Carolyn Maloney

Mrs. MALONEY of New York

Mrs. MALONEY of New York. Mr. Speaker, this is census day plus 10. My message to the American people is, if they have not already filled out their form, please do so now and mail it in. Be part of this great civic ceremony. As of today, over 61 percent of Americans have responded to the census, with 39 percent to go. This is a critically important milestone for the 2000 Census, and I am extremely encouraged by the American people's effort and by the Census Bureau's transparent tabulation efforts. Just months ago, the General Accounting Office warned that the initial response rate for the 2000 Census might peak at 61 percent. Well, with 8 days still to spare, the 2000 Census has reached this point and forms continue to flow in daily. I am extremely heartened by the response thus far, and tonight I say to the remaining 39 percent, please complete your forms. Do it today. Put it in the mail. As always, this is our main message. Fill out your form today. Unfortunately, we have reached 61 percent despite the amazing comments of some of my Republican colleagues and even Members of the Republican leadership. With 39 percent of the American people still not heard from, we have Members of Congress who should all know better telling the American people that the census is optional. We have Members of Congress saying that they, and I quote, ``believe in voluntarily cooperating,'' end quote, with the government; but beyond that they will not follow the law. Since when did following the law in this country become a voluntary, optional thing? Others have compared the long form to a college exam where some questions can be skipped. Is it because some people do not know the answers? I certainly hope not. Do they want participation, or do they want to make participation optional? Last week, Census Director Ken Prewitt testified that the initial response rate for the long form has been almost 12 percent below the response rate for the households receiving the short form. This is almost double the differential from the 1990 census and could seriously threaten the accuracy of the final count. What is really disheartening is the fact that most of the questions on the long form have been around for decades. They were part of the Bush and Reagan census. Even more astonishing about this new-found concern about the census is that, over 2 years ago, the content of the long and short forms, while they were being finalized, absolutely every Member of Congress received a detailed list of the questions to be asked, including a description of the need for the asking of it, along with the specific legal requirements supporting it. Notification of Congress is required by title 13 for a very good reason, to prevent the very situation we face today, a census effort at risk because Members of Congress simply do not know or do not care about the importance of the census data. Members of Congress received this information with all of the questions in 1997 and 1998. I know that all of the Members who are complaining about the census got a copy. Did they not read their mail? The time for input on the questions was then, not now when they will do more harm than good. Even last week, the Republican leadership convened a press conference supposedly in support of the census. But they went on to urge Americans to skip questions they were uncomfortable with. Maybe the Republican leadership should be reminded that the questions asked by the census represent a balance between the needs of our Nation's communities and the need to keep the time and effort required to complete the form to a minimum. Only information required by Congress to manage or evaluate programs is collected by the census. Federal and State funds for schools, employment services, housing assistance, road construction, day care facilities, hospitals, emergency services, programs for seniors, and much more are distributed based on census figures. Also, the Census Bureau uses data acquired from the long form to establish the baseline for many of the economic reports they release year-round, including data on the Consumer Price Index and unemployment. Without accurate data, we would be forced to manage our economic policies with even less information than we currently have available. We should remember that the Census Bureau has gone to great efforts to make both the short and long forms as brief as possible. The 2000 Census short form contains eight questions, down from nine in 1990. The 2000 Census long form contains 53 questions, down from 57 in 1990, the shortest long form in decades. The only new question in the census, which was added with my support as part of welfare reform, asked for information on grandparents as care givers. I am a bit confused, too, because the same people who today are making such a fuss over the long form just 6 months ago tried to add a question to the short form which everyone has to complete. I have a series of editorials from around the country urging Americans to stand up and be counted for their communities, for their representation, for their distribution of Federal funds. I would like to put in the Record an editorial from the Daily News from New York City, the city that I am proud to represent. The editorial is as follows: Stand Up and Be Counted That's the slogan of Census 2000, and nowhere is that cry more urgent than in New York. Last time around--10 years ago--New Yorkers sat down. There was an undercount. And the state lost out on everything from political representation to new schools. New York, particularly New York City, must not let this happen again. The filing deadline came and went April 1. But the ``Be counted'' Web site doesn't shut down until tomorrow. So if you haven't returned your census form, take a few minutes (or a few seconds, if you have the eight-question short form) and do so. Now. And, please, try not to get your dander up about how nosy some of the questions seem to be. Answers on how you get to work and what time you leave each morning, for example, can be used by local officials for highway and mass-transit improvements. Nobody's tracking your movement. Other answers will aid in planning for health, housing, education, employment, police and so forth. As for those racial- identification categories, just follow the Census Bureau's advice: Put down whatever race or ethnicity you identify with. It's simply a part of drawing an accurate population profile in this multicultural nation. So far, returns here are hovering about 55%--with some areas (like central Brooklyn, with a dismal 37%) considerably lower. A study by Price Waterhouse Coopers after the 1990 census determined that New York State was undercounted by 277,000 residents--245,000 of them in New York City. That cost the city three Assembly seats, a state Senate seat and half a congressional seat. As Rep. Carolyn Maloney (D-Queens), the ranking member of the House census subcommittee put it: ``It's your future, don't leave it blank.'' Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield to the gentlewoman from Illinois (Ms. Schakowsky), an outstanding leader and actually a new Member of Congress, representing the City of Chicago. She has been very active on the Subcommittee on Census and has worked very hard to bring up participation.

