Nancy Pelosi

Ms. PELOSI

Ms. PELOSI. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the Latham amendment, giving State and local law enforcement officials authority to apprehend immigrants violating deportation orders. Giving this important authority to local law enforcement agencies will do more to increase the public's distrust of the law rather than to increase the effectiveness of immigration enforcement. Our local law enforcement agencies are charged with the great responsibility of protecting citizens from crime. With this authority, the police will lose their effectiveness. This amendment endangers the life and health of many people. A particular concern is the case of victims of domestic violence or spousal abuse. Women who fear the repercussions for their husbands or themselves will not venture forward to seek help or report abuse. This provision also will serve to obstruct justice. Witnesses of violent crimes who fear deportation for themselves or someone close to them will choose not to come forward and cooperate with police because it would be too great a risk. I urge my colleagues to vote against the Latham amendment, and allow our State and local law enforcement officials to protect and serve within communities, rather to increase the fear. 1300

Ms. PELOSI

Ms. PELOSI. Mr. Speaker, I join today with my colleagues in commemorating Greek Independence Day. I thank my colleague from Florida, Mr. Bilirakis, for his leadership on issues of importance to the Greek-American community and for organizing this special order tonight. On March 25, we will celebrate the 175th anniversary of the revolution which released Greece from the tyranny of the Ottoman Empire. This date is a very important one, yet it represents only one facet of Greece's longstanding inspiration to the world as the home of democracy. The people of Greece and the people of the United States share a special and strong bond which goes back to the founding of our great Nation and which echoes through the ages. Greece's philosophical tradition inspired our Founding Fathers in their struggle for freedom and democracy. Their struggle, in turn, inspired the Greek patriots whose courageous fight for independence in the 1820's we acknowledge and commemorate today. Greece's intellectual, philosophical, cultural, and artistic contributions to the history of Western civilization are an important underpinning of the world in which we live. Today, here in the House of Representatives, we pause to acknowledge those contributions, Without Greek democratic thought, we might not have the democracy we practice here on a daily basis, one which is too often taken for granted. Greece's contributions to life in the United States are not just those based on lofty ideals. In communities across the country, Greek- Americans contribute in untold ways. The contribution of the Greek- American community to my district of San Francisco is a great one. This special community is a vital, historic, and vibrant component of San Francisco's world-renowned diversity. I am proud to join my colleagues in the House of Representatives and my friends in the Greek-American community in celebrating Greek Independence Day.

Ms. PELOSI

Ms. PELOSI. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in support of the Conyers- Nadler-Berman substitute to H.R. 2703. The substitute is a reasonable and measured attempt to address threats to U.S. citizens posed by terrorism without creating threats to our fundamental constitutional protections. In this debate, we should stipulate that all of us are concerned about the increase in domestic terrorism and that our thoughts and prayers are with the survivors of the terrible terrorist acts which we have seen perpetrated against U.S. citizens, including the terrorism directed at Federal workers in Oklahoma City. We can and must act against terrorism. At the same time, we must ensure that our actions are effective and within the bounds of the Constitution, which has safeguarded basic American freedoms for over 200 years. H.R. 2703 poses serious threats to civil liberties and civil rights. I have a number of concerns about H.R. 2703. The bill expands the use of the death penalty and changes the use of habeas corpus petitions, severely restricting avenues of recourse to the judicial system for people sentenced to death. The death penalty is not a punishment which should be taken lightly. Frankly, I do not believe it should be used at all. But since the death penalty is utilized, we must ensure that people sentenced to death have sufficient opportunity to petition for relief if they have not had a fair trial or competent counsel. The bill also contains changes to asylum law which threaten our 200- year history of providing refuge for people fleeing persecution in their countries of origin. I agree that we need to be able to exclude terrorists from our shores. I do not agree that we should turn away others who come to the United States seeking haven from persecution. That protection is one of the principles upon which this U.S. standing as an international beacon of freedom and hope is built. The Conyers-Nadler-Berman substitute addresses many of my concerns. This substitute deletes H.R. 2703's restrictions on habeas corpus appeals. It deletes the expedited asylum procedures contained in H.R. 2703. And, it provides for expedited deportation for terrorists without violating constitutional protections. The Conyers-Nadler-Berman mechanism for expedited deportation of terrorists is in accordance with procedures for dealing with classified information and preserves a fundamental principle of our justice system which grants accused individuals the right to face their accuser and to confront evidence. Regardless of what we think of individuals and the crimes of which they are accused, we are a nation of laws. The Conyers- Nadler-Berman substitute strikes a balance by allowing for the use of sensitive information in the deportation process while also preserving the right of the accused to mount an adequate defense. And, the Conyers-Nadler-Berman substitute prohibits foreign terrorist groups such as Hamas from fundraising in the United States. I urge my colleagues to support the Conyers-Nadler-Berman substitute, which increases our ability to stop terrorism while continuing to preserve our precious constitutional protections. We must fight terrorism. If, however, we undermine our civil liberties in that fight, the terrorists win. They succeed not only by sowing terror through their heinous acts, but also by undermining the very system which they claim to be fighting against. The Conyers-Nadler-Berman substitute is the best option before us in this debate and I urge my colleagues to support it.

