Cynthia McKinney

Ms. McKINNEY

Ms. McKINNEY. Mr. Speaker, pursuant to clause 2 of rule IX, I hereby give notice of my intention to offer a resolution which raises a question of the privileges of the House. The form of the resolution is as follows: Whereas, Loretta Sanchez was issued a certificate of election as the duly elected Member of Congress from the 46th District of California by the Secretary of State of California and was seated by the U.S. House of Representatives on January 7, 1997; and Whereas A Notice of Contest of Election was filed with the Clerk of the House by Mr. Robert Dornan on December 26, 1996; and Whereas the Task Force on the Contested Election in the 46th District of California met on February 26, 1997 in Washington, D.C., on April 19, 1997 in Orange County, California and has not met since that time; and Whereas the allegations made by Mr. Robert Dornan have been largely found to be without merit: Charges of improper voting from a business, rather than a resident address; underage voting; double voting; and charged of unusually large number of individuals voting from the same address. It was found that voting from the same address included a Marines barracks and the domicile of nuns, that business addresses were legal residences for the individuals including the zoo keeper of the Santa Ana zoo, that duplicate voting was by different individuals and those accused of underage voting were of age; and Whereas the Committee on House Oversight has issued unprecedented subpoenas to the Immigration and Naturalization Service to compare their records with Orange County voter registration records, the first time in any election in the history of the United States that the INS has been asked by Congress to verify the citizenship of voters; and Whereas the INS has complied with the Committee's request and, at the Committee's request, has been doing a manual check of its paper files and providing worksheets containing supplemental information on that manual check to the Committee on House Oversight for over five months; and Whereas the Committee on House Oversight, subpoenaed the record seized by the District Attorney of Orange County on February 13, 1997 and has received and reviewed all records pertaining to registration efforts of that group; and Whereas some Members of the House Oversight Committee are now seeking a duplicate and dilatory review of materials already in the Committee's possession by the Secretary of State of California; and Whereas the Task Force on the Contested Election in the 46th District of California and the Committee have been reviewing these materials and has all the information it needs regarding who voted in the 46th District and all the information it needs to make the judgments concerning those votes; and Whereas the Committee on House Oversight has after over nine months of review and investigation failed to present credible evidence to change the outcome of the election of Congresswoman Sanchez and is pursuing never ending and unsubstantiated areas of review; and Whereas, Contestant Robert Dornan has not shown or provided credible evidence that the outcome of the election is other than Congresswoman Sanchez's election to the Congress; and Whereas, Loretta Sanchez of the Golden State smiles brighter than Bob Dornan even on a cloudy day. Whereas Loretta Sanchez, a latina from California, has been persecuted for beating B-2 bomber Bob. Whereas Loretta Sanchez is working to represent all the people of her district regardless of race, color, creed, gender, national origin or sexual orientation, Whereas the Republican majority has failed to complete the nation's legislative business on time in each of its majority years, Whereas many feel that the real bottom line in all of this is that Bob Dornan needs to get a life--and a job, Whereas, the Committee on House Oversight should complete its review of this matter and bring this contest to an end and now therefore be it; Resolved, That unless the Committee on House Oversight has sooner reported a recommendation for its final disposition, the contest in the 46th District of California is dismissed upon the expiration of November 7, 1997.

Ms. McKINNEY

Ms. McKINNEY. Mr. Speaker, I know a little something about snatching victory from the jaws of defeat. All over this country, so-called folks in the know counted me out. And in the 46th District of California the same thing happened. Nobody gave Loretta Sanchez a chance of beating the infamous Bob Dornan. But she won in an election fair and square. But stung by the fact that he lost to a woman, he has not given up the fight. One would think he would just declare his intention to run in the next election, but no, not this Bob Dornan. And no, not this Republican Party. They have conducted a well-organized witch-hunt that is insulting to America's values. They have targeted every Hispanic voter as if they did not have the right to vote. And the Republican leadership has sided with Dornan over the people of the 46th District. Could it be that they think that Hispanic voters do not count? The Republicans would have us believe that they have changed, that they have mellowed. Unless they stop the race baiting now, they will prove themselves to be what we always suspected all along.

