Carolyn Maloney

Mrs. MALONEY of New York

Mrs. MALONEY of New York. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of the Rangel amendment. This is an amendment that respects the dignity of public housing residents. In 1998 the Congress passed legislation that essentially says that public housing residents aren't as good as other Americans. It requires residents to fulfill community service because they receive the benefit of public housing. Mr. Chairman, this provision was mean spirited when it was passed and we should overturn it today. Residents of public housing do receive a government benefit. In that way they are similarly situated to hundreds of millions of other Americans. They receive a benefit just as home owners are allowed to deduct mortgage interest from their taxes. They receive a benefit just as FHA and VA home loans receive a benefit. They certainly do not receive a benefit as great as those that huge multinational corporations are granted on taxes from federal, state, and local governments. I could stand on the floor of this House and name thousands of special interests that receive some sort of special government benefit because they have been determined to be worthy of such treatment by Congress. Just as many of these residents are moving from welfare to work we have singled out public housing residents has having to justify themselves by completing community service. We should be ashamed of such shoddy treatment of people with lower incomes. How will we administer this mess of a requirement? In New York City, NYCHA administers housing for 426,000 residents--30 percent of whom are elderly. This community service requirement, even with exemptions for the elderly, will require a huge amount of resources to monitor compliance. In the context of a housing bill that already under funds housing-- administration will simply take additional much needed resources away from where they are needed. This is truly meddling by the federal government in the affairs of local citizens. I urge my colleagues to support this amendment and repeal this belittling requirement of public housing residents.

Mrs. MALONEY of New York

Mrs. MALONEY of New York. Mr. Chairman, I rise to strike the requisite number of words. I thank the gentlewoman from New York for offering this amendment. I strongly support her efforts to increase the appropriation for YouthBuild by $10 million. The current level of $60 million in the bill flat funds this laudable program--a program that helps at-risk youth learn valuable skills enabling them to gain employment and ultimately break the cycle of poverty. This $10 million increase will make a significant difference. YouthBuild students work across the country, including in my city and state. In New York City, the unemployment rate is above the national average, and a significant number of these unemployed New Yorkers are young people. Programs like YouthBuild can have a positive impact on our nation's young adults. The program offers job training, education, counseling, and leadership opportunities to unemployed and out-of-school young adults, ages 16-24, through the construction and rehabilitation of affordable housing in their own communities. Many graduates go on to construction- related jobs or college. YouthBuild works in conjunction with Community Based Organizations, local small businesses, and international corporations who provide matching funds for these programs. This is a great initiative we all can support. Not only does YouthBuild help individual young people, but their work benefits many low-income families in our neighborhoods. I support the Valazquez amendment. I urge my colleagues to invest in our young people! Vote in favor of this amendment.

