Bill Pascrell

Mr. PASCRELL

Mr. PASCRELL. Mr. Speaker, in a letter that went from Suzanne Novak on behalf of the Brennan Center for Justice at NYU to the gentleman from Alaska (Mr. Young), the honorary chairman of the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, and the gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Oberstar), ranking member, she wrote in that letter in support of the Federal Government supporting States and being very specific about the bidding laws in contracting to respond to the collusion or the possibilities of collusion that have existed, I can assure my colleagues, not only in the State of New Jersey. She wrote this: ``Several recent scandals regarding government contracting in New Jersey prompted New Jersey to establish a criterion of responsibility for government contracting which prohibited the State from contracting with an entity that has contributed to a candidate for or holder of the office of Governor, or to any State or county political party committee, within certain time frames. The executive ``order of the Governor'' ``explicitly stated that `the growing infusion of funds donated by business entities into the political process at all level of government has generated widespread cynicism among the public that special interest groups are ``buying'' favors from elected officeholders.' '' Mr. Speaker, the courts have recognized that contributions from government contractors present a severe risk of engendering corruption, the appearance of corruption and, thus, have generally upheld pay-to- play contribution bans, and this is what this amendment is all about. It is a bipartisan amendment to reform government, to help government clean up its act. We have similar laws on the Federal books about contracting and bidding. We want to remove cynicism from the public about when the government does business that there is proper conditions that will be implemented to make sure that it is done according to the law. Blount v. the SEC was a perfect example. The Securities and Exchange Commission made it very clear that if you were going to do some bonding work, that if you give a political contribution to the entity beforehand, that is rather suspect. So let us remove that possibility. There is no doubt, if we do not allow the States to do what the Federal Government has on the books, how are we going to justify that? This is a win-win situation. Neither party is the source of corruption and neither party is privy to virtue; let us accept that. Let us also accept that this is a bipartisan amendment, introduced in good faith, so that each of the parties, if you will, look good. Not only talk the talk but take that extra step to clean up their own acts. How can we in this House not permit or allow each of the States to provide for cleaner governments? This is reality. The Federal law, the court cases have backed up this effort. There is no reason under the sun. This is bipartisan. It will help both parties and it will reduce the cynicism that exists in many, many areas of the public. So, Mr. Speaker, this great H.R. 3, the Transportation Equity Act, we have worked on it a long time. I have saluted both the Chair, as well as the ranking member. I have not heard one cogent argument as to why we should not pass and allow States to reform their own act and clean up their own acts. One criticism I heard is that this is going to open up a Pandora's box. The Federal Government has rules on the books already. Are we going to tell the Federal Government, you have opened up a Pandora's box because you are trying to implement clean-government rules? That is absurd. Give me one legal reason why this amendment should not only be in order, which it is, but it should not be both sides of the aisle supportive. Give me one good legal reason.

Mr. PASCRELL. Mr. Chairman, reclaiming my time, the Pascrell- Menendez-LoBiondo amendment only impacts States that choose to pass a pay-to-play reform law. This is a win-win for both sides. I cannot emphasize that enough. How many times have we come to this Chamber when we try to get it over on the other side? That is natural in politics. This is a win-win for both sides, not only in New Jersey but throughout the country. I ask for the support of this body. I think this is good legislation, I think the amendment makes sense, and it is backed up by Federal law. Mr. Chairman, I yield the balance of my time to the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Menendez).

Mr. PASCRELL. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. The so-called ``pay-to-play'' restrictions, Mr. Chairman, enacted in many States like Connecticut, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Illinois, South Carolina, Kentucky and West Virginia, for instance, there is a threat which is real; and whether it is real or whether it is apparent, we need to stamp out corruption. We have come to an agreement in the State of New Jersey. We have come to bipartisan support of an attempt by both sides of the aisle to end corruption as not only we know it because neither party is privy to virtue, neither State is privy to corruption. What we are trying to do here is look at what is the result of large political contributions from contractors who try to influence the awarding of public contracts. Mr. Chairman, there is Federal precedent for this, and I would venture to say that we all in this Chamber should be reading what that precedent is. This does not open up a Pandora's box. This is simply providing States the ability to clean up their own act, to reform their own government, and to give those people an opportunity to bid in a more apparent, transparent process. Mr. Chairman, the Federal Highway Administration argued that the New Jersey order violated section 112 of title XXIII, a provision dealing with bid-letting. This amendment intends to support what New Jersey has attempted to do to open up the bid process, not to close it down, not to shrink it, but rather to expand it so that there is more transparency. Why should the Federal Government stop those States who want to end the process of corruption in their contract-letting? Why should this Federal Government, which has our own rules, the SEC was a perfect example of this just a few years ago, that if you are going to contribute, then you need to stay out of the process of bidding. This passed in the New Jersey Assembly 78-0. It passed in the New Jersey Senate 34-0. It is bipartisan. Mr. Chairman, I yield to the gentleman from New Jersey.