Mrs. MALONEY of New York. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentlewoman from California (Mrs. Napolitano), another leader for a complete count.

Mrs. MALONEY of New York. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for his statement, and I would now like to yield to the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Cummings). He represents the 7th Congressional District in Maryland. The gentleman from Maryland chairs the Complete Count Committee for Baltimore and has served on really the oversight committee for the census, the Committee on Government Reform and Oversight, and I thank him for his leadership on this issue.

Mrs. MALONEY of New York. Mr. Speaker, another of our colleagues, the gentlewoman from the great State of Texas (Ms. Jackson-Lee), had a conflict and could not stay with us. She was here, however, and I will submit her statement later for the Record. Another colleague from Texas, however, the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Stenholm), is here. This Member holds many leadership positions in this body. He is the ranking member on the Committee on Agriculture and is the policy chair of the Blue Dogs, in addition to being a leader in this body on getting a complete and accurate count during the census.

Mrs. MALONEY of New York. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentlewoman from Florida (Mrs. Meek), a great leader on a complete count. She even hosted a public hearing in her district and has been a leader here on the floor and in the committee work, and I welcome here tonight.

Mrs. MALONEY of New York

Mrs. MALONEY of New York. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of international family planning. Today international guests from Kenya, Albania, Nigeria, Colombia, and Bangladesh will be visiting offices and participating in a forum cosponsored by the Congressional Caucus on Women'S Issues on why family planning matters. They will testify with personal stories from the field on how important family planning is in saving women's lives. In 1998, this body cut all U.S. funding for UNFPA and drastically cut USAID. Along with many of my colleagues, we fought back by introducing legislation to reinstate the U.S. contribution to UNFPA. We were successful last year in securing $25 million. This year it is time to go back to the future, back to 1995 levels for international family planning. I hope my colleagues will take advantage of our international guests visiting with us today and take the time to speak with them on what family planning programs give to communities around the world. I hope they will support our bill H.R. 3634, the Saving Women's Lives Through International Family Planning Act.

Mrs. MALONEY of New York

Mrs. MALONEY of New York. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to this bill, which is an attack on women's health and the constitutional rights of women. Let us put this vote in perspective. We have already voted on this 7 times. Since 1994 when the Republican majority took control of Congress, there have been 141 votes on choice; on this floor, 112, 79 percent, resulted in an antichoice loss for women. Each of these votes that are chipping away, chipping away at a woman's right to choose are detailed on my Choice Report which is located on my web site. This bill does not take into account women's health exceptions. It has no viability threshold, and does not allow a doctor to recommend the best medical procedure for a patient. The women who follow their doctor's advice and undergo these rare procedures are women who have had to come to terms with pregnancies that have tragically gone wrong. The new majority likes to talk about getting government off their backs, yet here they want to replace a doctor's expertise with a governmental judgment in the most personal of decisions. Doctors and their patients should make medical decisions. Congress has no place politicizing family decisions and family tragedies. As the mother of two children, I would have wanted the choice in the event I learned late in my pregnancy that my fetus was so deformed that it was incompatible with life and that my reproductive health was at risk, and also at risk, my ability to have future children. I would have wanted that choice, and I want that choice for every woman in this country. Vote no on this bill.

Mrs. MALONEY of New York

Mrs. MALONEY of New York. I thank the gentleman for his comments and his hard work. Mr. Speaker, the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Hinojosa) represents a great State which unfortunately was undercounted in 1990. He has worked hard over the past several years with many innovative programs and ideas to make people aware of the census and to improve the count in his State and in the country. I thank him for his leadership.

Mrs. MALONEY of New York. Same rule from an editorial headline. I thank the Chair for making that point. Mr. Speaker, from Friday's Journal Sentennial in Milwaukee, ``Census too Important to Ignore'' is the headline, ``There are also plenty of members of Congress who are now in a huff, saying they sympathize with citizens threatening to fill out their forms. One wonders what these guardians of the public good were doing when they reviewed and apparently approved of the same questions they are now complaining about.'' A certain Senator from the other body who ran for President and lost said and did yesterday what a lot of Members of Congress should do. This particular Senator urged all Americans to fill out the entire census form and to follow the law. I agree with him. And he was a Republican. He says, please fill it out. The good news is that the Census Bureau will follow 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 will go out and try to get an accurate photo 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. $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 form. I urge every American, every resident in America, to fill out the form. Do not leave it blank. Do not leave their future and their community be blank. Be part of the civic responsibility of this country. Please fill out the form. I have with me many members of the Census Task Force who have diligently worked for an active census, one that includes all of the residents of America. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Rodriguez), who has been a great leader on this issue.

Mrs. MALONEY of New York. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentlewoman from District of Columbia (Ms. Norton), who has been a great leader on this issue.

Mrs. MALONEY of New York. Mr. Speaker, I was reading from an editorial headline.

