Jim Langevin

Mr. LANGEVIN

Mr. LANGEVIN. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to extend my best wishes and congratulations to the leaders and citizens of Taiwan as they celebrate their 91st National Day. Despite our lack of formal relations with the Republic of China on Taiwan, we enjoy a flourishing relationship. Speaking in New York, Secretary of State Colin Powell recently called Taiwan a ``success story'' and noted that Taiwan has become a resilient economy, a vibrant democracy and a generous contributor to the international community. Indeed, Taiwan's economy has grown tremendously in recent decades. Taiwan is the United States' eighth-largest trading partner and seventh-largest export market. Our exports to Taiwan in 2001 totaled $18.2 billion. Taiwan's importance as a world economy was evidenced by its accession to the World Trade Organization earlier this year, the culmination of twelve years of collaborative efforts with the U.S. Over the past several decades, Taiwan has also become a successful model of rapid political reform. Taiwan today is home to more than ninety political parties, and virtually every political office is hotly contested through free and fair elections. Just two years ago, Mr. Chen Shui-bian, a former political dissident, was elected the tenth president of the Republic of China. Taiwan is making significant contributions to the international community, and I know that our bilateral relations will only grow stronger in the coming years. Mr. Speaker, I know you and all our colleagues join me in sending congratulations to the people of Taiwan on this special day.

Mr. LANGEVIN

Mr. LANGEVIN. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me the time. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to be here on this historic day to urge passage of H.R. 3295, the Help America Vote Act. The measure sets minimum standards for elections and provides States with the much- needed resources to upgrade voting equipment, improve election accuracy and provide voter education and poll worker training. This legislation has rightly been called the first civil rights legislation of the 21st century because it will ensure that all Americans can participate fully in our democracy by being guaranteed the fundamental right to vote. We would not be here without the leadership of the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Ney) and the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Hoyer), my good friends on the Committee on House Administration. Their diligent efforts to craft a bipartisan election reform bill demonstrates the successes that we may enjoy by setting aside our differences and working for the good of the American people. I particularly appreciate their work to make our polling places and election equipment accessible to people with disabilities. I encourage my colleagues to vote for this measure.