Mr. PASCRELL

Mr. PASCRELL. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in strong support of TEA-LU. The gentleman from Alaska (Mr. Young), the gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Oberstar), our ranking member, have done a remarkable job. It is a credit to their leadership that we are unified in our desire to pass such a major piece of legislation. No bill in the Congress that I know of considered this year will do more to positively affect the quality of life of every single American than this surface transportation reauthorization. This is the key bill. I know I am not alone in wishing that we had more funds to make the capital investments to meet the ever-growing need. After decades of investments to meet an expanding Nation in a growing population, the United States transportation system is unmatched anywhere else in the world. A vital transportation sector is a major reason for our Nation's high productivity and mobility. But we cannot accept stagnation. Without continuing to grow the program, we will fall further behind. New Jersey has some of the oldest infrastructure in the Nation, Mr. Chairman. This bill will do wonders for helping rebuild decrepit bridges and bringing commercial and commuter corridors into the 21st century. My home State has over 1,100 people per square mile going every which way. Without increases to meet our mass transportation needs included in this legislation, we will have to macadam our living rooms to reduce congestion on our roads. There is one provision I am disappointed is missing from the legislation. The gentlemen from New Jersey (Mr. Menendez and Mr. LoBiondo) have joined with me in crafting a bipartisan amendment to address an important clean-government issue found not only in New Jersey but across our Nation. Throughout the country, States like Connecticut are in the process of enacting pay-to-play restrictions to address the threat of real and apparent corruption resulting from large political contributions from contractors to influence the awarding of public contracts. Unfortunately in an interpretation of the Federal law, the Federal Highway Administration is withholding Federal aid highway dollars from States which choose to clean up corruption. The Pascrell amendment would clarify the law so that the rights of States are very clear. Our amendment allows States to enact anticorruption laws curbing the practice of pay-to-play contracting without losing their Federal aid. Federal precedent is clear on our point as well. Section 441(C) of the Federal Election Campaign Laws that prohibits campaign contributions for government contractors, this is the Federal law, in the 1990s the SEC enacted a pay-to-play ban, prohibiting contributions by bond traders. That has been upheld by the Federal courts. I would urge the Rules Committee to protect our simple bipartisan amendment within its second rule tomorrow. I congratulate the chairman and ranking member on advancing this legislation. As the process moves forward, we must work together to fight for a better bill, a bill which will create needed middle-class jobs. I thank the gentleman for yielding the time.

Mr. PASCRELL

Mr. PASCRELL. Mr. Speaker, I would like to call to your attention the work of a woman I am proud to represent in Congress, Joyce Wilson Harley, Esq. Ms. Harley was recognized as a recipient of the Essex County Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., Leadership Award on February 15, 2005. It is only fitting that Joyce Wilson Harley be honored in this, the permanent record of the greatest freely elected body on Earth, for she has a long career of dedication to public service. Joyce's recognition today as a recipient of the Essex County Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. Leadership Award is quite appropriate. As the first African American elected to the Board of Trustees for the Village of South Orange, Joyce has been a leader and a role model in the African-American community. After completing her honors degree at the Douglass College of Rutgers University, Joyce went on to complete her Juris Doctorate at Rutgers Law School. In addition to serving as a Village Trustee in South Orange, Joyce was also elected Village President. Prior to assuming her current position as Executive Director of the Newark Downtown District, Joyce has held numerous positions in the area of community and neighborhood development. One of her most prominent roles was during her tenure as the Executive Director of the New Jersey Multi City Local Initiatives Support Corporation (LISC). Under her leadership, NJ LISC expanded its investment in the 14 municipalities it serves to twice its original size. Ms. Harley's devotion to community development extends far beyond simply completing the task at hand. Her efforts were instrumental in the state of New Jersey implementing a Neighborhood Revitalization Tax Credit law. This law brings $20 million in new investment in New Jersey's most distressed cities. Beyond her post with the Newark Downtown District, Joyce also donates her time for other worthy projects. She is currently the president of the Board of Trustees of the Newark Emergency Services for Families. Ms. Harley is also a past president of the Association of Black Women Lawyers of New Jersey. Mr. Speaker, I am far from the first to recognize the outstanding contributions of Ms. Harley. In addition to receiving numerous awards for her work as the Director of Community Development for First Union and Fleet Banks, Joyce has also been recognized twice by the New Jersey State Legislature. The New Jersey State Council on the Humanities awarded Joyce its first ever Civic Leadership award. In 2003 the Women in Support of the Million Man March awarded Joyce the coveted Community Relations award for her leadership in facilitating the receipt of financial assistance by community groups throughout the state in order to complete much needed neighborhood revitalization projects. Mr. Speaker, the job of a United States Congressman involves so much that is rewarding, yet nothing compares to learning about and recognizing the extraordinary efforts of individuals such as Ms. Harley. I ask that you join our colleagues, Joyce's family and friends, the County of Essex, New Jersey and me in honoring Joyce Wilson Harley, Esq. for her history of leadership and community service.

