Carolyn Maloney

Mrs. MALONEY

Mrs. MALONEY. Mr. Speaker, today I am introducing the Disaster Area Health and Environmental Monitoring Act with my colleagues Representatives Chris Shays and Tim Bishop. During a disaster our first responders heroically rush to the disaster area with little regard for their personal safety in hopes of saving others. We owe it to them to at least monitor their health when it has been put at risk. Unfortunately, no such program exists. There is no better example of this than what has happened in the aftermath of 9/11. Today, more than 4 years after 9/11, there are literally thousands of individuals who are still sick as a direct result of their work in and around Ground Zero. Included in the sick are police officers, firefighters, volunteers, residents, and area workers. Despite a clear need, there is still no one in the Federal Government in charge of caring for these individuals, there is no coordination among programs established to screen these illnesses and there is no Federal program that provides anyone with any treatment. Now as we consider options to monitor the medical impacts of Hurricane Katrina, there is no Federal program in place to set up a medical monitoring program. This is why we are introducing the Disaster Area Health and Environmental Monitoring Act--H.R. 5329 in the 108th Congress. This is the companion to legislation introduced in the Senate by Senators Voinovich and Clinton--S. 1279--and has passed the Senate by unanimous consent last Congress. The Disaster Area Health and Environmental Monitoring Act would create a standard for a monitoring program following a disaster when the President determines a monitoring program is needed. This monitoring program would be set up to screen the health of affected individuals. By creating a coordinated monitoring program, we can provide valuable information to affected individuals and we can assure our first responders that we will continue to care about the health affects after the disaster. I urge my colleagues to support this legislation.

Mrs. MALONEY

Mrs. MALONEY. Mr. Speaker, I am delighted to rise today to pay tribute to our female astronauts. These heroines are not only a source of pride for all Americans, but they have also inspired countless women to reach for the stars in their own lives and careers. The space program has long been one of the best examples of America's leadership role in the world. Our astronauts are daring, brilliant, and selfless, risking their lives for the sake of scientific discovery. But like our Nation itself, they were once divided along gender lines. Indeed, when NASA was created by President Eisenhower in 1958, there were no female astronauts. Of course, there were no women on the Supreme Court back then, and in Congress there was just one female Senator, and only 15 women serving in Congress. Mr. Speaker, we have come a long way in the last four decades. There are now 14 women Senators, 66 female Members of Congress, and at NASA women are not just along for the ride, they have assumed leadership roles in both the agency and on its missions, as we have seen by this fine work of Eileen Collins and Wendy Lawrence. I am especially delighted today to recognize the achievements of my fellow New Yorker, Eileen Collins from Elmira, New York, who in 1999 became the first woman to command a space shuttle. In 2003, Ms. Collins again took to the reins of a space mission, providing steady guidance to the Space Shuttle Discovery during an incredibly difficult and perilous mission. Mr. Speaker, women have taken part in some of the greatest NASA missions, and some of the most heartbreaking too. Some of these women gave their lives for our country. As a former teacher, I remember feeling incredibly proud when my colleague, Christa McAuliffe, was selected from more than 11,000 applicants to become the first civilian in space, the first teacher in space. Of course, we were all horrified when the Space Shuttle Challenger exploded 73 seconds after lift-off, cutting short the lives of Christa and the other brave astronauts who flew with her. The loss of the Challenger and, more recently, of the Space Shuttle Columbia were staggering blows to our country. But I know that our space program will rebound from these disasters, as it always has, with a new sense of purpose, stronger and more determined than ever. I also know that as we rebuild, American women will be leading the way, inspired by the sense of duty to our country and by the women who have come before them. Women like Sally Ride, the first woman in space; Kathryn Sullivan, the first American woman to perform a space walk; Mae Jeminson, the first African American woman astronaut; Shannon Lucid, who set a U.S. record for the most time living in space. Thanks to these pioneering women astronauts, the sky is the limit for women and girls in this final frontier. Today, we recognize the contribution of all of the women who work to realize the grand mission of NASA and who continue to contribute today. Mr. Speaker, today our country faces an increasingly severe shortage of qualified math, science, and engineering students and professionals to fill the high-tech jobs of tomorrow. Women have long been underrepresented in these fields, both in the workplace and in the classroom. It is essential to our economy, even to our national security, that we attract the best and the brightest to these fields. The number of girls and young women entering math, science, and engineering is growing and moving in the right direction. And in our universities and workplaces, we need to cultivate nondiscriminatory environments to further this momentum. NASA truly showcases the very best of what women can achieve and can contribute, and the fact that they can contribute equally. May the women pioneers we honor today inspire not only the astronauts, but the scientists, mathematicians, and engineers of tomorrow. I thank them for their wonderful contributions. I congratulate the entire team. Mr. Speaker, I submit for printing in the Record the names of 29 current and 13 deceased or former female NASA astronauts. Ellen Baker, Yvonne Cagle, Tracy Caldwell, Kalpana Chawla, Laurel B. Clark, Mary Cleave, Catherine Coleman, Eileen Collins, Nancy J. Currie, Jan Davis, Bonnie Dunbar, Anna Fisher, Linda Godwin, Susan J. Helms, Joan Higginbotham, Kathryn Hire, Marsha Ivins, Mae C. Jemison, Tamara E. Jernigan, Janet Kavandi, Susan L. Kilrain. Wendy Lawrence, Shannon Lucid, Sandra Magnus, Megan McArthur, Pamela Melroy, Barbara Morgan, Lisa Nowak, Karen Nyberg, Ellen Ochoa, Judith A. Resnik, Sally K. Ride, Patricia C. Hilliard Robertson, Margaret Rhea Seddon, Heidemarie Sefanyshyn-Piper, Nicole Scott, Kathryn C. Thornton, Janice Voss, Mary E. Weber, Peggy Whitson, Sunita Williams, and Stephanie Wilson.

