Eleanor Norton

Ms. NORTON

Ms. NORTON. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Connecticut (Mr. Larson) for his graciousness and for yielding to me. I want to first offer my gratitude to the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Ney) and the gentleman from Connecticut (Mr. Larson) who had to get us all together and work very closely with us so that we could achieve agreement on this bill, agreement that would be accepted by the other body as well. That took some skill. I need to compliment and thank my good friend, the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. LaTourette), the chair of the Transportation subcommittee which has jurisdiction over this bill, the Subcommittee on Economic Development, Public Buildings and Emergency Management, because his patience and graciousness were important here, as well as in not insisting that we have yet another hearing on the bill but move forward rapidly so that the bill could be approved during this session. But, of course, no one deserves more credit for what we do tonight than my good friend and colleague, the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Lewis), whom I knew as a colleague in another life, a colleague in a life in which he was held in just the high esteem that he is held in this body, and that says something. So it is perfectly fitting that the major sponsor of this bill would be the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Lewis). Who would have thought 40 years ago that he or I would be here or that there would ever be such a bill. It is a great tribute to the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Lewis) that when he first came to the Congress and was a part of the Committee on Transportation and the subcommittee that has jurisdiction that this is one of the first bills that he authored. So for him, this is a stellar moment. In a real sense what we do tonight is to pick up the baton. It has been dropped over and over again for 100 years. There have been many tries in both Houses. And what is important about what we do tonight is that we brought both Houses together. I remember being on the committee when we passed the bill, guided it to the floor, thought we had the work done. Tonight, we know we have the work done because we know both Houses approved this bill. Why an African American museum? I do want to say a word about that. Because there might be museums, perhaps should be museums for many, many kinds of people who have come to our shores. And I take nothing from them when I say that I hope that they attain some such recognition in our city. But no one can doubt that there is no American story without telling the story of African Americans in this country who came to this country as it was being founded, as it was being born, before it was a Nation. We cannot understand the greatness of our Nation without understanding what our country has overcome. We can know that we can do anything if we come to grips with where we were, understand it, and see where we have come to. We are a Nation who started with original sin, with slavery, and then progressed only to discrimination under law. And what makes this story so important for us, and for Americans of every background, is to look at the history and where it has brought us. If we start even in this city, the city of my birth, and see the end of slavery, the establishment of the Freeman's Bureau and Howard University named for a Civil War general, but then look at the sad history of this city, the Capital of the United States, where I went to segregated schools and had public accommodations that were segregated. But then look to the poor people's campaign and the march on Washington and the triumph of true Americanism, this story needs to be told. Because when we get discouraged about not being all we want to be, we need to go to an African American museum and see from whence we came. Finally, let me say that my own constituents, the people of the District of Columbia, this majority African American city have been in true Thanksgiving that we would get to this day. I commend the Presidential commission consisting of many citizens from across the Nation, including citizens of this town that have worked single- handedly for this bill. But for the people who live here, who consider themselves the guardians of the city's museums and monuments, this is a very special day. We promise to indeed be a guardian of this museum, to work closely with my good friends the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Ney) and the gentleman from Connecticut (Mr. Larson), with all of those who have supported us on this bill, so we can raise the funds now that we have an obligation in writing, in this bill, from our country to, in fact, realize this bill so that we can all be at the groundbreaking. I thank both gentlemen again for their leadership on this bill. Mr. Speaker, I am proud to be cosponsor of H.R. 3491, a bill to establish within the Smithsonian complex the National Museum of African American History and Culture. The most important new national museum in decades as we take this giant step to making the museum a reality, praise and thanks must be extended to Congressman John Lewis, my friend who introduced this bill when he was first elected to Congress and before I was elected to Congress. My strong support for this bill has several sources. I have been a cosponsor of the museum bill since my first term in Congress in 1991. I have been a member of the Transportation Subcommittee that often considered the museum bill during the several years when the museum was repeatedly debated and voted. The House passed the museum bill during the 103rd Congress only to have Senator Jesse Helms stop it in the Senate. I represent the District of Columbia whose residents consider themselves the guardians of our memorials, a city with a majority African-American population that has watched and waited from the front row for the promised museum. I am a fourth generation Washingtonian with what I must admit is a personal stake that I trace to my great grandfather, Richard Holmes, who walked away from slavery in Virginia long before the Civil War to start a new life and a family in the District, where my family has long awaited the museum. Finally, I am an African-American who joins millions of blacks and people of every color and background that have asked for the promise of an African American museum to be kept. This bill is a good bill. It lists four sites for the location of the museum. I am pleased to see the working relationships between the Smithsonian and the National Capitol Planning Commission (NCPC) are preserved. The bill provides that the Board of Regents will consult with not only the NCPC and the Commission on Fine Arts, but also the Chair and Vice Chair of the Presidential Commission, and further the Chair of the Commission's Site Subcommittee. The appropriate Congressional Committees will also be consulted regarding the final site selection. The bill also provides for a 50/50 split in cost sharing for the museum, 50% of the cost to be paid by the federal government and 50% to come from the private sector. Finally, the bill authorizes $17m in FY04 for the Smithsonian to carry out its duties under the Act and such sums as are necessary for each fiscal year thereafter. This bill is especially appreciated, considering that in one form or another this subject has been before Congress for nearly 100 years. Civil War veterans first raised the idea of a memorial as they sought recognition for their service to their country in all its wars and for their ancestors because the country's large population of slaves, free blacks and their descendants were instrumental in building our nation. Colonel Charles Young, the highest ranking African American officer and the third black graduate of West Point asked Congress in 1919 for ``a memorial to the Negro dead and that that memorial be the thing for which these Negroes gave their lives--liberty, justice, equal opportunities and educational facilities, the suppression of lynching by making it a federal crime [and] the abolition of jimcrow [sic] cars.'' No one can doubt that the case for the museum has long ago been made. It was accepted and recognized by Congress as a worthy project, including a $50,000 appropriation even in 1929, at a time when racial segregation was the law of the land. Much work has been done, and much work lies ahead of us, but passage of this bill will be a giant step forward to placing African American history in its appropriate place in our Nation's story. Mr. Speaker I would like to quote from the museum's mission statement: ``The National Museum of African American History and Culture will give voice to the centrality of the African American experience and will make it possible for all people to understand the depth, complexity, and promise of the American experience. The museum will serve as a national forum for collaboration with educational and cultural institutions in the continuing quest for freedom, truth, and human dignity.'' H.R. 3491 is a historic bill. I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting this bill.

Ms. NORTON

Ms. NORTON. Mr. Speaker, funeral services were held for the first elected Mayor of the District of Columbia in the 20th century, Mayor Walter E. Washington, on Saturday, November 1, 2003. The funeral had the full trappings of a state funeral that Mayor Washington deserved. He lay in state at the John A. Wilson Building (the District Building) on Friday, October 31. Following memorial services, which took place at the Washington National Cathedral, Mayor Washington's coffin, draped with the District of Columbia flag, was carried through the city on a large fire truck, passing through neighborhoods associated with his life in our city, including LeDroit Park, where he lived, Howard University, where he attended undergraduate and law school, and the City Museum which he helped to found. He was laid to rest at the Lincoln Memorial Cemetery. I paid tribute to Mayor Washington in remarks last week and also placed in the Record a Washington Post editorial and a personal tribute from Post editorial writer, Colbert King. Howard University Law School Professor J. Clay Smith, Jr., who served with me when I chaired the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, has asked me to share with the House his reflections to the faculty and students of the law school concerning Mayor Washington. I am pleased to submit his remarks for the Record. In Memory of Walter E. Washington 1915-2003 (By Professor J. Clay Smith, Jr.) Dear Faculty and Students: I pause today to share with you just a bit of information about one of our most esteemed graduate, the Honorable Walter E. Washington. Many of our students attend law school because they are interested in politics or public service. For nearly 140 years our law school has produced several leading political figures in the Nation and beyond. One of our graduates, the Honorable Walter E. Washington, class of 1938, died this week. Why is his life important to us? He was a graduate of Howard University School of Law, who is an example of what our students can do to make the world a better place. It is an opportunity for us to reflect, even for a moment and consider why we came to Howard Law School and the aspirations that directed us to enter the profession of law or to teach. Walter Washington was a friend of many people in Washington and abroad. He was graduated during a period when life was hard, but his spirit to achieve was strong and his determination unstoppable. There was little if any scholarship money when Walter Washington entered the law school. His generation worked their way through school, but they studied long hours at night into the morning sun. Washington, like so many of the students of his generation, were guided by their law teachers, yet they also brought with them seeds planted for the future from their high schools, colleges, families, and friends. Washington was a graduated from Howard University and its law school. I was honored to know him personally, but not as much as I would have like to have known the depth of his extraordinary intellect and perseverance in his early years. Many people knew of him very early in his life and most must have predicted that he would be successful in his calling to the law. But he stretched beyond the law to the political arena and in 1973, he was first appointed by President Johnson as Mayor-Commissioner of the District of Columbia becoming the first African American Mayor in a large city in the Nation. He was subsequently elected as Mayor of Washington, DC in 1974. As a recent law graduate, I remember his election well because he was a graduate of the very law school that I attended. It made me proud of our school and caused me to respect him all these years even as an outsider to the life that he lived, except for the past 7 years during which I got to know him in more professional surroundings. I bring this message to the faculty and more importantly to our students as an example of what students are capable of becoming and how we influence them in the ways each of us teach and inspire them, even students who may not see the value or the power of their intellects that will rest upon recognition of their own worth and accountability. Walter Washington loved his law school and the friends that he made during his matriculation at Howard University. In so many ways, Mayor Washington's life is like so many of our graduates who placed or left marks in the sand that will not and cannot be brushed away. Mayor Washington will be remembered not only by the wonderful articles that appear in today's newspaper (Washington Post Oct. 28, 2003), he is to be studied by our students as an exemplar of what (you) can become. As for us who teach, I hope that from time to time we remind our students that what we do here at the law school is to help mold them toward law so that they can lead as Walter E. Washington and so many others of our graduates have done to secure the democracy, to find answers to secure the poor, to create better housing, to be honored by the people as leaders from the law school of its first Dean, John Mercer Langston. Nevertheless, to achieve these wonderful levels, giants like Washington, to hear him tell it, meant that a 100% effort was required in the study of law. Greatness may be defined in many ways, our law school has graduated many great people, and many more will come and leave this law school that will and who have prepared themselves to be leaders and successful lawyers in communities they will serve. Mayor Washington was one of such students. He will be missed, but he has left with us, particularly our law school, seeds that will grow many others like him.