Ms. McKINNEY

Ms. McKINNEY. Mr. Chairman, 50 years ago, the U.S. Army School of the Americas opened its doors in Panama to a class of Latin American and Caribbean military officers to receive training in the art of war. Half a century later it's time to shut the school down. Last September, the Pentagon revealed what activists opposed to the school have been alleging for years--that foreign military officers were taught to torture and murder to achieve their political objectives. According to the Pentagon's own excerpts, School of the Americas students were advised to imprison those from whom they were seeking information; to ``involuntarily'' obtain information from those sources--in other words, torture them; to arrest their parents; to use ``motivation by fear''; pay bounties for enemy dead; execute opponents; subvert the press; and use torture, blackmail, and even injections of truth serum to obtain information. These tactics come right out of an SS manual and have no place in a civilized society. They certainly have no place in any course taught with taxpayer dollars on U.S. soil by members of our own military. These practices, which as we know too well have, in fact, been used by graduates of the School of the Americas, are part of a totalitarian playbook. They show complete disregard for the rule of human law and violate every tenet of basic human rights. Yet nowhere in this report was there any apology for the horrific misdeeds tied to this training. Nor was there any mention of the poor--any mention of all those who have suffered so much at the hands of those who were taught to torture and murder by elements within our own Government. What about Archbishop Oscar Romero, gunned down in cold blood by SOA graduates because he stood up for the powerless against the powerful? What about the Jesuit priests and their housekeeper and her daughter, murdered in El Salvador because their hope for the poor clashed with the interests of dictators? What about the four Ursuline nuns, ravaged and mutilated and thrown into a ditch for the crime of teaching children to read? What about the children at El Mozote--machine gunned by School of Americas alumni for the sin of living in the wrong place at the wrong time? These manuals are the smoking gun. They provide direct evidence that the school has not only failed to serve its mission, but has subverted its mission. It's time to close down the School of the Americas.

Ms. McKINNEY

Ms. McKINNEY. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.

Ms. McKINNEY. Yes, Mr. Chairman, it is.

Ms. McKINNEY. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent that I be recognized for 8 minutes.

