Donald Payne

Mr. PAYNE

Mr. PAYNE. Mr. Speaker, I really appreciate those remarks from the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Ehlers). Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Hastings) from our committee, who has worked hard on this issue. (Mr. HASTINGS of Florida asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. PAYNE. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from New York (Mr. Meeks).

Mr. PAYNE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Let me once again thank the gentleman from California (Mr. Royce) for bringing this very important resolution to the floor. Let me just say in conclusion that Sierra Leone is a country that many people do not realize in addition to Liberia, where free men and women went back to Africa to create the country of Liberia back in 1822, and then under President Monroe, Liberia was founded in 1847, called Liberia for free men in Monrovia, its free city, Sierra Leone was founded also by freed slaves that went to Freetown. Many of these persons actually fought in the Revolutionary War, and they fought for the British actually. The British guaranteed that, if they won the war, or when the war was concluded, that these persons would earn their freedom by fighting with the British against the colonists. Of course many African Americans also fought with the colonists. As my colleagues know, Crispus Attucks was the first person killed in the Boston Massacre in May of 1770. So Freetown does have some links to African-Americans. Many Sierra Leonans also went to South Carolina where many of them still speak a dialect. So we feel there is an importance to not only African-Americans, but to all Americans in that we should move to see that this terrible war ends and that the cease-fire holds, and that we can move on to reconciliation as we have seen in Namibia after their long civil war and we saw in Mozambique in that war when people sat at the table and came up with a solution. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. PAYNE

Mr. PAYNE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume, and I rise in strong support of this resolution. Mr. Speaker, once again let me commend the gentleman from California (Mr. Royce), the chairman of the Subcommittee on Africa, for bringing this very important resolution to the floor; and also to the ranking member of the full committee, the gentleman from New York (Mr. Gejdenson); and the chairman of the full committee, the gentleman from New York (Mr. Gilman), for the work that they have done on this very important issue. The issue has been an issue that has been very important to me for many, many years: The question of Sudan and the horrendous quality of life that people, in particular in the south of Sudan, must go through in their daily lives simply to exist. My first visit to Sudan was in 1993, and since then I have traveled several times to the region. Just last week I was joined by my colleagues, Senator Brownback from Kansas and the gentleman from Colorado (Mr. Tancredo), and it was great to have those Congress persons, as a matter of fact, the largest congressional delegation to go to the south of Sudan perhaps in decades. Our trip took us to Loki in Kenya, to southern Sudan, to Yei and Labone, and at each of these places we saw thousands and thousands of refugees who are living in substandard conditions. Let me say that the war in Sudan is currently Africa's longest running Civil War. It is estimated that two million people have died, and as a direct result of this war many others have been misplaced, close to four million. The Sudanese conflict is often one of the major causes of famine and misery in southern Sudan. The National Islamic Front government in Khartoum has systematically and militarily tried to wipe out the people in the south by genocidal means. The NIF government of the north has supported international terrorist activities and has even attempted to destabilize neighbors in East Africa. They have supported the Lord's Resistance Army in northern Kenya, an army of people who brutalize, kidnap children and maim and kill innocent people. H.Con.Res. 75 condemns the NIF government for its genocidal war in southern Sudan, its support of terrorism and continued human rights violations. H.Con.Res. 75 deplores the slave raids into southern Sudan where women and children are captured and sold as chattel slaves by a military controlled by the Khartoum government. The resolution calls upon the United States Government to increase aid to relief organizations working outside of Operation Lifeline Sudan, the OLS, and it instructs USAID to better coordinate the delivery of aid and relief materials. The State Department is called upon to increase the diplomatic pressure on the NIF government and to provide greater leadership by strengthening the Intergovernmental Authority for Development, the IGAD process, and we urge President Moi from Kenya, who chairs IGAD, to even work more diligently at coming up with a solution. Finally, H. Con. Res. 75 calls upon the U.N. Security Council to impose an arms embargo against the Sudanese Government, condemn slavery and reform OLS to strengthen its independence from the NIF government. All Members of the House are encouraged to vote for this resolution. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. PAYNE. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from New York (Mr. Meeks), a member of the Subcommittee on Africa.