Ms. PELOSI

Ms. PELOSI. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me time. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the Cox resolution today and commend the gentleman for his leadership in bringing this legislation to the floor and the chairman of the full committee for expeditiously getting this through committee. I think this is a very important resolution. Mr. Speaker, I have been in serious disagreement with the Clinton administration on its China policy in relationship to trade, human rights, and proliferation, but I do think on the issue of Taiwan that the administration's actions have been prudent and appropriate. I think they have been completely consistent with Mr. Cox's resolution. I believe that we are voting for this resolution in support of the actions of the administration that calls for a peaceful resolution of the reunification issue between China and Taiwan, and that calls for a cessation of the intimidation of the political process and the economic progress on Taiwan. These missiles, armed missiles, that the Chinese are lobbing at Taiwan, are lobbed not only against Taiwan, but against democracy, and it is important for this body to stand firm in our support of democracy in Taiwan. I commend the gentleman from California [Mr. Cox].

Ms. PELOSI. Mr. Speaker, with all due respect to the previous speaker, and I do respect him, I think he overstates the importance of the vote for President Li's visa. I believe the actions on the part of the Chinese Government would be the same with or without the vote that the Congress took at that time. I want the Record to show that.

Ms. PELOSI

Ms. PELOSI. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to the San Francisco Art Institute as it celebrates its 125th year of contributing to the enrichment of the artistic and cultural community of the San Francisco Bay Area and the United States. The San Francisco Art Institute has excelled in training, guiding and nurturing budding artistic talent, and these talented students and artists have shared their many gifts with the Nation and the world. Founded in 1871 by a group of artists, writers and civic leaders, the San Francisco Art Institute has become an integral part of the heritage that has made San Francisco a thriving creative arts community. First named the San Francisco Art Association, it was then and continues to be a pioneering institution with a distinct cultural vision for the West. After World War II, the Art Institute became the west coast center of abstract expressionism, involving an impressive group of artists, including Clyfford Still, Mark Rothko and Ad Reinhardt. In 1946, renowned photographer Ansel Adams created the Nation's first fine art photography department at the Institute, which later enticed such notable instructors as Dorothea Lange, Imogen Cunningham and Edward Weston. In the 1950s, the Institute was a center for the Nation's leading figurative artists, including Richard Diebenkorn, Elmer Bischoff, David Park and James Weeks. In the 1960s, the Art Institute established the country's first fine art film program. And in 1995, keeping up with ever changing technology and new tools for creative expression, the Art Institute launched the New Imaging Center, an important new computer resource center for the visual arts. The Art Institute offers innovative academic programs in painting, photography, printmaking, filmmaking and sculpture. One of the keys to its exceptional success as an educational institution is the Institute's emphasis on personal exploration, growth and total immersion in one's work. The roster of stellar creative talent associated with the Art Institute throughout its last century is stunning in its breadth. The sculptor of Mount Rushmore, Gutzon Borglum, was a student. Diego Rivera created a mural at the school. Enrique Chagoya, Annie Liebowitz and the Grateful Dead's Jerry Garcia are just a few more of the notable artists who have left their mark on the Art Institute and our Nation. Mr. Speaker, on March 16, 1996, the San Francisco Art Institute will host a gala celebration of its 125 years. A city-wide arts celebration will occur this month and next, as other San Francisco museums, galleries and art spaces pay tribute to the Institute on this landmark anniversary. On behalf of the United States Congress, I salute Art Institute President Ella King Torrey and all of the great contemporary artists and teachers who have contributed throughout the years to creating and building this legacy for our Nation. Let us all join with the San Francisco Art Institute and continue to celebrate and support the arts and their prominent place in our society for years to come.

Ms. PELOSI

Ms. PELOSI. Mr. Speaker, I was also detained at the Committee on Appropriations. Had I been present for the vote I would have voted ``nay.''

Ms. PELOSI

Ms. PELOSI. Mr. Speaker, I rise to day in strong support of the Lowey amendment, which deletes the provision in this legislation permitting States to decide whether to use Medicaid funds for abortions in the case of rape or incest. This provision is cruel, unfair, and has no place in any legislation, but most particularly not in this already troubled omnibus appropriations bill. States should not be given the option of providing coverage of these services under the guise of States' rights. States have the choice whether or not to participate in the Medicaid Program--they do not and should not have the option to pick and choose which procedures they will cover. The provision in this bill clearly discriminates against victims of crime. It blames the victim and forces her to accept the responsibility and consequences resulting from the violent crime perpetrated against her. Indigent women who are victims of rape or incest have already been brutally assaulted once by their attacker--this provision will make them victims of a second brutal assault, this time by the Government that pledges to assist and protect them. I urge my colleagues to protect the rights of poor and vulnerable victims and vote ``yes'' on the Lowey amendment.