Ms. NORTON

Ms. NORTON. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to introduce a public safety bill for the second week in a row. My current bill would reauthorize the successful Community Oriented Policing Services (COPS) program that has used federal funds to help put more cops on the streets and to fund community policing. Like a similar Senate bill sponsored by Sen. Joseph Biden, Jr. (D-DE) and almost 50 other Senators, my bill seeks to head off the shut down of the COPS program, as forecast by the President's 2004 fiscal year budget, which severely cut COPS and critical community policing projects. Last week, I introduced the Crime Victims Assistance Act of 2003 to provide enhanced rights and protections for victims of federal crimes. This bill also has been introduced in the Senate. As a member of the Select Committee on Homeland Security, I have watched police departments here and across the country pressed increasingly into protecting the homeland from potential terrorism. Our police need funding and support from the federal government now more than ever if they also are to continue to focus on the indispensable everyday duties of protecting their communities from street violence and other crime. My bill would provide funding to help police departments put more officers on the beat, purchase high-tech crime fighting tools and technology such as patrol car cameras, pay overtime devoted to community policing and homeland security, and reimburse officers for college or graduate school. Also, my bill would help the U.S. Attorney's office hire more community prosecutors who interact closely with the people they serve. The District of Columbia has been a pioneer in community prosecution, which links prosecutors to specific police districts and neighborhoods. Recent studies show that COPS grants played a critical role in the crime drop of the nineties. Now with cities like the District experiencing alarming criminal activity, police departments need all the help they can get to find real solutions for handling the heavy double burden of balancing the securing of citizens from terrorism along with protecting them from violence and other crime in their neighborhoods. Since it was created in the 1994 Crime bill, COPS has awarded more than $8 billion to police departments to hire or re-deploy almost 120,000 community police officers across the country. In FY 2003, the COPS office awarded $635 million in grants nationwide, and almost $7.5 million to the District, $3 million for Metropolitan Police Department homeland security overtime. In September, I announced a $750,000 grant for the Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority (WMATA) to hire 10 new Metro officers who will perform community policing and homeland security functions. Many other jurisdictions received similar grants. My bill will fund the COPS program through 2009. A key change would authorize a new, permanent COPS Overtime Program. I urge my colleagues to continue to reauthorize the COPS program.

Ms. NORTON

Ms. NORTON. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize Second Baptist Church, the second oldest African American Baptist congregation in the District of Columbia, as it prepares to celebrate its 155th anniversary on Sunday, November 16, 2003, and its designation as a historic landmark in the District of Columbia Inventory of Historic Sites by the Historic Preservation Review Board. History has documented the critical role African American churches have played not only as places of spiritual fortification, but also as centers of political activism, and neighborhood preservation. Second Baptist Church is a shining example of these functions. Second Baptist Church, located at 816 3rd Street, NW., is a longstanding anchor of a changing neighborhood north of H Street and west of North Capitol Street. Founded in 1848, Second Baptist Church was started 14 years before slaves in the District of Columbia were freed. The church was erected in 1894 and designed by prominent Washington architect, Appleton P. Clark, Jr. Second Baptist Church represents a revival of the early phase of Gothic church architecture, but rendered in late Victorian fashion. The beautiful rose window, square towers and rusticated limestone on a granite base are suggestive of Romanesque. Second Baptist Church began when seven members of the First Colored Baptist Church, now Nineteenth Baptist Church, left to organize the Second Colored Baptist Church of Washington City, District of Columbia. Second Baptist Church served as a station on the Underground Railroad during the Civil War and the preceding years. It was one of the few Negro churches in Washington, D.C. that had a black minister prior to President Lincoln's Inauguration. Second Baptist Church is considered the ``Mother Church'' for the Baptist community because from it Mt. Carmel Baptist Church in NW; Mt. Olive Baptist Church in NW; Rehoboth Baptist Church in SW; Central Baptist Church (later disbanded); St. Paul Baptist Church in Bladensburg, MD; Ebenezer and First Baptist in Takoma Park, MD were formed. During the course of its 155 years, Second Baptist Church has had only 15 pastors: Licentiate H.H. Butler--1848; Rev. Jeremiah Asher-- 1849; Rev. Gustavus Brown--1850; Rev. Henry Butler--1853; Rev. Sandy Alexander--1856; Rev. Caleb Woodward--1861; Rev. John Mays (Maze)-- 1864; Rev. Sandy Alexander--1865; Rev. Chauncey Leonard--1868; Rev. John Gaines--1869; Rev. Madison Gaskins--1871; Rev. William Bishop Johnson--1883; Rev. Dr. J.L.S. Hollowman--1917; Rev. Smalls Bartley-- 1971; and Rev. Dr. James E. Terrell--1997 to the present. Mr. Speaker, I ask the House to join me in saluting Rev. James E. Terrell, and the congregation of Second Baptist Church in the District of Columbia on the occasion of its 155th anniversary, November 16, 2003.

Ms. NORTON

Ms. NORTON. Mr. Speaker, I arise today to inform the House of the passing of the first Mayor of the District of Columbia in the 20th century. Some members will remember Walter Washington's service or will know him by reputation because no mayor here or, I dare say, elsewhere has enjoyed more respect from this body. Mayor Washington enjoyed the same bipartisan admiration from the two presidents during his tenure, Lyndon Johnson, who appointed Mr. Washington the District's first mayor in 1968 and Richard Nixon who signed the Home Rule Act in 1973 giving the District its current home rule status, complete with an elected mayor and city council. The conventional wisdom is that home rule for the District depended upon Mayor Washington's performance as appointed mayor. Few would disagree. If home rule was past due then, more than 150 years after the city's founding, surely full self-government, democracy and congressional voting representation are shamefully tardy in coming to the city's approximately 600,000 residents today. Mayor Washington, who did more than any person to bring self-government to the District, deserved to see its full realization before his death. Home rule happened because people made it happen, with Walter Washington as the leader. Freedom and democracy for an entire city is a lot to have on one man's shoulders, but Walter Washington carried the burden easily. His gifts were spectacularly broad--deep integrity and ability that won him enormous professional respect as well as personal and political skills that evoked affection from the people. That combination amounts to the sum total of what it takes to lead. Few leaders have it all. Walter Washington did. Mr. Speaker, I ask that in addition to my own statement at the time of Mayor Washington's death, I be allowed to place in the Record a Washington Post editorial and a personal tribute from Post editorial writer, Colbert King, who was a close friend of Walter Washington and who served on the Senate staff when Mr. Washington was mayor. I ask the entire House to join me in paying tribute to a man of historic stature in the District of Columbia and in offering the profound respect and condolences of the House of Representatives to Mayor Washington's wife Mary and his family. Norton Says Passing of Walter Washington Marks End of Home Rule Era Congresswoman Eleanor Holmes Norton (D-DC) today released the following statement on the passing of Mayor Walter E. Washington. ``The era of home rule ended today with the passing of Walter Washington. Mayor Washington simultaneously shaped the office of mayor and the practice of home rule governance for a city that had lived without democracy for a hundred years. The District has a strong mayor form of government in no small part because his service as appointed mayor demonstrated that a mayor could lead this city as mayors of other big cities did. His service is significant for far more than the office he held, however; President Lyndon Johnson appointed Walter Washington our first mayor because he wanted a man of great character and ability to pave the way for an elected mayor. The people of the District returned the compliment by electing Walter Washington our first elected mayor. Residents realized he had the ``right stuff' to be mayor--not only outstanding ability and integrity but also the indispensable political skills and common touch that make people want to follow the lead of an elected official. That combination of gifts proved mighty useful during the 1968 riots. The mayor was legendary for his way with the President and the Congress, but Walter Washington was appreciated in this town not only because he could talk to power but because he talked equally well to the powerless. ``People who missed his years as mayor often got some sense of his political gifts on the public occasions when his extraordinary wit was in full form as it remained throughout Walter's life. ``With the passing of Mayor Washington, the home rule era he shaped also passes. Perhaps, almost 30 years after Walter Washington was first elected, Congress will now understand that a new era of full democracy, independence and voting rights is overdue. ``Mrs. Mary Cornelia Washington, Walter's daughter, Bennetta Jules-Rosette and his family have my condolences and the sympathy of the city who loved him.''

Ms. NORTON

Ms. NORTON. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me time. I can identify with the frustration of the gentleman from Alaska (Mr. Young) and the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Mica) because you really did do your job. You have gotten a good bipartisan bill out of committee, and I know it because up close there were things that both chairmen worked with me on together. Their bipartisan bill did not have privatization. It is really hard to find out who are the folks that are for privatization because you will not find them in the committee, and you will not find them in the House and the Senate, and that is who I thought we were. This breaks my heart because both chairmen worked so closely with me to get changes in this bill that I wanted and some of them were controversial. An example is the slots, very controversial. I did not get all I wanted, but instead of the proposed 36, it is down to 20 and we worked together to get that. I worked with the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Mica) and the gentleman from Alaska (Mr. Young) because general aviation here had not been reimbursed and everybody else had been reimbursed. They said we will work with you and they did. There is $100 million in here for the small airports that were not reimbursed the way the big airlines were. D.C. was hit especially hard because we are not open yet. They worked with me on that and there is language in there instructing the Department of Homeland Security to develop and implement a plan to open to general aviation, including charters, to the airports so that they can come in. They worked with them on language to get airplanes here, state-of- the-art airplanes that take more passengers, but they are quieter and more fuel efficient. My only regret in this bill for myself is that the Metropolitan Airport Authority has to come here to ask for grant funds that everybody else gets automatically. Having all of that good stuff and it is full of other good stuff for the entire country in here, the chairman did not want privatization here. We have privatization messing up the bill and causing a huge controversy in this House. First, the small airports will be the guinea pigs. The poor 69 airports they have come and screamed to high heaven. Many of us were nervous because we thought after the guinea pigs the rest of us would follow. The problem, I want to say to my good friend, the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Mica), is once the language is bare, it leaves the impression, and I think that most of us have the impression, that anything can be privatized now. It leaves the impression that instead of improving the bill, we have gone from bad to worse. I know what we went through with security guards. If we believe that security guards are inherently governmental, and that is the language here, we surely have corrupted the concept if air traffic controllers are not governmental. 9/11 changed everything. It is a bright line. We are not willing to risk anything in the air. We are no longer willing to risk anything in the air. I would defy the other side to stand up when I am through and give me an example of something that is inherently governmental if air traffic controllers are not. After 9/11 we would not leave anything to chance in the air space of our country, and the problem with the private sector is they are in the business of making money. They have got to cut corners if it gets tight. This bill fails the indispensable test of guarding our air space as we promised in the post-9/11 period.