Mrs. MALONEY of New York. Madam Speaker, this is Census Day plus three. My message to the American people is that if they have not already filled out and returned their census questionnaire, do it today. Do it this very minute. It is everyone's civic responsibility. I am very pleased that the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Miller), the Chair of the Subcommittee on Census, joins me in this message. As of today, over 53 percent of Americans have responded to the census, with 47 percent to go. To the remaining 47 percent, I say please do their civic responsibility and fill out the form. This was going to be our main message tonight here on the floor. But instead, regretfully, and with some disbelief, we must also stand here and ask what is going through the minds of some of our colleagues both here in the House of Representatives, in the Senate, and on the campaign trail. With 47 percent of the American people still not being heard from, 2 days before census day, we have Members of Congress, who should all know better, standing up, holding press conferences and telling the American people that the census is optional. Is it that some in the majority are undercount-aholics, they cannot help themselves but they want an inaccurate census? We have Members of Congress saying that they ``believe in voluntarily cooperating'' with the Government; but, beyond that, they will not follow the law. Since when did following the law in this country become a voluntary thing? Do they want participation, or do they want to make participation in the census optional? What is really disingenuous is the fact that most of the questions on the long form have been around for decades. What is really amazing with this newfound concern about the census is that, over 2 years ago, really 3 years ago also, the content of the long and short forms and while it was being finalized, every single Member of the House of Representatives and the United States Senate received a detailed list of the questions to be asked, including a description of the need for asking it, along with the specific legal requirement supporting it. Notification of Congress is required by Title 13, for a very good reason. That is to prevent the very situation that we face today, major leaders in our country literally telling the American people that the census is optional. Members of Congress, every single Member of Congress, received this book ``Preparing for the Census: Questions Planned for Census 2000, Federal Legislative and Program Uses.'' They received this book in 1997, and they received it in 1998. I know that all of the Members who are complaining about this census received it. Do they not read their mail? The time for input and to ask questions was when we were formulating the census, not now, not during the census, not days before census day. The questions asked by the census represent a balance between the needs of our Nation's communities and the needs to keep the time and effort required to complete the form to a minimum. Only information required by Congress, not the Census Bureau, but required by Congress to manage and evaluate Federal programs is collected by the census. Federal and State funds for schools, employment services, housing assistance, road construction, day-care, hospitals, emergency services, programs for seniors, and much more are distributed based on these census figures. We must all work to make them as correct as possible. We should remember that the Census Bureau has gone to great effort to make both the short and long forms as brief as possible. The 2000 Census short form contains eight questions, down from nine in 1990, and it takes about 10 minutes to fill it out. Ten minutes every 10 years to perform our civic duty on the needs in our community, is that too much to ask? It is shorter than 1990. Also, the 2000 Census long-term contains 53 questions, down from 57 in 1990. We have the shortest long form in decades. It is four questions less than the 1990 Census. The only new questions in the census were added to really evaluate welfare reform, and the question that was added is asking grandparents how many of them are caregivers. Does the Senator from Mississippi think that this question should be optional? I am a little bit confused, because the same people who today are making such a fuss over the long form just 6 months ago literally tried to add a question to the short form, which everyone has to complete. Some of the Senators raising questions also cosponsored an amendment offered by Senator Helms which would have asked every American what their marriage status was and add it to the short form. Come on Senator, the head of the Senate, he cannot have it both ways. He cannot be lobbying for additional questions and then turn around and say that it is too long, that answering them should be optional. Some of my friends who have been with me fighting for an accurate census, and many of them are on the floor with me tonight, they know because they were there when opponents of an accurate census threatened to shut down the Government twice over the census and the budget and a flood relief bill was held hostage, and we had to have the anti-modern count language removed. Listen, believe me, these people who have fought to get the census forward to this point, they believe that the actions that are taking place now are intentional sabotage, the equivalent of a statistical shutdown of the Government by a small fraction of the GOP. I really do not believe that, and I do not want to believe it. I think the answer is much simpler. I think the people criticizing the long form either do not know or maybe do not care how essential this information is to solving the problems of the people of our country. If they do not know what the problems are, then they do not have to spend the resources and the time and effort to correct the problems. Let us look at the plumbing question that some of the Senators have raised. Well, it may shock some Senators but there are places in this country where Americans do not have plumbing, in the Colonias in Texas, on Indian reservations. And I really do say that in rural communities, even in Mississippi, what some elected officials are essentially saying is that they do not care and that they do not want to know about the problems. If they do not know about the substandard housing in America, then we will not direct the resources to correct it. But maybe some of these Members who have raised questions should talk to some of the Alaskan representatives and hear what Alaskans have to say or had to say when the census removed a question on sanitation from the long form. They want it added again because they have plumbing problems and a lack of adequate plumbing in many places in Alaska. Or let us look at question 17 concerning a person's physical, mental, or emotional condition in the last 6 months. Are some Members saying they do not want to know how big a problem it is, how many disabled Americans there are in this country? I would like to remind the House that these questions are essentially the same questions approved by Ronald Reagan and former President Bush except that there are fewer questions than the questions in 1990. 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, we cannot administer the laws of this country fairly. Their comments are rash, appropriate, and just plain wrong. I want to take the time to read excerpts from some of the editorials that have appeared since Governor Bush joined with some of his colleagues and declared the census optional. From the Sacramento Bee on April 1: ``Trashing the Census. Irresponsible Bush Comments Could Sabotage the Count.'' That was the headline. From the New York Times, April 1, and I quote from the headlines: ``Civic Duty and the Census. Some Congressional Republicans are Seriously Undermining the 2000 Census.'' From today's Atlanta Constitution: ``Keep the Census From Becoming Political Fodder and Participate'' is the headline. I further quote: ``Participation in the census may also be harmed by political grandstanding. Presidential candidate George W. Bush and Senate Majority Leader Trent Lott have criticized the long form. The alternative as urged by Bush, Lott, and company would be to operate the government informally . . .'' Announcement by the Speaker Pro Tempore

