Carolyn Maloney

Mrs. MALONEY of New York

Mrs. MALONEY of New York. Mr. Chairman, I rise today to speak against this ill-conceived legislation that hurts working American families. This legislation will prevent the Department of Labor from issuing common-sense, scientifically-based workplace safety standards. These reasonable standards will ensure that workplace safety guidelines are in place to prevent increasingly common workplace injuries. More than 647,000 Americans suffer serious injuries and illnesses due to musculo-skeletal disorders each year. There injuries are currently costing businesses $15 to $20 billion annually in workers' compensation costs. Tragically, these injuries disproportionately affect women workers. Although women make up 46 percent of the workforce and 33 percent of those injured, 63 percent of repetitive motion injuries happen to women. Women experience 70 percent of carpal tunnel syndrome injuries that result in lost work time. This is unacceptable and we must act now to prevent these injuries. Americans who are willing to work hard each day to support themselves and their families deserve reasonable standards to prevent workplace injuries. Many of the workers who will be covered by these common sense guidelines often work more than one job just to make ends meet. They work long hours loading trucks, moving boxes, and delivering packages. Their jobs aren't easy, but they are willing to show up every day and do their best. The last thing these hard-working Americans want is to get hurt. These sensible standards will keep them on the job and prevent costly workplace injuries. Opponents of these common-sense guidelines claim that they will ``regulate every ache and pain in the workplace''. This is simply not true. These standards will only ensure that companies make someone responsible for ergonomic standards and that employees are not afraid to report these injuries. This is hardly an overwhelming request. Lets eliminate this language today and give hard- working Americans the chance to avoid these career threatening injuries. I would also like to register my support for the additional resources requested by the Administration for the National Labor Relations Board and OSHA. These agencies are doing everything possible to improve the health and safety of the workplace. We should support their efforts. I urge all of my colleagues to stand with hard-working Americans and to oppose this harmful legislation.

Mrs. MALONEY of New York

Mrs. MALONEY of New York. Mr. Speaker, in 7 out of 10 families, both parents work. The supply of day care is not adequate to the need. In New York City alone, over 37,000 families are on the waiting list for subsidized day care. Yesterday, I joined Vice President Gore, Mrs. Gore, and Rosie O'Donnell at a day care center in my district where Vice President Gore outlined his plans to expand access and quality of day care. Vice President Gore would help parents afford child care by expanding the child care tax credit for families with two working parents and where one parent stays at home. He would increase the child care development block grant so that more families could afford child care. His Ready to Learn plan would provide funding for States that develop better training and raise standards. Mr. Speaker, difficult challenges require creative solutions. The Vice President's plan, his 4-year plan, would expand affordable, available, quality day care.

Mrs. MALONEY of New York

Mrs. MALONEY of New York. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize Esther Kim and Kay Poe of the US Taekwondo team, who recently participated in the U.S. Olympic Taekwondo Trials in Colorado Springs, Colorado. Ms. Kim and Ms. Poe deserve this body's special recognition for their outstanding display of courage and sportsmanship. Ms. Poe was set to fight her best friend Esther Kim, whom she has known for thirteen years, in the final match of the tournament, when Ms. Kim then made a most monumental decision, which will undoubtedly affect the lives of both taekwondo stars forever. Knowing that Ms. Poe was injured and unable to fight competitively, Ms. Kim forfeited the women's flyweight championship match and title in honor of her best friend. Ms. Kim's ``bow down'' ended her chances of competing for the U.S. in Sidney this September at the Olympic Games. Mr. Speaker, this action clearly demonstrates Ms. Kim's courage and conviction, as well as her indescribable admiration and love for a friend. Ms. Kim believed that Ms. Poe had worked harder at the sport and deserved the opportunity to represent her country. Poe was seeded number one in the world, while Ms. Kim was ranked tenth. Rather then dishonoring her best friend by defeating an injured opponent, Ms. Kim chose to respect not only Ms. Poe's ability in the sport, but her determination in defeating her semi-final opponent after suffering an injury. The Olympic Games are a pillar for international unity, as a plethora of athletic ambassadors compete for a chance to bring back a medal of outstanding athletic achievement for their respective nations. The U.S. teams' goals are very similar, in that our athletes make great sacrifices, with the hope that their efforts will be rewarded with a medal that can be brought back to our grateful nation. Ms. Kim's father, Mr. Jin, who trained both Ms. Poe and Ms. Kim was honored by his daughter's decision. He believed that both athletes emerged victorious, as they worked together in honoring the team's final Olympic birth. I salute Ms. Poe and Ms. Kim for their dedication and sacrifice and I ask my colleagues to join me in commending both Esther Kim and Kay Poe for their efforts at the U.S. Olympic Taekwondo Trials in Colorado Springs, Colorado.