Ms. PELOSI

Ms. PELOSI. Yes. I know the focus of this special order is education and the Republican cuts, and that is most appropriate, but I want to also point out that these cuts are not made in a vacuum. Our colleague, the gentleman from California [Mr. Miller], talked about community service in AmeriCorps, as did the gentlewoman from Connecticut [Ms. DeLauro], and I wanted to just add something briefly there because I think we will have to have our own special order on community service cuts, too, but they are related to education. In the same Labor, Health and Human Services and Education appropriations bill there are drastic cuts in community service, and some of the programs affected are RSVP, foster grandparents, et cetera. In our testimony, all the testimony that we get from professional judgment opinions and testimony of those who have to justify the spending in their agencies, looks to what the gentleman from California [Mr. Miller] said. For every dollar you spent on an AmeriCorps volunteer, you get at least $25 return on your investment. So, too, with community service across the board, also contained in this bill. It flies in the face of the trend, because what we are saying here is everybody wants to reduce the deficit, right? So how do we use the spending to the best advantage? Of course we educate our children. That is an investment. But we also had what they call the twin engines of paid supervisors and thousands of volunteers, but who need the employees in place to organize their work and them, in order for us to have the big payoff in our society of people coming together and helping children to read or taking seniors to the park or whatever it happens to be to meet the need. It was referred to as the catalytic power of community service. This is what we should be doing if we want to reduce the deficit, is make sure that the dollars that we spend are investment and that they have a multiplier effect across the board. When we cut those dollars for community service, we are really going backward. It does not take an economic genius to see the worth of all of that, the power of men and women across the country volunteering. But subtract the Federal commitment there and you lose the supervision, the organization, the guidance and the catalyst for making all of that work. So these education cuts are taking place at the same time as we are making community service cuts. Begging off of AmeriCorps captures both aspects of it, education and community service, and it does a grave disservice, whether it is to civic associations or volunteerism in our country or, as President Bush so aptly called it, 1,000 points of light. Let us support President Bush's 1,000 points of light by fueling and funding the community service agencies that we have in Government.

Mr. PELOSI

Mr. PELOSI. I think there is a lack of understanding by some of our Republican colleagues about how this issue is understood in the country. As a member of the subcommittee, I get many calls and letters, et cetera, from very different people; not the usual folks who usually call, but members of PTA's across the country. This has gone beyond the usual advocacy groups who will pay attention to what goes into legislation in Congress. This is well beyond that. This is parents, members of PTA's and the rest, members of school boards across the country. They are not particularly political, but they understand how this is going to affect their neighborhood schools. That is critically important. I certainly think the Senators understand, because they put back almost all of the $2.7 billion. I think nothing speaks more eloquently to the bankruptcy of the policy in this House on education funding than the fact that even the Republican Senators disassociated themselves from it and came back with $2.7 billion, which I hope we can get into the House bill, or in conference back in. The other point I want to make is that in the course of all of this appropriating, our colleagues on the Republican side say, ``We will put more money back into some of these programs, contingent upon the House passing a separate bill, a reconciliation bill, and then we will have money for education, if you pass a balanced budget bill in 7 years, a reconciliation bill.'' We can never let that stand, that children are contingent upon some reconciliation bill. Children are a first priority. This is not something we do when we see how much money we have left over from tax breaks and an increased defense budget that the Pentagon did not even ask for. This is what we do first, take care of our children, educate them; that is, if we have, I think, our priorities in order. Our budget must be a statement of our national values. It must reflect what is important to us, and that is what we would put our resources to. It certainly is not, in the case of the budget we have before us. Of course, that goes on to higher education, as well. Eliminates 13 percent for student financial assistance, less than 1995, eliminates the Perkins Loan Program, and the direct loan program is capped at 40 percent, and further reductions, which will again pose an obstacle for people without means or middle-income people in our country to receive the benefits of higher education. Then it goes on and on to what has happened to job training, school- to-work, lifetime learning, reflecting that our economy is a different one and that people in the work force must be constantly educated in a lifetime, but much of that job training funding is also cut on the labor side of the Labor, Health and Human Services and Education. I might say that the Senators restored the education cuts, but there are other problems that we have with the bill for cuts that were not restored. I would be happy to yield to my colleague.

Ms. PELOSI

Ms. PELOSI. If the gentlewoman will continue to yield, and when we think that this is done in the context of a $250 billion tax break to the wealthiest people in our country, $250 billion, and we are here talking about $3 billion or $4 billion. Could they not make the tax break that much less? It is penny-ante. It is change to them. It is a little bit of money when it is a tax break, but it is all the money in the world when we are trying to deal with education.

