Juanita Millender-McDonald

Ms. MILLENDER-McDONALD

Ms. MILLENDER-McDONALD. Mr. Speaker, during roll call vote 110, 111, and 112, which is H. Con. Res. 218, S. Con. Res. 37, and H.J. Res. 102, I was unavoidably detained because my flight has just gotten in. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yes.''

Ms. MILLENDER-McDONALD

Ms. MILLENDER-McDONALD. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to commemorate Take Our Daughters to Work Day. The Capitol Hill activities for Take Our Daughters to Work Day have been rescheduled for next Thursday because of the D.C. schools having academic testing today. Today many fathers and mothers took their daughters to work. Take Our Daughters to Work Day was created in 1993 to help maintain that essential feeling of self-worth and enhance their understanding of what is possible and what they can accomplish if they put forth the effort. This is an important day for the millions of girls who are provided with the rare and much-needed opportunity to meet successful professional women and envision the immense possibilities that stand before them. Numerous studies have shown how many girls exhibit a strong and distinct sense of self-confidence until they reach the age of 11. Then there is a sudden drop in self-esteem, a lowered sense of self-worth, and intense feelings of insecurity about their own judgments and emotions. Take Our Daughters to Work Day is an effective way of maintaining their self-esteem. Last year, 48.3 million adults said that their company and their spouse's company participated in this special day. In addition, three in ten adults said that they or their spouse personally participated by taking a girl to their workplace, which equals 15.4 million people. Clearly, this is a day not only for this Nation's daughters but for parents, employers, and people who understand the value of investing in and training the younger generation to become better, stronger, and more effective members of the labor force in the years ahead. As we approach the new millennium, Take Our Daughters to Work Day and similar activities which promote reaching out to young girls and women will become even more essential. By the turn of the century, 8 out of every 10 women between the ages of 25 and 54 will be on the job because they want and, in most cases, need to work. For the first time in history, most new jobs will require education or training beyond high school. I hope that Members will participate in the Take Our Daughters to Work Day activities we have organized for our colleagues on Capitol Hill next week. Our Nation's daughters need to know who they are and what they can be, which will exceed far beyond any societal limitations that were placed on their foremothers and to some degree continue to this day. This knowledge and self-confidence help them develop more ambitious dreams, strive to take on more challenges, and become valuable leaders in America's future. We look forward to next week, Take Our Daughters to Work Day.

Ms. MILLENDER-McDONALD

Ms. MILLENDER-McDONALD. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 2729, a Private Bill For the Relief of Ruth Hairston Relating to Her Application for a Survivor Annuity. I introduced this legislation in an attempt to provide relief for my constituent, Mrs. Ruth Hairston. This legislation seeks a waiver of the 30-day period to file an appeal to the U.S. Court of Appeals. Mrs. Hairston requested reconsideration from the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) on May 26, 1995 of their decision to deny her survivor annuity benefits under the Civil Service Retirement System as the ``former spouse'' of Paul Hairston. The Hairstons were married for more than 45 years when their marriage ended in divorce on March 16, 1987. Mr. Hairston had almost 35 years of civil service when he retired on June 11, 1990. When he retired, he selected a survivor annuity for Mrs. Hairston with a reduced annuity for himself. Mrs. Hairston started to receive retirement annuity payments in 1988 but these payments were stopped after Mr. Hairston's death on February 22, 1995, because it was concluded that she was not entitled to benefits as a ``former spouse.'' When Mr. Hairston retired, there was no statutory provision which would have allowed Mrs. Hairston to receive a survivor annuity as a divorcee (former spouse). However, the Civil Service Retirement Spouse Act of 1985 changed this, and allowed Mr. Hairston to elect a survivor annuity within two years following the divorce. Mr. Hairston did not make a formal request for Mrs. Hairston to receive a survivor annuity after the divorce (as a former spouse), neither did he make an annuity adjustment to stop Mrs. Hairston from receiving the larger portion of his retirement annuity which were due to her under community assets. He was informed that he was still being charged for a survivor annuity after his divorce and that he no longer had to allow Mrs. Hairston to have the larger portion of his annuity, yet he did not change this. The fact that Mr. Hairston did not change this annuity arrangement establishes an ``intent'' for Mrs. Hairston to received a survivor benefit after his death. Intent is one of the grounds to excuse the failure of Mr. Hairston to make a formal election (Valee versus Office of Personnel Management). On October 31, 1995 the Merit Systems Protection Board upheld the OPM decision to deny Mrs. Hairston a survivor annuity. At the time, Mrs. Hairston was severely ill and under doctor's care and could not file a timely appeal to the U.S. Court of Appeals. Mrs. Hairston remains in poor health and faces eviction from her home because of her inability to meet her financial obligations. She desperately needs the survivor's annuity she deserves. It is because of these extreme circumstances that relief through private legislation is necessary. Therefore, I commend my colleagues for supporting this bill and providing Mrs. Hairston with an opportunity to appeal the denial of her survivor's annuity. The bill was ordered to be engrossed and read a third time, was read the third time, and passed, and a motion to reconsider was laid on the table.