Mr. PAYNE

Mr. PAYNE. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in strong opposition to this amendment. The Gilman/Goss amendment sends the wrong signal to the people of Haiti. It says that we don't care about democracy and we don't care about the rule of law and certainly we don't care about the people of Haiti. This amendment would mandate a congressionally-imposed deadline for the withdrawal of troops which could send a destructive signal to opponents of democratic reform in Haiti. We are not talking about many troops--just 270 troops. That is vastly different from the 25,000 troops that went to Haiti 5 years ago. The 25,000 troops didn't have a single causality and you wanted to end that. Now the 270 troops that help in the areas of health care and rehabilitation program--you want to cut that also. This is ludicrous. This is just another tactic to embarrass this Administration and to call into question smart, quick and decisive action we took in 1994 when we restored democracy back to Haiti by taking out Raoul Cedras and restoring the democratic government of then President Jean Bertrand Aristide. Don't you remember what it was like 7 years ago when boat people drowned just to flee persecution and repression. 60,000 refugees left and fled for their lives. Many died trying to escape. This amendment would cut off badly needed money to the defense program. This program allows children to be vaccinated and also allows engineers to train in building roads and bridges. Mr. Speaker, this is the last program we have in Haiti and now that is in jeopardy. What exactly do you want to happen in Haiti. You cut off the training program, you effectively ended the MICIVIH program and now this humanitarian program. The MICIVIH program was established in 1993 jointly by the United Nations General Assembly and the Organization of American States. Since that time, it has made critical contributions to Haiti's political development by assisting judicial reform efforts, conducting credible human rights monitoring and carrying out impartial investigations into human rights violations. Now that's gone. Elections are coming up soon. This amendment would end what is a small and worthwhile humanitarian support program in Haiti. The U.S. Military Support Group in Haiti--a 400 strong presence of engineers, humanitarian civil affairs and other personnel--serves as a visible manifestation of U.S. support for Haiti's democratic transition and economic development. The presence of U.S. military personnel in Haiti also has a positive effect on the security and stability of Haiti. This is not a permanent presence in Haiti. The role our troops play there is critical, giving Haitians reason to be hopeful by building schools, providing health care, digging wells, and being a visible sign of the U.S. commitment to democracy in that country. The President has made it clear that he is paring down on the deployment and this is not the time to pull our troops out of Haiti. Let's not pick on Haiti. I rise in opposition to this amendment and urge my colleagues to do the same.

Mr. PAYNE

Mr. PAYNE. Mr. Speaker, today I rise in support of this resolution to commemorate the historic decision of Brown versus the Board of Education. This landmark court decision ended years of the separate but unequal education of African American students in the United States. It also played a role in instigating the larger Civil Rights Movement. This decision is a prime example of how one person who sees an injustice can use our legal system to make that situation more tolerable. Oliver Brown was distressed that his young daughter had to walk across town and over dangerous railroad tracks to attend school when a perfectly adequate school sat just blocks from their home. Rather than accepting the status quo Oliver Brown took matters in his own hands and sued the school system that refused to let his daughter attend the neighborhood school because she was black. Mr. Brown is an example to all parents and citizens in the United States. When injustices occur it often is our response to accept it and move on. Progress has never occurred using that philosophy. I ask our parents to become involved in their children's education. If you see problems with your schools or problems with the police in your town or neighborhood--speak out against these injustices. While the laws that created segregation and discrimination have been lifted, these terrible acts still occur. We must make our voices be heard and let the United States government know that we will not tolerate de facto segregation and discrimination anywhere in this nation, not in our schools, not in our government, not in our workplace and not on our highways or in our police stations. We must take the commemoration of this landmark legal decision which sparked the beginning of the end of legal separate but equal laws and use it to end the segregation and discrimination that still exists in our country today.

Mr. PAYNE

Mr. PAYNE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of President Lee Teng-Hui and Vice-President Lien Chan of Taiwan as they prepare to celebrate their anniversary in office this May 20th. We are reminded once again that we have a strong partner and friend in the Far East-- The Republic of China on Taiwan. Throughout its history, the Republic of China on Taiwan has always continued to foster good relations with the United States. Many of Taiwan's leaders were either educated in the United States or the United Kingdom and they, just as much as we do, believe in democracy and a free enterprise system. In the future, I hope we can continue to work together on issues that are mutual beneficial to both countries in the areas of democracy and governance, the rule of law, international trade and the environment. Taiwan has always supported the United States in many areas as it relates to security in and outside of the region. I hope we can continue to do this. It is time we show our appreciation of Taiwan by offering our help to them when they need us.

Mr. PAYNE

Mr. PAYNE. Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank Congresswoman Millender-McDonald and Congressman DeLauro for arranging this special order tonight. We must bring attention to the exceptional circumstances of women as we examine the Social Security issue. As other Members of Congress have mentioned tonight, there are a few simple facts that show why women are effected by changes made to Social Security more than their male counterparts. First of all, most women earn a lower salary than men and therefore put a smaller amount into the Social Security Trust Fund with every paycheck. They are also more likely to spend a portion of their lives out of the workforce than men and women are half as likely as men to receive a pension which means they depend on their Social Security check as their sole source of income. Finally, women live longer than men and depend on Social Security for a longer period of time. Therefore, changes made to the Cost of Living Adjustment and the idea of converting Social Security funds in private accounts will have a drastic effect on the way that retired women live. These factors must be taken into consideration when we decide how to resolve the issue of the potential insolvency of the Social Security Trust Fund. While limiting COLA's may cut costs, it will lower the standard of living for retired women because they rely heavily on Social Security as their only means of income and they live longer and need these adjustments to stay out of poverty. Private accounts may also have a negative effect on the retirement income of women because they may outlive their accumulated funds. Private accounts may put many women in a position where they live the later half of their retired years in poverty. While Social Security is the economic mainstay for many women, we must also make a better effort to educate working women today about the benefits of investing in a pension plan. We must give them an opportunity to invest so they do not have to live out their golden years on an annual Social Security income that amounts to less than the minimum wage for most recipients. This coupled with making changes to the Social Security system that helps not harms women will improve the lives of all women in their retirement years. Again, Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank all of the women who were here tonight. We did not cover this as extensively as I would have wanted to. We will be back, because as we embark upon Mother's Day we must remember the elderly women in this country and their need for Medicare and Social Security.

