Carolyn Maloney

Mrs. MALONEY of New York

Mrs. MALONEY of New York. I thank the gentleman.

Mrs. MALONEY of New York

Mrs. MALONEY of New York. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to urge the Department of State not to issue an export license for the sale of attack helicopters to Turkey. As my colleagues are aware, in July of this year, the Turkish government announced that it had awarded a $4 billion contract for attack helicopters to the American company Bell-Textron. However, before the sale can take place, the Department of State must issue an export license and its decision must take into account both foreign policy and human rights considerations. As I look at these considerations, it is clear to me that sending 145 attack helicopters to Turkey runs directly counter to American interests and values in the region. The United States has a national interest in fostering peace and stability in the Eastern Mediterranean region. Recent developments in this regard have been encouraging, in particular the thaw in relations between Greece and Turkey. Yet, the sale of attack helicopters threatens to reverse this positive trend and unleash a regional arms race. This is not in our interest. It is also not in our interest to see these helicopters used not for legitimate self-defense or NATO purposes but instead to terrorize and threaten. Turkey has had a long record of using U.S.-supplied military equipment in direct violation of U.S. law. In 1974, Turkey employed U.S.-supplied aircraft and tanks in its invasion of the northern part of Cyprus, an area that Turkish forces continue to occupy today with the use of U.S.-supplied military equipment. For the past 16 years, Turkey has been illegally using American weaponry, especially attack helicopters, in a scorched-Earth campaign against its Kurdish minority and has threatened to use them against Greece and Cyprus as well. To date, according to reports from various human rights organizations, the Turkish military has killed over 30,000 civilian Kurds, destroyed over 2,000 Kurdish villages, and created perhaps as many as 2.5 million Kurdish refugees. Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, and even our State Department have reported that Turkey has illegally used American attack helicopters in these horrendous crimes against humanity. The administration appears ready to grant an export license despite statements by the State Department in 1998 that it would condition approval of an export license on Turkey's meeting a series of eight human rights benchmarks. A review of the State Department's annual human rights report issued earlier this year can lead to only one conclusion, that Turkey has not met the criteria laid down in 1998. In light of its own report, the State Department should follow the principled example of our NATO ally Germany. Just a few weeks ago, Peter Struck, the parliamentary leader of Germany's ruling SPD party, announced that a pending multi-billion- dollar sale of Leopard II tanks to Turkey would be blocked on human rights grounds. Mr. Struck added that he did not expect this decision to change in light of the fact that no progress was being made in Turkey's human rights performance. The overall impact of going through with this helicopter sale would be to damage America's credibility as a champion of human rights and endanger regional stability in an area of considerable strategic significance to the United States. The argument that Turkey needs these additional attack helicopters to defend itself against possible attack by Syrian, Iraqi, or Iranian tanks is suspicious. The existing Turkish military inventory already provides an overwhelming deterrent against these alleged threats. This arms deal is also not in Turkey's best interest. Turkey recently became a candidate for accession to the European Union. For this purpose, it needs to undertake massive restructuring and modernization of its economy. It also needs to reduce the military's role in government, make dramatic improvements in human rights, resolve territorial issues with Greece, and help to solve the Cyprus problem. By moving to expand its fleet of attack helicopters, Turkey sends a signal of misplaced priorities and undercuts its quest to join Europe. In short, I call upon the administration to take a principled stand against this pending sale of 145 attack helicopters to Turkey and deny the export license.

Mrs. MALONEY of New York

Mrs. MALONEY of New York. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to the rule. It is riddled with loopholes and will do little to lower drug costs here in the United States. I rise in support of this legislation which includes funding for a number of important initiatives to fight invasive species in the United States. I am specifically pleased that this bill includes $540 million for the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service and $973 million for the Agricultural Research Service. Both of these programs are essential to ensure that we win our battle against harmful invasive species that are killing our forests and farmlands. The threat of invasive species outbreaks as a result of recent wildfires across the country have made many Members aware of the incredible threat that invasive species can pose to our natural resources, and I would like to thank the appropriators for including additional funding for APHIS and ARS, two programs which specifically help to control invasive species. In New York, we are fighting the Asian Longhorned Beetle, which has already destroyed more than 2600 trees. Earlier this year, these beetles were found in several new locations across New York City. Experience has taught us that the only way we can destroy these incredibly destructive pests is to respond immediately and decisively. The additional resources provided for APHIS and ARS will guarantee that we can accomplish this goal and protect New York City's greenspaces and forests across the country. I strongly urge my colleagues to support this critically important legislation today. I would also like to comment on the inclusion of provisions designed to deal with prescription drug imports. Although this bill will allow pharmacies and wholesalers to buy American-made prescription drugs and reimport them into the United States, this bill will do nothing to lower drug costs for people in the United States. It is riddled with loopholes. In my home State of New York, breast cancer medications can cost over $100 per prescription while they are available in Canada and Mexico to their residents for a tenth of that price. Many women in my home State and, indeed, across the country are forced to dilute their prescriptions that fight breast cancer, to cut their pills in half because they cannot afford their prescription drugs in order to get by financially. And many in my home State get on the bus every weekend to go to Canada to purchase American manufactured drugs because it is cheaper than in their own country. This situation is completely unacceptable. Sadly, the reimportation provisions included in this bill will likely have little effect on these seniors and many others around the Nation. We need to take stronger action to protect seniors forced to travel abroad to obtain medicines they desperately need. This language fails to achieve this goal. Finally, this Congress needs to act now to pass real prescription drug legislation to solve this problem once and for all. I strongly support the bill put forward by the gentleman from Maine (Mr. Allen) which would make seniors the same preferred customers as HMO's and also the President's plan to expand Medicare to cover prescription drugs. I urge this Congress to take real action on this issue today and make a difference for America's seniors.

Mrs. MALONEY of New York

Mrs. MALONEY of New York. Mr. Speaker, it is with a heavy heart that I join my colleagues in adding our colleague, Congressman Bruce Vento's, name to this important legislation. We all knew that some day Members of Congress would stand here in the well of the House to praise Bruce's many accomplishments. It is truly sad that this day has come so soon. In my years in Congress, I have enjoyed a close working relationship with Congressman Vento as colleagues on the Committee on Banking and Financial Services. The Committee on Banking and Financial Services deals with some of the most complex issues in all of Congress. Bruce put in the time and mastered the range of complex issues. As a teacher himself, prior to coming to Congress, he became a resource to all committee members, providing counsel on a host of complex issues from financial modernization to intricate housing programs. All along the way, Bruce served as a tireless advocate for all consumers. He truly stood up for the working people time and time again. He made it his focus to ensure that individual's rights are protected when they do business with the most powerful banks and financial companies in the world. His legacy on the committee and his impact on consumer banking law will live for decades to come. It is truly appropriate that we add his name to this legislation, the aim of which is to aid the homeless. Providing housing for the less fortunate was part of Congressman Vento's daily work. President Clinton said it best yesterday at a White House event saying, and I quote, ``that Congressman Vento was a great teacher, a great representative and a wonderful human being.'' Let me convey to Congressman Vento's family, his friends, his dedicated long-time staff here in Washington and Minnesota, and to the people of Congressman Vento's fourth district my strongest and heartfelt condolences.