Mr. LANGEVIN

Mr. LANGEVIN. Mr. Speaker, as I take the floor this evening I am humbled by the task at hand and the paths that have led us to this point. When I arrived in Congress last year, I never imagined that we would witness cruel attacks on our own soil, that we would lead a war against terrorism across the globe or that we would contemplate returning to Iraq to address the ongoing threat of Saddam Hussein, all in less than 2 years. Yet, we did not choose these circumstances. Instead, they found us; and it is our responsibility to act in a careful and appropriate manner to protect the United States, its people, its allies and our ideals. Authorizing the use of military force is one of the most important decisions Congress can make; and as a member of the House Committee on Armed Services, I do not take it lightly. Last month, I held a listening tour in Rhode Island to understand my constituents' concerns about military action in Iraq. I spent many hours being briefed in the Committee on Armed Services and in the White House by senior administration officials and other experts. From these conversations, I have grown increasingly alarmed by the widening body of evidence that Saddam Hussein poses a grave and expanding threat to the security of the United States. His development of biological and chemical weapons, as well as his pursuit of nuclear capabilities, flaunts United Nations resolutions and threatens the stability of the region. His oppression of the Iraqi people, including his use of chemical weapons against civilians, strikes at the very core of our belief in protecting human rights. He has also made it clear that he will take action to harm us and our allies, even firing on aircraft and enforcing the Iraqi's no-fly zone 2,500 times since 1991. While it may be difficult to imagine what horrors this tyrant is planning over 6,000 miles away, I am convinced that the threat is very real. The question, therefore, becomes how best to deal with this danger. I have heard overwhelming concerns from constituents that the United States could endanger the international coalition against terror if we act against Iraq, if we act particularly unilaterally. Equally important, I share the concern that we will damage our moral authority as the world's sole remaining superpower if we do not proceed responsibly. For this reason, we must engage the global community in our efforts to neutralize the threat of Saddam Hussein. Cooperation with the United Nations and our allies is critical, and I hope that we are collectively able to develop a strong mandate for the disarmament of Iraq. In his speech Monday night, President Bush pledged to engage the U.N. Security Council in drafting a new resolution; and I fully expect him to pursue this strategy, not only to establish broader support and deeper confidence for our mission but also to protect the integrity of the United States. If new weapons inspections do not achieve total disarmament, we must not rule out using military action to force compliance with U.N. resolutions, eradicate Iraq's destructive capabilities and protect the American people. Again, such action must be taken in conjunction with other Nations. President Bush stated that we would act with our allies at our side, and we must hold him to his promise. We cannot ignore that unilateral action against Iraq could have dangerous ramifications on the region and America's own efforts in the war on terrorism. Furthermore, the international coalition would also be essential in promoting a new government in Iraq, an effort that should be undertaken as seriously as the Marshall Plan. Tomorrow, I will vote for the Spratt amendment, which would require cooperation with the United Nations to the greatest extent possible. In contemplating a preemptive attack against another nation, it is our responsibility to work with our friends and allies and rally them to our cause. If the Spratt amendment is unsuccessful, I cannot support the underlying resolution until we first go to the U.N. Security Council and attempt to get a vote authorizing the use of force. Though that vote may ultimately fail, the United States has been instrumental in shaping the guidelines and agreements that have fostered peace and cooperation throughout the world, and we must demonstrate our continued commitment to these goals. The threat posed by Saddam Hussein is too great for us to remain inactive. We cannot sit idly by while the pieces of another September 11 fall into place. We cannot risk a single American life waiting for the promises from a madman. We now have the opportunity to improve the safety of our citizens and the stability of the Middle East. However, there is a right way and a wrong way of approaching this complicated issue. Just as a prosecutor must lay out the facts to establish guilt, we must make our case before the world community. I urge support for the Spratt amendment. As I take the floor this afternoon, I am humbled by the task at hand and the path that has led us to this point. When I arrived in Congress last year, I never imagined that we would witness cruel attacks on our soil, that we would lead a war against terrorism across the globe, or that we would contemplate returning to Iraq to address the ongoing threat of Saddam Hussein--all in less than two years. Yet we did not choose these circumstances; instead, they found us, and it is our responsibility to act in a careful and appropriate manner to protect the United States, its people, its allies, and its ideals. Authorizing the use of military force is one of the most important decisions Congress can make, and, as a member of the House Armed Services Committee, I do not take it lightly. Last month, I held a listening tour in Rhode Island to understand my constituents' concerns about military action in Iraq. I have spent many hours being briefed in the Armed Services Committee and at the White House by Administration officials and other experts. From these conversations, I have grown increasingly alarmed by the widening body of evidence that Saddam Hussein poses a grave and expanding threat to the security of the United States. His development of biological and chemical weapons, as well as his pursuit of nuclear capabilities, flaunts United Nations resolutions and threatens the stability of the region. His oppression of the Iraqi people, including his use of chemical weapons against civilians, strikes at the very core of our belief in protecting human rights. He has also made it clear that he will take action to harm us and our allies, firing on aircraft enforcing the Iraqi no-fly zones 2,500 times since 1991. And while it may be difficult for some to imagine what horrors this tyrant is planning over 6,000 miles away, I am convinced that the threat is real. The question therefore becomes how best to deal with this danger. I have heard overwhelming concern from my constituents that the United States could endanger the international coalition against terror if we act unilaterally against Iraq. Equally important, I share their concern that we will damage our moral authority as the world's sole remaining superpower if we do not proceed responsibly. For this reason, we must engage the global community in our efforts to neutralize the threat of Saddam Hussein. Cooperation with the United Nations and our allies is critical, and I hope that we are collectively able to develop a strong mandate for the disarmament of Iraq. In his speech on Monday night, President Bush pledged to engage the U.N. Security Council in drafting a new resolution, and I fully expect him to pursue this strategy, not only to establish broader support and deeper confidence for our mission, but also to protect the integrity of the United States. If new weapons inspections do not achieve total disarmament, we must not rule out using military action to force compliance with U.N. resolutions, eradicate Iraq's destructive capabilities, and protect the American people. Again, such action must be taken in conjunction with other nations. President Bush stated we would act ``with allies at our side,'' and we must hold him to his promise. We cannot ignore that unilateral action against Iraq could have dangerous ramifications on the region and America's own efforts in the war on terrorism. Furthermore, an international coalition would also be essential in promoting a new government in Iraq--an effort that should be undertaken as seriously as the Marshall Plan. Tomorrow, I will vote for the Spratt amendment, which would require cooperation with the United Nations to the greatest extent possible. When contemplating a preemptive attack against another nation, it is our responsibility to work with our friends and allies and rally them to our cause. If the Spratt amendment is unsuccessful, I cannot support the underlying resolution until we first go to the U.N. Security Council and attempt to get a vote authorizing the use of force. Though that vote may ultimately fail, the United States has been instrumental in shaping the guidelines and agreements that have fostered peace and cooperation throughout the world, and we must demonstrate our continued commitment to these goals. The threat posed by Saddam Hussein is too great for us to remain inactive. We cannot sit idly by while the pieces of another September 11 fall into place. We cannot risk a single American life waiting for promises from a madman. We now have the opportunity to improve the safety of our citizens and the stability of the Middle East. However, there is a right way and a wrong way of approaching this complicated issue. Just as a prosecutor must lay out facts to establish guilt, we must make our case before the world community. This is the only approach to guarantee that our efforts to disarm Iraq will have the full force of international support and not undermine our greater war against terrorism. I appreciate the opportunity to share in this debate and urge my colleagues to vote for the Spratt amendment.