Ms. NORTON

Ms. NORTON. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to introduce the Crime Victims Assistance Act of 2003 to benefit victims of crime here and throughout the country during a period when crime has increased as well as to help the police resolve more crimes. I commend the authors of the original bill introduced in the Senate by Judiciary Committee Ranking Member Patrick Leahy, Minority Leader Tom Daschle, and Senators Jon Corzine, Dick Durbin, Russ Feingold, Tim Johnson, Edward Kennedy, John Kerry, Patty Murray and Charles Schumer. The bill will provide enhanced rights and protections for victims of federal crimes and will assist victims of state crimes with grant programs designed to promote compliance with state victims rights laws. The bill requires that victims concerns be incorporated into decision-making throughout the proceedings. I have changed the Senate bill only to assure the safety of those who have a personal relationship (family or other) with the victim. This bill is an alternative to the constitutional amendment approach proposed by some in the Congress. As a lawyer who specialized in constitutional matters early in my legal career, I am confident that the improved rights and benefits that victims justifiably seek are well within existing congressional authority to grant through the legislative process. The protracted constitutional process simply puts the most arduous, lengthy and, in this case, unnecessary process in the path toward the rights and funds crime victims need now. The bill would be particularly valuable in the District and in other jurisdictions where many crimes, including state crimes are processed through the federal courts. Among the provisions that would benefit the District and many other jurisdictions is a section that protects victims from repeat offenders. The bill requires consultation with a victim prior to a detention hearing in order to obtain information that can be presented to the court on the issue of any threat that the suspected offender may pose to the safety of the victim. The bill also requires greater notification to the victim in case of the release, escape, parole or furlough of the offender. There have been many reports of victim reluctance to testify out of fear of harm to a victim or her family. Understandable reluctance by a victim to expose herself to further victimization must be met with strong laws, concrete assistance and services, or crime will not be deterred. I urge my colleagues to quickly bring relief and reassurance to victims of federal and state crimes by enacting the Crime Victims Assistance Act of 2003.

Ms. NORTON

Ms. NORTON. Madam Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman from the Virgin Islands for yielding me this time and the chairman who is managing the bill on the other side, the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Saxton), for their good and hard work on this bill and for bringing it to the floor before the deadline. I appreciate that this bill was authorized in 1996 and that the Congress understood it to be an important matter, that Martin Luther King, who has been honored all over the world, has never been sufficiently honored until he is honored by the Congress of the United States in the Nation's capital. Site selection and other processes on the memorial, however, were not completed until the year 2000. So although authorized in 1996, the Congress is aware that the District has the most elaborate process for monuments in the country. You do not hear me complaining. I am a strong supporter of those processes. It is one Mall; it is priceless. We already are in danger of filling it up and not paying enough attention to it. I am working on a conservancy bill because it is deteriorating. We have to make sure that everything that goes on that Mall which is, after all, our real crown jewel, goes through each and every process and is exactly right. And so it took some time to find the right space on the Mall. We do not just put things anywhere on the Mall anymore. This is a plot of land meant to last in perpetuity. It is already greatly endangered. But if you do not know precisely where the memorial is going to go until almost 4 years after Congress has authorized it, it is very difficult to do all of the fundraising because it is when the site is chosen that people recognize that the monument is going to happen and they come forward more easily to, in fact, contribute. It eases the process tremendously after that point. I want to commend Alpha Phi Alpha for what they have done so far. It is herculean to do what they have done. It is a $100 million memorial, no Federal funds, one lone fraternity, the fraternity that Martin Luther King himself belonged to. They have the entire burden of raising the funds for this memorial. This bill will help them to continue the process; yet it is only 3 more years. I believe every Member of this body and of the other body appreciates the singular place of Martin Luther King in our country's history. His reconciling, nonviolent approach was critical. Otherwise, we need only look around the world and we need only consider that we had legal discrimination in this country for 100 years after the Civil War to appreciate what this man did. All over the world in order to settle such disputes there are conflagrations going on. As I speak, in our country we have still not gotten over the Civil War. We are much further along the way, however, after the nonviolent revolution that began in the 1960s. The man most responsible for the character of that revolution is Martin Luther King, Jr., himself. It loses the Congress nothing and gives it much to simply extend the time for Alpha Phi Alpha to gather the funds necessary for a memorial for this great American.

Ms. NORTON

Ms. NORTON. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. To close, I just want to remind Members of what the mission is of this bill that was declared in 1965, to enhance community success in attracting private capital investment and lucrative job opportunities. This is not a classic public works program. What we are providing, Mr. Speaker, is seed money. And the indication of that is worth putting on the record. The average project, EDA project, leverages $10 million in private sector investment for every $1 million in Federal assistance. And I spoke earlier of the efficiency of this program that was presented at hearings. Here is an indication of that: 99 percent, that is 99 percent, which is a rare number on this floor, of EDA infrastructure projects are completed as planned and 91 percent of projects are completed on time. Would that we could say that about some other projects I can think of. I will not even mention the Visitors Center. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Ms. NORTON. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I thank the gentleman for moving to restore my time by unanimous consent. And since we do have the time, I want to note how long-lasting this bill has been. I mentioned that it was first authorized in 1965 when the President was Lyndon Johnson. It was a bipartisan bill then, and it remains bipartisan today. And it comes at a time of special need for such a bill. Since January, 2001, if we look nationwide, the number of unemployed have increased by 50 percent. We know what that means in big cities because of the media in big cities. The effect on small communities is far more serious because they do not have the economic development vehicles in the first place and because those areas by definition have found it harder to attract the vehicles on their own. The importance of this bill is that it has given the signal to the private sector to come on in, and the bill is so successful because that is exactly what the private sector has done in rural communities where they would not have thought of coming without the Economic Development Act. So these grants are critical to economic development in good times and in poor times. They keep economic development alive very often. And what kind of money are we talking about? The chairman indicated the size of the average grant. When we come on the floor with a bill that authorizes $400 million for fiscal year 2004 and $500 million by the year 2008, we are really talking pocket change for bills that come before this body. And look at what it does. Hundreds of millions more is leveraged from private resources because of this bill. I am very proud of the work the committee has done, but I am prouder still of what came before us in the form of benefits to rural communities and efficiencies that they had incorporated into their own economic development work. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. NORTON. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I want to thank the gentleman who has just spoken. I want him to know that I think I would speak for the chair, as well as myself, when I say it was heartbreaking not to have more money for this bill because of the way in which communities came forward and wanted to be included. But we thought that pretty soon you are going to have every community from a rural area in the United States included in this bill, and for good reason. What made it heartbreaking, of course, is that we are not just talking about another bill that will throw some money out here for communities, even hard-pressed communities. What was really so rewarding was to hear experts who had looked at the program testify as to its benefits and its efficiency. There came a time in the hearings when I wondered if I was hearing a discussion of a Federal program when its efficiencies were being touted the way they were. What the chairman and I did was to work on making these efficiencies even more widespread with new ways to not only measure performance but to reward performance. I do want to say a word about rewarding performance. The incentive portion of this bill will also mean that the private sector, whose resources get leveraged as well, will understand why this bill is important for their participation, because they understand incentives. The joining of the performance with incentives, which means that some of that actually comes back to you to use, is a model I would like to see in other Federal legislation as well. I regret that there was not more money. I applaud the fact that there is a greater amount than before. I thank the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. LaTourette) for his hard work on this bill. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Ms. NORTON. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, first I want to commend the chair of the subcommittee for the several hearings he had with great profit on the bill before us today and with the way he conducted those hearings so as to bring out many new ideas that have improved this bill. I rise, therefore, in support of H.R. 2535 as amended by the manager's amendment, a bill to reauthorize the program authorized by the Public Works and Economic Development Act of 1965. This bill will reauthorize the Economic Development Administration for 5 years and provide authorization for sufficient funding levels to carry out its statutory obligations to provide economic opportunities in distressed areas of our country. This bill is of great importance to many struggling rural communities in our country and has very strong bipartisan support in this body. The bill being considered this morning authorizes some new concepts, such as performance grants, and reinforces some tried and true approaches, such as ensuring economic development proceeds with close cooperation between local governments and Federal partners. One of the new concepts is the authorization of a performance grant program. Under this new program, grantees that meet or exceed goals for projects scheduled, jobs creation and financial leverage will be eligible for a performance grant of up to 10 percent of the project grant. Further, for purposes of this act, the grantee can consider the proceeds as local funds to meet the non-Federal share requirements of this or other economic development acts. This is a new and innovative approach to rewarding high performance and provides the grantees with a tangible asset for future use. This will, we think, bring important new efficiencies to a program where there was already great efficiency according to many who testified. The bill also authorizes the Secretary to make grants for projects to expand, redevelop or reuse brownfields sites. This is a much needed authority for major industrial sites. I also appreciate the consideration the committee gave to my own interest in university centers and the expertise and resources they can bring to small and disadvantaged communities, just as they are well known to bring such advantages to big cities. Report language will highlight the committee's intent that the EDA should consider increasing the number of university centers. With the increase in authorized sums, I hope new university centers will become a reality. Most of the districts that will benefit from this bill are rural communities, some of them very small, some of them larger communities. Many communities wanted to be a part of this bill because of its long history of promoting economic development and leveraging private resources, where otherwise that would be very difficult. Although, I represent a highly-urbanized district, I certainly know firsthand the singular importance of economic development, the benefits associated with economic opportunities that are created with a strong, vibrant economic development program and, of course, the persistent need for funding to transform ideas into reality. At the April hearing on economic development, I mentioned the recent opening of the new Washington Convention Center and the immediate economic effect that it is having on my community and on the residents and community at large, including the entire region. I want to especially thank Chairman Young and Ranking Member Oberstar for their constant and beneficial leadership on this bill. I also extend my personal thanks and congratulations to the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. LaTourette) for the interest and attention and expertise in committee he brought to reauthorizing this agency which is so vital to so many rural Americans. I strongly support H.R. 2535 and urge its passage. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. NORTON

Ms. NORTON. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this time. The President himself woke up the American people with his September 7, $87 billion sticker-shock speech. People have already voted. Choose the poll: 59 percent in one, 66 percent in another. The vote is ``no.'' The reason is the President failed to seize the issue, the one issue that could have changed people's minds, that is paying for the war with a tax cut from the top 1 percent of the wealthiest Americans. Instead, he persists in making sacrifice a one-way street, sacrifice for the troops, while the rest of us remain untouched. The President has really touched the American people this time, though, with his $87 billion request. Having almost wrecked the economy with a crippling deficit, this $87 billion will prove our economic denouement. First, the wreck of our relations with the very allies necessary for our own protection in the war against terrorism. Then, the wreck of the volunteer Army, particularly the loss of many of our weekend warriors from the National Guard and Reserve who never signed up for an indefinite duty in a preemptive war. Every amendment before this body must be paid for except this one. Mr. Chairman, if we approve this request, the final wreck will be the appropriation power meant to check Presidential power. Our appropriation responsibility in time of war, never a tiger, will become a pussy cat that delivers to the cat in the White House, even without getting its proverbial cup of milk.