Mrs. MALONEY of New York

Mrs. MALONEY of New York. Madam Speaker, it is with a heavy heart that I join my colleagues tonight in this tribute to Congressman Bruce Vento. We all knew that someday Members of Congress would stand in the well of the House in tribute to Bruce Vento's many accomplishments, it is truly sad that this day has come too soon. Since coming to Congress 8 years ago, I have had the pleasure of a close relationship with Congressman Vento on the Banking Committee. The Banking Committee deals with some of the most complex issues in all of Congress. Congressman Vento put in the time, attended all the hearings, and mastered all these complex problems. As a teacher himself prior to coming to Congress, he became a resource to all Committee members, providing counsel on a host of from financial modernization to complex housing programs. Congressman Vento served as a tireless advocate for all consumers on the committee. He truly stood up for working people of all stripes time and time again. He made it a focus to make sure that individuals rights are protected by law as they interact with the most powerful financial companies in the world. His legacy on the committee and his impact on consumer banking law will live forward for decades to come. From timeless issues such as housing for the poor, to newer issues like the protection of consumers' private banking information in the online world, Congressman Vento was ahead of the curve, and on the people's side. I will truly miss Congressman Vento, Congress is truly diminished by his absence. Let me convey to Congressman Vento's family, his dedicated longtime staff here in Washington and Minnesota, and to the people of Congressman Vento's 4th district my strongest, and heartfelt condolences.

Mrs. MALONEY of New York

Mrs. MALONEY of New York. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. Slaughter) for her leadership and yielding the time to me. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to the rule because it couples many unrelated nongermane provisions to two underlying bills that are tremendously important, the Violence Against Women Act and the antitrafficking bill. These bills will literally save lives, and they have been a top priority this year of the bipartisan women's caucus. In this month alone, approximately 75,000 women will become victims of beatings, and in many cases their children will be attacked as well. The Violence Against Women Act has been, and must, remain a powerful tool in the fight against domestic violence, stalking and sexual assault. Domestic violence is the number one health risk for women between the ages of 15 and 44, and close to a third of all the women murdered in America are killed by their husbands or boyfriends. This conference report authorizes more than $3 billion over the next 5 years to combat violence in our families and homes and schools through September 2000, from the first VAWA grant. My home State of New York received over $97 million in funding, but you cannot measure the value of that funding unless you look into the eyes of a child who has witnessed the violence in the home. There is no cost too great for preventing this tragedy. The Violence Against Women Act will do many good things. It has a hot line, and in New York City alone, in 1999, over 169,000 calls were received. I am very pleased that two provisions were added to the bill from my Older American's Protection from Violence Act, H.R. 2590. My bill specifically allows VAWA programs to help older and disabled women, and they were included in this bill, specifically a grant program to address domestic violence among older women and the disabled. It is a proud day. I compliment all who have worked to make this pass to stop the Violence Against Women Act.

Mrs. MALONEY of New York. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for his leadership and for yielding me the time. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support for the reauthorization of the Violence Against Women Act and the International Sexual Trafficking Bill. Both of these important bills were top priorities of the bipartisan Women's Caucus. I regret that it was packaged with several other unrelated, nongermane bills. The International Sexual Trafficking Bill is important because not only does it take steps to eliminate the sex trafficking industry by punishing the predators that exploit women around the world, but it also takes steps to protect the victims of sex trafficking. The bill sets forth the minimum international standards for the elimination of sex trafficking. It establishes criminal and civil penalties. And it does many other things. I appreciate all of my colleagues' work on this important bill for women. And by establishing criminal and civil penalties for traffickers this bill punishes traffickers for profiting from the victimization of women. In addition, it authorizes assistance, through non-governmental organizations to the native countries of sex trafficked victims to help the victims and to take steps to stop the industry. The United States is not immune to the problems of trafficking. It is estimated that as many as 50,000 women, children, and men are trafficked into the U.S. each year. This bill would assist those victims by authorizing a new visa for trafficking victims to provide protection to the women and children that are brought into the United States and forced into prostitution. Of course there is more that needs to be done to stop the many human rights abuses inflicted on women around the world. Attacking the sex trafficking industry is an important step in the continued fight for women's rights and freedom around the world.

Mrs. MALONEY of New York

Mrs. MALONEY of New York. Mr. Speaker, one of the top priorities of the bipartisan Women's Caucus is reauthorizing the Violence Against Women Act. The House has already passed it by a nearly unanimous vote, 415 to 3. But while women are being beaten up and children continue to witness violence every day in their homes, the Senate and the conference committee have yet to act. It is time for action. We are calling, in a bipartisan way, on our colleagues in the House and the Senate on the conference committee. We know that this bill will save lives. We know that it helps our communities deal with domestic violence. We know that passing VAWA is one way to stop the cycle of violence in America. We know that the prosecutors and law enforcement officers support it. How long must our children suffer the consequences of family violence. Every day that goes by without passing it is too long. We call upon this House and Senate and conference committee to pass the Violence Against Women Act.

Mrs. MALONEY of New York

Mrs. MALONEY of New York. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of this legislation, and particularly in support of the additional funding to combat invasive species and to provide arts education in rural and underserved communities. Although I am disappointed that this legislation does not include all of the provisions included in the Conservation and Reinvestment Act, a bill that certainly has strong bipartisan support in both chambers, I am pleased that this bill funds a number of important national environmental priorities. I am also excited that we have finally given additional funding to the Challenge America Arts programs, the National Endowment for the Humanities and the Office of Museum Services. The NEA has been working hard to support quality arts projects across the country. I strongly believe that these programs help all of America's communities develop critically important cultural resources. Through NEA grants to local communities, support is provided for more than 7,400 K-12 arts educational programs in more than 2,600 communities all across this great Nation. The additional investment in the Challenge America Arts Fund will target additional resources to rural and underserved communities around the country. I am pleased that we have taken this positive step to ensure that every community in America has the opportunity to enjoy local arts programming and activities. Research has consistently shown that children who are exposed to the arts do better in school and have higher self-esteem. This extra funding will help bring these benefits with children in rural and urban communities that need it most. I would also like to commend the additional funding included in this legislation to help eradicate invasive species. In New York, we have been forced to deal with the Asian Longhorned Beetle, which has already destroyed more than 2,600 trees. Earlier this year, these beetles were found again in New York City. This legislation will provide additional resources to fight the beetle and specifically includes $12 million in additional funds for forest health treatments to help control and eradicate invasive species. I commend the conferees for including these additional resources, and I urge all of my colleagues to support this legislation.

Mrs. MALONEY of New York

Mrs. MALONEY of New York. Mr. Speaker, 3 days ago the deadline passed for reauthorizing the Violence Against Women Act. There was no good reason for the Congress not to pass this important bill. After all, it passed this House with an overwhelming majority, 415 to 3. Judges support this bill, police officers support this bill, prosecutors support the bill, victims, social workers, health care workers, men and women around the Nation support this bill. It protects women from violence, it protects children from witnessing violence, it stops the cycle of violence. Unfortunately, some in Congress are talking about using this bill as a sweetener, adding it to other bills to help them pass. The Violence Against Women Act deserves to pass on its own, and adding it to another bill to sweeten it is an insult to the women of America. Let us get our work done. Let us pass the Violence Against Women Act.

Mrs. MALONEY of New York

Mrs. MALONEY of New York. Mr. Speaker, over 900,000 women suffer violence each year at the hands of an intimate partner. We need the Violence Against Women Act to be reauthorized. It has provided over $1.6 billion in Federal grants to prosecutors, to law enforcement officials, and to victim assistance programs; yet it was allowed to expire this past weekend. Last week, this body passed it overwhelmingly. There is deep support in the Senate, with over 70 co-sponsors. Yet the Senate is holding this important piece of legislation up. Meanwhile, women fleeing domestic violence and children who live in violent situations wait and wait and wait. I urge the other body to pass this bill immediately. Women and children around this Nation are counting on us. We should have passed it in the other body last week. We should not have allowed it to expire.