Ms. MILLENDER-McDONALD

Ms. MILLENDER-McDONALD. Mr. Speaker, I would like to share with you a historic event I convened yesterday so that my colleagues and I could celebrate Women's History Month. I would like to share with you my remarks at the first Women of Congress' Wreath-Laying Ceremony at the Women in Military Service for America Memorial at Arlington National Cemetery: Good afternoon, I'd like to thank my friends and colleagues Congresswoman Marcy Kaptur, Congresswoman Barbara Kennelly, Congresswoman Tillie Fowler, Congresswoman Sheila Jackson-Lee and Congresswoman Corrine Brown for being here at the Women of Congress' Memorial Wreath-Laying Ceremony. We have come today to honor the brave women who served in our Armed Services and to recognize their outstanding service to this country and the ultimate sacrifice that was made to enable us to have the freedom we so much enjoy as a country. It seems fitting that we pay homage to them during Women's History Month and to salute them for their contributions as patriots of this great nation. So we have come to this shrine that was built as a lasting memorial of their service, bravery and sacrifice during military conflicts dating back to the founding of America. Without the heroic efforts of American service women, we would not be here today. Women In Military Service for America Memorial was dedicated on October 18, 1997. This is the first major, national Memorial honoring all military women of all eras, past, present and future. Women have served in all of America's major conflicts. Beginning with the American Revolution--when some women disguised themselves as men to join the Continental Army. In the wars of the 18th and 19th centuries and during the Civil War women were hired to provide medical care, forage for supplies, cook, make clothing, engage in sabotage, scout and serve as couriers. Dr. Mary Walker, an Army physician who served during the Civil War, was the first and only woman awarded the Congressional Medal of Honor for her work in treating patients. Women were first recruited as members of the armed services in World War I. With more than 35,000 women having served in roles ranging from nurses to telephone operators. It was the first war in which American women served overseas. More than 350,000 women served in World War II, which included the first female officers. More than 200 military women of the Women's Army Corps and Women Air Force Service Pilots died in action overseas or ferrying aircraft; and 88 were held as prisoners of war. In the Gulf War (July 2, 1990 to April 6, 1991), women accounted for 35,000 of the 540,000 U.S. troops. Although they were not assigned to combat by law, these women ferried fuel, food and troops into combat areas. Two women were taken prisoner and 11 died. The Number of Women Who Served in U.S. Military Conflicts are: Persian Gulf--41,000 Panama--770 Grenada--170 Vietnam--7,500 Korea--48,000 World War II--350,000 World War I--35,000 Spanish-American War--1,500 As we lay this wreath, may it symbolize the appreciation we have for the courageous servicewomen who dedicated their lives for their country. We appreciate the service and the lives of these noble women. May they always be remembered for their bravery.

Ms. MILLENDER-McDONALD

Ms. MILLENDER-McDONALD. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding me the time. Mr. Chairman, over the last 2 years I have heard a lot of talk about building bridges to the 21st century. Let us talk about building roads and bridges for America's future, real roads and real bridges that are traveled on by real Americans. BESTEA builds those roads and builds those bridges and provides the infrastructure that will allow our Nation to move into the 21st century. I come from the most populous State in the Nation, the great State of California, with 32 million people, 25 million registered vehicles, and moves 30 percent of our Nation's freight traffic on our highways. Clearly, we have the most traveled roads and bridges of any State represented in this House and contribute more in gas taxes to the Highway Trust Fund. As one of the cochairs of the California ISTEA Task Force, I, along its founder, my friend, the gentleman from California (Mr. Jay Kim), held a number of hearings throughout our great State. In those hearings our State and local elected officials, municipal planning organizations and citizens at large told us one thing: Pass BESTEA. It is a good bill for California, and we all know that what is good for California is good for the Nation. Transportation provides substantial economic benefit to our country. According to the study by the Department of Transportation, 42,000 jobs are created for every $1 billion we invest in highways, transit, and bridges. How can we expect to compete in today's global economy without a world class highway and transit system? I would like to congratulate both my chairman and my ranking member on doing a yeoman's job on bringing this bipartisan bill to the floor. I will urge colleagues on both sides of the aisle to dismiss the empty rhetoric about demonstration projects and focus on our Nation's infrastructure needs to compete in this global economy. Let us move America.

Ms. MILLENDER-McDONALD. Mr. Chairman, I would like to thank the distinguished gentleman from Illinois for offering this amendment and for yielding me time. Mr. Chairman, last year we passed a welfare-to-work bill, knowing that that bill was not the sound bill it should be for those who are moving from welfare to work. This amendment that my friend has put on the floor is one that will help us to move this generation of welfare recipients to work. One in 20 welfare recipients in this country own a car. That is a frightening statistic. When one considers that when we passed welfare reform we placed strict time limits on the welfare recipients, we can ill-afford to not pass this amendment. I urge all Members to pass the Davis amendment.

Ms. MILLENDER-McDONALD. Mr. Chairman, I thank my colleague from California for yielding to me. A distinguished Member of this House once wrote that ``In politics we have no permanent friends, no permanent enemies, just permanent interests.'' It gives me no great pleasure to rise in opposition to one of my Women Caucus colleagues, but I do have permanent interests, and that is the economically disadvantaged. As the co-chair of the Women-owned Business of the Women's Caucus, I held a hearing the top of the year because women were complaining that, though we have mandated about 5 percent of the procurement contracts, they have only gotten 1.8 percent of the contracts. This is what DBE is all about. It allows women and others, irrespective of their race, the opportunity to apply for contracts if they qualify. The DBE program is not a set-aside, it is not quotas, it is simply giving them an opportunity to qualify for contracts for those who are economically disadvantaged. The disadvantaged business enterprise provisions of BESTEA are sound and were passed out by the full committee with bipartisan support. I join the Senate in saying ``no'' on the Roukema amendment and ``yes'' for moving an agenda for women-owned businesses.