Mrs. MALONEY of New York

Mrs. MALONEY of New York. Mr. Speaker, it is my honor and privilege to commemorate the 27th anniversary of the 1974 illegal Turkish invasion of Cyprus. I have commemorated this day each year since I have become a Member of Congress; and, unfortunately, each year the occupation continues. The continued presence of Turkish troops represents a gross violation of human rights and international law. Since their invasion of Cyprus in July of 1974, Turkish troops have continued to occupy 37 percent of the island. This is in direct defiance of numerous U.N. resolutions and has been a major source of instability in the eastern Mediterranean. Recent events have created an atmosphere where there is now no valid excuse to avoid resolving this long-standing problem. Peace in this region cannot happen without continued and sustained U.S. leadership, which is why I am heartened that President Bush, like his predecessor, President Clinton, is committed to working for reunification of Cyprus. He recently stated, and I quote, ``I want you to know that the United States stands ready to help Greece and Turkey as they work to improve their relations. I'm also committed to a just and lasting settlement of the Cyprus dispute.'' I was also encouraged to read last week that the European Union considers the status quo in Cyprus unacceptable and has called on the Turkish Cypriot side to resume the U.N.-led peace process as soon as possible with a view toward finding a comprehensive settlement. Now is the time for a solution. More than 20 years ago, in 1977, in 1979, the leaders of the Greek and Turkish Cypriot communities reached two high-level agreements which provided for the establishment of a bicommunal, bizonal federation. Even though these agreements were endorsed by the U.N. Security Council, there has been no action on the Turkish side to fill in the details and reach a final agreement. Instead, for the last 27 years, there has been a Turkish Cypriot leader presiding over a regime recognized only by Turkey and condemned as ``legally invalid'' by the U.N. Security Council in Resolution 541 and 550. Cyprus has been divided by the green line, a 113-mile barbed wire fence that runs across the island, and Greek Cypriots are prohibited from visiting the towns and communities where their families have lived for generations. With 35,000 Turkish troops illegally stationed on the island, it is one of the most militarized areas in the world. This situation has also meant the financial decline of the once rich northern part of Cyprus to just one-quarter of its former earnings. Perhaps the single most destructive element of Turkey's fiscal and foreign policy is its nearly 27-year occupation of Cyprus. We now have an atmosphere where there is no valid excuse for not resolving this long-standing problem. Cyprus is set for movement into the European Union in 2004. I am hopeful that this reality will act as a catalyst for a lasting solution of the Cyprus challenge. EU membership for Cyprus will clearly provide important economic, political, and social benefits for all Cypriots, both Greek and Turkish alike. This is why both sides must return to the negotiating table without any conditions. There is also a new climate of cooperation between Turkey's Ismail Cem and Greece's George Pappandreou, and this is a very positive sign. More has been achieved in a year than what has been achieved in the past 40 years, but this cooperation needs to extend to the resolution of the Cyprus occupation. While the U.S., the EU, Greece, and Cyprus have all acted to accommodate Turkish concerns, it remains to be seen whether Turkey will put pressure on Rauf Denktash to bargain in good faith. Make no mistake about it, if Turkey wants the Cyprus problem resolved, it will not let Denktash stand in its way. Now is the time for a solution. It will take diligent work by both sides, but with U.S. support and leadership I am hopeful that we will reach a peaceful and fair solution soon. Twenty-seven years is too long to have a country divided. It is too long to be kept from your home. It is too long to be separated from your family. We have seen many tremendous changes around the world. The Berlin Wall came down. There are steps towards peace in Ireland. It is now time to add Cyprus to the list of places where peace and freedom have triumphed.

Mrs. MALONEY of New York

Mrs. MALONEY of New York. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Kolbe) for yielding to me, and I thank him for his leadership on this bill along with the gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. Lowey). Mr. Chairman, after the tragic war in Bosnia, there are many children who have lost their parents, been deserted, and have been left to fend for themselves. These are children who need and deserve a stable, safe environment where they can grow up and enjoy the support of a loving family. I strongly believe that we should support and work to help these children. We must direct USAID to work with the Bosnian government to address the special needs of children at risk, especially orphans. These funds would be designed to support the Bosnian government to set up systems, mechanisms and/or institutions to, first, identify urgently homeless children and provide for their immediate care and protection; two, pursue reunification with other family members if possible; three, establish foster care and/or adoption arrangements; and, four, where appropriate, establish procedures that permit legitimate international adoption. Like the Pearl S. Buck Initiative after the Korean War, we must work to establish an institutional structure to help our governments work in a cooperative manner for the good and well-being of the children. Between now and conference, I hope that we will work together with the administrator at USAID in order to assess the scope of the problem of orphaned children of Bosnia. I strongly urge that this matter be considered in conference in order to ensure that USAID addresses the problem and work towards finding a solution. I urge USAID and other appropriate organizations such as UNICEF to address this really horrible stressful condition of many, many orphaned children in Bosnia. I also would like to compliment the work of the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Young) and his wife, Beverly, in working to help these children.

Mrs. MALONEY of New York

Mrs. MALONEY of New York. Mr. Chairman, last January, instead of celebrating one of the most important dates on the calendar for the people of India--the 51st anniversary of the Republic of India, we unfortunately mourned the death of hundreds of people who died in the tragic earthquake. At that time, many of us stood on the House floor to offer our sincere condolences and deepest sympathies. Today, we stand on the floor to offer disaster relief funding for India in order to cope with that earthquake. The rebuilding of the state of Gujarat is an enormous challenge, with economic damage possibly topping $5 billion. This amendment demonstrates our support for our friends in India and proves that we are here to help in their time of need. US-India relations are warmer than they have been in years. We have seen a dramatic increase in economic and family ties. As the largest democracy in the world, India has shown a genuine commitment to improving its economic ties to the United States and the U.S. and India have formally committed to work together to build peace and security in South Asia, increase bilateral trade and investment, meet global environmental challenges, fight disease, and eradicate poverty. This is an important time in US-India relations and this is an important amendment that deserves our support.