Mrs. MALONEY of New York

Mrs. MALONEY of New York. Mr. Speaker, last week's announcement by President Clinton that the Federal Government would swap 30 million barrels of oil from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve was welcome news to myself and many other Members from the Northeast. I remember all too well the effect that last winter's dramatic spike in heating oil prices had on my constituents' heating bills. While the OPEC countries should do the right thing and increase supplies, here on Capitol Hill lobbyists are working behind the scenes to increase their companies' bottom lines at the expense of the public and taxpayers. I want to take this opportunity to bring to the attention of my colleagues an important piece of energy legislation that may soon be placed on suspension. The Commodity Futures Modernization Act of 2000, H.R. 4541, which was passed by the Committees on Banking and Financial Services, Commerce and Agriculture. This is important legislation for our Nation's financial services and our economy in general. I am concerned that a provision excluding trading in energy derivatives from proper regulation has been added to this legislation and that the House may not have an opportunity at this late date to debate this provision. The legislation, as reported by the Committee on Banking and Financial Services, increases the legal certainty of financial derivatives by excluding them from regulation by the Commodity Futures Trading Commission. These financial instruments are used by financial institutions and large businesses to offset interest rates, foreign currency, credit and other risks. When used by qualified investors, financial derivatives can reduce risk and increase the efficiency of the economy. In drafting the Commodity Futures Modernization Act, the House committees closely followed the recommendations of the report of the President's working group on financial markets. The working group, comprised of the Federal Reserve, SEC, OCC, and CFTC, produced its report after months of study of the derivatives market. A central recommendation of the working group was that the exclusion from CFTC regulation should be limited to financial derivatives. Financial derivatives are based on underlying commodities of infinite supply, such as interest rates. CFTC Chairman William Rainer elaborated on this distinction before the House Committee on Agriculture, and I quote, H.R. 4541 diverges, however, from the President's recommendations by codifying an exemption for most provisions of the Commodity Exchange Act for transactions in energy and metal commodities. In recommending an exclusion from the CEA for financial derivatives, the working group differentiated between trading financial products and nonfinancial products. Continuing, he said, The CFTC has already exempted many types of energy trading from the provisions of the Commodity Exchange Act. But the exemption for energy commodities included in H.R. 4541 expands the scope. ``The Commission's 1993 energy exemption is confined to parties with a capacity to make or take delivery. But this act would extend the exemption beyond those acting in a commercial capacity to encompass all eligible contract participants as defined in the bill.'' In other words, the bill that the House may be asked to vote on contains an exclusion for energy products that was not recommended by the report which the House otherwise followed in drafting the bill. Contributing to my concern is that the public and the CFTC may be handcuffed in monitoring energy derivative prices if trading that currently occurs on energy future exchanges moves to private, multilateral electronic exchanges that the energy companies themselves may own. Given the historically high energy prices we are currently facing, I believe now is the wrong time to limit our regulators in policing fraud in the energy markets. Again the CFTC, the regulator, agrees with me on this point. Last week I received a letter from Chairman Rainer in which he wrote of the provisions in this bill. He said, ``Charging the Commission with the responsibility to police for fraud and manipulation, however, without conferring authority to right regulations where necessary, leaves the CFTC inadequately equipped to fulfill these responsibilities.'' Mr. Speaker, I include for the Record the following letter from Chairman Rainer: U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission, Washington, DC, September 19, 2000. Hon. Carolyn B. Maloney, Member of Congress, House of Representatives, Rayburn House Office Building, Washington, DC. Dear Representative Maloney: I am pleased to write you on behalf of the Commodity Futures Trading Commission in response to your recent letter asking for the Commission's position with respect to language in H.R. 4541 that would exempt energy and metals products from regulation under the Commodity Exchange Act. Before addressing the specifics of the energy and metals exemptions, I would like to emphasize the Commission's support for swift Congressional action on legislation establishing legal certainty for over-the-counter financial derivatives consistent with the unanimous recommendations of the President's Working Group on Financial Markets. However, all versions of H.R. 4541 also contain provisions that effectively exempt most forms of trading in energy products from the Commodity Exchange Act, contrary to the recommendations of the PWG. As stated previously in testimony in both the House and Senate, the Commission is deeply concerned that these exemptions are not based upon sufficient evidence to warrant their inclusion in the legislation. One of the principal factors cited by the PWG in recommending an exclusion for OTC financial derivatives was that nearly every dealer in those products is either subject to, or affiliated with, an entity subject to federal financial regulation. This cannot be said with respect to most participants in trading energy products. The Commission also notes that the views of other agencies with responsibilities for regulating various aspects of the cash markets in energy products have not been solicited. The recommendations of the President's Working Group on Financial Markets for treatment of OTC financial transactions was preceded by nearly a year of deliberation and study by the four principal agencies of the Working Group, resulting in a consensus on treatment of those products. No such process has been undertaken by the agencies with responsibilities for various aspects of trading in energy products, and we are therefore concerned that the potential consequences of this part of the legislation have not been thoroughly considered. While the exemption in energy products is common to all three versions of the legislation--those of the Committees on Agriculture, Banking & Financial Services and Commerce, respectively--the Commerce Committee version extends the exemption to apply to metals products, as well. With respect to the exemption for metal commodities, the Commission has serious reservations about the extent to which H.R. 4541 would exempt these products from the CEA. In the Commission's experience, metal commodities have an unambiguous history of susceptibility to manipulation and we believe that futures and options transactions in these commodities require full regulatory oversight by the CFTC to protect the markets and their participants from unlawful practices. For example, in 1998 the Commission settled a major copper manipulation case, in which one company acquired a dominant and controlling cash and futures market position during 1995 and 1996 that caused copper prices worldwide to rise to artificially high levels. That case resulted in the offending company's paying the largest civil monetary penalty in U.S. history to that time. In fact, the President's Working Group Report explicitly stated that these markets have been susceptible to manipulation and to supply and pricing distortions and therefore recommended that they not be excluded from the CEA. The Commission recognizes that the legislation attempts to address some of these concerns by providing the agency with anti-fraud and anti-manipulation authority. Charging the Commission with the responsibility to police for fraud and manipulation, however, without conferring commensurate authority to promulgate regulations, where necessary, leaves the CFTC inadequately equipped to fulfill those responsibilities. While there are many important provisions of H.R. 4541 that warrant enactment, the Commission cannot recommend that the Congress move forward on those provisions unless the basic issues outlined here are addressed. The Commission is pleased to continue working with you and other interested parties to reach a satisfactory solution to these important issues. Sincerely, William J. Rainer. Mr. Speaker, I do not believe that now is the time to give big energy companies trading in energy derivative products a regulatory pass. Let me quote and note that the commodity modernization bill is otherwise very, very important legislation for the conduct of our Nation's financial services that I support. I urge the leadership to give this bill a full hearing in the House and not place it on suspension, and I urge my colleagues to remove the exemption for energy derivatives so that the public may know what the price is.