Ms. PELOSI. It would be one thing if they brought in a critique or criticism of title I, and they said, ``This is where we think the same number of children or even more children could be served with the same money or less money by addressing some reforms,'' but they could not criticize title I. Title I is effective. It does the job. The money will mean that 1 million children will not be served. In California, and I would like to put some observations on the record, in California, that will mean over $123,000,000 out of our one State, over 100,000 children will no longer have this special assistance for reading and math. That is why I rise also and join you to express my great concern about the future of our Nation's education programs at the hands of the Republican majority in the House. So drastic was this cut that even the Republicans in the Senate abandoned it. So drastic was it that they agreed to add back billions of dollars for education, because they knew that they were slashing right at the heart of America. Following up on something the gentleman from New York [Mr. Owens], said earlier about our entire budget, we hear a great deal of talk around here about how we have to reduce the deficit, and therefore we have to cut the budget to do that, cut spending to do it. But the very idea of cutting education, and that is going to increase our deficit, unless we invest in our children, enrich their lives, make them productive members of society, increase our competitiveness internationally, we are going down a path of increasing the deficit and increasing the national debt, because we are not investing in our greatest resource, our children. Our Federal commitment to education is truly a measure of our sincerity about economic recovery, social progress, and our children's future, again. In the House omnibus appropriations bill, as has been mentioned, $3.3 billion is cut from the Department of Education, $3.3 billion, or 13 percent; as has been mentioned, a 17-percent cut in compensatory education, title I. Ironically, just this week, March 15, the Ides of March and the last day for this CR is also the day that California school districts are required to notify teachers whether or not they will have jobs in the fall. Unless funding for title I is restored, thousands of California teachers and teachers' aides will lose their jobs. Tell me how that is going to help the children of California. In the House bill also, funding for safe and drug-free schools, an issue that I know that the gentleman from California [Mr. Miller] has worked very hard on, will be cut by $12 million or 25 percent. The safe-and-drug-free-schools program is vital, especially to urban school districts like the one I represent in San Francisco. The drastic cuts proposed by this funding would place in jeopardy the most vulnerable students. Basic needs that help young people survive cannot be addressed. At-risk children need the assistance that these programs offer. Funding for bilingual education in California would be cut by $18 million, or 32 percent, one-third of the funding for bilingual education. We talk about wanting everyone to speak English and making English the official language, and yet we are cutting funding for bilingual education. Anyone who supports any initiatives for English- only has to be a staunch supporter for bilingual education. That funding should follow. I, myself, do not subscribe to that theory of English as the official language, but ironically, those who do are just the ones who want to cut the funding for bilingual education. No funds for Goals 2000, the bill the President requested, $750 million. As the gentleman from California [Mr. Miller] said earlier, these programs were developed under a Republican President, President Bush, with bipartisan cooperation of Republican and Democratic Governors across the country, passed in a bipartisan fashion in the House, signed by a Republican President, and yet zeroed out in the labor, health, and human services, and education bill. I almost think we should strike education from the name of the committee, because we have taken such a blow at the education funding. I have more facts and figures, but I know my colleagues need time. I do not know how much time can be allocated. Perhaps I can resume later.

Ms. PELOSI. Mr. Speaker, let me thank the gentlewoman from Connecticut for her leadership in this body, and particularly this evening, for calling this special order on education. I would like to follow up on what has been said earlier by my colleagues. As a member of the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, and also as a member of the Subcommittee on Labor, Health and Human Services, and Education of the Committee on Appropriations, I saw firsthand the budgeting for the intelligence budget, and I agree with the gentleman from New York [Mr. Owens] on his observation about our spending priorities; and then also on the front line in our subcommittee, when we saw the $1 billion being slashed from title I, with the blink of an eye. When we said to our Republican colleagues, ``But what will happen to the 1 million children who will not be able to have access to Title I services,'' they said ``We have to cut somewhere.'' As our colleague, the gentleman from California, said----

Ms. PELOSI

Ms. PELOSI. Mr. Speaker, I thank my distinguished colleagues, Congressmen Stokes and Payne, for calling this special order in celebration of Black History Month for choosing this year's theme: African-American Women: Yesterday, Today and Tomorrow. The theme today heralds women who have made distinctive contributions to our country. For every woman from Harriet Tubman to Rosa Parks to Myrlie Evers- Williams who have become household names, there are legions of women from past to present who have made great contributions to their communities with little or no recognition. We are here to honor all of them today. When we examine this theme, it is only natural that our thoughts would turn to our recently departed friend and colleague Barbara Jordan. Congresswoman Jordan was a formidable force, not only in the African American community, but throughout our country. A champion of liberal causes, she was not only a role model for African American women, but also an inspiration to people of all colors. Mr. Speaker, I am very fortunate to represent California's 8th Congressional District and to work with many outstanding African- American leaders, both women and men, and community organizations based in the city of San Francisco. These are leaders like Enola Maxwell, who has been a driving force for the Potrero Hill Neighborhood House, guiding and mentoring several generations of neighborhood youth; or like Naomi Gray, who spent many years on the San Francisco Health Commission as an advocate for health care for low-income communities; or like Sharon Hewitt, who recently helped organize a city-wide summit to find ways to prevent youth violence among communities of color in San Francisco. These women are working within the community to make it a better place. I applaud their efforts, and the efforts of the many African-American women in my district who are working every day to improve life in the city of San Francisco and in our Nation. In just a few days, we will end Black History Month and enter a celebration of Women's History Month. Let us continue to acknowledge the accomplishments of pioneering women of the past and promote and support the goals of African-American women present and future. Their struggles deserve credit and recognition every day of the year, not just during Black History Month.

Ms. PELOSI

Ms. PELOSI. It is under your leadership that we are here today. In closing, Mr. Speaker, I would like to say that in addition to what the gentlewoman is saying, we must do all we can in succeeding to foster the self-esteem of our young women and actually our young men today. We are responsible to let each of them know there are people who love and support them, that love and support does not have to come from a child of their own, and that love is something they can give to themselves, a feeling of self-worth that will allow teens to say no in the face of great decisions or pressures. That sense of self-worth comes from the family, from school, and from the community. Once again, Mr. Speaker, unless the gentlewoman from North Carolina would like this time, I would like to yield back the balance of my time. I have spoken on three issues: Supporting the gentleman from New Jersey [Mr. Pallone] on the subject of the environment and the gentleman from Minnesota [Mr. Vento] on the importance of the environment to the health of the American people; and on the subject of teen pregnancy. In my close, I would like to say, once again, thank you to Edmond G. Brown, Junior, for the--Edmond G. Brown, ``Pat,'' Senior, for his contribution. I know I speak for every member of the California delegation when I say to the Brown family that we are grateful for their unselfishness with ``Pat'' Brown in making him part of our State's history, and his great legacy is one that will live for a long time to come, and extend on behalf of our delegation condolences and deepest sympathy to Mrs. ``Pat'' Brown.