Mrs. MALONEY

Mrs. MALONEY. Mr. Speaker, I rise to acknowledge the achievements of Daniel Finkelstein, a great New Yorker and a dear friend of mine. On September 29, 2005, Danny's friends, family and colleagues will gather to celebrate his 50 years as an attorney. Anniversaries are a time for reflection, and I feel that it is fitting to reflect on the career of a truly remarkable man. Mr. Finkelstein's distinguished 50-year career as a real estate litigation attorney has earned him the respect of New York's legal community; indeed, Danny is widely known as the ``Dean'' of New York's landlord-tenant lawyers. Formerly a founding partner of New York City's largest landlord-tenant law firm, Danny currently serves as the senior partner of Finkelstein Newman LLP. A graduate of New York University and Brooklyn Law School, Mr. Finkelstein's professional accomplishments include his service as Senior Real Estate Manager for the Board of Estimate of the City of New York and his role as Assistant Chief Enforcement Attorney to the Temporary State Housing Rent Commission. Mr. Finkelstein also served as a member of the Board of Directors of the New York County Lawyers' Association, NYCLA, and was the chair of its Committee on the Civil Court. He is an active member of several NYCLA committees, including the Association's Committees on the Judiciary and the Civil Court Practice Section. Danny has made tremendous contributions to the legal profession, but he has also placed a priority on teaching the law to others. For many years, Danny served as an Adjunct Professor of Law at New York Law School and taught courses at New York University's School of Continuing. and Professional Studies. Mr. Finkelstein's contributions to legal scholarship include a two-volume, 2000 page treatise on Landlord and Tenant Practice in New York and his service as Editor-in- Chief of Landlord-Tenant Monthly, a law journal published by Treiman Publications. Additionally, Mr. Finkelstein lectured, in conjunction with Brooklyn, Fordham, and New York Law Schools, on the rights of senior renters before members of the New York State Bar Association, on the conduct of landlord-tenant trials at numerous legal education forums and on arbitration and mediation programs. I am particularly proud of Danny's work to create the nationally recognized and award-winning ``Safe Housing for Children'' lectures, which were sponsored by NYCLA, the New York Foundling Hospital and Fordham University's Graduate School of Social Service. Finally, Mr. Finkelstein received Certificates of Appreciation from Presidents Ford, Nixon, Johnson and Kennedy for his service to the Nation and his contributions to the Military Selective Service Act and Selective Service System. Mr. Speaker, I request that my colleagues join me in honoring Daniel Finkelstein's 50 years in the legal profession and his lifetime of service to New York City. Along with Danny's longtime friends, colleagues and co-workers, I wish him many more years of happiness and outstanding public service.

Mrs. MALONEY

Mrs. MALONEY. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in support of H.R. 3132, the Children's Safety Act of 2005. I can think of few offenses more horrifying than sexually assaulting or abusing a child. Children are among our society's most vulnerable and it's up to us, the adults, to protect them. We have all heard the tragic stories about young children being kidnaped, assaulted, and too often murdered by sexual offenders who in some cases have been living in the same neighborhoods as these kids. Tragically, many of these offenders have committed multiple crimes against children. According to the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children, more than 500,000 sex offenders are registered in the United States and as many as 100,000 sex offenders cannot be located by law enforcement. Statistics from the Bureau of Justice show that child molesters who are released from prison are more likely to be rearrested for child molestation than other sex and non-sex offenders. Approximately 3.3 percent of 4,300 released child molesters in 1994 were rearrested for another sex crime against a child within 3 years. For those who had more than one prior arrest for child molestation, 7.3 percent were likely to be rearrested for the same crime. And 24 percent of released offenders were reconvicted for a new offense, encompassing all types of crimes. The legislation before us today would accomplish several critical objectives including requiring sex offenders to register more often and for longer periods of time, providing the public with access to more information on sex offenders, creating new penalties, and requiring DNA to be used to identify and prosecute sex offenders. However, I do share the concerns expressed by some of my colleagues regarding the limitations contained in the bill regarding the review of habeas corpus petitions by Federal courts. I would like to thank Ranking Member Conyers for offering an amendment today that is based on legislation that I have introduced, H.R. 1193, the ``Hate Crime Statistics Improvement Act,'' which would require the Attorney General to collect data about gender- based hate crimes. With accurate data, local communities can identify gender-based hate crimes in their area and chart their progress toward eliminating them. Moreover, the inclusion of gender will send a strong message that gender-based hate crimes will not be tolerated. It is my understanding that Chairman Sensenbrenner will accept this amendment, and I thank him as well. We must be diligent in our efforts to protect children from those individuals who would steal their innocence, or worse, take their lives. I am hopeful that this legislation will enhance the efforts already in place so that parents and communities can take the necessary steps to ensure that their children will be safe.

Mrs. MALONEY

Mrs. MALONEY. Mr. Speaker, on September 13, 2005, I was unavoidably detained and missed rollcall votes numbered 465, 466, and 467. Rollcall vote 465 was on the motion to suspend the rules and agree to SCONRES 26, a bill honoring and memorializing the passengers and crew of United Airlines Flight 93. Rollcall vote 466 was on the motion to suspend the rules and pass H.R. 3649, the Sportfishing and Recreational Boating Safety Amendments Act. Rollcall vote 467 was on the motion to suspend the rules and pass S. 276, the Wind Cave National Park Boundary Revision Act. Had I been present I would have voted ``yea'' on rollcall votes 465, 466, and 467.

Mrs. MALONEY

Mrs. MALONEY. Mr. Speaker, on September 7, 2005, I was unavoidably detained and missed rollcall votes numbered 456 and 457. Rollcall vote 456 was on the motion to suspend the rules and agree to H.R. 3650, a bill to allow United States Courts to conduct business during emergency conditions, and for other purposes. Rollcall vote 457 was on the motion to suspend the rules and agree to H.R. 3169, a bill to provide the Secretary of Education with waiver authority for students who are eligible for Pell Grants who are adversely affected by a natural disaster. Had I been present I would have voted ``yea'' on rollcall votes 456 and 457.

Mrs. MALONEY

Mrs. MALONEY. Mr. Speaker, on September 6, 2005, I was unavoidably detained and missed rollcall votes numbered 454 and 455. Rollcall vote 454 was on the motion to suspend the rules and agree to, H. Res. 360, commemorating the 60th anniversary of V-J Day and the end of World War II in the Pacific. Rollcall vote 455 was on the motion to suspend the rules and agree to, S.J. Res. 19, a joint resolution calling upon the President to issue a proclamation recognizing the 30th anniversary of the Helsinki Final Act. Had I been present I would have voted ``yea'' on rollcall votes 454 and 455.

Mrs. MALONEY

Mrs. MALONEY. Mr. Speaker, sadly, approaching the four year anniversary of the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks, our country faces great tragedy again and a tremendous national challenge in the wake of Hurricane Katrina. I would like to assure the people of Louisiana, Mississippi, and Alabama that New Yorkers who lived through 9/11 understand the shock and dismay being felt deeply after Hurricane Katrina. We are well aware that time and great effort will be needed to rebuild after Hurricane Katrina, but we know also that the recovery will advance strongly because of the great will of the people of Louisiana, Mississippi, and Alabama. I also hope that the recovery will be spurred by the strong support most assuredly coming from countless New Yorkers and Americans from all corners of the country. I stand ready to work with Members of Congress from Louisiana, Mississippi, and Alabama to advance all Federal programs necessary for recovery operations after Katrina. My thoughts and prayers are with those affected by Hurricane Katrina and with the people now facing great recovery challenges in its wake.

