Charlie Rangel

Mr. RANGEL

Mr. RANGEL. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to my friend, the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Cardin), a member of the Committee on Ways and Means.

Mr. RANGEL. Mr. Speaker, I would ask the chairman, what makes the Byrd law so powerful that it is one of the few Democratic legacies that we have that the gentleman has not dismantled? Everything else we believed in, in health care and Social Security and education, the gentleman found it so easy to say that we are now in power and this is where we can show you what we are going to do. When did the gentleman first find out that the gentleman had the power to change the Byrd amendment?

Mr. RANGEL. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. RANGEL. Mr. Speaker, the one word that could describe the procedure that we are going through this afternoon is ``outrageous.'' It is outrageous what is happening to this House of Representatives, and even more painful is what is happening to my beloved Committee on Ways and Means. It is true that most of the Members, Republican and Democrats, walk around with more self-esteem than we really need, but the truth of the matter is, we were under the belief that revenue issues came from the House of Representatives, came from the Committee on Ways and Means, came to the floor; and historically, this is the way it has been. Mr. Speaker, this is outrageous. I did not understand half of what the chairman said. I know one thing he is saying, and that is that what we are voting on has nothing to do with all of the tax cuts that came to the House of Representatives and were voted for. It is a fraud that has been committed by press releases that this House has cut people's taxes, because they have only taken one piece of the bill, and the only reason they have taken that is so that we can accept the Senate bill. So the prerogatives of the House in terms of revenue issues now has been laterally passed to the other body, and that will be decided in conference; and not only will Democrats be excluded, but most all Republicans will be excluded. So all of the compassion about the marriage penalty, all of the compassion about getting rid of the estate tax, all of the compassion about the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Cardin) and the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Portman) working together for better pension benefits, all of the things that we have debated on the floor, I think what the chairman of the committee said is that that is exactly what this debate is not about. This debate is about how fast can we relinquish our responsibilities as House Members, how quickly can we yield to the leadership, and how quickly can they bring something over here that nobody, freshmen, senior Members, Republicans or Democrats, had anything to do with. And guess what? If they do it on this, what is going to happen in the next bill? That is the best kept secret in the House. The next bill, that is the alternative minimum tax. That is the one that we take care of capital gains, that would take care of extenders, we take care of debt service, we take care of small business people. But do not trust us if we bring it to the House. That is just for practice. That is just for C-SPAN. The real tax bill will come from the Senate, and we probably will send something over there so that we can go into conference. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time, since nobody here should be wasting their time talking about tax policy, but rather how to yield to the other body.

Mr. RANGEL. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. (Mr. RANGEL asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. RANGEL

Mr. RANGEL. Mr. Chairman, I rise today to urge the presidential appointment of a Special Envoy for Sudan to facilitate bringing an end to the atrocities associated with the eighteen- year civil war. It is time for the United States to take a strong stand against the situation in the Sudan. Slavery, aerial bombardment of civilians, and other numerous human rights abuses victimize the people of Sudan. I believe that the President's appointment of a high-profile individual with an extensive diplomatic background will send a serious message to the government of Khartoum that slavery and the violence must end. Sudan has been at war intermittently since its independence in 1956. An estimated 2.2 million people have died as a result of war-related causes since the current conflict erupted in 1983. More than 4 million people, mostly southern Sudanese, have been displaced, largely due to the conflict. I commend President Bush on his appointment of Andrew Narsios, as special humanitarian coordinator for Sudan to facilitate U.S. assistance. This appointment demonstrates that the United States is taking a leadership role in resolving the situation in the Sudan, however we as a nation we must continue our efforts to put an end to the atrocities in the Sudan. I also applaud Secretary of State Powell for recognizing the tragedy that is underway in Sudan and for ordering a review of Administration policy. To begin with, the U.S. should use every means at its disposal to bring the military hostilities to an immediate end. At the same, we should apply every bit of moral persuasion and condemn in the loudest possible voice the unspeakable violations of human rights being perpetrated against the weakest members of that society. In the Sudan the world is faced with a human rights nightmare of the first order. We have the opportunity, indeed the responsibility, to use our international leadership to help end the civil war and the heartbreaking enslavement of women and children which has intensified as a result of the hostilities. As a nation with first-hand knowledge of the savagery of slavery, of the misery to its victims, and the suffering of future generations, we must recoil in horror at the practice of slavery in Sudan and work with the international community to end the war which is the root cause.