Mr. PAYNE

Mr. PAYNE. Mr. Speaker, we have a very important vote coming up in a few minutes. We are hearing discussions today about people saying, this in our national interests? Why should we be concerned about those people over there? Well, for 50 years we have been partners with our neighbors in western Europe. We came together to stop the Soviet threat from taking over Europe and coming over to our shores. All of a sudden, when there is a problem with our partners, now we have decided that perhaps now that we have defeated the USSR, it is time for us to take a look at this partnership. Maybe if there is a difficult situation coming up, we ought to step out of it because I thought we were the land of the free and the home of the brave. Next week we are going to have a constitutional amendment voting on flag desecration because we love our flag so much. And here we see people talking about, let us take our flag and let us run out of there because a person in a country of 11 million people, about the size of Tennessee, has raped and robbed and destroyed, killed, maimed a whole group of people, and we are saying this is not in any interests of ours. Destabilizes central Europe, destabilizes western Europe, and it continues to spread. I am shocked by some of the speeches that I have heard in this discussion today. Mr. Speaker, 60,000 people in Montenegro, 120,000 in Macedonia, 300,000 in Albania. Mr. Speaker, I ask for unanimous support for S. Con. Res. 21 so that we can put this in its right and proper perspective.

Mr. PAYNE

Mr. PAYNE. Mr. Speaker, I would like my colleagues here in the House of Representatives to join me in paying tribute to a man who has served the Newark community with distinction for over 36 years, our Chief of Police, Thomas C. O'Reilly. His many friends, colleagues, and family will gather on Thursday, April 29, for a testimonial dinner in Newark to honor him for his contributions and to express appreciation for his decades of dedicated service. A lifelong resident of Newark, Chief O'Reilly attended St. Columba Grammar School and St. Benedicts Prep, then went on to earn an undergraduate degree from Kean College and a master's degree from John Jay College of New York City. He furthered his education at Northwestern University, a Police Administration Institute. Chief O'Reilly, who is affectionately known as ``Tom,'' has built an impressive record throughout his career in law enforcement. He was appointed a patrolman and entered the Academy on December 10, 1956; he was later assigned to the 2nd Precinct and then to the Detective Division. Later, he was promoted to Sergeant and assigned to the Traffic Bureau. In 1966, he was assigned to the Police Training Academy and then promoted to Lieutenant in 1968. He was assigned to the Office of Management Improvement and Professional Development and assigned as Commanding Officer of the Gambling Squad. Upon promotion to Captain, he was assigned as the Commander of the West District in 1974 and then promoted to the rank of Inspector in 1977, where he was assigned as Commander of the Tactical Force. In 1978, he was assigned to the Detective Division until promotion to Deputy Chief of Police in 1983. Later, he was assigned Chief of Staff to the Police Director and in 1986, he assumed the role of Commanding Officer of the Office of Management Improvement and Professional Development. In 1987, he ascended to the position of Chief of Staff in the Office of the Chief of Police. In 1991, he was assigned as Chief of Staff to the Police Director, and on November 9, 1992, he took over the reins as Chief of Police. Mr. Speaker, Chief O'Reilly has touched many lives in our community throughout his years of service. He has been a positive influence and a great role model. I know my colleagues join me in wishing Chief O'Reilly all the best and commending him for a job well done.

Mr. PAYNE

Mr. PAYNE. Mr. Speaker, I would like to join the New Jersey Educational Opportunity Fund Professional Association (NJEOFPA) in honoring the 30th anniversary of the New Jersey Educational Opportunity Fund (EOF) program. This special anniversary is being highlighted during the NJEOFPA Student Leadership Conference and Awards Luncheon in Atlantic City, New Jersey. In July of 1968, the New Jersey State Legislature signed the EOF program into law. The legislation, sponsored by the then-freshman Assemblyman Thomas H. Kean, was aimed at opening the doors of higher education to economically and educationally disadvantaged students. During the fall of 1968, thirty-four colleges took initial steps to instituting the program and 1,500 students enrolled. Through the years, the EOF has provided valuable financial resources, counseling, basic skills and academic enrichment to many young men and women. Today, there are fifty-six EOF programs in New Jersey' diverse educational institutions. Over 30,000 students have received post- secondary degrees through EOF programs, including our current Assistant Secretary at the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, and former East Orange, New Jersey Mayor Cardell Cooper. The Educational Opportunity Fund sponsors more than one-third of the African-American and Latino students at New Jersey's state and independent institutions for higher learning. Furthermore, approximately 11% of the first-time, full-time freshman entering New Jersey's colleges and universities are enrolled through EOF. Mr. Speaker, for thirty years the Educational Opportunity Fund has helped disadvantaged students access higher education. I am proud to join members of the New Jersey Educational Opportunity Fund Professional Association in paying tribute to the 30th Anniversary of the program.