Mrs. MALONEY

Mrs. MALONEY. Mr. Speaker, today, I introduce the September 11th Humanitarian Relief and Patriotism Act with Representatives Peter King, Weiner, Nadler, Higgins, Farr, Serrano, Engel, Owens, McDermott, Lantos, Schakowsky, Bennie Thompson, Solis, Schiff, Berman, Pallone, Patrick Kennedy and Grijalva. We are introducing this legislation because the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, left many surviving spouses and children of legal employment-based visa holders and undocumented workers in jeopardy of being deported, because their immigration status was linked to a family member who was employed at the WorId Trade Center. While the USA PATRIOT Act allowed these individuals to stay in the United States until September 10, 2002, that reprieve has expired. These individuals should not be forced to leave the country because of the actions of the terrorists. The ``September 11th Humanitarian Relief and Patriotism Act,'' which would provide for the adjustment of status (application for permanent residence, commonly known as ``green card'' status) or the cancellation of removal (and adjustment of status) for the spouse, child, dependent son, or dependent daughter of victims who were killed on September 11. While the Administration continues to act with care by not moving forward with deportation procedures for these individuals, their legal status remains in limbo unless they are given legal status in the United States. They should not continue to be victimized by the 9/11 terrorists by living in fear that they will have to leave their homes, jobs, and communities. Additionally, New York City Mayor, Michael Bloomberg, supports this legislation and is calling on Congress to act. Finally, I would like to thank Moshe and Debra Steinberg for their assistance in preparing this legislation for introduction and for all of the work they have done on behalf of the victims of the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks. I urge my colleagues to support this legislation and urge its swift passage into law.

Mrs. MALONEY

Mrs. MALONEY. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in opposition to this conference report. As I've said before here on the floor of the House, America needs an energy policy. We need an energy policy that actually brings down record high gas prices, protects our environment, and truly reduces our dependence on foreign oil by encouraging energy efficiency and the use of renewable sources of energy. Unfortunately, this bill fails on all fronts. We are heavily reliant on oil to power our cars and fuel our lifestyle, and 58 percent of the oil we consume is imported, often from politically volatile regions of the world. Promoting conservation and raising efficiency standards must play an important role in overcoming our dependence on oil and reducing our reliance on imports. Today, more than two-thirds of the oil consumed in the United States is used for transportation, mostly for cars and light trucks. Increasing fuel efficiency would lower pressures on oil prices, enhance our national security, curb air pollution, and reduce the emission of greenhouse gases, which cause global warming. And yet, instead of truly addressing energy conservation and fuel efficiency, H.R. 6 hands out huge new subsidies to the oil, gas, coal and nuclear industries. This energy bill also harms our environment and threatens our drinking water by rolling back important safeguards in the Clean Water Act and the Safe Drinking Water Act, protections which are critical in keeping our waterways clean and safe. Under this bill, in fact, fluid laced with toxic chemicals and contaminants could actually be injected into oil and gas wells that penetrate underground water sources, risking contamination of our drinking water. I absolutely can not vote for an energy bill that might put the drinking water of my constituents at risk. I don't think any of us believe that this energy bill is the last word on energy policy, and much remains to be done to meet the great challenges that lie before us. Until more is done, I oppose this conference report, and urge my colleagues to do the same.

Mrs. MALONEY

Mrs. MALONEY. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to H.R. 3199, the ``USA PATRIOT and Terrorism Prevention Reauthorization Act of 2005.'' While I strongly agree that we must take every step possible to keep our nation secure, we should not be trampling on the rights of innocent Americans. When the original PATRIOT Act was passed in the weeks following the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, sixteen provisions were scheduled to sunset this year because a matter of this importance deserves to be carefully reviewed by Congress. The bill before us today would make permanent fourteen of those sixteen provisions thereby relinquishing this body of its oversight responsibilities. This is unacceptable. I have serious concerns about how this Administration has applied and may apply in the future the provisions included in this bill. Our constituents should be able to trust that we will actively work to protect their civil liberties by fighting against any abuses of those rights. I am disappointed that the Rules Committee denied two amendments that I offered, including one that would give the Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board, created by the Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act, the teeth to do its job, and one that would make permanent the temporary relief given to non-citizens, who were lawfully present or a beneficiary of the September 11th Victims Compensation Fund, in the original PATRIOT Act. I believe that these very worthy amendments at least deserved an open debate on the House floor. Moreover, an amendment offered by Representatives Sanders (I-VT), which already has passed this body, was denied by the Rules Committee. His amendment, which I strongly support, would prohibit the FBI from using a USA Patriot Act Section 215 order to access library circulation records, library patron lists, book sales records, or book customer lists, and it would help to restore the privacy that library patrons had before the passage of the USA Patriot Act four years ago. Law enforcement should spend its time going after the terrorists, not spending its time reviewing the records of innocent people who are visiting their local libraries. The terrorists who are in a battle against us resent the very rights and openness of society that I believe are what make this country great. We must remain vigilant in defense of the ideals and principles upon which this nation was founded, and the American people must be able to trust their government not to abuse their basic rights. I urge my colleagues to vote no on this legislation.

Mrs. MALONEY

Mrs. MALONEY. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H.J. Res. 59, to Establish Women's Suffrage Commemoration Day. With this Commemoration Day, we pay tribute to our foremothers, who worked tirelessly for generations to gain the right to vote. We acknowledge that the journey to equality is long and difficult, but it is well worth the fight. And we pledge to keep the struggle for women's rights alive. The journey towards women's rights in America is as old as our country itself. While John Adams drafted the Constitution at the Continental Congress, his wife counseled, ``Remember the ladies,'' but the Constitution made no mention of women's rights. So our foremothers fought on. Elizabeth Cady Stanton declared that all men and women are created equal. Susan B. Anthony was arrested for casting a ballot and refused to pay the bail. Between 1917 and 1919, over a thousand women held a vigil outside of the White House, asking, ``How long must women wait for liberty?'' Finally, in 1920, with the 19th Amendment, women won the right to participate in our democratic process. As we remember the long and arduous battle for women's suffrage, let us also remember the right not yet won. 157 years ago, Elizabeth Cady Stanton called for equal rights for all Americans. It is time for our Constitution to echo that sentiment. There is no better tribute to our brave foremothers than to pass the Equal Rights Amendment. Only the ERA can prevent women's rights from being rolled back. Afghanistan, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Finland, Austria, and Portugal are just a handful of the countries that already guarantee non-discrimination based on sex in their constitutions. It is time we join their ranks. Alice Paul used to say, ``When you put your hand to the plow, you can't put it down until you get to the end of the row.'' For Alice and Elizabeth, for Sojourner and Lucretia, for our foremothers, our grandmothers and our daughters, let us put our hands to the plow and pass the ERA.