Ms. NORTON

Ms. NORTON. Mr. Speaker, I am introducing today the Universal Pre- Kindergarten and Early Childhood Education Act of 2003 (Universal Pre- K) to begin the process of providing universal, public school pre- kindergarten education for every child, regardless of income. The bill is meant to fill the gaping hole in the President's No Child Left Behind law, which requires elementary and secondary school children to meet more rigorous standards while ignoring the preschool years which can best prepare them to do so. My bill would provide a breakthrough in elementary school education by taking a step at the federal level to provide initial funding and, using such funding, to encourage school districts themselves to add a grade to elementary schooling at age four as an option for every child. The Universal Pre-K Act responds both to the needs of parents for educational childcare and to the new science showing that a child's brain development, which sets the stage for lifelong learning, begins much earlier than previously believed. However, parents who need child care for their pre-K age children are rarely able to afford the stimulating educational environment necessary to ensure optimal brain development. Universal Pre-K would be a part of school systems, adding a new grade for 4-year-olds similar to 5-year-old kindergarten programs now routinely available in the United States. The bill would eliminate some of the major shortcomings of the uneven commercial day care now available and would assure qualified teachers and safe facilities. Because of decades of refusal by Congress to approve the large sums necessary for universal health coverage, the Universal Pre-K Act encourages school districts across the United States to apply to the Department of Education for grants to establish 4-year-old kindergartens. Grants funded under Title IV of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) would be available to school systems which agree in turn to use the experience acquired with the federal funding provided by my bill to then move forward, where possible, to phase in pre-kindergartens for all children in the school district in regular classrooms with teachers equivalent to those in other grades as part of their annual school district budgets. The success of high quality Head Start and other pre-kindergarten programs combined with new scientific evidence concerning the importance of brain development in the early years should mandate the expansion of early childhood education for all of our children. Traditionally, early learning programs have been available only to the affluent and to lower income families in programs such as Head Start. The goal of the Universal Pre-K Act is to bring the benefits of educational pre-K within reach of the great majority of American working poor, lower middle class, and middle class families, most of whom have been left out. In a letter to Congress opposing private school vouchers, City Council Member Kathy Patterson suggested that instead of vouchers, Congress should fund a number of unfunded D.C. public school priorities, including Pre-K education for all 4-year-old children. She said that although universal 4-year-old Pre-K was a top D.C. priority, the city has been able to provide this schooling to only half of its children from local tax revenue. Compare the cost of day care, most of it offered today with an inadequate educational emphasis, at an average cost of $6,171 per year to the cost of in-state tuition at the University of Virginia, which costs $6,150 per year. Yet, more than 60 percent of mothers with children under age six work. That proportion is rapidly increasing as more mothers enter the labor force, including mothers leaving welfare, who also have no long term access to child care. Considering the staggering cost of daycare, the inaccessibility of early education, and the opportunity earlier education offers to improve a child's chances in life, four-year-old kindergarten is overdue. The absence of viable options for working families demands our immediate attention.

Ms. NORTON

Ms. NORTON. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman for yielding me time. I thank her for her leadership and the gentleman from California (Mr. Pombo) for his leadership as well. Let me say what we all know, that there are no veterans, and I think all would agree, that are more deserving than Vietnam veterans, no veterans that got a rawer deal at home and in the field. We cannot do enough. They still are the homeless veterans, not simply the returning veterans. I support this memorial. And I support it because it has been put underground. But I come to the floor to remind people that that is not where it always was. It was above ground. Now it is going underground and still there is a lot of work to be done to make sure that it is in keeping with the Mall itself. The Mall is becoming a crowded urban area, rather than the Mall it was meant to be. The Vietnam Memorial, anybody who goes there knows that people who come to the Vietnam Memorial need some place to go. Some people that come, they bring so many things with them. They leave items. It is the most visited memorial. It is a shrine. It is not simply a memorial. So the need for some place for people to be is apparent here. We have to be very careful, however, as we get pressure from various groups. For example, there is another memorial, because after this wonderful shrine was put there, some came forward and said, we do not like that so we want another one. And so there is another one there which, of course, people ignore because the place where people come is the place where there was a competition. And pursuant to that competition was this extraordinary memorial that could not be improved upon. But there was political pressure, and there is another memorial there that looks like all the other memorials in Washington. And it is political pressure that I come to the floor to remind people of because political pressures are making our Mall a place where our generation is using up all of the space. There is a portion of the Senate bill, when this goes to conference, to access the so-called reserve, the access from the White House to the Jefferson Memorial, the Capitol to the Lincoln Memorial. It is unfair to future generations to say, look, I am sorry there is no space there, but we had a lot of things that we wanted to commemorate. Mr. Speaker, I want to read a letter from the National Capital Planning Commission that reluctantly approved, or said it supported, this memorial but warned the Congress, ``While we applaud efforts of the Vietnam Memorial Fund to seek ways to ensure the visitors center will not visually intrude on the historic open space of the Mall, the Commission is concerned that if this center is approved, Congress will soon find itself under increasing pressure to authorize similar education centers at other memorials throughout the monumental core, including the Vietnam Memorial, the World War II Memorial, the Martin Luther King, Jr. Memorial, and the FDR Memorial.'' My position on all these memorials is the same. Martin Luther King, when people wanted to memorialize him before 25 years, no, no exceptions. He had to wait 25 years. We wanted an African American memorial on the Mall, I was against it. It is not going to be on the Mall. We have to have one policy. I think we have done the right thing here. But this is a real warning to the Congress that it does not have a lot more space left on that Mall. Hon. Craig Thomas, Chairman, Subcommittee on Nationnal Parks, U.S. Senate, Washington, DC. Dear Senator Thomas: I am writing to express the views of the National Capital Planning Commission with regard to S. 1076, a bill that would authorize a visitor education center at the Vietnam Veterans Memorial. As I stated previously in testimony before the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee, the Commission is supportive of the establishment of a visitor education center. We believe such a center could help inform the millions of visitors to the nation's capital--including thousands of school-aged children--who are eager to learn more about the complex history of the Vietnam conflict and the Vietnam Veterans Memorial. However, the Commission is concerned that locating an education center at the site of the Vietnam Veterans Memorial would set an unwelcome precedent for additional education centers at other memorials across the Mall. Instead, we believe there are alternative ways to provide visitors to the Vietnam Veterans Memorial with an education center that would be more consistent with Commission policies and avoid setting a precedent for additional visitor centers on the Mall. Since 1991, the Commission has consistently expressed objection to constructing additional elements to the Vietnam Veterans Memorial. In our view, the memorial succeeds in evoking a powerful, emotional response precisely because of its simplicity. The memorial presents a complete and timeless tribute whose impact could be diminished if it were coupled with an education center whose main focus would be historical interpretation and exhibit. In addition, as you may be aware, in September 2001, this Commission, along with the Commission of Fine Arts and the National Capital Memorials Commission, adopted the Memorials and Museums Master Plan to guide the location of new memorials and related structures in the nation's capital. The Plan sets forth a policy stating that visitor services at memorials in Area I, which includes the Vietnam Veterans Memorial, ``should be limited to only small information kiosks and restroom facilities and should not contain buildings or interior housing exhibits, displays, collection, or other interpretive products and programs normally found in museums, visitor centers, or education centers.'' While we applaud efforts of the Vietnam Memorial Fund to seek ways to ensure that the visitor center will not visually intrude upon the historic open space of the Mall, the Commission is concerned that if this center is approved, Congress may soon find itself under increasing pressure to authorize similar education centers at other memorials throughout the Monumental Core, including the Korean War Veterans Memorial, the World War II Memorial, the Martin Luther King, Jr. Memorial, or the FDR Memorial. Additional structures at these sites would further diminish the Mall's cherished open landscape. As we move forward to implement the Memorials and Museums Master Plan, we anticipate working with the National Park Service on a study that will provide a comprehensive assessment of landscape conditions, land use, and visitor services on and adjacent to the Mall. We expect the study will examine alternatives for educating visitors about memorials located on the Mall. We look forward to working with the Committee on this important issue. Please do not hesitate to contact our General Counsel, Ash Jain, or myself at (202) 482-7200 if we can be of any further assistance. Sincerely, Patricia E. Gallagher, AICP, Executive Director.

Ms. NORTON

Ms. NORTON. Mr. Speaker, I think it bears saying that Dorothy Height, who is a District resident, although she lived for many years in New York, is indeed a great American leader among us and one of a kind. There is no comparable leader in American life today because she was a guiding light. She is about 90 years old, still going as strong as any of us on this floor. She was a guiding light in the achievements we have made thus far for equal rights in America today. At the 40th anniversary on the March on Washington we just celebrated on August 23, some of us noted that Dorothy Height had the same position. She was president of the National Council of Negro Women then, but she was not included in the leaders that put on the march because she was a woman, and yet this is a woman who has stood for the rights of people of color and women equally. She is unique in the sense that when particularly black people were confused about whether one could be equally for women and for African Americans, she was a leader to say there is no such bifurcation in human rights.

Ms. NORTON

Ms. NORTON. Mr. Speaker, I want to say that I do support the gentlewoman's work and the work of the Chair on the Defense Production Act, and I am particularly grateful for the Meeks amendment on minority contracting. As we now go abroad, it becomes more relevant around the world.

Ms. NORTON

Ms. NORTON. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased that Government Reform Committee Chair Tom Davis (R-VA) introduced a bill with me today to permit two statues honoring citizens of the District of Columbia in Statuary Hall of the Capitol, just as statues honoring citizens of states are placed in the historic hall. This legislation would allow the city to offer two statues to the Congress on behalf of D.C. residents. The District of Columbia was born with the nation itself. The city has more than two centuries of its very own rich and uniquely American history. It goes without saying that the almost 600,000 American citizens who live in the nation's capital deserve the honor of having two of its history makers represented in the halls of the nation's Capitol just as citizens who live in the 50 states have long enjoyed. Our bill would allow the Mayor and the City Council to devise the method for determining the identity of the honorees, who must be deceased. Mayor Anthony Williams has already agreed to find funds in the District's budget for these statues upon the passage of this legislation. Every time we allow the District to be excluded from its place among the 50 states, we undermine our own fight for congressional voting rights and full democracy. It is for this reason that I insisted on a D.C. coin when quarters were authorized for the states and a D.C. travel and tourism stamp. I got the Postal Service to issue the first hometown D.C. stamp depicting D.C. neighborhoods, as well as traditional monuments, last month. My coin bill has been introduced and is expected to be approved soon on the suspension calendar. While D.C. residents have not yet obtained the same full political equality and voting rights as the states, they have all the responsibilities of the states, including paying all federal taxes and serving in all wars. Today when we are losing residents in Iraq, the least we should do is to give this city its rightful and equal place in the Capitol. Recently the District lost 44-year old Lt. Col. Paul W. Kimbrough, an African-American engineer who was supporting Operation Enduring Freedom in Afghanistan. A month ago I attended the funeral of 21-year old Specialist Darryl Dent of the D.C. National Guard who was killed in Iraq. There are more than 100 soldiers still serving in Iraq from Specialist Dent's 547th Transportation Company.

