Charlie Rangel

Mr. RANGEL

Mr. RANGEL. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Most of us know that we are so honored to be Members of this august body and that whenever we have an election, the winners clearly are Members of the Congress, the Constitution, and our great country. We from New York have the special history of not being partisan and working together for our districts, our communities, our country. Peter King has been here long enough to remember the days when adversaries could also be friends. On behalf of the Congress and the New York delegation, we all welcome the Honorable Bob Turner in joining our group. We in the State delegation look forward to working with him. At this time, Mr. Speaker, I yield to my distinguished friend, Peter King, from the great State of New York.

Mr. RANGEL

Mr. RANGEL. Mr. Speaker, it is with great enthusiasm that I rise to congratulate The Booker T. Washington Learning Center as they reach their 25th milestone. This accomplishment has been achieved through dedication and committed service to the most vulnerable children and their families in my Congressional District. Since 1986, thousands of families have found support, opportunity and resources that have made a life-changing difference through the Booker T. Washington Learning Center. They have made it possible for people in my community to not only survive, but thrive. The center was originally founded under the parent organization, East Harlem Churches and Community Urban Center by Reverend Leroy Ricksy who decided to help four children being raised by their grandmother. Today, the learning center led by Executive Director, Reverend Kimberly Wright, has expanded its services to include an after school program, Saturday readings, adult education, summer camp, college preparation and support, and art therapy. There is a very personal approach taken at Booker T. They offer children, teens, and adults the extra that they need in order to find success. The Learning Center is able to look back over these 25 years and feel proud of the investment that they have made in so many lives. They have watched their children grow up to be extremely responsible, hard working, and productive citizens. There are so many who have overcome learning disabilities, achieved academic success--even in a failing school system, graduated high school and gone on to college. It continues to be a cornerstone in my beloved East Harlem Community for families who would otherwise not be able to afford quality services for their children and have no place to turn. Their programs meet the needs of many who are in desperate need of guidance and academic support. The small group of young people the learning center started with are all enjoying their careers, their families, and their lives. They have overcome poverty and beaten the odds. Booker T. could not exist if it were not for people who believe in our youngsters and their work. They are most fortunate in having the most dedicated group of staff and volunteers that continue to ensure that Booker T. offers quality enrichment programs that move people from poverty and despair to independence and hope. Mr. Speaker, I ask that you and my colleagues join me in celebrating with the staff and wonderful volunteers at the Booker T. Washington Learning Center on their milestone. Let's encourage others to help programs like these to ensure that they continue to offer a helping hand to our fragile families and make certain that each child in our great nation find a second home, a second family, and a second school in our learning institutions.

Mr. RANGEL

Mr. RANGEL. Madam Speaker, I rise against this resolution. I had thought that the Congress had already passed this very, very embarrassing experience. When you read the papers today and see the pain that exists throughout these United States, it is not Republican or Democratic pain. It's pain that they're feeling as a result of the lack of economic growth in our great country. And when you see the number of years and decades that this Congress has approved the President's authority to increase the debt ceiling for the purpose of maintaining the fiscal integrity of our country and, therefore, the democracy-loving countries that depend on the credibility of our fiscal condition, I would have hoped that we would think of this issue not in terms of the political implications, but how does the world perceive us to be. Quite frankly, without being political, in watching the debate the other night, it wasn't that it annoyed me, but I was just so embarrassed that the world might think that that represented the principles of my country, people laughing about execution and laughing about people dying. I'm certain nobody in this body takes pride in that type of thing. But to go against the President's ability to maintain the integrity of the United States of America, I think it is just so wrong. There are good reasons that we can't challenge as to why our polling as a body is so low. I don't think anyone can walk away feeling proud--liberal, conservative--about what's going on. The reason is because people don't go to sleep at night worried about what we're doing and debating on the question of revoking, of giving the power to the President to protect the integrity of our great Nation. No. They're going to bed at night having hope that maybe tomorrow they'll get a job, that maybe they'll be able to guarantee their health insurance, that maybe their kids will have a better life, that maybe we'll stop fooling around, playing politics with the future of this great country, that just maybe, one day, we'll be more concerned about the lack of default and the credit of our country than our own reelections. I know it seems absurd that we can wish that; but if you think about it, they're not talking about Democrats' polls being low, and they're not just talking about Republicans' polls being low. They're talking about all of us. The greatest thing about America, far beyond our military and economic wealth, is the trust that people used to have in government. Once they lose that, whether they're poor or whether they belong to that small number of people who hold the Nation's wealth, then the country is in desperate trouble. So I hope that people who witness this debate recognize that the opposition is not speaking for the country or the Congress, but probably for the Republican National Committee.

Mr. RANGEL

Mr. RANGEL. I'm so sorry.

Mr. RANGEL. Oh, yes, I didn't understand you had made that request.

Mr. RANGEL. I yield to the distinguished chairman of this great committee. I would like to take this opportunity to thank you for the patriotism that you have shown not only to the committee and the Republican Party but to this great country over the years. I'm just so sorry on this great occasion that you would take your chairmanship to produce a rule like this that Americans cannot see their way clear to say this has been fair and this has been equal. I yield back the balance of my time. Thank you so much.

Mr. RANGEL. My colleagues, I'm voting against the rule because, in the later years in this Congress, I've seen a whole lot of things, but it's never been this polarized, it's never been in terms of attacking a President, and it's never been risking the whole fiscal credibility of the great United States of America in order to make political gains. Clearly, when everyone talks about everyone must make a sacrifice, I assume that we're talking about a sacrifice in cutting the budget, not receiving the benefits; the protections of some programs and not others. And then on the other side, I have to pause because I don't see any sacrifice. It's assumed by the general public that the sacrifice means that maybe if you became wealthy under the great support that you received from this country, that you'll make some small sacrifice; or maybe that sacrifice could be interpreted as that when you received preferential treatment in the Tax Code for all of these years, that you're willing to say I don't need it now, you were there when I needed you. But I think it's safe to say that the American people will be making sacrifices, and they're making it for a crisis that they're so far away from. The people that enjoyed the crisis in terms of financial gain are not asked even to say ``I'm sorry.'' And the people that really love, respect, and hope, and dream, that lost their homes and their jobs, their self-esteem, these are the ones that will make further sacrifices. Only this time it won't be the executive branch. It certainly won't be the courts. It would be our own colleagues, from the Senate and from the House. A group of ``super members'' will go into a room to decide for us what the next trillions of dollars is going to be cut from a budget. And if they can't succeed, then there would be an automatic cut right across the board regardless of whether or not some programs should survive and others should be abolished.