Mrs. MALONEY of New York. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of this bill. I thank Chairman Kolbe and Ranking Member Lowey for succeeding in developing such a bipartisan bill. I think that it addresses many of our global concerns and adequately funds many important programs. But, there is one glaring omission that I think must be addressed. The bill does nothing to remove the anti-democratic, anti-woman global gag rule from imposing its harsh standards on our poorest, and most vulnerable women and children around the world. You've heard it so many times before--the gag rule isn't about abortion. It's about women dying, to the tune of 600,000 a year. That is equal to one or two jumbo jets crashing every single day. And, it's about saving women's lives. The fact remains that since 1973, no U.S. federal funds have been or are used around the world for abortions. During the time we are debating this bill, 65 women will die form pregnancy related complications. They are dying because they don't have access to the most basic health care. Let me be clear, the global gag rule restricts foreign NGO's from using their own funds. In America, this language is unconstitutional. Around the world, it's unconscionable. The gag rule is enough to make you gag. It cripples foreign NGO's ability to practice democracy in their own countries. The United States has always been dedicated to exporting the very best of our country, from our ideas of freedom and democracy to products that help make life better. Unfortunately, the global gag rule exports one of the worst, if not the worst, of our country's internal politics. Politics surrounding a policy that is unconstitutional in our own country and forcing it on the poorest women and nations of the world. And with dire effects. We can't afford to stifle the international debate on family planning by tying the hands of NGO's with an anti-woman gag rule. The gag rule forces NGO's to choose between their democratic rights to organize and determine what is best in their own countries and desperately needed resources of U.S. family planning dollars. We know that family planning reduces the need for abortions. We know that it saves lives. The gag rule reduces the effectiveness of family planning organizations and should be eliminated. This is a good bill, but we can't forget that it does nothing to remove a very dangerous policy, the anti-women, anti-democratic global gag rule. I hope that in conference that this harmful language is removed once and for all.

Mrs. MALONEY of New York. Mr. Chairman, I join with my colleague from New Jersey in support of women and children around the world and rise in strong support of the Smith Amendment. This amendment fulfills the promise for the Trafficking Victims Protection Act. The exploitation of our world's women and children in trafficking is a tragic human rights offense. Without the funds that this amendment provides, it is the victims of trafficking that will once again suffer. Forced to work in slave labor conditions in factories, farms, and even brothels. Once these victims are freed from their prisons they are in desperate need of rehabilitation, health care, and shelter. This amendment provides 10 million dollars in funds to pay for these services so that these women and children can return to having normal lives. Traffickers often lure their victims with the promise of better jobs, increased opportunities, better lives. Instead of making this dream a reality, the victims are forced into a life of terror, violence, and fear. This amendment provides 10 million dollars for education and training programs so that potential victims have the resources to resist the lies and schemes of traffickers. Prevention is a key component to combating this international human rights issue. Mr. Speaker, this amendment is important to the fight against trafficking because not only does it provide funds to protect the victims, it also provides 10 million dollars in assistance to foreign governments who wish to change their laws and practices to meet with the minimum standards for the elimination of trafficking outlined in the Trafficking Victims Protection Act. We must work with our allies and friends to stop these predators from profiting from the victimization of women and children around the world. Yes, there is much more we should do to prevent trafficking and punish the predators that profit from the exploitation of women and children. This amendment is important because it provides continued support to trafficked victims. Making a significant difference in the lives of millions of women and children around the world. Once again I commend my colleague for introducing this amendment. Let us continue to support the victims of trafficking, I urge a YES vote on the Smith Amendment.