Mrs. MALONEY

Mrs. MALONEY. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me the time and for his extraordinary leadership on human rights for people around the world. And I know that he joins his voice, his strength, his wisdom in working with the Iraqi Women's Caucus to do absolutely everything to protect the women in Iraq. Today's USA news report has an article that states that the government may designate Islam Sharia as a main source of legislation in the country according to a draft. This is incredibly troubling that the rights of women may be turned back. It would be a terrible step for the women if their rights are actually restricted under this new constitution. This resolution which we are sending to the government is tremendously important, and I would like to be associated with the comments on both sides of the aisle. Just last week, we met with women leaders from Iraq. Two of them were official members of the government, and they were major leaders in their communities. They expressed their tremendous concern, and they appealed to us to keep their names confidential, showing the fear that they feel for retaliation. I have corresponded with several Iraqi women. One was murdered, another one had a tremendous threat on her life, and they are working with incredible strength for their country and for the rights of their families. I would say that any country that protects their women is a stronger country, and Iraq will be a stronger country if women are able to preserve their position. One of the women we met with was a professional, and she had been denied her job. Under Sharia, women will lose many of the rights that they already have. As one of them said to me, and I quote: ``It is horrible. We are concerned. You must do something. The time is now.'' August 15 they will be coming forward with the final draft. They will be voting in October, and we must move forward. Just yesterday, along with 40 of my colleagues, I sent a letter to President Bush urging him and the State Department to do everything they possibly can to encourage the drafters of the constitution to include specific rights for women, thereby ensuring their equality and their full participation in the new Iraq country. Under the former regime, they were educated, participated in the workforce, and played a role in the government. And since the end of the Saddam Hussein dictatorship, women have served and are serving in the national assembly as cabinet members and in local governments across their country. I have had the opportunity twice to visit Iraq, to visit our soldiers, to meet with officials, and always to meet with women leaders. They are concerned. They are working hard, and with like- minded men are trying to preserve their role. If they lose their position in the constitution, it will be incredibly difficult to reverse that. So it is critically important, and it would be a tragic irony if women now began to lose ground. There might be full participation and equal treatment under the law for women in Iraq, and I know that my colleagues on both sides of the aisle, I hope they will join the Women's Iraqi Caucus in expressing our strong support and solidarity with the women of Iraq as they fight for the rights to which they are entitled. I would just like to close that it would be really a tragedy beyond words if women lose their standing in the constitution and lose the firm grounded protection of a constitution. This is critically important. I urge all of my colleagues to join us in supporting this important resolution. Mr. Speaker, I include the following for the Record: [From USA Today staff and wire reports.] One Draft of Iraq's Constitution Makes Islam Main Source Baghdad.--Framers of Iraq's new constitution are considering designating Islam as the main source of legislation in the country, according to a draft published Tuesday in the government newspaper. The draft, which appeared in the Baghdad newspaper Al- Sabah, further states that no law shall be approved that contradicts ``the rules of Islam,'' raising worries that the new government will restrict the role of women in society. The constitution could change significantly, however, before the parliament votes on it by Aug. 15. ``There are several drafts of the constitution out there,'' U.S. Ambassador Zalmay Khalilzad said in a statement Tuesday. ``I have seen one draft of the constitution in one of the newspapers today. There are other drafts, as well. Now is the time to produce a single draft by the commission,'' he said. The draft published Tuesday seems to reflect the views of conservative members of the constitution committee. ``Islam is the official religion of the state and is the main source of legislation,'' the draft reads. ``No law that contradicts with its rules can be promulgated.'' The document also grants the Shiite Arab religious leadership in the holy city of Najaf ``independence for its guiding role'' in recognition of its ``high national and religious symbolism.'' In Washington, 41 members of the House of Representatives wrote a letter to President Bush urging him to support provisions in the constitution that would protect women's rights. ``It would be a terrible step backward for the women of Iraq if their rights are actually restricted under the new constitution,'' said Rep. Carolyn Maloney, D-N.Y., in a press release. The letter points out that the constitution would replace the transitional administrative law, which provides for equal treatment under the law and set a requirement that 25% of the seats in the National Assembly go to women. During the U.S.-run occupation, which ended June 28, 2004, key Shiite and some Sunni politicians sought to have Islam designated as the main source of legislation in the interim constitution, which went into effect in March 2004. However, U.S. Administrator Paul Bremer blocked the move. He said that Islam would be considered ``a source''--but not the only one. At the time, prominent Shiite politicians agreed to forgo a public battle with Bremer and raise the issue again during the drafting of the permanent constitution. The drafting committee met Tuesday to discuss federalism, another contentious issue, according to Sunni Arab member Mohammed Abed-Rabbou. He described the discussion as ``heated'' and said no agreement was reached. Parliament speaker Hajim al-Hassani urged Iraqi media to refrain from publishing supposed texts unless they were released by the constitutional committee. The Sunnis on the committee agreed only Monday to resume work on the committee after they walked out to protest the assassination of two of their colleagues this month.

Mrs. MALONEY

Mrs. MALONEY. Mr. Speaker, I move that the House do now adjourn.

Mrs. MALONEY

Mrs. MALONEY. Well, I thank the gentlewoman for her comments. And I would just like to conclude by noting that this Monday was President Clinton's birthday. And I authored a resolution congratulating him on his birthday, which emphasized his strong economic program for this country. Although many of my colleagues or some of my colleagues may not agree with all of his policies, the facts speak for themselves. He inherited a deficit; he left office with a surplus. And while he was putting our economic house in order, we balanced our budget, and we invested also in child care, in health care, in education and helped the people in our country. During the Clinton years there was a very important economic factor, that the distance between the haves and the have-nots came closer together. In other words, everyone prospered, which is good for the Nation. It is not good for only one segment to prosper and others to fall behind. That really could destroy the social fabric of this country. It is very disturbing to me. So I wish that we would return to really the financial policies that we had under President Clinton where we balanced our budget, we invested in our people, in education, and health care, and we had a surplus. Yet under this administration the surplus is gone, and we have a staggering debt, the largest in our history. This is not the legacy that I want to leave to my children.