Mr. PASCRELL

Mr. PASCRELL. Mr. Speaker, I would like to call to your attention the life and work of a man whose many achievements I am proud to recognize today, the Honorable William D. Payne. Assemblyman Payne was recognized as a recipient of the Essex County Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. Leadership Award. It is only fitting that he be honored in this, the permanent record of the greatest freely elected body on Earth. After completing a Bachelor of Arts in Political Science at Rutgers University, Bill began his professional career with the Essex County Welfare Board as a caseworker. His commitment to public service commenced during his tenure as a caseworker and continues today. Bill's involvement in politics started long before his career in the New Jersey Legislature. As the chairman of the Payne Congressional Campaign Committee in 1988, Bill successfully led the effort to elect his brother, Donald, to the United States House of Representatives. This was not only a victory for the Payne family, but one for the African American community of New Jersey as well. Donald Payne was the first African-American elected to represent New Jersey in the House of Representatives. Bill has held several positions that exemplify his devotion to his community. As executive director of One to One New Jersey, Bill oversaw a non-profit organization dedicated to encouraging volunteerism and mentoring among New Jersey adults. The participants in the program worked to improve the quality of life for disadvantaged youths and their families. His commitment to the Essex County community was evident during his tenure with the Essex County Improvement Authority and the Newark Housing Authority, the country's 8th largest public agency. Bill has also donated his time to the Greater Newark Chamber of Commerce Executive Committee, the United Negro College Fund Corporation Committee and the Federal Reserve Bank of New York Small Business Advisory Council. Prior to his election to the New Jersey General Assembly, Bill bad transitioned into the private sector, establishing William Payne and Associates. Having an extensive background in community service, international government relations and the corporate world; Assemblyman Payne's company specializes in government relations and marketing. In 1998, William Payne reached the pinnacle moment of his career, when he was elected to represent the 29th Legislative District of New Jersey. Bill holds many positions within the legislature including Commissioner of the Amistad Commission. This commission is a result of his diligent efforts to pass The Amistad Act, a law which requires the inclusion of African-American history in the year-round curriculum for New Jersey's public schools. The County of Essex and I are far from the first to recognize the many accomplishments of Assemblyman Payne. He has been honored by many community organizations including The Jaycees, the NAACP, The North Ward Cultural Center and the Newark Board of Education to name a few. Mr. Speaker, the job of a United States Congressman involves so much that is rewarding, yet nothing compares to recognizing the extraordinary efforts of public servants like Bill Payne. I ask that you join our colleagues, Bill's family and friends, the great County of Essex, New Jersey and me in recognizing Assemblyman William D. Payne for his long history of leadership and community service.

Mr. PASCRELL

Mr. PASCRELL. Mr. Speaker, I would like to call to your attention the life and work of a fellow colleague, The Honorable Donald M. Payne of New Jersey's 10th Congressional District Mr. Payne was recognized on Tuesday, February 15, 2005 as a recipient of the Essex County Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. Leadership Award. It is only fitting that we honor our colleague Mr. Payne, in this, the permanent record of the greatest freely elected body on Earth. Mr. Payne is truly a role model for the African-American community. His devotion to advancing human and civil rights on an international scale is unparalleled. While he is a proven leader in the Congress, Mr. Payne's devotion to improving the community at large began as a result of his deep roots in Newark, New Jersey. A native of Newark. Mr. Payne attended Seton Hall University. After completing his undergraduate education, Mr. Payne pursued graduate studies at Springfield College in Massachusetts. His professional career commenced in the Newark Public Schools where Mr. Payne taught. He went on to hold an executive position with the Prudential Insurance Company following his tenure as Vice President of Urban Data Systems, Inc. In 1988, Donald Payne achieved a milestone not only for himself, but for the entire African-American community of New Jersey. He was elected to the serve in this great body, the first for an African-American from New Jersey. Mr. Payne has used his position as a Member of Congress to further the cause of human and civil rights throughout the world. His efforts have enabled Mr. Payne to travel throughout the globe to represent the United States government. He was one of five Members of Congress asked to accompany President and Mrs. Clinton on their six nation tour of Africa. As a member of the Balkans Caucus he met with NATO officials in Brussels to asses the crisis in Kosovo. This mission brought Mr. Payne to the frontlines of the devastation caused by the inhumane acts committed there. Mr. Payne's diligent efforts to restore democracy and human rights throughout the globe have led him to bring to light the recent atrocities in Sudan. In the 108th Congress, Mr. Payne successfully guided the passage of a resolution declaring genocide in Darfur, Sudan. Additionally he saw the Sudan Peace Act come to fruition. This law, a comprehensive solution to the war in Sudan as well as a plan for famine relief efforts, was the result of more than 2 years work by many organizations. Anti-slavery groups, churches and community groups were among the organizations involved in working with Mr. Payne on this most important issue. Mr. Payne has done much humanitarian work on both the international and local level. He has served on the board of directors of the National Endowment for Democracy, TransAfrica, Discovery Channel Global Education Fund, The Boys and Girls Clubs of Newark, The Newark YMCA and the Newark Day Center. While many of his efforts focus on correcting atrocities in developing nations, the implications extend far beyond the regions involved. His goal to improve the quality of life for those who cannot defend themselves is remarkable. Donald truly exemplifies the notion of a global community and that we are all responsible for our fellow man. Mr. Speaker, I am honored to share the responsibility of representing communities in Essex County, New Jersey along with Mr. Payne. He is a true humanitarian and is more than deserving of the honor bestowed upon him today. I ask you to join with a grateful County of Essex and our colleagues in recognizing the truly outstanding achievements of the Honorable Donald M. Payne.