Mr. RANGEL. Will the gentleman yield?

Mr. RANGEL. Thank you. The answer to this problem is three things: jobs, jobs, and more jobs.

Mr. RANGEL

Mr. RANGEL. Mr. Speaker, while I stand on this floor as an American and a person that loves this Congress so much, I'm embarrassed also as a Member that a President of the United States would have his domestic and foreign policy actually held hostage, because with him and only him and no other President have we decided that we would almost put in jeopardy the faith and the fiscal responsibility of this country paying its debts. You know, a lot of people have said that we got to a $14.4 trillion debt because we got drunk and spent money like a drunken sailor. If that is so, the people having the hangover certainly aren't the wealthy people in this country. And this decision was decided without any consideration of the people that are longing for jobs in our great country. If the Republicans had to hold the President hostage, I wish that they would have held him hostage on the questions that my constituents wake up in the morning and ask, not whether or not the debt ceiling has risen, but how can I get a job? How can I really get back my dignity? How can I put food on the table? These are issues that you certainly don't resolve by cutting spending, causing people to lose their jobs and to lose their hope. So, indeed, I'm glad that we are not going to default, but in the days ahead we ought to be spending some time talking about what most Americans want, and that is a fair tax system--while the wealthy have gained so much during this spree that we've had--and not allow a hangover to be with the people that are jobless. We still have time to close this responsibility that we have, to close the debt that we have, not by laying off people, not by just cutting programs during a recession, but by thinking about how we can train people, how we can research, and how we can get our people back to work.

Mr. RANGEL

Mr. RANGEL. Mr. Speaker, twenty-one years ago on July 26, 1990, the Americans With Disabilities Act (ADA) was enacted with complete bi- partisan support; opening doors that were once shut and enabling persons with disabilities to go to work, movies, take public transportation and enjoy everyday activities with dignity. Where physical and mental difficulties once served as barriers, countless numbers of employment and educational opportunities are now available as a result of this important piece of legislation. I am proud to recognize the great work of The Harlem Independent Living Center in my congressional district in Manhattan, an organization that emerged under the ADA, and offers invaluable services for the disabled community such as counseling, training, and job referrals. Under the leadership of Ms. Christina Curry, who heads the center, all disabled New Yorkers have access to these services and the organization works tirelessly to make sure that businesses abide by the ADA. While there is much to be proud of, we must do more to better accommodate the disabled community. Compared to the national unemployment rate of 9.2%, a disproportionate 16.9% of our disabled Americans are currently unemployed. At a time when we are relying more heavily on advanced technology and Internet services, our hearing and visually impaired are being left behind. Worse, the cuts proposed under the Republican agenda take away vital support services, including Social Security, which is relied on by 55 million people with disabilities. I will continue to fight to ensure that all Americans, regardless of background, ethnicity or physical or mental capabilities have the same opportunities to enjoy the American Dream. We owe it to one out of five Americans with a disability, including 16,000 residents in my district, who are counting on Congress to be there for them.

Mr. RANGEL

Mr. RANGEL. My colleagues, yesterday I was talking about the American Dream. But then again, I was thinking about how many people woke up this morning concerned about our national debt. When you represent the type of district that I do, and many other Members, they're concerned about can they get a job or can they keep the job they have. They're concerned about the bills and obligations that they have. They're concerned about whether they can keep their kids in school and whether they can keep food on the table, whether they can keep the dignity and pride and not have their dream shattered by this nightmare that their country owes $14.3 trillion. We're making a special appeal to Americans, Republicans and Democrats, not to allow our country to get caught in a position that we don't pay our bills. I suspect that a lot of my constituents would say: Well, how the heck did I get that bill? How do we owe $14.3 trillion, and what did I have to do with it? And I guess we have to say honestly: You didn't have much to do with it. You did not go into countries and get involved in three wars. You were not responsible for saying that the richest of Americans and corporations that are receiving large profits should have and continue to have preferential tax treatment. Well, why are you telling me then that I have to pay the debt? If we all have to pitch in on this, what about the guys who will not be making a sacrifice? Well, that's kind of difficult to explain to these people. But you tell them that there are people in the Congress who truly believe that they can address their problem by having a constitutional amendment. I know it's a stretch, but that's what some of us have to deal with in the Congress. But you've heard some of them this morning say the only answer to our problem is to have a vote in the House of Representatives and persuade two-thirds of our Members that in the United States Constitution we will require a balanced budget. Now, after we get two-thirds here--and we can't get two-thirds to agree to anything but, hey--then we have to get two-thirds from the Senate. And we only hold the Senate by one vote, but it's a commentary because after we do that, then we have to go out to the States and ask the State legislators to approve what we have done, at least two-thirds of the States. That's their answer to those people who had an American Dream. It would seem to me that along the line they may ask: Who received the benefits of all of this debt? And I would suspect that a lot of the people that manufacture military equipment had a windfall. I would suspect that those people that were able to take jobs overseas, the profit-and-loss books look like they did pretty well. And the financial section, our committee voted for and it was approved by the President, $789 billion to be given to the financial community. And God knows they say these are the people that can create the jobs. Well, I don't know whether any economist agrees with that, but they have enjoyed these tax cuts for decades, and we now are at the highest unemployment that we've ever been. And it would seem to me that those who have, through the benefits of all of our taxpayers, received this windfall, that it's not asking too much to ask them to invest in their country, to invest in jobs, to not look at how much profit they can make overseas but how many lives can they have to get a decent salary, to be able to join the union, to be able to pay their bills, and at the same time be able to go back to work. This answer that everyone makes a sacrifice, it's not talking about the private sector that made the money. I don't even know why ``sacrifice'' is even used in any dialogue. What we're basically saying is that we have to cut spending. Well, everyone would agree to that. But these people that are receiving benefits from their government are the ones that will be making the sacrifice. And as we cut the benefits--whether we're talking about education benefits, health care benefits, supplements to pensions, or sometimes the only funds that they have in retirement, Social Security; whether we're talking about checks for the disabled who cannot work--now they want to cut those programs and the people that provide the service. So that means that they will be increasing the number of people that are unemployed. It just doesn't make sense that we have unemployment compensation and other things for people to have disposable income, but we cut $4 trillion from those people that are trying to survive. Thank you, Mr. Speaker, for allowing me to address the House.