Mrs. MALONEY. Mr. Speaker, I really want to point out that the President and his supporters are trying to make the case that the economy is thriving and that their policies are responsible. But when we look at the facts that we have pointed out tonight, we see instead that American workers are still waiting to see the benefits of the economic recovery in their paychecks, and that we have large and unsustainable budgets and trade deficits. In fact, this administration has set a number of records, only the problem is, they are the wrong records. They have raised the debt ceiling 3 times so that now, we have a staggering debt of over $7.6 trillion. This is the largest debt in the history of our country, and that breaks down to each American's share being over $26,000. That is what we are giving to our children and our grandchildren. And, as was said earlier, the trade deficit is again another record, only the wrong kind of record; another record of over $619 billion, the largest in the history of this country, and growing. And, we have a staggering deficit of over $333 billion. I remember when I ran for office back in 1992, the country had a deficit of $250 billion, and everybody said it was the worst they have ever seen. If I had told them, ``vote for me, I am going to go to Congress, I am going to work with the democratic Congress to pay off that deficit, and in a number of years you are going to see a huge surplus,'' they would have said, well, she is a nice little girl, but she does not know what she is talking about. But that is exactly what we did. We came to Congress with President Clinton, we paid down that deficit, and he left office with a surplus, a huge surplus. That is what the Bush administration inherited. And what have they given us? They have given us a staggering deficit, a staggering trade deficit, and the largest debt in the history of our Nation. What kind of legacy is that? Mr. Speaker, I say to my colleagues that on top of this burden that they are putting on our children and our grandchildren, they now plan to privatize part of Social Security that would also add to the debt without increasing our national savings. And, according to Chairman Greenspan, this privatization that they proposed for Social Security would not do one inch of help to help the solvency of the Social Security plan. It does not help the solvency; it just adds to the staggering debt. And on top of this, they proposed cuts to traditional Social Security benefits that would undermine the economic security of future retirees. And I say to my colleagues, this is not the legacy that I want to leave to my children or to my grandchildren. It is a burden that will have a huge impact on their quality of life. That concludes my remarks.

Mrs. MALONEY. Mr. Speaker, the great American jobs machine, which brought the unemployment rate down under President Clinton from 7.5 percent in 1992 to 4 percent in 2000, has been sputtering under President Bush. We are only just emerging from really the worst job slump since the 1903s, and job creation is still sluggish. There continues to be substantial hidden unemployment. Wages are not keeping up with inflation, and there is a widening disparity, as we talked about, in wages and incomes. The benefits of the economic recovery are showing up in the bottom line of companies, but it is not showing up in the pocketbooks of American workers. Let us look at hidden unemployment. The good news is that the official unemployment rate has come down from its high of 6.3 percent in June of 2003 to 5 percent this last month. The very bad news is that a 5 percent unemployment rate is still nearly a percentage point higher than it was when President Bush took office. But, it is worse than that, because there is an additional hidden unemployment. People have not come back into the labor force the way they usually do in an economic recovery. Last month, 7.5 million people were officially counted as unemployed, 1.5 million more people than were unemployed when President Bush took office in January of 2001. To be counted as unemployed, a person must be actively looking for work, but in a weak labor market, there can be considerable hidden unemployment and underemployment if people who want to work have been discouraged from looking for work, and if people who want to work full- time can only find a part-time job. In a typical business cycle recovery, people come back into the labor force as the prospects of finding a job improve but, this time, the labor force participation rate has remained depressed, compared with what it was in the start of the recession. Last month, 5.2 million people who were not in the labor force said they wanted a job. About 1.6 million of these are considered ``marginally attached'' to the labor force because they have searched for work in the past year and are available for work, but they are not counted in the official unemployment rate, because they did not search for work recently enough. In addition to people who are not in the labor force but say they want a job, 4.5 million people were working part-time in June because of the weak economy. They wanted full-time work, but they were not able to find it. The official unemployment rate was 5 percent in June. The Bureau of Labor Statistics estimates that if marginally attached workers were included, the unemployment rate would have been 6 percent, and if those working part-time for economic reasons were also included, it would have been 9 percent. A new study by Katherine Bradbury of the Federal Reserve of Boston reaches similar conclusions: labor force participation has not rebounded in this recovery the way it usually does, and the unemployment rate would be 1 to 3 percentage points higher if those missing participants were in the labor force. Mr. Speaker, the President and his supporters seem to think that a 5 percent unemployment rate shows the success of their economic policies in creating jobs, but the facts tell a very different story. Employers are not hiring as though they believe the economy is strong, and potential workers are staying out of the labor force. The unemployment rate is still almost a percentage point higher than it was when President Bush took office, and there is considerable hidden unemployment. Employers are not hiring as though they believe the economy is strong, and potential workers are staying out of the labor force. So these numbers are not strong, and I ask my colleague if she would like to elaborate.

Mrs. MALONEY. Mr. Speaker, reclaiming my time, the gentlewoman has pointed out a good fact there. But let us talk a little bit now about the American jobs machine, which brought the unemployment rate down under President Clinton.