Mr. PAYNE

Mr. PAYNE. Mr. Speaker, the bill before us today boasts better flexibility while allocating Federal funds in school districts, but I have to say a number of times, as I have done in the past in reference to Ed-Flex, if we want to give States the flexibility they desire, we need to get in return some type of assurance that funds will still go to low income Title I children as Title I was created to do. Title I funds are supposed to go to children in disadvantaged school districts or children who are disadvantaged. This bill will give school districts and States the right to take Title I funds and spread them among other students in the school that are not necessarily disadvantaged. This dilutes the entire purpose of Title I, and it will leave students who are poor and indeed in need of special attention without the help they need. The final version of the bill will ensure schools with poverty levels of above 75 percent are served Title 1 funds first, and it retains language from the House bill that allows a larger number of schools to receive Title I funds only if the number of children living in poverty is at most 10 percent below the districtwide poverty level. This seems the least we can do to protect the children who are most in need of Title I funds. But I was supportive of even stronger measures to assure that those students were being served during the House consideration of the Ed- Flex bill, and I continue to believe that language addressing targeting in Title I schoolwide programs must be included in this bill. The absence of such language is one of the reasons that I cannot support the final version of this bill we are asked to vote on today. Additionally, as the gentleman from California (Mr. George Miller) has stated, much of the language in the House bill that improved the reporting and accountability measures of those states and school districts that are given Ed-Flex authority has been removed from the final version of this bill. The absence of strong accountability language will leave us in the dark about how effective Ed-Flex has been, and I know no one wants to revisit Ed-Flex issues, preferably during the reauthorization of Elementary and Secondary Education Act, with little or no information about how it works and who it is working for. But it looks like that will be the case because without accountability and without targeting for schoolwide programs, I continue to oppose this bill, because it is not, in my opinion, in the best interest of people that Title I was supposed to serve, those who are disadvantaged, and with the lack of accountability we are moving in the dark as we move towards more legislation.

Mr. PAYNE

Mr. PAYNE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of this legislation before us in honor of Rosemary Nelson who gave her life on Monday, March 15. It is so ironic that today we also honor Rosa Parks. Rosa Parks and Rosemary Nelson have a lot in common. They both stood up for injustices in the world. Rosa Parks refused to give up her seat at the front of a bus in Selma, Alabama, and did not give in to intimidation of police. Like Mrs. Rosa Parks, continents away, Rosemary Nelson continued to receive death threats from those who continue to see Catholics as second-class citizens. In the shadow of peace talks, I know that Prime Minister Tony Blair and Irish Premier Bertie Ahern met yesterday for 5 hours at Downing Street. Although the parties showed little outward signs of progress, I do believe that they must continue. But let me say this. The peace process is in serious trouble if perpetrators of Mrs. Nelson's death do not come forward. To date, the RUC has yet to bring anyone accused of any crime associated with the killings of the minority Catholic community. How do they have no indictments or imprisonments over several years of sustained and continued intimidation and abuse? There is something wrong with this picture. The investigation into the assassination of not only Rosemary Nelson is disturbing, but the death of Pat Finucane as well. I have asked for an independent investigation, one that is totally independent of RUC involvement. Since there is well-founded evidence that there was collusion by the RUC in both these murders, it is imperative that the investigation be totally delinked. Last year, the United Nations Rapporteur called for an independent investigation and pointed specially to look at the harassment of civil rights attorneys in the north of Ireland. Many lawyers on behalf of residents in Ireland are routinely excluded from interviews with their clients and are detained in holding centers. The troubles in the north of Ireland did not begin with this one courageous woman's death. We must also investigate Bloody Sunday which began on Easter Sunday in 1972. Two years ago I went to the Pat Finucane Center in West Belfast and met with Miss Ruth Taillon of the West Belfast Economic Forum. While there, I also met with the wife of imprisoned lawyer, Colin Duffy, and Oliver Kearney, Chairman of the Fair Employment Group of Equity and relatives of the Justice Committee. The Justice Committee sent me a letter, and I quote: ``It would be untenable for RUC to have the inquiry.'' Moved by what I saw, I came back to the States committed to seeing that justice is done. I introduced legislation that will call for full disclosure of the inquiry reports of both Pat Finucane and the Nelson case, and it also calls on the United Nations to form an independent inquiry into the long-term harassment of these individuals. I have worked with the sponsors of this bill, and I believe my concerns have been incorporated in the bill. It is public knowledge that Mrs. Nelson's life was threatened on several occasions by the RUC Special Branch. Mrs. Nelson testified before the Committee on International Relations' Subcommittee on International Operations and Human Rights on September 29 of last year that she had been threatened by the RUC officials. Rosemary Nelson lost both of her legs and suffered extensive abdominal injuries in the blast and died despite intensive medical efforts to save her life. Ms. Nelson was a prominent Armagh County human rights attorney and was a defender of the basic principles that this country has fought for during the height of the civil rights movement and continues to fight for today, the equality of mankind. She died to enable our world to live more amply with greater vision and finer spirit of hope and achievement. We impoverish her memory if we forget the task at hand. Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the opportunity to address the House and ask for passage of this legislation.