Ms. PELOSI. I thank the gentleman from New Jersey for yielding and thank him also for his strong leadership on this issue. I am pleased to join our colleague, the gentleman from Minnesota, [Mr. Vento], and the gentleman from New Jersey, [Mr. Pallone] in this special order. It is very interesting. I recently just had an environment town meeting in San Francisco, and it was environment and health, and we addressed very directly the proposals that are being made in this House of Representatives that effect the environment and just the subject you were talking about and how it effects individual health. The public is on to this. They are very, very interested in what is happening here in this House of Representatives, and they are very concerned about the riders that were placed on the VA-HUD bill, obviously making that complete veto bait for the President. But it is not enough for us just to defeat those riders, however important that was, and it took a bipartisan effort for us to have a majority vote to defeat them. However, many of the same Members of this House who voted against the riders then went on to support the bill, which had huge cuts in the EPA budget, thereby tying the hands of the EPA to do its job. Now certainly if there is any alteration that we want to make in regulations, et cetera, governing EPA, everything is up for discussion, but not serious defunding, which says to the EPA, well, we would not have the riders but you would not have money either to enforce it. Right now we are planning another meeting about breast cancer and the environment and the relationship of not having clean air, clean water, whatever else. I think it is a very explosive issue. As I say, the public is very concerned about it. It is an environmental issue that is distinct from saving certain endangered species that some think is not necessarily important in their lives, although we see the connection in nature among all of us. But these issues of environment and health, the EPA budget restrictions on enforcement, are issues that are important to our children, and in a Congress that talks about values and in a Congress that talks about our children's future two things are for sure: If we want our children to lead healthy lives we must make sure they live in a healthy environment, and second is we are never going to reduce the deficit as long as we would allow our environment to be polluted, causing illnesses, causing cost, and of course reducing quality of life. One of the reasons many of us are in politics is to extend the protection that we give our own children as parents beyond the home, but there is only so much we can do, and protecting the environment is one thing the American people look to government to do. It never happened under the honor system, and it requires the government role, government regulation, and it calls for a Federal Government role so that our entire country is safeguarded. With that, I once again want to thank the gentleman for his leadership on this as well as for holding the hearings yesterday and his ongoing leadership on the issue of protecting the environment, and if the gentleman is not using all of his time, I would like to be yielded to again toward the end of his remarks.

Ms. PELOSI. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman, and once again want to commend him for his leadership on this. We have talked about the environment for many years in the Congress. The expression ``environment and health'' now go hand in hand, as they have for a long time, but, as I say, in the public's mind, and I think that if the public is mobilized and understands what is at risk here, then maybe the environment will once again become an issue which has bipartisan support, protecting the environment has bipartisan support, and is no longer an issue of controversy on the floor of the House, and if that is so, it will be in due measure, large measure, to your hard work on this, Mr. Pallone, and I once again commend you. tribute to edmund g. ``pat'' brown