Ms. MILLENDER-McDONALD. Mr. Chairman, a distinguished Member of this House once wrote that ``in politics, we have no permanent enemies, just permanent interests.'' It gives me no great pleasure to rise in opposition to one of my Women's Caucus colleagues, but I do have permanent interests--the economically disadvantaged. The Disadvantaged Business Enterprise provisions of BESTEA are sound and were passed out of the full Committee with bi-partisan support. The DBE programs in this bill do not include set asides or quotas. These DBE programs use a competitive bidding process to include minority and women-owned businesses. As Co-Chair of the Women's Caucus Women-Owned Businesses Legislative Task Force, I held a hearing on the lack of procurement opportunities for women-owned businesses because women were complaining that they did not have access to federal contracts. The Disadvantaged Business Enterprise program is fair, flexible and complies with the Supreme Court's ``strict scrutiny'' standard. It serves as the model program for federal agencies aspiring to extend contracting opportunities for women and minority-owned firms who receive disproportionately fewer contracts and subcontracts than their qualifications and ability warrant. It sets the goal of 10 percent of highway and transit funds be used for services rendered by disadvantaged businesses. State and local governments then set their own goals based on the numbers of disadvantaged businesses in their local markets. And if a prime contractor cannot find a qualified disadvantaged business, the state can waive the goal entirely. Any individual owning a business may demonstrate that she or he is socially and economically disadvantaged, even if that individual is not a woman or minority. In fact, businesses owned by white males have qualified for DBE status. Since the inclusion of women in the DBE program in 1987 under President Ronald Reagan, women have enhanced their procurement dollars by approximately 175 percent. The participation of women and minority- owned small and disadvantaged businesses in federally assisted highway construction contracting has grown from a mere 1.9 percent in 1978 to 14.8 percent in 1996. In fiscal year 1996, 6.7 percent of contracts were awarded to women- owned businesses under the DBE program, generating $1.4 billion for women-owned businesses and producing 62,000 new jobs in highway and transit industries. Between 1987 and 1996, women-owned businesses in the field of construction grew by 171 percent. During that same time period, contracts to women-owned businesses increased from 2.6 percent to 6.7 percent in 1996. As of 1996, there were more than one million women-owned businesses in the state of California--that is a 77.7 percent growth since 1987 when Ronald Reagan signed into law the inclusion of women in the DBE program. In California, women-owned businesses received less than 4 percent of the DBE dollars. We need the DBE program. White-owned construction firms received 50 times as many loan dollars as black-owned firms with identical equity. At least 492 firms have grown from subcontractors to prime contractors after entering the DBE program. The Senate voted 58 to 37 to defeat an amendment to replace the DBE program. I urge the House to follow their bipartisan lead and maintain this fair, effective and constitutional program.

Ms. MILLENDER-McDONALD

Ms. MILLENDER-McDONALD. Mr. Speaker, today I am introducing legislation to help save our Nation's children: The Prohibition Against Alcohol Traffic to Minors Act. The PAAT Act curbs the problem of underage drinking by prohibiting the ``direct shipment'' of alcoholic beverages to persons not meeting a State's legal drinking age. The bill amends Title 18, United States Code by inserting a new section after 1865 that prohibits shippers, their employees, common carriers or agents of common carriers or delivery companies from delivering a package containing an alcoholic beverage or compound, fit for consumption, to any person not meeting the minimum drinking age within a state. On Friday, December 12, 1997, a local NBC affiliate aired in which an underage youth ordered and received shipment of alcoholic beverages. The youth in question lived in New York, purchased the alcohol via the internet from a retailer in California, paid for the order with a credit card, and accepted delivery of the alcohol from a commercial air-freight carrier. This same story is also the subject of an undercover operation being conducted by the Attorney General of the State of New York. While this particular incident was documented by television cameras, there are numerous others that are not. According to the Center for Disease Control, 80.4% percent of the nation's high school students have had at least one drink of alcohol during their lifetime; 51.6% have had at least one drink in a 30 day period; and 32.6% qualify as ``episodic heavy drinkers'' having had five or more drinks on at least one occasion during a 30 day period. Sixty-nine percent of Americans polled oppose the direct shipment of alcohol to minors; 85% agree that the sale of alcoholic beverages over the Internet would give minors easier access to alcohol and could result in more abuse; and 70% of those polled don't trust delivery drivers to ensure that the recipient of alcoholic beverages via common carriers is at least 21 years of age. Direct shippers operate outside of the licensed distribution system. The licensed beverage distribution system is an essential and legal of the alcohol control process and contributes billions in federal and state taxes each year. Direct shipments circumvent these laws and robs states of tax revenues. Florida, Tennessee, Kentucky, Georgia and North Carolina have recently upgraded their laws to make ``direct shipment'' a felony. At least 26 other states have sent ``cease and desist'' letters to wineries or retailers urging them to stop illegal shipments. Every state has set 21 as the minimum drinking age. The passage of ``21'' laws by states stopped underage drinkers from driving to another state to purchase alcohol. However, Internet and toll-free direct shipment creates a new technological way for underage drinkers to have alcohol shipped directly to the home. With ``shipments'' there is no regulatory system to guard against underage access and to collect alcohol beverage taxes. What started many years ago as a cottage industry to sell rare wines and micro brewed beer to connoisseurs has burgeoned into a billion dollar a year business. According to the Center for Disease Control, 80.4% percent of the nation's high school students have had at least one drink of alcohol during their lifetime; 51.6% have had at least one drink in a 30 day period; and 32.6% qualify as ``episodic heavy drinkers'' having had five or more drinks on at least one occasion during a 30 day period. This behavior is dangerous, life threatening and must be stopped. I ask that my colleagues support our nation's children and pass this important legislation. Summary of the Prohibition Against Alcohol Traffic to Minors Act (PAAT Act) The PAAT Act curbs the problem of underage drinking by prohibiting the ``direct shipment'' of alcohol beverages to persons not meeting a State's legal drinking age. The bill amends Title 18, United States Code by inserting a new section (1866) after 1865 that prohibits shippers, their employees, common carriers or agents of common carriers, delivery companies, or business entities that deliver goods from delivering a package containing an alcoholic beverage or compound, fit for consumption, to any person not meeting the minimum drinking age within a state.