Mrs. MALONEY of New York

Mrs. MALONEY of New York. Mr. Speaker, it is my distinct honor and privilege to commemorate the 27th anniversary of the 1974 illegal Turkish invasion of Cyprus. I have commemorated this day each year since I have become a Member of Congress and unfortunately, each year the occupation continues. The continued presence of Turkish troops represents a gross violation of human rights and international law. Since their invasion of Cyprus in July of 1974, Turkish troops have continued to occupy 37% of Cyprus. This is in direct defiance of numerous United Nations resolutions and has been a major source of instability in the eastern Mediterranean. Recent events, however, have created an atmosphere where there is now no valid excuse to avoid resolving this long-standing problem. Peace in this region cannot happen without committed and sustained U.S. leadership, which is why I am heartened that President Bush, like his predecessor President Clinton, is committed to working towards the reunification of Cyprus. He recently stated (and I quote): ``I want you to know that the United States stands ready to help Greece and Turkey as they work to improve their relations. I'm also committed to a just and lasting settlement of the Cyprus dispute.'' I was also encouraged to read last week that the European Union considers the status quo in Cyprus unacceptable and has called on the Turkish Cypriot side to resume the U.N.-led peace as soon as possible with a view to finding a comprehensive settlement. Now is the time for a solution. More than twenty years ago, [in 1977 and 1979] the leaders of the Greek and Turkish Cypriot communities reached two high level agreements which provided for the establishment of a bicommunal bizonal federation. Even though these agreements were endorsed by the U.N. Security Council Resolution 649 of 1990, there has been no action on the Turkish side to fill in the details and reach a final agreement. Instead, for the last 27 years, there has been a Turkish Cypriot leader presiding over a regime recognized only by Turkey and condemned as ``legally invalid'' by the U.N. Security Council in resolution 541 (1989) and 550 (1984). Cyprus has been divided by the green line--a 113-mile barbed wire fence that runs across the island and Greek-Cypriots are prohibited from visiting the towns and communities where their families have lived for generations. With 35,000 Turkish troops illegally stationed on the island, it is one of the most militarized areas in the world. This situation has also meant the financial decline of the once rich northern part of Cyprus to just one quarter of its former earnings. Perhaps the single most destructive element of Turkey's fiscal and foreign policy is its nearly 27 year occupation of Cyprus. We now have an atmosphere where there is no valid excuse for not resolving this long-standing problem. Cyprus is set for accession to the European Union in 2004, and I am hopeful that this reality will act as a catalyst for a lasting solution of the Cyprus problem. EU membership for Cyprus will clearly provide important economic, political, and social benefits for all Cypriots, both Greek and Turkish alike. This is why both sides must return to the negotiating table without any conditions. There is also a new climate of cooperation between Turkey's Ismail Cem and Greece's George Pappandreou is a positive sign. More has been achieved in a year than what has been achieved in the past 40 years, but his cooperation needs to extend to the resolution of the Cyprus occupation. While the U.S., the EU, Greece and Cyprus have all acted to accommodate Turkish concerns, however, it remains to be seen whether Turkey will put pressure on Rauf Denktash to bargain in good faith. And make no mistake about it, if Turkey wants the Cyprus problem resolved, it will not let Denktash stand in the way. Now is the time for a solution to the Cyprus problem. It will take diligent work by both sides, but with U.S. support and leadership, I am very hopeful that we will reach a peaceful and fair solution soon. Twenty-seven years is too long to have a country divided. It is too long to be kept from your home. It is too long to be separated from family. We have seen many tremendous changes around the world in the last several years; it is now time to add Cyprus to the list of places where peace and freedom have triumphed.