Ms. PELOSI. Mr. Speaker, I am very grateful to the gentleman from New Jersey [Mr. Pallone] for yielding time to me this evening, as I was not on the floor when my 5 minutes came up. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to talk about the former Governor of California, ``Pat'' Brown. The life of Governor ``Pat'' Brown spanned nearly the entire 20th century, and made an indelible mark on the history of California. Born in San Francisco before the great quake, Edmund G. ``Pat'' Brown was one of our city's finest citizens, and a leading advocate for progress for California. His death last week at the age of 90 was eulogized at a San Francisco funeral Mass at St. Cecilia with the archbishop present, attended by Government officials, civic leaders and citizens who never ceased to admire his awesome tenacity. As a public figure in San Francisco, Governor Brown's legendary optimism and energy characterized the spirit of his hometown, San Francisco. Mourners, thousands of mourners, joined four generations of the Brown family, the Governor's wife of 65 years, Bernice Brown, their four children, 10 grandchildren, and many of their 13 great grandchildren in remembering the personal qualities that distinguished Pat Brown throughout his political career and in his later years as a private man. All of these people had many stories to tell. In the interest of time, I will not go into those stories right now, but they will be stories that will be heard over and over about this legendary man and his great heart. Governor Brown's generosity and warmth emanated from his devotion to family. He thrived on the closeness of his growing family, champion their ambitions, proudly cheered their successes. From the 1970's to the 1990's, he campaigned for the two children who followed in his political footsteps to hold statewide office: his son, as you know, Jerry Brown, who served as Secretary of State and as California Governor, and daughter Kathleen Brown, who served as California Treasurer, and who won the Democratic nomination for the Governor in 1994. At the funeral services, though, even though ``Pat'' Brown was a very public man, Governor Brown's grandchildren ruled the day. They affectionately recalled that he loved to do whatever the children wanted to do. ``He loved us, he loved politics, he loved California, and he loved the law,'' granddaughter Kathleen Kelly said. She told the crowd that her grandfather cried with joy with learning that she had passed her bar exam to join the profession he so respected. Though 30 years have passed since he led our State in the Governor's office, Californians are still reaping the benefits of his bold achievements. His accomplishments were many during his years as San Francisco's district attorney, California's attorney general, and the State's Governor for 8 years of tremendous growth. Californians are particularly grateful for the lasting foundation he built to ensure the excellence of California's public system of higher education. Former Governor Jerry Brown described his father's contribution to education as a powerful legacy. His death has generated an outpouring of condolences and expressions of gratitude from people who credit Governor ```Pat'' Brown for the chance to earn a diploma. Governor ``Pat'' Brown set a standard for educational opportunity that we, his benefactors, must strive to maintain. The State's universities and colleges were a model for the Nation and a cornerstone of the economic prosperity that California enjoyed for decades. Governor Brown created this enduring legacy of access to higher learning by enjoining all Californians to share his enthusiasm for investing in the future. The people of our State made that commitment under the Governor's leadership. Now we can pay tribute to his public service by renewing a commitment to today's generation of aspiring students. No tribute to Governor ``Pat'' Brown could overlook his dedication to the Democratic Party and its principles, that is democratic with a capital D. An outspoken partisan, he build party loyalty, articulated Democratic values, and fully participated in the political battles to determine Democratic leadership. He was a politician in the most admirable sense of the term, believing that the true leaders must activate the citizenry in order to achieve their goals. Democrats will miss Governor Brown's presence at State and national party gatherings and his abundance of options on the pressing issues of the day, but the education and economic infrastructure for he built for all Californians will live long beyond his time among us, and the intangible monuments to his greatness will always be present in his wisdom and vision, inspired by his genuine love of family. As his daughter Kathleen described her father, he was a man who, for all his accomplishments, was a man of a singular inexhaustible spirit of love. We all will love and long remember and respect and admire with great affection the legacy and the person that was California Governor ``Pat'' Brown. the national campaign to reduce teen pregnancy

Ms. PELOSI. Mr. Speaker, since I have a few minutes remaining on my time, I believe I have a few minutes remaining on my time, I wanted to associate myself with the time being taken by our colleague, the gentlewoman from North Carolina, [Mrs. Clayton], to talk about the promise and potential of our young girls growing up in our Nation today. These young women should have enormous promise and opportunity to succeed and make great and positive change in our world. That opportunity should not be denied or deterred because of the alarming problem of teen pregnancy. There are many ways to combat the rising rate of teen pregnancy. One is to educate State and community decisionmakers about adolescent pregnancy and its causes. Another is to educate youth about their options and possibilities. It is possible that many teens would think twice about engaging in unsafe sexual activity if they were able to gain clear awareness of the personal cost and responsibilities associated with becoming pregnant and raising a child. In that spirit, I applaud the efforts of the National Campaign to Reduce Teen Pregnancy. We should all join with the campaign in its goal to take a clear stand against teen pregnancy and to reduce the teen pregnancy rate by one-third by the year 2005. I was proud to be one of a large group of Members who signed the letter of the gentlewoman from North Carolina [Mrs. Clayton] to President Clinton in support of this campaign. In the interest of time, Mr. Speaker, I will submit the rest of my statement for the Record, because I took this time because it was the time that was available, but the gentlewoman from North Carolina [Mrs. Clayton], is our leader on this issue. If there is any time remaining, I would like to yield some of it to the gentlewoman from North Carolina, in addition to the time that she will have on this subject, commend her for her leadership, and thank her for calling us to the floor on this subject today. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to talk about promise and potential. Young girls growing up in our Nation today should have enormous promise and opportunity to succeed and make great and positive change in our world. That opportunity should not be denied or deterred because of the alarming problem of teen pregnancy. There are many ways to combat the rising rates of teen pregnancy. One is to educate State and community decisionmakers about adolescent pregnancy and its causes. Another is to educate youth about their options and possibilities. It is possible that many teens would think twice about engaging in unsafe sexual activity if they were able to gain clear awareness of the personal costs and responsibilities associated with becoming pregnant and raising a child. I applaud the efforts of the national campaign to reduce teen pregnancy. We all should join with the campaign in its goal to take a clear stand against teen pregnancy and to reduce the teen pregnancy rate by one-third by the year 2005. I was proud to be one of the large group of Members who signed Representative Clayton's letter to President Clinton in support of this campaign. I believe that for this campaign to be successful we need to do much more than take a firm stand against teen pregnancy. to succeed in reducing teen pregnancy, we must succeed in fostering the self-esteem of young girls and boys. We are responsible to let each of them know that there are people who love and support them. that love and support does not have to come from a child of their own. That love is something they can give to themselves--a feeling of self-worth that will allow teens to say no in the face of difficult decisions or pressures to be sexually active. That sense of self-worth comes from family, from school and from the community. Funding for the title X Family Planning Program is also a key component in our fight against rising rates of teen pregnancy. Preventing unintended pregnancies among sexually active teens through counseling and education is the highest priority of Federal family planning programs. Community based teen pregnancy prevention programs place a strong emphasis on avoidance of unprotected sex, or avoidance of sex completely during the teen years. The community level is where we all need to get involved to assist young people through the difficult prospect of growing up in this uncertain world we have made for them. We can offer teens activities like summer youth employment, like school-to-work programs, like after school programs and activities. We can encourage them to become involved in their communities--to volunteer their services to help the lives of others, rather than creating a life in a difficult environment. And we can definitely help by refusing to make out-of-wedlock childbirth and pregnancy the scapegoat in the welfare reform debate. Denial of AFDC benefits to unwed adolescent mothers is cruel. This is not the way to deter teen pregnancy. This is the way to increase the number of poor women and children in this Nation. We can achieve a significant reduction in teen pregnancy the same way we can achieve real welfare reform--by offering positive, long-term solutions.