Mrs. MALONEY of New York

Mrs. MALONEY of New York. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Moakley) for yielding me this time. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the rule and in support of PNTR, a vote that is good for New York and the United States and an important step in integrating China with the West. China will enter the WTO regardless. This vote opens China to U.S. exports. Our market is already open. This is about fairness. I believe that a vote for PNTR is also a vote to improve labor rights, human rights, and respect for the environment in China. Many opponents of PNTR have taken this floor to discuss indefensible violations of basic human rights that are now occurring in China. Opponents of PNTR argue that we should not give up the leverage of a yearly NTR vote; but for 20 years we have approved NTR, and these violations of human rights are still occurring. By granting PNTR, we allow for greatly increased interaction between China and the West. As one example, the ability to access the Internet over U.S. manufactured equipment could have a tremendous impact on the free flow of ideas in China. The fact is that China is unique. No other country has gone to such lengths to isolate itself for so many hundreds of years. PNTR presents a unique opportunity for us to get behind China's great wall and engage the Chinese people. Over time, PNTR will raise the standard of living of the people in China and its trading partners. From a national security point of view, a stable China and a forward- looking U.S.-China relationship is in the interest of the United States. Our allies in the region, including Korea, Japan, and Taiwan, favor China's entry into the WTO. The Dalai Lama himself, who knows quite a bit about Chinese oppression, favors China's entrance into the WTO and its integration into the world community. Change in China will take many years. I will vote for PNTR because it puts us on the right course morally and economically.

Mrs. MALONEY of New York

Mrs. MALONEY of New York. Mr. Chairman, I am truly displeased to have to rise in opposition to this bill. As the managers have stated, this legislation carries great importance for the transportation funding needs for the country going into the future. Nowhere is there a greater need for basic improvements in the transportation infrastructure than in the State of New York. The New York City region is operating with a transit network laid out in the 1930's, one that desperately needs to be modernized to serve the needs of a 21st century metropolis that is one of America's major assets in competing in the global economy. Unfortunately, this bill fails to provide adequate funding for two desperately needed projects in New York and rescinds funding for another important project. This continues a trend that the great Senator from New York, Daniel Patrick Moynihan, has documented for many years in his Fisc Reports, of New York State losing out on its share of Federal money. Mr. Chairman, the entire country knows that the benefits of the new economy have spurred a revival of New York in the last decade. The country knows this because tourism in New York City and New York State is exceeding all expectations. In the city itself, a booming high-tech sector has developed, known as Silicon Alley, which complements the city's many other highly attractive employment sectors. The end result of all this tourism generated by my colleagues' constituents and the booming New York economy is that an already antiquated transportation system is bursting at the seams. The State of New York has recognized this problem and is devoted to two critical transportation projects--the building of a full length 2d Avenue subway in Manhattan and the construction of the East Side connector that will benefit commuters entering the city from the East to Grand Central Station. One of the primary reasons for the building of these projects is to relieve crowding brought on by my colleagues' constituents as they come into the city to visit the East Side and attractions like St. Patrick's Cathedral, Rockefeller Center, and the many museums, such as the Met, Guggenheim, and the Museum of Modern Art--all which will be directly served by these needed infrastructure projects. The Lexington Avenue subway line on the East Side of Manhattan is already dangerously overburdened. The line is well beyond capacity during rush hour, to a point where overcrowding delays have reduced the hourly throughput on the Lexington line from a possible 30 to an actual 23 trains per hour. Furthermore it is vital that the 2d Avenue subway and East Side Access be funded in tandem. Without a full length 2d Avenue subway, much of the benefit to Long Island of the East Side Access Project will be lost and conditions for hundreds of thousands of New York City riders and Westchester commuters will actually be made worse. Without a full length 2d Avenue subway, both urban and suburban users will continue to be subjected to stultifying levels of elbow-to-rib crowding, often miserable or non-existent connections between services, and unreliable and unnecessarily long commuting times that burden both employers, commuters, and tourists. Leaders in New York like Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver have recognized the importance of improving this basic infrastructure and have included over $1 billion in the State budget for the 2d Avenue subway. Unfortunately, this bill severely underfunds both, granting only $10 million for the East Side Connector, which is not enough money to even build a fence around its construction site. Let me stress that these are smart mass transit projects. There is no more room for cars in the area. These projects will get people on trains and not add additional car pollution to the environment. As I said, this underfunding is the continuation of a trend that Senator Moynihan has well documented. In his most recent Fisc Report documenting 1998, he concluded that each citizen of New York pays $835 more into the Federal Government than she receives back in benefits. Our total statewide deficit is $15 billion. This bill exacerbates this imbalance by actually rescinding $60 million for the Farley Penn Station project in New York City. The Farley Station is critical to the development of Amtrak's high speed rail system, which is being perfected on the east coast. Eventually, this system is intended to benefit the entire country when fully deployed. Mr. Chairman I believe this bill does a disservice to New York State and New York City and I will oppose it.