Ms. MILLENDER-McDONALD

Ms. MILLENDER-McDONALD. Absolutely. I am a product of the private schools, but my father paid for the tuition, not, he did not strip public education funds for me to go to a private school. And so I submit to you for parents who want to pay for the private tuition, so be it. But we can ill afford to have anyone in this body strip the funds from public education to trick parents into going to schools whereby the parents will not be able to continue, first of all, the tuition fee. Tuition fee as we looked at this a couple of years ago when we had that as a proposition on the California ballot was beyond the amounts of money that the voucher system would entitle them to have. So consequently, they would not have enough money to even pay for the tuition, let alone the transportation and all other factors that are embedded in this whole notion of transferring kids from public schools to private schools. I will say to you that I am not for that, but a lot of my parents are not for that; they are African American parents. Maybe it is because we have drilled them quite a bit. We have had sessions with them, and they do understand the ramifications of the issue if in fact they would choose to do that. And they do not choose to have a voucher system.

Ms. MILLENDER-McDONALD. We are trying to educate the masses because I think it is important that we do that. I think we as CBC Members should really do the network and the cross to the school board Members and others to educate our constituencies to let them know that stop before you pick up the wrong plum because that might not be the plum, that might be the plum with the worm in it. We must be careful of folks coming in sheep clothing because it may not be the right thing that is applicable to our child getting a quality education. I think we can do that. We can do that and should do that expeditiously so that we can provide the type of leadership that African Americans and other minorities need when it comes to this voucher program. We must just turn off from that and start looking at the number of children who must be educated by public schools and get the type of school facilities that will be conducive to these kids and a quality education. I am just appalled at us still hammering out and staying on this one issue of vouchers and not looking at the crumbling schools, the inferior types of classrooms and schoolhouses that we are asking our children to go to, and yet we are talking about the 21st century and this global work force. This is why businesspeople are coming now to me asking what can they do to help create the climate in public schools whereby our children can learn and have a quality education. And that is the road that I am going to journey, not this other road.

Ms. MILLENDER-McDONALD. The gentleman is absolutely right, I have heard of that. I think again it is unconscionable that we are talking about bringing folks into a country that has so much to offer and a people who are thirsty for this type of education that we cannot educate our own to provide them the jobs that will be sorely need in the Silicon Valley to all other places where high tech is booming. So I submit to the gentleman that I hope that we come to our senses before this bill comes and goes off of this floor. What type of message are we sending to our students? I have a science academy with very bright kids coming from low-income families. It is not the top 1, 2 and 5 percent, it is the middle level who are very sharp kids who are going to this academy. They are looking for these jobs in the future. What am I to tell them when they are making the A's and B's and wanting to go to MIT and others; that I am sorry someone from overseas might come and take their jobs? I cannot do that, and, therefore, I will be fighting against that bill.

Ms. MILLENDER-McDONALD. We thank the gentleman so much for this tonight. I am happy to have had an opportunity to come and share with him my feelings. Again, I thank him so much for being just absolutely a stalwart person in bringing this education issue to the people across this Nation so that they can write us and let us know that they agree with us. They applaud what the gentleman is doing, and I hope he will continue his great work for all our children. One-third of all elementary and secondary schools in the United States, serving 14 million students, need extensive repair or renovation. Over 60 percent of the Nation's 110,000 public elementary and secondary school facilities need major repair. In 1996, an estimated $112 billion was needed to repair and upgrade school facilities to a ``good'' condition. Many schools do not have the physical infrastructure to take advantage of computers and other technology needed to meet the challenges of the next century. I am a former school teacher for the Los Angeles Unified School District in California. In California, 87 percent of the schools report a need to upgrade or repair on-site buildings to good overall condition. Seventy-one percent of all California schools have at least one inadequate building feature, and of these building feature problems: 40 percent are the roofs; 42 percent are exterior walls and windows; 41 percent are plumbing; 41 percent are heating, ventilation, and air conditioning; and 37 percent of schools do not even have sufficient capability to use computers. Currently, 25 percent of schools are too small or overcrowded and the Department of Education predicts that the Nation will need 6,000 more schools by the year 2006.

Ms. MILLENDER-McDONALD. And the one real solution to keep America strong, we must invest in public education. Vouchers are not the answer. I can tell you that unequivocally, because when you give the vouchers, you are only giving X amount of dollars, supposedly, for the tuitional fee or tuitional cost of the student going to a private school. But you do not take into consideration the transportation that the parent has to provide for that student to go over there. If that student gets ill, the means by which or the inability of parents to go, to find their way to the school to take the child to what we perceive now, not really any health care facilities at all. The kids are not networking in the community of which they live. As a former educator, I will say to you, I fought the voucher in California and will fight it again because vouchers are not the answer. I am for charter schools, for those experimental types of schools that will allow the local control to be in control of their schools and that is because parents are involved in that process. That is why I am open to that concept. But never to the one that suggests that vouchers will be the answer when vouchers have not and will not be the answer to quality education for students. You are taking them out of their neighborhood environments. You are putting them ofttimes in environments that are more hostile because they do not know anyone and it becomes an isolated environment and then the parents are ill prepared to go and get the child if the child is sick. And so the voucher system is not a system that will work. I submit to you that a lot of our Presidents went to public schools, finished public schools.