Mrs. MALONEY of New York. Mr. Speaker, I refer Members to an editorial from the New York Times on April 1. In it they criticize the congressional Republicans for undermining an accurate 2000 Census. They state, and I quote, ``These comments are irresponsible. Completing the Census form fully and accurately is not optional; it is a civic duty that is required by law.'' I include this article for the Record. The article referred to is as follows: [From the New York Times, Apr. 1, 2000] Civic Duty and The Census Some Congressional Republicans are seriously undermining the 200 census by suggesting that the national head count, which officially takes place today, is an invasion of privacy. That bizarre complaint could discourage the public from participating in a project that is crucial to the functioning of state and federal government. The question's on this year's long census form--including questions on household income, plumbing facilities and physical disabilities--have been part of the census for decades. The only new question asks for information on grandparents who are caregivers for children. In fact, this year's long form is the shortest one in 60 years. All answers on census forms are kept confidential. Yet Senator Chuck Hagel of Nebraska has suggested in recent days that people can simply ignore questions on the long form--which goes to one out of six American households--that they find intrusive. A spokesman for Senator Trent Lott, the majority leader, has made similarly inappropriate suggestions. Gov. George W. Bush of Texas has said that people should fill out the forms, but that if he received a long form, he was not sure he would want to fill it out either. These comments are irresponsible. Completing the census form fully and accurately is not optional; it is a civic duty that is required by law. Senator Hagel now says that he does not want to encourage people to break the law, but will introduce legislation to make most of the questions on the long form voluntary. The federal government has spent billions of dollars trying to produce an accurate count as response rates have continued to decline with each decennial count. Accuracy is critical because the census is used to apportion seats in Congress, draw legislative districts within the states and distribute more than $185 billion in federal funds. The government uses information from the long form of the census to allocate money to communities for housing, school aid, transportation, services for the elderly and the disabled and scores of other programs. The data are also necessary to calculate the consumer price index and cost of living increases in government benefits. When individuals fail to give complete information about their households, they risk shortchanging their communities of government aid that they may be entitled to. That is why many state and local government officials are working hard to increase census response rates in their communities. The mindless complaints of some politicians could well sabotage those efforts. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from Guam (Mr. Underwood), who is here representing the Asian Pacific American Caucus. Asians were terribly undercounted in the 1990 Census. The gentleman has been a leader on this issue.

Mrs. MALONEY of New York. Mr. Speaker, I would mention to Members a Washington Post March 31 editorial. In this editorial, they call upon all Americans to fill out their Census form. I quote, ``All kinds of harm will be done if the count is defective. A politician not seeking to score cheap political points at public expense might resist the temptation to demagogue, and instead urge citizens to turn in their forms. But in an election year such as this, that apparently is too high a standard for some.'' So they are critical of all elected officials that are urging people not to fill out their forms, that doing so is optional. Mr. Speaker, I include for the Record this editorial from the Washington Post: The editorial referred to is as follows: [From the Washington Post, Mar. 31, 2000] Census Bashing THE CENSUS always produces complaints that an intrusive government is asking for more information than it has a right to know. Usually the complaints are scattered and come from the fringe. But this year some radio talk show hosts have taken up the issue, and now some national politicians who otherwise yield to none in insisting on law and order are telling constituents not to answer questions they feel invade their privacy. The Senate majority leader, Trent Lott, is one such. He believes that people ought to provide ``the basic census information'' but that if they ``feel their privacy is being invaded by [some] questions, they can choose not to answer,'' his spokesman says. Likewise Sen. Chuck Hagel, whose ``advice to everybody is just fill out what you need to fill out, and [not] anything you don't feel comfortable with.'' Yesterday, George W. Bush said that, if sent the so-called long form, he isn't sure he would fill it out, either. And which are the questions that offend these statesmen? One that has been mocked seeks to determine how many people are disabled as defined by law, in part by asking whether any have ``difficulty . . . dressing, bathing, or getting around inside the home.'' when it mailed the proposed census questions to members of Congress for comment two years ago-- and got almost no response--the bureau explained that this one would be used in part to distribute housing funds for the disabled, funds to the disabled elderly and funds to help retrain disabled veterans. Are those sinister enterprises? A much-derided question about plumbing facilities is used in part ``to locate areas in danger of ground water contamination and waterborne diseases''; one about how people get to work is used in transportation planning. All have been asked for years. Earlier this year, Mr. Lott's Senate complained 94 to 0 that a question about marital status had been removed from the basic census form. That was said to be a sign of disrespect for marriage. Come on. This is a critical period for the census. All kinds of harm will be done if the count is defective. A politician not seeking to score cheap political points at public expense might resist the temptation to demagogue and instead urge citizens to turn in their forms. But in an election year such as this, that's apparently too high a standard for some.