Mr. LANGEVIN

Mr. LANGEVIN. Mr. Speaker, as a member of the Cox-Frost Continuity of Congress Working Group and an original cosponsor of this legislation, I strongly urge my colleagues to support House Resolution 559 to address problems with our method of filling vacancies in the House of Representatives. The Constitution declares that Members of the House must be popularly elected. However, the specter of terrorism, notably, reports that the Capitol was a targeted Capitol on September 11, reminds us that mass casualties in Washington or elsewhere could have a detrimental effect on the representative nature of the House and its ability to fulfill its duties. As a former Secretary of State, I know that States have vastly different methods and time lines for filling vacant House seats, which could pose a serious problem in the event of a catastrophe. For example, Rhode Island general laws state simply: ``The Governor shall immediately issue a writ of election ordering a new election as early as possible.'' Today's resolution would address such problems by encouraging States to review their special elections procedures to fill House vacancies as expeditiously as possible. This resolution is the first recommendation of the Continuity of Congress Working Group, which has been tackling the complicated issues of how government would function in the wake of a catastrophe. I would like to thank my good friend and colleague, the gentleman from Washington (Mr. Baird), who has helped raise the profile and understanding of these complex problems while leading the effort to find solutions. I also commend the gentleman from California (Mr. Cox) and the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Frost) for devoting so much of their time and effort to this topic and making it a priority for Congress. Another area I feel worthy of discussion is the ability of Congress to communicate and possibly even conduct legislative operations remotely in the event of a major disruption. The Committee on House Administration has held hearings on the feasibility of establishing an e-Congress for emergency situations, and I have introduced legislation to study this matter. At this time I would like to commend and recognize the efforts of the distinguished chairman of the Committee on House Administration, the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Ney), and also my colleague, the ranking member, the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Hoyer), for their outstanding efforts and leadership on this issue. While several of my colleagues have expressed discomfort with this and other related topics, it is our duty to prepare the legislative branch for any kind of disaster. We must never allow the people's business to be interrupted. Today's resolution is an important first step in addressing complex questions about our government's ability to function in the age of terrorism, and I encourage my colleagues to support this legislation.