Mrs. MALONEY of New York

Mrs. MALONEY of New York. Mr. Speaker, today I pay special tribute to the George K. Almiroudis Chian Geriatric Foundation, Ltd. on the occasion of their first honoree dinner. I also salute their guest of honor, His Eminence Metropolitan Dianysios of Chios, Psara and Oinousses. The mission of the George Almiroudis Chian Geriatric Foundation, Ltd. is to provide emotional, physical, financial and psychological, support to Hellenic American senior citizens residing in senior residencies and nursing homes in the United States. This foundation will also support the residents of the Zorzis Mihalinos Nursing Home of Chios. This year, at their first annual dinner, the Foundation will honor Metropolitan Dionysios of Chios, Psara and Oinousses, born in Kalimeriani in Evoia. In 1952 he was ordained deacon and in 1956 he received his Bachelors Degree in Theology from the Theological University of Athens. For eight years he served as Archdeacon at the Metropolis of Athens and in 1960 was ordained a priest. His Eminence Metropolitan Dionysios chose an eclectic education and mission within the priesthood. He attended Athens Law School and from 1960 to 1978 served in the Navy, teaching at the Training School of Non-Commissioned Officers of Poros and Naustathmos, and Salamina. He also served as the General Director of the Directorate of Religion of the Armed Forces of Greece. On November 6, 1979 Archbishop Serafim of Greece ordained him Metropolitan of Chios, Psara and Oinousses at the Metropolis of Athens. Metropolitan Dionysios has participated in various ecclesiastical missions and conferences in Greece and abroad, and was recognized for his services with many awards and medals of honor. He also served as a Supervisor at the Metropolises of Mytilini, Eressos, Plomaria, Samos, Ikaria and Korsei where he developed many diverse activities in the pastoral and philanthropic areas. He has also authored many books on ethic/religious, spiritual and ecclesiastical topics. Mr. Speaker, I salute the life and work of Metropolitan Dionysios and ask my fellow Members of Congress to join me in recognizing his contributions to humanity.

Mrs. MALONEY of New York

Mrs. MALONEY of New York. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in strong support of the Moakley Amendment. This body has already had this fight and we have won. Last August, the House voted to finally stop funding School of the Americas, and I quote, ``None of the funds appropriated or otherwise made available by this Act may be used for programs at the United States Army School of the Americas located at Fort Benning, Georgia.'' The effort to rename the school without changing its essential role is nothing more than a public relations scheme. Remember, this is an organization whose roster of graduates reads like a Who's Who of human rights violators: 19 of 26 Salvadoran officers accused of the 1989 massacre of the Jesuits, 10 of 12 cited for the El Mozote massacre, 2 of 3 officers cited in the assassination of Archbishop Romero, and the list goes on and on. More importantly, we have heard from the people. Their voices are smaller and their speeches are not as polished, but these are the people who have suffered from this scandalous school and they deserve to be heard. A name change will do nothing to improve the human rights record of this misguided institution. I urge my colleagues resist this obvious scheme and support the Moakley amendment.

Mrs. MALONEY of New York. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the Sanchez amendment. Mr. Chairman, here we go again. This is the 145th vote on choice since the beginning of the 104th Congress. I have documented each of these votes in my choice scorecard, which is available on my website: www.house.gov/maloney. This common-sense amendment offered by Ms. Sanchez, lifts the ban on privately funded abortions at U.S. military facilities overseas. It is bad enough that current law prohibits a woman from using her own funds at all military facilities overseas to get an abortion. But I want to point out although there is an exception when a woman's life is in danger, abortion is not even covered for cases of rape and incest. How can anyone interfere with a woman's right to choose under these extreme circumstances? Just this week, the Supreme Court ruled that a woman who is raped is not entitled to sue in Federal court for civil damages. Too often in our society, women who are raped are victimized a second time by the judicial system. Failure to pass this amendment doubly victimizes a women who is raped. Why doesn't this Republican majority take rape seriously? I believe that the underlying law is discriminatory. While a woman may serve overseas defending our Constitutional rights, and defending our freedom, this Republican-led Congress is busily working to undermine hers. I cannot think of a men's medical procedure that is not covered. I cannot imagine a situation where a man would be told that a certain medical procedure was prohibited at overseas military hospitals. In fact, when the drug Viagra came on the market, DoD quickly decided to cover it. This amendment is simple. This amendment will not cost the Federal Government one dime. This amendment is about fairness. This amendment simply allows privately funded abortions at U.S. military facilities overseas. This amendment protects women's rights. I urge a ``yes'' vote on the Sanchez amendment.