Mrs. MALONEY. Mr. Speaker, reclaiming my time, I thank my colleague for her comments. And one of the things that we have talked about that is very troubling to her and me besides the sluggish job growth and the hidden unemployment which she talked about, the third most disturbing development in the labor market is the widening disparity in earnings between the haves and the have-nots. It is fundamentally unfair, and democracy works better when there are not huge differences between our people. And as Chairman Greenspan has testified before Congress many times his concern about this widening distance, he has argued that it tears at the very social fabric of our Nation. And let me illustrate this with a few facts. The Bureau of Labor Statistics publishes data on the usual weekly earnings of full-time workers at different points on the wage ladder, and the chart shows that after adjusting for inflation, the usual weekly earnings at the exact middle of the distribution, real median usual weekly earnings, grew a paltry .2 percent per year from the fourth quarter of 2000 to the fourth quarter of 2004. That contrasts with the healthy 1.7 percent per year in the previous 4 years under President Clinton. In other words, the typical worker, whose earnings grew substantially faster than inflation in the late 1990s, has seen the earnings growth grind to a halt during the first 4 years of the Bush administration. The typical worker's earnings barely kept up with inflation. Worse than the overall stagnation in earnings is the widening disparity of earnings between high earners and low earners. If we look at those same data on usual weekly earnings of full-time workers, but instead of just looking at the middle, we look at the top and bottom as well, we see a disturbing pattern. In this chart, the blue bars show growth in the Clinton years. Yes. There was very good growth at the very top of the distribution, but there was likewise substantial growth in the middle and at the bottom as well. Compare that with the red bars showing the changes during the first 4 years of the Bush administration. Real earnings at the bottom of the distribution, the 10th percentile, actually fell at an average annual rate of .3 percent per year in President Bush's first term, while those at the top, the 90th percentile, rose the most, almost 1 percent per year. In other words, the earnings that lagged farthest behind for inflation under President Bush were those people with the lowest earnings to begin with, while the earnings that grew the fastest, faster even than inflation, were those for people at the highest earnings to begin with. Finally, we come to the most disturbing trend of all. Things have been getting worse, not better, recently. During the period when the economy has finally started creating jobs, earnings have not been keeping up with inflation. In the past year, the only earnings that grew faster than inflation were those of people at the very top. Everyone else saw their cost of living grow faster than their earnings. And when we look at the facts of what is happening to most workers, it is hard to accept the President's argument that his tax cuts have worked to create better jobs and higher wages. That is not what we see when we look at this data. It is very troubling to the people, and it is very troubling, I would say, to the future of this country. It is not good for anyone, whether they are at the top or bottom, to have this wage gap growing and this disparity growing in our Nation. It is an extremely troubling trend. I yield to the gentlewoman from California.

Mrs. MALONEY. I thank the gentlewoman for her comments. The great American jobs machine, which created over 20 million net new jobs under President Clinton, has been sputtering under President Bush. We are only just emerging from the most protracted job slump since the 1930s. Job creation is still sluggish. There continues to be substantial hidden unemployment. Wages are not keeping up with inflation, and there is a widening gulf between the haves and the have- nots. The benefits of the economic recovery are showing up in the bottom line of companies, but not in the paychecks of American workers. Let us look at job creation. Last month there were 1.1 million more jobs on nonfarm payrolls than there were when President Bush took office in January of 2001. That is a paltry pace of job creation of just 20,000 jobs per month, 2/10 of 1 percent per year. That is the slowest pace of job creation under any President in over 70 years. Leaving aside job creation in the government sector, there were just 161,000 more private sector jobs on U.S. payrolls last month than there were when President Bush took office. Within the private sector, manufacturing was particularly hard hit, with payrolls declining by 2.8 million manufacturing jobs between 2001 and 2005. That is 2.8 million manufacturing jobs lost. The job slump associated with the recession that began in March 2001 has been the most protracted job slump since at least the end of World War II. We only have consistent data back that far. But, in fact, one would have to go back to the 1930s to find a worse job slump. As you can see in this chart, which focuses on the period after the end of World War II and shows the percentage change in employment after the start of a recession, job losses typically stop about a year after the onset of a recession, and employment begins to increase after about 15 months. Within 2 years, employment surpasses its prerecession level and is expanding at a healthy pace. The most recent job slump has been dramatically different from that pattern and even more protracted than the so-called ``jobless recovery'' following the 1990-1991 recession. In the latest recession, which began in March 2001, job losses continued until May 2003, more than 2 years after the start of the recession. It was not until January 2005, nearly 4 years later, that payroll employment finally climbed out of the hole created by the recession. The administration seems to think that it is evidence of a strong economic recovery that payroll employment has increased in every month since May 2003, but the pace of job creation over that period has been just 148,000 jobs per month. This is not the kind of job creation that you would expect in a strong economic recovery. In fact, it is only a little bit faster than the amount of job creation that is needed just to keep pace with normal growth in the labor force. We have to have between 125,000 to 150,000 new jobs created to just keep pace with the number of workers going into the labor force. Compare this experience with the 1990s the long economic expansion of the 1990s under President Clinton, it was common to see job gains of 200,000 to 300,000 and, in some cases, 400,000 jobs per month. But months with job gains of 200,000 or more have been few and far between in this business cycle recovery. In May, 104,000 jobs were added and in June, 146,000 were added. These are not strong numbers because, as I said, we have to create between 125,000 and 150,000 new jobs just to keep pace with the new young workers moving into the job market. The expansion of the 1990s started slowly, but the jobless recovery following the 1990-1991 recession pales in comparison with the prolonged job slump we experienced after the 2001 recession. At this point in the recovery from the 1990-1991 recession, the economy had created over 4 million more jobs than we have seen in this recovery. Contrary to administration claims about the success of their policies in stimulating the economy and producing jobs, the facts tell a very different story about the Bush economic record on job creation. President Bush has the worst job creation record of any President since Herbert Hoover, and the economy under President Bush has struggled to escape from what has been by far the most prolonged job slump in the postwar period. I yield to the distinguished gentlewoman from California for further comments on this issue.