Mrs. MALONEY of New York. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman. I would like to put into the Record the editorial from the Sacramento Bee in California. They are very critical of leaders who have come out against filling out the long census. They state, and I quote: ``How harmful to this important civic exercise. How irresponsible and unpatriotic.'' They go on to say, ``With their thoughtless comments, they feed mindless anti-government sentiment. Do they really think they can govern better by knowing less about America? They have done a disservice to the census and to the country.'' I would include that in the Record at this time. [From the Sacramento Bee, April 1, 2000] Trashing the Census: Irresponsible Bush Comments Could Sabotage Count Just two days ago before Census Day, as U.S. Census Bureau officials were urging Americans to cooperate in the crucial once-in-a-decade national count, Texas Gov. George Bush made their job harder. If he had the long census form, Bush told a campaign crowd, he's not sure he'd want to fill it out either. How harmful to this important civic exercise; how irresponsible and unpatriotic. Bush's remarks come on the heels of Senate Majority Leader Trent Lott's advice to his fellow Americans not to answer any questions on the census long form that they believe invade their privacy. Taken together, those remarks by the leading Republican in Congress and the likely Republican presidential nominee can easily be interpreted as a deliberate attempt to sabotage the 2000 census. They raise questions about the integrity of the census that are unwarranted, unfair and irresponsible. One in six households receives the census long form. Beyond the basic eight questions about the number, age, gender and race or ethnicity of people living in the household, the long form asks other questions designed to measure the well-being of Americans, to help government agencies to plan where to put schools or highways or health funding. Included in the long forms are 53 questions such as: How many bedrooms in the house? Has anyone been disabled by health problems in the last six months? Is there a telephone? What is the income of the household? Is there indoor plumbing? By law the responses are strictly confidential. The U.S. Census cannot share individual household answers with the IRS, FBI, INS or any other government agency or private entity. Moreover, every single question on the long and short forms is there because of a specific statutory requirement. Most of these questions have been on the form for decades. The only new question added since 1990 was put there at the behest of Republicans in Congress, including Lott. It asks grandparents whether they are caregivers for their grandchildren. The wording of each question was reviewed by Congress in 1997 and 1998. Lott, who now raises objections, pushed a resolution urging the Census Bureau to return to the short form a question about marital status that it had moved to the long form. The census is the law of the land, enacted by the first Congress. When Bush says he wouldn't fill out the form, he's saying he's prepared to break the law. When Lott advises Americans not to answer questions they don't want to answer, he's telling them to break the law. And although both Lott and Bush limit their specific objections to the long form, the impact will inevitably reverberate more widely--to those who only receive the short form. In Sacramento, census officials report that the response to the census is already lagging. Only 39 percent of Sacramento households have returned the form so far. Every man, woman or child not counted costs $1,600 in lost federal funds. That's money that would go to our schools and highways and mental health and police protection. Participating in the census is a civic duty, like voting, serving on juries and defending the country. As duties go, it's not burdensome; for most people, filing out the long form is a once-in-a-lifetime chore. With their thoughtless comments that feed mindless anti-government sentiment--do they really think they can govern better by knowing less about America?--Bush and Lott have done a disservice to the census and the country. Mr. Speaker, our next speaker is the gentleman from California (Mr. Baca), who is a new Member, but already a great leader on the census and other issues.

Mrs. MALONEY of New York. I thank the gentleman for his remarks. Mr. Speaker, I include for the Record an editorial from the Atlanta Journal Constitution that says, ``To find fault with those queries at this late date is a cheap shot. The alternative would be to operate government uninformed of its people's needs.'' [From the Atlanta Journal Constitution, April 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, I would now like to call upon a great leader on the census and many other areas, the gentlewoman from Florida (Mrs. Meek). She helped organize a bipartisan hearing on the census and has worked very hard for an accurate count.

Mrs. MALONEY of New York. Mr. Speaker, I would like to place in the Record an editorial from March 29 from the Seattle Times Company, and they write: The questions provide a telling snapshot of America and help determine how large pots of tax dollars are spent on social programs. Further, they say, Smile. A big family portrait is being painted with census numbers. Nothing scary about that. They go on to encourage everyone to fill out their form. [From the Seattle Times, Mar. 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. Mr. Speaker, my next speaker is a very diligent and outstanding member of the Subcommittee on the Census, the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Davis), who has been a great leader on getting an accurate count.