Mr. RANGEL

Mr. RANGEL. I think I share the embarrassment of all of the Members of this great legislative body when it appears as though in our hands we have the ability to tell people, our creditors all over the country and the world, that for the first time in our Republic's history we are prepared to say we are not going to pay our debts. We're not doing this because of some pledges that we've signed or because of some commitment that some Members have made that they will never, never, never do anything in support of our President. They would never talk about raising revenue; that they will never vote for a bill, whether it's a health bill, Social Security, Medicaid, Medicare, education. If the President supports it, they just don't want it. I don't know how many Americans are really waking up this morning wondering exactly what would happen if we hold our country and our President hostage in order to reach just short political gain by people who have been recently elected and believe that compromise is unpatriotic instead of the legislative objective. But more important than the jobs that we would lose, the money that we would lose, the fact that government would have to be expanded and larger than it's ever been, what I'm really afraid of is that we lose the American Dream and create a scenario where that dream becomes a nightmare. I don't know what it is that made America so great. I can't imagine what kind of dream that someone could have in Europe or a foreign country and just believe that making it to America would be better than staying in their own country with their own language and with their own race of people. Yet these tens of thousands of people were prepared, in many cases to risk their lives, to come to participate in that American Dream. I can't imagine how people who have been snatched from Africa and brought in chains in the bottom of vessels and were actually sold as property, and yet, instead of saying that they want to go back to Africa, they adopted our Bible, they adopted American customs. But most importantly, with all of the obstacles that they had to overcome, they adopted the American Dream. What makes America so different is that we're one of the few countries that no matter what you look like or what your last name is, you can become an American. It's absolutely amazing the attractiveness that this dream has. Does it mean that a part of that dream is getting rich inheriting or getting property, having yachts and cars? No. It's having hope and dreams that you would be able to do better for yourself, your family, your kids, your grandkids, your community, and yes, our great country. It means that you're willing to make sacrifices to help others because even though you never fulfill that dream, the dream never, never stops. There's always the ability to say that even though I didn't make it, my kid is going to go to school. Even though I didn't make it, there's going to be the possibility that I'll be living in a better world--a world of peace, a world of harmony, a world that makes no difference where you came from, that you have a dream that can be fulfilled in this country. In other countries, you can't dream. How you're born is how you die. That's going to be your legacy. But in America, all of this is going to be placed in jeopardy because we don't have the guts to call out these people that obviously would rather have this dream shattered, not just for those people that are here but for people all over the world that watch us, and maybe they don't have the ability to come here and become a part of that American Dream still. Throughout the Middle East you see other people saying, I too can dream. I can be somebody. Don't let that dream become a nightmare. Support our President, support our fiscal system, and support that dream.

Mr. RANGEL

Mr. RANGEL. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor, recognize, and celebrate the Murid Islamic Community in America's 23rd Annual Cheikh Ahmadou Bamba Mbacke Islamic Cultural Week Celebration in New York City. On Thursday, July 21, the Murid Islamic Community in America (MICA) will host its annual welcome reception at Wadleigh Secondary School for the Performing & Visual Arts in Harlem, where they will officially launch the North American Tour of the Cheikh Ahmadou Bamba Mbacke Islamic Cultural Weeks. The Honorable Iman Ababacar Dabo, President of the Murid Islamic Community in America and The Honorable Serigne Mame Mor Mbacke, grandson to Cheikh Ahmadou Bamba Mbacke will pay special tribute to my brother, the Honorable David N. Dinkins, first African American and 106th Mayor of the City of New York. David Dinkins was the first public official outside of Senegal, West Africa to proclaim ``Cheikh Ahmadou Bamba Day'' in celebration of his profound philosophies of Universal Peace and International Brotherhood. Cheikh Ahmadou Bamba was born in the year 1271 (A.H.), which is 1853 in Mbacke Baol, a small village in Senegal. Cheikh Ahmadu Bamba Mbakke was born in the village of Mbacke Mbakke Bawol in Wolof in the Kingdom of Baol, the son of a Marabout from the Xaadir Qadriyya brotherhood, the oldest in Senegal. A religious prayer leader, poet and monk, Ahmadou Bamba founded the Mouride brotherhood in 1883 and the city of Touba. In one of his numerous writings, Matlabul Fawzeyni the quest for happiness in both worlds, Sheikh Ahmadou Bamba describes the purpose of the city, which he founded in 1887. In his concept, Touba should reconcile the spiritual and the temporal. Cheikh Ahmadou Bamba intended to have the spiritual capital of Brotherhood, by showing all the characteristics of a Muslim city. He is the son of Muhammad, and grandson of Abibul-allah, who was the son of Muhammad. His father Mohammad Ibn Habiballah was a famous Juriconsult and a well-respected Imam. The Cheikh's mother was known as Diaratoullah close to Allah, because of her renowned piety and chastity. Cheikh Ahmadou Bamba memorized the Holy Qu'ran very early. He was very educated in the different fields of Islamic sciences and the Arabic language. He wrote many books in the teaching of Islam, and great poems dedicated to the Prophet Muhammad. As his fame spread, the French colonial government worried about Bamba's growing power and potential to wage war against them. He had converted a number of traditional kings and their followers and no doubt could have raised a huge military force, as Muslim leaders like Umar Tall and Samory Toure had before him. The French sentenced him to exile in Gabon 1895-1902 and later in Mauritania 1903-1907. However, these exiles fired stories and folk tales of Bamba's miraculous survival of torture, deprivation, and attempted executions, and thousands more flocked to his organization. On the ship to Gabon, forbidden from praying, Bamba is said to have broken his leg irons, leapt overboard into the ocean and prayed on a prayer rug that appeared on the surface of the water or, when the French put him in a furnace, he simply sat down in it and drank tea with Muhammad. In a den of hungry lions, the lions slept beside him, etc. By 1910, the French realized that Bamba was not interested in waging war against them, and was in fact quite cooperative, eventually releasing him to return to his expanded community. In 1918, he won the French Legion of Honor for enlisting his followers into World War I. The French allowed him to establish his community in Touba, believing in part that his doctrine of hard work could be made to serve French economic interests. The French government allowed his movement to grow, and in 1926, he began work for the great Mosque at Touba, where he is buried. Upon his death in 1927, The Cheikh has been succeeded by his descendants as hereditary leaders of the Brotherhood with absolute authority over their followers. Murid Islamic Community in America MICA is a non-profit organization was founded in 1989 to spread the teachings of Cheikh Ahmadou Bamba in accordance with the Quran and the Sunnah of the Prophet Muhammad. I ask my colleagues and our nation to join me in this special Congressional Recognition in celebration of Cheikh Ahmadou Bamba Mbacke Islamic Cultural Week in New York City.