Ms. McKINNEY. Mr. Chairman, I am very proud to offer the McKinney- Rohrabacher amendment, which I believe is a significant enhancement to the legislation we are now considering, the State Department authorization bill. This is no longer a controversial amendment. Significant compromise and change have been incorporated into this new version of the Arms Trade Code of Conduct that I am introducing today. In the first version of the bill, the President would certify countries at the beginning of each fiscal year that comply with the code of conduct. If the President wanted to sell weapons to a noncomplying government, then the President would have to come to Congress requesting an exemption and have that exemption approved by a vote in Congress. The administration and some Members of Congress felt this gave too much authority to Congress and deprived the President of his ability to make foreign policy. In the spirit of compromise, we have stripped the original bill of this language and now all that remains are the underlying values that motivated this bill in the first place, and that is that the United States ought not be in the business of supplying weapons to dictators. Gone is the automatic trigger that some objected to. And so now the piece of legislation before us asks us to make the fundamental assertion of what we stand for in the world and whose side we are on. Is it that the United States of America that speaks eloquently on the subject of respect for human rights and democracy and democratic traditions is only paying lip service to these ideals when confronted with a hungry client wanting our advanced technology only to enhance their ability to torture and abuse their own population? Or do we stand with those people around the world who are victims of the world's tyrants, who have no voice in the international arena and who only have the conscience of the world to help them? This legislation helps to give the United States a conscience for the leaders around the world who do not have one. This legislation helps to give a voice to those people around the world who cannot speak out in their own countries. And finally, this legislation puts the international behavior of the United States in sync with our words, our beliefs, and our fundamental values. The initial opponents of this bill did us a favor, really, by asking us to remove and cut certain sections of the bill, because what is left is the fundamental answer to the question, ``Will we sell weapons to dictators?'' This bill is no longer about Presidential prerogatives being impinged on. This bill is no longer about too much congressional authority in the area of foreign policy-making. This bill is simply about whether we will apply the standards to our guns and tanks and missiles and bombs that we apply to computers and chemicals. In this country, even a car is considered a lethal weapon, and we apply certain standards on who can operate a car. So getting a driver's license and keeping that license subjects us all to certain competency requirements, certain standards. If we lose our license, then we fail to meet the requirements for operating the car. Do we not consider it important who purchases our rifles, tanks, guns, and bullets? We even have laws that govern and restrict the flow of certain information and knowledge. Should we not at least be concerned about who gets our weapons that kill people? At home, after much struggle, we have come up with standards on who can buy a gun. Convicted felons and the mentally ill cannot buy guns legally in this country. Thank goodness we were able to pass the Brady bill so that we could stop certain purchases of guns. Passing the Brady bill was done, though, only after the unreasonableness and extremism of the NRA was demonstrated to the American public. Unfortunately, the code of conduct has its own equivalent to the NRA which, I believe, is not only extreme but also reckless in its disregard of what happens when these weapons are delivered to our dictator clients. In 1964, the United States made a decision to support Mobutu Sese Seko, who became a tyrant and a dictator to the people of Zaire. Over the course of the decades of our support for his dictatorship, we shipped almost $170 million of weapons to him. We provided $18 million of training to the military; 1,356 officers, virtually the entire Zairian officer corps, received officer training. A total of $187 million of U.S. military aid went to Zaire. What was that aid? 2,500 riot control kits; 2,000 military vehicles for crowd control; 2,000 rifles; $2 million worth of ammunition, and 24 military aircraft. What we gave Mobutu was not military assistance to defend his country from outside intervention. What we gave to Mobutu was the means to control dissent and demonstrations. What we gave Mobutu was the means to control his own population and hence, to keep himself in power. As a result, we are complicit in how he used his military, trained and supplied by us. This is the kind of end use that concerns us. This is the kind of end use that compelled Dr. Arias and four other Nobel Peace Prize winners to come together 2 weeks ago in New York to declare their support for the code of conduct. Dr. Oscar Arias brought together Jorge Ramos-Horta of East Timor, Betty Williams of Northern Ireland, His Excellency the Dalai Lama of Tibet, and our own Elie Wiesel. Organizations that have won the Noble Peace Prize were also represented at this press conference: Amnesty International, the American Friends Service Committee, and the International Physicians for the Prevention of Nuclear War. Dr. Arias also had letters of support from Archbishop Desmond Tutu, Lech Walesa, and several others who were not able to attend. The gentleman from New York [Mr. Gilman] attended the press conference and was moved to a standing ovation after the remarks of Elie Wiesel. So, people who have been recognized in the international community for their dedication to peace have come together to say that this legislation is necessary. How will history record those who do not support this legislation? Member states of the European Union have already agreed to eight common criteria governing their own arms transfers. There is growing support for European Union-wide code of conduct among all of Europe's governments. Germany, Sweden, The Netherlands, Belgium, and Ireland are all leading this fight. But the boldest steps have been taken by Tony Blair's Britain. The New Labour Government has declared that centrality of human rights in its weapons sales is central to its decisions. So we are not alone, those of us who want the United States to stand on the opposite side of whatever dictator is there with ready cash for our guns and bullets. History teaches us that those weapons do not end up in a remote depot, they end up either intimidating or ``in'' people who want a better way of life and who dare to say so; who want freedom of expression and who dare to act; who want to live in a democracy as we do in this country and who dare to confront tyranny. We are not alone at home either, even in this administration. The recently-confirmed CIA director, George Tenet, on May 6, 1997, at a session of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, said the following: ``But the proliferation issue--and particularly the proliferation of ballistic missiles--and conventional weapons--we often ignore what the proliferation of conventional weapons means for U.S. forces--this issue is probably the greatest threat to U.S. forces and our men and women who deploy overseas than any other'' issue.