Ms. MILLENDER-McDONALD. Absolutely. I come from inner city so I am talking about the schools in the Los Angeles Unified School District, in the Compton School District, in the Long Beach School District. These are urban school districts that I am talking about, with the majority minority students. As we look at the work force in the year 2000 and beyond, it will be a majority minority. But we cannot educate kids in these dilapidated schools. That is what we are talking about. Minority students, African American students, Latinos, Asians and others, they will not be able to move into the 21st century because they will be behind having been impeded by the lack of infrastructure in these schools. Let me give you some more statistics. Over 60 percent of the Nation's 100,000 public and elementary school facilities need major repair. We are talking about schools across the strata but we are really talking about a lot of the urban schools because that is where the parents are not able to put money into the schools to help, whereas in suburban schools, some suburban schools and some is rural schools. Rural schools and urban schools are pretty much in the same boat. They, too, are witnessing a decline in school facilities that will not be conducive for children and their learning. In 1996, an estimated $112 billion was needed to repair and upgrade school facilities into a good condition, not excellent condition, which means that the child might come in and something, plaster might fall on them. So when you talk about our African American children, you are talking about schools that are absolutely dilapidated and we should feel badly, we should really feel, talking about feeling ungodly, we should when we ask kids to go to these types of schools to learn. We do not come to this House where the roof is leaking and the plaster is falling. Why should we ask the 50 something million children in this country to be put in that type of environment. So I am happy tonight that you have come to talk about that and to talk about all of the things that are impeding the quality education, public education that is sorely needed in this country. Public education must be the tool that helps African American children, other minority children to get the head start that they need if we are going to cross this bridge into the 21st century with students and ultimately workers to be prepared for this global work force. I will defer to the gentleman.

Ms. MILLENDER-McDONALD. I thank the gentleman so much. When I heard the gentleman speak about the emergency state that our education system is in, I had no other recourse but to come to this floor. Let me first thank the gentleman for his unwavering, tireless efforts on behalf of the children of this country because he comes to this floor every night to talk about the conditions of education in this country and until we do something about that, I am sure he is going to continue to come and he is going to pull some of us out. Because we recognize what the state of emergency the education system is in, as I serve on the National Commission on Teaching and America's Future, I was pleased to hear the President's education initiative that he brought on the night of the State of the Union. And there are two very key components of that education initiative. One is the 100,000 new qualified teachers. We must have qualified teachers to teach our students if they are to engage in this global work force beyond the year 2000. The second part of that initiative is school construction. We can ill afford to talk about the infrastructure of our roads and bridges and not talk about the infrastructure of our schools. You are absolutely right. They are delapidated. They are the worst things that we can provide for our children when we talk about environments that are conducive to learning. I have gone to a lot of schools, the majority of the schools in my district, but a lot of other schools across this Nation. It is absolutely deplorable that we want to talk about educating our children when we do not put our money where our mouths are in, putting up the funds for the school construction to build the infrastructure for educating our children. It is absolutely unconscionable that we sit in this House and those on the other side of the aisle speak about education and speak about productivity when it comes to businesses but they do not see that it starts in the classrooms. When children have to run for cover when it rains because of leaky roofs, when they are sitting in classrooms and the plaster falls from the walls and from the top of the classroom and they have to run, that is lost productivity in a sense because they are not being trained. Therefore, they are not learning and it impedes those students. So what you are talking about is absolutely the number one issue in this country. If we are going to talk about education and the quality of education, we must first put our children in classrooms and facilities that are conducive to learning. I brought some statistics along and I want you to just hear me out here for a second. One-third of all elementary and secondary schools in the United States serving 14 million students need extensive repair or renovation. Now this is what we are talking about.

Ms. MILLENDER-McDONALD

Ms. MILLENDER-McDONALD. Mr. Speaker, as we continue to celebrate Women's History Month, today we have gotten together, both my colleague and friend, the gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. Kelly) and I, who are cochairs of the Women's Caucus on Women-Owned Businesses, to come tonight to speak on women-owned businesses. I am pleased that such a strong showing of Members will be coming forth to speak on this issue. The gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. Kelly) and I, in cochairing the Women-Owned Businesses Caucus, had, for the first time ever, a women's caucus hearing on woman-owned businesses on September 25 of last year. In that hearing, a lot of things were revealed. We delved into the problems facing women-owned businesses and explored the obstacles that these women continue to face in trying to obtain contracts with the Federal Government. Current procurement rates to women-owned businesses is 1.8 percent. The Federal goal is 5 percent. This was a concern of ours, and as we began to probe, we wanted to get down to the real issue as to why women, who are making up the largest growth of jobs and growth of businesses, were unable to get the Federal procurement goal of 5 percent. The hearing further brought up the problems of the lack of access to the Federal contracting process, the bundling of contracts, the need for more outreach to women business owners, poor and incomplete feedback provided to businesses when their bids are not accepted, and frustration in the certification process. The certification process was one particular concern of ours. Thus, our introduction of House Resolution 313. This resolution was introduced so that we can begin to recommend to agencies that they make a part of their outreach information on contracting practices and opportunities readily available to women-owned businesses and recommend the ``Rule of One'' where at least one woman-owned business is solicited on all competitive acquisitions. We would also like to mention that the Clinton Administration supports doubling the funding from $4 million to $9 million for SBA women's business centers, and then, in addition to that, funding the Census Bureau's Survey of Women-Owned Businesses. We must ensure that women-owned businesses get the type of support that they need in order for their growth as well as their opportunities to expand. I would also like to congratulate the SBA for launching a new initiative for women entrepreneurs, the On-Line Women's Business Center, which helps women start and expand their businesses. Mr. Speaker, the statistics are really exciting. In California, from 1987 to 1996, the number of women-owned businesses have grown by 78 percent, employment has increased by 255 percent, and sales have grown by 313 percent. California ranks first out of 50 States in the number of women-owned businesses, first in employment and first in sales. So as my colleagues can imagine, we are excited about women-owned businesses and are really eager to ensure that the women get their rightful 5 percent Federal contract procurement, procurement contracts, so that they can continue to expand and grow as we look at women who are coming off of welfare-to-work and are in need for strong support from women-owned businesses for entrepreneurship and other ventures that they might enjoy. There are now approximately 8 million women-owned businesses providing jobs for 15.5 million people and generating nearly $1.4 trillion in sales. We are absolutely ahead of the game in ensuring that women-owned businesses are out there to ensure that jobs are created for women and to provide the type of leadership that is necessary for women to go into business. In the 37th District of California, women-owned businesses are generating $105 billion in sales in the Los Angeles-Long Beach metropolitan area. This area ranks second out of the top 50 metropolitan areas in the number, employment and sales of women-owned businesses. general statistics There are now approximately eight million women-owned businesses, providing jobs for 15.5 million people and generating nearly $1.4 trillion in sales. Women-owned businesses now employ 35% more people in the U.S. than the Fortune 500 companies employ worldwide. Between 1987 and 1996, the number of minority women-owned businesses increased by 153%, which is three times the rate of overall business growth in the U.S. The rate of employment by minority businesses grew by 276% and revenues rose by 318%. Between 1987 and 1996, women-owned businesses grew by 171% in construction; by 157% in wholesale trade; by 140% in transportation/ communications; by 130% in agriculture; and by 112% in manufacturing. Between 1987 and 1996, minority women-owned businesses grew by 319% in construction; by 276% in wholesale trade; and by 253% in transportation/communications/public utilities. organizations you could commend Small Business Administration--Aida Alverez. Office of Women's Business Ownership within SBA--Sherrye Henry. National Women's Business Council--Amy Millman. National Association of Women Business Owners--Susan Peterson. Women's Business Enterprise National Council--Susan Bari. organizations helping women business owners in/near the 37th Women's Business Exclusive in Torrance. Association of Black Women Entrepreneurs in Los Angeles. Los Angeles County Office of Small Business.