Ms. PELOSI. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentlewoman from North Carolina [Mrs. Clayton].

Ms. PELOSI

Ms. PELOSI. Mr. Speaker, I rise today with mixed feelings of joy and sadness as we honor our good friend and colleague Kweisi Mfume. I am saddened to lose our esteemed colleague as a relentless advocate in Congress for the poor and disadvantaged, yet I am so pleased and proud that a man of such leadership, courage, dignity, and vision will now guide the NAACP to marvelous new heights. Congressman Mfume has spent most of the last 10 years representing an area I know very well--the city in which my father, Thomas D'Alesandro, once served as mayor and as Member of Congress. Kweisi and I were both born and raised in Baltimore and had the good fortune to learn at the feet of some of the Nation's finest Democrats. While I moved to San Francisco, Congressman Mfume remained to represent the interests of those living in Maryland's Seventh Congressional District, which includes some of Baltimore's poorest neighborhoods. Kweisi Mfume is the best possible role model for the youth he has worked to assist because he has experienced the challenges of life's adversity and knows that it is possible to triumph. After surviving difficulties in his childhood, he adopted not only a new name but a new way of life, completing his education, achieving popularity for his outspoken views as a radio talk show host, then winning a seat on the Baltimore City Council to promote the causes of the poor and disadvantaged living in distressed communities. In 1986, he was elected to Congress to continue his good work on Baltimore's behalf. The limited time we have on the floor today is not nearly enough to list this member's many accomplishments and successes. We all know that Congressman Mfume has been a tireless advocate and a national leader for minority business development and civil rights legislation. His voice is always clearly and eloquently heard in defense of the rights and needs of children, people of color, the poor, the elderly, and the disabled--people who do not often have access to the halls of power. During his impressive term as the leader of the Congressional Black Caucus, Kweisi's style was to build coalitions, not to tear them down. He was instrumental in shaping the caucus into the formidable force that it is. At the announcement of his selection as president and CEO of the NAACP, A. Leon Higginbotham said that Congressman Mfume ``combined the brilliance of W.E.B. Dubois, the eloquence of Martin Luther King, the toughness of Thurgood Marshall, and the caring of Harriet Tubman.'' This great and natural leader could receive no more fitting tribute. The name Kweisi means conquering son of kings. He has conquered everything he has sought to achieve in this Congress. Now he is moving on, not to conquer, but to bring together the people of our Nation and to continue to fight for the causes in which he believes. I join with his many, many friends, family, and colleagues in this body in bidding him farewell and wishing our friend good luck and great success in his new and very important endeavor. We look forward to working with him in his new capacity as president of the NAACP.

Ms. PELOSI

Ms. PELOSI. Mr. Speaker, earlier this evening I heard it announced that our colleague, Representative Kweisi Mfume, was submitting his resignation to the Congress of the United States. Tonight he cast his last vote, a vote which followed hundreds of votes in support of people across this country. I was pleased to serve in the Congress with him but especially on the Banking Committee a number of years ago when we both came to the House of Representatives. On that committee Congressman Mfume was a champion for affordable housing, for low-income housing, for consumer credit for all Americans and for access to loans for people who wanted to gain equity in business but who had been banned from doing so, also for those who wanted to buy homes but who had been red-lined in the past. Congressman Mfume served very well in the Chair that you occupy now, Mr. Speaker. He knew how to keep order in the House. He did so with great dignity. But he also knew how to raise a ruckus in the name of social justice. We will all miss him greatly here. I feel as a Californian, I rise to speak about Congressman Mfume, and he is a representative, as you know, from Baltimore, MD, because I, too, am a native of Baltimore. My father Thomas D'Alesandro served as a Member of Congress for parts of Mr. Mfume's district that he now represents. So I was sorry not to be part of the Maryland delegation's tribute yesterday to Congressman Mfume but my committee assignments prevented me from doing that. Nonetheless, I am proud to have been a colleague of Mr. Mfume's. I wish him and the NAACP much success under this new, fresh leadership and know that every Member of this Congress who has ever served with him will be proud to make that boast. Mr. Speaker, I want to once again commend Mr. Mfume for his great service to this House of Representatives.