Mr. LANGEVIN. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this time. (Mr. LANGEVIN asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. LANGEVIN

Mr. LANGEVIN. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding to me. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to express my deep concerns about our Federal budget and its impact on our Nation's economic future. I would also like to commend my colleague, the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Spratt), for organizing this special order on such an important issue. Mr. Speaker, I stand united with the President and my colleagues on both sides of the aisle in our commitment to defeating terrorism and doing what is necessary to preserve national security, both at home and abroad. However, despite the many new security and economic challenges confronting us, our homeland protection efforts and fiscal policies should not and need not shortchange our domestic priorities. We can win the war against terrorism without raiding Social Security and Medicare, and without increasing the national debt. Last year I joined many of my colleagues in cautioning that the administration's budget simply did not add up. Sadly, our warnings were ignored, and we were instead continually reassured that we could afford an enormous tax cut, ensure the solvency of Social Security and Medicare, pay down the national debt, fund our domestic priorities, and still have a large reserve fund for unanticipated emergencies. As it is now very clear to us all that that budget was based on unrealistic surplus projections that never materialized, and we now face deficits and an ever-increasing national debt that stretches far beyond the temporary economic downturn or the costs of the war on terrorism. Recent Congressional Budget Office projections confirmed the dramatic deterioration in the budget outlook since the current administration took office. Less than 2 years ago, the administration and Congress were looking covetously at a staggering $5.6 trillion cumulative surplus through 2010. Much of it I hoped would be used to pay down what was then a $4 trillion national debt. Sadly, it has become clear that the fiscally irresponsible policies of the Bush administration and the Republican-led House have squandered these opportunities. The CBO's current surplus projections now total only $366 billion. Even worse, CBO's current projections are optimistic, as they do not reflect the cost of the likely extension of several expiring tax cuts, relief from the expanding alternative minimum tax on individuals, potential new tax breaks for businesses and investors, and an expanded war on global terrorism, or a new Department of Homeland Security. If these initiatives are all enacted, we could be faced with a $386 billion deficit over the next 10 years. When Social Security funds are not counted, the deficit could balloon to $2.7 trillion. Mr. Speaker, the American public is already paying $1 billion on interest-only payments on the debt every day. Further, the interest payments on our debt are on a fast track to become our single largest annual expenditure. By continuing to rack up debt on the national credit card, we are saddling future generations with our poor choices, and endanger the fiscal stability of this Nation. Our rapidly deteriorating fiscal outlook presents a serious challenge for every Member of Congress. The government is now on track to raid more than $2 trillion of the Social Security surplus over the next 10 years to cover deficits in the rest of the Federal budget. When I was elected to Congress, I promised my constituents that I would protect Social Security and the Medicare Trust Funds. And I was not alone. As many of my colleagues on both sides of the aisle made this same vow, it is time to honor our commitments by acknowledging our current situation and working together to craft a budget that is fiscally responsible and protects Social Security. Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to heed this call and do the right thing.

Mr. LANGEVIN

Mr. LANGEVIN. Mr. Speaker, today I am joined by 35 of my colleagues in introducing a bipartisan resolution supporting the issuance of a postage stamp honoring America's small businesses. Small businesses make up a significant sector of our economy. The estimated 25 million small businesses in this nation bring new and innovative services and products to the marketplace and provide business ownership opportunities to diverse and traditionally underrepresented groups. According to the Small Business Administration, small firms create two out of every three new jobs in America. In fact, small businesses employ 54 percent of the national work force, and the men and women who own small businesses represent over 99 percent of all employers. Many cutting-edge technologies which have become a part of our daily lives are the product of small business innovation. From the zipper and quick-frozen food, to the personal computer and high-resolution x-ray microscopes, small businesses have been a major force in shaping the last half century. In fact, it is estimated that small firms produce twice as many innovations per employee as large firms. Although small businesses receive a low percentage of federal research and development funds, they are responsible for a larger percentage of patents than big companies. I urge my colleagues to join me and the 35 original bipartisan cosponsors of this resolution in honoring the real engine of our nation's economy by supporting the issuance of a postage stamp in commemoration of America's small businesses.