Ms. McKINNEY. Mr. Chairman, I cannot say it any better than our CIA director. The issue before the Congress today is a national security issue and a moral issue. Seldom are we given such a stark opportunity to be on the right side of both issues. The Arms Trade Code of Conduct is just such an opportunity. I ask my colleagues to vote for this amendment and let us be known by the values we espouse and not the weapons of oppression that we supply. Mr. Chairman, U.S. weapons are currently being used in 39 of the world's current 42 ethnic and territorial conflicts. In the past 4 years, 85 percent of U.S. arms sales to the Third World have gone to undemocratic governments. The United States is responsible for 44 percent of all weapons deliveries in the world. The United States is unqualifiedly the arms dealer to the world, and the merchant for death to the world's dictators. Language requiring Congress to approve an arms sale to a dictator before it's been made has been modified to give the President an automatic waiver for national security purposes which Congress could block after extensive debate. A total of 453 American soldiers have been killed by armies strengthened by our own weapons and military training: Iraq, Saddam Hussein; Panama, Manuel Noriega; Somalia, Siad Barre, and Haiti, the Duvalier family. In fiscal year 1994 $7 billion of taxpayer money went to subsidize U.S. arms exports. In fiscal year 1995, that figure jumped to $7.6 billion. After agricultural price supports, this represents the largest subsidy program for business in the entire Federal budget--Welfare for Weapons dealers. Our Government employs nearly 6,500 full time personnel to promote and service foreign arms sales by U.S. companies. U.S. subsidies for arms transfers are scheduled to increase. The international market for U.S. arms is estimated to be around $12 to $16 billion per year. Therefore, our foreign customers aren't even paying for the weapons that they get. And more than half of U.S. weapons sales will be paid for by the U.S. taxpayers. In 1995, subsidies for arms exports accounted for over 50 percent of U.S. bilateral aid and more than 39 percent of total U.S. foreign aid. the emphasis on promoting weapons exports has come at the expense of programs designed to promote economic development and social welfare in these recipient nations. I'd much rather see us exporting tractors and seeds to dictators than guns and bullets. The American arms trade policy is killing our citizens, destroying worldwide democracy, and sending us spiraling down a path of economic ruin. President Dwight D. Eisenhower said, ``There can be no peace without law. And there can be no law if we were to invoke one code of international conduct for those who oppose us and another for our friends.'' We must help to stop the arms trade boomerang. Over 300 organizations support the No Arms to Dictators Code of Conduct. Among these organizations are: Vietnam Veterans Of America Foundation, Young Women's Christian Association--the YMCA--of America, and Bread of the World, and organizations of the Presbyterian, Lutheran, and Roman Catholic churches. I would like to thank the hundreds of volunteers who have put thousands of hours into making the U.S. Code of Conduct our law. Each of us must be concerned about what happens when we sell weapons to dictators. I urge my colleagues to support the Arms Trade Code of Conduct.

Ms. McKINNEY

Ms. McKINNEY. Mr. Speaker, today I am proud to wear an official Jackie Robinson 50th anniversary shirt licensed by Terry Manufacturing, the largest African-American manufacturing apparel company in the United States. Fifty years ago this week Jackie Robinson shattered not just the color line in baseball, he also shattered the myths upon which Jim Crow America was built. A few brave men in major league baseball took the courageous step to hire one player. But in major league baseball, just as in other areas of American mainstream life, there are still many more barriers to tear down before we have reached our true ideal as a nation. Monday the world watched in awe as Tiger Woods shattered every record held for the Masters Tournament at Augusta National. Unfortunately there remain golf courses in America where families like Tiger and his family are not welcome and minorities cannot play. It is right and appropriate that we take the time now to celebrate how far we have come. Let us also reflect on how far we still have to go.