Mrs. MALONEY. Mr. Speaker, there has been a great deal of happy talk lately from the Bush administration and its supporters about the state of the American economy. To hear them tell it, you would think that some kind of supply-side miracle has taken place in the past few months and that the economy is now performing so well that jobs are plentiful, workers are well paid, that the budget deficit is being slashed in half, and that the trade deficit, which happens to be the largest in history, is nothing to worry about. Of course nothing could be further from the truth, and all we have to do is go out and talk to our constituents to know that. Tonight my colleagues and I want to set the record straight on the economic policies of the Bush administration. We want to look at the real record of job creation, the continued presence of unemployment, the failure of wages to keep up with inflation, and the widening disparity between the haves and the have- nots which is tremendously troubling. We will document how ordinary workers have been shortchanged in this economy, which has gone through the most protracted job slump since the Great Depression. This chart summarizes the point well. The Bush administration has the worst job creation record of any administration back to Herbert Hoover. This chart shows the average rate of job creation by this administration. For most of his term, President Bush was the only President since President Hoover to actually lose jobs. Now he is at least in positive territory, but with a very anemic job growth of just 0.2 percent per year. Compare that with the 2.4 percent annual job growth under President Clinton, which is more than 10 times greater. Compare this from the Clinton administration back to the Hoover administration. The Bush administration and its supporters will not take responsibility for the failure of their policies. Instead they keep saying the same thing over and over again: tax cuts. But the Bush administration's economic program has not created an economy that works for America's ordinary citizens, and they have mortgaged our future. Responsible analysts have shown that the Bush tax cuts were poorly designed for generating jobs and putting people back to work in the wake of the 2001 recession. They had very low ``bang for the buck'' in terms of job stimulus in the short run, but they were so massive, they created a legacy of large budget deficits and mounting debt that will be a drag on the economy in the long run. President Bush has squandered the hard-won fiscal discipline achieved in the 1990s. He inherited a 10-year budget surplus of $5.6 trillion and turned it into a stream of deficits. This chart shows what has happened so far. This chart shows that when President Bush took office, the Congressional Budget Office was projecting that the budget surplus of $236 billion in 2000 would grow to over $433 billion in 2005. In fact, the latest projection from the administration is that the budget will have a deficit of $333 billion this year. In their mid-session review, the administration proclaimed this a major improvement because they had projected an even larger deficit in their January budget. But $333 billion is still the third largest deficit in the history of our country and a far cry from the $435 billion surplus that was being projected at the start of the Bush administration. The administration is portraying a future of declining deficits over the next few years, but that is not what responsible analysts say. They observe instead that special factors were probably the reason for the jump in revenue this year, and they point out how much is left out of the budget projections, including the ongoing cost of the war in Iraq and Afghanistan and a fix for the alternative minimum tax. We have become a Nation of debtors, relying on the rest of the world to finance our budget deficits and the rest of our excessive spending. Last year we had to finance a record current account deficit of $668 billion, and that deficit was even larger at an annual rate in the first quarter reaching 6.4 percent of our gross national product. Foreign governments are holding large quantities of our public debt, putting us at risk of a major international financial crisis if they should decide that the benefits of holding dollars are no longer worth the risk. Mr. Speaker, our future prosperity depends on increasing our national savings and making wise investments. It depends on being ready for the retirement of the baby boom generation and the pressure we know that will be put on the budget. But how is the Bush administration preparing us for this future? With more deficits and more debt. They want to make the tax cuts that have gotten us into part of this mess permanent, and they have a plan for privatizing Social Security that would cut benefits substantially and add even more to our debt. We need a better plan. Mr. Speaker, in the remainder of our time, we will look more closely at the realities of this economy and the failures of the current economic policies, including the weak labor market that continues to be a major characteristic of the Bush administration economy. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Loretta Sanchez), an economist by training.

Mrs. MALONEY

Mrs. MALONEY. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the Hensarling amendment. This amendment would strip critical provisions contained in the underlying bill. The gentleman's amendment would require the Postal Service to continue to be responsible for the military retirement costs of its employees. No agency other than the Postal Service is responsible for the military retirement costs that Treasury pays for all other Federal employees. It is absolutely essential to the long-term survival of the Postal Service to relieve it and postal customers of this $27 billion burden by returning that responsibility to the Treasury. Additionally, his amendment would mandate that 100 percent, rather than \2/3\, of the Civil Service Retirement System savings that resulted from the fix Congress enacted 2 years ago and are currently in an escrow account, must go to the Retiree Health Benefits Fund. This provision would have the effect of increasing postal rates by preventing the USPS from using these savings to help keep postal rates stable. If Congress had not fixed this formula, the Postal Service's required share of this Federal government retirement fund would have resulted in a long-term overpayment of more than $70 billion. These savings were intended to provide the Postal Service with much- needed fiscal relief and a promise of stable postal rates until 2006. A vote for this amendment would undermine the very reason why this bill is on the Floor today . . . to enact long overdue reforms of the Postal Service. I urge my colleagues to vote ``no.''

Mrs. MALONEY. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this time and for his extraordinary leadership on the Task Force for Postal Reform, on which I have served, and I rise in strong support of it. It has been a long and difficult journey which has brought us here today, well over 10 years, and I thank everyone who has been involved in this bipartisan effort to reform the way the Postal Service currently operates: the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Tom Davis), our chairman; the ranking member, the gentleman from California (Mr. Waxman); the gentleman from New York (Mr. McHugh); the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Davis); and their hard and dedicated working staffs. This is very strongly supported legislation. It is a balance that we have achieved. We urge everyone to vote for it and to vote against the amendments that will be coming forward. It is supported by many of the unions, APWU, the Letter Carriers, the Postmasters, and the postal- reliant businesses, some of whom are located in my district, the Magazine Publishers of America, the direct marketers, the financial services. In fact, there is a coalition of many, literally hundreds, of businesses, and the 21st Century Postal Service Committee has issued a statement of support along with the over seven union statements in support of this bipartisan legislation. As we know, this is incredibly important to our economy, with more than 9 million workers worldwide. They generate over $900 billion annually of our GDP, and represent nearly 9 percent of our overall budget. If we fail to act on this very pressing issue, the public and the postal-reliant businesses surely will face higher postal rates in the near future. With the Postal Service facing billions of dollars in debt over the next few years, this Congress, 2 years ago, passed bipartisan legislation that reduced the Postal Service's contribution to the Civil Service Retirement and Disability Fund after it was determined that it had been making overpayments. This reform was expected to help the Service reduce its debt to the Treasury by approximately $3 billion each year and to keep rates stable until 2006. It also created an escrow account designed to ensure that the Postal Service uses these savings wisely. The bill before us today releases that escrow account and will help us to keep our rates stable. Earlier this year, the Postal Service filed a request with the Rate Commission for yet another increase of 5.4 percent. It would be the fourth increase since 2001, and it is critical that we release these monies in the escrow to delay this rate increase. Mr. Chairman, this legislation relieves the Postal Service and postal customers of the $27 billion burden in military service payments by returning that responsibility to the Treasury. After all, every other agency has this responsibility in the Treasury, and Postal should also. This legislation also creates a Postal Regulatory Commission with authority to create a modern system for postal rate regulation. Mr. Chairman, a number of magazines have gone out of business because of rate increases, and so this legislation is vital to our economy. Mr. Chairman, I submit for the Record the material I referred to above regarding the unions in favor of this legislation, and also a listing of numerous companies and organizations in favor of the legislation: [From the Coalition for a 21st Century Postal Service] 9 Million Workers . . . $900 Billion Economy . . . 9 Percent of U.S. GDP Help Keep the Mailing Industry Strong and the USPS Viable--Vote Yes on H.R. 22 Dear Representative: The companies and organizations below urge you to support H.R. 22, the ``Postal Accountability and Enhancement Act of 2005.'' This legislation will bring urgently needed modernization and meaningful reform to the United States Postal Service (USPS), the lynchpin of the mailing industry--a key economic sector that employs 9 million workers adding $900 billion annually to the U.S. Gross Domestic Product. In fact, 9 percent of the nation's GDP can be directly attributed to the mailing industry. H.R. 22 will bring increased efficiencies to the USPS, and would allow for more predictability and affordability in future postal rate increases. Without postal reform, American jobs will be placed at risk as companies are forced to compensate for capricious and expensive rate hikes in the future. The companies and organizations listed below consider passing postal reform legislation this year an urgent priority, and urge you to cast a ``YES'' vote on H.R. 22 when it is considered on the House floor. Thank you for your consideration. Advertising/Marketing/Retail Industries Arandell, CC3, Direct Marketing Association, Domtar, Hayzlett Companies, Inc., J.C. Penney, National Retail Federation, Vertis Direct Marketing Services. Financial Services/Insurance Industries Aegon, American Express, Bank of America, CapitalOne, Chase, JP Morgan Chase, Citigroup, CUNA Mutual, The Financial Services Roundtable, LaSalle Bank, MBNA, Property Casualty Insurers Association of America, USAA, Wachovia. Forestry/Paper/Printing Industries American Forest & Paper Association, Banta, International Paper, MeadWestvaco, National Association for Printing Leadership, Paramount Cards, Quad Graphics, Quebecor World, R.R. Donnelly, Richardson Printing, Inc., Solar Communications, Stora Enso, Weyerhaeuser Company, Wisconsin Paper Council. Newspaper/Publishing Industries Harcourt, Inc., Holt Reinhart & Winston, Inc., IDEAlliance, LexisNexis, Magazine Publishers of America, McGraw-Hill, National Newspaper Association, Printing Industries of America/GATF, Publishers Press, Reed Business Information, Reed Elsevier, Inc., Time, Inc. Mailing/Fulfillment/Shipping Industries Alliance of Non-Profit Mailers, Association for Postal Commerce, Association of Priority Mail Users, Mailers Council, Mailing and Fulfillment Service Association, National Postal Policy Council, Parcel Shippers Association, Pitney Bowes, PSI Group, Total Systems Services, Inc. Manufacturing/Technology Industries Document Management Industries Association, Envelope Manufacturers Association, Keyspan, Kodak, Multi-Plastics, Inc., National Association of Manufacturers, NPES The Association for Suppliers of Printing, Publishing and Converting Technologies. Small Business/General Commerce National Federation of Independent Business, Small Business Legislative Council. USPS Management/Labor Organizations National Association of Postal Supervisors, National Rural Letter Carriers Association. State and Local Organizations Printing Industry Association of the South, Inc., Pacific Printing and Imaging Association, PIA, Inc. of Arizona, PIA of Southern California, PIA of San Diego, Printing Industries of Northern California, Printing & Imaging Association Mountain States, The Association of Graphic Communications, Graphic Arts Association, Printing and Graphics Association MidAtlantic, Printing Association of Florida, Inc., PIA of Georgia, Inc., Printing Industries of Illinois/Indiana Association, Printing Industries of the Midlands, Inc., Printing and Imaging Association of Mid America, Printing Industries of New England, Printing Industries of Michigan, Printing Industry of Minnesota, Inc., Printing Industries of St. Louis, Printing & Imaging Association of New York State, Inc., PI of the Carolinas, Inc., Printing Industries of Utah, Printing Industries of Virginia, Inc., Printing Industries of Wisconsin.