Ms. NORTON

Ms. NORTON. Mr. Speaker, I appreciate that the Members understand the vulnerability we feel here in the national capital. The gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Cummings) is in this region as well. And, of course, there is almost no attention being paid to vulnerability at home. I am on the Select Committee on Homeland Security, and I can tell you that those issues have been moved off the screen by what is happening in Iraq, by this $87 billion request. I want to thank the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Cummings) for coming forward this evening to continue this dialogue in the way he is continuing it among the members of the Congressional Black Caucus. I thank the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Meek of Florida) and the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson-Lee of Texas) for the repartee and colloquy that they have. I see I have two of my good friends and sisters who need also to be able to speak before our time is up, so I will try and have consideration and bear that in mind as I speak briefly. I want to congratulate my colleagues. I heard some of their colloquy on the troops. I am tired of talking about the war. I want to talk about the people who are being forced to make this war. Yes, they are volunteers, but none of them, none of them expected and indeed none of them were promised what has happened to them now. We of the Congressional Black Caucus are concerned. A third of the U.S. Army is African American. About 20 percent of the armed services are all over, but when we speak about troops, we are talking about the American men and women who are in Iraq. I am saying, Mr. Speaker, they are not just in Iraq. My God, one begins to wonder where are they not? We are still in Europe and Japan. How long ago was World War II? When did the Cold War end? Nobody is talking about burden sharing anymore, about pulling them out. Korea. I guess most of the Congressmen were not even alive. Nobody is talking about going home from there. We are in Philippines, Bosnia, Kosovo, the Sinai Peninsula, Liberia. This is all that has come to mind. I have not done the encyclopedic rendition of where we are. I am very, very frightened for my country now. Because my country is overly dependent on what we have come to call the weekend warriors. We know who the weekend warriors are. The weekends warriors are not your daughter and my son. They are not the folks who can go to college. The weekends warriors are the people who, knowing full well they may have to go abroad to fight a war, nevertheless had no expectation, for example, of having 6 months turn into a year and then come back and have to go again. They want more troops. They say more foreign troops. They do not have enough troops to fight this war. They say foreign troops because they do not want to tell the American people the truth: They need more folks. We know from what has happened at the U.N. they are not going to get them from France and Germany. We are paying for the troops that are there from other countries already, so we are getting no financial relief. There are drips and dabs from other parts of the country. Where is the pool going to go come from, Mr. Speaker? There is no place else for it to come from. It is going to come from the people who are now supporting their families here that have not been called up yet. The people who are in the Reserves and in the National Guard, largely for financial reasons, and are now becoming the blood and guts of the Armed Forces. Mr. Speaker, I do not believe, and I think it can be easily proved, that this notion that we talked about endlessly of being able to fight two wars at the same time is any longer the case. We are hardly able to fight Afghanistan and Iraq at the same time, and there were howls about how Afghanistan was being neglected. I defy anybody to tell me if a major war were to break out somewhere else in the world today how we would be prepared to go even a fight that war. But that was always the paradigm. We could do that. Because we invaded Iraq, a war of choice, that was unnecessary, we can no longer do that. Mr. Speaker, I just want to say why a country, not simply we who feel for the troops, should be concerned about this. For the Active Duty and the Reserves thus far, there have been no particular impact of this war; and the reason the analysts tell us is there is no impact is the bad economy. People are, in fact, still joining the Active Reserve and Active Duty because they cannot get a job at home. Thank you, Uncle Sam. What you are not providing in America, people are getting their job risking their lives in the armed services. But watch out for the National Guard. The National Guard is already 20 percent down on meeting its goal for the year. I ask you, Mr. Chairman, do you think the average person seeing National Guard targets in Iraq would now sign up to be in the National Guard? Moreover, the parents and the relatives of those who are there now say that, in the units where their husbands are fighting, three-quarters of the unit is going to go as soon as they are able to get out. Who is going to fight the wars at all if going into Iraq means nobody wants to be in the Reserve anymore, nobody wants to be in the National Guard? Mr. Chairman, did you know that you cannot get out now when your time is up because there is something called the Stop Loss for mobilized units? So your time is off. You signed up to X date; X date is passed and you are still in. Last time I looked, that was called a draft, and yet these are supposed to be volunteers. Finally, Mr. Speaker, let me indicate a particular outrage that came to public note only this week. I do not know if I were to ask the average person what employer do you think has the largest number of Reservists? And I think people might think of AT&T or General Motors. Mr. Chairman, it is the United States Government. There are 65,000 Reservists who are employed by the Federal Government, people who serve their country in a civilian capacity, serve their country as a Reservist, the single largest employer in the United States is Uncle Sam, and so it should come as no surprise that we would have more Reservists. I did not realize until recently that 48,000 Federal technicians, there are 48,000 Federal technicians who are required to be members of the National Guard as a condition for employment by the Federal Government. So you would think that we would do what we could having so many of these Reservists. We are not among the 200 private sector employers and 50 local and State governments who make up the difference in pay between what they earned on the job and their military pay. We are not among them, although many State governments are and many private employers are. So we have a chance to close that, to say we realize there is a war no one expected to fight. We realize horrific things are happening to families, so let us do what large companies do. Instead, this week we learn that there was no chance, indeed, the defense appropriators in conference indicated that there was no chance that there would be a provision to close the gap that the civil service employees who have been called to active duty face. It was being considered by House and Senate negotiators working on the fiscal 2004 defense authorization bill, and word came on Monday that provision is dead, and they said it costs too much money. Let me tell you what is too much money to make up the difference, the huge financial sacrifice to families would have cost over 5 years, $160 million dollars. We are talking about $87 billion. The notion that we cannot find in the huge defense budget, $160 million to do what 200 private companies do, to make sure that the sacrifice which is already horrific because you are already in the first place, would not come in dollars and cents to you and your family. So I say shame on you, Congress. Shame on the conferees for coming to the floor every day that this Congress is in session to talk about the troops. And when time comes to put up or shut up for the troops, they shut up. Mr. Chairman, I want to invite one of my sisters to come forward now who has not had an opportunity to speak, and I would like to thank the gentleman for his leadership on this special order.

Ms. NORTON

Ms. NORTON. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman for New York (Ms. Slaughter) for her steadfast work to preserve a woman's right to choose, as this bill does not, and to keep us from endangering that right from the thirteenth week on. And that is what this bill does. I want to speak to the constitutional issues. I understand where many Americans are on what they think is misnamed partial birth abortion. You know, that is a 1984 gamut, call something what it is not, trying to focus the American people on a viable baby being aborted as it comes out of its mother's womb. My friends, that is not this bill. This bill is a virtual twin of a bill in Nebraska law that was struck down 3 years ago by the Supreme Court in Stenberg versus Carhart. This is a redux of that unconstitutional law. And though there have been some attempts to fiddle with the bill in those terms, there is not a dime's worth of difference between this law and the Nebraska law. Now, the Republicans are not as dumb as they look. They have read the decision. They are not even trying to ban one procedure. They are trying to dip into the second trimester, and, boy, have they done it. And Ms. and Mrs. America do understand that, beginning with the thirteenth week, the procedures most commonly used and understood to be the safest procedures for performing abortions after the thirteenth week would be banned by this bill. In the law we say it is unconstitutionally vague. That means it is so broad that it goes beyond what might be legal. Of course, this would not be legal because it has no health exception. The majority is trying to practice medicine without a license. It certainly is not capable of practicing law without a license, because each and every time this and similar bills have been overturned. Worse, there is no health exception. It is as if Roe versus Wade never said that in order to be constitutional there always had to be a health exception. These folks just slide right over that. I want to leave you with the words of the Supreme Court in Carhart, because you are going to be hearing them again. This is not my Supreme Court, this is a conservative Supreme Court. And it said, ``Using this law some present prosecutors and future attorneys general may choose to pursue physicians who use the most commonly used method for performing previability, second trimester abortions. All those who perform abortion procedures using that method must fear prosecution, conviction, and imprisonment. The result is an undue burden upon a woman's right to make an abortion decision. We must quickly find the statute unconstitutional.'' It was unconstitutional 3 years ago, my friends. It is unconstitutional today, even if we enact it.

Ms. NORTON

Ms. NORTON. Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased to recognize one of the nation's premier schools of nursing and health studies, here in the District of Columbia, the Georgetown University School of Nursing & Health Studies, as it celebrates its centennial anniversary. In December 1903, a committee at Georgetown Hospital formally created the Georgetown University Training School for Nurses. One hundred years later, now called the School of Nursing & Health Studies, the school is celebrating its long-standing traditions as well as its continued status as a leader in health care education. The School of Nursing & Health Studies, located in the newly renovated St. Mary's Hall, has been at the forefront of the health care field, preparing future leaders to respond to the growing complexity of health care delivery at all levels. Graduates pursue various health professions within nursing, medicine, law, health policy, health management, and public health, among many other careers. Students have an opportunity to study and intern at health care facilities and agencies throughout Washington, D.C., including Georgetown University Hospital, the National Institutes of Health, and the World Health Organization. Both the Nursing and Health Studies majors focus on cura personalis-- the care and development of the whole person--by educating students for a meaningful life, challenging them intensively, but also supporting them in their learning. The School embraces the Jesuit inspired principles shared by the entire University community, which emphasize the pursuit of knowledge with a responsibility to contribute to the common good. Mr. Speaker, one hundred years have seen remarkable changes and advances in health care, yet the School of Nursing & Health Studies continues its core mission of developing exceptionally qualified health professionals who can recognize and respond to the full human experience encountered in the health field. I hope you will join me in congratulating the School of Nursing & Health Studies and Dean Bette Keltner on this auspicious occasion.

Ms. NORTON

Ms. NORTON. Mr. Speaker, I was pleased to support enactment of H.R. 13, the Museum and Library Services Act of 2003. In addition to authorizing Federal funding support for our Nation's museums and libraries, the bill contains a small provision with great importance to the District of Columbia. It designates the Capital Children's Museum as the National Children's Museum which will be a new state-of-the-art, interactive museum offering a national model for exhibits oriented and dedicated to children. The purpose of the museum will be to explain the Nation's institutions and ideas to American children, providing a gateway of understanding not only for children in the Washington, DC, metropolitan area, but also for the millions of school children and families who visit the Nation's capital from across the Nation and the world. The National Children's Museum designation is critical for several reasons. The designation enables the museum to highlight its activities and exhibits, and expand the reach of its educational experiences to children both in the United States and abroad. The museum serves as a flagship for the Nation's children's museums, and the Association of Children's Museums supports the designation because it increases public understanding of the purpose of all children's museums. In addition, the designation will help facilitate partnerships for the National Children's Museum with other regional museums to create models for innovative learning experiences. For almost 30 years, the Capital Children's Museum has been serving the children of the Nation's capital. I hope my colleagues will join me in thanking the Capital Children's Museum on its service to children for these many years, and in congratulating the museum on this designation and its commitment to the creation of the National Children's Museum.

Ms. NORTON

Ms. NORTON. Mr. Speaker, I thank our hard-working ranking member for yielding me this time, and I thank both of our ranking members and both of our Chairs of our committee and our subcommittee for the diligent work they have put in. I congratulate them on that and on trying to get us as far as we could thus far. We are on suspension, which is really the only thing we could do, and it probably is the easiest thing we can do; and when you are doing the easiest thing, you have to watch out. Everybody knows that if something happened after 5 months and we were not ready, we would have to be right back here extending this bill. We just have to. We are not going to let a transportation bill expire. That is why I am sorry it is not for 6 months. I am glad we are doing this on the floor today. For me it is a message for now and it is a message for the future. In this jobless recovery, folks out there need to know that we are working on jobs, and when they hear this bill is on the floor, they think, oh, goodness, at least they are not going to cut off what jobs are still going and maybe there will be some jobs coming. I am terribly concerned about a jobless rate of 6.4 percent, and 6.9 percent in my own district. Among African Americans, it is an amazing 11.5 percent, more than twice what it is for whites, and 5.5 percent for Hispanics, 50 percent higher than it is for whites. I hope we will not forget what this bill means to Americans: roads. Transportation means that we are going to put people to work, and today we are saying that we are trying our best to do that. Mr. Speaker, I want to second the remarks of our ranking member about funding, the $375 million figure. I have begun to understand that figure as I became a member of the Committee on Homeland Security, and more and more of what I am asking for roads really has to do with security. The money I am asking for really has to do with things like bridges and tunnels because you cannot get out of the District of Columbia the way it is now if there were an emergency. So I ask us all to focus on this bill, to focus on getting it done now, and to focus on doing what we have to do to get it out at the earliest possible moment.