Mrs. MALONEY of New York

Mrs. MALONEY of New York. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor Dr. Murray Itzkowitz, of The Bridge Inc., who after 31 years as Executive Director is now the Executive Director Emeritus in charge of research and new program development. For more than 45 years, The Bridge Inc. has worked with mentally disabled adults as a nonprofit mental health, rehabilitation, and housing agency. The Bridge is a key provider of housing and support services for the chronically mentally ill within New York City. Its Mental Health Clinic provides individual, group, and family psychotherapy with specialities in, among others, bereavement and divorce counseling, substance abuse counseling, and offers treatment to victims of crime. The Bridge offers health care services provided by a part-time primary care physical and nurse practitioner team and a full-time licensed practical nurse. This service provides comprehensive services such as physicals and follow-up visitations. Another cornerstone of The Bridge Inc, is its residence assistance program. The Bridge operates more than 300 beds in various settings, such as 24-hour supervised residences and independent apartments. In fact in December 1998, The Bridge Inc, was granted a $1.7 million grant from the US Department of Housing and Urban Development to finance 18 individual apartment units in the South Bronx and Harlem. Finally, I must mention the vocational and educational programs offered by The Bridge. Among these programs include work training, on- site employment, and job-placement services. The education program includes basic literacy instruction, GED preparation, and college preparatory work. Through his selfless leadership of this fine organization, Dr. Murray Itzkowitz has demonstrated his desire for a physical and mentally healthy, better educated, and properly housed citizenry of New York City. Exceptional individuals like Dr. Itzkowitz, help improve the quality of life for many of our most needy citizens. Mr. Speaker, I am proud to have a deeply intelligent and compassionate man like Dr. Murray Itzkowitz working within my district and I am confident that, as the new Executive Director Emeritus in charge of research and development, Dr. Itzkowitz will continue his rigorous pursuit of the public well being.

Mrs. MALONEY of New York

Mrs. MALONEY of New York. Mr. Speaker, I rise today with my colleague Nydia Velazquez, to pay special tribute to Adam Veneski, the President of The People's Firehouse and a pillar of the Northern Brooklyn community, who recently passed away. Mr. Veneski, who in early 1975 was a well-liked neighborhood grocer in Williamsburg, Brooklyn, suddenly became a passionate political activist after his neighborhood firehouse, Engine 212, was closed as a result of the Mayor Abe Beame's financial cutbacks. Disillusioned by the excessive number of firehouse closings and concerned for the safety of his neighbors, Mr. Veneski organized a campaign against the city government aimed at changing the Mayor's mind. Mr. Veneski, using every resource he had, however limited, strove towards achieving a single, meaningful goal--to save Engine 212. Conceiving one of New York City's most memorable acts of civil disobedience, Mr. Veneski encouraged neighbors to sleep in the firehouse on round-the-clock shifts for nearly eighteen months while holding the fire truck hostage as a direct message to the city to keep North Brooklyn's firehouse open. When the Mayor ordered his opposition removed, a deputy fire chief said, ``We're not going to remove them, it's the people's firehouse.'' The name has stuck around since--and so has Adam Veneski. Mr. Veneski's goal was not only achieved through his public protests, but it was also realized as a result of his relentless research into facts that exhibited the necessity of preserving Engine 212. Mr. Veneski became an expert on fire-related injuries in his neighborhood, pointing out that eight fire-related deaths had occurred during the eighteen months Engine 212 was closed. As a result of the valiant efforts of Mr. Veneski and his neighbors, Engine 212, now known as the People's Firehouse, was reopened and the alarming increase in fire deaths in Williamsburg strongly reduced. Mr. Veneski, fresh from his triumphal success as a community activist and invigorated by his role in helping the community, continued to serve his North Brooklyn neighborhood. After Engine 212 was reopened as a fully operational fire station, Mr. Veneski and his united neighbors formed a community assistance program, the People's Firehouse, Inc. (PFI). PFI provides legal outreach and mediation services, language education specialists, and housing development assistance to the residents of North Brooklyn. The People's Firehouse is celebrating its twenty-fifth year of public service this year and owes it success to a kind and personable grocer from Williamsburg Brooklyn--Adam Veneski. From simple beginnings and with few resources, Mr. Veneski pioneered a movement that not only assisted in the improvement of the lives of those in his community, but through the preservation of the People's Firehouse and his dogged determination, saved many of those lives as well. North Brooklyn lost a tenacious advocate with the death of Adam Veneski. He will be sorely missed.

Mrs. MALONEY of New York

Mrs. MALONEY of New York. Mr. Speaker, this has been called many things, but I call this a rollback of Roe v. Wade, since the real goal here is to roll back a woman's constitutional right. Earlier this year, the Supreme Court rejected an abortion law in Nebraska. But I do not ask my colleagues to take my word for it. I will place in the Record quotes from anti-choice organizations. One called this ``A viable legislative option for pro-lifers that will not be struck down by the Supreme Court.'' Another called it, ``A starting point from which we can roll the point of legal protection back.'' But it is truly the statements of neonatologists and doctors, who have submitted letters to my office and others, that I would like to submit into the Record. One states, ``It would impose on doctors and parents a universal definition of life or alive which is inconsistent with the harsh reality presented by a number of circumstances.'' As my colleague, the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Watt) pointed out, we do know that it changes the definition of a person in 72,000 places in the law; 15,000 in the U.S. Code and 57,000 places in the Code of Federal Regulations. Quite frankly, I do not know what the long-term impact of this bill will be, but I do know the intent, because I have the internal documents from the pro-lifers, which I will put in the Record, and I do know that doctors who deal with the painful decisions of trying to help save the life of a child, many of them have said that this does not help; it merely complicates and makes the hard process of dying even harder on doctors and nurses and parents when they have children who, for whatever reason, modern technology cannot save that child's life. I submit for the Record, Mr. Speaker, a number of letters from doctors and other documents I referred to earlier. Testimony of F. Sessions Cole, M.D. to Committee on the Judiciary, Subcommittee on the Constitution, United States House of Representatives, July 20, 2000 Mr. Chairman, Honorable Representatives, Staff, and spectators. My name is Francis Sessions Cole, and my family, including our two daughters, ages 16 and 14, and my wife of 28 years resides in St. Louis, Missouri. I appear before you to offer testimony concerning Representative Canady's Born Alive Infants Protection Act of 2000 (H.R. 4292) as a physician whose specialty is care of newborn infants. My testimony is not sponsored by any organization. I completed my pediatric residency training at Boston Children's Hospital and my specialty training in caring for newborn infants in the Joint Program in Neonatology at Harvard Medical School. Since my Board certification in Pediatrics in 1981, I have cared for more than 10,000 new-born infants directly, and I currently have administrative responsibility for approximately one half of all the babies born in St. Louis annually (approximately 13,000 babies). I also have an active clinical practice that focuses on caring for babies whose transition from womb to world is complicated by one or more problems like prematurity, birth defects, infections, or problems with the afterbirth or placenta. I routinely encounter babies whose problems place them on the edge of viability. The language of H.R. 4292 would impose on doctors and parents a universal definition of ``life'' or ``alive'' which is, in my experience as a neonatologist, inconsistent with the harsh reality presented by a number of circumstances. The fact is that the indicia identified in the bill--breathing, or a beating heart, or pulsation of the umbilical cord, or definite movement of voluntary muscles--are not themselves necessarily indicative of life or continued viability. Frequently, the heartbeats of infants will be maintained by medicines, not nature; their breathing may be present but ineffective as they die; they may move voluntary muscles during the dying process. As a physician who cares for ill newborn infants, I feel that I have the greatest practice in medicine, because my practice permits me to participate in miracles everyday. Thanks to significant advances in technology over the last 20 years, babies whose parents could have been offered no hope can now see their babies survive and, for the most part, exceed both their parents' and their doctors' expectations as they develop. Unfortunately, even today's most advanced medical science is still a long way from being able to offer every sick infant a reasonable chance for survival. In fact, in our neonatal intensive care unit, approximately 10% of the infants do not respond to advanced technology and pass away. These deaths result from accidents of nature that are no one's fault, and they are excruciatingly difficult for parents, doctors, and nurses. Frequently, the emotional pain of the decision to terminate treatment in such cases is compounded by the fact that the technology that we provide babies requires painful, invasive procedures. When parents and physicians together decide that life support technology is futile for an infant and is only prolonging the pain of the dying process, parents have a moral and legal obligation to minimize the suffering of their baby, regardless of the pain such a turn of events brings to them in their loss. The language of H.R. 4292 will, in my view, significantly interfere with the agonizing, painful and personal decisions that must be left to parents in consultation with their physicians. Imposing the proposed definition of ``alive'' or ``life'' for statutory purpose may cause parents to prolong the medically inevitable dying process of their infants out of fear that terminating that process might be deemed to be, for legal purposes, the termination of a life, when in fact all that would be terminated would be the painful process of death. Prolonging treatment in such cases would be not the saving of a ``life'', but the prolonging of the pain and suffering of inevitable death. As a physician whose career has been dedicated to the welfare of newborns, and especially critically-ill newborns, I urge the Subcommittee not to inject an unnecessary and unrealistic definition of ``life'', with all its legal implications, into the already agonizing and heart-breaking situation faced by parents of infants in the dying process.