Mrs. MALONEY

Mrs. MALONEY. Mr. Speaker, on August 19th, William Jefferson Clinton, our 43rd president, will celebrate his 59th birthday--today, we honor him. We honor him not just for being one of 43 Americans to have led history's greatest Nation from its highest office, we honor him for the legacy the current President Bush described as, ``a deep and far- ranging knowledge of public policy, a great compassion for people in need, and the forward-looking spirit Americans like in a President.'' Since his last birthday, President Clinton characteristically responded to one of the most devastating natural disasters in modem history with the compassion for people in need that President Bush talked about. In the aftermath of the tsunami in Southeast Asia, President Clinton showed the diplomacy and humanity he has always displayed in a career filled with good works. Together with former President Bush, President Clinton helped generate billions of dollars in donations for the tsunami-torn nations. As a representative of our generous and caring Nation, he showed the world America's compassion. And he and former President Bush rolled up their sleeves and lent helping hands to the recovery efforts when they traveled to southeast Asia. In two terms in the White House, President Clinton stewarded our Nation's longest-ever economic expansion, largest-ever budget surplus, and the growth of 22 million jobs. He helped broker the Good Friday Accords for Northern Ireland, engaged in Middle East peace talks, and brought an end to ethnic cleansing in the Balkans. And he encouraged Americans to care for their fellow man and woman, creating AmeriCorps, which engages more than 50,000 Americans each year in community service. We in Congress are thankful that President Clinton's health has improved since his recent heart surgeries, and we pray that he continues to be healthy and strong. Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank Chairman Davis and the House leadership for bringing this resolution to the floor in time for President Clinton's birthday. Mr. Speaker, from his birth in a town called Hope in the State of Arkansas, to his education at Georgetown University, Oxford and Yale Law School, to his service in Arkansas as attorney general, Governor and chairman of the National Governors Association, to his two terms as President of the United States to now, as a private citizen still showing the world humanity and compassion, we honor President Clinton. President Clinton, happy birthday.

Mrs. MALONEY

Mrs. MALONEY. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of H. Con. Res. 202, which will permit the use of the Rotunda for a ceremony honoring Constantino Brumidi on the 200th anniversary of his birth. I would like to thank my colleagues, Representative Pascrell, Mica, and Bilirakis, for their efforts in getting this bill to the Floor today. As a founder and co-chair of the Congressional Caucus on Hellenic Issues, I am especially proud of Brumidi's Greek heritage. The son of a Greek father and Italian mother, Constantino Brumidi, fled Rome and immigrated to the United States on September 18, 1852. From 1868-1879 as a resident of New York City, Brumidi painted forty-three murals and paintings at St. Stephen's Church which is located in my congressional district. Brumidi is most famous, however, for his artistic achievements in the U.S. Capitol. ``The Apotheosis of George Washington,'' on the dome in the Rotunda, is one of the highlights of his work here. Although he worked flat on his back on wooden scaffolding through the intense summer temperatures, Brumidi created a masterpiece. Additionally, his artwork can be found in the House of Representatives Chamber, several committee rooms, the President's Room, the Senate Reception Room, and throughout the corridors of the Capitol. I am thrilled that we are recognizing such an outstanding artist and an important contributor to the history of our Nation. The Capitol Building is truly special because of its beautiful architecture and priceless artistic treasures. Without Brumidi's influence, tours of the Capitol simply would not be as interesting and exciting for our constituents. I am pleased to see the Hellenic Caucus join with the co-chairs of the Italian American Congressional Delegation in bringing this resolution to the Floor, and I urge my colleagues to support it.