Mr. LANGEVIN

Mr. LANGEVIN. Mr. Speaker, I first want to thank the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Waters) for offering this motion to instruct today and for her leadership on this very important issue. I also want to echo the comments of the gentleman from Maryland and thank the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Ney) and, of course, the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Hoyer) as well for his hard work on this bill. Mr. Speaker, as we enter the closing days of the 107th Congress, the House faces a number of legislative initiatives that we would like to complete. While many of these are necessary to keep our government running and to protect the American people, we must not forget our responsibility to protect the fundamental right to vote. The election debacle of November 2000 was not an isolated incident. Last week's primary in Florida demonstrated we still have serious problems with the administration of our election systems. I know that many States, including Rhode Island, are poised to initiate substantial election reforms but are merely waiting for the Federal Government to issue guidelines and provide funding. The gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Ney) and the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Hoyer) were instrumental in crafting H.R. 3295 which passed the House with strong bipartisan support. While our bill differs from the other Chamber in several respects, these differences are not insurmountable. I know that the conferees of H.R. 3295 have the American people's best interests at heart, and I encourage them to work expeditiously to resolve the remaining disagreement and develop a conference report that we can pass before the end of the year. Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support the Waters motion to instruct.

Mr. LANGEVIN

Mr. LANGEVIN. Mr. Speaker, today I join millions of people in solemn reflection on the tragic events of September 11, 2001. One year has passed since that horrific day thrust the world into shock and sadness; and while some pain has subsided, our wounds have not entirely healed, particularly for those who lost loved ones in New York, Pennsylvania, and Washington. However, by responding to this tragedy with hope and determination, our Nation has grown stronger. As the initial confusion of the attacks subsided, we became familiar with some of the names and the faces of the victims. Rhode Island was touched personally by this tragedy through the loss of several who called our State home. David and Lynn Angell, Carol Bouchard, Renee Newell, Mark Charette, Michael Gould, Amy Jarret, Kathryn Laborie, Shawn Nassaney and Lynn Goodchild. We learned about these individuals, their interests and their lives. We have prayed for their families and loved ones and responded to their grief with compassion. As in the past, Americans offered sympathy and support to those touched by tragedy, reminding us that though the terrorists attacked our Nation, they did not and they cannot damage our spirit. On this solemn occasion I pay tribute to those who lost their lives, to their friends and families who continue to grieve, to the American heroes who dedicated themselves to rescue and recovery efforts, to our service men and women who are defending our Nation against the ongoing threat of terrorism and to the spirit of America which has helped us endure these difficult times and will grow stronger from our sacrifices. God bless America.

Mr. LANGEVIN

Mr. LANGEVIN. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to the patriotism of 100 of my fellow Rhode Islanders, who are members of the 43rd Military Police Brigade of the Rhode Island Army National Guard. As I speak, these fine men and women are deployed to U.S. Naval Base Guantanamo Bay in Cuba, where they are part of Joint Task Force-160. The mission of Joint Task Force-160 is to oversee the care, custody and control of the detainees who have been apprehended by United States and international forces in the global war on terrorism. The 43rd Military Police Brigade is serving as the core staff and headquarters for the entire Joint Task Force, as well as providing critical security requirements for Camp Delta, where the detainees are being held. Additionally, they support the efforts of Joint Task Force-170, which includes both the FBI and the CfA, who are handling interrogation of the detainees. In deploying to Guantanamo Bay, they have been reunited with their commander and fellow Rhode Island Guardsman, Brigadier General Rick Backus, who became the Task Force Commander in March of this year. U.S. Naval Base Guantanamo Bay is over 45 square miles and is not only the oldest U.S. base overseas but it is also the only one in a Communist country. It is located on the southeast corner of Cuba, and is about 400 air miles from Miami, Florida. For these Guard members it is home because it is where their country needs them to be. They are an integral part of the 1,700 members of Joint Task Force-160, made up of servicemen and women from the Air Force, Army, Navy, Marines and Coast Guard, and they are all unsung heroes of the war on terrorism. The 43rd Military Police is a mobilized National Guard unit from my hometown of Warwick, Rhode Island. They recently made history when, on May 20, 2002, they became the first National Guard unit to assume the role of a joint task force command. Clearly this demonstrates the ability of the National Guard to seamlessly transition into an active duty command. This complete integration of a National Guard Unit into a Joint Task Force is a tribute to both the National Guard Bureau and the U.S. Army. A member of my staff recently had the privilege of visiting these Guard members at Guantanamo. He told me that it was impossible not to be struck by the professionalism and dedication of these men and women. Their morale is excellent, despite the incredibly stressful task they have. They make every daily decision, which affects the lives of 1,700 troops and 564 detainees, and they are our next-door neighbors. They are accomplishing something they have constantly prepared for but never imagined would become reality in this way. They have been assigned an awesome challenge and have risen to the occasion. In recognizing these members of the Rhode Island National Guard, I also want to acknowledge the outstanding support that they receive from their families and their employers. Most of these Guard members are traditional members, or ``weekend warriors'', as they are often known. Many are self-employed or hold critical positions in their companies. The extremely unique demand of this war on terrorism is a duty that is shared by employers and employees alike. Many Guard members expect to be away from their families and jobs for four months, which could impose a significant financial and psychological burden on members at a time when they need to be functioning at 100 percent. The support they receive is critical to the success of their mission. I am proud as an American and a Rhode Islander to recognize this partnership in patriotism displayed by the guardsmen of the 43rd Military Police Brigade, their families and their employers in their deployment as part of Joint Task Force 160.