Mr. PAYNE

Mr. PAYNE. Mr. Speaker, let me compliment the gentleman from New York (Mr. Crowley) for taking this time and handling this very important bill. Mr. Speaker, I would like to rise today in support of the continuation of the peace process in the north of Ireland. I must begin by complimenting President Clinton, because it was his decision to allow Jerry Adams and the Sinn Fein organization to visit the United States after many years of being refused a visa, and that began to get the other side and the story of the work that was being done by the political wing of the movement in the north of Ireland. Also, I have to compliment the skills and the patience and the deliberation of Senator George Mitchell for his work of for years forging an agreement between the parties. People who said they would never sit down together sat down and worked together, and I must compliment the people of the north of Ireland and Ireland for overwhelmingly approving the referendum that came to the agreement of the Good Friday Accords. The Good Friday Accords were promulgated nearly a year ago this April with the best intent in mind: To end the authoritative rule and domination of the Protestant party over minority Catholics. It gave Catholics a real voice, for once, by ending three decades of conflict in the north of Ireland. I became very interested and involved because as a youngster I was involved in the civil rights movement in this country, and I emulated and felt very close to the movement in the north of Ireland because of the same obstacles and the same freedom songs that they sang about ``We Shall Overcome.'' So I became very involved as a young person in the struggle there. But it will be two years this July since I went and spent time in the north of Ireland and had the opportunity to see for myself the violence and the killings associated with the Orange Order march in the village of Drumcree where I stayed, right there in the center of town. I also had the opportunity to visit the north of Ireland and Ireland with President Clinton on his historic trip back to that region. The celebration of the victory of William of Orange, in which Irish land was seized and confiscated, is an assault to Catholics everywhere. Sadly, this parade glorifies a part of history and is provocative in its nature, and I have seen the walls that they marched down and threw pennies on both sides of the area, which just provokes people. I believe that the political prisoner release of paramilitary groups on both sides was a good issue. I know that Tony Blair is receiving pressure to overturn this rule. I think it would be a very bad precedent for all involved if it was overturned. In the same light, I know that the decommissioning issue was one of the last things discussed before all parties made the last push toward peace. We cannot allow decommissioning to be used as a wedge to keep Jerry Adams and Sinn Fein out of the government. Decommissioning of paramilitary weapons will take place, but I think we know that disarming the paramilitaries is going to be a very difficult task. This was never a precondition of power-sharing. But let me say this: The peace agreement does not explicitly require a start on disarmament, but the politics of the accord compel it. I will hope that this could be worked out soon because we must have decommissioning, but it should not be a precondition. If it is not, we are faced with confronting Bloody Sunday all over again in the future. We have gone too far, we have worked too hard, we have pushed too long to allow this. So this is the stakes that we all must make to ensure that peace in the north of Ireland becomes a reality and irreversible.

Mr. PAYNE

Mr. PAYNE. Mr. Speaker, as National Volunteer Week approaches, it is with great pride that I rise to commend a dedicated group of individuals from my alma mater, Seton Hall University, who are making a real difference in lives every day--on campus, in their local community, and internationally. Known as the Division of Volunteer Efforts (DOVE), this volunteer service component of Campus Ministry is actively engaged in the promotion of social justice. DOVE volunteers work to ensure that graduates of Seton Hall, in addition to being well-educated academically, also develop a keen awareness of social problems and a compassionate approach to resolving them. Putting their faith into action, members of DOVE, which include Seton Hall graduates, undergraduates, staff and faculty, number 2,000 strong and contribute an average of 10,000 hours of service each academic year. DOVE is involved in a wide range of volunteer activities, including Adopt a Grandparent Month; American Red Cross Disaster Response Team; Tutoring for English as a Second Language; visits to hospitals, soup kitchens and community food banks; Carnival of Fun and Camp Fatima for the mentally and physically disabled; New Jersey Special Olympics; SHU 500; Day of Community Service; AIDS Walkathon and Softball Tournament; and The Literacy Volunteers of America. DOVE is also involved in a number of mentoring programs to address the needs of at-risk youth; efforts to aid victims of natural disasters; and an international service project for the Republic of Trinidad and Tobago. Mr. Speaker, I know my colleagues here in the House of Representatives join me in sending the members of DOVE our congratulations on their outstanding community service and our very best wishes for continued success in their important mission.

Mr. PAYNE

Mr. PAYNE. Mr. Speaker, this weekend Mrs. Luella Powell Koonce will be joined by family and friends to celebrate her 90th birthday. Birthdays are perfect occasions for reflexion. Mrs. Koonce's life has been fruitful and she has much of which to be proud. She has many names--Mother, Mom-in-Law, Granny, Aunt Tee, and Cousin Lou. She is the eldest living member of the Powell-Hutchins-Koonce families and has more than 100 living relatives. As you can imagine, a woman with so many relations must have a busy life. She is known as a counselor, professional seamstress, good cook, baby sitter, family banker and hot line monitor for her church and neighborhood. Luella Koonce was born 90 years ago on a farm in Blakely, Georgia. She was one of the four children of James and Elizabeth Hutchins Powell. After the family moved to Dothan, Alabama, she met and married Early Koonce and they subsequently moved their family of three children to Newark, New Jersey and eventually to East Orange, New Jersey. Family unity, independence and moral values have always been emphasized in her family and she has passed those and other cultural traditions down to her children and grandchildren. In the early 1940s, she joined St. Paul AME Church in East Orange. She has remained a faithful member since that time. During her membership, she has devoted her attention to the Pastor's Aide Club, Missionary Society, and Georgia Circle. A firm believer that ``prayer changes things,'' she has made a believer out of many of her relatives. While she is proud and boastful of the accomplishments of her children-- Willie, my successful barber; Evelyn, a retired teacher/ librarian; and Mary, a member of the East Orange City Council; she is always quick to remind them to remember where they came from and not get ``too big for their britches.'' Her nine grandchildren have profited from her inspired motivational talks using the Prodigal Son as her text to teach the value of love. As a teenager, I remember visiting the Koonce home. It was a place that always seemed to have young people around. I am sure that was because we all had a tremendous amount of respect for Mrs. Koonce. She instilled values in all of us, not just her children. She always seemed to extend herself. Mr. Speaker, I know my colleagues join me in sending Mrs. Koonce our best wishes for a wonderful birthday.