Ms. McKINNEY

Ms. McKINNEY. Mr. Speaker, I wanted to come to the floor this evening because I wanted to talk about the bill that we just passed here, H.R. 1, the comptime bill, flexibility time bill, what the gentlewoman from California [Ms. Woolsey] called the chumptime bill. I would first like to commend CBS Evening News for their March 18 Eye on America story reported by Sandra Hughes. I called CBS and requested a transcript because I want to read that transcript now. The opening shot, for those who did not see it, was a door opening and a woman by the name of Etta and her family walking out, and a narrator says: ``Just after dawn, just east of Charleston, the daily struggle begins for Etta Williams.'' And Etta sees her kids off to school, and a narrator says: ``Even though she was working up to 60 hours a week as a cook at the local Pizza Hut, Etta says she had to go on food stamps to feed her family because her manager was not paying her for all the hours she worked.'' Etta says: ``They go in, they take your hours, they delete it from your pay.'' The narrator says: ``This minimum wage mom has joined a dozen other employees suing Pizza Hut saying the company deleted countless hours from their weekly paychecks.'' Etta Williams continues: ``It is stealing from the poor, stealing, and they are getting rich off of it.'' The narrator says that we tried to talk to her manager at Mount Pleasant, SC, Pizza Hut, and the employees called the police. Then there is a segue to Gregg Dedrick who is a senior vice president eloquently situated in a nice plush office, and he says: ``I would say it is unfortunate she feels that way. I think we are a fair employer, we want to pay people a fair day's pay for the work they do, and we have processes in place to resolve those discrepancies.'' The narrator then says: ``But a former manager at a Pizza Hut in Walterboro, SC, told us a far different story. ``Pam Chapman is that former manager who says: I have to live with this. The thought of going and taking hours actually stealing from the employees.'' Pam Chapman admitted that every week she entered the computer and deleted hours from workers' payroll. Pam Chapman says: `I have been through 3 previous managers and every last one of them did the same thing.'' Then CBS concludes the story by saying all of this comes on the heels of a CBS news investigation into similar allegations at Albertson's grocery stores. In that report which was played as a recent Senate hearing on overtime workers in four States who are suing the grocery store chain claimed they were cheated out of millions of dollars in back pay. Jenni Perry was a bookkeeper. Jenni says, ``I was told by my store director to change, falsify, whatever you want to call it, time cards.'' Then CBS goes on to say, ``We wondered just how common these kinds of wage complaints are, so we asked the United States Department of Labor. They sent us this, and it was a great big, huge book, a printout, really, about this thick. Last year alone, more than 12,000 companies were fined a total of $100 million for not paying employees for all the hours they worked.'' Etta Williams ends by saying, ``It is not only stealing from me, they are taking away from my children too,'' which is why Etta Williams decided, in order to protect her family, she was going to have to stand up for herself. Now, the bill that we passed today has very real implications for the millions of Etta Williamses that are out there across this country, and for the benefit of my constituents, I want to make it clear to them what this is about. This bill is not family legislation and it needs to be vetoed by the President.

Ms. MCKINNEY

Ms. MCKINNEY. Mr. Speaker, for years Mexico has served as a gateway to the United States for drug traffickers. In fact, just 3 weeks ago, Mexico's drug czar was arrested on charges that he took bribes from cocaine dealers. This was just after he received highly sensitive information from U.S. officials detailing our antinarcotic strategy. Thus, if decertification is what happens to those who have hurt our efforts in the drug war, we must not only decertify Mexico and Colombia, we must also decertify our other unreliable partner in the drug war, the CIA. Last year the San Jose Mercury News reported that the CIA has had a major role in the flow of illegal narcotics from Mexico and other Latin American countries into the United States. Former financiers of the Nicaraguan Contras, testifying under oath, admitted that the CIA was an active participant in the drug trade and then used the profits to fund covert military operations. The administration's decision to certify Mexico, decertify Colombia, and sidestep the CIA has made a joke of the entire certification process. I call on the administration and Congress to report to the American people what role the CIA has played in moving drugs in our country. While drug dealers are preying on America's youth in the inner cities, millions of dollars are being laundered in American banks. Our prisons are brimming over, young people are dying in the streets, and the message that the administration sends is that a buck of trade is worth more than the tears of our mothers, the deaths of our brothers, and the shattered lives of too many American people. Some of us have just, quite frankly, had enough.

Ms. McKINNEY

Ms. McKINNEY. Mr. Speaker, a cloud of shame is hanging over America's intelligence community. In August, the San Jose Mercury News reported that the Central Intelligence Agency shipped cocaine into south central Los Angeles, then used that money to buy guns to overthrow the Government of Nicaragua. And while Aldrich Ames was busy selling us down the river, our ``Central Intoxication Agency'' was selling crack cocaine in south central Los Angeles. It is no wonder we could not predict the fall of the Soviet Union; the CIA was too busy shipping crack into the United States. Mr. Speaker, as the ``Hemp-Dope'' ticket traverses America proselytizing about the increase in drug use, the administration they hope to emulate, the Reagan-Bush administration, was running crack in the 1980's. I urge my colleagues to just say ``no'' to the ``Central Intoxication Agency'' and the ``Hemp-Dope'' ticket.