Mr. LANGEVIN

Mr. LANGEVIN. Mr. Speaker, today I join with my colleagues on the Hellenic Caucus to mark the 28th anniversary of the Turkish invasion of Cyprus. I thank Mrs. Maloney and Mr. Bilirakis for their ongoing leadership in the Hellenic Caucus and for organizing events such as today's, which draw much-needed attention to issues of importance to the Hellenic community. Two days from now will be the 28th anniversary of the invasion. On July 20, 1974, Turkish troops seized control of northern Cyprus, establishing an occupation that exists to this day. The invasion and occupation caused the deaths of 5,000 Cypriots and the expulsion of 200,000 Greek Cypriots from their homes. To add insult to injury, Turkey promoted an independence declaration in the controlled area, drawing the condemnation of the United States and the United Nations Security Council. Our Nation's top foreign policy priorities must include the reunification of Cyprus. One of my first acts as a Member of Congress was to join many of my colleagues in sending a letter to President Bush requesting that his administration immediately address this matter and work toward a peaceful solution. The United States holds a unique position of trust with both Greece and Turkey, and must use its influence to encourage the Turkish-Cypriots to continue negotiations, so that Cyprus may once again be whole. This year, the United Nations has redoubled its efforts to encourage unification negotiations between the Republic of Cyprus and the Turkish Cypriots, with Secretary General Kofi Aman visiting the island in May to meet with government leaders. Unfortunately, LTN negotiators, as well as other international observers, have noted that Turkish Cypriot leader Rauf Denktash has shown little interest in negotiating a settlement, while noting that Cypriot President Glafcos Clen'des has shown far more flexibility. The United States must remain engaged in negotiations in Cyprus to promote a lasting settlement to this ongoing problem. Cyprus, like the United States, shares a commitment to democracy, human fights, and the concept of equal justice under the law. The nation's economic growth and high standard of living make it a prime candidate for membership in the European Union. I am a proud cosponsor of H. Con. Res. 164, which supports the accession of Cyprus to the European Union, as it would greatly contribute to the diversity and shared history of the EU. Membership would provide Cyprus with greater opportunities to contribute to the international community and could also serve as a catalyst for settlement of the unification problem. On this important anniversary, we mourn those who lost their lives in the Turkish invasion of Cyprus. However, we can also look forward to a time when Cyprus is again unified and able to reach its fullest potential in the international arena. The United States has stood beside her in the past, and we will undoubtedly maintain this strong relationship for years to come. Again, I thank my colleagues on the Hellenic Caucus for addressing this important matter, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. LANGEVIN

Mr. LANGEVIN. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to express my deep concerns about corporate accountability and its impact on our Nation's economic future. In the wake of recent corporate bombshells, investor confidence in our financial markets has been badly shaken. Congress cannot afford to wait for reports of another tragic example of corporate deception, followed by more lost jobs and depleted pensions. While I welcome the President's comments during his visit to Wall Street last week, this looming crisis requires a firm commitment from our administration to seriously address this problem. But words, like stocks, lose their value when actions do not back them up. We must hold those irresponsible few accountable for their actions now and enact safeguards to protect our markets, our workers, our consumers and reputations of companies who do play by the rules. Our economic recovery and the future of millions of American families depend on it.