Mrs. MALONEY of New York

Mrs. MALONEY of New York. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay special tribute to Celine Marcus. Mrs. Marcus is well known and broadly respected as a leading advocate for tenants' rights, seniors, and the poor. She is a role model and an inspiration to countless residents in New York City. I ask my colleagues to join me in celebrating Mrs. Marcus's 90th birthday by expressing our Nation's deep appreciation and gratitude for her life and work. A civic activist for more than 30 years, Mrs. Marcus has devoted herself to helping the poor, the elderly, and the homeless in her community on the Upper East Side of Manhattan. As an advocate for tenant rights and rent protections, Mrs. Marcus was a founder of the Neighborhood for Shelter, the Stanley M. Isaacs Neighborhood Center, and Interfaith Neighbors. Serving first as Associate and then as Executive Director of the Lenox Hill Neighborhood House, Mrs. Marcus created such innovative programs as the Lenox Hill Senior Center and Project SCOPE, which provides home care services for housebound older adults in the community. As Executive Director, Mrs. Marcus has thoroughly advanced the mission of The Lenox Hill Neighborhood House, to help those in need on Manhattan's East Side while improving the quality of life for all the individuals and families in its community. In recognition of her leadership and great commitment to those in need, the City Council of New York has declared March 30, 2000, ``Celine Marcus Day.'' For more than 30 years, Mrs. Marcus has devoted herself to the underserved residents of her community. She created numerous tenant and block associations and organized neighbors to fight for fair housing protections. In her every endeavor Mrs. Marcus has brought health and happiness to others and touched the lives of countless New Yorkers. Mr. Speaker, I salute the life and work of Celine Marcus, and I ask my fellow Members of Congress to join me in recognizing her significant contributions to the Lenox Hill community, to the city of New York, and to our great Nation.

Mrs. MALONEY of New York

Mrs. MALONEY of New York. Mr. Speaker, census day is 3 days away, and so far, the census is going very well. The Federal response rate is at 44 percent. Everyone can go to the census Web site at census.gov and get a daily update on how their localities and States are responding. I know that some Members on the other side of the aisle have urged their constituents not to fill out the long form. This will only hurt people and localities and their districts. The information we gather on the census enables us to understand who we are as a Nation and serves as a guide on where to spend our resources from the Government. The Speaker and the minority leader should be urging all Members to work with and encourage their constituents to participate in this important civic ceremony.

Mrs. MALONEY of New York

Mrs. MALONEY of New York. Mr. Speaker, I too would like to join my colleagues, the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Bilirakis) and the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Gekas) in honor of the 179th anniversary that marks the Greek's national day of independence, and I thank the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Bilirakis) for organizing a special order each year to celebrate Greek Independence Day. Greece had remained under the Ottoman empire for almost 400 years; 400 years that Greek people were deprived of all their civil rights. Even under the threat of death, Greeks fought back by continuing to educate their children in their culture, their language, and their religion. On March 25, we celebrate this courage; this the 179th anniversary of freedom and independence for Greece. I wish we had more to celebrate today, to be able to celebrate the return of the Elgin Marbles to their homeland. The Elgin Marbles are magnificent sculptures that were created to adorn the Parthenon. Their detail and beauty are even more profound when one knows these sculptures were actually carved into the Parthenon itself after it had been constructed. However, in 1806, these sculptures were removed, sometimes broken in half, and transported to England. They are now in view in the British museum, far away from their native land. In this age of open communication, friendship, and a unified Europe, we must work together to see that these marbles will soon be returned to their homeland. In this respect, I join my colleagues, the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Payne) and the gentleman from New York (Mr. Gilman) in their House Resolution stating the importance of returning the Elgin Marbles back to Greece. I am also very pleased to have welcomed today Dimitris Avramopoulos, the mayor of Athens, to Washington. He joined members of the Hellenic Caucus and other Members of Congress today for a discussion on the progress that Athens has made in becoming a global partner and leader and city. Through his efforts, the mayor's, he has made Athens a leading contributor to cities around the world in policy; and he has diligently worked to create a forum for mayors from other cities and capitals throughout the world to work together on their common goals. I am very fortunate and privileged to represent the largest Hellenic community outside of Athens, one of the most vibrant communities of Hellenic Americans in our country. It is truly a very great pleasure for me to co-chair the Hellenic Caucus and to represent so many fine friends from Greece in my district. The caucus now has a record 72 bipartisan membership who are committed to bringing the voices of Hellenic Americans to the floor of the United States capitol, as we are tonight. We continue to strengthen the voice of Hellenic Americans in promoting legislation, monitoring and arranging of briefings on current events and handing out information to all Congressional Members on such important developments as the renewed talks between Greek Cypriots and Turkish Cypriots, U.S. aid to Greece and Cyprus and the continued dispute in the Aegean. In the coming year, we hope to see peace and justice in the Aegean, and justice, finally, in Cyprus after so many years of illegal occupation and invasion. And we need to see not only peace in northern Greece, but the restoration of human rights to the many cultures and people suffering throughout the world. As we celebrate the 179th anniversary of Greek independence and the special bond of friendship between our two great countries, I would like to leave my colleagues with a quote from Percy Shelley, and he said, ``We are all Greeks. Our laws, our literature, our art have their roots in Greece.'' So I join him and many others in not only paying tribute to Greek Independence Day, but also the many contributions of Greek Americans to our culture here in America.