Mrs. MALONEY of New York

Mrs. MALONEY of New York. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the bill and commend the chairman, the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Kolbe), and my good friend and colleague, the gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. Lowey), for her great leadership. Mr. Chairman, this is a strong bill that recognizes and includes our national security and our national interests; that funds our allies in the Middle East, Israel, Egypt, Jordan, Lebanon; and it funds the important International Fund for Ireland, Cyprus and many other important allies. In addition, it funds the child survival account, USAID, UNFPA, and takes into account and funds the AIDS crisis. But in this bill we are being asked to consider a substantial increase in aid for Peru. Peru has made substantial advances in recent years in democratizing its system and improving its economy. These improvements certainly deserve our support and assistance. But Peru has imprisoned an American citizen, Lori Berenson, a constituent of mine, under anti-terrorism laws that have been condemned by the international human rights organizations. Lori served 5\1/2\ years in prison under extremely harsh conditions for a crime that Peru now agrees she did not commit. At her recent civilian trial, Lori was acquitted of the leadership or membership of a terrorist organization. For more than 5 years, Peru insisted that Lori was the leader in a terrorist movement. For that crime she was imprisoned in Peru's highest security prison for leaders of terrorist movements. Now they concede that she was not even a member. At all times Lori has maintained her innocence of the charges against her, and during her recent trial she publicly denounced all forms of terrorism and violence. Lori's health has been damaged, and I will submit for the Record a complete record of all the health problems that she now suffers from. From the beginning, Members of Congress have supported her. And recently over 142 Members joined me in a letter to the current president asking him to pardon Lori before he leaves office. In his recent meeting with President-elect Toledo, President Bush said that humanitarian factors should be taken into account in the final resolution of Lori's case. President Bush's conversation with President-elect Toledo sends a very important message to Peru: the United States will not forget Lori Berenson. We should send Peru another message. It is troubling to me that we are giving so much nonhumanitarian aid to Peru when they have treated an American citizen so badly. If she is not released on humanitarian grounds, Congress should take appropriate action.

Mrs. MALONEY of New York

Mrs. MALONEY of New York. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?

Mrs. MALONEY of New York. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.

Mrs. MALONEY of New York. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.

Mrs. MALONEY of New York. Mr. Chairman, I rise on behalf of myself and the gentleman from New York (Mr. Rangel) to amend the fiscal year 2002 appropriations for the U.S. Census Bureau. The Census Bureau changed the question on Hispanic origin in the 2000 census; and as a result, our ability to measure changes in subgroups of Hispanics has been severely hindered. This amendment is to provide the funds necessary for the Census Bureau to create accurate counts of subgroups of Hispanics from the 2000 census. In the 2000 census, the question on Hispanic origin had a subtle change from 1990 that produced a profound result. In 1990, the category ``other Hispanic'' was followed by a line that said, ``Print one group, for example, Argentinian, Colombian, Dominican, Nicaraguan, Salvadorian, Spaniard, and so on.'' In 2000, these groups were given only the instruction, ``Print group.'' As a result, the number of persons who marked ``other'' and did not write in a particular group went up and the counts for these other Hispanic groups do not reflect the actual increase in population that occurred between 1990 and 2000. Let me give my colleagues a few examples of the confusion this change caused. The Census Bureau has reported that the population of Hispanics grew by 58 percent between 1990 and 2000. That may be, but the number of Nicaraguans declined almost 15 percent. The number of Panamanians declined from 92,000 in 1990 to 91,000 in 2000. At the same time these groups supposedly declined, the number of ``other'' Hispanics of which Panamanians and Nicaraguans are a subgroup, grew threefold from 2 million to 6 million. In short, there are problems with comparing the 1990 and 2000 census data on Hispanics. This problem can be taken care of, to a large extent, by using data on the long form to revise the counts of Hispanic subgroups. This was done in 1990 and could be done again in 2000. The long form collects data on place of birth and ancestry which can be used to augment the Hispanic origin data to provide a more accurate count of Hispanic subgroups. The funds transferred in this amendment should provide ample resources for correcting these data. Some have suggested that this is an issue that is of interest only to New York. That is in part because New York's data has been released, and detailed data for other States with large Hispanic population have not yet been released. California, for instance, contains a third of the U.S. Hispanic population and is itself almost a third Hispanic. It is quite likely that when the data for California is released, we will see similar problems there. The data for Texas, which contains almost 7 million Hispanics, have not yet been released. And so we have not yet seen the detail on Hispanic subgroups. Mr. Chairman, we owe it to the Hispanic groups that worked so hard to make sure that the 2000 census was a good census to provide the best possible data on Hispanic subgroups. I hope that my colleagues will join me in making sure that this happens by supporting the amendment that the gentleman from New York (Mr. Rangel) and I are putting forward.

Mrs. MALONEY of New York. I yield to the gentleman from New York.

Mrs. MALONEY of New York. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?