Mrs. MALONEY of New York

Mrs. MALONEY of New York. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of this bill and congratulate the leadership on both sides of the aisle for bringing it to the floor for a vote today. The IRS made a terrible decision for an aggrieved American family, and I believe every mother and father can identify with the sorrow that the family felt when they lost their child through kidnapping. The child was kidnapped and the IRS said the family could not take a child dependent tax benefit due to a legal interpretation of support. The family merely asked if the dependent exemption could be claimed in future years if the child's room was kept intact and money was being spent on the search for the child. I am glad that the IRS reversed themselves yesterday. Their first response was callous, to say the least. The IRS should not profit or benefit from a child that is missing or one that has been abducted. But as my colleagues have pointed out on both sides of the aisle, it is important that we take steps for the future so that this is not a sorrow or a problem that other families confront. I do not believe that there is any opposition to this bill. Everyone I know has spoken to me of their strong support for it. But I would like to mention a bill that will be coming up for which there may be some opposition, and I believe it is the most important bill before Congress, which has the bipartisan support of the Women's Caucus, and that is the Violence Against Women's Act. Enacted in 1994, VAWA has already provided crucial judicial and law enforcement training on violence against women, shelters for abused women, a national hot line that logs over 13,000 calls a month, and child abuse prevention programs that run across this country. Two weeks ago, the Democratic leadership raised this issue directly with the President and the Republican leadership and sent a letter to Speaker Hastert demanding a vote on this bill. I quote from the minority leader, the gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Gephardt), in part. He said, ``This is an epidemic problem in this country and we need to put the Federal Government behind it.'' I will put his letter in the Record and also mention that this is the first time that I have seen the Democratic leadership take a women's abuse issue and make it a top priority for the Democratic caucus. I congratulate the leadership and the many women in this body who have worked for years on this issue; my good friend, the gentlewoman from Maryland (Mrs. Morella), the gentlewoman from Illinois (Mrs. Biggert), and others. Mr. Speaker, I call upon my colleagues to have the same support for the Violence Against Women Act that we have for this correction for the child deduction and the IRS. And again, I congratulate the leadership on both sides of the aisle on this important bill. Mr. Speaker, I include the letter I just referred to for the Record: Congress of the United States, Washington, DC, September 12, 2000. Hon. J. Dennis Hastert, Speaker, U.S. House of Representatives, Washington, DC. Dear Speaker Hastert: We write to request that you bring H.R. 1248, the Violence Against Women Act of 2000 (``VAWA'') introduced by Representative Connie Morella, before the full House for consideration as soon as possible. H.R. 1248 has 224 bipartisan cosponsors and the support of domestic violence and sexual assault groups nationwide. H.R. 1248 was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary, the Committee on Education and the Workforce, and the Committee on Commerce. The Committee on the Judiciary favorably approved H.R. 1248 by a voice vote on June 27, 2000, but unfortunately, the Committee on Education and Workforce and the Committee on Commerce have failed to consider this legislation. H.R. 1248 is stalled despite the fact that VAWA funding authorization expires on September 30, 2000. In recognition of this fact, the Senate last week hotlined the Biden-Hatch version of VAWA, S. 2787. H.R. 1248 reauthorizes programs created by the Violence Against Women Act of 1994 for five years beyond 2000. It continues funding for VAWA programs such as law enforcement and prosecution grants to combat violence against women, the National Domestic Violence Hotline, battered women's shelters and services, education and training for judges and court personnel, pro-arrest policies, rural domestic violence and child abuse enforcement, stalker reduction, and others. As passed by the Judiciary Committee, the bill also authorizes funding for new programs such as civil legal assistance, transitional housing, and a pilot program for supervised child visitation centers. VAWA programs have made a crucial difference in the lives of domestic violence victims and their families. Since the passage of VAWA, intimate partner violence is down almost ten percent. Nevertheless, domestic violence is still too common, and each year about 850,000 violent crimes are committed against women by their current or former husbands or boyfriends. We must continue the commitment Congress made in 1994 to combat this violence. We hope you will agree that VAWA reauthorization is an urgent priority, and will therefore encourage expedited Committee review and consideration by the full House as soon as possible. Sincerely, Richard A. Gephardt, Democratic Leader; John Conyers, Jr., Ranking Member, Committee on the Judiciary; William Clay, Ranking Member, Committee on Education and the Workforce; John D. Dingell, Ranking Member, Committee on Commerce.

Mrs. MALONEY of New York

Mrs. MALONEY of New York. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding the time and for his leadership. With the Violence Against Women Act set to expire and with the 106th Congress coming to a close, it is critical that we act today to pass it. The Violence Against Women Act is the most important legislative action before Congress that has been endorsed by the bipartisan Women's Caucus. Enacted in 1994, VAWA has already provided crucial judicial and law enforcement training on violence against women, shelters for abused women, a national hotline with over 13,000 contacts each month, and child abuse prevention programs across this country. The committee acted to expand it in several ways this year, and I am pleased that my bill, the Older Americans Protection from Violence Act, was included in the underlying mark which has grant programs and aspects that specifically address older and disabled women. I also would like to join in thanking the Democratic leadership who more than 2 weeks ago sent a letter to Speaker Hastert demanding a vote on this bill, as have many Members of Congress. Mr. Speaker, I include for the Record that letter and an editorial in support of this legislation. Washington, DC, September 20, 2000. Hon. Dennis Hastert, Speaker of the House, The Capitol, Washington, DC. Dear Mr. Speaker: We are writing to urge immediate consideration of H.R. 1248, The Violence Against Women Act, before the 106th Congress adjourns. H.R. 1248 currently has 233 co-sponsors with strong bi-partisan support. The Violence Against Women Act was originally passed in 1994 as an amendment to the omnibus Crime Bill. The act authorized over a billion dollars to states for law- enforcement grants, judicial training, shelters, a national hotline, child abuse and prevention programs. Thousand of victims from every state, race, and socio-economic level have relied on these services for protection from violence for themselves and their children. We believe that VAWA has saved lives and helped to re-build even more. Without re- authorizing this program by its expiration in October of this year, every state risks losing millions of dollars for existing programs. As you may recall, the Congressional Caucus for Women's Issues met with you earlier this year to discuss this bill, which remains one of our top priorities. The bill passed the House Judiciary Committee by voice vote. Several key amendments were added and approved by the full Committee, but the bill has yet to reach the House floor. As you know, jurisdiction over the re-authorization bill is also held by the Committee on Education and Workforce and the Committee on Commerce. We urge you to schedule a vote by the full House before the end of this session. Sincerely, Carolyn B. Maloney and 81 others.