Ms. NORTON

Ms. NORTON. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in recognition of Constitution Day to submit to Congress a petition from nearly 1,000 District of Columbia residents for voting rights in the Congress. I commend Joseph N. Grano, the leader of the Voting Rights Petition who has gathered the signatures of prominent Washingtonians contained in the petition. Full democracy and voting rights for the District of Columbia residents have been my chief goals since I was first elected to Congress. Joseph Grano has furthered the goal for DC residents through this petition. Last year in the 107th Congress, a 9-0 Senate Committee vote sent my DC voting rights bill, No Taxation Without Representation, to the Senate floor for the first time in 25 years. Mr. Speaker, I ask the House to join me in acknowledging that the denial of full congressional voting rights is a denial of fundamental rights to District of Columbia residents. District of Columbia Voting Rights Petition to Congress, 2001-2002 To the Honorable Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America: We, the undersigned residents of Washington, DC and citizens of the United States, respectfully petition for representation in Congress as is duly granted to all citizens residing in the fifty States.--Washington, DC, February 2, 2001-June 14, 2002. petitioners Elected Officials Delegate, U.S. House of Representatives: Eleanor Holmes Norton. Mayor, District of Columbia: Anthony A. Williams. Council of the District of Columbia: Linda W. Cropp, Chairman; Harold Brazil, At Large; David A. Catania, At Large; Phil Mendelson, At Large; Carol Schwartz, At Large; Jim Graham, Ward 1; Jack Evans, Ward 2; Kathleen Patterson, Ward 3; Adrian Fenty, Ward 4; Vincent B. Orange, Sr., Ward 5; Sharon Ambrose, Ward 6; Kevin P. Chavous, Ward 7; Sandy Allen, Ward 8. Advisory Neighborhood Commissioners: Jacqueline Arguelles, 1A01; Mack A. James, 1A04; Regina Upchurch, 1A08; Lawrence T. Guyot, Jr., 1B04; Statehood Delegation to Congress: Florence H. Pendleton, Senator; Paul Strauss, Senator; Ray Browne, Representative. Board of Education of the District of Columbia: Peggy Cooper Cafritz, President; Julie Mikuta, District 1; Dwight E. Singleton, District 2; Tommy Wells, District 3; William Lockridge, District 4. Theadore B. Butler, 1B10; Josh Gibson, 1C07; Christopher Shaheen, 1E01; Maria Tyler, 2A03; Dorothy Miller, 2A05; Norma Z. Chaplain, 2B01; Alexander M. Padro, 2C01; Doris L. Brooks, 2C03; Richard B. Westbrook, 2D01; Roger Moffatt, 2D05; Len Levine, 2E02; Thomas L. Birch, 2E07; David H. Stephens, 2F01; All Lloyd Breed, 3B03; James C. Lively, 3B05; Kurt Vorndran, 3C02; Gertrude E. Reeves, 3C06; Lars H. Hydle, 3C07; Rosalyn P. Doggett, 3C08; Nancy J. MacWood, 3C09; Thomas A. Dibiase, 3E03; David J. Bardin, 3F04; Frank Gordan, 3E05; Allen E. Beach, 3G04; Douglas Sloan, 4A01; Jourdinia S. Brown, 4A02; Louis Lieb, 4B03; Pat Kidd, 4B04; Luis W. Thurston, 4B06; Joseph Bowser, 5A03; George A. Jackson, 5B05; Kathy Henderson, 5B10; Cleopatra Jones, 5C03; Vicky Leonard-Chambers, 5C04; Matthew J. Hanka, 5C12; Ronald T.T. Nelson, 6A11; Kenan P. Jarboe, 6B05; Kathy Chamberlain, 7B05; Terrance Johnson, 7C03; Ramon Murchison, 7D06; Johnnie Scott Rice, 7E08; Charles Wilson, 8A03. Former Elected Officials United States Senator: Charles H. Percy (R-IL). U.S. Representative: Fred B. Rooney (D-PA). Delegate, U.S. House of Representatives: Walter E. Fountroy. Mayor, District of Columbia: Walter E. Washington; Sharon Pratt. Council of the District of Columbia: Sterling Tucker, Chairman; Arrington Dixon, Chairman; Betty Ann Kane, At Large; William Lightfoot, At Large; Hilda H.M. Mason, At Large; Douglas Moore, At Large; John Ray, At Large; Frank Smith, Ward 1; James E. Nathanson, Ward 3; Charlene Drew Jarvis, Ward 4; William Spaulding, Ward 5; Nadine Winter, Ward 6; H.R. Crawford, Ward 7; Wilhelmina Rolark, Ward 8. Statehood Delegation to Congress: John Capozzi, Representative. Board of Education of the District of Columbia: Tonya Vidal Kinlow, Member; Alaire Rieffel, Member; Barbara Lett Simmons, Member; Wanda Washburn, Member; Phyllis E. Young, Member. Additional Signers, in Alphabetical Order, Last Name First Abate, Mary M., Abbott, Richard O., Adielou, Jean-Francois, Adkins, Mark, Agostinelli, Floyd H., Aikin, Robert H., Albers, Gerardine M., Albright, Craig M., Alexander, Clifford, Alexander, Harry, Toussaint, Alford, Susanne E., Ali, Kamil B., Ali, Virginia, Allen, Hugh, Allen, Mildred, Alley, Dionti, Alston, Wanda R., Alvarez, Anne, Anderson, Eleanor A., Anderson, John W. R., Anthony, Lewis M., Apple, Janet, Aranha, Lesley G., Archer, Vivian, Artisst, Robert, Athy, Andrew, Audette, Rose Marie, Auld, Barbara Ann, Axelrod, Kimberly, Baker, A. Cornelius, Baker, Johanna, Baker, Josephine C., Baldrige, Letitia, Barbara, Green, Barker, Dorothy, Barnes, Denise Rolark, Barnes, Johnny, Barton, Shari, Bashkin, June C., Bass, Gerald H., Bates, Barbara D., Battle, Roma, Bauch, Michael M., Baxter, Nathan D., Beach, Martha Page, Beach, Walter, Bearden, Janet, Becker, Mary H., Beghe, Bina, Bell, T. David, Benjamin, Julie, Bentley, Jerry, Berg, Al, Berk, Sally, Berkley, Marta W., Berman, Lawrence E., Bermpohl, Barbara J., Bermpohl, Charles, Bernhardt, Sonya, Berry, Jr., James D., Berry, Max N., Bertran, Silvia P., Best, Jr., Richard A., Bick, Barbara, Bicknell, Alesia, Bieri, Sandra J., Birch, Thomas L., Bitondo, Patricia S., Bixley, Donna M., Black, Ethel R., Blackwelder, Brent, Blair, Jr., Philip J., Block, Steven, Blufer, Jennifer, Blume, Joshua S., Boasberg, Tersh, Bolden, A. Scott, Bolt, Janis M., Booker, R. H., Boorstin, Daniel J., Boorstin, Ruth F., Borbely, Marc, Borman, Susan G., Bost, Samuel F., Boswell, George W., Boteler, William, Boucher, Marie A., Bourgin, Simon, Bowen, Helen, Bowen, Tracy, Bowling, Kenneth R., Bradburn, Ben, Bray, Joan M., Brazile, Donna, Brizill, Dorthy, Broderick, Katherine S., Bronstein, Harriet, Brooks, Doris L., Brooks, Earline, Brown, C. Dudley, Brown, Chelai, Brown, Danielle M., Brown, Elizabeth F., Brown, Janet Welsh, Brown, Janice, Brown, Sherry, Brown, Theresa F., Brown, William B., Brown, William N., Browne, Elaine A., Browser, Joan B., Brylawski, Henry H., Buavie, Earl, Burden, Valerie K., Burger, Charles A., Burgess, Julie, Burkhart, Edwardo, Burton, Jr., Melvin M., Busang, F. Brett, Butler, Alice Y., Butler, Theodore, Cain, Bonnie J., Calbert, William E., Cantey, Gloria A., Capozzi, Susan U., Carliner, David, Carpenter, Anne, Carr, Novella M., Carter, Randolph, Carter, Virginia L., Cartland, Beth, Cassell, Charles I., Ceja, Kathy, Ceja, Paul, Chambers, Cathy, Champagne, Rita V., Chane, John B., Charles, Christopher, Chartowitz, Simon, Cheney, Carolyn, Chevalier, Mellanie, Christian, Elois Felder, Clark, Bruce W., Clark, Jeannine Smith, Clarke, Carole E., Clarke, III, Francis M., Clarke, III, Randolph L., Clay, Carolyn, Clemmons, Richard L., Cleveland, Gwendolyn M., Coan, Nancie S., Coates, Mary M., Cohan, Marsha A., Cohen, Carla, Cohen, Claire, Cohen, David, Cohen, Jean, Cohen, Paul J., Cohen, Roberta S., Cohen, Stephen P., Cole, Carl C., Cole, Michelle C., Coleman, Stephen, Collins, Michael A., Condrell, William A., Conly, Robert J., Connors, Jill, Conroy, Sarah Booth, Cooke, Paul P., Cooper, Dawn M., Cooper, Ethel C., Cooper, Jerry I., Cooper, Maudine R., Cooper, Timothy, Corboy, Joan E., Corvington, Patrick S., Courtney, Sarah, Critchfield, Margot, Crittenden, Ann, Croft, Howard R., Cropp, Dwight S., Cushing, Joan, Cymrot, Steve, Czaplewski, Ellen, Davis, Dorothy J., Davis, Ellen P., Davis, Judith, Day, Alice T., Day, Lincoln H., Deaver, Laura D., DeGoia, John J., Del Negro, Albert A., Del Signore, Gilda, Demczuk, Bernard, Derrick, Jr., John M., Devall, Donna, Devall, James L., DeVoto, Emily, Dial, Lacy Anne, diGiacomantonio, William C., Dillard, Russell L., Dinan, Donald R., Dixon, Cora O., Dixon, Jane Holmes, Dixon, Jr., Walter, Doctor, Charles A., Doctor, Marcia, Doggett, Bill, Domike, Joan R., Donkin, Steven G., Doucette, Dail D., Dougherty, James B., Douglas, Selma Ford, Downs, Barbara, Downs, Dalton D., Drew, Joseph, Drissel, Anne, Durant, Bene L., Eaddy, Phyllis C., Earhart, Farley, Eck, Barbara Coughlin, Eckles, Kathryn A., Edelman, Peter B., Edwards, Yvonne E., Egendorf, Paul, Eichenlaub, Dawn M., Eichhorn, Jan, Eiland, Genevieve, Eilenberg, Eleanor F., Eisenhardt, Julie, Elsworth, Robert W., Elwood, Patricia, Emerine, Dan, Eng, Ronald M., Epperson, Audrey I., Erdman, Ann, Espenschied, Peter, Espy, Anita, Essaye, Eileen, Eugene, Elinor F., Evans, Ronald, Evelyn, Douglas E., Fagin, Roy V., Falk, David, Farlee, Coralie, Farley, Kecia M., Farrell, Mary, Farren, Linda, Fasano, Michael V., Fassler, Bettifae, Fay, Peter J., Feldman, Abraham E., Feldman, Margaret, Fenton, Mary E., Ferens, Michael, Fidler, Lillian, Fillmore, Terrence, Fineberg, Rachel, Fischer, Eleanor P., Fitzgerald, IV, William B., FitzGerald, William H.G., Flack, J. Kirkpatrick, Flack, Joan, Fleming, Carol E., Fleming, Jean, Ford, James R., Ford, Jessica M., Forster, John J., Fox, Catherine J., Fox, Howard, Francese, Marge, Freund, Charles Paul, Freundel, Barry, Frye, Denetra T., Furlong, Joan M., Gaffney, James C., Gaine- Jernigan, April C., Gaither, Jr., Charles, Gardiner, Laura, Gardner, Letitia, Garnett, C. Vance, Gati, Charles, Gati, Tobi T., Gaull, Eric S., Gauntt, Barbara, Gautier, Philip R., Gemmill, Frances C., Gemmill, Robert, Gench, Roger J., Gerstle, Tracy, Gibson, James O., Gildemeister, Joan E., Gildenhorn, Jeffrey N., Gill, Sr., John W., Gilson, Anne E., Gist, John Earl, Gittens, Tony, Glickman, Andrew, Glover, Joseph A., Gold, Gregg H.S., Golden, Ryan, Golomb, Rita, Goodall, Nataki, Goode, James M., Gordon, Lillian A., Gottfried, Bobby, Gottfried, Margery, Gould, Michael A., Grana, Teresa, Grano, Joseph N., Granoff, Nadine, Grant, Denise E., Grant, Evelyn R., Grant, Miriam, Grass, Eleanor, Graves, Jr. Donet D., Gray, Evelyn T., Gray, Harold, Gray, Lawrence A., Graye, Eric S., Green, Charles C., Green, Marjorie Reed, Green, Tyler, Greenan, Linda, Greene, M. Sharon, Greene, Natalie