Mr. PAYNE

Mr. PAYNE. Mr. Speaker, I would like to ask my colleagues here in the U.S. House of Representatives to join me in expressing appreciation to a remarkable woman of our times who will be lending her support to a school in my Congressional District this weekend, Ms. Susan L. Taylor. Editor in Chief of Essence Magazine and Senior Vice President of Essence Communications, Ms. Taylor still manages to give generously of her time so that others might enjoy a fuller and richer life. On Saturday, March 27, she will be featured as the keynote speaker at an event entitled ``An Afternoon of Inspiration'' in support of New Hope Academy in Newark, New Jersey, so that the school may continue to offer young people the chance to achieve their dreams. She is a believer in the African proverb that ``It takes a whole village to raise a child.'' I was fortunate to serve on a panel at Essex County College several years ago with Ms. Taylor where the discussion centered around the challenges facing single parents. Her presentation was so impressive and dynamic that years later, people are still coming up to me and commenting about how well they recall that discussion. Ms. Taylor has inspired many others with her outstanding professional success. Under her leadership, Essence Magazine enjoys a monthly circulation of 1 million and a readership of 7.6 million. Mr. Speaker, I know my colleagues share my appreciation for Ms. Taylor's generosity in sharing her time and talents with others. We thank her for her appearance in support of New Hope Academy and wish her continued success.

Mr. PAYNE

Mr. PAYNE. Mr. Speaker, I move that the House do now adjourn.

Mr. PAYNE

Mr. PAYNE. Mr. Speaker, let me thank the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Lee) for organizing the special order that was supposed to be on women's history, although it had been altered. I would just like to offer my remarks for this evening. Let me also add that the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Lee) has certainly put her stamp on history through her outstanding work here in the House of Representatives and being the first African American woman to be elected to her district. It is fitting indeed that we honor the achievements of women of color, who for too long were neglected in our Nation's history. In recent years, it has been exciting to watch school children learn about African American women of strength, courage, and dignity who shaped the course of history. We can point with pride to women like Harriet Tubman who secretly guided over 300 slaves to freedom on the ``Underground Railroad.'' She spent time working in my home State of New Jersey at Cape May between 1849 and 1852. We honor the legacy of Sojourner Truth, who was freed from slavery by the New York State Emancipation Act of 1827, became famous in her lifetime as a preacher and abolitionist and lecturer. When war broke out, she raised money to buy gifts for the soldiers and went into Army camps and distributed them by herself. We recall the contributions of Mary McLeod Bethune, who built Bethune-Cookman College in Florida and founded the National Council of Negro Women. She was the first black woman to receive a major appointment in the Federal Government. She served as an adviser to President Franklin Roosevelt and to President Truman. There have been so many remarkable women of color that it is impossible to pay tribute to all of them tonight. We have all had the opportunity to meet women who were personal heroines in our own lives, and I would like to pay tribute to three women who have had the greatest impact on my early life, African American women who have made a direct contribution to my growth and development. And these three women, other than my late mother and grandmother, have had a tremendous impact on my development. The first one I would like to mention is Mrs. Madeline Williams, who was an adviser of the NAACP Youth Councils and College Chapter of the Oranges and Maplewood in New Jersey. When I was invited to join the NAACP as a college student she provided the opportunity for young people to become involved in civic activities and public service. She helped me develop an interest in civil rights at a time in history when we were all moved to become involved. I remain grateful to her for giving me the opportunity to become involved in civil rights and government affairs. Another great woman who exerted an enormous positive influence on my life was Mrs. Mary Burch, founder of a group called The Leaguers, which helped young people from the inner city to become more involved in their activities in their cities. Belonging to the Leaguers opened up a whole new world for young people like myself, a world from which we otherwise would have been excluded. Never before had we been able to have the opportunity to wear formal attire when I was a young boy; to learn the waltz and to attend cotillion dances in a ballroom. It was an uplifting experience which taught us about social graces and made us feel special. The Leaguers sponsored many innovative programs. I recall as a teenager my excitement over my first real trip as a high school student away from home, to visit Philadelphia, through a Leaguer exchange program. Later, the student I visited, Joe Wade, stayed at my home in Newark. Forging friendships and relationships with young people from different cities was exciting, it was novel, and it was a great experience. This year we are celebrating the 50th anniversary of the founding of the Leaguers. Finally, let me just mention another exceptional woman from New Jersey whom I was pleased to join at a celebration recently at her hundredth birthday at the YWCA in Montclair last week, and that is Mrs. Hortense Tate. Her career spanned seven decades of service through education as a teacher and guidance counselor, the enrichment and development of young women through the Montclair YWCA and the AKA sorority, and over 70 years of service to her church. When I was a young teacher at Robert Treat School in 1957, Mrs. Tate guided me and inspired me. She comes from on outstanding family; her father worked his way up from a blue collar job to become a principal of an African American school in Topeka, Kansas. As we all know, the 1954 Supreme Court case was based on the Topeka Board of Education that said separate but equal is unconstitutional. He was acquainted with Booker T. Washington and George Washington Carver. Mrs. Tate entertained Mary McLeod Bethune and Dorothy Height. Her son, Herb Tate, was a distinguished foreign diplomat, and her grandson, Herbert H. Tate, Junior, is President of the State of New Jersey Board of Public Utilities. Mr. Speaker, I know my colleagues join me in honoring these women of achievement who have, as the theme of this Women's History Month goes, ``put their stamp on America.'' I am so pleased to have the chance to express my personal gratitude and admiration for women who have meant so much to me throughout my life. I would not be here if it were not for the faith, confidence and direction that these persons have had on my life.