Mrs. MALONEY of New York

Mrs. MALONEY of New York. Mr. Speaker, today I pay special tribute to an exceptional independent school in the New York Metropolitan Area as it celebrates its 100th Anniversary. The Loyola School is a prime example of independent and progressive education at its best. Loyola school is an institution filled with rich history. It was founded by a most visionary educator, The Reverend Neil McKinnon, S.J. In October of 1900, McKinnon, Pastor of the Parish and founding Principal of the school, opened the door to eight young men of various ages and academic readiness. Since its conception 100 years ago, the school has survived and thrived through its early days of struggle, the depression, two World Wars, rising educational costs, and the struggle to maintain the ever important Jesuit tradition. Throughout its history the school has overcome a century filled with challenges in order to encourage and establish the highest of educational and religious standards. The Loyola School strives to provide every student with an excellent education complimented by diverse and enriching extra-curricular activities. Loyola is nationally recognized as a School of Excellence and regionally respected as one of the finest independent schools in the Metropolitan area. They enjoy success in sports, both old and new. To complement the success of the staff and students, the school also enjoys a growing endowment and an expanded faculty. All of these factors have proven successful to the students. In addition to the excellence of the staff and student body, Loyola school also enjoys the convenience of new network wiring and learning curriculum to incorporate technology into a vibrant and interesting juxtaposition of traditional heritage and forward-thinking education. Loyola's rich history provides the school with a promising future. The school now educates some 200 of the brightest boys and girls in a comprehensive program which works to mold its young individuals into conscious, competent and compassionate graduates. Their hope is to enrich students with intellectual ability, religious clarity, and a commitment to justice. The graduates of Loyola move forward armed with the ``strength from the past and faith in the future.'' I ask my colleagues to join me in commending the faculty, students and individuals involved in creating and maintaining the standard of excellence at The Loyola School.

Mrs. MALONEY of New York

Mrs. MALONEY of New York. Mr. Speaker, I support this bill The exploitation of our world's girls and young women in sex trafficking is a tragic human rights offense. Many of these women are kidnaped, sold, or tricked into brothel captivity. And this does not happen just in countries miles away form our own. Each year women from all over the world are brought into the United States, for the sole purpose that they be bought and sold by American citizens for commercial sex. I am happy to see that Congress is addressing this issue. It is important that we protect the victims of the sex trade industry, and punish the predators that exploit the women. This bill takes a significant step towards making a difference in the lives of women around the world. It authorizes 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. The bill establishes initiatives to prevent trafficking through education, and authorizes assistance to the native countries of sex trafficked victims to help stop the industry. And by establishing new criminal provisions and increasing penalties for traffickers this bill punishes traffickers for profiting from the victimization of women. Of course there is more that needs to be done to stop the many human rights abuses inflicted on women around the world. Preventing the trafficking of women is an important step in stopping the booming sex trade industry. I commend the Representative from New Jersey for this legislation and I join with him and urge a ``yes'' vote on this bill.

Mrs. MALONEY of New York

Mrs. MALONEY of New York. Mr. Speaker, today I pay special tribute to John J. McCarthy, C.P.P. on the occasion of his 90th birthday. Mr. McCarthy is an outstanding citizen of New York who has raised the city's quality of life and made great contributions to the criminal justice system. Mr. McCarthy has devoted much of his life to public safety and justice through the field of correctional services. As the Inspector General of the State of New York Department of Correctional Services, Mr. McCarthy was responsible for the prevention of corruption, escapes and smuggling, among other duties within the department. Before he was named Inspector General, Mr. McCarthy was the Director of the Bureau of Special Services of the State of New York Division of Parole. He has lectured at various police parole, correctional and training facilities throughout New York State. As an active member of the community, Mr. McCarthy has contributed greatly to the quality of life and safety of neighborhoods like Gramercy Park, Peter Cooper Village, Stuyvesant Town, and the 23rd Street vicinity in Manhattan. In fact, the First Deputy Commissioner of the New York City Police Department has said that the unprecedented reduction in crime in this area could not have been achieved without Mr. McCarthy's long-term involvement and support. Mr. McCarthy spent four years overseas during his military service. He served in the United States Army and the United States Air Force during World War II as an Intelligence Non-Commissioned Officer, a First Sergeant, Intelligence Officer, Provost Marshall and a Company Commander. He also served as the Chief of Police and Security of the War Department in the occupied enemy territory of East Africa. When he left the armed forces, Mr. McCarthy was a First Lieutenant. Mr. McCarthy is a graduate of New York University (1955), and he holds M.A. and M.F.A. degrees from New York University (1956, 1959). Mr. McCarthy also graduated from the Federal Bureau of Investigation's National Academy. Mr. Speaker, I salute the life and work of Mr. John J. McCarthy and I ask my fellow Members of Congress to join me in recognizing Mr. McCarthy's contributions to the New York community and to our country.