Ms. McKINNEY

Ms. McKINNEY. Mr. Speaker, I want to know what these guys are smoking. TheHemp-Dope ticket expects to cut taxes by $550 billion, increase military spending, balance the budget, and, at the same time, promises not to decimate Medicare and Social Security. As always, their plan cuts taxes for the wealthy first, then leaves the hard spending cuts for future Presidents. That is what I would call a political hit and run. Moreover, Mr. Speaker, Hemp-Dope wants to abolish the Department of Education at a time when our young people will have to compete in a changing global economy. Simply put, our Nation cannot afford another decade of voodoo Reaganomics, which bankrupted us in the first place. As the President said, we are on the right track to the 21st century. Just say no to Hemp-Dope.

Ms. McKINNEY

Ms. McKINNEY. Mr. Chairman, Este proyecto de ley es una desgracia y no es necesario. How rude can the Republican leadership be? At a time when America is hosting the world in Atlanta, here we are trying to silence other languages in some kind of perverted, xenophobic frenzy. Why not ban New York Accent English, or ban Southern English? Who are we to tell the American people--a free and diverse people--which language is the only language for dignity and respect? Are we so insecure about our heritage that we have to lash out at other languages? And what about the native American languages that were here long before English? Or the Americans who speak cajun? Mr. Speaker, this bill is just one more example of the hot button politics that dominates this Congress since the Republicans took over. I just wonder who we'll be told to hate next week.

Ms. McKINNEY

Ms. McKINNEY. Mr. Speaker, as a Member of Congress from the Metro- Atlanta area I, like the rest of the Nation, was horrified by the senseless bombing of innocent civilians at the Olympic Park. As Americans, we have had a false sense of security that we are somehow immune to terrorism on our soil. However, Mr. Speaker, we have always had terrorist acts committed against Americans in the United States--we just did not call it terrorism. Whether it was lynchings, church burnings, abortion clinic bombings, and now attacks by antigovernment groups, terrorism has, unfortunately, always been with us. Mr. Speaker, it is time now that we dealt with all terrorist acts head on. Although the House passed the President's antiterrorism bill, it was watered-down to the point where it is almost ineffectual. Now we have an opportunity to reintroduce the antiterrorism tools stripped from the legislation. Let us do the job right this time.

Ms. McKINNEY

Ms. McKINNEY. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.

Ms. McKINNEY. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to this antifamily legislation. Let us face it, the Republican record has been hideous on workers rights, and this bill is just their Medusa of antiworker proposals. In my 3\1/2\ years in Congress, I have never seen a bill more insidious than this attempt to lengthen the workweek with no corresponding increase in pay. Contrary to what the Republicans say, this bill abolishes overtime pay, period. Does anyone believe for 1 minute that workers were consulted on this bill? The so-called Working Families Flexibility Act allows employers to suddenly coerce workers into taking comp time instead of overtime pay. Employers will use this legislation to hire workers who agree to accept comp time instead of overtime pay. This bill allows employers to promote workers who acquiesce to comp time in lieu of overtime pay. Unlike overtime pay, workers can only use their comp time when it is convenient for their employers, not their families. So much for family friendly legislation Moreover, Mr. Chairman, workers can be forced to 75 hours a week and not see any comp time for 13 months. If the company goes bankrupt in that 13 months, too bad, the worker gets no comp time and no overtime pay. In effect, this bill forces workers to give their employers interest free loans until the boss says it is OK for them to use their accrued comp time. For families who rely on overtime pay to supplement their low salaries, they will be comforted in knowing that they might get some time off in the next 13 months. In short, Mr. Chairman, this bill legalizes the extraction of unpaid labor from workers at a time when people are already working longer and harder for less pay. Finally, employers can already give workers comp time as long as it is used in the same week that the overtime is worked. Mr. Chairman, I do not mind being a pit bull for the working men and women of this country.