Ms. MILLENDER-McDONALD

Ms. MILLENDER-McDONALD. Mr. Speaker, as we celebrate African American History Month and those of us who are not African Americans recognize the importance of education, we further recognize the importance of facilities that are conducive to learning for those young people who are in the inner city. So, Mr. Speaker, today I rise to address the need for school construction and repair throughout the country, but, most importantly, in the inner cities, and especially in the 37th Congressional District, which I represent. Mr. Speaker, today's youth cannot learn in an environment that is surrounded with decrepit walls, that are crumbling from neglect, roofs that are leaking into classrooms, broken windows that have not been repaired for months on end, buildings that are painted with toxic levels of lead paint, and the list goes on. These young students face the hazards of asbestos, poor indoor air quality, nonexistent air conditioning systems and heating units which barely warm the buildings throughout the winter months. These schools are literally in decay. Mr. Speaker, these are the schools that represent the inner city that our children are asked to be educated in. Mr. Speaker, we all know the critical importance of placing our children and the Nation's children in an environment that is conducive to learning. The Los Angeles Unified School District, the second largest public school district in the country and where I served as an educator for several, is one of the many public schools in need of school repair. In the entire State of California, 87 percent of schools report a need to upgrade or repair on-site buildings to just good condition, and the majority of these schools are in the inner city. Seventy-one percent of all California schools have at least one inadequate building feature, ranging from lead paint to lack of heating units. So today I ask my colleagues to think about the larger issue when it comes to educating our children. I ask my colleagues to consider the more than 60 percent of the Nation's 110,000 public, elementary and secondary school facilities that need major repair in order to function as an effective education institution. This Nation's youth not only deserve it, but they cry out for schools that represent a conducive learning environment. Mr. Speaker, this must be at the top of our priority as we begin the second session of the 105th Congress.

Ms. MILLENDER-McDONALD

Ms. MILLENDER-McDONALD. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to commemorate a remarkable woman from the 37th District of California: Karen Sue Nobumoto. Ms. Nobumoto is an exceptional leader in the field of law within the African American community and the Los Angeles area. She has inspired young lawyers and law students throughout her long history with the John M. Langston Bar Association, and has dedicated her life to giving back to her community. As she completes her one year term as President of the Langston Bar Association, I would like to take this opportunity to recognize her long list of achievements. Ms. Nobumoto received her Bachelor of Arts degree in Political Science from the University of Hartford in West Hartford, Connecticut in 1973. She continued her studies at Southwestern University School of Law in Los Angeles, where she obtained her Juris Doctorate degree in 1989. Throughout her years at Southwestern University, Ms. Nobumoto served as an active student leader. She was the President of the Black Law Students Association and Vice-Dean of the Delta Theta Phi Law Fraternity. Ms. Nobumoto has served on the board of directors of the John M. Langston Bar Association continuously since 1987. In 1988, she received the President's Special Recognition Award and received the same award again in 1996. She served as the first student Section Chairperson and worked with the past president to institute the Langston Law Student Career Day and Mentor Program. She also managed the Law Student Scholarship Program in 1990 and succeeded in increasing the scholarship funds distributed to African American law students over the past seven years. Perhaps more important than this long list of achievements, is Ms. Nobumoto's unyielding determination and strong commitment to leaving no stone unturned when it comes to planning the critical path to success. She has attended every Langston board meeting and monthly meeting and represented the Langston Bar Association at over sixty-five different events throughout this past year. In addition to her work for Langston, Ms. Nobumoto is a hardworking Trial Deputy in the Office of the District Attorney in Los Angeles. She has also served on the Ethnic Minority Relations Committee of the State Bar from 1987 to 1990 and was the Vice-Chair of the Committee from 1989 to 1990. In 1990, she was also elected to a District 7 seat on the California Young Lawyers Association Board of Directors. Clearly, Karen Nobumoto's commitment to carrying forward the tradition of service and leadership that defines the Langston Bar Association has made her one of the greatest Presidents to serve Langston. I am honored to know Ms. Nobumoto and wish her the best of luck as she pursues a position on the State Bar Board of Governors. Karen Nobumoto is a shining example of what it means to lead, to educate and to truly make a difference for the generations of today and tomorrow.