Mrs. MALONEY of New York. Mr. Chairman, I rise today to offer an amendment for which there is strong bipartisan support with my colleague, the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Miller), on the other side of the aisle. This amendment would provide funding to begin planning to ensure that all Americans, including those living and working abroad are counted. Last year's census workers fanned out across the Nation to count every single American. Millions of Americans came together to complete their census forms and provide us with a snapshot of America. Unfortunately, during the 2000 census, we were unable to include a critical group of Americans: Americans, private citizens, living abroad. Americans abroad make huge contributions to our economy each year. They encourage overseas expansion of American companies, improve exports, help us to expand our trade opportunities, and act as ambassadors to what we as Americans are all about, our American values. Unfortunately, although these hardworking Americans contribute so much to our Nation, although they vote, although they pay taxes, these Americans were not included in the 2000 census. I strongly believe that these Americans deserve to be counted. I have met with them from around the world, from the Arabian peninsula, to France, to Latin America. I have gotten their e-mails, letters, and faxes. And what has impressed me the most is that, even though some have been living abroad for years, or even decades, they are still proud to be Americans living abroad. It is very important that they are part of the great civic experience of being part of our national census. If we truly want to embrace the global economy, then we should keep better track of these critically important citizens. This legislation will provide $2.5 million for the Census Bureau to use to begin planning a census for Americans abroad by 2010. This is a necessary shift for this purpose. I believe this effort is long overdue and that these Americans who offer so much to our Nation deserve to be counted. I want to remind all of the Members that while they may be living in France or Canada or Italy, they all come from Michigan, Texas, and California; and many do in fact vote and pay taxes in their home States, in all our districts. Finally, I would like to compliment the patriotism that many Americans abroad have shown in their quest to be included in the census. Their love for our Nation has been an inspiration, and I am proud to offer this amendment on their behalf. I hope all of my colleagues will support this commonsense amendment which will begin the process to ensure that all Americans are included in the census. Mr. Chairman, my colleague, the chairman of the Subcommittee on Census of the Committee on Government Reform, the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Miller), conducted numerous very important hearings on the need to include Americans abroad. Last year, because of his efforts, there was report language that included a demand that the Census Bureau come forward with a plan. The problem is that the whole time that I have been in Congress we have been asking for this plan. Like Moses, we could be in the desert for 40 years if we do not have a plan. They are supposed to come back with a plan in September. Yet I fear that it will be like the other plans, a statement, a dwindling of time, and not a concrete plan to go out and count these Americans abroad. This $2.5 million would allow them to have a trial run at counting them so that we could study the proper and best way to make sure that it is fairly and legally done. I want to compliment the fine work of my colleague, the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Miller), on this particular effort. We have worked together in a bipartisan way. And I hope that the distinguished Chair of this appropriations subcommittee, the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Wolf), and the distinguished ranking member, the gentleman from New York (Mr. Serrano), will accept this amendment. We called the Census Bureau yesterday because the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Miller) had mentioned to me that this report was coming; and just last month the acting director of the Census Bureau said that the September report on counting Americans abroad, and I quote, ``will raise serious concerns about the feasibility of counting them.'' It sounds to me like the Census Bureau is not asking how this can be done, but instead is once again looking at the negative. This allocation will show that we are serious that 10 years from now we want these citizens counted and we want trial runs in between. We want this to happen for the American citizens. It is important to our country, it is important to our global economy, and it is the fair and right thing to do.

Mrs. MALONEY of New York. Mr. Chairman, I applaud the gentleman for his statements and would like to point out that the long-form information is available in 2002, not 2003, but 2002; and the professionals in this case made a mistake. They changed the question. They changed the question, and they did not know the effect it would have. Now that we know the effect and the problem that it has caused, we have a chance to go and correct it. That is what this amendment seeks to do. Let us correct this data so it more properly reflects, in the case that my colleague so eloquently made, the Dominican population in New York and other places in the country.