Mr. PAYNE

Mr. PAYNE. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of this motion to instruct. Mr. Lott's amendment that was included in the Senate passed version of the Education Flexibility Partnership Act would gut the ability of schools to hire more teachers for our classrooms. The Republicans would like you to believe that this amendment will help our schools more because funds would be reallocated toward special education. Pitting one education priority against the other is bad public policy and bad politics. This is an attempt by the Republicans to have American people believe that education is a priority in the GOP. But if you look closely at the Budget they have come up with, it is obviously not the truth. While they may have increased education funding by $500 million above the 1999 level for elementary and secondary programs, they have decreased funds by cutting funds for the Pell Grants, Work Study and other programs for low-income college students. Democrats and true education advocates know that the key to improving education in this country cannot be achieved by picking and choosing programs to adequately fund. We must ensure that the entire funding level for education programs is funded at an adequate level and only then will we see true improvements in achieving among our students. Americans must realize that we truly value all education initiatives and we do not pit one against the other. I urge members to vote for this motion to instruct. The Speaker pro tempore. Without objection, the previous question is ordered.

Mr. PAYNE

Mr. PAYNE. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the requisite number of words. Mr. Chairman, let me say that there are many, many difficult decisions that we have to make in our lifetime. I think that, when the world is looking for leadership, it puts one in a position because, if one is a leader, one is expected simply to lead. When people say what is our interest there in central Europe, I think that, if we start to remember what our country stood for for many, many years, we were the place that had the Statute of Liberty, we were the place that the whole world looked to for leadership, we were the place that we could stand proud and tall and say in justice anywhere is in justice everywhere. We should attempt to keep stability in the world. Perhaps it is not a good position to be the strongest Nation in the world. Perhaps if we were weaker, we would not have this responsibility. But I do not know how we could support NATO for decades and decades and then, when there gets to be a little tough situation, we say we should not participate, we should not be a part of this. No, I do not like to see our young men go off to foreign places and to be put into harm's way. But if we are a Nation of leaders, if we are the world's leader, then people are really looking for us to participate in keeping this world together. We attempted to have intervention in Rwanda at the beginning of an ethnic cleansing, but the U.N. said the U.S. was not really pushing it. We are not sure this is genocide. Then we waited, and we waited, and close to a million people were killed. We showed no leadership. We were not even asking for American troops to go there but simply to bring in troops from African countries that were willing to go to get between the combatants and the innocent people. So here we are talking about having an agreement signed and simply to have our people there trying to keep the peace because the same way that we went from one to a million in Rwanda, if this conflict goes beyond borders, we will have people lining up on all sides. So I think that we have actually a responsibility as a world leader or we should simply become a force to simply defend our borders. Maybe we should even start to reduce the size of our forces just to be here to protect our borders. They wanted to do that before World War II, a lot of isolationists. So I think the thing to do is to stand up tall and to take this serious responsibility not to turn our backs on our colleagues around the world. We are a proud, strong Nation, and we need to simply behave that way in a world that is full of people who need to know that there is a higher order, there is someone else who is around in order to keep the peace, so to speak. So I would strongly urge the support of the Gejdenson amendment. I think it is the right thing to do. It is a tough thing to do, but I think when things get tough, that is the time we have to stand up with our back straight and our head held high and we move forward, as this great Nation has done in the past, and I think that we will, of course, be called upon to do this again in the future.

Mr. PAYNE

Mr. PAYNE. Mr. Chairman, the bill before us today offers States the ability to waive certain regulatory and statutory requirements for educational programs. I certainly understand the constraints that many States are faced with when they accept Federal funds. However, many of these requirements are in place so that we can be sure that school districts are meeting the needs of students that these programs are supposed to target. I am particularly concerned about what will happen to Title I when the Ed-Flex is expanded to all 50 States. It seems to me that some parts of Ed-Flex will take away the main purpose of Title I. When Title I was created, it was a mechanism to reach out to poor-performing, low- poverty schools. That is the reason funding formulas that target high- poverty schools were put in place in the first place. These formulas enabled us to reach out to those poor students and poor schools and give them the funding in those areas that they lack. The gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Scott) and I will offer an amendment today, that I hope will get the support of the Congress, that will simply require schools that ask for a waiver for schoolwide programs to have a poverty level of at least 35 percent or higher. When the legislation went in initially, it was 75 percent. It was moved down to 50. Now we want to eliminate it, and I think that is going in the wrong direction. This gives States considerably more flexibility in issuing schoolwide program funds than they currently have now. Schoolwide programs are under the regular Title I program, and they must have a student population of at least 50 percent, as I mentioned. So our amendment will allow more schools to be eligible for the schoolwide program while maintaining the emphasis on schools that have high or moderate levels of poverty. Now, I know many Members today will argue that Title I has not effectively bridged the gap between low- and high-poverty schools, so they would like to take away the priority that these schools and students get in the funding formula. Some States with waivers have done just that and have been successful. But they can prove that only because they have desegregated information. The choice of these States will definitely be undermined. I support the Miller-Kildee amendment and ask for Members to support the Scott-Payne amendment.