Mr. RANGEL

Mr. RANGEL. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor, recognize, and celebrate my dear friend, Dr. Herbert Pardes, on his retirement as President and Chief Executive Officer of New York-Presbyterian Hospital. Dr. Herbert Pardes has dedicated his life to advancing the medical profession and patient care. He received his medical degree from the State University of New York in Brooklyn and completed his residency in psychiatry at Kings County Hospital. He also received additional psychoanalytic training at the New York Psychoanalytic clinic. Since 1999, Dr. Pardes has been President and CEO of New York- Presbyterian Hospital. Under his guidance the hospital has achieved an incredibly impressive record; it is top-ranked in the New York metropolitan area and is consistently ranked among the best academic medical institutions in the Nation. The Hospital is the largest not- for-profit hospital and one of the most comprehensive hospitals in the world. Dr. Pardes has always been an active advocate for academic medicine and advancing medical technology. The importance he places on academic medicine has helped to produce a generation of new highly skilled doctors to combat emerging health issues. He participates at the State and local level by supporting legislation that increases the quality of care in hospitals. He is a passionate supporter for achieving the best possible medical care for all who need it. Dr. Pardes was appointed by Congress and President George W. Bush to serve on the Commission on Systemic Interoperability, which initiated action to develop a national health information technology infrastructure. During the Clinton administration he served on an advisory commission on consumer protection and quality in the health care industry. He is Chairman Emeritus of the eHealth Initiative and serves on the boards of the Macy Foundation and Markle Foundation, which are dedicated to improving quality, safety and efficiency in health care. Dr. Pardes is devoted to enhancing patient care. He implemented a campaign called We Put Patients First to humanize the hospital experience for patients and their families. He also launched myNYP.org, a website which allows patients and families to access personal health records online. Dr. Pardes has also strived towards fostering close interaction between the hospital and communities in New York. He initiated the Lang Youth Medical Program, a six-year science education and mentoring program for middle and high school students, and helped start the WIN for Asthma outreach program along with other community health screening events. I greatly admire the leadership that Dr. Pardes has provided to the medical community. He has demonstrated great care for his patients and has tirelessly worked to improve their experience and the quality of their health care. He is an extraordinary example of the tremendous changes that can be accomplished through the dedication of one individual. I ask my colleagues and a very grateful Nation to join me in this special Congressional Recognition of Dr. Herbert Pardes.

Mr. RANGEL

Mr. RANGEL. Mr. Speaker, it is my great honor and privilege to congratulate New York--Presbyterian Hospital for its impressive achievement of once again ranking number one among New York hospitals according to U.S. News and World Report's 2011-2012 Best Hospital Rankings. Nationally, New York--Presbyterian ranked sixth out of almost 5,000 hospitals. The hospital offers the highest quality comprehensive care, which has also landed it on U.S. News' Honor Roll for the eleventh year in a row. Achieving this prestigious distinction is no small feat. In order to reach this list, a hospital must be ranked at or near the top in at least six specialties. New York--Presbyterian is highly ranked in 11. These specialties include Cancer; Cardiology & Heart Surgery; Diabetes & Endocrinology; Geriatrics; Neurology & Neurosurgery; Orthopedics; Psychiatry; and Pulmonology. The hospital is also nationally ranked in 15 adult and 10 pediatric specialties. New York--Presbyterian Hospital is the largest not-for-profit, non- sectarian hospital in the United States, with 2,409 beds and nearly 2 million inpatient and outpatient visits annually. The hospital has 6,144 affiliated physicians and a staff of nearly 20,000. New York-- Presbyterian is a teaching hospital with five major centers located throughout New York State. It is accredited by the Joint Commission and the Commission on Accreditation of Rehabilitation Facilities. There are many other attributes to this great institution that keep it among the nation's top hospitals. New York--Presbyterian Hospital puts its patients first, staying on the cutting edge of life-saving technology. As the only hospital in the United States affiliated with two Ivy-League medical schools, the hospital seeks to reinvent medical practice, offering breakthrough treatments for brain and prostate cancers. The hospital has centers and institutes dedicated specifically to cardiology and reproductive medicine. New York--Presbyterian Hospital offers world class care, with the largest solid organ transplant program in the nation. Safety and quality are top priorities for the hospital and they have created an award-winning ``Patient Safety Fridays'' program that has been adopted by medical centers throughout the country. It brings immense honor to the fifteenth district of New York and to the state as a whole, for the commendable work of this hospital to be recognized on a national scale. I congratulate New York--Presbyterian, the President and CEO of the hospital, Dr. Herbert Pardes, and encourage them to keep up the great work.