Mr. RANGEL

Mr. RANGEL. Mr. Speaker, today is a bittersweet day. It is with both great sadness and immense pride that I rise today in honor and celebration of the life of a music legend, Mr. Al Hibbler. Albert George Hibbler was born on August 16, 1915 in Tyro, Mississippi. At the age of twelve he moved to Arkansas and entered school for the first time when he was fourteen years old. Blind since birth, Al Hibbler studied voice at the Conservatory for the Blind in Little Rock and sang in the choir as a soprano. Four years later his voice deepened to his signature eloquent baritone. Hibbler became the first blind artist to achieve significant popularity as an entertainer. After leaving the Conservatory, Mr. Hibbler started singing the blues in roadhouses, but shortly thereafter realized his first love was soft smooth ballads. He sang with local bands throughout Arkansas and Texas until 1942 when he landed a major break with Jay McShann's band in the 1940's. Eighteen months later Hibbler's dream of becoming a big band singer came to fruition when he auditioned and was hired as lead singer for the Duke Ellington Orchestra. He remained with the Duke Ellington Orchestra for eight years until he went out on his own achieving enormous success. During his musical career, Hibbler had a number of hit songs including, ``Do Nothing Until You Hear From Me'', ``Unchained Melody,'' ``He'', ``11th Hour Melody'', ``After the Lights Go Down Low'', ``Honeysuckle Rose'', ``All or Nothing at All'', ``Don't Get Around Anymore'', and ``The Very Thought of You''. As a man of great consciousness, in the late fifties he turned his attention to the civil rights movement and was arrested twice during protest marches. These acts of courage scared away major record labels, but with the assistance of Frank Sinatra he was able to sign a contract with the Reprise Record label in the early sixties. Although, with the introduction of rock and roll his career as a jazz recording artist slowed, he performed through the Nineties. Mr. Speaker, I ask that all my colleagues join me in celebrating the life and the music of Al Hibbler, a jazz legend that gained success against all odds.

Mr. RANGEL

Mr. RANGEL. Mr. Speaker, on April 26 I inadvertently voted ``yea'' on final passage of H.R. 503, the Unborn Victims of Violence Act, when it was my strong intent to vote ``no'' on the bill. I feel that the best way to protect the fetus is to better protect the woman, and because this legislation fails to address the need for legislation to prevent and punish violence against women, I would not support this or any other similar bill.

Mr. RANGEL

Mr. RANGEL. Mr. Speaker, I rise to celebrate the 90th anniversary of an important institution in my Congressional district, the New York College of Podiatric Medicine. In view of the fact that podiatric doctors are assuming a growing and significant place on the Nation's health care team, the College means even more to our community. The College was founded in 1911 in East Harlem by Dr. Maurice J. Lewi, medical physician and educator, former Secretary to the New York State Board of Medical Examiners and first president of this institution. Dr. Lewi drafted the first legislation creating the New York College of Podiatric Medicine and its clinical training arm, the Foot Clinics of New York to provide educational and training programs and the establishment of the first standards of podiatric clinical care. The College is the first and largest college of podiatric medical education in the Nation, having treated literally hundreds of thousands of people in its foot clinics over the 90 years of its existence. Graduates of the College account for 25 percent of the Nation's practicing podiatrists. Forty percent of the current student enrollment are minorities, 45 percent of whom are women. The college is affiliated with the New York Presbyterian Healthcare System, Lincoln and Harlem Hospitals, Metropolitan Medical and Nassau County University Medical Centers--a clear reflection of the outstanding reputation the college has earned in the health care community. In October, 2000, the college affiliated with Columbia College of Physicians and Surgeons to provide improved access to patient care, academic programs for medical education and joint research programs. The Foot Clinics of New York is a fully staffed medical teaching/ training facility with more than 50,000 annual patient visits who have benefited from the skill, dedication and quality of care provided by clinical faculty of the Foot Clinics. As the College is celebrating the 90th year of its existence, I want to salute the New York College of Podiatric Medicine, the Foot Clinics of New York, its board of trustees, president, Louis Levine, faculty and staff and students on the occasion of this 90th anniversary year. The history of this outstanding educational institution truly has been marked by its distinguished graduates and by its traditions of academic excellence and service to the community. May it continue to carry on its proud tradition for many years to come.

Mr. RANGEL

Mr. RANGEL. Mr. Speaker, on April 26, I inadvertently voted ``yes'' on final passage of H.R. 503, the Unborn Victims of Violence Act, when it was my strong intent to vote ``no'' on the bill. I feel that the best way to protect the fetus is to better protect the woman, and because this legislation fails to address the need for legislation to prevent and punish violence against women, I would not support this or any similar bill.