Mrs. MALONEY of New York

Mrs. MALONEY of New York. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me the time. Mr. Speaker, as co-chair of the Congressional Caucus for Women's Issues, I rise in strong support of this bill and congratulate my colleagues who have been leaders on this issue on both sides of the aisle, the gentleman from New York (Mr. Lazio), the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Eshoo), the gentlewoman from California (Mrs. Capps), the gentlewoman from Missouri (Ms. Danner), the gentlewoman from North Carolina (Mrs. Myrick) and the gentlewoman from Connecticut (Ms. DeLauro). Some of them have come to the floor today and shared their personal experiences that have highlighted the important need for this bill. This particular bill is one of the top priorities of the Women's Caucus, and we urge its passage. The Center for Disease Control's National Breast and Cervical Cancer Early Detection Program provides screening services for low-income people who have little or no health insurance. But for many women who find that they have cancer from this important screening program, there is no guarantee of complete and comprehensive treatment. This bill underscores the need for the uninsured and it underscores the fact that many, many women and, actually, many men cannot afford treatment. It is clear that much more needs to be done to provide coverage. The bill, H.R. 4386, the Breast and Cervical Cancer Treatment Act, will help low-income women find resources to combat and, hopefully, cure cancer. I am a proud cosponsor of this legislation, and I encourage its swift enactment. It will save thousands and thousands of lives.

Mrs. MALONEY of New York

Mrs. MALONEY of New York. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay special tribute to the Lexington Democratic Club, a very special and important democratic organization in the Upper East Side of Manhattan. Over the fifty-one years of the club's existence, Mr. Speaker, the members of the Lexington Democratic Club have forged a more democratic, more inclusive form of civic participation in New York City. The ``Lex Club'' was the first Reform Club in Manhattan. Driven by the belief that openness and public deliberation are the key ingredients for a healthy democracy, the Lexington Democratic Club blazed a trail for opponents of top- down, closed-door decision making in the political process. Decisions at the Club are made at open meetings of the membership and patronage positions have been replaced with merit-based nomination systems. Furthermore, Mr. Speaker, the Lexington Democratic Club led the way in reforming the system for judicial appointments in New York. The Club spearheaded the creation of a system where independent experts screen applicants and recommend three candidates to the club for every open judicial seat. The Club then endorses a final candidate through open meetings. The Lexington Democratic Club has been graced with dynamic leaders since its inception. Jack Baltzell and Alice Sachs were the very first Reform District Leaders in the city and they helped make the reform movement a major political force in New York. Ken Mills, the current President of the Lex Club, has increased membership in the club, tripled its financial resources, and managed the club's monthly newsletter. More importantly, Mr. Mills has led the club's major civic efforts--including the successful election of candidates and the mobilization of major tenant protests against plans to abolish the city's rent control laws. In short, Ken Mills, aided by Niki Stern, the club's Executive Vice President, and all the club's members, has revitalized the Lex Club and returned it to its place as one of the most prestigious civic organizations in the city. Mr. Speaker, I salute the Lexington Democratic Club of Manhattan and I ask my fellow Members of Congress to join me in recognizing the great contributions of the club's membership to the New York community and to our democracy.

Mrs. MALONEY of New York

Mrs. MALONEY of New York. Mr. Speaker, today, I celebrate John Cardinal O'Connor. It is my deepest hope that Cardinal O'Connor's wise, charitable, and dynamic legacy of leadership becomes a standard for all future New York City Cardinals. Cardinal O'Connor had an extraordinary capacity to speak to New York's many diverse communities--to both comfort and inspire. The Cardinal cast light on our City's most pressing problems, and then showed us what needed to be done, particularly for homelessness, the AIDS crisis, and condition of the poor. In the past months, many people learned that Cardinal O'Connor often anonymously volunteered in AIDS clinics. We may never know the other people and place Cardinal O'Connor selflessly aided. We can only assume that his actions were innumerable and always compassionate. Cardinal O'Connor was a great leader and a friend of all leaders in our city. More than one mayor told me they often consulted with him on how to handle their work and to respond to the challenges of leading the City. He received almost every award his Church and City could bestow on him.

Mrs. MALONEY of New York

Mrs. MALONEY of New York. Mr. Speaker, today I pay special tribute to Deborah Kaplan, Esq. Ms. Kaplan is a dedicated lawyer who has worked tirelessly for a more just and humane society and an improved quality of life for countless New Yorkers. Ms. Kaplan contributes greatly to the New York justice system in her current position as a Principal Court Attorney in the office of the Honorable Juanita Bing Newton, Deputy Chief Administrative Judge for Justice Initiatives. Ms. Kaplan has also guided many litigants toward fair and just resolutions of grievances as an arbitrator for the Small Claims Court of the City of New York. As a Senior Trial Attorney for the Criminal Defense Division of The Legal Aid Society, Ms. Kaplan is committed to helping those with the greatest need for knowledgeable legal representation. As a former president of the Brooklyn Women's Bar Association and a committee member for the First Department Committee on Character and Fitness of Applicants for Admission to the Bar, Ms. Kaplan has further dedicated herself to enhancing the quality and character of the legal profession. Ms. Kaplan consistently displays displays a deep concern for the New York community. She serves as vice chair of the Community Advisory Council at Beth Israel Medical Center, serves as chair of the Health, Human Services Committee of Community Planning Board Six, and participates with the New York City Board of Education as a Statewide Mock Trial Coach. In recognition of her outstanding contributions to the New York community and to the legal profession, Ms. Kaplan has received, among many, the Orion S. Maraden Award and the Honorable Sybil Hart Keeper Award. On May 5-7, 2000, Ms. Kaplan will be installed as the President of the Women's Bar Association of the State of New York. Mr. Speaker, I salute the life and work of Ms. Deborah Kaplan, Esq., and I ask my fellow Members of Congress to join me in recognizing her contribution to the legal profession and the New York community.