Ms. McKINNEY. Mr. Chairman, I rise to offer this amendment because I believe that this is an amendment whose time has come. Unfortunately, I understand that it will be ruled nongermane and, therefore, I offer the amendment but I will withdraw the amendment as well. I do want to talk about my amendment, which instead of increasing the workweek as this legislation does, my amendment reduces the workweek. In fact, while this is called the comp time bill, some of my friends have said this is the chump time bill because our colleagues on the other side of the aisle are taking the working men and women of this country for chumps. My amendment reduces the workweek as defined in the Fair Labor Standards Act from 40 hours to 37 hours. That means that overtime pay would start at 37 hours rather than 40 hours and also that comp time would start at 37 hours rather than 40 hours. Already the United States lags far behind other countries in terms of our time off for our workers. I would like to submit for the Record an article from the Atlanta Constitution that documents the fact that we lag behind other industrialized countries in the world with respect to the time off for our men and women who are in the work force. We do not need to be talking about making our hard-pressed workers work longer hours for even less money. If America's workers had 3 hours less work time, what would we see? I believe we would see more families together. I think we would see more fathers and mothers with quality time with their children. We would see an enhancement in the quality of life for our working men and women, our working fathers and mothers. I think if our colleagues truly supported family time, they would support this amendment. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent to withdraw my amendment.

Ms. McKINNEY

Ms. McKINNEY. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in strong support of real campaign finance reform. I rise, however, in opposition to the sorry excuse that the Republicans are offering today. Had it not been for the Democrats, the Republican bill would still allow individuals to contribute up to $3.1 million a year. And while that provision was revised, the Republicans actually increase the influence of soft-money contributions. The Democratic substitute, on the other hand, reduces this influence and requires a spending limit of $600,000. The Republican bill still allows unlimited campaign spending. In short, Mr. Chairman, the Democratic substitute offers real reform while the born-again Republican bill increases the role of big money in politics. Once again, Mr. Chairman, the Republican Party has demonstrated its desire to perfect the art of cash-and-carry government.

Ms. McKINNEY

Ms. McKINNEY. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the Frank amendment and oppose this bill. Mr. Chairman, once again, the Republican leadership is seeking to divide the American people by appealing to our emotions and fears. Rather than working to protect middle-class families in this changing economy, the GOP prefers to divert everyone's attention from Republican efforts to cripple Medicare and cut taxes for the rich. Why, Mr. Chairman, are we targeting gays and lesbians, blacks, and immigrants this year, now, today? The answer, pure and simple, is politics--election year politics. The Republicans will stop at nothing to win the White House and the Congress. They will fan the flames of intolerance and bigotry right up to November. And if the result is an election won--at the expense of national unity--their attitude is, so be it. By the time my Republican colleagues are done, this country will be a boiling cauldron. This bill doesn't prevent a single divorce, a single case of spousal abuse, or protect the institution of marriage. Mr. Chairman, America was settled by people fleeing the intolerance and bigotry prevalent in Europe. Our Nation has always been a haven for those seeking peace, tolerance, and justice. The real issues are extremist Republican values versus American values. Health care for the elderly and needy versus tax breaks for the wealthy. Money for children and education versus money for corporate welfare. More police on the streets versus assault weapons in the hands of dope dealers. In short, the real issue is the kind of America we want--one of hope and fairness, or one of division and hate.

Ms. McKINNEY

Ms. McKINNEY. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this time. Mr. Speaker, my colleagues who support extending most-favored-nation status to China claim that the importance of trade should be the only issue considered. While I would also look at the murder of 1 million Tibetans, the selling of missile technology to rogue nations, the human rights atrocities committed against Chinese citizens, and the military intimidation of Taiwan, I will only discuss trade-related reasons why we should not extend MFN. First and foremost, MFN for China isn't working. In 1995 our worldwide trade deficit was $111 billion. Almost one-third of this amount was our growing deficit with China. In addition, they are notorious for printing American intellectual property. Last year United States companies lost $2.4 billion because China refused to enforce its intellectual property laws. Mr. Speaker, China's crimes against humanity and against America's business interests can no longer be tolerated. China does not deserve, and has not earned most-favored-nation status.