Mr. PASCRELL

Mr. PASCRELL. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H. Res. 69, a resolution honoring the life and accomplishments of the late actor, director, veteran, and civil rights activist Ossie Davis. Ossie Davis was born in Cogdell, Georgia in 1917. Davis realized his love for acting and writing while attending Howard University, here in Washington, D.C. After finishing his education, Davis moved to Harlem, New York on a quest to start his acting career. Before he could move into acting, Davis was drafted by the United States Army. He served in the Army medical unit during World War II. Ossie Davis appeared in almost all forms of entertainment. He was brilliant to watch on stage and knew how to captivate an audience. On screen he made all the characters he played come to life right before our eyes. Even as great as he was on stage and film, Davis' passion was writing. He wanted to move audiences not just by his acting but by his written word. Davis and his wife Ruby Dee, also an established actor, were very active in civil rights issues and promoting African-Americans in the entertainment industry. They sued for African-American voting rights, and when their friend, Paul Robeson, was blacklisted, they stood by his side only to become a victim themselves. Ossie and Ruby Dee were proud participants in the March on Washington in 1963. Davis received several awards throughout his career, including the Screen Actors Guild Lifetime Achievement award and the Kennedy Center Honor, which he received with his wife in 2004. In particular, I will recall his powerful voice as host of the annual National Memorial Day Concert held on the West Lawn of the Capitol. As an eleven-time host of the concert, his appearance each and every year was an inspiring addition to our remembrance of those who served our nation. Mr. Speaker, I was truly saddened upon learning of his passing this past Friday. I would like to express my deepest condolences to Ossie Davis' family. My thoughts are with his wife Ruby Dee and his three children Guy Davis, Hasna Muhammad, and particularly Nora Day, a proud resident of Montclair, NJ.

Mr. PASCRELL

Mr. PASCRELL. Mr. Speaker, I stand on this floor as a proud graduate of Saint George's Elementary School and Saint John's High School in Patterson and Fordham University, New York. Catholic School taught me, and I think teach generally, a spirit of tolerance to those who did not go to Catholic School, compassion for the poor, service to our fellow man. I never hear these values discussed lately during the so-called values debate we have had in this country. To those who believe they have a corner on values, I ask you to look to the Catholic Schools of this country and think again. The Catholic education I received provided me with the tools to not only forge success in life, but it also gave me an unending desire to serve my fellow man. I stand before you as the father of three sons who attended Catholic School. Not too long ago in our Nation's history, Roman Catholics were not welcome in many parts of our society. My Catholic education taught me that every American, no matter what their religion, no matter their creed or their color had an equal right to the American dream. Today, there are almost 8,000 Catholic Schools in this country serving 2.4 million students. As a lifelong resident of Patterson, which is the third largest city in New Jersey, I strongly embrace this year's Catholic Schools Week theme: ``Faith in Every Student: Catholic Schools.'' I am proud to report that 44 percent of the Catholic Schools are in urban areas. Many of these schools educate our most vulnerable students. Catholic Schools continue to be as diverse as America. More than one in four students in a Catholic School is a minority. I am pleased to add my voice to the chorus of those celebrating the wonderful achievements of these wonderful American institutions.

Mr. PASCRELL

Mr. PASCRELL. Mr. Speaker, I would like to call to your attention the work of a man I am proud to represent in Congress, Captain Barry J. Colicelli. Barry was recognized on Tuesday, January 18, 2005 in honor of his recent retirement from the Newark, New Jersey Police Department. It is only fitting that he be honored, in this, the permanent record of the greatest freely elected body on earth, for he has a long history of dedication, leadership, and commitment to his community. Barry has enjoyed a career in law enforcement that has spanned nearly three decades. In 1977, he began his tenure in law enforcement with the Newark Police Department. Shortly after his assignment to Newark, Barry was reassigned to the Camden Police Department and then to the Union County Prosecutor's Office before returning to Newark. Upon his return to the Newark Police Department in 1980, Barry was assigned to the East District as a Police Officer. In 1982 Barry received his first of several promotions to Detective and was assigned to the Violent Crimes Bureau. Ten years following his first promotion, Barry received a subsequent promotion to Detective Sergeant. It was at this time that he was placed in charge of the Narcotics Squad. During his post as Detective Sergeant, Barry created a program that would garner him national recognition. The Tactical Auto Recovery Group and Enforcement Team (TARGET) aimed at limiting the amount of auto thefts and carjackings in the City of Newark. The program's success netted over $5 million worth of stolen autos, $600,000 in stolen currency and 52 firearms confiscated. The program was not only successful in the amount of property recovered, but it also removed Newark as the number one city for car theft in the nation. For its achievements, the TARGET program received praise from the United States Department of State. Barry has been successful in every undertaking with the Newark Police Department. His final promotion before retiring came in 2000 when he achieved the rank of Captain. His most recent work in the field of Gang Enforcement and Intelligence has benefited not only the residents of Newark, but the entire State of New Jersey as well. Through collaborations with State Senator Ronald Rice, Barry was able to introduce legislation targeting gang violence and activities. Mr. Speaker, I ask that you join our colleagues, the City of Newark, Barry's family and friends, and me in recognizing the outstanding and invaluable achievements of Barry J. Colicelli.