Ms. MILLENDER-McDONALD

Ms. MILLENDER-McDONALD. Mr. Speaker, I come to this floor today to pay homage to a great man, a great Californian and a great American, my colleague, my friend, the Honorable Ronald V. Dellums. The gentleman from California (Mr. Dellums) has served 31 years in public life, the last 27 in the U.S. House of Representatives, with distinction and honor. When he came to this House 37 years ago in 1971, he wore bell bottom pants and an afro perhaps larger in scale than the dome of this Capitol. Not surprisingly, he was immediately labeled as an untrustworthy radical and militant, the victim of stereotypes to which African Americans have long been accustomed. But he was here to represent his East San Francisco Bay area constituents, whose commitment to a full employment economy, equality, civil rights, quality education and peace with justice has been and remained steadfast throughout his career. What those who stereotyped him failed to recognize was that they would be dealing with a distinguished, principled, educated man who diligently and strategically worked to understand the rules and customs of this House and to learn how to work within the construct of this House. Through his work and example, we who are new Members learned many lessons from Ron Dellums. Policy development and lawmaking is a marathon, not a sprint. To be successful, we must be prepared to meet those who hold different points of view than our own and meet them on their own terms, carefully listening to their arguments, and struggle to find common ground and mutuality of interest. In offering this advice, he never told us what we should do, but instead suggested what he would do. He taught us to plan and prepare, to thoroughly understand the nuts and bolts of an issue. And finally, he said, never forget the people who sent you here, the constituents who invested in us the power to represent them. They are the reason we are here. Congressman Ron Dellums is revered on both sides of this aisle because of his integrity and his commitment to progressive ideas. He was always on the cutting edge of the issues. California will miss him in the ninth district, but the State has been enriched by Ron Dellums. While he towers above most of us physically, this attribute is matched by his intellect, faith in the process and optimism for peaceful resolution of conflict. Mr. Speaker, I came to Congress during the midterm of the 104th Congress, having won a special election. My path to Congress did not provide me the opportunity to bond with the Members of my class during the heady days which normally follow a general election victory. I did not have orientation for Members-elect, as is the practice of getting acquainted with your colleagues before sitting for a new Congress. Nevertheless, Ron Dellums' gentle smile, kind words and unreserved support, willingness to listen without prejudice and accessibility qualities have contributed to my development as a Member and my ability to better represent the constituents of my California's 37th Congressional District. Congressman Ron Dellums' intellect, keen grasp of the issues, knowledge of the process and impeccable style are attributes to the people of California's Bay area, the United States House of Representatives and the Nation which will mostly miss him. And while we will miss him, we all recognize that life goes on, and the only constant in life is change. Ron Dellums' contributions to this House, indeed his greatest legacy, will be that he used his service in Congress as an instrument for change in the pursuit of jobs, peace and justice. I wish him the very best as he pursues his future endeavors and wish to convey my thanks as a colleague, a friend, and an American to his family for their sacrifice and generosity in sharing this unique man with us. And I thank my brother, the honorable Ronald V. Dellums, for his friendship and his unreserved brotherly support on my behalf.

Ms. MILLENDER-McDONALD

Ms. MILLENDER-McDONALD. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in opposition to the Census language in the Commerce, Justice, State Appropriations bill because all Americans must be counted in this nation's census. Republican attempts to make sure that the 2000 census does not represent all Americans flies in the face of democracy. We now have the opportunity to accurately collect data from all sectors of society through the methodology of sampling. If we accept the language in this bill, we will direct the Census Bureau to separate planning and implementation activities for these ``dress rehearsal'' sites when the Census Bureau can barely support one--that is a set up for failure. If we accept this language, we will create an entire new subcommittee exclusively on the census issue--this not only wastes taxpayers' money on a method which all national organizations in the field of statistical analysis agree is the most accurate tool for determining the census, but also runs contrary to what the Republicans boast as one of their greatest accomplishments of the 104th Congress, eliminating subcommittees. Finally, if we accept this language, we will permit opponents of sampling to file suits in any court in the country, and they will file suits until they find a court to issue an injunction against the use of sampling. Such an injunction could be the death knell for sampling and with no sampling in the ``dress rehearsal'', there can be no sampling in the census and no way to avoid the inaccuracies of the 1990 census. In 1990, four million Americans were not counted and several million were counted twice. Between 1940 and 1980 the net undercount of all Americans and legal immigrants decreased from 5.4 to 1.2 percent. However, the difference between black and non-black undercount increased from 3.4 percent in 1940 to 4.3 percent in 1970. In 1980, this undercount improved slightly to 3.7 percent, but this is still a significant miscalculation of the actual number and kind of people who make up this country. In 1990, the difference between Black and non- Black census undercount was the largest differential in the entire history of the census. As a representative of California's 37th Congressional District, I am particularly concerned about the disproportionately high number of the California residents who were not included in the 1990 census. In 1990, 800,000 people were undercounted in California alone. The entire state represented 20% of the 1990 undercount. Because of these errors, my state was denied a Congressional seat that rightfully belonged to Californians. My constituents deserve to be included and counted in the 2000 census and in all future census counts. The census not only determines how the seats of the House are apportioned among the states, but is a significant force in shaping private and public sectors across the country. The census is used to allocate hundreds of billions of dollars to state and local governments. It is used to enforce the Voting Rights Act. It is used by businesses to locate specific work force populations. It is used to determine the kinds of services to provide to certain demographic areas. It is used to allocate resources for the construction of highways and the maintenance of adequate water supplies for communities. This census is too important for it to not be accurate. Leading experts, including the National Academy of Sciences, have clearly stated the need for statistical sampling. Scientists admit that it is impossible to physically count every American citizen and legal immigrant in this nation. But it is not impossible to produce an accurate assessment of the American population. The Census Bureau has made and continues to make tremendous strides in trying to accurately calculate census tracts throughout the country. With all of these improvements in distribution, collecting and analyzing the census surveys and the use of statistical sampling, the 2000 count could be the most accurate census yet. It could include all of the constituents of the 37th Congressional District, of the state of California, and of the entire nation. But if we let the current language remain in the Commerce, Justice, State bill, we will make the realization of this possibility impossible. It is illogical, unscientific and wrong to endorse a proposal that we know would produce incomplete information about the people who make up this nation. We do not have the right to waste taxpayers' money on an old methodology that we know is not accurate. And we do not have the right to tie up a scientific methodology that is proven effective in the hands of adversarial politicians.