Mrs. MALONEY of New York

Mrs. MALONEY of New York. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from New York (Mr. Crowley) for yielding the time to me. Mr. Speaker, I commend the gentleman's leadership on this issue and so many others. I rise in support of this resolution, which reaffirms our Nation's commitment to the Northern Ireland peace process and expresses our strong support for the policing recommendations of the Patten Commission. Mr. Speaker, I thank very much the author of this bill, the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Neal), a long-term leader of the Irish Caucus, and the gentleman from New York (Chairman Gilman) of the Committee on International Relations for his staunch and strong support. Many of the Members of the Irish Caucus have already spoken, and it shows the strong bipartisan support that has come together on this issue. It has been well over 2 years since the Good Friday Agreement was signed and Northern Ireland has come a long way toward a lasting peace acceptable to all sides. That agreement was supported first and foremost by the people of Northern Ireland, Britain and Ireland itself. With such broad support, the peace process has been able to withstand numerous attacks and remain on track. Nevertheless, there still are a number of obstacles that stand in the way of a permanent peace, and one of the most significant hurdles is the effective implementation of the policing recommendations developed by the Patten Commission. Everyone agrees that police reform needs to take place, and accountability needs to be part of it. The gentleman from New York (Mr. King), my colleague, outlined many of the abuses and why this is such a deep-felt proposal by so many of the people. The recommendations were supported by all sides, but with one condition, that all of the recommendations were completely implemented. In this way both sides could be assured that final policing arrangements were fair to everyone. Unfortunately, although they were issued over a year ago, these recommendations have yet to be implemented. Legislation proposed in the British parliament fails to include all of the recommendations and nationalists in Northern Ireland have expressed their displeasure with this bill. Mr. Speaker, I end by commending the President of the United States, George Mitchell and many others who have worked hard for this peace accord; and I really urge complete and total adoption of this resolution.

Mrs. MALONEY of New York

Mrs. MALONEY of New York. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this time. Here we go again. Although this session is about to wrap up, the attacks on reproductive health care keep coming. Today, we have a motion that strips away local control over school-based health clinics. My dear friends and colleagues on the other side of the aisle constantly talk about the importance of local control. These clinics are currently run by communities, and they are not asking for interference by the Federal Government. But this motion steps in and prohibits school-based health clinics from dispensing emergency contraception. What we are talking about is not an abortion pill. What we are talking about is a contraception pill that a young woman can take the morning after an evening where she may have had an emergency situation, such as rape or incest. Why should Congress make this decision for every single community and every single school and every single child? If my colleagues believe in local control, vote ``no,'' and for many other reasons. Announcement by the Speaker Pro Tempore

Mrs. MALONEY of New York

Mrs. MALONEY of New York. Mr. Speaker, I rise to pay tribute to Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan. On behalf of my colleagues, Jimmy Walsh and other Members of the New York delegation, I welcome Mrs. Moynihan, Elizabeth Moynihan, who is with us in the gallery, and Senator Moynihan. He is one of our truly inspiring legislators. He has been a scholar, a legislator, an ambassador, a cabinet officer, a presidential adviser in four administrations, a witness, a teacher, a writer, and one of the best Senators ever to grace the Halls of this institution. He is unmatched in his ability to craft innovative solutions to society's most pressing problems, from welfare to Social Security, to transportation, to taxes. His legislative stamp is everywhere. Known as, and I quote the Almanac of American Politics, ``the Nation's best thinker among politicians since Lincoln, and its best politician among thinkers since Jefferson,'' Senator Moynihan has moved people through the power of his ideas. He is a unique figure in public life, a man of pure intellect who is unafraid of speaking inconvenient truths. Senator Moynihan's life exemplifies the American dream. He grew up in a slum known as Hell's Kitchen. Abandoned by his father, his mother became the sole supporter of the family during the Depression. Small wonder that Senator Moynihan grew up to be a strong voice on welfare issues. He recognized the danger of fostering a culture of dependency while understanding the importance of maintaining a strong safety net. He has proved to be one of the most accurate prophets of our era. Time after time, he has correctly predicted future consequences, even though many refused to believe him when his prediction ran counter to conventional wisdom. In the 1960s, he expressed concern about the disintegration of the African American family. In the 1980s, he predicted the coming collapse of the Soviet Union. In the 1990's, he expressed concern about the tendency of our society to define deviancy down. Antisocial behavior, he warns, is tolerated at our peril. For New Yorkers, Senator Moynihan has always been one of our homegrown heroes, our proud gift to the Nation. Despite his reputation for attention to the more scholarly pursuits, he authored 18 books. Senator Moynihan has never forgotten those of us who elected him. He is a hero to landmark preservationists for his effort to preserve the Custom House and the Farley Post Office, the new train station on the Farley site he helped plan and is continuing to fund, but it does not have a name yet. I believe it should be named for Daniel Patrick Moynihan. When the Coast Guard left Governors Island, he persuaded President Clinton to agree to give the island to New York for a dollar. I am hopeful that in the last days of this Congress, we will be able to make that pledge a reality. As ambassador to the United Nations, he denounced the resolution equating Zionism with racism. Seventeen years later, the U.N. reversed itself, revoking this shameful resolution. Senator Moynihan was a prime mover behind ISTEA, which changed the way highway and transportation funds are distributed. He is widely credited with shifting transportation priorities and making it possible for us to invest in alternatives like high speed rail. As a member of the Senate Finance Committee, he has been a guardian of Social Security; and most recently, he has focused his attention on the importance of opening up government filings and reducing secrecy in government. I was proud to have worked with him on the passage of the Nazi War Crimes Disclosure bill. After 50 years, Americans finally are beginning to get a glimpse of the things that our government knew. Senator Moynihan has also worked tirelessly on getting an accurate census for our country. Senator Moynihan's absence will make the Senate a poorer place. I am hopeful that he will remain in the public eye as a strong voice of public conscience. We need him and we will miss him, and my colleagues are here to join me in paying tribute to the great Senator from the great State of New York, Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan, a true American treasure. Mr. Speaker, I will place into the Record his biography and a list of his speeches. I also will place editorials and tributes that have appeared recently in the papers of our country, applauding the work and contributions of the great Senator from New York. Daniel Patrick Moynihan Daniel Patrick Moynihan is the senior United States Senator from New York. First elected in 1976, Sen. Moynihan was re- elected in 1982, 1988, and 1994. Sen. Moynihan is the Ranking Minority Member of the Senate Committee on Finance. He serves on the Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works and the Senate Committee on Rules and Administration. He also is a member of the Joint Committee on Taxation and the Joint Committee on the Library of Congress. A member of the Cabinet or sub-Cabinet of Presidents Kennedy, Johnson, Nixon and Ford, Sen. Moynihan is the only person in American history to serve in four successive administrations. He was U.S. Ambassador to India from 1973 to 1975 and U.S. Representative to the United Nations from 1975 to 1976. In February 1976 he represented the United States as President of the United Nations Security Council. Sen. Moynihan was born on March 17, 1927. He attended pubic and parochial schools in New York City and graduated from Benjamin Franklin High School in East Harlem. He went on to attend the City College of New York for one year before enlisting in the United States Navy. He served on active duty from 1944 to 1947. In 1966, he completed twenty years in the Naval Reserve and was retired. Sen. Moynihan earned his bachelor's degree (cum laude) from Tufts University, studied at the London School of Economics as a Fulbright Scholar, and received his M.A. and Ph.D. from Tufts University's Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy. Sen. Moynihan was a member of Averell Harriman's gubernatorial campaign staff in 1954 and then served on Gov. Harriman's staff in Albany until 1958. He was an alternate Kennedy delegate at the 1960 Democratic Convention. Beginning in 1961, he served in the U.S. Department of Labor as an assistant to the Secretary, and later as Assistant Secretary of Labor for Policy Planning and Research. In 1966, Sen. Moynihan became Director of the Joint Center for Urban Studies at Harvard University and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. He has been a Professor of Government at Harvard University, Assistant Professor of Government at Syracuse University, a fellow at the Center for Advanced Studies at Wesleyan University, and has taught in the extension programs of Russell Sage College and the Cornell University School of Industrial and Labor Relations. Sen. Moynihan is the recipient of 62 honorary degrees. Sen. Moynihan is the author or editor of 18 books. He most recent work is Secrecy: The American Experience, published in the fall of 1998, an expansion of the report by the Commission on Protecting and Reducing Government Secrecy. Sen. Moyniahn, as Chairman of the Commission, led the first comprehensive review in forty years of the Federal Government's system of classifying and declassifying information and granting clearances. Since 1976 Sen. Moynihan has published an analysis of the flow of funds between the Federal Government and New York State. In 1992 the analysis became a joint publication with the Taubman Center for State and Local Government at Harvard University, and includes all fifty states. Sen. Moynihan is a fellow of the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS). He was Chairman of the AAAS's section on Social, Economic and Political Science (1971-72) and a member of the Board of Directors (1972-73). He also served as a member of the President's Science Advisory Committee (1971-73). Sen. Moynihan was Vice Chairman (1971-76) of the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars. He served on the National Commission on Social Security Reform (1982-83) whose recommendations formed the basis of legislation to assure the system's fiscal stability. He was the founding Chairman of the Board of Trustees of the Hirshhorn Museum and Sculpture Garden (1971-85) and serves as Regent of the Smithsonian Institution, having been appointed in 1987 and again in 1995. In 1985, the Smithsonian awarded him its Joseph Henry Medal. In 1965, Sen. Moynihan received the Arthur S. Flemming Awards, which recognizes outstanding young Federal employees, for his work as ``an architect of the Nation's program to eradicate poverty.'' He has also received the International League of Human Rights Award (1975) and the John LaFarge Award for Interracial Justice (1980). In 1983, he was the first recipient of the American Political Science Association's Hubert H. Humphrey Award for ``notable public service by a political scientist.'' In 1984, Sen. Moynihan received the State University of New York at Albany's Medallion of the University in recognition of his ``extraordinary public service and leadership in the field for education.'' In 1986, he received the Seal Medallion of the Central Intelligence Agency and the Britannica Medal for the Dissemination of Learning. He has also received the Laetare Medal of the University of Notre Dame (1992), the Thomas Jefferson Award for Public Architecture from the American Institute of Architects (1992), and the Thomas Jefferson Medal for Distinguished Achievement in the Arts or Humanities from the American Philosophical Society (1993). In 1994, he received the Gold Medal Award ``honoring services to humanity'' from the National Institute of Social Sciences. In 1997, the College of Physicians and Surgeons at Columbia University awarded Sen. Moynihan the Cartwright Prize. He was the 1998 recipient of the Heinz Award in Public Policy ``for having been a distinct and unique voice in the century--independent in his convictions, a scholar, teacher, statesman and politician, skilled in the art of the possible.'' Elizabeth Brennan Moynihan, his wife of 44 years, is an architectural historian with a special interest in 16th century Mughal architecture in India. She is the author of Paradise as a Garden: In Persia and Mughal India (1979) and numerous articles. Mrs. Moynihan is a former Chairman of the Board of the American Schools of Oriental Research. She serves as a member of the Indo-U.S. Subcommission on Education and Culture, and the visiting committee of the Freer Gallery of Art at the Smithsonian Institution. She is Vice Chair of the Board of the National Building Museum, and on the Trustees Council of the Preservation League of New York State. personal Born March 16, 1927, Tulsa, OK. Three children, Timothy Patrick, Maura Russell, and John McCloskey; two grandchildren. Reside in Washington, D.C. on Pennsylvania Avenue and near Pindars Corners in Delaware County, Davenport, NY. public service Office of the Governor of the State of New York, W. Averell Harriman, Albany, NY, 1955-58 Speech writer, Assistant to Secretary Jonathan Bingham; Assistant Secretary for Reports, 1956; Acting Secretary, 1958. Special Assistant to the Secretary of Labor, Washington,