Mr. RANGEL

Mr. RANGEL. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor, recognize, and celebrate the Families of Our Lady Queen of Angels in celebration of the 125th anniversary of the founding of Our Lady Queen of Angels Church. Our Lady Queen of Angels Church was constructed in 1886 at the urging of the New York Archbishop Corrigan for the German community that lived in the neighborhood. The church, located in East Harlem, was built by Father Bonaventure, a Capuchin Friar who founded the Capuchins in New York City. The building was designed as a replica of the Portiuncula, the chapel where Francis of Assisi died. Friar Solanus Casey, the only American Capuchin to become Venerable lived at Our Lady Queen of Angels during the 1920s and was very devoted to the congregation. The church holds a rich religious history and a symbolic legacy for the Capuchins. The church has been an important feature of the East Harlem Community for 125 years. The congregation has opened its doors, providing service and hope, to the poor and immigrant communities. The church has united the community and provided a welcoming place to practice the Catholic faith. On February 12, 2007 Cardinal Egan, the Archbishop of New York ordered that the church be closed immediately. Although the building itself was closed, the families of Our Lady Queen of Angels refused to abandon the spirit of the parish community. Every Sunday since the closing the congregation has gathered on the sidewalk in front of the church to conduct their own service. Lacking a priest, they conduct the services themselves; the parishioners stand in a tight circle to sing hymns and discuss Bible passages in the context of their own lives. These services take place without fail, regardless of rough weather conditions. In addition to the weekly services, the congregation goes on retreats, celebrates Catholic holy days, and hosts community and ethnic special events. This parish has demonstrated the power and fortitude of community. They refused to allow the loss of a physical space to destroy the bonds that they share with each other. The congregation serves as a beautiful portrayal of the positive outcome produced by uniting in the face of adversity. I ask my colleagues and our Nation to join me in this special Congressional Recognition of the Families of Our Lady Queen of Angels as they celebrate the 125th anniversary of the church founding.

Mr. RANGEL

Mr. RANGEL. Good morning, my colleagues. Like most of you, I have taken so many things around this wonderful Capitol for granted. And this beautiful statement, ``In God We Trust,'' unfortunately for me has been one of them. It has not really struck me like the pledge of allegiance to the flag or the ``Star Spangled Banner'' or so many other things. But I think that now is the time that we really need God to guide us to do the right and the moral thing. And the reason we have to do it is because we're dealing with something that is basic to all religions and faiths and this is our responsibility to make certain that we balance our budget, do what is fiscally necessary for our great Nation to survive. But also to do it in such a way that the poor and the vulnerable, who have nothing to do with the crisis that we face, are not hurt. So I guess this is what we're talking about when we say ``In God We Trust.'' But God works through us. We are the tools. We have the responsibility of the missionaries. We don't have lobbyists that come down to say protect those people. And I guess this is one of the reasons why this saying here is a constant reminder to us that even though we're carried away with our ability to create statutes, that we respect our court system and the Supreme Court, in the final analysis it's the higher authority of morality that should be guiding all of us. Recently, I called upon religious leaders to help us in this guidance, to make the right decisions--Christians, Catholics, Protestants, Muslims, Mormons, Jews, and gentiles. And I was so pleased that a long and dear friend named Jim Wallis--he's a Lutheran pastor, was an adviser to the President, and just yesterday he brought in a group of ministers to help the President to make the moral decision as he struggles so hard to make the proper decision as it affects our budget and how we're going to reduce our deficit. But the things that he had cited, like Matthews, ``Truly I tell you, whatever you did for the least of these brothers and sisters of mine, you did for me,'' what it is, is that whatever you have done to assist a poor person or those who are not as strong physically and financially as you and I that you really did this, in a sense, for Jesus because you have done the right thing. And then he goes on to have something that sounds like statutes when it says: Woe to those who enact unjust statutes and who write oppressive decrees--oppressive decrees--depriving the needy of justice and robbing poor people of their rights. Is health care a right? Is Social Security a right? Is decent housing, education, the pursuit of happiness--is all of this a right? And does this permeate the entire budget and every decision that we're trying to make? Well, in these statements that he made, we have the Torah that says the same thing: If there is a poor man among your brothers in any of the towns of the land, we have a responsibility. The Koran indicates: Believe in Allah and his messengers and spend on charity. And so my brothers and sisters, it seems to me that now is the time for us to really get in touch with the Gang of Six because it seems like nobody in the House of Representatives has any clue as to what ultimately the President and his advisers will decide. Certainly the Senate doesn't know what we will decide. But somehow we should include not just the question of revenue, not just the question of trillions of dollars to be cut, but in the course of these negotiations to think of the lesser of our brothers and sisters. Remember that it is a part of our very lives in saying ``in God we trust'' and to know that you just can't cut services without losing jobs. In other words, when you have people who are jobless, homeless, who lost their savings, these are God's children and they need hope for the future. So thank you for once again giving me this opportunity. And what words could better express what I've been trying to say, and that is, Mr. Speaker, ``in God we trust.''

Mr. RANGEL

Mr. RANGEL. Mr. Speaker, I join all people in South Africa and across the world in celebrating the Honorable Nelson Mandela's 93d birthday on July 18, 2011. Mandela is an inspirational leader who braved 27 years of imprisonment fighting to free South Africa from the racial oppression of apartheid, and ultimately unified the nation as its first President elected in a free South Africa. Madiba is my personal hero because he fought and suffered for what was right and did not emerge bitter from the experience. I still remember his graciousness and good humor when I first met him; he started laughing and said, ``No, this is not the sponsor of the bloody Rangel Amendment.'' I am proud to have met and worked with him to bring freedom and dignity to the oppressed in South Africa. In honor of his birthday, the United Nations recognizes July 18 as Mandela Day. To pay tribute to Mandela's tireless 67-year effort in addressing the biggest issues we face, from combating HIV/AIDS to brokering global peace, we are asked to dedicate 67 minutes to do something for others in need. I pledge to continue his work to help those in need and encourage everyone to do so as well.