Ms. MILLENDER-McDONALD

Ms. MILLENDER-McDONALD. Mr. Speaker, I am proud to announce that today my colleague, Sue Kelly, and I introduced an important resolution which recognizes important findings and makes recommendations on ways to assist women-opened businesses obtain more Federal procurement opportunities. On September 25 of this year, we cochaired an unprecedented bipartisan forum addressing the vast growth of women-owned firms and the contrasting poor rate of procurement to these firms. This was a historic day for women business owners, for it was the first time that women business owners have ever convened on Capitol Hill to share their stories with members of the Congressional Caucus on Women's Issues. On that historic day, the problems contributing to the dismal Federal procurement rate of 1.8 percent to women-owned firms became painfully clear. Despite the 5 percent Federal procurement rate goal which Congress established in 1994, the procurement rate remains low because of the lack of access to the Federal contracting process, the bundling of contracts frequently excluding small women-owned businesses, the ineffective outreach to women business owners, the poor and often incomplete feedback which is provided to businesses when their bid is not accepted, and the need for one certification for all women-owned businesses. The sense of Congress resolution we have introduced today is the first step in our plan to address these problems and ensure that there is indeed a level and fair playing field for all business owners. I am fully committed to ensuring that this goal is met and that women-owned businesses are given equal opportunity to obtain a piece of the more than $200 billion annual procurement pie. Women-owned businesses are growing at nearly twice the rate of all other U.S. firms, employ 18.5 million people, and produce $2.38 trillion in revenues to the U.S. economy every year. We simply cannot allow this discrepancy to continue. There is a wealth of knowledge and skills steeped within these women- owned businesses that we as an economic leader in the global marketplace cannot afford to ignore. Today, we take this first step to recognize the contributions the more than 8 million women-owned businesses are making to strengthen our economy. In the coming months, I will continue to recognize these achievements and take concrete actions to ensure equality of opportunity in obtaining Federal contracts.

Ms. MILLENDER-McDONALD

Ms. MILLENDER-McDONALD. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to commemorate a remarkable man from the 37th District of California: Dr. Charles W. Buggs. Dr. Buggs has served a leading role in the field of medicine and has inspired thousands of other young African-Americans to follow in his footsteps. Often referred to as the ``Father of Allied Health'' within the Drew University of Medicine and Science, Dr. Buggs made significant accomplishments during his 85 years of life. Dr. Buggs was a microbiologist who contributed to the advancement of humandkind through his extensive scientific research. He worked on the original research to develop penicillin and laid the foundation for the work of today's scientists and physicians who are studying cancer metabolism and using antibiotics such as streptomycin. He conducted the study which opened the eyes of Congress to the need for science educational centers in historically black colleges and universities. He paved the way for the establishment of Federal funding for these educational centers and provided the foundational research and development for Drew University's College of Allied Health. Dr. Buggs scientific work has enriched the lives of Americans far beyond Drew University and the 37th District of California. His leadership and unyielding commitment to expanding the minds of aspiring physicians and scientists has contributed to the education of a significant number of African-American physicians in the United States. Numerous people throughout the country have become educated and are now serving their communities as health professionals because of his shining example of what it means to lead, to educate, and to truly make a difference for the generations of today and tomorrow. As a leading role model for young African-Americans striving to become scientists, Dr. Buggs ensured that this spirit of learning and expanding science would not end with his passing. I am honored to be able to represent a district which has benefited so immensely from this man.

Ms. MILLENDER-McDONALD

Ms. MILLENDER-McDONALD. Mr. Speaker, I rise to express my support for S. 858, the Intelligence Authorization for fiscal year 1998. However, I remain deeply concerned about allegations that have been raised regarding CIA involvement in drug trafficking in south central Los Angeles and elsewhere. A year ago next week, then Director of Central Intelligence John Deutch made an unprecedented visit to Alain Locke High School in my district to directly address the concerns raised by my constituents and me generated by these allegations. His visit illustrated a new openness to wrestling with the issues raised by press reports. Those reports, some of which have been retracted, suggested that the crack cocaine trade that has devastated whole communities was promulgated by official government activities under the aegis of the Central Intelligence Agency. Consequently, I and my constituents eagerly await the release of the inspector generals of Justice and CIA. I understand the release of the Justice Department's inspector general is imminent. I hope that the select committee will give their content, methodologies and findings the scrutiny they deserve and in a similar spirit of openness, make themselves available to my constituents to respond to any questions these report generate. I believe such openness is critical to restoration of the credibility and public trust necessary to allow intelligence gathering activities, which by their nature are secretive, to coexist with democracy.

Ms. MILLENDER-McDONALD

Ms. MILLENDER-McDONALD. Mr. Speaker, on rollcall No. 560, I was coming down the aisle when the Speaker closed the vote before I was able to cast my vote. Had I been able to vote, I would have voted ``no.''