Mrs. MALONEY of New York

Mrs. MALONEY of New York. Mr. Speaker, it is with profound pleasure that I speak today in honor of the 179th Anniversary that marks Greece's declaration of independence from the Ottoman Empire. Greece had remained under the Ottoman Empire for almost 400 years. Even though they were deprived of all of their civil rights during this time they continued to educate their children in their culture, their language, and their religion under the threat of death. On March 25, we celebrate this courage on the 179th Anniversary of freedom and independence in Greece. I wish we had more to celebrate--to be able to celebrate on Greek Independence Day the return of the Elgin Marbles to their homeland. Taken from Greece in 1806, these ancient sculptures from the Acropolis of Athens have been on view in the British Museum. In this age of open communication, friendship, and a unified Europe, lets hope that these marbles will soon be returned to their home. This year the Greek Independence Day parade will be honoring His Eminence Archbishop Demetrios, Primate of the Greek Orthodox Church of America. I join with my Hellenic neighbors in honoring him on the auspicious occasion of the Greek Independence Day Parade. I am very fortunate and privileged to represent the largest Hellenic community outside of Athens, one of the most vibrant communities of Hellenic Americans in this country. It is truly one of my greatest pleasures as a Member of Congress to be able to participate in the life of this community, and the wonderful and vital Hellenic American friends that I have come to know are one of its greatest rewards. While commemorative resolutions are no longer allowed in the House, there is enormous support for Greek Independence Day among my colleagues. In 1993, inspired by the strong Hellenic American presence in my own congressional district, I co-founded, and now Co-Chair, the Congressional Caucus on Hellenic Issues. The Caucus is composed of seventy-two, bipartisan members who are committed to bringing the voices of Hellenic Americans to the floor of the U.S. Capitol. Since its beginning in 1993, the Congressional Caucus on Hellenic Issues has grown in both size and strength to foster and improve relations between the United States and Greece. The Hellenic Caucus serves to strengthen the voice of Hellenic Americans in promoting legislation, monitoring and arranging briefings on current events, and disseminating information to all Congressional Members on such important developments as the renewed talks between Greek Cypriots and Turkish Cypriots, U.S. aid to Greece and Cyprus, and the continued conflict in the Aegean. In the coming year, may we see peace in the Aegean, justice in Cyprus, peace in Northern Greece, and the restoration of human rights to the many cultures and people suffering throughout the world. As we celebrate the 179th anniversary of Greek Independence and the special bond of friendship between our two countries, I would like to leave you with a quote from Percy Shelley, ``We are all Greeks! Our laws, our literature, our art, have their roots in Greece.''

Mrs. MALONEY of New York

Mrs. MALONEY of New York. Mr. Speaker, last week, there was a hearing before the Subcommittee on Health and the Environment of the Committee on Commerce concerning fetal tissue. Though the hearing was purported to be about alleged abuses involving fetal tissue for medical research, I believe it was an attempt by antichoice Members to try to stop lifesaving research involving fetal tissue and stem cells. Mr. Speaker, I have introduced House Resolution 414 in a bipartisan manner with the gentlewoman from Maryland (Mrs. Morella) and many others to allow Federal funding of human pluripotent stem cell research to help us further understand Parkinson's Disease and other medical conditions. I am asking for no specific amount of money nor to direct disease- specific research. I am only asking that Federal money be allowed to be used to utilize the next best chance science has to not only treat, but to cure debilitating and life-threatening illnesses that afflict millions of Americans. Many people have been confusing human pluripotent stem cell research with human embryo research. Stem cells are not embryos. There is now a ban on the use of Federal funds for human embryo research in the United States. Stem cells cannot develop into a complete human being and therefore, under the law, they are not embryos. Stem cells are a type of cell that can be turned into almost any type of cell or tissue in the body. With further research, these cells can be used as replacement cells and tissues to treat many diseases, including Parkinson's Disease, Alzheimer's, Diabetes, AIDS, Lou Gehrig's Disease, and many others. Stem cell research holds hope of one day being able to treat brain injury, spinal cord injury and stroke for which there is currently no treatment available. They may solve the problem of the body's reaction to foreign tissue, resulting in dramatic improvements in the treatment of a number of life-threatening conditions, such as burns and kidney failure, for which transplantation is currently used. Mr. Speaker, my resolution, House Resolution 414, discusses Parkinson's Disease in particular for many reasons. My family has been personally affected by this devastating illness, and I am proud to serve as cochair of the congressional working group on Parkinson's Disease. However, it is science that makes the best argument to lead with this disease. With all that is already known about Parkinson's Disease, it is believed that with Federal funds and stem cell research, it is very possible that Parkinson's Disease could not only be treatable, but curable within as little as 5 years. Dr. Gerald Fischbach, the Director of the National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke, said last year in the Senate, and I quote, ``I concur that we are close to solving, and I mean the word `solving,' Parkinson's Disease. I hesitate to put an actual year or number on it. I think with all the intensive effort, with a little bit of skill and luck, 5 to 10 years is not unrealistic. We will do everything possible to reduce that below 5 years. I would not rule that out.'' Mr. Speaker, here is why that is possible. Parkinson's Disease is a progressive degenerative brain disease which kills a specialized and vital type of brain cell, a cell which produces the substance dopamine, that is essential for normal development and balance. The loss of these dopamine-producing cells causes symptoms, including slowness and paucity of movement, tremors, stiffness and difficulty walking and balancing, which makes the sufferer unable to carry out the normal activities of daily living. In 30 percent of the cases, those symptoms include dementia. As the disease progresses, it inflicts horrific physical, emotional, and financial burdens on the patient and family, requiring the care-giver to assist in the activities of daily living and may eventually lead to placement in a nursing home until death. With further research into stem cells, scientists will be able to reprogram the stem cells into the dopamine-producing cells which are lost in Parkinson's Disease. Parkinson's Disease affects at least 1 million Americans. Fifty thousand are diagnosed each year, and for every one diagnosed, two who have Parkinson's Disease are not diagnosed. It is alarming to think that 2 million Americans with Parkinson's Disease are undiagnosed. Parkinson's Disease costs the Federal Government approximately $10 billion in health care costs and, on an average, the cost per patient is 5,000 per year. As a society, we spend $15 billion a year on Parkinson's disease and that is only in direct costs for treatments that only bring temporary relief. Building on the technology developed from research on Parkinson's disease makes treatments and even cures possible for many conditions. These include Alzheimer's, diabetes, AIDS, Lou Gehrig's, brain injury, spinal cord injury, stroke, and problems with the body's reaction to foreign tissue. It may even provide for safer and more effective ways to test drugs without experimenting on humans and animals. We cannot allow the opportunities afforded us by stem cell research to go untapped! The National Institutes of Health has proposed guidelines to human stem cell research to address the legal and ethical issues surrounding this particular type of research. It is being approached in a responsible way to utilize the technology while being sensitive to the ethical questions raised. The National Bioethics Advisory Commission (NBAC) even felt they could have gone further and is very supportive of allowing this type of research to continue with Federal funding. The NBAC points out that Federally funding this research will allow Federal oversight to ensure this type of research continues ethically. And finally, the American people support stem cell research as shown by a nationwide survey conducted by Opinion Research Corporation International last year that found that 74% of those polled favored funding of stem cell research by NIH. Federal funds are crucial to allow scientists to proceed with stem cell research and to exploit fully this novel, innovative, and ground- breaking technology.