Mrs. MALONEY of New York

Mrs. MALONEY of New York. Mr. Speaker, as a proud member of the Congressional Caucus on Armenian Issues and the representative of a large and vibrant community of Armenian Americans, some of whom lost their loved ones in the genocide, I rise today to join my colleagues in the sad commemoration of the Armenian Genocide. I would like to thank my colleagues and cochairs of the Armenian Caucus, the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Pallone) and the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Porter), for their dedication and their hard work on this issue and other issues of human rights. Today, we pause to remember the tragedy of the Armenian Genocide. More than 1.5 million Armenians were systematically murdered at the hands of the young Turks and more than 500,000 more were deported from their homes. Monday, April 24, will mark the 85th anniversary of the beginning of the Armenian genocide. It was on that day in 1915 that more than 200 Armenian religious, political, and intellectual leaders were arrested in Constantinople, now Istanbul, and killed. This was the beginning of a brutal, organized campaign to eliminate the Armenian presence from the Ottoman Empire that lasted for more than 8 years, but Armenians are strong people, and their dreams of freedom did not die. More than 70 years after the genocide, the new Republic of Armenia was born as the Soviet Union crumbled. Today, we pay tribute to the courage and strength of a people who would not know defeat; yet independence has not meant an end to their struggle. There are still those who question the reality of the Armenian slaughter. There are those who have failed to recognize its very existence; and my colleague, the gentleman from California (Mr. Sherman) spoke earlier about efforts at UCLA to buy a chair that would really focus its time and attention to erasing the existence of this horrible occurrence. I join him in applauding UCLA and other institutions that have turned down this request to put forward a lie. As a strong supporter of human rights, I am dismayed that the Turkish government continues to deny the systemic killing of 1.5 million Armenians in their country. We must not allow the horror of the Armenian genocide to be either diminished or denied, and we must continue to speak out and preserve the memory of the Armenian loss. We can never let the truth of this tragedy be denied. Nothing we can do or say will bring back those who perished. But we can hold high the memories with everlasting meaning by teaching the lessons of the Armenian genocide to future generations. We will not forget. We will continue to bring this to the floor every single year. We will not forget.

Mrs. MALONEY of New York

Mrs. MALONEY of New York. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to claim the special order time of the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. McGovern).

Mrs. MALONEY of New York

Mrs. MALONEY of New York. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to protest the House leadership's continued refusal to enact reasonable gun safety legislation. We are now one week from the first anniversary of the tragedy at Columbine. But instead of reasonable legislation that requires child- safety locks on all guns, closes the gun show loophole, and bans large- capacity clips the Republican leadership is putting forward a limited half-measure that will only help six states. Does the Republican leadership truly believe that only children in those states deserve to be protected from gun violence? Mr. Speaker, this legislation will do nothing for the victims of gun violence in my state. It will not help the thousands of New Yorkers who are victims of gun violence. It will do nothing to prevent criminals from buying guns at gun shows. It will do nothing to prevent another six year-old from bringing an unlocked gun to school. Mr. Speaker, before another child dies from senseless gun violence we must take action. I implore the leadership of the Congress to move forward with reasonable gun-safety legislation.

Mrs. MALONEY of New York

Mrs. MALONEY of New York. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Illinois. I think what he just said he said it beautifully. Added to his words are Senator John McCain who recently exhibited the kind of leadership all Members of Congress should emulate, when he urged all Americans to fill out the entire census form.

Mrs. MALONEY of New York. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Davis), a member of the Census Subcommittee of the Committee on Government Reform. He has been fighting for an accurate census through two threatened government shutdowns and a flood relief bill held hostage. He fought against the designation of the census as an emergency. The census has been around since the beginning of our Nation, and he fought every day to get the funding for the census. He is continuing as one of our outstanding leaders for a complete and accurate count. I thank him for all of his hard work.

Mrs. MALONEY of New York. I congratulate certain Members of the other body who are urging everybody to fill out the form. Announcement by the Speaker Pro Tempore

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 on the subject of my special order today.