Mr. RANGEL

Mr. RANGEL. Mr. Speaker, I congratulate the Republic of South Sudan on achieving their independence. This is a long awaited step for a nation that has experienced many years of struggle and strife. South Sudan has fought for their independence for a long time: first from Egypt and the United Kingdom, which was achieved in 1956, and then years of civil war with Northern Sudan that culminated with the horrific genocide in Darfur. Thanks to the efforts of Secretary of State Colin Powell in 2005, an end to civil war was reached and the framework for an independent Southern Sudan was established. There are many people who deserve credit for fostering this momentous occasion. I thank President Barack Obama and Vice-President Joe Biden for their leadership in rallying the international community to push this referendum through; Secretary of State Hillary Clinton for helping broker peace in the region; Ambassador Susan Rice for building support for South Sudan in the United Nations; and Special Envoy Princeton Lyman, his predecessor, Scott Gration, and numerous other U.S. Government officials who worked tirelessly to bring peace and independence to a troubled region. A special word of praise goes out to the tireless efforts of dozens of American diplomats who, in the face of considerable danger, have been on the ground throughout Sudan. They helped to forge independence for South Sudan through guidance, advice, and collaboration with both sides and helped facilitate negotiations that culminated in the referendum for South Sudan's independence. Our heroic diplomats will continue to remain in both countries to support them through this time of transition. The United States has worked long and hard for this moment. Our commitment, however, does not end with the declaration. I look forward to working with my colleagues and the State Department in helping the new African nation establish their economy, strengthen their democracy and meet the needs of the people. This is a joyous event for South Sudan and an inspiration to the world for achieving peace and stability.

Mr. RANGEL

Mr. RANGEL. A previous speaker referred to our distinguished Speaker pro tem with that historic name and was suggesting that we look for something to guide us that would be over the podium. What I see is ``In God We Trust,'' not the Congress, not the House, not Democrats, and certainly not Republicans, but in God we trust. Recently, I took this to be a very serious thing. I was saying that in the process of increasing the debt ceiling and cutting back spending, that a lot of people were vulnerable, and I called upon our spiritual leaders not to forget them. And, indeed, whether we're talking about Social Security or Medicare or Medicaid, that all of these things were going to be on the block, subject to being cut. The press said that I was calling upon Jesus to help Democrats. Well, that's not so. I was calling upon religious leaders, whether they were Christian or Protestant or Jewish or Gentile or Mormon or Muslim to say ``in God we trust,'' and that there comes a time when human beings, regardless of their party registration, need some help in deciding the crucial issues that actually, actually affect the lives of people. And whether we're talking about peace or war, with thousands of people being killed, no one can deny that this is a moral issue, if we were asked whether we support it or not. But yet we find that most Members of Congress cannot even give a reason why we're in Iraq and Libya and Afghanistan. But having said that, let's face it. It would be ridiculous to assume that I'm making an appeal for Democrats when what I'm talking about is those people who are vulnerable. When flaws in our financial center caused people to lose their homes, it wasn't just Democrats. There were Democrats, Republicans, Independents, and those that have no faith in government who woke up in the morning, they have lost their jobs; they lost their homes; they lost their pension funds; they lost their savings; they had to pull their kids out of school; they lost their self-esteem; some lost their homes. I don't remember anywhere where we're talking about people who are registered Democrats. These are Americans that expected more from their government than just saying that we will be able to address your needs in the by-and-by. And the very people that are aged, God knows we're not talking about a party label. When we talk about our sick, when we talk about Medicaid, when we are talking about Medicare, when we are talking about Social Security, how in God's name can we say we are just talking about Democrats? No. We're talking about all Americans that invested in this country that now see that some of them are so hopeless. We had hoped that we would deal with the debt ceiling which gives the President the ability to say, When America borrows, America pays back. We thought that the integrity of our great country would never be challenged, certainly by Members of the Congress. But that's not the case. The President is being held hostage. And what's being held hostage is the budget. On the other side of the issue is the question of taxes. So it appears to me that wherever you find the vulnerable, somebody should be protecting them since the lobbyists are not knocking on their door saying, Protect the poor. And this is a great opportunity, since the President is being held hostage, that we can reform some of the things that we wanted to do, whether it's the tax system, Medicare, Social Security. But these things are supposed to go through a process. I was honored to chair the Ways and Means Committee, which constitutionally deals with all tax issues, all fiscal issues. It deals with trade. It deals with Medicare. It deals with Social Security. And it deals with taxes. So you wake up in the morning, and you find out that the Congress, 435 of us who now have this important decision to make as we hopefully move forward after the deadline of August 2, and the Senate are to decide these questions by the Gang of Six. Well, I'll be back because no longer am I making an appeal for the Congress; God bless the Gang of Six in trying to save this great Nation.