Mr. PAYNE

Mr. PAYNE. Mr. Chairman, the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Scott) and I feel that this amendment is extremely important. When the Elementary and Secondary Education Act was originally written in 1965, it was clear that the performance of students at high poverty schools was relatively low. The Federal Government decided to commit resources to ensuring those schools receive program funds specifically targeted to schools that had large numbers of children who lived in poverty. That program is now called Title I, and it was created to help improve the gap in achievement between low- and high- income students. We all know that today the gap of achievement still exists. That is why it is important that we maintain our commitment to reaching out to those schools in the form of targeted assistance. But under H.R. 800, States are given the authority to allow schools to participate in school-wide programs under Title I, regardless of their low-income child percentages. Let me give an idea of what Title I school-wide programs do and how they are funded. Funds are currently given to individual schools with a student population that is 50 percent or more below the poverty level. They are able to use the school-wide funds to institute programs that benefit all students at a high priority school. Such examples include hiring more teachers, instituting reform plans. This bill will allow waivers to be issued to schools so they may give these funds to any school, regardless of their poverty level. This is wrong. Giving school districts the authority to use Title I funds for school-wide programs at any school, regardless of the number of children who are low-income, dilutes the purpose of Title I. It is wrong. Over the years, when the program first started, we had to demonstrate 75 percent of the students. It was dropped to 50 percent. Now we are saying it is unimportant about the level. Now we stand here today, about to vote on a bill that will give the States the authority to waive this poverty level requirement and allow schoolwide program funds to be allocated to schools that do not have one child who lives below the poverty level. We can argue all we want about the effectiveness of the Title I program over the years. But make no mistake about it, Title I was created to give high poverty, low performing schools a better chance at improving student achievement. We cannot take away our commitment to these schools by allowing waivers to be issued to schools that have low levels of poverty to be eligible for Title I funds. Diluting Title I funds for school-wide programs so that any school can use them defeats the entire purpose of the program. This amendment will simply make sure that only schools with over a 35% poverty rate are eligible for schoolwide project funds. It will keep low poverty schools from capitalizing on a program meant for high poverty schools. This amendment is consistent with the actions of the Secretary of Education who has only issued waivers for schoolwide programs to schools with poverty levels of above 35%. Without accepting this amendment, we will find that we have spread the funds too thin to see any real gains in achievement at schools using Title I funds for schoolwide programs. And we will most certainly find that disadvantaged schools will see less of the Title I funds originally created to bridge the gap between high and low poverty schools. The Title I program was created as a program for disadvantaged students. You can keep some semblance of that intention if you vote for this amendment.

Mr. PAYNE

Mr. PAYNE. Mr. Speaker, I would like to congratulate and honor a young New Jersey student from my district who has achieved national recognition for exemplary volunteer service to his community. Mr. Marc Freed-Finnegan of Montclair has just been named one of New Jersey's top honorees in the 1999 Prudential Spirit of the Community Awards program, an annual honor conferred on the most notable student volunteers in each state, the District of Columbia and Puerto Rico. Mr. Marc Freed-Finnegan is being recognized for being one of my state's top two student volunteers for 1999. Mr. Freed-Finnegan created a program at Montclair High School that coordinates a wide variety of activities for children at a nearby homeless shelter in the City of Newark. His program, ``Kids for Kids,'' has more than 100 active student members and hopes to expand to five additional schools this year. Statistics state that Americans are less involved in their communities today than they have been in the past. Therefore, it is vital that we encourage others to volunteer by celebrating the accomplishments of Mr. Freed-Finnegan. All Americans must realize that we need to work together to ensure the prosperity and growth of our communities. Young volunteers like Mr. Freed-Finnegan are an inspiration to all of us, and are among our leaders in the quest for a brighter future. The program recognizing Mr. Freed-Finnegan, the Prudential Spirit of the Community Awards, was created by the Prudential Insurance Company of America in partnership with the National Association of Secondary School Principals in 1995. The purpose of the award is to impress upon all youth volunteers that their contributions are of the highest importance, and to encourage other youths to follow their example. Mr. Freed-Finnegan should be extremely proud to have been selected from such a large group of participants. I applaud Mr. Freed-Finnegan for his initiative in seeking to make his community a better place to live, and for the positive influence he has had on the lives of others through his work. His actions show that young Americans desire to make an impact in our society and that America's community spirit continues to hold tremendous promise for the 21st Century.