Mrs. MALONEY of New York

Mrs. MALONEY of New York. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks relating to this tribute to Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan.

Mrs. MALONEY of New York

Mrs. MALONEY of New York. Mr. Speaker, in the past few weeks, thousands of doctors from the frontline in the global fight to save women's lives were here in our Nation's Capital as part of the International Federation of Gynecologists and Obstetricians conference. Many of these doctors have launched a petition drive urging the President and all of us to end the onerous gag rule that impedes their ability to treat their patients. For these doctors, the death of some 600,000 women each year from pregnancy-related causes is not just a statistic. It represents their neighbors, their friends, their relatives, and their patients. It represents the fact that one out of every 48 pregnant women in their communities will not survive childbirth because of preventable complications. For these doctors, the fact that U.S. funding for international family planning and related reproductive health programs has declined 30 percent since 1995 has very real consequences. Last week, we heard from Dr. Friday Okonofua, a physician that heads the Action Health Research Center in Nigeria, about his fight to save women and children's lives. In Nigeria, 50,000 women die annually from pregnancy and childbirth complication, 20,000 of these deaths from unsafe abortions. This accounts for almost 10 percent of maternal deaths worldwide. We also heard from Dr. Godfrey Mbaruka, an ob-gyn in Tanzania. When he started working in rural Tanzania 14 years ago, he worked in a hospital where there were only two beds for delivery. Many women in his clinic would deliver babies on the floor. He saw that women were dying in conditions that could have easily been prevented, dying from bleeding during and after delivery, and from convulsions during labor and from anemia. He spoke about the simple changes that additional resources allowed him to make, such as training and basic supplies including contraceptives, that helped reduce maternal mortality in his clinic by 50 percent. However, this hospital could not sustain this improvement. Resources for reproductive health care started to fall in rural Tanzania, just at the time when an influx of refugees, some 500,000, of which 70 percent are women and children, further drained their resources. Then we heard from Dr. Enyantu Ifenne, a pediatrician from Nigeria, who spoke at the White House on World Health Day about the differences family planning makes in the lives of women in Nigeria. She spoke about an adolescent girl, Jemala, who was married at 12 and pregnant at 13. Jemala did not have access to desperately needed reproductive health care. She was in labor for 4 days and suffered life-altering damage. Jemala is not alone. Complications of pregnancy in childbirth are some of the leading causes of disability for women in developing countries. These are just a few stories, but there are countless others from Colombia to Kenya, from Nigeria to Nepal. Although these countries are very different from one another, what unites them is the fact that in each one women are dying needlessly because of the lack of access to effective family planning programs. Last November, Congress enacted the onerous global gag rule, which sought to stifle doctors and health providers from advocating for or against, with their own money, abortion reforms in their countries. The ob-gyns here in New York last week put it best when they said, ``We are at a loss to understand how it is that the U.S. is now exporting as a matter of foreign policy a position that may expose more women to unnecessary health risks.'' These doctors are calling on the United States to end the global gag rule because they cannot understand, as they said in their own words ``being subjected to such a policy that not only would never be tolerated within the United States, but would be unconstitutional if applied to citizens of America.'' Last week, we heard from Maria Isabel Plata, the executive director of Profamilia in Colombia, about how difficult it is to explain the gag rule to women in her country. In Colombia, unsafe abortion is the second leading cause of maternal mortality; and abortion is illegal, even in cases to save the life of the mother. Yet local organizations are afraid to talk to their policymakers about the impact of these laws on women's health. Ms. Plata told us that women in her country now view the United States as a Nation that believes in two types of women: first, those who have human rights, those who can freely debate laws and policies in their own country; and, second, Colombian women who do not have those same basic human rights. Mr. Speaker, for those who would question the value of U.S. dollars going overseas for family planning, for those of you who support the onerous global gag rule, I'd like you to consider the women of rural Tanzania; the adolescent girls from Nigeria; and all of the women around the world. On behalf of the doctors on the front-line for women and children's health around the world, let's restore funding for international family planning programs without unconstitutional gag rules.