Mr. RANGEL

Mr. RANGEL. Mr. Speaker and my colleagues, as we go home to our districts, I am certain that no constituents have said they wake up in the morning wondering about what we're going to do with the debt ceiling. In my district, most wonder how they're going to get a job, how they're going to take care of their families. So many Americans have lost their jobs through no fault of their own. They didn't commit any wrongdoing. They lost their savings. Many are homeless. They've lost their self-esteem. They've lost their health benefits, and they're looking toward this Congress to kind of put America on the right track--to restore the middle class that made us such a great and successful Nation. Instead of talking about jobs, we find ourselves holding the President hostage by saying, unlike other Presidents, we're not going to increase the debt ceiling. This is a technical way of saying that we owe $14.3 trillion to people whom we borrowed from for unnecessary wars, for tax cuts that shouldn't have been there, and for a variety of things that unemployed people throughout the United States are just not responsible for. Instead of talking about jobs, they will tell you we have to cut spending. So the people who have lost their jobs may lose their Medicaid, those who are poor enough to be eligible for it; the older people that soon will be or are entitled to Medicare and the hospitals and the doctors and the nurses; and, of course, Social Security that so many millions of Americans have come to depend on. Cutting these benefits are not just cutting benefits for the vulnerable, but we're cutting jobs. You can't cut benefits without cutting hospital workers, without cutting off nurses and doctors and those that provide the services for the vulnerable. Is this the only way we can go? Of course not. Pastors and rabbis and imams all over the country ask: Why are you picking just on the vulnerable? Why are you picking on the sick and the poor and the aged? Is there another way that we can resolve this problem? You bet your life there is. Because, just as in biblical days, we have among us those who really God has blessed with riches that our parents and grandparents never thought could be accumulated. Are we asking them to pay just a little bit to ease the pain for those that are vulnerable? I don't know about you, but our pastors and rabbis have spoken out. And for those of you who don't have pastors and don't have rabbis or don't have time to listen to our obligation morally, to the people that can't speak for themselves, the people who have no lobbyists, I will place into the Record what 4,000 pastors have said is not just our legal and political obligation but, more importantly, our moral obligation. I will place this into the Record for when we come back and try to decide what is our responsibility. Some people have come to this Congress with a commitment not to raise taxes no matter what, whether we're attacked, whether the revenue's coming from obscene tax offenses, whether the Tax Code could be improved. For those of you who remember kamikaze pilots, these were people who were prepared to lose their own lives in fighting our forces during World War II even if it meant that they were destroying somebody. There are people here that are prepared to destroy the fiscal reputation of the United States of America so that they can go back home and say they fulfilled their commitment about not raising revenues and about slashing and cutting those people that made this great country the great country that it is. So I see on television no one talking about the poor. But thank God we do have ministers, priests, rabbis, imams, and of all of the religions and people that have come together, most of whom from foreign lands, that say this land is my land and in this country a poor person can make it, and we never, never, never will forget where we've come from. Some people have managed to get out of poverty. Others have enjoyed the middle class. Let's hope that our kids and grandkids will be able to enjoy the benefits of doing the right thing. [From Faith in Public Life and Sojourners, July 19, 2011] An Open Letter to Congress and the President--Listen to Your Pastors More than 4,000 of them believe the federal budget is not just a fiscal document, but a moral one. We are local pastors. We work, pray, and do whatever we can to remain faithful to the responsibility of every Christian to help the poor. Still, we can't meet the crushing needs by ourselves. Programs like SNAP, WIC, Medicaid, and Head Start aren't just abstract concepts to us; they serve the same people we serve. There are changes that can be made or efficiencies that can be found, but every day we see what government can do. We have seen government support allow young people to be the first members of their families to get college degrees, ensure mothers can feed their children a healthy diet, enable those with disabilities to live fulfilling lives, give much needed medical care to those who can't afford it, support seniors, provide housing for families, and help people in finding a job. As Christians, we believe the moral measure of the debate is how the most poor and vulnerable people fare. We look at every budget proposal from the bottom up--how it treats those Jesus called the ``least of these'' (Matthew 25;45). They do not have powerful lobbies, but they have the most compelling claim on our consciences and common resources. As Christian leaders, we are committed to fiscal responsibility and shared sacrifice. We want to support you in reducing the deficit. There is more need today than churches can meet by themselves. This is why we join in the ``Circle of Protection'' around programs that meet the essential needs of hungry and poor people at home and abroad.

Mr. RANGEL

Mr. RANGEL. Mr. Speaker, my colleagues, as we have the opportunity to debate whether or not our brave young men and women are fighting in wars in foreign lands that have not been approved by the Congress, as we talk in terms of trillions of dollars as to the national debt that we have acquired and think of ways that we can reduce it, and as we look at our revenue code and recognize that it is just so totally unfair and should be reformed and revamped, millions of people have awakened this morning unable to really consider these important issues because they are without work. Millions of people have lost their self- esteem, have lost their jobs, and some have lost their health insurance. Many have lost theirs homes, others have pulled their kids out of college, cars have been lost for inability to pay, and creditors have been just nightmares to them. Included in this vast amount of people are African Americans, many who have served this country, hardworking people that find themselves not at the 9.2 so-called unemployment rate but at a 16 percent unemployment rate. And this doesn't take into account the millions of people, and especially African Americans, that know that there are no jobs for them. And to be going to the unemployment office just to be counted among the faceless unemployed doesn't make sense. Included among them are veterans that have fought for this country. Some have come home with physical and mental problems, but they have not received the support or the transitional aid that's necessary for them to assimilate in a work market that has no jobs. So many of these people have worked in local establishments, in our butcher shops, our cleaners and our shoe repair, and they are without work. So many of them are women that have toiled and raised their families without the assistance of anyone else, and they too are without work and without hope. As we think about these people and think about reduction of our spending, we find that Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security seems to be constantly referred to as entitlements, and people talk about that it has to be protected. So many mayors and Governors are talking about how they too have to cut their budgets. And so many African Americans, for reasons that I do not have to go into, have sought public service as a way of life because of the security that's involved in it. And so when we talk about cutting the budget and cutting the services that are provided, we're talking about a larger number of minorities that will be losing their jobs as a result of budget cutting, whether we're talking about teachers or policemen or clerks that work in the city halls or the communities that have Governors that have slashed back their jobs, but certainly as we talk about Medicaid and Medicare, we're talking about hospitals. And all of you know, no matter where you come from, that you see a large number of African Americans working in these institutions trying to get an education to move forward because we know of the large number of health care providers that we need. We are proud in the city of New York to say that we have been able to train and educate a larger percentage of physicians than all of the teaching hospitals that we have throughout our great country, and we're proud to do that. All of a sudden, we hear that some $300 billion will be cut from the hospitals that provide this care. And it's not just by the beneficiaries that you and I know they need this care and they will be put in harm's way, but also we have to acknowledge that many of the people that work in these hospitals, a large number of them being minorities, they too will be released to join the unemployed. So while I'm praying for our spiritual leaders to protect the vulnerable, please understand that every time we make a cut in the budget, we're cutting someone's job, and they will join the hopeless and the unemployed.