Mr. LANGEVIN

Mr. LANGEVIN. Mr. Speaker, today we pay tribute to a true hero, Justin Dart, Jr. I am proud to join with my colleagues, the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Hoyer), the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Boehner), the gentleman from California (Mr. George Miller), and the gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Ramstad) in introducing this legislation. I have known Justin for several years. He spoke at my alma mater 3 years ago. He has traveled to my home State of Rhode Island on numerous occasions. But most of all, he is one of the primary reasons that I am here today. Justin Dart inspired me to run for office, supported me throughout my campaign and, years before, laid the path to make it possible for me to run for the United States Congress. Twelve years ago, Justin crisscrossed the country to build grass- roots support for the passage of the Americans With Disabilities Act. He traveled five times to each of the 50 States, educating the public on mobilizing people with disabilities, their friends and loved ones, to support the enactment of ADA. He was the voice of reason, a vision of leadership, and a force to be reckoned with. He understood that the injustices he and millions of other Americans experienced on a daily basis must be stopped and that only Federal legislation could meet this objective. Justin Dart's dogged, yet charismatic, skills of persuasion and unyielding dedication to implementing a meaningful civil rights law is what ensured successful passage of the ADA. Justin applied this rare combination of grit and wisdom to the many invaluable roles he played in prior administrations. He served as vice chairman of the National Council on Disability, commissioner of the Rehabilitation Services Administration, and chairperson of the President's Committee on Employment of People With Disabilities. He was also awarded the prestigious Presidential Medal of Freedom in 1998. The commitment of making a difference ran through Justin Dart's veins from his youth. He was born into wealth, but chose to fight for justice at all costs. At the young age of 22, he created an organization to promote racial integration of the then-segregated University of Houston where he studied as both an undergraduate and graduate student. He championed equal rights and self-empowerment throughout his years in both the public and private sectors. He constantly fought for justice and equality for people with disabilities and government, business, labor, and religious organizations. He knew that if people are provided with the proper resources, training and opportunities, disabled or not, they can achieve tremendous success. Last year when I joined Justin for ADA anniversary celebrations in the Senate, he said, ``Let us rise above politics as usual. Let us join together, Republicans, Democrats, Independents, Americans. Let us embrace each other in love for individual human rights. Let us unite in action to keep the sacred pledge: Liberty and justice for all.'' Today I salute Justin Dart. I send my warmest condolences to his wife, Yoshiko, and I thank God for blessing us all for the powerful presence of such a luminous spirit, which lives on in each and every one of us. As we will soon commemorate the 12th anniversary of the ADA, I urge all Americans to honor and celebrate Justin Dart.

Mr. LANGEVIN

Mr. LANGEVIN. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks on the motion to instruct.

Mr. LANGEVIN. Mr. Speaker, I offer a motion to instruct conferees on H.R. 3295.