Mrs. MALONEY of New York. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding, and I place in the Record statements by local homeless advocates who want to see the numbers. I could read it, but I will place it in the Record. Census: Local Homeless Advocates Who Want To See the Numbers ``Who are they safeguarding?'' asked Ron Reinhart, director of the Salvation Army's PASS Program in Cleveland. ``They don't want people to know what a poor job they did.'' (Census Keeps Lid on Homeless Numbers, Cleveland, the Plain Dealer, 6-21-01.) Brian Davis, head of the Northeast Ohio Coalition for the Homeless, helped count the homeless in 1990, when Census officials tried to do it all in one day. He said the 2000 count was much improved, but not without major problems. ``It's important to have these numbers,'' Davis said. ``There are 1,600 [shelter] beds in Cleveland. And all the beds are usually full. You should get at least 1,600 homeless people.'' (Census Keeps Lid on Homeless Numbers, Cleveland, the Plain Dealer, 6-21-01.) ``It really doesn't make any difference to us when the census numbers come out. But it does strike me as being extremely weird,'' said John Suggs, executive director of the Presbyterian Night Shelter of Tarrant County, near downtown Fort Worth. ``They had a lot of people here counting the homeless people inside and outside the shelter. Why do all of that work and not share it with the public?'' (After Costly Count, Census Skips Homeless; Report to Reflect Only People in Shelters, News Section, page 1 Fort Worth Star-Telegram, 6- 23-01.) Tillie Burgin, director of Mission Arlington, also questioned the decision to withhold the numbers. ``We don't depend on stats,'' she said. ``However, the folks are expecting whole truths from the census.'' (After Costly Count, Census Skips Homeless; Report to Reflect Only People in Shelters, News Section, page 1 Fort Worth Star-Telegram, 6-23-01.) ``I'd rather have [the numbers] now. It's almost been a year since we've done it,'' said Candis Brady, communications director for the 700-bed Shelter for the Homeless in Midway City, Calif. ``It could help in getting funding for programs.'' (Census Policy on Homeless Draws Criticism, Midway City, CA, Associated Press, 6-27-01.) Leslie Leitch, director of Baltimore's Office of Homeless Services, said she also thought the census was going to release more detailed figures. Now, she said, her city may have to go out and do their own survey of people in soup kitchens and living on the streets. (Census Policy on Homeless Draws Criticism, Baltimore, Associated Press, 6-27- 01.) ``Here in Seattle, we worked hard to get people to cooperate with the census, and we would support releasing more information,'' said D'Anne Mount, spokeswoman for the Seattle strategic planning office. (Numbering the Homeless, Associated Press, 6-29-01.) Still Tavares [Columbus City Councilwoman] says there has to be a better way. ``By not having the numbers, we're missing out on dollars that would come back . . . for homeless programs, child care, funding for education, emergency food services, transportation and many more,'' Tavares said. ``These are living, breathing citizens in our community.'' (City Won't Get True Homeless Count: Census Numbers to Include Only Those at Shelters, Dispatch.com, 7- 17-01.)

Mrs. MALONEY of New York. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?

Mrs. MALONEY of New York. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?

Mrs. MALONEY of New York. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?

Mrs. MALONEY of New York. Mr. Chairman, I would like to first of all thank the distinguished chairman for accepting this amendment; and to my distinguished colleague, the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Miller), I wish to thank him for all of his hard work on this. And from the bottom of my heart, and sincerely, I sincerely wish he were not retiring at the end of the term. The gentleman has been a distinguished leader on many, many issues, particularly the census. But I know that 10 years from now I will probably still be here, and they are going to be yelling their heads off at me saying, You and Dan Miller said you would take care of it. So I am glad the gentleman is taking a continued leadership role to be sure that by 2010 we have a viable plan that will work, that will have strong standards that everyone understands, that are fair, and really represent the interests of our country and the interests of our citizens. I thank the gentleman so much, and congratulations on accepting it.

Mrs. MALONEY of New York. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for his excellent statement, and I would like to just underscore what the change in the question meant. In 1990, 1.9 million Hispanics were classified as ``other.'' In 2000, 6 million Hispanics were classified as ``other.'' That is 17 percent. Why? Because, as my colleague has pointed out and as we well know, the bureau changed the question. In 2000, according to the Census Bureau, Hispanic population, 17.6 percent of the Hispanic population was classified as ``other.'' That makes ``other'' the second largest group of Hispanics. Now, only the bureau can tell us how much of this change is a result of changing the question. And why will my colleagues on the other side of the aisle not support our efforts to answer this question? We are merely asking to be able to get this question answered and to direct the resources to make that happen.

Mrs. MALONEY of New York. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.

Mrs. MALONEY of New York. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.