Mrs. MALONEY of New York. Mr. Speaker, I would like to remind the House that many of the questions are essentially the same questions approved by former President Ronald Reagan and President Bush, except that they are less than the questions in 1990. I would ask some of my more conservative Members to think about that before they criticize the census. In the information age, we need reliable information in order to make good decisions for this Nation. Some Members of Congress must be stuck in the 18th century. They do not seem to want to know how America is doing. Without good data, you cannot administer the laws of this country fairly. Their comments are rash and inappropriate. The good news for the census is that the Census Bureau is following the law. It will try to get the long form questions answered, because the professionals at the bureau do what the law says, the law Congress passes. They go out and try to get an accurate picture of this country and report back to Congress. I guess we now know why the 2000 census was designated an emergency in last year's budget. We just did not know that some Members of Congress were the ones who would be creating the emergency. On average, the long form takes a little over half an hour to complete. Only information needed to manage or evaluate government programs is collected by the census. Just a half an hour every 10 years for good data on your country, a photograph of where your country is going. The short form just takes several minutes, just several minutes to be a good citizen. $180 billion a year in Federal money depends on census data. That is close to $2 trillion over the decade. Clearly that is reason enough to fill out the long form which, by the way, goes to only one in six American households. As I said, Members should remember that they were informed of the questions that would be in the census over 2 years ago. Every single Member got a book that had every question, they had the reason for the question, and they had the congressional law that required it. They had an opportunity to criticize or complain then. But that time has passed. Now is the time to urge everyone to participate in this civic ceremony together as one Nation. It is your future. Do not leave it blank. Please fill out the form. Mr. Speaker, I include for the Record a series of editorials across the country from Seattle to Washington, Sacramento, Palm Beach, Minneapolis, Atlanta; David Broder in the Washington Post; Gail Collins, New York Times; Los Angeles, USA Today, Atlanta Journal; along with many, many other articles that have come out in support of being good citizens and filling out the long form, being part of an accurate census. [From the Seattle Times Company, March 29, 2000] Overly Overwrought About the 2000 Census On any given day, citizens are bombarded with dozens of legitimate, stress-producing worries. The U.S. Census Bureau, even its much-maligned long-form questionnaire, ought not be one of them. Census questionnaires have been mailed to 120 million American households. The seven-question short form was sent to most households; a longer, more-detailed, 52-question form was delivered to one in six households. Then the yowling began--The Snoops! The invasion of privacy! The complaints are nine parts hype, one part hooey. Two important developments have occurred since the last census was taken in 1990. The long form got shorter by four questions, and talk radio got louder. In fairness to those with census jitters, more people nowadays are concerned about personal privacy. Frequent calls by solicitors and marketing companies wear down a person's patience and goodwill. Remember, though, the census is the head count prescribed by the Constitution. The people who make money by whipping up fear--and those who buy into it--substitute paranoia for logic. The loudest concerns focus on question 31 on the long form, which asks people to report wages, salaries, commissions, bonuses or tips from jobs. This is not a scary question. The federal government, the Internal Revenue Service, already knows the answer for individuals. The Census Bureau is looking for data to report in the aggregate. Before people allow themselves to be whipped into an unnecessary froth, remember the manner in which the data is reported. It is much like a series of USA Today headlines, ``We're older,'' ``We're more mobile, more diverse'' and so on. The census doesn't announce that Joe Dokes at 123 Pine Street does or says anything. Nor does the Census Bureau share personal information with other agencies. The questions provide a telling snapshot of America and help determine how large pots of tax dollars are spent on social programs, highways and mass transit, and how congressional seats are distributed among the states. Smile. A big family portrait is being painted with numbers. Nothing scary about that.

Mrs. MALONEY of New York. Mr. Speaker, I put a brief quote in from the Atlanta Journal Constitution on April 3. It says, ``Participation in the census may also be harmed by the political grandstanding it continues to inspire.'' Presidential candidate George W. Bush has criticized the long census sent to one in six American households as some sort of government intrusion on privacy. However, the Census Bureau takes very seriously its responsibility to keep individual responses absolutely confidential. Leakers inside will be sought out and prosecuted. And hackers on the outside have not been able to get in. If they were caught, they would be prosecuted. In fact, the Bureau is working with leading computer security experts to make sure its data remains untapped. Mr. Speaker, I include the entire article for the Record: [From the Atlanta Journal Constitution, Apr. 3, 2000] Constitution: Keep the Census From Becoming Political Fodder and Participate Roughly half of America's households did their civic duty and answered the U.S. Census Bureau's Year 2000 postal survey by its April 1 deadline. That level of participation is not nearly good enough if America is to get the accurate picture of itself essential to governing fairly and efficiently at local, state and federal levels. Fortunately, the bureau still has a ``final, final deadline'' for mail and e-mail replies. It's April 11, the day it will send out its enumerators to count Americans who didn't respond. So if you have yet to fill out your census form, please do so and mail it this week. Participation in the census may also be harmed by the political grandstanding it continues to inspire. Presidential candidate George W. Bush and Senate Majority Leader Trent Lott (R-Miss.) have criticized the long census--sent to one in six American households--as some sort of government intrusion on privacy. However, the Census Bureau takes very seriously its responsibility to keep individual census responses confidential. Leakers inside will be sought out and prosecuted, as will hackers on the outside. In fact, the bureau is working with leading computer-security experts to make sure its data remain untapped. Is this year's census survey exceptionally burdensome or intrusive, as its critics suggest? No, the questions on the long form are almost all similar to those asked in previous censuses, including the 1990 census conducted when Bush's father was president. And every question on this year's long form was presented to members of Congress for their comments two years ago. To find fault with those queries at this late date is a cheap shot. The information being gathered will be used to redraw political districts, calculate how government benefits like Medicare are to be shared equitably, and predict public needs such as mass transit, roads, libraries, schools, fire and police protection. Census figures from 1990 helped federal emergency officials determine quickly where shelters were most needed after Hurricane Andrew smashed south Florida in 1993. The alternative, as urged by Bush, Lott & Co., would be to operate government uninformed of its people's needs. Mr. Speaker, the next speaker is the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Millender-McDonald) a leader not only in the census but in the Women's Caucus. She is the co-chair of the Women's Caucus.