Mrs. MALONEY of New York

Mrs. MALONEY of New York. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay special tribute to Rabbi Arthur Schneier, an international leader for religious freedom and tolerance and a role model and inspiration to the world. I ask my colleagues to join me in celebrating his 70th birthday by expressing our nation's deep appreciation and gratitude for his life and work. Rabbi Schneier has displayed an unshakable dedication to human rights and religious freedom, and a deep devotion to justice and decency for all people. Spiritual leader of the historic landmark Park East Synagogue since 1962, Rabbi Schneier has acted as a diplomat and envoy for four U.S. Presidents. He has served as Chairman of the U.S. Commission for the Preservation of America's Heritage Abroad. He was selected by President Clinton to be one of three U.S. religious leaders to meet with President Jiang Zemin and top leaders of the Chinese Government to enter into the first official dialogue on religious freedom in China. Among many other contributions to U.S. diplomacy, Mr. Speaker, Rabbi Schneier negotiated and successfully completed bilateral agreements with the Czech and Slovak Republics, Hungary, Romania, Slovenia, and Ukraine. Rabbi Schneier is certainly one of this century's great human rights leaders, Mr. Speaker. In 1965, he established the Appeal of Conscience Foundation, an ecumenical coalition of business and religious leaders, advocating mutual understanding, tolerance and peace. Rabbi Schneier has contributed greatly to the peaceful emergence of new democracies in Russia and the countries of Eastern Europe. Through spiritual wisdom, perseverance, and leadership, Rabbi Schneier has quelled ethnic conflict the world over, protecting minorities and securing the reign of peace. I am sure, Mr. Speaker, that those in the midst of chaos and destruction, in the aftermath of earthquakes in Turkey and Armenia, floods in Romania, and natural disasters around the globe, rejoiced in the aid Rabbi Schneier was able to provide through organization, inspiration, and faith. His work provided hope to thousands and saved lives in times of great need and suffering. Rabbi Schneier is an inspiration to all who aspire to lives of hope, peace, and understanding. His convictions are noble and immutable. His faith and his devotion to peace remain undeterred. His influence around the world is a blessing to human kind. Mr. Speaker, I salute the life and work of Rabbi Arthur Schneier and I ask my fellow Members of Congress to join me in recognizing Rabbi Schneier's contributions to the New York community, to our great country, and to the world.

Mrs. MALONEY of New York

Mrs. MALONEY of New York. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of the Lofgren motion to recommit and commend the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Lofgren) for her consistent leadership on this issue. It has been almost a year since the Columbine tragedy and still the conference committee has not yet held one substantive meeting. That is what this motion calls for. It calls for them to meet and review and act on gun safety measures. How many children have to die before this Congress acts? My colleagues have mentioned the death of one 6-year old by another 6-year old. How young must the victims be of gun violence before the House leadership acts? Will they finally call a meeting if a 5-year old kills a 5-year old or a 4-year old kills a 4-year old? When are they going to at least meet and discuss what people on both sides of the aisle have said they support, safety locks, child safety locks? If the child safety lock was on that gun, whether it was in the house or the crack house or the street, that child would be alive today. The conference should meet. Pass the Lofgren amendment.

Mrs. MALONEY of New York. Mr. Speaker, I will state that they would have, but the example of the rifle in the home, the degree of probability that a trigger lock would have been on that gun is if we had passed it into law. That would have been a provision of safety. We should take that step.