protect this constitutional right for women in America and vote ``yes'' on the DeGette amendment.

Ms. LEE

Ms. LEE. Mr. Speaker, I rise to support the LaFalce motion to instruct the conferees on H.R. 10. It is important to support and protect the House version of the Community Reinvestment Act sections of H.R. 10. Although the House version, for me, is weak on ensuring that these provisions are extended to other financial institutions now with this enormous extension of the powers of banking, at least the House version ensures that the Community Reinvestment Act conditions apply to banking. The Senate version does not. We must remember the CRA was passed as a creative response to blatant ethnic gender and neighborhood discrimination in the lending of money for housing. A red line would be drawn around a neighborhood that a bank or an insurance company perceived to have a majority of people with risky credit. The bank or the insurance company would then not lend to anyone within those red lines. Unfortunately, this discriminatory behavior exists today. The Community Reinvestment Act, however, encourages banks that do business in communities to reinvest in those communities. It is a positive way to encourage banks to do the correct thing, to not discriminate. I urge an ``aye'' vote on the LaFalce motion to instruct.