Mr. RANGEL

Mr. RANGEL. Madam Speaker and my colleagues, last week, I tried to point out that there was a serious meeting going on in the White House last weekend between the President and our congressional leaders to point out that we were facing a serious crisis and that we had to do something to make certain that the President felt sure that we would increase the debt ceiling and that we would make certain that we did stop this unnecessary spending. And of course the question of revenues has always been a part of the debate. What I was trying to do was to point out that on one side it appeared the issue was that we shouldn't tax those people that created jobs--and these are people, as people have pointed out, who are the wealthiest corporations that have record profits, and of course the wealthy that have really had the lowest tax rates and have received more money in the last decade than in the history of the country. And I was really trying to say that, since the vulnerable and the poor did not have any lobbyists or voices to debate this issue, that when we talk about entitlements, that when we talk about Social Security and Medicare and Medicaid, these are not just political labels. The Medicaid, of course we're talking about the vulnerable, the poor, and those who are sick. Medicare, we're talking about the aged that need help. I was also pointing out that, unfortunately, Social Security has become the main income for so many Americans. And we have veterans that are coming home, we have the jobless, the homeless, the hopeless. And even though they did not have a lobbyist to say, hey, I want to have a seat at that table, that I called to all of our spiritual leaders, since I knew that in every religion there was a good Samaritan aspect which really ended up saying, just do the right thing. I didn't put politics in it, I didn't put party labels in it. And I wasn't just talking to Christians and ministers and Catholics and Protestants; I was reaching out to the rabbis, to the imams, to the Buddhists, to the Mormons, to the Muslims and saying that in every Scripture, in every religious document, taking care of the vulnerable and those who can't take care of themselves, that that moral issue should be on the table. Well, as a result of that, some people thought that instead of just a good Samaritan, I would ask what Jesus would do. And I just want to make it clear: I haven't the slightest idea what he would do, but my very dear friend, Governor Huckabee, said one of the things that Jesus would do would be to pay his taxes. And, of course, that was something that reminded me. He also went to Deuteronomy. And he said it on TV: ``For the Lord your God will bless you as He has promised, and you will lend to many nations but will borrow from none. And you will rule over many nations but none will rule over you.'' Well, again, that scored for the good Governor, but however, when you have got a $14.3 trillion debt, it's kind of late for that message to have a strong impact. But what I want to make clear is that no matter what religion you are, it appears to me that what we're talking about are two sides of sincere Americans that do recognize that this is not just saying that the sky may fall. All economists agree that there are various ways to do it, and we cannot just cut back spending in order to resolve this serious economic problem we have. As a matter of fact, we have to be very sensitive when we do cut back spending that we don't create an addition to the unemployment and those that provide services to the disadvantaged. And I am talking specifically about our hospitals, about our social workers. Because there is no one in this Chamber that doesn't believe that the homeless and the sick, those that are disabled and those that are dependent on these programs should be ignored as we protect those people who, for whatever reason, have not participated in the creation of those jobs, even though we all are waiting. But more importantly, we have not heard any complaints from the wealthiest of Americans that more equity should be involved in our taxing system. When the billionaires can say that their secretaries have a higher tax rate than they do, it means that we have a responsibility not to raise taxes but at least to close the inequity that exists that would raise revenue. So when we do get home it seems to me that we would say this is not a Democratic issue, this is not a Republican issue alone, it is a moral issue. Thank you, Governor Huckabee.

Mr. RANGEL

Mr. RANGEL. Mr. Speaker, I would like to congratulate Mr. Lin-Manuel Miranda for all of his marvelous accomplishments. It is my pleasure to pay tribute to this prodigious composer, lyricist and actor. I want to give thanks to this exceptional constituent for sharing his vision and talents with the world for all to enjoy. Mr. Miranda is a native New Yorker who grew up in Manhattan's diverse and vivacious Washington Heights neighborhood and is of Puerto Rican descent. He attended Hunter College High School and later graduated from Wesleyan University in 2002. While pursuing higher education he wrote his earliest draft of In the Heights in 1999. He also wrote, acted and directed several other musicals while attending Wesleyan. While in school he diligently worked to perfect his craft, so it is of no surprise that Mr. Miranda would later take such large strides toward the road of success. His claim to fame comes from writing and starring as Usnavi in the Broadway musical In the Heights, which opened on Broadway at the Richard Rodgers Theater in 2008. This phenomenal musical composer has won the Tony Award as composer and lyricist. With his creativity and determination he was able to take an idea and catapult it into success. He took a risk and believed in his dream as well as himself. We can all learn from this fine example and believe in ourselves, especially when no one else will. We should all have the courage to live out our dreams, while inspiring others. Les Brown once said ``Shoot for the moon. Even if you miss, you'll land among the stars.'' This is exactly what Mr. Miranda did and now he is taking his dreams and plays to new heights. With his countless accomplishments, it is impossible to single out Mr. Miranda's greatest achievement, but one could say that In the Heights has won critical acclaim. This extraordinary theater piece has been nominated and has won countless awards, such as the 2009 Grammy for Best Musical Show Album, 2008 Tony Award for Best Musical, 2008 Tony Award for Best Original Score, and was a Finalist for the 2009 Pulitzer Prize for Drama, among many other accolades. As a performer, Mr. Miranda has also showcased his talents on many popular television series, including The Sopranos, House, Electric Company, Modern Family and Sesame Street. Mr. Miranda is also a co-founder of the popular hip hop-improvisational group, Freestyle Love Supreme that has toured comedy festivals throughout the world and continues to perform at esteemed venues throughout the country. The White House has taken notice of this rising star. In 2009 he was invited to perform at the White House Evening of Poetry, Music and the Spoken Word. The University of Yeshiva also took notice of his greatness and bestowed him with an honorary degree. He has also been acknowledged by former mayor of New York City Ed Koch. This young fresh talent continues to believe in his dream and make positive strides. He is currently working on a musical theatre version of Bring It On, which will start its National Tour in the fall of 2011. Mr. Speaker, for this, I ask that you and my distinguished colleagues in Congress join me in applauding this prolific artist, who is truly an inspiration.