C., Greenfield, Brad, Griffin, Susan, Gundersheimer, Werner, Gunn, Zanette, Gunn-Williams, Berna, Gurley, George E., Gwynne, J. Guy, Hagerty, Helen M., Hagler, Graylan S., Hahn, Jr., Gilbert, Hahn, Margot H., Hallman, E. Patricia, Hanrahan, Deborah, Hanrahan, John, Hansen, Erling, Hargrove, Ann Hughes, Hargrove, John Lawrence, Harigan, Merrilee, Haring, Ellen E., Harles, Andrea, Harles, Charles, Harraway, Jane, Harris, Janette Hoston, Harrison, Keyla, Hatry, Audrey H., Hawkins, Ann W., Hawthorne, Annie F., Hayden, Andrea R., Hechinger, Sr., John, Height, Dorothy, Hemphill, Gwendolyn, Henderson, Wade, Henry, James, Herman, Christina C., Herman, Christopher C., Heurich, Gary F., Hier, Thomas C., Hill, Barbara, Hinman, Brian R., Hinton, Shauntay, Hinton, Solomon, Hitchcock, Joanne, Hobbs, Loretta M., Hobson, Phyllis J., Holeman, Larry E., Holman, Kwasi, Holmes, Anastasia M., Hoover, Bette, Hopper, Janice H., Hoskins, Marilyn W., Howard, John M., Hubbard, Reginald, Huff, James E., Hughes, Reginald T., Hughley, Alisa M., Hugo, Glen, Hunter, Deitrich, Hurst, Paul R., Hussey, Sandra R., Hydle, Lars S., Hyman, Robert E., Hyman, Toby R., Imperatore, Catherine, Isaac, Donald, Isaac, Fulwood, Ivey, Mary E., Jackson, Jr., Arthur H., Jackson, Jumoke, Jackson, Maurice, Jacques, Kenneth R., Jaffe, Lorna S., James, Sandra P., Jamison, Kay, Janke, Lucinda, Jarvis, Ernest D., Jashinsky, Judy, Jenkins, Anise, Jenkins, Lauretta C., Jenkins, Mark, Jenkins, Timothy L., Jewett, Martha, Johns, Marie C., Johnson, Aaron L., Johnson, Edith, Johnson, Jermaine, Johnson, Linda, Johnson, Mark F., Johnson, Michael, Johnson, Mzilla Boyd, Johnson, Sr., James R., Johnson, Wendell R., Johnstone, James M., Jones, Brenda, Jones, Cecily, Jones, Cliftine, Jones, Elaine R., Jones, Germaine, Jones, Gwen, Jones, Jean C., Jones, Mary C., Jordan, Jr., Vernon E., Joynt, Carol Ross, Junge, Emilie, Kameny, Franklin E., Kaplan, Joel, Kaplan, Michael, Katz, Kenneth S., Kaufman, Sarah E., Keenan, Joan S., Keeny, Jr., Spurgeon M., Keeny, Sheila S., Kelley, Kitty, Kelly, Brandy, Kemp, Virginia, Kendrick, Dolores, Kennedy, Adele, Kennedy, Emily A., Kennedy, Mary T., Kidney, Judy, Kiger, Keven, Kimber, Stephanie, Kinch, Patricia, King, Branda J., King, Catherine Y., King, Jean A., Kingsley, Rebecca, Kinlow, Eugene D., Kissel, Sharon M., Klein, Max, Klein, Suzette, Kleinhenz, Laura M., Knot, Kenneth, Koenigs, Marion, Kopper, Starr, Korzenik, Jeremy F., Koskinen, John A., Kraft, Barbara S., Kreitzman, Elizabeth, Kreitzman, Horace, Krowl, Michelle A., Kukulski, Raymond J., Kurtz, Gwendolyn M., Larh, Jack, Larh, Joanna Hanes, Lake, R. Renita, Lancastre, Johncie L., Lane, Joseph, Lane, Madelyn A., LaRoche, George S., Larsen, Amy Gracey, Lawrence, Charles, Lawrence, Krystal, Lawton, Virginia, Lee, Ethel Delaney, Lee, Vilma L., Leiman, Robin, Leonard, Lloyd S., Levin, Vivian, Lewis, Charles Thomas, Lewis, Iris R., Lewis, Stacey L., Liberatore, Robert G., Lidoff, Marjorie, Lindenblad, Irving W., Linder, Geraldine, Linton, Ronald M., Loikow, Ann Hume, Lowe, Charles, Lowell, Kathyrn Solorzano, Lucas, Anne, Luchs, Allison, Luchs, Barbara B., Lugo, Elena, Lynch, Jr., Willie J., Lynch, Terrance, Lytle, Lelia A., Madison, Joseph, Mahone, Othello, Malasky, Gary, Malone, Brenda D., Marsh, Anna, Marsh, Luther, Martin, Elizabeth, Marx, Jay, Marzin, Anne D., Mason, Charles, Mason, Ernest J., Mawber, Carolyn, Maza, Rudy, May, Jr., Ernest N., Mayes, Stanley J., Mayoch, Melanie, McBride, Lindsay, McCauley, Mary T., McClintic, Dusty, McFarlane, Jonda, McIntosh, Janet, McIver, Dale, Mckee, Pamela L., McKiney, Arthur D., McKoy, John H., McLeod, James, McLeod, Kate, McMahon, James B., McSweeny, Dorothy Pierce, McWaters, Mary Harris, Meade, Barbara M., Meehan, Robert, Meehan, Susan, Meigel, Robin, Melder, Keith E., Melendez, Norma., Melgren, Linda M., Mersha, Wondimu, Merz, Mary Frances, Method, Francis J., Metzger, Nancy Pryor, Miller, H. Crane, Miller, Iris, Miller, Janette S., Miller, Joan, Miller, Joyce D., Miller, Nancy E., Miller, Rosemary E. Reed, Miller, Sabrina, Miller, Victor J., Mills, Yvette, Minott, Gloria, Mitchell, Cynthia T., Mitchell, Hedrick E., Mitchell, Shirley G., Mitten, Carol J., Moe, Richard, Molinelli, Lucille, Monagan, Rosemary, Mondale, Clarence, Mondale, Virginia, Monteilh, Richard, Moody, Linda H., Moore, Carol, Moore, Carolyn, Moore, Robert L., Morris, Debra S., Mosely, Bill, Muier, Adam E., Mumford, Jennifer, Mumin, Ibrahim, Munson, Marit, Najjab, Jamal, Neal, Beverly, Neil, Cynthia S., Nelson, Judith G., Nelson, Karen, Neumann, Loretta, Neverson, Angela P., Neverson, Norman C., Newsman, Elaine L., Nichols, Susan, Nickerson, Lisa M., Nijjeri, Redus, Noherty, Sean Patrick, Norouzi, Parisa, Norris, Alice L., Noto, Nonna A., Nyguard, Debra, O'Field, Jr., William R., Odabas-Geldiay, Filiz F., Odum, Joel, Ogilvie, Phil, Oldham Molly, Olender, Jack H., Oliver, Anne, Pannell, Philip E., Parker, Cheryl A., Patrick, Jaquetta, Patterson, Michael, Payton, II, Douglas Neil, Payton, Pamela, Pearson, Shawn L., Pearson-West, Kathryn A., Peck, Robert A., Peete, Etta C., Perry, Keith Andrew, Peterson, Sushila J., Pigott, Howard, Plotkin, Mark, Pollard, William L., Pollock, Lucia, Pontius, John F., Pontius, Ruth C., Pope, George, Popkin, Joanne, Poteat, Willard C., Potter, Julian, Powell, John, Present, Sheri, President, Delure, Price, Woodruff, Pridgen, Marguerite, Priemou, Lina, Quander, Carmen, Quander, Rohulamin, Quinn, Brigid, Raines, Franklin D., Rainwater, Peggy E., Rausch, Richard L., Ravens, Robert B., Ray, Kathryn C., Redman, Gail, Redwood, Rene A., Reed, Jeanne P., Reeves, Brian, Rega, Elizabeth, Rega, John, Regardie, Renay, Regardie, William, Reid, Sheila A., Rhodes, Samuel W., Rice, Bill, Rich, Sr., Frank, Richards, Laura, Richards, Mark David, Richardson, Bernard, Richardson, Charles, Richardson, Neil, Richardson, Ronald, Rieffel, Lex, Riley, Paul J., Rimensnyder, James N., Rimensnyder, Nelson F., Rivers, Beverly D., Rivlin, Alice M., Robbins, Stacey, Robbins, Warren, Robin, Alex, Robinson, William L., Rodriguez, Hector, Rogers, Helen H., Rojo, Eric, Roles, Margaret, Rollins, Jr., Robert A., Romanek, Walter, Rooney, Angela, Rooney, Thomas P., Roosevelt, Kermit, Rose, Loraine, Ross, Glyndola C., Ross, Pete, Ross, Tayloe, Roth, Alan J., Rothschild, Kenneth, Rouncie, Hollace, Rowan, Mary Pat, Rowen, Paul R., Russell, Elizabeth, Ruttenberg, Charles B., Rybeck, Richard, Sacks, Benjamin R., Saez, Miriam, Sanders, Charles E., Sandvold, Irene, Sarla, Leo, Saul, Judy Hubbard, Saunders, Sherry J., Schaefer, Christie, Schaefer, Mark A., Scher, Barry F., Schietinger, Egbert F., Schietinger, Helen, Schlefer, Marion K., Schyler, Krista, Schmidt, Kathy, Schott, Peter, Schussheim, Hanna L., Schwinn, Gerald Allan, Scott, Edith M., Scott, Paul D., Seegars, Sandra, Seligman, Michele, Sellin, Anne, Sellin, David, Semans, Linda K., Sericca, Cherie, Shaffer, Joseph, Shannon, Donald H., Shannon, Sally, Shapiro, Carol Ann, Shapiro, Sarah, Sheehan, Kathleen M., Shema Yah, Queen Mother, Sheppard, Anthony M., Shepperd, Randall J., Short, Jr. James N., Shulman, Judith L., Sibert, Karen M., Sigerson, Bartlett, Sivlerman, Gary S., Silverstone, Gail, Simmons, Jacquelyn S., Simmons, Nancy L., Simon, Gottlieb, Simons, Elaine D., Simons, William H., Simpson, Alec, Singleton, Harry M. Sinzinger, Kathryn M., Sislen, Myrna, Slemmer, Amy, Smalls, Betty L., Smith, B. Harold V., Smith, Dane F., Smith, Jeffrey, Smith, Judith A., Smith, Juliette W., Smith, Kathryn S., Smith, Kimberly R., Smith, Lloyd D., Smith, Naomi B., Smith, Nelson, Smith, Sherwood, Smith, Vivian L. Smith, Wallace Charles, Smith, Walter, Snyder, Tanya, Sockwell, Robert N., Softli, Linda E., Solomon, Daniel, Solomon, Elizabeth, Solorzano, John, SoWell, Richard, Sparkman, Jennifer L., Speight, Chester, Spencer, Annette L., Spillinger, Barbara, Springmann, Ruth E., Standing, Benjamin M., Stanmore, Stuart, Starke, George, Steacy, Richard, Steen, Jim, Stein, Gary, Stephens, David H., Sternlieb, Joseph, Stewart, Rhonda, Stock, Richard H., Stout, Anna, Stowell, Kerry H., Strawser, Neil E., Sulton, Cynthia Gayle, Sussman, Michael, Szulgit, Karen A., Talbott, Strobe, Tangherlini, Daniel, Tank, Mary L., Tanney, Faith, Tate, Constance P., Tayler, William, Taylor, Clara S., Taylor, Inell P., Teasley, Inez L., Tellis, Edward L., Temple, Donald M., Tennly, Emanuel Tanen, Terry, Diane, Tess, Dillon, Theobald, Ursula, Thomas, Annie Marcs, Thomas, Hazel B., Thomas, J. Maurice, Thomas, Martin, Thomas, Romain B., Thomas, W., Thorne, Doris, T., Thorp, Matthew B., Tierney, Mary B., Tillman, Joan E., Tingling, Michele A., Tobias, M., Todd, Ellen, Tottenberg, Polly, Tractenberg, Stephen Joel, Trumbull, Kuann, Tuckerman, Jane, Turner, Wayne, Tyrance, Marian T., Tyson, Harriet, Updike, William A, Valenti, Jack, Van Susteren, Lise, Van Williams, David, Vandivier, Elizabeth, Vicary, Scott, Vigderhouse, Mildred, Volk, Joann, Walker, Alice, Wallace, Elizabeth F., Ward, Derrick, Washburn, Abbott M., Washington, Mary Burke, Washington, Paul, Washington, Robert E., Washington, Shirley A., Waters, Joyce N., Watkins, Erikka B., Watkins, Frank, Watkins, Robert P., Watson, Loretta M., Ways, Sherry B., Weaver, Gladys C., Wedderburn, Daniel H., Weill, Daniel F., Weisman, Jr., Malcolm L., Weiss, Chris, Weiss, Marc A., Weiss, Nancy, Welch, Delores H., Wellborn, Clay H., Wellborn, Edna P., Wenham, Gerard R., Werronen, Betsy W., West, Jr., Togo D., Westbrook, Richard B., Wheeler, A.L., Whitman, Sue, Wilbourn, Beverly J., Wilcher, Vickey M., Wilkins, Roger, Willet, Sheila A., Williams, Anthony M., Williams, Elsie B., Williams, Paul, Williams, Shelore, Williams, Virginia Hayes, Wills, Kathleen H., Wilson, Charles, Wilson, Joan R., Wilson, Joann L., Wilson, Raymond J., Wilson, Vaughn, Winborne, Annie M., Wirtz, Jane Q., Wirtz W. Willard, Wiseman, Dewey, Wholberg, Jeffrey A., Wolf, Muriel D., Wolf Richard N., Wolff, P.L., Wooby, William, Woodfork, Ethel S., Woodfork, Sterling V., Woods, Elizabeth M., Woodson, Roderic L., Woosley, Dorothy L., Worthy, Ruth, Wynn, Lester M., Yancey, Elizabeht C., Yeomans, Barbara, Zanders, Miriam, Zeldin, Zelda, Zobgy, James, Zupa, Mary Beth.