Mr. PASCRELL

Mr. PASCRELL. Mr. Speaker, I would like to call to your attention the life and work of a man who I am proud to represent in Congress and prouder still to call a friend, Walter W. Porter, Jr. I have worked with Walter closely over the years and can say without reservation Mr. Speaker, that you would be hard pressed to find an individual more committed to improving the lives of those in his community than Walter Porter. A life-long resident of my hometown, Paterson, New Jersey, Walter Porter has had an extensive career in public service. Matriculating from the Paterson Public School System, Walter met and married his wife Mildred shortly after graduating from Eastside High School. Walter Porter's life has long been intertwined with public service. His selfless devotion to others began when he entered into the Army to fight in World War II. As an Infantry Combat Officer, Water earned a Bronze Star, Combat Infantry Badge and Purple Heart for his heroic actions. Upon returning from the frontlines of the Battle of the Bulge, Walter joined the Paterson Police Department. It was during his tenure as a motorcycle officer that Walter came to be known around town as a ``straight shooter and a man of the people.'' The knowledge and experiences Walter gained on the streets of Paterson laid the foundation for the many successful years of public service ahead. Remaining in the law enforcement sector, Walter transferred to the Passaic County Prosecutor's Office where he rose to the rank of Captain. After a long and successful tenure with the Prosecutor's Office, Walter retired in 1979. However, he would not rest on his laurels. The year following his retirement, Walter ran for a seat on the Passaic County Board of chosen Freeholders. After a successful bid for Freeholder, Walter began to work diligently on behalf of the people of Passaic County. Throughout his tenure on the Board of Chosen Freeholders Walter Porter has been a steady supporter of the law enforcement community, veterans groups and the senior citizen community of Passaic County. Chosen by his colleagues on the Freeholder Board, Walter has served four one-year terms as Freeholder Director. Additionally, he has served on each of the committees within the Freeholder Board. His professional demeanor and commitment to good government earned Walter the moniker, ``Dean of the Board of Freeholders.'' Walter's tireless devotion to serving the people of Passaic County extends far beyond his life as a public official. He is a co-founder of the Boys & Girls Club of Paterson, a Life Member of Elks Lodge #60 and a member of several veterans' organizations. His continued support of the law enforcement community has earned Walter many accolades from various groups. The Paterson Police Benevolent Association presented Mr. Porter, a past president of the association, the Lifetime Silver PBA Card. Additionally he is an Honorary Chief of the Passaic County Chiefs Association. Walter Porter will be deeply missed on the Passaic County Board of Chosen Freeholders. His legacy of integrity, devotion and commitment to his community will carry on in all of the wonderful accomplishments he saw come to fruition during his tenure in public service. Mr. Speaker, the job of a United States Congressman involves so much that is rewarding, yet nothing compares to recognizing the extraordinary efforts of public servants like Walter Porter. I ask that you join our colleagues, Walter's family and friends, a grateful County of Passaic, New Jersey and me in recognizing Walter W. Porter, Jr. for his long history of leadership and community service.

Mr. PASCRELL

Mr. PASCRELL. Mr. Speaker, I was unavoidably absent for the rollcall vote today on challenging the Ohio electoral vote. Had I been present, I would have voted ``no'' on rollcall 7.

Mr. PASCRELL. Mr. Speaker, I strongly believe that every vote should be counted. There were obviously irregularities in the Ohio vote and I urge that they be thoroughly investigated by this Congress and the Department of Justice. We have an obligation to resolve the problems that have been documented. However, I would have voted against the motion because I do not believe this to be the proper occasion to address this important issue.

Mr. PASCRELL

Mr. PASCRELL. Mr. Speaker, I am deeply concerned about the State of our Nation's border security. If we cannot secure our land borders where 80 percent of all people enter our country, then we are simply not safe as a Nation. In 1994, there were 2.7 million truck crossings on the southern border. In 2003, this traffic increased to 4.2 million crossings. In 1994, there were 66 million personal vehicles crossing into the United States from Mexico. In 2003, the number of personal vehicles rose to 88 million, carrying 194 million passengers. These numbers cry out for a substantial investment in our borders, and what do we get? The administration has failed to meet our security and commercial needs by investing in our Nation's port of entry. In 2003, the Department of Homeland Security's own Data Management Improvement Act Task Force reported that more than 70 percent of the 166 land ports of entry have inadequate infrastructure. What is the response? More investment? No. Typically, the administration shut down the task force. They are famous for that. We need a substantial investment in border infrastructure tied to a vulnerability assessment to ensure national security.