Ms. PELOSI

Ms. PELOSI. Mr. Speaker, while I support many of the provisions in this conference report, I have serious concerns about computer censorship provisions included in the telecommunications agreement. In response to a strong lobby by the Christian Coalition, conferees voted 17-16 to include a provision which would make it a felony to put indecent material on a computer where a person under 18 can get It. Because indecent has not been defined by the Congress or the courts, the potential for abuse is great. I do not believe the Federal Government should be involved in using a very loosely defined to test to judge communications between individuals. It is wrong to have the Christian Coalition judge what is appropriate speech on the Internet or anywhere else. I am particularly concerned about the potential impact of this provision on HIV-prevention programs. The indecent provision has the potential to ban explicit HIV-prevention materials from the Internet. The Internet has great potential as a tool in HIV prevention. It has the potential to provide accurate information that could be used by young people to protect themselves from HIV and other sexually transmitted diseases. According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention [CDC], other than abstinence, the most effective way to prevent HIV transmission is the consistent and proper use of condoms. Organizations currently provide detailed information on the proper use of condoms. The question remains whether individuals working for these AIDS organizations in California could be arrested and extradited to more conservative parts of the country because this information was obtained by an individual under 18 years of age. Banning HIV-prevention information does not protect young people. In fact, it can have the opposite effect. This computer censorship provision is wrong and should not be part of this legislation. I am pleased that this legislation will empower parents by requiring the development of the V-chip. This chip will allow parents to block television programming they do not want their children to see. The V- chip will provide parents with a tool to help in the positive up- bringing of their children. Mr. Speaker, there are provisions of the bill that have a significant affect on cities, including the city of San Francisco. I am pleased that section 253(c) recognizes the historic authority of State and local governments to regulate and require compensation for the use of public rights of way. It further recognizes that States and local governments may apply different management and compensation requirements to different telecommunications providers' to the extent that they make different use of the public rights of way. Section 253(c) also makes clear that section 253(a) is inapplicable to right of way management and compensation requirements so long as those entitles that make similar demands on the public rights of way are treated in a competitively neutral and nondiscriminatory manner. As for the issue of FCC preemption, I am pleased that the committee agreed to support the Senate language which authorizes the Commission to preempt the enforcement only of State or local requirements that violate subsection (a) or (b), not (c). The courts, not the Commission, will address disputes under section 253(c). The overwhelming vote in the House on Representative Barton and Representative Stupak's amendment, as well as the unanimous acceptance of Senator Gorton's amendment in the Senate, indicate that the Congress wishes to protect the legitimate authority of local governments to manage and receive compensation for use of the rights of way. Mr. Speaker, I support the telecommunications reform legislation.

Ms. PELOSI

Ms. PELOSI. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize an important art exhibit recently opened in San Francisco. Sponsored by the African- American Historical and Cultural Society, ``Portraits in Black'' presents a detailed history of the Buffalo Soldiers--a select group of African-American soldiers and cowboys who fought heroically for our country at home and abroad. Too often, the history of the Old West and the settling of the Western frontier has neglected to portray the important role played by these African-American soldiers and cowboys. Through a series of photos, narratives, and artifacts, ``Portraits in Black'' proudly advances the significance of the contributions made by these daring American heroes. The Buffalo Soldiers have a long and proud history of association with the Presidio of San Francisco. The 9th Cavalry was stationed at the Presidio around the turn of the century. These soldiers served as an escort of honor for President Theodore Roosevelt. Some historians estimate as many as 500 Buffalo Soldiers are buried in the Presidio's National Cemetery. Buffalo Soldiers were so named by native Americans in recognition of their courage and decency as warriors. Most of their achievements were not chronicled in history texts, making it very important for other avenues of learning, such as this exhibit, to flourish. Mr. Speaker, I commend the work of the African-American Historical and Cultural Society for its role in presenting this magnificent exhibit. On behalf of the U.S. Congress, I join with the society and the many others who honor the Buffalo Soldiers for their important contribution to American history.

Ms. PELOSI

Ms. PELOSI. Mr. Speaker, I rise to urge my colleagues to oppose the fiscal year 1996 Department of Defense [DOD] authorization bill conference report. There are many reasons to defeat this conference report. One of the worst provisions contained in this bill would lead to the immediate discharge of the 1,049 service members infected with HIV, the virus that causes aids. The Department opposes this provision and does not believe that service members with HIV present a deployment problem. The DOD believes that members with HIV should be treated as any other service members with chronic, possibly fatal, medical conditions, and remain on active duty until such time as they cannot perform their duties. This provision is discriminatory because it treats people with HIV differently from the way people with other chronic diseases are treated. Current policy concerning service members who are not eligible for worldwide deployment, such as those with HIV, are sufficient. Service members become ineligible for worldwide deployment due to a number of medical reasons, such as diabetes, asthma, heart disease, cancer, and pregnancy. They still perform very significant duties but are restricted in overseas travel to remain close to adequate medical services. It is inappropriate to single out individuals with HIV disease for discharge from the Armed Services and in so doing, treat these individuals differently than the military treats other productive service members with chronic illnesses. The current policy has been in place since the Reagan administration and received the support of senior military officials. The policy is the product of serious analysis and deliberation by the Pentagon of the impact of individuals with HIV disease on military readiness. The Clinton administration has only moved to continue these policies, demonstrating bipartisan support for this approach. The presence of HIV-infected service members in the military does not adversely affect combat readiness or efficiency. These troops are still physically capable and are valuable to the Armed Services. Adopting this conference report would endorse unacceptable discrimination.