Mrs. MALONEY of New York. Mr. Speaker, our next speaker will be the gentleman from the 42nd Congressional District of California (Mr. Baca) the inland empire. But before he speaks, I would like to read a short quote from an editorial published in the Minneapolis Star Tribune on April 2. A handful of conservative lawmakers in Washington have come up with a creative response. They're urging constituents to simply ignore the questions they don't like. That's a cynical and irresponsible approach from elected officials who should know better. The census long form might be a nuisance, but there is no question that it provides useful, sometimes required, information for Federal agencies to allocate taxpayer's money for private scholars to conduct research and for the government to serve citizens more effectively. Mr. Speaker, I do not think anybody could have said it any better. Mr. Speaker, I include the following entire editorial for the Record: [From the Star Tribune, Apr. 2, 2000] Census Ruckus; Don't Boycott the Long Form One in six American households has received the Census Bureau's dreaded ``long form'' in recent weeks, and most are reacting to its 52 detailed questions with an understandable combination of patience, impatience and procrastination. But a handful of conservative lawmakers in Washington have come up with a more creative response. They're urging constituents to simply ignore the questions they don't like. That's a cynical and irresponsible approach from elected officials who should know better. The census long form might be a nuisance, but there is no question that it provides useful--sometimes required--information for federal agencies to allocate taxpayers' money, for private scholars to conduct important research and for the government to serve citizens more effectively. Senate Majority Leader Trent Lott has led the attack, arguing that the census questionnaire is overlong and intrusive. But the Census Bureau has added only one item since 1990, and it provided all the questions for congressional review two years ago, as required by law. Rep. Tom Coburn, R-Okla, says the questions are too personal. When pressed for an example last week, a Coburn aide cited a question about bathing habits. But it turns out that the question is actually about mental and physical disability. As a series of examples, the question asks whether the respondent has a disability severe enough to interfere with schooling, holding a job or conducting normal household activities such as eating and bathing. Granted, that's personal. But it's also a perfectly good example of the census' value. Washington hands out billions of dollars every year to disabled Americans, and every year skeptical lawmakers ask how many Americans are truly so disabled that they need government assistance. The same could be said for the billions of dollars that Washington spends every year on highways, parks, mortgage subsidies, tuition assistance and so forth. It would be irresponsible for Congress to spend the money without good data on the nation's housing stock, travel habits, recreation needs and educational deficiencies. And that says nothing about the small army of scholars who will dig into census data in coming years to conduct important research on health care, mobility, poverty, education and countless other subjects. Lott and Coburn say their constituents don't trust the Census Bureau to keep their answers confidential. But responsible leaders would not inflame groundless suspicions. They would remind their constituents of the Census Bureau's excellent 200-year records of vigorously protecting the confidentiality of personal information. What's most depressing about the Lott-Coburn critique is that it's one more effort to depict the government as an enemy of the people, not an extension of their will. Americans who want their government to function more effectively should support a thorough census. A sophisticated society cannot function without good information about itself. And for those busy souls who haven't labored through the long form yet, we trust they'll approach the task more responsibly than some of their leaders in Washington. Last Friday, the Senate passed a misguided Sense of the Senate resolution that will only encourage more Americans not to participate in this critically important civic ceremony. Ironically, many of the Senators raising questions also cosponsored an amendment offered by Senator Helms which would have asked every American what their marriage status was. Those Senators should realize that they cannot have it both ways. It is much too late to be raising these questions. At this time, I would like to read a few quotes from an editorial published in the Minneapolis Star-Tribune on April 2nd. A handful of conservative lawmakers in Washington have come up with a creative response. They're urging constituents to simply ignore the questions they don't like. that's a cynical and irresponsible approach from elected officials who should know better. The census long form might be a nuisance, but there is no question that it provides useful--sometimes required--information for Federal agencies to allocate taxpayer's money, for private scholars to conduct research, and for the government to serve citizens more effectively. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from California (Mr. Baca).