Mr. PASCRELL

Mr. PASCRELL. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding me time. Mr. Chairman, yesterday the Senate overwhelmingly passed a bipartisan bill that would make needed changes to our Nation's intelligence community. Ninety-six Senators voted for it and the 9/11 Commission supported it. Whether you read the executive commission report, the executive summary or the full report, it is quite specific what they recommend. Everyone recommends it, except the leadership of the House of Representatives. Once again, the important work of this body has morphed into a political exercise, and it is an additional tragedy that this comes as no surprise to any of us. The leadership had their chance to proceed on this critical endeavor in a judicious, fair and thoughtful manner. H.R. 10 fails to give the National Intelligence Director sufficient authority over the budget and personnel of the intelligence agencies. H.R. 10 fails to fully address transportation modes, such as inner-city rail and public transit. H.R. 10 fails to provide additional security assistance to Afghanistan or economic development assistance to Arab and Muslim countries. Yet somehow 50 extraneous provisions, none of which were recommended by the 9/11 Commission, have been added. So today I will support the Menendez substitute. This substitute is based on the bipartisan Senate bill to fully implement the 9/11 Commission recommendations. It is the most effective approach to ensure that this process does not get sidetracked or enmeshed in a superfluous quagmire. The safety and security of our Nation deserves more than the political ploys of the House leadership. I implore my colleagues to vote for the Menendez substitute.

Mr. PASCRELL

Mr. PASCRELL. Mr. Speaker, the fact is that the importance of infrastructure investments to my home State of New Jersey and our Nation cannot be overstated. More resources are desperately required to satisfy unmet needs, to improve livability, to alleviate congestion, to build safer roads, to upgrade and expand our mass transit system, to facilitate commerce, and create good-paying local construction jobs. Every $1 billion invested in Federal highway and transit spending means over 40,000 jobs are created or sustained. Why do we only have an extension on the floor today rather than a good 6-year bill, a full 6-year bill that can benefit all of our States? The administration has been one of the biggest roadblocks in our path. For months, the administration would stonewall on supporting the funding necessary to get a right-sized bill. Their original proposal actively ignored new needs, choosing to keep the status quo. They did not want to make the tough choices in an election year to do what is right. The gentleman from Alaska (Mr. Young), the gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Oberstar), the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Lipinski), the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Petri), et cetera know what is right. They put a lot of hours into this legislation. Both sides of the aisle. The President has been deafening in his silence on the importance of a highway bill. They choose to hold the highway bill hostage as a credit to their ideology of fiscal responsibility. That is a laugh. It is a joke. Everybody knows it is. This ignores the reality that we are running up record deficits. It ignores the reality that the interest we are paying on the debt, $300 billion this year, is equal to the entire government outlay in 1974. So it cannot really be an issue of fiscal responsibility. It is just politics, plain and simple. I support the extension because we need to keep the funding flowing to the States, or we will stop those projects right in their tracks. Chairman Young and Ranking Member Oberstar understand that we need to keep our States working. They have understood it too well. Our committee to its credit always works in a bipartisan manner. At one point, 74 members of our committee supported a bill which actually provided the level of funding that our own Department of Transportation recommended. Imagine that, actually passing a bill based on need, not politics. We need to keep up with aging roads and bridges and transit systems. Rather than sitting in traffic, we need to get parents home after work on time to take care of their families. But leadership has held down the investment and is holding back trust fund dollars which would alleviate congestion. Folks are paying gas taxes, user fees, and not spending that money as we should. 1998 was a long way off, the last time we passed this legislation. This is terrible. But we need to do this to keep the projects that are in the ground already working. I welcome and congratulate the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Lipinski) for the fantastic job that he has done, not on our side of the aisle but for the United States Congress, not only for the people in his district but for all Americans; and we thank him today.

Mr. PASCRELL

Mr. PASCRELL. Mr. Chairman, this is not about Mexican trade. This goes to the very issue of safety, besides taking our national sovereignty, our manufacturing base, the American jobs and Mexican jobs. Look at the data. NAFTA is now threatening the safety of our constituents. The decision by a faceless panel is requiring our government to allow hazardous trucks access to our roadways. In testimony before the Senate Commerce, Science and Transportation Committee on July 18, 2001, Secretary Mineta stated, ``Every Mexican firm, vehicle and driver that seeks authority to operate in the U.S., at the border or beyond, must meet the identical safety and operating standards that apply to the U.S. and Canadian carriers.'' That is where it is at. It is a sad day that the Olver amendment is desperately needed 3 years later after Mineta's speech, as we cannot count on the Department of Transportation to act appropriately and in the public's interest by requiring foreign-built trucks and buses from meeting Federal motor vehicle safety standards. The measures Congress has passed addressing safety have made progress towards ensuring trucks on our highways meet certain standards. It is not just an issue of fairness. It is a matter of life and death. The bottom line is, Mr. Chairman, the House cannot allow this administration to gut safety regulations or compromise environmental standards in the name of trade. Vote ``yes'' on the Olver amendment and defend the work of the Congress and defend the work of American working families. Announcement by the Chairman

Mr. PASCRELL

Mr. PASCRELL. Mr. Speaker, Divider, Chapter 1: Yesterday, the Vice President of the United States said, ``It is absolutely essential that 8 weeks from today on November 2 we make the right choice, because if we make the wrong choice, then the danger is that we will get hit again.'' Besides being outrageous, the Vice President mocked the word ``sensitive'' used by Senator Kerry several weeks ago. He took it out of context. Measuring, he is going to tell us what toughness is. He is the evaluator of what ``toughness'' means. If that is not the biggest joke. The choices we are making here in this body will determine the safety and the security of the American people, not partisan, political rhetoric on the campaign trail. And that is why we need to act now together, not divided, to implement the recommendations of the 9/11 Commission. Campaigns are no excuse for questioning the patriotism or the motivations of the other side. In campaigns you are supposed to air what you feel about a particular subject. This is a disgraceful act. I did not serve in the service to listen to this garbage.