Ms. McKINNEY

Ms. McKINNEY. Mr. Chairman, Metropolitan Atlanta is the fastest growing major metropolitan area in the nation. DeKalb County, a major part of metropolitan Atlanta, is the second most populated county in the State of Georgia, with 577,877 residents in 1994 and a projected growth to 719,761 residents by the year 2010. This growth is bound to exacerbate current stress on the county's increasingly insufficient public transportation system. Regarding the modes of transportation used in DeKalb County, 75 percent of commuters drive alone and only 8 percent use public transportation to reach their work on a daily basis. Moreover, almost half the county's residents work within the county. Clearly these present factors contribute to the daily traffic jams that occur throughout the populated communities of DeKalb County. While the Metropolitan Atlanta Rapid Transit Authority's [MARTA] rail system serves the city of Atlanta, only two lines are dedicated to serve DeKalb County, and the vast number of rail stations exists outside DeKalb County. For these reasons, I requested $1 million to be included in H.R. 3675 to conduct a study exploring the feasibility of a light-rail line in DeKalb County. This study will examine the impact of the line and its effect on the surrounding communities. Among the institutions and communities that will benefit from the MARTA extension are the Emory community that is home to the university, the Center for Disease Control, several other prominent health institutions, and the residential area of South DeKalb. One excellent possibility would be a rail line connecting the Lindbergh Station on the current North- Northeast-South Line nexus with the East Line at East Lake Station and extending into Southern DeKalb County to DeKalb College South Station. Such a line would be a vital connection between these important areas. Thus, to ensure the future vitality of Metro Atlanta, we must continue to explore new ways of transporting its residents. I commend the chairman and the ranking member for their work on this bill, and for their efforts to meet the transportation needs of America's fastest growing metropolitan area.

Ms. McKINNEY

Ms. McKINNEY. Mr. Speaker, over the past few days I have spoken with people who have seen the center of their communities destroyed. When a church is burned much more is desecrated than the wood and the bricks. Churches are placed where families and friends meet, hold community events, and pray. In poor areas where people struggle to get through each day, the church is a place to ask for strength , help and perseverance. Thankfully, despite losing their churches, these people have not lost their spirit. In DeKalb County, where I live, the predominantly white and integrated congregations affected by these cowardly acts must know that there are extremists in this country who wish to divide us. However, now more than ever, we must unite and send a clear message that their efforts to divide us will fail. They may burn our churches, but they will never destroy our spirit.

Ms. McKINNEY

Ms. McKINNEY. Mr. Speaker, proudly beating their chests in 1994, the Republicans signed a contract with America which promised to balance the budget. Last week, however, almost every Republican voted for a budget resolution that would increase the deficit by $40 billion over the next 2 years. It was only after 3 years of hard work by President Clinton and the Democrats that we succeeded in reducing the Reagan and Bush deficits from $290 billion a year to $130 billion. And now, Mr. Speaker, Republican leaders want to take us back to the borrow-and-spend policies which put us in this deficit hole in the first place. By now it should be crystal clear that the only things the Republican Party cares about are giving tax breaks to the wealthy and more money to the Pentagon. Mr. Speaker, let's face it. The Contract on America was nothing more than the vehicle by which the Republican Party delivered Government handouts to defense contractors and junk bond dealers, period.

Ms. McKINNEY

Ms. McKINNEY. Mr. Speaker, in 1981, President Reagan convinced Congress to increase military spending and cut taxes for the wealthy, claiming this would balanced the budget by 1983. Well, 1983 came along and our deficit exploded to $207 billion in just the first 2 years of the Reagan administration. Yesterday, Mr. Speaker, Republican leaders did the exact same thing. The Republican budget resolution passed last night actually increases the deficit by $40 billion over the next 2 years, just to pay for--you guessed it--tax breaks and star wars. In summary, Mr. Speaker, Republican leaders shut down the Government twice just so they could increase the deficit by $40 billion, leaving real deficit reduction to future congresses. As Forrest Gump said, Mr. Speaker, ``stupid is, as stupid does.''