Mr. LANGEVIN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, today I offer this motion to instruct on H.R. 3295, the Help America Vote Act of 2001, in order to raise awareness of a significant shortcoming in our Nation's elections: the disenfranchisement of disabled voters due to inaccessible voting equipment. I wish to first dedicate this motion to the memory of my good friend, Justin Dart, Jr., one of the strongest voices for the disabled community, who died June 22 at the age of 71. Justin, often called the Father of the Americans with Disabilities Act, leaves a great legacy of activism and inspires us all with his vision of an America in which every person can reach his or her full potential and actively contribute to society. Millions of people's lives have been improved by his good deeds, and it is in his honor that I offer this motion today. I first want to thank my good friend, the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Ney), for his inclusive and bipartisan efforts to improve our Nation's elections, and for being so receptive to the needs of disabled voters. We owe him a debt of gratitude. I also owe a great deal of gratitude to the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Hoyer) and the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Conyers) for their support of this motion and for their lifelong commitment to civil rights. We would not be where we are today without them. Finally, I thank my friend and colleague, the gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Ramstad), for his advocacy of the rights of the disabled and for joining us today in this effort to ensure that people with disabilities have full access to voting. Mr. Speaker, the low voting participation rate among the disabled is a pervasive and well-documented problem. Yet the Nation has made little progress in addressing its causes. The inaccessibility of polling places and election equipment is one of the major factors in this unfortunate phenomenon. Shockingly, the General Accounting Office found that 84 percent of our Nation's polling places were inaccessible to the physically disabled in 2000. Blind voters often cannot cast a vote without assistance, the visually impaired may not be able to decipher small print or confusing ballots, and people in wheelchairs may have difficulty maneuvering in older voting booths. Just as a personal story to lend passion to this argument, it was only just a few short years ago that I myself never knew the privilege of voting independently, in privacy, in a voting booth. Rhode Island had the oldest voting machines in the country, lever machines, in which I would have to go in and could not possibly reach the levers myself; I would always have to take someone in. Though I was grateful for the assistance, it certainly deprived me of the right to a secret and independent vote. Many others know the same story. As a result of these problems, only 41 percent of people with disabilities voted in November of 2000, in the November of 2000 elections, far below the national average. With nearly one in five Americans having some level of disability, and approximately 35 million Americans over the age of 65, we must act now to ensure that our voting system is accessible to all Americans. Improving access to voting has been an overarching goal of my work in public service. As Secretary of State of Rhode Island, I was the chief architect of a plan to upgrade the State's voting system and equipment. The replacement of outdated lever machines with electronic equipment and Braille and tactile ballots helped increase voter turnout and significantly reduced chances of error. The entire upgrade was statewide and cost effective, and Rhode Island is now widely recognized as having one of the most modern and accessible voting systems in the United States. In Congress, I have continued to emphasize the importance of voting access. In March 2001, I joined former Secretaries of State in Congress in hosting a voting technology demonstration in which we highlighted accessible election equipment. Not only did this event illustrate the many types of affordable and accessible equipment, it also offered several people with disabilities the opportunity to use a voting machine for the very first time in their lives. The technology exists to address the disenfranchisement of disabled voters, and Congress must encourage its use. For this reason, I am pleased to offer this motion to instruct in support of the Senate's accessible voting equipment provisions. The Senate's version of H.R. 3295 requires voting systems used in Federal elections to be accessible for individuals with disabilities, including the blind and visually impaired, in a manner that provides privacy and independence. The Senate's language also requires that each polling place have at least one voting system equipped for individuals with disabilities. Guaranteeing voting equipment in all polling places is one of the disability community's top priorities in election reform, and I am pleased to announce that this motion to instruct has been endorsed by 26 disability advocacy groups. One major component of election reform must be to provide the greatest possible access to voting for all eligible citizens, and the Senate's accessibility language is a major step toward this noble goal. I urge my colleagues to support this motion to instruct so that all Americans can exercise their fundamental right to participate in our democracy by guaranteeing them the right to vote. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. LANGEVIN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, again, I thank the chairman for his help and support on this issue. We would not be here on the election reform without his diligent leadership, and I thank the gentleman. Earlier in my statement, Mr. Speaker, I acknowledged and expressed my gratitude to the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Hoyer), my distinguished colleague, who is, as many know, the author of the Americans with Disabilities Act and who has been a great champion of people with disabilities and their rights. Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Hoyer).

Mr. LANGEVIN. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the distinguished gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Eddie Bernice Johnson).

Mr. LANGEVIN. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Davis).

Mr. LANGEVIN. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Scott).

Mr. LANGEVIN. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from California (Mrs. Capps).

Mr. LANGEVIN. Mr. Speaker, I again want to thank the gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Ramstad) for his support of this issue. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. LANGEVIN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. In closing, I just want to reiterate my appreciation to the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Ney) for his leadership both on election reform and on disabilities issues and agreeing to support this motion to instruct. We would not be where we are on election reform without his support and I thank him. Mr. Speaker, as I previously mentioned, I offered this motion in honor of Justin Dart, the father of the Americans with Disabilities Act and an ardent supporter of greater access to voting. Last year during the ADA anniversary celebration Justin said, Let us rise above politics as usual. Let us join together, Republican, Democrats, Independents, Americans. Let us embrace each other in love for individual human life. Let us unite in action to keep the sacred pledge, life, liberty and justice for all. I ask my colleagues to help empower all Americans by voting for this motion to instruct. General Leave

Mr. LANGEVIN. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. LANGEVIN. Mr. Speaker, I object to the vote on the ground that a quorum is not present and make the point of order that a quorum is not present.