Mr. PASCRELL

Mr. PASCRELL. Mr. Speaker, every single law enforcement organization, including the Fraternal Order of Police, the National Sheriffs Association, supports our efforts, or lack of them, our efforts to continue the ban on assault weapons. Their only purpose is to kill or maim. The President made a commitment in his campaign in 2000. He said it. I did not. He said he would continue that ban, and now he is gone back on it. Now, Mayor Bloomberg of New York said something very interesting 2 weeks ago. You folks are going up there for your convention. They had 11 homicides 2 weekends ago. He stood in a press conference and said, there are too many weapons on the street. I say to Mayor Bloomberg, call your President, remind him of the commitment he made in the 2000 campaign, the presidential campaign, and make sure he keeps those commitments. We do not need another Columbine. We do not need another spraying of people who are innocently lost day in and day out. What we need is keeping our commitment. Will the President?

Mr. PASCRELL

Mr. PASCRELL. Mr. Speaker, I rise to offer a personal explanation. I was unavoidably detained on rollcall votes 359-362 due to a prior obligation. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yea'' on rollcall 359, ``no'' on rollcall 360, ``yea'' on rollcall 361, and ``yea'' on rollcall 362.

Mr. PASCRELL

Mr. PASCRELL. Mr. Speaker, we have heard a lot recently about the so- called improving economy, but I want to bring my colleagues' attention on both sides of the aisle to the fact that 90 percent of the new jobs created since August of 2003 are in industries that pay an average hourly wage that is less than the national average, or that many of these new jobs are part-time or temporary. So the President says, look, I have only lost, with this upturn in the last 3 months, I have only lost 1.5 million jobs. If Clinton ever came before us and said that, we would all have booed him out of here, and my Republican colleagues know it. They have never mentioned that since the tax cut took effect there are actually 2.3 million fewer jobs than the administration projected that would be created by the enactment of its tax cuts. Merrill Lynch put it more aptly: The number of millionaires jumped 14 percent last year. There is a middle-class squeeze. The Bush tax cuts, which included a reduction in the top tax rate as well as reductions in taxes on estates, led the Wall Street Journal to report: This helped bolster the fortunes of the fortunate.

Mr. PASCRELL

Mr. PASCRELL. Mr. Speaker, our Nation's trade policy is not so much a policy as an ideology, and those in the Office of the Trade Representative bow at the altar of free trade. One way we can level the playing field in trade is to put labor and environmental standards on equal footing with other commercial sections, and why should that not be, such as intellectual property rights, patents, goods and services. While the Australia FTA does a great job of mentioning the international labor organization and saying the right things, the proof is in the enforcement, and that is lacking in the legislation. The agreement's enforcement procedure excludes an obligation for both governments to meet the international labor organization or any other definable standard. In the Jordan FTA, which many look to as a model of how the agreement should be written, we had input into that agreement. Labor and environmental articles used the same dispute settlement procedures as every other commercial provision. This is not the case under the Australia agreement. Let us go to the videotape. Article 18.6.5 clarifies that the key pieces of chapter 21, dispute settlement, ``shall not apply to a matter arising under any provision of this chapter other than article 18.2.1.'' Excluding 18.1 and 18.2 from any possibility of dispute settlement or enforcement leaves the sole enforceable labor obligation in these agreements that countries need to ``enforce their own labor laws.'' This is terrible. And while Australia has a strong labor and environmental protection, what we are doing in this legislation is saying if we cannot add strong labor and environmental agreements with Australia, who the heck can we add it with? Then we are going to get a solid gold standard when it comes to property rights and commercial rights, but we are not willing to do it to labor and the environment? This stinks, and you know it. And we are not going to pray at that altar.

Mr. PASCRELL

Mr. PASCRELL. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from California for yielding me time. Mr. Speaker, I must remind my brother from Indiana that the Mideast is in reality a dream for Jews, Christians, and Muslims; and that is the approach. I am going to vote for this resolution probably, but I would like to take the opportunity to speak about what people in my area, my district, and abroad should take from the resolution. The conflict in Israel is the axis on which much of Middle East politics spins. Let us not forget that what we do and say here has major implications all across the globe. The United States is strongly committed to the security of Israel as a Jewish state. That is not debatable. There is no question that our friend and ally has every right to defend itself against terrorists who oppose freedom and democracy. This resolution takes a strong stand on that issue. But equally important, this resolution stands in favor of a peaceful two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Read it carefully. A vital first step to a peaceful solution is the proposed withdrawal from Gaza, as the Prime Minister has planned and President Bush has endorsed. But we must not forget that this withdrawal should be a precursor to the restart of negotiations. By passing a resolution that endorses the road map to peace and discusses what should be done during final status negotiations, the House is recognizing the importance of negotiations led by the United States and the quartet. We lost valuable time in the first 8 months of this administration when we did nothing. We separated ourselves from the issue. On a parallel track, the Congress should be looking at ways to spur economic development throughout Israel, including the West Bank and Gaza. Let us use this resolution as an opportunity to get back on track. We must work to get the two sides negotiating for an agreed-upon solution, rather than imposing one which will not have the legitimacy that is needed. The United States must use its leadership to get the Israelis and Palestinians and neighboring nations in the Middle East to the table and start the talks, so that when we look to the future, we will see Israeli and Palestinian children living in peace. This is what we want; and as committed as we are to Israel, that must be our commitment as well.