Mr. RANGEL

Mr. RANGEL. Mr. Speaker, I rise before you today to speak on H.R. 503, the ``Unborn Victims of Violence Act.'' Although this bill recently passed the House by a vote of 252 to 172, it is important that we not give up the fight to protect women from violence, but equally as important, a woman's right to choose. Acts of violence against women, particularly pregnant women, are tragic and should be punished accordingly. However, the Unborn Victims of Violence Act is not the answer to imposing such punishment because it seeks to separate the woman from her fetus in the eyes of the law, elevating the legal status of the fetus to that of an adult human being. Currently, sentencing guidelines already exist that enable Federal judges to impose increased penalties for criminal acts that compromise a woman's pregnancy. Such penalties punish the additional injury to the woman without recognizing the fetus as a legal entity separate and distinct from the woman. And certainly, this is how it should be. Clearly, the best way to protect the fetus, is to better protect the woman, and it is my hope that Congress will one day enact a more reasoned approach to violence against women.

Mr. RANGEL

Mr. RANGEL. Mr. Speaker, I object to the vote on the ground that a quorum is not present and make the point of order that a quorum is not present.

Mr. RANGEL. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time. Mr. Speaker, one of my Republican friends brought to me an ad which ran in The Washington Post where African American businesspeople were calling for an end to the estate tax. I was moved by their concern for these African Americans. I thought it was the beginning of the new Republican civil rights movement. But I told them that I had shared my concerns about this with some of these people, and they agreed with me that only in a country as great as America can someone be born in poverty and be able to achieve the great economic success that they have been able to achieve. But in doing this, we also had an obligation to America, to those people who are less fortunate. Whether they be black or white or Jew or gentile, there has to be a basic understanding that we have to secure for ourselves a sound economic system that allows all of the people to hope and aspire to achieve economically, a sound public school system that gives us the tools to be able to negotiate one's way through success; a Nation that would not only allow us to move forward, but have a concern about the Social Security System, the Medicare System, to be concerned about one whose parents who are dependent on Social Security and dependent on prescription drugs. In other words, yes, we have to be prepared to give something back to this great Republic that has given so much to so few. So it seems to me as we conclude this argument, if people are talking and debating about repealing the estate taxes now, we have the wrong debate. Yes, that figure, $662 billion, no longer applies because the Republicans do not want repeal; not now, not next year, not the year after. They are talking about a decade from now. So call it the Republican I-Hope-You-Live-For-10-Years bill, but do not say relief is being given now, because the relief is in the Democratic substitute and the relief is when? The relief is now. The Republicans would expose those who hold property that have appreciated in value to additional capital gains taxes after they die. We do not do that. So what I am suggesting to my colleagues is that we have to live with some framework of what we are going to do in the future, and I can tell my colleagues this. The Republicans are talking about $1.6 trillion today, but tomorrow they will be talking about $2 trillion, the next day they will be talking about $2.5 trillion, and before we leave this House, they will be talking about a $3 trillion bill. Am I making it up? No. The thing is that there is nothing left for them to cut after this bill. If this bill passes, they would have taken a $662 billion budget bill and squeezed it into a wedge that is left for $200 billion. But that is the last wedge, and this is our last chance.

Mr. RANGEL. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Millender-McDonald).

Mr. RANGEL. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson-Lee). (Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas asked and was given permission to revise and extend her remarks.)

Mr. RANGEL. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Mississippi (Mr. Taylor).

Mr. RANGEL. Mr. Speaker, I yield 30 seconds to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Pelosi) to respond to the gentleman from California (Mr. Thomas).

Mr. RANGEL. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Pelosi).

Mr. RANGEL. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from the District of Columbia (Ms. Norton). (Ms. NORTON asked and was given permission to revise and extend her remarks.)

Mr. RANGEL. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. You may want to repeal it but it is taking you 10 years to get there. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Delahunt).

Mr. RANGEL. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. It just seems to me under that last example that appreciated property under the Republican bill will be exposed to capital gains tax for the next 10 years. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from North Dakota (Mr. Pomeroy), a member of the committee.

Mr. RANGEL. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. Sherman).

Mr. RANGEL. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Hoyer), my distinguished colleague.

Mr. RANGEL. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I would say to my colleagues on the other side of the aisle, if they are concerned about young people, they have 10 years to wait for relief.

Mr. RANGEL. Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 seconds to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Weldon), if he has another question.