Ms. NORTON

Ms. NORTON. Mr. Speaker, I thank the Chair of the Congressional Black Caucus for yielding. We all owe him particular gratitude for the way in which this entire session he has brought this caucus together on this floor on important issues, none more important than the issue before us today. If I were to summarize what I have to say today, it would be that the troops have become an abstract concept. I want to deconstruct the concept. The proposition that I want to put forward is that two inexcusable errors by the administration are endangering our troops in Iraq: first, the rush to war without allies, and, secondly, the inexcusable failure to plan for the peace. The context of what I want to speak about further is a young man whose funeral I went to a couple of weeks ago, Darryl Dent, 21 years old, due home several times, extended each time. Dead. I believe that the Darryl Dents, who are mounting up every day, are unnecessarily mounting up; and I want to make that case today. I want to congratulate the Chair once again on his ``Statement of Principles as to War against Iraq'' that the caucus issued before that war. The most important principle has been vindicated, that a unilateral first strike action by the United States without a clearly demonstrated and indicated threat of attack on the United States, that notion that you do not do that kind of strike unless you know you are in imminent danger, has been fully vindicated by multiple failures of the administration. I want to spell out what those failures are. First, the failure to form a pre-war and a post-war alliance to provide adequate civilian and military assistance to our troops in the field and to the people of Iraq after the war; the failure to secure the peace; the failure to prepare for the probability of an Iraqi resistance. What did we think they were going to do, just melt into the woodwork? Or, finally, to understand that once there was the chaos of war, we would draw in terrorist elements following the war, the failure to prepare for what U.S. commanders now themselves now call a guerilla war in Iraq. Was all of this necessary, Mr. Speaker? I think not. It comes up now in the context of an astonishing request. Nobody expected $87 billion more. What is that, for this year alone? I want to talk about the troops through Darryl Dent, because I think the words need to be humanized. The only people who have been asked to sacrifice for this war are the military. We certainly have not been asked to sacrifice a thing, whether we are rich or poor, since we are getting tax cuts thrown at us. The greatest hardship has been on the people we call the Weekend Warriors. You will notice that the Congressional Black Caucus does not feel defensive at all about indicating that we support the troops. We do not need to come forward and let everybody make sure you know we support the troops. That is a truism, particularly since the troops are disproportionately African American. Mr. Speaker. Yes, we do support them. That is a given as well. We also believe that once you destroy somebody's country, you invade somebody's country, you ought to fix it up and not simply leave it in chaos. That is the obligation that comes once you invade somebody's country. That is an obligation, by the way, under the U.N. charter. Winning the war in Iraq was a virtual given. But we had a special obligation not to engage in a war of choice unless we were in imminent danger the moment we decided to have a volunteer Army, because that Army we knew from the outset would be composed disproportionately of Weekend Warriors. We were under a particular obligation to make sure that we did not call people who we gave to understand that, yes, in the event of a war of last resort you will be called up, but basically there was not much chance that you would be called up. We had no right to go into a war of choice unless we had no other choice. They were prepared to fight a defensive war, they were prepared to fight this war of choice, but it is unfair that we have asked them to do that. They are all surprised. They are as astonished as anybody is. And we are having a snowball effect. We are having a snowball effect on the troops, on their families, on small businesses, and on employers. We know it, because employers and families are beginning to escalate their use of the mechanism in the Defense Department that allows you to ask for particular troops to come home because of emergency or hardship. Businesses are using that as well. We know it because families are organizing to bring the troops home, for goodness' sake. And we know one other thing: we had better not get up ever again and declare that we can fight a war on two fronts. We now know we cannot fight a war on two fronts without substantial aid from substantial allies using a military force composed so disproportionately of Weekend Warriors, of people in the Reserves, of people in the National Guard. Nobody can fail to understand that now, particularly when the commanders are calling for troops. They call them ``foreign troops,'' but what they mean is they need reinforcements. We know they need reinforcements because of the horror stories we are hearing, for example, of people coming home after a year of service and being called back after a few weeks on the job. How long do you think you will have a volunteer Army when you are treating troops this way? How long? Not long. In particular, we ought to remember who the National Guard is. They perform triple duty: homeland defense now in the age of domestic terrorism, which is what Americans are truly afraid of; natural disasters, like the hurricane that is bearing down upon us; and, of course, the regular military duty that so many of them are engaged in now. We had better hope and pray we do not need the National Guard at home, because they simply are unavailable to us at the moment. The administration changed the rules of the game once these young people were signed up and in the field. Now they find that commanders can decide when and if they will go home. They are getting extension after extension of duty, and they are getting back-to-back service, all of which they were promised would almost never happen. Where does this spring from? From the go-it-alone attack on Iraq that this administration did, against all of the advice of our allies, indeed, of the whole world. The way in which we have handled Iraq has already wrecked American foreign policy and its relations with its allies. Yes, I support the Congressional Black Caucus statement of principles. I also believe it is time to do more than ask tough questions. It is time to do more than talk about the troops, as if they were some inanimate body. It is time to come to grips with our duty to protect the troops, not only in the field, but here at home, against policies that could wreck the volunteer forces on which we have become so dependent in an age when we do not use the draft. Mr. Speaker, I again thank the chairman for his leadership.