Mr. PASCRELL

Mr. PASCRELL. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the requisite number of words. Mr. Chairman, as a member of the Select Committee on Homeland Security, I am very proud to cosponsor this port security amendment which would more than triple the Federal funding for security enhancements in our ports. I believe that the chairman, I do not say this in a condescending way at all, and the ranking member of the subcommittee have done an outstanding job with insufficient allocation. That is my position. When everything is a priority, nothing is a priority. We have to establish priorities based upon assessment, risk assessment. Mr. Chairman, we do not have a national assessment of our most vulnerable areas. We have asked for this 2 years ago, we asked for this 1 year ago, because I think this amendment would not be on the floor. Our assessment as laymen indicates that this should be a priority. It is our weakest point. One glaring need in this bill begs for more resources and that is port security. I fear that providing the same level as last year will not suffice. There is a legitimate threat that maritime transportation will be used to smuggle people, to smuggle weapons or other materials into the United States for the purpose of terrorist attacks. We know that. We know that from the intelligence. The FBI testified earlier this year that ports suffer from an acute vulnerability. How could we allow this to continue in a time of heightened risk? In the wake of 9/11, Congress passed the Maritime Transportation and Security Act. That act required, among other things, the establishment of a maritime security committee and security plans for facilities and vessels. The deadline of July 1 for this mandate is only a few weeks off. I hope everyone in the Chamber understands that in 2 weeks that mandate about our port security must go into effect. Or shall it be like all the other mandates we have had, for instance, dealing with airlines? To meet these mandates, the MTSA authorized a grant program to help pay for security investments and enhancements. While the committee improved upon the disturbingly insufficient funds requested by this administration, here we go again, Democrats and Republicans from both sides of the aisle are not accepting what the administration has put forth. Thank goodness. We talk about security out of one side of our mouth, and then we provide the proposals that do not meet these priorities. That is a fact of life. The Coast Guard estimates that the first year of cost compliance with the Maritime Transportation Security Act will be $1.2 billion. Demand from the ports is far outweighing the supply of assistance. The Coast Guard, remember that forgotten branch of our service, is now a prominent part of security in America. In the first 3 rounds of grant awards, and I would ask the gentleman from Kentucky to please heed this, this is a priority, this is serious business, and I know he takes it seriously, the DHS funded less than 20 percent of the submitted applications. How can we stand on the floor of the House and say that this is now sufficient money to deal with what we have all considered to be and deemed such a priority when only 20 percent of the applications have been responded to? Many deserving applications to help install access controls to our ports, surveillance equipment, communications upgrades, really lacking, and physical enhancement at ports around the Nation had to be denied because of a lack of funds. We are not asking to put more money into this particular part of the budget. We are saying, let us shift some dollars from this part of the budget to that part of the budget. When everything is a priority, nothing is a priority. The Port of New York and New Jersey, the largest on the east coast, generates 229,000 jobs and $14.6 billion in gross domestic product. It is a major economic driver for the metropolitan area. I would say that we could obviously duplicate this throughout the entire country. I ask the chairman to please address this. I appreciate all that he and the ranking member have done in this area.

Mr. PASCRELL

Mr. PASCRELL. Reclaiming my time, I witnessed the screener cap issue firsthand when there were media reports that Newark International Airport was not meeting the baggage screening mandate. At one point this past year, Newark was dangerously understaffed to the point where the EDS machines, and we know how sensitive they are; we know how much effort we have put into this, thanks to the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, thanks to homeland security, they were sitting idle. No one was there to operate them despite high passenger traffic. The airport is now meeting its mandates, but only with the temporary assignment of an extra 150 screeners to deal with the summer months. Come the fall, we may be short-staffed again. So what is actually needed is clearly more than the arbitrary level set in the bill. That is what I am addressing, Mr. Chairman, through the Chair, and that is, I believe the 45,000 number is arbitrary. And I would ask the gentleman in his capacity as the chairman, and he has looked at this and the sensitivities that exist in all of these amendments and issues, to please look at this, what has happened to these EDS machines that are on-line but there is no one to staff them. I think that the 45,000 figure, that cap, that threshold is not realistic. I have looked at the data. I have examined the small airports, the large airports. I agree with everything that you have said in terms of the ridiculousness of many screeners standing around all day doing nothing. We know that there needs to be a deployment change. I am simply asking, we should not have this threshold number unless we have the data to support it. And I would ask the gentleman to reconsider that, Mr. Chairman.