Mrs. MALONEY of New York

Mrs. MALONEY of New York. Mr. Speaker, while there are still areas of this bill that need to be revised, I would like to commend the Conference Committee Members for including in this report $5 million for the Nazi War Crimes Disclosure Act's Interagency Working Group. This funding is vital to the work of the Interagency Working Group responsible for diligently reviewing documents regarding the atrocities of World War II and making those records available to the public. I applaud Senator DeWine for successfully securing this funding in the Senate version of the bill and then working with the Conference Committee to retain this funding. In 1994, I introduced the Nazi War Crimes and Disclosure Act with Chairman Steve Horn in the House and with the leadership of Senator DeWine in the Senate. After several hearings held by the Government Reform Committee and wide community support, this bill became law in 1998. Recently the Government Reform Committee, under the leadership of Chairman Horn, held a hearing to announce some of the findings from the Interagency Working Group's efforts. At this hearing, we heard first- hand how critical funding is to the future efforts of the Interagency Working Group as they begin reviewing classified documents regarding Japanese War Crimes. The Interagency Working Group has successfully released more than 1.5 million documents to the public. While this is an impressive accomplishment, the IWG has succeeded without the support of Congress. This has led to inadequate staff support and the inability to preserve and protect the deteriorating and crumbling documents. This conference report before us will be the first time Congress has stepped up to fully support the work of the Interagency Working Group. Already, significant new information about the Holocaust has been revealed in the more than 400,000 Office of Strategic Services records released by the Interagency Working Group at the National Archives this past June, but that is only the beginning. Without the support of historians and trained staff, we only have a small glimpse of the information contained in those documents. It is essential that the Archivist use all of the earmarked $5 million dollars which is authorized in this legislation for the explicit purpose of supporting the efforts of the Interagency Working Group so that they may restore decaying documents, afford historians and trained staff, and to help the Archives make these documents available to the public. The report before us contains $14 million more for the National Archives than the previously passed House version. It is my understanding that this increase was included to provide adequate funding for this expenditure. I therefore urge my colleagues to preserve this provision in the bill and support the vital work of the Interagency Working Group. While there is still a lot of debate surrounding the Legislative Branch/Treasury Postal Appropriations conference report before us today, and there are many issues that must still be resolved, I rise to highlight two specific provisions in this bill that I strongly support. First, I am proud that this conference report contains a provision I authored which requires the Office of Personnel and Management to study the positive impact of providing federal employees with paid paternal leave. This study means progress! In May, I, along with Mr. Davis of Virginia, Mr. Hoyer of Maryland, and Mr. Gilman of New York, introduced H.R. 4567, the Federal Employees Paid Parental Leave Act of 2000. This bipartisan bill would give federal employees 6 weeks of paid parental leave for the birth or adoption of a child--a benefit that the majority of private sector employers already give their employees. Since we introduced the bill in May, I have heard from men and women across the country who have relayed their stories to me about the great impact this legislation would have on their families. They have told me that they will no longer be forced to make a choice: whether to stay home with an ill newborn or to put food on the table. In response to this overwhelming support, we have asked OPM to conduct a study to understand the important of providing paid parental leave to federal employees. This study will help us understand and quantify why H.R. 4567 is so important. It will also likely reveal that the federal government will become more competitive with the private sector by offering paid parental leave. It may also show that the government's recruitment efforts will be boosted and that the costs related to turnover and replacement will be greatly reduced. Finally, this study will conclude that the federal workforce can win back dedicated and qualified workers to the government if we offer a benefit that is already being offered by the majority of private sector companies. Everyone always says that the federal government should be run more like a business. This study will lay the foundation for the federal government to do just that. Let's keep this provision in the bill and show our federal employees that we care about them and support their families. I am also extremely pleased that we were able to find additional resources for this conference report to adequately fund the activities of the General Accounting Office. The funding included in this appropriation will guarantee that the GAO will be able to continue to produce the high quality, objective reports that we have come to expect. In recent years, the GAO has experienced severe budget cuts even as the demand for their services has grown. Since 1992, the GAO has been forced to reduce its workforce by 40%. Nonetheless, the quality of their work has never wavered. As a Member of the Government Reform Committee, I have frequently had the opportunity to see the GAO in action and have been constantly impressed by the quality and professionalism of their reports and testimony. Recently, the GAO's oversight of the decennial census has reminded me again of the fantastic, impartial work that the GAO consistently provides. I commend them for their work. I strongly believe that this agency is one of our best resources in the quest to make government run more efficiently. In fact, for every dollar invested in the GAO, taxpayers save more than $57. The funding included in this legislation will guarantee that the GAO will be able to hire necessary personnel to meet ever-increasing Congressional demands and continue to provide the services we have come to expect. I applaud the inclusion of these resources and hope that next year we can find the resources for the GAO without hurting the funding of the other agencies we rely on every day. Mr. Speaker, I strongly support these provisions included in the Conference Report. Even though other measures in this particular report will prevent me from supporting this bill, I look forward to working with my colleagues to retain these provisions and work toward a conference report that will have full support.

Mrs. MALONEY of New York

Mrs. MALONEY of New York. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of this motion. We have waited much too long to strengthen hate crime laws. This motion will expand the definition to include crimes motivated by gender, sexual orientation, and disability among the list of crimes considered as hate crimes. If criminals are motivated by bias, then prosecutors should have the ability to seek a higher penalty. I feel strongly about this because earlier this year over 50 women were beaten, surrounded, robbed, stripped in Central Park in my district. There is one thing all these victims had in common. They were from different countries, different ages, different races and religions but all of them were women. The mob went after these victims simply because they were women. Hate crimes create a climate of fear that keep a particular class of people from participating fully in society. As Americans, we cannot let this stand. This motion also includes my bill, the Hate Crimes Statistics Improvement Act, that requires the FBI to gather statistics about gender-based hate crimes as well. This is an incredibly important motion. We must all support it. It is important.

Mrs. MALONEY of New York

Mrs. MALONEY of New York. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of this important legislation which will improve the chances of parents trying to manage the transition from welfare to work. The underlying bill will significantly strengthen child support enforcement efforts and improve the lives of working families and their children. I am particularly pleased that this bill will improve the lives of thousands of women working hard to support themselves and their families on their own. This legislation will focus more of the funds collected from child support enforcement activities on the individuals who are actually owed the funds. Too often, in spite of our best efforts to continually improve enforcement activities, child support dollars often fail to reach the families and children who so desperately need them. This change will ensure that single mothers receive an additional $3.5 billion over the next five years. This marks yet another important improvement in child support enforcement activities. I am extremely proud that the Clinton Administration and Congress have made so many significant strides in this arena. Last year, we collected over $16 billion in child support-- more than twice the amount collected in 1992. In 1992, I introduced the Child Support and Enforcement Improvements Act which was designed to improve the ability of states to collect overdue child support payments. Many of the provisions of that bill were included in the 1996 Welfare Reform legislation and have helped child support collections continue to rise. I am proud we have been able to use innovative ways to improve collections including new efforts to redirect tax refund dollars which have resulted in $1.3 billion in additional collections, and programs to match delinquent parents with financial records which have also yielded $3 billion since last August. This legislation is another important step in the effort to ensure that all Americans fulfill their responsibilities as parents. It will help families achieve independence and ensure that more children grow up in safe, stable households. I urge all of my colleagues to support this common-sense legislation today.